But maybe VAERS is more under-reported than that, and a factor of 10 is more fair?
It may be a negative slope: the more serious a side effect is, the more it gets reported. Going by that, a factor of two or three for blood clots sounds pessimistic enough. Then we’d still be somewhere around the base rate.
This study estimates the risk of cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) following Covid-19 diagnosis vs vaccination (mRNA).
Excluding those with prior history of CVT or PVT, we get 3.53/100K and 17.5/100K cases, respectively. This includes both hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients.
Also, for CVT
Among the 23 events, 7 were observed in patients under the age of 30, 4 between 30 and 39, 2 between 40 and 49, 3 between 50 and 59, 2 between 60 and 69, and 5 between 70 and 79.
I am afraid if we only look at the relevant group (e.g. under 30, hon-hospitalized), we will end up with too small a sample to draw any conclusions, so I’m not going to do so. But excluding those with prior history seems to be a good choice.
Supposing nobody gets both CVT and PVT, we end up with a total of 21.03/100K cases. This is still 2.6 times more than your worst-case scenario. Of course, the probabilities are not adjusted for those recovered from Covid-19 and having natural immunity, in which case the risk probably goes down drastically.
The study itself concludes you’re about 10 times more likely to get thrombosis from Covid-19 than from Pfizer/Moderna. I wonder how Jannsen compares to that.
Side note: my mother had a contact with an infected individual. Coincidentally, she tested for antibodies soon after that, and found out they shot up quite drastically (about 7-fold) from almost not existing to a decent level. This gets me thinking just how pointless it is to race after constantly high levels. Haven’t we known for a good deal of time that the immune system produces what’s necessary at the moment?
Hm,
It may be a negative slope: the more serious a side effect is, the more it gets reported. Going by that, a factor of two or three for blood clots sounds pessimistic enough. Then we’d still be somewhere around the base rate.
This study estimates the risk of cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) following Covid-19 diagnosis vs vaccination (mRNA).
Excluding those with prior history of CVT or PVT, we get 3.53/100K and 17.5/100K cases, respectively. This includes both hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients.
Also, for CVT
I am afraid if we only look at the relevant group (e.g. under 30, hon-hospitalized), we will end up with too small a sample to draw any conclusions, so I’m not going to do so. But excluding those with prior history seems to be a good choice.
Supposing nobody gets both CVT and PVT, we end up with a total of 21.03/100K cases. This is still 2.6 times more than your worst-case scenario. Of course, the probabilities are not adjusted for those recovered from Covid-19 and having natural immunity, in which case the risk probably goes down drastically.
The study itself concludes you’re about 10 times more likely to get thrombosis from Covid-19 than from Pfizer/Moderna. I wonder how Jannsen compares to that.
Side note: my mother had a contact with an infected individual. Coincidentally, she tested for antibodies soon after that, and found out they shot up quite drastically (about 7-fold) from almost not existing to a decent level. This gets me thinking just how pointless it is to race after constantly high levels. Haven’t we known for a good deal of time that the immune system produces what’s necessary at the moment?
A lower ratio than I expected! Thanks for doing the analysis. Cheers