3 ms·

More evidence that the “anti vaxxers,” as they were smeared, were correct that we don’t actually know everything about the vaccine’s long term efficacy. With o

More evidence that the “anti vaxxers,” as they were smeared, were correct that we don’t actually know everything about the vaccine’s long term efficacy. With only short term effectiveness, at best, nobody can clearly explain why I need to vaccinate my young children who have a 6x risk of myocarditis from the vaccine than from COVID itself.

Someone 5y ago
Did anybody ever claim we know everything about the vaccine’s long term efficacy? Viruses mutate. Also, myocarditis risk is way overblown, and I haven’t seen any claim it’s higher for the vaccinated than the non-vaccinated, when (and that’s as good as certain to happen) they get infected.
- xboxnolifes 5y ago
  I don't keep these things close by so I don't actually have a source, but on a past hackernews discussion I came across the trial data for the pfizer vaccine in young children. The outcomes between unvaccinated vs vaccinated children was basically a wash of almost no benefit, but there was 1 case of myocarditis in a male participant for the vaccine with none for unvaccinated. So, terribly low data points, but at best it was no benefit for a vaccine, and at worst there were heart issues in young male children who took the vaccine. If the vaccine showed a huge benefit for the children it would be easily seen as a calculated risk, the issue is that the vaccine did not have a clear major benefit to outweigh the possible risk.
  - bhaak 5y ago
    Because most children don't have a severe case of covid-19 doesn't mean that there is no benefit overall. For once because there are only few severe cases it is much more difficult to assess that there is a benefit. Like if for unvaccinated children 1 in 10_000 has a severe case but for vaccinated it's 1 in 100_000 that's gonna take a while for studies to verify. There are no reasons to believe that the benefits for society are less than for vaccinated adults. Like less time being infectous and less infectous to begin with. But yes that has to be weighted against possible detrimental issues but how is that different to any other trial study for a vaccine?
    - xboxnolifes 5y ago
      > But yes that has to be weighted against possible detrimental issues but how is that different to any other trial study for a vaccine? It's not different. That's why it's being taken seriously when the trial shows more negative results than positive. Instead of picking and choosing to only listen to the trials that suggest to roll out the vaccine to everyone.
- dwmbt 5y ago
  being a person in the most vulnerable category for developing myocarditis from the vaccine (and in general), i felt like i should add some of my experience with researching this topic. SARS-CoV-2 has been shown to make a person 18 times more likely to develop myocarditis than if they never got sick [0]. other sources suggest that number is much higher: "Across all ages, the risk of myocarditis was almost 16 times higher for people with COVID-19 compared to those who aren’t infected. The myocarditis risk is 37 times higher for infected children under 16 years and seven times higher for infected people ages 16-39 compared to their uninfected peers." [1] okay, so let's take a step back. the global prevalence of myocarditis has previously been found to be ≈ 22 of 100 000 patients (annually) [2]. i haven't found any statistics of annual ratio's for young men developing myocarditis in general, but all reports read that those numbers are higher. the recent israeli study found that male vaccine recipients between the ages of 16 and 19 were found to have developed myocarditis in 13.73 cases per 100,000 people. so what does this tell me? for me, it shows that the risks of developing myocarditis are in general, scary -> post-vaccination, similarly spooky -> post-covid, terrifying. still though, some arguments for younger people (closer to the age group parent comment may be referring to) suggest that "the risk of developing myocarditis might be increased more by the vaccine than by the disease, particularly because children rarely develop severe COVID-19" [3]. this is merely conjecture, but i'm assuming that the source would define developing myocarditis as a severe COVID-19 case. otherwise, it would not be very relevant. most of the research i've done for myself reach a similar conclusion for children (under the age of 18): the risks of getting vaccinated outweigh the risks associated with COVID-19 if a person has at least one COVID-19 comorbidity. for me, i decided to get my third-dose because i felt that although the chances of developing myocarditis seem to increase with the number of vaccinations you get, the benefits still seem to outweigh the risks. and finally, this is not a new phenomena and from what i understand, it is a natural reaction post-vaccination. the increase in the possibility of developing myocarditis has been a spook (albeit, a real risk for some people) associated with vaccination for a long time now. [2] [4] [5] [0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22328081/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22328081/ [1] https://publications.aap.org/aapnews/news/16388?autologincheck=redirected https://publications.aap.org/aapnews/news/16388?autologinche... [2] https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.306573 https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.30657... [3] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y#ref-CR4 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y#ref-CR4 [4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6437672/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6437672/ [5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4751718/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4751718/
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

