【其它话题】Sci:新冠康复后严重心血管疾病风险+72%Science上2月9号的新文章大家怎么看？
原文地址：
https://www.science.org/content/article/covid-19-takes-serious-toll-heart-health-full-year-after-recovery
引用下文章的一些发现：
　In an analysis of more than 11 million U.S. veterans’ health records, researchers found the risk of 20 different heart and vessel maladies　was substantially increased　in veterans who had COVID-19 1 year earlier, compared with those who didn’t.　
　had COVID-19 faced a 72% higher risk of heart failure after 12 months than those in a control group who didn’t test positive
该帖荣获当日十大第2，奖励楼主18分以及27华新币，时间：2022-02-19 22:00:04。 [Gofly (2-18 23:46, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]1楼

还能怎么看，顺其自然呗物竞天择就行了。
再说了，趁现在这个机会发的一些水论文，未必有什么鸟价值。[fqfp (2-18 23:57, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]2楼

(引用 fqfp:还能怎么看，顺其自然呗物竞天择就行了。 再说了，趁现在这个机会发的一些水论文，未必有什么鸟价值。)嗯的确很水才一千一百万人的数据，而且大家都知道science是世界最水的几个期刊之一 　[本文发送自华新iOS APP] [Gofly (2-19 0:21, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]3楼

别盲目崇拜集最顶尖制药公司的力量搞出来的疫苗和booster，现在看来也是屁用没有，完全是靠硬趟靠病毒的自然演化靠全民免疫。
发几篇鸟文章能指望个啥。[fqfp (2-19 0:35, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]4楼

怕啦https://youtu.be/R4e
oMKB7cKo鱼[美好的岁月 (2-19 1:40, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]5楼

(引用 美好的岁月:怕啦https://youtu.be/R4e oMKB7cKo鱼)分三类。没有入院的增加的幅度非常非常有限。没有标题惊悚。都喜欢搞个大新闻

The study’s enrollment period ended before vaccines were widely available, so 99.7% of infected veterans were unvaccinated when they contracted COVID-19. Therefore, the paper doesn’t address whether long-term cardiovascular problems may arise after breakthrough infections in already vaccinated people. (A new analysis tackling that question is now under review at a journal.) Another limitation of the study is that the veteran population skews older, white, and male: In all three groups, about 90% of patients were men and 71% to 76% were white. Patients were in their early 60s, on average 　[本文发送自华新手机Wap版] [dsx1 (2-19 6:39, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]6楼

(引用 dsx1:分三类。没有入院的增加的幅度非常非常有限。没有标题惊悚。都喜欢搞个大新闻 The study’s enrollment period ended before vaccines w...)应该去搞一个关于拜神和不拜神 对于中彩票概率的影响。
一组是从不拜神，概率百分之0.01。另一组是经常拜神，概率是百分之0.02。科学显示，拜神可以加倍中彩票概率。 　[本文发送自华新手机Wap版] [dsx1 (2-19 6:46, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]7楼

拖拖的标题党假新闻，不懂哪个新闻网站抄的1，原文根本不在science,而是nature medicine
2,研究的人99.7 %的人是没打疫苗的
3，假新闻的精髓:半真半假，断章取义
原文Other cardiovascular disorders included heart failure increase 72%
改成faced a 72% higher risk of heart failure [爱瞎说大实话 (2-19 6:56, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]8楼

(引用 爱瞎说大实话:拖拖的标题党假新闻，不懂哪个新闻网站抄的1，原文根本不在science,而是nature medicine 2,研究的人99.7 %的人是没打疫苗的 3，假新闻的...)现在的论文都是先有结论 再找zhengju

　[本文发送自华新手机Wap版] [vitesse (2-19 7:17, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]9楼

(引用 爱瞎说大实话:拖拖的标题党假新闻，不懂哪个新闻网站抄的1，原文根本不在science,而是nature medicine 2,研究的人99.7 %的人是没打疫苗的 3，假新闻的...)原文链接呢？ 　[本文发送自华新iOS APP] [国王大道 (2-19 7:48, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]10楼

