Posted on 06/21/2021 10:26:31 AM PDT by Red Badger
Is there any area of your life where you don't see conspiracies?
Right
"Myocarditis can also be caused by certain medications, as well as by some autoimmune diseases,” he says. “And, though rare, myocarditis can be caused by an immune response to a vaccine such as the smallpox vaccine, which was the most successful vaccine in world history.”
Someone will be along shortly to distort this information or play up Yale's 'spin' (nothing to see here) but I wanted to make the point that vaccines can cause myocarditis.
Myocarditis, COVID-19, and mRNA Vaccines: Is There a Connection? > News > Yale Medicine
What if it's not a pre-existing condition? What if it is normal growth from puberty?
I did a cursory Google search on papers regarding body growth (specifically heart growth) during puberty, and the results were interesting. Certain organs grow at different rates, some grow at a constant rate, others grow in an accelerated spurt and then slow down again. Muscle growth in boys is faster than with girls, while body fat grows faster in girls than in boys.
I'm wondering if what we're seeing in these cases with boys is not a pre-existing heart condition, but rather, early growth of the heart muscle during puberty relative to the growth of the rest of the body, such that it appears to be a heart condition when it is really not.
I have no medical background so I can only ask the questions. Others will have to provide the answers in a straight-forward way. But, could this explain why we're seeing clusters of heart reactions in boys but not girls? Could the idea of a growing heart due to pubescent hormonal changes explain why boys' hearts appear to be more susceptible to reactions from the vaccine rather than labeling it as a pre-existing heart condition in so many young boys?
-PJ
Out of curiosity, I decided to look into a different approach entirely that I’m interested in hearing others’ feedback on.
What if it’s not a pre-existing condition? What if it is normal growth from puberty?
I did a cursory Google search on papers regarding body growth (specifically heart growth) during puberty, and the results were interesting. Certain organs grow at different rates, some grow at a constant rate, others grow in an accelerated spurt and then slow down again. Muscle growth in boys is faster than with girls, while body fat grows faster in girls than in boys.
I’m wondering if what we’re seeing in these cases with boys is not a pre-existing heart condition, but rather, early growth of the heart muscle during puberty relative to the growth of the rest of the body, such that it appears to be a heart condition when it is really not.
I have no medical background so I can only ask the questions. Others will have to provide the answers in a straight-forward way. But, could this explain why we’re seeing clusters of heart reactions in boys but not girls? Could the idea of a growing heart due to pubescent hormonal changes explain why boys’ hearts appear to be more susceptible to reactions from the vaccine rather than labeling it as a pre-existing heart condition in so many young boys?
-PJ
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In the US, the CDC has used VAERS to track adverse events following vaccination. For some reason, the ‘normal growth from puberty’ you propose has never occurred in these numbers following vaccination for any other vaccine.
Only a fool in this day and age would not be cynical of corporate and government entities.
-PJ
Quite possible, but nothing about enlarged heart.
People. Trolls are going to troll. Myocarditis is inflammation of the heart. Inflammation is one way a heart can be enlarged. It doesn’t take long. Even disruption of the functioning of a valve can enlarge the heart.
Have you ever heard of this number of enlarged hearts among the young following vaccination? Uhm. No. The trolls will dilute and distract -it’s our job as citizens and parents to push back on vaccine harm and people like Fauci, the CDC, and trolls.
According to the article -—
“ June 2021 report from the Associated Press documented several severe responses to the Pfizer vaccine course, citing a medical study published by a pediatric journal which highlighted lethal heart issues arising in the boys in the days immediately following their vaccination.”
no such thing as “mostly safe”...you’re either safe or not safe when it comes to health and death....
The vaxes can cause myocarditis and pericarditis. The latter can cause enlargement and swelling of the heart.
So the person on this thread stating he knows so much didn’t dig deep enough.
Still, those reports that make it into CDC, and that the CDC elects to publish show that myocarditis and pericaditis for Covid Vaccines are through the roof compared with 20 years of flu vaccinations.
I understand it completely. The propaganda, and fear that most people have been stewing in over the past year is incredibly extensive. So many people think that 10s of millions of people have died from this chicom virus in this country over the past year that it's simply not even funny.
Add on top of that, the fact that people are generally so incredibly poor at assessing real versus imagined risk, that it's really not surprising at all. Sad to say, but this lady killed her son with her own ignorance.
The experimental gene therapy that was forced on this child probably had a bit more than 3 days to do it's damage, since she specifically mentioned that it was his SECOND shot.
Why are so many people grasping at any fig leaf to excuse this medical malpractice? Most likely this kid was, like most, extraordinarily unlikely to suffer any consequences at all even if he came down with the chicom virus.
An immediate case of mild size moobs didn't kill this kid. I wouldn't try and deflect the basic fact that this kid was ok like every other mildly, baby-fat boy until after the shot.
The cited article, from Stat News, says nothing about lethal issues and the Pediatrics article they were discussing says the benefit of young people getting the vaccine greatly outweighs the risk.
This is pure misrepresentation by National File.
When people have to deceive in an attempt to convince you it should tell you something.
Dreadful. RIP.
The cited article, from Stat News, says nothing about lethal issues and the Pediatrics article they were discussing says the benefit of young people getting the vaccine greatly outweighs the risk.
I doubt the families with dead or sick young sons would agree with that. I certainly don’t. And what would you expect the pediatrics journal to say? That the vaccines they and most of the medical profession have been pushing are dangerous? Not on your life! At LEAST until enough time has passed for them to act suitably shocked and dismayed.
And this is my final word in our discussion, say what you will.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.