Editor’s Commentary: There’s a very good chance that if you’re reading this article, you’re either already convinced the Covid-19 “vaccines” pose serious health threats that increase the more people get jabbed, or you’ve been sent this article by someone who cares enough about you to want you to hear the truth. We’re only getting these truths in occasional bits and pieces from corporate media and an increasing number of brave healthcare professionals who are finally obeying their conscience.
You won’t hear the truth from Big Pharma or their many pawns in government.
For two years we’ve heard from “fringe” scientists (many of whom were highly respected in their fields before they uttered a sour word about the vaccines) and alternative media screaming as loudly as possible about inefficacy and health risks associated with the jabs. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans didn’t listen or weren’t getting their news from the right sources. But there’s still a valid reason to press this issue since it appears the more people get jabbed, the more likely they are to experience long-term or even deadly adverse reactions.
In recent months, we’ve seen study after study from respected teams across the globe declaring the jabs are harming and oftentimes killing people. These stories are usually ignored by corporate media, but some of the most popular studies get “fact checked” by unqualified people to “debunk” the work of extremely qualified people.
How many studies will it take to convince “normies” that they need to stop getting jabbed? Hopefully, it’ll only take one massively important study that isn’t getting the attention it deserves. Dr. Joseph Mercola wrote about it in the article below, but before you read that there are two important things to understand.
First, the attitude being adopted by many who haven’t been jabbed is that the “vaccinated” are lost souls, that it’s too late for them. This is also scientifically inaccurate because stopping people from getting boosters seems to reduce the impact. Therefore, it behooves us to continue to passionately educate those we can touch. If you talk to five people about it but only one decides to stop getting boosted, it’s worthwhile.
Second, there have been more indications that “vaxx-shedding” is happening. It’s in our own best interests to slow or stop the spread of boosters. Otherwise, those around us might pollute the blood of the unvaccinated who are around them regularly.
The article below by Dr. Mercola highlights what I believe to be the most convincing study as it pertains to myocarditis. We need to start there rather than bombarding friends and family with every fear-inducing adverse reaction because myocarditis is an easier way to keep their attention. They haven’t been swayed by reports of unprecedented deaths. They weren’t swayed by famous people developing facial ticks. Therefore, getting the word out about myocarditis has the advantage of prolonged attention. Those who may have tuned you out the first time you told them millions worldwide are dying from the jabs may listen more carefully if you’re talking to them about myocarditis studies. Here’s Dr. Mercola…
Another Study Confirms Myocarditis Post Jab
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
- A study estimated the incidence of myocarditis after COVID-19 shots and compared it with expected rates in British Columbia; a significantly increased risk of myocarditis was found following COVID-19 jabs
- While seven myocarditis cases would be expected within seven days, the study found 99 cases among those who’d received the shots
- Within 21 days post-vaccination, 141 cases of myocarditis occurred. The expected rate was 20
- This worked out to a myocarditis rate of 1.37 per 100,000 COVID-19 doses, compared with an expected rate of 0.39 per 100,000 people who did not get the shots
- Rates of myocarditis after COVID-19 shots were highest among males, those aged 18 to 29 years, people who received a Moderna COVID-19 shot and people who received two doses
- The rate of myocarditis among males aged 18 to 29 who received Moderna’s COVID-19 shot was 22.9 per 100,000
Yet another study has revealed people who receive a COVID-19 shot are at an increased risk of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle.1 With symptoms similar to a heart attack, including chest pain, shortness of breath, abnormal heartbeat and fatigue,2 myocarditis isn’t something that young, healthy adults typically experience.
But soon after mRNA shots for SARS-CoV-2 became widespread, reports of myocarditis, including sudden death, began to emerge.3 In Canada, more than 32 million people had received COVID-19 shots as of September 2022.4
“Prelicensure study data did not suggest any risk of postvaccination myocarditis,” researchers with the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control wrote in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ). However:5
“[P]ostmarketing studies have suggested an association between mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] and mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) and myocarditis, among other adverse events after immunization, which has raised concern regarding the safety of mRNA vaccines, specifically among younger populations.”
This prompted the featured study, which estimated the incidence of myocarditis after COVID-19 shots and compared it with expected rates in British Columbia. A significant increased risk of myocarditis was found following COVID-19 shots.
Getting a COVID-19 Shot Increases Risk of Myocarditis
The study used data from the BC COVID-19 Cohort study, which included more than 10.2 million doses of mRNA COVID-19 shots given to people 12 and over. Cases of myocarditis that occurred seven to 21 days after the shots and required hospitalization were examined. While seven myocarditis cases would be expected within seven days, the study found 99 cases among those who’d received the shots.
Within 21 days post-vaccination, 141 cases of myocarditis occurred. The expected rate was 20. This worked out to a myocarditis rate of 1.37 per 100,000 COVID-19 doses, compared with an expected rate of 0.39 per 100,000 people who did not get the shots.6 Rates of myocarditis after COVID-19 shots were highest among:7
- Males
- Those aged 18 to 29 years
- People who received a Moderna COVID-19 shot
- People who received two doses
The rate of myocarditis among males aged 18 to 29 who received Moderna’s COVID-19 shot was 22.9 per 100,000.8 The researchers concluded:9
“In this study, we found higher observed rates of myocarditis after receipt of mRNA vaccines than expected … We observed a higher rate of myocarditis among males aged 18-29 years after receipt of the second dose of mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine compared with those who received BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) …
Comparisons of observed with expected rates also confirmed these findings, with the highest observed-to-expected ratios among males 18–29 years of age after the second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine.”
Myocarditis Link to COVID-19 Jabs Confirmed Again and Again
Many case reports exist of myocarditis following COVID-19 jabs, but they’re still recommended as safe and effective in the U.S. The Journal of Cardiology Cases described the case of a 23-year-old man who was otherwise healthy, who experienced chest pain for three days after receiving the second dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot.
Myocarditis was confirmed via MRI and other medical tests, and he was diagnosed with “acute myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination.”10 In another example, researchers reviewed nine case series and 15 case reports involving 74 patients of myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 shots. Again, most of the patients (94.6%) were male and young, with a median age of 17.6 years.11
In a September-October 2021 case report with literature review, it was concluded that “the outcomes of this case scenario confirm myocarditis as a probable complication of COVID-19 vaccines.”12 Another study from Israel detailed myocarditis following Pfizer’s COVID-19 jab in six male patients with a median age of 23 years.13
A similar study published in Pediatrics reported seven cases of acute myocarditis or myopericarditis in otherwise healthy adolescent males. Each had experienced chest pain within four days of receiving the second dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 jab.14
Data published in JAMA Cardiology by physicians from the Navy, Army and Air Force also revealed a higher-than-expected rate of myocarditis in U.S. military personnel who received a COVID-19 jab.15
And a real-world case-control study from Israel16 revealed that the Pfizer COVID-19 jab is associated with a threefold increased risk of myocarditis,17 leading to the condition at a rate of 1 to 5 events per 100,000 persons.18 Other elevated risks were also identified following the COVID jab, including lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes), appendicitis and herpes zoster infection.19
CDC, FDA Acknowledge Myocarditis Risk
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) acknowledges that COVID-19 shots are associated with an increased myocarditis risk, stating:20
“In April 2021, increased cases of myocarditis and pericarditis were reported in the United States after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna). Data from multiple studies show a rare risk for myocarditis and/or pericarditis following receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.
These rare cases of myocarditis or pericarditis have occurred most frequently in adolescent and young adult males, ages 16 years and older, within 7 days after receiving the second dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna).”
