This is a study published, no more and no less, in the scientific medical journal “Vaccine”. I write “no more and no less” because this journal has been the unwavering mouthpiece of the narrative written and guarded by the pharmaceutical industry (yes, they are one and the same, make no mistake). The study is entitled, “Revaccination of people who experienced cardiac adverse events after vaccination with COVID-19: a study by the Canadian Immunization Research Network”, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41317434/
This study by Piché-Renaud et al did indeed take into account that myocarditis and pericarditis are “well-described rare adverse events associated with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines” and that, as there were no data on the wisdom of administering additional doses to people who had already experienced such adverse events, it was worth studying… Do you see the importance of common sense?
Source: BonSens on 15 January 2025
I’m repeating myself… Do you see the importance of Common Sense? The authors could have saved many hours of study, and doctors and patients could have avoided many cases of heart disease and even death, if they had had Common Sense… https://t. me/vivrecorrectement/5756
To carry out their study, they consulted Canada’s “Special Immunization Clinical Network” database, which contained information on people vaccinated in various parts of the country. They designed a prospective (i.e. forward-looking), observational epidemiological study. They were interested in people who had cardiac events (myocarditis or myopericarditis or pericarditis) following the injection of Pfizer or Moderna. They analysed the events in the 42 days following the new injection. Why 42 days, you may ask? No idea at all! They said nothing about the number of days chosen.
They have a total of 114 people in the study (including 55 children aged 12 to 17, 29 adults aged 18 to 30 and 22 aged 31 to 64). Most of the patients (remember, they all had an adverse cardiac event after vaccination and in over 50% of cases the adverse event had a severe or high impact on their health… don’t forget) received Pfizer or Moderna, meaning that adverse cardiac events were disproportionately associated with mRNA-based technology. The authors acknowledge that in 74% of cases causality was established and consistent (see Table 1). Of the 114 whose hearts were affected by the ‘lifesaving injections’, 46 suffered from myocarditis, 26 from myopericarditis, 11 from pericarditis and 31 from other heart diseases.
Doctors with no common sense, no scruples or who were paid to advertise for Pfizer recommended a new dose of mRNA injections to 10 children and 17 adults who had already suffered heart damage as a result of the vaccines. Of these, 16 patients (or their parents) with no Common Sense and who were very obedient agreed to be revaccinated, and four of them (25%) again developed myocarditis, myopericarditis, pericarditis and other heart diseases. They conclude that revaccination for COVID-19 with mRNA-based injections “could be considered for people with heart pain who do not meet the criteria for myocarditis” and urge their colleagues to “exercise caution” before recommending it for “adults with myocarditis that occurred as an adverse event following previous mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination”. How incompetent is that?
It’s worth mentioning that the study period was from January 1, 2021 to February 23, 2023… I repeat: people who were revaccinated between January 1, 2021 and February 23, 2023. In other words, between the end of the study evaluation period and the sending of the study (it was sent to the journal on 7 April 2025), two years and two months had passed, and no, it wasn’t published as a pre-print on a server between 2023 and 2025; the first one you find is from November 2025, when they already knew the journal had accepted it(https://discovery.researcher.life/article/revaccination-of-individuals-with-cardiac-adverse-events-following-covid-19-vaccination-a-canadian-immunization-research-network-study/8c1810f9ffc03c428a473f301f1f5364)
In my view, it is scandalous to have these results and not to share them, when they could have prevented similar problems in people predisposed to heart disease who decided to be revaccinated. Moreover, some of the authors have indicated potential conflicts of interest, such as being funded by Pfizer and other pharmaceutical companies. At least they said so openly, but I don’t suppose it was in their interest for this to be known during the wave of vaccinations…
So, to sum up, the message for cardiologists and heart specialists is that if their patients continue to inject themselves with these products, they have a 25% probability of having a new heart problem or of aggravating an existing one. The good news is: the risk of heart disease caused by vaccination can be considerably reduced! Do you know how? Don’t get them injected! Common sense!
