Zobel said:

---

One, you are the one with the assertion, so you have the burden of proof.

Two, there is a handy dandy graph above that shows that the rise preceded the vaccine on a 12 month rolling average basis, so I think it's pretty clear that rise wasn't related to the vaccine, unless it also time travels.

---

***THAT GRAPH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE VACCINE!!!*** There could be a billion other explanations for those data! That's the weakest, and the only, "the vax is good for your heart" info I've seen. Literally pointless to this conversation.

And I would love to prove it! Unfortunately I'm not equipped with the resources to run some study to get actual current and relevant data on this. And since nothing substantial is complete yet, makes it hard. All I can do is use the abundant data from earlier that points to a very dangerous vaccine.

In '76 the swine flu vaccine was pulled after it was linked to 25 deaths. That was far too dangerous in 1976. Vaers reported 16,000 deaths (vastly under reported) and 778,685 injuries (10/01/21), and somehow this is acceptable. Numbers even higher in Europe (40k deaths and 2.2M injuries).

Here is the current Vaers data. But yeah, nothing to see here.

https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8;jsessionid=49049A09AC4AC4E1E69B7C709225

Chart was too big to get the entire thing in here, but unprecedented risk. To suggest otherwise is malicious. And Vaers is heavily underreported so it's likely far worse than it looks. Conservative estimates are 3-5 times these numbers, but as high as 17 times these numbers has suggested.

Edit to add: This is only looking at "serious" events. I didn't even include all of them.
Edit 2 for context: Serious events only (you can no longer categorize by deaths - interesting) and this includes all available vaccines per year. So any and all vaccines available are included in every year.

I didn't propose a cause for the graph. I said that the vaccine couldn't be the cause, because the rise happened before the vaccine was available. There could be a billion explanations, but the vaccine can't be one of them.

Whistle Pig said:

---

OP seems to be easily persuaded by feelings, anecdotes, and Facebook memes. 350 young people/year died of SCA pre covid.


https://wonder.cdc.gov/

---

Yeah fat ****ers, diabetics, and people with known heart issues. Not perfectly healthy 20 year olds.

Your need to prove how this is normal is laughable.

Not the point. Do you see the squiggly lines zooming up before vaccines were available?

Zobel said:

---

I didn't propose a cause for the graph. I said that the vaccine couldn't be the cause, because the rise happened before the vaccine was available. There could be a billion explanations, but the vaccine can't be one of them.

---

So then you're saying the rise happened for one reason? Or all the reasons except one? Either way, you're flat out wrong. I mean, you've admitted there is risk for heart related issues with the vaccine, yet that can't play a role in heightened cardiovascular events? Doesn't track, logically.

I don't think anyone here is saying that a rise in heart issues is *only* due to the vaccine... Covid causes those issues, stress, etc.. And with that rise, the infection rate wasn't high enough to account for that sharp of a rise. If it was just due to covid there should have been a massive spike in Jan of 22. Common sense would say that chart is explained by shut downs, stress, and no access to preventative care.

i think a better approach than picking one side or another is to inquire as to what normal is.

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.020254
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/sudden-cardiac-arrest/in-depth/sudden-death/art-20047571

some info from those.

• sudden cardiac arrest is the leading cause of death in young athletes*
• the deaths are at a rate of 1 in 43,000 to 1 in 80,000
• young athletes seem to be at a 2 or 3 times greater risk than general population
• it is significantly more prevalent in young males by a factor of around 2:1
• most of the events are caused genetic or congenital conditions

* this is from the mayo clinic, but this almost certainly needs to be said as "natural" cause of death vs accidents, suicide, etc

The rates go up as the lockdowns take theirs toll. They moderate after the lockdowns are ended but continue up as vaccination accelerated. The graph rolls over as vaccination and booster rates decline but are still at a higher level than pre-Covid.

The graph does not necessarily exonerate the vaccines.

So why do you feel you need to preach the virtues of the sacred vaccine? Is it just a lib thing? Let people make their own decisions. You're kind of like another poster that did this.

Whistle Pig said:

---

If the vaccine was causing a significant amount of heart related deaths in young people would it not show up in population level data? Instead we see the opposite.

VAERS is a self reporting system, they aren't verified.