The CDC is now investigating long-term effects of myocarditis after COVID-19 shots and is contacting people who have experienced chest pain, shortness of breath and feelings of having a fast-beating, fluttering or pounding heart following a COVID-19 shot. In order to meet the CDC’s case definition of myocarditis following a COVID-19 shot, you must also have “medical tests to support the diagnosis of myocarditis and rule out other causes.”21
However, despite the risk, the CDC is still advising children aged 12 and older to get the jab, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted full approval August 23, 2021, to Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA injection, now sold under the brand name Comirnaty, for people aged 16 and older.22
FDA does list myocarditis on the prescribing information for COVID-19 shots,23 and in its approval letter for Comirnaty, the FDA ordered Pfizer to conduct research to investigate the risk of inflammation in and around the heart, as voluntary reporting mechanisms are insufficient.24
The FDA accepted Pfizer’s suggested timetable for the post-approval study to evaluate incidence of heart and heart sack inflammation, which includes the submission of an interim report at the end of October 2023, a study completion date of June 30, 2025, and submission of a final report October 31, 2025.
British Health Agency Advises Against COVID-19 Jabs for Kids
Britain’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization (JCVI) recommended against COVID-9 injections for healthy 12- to 15-year-olds. JCVI member Adam Finn told Reuters:25
“… the number of serious cases that we see of COVID in children this age are really very small. There are uncertainties about the long-term implications of (myocarditis), and that makes the risk-benefit balance for these children really quite tight and much tighter than we would be comfortable to make the recommendation.”
In contrast, the CDC has downplayed the risks, stating that most people should still get jabbed: “The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and CDC have determined that the benefits (such as prevention of COVID-19 cases and its severe outcomes) outweigh the risks of myocarditis and pericarditis after receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.”26
Others, however, aren’t so sure. Cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra has spoken openly about the shots’ downfalls. He said in “Safe and Effective: A Second Opinion,” a documentary by Oracle Films:27
“Having been double jabbed and being one of the first to take the Pfizer vaccine, I have — after several months critically appraising the data, speaking to eminent scientists in Oxford, Stanford and Harvard, speaking to two investigative medical journalists and being contacted by two Pfizer whistleblowers — reluctantly concluded that this vaccine is not completely safe and has unprecedented harms, which leads me to conclude that it needs to be suspended until all the raw data has been released for independent analysis.”
Deaths and Disabilities Ignored, Silenced
Myocarditis reduces your heart’s ability to pump and can cause rapid or abnormal heart rhythms that can be deadly. In severe cases, myocarditis can cause permanent damage to the heart muscle and lead to heart failure, heart attack, stroke and sudden cardiac death.28 Tragic stories have accumulated worldwide:
- In August 2021, New Zealand reported the death of a woman following Pfizer’s COVID-19 jab, which they believe was due to vaccine-induced myocarditis.29
- A previously healthy 36-year-old mother of two died 11 days after receiving a Pfizer COVID-19 shot; her death was deemed to be caused by myocarditis due to the shot.30
- Dr. Neil Singh Dhalla, a CEO of a major health clinic, fell asleep four days after he got a COVID-19 booster shot — and died from a heart attack.31 The autopsy stated myocarditis. He was only 48 years old and had never had heart problems in his life.
- In another example, epidemiologists confirmed that two teenage boys from different U.S. states died of myocarditis days after getting the Pfizer shot.32 Both had received second doses of the shot. In a study that examined the autopsy findings, it’s reported that the “myocarditis” described in the boys’ deaths is “not typical myocarditis pathology.”33
If you’re wondering why you haven’t heard more about these and other cases, it’s because Big Tech has tried to censor these stories and keep them from getting out. But the truth has a way of finding the light.
