The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Very scary to see what Ray Lawry commented about this situation. Said that he some incidents post vaccination. Never had any issues until he was vaccinated.

(01-09-2023 02:22 PM)757ODU Wrote:  Very scary to see what Ray Lawry commented about this situation. Said that he some incidents post vaccination. Never had any issues until he was vaccinated.

Oh please don't tell me you're falling into that baloney

(01-09-2023 02:42 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 02:22 PM)757ODU Wrote:  Very scary to see what Ray Lawry commented about this situation. Said that he some incidents post vaccination. Never had any issues until he was vaccinated.

Oh please don't tell me you're falling into that baloney

I am not, but it's impossible to rule it out with some of the things happening. Not sure we will really ever know the truth with that.

(01-09-2023 02:49 PM)757ODU Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 02:42 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 02:22 PM)757ODU Wrote:  Very scary to see what Ray Lawry commented about this situation. Said that he some incidents post vaccination. Never had any issues until he was vaccinated.

Oh please don't tell me you're falling into that baloney

I am not, but it's impossible to rule it out with some of the things happening. Not sure we will really ever know the truth with that.

I'm begging the moderator: let's close this down before it turns into a vax or anti-vax topic.

Y’all are free to discuss this here on the off topic board. But it doesn’t need to be in a game thread.

I really try not to be one who is a conspiracy theorist, but I do think the question has to be asked.

To put things into perspective, a 2006 scientific study conducted by the International Olympic Committee out of Lausanne, Switzerland, reported 1,101 sudden deaths among athletes under age 35 between 1966 and 2004. This number works out to be roughly 29 sudden deaths among athletes worldwide per year for 38 years: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17143117/

Fast-forward to the present day. According to data collected by Good Sciencing, in about 23 months, there have been over 1600 reports (and growing) of athletes suffering cardiac arrests. Of all of these, 1114 died. Sadly, that’s almost 70% of all reports. Comparing the Lausanne study against data collected between January 2021 and April 2022, the monthly average number of athlete deaths worldwide is 1,700% higher than the monthly average between 1966 and 2004. The number of deaths in one month alone — March 2022 — is three times higher than the previous annual average: https://goodsciencing.com/covid/athletes...ovid-shot/

You should be careful when comparing two different studies with different scopes.

(01-09-2023 11:31 PM)Chillie Willie Wrote:  You should be careful when comparing two different studies with different scopes.

No doubt. And I wasn't really comparing the two in a scientific way and certainly draw no conclusions from the two. But, I read this abstract that I think makes the point I was trying to make:

Quote:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA vaccine-induced myocarditis is a rare but well-documented complication in young males. The increased incidence of sudden death among athletes following vaccination has been reported and requires further investigation. Whether the risk of myocarditis, a known major cause of sudden death in young male athletes, also increases after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection is unknown.

Again, I’m not saying it is related, but can the scientific community at least consider the possibility?

https://sports.yahoo.com/air-force-offen...35303.html

(01-10-2023 08:01 AM)ODUCoach Wrote:  

(01-09-2023 11:31 PM)Chillie Willie Wrote:  You should be careful when comparing two different studies with different scopes.

No doubt. And I wasn't really comparing the two in a scientific way and certainly draw no conclusions from the two. But, I read this abstract that I think makes the point I was trying to make:

Quote:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA vaccine-induced myocarditis is a rare but well-documented complication in young males. The increased incidence of sudden death among athletes following vaccination has been reported and requires further investigation. Whether the risk of myocarditis, a known major cause of sudden death in young male athletes, also increases after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection is unknown.

Here is the link to the full study of that abstract, now that I've had the time to look through it.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9372380/

Quote:The epidemiological findings of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine-induced myocarditis, which is overrepresented in young males, and the preliminary reports of an increase in sudden deaths, particularly in athletes, while absent after COVID-19 infection present highly concordant molecular justifications for the physiological differences in anatomopathological findings and catecholamine activity, which is more intense in active young males. We may conclude that supported by biological, clinical, and epidemiological findings, enhanced catecholamine activity or a hypercatecholaminergic state provides sufficient evidence for the highly plausible catecholamine theory of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA or spike protein-mediated myocardial complications to be considered a strong hypothesis.

