Hacker News Reader

Comment by eggy | Hacker News Reader

At this point why do they have to apply for emergency use authorization? Shouldn't we be back to typical safety trials? Is the yearly flu shot under EUA too?

Why is the CDC still blanket recommending shots for young people? Especially with risk of myocardiitis predominant in young males?

View on HN

> Especially with risk of myocardiitis predominant in young males?

Isn't the risk of myocarditis worse from COVID than the vaccines? From [1], "In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that the risk of myocarditis is more than seven fold higher in persons who were infected with the SARS-CoV-2 than in those who received the vaccine."

I understand that my linked source doesn't seem to split up the data by age group, but given their overall findings, do you have a source that says the 7x difference doesn't hold in younger men?

[1]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36105535/

Let's assume that's true (though I wouldn't be surprised to learn there are sources saying otherwise). Why is it relevant? In one scenario you have the risk from just covid, in the other you have the risk from both covid and the shot. When it comes to myocarditis, what are we supposed to do with this knowledge?

Also, we are talking multiple shots and boosters, not a single vaccination. If young, healthy males are not in the high-risk group for a COVID infection, then why recommend several vaccines to them that carry this risk? How about not recommending it to healthy, young people like Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark have done. And we are still at less than 3 years since the vaccine was first administered. There are still ongoing studies, however, Pfizer invalidated their long-term study by vaccinating their control group under the guise of worrying about the control group's health & safety.

Why would we need to do any type of greater testing when we already know the shot is safe and effective?

More testing is a good thing, whether it tells us vaccines are just as safe as we think, safer, or less safe. The hard part is getting the public to listen to and comprehend the data

Vaccine safety data and studies are typically collected well beyond the almost three years this vaccine has been around. If you think we don't need any further testing, then my point of the vaccine being under EUA is even more relevant. It should not need EUA if that were the case.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com