American Heart Association Journal: 98% of young people with heart damage took the clotshots | |
Anonymous Coward (OP) User ID: 81467889 ![]() 12/09/2021 12:33 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward (OP) User ID: 81467889 ![]() 12/09/2021 12:35 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 49331619 ![]() 12/09/2021 12:36 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Dr. Clayton Forrester User ID: 80583192 ![]() 12/09/2021 01:41 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
2b1ask1 User ID: 5488061 ![]() 12/09/2021 04:19 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
beeches User ID: 78973486 ![]() 12/09/2021 04:20 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78247657 ![]() 12/09/2021 04:24 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
SeekerForward User ID: 80954763 ![]() 12/09/2021 05:31 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | OP title: "American Heart Association Journal: 98% of young people with heart damage took the clotshots" I'm sympathetic, but that's not what the AHA article cited in the healthimpactnews says. At all. Please pause think and comment thoughtfully before you share this kind of study. Otherwise, it only discredits any criticism of the shot. I gave this a quick read and need to go back, but this is what I saw. This study looked at a sample of 140 events (some confirmed, most suspected) from 139 young people only after they reported heart episodes. It does not offer any clue about what percentage of all people who took the shot got heart problems. It is not peer-reviewed and two of the authors are Pfizer consultants. 1. The authors demonstrate that reported cases need to be taken seriously. Over 75% of people examined had an irregular heart image using cMRI. 2. The authors indicate that heart problems in young people after the shot are real. 3. The authors are desperate, maybe because they have to say it to have any hope of being published, to say all the problems are temporary and there is nothing to see here. They say that with basic treatment, symptoms like chest pain go away. I see no convincing data that this kind of heart damage magically heals itself, especially in the long-term. 4. What I find interesting is that a lot of studies, even when they reveal serious problems with the shots, almost always have to include some kind a line that says "get the shot!" or "nothing to see here!" Be especially careful with AHA publications. I keep seeing "bombshell" headlines pointing to conference abstracts. That probably just means researchers found something interesting, and they want feedback before they submit it for peer-review in a journal. Also, don't be impressed by a long list of authors in the sciences. You have to go the university site if applicable to get a sense of who was listed just for prestige or to help students get a publication, and who actually did the work. Last Edited by SeekerForward on 12/09/2021 05:35 PM |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 79755087 ![]() 12/09/2021 05:47 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | OP title: "American Heart Association Journal: 98% of young people with heart damage took the clotshots" Quoting: SeekerForward I'm sympathetic, but that's not what the AHA article cited in the healthimpactnews says. At all. Please pause think and comment thoughtfully before you share this kind of study. Otherwise, it only discredits any criticism of the shot. I gave this a quick read and need to go back, but this is what I saw. This study looked at a sample of 140 events (some confirmed, most suspected) from 139 young people only after they reported heart episodes. It does not offer any clue about what percentage of all people who took the shot got heart problems. It is not peer-reviewed and two of the authors are Pfizer consultants. 1. The authors demonstrate that reported cases need to be taken seriously. Over 75% of people examined had an irregular heart image using cMRI. 2. The authors indicate that heart problems in young people after the shot are real. 3. The authors are desperate, maybe because they have to say it to have any hope of being published, to say all the problems are temporary and there is nothing to see here. They say that with basic treatment, symptoms like chest pain go away. I see no convincing data that this kind of heart damage magically heals itself, especially in the long-term. 4. What I find interesting is that a lot of studies, even when they reveal serious problems with the shots, almost always have to include some kind a line that says "get the shot!" or "nothing to see here!" Be especially careful with AHA publications. I keep seeing "bombshell" headlines pointing to conference abstracts. That probably just means researchers found something interesting, and they want feedback before they submit it for peer-review in a journal. Also, don't be impressed by a long list of authors in the sciences. You have to go the university site if applicable to get a sense of who was listed just for prestige or to help students get a publication, and who actually did the work. Thank you for some reason. People here tend to fill in gaps with what they want it to say. Remember, all of these published studies are funded by pharmaceutical corporations so the odds of any bombshells is virtually zero. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 79192717 ![]() 12/09/2021 06:02 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