But, also important to note this:

Quote:It remains unclear whether the proteins transcribed by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA or SARS-CoV-2 spike protein or both trigger the hypercatecholaminergic state that eventually causes myocarditis after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. However, this should be explored in further study after the proposed hypothesis has been confirmed.

You know what else damages the heart? Getting COVID. Yet the anti-vaxxers force out misinformation claiming it’s a massive problem when 1 in 5000 young males are impacted by the vaccine. 1 in 5000. That’s a fraction of 1%.

(01-11-2023 12:37 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  You know what else damages the heart? Getting COVID. Yet the anti-vaxxers force out misinformation claiming it’s a massive problem when 1 in 5000 young males are impacted by the vaccine. 1 in 5000. That’s a fraction of 1%.

I'm going to ignore the 1/5000 piece, because we don't really know what the number is. But it is absolutely true that COVID can be a cause of myocarditis, as well. There is one meta-analysis that was done that says those with COVID had 7x the rate of myocarditis as the vaccine/no COVID group. I'm not arguing this, at all. However, as far as I can tell, that review was not stratified by age.

I'm not sure if you're actually interested in engaging in a real conversation on this. I am. I'm not out to score political points. I couldn't care less what Clay Travis or Tucker Carlson say. But, by nature, I'm a curious person. I'm genuinely curious as to whether or not we rushed young people, who weren't ever at tremendous risk from COVID, into vaccinations that negatively impacted their health, without properly assessing the risks.

To me, it's not a "Vaccines are safe vs. vaccines are dangerous" argument. That has become politicized and no one even bothers to listen to the other side.

However, it would seem to be that science requires us to figure out how safe are the vaccines. What are the risks of taking them? What are the risks of not taking them? What are the statistics for various groups? I don't think those are unfair questions to ask.

(01-11-2023 12:59 PM)ODUCoach Wrote:  

(01-11-2023 12:37 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  You know what else damages the heart? Getting COVID. Yet the anti-vaxxers force out misinformation claiming it’s a massive problem when 1 in 5000 young males are impacted by the vaccine. 1 in 5000. That’s a fraction of 1%.

I'm going to ignore the 1/5000 piece, because we don't really know what the number is. But it is absolutely true that COVID can be a cause of myocarditis, as well. There is one meta-analysis that was done that says those with COVID had 7x the rate of myocarditis as the vaccine/no COVID group. I'm not arguing this, at all. However, as far as I can tell, that review was not stratified by age.

I'm not sure if you're actually interested in engaging in a real conversation on this. I am. I'm not out to score political points. I couldn't care less what Clay Travis or Tucker Carlson say. But, by nature, I'm a curious person. I'm genuinely curious as to whether or not we rushed young people, who weren't ever at tremendous risk from COVID, into vaccinations that negatively impacted their health, without properly assessing the risks.

To me, it's not a "Vaccines are safe vs. vaccines are dangerous" argument. That has become politicized and no one even bothers to listen to the other side.

However, it would seem to be that science requires us to figure out how safe are the vaccines. What are the risks of taking them? What are the risks of not taking them? What are the statistics for various groups? I don't think those are unfair questions to ask.

That 1 in 5000 number comes from an NIH study.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9813456/

And doesnt that 7x number tell you what you need to know?

(01-11-2023 01:44 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  That 1 in 5000 number comes from an NIH study.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9813456/

And doesnt that 7x number tell you what you need to know?

Thanks for that. I would point out that the Taiwanese vaccine, while an mRNA vax, was not the Moderna/Pfizer ones used here. A RCT comparing the three would probably be useful, as the manufacturer could be a causative variable.

The 7x number doesn't necessarily tell me what I need to know. As far as I could tell, that was not age-stratified. It's clear that age was a major variable in the effects of COVID on the human body, so to properly consider the risk/reward of the vaccine, it would be important to know if that 7x number is higher across the board or if it was different by age groups.

