Tag Archives: Children Health Defense

Did Scientists Call For Global mRNA Vaccine Moratorium?!

Did scientists call for a global moratorium on the mRNA vaccine, after finding high rates of serious post-injection injuries?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Scientists Call For mRNA Vaccine Moratorium!

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) activist group, which is chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., just posted an article claiming that scientists have called for a global moratorium on the mRNA vaccine, after finding high rates of serious post-injection injuries!

Here is an excerpt from the CHD article (archive) with my emphasis in bold.

Scientists Call for Global Moratorium on mRNA Vaccines, Immediate Removal From Childhood Schedule

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

Scientists Call For mRNA Vaccine Moratorium : My Fact Check

The CHD story appears to suggest that scientists are calling for a global moratorium on the mRNA vaccine because it’s dangerous. However, it’s really more like the same bunch of anti-vaccine activists repeating long-debunked claims about the mRNA vaccine, and calling (yet again) for a moratorium.

Here are the reasons why the vast majority of scientists and health authorities are ignoring them, and why you too should ignore their repeated calls for an mRNA vaccine moratorium:

Fact #1 : Cureus Relies On Post-Publication Peer Review

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) article repeatedly points out that the paper was “peer-reviewed”, probably to suggest that it should be taken seriously. That’s not exactly accurate.

Even though this paper was marked as “peer-reviewed”, the peer review process at Cureus is “unusually fast” at just a few days. That’s because the journal Cureus relies on “post-publication peer review“, as its Editor in Chief John R. Adler explained to Retraction Watch in 2015:

Yes, Cureus has an unusually fast review process, which is an important part of the journal’s philosophy. We believe that post publication peer review, a focus of our journal through commenting and our unique SIQ process, is potentially a more powerful way to discern truth.

In other words – the pre-publication peer review appears to be superficial, and Cureus relies on the scientific community to peer-review the papers after publication.

Fact #2 : It Regurgitates Long-Debunked Claims

The paper in question is a literature review called “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” by Mead et. al. (archive), which includes anti-vaccine activists like Jessica Rose, Steve Kirsch, and Peter McCullough.

While it is being heralded as something new, the paper appears to be nothing more than a regurgitation of long-debunked claims about mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. It certainly offers no evidence to back up their claim for a vaccine moratorium. Let’s just take a look at a few:

COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials Were Too Short?!

The paper claimed that no vaccine was permitted for market release without a testing period of at least four years, using the mumps vaccine by Merck as example. That’s not true.

The Mumpsvax (Jeryl Lynn strain) vaccine was developed and approved in a record four years, but its testing did not last four years. The mumps vaccine clinical trial in 1966 (abstract) only lasted 6 months.

This paper gives the results of a large field trial of the vaccine conducted among schoolchildren in North Carolina.

Vaccination was carried out in November 1966, every tenth child receiving a placebo preparation. Serum specimens were obtained at the time of vaccination and 4 weeks later from 556 children representing a cross-section of the total group of participants.

During the 180 days of post-vaccination surveillance, 56 cases of mumps were reported among the study population and 69 cases among non-participants.

There is no requirement by health authorities that testing or assessing any vaccine should last 10 years. The typical vaccine development time of 10-15 years is not a reflection of how much time a clinical trial needs to run, but rather the time it “generally” takes to create a vaccine, gather resources, get approvals, run clinical trials, process the data, file for approval, etc.

COVID-19 vaccines were so quickly developed because scientists all over the world collaborated on the effort, while governments funded their development, and fast-tracked their clinical trials and manufacturing preparations.

The speedy development of COVID-19 vaccines was also enabled by new vaccine platforms using mRNA or DNA technologies, in which genetic information from the new virus only needed to be “plugged in” to produce a new vaccine.

More importantly – the paper provided no evidence that the accelerated development of COVID-19 vaccines has actually resulted in unsafe vaccines.

Recommended : Pfizer Vaccine Causes Autism? Rats Are Not Mini Humans!

mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Were Not Proven Safe / Effective?

The Mead et. al. paper claimed or suggested that the clinical trials did not show that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were safe or effective because too few people in the unvaccinated (placebo) group died from COVID-19.

Well, not only is that a “misunderstanding” of the clinical trial results (see the next section), many studies have been conducted into the safety and efficacy of the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 since they were deployed.

Those real world studies (example, example, example) consistently showed that the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 are safe and effective.

Low Absolute Risk Shows No Need To Vaccinate?!

The Mead et. al. paper repeats the old trope that the low absolute risk (AR) seen in the mRNA vaccine clinical trials mean there is no need for anyone to get vaccinated. That’s simply not true, and is a (deliberate?) misunderstanding of statistical calculations.

The Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) will “always appear low” because it depends very much on the “event rate”. As the Meedan Health Desk explained:

Let’s say a study enrolled 20,000 patients into the control group and 20,000 in the vaccine group. In that study, 200 people in the control group got sick and 0 people in the vaccine group got sick.

Even though the vaccine efficacy would be a whopping 100%, the ARR would show that vaccines reduce the absolute risk by just 1% (200/20,000= 1%).

For the ARR to increase to 20% in our example study with a vaccine with 100% efficacy, 4,000 of the 20,000 people in the control group would have to get sick (4,000/20,000= 20%).

Hence, the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) is used instead to determine a vaccine’s efficacy, because it tells us how much risk is reduced in the vaccinated group, compared to the unvaccinated control group.

To be clear – the clinical trials and post-vaccination monitoring and studies have clearly shown that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19.

Recommended : Did Norway Study Show mRNA Vaccine Danger In Children?!

mRNA Vaccines Do Not Prevent Transmission?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that the CDC said that “COVID-19 products would stop transmission”, but in the end “COVID-19 mRNA products do not prevent transmission or infection”. Well, that’s not really true.

For one thing – the CDC never said that COVID-19 vaccines would stop transmission. In fact, the CDC article the paper linked to only said that the vaccines appear to reduce (not stop) transmission:

… a growing body of evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccines also reduce asymptomatic infection and transmission.

To be clear – the COVID-19 vaccines were primarily designed to reduce or prevent severe disease and death, which is why transmission for not an endpoint for their clinical trials. It would have been a nice bonus to block transmission completely, but partially reducing transmission is not too bad.

mRNA Vaccines Have A Lot Of AESIs?!

The Mead et. al. paper warns us about the many Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) reported after COVID-19 vaccinations. The problem is – those AESI are not actual vaccine side effects!

The AESI list for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for example has 9 pages of 1,291 adverse events, but that is not a list of the mRNA vaccine side effects. It is a list of “adverse events” that Pfizer must look for during the post-vaccination monitoring period. Not only are these “adverse events” not specific to the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, they include:

  • diseases like Herpes, MERS, Varicella, and other “communicable disease”,
  • exposure to SARS-CoV-2,
  • manufacturing and lab test issues, and even…
  • product availability and supply issues!

Needless to say – those adverse events are not vaccine side effects, or are any indication of vaccine performance or safety in any way.

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines Increase Risk Of Long COVID?!

Lots Of Deaths + Hospitalisation Were Reported?!

The Mead et. al. paper also claimed that two large drug safety reporting systems in the US and Europe have over 7.8 million reports of adverse events, with “death, hospitalisations, and life-threatening reactions”. It is probably referring to VAERS and EudraVigilance.

The thing is – VAERS / Yellow Card / EudraVigilance data are all unverified, and may contain duplicated information. That’s why they are all prefaced with warnings like:

  • they may contain duplicated information and/or reports
  • the reported event may be caused by an illness, like a COVID-19 infection for example,
  • the reported event may be caused by a different drug taken by the patient at the same time
  • they have not been assessed by health authorities to ascertain if it’s even “biologically plausible”

In addition, open systems like VAERS, or the UK Yellow Card system, are very susceptible to abuse because they allow anyone from anywhere to post anything they want, without evidence or verification.

