New Nordic study🇩🇰🇸🇪🇫🇮🇳🇴
Follow up through late winter/early spring 2022
4.8x more cases of post vax myo than post covid myo
>10x more in 12-24 year olds
2x as many post vax heart failure dx than post covid
But the authors' conclusions may surprise you 🧵…
The authors conclude that PER MYOCARDITIS CASE, the risk of heart failure was lower post vax than post Covid or post conventional myo... true!
But they aren't using infections or # vaxed as denominators
By late winter 2022, at least as many people were infected as vaccinated
So the OVERALL risk of getting myocarditis or HF from *vaccination* (all doses combined) appears higher than post covid, but per myo case, the vaccine myo appears be milder
YET "six patients with myocarditis after vaccination died within 90 days of admission to hospital"
And, it's important to note, the Nordic countries stopped giving the higher risk Moderna to males in October 2021.
Risk of readmission to the hospital post myo diagnosis was not significantly different between post vaccination and post covid myocarditis
But total # of readmissions was 6.9x higher post vax
This study is complex & involved a lot of work so I am very grateful to the authors.
But I'm not getting the same degree of reassurance from their findings because overall there were a greater # of people who developed post vax myo and post vax heart failure than post covid
But I'm curious to hear cardiologists and potentially study authors weigh in with input.
This study has shed important light on a poorly understood topic.
Please let me know if I have misinterpreted anything.
Adding info: This is an important comment from cardiologist @anish_koka. Would really appreciate @a_husby & @anders_hviid 's thoughts on this
& see @ZackStieber 's excellent coverage of this study & more background + quotes from @anish_koka , @a_husby + me.
Dr. Husby draws different conclusions than I do but this is how science works & this is just a respectful debate about what we can learn…
Addition from @dobssi
If we subtract 90 days from each study's end date to allow for follow-up time, this is the
Fully vax/est infected ratio
DK w4 2022 78%/46%
FI w49 2021 73%/16%
NO w4 2022 75%/31%
SE w43 2021 67%/23%
(will be lower vax % for younger)…
This last part from @dobssi is key👆
If we allow for 90 days of follow-up & using that seroprev. rather than end of the study seroprev, the vax denom is ~ 2.4x higher than the infected.
This still makes overall post vax myo cases 2x higher than post covid & 4x higher in 12-24.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Tracy Høeg, MD, PhD

Tracy Høeg, MD, PhD Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @TracyBethHoeg

Feb 2
Scrolling through the replies and quote tweets to my thread about the COVID vaccine and RCTs like
(Chad yes soyboy version #1)
Chad yes soyboy version #2
The "I'll just gloss over the fact the Covid vaccine is not actually effective at preventing Covid-19 and the Covid-19 vaccine does not have evidence to suggest it reduces cancer risk" variant.
Read 6 tweets
Feb 1
🔥 @WSJ article about our prelim injunction against #AB2098

"Judge Shubb’s ruling is a warning to lawmakers in other progressive states contemplating similar legislation...Newsom should have known the law was unconstitutional, but he signed it anyway"…
I am so glad people's eyes are being opened to how utterly non-sensical the text of AB-2098 is. So much of what Judge Shubb said we had in our testimonies and @LauraPowellEsq & I have been pointing out since we started testifying/writing in opposition last spring.
It's scary such a harmful, unconstitutional, even uninterpretable bill that would silence physicians can become law in California .. apparently just because it was democratic & voting for this bill tended to go right down party lines.
Read 4 tweets
Jan 29
🤔Personally, I don't need RCTs to know I'm not getting more than the 2 I had. 2nd was against my will & my 11 & 14 yo sons don't need any & have had 0. It's about gauging personal risk from covid.
Vax doesn't prevent transmission
I'd like to see RCTs of bivalent in high risk 🧵
I also had an adverse reaction to dose 1 moderna and, if I could do it again, I would not have had any covid vaccines.
The last 10+ years I've had nothing more than a sniffle from a URI and also refuse the influenza vaccine if given the chance.
I was glad my parents in their 70s could get covid vaccinated but have yet to see non-confounded data to advise them about the bivalent booster. I would have liked to see an RCT for the bivalent for people their age and for adults with health conditions that put them at risk.
Read 8 tweets
Jan 21
Cool experience filming a documentary about our lawsuit against AB2098, the physician censorship law (film being made by pros @AzadehKhatibi & team)
Hearing Monday
It's essential physicians retain the right to give patients accurate info
Grateful the CA ACLU is on our side 1/
The amicus brief specifically for our case (Høeg v Newsom) from ACLU Northern & Southern California states "as even the State acknowledges, it does not need AB 2098 to keep patients safe"
And goes on to explain more
Also from ACLU:
"Given the ambiguities..of AB 2098..physicians will be loath to speak their minds & share their opinions w patients..At any point, the State could determine that a physician has violated AB 2098 for sharing an unconventional opinion & take away their...license"
Read 5 tweets
Jan 21
2 major issues in comparing covid vs vax myocarditis:
1. Data need to be stratified (young males post dose 2 at highest risk of post vax myo)
2. Most studies undercount covid infections & thus overestimate post covid myo
This review👇 is misleading esp for highest risk group
For example Patone et al (…) undercounted infections as estimated by Bourdon & Pantazatos using UK ONS inf data
They estimated males <40 had
>6x higher risk of myo post dose 2 moderna
& higher risk post dose 2 pfizer than post covid
I keep referring back to this study in @JAMACardio bc the Nordics had a high asympt testing rate so have been less likely to undercount infections & they stratified even better than Patone by looking at a higher risk group 16-24 M post pfizer-moderna
Read 7 tweets
Jan 21
Deaths with vs from covid
Distinguishing has required death certificate review in Denmark ( & now Finland doing the same as of 12/2022)
Danish data here showing
🟡with🔴from increased to 60-70% with vs from in 2022
LA county now says 15-20% deaths incidental, but based on what?🧵
Finland reported up to 40% of the deaths attributed to covid during the pandemic were incidental (
Below they describe how as of 12/2022 they report based on screening of death certificates & not proximity to covid diagnosis…
Here is an even more recent breakdown of the Danish data showing the 60-70% incidental deaths in 2022
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!