patrick.net

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-15374809/Stanford-scientists-Covid-vaccine-myocarditis.html

Scientists discover how Covid shots cause deadly heart damage... as officials launch probe into vaccine-linked deaths

Scientists at Stanford University have revealed how the mRNA Covid vaccines can cause damage to heart cells.

Experts have long sounded the alarm over myocarditis, an VERY COMMON complication of the vaccine that causes inflammation of the heart muscle. ...

They found that people who suffered from the rare side-effect had elevated levels of two immune system-linked proteins in their blood.

Subsequent experimentation in mice then showed that these proteins prompted neutrophils (a type of immune cell that is the first responder to damage) to infiltrate the heart muscle, causing damage to the tissue via inflammation.

Doctors say the complication is normally mild and eases on its own without treatment. In severe cases, however, it can cause hospitalization or death...

Just a mild case of death.

I personally know three people who developed heart inflammation after taking the mRNA death jabs, so it's not "rare" at all.

Patrick says

y
I think it would be better to use AI to try to find a specific antigen on the tumor cells which is already there and simply inject antibodies against that instead of using mRNA at all.

Yes. The hunt for tumor-restricted antigens hasn’t tured up a trememndous amount of targets. Usually they are tumor-associated with expression also on “dispensable” bystander cells. For example, BCMA, B-cell maturation antigen, is found on multiple myeloma cells (cancerous plasma cells) but also healthy plasma cells. Plasma cells produce antibodies, with which you would die if you had zero antibodies. But giving donor antibodies (IVIG) to patients receiving BCMA-targeted antibodies or CAR T cells, helps a lot. The patients still can still ocassionaly get nasty infectious disease complications, but the risk-reward is acceptable. If AI could help find tumor-restricted targets, that would be great.

Maybe tumors have a multiple-antigen profile that could be targeted somehow.

There has to be something about each tumor that is sufficiently weird for that characteristic to be a narrow target, given that they are so obvious to the human eye.

Car t is very dangerous and has only be proven useful in very limited situations so far. Still it's a valid means, esp. in a life or death situation, in which those risks become acceptable. It probably will mature further. PSS's Anktiva or SLS's (disclaimer: holding stock) GPS (targeting WT1) are likely more promising in a broader range. Immunotherapy is where it's at, and it doesn't (necessarily) need gene therapy. Otherwise vectors such as modified viruses are also very interesting.

It started out with a nurse dying publicly on air, but only several years until anybody really started catching on that the vaccines were dangerous and were intended to be that way, no matter how many warnings there were. The trillion dollar global psyops defeated what could openly be seen. The evidence of the senses didn't matter.

That was Tiffany Dover. The Covid-19 vaccine killed her in December 2020 - the
moment she was given the vaccine.

The_Deplorable says

That was Tiffany Dover. The Covid-19 vaccine killed her in December 2020 - the
moment she was given the vaccine.

Someone needs to do an "Abbey Road" AI meme with her as the dead person. Pfauci could be the preacher, Birx the undertaker, and Hotez the gravedigger.

This sounds like a mission for @UveBeenNudged1

^^^

Patrick says

This sounds like a mission for UveBeenNudged1

^^^

I've never used AI (but have lifted the occasional AI backdrop someone else has made). It's pity because what normally takes hours can be done in seconds...
I don't have Abbey Road, so you'll have to make do with these for now :-)

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/black-box-saturday-december-13-2025

Earlier this week we reviewed (in a special edition!) the astonishing Atlantic article admitting babies died from the covid shots— right in the headline. On Thursday, Stanford Medicine News ran a similar but unrelated story headlined, “Stanford Medicine study shows why mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines can cause myocarditis.”

The study was titled, “Inhibition of CXCL10 and IFN-γ ameliorates myocarditis in preclinical models of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination.” It features a whopping 16 authors, all members of Stanford’s cardiology institute. It was funded, in large part, by the National Institutes of Health.

In other words, this is undeniably “gold standard” science.

Unsurprisingly, the study starts with the regurgitated slogan that must always be included for publication in a respectable journal: “The highly effective SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines were essential for limiting the COVID-19 pandemic.” That was the first and last time it praised the jabs.

The dense, technical paper identified a potential and plausible biological pathway between mRNA vaccination and myocarditis. It starts with a potential immune overreaction to the presence of foreign proteins, including in this case the lipid nanoparticles, transfected cells, and the spike protein produced by them.

An immune system overreaction can then damage the heart muscle, sometimes leading to myocarditis, which is a kind of injurious inflammation. Even asymptomatic myocarditis can cause permanent scarring in the heart, which can lead to very serious problems years later.

