20% Of Jabbed Have Myocarditis

I would not know my blood pressure if i fell over it lol.

Been in hospital all day today and it was taken 3 times... i think its ok, but i dont know what the readings were or know what the numbers mean.
If you cut me red stuff squirts out !

All the best

a reply to: BlueBaby

Yes, the truth and nothing but the truth?
Vague maybe, they just took Ivermectin, along with millions and died? All of them? And you and your husband were beneficiaries, and Trump is to blame. Got it.

Why is it hard? Because I just don’t go around believing just any ole bs posted, or broadcasted on the internet.

originally posted by: EternalShadow

So around 2025, there's going to be a gradual massive die off of 50% of the 20% that took the vaccine and will, or do have, myocarditis...??

We need the Avengers.

So let's put this to numbers... 81.5% of people in the USA have gotten at least one jab. That means 269 million have been jabbed. 20% of that is 54 million, so are you saying 27 million above the normal 3.5 million yearly deaths within a year or so?

originally posted by: Mantiss2021

Guess I'm among the those that have been vaccinated and who don't have vaccine induced myocarditis.


In fact, my latest blood pressure test (checked by my primary care doctor three days ago as part of regular check up) was 103/65. And I'm in my mid-60's.


No scare here.

At 63 just had a full blood analyst etc done and I'm perfectly in the middle on all readings. My blood pressure was also 110/65. Pretty much the same my whole life.

originally posted by: anonentity

Back in 1970 we were taught A healthy twenty-one-year-old should have a reading of 80/120 and add one on the systolic or diastolic I forget which was which for every year over. So a forty-year-old could have a reading of 80/140 without anyone getting nervous, then suddenly they bring out statins and get precious if it goes above the twenty-one-year-old figure. The worst thing about BP is worrying about it.

Now they are suggesting anything over 130 is high blood pressure...

a reply to: Itisnowagain

.
''Anybody in their mid 60's (Especially males) with a very low blood pressure of 103/65 has some underlying health issues that should be investigated''

I would appreciate it if you could post a direct quote.

Sure!
To quote source: ''Anybody in their mid 60's (Especially males) with a very low blood pressure of 103/65 has some underlying health issues that should be investigated''.

a reply to: nugget1

It's not in your link that you provided.

103/65 is not low blood pressure!

Where did you read this:
''Anybody in their mid 60's (Especially males) with a very low blood pressure of 103/65 has some underlying health issues that should be investigated''??

originally posted by: TheLieWeLive

We need to know more statistics like how many people that refused the jab have myocarditis now vs those who inoculated. Doctors should be able to figure this out within their own offices, but If the stats are damning I doubt they would release that self incriminating evidence.

The problem is we do not have numbers before the jab of how many cases of myocarditis are in young adult males since we really never tested for it unless someone had a serious condition to trigger doctors to look. Myocarditis at a minor level may be a lot more common than we might have thought before, but today all of a sudden we start testing for it on a massive scale and say wow look what the jab did without any baseline of massive testing to compare it to.

originally posted by: SRPrime
But they must also be compliant. So anti-vaxxers are smart but not-compliant.

Im sure they are using AI and social media to try to create profiles on who to select for the gift of death. This is absolutely eugenics.

Well, I guess in the end all you smart anti-vaccers people win as the population reduction has weeded off the "slow" ones.

BTW boosters are not made to boost other vaccines, they are made to realign the antibodies with new variants that the other initial vaccine isn't affected against anymore. What this means is vaccine A or B has nothing to do with future boosters.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: sqd5driver
Your GP told you you have a BP of 103/65? A board certified PHYSICIAN took your BP and threw not one, but TWO, odd numbers at you?

Interesting.

And? I just took mine and it's 128/83.

Which would lead me to guess that you are utilizing an over the counter digital/automatic device. Having spent two of my best decades as a firefighter and practicing and teaching EMS (EMT/Paramedic/SWAT medic/TCCC), in regional colleges and trauma centers, I can pretty much guarantee you two things about the average American residence:

1) The batteries in the TV remote will be rotated like clockwork while the batteries in the smoke detectors are left to decompose and…
2) The OTC automatic BP cuffs we find in most homes and (alarmingly and increasingly) in many medical practices are superb paper weights.

If a PHYSICIAN is obtaining a BP with the manual cuff and stethoscope and gives you odd numbers, find a new doctor because the one you have can’t perform a basic assessment. Period. I’d be happy to expound on that if you don’t understand why (99.99% of the public don’t).

