The title is fine. The problem is when people base a conclusion from the title. If all the details we needed to draw factual and accurate conclusions were in the title, it wouldn't be called the title. It'd be called the article.

People need to read.

after reading both I don't see the probem. 77 cases out of 1.65 would be rare. 34 out of 77 were hospitalized. Not even half That is exactly what the article says. I took that directly from your cut and paste.

Please explain what was wrong with the title. It just quotes the study. You may also note there were no deaths reported in the study. At least in your quote.

I'm not a science journalist. I highlighted that detail because most of this information isn't new, as the authors note: "many of the cases of myocarditis or pericarditis were mild and required either no treatment or were managed conservatively with NSAIDs, similar to what has been reported in other studies."

What is actually new is the finding that many weren't hospitalized, and that those who were had a shorter duration than previously recorded: "Almost all episodes were seen in an emergency department, fewer than one-half of adolescents were admitted to hospital, and those who were hospitalized experienced a short length of stay (median duration: 1 day)."

The originating title in JAMA is “Myocarditis or Pericarditis Events After BNT162b2 Vaccination in Individuals Aged 12 to 17 Years in Ontario, Canada”. This is a pretty standard and neutral PICO format title.

The problem is people on reddit (and elsewhere) taking that original article and translating it to focus on upping readership.

I thought I read the risk of myocarditis was higher for people infected with the virus than those that were vaccinated, is this true?

If you're a doctor then you should be smart enough to know that a lot of these cases of myocarditis are asymptomatic in children. To make it simple for you, they aren't going to the doctors because they don't feel different. You wouldnt really be able to tell unless you did a study and recorded heart health data.

[deleted]

Aspiration is routine. It is so routine, it is automatic. Not a matter of forgetting once it becomes that routine.

We don't aspirate when covid vaccinating in the Netherlands..

is the logic that aspiration assures that the injection goes into your muscle and doesn’t hit your blood stream right away so like the immune response goes crazy in your shoulder but mellows out before spreading?

anyways i cant see how this would be reliably recorded. if a person performing the vaccine forgets to aspirate, they likely don’t remember that they forgot. if they do remember then realistically they aren’t going to report their own mistake.

if they were to report themselves, aspiration is a test to see if blood is drawn. ive aspirated thousands of times and never drew blood into the syringe. it wouldn’t be the act of aspiration, but the mitigated extremely low likelihood of hitting a blood vessel if administering into the blood stream is related to myocarditis.

Err... no?

From the article:

>>There were approximately 1.65 million doses of BNT162b2 administered and 77 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis among those aged 12 to 17 years,

That's 77 out of 1.65 million.

Your link shows 78 PER 100,000 people.

[removed]

Would you care to point out in the article where you saw the words that you quoted? Mild heart damage does not occur. Heart damage does not occur. Damage does not even occur. The only one of those 3 words in the story is MILD and that occurance says the cases were mild. It does not mention damage.

It’s not mild heart damage, it’s mild heart inflammation. In 11 out of 77 cases, it got better with no treatment. In 57 cases it got better with over the counter NSAIDS (e.g. Advil), and in 8 cases a second medication was added to the NSAIDS. Only 2 were admitted to the ICU, one for monitoring and 1 required surgery. Out of 1,650,000 doses administered. So that’s a rate of 46 cases of inflammation per dose, or 0.000046%.

Compare that to COVID, which has a rate of 450 cases per million among adolescent males age 12-19, which is the age most likely to have heart inflammation from the vaccine (<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8328065/>). That’s not counting all the other risks, like damage to lungs and other organs, permanent loss of taste and/or smell, or or developing debilitating chronic fatigue syndrome.

Vaccines are never without risk. Neither are over the counter medications. Hell you can spontaneously develop a peanut allergy at any point in your life, but people don’t avoid peanuts because of that tiny risk. The point is that it is safer to get the vaccine than the illness.

We know covid fucks you up long term

At what point do the effects become long term? 12.7 billion vaccinations have been given since the first given in December 2020. When do the legions start to show these long term effects?

Out of 1.65 million people, there were less than 100 cases that escalated to the point of needing a medical diagnosis. It's possible there were more, but that's a comparable rate to, say, aspirin or ibuprofen.

Were you going to organize a class action against Bayer? Roll this lawsuit against Pfizer with everyone who's had an adverse reaction to Advil?

It was on every label listing side effects...

For what? What will the class action be based on?

77 cases in 1.6 million people isn't going to be much different from the background incidence of myocarditis/pericarditis...