Twitter Labels American Heart Association Link to Research Summary on Vaccine Side-Effects as “Potentially Spammy or Unsafe”

Twitter American Heart Association
According to reports, Twitter has faced social media blowback from putting a warning label on a link to the American Heart Association Journal that included a summary of findings about MRNA COVID Vaccines increasing endothelial Inflammatory markers and ACS risk as measured by the PULS Cardiac Test. Photo credit: Sundry Photography, Jonathan Weiss, Shutter Stock, licensed.

SAN FRANCISCO, CA – Links to an abstract published on the American Heart Association’s (AHA) website that claims that COVID-19 vaccines can raise the risk of heart inflammation in some individuals was recently marked as “unsafe” by Twitter, causing some to question why information provided by the well-known nonprofit organization was being questioned by the social media platform.

The AHA funds cardiovascular medical research, and currently “Abstract 10712” on their website – titled “MRNA COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: a Warning” – raised some eyebrows on Twitter when individuals clicking on the link were taken to a warning page instead of the actual AMA website.

“Warning: this link may be unsafe. The link you are trying to access has been identified by Twitter or our partners as being potentially spammy or unsafe, in accordance with Twitter’s URL Policy,” the warning page reads, and claims that the linked page may contain “violent or misleading content that could lead to real-world harm.” An option to ignore the warning and continue to the AHA website is included.

Those who chose to continue could then view Abstract 10712, which chronicles research that claims to have measured various biological characteristics – known as “biomarkers” – like blood pressure before and after patients received their second mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose, and uses this information to generate a “PULS score.”

Based on PULS scores, the research claims that the 566 patients involved in their study showed the risk of developing acute coronary syndrome (ACS) – which cause heart inflammation and heart attacks – within five years jumped from 11 percent to 25 percent after receiving the jab.

The research, which has not been peer-reviewed and does not provide statistical analyses for significance provided – meaning that the study does not clearly state if results are due to chance or some other factor – has since been downplayed by the AHA on Twitter.

“The American Heart Association itself has been unequivocal in its belief in and support of vaccination as the best available public health strategy to address the pandemic. The American Heart Association continues to fully support the CDC’s COVID-19 vaccination recommendations,” the AHA tweeted in response to inquiries about the abstract, which has been presented in poster form at a recent AHA meeting.

An abstract submitted to a scientific conference does not represent the beliefs or policies of the Association,” the AHA added.

“It’s your journal,” replied a Twitter user.

Well-known cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra, during a recent appearance on Britain’s GBNews where he discussed the AHA abstract, referred to a “well known cardiologist” – who wished to remain anonymous – who he said had arrived at similar findings after conducting an independent vaccine study.

However, Dr. Malhotra claimed that this researcher and his organization were holding off on publishing their studies for fear of losing a primary source of their funding, which he said comes from the pharmaceutical industry.

“A few days ago after [the abstract] was published, somebody from a very prestigious British institution, cardiologist department, a researcher,” he said. “A ‘whistleblower’ if you’d like, contacted me to say that the researchers in this department had found something similar within the coronary arteries linked to the vaccine, inflammation from imaging studies around the coronary arteries.”

“And they had a meeting, and these researchers at the moment have decided that they’re not going to publish their findings. Because they are concerned about losing research money from the drug industry,” Dr. Malhotra added.  “Now this person was very upset about it, and um, I obviously wanted to share this on GB news today.”

Comment via Facebook

Corrections: If you are aware of an inaccuracy or would like to report a correction, we would like to know about it. Please consider sending an email to and cite any sources if available. Thank you. (Policy)