• Login
  • Register
The Daily Sceptic
No Result
View All Result
  • Articles
  • About
  • Archive
    • ARCHIVE
    • NEWS ROUND-UPS
  • Podcasts
  • Newsletter
  • Premium
  • Donate
  • Log In
The Daily Sceptic
No Result
View All Result

Doubled Pregnancy Loss Rate, Raised Foetal Abnormality Rate and Concentration of Lipid Nanoparticles in Ovaries – How Could They Call This Vaccine ‘Safe’?

by Alex Kriel and Dr David Bell
14 April 2023 2:00 PM

The mRNA vaccines were released globally in early 2021 with the slogan ‘safe and effective’. Unusually for a new class of medicine, they were soon recommended by public health authorities for pregnant women. By late 2021, working age women, including those who were pregnant, were being thrown out of employment for not agreeing to be injected. Those who took the mRNA vaccines did so based on trust in health authorities – the assumption being that they would not have been approved if the evidence was not absolutely clear. The role of regulatory agencies was to protect the public and, therefore, if they were approved, the drugs were safe.

Recently, a lengthy vaccine evaluation report sponsored by Pfizer and submitted to the Australian regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) dated January 2021 was released under a Freedom of Information request. The report contains significant new information that had been supressed by the TGA and by Pfizer itself. Much of this relates directly to the issues of safety in pregnancy and impacts on the fertility of women of child-bearing age. The whole report is important, but four key data points stand out:

  • The rapid decline in antibody and T cells in monkeys following a second dose;
  • Biodistribution studies (previously released in 2021 through an FOI request in Japan);
  • Data on the impact of fertility outcomes for rats;
  • Data on foetal abnormalities in rats.

We focus on the last three items as, for the first point, it is enough to quote the report itself: “Antibodies and T cells in monkeys declined quickly over five weeks after the second dose of [Pfizer Covid vaccine] BNT162b2 (V9), raising concerns over long term immunity.” This point indicates that the regulators should have anticipated the rapid decline in efficacy and must have known at the outset that the initial two dose course was unlikely to confer lasting immunity and would, therefore, require multiple repeat doses. This expectation of failure was recently highlighted by Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director at the U.S. NIH.

The three remaining items should be a major cause for concern with the pharmaceutical regulatory system. The first, as revealed in 2021, involved biodistribution studies of the lipid nanoparticle carrier in rats, using a luciferase enzyme to substitute for the mRNA vaccine. The study demonstrated that the vaccine will travel throughout the body after injection and is found not only at the injection site but in all organs tested, with high concentration in the ovaries, liver, adrenal glands and spleen. Authorities who assured vaccinated people in early 2021 that the vaccine stays in the arm were, as we have known for two years, not being honest.

Lipid concentration per gram, recalculated as percentage of injection site.

In terms of the impact on fertility and foetal abnormalities, the report includes a study of 44 rats and describes two main metrics, the pre-implantation loss rate and the number of abnormalities per foetus (also expressed per litter). In both cases the metrics were significantly higher for vaccinated rats than for unvaccinated rats.

Roughly speaking, the pre-implantation loss ratio compares the estimated number of fertilised ova and the ova implanted in the uterus. The table below is taken from the report itself and clearly shows the loss rate for vaccinated (BNT162b2) is more than double the unvaccinated control group.

In a case control study, a doubling of pregnancy loss in the intervention group would represent a serious safety signal. Rather than take this seriously, the authors of the report then compared the outcomes to historical data on other rat populations – 27 studies of 568 rats – and ignored the outcome because other populations had recorded higher overall losses. This range is shown in the right hand column as 2.6% to 13.8%. This analysis is alarming as remaining below the highest previously recorded pregnancy loss levels in populations elsewhere is not a safe outcome when the intervention is also associated with double the harm of the control group.

A similar pattern is observed for foetal malformations with higher abnormality rate in each of the 12 categories studied. Of the 11 categories where Pfizer confirmed the data are correct, there are only two total abnormalities in the control group, versus 28 with the mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2). In the category which Pfizer labelled as unreliable (supernumerary lumbar ribs), there were three abnormalities in the control group and 12 in the vaccinated group.

As with the increased pregnancy losses, Pfizer simply ignored the trend and compared the results with historical data from other rat populations. This is very significant as it is seen across every malformation category. The case control nature of the study design is again ignored, in order to apparently hide the negative outcomes demonstrated.

