This is from an article that’s behind a paywall (links below). While I don’t want to “steal” it, what the writer is pointing out needs to be shared, especially because pregnant and nursing mothers are being bullied into getting the shots. Being pregnant is an emotional and vulnerable time, so these women are more susceptible to manipulation in the name of “health”. It’s also being pushed by hospitals, OBGYNs, and the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine (“experts” at keeping you and your baby safe.)
Here are the highlights:
Another population that requires special care is pregnant and nursing women. The effects of any medication on the rapidly developing fetus need to be approached carefully. Initial studies demonstrate that the placenta provides a potential barrier to the infant from COVID-19 infection. It also seems that the mother’s SARS-CoV-2 antibodies do not transfer to the infant at high rates compared to influenza. However, the mRNA vaccine wraps the spike proteins in a lipid nanoparticle. There is no data on how that changes the permeability of the placenta.
Budesonide, an inhaled corticosteroid, has been used safely in asthmatic patients in pregnancy. An Oxford study shows it reduces the need for hospitalization by 90% in COVID-19 if given early and outpatient. It also shortened illness duration. A pregnant or nursing mother who opted to use this outpatient if she contracted symptomatic COVID-19 during pregnancy would be able to receive informed consent. Why would the medical community encourage vaccination rather than effective and safe outpatient treatment with the information they don’t know about vaccines in pregnancy?
A final population that is generally carefully considered is men and women of childbearing years. Since the introduction of the mRNA vaccines, complaints about dysmenorrhea, or abnormal menstruation, have been common. The NIH is just now encouraging research into this potential side effect. The NIH suggests menstrual cycle changes could be due to stress. Women, of course, are presumed to be emotionally fragile when it is a convenient excuse to brush aside a medical concern.
Dr. Byram Birdle, Ph.D., requested biodistribution data on the Pfizer mRNA vaccines from the Japanese government. These studies measured the distribution of the lipid nanoparticles that contain the spike proteins in the mRNA vaccine. What these studies found is that the nanoparticles do not remain in the muscle as most vaccines do. After 24 hours, the study found some of the highest concentrations in the liver, spleen, and ovaries. The ovaries are the only organs where the particle concentration continues to grow, not decline. While many people have tried to minimize Dr. Birdle’s findings, they have primarily focused on his comments about the destructive nature of the spike protein. These “debunkings” do not dispute the biodistribution data.
Women are born with all of the follicle cells they will ever produce. These follicles mature into an ovum capable of being fertilized about once a month during a woman’s reproductive years. The ovaries, which contain these follicles, secrete the estrogen and progesterone that govern the menstrual cycle and prepare the uterus for the egg’s implantation. Lipid nanoparticles used in the Pfizer vaccine accumulate and increase in the ovary for at least 24 hours after vaccination. Women are complaining of menstrual issues post-vaccination.
While that summary is not proof of causation, it is astonishing that the NIH is just looking into it now. It is even more surprising that the FDA did not demand the same biodistribution data from Pfizer and the vaccine manufacturers and investigate it before “full approval.” Millions of women between the ages of 12 and 45 have taken these vaccines. And none of them were able to give full informed consent because the NIH does not know what is causing these issues.
While the CDC and NIH encourage vaccination for everyone, their go-to phrase for people in these groups regarding the vaccine is “there is no evidence that.” What they don’t tell you is that there is no evidence to the contrary either. Not studying something doesn’t prove it is “safe and effective.”
Here are the links:
https://hms.harvard.edu/news/placental-protection