That’s why some doctors say “there is no such thing as mild myocarditis.” The heart is kind of important. Mild myocarditis is like mild brain damage. After all, what are a few neurons here or there, between pharma friends?

💉 Which brings us to the study’s first major takeaway. The Stanford researchers’ conclusions weren’t limited to spike proteins. The authors were careful, concise, and cautiously stayed in their lane, but the obvious implication was that all mRNA vaccines —not just covid shots— carry the same risk. Since they didn’t test any, we don’t know whether the risk varies between types of mRNA shots; it could be even worse for other types of mRNA vaccines. ...

In other words, this study is bad news for the entire mRNA platform, not just the covid shots. Until now, the “consensus group” believed that the lipid nanoparticles (tiny globs of artificial fat carrying the mRNA payload) were immunologically neutral, and can safely travel around the body without notice or harm. But this study found that the platform itself could trigger an immune response —sometimes a very bad one— independent of the spike protein and even before many cells had been productively transfected.

Even the UK Telegraph picked up on this point, proving that corporate media occasionally stumbles over a truth nugget:

Now Stanford University has found that the immune system
can lock on to the foreign RNA from the vaccine, which
triggers a fierce response and in some cases can inflame
heart cells. It is likely to be a problem with other mRNA
jabs, they warn.

Imagine that. But the next takeaway was even more significant.

💉 From time to time over the last few years, several strong papers have been published in various places finding problems with the jabs. But this one is categorically different, because it comes down from the tippy-top of the credentialed-class mountain. No one can wave away a peer-reviewed Stanford study with 16 institutional authors. So the publication of this study is, like the Atlantic article, more of a permission structure than any revolutionary scientific discovery.

It’s a green light: we can talk about covid jab harms now.

Which is not to say this study failed to break any new ground. As far as I know, it’s the first study to describe all three parts of an identified injury pathway: (1) a concrete mechanism of harm (a cytokine loop), (2) an organ-specific injury (the heart), and (3) confirmation of the mechanism through blockability (using neutralizing antibodies or an anti-inflammatory supplement).

Curiously, all the work described in the study was completed in 2023. That’s a long runway to publication in mid-December 2025. There is no smoking gun, but it appears the publication of this study was delayed until now. Which raises the question: why now?

As I conjectured before, my best guess is the drug cartel has finally given up on pushing the covid shots, and maybe on the whole mRNA platform. But that only shifts the question one step backwards: In other words, what is now making them give up on the shots?

Which brings us to the next remarkable development.

💉 Yesterday, CNN ran an exclusive story headlined, “FDA intends to put its most serious warning on Covid vaccines, sources say.” It’s the dreaded “black box” warning, which the FDA reserves for the most dangerous types of drugs. ...

A black box warning is the FDA’s nuclear option. It’s the strongest safety label the agency can place on any drug or vaccine, reserved for risks that are serious, potentially irreversible, or life-threatening. The warning is literally boxed in black ink at the top of the drug label so it cannot be overlooked, skimmed, or buried down in the fine print.

Black box warnings are not suggestions, footnotes, or talking points. They are how the FDA formally announces: this risk matters. Black boxes are rare, reputationally toxic, and legally consequential. Once applied, they signal to doctors, hospitals, insurers, and courts that the risk is “material” as a matter of law, not opinion.

Once a black box exists, the ground rules permanently change. Even the most enthusiastic, guideline-faithful physician cannot realistically ignore it without stepping into legal quicksand. The warning must be disclosed to patients as part of informed consent; failing to do so is no longer a judgment call but a liability problem. “Following APA guidance” stops working as a shield, because FDA labeling outranks press releases and reassurance campaigns.

Hospitals’ risk management officers will mandate documentation, insurers will demand compliance, software systems will prompt patient disclosures, and plaintiffs’ lawyers will staple the warning onto every complaint. Doctors may still recommend— but they can’t minimize, pressure, or pretend there’s nothing serious to discuss. A black box doesn’t ban a product; it forces patients to face true risks.

And once that bell has rung, it never unrings.

💉 It’s not a done deal. The story was based on “two people familiar with the agency’s plans,” which could be a couple of psychics, for all we know. And, even assuming they were legit FDA leakers, CNN said, “the plan has not been finalized and may still change.” ...

But diabolical jab doctor, former vaccine committee member, and pharma shill Paul Offit told a podcast host this week that “myocarditis was a very small price to pay. People need to have realistic expectations; you’re going to learn as you go.” Behold the grandfatherly banality of evil.

