My favorite substack yet! I want to forward this to every physician in my multi-specialty group!! My lowest point in the pandemic came discussing the risk benefit analysis for a young healthy patient who was in tears because her college mandated a booster dose for her to return to campus. I spoke to the physician at the college on her behalf. He insisted I didn’t understand how high her risk was despite already being vaccinated at 20 years old without any medical problems.
So very sad. Thank you for taking the time to try an advocate for your patient. It is so important that Dr. Prasad and Dr. Hoeg continue to use data that illustrates the discrepancies between the propaganda and a scientific approach. (That myocarditis chart showing the studies side by side is a thing of beauty—so clarifying). Unfortunately, I think most schools follow the CDC in order to cover themselves legally in this country. I think the schools are also following their local public health departments, which unfortunately usually extend the rules far beyond what the CDC even requires. The universities should be leading the way out of this pandemic and advocating for their students rather than protecting their institutions’ federal funding by aligning themselves with the current administration. Hopefully, the next administration will choose to fund the scientists and labs, who produced Independent thinkers that shed light on truly understanding this pandemic and being voices of sanity in the chaos.
In our state, the high school athletic associations require students to see a licensed doctor, PA, or NP to return to any Sports or physical activities 10 days after testing positive for COVID because of the risk of myocarditis. Of course, they have to go to their pediatrician or FP —right now in January (when every other virus is circulating). Meanwhile, booster shots are encouraged and the school provides on campus boosting with parental permission, but no return to sports form for boosting healthy teen athletes.
Now with the mandatory booster requirements for college students, it reminds me of people who insist on following the 5 mph rule in many campus parking lots on a Sunday when there are literally no cars other than one's own car. Or waiting for the green light at a crosswalk when it's the dead of night and there are no cars. Or buckling your seatbelt when moving your car across the street because of street sweeping. Or wearing your mask when walking to your car because the rules say wear a mask at all times on campus.
Fortunately, I'm allowed an exemption from boosters as a graduate student because my program is fully-online, but even then I have to promise not to come on campus for any reason. It's more about compliance at this point, or maybe about keeping up appearances? Maybe placating people who are overly concerned about Covid and latching onto the hope that vaccines can reduce transmission? Or maybe it's the typical CYA and mitigate liability mentality of administrators and bureaucracies.
This highlights the "madison avenue" hucksterism that lurks behind the numbers, does it not? Vaccines were originally widely touted as having a 95% reduction rate, relative to an unvaxxed person. Relative improvement, not absolute.
Background rate of myocarditis is 2 for the unvaxxed, rises to 162 for the vaxxed. Same 'relative improvement' methodology applied? Going unvaxxed shows a 98+% risk reduction advantage for the young who remain unvaxxed.
Why the public health authorities continue to push the experimental vaccines on the young is beyond me.
So much of this approach is salesmanship, and nothing more. If it was my kid, I would leave well enough alone.
I like the "relative improvement" distinction. If the risk of having severe illness or dying for my demographic group (late 30's, no co-morbidities, regularly get exercise, healthy weight, good vitamin D levels) is, say, 0.1%, then a 95% reduction of that already small risk factor is ... not so convincing. If you're in a demographic group where your risk is, for example, 10%, then 95% reduction is amazing! Given the tiny number of children in America dying from Covid (1,000 or so out of ... 50 million?), the benefits of mandatory mass vaccinations seems sketchy. Yes, vaccines will clearly help people with compromising health issues, but it should still be the decision of the individual or parents, especially since transmission doesn't seem reduced much with vaccinations anymore.
Love this, as well as her linked article about how we need to fix our covid math.
Is there somewhere we can easily see some of this covid math in one place eg. Our relative risk of harms from covid vs other risks we tolerate daily? I feel like a lot of people haven’t actually seen the numbers (myself included), and I wonder if it would give some perspective.
Would love if you and ZD could present some of these data.
