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

Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 315 posts

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#121

Post by OrangeMonkey »

poorbutdebtfree wrote: post #70
in_cahoots wrote: post #9

As someone who was trying to conceive while the vaccine rolled out, this isn’t surprising. People were regularly reporting basal temperature spikes, delayed ovulation, and delayed periods. This is a community that is extremely data-oriented, since with the right measurements you’re able to predict your fertile (or non-fertile) window. I was disappointed to see how little research there was into menstruation at the ti…

There were several posters on HN pointing out menstrual cycles anecdotes last year and they were largely down voted and possibly shadowbanned. You don't even need censors anymore when the majority decides what is acceptable thought.

I work in healthcare and life sciences research and I have to censor myself because my account will be banned if I don't. I literally do this for a living, but if I say something a moderator or admin doesnt like or that they feel 'awkward' about I would be gone.

Long in the future, when people can admit they are wrong, we will look back on this period with disgust. But, for now, carry on everyone - just a few more people banned and finally we can stop the spread.

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#122

Post by StillBored »

PKop wrote: post #97
StillBored wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After it already went endemic, and the transmissiblity went through the roof. Not sure why that is hard to understand. If this virus killed 95% of people would you be arguing against lockdowns? I think most people can agree that its one of those to little to late situations in china and they need to reconsider at this point, but that doesn't make what they are trying to do wrong.

People that think the spread of this coronavirus could ever have been stopped, let alone without destroying social fabric, mental health and causing an economic depression/hyperinflation are insane.

The 95% thing was a hypothetical. But lets rephrase it a bit.

Lets say another virus is discovered tomorrow, how high would the mortality have to be before you were to accept all those effects you list?

And lastly, how high would it have to be before you would accept actually shooting people who violated quarantine procedures? With the understanding that a statement like never, could mean the extinction of humanity (a valid choice I guess).

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#123

Post by spfzero »

jmcgough wrote: post #28
PKop wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here again a blatant lack of clarity around the issue. Who are dying and at what rate? What are their comorbidities? What is the vax status of those that are dying, presumably many have taken the vaccine anyways yes? But you do you, is the point. I'm perfectly fine with my choice of not taking it: I'm not overweight, I lift weights and exercise regularly, have low bodyfat percent, I get plenty of sunlight for Vitamin…

> But you do you, is the point I've never understood this type of selfishness. If you get sick you will, on average, infect another 2-3 people. It's not just about you.

The R number has never been that high, where did you get it from? If it were "2-3 people", every variant, except maybe the latest, would have infected every person on earth by now.

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#124

Post by PKop »

woodruffw wrote: post #73
PKop wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here again a blatant lack of clarity around the issue. Who are dying and at what rate? What are their comorbidities? What is the vax status of those that are dying, presumably many have taken the vaccine anyways yes? But you do you, is the point. I'm perfectly fine with my choice of not taking it: I'm not overweight, I lift weights and exercise regularly, have low bodyfat percent, I get plenty of sunlight for Vitamin…

This kind of skepticism goes both ways: you could get COVID next week and discover that you have a latent comorbidity that otherwise would never have affected you. From a public health perspective, universal (or near-universal) vaccination is an unequivocal good. Given the sum of what we know about both COVID and any side effects of vaccination, this remains the case.

This is an abuse of language: "universal vaccination"

Is it a vaccine, or a therapy? Why does the supposed efficacy of the vaccines ability to prevent spread of covid wane so quickly? At best the vax is novel therapy that temporarily boosts immune system to fight the current strain. But whatever the side effects of this mechanism, they can accumulate with each successive round of boosters. Is it safe to keep taking these shots every 6 to 12 months? Who knows... but if they have to be repeatedly taken, they clearly do not effectively stop the spread of covid which the evidence shows.

I'll take my chances as having good enough genetics and lifestyle, and being young enough, in aggregate to tip the scales well past the point where getting covid and whatever natural immunity that it provides is just fine.

>latent comorbidity

Yea and I can get hit by a bus tomorrow. The main comorbidities that dominate the stats as present in over 80% of deaths are obesity and age. I have neither. We have to be realistic here.

Look at Haiti vs New Zealand regarding vax rates vs death rates. It is not unequivocally good.

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#125

Post by OrangeMonkey »

moistly wrote: post #75

Quoted post unavailable.

My friend, I think you are assuming that everyone shares equal risk and that is simply and unequivocally untrue.