Anti-vaccination activists can, for example, key in unlimited numbers of adverse reaction reports, even if they never received a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine!

Autopsy Reports Show Deaths Caused By Vaccines?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that “autopsy studies” showed that 74% of deaths were “judged to have been caused by the COVID-19 mRNA products”.

The problem is – the study it referred to was a preprint by one of its own authors – Peter McCullough, that was removed by The Lancet for violating its “screening criteria”.

This preprint has been removed by Preprints with The Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology. Preprints with The Lancet reserves the right to remove a paper that has been posted if we determine that it has violated our screening criteria.

Not only was that study just a “review” of autopsy reports, many of the cases had other far more likely causes of death.

Recommended : Did mRNA Vaccines Trigger Severe Nerve Damage?!

mRNA Vaccines Are Contaminated By DNA?!

The paper suggested that the mRNA vaccines are contaminated with DNA “orders of magnitude higher than the EMA’s limit”.

The truth is – residual DNA is found in all biological products manufactured using cells, and has not shown any health risk after being studied for many decades.

In any case, the amount of residual DNA in mRNA vaccines were found to be far below regulatory limits.

Pfizer Vaccine Has DNA From SV40 Virus That Causes Cancer?!

The paper also warned about the Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter found in samples of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Why? Because it warns – the SV40 virus “induces lymphomas, brain tumors, and other malignancies in laboratory animals”.

First of all – after decades of studies, there is still no conclusive evidence that the SV40 virus can cause cancers in humans. However, out of an abundance of caution, the SV40 virus is considered to potentially cause cancer in humans.

In any case, the SV40 promoter is a DNA sequence that is often used to manufacture mRNA, and is not dangerous. It certainly poses no cancer risk, because the part of the SV40 that can potentially cause cancer – the T-antigen, is not present in the SV40 promoter, or the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Pfizer Vaccine Causes Autism? Rats Are Not Mini Humans!

Did a new Turkish study suggest that giving the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine to pregnant women may cause autism in their children?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Study Suggests Pfizer mRNA Vaccine May Cause Autism!

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) activist group, which is chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., just posted an article suggesting that a new Turkish study suggests that giving the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine to pregnant women may cause autism in their children!

Here is an excerpt from the CHD article (archive) with my emphasis in bold.

Pfizer’s COVID Vaccine Caused Autism-Like Behaviors in Offspring of Rats Vaccinated During Pregnancy

COVID-19 mRNA gene therapies (“vaccines”) were likely the first injectable medicines recommended for pregnant women based on just 11 weeks of testing — even though according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the average time required to test a drug for safety is eight-and-a-half years.

Now, a Turkish study in Neurochemical Research, by Mumin Alper Erdogan et al., suggests administering the mRNA vaccines to pregnant women may cause neurodevelopmental harm to their children.

Recommended : Did New Study Show Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Autism?!

 

Truth : Study Did Not Suggest Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Autism!

Let’s take a closer look at the study from Turkey, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : mRNA Vaccines Are Not Gene Therapies

Let me just start by pointing out that the first sentence in the CHD article is factually wrong – mRNA vaccines are not gene therapies. It’s really peculiar for anyone to make such a claim.

mRNA vaccines do not enter the cell nucleus, and do not modify our cell DNA. There is no danger of “genomic integration”. The mRNA is also transitory – being broken down by the cell after some time.

Gene therapies, on the other hand, are designed to make permanent changes to a patient’s DNA, by adding a functional copy of a gene, disabling a gene, or activating an existing gene.

Fact #2 : Bridging Studies Do Not Require Long Trials

I also find it odd that the article took pains to point out that the mRNA vaccines for pregnant women were approved after “just 11 weeks of testing”. Does the CHD have any evidence that this is insufficient time to determine the vaccines’ safety and efficacy in pregnant women?

It is interesting that the article failed to mention that the 11-week trial involved more than 35,000 individuals who received the Pfizer or Moderna mNRA vaccine during or shortly before pregnancy, making it the largest trial (at that time) on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women.

I should point out that that wasn’t a full-blown Phase 3 clinical trial, which both Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines had already passed with flying colours months earlier. That was a bridging study, which does not require long trials. So any suggestion or insinuation that they should take the “average time” of 8.5 years is nonsensical.

In any case, the COVID-19 vaccines continue to be monitored for safety and efficacy long after their approvals. If any COVID-19 vaccine was found to have a bad side effect, its approval would be rescinded.

Fact #3 : Study Never Suggested mRNA Vaccines Cause Autism In Humans

I should point out that the Turkish study never suggested that mRNA vaccines given to pregnant women may cause neurodevelopmental harm to their children. The authors stated this clearly. More on this in the next section.

Recommended : Did Norway Study Show mRNA Vaccine Danger In Children?!

Fact #4 : It Was An Animal Study

The paper from Turkey by Mumim Alper Erdogan et. al., which is called Prenatal Exposure to COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 Induces Autism-Like Behaviors in Male Neonatal Rats: Insights into WNT and BDNF Signaling Perturbations, is available for public access (archive).

As the title points out – the Turkish study was conducted on rats, specifically Wistar rats. Therefore, the results obviously do not necessarily translate to actual human beings.

While rats are mammals too, they are not miniature human beings, and respond differently to chemicals, drugs, and yes, vaccines too. Therefore, the results of any animal study should not be used to draw any conclusions about human beings. The authors themselves pointed this out:

… it’s vital to note these insights come primarily from animal studies, limiting their direct applicability to humans. Further human clinical research is required to confirm these findings.

It’s imperative to recognize the limitations of our research, given that it relies on animal models. Caution should be exercised in generalizing these results to humans.

Fact #5 : Pfizer Vaccine Dose Was Extremely High

To conduct their experiments, the Turkish researchers impregnated 15 female Wistar rats, splitting them into two groups – 7 receiving a saline solution (control group), and 8 receiving the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. However, it does not appear that the rats were given the appropriate dosage of the Pfizer vaccine.

Human adults receive 30 μg of the Pfizer vaccine in each dose. Given that the average female adult weight is 77.5 kg / 170.8 pounds (per CDC), and the average Wistar rat in that experiment weighed about 220 grams, each female rat should have received only 0.085 μg – 1/352th of the human dose.

Instead, each female Wistar rat was injected with 30 μg of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine – equivalent to 10,560 μg in human dosage, or 352 vaccine doses in one shot. This was the same problem we saw with an earlier Belgian study on the Pfizer vaccine causing turbo cancer.

This decision to use such a high dose of the Pfizer vaccine (in relative terms) makes the experiment a poor reflection of actual vaccine safety in human beings. Anything taken at such high doses would likely be toxic. Even water, when taken in large amounts, is toxic to humans.

Recommended : Why Study Didn’t Prove Pfizer Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer!

Fact #6 : Study Did Not Test COVID-19 Infection

The study suggested in its introduction that the spike protein – whether produced by “natural viral infection” or “post vaccination” may potentially cause “neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism”.

There are theoretical postulates suggesting that the biosynthesis of the spike protein, either through natural viral infection or post-vaccination, could induce neuroinflammation and elicit alterations in synaptic plasticity [5, 6]. These proposed changes might exert effects on brain development and have potential contributions to neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism [7].

Unfortunately, the study did not test that hypothesis by testing to see if COVID-19 infection also causes similar changes in the progeny of pregnant Wistar rats. So it is impossible to know if it was a component in the Pfizer vaccine, or the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, that caused those changes in the rat babies.

