Unit2Sucks said:
Lol that's a long winded way of saying you didn't read the study.
To be fair, we also learned you are an anti-masker. Can't say I'm surprised.
That is correct. H is accepting all vaccines approved by WHO under a EUA.Cal89 said:
I read that Harvard and other universities are requiring proof of vaccination this Fall to live on campus. It seems they have approved not just the vaccines discussed here, but China's Sinopharm. If true, that's concerning, based upon much of the data provided on Sinopharm, even in today's in NYT's article (Seychelles).
Others heard the same? If so, I find that acceptance damaging to the end sought...
Except Pediatricians and the American Academy of Peds don't know squat about LONG-TERM effects of this vax on growing/maturing bodies & nervous systems. The fact is, we have less than one year of 'long'-term data on adults for this vax and not many weeks for teenagers.....Cal89 said:
I read that Harvard and other universities are requiring proof of vaccination this Fall to live on campus. It seems they have approved not just the vaccines discussed here, but China's Sinopharm. If true, that's concerning, based upon much of the data provided on Sinopharm, even in today's in NYT's article (Seychelles).
Others heard the same? If so, I find that acceptance damaging to the end sought...
Quote:
Is there an increased incidence of COVID-related myocarditis in children?
Viruses are the most common cause of pediatric myocarditis. In general, the most common viruses causing pediatric myocarditis are Coxsackievirus B, other enteroviruses, influenza, rubella, and adenovirus.1 During and after important viral outbreaks, including the original 2002 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), 2012 Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS), and 2009 H1N1 influenza A, increases in cardiac abnormalities in adults (suggesting cardiac association with these viruses) have been reported.2,3
More recently, a systematic review specifically evaluated pediatric COVID-19associated myocarditis.7 The authors found that, as of July 2020, there were 570 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)reported cases of pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome (PMIS). PMIS is more routinely referred to as MIS-C (multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children) in much of the emerging literature on this topic. The condition is a Kawasaki-like hyperinflammatory disease presentation involving multiple organ systems and often accompanying myocardial dysfunction. As of the end of July 2020, the authors calculated an incidence of CDC-reported MIS-C of approximately 0.2 to 0.6 percent of COVID-19 pediatric infections. In their systematic review, the authors identified 688 cases of MIS-C in the literature, with myocardial dysfunction documented in 340 of 688 of these cases (50.9 percent). Of note, isolated COVID-19associated myocarditis cases have been reported in the literature, but most cases of myocarditis are related to MIS-C.
The overall incidence of COVID-19associated myocarditis is difficult to estimate using these data, as these studies reported MIS-C patients in pediatric ICUs only. The incidence of less severe myocarditis is unknown in both patients with COVID-19 and influenza patients.
Go back and read his posts. They mention myocarditis in children also being associated with COVID. If anyone is doing any handwaving, it's you.Unit2Sucks said:
Myocarditis in children has also been associated with COVID. If you wanted to do an apples to apples evaluation of the risks of the vaccine, you should of course also evaluate the risk of the thing you are vaccinating against. But for whatever reason, people who have questions about the vaccine seem to hand wave away all of the known and unknown risks associated with COVID.Quote:
Is there an increased incidence of COVID-related myocarditis in children?
Viruses are the most common cause of pediatric myocarditis. In general, the most common viruses causing pediatric myocarditis are Coxsackievirus B, other enteroviruses, influenza, rubella, and adenovirus.1 During and after important viral outbreaks, including the original 2002 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), 2012 Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS), and 2009 H1N1 influenza A, increases in cardiac abnormalities in adults (suggesting cardiac association with these viruses) have been reported.2,3
More recently, a systematic review specifically evaluated pediatric COVID-19associated myocarditis.7 The authors found that, as of July 2020, there were 570 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)reported cases of pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome (PMIS). PMIS is more routinely referred to as MIS-C (multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children) in much of the emerging literature on this topic. The condition is a Kawasaki-like hyperinflammatory disease presentation involving multiple organ systems and often accompanying myocardial dysfunction. As of the end of July 2020, the authors calculated an incidence of CDC-reported MIS-C of approximately 0.2 to 0.6 percent of COVID-19 pediatric infections. In their systematic review, the authors identified 688 cases of MIS-C in the literature, with myocardial dysfunction documented in 340 of 688 of these cases (50.9 percent). Of note, isolated COVID-19associated myocarditis cases have been reported in the literature, but most cases of myocarditis are related to MIS-C.
The overall incidence of COVID-19associated myocarditis is difficult to estimate using these data, as these studies reported MIS-C patients in pediatric ICUs only. The incidence of less severe myocarditis is unknown in both patients with COVID-19 and influenza patients.
Civil Bear said:Go back and read his posts. They mention myocarditis in children also being associated with COVID. If anyone is doing any handwaving, it's you.Unit2Sucks said:
Myocarditis in children has also been associated with COVID. If you wanted to do an apples to apples evaluation of the risks of the vaccine, you should of course also evaluate the risk of the thing you are vaccinating against. But for whatever reason, people who have questions about the vaccine seem to hand wave away all of the known and unknown risks associated with COVID.Quote:
Is there an increased incidence of COVID-related myocarditis in children?
