Baby Die-Off: Lactation Issues, Miscarriages, and Neonatal Death

a reply to: Grenade

Oh I forgot you never believed the study you said was correct and proved me wrong anyways, so the fact the study proved me right and you wrong doesn't matter, anything that doesn't say what you like is wrong.

a reply to: Grenade

My post about my experience on my unit.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
As an RN all the 'long covid' cases I have had have been unvaccinated.

Your post stating my assertion that vaccinated people were not greatly protected from being hospitalized with long term covid complications.

originally posted by: Grenade

From what i've read the vaccines offer little protection from "long covid"

Vaccines reduce risk of long covid by just 15 percent

That's from a publication owned by Mr Gates and published on MSN.

You can look 2 posts up to see me quoting the study where you cherry picked '15% reduction', which included loss of taste and smell, and the study actually proves what I said was correct and while minor symptoms were not reduced by much, serious symptoms, such as would land you in the hospital for months, were greatly reduced just as I claimed. Here's a relevant sample.

Analyses within each care setting suggested that the risk reduction in BTI versus SARS-CoV-2 infection on both the relative (HR) and absolute (burden) scale generally becomes increasingly more pronounced as the acuity of the care setting increased (from non-hospitalized to admitted to ICU)

Then we have you saying it doesn't matter what the study you sourced and used to 'prove me wrong' says because you never believed it anyways! So the fact the study you used agrees with me is irrelevant.

originally posted by: Grenade

As i stated clearly i believe the 15% reduction in long covid among the vaccinated is nothing more than manipulation of statistics.

Pure gold.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Did i really, have another look and take my reference to the article in context with the rest of the thread.

The big picture will become clear.

Hell will freeze over before you see me peddle an article from the desk of Bill Gates as having any legitimacy.



The books on that desk sum up the pandemic, no coincidence.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Did i really

Hahaha, the comedy gets better. Now you claim you didn't cite it and source it, when you clearly did and even stated why you used this source.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Actually i try to use official government sources or from pro vaccine corporations as it makes it more difficult for you to refute the data. As in this case.

Hilarious.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

I would imagine that all-cause mortality is climbing exponentially. The 40% is from November of 2021. I noticed the tv ads for getting the shot have all but disappeared off the screen. According to this Doc, they said it was ok for pregnant women to have the shot, zero testing was done on pregnant women the only trial was on rats, by a company heavily invested in the Vaccine issuing company. It seems that a massive crime has been committed. So massive total media control and information sources have to be contained to stop a reaction. The lipid-protein was supposed to stay in the deltoid muscle. When in fact it inserts itself in many necessary organs. Yeh I know it's Bitchute but there are not many venues where this information can be discussed anymore, which shows the extent of the information control. If truth is expedient, what is the extent of the crime being hidden? www.bitchute.com...

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

I would imagine that all-cause mortality is climbing exponentially. The 40% is from November of 2021. I noticed the tv ads for getting the shot have all but disappeared off the screen. According to this Doc, they said it was ok for pregnant women to have the shot, zero testing was done on pregnant women the only trial was on rats, by a company heavily invested in the Vaccine issuing company. It seems that a massive crime has been committed. So massive total media control and information sources have to be contained to stop a reaction. The lipid-protein was supposed to stay in the deltoid muscle. When in fact it inserts itself in many necessary organs. Yeh I know it's Bitchute but there are not many venues where this information can be discussed anymore, which shows the extent of the information control. If truth is expedient, what is the extent of the crime being hidden? www.bitchute.com...

It could be. I see many methods of genocide. One is the initial die off from the "bad batches," where people have cardiac events and other "quick" conditions. The next way is the neurological issues like dementia and CJD, and cancer that can be slower and take 3-10 years. Finally, the next generation is infertile from a few gene edits. The combination of these factors could add up to a very large number within 10-20 years.

a reply to: Grenade

That is one interesting book.

When numbers appear, the reader believes some truth is about to be imparted

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

When they don't count the first 14 days as the person being vaccinated, when they blur the lines by stating one or two vaccines, boosters etc is a requirement of being in the "fully vaccinated" group i tend to think data on mortality is being skewed.

Labelling someone as unvaccinated when they've been injected with the so called "vaccine" is rather disingenuous wouldn't you agree? Especially when this status applies to the period of time directly after injection and the most likely to manifest symptoms and reactions.

If you can die from the side effects of being vaccinated within a day but aren't considered "vaccinated" for another 2 weeks, that's insanity.

Insane and deliberate.

Science, as taught decades ago, would not have allowed such an obvious omission. That fourteen days might be too soon to assess immune response versus covid but surely the second after the shot is in the arm the person is vaccinated for the purpose of recording side effects, adverse events and deaths. It baffles me that the medical system can allow this to happen.

New Science seems all bendy to fit.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04
I got from your posts that both you and your wife are RNs but I may be wrong.

If you both believe it is worth withholding the shots during pregnancy, is it due to seeing adverse reactions or out of abundance of caution?

My whole issue with the vaccines was that many people held off due to wanting to wait it out or be cautious also but were then coerced by family, friends, governments, media and bullied by the same. If people are throwing out information now, deemed dubious or not, it is largely because something doesn't seem right and they are asking questions and trying to hold on to their rights.

If medical people can have those concerns why aren't the average people also allowed to question?
Why were there no exemptions for pregnant health care workers?
Why didn't pregnant health care workers fight for their rights?
Are they being silenced?

It baffles me that medical people are on board. I get that they would be pro shots but the coercing of others (to the level of job loss, lack of travel, extreme isolation, suicides) really has an element of mental abuse to it. Why has that happened?

It's the same medical system in areas of harm reduction, self care, psychiatric care yet it pushes this equally on all people even those who don't want it. That is abusive to my mind.

Not expecting you to answer but a lot of people have a lot of questions and the inquiries won't stop until these questions are answered.

How long until they blame long covid and the unvaccinated?