Think about it – if it was really the spike protein that caused those changes, then the benefits of vaccination would still outweigh the risks. After all, COVID-19 vaccines only create a limited number of spike protein analogues to trigger the immune system into learning how to create antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

On the other hand, the actual COVID-19 infection will create an unlimited number of SARS-CoV-2 viruses – each covered with spike proteins! The longer the COVID-19 infection persists, the more cells are infected to produce more SARS-CoV-2 viruses… and yes, more spike proteins!

Fact #7 : Authors Warned Against Drawing Conclusions

I should end by pointing out that the authors of this study themselves warned against drawing any conclusions about whether the Pfizer vaccine causes autism in human beings.

It’s imperative to recognize the limitations of our research, given that it relies on animal models. Caution should be exercised in generalizing these results to humans. Further rigorous clinical studies are required to confirm these observations in human populations and to ascertain the exact mechanisms at play.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Protect yourself and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19 and other preventable diseases!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Norway Study Show mRNA Vaccine Danger In Children?!

Did a study from Norway just show that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine can cause serious side effects in children?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Norway Study Shows mRNA Vaccine Danger In Children!

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) activist group, which is chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., just posted an article suggesting that a new study in Norway shows that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines can cause severe side effects in children!

Here is an excerpt from the CHD article (archive). Please feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

Two COVID Shots Raise Risk of Anaphylaxis, Heart Issues in Older Adolescents

A Norwegian study found a low but significant risk of serious side effects among adolescents a short time following a second COVID-19 vaccination. The tenfold higher risk for anaphylaxis was the most concerning outcome, but the researchers also found swollen lymph nodes and heart issues.

Recommended : Do mRNA Vaccines Increase Risk Of Illnesses In Children?!

 

Truth : Norway Study Shows Limited mRNA Vaccine Risk In Children!

Let’s take a closer look at the various claims in the Children’s Health Defense article, and the study it referred to, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : It Was A Pre-Print On medRxiv

Let me start by pointing out that the study, which was conducted by researchers in Norway, has not been peer-reviewed – the first step or many in the scientific review process.

Hence, it has not been published in a journal, but in medRxiv – a preprint server operated by the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL). You can read the paper in full here – PDF.

While that does not mean its findings are wrong, such preprint papers should “not be considered for clinical application, nor relied upon for news reporting as established information“, as per CSHL.

Fact #2 : It Was A Retrospective Cohort Study

The CHD article took pains to claim twice that the researchers “enrolled” almost half a million adolescents in Norway in that study. If that’s true, it would have been a massive and costly undertaking.

Researchers led by German Tapia, Ph.D., a postdoctoral epidemiologist at NIPH, enrolled 496,432 adolescents …

By enrolling a large number of subjects and applying different observational time periods, Tapia et al. not only captured all available data but purposely subjected their data to a high level of statistical scrutiny.

But according to the study authors themselves, they did not actually enrol any participants. Rather, they used existing data from the Norwegian Emergency Preparedness Register for COVID-19 (Beredt C19).

Fact #3 : Risk Of Adverse Events Were Low

While the CHD article, and a similar article by The Epoch Times, appear to suggest that the Norway study has shown that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine can cause severe adverse events or side effects in children, it actually suggested the opposite.

The Norway study concluded that the number of adverse events, and any “statistically significant associations” were “generally low“. While it did identify “some exceptions”, the study authors did not say that they were conclusive. They only said that they should be further monitored.

Recommended : Did mRNA Vaccines Trigger Severe Nerve Damage?!

Fact #4 : Lymphadenopathy Was Most Common Event

The Norway study identified lymphadenopathy as the most common “post-vaccination event”. However, lymphadenopathy isn’t as scary as it sounds.

Lymphadenopathy refers to enlarged or swollen lymph nodes that can appear for any number of reasons, most commonly an infection. Hence, it often appears in anyone – children or adults – who are suffering from infections. In fact, the study noted that lymphadenopathy was seen in both vaccinated and unvaccinated children:

Lymphadenopathy Cases Incidence
Vaccinated 651
out of 494,138
120
per 100,000 person-years
Unvaccinated 152
out of 493,360
103
per 100,000 person-years

According to a 2023 study (archive) published in the journal Vaccines, study results suggest that post-vaccination lymphadenopathy is caused by a “strong vaccine immune response“, possibly through the “B cell germinal centre response” after vaccination.

The study results also show that vaccine-induced lymphadenopathy is self-limiting, generally resolving by itself between 10 days to two months. In other words – lymphadenopathy seen after COVID-19 vaccination shows a robust response to the vaccine, and is not something to worry about.

Arguably, the biggest issue identified by the Vaccines study authors was in distinguishing such “reactive lymph nodes” from “metastatic lymph node enlargement” in patients who are already suffering from cancer.

Fact #5 : Study Found No Vaccine Link To Deaths

I found it interesting that the CHD article did not point out that the Norwegian study found no evidence of any deaths linked to the mRNA vaccine, even though it had a large sample size of almost half a million children:

We found no statistically significant associations with all-cause mortality within 28 days. Events were
very rare.

No Norwegian adolescents were registered with vaccine-associated death (International
Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision [ICD-10] code
U12.9) during follow-up.

Fact #6 : Study Found No Vaccine Link To Arrhythmia 

Interestingly, this Norway study also found no link between COVID-19 vaccines and heart arrhythmia, even though it noted that myocarditis may potentially cause arrhythmia.

Myocarditis may lead to arrhythmia, but we observed no vaccine-arrhythmia association.

mRNA vaccines are known to cause myocarditis and pericarditis in children and young adults, generally in males. However, they have been shown to be milder and far less common than myocarditis and pericarditis caused by COVID-19 infections.

Recommended : SAFECOVAC : Vaccine Myocarditis Risk Less Than 1 In Million!

Fact #7 : Study Confirmed Existing mRNA Vaccine Risks

The large Norwegian study merely confirms what we already know about mRNA vaccine risks – it can cause rare side effects like anaphylaxis right after vaccination, or pericarditis / myocarditis within 7 days of receiving the vaccine.

These are known risks of the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19, from both Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna. However, the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination still far outweighs these rare risk factors.

In fact, anaphylaxis can be dealt with immediately (which is why you are asked to wait 30 minutes after vaccination), while vaccine pericarditis / myocarditis are generally milder (and much rarer) than pericarditis / myocarditis from COVID-19 infections.

Fact #8 : Study Did Not Compare Risk To COVID-19 Infection

Finally, I should point out that this Norway study only compared adverse events reported for vaccinated and unvaccinated children. It did not compare the risk of adverse events against COVID-19 infections.

To properly weigh the benefits against the risks of COVID-19 vaccination in children, any potential vaccine side effect should be compared to those from COVID-19 infections.

For example, the massive SAFECOVAC study showed that the risk of getting myocarditis from a COVID-19 infection is hundreds of times higher, compared to getting vaccinated against COVID-19!

Myocarditis
Risk
Per Million
People
vs
Sinovac
vs
AstraZeneca
vs
Pfizer
COVID-19 450 +300x +214x +167x
3x Pfizer 2.7 +1.8x +1.3x Baseline
3x AstraZeneca 2.1 +1.4x Baseline -0.2x
3x Sinovac 1.5 Baseline -0.3x -0.4x

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Do COVID-19 Vaccines Increase Risk Of Long COVID?!

Do COVID-19 vaccines really increase the risk of long COVID symptoms?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : COVID-19 Vaccines Increase Risk Of Long COVID!

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) activist group, which is chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., just posted an article suggesting that a study has shown that people who received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine may be more likely to get long COVID symptoms than people who received one or no dose at all.

Here is an excerpt from the CHD article (archive). Please feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

Two Doses of COVID Vaccine May Increase Risk of Long COVID Symptoms

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

Truth : COVID-19 Vaccines Do Not Increase Risk Of Long COVID!

