Live data from Hacker News

Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

link.springer.com

171–180 of 662 posts

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#171

The last paragraph in the article literally indicates there is no causal relationship or proof of any direct link between the vaccination and myocarditis. > "Finally, we cannot provide a definitive functional proof or a direct causal link between vaccination and myocarditis."

It states that they cannot provide a definitive proof or a causal link, not that there isn't one.

As we say in epidemiology (and other fields), absence of evidence, isn't evidence of absence.

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#172
post #65

"Interestingly, we recorded inflammatory foci predominantly in the right heart, which may suggest a gradual blood-stream derived dilution effect and based on this finding it is at least tempting to speculate that inadvertent intravascular vaccine injection may be contributive." Does this indicate that the authors believe aspirating the vaccine during administration would reduce the risk of myocarditis? I don't have a…

Yes. Complication from jab administration is something that has been widely discussed (not widely reported though). The clinical trials were supposed to show that the jab (and therefore the mRNA, and the resultant spike protein generated, which is known to be toxic) stayed in the muscle local to the injection site. What is widely speculated is that on some not-insubstantial portion of injections, the jab makes it int…

A nurse friend of mine raised this as a concern. The protocol for intramuscular injections used to be (and in some places still is) to draw the plunger back a bit first to verify that you're in muscle, and haven't hit a small vein. If you pull blood, you find new spot.

In practice this doesn't happen for covid vaccines, and her personal hypothesis was that many of the adverse reactions (myocarditis, or just being hit hard) were due to the vaccine partially being administered into a vein.

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people keep thinking young people have no risk of ending up in the hospital for Covid? So many people have, and so many have died?

statistically, it is extremely unlikely[0] for an otherwise healthy young person to end up in the hospital for covid, much like myocarditis -- i am simply interested in which is more likely for specific population subsets [0] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/figures/mm6915e3-F1.g... -- from https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm

The numbers are so small that it is hard to say -- several long-term studies are ongoing. All the evidence suggests the risk of Covid is far greater. I'm sure you know this, but covid causes significantly more cases of myocarditis than the vaccine.

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might not like that the exemption exists, but it's legal in the USA. Would you rather that religious beliefs were not respected by the government?

I would prefer the government was completely indifferent to religious beliefs. Because any belief can be construed as religious if you’re willing to take the position that religion is stupid and you don’t care about optics. So yeah, I would prefer beliefs not garner you special privileges

What special privileges are being garnered? The topsy-turvy world of the religious person existing as the exception rather than the rule is quite odd to me. But regardless, in the USA the religious exemption policy is incredibly diverse and welcoming, you are correct on that. You do not even need to communicate with your God in expressible ways to other people. What should be the limit on someone's divine communication and the restrictions upon the government they live under?

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#175
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not drawing conclusions - you invented that claim. The data I’m referring to is available in several other studies, with regards to estimated myocarditis rates in young men. But if you agree with me that it’s not unreasonable to think that is the scope of fatalities, I would urge you to integrate that new prior into things like the ethics of mandating this drug for college.

> it’s not unreasonable to think we killed tens of thousands of people with them. I mean, what is this if not a conclusion you're trying to draw?

Saying it’s not unreasonable means there is some significant probability that we may ultimately determine this to be the case. The conclusion is about the range of probabilities, not the actual state of reality. But probabilities matter when you are deploying policies like mandating kids take this drug to go to college.

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#176
post #42

Key takeaway: >>The reported incidence of (epi-)myocarditis after vaccination is low and the risks of hospitalization and death associated with COVID-19 are stated to be greater than the recorded risk associated with COVID-19 vaccination [29].

"stated" is an interesting choice there, especially when using "recorded" a few words later. It reads as being a bit untrusting of the COVID death numbers.

Are the covid death numbers trustworthy? (honest Q)

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#177

The last paragraph in the article literally indicates there is no causal relationship or proof of any direct link between the vaccination and myocarditis. > "Finally, we cannot provide a definitive functional proof or a direct causal link between vaccination and myocarditis."

But we know for certain that they were all very safe drivers /s

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#178
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem here isn't the study---of course we should study possible vaccine side effects. The problem is the massive leaps of logic being made by people who have (quite wrongly, based on available evidence) become convinced that the vaccines are a greater threat to healthy people than the virus is. As unlikely as it is that an otherwise healthy young person will die from covid, it is even less likely that they'll d…

Ok, so if you believe your chance of dying of covid is improbably small due to age and overall health, why is it necessary to be vaccinated even if there's only a small chance of side effects? Rare is not zero. I don't even take OTC pain killers like advil unless I absolutely feel like I have to.

Because a) the risk from covid, while small, is still greater than the risk from the vaccines and b) unvaccinated people are more likely to be infected and become a vector for the virus, infecting other people.

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#179
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but aren't the side-effects of covid well established, on average more severe, and much more common? You forgot to account for the risk of getting the virus. If you choose to get the vaccine, the probability is 1. But what's the probability of getting Covid? Definitely less than 1. For certain age groups (young men), the risk of complications * probability of getting the vaccine (1) was more than the risk of compli…

It's been only 3 years and basically everyone I know has had COVID, some more than once. I don't think it's significantly less than 1.

https://time.com/6170735/how-many-people-have-had-covid-19/

It's 60%. Probably.

Meanwhile most vaccinated people have had 2-4 shots. Also keep in mind immunity doesn't last forever, so you need to balance the risk of the shot within a certain timeframe versus the risk of Covid times the risk of complications within the same timeframe. You also can't compare the lifetime risk of Covid versus only 1 shot, both occur within a timeframe since immunity from the shot isn't forever.

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We claimed that vaccinated people would not spread the virus. Who is "we", I have never seen anything other the claims that there were claims. Can you point me to an epidemiologist that made this claim. > And we gave the companies producing these vaccines blanket legal immunity from any potential liability. We have ALWAYS given vaccine companies blanket legal immunity. This isn't a new thing and there are good reas…

>Who is "we", I have never seen anything other the claims that there were claims. Can you point me to an epidemiologist that made this claim. https://twitter.com/guccibase/status/1488297386208378889 Included in the video: Rochelle Walensky, Monica Gandhi

Ah, by "we", you mean politicians.

These clowns are also all saying it's 100% effective which was known to be false from day 1.

Post reply on HN