|
Mar 16, 2023 | 19:10
1141
"COVID vaccine tied to fewer heart attacks, strokes among previously infected"
What the phuck does that mean?
Better to have had Covid BEFORE you get mRNA shots?
Hope you all did, or this does not help you.
|
|
Mar 16, 2023 | 23:08
1143
Finally covid has caught up with me.
Like a bad hangover and a few joint pains.
Day three of feeling off, funny only just tested pos today.
In spare room so nobody else catches it. Only isolated last night so rest might get it.
|
|
|
Mar 17, 2023 | 07:40
1144
 Originally Posted by fjlip
"COVID vaccine tied to fewer heart attacks, strokes among previously infected"
What the phuck does that mean?
Better to have had Covid BEFORE you get mRNA shots?
Hope you all did, or this does not help you.
What this means is the vaccines didn't cause an increase in heart attacks or strokes! Plain an simple.
So all the antavaxers don't have any evidence to back up their lies that vaccines are causing heart attacks and strokes!
|
|
Mar 17, 2023 | 07:43
1145
Originally Posted by Landdownunder
Finally covid has caught up with me.
Like a bad hangover and a few joint pains.
Day three of feeling off, funny only just tested pos today.
In spare room so nobody else catches it. Only isolated last night so rest might get it.
Over the counters like Aspirin, Zinc, Vit D, Vit C help. Not sure if chicken soup is a thing down under. I know you have vegimite available, I tried it when I toured Australia, not even covid could withstand that stuff. All the best and a speedy recovery.
Last edited by biglentil; Mar 17, 2023 at 07:45.
|
|
|
Mar 17, 2023 | 09:00
1146
Originally Posted by biglentil
Over the counters like Aspirin, Zinc, Vit D, Vit C help. Not sure if chicken soup is a thing down under. I know you have vegimite available, I tried it when I toured Australia, not even covid could withstand that stuff. All the best and a speedy recovery.
Acquired taste eh. thanks for thoughts and kind words
|
|
|
Mar 17, 2023 | 09:07
1147
You are tough, head out to the beach for a couple of days if you feel ok. That warm sun will cure all evils. 😂
|
|
|
Mar 18, 2023 | 19:16
1148
turned the corner on covid.
5 days symptoms easing was a bitch on day 4
will isolate for another 2 yet but will go to work
|
|
|
Mar 18, 2023 | 19:25
1149
Same for 99+%, we had the shit twice...gee still here, PURE blood, ZERO shots. Plus do not have the cumulative risk of effects having Covid AND shots. Wish you well.
|
|
|
Mar 18, 2023 | 19:35
1150
Originally Posted by Landdownunder
turned the corner on covid.
5 days symptoms easing was a bitch on day 4
will isolate for another 2 yet but will go to work
Good to hear. The basis of a robust immune system is primarily derived from what you eat. Don't get any more boosters.
No jabs for me.👍
|
|
|
Mar 19, 2023 | 08:34
1152
https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/canada-covid-immunity-vaccination-infection-1.6779949
Hybrid immunity offers strongest protection
A growing body of research has consistently shown that the hybrid protection from vaccination and infection is superior to immunity from prior infection alone — meaning those who have previously been infected should still get vaccinated.
"Vaccine-induced immunity is what got us to the point of even asking the question of whether hybrid immunity is what's getting us out of the pandemic," said John Wherry, director of the Institute for Immunology at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.
"It doesn't look like it's really helping with transmission, but it almost certainly is adding to the overall population immunity in a way that's making [new subvariants] a lot less concerning."
A Canadian study of health-care workers in Quebec published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases in January found that two doses of an mRNA vaccine and a previous Omicron infection offered substantial protection against future infection from Omicron subvariants.
"Importantly, this protection seems to have little waning over time during one year followup, which contrasts with the loss of effectiveness with time among persons vaccinated but not previously infected," said Carazo, the lead author of the study.
"We also observed that protection from hybrid immunity was maintained even for distant variants and subvariants compared with protection from infection alone."
Carazo's research also found that those with a previous infection had a 90 per cent risk reduction of BA.4/5 hospitalization when combined with vaccination, compared with only about 70 per cent if they were unvaccinated and had immunity from infection alone.