Viruses are the most common cause of pediatric myocarditis. In general, the most common viruses causing pediatric myocarditis are Coxsackievirus B, other enteroviruses, influenza, rubella, and adenovirus.1 During and after important viral outbreaks, including the original 2002 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), 2012 Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS), and 2009 H1N1 influenza A, increases in cardiac abnormalities in adults (suggesting cardiac association with these viruses) have been reported.2,3
More recently, a systematic review specifically evaluated pediatric COVID-19associated myocarditis.7 The authors found that, as of July 2020, there were 570 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)reported cases of pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome (PMIS). PMIS is more routinely referred to as MIS-C (multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children) in much of the emerging literature on this topic. The condition is a Kawasaki-like hyperinflammatory disease presentation involving multiple organ systems and often accompanying myocardial dysfunction. As of the end of July 2020, the authors calculated an incidence of CDC-reported MIS-C of approximately 0.2 to 0.6 percent of COVID-19 pediatric infections. In their systematic review, the authors identified 688 cases of MIS-C in the literature, with myocardial dysfunction documented in 340 of 688 of these cases (50.9 percent). Of note, isolated COVID-19associated myocarditis cases have been reported in the literature, but most cases of myocarditis are related to MIS-C.
The overall incidence of COVID-19associated myocarditis is difficult to estimate using these data, as these studies reported MIS-C patients in pediatric ICUs only. The incidence of less severe myocarditis is unknown in both patients with COVID-19 and influenza patients.
From Oski003's last post: "Experts emphasized that the potentially rare side effect of myocarditis paled in comparison to the potential risks of Covid, including the persistent syndrome called "long Covid." Acute Covid itself can cause myocarditis."Unit2Sucks said:Civil Bear said:Go back and read his posts. They mention myocarditis in children also being associated with COVID. If anyone is doing any handwaving, it's you.Unit2Sucks said:
Myocarditis in children has also been associated with COVID. If you wanted to do an apples to apples evaluation of the risks of the vaccine, you should of course also evaluate the risk of the thing you are vaccinating against. But for whatever reason, people who have questions about the vaccine seem to hand wave away all of the known and unknown risks associated with COVID.Quote:
Is there an increased incidence of COVID-related myocarditis in children?
Viruses are the most common cause of pediatric myocarditis. In general, the most common viruses causing pediatric myocarditis are Coxsackievirus B, other enteroviruses, influenza, rubella, and adenovirus.1 During and after important viral outbreaks, including the original 2002 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), 2012 Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS), and 2009 H1N1 influenza A, increases in cardiac abnormalities in adults (suggesting cardiac association with these viruses) have been reported.2,3
More recently, a systematic review specifically evaluated pediatric COVID-19associated myocarditis.7 The authors found that, as of July 2020, there were 570 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)reported cases of pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome (PMIS). PMIS is more routinely referred to as MIS-C (multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children) in much of the emerging literature on this topic. The condition is a Kawasaki-like hyperinflammatory disease presentation involving multiple organ systems and often accompanying myocardial dysfunction. As of the end of July 2020, the authors calculated an incidence of CDC-reported MIS-C of approximately 0.2 to 0.6 percent of COVID-19 pediatric infections. In their systematic review, the authors identified 688 cases of MIS-C in the literature, with myocardial dysfunction documented in 340 of 688 of these cases (50.9 percent). Of note, isolated COVID-19associated myocarditis cases have been reported in the literature, but most cases of myocarditis are related to MIS-C.
The overall incidence of COVID-19associated myocarditis is difficult to estimate using these data, as these studies reported MIS-C patients in pediatric ICUs only. The incidence of less severe myocarditis is unknown in both patients with COVID-19 and influenza patients.
Where has he posted about COVID related myocarditis in this thread? I don't recall any contextualization of the risks of myocarditis from vaccines vs COVID.
These posts aren't helpful, they are just intended to induce fear. If people have questions about the risks of vaccines or COVID, they shouldn't trust random strangers posting on a Cal sports forum, they should speak to their trusted physician. Oski003 has said multiple times he's not a physician. I'm not pretending to by a physician either and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I encourage people to ignore anti-vaxx sentiment spread through social media by people with an agenda and instead rely on their trusted physicians.
My constant drumbeat is against misinformation and I make no apologies for that.Civil Bear said:From Oski003's last post: "Experts emphasized that the potentially rare side effect of myocarditis paled in comparison to the potential risks of Covid, including the persistent syndrome called "long Covid." Acute Covid itself can cause myocarditis."Unit2Sucks said:Civil Bear said:Go back and read his posts. They mention myocarditis in children also being associated with COVID. If anyone is doing any handwaving, it's you.Unit2Sucks said:
Myocarditis in children has also been associated with COVID. If you wanted to do an apples to apples evaluation of the risks of the vaccine, you should of course also evaluate the risk of the thing you are vaccinating against. But for whatever reason, people who have questions about the vaccine seem to hand wave away all of the known and unknown risks associated with COVID.Quote:
Is there an increased incidence of COVID-related myocarditis in children?
