1971 replies to this topic

[Mind]

No vaccine is 100% safe or 100% effective. Many vaccines don't prevent infection but prevent serious disease. The statistics, which I have posted here over and over and over, clearly show that the COVID vaccines have kept people from getting seriously ill, kept people out of the hospital and kept people from dying. The anti vax people are deluded. If people listened to them many more people would be dead now. It's fundamentally evil. People on a longevity site promoting advice that will get people killed. I just don't get it. 

 

We have control groups. Injections were not widespread in Africa, yet most of those countries have far less deaths/million COVID than highly injected countries. Many countries, including Australia, Israel, Taiwan, etc... had their biggest caseloads and most deaths AFTER widespread injections. This is the opposite of what should have happened - the opposite of how the injections were sold.

[geo12the]

We have control groups. Injections were not widespread in Africa, yet most of those countries have far less deaths/million COVID than highly injected countries. Many countries, including Australia, Israel, Taiwan, etc... had their biggest caseloads and most deaths AFTER widespread injections. This is the opposite of what should have happened - the opposite of how the injections were sold.

 

You can't compare apples and oranges. Africa has overall lower population density and many people live outdoors. Asia, Israel etc. are more densely populated and have densely populated cities like Singapore and Hong Kong. I feel like a broken record repeating over and over that you just can't compare places that are densely populated to those that are sparsely populated and draw sweeping conclusions about mask or vaccine effectiveness  because closer contact of humans to other humans means increased chance of COVID spreading and is a major confounding factor. I don't know why you can't see that it's common sense. If you look at the stats within places, like the US, they show that vaccines have saved countless lives.

Edited by geo12the, 11 November 2022 - 06:23 PM.

[Mind]

You can't compare apples and oranges. Africa has overall lower population density and many people live outdoors. Asia, Israel etc. are more densely populated and have densely populated cities like Singapore and Hong Kong. I feel like a broken record repeating over and over that you just can't compare places that are densely populated to those that are sparsely populated and draw sweeping conclusions about mask or vaccine effectiveness  because closer contact of humans to other humans means increased chance of COVID spreading and is a major confounding factor. I don't know why you can't see that it's common sense. If you look at the stats within places, like the US, they show that vaccines have saved countless lives.

 

Rwanda has roughly the same population density as Taiwan, South Korea, the Netherlands, and Israel.

 

Uganda, Nigeria, and Gambia have roughly the same population density as Switzerland, Italy, and Germany.

 

None of those African countries followed the pandemic policies to the same degree. They had far less COVID injections, less masking, fewer lockdowns.

 

The non-African countries listed above had forced compliance with masking, social distancing, injections, etc. They have more modern medical facilities. In the case of South Korea, they had intensive contact tracing.

 

Yet Germany, Switzerland, South Korea, Israel, Netherlands, Italy, all fared FAR FAR worse in deaths/million due to COVID.

 

If population density was a factor, then the African countries with little in the way of pandemic control measures and COVID injections, should have been faring MUCH worse. It didn't happen.

 

You would be better to argue that African countries are on average - younger and less obese - and thus less vulnerable to death from COVID. I have argued this from the beginning, that the U.S. has fared poorly during the COVID pandemic because it is the least healthy and most obese country in the world. Of course, I was attacked by the COVID rage mob, called and idiot and delusional, for making such an argument.

 

Evidence for the total and utter failure of pandemic policies/restrictions can be seen in the EU as well. According to this published research, Sweden fared the best BY FAR when it comes to excess mortality during the COVID pandemic, even though their deaths/million from COVID were greater than other Nordic countries (but FAR below most of the EU). Sweden took a light approach. They didn't create fear and panic. They didn't try to destroy human social and economic connections. According to excess mortality data, they took the correct approach.

[Mind]

Remember when you were viciously attacked by the COVID rage mob for pointing out the fact that the COVID injections were causing heart problems (which was obvious from the trial data - even before widespread injection programs).

 

I wonder if the rage and hatred will now be spewed at NBC news, telling the story of people who now have myocarditis from the injections.

 

Even more mainstream news reports about how the Moderna injection causes 2 to 3 more times heart problems than Pfizer.

 

It was just a few short months ago that no one was allowed to talk about side effects from the injections without the threat of losing their career, reputation, freedom, etc. Dr. McCollough correctly pointed out the risk of heart issues. Now he is losing his license and certifications. I doubt there will be any apologies coming from the COVID hate mob. Lawsuits are probably the only option.

 

In addition, there are now more published studies showing how fast the antibody protection wanes and how new boosters offer almost no protection after a couple of months. There are even several studies showing negative vaccine effectiveness after a couple of months - meaning you are MORE likely to get symptomatic COVID and be hospitalized a couple months post-injection.

 

I correctly pointed out the short-comings of the potential injection campaign a couple of years ago. The world medical establishment had never successfully eliminated any contagious respiratory disease. The COVID injections are failing in a similar manner. You were told that taking the injection would end the pandemic real quick. It didn't happen. Early studies demonstrating near 100% effectiveness have been proven to be incorrect.

