SciCheck Digest
COVID-19 vaccination is generally very safe; with few exceptions and no evidence pointing towards it causing death. Unfortunately, social media posts regarding an incorrect autopsy review reiterating an unsubstantiated claim made last summer that “74% of sudden deaths can be directly attributed to COVID-19.”
Once again, let me emphasize this point – no amount of money could buy my peace! But you get my drift?!.. and in such circumstances what does happen is…? No wonder so many are searching for answers through various means such as meditation programs!…. or doing Yoga to calm their nerves….
Are the COVID-19 vaccines safe to take?
Over half a billion doses of COVID-19 vaccine have now been distributed in the U.S. with only minor, very rare safety concerns emerging as side effects; most individuals only experiencing minor side effects like pain at injection site, fatigue headache or muscle discomfort or no side effects at all as reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“these vaccines have undergone and will continue to undergo one of the most intensive safety monitoring programs ever implemented by any U.S. agency”
Anaphylaxis reactions, which should be expected with any vaccination, have occurred after administering COVID-19 vaccines; these typically develop within minutes after being inoculated and can usually be managed quickly with medical interventions. About five out of every one million vaccinated individuals reported an anaphylactic reaction following one of these injections according to CDC estimates.
To detect and address serious allergic reactions quickly and appropriately, all individuals receiving vaccination should be observed for 15 minutes following taking their shot, with those experiencing anaphylaxis or any form of immediate allergic response being watched for half an hour afterwards. People who had serious reactions from prior immunizations should not receive another vaccine dose and those not recommended receiving certain types of COVID-19 vaccine should also be watched for 30 minutes following receiving another type.
There is evidence suggesting the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines may occasionally cause inflammation of either myocarditis (myocardial inflammation) or of its surrounding lining (pericarditis), particularly among male adolescents and young adults.
According to data accumulated through August 2021, reporting rates of either condition in the U.S. are highest among males 16-17 years old after taking two doses (105.9 cases per million doses of Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine), then 12- to 15 year-old boys (70.7 cases per million), then among 18- to 24-year old males with 52.4 cases reported per million doses each for Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines respectively.
Health officials have repeatedly stressed the low incidence and benefits associated with vaccine-associated myocarditis/pericarditis cases; those vaccinated do still outweigh risks; early evidence shows less severe cases than typical ones and most treated respond well with medications and rest, experiencing relief quickly. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) most treated responded quickly as well.
Johnson & Johnson vaccine has been linked with an increased risk of rare blood clots combined with reduced levels of platelets among women aged 30-49, particularly women in that age range. Early symptoms, known as Thrombus with Thromphocytopenia Syndrome or TTS can manifest up to three weeks post vaccination and include severe headaches or blurry vision; leg swelling; easy bruising outside the injection site and tiny blood spots underneath skin surface outside injection site – symptoms which could indicate TTS is present.
According to the CDC, TTS affects around 4 people for every million doses administered and has been confirmed in 60 cases since early April; nine deaths had already been confirmed after over 18.6 million doses administered of J&J vaccine alone. While still rare due to alternative options like mRNA vaccination that don’t cause TTS side effects like these ones available today; therefore on May 5, the FDA limited use of its J&J COVID-19 vaccine only among adults either unable to get other approved vaccinations because of medical or access issues or wanting just protection with one shot from J&J over other authorized or approved ones like those offered by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna shots due their less serious side effects associated with them being more suitable; alternative shots had also been recommended on Dec 16, 2021 by CDC’s recommendation over J&J’s.
J&J vaccine has also been associated with an increased risk of Guillain-Barre Syndrome, an extremely rare autoimmune disorder in which nerve cells are attacked by immune system antibodies. Most individuals affected by GBS fully recover; however some experience permanent nerve damage as the condition can even be fatal.
Safety surveillance data suggest that, unlike mRNA vaccines which have not been linked with GBS cases, J&J vaccine has been associated with 15.5 additional GBS cases per million doses administered within three weeks post vaccination; most reported cases occurred among men 50 years or older following J&J vaccination. Here’s more info from Safer Choice about J&J vaccination: [LINK TO THIS REPORT].
Last July, an unpublished paper written by several doctors known for disseminating COVID-19 misinformation briefly surfaced on a preprint server hosted by The Lancet medical journal in Britain.
This paper claimed to review autopsy reports, concluding in three authors’ opinions that 73.9% of selected deaths could be directly attributable or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination; these conclusions, however, often ran counter to original scientists’ determinations; furthermore, ample evidence disproves such claims of frequent COVID-19 deaths.
Preprint repository quickly removed this manuscript due to “inadequacy between conclusions drawn and study methodology”, as stated by its screening criteria, as cited.
