Running List of Professional Athletes w/ Heart Problems?

80,750 Views | 884 Replies | Last: 2 mo ago by ProgN
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't think everything on here is fact. Not trying to argue per se, but if you're trying to outline "what we know" it needs to be pretty strict on what is and isn't absolutely true. motivations are hard to make facts out of, and that's mostly where I'd raise the flag.

The original fatality rate estimates were all over the place, but wayyyyyy back early March of '20 the much-maligned (incorrectly, in my opinion) Imperial College put out a paper that had an IFR of 0.6% for the US, based on our demographics. It also broke down IFR by age group. I've seen several subsequent papers that make that a pretty dang good prediction for the initial variant. The transmissibility estimates were also good - if you're saying how does it transmit (aerosol, touch, whatever) I think a lot of that was just wtf mass chaos of research trying to figure it out.

One thing I learned when I was digging into stuff at the beginning of the pandemic was that you could fill books with things we don't know about everyday diseases like flu and seasonal colds...questions like, how transmissible is it, how many people are actually immune, how often do we get reinfected by the same virus, how long does immunity last, how does flu actually spread. it was pretty eye-opening. So I think you should also extend at least some grace to genuine not knowing on some of the contradicting early information. The other thing that contributed to the chaos was the sheer volume of research being done - a lot of it by people who are not experts in that field. there was so much money available for research that anyone with a PhD in almost any subject was researching, and the volume overwhelmed journals, which lead to a ton of pre-prints being out there before review, which lead to many retractions, which lead to more confusion.

I agree that politicization began from the left. It was disheartening, actually.. a stark contrast to how the country came together after 9/11 for example.

I would really contest item 4. I just don't think this comports with the facts at all. This is one of those social media filter things, that depending on where you look you get an extremely different perspective. the signal to noise ratio of research publications as above contributed a lot to this. What's more, effective therapeutics were identified (dexamethosone, for example) and care got better as people got more experience with the disease, so I'm not sure the narrative is even directionally correct. There were tens of thousands of studies done on all kinds of therapeutics.

Item 6 is again moving the locus of power way too far into the hands of politicians. I think there was some element of the "noble lie" going on, but there is again also a genuine element of unknowing. The efficacy claim was what was measured, it isn't a lie to report it. What was part of the "noble lie" was not also saying that we didn't know how long that would last - because we didn't know very much about immunity vs coronaviruses. So more of a lie of omission than a lie about facts.

Sometime around item 7 is where things become a false dichotomy. The vaccine was never tested to prevent PCR positive nose swabs. This was just a complete mismanagement and poor messaging by the CDC etc - we should never have been counting cases that way. Early on, maybe, because you're trying to halt general spread, but later it was just nonsense and led to sensationalist reporting. Too easy to make if it bleeds it leads headlines from it. The other thing that matters is that the virus did mutate, and that did make the vaccine less effective at preventing minor illness. So this doesn't show the vaccine never worked, or that the 95% finding was wrong. It shows that it worked differently against a different virus. It also gave us some understanding of how long the protection lasted - just like we learned over time how long protection from infection lasted.

A big part of the problem with 7 is that the public's perception of how well vaccines work is skewed by vaccines like measles and polio, and most people don't know how effective vaccines in general are at preventing infection and illness (most don't prevent infection, most aren't 99% effective, and so on). I know I was completely ignorant of those things because it never mattered before. And politicians I think played into that ignorance to some extent with the messaging, which backfired spectacularly.

I think item 8 is more explained by ineptitude and a general belief in the illusion of control than anything else. people in government felt like they had to do something, so they tried something, anything. in the end lockdowns etc probably did delay the spread, but the economic and human cost was incredibly high. the facts about the efficacy of the lockdown measures can be established, but the motivations are less absolute.

I think items 9-10 are very fair.

Ironically a big part of the lack of trust comes from a kind of paradox of trusting the CDC and FDA too much before this. Prior to covid I think most Americans would have given both of those institutions very very high scores in credibility and reliability. Too high, to be frank. But people have a incredibly high degree of trust in the FDA that's well earned, largely. We don't worry about food and medicines being crappy in this country. So when we needed them, and they couldn't answer what seem like the most basic of questions, it shattered the illusion. Because people are what they are, the perception way overcorrected to the other side, so now you have people that think the CDC and FDA are utterly incompetent and suck at everything. That's just as wrong as the former view, I think. They're actually pretty good at what they do, with certain areas where they are exceptionally good, and certain areas where they're bad, and a bunch of stuff in the middle.

