Live data from Hacker News

Finland joins Sweden and Denmark in limiting Moderna Covid-19 vaccine

reuters.com

91–100 of 407 posts

Re: Finland joins Sweden and Denmark in limiting Moderna Covid-19 vaccine

#91
post #22
post #2

> "A Nordic study involving Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark found that men under the age of 30 who received Moderna Spikevax had a slightly higher risk than others of developing myocarditis," he said. I find it frustrating that we’re still not putting numbers on statements like this in news articles. How slight?

https://thl.fi/en/web/thlfi-en/-/thl-monitoring-myocarditis-... According to Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, an additional 4 cases per 100k men under the age of 30. They also note that having covid is a risk factor for myocarditis. So perhaps still worth it to take the shot. Possibly they are doing this to put out the antivax wildfires in social media by reacting to statistical information about risks. So a…

Yeah, the anti-vax hockey player Josh Archibald recently caught COVID and developed myocarditis as a consequence. It's among the known sequelae.

Your risk of myocarditis from COVID is 10x-20x your risk of myocarditis from a vaccine.

(One of many many sources: https://twitter.com/awong37/status/1444825498018795521)

Re: Finland joins Sweden and Denmark in limiting Moderna Covid-19 vaccine

#92
post #59

A lot of comments here asking for specific numbers and making comparisons to other risks. That's exactly how one should be looking at this. What I don't understand is why people don't apply this same critical thought process to the risks of Covid? For example, do you know what the risk of hospitalization from Covid is when unvaccinated? If you said >50%, you would be in good company. It's the most common answer. But…

> But what's the actual risk? > Where did you get that number? As of Sep 29, 2021, US reported 43,289,203 cases where 3,047,033 of them are hospitalized, including vaccinated. This is nowhere close to <1%. I'm pretty sure the number could be much higher with saner medical insurance system.

From the page I linked:

The correct answers to hospitalization risk can be calculated using data from the Department of Health and Human Services (via HealthData.gov) and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). One needs only the following figures: 1) the population of vaccinated and unvaccinated people 2) total hospitalizations resulting from COVID-19 3) hospitalizations of vaccinated people. We used data through August 9, 2021, one week before the survey was fielded. At that time, total hospitalizations from COVID-19 were estimated to be 2.6 million, with 7,608 vaccinations found among vaccinated people. The size of the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations was nearly equal on August 9 (with 168 million vaccinated and 163 million unvaccinated).

A simplistic analysis of these numbers would yield hospitalization rates of 0.005% for the vaccinated population (1 case in 22,118) and 1.6% for the unvaccinated population (1 case in 62), but those numbers exaggerate the benefits of the vaccine because the unvaccinated population confronted many more days of risk, since vaccination was gradually rolled out starting in December of 2020. For that reason, we take the average population totals over the relevant periods for each population (March 1, 2020-Aug. 9, 2021 for the unvaccinated population and Dec. 15, 2020,-Aug. 9, 2021, for the vaccinated population). The adjusted population of vaccinated people comes to 83 million and 295 million for the vaccinated population, since the entire U.S. population was unvaccinated -- except a small number of participants in clinical trials --up until December of 2020.

Using these adjusted figures, we calculate that the hospitalization rate for the vaccinated population is 0.01% (or 1 in 10,914), and the rate for unvaccinated adults is 0.89% (or 1 case in 112 people). In both cases, therefore, the correct answer is less than one percent, but the implied efficacy rate of vaccination is 99% at preventing hospitalizations. This is calculated as the hospitalization rate for the unvaccinated minus the hospitalization rate for the vaccinated, divided by the unvaccinated rate. In other words, it is the percentage decrease in hospitalization risk. This high rate of protection -- even against Delta -- is consistent with a recent article published in the Lancet, which reviewed large-scale empirical data from the United States and around the world.

Some may argue that patients may have been hospitalized as a result of COVID but not diagnosed as such. We think this is highly unlikely to result in significant downward bias in the rates of hospitalization risk since testing at hospitals became widespread after only a few weeks at the start of the pandemic, and the vast majority of hospitalizations would have occurred since May of 2020, given data on deaths, which are more comprehensively documented. Nonetheless, using various modeling assumptions, CDC epidemiologists estimate that the actual number of hospitalizations may be 1.8 times higher than the reported number. If these estimates are accurate, the true rate of hospitalization risk for the unvaccinated population is 1.6% and as high as 0.2% for the vaccinated population. In either case, the public's misunderstanding of risk is roughly just as inaccurate. One criticism of these inflated estimates is that they assume that many people were hospitalized while asymptomatically carrying the SARS-CoV-2 virus, leading to an undetected case. The problem with this reasoning is that it would count people admitted to the hospital for non-COVID reasons who coincidentally had an asymptomatic infection. These cases were correctly omitted from official statistics since the absence of symptoms cannot cause hospitalization.

A more serious limitation is that we count each admission from COVID-19 into a hospital as a unique person. In fact, we know from scholarly research that some patients are readmitted multiple times. One paper estimates that 9% of COVID-19 patients were readmitted to the hospital. This implies that, at minimum, our hospitalization estimates should be multiplied by 0.91 to capture only hospitalizations of unique individuals. Doing so would shrink both hospitalization risk estimates, and they would still both be well below 1%.