Here's a VAERS report claiming a p3nis grew out of a forehead.

---

Yeah, there was a small group of redditors who did some of these with outlandish events. It was so funny. Ha ha. Vaers has been used for years and is as trustworthy as anything else used in this conversation. If we're going to use your chart from the CDC, then you have to use vaers... no cherry picking here.

Whistle Pig said:

---

Check the dates again chief. The people responsible for the vaccine are being held accountable, winning Nobel prizes for saving millions of lives.

---

lol

release virus
lock em down
force vaccine
get award

just wait for the wash rinse repeat

Whistle Pig said:

---

Quote:

---

I don't think anyone here is saying that a rise in heart issues is *only* due to the vaccine...

---

I hope not, that would be foolish. There has been no rise in heart issues since vaccines became available. There's been a plateau and decline.

---

You calling anything "foolish"..... my God man. You've been all surface and no substance this entire thread.

Smudge said:

---

Zobel said:

---

I didn't propose a cause for the graph. I said that the vaccine couldn't be the cause, because the rise happened before the vaccine was available. There could be a billion explanations, but the vaccine can't be one of them.

---

So then you're saying the rise happened for one reason? Or all the reasons except one? Either way, you're flat out wrong. I mean, you've admitted there is risk for heart related issues with the vaccine, yet that can't play a role in heightened cardiovascular events? Doesn't track, logically.

I don't think anyone here is saying that a rise in heart issues is *only* due to the vaccine... Covid causes those issues, stress, etc.. And with that rise, the infection rate wasn't high enough to account for that sharp of a rise. If it was just due to covid there should have been a massive spike in Jan of 22. Common sense would say that chart is explained by shut downs, stress, and no access to preventative care.

---

nice how you didn't ask what i thought caused it, and i haven't said, but you're sure i'm wrong.

some probable contributors would be

- increase in sedentary lifestyle during lockdowns leading to poorer health
- decrease in access to medical care during lockdowns (fewer avoided/prevented deaths)
- decrease in routine medical screenings during lockdowns (fewer identified genetic or congenital heart defects)
- covid itself

i have no idea how you should weight these.

what i do know is that this graph is an average of 12 months trailing, and the rise occurred before the vaccine, so the rise can't be attributed to the vaccine.

Another graph. Lol. Go get another shot.

Rodney Ruxin said:

---

Whistle Pig said:

---

Quote:

---

I don't think anyone here is saying that a rise in heart issues is *only* due to the vaccine...

---

I hope not, that would be foolish. There has been no rise in heart issues since vaccines became available. There's been a plateau and decline.

---

You calling anything "foolish"..... my God man. You've been all surface and no substance this entire thread.

---

It would be foolish to keep insisting that cardiac related deaths increased after vaccines became available after being irrefutable shown that is not the case. Yet you're still doing it.

Rockdoc said:

---

So why do you feel you need to preach the virtues of the sacred vaccine? Is it just a lib thing? Let people make their own decisions. You're kind of like another poster that did this.

---

well for starters i'm a Christian, and i know its a figure of speech but i find the idea of implying that i would worship or revere a vaccine as sacred pretty disgusting.

i don't preach the virtues of it. i aspire to be a rationalist in things like this and i am very interested in what is true. the covid vaccine is a fascinating topic in this regard... where else do we get a subject that simultaneously has so much available information with such a sharp dichotomy of beliefs associated with it?? don't you find that interesting? we have so much more information available for these vaccines than, say, climate change.

so there's the puzzle of trying to arrive at the best possible understanding of the situation here, as well as the human factors that lead to this crazy hollowed out middle.

for example, why do you think i'm a liberal? i'm not. why should disagreeing with you about this vaccine make me, say, pro abortion (i'm staunchtly pro-life) or in favor of increased governmental control (i'm somewhere between chicago and austrian schools in my economics)?

i have never advocated for people to go get the shot. you do you. but let me ask one more question - why do you interpret me saying x is or isn't true about the vaccine as preaching virtues or trying to make your decision for you? is the op preaching against the vaccine or trying to not let you make your decision?

Whistle Pig said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Another graph. Lol. Go get another shot.

---

Actual data and statistics are so annoying aren't they? Not as fun as just going by vibes and feelings.

