Strokes heart attacks and sudden deaths | Hacker News Reader

Strokes heart attacks and sudden deaths

fortune.com

There can’t possibly be any side effects down the road they said, with certainty after a whole six months of testing

Just read today that the Florida Surgeon General announced they are recommending against mRNA vaccines for males under 40:

> The self-controlled case series analysis found that men 18-39 years old experienced an 84% increase in the relative incidence of cardiac-related death within 28 days of vaccination. [1]

Twitter removed the Surgeon General’s tweet then eventually restored it.

[1] https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/oct/9/floridas-sur...

This article says that (an emergency resident says that) the analysis is not peer-reviewed and that the sample size is quite small (20 death for men below 40). A big part of the article is actually about showing us other less fringe opinions about this.

> Twitter removed the Surgeon General’s tweet then eventually restored it.

So glad Twitter is the non-scientific guardian of local states recommendations.

> Twitter removed the Surgeon General’s tweet then eventually restored it.

The submission of the official press release was also flagged on this site: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33132860

The Florida health department and Florida government is victim of a lot of non-scientific but politically based decisions. I would not rely on a source like that.

It would be useful to offer at least some indications of remediations people can take.

It would have been interesting to refer to the post Spanish flu syndrome, and the encephalitis issues which lie at the heart of "awakenings" or, perhaps the long tail of polio and TB sufferers lives.

We've always had post viral syndrome. And bacterial infections leave their mark.

Captain America wasn't marked F4 because he was little.

The most effective strategy is prevention. Wear a mask when you share the air with untested individuals. I managed to evade infection since initial outbreak with this simple strategy. Even vaccinated, I don't want to get infected with this virus until effective treatments come online.

> Wear a mask when you share the air with untested individuals.

there are still things we don't understand about transmission. I have been in settings where nobody was wearing masks and some of us got infected while not the others (with no difference in vaccine status), even though the disease is supposed to be highly transmissible. There seems to be a very big individual component (based on what, I don't know) that factors in whether you can get infected or not. We see that too with family members when someone gets infected at home, not all family members catch it either.

> I have been in settings where nobody was wearing masks and some of us got infected while not the others (with no difference in vaccine status), even though the disease is supposed to be highly transmissible.

Were the people in question who were believed to be uninfected testing frequently enough that they would be aware of an asymptomatic infection?

Everyone was tested following the infection, so yes, we know. they were not infected at all.

If you believe a goofy little face mask is going to stop or slow down the spread, in either direction, of a respiratory virus, then I have a bridge to sell you. Look at the data. There's no correlation between masking and prevention.

And FWIW, there are effective and early treatments available. Many people have just been prevented from receiving them if needed.

Like?

You’re belittling the preventative measures that the poster took but have offered zero in return. Not at link to peer reviewed study, not an article… nothing. Just a “FWIW” conspiratorial post script.

Let’s be more productive on hackernews, please.

And FWIW, respiratory illness are limited by masking because the respiration is causing aerosols. Some of which are stuck to the mask rather than ejecting in front of your mouth when breathing.

So you’re saying masks that filters out nearly all respiratory particles from getting into the respiratory system won’t be effective at reducing the incidence and viral load of a virus that spreads by inhaling virus particles?

Or is it just a vanity thing since the comment calls them “goofy” and one can’t be bear to have others see one wearing a mask because of some insecurity of what others might think? Doctors are so goofy, people working around dust are goofy! Haha look at them?

Yes, I agree. But if you don't manage to prevent catching a disease with a long tail, what you need is guidance on how to mitigate the effects of that long tail.

Like the NHS provide: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/long-term...

Don't take the Covid vaccine if you are a healthy person.

Why is getting a massive dose of all the Covid proteins and stuff with a totally naive immune system from an actual Covid infection as ones first brush with the virus better than getting a comparatively small dose of a few surface proteins prior that primes the immune system? Not getting covid is not a realistic hope, seems wise to do some practice runs before the actual marathon.

You’re getting those Covid proteins whether you like them or not, might as well do it in the time and place of your choosing in a controlled manner rather than have it forced on you in a more severe form when you don’t want it.

If in the USA, getting close to 90% have been exposed to Covid enough to have developed nucleocapsid antibody: https://covid19serohub.nih.gov/ The assumption that you are Covid naive is a bad one.

"increased incidence of ischemic strokes in young patients compared to pre-pandemic levels."

And if you plot this on a timeline they coincide with the rollout of vaccines.

The elephant in the room, but the problem is that the correlation between deaths and the vaccine is also a correlation between the vaccine and covid.

People rush very quickly to defend the vaccine, and somewhat understandably, but to suggest that medicine can do no wrong is just as naive as anything else.

We might never know the real cause. A lady in my community had months of heart attacks before she died, they only started after the vaccine and she never had covid. Statistically she's an excess death during COVID, anecdotally she's irrelevant.

Might be. I don't know, and I couldn't see it in the study.

But the study indicates that the vaccines are partially protective against sequelae (by comparing vaccinated covid-19 patients with unvaccinated) and that the sequelae is not due to vaccine (by comparing a vaccinated group without a record of covid-19 to a vaccinated group with record of covid-19).

So nothing in the study suggests any adverse effects from vaccines.

Also may be worth noting, that the increased risk of all sequelae was found to be very low for patients without a hospitalization record in connection with their covid-19 infection.

Have you corrected for confounders in your study? (Such as increased sedentism/reduced exercise and dietary changes?)

Since there was a fairly long period of time between the early incidences of Covid and the appearance of the various vaccines, is the correlation to Covid or to the vaccines?

There can't be ANY correlation to vaccines because everyone knows that vaccines are safe and sound, and have no side-effects whatsoever.

This question is disinformation.

If the trend mirrors the growth of the disease, it's the disease;

If the trend mirrors the rollout of the vaccine, it's the vaccine (or possibly adverse reactions in previously exposed patients);

If it appears to be a mix of the two, the problem's probably due to the spike protein.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com