Is post vaccine myocarditis "mostly" mild and transient?

What the foreign VAERS reports tell us

Summary:

• My analysis challenges the "mild and transient" characterization of post-vaccine myocarditis by examining foreign VAERS recovery data over time

  • Data shows less than 50% recovery rates across most time periods, contradicting literature suggestions that only 20% have severe or long-lasting effects

• Foreign VAERS reports provide more reliable data because they try to monitor patients until resolution before filing, unlike US reports

• Chart reveals recovery percentages plateau below 50% rather than increasing steadily over time as expected for truly transient conditions

  • These results suggest post-vaccine myocarditis has more persistent effects than commonly claimed, with significant numbers not recovering even after extended periods

One of the frequent dismissals of the concerns about post-vaccine myocarditis is that it is mostly “mild and transient” even when it does happen.

I asked Grok to do a literature search to quantify “transient”.

Grok said it is reasonable to assume that no more than 20% of the people who got post-vaccine myocarditis had severe or long lasting effects.

Link to Grok conversation

I took all myocarditis reports from foreign¹ VAERS and grouped them by number of weeks which had elapsed between date the report was received and the date of symptom onset.

How many had actually² recovered?

So I created a plot of the number of weeks that had elapsed versus percentage of VAERS reports which mention that the patient has recovered (RECOVD=Y)

Link to chart

What you expect to see is that nearly every data point should be above the 80% line if less than 20% of the cases where long lasting (as Grok says). But this happens only once in the entire chart, and that too for a data point where the number is pretty low.

And you also expect the percentage to go up steadily over time. What we see is a sort of a plateau where most weeks do not cross the 50% mark, which suggests that for the people who do file VAERS reports, less than half have actually recovered in the long run.

Link to chart dataset

You can also check out the full list of foreign myocarditis reports if you would like to verify the numbers.

Notice that there are also 2194 reports where the weeks_elapsed is empty, because the onset_date is not known.

Of these only 372, which is 17% of 2194, had recovered.

If anything this only further validates my analysis that less than 50% of the people recovered in the long run.

1. Foreign VAERS reports rarely code symptoms badly (by missing them or by undercoding them), so you can be fairly sure that if the symptom file says Myocarditis, the person was actually diagnosed with myocarditis

2. It is very important to note that unlike US reports, foreign VAERS reports do their best to monitor the patient till the issue resolves and only file the report afterwards so they have the full picture of whether the patient recovered. If the value is U = Unknown, it is fair to say that the patient had not recovered in a reasonable amount of time.