There's also a kind of bitter irony in that President Trump spent a good chunk of his campaign and presidency deliberately sowing distrust in the federal government. Rightly or wrongly, when he needed people to come together and listen to federal institutions, it felt hypocritical (even if the FDA and CDC weren't the organizations he was originally talking about as the swamp). When you spend years telling everyone not to trust anything in DC, it shouldn't be surprising when people don't. I do think a different president, like a Reagan, could have guided us through this with a very different outcome. Maybe not from a statistics perspective, but definitely from a cultural one.

A lot of the disconnects we have even on these two posts link directly back to these last two paragraphs.

Really good post, thanks.
Smudge
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:

I don't think everything on here is fact. Not trying to argue per se, but if you're trying to outline "what we know" it needs to be pretty strict on what is and isn't absolutely true. motivations are hard to make facts out of, and that's mostly where I'd raise the flag.

The original fatality rate estimates were all over the place, but wayyyyyy back early March of '20 the much-maligned (incorrectly, in my opinion) Imperial College put out a paper that had an IFR of 0.6% for the US, based on our demographics. It also broke down IFR by age group. I've seen several subsequent papers that make that a pretty dang good prediction for the initial variant. The transmissibility estimates were also good - if you're saying how does it transmit (aerosol, touch, whatever) I think a lot of that was just wtf mass chaos of research trying to figure it out.

One thing I learned when I was digging into stuff at the beginning of the pandemic was that you could fill books with things we don't know about everyday diseases like flu and seasonal colds...questions like, how transmissible is it, how many people are actually immune, how often do we get reinfected by the same virus, how long does immunity last, how does flu actually spread. it was pretty eye-opening. So I think you should also extend at least some grace to genuine not knowing on some of the contradicting early information. The other thing that contributed to the chaos was the sheer volume of research being done - a lot of it by people who are not experts in that field. there was so much money available for research that anyone with a PhD in almost any subject was researching, and the volume overwhelmed journals, which lead to a ton of pre-prints being out there before review, which lead to many retractions, which lead to more confusion.

I agree that politicization began from the left. It was disheartening, actually.. a stark contrast to how the country came together after 9/11 for example.

I would really contest item 4. I just don't think this comports with the facts at all. This is one of those social media filter things, that depending on where you look you get an extremely different perspective. the signal to noise ratio of research publications as above contributed a lot to this. What's more, effective therapeutics were identified (dexamethosone, for example) and care got better as people got more experience with the disease, so I'm not sure the narrative is even directionally correct. There were tens of thousands of studies done on all kinds of therapeutics.

Item 6 is again moving the locus of power way too far into the hands of politicians. I think there was some element of the "noble lie" going on, but there is again also a genuine element of unknowing. The efficacy claim was what was measured, it isn't a lie to report it. What was part of the "noble lie" was not also saying that we didn't know how long that would last - because we didn't know very much about immunity vs coronaviruses. So more of a lie of omission than a lie about facts.

Sometime around item 7 is where things become a false dichotomy. The vaccine was never tested to prevent PCR positive nose swabs. This was just a complete mismanagement and poor messaging by the CDC etc - we should never have been counting cases that way. Early on, maybe, because you're trying to halt general spread, but later it was just nonsense and led to sensationalist reporting. Too easy to make if it bleeds it leads headlines from it. The other thing that matters is that the virus did mutate, and that did make the vaccine less effective at preventing minor illness. So this doesn't show the vaccine never worked, or that the 95% finding was wrong. It shows that it worked differently against a different virus. It also gave us some understanding of how long the protection lasted - just like we learned over time how long protection from infection lasted.

A big part of the problem with 7 is that the public's perception of how well vaccines work is skewed by vaccines like measles and polio, and most people don't know how effective vaccines in general are at preventing infection and illness (most don't prevent infection, most aren't 99% effective, and so on). I know I was completely ignorant of those things because it never mattered before. And politicians I think played into that ignorance to some extent with the messaging, which backfired spectacularly.

I think item 8 is more explained by ineptitude and a general belief in the illusion of control than anything else. people in government felt like they had to do something, so they tried something, anything. in the end lockdowns etc probably did delay the spread, but the economic and human cost was incredibly high. the facts about the efficacy of the lockdown measures can be established, but the motivations are less absolute.