"It's safe to say that the relative lack of severity of the waves that we've seen here is because of immunity — it's hard to argue anything differently than that," said Deepta Bhattacharya, an immunologist and professor at the University of Arizona in Tucson.
"And obviously, given what fraction of the population has had a prior infection, you would have to think that hybrid immunity is a big part of that."
Vaccination 'the safest way to get immunity'
A new study of 613 patients published this week in Science Translational Medicine found that people who had received a COVID-19 vaccine after an infection showed much stronger immune responses than those who were either only vaccinated or only infected.
"The level of protection expected from hybrid immunity is significantly higher than that afforded by vaccination only or infection only," said Thierry DeFrance, a lead author of the study and an infectious diseases researcher at the University of Lyon in France.
And a recent systematic review of 65 studies from 19 countries in The Lancet found that a previous COVID-19 infection reduced the risk of hospitalization and death from a reinfection by up to 88 per cent for at least 10 months — equivalent to two doses of an mRNA vaccine.
"Clearly, the good news is sustained protection against severe disease," said Dr. Christopher Murray, the lead author of the review and director of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington in Seattle.
"The less good news is that protection against infection is not as good and wanes much more quickly, meaning that there will be continued waves of transmission even though we have a very high level of immunity from either vaccination or infection."
It's also important to note that not all immunity carries the same risk, and an infection with Omicron or one of its subvariants is much different than an infection with previous variants, such as Alpha, Beta, Delta or even the original strain, prior to vaccines.
"The safest way to get immunity is through vaccination," Murray said. "The risk you were taking was huge back in the days of Delta or even the ancestral strain, because the infection fatality rate was 10 times higher than Omicron."
|
|
Mar 19, 2023 | 11:15
1153
Too bad there isn't immunity to fear and mistrust.
|
|
|
Mar 19, 2023 | 12:53
1154
[QUOTE=chuckChuck;562561]https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/canada-covid-immunity-vaccination-infection-1.6779949
Hybrid immunity offers strongest protection
Funny cause I’m Unvaxed and never got more than a gray line on a stick, hmmm, you are sure about hybrid immunity? Same for other close Unvaxed around here. I guess any report can twist the facts so the report misfit-tingly substantiates hoaxes too.
|
|
|
Mar 19, 2023 | 15:45
1155
i did tests.
had neg neg pos neg today ok presuming i had it.
first two tests done at hospitals.
doc said new super strain influenza hitting oz early could have had that didnt worry about blood test
|
|
|
Mar 19, 2023 | 16:16
1156
CBC and Canada Health...oh ya trustworthy. Paid advertising, By Pfizer, Turdo Foundation.
Still says GET a Vax AFTER Infection did you guys?
You missed the part where 90% of younger people have HAD covid.
Last edited by fjlip; Mar 19, 2023 at 16:20.
|
|
|
Mar 19, 2023 | 19:17
1157
https://youtu.be/Fn8MxJx_erk
|
|
|
Mar 19, 2023 | 19:25
1158
Why do I know of more people that died after the booster shots than from Covid???
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 07:33
1159
Originally Posted by TSIPP
Why do I know of more people that died after the booster shots than from Covid???
How do you know what they died of?
I already posted research from a large study that showed there was no increase in heart attacks or strokes from vaccinations.
So people who you know who died are not evidence of anything.
Here are the study results again:
COVID vaccine tied to fewer heart attacks, strokes among previously infected
News brief
February 20, 2023
Mary Van Beusekom, MS
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/covid-vaccine-tied-fewer-heart-attacks-strokes-among-previously-infected
COVID-19 vaccination is linked to fewer heart attacks, strokes, and other cardiovascular issues among previously infected adults, suggests a US study today in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
Researchers from Mount Sinai's Icahn School of Medicine parsed data from the country's largest SARS-CoV-2 dataset, the National COVID Cohort Collaborative, on adults infected with SARS-CoV-2 from March 2020 to February 2022. The team tracked patients for 6 months to determine any association between COVID-19 vaccination and major cardiac events (MACE) among previously infected patients.
Last edited by chuckChuck; Mar 20, 2023 at 07:36.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 09:17
1160
I'm not sure if the article you posted proves what you think it claims.
In fact, based on this sentence from your post, I can't make any sense of it all. There's either a typo or a purposeful obfuscation.