Someone 5y ago

Did anybody ever claim we know everything about the vaccine’s long term efficacy? Viruses mutate. Also, myocarditis risk is way overblown, and I haven’t seen any claim it’s higher for the vaccinated than the non-vaccinated, when (and that’s as good as certain to happen) they get infected.

xboxnolifes 5y ago
I don't keep these things close by so I don't actually have a source, but on a past hackernews discussion I came across the trial data for the pfizer vaccine in young children. The outcomes between unvaccinated vs vaccinated children was basically a wash of almost no benefit, but there was 1 case of myocarditis in a male participant for the vaccine with none for unvaccinated. So, terribly low data points, but at best it was no benefit for a vaccine, and at worst there were heart issues in young male children who took the vaccine. If the vaccine showed a huge benefit for the children it would be easily seen as a calculated risk, the issue is that the vaccine did not have a clear major benefit to outweigh the possible risk.
- bhaak 5y ago
  Because most children don't have a severe case of covid-19 doesn't mean that there is no benefit overall. For once because there are only few severe cases it is much more difficult to assess that there is a benefit. Like if for unvaccinated children 1 in 10_000 has a severe case but for vaccinated it's 1 in 100_000 that's gonna take a while for studies to verify. There are no reasons to believe that the benefits for society are less than for vaccinated adults. Like less time being infectous and less infectous to begin with. But yes that has to be weighted against possible detrimental issues but how is that different to any other trial study for a vaccine?
  - xboxnolifes 5y ago
    > But yes that has to be weighted against possible detrimental issues but how is that different to any other trial study for a vaccine? It's not different. That's why it's being taken seriously when the trial shows more negative results than positive. Instead of picking and choosing to only listen to the trials that suggest to roll out the vaccine to everyone.
dwmbt 5y ago
being a person in the most vulnerable category for developing myocarditis from the vaccine (and in general), i felt like i should add some of my experience with researching this topic. SARS-CoV-2 has been shown to make a person 18 times more likely to develop myocarditis than if they never got sick [0]. other sources suggest that number is much higher: "Across all ages, the risk of myocarditis was almost 16 times higher for people with COVID-19 compared to those who aren’t infected. The myocarditis risk is 37 times higher for infected children under 16 years and seven times higher for infected people ages 16-39 compared to their uninfected peers." [1] okay, so let's take a step back. the global prevalence of myocarditis has previously been found to be ≈ 22 of 100 000 patients (annually) [2]. i haven't found any statistics of annual ratio's for young men developing myocarditis in general, but all reports read that those numbers are higher. the recent israeli study found that male vaccine recipients between the ages of 16 and 19 were found to have developed myocarditis in 13.73 cases per 100,000 people. so what does this tell me? for me, it shows that the risks of developing myocarditis are in general, scary -> post-vaccination, similarly spooky -> post-covid, terrifying. still though, some arguments for younger people (closer to the age group parent comment may be referring to) suggest that "the risk of developing myocarditis might be increased more by the vaccine than by the disease, particularly because children rarely develop severe COVID-19" [3]. this is merely conjecture, but i'm assuming that the source would define developing myocarditis as a severe COVID-19 case. otherwise, it would not be very relevant. most of the research i've done for myself reach a similar conclusion for children (under the age of 18): the risks of getting vaccinated outweigh the risks associated with COVID-19 if a person has at least one COVID-19 comorbidity. for me, i decided to get my third-dose because i felt that although the chances of developing myocarditis seem to increase with the number of vaccinations you get, the benefits still seem to outweigh the risks. and finally, this is not a new phenomena and from what i understand, it is a natural reaction post-vaccination. the increase in the possibility of developing myocarditis has been a spook (albeit, a real risk for some people) associated with vaccination for a long time now. [2] [4] [5] [0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22328081/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22328081/ [1] https://publications.aap.org/aapnews/news/16388?autologincheck=redirected https://publications.aap.org/aapnews/news/16388?autologinche... [2] https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.306573 https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.30657... [3] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y#ref-CR4 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y#ref-CR4 [4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6437672/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6437672/ [5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4751718/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4751718/

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]