Is it Any Wonder The Public is Confused and Suspicious
 

Switzerland will not recommend a COVID-19 vaccine for its citizens, even for those at high risk of experiencing severe illness from contracting the virus. A study performed in Basel Switzerland highlighted that "subclinical mRNA vaccine-associated myocardial injury is much more common than estimated based on passive surveillance. Up to 3000 times." In other words, the active surveillance conducted by the researchers revealed a significantly higher prevalence of heart damage compared to the passive surveillance systems, such as the federal government's VAERS. In fact, in a study with only 777 participants with a median age of 37--all medical professionals getting the COVID vaccine–the incidence of elevated cardiac enzymes 3 days after injection was pretty substantial, at almost 3%. How can there be such a variance in what countries tell their citizens? The USA Is suggesting vaccines for toddlers while European countries advise against getting the vaccine/boosters. If you have a good relationship (rare in today's world) with your doctor you can discuss what would be right for you. Regrettably the relationship and trust many of us had with our doctor in the past are just that, in the past.

Too many studies and too difficult to compare. In this case it looks like an apples to oranges situation.

The Swiss study looked at 777 hospital workers and not a sampling of the population.

The article acknowledges that while myocarditis primarily affects young men, the participants in this study were middle-aged women.

The Swiss study took samples to find elevated enzymes while the CDC study looked at diagnosed cases.

The article about the Swiss study mentions a 3% occurrence rate but also mentions that myocarditis complications occur in about 3% of cases. Using just those numbers you might expect a 0.09% rate of cases that rise to the level of being noticed and requiring attention. This is still 90 times higher than the CDC rate but far less than the factor of 3,000 mentioned in the article.

Perhaps the US needs a better study in order to compare apples to apples with the Swiss study (maybe it already exists somewhere).

Conflicting studies certainly drive confusion and skepticism.

“ The COVID-19 vaccine isn't banned in Switzerland. The country isn't recommending vaccination for the spring and summer of 2023 because of high vaccination and recovery rates across the country. However, the vaccine is still available for high-risk individuals who consult with a doctor” April 17 2023

Seems like “the rest of the story”, follows.

Where did it say banned? They said wouldn't recommend. Politics, philosophy, food, these I can see varied opinions but medicine ?
England along with several other European countries—including Sweden, Finland, Norway, and Denmark—do not offer or recommend mRNA vaccines to healthy young children.
In the United States, on the other hand, some cities are pushing in a different direction.
In Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser is embroiled in a bitter battle over her order that all students must be vaccinated for Covid-19 for in-person learning in schools. I assume there is a reason countries are not offering or recommending it to children. Risk vs benefit? Dangerous? Do the doctors in the US not see or agree with the risks that the other countries speak of? The virus has been around long enough where we should have comprehensive peer reviewed studies.
Especially when dealing with our children, I would hope for agreement from the experts of different countries. There are a few doctors on TOTV, maybe they can help clarify the different views taken by countries.

An old expression do not waste time worrying about things you can do nothing about. Covid 19.
You cannot untake the vaccine. Government, we the people demanded action. If, doing nothing was a best choice we would not accept government sayng we have decided to do nothing.

Relationship, trust in your doctor? They even have a word for that-GOOGLE MEDICINE. We need to deal with what is, rather than what was. Long gone are the days when the doctor would make house calls and the charge was five dollars.

An operation? The doctor does surgery on tuesday. I had cataract surgery. There is a follow up.
Best I could tell the doctor does over 12 in a day. Medicare. They figure the doctor should see four patients an hour. He she does not have the time to be the old time family doctor.

Getting a covid shot. I remember waking up early to win a lottery to get an appointment. Valid data? It would be unethical to do valid research. Giving some a placebo and comparing the infection rate to the group that was vacinated.

Even the shots. I took the physer shot, some got Johnson and Johnson some moiderna and there may have been others.

Input from people. The salk, polio vaccine became widely available in 1955. I was 4 or 5. You had to get the shot to go to school. We did not debate it. I recall my mother talking about parents fear of polio and what a horror it was for many.

This is word salad. VAERS is a "data-collection" depository, where anyone can report anything, related or not, with regards to vaccines. Someone can say "I was vaccinated with the flu shot last week and the next afternoon I fell off a ladder and broke my leg." The two have nothing to do with each other, but it sits in VAERS. There are actual entries in VAERS by people who claimed they were killed by vaccines. Obviously - they weren't killed. If they were, they wouldn't have been able to submit the entry.

