September 30, 2022 from COVID Chronicles

Another typically frustrating article about COVID-19 science was published last week; September 21st to be exact. It appeared in the journal called The Lancet Child and Adolescent Health, which is a sister journal to The Lancet. This journal has such a high impact factor that it claims to be “the world-leading paediatrics journal”. These days, however, I cringe whenever I hear that something that has been published in journals like the The Lancet, the New England Journal of Medicine, and many of their sister journals. These previously prestigious journals have become purveyors of poor-quality COVID-19 science, which sometimes dips into the realms of misinformation and even disinformation.

COVID Chronicles is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

The article I am referring to is entitled “Outcomes at Least 90 Days Since Onset of Myocarditis After mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination in Adolescents and Young Adults in the USA: a Follow-Up Surveillance Study”. You can find the article at this link. Here is the full citation:

Kracalik I, Oster ME, Broder KR, Cortese MM, Glover M, Shields K, Creech CB, Romanson B, Novosad S, Soslow J, Walter EB, Marquez P, Dendy JM, Woo J, Valderrama AL, Ramirez-Cardenas A, Assefa A, Campbell MJ, Su JR, Magill SS, Shay DK, Shimabukuro TT, Basavaraju SV; Myocarditis Outcomes After mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination Investigators and the CDC COVID-19 Response Team. Outcomes at least 90 days since onset of myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in adolescents and young adults in the USA: a follow-up surveillance study. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2022 Sep 21:S2352-4642(22)00244-9. doi: 10.1016/S2352-4642(22)00244-9. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 36152650.

You will note that this study was largely conducted by the United States Centers for Disease Control COVID-19 Response Team. The messaging in this paper follows what has become an all-too-common pattern for those still pushing the singular so-called ‘COVID-19 narrative’. In other words, it is what I like to call a ‘rhetoric sandwich’. There is some important objective data that contradict the narrative but it is downplayed amongst a presentation of the science that seems to make it almost support the narrative.

In this case, the authors found what others have already published, which is that COVID-19 ‘vaccine’-induced myocarditis is not as transient as we were told by public health officials. You can find a good example here. However, the authors try to convince us that it is only a little bit more chronic than what they previously thought. They nurse their data set in a way that makes it seem like most cases of COVID-19 jab-induced myocarditis have resolved by 90 days post-inoculation.

The most important and reliable data in this paper were inconspicuously placed in one of two appendices containing supplementary data. These data are not included in the manuscript. They have to be downloaded as separate files. Most scientists never look at supplementary materials, let alone ‘investigative journalists’ (whatever that means these days). I have noted that this is a common strategy to make it challenging for the average person to access data that fail to paint the COVID-19 narrative in a good light. As soon as I hear that a paper has been published in one of these journals that have lost my respect, one of the first things I do is take a close look at what is ‘de-emphasized’ in the supplementary materials.

Although I could highlight several issues that I have with this particular publication, I will focus on the most important one.

Here is the overall message that the authors want you to take away:

After at least 90 days since onset of myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, most individuals in our cohort were considered recovered by health-care providers, and quality of life measures were comparable to those in pre-pandemic and early pandemic populations of a similar age. These findings might not be generalisable given the small sample size and further follow-up is needed for the subset of patients with atypical test results or not considered recovered.

Now, let’s explore the core data set from the supplemental appendix #1. Here is supplementary figure 2:

This figure contains data from patients in the study for which there were matching reports from both the patient and their physician. In other words, these are the data in which the patients had a ‘voice’ in determining whether they might still be suffering from myocarditis.

I added the red and yellow boxes and their associated text. Panel i shows data for 33 patients that physicians deemed to have not recovered from myocarditis. Interestingly, one of these patients apparently had no relevant signs or symptoms, so I am not sure why they were deemed to have not recovered. This is just an aside.

Much more importantly, panel ii shows data for 195 patients that their respective physicians had defined as having ‘fully’ or ‘probably fully’ (whatever this means) recovered from their jab-induced myocarditis. Really!?! Of those 195 patients, 27 of them had no reported signs or symptoms of myocarditis, but their data sets were incomplete! I highlighted these cases in yellow. They all contain at least one white rectangle, which means the test result was either unknown or unavailable. As such, these patients cannot be incorporated into an accurate analysis. This brings the total number of assessable patients from 195 to 168.

Now, of these 168 assessable patients, only five had received complete evaluations and had no objective evidence of myocarditis (at least based on the eight measurements that were included). This means that a remarkable 163 out of 168 assessable patients had at least one clear sign and/or symptom of myocarditis! That is 97%!

