COVID-19 vaccines are “significantly associated” with the sudden rise in young people suffering from emergency heart problems, a bombshell peer-reviewed study by MIT researchers has found.
LINK

COVID-19 vaccines are “significantly associated” with the sudden rise in young people suffering from emergency heart problems, a bombshell peer-reviewed study by MIT researchers has found.

Published last week in the Nature journal Scientific Reports, the study was conducted among 16-39 year-olds in Israel, where the vaccination rate is one of the world’s highest.

According to the study, Covid vaccinations are directly linked with a 25% jump in emergency medical services (EMS) for heart problems in young people aged between 16 and 39.

The study found no link between heart problems and COVID infections, however.

“While not establishing causal relationships, the findings raise concerns regarding vaccine-induced undetected severe cardiovascular side-effects and underscore the already established causal relationship between vaccines and myocarditis, a frequent cause of unexpected cardiac arrest in young individuals,” the study states.

The research adds more fuel to grassroots and legal campaigns against vaccine mandates.

An Italian administrative court recently deemed a vaccine mandate on nursing students to be unconstitutional.

The case cited nearly 10,000 reported deaths from various COVID vaccines in the European Medicines Agency’s EudraVigilance monitoring system. (The new MIT study also mentions EudraVigilance.)

However, the judge referred the case to the country’s Constitutional Court.

Published in late March, the 53-page ruling only drew attention in the U.S. last week.

The ruling emerged when an anti-vaccine mandate group translated a portion into English.

A copy of the Italian ruling was obtained by Just the News, which ran it through Google Translate.

It said in part that the reported death count exceeds the “normal and, therefore, tolerable” risk permitted under vaccine mandates, according to the translation.

View the translated version here: Italian-court-ruling-vaccine-mandate.pdf

Meanwhile, American Airlines pilot Robert Snow blamed his own cardiac arrest, which occurred six minutes after landing a 200-passenger flight on April 9, on his compelled vaccination in November.

“I will probably never fly again” due to FAA health criteria for pilots, he said in a video from the ICU in Dallas.

“This is the actual result of the vaccine for some of us.”

Anti-mandate pilot group U.S. Freedom Flyers accused the Federal Aviation Administration of turning a blind eye to the risks of adverse events from COVID vaccines, both to pilots jabbed against their will and crew and passengers on their flights.

“The FAA’s Federal Air Surgeon determined in December 2020 and February 2021 that pilots and air traffic controllers can safely receive the Pfizer, Moderna, or Johnson & Johnson vaccine,” the FAA said in a prepared statement.

“The FAA has seen no evidence of aircraft accidents or pilot incapacitations caused by pilots suffering medical complications associated with COVID-19 vaccines.”

The MIT study’s corresponding author is management professor Retsef Levi, also a member of Israel’s Public Emergency Council for the Coronavirus Crisis.

He and McCullough both spoke at the Academy for Science and Freedom inaugural conference on censorship in science in March.

The study notes Israel’s Ministry of Health has already assessed a myocarditis risk in 16-24-year-old males of between 1 in 3,000 and 1 in 6,000 after the second mRNA dose, and 1 in 120,000 for under-30 males.

The study analyzed calls to the Israel National EMS data system from Jan. 1, 2019, through June 20, 2021.

This represents a 14-month “normal period” before the pandemic, 10-month pre-vaccination, dual-wave “pandemic period,” and six months of vaccination.

The breakdown shows how cardiac arrest (CA) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) calls, confirmed on site by first responders, “change over time with different background conditions and potentially highlight factors that are associated with the observed temporal changes.”

Researchers excluded CA calls related to trauma, overdose, or suicide, and the protocols were the same for the full 30-month study period, “allowing for a consistent comparison between the call counts during the baseline, pandemic, and vaccination periods.”

The vaccine rollout period for 16-39 year-olds, January-May 2021, coincided with the third COVID wave in Israel.

It showed a “statistically significant increase of over 25%” for both kinds of calls compared to the same period in 2020.

For CA specifically, there was “no statistically significant difference in the respective call volume” between full-year 2019 and 2020. For ACS, the “significant relevant increase” in that full-year period (15.8%) was outpaced by the January-May 2021 increase (26%).

The researchers said the January 2021 increase “seems to track closely the administration of 2nd dose vaccines,” while a second observed increase starting April 18 “seems to track an increase of single-dose vaccination to individuals who recovered from COVID-19 infections.”

