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

Heart attacks on rise for 25-44 age group

khon2.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 311 posts

Re: Heart attacks on rise for 25-44 age group

#151

Post by justsomeadvice0 »

incrudible wrote: post #145
justsomeadvice0 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nit: mRNA vaccines were used in human trials for cancer immunotherapy starting in 2001, rabies in 2013, ebola, zika, influenza, cytamegalovirus, etc followed. It's not accurate to say the technology had "never been used in humans before" COVID19; but the US FDA had never approved widespread use of it until then.

This raises the question of why, despite being trialed for twenty years, the technology never was deemed ready for primetime until the emergence of COVID. Part of the reason is safety issues. https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna/ We assumed that the vaccine doses are low enough to not cause any unacceptable health risks, but after finding these vaccines do cause cardiac complications, particularly…

You linked to an article wherein the company itself deemed its own research into a different mRNA-type vaccine for a separate disease as not yet safe for human trials. This sounds like the type of caution you want to see from a vaccine research company.

Personally I would speculate the much larger "part of the issue" was that there was never any real need to seek authorization for mRNA vaccines in the US before COVID19, as alternatives for their targets existed. I would also speculate cardiovascular issues in mRNA COVID19 vaccines (which are real certainly) have something to do with spikey proteins in your bloodstream, and one can imagine what a more prevalent spikey virus might do to the same person. But I am not a doctor or medical researcher, just some guy on the internet who reads things; so I would not really put any stock into my speculations.

edit: my point is: it's good to be skeptical of things. Yes. It's not good to share inaccurate information, as the post above yours did.

Re: Heart attacks on rise for 25-44 age group

#152

Post by jamesblonde »

logicchains wrote: post #78
nyrulez wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's difficult to draw conclusions because first graph is not the delta in deaths, just total deaths. and southern states have always had a high cardiovascular mortality. I guess the bigger question that I often have is why the rush to completely rule out vaccines? Whenever this discussion comes up, its either complete blame or zero blame. How about investigate it like any other factor with the help of proper data? A…

>My doctor said he doesn't know if it's common enough because they are not instructed to collect this information. Some other countries are collecting this data, and it's not uncommon. Prospective studies (which compare cardiovascular health measurements of a cohort pre- and post-vaccine) show a myocarditis rate of around 0.1-1% in teenagers. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36602621/ https://www.mdpi.com/2414-6366/7/…

Many european countries stopped Moderna for men under 30 because they saw this early signal -

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/...

Re: Heart attacks on rise for 25-44 age group

#153

Post by unvaxxed_sperm »

vasco wrote: post #140
friend_and_foe wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just so I understand what you're saying, it sounds to me like covid is killing old people and something else is killing everyone else at a higher rate, correlating with vaccination status? So only old people and high risk individuals should've gotten the vaccine?

That much was obvious. Young people weren't asked to take the vaccine to protect themselves but to protect the herd.

And by „asked“ you mean (in many cases) forced.

Not to mention, the emergency auth clearly stated (in europe at least) that it was unknown if the serum prevented spread. Lookup the documents, it‘s right there.

So the reality is that young people were forced to take untested gene therapy for no medical reason at all.

Re: Heart attacks on rise for 25-44 age group

#154

Post by spaceman_2020 »

neuronic wrote: post #141
spaceman_2020 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the rush to defend vaccines. I've been vaccinated and don't regret that because in those circumstances, they were a positive health choice. But it's impossible to know the long-term impact of any medicine unless you've actually studied it, well, long-term. In 5 years, the vaccines might be death in a vial. Or they might be completely benign. You'll only know after 5 years.

Stop spreading these right wing anti-vaxxer lies, my god. "Death in a vial". Dont you feel ashamed and ridiculous posting this insane over-the-top inflammatory rhetoric? People are already discussing the science and long term effects and few people just take the vaccines at face value. And to add to your harmful, conscious spread of disinformation, you thinly veil it in "I am vaccinated myself, but..."

Way to miss the point.

Absolutely hysterical.

Re: Heart attacks on rise for 25-44 age group

#155

Post by ajsnigrutin »

lazyasciiart wrote: post #127
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, it also worrying to see science take a backseat to politics. It's not politics directly, it's lying and all the "whoopsies". I live in slovenia, so there was no trump vs others here. When I got vaccinated we had four kinds of vaccines (J&J, astrazeneca, pfeizer and moderna... if you got vacicnated abroad, also sputnik). All those vaccines were said to prevent getting a symptomatic covid infection and also…

Young people also need doctors and teachers and the entire infrastructure of society. Old people not only continue enjoying restaurants and social events but they are a significant percentage of those doctors and teachers and infrastructure workers. In Slovenia, specifically, 20% of the population is over 65. Let's say covid is dangerous if you are 55 or older. Oops, there goes 30% of doctors and 30% of teachers! Tha…

I was saying that "stuff old people do" was not limited/forbidden for unvaccinated, while "stuff young people do" was. Mostly because old people don't do a lot (except for stay at home, socialize at other peoples homes, go to the store, doctor, pharmacy)... in turn, if an old person stayed unvaccinated, it did not affect their day-to-day life. Even cufew, after 21h/22h, old people are usually home then. But we did close bars, restaurants etc for unvaccinated, also clubs (somewhat understandable) but also stuff like outside playgrounds, basketball/football fields, etc. which was illogical to most. Curfew caused kids who would otherwise drink and party outside on benches in parks to move inside into small unventilated bedrooms and stay inside until morning.

