by Rhoda Wilson, Expose News:
Health experts appearing on or writing in corporate media to discuss Covid are reassuring the public that they are keeping up with science publishing and tailoring their messaging accordingly. But are they?
Recently we reviewed a study published in The Lancet which shows that, contrary to the assurances of New Zealand (“NZ”) experts, mRNA vaccination fails to reduce transmission, serious illness, and death among the vulnerable. In this article we discuss two more recent studies which run counter to the government narrative.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
German study implicates myocarditis in post mRNA injection deaths
German researchers performed standard autopsies on 25 persons dying within 20 days of mRNA vaccination. The results are reported in a paper entitled ‘Autopsy-based histopathological characterization of myocarditis after anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination’.
In four patients who received an mRNA vaccination, the researchers identified acute myocarditis without detection of any other significant disease or health constellation that may have caused an unexpected death.
The deaths were found to be caused by acute arrhythmia leading to cardiac failure associated with interstitial myocardial T-cell invasion. The effect was most notable on the right side of the heart which receives blood returned from veins, which is likely to have contained elements of vaccine components.
The authors concluded:
Myocarditis can be a potentially lethal complication following mRNA-based anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Our findings may aid in adequately diagnosing unclear cases after vaccination and in establishing a timely diagnosis in vivo, thus, providing the framework for adequate monitoring and early treatment of severe clinical cases.
The prevalence of definitive causal myocarditis symptomatology was 16% among deaths within 20 days of mRNA vaccination. According to NZ’s Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring (“CARM”) data held by Medsafe, up to September 2022 there have been 157 deaths reported to CARM proximate to vaccination. Medsafe admits this figure is highly under reported by a factor of approximately 20. Therefore, a conservative estimate of the actual total would be 3,140 – 16% of 3,140 is 502 deaths.
It is noteworthy that over the course of almost two years NZ Medsafe has admitted that only two deaths proximate to vaccination can be causally ascribed to the effects of vaccination. If the German experience is being repeated here, there could be 500 deaths from vaccine related myocarditis that have remained undetected and unacknowledged.
The huge discrepancy between the German results and the official NZ figures indicates that insufficient investigation, including autopsies, have taken place here. For a detailed discussion by Dr Mobeen Syed of this technical study see HERE.
Large prospective Lancet study calls the current long Covid narrative into question
Dangers of “long Covid” are repeatedly cited as a reason to vaccinate and take severe precautions such as masking, ventilation of social spaces, social distancing and isolation. A number of cross-sectional studies have been completed on the prevalence and persistence of long Covid. Those published so far appear to indicate that a very wide range of symptoms persist over long periods among a significant percentage of persons subsequent to Covid infection.
A potential difficulty with the information we have so far is the great variability of the estimates offered by different papers. Current estimates of long Covid prevalence hover around 10-30% of those infected who still suffer some symptom(s) after three months. These include loneliness, mental health and wellbeing, fatigue, and specific physical symptoms including, loss of taste or smell, pain and shortness of breath. Is this picture accurate?
Studies to date have an inherent defect, they are based on surveys of populations at specific intervals post infection, but they don’t follow the course of long Covid for the same groups of individuals over time. In other words, from a strictly scientific perspective we have to ask: are the same people suffering symptoms throughout the study period? This defect can be rectified by prospective studies that follow individuals from the point of infection onwards
A prospective controlled study published by The Lancet of 7,000 children and young persons (5,000 Covid positive and 2,000 Covid free) over the course of a year post infection during 2020 up to March 2021 is entitled ‘Natural course of health and well-being in non-hospitalised children and young people after testing for SARS-CoV-2: A prospective follow-up study over 12 months’. The results are very surprising and entirely up-end our understanding of long Covid.
In summary, symptoms of long Covid in all categories decline greatly over the course of the year which is very reassuring. But here’s the rub, for many young subjects, not initially subject to long Covid, new symptoms appear after 6 or 12 months which are actually not related to Covid infection but have multiple other causes.
New adverse symptoms were reported six- and 12-months post-test by both test-positives and test-negatives, particularly tiredness, shortness of breath, poor quality of life, poor well-being and fatigue.
The authors conclude that the evidence points to:
The new-onset adverse symptoms arising 6- or 12-months after initial viral infection should not exclusively be viewed as new long Covid symptoms as a consequence of the initial SARS-CoV-2 infection. Rather, these adverse symptoms should be seen in the wider context of health and well-being in the general adolescent population.
Some symptoms being ascribed to long Covid have other causes unrelated to Covid infection. Thus, young persons are likely to be affected by stressful social effects of pandemic policies which could include lockdowns, loss of school time, peer interactions, inadequate medical care, masking, etc. In other words, pandemic policies could be making things far worse for young persons, not better. For a good video summary by Dr. Vinay Prasad see HERE.
Why have alarm bells remained silent at the Ministry of Health?
Increasingly government policies around the world are falling out of step with Covid findings published in journals. There is a need for greater vigilance and an educational programme to get medical professionals up to date. However this is not the whole story, if you listen to eminent UK Cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra in a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, you will be horrified to learn that many doctors are actually up to date with mRNA vaccine harms especially those related to cardiac problems, but they are carefully protecting big pharma from blame by keeping silent and pressuring others to do the same.
The systemic pathology of the regulatory system and the profit incentive in the pharmaceutical industry, have distorted the safety data and hidden the adverse effects of mRNA vaccination. Many people are anxious to keep it that way. The latest findings reveal mRNA vaccination is far more dangerous than Covid itself. Malhotra’s in-depth interview with Carlson is one of the clearest and most measured discussions of research on safety data I have seen. Please take the time to watch this so that you inform others and help protect public health.
Corporate media is still offering the NZ public incomplete information
Is any of Dr. Malhotra’s message coming to public attention in NZ? Unfortunately, not. The NZ Herald published an article yesterday ‘Covid 19 Omicron: Explained – the two big variables that could slow or grow this wave’ – another missed opportunity. Curiously the article didn’t mention mRNA vaccination and it didn’t tell us why it got left off the page. Short answer: mRNA vaccination doesn’t work and more to the point it leaves recipients more vulnerable to Covid and other illnesses including cardiac conditions. This could have been avoided if the Ministry of Health had examined the Pfizer trial data more diligently early on.
So here is the sad outcome of a highly vaccinated NZ, we are now all being encouraged by corporate media to:
1. mask, test, socially distance, and isolate
and wait for it:
2. take antiviral medication
Yale Medicine lists the possible side effects of antiviral Paxlovid (currently being widely advertised on television) as: hives, trouble swallowing or breathing, swelling of the mouth, lips, or face, throat tightness, hoarseness, skin rash, an altered or impaired sense of taste, diarrhoea, increased blood pressure, muscle aches, abdominal pain, nausea, and feeling generally unwell.
