Though they represent the deep, deep state: billionaires Musk and Trump very cleverly road astride the justifiable opposition to the 'covid' measures and mandates. De Santis, though Florida is drowning, also gained kudos from opposing a fake left wing conspiracy to control us using the climate crisis. Well played fossil fuel and animal ag industries.
Sorry, I’m on my phone right now and for some reason I can’t read the end of either of your messages, both cut off before the end. When I have my computer later I’ll see if I can read them fully.
The reason I included Elon’s Covid vaccine comments was because of his lack of context and information. At the time he seemed to be more saber-rattling rather than being constructive. Not to forget his own personal agendas which have become evermore apparent in the past few months and days.
Obviously we know a lot more now than we did then, but even with that, the risk of myocarditis from COVID-19 vaccines is extremely rare, with 1–11 extra cases per million doses. It is far lower than the risk of heart inflammation following a COVID-19 infection. Vaccine-related cases are typically mild. All vaccines carry a chance of side effects and adverse effects, but we have to look at them versus the disease or infection we’re vaccinating against.
There are more details are available at newsroom.heart.org plus from a number of good European studies.
In that instance my issue was less what Elon said, and more how he went about it. I probably should have made that clearer.
Oh dear James. You seem to be a parrot. I agree all about Musk, but there’s still nothing wrong with questioning the jabs safety - and I’m not convinced about the myocardititis numbers- VAERS significantly under-report, by atleast a factor of 10, and the jabs seemed to affect the very active subset more than the general population.
As to ‘covid’ (please don’t capitalise) ‘infection’ causing myocarditis - so many problems with that statement. What is a ‘covid’ case- a positive for an unvalidated PCR technique or the presentation of common and wide-ranging symptoms- and what was the treatment for ‘covid’ and can they be separated from the ‘disease’ - kidney damaging remdesivir in the States, midazolam in the UK and high doses of HCG in the EU and no. The obese and diabetics were of course more likely to get symptoms: particularly with all the stress and fear- was their myocarditis measured before they got the 'infection' to exclude this confounding factor? And were controls with similar symptoms but not 'sars' also screened for myocarditis?
Musk and Trump read the room well with supporting the opposition to the authoritarian application of 'the science' and censorship of the debate- though I was still banned from Twitter for months after Musk bought it for questioning the existence and sequencing of 'sars'- so not everything goes down well.
Let me pick up on a few of your points and clarify things with what seems to be the latest available evidence.
First, regarding the link between myocarditis and the mRNA vaccines: I agree with you that it's important to scrutinise vaccine safety — we should ask questions, particularly when dealing with something new. That said, the current data shows that while there is a small increased risk of myocarditis following mRNA vaccination, it is extremely rare, with estimates ranging from 1 to 11 cases per million doses. The risk of myocarditis following a COVID-19 infection is far higher — studies suggest an incidence of 30 to 50 cases per million. It’s also important to note that the cases of vaccine-related myocarditis are typically mild, and most people recover fully with proper treatment. This is why the vaccines remain strongly recommended, as the benefits in preventing severe disease, hospitalisation, and death far outweigh the small risks of side effects. But everyone is different, and that’s just the nature of our individual biology, environment and how medications and deceases can affect everybody differently. There is no 100% in medicine, infection, immunity or reaction.
On your point about VAERS, you’re right that underreporting can be an issue with any passive surveillance system. However, when you look at the broader body of data — including studies from health bodies like the CDC, the European Medicines Agency, and peer-reviewed research — the risks of adverse events reported through VAERS are consistent with those found in clinical trials and other monitoring systems. It’s always important to look at the full body of evidence, rather than relying on any one data source.
You also raise a valid point about the definition of a "COVID case." PCR tests are not perfect, and as you rightly say, they can detect viral RNA even when someone is no longer infectious. However, PCR remains one of the most accurate diagnostic tools we have for detecting the virus, and it has been crucial in tracking the spread of COVID-19. As for myocarditis, while it's true that there can be confounding factors in any medical condition, studies have shown that the risk of myocarditis is significantly higher after COVID-19 infection compared to vaccination. Moreover, this is not just about the presence of the virus, but the inflammatory response it triggers, which can have lasting effects on the heart.
