An abstract was recently published in the journal Circulation warning that the mRNA vaccines dramatically increase the risk of Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). The study compared pre-vaccination and post-second dose vaccination PULS test results in 566 cardiac patients aged 28 to 97 in equal male to female ratio, finding that use of the mRNA vaccines more than doubled their 5-year risk of ACS from 11% to 25%. How significant is this?
Steven R. Gundry is the author of the study. According to his webpage, Gundry is a former cardiac surgeon with over 40 years of experience in medicine. He is also listed as the Director and Founder of the International Heart & Lung Institute and the Center for Restorative Medicine in Palm Springs and Santa Barbara, CA. It would appear he is more than well-qualified to report on this issue. Gundry has, however, published some dietary books that have been controversial.
The PULS Test
PULS stands for Protein Unstable Lesion Signature. The PULS Test is a test used to approximate a person’s risk of heart attack over five years. The basis of the test is measurements from a blood sample of traces of proteins that have leaked from cardiac lesions in the blood vessel walls. Referred to as biomarkers, the levels of these proteins give an indication of the body’s immune response to arterial injuries. Nine biomarkers are analyzed as part of the test (see right).
The Circulation abstract reported that the increase in these biomarkers persisted at least 2.5 months post-vaccination. Readers of this blog may recall top cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough also reporting that cardiac enzymes in vaccine-injured myocarditis and pericarditis sufferers can remain elevated for a month or more.
According to the test’s co-developer Dr. Douglas Harrington, fifteen years of study went into the creation of the PULS test. A video of Harrington discussing the test in 2016 is shown below. While perhaps not absolutely ideal, it does appear the test and its interpretations have some longer-standing legitimacy. For example, Evoke Integrative Medicine in Vancouver, Canada calls it the most powerful risk assessment for heart attacks and strokes. The results are used to advise patients of specific diet and lifestyle changes.
Concerningly, Harrington says that two-thirds of Americans have a heart age that is older than their chronological age, and it is the actual heart age that is important. This is a big problem if the mRNA vaccines adversely affect the heart.
Broad Interest
Not surprisingly interest in the PULS abstract has been substantial, with even pro-vaccine, pro-mainstream narrative retired nurse Dr. John Campbell of the UK discussing it on his YouTube channel. In a brief assessment, Campbell advised the test’s measuring markers were “remarkably relevant” and that Gundry was “well-regarded.” He also commented both the baseline data and cohort size was good, and that the individuals tested were their own controls and therefore a valid comparison. His video received 1.2 million views in three days and a 96.5% like/dislike ratio.
Of the PULS increase Campbell stated it was “massive,” and that if applicable to the entire population it would translate into an “unimaginable amount” of extra heart attacks. Is that what we are seeing now? Campbell concluded by saying the work merited an official response from the UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization (JCVI) and US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), along with further studies. He said he wanted to see high-resolution MRI scans of the cardiac tissue and that all work needed to be done urgently.
Age of Transition 