Posted on 02/09/2022 10:44:49 AM PST by Red Badger
Researchers tracked more than 100,000 COVID-19 patients for up to a year
A massive analysis of health records has revealed recovered COVID-19 patients are at a significantly higher risk of cardiovascular complications in the year following an acute infection. The new findings, published in Nature Medicine, showed COVID-19 survivors were 55 percent more likely to experience a serious cardiovascular event after recovering.
“We wanted to build upon our past research on COVID’s long-term effects by taking a closer look at what’s happening in people’s hearts,” explained Ziyad Al-Aly, senior author on the new study from Washington University. “What we’re seeing isn’t good. COVID-19 can lead to serious cardiovascular complications and death. The heart does not regenerate or easily mend after heart damage. These are diseases that will affect people for a lifetime.”
The researchers looked at medical records from the US Department of Veteran Affairs, analyzing around 150,000 positive COVID-19 cases. Cardiovascular outcomes in the 12 months after acute disease were compared to two large control groups of more than five million patients.
In a period starting 30 days after initial infection, and up to a year later, COVID patients were 72 percent more likely to experience coronary artery disease compared to those without SARS-CoV-2 infection. They were also 52 percent more likely to have a stroke and 63 percent more likely to suffer a heart attack.
These include cerebrovascular disorders, dysrhythmias, ischemic and non-ischemic heart disease, pericarditis, myocarditis, heart failure and thromboembolic disease. pic.twitter.com/j2xPy4IrAm
— Ziyad Al-Aly, MD (@zalaly) February 7, 2022
(Excerpt) Read more at newatlas.com ...
Actually the Alinsky was you .
You had no intelligent response for what I posted so you pulled out your stock know response and hurled at me.
You don’t seem to know how to have a rational discussion. You might just learn the truth is somewhere in between ant exactly what you think it is.
Anyone who thinks they have all the answers to Covid right now is naive and uninformed.
That had occurred to me............................
The VA refuses to treat any vet who isn’t vaxxed so does that answer your question?
The sick ones are you vax freaks who actually believe the lies you’ve been choking down. Your patron Saint Fauci has a booster for you. Go get in line like a good little lamb.
The VA won’t treat anyone who doesn’t get vaxxed. So it’s a safe bet that 150,000 of these people had gotten the jab
And the fact that none of that is mentioned makes the whole study worthless. Even if it is accurate it’s worthless because they’re leaving out information. Another POS study science is so politicized now
And the fact that none of that is mentioned makes the whole study worthless. Even if it is accurate it’s worthless because they’re leaving out information. Another POS study science is so politicized now
👍🏼
What are there, like 4 - 5 of them ($hot $hills), here, now? If that many?
A few more than that. Bunch of trolls with no reasoning skills.
RE: vaccination and this article—see my “bottom line” at the very bottom of my response.
If you read the article, you’ll see the paper has a whole section on vaccination and how they handled it (pp. 4 and 5 of the paper):
“Risk of myocarditis and pericarditis without COVID-19 vaccination. Because some COVID-19 vaccines might be associated with a very rare risk of myocarditis or pericarditis, and to eliminate any putative contribution of potential vaccine exposure to the outcomes of myocarditis and pericarditis in this study, we conducted two analyses. First, we censored cohort participants at the time of receiving the first dose of any COVID-19 vaccine. Second, we adjusted for vaccination as a time-varying covariate. Both analyses were conducted versus both the contemporary and historical control groups. The results suggested that COVID-19 was associated with increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis in both analyses (Supplementary Tables 21–24).”
You’ll also notice that much information is included outside the article in the supplementary tables, etc. You have to go to the article at the doj website, rather than the nature.com website, to see that information easily. That link is at the upper right corner of the article title on the first page. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01689-3
There you can see the supplementary tables listed, and read them.
Regarding how many got the vaccine before and during the study, it’s a large number (Supplementary tables 21-24):
“Before cohort enrollment, 347 (0.23%) of the COVID-19 participants and 9,170 (0.16%) of the contemporary control
participants received COVID-19 vaccine. In total, 95,223 (61.93%) participants in COVID-19 group received COVID-19
vaccine . . . and 3,173,169 (56.29%) participants in contemporary group received COVID-19 vaccine . . . before end of follow up.”
Here’s what the authors concluded about vax. vs. no vax and the increased risk of cardiac complications (p. 7 of their article):
“Our analyses censoring participants at time of vaccination and controlling for vaccination as a time-varying covariate show that the increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis reported in this study is significant in people who were not vaccinated and is evident regardless of vaccination status.”
