As with all things in hindsight, troponin kinetics was something I should have emphasized more.
That is, elevation and clearance of troponin should be taken into consideration when it comes to figuring out what troponin levels are actually telling us at any given time. In the same ways that several people among the suspected vaccine-injured cohort may be on the troponin decline by Day 3 or Day 4 of their blood tests, it's quite possible that several individuals may have also had a sudden elevation in troponin that lasted a day or two, in which case Day 3 measures would have missed this finding and lumped these people in with the non-elevated group if their levels happened to fall below the ULN at the time of sampling. There's a lot about the time frame that is worth scrutinizing.
Although I’m not inclined to run up healthcare cost...seems that adding “routine” Troponin levels with a variety of possible spike protein damage injuries, rather than only cardiac, but also screening other known injury sites...
Along with actual public autopsies and data...
...along with halting mRNA until transparent Independent investigations regarding efficacy and safety (including potential breakthrough contagions)
In the grand scheme of things I would agree. I think the fact that medical institutions are acting very hesitant to dig deeper testing warrants a ton of criticisms.
In the case of these studies, I would hope that we get more serial data as the case report. I'm willing to sacrifice quantity for quality. Having a few participants but thorough analyses is far more crucial. A lot of nuance gets lost in the weeds of larger studies.
Edit: dig not doo! Not sure why that word was typed. 🤦♂️
As with all things in hindsight, troponin kinetics was something I should have emphasized more.
That is, elevation and clearance of troponin should be taken into consideration when it comes to figuring out what troponin levels are actually telling us at any given time. In the same ways that several people among the suspected vaccine-injured cohort may be on the troponin decline by Day 3 or Day 4 of their blood tests, it's quite possible that several individuals may have also had a sudden elevation in troponin that lasted a day or two, in which case Day 3 measures would have missed this finding and lumped these people in with the non-elevated group if their levels happened to fall below the ULN at the time of sampling. There's a lot about the time frame that is worth scrutinizing.
Although I’m not inclined to run up healthcare cost...seems that adding “routine” Troponin levels with a variety of possible spike protein damage injuries, rather than only cardiac, but also screening other known injury sites...
Along with actual public autopsies and data...
...along with halting mRNA until transparent Independent investigations regarding efficacy and safety (including potential breakthrough contagions)
In the grand scheme of things I would agree. I think the fact that medical institutions are acting very hesitant to dig deeper testing warrants a ton of criticisms.
In the case of these studies, I would hope that we get more serial data as the case report. I'm willing to sacrifice quantity for quality. Having a few participants but thorough analyses is far more crucial. A lot of nuance gets lost in the weeds of larger studies.
Edit: dig not doo! Not sure why that word was typed. 🤦♂️
Excellent point!