Reply to Only ~14% Of U.S. Adults Have Gotten Latest Covid-19 Vaccine Update

Forum Index » Health and Medicine

Reply to "Only ~14% Of U.S. Adults Have Gotten Latest Covid-19 Vaccine Update"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Research published in The Lancet medical journal in April 2022 shows that there is no greater risk of developing heart inflammation after a Covid-19 vaccine than after other common vaccines, including the flu jab.

Researchers from Singapore looked at the findings of 22 different studies, covering 405 million doses of different vaccines around the world – including flu, smallpox, polio, measles, mumps and rubella. Overall the rates of myocarditis and pericarditis following Covid vaccines weren’t significantly different to other vaccines, including flu, although rates of myocarditis or pericarditis in young men were higher following mRNA-based Covid vaccines such as Moderna or Pfizer.

The researchers, writing in The Lancet medical journal, suggested that the rare cases of post-vaccine myocarditis and pericarditis might be connected to the overall immune response to vaccination, not specifically because of the Covid-19 vaccination or the spike protein it is based on. They suggested that the reports of myocarditis and pericarditis might be because of the large scale of Covid-19 vaccination and the close scrutiny it has had.

Based on these findings, the researchers said that the benefits of Covid-19 vaccines (including a reduced risk of severe illness or death) far outweigh the very small risk of myocarditis or pericarditis, which is also seen for other vaccines.

https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/news/coronavirus-and-your-health/coronavirus-vaccine-your-questions-answered/myocarditis-and-covid-19-vaccines-should-you-be-worried

[/quote]
This study makes misleading claims. Its authors conducted a literature review/meta-analysis of existing studies on the cardiac side effects of vaccines. It is known that covid and smallpox vaccines can generate cardiac side effects. Unsurprisingly, most of the studies in this review relate to covid or smallpox. There were only five studies that looked at other vaccines: two studies found zero cardiac side effects from non-smallpox vaccines, a third study found only one instance, while 90% of the reported cardiac side effects in non-smallpox vaccines (152 total) came from just one study. However, when you read that one study on live vaccines, you find that of the 152 cardiac cases initially flagged, there was ultimately only one probable case of pericarditis found in the 42-day window post-vaccination, leading those authors to say that "While our study does not speak to risk related to smallpox vaccination, our results provide evidence for the lack of an association between other commonly-administered live viral vaccines and these cardiac outcomes." Despite this, the literature review authors use the 152 initially flagged cardiac cases and draw the opposite conclusion to the authors of the underlying study.

What does this literature review show? They found numerous studies which showed cardiac side effects from covid and small pox vaccines, and very few studies finding cardiac links with other vaccines, consistent with common consensus. The authors do not show convincing or extensive evidence of cardiac side effects in non-covid, non-smallpox vaccines, despite its claims. Also of note: one of the two authors who conceived and drafted this literature review receives funding from a medical company that is involved with the manufacturing and packaging of two well-known covid vaccines. [/quote]

You are being misleading or else you don't understand math. Those "only five studies" that looked at other vaccines were at scales plenty large enough to draw conclusions:
"two studies on [b]1 521 782 doses of influenza vaccines[/b],34, 42 and three studies on a variety of non-COVID-19 vaccines (such as varicella; yellow fever; oral polio vaccine; measles, mumps, and rubella; meningococcal; diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus; BCG; hepatitis; and typhoid; [b]5 488 732 doses[/b])"

"The overall incidence of myopericarditis in the general population did not differ significantly after receipt of COVID-19 vaccines ([b]18·2 cases [10·9–30·3] per million doses, high certainty[/b]) compared with non-COVID-19 vaccines ([b]56·0 [10·7–293·7], moderate certainty, p=0·20; figure 2[/b])"

"Across all vaccines, the incidence of myocarditis was 16·0 cases (95% CI 8·2–31·2) per million doses (180 995 007 doses, seven studies, moderate certainty; appendix p 38). [b]The incidence of myocarditis was significantly lower (p<0·0001) among those receiving COVID-19 vaccines (8·9 [6·7–11·8]; 179 664 350 doses, five studies[/b]) than those receiving non-COVID-19 vaccines (79·4 [63·6–99·0]; 1 330 657 doses, two studies)."[/quote]
The authors are grouping smallpox vaccine results with other non-covid vaccines to make their comparison to covid vaccines, with the smallpox vaccine dominating their results. We already know that the smallpox vaccine has cardiac side effects. The question is with regards to other vaccines. With regards to your quotes. Quote #1 Many vaccines are listed in your first quote, but only influenza, varicella, and yellow fever were found to have any cardiac effects. Oddly, the authors did not list the smallpox vaccine here even though it is included in the latter group of studies and did have cardiac effects. One study accounting for 1.2 million influenza doses found no cardiac effects; one study accounting for 5 million non-covid non-smallpox doses found one cardiac effect. Quote #2 The authors are comparing COVID-19 vaccines to non-COVID-19 vaccines; smallpox is driving this result. Quote #3 The two non-COVID-19 comparison studies noted include one smallpox study and the one study mentioned above which had a far smaller confirmed cardiac total than what the review authors used.

Further, the review authors misstated their findings in the page 1 summary; they stated covid vaccine results were not significantly different from "studies reporting on various [b]other non-smallpox vaccinations[/b] (57·0 [1·1–3036·6], p=0·58)" However, these "other non-smallpox vaccinations" studies did indeed include a smallpox study (Engler), which had the highest cases per million of any surveyed study. Engler is not a "non-smallpox" study so its results should not have been included in this grouping. The Kuntz study included here is the one mentioned above where the study authors believed that there was in fact only 1 probable cardiac effect, not the 152 assumed by the review authors.

The review gives the impression that a number of other vaccines generate cardiac effects beside the covid vaccine. "Thus, the overall risk of myopericarditis appears to be no different for this very new group of vaccines against COVID-19 than for traditional vaccines against other pathogens." (page 684) The BHF expands on this idea in its press statement. However, the review results show that the risk of cardiac side effects are predominantly with the covid and smallpox vaccines. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics