Fatal Heart Inflammation Officially Recognized as Being Caused by Pfizer Vax

originally posted by: BatSars
world.kbs.co.kr...

The South Korean government has acknowledged for the first time a causal link between the Pfizer vaccine and a heart inflammation in a recipient that turned fatal.

As I've stated before, these "relationships" will come out in a drip-drip fashion. Despite TPTB having a list of problems they knew to look out for (while claiming there was no data that brought the list to fruition - just a "gut feeling," because of previous vaccines - see video below @2:33:39)

So far, every issue listed in the above list has been reported in VAERS, aside from the "Vaccine Enhanced Disease," and "Kawasaki's" but Kawasaki's is basically the exact same as MIS-C and MIS-A. It's so similar that doctors often argue about how to differentiate between the two. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Prior to this "official" recognition of death resulting from a side effect resulting from the vaccine, they merely added "warnings" with the qualifier that "this does not prove causation" yada yada.

Then we get into the ethics of this. There are KNOWN risks involved with the vaccine. Most appear to be fine, but many die, many suffer long-term issues from it, and many more suffer long-term, temporary issues from it. Given this, is it really ethical to demand someone take a vaccine that may be a roll of the dice for some people? Is that really okay?

It would be one thing if the side effects were all mild and temporary, but it's something else entirely to demand a person take something that may kill them, especially considering the fact that vaccinated people are still spreading disease, fully vaccinated or not.

At first, when this was an issue, they said "we must vaccinate to stop the spread," but when that proved itself false, they shifted to "but it reduces symptoms and severity," but when vaccinated people ended up in the hospital or dead from it, they then claim "yeah but they're all old and it could have been from something else or a complication of comorbidity" despite many of these same people dismissing comorbidity and age during the height of the pandemic.

Given all this, do you still believe it's ethical to force someone to get a vaccine and punish them for not doing it? And if an employer forces an employee to get it, shouldn't the family of that employee be allowed to sue the company for forcing the vaccine?

Exactly, they are by hook or by crook trying to get you to take the vaccine that could kill you or long term have issues. Your roll a dice on long term health and/or death compared to just being temporarily sick.

a reply to: Xtrozero

It's only partially bureaucracy in that each phase of a trial tracks toxicity of drug/vaccine and collects data. Phase I is first in human trials which is designed to asses the safety of the treatment/vaccine done in a small pool of candidates to ensure it is safe to be administered into a larger pool of candidates.

Phase II determines efficacy and gives room for the protocols to adjust dosages or intervals based upon toxicity to get the best results. The pool grows and offered to a larger patient pool. More data collection takes place.

Once Phase II is FDA approved, Phase III trials begin (generally) adding to an even larger patient pool to which trials become randomized with existing treatments (or placebo) to the new experimental treatment double blinded to ensure data is not compromised.

Phase IV the drug is FDA approved, but still tracked and data is collected.

All phases, large pools of data are collected and evaluated, sometimes for many years to ensure there are no long term effects to a patient. The reason we do this is because we are adding toxins into a delicate system that over time, can have serious health effects. The data over time allows us to ensure pharmaceutical is safe for humans and that's why it takes much longer. We are a tad more stringent than other nations when it comes to adding cytotoxins into the human blood stream.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

Bureaucracy? I'm not the one saying it is approved. That is the only bull$hit statement here.

I have never said it was "approved". I have said it has passed all testing it will ever get.

So why even have the FDA then? What a silly argument. You do know clinical trials and approval typically take a decade or more right? We aren't even at 1 year yet....

Actually it is like 3 to 5 years...

Phase 1 = 20 people to see if it like kills people...

Phase 2 + 200 to 300 people to see if it actually works

Phase 3 = 3000 people to see if there is any ill effects within a larger sampling group.

mRNA been around for 30 years... The process to make mRNA Ebola or mRNA COVID is the same, so it is not like they just invented it last year, so mRNA been in testing for decades. They also ran phase 2 and 3 at the same time and used 100,000s of people. During it all they were already mass producing it since if it failed the government was going to pay for the failure as a part of the Warp Speed program, but with 30 years of testing they knew it wouldn't fail.

So adding all this up how long do you think the process should take.

originally posted by: Bearack

All phases, large pools of data are collected and evaluated, sometimes for many years to ensure there are no long term effects to a patient. The reason we do this is because we are adding toxins into a delicate system that over time, can have serious health effects. The data over time allows us to ensure pharmaceutical is safe for humans and that's why it takes much longer. We are a tad more stringent than other nations when it comes to adding cytotoxins into the human blood stream.

I agree, but the Phases outside of Phase 4 do not need to be years long, and typically are not. mRNA really isn't a drug either as it is just RNA that uses the natural cell process, so is it even a cytotoxin? They have 30 years working with it, so how COVID vaccine happened so quick has a lot to do with that too.

originally posted by: hoghead cheese

Exactly, they are by hook or by crook trying to get you to take the vaccine that could kill you or long term have issues. Your roll a dice on long term health and/or death compared to just being temporarily sick.

