Connect with us

COVID-19

The Tragic Story Of A 14-Year-Old Vaccine Myocarditis Victim — One Of Umpteen Males Misinformed By Health Authorities

Published

16 minute read

Posted with permission from the author, this was originally published in Noble Truths with Rav Arora

Vaccine myocarditis is not trivial, mild, or “rare.” In young men, it’s a far greater risk than Covid hospitalization and death.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of my investigative vaccine myocarditis series.


On May 12th of last year, school teacher Emily Jo took her 14-year-old son Aiden to get his first Pfizer vaccine dose. The public health authorities and her son’s pediatrician unanimously recommended vaccination, prompting her decision. She knew that mRNA shots caused some number of adverse events, like all vaccines, but was re-assured by the CDC and White House’s public recommendation.

“The talk amongst the mainstream medical community was that vaccine myocarditis was mild and that this was very rare,” she told me.

At that time, despite alarming heart inflammation reports from Israel, the CDC publicly claimed to have found no signal of myocarditis after “intentionally” investigating over 200 million administered doses.

 

 

Moreover, Emily Jo was never warned of the myocarditis risk or informed about the risk-benefit profile.

“When I took Aiden to get his vaccines at the drive-through vaccination site, there was no warning about myocarditis. We were not counseled about any side effects to be aware of,” she said.

In the name of public safety, scientific innovation, and personal health, Emily Jo sent out a celebratory tweet proclaiming she and her family are “so thankful” their teenage son was able to get vaccinated.

 

 

However, her pride and relief turned out to be tragically short-lived. Two days after her son’s second vaccine dose (which he got a month after his first), he ended up in the hospital after experiencing intense chest pain. He was moved to a room on the acute cardiac floor where he was found to have elevated troponin levels (a key sign of heart damage) and an abnormal electrocardiogram. Every doctor Emily Jo spoke to at the pediatric hospital Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta confirmed her son had vaccine-induced myocarditis.

 

Aidan in the hospital on June 12, 2021, two days after his second Pfizer vaccine. (Photo courtesy of Emily Jo)
Aidan admitted to Atlanta pediatric hospital on June 12, 2021, two days after his Pfizer vaccine

 

Given her son’s dire condition, Emily worried Aidan might die or suffer from a catastrophic injury. Thankfully, after four distressful days at the hospital, Aidan troponin levels returned to baseline and he was discharged. However, this didn’t mean he could return to his normal life. Aidan was unable to do physical activity for six months. Sports, hikes, and other forms of exercise were deemed too dangerous for his heart — a typical consequence of myocardial injuries.

“I had no idea how life altering ‘mild’ myocarditis actually is. I have a very hard time with the label ‘mild’ for anything that requires hospitalization and months of inactivity,” Emily Jo said.

The most serious concern with Aidan’s vaccine injury isn’t the harrowing experience itself, but the frequency at which it occurs. Virtually any substance or medication will produce a diverse range of reactions across the human population. As Sam Harris has correctly noted, if you administer peanuts to everyone, there will be some number of fatalities and cases of anaphylaxis.

The rare incidence of life-threatening anomalies doesn’t mean that peanuts produce a net harm or should be banned altogether. Tragic interactions with any kind of externality are often exaggerated and exploited to justify irrational ideological agendas. For example, Minneapolis officer Derek Chauvin’s treatment of George Floyd paved the way for radical “Abolish the Police” initiatives.

In the case of COVID-19 vaccines causing myocarditis, we aren’t dealing with trivial ratios of one in a million or even one in ten thousand. Among the most robust data we have—according to Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg (Florida Health department) and Dr. Marty Makary (Johns Hopkins University)—is from Dr. Katie Sharff (who had her young son vaccinated) and colleagues, who analyzed a wide database from Kaiser Permanente.

Dr. Vinay Prasad on the Kaiser Permanente study

 

Going beyond other study methods, Sharff found a number of vaccine myocarditis cases that weren’t explicitly labelled as such or were outside the parameters of the CDC’s vaccine safety search. After performing an exhaustive search of the Kaiser medical records, Sharff and colleagues found a 1 in 1,862 rate of myocarditis after the second dose in young men ages 18 to 24. For boys ages 12 to 17, the rate was 1 in 2,650. Countries with active surveillance monitoring of medical data (which suffer from far less under-reporting than the passive system in the U.S)—such as Hong Kong—show virtually identical figures. The risk of vaccine-induced myocarditis remains elevated for men up to the age of 40.

