Why the heck wasn’t the study on myocarditis in young men post-vax done in the United States?
That’s precisely what Dr. Vinay Prasad was upset about.
Dr. Prasad doesn’t pull punches… ever.
A 2017 profile in STAT News titled, “Did he really just tweet that? Dr. Vinay Prasad takes on Big Pharma, Big Medicine, and his own colleagues — with glee,” describes the Oregon-based oncologist and associate professor of epidemiology as a healthcare professional who believes that we should be using “solid scientific evidence, not hope or hype” when making healthcare decisions. Dr. Prasad calls himself an “evidence-based purist.”
Sounds like the kind of guy that you’d want digging into the data.
A preprint study from Thailand examines the cardiovascular effects of two doses of the Pfizer jab on teens. The study cohort was done on 202 boys and 99 girls aged 13-18. The study shows 7 out of the 202 boys had overt or subclinical myocarditis (3.5%) or roughly 2 orders of magnitude more common than prior reports from passive adverse event reporting of myocarditis.
Dr. Prasad then cites Dr. Anish Koka, a cardiologist, who takes the claim that myocarditis in teen boys is “mild” to the woodchipper. The pre-print Thai study shows that some teens have asymptomatic myocarditis that was only detected because of the study. She also says that there is a “theoretical risk of malignant cardiac arrhythmias” and most cardiologists would advise these patients against strenuous cardiac activity for some months — but if you don’t know that there is a problem, how will a doctor give that patient that advice?
And this was just a study of the Pfizer jab.
“If the study included Moderna, I, like Dr Koka, expect worse results. I don’t know what to expect in men 18-30, but I am worried,” writes Dr. Prasad.
It isn’t just the results of the study that are the problem — it’s that it wasn’t done in the United States in the first place.
Dr. Prasad writes on Substack, “The fact the US, CDC, NIAID, FDA, etc etc. have to rely on a Thailand preprint for the first prospective study of cardiac biomarkers is mind-boggling negligence. The US and this CDC have shown that either they are incompetent to take safety signals seriously, or indifferent to safety. They earn Grade F. This study should have been done in the USA, by Pfizer 1 month after EUA was granted. End of story.” (Emphasis added)
He begins his piece, “The goal of vaccination programs is to protect people from diseases as safely as possible. Vaccines and diseases are not supposed to have harms that are even in the same ball-park as each other; Vaccines are supposed to be much, much, much safer than the diseases they prevent or diminish.” (Emphasis added)
He goes on to say that back in January 2021, the benefit of 2 shots of an mRNA vaccine for an 80-year-old who had not yet had COVID outweighed the risk of contracting COVID, but that didn’t translate to the age groups — especially when young men started to present with myocarditis and pericarditis after their second jab.
The risk of serious illness or death for teen boys from COVID was low to begin with, but now we’re putting healthy teens at risk of heart complications that can cause long-term harm or in some cases, death.
Many doctors missed the plot: the purpose of talking about myocarditis is not to be critical of vaccines— they are a tremendous good— but to take seriously safety signals so that we can personalize or tailor appropriate vaccine strategies to the right ages to maximize efficacy and minimize harm. That’s Medicine 101.
Most of Dr. Prasad’s analysis and recommendations that he posted on Substack are in his YouTube video.
Grab a coffee and give it a watch:
Dr. Prasad ends his Substack post with a few considerations for what he calls the “indefinite booster plan.”
- Boosters should not be mandated without robust RCT evidence of benefit to others. (that has never happened)
- We must run large RCTs of boosters in this age group and test lower doses— looking for optimal safety/ efficacy before we move forward.
- Every time you change the spike protein construct, you might get LESS myocarditis, but you might also get MORE myocarditis. Novavax proves it is not the mRNA but spike that is the issue. Vaccine makers must be tasked to generate clinical data and not mere Ab titer data for approval.
- Use of EUA for any further vaccine outside of nursing home patients no longer makes sense, traditional BLA is needed for more doses.
- The US CDC should issue an apology for not taking safety signal more seriously, and work to build back trust in vaccines. Already, there is spillover into childhood immunization— a dangerous precedent.
- Pre-pandemic, I lamented that doctors who spent a large percentage of their intellectual time debunking cupping or other obviously useless things were not providing much value for science education, and COVID19 vaccine debates vindicate that view. These groups have been absolutely unable to shatter their pre-existing heuristics (vaccine good/ any concern bad) to novel products with fundamental different risk benefit. The real lesson is that careful understanding of EBM remains poorly taught to doctors; instead many think by blind allegiance to political party or relying on simple rules that serve them well in times of peace, but fall apart in times of war.
- There has to be a point where we conclude that the benefit of the nTH dose of the vaccine is outweighed by the harm. That is true for all drug products, and that is true here. These findings suggest that may come faster than we think, or may already have passed.
- Anyone who had COVID should be exempt from any further vaccine or booster requirement until credible data is generated in these groups— data of net clinical benefit.
It has been nearly 3 years of this pandemic and we have a whole lot of data now that we didn’t have when Fauci was saying that it will just be “15 days to slow the spread” — the “medical consensus” on COVID isn’t a consensus at all.
There are a number of doctors like Dr. Prasad that think that we need to balance risk vs reward when it comes to these jabs and look at the evidence, and others like Dr. Fauci who demand that you just obey whatever diktat is issued even if it contradicts the previous diktat.
But who is it that’s always accused of “politicizing” the pandemic? It’s the medical professionals that question the interventions and recommendations of the regime.
by Doug Giles
Beginning in March 2020, many Christians went into lockdown-freak-out mode. Uncut, irrational, unbiblical, and not to mention, unconstitutional, fear gripped many churches and church leaders. Forced to choose between obeying the Word of God or the edict of man, most Western Churches buckled. We even saw it here in First Amendment-protected America.
The Apostle Peter buckled to fear on the night of Christ’s crucifixion. But he learned his lesson and lived the rest of his life bold as a lion. How can the church ‘go and do likewise’?
Read the book and find out!
Get your copy of Dear Christian: Your Fear Is Full of Crap now. Better yet, grab an extra copy for any petrified pastor who dutifully put obedience to the unconstitutional edicts of Mayor McCheese ahead of obedience to the explicit commandments of the LORD God Almighty.