These data indicate that there is no basis for saying the vaccine is safe in pregnancy. Concentration of lipid nanoparticles in ovaries, a doubled pregnancy loss rate and raised foetal abnormality rate across all measured categories indicates that designating a safe-in-pregnancy label (B1 category in Australia) was contrary to available evidence. The data imply that not only was the Government’s ‘safe and effective’ sloganeering not accurate, it was totally misleading with respect to the safety data available.

Despite the negative nature of these outcomes, the classification of this medicine as a ‘vaccine’ appears to have precluded further animal trials. Historically,  new medicines, especially in classes never used in humans before, would require a very rigorous assessment. Vaccines, however, have a lower burden of proof requirement than ordinary medicines. By classifying mRNA injections as ‘vaccines’, this ensured regulatory approval with significantly less stringent safety requirements, as the TGA itself notes. In fact, these mRNA gene therapy products (to use the proper term) function more like medicines than vaccines in that they modify the internal functioning of cells, rather than stimulating an immune response to presence of an antigen. Labelling these gene therapy products as ‘vaccines’ means that, as far as we are aware, even today no genotoxicity or carcinogenicity studies have been carried out.

This report, which was only released after a FOI request, is extremely disturbing as it shows that authorities knew of major risks with mRNA COVID-19 vaccination while simultaneously assuring populations that it was safe. The fact that mainstream media have (as far as we are aware) completely ignored the newly released data should reinforce the need for caution when listening to the advice of public health messaging regarding COVID-19 vaccination.

Firstly, it is clear that regulators, drug companies and the Government would have known that vaccine induced immunity tails off very rapidly, with this being subsequently observed in real world data with efficacy against infection falling to zero. Accordingly, the single point in time figures of 95% and 62% efficacy against symptomatic PCR-positive infection quoted for Pfizer and AstraZeneca respectively meant almost nothing since a rapid decline was to be expected. Similarly, the concept of a two dose course was inaccurate as endless boosters would likely have been required given the rapid decline in antibodies and T-cells observed in the monkeys.

Most importantly, the data do not in any way support the ‘safe’ conclusion with respect to pregnancy; ‘dangerous’ would be much more accurate. The assurances of safety were, therefore, completely misleading given the data disclosures in the recent freedom of information release. Regulatory authorities knew that animal studies showed major red flags regarding both pregnancy loss and foetal abnormalities, consistent with the systemic distribution of the mRNA they had been hiding from the public. Even in March 2023, it is impossible to give these assurances, given the fact that important studies have not, to the best of our knowledge, been done.  Pfizer elected not to follow up the vast majority of pregnancies in the original human trials, despite high miscarriage rates in the minority they did follow. Given all of the problems with efficacy and safety, the administration of these products to women of childbearing age and administration to healthy pregnant women is high risk and not justified.

Alex Kriel is by training a physicist and was one of the first people to highlight the flawed nature of the Imperial Covid model; he is a founder of the Thinking Coalition which comprises a group of citizens who are concerned about Government overreach. David Bell is a public health physician with a PhD in population health and formerly worked as a scientific and medical officer at the World Health Organisation.

Tags: AustraliaCOVID-19Freedom of InformationPfizerPregnancyVaccineVaccine injury

Donate

We depend on your donations to keep this site going. Please give what you can.

Donate Today

Comment on this Article

You’ll need to set up an account to comment if you don’t already have one. We ask for a minimum donation of £5 if you'd like to make a comment or post in our Forums.

Sign Up
Previous Post

Zika: The Pandemic That Never Was

Next Post

The Green Agenda has Become an Embarrassing Failure

Subscribe
Login
Notify of
Please log in to comment

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

11 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tonka Rigger
Tonka Rigger
4 months ago

Damn, I was looking forward to this. Looks like I’ll be giving it the swerve.

3
0
Jon Mors
Jon Mors
4 months ago

First of all, what are you doing watching a show that clearly has an 18 rating?

I’ve seen the whole season (it isn’t finished – the next season is coming later this year), and thought it was ok. The woke story line (not really a story line) about the trans person came across as hamfisted and, dare I say it, retarded. It doesn’t dominate the show at all.

Obvs the novelty value isn’t there any more if you watched the first season, but I thought the games themselves were plenty thrilling. If you enjoyed the first one then you should enjoy the second one as long as you put your finger in your ears and go ‘la la la’ during the woke bits.

2
0
Marque1
Marque1
4 months ago
Reply to  Jon Mors

You never tried to sneak into an 18? Wierdo!

