Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 63 posts

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#31

Post by phonypc »

user743 wrote: post #17
phonypc wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WHO essentially says it lacks context. Read the "Important points to consider" heading in your link. Namely "VigiAccess cannot be used to infer any confirmed link between a suspected side effect and any specific medicine."

What data on adverse reactions would you all accept?

VAERS and its like are useful data. The issue is abusing them by implying that all reports are causally linked to the vaccine. They track adverse events following vaccination, not adverse reactions to vaccines.

They exist so that professionals can comb through the data and follow up on patterns they may find.

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#32

Post by mullingitover »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #22
mullingitover wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The same is not necessarily true for a healthy 19 year old without comorbidities who is forced to get a Covid vaccination to attend college. True, if you only narrowly focus on the immediate benefit to the individual there are head-spinning number of laws and rules that don't make sense in civilization.

What other sort of benefit is there supposed to be? The reduction in infection and transmission risk for Delta from the vaccines is marginal at best, wanes quickly, and might well be defeated completely by future variants. If we're acknowledging that the immediate risk tradeoff might be negative, these would be the first vaccines in history that people were widely expected to take on those terms.

> The reduction in infection and transmission risk for Delta from the vaccines is marginal at best

That's not what the New England Journal of Medicine says[1]:

> Only modest differences in vaccine effectiveness were noted with the delta variant as compared with the alpha variant after the receipt of two vaccine doses.

[1] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2108891

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#33

Post by AndrewBissell »

mullingitover wrote: post #32
AndrewBissell wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What other sort of benefit is there supposed to be? The reduction in infection and transmission risk for Delta from the vaccines is marginal at best, wanes quickly, and might well be defeated completely by future variants. If we're acknowledging that the immediate risk tradeoff might be negative, these would be the first vaccines in history that people were widely expected to take on those terms.

> The reduction in infection and transmission risk for Delta from the vaccines is marginal at best That's not what the New England Journal of Medicine says[1]: > Only modest differences in vaccine effectiveness were noted with the delta variant as compared with the alpha variant after the receipt of two vaccine doses. [1] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2108891

This study stopped collecting data on May 30, it's way out of date at this point especially wrt Delta and could not have captured the waning efficacy the vaccines have exhibited over time.

> Unfortunately, the vaccine’s beneficial effect on Delta transmission waned to almost negligible levels over time. In people infected 2 weeks after receiving the vaccine developed by the University of Oxford and AstraZeneca, both in the UK, the chance that an unvaccinated close contact would test positive was 57%, but 3 months later, that chance rose to 67%. The latter figure is on par with the likelihood that an unvaccinated person will spread the virus.

A reduction was also observed in people vaccinated with the jab made by US company Pfizer and German firm BioNTech. The risk of spreading the Delta infection soon after vaccination with that jab was 42%, but increased to 58% with time.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02689-y

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#34

Post by stbenjam »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #29
tjr wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Referring to the Politico article based on the anonymous source? Not sure about that; Novavax immediately put out a release today that they are still on target to submit for approval in various countries yet this year. Agreed, I'm not sure of the value of continuing to target the original virus, but it sounds like Novavax offers decent protection against known variants also. More interestingly, their vaccine directly…

Yeah it definitely seems less risky than the mRNA/adenoviral-vector approach. I know a guy in the Phase 3 trials who had some really bad side effects from the shots, but they only lasted a day. Unfortunately now he's stuck because the mandates all require one of the authorized vaccines, and there's essentially no data on whether it would be safe for him to take one after Novavax.

The CDC guidelines explicitly state clinical trial participants are ok for the mandate. My company has a mandate and I’m fine since I was part of the AstraZeneca trial.

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#35

Post by bendauphinee »

user743 wrote: post #5

2.2M+ adverse reactions in the WHO database. Of course Google, the corporate press, and "independent fact checkers" are saying it lacks context. Most people I know, know at least a few people that had adverse reactions already; let alone ADE or long-term consequences. http://www.vigiaccess.org/

Counterpoint, in my work and social circle, a group of around 50 regular contacts including several with immune issues, the worst adverse reactions that have been talked about are one had a fever for a day.

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#36

Post by SkyPuncher »

nuerow wrote: post #6

I apologize for going out on a tangent, but I jus have to draw some attention to this quote from the article: > McFadden, 44, said she was previously healthy and needed two emergency surgeries to remove massive clots in her lungs, heart and left leg. She spent nine days in the hospital, racking up $489,153 in medical bills, she said. Seriously, US of A. What the hell is this? How is this even possible?

That's "the bill". Actual, negotiated insurance rates are significantly lower.

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#37

Post by aesh2Xa1 »

Factorium wrote: post #10

https://investinganswers.com/articles/10-most-popular-stocks... Top stock owned by members of congress - Pfizer #6 Johnson and Johnson #7 Moderna stock up 387% YoY: https://investinganswers.com/articles/10-most-popular-stocks... Bill Gates invested $55million into BioNTech in October 2019: https://investors.biontech.de/news-releases/news-release-det... Why are people with COVID antibodies from successful recovery for…

It makes sense that wealthy and powerful people would invest in popular companies.

It makes sense that vaccine producers would be popular companies during two years of pandemic.

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#38

Post by Auracle »

nuerow wrote: post #6

I apologize for going out on a tangent, but I jus have to draw some attention to this quote from the article: > McFadden, 44, said she was previously healthy and needed two emergency surgeries to remove massive clots in her lungs, heart and left leg. She spent nine days in the hospital, racking up $489,153 in medical bills, she said. Seriously, US of A. What the hell is this? How is this even possible?

The estimate for the birth of our baby was over $30,000 for a normal, natural birth.

It ended up being a c-section, so I can’t wait to see what the actual total is. We don’t have a “healthcare is private” problem, we have a cost problem. Doctors, nurses, medical device companies, prescription drug makers, and everyone else get paid significantly more here than pretty much anywhere else.

Now is definitely not the time to bring up that medical professionals should be paid less though.

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#39

Post by unanswered »

mullingitover wrote: post #32
AndrewBissell wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What other sort of benefit is there supposed to be? The reduction in infection and transmission risk for Delta from the vaccines is marginal at best, wanes quickly, and might well be defeated completely by future variants. If we're acknowledging that the immediate risk tradeoff might be negative, these would be the first vaccines in history that people were widely expected to take on those terms.

> The reduction in infection and transmission risk for Delta from the vaccines is marginal at best That's not what the New England Journal of Medicine says[1]: > Only modest differences in vaccine effectiveness were noted with the delta variant as compared with the alpha variant after the receipt of two vaccine doses. [1] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2108891

> vaccine effectiveness

does not mean "effectiveness at preventing the spread of the virus", it means "effectiveness at preventing severe illness and death".

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#40

Post by tpoacher »

SkyPuncher wrote: post #36
nuerow wrote: post #6

I apologize for going out on a tangent, but I jus have to draw some attention to this quote from the article: > McFadden, 44, said she was previously healthy and needed two emergency surgeries to remove massive clots in her lungs, heart and left leg. She spent nine days in the hospital, racking up $489,153 in medical bills, she said. Seriously, US of A. What the hell is this? How is this even possible?

That's "the bill". Actual, negotiated insurance rates are significantly lower.

how lower?
Post reply on HN