Hello and warm welcome to this talk now
probably the most definitive paper yet
published on the adverse reactions from
the mRNA vaccines has just come out it’s
in the international journal of
cardiovascular research and innovation
and it’s open access and I’ll be showing
you how to access it in a minute but
let’s just start with a
quiz now here we have the uh all adverse
events reported filed under the vaccine
adverse events reporting system in the
United States from uh 1990 through to
2024 so the quiz
is guess what year was
2021 the year of the vaccine roll
out well I don’t think you’ll be too
surprised that it’s the first big red
column
2021 vaccine rollout year now it’s true
that there were more uh vaccines given
during that time but the amount of
adverse events reported is massively
disproportionate as we’ll see uh in a
minute so that’s the first part of the
quiz this is the second part now these
are uh deaths reported um under the
vaccine adverse events reporting system
domestic data all death adverse events
reported and uh I’m not going to make
light of this um 2021 again is the
obvious uh year
there the year of the vaccine roll out
and we see that the deaths were over 10
a half thousand in
that time period which is completely
unacceptable now I’m just going to give
you the conclusion of this paper before
we uh look at it i maybe just look at
the paper first here’s the paper
itself this is the paper here um now
it’s an incredibly thorough piece of
work this is a very impressive piece of
academia they’ve tied everything
together really quite I was really quite
taken back when I read this paper the
quality of it um so here is the study
here myioard myocarditis after SARS
corona virus 2 infection and covid-19
vaccination epidemiology outcomes and
new perspectives now it’s just
incredibly thorough piece of work I’m
not going to sort of scroll through it
all but if we just look down it covers
amazing amount of detail ties together
all the literature pretty well so it
runs to uh what is it uh one page 1 to
43 three um and the amount of
referencing and scholarship in here is
really quite uh quite impressive the
amount of work that’s been done on this
to get this compilation we’re going
we’re down to what good
grief yeah how many references are there
uh 341 references
um really is quite an impressive piece
of work in the conclusion
uh we urge governments to remove the
COVID 19 mRNA products from the
market pretty clear due to the
wellocument documented risk of
myocardial damage a risk that is
strongest for young males in the um well
under 40 years of age now in a minute
we’re going to be hearing from um
Independent Medical Alliance senior
fellow of pediatrics and cardiology Dr
kurt Milhome so let’s just listen to the
introduction from Fox News the um this
is the introduction under this reference
here this only lasts for a few seconds
and it just gives us some useful context
that’s very nicely expressed
a groundbreaking new study sounding
alarms about the safety of COVID mRNA
vaccines directly challenging claims
from public health officials and raising
urgent questions about transparency and
trust so using hard data from disease
trends from patient outcomes and immune
system analysis multiple research
reports show that heart inflammation
risks tied to the vaccines may be far
greater and and maybe even more
dangerous than previously reported
particularly among young men
and more from that report in a minute
and we’ll listen to the segment from Dr
kurt Milhome as well but just so you
know we’re not making this up as always
uh this is the journal
here uh this is the full reference PDF
is uh available myocarditis typically
manifesting as
myopericarditis so the heart muscle and
the layers around the heart are
typically inflamed itis simply means
inflammation of is among the serious
cardiac consequences observed after the
course over the course of the co9
pandemic and here we have a
comprehensive evidence-based literature
synthesis so they’ve actually
synthesized this together it’s it’s a
very very nice piece of work as I said
clinical trial data reanalysis
postmarketing surveillance large
observational studies epidemiological
clinical and
immunological perspectives now I’m just
going to show you some of the data um we
we’ll probably do this paper in a little
more uh detail um in subsequent videos
but let’s just look at some of the
important data that’s come out from it
now this first one we see here this is
the adverse events types reported so
this is not adverse events it’s the
different types the different
manifestations of adverse events and we
see it’s six times the the adver the
types of adverse events are six times
two times 6.2 times higher so six times
more than we would expect now to be fair
there were uh it was times 2.3 more
vaccines were given during this time
period but we’ve got 6.2 times more
types of adverse reactions so what this
is telling me is that the mRNA vaccines
are having adverse effects on more
systems of the body than conventional
vaccines and here we see that here so
here we see the influenza vaccine in
purple and the COVID vaccines in red and
the more types of adverse reactions are
occurring in the M RNA vaccines
and just to be clear it’s the mRNA
vaccines that we want taken off the
market i don’t think mRNA vaccines
should be currently being given to human
beings or anyone for that matter at the
moment until we know an awful lot
more so that’s the types of reactions
this is the actual adverse events
reporting system influenza and COVID in
