I could probably live with the lying, as she is a woman after all so there is nothing unexpected there. The deal breaker to me is the sheer stupidity and bowing to social pressure, which is why she lied to you.
The hiding of it is worrisome. I think the problem is bigger than the vaccine. You have to ask yourself if you can deal with the myriad of bad side effects and lifelong injuries, not to mention death that could happen. Did you see that 141 pg pdf titled Informed Consent Matters? Its on here somewhere. You both need to read that like asap before the second shot. Good luck.
Yeah man, this one has to go. Getting a vaccine ain't the problem here. Lying and scheming behind your back is a no go. You might end up on a gulag list with this one.
It's very possible if there aren't overt fertility issues then there may be birth defects. The spike proteins are known to collect in the ovaries and cause damage.
If OP is wanting children someday then find an honest straightforward mate that hasn't taken an experimental injection.
I've heard one of the doctors who are against the jab say that 'they wouldn't have sex with anyone who had it' (and not for ideological reasons, rather, health reasons). Fairly sure it as Dr. Tenpenny.
It only has a half-life of a few days. I don't think it can be sexually transmitted. There is zero evidence that it can be, and no biological path that I can see, but biology can be tricky, so who knows. Regardless, after 2 weeks or so it most definitely can't be, because it will all be gone from her system.
Since the spike protein that the vaccine produces is the worst part (mostly), the same things that work for the virus also are good for the vaccine. Make sure she gets plenty of Vitamin D and Zinc with Quercetin prior to getting her next shot. Keep her on those things for two weeks. Also add plenty of Vitamin C.
Ivermectin is really good too, and I would recommend that. If getting Ivermectin is a problem you can get the horse dewormer stuff (the active ingredient is identical, the inactive ingredients are totally normal human food. Its just called horse dewormer, the name is irrelevant biologically, though not psychologically). If you are interested in that route and she would be willing I can give you the dosage and schedule.
So far there is zero evidence of long term damage to the female reproductive system. That doesn't mean none will come out, but it does mean there has been none so far. All the fear porn that people have seen is not evidence of ovarian damage, but evidence of blood vessel damage somewhere in the reproductive system. Blood vessels and ovaries are not the same tissues, so its not the same thing. One could have an effect on the other, but without actual evidence, any suppositions are just that.
Anons on this board have been over the data before. It goes far beyond 'supposition', 'fear porn', and 'hypothesis'. There is actual clinical data now on a horrific miscarriage rate among vaxxed women.
Since vaxes started to become popular early this year, we'll have to wait until Sept/Oct to see how many healthy babies are born to vaxxed women. I'll venture to guess not many.
If you looked in the thread you linked you would see that the second comment from the top is mine. I show that it is not 82% death rate but 90.6% death rate in the first two trimesters according to their data.
But here's the thing. Spontaneous abortion is not generally caused by damage to the ovaries. It is caused by a shock to the developing embryo, or the mothers system, or whatever. Many things can cause it, but direct ovarian damage is not really one of the causes, unless such damage also has secondary effects (which is likely if the cause is trauma, but not minor tissue damage (AKA the vaccine), at least there is no evidence).
In addition there are thousands of data points that show endothelial damage, including specifically within the female reproductive tissue. But endothelial tissue damage IS NOT OVARIAN damage,, at least not directly. So far there has been zero data (and zero evidence) that there has been any damage to the reproductive system itself.
That doesn't mean there hasn't been. It needs to be looked at. But there is a difference between the tissues, and any biologist (including myself0 can explain it. I would be happy to elaborate on the differences if you wish.
The damage that the vaccine causes to the endothelium is so deadly because it doesn't take much to cause clotting in the capillaries, or heart attacks if there is damage in heart blood vessels, or aneurysms if there is damage to brain blood vessels, etc. That's why killing off, or causing an immune response to the blood vessels themselves (endothelium) is so harmful. It doesn't take that much damage to do a lot of harm.
But in the ovaries, killing off a few cells won't do much. It would have to be a lot of damage to the tissue itself and there is no evidence for that. Until such actual evidence exists, its fear porn and speculation.
The OP raised the issue of what to do with a prospective bride who has taken the vax. It doesn't really matter whether her future reproductive problems are caused by endothilial cell damage, ovarian damage, placental damage, poor oxygenation of the blood due to lung damage, etc. The point is simply that a young man who wants to get married and have children ought to avoid vaxxed women. His chances of fathering healthy children are much better if he marries an unvaxxed woman.
There is no evidence that there will be long term effects to the lungs, the ovaries, the endothelium, or any part of the body from any of the vaccines to any statistical significance. The truth is, we don't know. The other truth is, according to biology it is unlikely to be a problem for many people.
