With each passing day, the list of
people suffering tragic consequences from the novel gene therapies
marketed as COVID “vaccines” gets longer. Slews of professional and
amateur athletes have collapsed and died in recent weeks, and mainstream
media act as if those things are either normal or inexplicable.
They’re neither. They’re abnormal, and totally explainable when you
know how the COVID shot destroys your heart and clumps your blood. Among
the latest victims is Florian Dagoury, world record holder in static
breath-hold freediving. Before his Pfizer jabs, he was able to hold his
breath for 10 minutes and 30 seconds.
After his second dose, his diving performance was slashed by about
30%, and he’s been diagnosed with myocarditis, pericarditis and trivial
mitral regurgitation, a condition in which the mitral valve in the heart
gets leaky, allowing blood to flow backward into the left ventricle.
Dagoury shared his experience on Instagram:1,2
“After my 2nd dose I noticed that my heart rate was
way higher than normal and my breath hold capacities went down
significantly. During sleep, I’m at 65-70bpm instead of 37-45bpm. During
the day, I’m now always over 100bpm instead of 65bpm, even when I sit
down and relax. Once I even reach[ed] 177bpm while having dinner with
friends!
Ten days after my 2nd jab, I went to see a
cardiologist and he told me it’s a common side effect of Pfizer vaccine,
nothing to worry about, just rest, it will pass. 40 days after 2nd jab,
I had no progress so I went to see another cardiologist and got
diagnosed with myocarditis and trivial mitral regurgitation!
Which is basically
an inflammation of the heart muscles cause by the immune system and some
tiny leaks of blood from the valves that no longer close properly. I’m
now struggling to reach 8 min breath hold, 150m dyn[amic apnea
freediving] and I even have a strong urge to breath[e] doing 40m dives.
30% decrease on my diving performance roughly.”
Many Athletes Are Losing Their Careers
Other professional athletes whose careers are now on hold include
French tennis player Jeremy Chardy, who commented on his situation:3
“Since I had my vaccine ... I am struggling. I can’t
train. I can’t play ... It’s frustrating, especially that I don’t have
10 years left to play. I regret having the vaccine, but I could not have
known that this would happen ... it’s difficult because I was having
fun and I want to play longer.”
Another one is Antoine Mechin, a 32-year-old triathlete whose career
is on indefinite hold, as he developed pulmonary embolism after taking
his second dose of Moderna. What makes it all the more tragic is that
Mechin suffered pain and shortness of breath after the first shot, but
he was told his symptoms were probably just stress and fatigue. He went
ahead with the second, and now has severe lung damage. Mechin said:
“Damaging healthy people to preserve the health of
the weakest, a choice of backward logic. I would not get vaccinated
again if it had to be done again.”
Largest Safety Signal in the History of Medicine
By any objective measure, the COVID shots are the most dangerous
drugs ever launched. The safety signal is absolutely massive. Here’s a
screenshot summary from OpenVAERS’ November 19, 2021, report (the latest
available at the time of this article),4 listing some of the most common effects reported following the COVID jab.
According to calculations by Steve Kirsch, executive director of the
COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, adverse events are conservatively
underreported by a factor of 41,5 so it’s possible we need to multiply these numbers by 41 to get closer to the real-world impact.
For a visual illustration of how dangerous the COVID shots are in
comparison to all other vaccines on the market, just look at this
OpenVAERS graph. It speaks for itself.
Ignored Safety Signal: Post-Injection Miscarriages
While we’re starting to hear more about the heart damage and strokes
the COVID shots cause, a troubling effect that isn’t getting the
attention it deserves is miscarriage. As of November 19, 2021, 3,071
miscarriages had been reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events
Reporting System (VAERS). There were also:6
- 18,024 cases of menstrual disorders
- 6,654 cases of vaginal/uterine hemorrhage
- 1,216 cases of testicular pain or swelling
- 395 cases of erectile dysfunction
All of these effects point to the shots having an adverse impact on human reproductive health. A recent paper7
in Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law addresses reproductive
concerns, noting that while “the use of mRNA vaccines in pregnancy is
now generally considered safe ... the influential CDC-sponsored article
by Shimabukuro et. al.8 (2021) used to support this idea, on closer inspection, provides little assurance ...”