VAS this is the number of reactions the
number of adverse events and we see it’s
times
118 now as as we mentioned um there was
2.3 times more vaccines being given so
that number being generous should be 2.3
not
118 so way more adverse reactions
totally unacceptable numbers of adverse
reactions in my view why the regulators
tolerate this is really quite beyond me
and I know beyond a lot of
you um but that’s the actual number of
adverse events
reported now this put together by Jess
Dr jessica Rose done an awful lot of
brilliant uh Jessica Rose has done some
brilliant statistical work and
scientific work on this topic and
continues to uh be a real spokesperson
uh spokeswoman for the ordinary man and
woman who don’t have the skills that she
has
uh and that most certainly includes me
um but here here we see the age groups
so number of adverse events here uh for
example we see in n to fours they’re
3,263 the idea that you would be giving
experimental RNA
vaccines to children 6 months to four
years of age i just find it reckless
appalling but there we are and then 5 to
11s a bit lower in these age groups but
still an awful lot and then the adverse
the uh the number of adverse reactions
start to increase and these are
normalized per million doses in the
different age groups so a nice piece of
work from Jessica there now here we
start to look at the pathology and
really we’ve known this for some time
that the vaccine is injected the lipo
nanop particles go all around the body
they circulate to the heart um the lipid
nanop particles inject their mRNA into
the mioardial cells the myioytes the
meiocytes express this foreign protein
the immune system recognizes this
foreign protein and attacks the whole
cell it’s so simple we’ve had this
confirmed by numerous leading doctors
and scientists we’ve talked to and here
they say that their profusion stable
spike protein so the myio the mioardial
cells under the instructions some might
say under the dictate of the mRNA
produces the spike protein and it it
doesn’t wash away it sticks to the
surface of the myio site the mioardial
cell membrane and and and that’s why the
immune system can attack the whole thing
because it’s stuck on the cell membrane
and of course that’s what causes the
damage to the heart the inflammation and
we also see in this pathology slide copy
uh we see fibroic tissue which would
indicate some degree of healing and we
also see inflammatory immune cells
attracted to the site of the
inflammation so confirmation from
numerous types of literature of what
we’ve already had confirmed on this
channel that the lipid nanop particles
are systemically
distributed and cause the spike protein
to be produced all over the body and yet
these are still tolerated by
regulators now
um this one here young males the highest
risk um so age and sex young males 12 to
24 face the highest risk up to seven
times higher myocarditis incidents post
Maderna vaccine compared to their female
counterparts so young men at extremely
high
risk could be more information to come
out from the American military yet
although that is somewhat covered in the
um in the
paper um hormonal influence possibly
testosterone may amplify the immune
response increasing myocardial
inflammation obviously young men have
the highest amounts of testosterone as
you could judge from their behavior
sometimes but um let’s not make light of
this because it’s a serious issue
um dose and timing uh risk spikes after
the second dose with higher rates linked
to shorter dosing intervals don’t want
these things close together probably
doesn’t doesn’t actually say this but
probably worse if there’s been the
natural infection as well which of
course was everywhere at the
time madna versus FISA so Madna has up
to three to five times higher myioardial
risk compared to the FISA vaccine likely
due to its higher u RNA concentration
now I’d say the adverse reactions from
the FISA are
unacceptable unacceptably high but Madna
3 to five times higher why on earth they
wanted to put so much
mRNA in the Madna vaccine I I simply
don’t
know but of course regardless of the
amount of mRNA that you give still the
amount of spike protein that the body
produces and where the body produces
that spike protein is completely
unpredictable it’s roll the dice and
take your chances isn’t it
uh also genetic and immune factors
certain genetic markers and immune
dysregulation may contribute to
increased susceptibility as really you
would have expected that’s usually the
case now this is this is quite
concerning of those that got myocarditis
myoparicarditis 84 to 96% of madna RNA
myocarditis cases required
hospitalization 50% showed long-term
myioardial abnormality ities now this is
particularly concerning the reports of
scarring in the
mocardium basically as I understand the
pathology once the mocardial muscle is
dead and it’s scarred
um the muscle is never going to
recover we’re talking about
permanent myioardial damage in a
proportion of these adverse events
and 10 to 20% fatality rate quite
appalling figures now what this paper
really usefully does is it um I don’t
like the term debunks but it basically
debunks quite a few myths that have been
put about by certain people who who
knows may have a uh vested interest
let’s look at those
now um misconception one infection
causes more myocarditis the fact Madna
MRNA shots pose higher
risk so they’re saying here that the
madna shots have got a higher risk of
myoparicarditis compared to having the
infection especially in the younger less
at risk age groups whom this vaccine was
