COVID shots protect kids from long COVID—and don’t cause sudden death
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Deal with? The spoons give us fantastic 5G reception!
(I wish I didn't need to obviously write the /s)
Upvote
3
(4
/
-1)
"This work is still in its early stages, and we need to validate these findings"
Is the nypost just AI garbage now? This is a quote, of a fox news analyst saying who the lead at the bottom of the article.
"“Akiko Iwasaka is a world-renowned immunologist at Yale who has studied COVID (and COVID vaccines) extensively,” Siegel pointed out."
This is near the top. Thanks for telling me a person who isn't you summarized who the person is????
"co-senior study author Akiko Iwasaki, Sterling Professor of Immunobiology at Yale School of Medicine, in a press release."
Upvote
27
(27
/
0)
Guess what sorts of chronic health problems Covid 19 (without vaccine) causes in some...
(I mean, you might've tried to actually RTFA before posting - because then you'd have known, and it might've spared you the embarrassment.)
Upvote
49
(51
/
-2)
When have the NY Post and Washington Times (the evil mirror-universe parodies of NY Times and Washington Post, natch) actually not been garbage - with or without AI involvement?
Upvote
46
(48
/
-2)
Don't think I've ever read the Washington Times. And yes it was always garbage. It just feels like even worse garbage.
Upvote
12
(12
/
0)
There are other reports of something like Long-COVID from the vaccine, in a very small percentage of people. If COVID is triggering some weird immune response that causes Long-COVID, then the vaccine could trigger it, too. What we see with COVID is that the sicker you get, the more likely to get Long-COVID, but that people have also shown up with Long-COVID without having been particularly sick. To your immune system, getting the vaccine is very similar to getting COVID without getting particularly sick. Note that lots of people get noticeable immune response from the vaccine, with things like achiness, fever, chills, etc., which is essentially getting a little sick -- as most of the symptoms of viral infection will be from a combination of your infected cells dying from being overwhelmed by the viral replication and the immune response to the infection (some of the latter being exactly the same immune response that the vaccine triggers).
But note that (assuming Long-COVID from the vaccine is even a thing) if you were susceptible to Long-COVID from the vaccine, it's likely you would have been susceptible to Long-COVID from the actual virus. Only if you get the actual virus, you also have all the risks associated with an actual COVID infection, including a risk of even worse Long-COVID than you might have gotten from the vaccine. And the likelihood that everyone will regularly be exposed to COVID, considering how endemic it is, is essentially 100%.
So by all means, people might avoid the vaccine because they are afraid of Long-COVID from the vaccine. They should just be aware that (1) they will be exposed to the live virus in the wild, (2) that exposure is probably just as likely to cause Long-COVID in them as the vaccine and (3) they will also have all the risks associated with being infected with the actual virus -- up to and including death, but also just the risk of worse Long-COVID than might have been triggered by the vaccine. Their call.
But note that (assuming Long-COVID from the vaccine is even a thing) if you were susceptible to Long-COVID from the vaccine, it's likely you would have been susceptible to Long-COVID from the actual virus. Only if you get the actual virus, you also have all the risks associated with an actual COVID infection, including a risk of even worse Long-COVID than you might have gotten from the vaccine. And the likelihood that everyone will regularly be exposed to COVID, considering how endemic it is, is essentially 100%.
So by all means, people might avoid the vaccine because they are afraid of Long-COVID from the vaccine. They should just be aware that (1) they will be exposed to the live virus in the wild, (2) that exposure is probably just as likely to cause Long-COVID in them as the vaccine and (3) they will also have all the risks associated with being infected with the actual virus -- up to and including death, but also just the risk of worse Long-COVID than might have been triggered by the vaccine. Their call.
Upvote
33
(33
/
0)
Repugnicans responding to 1.2 million deaths in the USA from COVID : ...
Repugnicans responding to thousands of shooting deaths each year : ...
Repugnicans responding to proven medical care techniques : RAHGAGRAHRGARHGAHGRAHGRAHGR
Last edited:
Upvote
45
(45
/
0)
Meaning what? Aurich can tell you I don't lick his boots (though I could stand to be fairer to him), and I've criticised government lies numerous times.
The thing is, we understand the evidence, and the evidence shows that vaccinations are literally the MOST effective and safe medicine humanity has ever developed, mainly because it's just training our built-in immunity systems so technically it's not even directly treating it, just telling our bodies, honed by eons of evolution, to invent a cure itself in advance.
Upvote
51
(52
/
-1)
NYPost is a Rupert Murdoch rag. Washington Times was founded by Moonies. “Garbage” is too nice a word.
Upvote
32
(32
/
0)
For some reason german authorities only recommend covid shots above the age of 18. For children its only recommended if there is an underlying condition that confers a higher risk of severe illness.
https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/en/coronavirus/faq-covid-19-vaccination.html
https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/en/coronavirus/faq-covid-19-vaccination.html
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
Fraud? That was the introduction of the new US vaccine science standards. And no, not joking. You'll figure it out soon enough.
Upvote
3
(5
/
-2)
The thing is that we literally did that 2-5 years ago and people didn't wise up, they started drinking bleach and taking horse dewormer. One thing I think a lot of is struggle with here on Ars is that there is a large contingent of the US population that is actively anti-science, anti-intellectual, and most stupidly of all, aggressively anti-knowledge.
You don't have to be a scientist to appreciate the value of vaccines; you don't have to be an intellectual to have a general grasp on the ethical responsibilities of preventative medicine for contagions; you do have to be anti-knowledge, not just ignorant but stupid, to live through a global epidemic that killed about 1 in 300 people in your country alone, to look at easily preventable diseases that disabled or killed thousands in living memory, to watch your child go to the brink of death, and decide that this leaves you on the moral and intellectual high ground.