[joesixpack]

Covid 19 vaccines and the misinterpretation of perceived side effects clarity on the safety of vaccines

 

New study from NIH explains it all. Fear of the vaccine, causes the adverse side effects. Apparently, fear of "alleged" myocarditis caused by the shot, causes myocarditis. Clown world.

 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/36381188/

Edited by joesixpack, 22 November 2022 - 03:07 PM.

[Mind]

Covid 19 vaccines and the misinterpretation of perceived side effects clarity on the safety of vaccines

 

New study from NIH explains it all. Fear of the vaccine, causes the adverse side effects. Apparently, fear of "alleged" myocarditis caused by the shot, causes myocarditis. Clown world.

 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/36381188/

 

Hmmm? Now the NIH needs to look into how their mega-fear campaign affected mortality during the pandemic. If fear alone can cause myocarditis it can certainly cause worse COVID outcomes. Fear, depression, and loneliness are well known to cause lower immune response. The NIH's irresponsible fear campaign during the pandemic probably caused a lot of death.

[Mind]

Pfizer is riding their injections all the way to the bank, jacking up the price recently. A shot that costs a little over a dollar per shot (according to some analysts) will now cost $130 USD.

 

The FDA barely inspected any of the Pfizer COVID injection trial sites....yet approved the injections. They had the trial data showing tens of thousands of adverse events and nearly 3% of the subjects dying, yet approved the injections. Were they not aware of how sloppy the injection trials were? They were made aware, of course, but were not interested in looking into it. They just approved the COVID injections for kids after a trial involving 8 mice. Many other countries of the world are not forcing the injections on kids because there is more risk than reward.

 

 

[smithx]

3% of covid vaccine recipients clar4ly are not dying. That's just silly.

 

If that were the case, it would be front page news everywhere with a massive outcry.  There's no way something that massive could be hidden or suppressed.

 

 

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Re post #578

 

smithx wrote: "3% of covid vaccine recipients clar4ly are not dying. That's just silly." in response to post Mind's post #577

 

smithx, In post #577, Mind wrote "They had the trial data showing tens of thousands of adverse events and nearly 3% of the subjects dying...". In the quote I have emphasized that the claim made by Mind is referring to trial data and not to the totality of vaccine recipients, as you seem to be suggesting was claimed.

[Mind]

3% of covid vaccine recipients clar4ly are not dying. That's just silly.

 

If that were the case, it would be front page news everywhere with a massive outcry.  There's no way something that massive could be hidden or suppressed.

 

nearly 3% of TRIAL participants died during the study. The death toll from the roll-out of the COVID injections is currently unknown.

[Mind]

More peer-reviewed research shows that the COVID injections wear off very rapidly while natural immunity is durable, stronger, and lasts longer.

 

A new paper attempting to explain why your immune system response and function is much lower after the COVID injection.

 

Government data shows that the new bivalent booster is only 20-30% effective after 2 months (based upon whatever the evolving definition of "effective" is). It is no wonder why more vaccinated people are now dying in the U.S. than unvaccinated (same as most of Europe).

[Hip]

The death toll from the roll-out of the COVID injections is currently unknown.

 

Wrong. 

 

Excess death data from New Zealand indicated the roll out of the COVID vaccines produced no excess deaths. In fact, during the vaccine roll out in NZ, most of the time, excesses death levels were negative, not positive. See this chart of excess deaths by country. 

 

NZ is a good country to study, since there was almost no COVID cases at all for much of the pandemic, due to the tough restrictions imposed. So the vaccines were rolled out in a COVID-free environment. And there were no excess deaths. 

 

So all the paranoid schizotypal people who think there has been some coverup of vaccine side effects need to look at the NZ data. 

 

On second thoughts, don't bother. Schizotypy cannot be cured with facts; it requires antipsychotic drugs to treat.

[joesixpack]

Wrong. 

 

Excess death data from New Zealand indicated the roll out of the COVID vaccines produced no excess deaths. In fact, during the vaccine roll out in NZ, most of the time, excesses death levels were negative, not positive. See this chart of excess deaths by country. 

 

NZ is a good country to study, since there was almost no COVID cases at all for much of the pandemic, due to the tough restrictions imposed. So the vaccines were rolled out in a COVID-free environment. And there were no excess deaths. 

 

So all the paranoid schizotypal people who think there has been some coverup of vaccine side effects need to look at the NZ data. 

 

On second thoughts, don't bother. Schizotypy cannot be cured with facts; it requires antipsychotic drugs to treat.

Sources please.

[Hip]

Sources please.

 

See the webpage I linked to in my above post. Look at the diagram at the top of that page entitled "Excess deaths by country". About half way down in that diagram, you see New Zealand.

 

Almost all other countries in the diagram have areas of bright red or orange due to the high level of excess deaths from COVID. But not New Zealand, as the restrictions NZ imposed more or less prevented COVID from appearing in NZ during most of the pandemic.

