Its a database scan, it is not a study, and it found that the severe myocarditis risk following Covid infection was negligible, with only around one excess event per 100,000 within 28 days of infection and a confidence interval that included zero!! Lol
For some reason the study did not look at the risk outside the 28-day post-vaccination window, so we don’t know whether the elevated risk continues past that period.
The risk estimates are adjusted estimates based on modelling that takes into account “potential” confounding factors: sex, age group, health care worker status, nursing home resident and certain listed comorbidities. The unadjusted risk estimates are hidden. And we do not know how accurate the adjustments are. It’s not clear why it was necessary to use flawed modelling to adjust for these factors rather than, say, simply providing results stratified by sex and age and with health care workers, nursing home residents and people with comorbidities excluded, at least from some of the results. Flawed modelled adjustments hide data, especially when unadjusted estimates aren’t provided. This study didn’t provide stratified findings, which are always clearer**.
Among children and males aged 16 to 24 years, the heart disease risk was 13-fold greater during the week after a second dose of Pfizer and 38-fold greater after a second dose of Moderna. For a second dose of Moderna where the first dose was Pfizer the risk was 120-fold greater for heart disease.
Maybe it says that, maybe it doesn't. Can't tell from your post because you have trouble finding quotes to support your opinions.
I can find quotes from that study that say you should get vaccinated though, and I'll just repeat them here for the benefit of any poor soul who has nothing better to do than watch us type at each other...
"The risk of myocarditis following the mRNA vaccines has been evaluated by the US Food and Drug Administration, which concluded that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks and fully authorized the use of mRNA-1273 in persons 18 years or older and BNT162b2 in persons 16 years or older. In addition, BNT162b2 is authorized for emergency use in children 5 years or older.20,21 The European Medicines Agency concluded that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks and approved mRNA-1273 for use in persons 12 years or older and BNT162b2 for those 5 years or older.22,23 In addition, a comment published by the American College of Cardiology24 evaluated vaccine-associated myocarditis risk and concluded that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks. As of January 2022, there have been nearly 5.8 million deaths associated with COVID-19 worldwide since the start of the pandemic.25 All currently available SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines are highly effective against severe COVID-19 and provide some protection against transmission and infection."
Its a database scan, it is not a study, and it found that the severe myocarditis risk following Covid infection was negligible, with only around one excess event per 100,000 within 28 days of infection and a confidence interval that included zero!! Lol
For some reason the study did not look at the risk outside the 28-day post-vaccination window, so we don’t know whether the elevated risk continues past that period.
The risk estimates are adjusted estimates based on modelling that takes into account “potential” confounding factors: sex, age group, health care worker status, nursing home resident and certain listed comorbidities. The unadjusted risk estimates are hidden. And we do not know how accurate the adjustments are. It’s not clear why it was necessary to use flawed modelling to adjust for these factors rather than, say, simply providing results stratified by sex and age and with health care workers, nursing home residents and people with comorbidities excluded, at least from some of the results. Flawed modelled adjustments hide data, especially when unadjusted estimates aren’t provided. This study didn’t provide stratified findings, which are always clearer**.
Among children and males aged 16 to 24 years, the heart disease risk was 13-fold greater during the week after a second dose of Pfizer and 38-fold greater after a second dose of Moderna. For a second dose of Moderna where the first dose was Pfizer the risk was 120-fold greater for heart disease.
Maybe it says that, maybe it doesn't. Can't tell from your post because you have trouble finding quotes to support your opinions.
I can find quotes from that study that say you should get vaccinated though, and I'll just repeat them here for the benefit of any poor soul who has nothing better to do than watch us type at each other...
"The risk of myocarditis following the mRNA vaccines has been evaluated by the US Food and Drug Administration, which concluded that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks and fully authorized the use of mRNA-1273 in persons 18 years or older and BNT162b2 in persons 16 years or older. In addition, BNT162b2 is authorized for emergency use in children 5 years or older.20,21 The European Medicines Agency concluded that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks and approved mRNA-1273 for use in persons 12 years or older and BNT162b2 for those 5 years or older.22,23 In addition, a comment published by the American College of Cardiology24 evaluated vaccine-associated myocarditis risk and concluded that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks. As of January 2022, there have been nearly 5.8 million deaths associated with COVID-19 worldwide since the start of the pandemic.25 All currently available SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines are highly effective against severe COVID-19 and provide some protection against transmission and infection."