Re: Finland joins Sweden and Denmark in limiting Moderna Covid-19 vaccine

#93
post #59

A lot of comments here asking for specific numbers and making comparisons to other risks. That's exactly how one should be looking at this. What I don't understand is why people don't apply this same critical thought process to the risks of Covid? For example, do you know what the risk of hospitalization from Covid is when unvaccinated? If you said >50%, you would be in good company. It's the most common answer. But…

“Yet people are still more afraid of Covid than myriad other risks we accept on a daily basis” keep in mind a lot of people are older than 40 or have treasured family members who are 65 or older.

COVID’s risk isn’t symmetric across the population. It is definitely extremely dangerous though and killed 700,000 Americans, for instance.

Re: Finland joins Sweden and Denmark in limiting Moderna Covid-19 vaccine

#94
post #60
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://thl.fi/en/web/thlfi-en/-/thl-monitoring-myocarditis-... According to Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, an additional 4 cases per 100k men under the age of 30. They also note that having covid is a risk factor for myocarditis. So perhaps still worth it to take the shot. Possibly they are doing this to put out the antivax wildfires in social media by reacting to statistical information about risks. So a…

It seems like if you take everything into account, taking the vaccine might not provide any benefit from men under 30. Any medical intervention must be beneficial to justify the use. If it's so and so, or equal risk, then it's not done. EDIT: The alternative is not stopping vaccinations. Men under 30 are given Pfizer.

Based on the data in the study linked below, the risk for myocarditis among COVID-19 patients is 0.146%, and 0.009% among people without COVID-19 (study was done pre-vaccine).

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm

> During March 2020–January 2021, the risk for myocarditis was 0.146% among patients with COVID-19 and 0.009% among patients without COVID-19. Among patients with COVID-19, the risk for myocarditis was higher among males (0.187%) than among females (0.109%) and was highest among adults aged ≥75 years (0.238%), 65–74 years (0.186%), and 50–64 years (0.155%) and among children aged <16 years (0.133%).

Re: Finland joins Sweden and Denmark in limiting Moderna Covid-19 vaccine

#95
post #60
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://thl.fi/en/web/thlfi-en/-/thl-monitoring-myocarditis-... According to Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, an additional 4 cases per 100k men under the age of 30. They also note that having covid is a risk factor for myocarditis. So perhaps still worth it to take the shot. Possibly they are doing this to put out the antivax wildfires in social media by reacting to statistical information about risks. So a…

It seems like if you take everything into account, taking the vaccine might not provide any benefit from men under 30. Any medical intervention must be beneficial to justify the use. If it's so and so, or equal risk, then it's not done. EDIT: The alternative is not stopping vaccinations. Men under 30 are given Pfizer.

The number of C19 fatalities under 30 in the US appears to easily exceed the number of vaccine-related myocarditis cases. The overwhelming majority of those myocarditis cases followed a benign course.

Later

Another thing to consider is that the myocarditis rate from C19 itself may exceed that of the vaccine, which would basically refute the argument against vaccination.

(By all means, pick vaccines strategically.)

Re: Finland joins Sweden and Denmark in limiting Moderna Covid-19 vaccine

#96
post #27

~2.7 cases of myocarditis per 100k. Deadly car crashes in the US is about 11 deaths per 100k (between 3.3 and 25 when looking at states directly, 18.2 worldwide average). That's not even counting indirect deaths caused by car fumes. So to the person posting the same thing from new accounts about vaccines being a great risk to yourself, I hope you take driving and crossing the road as seriously as you take getting vac…

There’s no connection between car crashes in the US and risk of myocarditis from the vaccine in Sweden. Each country is looking at the risk for its own citizens.

Re: Finland joins Sweden and Denmark in limiting Moderna Covid-19 vaccine

#97
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2.7 per 100k [1] according to an Israeli study. Couldn’t find these details on the Scandinavian study. This article at least in text said you’re more at risk of getting it from Covid than the vaccine — I wish this context with numbers were always printed in these cases. The non-scientifically trained public isn’t taught or should be expected to know how to contextualize these things. [1] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full…

Wow. I'm trying to do a sanity check on this study, and I'm not convinced they found anything but noise? They looked at 25 "averse events", and only half of them (12 of the 25) had higher prevalence with the vaccine than in the control group, which is what "no difference" looks like. The normal way you protect against this is by adjusting for the fact that you're doing multiple tests (one for each of the 25 adverse e…

I'm not sure any of the studies that measured it for any of the 3 main vaccines are distinguishable from noise. All the numbers that I managed to find weren't.

I'm starting to think that we should redesign all the older vaccines to be more like those ones.

Re: Finland joins Sweden and Denmark in limiting Moderna Covid-19 vaccine

#98
post #2

> "A Nordic study involving Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark found that men under the age of 30 who received Moderna Spikevax had a slightly higher risk than others of developing myocarditis," he said. I find it frustrating that we’re still not putting numbers on statements like this in news articles. How slight?

[deleted]

Re: Finland joins Sweden and Denmark in limiting Moderna Covid-19 vaccine

#100
post #2

> "A Nordic study involving Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark found that men under the age of 30 who received Moderna Spikevax had a slightly higher risk than others of developing myocarditis," he said. I find it frustrating that we’re still not putting numbers on statements like this in news articles. How slight?

The study is preliminary - but they're being cautious and recommending young men switch to the Pfizer vaccine since the risk of myocarditis is lower. But just so people don't get the wrong idea, they're finding that the risk of myocarditis in young men who've actually caught Covid is something like 6x more likely than in those who received the vaccine: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998v... S…

Typically how severe is the post-Covid myocarditis in young males versus that which can be induced by the vaccine?

Also, since the vaccine doesn't prevent contraction of Covid, does it really make sense to frame this as though the two risks are mutually exclusive?

Post reply on HN