Well then roll the dice with the virus...I heard it is very safe, does nothing, harmless...

a reply to: Xtrozero

It doesn't bother you at all that it has been played with for 30 years and still nothing mRNA has ever had approval from the FDA for human use? No worries that it has been pushed into millions of humans under a false narrative that it is approved and safe?

a reply to: Xtrozero

mRNA has been around for 3 decades and not one therapeutic treatment has ever been approved. I'm in Cancer Clinical Trials and we have some exciting science coming out regarding mRNA cancer treatments, but still many, MANY years away from being main stream.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

It doesn't bother you at all that it has been played with for 30 years and still nothing mRNA has ever had approval from the FDA for human use? No worries that it has been pushed into millions of humans under a false narrative that it is approved and safe?

I did say that young people most likely do not need it. It is all about risk vs reward, and I don't see the risk level with the virus for them compared to me at 61.

Non of us gave a crap a year ago, and now we are all experts and concern with the drug approval process...lol Every year we get a new flu shot...No one was ever screaming where is the data from the 1-3 Phase checks...lol

First, mRNA isn't even a drug, it uses the natural process of the cell. What gets me is people say that the virus is nothing, but we do know the virus is producing a number of spike proteins that are all active to make new viruses and they get everywhere, your heart, brain and they really like your lungs where they can be in there weeks on end in a never ending process of killing off your cell as they mass produce, or your body does the same in trying to kill the virus like a double whammy. If it gets real bad they can kill off so many lung cells that you drown in your own fluids.

Then we have the evil vaccine mRNA. It produces one inert protein that within a day the mRNA is all gone, and within a few days at best all the protein is gone as it does nothing but activate your immune system. This happens so quickly and with zero reproduction very little make it out of the vaccine site. One could say no matter how weak the virus is to us all the vaccine is 100x weaker.

So please explain to me how that would not be the case here as they both use the same process except, the virus, does it on a massive scale that can hurt you really bad compared to the vaccine?

originally posted by: Bearack

mRNA has been around for 3 decades and not one therapeutic treatment has ever been approved. I'm in Cancer Clinical Trials and we have some exciting science coming out regarding mRNA cancer treatments, but still many, MANY years away from being main stream.

Well with cancer treatments it will likely really be gene therapy using mDNA instead of mRNA, so yes most likely much different.

Whether mRNA or the virus the cell process is the same, so it isn't drug as we would typically think of what one would be...

a reply to: Xtrozero

Each of our active trials currently (have 3 active out of our 270 open to accrual or closed to accrual but treating) are all mRNA. 2 Phase I trials and 1 Melanoma.

A Phase I/II, Open-Label, Multicenter, Dose Escalation and Efficacy Study of mRNA-2416, a Lipid Nanoparticle Encapsulated mRNA Encoding Human OX40L, for Intratumoral Injection to Patients with Advanced Malignancies

A Phase 1, Open-Label, Multicenter, Dose Escalation Study of mRNA-2752, a Lipid Nanoparticle Encapsulating mRNAs Encoding Human OX40L, IL-23, and IL-36, for Intratumoral Injection Alone and in Combination with Immune Checkpoint Blockade

A Phase 2 Randomized Study of Adjuvant Immunotherapy With the Personalized Cancer Vaccine mRNA-4157 and Pembrolizumab Versus Pembrolizumab Alone After Complete Resection of High-Risk Melanoma

originally posted by: Bearack
a reply to: Xtrozero

Each of our active trials currently (have 3 active out of our 270 open to accrual or closed to accrual but treating) are all mRNA. 2 Phase I trials and 1 Melanoma.

A Phase I/II, Open-Label, Multicenter, Dose Escalation and Efficacy Study of mRNA-2416, a Lipid Nanoparticle Encapsulated mRNA Encoding Human OX40L, for Intratumoral Injection to Patients with Advanced Malignancies

A Phase 1, Open-Label, Multicenter, Dose Escalation Study of mRNA-2752, a Lipid Nanoparticle Encapsulating mRNAs Encoding Human OX40L, IL-23, and IL-36, for Intratumoral Injection Alone and in Combination with Immune Checkpoint Blockade

A Phase 2 Randomized Study of Adjuvant Immunotherapy With the Personalized Cancer Vaccine mRNA-4157 and Pembrolizumab Versus Pembrolizumab Alone After Complete Resection of High-Risk Melanoma

That is interesting they are still using mRNA, I wonder if it gets converted to DNA in the process.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I am NO expert in this field by any stretch as I've only been in the field in data management for the last 6 years, however I know DNA sequencing is an extremely patient specific (gene therapy) so each trial is low enrollment and the results are generally not good.. Granted, those peoples sacrifice are for the better good. I know there have been vast strides in Sickle cell, however.

Again, I am a data guy... Not a PI, not a clinician, but a data guy. I am in management so I do get to be part of some of the decision making, but doctors rule all when it comes to authority.

