Collection of peer reviewed case reports and studies citing adverse effects post COVID vaccination.

I clicked on a hot link in this article...

COVID Vaccines Pose 112,000% Greater Risk of Brain Clots, Strokes Than Flu Shots
https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-vaccines-greater-risk-brain-clots-strokes/5872208

...and this list of studies came up.
https://react19.org/science


I clicked on a few of them and it kind of looks like the covid vaccine is causing a lot of injuries. I'm a medical layman but this list of studies seems to show that the covid vaccine is far from being safe and effective. I personally know three people who had health issues shortly after getting the vaccine and I've heard a lot of stories from other people so what I observe is consistent with this info and is not consistent with the official narrative.. I think the case is closed. The covid vaccine is dangerous.

 

The unvaccinated are the healthiest people on the planet...they are as healthy as children were in the '50s before all the govern=mentis push with these life altering, detrimental shots.

 

Here's a study that has pictures.

Vascular and organ damage induced by mRNA vaccines: irrefutable proof of causality
https://doctors4covidethics.org/vas...mrna-vaccines-irrefutable-proof-of-causality/
(excerpts)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Healthy heart muscle tissue, and lymphocytic myocarditis
In Slide 7, we saw that heart muscle cells strongly expressed the spike protein after vaccine injection. Here, we see the consequences. The picture on the shows a sample of healthy heart muscle tissue, with regularly oriented and aligned heart muscle fibres. On the right, we see a heart muscle sample from one of the autopsies. The muscle fibres are disjointed and disintegrating, and they are surrounded by invading lymphocytes. Burkhardt found myocarditis in multiple of his deceased patients.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The evidence presented here clearly demonstrates a chain of causation from vaccine injection to

• rapid distribution of the vaccine through the bloodstream,
• widespread spike protein expression, prominently in blood vessels, and
• autoimmune-like inflammation and organ damage.

Vaccine-induced vascular damage will promote blood clotting, and clotting-related diseases such as heart attack, stroke, lung embolism are very common in the adverse events databases [4,12].

In addition to autoimmune-like inflammation, other disease mechanisms, including prion-mediated CNS degeneration [13], aberrant vascular protein deposition (amyloidosis) [14,15], and lipid nanoparticle toxicity [16], are plausible but require further study and corroboration. Overall, these vaccines can no longer be considered experimental—the “experiment” has resulted in the disaster that many medical doctors and scientists predicted from the outset [17]. The vaccination must be stopped, and all approvals and authorizations of their use must be revoked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Misleading title:
Collection of "peer reviewed" case reports and studies

Peer review involves getting reviews from peers, not people within the same group of antivax activists.

And that impresses you?

Hogwash. No causality is shown whatsoever.

Disinformation website.

Covid-19 can cause myocarditis.

Hogwash. There is absolutely ZERO causation established. That's assuming that this disinformation website is representing the data honestly.

AUTHORS:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sucharit_Bhakdi
"Sucharit Bhakdi is a retired Thai-German microbiologist. In 2020 and 2021 Bhakdi became a prominent source of misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic, claiming that the pandemic was "fake" and that COVID-19 vaccines were going to decimate the world's population.[4][3]"

https://www.politifact.com/personalities/arne-burkhadt/
Arne Burkhardt
One of his batshit claims!
"In vaccinated males, the COVID-19 vaccine’s spike protein “has entirely replaced their sperm.”"

So, basically - disinformation website, comedy researchers and NO causation established whatsoever.
"But look at meh picture" doesn't prove a vaccine did it, let alone where the damn thing came from!

 

@ToddWB This thread deals with your "anecdotal evidence"! Pick any one of these stupid reports and maybe hang around to discuss it objectively and honestly.

See example number 1 just above for a) zero causation b) zero details of provenance! c) known disinformation source d) known crank doctors - the lead researcher thinks that the vaccine spike protein has replaced the sperm on all recipients. If you think this doesn't call into question his credibility then don't bother hanging around to discuss a single thing. Just read my signature.

 

That is absolute trash. They apparently searched the VAERS database (which, as you well know, was never intended as a statistical data source) and then compared reports associated with COVID vaccines with those associated with other types of vaccination based exclusively on events over time rather than based on number of patients. Also note that a report on VAERS isn't proof that the reported side-effect was caused by the vaccination in question.

It's COVID vaccines, plural. There are multiple different types of vaccine used and the list you stumbled across appears to cover various different ones. I'm sure I've explained this to you before but I understand that treating it as a singular thing makes it easier to demonise.

