What does that mean? I don’t understand the meaning, severity or prognoses related to “cardiac involvement” and “ongoing myocardial inflammation”.
This means you have a medical test that shows the heart was damaged. We don’t have the full knowledge of how that heart damage plays out years down the road.
Oh come on, I expect better from people on LW. There was no opportunity yet to produce evidence for long-term problems due to the vaccine.
This sounds to me like you don’t understand what the word evidence means when it’s used on LessWrong. On LessWrong the word evidence is generally meant in the Bayesian sense.
There are long-term effects that only appear after a while. Neither for COVID-19 nor for the vaccine we can measure those effects currently.
On the other hand there are adverse effects that happen when a person gets vaccinated or a person gets ill. We can measure whether those effects disapper after 2-3 months or are still there.
This means you have a medical test that shows the heart was damaged. We don’t have the full knowledge of how that heart damage plays out years down the road.
This sounds to me like you don’t understand what the word evidence means when it’s used on LessWrong. On LessWrong the word evidence is generally meant in the Bayesian sense.
There are long-term effects that only appear after a while. Neither for COVID-19 nor for the vaccine we can measure those effects currently.
On the other hand there are adverse effects that happen when a person gets vaccinated or a person gets ill. We can measure whether those effects disapper after 2-3 months or are still there.
If a vaccine was causing long-term problems, how would you expect the world to be different from what we have now?
I would expect that there are reported vaccine side effects that don’t go away after a few days.