Shocking! 30% of adolescents developed cardiovascular symptoms after Covid-19 vaccinations

The title of this thread is COMPLETELY misleading, and you are trying to skew facts. I have no clue where the OP arrived at 30%, but based on Table 4 in the study

Normal sinus rhythm 247 (82.06%) where n=301

If 82.06% had a normal sinus rhythm then only 17.94% had anything other than normal rhythms.

You can't just cherry pick numbers to try and sell your narrative when assessing reports like this.

That having been said, I like the fact that a valid scientific study was used as evidence for the post instead of crazy Uncle Bob on Bitchute.

I still think we are at the top of the slide and things will get worse and worse. Sad that people would do this to others, abusing their ignorance and trust.

a reply to: rickymouse

and to think that they want to change all the other vaccines to mRNA based vaxxes

originally posted by: CanadianLoudMouth
The title of this thread is COMPLETELY misleading, and you are trying to skew facts. I have no clue where the OP arrived at 30%, but based on Table 4 in the study

Normal sinus rhythm 247 (82.06%) where n=301

If 82.06% had a normal sinus rhythm then only 17.94% had anything other than normal rhythms.

You can't just cherry pick numbers to try and sell your narrative when assessing reports like this.

That having been said, I like the fact that a valid scientific study was used as evidence for the post instead of crazy Uncle Bob on Bitchute.

From the paper itself

Cardiovascular manifestations were found in 29.24% of patients, ranging from tachycardia or palpitation to myopericarditis. Myopericarditis was confirmed in one patient after vaccination. Two patients had suspected pericarditis and four patients had suspected subclinical myocarditis. In conclusion, Cardiovascular manifestation in adolescents after BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccination included tachycardia, palpitation, and myopericarditis

If you do the math it's 88 out of 301 participants.

Like I said earlier to another member, please don't try to justify or excuse the mRNA vaccines. There are dangerous, especially when young kids and adolescents are around.

When you read a paper you're starting with the abstract first.

originally posted by: ARM1986
I still think we are at the top of the slide and things will get worse and worse. Sad that people would do this to others, abusing their ignorance and trust.

Based

a reply to: Byrd


it's important to understand your role in all this. Kids had no business taking this vaccine, as they had almost no risk from the covid illness. Even early on, the studies showed they had a higher chance of getting adverse reactions from the shot than getting covid. Being a cheerleader for the left is wonderful, and I'm sure super fulfilling, but when young lives are at stake, I'd ask that you use some of those superior smarts for more than perty words. Think for a minute.

a reply to: AlienBorg

A few weeks after my 39 y o daughter had the vaccine she suffered a stroke cause by a clot in the brain . We will never know if it was the vaccine but that’s very young to have a major stroke. You couldn’t go anywhere without proof you had the shot.

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: ARM1986
I still think we are at the top of the slide and things will get worse and worse. Sad that people would do this to others, abusing their ignorance and trust.

Based

On facts

originally posted by: TheToastmanCometh
a reply to: rickymouse

and to think that they want to change all the other vaccines to mRNA based vaxxes

They could not take a part of the coronavirus itself....that has had poor success and is a failure because we have evolved with coronaviruses and attacking the coronavirus itself causes it to possibly attack the cells of our body. So they chose a part of the spike....but it appears the part they chose was bioactive and caused problems. Plus their choice of the lipid molecule..polyethylene glycol has a lot of people who are intolerant to it. So, in my opinion the vaccine was not safe for quite a few people.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Byrd


it's important to understand your role in all this. Kids had no business taking this vaccine, as they had almost no risk from the covid illness. Even early on, the studies showed they had a higher chance of getting adverse reactions from the shot than getting covid. Being a cheerleader for the left is wonderful, and I'm sure super fulfilling, but when young lives are at stake, I'd ask that you use some of those superior smarts for more than perty words. Think for a minute.

Oddly enough the metric used to argue the vaccines are dangerous has been raised dangerously. According to the member and even though almost 30% of the participants have cardiovascular symptoms after two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, that's not enough evidence itself to show how dangerous these products are.

Another member didn't even read the abstract.

"One in 35 myocardial injury"

Watch the video from Dr John Campbell.



