3 ms·

Right if you asssume your case will be mild then there is virtually no risk. There is also no risk from mRNA if you assume the vaccine won't give you any side e

Right if you asssume your case will be mild then there is virtually no risk. There is also no risk from mRNA if you assume the vaccine won't give you any side effects. However to judge the risk you need to account for every potential outcome. And on myocarditis it still seems like the risk is greater with covid: https://www.heart.org/en/news/2022/08/22/covid-19-infection-poses-higher-risk-for-myocarditis-than-vaccines https://www.heart.org/en/news/2022/08/22/covid-19-infection-... There is one combination where the risk of myocarditis does come close to Covid-19 and that is with Moderna and men under 40. However myocarditis isn't the only potential side effect from Covid and you can just opt to get Pfizer instead if you're under 40.

ekianjo 4y ago
> Right if you asssume your case will be mild t You don't have to assume. You know it from almost Day + 30 of the pandemic that the people at real risk of a bad COVID were old and with 3-4 comorbidities. It was never a secret. The media has just been hyping up the risk to make it look like everyone could die from it for absolutely no reason. > And on myocarditis it still seems like the risk is greater with covid: https://www.heart.org/en/news/2022/08/22/covid-19-infection- https://www.heart.org/en/news/2022/08/22/covid-19-infection-... This data has virtually no value because it is based on myocarditis that was diagnosed and detected and who knows how many goes completely unnoticed or undiagnosed. You can't compare the rates of rare events this way. Interesting to look at the footnotes for disclosures too: > A.S. is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group, the Scottish Government’s Standing Committee on Pandemics, and AstraZeneca’s Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Advisory Group. > J.H.C. is chair of the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAG) risk stratification subgroup and a member of Scientific Advisory Group for Emer-gencies (SAGE) COVID-19 groups and the NHS group advising on prioritization of use of monoclonal antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 infection. > A.H. is a member of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation Color me surprised that people whose livelihood depends on recommending vaccines and COVID19 treatment end up "finding" that vaccines cause less side effects than COVID19..
- armada651 4y ago
  Even if the data is incomplete, it's the best we have right now. To the best of our knowledge the vaccine is the best option. Of course there's a risk cases are being undercounted or there is some long term effect we just don't know about that goes against what we know about mRNA today. But that's life unfortunately, a chain of decisions based on your best knowledge at the time some of which may turn out to be wrong. > Color me surprised that people whose livelihood depends on recommending vaccines and COVID19 treatment end up "finding" that vaccines cause less side effects than COVID19.. One of them serves on AstraZeneca's advisory board which is not an mRNA vaccine, in fact they would benefit from overestimating the risk of myocarditis with mRNA so the AstraZeneca vaccine would compare more favorably. Another one serves on a board to prioritize the use of monoclonal antibodies, so he benefits from people who remain unvaccinated and get hospitalized. If anything these people have a conflict of interest to inflate the dangers of mRNA vaccines. > The media has just been hyping up the risk to make it look like everyone could die from it for absolutely no reason. No argument from me there, but for anyone who thought the media wasn't prone to scaremongering hasn't been paying attention during the Ebola outbreak. However even if we are in a demographic not likely to have severe cases we shouldn't ignore the real strain epidemics put on the healthcare system and the risks it poses to demographics who are vulnerable. Also have you considered some of your own sources may be hyping up the risks of mRNA vaccines? While the vaccine is available to everyone I prefer getting it even if I'm not likely to get hospitalized. Because based on the available data it looks safe enough to me and it gives me the option to plan some days off in advance to deal with the vaccine side effects rather than suddenly getting Covid and then having to deal with being out for a week or more and having to worry about additional side effects whose severity exceeds the vaccine.
  - ekianjo 4y ago
    > To the best of our knowledge the vaccine is the best option. based on clinical data that nobody has seen apart from a few experts in the FDA who are probably paid by Big Pharma anyway. Its funny, I remember not so long ago on HN when the prevailing sentiment was that Big Pharma was just right next to Satan in terms of evil, but suddenly after the pandemic hit it]'s almost impossible to say that their motives and their data should be questioned. People have been completely brainwashed and were too quick to forget about VIOXX, Oxycontin and a lot more

ekianjo 4y ago

> Right if you asssume your case will be mild t You don't have to assume. You know it from almost Day + 30 of the pandemic that the people at real risk of a bad COVID were old and with 3-4 comorbidities. It was never a secret. The media has just been hyping up the risk to make it look like everyone could die from it for absolutely no reason. > And on myocarditis it still seems like the risk is greater with covid: https://www.heart.org/en/news/2022/08/22/covid-19-infection- https://www.heart.org/en/news/2022/08/22/covid-19-infection-... This data has virtually no value because it is based on myocarditis that was diagnosed and detected and who knows how many goes completely unnoticed or undiagnosed. You can't compare the rates of rare events this way. Interesting to look at the footnotes for disclosures too: > A.S. is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group, the Scottish Government’s Standing Committee on Pandemics, and AstraZeneca’s Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Advisory Group. > J.H.C. is chair of the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAG) risk stratification subgroup and a member of Scientific Advisory Group for Emer-gencies (SAGE) COVID-19 groups and the NHS group advising on prioritization of use of monoclonal antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 infection. > A.H. is a member of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation Color me surprised that people whose livelihood depends on recommending vaccines and COVID19 treatment end up "finding" that vaccines cause less side effects than COVID19..

armada651 4y ago
Even if the data is incomplete, it's the best we have right now. To the best of our knowledge the vaccine is the best option. Of course there's a risk cases are being undercounted or there is some long term effect we just don't know about that goes against what we know about mRNA today. But that's life unfortunately, a chain of decisions based on your best knowledge at the time some of which may turn out to be wrong. > Color me surprised that people whose livelihood depends on recommending vaccines and COVID19 treatment end up "finding" that vaccines cause less side effects than COVID19.. One of them serves on AstraZeneca's advisory board which is not an mRNA vaccine, in fact they would benefit from overestimating the risk of myocarditis with mRNA so the AstraZeneca vaccine would compare more favorably. Another one serves on a board to prioritize the use of monoclonal antibodies, so he benefits from people who remain unvaccinated and get hospitalized. If anything these people have a conflict of interest to inflate the dangers of mRNA vaccines. > The media has just been hyping up the risk to make it look like everyone could die from it for absolutely no reason. No argument from me there, but for anyone who thought the media wasn't prone to scaremongering hasn't been paying attention during the Ebola outbreak. However even if we are in a demographic not likely to have severe cases we shouldn't ignore the real strain epidemics put on the healthcare system and the risks it poses to demographics who are vulnerable. Also have you considered some of your own sources may be hyping up the risks of mRNA vaccines? While the vaccine is available to everyone I prefer getting it even if I'm not likely to get hospitalized. Because based on the available data it looks safe enough to me and it gives me the option to plan some days off in advance to deal with the vaccine side effects rather than suddenly getting Covid and then having to deal with being out for a week or more and having to worry about additional side effects whose severity exceeds the vaccine.
- ekianjo 4y ago
  > To the best of our knowledge the vaccine is the best option. based on clinical data that nobody has seen apart from a few experts in the FDA who are probably paid by Big Pharma anyway. Its funny, I remember not so long ago on HN when the prevailing sentiment was that Big Pharma was just right next to Satan in terms of evil, but suddenly after the pandemic hit it]'s almost impossible to say that their motives and their data should be questioned. People have been completely brainwashed and were too quick to forget about VIOXX, Oxycontin and a lot more