CLIP: Dr. Paul Offit confirms war criminal status (1:02).

https://x.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1999441792350192002

How about that warm-spirited, scientific nuance? “We’ll learn about the risks together, as we go!” Now they tell us. Back when they were coercing people to take the shots —jab or job!— they weren’t nearly so nuanced. And, “it was a small price to pay,” Offit quite generously declared. Yes, but who paid the price? Do the people who paid the piper also agree how small the price was?

Easy for him to say.

One thing we know for sure is that Paul Offit didn’t pay the price. It’s not his heart. Just the opposite. It’s well known that Paul made millions off his rotavirus vaccine, which he sold to Merck. He currently hogs a Merck-endowed chair at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (ironically, ‘CHOP’), runs the school’s endowed Vaccine Education Center, and mints more money with grants related to vaccine development.

It’s pretty rich that he’s talking about the “price” that everyday people who aren’t compensated for injuries have to pay.

If the FDA does black-box the covid shots (as it should), even pharma shills like Dr. Offit will have to tread very carefully. The FDA establishes the standard of care, and if doctors like Offit advise patients to defy it, the docs can become personally liable. (Which, by the way, is the same reason so few good doctors defied CDC/FDA guidelines during the pandemic.)

Here’s the thing: as CNN’s article showed, the FDA leaks like a rusty sieve. Assuming pharma also has its sources inside the FDA, which seems pretty safe to assume, then they all know what’s coming. Maybe that’s why they’ve suddenly become so much more forthcoming about the shots. By the time the FDA finally does something— it will be ‘old news.’

All in all, it’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that Democrats’ long, failed experiment in coercive public health is finally, at long last, reaching a shuddering stop. As we’ve previously discussed, once the public finally grasps the horrifying extent of the fraud that was perpetrated upon us, it will crush into powder the last remaining shards of trust in the institutions. There’s no going back now.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/11/15/government-withholding-data-covid-jab-link-excess-deaths/

Government ‘withholding data that may link Covid jab to excess deaths’

UKHSA argued that releasing figures would lead to ‘distress’ of bereaved relatives if connection were discovered

The public health watchdog has been accused of a “cover-up” after refusing to publish data that could link the Covid vaccine to excess deaths. ...

UsForThem, a campaign group, requested that UKHSA release the data under freedom of information laws. But the agency refused, making a number of different arguments including that publishing the data “could lead to misinformation” that would “have an adverse impact on vaccine uptake” in the public.

https://tdefender.substack.com/p/john-campbell-demands-release-uk-data-covid-vaccine-deaths

According to The Telegraph, UKHSA argued that disclosing vaccine dates and corresponding dates of death could cause “distress” to bereaved families and fuel “misinformation.”

Campbell said the agency’s logic defies belief.

“They argued that release of data would lead to distress of bereaved relatives if a link … was discovered,” he said. “‘So the reason we’re not telling you why your mom died is because it might upset you.’”

Campbell said the public is being denied the most fundamental data required to assess vaccine safety. He noted that only two simple data points are needed to conduct a basic correlation analysis: vaccine dose dates and dates of death.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/more-miracles-monday-december-15

The story was cast as an interview with Dr. Retsef Levi, an applied mathematician who specializes in health systems management. He has a PhD from Cornell, and has been a prominent faculty member at MIT’s Sloan School of Management since 2006. During the pandemic, like many of us, Levi was initially optimistic about the vaccines and willingly took the first two jabs.

But between 2021-2023, Levi became alarmed by the data. He began to shift toward what he called “mounting evidence” of safety problems, including myocarditis as well as broader signals of other serious adverse events. In a now-famous 2023 video, he called for an immediate halt to the jabs, arguing that surveillance data showed an “unprecedented” level of harm in younger people than any traditional vaccine.

This year, RFK appointed Dr. Levi to the CDC’s new ACIP vaccine committee, causing consensus scientists to experience an anxious, woozy feeling very similar to incipient myocarditis. ...

Realizing Politico was actually letting Dr. Levi speak was shocking. Based on the usual corporate media playbook, I had expected to just see a series of quotes from critics, interspersed with a few of Levi’s short, out-of-context comments to make him sound crazy.

But instead, the article’s structure gave Dr. Levi adequate room to present his counter-narrative, from questioning Hep‑B birth-dose safety, alleging undisclosed myocarditis deaths, and denying the “anti-vaxxer” label, to calling for a broader, outcome‑based safety redesign of vaccine surveillance in general.

Another vaxicide?