Increased Age-Adjusted Cancer Mortality After the Third mRNA-Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccine Dose During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan

https://www.cureus.com/articles/19627...

Gibo M, Kojima S, Fujisawa A, et al. (April 08, 2024) Increased Age-Adjusted Cancer Mortality After the Third mRNA-Lipid Nanoparticle Vaccine Dose During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan. Cureus 16(4): e57860. DOI 10.7759/cureus.57860

Conclusions

Statistically significant increases in age-adjusted mortality rates of all cancer and some specific types of cancer, namely, ovarian cancer, leukemia, prostate, lip/oral/pharyngeal, pancreatic, and breast cancers, were observed in 2022 after two-thirds of the Japanese population had received the third or later dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-LNP vaccine.

These particularly marked increases in mortality rates of these ERα-sensitive cancers may be attributable to several mechanisms of the mRNA-LNP vaccination,

rather than COVID-19 infection itself or reduced cancer care due to the lockdown.

Researchers have reported that the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-LNP vaccine may pose the risk of development and progression of cancer.

Several case reports have described cancer developing or worsening after vaccination and discussed possible causal links between cancer and mRNA-LNP vaccination.

Details of the paper

No significant excess mortality was observed during the first year of the pandemic (2020).

However, some excess cancer mortalities were observed in 2021 after mass vaccination with the first and second vaccine doses,

and significant excess mortalities were observed for all cancers and some specific types of cancer after mass vaccination with the third dose in 2022.

During the COVID-19 pandemic

Excess deaths including cancer have become a concern in Japan

Study aimed to evaluate how age-adjusted mortality rates (AMRs) for different types of cancer in Japan changed during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022).

Official statistics from Japan,

used to compare observed annual and monthly AMRs,

with predicted rates based on pre- pandemic (2010-2019) figures

In 2020

(first year of the pandemic)

Significant deficit mortality for all causes, and no excess mortality for all cancers.

In 2021

Significant excess mortality of 2.1% for all causes,

and 1.1% for all cancers.

In 2022

Excesses mortality, 9.6%

2.1% for all cancers

Number of excess deaths 115,799

Number of excess cancer deaths, 7,162

Lung, colorectal, stomach, pancreatic, and liver cancer

Accounted for 61% of deaths from all cancers.

AMRs for the four cancers with the most deaths showed a decreasing trend until the first year of the pandemic in 2020,

but the rate of decrease slowed in 2021 and 2022.

Since February 2021, the mRNA-lipid nanoparticle (mRNA-LNP) vaccine has been available for emergency use,

and is recommended for all aged six months and older

As of March 2023

80% of the Japanese population had received first and second doses,

68% had received third dose,

45% had received fourth dose

Excess deaths from causes other than COVID-19 have been reported in various countries, including deaths from cancer,

and Japan is no exception

Japan, good data

Large population of 123 million

Availability of official statistics

80% accuracy rate of death certificates according to autopsy studies

Vaccination rates by age group, the websites of the Prime Minister's Office and the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare

Discussion

All cancer deaths: A statistically significant excess emerged in 2021 and increased further in 2022.

In addition, significant excess monthly mortality was observed after August 2021,

whereas mass vaccination of the general population began around April 2021.

There were excess trends in cancer deaths across most age groups.

The significant increases in mortalities for six specific cancer types were unlikely to be explained by a shortage of healthcare services.

Key Takeaways:
[00:14] Similar Illness: Professor Clancy suggests long Covid and post-vaccine complications share a common cause: abnormal immune response to the spike protein.
[00:42] Body-wide vs. Localized: Unlike traditional vaccines, mRNA vaccines deliver spike protein instructions throughout the body, potentially causing issues in various organs.
[01:21] Autoimmune Response: Clancy theorizes long Covid and post-vaccine complications stem from an autoimmune response triggered by the body's own immune system attacking spike proteins.
[01:49] Long-term Spike Protein Presence: Clancy highlights a study suggesting the spike protein can persist in the body for over a year, potentially affecting organs like the brain and heart.
[02:03] More Vaccine Cases: Clancy claims to see more long-haul complications from vaccines than from Covid infection itself in his practice.
[02:27] ️Icton and Spike Protein: The video mentions Icton as a drug that may bind to the spike protein, preventing the immune system from attacking it.
[03:06] Rapid Oxygen Improvement: Icton's ability to quickly improve oxygen saturation in Covid patients is presented as evidence for its effectiveness.
[03:19] Preventing Red Blood Cell Clumping: The video suggests Icton might prevent the spike protein from causing red blood cell clumping, potentially improving oxygen delivery.
Key Takeaways:
[03:58] 🩸 Icton for Improved Oxygen Delivery: The video suggests Icton improves oxygen delivery by preventing red blood cell clumping in capillaries.
[05:08] Frequent Vaccination Concerns: Professor Clancy expresses concern about the effectiveness and safety of frequent mRNA vaccinations, citing potential for diminishing returns and adverse events.
[05:46] ️ Over-stimulating the Immune System: Clancy theorizes frequent vaccinations may suppress the immune system's ability to fight off infections.
[06:11] Studies Show Reduced Effectiveness: The video mentions studies suggesting that receiving multiple Covid vaccines might decrease their effectiveness against future infections.
[06:26] Comparison to Allergy Shots: Clancy compares frequent Covid vaccinations to allergy shots, where multiple injections aim to desensitize the immune system, whereas Covid vaccines aim to stimulate it.

