Myocarditis after Covid vaccination: Research on possible long-term risks begins

“Good process, bad outcome.”

And that is where I vehemently disagree. Bad process, bad outcome. Many people lied to make the information appear as you said. The incentives they had to lie should have a lot more scrutiny, rather than being shrugged off, and many of these people should be in jail.

Many who blanket-praise the vaccine as you have, are doing so from a pre-existing "team sport" position on the subject. I'm not saying you are, but it's common.

I live in a place which has the unfortunate claim of longest, harshest lockdown in the world (Victoria, Australia). Multiple lengthy lockdowns, curfews, masks outside enforced by cops, sitting on the beach was illegal, taking kids to park illegal; people were literally chased down the street by cops demanding to "see your papers". Many cops resigned, and now in 2022 Victoria is struggling to find new recruits after a mass exodus of cops - many of whom did not agree with the job they were ordered to do.

Most people here do not consider those lockdowns a "success", and experts including epidemiologists have referred to our lockdowns as "draconian", and harmful.

Now, in 2022 we have more covid deaths than before, and that's with a very high rate of vaccination in the community, particularly the older age groups. But they're still dying at a record rate. The virus still spreads and still takes out vaccinated and boosted victims. Therefore, I would never adopt the blanket "thankful" rhetoric that you've shared. Thankful for lockdowns, thankful for mandates, thankful for what is frankly, an underwhelming vaccine compared to other vaccines. Yet, "saved millions of lives" is the go-to catch-phrase, and anything else can't possibly be true. Can it.

I personally experienced a week of heart palpitations following my second dose of Moderna, as well as an acute visual aura, having never had a migraine. Not only did I fail to report this to VAERS, it only occurred to me as a vague possibility that the vaccination might be related, so I didn’t think twice about getting the booster. After her second dose of Moderna my sister developed a migraine (having never had one previously) that lasted a week, culminating in an emergency room visit, for which no VAERS report was made. My mother recently intimated that ever since her second Moderna shot she periodically experiences heart palpitations, and especially when ingesting caffeine, whereas before this was not the case. Again, no VAERS report.

Knowing what I know now, were a family member to die 20 days after a vaccination I would certainly submit a VAERS report, but I find this question incredible: are you really disputing multiple studies that conclude that VAERS underreports adverse events by appealing to your nebulous feeling that family members surely would not neglect to file a VAERS report after the death of a family member?

Does the fact that only a tiny minority of the population even knows VAERS exists provoke doubt?

How about what HHS has this to say about the matter (https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html):

  “Underreporting" is one of the main limitations of passive 
  surveillance systems, including VAERS. The term, underreporting 
  refers to the fact that VAERS receives reports for only a small 
  fraction of actual adverse events. The degree of underreporting 
  varies widely.

Further, even if I granted that literally every death due to the vaccines was reported to VAERS, there still remains the extant signal which logically admits the possibility that children 0.5-5 suffer a higher rate of death to the vaccine than they do the disease.

As for the insulting claim that no standard of proof would convince me that the vaccine is better than the virus: all I require is a sufficiently powered RCT with a genuine placebo in the control, full disclosure of patient level data, and all cause mortality as the primary endpoint. It baffles me that you don’t demand the same.

I'm sorry about the hospitalization and the absurd hospital bill.

But one thing I don't understand, are you saying that before Obamacare, the situation would have been better? If so, how?

Personally, I wish we had a healthcare system where people are simply covered for this sort of occurrence automatically.

I'll cheer lead vaccines from a team sport position all day long; in this case I'm doing so from that perspective and from the perspective that the vaccine has shown to have a significant (order of magnitude) impact on death (etc, etc).

I don't think it's totally unfair to call it 'underwhelming' though. We are so used to vaccines being wildly successful at stamping out a bunch of diseases that when something as virulent as this comes along & the efficacy isn't as high (in no small part due to the fact that so many countries decided to make it the only line of defence), it's easy to be disillusioned.

I live in Queensland, Australia, where we had lockdowns that were similar in harshness but much more limited in length. I am very familiar with the Melbourne lockdowns (one of my colleagues got stuck there for months after he got trapped there after going down for a 1 week holiday).

We probably just got lucky that we didn't have a Melbourne-style outbreak. But the simple fact is the lockdowns prevented us from having a widespread outbreak before the vaccine was deployed. The lockdowns sucked but my anecdata from my network (certainly generally privileged people whose careers were not wildly affected, so not a representative sample) was the lockdowns were worth it.

It is trivial to look at mortality rate data between, say, US/UK and Australia to see the impact that the lockdowns had. It's simply undeniable that they saved lives. People complaining loudly about 'draconian' tend, in my experience, to be dipshit libertarians that would never brook any lockdowns under any circumstances simply because of their insane political views. Others complaining about lockdowns not working tend to be talking about their own lockdowns in their own contexts which were not as harsh as Melbourne (which, arguably, ended up working).

Of course we have more COVID deaths than before - we've dialled back all the preventions! The policy decision was made to let COVID run free through society and that the vaccines (which we both agree are imperfect, but perhaps I'm the only one that acknowledges they're vastly better than nothing) were the only mitigation that we're apparently willing to tolerate.

We've done fuck all about it and everyone seems surprised that the body count is still so high. I don't know why people are still surprised people are dying - we've clearly decided the policy position is to sacrifice people on the altar of the economy and that people are bored of dealing with COVID. We're not bothering with other mitigations despite it being a top 5 cause of death in Australia (top 3 in the US?).