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

Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 415 posts

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#391

Post by mike_hearn »

eganist wrote: post #260
trhway wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone you come into contact with to take that same risk how come so if those "everyone" got vaccinated? I mean all the risk groups who has clearly higher risk from covid than vaccine should definitely go for vaccine. The rest - personal choice of risk. And as a healthy 49 years old, i'm taking my chance with covid and have no plans for vaccination (i was always laughing at anti-vaxxers, yet seeing all misinforma…

> (i was always laughing at anti-vaxxers, yet seeing all misinformation and propaganda (the smell of USSR strength propaganda is just overwhelming) around covid i think i'll pass this one) No, you weren't. A common false-flag ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag ) attack involves presenting oneself as a member of an opposing viewpoint in order to find adherents for the desired viewpoint. The tell is your use of…

You should apologize to trhway. He's proven that his statement was correct with a comment he made here on HN in 2015 where he does indeed take a (very) pro-vax position.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#392

Post by EMM_386 »

taxicabjesus wrote: post #337
mike_hearn wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alright. As an exhausted 37 year old, I'm going to stick my neck out and explain why I've chosen to put myself at the back of the queue for vaccines this time around. I'm sure the authorities will find some way to force me to take it at some point, but refusing these vaccines is a rational position. You may not agree with it, but it's based on rationality and logic. So here are my reasons. Firstly, I don't believe CO…

I appreciate your comment. > I'm going to stick my neck out and explain why I've chosen to put myself at the back of the queue for vaccines this time around. I'm not getting vaccinated because I think I had "Early Covid", which I define as a case of SARS-CoV-2 before there was a test to diagnose it. Someone on Twitter said the timeline promoted by the media is impossible [2]; Michael Burry (MD in The Big Short [4]) p…

> I'm not getting vaccinated because I think I had "Early Covid", which I define as a case of SARS-CoV-2 before there was a test to diagnose it.

There is a very high chance you can get Covid-19 again, hence why the vaccines are going to require boosters.

If you want a dangerous, man-made virus hanging out repeatedly in your vital organs, that's your choice. I'd much rather prime my immune system to handle it via a vaccine so I don't have to have it in my heart, lungs, kidneys, pancreas, etc.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7239191/

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41575-020-00389-y

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#393

Post by fwip »

jlokier wrote: post #131
makomk wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trouble is that the people apparently at risk from this are not the people at risk from Covid-19. The risk to people between the ages of 12 and 24 from Covid is really, really small. Especially towards the lower end of that age range, most countries seem to be seeing low single-digit per million deaths: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4...

The risk of death from Covid-19 is low in that age range. But what about the risk of heart inflammation from Covid-19 in that age group, possibly with no other Covid symptoms?

There's also the relatively high chance that you'll pass the infection on to another person, who may not be nearly as healthy/resilient as you.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#394

Post by Pyramus »

mike_hearn wrote: post #374
cloverich wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Expressing spike protein and being destroyed by the immune system is a disruption of the normal cellular function. That’s how the immmune system works in general, with or without the vaccine. > what you're saying is that there's effectively no difference to the recipient beyond the fact that the artificial self-replicating mRNA might be higher "quality" in some way It’s the difference between taking a known dose wi…

There are many viruses in the world that have never been wiped out, and which I've never caught, nor have any other people I know. The assumption that eventually SARS-CoV-2 will infect 100% of the population is a common modelling assumption. When I went looking for validation of it, I couldn't find any. As for known dosages, as I say above, I couldn't find any information comparing dosages or cell death levels of vac…

> When I went looking for validation of it, I couldn't find any.

It's unlikely you will find validation outside an entry-level text book for virology or epidemiology. From my understanding it's a fundamental assumption that's easy to verify: ALL viruses with a similar transmissibility profile as SARS-Cov-2 (high R0, aerosols) have become endemic, that includes e.g. seasonal influenza and all other human coronaviruses.

That's the reason seasonal influenza is not a big issue most of the time, because we already had it in the past (or a related strain) and our immune system is primed. This happens usually as children and is the reason why both young children and their parents are a lot more ill than the average.

A completely new influenza strain, however, has a similar pandemic potential as SARS-Cov-2, and one hypothesis why the 1918 influenza was so deadly for younger generations is that they likely had not encountered it before, while the older had.

In fact, if SARS-Cov-2 wouldn't go the same route as basically all similar viruses have done before, it would be a big surprise. Try to speak to an expert in the field, preferably a virologist or an epidemiologist.

Somewhat related: it's a common cognitive bias to trust self-generated knowledge more than the knowledge from others.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#395

Post by ppf »

JamisonM wrote: post #386
ppf wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reduced case numbers is not the same as reduced transmission. As the vaccines have only been tested to reduce symptoms, it would not be surprising that we are seeing fewer cases. In fact, it would be expected, as people don't generally test unless they have symptoms.

This is so hopelessly stupid I just feel sorry for you at this point. If you think that the hospitals just magically emptied out and the virus is still circulating at the same rate as before vaccinations started in every jurisdiction that has significant vaccination rates you are hopelessly lost. But I know you are not hopelessly lost, you are just not engaged in an honest discussion.

My turn to accuse you of dishonesty - intellectual, this time. All the vaccine developers have promised about the vaccines is that they will reduce symptoms, as I'm sure you are fully aware. Unless some later study is done that provides some more concrete data on exactly how the vaccine is achieving what it is, at the moment all we can say is that the benefits we see (reduced hospitalisations and deaths, as well as some amount of reduced transmission) are a secondary effect of that primary benefit.

