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

641–650 of 662 posts

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

#641

Post by ifyoubuildit »

kurthr wrote: post #635
bombcar wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we've shown that the vaccine doesn't prevent transmission, so not getting it is an individual issue ...

So you filling up ICUs where there's no room for people who bothered to help their fellow citizens with heart attacks, car crashes, or cancer treatment is transmission? That is a different definition of transmission than I am aware of. Can you please provide a dictionary or other reference? In case you were wondering when ICUs were full of respiratory diseases, that would be last week.

If 100 healthy unvaccinated people in their mid 30s caught delta, how many of them would you expect to end up in the ICU?

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

#642

Post by chedca21 »

thewizardofaus wrote: post #46
chedca21 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But wait 15 minutes to see if your child gets anaphylaxis from them. We could have tested for allergy before giving the vaccine but its more convenient to have you wait around after. Don't worry if you experience allergic shock we have epinephrine on standby. It might not work and its use is associated with Alzheimer's onset but don't worry! Safe and effective!

"But wait 15 minutes to see if your child gets anaphylaxis from them. We could have tested for allergy before giving the vaccine but its more convenient to have you wait around after." The waiting period of 15 minutes after a vaccine has always been recommended. It's standard medical recommendation and safety.

That's like saying you don't need to look both ways before crossing the street because its not the status quo

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

#643

Post by chedca21 »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #266
LarryMullins wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got a tetanus shot a year ago and they didn't ask me to wait around afterwards. They just handed me the paperwork and showed me the door (this was after they had already stitched me up.) I see the CDC website says that a 15 minute wait after getting a tetanus shot is recommended due to a fainting risk. But I bet this is not widely observed. I surmise they had already judged me to not be a fainting risk, since I did…

The CDC discusses anaphylaxis as a possible side effect of the tetanus shot too[1]. It would seem the difference between the two is an adherence to protocol as opposed to risk profiles. According to the CDC the rate of anaphylaxis is incredibly low with the COVID shot[2]. [1] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/general-recs/adve... [2] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7002e1.htm

VAERS includes thousands of reports of death including broad anaphylaxis following their vaccination for CV. So what are you saying? Those lives are an acceptable cost for the convenience of skipping failsafes?

You're essentially giving full confidence to an industry - so why stop at covid? Shouldn't you prophylactically vaccinate yourself against all the viruses on earth?

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

#644

Post by dang »

dontwearitout wrote: post #7
canadiantim wrote: post #4

I'm surprised this sort of post is even allowed to be discussed

I agree, it'll probably be scrubbed from the frontpage shortly. It's sad that this is the case, especially since it's published in a scientific journal.

The thread spent 11 hours on HN's front page.

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

#645

Post by chedca21 »

oneoff786 wrote: post #209
chedca21 wrote: post #15

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425/rr-31 Covid-19: politicisation, “corruption,” and suppression of science "Professor John Ioannidis of Stanford University, quotes an infection fatality rate (IFR) for Covid of 0.00-0.57% (0.05% for under 70s), far lower than originally feared and no different to severe flu" -March 2020 The bigger scandal is how covid case:fatality rate was so much higher in some places than t…

Professor ioannidis forecasted 10,000 deaths in the US as a mid range guess of what to expect. He’s not exactly a good appeal to authority.

Ioannidis did a antigen survey and found the vast majority of cases were mild; https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/340124

A survey by the most cited epidemiologist alive is not a forecast for one. It is the best appeal to authority one can make. I've seen it shown that h1n1 in england in 2009 had a IFR of 0.05% which is greater than the revised figure for covid.

Amazing how all the proof in the world makes such little difference to the average Luddite who will just defer to authority regardless. Stanley Milgram was clearly right about everything he said.

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

#646

Post by rednerrus »

eli wrote: post #630
rednerrus wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to https://www.health.state.mn.us/diseases/coronavirus/stats/vb... , During the past 60 days for people 18-49 (the cohort sizes are suspect) COVID cases per 100,000 were as follows: Not fully vaxxed: 98.0 Fully vaxxed: 70.3 Boosted: 92.8 For 49-64 (again with the cohort sizing) per 100,000 cases are: Not fully vaxxed: 90.0 Fully vaxxed: 86.7 Boosted: 96.7 Over 65 cases: Not fully vaxxed: 390.05 Fully vaxxed…

Just looking at last 60 days in MN seems a bit cherry picked and ignores confounding variables. Nationally people 12+ who were vaccinated were 3.2x less likely to test positive for covid in October 2022. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-s... . (The protection against serious illness and death is obviously much stronger.) The CDC summarizes and caveats the data as follows (note particularly t…

Lumping all people over the age of 12 together doesn't address what I was saying. I used the data I could find that had cohorts by age and vaccination status. I'm trying to dig through your source to see what the numbers look like per age cohort. I'm assuming we are going to find similar numbers in your data as we did in the MN data.

