Posted on 01/22/2023 12:45:31 PM PST by george76
The Federal Aviation Authority (FAA), the body responsible for licensing pilots, has quietly changed the criteria for measuring heart damage in pilots.
It’s one thing for a professional athlete to collapse on the sports field as so many have been wont to do since the roll-out of mRNA vaccines, but it’s something entirely different for a pilot while flying a plane with the lives of hundreds of passengers in the balance.
Now it appears that the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA), the body responsible for licensing pilots, has quietly changed the criteria for measuring heart damage in pilots. Until October 2022, pilots were required to pass stringent health tests and have EKG readings of between 0.12 and 0.2. However, from October 26th, the FAA increased that measurement to 0.3. That’s over a 100 percent increase from the low marker.
As Dr. Thomas Levy, practicing cardiologist and author of the paper “Myocarditis: Once rare, now common,” in the journal Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, points out, “This is not a nominal increase in PR interval, but a very large one. In a Harvard study that extended over a 30- to 40-year period, it was found that individuals with PR intervals greater than 0.2 seconds had twice the risk of atrial fibrillation, three times the risk of needing a pacemaker (meaning the presence of advanced degrees of heart block), and nearly a one and a half times increase in all-cause mortality. Furthermore, greater degrees of PR interval prolongation led to an even greater risk.”
Moving the medical goalposts appears to have put the flying public at greater risk of catastrophic harm in the hands of pilots unfit to fly. “Why they made the change is very obscure because extending the PR interval from the acceptable range of 120 to 200 milliseconds to 300 milliseconds does not improve safety,” said Colonel Theresa Long on the Tucker Carlson Tonight Show. “And I would like to see the data and research on which they based that decision. In aviation, we are a data-driven institution, and everything centers around risk mitigation. So, making that broader actually puts the public at greater risk of a pilot having a cardiac event that didn’t get caught because they’ve extended that range. In light of the emerging and overwhelming data showing the cardiac damage from COVID and the COVID vaccines on the cardiac muscle, I can’t imagine why they would make this move.”
...
While the FAA declined to answer that question when asked by the Tucker Carlson team, Steve Kirsch, the relentless citizen journalist critical of COVID policies, has an idea. “This is a tacit admission from the US government that the COVID vaccine has damaged the hearts of our pilots. Not just a few pilots. A lot of pilots and a lot of damage,” he wrote in a January 17th Substack post. “I’ll take an educated guess as to why they did that. I believe it is because they knew if they kept the original range, too many pilots would have to be grounded. That would be extremely problematic; commercial aviation in the US would be severely disrupted.
“And why did they do that quietly without notifying the public or the mainstream media? I’m pretty sure they won’t tell me, so I’ll speculate: it’s because they didn’t want anyone to know. In other words, the COVID vaccine has seriously injured a lot of pilots, and the FAA knows it and said nothing because that would tip off the country that the vaccines are unsafe. And you aren’t allowed to do that.”
As members of the flying public, we have heard little to no reports on the number of pilots who have collapsed while flying commercial passenger planes. But there are many. A small sample includes a November 22nd Gulf Air flight en route from Bahrain to Paris, forced to make an emergency landing. The pilot was declared dead. Newly hired American Eagle pilot Captain Patrick Ford died on a Chicago to Columbus flight on November 25th, while American Airlines Captain Bob Snow went into cardiac crisis with heart arrhythmia on his approach to Dallas airport. He collapsed after landing and was only resuscitated with three electric shocks to his heart.
While the FAA is putting passenger safety and pilot health behind its desire and political imperative to keep on carrying on, airline executives and government regulators cannot claim that they were not warned. In December 2021, a group of doctors, lawyers, and citizens’ advocates sent a letter clearly describing the risks presented by vaccinated pilots.
“Put simply, any pilot flying right now who has been vaccinated in the U.S. has almost certainly not received an FDA-approved vaccine, as the available J&J, Pfizer, and Moderna shots are not yet FDA-approved. And even were such pilots to have received an FDA-approved vaccine, under relevant federal regulations, the pilots should still not be flying for 12 more months – until such time as at “least one year of post-marketing experience” has occurred after the FDA’s initial approval.
“The reason for this cannot be overstated: history and common sense evince that significant time must elapse post FDA-approval to ensure that new medical products do not end up causing adverse effects (as did Thalidomide and Glyphosate). This is particularly true when the individuals who are receiving such new, experimental medical products are spending significant amounts of time at high altitudes and are in control of large vehicles carrying hundreds of other passengers, who could all die or be severely injured should the operator suffer an adverse health event.”
It can only be a matter of time before a catastrophic air accident occurs due to a pilot’s adverse health event. But the destruction will likely mask the evidence, so it’s quite possible we’ll never know.
So true.