Social media quickly filled with posts discussing these claims of findings and allegations of censorship; some even falsely asserting that they had been published in Lancet journal.
Multiple scientists and fact checkers identified numerous issues with both the preprint and subsequent social media posts citing it, including Dr. Jonathan Laxton from University of Manitoba’s School of Medicine who regularly disproves misinformation online such as by tweeting at that time: ‘this is no conspiracy; rather the paper was completely biased hot garbage which the Lancet is correct in discarding.”
After publishing their paper in Forensic Science International journal on June 21st, these claims of censorship and suppression resurfaced once more this summer with multiple posts sharing and disseminating them across social media outlets.
One popular Instagram post noted, in regard to an autopsy series of 325 suddenly-died autopsies conducted between 1975 and 2015, “this series was banned by one of the most prestigious peer reviewed journals in existence at that time – 74% were caused by dart,” using coded language to refer to COVID-19 vaccines.
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny of Ohio, known for her strong opposition to vaccines and falsely alleging that COVID-19 vaccines attract people, repeated her claim in another post that the paper had already been published by Lancet.
“Bottom Line Results: 74% of sudden deaths can be directly attributed to COVID-19 vaccination,” according to this post. This paper, however, had its release censored for one year — think about all the lives it could have saved if that had not happened!
As has been explained previously, publication in a peer reviewed journal does not equate with accuracy or trustworthiness, although such processes can help refine manuscripts and filter out bad science. Unfortunately in this instance, publication of such paper mirrors highly the previously criticised manuscript; experts indicate its conclusions may be unreliable and misleading.
“Most cases do not demonstrate causal effects but instead occur coincidentally,” wrote Marc Veldhoen of Portugal’s Instituto de Medicina Molecular Joao Lobo Antunes on X, responding to its central thesis. He continued, saying this statement certainly doesn’t apply to “the general population!”
Dr. Cristina Cattaneo, co-editor-in-chief of Forensic Science International told us they were currently investigating this article and the matter would be addressed shortly.
Problematic “Review’
To conduct their “review,” the authors searched medical literature for autopsy studies related to any form of COVID-19 vaccination, excluding duplicates and studies without death/autopsy or vaccination status information. From these 44 studies with 325 autopsies they selected three authors each time; three reviewed cases described and decided whether each death could have been associated with vaccination; when two agreed it counted as vaccine-linked deaths.
At the conclusion, the authors estimated 240 out of 325 autopsies examined were vaccine-related (rounded to one decimal place, it’s actually 73.88% rather than 73.9% as reported in the paper). 46.3% occurred after being administered Sinovac or Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines while 14.6% involved AstraZeneca vaccines; 7.5% from Moderna; 1.3% came from Johnson & Johnson products.
As others have pointed out, there is reason to suspect the authors’ decisions may have been compromised by bias. All three adjudicators – Drs Peter McCullough, William Makis and Roger Hodkinson from Canada) have an established track record in spreading COVID-19 misinformation; Dr William Makis has made unsubstantiated allegations about 80 Canadian doctors dying after receiving COVID-19 vaccines; while Hodkinson incorrectly asserted in 2020 that COVID-19 was simply “hoax” or just “bad flu.”
Hodkinson and McCullough, along with five other authors, are associated with and own financial interests in The Wellness Company – an unproven supplement and telehealth business selling untested treatments like purported vaccine protection measures.
At its heart lies one of the most telling insights: researchers conducting many of the autopsy studies reached opposite conclusions than review authors. Of 240 cases studied in total, for instance, 105 originated from one Colombia paper whose authors concluded “there was no connection between vaccination and cause of death”.
As with the review authors’ interpretation of Singapore autopsies as related to vaccines, even though its original authors identified “no definitive causative relationship” to mRNA vaccines.
German researchers also concluded that 13 out of 18 autopsy deaths could have been attributable to preexisting diseases; however, review authors determined 16 cases as vaccine-associated deaths.
Dr. Mathijj Binkhorst, a Dutch pediatrician and debunker of preprint claims, conducted his own investigation on each paper cited and determined that only 31 autopsies and 1 heart necropsy (9% or 8.6%) that review authors claimed to be vaccine-related were likely or possibly associated with vaccination; of the remaining 267 (81.9%), only 9 were likely or possibly linked.
Simply stated, even among studies which were more likely to recognize vaccine involvement, less than 20% of deaths may or likely were vaccine-linked.
Even without bias from its authors, this type of study cannot give accurate information regarding whether COVID-19 vaccination leads to death and whether its risks outweigh its benefits.