Let’s take a closer look at the various claims in the article, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : Arjun et. al. Study Was Published In 2022

Let me start by pointing out that the Arjun et. al. study mentioned in the CHD article is more than a year old, being published in PLOS ONE in December 2022. You can read it in full here.

Why would the Children’s Health Defense dig up this study from 2022, when several newer studies showed that COVID-19 vaccines significantly reduced the risk of long COVID?

Fact #2 : Study Did Not Conclude Vaccines Increase Long COVID Risk

While the Arjun et. al. study results show that receiving two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine was a predictor of long COVID, the authors did not reach the conclusion, calling it “an observational paradox” that might be explained by vaccination patients more likely to survive COVID-19 infections.

This collider bias, they pointed out, was to be expected since their sample only included patients with access to hospital care. In fact, their study showed that patients who received hospital care were associated with a higher risk of developing long COVID symptoms!

An observational paradox in our study was that the participants who took two doses of COVID-19 vaccination had higher odds of developing Long COVID. It could be due to better survival in vaccinated individuals who may continue to exhibit symptoms of COVID-19 disease.

We could not find any interaction effect of COVID-19 vaccination and acute COVID-19 severity on causing Long COVID.

This association might have also arisen due to Collider bias [40]. The Collider bias might have operated in this case since the sample included only COVID-19 positive tested patients who accessed the hospital (healthcare workers included) making the sample inherently biased to derive such conclusions.

They also pointed out that other studies have shown that COVID-19 vaccination reduced long COVID risks. So why would anyone use their paper to draw a completely different conclusion?

Recommended : Did mRNA Vaccines Trigger Severe Nerve Damage?!

Fact #3 : Other Factors Were Far More Significant

If you read the Arjun et. al. study, you will notice (see results) that it actually found that other factors were more strongly associated with a higher risk of long COVID symptoms:

  • suffering from 1 to 4 symptoms of COVID-19
  • suffering from 5 or more symptoms of COVID-19
  • developing severe or critical COVID-19
  • being admitted to a hospital

In other words – you are more likely to get long COVID, if you experience moderate or severe COVID-19. Which means the benefits of vaccination still outweighs the risks.

Fact #4 : Newer Studies Show Vaccines Greatly Reduce Long COVID Risk

Interestingly, this CHD article came just after Scientific American posted its article on how several new studies show how getting multiple COVID-19 vaccine doses “dramatically lowers long COVID risk“.

A growing consensus is emerging that receiving multiple doses of the COVID vaccine before an initial infection can dramatically reduce the risk of long-term symptoms. Although the studies disagree on the exact amount of protection, they show a clear trend: the more shots in your arm before your first bout with COVID, the less likely you are to get long COVID.

One meta-analysis of 24 studies published in October, for example, found that people who’d had three doses of the COVID vaccine were 68.7 percent less likely to develop long COVID compared with those who were unvaccinated.

In short – newer studies show that COVID-19 vaccines not only protect against long COVID, the protection increases with each additional dose!

Therefore, if you are worried about long COVID, you should definitely be up-to-date on your COVID-19 vaccinations!

Recommended : Do mRNA vaccines have 1 in 800 severe adverse event rate?!

Fact #5 : Long COVID More Common In Unvaccinated People

According to Scientific American, the prevalence of long COVID is significantly greater in unvaccinated people, compared to people who had two or more doses of the COVID-19 vaccines.

  • Unvaccinated : 11%
  • Fully-vaccinated : 5%

Again, it clearly shows that COVID-19 vaccines have a significant protective effect against long COVID.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did mRNA Vaccines Trigger Severe Nerve Damage?!

Was the mRNA vaccines just shown to trigger severe nerve damage, including multiple sclerosis?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : mRNA Vaccines Trigger Severe Nerve Damage!

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) activist group, which is chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., just posted an article suggesting that Brazilian researchers uncovered two cases of serious nerve damage in patients who received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

This was what was posted on the CHD page on X (formerly Twitter):

Children’s Health Defense : 🚨 COVID vaccine triggers nerve damage, MS

Brazilian researchers have uncovered two cases of serious nerve damage in patients who received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

Here is an excerpt from the CHD article (archive). Please feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

COVID vaccine triggers nerve damage, MS

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

No Evidence mRNA Vaccines Trigger Nerve Damage!

Let’s take a closer look at the various claims in the article, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : It Was A Case Presentation

Let me start by pointing out that the Brazilian paper in question was a case presentation submitted to Neuroimmunology Reports, called Multiple Sclerosis and Optic Neuritis triggered by COVID-19 mRNA by Moretti, Fabiani, et. al.

You can read it in full here.

Fact #2 : Paper Did Not Conclude mRNA Vaccines Cause Nerve Damage

If you read the conclusion, you will note that the authors never actually concluded that mRNA vaccines causes nerve damage. The authors only pointed out that such cases should be reported, and that “more studies are still needed”. Here is the relevant quote from the paper, with my emphasis underlined.

Diseases or symptoms triggered or linked to this new vaccine technology must be reported and studied, contributing to worldwide databases.

More studies are still needed on the association between neurological complications and the vaccine against COVID-19. Long-term monitoring is needed if the vaccine can cause or trigger neurological disorders.

Fact #3 : Paper Says Vaccine Benefits Outweigh The Risks

Anyone who reads the conclusion will also realise that the authors actually pointed out that the benefits of vaccinating against COVID-19 outweigh the risks. On top of that, they said that no neurological condition is an absolute contraindication for vaccinating against COVID-19.

Overall, the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of neurological complications, and, to date, no neurological condition is an absolute contraindication for vaccination against COVID-19.

Recommended : SAFECOVAC: Vaccine Myocarditis Risk Less Than 1 In Million!

Fact #4 : AstraZeneca Vaccine Is A Virus Vector Vaccine

With all due respect to the authors, the editors and the peer-reviewers, I should point out that the first case report does not involve any mRNA vaccine.

The first case involved the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, which is a virus vector vaccine. It is not an mRNA vaccine.

ChAdOx1 was not the vaccine’s name either. Rather, ChAdOx1 was the name of the modified chimpanzee adenovirus the Oxford-AstraZeneca used as its vector.

Fact #5 : First Patient Already Had Multiple Sclerosis

What may not be obvious, but was mentioned in the paper, was that the first patient – who received the AstraZeneca vaccine, already had multiple sclerosis (MS).

The authors pointed out that she already met the 2017 McDonald’s criteria for multiple sclerosis. That meant that this patient had prior MRI-detected lesions, or oligoclonal bans in the spinal fluid, or prior clinical symptoms of MS.

This is because a key requirement for the diagnosis of MS is Dissemination In Time (DIT) – there must be evidence of damage, at different times, and to different parts, of the central nervous system (source).

In fact, the authors pointed out that the COVID-19 vaccination only triggered the symptoms, but did not actually cause multiple sclerosis. Here’s the relevant quote, with my emphasis underlined.

The female patient met the McDonald’s (2017) criteria for multiple sclerosis, and the vaccine only triggered the symptoms.

I should point out that multiple sclerosis patients often suffer such relapses of symptoms that are triggered by anything from viral infections to stress. Certain vaccinations involving live viruses or bacteria can also trigger a relapse.

Since the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine (Vaxzevria) uses a modified chimpanzee virus, it is plausible that it may trigger symptoms in multiple sclerosis patients.

Recommended : mRNA Vaccines Created Spike Protein In Human Heart?!

Fact #6 : Multiple Sclerosis Can Cause Optic Neuritis

The second patient in the Brazilian case presentation developed optic neuritis – inflammation of the optic nerve. Optic neuritis is most commonly seen in multiple sclerosis patients.

Even though this 8 year-old boy is not known to have multiple sclerosis, the authors noted that a brain MRI showed three small acute hypertension lesions in his brain. Such brain lesions developing in multiple places over time (Dissemination in Time, DIT) are highly suggestive of multiple sclerosis, as per the McDonald criteria.

