Thread by @ICK_GalG

🧵1/ The story of Myocarditis & versions of truths - In “The Human Laboratory of The World” is a sad, confusing and very disturbing one.
>

2/ Jan. 2021.
Yesterday on a bioethics conference Prof. Mevorach declared that the first person ever reported with myocarditis after the Pfizer vaccine in his hospital “Hadasa” was in January 2021. This was Reported to WHO he said, WHO ignored him to this day.

>

3/ Feb. 2021.
As I only recently learned from @Bene149 - that the Israeli MOH wrote to the EMA about ~40 Israeli cases reported to them with myocarditis after the Pfizer “vaccine” in the age range of 16-30 y.o.

None of it was published in Israel.

4/ April 2021.
A MSM article reports of a temporary study results, made by a group of experts appointed by the IMOH, led by Prof. Mevorach- that found:

65 myocarditis cases,
mostly 18-30 y.o. men
after the 2nd dose.
2 healthy young people-
died.

mako.co.il/news-lifestyle…

>

5/ The news article claimed:
The findings were presented to Pfizer (‘at this stage we haven’t found similar findings in the rest of the world’) and to the FDA & CDC (‘we will examine the issue with the data we have’)

* Prof. Mevorach is a big supporter of the MOH Covid policy.
>

6/ June 2021.
An official announcement of myocarditis signal was finally made to the public
“Details of the cases:
Dec. 2020 to May 2021-
A total of 275 cases of myocarditis were reported.
gov.il/he/departments…

>

7/ Of these, 148 cases of myocarditis occurred in close proximity to the vaccine:
• Soon after the 1st dose - 27 cases (5,401,150 vaccine recipients, 11 with co-morbidities)
• Soon after the 2nd dose- 121 cases out of 5,049,424 vaccine recipients (60 with co- morbidities).

>

8/ Aug. 25, 2021.
A new study published in the @NEJM claimed that the risk for myocarditis after and from Covid is much higher than after and from the vaccine:
nejm.org/doi/full/10.10…

9/ Aug. 27, 2021.
A new research published was published by Prof. Ron Milo from the Weizmann institute, Dr. Preis and others, claiming the booster’s necessity for efficacy in fighting with infections and the pandemic in general, including in young people:
gov.il/BlobFolder/rep…

10/ Dr. Preis also co-signed Prof. Mevorach’s research (the one that was the first to say something publicly about myocarditis after the Pfizer “vaccine”, back in April 2021) - but for some reason, this study was published only in October 2021.

What happened in between?
>

11/ Sep. 17, 2021.
Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis and Prof. Ron Milo were invited to the FDA advisory committee to discuss the efficacy and safety of the 3rd dose (first vaccine “booster”).

12/ Preis said then to the FDA advisory committee that Israel is experiencing its 4th wave, “despite being very vaccinated with 2 doses”.

Efficacy- Prof. Milo presented a study, Preis said Most of the infections are of a vaccinated after 2 doses- that are “not fresh”
>

13/ Regarding the safety issues- Dr. Preis mentioned ASE in general after the 3rd dose in adults at the age of 65+, stating that almost all cases was found “not connected to the vaccine”

(This is an edited clip of her comments)
>

14/ Myocarditis signal:
In young people (12-30 y.o.) Preis showed a total of 165 cases reported in Israel after the 1-2 doses, most after the second dose of the “vaccine”, from Dec. 2020 to Sep. 13 2021
out of ~ 3.7M doses given.
27 after the first,
138 after the 2nd.

15/ And only an additional
1 case was reported with myocarditis after a •booster shot• (out of 1.2 M booster shots given) according to Preis

* The boosters started the rollout about a month earlier. With young people at the age of 16+ only 2 weeks prior to this discussion.

>

16/ This is the relevant slide with the numbers presented:

>

17/ This immediately looked like absolute lie to me -
first, because there is no logical way to explain how a drug is causing myocarditis after the 1st dose, then worse & more myocarditis after the 2nd dose (re-challenge) but the 3rd dose is magical and it cures everybody.
>

18/ second, because the total cases numbers didn’t
add up to what Israel published on June 2021 (275/165).

If anything the total number in September should be much higher than the number reported on June.

>

19/ But it could also be data manipulation, if the myocarditis cases after 1-2 doses were referring to ~ 4M doses and a year of rollout- the myocarditis cases after the booster were referring to ~3.9K doses and only within 13 days of vaccination and for 16 + y.o. (not 12+)
>

20/ On Sep. 13 the IMOH published a report in Hebrew in it the total amount of only 3rd doses given to the 16-29 y.o. in the 13 days vaccination rollout =
3.9K (not 1.2M as stated in the slide to the FDA)
t.me/MOHreport/8572

>

21/ And if you adapt the numbers to reflect the relative comparison, than it would be ~ 9 cases in 13 days. Possibly 216 cases in 1 year? 🤔

But the manipulation was to present side by side data that there is no way of comparing at this point.

>

22/ When asked about myocarditis risk to young people Preis referred to a recent study by “Clalit” published on @NEJM and claimed that the decision to booster young people relied on this research’s conclusions that there is a higher risk to have myocarditis after Covid
>

23/ When asked about Covid infections by “vaccinated” - Preis said that was one of the reasons to vaccinate the children (12+ at that time) - because ‘they infected their vaccinated parents- which then infected their vaccinated co-workers’

This argument has 0 logic to me.