Also, define "a lot". Your list has 3,580 case reports, which will tend to refer to a very small number of patients (often one), from all over the world. Literally billions of people received COVID vaccinations during the pandemic. As I've told you before, nobody is denying that COVID vaccines cause side-effects, some very serious and probably at a greater rate than many (but not all) other vaccines or medical treatments. What is being challenged is the routine lies, misinformation and wilful ignorance used to present that as some massive disaster with a grand conspiracy of cover-up.

As you've regularly demonstrated. Maybe you should start acting like it and accept information from those better informed, even if it doesn't fit your preconceived conclusions.

 

I'm just a layman so I can't opine on this issue. Here's where he talks about it. He shows pictures.

Dr Arne Burkhardt Confirms Sperm Has Been Almost Entirely Replaced By Spike Proteins
https://rumble.com/v2a5fpw-dr-arne-...s-been-almost-entirely-replaced-by-spike.html

Sterility seems to be on the rise so what he says fits what's happening.
https://rumble.com/search/all?q=sterility

What's your opinion of what's said here?

Do viruses exist?
https://doctors4covidethics.org/do-viruses-exist/
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before we go into any specifics on germs and viruses, we should acknowledge that the public has ample reason to mistrust not only politicians, public officials and the media, but also the “scientific community.” Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, several very senior members of that community had drawn attention to the deplorable state of scientific integrity in medical research. Particularly poignant is this quote by a former editor-in-chief of one of the world’s leading medical journals, Marcia Agnell [1]:

It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.

 

@Scott Can you explain how this list is any different to the one you posted in 2 other conspiracy threads?

Also, you've posted one from the list - addressed above and ignored by you..

Here's the first one I clicked on:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34619700/

Can you identify, using google to verify your answer, how exactly this qualifies as contributing to the lie told in the headline? Thanks. Just so you understand, it doesn't in any way whatsoever.

Don't be absurd! He was a retired clown doctor who claimed "In vaccinated males, the COVID-19 vaccine’s spike protein “has entirely replaced their sperm.”"

If anyone thinks that likely, no matter whether they are a damn layman or not, they are deluding themselves. Did you notice the birth rate plummeting? Of course not!

I know for a fact that were I to present a so called "expert" to you who made such an absolutely ludicrous claim you would dismiss his credibility completely.

 

I don't see how it's different.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...and-the-vaccine.613477/page-2#post-1075082667

This info is from the other list.

blood clotting
https://www.heart.org/en/news/2020/...ecline-death-rate-from-lung-clots-on-the-rise
----------------------------------------------------
"Death rates for PE are rising and seem to be doing so across age, race and geographic regions," said lead author Dr. Karlyn Martin. She is assistant professor of medicine in the division of hematology/oncology at Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago.
----------------------------------------------------

myocarditis
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0281296
(excerpt)
------------------------------------------------------
Results
Among 2,988 patients (51.0±16.9 years, 46.2% women), 362 (12.1%) were of complicated phenotype. Of these, 163 (45.0%) had died within 1 month. All-cause death at 30 days occurred in 40 (4.7%), 52 (4.8%), and 105 (10.0%) patients in the young-adult, mid-life, and older-adult groups, respectively. For 10 years of follow-up, all-cause death occurred in 762 (25.5%). Even in young adult patients with non-complicated phenotypes, excess mortality remained higher compared to the general population.
Conclusion
In hospitalized patients with clinically suspected acute myocarditis, short-term mortality is high both in young and older adults, particularly those with comorbidities and severe clinical presentation. Furthermore, excess mortality remains high for at least 10 years after index hospitalization in young adults.
------------------------------------------------------

pericarditis
https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jaccas.2024.102282
------------------------------------------------------
If there is suspicion of pericarditis, TTE is recommended for its high sensitivity in detecting effusions, whereas pericardiocentesis is useful to evaluate the nature. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory therapy is the primary treatment for acute pericarditis; however, surgical drainage and antimicrobial therapy are mandatory for bacterial pericarditis. Purulent pericarditis with pneumopericardium can be highly fatal without surgical intervention.1,2 Even with proper surgical treatment, mortality rate approaches 40% due to cardiac tamponade, constriction, and septic shock.2,3 The inability to establish immediate surgical intervention after pericardiocentesis led to rapid purulent fluid reaccumulation and risk of sudden decompensation given the constrictive physiology at diagnosis.
------------------------------------------------------