Upvote
31
(31
/
0)
Booster shots with flu every year for me, wife, kids, only has Covid once and it wasn’t that bad. Will continue as long as we are allowed lol. We’ll need to see a disease with like a 50% death rate without a vaccine (and like 1% with) before people will finally admit they’re fucking wrong.
Upvote
18
(18
/
0)
Thank you for the article Beth. Well done as usual.
I realize it's tempting to use "the enemies" tactics against them. I try to resist doing that.
Nothing is without risk, though we seem to be biased against taking action that adds risk, even where inaction carries its own, potentially higher risk. See the Omission Bias
It should be noted the first study only looked at first vaccination (where that's 2 shots) vs. first infection (it's all they could study given the time horizon). Boosters were out of scope.
If you had a child during the pandemic, and are an Ars reader (and commenter) you should remember that there was serious and legitimate concern over the risk of myocarditis from the vaccine itself. In the early days after the mRNA doses were approved for those < 18 years old the data were not in yet, but we knew both COVID and the vaccine could cause it, but the relative and absolute risk was unknown.
My conclusion at the time was that it may be prudent to space out the shots a bit more than the standard in a healthy young person. Or to delay a booster if they had been infected in the last 6 months.
Studies since have confirmed the risk is real, but shown the risk of that complication from COVID was about 7x higher than the risk from the vaccine. source (Aug2022): Myocarditis in SARS-CoV-2 infection vs. COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Unfortunately "doing the science" takes time.
I realize it's tempting to use "the enemies" tactics against them. I try to resist doing that.
Nothing is without risk, though we seem to be biased against taking action that adds risk, even where inaction carries its own, potentially higher risk. See the Omission Bias
It should be noted the first study only looked at first vaccination (where that's 2 shots) vs. first infection (it's all they could study given the time horizon). Boosters were out of scope.
If you had a child during the pandemic, and are an Ars reader (and commenter) you should remember that there was serious and legitimate concern over the risk of myocarditis from the vaccine itself. In the early days after the mRNA doses were approved for those < 18 years old the data were not in yet, but we knew both COVID and the vaccine could cause it, but the relative and absolute risk was unknown.
My conclusion at the time was that it may be prudent to space out the shots a bit more than the standard in a healthy young person. Or to delay a booster if they had been infected in the last 6 months.
Studies since have confirmed the risk is real, but shown the risk of that complication from COVID was about 7x higher than the risk from the vaccine. source (Aug2022): Myocarditis in SARS-CoV-2 infection vs. COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Unfortunately "doing the science" takes time.
Upvote
16
(16
/
0)
You mean recognizing that vaccines work (as shown by this study) is now bootlicking? Fuck off.
Upvote
45
(46
/
-1)
Who cares about gay frogs?
About the microchips: In the UK, practically every dog and most cats have a microchip implanted, which is a small operation and not cheap. This chip can only be read by a vet having a reader, and only from a few inches distance. If you could inject a dog with a 5G chip using a vaccination needle, and detect its location instantly everywhere in the UK, that would be in my estimate a 500 million UK£ business. Since my vet doesn't offer this, it's nonsense.
Last edited:
Upvote
16
(16
/
0)
We have them in Canada too. Andrew Wakefield (may he burn in Hell) is a Brit. Assuming that stupidity respects borders is dangerous.
Upvote
30
(31
/
-1)
It says "a non-existent risk". The "a" that you conveniently left out has meaning in the English language. That risk is referring to "cardiac arrest or sudden cardiac death in young athletes." It doesn't say that there is no risk whatsoever. It says there hasn't been any link found between cardiac arrest or cardiac death in young athletes. The last paragraph is primarily about that exact topic. Did you just stop reading at the titles?
Reading comprehension and all that...
Last edited:
Upvote
32
(32
/
0)
RickRoyLeonPrisZhoraRacha
Ars Scholae Palatinae
He's a Kennedy. Either your uncle flips a car and leave his date to die, your Grand dad sold booze during the Prohibition, your uncle head esplodes, your dad gets sir handed, a cousin crashes into the water... fate for being a Kennedy... I mean a Brain Worm is the LEAST of his problems.
Upvote
-14
(2
/
-16)
It is pretty dumb to hawk a shot that vaccinates for a disease that killed over a million Americans... But don't worry, you got your moron President and his brain wormed whale beheading dipshit of an HHS Secretary to do what you desire.
Upvote
28
(30
/
-2)
I bet you actually think this is clever, don't you. I can't imagine the level brain sludge needed to think something like this is clever.
Upvote
43
(43
/
0)
the key initial motivation for many of these recommendations was rationing
remember- covid shots like basic ppp were in high demand and short supply
Government and health agencies were attempting (logically and reasonably) to perform triage on who got them ..
hopefully who got them first but also in some cases in who they would be most effective
Upvote
27
(27
/
0)
please explain to me …
please name any significant medical intervention that carries no risk (statistically or actual)
do people really have any understanding of medicine ?
do they even try to understand how statistics work?
please explain how they can be so foolishly proud of themselves to keep reciting this malarkey
Upvote
24
(24
/
0)
How about you do us all a favor. Go to a lawyer, have them write up a statement that you do not agree to any medical procedure that carries risks, or has not been proven 100% safe.
Upvote
36
(36
/
0)
Upvote
-6
(1
/
-7)
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
Why do you feel the need to lie so blatantly? You're trolling because you're objectively clueless, we all know it, why not own it?
Upvote
33
(33
/
0)
uesc_marathon
Ars Scholae Palatinae
Where do people like you even come from? Seriously? What broke in your brain?
Upvote
30
(30
/
0)
Upvote
11
(12
/
-1)