 

The COVID vaccination program was started in NZ on 20 February 2021. If you look at the diagram, there were no excess deaths at that time, nor in the year that followed the introduction of the vaccine. 81% of the country had at least two doses of the vaccine, so the rollout was quite comprehensive. 

 

In fact, if anything, there were less deaths than normal on the diagram as the vaccine rollout took place (indicated by a grey colour). 

 

You can hover your mouse along the NZ line in the diagram, to get the week by week excess death percentage. For the whole year following the start of the vaccine rollout, you see more grey than anything else, indicating less death than expected for that week.

 

 

 

Some excess deaths only started appearing in NZ around March 2022, when NZ relaxed their restrictions and were then finally hit with a wave of COVID. Those excess deaths you see from March 2022 onwards were due to the virus. 

 

So it is clear from the New Zealand data that the COVID vaccines are not killing millions of people, as many irresponsible people on social media are trying to claim. 

Edited by Hip, 27 November 2022 - 07:03 AM.

[pamojja]

Wrong. 
 
Excess death data from New Zealand indicated the roll out of the COVID vaccines produced no excess deaths. In fact, during the vaccine roll out in NZ, most of the time, excesses death levels were negative, not positive. See this chart of excess deaths by country.

 

 

Excess deaths have to be understood in the context of what are 'normal' excess deaths before covid.

 

Those charts doesn't put it in any reasonable relation, and exagerates the extent for suggesting there were exceptional excesses during the covid-plandemic, despite till now not exceeding by far much worse pandemics of the past.

 

It also ignores that excess mortality was declining up to the year 2000 and increasing gradually since again. However, even with in recent times increasing and now naturaly worse - still not actually reaching pre-2000 levels in excess mortality, then rather normal. As seen in these examples of Germany, UK and the US:

 

 germany-mortality-1950-2020-monthly-ben-marten-1.jpg   72.12KB   0 downloads

 uk-mortality-age-adjusted-1842.jpg   80.63KB   0 downloads

 us-mortality-1900-2020-age-adjusted.jpg   83.91KB   0 downloads

 

To be unterstood is also the 'dry-fodder' phenomena, where often countries with less deaths the preceeding year will experience worse winter seasons, and vis-versa. Since Covid was worse for some countries, they will naturally see less deaths the following time-periods.

 

Next look at the more fine-grained excess mortalities above article took the data from Europe, "EuroMOMO (euromomo.eu) 2022". For example just the 3 first countries it lists alphabetically:

 

 Screenshot_20221127-111914~2.png   255.22KB   0 downloads

 

Austria was as bad as the flu season in 2017, which at that time wasn't even worthy mentioning in the news. Belgium seems to suggest it was indeed affected during the first wave. Nothing in Cyprus.

 

That's the seemingly randomn pattern troughout all European countries. Covid like flu, Covid worse, or seemingly nothing at all. On and on.

 

The only country indeed suggesting faring worse from the vaccine is really Israel only, again in the context of 2 other alphabetically following counties:

 

 Screenshot_20221127-112101~2.png   462.19KB   0 downloads

 

Israel's post-vaccine excess mortality. Italy hit. Luxemburg nothing.

 

We all know correlation doesn't prove causation. But only can suggest a hypothesis, which still has to be verified with other investigations. As for example a follow-up on the 3% mortality in the vaccine-group in above study.

 

For me from all this long-term excess mortality data only one thing is sure: This wasn't a remarkable pandemic - 3/4 of my life I lifed happily and free with much worse excess mortality - it was pushed by other interrest to be portrayed a pandemic of concern.

 

And real concerns about an experimental and very profitable vaccine are still not truely investigated, but tried to hide everywhere.

 

 

 

Edited by pamojja, 27 November 2022 - 11:36 AM.

[Hip]

I don't know what you are talking about, pamojja, your post comes across as gobbledygook. I suspect you don't understand what excess mortality is, or how it is calculated. There are probably others here who also do not understand what is meant by excess mortality. 

 

Excess mortality is usually calculated by comparing the number of deaths that occur in one week to the same week in the previous year, and maybe to the year before that too, averaging the figures for the previous two years. The excess mortality is any percentage increase or decrease in deaths in one weeked compared to the same week in the previous year.

 

 

If you look at ALL countries in the excess death diagram I posted, from Jan 2020 to the end of March 2020, which was just before COVID hit, there were no excess deaths.

 

In ALL countries, death levels were normal just before the pandemic, and very similar to the previous year. In this period of a few months just before COVID hit, the diagram shows excess deaths for each week to be normal, just a few percent increased or decreased from the previous year.

 

Then as COVID arrived in multiple countries from about April 2020 onwards, excess deaths shot up in nearly all countries, to values like 50% to 100% or more excess deaths. So as COVID hit, the impact on excess deaths was huge, and a major difference to the time just before the pandemic hit. The diagram shows this very clearly: no major excess deaths before March 2020, then after that time, all hell broke loose. 

