Finland joins Sweden and Denmark in limiting Moderna Covid-19 vaccine • Hacker News Board

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

#251

Post by cletus » Fri, Oct 08, 2021, 12:27 AM UTC

guywhocodes wrote: post #216

cletus wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is that the perception of public trust is eroding significantly ... There are many problems. That's not one of them. Here is a better list of problems: 1. People don't understand what "research" means. Hint: watching a Youtube video with no peer-reviewed research is not "research"; 2. People fundamentally don't understand and assess risk correctly. This long predates the anti-vaxxer hyseria. It's why, f…

The main assumption that is incorrect here is that there is no alternative to the mRNA vaccines targeting the spike protein. I'm not against vaccination but I would not recommend it to anyone after what it did to my body. Whatever it is. Give me anything else and I'll take it, all I need is COVID risk reduction and due to where I am it will likely be one of the Chinese alternatives.

You have my sympathies if indeed you did have a severe adverse reaction from a Covid vaccine. I say "if" because honestly, anyone can say anything on the Internet. That doesn't make it true.

But let's assume it is: by itself, it's basically irrelevant. What you've presented, if 100% true, is an anecdote. These situations need to be looked at in aggregate. To start with:

- How common is it? Is it 1 in 10,000 or 1 in a billion? What level is acceptable?

- Is the likelihood of adverse effects related to Covid risk factors? Example: this submission is about the prospect of an elevated risk of myocarditis for young recipients of the Moderna vaccine. Well, that's also an issue for people who get Covid. So the vaccine's adverse reaction may go hand in hand with an elevated risk of severe Covid outcomes due to the same underlying risk factors;

- How does the likelihood of severe vaccine reactions compare to the decreased chance of severe Covid outcomes (eg being on a ventilator, long Covid, death)?

- Factored into the above, what about the improvement in outcomes for the population as a whole from having a sufficiently large number of vaccinated people (ie herd immunity)? This also includes people who genuinely cannot get the vaccine.

- Not getting the vaccine clearly increases severe outcomes from getting Covid. Based on the data, this is undeniable (eg 98-99% of Covid deaths are now among the unvaccinated). Being unvaccinated means you increase the chance of needing expensive medical treatment. It may also mean using up a bed that's needed for something completely unrelated to Covid (eg a heart attack).

On the last point, I guarantee you you'll be dealing with medical professionals who essentially have PTSD because they have to come to terms with the fact that they've chosen who gets to live and who gets to die because there simply aren't enough beds.

But sure, never mind that. There's a one in a million chance of an adverse reaction so screw em, basically.

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

#252

Post by shusaku » Fri, Oct 08, 2021, 12:31 AM UTC

Denvercoder9 wrote: post #158

tshaddox wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My interpretation of that phrasing is that it refers to the risk of hospitalization from a single infection of COVID-19, so I don't think the time frame matters all that much (other than perhaps much later hospitalizations from long-term effects that we still don't know a lot about yet).

> My interpretation of that phrasing is that it refers to the risk of hospitalization from a single infection of COVID-19 That interpretation is not supported by the source linked by GP. The risk you allude to (infection hospitalization rate) was generally reported as ~5% (it's probably halved now that half the population is vaccinated). See for example [0], the first Google hit I got, or the CDC COVID tracker [1], w…

I don’t blame him for misinterpreting it though, Gallup basically made a trick question and then write an article about how stupid Americans were for getting it wrong.

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

#253

Post by AndrewBissell » Fri, Oct 08, 2021, 12:38 AM UTC

nojokes wrote: post #199

AndrewBissell wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Actually mRNA vaccines/tech been in development and trials for a long time (decades). Obviously the parent was not referring to the entire development history of mRNA tech, any more than one would include the initial work on inventing the internal combustion engine when talking about how much safety testing had been carried out for a new model car. The usual safety trials were not carried out for these vaccines, fu…

Yes, they were. Each of the vaccines used around 40000 people in their trials. It is an equal to series of crash tests. But there are effects that are so rare that do not come out unless the medicine is administered to larger group of people. This is the reason why every approved medicine is kept under extended surveillance.

> Yes, they were. Each of the vaccines used around 40000 people in their trials.

And for how long do most vaccine trials last? How long have they historically been in use before any mandate was instituted?

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

#254

Post by guywhocodes » Fri, Oct 08, 2021, 12:40 AM UTC

cletus wrote: post #251

guywhocodes wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main assumption that is incorrect here is that there is no alternative to the mRNA vaccines targeting the spike protein. I'm not against vaccination but I would not recommend it to anyone after what it did to my body. Whatever it is. Give me anything else and I'll take it, all I need is COVID risk reduction and due to where I am it will likely be one of the Chinese alternatives.

You have my sympathies if indeed you did have a severe adverse reaction from a Covid vaccine. I say "if" because honestly, anyone can say anything on the Internet. That doesn't make it true. But let's assume it is: by itself, it's basically irrelevant. What you've presented, if 100% true, is an anecdote. These situations need to be looked at in aggregate. To start with: - How common is it? Is it 1 in 10,000 or 1 in a…

This is a meaningless wall of text since you did not read my original message.

It is an attempt, one of so many, to victim blame. You might think that's not what you are doing because it is ok to attack any of the millions of statements like mine because in the end: each of them is an anecdote by themselves and since you make no effort to aggregate them. They always will remain that.

You are what's wrong in this situation.

Your anecdotal and marginal position is irrelevant because it fails to see the larger picture of available vaccines and complications. You are hyperfocused on myocarditis as if that is the only valid diagnosis of the issues we have or as if it was well known what the long term effects are of the un-named side effects caused.

