Were Pregnant and Breast Feeding Women Sold A Lie?
In this commentary we unpack whether pregnant and breast feeding women were sold a lie. Regular supporters, and followers of this unfolding medical mass casualty event will know our view on this question already.
Our colleagues at the Canadian Covid Care Alliance have produced another excellent educational video, this time about the women being falsely reassured by public health bodies and ‘experts’ in Canada, whilst Pfizer and Moderna, being no fools, were actually more candid about the lack of any safety testing data in pregnant and lactating women. We have posted frequently on this terrible chapter in New Zealand’s public health history
The exact parallels between Canadian and Kiwi marketing of the Pfizer jab to these groups are stark, and the video could be, word-for-word, a depiction of the identical abandonment of ethical principles by our own health officials.
Our respected NZ truth warrior, Dr Ursula Edgington has, by coincidence, just posted her own very pointed dissection on her Informed Heart substack. Towards the end, after profiling a parade of earnest but clueless health workers exhorting this experimental gene shot, she concludes:
There are no words to describe what these people have done – especially those who should have known better. Why didn’t they read the original documents from Pfizer? Why didn’t they ask questions? Why did they just blindly do as their managers/funders instructed them?
what were the prior norms?
Of all the Golden Rules of medicine broken in the time of covid, the most appallingly demolished is the politically-driven narrative to risk the sanctity of pregnancy, breast feeding and future fertility. This represents an obscene assault on the most foundational bedrock of conscientious medicine, which pragmatically is about protecting the future of our species.
Many adages describe how doctors – and pharmacists, midwives and nurse prescribers – have traditionally approached this vulnerable group in their prescribing approach:
first do no harm; when in doubt, leave it out; think twice, prescribe once; what you don’t know can hurt them; err on the side of caution; better safe than sorry; an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure; less is more; and, it shouldn’t need saying, the baby comes first.
Even paracetamol comes with a caution for pregnant women
There were never contradictory adages, compelling an opposing and reckless approach, until the imperative to mass ‘vaccinate’ the world’s population against SARS-CoV-2 – the alleged virus still not yet demonstrated or identified outside of a deliberately over-sensitive PCR test looking for scraps of an uploaded computer-derived RNA sequence.
Irrespective of an actual transmissible, bioweaponised illness, the officials and doctors round the world who spear-headed orders to tolerate no vaccine hesitancy will go down in history as criminals, in our view. Whether by purring on the TV about little fatty bubbles containing a bit of genetic material, refusing exemptions requested by women worried about all the unknowns, or persecuting and prosecuting doctors and other conscientious health workers for trying to warn their patients, these people are guaranteeing immense suffering for many, and forever infamy for themselves.
The just released RKI files, from Germany’s prestigious Robert Koch Institute of Public health, demonstrate one thing above all else: that politicians drove the pandemic policies, often against the advice and knowledge of their science experts. The unredacted emails confirm there never was a pandemic of the unvaccinated, nor evidence that masking worked except to freak people out, and that vaccinating children was a predetermined political imperative lacking clinical support. Clearly, New Zealand’s “whole of government response” was dictated from the same playbook, globally distributed, with sincere-pretending politicians claiming a scientific mandate provided by their tame ventriloquist dummy-doctors.
doctoring the truth
Of the various lies spoken in the video, one stands out particularly, spoken by several of the medical women. They must never have been pregnant let alone gone to an actual medical school. Well, perhaps they did, but they certainly learnt no specialised training beyond going straight from graduating to ‘public health medicine’.
They say – wait for it – there is no special reason to predict different physiological responses to the injections during pregnancy.
Let that sink in.
We know this idiotic abandonment of intellect and basic common sense operates here in NZ too, in fact in every region where Big Vax has ruled the messaging. We have watched, read and listened to much of the same from the likes of Dr Nikki Turner, NZ’s face of the ‘safe and effective in all stages of pregnancy’ trope, as well as Helen Petousis-Harris, a PhD vaccinologist, who both front IMAC.
a quick cpr for the truth
A properly trained doctor would know that the pregnant woman is carrying a new human developing at rapid speed who relies on an exquisitely non-toxic cocoon, with very healthy placental blood vessels, ideally balanced metabolism and hormones, and a blunted maternal immune system so that the father’s foreign DNA is not attacked by mum’s innate immunity. Every maternal body system is changed markedly by the effects of pregnancy, all to support growth and delivery of the baby. There are whole textbooks, specialities even, on foetal development, neonatology, and medical and surgical considerations in pregnancy. Some particular pregnancy adaptations include:
1. Cardiovascular System:
Increased Blood Volume and Cardiac Output and Decreased Blood Pressure. Mum is a life support system and has to provide oxygen and nutrients to the baby(s) and remove waste. Her heart has to work much harder.
2. Hepatic System:
Altered Liver Enzyme Activity: Pregnancy can modify the activity of liver enzymes, impacting drug metabolism. Some enzymes may be upregulated, increasing the metabolism of certain drugs, while others may be downregulated. Blood clotting is increased as bleeding could be a risk to the fetus, and the liver is working for two.
3. Body Fluid and Composition:
Increased water retention and increased fat stores can affect the volume of distribution of the pharmaceutical ingredients.
4. Immunological Changes:
Pregnancy induces a shift from Th1-lymphocyte predominant (cell-mediated) to Th2 (humoral/antibody) immunity to protect the foetus, which can alter the body’s response to infections and immune-modifying medications. Increased regulatory T-Cells help prevent rejection of the foetus but can also modulate immune responses to drugs. As we have reported repeatedly, profound alterations have been detected in the vaccinated, some predictable but some not so. It still beggars belief that anyone would continue to promote the jabs anyway, with what has become known about contamination and batch variability, cancer and sudden deaths. The appearance of the white rubbery clots in the mortuary in 2021, and now confirmed in the living, should have changed everything already. But, sadly, the “safest vaccines ever” maintain their blockbuster status.