Could it happen to some? Sure. But the evidence we have so far (that we know of, it could be fraudulent) suggests such events will be very rare.
The VAERS data suggests short term serious effects in the 1:1000 range (or so), and the death rate is more like 1:20,000. Of course death is a non-issue, since she'd be dead, and its illegal to marry dead people, but serious short term effects (which is all the VAERS data shows) are also not overly concerning for long term effects. The body has a remarkable capacity for healing. To discount that is giving into your fears of the unknown, and not evidence based.
Within the VAERS data is also evidence of long term effects, but those are about the same level as the death data, and predominantly in older people. So the risk is actually very low (according to that data).
Could the VAERS data be underreported? Absolutely. I think that is highly likely. I doubt very much it is more than 10 times worse than it suggests however because if it were it would quite simply be too hard to hide from someone like myself who looks every day for such evidence (and all the other people doing the same thing diligently).
So if my 10 times hypothesis is correct (its really a reasonable upper limit) that would put the long term effects for which there is evidence at a rate of about 1:2000. Thats actually really good odds.
Its not good enough that I would risk my life. And its bad enough that I advise everyone I know to not get it, to the destruction of some friendships unfortunately (people who care nothing for actual evidence because they are too far under the spell), but in real actual numbers, its pretty good odds.
So to even slightly suggest that its a forgone conclusion, when every piece of actual evidence, and even reasonable speculation suggests that it is not going to be that bad is disingenuous at best, and fear mongering at worst.
The cell is constantly clearing surface proteins; recycling them. Especially a protein like the S protein that has no cytoskeletal and extracellular matrix anchors. So the actual proteins that get expressed on the surface will absolutely be cleared in relatively short order. The mRNA itself has a half life of a couple days. Within two weeks any infected cells should be clear of any spike producing mRNA.
According to this paper which tested PEG clearance (polyethelene glycol, which coats the nanoparticle) the body breaks it down and clears it relatively quickly.
The lipids that make up the rest of the nanoparticles will be integrated into the cell walls. But cell walls are in constant flux, and those lipids will almost certainly be broken down in short order as well. That is of course if a vaccine infected cell survives. Since the point of the vaccine is to cause an immune response which will likely kill any infected cell through induced apoptosis, the most probable outcome is that the entire thing will be consumed and cleared very quickly by this mechanism.
Our entire bodies are in constant flux. It is likely that not a single atom or molecule of you is one that you were born with. Everything gets replaced all the time. Some things can last longer than others, especially things for which there is no breakdown mechanism (can't enter any metabolic pathway), but everything gets cleared eventually. We are after all, biological machines designed for that exact purpose.
So yes, all of the vaccine will go away. I would guess very nearly every single molecule of it is gone within two weeks. I would like to see studies on the lipid clearance itself, but having looked at the molecules I see no obvious issues. That doesn't really mean much except there is nothing glaring. Biology is complicated and everything requires testing. But as for the actual nasty shit, the mRNA and S protein, that stuff has very clear breakdown pathways, so even if a cell survives the experience, that stuff will be gone in a couple weeks for sure.
That's great and all, except this does effect him, if the spike proteins her body produce can be spread sexually or via shedding, and, if it makes her infertile (provided he wants children).
Don’t fear my brother we are all going through these times. Stay strong and don’t fear. Fear is what has deceived some of our loved ones. I believe there is a “free will” aspect at play here and you do not consent. Pray!
You have to take a step back and wonder what else she has been hiding from you. I've found if they are hiding one thing, they are hiding many. Good luck fren. Sorry for your heartache.
Best steer clear.
She lied to you. That is enough to sever the relationship right there.
Plenty of other lady fish in the sea.
Agreed. Hate to say it but she lied to you and hurt you. I wonder if she even feels bad.
I could probably live with the lying, as she is a woman after all so there is nothing unexpected there. The deal breaker to me is the sheer stupidity and bowing to social pressure, which is why she lied to you.
Not only that but you shed the spike protein for 24 hours after vaccination so you could've got it unwillingly
The hiding of it is worrisome. I think the problem is bigger than the vaccine. You have to ask yourself if you can deal with the myriad of bad side effects and lifelong injuries, not to mention death that could happen. Did you see that 141 pg pdf titled Informed Consent Matters? Its on here somewhere. You both need to read that like asap before the second shot. Good luck.
Yeah man, this one has to go. Getting a vaccine ain't the problem here. Lying and scheming behind your back is a no go. You might end up on a gulag list with this one.
Would you really want a woman who feels the need to lie to you about getting a vaccine to be the mother of your children?
IF is the operaative word here. Word on the street is that the shot causes infertility.
It's very possible if there aren't overt fertility issues then there may be birth defects. The spike proteins are known to collect in the ovaries and cause damage.