There are entries about dog bites following vaccines, people getting skin rashes while working in their wooded back yard following vaccines (poison ivy, anyone?), people suddenly becoming allergic to something following vaccines (they would've become allergic to whatever it was, even if they hadn't been vaccinated).

So don't look at VAERS as a valid or appropriate source of information about vaccines. Please read the Adverse Event Reporting Fact Sheet here: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/pd...factsheet1.pdf

to help you understand further the function of VAERS.

2. Switzerland stopped recommending vaccines for the current season because the Swiss aren't getting sick or infected much anymore, as most of them either have acquired an immunity through exposure, or have already been sick with it and acquired their immunity that way. Their decision had nothing to do with heart enzymes.

I am far from an expert. I recall reading that the normal path for a pandemic runs around three years. Initially there is a strain more likely to kill. When, is disease kills it is less able to be spread.
Covid weakened became less likely to kill. We even had people with no symptoms but would and could spread it to others.

For those who state they do not trust their doctor. Reality, personality yours or theirs in any case, the solution is truly simple time to find another doctor

Vaccine
 

Follow the money.

Those of us reading and writing about this are alive and likely so because we either had the vaccines or the majority of those who live around us did. All of us were in the high risk category at least because of our age. That’s enough proof for me.

The COVID vaccines are considered gene therapy by some professionals. Of course this draws extreme outrage by some supporters of them.

But there can be no debate that they are radically different than the traditional vaccines we received in childhood.

This technology uses mRNA enveloped in a lipid (fat) sphere. The vaccine is then introduced into the body, where the body’s immune cells take up the vaccine particles and reveal the mRNA. The mRNA gives the cell “code” to create a protein similar to the “spike” protein on the coronavirus’ surface. The immune cell then releases that protein to other immune cells, triggering an immune response that includes antibody production and activation of specialized cells to find and kill coronaviruses bearing that spike protein and any host cells infected.
Different Types of Vaccines | History of Vaccines

A small percentage suffer life threatening side effects but because of politics and greed, they often do not receive just compensation as the law requires.

It is a shame that today that we can not have true scientific discourse unaffected by corrupt ulterior motives.

:BigApplause: :bigbow:

I have taken all the covid vaccines offered and other than getting after day reactions, which my wife never got I survived.
I remember during the height of the pandemic many people in their hospital death beds who did not get the vaccine urging people to do so.
Just the other day on TV there was a poll showing the amount of people who died in states where people were most likely vaccine deniers.
I don't know if it works or not but when it comes to life, I believe whatever prevention they offer I will take.
But in my lifetime, I took enough recreational drugs to kill a horse and I'm still above ground.
So, everyone should do what is best for them and forget all the noise on both sides.

Yeah right...Vaers is a difficult and time consuming report to fill out, tell me why a Dr would do that, it's not filled out by the patient...Knowing full well they "fell off a ladder and broke my leg comparison" this is the most ridiculous thing I've heard. Obviously we know your decision, and you're trying to cover for that poor judgment. I know someone who did die directly from blood clots with in a week of having forced vaccination because they were in the medical field. Such blatant casual disregard of the seriousness of side effects is upsetting, tell that family your uneducated comments..

A while ago when I was looking into VAERS to dispute some misinformation on here I looked at a few of the adverse reactions linked to COVID vaccines. In one case or a death after taking the COVID vaccine it noted in the comment section that this patient had recently chosen to discontinue their dialysis treatments. But sure, it was the vaccine that killed them. In another record the adverse reaction that was noted was the death of the patient's dog.

Is it logical to think that a medical professional would generate entries that attempted to link the COVID vaccine to the death of a patient who refused dialysis and the death of a dog?

Some few entries are truly ridiculous but they do exist.

Anyone can generate a VAERS entry. From the VAERS website:

Anyone can report an adverse event to VAERS. Healthcare professionals are required to report certain adverse events and vaccine manufacturers are required to report all adverse events that come to their attention.