 

Twitter avatar for @TracyBethHoeg

Tracy Høeg, MD, PhD @TracyBethHoeg
If the best study we have (Hong Kong) says post-vax dose 2 myocarditis occurs in 1/2680 12-17 yo boys & Nordic & French studies say myocarditis post moderna is 3.3-3.7x more common than pos Pfizer, that would give a post dose 2 moderna myo rate of 1/724-812 in 12-17 yo males 🧵

11:26 PM ∙ Jul 19, 2022


4,232Likes1,861Retweets

 

One need not be an anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist to recognize these figures are alarmingly high.

Historically, vaccines with adverse event profiles far lower — but still deemed far too high — than the mRNA myocarditis signal have been withdrawn. The 1976 swine flu vaccine was pulled back because of a 1 in 100,000 risk of Guillain-Barre Syndrome.

An approximate 1 in 3,000 risk of vaccine myocarditis in young males would only be favorable in a cost-benefit analysis wherein the risk of disease would be considerably serious.

The pre-vaccine Covid infection fatality rate for people under 30 was 0.003%.

The vaccine myocarditis risk after dose two (0.03%) is ten times higher than the fatality rate.

Today, since the vast majority of young Americans have been previously infected with Covid once or twice, the calculus has shifted. Putting aside the question of whether it makes sense for unvaccinated people to get the primary series targeting outdated variants, the myocarditis risk (in young males) from even one dose eclipses that of hospitalizations from re-infection. Josh Stevenson — a data analyst who has co-authored multiple peer-reviewed studies on vaccine myocarditis — has designed the following bar graph comparing risks:

 

From Covid data analyst Josh Stevenson

[Source]

 

Using Covid hospitalization statistics instead of deaths is a more accurate comparison since Covid deaths are virtually nonexistent in healthy, young populations. Still, the differences are massive. For example, the risk of myocarditis from dose one in males ages 18-24 is 15 times higher than hospitalization from Covid re-infection. For dose two, the risk differential is a stunning 61 times greater.

Unless a young male is immunocompromised, obese, or suffering from other serious health conditions, taking any mRNA Covid vaccines carries far more risk than benefit. The best data indicate this is a fact — though this is hardly considered in mainstream media.

***

Cases such as Aidan’s have prompted many honest voices in the public health community to reflect on the CDC’s top-down vaccine recommendations. Dr. Anish Koka—a renowned cardiologist with his own clinic in Philadelphia—believes medical experts should have been “more careful about recommending this to low-risk patients from the very outset.”

Koka Cardiology

As he explained to me over email, “Clinical myocarditis is never mild—a recent paper of 12–29-year-olds found 25% of myocarditis patients end up in the ICU, and 1 patient needed ECMO (a modified heart lung machine) to stay alive.”

 

 

“The long term impacts of the persistent scars that are apparent in follow-up on cardiac MRI are also unknown,” he added.

Koka believes it was “apparent by April (of 2021) there was a real safety signal,” and he questions why public health authorities “didn’t make decisions starting then to at least inform the public about this potential side effect at that point. ”

Instead of mitigating risks by further spacing vaccine doses, recommending Pfizer over Moderna, and being honest about near-zero risks of severe outcomes in younger, healthy groups, Big Pharma in collusion with the government recklessly opted for universal decrees.

Looking back on the CDC and Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) possible negligence and recklessness, Khoka stated the harm perpetrated was “unconscionable.”

More and more medical professionals are now speaking out on the strong likelihood that vaccine-induced myocarditis seems to occur at a rate that far exceeds deaths and hospitalizations in healthy, naturally immunized men under 40. Johns Hopkins public health professor Marty Makary recently wrote in a tweet:

 

“Last y[ea]r, the NEJM described a 22-yr-old that died from vax-induced myocarditis & I’ve heard of many more cases. I have never heard of a young healthy person with nat[ural] immunity dying from Covid. Our gov’t doctors have not been honest about the risks:benefit in young healthy people.”

Twitter avatar for @MartyMakary

Marty Makary MD, MPH @MartyMakary
Last yr, the NEJM described a 22-yr-old that died from vax-induced myocarditis & I’ve heard of many more cases. I have never heard of a young healthy person with nat immunity dying from Covid. Our gov’t doctors have not been honest about the risks:benefit in young healthy people.

2:00 PM ∙ Sep 27, 2022


3,429Likes1,124Retweets

 

I had been frankly hesitant to make such a statement since it isn’t scientifically rigorous, but since this topic is becoming less taboo, I will say it now: I have heard (without deliberately seeking) of several vaccine myocarditis cases in healthy, young people but have heard of zero hospitalizations and deaths.

This observation is in line with real-world statistics. According to UK databefore Omicron—when the virus was deadlier—the COVID-19 death rate was just over 0.001 percent in unvaccinated 30-year-olds. For unvaccinated people in their 20s, the risk was more like 0.0001 percent. Hospitalization figures (from, not with COVID-19) are similarly infinitesimally low. Compare that with a vaccine myocarditis risk of 0.03 percent in young men.

