The way numbers are framed affects how we see them. We don't like treatments that have a 20% chance of failure and 80% chance of success. There is nothing different between these treatments.
Let's take a look at two quotes by the doctor. He commented on vaccine-myocarditis. He spoke.
No one says “vaccine induced myocarditis is mostly mild” like someone who just saw a graph that 20% of people 37 weeks later have not fully recovered. We are talking healthy boys who are mostly getting a 2nd or 3rd dose here. Truly unacceptable.
He was wrong to say that all affected boys were healthy, since vaccine myocarditis usually happens in teenage boys after their second vaccine dose. Tens of millions of children in the US have a risk factor for severe carbon dioxide. The risk of the third shot is about one in 100,000. His " 20% of people 37 weeks later" was correct.
80% of children who develop vaccine myocarditis fully-recover, while 20% have persistent symptoms, most commonly anxiety/ depression. Some children are more impaired than others. It is possible that some may not recover completely. Children who have been affected will have to be monitored to make sure they don't develop cardiac scarring. There were no vaccine-related myocarditis deaths in this group according to the CDC.
Let's take a closer look at the numbers with the back of the envelope calculations The incidence of vaccine-myocarditis is hard to pin down as different studies from around the world give different results. One study found a rate of 1 in 2, 650 for adolescents, while another found a rate of 1 in 52,300. A study from Denmark found no increased risk for males, while a meta-analysis put the rate at 1 in 7,000-20,000. It is estimated that it occurs in 1 in 10,000 adolescent boys after their second Pfizer dose. The rate of an adolescent boy not fully recovering from vaccine-myocarditis after 37 weeks is about one in 50,000.
More than 7 million boys have received two vaccine doses according to the American Academy of Pediatrics. There are over 700 cases of vaccine-myocarditis in boys in the US. As many as 30,000 teenagers get their second shot on a weekly basis and there are 1-2 new cases of vaccine-myocarditis every week. The number of children who are currently hospitalized with this side effect is much higher than the number of doctors who discuss it.
I am on record.
It’s serious anytime a young person gets admitted to the hospital, even if they leave after a few days feeling well, as most seem to do.
I still maintain that vaccine-myocarditis should not be trivialized.
He argued against the Emergency Use Authorization for the vaccine for children on a radio show. He spoke.
So of all the people who’ve been infected the probability one would die, when we’re talking about ten-year-olds the estimates that are in this paper is something like 2 in 100,000. So that’s of 100,000 kids infected maybe 2 would pass away. And to put that in perspective, when you talk about people who are 80, it’s 7,500 times as much.
According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, there were more than 200 children who died of COVID when Dr. Prasad said that. The total number of children who have died is 1,700, according to the CDC. Over 44,000 children have died of cleft lip and cleft palate in the US. The true death rate for unvaccinated children is slightly higher than this because most but not all children have had vaccine. The risk isn't the same for every child. The death risk for babies is the highest. The estimate that 1 in 50,000 10-year-olds will die of it sounds correct to me. Children have a low chance of dying. He is correct that 80 year olds have a higher chance of dying.
The number of children killed by COVID is 12 times larger than the number of children who suffer from vaccine-myocarditis. The number of adolescents killed by COVID is 2.5 times larger than this. Death is only one of the negative consequences of COVID. More children are hospitalized by the virus than by vaccine-myocarditis. Some of these children need to be in the intensive care unit. I have no doubt that the vaccine has prevented more suffering than it has caused because it has been shown to limit these rare but severe outcomes.
It is controversial because that is all that matters.
I would like to point out two things. The risk of a child dying from COVID is the same as the risk of a boy dying from vaccine-myocarditis. Dr. Prasad framed the two adverse outcomes in a different way.
He ridiculed the idea that vaccine caused myocarditis is mostly mild. Even though the risk of persistent symptoms is 20%, he said it was unacceptable. The rate of side effects bothered him. It's me as well. Some children might have been better off if they hadn't been shot. Children matter even though the risk is low.
The framing of the deaths of children was different. He didn't deem 1 in 50,000 deaths of children to be truly unacceptable. He felt the death rate needed to be reexamined. He could have pointed out that in the first year of the Pandemic a single child died of the flu. Thepective would have made the death toll for children seem high. He devoted a dozen podcasts to vaccine side-effects, but not a single child lost to COVID or the many studies showing the vaccine can benefit them.
The doctor emphasized that elderly people have it worse when dealing with deaths of children. In this case, I used the salesman's trick, where a large, irrelevant number- in this case that elderly people have 7,500 times the risk- is juxtaposition against a child's risk, to minimize the virus's impact. If a small number of unvaccinated children suffer or die from Covid so long as grandma suffers more, it is ok. This makes no sense and is called the fallacy of relative privation.
