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

401–410 of 662 posts

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

#401

Post by blub »

CharlesW wrote: post #165
nyolfen wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the more interesting unaddressed question is, for whom ? i am a young-ish healthy person, i have basically no risk of ending up in the hospital for covid. what is the risk tradeoff for people similar to me, rather than an abstraction of the entire population? what is the risk tradeoff for a young child, who effectively has zero risk of serious covid?

> what is the risk tradeoff for a young child, who effectively has zero risk of serious covid? This is only true if you consider death the only "serious" outcome. Around 25% of children and adolescents who get COVID-19 will get "long COVID", with long-term effects we've just begun to understand. Plenty of "young-ish healthy people" have suffered debilitating effects.

Vaccines don’t make a major difference against Long Covid. 14-25% reduction in risk I read.

At this efficiency level they’re not an adequate preventive measure.

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

#403

Post by birken »

wsc981 wrote: post #331
skissane wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 inf…

While I think it is certainly fair to talk about the policies of other countries, I don't think just because another country has a different policy necessarily dictates that policy is better or worse.

Additionally, I think it's very easy to see something like "Denmark doesn't recommend the vaccines to anybody under 50" and conflate that it means that Denmark doesn't think vaccines were ever beneficial to people under the age of 50 (which is the leap in logic you often see on anti-vax sites). But that isn't the case. What was good health policy in 2021 is different from good health policy now, because we have way more information about the virus, better and more effective drug to treat it, new variants, etc.

Two things can be true at the same time: The vaccines are (on net) incredibly beneficial to people and the population as a whole, and yet at the present time there are certain specific populations of people whose optimal number of doses might be fewer than others.

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

#404

Post by 2devnull »

lamontcg wrote: post #381
pexabit wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

> The risk of COVID-19 infection-related myocarditis risk was cut in half among people infected after vaccination (received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine). https://newsroom.heart.org/news/myocarditis-risk-significant...

Based on the original strain. Not that I would want to argue. There are several nations that do not recommend vaccination for younger people. They could be wrong of course, but to be so certain about science of a rapidly changing virus and wave away methodological difficulties, like measuring myocarditis without an autopsy, strikes me as scientifically naive, perhaps bordering on religiosity.

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

#405

Post by josephcsible »

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,…

> multiplied by the risk of getting covid

Wouldn't you actually multiply by (the risk of getting covid without the vaccine, minus the risk of getting covid with the vaccine)?

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

#406

Post by asdf123wtf »

t0bia_s wrote: post #379
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…

There is a lot of studies on this topic. Somehow not covered in media. Which makes me even more curious. Gill J.R. et al: Autopsy Histopathologic Cardiac Findings in 2 Adolescents Following the Second COVID-19 Vaccine Dose, Arch Pathol Lab Med (2022) 146 (8):925-929 https://meridian.allenpress.com/aplm/article/146/8/925/47778... Risks of myocarditis, pericarditis, and cardiac arrhythmias associated with COVID-19 vacc…

What does "not covered in media" mean to you?

While this topic doesn't dominate the news cycle, I've seen plenty of reporting on it.

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

#407

Post by oldgradstudent »

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…

> 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.

The fact that people feel the need to say that for any criticism of an intervention says that we have long left the realm of science and entered the realm of religion.

Every intervention has benefits and harms.

Not talking about harms makes it impossible to assess the cost-benefit tradeoffs of the intervention.

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

#408

Post by driggs »

ceejayoz wrote: post #257
driggs wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> Because vaccination prevents you from spreading covid to others... I agree with your general point, but to be clear, it likely reduces your chances of doing that, to some extent. It does not prevent you from spreading COVID.

If vaccination prevents you from catching covid, then it has prevented you from spreading covid to those you would have otherwise.

If vaccination causes you to experience an early immune response, versus several asymptomatic days while unknowingly contagious, then it has prevented you from spreading covid to some of those you would have otherwise.

If vaccination results in a less severe infection with lower viral load, then it has prevented you from spreading covid to some of those you would have otherwise.

My reply was intentionally simple in order to drive home a point about selfish versus societal viewpoints.

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

#409

Post by meindnoch »

blub wrote: post #362
skissane wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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-…

I’ve been watching the vaccine discussions on HN these years and one can see that too many people are stuck fighting vaccination windmills from days gone by, while downplaying vaccine risks which by now are established and continue to be investigated as this publication shows. Meanwhile many EU countries have understood that heart problems are a real risk and have adjusted recommendations accordingly. They’ve also st…

It’s the paradox of intelligence: smart people are more prone to fight tooth and nail, and do all kinds of mental gymnastics, rather than to admit that they too have been misled. People of average or below average intelligence tend to accept it much more easily.

I don’t know if there’s already a name for this phenomenon…

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

#410

Post by commandlinefan »

vannevar wrote: post #144
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…

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…

> even less likely that they'll die from a vaccine side effect

My understanding is that there've always been risks associated with vaccines, and they were always relatively small risks. What I can't find any unbiased information about is how the risks of the Covid vaccine compare with the risks of, say, the mumps or rubella vaccines.

Post reply on HN