A U.S. judge ruled that the White House must release correspondence regarding a “massive censorship enterprise” with Big Tech; it’s alleged that federal agencies communicated with social media companies to suppress private speech during the pandemic.34,35
Open debate and access to data from all sources is crucial to proper informed consent, including learning why some experts believe myocarditis due to COVID-19 shots “will kill kids,” without a doubt.36
- 1, 4, 5 CMAJ November 21, 2022, 194 (45) E1529-E1536; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.220676
- 2, 28 Mayo Clinic, Myocarditis
- 3 Rumble, Safe and Effective: A Second Opinion September 28, 2022, 37:18
- 6 University of Maryland, Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy November 2022
- 7, 8 EurekAlert November 21, 2022
- 9 CMAJ November 21, 2022, 194 (45) E1529-E1536; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.220676, Conclusion
- 10 Journal of Cardiology Cases May 2022, Volume 25, Issue 5, Pages 285-288
- 11 Journal of Medial Virology December 4, 2021
- 12 Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2021 September-October; 15(5): 102205
- 13 Vaccine. 2021 Jun 29;39(29):3790-3793. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.05.087. Epub 2021 May 28
- 14 Pediatrics. 2021 Sep;148(3):e2021052478. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2021-052478. Epub 2021 Jun 4
- 15 JAMA Cardiology, 2021; DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2021.2833
- 16, 18, 19 The New England Journal of Medicine August 25, 2021
- 17 MedPage Today August 25, 2021
- 20, 26 U.S. CDC, COVID-19 Vaccination, Myocarditis and Pericarditis Considerations
- 21 U.S. CDC, Investigating Long-Term Effects of Myocarditis September 23, 2022
- 22, 24 FDA.gov BLA Approval Pfizer/BioNTech August 23, 2021
- 23 STAT News August 23, 2021
- 25 Reuters September 3, 2021
- 27 Rumble, Safe and Effective: A Second Opinion September 28, 2022, 1:51
- 29 New Zealand Ministry of Health August 30, 2021
- 30 Independent May 6, 2022
- 31 BitChute December 28, 2021
- 32 Odysee February 17, 2022
- 33 Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine February 2022
- 34 Rumble, Safe and Effective: A Second Opinion September 28, 2022, 52:38
- 35 Children’s Health Defense September 7, 2022
- 36 Bitchute December 11, 2021 Dr. Peter McCullough, COVID: A Legal Perspective, 27:00
Safeguarding Your American Dream: Discover the Power of America First Healthcare
In today’s economy, healthcare costs remain one of the biggest threats to financial stability and family security. Americans work hard to build a better life, yet rising medical expenses can quickly erode savings, force tough trade-offs, and even push families toward debt or bankruptcy. Medical bills continue to rank as the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States, with millions facing underinsurance or unexpected out-of-pocket burdens that no one plans for. Many turn to government-run marketplace plans under the Affordable Care Act, hoping for relief, only to discover that what appears affordable on paper often delivers higher long-term costs, limited real protection, and coverage that may not align with personal values or family needs.
America First Healthcare stands out as a private insurance agency dedicated to helping conservatives and families secure better coverage and better rates through customized, values-aligned options. By conducting free insurance reviews, the agency uncovers hidden gaps in existing policies and connects clients with private alternatives that emphasize personal responsibility, small-government principles, and genuine affordability—often delivering up to 20% savings while providing stronger protection for the American Dream.
The allure of marketplace plans is easy to understand: open enrollment periods, premium tax credits for many households, and the promise of “comprehensive” benefits mandated by law. Yet recent data reveals a different reality, especially after the expiration of enhanced premium subsidies at the end of 2025. Enrollment for 2026 dropped by more than one million people compared to the prior year, with many shifting to lower-tier bronze plans to keep monthly premiums manageable.
These plans feature significantly higher deductibles—averaging around $7,500 nationally—and greater cost-sharing requirements. Families who once paid modest amounts after subsidies now face average premium increases of $65 or more per month, even as they accept plans that leave them responsible for thousands in upfront costs before meaningful coverage kicks in.
High deductibles create a dangerous barrier to care. Studies show that people in such plans are less likely to seek timely treatment for chronic conditions, attend preventive screenings, or fill necessary prescriptions. A seemingly minor illness or injury can balloon into major expenses when patients delay care until problems worsen. For a family of four, a single hospitalization, cancer diagnosis, or unexpected surgery can easily exceed the deductible, triggering coinsurance and out-of-pocket maximums that still leave substantial bills. One recent analysis noted that some proposed changes could push family deductibles toward $31,000 in future years, further exposing households to financial risk.
