CHUDOV fires a bomb highlighting a study by Fell et al. showing that children born to mothers mRNA vaccinated during the first trimester of pregnancy consistently show a greater rate of developmental
problems compared to mRNA vaccinations done during the third trimester. Igor Chudov: "For a safe vaccine "not affecting pregnancy", the trimester would not matter." Pregnant women must take NO vaccine
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2790607
‘My two recent posts mentioned a disturbing pattern appearing in several studies of children born to COVID-19-vaccinated mothers. For a yet unknown reason, children born to mothers vaccinated during the first trimester of pregnancy consistently show a greater rate of developmental problems compared to vaccinations done during the third trimester.
By pure luck (searching for information about the RSV vaccine,) I stumbled upon another study showing the same pattern.
The Canadian authors proclaim that their study did not find any problems in infants born to vaccinated mothers:
However, the data provided in the Supplement shows the same pattern we saw in the two previous trimester analyses: children born to mothers vaccinated early in pregnancy show worse developmental outcomes than those vaccinated in the third trimester. The Canadian study we are discussing today lumped the first and second trimesters together but still demonstrated the difference in outcomes between “early” and “late” vaccinations.
Take a look at eTable 7 in the supplement. I highlighted (in blue) the outcomes that were worse for infants whose mothers got the vaccine in the first and second trimester, compared to the third trimester:
What is in that table? It shows the relative risk of certain events (for example, neonatal ICU admission) for the given subgroups - which are compared to the unvaccinated mothers. The column “SUBGROUP ANALYSIS 3” that I highlighted shows analysis by trimester.
You can see (in the blue circles) that the risks of negative outcomes for the two subgroups, compared to unvaccinated mothers, show a higher relative risk for those mothers who were vaccinated during the first or second trimester.
A child given birth by an early-vaccinated mother has a 28% greater chance of a low Apgar score. For those who are not parents, the Apgar score is a quick rating given to newborns to see how well they are doing post-birth. A low Apgar score demonstrates serious health concerns, for example, being limp, not breathing on their own, etc.
This video explains the Apgar score:
Can a “safe vaccine” that has “no effect on pregnancy” cause a 28% greater chance of a newborn with serious problems having a very low Apgar score, if given during the first trimester as opposed to the third trimester?
That does not seem plausible!
Anyway, if any future mother you know is dead set on receiving a Covid vaccine during pregnancy, at least try to talk them into waiting until the third trimester.
What do you think? Why do first-trimester vaccinations show much greater risks to newborns across the board? Is that because their major organs are forming early in pregnancy?
Let us know what you think!’
Two years ago at the prenatal clinic there was a poster warning about the dangers of some types of cheese and diary during pregnancy, next to another one, recommending to be "up to date" with the covid "vaccine".
There is so much about our civilisation in that image.
As with my medical school teaching.
The cognitive dissonance involved in warning about the dangers of any quantity of alcohol during pregnancy whilst coercing women to uncritically take Covid shots is breathtaking.
Potential Children, and later Adults with Anger issues, possible Criminally insane? No one knows, long term affects, shortened life spans? Sickly? Cancer ridden?
Step back a little bit from the problem and just ask - What do we even know about the fetal immune system. I just did a quick google search "fetal immune system and T-cells", and the papers that come up are dated 2020 and 2022. We know basically jack about it still. And you're going to contaminate a fetus with spike protein crossing over from the mother, a totall foreign protein, foreign to both the fetus and the mother (but does the fetus even "know" that it's foreign this early? And coming from the mother does it just accept it as "mother?) And even worse, contaminate the fetus with mRNA that gets taken up into its cells, and those cells, no doubt totally consumed in developing and dividing into human form and operation, having this additional task of churing out its own spike protein. Think of the cellular disruptions going on here, and introducing this confusion into the developing immune system. It's incomprehensible that nothing can go wrong with this. One interesting search hit I only glanced through is a paper "Mechanisms of Fetal T Cell Tolerance and Immune Regulation" 2020 (https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.00588/full) where it talks about the need for immune tolerance and so forth. "Immune tolerance" alone should send up alarm bells! Here's an interesting line from it: "Thymic development begins by week eight of human gestation, and the first T cells begin to populate the periphery by 12–14 weeks of gestation". So 1st trimester, the thymus is barely even there yet! Lots of other lines in this article too that you can extrapolate out as equally alarming when you apply this spike confusion to it. The horror of all this is, unlike the thalidomide debacle, it's going to take several more years of infant growth before we finally wake up to it.