In particular, getting the COVID shot during the first 20 weeks of
pregnancy is extremely risky — the risk of miscarriage is anywhere
between 82% and 91% — but Shimabukuro et. al. hid this stunning finding
in their paper.9 Here’s how they did it.
How Shimabukuro et. al. Hid Massive Safety Signal
According to Shimabukuro et. al.,10
the miscarriage rate within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy was 12.6%
(104 miscarriages out of 827 pregnancies), which is only slightly above
the normal average of 10%. However, there’s a distinct problem with this
calculation. As explained in the Science, Public Health Policy, and the
Law paper:11
“... closer inspection of the 827 women in the
denominator of this calculation reveals that between 700 to 713 women
were exposed to the vaccine after the timeframe for recording the
outcome had elapsed (up to 20 weeks of pregnancy).”
To clarify, Shimabukuro et. al. included women in the group of 827
who actually didn’t get the shot during their first 20 weeks of
pregnancy. Since they didn’t get the shot until later in the pregnancy,
they would not have been AT RISK for miscarriage from the shot in the
first trimester.
Put another way, since the third trimester is after week 20, you
should not include women who got the shot in the third trimester when
you’re trying to determine the miscarriage rate among those injected
BEFORE week 20. I hope that’s clear.
If you only include women who were at risk for side effects during
the first 20 weeks, because they actually got the shot during those
first 20 weeks, then there are only 114 or, at most, 127 of them left in
that group. And that changes the calculation considerably! What we
actually have are 104 miscarriages out of 127, which is 82%, or possibly
as high as 104 out of 114, which is 91%.
Of those 104 miscarriages, 96 of them occurred before 13 weeks of
gestation, which strongly suggests that getting a COVID shot during the
first trimester is an absolute recipe for disaster.
The Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law paper points out
several other problems with Shimabukuro’s analysis that compound the
confusion, including the fact that they used overlapping periods of
exposure and outcome:
“Exposure to the vaccine was defined by trimester
(periconception, first, second, and third). Outcomes were defined as
women first exposed to the mRNA vaccine before 20 weeks’ gestation; and
first exposed from 20 weeks’ gestation. The infant was followed for 28
days during the perinatal period (birth-28 days).”12
This strikes me as an intentional misdirection strategy to confuse
and obfuscate. They could easily have used the same periods for exposure
and outcome, either the three trimesters or weeks 1 through 20 and
weeks 21 through 40.
Other adverse event statistics included a preterm birth rate of 9.4%
(60 out of 636 births), a 3.2% incidence of small size for gestational
age, and a 2.2% incidence of birth defects (16 out of 724 births).
Another Problem With Shimabukuro’s Paper
Another minor detail found in Shimabukuro’s paper hints at an effort
to downplay and hide the miscarriage risk. The authors claim the normal
rate of miscarriage in the published literature is between 10% and 26%.
However, the 26% rate includes clinically-unrecognized pregnancies,
and since the cohort under investigation included only
clinically-RECOGNIZED pregnancies — meaning women who knew they were
pregnant — that 26% statistic does not apply. Basically, it’s included
to confuse you into believing that the miscarriage incidence is far
higher than it actually is.
Looking at statistical data, the risk of miscarriage drops from an
overall, average risk rate of 21.3% for the duration of the pregnancy as
a whole, to just 5% between Weeks 6 and 7, all the way down to 1%
between Weeks 14 and 20.13
So, when you consider that the normal risk for miscarriage is just 5%
by the time you enter Week 6 (and many women don’t even realize they’re
pregnant before that time), an 82% to 91% risk of miscarriage is no
negligible increase. This should also make everyone realize that
recommending this injection to pregnant women is a reprehensible crime
against humanity.