Average age among the 1,934,294 participants was 45.2 years, and 81.3% were White. Among 195,136 participants, (10.1%) were fully vaccinated, 88.7% were unvaccinated, and 1.2% were partially vaccinated.
Were there 1.9 million participants or 190,000 participants? One sentence contradicts the other. If it is the former, and 88.7 percent of them were unvaccinated, that would constitute almost the entire unvaccinated population of Israel. That would be an impressive sample size. Why are the proportions of vaccinated to unvaccinated within this study completely opposite to the proportions in the broader population? What was the logic behind such a lopsided sample group? If those proportions are correct, how was the relatively much much smaller vaccinated sample chosen from the broader population? Was it random and representative, or Cherry picked for certain risk factors?
Have either you , or agstar( who liked the post), read the actual study? If so, can eiher of you interpret it and answer my questions?
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 09:41
1161
had phone consult with doc today recovid.
one thing they dont mention is sleep depravation 2 am cant sleep.
lost me taste tonight.
todays doc unashamadely pro vax but heres the kicker over 60.
told him thats against the grain, he said opinions change info changes.
told him i got walloped on day 3 he said good worse it is within reason more natural immunity. double edge sword he said vaxx to reduce symptoms essential in over 60s.
just one docs opinion 100s of other different lines of thought.
told me to get into fruit and multiu vitamins zinc in particular
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 10:56
1162
Originally Posted by AlbertaFarmer5
I'm not sure if the article you posted proves what you think it claims.
In fact, based on this sentence from your post, I can't make any sense of it all. There's either a typo or a purposeful obfuscation.
Average age among the 1,934,294 participants was 45.2 years, and 81.3% were White. Among 195,136 participants, (10.1%) were fully vaccinated, 88.7% were unvaccinated, and 1.2% were partially vaccinated.
Were there 1.9 million participants or 190,000 participants? One sentence contradicts the other. If it is the former, and 88.7 percent of them were unvaccinated, that would constitute almost the entire unvaccinated population of Israel. That would be an impressive sample size. Why are the proportions of vaccinated to unvaccinated within this study completely opposite to the proportions in the broader population? What was the logic behind such a lopsided sample group? If those proportions are correct, how was the relatively much much smaller vaccinated sample chosen from the broader population? Was it random and representative, or Cherry picked for certain risk factors?
Have either you , or agstar( who liked the post), read the actual study? If so, can eiher of you interpret it and answer my questions?
I will leave it up to University of Minnesota and the Journal of the American College of Cardiology to come to their conclusions based on the published study. But the article clearly said COVID vaccine tied to fewer heart attacks, strokes among previously infected
The journal is locked and even it it wasn't I would leave it up to experts to analyse the results and to come to their own conclusions. That's why there is peer review and professionals doing this work.
Why would you not trust them? Especially if there is no other credible evidence from multiple sources that vaccines raise the risk of heart attacks and strokes?
If there is credible evidence, why do the antivaxers keep talking only about the people they know who died, had a heart attack or stroke after vaccination as proof?
A small group of people you know is not credible evidence. Its speculation and highly unreliable except in the coffee shop where its taken as the truth by a handful of the antivaxer sheep.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 10:59
1163
Originally Posted by chuckChuck
I will leave it up to University of Minnesota and the Journal of the American College of Cardiology to come to their conclusions based on the published study. But the article clearly said COVID vaccine tied to fewer heart attacks, strokes among previously infected
The journal is locked and even it it wasn't I would leave it up to experts to analyse the results and to come to their own conclusions. That's why there is peer review and professionals doing this work.
Why would you not trust them? Especially if there is no other credible evidence from multiple sources that vaccines raise the risk of heart attacks and strokes?
If there is credible evidence, why do the antivaxers keep talking only about the people they know who died, had a heart attack or stroke after vaccination as proof?
A small group of people you know is not credible evidence. Its speculation and highly unreliable except in the coffee shop where its taken as the truth by a handful of the antivaxer sheep.
That was a very long-winded way of saying you have no idea what the study actually measured, what the results tell us, and no inclination to find out for yourself.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 11:04
1164
Here is another article about the same study. It clears up some of the confusion. But please tell us if you think its not credible or is perhaps wrong. Or not an important conclusion?
