>=A major new study from Stanford Medicine, published in Science Translational Medicine, offers a fundamentally new explanation for rare cases of mRNA vaccine–associated myocarditis. Rather than simply showing that cardiac injury occurs, the researchers identify a specific immune signaling mechanism that can trigger heart cells to damage themselves from within.
Crucially, the authors describe this mechanism as a potential class effect of mRNA technology, raising important design considerations not only for current COVID vaccines, but also for future mRNA vaccines and cancer therapies.
I’m waiting to see when the long term effects of drugs like Ozempic will appear….along with many other new drugs on the market.
“I’m waiting to see when the long term effects of drugs like Ozempic will appear…”
No need to wait for the long term effects, the short term and 2-5 year effects are not awesome.
Yes, you will lose weight. Possibly too much weight, and from the wrong places like your skeletal muscles and your heart.
No, it probably won’t be good for you. But there they are, lining up to take it…
Google “ozempic face.” Also implicated in digestive tract trouble. And the weight comes back if you stop taking it.
It requires you to engage in weight and resistance training, else ~40 to 60% of your weight loss will be skeletal muscle, and it requires you to support those workouts with a proper diet.
So do you think those taking it are likely to comply with it’s other requirements, given they can’t put the spoon down to begin with?
Geeze …… Covid was a gift for researchers …… After the fact. Everyone turned themselves into a terminal ill patient with nothing to lose.
And were treated as such.
Smart people and the institutions they scurry under just aren’t what they used to be.
Covid was the moment the masses drove a stake through the heart of reason.
Some people think that the COVID mRNA vaccine’s propensity for causing myocarditis should have resulted in the vaccine being pulled.
But COVID itself was 7 to 20 times more likely to give someone myocarditis than the vaccine. Thus the vaccine likely REDUCED people’s chances of getting myocarditis by (1) reducing their chances of getting COVID, and (2) easing the symptoms if they did.
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/11/2/362
Vaccines are at all times a trade off of benefits versus side effects. This makes them particularly vulnerable to bad actors who distort the situation by providing only part of the story.
You don’t know hard it was not to ask the guy training young people about WHIMIS , where the safety data sheet was for the vaccine……
You dance around the obvious pretty elegantly Killer but what you hold on to – reason doesn’t mean squat when people of “stature and integrity” cover their ass , like the average Joe, all the while looking down their nose.
You do you though, I do pity you when you realise, inmates from an asylum could have done a better job. Then and now…..
I have heart disease, and I’m glad I never took the sht, and got COVID twice and here I am.
Then again I’ve never measured life by the amount of breaths you take.
Where was the safety data sheet for the vaccines? Well here it is for Pfizer mRNA COVID vaccine:
https://labeling.pfizer.com/ShowLabeling.aspx?id=14472
And that you had COVID twice and survived is anecdotal and proves nothing. It takes large-scale trials, preferably controlled, randomized, and double blind, to determine effectiveness and risks of a medication.
The mammal said: “And that you had COVID twice and survived is anecdotal and proves nothing.”
That is true. But you will be hard-pressed to find anyone in Canada who hasn’t had it two or three times at this point. I’ve had it at least three times myself, each time it was -nothing-. Not even a decent head-cold. Same as everybody else.
There is no large-scale trial better than the entire population.
There is no large-scale trial better than the entire population.
A randomized placebo-controlled trial can prevent certain confounding effects. As an example, the people who are most likely to get vaccinated are those who tend to care for their health in general, and thus are already more likely to survive a COVID infection. Thus a purely observational study on the entire population might conclude that getting vaccinated is more effective than it actually is.
But an observational study on the entire population would be useful. Why you think your experience extends to the entire population is anyone’s guess. There is no doubt that COVID was dangerous to a significant portion of the population.
“A randomized placebo-controlled trial can prevent certain confounding effects.”
Yes it can, particularly if the people doing the trial are not lying scoundrels. One can’t really make that claim regarding Covid jabs.
“Why you think your experience extends to the entire population is anyone’s guess.”