It makes little coherent sense why young males were not only permitted and recommended to get the mRNA vaccine series, but mandated by the state (as I wrote at length here). This injustice is even more egregious now that we know vaccines confer little to no long-term protection against infection.

Aidan’s mother recently came across a new scientific paper showing dismal vaccine efficacy in adolescents and tweeted the following:

Thinking about the fact that Aidan got myocarditis for 30.6% transient efficacy is pretty infuriating…This Pfizer vaccine was initially sold as 95% effective. Big change.

Fast-forward to today, Aidan is far from his physical condition before getting double-vaccinated. After advising him against even going on for a walk for the first four months post-vaccination — and eventually allowing a return to exercise after six months — Aidan’s cardiologist has cleared him for all physical activity. However, “he tires more easily and has lower endurance,” Emily says.

“He used to be able to run around and play for hours….now it’s like 20-30 minutes and he gets exhausted,” she added.

More than a year later, Aidan is still recovering from a vaccine that had little to provide him in the first place. Though some have shamed Emily for getting her son vaccinated, she is hardly to blame for trusting in taxpayer-funded health agencies whose sole function is to keep the public healthy and safe.

In light of the FDA and CDC’s outrageous push to vaccinate everyone with the new “bivalent” booster—despite explicitly “unknown” myocarditis risks—hopefully more people will wake up and re-evaluate their blind faith in institutions who have far abandoned their ostensible mission of keeping us safe and healthy.


 

Rav Arora is a 21-year-old, independent journalist formerly writing for top publications such as The Globe and Mail and New York Post before critically covering vaccines and state mandates. Please consider supporting his fearless journalism, focusing on tragic stories of vaccine myocarditis, by becoming a paid subscriber. Read his in-depth vaccine myocarditis series here.

Consider becoming a paid subscriber to help fund future vaccine injury investigations:

Thank you for reading Noble Truths with Rav Arora. This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

 

 

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

Two deputy chief medical officers resign from their positions with Alberta Health

Published on

Edmonton – Alberta’s two deputy chief medical officers of health are leaving their roles — less than a month after Dr. Deena Hinshaw was removed as the province’s top doctor.

Health Minister Jason Copping confirmed during question period Wednesday that both of the doctors have submitted letters of resignation.

“They are still continuing to work at this point in time,” he said in the legislature. “We are in the process of actually looking to fill those roles.”

A statement from Alberta Health said Dr. Rosana Salvaterra and Dr. Jing Hu, who are listed as public health physicians on the department’s website, have given notice.

When reached by her department email, Salvaterra responded: “Unfortunately, we are not able to comment.”

She later added that she respects and admires both Dr. Hinshaw and Dr. Hu.

“They are brilliant, hard-working, and compassionate public health physicians and I consider myself fortunate to have had the opportunity to work alongside them for these past 14 months.”

Salvaterra, who has extensive public health experience including as the medical officer of health for Peterborough, Ont., joined the office in October 2021.

Her career in public health includes work in “the COVID-19 response, mental health, the opioid response, women’s health, poverty reduction, health equity, community food security and building stronger relationships with First Nations.”

Hu’s out-of-office message said her “last day at work with Alberta Health was Nov. 18, 2022,” and noted she wouldn’t have access to the department email after that date.

She got extensive training in China and at the University of Calgary before joining the health department in January 2020.

Their resignations came within a month of Hinshaw, who became the face of Alberta’s public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic, being removed from her position.

Hinshaw was replaced by Dr. Mark Joffe, a senior executive member of Alberta Health Services, on an interim basis.

“Dr. Joffe will be supported by medical officers of health within AHS, by other staff in the Office of the Chief Medical Officer of Health, and by the Public Health Division,” said the statement from Alberta Health late Wednesday.

“We expect these changes to have no impact on the department’s and Dr. Joffe’s ability to meet the requirements of the Public Health Act.”

Hinshaw’s dismissal didn’t come as a surprise.

Premier Danielle Smith announced on her first day in office in October that she would be replaced.

Smith has made it clear that she blames both Hinshaw and Alberta Health Services for failing to deliver the best advice and care for Albertans as the hospital system came close to buckling in successive waves of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“A lot of the bad decisions were made by Alberta Health Services on the basis of bad advice from the chief medical officer of health,” Smith told reporters on Oct. 22.

Smith has not placed the blame on front-line doctors and nurses but broadly on AHS senior management. Joffe, while serving as chief medical officer of health, retains his role in AHS senior management as a vice-president responsible for areas in cancer and clinical care.