I think items 9-10 are very fair.

Ironically a big part of the lack of trust comes from a kind of paradox of trusting the CDC and FDA too much before this. Prior to covid I think most Americans would have given both of those institutions very very high scores in credibility and reliability. Too high, to be frank. But people have a incredibly high degree of trust in the FDA that's well earned, largely. We don't worry about food and medicines being crappy in this country. So when we needed them, and they couldn't answer what seem like the most basic of questions, it shattered the illusion. Because people are what they are, the perception way overcorrected to the other side, so now you have people that think the CDC and FDA are utterly incompetent and suck at everything. That's just as wrong as the former view, I think. They're actually pretty good at what they do, with certain areas where they are exceptionally good, and certain areas where they're bad, and a bunch of stuff in the middle.

There's also a kind of bitter irony in that President Trump spent a good chunk of his campaign and presidency deliberately sowing distrust in the federal government. Rightly or wrongly, when he needed people to come together and listen to federal institutions, it felt hypocritical (even if the FDA and CDC weren't the organizations he was originally talking about as the swamp). When you spend years telling everyone not to trust anything in DC, it shouldn't be surprising when people don't. I do think a different president, like a Reagan, could have guided us through this with a very different outcome. Maybe not from a statistics perspective, but definitely from a cultural one.

A lot of the disconnects we have even on these two posts link directly back to these last two paragraphs.

Really good post, thanks.


Actually a lot I agree with here… some I don't

I'll respond more later… Busy day.

Thanks for the logical and emotion free response, as always…
Class of '00
Gig 'em!
J. Walter Weatherman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There's some I agree with and some I don't here, Zobel already outlined most of it, but I also appreciate the well thought out response. Much better than the "lol take your 8th shot lib" type posts that have come from others.

One thing I would say that is addressed as one cause of the issues in your post, but to me not to the degree that it should be in terms of blame - the media on both sides being financially motivated to sew panic and controversy vs. just reporting the facts what was happening. To me this was the key driver and connector between all of the issues we've seen. Politicians on the left used the media driven panic to get more control because more control is all they ever want, and psuedo celeb doctors/scientists like Feigl-Ding and that clown Hotez used the panic to get more famous for future book and speaking deals. But none of that happens without the media enterprise constantly driving panic by over-reporting what was actually happening.
Robert L. Peters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I support all members of the left in getting continued boosters. Frankly I think if you voted for Biden it should be mandated.
Whistle Pig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Green Dragon said:

I support all members of the left in getting continued boosters. Frankly I think if you voted for Biden it should be mandated.


Ritual suicide by 350,000 people. But at least they owned the libs.

fullback44
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The goal tenders are out in force on this thread.. right on que guys .. bravo bravo bravo clap clap clap

Glad I have you guys perma'ed

But please let the posters post about sudden cardiac arrest / strokes for athletes .. that's all this thread is for, to keep a tally and post new ones people find …. This is not a Covid vaccine debate thread
aggierogue
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

5. Vaccine released with well documented, though exceedingly rare, serious side effects (basically any medicine ever).
Yeah, I don't agree with this. I also believe that the risk/return benefit is not there for healthy children.

As we continue to learn more, we're going to find that this vaccine's side effects are not as "exceedingly rare" as many claim.

Quote:

11. Studies have been recently released showing that vaccine induced strokes/myocarditis are lower than infection induced, and both are very rare.
Sure...(eyeroll)
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Healthy children and young adults never needed any kind of vaccine whatsoever and it was pretty clear from the beginning they had little to no risk from that virus.

The tyrannical mandates at schools and businesses and by governments to force masses of children and healthy young adults to inject an experiment with zero long term studies was sick and the sanctimonious government-worshiping programmed minions who joined in on the scare tactics, pressuring, humiliating, and degrading of anyone who was rightfully hesitant should have hell to pay.

By the time we got to Dec 21 - early spring 22, when most of the western world was over 70% force vaxxed and the omicron sniffles were infecting millions and millions, the vaxxed and unvaxxed had the exact same common cold-like symptoms for the same couple of days. Vax made no difference. Now, healthy people and athletes seem to be dying suddenly at an alarming rate and questions can't be asked about these "coincidences". Dismiss it as a conspiracy theory or call it confirmation bias all you want. Keep posting some charts about how proud you are of blue locked down and more forced and heavily vaxxed states, go boost yourselves some more if it makes you feel better, but no one who isn't vaxxed now is going to get vaxxed and more and more vaxxed people should be concerned enough to want a real study done on #diedsuddenly and ultimately hold big gov and big pharma accountable.
Whistle Pig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
70% were forced to vax huh? Citation needed.
snowdog90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Whistle Pig said:

70% were forced to vax huh? Citation needed.