In other words – it is possible that this patient may also have multiple sclerosis that may not have been previously diagnosed, whose symptoms was triggered by the vaccine – just like in the first case.

Fact #7 : COVID-19 Infection Can Cause Optic Neuritis

I should also point out that past COVID-19 infections can cause optic neuritis. In fact, this January 2022 case study published in the Indian Journal of Ophthalmology detailed three patients who developed optic neuritis weeks or months after recovering from mild COVID-19 infections.

The authors noted that in those three patients, demyelinating lesions were identified in two cases, while the third case was found with serum anti-myelin antibodies.

  • Patient 1 suddenly lost vision in his left eye two weeks after recovering from mild COVID-19.
  • Patient 2 lost vision in his left eye six months after recovering from mild COVID-19.
  • Patient 3 lost vision in his left eye twice, two weeks after recovering from mild COVID-19, and then again four weeks later.

All three patients recovered their vision, but as you can see – COVID-19 infections can potentially cause optic neuritis long after recovery. It is plausible that the second patient in the Brazilian case presentation may have had a prior COVID-19 infection (before his vaccination).

That is why we cannot draw conclusions from any of these case reports / presentations. They all need to be investigated to determine their actual cause.

Recommended : COVID-19 Vaccines Estimated To Cause 17 Million Deaths?!

Fact #8 : Both Patients Recovered

It is also important to note that neither patients mentioned in this Brazilian case presentation died.

The first patient recovered partially after treatment with methylprednisolone, and was discharged with the treatment of dimethyl fumarate.

The second patient was also treated with methylprednisolone, and experienced a complete recovery, with no further treatment.

Methylprednisolone is often used in symptomatic attacks of multiple sclerosis. Dimethyl fumarate is also a treatment of multiple sclerosis.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Are Soccer Players Keeling Over From COVID-19 Vaccine?!

Are soccer players keeling over while playing on the field from the COVID-19 vaccine?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Soccer Players Are Keeling Over From COVID-19 Vaccine!

The Children’s Health Defense (CHD) activist group, which is chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., just posted an article suggesting that soccer players are keeling over while playing on the field from the COVID-19 vaccine!

Here is an excerpt from the long, rambling article. Please feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

Keeling Over on the Soccer Field: Is It ‘Long COVID’ — or the Vaccines?

There is an urgent need for studies comparing the health of COVID-19-vaccinated and unvaccinated people. This research is not being done. The data that would identify people who die or were hospitalized is available to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, but is not being released.

Recommended : Young Athletes At High Risk Of Sudden Cardiac Arrest!

 

No Evidence Soccer Players Are Keeling Over From COVID-19 Vaccine!

Let’s take a closer look at the various claims in the article, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : Sudden Cardiac Arrest Is Pretty Common

The first reports of soccer players keeling over on the field did not start only “in the summer of 2021”. Sudden Cardiac Arrest (SCA) is a medical emergency that has been documented for as long as medical records exist.

And SCA is actually pretty common. The United States alone records over half a million cases of sudden cardiac arrest cases every year – an incidence of about 130 per 100,000 individuals per year.

In addition, the COVID-19 vaccines were first prioritised towards vulnerable people, and not athletes. So some athletes who collapsed on the field in the summer of 2021, like Christian Eriksen, were actually unvaccinated!

The incidence of SCA also did not increase after the COVID-19 vaccines were introduced, which squashes the claim that vaccines are causing a spike in sudden cardiac arrest deaths.

As this Peterson-KFF chart shows, the incidence of heart disease as well as other causes of death in the United States remained relatively stable during the pandemic. Only deaths from COVID-19 varied significantly during that time.

Fact #2 : COVID-19 Causes Far More Myocarditis Than Vaccines!

It is true that younger males are more likely than other segments of the population to develop myocarditis after taking COVID-19 vaccines based on mRNA technology. However, what you may not know is that – the risk of developing myocarditis is much, much higher with COVID-19 infections!

The large SAFECOVAC study showed that the risk of developing vaccine myocarditis is less than 1 in a million doses. On the other hand, the study data showed that the risk of developing myocarditis after a COVID-19 infection is hundreds of times higher than getting 3 doses of any COVID-19 vaccine!

If you are worried about myocarditis, you should definitely want to AVOID getting infected with COVID-19.

Recommended : SAFECOVAC: Vaccine Myocarditis Risk Less Than 1 In Million!

Myocarditis
Risk
Per Million
People
vs
Sinovac
vs
AstraZeneca
vs
Pfizer
COVID-19 450 +300x +214x +167x
3x Pfizer 2.7 +1.8x +1.3x Baseline
3x AstraZeneca 2.1 +1.4x Baseline -0.2x
3x Sinovac 1.5 Baseline -0.3x -0.4x

Fact #3 : COVID-19 Vaccines Continue To Be Monitored

COVID-19 vaccines received their Emergency Use Authorisations (EUA) in December 2020 through early 2021, after passing large Phase 3 clinical trials. Even then, they continue to be monitored by their manufacturers, and health authorities across the world.

Even after the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines received their full FDA approval on 23 August 2021, and 31 January 2022 respectively, they continue to be monitored for safety and efficacy.

After three years of safety monitoring and billions of doses administered, COVID-19 vaccines have been proven to be largely safe and effective. There is zero evidence that the COVID-19 vaccines are nefariously targeting soccer players, and “assassinating” them while they play on the field.

Fact #4 : Viruses Multiply, Vaccines Won’t

The claim that COVID-19 vaccines produce more spike proteins than an actual COVID-19 virus infection is illogical. After all, viruses multiply, while the vaccines won’t.

Even if we simply look at the mRNA vaccines alone, they contain a limited number of mRNA instructions that encode for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The mRNA instructions enter a limited number of cells, which then produce and display those spike proteins on their surfaces, to trigger our immune system.

If you are infected by the actual SARS-CoV-2 virus though, it quickly hijacks your cells to produce millions of copies – each covered with spike proteins, which then infect even more cells, in an ever-expanding chain reaction.

Until your immune system learns to stop and defeat the SARS-CoV-2 virus, it will keep producing millions and millions of viruses that will circulate through your body, delivering those nasty spike proteins everywhere.

So if you are really worried about the spike protein, you should really get vaccinated against COVID-19!

Recommended : mRNA Vaccines Created Spike Protein In Human Heart?!

Fact #5 : No Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Is A Bioweapon

There is no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was developed as a bioweapon. Neither is there any evidence that the spike protein was man-made, or “engineered to be toxic”.

For one thing – SARS-CoV-2 isn’t virulent enough to serve as a bioweapon. There are far more potent bioweapons that have already been tested in the past that make this coronavirus look puny.

COVID-19 also disproportionately targets the elderly and the vulnerable, instead of the “fighting age” population. A good bioweapon would do the opposite.

The Chinese also did not have any antidote at hand to deal with COVID-19, when it first broke out in Wuhan.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Do COVID-19 Vaccines Cause Long-Term Heart Damage?!

Did Japanese researchers just discover that COVID-19 vaccines can cause long-term heart damage, even in people with no symptoms?!

Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : COVID-19 Vaccines May Cause Long-Term Heart Damage!

People are sharing an article by the Children’s Health Defense, suggesting that Japanese researchers found evidence that COVID-19 vaccines cause long-term heart damage, even in people with no symptoms!

Children’s Health Defense : 🚨 COVID Vaccine May Cause Long-Term Heart Damage, Even in People With No Symptoms

The findings contradict claims by the CDC that people who develop myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccines experience symptoms but “feel better quickly.”

Recommended : mRNA Vaccines Created Spike Protein In Human Heart?!

