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

301–310 of 311 posts

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

#301

Post by aliqot »

petodo wrote: post #131
fsh wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could simply check some of the papers that have already been written on this exact issue: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/research/publications/inde...

institution which was forcing people to vax and was spreading lies you can't get infected or spread virus while vaxxed is the last place I'd look for unbiased information

Then the inverse is also impossible, so this can't be a stipulation of the argument. It's a binary situation, either an institution accepted the unvaccinated or they didn't, ergo, by your logic, neither should be trusted to do this research. If not an academic institution then who? Dare I elicit a gasp from the crowd and say "The Government"? What exactly is it that would satisfy you?

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

#302

Post by collyw »

ImaCake wrote: post #300
collyw wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edward Dowd points out that one group where these problems are not increasing is the unemployed. Many people took the vaccine to stay in employment. Many other quit employment to opt out of the experimental treatment.

The health and demographics of unemployed people differ in very meaningful ways from the employed.

yes, vaccine status being one of them

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

#303

Post by collyw »

chimprich wrote: post #291
collyw wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many vaccines have actually been subject to proper long term trials? Sure VAERS is a self reported system, but long term monitoring isn't actually done in any meaningful sense. Hygiene and sewage systems have saved far more than vaccines did.The diseases that we eradicated were already in massive decline before vaccines were introduced. Viruses usually mutate to milder but faster spreading strains. It is heresy t…

> The diseases that we eradicated were already in massive decline before vaccines were introduced. The only human disease we've ever eradicated is smallpox. But semantics aside... Here's a graph of polio cases in the US. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/prevalence-of-polio-rates... The polio vaccine was introduced in the 50s. Please explain how polio was in "massive decline" before then. > Hygiene and sewage system…

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/04/14/cutter-pol...

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

#304

Post by collyw »

kelipso wrote: post #297
collyw wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not heart attacks, but Scotland is investigating a rise in neonatal deaths, which correlates with the vaccine rollout, yet has decided that it's definitely not the vaccine. Science at it's finest. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/23259523.expert-review-m...

Haha yeah, mother's vaccine status not checked, they don't know why it is happening, but definitely can't be the vaccine, wouldn't want to cause a scare you know.

What a joke.

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

#305

Post by headsoup »

autoexec wrote: post #210
ada1981 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess one question that comes up is that, has there ever been a time in history when the US government hadn’t lied to the American people and had an alternative agenda from the mainstream narrative / propaganda campaign. And why should I believe now is any different? I’ve already seen evidence of intentional misleading in the name of public health around Covid. Not to mention just the incompetency of leadership. Be…

Let's pretend for the moment that there isn't a single person in all of government who has integrity and every one of them would lie to you if it served their own ends. This is a global pandemic. Is every government everywhere corrupt? Actually, probably to some extent, yeah, but corrupt in the same way? Much less likely. Yet even if they are that's actually okay, because you don't have to trust them. You can instead…

You really are living in a rose-tinted reality, or being deliberately disingenuous. Of course we can talk about it now, the evidence is piling up enough that it can't be censored without it being obvious.

We're at the point now where all the 'smart' people are saying the 'stupid' conspiracy theorists and 'anti-vaxxers' got a lucky guess or were right by coincidence, because of course such smart people couldn't be fooled or have missed the evidence. So they defend their egos.

I do wonder if the professionals that had their reputations and credibility trashed earlier on when they were 'guessing it right' or 'fluking it' will get any apologies and be allowed to serve some humble pie... I doubt it, being wrong is a powerful thing to face, especially with the righteousness that came from 'being right.'

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

#306

Post by bboygravity »

arghnoname wrote: post #91
bboygravity wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, more papers isn't going to fix this. This "life saving vaccines are the devil" stuff is indeed just a religion now. Isn't anti-vax generally literally correlated to geographies with more religious people anyway?

It's more charitable to acknowledge that each 'side' has been pretty 'religious' on this stuff. Fauci made his was onto Christmas ornaments and so on, after all. There were pro-vaccine dance numbers, and people who went to the beach without being vaccinated or masked were harangued. There were people who 'followed the science' on this stuff, which is more contentious on general covid policy than you might think, and…

My point was that the issue wasn't the quality or lack of science. There's plenty of papers out there addressing most points people worry about (some come out a bit late, but hey... science takes time to do).

The issue is with politics and media, which you seem to agree on since you're talking about "both sides", Fauci, tribes, venom and hate etc. All of which are concepts that aren't (or shouldn't be) relevant when doing virology and other related science.

In my view this isn't science versus anti-science, it's just media (sponsored by big money) & politicians (sponsored by big money) v.s. the people.

More papers or blaming scientists isn't going to fix any of those issues.

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

#307

Post by lazyhummingbird »

nyrulez wrote: post #251
autoexec wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have not seen any clear national level data or any discussion around it for vaccination status/blood clots in any media. In research: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35582622/ In media: https://nypost.com/2022/05/05/fda-restricts-jjs-covid-19-vac... I'll be generous and suggest that your doctor misunderstood your question. VAERS is a nationwide data collection program being used to collect evidence for the advers…

I think you provide a good link that's a basic start. Here is my central issue: I still can't find basic cohort level information about blood clot incidences at the cohort level: covid/vaccinated/not vaccinated. I think this is pretty basic stuff. Since you seem to be knee or chest deep into this, any idea why this information is so hard to find? It's a pretty obvious question that I think someone like you would be c…

A cousin mentioning something and a bunch of inductive DYOR googling are both far weaker than the data provided. The main pressure on doctors is to remain scientific, which is currently incompatible with claims linking clots to the rigorously tested, surveilled, and proven vaccine. There is also a hard bias against doctors saying that spiritual possession causes epilepsy or that smoking is secretly healthy —and I’m glad.

