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

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

link.springer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 662 posts

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

#331

Post by wsc981 »

skissane wrote: post #303
vannevar wrote: post #144

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…

> 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. In some cases, it may well be true that the vaccine is a greater risk than the virus. For example, in Australia, the official recommendation is that healthy people under 30 not receive a fourth dose of COVID-…

Denmark doesn’t recommend COVID vaccines anymore to anyone under 50 who is not at risk or work in health sector [0].

> People aged under 50 are generally not at particularly higher risk of becoming severely ill from covid-19. In addition, younger people aged under 50 are well protected against becoming severely ill from covid-19, as a very large number of them have already been vaccinated and have previously been infected with covid-19, and there is consequently good immunity among this part of the population.

———

[0]: https://sst.dk/en/English/Corona-eng/Vaccination-against-cov...

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

#332

Post by kodyo »

nulld3v wrote: post #67

I am vaccinated but I am upvoting this post because I believe that it is important to investigate these cases to determine how to improve future vaccines. I really don't like how this topic seems to be treated like some fringe conspiracy theory. Maybe it is just a conspiracy, but we won't ever know until sufficient research has been done. Currently, I still believe that people should vaccinate, even if vaccines cause…

If you're over 80, you should probably get vaccinated.

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

#333

Post by pexabit »

lamontcg wrote: post #294
tempsy wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 the risk of e.g. dying of myocarditis from the virus still exceeds the risk of dying of myocarditis from the vaccine. Particularly with the mRNA vaccines there isn't much in the vaccine that isn't in the virus already. There has to be a name for this fallacy. It is like we're living in the dark ages where contracting covid is just "God's will" and it doesn't count in risk assessments, while no matter how smal…

That isn't relevant because there is no evidence that the vaccine reduces your risk of suffering from myocarditis after infection. (It isn't even necessarily true, but that is a separate matter).

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

#334

Post by acdha »

ren_engineer wrote: post #302
librish wrote: post #39

A question for vaccine skeptics: For it to be a reasonable choice to not want to take the vaccine wouldn't you need to balance the risk of death / complications from the vaccine against the risk of death / complications from covid multiplied by the risk of getting covid? There seems to be a lot of "aha I knew it" whenever any side-effect of the vaccine is found, but aren't the side-effects of covid well established,…

>For it to be a reasonable choice to not want to take the vaccine wouldn't you need to balance the risk of death / complications from the vaccine against the risk of death / complications from covid multiplied by the risk of getting covid? a huge chunk of the population already got covid during the entire year no vaccine existed and have natural immunity, so that's not really a factor at this point. The risk of getti…

> a huge chunk of the population already got covid during the entire year no vaccine existed and have natural immunity, so that's not really a factor at this point.

The new variants are effective at evading immunity from earlier variants so, no, that's not moot. Even without evasion you'd still need to consider how quickly immunity wanes, too. The vaccines are holding up well for avoiding hospitalization but you're still looking at multiple per year given how much COVID has been mutating.

https://erictopol.substack.com/p/the-new-covid-wave

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

#335

Post by bombcar »

ajross wrote: post #319
danhak wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that there were coercive government mandates. "Almost everyone should get vaccinated" does not mean the government should coerce everyone into making the correct medical decision by barring them from employment or access to private establishments. Absent a very compelling reason, people should be free to go against medical advice. People have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies. People h…

> the government should coerce everyone into making the correct medical decision by barring them from employment or access to private establishments. But... the government has been doing that for decades and decades, since the very invention of the vaccine! Why is that "The Issue" when there's suddenly a pandemic and it's important, vs. when you needed to show your vaccination records to join the military or go to sc…

The "vaccine mandates" that have been around since the 90s have been relatively weak or non-existent, via any number of possible exemptions.

Perhaps the military had some say but it's relatively easy to not accidentally enlist.

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

#336

Post by koolba »

lamontcg wrote: post #296
danhak wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that there were coercive government mandates. "Almost everyone should get vaccinated" does not mean the government should coerce everyone into making the correct medical decision by barring them from employment or access to private establishments. Absent a very compelling reason, people should be free to go against medical advice. People have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies. People h…

> a highly specious argument that the unvaccinated were putting other people at significant risk. The unvaccinated were filling up the hospitals which was putting other people at risk. Your right to gamble with your health ends when you expect to be able to get treatment if the gamble comes out badly.

