When Pfizer and Moderna went for full FDA approval, they received from the FDA a Biological Licensing Agreement (BLA) letter, essentially stating, “You must study myocarditis with your vaccines.”
What that entails, explained Dr. Peter McCullough, is prospective cohort studies, meaning you measure everything (troponin levels, EKG, echocardiogram, ultrasound, etc.) at baseline, give the vaccine, and compare the results from before and afterwards.
But surprise, surprise, they never did those studies.
However, Mansanguan & Colleagues from Thailand did — and the data is alarming.
Their study had a total of 301 children aged 13 to 18. They screened each person’s cardiovascular baseline via troponin levels, EKGs, echocardiograms, ultrasounds of the heart, etc. — gave two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, and repeated everything afterwards.
“And here’s the bombshell.”
They came up with a suspected myopericarditis rate of 2.33%.
• “Seven participants (2.33%) exhibited at least one elevated cardiac biomarker or positive lab assessments.”
• Equally as worrying, “Cardiovascular manifestations were found in 29.24% of patients, ranging from tachycardia or palpitation to myopericarditis.”
• “Myopericarditis was confirmed in one patient after vaccination. Two patients had suspected pericarditis and four patients had suspected subclinical myocarditis.”
“This is [23,300] cases per million!” exclaimed Dr. McCullough.
Previously, the FDA had estimated six new cases per million. There were data from Tracy Beth Høeg, UC Davis said [253 cases] per million, and then Kaiser Permanente had an estimate of 537 per million.
This blows that out of the water! This is [23,300] cases per million, according to Mansanguan. And of those seven kids that had myocarditis that was serious, two kids [were] hospitalized.
Safe and effective? Benefits outweigh the risks?
This is third-grade-level math that our regulatory agencies can’t seem to calculate. Which number poses the greater threat to your child: 2.33% (23,300 per million) or 0.0027% (27 per million)? And that doesn’t even include the vast array of other potentially serious side effects. The risk/benefit analysis between these two prospects is completely upside down, with an 863-FOLD GREATER RISK for a teenager to develop myopericarditis!
And Mansanguan’s results have been corroborated by renowned cardiologist Christian Mueller.
What he did was he looked at the troponin levels of 777 healthcare workers before and after the third shot — and what he found was a rise of troponin to the point of indicating a cardiac injury in 2.8% of the individuals.
Interestingly, after these studies came out, Pfizer and Moderna finally announced they are launching their own cardiac studies on myocarditis.
“That is so egregious,” remarked Del Bigtree.
You’re now telling me they were told they were supposed to be doing that very early on — that they wouldn’t get approval if they didn’t do it. (And) they (still) didn’t do it.
And for those that think a myopericarditis rate of 2.33% is no big deal, imagine this scenario per Del Bigtree:
You’re at a school function for your child — there’s 100 kids in the class, and they’ve got 100 cupcakes out. Two and a half of these are going to lead to a heart condition.
Do you just say, “Hey, go ahead! We’ll take that risk with our kid. Eat any cupcake you want!” Because that’s what we’re talking about; we’re not talking about a risk out of a million anymore.
Because if the risk was really one or six cases per million, you would be lucky to find ONE in a sample size of 301 kids. But that’s not what happened — they found SEVEN.
“That is horrifying!” yelped Bigtree.
In the face of what we’ve been told about the safety record of vaccines, you would think this program would be stopped in its tracks.
You would think so, but it hasn’t.
Because what do criminals do when they’re caught? They double down. Walking back on the vaccine is an admission of wrongdoing or guilt after they literally threatened you to take these shots — or else.
And to quote Ed Dowd:
At this point, it’s a cover-up. And it’s criminal negligence because they see exactly what we see — and other countries are starting to stop it. So the longer this goes on, the more we can say it’s criminal.
Thank you, Dr. Peter McCullough, for exquisitely citing the literature, per usual. This was a 10/10 presentation of the data.
Red Voice Media would like to make a point of clarification on why we do not refer to any shot related to COVID-19 as a "vaccine." According to the CDC, the definition of a vaccine necessitates that said vaccine have a lasting effect of at least one year in preventing the contraction of the virus or disease it's intended to fight. Because all of the COVID-19 shots thus far available have barely offered six months of protection, and even then not absolute, Red Voice Media has made the decision hereafter to no longer refer to the Pfizer, Moderna, or Johnson & Johnson substances as vaccinations.