Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by m4l3x 1617 days ago
Can somebody verify, if this is antivax propaganda?
5 comments

In my opinion, it is not. I am vaccinated and I used this site to make sure my batch wasn't 'bad' before getting the injection.

Regardless of how you feel about vaccines, 95% of the bad reactions are linked to 5% of the batches. I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but on the surface at least that seems to suggest a manufacturing or quality control issue that may have been missed.

Actually taking a closer look it was a different URL I used, but the same software to make sure I was making the safest most informed decision I was able to. I think the author posted the code somewhere too and open sourced it (I don't have a link as I'm not affiliated, just happy someone built this).

So from my perspective this is an interesting data analysis project, an interesting observation on manufacturing processes, and enables people to more confidently get the jab if they are hesitant due to the known possibility of side effects that this can help mitigate.

Normally I lurk here but today I built an account to make this point, as I don't like to see the chilling effect that labeling anything that isn't all roses as antivax propaganda.

As a sidenote, it seems like the YC anti-abuse system could use a second look and possibly some tuning. Apparently a handful of accounts have been serial downvoting anything that even suggests vaccine manufacturing or preparation errors have occurred.
Only if you think drug recall notices are "antidrug propaganda."
I cannot, as I'm simply a laypeople. There are a ton of papers I can link to in the literature though!

> COVID-19 VACCINATION ADVERSE EVENTS PAPERS

Abbate, A., Gavin, J., Madanchi, N., Kim, C., Shah, P. R., Klein, K., . . . Danielides, S. (2021). Fulminant myocarditis and systemic hyperinflammation temporally associated with BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in two patients. Int J Cardiol, 340, 119-121. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2021.08.018. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34416319

Abu Mouch, S., Roguin, A., Hellou, E., Ishai, A., Shoshan, U., Mahamid, L., . . . Berar Yanay, N. (2021). Myocarditis following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. Vaccine, 39(29), 3790-3793. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.05.087. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34092429

Albert, E., Aurigemma, G., Saucedo, J., & Gerson, D. S. (2021). Myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccination. Radiol Case Rep, 16(8), 2142-2145. doi:10.1016/j.radcr.2021.05.033. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34025885

Aye, Y. N., Mai, A. S., Zhang, A., Lim, O. Z. H., Lin, N., Ng, C. H., . . . Chew, N. W. S. (2021). Acute Myocardial Infarction and Myocarditis following COVID-19 Vaccination. QJM. doi:10.1093/qjmed/hcab252. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34586408

Azir, M., Inman, B., Webb, J., & Tannenbaum, L. (2021). STEMI Mimic: Focal Myocarditis in an Adolescent Patient After mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine. J Emerg Med, 61(6), e129-e132. doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2021.09.017. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34756746

Bozkurt, B., Kamat, I., & Hotez, P. J. (2021). Myocarditis With COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines. Circulation, 144(6), 471-484. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056135. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34281357

And on... and on... https://www.rwmalonemd.com/references

Why, again, was this guy written off as a kook?

OP’s post history says: yes. Account created a few years ago, has never submitted to FP until yesterday, has new submitted more than a dozen links, half of which are extremely dubious vax/anti-vax articles, plus a bit of anti-evolution/creationist bullshit.

More and more we need a “report suspicious user” button. Too many throwaway and newbie accounts submitting disinformation and propaganda these days. HN is being gamed.

It certainly looks like it.

From what I can see VAERS data is just reports, you cannot state that the things reported are caused by the vaccine or just happened after getting the vaccine. Anyone can report to it, there is no checking or anything.

It's useful as input for further research, but making conclusions based on it seems just wrong.