331–340 of 407 posts
> "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?
I wonder if it's because it's a higher dose. Slightly better protection against covid and slightly higher risk of side effects.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.)
Even if the benefits outweigh the drawbacks for society you cannot make that calculation. You cannot administer a vaccine to a healthy person just because it doesn't increase their risk of dying as much as it decreases someone else's risk of surviving. Young healthy men should not be coerced into accepting an elevated risk because getting to herd immunity or whatever might save old and at risk persons. For children a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is not a political component to this, we (Sweden) have probably the most objective and science based Health system in the world. For this reason we get criticized by other nations for not having lockdowns and not wearing masks, there is no indication that these actually work and they probably cause more harm than good. Our leaders have shown great competence to follow the science and not make a knee-jerk reacti…
Except your scientist(s) were wrong this time and killed 10 times more people by not implementing quick and mild restrictions and letting the disease spread. Sure, what US and France did was also different kind of wrong but it does not make you right. Only thing that has been life saving is very quick reaction that limits the spread at its infancy. Also of course quick vaccination.
This is the dumbest hunk of shit I've ever heard. We have the exact same death rates and infection rates as the rest of Europe.
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…
I think I'm missing your point. This article is talking about the relative risk of developing myocarditis, but you are talking about the risk of hospitalization from COVID. Wouldn't the correct comparison be to look at the risk of myocarditis after catching COVID? Or going the other way, shouldn't we be comparing the risk of hospitalization due to COVID (if unvaccinated) to that of hospitalization after receiving the…
"As a general rule, the ICU cardiac injury described in COVID-19 illness is subclinical and largely reflected by a minor elevation of cardiac troponin, whereas CIRM is characterized by a clinical syndrome often warranting hospitalization, dramatic ECG changes, and very large elevations of cardiac troponin that are sustained over time. " "Again, children are not a high-risk group for COVID-19 respiratory illness, and yet they are the high-risk group for CIRM." Source : https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014628062...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vaccinated people can still get infected and transmit the virus to others, with or without mutations. The idea that vaccinated people are ‘safe to be around’ is an outdated fantasy.
I never said it stopped all transmission, but it will stop a large fraction of it. We're playing games of probability. Anybody that deals in absolutes is living in a fantasy world.
The theory of vaccinating people to protect others is taking another hit. It looks more that we should focus on proposing the vaccine to the people at risk (clearly identified, >65 years old, or multiple co-morbidity) for their own survival
> "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?
ffs, what have we come to? This is HN, where smart, educated, science-literate people congregate. Reading the comments, I'm ashamed of us. We're better than this. Read the actual f*cking papers people. Not the YouTube videos, not the weird-ass political shit on FB. Not the New York Times, or even Reuters. The actual papers. We've all got SciHub (thankfully!), there's no excuse. If you don't think you're educated enou…
> and you probably shouldn't be contradicting the experts.
As you know, expert themselves can disagree, and have strong evidence to defend their sides.
For example, Niels Bohr and Einstein had massive disagreements, both of them are references, and had convincing arguments.
In the end you got to choose what you want to believe in with your intellect and your guts. And if you have neither, the New York Times it is haha
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are at least three reasons that an injection is not the same. 1. The sudden viral load is orders of magnitude larger than typical exposure and given the complexity of the immune system, may produce a different response. Also recall that unlike traditional vaccines this mRNA hijacks your cellular machinery to produce an inflammatory protein - so comparing it to past vaccines in this respect is invalid. 2. Again…
> hijacks your cellular machinery No. It doesn't. This is completely ignorant misinformation. Your molecular machinery for creating proteins are doing so constantly. Introducing a bit of code that produces a protein that looks like the virus is in no way "hijacking" your molecular machinery. Your machinery happily chugs along with every other of the 10s of thousands of other proteins being produced at the same time.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Kids don't even feel this shit if they catch it. In general, sure, but that's a bit like arguing people should be able to drive drunk because drunks are more likely to survive a car accident. https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/odds-favo... > A retrospective study of nearly 8,000 trauma patients found that seven percent of people who came in sober died of their injuries, while those who were hurt whi…
Then the establishment should just be honest about it instead of trying to fear-porn parents into wanting to "protect your kids from the deadly disease".... Just say.... we are going to put your kids at risk from the vaccine because we think the ends justify the benefits for old people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if the benefits outweigh the drawbacks for society you cannot make that calculation. You cannot administer a vaccine to a healthy person just because it doesn't increase their risk of dying as much as it decreases someone else's risk of surviving. Young healthy men should not be coerced into accepting an elevated risk because getting to herd immunity or whatever might save old and at risk persons. For children a…
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
With an endemic Covid, how often will people get an infection on average?
It isn't a too trivial calculation at all.