3 ms·

It seems obvious at this point that there is a mechanism of action of the drug in the vaccine that can harm the heart and it’s highly likely this can lead to de

by gfodor 4y ago

It seems obvious at this point that there is a mechanism of action of the drug in the vaccine that can harm the heart and it’s highly likely this can lead to death. It’s time to stop mandating it for kids.

fzeroracer 4y ago
Obvious according to who? I literally directly addressed that claim, so I'll quote it again for you: > Myocarditis is another manifestation reported during SARS-CoV-2-infection [24]. It is under debate whether myocarditis in COVID-19 is primarily caused by the viral infection or whether it occurs secondary as a consequence of the host´s immune response, in particular by T-lymphocyte-mediated cytotoxicity or as a consequence of the cytokine storm observed during COVID-19 We don't know whether or not Myocarditis is a result of the infection or the immune response; in either scenario people who are predisposed to myocarditis would likely have similar reactions during either infection or vaccine. If myocarditis is a result of the immune system response to the spike protein then infection by COVID and/or vaccination can potentially trigger a response, with COVID likely triggering an even worse response with what we know and how it travels through the body. Additionally, as I also mentioned and will quote: > However, the vaccine against smallpox, based on a vaccinia virus, is reported to cause (epi-)myocarditis in rare cases Smallpox vaccines can also trigger myocarditis despite being a more 'traditional' vaccine. We distributed smallpox vaccines and managed to eradicate smallpox thanks to being thorough.
- gfodor 4y ago
  The claim I am making is it appears likely to me that at least some of these cases are fatal, which would mean the underlying mechanism of action for this side effect of the drug can, in the worst case, cause death. This ought to influence the ethics of mandating it at a minimum.
  - fzeroracer 4y ago
    What I'm saying is that the mechanism with which the vaccine can cause myocarditis might be the exact same mechanism that triggers myocarditis but worse for people who catch COVID-19, as brought up in the study. If the myocarditis is the result of the immune system's response to the spike protein then both COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccine will trigger myocarditis in those individuals. In this case the 'mechanism' is the same, but COVID-19 will likely trigger a far worse reaction from what we know about how the disease progresses in certain individuals. This is the exact point that the article mentions.
    - gfodor 4y ago
      So the argument is that if the vaccine causes this the same way COVID does, the risk of death would have been higher had they got COVID? You’ll have to excuse my skepticism, because setting things up so that we end up in a situation where it’s entirely unfalsifiable if the vaccine caused net harm in an individual has been par for the course. I reject the premise that even if it’s an immunological response shared by with COVID we should run with that to the assumption that catching COVID would have yielded a higher risk profile. That takes a far leap ahead of the science.
      - fzeroracer 4y ago
        We literally know COVID yields a higher risk profile for myocarditis. This data has been well captured through multiple studies. And that's just solely on the basis of myocarditis and not the other side effects we're also aware of like the damage to lung tissue, blood clotting and more. To provide an allegory, you are trying to point of the incidence rate of myocarditis in the smallpox vaccine and claiming that the smallpox vaccine was more dangerous than smallpox itself.
        gfodor 4y ago
        You’re smuggling in the assumption that the vaccine induced myocarditis is the same underlying phenomenon, with the same risk profile, as the viral induced one. Let’s say, hypothetically, that what was going on here was some % of vaccines were being injected intravenously in error, leading to massively localized spike protein buildup in the heart over a few hour period, with dynamics highly divergent with the progressive, broad way it would run with actual disease, causing a different set of possible outcomes like instant death being very much on the table. In this hypothetical scenario, can you see why your analysis about immunological response being similar, and myocarditis being caused by the disease and vaccine being relevant, would turn out to have in fact been missing the point? And that by failing to do so, we missed a simple protocol change that could have saved many lives counterfactually? I’m not saying that is what is going on. But what I am saying is if that scenario is logically coherent to you, can you extrapolate why the kinds of responses you are giving here could be falling into the the same trap you’d have recognized if the above scenario was actually what was happening? You’re telling me that I should stop thinking something bad is going on here, that we can stop, and am making nonsense arguments like the one you raised with the smallpox vaccine. I reject that - this is important and we should figure it out.