If that same physician or their staff are utilizing an automatic cuff (ESPECIALLY the types that fit around your wrist!!!), find a new doc because the one you are relying on clearly can’t be bothered to perform an ACCURATE, basic patient assessment. I’d wager that doc spends the entire visit typing and barely makes eye contact. Most docs today are more Henry Ford than Hippocrates.

Details matter in medical practice. Consistent baseline vital signs are just basic, day one stuff. Physicians demand the big bucks but many can’t bother to perform the most fundamental of tasks in their own practice. That’s a BIG red flag.

And regarding what your BP cuff read at home… Take that same device to the nearest firehouse. Ask them to perform a manual BP then A/B their results with what your cuff says. I’d wager there would be a not insignificant discrepancy between the two.

Please don’t misunderstand my tone here… I’m all for individuals making an honest effort to monitor their health. But having seen what poor quality equipment can lead to, I’d hate to think that you or anyone else is walking the streets confident that their BP is WNL when it’s actually not. May not get you today. May not get you tomorrow. But chronic hypertension with other underlying issues and genetic predispositions can do awful things. And I don’t want any of that for you.

a reply to: Xtrozero

BTW boosters are not made to boost other vaccines, they are made to realign the antibodies with new variants that the other initial vaccine isn't affected against anymore.

September 2022 was when the bivalent came out..........

However, there were boosters before that.

This is from November 2021:

For now, the same SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antigen is used for the vaccine and the boosters. However, there is the chance that, over time, the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein will shape-shift or mutate enough that a booster with an updated strain antigen would be required to prime the immune system to recognize the mutant virus.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
However, there were boosters before that.

This is from November 2021:

The other poster might be talking about the second shot in the initial sequence of shots and is calling it a booster now that I go back and reread it.

As for follow-on boosters, they are to recharge the efficacy of the initial vaccine that drops off over time and changes in the variants.

a reply to: Xtrozero

What does this mean:

"boosters are not made to boost other vaccines, they are made to realign the antibodies with new variants that the other initial vaccine isn't affected against anymore"?

It's hard to tell but to me, it says that boosters are for new variants and not just a recharge of the original vaccine........am I wrong?

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

It's hard to tell but to me, it says that boosters are for new variants and not just a recharge of the original vaccine........am I wrong?

There are a few things going on in a booster, right? When we look at the flu shot it is like 3 of the projected variants they think will be the primary variant for the season. These vaccines wear off over time so high-risk people should maybe get one annually.

Maybe my wording wasn't all that great in saying "recharge the efficacy". What I meant was a vaccine might start off let's say 80% efficacy and over time that drops off. Once that drops below like 40% it not doing a lot of good anymore so a booster will push the efficacy back up to 80%. Rinse and repeat each year as many do with the flu shot. The boosters are also aligned better with future variants too. My point was they do not have much to do with the initial vaccine.

I'm not sure the point you are getting at here.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: TheLieWeLive

We need to know more statistics like how many people that refused the jab have myocarditis now vs those who inoculated. Doctors should be able to figure this out within their own offices, but If the stats are damning I doubt they would release that self incriminating evidence.

The problem is we do not have numbers before the jab of how many cases of myocarditis are in young adult males since we really never tested for it unless someone had a serious condition to trigger doctors to look. Myocarditis at a minor level may be a lot more common than we might have thought before, but today all of a sudden we start testing for it on a massive scale and say wow look what the jab did without any baseline of massive testing to compare it to.

Where are they testing for it on a massive scale, and if so, why?
What triggered doctors to look for myocarditis now? Maybe something many were forced or coerced to take?
You say they are looking now and not before, so why now?

a reply to: Xtrozero

It's like we speak different languages.

a reply to: Xtrozero

But every time you get a Mrna shot it damages your immune system even more, it is like it protected a person for a couple of weeks but opened them up for a raft of diseases that they would not have been susceptible to before.

This could be exactly what the governments of the world needed to know before WW3.

Those who followed orders, took the jab, and survive make good Soldiers.
Those who thought twice of taking an experimental vaccine make good Generals.

a reply to: SkyAngel

More than 5.55 billion people worldwide have received a Covid-19 vaccine.

Which equates to about 72.3% of the world's population.

I think its safe to say that 20% of such don't have myocarditis heart damage.

No matter what Dr Chris Shoemaker claims.