Is a pacemaker preventive for feeling faint after a covid vaccinr?

[Quilter43]

With a booster feature like I would faint after rising from bed resting .then no pacemaket.heart stopped for 6 seconds.then later got pacemaker

[BobD Volunteer]

Really sorry but I don't understand your question but can make a guess.. If your presyncope was a result of your heart missing beats or briefly stopping then a PM should stop that yes.

[Quilter43 in reply to BobD]

Thx...thought so...had it after booster..thought related to that although had 3.4.5msec pauses which reas not so abnormal but pushed to get pacemaker so finally did..think kicks in ..

[Spiritji]

I fainted in the night after getting the Covid Booster Moderna and will not be getting any more vaccines!!!!! I woke up at 3am on the floor next to my bed ........I remember staggering on the way to the bathroom.........then woke up on the floor later...........I have permanent afib and on Pradaxa and diltiazen.......No more boosters for this girl..........plus I then went through over a year of chronic fatigue like it reactivated an old chronic fatigue virus..........My neighbor also fainted on the Pickle Ball Court after his Booster shot.....72 years old

[secondtry in reply to Spiritji]

Yes, you read about far too many booster problems but on the plus side the risk/reward discussion is opening up and resulting in less take-up this Autumn. Moderate exercise. Check out work by Peter Mccullough, FLCCC and World Council for Health. Hopefully soon a leading treatment will emerge to help all those with C/vaccine injury. Best wishes.

[Ppiman in reply to secondtry]

My brother wrote on his FB page a few weeks that he has "lost count" of the people he knows who have suffered after being given the booster. When I pressed him and reminded him that he really doesn't know enough people at all to have "lost count" even of any of them, he recanted and agreed only that he had "read of lots". And when I pressed him further, he agreed that the vast majority of those were likely anecdotal accounts (i.e. people who have only heard about problems).

As for the rest of the family, well, I decided to check and not one I asked knew a single person who had suffered long term from the vaccine and that was a lot of people, and includes some who are medical staff directly involved with the vaccines.

The vaccines are safe and are keeping us from getting the rare but terrible life-threatening form of covid.

Steve

[secondtry in reply to Ppiman]

I do so hope you are right but I will be waiting for more information. The truth will emerge one way or the other.

[Ppiman in reply to secondtry]

At least we can all be reassured that the scientific community isn’t holding its breath for the truth to emerge regarding the vaccine.

Regarding covid, however, the bad news for far too many people for my liking does continue to emerge. It’s looking clear that the virus homes in on and destroys certain cells that proliferate as we age or get overweight (i.e. cells in the lungs, heart and kidneys that produce lots of the “ACE2” enzyme).

Steve

[Silky57 in reply to Ppiman]

There’s no long term data to show they’re safe. So if there’s no long term data, we can’t yet know they’re safe. Maybe they are, but maybe they’re not. In the context of ‘anecdotal accounts’, what does ‘no one has suffered long term’ actually mean? What’s coming down the pipeline in 5/10/20 years we simply do not know. So it’s a risk/benefit balance. I’m 80 years old with comorbidity risk factors, yes I’m going to roll the dice. I’m 18 years old and healthy, no I’m not.

[Ppiman in reply to Silky57]

All that can be said is, yes, you are right; but can't it be added in mitigation that other vaccines work by exciting the body's immune system and they haven't given long term problems - quite the reverse?

It's true that mRNA is different; but that difference is only in the early stages of how it evokes a vaccine-like immune response and brings the body to create antibodies against serious disease. In that sense, the longer term potential for problems is very much less likely than might otherwise be the case since, once the mRNA has done its work in the cells, it is rapidly metabolised, neutralised and excreted.

We are also now a few years into mRNA vaccine development, trialling and usage, so researchers - many of them the world's leading specialists in virus research - are able to look back over quite a long period. It's also the case that nothing in pharmaceutical history has had anywhere near as much research carried out on it as covid-19 and its vaccines. The funding has been immense and continues to be so.

Finally, the transmission and suffering caused by disease itself simply had to be dealt with outside of ICTs as it transmits frighteningly easily and replicates rapidly via human cells primed with ACE2 protein. This gives it the potential - in rather few, for sure and thankfully, but still far too many people - to cause havoc with the body's immunological inflammatory systems and the major organs that exists to protect.

Steve

[Silky57 in reply to Ppiman]

I still can’t agree we can call it ‘safe’ for the whole population as yet.

MessengerRNA is an entirely new vaccine platform that has not been successfully used in humans to date anywhere in the world. It is not scientifically comparable with traditional vaccines and has bypassed levels of conventional safety testing before being issued with its Emergency Use Authority. Having been newly administered from the end of 2020, I don’t consider <3 years to constitute a ‘long period’ to accurately evaluate either long-term efficacy or, most importantly, safety.

We now know that it doesn’t stop transmission or infection. Indeed, it has recently been revealed that it was not even tested for efficacy in blocking transmission before it was granted EUA. So the individual risk/benefit analysis has shifted considerably based on current scientific knowledge of both the vaccine and the decreased fatality rate of the virus.

Therefore, back to my point. Accepting that this vaccine is by definition very different, we cannot reliably say it is safe until there are long term data. In the meantime, what is a very reasonable “safe” evaluation for an 80 year old cannot be equally applied to a healthy young person with a vanishingly small risk of being ill from Covid and 60+ years ahead of them.

[Ppiman in reply to Silky57]

To be clear, my use of the word “safe” was within the context of its being an injected vaccine and, so far as I can find out, it is still considered to be particularly safe. Short term adverse events such as thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, stroke, and myocarditis are very rare.

I am sure that most doctors and scientists do consider the vaccines to be effective at preventing severe covid, and I would argue that hospital admissions provide empirical evidence of this.

I understand that the vaccines do have some useful effect on transmission but take your point. The early trials surely showed high levels of antibodies forming post-vaccination, sufficient to prevent severe disease and to keep ICUs from becoming overwhelmed. As I understand it, the fatality rate from the virus is complex to calculate since so many people now have antibodies from prior infection survival or vaccination, both of which effectively prevent the severe respiratory form of covid.

The use of the vaccines in younger patients is, it seems - but only in retrospect - more open to question and it must remain possible that a different approach would be taken had we known then what we know now. Even so, severe adverse reactions in young people are still very low.

I do share some of your fears, however. I keep my fingers crossed. I had the booster two weeks ago but only after lots of reading and still with a little apprehension. The inflammatory effects of the mRNA vaccine and the potential for its inducing rare auto-immune effects are still being researched, but, the equivalent effects from the disease itself are vastly more likely and far more worrying.

Steve

[Silky57 in reply to Ppiman]

We don’t differ in our openness to the potential benefits in older people. Where we diverge I think is in younger people for whom the vaccine always presented more risk than benefit I would contend.

I’m surprised you’ve described “adverse events such as thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, stroke, and myocarditis” as “short term”. Equally, I can’t agree that “severe long-term adverse reactions in young people are still very low” because ‘long-term’ simply hasn’t elapsed and early signals are that the rates of myocarditis occurring in young men after second vaccination is already statistically significant.

In years to come, the vaccines may well prove to be safe. I, of course, fervently hope so. I am reminded, however, that legal cases are currently ongoing against Astra Zeneca whose vaccine we were assured was safe (and which I took on trust). With regard to the youngest and healthiest in our society therefore, whilst doubt persists and long term data remains necessarily unavailable, I believe the ethical decision should be (and should always have been) to err on the side of caution.

[Ppiman in reply to Silky57]

I have edited my post to reflect your comment as, yes, you are correct. There are, I presume, younger people who have experienced longer term effects from the illness, itself, rather than the vaccine, since I know personally of three. I don't know anyone who has suffered vaccine injury, but as you say, time will tell. One person I know suffers severely reduced kidney function from covid-induced vasculitis and two others had milder but rather long lasting effects on their taste and smell. The first was also vaccinated, but her GP rather ignored her "long covid" symptoms until it was almost too late in the day.

If I were younger, and had already had the illness and recovered, I don't think I would have the booster unless medically advised but part of that fear is owing to social media scare stories rather than empirical evidence, I strongly suspect. And, if I were overweight or had high blood pressure or diabetes, I would be first in the queue for a booster since most severe illness and deaths are in those groups.

I found this article interesting:

theguardian.com/commentisfr...

Steve

[Silky57 in reply to Ppiman]

So we agree: it depends on your individual circumstances and, I guess, your definition of ‘younger’ in our conversation. The topic engenders fierce debate but I don’t see it as unhealthy debate. I know I hold a passionate stance on my views on this particular jab vis a vis healthy young people. (Edit: Data published by Cambridge University using figures supplied by the MHRA showed that, as at April ‘21, the risk of anyone under 30 ending up in intensive care from the vaccine was 10x greater than doing so from Covid).

At the end of the day, we all want to protect the health of our families and society at large. We differ in our views of how to best do this.

Your last paragraph reflects my thinking, in particular your reference to social media and the fear factor (those in the UK will remember leaked WhatsApp messages revealed our Health Secretary’s aim to ‘frighten the pants off everyone’).

[Ppiman in reply to Silky57]

Yes - sensible discourse is always enjoyable and worthwhile. The governance of this country over that period was beyond our worst imaginings; one has to wonder if a similar enquiry was carried out over the government's handling of Brexit. Goodness me.

That Cambridge study was on the AZ vaccine, I suspect, and statistical claims phrased as "10x greater" are for the sensationalist media, I'd say? The actual figures were very small indeed. For young people at risk (obese and with hypertension, for example), it's not a good disease to catch, I would think.

Steve

[Budken in reply to Spiritji]

Trust me, getting Covid will do way more harm to you, than getting the booster. But if that's the way you want go, then that is your decision.

[Silky57 in reply to Budken]

Would that be your position for everyone Budken? Is there in your opinion a risk/benefit line?

[jayjay10000 in reply to Spiritji]

Hi there I have been reading some articles that a group of people in Germany are taking there local health authority to court after getting the Moderna COVID vaccine and later on finding out they all have some sort of heart health issues and there quality of the has been extremely reduced . Iam keeping a eye on the out come. After finding out I have heart health issues since getting my echo done in March2023. I always think that it was the Moderna vaccine which causes my heart issues.

[LaceyLady]

well I don’t intend to get any more, 8 wks having one ended up as emergency with severe T2 Dire-betes, no symptoms whatsoever. Also I’ve Haemochromatisis which they’ll know nothing about, won’t have tested amine with that! I have read a lot of accounts from drs.

[Qualipop in reply to LaceyLady]

After my booster last October -ish I developed an arrhythmia which lasted for 3 weeks then happened again about 2 months ago when I spent 4 days in hospital. The cardiologist told me it was almost certainly caused by the booster and they'd seen many many people the same. Needless to say I didn't have one this time. My husband did and is fine.

[LaceyLady in reply to Qualipop]

😳 Well, I’d had SVT, ventricular heart rhythm issue, but wasn’t that problematic. Develop PAF 2019 not sure why. Then T2D, booster caused??🤷🏼‍♀️ Found I have the Genetic Haemochromatisis, liver disorder that can affect organs there no way on gods earth will I willingly have a booster. They will not be able to assure me it won’t affect either of my conditions, they don’t even recognise that the GH Compound variant causes health issues 😡