This is excellent! You and Tracey have been so brave and inspirations to those of us on the frontlines who have no voice. We can see the idiocy and theatrics of most Covid guidelines. I subscribed to this Substack because of your reason and for standing up for common sense.
1) This is a clear example of how data can easily be manipulated. Dr. John Campbell recently reported that the average age of Covid-deaths in the U.K. was above 80. Yet, depending on how you divide age groups, one could easily group the elderly into, say, 65+, thus skewing the perception of how deadly Covid is regarding age group. One thing that continues to infuriate me is how often people lump deaths of people without co-morbidities with those who have other risk factors. It makes people feel they have an equal risk of severe illness or death. For example, if someone is 65 but very healthy, why should they feel as worried about covid as someone who is also 65 but is suffering from a multitude of health problems? If we were reporting on deaths from heart disease, we wouldn't lump healthy people together with people who smoke heavily, are obese, or have other health issues.
2) Masks seem to be a safety blanket at this point in general, though I agree that masks can be very beneficial in the right contexts and when used properly. The classroom I teach in is a bungalow, with large windows on either side for natural airflow and ventilation. (This is Southern California, so the weather is just fine even in winter.) The door is left open as well. There is plenty of space for students to sit far apart from each other. Yet the masks seem to make people feel like they have armor. They get very close together despite the official guidelines of sitting 6 feet apart. They gather together outside, close together, masks on. Although many are now wearing the much better fitting KF94 or KN95 masks, many still wear surgical masks that have significant gaps, especially on the sides. Getting back to the safety blanket metaphor, it reminds me of people who think holding a cell phone will keep them safe when walking home in a dangerous area. The police won't be there in time, but feeling like you could call them, or that the threat of calling the police would deter an attacker, is fairly illogical.
Such a conversation with an obviously talented person. Dr Hoag is a solid researcher and sees the data clearly. We might wish for such talent in our health agencies. Thanks for both of your efforts.
My favorite substack yet! I want to forward this to every physician in my multi-specialty group!! My lowest point in the pandemic came discussing the risk benefit analysis for a young healthy patient who was in tears because her college mandated a booster dose for her to return to campus. I spoke to the physician at the college on her behalf. He insisted I didn’t understand how high her risk was despite already being vaccinated at 20 years old without any medical problems.
So very sad. Thank you for taking the time to try an advocate for your patient. It is so important that Dr. Prasad and Dr. Hoeg continue to use data that illustrates the discrepancies between the propaganda and a scientific approach. (That myocarditis chart showing the studies side by side is a thing of beauty—so clarifying). Unfortunately, I think most schools follow the CDC in order to cover themselves legally in this country. I think the schools are also following their local public health departments, which unfortunately usually extend the rules far beyond what the CDC even requires. The universities should be leading the way out of this pandemic and advocating for their students rather than protecting their institutions’ federal funding by aligning themselves with the current administration. Hopefully, the next administration will choose to fund the scientists and labs, who produced Independent thinkers that shed light on truly understanding this pandemic and being voices of sanity in the chaos.
In our state, the high school athletic associations require students to see a licensed doctor, PA, or NP to return to any Sports or physical activities 10 days after testing positive for COVID because of the risk of myocarditis. Of course, they have to go to their pediatrician or FP —right now in January (when every other virus is circulating). Meanwhile, booster shots are encouraged and the school provides on campus boosting with parental permission, but no return to sports form for boosting healthy teen athletes.
Now with the mandatory booster requirements for college students, it reminds me of people who insist on following the 5 mph rule in many campus parking lots on a Sunday when there are literally no cars other than one's own car. Or waiting for the green light at a crosswalk when it's the dead of night and there are no cars. Or buckling your seatbelt when moving your car across the street because of street sweeping. Or wearing your mask when walking to your car because the rules say wear a mask at all times on campus.
Fortunately, I'm allowed an exemption from boosters as a graduate student because my program is fully-online, but even then I have to promise not to come on campus for any reason. It's more about compliance at this point, or maybe about keeping up appearances? Maybe placating people who are overly concerned about Covid and latching onto the hope that vaccines can reduce transmission? Or maybe it's the typical CYA and mitigate liability mentality of administrators and bureaucracies.