Absolutely, here are the key takeaways from the video Changing views - YouTube | Changing Views toward mRNA based Covid Vaccines in the Scientific Literature: 2020 - 2024 by Dr. John Campbell:

• [00:14] の変化 [へんげ] (change) Early scientific literature was biased in favor of promoting mRNA vaccines without any previous completed human clinical trials. This bias was likely due to social and political concerns, as well as corporate greed.

• [01:34] ⬆️ (increase) There has been a dramatic shift in the medical literature concerning mRNA vaccines between 2020 and 2024. Initially, the literature claimed there were no serious adverse events associated with mRNA vaccines. However, as more data became available, the literature began to acknowledge the existence of serious adverse events.

• [02:16] ⚠️ (warning) The early decision-making regarding mRNA vaccines was based on biased reports of the science. This led to the widespread use of mRNA vaccines despite the lack of safety data.

• [02:31] 🌐 (globe) Science should be completely objective when evaluating health risks. However, it can often be influenced by social and economic considerations.

• [03:27] 顕著 けんちょ The COVID-19 pandemic exposed serious vulnerabilities in Western medical research. These vulnerabilities include the susceptibility of science to bias and the influence of corporate greed.
  ░
  http://googleusercontent.com/youtube_content/0

• [04:23] (warning) The author argues that scientific principles were abandoned during the development and rollout of COVID-19 vaccines.

• [05:16] (increase) A review of over 4,000 scientific articles found an increasing acknowledgement of risks and reduced efficacy of mRNA vaccines between 2020 and 2024.

• [05:44] ➡️ (shift) There was a significant shift in scientific literature regarding mRNA vaccines. Early papers claimed no serious adverse events, while later papers acknowledged a significant number.

• [06:25] ⚠️ (warning) The author suggests early decision-making on COVID-19 vaccines was based on biased scientific reports that failed to acknowledge serious adverse events.

• [07:45] (corporation, money) The author claims the objectivity of scientific research on COVID-19 vaccines was compromised by social, political concerns, and overwhelming corporate greed.

• [08:11] ⚠️ (warning) The author warns that social, political concerns, and corporate greed can significantly bias scientific research, especially when evaluating health risks.

• [08:41] ⚖️ (balance) Scientific objectivity is crucial, but research can be influenced by social and economic factors.

• [09:40] (globe) The author suggests that international competition between superpowers like the US, Russia, and China influenced the development of COVID-19 vaccines.

• [10:08] (trophy) The author claims some countries prioritized being the "first" to develop a vaccine over safety and efficacy.

• [11:14] ❓ (question) The video raises the question of why the US heavily invested in mRNA vaccines when established vaccine technologies existed.

• [12:24] (money) The author suggests that economic considerations may have influenced the decision to prioritize mRNA vaccines over established alternatives.

• [13:19] (science tube) The video claims that national rivalries and corporate interests influenced scientific reporting on COVID-19 vaccines.

• [13:42] ➡️ (shift) There was a significant shift in scientific literature on COVID-19 vaccines between 2020 and 2024. Early papers claimed no serious adverse events, while later papers acknowledged a high rate.

• [14:23] ✅ (checkmark) Early scientific literature on COVID-19 vaccines often portrayed them as very safe and positive.

• [15:25] (minimize) Even when acknowledging some serious adverse events, later scientific literature downplayed their frequency with terms like "very rare."

• [17:41] ⚠️ (warning) The video cites a study that found a significant increase in reports of serious adverse events associated with mRNA vaccines.

• [18:10] (increase) The author claims there has been a dramatic shift in the medical literature regarding mRNA vaccines, with a later acknowledgement of serious adverse events.

• [18:43] (money) The author suggests the early positive portrayal of mRNA vaccines in scientific literature may have been influenced by monetary and political purposes.

• [19:29] (conflict) The video criticizes the practice of vaccine producers publishing research promoting their own products, citing conflicts of interest.

• [20:28] (newspaper) The video suggests that even prestigious medical journals may not be immune to bias.

• [20:46] (ban) The video mentions the existence of arguments for completely banning mRNA vaccines until further safety testing is conducted.

• [21:12] (lock) The video calls for more transparency in data regarding mRNA vaccines.

• [21:28] (bomb) The video concludes that the shift in attitudes towards mRNA vaccines exposes serious vulnerabilities in Western medical research.

By definition, these serious adverse events lead to either death,

are life-threatening,

require inpatient (prolongation of) hospitalisation,

cause persistent/significant disability/incapacity,

concern a congenital anomaly/birth defect

or include a medically important event according to medical judgement

Covid vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths

Experts call for more research into side effects and possible links to mortality rates

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024...

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-0...

Competing interests: None declared.

https://bmjpublichealth.bmj.com/conte...

Excess mortality has remained high in the Western World for three consecutive years, despite the implementation of containment measures and COVID-19 vaccines.

This raises serious concerns.

Government leaders and policymakers need to thoroughly investigate the underlying causes of persistent excess mortality.

Insight into excess death rates in years following WHO’s pandemic declaration is crucial for government leaders and policymakers to evaluate their health crisis policies.

This study explores excess mortality in the Western World from 2020 until 2022.

Methods

All-cause mortality reports, ‘Our World in Data’

47 western countries

Comparator

Historical death data in a country from 2015 until 2019

Total excess deaths, 1 January 2020 until 31 December 2022

3,098,456 from

Excess mortality 2021, 42 countries (89%)

Excess mortality 2022, 43 countries (91%)

Excess deaths

2020, 1,033,122 excess deaths (P-score 11.4%)

2021, 1,256,942 excess deaths (P-score 13.8%)

2022, 808,392 excess deaths (P-score 8.8%)

Conclusions

Excess mortality has remained high in the Western World for three consecutive years,

despite the implementation of containment measures and COVID-19 vaccines.

This raises serious concerns.

Government leaders and policymakers need to thoroughly investigate underlying causes of persistent excess mortality.

More information

The secondary analysis of the placebo-controlled, phase III randomised clinical trials of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines showed that the Pfizer trial had a 36% higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group.

The authors of the secondary analysis point out that most of these serious adverse events concern common clinical conditions, for example, ischaemic stroke, acute coronary syndrome and brain haemorrhage. This commonality hinders clinical suspicion and consequently its detection as adverse vaccine reactions

These reactions included cardiovascular diseases,

coagulation, haemorrhages,

gastrointestinal events and thromboses.

Numerous studies reported that COVID-19 vaccination may induce myocarditis, pericarditis and autoimmune diseases.

Postmortem examinations have also ascribed myocarditis,

encephalitis, immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia,

intracranial haemorrhage and diffuse thrombosis to COVID-19 vaccinations.

pulmonary embolism, acute myocardial infarction, immune thrombocytopenia and disseminated intravascular coagulation.

• 01:25 🩹 A fourth dose of the COVID vaccine does not provide protection against death, according to a population-wide study in Austria.
• 01:55 🦠 Although the fourth dose initially reduces infections by 177% for the first 3 months, it leads to more infections in the following 6 months, questioning its long-term efficacy.
• 08:53 📉 The extended follow-up until June 2023 shows no significant reduction in mortality with the fourth vaccine dose but indicates a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, raising concerns.
• 09:46 🏥 The observed lower mortality in those with a fourth dose may be attributed to a "healthy vaccine bias," as healthier individuals are more likely to receive additional doses.
• 12:21 🤔 The study questions the justification for repeated vaccine boosters for individuals with a history of previous infections, suggesting a need for a critical re-evaluation of current vaccine policies.

• 00:00 🔍 Conflicting Advice on Natural Immunity

  • Conflicting advice between natural immunity and vaccine-induced immunity.
  • World Health Organization's assertion of natural immunity lasting 6 to 8 months, while vaccine-induced immunity substantially reduces after 4 months.
  • Comparison of people vaccinated and unvaccinated but infected, revealing significantly higher protection with natural immunity against infection, symptomatic disease, and hospitalization.

• 03:13 🧬 Comprehensive Evidence on Natural Immunity

  • WHO data indicating robust natural immunity for at least 6 to 8 months post-infection, supported by cellular immunity.
  • Natural infection provides broader immune response targeting various viral proteins, not just the spike protein.
  • Research from the Oxford academic journal highlighting waning protection post two doses of Pfizer vaccine and contrasting the reduction in immunity between vaccinated and naturally infected individuals.

• 06:33 📊 Superiority of Natural Immunity Over Vaccination

  • Studies emphasizing the significant protective advantage of natural acquired immunity against Delta variant infection compared to two-dose vaccine immunity.
  • Instances where unvaccinated individuals previously infected had no subsequent infections, supporting the notion that COVID-19 vaccination might not benefit those who've already had the infection.
  • Criticism towards public health officials and leaders for holding onto the hypothesis that natural immunity is unreliable, despite growing scientific evidence against this notion.

• 09:09 🤝 Rebuilding Trust Through Acknowledgment

  • Emphasis on the loss of public trust due to conflicting messages and the necessity for authorities to admit the potential superiority of natural immunity.
  • Suggestion to rebuild trust by acknowledging the evidence and admitting any errors in the previous understanding of natural immunity.
  • Highlighting the importance of transparency and honesty in adapting to evolving scientific data to regain public confidence.

• 12:43 🌍 Community Health Project in Uganda

  • Conclusion with a heartwarming story about a community health project in Uganda supporting impoverished and abandoned children for their education.
  • Encouragement for viewers to contribute to the community project through donations, stating that over 100% of the funds go directly to support workers in Africa.
  • Highlighting the positive impact viewers' support has on these humanitarian projects.

One study suggests that there is no difference in the virus shedding while contageous between vaccinated and non-vaccinated people. Weird.

Current Risk Assessment
Based on what CDC knows now, existing tests used to detect and medications used to treat COVID-19 appear to be effective with this variant. BA.2.86 may be more capable of causing infection in people who have previously had COVID-19 or who have received COVID-19 vaccines. Scientists are evaluating the effectiveness of the forthcoming, updated COVID-19 vaccine. CDC’s current assessment is that this updated vaccine will be effective at reducing severe disease and hospitalization. At this point, there is no evidence that this variant is causing more severe illness. That assessment may change as additional scientific data are developed. CDC will share more as we know more.

• 5.1% of those who received the mRNA-1273 booster vaccine in a Swiss trial showed increased troponins, indicating cardiomyocyte damage.
• 2.8% of the vaccinated group (1 in 35 recipients) experienced vaccine-associated myocardial injury.
• The study was industry-independent, peer-reviewed, and conducted by cardiologists and scientists.
• Active surveillance was used, which is more reliable than passive retrospective surveillance.
• Women showed more myocardial damage than men in this study, different from passive surveillance results.
• Patients with elevated troponins were warned not to exercise, resulting in no major adverse cardiac events within 30 days.
• Vaccine-induced myocardial injury was more common than previously thought.
• The potential protective role of antiviral and antibacterial agents warrants further study.
• Regulators around the world need to respond urgently to this information.

• 00:41 The video presents microscopic evidence of spike protein presence in the heart tissue of deceased patients following a specific injection.
• 02:16 The spike protein in the heart tissue is linked to inflammatory changes and abnormal CD4 cell presence, indicating severe damage.
• 04:14 A systematic review of 28 autopsies reveals clear causality between COVID-19 vaccinations and myocarditis.
• 07:16 The study shows that the adverse events related to myocarditis occurred from Day 0 to Day 36 after vaccination, with a higher incidence in young men.
• 09:08 The authors suggest a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccinations and myocarditis in cases of sudden and unexpected death in vaccinated individuals.
• 11:20 Alarmingly, some cases show no reported symptoms before death, and autopsy reveals inflammation in young individuals aged 16 to 17.
• 13:23 The scientific community is open to replies and further investigation, and more information is yet to be revealed on this topic.

The fact (Campbell has reviewed the evidence in previous videos) the mRNA vaccine can travel from the vaccination site throughout the body is something I find horrific. And here he explains why it can be such a serious problem, especially for those with narrowing arteries in the heart and other vital areas. Scary stuff.

• 🦠 mRNA vaccine for influenza is being discussed in the video.
• 🩸 Lipid nanoparticles in the vaccine can potentially be distributed throughout the body.
• 🔬 The vaccine's lipid nanoparticles can merge with cell membranes and deliver RNA instructions.
• 🌡️ The vaccine stimulates an immune response and an inflammatory response.
• 💪 Immune cells produce antibodies to protect against disease.
• 💉 Systemic absorption of the vaccine and antigen production may vary based on the number of cells reached.
• ⚖️ Controlling the dose of antigen produced and monitoring systemic inflammation is a concern.
• 🌍 The video questions why vaccine manufacturers haven't taken these concerns into account.
• 🌐 Governments around the world are investing in mRNA vaccine production with companies like Moderna and Oxford.
• ❓ The video calls for answers regarding the potential systemic distribution and inflammatory effects of the vaccine.
• 🎥 A follow-up video is mentioned for explaining the proposed details by the National Institutes of Health.

Wow! Who is the arbiter of truth? Discuss ideas and data without fear.

German lab's frightening results. Found evidence of covid vaccine causing strange,new pathology. More work needs to be done, but unlikely that will happen in U.S. or U.K. where questioning the safety of vaccine is not allowed.

Another vaccine induced death. Wonder if youtube will force publisher to take this video down, too.