by gfodor 4y ago

fzeroracer 4y ago

Obvious according to who? I literally directly addressed that claim, so I'll quote it again for you: > Myocarditis is another manifestation reported during SARS-CoV-2-infection [24]. It is under debate whether myocarditis in COVID-19 is primarily caused by the viral infection or whether it occurs secondary as a consequence of the host´s immune response, in particular by T-lymphocyte-mediated cytotoxicity or as a consequence of the cytokine storm observed during COVID-19 We don't know whether or not Myocarditis is a result of the infection or the immune response; in either scenario people who are predisposed to myocarditis would likely have similar reactions during either infection or vaccine. If myocarditis is a result of the immune system response to the spike protein then infection by COVID and/or vaccination can potentially trigger a response, with COVID likely triggering an even worse response with what we know and how it travels through the body. Additionally, as I also mentioned and will quote: > However, the vaccine against smallpox, based on a vaccinia virus, is reported to cause (epi-)myocarditis in rare cases Smallpox vaccines can also trigger myocarditis despite being a more 'traditional' vaccine. We distributed smallpox vaccines and managed to eradicate smallpox thanks to being thorough.

gfodor 4y ago
The claim I am making is it appears likely to me that at least some of these cases are fatal, which would mean the underlying mechanism of action for this side effect of the drug can, in the worst case, cause death. This ought to influence the ethics of mandating it at a minimum.
- fzeroracer 4y ago
  What I'm saying is that the mechanism with which the vaccine can cause myocarditis might be the exact same mechanism that triggers myocarditis but worse for people who catch COVID-19, as brought up in the study. If the myocarditis is the result of the immune system's response to the spike protein then both COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccine will trigger myocarditis in those individuals. In this case the 'mechanism' is the same, but COVID-19 will likely trigger a far worse reaction from what we know about how the disease progresses in certain individuals. This is the exact point that the article mentions.
  - gfodor 4y ago
    So the argument is that if the vaccine causes this the same way COVID does, the risk of death would have been higher had they got COVID? You’ll have to excuse my skepticism, because setting things up so that we end up in a situation where it’s entirely unfalsifiable if the vaccine caused net harm in an individual has been par for the course. I reject the premise that even if it’s an immunological response shared by with COVID we should run with that to the assumption that catching COVID would have yielded a higher risk profile. That takes a far leap ahead of the science.
    - fzeroracer 4y ago
      We literally know COVID yields a higher risk profile for myocarditis. This data has been well captured through multiple studies. And that's just solely on the basis of myocarditis and not the other side effects we're also aware of like the damage to lung tissue, blood clotting and more. To provide an allegory, you are trying to point of the incidence rate of myocarditis in the smallpox vaccine and claiming that the smallpox vaccine was more dangerous than smallpox itself.
      - gfodor 4y ago
        You’re smuggling in the assumption that the vaccine induced myocarditis is the same underlying phenomenon, with the same risk profile, as the viral induced one. Let’s say, hypothetically, that what was going on here was some % of vaccines were being injected intravenously in error, leading to massively localized spike protein buildup in the heart over a few hour period, with dynamics highly divergent with the progressive, broad way it would run with actual disease, causing a different set of possible outcomes like instant death being very much on the table. In this hypothetical scenario, can you see why your analysis about immunological response being similar, and myocarditis being caused by the disease and vaccine being relevant, would turn out to have in fact been missing the point? And that by failing to do so, we missed a simple protocol change that could have saved many lives counterfactually? I’m not saying that is what is going on. But what I am saying is if that scenario is logically coherent to you, can you extrapolate why the kinds of responses you are giving here could be falling into the the same trap you’d have recognized if the above scenario was actually what was happening? You’re telling me that I should stop thinking something bad is going on here, that we can stop, and am making nonsense arguments like the one you raised with the smallpox vaccine. I reject that - this is important and we should figure it out.