Started By
Message

re: MIT peer reviewed covid vaccine study..."significant heart problems"

Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:07 pm to
Posted by WestCoastAg
Member since Oct 2012
145254 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:07 pm to
so we trust science now?
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
95925 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:07 pm to
Also let’s break the numbers down

That’s 25/100 people calling for heart related issues, to 30/100(just giving example on the 25% increase)

Now, does that sound all that different? Is that even really a noticeable uptick? You see how numbers, phrasing, etc can be used to manipulate? It’s the same thing lefties did with covid

“COVID DOUBLES BREATHING DEATHS IN CHILDREN”

From 1/100,000,000 to 2/100,000,000

This post was edited on 5/5/22 at 12:09 pm
Posted by blackinthesaddle
Alabama
Member since Jan 2013
1732 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:09 pm to
The results highlight a statistically significant increase of over 25% in both CA (25.7%, P?<?0.05) and ACS (26.0%, P?<?0.001) calls for patients of ages 16–39 during January–May 2021, compared to the same period in 2020. Interestingly, for CA, there is no statistically significant difference in the respective call volume across the full year (January–December) from 2019 to 2020 (relative decrease of?-?2.4% [P?=?0.740]), prior to the vaccination rollout and third COVID-19 wave in this age group. Similarly, for ACS, the increase across the full year from 2019 and 2020 (significant relative increase of 15.8% [P?<?0.001]) was followed by an even a larger increase in the January to May period from 2020 to 2021 (significant relative increase of 26.0% [P?<?0.001]), which was during the third COVID-19 wave and vaccination rollout. Both genders in the 16–39 age group experienced increases in CA and ACS calls from 2020 to 2021 for January–May. Among males, CA calls increased by 25.0% (P?=?0.073) and ACS calls increased significantly by 21.3% (P?<?0.01). Among females, CA calls increased by 31.4% (P?=?0.224) and ACS calls instead significantly by 40.8% (P?<?0.01).
Posted by blackinthesaddle
Alabama
Member since Jan 2013
1732 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:10 pm to
Supplemental Table 1 shows the year-to-year percent of CA patients who died on scene (i.e., prior to hospital arrival) for the same time periods. Among the 16–39 age group, the percent of CA patients that died prior to hospital arrival increased significantly from 2019 to 2020 during the full year (52.8–60.5%; P?<?0.001). This percent remained elevated during January–May of 2021 and no significant differences were found between same period in 2020 (65.1–61.3% P?=?0.460). Similarly, Supplemental Table 2 shows that in the 16–39 age group, resuscitation (i.e., patient received defibrillation or cardiopulmonary resuscitation delivery) rates for CA calls increased from 2019 to 2020 during the full year (41.5–54.4%; P?<?0.001). These higher rates of resuscitation persisted during January–May 2021, with no significant difference compared to the same period in 2020 (54.6–53.9%; P?=?0.900).
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
95925 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:13 pm to
So during the covid wave only, calls increased 16%

During the covid and vaccine wave, calls increased 25%

Wouldn’t that lease to the assumption covid accounted for a 16% increase in heart related issues and the vaccine 9%?

Posted by NoSaint
Member since Jun 2011
11307 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:13 pm to
quote:

I'll wait for the OT nurses to tell us its common for world class athletes to have heart attacks.


So a association with a 25% increase… and you are arguing it’s essentially zero at the baseline and now a much larger number?
Posted by LegendInMyMind
Member since Apr 2019
54834 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:15 pm to
quote:

MIT peer reviewed covid vaccine study

"I'm supposed to believe a study about a vaccine from MIT....a technical school? What the hell do they know about a vaccine? Huh? They're just a bunch of engineers and such!"



/sarcasm
Posted by LegendInMyMind
Member since Apr 2019
54834 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:16 pm to
quote:

I'm begining to wonder if the earth really is flat...

Of course it is.
Posted by blackinthesaddle
Alabama
Member since Jan 2013
1732 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:16 pm to
quote:

So during the covid wave only, calls increased 16%

During the covid and vaccine wave, calls increased 25%

Wouldn’t that lease to the assumption covid accounted for a 16% increase in heart related issues and the vaccine 9%?


The % increase related to vaccination would be directly tied to number of people vaccinated during the time period, as 16% and 25% are relative to the entire population.

I think the takeaway from the data is that the vaccine does nothing to reduce deaths and hospitalizations, but has a significant risk to heart health.
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
95925 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:17 pm to
quote:

I think the takeaway from the data is that the vaccine does nothing to reduce deaths and hospitalizations, but has a significant risk to heart health
How in the world do you take that away from the study?
This post was edited on 5/5/22 at 12:20 pm
Posted by Bonkers119
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2015
10198 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:17 pm to
quote:

It is important to note the main limitation of this study, which is that it relies on aggregated data that do not include specific information regarding the affected patients, including hospital outcomes, underlying comorbidities as well as vaccination and COVID-19 positive status.


Basically, this study lacks the necessary and important information to really determine if the increases were caused by the vaccines or just from prior covid-19 infections or underlying issues.

quote:

Therefore, it is likely that the observed changes in incidence can primarily be attributed to CAs of cardiac etiology.


Meaning most of the increases in calls was just from abnormalities or dysfunctions of the heart. Not from the vaccine at all really.

Nice try though.

Posted by blackinthesaddle
Alabama
Member since Jan 2013
1732 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:22 pm to
quote:

How in the world do you take that away from the study?


The lack of change in call volume for deaths, resuscitations, and hospitalization from the Covid only period to the Covid + vaccination period.
Posted by blackinthesaddle
Alabama
Member since Jan 2013
1732 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:24 pm to
quote:

quote:
It is important to note the main limitation of this study, which is that it relies on aggregated data that do not include specific information regarding the affected patients, including hospital outcomes, underlying comorbidities as well as vaccination and COVID-19 positive status.


Basically, this study lacks the necessary and important information to really determine if the increases were caused by the vaccines or just from prior covid-19 infections or underlying issues.

quote:
Therefore, it is likely that the observed changes in incidence can primarily be attributed to CAs of cardiac etiology.


Meaning most of the increases in calls was just from abnormalities or dysfunctions of the heart. Not from the vaccine at all really.

Nice try though.



I think you're missing that the initial two waves of a virus are going to take out the majority of at-risk populations and the vaccination period should have had lower incident rates.
Posted by Galactic Inquisitor
An Incredibly Distant Star
Member since Dec 2013
15292 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:25 pm to
quote:

"While not establishing causal relationships"
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
95925 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:26 pm to
quote:

The lack of change in call volume for deaths, resuscitations, and hospitalization from the Covid only period to the Covid + vaccination period.
Dude. That’s just for heart related calls to EMS. The study didn’t look at reduction in hospitalizations and deaths as it relates to covid at all
Posted by blackinthesaddle
Alabama
Member since Jan 2013
1732 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:27 pm to
quote:

Dude. That’s just for heart related calls to EMS. The study didn’t look at reduction in hospitalizations and deaths as it relates to covid at all


It didn't but the two will be related on the back end. Y
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
95925 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:29 pm to
quote:

It didn't but the two will be related on the back end. Y
Man, the main cause of death from covid isnt heart related sudden death

This study didn’t track hospitalizations of any kind besides that for heart related incidents

To try and conclude in anyway this study even hints at the efficacy of the vaccine is a joke. It has absolutely nothing to do with the actual results of the vaccine in fighting covid. It doesn’t even try to pretend to be in that arena either
This post was edited on 5/5/22 at 12:31 pm
Posted by blackinthesaddle
Alabama
Member since Jan 2013
1732 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:40 pm to
quote:

To try and conclude in anyway this study even hints at the efficacy of the vaccine is a joke.


Disagree. You would expect a reduction in call volume for the reported incidents if the vaccine efficacy was high.

If you peg the efficacy on deaths only, then yes, this study does not add any information.
Posted by Boo Krewe
Member since Apr 2015
9810 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:41 pm to
I have had significant pains in chest . If I die a virgin I atleast hope to go to St Louis before I pass
Posted by eatpie
Kentucky
Member since Aug 2018
1149 posts
Posted on 5/5/22 at 12:42 pm to
quote:

Also, nowhere in the study does it say “significant heart problems.”


What other kind of heart problems are there exactly?

That's like a "significant decapitation".
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram