I resigned several of my professional memberships when they formed DEI committees. They were founded to promote medical science in pathology and diagnostic medicine. Really sad that now they have committees to promote racism.
Vinay, you are wrong about a new agency. Agency capture by the left in DC is doing damage in all areas of government and destroying freedom. At least AAP recommendations can be ignored. Government agencies creep toward power and control and have the effect of law. The best defense is good data and their needs to be law or regulatory policy to prevent malevolent behavior by various academies against their members for independent thinking. Some of these state licensure agents are prosecute those that follow science or in the lack of hard data exercising clinical judgement with patient consent. They have been captured by "religion' as you say. I used to joke to masked co-workers that wearing a Biden hat was as effective as masking if you are well.
Are you LOOKING for evidence that masking impairs the speech development of babies? It takes time for the evidence to show up. Widespread masking for prolonged periods has not occurred in recent US history. I am confident that evidence will be abundant and decisively conclusive and the naysayers outed as the imbeciles that they are.
Truly…. I think you might be one of the last trustworthy doctors. If i asked you a question that mattered about my child, when it mattered the most…. I KNOW i could trust the basis of your answer is sound. Thats rare these days, and so is humility.
You want to create a new Federal Agency to protest kids when FDA,CDC,Fauci and Birks and all the rest failed to do this? Talk about doing the same old thing and expecting a different result!
The American Academy of Potty Training is the name my pediatrician husband uses. They don't take a stand on anything important, and when they do, there is seldom science to back it up.
Actually there is an organization that lobbies on behalf of kids but it is (in my opinion) unfairly demonized and ignored. That is Children's Health Defense - childrenshealthdefense.org, run by RFK Jr. If you read a couple of their articles to the end, you will see that they are not the extremists the media paints them as.
Dr. Prasad, I have been following you for over a year now (YouTube). Excellent work and thanks for breathing some sanity into the bad air emanating everywhere about basic things. I am particularly concerned about the pediatric angle. Are you available for consulting on a related legal matter?
“You have to be honest about uncertainty.” I swear that’s almost all I have wanted for the last two years!! Thanks for continuing to be such a thoughtful and well reasoned progressive voice. It is so rare.
You had it right until you suggested a governmental agency be tasked with issuing prospective guidance. Your Sanders/Warren crush destroys your argument. The government has consistently been the biggest part of the problem, but you want to double-down and trust them more? Otherwise, this was a wonderful piece you've written. Keep up the good work, and turn away from those who think government will solve our problems. Hint: They won't.
"It is now undeniable. Vaccine can cause more myocarditis in men < 40 than Covid-19"
Is there somehow no overlap between the vaccinated and those who got covid? What happened to breakthrough infections???
For purposes of comparing the risk of mycarditis, you have to look at four groups: 1) the naive unvaccinated, 2) the naive vaccinated, 3) the vaccinated who got covid, and 4) the unvaccinated who got covid.
Let us suppose, hypothetically, to make the point clear, that there is no risk of myocarditis in the naive groups--that the only risk is from covid. Let us assume the following facts:
6 cases of myocarditis in the vaccinated who got covid
4 cases of myocarditis in the UNvaccinated who got covid
-----------------
10 total cases of myocarditis in those who got covid
The myocarditis risk value for the vaccinated who got covid is 0.6, which seems to be a benefit.
The myocarditis risk value for the UNvaccinated who got covid is 0.4, which is an even greater benefit.
So, no matter whether you get vaccinated or not, there is benefit? I think not.
The proper comparison is between the vaccinated who got myocarditis following covid and the unvaccinated who got myocarditis following covid. In that case, the risk for the vaccinated is 1.5, which shows that the vaccine increases risk in this hypothetical case.
Now let's expand this a tad and consider the naive groups. So, for the unvaccinated, we take risk statistics for myocarditis from the men <40 in the pre-covid population. And we use the recorded statistics for the naive vaccinated from public health. We then compare total vaccinated with myocarditis (both naive and covid-infected) with the total unvaccinated with myocarditis (both naive and covid infected) to get the true risk of myocarditis from vaccination relative to the unvaccinated.
You never compare the risk of myocarditis from vaccines to the risk of myocarditis from covid because the two groups are not exclusive.
I resigned several of my professional memberships when they formed DEI committees. They were founded to promote medical science in pathology and diagnostic medicine. Really sad that now they have committees to promote racism.
