Risk of autoimmune diseases following COVID-19 and the potential protective effect from vaccination: a population-based cohort study

"Findings
The study included 1,028,721 COVID-19 and 3,168,467 non-COVID individuals. Compared with non-COVID controls, patients with COVID-19 presented an increased risk of developing pernicious anaemia [adjusted Hazard Ratio (aHR): 1.72; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.12–2.64]; spondyloarthritis [aHR: 1.32 (95% CI: 1.03–1.69)]; rheumatoid arthritis [aHR: 1.29 (95% CI: 1.09–1.54)]; other autoimmune arthritis [aHR: 1.43 (95% CI: 1.33–1.54)]; psoriasis [aHR: 1.42 (95% CI: 1.13–1.78)]; pemphigoid [aHR: 2.39 (95% CI: 1.83–3.11)]; Graves' disease [aHR: 1.30 (95% CI: 1.10–1.54)]; anti-phospholipid antibody syndrome [aHR: 2.12 (95% CI: 1.47–3.05)]; immune mediated thrombocytopenia [aHR: 2.1 (95% CI: 1.82–2.43)]; multiple sclerosis [aHR: 2.66 (95% CI: 1.17–6.05)]; vasculitis [aHR: 1.46 (95% CI: 1.04–2.04)].

Among COVID-19 patients, completion of two doses of COVID-19 vaccine shows a decreased risk of pemphigoid, Graves' disease, anti-phospholipid antibody syndrome, immune-mediated thrombocytopenia, systemic lupus erythematosus and other autoimmune arthritis.

Interpretation
Our findings suggested that COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of developing various ADs and the risk could be attenuated by COVID-19 vaccination. Future studies investigating pathology and mechanisms would be valuable to interpreting our findings."

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/e...331-0/fulltext


Data
"The Hospital Authority electronic medical record data underlying the results presented in the study are available from Administrative Assessment of External Data Requests, Hong Kong Hospital Authority Head Office."

Funding
Supported by RGC Collaborative Research Fund (C7154-20GF).
https://www.ugc.edu.hk/eng/rgc/fundi...sum.html#C7154

Pfizer, Janssen, Bayer, GSK, Roche, Novartis, and AstraZeneca are all listed in "Declaration of interests" for honoraria, speaking fees, and consulation outside of the submitted work.

I've read of that concern before about vaccines possibly causing autoimmune diseases. the worry being that vaccines fire up and change the immune system, which sometimes results in the immune system attacking the body.

Somewhat along these lines read today this concerning articles about observations seen with the COVID vaccine ~


"A Vaccine Nightmare Story Everyone Needs to Hear
Jane will never be the same."

https://www.frontpagemag.com/a-vacci...needs-to-hear/

Good find using millions of subjects.

"This territory-wide retrospective cohort study suggests COVID-19 is associated with increased risk of developing various autoimmune disorders and the risk is attenuated by full COVID-19 vaccination."

The problem is that the CT's don't have the supporting evidence.

How/why would "firing up the immune system" through vaccination be worse than "firing up the immune system" with an infection that alters DNA and cell functions?

Why do mRNA Covid jabs cause myocarditis and autoimmune diseases?

What is the impact of the unusual immune system changes they provoke?

Do their risks increase with each dose, and if so, does offering them to anyone now make sense?
Most of all, are the shots safe long-term?

None of these questions have quick answers. mRNA shots are hugely complex, and scientists have almost no long-term data on them. Before 2020 they were just another unproven biotechnology slowly moving through early-stage human trials.

But answers must be found. Over one billion people received the mRNAs, making them maybe the largest medical experiment ever. It is now clear the clinical trials from Pfizer and Moderna missed crucial risks and side effects, including menstrual disruption, myocarditis and other cardiovascular problems, and autoimmune crises.


Some scientists are trying to perform the crucial work that’s needed.

In only the last few weeks, researchers in Switzerland, Hong Kong, and Italy have published papers suggesting mRNA-caused myocarditis is more common and may hurt the heart for longer than previously known, while South Korean cardiologists reported almost two dozen fatal mRNA-caused myocarditis cases.
Only yesterday, immunologists in Hungary reported the mRNAs over time cause people to produce more of a type of antibody that does not destroy the coronavirus, building on findings last winter from German researchers.
Meanwhile, Japanese scientists have published many studies and case reports on potential autoimmune side effects of the mRNAs, including thyroid disease and rheumatoid arthritis.


Seeing a trend?

The United States has used far more mRNA Covid jabs than any other country, giving roughly 650 million jabs to about 250 million Americans.
Since April 2021, when regulators began discouraging use of Johnson & Johnson’s jab, which used a different but somewhat less radical biotechnology and required only one shot, the mRNAs have essentially been the only Covid vaccine technology available to Americans. More than 95 percent of all Covid shots given in the United States have been mRNAs.
The United States has spent more on the mRNAs than any other country, of course. But it has also profited more from them. Pfizer and Moderna, which brought the mRNAs to market and have sold over $100 billion in jabs worldwide, are both American companies (Pfizer splits mRNA sales and profits equally with the German drugmaker BioNTech.)


