A new scientific study by Nakahara et al. tested Covid-vaccinated people to see if they have “silent” changes in heart muscle function that standard radiology tests could detect. The study shows very unsettling results.
Scientists measured myocardial 18Fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) uptake. F-FDG has molecular similarity to glucose. However, 18F-FDG does not metabolise like glucose. Therefore, PET scans could detect it, and its presence shows the heart muscle’s abnormally high demand for glucose, indicative of abnormal cardiac function. More about it here.
Conclusions: Focal myocardial 18F-FDG uptake seen on oncologic PET/CT indicates a significantly increased risk for multiple myocardial abnormalities.
Indeed, this is what the Nakahara study finds (emphasis added, here and below):
Results
The study included 303 nonvaccinated patients (mean age, 52.9 years; 157 females) and 700 vaccinated patients (mean age, 56.8 years; 344 females). Vaccinated patients had overall higher myocardial FDG uptake compared to nonvaccinated patients (median SUVmax, 4.8 vs median SUVmax, 3.3 ; P < .0001). Myocardial SUVmax was higher in vaccinated patients regardless of sex (median range, 4.7-4.9 ) or patient age (median range, 4.7-5.6) compared to corresponding nonvaccinated groups (sex median range, 3.2-3.9; age median range, 3.3-3.3; P range, <.001-.015). Furthermore, increased myocardial FDG uptake was observed in patients imaged 1-30, 31-60, 61-120, and 121-180 days after their second vaccination (median SUVmax range, 4.6-5.1) and increased ipsilateral axillary uptake was observed in patients imaged 1-30, 31-60, 61-120 days after their second vaccination (median SUVmax range, 1.5-2.0) compared to the nonvaccinated patients (P range, <.001-<.001).
This was not supposed to happen! The Covid vaccine is not supposed to affect the heart in any way. It was promised to ‘stay in the arm’.
The explosive findings of the study are discussed in the editorial that the Editor of the magazine, Dr. Bluemke, felt obliged to publish.
Dr. Bluemke’s editorial is somewhat apologetic, and he gives faint praise for Covid vaccines.
The development of messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines is a remarkable biotech story. While traditional vaccines took 5-10 years to develop, the COVID-19 vaccines took less than a year. By comparison, the fastest conventional vaccine previously developed was the mumps vaccine, on a timescale of four years.
Dr. Bluemke also does not mince words. He explains that the findings are not due to chance:
The main results: asymptomatic patients vaccinated for COVID-19 before PET had about 40% greater radiotracer activity in the myocardium than unvaccinated individuals. The P value was low, less than .0001. This translates to only one time out of 10,000 that these results would occur by chance.
The editorial states that there is no rational way to ignore and explain away the negative findings of myocardial inflammation by Takahara et al.:
Vaccine manufacturers are aware of the adverse effects of mRNA vaccines. These adverse effects lead to vaccine hesitancy. The study results by Nakahara et al. suggest that mild asymptomatic myocardial inflammation could be more common than we ever expected. This in turn would support a hypothesis of more severe systemic inflammation related to mRNA vaccination in some patients who present with symptoma-c myocarditis.
Dr. Bluemke calls for further research into this:
The investigators understood their first result was only the starting point. They next performed extensive ‘sensitivity analyses’ – i.e., looking at the same data from multiple different directions. What if we account for age differences between groups, and the number of vaccinations? If mRNA vaccinations do cause asymptomatic myocardial inflammation, wouldn’t the effect be more likely shortly after vaccination, rather than six months later? Many of us who had COVID-19 vaccines had flu-like symptoms immediately after vaccination – perhaps those of us with common flu-like reactions would have more myocardial inflammation as well? Could trained readers see the differences visually? Or were the differences seen only after placing regions of interest on the heart that could be accidentally mispositioned? The list goes on. Great researchers are also sceptics – they need to prove the results to themselves.
Was the increase in myocardial inflammation due to a few unlucky patients driving high averages, with most people remaining unaffected?
Unfortunately, that is not the case: all quartiles were affected deleteriously, as this image shows:
Is there a dose-response relationship, providing further proof of causality? Can we see if the higher-dose Moderna vaccine causes more heart problems than the lower-dose Pfizer vaccine?
Recall that studies of other topics, such as pregnancy outcomes, show a 42% greater miscarriage rate and 93% greater infant death rate for Moderna (higher dose vaccine) compared to Pfizer.
What about the Nakahara study we are discussing? It shows a weaker but similar pattern of greater response due to Moderna:
The authors say there is “no difference” between Pfizer and Moderna. However, there is a difference. Pfizer-vaccinated patients’ SUVmax was 4.7, and Moderna-vaccinated patients (Moderna is a greater dose, remember) had a greater SUVmax of 5.1. The difference did not reach statistical significance, likely due to a small sample size.
Does the ill effect go away as time passes? Unfortunately, the scientists’ chart of SUVmax over time does not show complete recovery during 180 days, still above the unvaccinated level:
A test of cardiac function via F-FDG uptake, a standard radiological test, is something that careful scientists conducting Covid vaccine clinical trials could carry on with a few hundred patients. Watchful vaccine safety agencies could demand such tests to be conducted to ensure the general public’s safety. They chose not to do it, and their sponsors (Pfizer and Moderna) made much money selling unproven and untested Covid vaccines.
The vaccines, instead of stopping the pandemic, damaged the heart muscles of millions.
I hope that the vaccinated people will be able to ask for compensation for their damaged hearts.
The reality, sadly, is that the damage will most likely be ignored, and the vaccine billionaires will enjoy their newfound wealth while the hysterical Pfizer-sponsored press will be scaring us with new distractions.
This article was first published on Igor’s Substack page. Subscribe here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
In short, no. This storm in a tea cup will not speed up the the demise of the BBC. The establishment know how powerful the BBC can be at spreading half truths and Propaganda to help their causes. The BBC coupled with Ofcom are their most effective tools.
I’m all for scrapping this. I hate the arrogance of the license fee. It’s explicitly for funding the Beeb, but the stipulation that watching any incoming live channel makes you subject to this charge is laughable.
If we stop finding it, I’m sure gates et al would step in. They like owning media companies. Yet at least the money trail would be overt and so would their bias.
funding…
damn autocorrect
Yes, I thought that the conservatives were a bit wobbly on the BBC fir a while there, but their role in the covid scam seems to have cemented their position at least fir a while.
I’m afraid that the TV Tax will never disappear. It may transform into being taxed at source, but I can’t conceive of a time when the BBC will ever go subscription. This isnt just about covid lies or propaganda. It covers wide ranging issues, from Net Zero propaganda to breaking down National pride to so called ‘anti-racisim’ (or as it should be known anti white racisim) etc etc. This is not a battle that the spineless tory government are willing to fight, nor have they got the power to take on the civil service, which seems to have more power than any government, or that we give them credit for. The BBC is here for good unfortunately, whether we like it or not.
My TV tax has disappeared – I simply don’t pay it.
Correct.
BBC Ltd was originally a private company owned by a consortium of radio and TV receiver manufacturers. They paid for the service by incorporating a fee in the selling price, but they just were not selling enough sets fast enough to cover increasing costs.
Radio transmission are a public good (in the economics sense) therefore the licence fee was, at first, the only way to provide enough funding for BBC Ltd. It is in fact a receiver licence not a fee per se to watch the BBC, but a licence to receive ALL broadcast radio transmissions. At the time of course there was only the BBC.
War came and the consortium saw BBC Ltd as non-money making, so were happy to hand it over to Government.
However, post-war, it became clear that using sponsorship and commercial advertising (as in the USA, and later ITV in the UK) resolved the public good issue.
The justification to keep the licence fee, and opposition to commercial ITV at the time) was the Government and the clever folk, would lose control of what the population might see and hear – particularly important in times of national emergency.
No Government will willingly give up control of the BBC. It could be achieved easily by introducing encryption and subscription fee, then privatising it. It should have been done by Thatcher in the 1980s along with other State owned loss-makers, and the NHS, but…
The Prime Minister and his government, who I don’t trust, have announced this immigration policy. It won’t work because the civil service whose job it is to make it work, and the judiciary whose job it is to adjudicate legal challenges to the policy, and the Border Force whose job it is to execute the policy are largely made up of left leaning overpaid metropolitan social justice warriors like Lineker who think it is ok for them not to do their job if they disagree with the policy that their job requires. So it’s doomed to failure. I’m just hoping that the BBC and Lineker self immoliate (figuritively speaking) in the process.
Or even literally…? That picture from Vietnam times was powerful. Imagine Lineker going for that ..
I’m not that keen on the smell of napalm in the morning…it reminds me of Victory Vs.
It looks like the downvoters don’t know what figuratively means.
Listen …. The F – – king Boats won’t stop until we stop them by overthrowing ALL of the Double Eyed political Barstewards around the world who continue to hold our feet to the fire
!!!!!…
‘According to the latest estimates by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), net migration from overseas to the UK in the year ending March 2020 totalled 313,000 – the highest in four years and approaching the all-time record of 331,000 in the year to March 2015.’
Net migration into Britain has averaged about 250k per year since 1998.
Blair’s Britain has been propped up by 4 ‘O’ level nincompoops like Gary Winston Lineker who clearly has no idea of the generosity this country has shown since 1997 and is still showing to real refugees:
“….bespoke humanitarian schemes” for Ukrainians and Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) accounted for 45% of the increase in visas granted to non-EU citizens between 2019 and the year ending June 2022.’