The Israel Ministry of Health approved the latter for ages 16 and up in early March 2021.

Females unexpectedly had a higher jump in calls: 31% for CA and 41% for ACS, compared to increases for males of 25% CA and 21% ACS.

This may indicate a “potential underdiagnosis or under-self-reporting of myocarditis in females,” according to the study, which was exempt from review by MIT’s Institutional Review Board.

Well no sheit, I didn't need that report to confirm it for me. But, it is good to see it getting some attention.

Waiting for the “let’s move on” comments from the sheep that got taken and don’t want to hear the truth of it.

Yup

We need someone to rationalize this for us. One of the gullible would be good.

It only makes sense that increased rate of cardiac events would be associated. I haven't read the actual study and seen the evidence nor how strong the evidence is, but vaccines are designed to cause an immune response similar to the actual virus. There was a significant increase in cardiac events associated with viral infection, early on.

I'll give it a shot...

First, move on, there's nothing to see here.

Second, since this came from the Jews, it's obviously propaganda to further the cause of the NWO and must not be believed.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

How'd I do?

Ed

Paging CockSocket…

Paging CockSocket…


LOL

The study says there was no link with covid and heart attacks but a direct link between vaccines and heart attacks. The vax caused a 25% increase.

Never not funny.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

How many boosters did you get ?

This is seriously concerning information.

MIT is a good school and all that... but not the ultimate knowledge base.

This matter needs far more scrutiny.

Like I said, I didn't read the study in question, but I have seen it first hand. I would tend to question the research if they found no link between COVID and cardiac events.

Going on #7..........

I haven't taken any of them.

Whatever 🙄🙄🙄

Ask and ye shall receive:

Whoever wrote the article cherry picked what they wanted to hear from the original article.

"Third, myocardial injury and myocarditis is prevalent among patients with COVID-19 infection26,34. As COVID-19 vaccine rollouts often take place with background community COVID-19 infections, it could be challenging to identify whether increased incidence of myocarditis and related cardiovascular conditions, such as CA and ACS, is driven by COVID-19 infections or induced by COVID-19 vaccines. Moreover, such increases may even be caused by other underlying causal mechanisms indirectly related to COVID-19, for example, patients delaying seeking emergent care because of fear of the pandemic and lockdowns."

The original article for those who want to cherry pick whatever backs their bias on the subject:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-10928-z

I found the original article. Some interesting qutoes:

"Supplemental Table 1 shows the year-to-year percent of CA patients who died on scene (i.e., prior to hospital arrival) for the same time periods. Among the 16–39 age group, the percent of CA patients that died prior to hospital arrival increased significantly from 2019 to 2020 during the full year (52.8–60.5%; P < 0.001). This percent remained elevated during January–May of 2021 and no significant differences were found between same period in 2020 (65.1–61.3% P = 0.460)."

' In contrast, for ACS events, while EMS calls capture a significant fraction of the respective incidents, direct hospital walk-in will not be accounted for in the EMS data. In Israel this is estimated to be 50% of all events. Additionally, the diagnosis of ACS events is more involved, and while EMS protocols during the study period did not change, it is reasonable to assume a higher rate of diagnosis error."

"While increased CA incidence was not observed among the 16–39 age group in 2020, there was a significant increase in the proportion of CA patients that died on scene during 2020, relative to 2019 (Supplemental Table 1), emphasizing the potential direct and indirect harmful effects of the pandemic35,49,55 on out-of-hospital CA patient outcomes. The percent of patients that died on scene remained elevated in 2021."

"It is important to note the main limitation of this study, which is that it relies on aggregated data that do not include specific information regarding the affected patients, including hospital outcomes, underlying comorbidities as well as vaccination and COVID-19 positive status."

"05 May 2022Editor’s Note: Readers are alerted that the conclusions of this article are subject to criticisms that are being considered by the Editors. A further editorial response will follow once all parties have been given an opportunity to respond in full."


There seems to be a lot of questions raised, and it is definitely worthy of studying further. However, this doesn't appear to be a silver bullet, per se.

I was just about to quote the same paragraph.

Having just ready the study, not the article both statements are false.

Thanks. I fear the news will get much worse as time goes on and the truth begins to leak out.

Get you some more jabs. Like the DOD report said, post vax mental cases surged over 1000 percent. You can use that as your excuse.

How long before Faukki goes down for crimes against humanity?

FIXT

Hey, they arent worried. Faukki, Bidet, Pfizer and the MSM said it would save your life. Now they are vaxing babies.