Pregnant women have an altered immune response that can make them more susceptible to certain infections, and affect how drugs need to be used to manage these conditions. Clearly, covid positivity is more common in the multiply jabbed, pregnant or not, who may be prescribed other meds with uncertain or dubious safety profile, e.g. Paxlovid or God forbid Remdesivir. The placenta can transfer medications and other substances from the mother to the fetus. The degree of transfer depends on the drug’s properties, such as molecular weight, lipophilicity, and degree of ionisation. The placenta also contains enzymes that can metabolise drugs, impacting the exposure of the foetus to the medication.
what should have happened?
Planning a new drug for women of child-bearing age and pregnancy should have included the following routine considerations but, in an under-handed masterstroke, the mRNA gene transfer devices were re-defined as vaccines to give them a free liability pass. Thus, risking the chances of a thriving humanity, they were tricked into billions of pregnant and fertile women, men, and children.
1. Teratogenicity: Certain medications can cause congenital malformations or developmental issues in the foetus, particularly during the first trimester when organ development is most rapid.
VAERS and the Pfizer post-marketing study have many reports of miscarriage and birth defects. Miscarriage in early pregnancy can be the result of many different issues that are inconsistent with further healthy development and is relatively common. However, some midwives say their caseloads are decimated by miscarriages, where they book the woman for delivery but never get to meet them at the usual 20-week point. These anecdotal data points are increasing though, and consistent with all the biological mechanisms that have been uncovered for harm. Pfizer’s “official data” is full of holes and concerns.
2. Foetal Drug Exposure: The potential for drugs to cross the placenta and affect foetal development requires careful consideration. The timing of exposure and the specific drug involved are crucial factors.
Major questions were unanswered before the human ‘trials’ began, although rat studies showed the jab crossed the placenta (indeed the lipid nanoparticles are designed to do just that) and caused defects. Worryingly also, vaccine components have been detected in breast milk of injected mothers, and studies show that newborns somehow become ‘immunised’ by exposure to their mothers’ vaccines.
3. Maternal Health: The health of the mother is also paramount, and untreated conditions can pose risks to both mother and foetus. Thus, the benefits and risks of drug therapy must be carefully balanced.
Here in NZ, both drug regulator Medsafe and Pfizer itself advise caution in pregnancy, and that a woman’s decision should be individualised in consultation with her doctor. “Administration of Comirnaty in pregnancy should only be considered when the potential benefits outweigh any potential risks for the mother and fetus.“ This is in stark contrast to the advice to get it done at any stage of pregnancy as it his “highly safe”, as claimed by Dr Bonnie in the CCCA video. Dr Nikki Turner, a Wellington GP, who fronts IMAC, and many MoH officials have claimed this too. Rather different observations are made by midwives and specialists who are seeing more of everything, especially miscarriages, stillbirths, but also delivery complications. A NZ intensive care worker tells us that 3 times as many women are being admitted to ICUs since the rollout compared to pre-covid years. Dr James Thorp has been steadfast on the huge harms this very experienced and busy foetal-maternal medicine specialist is seeing.
Medsafe Datasheet:
https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/c/Comirnaty0.2mlOrangeCapinj.pdf
- Dosing Adjustments: Due to altered pharmacokinetics, dosing regimens may need adjustment to ensure therapeutic efficacy while minimising adverse effects. One size continues to fit all for these “vaccine products”.
- Monitoring and Safety: Close monitoring of drug levels, maternal health, and fetal development is often necessary when prescribing medications during pregnancy. But conventional vaccines, which Comirnaty surely is not, have finally been “outed” by their own champions for lacking any long term safety studies or proper placebo controls.
This was just a brief sketch of a few of the changes women undergo in pregnancy, and the usual cautions that apply. May utter shame be heaped on the seemingly clueless and irresponsible doctors and nurses carrying out the politicians’ plans.
summary
In normal times, prescribing a new drug without safety data to pregnant women is ethically dubious, clinically risky, and legally perilous. One would think the last group that would be pressured into uninformed coerced consent to a warp speed not-a-vaccine would be the pregnant. But they were lied to, tricked, deceived and pressured, despite sharing their age group’s very low risk of severe outcomes from a diagnosis of covid-19. Any professional who thinks this is OK should exit the stage.
Even worse, NZ has seen no heightened or targeted surveillance for adverse effects on mums and babies, and anecdotal evidence suggests strongly that the jabs are dangerous and damaging to mums and babies alike. Those responsible for this, and for ignoring safety signals when they are presented with them, will face prosecution, in a perfect world – which admittedly we are far from. Dr Ursula Edgington has written on the buried Auckland University study that was supposed to monitor pregnant women throughout the pandemic. She concludes:
It is beyond words how these women could be so expert in their fields and yet promote an injection that could potentially cause so much harm to the pregnant women they are paid to protect, including their unborn child. But it is unforgivable, deliberate behaviour to subsequently withhold information that could provide the informed consent that was censored three years ago. Today, the promotion of the dangerous injections continues in New Zealand, including to pregnant ‘people’. God help us.
If our population does not demand a return to basic medical ethics and human rights once it is made aware, do we deserve any better?
Note, we who read and accept these words are part of that population too, and the onus really does own us.
Hi there, just wanted to say how much I appreciate what you’re doing. It is heartening to see a cohort of professionals dedicated to the wellbeing of us all, rather than the head-in-the-sand prevailing alternative. Wishing you all the best, and sincere thanks. Cheers