Covid jabs, serious side effects and a law suit

[K4fxd]

That’s fine, but you’re failing to recognise that COVID is the leading cause of myocarditis, not the vaccines.

Safest medicine ever produced. Not one single side effect.

Don't forget to get your 16th jab and wear 5 masks, also stay 12 feet away from other people.

Sponsored

 

[Burkey]

Safest medicine ever produced. Not one single side effect.

Don't forget to get your 16th jab and wear 5 masks, also stay 12 feet away from other people.

If you vaccinate 100% of a population, 100% of the people suffering from myocarditis will be vaccinated. It’s pretty simple to work this out.
However, if you don’t vaccinate ANY of the people, you’ll have more than 5 times as many people suffering from myocarditis.

You're looking at the numbers and thinking ”Gee, thats a lot pf people” rather than looking at it and wondering how much worse it could‘ve been if a large potion of the population weren’t vaccinated. Science has the answer for you already but you don't want to hear it.

Use your brain for a change. Work it out. It’s not complex, it’s not a conspiracy, it’s just simple math based off the findings of the peak medical bodies from nearly every nation on this planet.

The person who believes in ghosts thinks that every bump in the night might be a ghost. You anti vax people are no different. You see the results and decide that the cause must be the thing that you’ve already decided on, rather than examining the problem critically.

Don't believe me? See the previous post from our mate with his “I get my information from FB/Twitter/insert other spurious source”

Anyways, I’m done here. It seems that you lot aren’t educable.

 

[K4fxd]

In the beginning, before the jab, I don't recall a higher rate of myocarditis.

 

[sk47]

Perhaps we should return to an age where people actually listened to the medical profession and bet their information from respected sources, rather than whatever BS the algorithms throw at you via FB, Twitter etc etc.

“We identified 22 eligible studies consisting of 55.5 million vaccinated cohorts and 2.5 million in the infection cohort. The median age was 49 years (interquartile range (IQR): 38–56), and 49% (IQR: 43 to 52%) were men. Of patients diagnosed with myocarditis (in both vaccination and COVID-19 cohort) 1.07% were hospitalized and 0.015% died. The relative risk (RR) for myocarditis was more than seven times higher in the infection group than in the vaccination group [RR: 15 (95% CI: 11.09–19.81, infection group] and RR: 2 (95% CI: 1.44-2.65, vaccine group). Of patients who developed myocarditis after receiving the vaccine or having the infection, 61% (IQR: 39–87%) were men. Meta-regression analysis indicated that men and younger populations had a higher risk of myocarditis. A slow decline in the rates of myocarditis was observed as a function of time from vaccination. The risk of bias was low.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9467278/#:~:text=The relative risk (RR) for,-2.65, vaccine group).

Do tell us more about the research you’ve conducted though @308 Cal. Bullitt
Im sure it’s just as extensive as that which has been performed by trained professionals.

Quote from the link;
"Ethical review and approval was not required for this study in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements"

Hello; did a quick read thru the linked study. Found the above quote of interest but am not implying such means any sort of ethical lapse occurred.

I was looking for a clear delineation between the myocarditis in infected only and those with the vaccine only. Perhaps I need to read and study the article some more in case I missed somethings. Maybe more information is to be found in the embedded data links.
I get and understand the assertion about myocarditist among those infected with the covid virus. Such damage to organs is associated with viral illnesses of different sorts. A virus does damage by taking over cells which eventually kills the invaded cells, often by the millions or more. In the year or so before the vaccines were made available there were indeed millions of Covid infected.

I found the text about the myocarditis among the vaccinated. What I may have missed is a comparison of myocarditis of vaccinated only compared to say pre Covid rates among younger men in general. The conclusion of the article stressed that the rate among the covid infected is seven times that of the vaccinated. Interesting enough but what i wanted to find is a comparison to vaccinated and normal rates before the virus showed up.

To me the question is not so much if a Covid infection results in a myocarditis rate greater than the covid vaccine. More so the rate of the vaccine on its own. Had the vaccine proven effective in preventing infection by the virus, then such would be of greater value. Alas since we can be infected after being vaccinated a number of times it seems of some lesser value.

 

[sk47]

In the beginning, before the jab, I don't recall a higher rate of myocarditis.

Hello; This is the point to be proven or debunked. Was the rate pre-covid vaccine and pre Covid viral infections different? Have to not consider any infected with the virus at all. Only the rate among vaccinated who never were infected and the rate among unvaccinated who never were infected.

What the rate of myocarditis is among the infected with or without the vaccine is a different page of interest and worth some study to be sure, but not part of the side effects of the vaccine alone.

The question, to me , is are younger males who never got the virus but did have covid shots having a higher rate of myocarditis?

 

[sk47]

Anyways, I’m done here. It seems that you lot aren’t educable.

Hello; On the contrary you contribute greatly to the education of us all. Perhaps not as you intend but the contribution is noted.

 

[Burkey]

In the beginning, before the jab, I don't recall a higher rate of myocarditis.

Your failure to recall or otherwise be aware of something, isn’t evidence that it didn’t exist.

This information is easily found if you actually went looking for it, but instead, you’ve decided your conclusion and search for information that seemingly confirms what you already believe.
Confirmation bias is a powerful enemy. When you combine it with algorithms that steer you in a given direction, it can become difficult to defeat it.

 

[sk47]

This information is easily found if you actually went looking for it, but instead, you’ve decided your conclusion and search for information that seemingly confirms what you already believe.

Hello; Actually went looking.
2019 NUMBERS FOR THE GLOBAL BURDEN OF MYOCARDITIS - Myocarditis Foundation
“So basically, the 2019 Global Burden of Myocarditis is 1 million cases, or a prevalence rate of 9.1 per 100,000.”

COVID-19, Myocarditis and Pericarditis | Circulation Research (ahajournals.org)
“Many epidemiologic studies have been conducted since that time concluding that SARS-CoV-2 increased the incidence of myocarditis/pericarditis at least 15× over pre-COVID levels although the condition remains rare. The incidence of myocarditis pre-COVID was reported at 1 to 10 cases/100 000 individuals and with COVID ranging from 150 to 4000 cases/100 000 individuals. “

“Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 were rapidly developed, including a new mRNA vaccine platform that utilizes mRNA against the dominant antigen of the virus encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles also known as extracellular vesicles (EVs). Soon after the vaccination programs started, case reports describing myocarditis and pericarditis appeared1,2 with data obtained from passive vaccine surveillance programs, hospital data, and from countries with mandatory vaccination programs or integrated health care systems. Over time, many large population-based studies examined the incidence or prevalence of vaccine-associated myocarditis. COVID-19 vaccines may activate resident mast cells or macrophages at the injection site that in susceptible individuals who have cardiac injury may promote an autoimmune response leading to myocarditis. Illustration credit: Sceyence Studios.”

“COVID-19 Vaccine–Associated Myocarditis and Pericarditis”

“Not long after COVID-19 vaccination began in the general population, case reports appeared identifying myocarditis and pericarditis as a side effect of vaccination, especially after the second dose. Since that time, many large, population-based epidemiology studies have been conducted around the world that report myocarditis/pericarditis after vaccination (Table S3; reviewed in the study by Heidecker et al2). Many COVID-19 vaccines have been developed using various platforms and with several names for the same vaccine (summarized in Table S4). The reported incidence of myocarditis or pericarditis varies widely depending on the vaccine type and how many doses were administered, with the highest levels reported for the Moderna mRNA vaccine, with an overall incidence of ≈10/100 000 and around 50/100 000 in men under 40 years of age (Table 1).91 All reports agree that the greatest risk of developing myocarditis occurs after the second vaccine dose in young men aged 12 to 39 years. Ages past 50 years had few reports of vaccine-associated myocarditis, similar to pre- and COVID-19–associated myocarditis. It is difficult to compare these incidence figures to prepandemic cases as previous reports did not typically report myocarditis by sex and age (or race).”

“A comprehensive study of all cases of myocarditis, pericarditis, or myopericarditis from vaccines passively reported in the United States to the Vaccine Adverse Events System from January 1, 1990, to July 20, 2021, identified 1841 definitive, probable, or possible cases out of 1 048 575 individuals.84 They found that 67.9% of myocarditis or pericarditis cases were related to mRNA vaccines. Smallpox vaccines were next most common followed by other vaccine platforms.”

“The study found 0.38 cases/100 000 individuals for COVID-19 vaccines in the United States compared with 1000 to 4000 cases/100 000 individuals for COVID-19 (Table 1).84 The highest number of cases were reported for men under 30 years of age, but it is important to realize that only around 50% of individuals in the United States in this age group were vaccinated during this time. Additionally, studies in the United States using the passive reporting system Vaccine Adverse Events System report a lower incidence of myocarditis/pericarditis than population-based studies from countries with integrated health care systems or a requirement for vaccination (Table 1; Table S3).”

“Studies indicate that the highest risk for myocarditis from vaccination are the new mRNA vaccines (eg, Moderna and Pfizer), especially for Moderna (Table 1; Table S3). “

“88 They found that 80% of myocarditis cases occurred after the second dose of one of the RNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) versus 60% of pericarditis cases occurred after a single dose or with Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson and Johnson) vaccine, and 75% were men. Symptom onset after vaccination was early for myocarditis (median, 3–11 days), whereas for pericarditis symptoms, the median was 20 days after vaccination. Myocarditis occurred primarily in young men under 40 years of age, while pericarditis occurred primarily in men over 50 years of age.”

“Overall, most cases of myocarditis associated with vaccines have been reported to be mild and of short duration. Most patients are hospitalized only to monitor for arrhythmias and heart failure, rather than for severe signs and symptoms.”

 

[CrazyHippie]

Quote from the link;
"Ethical review and approval was not required for this study in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements"

Hello; did a quick read thru the linked study. Found the above quote of interest but am not implying such means any sort of ethical lapse occurred.

I was looking for a clear delineation between the myocarditis in infected only and those with the vaccine only. Perhaps I need to read and study the article some more in case I missed somethings. Maybe more information is to be found in the embedded data links.
I get and understand the assertion about myocarditist among those infected with the covid virus. Such damage to organs is associated with viral illnesses of different sorts. A virus does damage by taking over cells which eventually kills the invaded cells, often by the millions or more. In the year or so before the vaccines were made available there were indeed millions of Covid infected.

I found the text about the myocarditis among the vaccinated. What I may have missed is a comparison of myocarditis of vaccinated only compared to say pre Covid rates among younger men in general. The conclusion of the article stressed that the rate among the covid infected is seven times that of the vaccinated. Interesting enough but what i wanted to find is a comparison to vaccinated and normal rates before the virus showed up.

To me the question is not so much if a Covid infection results in a myocarditis rate greater than the covid vaccine. More so the rate of the vaccine on its own. Had the vaccine proven effective in preventing infection by the virus, then such would be of greater value. Alas since we can be infected after being vaccinated a number of times it seems of some lesser value.

Your logic and impartiality are admirable, sir! Yes, viral infections cause death to invaded cells, and if widepread enough, tissues and organs can be compromised. The other, and arguably more common and more serious, source of damage during a viral infection, is due to the initial, vigourous, and relatively generalized immune inflammatory response in which the body damages its own healthy tissues in an effort to eradicate the virus. It is during the initial infection that antibodies form, such that the immune response to a subsequent re-infection is highy specific and targeted so that our immune response does not involve damaging inflammation. The objective of a vaccine is to initiate antibody formation without the dangerous inflammatory response.

The mis-information that is espoused includes unproven assertions like if the C19 vaccine was not employed, we would have seen 5X more myocarditis cases. This is interesting, but simply not supported by data, as you have found. We truly don't know what the myocarditis rate would have been without the vaccine.

We do know, however, that a properly vetted vacvine should NOT cause the damaging inflammation that the virus itself does. This is an unwanted and apparently initially unknown side effect that emerged.

The benefits of the C19 vaccine probably outweigh the costs in this regard, but again, I have not seen definititive data to quantify this.

 

[CrazyHippie]

Hello; Actually went looking.
2019 NUMBERS FOR THE GLOBAL BURDEN OF MYOCARDITIS - Myocarditis Foundation
“So basically, the 2019 Global Burden of Myocarditis is 1 million cases, or a prevalence rate of 9.1 per 100,000.”

COVID-19, Myocarditis and Pericarditis | Circulation Research (ahajournals.org)
“Many epidemiologic studies have been conducted since that time concluding that SARS-CoV-2 increased the incidence of myocarditis/pericarditis at least 15× over pre-COVID levels although the condition remains rare. The incidence of myocarditis pre-COVID was reported at 1 to 10 cases/100 000 individuals and with COVID ranging from 150 to 4000 cases/100 000 individuals. “

“Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 were rapidly developed, including a new mRNA vaccine platform that utilizes mRNA against the dominant antigen of the virus encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles also known as extracellular vesicles (EVs). Soon after the vaccination programs started, case reports describing myocarditis and pericarditis appeared1,2 with data obtained from passive vaccine surveillance programs, hospital data, and from countries with mandatory vaccination programs or integrated health care systems. Over time, many large population-based studies examined the incidence or prevalence of vaccine-associated myocarditis. COVID-19 vaccines may activate resident mast cells or macrophages at the injection site that in susceptible individuals who have cardiac injury may promote an autoimmune response leading to myocarditis. Illustration credit: Sceyence Studios.”

“COVID-19 Vaccine–Associated Myocarditis and Pericarditis”

“Not long after COVID-19 vaccination began in the general population, case reports appeared identifying myocarditis and pericarditis as a side effect of vaccination, especially after the second dose. Since that time, many large, population-based epidemiology studies have been conducted around the world that report myocarditis/pericarditis after vaccination (Table S3; reviewed in the study by Heidecker et al2). Many COVID-19 vaccines have been developed using various platforms and with several names for the same vaccine (summarized in Table S4). The reported incidence of myocarditis or pericarditis varies widely depending on the vaccine type and how many doses were administered, with the highest levels reported for the Moderna mRNA vaccine, with an overall incidence of ≈10/100 000 and around 50/100 000 in men under 40 years of age (Table 1).91 All reports agree that the greatest risk of developing myocarditis occurs after the second vaccine dose in young men aged 12 to 39 years. Ages past 50 years had few reports of vaccine-associated myocarditis, similar to pre- and COVID-19–associated myocarditis. It is difficult to compare these incidence figures to prepandemic cases as previous reports did not typically report myocarditis by sex and age (or race).”

“A comprehensive study of all cases of myocarditis, pericarditis, or myopericarditis from vaccines passively reported in the United States to the Vaccine Adverse Events System from January 1, 1990, to July 20, 2021, identified 1841 definitive, probable, or possible cases out of 1 048 575 individuals.84 They found that 67.9% of myocarditis or pericarditis cases were related to mRNA vaccines. Smallpox vaccines were next most common followed by other vaccine platforms.”

“The study found 0.38 cases/100 000 individuals for COVID-19 vaccines in the United States compared with 1000 to 4000 cases/100 000 individuals for COVID-19 (Table 1).84 The highest number of cases were reported for men under 30 years of age, but it is important to realize that only around 50% of individuals in the United States in this age group were vaccinated during this time. Additionally, studies in the United States using the passive reporting system Vaccine Adverse Events System report a lower incidence of myocarditis/pericarditis than population-based studies from countries with integrated health care systems or a requirement for vaccination (Table 1; Table S3).”

“Studies indicate that the highest risk for myocarditis from vaccination are the new mRNA vaccines (eg, Moderna and Pfizer), especially for Moderna (Table 1; Table S3). “

“88 They found that 80% of myocarditis cases occurred after the second dose of one of the RNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) versus 60% of pericarditis cases occurred after a single dose or with Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson and Johnson) vaccine, and 75% were men. Symptom onset after vaccination was early for myocarditis (median, 3–11 days), whereas for pericarditis symptoms, the median was 20 days after vaccination. Myocarditis occurred primarily in young men under 40 years of age, while pericarditis occurred primarily in men over 50 years of age.”

“Overall, most cases of myocarditis associated with vaccines have been reported to be mild and of short duration. Most patients are hospitalized only to monitor for arrhythmias and heart failure, rather than for severe signs and symptoms.”

This is what I've not yet seen - and certainly indicates and quantifies that the vaccine provided a definite benefit. Thank you very much for the information! Awesome teaching and learning!

 

[sk47]

We do know, however, that a properly vetted vacvine should NOT cause the damaging inflammation that the virus itself does. This is an unwanted and apparently initially unknown side effect that emerged.

Hello; An important distinction.

 

[CrazyHippie]

The mis-information that is espoused includes unproven assertions like if the C19 vaccine was not employed, we would have seen 5X more myocarditis cases. This is interesting, but simply not supported by data, as you have found. We truly don't know what the myocarditis rate would have been without the vaccine.

I stand corrected on this (thank you sk47).

 

[Balr14]

Thank you, sk47. I have 3 family members (one nurse and two directors) who work in major hospitals, including one who worked on the drug tests. Your post voices what they have been telling me for 2 years.

 

[mkcotton]

Hello; Must be toying around again. How is this a credible person?

At first the message was get the shots to prevent the disease. Regardless of what you think of me too many of us can still recall that time. The narrative around the shots slowly changed to get the shots and you will still get the infection but will not be so sick sort of message. At this point mases of folks would have to lose their collective memories for your version to be correct.

I do not know why i lost the privilege to post in that thread. I did ask mods about such but got no answer. Not even a reply. I was indeed accused by you and your cronies of "false news" (misinformation as it was called then)(again the narrative is changed). A thing is I continue with the same stances about things such as the shots and natural immunity. Another is my stances are now known to have been correct even the ones out of favor during the pandemic censorship phases. We all now know how the social media platforms were corrupted in terms of silencing some voices and only allowing specific narratives. You know, the narratives you and your cronies continue to push even at this late date.

Do us a favor and watch this thread from very far afar. That is, when you tire of just toying around with us.

Amen!

 

[sk47]

This is what I've not yet seen - and certainly indicates and quantifies that the vaccine provided a definite benefit.

COVID-19, Myocarditis and Pericarditis | Circulation Research (ahajournals.org)

Hello; The questions of benefits from the vaccine remain. Within a population of healthy young men who proved to deal with the covid infection naturally and overall did very well, the benefits of the vaccines seem small if any.
Within a population of elderly often also having co-morbidities the vaccines may have had some slight benefit, but reasonable doubts are arisen about that. By the time the vaccines rolled out clinical treatments (general body support to help the immune system) had been understood and were in use.
A thing is the fully vaccinated continued to become seriously ill with the virus with some number of fully vaccinated having died. This is not to be dismissed in my view. I follow that the narrative around the vaccines became get the shots so you will not become as ill as you will without the shot. A thing is most people who had the infection without taking the shots, either before the shots were available or after, had a mild course of the illness. Some estimates maybe close to 50%, who tested positive for after infection antibodies and reported no or very mild symptoms. I may be one of those or someone who so far has yet to cross paths with the virus.

We are now in the stage of the Covid variants having become "endemic" (an embedded part of everyday disease such as the flu or a cold). It is known for decades a new to a host species virus goes thru stages as it passes thru that population of new hosts. Eventually the new virus becomes less deadly but possibly easier to catch. One way (mechanism) to look at this is those individuals most susceptible to serious illness or death get removed early on. Another, more commonly taught to me decades ago, is a virus which can pass thru more individuals without killing the hosts will emerge successful within the scope of what is good for the virus.

Now I risk showing some ignorance by going into an area I do not know so well. Ebola and related virus are very deadly to people. For the normal wild hosts, the Ebola virus lives in it is not so deadly. Perhaps like having a sniffle or being able to lie dormant. What a normal host can deal with easily a new host may die from quickly. If Ebola was as deadly to its wild hosts as it is to humans (60 to 90% fatal), it would eradicate itself before long.

Back to the points I hope to make in this post. First is read thru the link. I quoted only a small portion of the comments. Perhaps limited enough to slant things as I was after information on vaccine side effects.
The other is the vaccines, I suspect, did not slow down the pandemic much if any. I tend to think perhaps the Covid virus ran a generally normal course it would have had the vaccines not been made. We were very lucky in that the Covid virus was not very deadly to over 99% of infected to start with. We were also lucky in that it was in the family of Corona virus which we humans have had lots of experience with. (colds virus as example).

Enough for me for now.

Sponsored