Viruses are the most common cause of pediatric myocarditis. In general, the most common viruses causing pediatric myocarditis are Coxsackievirus B, other enteroviruses, influenza, rubella, and adenovirus.1 During and after important viral outbreaks, including the original 2002 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), 2012 Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS), and 2009 H1N1 influenza A, increases in cardiac abnormalities in adults (suggesting cardiac association with these viruses) have been reported.2,3
More recently, a systematic review specifically evaluated pediatric COVID-19associated myocarditis.7 The authors found that, as of July 2020, there were 570 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)reported cases of pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome (PMIS). PMIS is more routinely referred to as MIS-C (multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children) in much of the emerging literature on this topic. The condition is a Kawasaki-like hyperinflammatory disease presentation involving multiple organ systems and often accompanying myocardial dysfunction. As of the end of July 2020, the authors calculated an incidence of CDC-reported MIS-C of approximately 0.2 to 0.6 percent of COVID-19 pediatric infections. In their systematic review, the authors identified 688 cases of MIS-C in the literature, with myocardial dysfunction documented in 340 of 688 of these cases (50.9 percent). Of note, isolated COVID-19associated myocarditis cases have been reported in the literature, but most cases of myocarditis are related to MIS-C.
The overall incidence of COVID-19associated myocarditis is difficult to estimate using these data, as these studies reported MIS-C patients in pediatric ICUs only. The incidence of less severe myocarditis is unknown in both patients with COVID-19 and influenza patients.
Where has he posted about COVID related myocarditis in this thread? I don't recall any contextualization of the risks of myocarditis from vaccines vs COVID.
These posts aren't helpful, they are just intended to induce fear. If people have questions about the risks of vaccines or COVID, they shouldn't trust random strangers posting on a Cal sports forum, they should speak to their trusted physician. Oski003 has said multiple times he's not a physician. I'm not pretending to by a physician either and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I encourage people to ignore anti-vaxx sentiment spread through social media by people with an agenda and instead rely on their trusted physicians.
I suppose the NY Times publishing the possible concerns is just their intention to induce fear as well. Trust me, your constant drumbeat and attempted labelling against anyone that shares conflicting information as anti-vaxxers is persuading no one. In fact, it appears to just cause people to dig in and share more conflicting information. And no one that I have seen is suggesting people only listen to them and not consult with their doctors.
Civil Bear said:From Oski003's last post: "Experts emphasized that the potentially rare side effect of myocarditis paled in comparison to the potential risks of Covid, including the persistent syndrome called "long Covid." Acute Covid itself can cause myocarditis."Unit2Sucks said:Civil Bear said:Go back and read his posts. They mention myocarditis in children also being associated with COVID. If anyone is doing any handwaving, it's you.Unit2Sucks said:
Myocarditis in children has also been associated with COVID. If you wanted to do an apples to apples evaluation of the risks of the vaccine, you should of course also evaluate the risk of the thing you are vaccinating against. But for whatever reason, people who have questions about the vaccine seem to hand wave away all of the known and unknown risks associated with COVID.Quote:
Is there an increased incidence of COVID-related myocarditis in children?
Viruses are the most common cause of pediatric myocarditis. In general, the most common viruses causing pediatric myocarditis are Coxsackievirus B, other enteroviruses, influenza, rubella, and adenovirus.1 During and after important viral outbreaks, including the original 2002 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), 2012 Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS), and 2009 H1N1 influenza A, increases in cardiac abnormalities in adults (suggesting cardiac association with these viruses) have been reported.2,3
More recently, a systematic review specifically evaluated pediatric COVID-19associated myocarditis.7 The authors found that, as of July 2020, there were 570 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)reported cases of pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome (PMIS). PMIS is more routinely referred to as MIS-C (multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children) in much of the emerging literature on this topic. The condition is a Kawasaki-like hyperinflammatory disease presentation involving multiple organ systems and often accompanying myocardial dysfunction. As of the end of July 2020, the authors calculated an incidence of CDC-reported MIS-C of approximately 0.2 to 0.6 percent of COVID-19 pediatric infections. In their systematic review, the authors identified 688 cases of MIS-C in the literature, with myocardial dysfunction documented in 340 of 688 of these cases (50.9 percent). Of note, isolated COVID-19associated myocarditis cases have been reported in the literature, but most cases of myocarditis are related to MIS-C.
The overall incidence of COVID-19associated myocarditis is difficult to estimate using these data, as these studies reported MIS-C patients in pediatric ICUs only. The incidence of less severe myocarditis is unknown in both patients with COVID-19 and influenza patients.
Where has he posted about COVID related myocarditis in this thread? I don't recall any contextualization of the risks of myocarditis from vaccines vs COVID.
These posts aren't helpful, they are just intended to induce fear. If people have questions about the risks of vaccines or COVID, they shouldn't trust random strangers posting on a Cal sports forum, they should speak to their trusted physician. Oski003 has said multiple times he's not a physician. I'm not pretending to by a physician either and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I encourage people to ignore anti-vaxx sentiment spread through social media by people with an agenda and instead rely on their trusted physicians.
I suppose the NY Times publishing the possible concerns is just their intention to induce fear as well. Trust me, your constant drumbeat and attempted labelling against anyone that shares conflicting information as anti-vaxxers is persuading no one. In fact, it appears to just cause people to dig in and share more conflicting information. And no one that I have seen is suggesting people only listen to them and not consult with their doctors.
If CDC and NIH employees are not required to get the vaccine to go to work, then why should college students be required to get it to go back to school?
