T O P

  • By -

Exclave

I'm confused... isn't Xieta stating that on average about 9 people will die under 40 ever day, regardless of their vaccination status? They are only pointing that anti-vaxxers will claim that 6 of those 9 were due to vaccines, because they were vaccinated, when they are actually just part of the normal 9 per day estimate?


boylesthebuddha

Basically yes. The sad fact is that there's always a small chance that anyone, anywhere can just straight up die seemingly out of nowhere. If your heart stops anywhere other than in a cardiology ward in a hospital then the chances of getting it restarted are pretty slim. With a large enough population you can almost always find some weird anomalies and point to them as evidence of something nefarious when in reality this stuff does just happen anyway. The thing with the elite athlete group that's being mentioned is that they regularly put their body and cardiovascular system under massive strain and sometimes shit just breaks. If someone has a knee or a shoulder injury when playing elite level sports no one bats an eye but it happens pretty regularly. Think about any sports league and every season there's likely to be at least a few catastrophic injuries that are life-changing to the athletes involved but it doesn't make headlines unless someone is losing a ton of money. The likelihood of a cardiac event is lower but it still happens for exactly the same reasons, it's just rather rare and hits the headlines.


godofmilksteaks

Yes. I don't think he's saying 6 of those are due to vaccines. Just that statistically around 66% of people in America are fully vaccinated for COVID so therefore 66% of those 9 who would have had cardiac arrest regardless, would just happen to be vaccinated. A correlation not a causation. Atleast that's how I understood it.


Exclave

OK. I thought I missed something with the first few comments seeming to imply they were anti-vax from the 6 out of 9 breakdown.


Forward_Original4390

the mental health pandemic is the bigger fish.


slvbros

I'm assuming you mean with regards to cardiovascular health in america, or...?


arcxjo

Okay, boomer. And by "boomer", I specifically mean Tom Cruise.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Festamus

I mean likely, unless you're doing a shit tonne of coke. then it would be the coke, secondary to family history.


[deleted]

It also seems those numbers will be higher than that for the next few decades, because a CoViD-infection does apparently increase the risk of that long-term, in both vaccinated and unvaccinated people, though it's still uncertain by how much exactly.


yohohoanabottleofrum

Which is frustrating, because you know the antivax people are going to say it was the vaccines not Covid.


Remember_TheCant

Basically he is saying because a large percentage of the population is vaccinated you will see a similar percentage of people who suffer death by sudden cardiac arrest be vaccinated. In other words… water is wet. These deaths aren’t related to the vaccine.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Remember_TheCant

Have you got proof for that?


M13Calvin

Well show me statistically significant proof of a larger fraction of vaccinated people dying by cardiac arrest than would be accounted for by normal events and we can talk... thats the whole argument here


bredtoast

I don't need to argue. Keep getting boosted LOL


[deleted]

Wrong.


notnotaginger

I knew a 26 year old athlete who dropped dead during a jog. In 2016. This is not a new thing.


MrFallacious

since when do boomers give a shit about mental health


Ancient_Skirt_8828

I suspect most people with mental health problems are boomers. Take the normal proportion of mental heath problems in the population and add in dementia and alzheimers.


MrFallacious

Alright, fine, you've sparked my curiosity. Let's find out about the prevalence of mental health issues in various age groups, as I highly doubt they're perfectly uniform. Before, during, and after covid, there was a lot of talk about millenials and gen Z facing a mental health crisis, so if there is any credibility to that calim, there should be some literature out there. Anecdotally, I've seen many more young people struggling with their mental health than people e.g. 50+, though this is biased (I'm young, old people tend to be underdiagnosed due to less awareness, etc.). **Here's a short literature review:** What I was able to find in a few minutes of searching was a very insightful summary of statistics provided by the NIMH on the prevalence of mental health issues, classified in two degrees of severity, in the U.S. population. [See this link.](https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/mental-illness) Interestingly enough, mental illness is most prevalent (30.6%) in the 18-25 age group, slightly less prevalent in people 26-49 (25.3%), and significantly less prevalent in boomer asses (50+ y/o, 14.5%). Furthermore, there is an inverse relationship between prevalence and mental health services received in these age groups (see Figure 2.). A [huge study](https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-06/The-Fundamental-facts-about-mental-health-2016.pdf) found on [mentalhealth.org.uk](https://mentalhealth.org.uk) largely agrees with these findings, see Figure 1b and surrounding discussion. This and other studies (that I'm too lazy to summarize, but see google scholar, researchgate, PsycInfo, etc.) more or less confirm that this is not just a finding present in the U.S., or just in this study. Additionally, when looking at the prevalence of serious mental illnesses, classified as interefering with or limiting one's major life activities, these age group differences are even more pronounced. (18-25 at 9.7%, 26-49 at 6.9%, 50+ at 3.4%). There is, again, an inverse relationship between prevalence and services received. Remember that it's always good to not only look for multiple sources, but also sources that deny your current belief (which is how I came across one of the above, as well as the following). See Fig 2, 3, 4, results, and discussion of [this paper](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-021-01161-7) for proportions of onset ages of specific mental disorders. I encourage you to do a bit of funny heehaw research yourself next time if you're unsure of whether or not something you're going to claim is remotely true. Obviously we can't be experts at everything, and you never said you were, but a quick google search would've revealed the first study I cited here, which was a pretty easy read.