This bears repeating…

97% of patients whose physicians claimed they had recovered from their ‘vax’-induced myocarditis still had clear evidence of having myocarditis!

In many of these cases, the confirmatory results were based on objective assessments of clinical signs, not subjective reporting of symptoms (not that accusing patients of lying about the symptoms they are experiencing would be appropriate anyways).

This leads me to conclude that the physicians who participated in this study had a complete disconnect between what they concluded about their patients and the objective reality of their patients’ conditions. This seems like gross medical incompetence to me. This does not in any way support the misleading concept that myocarditis is the latest ‘minor nuisance’ to be tolerated after getting ‘vaccinated’.

I consider this to be another example of why raw data related to the novel COVID-19 inoculations need to be assessed by independent, objective scientists. Public health messaging has been relying far too heavily on trusting that scientists reporting their own findings have applied correct analyses.

When this ‘high-impact’ paper is stripped down to its most objective and reliable data-imprinted underwear, I deem the take-away message posited by the authors to be either misinformation or disinformation (depending on whether their misleading reporting in the main text of the article was due to incompetence or was intentional).

Here is the only take-away that is actually supported by the data…

Most health-care providers are either unintentionally or willfully ignorant of the fact that their patients with COVID-19 jab-induced myocarditis are still suffering from this condition three months later.

Too many people are suffering from these kinds of serious conditions and public health and government officials, health care workers, and scientists need to stop downplaying it. A video that gives voice to some of these individuals can be found at this link.

COVID Chronicles is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Read Original Article
See Also ...
December 19, 2022
THE PLAN shows the official agenda of the World Health Organization to have ten years of ongoing pandemics, from 2020 to 2030. This is revealed by a WHO virologist, Marion Koopmans. You will also see shocking evidence that the first pandemic was planned and abundantly announced right before it happened.
November 28, 2022
Why do we never believe them? For centuries, the global elite have broadcast their intentions to depopulate the world - even to the point of carving them into stone. And yet… we never seem to believe them. The Stew Peters Network is proud to present DIED SUDDENLY, from the award winning filmmakers, Matthew Skow and Nicholas Stumphauzer.
November 14, 2022
This well researched documentary is a must see if you want to understand how governments around the world were deceived into BELIEVING the "science" which underpinned the global COVID response. How could people up to the highest levels of society be deceived?
October 04, 2022
Montagnier won the 2008 Nobel Prize for his co-discovery of the link between HIV and AIDS. Fact checkers swiftly deemed these claims to be false and the paper was taken down.
September 24, 2022
Cardiologist, Nuclear Cardiologist, Physicist, PhD, MD and JD, Dr. Fleming under oath describes the Spike protein bioweapon timeline and the parties involved in its development.
August 14, 2022
You were told the answer to everyone’s prayers was to get the Covid-19 injection. But now that you have done so, the healthcare system is on the brink of collapse. Waiting times for ambulances are at an all-time high. The number of emergency calls due to people suffering cardiac arrest is at an all-time high. The number of people dying is at an all-time high, with hundreds of thousands of excess deaths occurring around the world every single week.
July 11, 2022
Steve Kirsch talks with Brook Jackson and her top legal leads Warner Mendenhall, Robert Barnes about her False Claims case against Pfizer et al.
July 10, 2022
Brook Jackson is the Pfizer whistleblower. Her attorney, Robert Barnes, says that Brook Jackson exposed the fact that the Pfizer clinical trial was riddled with errors and fraudulent and false certifications to the US government.
July 09, 2022
The physicians said that they were suing Twitter for permanently suspending them for posting truthful information about COVID and also failing to provide them with verified badges.
June 19, 2022
We are pleased to bring your attention to the following featured article because it is a clear, well-written description of the monkeypox fraud delivered in a hard-hitting, no-nonsense style. We’ve added some emphases in red. [...]
June 16, 2022
One of the confidential Pfizer documents reveals that approximately 800 people never completed the phase 1 Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine trial. Click title above to read the full article
June 05, 2022
Instantly view those 3 videos or join the Fully Live Community where you can see various talks and interviews with David, as well as talks with David & Kim! By joining the community you will have access to many more videos!
June 03, 2022
Dr. David Martin lays it all out brilliantly. Inspirational!
June 03, 2022
Part 1 at Wise Traditions Conference 2021 on November 5, 2021
Notify me of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments