Posted on 03/28/2025 3:16:30 PM PDT by CondoleezzaProtege
Recent studies have illuminated the emergence of vaccine-induced acute pancreatitis, notably associated with COVID-19 vaccinations, presenting diverse mechanisms ranging from direct viral-mediated injury to autoimmune reactions. Understanding this link is pivotal for public health, yet challenges persist in identifying and managing cases post-vaccination.
(Excerpt) Read more at pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov ...
“Notably, the rare occurrences of vaccine-induced pancreatitis extend beyond COVID-19 vaccines, with reports also documenting associations with measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR), human papillomavirus (HPV), and other viral vaccinations.”
“In the extensive spectrum of COVID-19 related complications, acute pancreatitis has surfaced as a rare adverse event associated with exposure to the Pfizer vaccine.”
IOW, if you want vaccines that are 100% safe, then you’ll refuse all vaccines.
Your grandmother may also be in the group that benefits more from immunization than acquiring the illness itself.
The point is it’s not one size fits all, and for young healthy people, the shot may do way more harm than good:
Singapore’s Health Ministry warns about the risk of myocarditis to young men in particular — and to avoid strenuous exercise two weeks after getting shot esp. second dose.
And three more things:
1) The source of the above study is not some homeopath guru but a .gov page from the National Institutes of Health Library of Medicine.
2) It’s not saying Pancreatitis is the RULE but enough exceptions to the rule exist to warrant further investigation.
3) Most Americans are not against the fact that these vaccines exist. They’re against the fact they were blanket MANDATED .
1) This is not peer-reviewed, nor is it a study.
2) Any reaction to the vaccine is caused far more severely and frequently by the pathogen that the vaccine targets. Another way of saying this is that if a virus causes a particular type of event, there is an extremely low chance that the vaccine against the virus will also cause the event. This review (not study) does point out that several different viral infections are associated with pancreatitis.
3) There was no discussion of the actual incidence rate of pancreatitis following vaccination (or following Covid-19). When assessing relative risks, this kind of information is critical. They only found 64 reports to include in the review, but do not say how many they determined were actually pancreatitis occurring within a short time after receiving a vaccination. Still, if we assume that all 64 reports were temporally linked to the vaccine, we’re looking at just 64 incidents among billions who have been vaccinated. And a temporal link alone does not prove anything. In any given population, there is always a certain chance that an adverse event will happen. The pertinent question, left unanswered, is whether there is more pancreatitis among people who have recently received a vaccine as compared to those who haven’t.
4) Most of the review focused on symptoms and treatment of pancreatitis. Although they kept mentioning vaccination as a potential cause, there was no actual examination or discussion of the mechanism.
5) You still have a 1% chance of dying if you catch Covid and a fairly high chance of developing long Covid if you don’t die. The long term effects of surviving a Covid infection (regardless of whether you develop long Covid) are still unknown. So, between the 64 in several billion chance of (possibly) developing pancreatitis after vaccination, or the 1 in 100 chance of dying after catching Covid, it is clear that one option is many magnitudes of order safer than the other.
Full disclosure: I’m vaxxed!
And three more things:
1) The source of the above study is not some homeopath guru but a .gov page from the National Institutes of Health Library of Medicine.
2) It’s not saying Pancreatitis is the RULE but enough exceptions to the rule exist to warrant further investigation.
3) Most Americans are not against the fact that these vaccines exist. They’re against the fact they were blanket MANDATED .
You are believing the quality control in the manufacture and the administration is standard and of high quality. Its not. Pfizer/Moderna/J&J did not produce the actual end dose for application only the mRna core substance.
That work is sub-contracted to multiple manufacturers. The result “Hot lots”. That phenomena was observed early on in 2021 when 5% of the lots were associated with a high majority of adverse events and deaths.
The jabs are incredibly brittle and subject to degradation if temperature standards and mixing the doses up for use aren’t rigorously observed. Go to Pfizers or Moderna’s web site and there are or at least there were very specific instructions for mixing and dilution.