Giving pregnant women experimental gene-based therapies is
reprehensibly irresponsible, and to suggest that safety data are “piling
up” is nothing but pure propaganda. Everything is still in the
experimental stage and all data are preliminary. It’ll take years to get
a clearer picture of how these injections are affecting young women and
their babies.
Breastfeeding women also need to be aware that the mRNA in the COVID
shot, as well as spike protein, can transfer through breast milk. This
is another way by which infants can be put at risk for acute and/or
longer term health problems. So, if you got a COVID shot after giving
birth, please understand that you are not transferring protective
antibodies.
You’re transferring the vaccine itself, and the toxic spike protein
your body produces, to your baby. In March 2020, a 5-month-old infant
died from thrombotic thrombocytopenia purpura within days of his mother
receiving her second dose of the Pfizer vaccine.14,15
In addition to that lethal case, there are at least 72 other cases
where toddlers have had an adverse reaction to breast milk from a
vaccinated mother.16
There Are Plenty of Cause for Concern
In closing, I urge you to read through these selected highlights from the Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law paper:17
“The sweeping conclusions of safety that Shimabukuro
et al. (2021) make are not convincing ... [M]echanisms which may be
disrupted by the injection include syncytin-1 (syn1), a fusogenic
protein of retroviral origin, essential for cell fusion and placental
development.
Studies are required to determine if mRNA encoded
spike (S) protein HR1 (or HR1a28) or HR2 has the ability to
inadvertently inhibit syn1, preventing the cell fusion required for
placental attachment, resulting in pregnancy loss.
The rodent studies carried out by Pfizer and Moderna
to determine if there could be an impact on fertility and development
may need to be repeated in Old World primates, such as macaques, as they
have similar syn1 and syn2 proteins to humans, whereas rats do not.
The presence of autoantibodies to syn1 was
investigated by Mattar et al., and although a change from baseline of
autoantibodies to syn1 occurred in all 15 pregnant women exposed to the
first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech product, the change was not deemed
high enough to be considered biologically significant.
Given the small sample size, these findings may
indicate that further investigation is required. Further, an altered
syn1 expression is associated with pre-eclampsia, hemolysis, elevated
liver enzymes and low platelets syndrome, intrauterine growth
restriction and gestational diabetes mellitus in observational studies.
Synctyin-1 is also required for gamete fusion (syn1
and ACET2 receptors present in sperm and oocytes) and, additionally,
found in the testes34 and ovaries. In the Comirnaty (Pfizer/BioNTech
mRNA vaccine) Package Insert submitted to the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), the manufacturers state that potential impairment
of male fertility has not been evaluated ...
We question the conclusions of the Shimabukuro et al.
study to support the use of the mRNA vaccine in early pregnancy ... The
assumption that exposure in the third trimester cohort is
representative of the effect of exposure throughout pregnancy is
questionable and ignores past experience with drugs such as thalidomide.
Evidence of safety of the product when used in the
first and second trimesters cannot be established until these cohorts
have been followed to at least the perinatal period or long-term safety
determined for any of the babies born to mothers inoculated during
pregnancy.
Additionally, the product’s manufacturer, Pfizer,
contradicts these assurances, stating: ‘available data on Comirnaty
administered to pregnant women are insufficient to inform vaccine-
associated risks in pregnancy,’ and ‘it is not known whether Comirnaty
is excreted in human milk’ as ‘data are not available to assess the
effects of Comirnaty on the breastfed infant’...
Due to the nature of the mRNA vaccine roll-out,
healthcare providers need to report any issues in pregnancy to further
determine the safety of this product ...
Considering the evidence presented here, we suggest the immediate
withdrawal of mRNA vaccine use in pregnancy (Category X) and those
breastfeeding, alongside the withdrawal of mRNA vaccines to children or
those of child-bearing age in the general population, until
more convincing data relating to the safety and long-term impacts on
fertility, pregnancy and reproduction are established in these groups.”