Very well done study on myocarditis shows very high rates.

[noenegdod]

Very well done study presented very well:



Its only 8 minutes and 18 seconds long. If you dont have the attention span to make it all the way through please stay out of the thread.

 

[FilterGuy]

Interesting video and interesting paper.

As noted in the paper, using adverse event reporting tools can create problems due to inconsistent or incomplete reporting. Because of this, the study limited the reporting to the more severe events (presumably because they are more likely to be reported correctly). This means that the actual problems are probably *more* numerous than the data in the report would imply. (The paper indicated that the US BEST reporting system showed an adverse reaction rate nearly double the US VAERS system reporting. This is in line with anecdotal reports (not in this paper) that the VAERS system is often avoided because it is so cumbersome to use. This also highlights the limitation of using data from these tools)

As Dr Prasad indicated in the video, it would be interesting to see a study that looked at the dosage and adverse effects. Moderna showed more problems, but it is also a larger dose. Is there a correlation or even causation?

One related item to note is that some doctors are wondering if some of the Myocarditis issues are made worse by inadvertent injection directly into the bloodstream. In the US and UK (I don't know about Canada), asperation of the needle during the injection is not required and is often (usually?) not done. Typically this will not be an issue, but in a very small number of cases, the needle will be in a blood vessel and the vaccine will unknowingly be administered directly into the bloodstream. What makes this alarming is that in studies on humanized rats, intravenous injection of the mRNA vaccines caused an extremely high rate of myocarditis. Could the rate of problems be reduced by requiring aspiration of the needle?

As an aside, I will be getting my booster this week, but if the clinician refuses to asperate, I will leave and find someone that will. The risk of a problem is very low, but why take the risk if it can be avoided (or significantly reduced)? For those of you in the US: The CVS Minute Clinics are staffed with better-trained clinicians and they are much more likely to agree to do the aspiration. Most of the clinicians at the CVS pharmacies do not have the training and will not do the aspiration.

 

[FilterGuy]

BTW: Needle Aspiration is the process of pulling the plunger slightly back *after* the needle is inserted into the muscle. If the clinician sees blood pulled into the syringe, they know they accidentally hit a blood vessel and need to start over.

This used to be standard practice for all inner-muscular injections. However, in the past 10 years or so the process was determined to be unnecessary and has fallen out of practice. With these new Vaccine platforms, there is growing evidence that inadvertent injection into a blood vessel could have serious side effects. Consequently, some doctors are starting to say it should be required with these new vaccines.

From what I have been able to dig up, the risks from the vaccine are very low, but there are real risks of nasty side effects. If we can lower the risk with such a simple procedural change, why not do it? So far, the CDC has only stated that aspiration is not required because it might hurt too much. (Say WHAT?) I have no idea what has been discussed in the halls of the CDC, but I fear that they believe even admitting there are side effects to the vaccine is a bad thing to do. (I do not trust the CDC near as much as I did before the pandemic began.... I made the mistake of looking inside the sausage factory)

Note: I believe the risks of the vaccines are far lower than the reward so I got the vaccine. I know some folks on the forum will disagree and I respect that. Even though I believe in vaccines, I am very much against vaccine mandates. Other folks on the forum will disagree with that, and I can respect that as well. Unfortunately, some folks will think I am a bad/ignorant/stupid/evil person because of my position. Oh well; that is their problem, not mine.

 

[noenegdod]

BTW: Needle Aspiration is the process of pulling the plunger slightly back *after* the needle is inserted into the muscle. If the clinician sees blood pulled into the syringe, they know they accidentally hit a blood vessel and need to start over.

This used to be standard practice for all inner-muscular injections. However, in the past 10 years or so the process was determined to be unnecessary and has fallen out of practice. With these new Vaccine platforms, there is growing evidence that inadvertent injection into a blood vessel could have serious side effects. Consequently, some doctors are starting to say it should be required with these new vaccines.

A month or two ago I posted a video from this guy showing they were in fact aspirating all over the world in places like China, Taiwan etc but had stopped doing it in the US, Canada, Australia. This is not the video, cant easily find it but on the subject

Personally I think they quit doing it because the risks are low and it is easier to train the monkey doing the injection so it was simply a matter of them deciding the risk to you and me was worth the lower barrier to entry in training.

From what I have been able to dig up, the risks from the vaccine are very low, but there are real risks of nasty side effects. If we can lower the risk with such a simple procedural change, why not do it? So far, the CDC has only stated that aspiration is not required because it might hurt too much. (Say WHAT?) I have no idea what has been discussed in the halls of the CDC, but I fear that they believe even admitting there are side effects to the vaccine is a bad thing to do. (I do not trust the CDC near as much as I did before the pandemic began.... I made the mistake of looking inside the sausage factory)

The risks are low but the penalty is high so the practice should never have been done away with. My opinion of course.

