URGENT: Children had a HIGHER risk of long-term problems after a Covid infection if they’d received an mRNA shot

Guest Post by Alex Berenson

Evidence from a new study should be the final and long overdue nail in the coffin for Covid jabs for kids. But don’t expect the media to stop shilling for Pfizer and Moderna.

mRNA Covid jabs are linked to a higher risk of several serious conditions — including acute kidney injury — in children following Covid infections, according to data hidden deep in the appendix of a major new study on kids and Covid.

The study was published in the Lancet on Monday, but its researchers did not mention the apparently higher risk in jabbed kids. Instead, they buried the figures showing it on pages 39 and 40 of a 54-page supplement without comment.

The association does not prove the Covid shots caused post-infection kidney injury or other problems. Vaccinated and unvaccinated kids may have been different in ways that made jabbed kids more vulnerable to post-Covid problems. But it adds to years of evidence that mRNA Covid shots are useless, if not dangerous, for kids.

At best, the shots do little if anything to protect kids against infection. They also carry known side effects including myocarditis and high fevers when they are given.

The new study goes even further, suggesting that the shots may actually worsen rare long-term problems in children who are infected with Covid.

Using a federally funded health records database called RECOVER, the researchers examined the medical records of more than 465,000 children who were diagnosed with Covid in 2022 and 2023.

The data they found showed that children who had been Covid vaccinated were more than twice as likely than those who had not to be diagnosed with abnormal liver enzymes up to six months after Covid infection. Almost five out of 1,000 vaccinated kids had abnormal liver enzymes, compared to just over two out of 1,000 unvaccinated kids.

Vaccinated kids were also notably more likely to have acute kidney injury, chest pain, fatigue and malaise, and muscle pain up to six months after infection, and slightly more likely to have heart arrhythmias.

Overall, jabbed kids were about 10 percent more likely to be diagnosed with a wide range of conditions, including less serious ones, after Covid infection or reinfection.

—

The researchers framed the study as focusing on the risks of “long Covid” in children who have been infected with Covid more than once. They — and Pam Belluck, the New York Times reporter, who wrote about the study — noted that long Covid risks seemed to be higher after a second infection. They used that fact to push for more shots.

Repeating the mRNA catechism all Times reporters must parrot, Belluck wrote in her article:

Although Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the federal health secretary, has said healthy children do not need Covid shots, the study authors and other medical experts said the evidence suggests otherwise.

—

(How to hide the facts you don’t like, a study)

(SOURCE)

—

Actually, the study suggests the opposite.

Putting aside the fact scientists still cannot even properly define long Covid, the data the researchers reported shows vaccinated kids were about 50 percent more likely to be diagnosed with long Covid after infection than unvaccinated kids. And the gap between vaccinated and unvaccinated actually worsened after a second infection.

That evidence hardly suggests that the way to reduce long Covid is to give kids more mRNA. Once again, a study designed to show the value of Covid jabs proved the opposite.

This new study may feel like a sideshow, another brick in a mile-high wall. After all, parents have overwhelmingly lined up with Secretary Kennedy and against the public health bureaucrats and reporters still pushing mRNA. Almost no children or teenagers are getting Covid mRNA jabs anymore.

Yet the study still matters. The findings count even if they’re buried in the appendix. Arguably even more importantly, the study reveals, yet again, that the scientific establishment simply will NOT follow up on signals of potential mRNA risk. The study’s researchers parsed their data in countless ways, but they buried the vaccinated and unvaccinated data and failed to publish any direct analysis of vaccinated and unvaccinated kids.

They could easily have chosen to look directly at whether the mRNAs seemed to be linked to a higher risk of serious conditions, but they didn’t.

Hey, if you don’t look for the truth, you can never find it.

(Not, as initially published, this article said, “ the study reveals, yet again, that the scientific establishment simply will follow up on signals of potential mRNA risk.” Ugh, I meant “will NOT follow up.” Not sure where that “NOT” went.

But you already knew that.)