As for 60 days, that seems fair as that's likely to capture the prevalence of the most recent variants and not delta, which we know the vaccine worked well against...

So, looking at your source for the last 60 days, if you're in the 18-49 range your likelihood of getting Covid is about 2x if you're not vaxed and 2.2x if your not boosted.

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

#647

Post by kurthr »

ifyoubuildit wrote: post #641
kurthr wrote: post #635

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you filling up ICUs where there's no room for people who bothered to help their fellow citizens with heart attacks, car crashes, or cancer treatment is transmission? That is a different definition of transmission than I am aware of. Can you please provide a dictionary or other reference? In case you were wondering when ICUs were full of respiratory diseases, that would be last week.

If 100 healthy unvaccinated people in their mid 30s caught delta, how many of them would you expect to end up in the ICU?

Wow, what a cherry picked choice, too bad it's still awful and even an overly generous comparison makes that apparent.

   There are 23k ICU beds in the US.
   The population of the US is 330M. 
   The hospitalization rate for COVID was ~120/100k in 30 year olds.
   Average stay in ICU for COVID was 2-5 weeks.
So if the entire US was made up of unvaxed 30 year olds and 5% of them caught COVID every 2-5 weeks they would require ~3300x120x5%=20k ICU beds for at least an entire year! And since ICUs are normally about 30-50% full with other catastrophic medical events, that means someone else has to die for a self-important exercise of freedumb.

Normally, 30 year olds are healthy and don't present so highly in the hospitals or ICUs so on a percentage basis it's even worse (normal ~2%/decade vs ~20%/decade for 80yrs old). God forbid you're in rural America or your skin color is dark so you don't have access to the beds available in the cities. If you can't be polite to others, you shouldn't expect them to be polite to you.

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

#648

Post by oneoff786 »

chedca21 wrote: post #645
oneoff786 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Professor ioannidis forecasted 10,000 deaths in the US as a mid range guess of what to expect. He’s not exactly a good appeal to authority.

Ioannidis did a antigen survey and found the vast majority of cases were mild; https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/340124 A survey by the most cited epidemiologist alive is not a forecast for one. It is the best appeal to authority one can make. I've seen it shown that h1n1 in england in 2009 had a IFR of 0.05% which is greater than the revised figure for covid. Amazing how all the proof in the world makes such li…

The vast majority of cases are mild, yes. This doesn’t change the fact that Ionnadis’ predictions of the severity of the pandemic were off by a factor of x100.

Here is a pretty good recap of his blundering walk through covid

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/10000-deaths/

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

#649

Post by ifyoubuildit »

kurthr wrote: post #647
ifyoubuildit wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If 100 healthy unvaccinated people in their mid 30s caught delta, how many of them would you expect to end up in the ICU?

Wow, what a cherry picked choice, too bad it's still awful and even an overly generous comparison makes that apparent. There are 23k ICU beds in the US. The population of the US is 330M. The hospitalization rate for COVID was ~120/100k in 30 year olds. Average stay in ICU for COVID was 2-5 weeks. So if the entire US was made up of unvaxed 30 year olds and 5% of them caught COVID every 2-5 weeks they would require ~33…

> The hospitalization rate for COVID was ~120/100k in 30 year olds.

So I think that roughly answers the question, you might expect something like .12 people to be hospitalized (does that include ICU? Do these people have prior exposures? Comorbidities?).

I just ask because I think not everyone is aware yet that covid was (and is) a disease with a wide range of outcomes. I think the number you cited would surprise quite a few people. Many seem to think it was basically like playing russian roulette no matter your situation, and would have guessed a double digit number.

I'm not making any kind of claim that people shouldn't get vaccinated. Just trying to show that some individuals deciding not to get vaccinated isn't exactly as murderous as some might think.

I apologize if this didn't seem like a polite question. Thank you for indulging me.

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

#650

Post by wpietri »

emmelaich wrote: post #587
wpietri wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your theory is that the best way to prevent AIDS deaths is quarantining people? That seems extreme. Regardless, it's not one of the diseases listed on the linked page, and it's very different in nature than the ones there, so that sounds like a red herring to me.

WTH? No. How can you get such a meaning from that. It's the opposite!

You were the only one here suggesting people with HIV were relevant to quarantining. So since neither I nor the CDC thought that was a good idea, then either you did or it was a straw man.
Post reply on HN