thrombosis
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.009107
------------------------------------------------------
Conclusions
We found that patients with VTE have a long-term increased risk of dying. The risk is substantially elevated in the first year after diagnosis but remained increased during the entire 30 years of follow-up with VTE as an important cause of death. Over the past 3 decades, 30-day mortality has remained fairly constant after DVT but has improved markedly for PE.
------------------------------------------------------

thrombocytopenia
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29179504/
------------------------------------------------------
Severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome is an emerging life-threatening infectious disease identified in 2009. Given high case-fatality rate among patients with severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome, identification of the risk factors at acute phase associated with fatality is crucial for treatment. Therefore, we aimed to meta-analytically evaluate risk factors of fatal clinical outcome of severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome. 238 fatal cases and 873 non-fatal cases from 12 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Elder age and high viral load were significantly associated with fatal clinical outcome. Further, severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome patients with fatal clinical outcome had significantly reduced level of albumin and platelet count, higher level of serum alanine aminotransferase, aspirate aminotransferase, lactic acid dehydrogenase and creatinine phosphokinase, and prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time, comparing with mild patients. These disturbed parameters function as predictors to warn fatal clinical outcome of the disease. Moreover, ribavirin has a minimal impact to alleviate disease progression of severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome. In conclusion, our finding demonstrates a panel of factors associated with fatality of SFTS disease, which have important implications during clinical practice.
------------------------------------------------------


Guillain-Barre
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23576619/
------------------------------------------------------
Results: Fifteen (2.8%) of 527 patients with GBS died within 6 months of follow-up at highly variable time points during the disease course, with a median time from onset of weakness to death of 76 days (interquartile range 23-152 days). In 356 patients with an extended follow-up of 12 months, the mortality rate was 3.9%. Only 3 patients (20%) died during the acute progressive phase and 2 patients (13%) died during the plateau phase. Ten patients (67%) died during the recovery phase after neurologic improvement, most frequently from respiratory or cardiovascular complications. Eleven patients (73%) were admitted to an intensive care unit during the course of disease, but only 7 patients (47%) died in the intensive care unit. Risk factors for death were age (p < 0.001), severity of weakness at entry (p = 0.02), mechanical ventilation (p < 0.001), delay from onset of weakness to entry (p = 0.035), and time to peak disability (p = 0.039).
Conclusions: Death after GBS predominantly occurs in the elderly and severely affected patients, especially during the recovery phase. Future research is required to determine whether mortality of GBS can be reduced by intensified monitoring in patients with an increased risk profile.

 

Good, we agree then. You just spammed it onto another sub-forum!

Not a single one of your "thousand" links proved the claim you made. And here we are again with another similar and totally meaningless generic claim, that you as a self-confessed layman have no idea about. Basically a spam thread that provides a lying website conclusion, isolated cases at best from BILLIONS of administered vaccine doses. What is it you think this batshit website is proving here? Certainly not the tagline!

 

NONE of that related to covid-19 vaccinations. Can you expand on what it is you think it is saying?

 

It's a very tabloid-like opening for what purports to be scientific commentary directly criticising exactly that kind of misleading behaviour. I also find it amusing that they felt the need to put only "scientific community" in quotes because they are part of the scientific community but they obviously don't want people to mistrust them.

The actual conclusions presented aren't entirely unreasonable though (did you even read that far?);

Now, I can't help but notice that you completely ignored my comments on your last set of links and simply threw out something new. I'm going to have to flatly refuse to address any new links or tangents unless you first meaningfully respond to my comments on the previous ones, actually acknowledging (or indeed countering) the facts I've presented. You know, in the spirit of "rigorous but unprejudiced debate that once made medical science great".

 

You seem to be trying to muddy the waters.

According to the papers cited here...

COVID-19 Vaccines: Proof of Lethality. Over One Thousand Scientific Studies
https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-vaccines-scientific-proof-lethality/5767711

...the covid vaccine causes these ailments.
(excerpt from article)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Many have breached that duty and, in doing so, are recklessly causing a risk of death or serious injury, by carrying on regardless of the now-confirmed dangers associated with COVID 19 injections. Some of these risks are blood clotting, myocarditis, pericarditis, thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, anaphylaxis, Bell’s palsy, Guillain-Barre, cancer including deaths, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------

They're not lethal in one hundred percent of cases. I don't know the lethality rates but if the vaccine causes them, we can say the vaccine causes lethal ailments. The papers cited in the Global Research article showed cases in which those ailments caused sickness but not death so you said this.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...and-the-vaccine.613477/page-2#post-1075081727
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------------------------
Find me 3 reports in that pathetic list that suggest the vaccine is lethal.
----------------------------------------------------------

I responded with this.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...and-the-vaccine.613477/page-2#post-1075082667
(excerpt)
------------------------------------------------------------
Almost all of them show that the covid vaccine causes these ailments which are often lethal.
------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...and-the-vaccine.613477/page-2#post-1075083141
(excerpt)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Do you agree that a lot of those studies show that the vaccine causes these ailments? Are you saying that these ailments are never lethal?
-------------------------------------------------------------


According to those studies the covid vaccine caused those ailments in some people. Some of them just got sick and some of them died. The fact that the studies cited in the Global Research article only showed cases in which the vaxxed person didn't die doesn't mean that none of them die.

It seems that a lot of them have died.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...tests-secret-vaccines.615024/#post-1074540809

 

Nope. You agreed that you are basically spamming the same data repackaged and NONE of the reports proved what was claimed. I asked you to supply just 3 and you could not.

And you make a duplicate statement to one made from the two spammed threads.

Those ailments are a) extremely rare b) very rarely fatal and c) their severity and frequency exaggerated very deceptively by the disinformation website.
As you felt it ok to bring this already posted horseshit here, I shall bring my reply to it:
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...and-the-vaccine.613477/page-2#post-1075083263

Viewers can see that you cited reports with tiny numbers, none died and yet the claim is that it proves the vaccine as lethal.
DISINFORMATION.

 

Here's another one.

A Systematic Review Of Autopsy Findings In Deaths After COVID-19 Vaccination
https://publichealthpolicyjournal.c...indings-in-deaths-after-covid-19-vaccination/
(excerpt)
-----------------------------------------------------------
Conclusions: The consistency seen among cases in this review with known COVID-19 vaccine mechanisms of injury and death, coupled with autopsy confirmation by physician adjudication, suggests there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death. Further urgent investigation is required for the purpose of clarifying our findings.

 

For the hundredth time, there is no correlation and causation established. I hate these data mining reports, they do zero in depth research. They largely rely on keyword matches!

 

Definitely worth raising an eye brow at.

 

Nope. Have you just read the one reply?!

Try reading this one and this one.

This is a list with a ton of duplicate studies and identifying tiny numbers from a total in the billions.

 

It absolutely is.

It doesn't have to definitively prove it to simply raise an eyebrow.

By not doing so I would suggest one is being a sheep.

To not be skeptical is the least scientific thing one can do.

 

Your opinion is irrelevant.

Hilarious. It doesn't prove it. If the eyebrow is raised at the disinformation, then you have a point.

Your suggestion is noted. By assuming this is smoke and therefore a fire, you would be a member of a whole flock.

These examples have been tested for a reason, they are rare examples and medicine seeks to improve by finding cause. This disinformation thread takes rare instances and conflates them. It is horseshit and I have looked at quite a number of studies on the list. Did you click the link in post 14?

Have you clicked a single one of the studies and checked, the numbers, the conclusions and the recommendations? Try it. Get back to me when you have a proper reason to raise a Spock-like eyebrow. Otherwise you're just bleating.

 

No it's not, that much is clear lol.

It isn't misinformation. And to not raise an eyebrow is simply unscientific.

You are projecting.

I've read all the studies, with little exception. And nothing I've said about them has been disproven.

 

You are repeating yourself "lol".

It is DISinformation, when deliberately conflated.

The eyebrow was raised years back and lowered after cases were shown to be rare. Studies ensued checking cause and frequency.

Noise.

Really? There are around one thousand of them (mostly duplicates of the same cases) and you've read none of them.

Correct. The problem though is you haven't actually said a single thing about any of them.

So, let's have it. Link to one and tell me, the numbers, the conclusions and the recommendations? I won't hold my breath.

 

I'm saying the truth lol that's it and you are invested enough in it to reply.

No it isn't. You just jump to conclusions that's all.

And yet info is released constantly giving rise to more reason to raise an eyebrow. And be skeptical.

Projection.

Again you just jump to more conclusions. You don't know me but you know I haven't read them. Astounding leap of faith you are taking there, without evidence, for someone who feigns caring about science and evidence.

Hoe can I link to something you just said you were sure I've never read? You already so certain remember?

 

Noise.

So, let's have it. Link to one of the reports and tell me, the numbers, the conclusions and the recommendations? I won't hold my breath.

 

Projection.

Remember you already drew your conclusion without evidence about me?