MRI scans show an increase in heart inflammation because they do a better job than symptom based screening.  Using MRI the amount of heart inflammation in Big-10 University Athletics showed a 7x increase in athletes that contracted Covid-19.

 All of these were conducted in the Spring/Summer of 2020.  

The mean (SD) athlete age was 25 (3) years (range, 19-41 years), and 98.5% were male.

 58.3% had prior symptoms reflecting COVID-19 illness, and 1.7% were asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic but had tested positive for the virus; COVID-19 positivity was diagnosed by polymerase chain reaction assay in 587 athletes (74.4%) and antibody testing in 202 athletes (25.6%).

 For athletes testing positive for COVID-19 via polymerase chain reaction assay, cardiac screening was performed a mean (SD) of 19 (17) days (range, 3-156 days) after the positive COVID-19 test.  No athlete was deemed to have severe COVID-19 viral illness as determined by team physicians.  One athlete was hospitalized overnight for observation, but no athlete was admitted to a hospital for cardiopulmonary symptoms.
 
 Using the specified RTP cardiac screening algorithm, 0.8% had an abnormal troponin level (defined as a level greater than the 99th percentile of the reference laboratory value), 10 athletes (1.3%) had ECG abnormalities warranting further cardiac evaluation, and 20 athletes (2.5%) had an echocardiographic finding necessitating additional testing to exclude acute cardiac injury.


 This indicates there was an increase in heart inflammation in college athletes partially due to better screening and partially due to other reasons, most likely Covid 19 as the MRI readings alone wouldn't be able to account for such an increase.

"Did this article say,
of those that tested positive for Covid,
how many had a shot, brand, boosters?"


 It's a breakdown of thousands of verified medical documents, not an article, and this doesn't apply to this analysis.

 I am having this data set run again by a blind third party to re-verify, and also a data set on major Professional Sports in the US on the same issues.  So far heart failure, non-congestive, is the primary cause of death.

 Here is a simple Google search for "What is the leading cause of death in young athletes?

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+the+leading+cause+of+death+in+young+a...

Then the simple answer
would have been,
       NO.

 True.  I could also answer by not answering at all and instead asking another question.  Something like this:

Good question !
You want an answer.
I would like an answer to this;

Then ask my own question expecting an answer while refusing to provide one.  So it could be less simple.

 
"According to that analysis,
we will never know,
what the, ‘other reasons, are!"

 We know there are heart issues, and we know that there are increased percentage of findings from MRI scans.  However that increase in findings doesn't account for the overall amount of cardiac events in young athletes.

 The problem is that there a ton of variables when it comes to human cardiac care, and that Covid could have been part of this recent problem since it was the most consistent variable, and vaccines would not be a contributing factor.

 

WOW !

(We are talking about c-19 vaccines,
it is what the whole thread is about,
so no SPIN, saying it is 'another' vaccine)

I do believe their is a WHOLE BUNCH,
of people, organizations, and some manufactures,
that would disagree with that statement.



 None of this thread is about Covid vaccines except for the parts where you are trying to make it about Covid vaccines.  It is about MRI scans being a contributing factor to finding heart complications and how that percentage increase isn't enough to account for the overall numbers in specifically young athletes in Big 10 college sports.  Covid vaccines would not be a factor in this assessment.

Covid vaccines would not be a factor in this assessment.

Unless the people who show heart problems were jabbed.

Serowbot wrote on 05/21/22 at 17:33:38:



Does the vaccine meet the traditional definition of a vaccine?  No, 0.00%....
Does the vaccine offer any protection after 6 months?   No, let's make it compensatory and make everyone get multiple shots?

Also, what happened to my body my choice?

Best regards,

"Covid vaccines would not be a factor in this assessment.

Unless the people who show heart problems were jabbed."

 Impossible.  This is yet another example of wanting the Covid vaccine to be responsible so intensely that facts don't matter.  


 
"Also interesting,
the,  “…analysis.…”,
factors in positive  tests for Covid,
but does not factor in the,
Covid Vaccine."

 Why would it?  I made everything very clear in the first post.  

 Cardiac issues have been the leading cause of death in young athletes for decades.  Why should this be ignored when evaluating the current timeline increase?  To skew data maybe?

Serowbot wrote on 05/21/22 at 17:33:38:

Who,
Told You
  to say that ?