Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination • Hacker News Board

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#651

Post by kurthr » Fri, Dec 16, 2022, 11:16 PM UTC

ifyoubuildit wrote: post #649

kurthr wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, what a cherry picked choice, too bad it's still awful and even an overly generous comparison makes that apparent. There are 23k ICU beds in the US. The population of the US is 330M. The hospitalization rate for COVID was ~120/100k in 30 year olds. Average stay in ICU for COVID was 2-5 weeks. So if the entire US was made up of unvaxed 30 year olds and 5% of them caught COVID every 2-5 weeks they would require ~33…

> The hospitalization rate for COVID was ~120/100k in 30 year olds. So I think that roughly answers the question, you might expect something like .12 people to be hospitalized (does that include ICU? Do these people have prior exposures? Comorbidities?). I just ask because I think not everyone is aware yet that covid was (and is) a disease with a wide range of outcomes. I think the number you cited would surprise qui…

Sorry, just have immuno-compromised family who are still home bound and couldn't get medical care for more than a year.

I think the other thing that people forget is that covid immune response can give you the same myocarditis (along with clots and heart attacks) as vaccines for much the same reasons, but at higher rates. The fact that the stabilized (Novavax, Pfizer, Moderna) vaccines have 10x lower rates of myocarditis than unmodified spike RNA (ChadOx, Sputnik) indicates that reducing the immune surface variation lowers risk.

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#652

Post by spopejoy » Fri, Dec 16, 2022, 11:26 PM UTC

blub wrote: post #607

yakak wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 14℅ reduction in something that happens to 5%+ of people measurably and probably lowers your developmental outcome even if it is bellow the threshold of clear measure (a weaker school year that you never quite catch up from could just be random after all.) That's a much bigger deal than whether you have 12 in a million or 24 in a million chance of something that has a 5% chance of being fatal. Giving a population l…

You sound like somebody that likes to crunch numbers, but doesn’t understand how most parents decide on these things. Or if you happen to have children, you’re unusually clinical about their health… Anyway, the children’s vaccine was authorized in the EU on the 19th of October 2022, after all Omicron strains were making rounds through the population. In Germany at first one dose was recommended for 12-17 then one plu…

> doesn't understand how most parents decide on these things

> your dogmatic approach is not ... supported by parents

Your dogma here is that you assume all parents take the zero-sum "ok for thine but not for mine" approach. Personally I know plenty of parents who were eager to vaccinate their kids against COVID. But I'm not taking my personal outlook as some kind of fact about all parents.

Instead I will note that in the history of vaccine mandates there has always been opposition from a _minority_ of parents, doctors what have you in the context of broad societal support, even though vaccines have always had some amount of risk that similarly to COVID were vastly outweighed by the societal benefit and the risks of the disease itself.

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#653

Post by brooklyndude » Fri, Dec 16, 2022, 11:31 PM UTC

We knew this over a year ago, but it's called "acceptable risk" by the CDC. The thing is they never told us that. But it was on that document you signed when you took your jab.

You read the fine print right?

Moderna had "This is an EXPERIMENTAL VACCINE" on all thier media until not that long ago, and then they just removed that warning. We don't even have clinical trials any more.

Those Moderna shareholders are rough, once a week jab was the goal. That booster. Much upset there, when that did not go through.

They tried to push "your dog, cats, all your pets WILL need a shot!" That did not get much traction, remember that news?

Shareholders bailed. Lets all short TSLA was their next move. How markets work.

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#654

Post by brooklyndude » Fri, Dec 16, 2022, 11:32 PM UTC

nulld3v wrote: post #67

I am vaccinated but I am upvoting this post because I believe that it is important to investigate these cases to determine how to improve future vaccines. I really don't like how this topic seems to be treated like some fringe conspiracy theory. Maybe it is just a conspiracy, but we won't ever know until sufficient research has been done. Currently, I still believe that people should vaccinate, even if vaccines cause…

> As long as vaccine side effects cause less deaths and less harm than the virus, vaccination is still the way to go.

That's not how medicine works. What would be your opinion if you were the one that was going to die? Would you still stick by your statement?

The issue is NO ONE told anyone this data. It was "suppressed" to PREVENT "vaccination hesitancy", that's the issue.

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#655

Post by momo_O » Fri, Dec 16, 2022, 11:54 PM UTC

xcrunner529 wrote: post #582

throwawaylinux wrote: post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The vaccine has stayed just as effective for serious disease as it always was said. It wasn't, this is just how you're coping with your cognitive dissonance. > There really should be real life DARWIN awards. There are. They are called the Darwin Awards. They have a website and everything. > The great thing, it’s mostly right wing voters dying. :) No I know you don't really mean it, you're just angry and lashing out…

The people dying are almost all unvaccinated. In any age group. Period. It’s a fact you can’t change.

Source?

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#656

Post by nulld3v » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 12:13 AM UTC

brooklyndude wrote: post #654

nulld3v wrote: post #67

I am vaccinated but I am upvoting this post because I believe that it is important to investigate these cases to determine how to improve future vaccines. I really don't like how this topic seems to be treated like some fringe conspiracy theory. Maybe it is just a conspiracy, but we won't ever know until sufficient research has been done. Currently, I still believe that people should vaccinate, even if vaccines cause…

> As long as vaccine side effects cause less deaths and less harm than the virus, vaccination is still the way to go. That's not how medicine works. What would be your opinion if you were the one that was going to die? Would you still stick by your statement? The issue is NO ONE told anyone this data. It was "suppressed" to PREVENT "vaccination hesitancy", that's the issue.