The reason your 100-year-old grandmother hasn’t seemingly been effected by any side effects is most likely a combination of sheer luck (didn’t meet a hot lot) and sloppy technique on the part of the medical staff at the assisted living center. Medical staff at those facilities aren’t usually of the highest quality.
Good bless your Grandmother but I wouldn’t use her absence of adverse events to base any decision on whether to take an injection.
Condolences. It is an unforgiving disease. I have a classmate diagnosed with PC. A year of radiation and chemo before having a Whipple procedure. The Whipple helped, but did not get everything. He has mets now and is counting the days. I had never heard of a Whipple, then I was diagnosed with ampullary cancer last April and had my own Whipple in June 2024. The Whipple brothers are counting their days down now.
Making this public:
Johnson & Johnson and Astrazeneca shots quietly stopped being used with the latter officially pulling its supply worldwide due to the notable, pronounced CLOT risk particularly seen in a few — but enough — young WOMEN.
These young women reacted to the mechanism of the shot, but the same risk is not as noted with mRNA shots.
However with mRNA shots: myocarditis has been more linked to young MEN who’ve had the shot, typically after second dose especially if given only a few weeks after the first - many risked myocarditis more with getting the shot than just getting Covid naturally.
When it comes to babies: vaccine non-fanatics typically do not worry about the adjusted pathogen in the vaccine — they’re worried about other ingredients like neurotoxic aluminums — it’s ridiculous that 3 shots at once are often given to infants for whom no allergies are yet known or noted. Allergens can be present in the adjuvants and additives.
Well of course. Nobody expects vaccines will be 100% safe in all cases. My main gripe (well, gripes) is that the mRNA vaccines did not really have rigorous testing, they crossed over the placebo arm way too soon, it was a platform that had never worked before, it was rushed out, and there was very likely a safe and effective remedy for the disease using a cocktail of old generic drugs, minerals and vitamins that the “health experts” adamantly refused to investigate. When the virus was raging and tens of thousands of new infections per day were occurring it would have been very easy to run a very large double blind study of the IVM/zinc/C/antibiotic protocol against a placebo. We would have had solid results in weeks as we would see daily viral loads, symptom recovery, hospitalization rates and other data from the drug and placebo arms etc rolling in daily. We would have known for sure if it helped within weeks. “The experts” blew a great chance to learn something important.
monkeyshine wrote: “Well of course. Nobody expects vaccines will be 100% safe in all cases.”
That is the basis for claims that the vaccines isn’t safe or effective. In the minds of many, the vaccine must be 100% safe with no side-effects and must be 100% effective in preventing diseases. Quite frankly, most anti-vaxxers are looking for excuses not to take the vaccine so they create a false narrative that the vaccines are neither safe nor effective.
As for the rest of your post. You’re essentially buying into the anti-vaxxer narrative. The mRNA vaccines underwent rigorous testing. It is immoral to continue distributing placebos when it is evident that the vaccines are safe and effective. It would also be immoral to conduct a very large double blind study of the IVM/zinc/C/antibiotic protocol against a placebo since you would have condemned many to death during the weeks necessary to conduct that study prior to the release of the vaccines. In fact, such studies have been conducted in the years since the pandemic and, contrary to the anti-vaxxer narrative, that protocal was proven ineffective.
If one researches the history of vaccination one will only find emotional arguments against vaccination. These arguments haven’t changed. At first, the small pox vaccine was going to turn people in cows. Now, the vaccines change your DNA. Same arguments, different vaccines.
Bottom line. Some are very adamant that they do not want to take vaccines. They will believe any argument that supports that desire regardless of the truth behind the argument.
It wasn’t a vaccine. It was a shot.
yldstrk wrote: “It wasn’t a vaccine. It was a shot.”
No, it was/is a vaccine despite all the bogus propaganda spread by the anti-vaxxers.
yldstrk wrote: “It wasn’t a vaccine. It was a shot.”
No, it was/is a vaccine despite all the bogus propaganda spread by the anti-vaxxers.
******
Nope, it mimicked a vax. It did not use actual covid.
yldstrk wrote: “Nope, it mimicked a vax. It did not use actual covid.”
The vaccine contained the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, so yes, the vaccines used the actual covid.
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.