> What a manipulative comment. First of all, you didn’t quote the key points of the study: Please point out exactly where my direct citation from the article i

> What a manipulative comment. First of all, you didn’t quote the key points of the study: Please point out exactly where my direct citation from the article is manipulated in any way. > Meaning The risk of myocarditis in this large cohort study was highest in young males after the second SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose, and this risk should be balanced against the benefits of protecting against severe COVID-19 disease. —- Please read my comment. I quoted exactly the highest risk scenarios. The study determined that at worse it's less than 5 per 100 000 cases on young males. > Second of all, the word benign does not appear in the study. The study tracked primary and secondary myocarditis and pericarditis diagnosis at the moment of hospital discharge. The study mentions zero complications, let alone fatalities. A myocarditis diagnosis could mean something as little as claiming you feel fatigued and experience a weird feeling in your chest, no matter how brief you experience it. Please read the study before going on personal attacks. > The critical question in regards to heart inflammation was always about young males, this is very well known! You need to decide if you want to accuse my quotation as manipulative or stressing nothing new. You can't have it both ways. Also, you might find it interesting that the study points quite unequivocally that: * "Myocarditis after mRNA vaccination was rare in this study cohort and even among young males." * "The risk of myocarditis following the mRNA vaccines has been evaluated by the US Food and Drug Administration, which concluded that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks and fully authorized the use of mRNA-1273 in persons 18 years or older and BNT162b2 in persons 16 years or older."