Study of 38 million vaccinated adults shows 1 out of 100 were admitted with cardiac arrhythmias

originally posted by: Brotherman

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273.

This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test

So, getting Covid increases your risk of myocarditis much more than vaccination does.

So forcing people to take a vaccine that has a 1 in 100 chance of damaging your heart is totally cool with you? Keep in mind that not taking the vaccine has a 0 in 100 chance of adverse reactions to the shot.

Does that mean cigarettes are better for you then the vaccine?

oddly enough, some data infers that smoking may help reduce chances of getting covid. Ain't that a kick in the teeth.

www.acsh.org...

a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

The trick is at what age and comorbidity levels your risks from COVID outweigh your risks from the vaccine. You do reach that point, but it is not a blanket, across the board point. Healthy athletes are likely better off not getting vaccinated. People under 40 are likely better off not getting vaccinated.

We can always point to outliers either way, but no matter what you decide, you are always playing the odds with no 100% guarantee because this is biology we're discussing, not chemistry.

If this were true, since there have been eight billion or so vaccines administered so far, the hospitals would be filled with these people.
Fact is that for most, the vaccine causes no severe or lasting side effects. And for most the only side effect is a sore arm from the needle in your muscle.

a reply to: Meldionne1

IKR?
Not even this vaccine does this.
Its preposterous.
And there have been over eight billion vaccines administered already. www.bloomberg.com...
The hospitals would be over run and there wold be no hiding it.

We didn't get vaccinated, But had covid weird thing was my blood pressure hit 170 and my wife's the opposite hers fell so low she passed out .

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273.

This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test

So, getting Covid increases your risk of myocarditis much more than vaccination does.

So forcing people to take a vaccine that has a 1 in 100 chance of damaging your heart is totally cool with you? Keep in mind that not taking the vaccine has a 0 in 100 chance of adverse reactions to the shot.

Then don’t get the vax!!!…see how easy that is?

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273.

This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test

So, getting Covid increases your risk of myocarditis much more than vaccination does.

So forcing people to take a vaccine that has a 1 in 100 chance of damaging your heart is totally cool with you? Keep in mind that not taking the vaccine has a 0 in 100 chance of adverse reactions to the shot.

The data don't show that the vaccine has a 1 in 100 chance of damaging your heart.

The first thing that the data shows is that arrhythmia is nearly 250 times more prevalent in the population than either pericarditis or myocarditis. It is probably the most common heart problem, and a recent article published before the pandemic and before vaccines came out (2018) showed that about 2.3% of the population of the US has some form of it.
www.ahajournals.org...

Table 1 in the referenced article shows that the prevalence of arrhythmia in the UK in the two years prior to the study was typically slightly higher than in the US. This means that it would not be surprising to see at least 1% of the vaccinated population having arrhythmia strictly by chance.

This also brings up the point that in order to figure out whether an experimental intervention is good, bad, or indifferent in regard to producing a higher risk of some adverse event, you have to compare the frequency of adverse events in the population that gets the intervention to the frequency of adverse events in the population that doesn't. Simply knowing that 1% of the people in the study had arrhythmia tells you nothing about whether the intervention carries increased risk.

That's why this study reports its findings in terms of Incidence Rate Ratios (IRR). An IRR compares the rate of occurrence of some event (arrhythmia, in this case) within some specified time period (4 weeks after vaccination, in this case) with the expected rate of occurrence of that event in the general population. If the IRR is greater than 1, then that event is more common in the experimental (vaccinated) group than in the control group. If the IRR is less than one then it is less common, and if it is exactly 1 then there is no difference between the experimental group and the control group.

Table 3 in the paper shows the IRRs for arrhythmia as a function of which vaccine was used and elapsed time after first and second dose. The authors summarize the results as:

"Over the 1–28 days post vaccination, we found a decreased risk of cardiac arrhythmia associated with a first dose of ChAdOx1 (IRR 0.94, 95% CI 0.93, 0.96) and BNT162b2 (IRR 0.89, 95% CI 0.87, 0.90) and following a second dose of ChAdOx1 (IRR 0.95, 95% CI 0.94, 0.96) and BNT162b2 (IRR 0.95, 95% CI 0.93, 0.96). There was an increased risk of cardiac arrhythmia following a second dose of mRNA-1273 (IRR 1.46, 95% CI, 1.08, 1.98) and a SARS-CoV-2 positive test (IRR 5.35, 95% CI 5.21, 5.50)."

So the only case for which they found an increased risk of arrhythmia was after the second dose of the Moderna vaccine and that risk is still lower than the risk associated with being tested positive for Covid-19. All the other cases actually showed a reduced risk of arrhythmia.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273.

This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test

So, getting Covid increases your risk of myocarditis much more than vaccination does.

So forcing people to take a vaccine that has a 1 in 100 chance of damaging your heart is totally cool with you? Keep in mind that not taking the vaccine has a 0 in 100 chance of adverse reactions to the shot.

Then don’t get the vax!!!…see how easy that is?

You do understand that the people who make that choice are being told they can't live a normal life right? Can't fly, go in restarunts and even school.
Is this the right thing to do with a virus that is very low mortality?

In a restaurant a while back my party unmasked were seated, nice waitress seemed happy to see us.. The next table two trans people laid their masks on the table, they frowned at us the whole 7 ft walk to our table.

When they left they took their dirty masks off the table glared angrily at us as they very deliberately put them on and walked to the checkout about 3 feet away.

Think about it! Touching dirty things you breath on, putting those on the table and we are forced to cover our faces for a short walk free of touching anything how does any of this make sense! Clearly there is an alternate agenda, it is not about germs or health.

a reply to: SeaWorthy

You can fly globally without being vaccinated.