> The unvaccinated were filling up the hospitals which was putting other people at risk.

> Your right to gamble with your health ends when you expect to be able to get treatment if the gamble comes out badly.

My right to choose my own treatment outweighs any right you have to feel safer. That includes you feeling safe that the local hospital system will not be at capacity if you have to be admitted.

It’s no different than having a bunch of chain smokers, alcoholics, or morbidly obese people clogging the medical system. People have the right to make potentially destructive choices that are not directly harmful to those around them.

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

#337

Post by cnelsenmilt »

woodruffw wrote: post #306
lamontcg wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the risk of e.g. dying of myocarditis from the virus still exceeds the risk of dying of myocarditis from the vaccine. Particularly with the mRNA vaccines there isn't much in the vaccine that isn't in the virus already. There has to be a name for this fallacy. It is like we're living in the dark ages where contracting covid is just "God's will" and it doesn't count in risk assessments, while no matter how smal…

It's definitely not a standard name, but I call kind of reasoning error "active/passive bias": we're generally much more afraid of risks that manifest from action (mauled by a shark while swimming, getting in a car crash) than inaction (dying of obesity, getting hit by a car on the sidewalk). In the case of COVID-19: you have to actively get the vaccine, meaning that people overweight its risks relative to the risks…

I think you're right, and an additional factor is that the vaccine is tangible and certain where the virus is invisible and may or may not be present in any given situation (and in unknown quantity).

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

#338

Post by adamiscool8 »

librish wrote: post #315
adamiscool8 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The true hospitalization risk from COVID could be 1/4th to 1/10th that given that cases are widely estimated to be 4-10X what was reported. The serious adverse event definition and rates are defined here: https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/ut... 1 in 9000 doses reportedly results in a SAE, so if you are mandated to take 4 doses, your risk becomes ~0.04% or ~1/2500. This also does not factor in…

I'm looking at your link but I can't find anything about serious events controlled for age group (to make it a fair comparison to your covid hostpitalisation number). Is the data in there somewhere?

Would be nice, but all they volunteer is that the adverse event rate is highest in the 30-50 year olds. Given that, I don’t think it makes a material difference

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

#339

Post by oneoff786 »

TheCrownedFox wrote: post #256
oneoff786 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What special privileges are being garnered? The exemption > What should be the limit on someone's divine communication and the restrictions upon the government they live under? None. But your definition of divine communication should not override otherwise unrelated rules.

I would posit that the special privilege has been given to the non-religious, in that they have been able to openly discriminate against religious people in violation of existing laws. I would suggest looking into the EEOC regulations mentioned by someone else in this thread and Title VII of the 1964 civil rights act.

By posting that you have discriminated against my religious beliefs. So you’re just as bad as an offender. So it’s really a moot point.

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

#340

Post by gdavisson »

vikingerik wrote: post #281
shagie wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That first part is a mistaken belief. There's also a useful metric for the "chance of dying" - it's known as a micromort. Each micromort is a one in a million chance of dying https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromort A fair bit of statistical work has been done on COVID-19 and it is summarized in the wikipedia article. AstraZeneca vaccination against COVID-19 – 2.9 micromorts[31] COVID-19 infection at age 10 – 20 micro…

These numbers are useless going forward if they are based on the original Covid-19 strains and not the Omicron strains, which now account for virtually every case and are tens of times less lethal.

That's not true. Death rates are now much lower, but that seems to be mostly due to people having (partial) immunity due to vaccination and/or previous infection, and better treatment. Omicron variants are less intrinsically severe than delta, but delta was more intrinsically severe than the earlier variants, so it's not clear omicron's actually any lower than the original strain, alpha, etc.

For example, according to "Challenges in Inferring Intrinsic Severity of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant" (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2119682?query=fea...): "This meaningful but fairly small difference [vs Delta] implies that omicron, alpha, and wild-type SARS-CoV-2 have similar intrinsic severity."

Post reply on HN