A top cardiologist has issued a warning after discovering that deadly heart damage now impacts around 100 million Americans who received Covid mRNA “vaccines.”
According to Dr. Thomas Levy, those who received the injections should seek advice from a respected cardiologist.
Levy, a renowned cardiologist and an attorney-at-law who also serves as the contributing editor for the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service and serves as a consultant to LivOn Labs, told Steve Kirsch that the spike protein’s effect on the heart is even worse than previously thought.
In an article, Kirsch highlighted the heart damage in vaccinated pilots, which was revealed in a change to Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) guidelines.
Back in 2022, the FAA quietly changed the electrocardiogram (“ECG”) parameters for pilots to accommodate those with cardiac injury, suggesting the deadly shots are causing an unprecedented number of pilots to fail their screening.
In its updated ‘Guide for Aviation Medical Examiners,’ the FAA widened the ECG parameters beyond the normal range (PR max of 0.2).
According to Kirsch, this range wasn’t widened by a little, it was a lot.
“The cardiac harm of course is not limited to pilots,” Kirsch explained in his article.
“My best guess right now is that over 50 million Americans sustained some amount of heart damage from the shot.”
WATCH:
The following are excerpts taken from ‘Myocarditis: Once Rare, Now Common’ by Dr. Thomas Levy.
This essay was the basis of the discussion in the video above.
As an actively practising clinical cardiologist for many years in three different communities, Dr. Levy knew about myocarditis – he just never saw it. Quite literally, he recalls seeing ONE, just one case. Now, active clinical cardiologists are seeing myocarditis patients on a regular basis – it has become genuinely common.
Covid and Myocarditis
Scientific literature indicates that myocarditis is occurring quite frequently in patients harbouring the chronic presence of the covid-related spike protein. This is being seen in many individuals with persistent chronic covid, many of whom have been vaccinated, as well as in a substantial number of individuals who have been vaccinated and have never contracted covid.
A study in mice showed that the injection of the mRNA vaccine, which produces the spike protein, reliably induced myopericarditis. Regardless of the initial source of exposure to spike protein, it appears to be the reason for the pathology and symptoms seen in chronic covid.
While not yet clearly documented by any well-designed studies in the medical literature, a great deal of anecdotal information indicates that vaccine mRNA shedding can occur.
And once transmitted, the mRNA directly leads to spike protein production. Such mRNA shedding means that the spike protein is indirectly, if not directly as well, transmissible from one individual to another via inhalation or various forms of skin contact.
While many try to dismiss such an “exposure” as too minimal to be of clinical consequence, such an assertion cannot be assumed to be true when dealing with an agent – the spike protein – that appears capable of replication once it gains access to the body.
Myocarditis, which simply means inflammation of some or all of the muscle cells in the heart, can occur when the spike protein binds to the blood vessels in the heart, to the muscle cells themselves, or both.
Chest X-ray, electrocardiogram (“ECG”), and echocardiogram can all be used to help establish the diagnosis of myocarditis. An elevated troponin level on blood testing is extremely sensitive in picking up any ongoing heart muscle cell damage, and some elevation of this test will always be seen if any significant inflammation is present in those muscle cells.
The very high sensitivity of the troponin test has revealed that there are countless numbers of people post-Covid infection and/or post-vaccination that are continuing to have sustained subclinical degrees of myocardial inflammation.
No matter how minimal the elevation of the test, any increase means that a gradual and continued loss of heart muscle function will occur over time. It also means that the heart is highly susceptible to an acute and potentially severe worsening of heart function when an additional exposure to more spike protein occurs, as is seen with the booster shots being vigorously promoted now.
Many abnormal troponin tests eventually resolve completely and many do not. The quality of nutrition, the strength of the immune system, and the quality of the nutrient/vitamin/mineral supplementation being taken are all critical factors in determining whether a minimal, subclinical degree of inflammation in the heart is capable of completely resolving with a return of the troponin level into the reference, or normal, range.
In a recent Swiss study yet to be published at the time of this writing [5 January 2023], troponin levels were measured on 777 hospital employees who received a booster injection after having received two injections previously.
On the third day after the booster, troponin levels above the upper limits of normal were seen in 2.8% of those subjects.
By the next day, half of the elevated troponin levels had come back into the normal range. Longer-term follow-up data was not available. Rather than be concerned that some myocardial damage was done by the vaccine, which is openly acknowledged in the study, it is dismissed as being of no importance since half of the elevated troponins resolved 24 hours later. And, as with all of the current papers downplaying the significance of any vaccine side effect, however significant, the authors always conclude that the vaccine is doing much more good than harm without any further qualification as to why such a conclusion is valid.
Having even the most minimal elevation of troponin not only raises the concern of some collective long-term heart damage, or the ease of having a “re-flaring” of inflammation with new spike protein exposures, as from a booster shot, it also raises the concern of electrical instability in some of the inflamed myocardial cells.
There is always a possibility of electrical instability in any inflamed myocardial muscle cells, as it is their normal physiological nature to transmit electrical impulses from one cell to the next.
Because of this, stressful events that release surges of adrenalin and catecholamines in the circulation, as is seen with peak physical exertion, can readily provoke such electrically unstable cells into starting, and sustaining, an abnormal heart rhythm.
Hundreds of European soccer players have died or collapsed on the field of play in the last two years.
Of note, they have not been seen to collapse while standing or sitting on the sidelines. Similarly, any pilot with even a minimal but otherwise symptom-free elevation of troponin can potentially sustain such a life-threatening arrhythmia when a significant stress-provoking emergency arises in the cockpit.
Covid, Arrhythmias, Heart Block, and Pilots
The PR interval is the amount of time that the heartbeat takes to traverse the atrial chambers in the heart before reaching the conduction-accelerating AV node. The normal PR interval ranges from 0.12 to 0.2 seconds.
In the setting of the pandemic, it is of particular concern when PR interval prolongation is seen for the first time following a bout of covid and/or following a vaccination. This is a clear indicator of new inflammation in at least some of the heart cells, however minimal it may be. Regardless, it should not just be assumed to be of no importance.
However, ignoring the inherent pathology in a pandemic-induced prolonged PR interval is exactly what the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) appears to have done.
The FAA decided to change the rules, disregarding long-standing parameters of normalcy based on medical science and not convenience. The FAA has now declared a PR interval of 0.3 seconds to be the “new normal” in the FAA Guide for Aviation Medical Examiners as of October 2022. The October, 2021 standards asserted the PR interval was normal only at 0.2 seconds or less. An interval of 0.3 seconds represents a “permissible” increase in this interval by over 100% relative to the low normal interval of 0.12 seconds. This is not a nominal increase in PR interval, but a very large one.
I think it is unfortunate that in some of the results cited, the sample is described as of subjects who had covid or had a covid vaccination. The two groups, those who had covid and those who had a vaccine are unrelated and should be separated in the studies. This applies especially when many people regard covid as not a threat and regard the vaccine as a threat.