 

No Evidence COVID-19 Vaccines Cause Long-Term Heart Damage!

Let’s take a look at what the Japanese researchers did, and find out why they did not actually show that COVID-19 vaccines cause long-term heart damage!

Fact #1 : Assessment Done Via Pet/CT Scan

First, let me just point out that the study in question (link) is called “Assessment of Myocardial 18F-FDG Uptake at PET/CT in Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2–vaccinated and Nonvaccinated Patients” by Nakahara et al.

This was not an actual clinical study, but a retroactive study based on the PET/CT scans of about 1,000 people – 303 unvaccinated people and 700 vaccinated people.

Fact #2 : Study Was Paired With Editorial

The Nakahara et al study was published in Radiology Vol. 308, which lends it great credence. However, the journal paired it with an editorial by Dr. David Bluemke – a professor of radiology at the University of Wisconsin, to offer much needed context.

Professor Dr. Bluemke was very critical in his editorial, pointing out many problems with the Nakahara et al study. I will summarise some of his key findings below, but if you have the time, please read his editorial in full.

Fact #3 : Study Did Not Conclude Vaccines Cause Heart Damage

To be clear – the study did not show that vaccinated people actually had heart damage, whether long-term or otherwise. It’s even stated in the study’s conclusion:

When compared with nonvaccinated patients, asymptomatic patients who received their second vaccination 1–180 days prior to imaging showed increased myocardial 18F-FDG uptake on PET/CT scans.

The study authors only stated that those PET/CT scans increased myocardial 18F-FDG uptake. Did they not actually claim that it proves any heart damage, long-term or otherwise.

In fact, they also pointed out that the increased 18F-FDG uptake seen in the PET/CT scans may just show minor inflammation, and “may not represent severe myocardial abnormalities”:

[E]ven though vaccinated patients in this study showed elevated myocardial 18F-FDG uptake on PET/CT scans up to 180 days after vaccination, this could result from relatively minor inflammation and may not represent severe myocardial abnormalities.

Recommended : Did MIT Study Prove Pfizer Vaccine Raised Heart Problems?!

Fact #4 : 18F FDG PET/CT Is Bad At Evaluating Heart Inflammation

Dr. Bluemke pointed out in his editorial that PET/CT scans using the 18F FDG tracer are a bad way to evaluate any inflammation of the heart.

Unfortunately, in routine clinical practice, 18F FDG PET/CT is a terrible tracer with which to evaluate myocardial inflammation. This is because glucose is the normal source of energy for the myocardium—almost all patients have high myocardial uptake.

As he explained, a proper study would require “diet manipulation” and “12 hours of fasting” to accurately perform myocardial imaging for 80% of patients using FDG PET/CT scans.

Typical disease processes of interest (infection or inflammatory disease) also result in high myocardial uptake. Routine PET/CT cannot help to reliably identify higher activity due to inflammation on an already high background of normal myocardium. Special steps need to be taken.

The trick is to combine a low carbohydrate and high fat diet the day before the FDG PET scan with 12 hours of fasting immediately before imaging. The myocardium will then typically convert to lipid metabolism; radiotracer activity on 18F FDG PET scans is low in about 80% of patients. Therefore, after diet manipulation and fasting, the clinician has a reasonable possibility of detecting inflammatory or infiltrative myocardial disease.

Still, that leaves 20% of patients who have not switched off their use of glucose. With fasting alone (no diet changes), the success of myocardial imaging with PET/CT is even worse, with about 30%–50% of individuals having residual myocardial activity on FDG PET/CT scans.

Recommended : Do mRNA Vaccines Increase Heart Disease Risk?!

Fact #5 : The Patients Had Cancer + Other Diseases

I should point out that the study isn’t actually representative of the general population. About half the patients had cancer of some sort:

  • Vaccinated group : 328 of 700 patients had cancer (46.9%)
  • Unvaccinated group : 153 of 300 patients had cancer (50.5%)

On top of that, the other patients had a variety of diseases like – sarcoidosis, thyroid disease, etc. and many underwent chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and other forms of treatment that could account for the results.

Dr. Bluemke also pointed out in his editorial that such a non-representative cohort requires “further analysis”:

The main results are asymptomatic patients vaccinated for COVID-19 before PET had about 40% greater radiotracer activity in the myocardium than unvaccinated individuals. The P value was low, less than .001. This translates to only one time out of 1000 that these results would occur by chance.

These results are compelling, but we should remain suspicious without further analysis. There are simply too many things that can still go wrong with this comparison.

Patients with cancer who get vaccinated tend to be older and perhaps at greater risk for being immunocompromised or needing chemotherapy. We do not know the full characteristics of vaccinated versus unvaccinated patients (including the course and nature of chemotherapy treatments). Prior studies showed that younger male individuals had more reports of vaccine-related myocarditis after their second dose of vaccine.

Standardized uptake values are quantitative and useful, but metabolic derangements might also cause the same differences. In short, other differences besides vaccination could be responsible for differences between the two patient groups.

In short – this study requires more data, and more analysis. One certainly cannot draw any kind of conclusions based on PET/CT scams of just 1,000 people – half of which had cancer!

Please help us FIGHT MISINFORMATION by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Do UK Gov Data Show Cancer Deaths From Vaccine?!

Do UK government data show that young people are dying of turbo cancer caused by the COVID-19 vaccine at “explosive” rates?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : UK Gov Data Show Explosive Hike In Cancer Deaths From Vaccine!

People are sharing a Children Health Defense article that appears to suggest that UK government data show that young people are dying of turbo cancer caused by the COVID-19 vaccine at “explosive” rates!

Here is an excerpt from the very long article:

New Report: Young People Dying of Cancer at ‘Explosive’ Rates, UK Government Data Show

Recommended : COVID-19 Vaccine Causes Turbo Skin Cancer – Melanoma?!

 

No Evidence UK Gov Data Show Explosive Hike In Cancer Deaths From Vaccine!

Let’s take a look at the claims, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : It Was Just Statistical Analysis

Firsts, I should just point out that the “study” was just a statistical analysis of data from the UK Office for National Statistics (ONS). This is important to note because it does not actually show a correlation between the “excess deaths” caused by cancer, and mRNA vaccines.

Interestingly, the paper itself does not even mention the words “vaccine” or “mRNA” even once! So why would the Children Health Defense article suggest that the paper showed a link between those deaths and mRNA vaccines?

If there are actually increases in cancer deaths after the COVID-19 pandemic, could they not be caused by a lack of screening, laboratory investigations, or patients seeking diagnosis during the lockdowns?

The paper itself certainly offered no evidence linking any of the cancer deaths to the mRNA vaccines, or any COVID-19 vaccine for the matter.

Fact #2 : UK Data Showed No Increase In Cancer Deaths

On top of that, the UK excess mortality data (link) for the last 3 years (October 2020 to October 2023) showed no increase in deaths from all causes of cancer in the United Kingdom.

In fact, the data showed that weekly cancer deaths (dark grey bars) were generally LOWER than expected (dotted purple line). The light grey bars show cancer patients who died from other causes.

Does that mean that the COVID-19 vaccines were somehow protecting people in the UK from cancer deaths? Of course, not. So why should any excess death be attributed to the COVID-19 vaccines? Think about that.

Recommended : 1 In 4 Americans Know Someone Who Died From Vaccine?!

Fact #3 : mRNA Vaccines Cannot Enter Cell Nucleus

There is zero evidence to back up the claims that mRNA vaccines, or even DNA fragments in those vaccines, can change our DNA.

Let me just point out that messenger RNA (mRNA) cannot enter the nucleus of our cells. Therefore, it cannot possibly change our cell DNA, or deactivate genes that suppress tumours – the basis for claims mRNA vaccines cause turbo cancers.