5
0
RW
RW
4 months ago
Reply to  Jon Mors

If you enjoyed the first one then you should enjoy the second one as long as you put your finger in your ears and go ‘la la la’ during the woke bits.

And that’s exactly what you shouldn’t be doing.

The creator explained that including a trans character was a bold effort to raise awareness about the challenges and prejudices faced by gender minorities in South Korea.

First, that’s probably a lie: The creator was almost certainly paid to including this walking (as I assume) propaganda vehicle and didn’t do this because he actually cared about it. Otherwise, the character hadn’t magically appeared once the show had proven to be successful enough to consider it for delivering propaganda camouflaged as entertainment.

Second, the message behind this is clear. The first season was an entertainment show with characters the audience wanted to identify with going through a challenging, suspenseful story. A conventional design for the entertainment industry, so to say. But this has now changed. Characters are now forced onto the supposedly already hooked audience because they ought to identify with them in order to lecture them about somebody’s preferred pseudo-medical treatment for something that’s – at best – a disturbing and somewhat disgusting mental health issue affecting a tiny minority of the population and – at worst – simply a scam to make $$$ by harming vulnerable children (eg, depressed or autistic).

If you don’t roundly reject that because “the special effects are still so cool!” (I made that one up) you’re proving to be exactly the kind of target person (in the opinions of the people behind this scheme) whose brain is to be put through the propaganda ironing machine in order to make interpret the world in the proper way, this to be done by programming memories into it.

This may be entirely harmless because it may not work. But I’m not convinced of this and I’d never consciously let these people install anything into my brain because I want it to remain mine.

4
0
Ron Smith
Ron Smith
4 months ago
Reply to  RW

You could be talking about Eastenders!

2
0
Ron Smith
Ron Smith
4 months ago

Steyn on the ten years anniversary of the Charlie Hebdo attacks

“To be honest, it makes me vomit to see people holding these Princess Dianafied candlelit vigils, and using the hashtag #JeSuisCharlie – I am Charlie -and in effect appropriating these guys’ sacrifice for this bogus solidarity. It makes me sick to see all these ‘the pen is mightier than the sword’ cartoons that have appeared in newspapers all over the United States, Canada, Britain, Germany, France, Australia, everywhere, from other cartoonists, again expressing solidarity with these very brave men – but not doing what they did…
I’ve been on enough events in Europe with less famous cartoonists than these who live under death threats, live under armed guard, have had their family restaurant firebombed – it’s happened to a Norwegian comedienne I know – have come home and found their home burned, as a Swedish artist I know happened to. And all these people doing the phony hashtag solidarity, screw your phony hashtag solidarity. Let’s have some real solidarity – or if not, at least have the good taste to stay the hell out of it.”

10
0
GroundhogDayAgain
GroundhogDayAgain
4 months ago

Off-T
Two episodes of “Accused: The Fake Grooming Scandal” are showing on Channel 4 tonight. The second one features Tommy Robinson.

Very timely; suspiciously so.

My concerns:

  • The title is abysmal. The scandal itself isn’t fake, even if the case being examined might have been.
  • No doubt they’ll be giving TR a kicking. I expect to hear he’s a Far Right, Racist, Conspiracy theorist. I doubt he’ll have a fair hearing.
  • Will they acknowledge the other cases that are true?
Last edited 4 months ago by GroundhogDayAgain
5
0
Old Arellian
Old Arellian
4 months ago
Reply to  GroundhogDayAgain

Channel 4 – in total lockstep with tin eared, two tier Keir

6
0
psychedelia smith
psychedelia smith
4 months ago

We watched about 20 minutes then binned it. Anyone want me to spoil the new Day of the Jackal? That really boiled our piss to steam.

5
0
GroundhogDayAgain
GroundhogDayAgain
4 months ago
Reply to  psychedelia smith

What a great expression! 😃

1
0
Dinger64
Dinger64
4 months ago

Sorry mate, not a clue what this is about?
Please don’t try to explain, again sorry, squid game isn’t my greatest priority!

2
0
RW
RW
4 months ago

I don’t watch TV or any movies. For me, entertainment is music¹ and books and I make a conscious effort to stay away from anything I (for myself) refer to as activist’s prose. If I want to inform myself about a certain topic, I’ll buy a or some non-fiction books dealing with it. If not, then I don’t and I don’t want people who want to ‘inform’ me about stuff I don’t want to learn anything about sneak it into my brain through the back door. Should I discover something like this in a book I’m reading (happens sometimes), I’ll usually immediately stop and throw it away.