You just need to provide correct test results.

Do not fuel lies.

originally posted by: SeaWorthy

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273.

This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test

So, getting Covid increases your risk of myocarditis much more than vaccination does.

So forcing people to take a vaccine that has a 1 in 100 chance of damaging your heart is totally cool with you? Keep in mind that not taking the vaccine has a 0 in 100 chance of adverse reactions to the shot.

Then don’t get the vax!!!…see how easy that is?

You do understand that the people who make that choice are being told they can't live a normal life right? Can't fly, go in restarunts and even school.
Is this the right thing to do with a virus that is very low mortality?

In a restaurant a while back my party unmasked were seated, nice waitress seemed happy to see us.. The next table two trans people laid their masks on the table, they frowned at us the whole 7 ft walk to our table.

When they left they took their dirty masks off the table glared angrily at us as they very deliberately put them on and walked to the checkout about 3 feet away.

Think about it! Touching dirty things you breath on, putting those on the table and we are forced to cover our faces for a short walk free of touching anything how does any of this make sense! Clearly there is an alternate agenda, it is not about germs or health.

How do you eat in a restaurant wearing a mask?

Don't get what you're saying?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

The trick is at what age and comorbidity levels your risks from COVID outweigh your risks from the vaccine.

That's actually pretty simple. There is no age at which the vax is a greater risk than covid unless you have a demonstrated history of extreme reactions to vaccines in general, due to the risks being so incredibly low.

Still banging your head against the thick as a brick wall then?

I have up months ago, far too busy and letting Darwinism do what it does best from now on.

Merry Christmas dude.

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: SeaWorthy

You can fly globally without being vaccinated.

You just need to provide correct test results.

Do not fuel lies.

a reply to: SeaWorthy

a virus that is very low mortality

It's not just about the mortality. Do you know how much economic productivity has been lost simply through people being sick, and I mean purely through sickness, not quarantine.

We've had a winter flu season in the summer, and an even worse one in the actual winter. You get covid in a small business and it's like somebody set off a plague bomb.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273.

This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test

So, getting Covid increases your risk of myocarditis much more than vaccination does.

So forcing people to take a vaccine that has a 1 in 100 chance of damaging your heart is totally cool with you? Keep in mind that not taking the vaccine has a 0 in 100 chance of adverse reactions to the shot.

Then don’t get the vax!!!…see how easy that is?

Except it's not 1 in 100, it's 1 in 50,000, and it's usually so mild that it's barely a thing. Only 1 in around 500,000 had remotely serious effects. Mostly feels like anxiety with some muscle ache thrown in.

It's usually so mild that during the primary study in Israel they only found 136 cases in 5 million people. Which meant that people didn't even realize that they had a problem.

Link

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Brotherman

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273.

This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test

So, getting Covid increases your risk of myocarditis much more than vaccination does.

So forcing people to take a vaccine that has a 1 in 100 chance of damaging your heart is totally cool with you? Keep in mind that not taking the vaccine has a 0 in 100 chance of adverse reactions to the shot.

Does that mean cigarettes are better for you then the vaccine?

oddly enough, some data infers that smoking may help reduce chances of getting covid. Ain't that a kick in the teeth.

www.acsh.org...

Didn't that turn out to simply be that people tended to naturally socially distance from smokers, so they had less exposure.

The same would be true for people who didn't wash often enough, or people with horrifying flatulence.

a reply to: 1947boomer

So the only case for which they found an increased risk of arrhythmia was after the second dose of the Moderna vaccine and that risk is still lower than the risk associated with being tested positive for Covid-19. All the other cases actually showed a reduced risk of arrhythmia.

That didn't turn out to be true for this subgroup...

In women, we found an increased risk of myocarditis 1–28 days following a first dose of ChAdOx1 (IRR 1.40, 95% CI 1.01, 1.93) and BNT162b2 (IRR 1.54, 95% CI 1.08, 2.20), and following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test (IRR 11.00, 95% CI 7.12, 16.99). There were insufficient numbers of events to evaluate associations with the mRNA-1273 vaccine for women. In men, we found an increased risk of myocarditis at 1–28 days following a first and second dose of mRNA-1273 (IRR 3.79, 95% CI 1.59, 9.04 and IRR 12.27, 95%CI 2.77, 54.37, respectively) and following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test (IRR 9.06, 95% CI 6.51, 12.62). No association was found with the ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2 vaccines.

a reply to: Deetermined

You've actually got a significantly greater chance of being struck by lightening.

Globally, more people die from Autoerotic asphyxiation every year than were killed by the vax. Think about that for a minute.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

No matter what statistics you throw out there, people are going to use their own personal experiences to make their decisions. With that said, I can tell you that I only know 1 person who's been struck by lightening, and 3 who have had more serious repercussions from the Covid vaccine, including a death.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Old people with heart conditions?

Color me shocked.

People aren't excersising as much as they used to, and are delaying seeking help more than they used to and so are experiencing worse symptoms when they finally do.

Your statistics are evidence of this, not of the shot being dangerous.

Great. You’re starting to catch on.

So how many people died from Covid that didn’t have pre-existing conditions and poor lifestyle choices?

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273.

This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test

So, getting Covid increases your risk of myocarditis much more than vaccination does.

So forcing people to take a vaccine that has a 1 in 100 chance of damaging your heart is totally cool with you? Keep in mind that not taking the vaccine has a 0 in 100 chance of adverse reactions to the shot.

Then don’t get the vax!!!…see how easy that is?

Ya real easy.

I have family members with no job because they made that “choice”.

You do realize that when you are threatened to lose something to make a choice it’s called coercion?