Two of my friends got Covid three weeks ago, within a day of each other, but 250 miles apart. Both seemed really sick. Both had been vaccinated once, shortly after the vaccines became available, so the vaccines were no longer very effective. Both women were healthy and active. One, age 69, went to the doctor because her “severe cold” seemed to be turning into bronchitis. Testing showed she had Covid. He lit her on Paxlovid at once. The next morning she felt much better, and later that day was cleaning her house. The other woman, 63, also finally went to her doctor because she felt so bad. She was also found to have Covid, but she avoids taking medications (except for herbal meds, some of which she grows). She refused Paxlovid. More than a week later, she told me it had been really bad, though she wasn’t hospitalized. She could have saved herself a week of suffering.

LOTS of prescribed drugs (and lots of herbal meds) have side effects that hit a certain percentage of people. Millions of people take drugs that are so problematic that weekly or monthly blood tests are required to check for heart, liver, or kidney functions. If a Covid vaccine has side effects that affect a small number of people for a few days, what’s new? Paxlovid is made by Pfizer and has a lot more dropout interactions to watch for than the vaccine, yet a lot of people who won’t take the vaccine will be Paxlovid. Good friends of mine died from Covid—father and son, 2,000 miles apart. The wife/mother nearly died, but her dementia was badly exacerbated, and when she got out of rehab she no longer knew the na,e of her late husband or felt bad about his death. Before Covid, she was completely devoted to him.

It was not "word salad" at all...

And while your primer on VAERS is appreciated, it is irrelevant to the discussion, since the Swiss study didn't use VAERS and explained why it was not helpful...

ONE of the reasons the Swiss stopped recommending the vaccines MAY be due to their high compliance rate, but this study pointed out the SIGNIFICANT rise in Heart Issues post vaccine...

If you're going to post something like this, a link to your source would be helpful for those who
1. wish to read the entire article.
2. verify it is from what they consider to be a reputable source.
3. save us the trouble of attempting to Google it and then guess which of the results is the one you are sourcing.

Thanks

I haven’t been confused for even a second. I made up my mind what I wanted to do and did it. I don’t feel the need to discuss my decision with everyone to confirm that I made the correct choice. I have to live with the consequences of my decisions - no one else.

Which vaccine was the study done with in Switzerland? Could make a big difference.

Assuming you went with the scientific experts and had the vaccine, I agree.
I seem to notice that the people still looking for anti-Covid Vaccine stories, are always the skeptics who never were vaccinated.
Are they still unsure of their choice, even paranoid of it?
Most who are vaccinated seem quite happy with their decision, and just get on with their lives.

If you take into account that VAERS reports are overstated, than the difference between Vaers and the study in Basel Switzerland is even more significant.

Type in Basel Switzerland Covid Vax and you will get many hits. I will post one for you.
The first link below "Just A Moment" is the actual study. The other two discuss it.

Just a moment...


Myocarditis Heart Damage in 1 Out of 35 Covid Vaccinations | NextBigFuture.com

Swiss study: heart injuries from COVID vaccine 3000x higher than thought – HotAir

Or maybe they had a 58 year old friend who just died from myocarditis. Maybe the person asking IS vaccinated and concerned about continuing with boosters.

Thank you for presenting it better than I did.

The only times your last statement would be false:

IF your decision is to NOT vaccinate, AND you became sick, AND you chose not to isolate, AND you got other people sick.

Then, other people would absolutely have to live with the consequences of your decisions.

OR

If your decision is to NOT vaccinate, AND you became sick, AND you did isolate, AND other people who normally would rely on you for things are not able to rely on you for things, AND a hospital bed had to be taken up by you, with the nursing and physician staff attending, AND someone else had to walk your dog, AND someone had to take out your trash, or feed you, or bring you groceries, or whatever else.

Then, other people would absolutely have to live with the consequences of your decisions.

Then he should see his doctor……and not ask for advice on social media!

Agree 100%

Plenty of vaccinated people got covid and spread it. I am no longer listening to media hype and world illness stories, especially from a pack of liars in the media and medical community who refused to listen to common sense and face facts. Children don't need shots and the facts show that, in fact, only severely compromised kids died of the disease, otherwise they fared well. If you do not listen to the facts where they are presented and proved to be true by the numbers, why should I believe anything else you say?

wiley.com is a sales website a publications company that specializes in educational materials. They are in the business of making money off publishing things. It doesn't really matter what - which is evident by the fact that they misspell a pretty important word on their main page; 'Shop Addmissions Tests" The study data appears on their website.