SeekerForward User ID: 80954763 ![]() 12/09/2021 06:04 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Thank you for some reason. People here tend to fill in gaps with what they want it to say. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79755087 Remember, all of these published studies are funded by pharmaceutical corporations so the odds of any bombshells is virtually zero. You are correct. Unfortunately. A lot of studies are funded by NIH or drug company. This one claims no outside funding, but I'm skeptical when a couple authors are Pfizer consultants. A lot of journals are hesitant to publish anything that overtly challenges the drug companies, and when they do editors soften the blow. One possible exception is BMJ (British Medical Journal), and in retaliation one of the editors has been subjected to personal attacks online that look really stupid when you give them any thought. Remember, companies pay to strafe comments sections and set up their own pro-industry shill sites made to look respectable to the unwary visitor. If you want to see the danger, and you will see it even in articles like this one (they can only hide so much) you have to read between the lines. Look beyond the titles, critically read the data for yourself, and look for irregularities, omissions or deviations from standard procedures, Last Edited by SeekerForward on 12/09/2021 06:13 PM |
Disgruntled Health Worker User ID: 80613437 12/09/2021 06:36 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | For those of you that don't know what Troponin is that missed my breakdown of EKGs and double the amount of 20-50 yr olds in hospital here for heart problems I will break it down into Leymans terms for ya. Troponin is a natural occuring enzyme in your heart (only) and is released when your heart is either under stress (Myocarditis) or being damaged (Myocardial Infarction - MI) Generally what we do for observation is give a patient 2 sets of ekgs and bloodwork within 5 hours time. EKG's will present an active MI through ST elevation that is more so than less very obvious to a trained eye. However, some MIs cannot be seen on an EKG but its noticable in the bloodwork at the insane amount of elevated troponin that is gained within that 5 hour period. These are known as nSTEMIs (non-ST elevated myocardial infarction.) What he is basically saying is the bloodwork is coming back with elevated Troponin that is not heart attack related in mostly healthy people, hence the myocarditis. Anyone with a medical background can confirm what I am saying to be true. |
STRONGMAN SHELFORD User ID: 81436857 ![]() 12/09/2021 06:42 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | It's just incredible that the crazy mass vaccination campaign won't be slowed by any evidence. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 81467889 [link to healthimpactnews.com (secure)] FUCK. i PINNED THIS SHIT. SO THE TARDS parents who visited this website by accident see it. WE MAY SAVE SOME LIFE OF KIDS TONITE GUYS! GOOD JOB OP. WE ARE SAVIGN KIDS LIVE TONITE. best karma spent of the year if it saves 1 kid life here. ![]() Support Klaus Foundation: Buy your crickets-based food on Amazon here: [link to amzn.to (secure)] or just check it for fun ! |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 80518353 ![]() 12/09/2021 06:43 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
STRONGMAN SHELFORD User ID: 81436857 ![]() 12/09/2021 06:44 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | And that remaining 2% took it less than two weeks prior so they were counted as unjabbed Quoting: Anonymous Coward 80518353 ![]() sad but true ![]() Support Klaus Foundation: Buy your crickets-based food on Amazon here: [link to amzn.to (secure)] or just check it for fun ! |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 80613437 12/09/2021 07:11 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | For those of you that don't know what Troponin is that missed my breakdown of EKGs and double the amount of 20-50 yr olds in hospital here for heart problems I will break it down into Leymans terms for ya. Quoting: Disgruntled Health Worker 80613437 Troponin is a natural occuring enzyme in your heart (only) and is released when your heart is either under stress (Myocarditis) or being damaged (Myocardial Infarction - MI) Generally what we do for observation is give a patient 2 sets of ekgs and bloodwork within 5 hours time. EKG's will present an active MI through ST elevation that is more so than less very obvious to a trained eye. However, some MIs cannot be seen on an EKG but its noticable in the bloodwork at the insane amount of elevated troponin that is gained within that 5 hour period. These are known as nSTEMIs (non-ST elevated myocardial infarction.) What he is basically saying is the bloodwork is coming back with elevated Troponin that is not heart attack related in mostly healthy people, hence the myocarditis. Anyone with a medical background can confirm what I am saying to be true. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 79875745 ![]() 12/09/2021 07:19 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Ninety-Eight Percent. Only TWO out of ONE HUNDRED YOUNG PEOPLE did not get heart damage from the shots. yet will it be on cnn, msnbc, fox news tonight? yep, right after I sell you that bridge, I'm gonna show it to you on the mainstream news, by golly.... |