forced upon essentially in many cases
oh that I had more of this data and the
information was freely available and
dispersed in
2021 at that
time we were still let me rephrase that
I was still taking the word of
authority i feel
deceived it won’t happen again
misconception
two uh madna mRNA related myocarditis is
mild it’s not mild it can be mild but
fact long-term damage and death clearly
documented how much problems are still
to
become manifest and of course we could
be talking about other complications
potential cancers this is just we’ll
stick to what this paper actually
says um risk benefit ratio favors madna
RNA shots fact strong evidence
contradicts this
claim which I would agree with now just
a couple more graphics this is uh deaths
related to baseline major cardiovascular
diseases and we see the numbers go
up some extent in 2020 but also in to a
higher degree in
2021 above the baseline i’m pretty sure
that was from the insurers uh data i
think pretty sure that’s from the
insurance data do download this for
yourself free PDF quite quite readable
actually very
thorough um and this
is vers reports of myocarditis by age
and dose so here we see the doses and
you can unpick that a bit if you look at
it in the PDF but again we see highest
incidents in
what late
teenagers young adult very young
basically young
adults going down with uh
increasing age
um
so myths debunked
um phenomenon of myocarditis post SARS
coronavirus to injection versus covid-19
vaccine induced myocarditis it’s it’s
this is pointing out because what we
were always told was the natural
infection is more dangerous this is what
this is counter demanding so one severe
acute respiratory syndrome corona virus
2 and omicrron infections have caused
more cases of myocarditis than covid-19
mrna
vaccinations
refuted mrna vaccine induced myocarditis
is typically mild transient and rare
with no long-term squeli
refuted the risk benefit calculus favors
continued use of products despite
evidence of more iatrogenic that’s
vaccine caused cases
refuted now let’s listen to the rest of
the interview with
uh Dr curt Milhome senior fellow of
pediatric pediatrician uh pediatric
cardiologist joining us now to discuss
this is Independent Medical Alliance
senior fellow of pediatric cardiology Dr
kurt Kirk Milome good morning to you
doctor welcome to the National News Desk
great to have you good morning thanks
for having me on this new study about
the safety of COVID mRNA vaccines was
published in the International Journal
of Cardiovascular Research and
Innovation as I understand it tell us
about the scope of this research and
really your top findings from it so it’s
a compilation of studies that really
have been out there since 2021 we saw a
signal in um the vaccine product causing
problems especially in the young adults
especially young males uh that was
causing heart inflammation and so what
we have done is compiled all those
different peerreview journals articles
and data and put them in one place
easily accessible with 42 pages and 341
references of our our concerns that this
is a real issue and these vaccines do
little good for healthy children and
young adults right were you able to
distinguish the cause of myocarditis the
differential between a COVID infection
versus it being just an adverse reaction
to the COVID vaccine uh yes it’s it it’s
very it’s very clear from a number of
reasons that we we’ve been able to
evaluate and primarily there was a great
study out of um the Nordic countries
that studied 23 million children and
young adults and they found that the
people who had the young the least
amount of myocarditis were the
unvaccinated and as you incre increase
the number of vaccine doses or you use
madna versus fizer your risk just kept
stepping up in terms of your risk for
myocarditis once again in a a disease
state that is that is really very mild
for healthy children and young adults
you know initially this topic was so
rare when we first heard about this
myocarditis and the links you know to to
the vaccine but what does the data
reveal now so the re the there was a
study out of Lancet that showed and
looked at all these children who had
been harmed by the vaccine and received
and had myocarditis secondary to the
vaccine and they looked at them 90 days
out and a lot of things remain normal
except their cardiac MRI which showed uh
and continued inflammation and possible
scarring of the heart itself 90 days out
further studies a a new study released
by Yales said that they’re still seeing
free floating spike protein which is
what that vaccine asked the body to make
which is a cardiotoxin still floating
around in the body for over 700 days it
was supposed to just be put in and your
body made an immune response and then it
went away but it is hanging around in
some people so it’s not transitory it’s
not resolving over time i mean there’s
like long-term impacts we’re seeing
right now yeah for certain people it is
devastating and long-term issues for a
disease process that they had very
little risk for wow so for more
information uh you can visit
imahalth.org doctor we appreciate you
joining us this morning to talk about
this very important topic thank you for
having me on
well I don’t think there’s really any
need to say more than that dr milholmes
expressed that really quite well the
link for the paper is there download it
for yourself very
readable nice piece of work this is now
in the public
domain
um anyone can get it and if regulators
carry on ignoring
this um I will
be
confused thank you
Recent Comments