5 ms·

Vaccines still lower disease severity. Also vaccines reduce risk of some post-acute COVID disorders like MIS-C (which can result even from asymptomatic COVID).

Vaccines still lower disease severity. Also vaccines reduce risk of some post-acute COVID disorders like MIS-C (which can result even from asymptomatic COVID). https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7102e1.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7102e1.htm And of course you don't want to infect your child with a disease that has long term consequences which we are still learning about. Diabetes hit the news recently in the US, but it is actually been known for a while in other countries. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7102e2.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7102e2.htm https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/43/11/e170/35903/New-Onset-Type-1-Diabetes-in-Children-During-COVID https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/43/11/e170/35903/N... (UK) https://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/27/archdischild-2020-321220.abstract https://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2021/05/27/archdischild-20... (Finland) If that wasn't bad enough, diseases that are associated with T1D like celiac disease are on the rise, and show stronger association in COVID patients: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16173 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16173

notch656a 5y ago
< https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7102e1.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7102e1.htm The study you cite specifically excludes those under 5.
beerandt 5y ago
>Vaccines still lower disease severity. Not for kids under 5. That's why it's not approved. >And of course you don't want to infect your child with a disease Breakthrough cases are so common now that the media refuses to use the term anymore. That (lack-of) "preventing-infection" efficacy is baked into the <5 study that showed no benefit. >that has long term consequences which we are still learning about. Why is this a valid concern, but potential long-term effects of the vaccines aren't? Especially the known risk of inflammation in still-growing bodies and especially in developing hearts.
- cdjk 5y ago
  >>Vaccines still lower disease severity. >Not for kids under 5. That's why it's not approved. Wrong. Per the Pfizer press release [0], the immunogenicity analysis of the trial failed in children ages 2 to 4, but succeeded in children ages six months to two years. Given the small dose (3ug) in that study cohort, there was probably not enough rna in the vaccine for the 2-4 age group to show any effect. >Why is this a valid concern, but potential long-term effects of the vaccines aren't? Especially the known risk of inflammation in still-growing bodies and especially in developing hearts. The risk of developing myocarditis from the vaccine is about 100-150 in 5 million [1]. The risk of developing myocarditis from COVID-19 is about 150 in 100,000 [2]. I know I'm picking the vaccine for my child. [0] https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-provide-update-ongoing-studies-covid-19 https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-deta... [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y [2] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm edited for typos.
  - herbst 5y ago
    To be legally 2g compliant I need to boost every 4 months. Apparently the risk for inflammation might even get higher with each boost. If I'd catch COVID every 2 years or so how much does my risk rise for every infection?
    - tekknik 5y ago
  - somenameforme 5y ago
    The first diagram in the first study you referenced [1] puts the observed rate of myocarditis among patients -without- COVID at 450 per 5 million (9 per 100k). That is much higher than the rate of myocarditis among the entire vaccinated Israeli [2] cohort (125 per 5 million) you mentioned. The issue is that you're not comparing apples to apples. The Israeli data is looking at the entire population that received the vaccine. The COVID study is only looking at hospitalized patients with/without COVID which is a subset of the entire population restricted entirely to those experiencing the most severe symptoms. This is not an easy problem to solve. A more apples to apples comparison [3] puts the COVID:vaccine myocarditis ratio at about 6:1, but it also suffers from a bias. In order to measure those rates they relied on the population that tested positive for COVID. This excludes the population of individuals which were infected with COVID but did not received a diagnosis who presumably also had a near 0 rate of myocarditis. This bias [presumably] becomes more pronounced at lower age groups where COVID displays milder symptoms making it less likely to end up diagnosed. Finally, there is also the consideration that while the vaccines have not yet changed - COVID has. And its likely that the omicron strain will have a different distribution of side effects. It's a difficult problem to solve, and conflicts of interest abound make it all even more challenging. [1] - https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm [2] - https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y [3] - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998v...
walterbell 5y ago
> Vaccines still lower disease severity. As does early treatment, https://c19early.com https://c19early.com Vaccine efficacy decays monthly (Delta/2021), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSZMtSPX3iE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSZMtSPX3iE

notch656a 5y ago

< https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7102e1.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7102e1.htm The study you cite specifically excludes those under 5.

beerandt 5y ago

>Vaccines still lower disease severity. Not for kids under 5. That's why it's not approved. >And of course you don't want to infect your child with a disease Breakthrough cases are so common now that the media refuses to use the term anymore. That (lack-of) "preventing-infection" efficacy is baked into the <5 study that showed no benefit. >that has long term consequences which we are still learning about. Why is this a valid concern, but potential long-term effects of the vaccines aren't? Especially the known risk of inflammation in still-growing bodies and especially in developing hearts.

cdjk 5y ago
>>Vaccines still lower disease severity. >Not for kids under 5. That's why it's not approved. Wrong. Per the Pfizer press release [0], the immunogenicity analysis of the trial failed in children ages 2 to 4, but succeeded in children ages six months to two years. Given the small dose (3ug) in that study cohort, there was probably not enough rna in the vaccine for the 2-4 age group to show any effect. >Why is this a valid concern, but potential long-term effects of the vaccines aren't? Especially the known risk of inflammation in still-growing bodies and especially in developing hearts. The risk of developing myocarditis from the vaccine is about 100-150 in 5 million [1]. The risk of developing myocarditis from COVID-19 is about 150 in 100,000 [2]. I know I'm picking the vaccine for my child. [0] https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-provide-update-ongoing-studies-covid-19 https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-deta... [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y [2] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm edited for typos.
- herbst 5y ago
  To be legally 2g compliant I need to boost every 4 months. Apparently the risk for inflammation might even get higher with each boost. If I'd catch COVID every 2 years or so how much does my risk rise for every infection?
  - tekknik 5y ago
- somenameforme 5y ago
  The first diagram in the first study you referenced [1] puts the observed rate of myocarditis among patients -without- COVID at 450 per 5 million (9 per 100k). That is much higher than the rate of myocarditis among the entire vaccinated Israeli [2] cohort (125 per 5 million) you mentioned. The issue is that you're not comparing apples to apples. The Israeli data is looking at the entire population that received the vaccine. The COVID study is only looking at hospitalized patients with/without COVID which is a subset of the entire population restricted entirely to those experiencing the most severe symptoms. This is not an easy problem to solve. A more apples to apples comparison [3] puts the COVID:vaccine myocarditis ratio at about 6:1, but it also suffers from a bias. In order to measure those rates they relied on the population that tested positive for COVID. This excludes the population of individuals which were infected with COVID but did not received a diagnosis who presumably also had a near 0 rate of myocarditis. This bias [presumably] becomes more pronounced at lower age groups where COVID displays milder symptoms making it less likely to end up diagnosed. Finally, there is also the consideration that while the vaccines have not yet changed - COVID has. And its likely that the omicron strain will have a different distribution of side effects. It's a difficult problem to solve, and conflicts of interest abound make it all even more challenging. [1] - https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm [2] - https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02740-y [3] - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998v...

walterbell 5y ago

> Vaccines still lower disease severity. As does early treatment, https://c19early.com https://c19early.com Vaccine efficacy decays monthly (Delta/2021), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSZMtSPX3iE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSZMtSPX3iE