My bottom line: It’s all in a statistical gobbledygook of explanations, and we’re all supposed to know what it all means. But it ain’t easy to wade through, and I’m not done, and I am not sure I understand it or agree with the authors. But it reads as if 1) the authors believe they HAVE accounted for vaccination vs. not; 2) BOTH groups are at increased risk for the delayed cardiovascular diseases, at least for myocarditis and pericarditis, from Covid-19 infection; 3) the increased risk for non-vax group is “significant” but for vax group is “evident” (increased, and you can see it, but maybe not as much of an increase as with vax??? they don’t say); and 4) they seem to be implying that the vax isn’t the reason for the increased risk, it’s the covid infection. They never come right out and make that conclusion, though, it seems to me.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are well-known and not infrequent complications of post-viral illnesses of many types, so this isn’t really surprising. But if the covid vax was really super efficient at stopping the infections, you’d expect the group with the vax to have a much much lower complication rate than the non-vax’ed, but I can’t tell if this paper has such data like that available to be studied. The authors do warn that the different covid variants could be affecting the data, so the outcome they report might be good for alpha, but not omicron, etc. variants.
The age range on this study, because it’s veterans (active duty and not), is not reflective of youth, either. The age range is roughly mid 40’s to upper 70’s and averages about 62 years, and it’s mostly white males. So I’m not sure how well this translates to the under 40’s crowd, who are usually healthier (hey, we’re not talking about comparing college couch potatoes to active duty seals, though), and to the over 70’s non-military crowd, which it’s a guess whether they’re healthier or sicker than vets of the same age. And as to black and Asian populations......? Unknown.
This really needs some honest physician researcher input into it. Who here trusts the (current) cdc or doj on such things? Who here trusts statistics, anyway?
So maybe this is of some help to some of you.
Anyone who thinks they have all the answers to Covid right now is naive and uninformed.
/\
You resemble that remark.
Just sayin’.
There were controls and COVID survivors. On a quick read, I didn’t find whether the COVID group was subdivided into those who had been vaccinated before or after they had the ‘rona and those who had not. Did I miss it? It seems like it would be a worthwhile additional factor to explore.
“You resemble that remark.
Just sayin’.“
I don’t have all the answers, fully aware of that .
But neither do “the vaccine is evil and puts a tracking chip on your body” types that always post anti-vac info.
And neither do you.
So the question is; do you want to get to the truth about Covid, or just use pre determined talking points ?
So the question is; do you want to get to the truth about Covid, or just use pre determined talking points ?
/\
You resemble that remark also.
Quit digging.
“You resemble that remark also.
Quit digging.“
You appear to fall into the bucket of one who thinks they know it all.
Guess what you don’t .
I don’t have a lot of time for people who don’t have critical thinking skills and think for their self .
Conservatives used to be known by thoughtful discussion and getting to the truth.
Real conservatives still are.
You got that right.
Listen moron
I haven’t said one word about Covid on this thread.
I just pointed your own words back on you
as you have been parading around this thread shoving what you think you know on us in the know it all fashion you accuse others of.
Typical.
You, like all your ilk,, are like atoms
you make up everything.
Don’t you have a hate hoax that needs manufactoring ?..
Maybe a pregnant woman to talk into murdering her unborn child?
Or a fauci idol to pray too?
Or an unmarked person to screetch at ?
You burst in on a discussion and ran of at the mouth.
It doesn’t appear you much to contribute to this discussion.
Stay in your lane.
It doesn’t appear you much to contribute to this discussion.
Stay in your lane.
//
Well , let’s look at our discussion in your lane and what you contributed
\/
But neither do “the vaccine is evil and puts a tracking chip on your body” types that always post anti-vac info.
And neither do you.
So the question is; do you want to get to the truth about Covid, or just use pre determined talking points ?
You appear to fall into the bucket of one who thinks they know it all.
Guess what you don’t .
I don’t have a lot of time for people who don’t have critical thinking skills and think for their self .
Conservatives used to be known by thoughtful discussion and getting to the truth.
/\
\/
Looks like a lot more crap thrown at me than crap I threw at you,
so, ya, you contributed lot more crap than I.
Congrats.
Gee, and here I thought the whole point of a forum like FR was to exchange and discuss different ideas .
Maybe we actually learn new things from what others post?
Novel idea huh?
Like this
\/
But neither do “the vaccine is evil and puts a tracking chip on your body” types that always post anti-vac info.
And neither do you.
So the question is; do you want to get to the truth about Covid, or just use pre determined talking points ?
You appear to fall into the bucket of one who thinks they know it all.
Guess what you don’t .
I don’t have a lot of time for people who don’t have critical thinking skills and think for their self .
Conservatives used to be known by thoughtful discussion and getting to the truth.
/\
All I learned is you seem to be a RINO.
If I’m wrong I apologize and we can drop it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.