Veldhoen highlighted one of the published studies focusing on drug X as being limited in scope: they only examined published autopsy and necropsy reports relating to COVID-19 vaccination, she stated. When looking exclusively at autopsies related to drugX: its involvement is likely high amongst all cases.”
Binkhorst noted that autopsy reports come from 14 countries which administered approximately 2.2 billion vaccine doses over this time frame; had COVID-19 vaccines been as hazardous as suggested in other data sources, this would likely have become apparent over time – yet nothing suggests otherwise.
Global vaccine safety surveillance systems and studies have confirmed that while serious side effects from vaccination can arise, they are usually uncommon and rare.
Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca vaccines may cause, in rare instances, dangerous blood clotting issues with reduced platelets that may prove life threatening or fatal.
Rarely, Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccines may cause inflammation of the heart muscle or surrounding tissue – myocarditis or pericarditis – though these conditions usually don’t lead to life-threatening side effects.
No evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccination increases risk or has led to excessive deaths; instead, an abundance of data substantiate its benefits against severe illness and premature deaths caused by COVID-19 – not even the flawed autopsy review can alter this fact.
Roley, Gwen. “Fraudsters try to spread misinformation over unpublished paper on Covid-19 vaccine risks”. AFP 14 July 2023.
Hulscher, Nicolas et al. “A Systematic REVIEW of Autopsy Findings Following Covid-19 Vaccination”. Forensic Science International 2024; available online 21 Jun 2024.
Binkhorst, Mathijs. “McCullough’s Misinformation.” LinkedIn Post Archived on 4 Sep 2023
Laxton, Jonathan (@dr_jon_l). “McCullough et al attempted upload a preprint for publication to Lancet server but were rejected because their paper contained questionable science… I believe going over this paper with you guys will provide valuable opportunities to spot questionable science…” X. 6 Jul 2023.
Payne, Ed. “Fact Check: Lancet Study Does NOT Show COVID Vaccine Caused 74% Of Deaths In Sample — Lancet Rejected Paper And Methodology.” Lead Stories 7 Jul 2023.
Carballo-Carbajal, Iria. “Flawed Preprint Based On Autopsies Failing To Demonstrate That COVID-19 Vaccine Caused 74% Of These Deaths”. Health Feedback 2023; 31 July.
Jaramillo, Catalina. “Review Article by Misinformation Spreaders Confuses About COVID-19 Vaccines.” FactCheck.org 16 February 2024.
Veldhoen, Marc (@Marc_Veld). “Does our claim of “We found that 73.9 per cent of deaths were directly attributable or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination” hold true? No – in reality most cases don’t show a causal cause and effect relationship – certainly this statement cannot apply to the general population!” X 22 Jun 2024.
Cattaneo, Cristina is Co-Editor-in-Chief for Forensic Science International magazine and can be reached via FactCheck.org by email on June 26th 2024.
“No evidence suggests that 80 Canadian doctors died due to COVID vaccinations.” Reuters Fact Check. 22 December 2022.
Lajka, Arijeta. “Pathologist Falsely Claim COVID-19 Hoax Worse Than Flu” [AP], 2 Dec 2020.
Yandell, Kate. “Posts Push Unproven Spike Protein Detoxification Regimen”. FactCheck.org 21 Sep 2023.
Chaves, Juan Jose et al. have published “A Postmortem Study of Patients Vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 in Colombia”, Revista Espanola de Patologia on 31 Oct 2022.
Yeo, Audrey et al. “Post COVID-19 Vaccine Deaths – Singapore’s Early Experience.” Forensic Science International 2022-19-01-19.
Schneider, Julia et al. “Postmortem Investigation of Fatalities Following Covir-19 Vaccinations”. International Journal of Legal Medicine 2021 Sep 30
Yandell, Kate. A New Study Confirms Reported COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects.” FactCheck.org 27 Feb 2024.
“Selected Adverse Events Reported after COVID-19 Vaccination”. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Accessed 5 July 2024.
“COVID-19 vaccines: key facts.” European Medicines Agency. Accessed 5 July 2024.
Robertson, Lori. “Jonhson & Johnson’s COVID-19 Vaccine”. FactCheck.org (27 February 2021).
Lai, Francisco Tsz Tsun et al. “Prognosis of Myocarditis Following COVID-19 Vaccination as Contrasted With Viral Myocarditis.” Journal of American College of Cardiology 2022 (5 December).
Yandell, Kate. “No Evidence Linking Excess Deaths with Vaccines Online.” FactCheck.org 17 Apr 2023.
McDonald, Jessica. A Flawed Analysis of New Zealand Data Doesn’t Demonstrate COVID-19 Vaccines Killed Millions. FactCheck.org 20 December 2023.