Link

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: AlienBorg

Before these "health mandates" people had the idea that they were a society of human beings. Now they should understand that they are a flock of chickens. Shame on all the farmer Joneses on this forum that persistently argued that it was ignorance and madness to doubt the official WEF and CDC narrative.

originally posted by: violet
a reply to: AlienBorg

A few weeks after my 39 y o daughter had the vaccine she suffered a stroke cause by a clot in the brain . We will never know if it was the vaccine but that’s very young to have a major stroke. You couldn’t go anywhere without proof you had the shot.

I am very sorry to hear this.
I hope your daughter has recovered and she is well and healthy.

There have been many incidents of strokes soon after having been injected with the Covid vaccines. Some cases have been proven to be from the vaccines, in other cases it was inconclusive, and in many cases autopsies were not allowed. You don't need to be an expert to understand something is wrong with these vaccines. Not just something but everything I would say.

originally posted by: HilterDayon
a reply to: AlienBorg

Before these "health mandates" people had the idea that they were a society of human beings. Now they should understand that they are a flock of chickens. Shame on all the farmer Joneses on this forum that persistently argued that it was ignorance and madness to doubt the official WEF and CDC narrative.

But there is plenty of evidence of the harms caused by the vaccines. It's undeniable no matter what people say on this forum or anywhere else.

Covid increases the risk of cardiovascular illness.

Young males were the demographic least likely to take measures to avoid catching Covid

Coincidence?

MDPI was added to the 'Predatory Publisher' database in 2014 as they seek profit over proper scientific integrity or following the proper peer review process - the 'peer review' lasting only 3.5 days rather than the several weeks or months genuine peer
review scientific journals use.

MDPI added to predatory publisher database over false peer review claims

MDPI Predatory Publisher in depth review

MDPI break peer review process by publishing work their own peer reviewers told them was false info

I don't think under 18s should take the vaccine unless they have co-morbidities as the risk to reward ratio doesn't support it but there's very good reason the 30% claim hasn't been witnessed anywhere in the real world or any study outside this one which uses a ridiculously small sample size and has a high drop out rate of people involved in the study.

It's always worth checking if a journal is valid rather than a fraudulent one as predatory publishers deliberatley try and pose as valid journals and ignore the proper scientific and peer review method for profit.

originally posted by: bastion
MDPI was added to the 'Predatory Publisher' database in 2014 as they seek profit over proper scientific integrity or following the proper peer review process - the 'peer review' lasting only 3.5 days rather than the several weeks or months genuine peer
review scientific journals use.

MDPI added to predatory publisher database over false peer review claims

MDPI Predatory Publisher in depth review

MDPI break peer review process by publishing work their own peer reviewers told them was false info

I don't think under 18s should take the vaccine unless they have co-morbidities as the risk to reward ratio doesn't support it but there's very good reason the 30% claim hasn't been witnessed anywhere in the real world or any study outside this one which uses a ridiculously small sample size and has a high drop out rate of people involved in the study.

It's always worth checking if a journal is valid rather than a fraudulent one as predatory publishers deliberatley try and pose as valid journals and ignore the proper scientific and peer review method for profit.

Trying to discredit scientific study isn't a good and wise move.

What is predatory and unethical was the collision and complicity between the state and the pharmaceuticals in administering dangerous vaccines to children, adolescents, and young but otherwise healthy adults, who had very very low risk from getting harmed from the disease.

Not only it's unethical but criminal I would say.

originally posted by: AndyMayhew
Covid increases the risk of cardiovascular illness.

Young males were the demographic least likely to take measures to avoid catching Covid

Coincidence?

Terry to deal with the paper and its evidence rather than whataboutism

a reply to: AlienBorg

I'm a scientist, I've had study I was involved in published in actual scientific journals.

MDPI is not a scientific journal, MDPI is a money making scam that lies about having scientific integrity. It's a pay to play publisher who don't use peer review as the actual scientists and peer reviewers point out

Predatory Publishers make billions out of these scams. If you read the links I posted one of their own peer reviewers detauils how its a unethical money making scam that has no scientific integrity - actual scientists are warned not to submit work to them as it damages their credibility

The reason for the latter is my deep concern that having your results published in any of MDPI journals puts them under high risk of invalidation, furthermore it leads to likely damage of your scientific reputation.

Earlier I had flagrantly bad experience with this publisher, who disregarded my thorough review of the manuscript [1] and published it despite my rejection, retaining even its initial form (i.e. without improvements introduced). There was no sound scientific discussion offered by both, the authors of [1] and MDPI staff.

