5 ms·

> The vaccine is safer than infection Not for everyone, sadly: Boys more at risk from Pfizer jab side-effect than Covid, suggests study https://www.theguardia

by miles 5y ago

> The vaccine is safer than infection Not for everyone, sadly: Boys more at risk from Pfizer jab side-effect than Covid, suggests study https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-risk-from-pfizer-jab-side-effect-than-covid-suggests-study https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-r... > US researchers say teenagers are more likely to get vaccine-related myocarditis than end up in hospital with Covid Why COVID-19 Vaccines Should Not Be Required for All Americans https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/why-covid-19-vaccines-should-not-be-required-for-all-americans https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/why-covid-19-vacci... > Dr. Marty Makary, a professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and editor in chief of MedPage Today, argues that mandating vaccines for "every living, walking American" is, as of now, not well-supported by science. ... The risk of hospitalization from COVID-19 in kids ages 5 to 17 is 0.3 per million for the week ending July 24, 2021, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We also know that the risk of hospitalization after the second vaccine dose due to myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, is about 50 per million in that same age group.

alecst 5y ago
Thanks, I wasn’t aware of that pediatric study. In hindsight it’s not surprising that children might need a different quantity of vaccine than adults to tilt the balance further away from the harms caused by rare reactions.
- miles 5y ago
  > it’s not surprising that children might need a different quantity of vaccine Or perhaps none at all, given that the survival rate for unvaccinated children ages 0 to 19 is 99.9973%: Infection fatality rate of COVID-19 in community-dwelling populations with emphasis on the elderly: An overview https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.08.21260210v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.08.21260210v...
  - alecst 5y ago
    Yea but children live among the rest of us.
    - pbak 5y ago
      And they are no different in relation to risks of transmission than what we know are between 40% and 60% of vaccinated susceptible to asymptomatic breakthrough cases. Are you saying we should hurt the young to protect the old nevertheless, which would be the result of such a policy ?
      - alecst 5y ago
        It’s not clear to me what your position is. We are talking rare harms, perhaps dozens per million, and no deaths that I know of. So I’m unconcerned. As more data comes out maybe my mind will change and I’ll agree with you. But you seem to be nipping for a fight and I don’t really care to engage.
        AndrewBissell 5y ago
        You don't know of any deaths because most physicians and the media steadfastly refuse to attribute any to the vaccine. There are thousands of reports in VAERS, many of them of deaths in very young, healthy people hours or days after getting the vaccine. It's not the Pfizer vaccine, but the AstraZeneca vaccine has been publicly acknowledged as the cause of BBC presenter Lisa Shaw's death.
        Daishiman 5y ago
        If you even want to cite VAERS as a reliable source of _anything_ it means you don't even know the first thing about the topic.
        pbak 5y ago
        It is not reliable, for sure, and we don't know by what factor or which way the error goes. It might show ten times the real number, or half the real number. That would be either 1'700 people or 34'000 dead in the US alone. I wouldn't discount the lower limit either, 1'700 is still a lot and far from a small risk.
- native_samples 5y ago
  There are similar studies for adults. The reality is, nobody knows how dangerous the vaccines are relative to COVID because the trials weren't sufficiently reliable or well powered to show it, the data on COVID is corrupted by people being reported as died of/with COVID or hospitalized with COVID when the true causes were different, and all data on vaccines then is horribly corrupted by swivel-eyed hatred of "anti vaxxers". meaning reports of people being seriously injured or killed by the vaccines are constantly being swept under the carpet. Anyone who thinks they have a clear picture of this, or that they understand the tradeoffs, just isn't aware of how useless the data has been (deliberately) made.
PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> Boys more at risk from Pfizer jab side-effect than Covid, suggests study That study (which was still a pre-print, not reviewed) was retracted. It didn’t make any sense for the authors to compare the risk of myocarditis (most of which is benign) after receiving the vaccine to the risk of hospitalization from a COVID infection. Comparing two different outcomes against each other is deliberately misleading. COVID infection is also well-known to cause myocarditis at high rates, but the study conveniently ignored that.
- ggdG 5y ago
  > That study (which was still a pre-print, not reviewed) was retracted. That study wasn't retracted. It's still here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.21262866v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.21262866v... Maybe you're confusing it with another one. There was a Canadian preprint on myocarditis (sample size: 32) that got retracted by its authors: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/university-of-ottawa-heart-institute-myocarditis-study https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/university-of-ottawa-he... To make the confusion complete, there is a study on myocarditis that got peer reviewed and accepted for publication in an Elsevier cardiology journal, only to be "temporarily removed": > The Publisher regrets that this article has been temporarily removed. A replacement will appear as soon as possible in which the reason for the removal of the article will be specified, or the article will be reinstated. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146280621002267 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014628062...
- miles 5y ago
  The study was not retracted: SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination-Associated Myocarditis in Children Ages 12-17: A Stratified National Database Analysis https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.21262866v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.21262866v... and the CDC itself supports an even more "radical" conclusion: Why COVID-19 Vaccines Should Not Be Required for All Americans https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/why-covid-19-vaccines-should-not-be-required-for-all-americans https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/why-covid-19-vacci... > Dr. Marty Makary, a professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and editor in chief of MedPage Today, argues that mandating vaccines for "every living, walking American" is, as of now, not well-supported by science. ... The risk of hospitalization from COVID-19 in kids ages 5 to 17 is 0.3 per million for the week ending July 24, 2021, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We also know that the risk of hospitalization after the second vaccine dose due to myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, is about 50 per million in that same age group.