PS. Twerker investigated before she got jabbed. CNN let her know they were GTG, just like Bidet and Zero.

WTF is wrong with you people?

What sort of mental illness has this evil vax/covid propaganda caused?

Perhaps you should have employed a cursory level of curiosity before you Irish danced on your cock.

I hope you see the light before you throw a clot.

To bad all you idiots don't catch it and die

I spoke literally from clinical EXPERIENCE.

Then I went back and read the actual study, and as it turns out...well read what I posted several posts back.

Maybe you should read the entire thread before commenting.

Lol

Scabby aids ridden bitch that you are it’s no wonder you took the jab.

BOOM there she is! EVERY FUGGIN covid (non) vax thread lol

Safe and effective!

LOL

I haven't taken any of the COVID vaccines, nor do I blindly recommend them. I question things from both sides of this debate. But what I do find most hilarious in the comment sniping from people that clearly didn't read the study and merely took what the article stated as gospel. Confirmation bias is a thing.

That is, increased rates of vaccination in the respective age group are associated with increased number of CA and ACS weekly call counts. In contrast, the three-week cumulative new COVID-19 infection counts among the age group 16–39 (normalized by the respective population size) was not selected as a predictor of the call counts time-series. That is, the model did not detect a statistically significant association between the COVID-19 infection rates and the CA and ACS weekly call counts.

The J&J has been proven totally ineffective and quite dangerous.

But you’re still considered “fully vaccinated” if you got it.

LOL

Can’t make this schit any plainer. If you still believe those shots do something for you, you’re an idiot.

^^^Think this guy and CockSucket won’t report you?^^^

LOL

Did you know 8,200 people die a day? Good grief you are a rock head. Critically think, you might learn something.

They didn't get data as far as to if the patient was COVID+, recently COVID+, or if there causation was an actual cardiac event. We don't know if the individuals were vaccinated. In fact, they fully admit lack of information. Were EKG changes related to a cardiac event, or were they the result of demand ischemia? They have no way of knowing. The only data they used was national data. The "association" is about as strong as the association of being a member of the Campfire ad suffering a cardiovascular event. Does joining the Campfire cause cardiovascular events? If the standards of this studying were applied, then yes. There is an obvious breakdown in logic to determine causation in this paper.

Another interesting consideration, from the study: "These changes were calculated separately with respect to the full calendar year (2019–2020) and from January 1st to May 31st (2019–2021). January–May time period was used for comparison as it corresponds with the administration of vaccinations among the 16–39 age group in 2021." Why on earth would a whole year's data be used for an average vs the "vaccination period" when it is well known that different times of the year result in more illness? Additionally, no lip service is offered to explain what changes the "lock-down" period made in callouts. Interesting piece from the research the article seems to completely miss:

"Similarly, for ACS, the increase across the full year from 2019 and 2020 (significant relative increase of 15.8% [P < 0.001]) was followed by an even a larger increase in the January to May period from 2020 to 2021 (significant relative increase of 26.0% [P < 0.001]), which was during the third COVID-19 wave and vaccination rollout." So in 2020, before a vaccine existed, the call-out for ACS increased 15.8%, but of course none of it could be related to COVID infections? Give me a break. No explanation offered, strangely enough.

Then this statement: "The main finding of this study concerns with increases of over 25% in both the number of CA calls and ACS calls of people in the 16–39 age group during the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in Israel (January–May, 2021), compared with the same period of time in prior years (2019 and 2020), as shown in Table 1" ignores that indeed, there was a 15.8% increase in 2020 over 2019, despite there being no vaccine during that time.

Then this statement is suspect in and itself: "This result is aligned with previous findings which show increases in overall CA incidence were not always associated with higher COVID-19 infections rates at a population level35,49,50, as well as the stability of hospitalization rates related to myocardial infarction throughout the initial COVID-19 wave compared to pre-pandemic baselines in Israel". It didn't cross anybody's mind that the "baseline" was established using a single year's data?

Then we have this gem: "While increased CA incidence was not observed among the 16–39 age group in 2020, there was a significant increase in the proportion of CA patients that died on scene during 2020, relative to 2019 (Supplemental Table 1), emphasizing the potential direct and indirect harmful effects of the pandemic35,49,55 on out-of-hospital CA patient outcomes. The percent of patients that died on scene remained elevated in 2021." 2021 (vaccine period) being no worse that 2020 (pre-vaccine) but both worse than 2019....no explanation offered. Why? Their data is completely inferred rather than based on reality.