I think that because that’s what the reports say. The Covid coof was -less- dangerous than the usual influenza we get ever year. As demonstrated by survival rates. The people who died of Covid are the ones who would have died regardless. Or so the numbers say, anyway. Don’t forget that a huge preponderance of “Covid” deaths were people who died of -anything- while having a positive Covid test. One of those unfortunate bits of government misbehavior that we’ve all come to expect in the last five years.
Plus there’s the simple fact that if everybody has had it two or three times, and they have, it can’t have been that bad. They’d be dead by the third time otherwise.
“There is no doubt that COVID was dangerous to a significant portion of the population.”
Yes, the same portion that gets carried off by influenza every year. Those who are immune compromised, the very fragile elderly, and etc.
Not too many people really die of influenza, generally they have something massively wrong with them and the influenza is the last straw. Which I’m sure you know, but for some reason refuse to admit. Money involved, is there?
I take exception to your assumption that those who take vaccines are more attentive to their own healthy lifestyles. I would suggest just the opposite. That those who will take an injection to “save their life” … are more likely to be unhealthy pill-popping drones who are always looking for a shortcut to good health.
In 2022, there were 19,716 reported deaths in Canada due to COVID and 5,985 deaths due to influenza and pneumonia (not sure why they always combine the two). The survival rate is moot. A highly infectious but rarely deadly disease can present a far greater risk than a rare but deadly disease.
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/daily-quotidien/231127/dq231127b-eng.pdf?st=e4KabPH4
Keniji:
It’s just an example of how an observational study can give a deceiving result due to uncompensated-for correlations. You want to argue that this particular example doesn’t hold then fine. The point is that well-designed controlled studies are far less prone to the problem of confounding factors.
Killer, you quoted public health Canada “In 2022, there were 19,716 reported deaths in Canada due to COVID and 5,985 deaths due to influenza and pneumonia.”
Did you control for the 56% false positive rates of the PCR test?
And with this comment “But COVID itself was 7 to 20 times more likely to give someone myocarditis than the vaccine. Thus the vaccine likely REDUCED people’s chances of getting myocarditis by (1) reducing their chances of getting COVID, and (2) easing the symptoms if they did.”
Did you control for the 14 day rule about who was and who was not vaccinated? In other words if someone got myocarditis 13 days or less after the jab they were classified as unvaccinated. And then there’s the 28 day rule. If you got myocarditis more than 28 days after your last jab it is unrelated to the vaccine. So basically there was a single 14 day window in the vaccinated that was “counted” in determining how safe or unsafe the vaccine was.
The specificity of the PCR test (meaning the accuracy of positive readings) is around 97%. In lab conditions — which is what might happen in a hospital — the accuracy is almost 100%. This suggests that if a hospitalized or dead patient was diagnosed with COVID, they almost certainly had COVID.
https://www.ajicjournal.org/article/S0196-6553(20)30693-3/fulltext
The biggest problem with PCR tests was not false positives but false negatives.
“The biggest problem with PCR tests was not false positives but false negatives.”
Not true. The PCR test might have been very good at identifying tiny leftover noninfection fragments but it was horrible at detecting infectivity.
And the 56% false positive rate of the PCR test used in Canada. In Germany it was 86%.
https://www.jccf.ca/manitoba-chief-microbiologist-and-laboratory-specialist-56-of-positive-cases-are-not-infectious/
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/epidemiology/articles/10.3389/fepid.2025.1592629/full
You are moving the goal posts. There’s a difference between “has recently been infected by COVID” and “is now currently infectious”. Those are two different situations.
And yes, COVID-induced pneumonia can persist after COVID has ceased to be infectious.
Replying to KM:
“A randomized placebo-controlled trial…” Absolutely correct. This didn’t happen with the COVID vaxxes. After “efficacy” was demonstrated, the placebo subjects were vaxxed, because “it wouldn’t be ethical to not protect them.” Thus there are no long-term comparisons.
As for the placebo, those are often adulterated with the adjuvants used in the vaccine, such as aluminum.
