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

541–550 of 662 posts

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

#541

Post by oneoff786 »

TheCrownedFox wrote: post #344
oneoff786 wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Is it your position then that it's either your personal belief or a divine communication from your God that the government should be able to discriminate based on religious beliefs, against existing human rights legislation?

I think this is not worth engaging in any further. I don’t respect your perspectives. I’ll leave it at that.

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

#542

Post by [deleted] »

tempsy wrote: post #164
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…

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.

[deleted]

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

#543

Post by bsder »

koolba wrote: post #336
lamontcg wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> My right to choose my own treatment outweighs any right you have to feel safer.

No problem. Please sign this document stating that you will not seek treatment for Covid and that hospitals can legally refuse to treat you if you contract Covid.

But, see, that didn't happen. Instead what we wind up with are anti-vaxxers begging for the vaccine after they have been put on ECMO. Yeah, unfortunately it's too late at that point.

And even worse you are now soaking up a hospital bed for 4+ months that should have gone to someone who wasn't stupid.

And even worse that that is the dying person's family giving grief to the hospital staff because someone anti-vax dying of Covid doesn't fit their reality narrative. I could at least have some sympathy for the uneducated following foolish leaders. I have NEGATIVE sympathy for those who then abuse people trying to help them when the consequences come home to roost.

When I can see tears of relief in the eyes of a nurse simply by saying "Don't worry. I'm pro-vax." we have let the idiots have too much leeway.

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

#544

Post by jasonhansel »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #504
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…

My entire issue actually has nothing to do with health, and everything to do with authoritarianism. Before the vaccine mandates and coercion I had a seething hatred of corrupt and incompetent little tyrants in positions of power, afterward was nothing new, it just confirmed what I already knew about them. I don't care if I would have a statistically better outcome with the vaccine, I took great pleasure in standing u…

When you admit to making your decision based purely on "seething hatred," can you really blame people for seeing that decision as irrational?

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

#545

Post by jasonhansel »

claytongulick wrote: post #369
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…

Many other people have replied with great information, but I'm going to respectfully disagree with: > 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. I believe the problem is that we were so convinced that our solution to covid was infallible that we removed…

> If we'd presented vaccination as informed choice, had recommendations but not coercion, I think there would have been a lot less resistance.

Honestly, I seriously doubt it. I think the resistance would have been about the same; even the most gentle "recommendation" would have been cast as coercive by those who oppose the vaccine now. All a more "gentle" approach would have done is to dissuade those on the fence.

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

#546

Post by svnt »

ccorxi wrote: post #531

What most of you still supporting "vaccine" failed to understand is that a jab cannot be developed in less that 1 year. It was a huge experiment and many people paid with either their lives or have suffered severe damage. All for a virus that kill less that common influenza, which a much more dangerous corona virus than covid.

It never had before, because a commercial mRNA vaccine had never been the right trade off of immunity vs development time.

Until COVID-19 there had not been a pandemic we needed to address with a vaccine since mRNA vaccination tech became widespread several decades ago. If we had enough time to develop a vaccine, why sell a new one that doesn’t work as well as the old kind?

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

#547

Post by bsder »

koolba wrote: post #336
lamontcg wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> It’s no different than having a bunch of chain smokers, alcoholics, or morbidly obese people clogging the medical system.

These aren't comparable. Obesity or alcoholism aren't communicable and don't lead to outbreaks. If they did, we'd be having similar discussions as to Covid.

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

#548

Post by Izkata »

shagie wrote: post #523
Izkata wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The 50 micromorts per day is from the excess deaths in NYC during spring of 2020 and comparing that mortality to being a soldier in Afghanistan in 2010. So in other words it's pretty inflated. 1) Putting covid-positive patients in nursing homes instead of isolating them 2) Excess use of ventilators set to maximum 3) Omicron 4) I feel like I'm forgetting something...

The NYC numbers are from the spring of 2020. This was before Omicron and before Delta. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e5.htm was a initial report on the excess deaths in NYC in the spring of 2020. The by age micromorts are based on a paper that was published in December of 2020. Delta was first detected in the US in Feb of 2021 and named in May of 2021 - again, those numbers are before Delta and Omicron…

> This was before Omicron and before Delta.

> The numbers may not be current, but they are not inflated. They are an accurate representation of the excess deaths at that time.

That is exactly my point for mentioning Omicron: When you introduced them above you were using them for current risk.

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

#549

Post by throwawaylinux »

jasonhansel wrote: post #544
throwawaylinux wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My entire issue actually has nothing to do with health, and everything to do with authoritarianism. Before the vaccine mandates and coercion I had a seething hatred of corrupt and incompetent little tyrants in positions of power, afterward was nothing new, it just confirmed what I already knew about them. I don't care if I would have a statistically better outcome with the vaccine, I took great pleasure in standing u…

When you admit to making your decision based purely on "seething hatred," can you really blame people for seeing that decision as irrational?

> When you admit to making your decision based purely on "seething hatred,"

I didn't "admit" any such thing. My post is there for everybody to read.

> can you really blame people for seeing that decision as irrational?

I don't care what people think of my choices, but I never blamed people or complained about what they think of me. On the contrary I was quite explicit that a large segment of the population sees subservience to authority and following the herd as positive things and can simply never comprehend an objection to authoritarianism or see anything wrong with medical coercion "for the greater good, according to our betters". Clearly they will think my decision is irrational.

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

#550

Post by Izkata »

lamontcg wrote: post #535
Izkata wrote: post #478

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. There's several studies that have shown myocarditis from the virus is indistinguishable from previously-measured myocarditis in the population in general - that the virus isn't actually causing any. At least one of them included vaccine-caused myocarditis and showed it's several times higher…

> People who were infected with COVID-19 before receiving any doses of the COVID-19 vaccines were 11 times more at risk for developing myocarditis during days 1-28 after a COVID-19 positive test. https://newsroom.heart.org/news/myocarditis-risk-significant...

If we're just going to quote stuff at each other...

> Post COVID-19 infection was not associated with either myocarditis (aHR 1.08; 95% CI 0.45 to 2.56) or pericarditis (aHR 0.53; 95% CI 0.25 to 1.13). We did not observe an increased incidence of neither pericarditis nor myocarditis in adult patients recovering from COVID-19 infection.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35456309/

But also your source is kind of bad. It doesn't have an unvaccinated control group, so from that research there's no way to know if what they found was virus or vaccine related. But they did find an age and sex based correlation which lines up with other sources saying the vaccines are bad for young men:

> The risk of COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis was higher in men younger than age 40 after a first dose of an mRNA vaccine or after a second dose of any of the 3 vaccines.

Post reply on HN