Vinay, you are wrong about a new agency. Agency capture by the left in DC is doing damage in all areas of government and destroying freedom. At least AAP recommendations can be ignored. Government agencies creep toward power and control and have the effect of law. The best defense is good data and their needs to be law or regulatory policy to prevent malevolent behavior by various academies against their members for independent thinking. Some of these state licensure agents are prosecute those that follow science or in the lack of hard data exercising clinical judgement with patient consent. They have been captured by "religion' as you say. I used to joke to masked co-workers that wearing a Biden hat was as effective as masking if you are well.
Are you LOOKING for evidence that masking impairs the speech development of babies? It takes time for the evidence to show up. Widespread masking for prolonged periods has not occurred in recent US history. I am confident that evidence will be abundant and decisively conclusive and the naysayers outed as the imbeciles that they are.
Truly…. I think you might be one of the last trustworthy doctors. If i asked you a question that mattered about my child, when it mattered the most…. I KNOW i could trust the basis of your answer is sound. Thats rare these days, and so is humility.
You want to create a new Federal Agency to protest kids when FDA,CDC,Fauci and Birks and all the rest failed to do this? Talk about doing the same old thing and expecting a different result!
The American Academy of Potty Training is the name my pediatrician husband uses. They don't take a stand on anything important, and when they do, there is seldom science to back it up.
Actually there is an organization that lobbies on behalf of kids but it is (in my opinion) unfairly demonized and ignored. That is Children's Health Defense - childrenshealthdefense.org, run by RFK Jr. If you read a couple of their articles to the end, you will see that they are not the extremists the media paints them as.
Agree, I discontinued my membership this year. Their position on gender issues is also very politicized. A nightmare for children and parents.
Dr. Prasad, I have been following you for over a year now (YouTube). Excellent work and thanks for breathing some sanity into the bad air emanating everywhere about basic things. I am particularly concerned about the pediatric angle. Are you available for consulting on a related legal matter?
John
Wonderfully written!! I also love the video you made on YouTube. 👍🏼💓
Someone send a heart monitor to Taylor Nichols and Ryan Marino! Might need to go on life support if they keep on having no answers to this!
“You have to be honest about uncertainty.” I swear that’s almost all I have wanted for the last two years!! Thanks for continuing to be such a thoughtful and well reasoned progressive voice. It is so rare.
You had it right until you suggested a governmental agency be tasked with issuing prospective guidance. Your Sanders/Warren crush destroys your argument. The government has consistently been the biggest part of the problem, but you want to double-down and trust them more? Otherwise, this was a wonderful piece you've written. Keep up the good work, and turn away from those who think government will solve our problems. Hint: They won't.
I have to comment on this tweet by Dr. Prasad:
"It is now undeniable. Vaccine can cause more myocarditis in men < 40 than Covid-19"
Is there somehow no overlap between the vaccinated and those who got covid? What happened to breakthrough infections???
For purposes of comparing the risk of mycarditis, you have to look at four groups: 1) the naive unvaccinated, 2) the naive vaccinated, 3) the vaccinated who got covid, and 4) the unvaccinated who got covid.
Let us suppose, hypothetically, to make the point clear, that there is no risk of myocarditis in the naive groups--that the only risk is from covid. Let us assume the following facts:
6 cases of myocarditis in the vaccinated who got covid
4 cases of myocarditis in the UNvaccinated who got covid
-----------------
10 total cases of myocarditis in those who got covid
The myocarditis risk value for the vaccinated who got covid is 0.6, which seems to be a benefit.
The myocarditis risk value for the UNvaccinated who got covid is 0.4, which is an even greater benefit.
So, no matter whether you get vaccinated or not, there is benefit? I think not.
The proper comparison is between the vaccinated who got myocarditis following covid and the unvaccinated who got myocarditis following covid. In that case, the risk for the vaccinated is 1.5, which shows that the vaccine increases risk in this hypothetical case.
Now let's expand this a tad and consider the naive groups. So, for the unvaccinated, we take risk statistics for myocarditis from the men <40 in the pre-covid population. And we use the recorded statistics for the naive vaccinated from public health. We then compare total vaccinated with myocarditis (both naive and covid-infected) with the total unvaccinated with myocarditis (both naive and covid infected) to get the true risk of myocarditis from vaccination relative to the unvaccinated.
You never compare the risk of myocarditis from vaccines to the risk of myocarditis from covid because the two groups are not exclusive.
I like your idea about scoring impact on kids but who is to say that the scoring agency wouldn't also be captured?
You go Dr Vinay 🙌🙌🙌
I’m so thankful for you.