Peer-reviewed paper by Dr Aseem Malhotra appraising mRNA COVID-19 vaccine

Cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra is well known and highly regarded on this forum for his Low Carb work.

On 26 Sept The Journal of Insulin Resistance published a peer-reviewed paper of his looking at the best available data for mRNA Covid vaccine safety and benefits for various age ranges. I found it informative and very readable.

Note: He mentions the "importance of addressing metabolic health to reduce chronic disease and that insulin resistance is also a major risk factor for poor outcomes from COVID-19".

Quoting the paper's Abstract:

---

Background: In response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), several new pharmaceutical agents have been administered to billions of people worldwide, including the young and healthy at little risk from the virus. Considerable leeway has been afforded in terms of the pre-clinical and clinical testing of these agents, despite an entirely novel mechanism of action and concerning biodistribution characteristics.

Aim: To gain a better understanding of the true benefits and potential harms of the messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) coronavirus disease (COVID) vaccines.

Methods: A narrative review of the evidence from randomised trials and real world data of the COVID mRNA products with special emphasis on BionTech/Pfizer vaccine.

Results: In the non-elderly population the “number needed to treat” to prevent a single death runs into the thousands. Re-analysis of randomised controlled trials using the messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology suggests a greater risk of serious adverse events from the vaccines than being hospitalised from COVID-19. Pharmacovigilance systems and real-world safety data, coupled with plausible mechanisms of harm, are deeply concerning, especially in relation to cardiovascular safety. Mirroring a potential signal from the Pfizer Phase 3 trial, a significant rise in cardiac arrest calls to ambulances in England was seen in 2021, with similar data emerging from Israel in the 16–39-year-old age group.

Conclusion: It cannot be said that the consent to receive these agents was fully informed, as is required ethically and legally. A pause and reappraisal of global vaccination policies for COVID-19 is long overdue.

Contribution: This article highlights the importance of addressing metabolic health to reduce chronic disease and that insulin resistance is also a major risk factor for poor outcomes from COVID-19.

Keywords: COVID-19; mRNA vaccine; cardiac arrests; real evidence-based medicine; shared decision-making.

---

Paper available free and in various formats incl pdf: https://insulinresistance.org/index.php/jir/article/view/71

An article in the BJM "one of the world’s oldest and most influential general medical journals" concurs with comments about Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial of the mRNA vaccine (carried out by Ventavia) made in the above paper: https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635

It includes a short video with Brook Jackson who worked on the trial for a while.

The mechanism which causes harm?

Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying (both PhDs in Biology) discuss the mRNA booster. Bret makes a point about the mRNA "vaccine" - cells which produce the spike protein get recognised as "infected cells" and then killed by the immune system. He mentioned phoning Dr Robert Malone to discuss the validity of this point.
Quoting from the Joe Rogan podcast episode guide with Robert Malone:

Dr. Robert Malone is the inventor of the nine original mRNA vaccine patents, which were originally filed in 1989 (including both the idea of mRNA vaccines and the original proof of principle experiments) and RNA transfection. Dr. Malone, has close to 100 peer-reviewed publications which have been cited over 12,000 times. Since January 2020, Dr. Malone has been leading a large team focused on clinical research design, drug development, computer modeling and mechanisms of action of repurposed drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. Dr. Malone is the Medical Director of The Unity Project, a group of 300 organizations across the US standing against mandated COVID vaccines for children. He is also the President of the Global Covid Summit, an organization of over 16,000 doctors and scientists committed to speaking truth to power about COVID pandemic research and treatment.

Mr. Andrew Bridgen MP presents debate to UK Parliament on Dr Aseem Malhotra's research paper and related data:

Dr John Campbell shares a pre-print (not yet peer reviewed) study which found the more mRNA vaccinations a person has the more likely the risk of Covid infection.
He's also shared other studies which reevaluate mRNA vaccine efficacy/safety ( ) and House of Commons debate about mRNA vaccine efficacy/safety ( ) and a personal statement from him

Video notes: Summary of findings plus links to cited studies:
==================================
The risk of COVID-19 also varied by the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses previously received. The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of covid infection.

Download free high-res PDFs of the posters, download free copies of my two text books. Any donations using this link help the work of campbell teaching.
https://drjohncampbell.co.uk/

Order a hard copy Physiology book in the UK,

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1549733923...