If OP is wanting children someday then find an honest straightforward mate that hasn't taken an experimental injection.
ACE...it is time you found a Nice MAGA girl to settle down with :)
Believe me, it is not easy to say this. I do not do it lightly. I believe, if she gets the second shot, her life expectancy becomes 3-5 years.
sorry to hear, this worries me, too.
to your question about the sexual transmission, sorry for the frankly but: wait until trials are done.
May not be the answer you want to hear, or what I'd do myself, but... it's what a good friend would say.
god bless.
I've heard one of the doctors who are against the jab say that 'they wouldn't have sex with anyone who had it' (and not for ideological reasons, rather, health reasons). Fairly sure it as Dr. Tenpenny.
There's also the question of fertility.
And the lying.
This is all I found on that subject
https://indianexpress.com/article/lifestyle/health/is-it-safe-to-have-sex-after-covid-vaccine-7254527/
It only has a half-life of a few days. I don't think it can be sexually transmitted. There is zero evidence that it can be, and no biological path that I can see, but biology can be tricky, so who knows. Regardless, after 2 weeks or so it most definitely can't be, because it will all be gone from her system.
Since the spike protein that the vaccine produces is the worst part (mostly), the same things that work for the virus also are good for the vaccine. Make sure she gets plenty of Vitamin D and Zinc with Quercetin prior to getting her next shot. Keep her on those things for two weeks. Also add plenty of Vitamin C.
Ivermectin is really good too, and I would recommend that. If getting Ivermectin is a problem you can get the horse dewormer stuff (the active ingredient is identical, the inactive ingredients are totally normal human food. Its just called horse dewormer, the name is irrelevant biologically, though not psychologically). If you are interested in that route and she would be willing I can give you the dosage and schedule.
Best to move on from this young lady if you want to have kids.
That might not be particularly easy, but it's a helluva lot easier than splitting up after marrying her.
So far there is zero evidence of long term damage to the female reproductive system. That doesn't mean none will come out, but it does mean there has been none so far. All the fear porn that people have seen is not evidence of ovarian damage, but evidence of blood vessel damage somewhere in the reproductive system. Blood vessels and ovaries are not the same tissues, so its not the same thing. One could have an effect on the other, but without actual evidence, any suppositions are just that.
Anons on this board have been over the data before. It goes far beyond 'supposition', 'fear porn', and 'hypothesis'. There is actual clinical data now on a horrific miscarriage rate among vaxxed women.
Since vaxes started to become popular early this year, we'll have to wait until Sept/Oct to see how many healthy babies are born to vaxxed women. I'll venture to guess not many.
Some of the earlier threads where anons went over the data: https://greatawakening.win/p/12jJGXkWBl/-82-of-pregnant-women-who-took-m/c/
https://greatawakening.win/p/12jJGXlLCb/huge-red-flag-medical-researcher/c/
If you looked in the thread you linked you would see that the second comment from the top is mine. I show that it is not 82% death rate but 90.6% death rate in the first two trimesters according to their data.
But here's the thing. Spontaneous abortion is not generally caused by damage to the ovaries. It is caused by a shock to the developing embryo, or the mothers system, or whatever. Many things can cause it, but direct ovarian damage is not really one of the causes, unless such damage also has secondary effects (which is likely if the cause is trauma, but not minor tissue damage (AKA the vaccine), at least there is no evidence).
In addition there are thousands of data points that show endothelial damage, including specifically within the female reproductive tissue. But endothelial tissue damage IS NOT OVARIAN damage,, at least not directly. So far there has been zero data (and zero evidence) that there has been any damage to the reproductive system itself.
That doesn't mean there hasn't been. It needs to be looked at. But there is a difference between the tissues, and any biologist (including myself0 can explain it. I would be happy to elaborate on the differences if you wish.
The damage that the vaccine causes to the endothelium is so deadly because it doesn't take much to cause clotting in the capillaries, or heart attacks if there is damage in heart blood vessels, or aneurysms if there is damage to brain blood vessels, etc. That's why killing off, or causing an immune response to the blood vessels themselves (endothelium) is so harmful. It doesn't take that much damage to do a lot of harm.
But in the ovaries, killing off a few cells won't do much. It would have to be a lot of damage to the tissue itself and there is no evidence for that. Until such actual evidence exists, its fear porn and speculation.
The OP raised the issue of what to do with a prospective bride who has taken the vax. It doesn't really matter whether her future reproductive problems are caused by endothilial cell damage, ovarian damage, placental damage, poor oxygenation of the blood due to lung damage, etc. The point is simply that a young man who wants to get married and have children ought to avoid vaxxed women. His chances of fathering healthy children are much better if he marries an unvaxxed woman.