I understand the frustration with the political handling of the pandemic, in many places it was a shit show. It’s undeniable that there were many missteps in the way information was communicated and restrictions applied, and that led to a lot of mistrust. But it’s also worth acknowledging that the pandemic was an unprecedented global crisis, and the response, however flawed at times, has helped save countless lives through the development of vaccines and treatments. That’s why it’s crucial to have ongoing conversations about the best way forward, and to rely on evidence as we navigate such complex issues.
With regard to the information in your Substack link, COVID-19 is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, not just a collection of symptoms or environmental factors like pollution. While symptoms like fever and fatigue are common, they’re a result of the body’s immune response to the virus, confirmed through PCR tests and genome sequencing.
The virus has been isolated, visualised, and its genetic material sequenced. COVID-19 is transmissible between people, primarily via respiratory droplets.
Regarding treatments, midazolam is used in palliative care, not to hasten death, and remdesivir can reduce severity in some patients. Claims about virus isolation and transmission have been extensively researched and validated by scientists.
While it's important to question, the overwhelming evidence supports that COVID-19 is caused by SARS-CoV-2, and vaccines have played a key role in controlling the spread.
Lastly, I completely agree that the issue of censorship, especially on platforms like Twitter, was a major concern. I to have been censored on twitter, but for me it was more recently reporting on, and commenting about Palestine / Israel. Open debate and the free exchange of ideas are essential, particularly in scientific discussions, and it's disappointing when any valid questions are shut down. That said, as we question and challenge information, it’s important that we also base our arguments on the most reliable and up-to-date evidence. We’ve learned a lot over the past few years, and it’s essential we continue to look at all sides of the issue, while remaining grounded in the best available data.
Though they represent the deep, deep state: billionaires Musk and Trump very cleverly road astride the justifiable opposition to the 'covid' measures and mandates. De Santis, though Florida is drowning, also gained kudos from opposing a fake left wing conspiracy to control us using the climate crisis. Well played fossil fuel and animal ag industries.
What's wrong with suggesting a link between cardiac events and an experimental mRNA jab of unknown contents despite no 'verified' report?
Hi Jo,
Sorry, I’m on my phone right now and for some reason I can’t read the end of either of your messages, both cut off before the end. When I have my computer later I’ll see if I can read them fully.
The reason I included Elon’s Covid vaccine comments was because of his lack of context and information. At the time he seemed to be more saber-rattling rather than being constructive. Not to forget his own personal agendas which have become evermore apparent in the past few months and days.
Obviously we know a lot more now than we did then, but even with that, the risk of myocarditis from COVID-19 vaccines is extremely rare, with 1–11 extra cases per million doses. It is far lower than the risk of heart inflammation following a COVID-19 infection. Vaccine-related cases are typically mild. All vaccines carry a chance of side effects and adverse effects, but we have to look at them versus the disease or infection we’re vaccinating against.
There are more details are available at newsroom.heart.org plus from a number of good European studies.
In that instance my issue was less what Elon said, and more how he went about it. I probably should have made that clearer.
Oh dear James. You seem to be a parrot. I agree all about Musk, but there’s still nothing wrong with questioning the jabs safety - and I’m not convinced about the myocardititis numbers- VAERS significantly under-report, by atleast a factor of 10, and the jabs seemed to affect the very active subset more than the general population.
As to ‘covid’ (please don’t capitalise) ‘infection’ causing myocarditis - so many problems with that statement. What is a ‘covid’ case- a positive for an unvalidated PCR technique or the presentation of common and wide-ranging symptoms- and what was the treatment for ‘covid’ and can they be separated from the ‘disease’ - kidney damaging remdesivir in the States, midazolam in the UK and high doses of HCG in the EU and no. The obese and diabetics were of course more likely to get symptoms: particularly with all the stress and fear- was their myocarditis measured before they got the 'infection' to exclude this confounding factor? And were controls with similar symptoms but not 'sars' also screened for myocarditis?