Beyond the numbers, marketplace plans often carry structural limitations. Coverage for certain critical services may include waiting periods or narrower networks that restrict access to preferred doctors and specialists. Preventive care is required to be covered without cost-sharing, but everything else—lab work, imaging, specialist visits, or ongoing treatment—typically waits until the deductible is met. This reactive model contrasts sharply with the proactive, holistic approach many families prefer, especially those focused on wellness, early intervention, and maintaining health to enjoy life rather than merely reacting to illness.
Values alignment represents another growing concern. Government-influenced plans operate within a framework shaped by federal mandates and political priorities that may not reflect conservative principles of limited government, personal freedom, and ethical stewardship. Families who want to direct their healthcare dollars toward providers and benefits that honor traditional values sometimes find marketplace options feel misaligned, forcing a compromise between affordability and conviction.
Private alternatives, by contrast, offer year-round flexibility without the restrictions of open enrollment windows. Independent agents can shop across a wider range of carriers to design plans tailored to specific family needs—whether that means lower deductibles for frequent medical users, broader provider networks, or add-ons that support wellness and preventive services from day one. Clients frequently report more stable premiums that do not automatically escalate each year, along with genuine cost savings once the full picture of deductibles, copays, and coverage depth is considered.
Take the experience of real families who made the switch. Amanda C. shared that her new plan felt “way better” than what she had through the marketplace. Johnny Y. noted his previous coverage kept increasing annually until he found a more stable private option. Sofia S. expressed delight with her plan and began recommending it to others. These stories echo a common theme: when families move beyond one-size-fits-all government marketplaces, they often discover customized protection that better safeguards both health and finances.
Founder Jordan Sarmiento’s own journey underscores the stakes. In 2021, a six-day hospitalization generated a $95,000 bill. Under a well-structured private “Conservative Care Coverage” plan, his out-of-pocket responsibility would have been just $500. That stark difference illustrates how thoughtful planning and private options can prevent a medical event from becoming a financial catastrophe.
Practical steps exist for anyone questioning their current coverage. Start with a no-obligation review of your existing policy to identify gaps—high deductibles, limited critical-care benefits, or escalating premiums. Compare total projected costs (premiums plus potential out-of-pocket expenses) rather than monthly premiums alone. Consider family health history, anticipated needs, and lifestyle priorities. Private agencies can present side-by-side options that include stronger wellness incentives, broader access, and plans built on shared values of self-reliance and freedom.
In an era when healthcare inflation continues to outpace general cost-of-living increases, relying solely on marketplace solutions carries growing risk. Families who proactively explore private alternatives frequently achieve meaningful savings while gaining peace of mind that their coverage truly works when needed most.
America First Healthcare makes this exploration straightforward through its free review process. Families and individuals receive personalized guidance to close coverage holes, reduce unnecessary expenses, and secure plans that align with conservative principles—protecting wallets, health, and the American Dream without government overreach. Many who complete a review discover they can enjoy better benefits for less, often saving up to 20% while gaining the customization and stability that marketplace plans struggle to deliver.
Ultimately, protecting your family’s future requires looking beyond the marketing of “affordable” government options. By understanding the long-term costs hidden in high deductibles, shifting coverage tiers, and values mismatches, Americans can make empowered choices. Private, values-driven insurance offers a smarter path—one that rewards diligence, supports wellness, and delivers real security. For those ready to move beyond the limitations of traditional marketplace plans, a simple review can reveal options designed to serve families, not bureaucracies. The American Dream thrives when individuals and families retain control over their healthcare decisions, and thoughtful private coverage plays a vital role in making that possible.
The answer is NO stories will convince COVidiots the jab is dangerous because they don’t take it because it’s good; they take it because they are bewitched, spiritually deluded.
there are non so blind as he who will NOT see
no amount of scientific evidence will convince them. For them it is a religious-like belief in the clot shots to ward off evil spirits of covid – the Branch Covidians. They are the people who rushed to get the shots in fear and blind faith in “experts” and “the government”.
By all means convince them to take the jab and the never ending boosters. Good way to rid the country of stupid, devoid of common sense likely Democrat voters.