More bad news on Covid vaccines and myocarditis in men under 40 – even as more colleges require booster shots
By Alex Berenson | Unreported Truths | January 5, 2022
A huge new study has found the risk of serious heart problems called myocarditis in men under 40 soars with each dose of a Covid mRNA vaccine – and is sharply higher than the risk from a coronavirus infection itself.
The findings call into sharp question the efforts by American colleges and universities to make their students receive booster shots before returning to school this January – especially since other studies have shown that the risk of post-vaccine myocarditis is concentrated not merely in men under 40 but in those aged 16-25.
The study, which British researchers released in late December, showed that the risk of myocarditis almost doubled after the first Pfizer shot in men under 40. Then it doubled again after the second and doubled again after the third – to almost eight times the baseline risk.

SOURCE: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.23.21268276v1.full.pdf
For the Moderna vaccine, the risks were even higher, reaching 16-fold after the second shot. (The risk of a third Moderna shot could not be calculated because too few people received it.)
Because each Moderna shot contains 100 micrograms of mRNA, while each Pfizer shot contains 30, the findings suggest strongly that the heart risks are dose-related and likely to continue to rise with each additional shot.
The study also contained some evidence that post-vaccine myocarditis might be more dangerous than other forms of myocarditis. It showed a trend towards higher death rates in people hospitalized for myocarditis after vaccination compared to other myocarditis cases.
Both myocarditis and pericarditis are forms of heart inflammation that can be very serious, even deadly. In an appendix, the researchers reported that 263 Britons were hospitalized for myocarditis within four weeks of receiving a Pfizer shot; of those, 38, or 14 percent, died. Only about 9 percent of people hospitalized for myocarditis that did not follow an mRNA vaccination died.
The researchers did not look at other potential cardiovascular risks, such as heart attacks or irregular heartbeats, although American and European databases of post-vaccine side effects contain many reports of those as well.
The findings come even as many colleges and universities – including public schools like the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, large private schools such as Syracuse University, and Ivy League institutions such as Princeton University – demand that their students receive a booster Covid shot before returning to campus.
For nearly all these students, an mRNA shot is the only viable option, as the Johnson & Johnson shot is no longer in common use.
These colleges are likely subjecting their male students to a risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, a related illness, that is much higher than the overall risk of Covid, which is vanishingly small for healthy teenagers and young adults. Many larger universities are likely to have multiple cases of male students hospitalized for myocarditis as a result of the mandates.
The massive study was is based on data from 42 million Britons who received at least one Covid vaccine dose, including roughly 22 million who received the mRNA vaccines.
About half were given the mRNA vaccines, while the rest received AstraZeneca’s DNA/AAV vaccine, which is not available in the United States. The AstraZeneca vaccine, which works similarly to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, had a lower risk of myocarditis than mRNA vaccines.
There are now 4 myocarditis cases at Monte Vista
So it’s likely that 1 in 70 teenage boys are affected. That’s not rare. Why isn’t anyone speaking out about this? Is it fear? Of what?
By Steve Kirsch | January 5, 2022
I’ve written earlier about Monte Vista Christian school.
I just heard that there’s another case of myocarditis at the school, so now there are now 4 cases in 285 vaccinated boys (estimate), bringing the incidence rate to nearly 1 in 70, assuming all the cases are boys (285/4=71.25). This is not rare. This is a disaster.
Furthermore, these are just the cases we know about. There could be other cases that we simply don’t know about because the families decided not to tell anyone. And there could be sub-clinical cases where the damage is being done slowly over time.
Nikki Daniels, MVC’s Head of School, believes it is in the best interest of all parties to keep this information confidential so that nobody outside of the school will know. All the parents agree; they could speak out but choose not to say a word to anyone outside the community.
I disagree with that approach. There is nothing whatsoever to keep them from speaking out. They could save hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide if they spoke out and others followed their lead. It would destroy the credibility of the CDC and break people out of their hypnotic trance doing whatever the CDC says.