>

24/ I can show you why in my humble unprofessional opinion I don’t think the data at that time supported Preis’s argument, but it doesn’t matter because it has absolutely no logic regarding transmission.

I think it made no sense to the one asking that question as well…

25/ Myocarditis - the studies:

📋 Aug. 25, 2021 - a month before this FDA public discussion- a new study published in the NEJM claimed that the risk for myocarditis after and from Covid is much higher than after and from the vaccine:
nejm.org/doi/full/10.10…

Thread continues >

26/ conclusions:
“In this study in a nationwide mass vaccination setting, the BNT162b2 vaccine was not associated with an elevated risk of most of the adverse events examined. The vaccine was associated with an excess risk of myocarditis (1 to 5 events per 100,000 persons).
>

27/ The risk of this potentially serious adverse event and of many other serious adverse events was substantially increased after SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

* In the study’s disclosure form Pfizer is a big supporter of the researchers
nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1…

>

28/ This was the study Preis referred to when asked about myocarditis risk to young people - in the FDA committee’s discussion.

29/ 📋 Aug. 27, 2021 - Prof. Ron Milo from the Weizmann institute - presented to the FDA committee (with Dr. Preis) a research published just a few days before the discussion - claiming the booster’s necessity for efficacy in fighting with infections and the pandemic
>

30/ This research was co-signed by: Dr. Preis and Dr. Ash (Head of the Israeli MOH) among others.
gov.il/BlobFolder/rep…

31/ Back to myocarditis.

📋 Only in Oct. 6, 2021 -
a month after the FDA committee discussed the booster- the study made by Prof. Mevorach that was the first to announce myocarditis as an important signal from his study (Apr. 2021) was published in the @NEJM as well.
>

32/ The final conclusion was much “softer”: “The incidence of myocarditis,although low,increased after the receipt of the BNT162b2 vaccine, particularly after the 2nd dose among young male recipients. The clinical presentation of myocarditis after vaccination was usually mild.”
>

33/ This was co-signed by Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis among others. Did she have editorial authority?

nejm.org/doi/full/10.10…

34/ 📋 On the same day - Oct. 6 2021 - another study was published on @NEJM, again by “Clalit research institute” and others, now claiming (remember their research from Aug. 2021):
>

35/ “Among patients …received at least one dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, the estimated incidence of myocarditis was 2.13 cases per 100K persons; the highest … Most cases of myocarditis were mild or moderate in severity.”

nejm.org/doi/full/10.10…

* see disclosure form

36/ 📋 April 2022 -
As unbelievable as it is - only in April 2022 the study that Kaplan hospital researchers did on Clalit HMO’s patients was published, though it was done during the pre-vaccination Covid time in Israel, between March 2020 and January 2021 (!)
>

37/ This study showed that: Covid does NOT cause myocarditis.

“Our data suggest that there is no increase in the incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis in COVID-19 recovered patients compared to uninfected matched controls.”

mdpi.com/2077-0383/11/8…
>

38/ 📋 Feb. 2022
The scientific community in Israel much preferred this study that was claiming the opposite: “The results suggested that COVID-19 was associated with increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis in both analyses”.
>

39/ This study was based on the health data of US veterans who previously, about 150K Covid recoveries from the age of 40 to 80 before the start of vaccinations, and a year of follow up.
nature.com/articles/s4159…

>

40/ When there was no escape from more and more young people dying and cardio injured - we started hearing a million reasons for cardio risk in the past year, including:
Coffee; Napping; Cold shower; Skipping breakfast; Not brushing your teeth; “fake news and anti-vaxxers”;
>

41/Children swearing; Bird Migration; "Green fingers" - too much gardening; Living under an airplane runway; Lonely elderly women - at increased risk; Fall asleep with the TV on ; Solar storms around the sun that happen once every 11 years ; Hormonal changes in menopause;
>

42/ Too hot ; Too cold ; Shoveling snow ; Too much pizza ; Too much hotpot (Chinese soup) ; Genetics ; Physical activity ; Watching soccer ; Sex ; The increase in electricity prices ; The stress before the holidays ;

The source articles are here:
rtmag.co.il/health/increas…

>

42/ Air Pollution ; a certain sleeping position ; Global warming

And even - Breathing too much.
>

43/ I don't know what to say about the considerations that led the NEJM to publish certain studies at very specific timing, and not to bring many other studies to publication or even peer review. I just know that after reading this NYT publication from 2008 I don’t trust.
>

44/ But I can say that Israel signed a deal with Pfizer in Jan. 2021 (we’re not sure of that date) in which it’s obligated that All publications will be approved by Pfizer and if parties disagree on the content- Dr. Preis specifically (mentioned by name) will be the mitigator
>

45/ It would be reasonable to assume based on that unbelievable agreement- that even if Israel noticed something was terribly wrong with those “vaccines” it won’t be able to come out with it to the world, and frankly to assume that it is the least reliable data source for that.
>

46/ The only way to refute this assumption is to immediately and fully disclose all the documents and discussions transcripts concerning this deal, without censorship and blackouts.
>

47/ One final note:
We sadly realize that we are a human lab. It was coerced on us, and we’re trying to process it since. But it’s absolutely disgusting and shameful when others state out loud how we are doing a great job at being a coerced human lab.

Not a compliment.

End 🧵

BTW -