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

Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

medrxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 212 posts

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#161

Post by bavent »

loceng wrote: post #135
bavent wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren’t trying to start a productive discussion. Anti-vaxxers don’t approach debates in good faith. They tend to drop long-winded comments that vaguely link together different conspiracies and anecdotal bits of “evidence” but then never cite sources and never back up their claims when pushed.

I'm not an antivaxxer but lazy people like you won't differentiate and don't differentiate well which is why research studies published are poorly understood and bad conclusions are perpetuated and in part why we're in this mess. But yes, terrible way to start productive conversation but even when linking and putting the effort in the HN intellectual mob has already ideologically and shallowly investigated and come t…

Lazy people like me? I’ve tried engaging with anti-vaxxers. It’s completely unproductive. Every single time. When I’ve tried something a hundred times and get the same result, why bother continuing to try?

I’m also not trying to have a productive conversation with you - you started this thread with a post that basically said “woe is me, I’m going to get downvoted” and then you got downvoted. You didn’t cite any sources and I don’t really care enough to dig through your comment history to find where else you did cite them, because I am not invested in this enough.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#162

Post by bavent »

mpfundstein wrote: post #144
bavent wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren’t trying to start a productive discussion. Anti-vaxxers don’t approach debates in good faith. They tend to drop long-winded comments that vaguely link together different conspiracies and anecdotal bits of “evidence” but then never cite sources and never back up their claims when pushed.

because all anti vaxxers are the same, right?

No, they are all individual beautiful little snowflakes, except they converge on agreeing on one thing. Thinking vaccines cause $X and also are vaguely linked to other things that aren’t proven. I’m criticizing them for that one thing, that they all have in common, which does allow me to categorize them as a group, when it relates to that one thing.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#163

Post by bavent »

AndrewUnmuted wrote: post #84
bavent wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren’t trying to start a productive discussion. Anti-vaxxers don’t approach debates in good faith. They tend to drop long-winded comments that vaguely link together different conspiracies and anecdotal bits of “evidence” but then never cite sources and never back up their claims when pushed.

> Anti-vaxxers don’t approach debates in good faith. Neither do people who make blanket pronouncements about an entire broad demographic of people, after labeling them with loaded & vindictive terminology.

Neither do people who make blanket statements about people making blanket statements.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#164

Post by olaulaja »

ekianjo wrote: post #102
dboreham wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Study suggests the "90% who are fine" may not all be fine.

> Our general approach in this study was therefore as follows: (i) utilise brain imaging data from 782 participants who have visited the UKB imaging centres for two scanning sessions, on average 3 years apart, with 394 of these having contracted COVID-19 in between their two scans; Have they established with certainty that in the control group there were no-one with COVID19 infection in the first place?

Having a few false negatives in the control group shouldn't really matter since that would only make the groups more similar and hide any differences that exist rather than hallucinating ones that don't.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#165

Post by ch4s3 »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #137
ch4s3 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't make a lot of logical sense to me. > natural way that keep population in balance This is essentially a faith based belief, and not something rooted in personal risk as you previously mentioned. > All these vaccines are keeping more kindling for a bigger fire down humanity's timeline. Viral infections don't just kill you or you'll be fine. There are expensive (to society) effects of lots of people having…

I don't need the virus to kill anyone. Its part of the natural world. Viruses are literarily part of our genetic code, and may have helped to evolve the placenta. We have evolved along side of them. They're not there to only harm us, they also benefit us. It doesn't matter what I think anyway. There's a limit to how much armour you can wear. There's always a cost. And lets say each vaccine harms you just a tiny bit,…

> And lets say each vaccine harms you just a tiny bit, which they clearly do

I don’t think this is supported by evidence at all.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#166

Post by lagadu »

drno123 wrote: post #127
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #4

I wish I could get people that are avoiding the COVID vaccine “because we don’t know what the long term effects are” to realize that we have real data showing that there are long term effects from getting full blown COVID. You don’t want a tiny piece of mRNA but you want the whole organism reproducing in your body? The whole genome and all the proteins made?

The difference being, if you choose to get vaccinated, it’s 100% chance that you get mRNA. If you did not get Covid so far, the chances are going down you ever will.

Once the pandemic phase is over, it'll be yet another endemic disease, meaning that as time goes anyone's chance of getting it tends towards 100%.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#167

Post by ganzuul »

Jill_the_Pill wrote: post #130
ganzuul wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How old are you? Were you completely healthy before?

My 21-yo daughter was previously completely healthy and fit, and she has now experienced a year of long covid. Already skinny, she lost 16 pounds because food didn't register as food (messed up smell and taste) and she couldn't choke it down. She had a couple of weeks where she could tolerate almost no foods but almonds and miso soup. So much fatigue last summer that she couldn't even sit up for very long. New and pe…

I'm not blaming. I'm trying to gather data because I'm having a serious problem with trust.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#168

Post by ganzuul »

TaupeRanger wrote: post #136
pepperberg wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of looking up the original video (e.g. by using the watch id), you immediately write it off as "crackpot claims" because some unknown authority at YouTube removed it, citing broad community guidelines. Maybe we should stick to your words from 4 days ago: "Science reporting is terrible and the general education system doesn't teach rational skepticism, it teaches unconditional trust of intellectual authority."…

Statistically speaking, it is crackpot nonsense if it's removed. But if you'd like to make a specific claim I'm sure we can all tell you how wrong it is, using rational skepticism ;)

I don't usually downvote people here at all, but that was such shoddy reasoning that I think you deserve it.

The panel had three experts on the subject, including the inventor of the mRNA technology that was used to develop these vaccines, Robert Malone.

You really fell on your sword, mister.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#169

Post by r3trohack3r »

loteck wrote: post #129
r3trohack3r wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you advocating for full population vaccination of all contagious diseases with mortality rates (that have vaccines) or is there something special about COVID?

I'm introducing into your narrative a notion of morality in addition to your narrative (and the siblings narrative) of whether covid vaccination is in your self-interest.

It’s not purely self interest. If you note, my comment says my “or worse” outcome is that I steal hospital care from _someone else_ in a zero-sum game. I’m asking what is special about _this_ virus beyond being a “hospital killer.”

I don’t believe COVID has a monopoly on your narrative (chain of transmission leading to death). I’m asking if I should be special casing COVID, or treating it like any other virus.

Re: Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 in UK Biobank

#170

Post by ganzuul »

pepperberg wrote: post #116
graeme wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience on forums, when someone makes a grand contrarian claim (“vaccines are risky”) and then cites a video without explaining why it is relevant or summing it up, the claims indeed have extremely high odds of being crackpot claims.

Where do you see the "crackpot claims" in this situation? He/she just stated that "inclusive discussion is being suppressed", showing a recently removed YT video. For anyone who can't take 30s to look it up: It is a discussion between 3 individuals (2 of them already fully vaccinated with Moderna) regarding the pandemic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XkRq4PaHqo

And one of them is Robert Malone, who invented the mRNA tech that was used to develop the vaccines.

All they are trying to do is have a rational, inclusive discussion based on the data they have gathered, but they are not being allowed to do so.

Post reply on HN