Instead, Monte Vista behaves just like every other school: keep your mouth shut and pretend that the kids aren’t being injured by the vaccine. Maybe it will all just go away if we don’t say anything.
This kind of behavior doesn’t save lives. It fuels the false narrative and costs lives.
Monte Vista is setting a horrible role model for students
Students learn that if you see people being injured or killed by your government, the right thing to do is to keep your mouth shut and look the other way.
I guess these are the new Christian values that they are teaching kids today.
Reports of COVID Vaccine Injuries Pass 1 Million Mark, FDA Signs Off on Pfizer Booster for Kids 12 and Up
By Megan Redshaw | The Defender | January 3, 2022
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Dec. 31, 2021, released new data showing a total of 1,000,229 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and Dec. 24, 2021, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.
The data included a total of 21,002 reports of deaths and 162,506 reports of serious injuries. Excluding “foreign reports” to VAERS, 709,084 adverse events, including 9,623 deaths and 62,069 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020, and Dec. 24, 2021.
Foreign reports are reports received by U.S. manufacturers from their foreign subsidiaries. Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and does not appear on the product’s labeling, the manufacturer is required to submit the report to VAERS.
Of the 9,623 U.S. deaths reported as of Dec. 24, 20% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 25% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 61% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.
In the U.S., 499.7 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of Dec. 23. This includes 291 million doses of Pfizer, 190 million doses of Moderna and 18 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

Every Friday, VAERS publishes vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Dec. 24, 2021, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:
- 5,706 adverse events, including 114 rated as serious and 2 reported deaths.
- 11 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis (heart inflammation).
- 14 reports of blood clotting disorders.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Dec. 24, 2021, for 12- to 17-year-olds show:
- 25,802 adverse events, including 1,506 rated as serious and 34 reported deaths.
The most recent death involves a previously healthy 15-year-old girl from Wisconsin (VAERS I.D. 1963633), who experienced a cerebral and intraventricular hemorrhage secondary to a ruptured aneurysm. She also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 despite having been fully vaccinated.
- 61 reports of anaphylaxis among 12- to 17-year-olds where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death — with 96% of cases
attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine. - 579 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis with 568 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
- 146 reports of blood clotting disorders, with all cases attributed to Pfizer.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Dec. 10, 2021, for all age groups combined, show:
- 19% of deaths were related to cardiac disorders.
- 54% of those who died were male, 41% were female and the remaining death reports did not include the gender of the deceased.
- The average age of death was 72.3.
- As of Dec. 24, 4,692 pregnant women reported adverse events related to COVID vaccines, including 1,487 reports of miscarriage or premature birth.
- Of the 3,358 cases of Bell’s Palsy reported, 51% were attributed to Pfizer vaccinations, 41% to Moderna and 8% to J&J.
- 815 reports of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), with 41% of cases attributed to Pfizer, 29% to Moderna and 28% to J&J.
- 2,241 reports of anaphylaxis where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death.
- 12,070 reports of blood clotting disorders in the U.S. Of those, 5,341 reports were attributed to Pfizer, 4,302 reports to Moderna and 2,275 reports to J&J.
- 3,405 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis with 2,379 cases attributed to Pfizer, 1,197 cases to Moderna and 152 cases to J&J’s COVID vaccine.
FDA clears Pfizer boosters for 12- to 15-year-olds, bypasses experts
The FDA today amended Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for Pfizer’s COVID vaccine expanding eligibility for boosters to children 12 through 15 years of age.
The agency did not consult its expert panel of vaccine advisors, who in September, overwhelmingly rejected boosters for healthy people 16 and older.
The FDA also shortened the time for both adolescents and adults to receive a booster from six months to five months after receiving a second dose and authorized a third shot for immunocompromised children aged 5 to 11.
Dr. Peter Marks, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research at the FDA, said in a statement the agency made its decision because a third dose “may help provide better protection against both the Delta and Omicron variants.”
The FDA said it reviewed real-world data from Israel of more than 6,300 individuals 12- to 15-years-old who received a booster at least five months after their second Pfizer dose and found no serious safety concerns.
