The CDC published a study surveying young people who suffered from myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination in The Lancet on Sep. 21, showing the organization’s “biased selective analysis” and dismissing severe reactions to the controversial vaccines, according to cardiologist Dr. Sanjay Verma.
Premium-subscription article republished from our news partners at The Epoch Times.
The Lancet published the survey of young people ages 12 to 29 who suffered from myocarditis—a severe heart inflammation disease—after taking a COVID vaccine, based on VAERS reports from Jan. 12 to Nov. 5, 2021.
The survey assessed patient outcomes at least 90 days after the onset of myocarditis symptoms after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.
The Lancet publication shows that at least 90 days after myocarditis symptoms appeared, about 26 percent of surveyed young people still needed daily medication because of heart inflammation. Thirty percent of them said they felt pain and 20 percent said they had problems with their daily activities.
“ACIP [Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices] presentations have given us a glimpse of this data over the past year; however, this formal analysis truly underscores CDC’s biased selective analysis to advance an oversimplified agenda that may be causing irreparable harm,” Verma told The Epoch Times.
The CDC concludes in the study that “despite the higher than expected occurrence of myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination, the benefits of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to outweigh the risk of myocarditis.”
‘Flawed Methodology’
Verma says that the methodology the CDC used for their study is “grossly flawed,” but even so, it showed that 99 patients out of 393, or 25 percent of the patients, received treatment in an intensive care unit, “which is much higher than the 2 percent noted in previous ACIP presentations [pdf] and much more severe than the oft-repeated ‘generally mild’ [description of myocarditis],” he added.
Half of the patients, or 178 people, who participated in the survey had ongoing heart inflammation symptoms during follow-up encounters.
At the median follow-up of 98 days, 28 percent (91 people) of those who were considered fully or possibly recovered (320 people) continued to have activity restrictions.
At the time of initial myocarditis hospitalization or diagnosis, 83 percent (267 people) had restrictions on physical activity.
Verma explains the flaws in the study’s methodology: “Sixty percent of reported cases of myocarditis were not even included in the final analysis (missing telephone contact or were unreachable). Those who were not reachable may have died (needs to be more thoroughly investigated). Many (38 percent) did not have complete diagnostic data at time of follow-up. Median interval from myocarditis onset to survey completion was 143 days for patients and 191 days for health care providers.”
Verma further notes that VAERS underestimates the risk of vaccine-associated myocarditis “by 3-4 times,” a topic that he has reviewed (pdf) in great detail previously.
“An outstanding detailed and quantified analysis of the risk and benefits of COVID-19 vaccination in children and young adults is in stark contrast to CDC’s erroneous conclusion,” Verma said.
“Any glimmer of hope that the agency was aiming for redemption by acknowledging the very public missteps made throughout the pandemic is stultified by their ongoing dismissiveness toward the severe adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccinations, especially myocarditis in children and young adults. The latest CDC publication is a thinly veiled attempt at having nothing more than a pretense of rigorous pharmacovigilance to ensure public safety,” the cardiologist said.
The Epoch Times recently reported on a study that claims to have found “irrefutable proof of causality” that the mRNA vaccines cause vascular and organ damage. A WHO fact-checking branch dismissed it, but was rebutted by the microbiologists who authored the study.
The Epoch Times reached out to the CDC and The Lancet for comment.
Image by Ed Uthman via Flickr, CC BY 2.0.
