Myocarditis

Since covid and the mrna vaccines, we hear a lot about myocarditis, a kind of heart infection that often ends fatally in the short or slightly longer term. I myself didn't even know this disease existed... until covid arrived.
Everyone seems to talk about mild cases, but if I read correctly myocarditis is practically undetectable. With 17 BIOPSIES, there seems to be a 90 percent chance of making the right diagnosis (cfr Professor Marelli-Berg ).
Now a blood test would be on the market, I estimate at the end of 2023 if all goes well. However, it may not yet be known to what extent this test is reliable. My conclusion: if covid and the mRNA vaccines have myocarditis as a side effect, how can one know how often this side effect occurs?

www.chroniclelive.co.uk...
www.qmul.ac.uk...

a reply to: zandra

how can one know how often this side effect occurs?

By collection data and performing autopsies, which doesn't seem to be happening.

If you're not deliberately looking for problems, there's a far less chance of finding any. By being forced by the courts to release what little data they do collect on the mRNA vaccine, independent researchers have already uncovered an alarming number of serious flaws in the technology.

If Pharma had their way we know about any of it for 70 years. That should have been the biggest red flag for anybody and everybody considering whether or not to become a guinea pig.

a reply to: zandra

Their not even trying to collect the data.

They are destroying and hiding things at a much faster rate than data collection. The transparency and lack of data collection and investigation tells me all I need to know.

originally posted by: zandra
Since covid and the mrna vaccines, we hear a lot about myocarditis, a kind of heart infection that often ends fatally in the short or slightly longer term. I myself didn't even know this disease existed... until covid arrived.
Everyone seems to talk about mild cases, but if I read correctly myocarditis is practically undetectable. With 17 BIOPSIES, there seems to be a 90 percent chance of making the right diagnosis (cfr Professor Marelli-Berg ).
Now a blood test would be on the market, I estimate at the end of 2023 if all goes well. However, it may not yet be known to what extent this test is reliable. My conclusion: if covid and the mRNA vaccines have myocarditis as a side effect, how can one know how often this side effect occurs?

We need to look at it a couple of things here.

1. Before COVID no one really checked for it on a grand scale, just cases that got serious enough to warrant medical care. Now we look for it in everyone, especially young men and say wow look it is there. The question is whether it was there before too, and just not something we as a society focused on now. When Isriel came out and said they found 75 or so cases within their 5 million population after the vaccine I asked myself did they check the population before the vaccine too to get a baseline, nope, and why would they.

2. It seems spike protein does affect this to some degree. Looking at 350 million shots in young people they saw 4 per 100,000 got some level of myocarditis that the vast majority was either easily treatable as an outpatient or treatment was not needed. In that same group it is speculated there is 1 per 100,000 normally, but once again we never really checked before unless it was a more serious case.

3. The massive levels of spike protein from the virus is showing 150 per 100,000 for the young male age groups too, so vastly more and it depends on how long a person is sick. Sick a few days and not much of anything, sick a week or two and you might be in trouble even getting over it finally. It seems the big talk about here is just vaccine, but it seems the spike protein is bad either way and the virus will produce a massive amount more in your system than what the vaccine has.

a reply to: zandra

Here's a study from the period March 2020 to January 2021, which was the time before vaccines were generally available:

"Association Between COVID-19 and Myocarditis Using Hospital-Based Administrative Data — United States, March 2020–January 2021"

Their conclusion: "During March 2020–January 2021, patients with COVID-19 had nearly 16 times the risk for myocarditis compared with patients who did not have COVID-19, and risk varied by sex and age."

www.cdc.gov...

Here's a study on the number of myocarditis cases reported after vaccination:

"Myocarditis Cases Reported After mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccination in the US From December 2020 to August 2021"

Their findings; " In this descriptive study of 1626 cases of myocarditis in a national passive reporting system, the crude reporting rates within 7 days after vaccination exceeded the expected rates across multiple age and sex strata. The rates of myocarditis cases were highest after the second vaccination dose in adolescent males aged 12 to 15 years (70.7 per million doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine), in adolescent males aged 16 to 17 years (105.9 per million doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine), and in young men aged 18 to 24 years (52.4 and 56.3 per million doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine and the mRNA-1273 vaccine, respectively)."

Here's a myocarditis expert who estimates that the incidence of myocarditis in 2019--before the pandemic--was about 9 cases per 100,000 of population:

www.myocarditisfoundation.org...

So, in round numbers, the probability of getting myocarditis before either Covid or the vaccines were around was about 1 in 11,000.

Getting vaccinated with one of the nRNA vaccines without having Covid produced a maximum probability of getting myocarditis (16 to 17 year old males) of about 106 cases per million vaccinations, or about 1 case in 9,400. (About 18% more than the background rate.)

Getting Covid without being vaccinated produced a probability of getting myocarditis of about 1 in 687, or 16 times the background rate.

a reply to: nugget1

You are right of course. But we all now this is post mortem. And autopsies are not being done. So how dare they mention that mild mycocarditis is curable, if they can't diagnose even severe myocarditis?
Based on ECG and blood, doctors conclude that you have no/mild/severe myocarditis. And mild myocarditis is not dangerous ... they say.
However, knowing if you have myocarditis requires many biopsies of the heart, and even then you can't be sure. Myocarditis cannot be diagnosed even with biopsies (when one is still alive). So, definitely autosies are a must. That's a no brainer.

originally posted by: zandra
Since covid and the mrna vaccines, we hear a lot about myocarditis, a kind of heart infection that often ends fatally in the short or slightly longer term. I myself didn't even know this disease existed... until covid arrived.
Everyone seems to talk about mild cases, but if I read correctly myocarditis is practically undetectable. With 17 BIOPSIES, there seems to be a 90 percent chance of making the right diagnosis (cfr Professor Marelli-Berg ).
Now a blood test would be on the market, I estimate at the end of 2023 if all goes well. However, it may not yet be known to what extent this test is reliable. My conclusion: if covid and the mRNA vaccines have myocarditis as a side effect, how can one know how often this side effect occurs?

www.chroniclelive.co.uk...
www.qmul.ac.uk...

Thoracic imaging can show pericardial and myocardial swelling in heart tissue. Similarly, histological, immunological, and immunohistochemical assay (such as the one in the 2nd article) are also used in diagnosis, but these are all complementary to symptomatic evaluation.

Myocarditis and pericarditis that is symptomless and evades detection is mild and unlikely to kill but worsening onset can be rapid and so it is important that people should be aware and seek urgent diagnosis even for mild symptoms.

a reply to: 1947boomer

Vaccines don't prevent infection so a person is likely to suffer damage from Covid on top of the vaxx spike damage.

The numbers you mention for vaxx damage (1 case in 9,400 doses) is unacceptable. Not a single youth should have to suffer from a faulty unsafe and ineffective vaxx.

a reply to: 1947boomer
Tnkx for your reaction.
But if patients were still alive, I don't believe the numbers. You can disagree with me, but your arguments must be better to convince me.
+ not unimportant:
People who got covid got also vacinnated (more than once in many cases).
And especially: people who are vaccinated seem to get covid (a lot of them). Mild or non mild covid: who will say myocarditis is not a consequence?

a reply to: zosimov

Worse, the vaccine comes with the chance of VAED, Vaccine Associated Enhanced Disease. Previous to 2020, vaccines with high breakthrough rates were never allowed by the FDA because high breakthrough rates of vaccines leads to VAEDs everytime in lab environments where wild type virus against inoculated rat experiments are done over time.

Whether lab science over the last 100 years plays out the same in human population remains to be seen; but if lab science holds any credibility VAED among the vaxed is only a matter of wild virus mutation time.

originally posted by: zosimov

Vaccines don't prevent infection so a person is likely to suffer damage from Covid on top of the vaxx spike damage.

The numbers you mention for vaxx damage (1 case in 9,400 doses) is unacceptable. Not a single youth should have to suffer from a faulty unsafe and ineffective vaxx.

That is true to a point, but there is a huge difference between 3 days sick compared to 1 or 2 weeks sick. The longer it takes your body to get rid of the virus the longer and more the virus is producing spike protein, and the bigger chance all that spike protein makes its way into one's vital organs.

As to reducing infection we have seen that the infection period is 2 days before symptoms until 3 days after symptoms. So taking myself as example, I'm 63 and vacced and when I caught COVID over in EU I was sick for 2 days and then felt better, so that is roughly 7 days of infection capable period. Some of my workers not vacced were sick over 10 day and said it was the worst flu of their life, so that would be 2 + x days sick + 3 after = 15+ days of infection capable.

originally posted by: zandra
Mild or non mild covid: who will say myocarditis is not a consequence?

Since myocarditis was not really tested or looked at before the vaccine unless it was serious enough to warrant it, how many young males had it and never knew it before? The trials did not really show a BIG change in myocarditis cases, but out of 350 million shots given they found about a 4 per 100,000, so you tell me what is normal, what is not and what is unacceptable?

Is 150 per 100,000 from the actual virus acceptable? If not, then how do we lower the days one is sick to reduce the spike protein production down to a level it doesn't do harm?

a reply to: zandra

Myocarditis is an inflammation of the fluid-filled sac surrounding the heart.

It is not "a kind of heart infection", but rather, can be caused by an infection, either viral or bacterial, of the sac or the fluid within the sac.

It is important to understand that inflammation is often caused by the body's immune response to injury, or infection, whether that "infectious body" is real, or designed to mimic a real infection.

The mRNA vaccines "mimic" the part of the virus that triggers the immune system to generate antibodies.

a reply to: Xtrozero

The problem is that young enough males stood a good chance of not getting COVID. It meant maybe spike/ maybe not v 100% spike.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Herp derp, sources? Nah, it's the trusted opinion of Dr. Dudebro.

We can't know if this is accurate about vaccine related myocarditis bro, because we as a society didn't test for it before brah. We have to be super careful as a community not to give these pharma damaging numbers too much importance. That doesn't apply to the people I claim have COVID related myocarditis though, brah, and you definitely don't need a source that shows vaccines reduces it after infections that you are at higher risk for when vaccinated. Just trust The Science, bro.

Each injection increases your chance of getting COVID, with in excess of double the risk of infection at three+ doses over being unvaccinated. There are multiple sources now saying this multiplicative risk is actually in the double digits just for one dose.


The boosters increase less effective IgG4 with the potential to cause immune tolerance and do not cause you to clear infection faster as I've linked for you to ignore before. In addition this immune response is strain specific and likely increases your chance of multiple infections as strain prevelence changes and the vaccines cause antibody imprinting.

Presence of the spike protein is detected in lymph nodes after two weeks in the vaccinated. In case Pfizer's Internet medical school didn't cover this, the lymph system is connected to the circulatory system and the circulatory system happens to pass through the heart.

Natural infection doesn't cause spike proteins to be produced directly in the bloodstream, unlike vsccination. Biolipids penetrate endothelial cells, which are found in the arteries and heart, and then cause those cells to produce spike proteins directly in the bloodstream. In the string of lies told by vaccine promoters they said it didn't leave the injection site, which is now proven false.

I'll debunk your other claims when you provide some sources and you can convince me you understand them.

As you proclaim how safe the vaccines are, way safer than natural infection of course, are your boosters up to date or has the vaccine started failing Dr. Dudebro's highly scientific risk/benefit analysis?

originally posted by: zandra
covid and the mRNA vaccines have myocarditis as a side effect

So do common colds and seasonal flu. You guys learned a new buzz word last year, and now you see it everywhere.

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: zandra

Their conclusion: "During March 2020–January 2021, patients with COVID-19 had nearly 16 times the risk for myocarditis compared with patients who did not have COVID-19, and risk varied by sex and age."

www.cdc.gov...

Dancing in the rain increases your risk of being struck by lightning significantly over not doing it, but your chances are still quite slim. Two details left out of this scary 16× risk.

These findings suggest an association between COVID-19 and myocarditis, although causality cannot be inferred from observational data...

Myocarditis is uncommon among patients with and without COVID-19

And here's the list of reasons they themselves give for there to be significant doubt about the results. It also doesn't give any data that suggests COVID related myocarditis is more prevalent than after other respiratory infections, nor was any other infection considered. Since the current fear campaign is for COVID rather than the dozens of other viral infections that may result in myocarditis, people should be aware that this isn't unique to COVID nor is there evidence I'm aware of that the vaccines reduce the rate once infected.

First, the risk estimates from this study reflect the risk for myocarditis among persons who received a diagnosis of COVID-19 during an outpatient or inpatient health care encounter and do not reflect the risk among all persons who had COVID-19. Second, misclassification of COVID-19 and myocarditis is possible because conditions were determined by ICD-10-CM codes, which were not confirmed by clinical data (e.g., laboratory tests or cardiac imaging) and could be improperly coded or coded with a related condition (e.g., pericarditis). Third, encounters for COVID-19, myocarditis, and COVID-19 vaccination occurring outside of hospital systems that contribute to PHD-SR are not included within this data set. Fourth, underlying medical conditions and alternative etiologies for myocarditis (e.g., autoimmune disease) were not ascertained or excluded. Fifth, the obtained measures of association could be biased because of the choice of the comparison group (all patients without COVID-19) and if physicians were more likely to suspect or diagnose myocarditis among patients with COVID-19. Finally, the findings represent a convenience sample of patients from hospitals reporting to PHD-SR and might not be generalizable to the U.S. population.

The data you used for comparison isn't limited to post-viral incidence, but general population. The numbers start to get real sketchy when you start extrapolating from larger and larger dissimilar pools.

Here's a myocarditis expert who estimates that the incidence of myocarditis in 2019--before the pandemic--was about 9 cases per 100,000 of population:

www.myocarditisfoundation.org...

So, in round numbers, the probability of getting myocarditis before either Covid or the vaccines were around was about 1 in 11,000.

Getting vaccinated with one of the nRNA vaccines without having Covid produced a maximum probability of getting myocarditis (16 to 17 year old males) of about 106 cases per million vaccinations, or about 1 case in 9,400. (About 18% more than the background rate.)

Getting Covid without being vaccinated produced a probability of getting myocarditis of about 1 in 687, or 16 times the background rate.

You're comparing apples to donuts and excluding the risk of mycarditis after COVID in the vaccinated, which is a very important number that nobody seems to have. These expert estimates were global, while the CDC study was in one of the most obese countries in the world and was during the pandemic phase, when the incidence of COVID positives irrespective of symptoms or severity was increased. It is not unexpected that more people during a pandemic are going to have the specific disease. It is critically important that evidence is presented that the vaccine reduces risk of myocarditis after COVID infection rather than causing a synergistic effect on top of the singular risk from vaccination, because the vaccines do not prevent infection and increase your risk of it it the future.

That's not to mention it's literally a blog post that appears to be based on a telephone interview, which is just... LOL. You're going to be resorting to citing overheard pub conversations in your pharma defense strategy before long.

twitter.com...

originally posted by: ketsuko

The problem is that young enough males stood a good chance of not getting COVID. It meant maybe spike/ maybe not v 100% spike.

Sure, but not a vaccine issue as much as a Mandate FU Government issue.

a reply to: Xtrozero

It's also a marketing and medical (informed consent) issue. Societal pressure can be just as difficult to withstand as legal.
But I agree with you regarding the mandates.