The CDC continuously updates its surveillance of the vaccine via VAERS. Via VAERS, if any of those early warning signals reached significant levels, they would follow up with deeper studies. To date, that is not the case.

There are many questions worth asking yourself before you attribute your health issue to a vaccine:

Did I ever get COVID-19?

The risk of blood clots increases for at least 6 months after the virus.

Regardless of current fitness, have I ever had years of sedentary employment?

A computer heavy job (for instance coding) or lifestyle (say, one where you write long replies online or play videogames often) can be a major cause of cardiovascular issues for years.

Will another answer than the one you’re searching for satisfy you? Or is this truly a search for confirmation?

Nobody is saying that a link between your clots and the vaccine is impossible. They are gently reminding you that a massive body of evidence suggests it is as likely as a forest fire being caused by rain.

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

#308

Post by nyrulez »

lazyhummingbird wrote: post #307
nyrulez wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you provide a good link that's a basic start. Here is my central issue: I still can't find basic cohort level information about blood clot incidences at the cohort level: covid/vaccinated/not vaccinated. I think this is pretty basic stuff. Since you seem to be knee or chest deep into this, any idea why this information is so hard to find? It's a pretty obvious question that I think someone like you would be c…

A cousin mentioning something and a bunch of inductive DYOR googling are both far weaker than the data provided. The main pressure on doctors is to remain scientific, which is currently incompatible with claims linking clots to the rigorously tested, surveilled, and proven vaccine. There is also a hard bias against doctors saying that spiritual possession causes epilepsy or that smoking is secretly healthy —and I’m g…

There is no data that I've seen that shows blood clots for vaccinated vs covid vs unvaccinated. Everyone keeps saying there's full transparency while not linking a single source. It's quite paradoxical.

If all this data is so well connected, how come my heamtologist has no clue about this? He is a pretty senior doctor.

If data is being collected, how come my doctor didn't report this potentially adverse event?

If people are being careful about this, why did the doctor outright reject any connection between vaccination and clots, even if they happened next to each other. How is that scientific if you reject observations that don't meet your theories.

I'll believe it when I see an actual study or data on this topic. The lack of transparency around vaccinated cohorts is very evident.

If you disagree strongly, I'd love for you to link me to anything. Just saying "trust me" isn't very scientific.

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

#309

Post by nyrulez »

lazyhummingbird wrote: post #307
nyrulez wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you provide a good link that's a basic start. Here is my central issue: I still can't find basic cohort level information about blood clot incidences at the cohort level: covid/vaccinated/not vaccinated. I think this is pretty basic stuff. Since you seem to be knee or chest deep into this, any idea why this information is so hard to find? It's a pretty obvious question that I think someone like you would be c…

A cousin mentioning something and a bunch of inductive DYOR googling are both far weaker than the data provided. The main pressure on doctors is to remain scientific, which is currently incompatible with claims linking clots to the rigorously tested, surveilled, and proven vaccine. There is also a hard bias against doctors saying that spiritual possession causes epilepsy or that smoking is secretly healthy —and I’m g…

You also mention there's a massive body of evidence in this regard. Where is it? I'm genuinely curious as I've wanted to dig into it.

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

#310

Post by lazyhummingbird »

nyrulez wrote: post #308
lazyhummingbird wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A cousin mentioning something and a bunch of inductive DYOR googling are both far weaker than the data provided. The main pressure on doctors is to remain scientific, which is currently incompatible with claims linking clots to the rigorously tested, surveilled, and proven vaccine. There is also a hard bias against doctors saying that spiritual possession causes epilepsy or that smoking is secretly healthy —and I’m g…

There is no data that I've seen that shows blood clots for vaccinated vs covid vs unvaccinated. Everyone keeps saying there's full transparency while not linking a single source. It's quite paradoxical. If all this data is so well connected, how come my heamtologist has no clue about this? He is a pretty senior doctor. If data is being collected, how come my doctor didn't report this potentially adverse event? If peo…

Just to be clear, did you or did you not have COVID-19 prior to getting your blood clots? Not for the convenience of argument, but in reality.

It sounds like you’re requesting a study that nobody will conduct. Conducting a vaccinated vs. unvaccinated cohort study on blood clots before VAERS identifies blood clots as a statistically significant potential adverse effect is like conducting a study on why it’s raining when there’s not a cloud in the sky. VAERS identified ischemic stroke as a potential risk for those over 65. That was ultimately rejected as a risk by subsequent study(https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/bi...). The effect of getting COVID-19 on the same cohort is well established. You can’t Google “ischemic stroke covid” without running into a handful of studies.

If you are unable to see VAERS and the early warning apparatus for what it is, nothing will help you.

And no, nobody is publishing raw data for underpowered minds to wildly misinterpret and recast into a HIPAA violating database match.

You keep referring to things as “not scientific” but it’s you. If anyone here is saying “trust me bro” it’s the guy pitting his anecdote against millions of reports into VAERS, a body of data which contradicts the notion that clotting is even in the ballpark.

Post reply on HN