Father Whose Son Developed Myocarditis Gets Pharmacist to Admit They're Omitting the Truth

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

From:

covid19.nih.gov...

This is a great example of how you can make statistics say anything.

Note the 226 line is IF HOSPITALIZED WITH COVID, which is only a small percentage of covid cases. And in children the risk of hospitalization from covid is virtually nil. That graphic provides no comparison at all of the risk of myocarditis between those who get vaccinated and those who don't.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...#:~:text=Main%20outcome%20measures%3A%20Demographic%2Dstratified,those%20older%20than%2060%20years.

Main outcome measures: Demographic-stratified IHRs and case-hospitalization ratios.

Results: The overall IHR was 2.1% and varied more by age than by race or sex. Infection-hospitalization ratio estimates ranged from 0.4% for those younger than 40 years to 9.2% for those older than 60 years. Hospitalization rates based on case counts overestimated the IHR by a factor of 10, but this overestimation differed by demographic groups, especially age.

So it looks like 0.4% or 400 per 100,000 of those under 40 who get covid need hospitalization.

If, then 226 per 100,000 of that group go on to develop myocarditis, or 0.226%, that gives us 0.904, which we can round up to 1 person per 100,000 of those under 40 who get Covid will get myocarditis.

I don't know whether age affects the likelihood of that outcome or not, so I'll go ahead and assume 1 in 100,000 is the odds if an unvaxxed kid gets covid.

I'm sure you'll notice that 1.3 per 100,000 is the default odds from 2019 (before Covid entered the USA), so that should indicate that getting Covid has no net effect on the overall likelihood of getting myocarditis.

Statistics like this also fail to take into account personal differences. The chance of being struck by lightning, for example, includes people who are at a higher risk because of recreational choices or their job. The average person who stays inside when it is storming has pretty much 0 chance of getting struck by lightning.

I'm pretty sure 7 out of 100,000 is a high estimate for lightning strikes. If your odds of getting hit are close to 1 in a million per year, so if you live 80 years, then you would have about an 8 out of 100,000 chance.

But actually the odds are closer to one in ten million. So it should be 0.7 per 100,000 not 7 per 100,000

www.iii.org...#:~:text=In%202020%20there%20were%2017,strikes%20in%20the%20United%20States.

In 2020 there were 17 direct lightning fatalities, compared with 20 in 2019, according to the National Weather Service. From 2010 to 2019 on average, 26 people died each year from lightning strikes in the United States.

26 people per year in a population of about 300 million, gets you near to one in ten million.

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

From:

covid19.nih.gov...

So, the short version of what I was saying is:

The second statistic of 226 per 100,000 of those 'hospitalized" , tells us the odds of getting myocarditis if you get covid overall is 0.9 in 100,000

Meaning Covid doesn't have any effect at all on the likelihood of getting myocarditis. (The 226 of "those hospitalized" probably already had it prior to getting covid.)


And the "struck by lightning" statistic is off by a decimal point. It really should be 0.7 out of 100,000.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Mandating the jabs for the medical and teaching professions first means they flushed out anyone who questioned the narrative and got them out of the way, leaving only the subservient ones who can be counted on to parrot the official line.

a reply to: carewemust

You are the kind of man this earth needs. I hope you and others of your kind (real men I want to say here...) Will at some point stop staying few steps behind and actually start something that could save us all.

From a "désenchantée" woman