Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination

Re:Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-... by kyleblarson on Thursday December 15, 2022 @05:03PM (#34006456)

"two weeks to flatten the curve", "if you get the vaccine you won't get covid", "the vaccine is 95% effective", "the vaccine is 80% effective", "the vaccine is 50% effective", "well you'll still get covid but you won't spread it to others", "well actually you can spread it to others"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-... by TacticalCoder on Thursday December 15, 2022 @06:39PM (#34007431)

and more... "masks serve no purpose" followed by months if not years coercing everybody into going out with a mask.

But the best one, to me, is when we go back at the very root... "You're a conspiracy theorist like those who believe the moon landing was faked if you don't accept that it's a pure coincidence that the outbreak started in a market next to a lab known to do gain-of-function research on modified bat viruses".

That tune changed too and, at least, discussing the lab leak possibility became acceptable.

It's all seriously WTF. I got two Pfizer shots but I always fought for and respected those who didn't want to get the shot.

And with all the evidence out now and all the countries saying: "We don't recommend a fourth shot if you're below this or that age", I certainly don't plan to ever get a third shot.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Autopsy-based characterization of myocarditis after anti-... by yosame on Thursday December 15, 2022 @09:02PM (#34008651)

Covid was mutating, that's why the advice kept changing. Vaccines were 80% effective, than immune escape happened and the vaccines got less effective. At the same time, covid was getting better at spreading, which is why 2 weeks to flatten the curve wasn't enough.

It's not a bad thing for experts to change their opinion as new evidence comes out.

[ Parent | on HN ]