Coronavirus (COVID-19)

That article seems to be making the opposite point ... mild to moderate side effects from the vaccine in a group where the potential risk from covid complications is high.

Meanwhile www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-benefits-of-vaccinating-kids-against-covid-far-outweigh-the-risks-of-myocarditis1/

(Warning does include things proporting to be facts sometimes in pictorial form)

Umm. Here we go again. So everyone recognises that there are side effects to medicines and vaccines. This rollout of vaccines is the most stringently monitored in our history. So pretty much every 'incident' post vaccine whether caused by or utterly incidental is pretty much recorded, and is certainly actively encouraged to be recorded (to allow monitoring). 

Everyone knows there is a risk/benefit trade off. So nothing new being said in that regard in your post. 

I started writing an explanation of that article, but have now decided to simply delete it as it is a waste of words. I can only conclude that you have either not read it, or have but have not understood it, or are trying to make a point which is too obtuse for me to understand. I'll let my humble part of my character take over and assume the latter. 

Nonetheless, in very short summary the article concluded that side effects were mild to moderate and cleared up in no more than a week, in a group that were most vulnerable to complications from Covid 19 and therefore also stood to benefit the most from being vaccinated. 

to quote directly:

Although the study numbers are small, the data are representative of those teens most likely to benefit from the vaccination, and should offer reassurance to parents and clinicians, say the authors.

If this is your "mounting evidence" that vaccines are being rammed into people against their best interests, its not terribly compelling is it ? 

<Deleted> Point has now been made a few times.

So getting back to your original story, who is suggesting that heart problems following vaccination are fake news?

It was born out of a general feeling that should anyone even remotely critisize the vaccines then he (usually me) is asked essentially to shut up. The original comment in this "story" was someone who said he had heard that a person got into serious trouble after taking the vaccine. The fact that it was passed off as completely unrelated to the vaccine "maybe he got run over by a bus" suggested to me that one can not contemplate at all any problems with the vaccine at all and yes I extrapolated to suggest the implication there is that any such bad news about the vaccine must be fake news.

IF I have say a 1 in 35,000 of collapsing (dying?) after taking my booster I want to know that. If it is to be balanced by a 1 in 4000 chance (made up for illustration) of me getting into serious difficultues when contracting Covid I'd like to know that too. I certainly don't want any such discussion to be thrown out. Ditto on omicron potency.

Incidentally, when the vaccines were being rolled out, I was vocal here in criticising my vaccine, the AZN as being inferior. The fact that at the time numerous EU states weren't rolling it out or were imposing restrictions on its use for younger people was ignored. We now know it is almost certainly an inferior vaccine (with one major exception related to its anti-waning properties) which is why its not being used as a booster. My point here is not to say "look I was right" but to say we should be able to talk about these topics in an adult manner without attempting to close debate.

I think that says it all in relation to the credibility of the story.

Including a friend of ours, wife of a GP. She is now about a year into long 'vid, and has myocarditis.