For that to happen, two things must occur – the mRNA must be “converted” into DNA by a reverse transcriptase enzyme, which does not exist in human cytoplasm (but exists in viruses). Even after that happens, the transcribed DNA cannot enter the cell nucleus without an integrase enzyme (that viruses produce).

Unlike mRNA vaccines, viruses not only insert their genome into our cell nucleus, they literally take over our cells to turn them into virus factories. So anyone who is worried about “alien” RNA / DNA entering our cell nucleus should worry about viruses, instead of mRNA vaccines!

Fact #4 : There Is No Such Thing As Turbo Cancer

There is no such thing as “turbo cancer”, and there is no evidence that any COVID-19 vaccine can cause cancer, or make cancer go “turbo”.

Many cases of cancer go undetected until they become symptomatic. And sometimes, patients ignore those symptoms until they worsen.

Some cancers are also known “silent killers”, because they show no symptoms until they are already in an advanced stage, and have spread to other parts of the body. Such patients often die soon after diagnosis.

Hence, many people that were claimed to have died of turbo cancers were suffering from such “silent killer” cancers, or their cancers were actually diagnosed long before the COVID-19 vaccines were invented.

Ironically, Kirstie Alley refused to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Yet, it did not stop people from claiming that she died from turbo cancer caused by the COVID-19 vaccine!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Moderna Try To Cover Up Vaccine Deaths?!

Do newly-released clinical trial documents show that Moderna tried to cover up deaths caused by its COVID-19 vaccine?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

Updated @ 2023-08-08 : Updated with some additional information.
Originally posted @ 2023-07-25

 

Claim : Moderna Tried To Cover Up Vaccine Deaths!

People are sharing articles by The Epoch Times and Children Health Defense which claim or suggest that newly-released clinical trial documents show that Moderna covered up deaths caused by its COVID-19 vaccine!

Here is an excerpt of The Epoch Times article. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts:

‘Serious Doubt’ About COVID-19 Vaccine Safety After Forced Release of 15,000 Pages of Clinical Trial Data: Legal NGO

And here is an excerpt of Children Health Defense article. Feel free to skip to the next section for the facts:

Exclusive: Clinical Trial Documents Suggest Moderna Skimped on Autopsies, Discounted Serious Injuries — Did FDA Know?

Recommended : Died Suddenly : Anti-Vaccination Movie Lies Exposed!

 

No Evidence Moderna Tried To Cover Up Vaccine Deaths!

In this article, I will go through some of their claims, and show you what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : Adverse Events Are Not Necessarily Vaccine Side Effects

First, let’s start with the fact that adverse events are not necessarily vaccine side effects.

Like with Pfizer, Moderna has to monitor for these adverse events, which are “unfavourable” or “unintended” events that happen after vaccination or taking a drug, like having an anaphylactic reaction or getting into a car accident.

All reported adverse events have to be investigated to find out if they are related (anaphylactic reaction) or not (getting into a car accident) to the vaccine or drug that was taken.

Even if an adverse event was “possibly caused” by the vaccine, it must still be confirmed that the vaccine directly caused it, because an anaphylactic reaction (for example) can also occur from a bee sting, or an existing peanut allergy.

Only once an adverse event is confirmed to be caused by the vaccine, is it then a vaccine side effect. Otherwise, it is merely an adverse event, not a side effect.

Fact #2 : Moderna Sponsored Trial, But Did Not Run It

It is important to point out that Moderna only sponsored and created the protocol (PDF download) for the Phase 3 clinical trial of its mRNA-1273 vaccine candidate for COVID-19. Moderna itself did not conduct the mRNA-1273 vaccine trial.

The Moderna mRNA-1273 Phase 3 clinical trial was conducted by CoVPN investigators funded by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response and NIAID.

Moderna is leading the trial as the regulatory sponsor and is providing the investigational vaccine for the trial. The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response and NIAID are providing funding support for the trial.

The NIH Coronavirus Prevention Network (CoVPN) will participate in conducting the trial. The network brings together expertise from existing NIAID-supported clinical research networks. The mRNA-1273 vaccine candidate will be tested at approximately 89 clinical research sites in the United States, 24 of which are part of the CoVPN.

Hana M. El Sahly, M.D., principal investigator of the NIAID-funded Infectious Diseases Clinical Research Consortium site at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston; Lindsey R. Baden, M.D., principal investigator of the NIAID-funded Harvard HIV Vaccine Clinical Trials Unit at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston; and Brandon Essink, M.D., principal investigator and medical director of Meridian Clinical Research, will serve as co-principal investigators for the Phase 3 trial of mRNA-1273.

Recommended : Why Adverse Events of Special Interest Are NOT Side Effects!

Fact #3 : Moderna Does Not Conduct Autopsies

Defending the Republic (DTR) – the NGO that obtained and released the Moderna documents highlighted that only two autopsies were performed even though 16 people died during the clinical trial.

Just to be clear – Moderna itself did not conduct the clinical trial. Therefore, it does not have any say on whether an autopsy should or should not be conducted.

In fact, it is likely that the attending doctors / hospitals were the ones deciding whether to conduct the autopsies, while study authors only collected the data. That’s why many of the deaths were listed with Unknown autopsies. If the study authors were the ones conducting the autopsies (and refusing to do so), they would have listed them as None.

As I will show you below, there is no evidence that the study authors deliberately refused to conduct autopsies or investigate suspicious deaths in the Moderna vaccine clinical trial.

Fact #4 : Half The Deaths Were On Placebo

Many of these articles pointed out that sixteen people who received the Moderna vaccine died. What they did not tell you is that sixteen other people who received the placebo also died. In other words, a total of 32 people died during the clinical trial – half received the vaccine, and half received the placebo.

While that sounds like a lot – I should point out that the Moderna mRNA-1273 Phase 3 clinical trial involved 30,420 volunteers, and ran for approximately 3 months.

The mortality rate in the US for 2021 was 879.7 per 100,000 people, so for those three months, we should expect 89 people to die out of those 30,420 participants. Yet only 32 people died. There is simply no evidence in the clinical trial’s data to show an increase in deaths from the Moderna vaccine.

Fact #4 : Subject US3292023 Died From Heart Failure

In its summary, DTR highlighted some of those suspicious deaths that lack an autopsy. Sounds suspicious, right? Not really, if you actually look at the Moderna documents.

The first case was Subject US3292023 – an 80 year-old White male who died on 23 January 2021 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as None.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He had history of significant cardiac disease and diabetes.
  • He received Dose 1 on 4 August 2020, and Dose 2 on 1 September 2020.
  • He reported no adverse effects from both vaccinations.
  • He suffered from diabetic ketoacidosis (serious complication from his existing diabetes) on 26 October 2020.
  • He suffered from End Stage Congestive Heart Failure on 23 January 2023.

I’m sure you can see why there was absolutely no need for anyone to conduct an autopsy on this man.

Recommended : Did CDC Say COVID Vaccines Cause AIDS + Cancer?!

Fact #5 : Subject US3472001 Likely Died From Heart Attack

The second case was Subject US3472001 – a 70 year-old White male who died on 27 November 2020 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as Unknown.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He had history of significant cardiac disease and severe obesity.
  • He received Dose 1 on 31 August 2020, and Dose 2 on 1 October 2020.
  • He reported no adverse effects from both vaccinations.
  • He tested positive for Hepatitis C on 29 September 2020.
  • He suffered from a sudden fatal event, likely myocardial infarction on 27 November 2020.

It is unknown if an autopsy was conducted, but with a history of significant cardiac disease and severe obesity, it would not be surprising if the doctor / hospital did not bother to conduct an autopsy, especially during a pandemic that was straining doctors and hospital facilities.