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) May 23, 2021
🤔
calumnus said:Civil Bear said:From Oski003's last post: "Experts emphasized that the potentially rare side effect of myocarditis paled in comparison to the potential risks of Covid, including the persistent syndrome called "long Covid." Acute Covid itself can cause myocarditis."Unit2Sucks said:Civil Bear said:Go back and read his posts. They mention myocarditis in children also being associated with COVID. If anyone is doing any handwaving, it's you.Unit2Sucks said:
Myocarditis in children has also been associated with COVID. If you wanted to do an apples to apples evaluation of the risks of the vaccine, you should of course also evaluate the risk of the thing you are vaccinating against. But for whatever reason, people who have questions about the vaccine seem to hand wave away all of the known and unknown risks associated with COVID.Quote:
Is there an increased incidence of COVID-related myocarditis in children?
Viruses are the most common cause of pediatric myocarditis. In general, the most common viruses causing pediatric myocarditis are Coxsackievirus B, other enteroviruses, influenza, rubella, and adenovirus.1 During and after important viral outbreaks, including the original 2002 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), 2012 Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS), and 2009 H1N1 influenza A, increases in cardiac abnormalities in adults (suggesting cardiac association with these viruses) have been reported.2,3
More recently, a systematic review specifically evaluated pediatric COVID-19associated myocarditis.7 The authors found that, as of July 2020, there were 570 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)reported cases of pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome (PMIS). PMIS is more routinely referred to as MIS-C (multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children) in much of the emerging literature on this topic. The condition is a Kawasaki-like hyperinflammatory disease presentation involving multiple organ systems and often accompanying myocardial dysfunction. As of the end of July 2020, the authors calculated an incidence of CDC-reported MIS-C of approximately 0.2 to 0.6 percent of COVID-19 pediatric infections. In their systematic review, the authors identified 688 cases of MIS-C in the literature, with myocardial dysfunction documented in 340 of 688 of these cases (50.9 percent). Of note, isolated COVID-19associated myocarditis cases have been reported in the literature, but most cases of myocarditis are related to MIS-C.
The overall incidence of COVID-19associated myocarditis is difficult to estimate using these data, as these studies reported MIS-C patients in pediatric ICUs only. The incidence of less severe myocarditis is unknown in both patients with COVID-19 and influenza patients.
Where has he posted about COVID related myocarditis in this thread? I don't recall any contextualization of the risks of myocarditis from vaccines vs COVID.
These posts aren't helpful, they are just intended to induce fear. If people have questions about the risks of vaccines or COVID, they shouldn't trust random strangers posting on a Cal sports forum, they should speak to their trusted physician. Oski003 has said multiple times he's not a physician. I'm not pretending to by a physician either and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I encourage people to ignore anti-vaxx sentiment spread through social media by people with an agenda and instead rely on their trusted physicians.
I suppose the NY Times publishing the possible concerns is just their intention to induce fear as well. Trust me, your constant drumbeat and attempted labelling against anyone that shares conflicting information as anti-vaxxers is persuading no one. In fact, it appears to just cause people to dig in and share more conflicting information. And no one that I have seen is suggesting people only listen to them and not consult with their doctors.
However, it is not just accute cases of COVID that are associated with myocarditis, many of the cases have developed in people who had mild cases.
The point stands, no one is saying a vaccine is without risks. Those risks just need to be weighed against the risk of the disease you are vaccinating against. When we were vaccinating against smallpox and polio most agreed that the risks of the disease made vaccine worth it, and we have greatly improved the safety of vaccines from those.
It does seem like there is a huge overlap between people who dismissed the dangers of COVID ("no worse than the flu" "only people with comorbidities die" "no danger to anyone under 60" "the cases of myocarditis cannot be proven to be from the COVID" and those who look for and sensationalize any risk of the vaccine.
There is a "free rider" effect with vaccines. The best for you as an individual is likely for everyone else to be vaccinated and you not. However if everyone adopts that attitude we will not control much less eliminate COVID and many more millions will die.
oski003 said:
https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/europe-s-drug-regulator-evaluates-reports-heart-inflammation-rare-nerve-disorder-covid-19
Europe and Israel as well. My take on this is that there is an undersupply of Pfizer compared to the demands of Europe and Israel. Pfizer is likely asking them not to look a gift horse in the mouth.
GivemTheAxe said:oski003 said:
https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/europe-s-drug-regulator-evaluates-reports-heart-inflammation-rare-nerve-disorder-covid-19
Europe and Israel as well. My take on this is that there is an undersupply of Pfizer compared to the demands of Europe and Israel. Pfizer is likely asking them not to look a gift horse in the mouth.
Let me get this straight. You conclude (guess?) that there is some conspiracy between the manufacturer and Europe/Israel not to look a gift horse in the mouth ( I.e. ignore any possible negative effects of the vaccine) even though the report that you cite states that the governing medical body:
1. Has not found any connection. 2. Has nevertheless recommended that a warning be placed on the drug for certain susceptible patients who might suffer adverse effects. 3. has advised physicians to be on the alert for possible occurrences in other patients.
Isn't that conclusion at least a little illogical:
"We want to keep this rare problem a secret so let's tell everyone that maybe there is a problem and to keep an eye out for further recurrence of the problem."
My take is that; a. All parties are aware that there is a POSSIBLE problem in VERY RARE circumstances; b. All parties agree to keep an eye out for other similar occurrences; c. All parties understand that the clear benefits of the vaccine greatly outweigh the risks that might arise especially when no one has demonstrated that this particular problem really exists.
Thus my conclusion avoids the need to imagine a conspiracy among health professionals many of whom have sworn an oath to do no harm.
If you are under 18 and not vaccinated, you are safer than a vaccinated person over 30. And 100x safer than a vaccinated person over 75. https://t.co/fF2zmIDz0k pic.twitter.com/AAiRES17jf
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 17, 2021
BearForce2 said:If you are under 18 and not vaccinated, you are safer than a vaccinated person over 30. And 100x safer than a vaccinated person over 75. https://t.co/fF2zmIDz0k pic.twitter.com/AAiRES17jf
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 17, 2021
BearForce2 said:If you are under 18 and not vaccinated, you are safer than a vaccinated person over 30. And 100x safer than a vaccinated person over 75. https://t.co/fF2zmIDz0k pic.twitter.com/AAiRES17jf
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) May 17, 2021
oski003 said:GivemTheAxe said:oski003 said:
https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/europe-s-drug-regulator-evaluates-reports-heart-inflammation-rare-nerve-disorder-covid-19
Europe and Israel as well. My take on this is that there is an undersupply of Pfizer compared to the demands of Europe and Israel. Pfizer is likely asking them not to look a gift horse in the mouth.
Let me get this straight. You conclude (guess?) that there is some conspiracy between the manufacturer and Europe/Israel not to look a gift horse in the mouth ( I.e. ignore any possible negative effects of the vaccine) even though the report that you cite states that the governing medical body:
1. Has not found any connection. 2. Has nevertheless recommended that a warning be placed on the drug for certain susceptible patients who might suffer adverse effects. 3. has advised physicians to be on the alert for possible occurrences in other patients.
Isn't that conclusion at least a little illogical:
"We want to keep this rare problem a secret so let's tell everyone that maybe there is a problem and to keep an eye out for further recurrence of the problem."
My take is that; a. All parties are aware that there is a POSSIBLE problem in VERY RARE circumstances; b. All parties agree to keep an eye out for other similar occurrences; c. All parties understand that the clear benefits of the vaccine greatly outweigh the risks that might arise especially when no one has demonstrated that this particular problem really exists.
Thus my conclusion avoids the need to imagine a conspiracy among health professionals many of whom have sworn an oath to do no harm.
All parties are aware that there is a POSSIBLE problem in VERY RARE circumstances; b. All parties agree to keep an eye out for other similar occurrences; c. All parties understand that the clear benefits of the vaccine greatly outweigh the risks that might arise especially
*when no one has demonstrated that this particular problem really exists*
Agree with everything but the statement in the asterisks. BP is incredibly influential in the USA and elsewhere. The problem exists but countries that need to get their population vaccinated (almost all) and believe Pfizer is the best mass manufactured vaccine (which it is) are not going to make a big deal about myocarditis.
Here is a local story on myocarditis.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kiro7.com/news/local/kenmore-teen-develops-myocarditis-after-2nd-vaccine-shot-cdc-investigating-possible-rare-side-effect/2XVGAAJYXBATJFF3NS7JQUZCBE/%3foutputType=amp
Hier soir, j'annonçais qu'1 officiel du Min de la Santé israélien a reconnu le lien existant entre vaccin & myocardite chez les jeunes adultes.
— Steve Ohana (@ohanasteve) May 26, 2021
Voici la vidéo sous-titrée pour comprendre tous les détails de cette annonce, ainsi que ses impacts possibles sur la vax des 12/15 ans. pic.twitter.com/oZuwysUT7L
Quote:
Moderna to seek FDA authorization in June for COVID-19 vaccine in teens
Moderna said its COVID-19 vaccine was 100% effective for teenagers in clinical trials, and the company plans to seek emergency use authorization (EUA) from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in early June.
The data came Tuesday just as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released information on breakthrough infections among vaccinated people of all ages.
Moderna's trials enrolled more than 3,700 adolescents ages 12-17 years who were randomized to receive the vaccine or a placebo. After two doses, there were four cases of COVID-19 in the placebo group and none in the vaccine group, according to a Moderna press release. The data have not been published in a peer-reviewed journal.
The company also analyzed data based on a COVID-19 case definition that includes more mild disease and found a vaccine efficacy of 93% after the first dose. In addition, an immunogenicity analysis showed teens' immune responses were just as robust as those of adults.
The teen trials did not present any significant safety concerns, according to Moderna. The most common side effects from the vaccine were injection site pain, headache, fatigue, myalgia and chills.
Moderna's results come two weeks after the FDA extended an EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for adolescents as young as 12. Trials for that vaccine also showed 100% efficacy for adolescents.
More than 4.7 million adolescents ages 12-17 have received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, according to CDC data. While the vaccines have been safe and effective, the CDC is investigating a small number of cases of myocarditis in adolescents and young adults after vaccination to see if they are related. Most of those cases have been mild, but pediatricians should report any such cases to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.
Unit2Sucks said:
As most people now know, Moderna's now seeking FDA approval for its vaccine for 12-17 year olds. I am not surprised that oski003 didn't highlight this because he only points out potentially negative news re vaccines.
