5 ms·
> the amount of people suffering myocarditis and other vaccine complications is in the double-digits This is not true, according to the CDC (as of August 18th)
by criticaltinker 5y ago
> the amount of people suffering myocarditis and other vaccine complications is in the double-digits
This is not true, according to the CDC (as of August 18th) there at least 742 cases of myocarditis and myopericarditis associated with vaccination, potentially upwards of ~1,300 [1].
For males age 16-17 the reporting rate of myopericarditis after 2 doses of Pfizer is 71.5 per 1 million doses administered (0.0071%) [1].
Compared to natural infection, vaccination is likely still a favorable tradeoff for most people. However the tradeoffs are highly dependent on age, health, and gender. Stratifying by these factors is essential for any scientifically accurate discussion of risks.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-08-30/03-COVID-Su-508.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-...
- ostenning 5y agoPersonally, my heart & chest are still recovering from the second Pfizer shot, after having ECG, bloodwork and nearly going to the ER. Wont be getting a booster, thats for damned certain. I suspect the number to be significantly higher than whats reported.
- uniqueid 5y agoLiterally billions of people around the world have been vaccinated against Coronavirus now. How high can the chance of serious short-term side effects be?
- sprafa 5y agoAgain, depends on age, condition. I'm currently fighting long COVID symptoms that have showed up after vaccination. I never had COVID, but the vaccine has given me - chronic fatigue - chronic headaches - brain fog. From JJ vaccine. If you look into the Australia, Canada and Norway data you see that the numbers are higher than initially expected. Serious side effects like TTS were thought to happen around 1 in 100k, but they now think it would be something like 1 in 20 000. Perhaps less, if you account for people that don't even realise they're getting it. The vaccine are something like 5x reduction in mortality, but they are not perfect.
- kderbyma 5y agolol that's the same logic that resulted in 100M passwords and credentials being leaked....again and again and again..... mistakes are normal, to assume none is truly unfathomably dense....
- uniqueid 5y agoA large sample size provides more conclusive results than does a small sample size. In the case of Coronavirus vaccines, the sample size is 1/3 the population of Earth. If hundreds of millions of vaccinated people were developing heart problems it would be noticeable.
- quantumwoke 5y agoI note you conveniently left out "reported" cases from your sentence. You are citing numbers reported by VAERS which is not at all the same as confirmed cases. Please don't fear-monger on HN.
- criticaltinker 5y agoI cited numbers reported by the CDC who reviewed VAERS reports and determined that a subset met the CDC’s own criteria. I accurately transcribed facts from an official CDC document, and even linked the source, nothing more. Do you really think that is fear-mongering? The CDC is actively investigating many of the reports, dismissing them as not confirmed is a bit disingenuous at the very least.
- ubercore 5y agoI think parent is commenting here that the CDC is talking about self-reported data. We're not talking about a diagnosis from a doctor. Calling them "confirmed" is just as disingenuous, if I'm understanding the explanations in the slides you link.
- MatteoFrigo 5y agoSlide 11 appears to say that a large number of cases were hospitalized. If this interpretation is correct, we are talking about a diagnosis from a doctor, not self-reported data.
- quantumwoke 5y agoAll the slides say is that there were 700ish reports that met case criteria as reported through VAERS, a self-reporting system. We are not told any information about which case criteria were met (objective vs subjective), comorbidities, reason for presentation (all vital information for a true diagnosis not report). We are not told about degree of hospitalisation or reason for hospitalisation. We are most certainly not given confirmed cases as GP claims, the stringent criteria for which are listed one link deep from the presentation. We are left with a misleading link to a scary-sounding number that is being posted by multiple accounts across HN with nebulous intent and in some cases history of posting blatant misinformation. I feel that calling this practice out when I see it helps if just a little bit. In this case a look through GP's recent comment history reveals many comments with disinformation and fear-mongering.