 

 

But New Zealand had almost zero COVID, thanks to the excellent way it handled the pandemic, and the great cooperation between public and government. So New Zealand is about the only country where we can study effect of the COVID vaccines without the complexity of having COVID present at the same time as the vaccines. 

 

And the data clearly show that there is no uptick in deaths during for the entire year after vaccines were rolled out in New Zealand.

 

You cannot get any better data than that: it's very clear the vaccines are not causing an increase in mortality. 

 

 

 

Of course if one is mathematically challenged, or if one has psychiatric issues like schizotypy (a common mild mental illness which makes people paranoid and distrusting of the authorities, which makes people anti-establishment, as well as susceptible to being taken in by conspiracy theories), then no logic or data will sink in. 

 

For anyone who struggles with understanding mathematical data, I can recommend taking the intelligence-enhancing nootropic piracetam. This can improve the ability to understand maths and logic. For those who find themselves unduly paranoid of their government and anti-establishment, consider getting pharmacological treatment for this condition. Don't accept a reduced quality of life by living with low-grade psychosis-spectrum symptoms such as paranoia and undue suspicion. You can even try some of the supplements that can help psychosis, like sarcosine, high dose zinc, niacinamide, or electrical microcurrent treatments like tDCS. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 27 November 2022 - 07:05 PM.

[pamojja]

I don't know what you are talking about, pamojja, your post comes across as gobbledygook.

I knew you would insist correlation proves causation. And how convinent for you to talk away sure mortality data from almost a century with nothing more than gobbledygook.

Of course if one is mathematically challenged, or if one has psychiatric issues like schizotypy (a common mild mental illness which makes people paranoid and distrusting of the authorities, which makes people anti-establishment, as well as susceptible to being taken in by conspiracy theories), then no logic or data will sink in.

For anyone who struggles with understanding mathematical data, I can recommend taking the intelligence-enhancing nootropic piracetam. This can improve the ability to understand maths and logic. For those who find themselves unduly paranoid of their government and anti-establishment, consider getting pharmacological treatment for this condition. Don't accept a reduced quality of life by living with low-grade psychosis-spectrum symptoms such as paranoia and undue suspicion. You can even try some of the supplements that can help psychosis, like sarcosine, high dose zinc, niacinamide, or electrical microcurrent treatments like tDCS.

Since now 2 years you fight everyone who doesn't agree with your beliefs and no data behind, with unceasing add-hominem attacks. Usually only used by those in desperation and lack of any convincing data as a last resort. And thereby loosing their last credibility.

Not so for Hip: Because of a very sad ME/CFS he suffers since 2009 (or at least that's when he started posting on PhoenixRising). In a post from 2020 summarizing his success against the debilitating disease without a cure: https://forums.phoen...-stories.80502/

ME/CFS patient (Hip) — achieved a ½-level gain moving from the bottom end of moderate to the top within only 10 days as a result of high-dose selenium (taking selenomethionine 400 mcg once daily on an empty stomach).
​
● High-Dose Selenium Significantly Improves My Fatigue and Brain Fog

Sounds really great? - how much I wished it were otherwise: But in Hip's own words: https://forums.phoen...f-me-cfs.60746/

● Those with mild ME/CFS may be working full or part time, but struggle to do so. Of necessity they may have stopped or curtailed all leisure and social pursuits.

● Those with moderate ME/CFS are generally not able to work, probably don't leave the house much, have to perform domestic chores slowly with breaks and rests, and may need 1 or 2 hour's nap in the middle of day.

● Those with severe ME/CFS are more-or-less fully housebound, and likely bedbound (or lying horizontal on a sofa) for much of the day. They are unable to leave the house except on rare occasions, and usually dependent on a wheelchair for mobility, except for very short walks within the home or garden. They find domestic chores like cooking or any form of housework very difficult or impossible.

● Those with very severe ME/CFS will bedbound nearly 24 hours day, except for a few minutes each day to go to the bathroom. Dependent on help for all daily care. Often unable to tolerate any noise, and are generally extremely sensitive to light.

He wasn't able to work due to his cognitive impairments for over a decade, and lives with his parents. Really a very sad case.

Those dire personal circumstances are not posted here to take off any value of his well reasoned posts.

But here with these silly recommendations - dressing up unceasing personal insults to all disagreeing with him: Taking those - including pharmacological treatment - all himself, didn't even help with his own severe disabilty.

Therefore it has to be put in relation to the circumstances from whom those recommendations are comming from. Real desperation.

Edited by pamojja, 28 November 2022 - 01:49 AM.

[Hip]

I knew you would insist correlation proves causation. And how convinent for you to talk away sure mortality data from almost a century with nothing more than gobbledygook.

 
Does anyone here (out of those with science skills) know what pamojja is on about, because I cannot make any sense of what he is saying.


 

add-hominem attacks

 

People on Longecity may be literally murdering others with their antivax propaganda. In another thread, I calculated that the antivax comments in these Longecity COVID threads may have led to the death from COVID of around 3 people. 