---

Not at all. You can find a graph to agree with whatever your narrative is. I've had Covid. No big deal and I'm old. I'd rather have Covid again and again than have the dangerous vaccine. But by all means, you guys keep pushing the lib narrative.

We've always seen athletes collapse of heart attacks on the field or court right? We've always seen pregnancy and other reproductive issues right after taking vaccines right? We've all seen healthy women have period issues in prime child bearing years right? We've all seen menopausal women start menstruating again right?

I'm not claiming causation, but correlation is a *****. Whether it's from the man made disease or their alleged cure, uptick in all these after release of the bioweapon.

Zobel said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

So why do you feel you need to preach the virtues of the sacred vaccine? Is it just a lib thing? Let people make their own decisions. You're kind of like another poster that did this.

---

well for starters i'm a Christian, and i know its a figure of speech but i find the idea of implying that i would worship or revere a vaccine as sacred pretty disgusting.

i don't preach the virtues of it. i aspire to be a rationalist in things like this and i am very interested in what is true. the covid vaccine is a fascinating topic in this regard... where else do we get a subject that simultaneously has so much available information with such a sharp dichotomy of beliefs associated with it?? don't you find that interesting? we have so much more information available for these vaccines than, say, climate change.

so there's the puzzle of trying to arrive at the best possible understanding of the situation here, as well as the human factors that lead to this crazy hollowed out middle.

for example, why do you think i'm a liberal? i'm not. why should disagreeing with you about this vaccine make me, say, pro abortion (i'm staunchtly pro-life) or in favor of increased governmental control (i'm somewhere between chicago and austrian schools in my economics)?

i have never advocated for people to go get the shot. you do you. but let me ask one more question - why do you interpret me saying x is or isn't true about the vaccine as preaching virtues or trying to make your decision for you? is the op preaching against the vaccine or trying to not let you make your decision?

---

This wall of words made me laugh.

Whistle Pig said:

---

Why are you so threatened by actual logic and factual information? He isn't preaching or telling anybody what to do.

350,000 have already "owned the libs" by volunteering to die of covid. Isn't that good enough?

---

we all know this data was faked

https://nypost.com/2023/01/14/dr-leana-wen-writes-that-covid-deaths-are-being-overcounted/
https://ktrh.iheart.com/content/2021-06-09-more-proof-that-the-covid-death-stats-are-greatly-exaggerated/
https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-death-rate-lower-scientists-1495308

Zobel said:

---

Smudge said:

---

Zobel said:

---

I didn't propose a cause for the graph. I said that the vaccine couldn't be the cause, because the rise happened before the vaccine was available. There could be a billion explanations, but the vaccine can't be one of them.

---

So then you're saying the rise happened for one reason? Or all the reasons except one? Either way, you're flat out wrong. I mean, you've admitted there is risk for heart related issues with the vaccine, yet that can't play a role in heightened cardiovascular events? Doesn't track, logically.

I don't think anyone here is saying that a rise in heart issues is *only* due to the vaccine... Covid causes those issues, stress, etc.. And with that rise, the infection rate wasn't high enough to account for that sharp of a rise. If it was just due to covid there should have been a massive spike in Jan of 22. Common sense would say that chart is explained by shut downs, stress, and no access to preventative care.

---

nice how you didn't ask what i thought caused it, and i haven't said, but you're sure i'm wrong.

some probable contributors would be

- increase in sedentary lifestyle during lockdowns leading to poorer health
- decrease in access to medical care during lockdowns (fewer avoided/prevented deaths)
- decrease in routine medical screenings during lockdowns (fewer identified genetic or congenital heart defects)
- covid itself

i have no idea how you should weight these.

what i do know is that this graph is an average of 12 months trailing, and the rise occurred before the vaccine, so the rise can't be attributed to the vaccine.

---

Yep... had no idea we were just discussing the rise of the graph. I'll give you that. Impossible for the vaccines to cause the initial rise. I'm not concerned about the initial rise, or that graph in general, maybe why I missed that part of your previous replies. The issue remains the same aside from the red herrings... Ample evidence of dangers of the vaccine. Anecdotal and data driven evidence that young athletes are dying or having adverse reactions possibly due to the vaccine. It needs to be looked into, and to say that the vaccine is not a contributor is malicious. It's not simply ignorance, it's intentional. And whether you mean it to be malicious or not, it's a harmful outlook for many reasons. If this vaccine was truly as safe and effective as they have claimed it to be, the blatant lies and deception by the heads of the CDC, NIH, etc... would be completely unnecessary.

