ecosophia | Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 184

We are now in the fourth year of these open posts. When I first posted a tentative hypothesis on the course of the Covid phenomenon, I had no idea that discussion on the subject would still be necessary more than three years later, much less that it would turn into so lively, complex, and troubling a conversation. Still, here we are. Crude death rates and other measures of collapsing public health are anomalously high in many countries, but nobody in authority wants to talk about the inadequately tested experimental Covid injections that are the most likely cause; ~~public health authorities~~ government shills for the pharmaceutical industry are still trying to push through laws that will allow them to force vaccinations on anyone they want; public trust in science is collapsing; and the story continues to unfold.

So it's time for another open post. The rules are the same as before:

1. If you plan on parroting the party line of the medical industry and its paid shills, please go away. This is a place for people to talk openly, honestly, and freely about their concerns that the party line in question is dangerously flawed and that actions being pushed by the medical industry and its government enablers are causing injury and death on a massive scale. It is not a place for you to dismiss those concerns. Anyone who wants to hear the official story and the arguments in favor of it can find those on hundreds of thousands of websites.

2. If you plan on insisting that the current situation is the result of a deliberate plot by some villainous group of people or other, please go away. There are tens of thousands of websites currently rehashing various conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 outbreak and the vaccines. This is not one of them. What we're exploring is the likelihood that what's going on is the product of the same arrogance, incompetence, and corruption that the medical industry and its wholly owned politicians have displayed so abundantly in recent decades. That possibility deserves a space of its own for discussion, and that's what we're doing here.

3. If you plan on using rent-a-troll derailing or disruption tactics, please go away. I'm quite familiar with the standard tactics used by troll farms to disrupt online forums, and am ready, willing, and able -- and in fact quite eager -- to ban people permanently for engaging in them here. Oh, and I also lurk on other Covid-19 vaccine skeptic blogs, so I'm likely to notice when the same posts are showing up on more than one venue.

4. If you plan on making off topic comments, please go away. This is an open post for discussion of the Covid epidemic, the vaccines, drugs, policies, and other measures that supposedly treat it, and other topics directly relevant to those things. It is not a place for general discussion of unrelated topics. Nor is it a place to ask for medical advice; giving such advice, unless you're a licensed health care provider, legally counts as practicing medicine without a license and is a crime in the US. Don't even go there.

5. If you don't believe in treating people with common courtesy, please go away. I have, and enforce, a strict courtesy policy on my blogs and online forums, and this is no exception. The sort of schoolyard bullying that takes place on so many other internet forums will get you deleted and banned here. Also, please don't drag in current quarrels about sex, race, religions, etc. No, I don't care if you disagree with that: my journal, my rules.

6. Please don't just post bare links without explanation. A sentence or two telling readers what's on the other side of the link is a reasonable courtesy, and if you don't include it, your attempted post will be deleted.

Please also note that nothing posted here should be construed as medical advice, which neither I nor the commentariat (excepting those who are licensed medical providers) are qualified to give. Please take your medical questions to the licensed professional provider of your choice.

With that said, the floor is open for discussion.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

A few weeks back I calculated that the mRNA vaxx seems to diminish fertility by 36%. I just came across a study that shows a massive increase in medical complications when women were vaxxed during pregnancy. I'll quote a summary of the study I found on X

Peer-Reviewed Study Identifies Serious Safety Signals for 37 Adverse Events Following COVID-19 'Vaccination' in Pregnant Women🛑

CDC/FDA safety thresholds breached for miscarriage, stillbirth, premature infant death, fetal cardiac arrest, neonatal respiratory distress, fetal malformations, and many more.

📊 Highest Proportional Reporting Ratios (PRR) (COVID-19 v. Other Vaccines & Influenza Vaccines) – A PRR ≥2 is a CDC/FDA safety signal 🚨

⚠️ Placental Insufficiency – PRR = 499 (499x more frequent) (Severe placental dysfunction, restricting oxygen/nutrients to the baby)

💨 Neonatal Respiratory Distress – PRR = 134 (134x more frequent) (Newborns struggling to breathe, requiring urgent medical care)

💔 Premature Infant Death – PRR = 124 (124x more frequent) (Sharp rise in newborn deaths following preterm birth)

❤️ Fetal Cardiac Arrest – PRR = 108 (108x more frequent) (Baby’s heart stopping before birth, life-threatening)

🩸 Hemorrhage in Pregnancy – PRR = 67.6 (68x more frequent) (Excessive bleeding during pregnancy, endangering mother & baby)

🧬 Fetal Malformation – PRR = 51.5 (52x more frequent) (Congenital abnormalities affecting baby’s development)

⚠️ Miscarriage – PRR = 38.4 (38x more frequent) (Significant increase in pregnancy loss before 20 weeks)

⚰️ Stillbirth – PRR = 28.1 (28x more frequent) (Late-term fetal death, a devastating pregnancy outcome)

On average, adverse pregnancy events were reported 69.2 times more frequently (PRR = 69.2) after COVID-19 ‘vaccination’ compared to other vaccines, with some events occurring nearly 499 times more often (PRR = 499). The CDC/FDA define a safety concern as a PRR of ≥2, meaning these findings far exceed the established threshold for risk. Additionally, the mean z-score of 9.64 (where statistical significance begins at 1.96) and the mean Chi-square of 74.7 (compared to the safety threshold of 4) indicate that these results are highly statistically significant and unlikely due to chance.