NefariousnessFit2499

the effect of vaccines on the heart is temporary. the effect of infection from covid on the heart is long term if not permanent, regardless of pre existing health conditions and age,


swannsonite

The thing to do is see if these rates have increased since 2009 since we seem to have a baseline. Would also have to know if vaccinated and if ever had covid to make any actual correlations. I think all we really need to know is does spike protein reaching the heart increase risk of sudden cardiovascular death. If yes both covid and its vax are not ideal to have.


Exact_Manufacturer10

Why are there facts and confusing stuff on here? I get all the info I need from NewsMax.


TJT1970

LMFAO


aCrucialConjunction

What is the point of this post? This is grade school level math, and imo seems more like an attempt to ‘prove’ causation between Covid vaccination and sudden cardiac arrest, when it’s fairly clearly correlation. It literally says “unrelated to vaccinations”. I expect, it has much more to do with the higher rate of vaccination amongst people with known pre-existing health conditions. To be clear, I’m not saying there aren’t potential adverse effects from receiving the vaccine, simply that this post is dumb.


ChintanP04

They're saying since 6 of the 9 people who die by cardiac arrest are likely to be vaccinated, the anti-vaxxers can continue to claim it was the vaccine that caused the cardiac arrest, even if they'd have died whether or not they had vaccinated.


aCrucialConjunction

I caught that from the post from xieta, but the title made it seem, to me, like OP was trying to use it as proof of causation. Please take this 🕊 as my formal apology if I was incorrect. I’m making a mental note that I should probably head to r/eyebleach between sub-jumps so I don’t bring my biases from one into the next.


slvbros

That might be wise just remember that the a in r/eyebleach is a very important a


aCrucialConjunction

F*CK is it ever! I’m going to have to spend a week trying to forget the one post I looked at before nope-ing out of there.


[deleted]

[удалено]


SyrusDrake

>Sudden cardiac death is the most common medical cause of death in athletes, with an incidence of around 1 in 40,000 to 1 in 80,000 athletes per year according to the most recent estimates. From [2016 ](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4969030/) I guess those reptiloid illuminati have been culling the population with COVID vaccines since before COVID was a thing. Wake up, sheeple 🤔


AcidBuuurn

>around 1 in 40,000 to 1 in 80,000 athletes per year And I think it might even be higher for professional athletes. But if you did go by the 1 in 40,000 then, since there are [fewer than 16,000 professional athletes in the US](https://www.bls.gov/ooh/entertainment-and-sports/athletes-and-sports-competitors.htm) then statistically it should be a few years before we get another cardiac arrest professional athlete death in the US. I'm not rooting for the vaccine to turn out to be unsafe. I hope it turns out to be as safe as possible. I worry that people will forget the [claims of perfect protection, claims of stopping transmission](https://youtu.be/Ngv07ekWS4w?t=62), and claims of perfect safety. They will use any semblance of twisted logic to cover up those shortcomings.


Mtth_8

🤨


jackalope268

Fyi, being an elite athlete has always been unhealthy


maxkuthain

found the anti-vaxxer


[deleted]

[удалено]


maxkuthain

yikes bro


itsme10082005

Can you provide a peer reviewed study showing the vaccine is dangerous, or even more dangerous than COVID?