Vaccine doses versus risk of covid during the 3-month study period

One dose, 1.7 times more likely to test positive for covid

Two doses, 2.63 times more likely to test positive for covid

Three doses, 3.1 times more likely to test positive for covid

More than three doses, 3.8 times more likely to test positive for covid

So compared to the unvaccinated

1, x 1.7

2, x 2.36

3, x 3.1

4, x 3.38

P = 0.001 means 999 out of 1,000 likely to be a genuine result

That 99.9% likely to be a genuine result

Effectiveness of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Bivalent Vaccine

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.11...

In 2020

(published in 2021)

Evidence that vaccines prevented covid infection

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.11...

This was when the human population had just encountered the novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus

Things Have Changed (Dylan)

Bivalent antigens

Original vaccine and BA.4/BA.5 lineages of Omicron.

(Approved without demonstration of effectiveness in human clinical studies)

(Approved without demonstration of safety in human clinical studies)

Background

To evaluate whether a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine protects against COVID-19.

Methods

Employees of Cleveland Clinic, n = 51,011

Cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was examined over the following weeks.

Protection provided by recent and prior vaccination was evaluated

First bivalents given, 12 September 2022

Three-month study

Results

Among 51,011 employees,

20,689 (41%) had had a previous documented episode of COVID-19,

42,064 (83%) had received at least two doses of a vaccine.

10,804 (21%) were bivalent vaccine boosted

COVID-19 occurred in 2,452 (5%) during the study.

(Pfizer 89%, Moderna 11%)

Risk of COVID-19 increased with time since the most recent prior COVID-19 episode

Risk of COVID-19 increased with the number of vaccine doses previously received.

Note, this is based on large numbers

Doses, 0 = 6,419 (12.6%)

Doses, 1 = 2,528 (5%)

Doses, 2 = 14,810 (45.9%)

Doses, 3 = 23,396 (45.9%)

Doses 4, 3,757 (7.4%)

Doses 5, 85 (less than1%)

Doses 6, 16 (less than 1%)

The bivalent vaccinated state

Was independently associated with lower risk of COVID-19 (HR, 0.70)

(over the 3 months of the study)

Leading to an estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of 30%

CDCs latest variant data

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-trac...

Things Have Changed (Dylan)

Fabulous discussion between Dr. Aseem Malhotra and Bret Weinstein:


Somewhat long but v informative!

You probably know CDC=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

The VAERS produces data, not proof. Quoting from CDC pamphlet:

How are the VAERS data used?

VAERS scientists look for unusually high numbers of reports of an adverse event after a particular vaccine or a new pattern of adverse events. If scientists see either of these situations, focused studies in other systems are done to determine if the adverse event is or is not a side effect of the vaccine. Information from VAERS and vaccine safety studies is shared with the public.

Click to expand...

This appears to be competent analysis:

"CDC Finally Released Its VAERS Safety Monitoring Analyses for COVID Vaccines via FOIA" at https://jackanapes.substack.com/p/cdc-finally-released-its-vaers-safety

Skip to "Responding to Objections" for justification of the statistical methods: https://jackanapes.substack.com/i/91051374/responding-to-objections

The author, Josh Guetzkow is a Faculty Member at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Sociology & Anthropology dept

I recently posted

Mr. Andrew Bridgen MP presents debate to UK Parliament on Dr Aseem Malhotra's research paper and related data, context and MHRA:

Click to expand...

He has recently been castigated for a tweet.

In the tweet he includes an indirect link to an article I cite here: https://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/th...m-vaers-data-mrna-vaccine.193530/post-2575491

and said:

"As one consultant cardiologist said to me, this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust."

Click to expand...

HOWEVER, Andrew Bridgen’s later statement says (emphasis mine):

"Indeed, the Israeli doctor I quoted in my tweet has stated that there was nothing at all anti-Semitic about the statement."

Click to expand...

His statement in full:

"I’m disappointed that the Chief Whip Simon Hart, with the support of the Prime Minister, has chosen to suspend me as a member of the Conservative parliamentary party. My tweet of 11th January was in no way anti-Semitic, indeed it alluded to the Holocaust being the most heinous crime against humanity in living memory.

"Of course, if anyone is genuinely offended by my use of such imagery then I apologise for any offence caused. I wholeheartedly refute any suggestions that I am racist, and currently I am speaking to a legal team who will commence action to those who have led the calls suggesting I am.