Well, just anecdotal, but of my 3 sons, 2 were forced to vax to go to school. Third was still in high school. I was able to convince him not to vax. He graduated. He wanted to go into the Air Force, where he would have been forced to vax. I thankfully talked him into a year of college first. Evidently, vax is no longer mandated, at least not for Blinn.

So 66% of my sons are vaxed, very fortunate not to be 100%.
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
People rejoicing and mocking that dude was killed in a boating accident can go triple boost themselves.
unmade bed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oh no said:

People rejoicing and mocking that dude was killed in a boating accident can go triple boost themselves.


And what of the people "rejoicing" and "mocking" other people that die unexpectedly by immediately assuming their death is vax related.
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Wondering if all these #diedsuddenly could have a connection to an experimental drug with no long term studies that millions of people just took seems a little different than posting about a boating accident and asking for a study on boating accidents, but an ******* who would post that already knew that.
unmade bed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rapier108 said:

Exceeding lame attempt to downplay the problems with the shots, especially by using the accidental death of someone.


Not downplaying the "problems with the shots." The effects of Covid vaccines absolutely warrant continued study (which are ongoing as best as I can tell) and without question the vaccines can and have caused harmful side effects.

I totally get not wanting to be involved in a massive vaccine trial and 100% support your right as well as anyone else's right to refuse the vaccine. I don't think that makes you an "anti-vaxxer" or a bad person or whatever people were being accused of being for resisting the Covid vaccination. I think political efforts to mandate the vaccine was illegal and despicable. I said here MULTIPLE times when Biden was doing that **** that it was totally wrong and totally political and in my view it was designed to hurt his political opponents and to further turn the vaccination into a political issue, which was the opposite way to increase vaccine acceptance

What my post was a lame attempt to do, was to demonstrate how ridiculous (and really how much of an ******* move) it is to immediately take someone's unexpected death and start making points about the Covid vaccine with it.
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG


A lot of boating accidents in Scotland?
NASAg03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Former 'American Idol' contestant CJ Harris' cause of death revealed.

Walker County Coroner's Office confirmed C.J. Harris died of heart attack. He was 31

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/former-american-idol-contestant-c-j-harris-cause-of-death-revealed
Mike Shaw - Class of '03
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Probably nothing. Pure coincidence. These things probably happened all the time before; we just didn't hear about them. Do not do a study. Get vaxed and boosted.
Stat Monitor Repairman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
All this is getting awkward.
Robert L. Peters
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oh no said:

People rejoicing and mocking that dude was killed in a boating accident can go triple boost themselves.


I will mock the same way unvaxxed were mocked when they died. And I will laugh. Not because I'm hateful, but because so many wanted to force us to take it. Now we sit and smile.
unmade bed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oh no said:

Probably nothing. Pure coincidence. These things probably happened all the time before; we just didn't hear about them. Do not do a study. Get vaxed and boosted.


What makes you think studies are not being done?
captkirk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/01/faulty-gene-raises-heart-risk-british-heart-foundation
JFABNRGR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
captkirk said:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/01/faulty-gene-raises-heart-risk-british-heart-foundation


BHF a charity. I wonder who are their biggest financial supporters. No backup to their statements and man the timing is just another coincidence.
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
unmade bed said:

oh no said:

Probably nothing. Pure coincidence. These things probably happened all the time before; we just didn't hear about them. Do not do a study. Get vaxed and boosted.


What makes you think studies are not being done?
just the attitude of every media member, publication, and social media account and all the programmed minions that watch or follow them who are immediately dismissing every #diedsuddenly they see with every or any excuse and belittle anyone asking questions and especially the sanctimonious asses who post articles about a boating accident death and asking for boating accident studies.
samurai_science
How long do you want to ignore this user?
unmade bed said:

oh no said:

Probably nothing. Pure coincidence. These things probably happened all the time before; we just didn't hear about them. Do not do a study. Get vaxed and boosted.


