Vaccines are moving the needle...

[javadog]

Originally Posted by john70t

why isn't everyone in wuhan dead by now?

hcq…

[javadog]

More reading for Speeder:

https://meaninginhistory.substack.com/p/covid-friday-younger-and-younger

[Sooner or later]

Originally Posted by javadog

More reading for Speeder:

https://meaninginhistory.substack.com/p/covid-friday-younger-and-younger

Research the paper that is cited in the blog.

American Heart Association
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/reader/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001051

Expression of Concern: Abstract 10712: Mrna COVID Vaccines Dramatically
Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the
PULS Cardiac Test: a Warning
This article expresses concern regarding abstract “Abstract 10712: Mrna COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase En￾dothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: a Warning” which originally published November 8, 2021; https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712.
Soon after publication of the above abstract in Circulation, it was brought to the American Heart Association Com￾mittee on Scientific Sessions Program’s attention that there are potential errors in the abstract. Specifically, there are several typographical errors, there is no data in the abstract regarding myocardial T-cell infiltration, there are no statisti￾cal analyses for significance provided, and the author is not clear that only anecdotal data was used.
We are publishing this Expression of Concern until a suitable correction is published to indicate that the abstract in its current version may not be reliable.

[island911]

^ "Specifically, there are several typographical errors.."

LOL, what a lead.

Also, why would they include data in the abstract regarding myocardial T-cell infiltration when that is not their claim?

[island911]

snippet from Java's link

... a few days ago, after this was published, someone from a very prestigious British institution--cardiology department, researcher, whistleblower if you like--contacted me to say that researchers in this department had found something similar within the coronary arteries linked to the vaccine--inflammation from imaging studies--around the coronary arteries. They had a meeting and these researchers at the moment have decided that they're not gonna publish their findings because they are concerned about losing research funding from the drug industry.

[Sooner or later]

Originally Posted by island911

^ "Specifically, there are several typographical errors.."

LOL, what a lead.

Also, why would they include data in the abstract regarding myocardial T-cell infiltration when that is not their claim?

Read the paper. It is not a study. It is not a trial. It is a joke of a paper with significant errors that concern the American Heart Association.

When one uses a questionable source that cites a questionable paper one can draw questionable conclusions.

Go ahead and believe the crap.

[javadog]

Go ahead and believe what you want, there’s overwhelming evidence that these vaccines cause problems. I hope none of you suffer these issues personally but, I have to say you’ve been warned.

[ckelly78z]

Originally Posted by javadog

Go ahead and believe what you want, there’s overwhelming evidence that these vaccines cause problems. I hope none of you suffer these issues personally but, I have to say you’ve been warned.

^^^Not only that, but the continued chasing of variants by big Pharma through their vaccines, is only creating new. more resistant variants that don't respond to the current vaccines.

[javadog]

Originally Posted by ckelly78z

^^^Not only that, but the continued chasing of variants by big Pharma through their vaccines, is only creating new. more resistant variants that don't respond to the current vaccines.

Hey, that sounds like a really good business model. Engineer leaky vaccines which give rise to endless mutations, which you chase with noon improved booster shots forever.

Perpetual motion isn’t a thing, but this sounds like it sure could act like that.

[Sooner or later]

Originally Posted by ckelly78z

^^^Not only that, but the continued chasing of variants by big Pharma through their vaccines, is only creating new. more resistant variants that don't respond to the current vaccines.

This is the first variant of concern post vaccination approval. It presumably came from the part of the world with some of the lowest rates of vaccination. South Africa is at 24%.

[island911]

Originally Posted by Sooner or later

Read the paper. It is not a study. It is not a trial. It is a joke of a paper with significant errors that concern the American Heart Association.

When one uses a questionable source that cites a questionable paper one can draw questionable conclusions.

Go ahead and believe the crap.

If this observation stood alone you would have a strong point, but it doesn't stand alone.

Certainly there are always people who have heart problems that present coincidentally with whatever event, like say, putting on socks in the morning, or say getting a vaccine. BUT that (so-called static death rate) has bumped up significantly, especially among younger people who have been recently vax'd. - IIRC 6x higher.

FWIW, I don't believe that the vax is causing heart problems in every person jabbed. But I also don't believe that there is nothing to see there either.

People are loosing their minds over only a 99.98% survival rate of CV of the young. Well, what is the survival rate of the vaccine? Should we loose our minds over a .02% death rate from the vaccine? (should it be that or higher)

[javadog]

Originally Posted by Sooner or later

This is the first variant of concern post vaccination approval. It presumably came from the part of the world with some of the lowest rates of vaccination. South Africa is at 24%.

Hey, give Delta it’s due.

[island911]

Originally Posted by Sooner or later

This is the first variant of concern post vaccination approval. It presumably came from the part of the world with some of the lowest rates of vaccination. South Africa is at 24%.

That's RACIST!

Seriously, 24% vaccinated... that's a lot of Africans.

[Sooner or later]

Originally Posted by island911

If this observation stood alone you would have a strong point, but it doesn't stand alone.

Certainly there are always people who have heart problems that present coincidentally with whatever event, like say, putting on socks in the morning, or say getting a vaccine. BUT that (so-called static death rate) has bumped up significantly, especially among younger people who have been recently vax'd. - IIRC 6x higher.

FWIW, I don't believe that the vax is causing heart problems in every person jabbed. But I also don't believe that there is nothing to see there either.

People are loosing their minds over only a 99.98% survival rate of CV of the young. Well, what is the survival rate of the vaccine? Should we loose our minds over a .02% death rate from the vaccine? (should it be that or higher)

It is true that multiple studies show a higher risk of heart problems after vaccination compared to unvaccinated and uninfected population.

It is also true that covid infected populations are at an even higher risk of heart related problems compared to vaccinated populations.

Lowest risk is in unvaccinated and uninfected
Higher risk in vaccinated populations
Highest risk in infected populations

In all 3 groups the risk is far higher in young male populations.

[javadog]

I haven’t seen that previously infected people have more cardiovascular problems than vaccinated people. Are you sure about that?

[javadog]

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/shocking-big-pharma-received-emergency-use-approval-couple-weeks-ago-covid-discovered-couple-days-ago/

[Sooner or later]

Here is the latest. There are several. Myocarditis after infection has been know for a long time.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2110475

Vaccination was most strongly associated with an elevated risk of myocarditis (risk ratio, 3.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.55 to 12.44; risk difference, 2.7 events per 100,000 persons; 95% CI, 1.0 to 4.6)

SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a substantially increased risk of myocarditis (risk ratio, 18.28; 95% CI, 3.95 to 25.12; risk difference, 11.0 events per 100,000 persons;

[island911]

So that is comparing myocarditis risk during active (severe?) infection, and post vax risk.

But do we have a really good count of total CV infections? A year ago that number was 37% of the population had the CV. But even that number is tough to nail down because so many have no symptoms.

The other part of that is whether we have full reporting of myocarditis in post vax'd.

[island911]

Just saw this in your link (thanks for that, BTW)

However, phase 3 trials may have inherent limitations in assessing vaccine safety because of a small number of participants and a healthier-than-average sample population. Hence, they are often underpowered to identify less common adverse events.

[Sooner or later]

Originally Posted by island911

Just saw this in your link (thanks for that, BTW)

The avg phase 3 trial size is far smaller than the Pfizer or Moderna trials. Less than the normal max of 5,000 compared to 30,000+.

To find a 1 in 50,000 or 100,000 problem it would take several hundred thousand in a trial. And that doesn't happen

Phase IV is where the rare conditions are found. That is where it ultimately was shown.