From the American Academy of Pediatrics:Quote:
Moderna to seek FDA authorization in June for COVID-19 vaccine in teens
Moderna said its COVID-19 vaccine was 100% effective for teenagers in clinical trials, and the company plans to seek emergency use authorization (EUA) from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in early June.
The data came Tuesday just as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released information on breakthrough infections among vaccinated people of all ages.
Moderna's trials enrolled more than 3,700 adolescents ages 12-17 years who were randomized to receive the vaccine or a placebo. After two doses, there were four cases of COVID-19 in the placebo group and none in the vaccine group, according to a Moderna press release. The data have not been published in a peer-reviewed journal.
The company also analyzed data based on a COVID-19 case definition that includes more mild disease and found a vaccine efficacy of 93% after the first dose. In addition, an immunogenicity analysis showed teens' immune responses were just as robust as those of adults.
The teen trials did not present any significant safety concerns, according to Moderna. The most common side effects from the vaccine were injection site pain, headache, fatigue, myalgia and chills.
Moderna's results come two weeks after the FDA extended an EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for adolescents as young as 12. Trials for that vaccine also showed 100% efficacy for adolescents.
More than 4.7 million adolescents ages 12-17 have received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, according to CDC data. While the vaccines have been safe and effective, the CDC is investigating a small number of cases of myocarditis in adolescents and young adults after vaccination to see if they are related. Most of those cases have been mild, but pediatricians should report any such cases to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.
You are not under any obligation to cherry pick every potential negative association with the vaccines, but you choose to do so anyway.oski003 said:
If I had a choice on which EUA vaccine I would give my kids. It would Pfizer, then Moderna, then JnJ.
I did not realize I was under obligation to report that Moderna was seeking EUA for 12-17. It is the natural progression of things for how they are currently going.
Quote:
A total of 10,262 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections had been reported from 46 U.S. states and territories as of April 30, 2021. Among these cases, 6,446 (63%) occurred in females, and the median patient age was 58 years (interquartile range = 4074 years). Based on preliminary data, 2,725 (27%) vaccine breakthrough infections were asymptomatic, 995 (10%) patients were known to be hospitalized, and 160 (2%) patients died. Among the 995 hospitalized patients, 289 (29%) were asymptomatic or hospitalized for a reason unrelated to COVID-19. The median age of patients who died was 82 years (interquartile range = 7189 years); 28 (18%) decedents were asymptomatic or died from a cause unrelated to COVID-19. Sequence data were available from 555 (5%) reported cases, 356 (64%) of which were identified as SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including B.1.1.7 (199; 56%), B.1.429 (88; 25%), B.1.427 (28; 8%), P.1 (28; 8%), and B.1.351 (13; 4%).
Unit2Sucks said:You are not under any obligation to cherry pick every potential negative association with the vaccines, but you choose to do so anyway.oski003 said:
If I had a choice on which EUA vaccine I would give my kids. It would Pfizer, then Moderna, then JnJ.
I did not realize I was under obligation to report that Moderna was seeking EUA for 12-17. It is the natural progression of things for how they are currently going.
Almost everything in life has tradeoffs. Rather than point out the benefits of the vaccine, you are choosing to highlight every negative you can find and only the negatives.
Here's the latest CDC data on breakthrough infections and it's pretty good. Meanwhile, in just the last week of April, 350K+ unvaccinated Americans were infected.Quote:
A total of 10,262 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections had been reported from 46 U.S. states and territories as of April 30, 2021. Among these cases, 6,446 (63%) occurred in females, and the median patient age was 58 years (interquartile range = 4074 years). Based on preliminary data, 2,725 (27%) vaccine breakthrough infections were asymptomatic, 995 (10%) patients were known to be hospitalized, and 160 (2%) patients died. Among the 995 hospitalized patients, 289 (29%) were asymptomatic or hospitalized for a reason unrelated to COVID-19. The median age of patients who died was 82 years (interquartile range = 7189 years); 28 (18%) decedents were asymptomatic or died from a cause unrelated to COVID-19. Sequence data were available from 555 (5%) reported cases, 356 (64%) of which were identified as SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including B.1.1.7 (199; 56%), B.1.429 (88; 25%), B.1.427 (28; 8%), P.1 (28; 8%), and B.1.351 (13; 4%).
Are you criticizing me for criticizing you? Does this mean you are right for doing so?oski003 said:Unit2Sucks said:You are not under any obligation to cherry pick every potential negative association with the vaccines, but you choose to do so anyway.oski003 said:
If I had a choice on which EUA vaccine I would give my kids. It would Pfizer, then Moderna, then JnJ.
I did not realize I was under obligation to report that Moderna was seeking EUA for 12-17. It is the natural progression of things for how they are currently going.
Almost everything in life has tradeoffs. Rather than point out the benefits of the vaccine, you are choosing to highlight every negative you can find and only the negatives.