In case you missed it - I am not denying that the vaccines have done good - I am just very carefully sticking to what the vaccine developers themselves have said about the vaccine, which does not include anything about reducing transmission.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#396

Post by thatswrong0 »

gabriel9 wrote: post #67
thatswrong0 wrote: post #3

Anecdote: I had this reaction to the 2nd dose of the Pfizer vaccine, saw a cardiologist and she mentioned that she’s been seeing this quite a bit after the second dose. Have had to lay low for a month, but it seems like the symptoms are finally passing.

This sounds more scary then covid. At least from the people who told me how was it when they had the infection, four of my friends to be precise. Did you doctor said about any long term issues or it is too early?

The thing is that some cases of COVID can result in myocarditis as well, not to mention other kinds of damage (such as permanent taste changes, lung damage, etc.). Still waiting on the echo to confirm no long term damage. I'm feeling MUCH better now, compared to even 4 days ago.

Whatever the result, I can't say I really regret taking the vaccine because it _is_ somewhat rare, and the long term side-effects of COVID are just as unknown as these vaccine side-effects. I like knowing that I'm much less likely to be a transmitter of a disease that could be fatal to others.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#397

Post by JamisonM »

ppf wrote: post #395
JamisonM wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so hopelessly stupid I just feel sorry for you at this point. If you think that the hospitals just magically emptied out and the virus is still circulating at the same rate as before vaccinations started in every jurisdiction that has significant vaccination rates you are hopelessly lost. But I know you are not hopelessly lost, you are just not engaged in an honest discussion.

My turn to accuse you of dishonesty - intellectual, this time. All the vaccine developers have promised about the vaccines is that they will reduce symptoms, as I'm sure you are fully aware. Unless some later study is done that provides some more concrete data on exactly how the vaccine is achieving what it is, at the moment all we can say is that the benefits we see (reduced hospitalisations and deaths, as well as s…

https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/mounting-evidence-suggests...

Go ahead and wait for "absolute proof" or some other absurd standard to believe something about a novel virus to make up your mind, whatever. You concede in your comment "as well as some amount of reduced transmission", give it up already!

All along following the most obvious path that evidence has lead towards proven to be fruitful, here is another case.. in case you have missed it.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#398

Post by eganist »

trhway wrote: post #274
eganist wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (i was always laughing at anti-vaxxers, yet seeing all misinformation and propaganda (the smell of USSR strength propaganda is just overwhelming) around covid i think i'll pass this one) No, you weren't. A common false-flag ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag ) attack involves presenting oneself as a member of an opposing viewpoint in order to find adherents for the desired viewpoint. The tell is your use of…

>The tell is your use of the words "misinformation" and "propaganda." People who tend to levy such claims also tend to share more of it you said it yourself. It is kind of ironically not surprising that you levied the above mentioned claim and actually posted the misinformation and propaganda yourself - see below. >No, you weren't. you really don't know, yet you're making with complete confidence such a completely fa…

Hey, I figure the downvotes were probably a consequence of tone, but your quoted post is a robust defense of your prior assertion about your position on vaccines.

(in all honesty, I clicked the post a few times and wondered why you were linking it, but it only clicked after mike drew attention to it.)

Anyway, I apologize for doubting. I still don't understand your position regarding the current batch of mRNA vaccines, but I can appreciate that you're not an anti-vaccine generalist.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#399

Post by eganist »

mike_hearn wrote: post #391
eganist wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (i was always laughing at anti-vaxxers, yet seeing all misinformation and propaganda (the smell of USSR strength propaganda is just overwhelming) around covid i think i'll pass this one) No, you weren't. A common false-flag ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag ) attack involves presenting oneself as a member of an opposing viewpoint in order to find adherents for the desired viewpoint. The tell is your use of…

You should apologize to trhway. He's proven that his statement was correct with a comment he made here on HN in 2015 where he does indeed take a (very) pro-vax position.

> You should apologize to trhway. He's proven that his statement was correct with a comment he made here on HN in 2015 where he does indeed take a (very) pro-vax position.

Done.

Re: Heart inflammation cases in young men higher than expected after mRNA vaccines

#400

Post by eganist »

mike_hearn wrote: post #390
trhway wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The tell is your use of the words "misinformation" and "propaganda." People who tend to levy such claims also tend to share more of it you said it yourself. It is kind of ironically not surprising that you levied the above mentioned claim and actually posted the misinformation and propaganda yourself - see below. >No, you weren't. you really don't know, yet you're making with complete confidence such a completely fa…

It's very amusing you were actually able to show yourself laughing at anti-vaxers right here on HN, thus winning the argument against eganist completely. You should probably have called that out more clearly. I guessed what might be in the link but it would have been good to quote it.

> It's very amusing you were actually able to show yourself laughing at anti-vaxers right here on HN, thus winning the argument against eganist completely. You should probably have called that out more clearly. I guessed what might be in the link but it would have been good to quote it.

My guess is that what drew so much ire was the tone and presentation. Similar to "thus winning the argument against eganist completely" when it was less of an argument and more of an immune response to common patterns that proved in this case to be a false positive.

But yes, simply going with quoting the past post, drawing attention to it very clearly in text ("Please see linked one example of a past post where I've declared my own pro-vaccine views"), and then using that past position to contextualize their current aversion would've been great for constructive engagement.

Water under the bridge. Either way, sorry trhway; glad you're not anti-vax, but hoping to win you over to the mRNA side (though feel free to laugh at me on my way to the grave if I die of vaccine induced long term effects. I guess I'll have earned it at that point).

Post reply on HN