A paper published in Nature Medicine on Dec 14, 2021 suggests the chances of myocarditis after dose two of the Moderna vaccine was higher than myocarditis after a natural COVID infection for people under the age of 40. The study used data gathered from the United Kingdom.

The paper lumped together both men and women, when it was known that men have the greatest risk for these complications. As a result, the authors published another study in pre-print form to adjust for this factor.

The paper found that, for men under the age of 40, dose two and dose three of the Pfizer inoculation results in a higher chance of myocarditis than myocarditis from a natural COVID infection. This is also true for dose one and dose two of Moderna.

The results show that myocarditis after infection is more common as you get older, but myocarditis post vaccination is more common than natural infection the younger you are.

The pre-print explains,

Our recent article on the association between COVID-19 vaccination and myocarditis generated considerable scientific, policy and public interest [1]. It added to evidence emerging from multiple countries that have linked exposure to BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine with acute myocarditis [2-8] .In the largest and most comprehensive analysis to date, we confirmed prior findings and reported an increase in hospital admission or death from myocarditis following three different types of vaccine including both mRNA and adenoviral vaccines.

Importantly, we also demonstrated that across the entire vaccinated population in England, the risk of myocarditis following vaccination was small compared to the risk following a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test [1]. However, myocarditis is more common in younger persons and in males in particular [9, 10]

There are, however, other factors to consider that paint COVID vaccines in an even more concerning light than this study points out. One of them is the fact that serious adverse reactions to vaccines are estimated to be severely underreported.

For example,  a Harvard Pilgrim study published in 2010 reported that less than one per cent of vaccine injuries are probably reported. This includes serious adverse reactions. A study published on Oct 7, 2021 in the Journal Toxicology Reports estimates that underreporting of deaths as a result of the COVID vaccines may have resulted in a number 1000 times less than what the actual number is. These are a few of many examples.

If you enter an underreporting factor into the equation, which the study did not do, the results become even more concerning. It's truly impossible to say, however, the true number of vaccine injuries that go unreported.

The second issue is that seroprevalence data wasn't used. This is an estimate of how many people actually are and have been infected. This is impossible to know because we don't have the testing capacity. The true number of infections isn't accurate for this reason, as well as the fact that many infected people probably don't seek testing or medical care.

Seroprevalence studies show that the number of infected people is far greater than official testing numbers, which is why the survival rate (infection fatality) rate has been estimated to be extremely high. A Stanford study, for example, estimates that the survival rate of a COVID infection for people under the age of 40 is nearly 100 percent. Whether or not you agree with this rate, the general consensus among all health experts and authorities is that the number of infections is and has been far greater than we can measure.

If seroprevalence data was used, it would make the gap between vaccine induced myocarditis and myocarditis from natural infection even greater.

Dr. Vinay Prasad, MD MPH, hematologist-oncologist and Associate Professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of California San Francisco explains,

"But the truth is STILL WORSE than these data.If the authors fixed the denominator for viral infection (i.e. used sero-prevalence), it would look even worse. If the authors separate men 16-24 from 12-15 and 25-40, it would likely look worst in 16-24 age group. But regardless, these findings already clearly dispel the true misinformation online: Yes, sorry to break it to you, vaccines can have risks of myocarditis EXCEEDING risks of myocarditis from infection. Pls stop saying otherwise."

UK Now Reports Myocarditis stratified by Age & Sex After Vaccine Or Sars-cov-2

At the end of the day when it comes to examining this, it's truly hard to say with certainty what's going on. But it's not hard to say that something is indeed going on.

In November 2021 Taiwan joined Iceland, Sweden, Finland and Denmark in halting the 2nd dose of a COVID vaccine for children under the age of 17 due to myocarditis concerns. In Iceland, Sweden, Finland and Denmark they stopped the 2nd dose for anyone under the age of 30.

Risk of a myocarditis vaccine injury is also why Norway is not recommending vaccines for healthy children. They are however still available for parents who wish to have their kids vaccinated.

On Nov. 8, 2021, an abstract appeared in the Journal Circulation of the American Heart Association (AMA) showing that COVID vaccines "dramatically" increase heart inflammation in the people that were studied. It also led to a substantial increase in the risk of heart complications, like myocarditis and heart attacks.

Cardiologist and NHS consultant Dr. Aseem Malhotra appeared on GBN explaining the findings, and while he was doing so he mentioned another study conducted by a well known cardiologist, who wished to remain anonymous, that found the same thing. That particular researcher was afraid to publish the results in fear of a loss of funding from big pharma.

Approximately 50 percent of vaccine injuries reported to VAERS in the last 30 years are all from COVID vaccines. The death of a 15 year old boy who died six days after receiving his first dose of Pfizer product is one of many examples.

The VAERS report (I.D. 1764974) states that the previously healthy teen ‘was in his usual state of good health. Five days after the vaccine, he complained of shoulder pain. He was playing with two friends at a community pond, swinging from a rope swing, flipping in the air, and landing in the water feet first. He surfaced, laughed, told his friends “Wow, that hurt!” then swam towards the shore, underwater as was his usual routine. The friends became worried when he did not reemerge.

His body was retrieved by local authorities more than an hour later.’ The autopsy revealed ‘small foci of myocardial inflammation’, an adverse effect of these COVID products commonly found among children and youth, particularly young men.

Here in Ontario, Canada, mainstream media news headlines have been full recently about doctors spreading "misinformation" about COVID vaccines and myocarditis. For example, Global News Canada recently stated that that their investigation has revealed "that a number of doctors — mostly located in B.C. and Ontario — are sharing unverified information on blood clots and myocarditis side effects."

But they did not go into detail and address the actual concerns these doctors are sharing, and why. Furthermore, In Canada at least, it's not a small amount of academics, Canada has a group of more than 500 academics. Their list of representatives include PhDs in Immunogenetics, Immunology, Molecular Virology, Viral Immunology, Pharmacology, Biomedical Research, Biochemistry, Bioanalytics, practicing family doctors, MDs and they are all creating awareness about these issues.

Despite this they are heavily censored, ridiculed and ignored while the opinions of a small group of government affiliated scientists get to share whatever they please via mainstream media, which makes it instantaneously viral and influences public perception in an improper way.

This has been typical of mainstream media during this pandemic. They do not properly address the concerns, science and data these academics are sharing but instead use terms like "anti-vax conspiracy theories" along with other forms of ridicule.

This is why independent media is so important. It shares a side of the coin that is never presented to the public, no matter how important and relevant it is.