There is no evidence that there will be long term effects to the lungs, the ovaries, the endothelium, or any part of the body from any of the vaccines to any statistical significance. The truth is, we don't know. The other truth is, according to biology it is unlikely to be a problem for many people.
Could it happen to some? Sure. But the evidence we have so far (that we know of, it could be fraudulent) suggests such events will be very rare.
The VAERS data suggests short term serious effects in the 1:1000 range (or so), and the death rate is more like 1:20,000. Of course death is a non-issue, since she'd be dead, and its illegal to marry dead people, but serious short term effects (which is all the VAERS data shows) are also not overly concerning for long term effects. The body has a remarkable capacity for healing. To discount that is giving into your fears of the unknown, and not evidence based.
Within the VAERS data is also evidence of long term effects, but those are about the same level as the death data, and predominantly in older people. So the risk is actually very low (according to that data).
Could the VAERS data be underreported? Absolutely. I think that is highly likely. I doubt very much it is more than 10 times worse than it suggests however because if it were it would quite simply be too hard to hide from someone like myself who looks every day for such evidence (and all the other people doing the same thing diligently).
So if my 10 times hypothesis is correct (its really a reasonable upper limit) that would put the long term effects for which there is evidence at a rate of about 1:2000. Thats actually really good odds.
Its not good enough that I would risk my life. And its bad enough that I advise everyone I know to not get it, to the destruction of some friendships unfortunately (people who care nothing for actual evidence because they are too far under the spell), but in real actual numbers, its pretty good odds.
So to even slightly suggest that its a forgone conclusion, when every piece of actual evidence, and even reasonable speculation suggests that it is not going to be that bad is disingenuous at best, and fear mongering at worst.
The cell is constantly clearing surface proteins; recycling them. Especially a protein like the S protein that has no cytoskeletal and extracellular matrix anchors. So the actual proteins that get expressed on the surface will absolutely be cleared in relatively short order. The mRNA itself has a half life of a couple days. Within two weeks any infected cells should be clear of any spike producing mRNA.
According to this paper which tested PEG clearance (polyethelene glycol, which coats the nanoparticle) the body breaks it down and clears it relatively quickly.
The lipids that make up the rest of the nanoparticles will be integrated into the cell walls. But cell walls are in constant flux, and those lipids will almost certainly be broken down in short order as well. That is of course if a vaccine infected cell survives. Since the point of the vaccine is to cause an immune response which will likely kill any infected cell through induced apoptosis, the most probable outcome is that the entire thing will be consumed and cleared very quickly by this mechanism.
Our entire bodies are in constant flux. It is likely that not a single atom or molecule of you is one that you were born with. Everything gets replaced all the time. Some things can last longer than others, especially things for which there is no breakdown mechanism (can't enter any metabolic pathway), but everything gets cleared eventually. We are after all, biological machines designed for that exact purpose.
So yes, all of the vaccine will go away. I would guess very nearly every single molecule of it is gone within two weeks. I would like to see studies on the lipid clearance itself, but having looked at the molecules I see no obvious issues. That doesn't really mean much except there is nothing glaring. Biology is complicated and everything requires testing. But as for the actual nasty shit, the mRNA and S protein, that stuff has very clear breakdown pathways, so even if a cell survives the experience, that stuff will be gone in a couple weeks for sure.
Sorry, it's coming in fast and furious!
https://greatawakening.win/p/12jJBsC1cQ/buried-report-576-preborn-babies/
Please see my post in response to Huffman98 in this thread about spontaneous abortions.
Who thinks vaccinations are a problem? You.
Your girlfriend doesn't think it's a risk.
Then the only thing you can do is let go of the problem.
This is because only by respecting the freedom to make decisions for all people, including ourselves and others, can we truly be free.
To do this, we just need to agree to either move closer or further away from each other.
That's great and all, except this does effect him, if the spike proteins her body produce can be spread sexually or via shedding, and, if it makes her infertile (provided he wants children).
Yes, so include all of that in your thinking, and agree whether you want to move closer or further away.
We just need to be aware of trying to get our behavior right. We don't have to intend for the action to produce results.
Intentions and expectations carry dissatisfaction, or needless suffering.
^^^ this is the second sob story posted like this.
Who do you work for and what reaction are you trying to bait this community into giving you?
walk away now.
I hope she doesn’t plan on having children. I’ve heard a lot of issues with pregnant women. No breast milk, low hormone levels. Best of luck.
Don’t fear my brother we are all going through these times. Stay strong and don’t fear. Fear is what has deceived some of our loved ones. I believe there is a “free will” aspect at play here and you do not consent. Pray!
Sorry for your loss...cut her loose.
You have to take a step back and wonder what else she has been hiding from you. I've found if they are hiding one thing, they are hiding many. Good luck fren. Sorry for your heartache.