Hinshaw, an Alberta-trained public health specialist, became a celebrity of sorts in the first wave of the pandemic in the spring of 2020, as she delivered regular, sometimes daily, updates to Albertans on the virus, its spread and methods to contain it.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 7, 2022.

— By Colette Derworiz in Calgary.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

China eases anti-COVID measures following protests

Published on

By Joe Mcdonald in Beijing

BEIJING (AP) — China rolled back rules on isolating people with COVID-19 and dropped virus test requirements for some public places Wednesday in a dramatic change to a strategy that confined millions of people to their homes and sparked protests and demands for President Xi Jinping to resign.

The move adds to earlier easing that fueled hopes Beijing was scrapping its “zero COVID” strategy, which is disrupting manufacturing and global trade. Experts warn, however, that restrictions can’t be lifted completely until at least mid-2023 because millions of elderly people still must be vaccinated and the health care system strengthened.

China is the last major country still trying to stamp out transmission of the virus while many nations switch to trying to live with it. As they lift restrictions, Chinese officials have also shifted to talking about the virus as less threatening — a possible effort to prepare people for a similar switch.

People with mild cases will be allowed for the first time to isolate at home, the National Health Commission announced, instead of going to sometimes overcrowded or unsanitary quarantine centers. That addresses a major irritation that helped to drive protests that erupted Nov. 25 in Shanghai and other cities.

Public facilities except for “special places,” such as schools, hospitals and nursing homes, will no longer require visitors to produce a “health code” on a smartphone app that tracks their virus tests and whether they have been to areas deemed at high risk of infection.

Local officials must “take strict and detailed measures to protect people’s life, safety and health” but at the same time “minimize the impact of the epidemic on economic and social development,” the statement said.

China’s restrictions have helped to keep case numbers low, but that means few people have developed natural immunity, a factor that might set back reopening plans if cases surge and authorities feel compelled to reimpose restrictions.

Still, after three years spent warning the public about COVID-19’s dangers, Chinese officials have begun to paint it as less threatening.

People with mild cases “can recover by themselves without special medical care,” said Wu Zunyou, chief epidemiologist of the China Centers for Disease Control, on his social media account.

“The good news is that the data show the proportion of severe cases is low,” said Wu.

The latest changes are “small steps” in a gradual process aimed at ending restrictions, said Liang Wannian, a member of an expert group advising the National Health Commission, at a news conference.

The government’s goal is “to return to the state before the epidemic, but the realization of the goal must have conditions,” said Liang, one of China’s most prominent anti-epidemic experts.

Dr. Yanzhong Huang, an expert on public health in China, also emphasized the gradual nature of the announcement.

The new measures are a shift away from “zero COVID” — but “not a roadmap to reopening,” said Huang, director of the Center for Global Health Studies at Seton Hall University.

“When implemented, these measures may generate dynamics that fuel the rapid spread of the virus even though China is not ready for such a dramatic shift,” he said.

The government announced a campaign last week to vaccinate the elderly that health experts say must be done before China can end restrictions on visitors coming from abroad. They say the ruling Communist Party also needs to build up China’s hospital system to cope with a possible rise in cases.

But public frustration is rising now, as millions of people are repeatedly confined at home for uncertain periods, schools close abruptly and economic growth falls.

The changes have been rolled out despite a renewed spike in infections started in October. On Wednesday, the government reported 25,231 new cases, including 20,912 without symptoms.

Xi’s government has held up “zero COVID” as proof of the superiority of China’s system compared with the United States and Western countries. China’s official death toll is 5,235 since the start of the pandemic versus a U.S. count of 1.1 million.

Rules were left in place that warn apartment and office buildings might be sealed if infections are found. Complaints that families are confined for weeks at a time with uncertain access to food and medicine were a key driver of the protests.

The ruling party switched early this year to suspending access to neighborhoods or districts where infections were discovered instead of isolating whole cities.

On Wednesday, the government said the scope of closures will be narrowed still further to single apartment floors or buildings instead of neighborhoods.

It said schools in communities with no outbreaks must return to in-person teaching.

That appeared to be a response to complaints that local leaders, threatened with the loss of their jobs in the event of outbreaks, impose closures that are destructive, might be unnecessary and exceed what the central government allows.

The demonstrations in at least eight major cities and on dozens of university campuses were the most widespread display of public dissent in decades. In Shanghai, some protesters shouted the politically explosive demand for Xi, China’s most influential figure in decades, to resign.

Continue Reading

december, 2022

thu08dec5:30 pm7:30 pmPregnancy & Loss Support Group - Zoom Session5:30 pm - 7:30 pm

Trending

X