 

Normally I am quite tolerant when people post natural health mumbo jumbo, because normally it does not do any harm, even though it may be unscientific. But in this pandemic, the toxic antivax mumbo jumbo found all over the Internet and social media is killing people. That's why I take an no-nonsense stance against this mumbo jumbo.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 28 November 2022 - 03:17 AM.

[healthmysteries31]

Personally don't understand why people get so militant about vaccination. Taking it or not taking it is a personal decision. You are not automatically a good/bad person because you didn't take it or you took it.

 

Also I don't think at this point it's entirely clear what the risk/rewards for some age groups. I am very skeptical of people who claim to  already know what is best for others.

 

When the vaccine was offered I made an informed choice and didn't take it because I felt the vaccine was mostly designed to prevent severe lung disease for which my group has  a rather low risk.

 

I don't think there is really that much reliable data for other outcomes such as infection, myocarditis or also long covid due to the fact that it's hard to do, the vaccine has been on the market only for a short period of time and there is a lot of political pressure to incentivize certain outcomes. For example some studies show a low protective effect against long covid for the omicron variant.

 

Since I am not concerned about death/hospitalization and the data for other outcomes is poor and the vaccine appears to require frequent booster shots and the vaccine doesn't appear protect me against getting a covid infection I didn't see a good reason for me to take it.

 

There is also new data on myocarditis and the frequency of mild myocarditis due to vaccination is unusually high(1 in 50) in some studies.

 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/36006288/

 

I wouldn't want  to take a product that could have  a 2% risk of causing me heart inflammation every time I take it and that needs to be taken once or twice  a year unless I really badly need it.

Edited by healthmysteries31, 28 November 2022 - 02:16 PM.

[joesixpack]

Personally don't understand why people get so militant about vaccination. Taking it or not taking it is a personal decision. You are not automatically a good/bad person because you didn't take it or you took it.

 

Also I don't think at this point it's entirely clear what the risk/rewards for some age groups. I am very skeptical of people who claim to  already know what is best for others.

 

When the vaccine was offered I made an informed choice and didn't take it because I felt the vaccine was mostly designed to prevent severe lung disease for which my group has  a rather low risk.

 

I don't think there is really that much reliable data for other outcomes such as infection, myocarditis or also long covid due to the fact that it's hard to do, the vaccine has been on the market only for a short period of time and there is a lot of political pressure to incentivize certain outcomes. For example some studies show a low protective effect against long covid for the omicron variant.

 

Since I am not concerned about death/hospitalization and the data for other outcomes is poor and the vaccine appears to require frequent booster shots and the vaccine doesn't appear protect me against getting a covid infection I didn't see a good reason for me to take it.

 

There is also new data on myocarditis and the frequency of mild myocarditis due to vaccination is unusually high(1 in 50) in some studies.

 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/36006288/

 

I wouldn't want  to take a product that could have  a 2% risk of causing me heart inflammation every time I take it and that needs to be taken once or twice  a year unless I really badly need it.

I think you have provided a good summary of the current state of affairs, regarding the covid 19 vaccine.

[Hip]

Personally don't understand why people get so militant about vaccination. Taking it or not taking it is a personal decision. You are not automatically a good/bad person because you didn't take it or you took it.

 

I agree that taking or not taking a COVID vaccine is a personal decision that each person must weigh up. And nobody is a bad person if they do not want to take it.

 

Also an individual who decides not to take the vaccine is not an antivaxer. That's just their personal decision. Rather, and antivaxer is an activist who spends a lot of time posting emotive antivax material and antivax scare stories online. An antivaxer wants to convince as many people as possible to also not get the vaccine. That's very different to merely deciding not to take the vaccine yourself.

 

I think this sort of antivax activism and scaremongering is wrong. COVID vaccine adverse effects are rare, so the degree of scaremongering is far too high for the small risks involved.

 

We humans are strongly influenced by emotion, and not very influenced by the facts and statistics. That includes even scientific types, who can be emotionally swayed, in spite of their better judgement. So unfortunately a single emotive scare story of a one-in-a-million adverse vaccine effect can carry more power that 100 studies showing that the vaccine is safe statistically. The antivax groups, who incidentally actually pay $millions to place antivax adverts on social media, are very good at posting emotive scare stories, because they know emotion usually trumps reason and fact. 

 

So sadly, when ordinary people come to make their personal decision about vaccination, they are presented with distorted emotive info, do to the anxiety-raising effects of scare stories.

 

 

 

An analogy to the vaccination decision would be buying a car. In the US alone, something like 50,000 people are killed every year by motor accidents, and your annual risk of dying in a car accident is 1 in 6478 in the US (source here).

 

But when you are considering buying a car, and you ask people online which model they might recommend, they do not post lots of gruesome pictures of hideous car crashes and terribly damaged bleeding bodies, or tell you horror stories of people they know who were maimed or killed in an auto accident. If we did bombard people with lots of negative stories about car travel, perhaps that would lead to "car purchase hesitancy", in the same way as the antivax scare stories lead to vaccine hesitancy. 

