Mrna COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured

Mrna COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: a Warning

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712

Abstract

Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test (GD Biosciences, Inc, Irvine, CA) a clinically validated measurement of multiple protein biomarkers which generates a score predicting the 5 yr risk (percentage chance) of a new Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). The score is based on changes from the norm of multiple protein biomarkers including IL-16, a proinflammatory cytokine, soluble Fas, an inducer of apoptosis, and Hepatocyte Growth Factor (HGF)which serves as a marker for chemotaxis of T-cells into epithelium and cardiac tissue, among other markers. Elevation above the norm increases the PULS score, while decreases below the norm lowers the PULS score.The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients.This report summarizes those results. A total of 566 pts, aged 28 to 97, M:F ratio 1:1 seen in a preventive cardiology practice had a new PULS test drawn from 2 to 10 weeks following the 2nd COVID shot and was compared to the previous PULS score drawn 3 to 5 months previously pre- shot. Baseline IL-16 increased from 35=/-20 above the norm to 82 =/- 75 above the norm post-vac; sFas increased from 22+/- 15 above the norm to 46=/-24 above the norm post-vac; HGF increased from 42+/-12 above the norm to 86+/-31 above the norm post-vac. These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac.We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.

A few interesting things to note here re: pfizer
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v1

Go to appendix and note Table S4.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v1.supplementary-material
4x more cardiac arrest deaths in jabbed group and more deaths in jabbed group than placebo albeit small margin.

But then you go here and find 21 deaths in jabbed group and 17 in placebo (Page 23).
https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download

And then you read things like this.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/post-pandemic-stress-disorder-heart-conditions-covid-london-physicians-b969436.html
https://freewestmedia.com/2021/11/26/at-least-69-athletes-collapse-in-one-month-many-dead/

I personally know of someone who had their cardiologist recommend the shot but then ended up in hospital with chest pain and other issues after the shot.

Link for appendix.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v1.supplementary-material

Post Edited (JMF84) : 12/4/2021 8:23:11 AM (GMT-7)

Garzie said...
if it really is massively raised after 2-3 months then that would be news - but otherwise - a few weeks of measurable inflammatory response after vaccination is kind of par for the course.

Isn't that basically what the study claims?
"These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac."

Garzie said...

so tricky with these heavily loaded subjects - as there is pressure on people to make a name for themselves with surprising new scientific results - and also pressure on the powers that be to promote and defend their chosen path of action.

Agree with this. We watch this going on in the Lyme community right before our eyes.

saraeli said...
I wonder how these inflammatory marker measurements compare to those 2.5 months post-COVID infection. COVID itself produces all the endothelial and inflammatory issues outlines in the link.

It's my understanding that the jab basically gives you millions of spike proteins (not the whole Covid virus) while if you are infected with Covid, you of course would get the entire virus. This difference may be substantial.
The following could be applicable.
"One paper reported that certain antibodies in the blood of infected patients appear to change the shape of the spike protein so as to make it more likely to bind to cells, while other papers showed that the spike protein by itself (without being part of the corona virus) can damage endothelial cells and disrupt the blood-brain barrier."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34100279/