Likewise, additional data showed no problems giving anyone eligible for a Pfizer booster an extra dose at five months instead of six, the Associated Press reported.
The FDA said it will continue to review the information and communicate with the public if data emerges suggesting booster doses are needed for the younger pediatric population.
Pediatrician weighs in on FDA decision: children aren’t ‘mini-adults’
Dr. Michelle Perro, pediatrician and co-author of “What’s Making Our Children Sick,” disagreed with the FDA’s decision, pointing out that “children are not mini-adults.” In an email to The Defender, Perro said children’s rapid growth, quick cellular turnover and less efficient detoxification pathways are factors that must be considered whenever any new therapeutics are being introduced.
Perro said:
“This newest immunomodulating therapy, the mRNA inoculation, has already been shown to have produced multisystem negative health outcomes in children garnered from the CDC’s own database.”
Perro outlined five reasons she believes this “experimental therapy” must be immediately withdrawn:
- Gene-edited injectables have not been adequately studied in children as per Pfizer’s own data, where they meshed childrens’ and adults’ data together.
- The injection utilizes nanotechnology which is now part of the emerging technology in vaccinology research. These nanoparticles are so small in size they can cross the blood-brain barrier which can adversely affect our already fragile population of children.
- The mRNA itself is unstable and is thus encapsulated in a lipid biosphere comprised of a polyethylene glycol shell which in itself is toxic.
- The number of children suffering from already documented irreparable side effects from the inoculations, such as those occurring in their hearts (myocarditis), is not only unacceptable but immoral.
- Children’s healthcare providers are neither educated or proactive in diagnosing and treating the effects from this experimental therapy.
Perro questioned the FDA’s motives, given that children suffer nearly zero morbidity and mortality from COVID infections.
She also said the FDA is “veering from” its own historical stance.
“When previous true vaccines were introduced historically (rotavirus vaccine), after just a few cases of adversity, they were immediately withdrawn,” Perro told The Defender. “The FDA must adhere to its own historical position regarding their assigned task of the protection and oversight of our country’s greatest asset: our children.”
Fauci says hospitalization numbers for kids with COVID are overcounted
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in an interview on MSNBC, said statistics for hospitalizations among children with COVID are overcounted, making clear the distinction between children hospitalized with COVID and children hospitalized “because of COVID.”
Speaking to MSNBC’s Ayman Mohyeldin, who was filling in for Rachel Maddow on Dec. 29, about the rise in hospitalizations among children amid the Omicron variant, Fauci said the surge is due to two contributing factors — more children getting infected and the way COVID cases are counted.
“And what we mean by that — if a child goes in the hospital, they automatically get tested for COVID. And they get counted as a COVID-hospitalized individual,” Fauci said. “When in fact, they may go in for a broken leg or appendicitis or something like that. So it’s overcounting the number of children who are, quote, ‘hospitalized with COVID,’ as opposed to because of COVID.”
Covid passport microchip developer says chipping humans is happening “whether we like it or not”
By Ken Macon | Reclaim The Net | January 3, 2022
Towards the end of last year, tech start-up Dsruptive Subdermals announced a microchip installed under the skin that can be scanned to reveal Covid vaccination status.
The technology was criticized, with many calling it “invasive.”
In an interview with Express, the company’s managing director doubled down on the technology and told critics the technology was here to stay.
The technology is a pre-programmed and scannable implant about the size of a grain of rice. It stores the vaccination information, displaying a person’s Covid-19 vaccine passport when scanned.
Speaking to Express, Hannes Sjobald, the company’s managing director, said: “This technology exists and is used whether we like it or not.
“I am happy that it is brought into the public conversation.
“New technologies must be broadly debated and understood.
“Smart implants are a powerful health technology.
“That is what we are building at Dsruptive and our goal is to transform healthcare on a global scale.”
Sjobald said the technology makes the vaccine passports more “accessible.”
“This means it is always accessible for me or for anyone else, really, who wants to read me.
“For example, if I go to the movies or go to a shopping center, then people will be able to check my status even if I don’t have my phone.”