 

Far more people are killed or badly injured by car accidents each and every year than are killed or injured by the COVID vaccines. Yet we don't seem to have any organised anti-car movement that posts emotive stories of car deaths or injuries in the same way as we have an organised anti-vax movement that does this.  

Edited by Hip, 28 November 2022 - 08:57 PM.

[Hip]

There is also new data on myocarditis and the frequency of mild myocarditis due to vaccination is unusually high(1 in 50) in some studies.

 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/36006288/

 

I wouldn't want  to take a product that could have  a 2% risk of causing me heart inflammation every time I take it and that needs to be taken once or twice  a year unless I really badly need it.

 

You risk of dying from COVID if unvaccinated is not that high if you are younger. Those in their for example 40s have a 1 in 2500 chance of death if they develop COVID from omicron. Ref: here. 

 

However, SARS-CoV-2 can cause a fate worse than death at any age: it can trigger long COVID, which is one of the most life destroying fatiguing diseases you can get. Many long COVID patients are unable to work, and are housebound with illness. They have no energy for any social life, their girlfriends or boyfriends often leave them, because they have no energy to do anything. They will remain like this for the rest of their lives, a semi-vegetable that is trapped in their own home due to sheer bone-crushing fatigue, both mental and physical fatigue.

 

At any age, even in teenagers, the chances of getting long COVID after a SARS-CoV-2 infection are just 1 in 100. 

 

Long COVID appears to be identical to the illness myalgic encephalomyelitis / chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), which is the disease I have myself. I can tell you that it is dire. If a bolt of lightning struck me dead tomorrow, I would be grateful, because living with ME/CFS is no life at all.

 

COVID vaccination halves your risk of developing long COVID.

 

 

Don't think that death is the worse thing COVID can throw at you. 

Edited by Hip, 28 November 2022 - 09:36 PM.

[healthmysteries31]

COVID vaccination halves your risk of developing long COVID.

 

 

Don't think that death is the worse thing COVID can throw at you. 

 

I get what you are saying but it's just that I don't think we have that much good evidence that vaccines are that effective against omicron long-covid. They were never designed to prevent it. We don't even know for sure what causes it. 

 

https://time.com/621...nation-booster/

 

At first, it appeared that vaccines were pretty protective against Long COVID. Some 2021 research suggested vaccinated people were up to 50% less likely to develop Long COVID after a breakthrough infection, compared to unvaccinated people who got COVID-19. But a large study published in Nature Medicine in May reached a less-encouraging conclusion: it found that vaccinated people were only about 15% less likely to develop Long COVID than their unvaccinated counterparts.

 

 

Studies have come to very different estimates about the degree of protection vaccines offer against Long COVID. But some of the latest findings point to fairly disappointing protection. In one July report from the U.K.’s Office for National Statistics, more than 4% of vaccinated and boosted adults in the U.K. who were infected by Delta, Omicron BA.1, or BA.2 still had symptoms at least 12 weeks later. A preprint posted online on Sept. 6 (which has not yet been peer-reviewed) suggests the situation isn’t any better in the U.S. Researchers surveyed people from June into July, as the BA.5 variant was taking over. Among those who said they’d had COVID-19 at least a month earlier, roughly 20% had symptoms that lasted at least four weeks, with little difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated people.

 

 

 

 

In Thailand they found that 1 in 300 teenagers had heart inflammation from the vaccine bad enough that they had to go to the ICU. 

 

Assuming that we have to re-vaccinate  a class of 30 students for  several years with 10 vaccines  and the risk for each new vaccine is the same that would be 1 case each class that would have to stay in the ICU and several others with myocarditis.

 

I don't see how it's possible to base a long-term vaccination program for low risk groups based on this treatment without full informed consent and even then it's ethically questionable.

 

You can either roll the dice with covid or with the vaccine. Not 100% sure what the better option is but everyone will have to take responsibility for their own actions.

Edited by healthmysteries31, 28 November 2022 - 11:04 PM.

[Hip]

I get what you are saying but it's just that I don't think we have that much good evidence that vaccines are that effective against omicron long-covid. They were never designed to prevent it. We don't even know for sure what causes it. 
 
https://time.com/621...nation-booster/

 
Yes, different studies have come to different conclusions about how much vaccination protects you from having acute COVID turn into the dreaded long COVID. The best estimates are that it reduces your risk by a factor of 2, but other studies find significantly lesser protection.
 
However, that refers to how vaccines help reduce risks of long COVID once you have caught COVID. But the vaccines also reduce your risk of catching COVID in the first place by a factor of 3. So if you don't catch COVID to begin with, then you cannot get long COVID.
 
So if vaccines reduce your chance of catching COVID by a factor of 3, and in the best estimates, if you have actually caught COVID, vaccines reduce you chances of developing long COVID by a factor of 2, the combined protection will be 3 x 2 = 6. So as far as I can see, the vaccines could reduce long COVID risk by up to 6 times.

 

Believe me, if you get long COVID, you won't be interested in lengthening your life anymore, you'll then want to have a short a life as possible.
 


