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

Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality

jamanetwork.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 360 posts

Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality

#241

Post by zosima »

gopher_space wrote: post #229
zosima wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am speaking about what the paper shows. There are other sources of evidence for efficacy. This paper is not a very strong source of evidence for efficacy due to some obvious uncontrolled difference between groups.

I wouldn't bother critiquing methodology without current, masters-level experience in the domain. I make incorrect assumptions when I'm even narrowly outside my own lane, and end up asking questions that clearly demonstrate e.g. my inability to parse fig . 4a.

I wouldn't bother commenting if I were hallucinating figures. There is no figure 4a.

If you look at figure 4 in the supplemental material you also see, per your expertise, that covid vaccine protects against traumatic injury. However even adjusting for the protective effect against traumatic injury there is still quite a large protective effect against all-cause mortality. So the beneficial effect of the vaccine is not solely caused by its protective effect against traumatic injury.

Or it could be, bold proposition I know, that there is a difference between the groups that both protects against traumatic injury and protects against all-cause mortality, independently of the vaccine.

Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality

#242

Post by binary132 »

raddan wrote: post #221
binary132 wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

some people might like to quantify the risks that may or may not be associated with both in order to make informed decisions unfortunately that line of reasoning was so censured that people started weaponizing it

I assume that you mean "censored" and not "censured" (different thing), but it was not, in fact, censored. It was entirely in the open. However, the information was definitely not distilled effectively for the average layperson. I remember thinking at the time that the CDC was seriously ham-handed when it came to communicating with the general public. I even initially blamed the Trump administration, but when the Bid…

No. Questioning the dominant narrative was in fact censured.

Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality

#243

Post by magicalist »

whynotmaybe wrote: post #140
dalbaugh wrote: post #5

Unfortunately, I don't think any additional evidence will convince vaccine skeptics of the safety of mRNA vaccines

I can understand skepticism, notably from a woman I know that had many unwanted bleeding and it seems she was not alone : https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12407584 Although from this study the global vaccine output is positive, the personal one seems negative for a lot of people. Many still got COVID19 and the bleeding issue, but they can't compare to what would have happened without the vaccine. Notably many…

> I can understand skepticism, notably from a woman I know that had many unwanted bleeding and it seems she was not alone : https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12407584

From that study:

> Conclusions

> The availability of COVID-19 vaccination was not associated with a change in incidence of medically attended abnormal uterine bleeding in our population of over 79,000 female patients of reproductive age. Additionally, among 2,717 patients with abnormal uterine bleeding diagnoses in the period following COVID-19 vaccine availability, receipt of the vaccine was not associated with greater bleeding severity.

Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality

#244

Post by acjohnson55 »

btilly wrote: post #129
hannob wrote: post #31

I found the intro very confusing, tbh. Particularly the "no increased risk of all-cause mortality". I mean, if we assume the vaccines worked, we'd certainly expect a decreased risk of all-case mortality (because "all-case mortality" certainly includes "covid mortality"). Reading "no increase" seems to imply "it doesn't change anything". Yeah, technically, the sentence does not say that ("no increase" can mean "no dec…

This is a general problem in many technical fields. People in a technical field, learn to "chunk" complex phrases. Their natural communication style becomes complex. Which makes them hard to understand to those outside of the field. If they want to be understood, the solution isn't to try to educate the world. It is to educate themselves. To learn how to write simply and directly. Depending on the readability test us…

Papers like this are designed to fit into the conventions that allow knowledge to compound. Not that the conventions are perfect at doing this.

I would suggest that rather than changing this convention in a big way, there needs to be good pathways for communicating the most important takeaways to the general public. Unfortunately, there's kind of a chasm between academia and popular science.

Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality

#245

Post by tripletao »

ucoclddau wrote: post #142

> Sensitivity analysis revealed that vaccinated individuals consistently had a lower risk of death, regardless of the cause This sounds like a red flag to me if you're trying to isolate the COVID vaccine as something safe. Table 2 data showed less drownings, less car crashes, less falls, less deaths related to chromosomal abnormalities... How can there not be a confounding variable or two here?