And we receive MILLIONS through CCSG accreditation (NCI) so you will hardly ever get any kind of push back regarding anything NIH. Hence I need to be cautious to what I say.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I'm 44 and have 2 young girls. I watch everything they have done at a doctors office. My father is a surgeon. I have plenty of years listening to medical advice. I was pre-health undergrad and know enough to be ignorant.

Any old school physician will tell you not to do anything unless it is necessary....as in you can't take the pain, or whatever anymore. That is the only time you get a medical procedure done.

Our genetics, as far as human go, have done pretty well for thousands of years. You know the whole only the strong survive thing......

What we are doing is playing god with experimental science.

I'd be much more inclined to sink a ton of money into combating cancer. Covid is a nothing....drop in the bucket....

I don't need anyone to tell me a unapproved vaccine is the way to go. I know it isn't....and I base my assertions on personal experience of having it, as well as my oldest. Nothing happened....nothing will happen....it is literally all politically driven BS.

The fact Kamala Harris said she wouldn't take a vaccine Trump made is hilarious, considering it is the exact same vaccine she took that was made during Trumps presidency....

It is ALL political.

I just found this today and it should be cause for massive uprising!

Remdesivir is an intravenous nucleotide prodrug of an adenosine analog. Remdesivir binds to the viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase and inhibits viral replication through premature termination of RNA transcription. It has demonstrated in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2.1 In a rhesus macaque model of SARS-CoV-2 infection, remdesivir treatment was initiated soon after inoculation; the remdesivir-treated animals had lower virus levels in the lungs and less lung damage than the control animals.2

Remdesivir is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized adult and pediatric patients (aged ≥12 years and weighing ≥40 kg).

www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov...

If it was approved, why do we have emergency use of the vaccines, is the question.

a reply to: BlissSeeker

My son in law was given remdesivir last year when he caught the covid virus in March of 2020, he said that after taking the entire prescription he did not feel any better, he was given anti inflammatory and antibiotics, he was sick for almost a month, but that happen when the virus first started to spread in the US.

a reply to: Xtrozero

So adding all this up how long do you think the process should take.

Until it is proven safe and effective. And liability for any problems are excepted by the manufacturer. What's the problem? It's either safe and effective or not. Except responsibility Biden.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: dragonridr

You are wrong as well it doesn't teach your body to make the protein.

Are you saying the link from the CDC is wrong?

No just your understanding of it your only half right. Without the mRNA instructions, your body can't produce the protein.

Yeah.....I never said it could.

I think you imagined that I did....

And I did not imply that after (any amount of time) it would carry on production.

You said that the body would attack itself, which it won't because the protein that its being trained to attack isn't a normal part of the body, its an alien protein.

You've watched a couple of anti vaxer videos on BitChute and now you think you've got a Master in biology, but you've not even done pre bio 101 prep.

If the body won't attack itself and if the jab recipient never had Covid in the first place, then why is there miocarditis or any other organ inflammation happening?

Common sense is not your friend. Please explain, with science, why there are adverse reactions of a similar nature among many jab recipients....especially enlarged hearts.

Why it occurs is still a bit unclear what can cause it is well known. It can be caused by viruses, bacteria, parasites,funguses, diseases such as lupus, and medications. The inflammation has to do with the activation of our immune system

Myocarditis has a reported incidence of 0.04% to 1.14% depending on the cause this is a reaction of these individuals and not everyone's response. In other words, if you get it you are predisposed to get it where others are not. This is why the cause is unclear but believed to be genetic. Even with medications, people have had it with medications like penicillin which is considered one of the safest. So you cant determine the danger of a drug based on this.

a reply to: hoghead cheese

Yes you could have a severe reaction and die however your odds of that happening are very low. Your more likely to win the lottery.

As for long-term issues after 3 days any trace of the vaccine is gone the only thing you have left is antibodies. And your body made these and they are constantly inside us except at birth. This is why you try to keep newborns away from people for the first 2 months. They need time to build up their immune system.

So any damage from a vaccine needs to be within the first 3 days. After that, it is a reaction caused by your own immune system.

a reply to: BlissSeeker

Remdesivir is just a treatment and again doesn't work on everyone no drug does. What it does is lower the viral load to help your immune system. It doesnt help build up an immunity to the virus in any way

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: BlissSeeker

My son in law was given remdesivir last year when he caught the covid virus in March of 2020, he said that after taking the entire prescription he did not feel any better, he was given anti-inflammatory and antibiotics, he was sick for almost a month, but that happen when the virus first started to spread in the US.

It still happens if he got anti-inflammatories he was probably dealing with myocarditis. This is one of the problems with Covid and is still unclear as to the cause.

I know a study just went up for peer review that your 6 times more likely to have myocarditis occur because of covid over the vaccine. There are further studies being done to confirm this.

www.medrxiv.org...

Myocarditis (or pericarditis or myopericarditis) from primary COVID19 infection occurred at a rate as high
as 450 per million in young males. Young males infected with the virus are up 6 times more likely to develop
myocarditis as those who have received the vaccine.