Clot-related adverse events in VAERS 60 days out from last shot

Modified mRNA LNP products versus 'traditional' vaccines

When we wrote up the updated myocarditis paper¹, we had an idea to include examples of individuals who had succumbed to myocarditis many months after their last injection of COVID-19 injectable product, as per their reports to VAERS. In both cases included our paper, the product was Pfizer. As you can see in Figure 1 below, a 15-year-old boy had a diagnosis of idiopathic myocarditis that resulted in death 358 days after his first, and last, Pfizer injection.

Figure 1: Details of two cases of COVID-19 injection-induced myocarditis associated with sudden death. Source: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20420986241226566?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed

This is shocking enough, and these are only two examples. These late occurrences of myocardial incidents left me thinking about the long-term effects of these modified mRNA COVID-19 products.

I was more recently prompted to examine clot-related adverse events (AEs) in VAERS, since the lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) are suspected to be - along with the spike protein - a root cause of hemagglutination. I gave a talk about all things LNP to Doctors for COVID Ethics last year, and you can watch that here. I think they disrupt the zeta potential of red blood cells, as does the spike protein.²³

Figure 2: LNP degradation and gloopy fats. Source: Damages from the modified mRNA-containing LNPs - from vessels to brain - a numbers game. Doctors for COVID Ethics

We all know by now, especially by the given name “clot shot”, that the COVID-19 shots are associated with thrombotic events and clotting in human beings. It is widely accepted now also that SARS-2 itself is not a respiratory pathogen, but one that can induce these same clotting issues in people, and thus these ‘symptoms’ are certainly spike-related. But again, the LNPs don’t help and without them, the modified mRNA would likely get degraded way before it could ever be translated into ‘spike’ protein if not protected by the LNP trojan horse.

I pulled out clot-related⁴ AEs reported to VAERS in the domestic data associated with the modified mRNA shots reported from 2021 through to 2023. I did the same thing for all vaccines through 2018-2020. And similarly, for the Janssen and Novavax products for 2021-2023 in order to compare modified mRNA products and non-modified mRNA products.⁵ For each group, I separated out the reports that were made 60 days or more from the last injection. I suspected that in the context of the modified mRNA shots that there would be many more reports post 60 days than for ‘regular’ vaccines, and maybe for the non-modified mRNA products, since they do not employ this non-limiting, self-producing spike technology wrapped in these likely-degraded fat bubbles. Here’s what I found in what I fondly will call the “clot plots”. I will start with a comparison between all vaccines and the modified mRNA COVID-19 products (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Clot-related AEs reported in VAERS domestic data for all vaccines (left) and modified mRNA products (right) post 60 days. Source: https://vaers.hhs.gov.

It is quite striking isn’t it? Indeed, the number of shots administered for all vaccines combined is higher⁶ than for the number of modified mRNA COVID-19 shots for these 3 year periods, yet, the clot-related AEs differ in absolute count quite a bit. It seems like the ‘traditional’ vaccines don’t induce clotting in quite the same way as the LNP-spike-based products. So is it the LNPs? Or is it the spike?

Let’s look at the J&J and Novavax shots compared to the modified mRNA shots. Nota bene: the Novavax shots represent only 0.6% of all the reports when clumping the non-modified mRNA shots together (ie: Janssen and Novavax), so when I write about Janssen and Novavax together, I am basically only referring to Janssen.

Figure 4: Clot-related AEs reported in VAERS domestic data for all vaccines (left), modified mRNA products (middle) and Janssen/Novavax products (right) post 60 days. Source: https://vaers.hhs.gov.

Approximately 14% of all clot-related reports in the context of the modified mRNA products were made 60 days out whereby only ~5 and ~7% of reports made for all vaccines and the non-modified mRNA products were made 60 days out, respectively.

There were far fewer Janssen/Novavax shots doled out all-in-all, and interestingly, relative to the total AE count per manufacturer, Janssen is the worst for clotting. But… When does the clotting take place?

Figure 5: Clot-related AEs reported in VAERS domestic data per 100,000 total AE reports for all vaccines (left), modified mRNA products (middle) and Janssen/Novavax products (right) Source: https://vaers.hhs.gov.

When the post-60-day data is normalized per 100,000 clot reports as per manufacturing type (modmRNA vs non-modmRNA), it is clear that Houston, we have a clotting problem with the modified mRNA products when it comes to a delayed reporting effect. Therefore, even though the Janssen (and Novavax) products may induce clotting with immediate effects, the modified mRNA products appear to induce reportable clotting effects months after the last dose.

Figure 6: Percentages of all clot-related AEs reported in VAERS domestic data filed 60 days out from last shot for all vaccines (left), modified mRNA products (middle) and Janssen/Novavax products (right) Source: https://vaers.hhs.gov.

The difference between the percentages of clot-related 60-day-out reports is notable when comparing the modified mRNA and non-modified mRNA shots. 13.7% of the modified mRNA clot-related reports occurred 60 days out from the last shot, and in the case of all vaccines combined and the Janssen/Novavax products, they stand somewhat equal at 5.2% and 7.6% - far below the percentage reported for their modified mRNA colleagues.

Conclusion

The modified mRNA injectable COVID-19 products appear to induce clotting months after a ‘last’ shot, according to VAERS reports. It is notable that of these post-60-day reports, 69% were filed by medical professionals, so it was the opinion of these medical professionals that it was worth filing these clot-related reports months after their patient’s last COVID shot and therefore, they likely suspected a causal relationship. Proper ‘ting, as we Newfoundlanders say.

1. Rose J, Hulscher N, McCullough PA. Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2024 Jan 27;15:20420986241226566. doi: 10.1177/20420986241226566. PMID: 38293564; PMCID: PMC10823859

2. Scheim, D.E. A Deadly Embrace: Hemagglutination Mediated by SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein at Its 22 N-Glycosylation Sites, Red Blood Cell Surface Sialoglycoproteins, and Antibody. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 2558. https:// doi.org/10.3390/ijms23052558

3. Boschi C, Scheim DE, Bancod A, Militello M, Bideau ML, Colson P, Fantini J, Scola BL. SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Induces Hemagglutination: Implications for COVID-19 Morbidities and Therapeutics and for Vaccine Adverse Effects. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022; 23(24):15480. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms232415480

4. keywords used: ‘clot’, ‘occlusion’ and ‘agglutination’

5. Nota bene: the Novavax shots represent only 0.6% of all the reports when clumping the non-modified mRNA shots together (ie: Janssen and Novavax), so when I write about Janssen and Novavax together, I am basically only referring to Janssen. I didn’t want to exclude Novavax completely, but with regards to this analysis, Novavax is pretty irrelevant.

6. I was shocked to discover that msost of the ‘vaccine’ coverage data has been removed from the CDC website: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccine-delivery-coverage