Note: I believe the risks of the vaccines are far lower than the reward so I got the vaccine. I know some folks on the forum will disagree and I respect that. Even though I believe in vaccines, I am very much against vaccine mandates. Other folks on the forum will disagree with that, and I can respect that as well. Unfortunately, some folks will think I am a bad/ignorant/stupid/evil person because of my position. Oh well; that is their problem, not mine.

There are those on here that are tired of people making the wrong choice (different from theirs) and that is unfortunate.

 

[noenegdod]

Better video discussing aspiration near the end.

 

[FilterGuy]

There are those on here that are tired of people making the wrong choice (different from theirs) and that is unfortunate.

To disagree with someone is normal and expected. My point is that trying to say someone else is wrong about a choice of this complexity and magnitude displays an incredible level of hubris even if they are a medical doctor. We all need to accept that everyone has different value sets and backgrounds. I am more than happy to explain my decisions to someone and I am open to opposing positions. Healthy debate is good. However, to judge them as a 'bad person' for having a different opinion would be arrogant and to try to force my decision on someone else would be abhorrent.

 

[noenegdod]

I couldnt agree more. it is nice to know there is one more reasonable person in California

 

[Cdkipp]

Better video discussing aspiration near the end.

There are things done in medicine that continue to be done "because that is the way they were only done".

The US has a poor health care system but can provide excellent individual care to those with access. Part of that standard has been to challenge old practices and demand that evidence supports them.

Intramuscular injections need to go into the muscle, not just the skin and fat underlying the skin or they do not work. As you said the purpose of aspiration was to make sure the needle did not hit a vein and inject into the blood. However, there are areas of the body where you can inject if trained properly, such as the deltoid muscle where you have virtually no chance of hitting a major vein.

Veins are not easy to hit even when you know where to look for them. They roll away from the needle, need to be hit at the right angle, are very easy to puncture all the way through and even a good size vein is easy to blow (as they call it) which basically mean the wall of the vein go out and will not carry fluid. There is no vein in the middle of the deltoid muscle that is going to carry an injection away. (other areas of the body work as well but you do need to be even more careful. i. e. vastus lateralis muscle of the thigh ventrogluteal muscle of the hip and dorsogluteal muscles of the buttocks.

Research established that the deltoid and these other sites posed no risk of hitting a vein of significance but rather that the focus should be making sure you are in the muscle and minimizing pain. This is why the US adopted the Z track method of giving these injections.

Imagine you are going to give an injection into the average fat American arm. How are you going to position your hands? The US way is to use one hand to hold down the surface, to push the skin against the muscle and then with the free hand holding the needle to plunge into the muscle and inject. Now imagine doing that with aspiration. You can't do it. You cannot keep the one hand holding the skin taught. After you plunge the needle, you would then need then remove the hand holding the skin taught, allowing it to spring back except as held by the needle, and then use both hands to aspirate, and then inject, all without moving the needle to enter a vein (if that were a real concern).

Instead the z track lets you directly hit the muscle and get the injection done with one smooth movement minimizing the length of the shot and any damage once the needle is in.

I am sure old British nurses like "Dr." Campbell likes the old way bit that is why it is no longer done.

 

[noenegdod]

There are things done in medicine that continue to be done "because that is the way they were only done".

The US has a poor health care system but can provide excellent individual care to those with access. Part of that standard has been to challenge old practices and demand that evidence supports them.

Intramuscular injections need to go into the muscle, not just the skin and fat underlying the skin or they do not work. As you said the purpose of aspiration was to make sure the needle did not hit a vein and inject into the blood. However, there are areas of the body where you can inject if trained properly, such as the deltoid muscle where you have virtually no chance of hitting a major vein.

Veins are not easy to hit even when you know where to look for them. They roll away from the needle, need to be hit at the right angle, are very easy to puncture all the way through and even a good size vein is easy to blow (as they call it) which basically mean the wall of the vein go out and will not carry fluid. There is no vein in the middle of the deltoid muscle that is going to carry an injection away. (other areas of the body work as well but you do need to be even more careful. i. e. vastus lateralis muscle of the thigh ventrogluteal muscle of the hip and dorsogluteal muscles of the buttocks.

Research established that the deltoid and these other sites posed no risk of hitting a vein of significance but rather that the focus should be making sure you are in the muscle and minimizing pain. This is why the US adopted the Z track method of giving these injections.

Imagine you are going to give an injection into the average fat American arm. How are you going to position your hands? The US way is to use one hand to hold down the surface, to push the skin against the muscle and then with the free hand holding the needle to plunge into the muscle and inject. Now imagine doing that with aspiration. You can't do it. You cannot keep the one hand holding the skin taught. After you plunge the needle, you would then need then remove the hand holding the skin taught, allowing it to spring back except as held by the needle, and then use both hands to aspirate, and then inject, all without moving the needle to enter a vein (if that were a real concern).

Instead the z track lets you directly hit the muscle and get the injection done with one smooth movement minimizing the length of the shot and any damage once the needle is in.

I am sure old British nurses like "Dr." Campbell likes the old way bit that is why it is no longer done.

oh ya, look who showed up.....

There are many people that are calling for the practice to be reinstated. It was acknowledged that it is rare to hit a vein. arguably about as rare as the incidence of myocarditis, which is why people are calling to have the practice reinstated, and then the incidence monitored. It is a simple, quick practice that may have a positive result but we will never know if people refuse to do it because it is "the old way".

 

[Bob B]

I broke down and got the Pfizer booster today.... My wife is at greater risk than I am, and I couldn't ask her to get the booster without me getting it also.

Anyway .... We went to a CVS. I asked the pharmacist who was going to give the vaccine if she used the aspiration method .... she didn't know what that was.

I explained it to her .... and the reasoning behind doing it that way. She was a very nice lady and she said ... OK, I will try to do it that way.
Seemed to me she did it perfectly the first try.

 

[noenegdod]

I broke down and got the Pfizer booster today.... My wife is at greater risk than I am, and I couldn't ask her to get the booster without me getting it also.

Anyway .... We went to a CVS. I asked the pharmacist who was going to give the vaccine if she used the aspiration method .... she didn't know what that was.

I explained it to her .... and the reasoning behind doing it that way. She was a very nice lady and she said ... OK, I will try to do it that way.
Seemed to me she did it perfectly the first try.

Thats awesome! Its so nice to hear experiences like that. My brother went in and got the J&J shot and the lady he saw refused to do it. He should have told her to go find someone who would but he just let her do it "her way".

There is absolutely no harm in doing it and it may help so why not do it.

 

[Cdkipp]

oh ya, look who showed up.....

There are many people that are calling for the practice to be reinstated. It was acknowledged that it is rare to hit a vein. arguably about as rare as the incidence of myocarditis, which is why people are calling to have the practice reinstated, and then the incidence monitored. It is a simple, quick practice that may have a positive result but we will never know if people refuse to do it because it is "the old way".

Well if it was responsible for myocarditis it would be unusual that only veins were getting largely in young males. Right? That seems like the easiest crowd to give deltoid injections.

 

[FilterGuy]

Well if it was responsible for myocarditis it would be unusual that only veins were getting largely in young males. Right?

Even tho it is not politically correct to admit it anymore, the reality is that females and males *are* different in many ways. ( In fact, they are so different I can tell the difference just by looking at them!!!!! )

I have not seen adequate data to say there is a correlation, but it seems like many of the reports of serious myocarditis are not just in young men, but athletic young men. One hypothesis is that young men tend to have more mussel mass and more muscle mass would imply more and/or larger veins to hit.

BTW: For whatever it is worth, I heard yesterday that some European countries have recently re-instated aspiration for Covid Vaccine injections.

 

[Cdkipp]

Even tho it is not politically correct to admit it anymore, the reality is that females and males *are* different in many ways. ( In fact, they are so different I can tell the difference just by looking at them!!!!! )

I have not seen adequate data to say there is a correlation, but it seems like many of the reports of serious myocarditis are not just in young men, but athletic young men. One hypothesis is that young men tend to have more mussel mass and more muscle mass would imply more and/or larger veins to hit.

BTW: For whatever it is worth, I heard yesterday that some European countries have recently re-instated aspiration for Covid Vaccine injections.

There definetly is a difference between males and females but I would bet all I own and will ever own this has nothing to do with hitting veins.

 

[Cdkipp]

Even tho it is not politically correct to admit it anymore, the reality is that females and males *are* different in many ways. ( In fact, they are so different I can tell the difference just by looking at them!!!!! )

I have not seen adequate data to say there is a correlation, but it seems like many of the reports of serious myocarditis are not just in young men, but athletic young men. One hypothesis is that young men tend to have more mussel mass and more muscle mass would imply more and/or larger veins to hit.