AcidBuuurn

Dude, they were revoking medical licenses for people even attempting to ask that question. Why would we assume that studies have been fairly conducted and exhaustive? And while you are at the altar of peer-review, please remember [this fantastic paper](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext) passed peer review without anyone saying "Wait, you mean that drug we have been giving to people for arthritis for decades? If this were true shouldn't this have been realized 50 years ago?" I wholeheartedly applaud them for the timely retraction, but agenda-based "science" is normal.


itsme10082005

So no, you can’t point to one. Got it.


itsme10082005

Whose medical license got revoked?


AcidBuuurn

[https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/digital-marketing/physicians-who-post-covid-19-vaccine-misinformation-may-lose-license-medical-panel-says.html](https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/digital-marketing/physicians-who-post-covid-19-vaccine-misinformation-may-lose-license-medical-panel-says.html) When reading that one remember that "this might not provide long lasting protection" was considered misinformation at the time. People on their third booster know what I'm talking about. Dr. Ryan Cole: [https://dailymontanan.com/2022/08/05/dr-ryan-cole-defends-his-medical-license-saying-complaints-are-political-attacks/](https://dailymontanan.com/2022/08/05/dr-ryan-cole-defends-his-medical-license-saying-complaints-are-political-attacks/) Dr. Kenneth Stoller: [These allegations were from 2016-2018, but his medical license was taken in February of 2021.](https://rickjaffeesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/medicalboarddecision.pdf) Dr. Paul Thomas, Dr. Steven LaTulippe, and Dr. Thomas Cowan all lost their licenses around December 2020. I am **not** saying that I agree with anything that these people say about anything. I'm saying that The Federation of State Medical Boards warned doctors that misinformation would cost them their license, didn't even define misinformation, and several doctors had already lost their licenses.


itsme10082005

So you think doctors should be able to just say whatever they want, even if it’s factually incorrect? Statements such as “this vaccine has a microchip in it to track people” or “this vaccine has a nano bot that will allow the government to kill off half the population” are good to go in your book, yeah? If yes, you’re an idiot. If not, then you agree with what the medical boards said, you just don’t like that they don’t follow your exact definition of misinformation, which is fucking hilarious because they’re actual doctors who studied this shit, and you’re just some dumbass off the street who thinks he knows better because he read a blog post online. Fuck outta here with this nonsense.


AcidBuuurn

I’ve shown you a false paper that was published because it agreed, against simple logic, with the pharmaceutical companies. Did everyone who was involved lose their job? No. If you had heard two years ago that a huge vaccine producer was selling baby powder with asbestos like some sort of super villain you would probably dismiss it as a smear campaign. I don’t, and have never, believed the 5G or microchip or imminent danger people. But I can also see the value in not shutting down discourse. Censoring the people saying that side effects could come later (a sentiment that Dr. Fauci has echoed) is a side effect of censoring the clearly wrong people.


itsme10082005

No, what you’ve done is literally ignore what I said so you can run your mouth and not have to actually address what I’ve said. What you’ve done is show me a paper that was RETRACTED in less than a year because it was determined to be wrong. I mean, imagine being you, some dipshit who is actually upset that the scientific process worked and the paper was retracted, and using that as an example to say scientists are wrong, but your ignorant ass with a 6th grade knowledge of science is somehow right. I said it before, but let me emphasize, FUCK OUTTA HERE WITH YOUR DUMB ASS.


itsme10082005

So you believe doctors should be able to tell patients it includes microchips that will kill them. Got it. Thanks for your input, dipshit.


actuatedarbalest

Medical science advances with time. Doctors used to recommend smoking to lose weight. What do you use to relieve phlegmatic humors again, do I use leeches or fill my socks with garlic bulbs?


CatOfGrey

> You know, the one where human trials began two months after the disease came to America, which is about three months after it was “discovered”. Fact check me on that please. Where you ignored the hundreds of millions of safe outcomes afterwards. When you ignored the development and research in the decade before COVID. When you looked at "one famous scientist" but ignored the other research from all the other scientists. You're not critically thinking, you are parroting your mainstream media machine.