For months I am waiting from MDPI for the contact with the other reviewer who (as they claim) was reviewing this work simultaneously with me. I am also waiting for them to connect me with the external associated editor who prompted publication of [1] some weeks after my rejection, without notifying me. I tend to believe these people either do not exist or they never had any expertise on the subject, read merely pressed “publish it” button.

...

They foremost misuse YOU and your colleagues for THEIR personal profit (i.e. the money you are to pay for this publication) offering in return high risk of rejection of YOUR results by the scientific community. Some of my colleagues from Max‐Planck and Helmholtz Societies, NOAA, EGU, AGU, etc. do not consider publications in MDPI journals reliable and authentic. You can further get acquainted with the “predatory” open access publishing following [2, 3], I am a witness of such in relation with MDPI. I regret that the authors of [1] (some of who I do know not superficially) lost their reputation in (not only) my eyes subsequently. As to the lead author of [1], Mr. Keyhong Park, I cannot call him a scientist, as he betrays fundamental principles of Science.

Anyone who has done a science degree, post-grad or been involved in research over the last 20 years has been fully trained to spot and avoid falling for the predatory publishing scam and never to accept job offers as peer reviewers as they're such a threat to the basic principles and ethics of science but it's not an areaa the general public would be aware of.

As I said earlier there's a lot of very high quality proper scientific publications and research showing that under 18s shouldn't recueve the vaccine - this isn't one of them though as MDPI are a money making scam with no credibility and break fundamental scientific principles.


It's always wise to check if the publisher features on Beall's List as it's the main database detailing the fake science journals to avoid.There's sadly 1000s of these fake journals as it's such a succesful money makinng scam. Beall's List and they dp a very good job at appearing like actual scientific journals.

originally posted by: AlienBorg
Cardiovascular Manifestation of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine in Adolescents

Note: This is a peer-reviewed publication from a study in Thailand concerning a number of cardiovascular manifestations after vaccination with the Pfizer mRNA vaccines in adolescents aged 13-18 years from two schools who received the second dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Here. I will give part of the Abstract and here is the link to the study from Thailand.

www.mdpi.com...


Abstract

Data including demographics, symptoms, vital signs, ECG, echocardiography, and cardiac enzymes were collected at baseline, Day 3, Day 7, and Day 14 (optional) using case record forms. We enrolled 314 participants; of these, 13 participants were lost to follow-up, leaving 301 participants for analysis. The most common cardiovascular signs and symptoms were tachycardia (7.64%), shortness of breath (6.64%), palpitation (4.32%), chest pain (4.32%), and hypertension (3.99%). One participant could have more than one sign and/or symptom. Seven participants (2.33%) exhibited at least one elevated cardiac biomarker or positive lab assessments. Cardiovascular manifestations were found in 29.24% of patients, ranging from tachycardia or palpitation to myopericarditis. Myopericarditis was confirmed in one patient after vaccination. Two patients had suspected pericarditis and four patients had suspected subclinical myocarditis. In conclusion, Cardiovascular manifestation in adolescents after BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccination included tachycardia, palpitation, and myopericarditis. The clinical presentation of myopericarditis after vaccination was usually mild and temporary, with all cases fully recovering within 14 days. Hence, adolescents receiving mRNA vaccines should be monitored for cardiovascular side effects. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05288231

The results are really worrying.

Out of 301 participants 88 of them (!) experienced cardiovascular issues after the two doses of the Pfizer vaccine. The percentage is about 29.24% of the adolescents from both schools and even though the sample is not large it raises red flags for any vaccine or medical intervention with this profile.

Will you give this vaccine to adolescents or young children who have the lowest possible risk of getting harmed from SARS-CoV-2 (risk is miniscule) knowing that it could cause almost 30% of them to experience a range of cardiovascular symptoms such as tachycardia (high heart rate), palpitations, shortness of breath, chest pain, myocarditis, pericarditis, hypertension.

Now imagine you vaccinate 300,000 adolescents or 3 million adolescents. What kind of results are you expecting with almost a 30% chance of getting any of the symptoms and diseases described above.

Something wasn't and it's still not right.
With this profile you just withdraw the vaccine imho.

My friend got lung problems after taking a course of vaccination against covid 19! Everyone has a different level of immunity and it is worth taking this vaccine carefully!