What makes you think studies are not being done?
In the US the studies are being done by Pfizer and Moderna.....yay
samurai_science
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Whistle Pig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oh no said:

unmade bed said:

oh no said:

Probably nothing. Pure coincidence. These things probably happened all the time before; we just didn't hear about them. Do not do a study. Get vaxed and boosted.


What makes you think studies are not being done?
just the attitude of every media member, publication, and social media account and all the programmed minions that watch or follow them who are immediately dismissing every #diedsuddenly they see with every or any excuse and belittle anyone asking questions and especially the sanctimonious asses who post articles about a boating accident death and asking for boating accident studies.


You think studies aren't being done because of vibes you've observed on social media and on TV? What types of studies do you think should be done on the falling rates of cardiac deaths among 18-35 year olds?
ProgN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.foxnews.com/media/longtime-fox-news-executive-alan-komissaroff-dead-47

Quote:

Fox News Senior Vice President of News & Politics Alan Komissaroff died on Friday after suffering a heart attack at his home earlier this month. He was 47 years old.
oh no
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
There are super boosted vax defenders on this very thread dismissing died suddenly- where people just want real studies done- by saying things like:

"that list of died suddenly athletes doesn't count because it's made on a geocities site template"

"I'm sure lots of people died suddenly before; you just didn't notice"

"these people that died suddenly might have died from covid; not the covid vaccine"

"there's more excess deaths in red states where there are fewer people vaxxed"

"the article about dead soccer players was written by a doctor in Israel and wasn't peer reviewed"

There's only a thousand memes on the internet about these "coincidences", and there are real articles talking about how climate change or racism could be causing excess deaths or cardiac issues so I'm not the only one getting "vibes" that died suddenly is being ignored and people that are curious if vax could be connected and want real studies are getting dismissed, probably by the people who were sanctimonious asses about their vax status and now afraid to find out the truth.
ProgN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I just go by what I see and it's anecdotal but during the last 18 months I've had 9 good friends aged 35-70 experience a stroke or heart attack. I've put 4 in the ground and the others are shells of their former selves. They never spoke about heart issues before but they do have one common denominator among them, the jab. I'm glad I never took that **** and it will never go into my son.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sorry, Prog. That's rough. I know because in the late 80s I lost my only sister (natural causes) my first husband right at a year later (car accident) and my only brother a week after the loss of my husband (bro died in a boating accident.)

The heart can only sustain so much at one time. And the brain can only process so much before overload.
ProgN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thank you, they were good people. I help out their families when I can or they ask. I have no proof it was the vax but it's the only thing they all had in common and steeled my resolve to never take that crap and protect my son from it.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ProgN said:

Thank you, they were good people. I help out their families when I can or they ask. I have no proof it was the vax but it's the only thing they all had in common and steeled my resolve to never take that crap and protect my son from it.
Whatever it was or was not, doesn't matter. A loss like that is a loss. Gut punch that doesn't end.

And those really do change people. I was a different person before I went though my losses.

But the weird thing for me was how many people I saw die when I was a very young kid, like 3-6 years old. We lived ina rented house in Houston. Our back yard had a cyclone fence and backed to a very busy and mostly blind intersection. Wrecks happened often. Fatal wrecks. Seeing people who had gone through their windshields, tailmen on firetrucks when the truck couldn't make that 90 degree turn and rolled over on them?

Convertible coming from the opposite direction. Tire blew. Rolled over and over throwing the occupants out. Dad was trying to get the dirt out of their noses, so they could breathe. All dead right there. Had blood all over him when he finally came back to the car. The irony was that we were on the way to a funeral
TRADUCTOR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Death sucks for the living.
aggierogue
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ProgN said:

I just go by what I see and it's anecdotal but during the last 18 months I've had 9 good friends aged 35-70 experience a stroke or heart attack. I've put 4 in the ground and the others are shells of their former selves. They never spoke about heart issues before but they do have one common denominator among them, the jab. I'm glad I never took that **** and it will never go into my son.
It's all a coincidence. Just listen to Whistle Pig and Zobel. Heart issues are falling and people are healthier than ever!
Whistle Pig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

It's all a coincidence. Just listen to Whistle Pig and Zobel. Heart issues are falling.

The data doesn't care about your feelings, anecdotes, or vibes. It "feels" like there's a lot more because you're searching out these stories, but didn't do it prior to 2020. This is an emotive and unreliable way to gather information.


Quote:

people are healthier than ever!

Never said that. But heart related deaths among young people didn't increase after vaccines.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.