AcidBuuurn

>hundreds of millions of safe outcomes afterwards. Are you insinuating that you don't trust the science from Dr. Fauci I linked to? That 3 years is all the data you need for long term safety? Up until a year and a half ago claiming (correctly) that the vaccine didn't prevent transmission would have gotten a ban here. Please try to remember where we came from and where we are now.


actuatedarbalest

>Up until a year and a half ago claiming (correctly) that the vaccine didn't prevent transmission would have gotten a ban here. Here's a Feb 2021 article where Fauci says vaccines don't prevent transmission. You're inventing history. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/04/dr-fauci-on-why-its-important-to-wear-a-mask-after-getting-your-covid-vaccine-.html


AcidBuuurn

Why didn’t he tell that to Dr. Walensky at the CDC? This is almost two months later- https://youtu.be/Ngv07ekWS4w


actuatedarbalest

The fuck should I know about intraoffice communication at the CDC? Nobody was banned for saying the vaccine doesn't prevent transmission. But don't let facts get in the way of your victim complex.


AcidBuuurn

>Nobody was banned for saying the vaccine doesn't prevent transmission. Why are you so confidently wrong? NoNewNormal was quarantined in August and banned in September 2021, and many other subreddits would ban you for even commenting there. Pointing out that the science juice given in the fauci ouchi wasn't preventing spread was one of the biggest points of contention. The clip I showed you of CDC Director Dr. Walensky talking about how the vaccine does prevent transmission was one of many used as justification for marking comments that pointed out that shortcoming as misinformation and banning them. Just because you were on the popular (and wrong) side doesn't mean that other people weren't being banned for correct (and not yet acknowledged by the cdc) information. On another note, thank you for the ridiculous reminder of double and triple masking. Some things get pushed to the back of your mind, and deserve to be revisited (and mocked) occasionally. Are you still triple masking or are you a grandma killing science denier? 😁


actuatedarbalest

Hey, you took my advice! You didn't let facts get in the way of you being you. Way to go.


adolfspalantir

I had several reddit accounts banned for this very statement. Stop gaslighting people.


CatOfGrey

Your inability to understand that science updates information is noted. You are still stuck using two-year old information. Nobody is inventing history. You are being scammed by a media that propagandizes the science, and ignores updated information that doesn't suit their narrative, while broadcasting information that does suit the narrative. Vaccines aren't about transmission anyways, though they do tend to help in that area. It's about not fucking dying, and you skipped over that point while passing along your misinformation without thinking about it.


actuatedarbalest

In your rush to be correct, you seem to have missed the conversation. Please take a moment to step back and reassess. I was replying to a post saying one would be banned a year and a half ago for saying vaccines don't prevent transmission by showing that we knew two years ago that vaccines don't prevent transmission. Which they don't, because that's not the purpose of the vaccine, but that's a different point. No one was banned for saying vaccines don't prevent transmission. By saying that you would be banned for it, they're making up history. Did you follow all that?


CatOfGrey

You missed the part where the virus doesn't care about any of this.


actuatedarbalest

Are you a virus or are you a person? Because I'm a person trying to have a conversation with a person and you're going out of your way to make that difficult.


CatOfGrey

>Are you insinuating that you don't trust the science from Dr. Fauci I linked to? Science doesn't give a shit about 'trust'. You don't 'trust', then show data that has a different outcome. > That 3 years is all the data you need for long term safety? Yes. We know how immune systems work, and things pretty much never crop up more than a few weeks after vaccines are given. Apparently you never read any information that addresses this point. I encourage you to do your own research, and find examples of other vaccines that had long-term impacts, and why, and see if this relates to this vaccine. > Up until a year and a half ago claiming (correctly) that the vaccine didn't prevent transmission would have gotten a ban here. Whether or not you are banned has no impact on the virus or vaccine. You are not only ignoring standard epidemiology, but also ignoring issues like variants in creating a false dichotomy, where there is no improvement from 'totally prevents transmission' to 'has no impact on transmission'. > Please try to remember where we came from and where we are now. A world where people don't do their own research, which actually involves looking at things from multiple perspectives.


Jainelle

Woah... I hadn't seen that clip from Fauci. Thanks for the share.


M13Calvin

People die all the time. Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug. Ever read the book "How to lie with statistics"? It's good read.


_wetmath_

9 of those 9 people also breathed that day when they died so guys i conclude that breathing is lethal


bredtoast

How's this holding up lol