Differential Diagnosis and Approach to COVID-19 Vaccine Injury Syndromes – IOTW Report

Differential Diagnosis and Approach to COVID-19 Vaccine Injury Syndromes

America Out Loud: The advent of mRNA and adenoviral DNA vaccines has ushered in a whole new genre of internal medicine diseases that has besieged the medical community. Because so many physicians were duped into the taking one of the COVID-19 vaccines, they are having a hard time coming to terms with the reality that their patients are developing complications that indeed a physician could develop, including well-recognized problems such as myocarditis, blood clots, bleeding, and skin rashes and immune system problems. The most worrisome of all complications is death after vaccination.

Sadly, in the US domestic VAERS data, as of May 20, 2022, there have been 13,045 Americans that have died shortly after taking one of the ill-advised or mandated COVID-19 vaccines.1

From a regulatory perspective, any death that occurs after an investigational product within 30 days is attributed to the article under investigation. For traditional vaccines, special adverse events of interest (autoimmune problems, etc.) have a 24-month window of observation and potential concern. For genetic products (e.g., mRNA and adenoviral DNA), this window is extended to five years. more

4 Comments on Differential Diagnosis and Approach to COVID-19 Vaccine Injury Syndromes

  1. My mom’s hair fell out (It grew back) and her arm throbbed in pain whenever the slightest pressure was applied at the injection site for eight months after the jab. Hence my vaxxy vaxx hesitancy.

    5
  2. @Deplorable Second Class
    That maybe the billion dollar question. And what if the patient had the shots from one maker and receives a transfusion from a doner that received their jabs from another maker. Will they coexist? Has anyone in the medical community thought of that?
    That’s one scary question you brought up.

    5
  3. ^^^ “Has anyone in the medical community thought of that?”
    I thought about aspects of that, and quite a while ago. Remember when they suggested taking another ‘brand’ as one of the boosters? fauxi was saying ‘you might want to try another for your booster.’ Remember that? I sure do. When they did that, they scrambled any possibility of having a future scientific analysis. There is no way to sort anything out, with their having done that. And it was deliberate.

    ‘they have killed the science of epidemiology and are now practicing necromancy on the corpse’ me

    1

Comments are closed.