Where do people hear these things? All the COVID vaccines were subject to controlled randomized studies both during the approval process and in countless independent studies afterwords. Here’s a meta-analysis of 11 early independent trials.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rmv.2507
You are correct that after many controlled studies had been done and reasonable safety and efficiecy had been determined, that they were replaced with observational trials, as placebo controls became unethical. But that’s true for most medications. There’s nothing special about COVID vaccines there.
I haven’t had ANY sort of respiratory “infection” in 6 years now.
I know at least one other person who also hasn’t.
And NO, I never took those ridiculous, obviously dangerous shots either.
I also don’t know anyone who died from the “rona”, but I do know many people whose health took a dump after they took the shots.
The mammal said: “19,716 reported deaths in Canada due to COVID…”
Yes, quoted from the period during which “deceased due to traumatic brain injury from motor vehicle accident plus positive covid test = covid death because we can bill for it.”
This is like quoting Chinese government production numbers as if they mean something. They lied. We -know- they lied. It has been admitted that they lied. But here’s the little mammal, still quoting the scare propaganda from 2022 as if we didn’t already know that the lying liars lied.
Besides which it doesn’t survive even a back-of-the-envelope external reality check. If the WuFlu was as fatal as you suggest, we’d all be dead by now. Given that everybody’s had it two or three times already.
Feel free to provide evidence that COVID deaths were significantly overdiagnosed, and that influeza deaths were not.
“Vaccines are at all times a trade off of benefits versus side effects.”
Conveniently avoiding the irrefutable fact that the Covid Jab is not a vaccine. It is an mRNA genetic modification technology. One that nobody knew what the outcomes would be when it was deployed. The only commonality between any other vaccine and the Jab is that they both come in a needle.
You think we can’t see you twisting like a pretzel, but we can.
“Thus the vaccine likely…”
You know, “likely” is not a word I want to see when discussing the effects of a mandated medical intervention. The simple fact is that nobody knew what was going to happen at the time, and now in 2025 we still only know the five year outcomes. Because it’s been five years. What’s the ten-year outcome? WE DON’T KNOW, they never tested it properly so we must wait another five years to find out.
If you’re going to legally mandate a medical intervention and jail people for not taking it, you should know to a very fine degree what the plusses and minuses are going to be. But here we are, with you still pretending this is all fine and dandy.
The mRNA COVID vaccine reduced the likelihood of getting COVID, and reduced the severity of the symptoms if you did get COVID. The evidence for this is massive and consistent across numerous studies from around the world.
If you don’t want to call that a vacccine, go ahead. Call it a “Susan” if you wish. I’m not going to play stupid word games.
“The mRNA COVID vaccine reduced the likelihood of getting COVID, and reduced the severity of the symptoms if you did get COVID.”
Oh? So why has everybody, “vaccinated” or not, had it two or three times in the last four years? And why aren’t the unvaccinated crowding the hospitals with extremely severe cases? Because they’re not, you know.
The government said the jab would do all those things, but the results on the ground indicate that wasn’t true. But the jab did give a lot of people myocarditis, unfortunately. Also a few other fun side effects like strokes etc.
“I’m not going to play stupid word games.”
What you’re doing is pretending that the vaccination technique invented by Edward Jenner in the 1790s to prevent Smallpox is the same as a genetic modification technique that potentially alters every cell in the body. Vaccination stimulates the immune system to attack a particular pathogen. mRNA changes the genetic code of your living cells to produce a spike protein. Changes them permanently, until they die and are replaced. Or, in the case of certain cells in the brain, bone marrow and reproductive organs, until the patient dies. Because some cells are forever.
Your pretense is a disgrace, frankly.
Actually, they were. The rates of hospitalization and mortality due to COVID were significantly higher among the unvaccinated than the vaccinated. A ton of studies showed this. Here are two:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2842305
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/72/wr/mm7206a3.htm
Did the studies you quote correct for the misclassification bias and the false positive rate of the PCR test?And what would the result be if they didn’t and the work is redone doing it?
I discussed that above.
And I replied above.