Happy in Nature the earth laughs in flowers User ID: 81071993 ![]() 12/09/2021 07:42 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | OP title: "American Heart Association Journal: 98% of young people with heart damage took the clotshots" Quoting: SeekerForward I'm sympathetic, but that's not what the AHA article cited in the healthimpactnews says. At all. Please pause think and comment thoughtfully before you share this kind of study. Otherwise, it only discredits any criticism of the shot. I gave this a quick read and need to go back, but this is what I saw. This study looked at a sample of 140 events (some confirmed, most suspected) from 139 young people only after they reported heart episodes. It does not offer any clue about what percentage of all people who took the shot got heart problems. It is not peer-reviewed and two of the authors are Pfizer consultants. 1. The authors demonstrate that reported cases need to be taken seriously. Over 75% of people examined had an irregular heart image using cMRI. 2. The authors indicate that heart problems in young people after the shot are real. 3. The authors are desperate, maybe because they have to say it to have any hope of being published, to say all the problems are temporary and there is nothing to see here. They say that with basic treatment, symptoms like chest pain go away. I see no convincing data that this kind of heart damage magically heals itself, especially in the long-term. 4. What I find interesting is that a lot of studies, even when they reveal serious problems with the shots, almost always have to include some kind a line that says "get the shot!" or "nothing to see here!" Be especially careful with AHA publications. I keep seeing "bombshell" headlines pointing to conference abstracts. That probably just means researchers found something interesting, and they want feedback before they submit it for peer-review in a journal. Also, don't be impressed by a long list of authors in the sciences. You have to go the university site if applicable to get a sense of who was listed just for prestige or to help students get a publication, and who actually did the work. Thank you. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 80829544 ![]() 12/09/2021 08:24 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 81468698 ![]() 12/09/2021 08:25 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 77112757 ![]() 12/09/2021 08:40 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | OP title: "American Heart Association Journal: 98% of young people with heart damage took the clotshots" Quoting: SeekerForward I'm sympathetic, but that's not what the AHA article cited in the healthimpactnews says. At all. Please pause think and comment thoughtfully before you share this kind of study. Otherwise, it only discredits any criticism of the shot. I gave this a quick read and need to go back, but this is what I saw. This study looked at a sample of 140 events (some confirmed, most suspected) from 139 young people only after they reported heart episodes. It does not offer any clue about what percentage of all people who took the shot got heart problems. It is not peer-reviewed and two of the authors are Pfizer consultants. 1. The authors demonstrate that reported cases need to be taken seriously. Over 75% of people examined had an irregular heart image using cMRI. 2. The authors indicate that heart problems in young people after the shot are real. 3. The authors are desperate, maybe because they have to say it to have any hope of being published, to say all the problems are temporary and there is nothing to see here. They say that with basic treatment, symptoms like chest pain go away. I see no convincing data that this kind of heart damage magically heals itself, especially in the long-term. 4. What I find interesting is that a lot of studies, even when they reveal serious problems with the shots, almost always have to include some kind a line that says "get the shot!" or "nothing to see here!" Be especially careful with AHA publications. I keep seeing "bombshell" headlines pointing to conference abstracts. That probably just means researchers found something interesting, and they want feedback before they submit it for peer-review in a journal. Also, don't be impressed by a long list of authors in the sciences. You have to go the university site if applicable to get a sense of who was listed just for prestige or to help students get a publication, and who actually did the work. Pfizer was approved without p3, administering