Hacker News Reader

Comment by Factorium | Hacker News Reader

Ok I'll bite... that's not how this works, that's not how ANY of this works!

First off, vaccinations are done via intermuscular injections, not bloodstream injections.

Second, as cells produce the foreign proteins, they are captured and displayed by the MHC molecules, so this notion that 'spike protein coursing through the body' is a wild fabrication.

The body is good at degrading proteins. And honestly if you are worried about the mRNA vaccines doing bad things to you... I have news for you, SARS-CoV-2 injects a lot more mRNA into your cells, and lots more of those 'spike proteins' you're worried about are created, in a self-replicating pattern, until possibly you die. So you probably want to avoid SARS-CoV-2 a lot more than the mRNA vaccines.

>Second, as cells produce the foreign proteins, they are captured and displayed by the MHC molecules, so this notion that 'spike protein coursing through the body' is a wild fabrication.

That's not true. The body continues to produce circulating exosomes expressing the spike protein for 4+ months after vaccination: https://www.jimmunol.org/content/early/2021/10/11/jimmunol.2...

> First off, vaccinations are done via intermuscular injections, not bloodstream injections.

The spike protein doesn't remain in the arm, it has been found everywhere in the body, including the brain, after vaccination. It was in the news a couple months ago.

I'm not commenting on the other points since I don't know enough. However I'll echo the worries of Factorium, I believe we should wait and see what are the long term results of this round of ARN vaccines before we start administering new ones massively.

FWIW the "bloodstream injection" claim is related to a dubious study that intentionally injected an excessive amount of the vaccine into the bloodstream of lab animals and observed heart issues. So we're not just talking about "accidental bloodstream injections" (which is extremely unlikely to begin with) but also massively overdosing by orders of magnitude.

Are you referring to https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34406358/? The same amount was injected into the veins as into the muscles, and the injections into the muscles were not found to cause myocarditis in the lab animals, while those into the veins were. Which at least suggests that a given quantity is more dangerous if injected into the blood than into the muscle.

After more than 1 bn doses administered you shouldn't make such a claim without a reference.

The myocarditis risk in young males seems to be manageable.

I think that's what underlies a lot of this disagreement. Risk, and what risk is manageable, and who gets to shoulder it.

These allegedly affected athletes (if that's what really caused their issue), probably have a very different feeling and assessment about the manageability of their myocarditis vs covid risk, and they by-and-large didn't get to choose - the decision was made for them, in part because the risk of Covid in > 80s is 1000x+ higher. There wasn't any sort of democratic discussion and consensus about what risks we were willing to accept in either Covid or in possible vaccine effects, people were just told by the authorities what they were going to accept. So people with different risk profiles and people with different amounts of risk-willingness are are major levels of disagreement, even if they don't always frame it in those terms.

EDIT: Brief correction that the risk I was thinking of is in 85+ year olds, and it's only 570x the risk of 18-29 year olds, not more than 1000x.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investi...

This is one of those things i want to talk about any every time this subject comes up but i just don’t have the energy to sustain it because the arguments always turn into spreadsheet politics. So i 100% agree with you and i think exploring this aspect of the conversation is an essential part of healing it.

You are certainly right that risk assessment is hard, but with manageable I primarily meant that the myocarditis which was detected was primarily mild in the young age group(at least in Germany where I followed the reports) and didn't lead to any deaths or severe impairments.

The risk for myocarditis from Comirnaty for 12-17 aged men is given at 4.8 in 100.000 vaccinations. Of those the larger than expected analysis showed that 10 out of the 78 total cases would have been expected without vaccination.

please define manageable in the context of a life altering injury where the vaccine NNT numbers favor no vaccination in a young, healthy demographic?

Manageable means that it can be treated and in most cases is not a life altering inflammation.

And I don't know where you take your numbers, but the numbers to me seem to clearly favor getting a vaccine rather than risking myocarditis from Covid:

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm

I think you are failing to account for the incredibly low infection rate of the young and healthy with no comorbidities. The pericarditis rates from vaccine and infection are fairly comparable, ranging from 200 per million to high 700s per million.

However, given low infection rates of those young/healthy, the equation is fundamentally changed.

Please account for that before you provide half-baked advice.

Here's a reference wrt cardiac damage, from the highest-impact cardiology journal: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.107...

Thanks for this. Unfortunately it is only an abstract and thus is a little short on the details (for instance if they excluded people with Covid infections from their cohort). Also it is difficult to assess if a rise in inflammatory markers would still be considered normal for instance when comparing to other vaccines or not. Compare for instance similar publication of influence vaccine https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15976761/

The author is a known quack, please stop spreading misinformation.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29298178

I haven't heard of a single person dropping out due to the vaccine. Mind sharing some papers?

CDC of US links COVID mRNA vaccines with increased risk of heart inflammation among young adult men, with a note that this is rare and these risks are smaller than risks of COVID.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/my...

the stats on it have varied from report to report around 200 to 700 cases per million.

That is not "rare" as some people advocating vaccinating large populations.

Given that the super low infection rate, and miniscule mortality among young healthy adult men, it violates do no harm / NNT.

Not really, because the risk of myocarditis/pericarditis when contracting Covid is several times larger than through the mRNA vaccines.

Makes sense given that you are exposed to fewer viral particles through the vaccines.

There is also a difference between Moderna and Biontech/Pfizer, which is why many countries vaccinate under 30s only with Biontech.

And yes, SARS-Cov-2 will very likely become endemic, like the other human corona viruses before it. As a result close to 100 percent of everybody, including young healthy adult men, will contract the virus.

I don't have any scientific papers, but I can tell you it's frequent to read in the local newspaper here (east of France) about some cardiac problem on amateur football (soccer) fields.

The last I read last week the guy's heart stopped 2 times before he could be rushed to the hospital.

There's also a list that is circulating on social medias of celebrities that had problems after their vaccines.

Is it linked? I don't know, but before the vaccines these kind of problems were almost unheard of.

Then let's wait until we have real data before jumping to conclusions. Your environment may just be a statistical outlier. Or you are more attuned to it because of the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon.

Myocarditis rates are something like 30x higher in COVID infection cases vs. vaccination. So even if this phenomenon was real 1) you'd have to rule out it actually being because of COVID infection, and 2) the baseline for "it wasn't like this before" should compare to what happens with the statistically inevitable infection with COVID vs. in the presence of vaccines.

The reality is we have COVID, it's not going away and the effects are far worse, so this is the control scenario now.

> Myocarditis rates are something like 30x higher in COVID infection cases vs. vaccination.

Source of this please?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34406358/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7199677/

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.107...

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm

(influenza vaccine effect - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15976761/) et al

I'm not sure, specifically, where the 30x claim comes from. There are a myriad of studies showing a measurable increase.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com