A small study with Intramuscular mRNA vaccines has shown that if they go straight into a blood vessel they can cause myopericarditis, indicating that the problem may not arise from the vaccine content but how it is administered. Similar problems have been long established for the adenovirus vector for the Astra Zeneca and J&J vaccines.
The Pfizer vaccine comes with a leaflet; the Moderna vaccine does too. Both leaflets say the same thing. Doctors and nurses should ‘aspirate’ when giving the vaccine.
Aspirate to vaccinate
Let me explain. Aspiration is where you put the vaccination needle into the patient’s arm, but before starting the vaccination, you pull back on the pump handle taking some fluid from the patient into the vaccine. In the majority of cases this fluid will be clear, but sometimes you will have withdrawn some blood. At this point a trained nurse or doctor would abort the vaccination and start all over again.
The two Covid vaccines mentioned above are Intramuscular (IM) vaccines. Pfizer and Moderna want them to go into the muscle to make the Covid proteins that set up an antibody reaction.
The UK National Health Service has a Green Book detailing how things should be done properly in healthcare in the UK, and aspiration is exactly what it tells you to do when giving IM vaccinations.
The reason is that you are going in blind, and you don’t really know what you are sticking the needle into. It is extremely likely to be muscle tissue, but, of course, in any tissue there are blood vessels, some tissues have more or less than others.
If you withdraw a small amount of liquid (aspiration) before you go ahead, you will know exactly where you are sticking your needle.
Dr. John Campbell, who has a successful daily You Tube Channel presenting accurate and unbiased data on Covid is a pro-vaxer. But he is extremely concerned about accidental damage by giving these vaccines intravenously.
So Pfizer, Moderna and the British NHS want you to aspirate when using the IM vaccines. Why might this be? Well if you inject a vaccine into a blood vessel, the vaccine could travel straight to the heart and damage the heart wall permanently, or worse.
Dr. Campbell himself was trained to aspirate; he was a GP for 12 or so years but spent over 20 years training nurses in the UK to do the same. This is just good practise.
mRNA, myopericarditis and young males
His first show on the subject featured a study in the Oxford University press where researchers stated that nothing was known about the dangers of getting mRNA vaccines accidentally into the heart tissue, and so had injected rats with the IM vaccines. In their conclusions they stated – ‘This study (1) provided in-vivo evidence that inadvertent intravenous injection of COVID-19 mRNA-vaccines may induce myopericarditis. Brief withdrawal of syringe plunger to exclude blood aspiration may be one possible way to reduce such risk.’
He then held a second show to deal with a postbag of observations from patients, nurses and Doctors. Many UK doctors and nurses were trained to aspirate. They see it as the only safe option. And figures of withdrawn blood in the vaccine syringes varied from 1 in 1000 patients to 1 in 50.
As readers will know, the issue of myocarditis in young men in particular is serious. Less young men die from Covid than die from the vaccinations according to Scandinavian Governments, and they have banned vaccinations in those below 35. In the USA, vaccinations in the young are increasingly seen as unnecessary. According to William Schaffner, MD, a specialist from Vanderbilt University, on the WebMD site, the number of myocarditis events in young males is higher than expected. Since there is no ‘emergency’ to vaccinate these young men, many doctors in the USA argue that the causes of myocarditis in young males need to be sorted out first and recommend a full 2-year clinical study, and withdrawing of the ‘emergency use’ status.
Disregard for aspiration
But Campbell may be on to something. He has found that the WHO does not even mention aspiration when talking about vaccines, and the CDC say it is unnecessary, as do State Health Authorities in Australia.
In the UK, the mass vaccination programme saw many vaccines being given by Social Workers not even told about aspiration.
Why under 30 year-old males?
In case you are wondering, ‘Why particularly young males?’ Apparently they have more elasticity in their blood vessels and are more likely to have them punctured by needles.
The CDC says that out of more than 12 million vaccinations administered to 16 to 24 year olds, there were only 275 reports of heart inflammation. In the under 30’s, 475 cases of myocarditis after vaccination were reported to VAERS.
A search on Google provides cause for concern that the risk of myocarditis increases the more shots you have.
What about the Astra Zeneca and J&J vaccines?
It has been well established since 2004/5 that using the adenovirus vector given intravenously rather than into muscle tissue, can cause blood clots and clumps of platelets and white cells – thrombocytopenia is the condition. And blood vessel damage, intra-vascular coagulation, stroke, and heart attacks can follow.
Again, these two vaccines are supposed to be given IM, not straight into a blood vessel.
Again, the Health Authorities of Scandinavia are leading the way. Danish authorities say that Medical Staff must be trained to aspirate when giving these two vaccines to avoid the known heart problems. Even the UK doesn’t tell Medical Staff to aspirate when giving these two vaccines.
No one in authority denies that these aren’t serious vaccines. Why then are we leaving the vaccination process to chance?
If vaccines are to be mandated, why are we not mandating aspiration education and training?
In the UK, write to your MP, or in the USA or Australia, write to your elected representative and ask why we are ignoring protocols that can reduce risk.
- Clinical Infect Dis. 2021, August 28; Can Li et al; Intravenous injection of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine can induce acute myopericarditis in mouse model – https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab707/6353927