Everyone should read this!!! Thank you, Dr. Prasad and Dr. Hoeg! We appreciate all your hard work!
This highlights the "madison avenue" hucksterism that lurks behind the numbers, does it not? Vaccines were originally widely touted as having a 95% reduction rate, relative to an unvaxxed person. Relative improvement, not absolute.
Background rate of myocarditis is 2 for the unvaxxed, rises to 162 for the vaxxed. Same 'relative improvement' methodology applied? Going unvaxxed shows a 98+% risk reduction advantage for the young who remain unvaxxed.
Why the public health authorities continue to push the experimental vaccines on the young is beyond me.
So much of this approach is salesmanship, and nothing more. If it was my kid, I would leave well enough alone.
I like the "relative improvement" distinction. If the risk of having severe illness or dying for my demographic group (late 30's, no co-morbidities, regularly get exercise, healthy weight, good vitamin D levels) is, say, 0.1%, then a 95% reduction of that already small risk factor is ... not so convincing. If you're in a demographic group where your risk is, for example, 10%, then 95% reduction is amazing! Given the tiny number of children in America dying from Covid (1,000 or so out of ... 50 million?), the benefits of mandatory mass vaccinations seems sketchy. Yes, vaccines will clearly help people with compromising health issues, but it should still be the decision of the individual or parents, especially since transmission doesn't seem reduced much with vaccinations anymore.
Spot on. Well said!
Outstanding and forwarded on to many people I know!
Love this, as well as her linked article about how we need to fix our covid math.
Is there somewhere we can easily see some of this covid math in one place eg. Our relative risk of harms from covid vs other risks we tolerate daily? I feel like a lot of people haven’t actually seen the numbers (myself included), and I wonder if it would give some perspective.
Would love if you and ZD could present some of these data.
This is excellent! You and Tracey have been so brave and inspirations to those of us on the frontlines who have no voice. We can see the idiocy and theatrics of most Covid guidelines. I subscribed to this Substack because of your reason and for standing up for common sense.
Two thoughts:
1) This is a clear example of how data can easily be manipulated. Dr. John Campbell recently reported that the average age of Covid-deaths in the U.K. was above 80. Yet, depending on how you divide age groups, one could easily group the elderly into, say, 65+, thus skewing the perception of how deadly Covid is regarding age group. One thing that continues to infuriate me is how often people lump deaths of people without co-morbidities with those who have other risk factors. It makes people feel they have an equal risk of severe illness or death. For example, if someone is 65 but very healthy, why should they feel as worried about covid as someone who is also 65 but is suffering from a multitude of health problems? If we were reporting on deaths from heart disease, we wouldn't lump healthy people together with people who smoke heavily, are obese, or have other health issues.
2) Masks seem to be a safety blanket at this point in general, though I agree that masks can be very beneficial in the right contexts and when used properly. The classroom I teach in is a bungalow, with large windows on either side for natural airflow and ventilation. (This is Southern California, so the weather is just fine even in winter.) The door is left open as well. There is plenty of space for students to sit far apart from each other. Yet the masks seem to make people feel like they have armor. They get very close together despite the official guidelines of sitting 6 feet apart. They gather together outside, close together, masks on. Although many are now wearing the much better fitting KF94 or KN95 masks, many still wear surgical masks that have significant gaps, especially on the sides. Getting back to the safety blanket metaphor, it reminds me of people who think holding a cell phone will keep them safe when walking home in a dangerous area. The police won't be there in time, but feeling like you could call them, or that the threat of calling the police would deter an attacker, is fairly illogical.
Anyway, that's my rant. Thanks for reading!
Such a conversation with an obviously talented person. Dr Hoag is a solid researcher and sees the data clearly. We might wish for such talent in our health agencies. Thanks for both of your efforts.