Premium Only Content

Vaccine and Infection Myocarditis Risks Contrasted
Recently, YouTube removed one of my videos due to its “medical misinformation policy”. If you try to click on its link, you’re met with this screen. So in this video, I’d just like to set the record straight using data and information publicly available from official and respectable sources.
Yesterday, 25th October 2022, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) published an article titled, “Vaccine and infection myocarditis risks contrasted”. It can be found on Google News. Do not read other news articles on Google as they may be spreading dangerous misinformation.
In the RACGP article, they state, “A new Immunisation Coalition chart illustrates the much higher myocarditis risks following COVID-19 infection compared to vaccination.” Clicking on the chart, according to the Immunisation Coalition, we can see the risk of myocarditis per million people by age, gender and vaccination status, although only two genders have been included, which is not very inclusive. You may wish to pause this video if you’d like to take a more in-depth look. The chart shows us that the risk of myocarditis is much higher post COVID-19 infection. In terms of the vaccinated cohort, teenage males and males in their 20s were at elevated risk of myocarditis for both Pfizer and Moderna, as well as for teenage females who took two or three doses of the Moderna vaccine. Although the risk of myocarditis post vaccine is still lower than the risk post COVID infection, at least, according to this chart by the Immunisation Coalition.
In the interests of full disclosure, I think it’s important we take a look at who the Immunisation Coalition are, as I honestly had never heard of them. On their website, they state that they are an “independent not for profit organisation. We collaborate with like-minded organisations such as Primary Health Networks (PHNs), Public Health Units, Government health departments and other groups that fight vaccine hesitancy.” As they are not-for-profit, they must receive funding from somewhere, so on the same page further down they do address this. They state they get funding from “sponsors, grant givers and in-kind supporters”, and “sources of revenue include healthcare and pharmaceutical industries”. They list their In Kind Supporters which include Google, and their Sponsors & Supporters include Moderna and Pfizer. Of course they do.
Any surprises there? Anybody?
MUSIC
Melancholia by Godmode
-
6:02
Daily Insight
8 months agoPublic Transport Network Wokified in Australia’s Capital
1352 -
1:04:05
Timcast
1 hour agoThe TAMURA Conspiracy, Theory Says Blackstone WAS The Target Over Israel, NOT NFL
46K30 -
LIVE
Steven Crowder
3 hours ago🔴 NYC Shooting Exposes Massive Hypocrisy From Mamdani & the Left
21,287 watching -
LIVE
The Mel K Show
1 hour agoMORNINGS WITH MEL K - An Engaged Fed Up Citizenry is Finally Moving the Needle Towards Accountability 7-29-25
1,325 watching -
LIVE
Rebel News
26 minutes agoByelection ballot drama, Ford flips on jobs for asylum seekers, Pipeline problems | Rebel Roundup
200 watching -
LIVE
The Tom Renz Show
25 minutes agoThe Manhattan Shooting, Vax Accountability, & Trump's Trade Deals In Crypto World
80 watching -
LIVE
TheAlecLaceShow
1 hour agoGuest: George Papadopoulos | NYC Shooting In A Gun Free Zone | The Alec Lace Show
42 watching -
LIVE
LFA TV
15 hours agoLFA TV ALL DAY STREAM - TUESDAY 7/29/25
4,079 watching -
1:10:32
The Rubin Report
2 hours agoMidtown Tower Shooting Causes Resurfaced Bill Maher Clip to Go Viral
40.9K44 -
2:42:17
Tucker Carlson
23 hours agoRichard Werner Exposes the Evils of the Fed & the Link Between Banking, War, and the CIA
69.8K127