• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

The Dive's Covid Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
"In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that the risk of myocarditis is more than seven fold higher in persons who were infected with the SARS-CoV-2 than in those who received the vaccine. These findings support the continued use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines among all eligible persons per CDC and WHO recommendations."

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Myocarditis in SARS-CoV-2 infection vs. COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis - PubMed

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that the risk of myocarditis is more than seven fold higher in persons who were infected with the SARS-CoV-2 than in those who received the vaccine. These findings support the continued use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines among all eligible persons...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
 
Covid shots don't prevent infection. Get vaxxed, still catch covid. What are the risks of myocarditis in that situation? Why get vaxxed if it doesn't stop "higher risk" infection?
 
Last edited:
Las Veghost grower said:
Was myocarditis a issue with the original SARS ?
Click to expand...
Considering myocarditis is a symptom running the gamut of all recent viruses and historical ones, yes. Google whatever sars variant you want.

My brother in the Tao, myocarditis is the 2nd most dealdy complication from the common flu. Google it. If covid is less deadly than the flu, what does that say about myocarditis?

If you think myocarditis is some specific side effect of vaccine... well, you're grossly incorrect.
 
Yea I’m not buying unvaxxed are getting myocarditis as a higher rate, and definitely not 7x….who conducted the studies that conclusion was based off ?
 
nepalnt21 said:
"In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that the risk of myocarditis is more than seven fold higher in persons who were infected with the SARS-CoV-2 than in those who received the vaccine. These findings support the continued use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines among all eligible persons per CDC and WHO recommendations."

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Myocarditis in SARS-CoV-2 infection vs. COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis - PubMed

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that the risk of myocarditis is more than seven fold higher in persons who were infected with the SARS-CoV-2 than in those who received the vaccine. These findings support the continued use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines among all eligible persons...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Click to expand...


ok but first you have to catch covid.....right?


and who's the most likely to catch covid?

the vaccinated

so don't forget to factor that into your equation















:lolyoyo:
 
Conclusion: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that the risk of myocarditis is more than seven fold higher in persons who were infected with the SARS-CoV-2 than in those who received the vaccine. These findings support the continued use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines among all eligible persons per CDC and WHO recommendations.




so all they're saying is that if you catch covid, you're likelihood of myocarditis is higher than the likelihood of getting myocarditis from the vaccine



do you even read these studies before you post them, genius?
 
Mr. Krinkle said:
Conclusion: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that the risk of myocarditis is more than seven fold higher in persons who were infected with the SARS-CoV-2 than in those who received the vaccine. These findings support the continued use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines among all eligible persons per CDC and WHO recommendations.




so all they're saying is that if you catch covid, you're likelihood of myocarditis is higher than the likelihood of getting myocarditis from the vaccine



do you even read these studies before you post them, genius?
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same but I just assumed they ment unvaxxed infected, that’s why I’d like to see the studies they used to for this conclusion
 
Las Veghost grower said:
I was thinking the same but I just assumed they ment unvaxxed infected, that’s why I’d like to see the studies they used to for this conclusion
Click to expand...


that's not what they're comparing at all

it's the incidence of myocarditis from the vaccine compared to the incident of myocarditis from covid
 
That’s kinda the beauty of the whole thing tho , because the still is no real trial/study with a control over long period of time you really cant pin anything to the vaccine, almost like they thought this out or something
 
Last edited:
Xorkoth said:
Me too.
Click to expand...
I really can’t take “conclusions” from any site seriously anymore, I have to see how the study was conducted and who funded the study, taking shit like that at face value is dangerous these days, that’s just the unfortunate truth…but I know alot of people read those and think “well a scientist looked over the studies and came to that conclusion, they know better than me so I’ll just take it as the truth”
 
Yeah unfortunately that's true. The only way to really get a modicum of truth is to read the actual study... who funded it is important, as well as, obviously, reading their methods, sample size, and conclusions. And even the, you're accepting some level of trust, unless you happen to know enough about the subject to tell the trees from the forest in the words.

The average American probably doesn't have the ability to do a very good job at doing this, either, because our education is shit.
 
Xorkoth said:
Yeah unfortunately that's true. The only way to really get a modicum of truth is to read the actual study... who funded it is important, as well as, obviously, reading their methods, sample size, and conclusions. And even the, you're accepting some level of trust, unless you happen to know enough about the subject to tell the trees from the forest in the words.

The average American probably doesn't have the ability to do a very good job at doing this, either, because our education is shit.
Click to expand...
Yes, who funds the study is incredibly important. I think people think that when a company funds a study they just throw money at scientist and let them run wild, no, In most cases they fund a group to run THEIR tests that will likely give favorable results to the company funding the study…..this is fucking obvious shit but people hear the word scientist and it’s like the purest most infallible shit on the planet, I get so frustrated, honestly
 
not interested in your responses anymore, to be quite honest lvg...

i asked mr krinkle (or really anybody that isn't lvg)
 
nepalnt21 said:
not interested in your responses anymore, to be quite honest lvg...

i asked mr krinkle (or really anybody that isn't lvg)
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t want to see someone posting how ridiculous my post are either, so hit the block button and remain in your echo chamber, it’s gotten you this far
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i don't block people.

i love how i call out your bullshit and get my posts edited by the mods, you and the other antivaxxers directly insult me and crickets.

not that i care if you insult me, i just wanna be able to speak freely.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top