Whistle Pig said:

---

Quote:

---

We've always seen athletes collapse of heart attacks on the field or court right?

---

Yes.

---

What about women's reproductive issues after taking the therapeutic? What's your excuse for those?

Quote:

---

Not at all. You can find a graph to agree with whatever your narrative is.

---

No you can't. You can't find population level data showing cardiovascular deaths increasing after vaccine availability because the opposite happened.

Zobel said:

---

Smudge said:

---

Zobel said:

---

I didn't propose a cause for the graph. I said that the vaccine couldn't be the cause, because the rise happened before the vaccine was available. There could be a billion explanations, but the vaccine can't be one of them.

---

So then you're saying the rise happened for one reason? Or all the reasons except one? Either way, you're flat out wrong. I mean, you've admitted there is risk for heart related issues with the vaccine, yet that can't play a role in heightened cardiovascular events? Doesn't track, logically.

I don't think anyone here is saying that a rise in heart issues is *only* due to the vaccine... Covid causes those issues, stress, etc.. And with that rise, the infection rate wasn't high enough to account for that sharp of a rise. If it was just due to covid there should have been a massive spike in Jan of 22. Common sense would say that chart is explained by shut downs, stress, and no access to preventative care.

---

nice how you didn't ask what i thought caused it, and i haven't said, but you're sure i'm wrong.

some probable contributors would be

- increase in sedentary lifestyle during lockdowns leading to poorer health
- decrease in access to medical care during lockdowns (fewer avoided/prevented deaths)
- decrease in routine medical screenings during lockdowns (fewer identified genetic or congenital heart defects)
- covid itself

i have no idea how you should weight these.

what i do know is that this graph is an average of 12 months trailing, and the rise occurred before the vaccine, so the rise can't be attributed to the vaccine.

---

So you are saying that is impossible for variable A to drop (lockdown effects) while variable B (vaccine side effect) is rising making the net effect flat or even falling? This is a complex environment that some posters are trying to analyze in a binary fashion. I'm not completely sold either way, but I do remain highly skeptical.

And FWIW, I've served on a hospital board for almost a decade and discussed this often with our cardiologists. Not a one of them is convinced there are no heart issues associated with the vaccines. Two have told me they will not let their teenage boys take it.

I don't agree with your conclusions very often, but I do respect the fact you attempt to be data driven.

Whistle Pig said:

---

Quote:

---

Not at all. You can find a graph to agree with whatever your narrative is.

---

No you can't. You can't find population level data showing cardiovascular deaths increasing after vaccine availability because the opposite happened.

---

What about excess deaths? That has happened. What's your excuse there?

Rockdoc said:

---

Take all the jabs you want.

---

But don't for a second think just because HE wants the jab others should be FORCED to take one.

that's just the issue... there isn't a correlation between increased vaccine uptake and increase cardiac arrest, at least not in that same cdc database. if you were right, as more people get vaccinated you'd expect that graph to go up, not down.

oh, and by the way - the OP refers to a second student dying. the first one was of a congenital heart defect.

https://news3lv.com/news/local/cause-of-death-revealed-for-student-who-died-during-flag-football-game-experts-explain

these events are tragic, and what's more tragic is that the young lady had already seen a doctor for an issue and it went missed.

CSTXAg92 said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Take all the jabs you want.

---

But don't for a second think just because HE wants the jab others should be FORCED to take one.

---

Absolutely

You gave up that easily on your first point/question?

Quote:

---

To further understand the scale of the problem, a study, named the FIFA Sudden Death Report (FIFA-SDR), was commissioned by FIFA and carried out by Saarland University. It was published in 2020.[7] The report recorded worldwide deaths attributed to sudden cardiac arrest or other unexplained sudden death while playing (or shortly after playing) football during the period from 2014 to 2018. There were 617 cases during the five-year period. In the majority of cases where an autopsy was carried out, the cause of death was coronary heart disease.

---

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2020/12/23/bjsports-2020-102368