{"id":149,"date":"2023-02-27T15:30:32","date_gmt":"2023-02-27T15:30:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/experimentalfrontiers.peachpuff-wolverine-566518.hostingersite.com\/?p=149"},"modified":"2023-02-28T13:07:51","modified_gmt":"2023-02-28T13:07:51","slug":"are-the-mrna-shots-affecting-birth-rates","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/scienceblog.com\/experimentalfrontiers\/2023\/02\/27\/are-the-mrna-shots-affecting-birth-rates\/","title":{"rendered":"Are the mRNA shots affecting birth rates?"},"content":{"rendered":"

From the beginning, there have been glaring signs that the mRNA shots may be impairing fertility. FDA overrode signals that, in years past, would have been considered unacceptable dangers. After majorities of the reproductive-age population were inoculated, many of us expected to see sharp declines in birth rates beginning nine months later. Preliminary data suggests that our worst fears have not materialized. The reason for this is not yet clear.<\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n

Warning signs in flashing neon<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

In the spring of 2021, early signs suggested that COVID shots might cause a steep decline in fertility. The April\u00a0New England Journal article<\/a>\u00a0that was supposed to reassure us that the vaccines were safe for pregnant women actually included data tables that\u00a0indicated an 80% miscarriage rate<\/a>\u00a0for women vaccinated in their first trimester. A\u00a0follow-up article<\/a>\u00a0was based on a sample skewed heavily toward women vaccinated later in their pregnancy, when miscarriage rate is mostly past. Japan released Pfizer animal data (also available to the West, but kept from the public) indicating that\u00a0lipid nanoparticles from the vaccines tend to accumulate in the ovaries<\/a>. And among the few pregnant women who slipped inadvertently into the Pfizer trial, the\u00a0rate of stillbirths was high<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The mRNA shots were recommended in 2021 for pregnant women all over the world, even though pregnant women were excluded from clinical trials the previous fall. After the fact, Pfizer initiated a\u00a0trial specifically for pregnant women<\/a>, then abruptly curtailed it and never issued a report. Mayanne Demasi\u00a0reported recentl<\/a>y on this apparent cover-up.<\/p>\n

If our governments were honestly interested in vaccine safety, they would have been carefully monitoring fertility among many other health measures, with separate categories for vaccination status, number and timing of doses in both the mother and father. But this data has not been collected, or (more likely) it has been collected (by\u00a0VSafe<\/a>) but not shared with the public.\u00a0One article<\/a>\u00a0based on the authors\u2019 proprietary access to VSafe indicated moderately elevated levels of miscarriage in the late first trimester, and omitted pointedly to report on data from the first six weeks of pregnancy.<\/p>\n

Last year, the German Federal Institute for Population Research issued a\u00a0preliminary analysis<\/a>\u00a0noting sharp drops in fertility in early 2022. Women of child-rearing age began being vaccinated in the second quarter of 2021, so if there were an effect on fertility, we might expect to see it beginning 9 months later in the beginning of 2022.<\/p>\n

\u201cin the immediate aftermath of the pandemic, monthly fertility data from Sweden and Germany show a strong fertility decline in early 2022, with about 10 to 15 % less births, respectively, than what was observed during the same period the previous year. This poses questions on the role of previously suggested mechanisms for pandemic-related fertility change, such as the role of health-related or economic-centred factors in recent fertility change. It also brings factors related to the perceived cessation of the pandemic to our attention, as reflected in the onset of broad-based vaccination programmes directed at the population at reproductive and economically active ages.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The German report was recently cited in a\u00a0Substack by James Lyons-Weiller<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Some more reasons for concern:<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\"\"<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n
Graph from OpenVaers.com<\/a><\/h6>\n

 <\/p>\n