And the 56% false positive rate of the PCR test used in Canada. In Germany it was 86%.
https://www.jccf.ca/manitoba-chief-microbiologist-and-laboratory-specialist-56-of-positive-cases-are-not-infectious/
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/epidemiology/articles/10.3389/fepid.2025.1592629/full
And you ignored the whole bias of determining who was and was not vaccinated due to the 14 day rule.
No it didn’t. In fact, the largest number of COVID cases came after the “vaccine”. It also did not reduce the severity of the symptoms. What did, was the emergence of the Omicron variant which virtually everybody caught. The data out of the UK weekly vaccine surveillance reports in early 2022 shows clearly that the percentage of deaths in the double boosted jumped from 0% in Week 1 to 75% by Week 13. In the same time frame, the percentage of deaths in the completely unvaccinated dropped from 27% to under 10%. Week 13 was the last week the UK government provided the data broken out by age and vax status.
%#!$@^#
Allow me to rephrase.
The mRNA COVID vaccine reduced the likelihood of getting COVID compared to not getting the shot. That does not imply that the total number of cases had to drop.
You said the vaccine reduced the chances of getting COVID. That is nonsense. It did no such thing. And that is another reason why the UK government stopped providing the data broken out by age group and vax status. Go around in circles if you wish.
Many dozens of controlled trials found it did:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0024320525002449
Your claim has been made many times before by others. There is no scientific basis to it.
“Vaccines are at all times a trade off of benefits versus side effects.”
Russian roulette is at all times a trade off of empty chamber versus a bullet.
I’ll pass.
What everyone neglects to mention is that covid and its variants was created in a lab– an American funded lab situated in China but using research and samples from Canada and other western countries. Now, would someone please draw a line from these partners in covid creation and link them with the pharma that sold the mrna injections.
“Rather than simply showing that cardiac injury occurs, the researchers identify a specific immune signaling mechanism that can trigger heart cells to damage themselves from within.”
Gee, wouldn’t it have been nice if somebody had been able to do this research BEFORE the government mandated that everyone must take it? You know, like how things were normally done pre-Covid?
But no, instead they mandated a dangerously untested and dangerously -novel- genetic modification technology and shamed, browbeat and in fact jailed people into taking it. That this was public-health insanity was apparent at the time, and we all said so.
Comes now the -proof- that the Jab doesn’t work the way they said it did, which is what I was concerned about all along, and the cheerleaders are still trying to pretend that this is all fine, perfectly acceptable, shut up and take your medicine like you’re supposed to.
It’s not fine.
You’re damn right it isn’t fine, it is grotesque. There were instances of malevolence, and also a stunning display of incompetence and indifference from supposed authorities, who revealed themselves as just bureaucrats, lazy, useless, sub human parasites.
The UK is a powder keg, one spark and the bureaucrats will die by the 10,000 lot, I will shed not one tear and pray for a similar delousing here.
@Killer Marmot
Wanna compare myocarditis rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated?
No, he definitely does not want to do that.
There are two confounders that have to be fixed before there is such a study has any meaning. 1) That pesky 14 day rule. 2) False positive rate of the PCR tests.
nicely explained here https://www.drvinayprasad.com/p/observational-studies-of-covid-vaccine
And the 56% false positive rate of the PCR test used in Canada. In Germany it was 86%.
https://www.jccf.ca/manitoba-chief-microbiologist-and-laboratory-specialist-56-of-positive-cases-are-not-infectious/
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/epidemiology/articles/10.3389/fepid.2025.1592629/full
Please do so. Cite a study.
“Cite a study.”
How about the one from this post that we’re reading right now? The one you’re trying to pretend doesn’t exist.
Well I know you haven’t read the paper, because access is restricted.
Or doesn’t exist
I’m told there is a “Super-flu” (see: scary phrases like, bomb-cyclone and atmospheric-river) making its way across the world. It is a RARE, far more dangerous flu like we’ve never seen before! Be afraid! Be VERY afraid!!
But then I’m told to take my flu shot that will “save me”. But wait a minute. Yearly flu shots are just guesses as to what particular mutation the flu … might … take in the next year. So … did they correctly formulate a vaccine for this new, shockingly awful superflu? Evidently not since it’s ravaging the public … statistically BOTH vaccinated and unvaccinated.