*Let the record show. I am vaccinated, albeit with the J&J shot.*

(01-11-2023 01:59 PM)ODUCoach Wrote:  

(01-11-2023 01:44 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  That 1 in 5000 number comes from an NIH study.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9813456/

And doesnt that 7x number tell you what you need to know?

Thanks for that. I would point out that the Taiwanese vaccine, while an mRNA vax, was not the Moderna/Pfizer ones used here. A RCT comparing the three would probably be useful, as the manufacturer could be a causative variable.

The 7x number doesn't necessarily tell me what I need to know. As far as I could tell, that was not age-stratified. It's clear that age was a major variable in the effects of COVID on the human body, so to properly consider the risk/reward of the vaccine, it would be important to know if that 7x number is higher across the board or if it was different by age groups.

*Let the record show. I am vaccinated, albeit with the J&J shot.*

Israel’s ministry of health did a study on young males aged 16 to 19 and found the rate to be 1 in 15k after getting the third booster of the vaccine.

https://www.heart.org/en/news/2022/09/06...-young-men

And the CDC noted that “there have been around 1,000 reports of vaccine-related myocarditis or pericarditis in children under age 18, primarily young males”.

We have had over 260 million Americans receive the vaccine and only around 1000 juveniles have been impacted. 1000 in 260 mil is a lot less than 1 in 5k.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna55666

As for the overall populace, British Columbia compared the two vaccines and found both to be rather safe.
“For comparison, rates of myocarditis in the general population during the same period were 2.0 per million in vaccinees 18 to 39 years old and 2.2 per million in older adults.”

2 out of a million odds.

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/risk...id-vaccine

All these numbers confirm that it’s extremely rare for the vaccines to impact anyone let alone juvenile males.

(01-11-2023 03:00 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  Israel’s ministry of health did a study on young males aged 16 to 19 and found the rate to be 1 in 15k after getting the third booster of the vaccine.

https://www.heart.org/en/news/2022/09/06...-young-men

And the CDC noted that “there have been around 1,000 reports of vaccine-related myocarditis or pericarditis in children under age 18, primarily young males”.

We have had over 260 million Americans receive the vaccine and only around 1000 juveniles have been impacted. 1000 in 260 mil is a lot less than 1 in 5k.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna55666

As for the overall populace, British Columbia compared the two vaccines and found both to be rather safe.
“For comparison, rates of myocarditis in the general population during the same period were 2.0 per million in vaccinees 18 to 39 years old and 2.2 per million in older adults.”

2 out of a million odds.

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/risk...id-vaccine

All these numbers confirm that it’s extremely rare for the vaccines to impact anyone let alone juvenile males.

Ok, a couple of things. The Israel study: 1/15000 among teen boys, 1/94000 among teen girls. I wish that kind of information would be publicized, rather than just "get your kids vaccinated, there is no danger." I'm not sure I want to take a 1/15000 chance on my son, considering I think his chances of serious COVID issues are less than that (and that's assuming the vax would actually prevent COVID).

I'm not sure what you're saying in your 2nd point. Total population has nothing to do with the rate of juvenile heart problems. 1/5000 is probably about right, and it might even be closer to that 1/15000 number.

Here's the thing, again. I'm not interested in arguing whether or not the vaccines are safe. That's not really the question. The question is, how safe are they? What are the risks? What are the risks associated with not getting the vaccine? Does the risk depend on the vaccine manufacturer?

I think all of these are fair questions to ask. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that even daring to ask the questions, however, instantly get labeled as "anti-vax" and reduces our ability to have a true scientific discussion.

(01-11-2023 04:00 PM)ODUCoach Wrote:  

(01-11-2023 03:00 PM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  Israel’s ministry of health did a study on young males aged 16 to 19 and found the rate to be 1 in 15k after getting the third booster of the vaccine.

https://www.heart.org/en/news/2022/09/06...-young-men

And the CDC noted that “there have been around 1,000 reports of vaccine-related myocarditis or pericarditis in children under age 18, primarily young males”.