Here's the latest CDC data on breakthrough infections and it's pretty good. Meanwhile, in just the last week of April, 350K+ unvaccinated Americans were infected.Quote:
A total of 10,262 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections had been reported from 46 U.S. states and territories as of April 30, 2021. Among these cases, 6,446 (63%) occurred in females, and the median patient age was 58 years (interquartile range = 4074 years). Based on preliminary data, 2,725 (27%) vaccine breakthrough infections were asymptomatic, 995 (10%) patients were known to be hospitalized, and 160 (2%) patients died. Among the 995 hospitalized patients, 289 (29%) were asymptomatic or hospitalized for a reason unrelated to COVID-19. The median age of patients who died was 82 years (interquartile range = 7189 years); 28 (18%) decedents were asymptomatic or died from a cause unrelated to COVID-19. Sequence data were available from 555 (5%) reported cases, 356 (64%) of which were identified as SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including B.1.1.7 (199; 56%), B.1.429 (88; 25%), B.1.427 (28; 8%), P.1 (28; 8%), and B.1.351 (13; 4%).
You have every right to post positive EUA vaccine data and news. That does not mean you are right in criticizing me for personally not doing so.
Unit2Sucks said:Are you criticizing me for criticizing you? Does this mean you are right for doing so?oski003 said:Unit2Sucks said:You are not under any obligation to cherry pick every potential negative association with the vaccines, but you choose to do so anyway.oski003 said:
If I had a choice on which EUA vaccine I would give my kids. It would Pfizer, then Moderna, then JnJ.
I did not realize I was under obligation to report that Moderna was seeking EUA for 12-17. It is the natural progression of things for how they are currently going.
Almost everything in life has tradeoffs. Rather than point out the benefits of the vaccine, you are choosing to highlight every negative you can find and only the negatives.
Here's the latest CDC data on breakthrough infections and it's pretty good. Meanwhile, in just the last week of April, 350K+ unvaccinated Americans were infected.Quote:
A total of 10,262 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections had been reported from 46 U.S. states and territories as of April 30, 2021. Among these cases, 6,446 (63%) occurred in females, and the median patient age was 58 years (interquartile range = 4074 years). Based on preliminary data, 2,725 (27%) vaccine breakthrough infections were asymptomatic, 995 (10%) patients were known to be hospitalized, and 160 (2%) patients died. Among the 995 hospitalized patients, 289 (29%) were asymptomatic or hospitalized for a reason unrelated to COVID-19. The median age of patients who died was 82 years (interquartile range = 7189 years); 28 (18%) decedents were asymptomatic or died from a cause unrelated to COVID-19. Sequence data were available from 555 (5%) reported cases, 356 (64%) of which were identified as SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including B.1.1.7 (199; 56%), B.1.429 (88; 25%), B.1.427 (28; 8%), P.1 (28; 8%), and B.1.351 (13; 4%).
You have every right to post positive EUA vaccine data and news. That does not mean you are right in criticizing me for personally not doing so.
As far as I can tell this is a discussion forum where civil disagreements are appropriate. I'm merely pointing out, to anyone not paying close attention, that you are cherry-picking negative data regarding the vaccines. Rather than acknowledge you are doing so, you are objecting to the fact that I'm pointing it out. Your goal in posting news that paints the vaccines in a negative light is intended to create and/or further hesitancy regarding the COVID vaccines because you believe they may be unsafe. You are not providing context regarding those negative data points because you aren't interested in a balanced discussion that might cause people to disregard your message that the vaccines are unsafe. You should just own it.
oski003 said:Unit2Sucks said:Are you criticizing me for criticizing you? Does this mean you are right for doing so?oski003 said:Unit2Sucks said:You are not under any obligation to cherry pick every potential negative association with the vaccines, but you choose to do so anyway.oski003 said:
If I had a choice on which EUA vaccine I would give my kids. It would Pfizer, then Moderna, then JnJ.
I did not realize I was under obligation to report that Moderna was seeking EUA for 12-17. It is the natural progression of things for how they are currently going.
Almost everything in life has tradeoffs. Rather than point out the benefits of the vaccine, you are choosing to highlight every negative you can find and only the negatives.
Here's the latest CDC data on breakthrough infections and it's pretty good. Meanwhile, in just the last week of April, 350K+ unvaccinated Americans were infected.Quote:
A total of 10,262 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections had been reported from 46 U.S. states and territories as of April 30, 2021. Among these cases, 6,446 (63%) occurred in females, and the median patient age was 58 years (interquartile range = 4074 years). Based on preliminary data, 2,725 (27%) vaccine breakthrough infections were asymptomatic, 995 (10%) patients were known to be hospitalized, and 160 (2%) patients died. Among the 995 hospitalized patients, 289 (29%) were asymptomatic or hospitalized for a reason unrelated to COVID-19. The median age of patients who died was 82 years (interquartile range = 7189 years); 28 (18%) decedents were asymptomatic or died from a cause unrelated to COVID-19. Sequence data were available from 555 (5%) reported cases, 356 (64%) of which were identified as SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including B.1.1.7 (199; 56%), B.1.429 (88; 25%), B.1.427 (28; 8%), P.1 (28; 8%), and B.1.351 (13; 4%).
You have every right to post positive EUA vaccine data and news. That does not mean you are right in criticizing me for personally not doing so.
