"In other words, does this mean the shots were harmless if administered during pregnancy?" to ==>
"In other words, does this mean the shots caused the harm pre-pregnancy?"
tl;dr: there are 2 processes that occur before pregnancy that could answer in the positive:
1. fertilization, 2. implantation.
1. If it's sperm-caused fertility issues, this could be the case.
2. Is it possible - if we look at vaccine causing increased +/- prolonged bleeding, even re-started (ffs) for post-menopausal women - that pre-pregnancy changes in the uterine wall from vaccine lead to poor adhesion. But if the adhesion has already taken (vaccine during-pregnancy), the increase in hormones and general success of existing adhesion ameliorates the potentially deleterious effect of the jab once pregnancy has been established.
eg: "Preimplantation factor promotes first trimester trophoblast invasion "Preimplantation factor is a novel embryo-derived peptide that influences key processes in early pregnancy implantation, including immunity, adhesion, remodeling, and apoptosis."
If you get injected within a month +/- of this process of preimplantation and LNP are allowing all kinds of shenanigans to disrupt this process, which stops once implantation has occurred?
I suppose that clinicians obervations are based on smaller numbers with less certainty and local factors may come into play more, but on the other hand their experience and expertise may allow them to ask the right questions for a good 'bottom up' approach.
Seems that public health surveillance is relatively poor despite $$$$ western budgets, and datasets are prone to criteria changing halfway through. (It would be better to publish separate data sets with the new and old criteria applied to the entire series, if possible)
You're complicating matters way too much. Just look at a cross section of problems - not just problems with pregnancies and births. Deaths overall have SKYROCKETED. Amongst the healthy young age group around 20-45 deaths have increased by 40% in two years! And everyone is still twiddling their thumbs talking about this study and that study without acknowledging that half (HALF!) the studies done are faulty! You say humanity is dumb??? But humanity is also super smart, it's just that these humans are too few. Go on admit it.
Mar 2, 2023·edited Mar 2, 2023Liked by Brian Mowrey
"If stillbirths are increasing and live births decreasing nine months after widespread uptake of the Covid vaccines, as Berenson and others have suggested, my first question is why should an impact on fertility take so long to manifest? In other words, does this mean the shots were harmless if administered during pregnancy? That only the pre-injected are suffering harms?"
I find it difficult to believe that they're actually injecting pregnant women with this stuff. I mean, come on, really? How can any serious person consider the risks worthwhile. Additionally, I do not trust many of the "studies" given that they are often funded, run, documented, and/or reported by "Big Pharma" - and beyond simply being untrustworthy, are very likely going to be falsified.
I'd bet money that there were various trials done on the vax and the results turned out to show ineffectiveness or harm, so the findings were just dumped into the trash and it was all forgotten about.
If I can reword
"In other words, does this mean the shots were harmless if administered during pregnancy?" to ==>
"In other words, does this mean the shots caused the harm pre-pregnancy?"
tl;dr: there are 2 processes that occur before pregnancy that could answer in the positive:
1. fertilization, 2. implantation.
1. If it's sperm-caused fertility issues, this could be the case.
2. Is it possible - if we look at vaccine causing increased +/- prolonged bleeding, even re-started (ffs) for post-menopausal women - that pre-pregnancy changes in the uterine wall from vaccine lead to poor adhesion. But if the adhesion has already taken (vaccine during-pregnancy), the increase in hormones and general success of existing adhesion ameliorates the potentially deleterious effect of the jab once pregnancy has been established.
eg: "Preimplantation factor promotes first trimester trophoblast invasion "Preimplantation factor is a novel embryo-derived peptide that influences key processes in early pregnancy implantation, including immunity, adhesion, remodeling, and apoptosis."
https://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/embryology/index.php/Implantation
If you get injected within a month +/- of this process of preimplantation and LNP are allowing all kinds of shenanigans to disrupt this process, which stops once implantation has occurred?
Just, spit ballin' here.
Great post as usual. I was watching this video the other day which gives quite a pessimistic outlook:
https://soniaelijah.substack.com/p/obgyn-reveals-damning-data-on-miscarriage
I suppose that clinicians obervations are based on smaller numbers with less certainty and local factors may come into play more, but on the other hand their experience and expertise may allow them to ask the right questions for a good 'bottom up' approach.
Seems that public health surveillance is relatively poor despite $$$$ western budgets, and datasets are prone to criteria changing halfway through. (It would be better to publish separate data sets with the new and old criteria applied to the entire series, if possible)
You're complicating matters way too much. Just look at a cross section of problems - not just problems with pregnancies and births. Deaths overall have SKYROCKETED. Amongst the healthy young age group around 20-45 deaths have increased by 40% in two years! And everyone is still twiddling their thumbs talking about this study and that study without acknowledging that half (HALF!) the studies done are faulty! You say humanity is dumb??? But humanity is also super smart, it's just that these humans are too few. Go on admit it.
Looks like the stillbirths story was a result of a misunderstanding and changed criteria for recording stillbirths.
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/urgent-updatecorrection-to-previous
I am glad that I did not cover it.
There was a similar story of a "71% drop in births in Australia" that a lot of people ran off with.
"If stillbirths are increasing and live births decreasing nine months after widespread uptake of the Covid vaccines, as Berenson and others have suggested, my first question is why should an impact on fertility take so long to manifest? In other words, does this mean the shots were harmless if administered during pregnancy? That only the pre-injected are suffering harms?"
I find it difficult to believe that they're actually injecting pregnant women with this stuff. I mean, come on, really? How can any serious person consider the risks worthwhile. Additionally, I do not trust many of the "studies" given that they are often funded, run, documented, and/or reported by "Big Pharma" - and beyond simply being untrustworthy, are very likely going to be falsified.
I'd bet money that there were various trials done on the vax and the results turned out to show ineffectiveness or harm, so the findings were just dumped into the trash and it was all forgotten about.