By Guy Page
A study of 566 patients published Nov. 8 by the American Heart Association concludes the Moderna and Pfizer MRNA Covid-19 vaccines increase the likelihood of Acute Coronary Syndrome from 11% to 25% over five years.
The abstract of the study by Dr. Steven Gundry is posted on Circulation, an American Heart Association medical journal. The study provoked quick pushback. Circulation last week posted an ‘expression of concern’ that the study lacked sufficient data and statistical analysis. A Reuters fact-checking article also criticized the study for lacking peer review.
Gundry is a former cardiothoracic surgeon and dietary expert who operates his own clinic. He said patients’ PULS scores – a measurement of heart disease, the higher the number the worse the heart’s condition – went up dramatically after vaccination.
“The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years,” Gundry writes. “Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients.”
In particular, “the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.”
These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, the changes had persisted for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vaccination.
Support Vermont DailY Chronicle TODAY for $9/MONTH
Categories: Covid-19
Nothing to see here folks ….Move along now…Oh look, pretty bird….
My kingdom for an edit button Guy.
Your boon is granted, your majesty. Now about that kingdom….
Safe and Effective….at killing us!
I wasn’t looking to buy a vowel Guy, rather, an edit button,,,I won’t evict my Queen out onto the streets for less.
Doesn’t matter. The sheep are blind and deaf as well now too. Forty percent of the 5-11 year old kids in VT vaxed as of today. Why? For something which would never have harmed them. Stupidity is a fatal disease though.
Because their parents are devoted democrats willing to put partisan politics over the health of their children. Theyve been brainwashed and then some
Add this to the conundrum of what’s “Fake News” and what’s propaganda. This appears to be neither- it is useful information that we as individuals need to consider regarding our personal plan to combat SARS-CoV-2 and the government narrative.
The more vehemently the information is attacked by government and it’s mouthpieces, it seems likely the accuracy of the contested information- a very disconcerting dilemma.
What information seemed a conspiracy theory just 18 months ago has in most cases proven accurate. It seems that the official spokesman for the Federal government, lord fauci simply is unable to answer anything but softball questions and quickly revert to his opinions. One must consider that this megalomaniac is an administrator and bureaucrat- not a physician with hands on experience with humans.
Thanks, but I’ll take the information proffered by the folks in the trenches, doing the work trying to save people from the virus and the “vaccine”. Just like the information in this article.
And yet– today Guv Picklenose was PUSHING the jabs & shoving it to kids in his “con-ference” but NO mention of Vt.’s having an 83% jab rate BUT being #3 or #4 in the national rise in cases? I hope all these “adverse events” are wrong but I FEAR they are right and that MORE might arise in the future, then what? There’s NO “vaccine fund” like ALL the others to settle claims & cases where kids are (proven) harmed afterwards, NONE for these companies granted “immunity” at ALL. Maybe Scott’s “statehouse portrait” will show him in a lab coat holding a BIG needle vs. Howard Dean’s in a canoe. This could be the biggest medical FUBAR since Thalidomide & it’s proponents pelted w/garbage if daring to show their faces in public.
This is a tough one. Is this physician’s clinic a normal cross-section of the population or is it a population particularly at risk (eg, are the patients seeing a CT surgeon already a population “at risk” for the vaccine to be more likely to cause damage). If the latter, since we know they would be at a higher risk for cardiac complications if infected, where is the risk/benefit ratio for this? This is not a simply one-liner sort of story. It is complicated, should be peer-reviewed and likely very nuanced. Unfortunately, nuance is very hard to talk about in 30 second sound bites. We also don’t know how long the effect lasts. The author said it has persisted 2.5 months, but we need longer term follow-up. In short, this study might be reflecting information that is important for the whole population or it might only apply to a narrow wedge of the population. Of course it must be reproducible in other settings, so we will have to see.
But Guy wouldnt reference this at the press conference……
What a load of crap. Keep drinking the Qanon kool-aid. People have been saying the government is going to kill up for decades. No put down your cigarettes and Burger King, that’s what’s going to kill up lmao.
Interesting that all of a sudden they care about peer review studies. That never seems to be important to the political manipulators of science. I suggested to the Gov. he find a peer reviewed study that supports mask efficiency, no comment.