(引用 爱瞎说大实话:拖拖的标题党假新闻，不懂哪个新闻网站抄的1，原文根本不在science,而是nature medicine 2,研究的人99.7 %的人是没打疫苗的 3，假新闻的...)有点道理，我是觉得science 怎么会闲到去搞这种劳动密集型分析。。。。。 　[本文发送自华新iOS APP] [Blzrd (2-19 8:36, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]11楼

(引用 爱瞎说大实话:拖拖的标题党假新闻，不懂哪个新闻网站抄的1，原文根本不在science,而是nature medicine 2,研究的人99.7 %的人是没打疫苗的 3，假新闻的...)Nature 上也有类似的文章没错，并不是假新闻，原文的前两段如下

　
Even a mild case of COVID-19 can increase a person’s risk of cardiovascular problems for at least a year after diagnosis, a new study1　shows. Researchers found that rates of many conditions, such as heart failure and stroke, were substantially higher in people who had recovered from COVID-19 than in similar people who hadn’t had the disease.


“It doesn’t matter if you are young or old, it doesn’t matter if you smoked, or you didn’t,” says study co-author Ziyad Al-Aly at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, and the chief of research and development for the Veterans Affairs (VA) St. Louis Health Care System. “The risk was there.”
[Gofly (2-19 15:06, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]12楼

(引用 国王大道:原文链接呢？)Nature上的链接如下https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00403-0[Gofly (2-19 15:07, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]13楼

(引用 爱瞎说大实话:拖拖的标题党假新闻，不懂哪个新闻网站抄的1，原文根本不在science,而是nature medicine 2,研究的人99.7 %的人是没打疫苗的 3，假新闻的...)说得好！英文的东西可以信？ 现在正经人谁说英文啊。

不论science， nature，还是柳叶刀，都是被资本控制的宣传机器。不接受反驳

原文的意思还是让大家继续打疫苗，买特效药，你们懂的[DerrickCH (2-19 15:24, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]14楼

(引用 Gofly:Nature上的链接如下https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00403-0)？？这个是10号的news，你发的那个science是九号的，哪个是原文。 　[本文发送自华新iOS APP] [国王大道 (2-19 15:37, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]15楼

(引用 dsx1:分三类。没有入院的增加的幅度非常非常有限。没有标题惊悚。都喜欢搞个大新闻 The study’s enrollment period ended before vaccines w...)平均年龄60+这个亮了，干嘛不直接分析年龄80+的，风险妥妥90%以上。。lol….. 　[本文发送自华新iOS APP] [Blzrd (2-19 15:40, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]16楼

(引用 国王大道:？？这个是10号的news，你发的那个science是九号的，哪个是原文。)我标题引用的是原文啊上面另外一个家伙说nature上的才是原文，还说我说的是假新闻，我就把链接都贴出来了 　[本文发送自华新iOS APP] [Gofly (2-19 15:40, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]17楼

(引用 Blzrd:平均年龄60+这个亮了，干嘛不直接分析年龄80+的，风险妥妥90%以上。。lol…..)Nature上有类似的报道，上面有链接“It doesn’t matter if you are young or old, it doesn’t matter if you smoked, or you didn’t,” says study co-author Ziyad Al-Aly at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, and the chief of research and development for the Veterans Affairs (VA) St. Louis Health Care System. “The risk was there.” 　[本文发送自华新iOS APP] [Gofly (2-19 15:48, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]18楼

(引用 Blzrd:平均年龄60+这个亮了，干嘛不直接分析年龄80+的，风险妥妥90%以上。。lol…..)100岁以上的老人国家免费医疗[fqfp (2-19 16:16, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]19楼

什么时候science，nature这么不堪了，仅仅是因为和自己观点不合？[lgland (2-19 16:20, Long ago)] [ 传统版 | sForum ][登录后回复]20楼