trials unblinded, crap breakdown of what defines covid positive, won’t release data and the control groups destroyed Need I say more? Everyone is crooked. Aha , fda , my cpa |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 77512693 ![]() 12/09/2021 08:48 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Only two things could account for such an increase in youthful hearts being damaged like this, a nuclear reactor meltdown, or harmful chemicals accumulating in young people's muscle tissues. I haven't heard of any nuclear reactors melting down lately. ![]() |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 81381419 ![]() 12/09/2021 08:48 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Coy User ID: 72667806 ![]() 12/09/2021 08:58 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Covid and the vaccines are the vehicle to demean and permanently destroy all of America's institutions so the NWO will rise from the ashes. AHA, FDA, OSHA... The whole enchilada is being set up for universal ire. ![]() |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 80610697 ![]() 12/09/2021 09:18 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 80986146 12/09/2021 09:25 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | It's just incredible that the crazy mass vaccination campaign won't be slowed by any evidence. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 81467889 [link to healthimpactnews.com (secure)] If they start to backtrack that the vaxxes KILL, the lawsuits would cripple the govt, the health industry, insurance companies - CAN'T WAIT. |
Pilgrim001 User ID: 78018011 ![]() 12/09/2021 09:42 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | It's just incredible that the crazy mass vaccination campaign won't be slowed by any evidence. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 81467889 which is the strongest evidence that there really is a malevolent conspiracy in play. . That they are hellbent to shove that shit in every man woman and child on the face of the earth to protect from a cold ought to tell you something. It sure tells me something. And that nothing slows down their obsession for everyone to get the "vaccine". Don't forget to have your Liberals spayed or neutered....Stolen The greatest black on white crime was the Obama Presidency. Communism is for LOSERS Communism is SLAVERY Fuck Joe Biden |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 80802935 ![]() 12/09/2021 10:45 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 81134247 ![]() 12/09/2021 10:46 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
TXP User ID: 80383054 ![]() 12/09/2021 10:49 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | OP title: "American Heart Association Journal: 98% of young people with heart damage took the clotshots" Quoting: SeekerForward I'm sympathetic, but that's not what the AHA article cited in the healthimpactnews says. At all. Please pause think and comment thoughtfully before you share this kind of study. Otherwise, it only discredits any criticism of the shot. I gave this a quick read and need to go back, but this is what I saw. This study looked at a sample of 140 events (some confirmed, most suspected) from 139 young people only after they reported heart episodes. It does not offer any clue about what percentage of all people who took the shot got heart problems. It is not peer-reviewed and two of the authors are Pfizer consultants. 1. The authors demonstrate that reported cases need to be taken seriously. Over 75% of people examined had an irregular heart image using cMRI. 2. The authors indicate that heart problems in young people after the shot are real. 3. The authors are desperate, maybe because they have to say it to have any hope of being published, to say all the problems are temporary and there is nothing to see here. They say that with basic treatment, symptoms like chest pain go away. I see no convincing data that this kind of heart damage magically heals itself, especially in the long-term. 4. What I find interesting is that a lot of studies, even when they reveal serious problems with the shots, almost always have to include some kind a line that says "get the shot!" or "nothing to see here!" Be especially careful with AHA publications. I keep seeing "bombshell" headlines pointing to conference abstracts. That probably just means researchers found something interesting, and they want feedback before they submit it for peer-review in a journal. Also, don't be impressed by a long list of authors in the sciences. You have to go the university site if applicable to get a sense of who was listed just for prestige or to help students get a publication, and who actually did the work. And, this ^^^ is old school GLP where an OP would have not posted a piece without some level of this verification and checking, or, at minimum, the 'I haven't verified' disclaimer. And, rarely would something be posted without the original source. Thank you, Seeker. Cheers! . "Stop the lockdown. Stop the masks. Stick your vaccine up your ass." - Tess....AMEN! "What does CENSORSHIP reveal? It reveals FEAR." - Julian Assange . |