Related:
Supreme Court to Hold Special Session on Legal Challenges to Biden Vaccine Mandates
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | January 3, 2022
The U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 7 will convene a special session to hear oral arguments in two cases related to the Biden administration’s COVID vaccine mandates.
The two cases pertain to the mandates imposed on private businesses with 100 or more employees, and healthcare facilities participating in the Medicare or Medicaid programs.
The Supreme Court announced Dec. 22, 2021, it would hold a special session to hear both cases, following a series of decisions in lower courts that successively implemented and lifted injunctions against the two mandates.
In both disputes, the formal legal question at hand pertains to whether the federal government can continue enforcing the mandates while legal challenges against them work their way through the judicial system.
In the first instance, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 ruling Dec. 17, 2021, lifted an injunction against Biden’s vaccine mandate for private businesses previously issued by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
The mandate is now set to come into force on Jan. 4, though the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced it will not begin enforcement of the rule until Jan. 10. The mandate, if and when it is enforced, will impact an estimated 84 million U.S. workers.
Immediately following the 6th Circuit Court ruling, 27 states and several business groups, companies and ministries submitted applications to the Supreme Court seeking an emergency stay.
Two of these requests, one filed by a trade group and the other by a group of states led by Ohio, were formally accepted for oral argument.
These groups were joined by more than 170 Republican lawmakers who on Dec. 30, 2021, jointly filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court arguing OSHA has no legal authority to impose a vaccine mandate on private businesses.
The Supreme Court, via Justice Brett Kavanaugh — whose jurisdiction includes the 6th Circuit — asked the Biden administration to submit a response to the legal challenges by Dec. 30, 2021.
In its response, Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar argued the Biden administration possesses the authority, under federal law, to impose the mandate and the Supreme Court should not block a program that will save thousands of lives.
The Supreme Court will also hear arguments pertaining to Biden’s vaccine mandate for healthcare workers at facilities that receive federal Medicare or Medicaid funding. This rule is estimated to impact more than 17 million workers across the U.S.
In this instance, it was the Biden administration that filed an emergency request with the court, requesting it be allowed to temporarily enforce the healthcare worker mandate, which is currently blocked in 24 states following a series of injunctions issued by lower courts.
A brief filed with the Supreme Court by 14 Republican-led states described the mandate as “plainly unlawful.”
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service, which oversees the healthcare mandate, announced Dec. 29, 2021, it will begin enforcing the mandate in the 26 states where it is not blocked.
A modified enforcement timeline accompanied this announcement: Healthcare workers will now be required to receive the first dose of a COVID vaccine by Jan. 27, and the second dose by Feb. 28.
The Supreme Court’s move to hold oral arguments in deciding whether or not to issue an emergency stay is considered unusual. Typically, such cases are placed on the “shadow docket” and are decided without a full briefing or a presentation of oral arguments.
In this instance though, the Supreme Court may seek to alleviate the uncertainty which exists among employers and workers who remain unsure as to whether they are subject to a mandate or not.
It remains unclear whether a decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the injunctions against the healthcare worker mandate will impact all 50 states or only the 24 where the mandate is currently blocked.
Any emergency stay issued by the Supreme Court would not constitute a final ruling regarding either case, but would freeze the enforcement of the two mandates until legal challenges make their way through the federal appeals courts before, most likely, ending up in the Supreme Court for a full hearing.
Separate Biden administration mandates pertaining to such categories as federal contractors and military personnel also have been challenged legally.
In the most recent such example, Judge James “Wesley” Hendrix of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled against a mask and vaccine mandate for participants in federal Head Start programs. The rules were set to take effect by the end of January.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton described the ruling as “a win for the children of Texas.”
However, the Supreme Court will not examine any of these other Biden administration mandates in the Jan. 7 special session.
While the Supreme Court previously rejected requests for emergency stays against state-level vaccine mandates, the court is also viewed as one that is skeptical of the power of federal agencies to issue mandates relating to COVID countermeasures.