When biostats does a project, we have to stratify our patient comparison groups on age, gender, and sometimes even 'approximate cash' as all of these change risks and outcomes. The outcome for healthy 60 year olds.

The question is not 'is the vaccine better than the infection' - its 'for healthy women in child bearing age, is the impact of a vaccine better than the impact of an infection on their fertility.'

I am guessing that you don't have quite the eye roll for this more nuanced question.

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#126

Post by jomjomv »

throwaway406382 wrote: post #111
manwe150 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How bad is it for health? This paper also notes that the virus itself is of great concern foremost, so any conclusion must be in comparison to the alternative (aka the control group): “Studies and anecdotal reports are already demonstrating that menstrual function may be disrupted long term [by the virus], particularly in those with long COVID (32–35)” It seems so many commenters here miss that sentence, and live in…

It is possible to take a finite duration and look at the unvaccinated+covid, unvaccinated+no-covid, vaccinated+covid, vaccinated+no-covid and see differences. And the signals a so large between unvaccinated and vaccinated you don't need much in the way of fancy stats. Also consider that it wasn't until the late 90's that the flu vaccine was approved for pregnant women and they were still worried about it. So we have…

Which vaccine does your research refer to? Can you share?

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#127

Post by throwaway406382 »

tiahura wrote: post #114
throwaway406382 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a throwaway because of the potential backlash...This paper is pure bull. They did a survey of 30k people and asked them about their experience and then said that the vaccine didn't cause anything and that we should trust our institutions. They didn't even have a control (unvaccinated) group! Just 30k vaccinated folks who responded to a survey about whether they perceived more/less bleeding, and such. I'm actuall…

How do you explain the fact that the US birth rate dipped (barely) pre-vaccine and has crept back up post-vaccine? https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/natality-dashboard.htm#

Well, I'm not a doctor, just someone doing stats for doctors...but I think we're going to start seeing it as we're reaching the 9-month mark from the big push for child-bearing-age vaccination. It's starting to show up in Sweden and (I think) Taiwan, but it's not something I'm really studying.

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/sweden-birthrate-update-m...

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#128

Post by manwe150 »

throwaway406382 wrote: post #111
manwe150 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How bad is it for health? This paper also notes that the virus itself is of great concern foremost, so any conclusion must be in comparison to the alternative (aka the control group): “Studies and anecdotal reports are already demonstrating that menstrual function may be disrupted long term [by the virus], particularly in those with long COVID (32–35)” It seems so many commenters here miss that sentence, and live in…

It is possible to take a finite duration and look at the unvaccinated+covid, unvaccinated+no-covid, vaccinated+covid, vaccinated+no-covid and see differences. And the signals a so large between unvaccinated and vaccinated you don't need much in the way of fancy stats. Also consider that it wasn't until the late 90's that the flu vaccine was approved for pregnant women and they were still worried about it. So we have…

Good, that is what I was hoping to hear. Looking forward to seeing it published. Though unvaccinated+no-covid does not exist in steady state, so any signal that includes them cannot be extrapolated into the future. But it is seeming like vaccinated+no-covid won’t exist either in the long term steady-state. So we might eventually be having to deal statistically with considering frequency of infection instead of binary yes/no. Lots of math to consider. Best wishes to you in this.

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#129

Post by OrangeMonkey »

Nextgrid wrote: post #72
junofan wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> correct choice of action Correct? To… delay conception? According to… you? I am not comfortable leaving decisions like that to others.

There’s an argument for forcing this decision if it affects others. The prevailing theory, at least at the time, was that widespread vaccination would reduce spread and protect everyone including the unvaccinated. In that case, it could make sense to force people to delay if it means everyone ends up better off overall.

My wife and I are at the end of our child-capable years. A delay, even of a year or two, is likely to leave us without.

I know you didn't mean this the way it sounded. I know you are probably well educated and think your choices are obvious. I will only state that I have very strong feelings towards someone who tries to force a decision like this on someone else.

Re: Trends in menstrual bleeding changes after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination

#130

Post by NullPrefix »

Zigurd wrote: post #118
iratewizard wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thalidomide is out of your system by your first grandchild.

Thalidomide caused birth defects because it is in your system during pregnancy. Thalidomide is still in use to treat leprosy. Thalidomide does not cause second-generation birth defects.

>Thalidomide does not cause second-generation birth defects.

That's exactly what the parent commenter said. Your children are affected, but your first grandchildren should be safe.

Post reply on HN