People who were vaccinated showed higher levels of a myocardial inflammation marker than unvaccinated. This is on a much more common scale than the still-rare myocarditis effects, and it seems to last the two years of the study period.
Hundreds of people were in the study.
What it all means for patients isn’t clear but despite being alarming there’s no clear indication that this translates to harm, or at least risk we didn’t know about already.
Chudov’s ‘damage to all hearts’ may be a little premature; while the substance in question (a glucose analoge called fluorodeoxyglucose F18 or FDG) is used as a marker of inflammation, it may be minor.
I personally see it as a clear indication that, rather than a bit of Russian Roulette, there are now a range of definite unwanted effects; this is not ‘proof of a new pudding’, but there’s enough of that already to worry about.
As Chudov points out (and the eminent Dr hints at in the slightly deferential editorial) they could have tested for this kind of effect in the trials.
It follows that they neither knew nor cared much what happened once vaccines went into arms.
It also occurred to me that the glib explanations of fatigue following vaccination as “that’s the jab working” should now be kicked into touch and a more medical type of consideration should be given.
Chudov goes through the study and an accompanying editorial. Experts discuss it, but we’ll need to wait.
ED
Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more