 

In Thailand they found that 1 in 300 teenagers had heart inflammation from the vaccine bad enough that they had to go to the ICU. 
 
Assuming that we have to re-vaccinate  a class of 30 students for  several years with 10 vaccines  and the risk for each new vaccine is the same that would be 1 case each class that would have to stay in the ICU and several others with myocarditis.
 
I don't see how it's possible to base a long-term vaccination program for low risk groups based on this treatment without full informed consent and even then it's ethically questionable.
 
You can either roll the dice with covid or with the vaccine. Not 100% sure what the better option is but everyone will have to take responsibility for their own actions.

 
That Thai study was small scale, taking only 301 students from two schools. And they did not properly diagnose myocarditis, which I believe requires medical imaging on the heart, but just went by symptoms like heart palpitations or shortness of breath. I don't think that is a reliable way of diagnosing myocarditis.

 

In any case, the authors stated symptoms were mild and temporary, with all cases fully recovering within 14 days.
 
Also, with all the students coming from just two schools, it is not a random cross-section of the population. Maybe those students were prone to myocarditis because of previous heart viruses that might have been circulating in the school.

 

I have personal experience of heart viruses:
 
When I caught the virus which triggered my ME/CFS some 15 years ago, this virus (which blood tests showed was coxsackievirus B4) went around all my family and friends, and in 4 out of about 30 people who caught my virus, it triggered chronic viral myocarditis, and some heart attacks in the previously healthy.

 

All the people who caught my virus could now be ticking time bombs for heart diseases like myocarditis, coronary heart disease, and heart valve disease later in life, as it is known that Coxsackie B virus likes to live long term in the heart tissues, and can then trigger heart disease at any point in the future.
 
If a similar Coxsackie B virus had previously spread through the children of a school, those children might be more susceptible to getting myocarditis triggered from a vaccine. Coxsackie B is a common virus, there are 6 of them, Coxsackie B1 to B6, and they are linked to many nasty chronic diseases, from type 1 diabetes to heart diseases to Parkinson's and ME/CFS.
 
So really you need larger studies with a more random cross-section of the population. Studies in the UK have shown that myocarditis is very low risk:

 

Even in the highest-risk age group (18-29), there were just 29 cases of suspected myocarditis or pericarditis for every million second doses of the Pfizer vaccine given in the UK (up until 24 August 2022). The risk is even lower following a Pfizer booster, with just 17 cases per million people in this age group. In other age groups the risk is even lower.

 

For Moderna, there were 68 cases of suspected myocarditis or pericarditis for every million second doses given in the UK, in this age group.

 

Source: here.

Edited by Hip, 29 November 2022 - 12:12 AM.

[healthmysteries31]

However, that refers to how vaccines help reduce risks of long COVID once you have caught COVID. But the vaccines also reduce your risk of catching COVID in the first place by a factor of 3. So if you don't catch COVID to begin with, then you cannot get long COVID.

 

 

I don't think there is any good evidence that vaccines protect against infection with newer variants for more than a few weeks assuming they protect against infection at all.

 

That Thai study was small scale, taking only 301 students from two schools. And they did not properly diagnose myocarditis, which I believe requires medical imaging on the heart, but just went by symptoms like heart palpitations or shortness of breath. I don't think that is a reliable way of diagnosing myocarditis.

 

 

They also did medical exams. The fact that they diagnosed several cases and one had to go to the ICU despite such a small group is very concerning.

 

Also, with all the students coming from just two schools, it is not a random cross-section of the population. Maybe those students were prone to myocarditis because of previous heart viruses that might have been circulating in the school.

 

 

Hard to believe. A similar study in another country had the same results. 

 

In any case, the authors stated symptoms were mild and temporary, with all cases fully recovering within 14 days.

 

 

Not sure of I would call it mild if you have to stay in the ICU. Some people who recover have to continue to take drugs or have an elevated risk of developing heart problems later.

 

So really you need larger studies with a more random cross-section of the population. Studies in the UK have shown that myocarditis is very low risk:

 

 

the previous studies never followed  and examined all vaccinated patients that's why they found lower rates. According to the most recent studies the risk of some mild subclinical myocarditis is probably very high but it's not known what that means it practice. It's also not known if damage can build up with multiple shots.

 

not good enough for me to want to take it. Benefits and risks aren't really clear. Will probably take years to figure out.

Edited by healthmysteries31, 29 November 2022 - 12:42 AM.

[Hip]

I don't think there is any good evidence that vaccines protect against infection with newer variants for more than a few weeks assuming they protect against infection at all.

 
There's nothing to suggest that the vaccines are not continuing to protect against COVID. The original vaccines were designed for earlier strain of COVID, but they work well for omicron too, and shown by the data I provided above, where the original vaccines greatly protect against omicron death or hospitalisation. 
 
In fact the new bivalent vaccines, which target both the original strains as well as omicron have not offered any more protection than the original vaccines (the bivalent vaccines have been a failure in this respect), indicating that you don't need to specifically target omicron to get protective benefit, since the original vaccines work just as well for omicron.
 