As far as I can tell this is a discussion forum where civil disagreements are appropriate. I'm merely pointing out, to anyone not paying close attention, that you are cherry-picking negative data regarding the vaccines. Rather than acknowledge you are doing so, you are objecting to the fact that I'm pointing it out. Your goal in posting news that paints the vaccines in a negative light is intended to create and/or further hesitancy regarding the COVID vaccines because you believe they may be unsafe. You are not providing context regarding those negative data points because you aren't interested in a balanced discussion that might cause people to disregard your message that the vaccines are unsafe. You should just own it.
So, if someone criticizes Wilcox, they are obligated to also post all the good things he does?
Frankly, the positives of the vaccine are near common knowledge. The press bombards us with it. Side effects are good! etc... I also acknowledged that my wife and I are vaccinated, which was the right thing to do.
I believe that the JnJ vaccine is actually a better tech against covid vaccines because of t cell production, even if it is low on antibodies. I think the mrna and protein vaccines that produce incredible amounts of antibodies are too strong and too effective, at least for a short period. If they could solve the blood clotting problem of jnj, they would have a good vaccine. It will not stop covid, but it will prevent severe disease. I think the mrna vaccines are too powerful for young, healthy people.
Too many side effects. Lost time at work. My kids day care was closed on the monday after the providers got the mrna second shot due to side effects.
The first generation vaccines are not the best vaccines. However, big pharma is not letting go of that cash cow.
GivemTheAxe said:oski003 said:Unit2Sucks said:Are you criticizing me for criticizing you? Does this mean you are right for doing so?oski003 said:Unit2Sucks said:You are not under any obligation to cherry pick every potential negative association with the vaccines, but you choose to do so anyway.oski003 said:
If I had a choice on which EUA vaccine I would give my kids. It would Pfizer, then Moderna, then JnJ.
I did not realize I was under obligation to report that Moderna was seeking EUA for 12-17. It is the natural progression of things for how they are currently going.
Almost everything in life has tradeoffs. Rather than point out the benefits of the vaccine, you are choosing to highlight every negative you can find and only the negatives.
Here's the latest CDC data on breakthrough infections and it's pretty good. Meanwhile, in just the last week of April, 350K+ unvaccinated Americans were infected.Quote:
A total of 10,262 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections had been reported from 46 U.S. states and territories as of April 30, 2021. Among these cases, 6,446 (63%) occurred in females, and the median patient age was 58 years (interquartile range = 4074 years). Based on preliminary data, 2,725 (27%) vaccine breakthrough infections were asymptomatic, 995 (10%) patients were known to be hospitalized, and 160 (2%) patients died. Among the 995 hospitalized patients, 289 (29%) were asymptomatic or hospitalized for a reason unrelated to COVID-19. The median age of patients who died was 82 years (interquartile range = 7189 years); 28 (18%) decedents were asymptomatic or died from a cause unrelated to COVID-19. Sequence data were available from 555 (5%) reported cases, 356 (64%) of which were identified as SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including B.1.1.7 (199; 56%), B.1.429 (88; 25%), B.1.427 (28; 8%), P.1 (28; 8%), and B.1.351 (13; 4%).
You have every right to post positive EUA vaccine data and news. That does not mean you are right in criticizing me for personally not doing so.
As far as I can tell this is a discussion forum where civil disagreements are appropriate. I'm merely pointing out, to anyone not paying close attention, that you are cherry-picking negative data regarding the vaccines. Rather than acknowledge you are doing so, you are objecting to the fact that I'm pointing it out. Your goal in posting news that paints the vaccines in a negative light is intended to create and/or further hesitancy regarding the COVID vaccines because you believe they may be unsafe. You are not providing context regarding those negative data points because you aren't interested in a balanced discussion that might cause people to disregard your message that the vaccines are unsafe. You should just own it.
So, if someone criticizes Wilcox, they are obligated to also post all the good things he does?
Frankly, the positives of the vaccine are near common knowledge. The press bombards us with it. Side effects are good! etc... I also acknowledged that my wife and I are vaccinated, which was the right thing to do.
I believe that the JnJ vaccine is actually a better tech against covid vaccines because of t cell production, even if it is low on antibodies. I think the mrna and protein vaccines that produce incredible amounts of antibodies are too strong and too effective, at least for a short period. If they could solve the blood clotting problem of jnj, they would have a good vaccine. It will not stop covid, but it will prevent severe disease. I think the mrna vaccines are too powerful for young, healthy people.
Too many side effects. Lost time at work. My kids day care was closed on the monday after the providers got the mrna second shot due to side effects.
The first generation vaccines are not the best vaccines. However, big pharma is not letting go of that cash cow.
Once again you conclude your post with criticism of the vaccine (the first generation of the vaccine is not as good as later generations and there are side effects that cause people to lose time at work) and the motives of the vaccine manufacturers.
Yes first generation vaccines are probably not as good as later generations. But that will be true of the second generation and the third generation
How long is the public to wait until the vaccines are perfect enough to receive your seal of approval. And how many people with catch COVID in the interim?
Yes many people felt sick after the second shot of vaccine and it caused many to miss work. So did I. But it was a small price to pay for me to receive proven protection against a disease that could kill or could cause me other serious damage. In the long term the vaccine has made me more effective and productive
Yes Big pharma is making big bucks from providing the vaccine. But that does not mean that Big Pharma would resist making improvements to the vaccine as they become available (Making improvements changes would not cut much into their profits. More likely it would increase those profits as the first people vaccinated would come back for booster shots.).