Then we get to the real jewel of the entire piece of research:

"The large increase in the incidence of CA and ACS events in the population of age 16–39 parallel to the vaccination rollout and its association with the vaccination rates could be consistent with the known causal relationship between the mRNA vaccines and incidents of myocarditis in young people14,17,19,56, as well as the fact that myocarditis is often misdiagnosed as ACS28,29,30, and that asymptomatic myocarditis is a frequent cause for unexplained sudden death among young adults from CA26,31,32,33. This is further supported by more anecdotal reports describing sudden cardiac death following COVID-19 vaccination"

Lots of assumptions based on anecdotes and inferred datasets to come up with the grand conclusion: "maybe we aren't diagnosing myocarditis because anecdotes."

Finally, the writers admit what I'm thinking as I read the study:

"It is important to note the main limitation of this study, which is that it relies on aggregated data that do not include specific information regarding the affected patients, including hospital outcomes, underlying comorbidities as well as vaccination and COVID-19 positive status."

And again: "Change history
05 May 2022Editor’s Note: Readers are alerted that the conclusions of this article are subject to criticisms that are being considered by the Editors. A further editorial response will follow once all parties have been given an opportunity to respond in full."


When we get down to it, here are some key points:


The article assumes the research concludes things it does not.

The research nor authors are recommending vaccination being abandoned.

The article tries to falsely attribute the research to MIT when it is NOT affiliated with MIT, rather two of the credited authors work at MIT and crunched the numbers without input into methodology. In fact, they acknowledge that this is post-doctoral research for Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.


The NEWSARTICLE referenced by OP is junk journalism that literally lies and twists research to meet their narrative and people here are gullible and fell for it without reading or analyzing the research it references. All you can say is more people 18-39 years of age called the ambulance in Israel in 2020 than 2019 with cardiac complaints. A few more people called in a portion of 2021 than in 2020. That's it.

It's easy to dismiss the findings. It's also easy to assume that they weren't happenstance.

That Sir... is exactly the point.

People are gullible beyond belief in 2022.

They will quite literally fall for ANYTHING... ANYWHERE.

The pain these people will experience later... is going to be staggering.

Obviously you didn't even read what I wrote nor did you read the research article.

I’m starting to think Tyler pours Gatorade on his garden.

LOL

Tell me this is fake news.

DC Capital 🇺🇸
@WhoIsDCcapital
·
11h
Trump just bragged on stage that the owners of Johnson & Johnson were at the rally and great supporters and how incredible they are???

Bragged about how Mrs. Johnson is from Ukraine???

Crowed went radio silent

https://mobile.twitter.com/WhoIsDCcapital/status/1522748875353722880

Did the study use any kind if control group of people who were un-vaccinated?

The study had no idea of vaccination status of anybody involved. Assumptions were made.

One of the things that you never see numbers on is negative health effects of lock-downs. Lack of exercise, weight gain, consumption of alcohol and drugs, high blood pressure, domestic abuse, mental health and so forth.

I'd bet that the negative health effects of lockdowns were worse for any population as a whole than the negative effects of covid and the vaccine combined. Not to mention the damage to our economy, inflation, federal govt printing money and handing it out like a drunken sailor because people couldn't work and on and on.

The cure was worse than the disease.

This was not a study to determine the efficaciousness of a particular drug, so the gold standard of a double blind study with a placebo and crossover was unnecessary.

This was an accumulation a data that clearly illustrated a dramatic increase in cardiovascular events following the rollout of these mRNA shots.

Those studies concerning the effects of lock-downs are ongoing.Preliminary data has indicated they were negative at best.

I sincerely doubt that lock-downs will be proven to be more damaging than these fake vaccines,unless they are conducted by big pharma.Big pharma gets the results for which they pay.

The cure,that is,mRNA clot shots, were far worse than the disease, since Covid 19 had a 99% plus survival rate.

Is that supposed to concern me?

What is the survival rate for the vaccines?

Ever wondered what the survival rate for sinking ships is?

Don't ask passengers on the Titanic...

Nope. You've been over the target from the get. I'm mostly concerned that Trump is going to be associated with the clot shots.

I wouldn't. They'd be too busy re-arranging the deck chairs to answer.

Some are blaming tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of deaths on lock down measures. More died from COVID, I'm sure, but certainly more than that of the vaccines.

Meanwhile, back at Mcdonalds.

Pretty certain you drank the bong water out of your toilet.