A new meta-analysis covering 85 million people has found more evidence linking the COVID-19 vaccines to serious medical harms, although the authors appear to downplay the significance of their own findings in what one analyst calls the price of publication.
The study, published in the International Journal of Preventive Medicine, analyzes the findings of 15 previous studies covering almost 46 million vaccinated individuals and 40 unvaccinated ones. The effects overwhelmingly concern the Pfizer and AstraZeneca shots.
“Bayesian meta-analysis revealed a link between vaccines and CAD risk (OR, 1.70; 95% CrI: 1.11-2.57), particularly after BNT162b2 (OR, 1.64; 95% CrI: 1.06-2.55) and second dose (OR, 3.44; 95% CrI: 1.99-5.98),” the paper summarizes. “No increased risk of heart attack, arrhythmia, or stroke was observed post-COVID-19 vaccination. As the only noteworthy point, a protective effect on stroke (OR, 0.19; 95% CrI: 0.10-0.39) and myocardial infarction (OR, 0.003; 95% CrI: 0.001-0.006) was observed after the third dose of the vaccine.”
However, digging into the study’s actual data reveals a 70% increased overall risk of coronary artery disease (CAD); a 286% increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI) after second doses; a 240% increased risk of stroke after a first dose; and a 199% increased risk of arrhythmia after a first dose.
The authors conclude that the “association of COVID-19 vaccination with the risk of coronary artery disease should be considered in future vaccine technologies for the next pandemic,” but curiously argue that “(w)hile acknowledging potential side effects, our findings support the overall safety of the COVID-19 vaccine concerning cardiovascular complications such as myocardial infarction, stroke, and arrhythmia.”
Commenting on the study, McCullough Foundation epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher argued that the discrepancy between the “actual data” and “how the authors spin it for publication” was to be expected, as “most will say anything to get the paper published” given the pervading biases among the medical establishment.
The data adds to a significant body of evidence behind ambivalence to the COVID-19 vaccines.
The federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports 38,541 deaths, 220,494 hospitalizations, 22,247 heart attacks, and 28,908 myocarditis and pericarditis cases as of March 28, among other ailments. U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) researchers have recognized a “high verification rate of reports of myocarditis to VAERS after mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination,” leading to the conclusion that “under-reporting is more likely” than over-reporting.
An analysis of 99 million people across eight countries published in the journal Vaccine “observed significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses” of mRNA-based COVID vaccines, as well as signs of increased risk of “pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis,” and other “potential safety signals that require further investigation.” In April 2024, the CDC was forced to release by court order 780,000 previously undisclosed reports of serious adverse reactions, and a study out of Japan found “statistically significant increases” in cancer deaths after third doses of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, and offered several theories for a causal link.
In January, a long-awaited Florida grand jury report on the COVID vaccine manufacturers found that while only a miniscule percentage of the millions of vaccinations resulted in serious harm based on the data it had access to, such events do occur, and there are “profound and serious issues” in pharmaceutical companies’ review process, including reluctance to share what evidence of adverse events they did find.
All eyes are currently on President Donald Trump and his health team, helmed by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services. As one of the country’s most vocal critics of the COVID establishment and vaccines more generally, his nomination brought hope that the second Trump administration will take a critical reassessment of the shots that the returning president has previously embraced, although most of Kennedy’s comments since joining Trump have focused on other issues, such as conventional vaccines and harmful food additives, and during confirmation hearings he called Operation Warp Speed an “extraordinary accomplishment.”
Trump has given mixed signals as to the prospects of reconsidering the shots and has nominated both critics and defenders of establishment COVID measures for a number of administration roles.