The nextbigfuture.com article uses the same study and analyzes it, comparing it to other studies. The writer of the article is not an immunologist, or a medical scientist. One of the comments reminds everyone that if you look at the entire population - you'll see an increased risk of myocarditis among people who contract COVID is 7 times WORSE than the risk of getting it as a result of the vaccine.

David Strom is a bloviated alt-right propaganda writer. His opinion about any subject at all is 100% irrelevant.

Agreed. Unless you are the family of one of the 1800+ children that died - then you might feel differently.

Wow. Other than fact that the vaccine does not prevent everyone from getting COVID, does not prevent all serious cases, does not prevent death, and does not prevent you from spreading the disease, great one-sided post.

So the vaccine is not 100% effective? Imagine that.

From the study itself:

COVID-19 associates with a substantially higher risk for myocarditis that(sic) mRNA vaccination, and myocarditis related to COVID-19 infection has shown a higher mortality than myocarditis related to mRNA-vaccination. Thus, for the majority of individuals, the overall very favorable risk-benefit ratio of booster immunizationspersists.

I've got to love this.

This entire thread is a great example of why "believe the science" is flawed. Science advances by exploring hypotheses through experimentation. Different experiments produce different results. Frequently, "science" claims are based on some level of majority in those results—but in nearly all cases, there are also minority results.

The VERY interesting thing is that those minority results are often confirmed years later, causing a change in the scientific claims. Examples are rife.

(Science once thought thalidomide was a great medication for morning sickness...)

Wiley online library is a source for reading articles published in their mostly peer reviewed journals. Thus your criticism is bogus. The fact that the article is available free to you indicates that Wiley is willing to allow you access to some copyrighted material that you normally would have to pay to read.

I don't understand why you are arguing that the publishers of medical journals should not charge for their journals. You cannot read the New England Journal of Medicine for free. You cannot read Lancet for free.

This study used the Moderna vaccine. The authors recruited hospital workers in good health and they received the vaccine. No baseline labs were done which would have been useful. At day 3 after the vaccine a troponin cardiac enzyme test was done and those with elevated levels, follow up testing was done.

None of the people with elevated tests became ill, all had normal follow up testing which showed no evidence of injury. Interestingly it was overwhelmingly women, who have a lower baseline level, who showed mild blood test elevations. In the real world it is young men, not middle aged women who have rarely presented with clinical heart issues after vaccination.

The study is interesting and shows that the medical community is continuing to evaluate the vaccine, and publish data which certain people might see as negative. No cover up, no ignoring, no conspiracy. Just medical scientists pursuing information. Like they are supposed to do.

For those of you who had mono [mononucleosis], meaning almost everyone.... It is nearly certain you had hepatitis as the mono virus, EBV, causes a subclinical liver inflammation, meaning you are not liver sick but you have an elevated liver blood test, in about 90% of mono patients. Same story with chicken pox.

The point being that a subclinical mild elevation of a blood test is almost always a nothing burger.

Intense exercise elevates the same heart blood test used in the Swiss study in almost all exercisers. Nobody is going to suggest you don't exercise because it damages your heart as shown by the short term troponin spike

NEVER was if you learned that covid viruses coronronas have been around way over 50 years with NO cure

Medicine is not a science; it is an art. The government and Fauci scared all of America into believing (and forcing) all of us (Americans) that the virus would kill if not hundreds of millions, everyone who was not vaccinated. It was overreaction at it worst. There were no studies done, just some doctors (not scientists, opinions). Their best guess.
Then they shut down everyone who disagreed with them. Scientists do not do that.
They listen to the opinions of others and then test theories to see which one has the most validity. That did not happen. It was my way or you are fired. I got the vaccine and the booster, but I have no problem with those who did not. If you are so afraid of a virus, that have been with us for centuries and will always be with us, then you need to live in a cave and never be around other people.

May we assume you are a world renowned virologist since you made up your own mind regardless of the experts?

I didn't read the original article so may I pick your brain???? How high a rise in Troponin I did they consider diagnostic of acute myocarditis? As we both know, a one mile jog or a violent coughing spell can give a small Troponin elevation. I've seen patients admitted for ACS from the ER for a Troponin of 0.07 in the absence of ANY other suggestive sx, or even after an MVA with the dx of cardiac contusion. So I guess my concern is the threshold for diagnosing post vaccination myocarditis on the basis of Troponin I alone.