Live data from Hacker News

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

link.springer.com

441–450 of 662 posts

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

#441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it coincides closely with the spikes in COVID cases we've seen. Aren't there about 100 other confounders that could be in the mix there

Which of them do you propose would cause the American public (and others worldwide; we see excess deaths increased everywhere, whether they required masking or closed schools or did very little to mitigate) to suddenly start dying in significantly higher numbers - again, of any cause - for the last two years - and especially so at the same time large COVID waves are occurring?

Does it matter which?

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

#442
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…

This has bugged me since the beginning of this mess. It ought to be possible to say "Hey this looks kind of funny, could the vaccines be having weird effects in this .0000001% of the population?" without daggers coming out all around. It seems perfectly reasonable to me that "The SARS-Cov-2 vaccines occasionally cause health problems" and "Almost everyone should get vaccinated/boosted" are both entirely true statemen…

> It ought to be possible to say "Hey this looks kind of funny, could the vaccines be having weird effects in this .0000001% of the population?" without daggers coming out all around.

That's one in a billion. No, it's not possible to reason about a weird effect affecting less than one person in all of EU + US combined.

But we do actually know what happens when there is a legit safety concern with the vaccines affecting a slice of the population, since it has happened. The AZ vaccine turned out to have rare (but not one in a billion rare), serious and even lethal, complications for young women. The public health authorities picked up on this within a month, and acted to stop the use of that vaccine first for that at-risk group and later for everyone.

That was all fairly low drama.

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

#443
post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

In my experience smart people are also far more likely to create elaborate self-reinforcing systems of belief that are detached from reality.

Any moron can understand the idea of a round Earth and stuff orbiting around it. It takes a genius to comprehend the sublime intricacies of ether vortex theory which explains how a flat Earth can still permit satellites to stay airborne over the plane.

I've met an extremely intelligent person who was convinced we never landed on the Moon and that Stanley Kubrick faked the whole thing and left clues to this in his production of The Shining. I've also met one who thinks the Nazis invented anti-gravity and are hiding the technology to this day in underground bases in Antarctica and South America.

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

#444
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…

Okay, please explain my leap in logic:

- I was curious

- I went to OECD to get datasets for COVID, excess, and all mortality [1]

- I subtracted COVID deaths from excess deaths to get “likely non-COVID excess deaths”

- then I made a chart [2], showing the ratio of COVID to non-COVID; log-2 scale with a black line at zero (equal COVID and non-COVID)

- I expected mostly COVID excess, like during the delta wave near the 2020/2021 boundary

- chart doesn’t look like that

- I would like the FDA to explain more, including serious studies

What is wrong about that process?

[1] - https://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=104676

[2] - https://zmichaelgehlke.com/images/relative-mortality.png

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

#445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We generally don't allow parents to force risky irreversible things onto their children. But also, the view of all citizens as simple children of the State seems...problematic.

> We generally don't allow parents to force risky irreversible things onto their children. We absolutely do, but that is a completely different conversation. If that doesn't work for you I am sure you can't object to conscription as a societal burden. Where are you going with this line of discussion? Or did you just want me to think of something that wasn't medical?

Conscription is a good example of a social burden unfairly dispersed and widely objected to — at least in the West. My point is the underpinning of this “one more mandatory intervention is no big deal” view is not based on reality. The State stopped forcing irreversible interventions on adults when eugenics went out of (polite) fashion. The belief compulsory acts are normal and good policy is based on something like a public health bureaucracy fantasy version of economics’ perfectly rational actor models.

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

#446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These people also seem to ignore that CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE CHANGED QUITE A BIT over the entire pandemic. Of COURSE recommendations made when the vaccine first came out might need to be modified or updated as more gets learned about possible side effects and how it interacts with different variants. These people never seem to have a problem with the changes in the polio vaccine over the years, or chickenpox

They also like to yell and scream about how "science can't make up its mind" Yes, because that's how science works. When new information is acquired, new hypotheses are created and tested.

It wasn't "science" which was changing its mind though – "science" doesn't have a mind – it was the public health authorities. The same authorities would change their recommendations over time, and authorities in different countries were making different recommendations at the same time. In part, this was due to differences in circumstances (across both time and space) around the severity of the pandemic, availability of vaccines, hospital resources, etc. But, another factor was that, despite (at any given point in time) all having largely the same scientific evidence, they sometimes interpreted it in different ways, drew different conclusions from it, differed in the weight they decided to give to individual pieces of evidence, etc. It is legitimate for people to question whether they were interpreting the available evidence correctly – and this is not just a matter of hindsight, even at the time, there were qualified professionals who disagreed with their judgements.

I think this frequent conflation of "science" with "public health authority interpretations of science" is rather misguided – and it isn't just "anti-vax" people who commit that conflation, many "pro-vax" people do the exact same thing. I've always been supportive of vaccination – indeed, I have all my recommended doses of COVID-19 vaccine – but I think the excessive rhetoric which some people use against those who express doubts has been very harmful – it has actually been a major unnecessary setback in the cause of encouraging vaccination.

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

#447
post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We all have to take risks and some of them are mandated for the good of society. What are some other risky and irreversible interventions mandated upon the individual for the good of society?

Schools spring to mind.

Schooling is mandatory but schools are not. That process is maybe arguably risky, but also not irreversible.

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

#448
post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

A 14℅ reduction in something that happens to 5%+ of people measurably and probably lowers your developmental outcome even if it is bellow the threshold of clear measure (a weaker school year that you never quite catch up from could just be random after all.)

That's a much bigger deal than whether you have 12 in a million or 24 in a million chance of something that has a 5% chance of being fatal.

Giving a population lead poisoning didn't kill any of them outright but cognitive problems in the lead generation is correlated to our higher homicide rates and many of the poorer outcomes in our generation and echo's of its affects in society.

I find it interesting that the wider anti-vax demographics overlap heavily with the safety/helicopter parenting that focuses on some extremely unlikely demise as a reason to limit the next generation in ways that will have much higher rates of earlier deaths and reduced lifestyles when considering their overall lifespan.

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

#449
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…

> 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.

That may be true overall (and it may not btw, only time will tell), but it's certainly not true on a by-indvidual basis. Someone who's, say, 18 with no major health disorders is going to experience a lot more risk of adverse outcome from any of the vaccines than from SARS-CoV-2. That's partially a function of the incredible SARS-CoV-2 outcomes in the "not old" age range but also because vaccination is also a fundamentally different intervention than exposure to the entire SARS-CoV-2 virus. If we're talking about the mRNA vaccines (Pfizer/moderna/etc), those are basically spike protein mRNA suspended in lipid nanoparticles. It makes your cells express the spike protein, not the whole SARS-CoV-2 virus. So metaphorically speaking you're getting pure spike protein antigen, and different peoples' genetic predispositions/etc are going to play out differently in that scenario as opposed to contact with the normal virus.

...Like those of the people in the case report we're looking at.

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

#450
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,…

> A question for vaccine skeptics:

I don't think it's the correct question to ask.

I've got two Pfizer shots but I know many vaccine skeptics who refused to take the shots and they aren't skeptics because of the risk/reward ratio of the vaccine vs covid. They're skeptics because the politicians and the media have repeated a great many different lies during this entire fiasco.

For a start if people were allowed to discuss the lab leak hypothesis without being called moon-landing deniers then maybe there'd have been way less skeptics.

It's the attitude of the politicians and the mainstream media that created the skeptics.

To me what the mainstream media were publishing about the Covid-19 during the outbreak and the first lockdown was approximately as correct as what they were publishing about SBF/FTX before his ponzi was exposed: a narrative they were fed.

Post reply on HN