So let me guess … even though the vaccine isn’t tailored to THIS particular Super-Flu … it’s still saving lives and lessening the intensity of the flu. Sorry. Don’t buy it.
“Yearly flu shots are just guesses as to what particular mutation the flu … might … take in the next year.”
Yes they are. Utterly useless as well, because influenza -mutates- so quickly. Give Bug A a month and it’ll be Bug AB and immune to the antibodies against Bug A.
I’ve been pretty disgusted to see them trying it again this year.
But at least it is actually a -vaccine-. As far as we know, anyway. I’m feeling much less trusting of late. “Fool me once, shame on you. fool me twice, shame on me.”
Kenji,
I hate the new terms like “atmospheric river,” which was formerly known as “heavy rain.”
I ignore the fear porn about super flus on through to far right useless eaters, etc.
Here in BC, Canada, the latest attempt at fear porn is what would happen to Vancouver if a 9.0 earthquake hit.
Their modelling suggests that 1,000s would die and Brookfield would make billions rebuilding.
As for your vaccine comments, stand by. A certain rodent will stand you corrected.
PS…thanks for posting Hodson on his 12 string.
The Stanford study is very important for two reasons. 1) It actually involves admitting the vaccine is not safe and effective for everyone. 2) It offers a possible treatment that might prevent the damage.
Of course the other possibility is the vaccines can never be safe and effective no matter what.
That the vaccines can cause myocarditis has been know for five years now. It’s not some explosive new revelation.
And yet healthy young people were forced to get the shot or lose their job. You would fit right in with the Pfizer propaganda department.
Screw off with the personal remarks. I don’t make public policy.
At any rate, the vaccines likely REDUCED the chance of myocarditis, as COVID itself was a far bigger threat of myocarditis. See my first post above.
Well jab me dead and call me XS!
Are you related to the famous unemployed guy, Francis X. Cess?
Why don’t we address the real problem with them which is class switch of Igg3 to Igg4. This is why cancer is soaring in young people who get a stage 4 cancer diagnosis without prior symptoms. At what point do even the most stubborn advocate of this technology agree that young people dying of cancer is an unacceptable outcome for any new technology they force on people.
https://www.igor-chudov.com/p/immune-tolerance-igg4-class-switch
There has been rising cancer rates among young people, but this is trend is more than two decades old. There is no sound evidence of a significant increase in cancer rates or a rise in “turbo cancers” since the COVID vaccines came out in any demographic.
Only slightly off topic…
(From Blazingcatfur)
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/article/cra-says-its-owed-more-than-10-billion-in-covid-19-benefit-payments/
I find you can reduce most very complex topics (like “was COVID-19 actually dangerous”) by treating the claims as a black box, looking at what must necessarily happen if the claims are true, and then checking if that’s what actually happened.
If COVID-19 was so dangerous it necessitated shooting the world economy in the head for over a year, then it must have been terribly, terribly lethal. There must have been piles of excess bodies, akin to the depopulation of Europe during outbreaks of the Black Death.
So where are all the bodies? It’s really hard to hide a body. Every local hospital and funeral home must have been running their crematoria 24/7 to deal with the load. Morgues must have been overflowing with corpses. How come none of that ever happened? It doesn’t matter whether people who died of motorcycle accidents also had COVID-19 and were coded as COVID-19 deaths; people die of motorcycle accidents all the time and the system handles their number without incident. If COVID-19 was so dangerous it mandated tyranny on a par with the little corporal’s Germany, where are all the bodies?
At its peak in the winter of 2020-2021, the excess death rate hit 35% in the United States. This is beyond dispute.
https://www.apmresearchlab.org/covid/excess-mortality-by-state-graphics
Did this stress resources? You better believe it. At one point, New York City had 85 refreigerated trucks to handle the overflow from the morgues. LA did something similar. Some crematoriums ran around the clock.
https://londondaily.com/fema-sends-85-refrigerated-trucks-to-new-york-city-to-hold-bodies