(NaturalHealth365)  Ever since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave the green light for teens and children to receive the new-to-the-market mRNA COVID shots, we’ve seen a whirlpool of changing messages regarding the potential impact of these shots on kids’ health.  Most notably: when people voiced concerns over pediatric post-jab heart problems like myocarditis and pericarditis, the mainstream narrative shut those concerns down, insisting that there was no cause for alarm.

But it wasn’t long before the FDA, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and others acknowledged that side effects like heart inflammation were indeed a legitimate concern and that children – especially teen boys – were at an increased risk of these cardiac issues.  At the same time, three-letter agencies insist that the risk of heart problems is still greater following a COVID-19 illness than a COVID-19 jab (an interesting point, given that the COVID jabs don’t prevent someone from getting COVID-19).  But a new study calls even this claim into question.

Pfizer jab causes chest pain, shortness of breath, other cardiovascular side effects in nearly one-THIRD of all injected kids: Thai study

A prospective cohort study currently available for preprint assessed the side effects experienced by teenagers in Thailand after receiving a second dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 shot (aka Pfizer’s current cash cow).

The study authors compiled data of 314 double-vaxxed Thai students between the ages of 13 and 18.  13 of these students were lost to follow-up, which left 301 participants for the final analysis.  The analysis revealed the following:

“Cardiovascular effects were found in 29.24% of patients,” the study authors write, noting that the most commonly reported cardiac-related side effects included:

• Tachycardia (elevated heart rate)
• Shortness of breath
• Heart palpitations (that feeling of the heart fluttering or “skipping a beat”)
• Chest pain
• High blood pressure

Additionally, one student had a confirmed case of myopericarditis.  According to Up to Date, myopericarditis is a complication of acute pericarditis and “is characterized by extension of pericardial inflammation to the myocardium, which manifests as an elevated troponin level.”  Another two students had suspected pericarditis, and four had suspected subclinical myocarditis.

In other words, approximately 2.3% of students (1 in 43) in the cohort experienced heart inflammation immediately following the gene-based injection, and nearly one-third of the students experienced other heart-related side effects.

Known and unknown risks: What are you willing to take on?

If we can find a silver lining in this research (which has not yet been peer-reviewed), it would be that the cases of pediatric heart inflammation post-jab were “usually mild,” allegedly, with “all cases fully recovering within 14 days,” according to the study authors.

Interestingly, the authors of this preprint study repeat the claim that the risk of heart inflammation post-COVID infection is still higher than the risk of heart inflammation post-jab.

Higher than, based on their data, 1 in 43?  Really?  Since the data to support this claim is still inconclusive, consider the following:

Even if we were to trust the claim that “COVID-19 infections cause heart inflammation at a higher rate than COVID vaccines,” aren’t people elevating their risk of heart inflammation even more by taking the jabs?

Think about it: we know that mRNA COVID-19 shots don’t stop transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and that getting multiple doses does not prevent you from actually getting COVID-19.  (Notice how hardly anyone uses the term “breakthrough infection” anymore … our guess is because “breakthrough” cases are no longer considered “rare.”  In fact, they’re incredibly common.)

So, a person can get the jab hoping that it will prevent them from SARS-CoV-2 infection, yet still get infected anyway.  PLUS, they’ve now assumed a double-whammy risk of heart inflammation: one from the infection AND one from the injection.

Taken into context of the highly survivable SARS-CoV-2 infection (even Bill Gates finally admitted that COVID-19 is “like the flu”), we come round yet again to the crux of the issue: that these COVID jabs should be about personal choice, individual decision-making, and the right to make medical decisions for oneself and one’s family without coercion from the government, employers, and society at large.

Sources for this article include:

Uptodate.com
KUSI.com
Medicalnewstoday.com
Preprints.org
Dailysceptic.org
Dailysceptic.org
Nature.com