Woman, 72, who died a day after Covid-19 jab suffered heart failure unlinked to

[default]

On June 5, Dr Audrey Yeo, a medical officer with the Health Sciences Authority's (HSA) forensic medicine division, conducted an autopsy.

The autopsy certified that the cause of death was ischaemic heart disease, or coronary heart disease.

On June 7, Chan's peripheral blood and urine samples were also submitted to HSA for analysis.

The coroner's report stated that nothing unusual was detected from the analysis.

Though certain drugs were detected, Dr Yeo clarified that these drugs had been used for the treatment of – among other things – abnormal heart rhythms, hypertension and ischaemic heart disease.

Dr Yeo opined that the drug concentrations in the post-mortem blood sample were within their respective expected ranges and did not cause or contribute to Chan's death.

Medical reports were also obtained from Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH) and independent medical experts.

The TTSH medical report stated that Chan was first seen as an outpatient at the hospital's cardiology clinic on May 18, 2015.

It stated that she had a past medical history of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidaemia and stable ischemic heart disease.

Separately, Dr Lim Xin Rong from TTSH's department of rheumatology, allergy and immunology was appointed by the Academy of Medicine to be the independent medical expert.

In her report, Dr Lim concurred with the finding of ischaemic heart disease as Chan's cause of death.

Dr Lim said that the diagnosis of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia was "unlikely" as there were "no demonstrable thrombi or clots".

Dr Lim was asked to comment on a document furnished by Chan's next-of-kin, which included a section stating that acute coronary syndrome and coronary artery disease were known to be adverse effects of the vaccine.

However, she concluded that the document did not show these to be the vaccine's adverse effects.

On Dec 13, 2022, Dr Lim was provided with additional post-mortem ancillary investigation reports, and asked to provide her views on whether there were any links between the vaccination and Chan's cause of death.

Dr Lim concluded that there was no such evidence.

In his report, Coroner Goh noted that Chan had a known history of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia and ischaemic heart disease.

As she had died shortly after she had taken a Covid-19 vaccine shot, "her family understandably has expressed concerns as to whether the Covid-19 vaccine had caused her death".

The coroner, however, said that the medical reports concluded that the vaccine did not cause her death.

"Whilst the family has provided medical literature to show a possible link between the Covid-19 vaccine shot and Mdm Chan's death, in my view, this literature was inconclusive and insufficient for this inquiry to reach the conclusion that the Covid-19 vaccine caused or contributed to Mdm Chan's death.

"Further, the evidence before the court is that the body's reaction to, in this case, a vaccine, would occur almost immediately after a vaccine is administered.

"This was not the case here."


https://www.todayonline.com/news/woman-died-day-after-covid-vaccine-heart-failure-unlinked-vaccine-coroner-2466971?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[Risa]

but the coincidence is...

[horiv3]

The doctor and coroner wants to keep their jobs

[daryl76]

"vaccines for covid19 are safe"
"underlying conditions"

wonder how these cb can sleep well at night

[Arctic]

Must be Underlying.. Or someone is lying

Covid 19 vaccine issues will be buried as time passes... We will nv know the truth

[BuiBuiForeverAlone]

Under-
Lying 🤥
Yo~

[FireOpal]

Singapore is PAP
PAP is God and the ultimate truth.
Do you go against God?

[jim889]

Singapore is PAP
PAP is God and the ultimate truth.
Do you go against God?

of coz chiu can sayed no

 

[Philipkee]

I will just say something as a medical professional.  A lot of times, the doctors have to be careful because they need to back up what they say.  That's why they usually use the words "no evidence of".  It's very tricky and contentious also.  Cos Covid 19 vaccination is a very emotional topic cos it was forced down on people and people did die after vaccination, it's just whether or not evidence suggest that Covid 19 vaccination is cause of death.

If 10,000 people got the jab and 100 died, how do you prove that the jab caused the death seeing 9900 survived?  This is especially so if the 100 who died had multiple co morbidities as well.