BTW: For whatever it is worth, I heard yesterday that some European countries have recently re-instated aspiration for Covid Vaccine injections.

There definetly is a difference between males and females but I would bet all I own and will ever own this has nothing to do with hitting veins

Very well done study presented very well:



Its only 8 minutes and 18 seconds long. If you dont have the attention span to make it all the way through please stay out of the thread.

Do notice in this that Prasad, who does know what he is talking about but is extremely annoying, is not saying the myocarditis is caused by any ingredient in the vaccine. He is saying there is no mechanism for that to occur which is what I have been saying to the antivaxxers here trumpeting the dangers of the vaccine. What he thinks causes the myocarditis is the immune response of our bodies to seeing the antigen. This makes sense as we know myocarditis also can occur when people get an actual Covid infection. So while I do agree we should monitor the age and sex groups most likely to get myocarditis and see if different combos of vaccines reduce the incidence, no one should ignore that getting a vaccine is much much safer than getting Covid. The catch 22 here is that in order for a vaccine to be effective it needs to trigger a good immune response and in the case of Covid that immune response carries a kick, as does Covid.

 

[FilterGuy]

More info about Myocarditis and the vaccines.

The paper is here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01630-0

Edit: added the following:

The chart he shows separates myocarditis events from the 1st dose from myocarditis events from the 2nd dose and compares them individually to myocarditis risk from infection. A more appropriate comparison would be the combined events of both doses to events of myocarditis events from infection.... I don't think you can add the 1st and second dose bars...... but it would still probably make the difference a lot more pronounced!

 

[Cdkipp]

More info about Myocarditis and the vaccines.

The paper is here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01630-0

Edit: added the following:

The chart he shows separates myocarditis events from the 1st dose from myocarditis events from the 2nd dose and compares them individually to myocarditis risk from infection. A more appropriate comparison would be the combined events of both doses to events of myocarditis events from infection.... I don't think you can add the 1st and second dose bars...... but it would still probably make the difference a lot more pronounced!

I have not watched Prassad's video yet but he seems to be cherry-picking. The study estimates 40 cases of myocarditis per million persons who got Covid, compared with between 1 and 10 cases per million after vaccination.

If you look at the charts that add all age groups and add pericarditis and arrhythmia you see the absolute danger of Covid and this isn't even how Covid typically kills ( based on what we know in the short run).

 

[Bob B]

I have not watched Prassad's video yet but he seems to be cherry-picking. The study estimates 40 cases of myocarditis per million persons who got Covid, compared with between 1 and 10 cases per million after vaccination.

If you look at the charts that add all age groups and add pericarditis and arrhythmia you see the absolute danger of Covid and this isn't even how Covid typically kills ( based on what we know in the short run).

So .... now you are quoting the guy you previously labeled as a nutcase? Who is actually doing the cherry picking?

 

[Cdkipp]

I have not watched Prassad's video yet but he seems to be cherry-picking. The study estimates 40 cases of myocarditis per million persons who got Covid, compared with between 1 and 10 cases per million after vaccination.

If you look at the charts that add all age groups and add pericarditis and arrhythmia you see the absolute danger of Covid and this isn't even how Covid typically kills ( based on what we know in the short run).

Okay, I watched Prasad's video. I don't know why he does stuff like this but:

1. Look at the entire graph from the article where he got the graph he showed (Figure 2). We all know mRNAs pose a risk of myocarditis in young males. There is nothing dramatic about these results as he repeatedly claims. He just completely ignores the much higher rate of myocarditis, pericarditis and actual heart arrhythmia across the general population from Covid. He also talks about these numbers being huge when we are talking about the difference between 4 and 6 cases per million shots given!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2. Secondly, notice the huge logical error here. He says you do not want to give a vaccine that is worse than the problem. That would be true if the vaccine were created to prevent myocarditis which again presents in only a handful of cases per million, is transitory, and has killed no one. BUT the vaccine is for Covid which has killed over 800,000.

What compels someone like Prasad to say these things I cannot begin to explain. He obviously knows much much better.

 

[Cdkipp]

So .... now you are quoting the guy you previously labeled as a nutcase? Who is actually doing the cherry picking?

I never said Prasad was a nutcase. Prasad and Dr Zdogg are different than the majority of youtube people in that they are exceptionally competent. I just don't know why he spins things the way he does sometimes. He loves being a contrarian. I have always felt that his comments were more appropriate to spur debate amongst medical professionals but here he spurs confusion.

All in all, youtube is a horrible place to learn about Covid, or science. Read the Nature article and forgo the doctors that wished they became entertainers..