The risk of developing a form of heart inflammation is higher for people younger than 40 after receiving Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine than it is from contracting COVID-19, according to a new study.

Researchers found 15 excess cases per 1 million people who received a second dose of the vaccine compared to 10 extra cases of myocarditis following a positive COVID-19 test. Moderna’s vaccine is typically taken in a two-dose regimen.

The risk of myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation, was much higher following the second dose of the Moderna vaccine, but there were still eight excess cases per 1 million people following the first dose as well.

“Time to abandon the belief that COVID-19 myocarditis risk is always higher than mRNA vaccine myocarditis risk. For some individuals, myocarditis risks of the vaccine(s) are higher than those of the disease,” Euzebiusz Jamrozik, an infectious disease expert who works at the University of Oxford, wrote on Twitter.

The elevated risk stood out against what researchers found for the Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccines. People were found to be more at risk of contracting myocarditis from COVID-19 than from either of those vaccines, regardless of age.

“This population-based study quantifies for the first time the risk of several rare cardiac adverse events associated with three COVID-19 vaccines as well as SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 in adults was associated with a small increase in the risk of myocarditis within a week of receiving the first dose of both adenovirus and mRNA vaccines, and after the second dose of both mRNA vaccines. By contrast, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a substantial increase in the risk of hospitalization or death from myocarditis, pericarditis, and cardiac arrhythmia,” the researchers wrote.

SARS-CoV-2 is another name for the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, which causes COVID-19.

The study was published in Nature and was carried out by professors from multiple colleges, including the University of Oxford, which helped develop the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.

Researchers utilized data from the English National Immunization database, which includes information on all people vaccinated in England. The database featured information on 38.6 million people through Aug. 24.

Limitations on the study included not breaking down the data further—previous studies indicate that teenagers are at much higher risk of myocarditis from vaccines than older people—and Moderna’s vaccine not being available in the UK until April.

Representatives for Moderna, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Myocarditis and another form of heart inflammation, pericarditis, have been identified as serious side effects following vaccination with the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines, which are both built on messenger RNA technology. A U.S. study analyzing reports submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System found that teenage boys were more likely to suffer heart inflammation from the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines than they were from COVID-19 hospitalization.

Some countries, including Finland, paused their administration of Moderna’s vaccine to youth because of concerns about the side effect.

“The preliminary data showed that among those under 30, the myocarditis and pericarditis incidence was higher than expected,” Dr. Hanna Nohynek, chief physician of the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare’s Unit Infectious Diseases Control and Vaccines, told The Epoch Times in November.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration pushed back a decision in late October on whether to authorize the Moderna vaccine for children aged 17 and younger. Moderna stated that this was done so that drug regulators could more closely analyze the risk-benefit calculus.

Moderna stated in a November call that its vaccine, which is administered at a higher amount than Pfizer’s, offers better protection, but also brings more myocarditis risk.

A Canadian pre-print study published last week found that the incidence of heart inflammation was 5.1 times higher for males between 18 and 24 who got a second dose of Moderna’s vaccine versus those in the same population who received a second dose of Pfizer’s vaccine.

The risk of myocarditis following vaccination was much lower in youth who received the second dose at a longer interval, researchers found. Some countries have stretched the time between the first and second vaccine dose as a result of similar studies.

GOD IS WITHIN YOU

Jean Claude Koven

15 October 2009

When people ask me if I am religious, I tell them I love God far too much to be religious. “Oh, then you must believe in God?” they inevitably God is within you ask. “Of course not,” I reply with a smile, “does a fish believe in water?” For me, God is all there is. What’s to believe?

Although all the world’s major religions agree that God (however they define the term) is omnipresent, it seems that very few of their followers including their clerical hierarchy actually understand what omnipresence really means. And therein lies the source of the world’s ills.

For a start, we take our relationship with God far too seriously. We bring so much solemnity to the way we view God awe, veneration, obedience, and the like that we end up creating distance between us and the object of our worship.

Expressions such as “God is my judge,” “God forbid,” and “God bless you” creep into our language, and consequently our thoughts. People are actually proud to call themselves God-fearing folk. For too many of us, God is somewhere out there, watching and judging us as we struggle through our imperfect lives.

And consider this: Some religions consider the name of God so holy that it is never pronounced. Instead they create a litany of substitute terms so they can talk about God without having to commit the blasphemy of actually using his name.

When practitioners of these religions write about their deity, they are instructed to omit the vowel: G-d. Other religions take the opposite tack. They encourage their devotees to chant or meditate on the name of God for hours at a time.

To their way of believing, focusing on God leads to a state of bliss that opens the door to transcendence and enlightenment. But if God is truly all that is, what can possibly make one of his names more powerful than any other?

For that matter, what is the purpose of naming him (or her or it) in the first place?

Naming anything creates a subject/object relationship between you and the thing named, and that in and of itself means a separation. Every name of God, no matter how holy, drives a wedge between the creator and the created which includes you and me.

This separation is the primal breeding ground for fear, for we then see ourselves as tiny beings, abandoned (or evicted from Paradise) and living on the fringe of an incomprehensibly huge cosmos.

But what if the phrase “God is all that is” were literally true? This is what R Buckminster Fuller must have understood when he said, “God, to me, it seems, is a verb not a noun.” His words, when I first read them, lodged in my mind.

But I didn’t get their full import until many years later, during my first visit to Findhorn, the renowned spiritual community in northeast Scotland.

It was there, sitting in a circle with my fellow newbies, that the penny dropped. One young man in our group, Peter, suddenly exclaimed, “Oh, wow, I finally see it. It is not that God is in all things; it’s that God is all things.”

His exclamation triggered two remarkable realisations for me. First, the obvious is obvious only to those who are sufficiently present to see it. The delivery of Peter’s life-changing epiphany had virtually no effect on the rest of the group.

Our facilitator was so consumed by his orientation agenda that he missed the moment completely. Thanking Peter for his contribution, he simply asked the group if anyone else had anything to share.

Second, what Peter said is literally true. In an instant, Bucky’s words became crystal clear. God is indeed a verb. He is not the creator. He is the ongoing unfoldment of creation itself. There is nothing that is not a part of this unfolding. Thus there can be nothing separate from God. God is infinite and infinity is One.

From that moment, everything in my life began to change. It wasn’t immediate; it was rather like a giant oil tanker slowly making a U-turn. As if I were facing in a new direction, I looked at the world in a new way “How,” I asked myself, “do we dupe ourselves so completely? How come so few people see what Bucky and Peter see? How could I myself have been so blind?”

When we perceive God as a noun, we envision him as the creator, the architect of, and therefore separate from, his creation.

Identifying ourselves as part of that creation, we see ourselves not only separate from our source but separate from each other and all other manifest things as well. This is the fatally flawed axiom underlying virtually all of the world’s faiths.

Once I viewed God as a verb instead of a noun, my perception of life shifted. Everything around and its manifestation became God. There was only God. When someone spoke to me, it was with God’s voice; when I listened, it was with God’s heart. I invite you to try it.

The small shift from noun to verb may well be the antidote to the forbidden fruit that banished us from Eden. As you begin to view God not as the creator but as the constantly changing dance of creation itself, you’ll discover him in everything you see including yourself.

Source: Times of India, New Delhi

URL of this page: http://www.newageislam.com/spiritual-meditations/god-is-within-you/d/1993