¹ In case someone cares about this. Here’s a track from a nice, current EP of a London-based death metal outfit (I have this on CD, obviously).

https://decrepid.bandcamp.com/track/vortex-of-chaos

Last edited 4 months ago by RW
3
0
transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
4 months ago
Reply to  RW

I love music and books

Currently reading the new “Smiley” novel by Le Carre’s son. It’s reasonably well done but the son has introduced lots of females into the story – there were many fewer females in the Le Carre Smiley books, presumably because that was an accurate reflection of the reality of a world that the author knew well. A bit disappointing- back to Dostoyevsky after this.

2
0
Ron Smith
Ron Smith
4 months ago
Reply to  transmissionofflame

Remember stumbling across a Mills & Boon book, quite raunchy!

0
0
Ron Smith
Ron Smith
4 months ago
Reply to  RW

Obituary is a well known death band. Here is a British thrash band:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8-5Ya_OTMs

1
0
RW
RW
4 months ago
Reply to  Ron Smith

See also: John Tardy is a wuss!¹

Unfortunately, I think Xentrix is about as exciting as an old sock lost in some corner.

🙂

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgNqvxQD9RI

¹ Because he uses (or used to use) a harmonizer for his vocals.

1
0
hogsbreath
hogsbreath
4 months ago

Just started watching it, already into the 3rd or 4th episode of season 1, I am getting bored with the mellowdrama.

2
0
NeilParkin
NeilParkin
4 months ago

One dimensional, in-substantial, excessively violent. Perfect for the Tik-tokkers

1
0
The Enforcer
The Enforcer
4 months ago

Good young writer is Jack Watson, however, I suggest that one stops watching banal programmes like this and read a good book

0
0
Jabby Mcstiff
Jabby Mcstiff
4 months ago

My goodness you shouldn’t be watching things with people dressed up like that it isn’t right.

0
0

NEWSLETTER

View today’s newsletter

To receive our latest news in the form of a daily email, enter your details here:

DONATE

PODCAST

Episode 36 of the Sceptic: Karl Williams on Starmer’s Phoney Immigration Crackdown, Dan Hitchens on the Assisted Suicide Bill and Tom Jones on Reform’s Local Council Challenge

by Richard Eldred
16 May 2025
0

LISTED ARTICLES

  • Most Read
  • Most Commented
  • Editor’s Picks

Chinese ‘Kill Switches’ Found in US Solar Farms

15 May 2025
by Will Jones

News Round-Up

16 May 2025
by Richard Eldred

Spy Agency Report on the Alleged “Extremism” of AfD Turns Out to Be So Stupid That it Destroys all Momentum for Banning the Party

16 May 2025
by Eugyppius

The Folly of Solar – a Dot on the Horizon Versus a Blight on the Land

16 May 2025
by Ben Pile

Civil Servants Threaten to Strike Over Trans Ban in Women’s Lavatories

16 May 2025
by Will Jones

The Folly of Solar – a Dot on the Horizon Versus a Blight on the Land

29

Civil Servants Threaten to Strike Over Trans Ban in Women’s Lavatories

25

Spy Agency Report on the Alleged “Extremism” of AfD Turns Out to Be So Stupid That it Destroys all Momentum for Banning the Party

19

News Round-Up

18

Chinese ‘Kill Switches’ Found in US Solar Farms

27

Trump’s Lesson in Remedial Education

16 May 2025
by Dr James Allan

Spy Agency Report on the Alleged “Extremism” of AfD Turns Out to Be So Stupid That it Destroys all Momentum for Banning the Party

16 May 2025
by Eugyppius

The Folly of Solar – a Dot on the Horizon Versus a Blight on the Land

16 May 2025
by Ben Pile

Renaud Camus on the Destruction of Western Education

15 May 2025
by Dr Nicholas Tate

‘Why Can’t We Talk About This?’

15 May 2025
by Richard Eldred

POSTS BY DATE

April 2023
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
« Mar   May »

SOCIAL LINKS

Free Speech Union
  • Home
  • About us
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy

Facebook

  • X

Instagram

RSS

Subscribe to our newsletter

© Skeptics Ltd.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Articles
  • About
  • Archive
    • ARCHIVE
    • NEWS ROUND-UPS
  • Podcasts
  • Newsletter
  • Premium
  • Donate
  • Log In

© Skeptics Ltd.

wpDiscuz
You are going to send email to

Move Comment
Perfecty
Do you wish to receive notifications of new articles?
Notifications preferences