by miles 5y ago

alecst 5y ago

Thanks, I wasn’t aware of that pediatric study. In hindsight it’s not surprising that children might need a different quantity of vaccine than adults to tilt the balance further away from the harms caused by rare reactions.

miles 5y ago
> it’s not surprising that children might need a different quantity of vaccine Or perhaps none at all, given that the survival rate for unvaccinated children ages 0 to 19 is 99.9973%: Infection fatality rate of COVID-19 in community-dwelling populations with emphasis on the elderly: An overview https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.08.21260210v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.08.21260210v...
- alecst 5y ago
  Yea but children live among the rest of us.
  - pbak 5y ago
    And they are no different in relation to risks of transmission than what we know are between 40% and 60% of vaccinated susceptible to asymptomatic breakthrough cases. Are you saying we should hurt the young to protect the old nevertheless, which would be the result of such a policy ?
    - alecst 5y ago
      It’s not clear to me what your position is. We are talking rare harms, perhaps dozens per million, and no deaths that I know of. So I’m unconcerned. As more data comes out maybe my mind will change and I’ll agree with you. But you seem to be nipping for a fight and I don’t really care to engage.
      - AndrewBissell 5y ago
        You don't know of any deaths because most physicians and the media steadfastly refuse to attribute any to the vaccine. There are thousands of reports in VAERS, many of them of deaths in very young, healthy people hours or days after getting the vaccine. It's not the Pfizer vaccine, but the AstraZeneca vaccine has been publicly acknowledged as the cause of BBC presenter Lisa Shaw's death.
        Daishiman 5y ago
        If you even want to cite VAERS as a reliable source of _anything_ it means you don't even know the first thing about the topic.
        pbak 5y ago
        It is not reliable, for sure, and we don't know by what factor or which way the error goes. It might show ten times the real number, or half the real number. That would be either 1'700 people or 34'000 dead in the US alone. I wouldn't discount the lower limit either, 1'700 is still a lot and far from a small risk.
native_samples 5y ago
There are similar studies for adults. The reality is, nobody knows how dangerous the vaccines are relative to COVID because the trials weren't sufficiently reliable or well powered to show it, the data on COVID is corrupted by people being reported as died of/with COVID or hospitalized with COVID when the true causes were different, and all data on vaccines then is horribly corrupted by swivel-eyed hatred of "anti vaxxers". meaning reports of people being seriously injured or killed by the vaccines are constantly being swept under the carpet. Anyone who thinks they have a clear picture of this, or that they understand the tradeoffs, just isn't aware of how useless the data has been (deliberately) made.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago

> Boys more at risk from Pfizer jab side-effect than Covid, suggests study That study (which was still a pre-print, not reviewed) was retracted. It didn’t make any sense for the authors to compare the risk of myocarditis (most of which is benign) after receiving the vaccine to the risk of hospitalization from a COVID infection. Comparing two different outcomes against each other is deliberately misleading. COVID infection is also well-known to cause myocarditis at high rates, but the study conveniently ignored that.

ggdG 5y ago
> That study (which was still a pre-print, not reviewed) was retracted. That study wasn't retracted. It's still here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.21262866v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.21262866v... Maybe you're confusing it with another one. There was a Canadian preprint on myocarditis (sample size: 32) that got retracted by its authors: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/university-of-ottawa-heart-institute-myocarditis-study https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/university-of-ottawa-he... To make the confusion complete, there is a study on myocarditis that got peer reviewed and accepted for publication in an Elsevier cardiology journal, only to be "temporarily removed": > The Publisher regrets that this article has been temporarily removed. A replacement will appear as soon as possible in which the reason for the removal of the article will be specified, or the article will be reinstated. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146280621002267 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014628062...
miles 5y ago
The study was not retracted: SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination-Associated Myocarditis in Children Ages 12-17: A Stratified National Database Analysis https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.21262866v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.21262866v... and the CDC itself supports an even more "radical" conclusion: Why COVID-19 Vaccines Should Not Be Required for All Americans https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/why-covid-19-vaccines-should-not-be-required-for-all-americans https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/why-covid-19-vacci... > Dr. Marty Makary, a professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and editor in chief of MedPage Today, argues that mandating vaccines for "every living, walking American" is, as of now, not well-supported by science. ... The risk of hospitalization from COVID-19 in kids ages 5 to 17 is 0.3 per million for the week ending July 24, 2021, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We also know that the risk of hospitalization after the second vaccine dose due to myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, is about 50 per million in that same age group.