by Rhoda Wilson, Expose News:
A recent large-scale, peer-reviewed study from South Korea found a significant increase in the risk of serious cardiac and neurological conditions following mRNA covid vaccination.
The study found that a 620% higher risk of myocarditis and a 175% higher risk of pericarditis were observed in people who received the mRNA vaccine compared to historical controls. It also revealed a 62% increased risk for Guillain-Barré syndrome (“GBS”), a rare neurological disorder.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
The South Korean nationwide population-based cohort study, one of the largest of its kind, was published in Nature Communications and followed nearly 4.5 million people for an average of 15 months after vaccination.
The researchers set out to determine whether there was a long-term risk of autoimmune connective tissue diseases (“AI-CTDs”) after mRNA-based injections. As it wasn’t the focus of their study, their paper didn’t highlight the cardiac and GBS risks. However, data for these conditions were included as control outcomes to validate their findings:
To validate these findings, we evaluated the risks of positive and negative control outcomes associated with mRNA vaccination. For the positive control outcomes, the risk of myocarditis … pericarditis … and Guillain- Barré syndrome … were considerably higher in the vaccination cohort than in the historical control.
Jung, SW., Jeon, J.J., Kim, Y.H. et al. Long-term risk of autoimmune diseases after mRNA-based SARS-CoV2 vaccination in a Korean, nationwide, population-based cohort study. Nat Commun 15, 6181 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-50656-8
Fig. 3 of the paper (see below) shows the incident rates of autoimmune diseases compared to “control outcomes.” We have outlined the incident rates of cardiac and GBS incident rates in red. The right-hand column is labelled “aHR” which is an abbreviation for “adjusted hazard ratios.” Under this column, to determine the percentage increase in risk of developing these conditions, we subtract 1 from the number shown and then multiply the result by 100. For example, myocarditis is shown as having a 7.20 aHR. This equates to 620% ((7.20 – 1) = 6.20. Then, 6.20 x 100 = 620%).
While the researchers found that the incidence of most AI-CTDs was not associated with mRNA injections, they did observe an increased risk of developing some AI-CTDs after booster vaccination.
Our study found that booster vaccination was associated with an increased risk of developing certain AI-CTDs, such as alopecia areata, psoriasis, and rheumatoid arthritis, albeit the effect size was small. This finding could be associated with autoimmune flare-ups following repeated mRNA vaccination, which can cause subclinical diseases to become active and diagnosed. The result of our study may indicate the necessity for additional monitoring when administering booster vaccinations. However, it should be interpreted cautiously due to the potential healthy vaccine effect.
Jung, SW., Jeon, J.J., Kim, Y.H. et al. Long-term risk of autoimmune diseases after mRNA-based SARS-CoV2 vaccination in a Korean, nationwide, population-based cohort study. Nat Commun 15, 6181 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-50656-8
The study notes that it has some limitations:
First, the analysis was conducted on individuals belonging to a single ethnic group. Since autoimmune disease-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms vary by ethnicity, our results may not be generalisable to other populations.
Second, although our study has one of the longest follow-up periods among mRNA vaccine studies reported to date, this duration may still be considered too short, given that the development of AI-CTDs can take years to decades after trigger exposure.
Jung, SW., Jeon, J.J., Kim, Y.H. et al. Long-term risk of autoimmune diseases after mRNA-based SARS-CoV2 vaccination in a Korean, nationwide, population-based cohort study. Nat Commun 15, 6181 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-50656-8
Brian Hooker, PhD, chief scientific officer at Children’s Health Defense, noted how the authors minimised the most alarming data but told The Defender the study was otherwise “very robust.”