We have had over 260 million Americans receive the vaccine and only around 1000 juveniles have been impacted. 1000 in 260 mil is a lot less than 1 in 5k.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna55666

As for the overall populace, British Columbia compared the two vaccines and found both to be rather safe.
“For comparison, rates of myocarditis in the general population during the same period were 2.0 per million in vaccinees 18 to 39 years old and 2.2 per million in older adults.”

2 out of a million odds.

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/risk...id-vaccine

All these numbers confirm that it’s extremely rare for the vaccines to impact anyone let alone juvenile males.

Ok, a couple of things. The Israel study: 1/15000 among teen boys, 1/94000 among teen girls. I wish that kind of information would be publicized, rather than just "get your kids vaccinated, there is no danger." I'm not sure I want to take a 1/15000 chance on my son, considering I think his chances of serious COVID issues are less than that (and that's assuming the vax would actually prevent COVID).

I'm not sure what you're saying in your 2nd point. Total population has nothing to do with the rate of juvenile heart problems. 1/5000 is probably about right, and it might even be closer to that 1/15000 number.

Here's the thing, again. I'm not interested in arguing whether or not the vaccines are safe. That's not really the question. The question is, how safe are they? What are the risks? What are the risks associated with not getting the vaccine? Does the risk depend on the vaccine manufacturer?

I think all of these are fair questions to ask. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that even daring to ask the questions, however, instantly get labeled as "anti-vax" and reduces our ability to have a true scientific discussion.

I'm using the total population number with the second point because that was how the 1,000 were presented in that source. And no one is labeling anyone in this discussion.

All of your questions (risks, odds, impact, etc) can be answered by simply looking on the internet. You are smart enough to understand what sources are trustworthy and not. But if you can't admit a vaccine is safe enough after seeing the rate of myocarditis in juvenile males is 00.02 of 100.00, this entire discussion is pointless because you will never be content with anything your peers on this board can present.

(01-12-2023 09:03 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  But if you can't admit a vaccine is safe enough after seeing the rate of myocarditis in juvenile males is 00.02 of 100.00, this entire discussion is pointless because you will never be content with anything your peers on this board can present.

One thing is certain, I'm not smart enough for anything. I'm an idiot. But, we all know that.

Let me put it this way: if you don't have a teenage son, let's pretend you do? Would you have him take the mRNA vaccine? I don't think I would. Not because I don't think the vaccine is "safe" but because I don't think the net benefit is there, given the associated risks of getting the virus compared to the vax (and maybe still getting the virus).

I truly do appreciate you engaging me in this discussion. I'm fairly sure you think I'm just some anti-vax, Trump supporting conspiracy theorist (even if you're not labeling me that way), and while I can assure you, I am not, even if you're being condescending, I appreciate the discussion.

(01-12-2023 09:32 AM)ODUCoach Wrote:  

(01-12-2023 09:03 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  But if you can't admit a vaccine is safe enough after seeing the rate of myocarditis in juvenile males is 00.02 of 100.00, this entire discussion is pointless because you will never be content with anything your peers on this board can present.

One thing is certain, I'm not smart enough for anything. I'm an idiot. But, we all know that.

Let me put it this way: if you don't have a teenage son, let's pretend you do? Would you have him take the mRNA vaccine? I don't think I would. Not because I don't think the vaccine is "safe" but because I don't think the net benefit is there, given the associated risks of getting the virus compared to the vax (and maybe still getting the virus).

I truly do appreciate you engaging me in this discussion. I'm fairly sure you think I'm just some anti-vax, Trump supporting conspiracy theorist (even if you're not labeling me that way), and while I can assure you, I am not, even if you're being condescending, I appreciate the discussion.

I’m not labeling you as anything. You’re a dad who is just asking questions out of concern for their offspring or just explaining your choice. It’s understandable. At this point, enough Americans have been vaccinated where the impact from citizens making their own choice not to get the vaccine is not presenting the risk to the elderly and immunocompromised that it once was. So do you.