Fact #6 : Subject US3512042 Died From Cardiac Arrest

The third case is Subject US3512042 – a 78 year-old White male who died on 1 September 2020 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as Unknown.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He received Dose 1 on 12 August 2020, but never received a second dose.
  • On 30 August 2020, he reported nausea and malaise.
  • On 31 August 2020, he vomited three times.
  • On 1 September 2020, he suffered from cardiopulmonary arrest and died.

It is unknown if an autopsy was conducted, but it is not uncommon for a 78 year-old man to die from cardiopulmonary arrest.

Fact #7 : Subject US3622169 Died From Metastatic Liver Cancer

The fourth case was Subject US3622169 – a 56 year-old White male who died on 21 January 2021 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as Unknown.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He had history of severe obesity and diabetes.
  • He received Dose 1 on 9 September 2020, and Dose 2 on 7 October 2020.
  • On 29 November 2020, he reported worsening dyspnea (breathing difficulties) with nasal congestion.
  • On 6 December 2020, he was diagnosed with pneumonia.
  • On 30 December 2020, he was diagnosed with metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (metastatic liver cancer).
  • On 16 January 2021, he suffered sepsis and his metastatic liver cancer worsened, and he ultimately died on 21 January 2021.

Needless to say, there was simply no need to perform an autopsy, after confirming his metastatic liver cancer diagnosis.

Recommended : New Study Proves Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer?!

Fact #8 : Subject US37012010 Died From COVID-19

The fifth case was Subject US3702010 – a 74 year-old Hispanic male who died on 25 February 2021 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as Unknown.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He had history of liver disease and HIV infection.
  • He received Dose 1 on 4 September 2020. He never received a second dose.
  • He complained of nausea issues on the same day, which resolved.
  • He complained of fatigue and pain of the injection site on 5 September 2020, which resolved.
  • He complained of fatigue again on 11 September 2020, which resolved.
  • He complained of lower abdominal pain on 23 October 2020, which resolved.
  • He got infected with COVID-19 on 1 January 2021, with diagnosis confirmed on 5 January 2021
  • On his last follow-up 175 days after his first dose, he was still suffering from COVID-19
  • He died from COVID-19 on 25 February 2021

I’m sure you can see why there was absolutely no need for anyone to conduct an autopsy on this man.

Fact #9 : Subject US3752173 Died From Heart Attack

The sixth case was Subject US3752173 – a 77 year-old American Indian / Alaskan native male who died on 1 November 2020 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as None.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He received Dose 1 on 20 August 2020, and Dose 2 on 18 September 2020.
  • He did not report any adverse events from both Moderna vaccine injections.
  • He suffered a myocardial infarction (heart attack) on 1 November 2020, and died from it.

Again, you can see why there was absolutely no need for anyone to conduct an autopsy on this man.

Fact #10 : Subject US3862141 Died From Cardiac Arrest

The seventh case was Subject US3862141 – a 72 year-old Asian male who died on 9 March 2021 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as Unknown.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He received Dose 1 on 8 September 2020, and Dose 2 on 6 October 2020.
  • He did not report any adverse effects from both vaccinations.
  • On 9 March 2021, he suffered from cardiopulmonary arrest and died.

It is unknown if an autopsy was conducted, but it is not uncommon for a 72 year-old man to die from cardiopulmonary arrest.

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines DOUBLE Heart Attack Risk?!

Fact #11 : Subject US3872318 Died From Suicide

The eighth case was Subject US3872318 – a 62 year-old White male who died on 16 September 2020 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as None.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He received Dose 1 on 27 August 2020, but never received a second dose.
  • He did not report any adverse effects from the first vaccination.
  • On 16 September 2020, he died after committing suicide.

Needless to say – an autopsy was completely unnecessary in this case.

Fact #12 : Subject US3872496 Died From Unknown Cause

The ninth case was Subject US3872496 – a 61 year-old Native Hawaiian / Pacific Islander male who died on 17 December 2020 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as Unknown.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He had history of severe obesity and diabetes.
  • He received Dose 1 on 9 September 2020, and Dose 2 on 9 October 2020.
  • He did not report any adverse effects from both vaccinations.
  • On 17 December 2020, he died but the details behind his death is unknown.

It is unknown how the man died, and unknown if an autopsy was conducted.

Fact #13 : Subject US3912024 Died From Organ Failure

The tenth case was Subject US3912024 – a 72 year-old White male who died on 22 November 2020 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as None.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He received Dose 1 on 28 August 2020, and Dose 2 on 24 September 2020.
  • On 31 October 2020, he was diagnosed with obstructing nephrolithiasis (kidney stones blocking the flow of urine).
  • On 3 November 2020, he was diagnosed with thrombocytopenia (low platelets), as well as acute renal failure, Klebsiella-complicated pyelonephritis (kidney infection), and atelectasis (collapse) of the lower lobes of both lungs.
  • On 8 November 2020, he was found to have ascites (intra-abdominal fluid), anasarca (severe, generalised accumulation of fluid in the interstitial space), and a perforated duodenal ulcer with bleeding.
  • On 15 November 2020, he was diagnosed with anaemia.
  • On 18 November 2020, the collapse of his lungs worsened and he developed pleural effusion (accumulation of fluid in the pleural cavity) as well.
  • On 20 November 2020, he died from multi-system organ failure and acute hypoxic respiratory failure.

Needless to say – an autopsy was also completely unnecessary in this case.

Recommended : Did Switzerland Just Stop All COVID-19 Vaccinations?!

Fact #14 : Subject US3932197 Died From Unknown Cause

The eleventh case was Subject US3932197 – a 37 year-old Black female who died on 13 March 2021 due to an Adverse Event, and her autopsy status was listed as None.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • She received Dose 1 on 26 September 2020, and Dose 2 on 27 October 2020.
  • On 13 March 2021, she died, but her cause of death was unknown.

In this case, an autopsy might be warranted. However, that is impossible to determine, because we do not know the circumstances behind her death – she could have died from any number of causes – an accident, suicide, a fall, a surgical procedure, an infection, etc.

Fact #15 : Subject US3962094 Died From Suicide

The twelfth case was Subject US3962094 – a 56 year-old White female who died on 15 October 2020 due to an Adverse Event, and her autopsy status was listed as None.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • She had history of severe obesity.
  • She received Dose 1 on 9 September 2020, but never received a second dose.
  • On 12 September 2020, she was diagnosed with high triglycerides
  • On 7 October 2020, she suffered from acid reflux.
  • On 15 October 2020, she fell and died from head trauma.

Needless to say – an autopsy was also completely unnecessary in this case.

Fact #16 : Subject US3972010 Is Pending Autopsy

The thirteenth case was Subject US3972010 – a 27 year-old Black male who died on 8 January 2021 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as Unknown.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He received Dose 1 on 24 August 2020, and Dose 2 on 21 September 2020.
  • He did not report any adverse effects from both vaccinations.
  • On 8 January 2021, he died but the details behind his death is unknown, pending an autopsy.

It is unknown how the man died, but in this case, an autopsy was conducted.

Recommended : Did Moderna CEO Know Pandemic Was Coming?!

Fact #17 : Subject US3972045 Likely Died From Heart Disease

The last case was Subject US3972045 – a 62 year-old White male who died on 3 December 2020 due to an Adverse Event, and his autopsy status was listed as Unknown.

If you search through the Moderna document (PDF download), you will see that this sequence of reports:

  • He had history of diabetes.
  • He received Dose 1 on 27 August 2020, and Dose 2 on 24 September 2020.
  • He did not report any adverse effects from both vaccinations.
  • On 21 October 2021, he was diagnosed with diabetic gastroparesis – delayed stomach emptying due to diabetes.
  • On 3 December 2020, he died from a suspected coronary artery disease – a complication of his diabetes mellitus.

It is unknown if an autopsy was conducted, but it is not uncommon for a 62 year-old man to die from heart disease.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!