‘The new data show immigration of 1.1 million in the year to June 2022, with emigration of 560,000, leading to net migration of 504,000.’ Nov 2022
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/press/net-migration-rises-due-to-ukraine-and-bno-schemes-as-well-as-post-covid-rebound-in-international-students/
Well done ‘Winston’. By your efforts, the whole country now sees what Blair/Brown did to us, which the hopeless conservatives have failed to undo.
Oh….and well done also for adding half a million viewers to match of the day in your absence.
Rumbled……
Britain is like a septic tank, all the thick nasty stuff coming in stays in an unpleasant layer at the bottom whilst the cleaner, brighter stuff flows off down-stream and thence overseas.
Ok then so lets just allow all the boats and we can build a ring road around the Orkneys. How many people do the social justice twerps think can comfortably live in this country? 80 million? 100 million? 120 Million? And ofcourse there will be no room for cars by then and we will all be offered a bicycle if we hand in our vehicle.
I don’t think this will end the BBC, but I can foresee a switch to subscription sooner rather than later. There’s no way ‘neutrality’ can work there. The entire mindset is left wing on every level. Conservatives and libertarians don’t want to work there.
As it stands, if everyone’s licence fee is switched to subscription, most people will continue to use the BBC. When it comes to the end of the licence year, most people will pay up the same as usual and type in their former licence – now subscription – number when they access the BBC on their TV.
People who currently refuse to pay the licence fee won’t subscribe, so no change there. People who are using the BBC without a licence will stop receiving it, so there’s no legal issue. Capita will no longer need to be employed to send goons around to people’s houses and the courts won’t have to waste time chasing up people who don’t pay the licence, so that’s money saved.
The BBC will remain under the auspices of the WEF-aligned Ofcom and can carry on its campaign of lies to undermine British culture, but at least if you don’t like it, you won’t have to pay for it. Maybe it would be a good moment for GB News to have a chat with Daily Wire in the USA and other organisations about creating a subscription network for those who want a different source of media.
I was pleased to see there was no solidarity from the oval ball commentary team at today’s 6 Nations match. I have always thought Rugby Union was altogether more classy than soccer.
Yes they were and then they weren’t. They were pretty quick to take the knee. Vomit inducing really for an ex school and club player. And then of course there is this…
I once entertained some clients at a Rugby League match. Northampton v London Irish, I think.
It was as if time had stopped.
I mean Union, don’t I?
You do, indeed
“Why the Lineker Saga Will Accelerate the BBC’s Demise”
Well it would be nice to think that some good might come from this sorry little soap opera, filled as it is with thicko,
woke touting, grotesquely overpaid inconsequential has beens.
Imagine if the first few barbarian invader dinghys had been sunk.
The problem would have gone away.
But we live in corrupt and decadent times.
Christ, I’ve just googled him and he’s only 6 weeks older than me.
He looks like a little old man who smells of stale urine.
If the beeb sold advertising, they’d be happy with the BARB figures.
You only need a TV licence if you watch live broadcast TV (air, satellite, internet) or use iPlayer. So if you watch ITV on catch-up, stream Netflix, etc. you don’t need a licence.
Rather than whinge about the BBC partiality I cancelled my licence years ago.
The comments at the linked Guido Fawkes are very funny.
The Telegraph’s headline this morning talked about the BBC giving in to the crisp salesman. They should take account of the 25% ish increase in viewers on Saturday night in the absence of the smug thicko and think again
If Lineker is re-instated then that means he and all other BBC employees must now be able to say whatever they like on other platforms. Toby Young has even said he thinks Lineker should be able to speak freely. ——–So, if that is the case then all BBC employees and presenters should be able to speak freely on all manner of topics. But imagine if Lineker were to say “Global warming is a load of rubbish” or “Vaccines don’t work and Lockdowns were a joke”. ————-The BBC does not allow any questions to be asked about the climate issue. They have simply decided that everything about it is all true, and they have really just become climate change activists, so what would be the reaction of the BBC if Lineker or any other presenter were to be saying things like that? This is the problem that the BBC has created for itself. It wants to try and claim it is “impartial” but it is NOT. It has a world view all to the progressive left. So then when something like this happens with Lineker they don’t know which way to turn. Because they realise that the government and all the license fee payers who do not subscribe to the world view of the BBC and Lineker think that as the state broadcaster it should not be blatantly spouting this social justice stuff. Oh what a pickle. —-The lesson then is that you either let people speak freely or you don’t. But they must also be allowed to speak freely on issues such as climate and covid, which BBC currently won’t allow. SKY do something similar but people are not forced to pay for SKY.
To paraphrase a famous late PM the trouble is the BBC (like the NHS) is a State within a State.
Time to withdraw funds if you haven’t already done so?
Will sufficient people find a teeny weeny bit of backbone and stop paying their licence fee to fulfil the phenomena of companies going broke by going woke?