The American government played a crucial role in the development of both shots, especially Moderna’s, which the National Institutes of Health helped the company design.
The aid was so crucial that in February Moderna agreed to pay NIH $400 million for it. And the United States encouraged other countries to use them, including offering doses to China in December 2022, a gift the Chinese rejected.
If BioNTech’s key role in creating the mRNAs means they cannot be called an entirely American creation, they are close. American scientists, companies, and government officials shepherded their development.

Now the mRNAs have, to put it politely, missed their marks.
That failure can be measured in many ways, including cratering public demand despite a multi-year propaganda campaign and the unexplained rise in all-cause mortality across mRNA countries following last winter’s booster campaign.

Perhaps the most basic measure of their failure is this: the choice countries made in 2020 and 2021 was not between the mRNAs and no Covid vaccines. It was between the mRNAs and simpler vaccines based on older technology. Countries that used the old-style vaccines, including China, have had comparable or better outcomes to the mRNA nations - without any of the long-term risks.

But now that the winter 2021 promise of an mRNA miracle has vanished, American scientists and institutions have disappeared too. The lack of American research on papers examining problems with the jabs grows more glaring each week.

The gap is especially notable because the United States biomedical complex is the most powerful and best-funded in the world. Without its involvement, progress on understanding these issues will occur much more slowly.
Why this studied disinterest from American scientists? And what if anything can be done to change it?

Aside from the underlying issue of what long-term risks the shots may carry, those questions are becoming among the most urgent for mRNA skeptics to answer.


https://open.substack.com/pub/alexbe..._campaign=post

Total amount fined since 2000

J&J $24,347,639,699
Bayer $15,668,729,037
Pfizer $10,945,838,549
GSK $9,572,803,406
Novartis $2,951,229,570
Astrazeneca $1,539,362,457
Roche $426,229,688

Therefore covid infection doesn't lead to increased risk of developing an autoimmune disorder?

I'm not following the attempted logic

Wauw another CTRL+F medical records study, who would have guessed?!

Should I inject a product into myself produced by companies fined billions of dollars for safety violations?

Wow, so to keep score, Impotence, brain damage, lung damage, heart damage, low testosterone, diabetes, high blood pressure, childhood diabetes, and now auto immune disease?

Not if you don't want to

Ideally, one would weigh the risks of immunonaive infection against the risks of vaccination in their decision making process.

I'll probably get the third variant eventually, and I'm not vaccinated.

What should I do?

J.L.C. not following something….why are we not surprised?


- XL received research grants from Janssen and Pfizer and consultancy fee from Merck Sharp & Dohme and Pfizer

- SCWC has received traveling support from Novartis and GSK

- CSLC has received grants from Pfizer, IQVIA, and Amgen; personal fees from Primevigilance Ltd

- CKHW reports receipt of research funding from AstraZeneca, and Boehringer Ingelheim

- EWC reports grants from Bayer, AstraZeneca, Novartis, RGA Reinsurance Company, Pfizer and consulting fees from Pfizer, Novartis, and AstraZeneca

- WKL participated on the Data Safety Advisory Board of AstraZeneca and Pfizer

- CSL reports payment of speaker fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, GSK, Janssen, Pfizer and Roche. He has also participated on the AstraZeneca Data Safety Advisory Board

- ICKW receives research funding outside the submitted work from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Janssen, Bayer, GSK, Novartis, Takeda




And lmmfao at the end of that giant wall of text being “ All other authors report no conflicts of interest.”

This is just the usual trying to dismiss for irrelevant reasons.

Do you have any criticism of the actual study?

You'll often find scientists at the top of their field are invited to give talks. Dunno why that invalidates their work

Whatever you want

Not just now, but yep.

It also turns people in to colossal ph4ggots.

In the meantime the last few months have been the lowest rate of infections since this whole thing started, 1/6th as much as this time last year.


covidactnow.org

August is traditionally cold and flu season, amirite?

Dang, must suck for all the jabbies who caught covid.

LMAO

Why?

This study concluded that infection post vaccination resulted in lower risk of later autoimmune disorder.

Oh, they have cohort data?

Wow.

Such evidence.

I'm sold.

Inject me harder!

So purebloods have a higher risk of aids?

I dunno.

I was asking why you made your statement.

Acquired immunodeficiency =/= autoimmune disorder

Would somebody please just give OP the Forum Fauci award. He's not going to stop until he gets it...

Is that a prize for not buying into CT's?

Is it a CT that Moderna causes many times greater chance of myocarditis among young males than pfizer?

or is that also fake?

What's the difference in risk? How do either compare to the base rate?

Absolute or relative risk?