COVID19 vaccines linked to myocarditis, pericarditis, ITP, Guillain Barre Syndrome, Bell's Palsy, ADEM, PE, Febrile seizures & more
COVID19 vaccines linked to myocarditis, pericarditis, ITP, Guillain Barre Syndrome, Bell's Palsy, ADEM, PE, Febrile seizures & more
That's the headline from an article by UCSF Professor of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Medicine Vinay Prasad MD MPH, not some "misinformation spreader." He's right.
Executive summary
UCSF Professor of Epidemiology Vinay Prasad MD MPH just published an article entitled “COVID19 vaccines linked to myocarditis, pericarditis, ITP, Guillain Barre Syndrome, Bell's Palsy, ADEM, PE, Febrile seizures & more.”
In the article, he points out two major reasons that the study of 99 million vaccinated people under-reported safety signals:
Using electronic health records (EHR) will result in under-reporting of symptoms
The comparison rates were not age stratified
Prasad also says, “First, let us be clear, the benefit of COVID vaccination is small, uncertain or not present in several populations… absolute benefits to healthy people under 20, 30 or 40 were always minuscule— bordering on zero— and possibly not present. Available data lacks power to show a benefit in 20 year olds.”
He’s right about that too, but it’s even worse than he said. Much worse.
The study failed to recognize significant signals, and showed evidence that side effects were reduced by vaccination. How is that possible?!?
Zero benefit for all
Professor Prasad should have said “the benefit is zero in all populations.”
I’m unaware of any population that can benefit from these shots. Someone show me. Please.
How can the study miss the huge Bell’s palsy signal?
Secondly, the study appears to be incapable of finding a signal.
Let’s look at Bell’s Palsy for example.
The paper shows a mild signal: OE of 1.05 for Pfizer and 1.25 for Moderna.
But the signal in VAERS is off the charts: virtually every single case of Bell’s palsy ever reported in VAERS in the last 35 years is from the COVID vaccines.
If the mRNA COVID vaccines weren’t strongly causing Bell’s palsy at a higher rate than background, how can we explain this VAERS signal? Nobody wants to explain that.
I tried to engage Roger Seheult MD, founder of Medcram who produced a video on VAERS to explain data like this, but he blocked me.
The block was expected. That’s the way real scientists are supposed to respond to those who challenge their work: you block or ignore all challengers. You never respond because you don’t want to risk having someone make you look bad. It’s always better to leave bad information out there than to have to admit you made a mistake and have your reputation damaged!
How can the COVID vaccine reduce side effects? Is it a miracle drug? Or is the study flawed?
Finally, it was also interesting to see that for the 3 vaccines tested, more than half the side effects studied had scenarios where the shots provided a statistically significant benefit:
Guillain-Barre Syndrome
Bell’s palsy
Febrile seizures
Generalized seizures
Thrombocytopenia
Idiopathic thrombocytopenia
Pulmonary embolism
Splanchnic vein thrombosis
Seriously?!!?! Vaccines don’t work that way. They always increase side effects. They never reduce them.
Yet, in this paper, in 8 of the 11 side-effects examined in the study Tables 3 and 4, there were one or more table rows (each row is a vaccine type and dose number) where there were one or more statistically significant reductions in incidence.
This does not inspire confidence in this study or in the peer-review process of the top medical journals.
Bottom line: A study showing statistically significant reductions in side effects from a deadly vaccine should cause anyone with a working brain to seriously question the study conclusions.
Summary
A widely acclaimed study of 99M vaccine recipients showed statistically significant reductions in over half of the side effects studied.
That’s simply not possible. There is simply no mechanism of action that could account for such effects.
How these studies are taken seriously by the medical community is truly a mystery to me. That is what an enlightened press should be writing about: how the medical community embraces so obviously flawed peer-reviewed studies.
In March 2022, Pfizer was forced to release documents that they had previously requested to remain sealed for until 2070.
One of the documents had a list of known side effects of interest. I sorted that list in to a single file and uploaded it to pastebin on March 1st 2022.
https://pastebin.com/rjRv8jai
Hi Steve. Thanks for this. I comment very rarely. But I've been following your offerings and COVID era studies fairy closely for the last few years, and I greatly appreciate what you've done. I was just now reading this study and also reading Prasad's comments. Your article shows how to assess the paper properly. I initially felt the excitement of reading a "mainstream," peer-reviewed journal article that acknowledged some major adverse events, followed by the more sobering realization that the effects were vastly underestimated, with some signals entirely ignored. EHRs vastly underestimate adverse effects, as you've emphasized here and for the last few years. There's no age stratification here. The reported reduction adverse effects is actually ridiculous, as you clarify. There's a lack a Bell's palsy signal, among other things. And from this, Prasad figures some of it out, but not all of it, as usual. And worse, despite the study's flaws, ignoring the study's profound limitations, the authors and others will suggest that the adverse effects are minor compared to the benefits of the C19 vaxxes. That's already happening, as shown here: https://journals.lww.com/neurotodayonline/fulltext/2024/04040/global_database_confirms_low_rates_of_adverse.3.aspx?context=latestarticles