Coincidentally, the same people who want to reduce population and get them out of their cars and off their airplanes to save the erf just so happened to mandate vaccines for pilots
Just like the FDA changed the definition of “vaccine” twice when the Fauci/China weaponized virus “vaccines” didn’t protect from infection or transmission.
Another reason not to fly, not that I needed any more.
This on top of proposing only one pilot per flight.
The US government is amping up its wholesale slaughter of Americans.
I think we're having problems with logic and math.
So accepting a pilot with a PR interval above the previous cutoff represents a significantly increased risk for arrhythmias, such as atrial fibrillation, and is associated with an increase in all-cause mortality (over the 30-40 year study period). That’s what I get out of the article.
“It can only be a matter of time before a catastrophic air accident occurs due to a pilot’s adverse health event. But the destruction will likely mask the evidence, so it’s quite possible we’ll never know.”
But the article doesn’t say what the same risk is for people with the previous cutoff, and I don’t know it and don’t want to spend time looking up what should already have been in the article. If the risk is nearly zero, but now is still nearly zero (although higher than before), is this a difference that makes a difference? And how much risk is “acceptable” to the public? A lot, if you think of its penchant for driving, but not much of the COVID scare is instead considered. And if the all-cause mortality is higher in people with a larger PR, implying worse heart disease, what is the average age for those deaths? Is it within 2 years of exam, or 20 years after retiring from being a pilot??? And what is the real risk of an incapacitation and a subsequent catastrophic air event (which planes presumably have a copilot and perhaps also computer-aided flying and landing), from atrial fibrillation or some degree of heart block which are at increased RISK of occurring with a higher PR interval???
And autopsies are done on pilots who crash, and frequently when they die on the ground because they’re usually “young” and “relatively healthy” (or they wouldn’t be active pilots, right????). Unless a body is totally burned up or the heart itself is destroyed in a crash, which isn’t very often, pre-existing heart disease can be found and documented. Mind you, no autopsy can show the function of the heart at the time of air catastrophic event (arrhythmias and heart blocks are physiologic events that don’t show up on a non-beating, i.e., dead, heart). The autopsy will (maybe) show just possible reasons why an increased PR interval or a dysrhythmia (of several types) might have been present.
My point is not to doubt the reportedly increased risk, but to highlight how the news article doesn’t really understand the science or what “increased risk” really means, or what a post-crash autopsy might show, and what amount of risk is acceptable to the public, and I would love to have had those covered in the article.
“Put simply, any pilot flying right now who has been vaccinated in the U.S. has almost certainly not received an FDA-approved vaccine, as the available J&J, Pfizer, and Moderna shots are not yet FDA-approved.”
These vaccines are fully approved.
Dean Martin airline pilot skit
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=dean+martin+airline+pilot+skit&qpvt=dean+martin+airline+pilot+skit&FORM=VDRE&adlt=strict&toWww=1&redig=8B26C37D8E01495092E9D9E78390131B
But they can’t hide it for much longer. What happens when it eventually comes out - in a modified, limited hangout - from the mouths of “trusted” authorities? Their intended “Trump’s fault for rushing it!” defense isn’t going to save them.
The math is right.
The current spread has the high mark (0.2) being 67% higher than the low mark (0.12).
The change of the high mark to 0.3 increases the spread of the high mark to 150% higher than the low mark.
-PJ
Ha! Foster Brooks.
I'm not sure what you meant by the use of the word "driving" in this sentence, but it got me to think about driving a car.
Let's say that if people generally have the same risk of a vaccine reaction whether they are piloting a commercial airliner or driving the family car, then obviously the pilot's death that leads to a plane crash would lead to hundreds of dead while the car crash might kill only 1-4 people. It's worse if it's a bus driver or train operator.
We've all been reading the stories about healthy young people who died suddenly while walking about, but what about people who died behind the steering wheel of a car?
The recent story about the autopsy results of actor/comedian Leslie Jordan was that he died from sudden cardiac dysfunction. The car was found crashed into a tree; did Jordan die from the stress of the crash or did he die from a heart attack and then the car crashed into a tree?
I think the media should start reporting on solo car crashes as well as suddenly collapsing youths, as these can be identifiable incidents worth investigating.
Unexplained motor vehicle crashes may be indicators of potential rates of pilot heart failure.
-PJ
If they’re going to let their pilots have heart attacks on takeoff then they need to be sure that the co-pilot knows how to fly the plane:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TAROM_Flight_371
Should be public policy that the vax status of pilot/co-pilot must be disclosed for each flight.
Glad my Delta Captain son did not get the jabs
The FAA forced the pilots to get the deadly vaccinations and now that the pilots are quitting so they do not have to and there are big delays as aircrews are not available or are either dying while at the controls or suffering heart problems and other issues from the deadly vaccinations.
The FAA now changes the medical requirements to ignore the results of the deadly vaccinations.
They will not be able to ignore the plane crashes.
The airlines will be sued into oblivion.
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.