Thread by @VPrasadMDMPH

I'm extremely critical of how poorly this CDC & FDA have handled myocarditis in young men (aka Worst Job Ever/ You Only Had 1 Job)

But I ALSO think this type of news reporting is HUGELY irresponsible 👇

Think about all the issues it raises... 🧵
theatlantic.com/science/archiv…

1. If it wasn't a rich, successful scientist in whom this happened in, they would never have covered it.

If it happened to an electrician, they would have said: its anti-vax nonsense; "shut up, anti-vaxxer!" they would say

How disturbing is that?
theatlantic.com/science/archiv…

2. Where is the evidence that mRNA vaccines fuel cancer growth even in a subset of people?

Case-reports don't count, obviously.

You need careful epidemiological evidence to make such a claim. Where is that?

Do that before you cover it in the news. Duh.

3. Now, it would be fair, and the article should discuss how the CDC's passive surveillance system is entirely byzantine and frankly shit, and that's why it can detect only the most blatantly obvious signal (ala VITT, ala myocarditis where baseline is a floor event)

but 🦗

4. The power of this anecdote will be to DISCOURAGE vaccination in the one group OVERWHELMINGLY likely to have the most favorable benefit/ risk balance-- B cell deplete people/ people w/ cancer

wtf!

5. Meanwhile, there is an ACTUAL safety signal, proven over and over in datasets-- myocarditis in men 12-40, which is a subgroup LEAST likely to derive benefit from perpetual boosting and no one has done anything to mitigate this risk

The CDC & FDA just keep failing

6. We are living in a mad world, where a speculative anecdote in an older person with cancer is the Atlantic, but there is little to no coverage of a serious, proven AE in young healthy people.

Why not cover the human story of a 22 year boy with myocarditis-- it won't be pretty

7. The evidence bar to boost a young healthy child is higher than an older vulnerable person, who is far more likely to embrace weaker data.

8. I remain open to the fact that current systems have missed other adverse events (AEs) of note, but the solution is better systems and to establish those AEs BEFORE YOU COVER THEM IN THE NEWS!

Meanwhile, you aren't covering a proven AE

9. None of this makes any sense.

The White House COVID policy is set by people too incompetent to tackle a PROVEN SAFETY issue, and the news is chasing ANECDOTES of something unrelated.

Rational scientists have our work cut out for us this century

10. Its entirely possible the cancer worsening had nothing to do with the booster-- it happens-- it also might be related, but no anecdote can ever sort it out

So why are you covering this, but not the actual proven AE!