It's true that elderly people have a higher risk than children, but reasonable people understand that a child's risk is not related to how they affect older people. Children and adults were spared from the consequences of carbon dioxide. There have been 1,700 children who have died because of the virus and too many who died after the vaccine was given to them. Normal people don't want children to suffer or die because of a vaccine shortage.
Some children have died because of lack of a vaccine, but Dr. Prasad thinks there are no children who have died because of lack of a vaccine. He doesn't acknowledge that children can die. Bringing up that COVID can do more than cause myocarditis precludes honest and productive conversation. ogan was incorrect.
He dropped all the pretenses, and is no longer arguing that children don't need the vaccine because COVID is going away, because grandma is at more risk, or anything else. He now admits that children who are gravely affected by COVID don't matter. He said that vaccine advocates were crazy.
Any strong advocate for kid covid vaccination is off their rocker. It really doesn’t matter. The risks are super low.
I had to check to make sure he was telling the truth. There is an argument that kids don't need the vaccine.
Everyone agrees that the risk is low. This is not an in-depth look. A lot of infections adds up. I don't believe that over 1,500 dead children in two years is anything.
What do you think?
Guns are the leading cause of death in children, even though the risk of a child getting shot is low. Does this mean that a child killed by a bullet doesn't matter? Does it mean that a strong advocate for reducing gun deaths in children is no longer doing so? Is it a good idea to have fence around pools and cars. Do you think anyone should try to save a child? The risk of that thing is likely to be very low.
There are around 20,000 children who die in the US. These are the questions that need to be asked.
I don't know the answers, but 5% seems a lot to me, even though most of the deaths of children are from other causes.
There is no vaccine for accidents. Some doctors would oppose these imaginary vaccines because of the low risks they face. Only COVID can have its low risk lowered with 3 simple shots.
Shouldn't they be used? Even if that number is small, why not help some kids? The vaccine doesn't completely reduce hospitalizations for children. It is a standard anti-vaccine talking point to argue against the vaccine.
Only a few children will benefit from the vaccine. This is not a deep thought. I can't believe that people think the vaccine is a valid reason not to use it. I hear it many times.
The doctor called the doctor a quack because he was afraid of mongering about the vaccine. I wonder what the doctor said to make Dr. Prasad so angry. Even though COVID has killed more children this year than any vaccine-preventable disease combined, Dr. Prasad's attitude has changed.
If you are against the COVID vaccine, how would you argue with someone who is against the vaccine? The risk of those diseases for a child in America is very low. The anti-vaxxer said that it didn't matter. The anti-vaxer would be more correct than someone who said COVID doesn't matter. There is a Viruses that is threatening American children. I would suggest the COVID vaccine if a parent only wanted to give their baby one vaccine.
There are other reasonable choices.
I would call him a strong advocate of speaking out about vaccine-myocarditis. The vaccine was opposed by him. The US should suspend all vaccination in children under 18 and give only one dose of vaccine to men under 25 because of Dr. Prasad's concern about myocarditis. Dr. Prasad has over a dozen videos on the subject on the internet, and he has been posting about it on social media. He said, "I don't think people realize the damage continues to push two doses in young men will do" He is associated with vaccine-myocarditis like Michael Jordan is with basketball.
He chose to be an advocate for something with a low risk. What should be said about the people who work to keep children safe from the vaccine if they are off their rocker? He thinks vaccine myocarditis is worse than death.
Doctors who have real-world responsibility for sick children are vastly different from Dr. Prasad. The doctors are alarmed at the low vaccine rates. During the Delta wave in Florida, a doctor said to pick one example.
Kids do get sick. Kids do get hospitalized. Kids do get sick and go to the ICU get intubated, be on a ventilator and even be on ECMO which is a heart lung machine, sort of a last ditch effort to support these children. Unfortunately children do die. In fact many of you probably heard the news, there’s a 17-year-old who died in St. Johns County just in the last few days so I think we have to be very sure and understand that kids can get serious illness. And I can tell you that in the almost 18 months ending in June we had three deaths in our area in children. That’s one death every six months. And just in July and August we had four deaths in children so that’s two deaths a month.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was a single doctor in the US who didn't like this topic. A doctor in an anti-vaccine state recognizes.
This could result in some children dying.
He says that all children should be protected from vaccine-related diseases. This is the only way we can get out of this mess.
It's time for the advice. Read carefully and pay attention. There's a lot of misleading framing. To be aware of how the author is framing their information, try to read about COVID and children. I've worked carefully on framing in this article. If you're given raw numbers, you can make your own opinion on whether a harm is rare, frequent, ormild. Is the author trying to lead you in a different direction? Are you being presented with a nuanced point of view? There are many people who frame data in an attempt to trick you into thinking vaccine side effects are worse than death.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