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20230220/COVID-19-vaccination-associated-with-fewer-heart-attacks-strokes-and-other-cardiovascular-issues.aspx
COVID-19 vaccination associated with fewer heart attacks, strokes, and other cardiovascular issues
Reviewed by Emily Henderson, B.Sc.Feb 20 2023
Analyzing the most extensive datasets in the United States, researchers from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai have revealed that vaccination against COVID-19 is associated with fewer heart attacks, strokes, and other cardiovascular issues among people who were infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.
Study: Impact of Vaccination on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients With COVID-19 Infection. Image Credit: Kateryna Kon / Shutterstock
The research letter, "Impact of Vaccination on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients with COVID-19 Infection," was published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology on February 20.
In addition, the research will be presented in a poster session in New Orleans, LA, at the American College of Cardiology's 72nd Annual Scientific Session Together With World Heart Federation's World Congress of Cardiology:
Poster Session
Title – Prevention and Health Promotion: Population Science
Date/Time – March 5, 2023, 9:30 am to 10:30 am *Central Time*
Location – Poster Hall, Hall F
It is the first study to examine both full and partial vaccination and the link to major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in the United States, confirming similar analyses performed previously using the Korean COVID-19 registry. Researchers used the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) database, the largest national comprehensive database on COVID-19. Since its inception in 2020, the N3C has continuously collected and harmonized data from electronic health records of institutions nationwide. Included in this study were 1,934,294 patients, 217,843 of whom received mRNA vaccine formulations by Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna or viral vector technology by Johnson & Johnson. Cox proportional hazards, a statistical technique, was implemented to assess vaccination association with MACE.
We sought to clarify the impact of previous vaccination on cardiovascular events among people who develop COVID-19 and found that, particularly among those with comorbidities, such as previous MACE, type 2 diabetes, high cholesterol, liver disease, and obesity, there is an association with a lower risk of complications. While we cannot attribute causality, it is supportive evidence that vaccination may have beneficial effects on a variety of post-COVID-19 complications."
Girish N. Nadkarni, MD, MPH, Senior Author, Irene and Dr. Arthur M. Fishberg Professor of Medicine at Icahn Mount Sinai, Director of The Charles Bronfman Institute of Personalized Medicine, and System Chief, Division of Data Driven and Digital Medicine (D3M), Department of Medicine
"To our surprise, even partial vaccination was associated with lower risk of adverse cardiovascular events," said first study author Joy Jiang, an MD/Ph.D. candidate in the lab of Dr. Nadkarni. "Given the magnitude of SARS-CoV-2 infection worldwide, we hope our findings could help improve vaccination rates, especially in individuals with coexisting conditions."
Further work will be necessary to elucidate the mechanisms involved from an immunological perspective and clarify the role of SARS-CoV-2 subtypes and reinfections in their relationship to the risk of MACE.
Source:
The Mount Sinai Hospital / Mount Sinai School of Medicine
Journal reference:
Jiang J, Chan L, Kauffman J, et al. Impact of Vaccination on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients With COVID-19 Infection. J Am Coll Cardiol. null2023, 0 (0) .https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.12.006
Last edited by chuckChuck; Mar 20, 2023 at 11:49.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 13:51
1165
How many young hockey players died in the last couple years?
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 15:06
1166
Let chuck have as much gene modification as he likes, the vast majority arent that stupid.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 16:36
1167
"1,934,294 patients, 217,843 of whom received mRNA vaccine formulations by Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna or viral vector technology by Johnson & Johnson. "
SO 11% were vaxed...89% unvaxed. I thought 80+% of population are SHOT to hell?
And lump them all together? This says SHIT!
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2023 | 07:31
1168
Here is what some of the latest research said about the risk of heart attacks and strokes:
"Analyzing the most extensive datasets in the United States, researchers from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai have revealed that vaccination against COVID-19 is associated with fewer heart attacks, strokes, and other cardiovascular issues among people who were infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19."
Let us know when you find any credible evidence that vaccines cause more heart attacks and strokes.
Your opinions and speculation don't count!
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2023 | 08:14
1170
A lame and stupid response That's all you got? Give up. Nobody is listening.
Peer review and similar results from a wider range of similar studies done by different scientists in different countries lays waste to the idea that all science outcomes are biased by the funder.
More likely in your case only the science you disagree with is biased! LOL
Last edited by chuckChuck; Mar 21, 2023 at 08:31.
|
|