If we assume vaccines save lives, making them mandatory to get your pension (or atleast getting pension harder for unvaccinated), and left all the clubs open, we'd save more lives, than with closing the clubs and playgrounds and not affecting old people at all.

Re: Heart attacks on rise for 25-44 age group

#156

Post by z7 »

heavyset_go wrote: post #56
thinking4real wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This is what confirmation bias looks like. You weren't looking for it before, and people weren't incentivized to sensationalize athletes' medical problems in the past. Sudden cardiac problems tend to rear their heads when you're overexerting yourself, no matter how healthy you perceive yourself to be[1]. There's a reason gyms have defibrillators, it's because strenuous exercise increases your risks of sudden cardiac…

I agree the phenomenon isn't new.[1] But that doesn't mean that number of cases hasn't changed. I think what started the recent 'sudden cardiac death of athletes' speculation is more the perceived incidence than the phenomenon itself.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudden_cardiac_death_of_athlet...

Re: Heart attacks on rise for 25-44 age group

#157

Post by incrudible »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #148
incrudible wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This raises the question of why, despite being trialed for twenty years, the technology never was deemed ready for primetime until the emergence of COVID. Part of the reason is safety issues. https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna/ We assumed that the vaccine doses are low enough to not cause any unacceptable health risks, but after finding these vaccines do cause cardiac complications, particularly…

I’m confused by your link. It describes Moderna trying to use a drug to produce a liver enzyme and that was never safe, so Moderna ended up lowering their expectations with the safer and less profitable vaccines . If anything it shoes vaccines are the way to go with mRNA and the primary issue is profit.

Again, it was just an assumption that vaccines would be "safe enough", despite no mRNA vaccine having ever been rolled out at scale. The "profit" issue disappeared with COVID vaccines. You now have the FDA proposing annual COVID boosters and combined mRNA-COVID/Influenza shots for everyone, whereas European countries are age-restricting COVID boosters. If that doesn't smell like regulatory capture to you, you might suffer from COVID-induced anosmia.

Re: Heart attacks on rise for 25-44 age group

#158

Post by abcc8 »

nyrulez wrote: post #37
autoexec wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think my biggest issue with the whole thing is lack of data collection at the national level about adults who face cardiovascular issues and their vaccination/covid status. What is your evidence that there is zero data being collected on this? What is your evidence that we refuse to collect this data? I can prove that the issue is being considered along with every other side effect experienced by people taking th…

1. My doctor(s) (in USA) told me so. They were not aware of any data collection around this and my condition. I did explicitly ask them. 2. Where is this data? If it's being collected, we should be able to see it or clear conclusions from it? It's a very simple data set too. I have not seen any clear national level data or any discussion around it for vaccination status/blood clots in any media.

This type of data is being collected at large academic institutions who are doing longitudinal analyses of their patient population.

Re: Heart attacks on rise for 25-44 age group

#159

Post by tomohawk »

nyrulez wrote: post #21
SturgeonsLaw wrote: post #17

For those who are desperate to draw a link between vaccines and heart attacks, this article essentially says the opposite of that. While the paper itself doesn't differentiate between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations, it does contain a graph showing a state-by-state breakdown of acute myocardial infarction (AMI)-associated deaths: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/cms/asset/c0aed082-9f81-4a88... Dark purple is a…

It's difficult to draw conclusions because first graph is not the delta in deaths, just total deaths. and southern states have always had a high cardiovascular mortality. I guess the bigger question that I often have is why the rush to completely rule out vaccines? Whenever this discussion comes up, its either complete blame or zero blame. How about investigate it like any other factor with the help of proper data? A…

Not being curious has become a joke.

https://babylonbee.com/news/experts-say-they-dont-know-what-...

Re: Heart attacks on rise for 25-44 age group

#160

Post by incrudible »

justsomeadvice0 wrote: post #151
incrudible wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This raises the question of why, despite being trialed for twenty years, the technology never was deemed ready for primetime until the emergence of COVID. Part of the reason is safety issues. https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna/ We assumed that the vaccine doses are low enough to not cause any unacceptable health risks, but after finding these vaccines do cause cardiac complications, particularly…

You linked to an article wherein the company itself deemed its own research into a different mRNA-type vaccine for a separate disease as not yet safe for human trials. This sounds like the type of caution you want to see from a vaccine research company. Personally I would speculate the much larger "part of the issue" was that there was never any real need to seek authorization for mRNA vaccines in the US before COVID…

> I would also speculate cardiovascular issues in mRNA COVID19 vaccines (which are real certainly) have something to do with spikey proteins in your bloodstream...

All COVID vaccines deliver spike proteins into your bloodstream, but not all of them substantially raise the risk of Myocarditis.

> ...and one can imagine what a more prevalent spikey virus might do to the same person.

Imagination is not enough, we're going to need some hard data. COVID vaccines don't prevent infection. Is there a net risk reduction? This is further complicated by underestimating the number of COVID infections. Many studies presume to have found a higher risk of Myocarditis with COVID infection, but these cases tend to be biased towards health care settings. For comparison, the difference between infection fatality rate and case fatality rate may be an order of magnitude. In this study, COVID was not associated with an increased risk of Myocarditis in the unvaccinated:

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

Post reply on HN