This consitutes a *massive* safety signal, more than 30 times the minimum level for such signal.

The study itself can be found here https://publichealthpolicyjournal.com/are-covid-19-vaccines-in-pregnancy-as-safe-and-effective-as-the-medical-industrial-complex-claim-part-i/

Personally, I believe that the vax was a depopulation bioweapon experiment, given the DoD was running the show (Operation Warpspeed). Hence the batch variability, with some very high kill rates in certain batches.

We should also note the weaponised propaganda trial run.

ALL safety signals were deliberately ignored, because it wasn't a vax as we previously considered them to be.

Birth rates are down in heavily vaxxed countries, but they were falling anyway and one thing COVID and the vax did was magnify the war between the sexes i.e. liberal women vs conservative men. Thus fewer people are forming relationships and procreating.

My estimate is overall the ideological battle between the sexes is having a greater effect on birthrates than the vax.

Meanwhile the Amish quietly breed like rabbits, spreading and forming new colonies. Guess the future belongs to them.

For sure the trend was downward and multiple factors are in play, but the trend went sharply downward in 2022. Czech Republic has now 22% less live births than 2019 and only the vaxxed women saw a major decline. I have little doubt this is the effect of the jab.

"only the vaxxed women saw a major decline".

I have anecdotal evidence of reproductive problems amongst the (presumed vaxxed) peers of my kids, but I've never seen any official birth data for vaxxed vs unvaxxed women.

Do you have a data source?

You can start in this thread https://ecosophia.dreamwidth.org/313959.html?thread=53763943#cmt53763943
In a comment in the Steve Kirsch article I made the 36% calculation, while the 22% is in the Dreamwidth thrad

did it increase teh down syndrome abnormalities ?

Fetal chromosome abnormality increased 87-fold (PRR 87.6)

someone I know had a down syndrome prenancy, but since this happens sometimes anyway, I have been wondering since then if it was due to the multiple covid vixens mom the parents got or if they would have been one of the ones to have a downs child in any case. And, a secondary thought is that we may have alot of underreporting of fetal abnormalities as some amount of them are terminated I maybe that isnt in those statistics.

That's true. Even then, in a sane world a 87-fold increase would be front page news. Now it's just crickets.

These gigantic ratios can't be the true numbers, and not just because nobody could fail to notice such huge, global effects. There clearly IS a real safety signal with regard to miscarriages, but the "normal" rate of miscarriage before 20 weeks is probably at least 25%, so for vaxxed women to miscarry 38.4 times more often would require that almost 1000% of pregnancies miscarried.

The authors have taken small absolute numbers and somehow turned them into huge ratios, but you can't do that meaningfully without knowing what the correct denominators are. For example, VAERS has 40 reports of fetal malformation associated with covid "vaxxes", vs. 2 with flu vaxxes since 1990 and 8 with "all other vaccines." This gets turned into "52 times more frequent" by assuming that the correct measure is reports per *month*, not per woman exposed. That doesn't compute. Lots of women were coerced to get covid jabs in pregnancy, but how many women get "other" non-flu vaccines in pregnancy? Before the latest RSV-vax-pushing tendency, probably few. Since there's maybe a 3% malformation rate normally, there have to have been thousands of malformations following flu vax (even if uncaused by it) that were not reported. Anyway, the covid "vax" certainly can't increase the *real* malformation rate 52 times, or that would mean that ca. 150% of exposed babies were malformed.

This suggests that part of what they are really measuring is variation in *reporting* rates. It would be of interest to compare the 40 months of covid-jab reports with the same period of "other-vax" reports, since the observed toxicity of the covid jabs allowed many people to become aware of the existence of VAERS and their right to make reports to it. I'd predict that "other-vax" reports per month increased post-2020.

If you read the originating paper you will absolutely see what the ratios represent.

The researchers investigated VAERS reports and pulled out every report that corelated a pragnancy related issue with any vaccine given during pregnancy.

They then divided the reports into three groups.

Incidents related to flu vaccines.

Incidents related to covid vaccines.

Incidents related to any other vaccine.

The reported ratios arise from comparing these reports - because flu vaccines and "any other vaccines" resulted in reports numbering in the low tens or units, whereas the covid vaccines resulted in reports numbering in the hundreds and thousands and even tens of thousands.

The reason their conclusion restricts itself to saying "there is a screamingly high safety signal here which needs further investigation", is because discerning safety signals is precisely what VAERS is designed to do.

It can only do that if policy makers opt to pay close attention to such signals. Notably, other vaccines were shut down and removed from production for much smaller signals.

Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 184

Fertility

Re: Fertility

Re: Fertility

Re: Fertility

Re: Fertility

Re: Fertility

Re: Fertility

Re: Fertility

Re: Fertility

Re: Fertility

Re: Fertility

Re: Fertility