I'm pretty sure that's how medicine works. Obviously, if I knew the vaccine would kill me, I would not take it. But it's the same deal with literally any medication.

When I was prescribed Accutane for my acne, I was told that it could cause kidney damage. If I knew it would cause kidney damage to me would I have taken it? Of course not. But I hedged my bets and gambled that it wouldn't.

As far as the suppression of information goes, obviously that is totally unacceptable. That's also partially why I upvoted this post right?

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#657

Post by t0bia_s » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 12:23 AM UTC

asdf123wtf wrote: post #406

t0bia_s wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of studies on this topic. Somehow not covered in media. Which makes me even more curious. Gill J.R. et al: Autopsy Histopathologic Cardiac Findings in 2 Adolescents Following the Second COVID-19 Vaccine Dose, Arch Pathol Lab Med (2022) 146 (8):925-929 https://meridian.allenpress.com/aplm/article/146/8/925/47778... Risks of myocarditis, pericarditis, and cardiac arrhythmias associated with COVID-19 vacc…

What does "not covered in media" mean to you? While this topic doesn't dominate the news cycle, I've seen plenty of reporting on it.

In commercial mass media?

In Czechia, quite respected medium blame inflation and high prices for energy the reason of higher heart failures. No words about possibly side effect of vaccines.

https://zpravy.aktualne.cz/domaci/prvni-priznaky-akutni-infa...

https://zpravy.aktualne.cz/domaci/srdecni-selhani/r~9214c0b4...

But it's not surprise when gonverment bought 20 milion doses for 10 milion nation in spring 2022 for 7,5 bilion CZK when most are done with vaccination for covid. In 2023 they plan buy even more for another 5,5 bilion CZK. Thats how corrupted our gonverment is.

https://www.prolibertate.cz/2022/03/zatimco-sledujeme-valku-...

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#658

Post by zmgsabst » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 9:47 AM UTC

marcosdumay wrote: post #639

zmgsabst wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This chart isn’t absolute death: it’s the ratio of two causes of death. You’re not seeing countries go into negative excess in 2021 and 2022 — you’re seeing non-COVID excess surge. I was expecting during the omicron wave that we had more than two COVID deaths compared to non-COVID excess deaths — and that more broadly, we’d see more COVID than other excess death What we see instead is that during the height of omicro…

When that ratio turns negative, it literally means that there has been negative excess deaths when compared to the average. You can claim that the average is abnormally high, but that's quite a wild claim. Negative excess deaths through the pandemics were pretty common and very well explained. Anyway, such concepts like "non-COVID excess" doesn't even start to make sense. Either you are determining the death causes,…

No — it doesn’t.

When that chart turns negative, it means that the ratio of COVID deaths to non-COVID excess is less than one, ie there is more non-COVID excess death than COVID deaths. When there is no non-COVID excess, but still COVID deaths, the chart shoots up; when there’s none of either, it clamps to the black line. This is a log-scale chart of their ratio; that solid black line represents a ratio of 1, ie, equal amounts.

The chart going below the black line represents positive excess death in a ratio that favors non-COVID excess deaths.

Edit: I’ve added a log chart of excess deaths, with the black line at zero, ie, the expected amount.

https://zmichaelgehlke.com/images/shaded-excess-mortality.pn...

> concepts like "non-COVID excess" doesn't even start to make sense

Sure they do: excess deaths which exceed the number of registered COVID deaths in the same period. We can detect that by looking at all cause mortality and subtracting identified COVID mortality.

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#659

Post by kyleblarson » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 5:31 PM UTC

Bud wrote: post #487

kyleblarson wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of the resentment comes out of "the experts" changing their narratives a dozen times about the efficacy of the vaccines over the last 3 years while browbeating anyone who voiced any amount of skepticism.

No part of this happened. Also, experts are actually experts, so let's lose the quotation marks. Please cite instances of "browbeating" from Fauci or other prominent public health figures. Please support this wild story in, well, any way at all.

Like the experts who closed beaches in CA and filled in skate parks with sand so children couldn't get exercise and sunlight? Those experts?

Re: Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

#660

Post by entropicgravity » Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 6:20 PM UTC

birken wrote: post #403

wsc981 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Denmark doesn’t recommend COVID vaccines anymore to anyone under 50 who is not at risk or work in health sector [0]. > People aged under 50 are generally not at particularly higher risk of becoming severely ill from covid-19. In addition, younger people aged under 50 are well protected against becoming severely ill from covid-19, as a very large number of them have already been vaccinated and have previously been inf…

While I think it is certainly fair to talk about the policies of other countries, I don't think just because another country has a different policy necessarily dictates that policy is better or worse. Additionally, I think it's very easy to see something like "Denmark doesn't recommend the vaccines to anybody under 50" and conflate that it means that Denmark doesn't think vaccines were ever beneficial to people under…

The change in policy by Denmark very likely comes down to the risk of overloading their ICU's with a naive covid population. When covid first arrived everyone was susceptible to covid and the long tail of poor outcomes was enough to plug up the hospitals (and primarily the ICU's).

Now, much of the population has become either naturally or through vaccination much less susceptible to poor outcomes from a covid infection, and this is especially true of younger people.

So the response to covid was never really about the health of the population as much as it was about the health of the hospitals. The risk to the hospitals is now much lower and therefore the reasonable vaccination effort has now changed.