I don't know where you are getting this idea that the COVID vaccines no longer protect? That's misinformation.

 

Are you perhaps mixing this up with the fact that omicron does not produce natural immunity?
 
This has been the big change with omicron, it does not produce natural immunity. Delta infections provided natural immunity that was reasonably long lasting, but omicron is a bit of a stealth virus which evades th adaptive immune system to a degree, so does not strongly stimulate the adaptive immune response. For this reason, omicron immunity is weak and wanes in a matter of weeks. So forget about natural immunity, in this era of omicron.

 

 

the previous studies never followed  and examined all vaccinated patients that's why they found lower rates. According to the most recent studies the risk of some mild subclinical myocarditis is probably very high but it's not known what that means it practice. It's also not known if damage can build up with multiple shots.
 
not good enough for me to want to take it. Benefits and risks aren't really clear. Will probably take years to figure out.

 

So you are suggesting that previous studies looked out for proper myocarditis, and found it to be rare, but this Thai study was interested in mild subclinical myocarditis?

 

So in your risk/benefit analysis, this mild transient heart inflammation, which is only tends to appear in young kids anyway, not so much adults, is more of a concern for you than the high risk long COVID, and also the risk for that milder outcomes like death?

 

By the way, according to Reuters, in that Thai study on myocarditis, 44% of the kids had underlying diseases including asthma, allergies, blood or thyroid disorders and migraine. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 29 November 2022 - 03:12 AM.

[Hip]

This article details the protection against omicron infection provided by the vaccines:

 

Qatar’s health-care system. They found that Qatari residents who received two doses of either the Pfizer–BioNTech or Moderna mRNA-based vaccine enjoyed several months of substantial protection against symptomatic disease caused by either BA.1 or BA.2. But protection waned to around 10% after only 4–6 months, meaning that the vaccines prevented only 10% of the cases that would have occurred if all of the individuals had been unvaccinated.

 

[healthmysteries31]

 
I don't know where you are getting this idea that the COVID vaccines no longer protect? That's misinformation.

 

 

I didn't say they don't protect  against disease/death. Protection against infection wanes rapidly though.

 

So you are suggesting that previous studies looked out for proper myocarditis, and found it to be rare, but this Thai study was interested in mild subclinical myocarditis?

 

 

No. The other studies weren't monitoring patients. They weren't interested in subclinical myocarditis specifically.

 

So in your risk/benefit analysis, this mild transient heart inflammation, which is only tends to appear in young kids anyway, not so much adults, is more of a concern for you than the high risk long COVID, and also the risk for that milder outcomes like death?

 

 

Why only kids? They found similar rates in adults.

 

As I said, I am not concerned about death for myself since the risk is so low.  That doesn't mean it's not  a problem for others. I haven't seen any good evidence that the vaccine really  that effective against long-covid. Most likely the vaccinated will get it as well even though it could be  a bit less common.

 

It's not known what the long-term effects of this "mild" myocarditis are and if the damage builds up with further vaccines.

 

I don't like the high rates of heart inflammation that I see in studies and that the vaccine needs to be given frequently which makes it undesirable for long-term administration.

 

publication bias is common in medicine, drugs are often reported to be more effective and less harmful than they actually are. Since covid vaccination is highly political I expect publications to overestimate the positive effects and underestimate the negative effects.

 

Harming yourself in order to protect yourself is the wrong philosophy IMO. I couldn't consciously damage my body. 

 

so I prioritize my heart health instead of rolling the dice with the vaccine because it seems the best choice for my situation.

 

Edited by healthmysteries31, 29 November 2022 - 08:38 AM.

[Hip]

Why only kids? They found similar rates in adults.

 
My understanding is that younger people are disproportionately affected by the myocarditis side effect of the COVID vaccines. See this graph, where the peak incidence of myocarditis is in the 16 to 19 year olds. By the time you get to 30 years old, your risk of this side effect is 4 times lower.

 

 

This rare myocarditis side effect seems to be caused by the mRNA COVID vaccines, not the adenovirus vector COVID vaccines (like the AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson). Though the adenovirus COVID vaccines have been restricted due to the rare but sometimes fatal risk of blood clots.

 

That's unfortunate, because Professor Christine Stabell-Benn in Denmark found that the adenovirus COVID vaccines were associated with reducing in all-cause mortality (ie, after getting these adenovirus vaccine, your chances of dying from any medical condition, not just COVID, is substantially decreased).

 

This across-the-board reduction in death by any cause was not however observed with the mRNA COVID vaccines; if anything, Stabell-Benn found that the mRNA vaccines increased non-COVID mortality (even though they protect against COVID death).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 29 November 2022 - 09:24 PM.

[Gal220]

Best person I have found tracking the data

https://twitter.com/...490635175403521

 

 

https://twitter.com/...033850668187648

 

 

https://twitter.com/...313058757910528

 

 

But the current media blackout on excess deaths really says it all, would be big news if they were Covid deaths(especially if unvaccinated)

https://twitter.com/...838686134169601