This stance was evident, for instance, when the court lifted a moratorium on evictions imposed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, on the basis it was outside the agency’s authority.
Notably, a well-known Supreme Court decision from 1905, Jacobsen v. Massachusetts, which, according to proponents of vaccine mandates, sets a legal precedent for their legality, actually pertains to state-level mandates.
This argument was made by the state of Arizona in its lawsuit against the OSHA mandate, as previously reported by The Defender.
The lack of a federal-level precedent may therefore weigh into the justices’ decision.
Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., is an independent journalist and researcher based in Athens, Greece.
© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
Vaccine evasion and an Original Antigenic Sin signal in Ontario
el gato malo – bad cattitude – january 2, 2022
there is some really interesting data coming out of ontario on vaccine efficacy (VE) and vaccine evasion from omicron.
it also seems to be being widely misinterpreted/misread, so i want to put a paw in here and opine.
this is the key chart. (generated from the ontario gov’t website HERE)
and it shows something incredibly interesting. it shows vaccines working to stop cases until mid december and then suddenly inverting. this is presumably due to omicron.
vaccination just fell to a -33% VE for cases and this looks to be worsening rapidly, likely because of a rise in omicron prevalence.
this is consistent with not just vaccine escape, but vaccine driven acceleration.
the vaccinated are getting covid at higher rates than the unvaxxed and that rate looks to be increasing rapidly as omi gains viral share.
many are denying this and calling it a simpson’s paradox (SP) where each subgroup is actually showing strong VE but where the way they aggregate causes the net figure to invert and imply an erroneous relationship that does not actually pertain. such things have been common in covid data.
i think this claim is incorrect.
firstly, if this is an SP, then why did that not manifest before? why did the relationship for case reduction invert so suddenly? it was certainly not a massive, sudden change in who was vaccinated.
this confusion has been greatly amplified by the website itself. when you select for any given age cohort, it shows positive VE for cases. this seems to be an open and shut case for this being an SP.
but it’s not. such claims contain a severe error. can you spot it?
look closely at the dates. see where they end?
all the age cohorted data ends in october.
the same is true of the data in the table above. it’s full blown apples and oranges. there seems to be no post october age delineated data in this system at all.
but the change in vaccine efficacy pattern did not occur until mid decemeber. so, this is an irrelevant comparison to the current data and current situation. it actually agrees with the first chart.
whether this is just carelessness or sloth on the part the ontario health agencies or a subtle and cunning manipulation is anyone’s guess and i’m not going to wade into that. but i HAVE seen an awful lot of smart people miss this. (i missed it at first too) you simply do not expect to see the data truncate like that on the same graphing tool.
just one more cautionary tale on data handling…
ADDENDUM OF EXCELLENT GRAPHIC FROM GATOPAL™ ORWELL2024.
and an additional catch:
“The https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data says: “Due to technical difficulties, the case rate by vaccination status by age group is not available”.
We can lockdown the entire economy, but can’t fix a dashboard that would help showing what’s going on?”
https://twitter.com/orwell2022/status/1477636960348946436?s=20
this is what team work looks like and it’s how we make progress.
(END ADDENDUM)
but the conclusion here looks to be that this data (along with data from many other places) is consistent with omicron being not just a vaccine escaping variant, but one that is actually vaccine enabled.
if it was just escape, we’d see parity with the unvaxxed. having it go strongly negative is a sign that the vaccine is making it worse either though OAS/antigenic fixation or some other mechanism.
See:
Is original antigenic sin starting to dominate covid?
the good news is that omicron looks mild. the bad news is that it increasingly looks like the variant that original antigenic sin (OAS) begot and this means that the vaccinated may be wide open for it in a way they would not have been had these programs not been rolled out. worse, they may NEVER be able to generate sound immunity because that’s what OAS…
and this data starts to get STARK when you isolate the omi variant alone.
this leads me to predict that the curves will continue to separate in ontario as omicron becomes more prevalent and that we’ll start seeing VE’s that look more like denmark.
will keep an eye on it (and hope they keep reporting the data).