Could the vaccines have caused the deaths?  No evidence of it

Could the vaccines have triggered a co morbidity that killed the person?  Possible but the question is how to prove it.

Were the vaccines effective?  Partially cos vaccines are supposed to prevent an illness from happening as opposed to reducing the severity of illness.  It's the ineffectiveness of the vaccine that changed the definition of vaccines

But the underlying question is did the vaccines cause the death and the only answer any medical professional can give now is "no evidence of it".  It's not the same as saying not possible.  It's just saying no evidence of it.

[jim889]

I will just say something as a medical professional.  A lot of times, the doctors have to be careful because they need to back up what they say.  That's why they usually use the words "no evidence of".  It's very tricky and contentious also.  Cos Covid 19 vaccination is a very emotional topic cos it was forced down on people and people did die after vaccination, it's just whether or not evidence suggest that Covid 19 vaccination is cause of death.

If 10,000 people got the jab and 100 died, how do you prove that the jab caused the death seeing 9900 survived?  This is especially so if the 100 who died had multiple co morbidities as well.

Could the vaccines have caused the deaths?  No evidence of it

Could the vaccines have triggered a co morbidity that killed the person?  Possible but the question is how to prove it.

Were the vaccines effective?  Partially cos vaccines are supposed to prevent an illness from happening as opposed to reducing the severity of illness.  It's the ineffectiveness of the vaccine that changed the definition of vaccines

But the underlying question is did the vaccines cause the death and the only answer any medical professional can give now is "no evidence of it".  It's not the same as saying not possible.  It's just saying no evidence of it.

have evidence also wont say one rah.

coz the confidentiality agreement they signed to get access to this vaccine
 

[Philipkee]

have evidence also wont say one rah.

coz the confidentiality agreement they signed to get access to this vaccine
 

Not true.

Now, you need to differentiate between the medical doctors and the politicians or doctors who wanna be politicians.  The difference is subtle but it's there

[Arctic]

have evidence also wont say one rah.

coz the confidentiality agreement they signed to get access to this vaccine
 

Have lah... Sg got payout a few ppl who had serious adverse effects

But downplay it until duno what

[Suntan]

I will just say something as a medical professional.  A lot of times, the doctors have to be careful because they need to back up what they say.  That's why they usually use the words "no evidence of".  It's very tricky and contentious also.  Cos Covid 19 vaccination is a very emotional topic cos it was forced down on people and people did die after vaccination, it's just whether or not evidence suggest that Covid 19 vaccination is cause of death.

If 10,000 people got the jab and 100 died, how do you prove that the jab caused the death seeing 9900 survived?  This is especially so if the 100 who died had multiple co morbidities as well.

Could the vaccines have caused the deaths?  No evidence of it

Could the vaccines have triggered a co morbidity that killed the person?  Possible but the question is how to prove it.

Were the vaccines effective?  Partially cos vaccines are supposed to prevent an illness from happening as opposed to reducing the severity of illness.  It's the ineffectiveness of the vaccine that changed the definition of vaccines

But the underlying question is did the vaccines cause the death and the only answer any medical professional can give now is "no evidence of it".  It's not the same as saying not possible.  It's just saying no evidence of it.

As medical professional, chiu do know there cannot be death, not even one even in clinical trial. Because everyone has only 1 life.

[Philipkee]

As medical professional, chiu do know there cannot be death, not even one even in clinical trial. Because everyone has only 1 life.

Yes but you do know that even Panadol can cause death in some people

Every surgery or treatment has a risk of death or injury.  So it's benefits outweigh the risk.

Ultimately it's the greater good that's at stake.

[Suntan]

Yes but you do know that even Panadol can cause death in some people

Every surgery or treatment has a risk of death or injury.  So it's benefits outweigh the risk.

Ultimately it's the greater good that's at stake.

Everything has risk but it's the responsibility of the medical world to ensure 100% before rolling out so ppl can make a decision to use or not. In vaccine case, it's not 100% voluntarily. If not 100, can't force or write indemnity.