"Indeed, the Israeli doctor I quoted in my tweet has stated that there was nothing at all anti-Semitic about the statement. The fact that I have been suspended over this matter says much about the current state of our democracy, the right to free speech and the apparent suspension of the scientific method of analysis of medicines being administered to billions of people.

"As I have consistently maintained, there are very reasonable questions to be asked about the safety and effectiveness of the experimental mRNA vaccines and the risks and benefits of these treatments. There are reasonable questions to ask of a government that is considering extending the use of these experimental vaccines to children as young as 6 months of age.

"These ladies and gentlemen are babies. There are reasonable questions about the side-effects of mRNA vaccines especially when we know categorically that the current risk of harm to most of the population and especially young people from covid-19 is miniscule.

"We have a government who indemnifies vaccine manufacturers from claims against the harms caused by their products and the government who it appears actively looks to remove MPs who raise questions about those harms. I was saddened to hear of my suspension but I’m not downhearted.

"I have received huge support from ordinary people, medical workers who are too intimidated to speak out and, of course, from those who have experienced vaccine harms themselves or to a loved one. Hopefully the media interest around my suspension will finally get the issue of vaccine harms into the media, who have been so reluctant to cover this issue for so long.

"An issue that is clearly huge and a growing concern to many people across the globe. Reasonable questions about the safety and effectiveness of mRNA vaccines must continue to be asked and I will continue to ask them.

"If I cannot do that as a Conservative member of Parliament, then so be it. Highlighting these important questions - questions about life, death, serious injury - must override party loyalty.

"I owe that not only to my constituents in North West Leicestershire but also to the wider British public and especially to our children and young people, who are the future of our great nation. Thank you very much for listening to me."

Click to expand...

In this brief clip, Professor Robert Clancy confirms the manner John Campbell envisages an mRNA vaccine might affect someone at the cellular level:
From Newcastle Uni (Aus) website:

Emeritus Professor Clancy has an international reputation in the study of infection of the airways and gut, the way the body processes infection, and the development of vaccines to prevent or modify infection. He was awarded a Doctor of Science by the University of Newcastle for his studies of infection and the immune response at mucosal surfaces. He is a senior Clinical Immunologist, with an ongoing involvement in the management of immune disorders.

Click to expand...

In this part, Prof Clancy explains the relationship between repeated vaccinations for a virus which affects mucosal surfaces (lungs etc) and the body's natural suppressor T cells (cells that suppress the immune response of B cells and other T cells to an antigen)

hankjam said:

I think this sentence probably sums up ******** when you see it. A paper on a Covid vaccine in a Journal of IR.....

just why would that be?

and then to see Andrew Bridgen mentioned.

All hope is lost.

Click to expand...

One of the benefits of The Journal of Insulin Resistance is that it will consider publishing papers which would not be considered by science journals which are more captured by a mainstream narrative (rather than purely evidence-based science).

From their website, I note The Journal of Insulin Resistance has on its editorial team Jason Fung, David Unwin and Aseem Malhotra, who are considered apostates in sections of the narrative-captured press (both scientific and non-scientific).

Dr Malhotra's work is recognised and appreciated by me and other users of this BB.

You will see from post #8 how Andrew Bridgen hasn't always been accurately represented by mainstream media

Just came across this UK Govt report "Appendix 1: estimation of number needed to vaccinate to prevent a COVID-19 hospitalisation for primary vaccination, booster vaccination (3rd dose), autumn 2022 and spring 2023 booster for those newly in a risk group"


A highlight:

Interesting to compare the figures above of "COVID-19 hospitalisation" or "severe COVID-19 hospitalisation" (there were codes to indicate use of oxygen or ventilation and admission to intensive care - ICU) with the secondary analysis of "serious adverse events of special interest" reported in the Pfizer and Moderna phase III trials published in the journal Vaccine September 2022 (emphasis mine):

Results

Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95 % CI −0.4 to 20.6 and −3.6 to 33.8), respectively. Combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated (95 % CI 2.1 to 22.9); risk ratio 1.43 (95 % CI 1.07 to 1.92).

Click to expand...

A combined excess risk of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated means 1250 per 1,000,000 vaccinated for easier comparison with the figures in Table 1 in post #12.

The paper can be found here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X22010283