Musk and Trump read the room well with supporting the opposition to the authoritarian application of 'the science' and censorship of the debate- though I was still banned from Twitter for months after Musk bought it for questioning the existence and sequencing of 'sars'- so not everything goes down well.
I think the whole thing was a set-up- a pandemic that respected political borders- what a joke. https://jowaller.substack.com/p/seeing-is-believing
Hi Jo,
Let me pick up on a few of your points and clarify things with what seems to be the latest available evidence.
First, regarding the link between myocarditis and the mRNA vaccines: I agree with you that it's important to scrutinise vaccine safety — we should ask questions, particularly when dealing with something new. That said, the current data shows that while there is a small increased risk of myocarditis following mRNA vaccination, it is extremely rare, with estimates ranging from 1 to 11 cases per million doses. The risk of myocarditis following a COVID-19 infection is far higher — studies suggest an incidence of 30 to 50 cases per million. It’s also important to note that the cases of vaccine-related myocarditis are typically mild, and most people recover fully with proper treatment. This is why the vaccines remain strongly recommended, as the benefits in preventing severe disease, hospitalisation, and death far outweigh the small risks of side effects. But everyone is different, and that’s just the nature of our individual biology, environment and how medications and deceases can affect everybody differently. There is no 100% in medicine, infection, immunity or reaction.
On your point about VAERS, you’re right that underreporting can be an issue with any passive surveillance system. However, when you look at the broader body of data — including studies from health bodies like the CDC, the European Medicines Agency, and peer-reviewed research — the risks of adverse events reported through VAERS are consistent with those found in clinical trials and other monitoring systems. It’s always important to look at the full body of evidence, rather than relying on any one data source.
You also raise a valid point about the definition of a "COVID case." PCR tests are not perfect, and as you rightly say, they can detect viral RNA even when someone is no longer infectious. However, PCR remains one of the most accurate diagnostic tools we have for detecting the virus, and it has been crucial in tracking the spread of COVID-19. As for myocarditis, while it's true that there can be confounding factors in any medical condition, studies have shown that the risk of myocarditis is significantly higher after COVID-19 infection compared to vaccination. Moreover, this is not just about the presence of the virus, but the inflammatory response it triggers, which can have lasting effects on the heart.
I understand the frustration with the political handling of the pandemic, in many places it was a shit show. It’s undeniable that there were many missteps in the way information was communicated and restrictions applied, and that led to a lot of mistrust. But it’s also worth acknowledging that the pandemic was an unprecedented global crisis, and the response, however flawed at times, has helped save countless lives through the development of vaccines and treatments. That’s why it’s crucial to have ongoing conversations about the best way forward, and to rely on evidence as we navigate such complex issues.
With regard to the information in your Substack link, COVID-19 is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, not just a collection of symptoms or environmental factors like pollution. While symptoms like fever and fatigue are common, they’re a result of the body’s immune response to the virus, confirmed through PCR tests and genome sequencing.
The virus has been isolated, visualised, and its genetic material sequenced. COVID-19 is transmissible between people, primarily via respiratory droplets.
Regarding treatments, midazolam is used in palliative care, not to hasten death, and remdesivir can reduce severity in some patients. Claims about virus isolation and transmission have been extensively researched and validated by scientists.
While it's important to question, the overwhelming evidence supports that COVID-19 is caused by SARS-CoV-2, and vaccines have played a key role in controlling the spread.
Lastly, I completely agree that the issue of censorship, especially on platforms like Twitter, was a major concern. I to have been censored on twitter, but for me it was more recently reporting on, and commenting about Palestine / Israel. Open debate and the free exchange of ideas are essential, particularly in scientific discussions, and it's disappointing when any valid questions are shut down. That said, as we question and challenge information, it’s important that we also base our arguments on the most reliable and up-to-date evidence. We’ve learned a lot over the past few years, and it’s essential we continue to look at all sides of the issue, while remaining grounded in the best available data.
Best,
James.
I'll pick up just one, crucial point. Claims about virus isolation and transmission have been extensively researched and validated by scientists.
No. They. Have. Not.
All the best,
Jo