I'm tired of this goalpost moving (mRNA vaccines against spike protein and the idea that the only side effect is myocarditis). And honestly if this is where you will hold your stand I think it's regretful you didn't suffer with us.

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

#255

Post by AndrewBissell » Fri, Oct 08, 2021, 12:42 AM UTC

guywhocodes wrote: post #213

citilife wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The long-term studies I am way more curious about. Heart damage typically can cause lasting effects. Many people may have heart damage and not even know it. I'm not making any specific claims, just that it's unknown. Here's an explanation of how a heart cannot or very slowly repairs: https://www.uclahealth.org/heart/cardiac-repair-regeneration

I personally know three persons that got some degree of chest pain. I had worse symptoms than they did, now 3 months later I can let my heart rate hit maximum, which is significantly lower than before. My cardiologist says that without an MRI he can't diagnose me and my insurance did not cover it. It's quite likely imo that there is a relevant diagnosis not being made because it's inaccessible.

> My cardiologist says that without an MRI he can't diagnose me and my insurance did not cover it. It's quite likely imo that there is a relevant diagnosis not being made because it's inaccessible.

I would suggest you report it to VAERS, but everyone's decided that data should just be ignored so what's the point?

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

#256

Post by tartoran » Fri, Oct 08, 2021, 12:42 AM UTC

curmudgeon22 wrote: post #230

bserge wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, yeah. If vaccines don't protect against virus spread... Fuck it, let people decide. Either take a vaccine or risk getting Covid in the wild. Just make it so you can't use a hospital bed in that case. It's only fair to people who are actually forced to go to the hospital, as opposed to gambling for it.

Should smokers be denied medical treatment related to that choice too?

If they overwhelmed the medical system to the detriment of others then yes. And this is coming from an ex smoker who knew it was bad for you when begun smoking. Now this is slightly different for other age groups that started their habit when the tobacco industry were paying doctors to promote smoking.

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

#257

Post by vkou » Fri, Oct 08, 2021, 12:43 AM UTC

RustyRussell wrote: post #241

vkou wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is, by the way, still multiple orders of magnitude lower than the risk of myocarditis from catching COVID.

Can you provide data? Here's the weekly Ontario report on vaccine side effects: at the end is the myocarditis/pericarditis breakdown: https://www.publichealthontario.ca/en/health-topics/immuniza...

> 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 > In adjusted analyses, patients with COVID-19 had, on average, 15.7 (95% CI = 14.1–17.2) times the risk for myocarditis compared with patients without COVID-19;

Okay, so it's 'just' an order of magnitude higher. Unfortunately, myocarditis is one of the least serious side effects of COVID.

If you have a choice between a vaccine that offers 95% protection against COVID, and a 1 in 5000 chance of myocarditis, and one that offers 90% protection against COVID, and a zero chance of myocarditis, you're better off taking the former. You're also far better off taking either one, compared to being unvaccinated.

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

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

#258

Post by nojokes » Fri, Oct 08, 2021, 12:44 AM UTC

8note wrote: post #212

CRConrad wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They also note that having covid is a risk factor for myocarditis. So perhaps still worth it to take the shot. No: Absolutely not worth it to take that particular shot, as there are others available which don't have that side effect.

Is it likely that if both the vaccine and the virus cause it, that the symptom could be related to the spike protein itself? In that case, I'd expect all of the vaccines to have a similar risk, and it's only been spotted in one so far

It has been clearly spotted in 2 mRNA vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna). There is limited information about vector based vaccines.

It is fairly clear that adverse effect is dose dependent and it may be the reason why we do not see that many with vector vaccines - immune system creates some immunity against the vector virus and actual amount of vaccine entering cells is limited. It is also evident from the limited immune response from vector vaccines.

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

#259

Post by nojokes » Fri, Oct 08, 2021, 12:45 AM UTC

bjourne wrote: post #242

8note wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's the right question or comparison. If this young person below 30 gets a side effect from the vaccine, is that side effect worse than what they'd get by having the virus? It should be clear that we aren't going to suppress or eradicate covid, so you shouldn't be comparing getting the vaccine or nothing happening, but getting covid with or without the vaccine

It doesn't matter if the virus is worse than the vaccine since the vaccine is intentionally administered. Someone who is cautious might attempt to avoid the virus altogether thus their risk might be much lower than the average. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that Covid won't mutate so that you will have to refill your vaccination every year to stay immune like with vaccines against the flu. If so, mass vaccinatio…

Good luck with avoiding it. Scotland had no restrictions and when they opened schools, about 8% of 12-15 children got infected within first 5 weeks. Delta variant is so infectious that it will not disappear until about 90% of all the people are immune to it. For seasonal flu only 25% is required.

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

#260

Post by npunt » Fri, Oct 08, 2021, 12:50 AM UTC

gorwell wrote: 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…

C’mon we’re almost two years into this, how is it we’re still under this idea that it’s about individual risk, and hospitalization (or death) is the only meaningful risk factor? A pandemic is a population-level problem, risk is dependent on how everyone acts collectively. This includes mutation rate and resource limitations. If it keeps spreading, it keeps mutating (see: Delta). If hospitals are overflowing, risk goes up for everyone - whether or not they even have covid. Things that were treatable with a visit to an ER before are now life threatening due to resource constraints. And there’s tons of people with postviral covid complications that weren’t hospitalized.

You can’t do apples to apples with things like ‘getting bitten by sharks’ or whatever things get dragged out in typical risk comparisons. That’s why this is hard.