It's obviously almost all confounders, since COVID mortality is low now and choosing to obtain the vaccine correlates strongly with other medical and non-medical factors affecting all-cause mortality. The point is that no adverse effect from the vaccine offsets that confounding beneficial effect. More covariates would shrink the confounding effect, but they did the best they could with their dataset.

That confounding effect turned out to be massive, which is bad news for anyone hoping to tightly bound the vaccine risk. It's good personal news for anyone in the vaccinated group, just more as to their general life choices than as to COVID.

Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality

#247

Post by sdo72 »

I don't consider myself an anti-vaxxer. But I do have doubt in vaccines especially mRNA vaccines nowadays, and I wish these studies do more than just this.

I have 4 kids, and 3 of them got vaccinated for the covid (1 is a baby 2 years old) for the very first time with Delta. They struggle for weeks to recover, they get tired, they seem to have heart related symptoms. Eventually, those went away after months. The baby has never had covid (no vaccine). I then have never covid vaccinated them, and they have never been sick with covid even though my wife and I caught covid after our 3rd vaccine shots. We didn't do any isolation, we share things and direct contacts with them. They might have had Covid but very mild, the quick tests never showed positive.

My wife got blood clot issue that I saw blood coming out from her skin.

I struggled many months with the vaccines with weird fatigues (I'm normally very healthy in my late 30s). My gut biome seemed to change and I became quite sensitive to some food (milk proteins mostly, not just lactose intolerance)

My mom who lived in a different country got 3 shots and she struggled with heart condition for more than a year, Drs couldn't find the reason why. It was difficult for her to do anything with strength. She finally recovered after 1+ year.

There're many real and true stories like mine, I really have no idea what these studies saying anymore.

Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality

#248

Post by jibal »

sdo72 wrote: post #247

I don't consider myself an anti-vaxxer. But I do have doubt in vaccines especially mRNA vaccines nowadays, and I wish these studies do more than just this. I have 4 kids, and 3 of them got vaccinated for the covid (1 is a baby 2 years old) for the very first time with Delta. They struggle for weeks to recover, they get tired, they seem to have heart related symptoms. Eventually, those went away after months. The baby…

> I don't consider myself an anti-vaxxer.

But you write anti-vax comments filled with the usual anti-vax post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies.

Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality

#249

Post by CrossVR »

binary132 wrote: post #242
raddan wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume that you mean "censored" and not "censured" (different thing), but it was not, in fact, censored. It was entirely in the open. However, the information was definitely not distilled effectively for the average layperson. I remember thinking at the time that the CDC was seriously ham-handed when it came to communicating with the general public. I even initially blamed the Trump administration, but when the Bid…

No. Questioning the dominant narrative was in fact censured.

I believed in the lab leak theory so for me getting the vaccine was a no brainer. I could get infected by one of two things developed in a lab, only one of which had clinical trails on humans. I went with the clinically tested option.

Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality

#250

Post by jibal »

tedd4u wrote: post #238
jquaint wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, one of the only things that is proven to convince vaccine skeptics is when someone from their community dies of a preventable illness. This is a great book on this topic: https://www.amazon.com/Anti-vaxxers-How-Challenge-Misinforme...

Also, what's the overlap here between people who believe a) the unborn have a "right to life" (or forced birth as some others call it, where the parent has no choice but to take the pregnancy to term and give birth), and b) those who think the parents have every right to decide not to vaccinate their children? If you believe (a), shouldn't you believe (not b)? And if you believe (b), shouldn't you believe (not a)?

Indeed. A lot of antivaxxers mockingly say "my body, my choice" but they are highlighting their own hypocrisy, not anyone else's. One critical difference between the cases is that pregnancy is not contagious.
Post reply on HN