More Fetal Losses Than Expected After Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccination In Israel: Study

A higher-than-expected number of miscarriages and other forms of fetal loss were associated with COVID-19 vaccinations in Israel, a new study has revealed.

Researchers found 13 fetal losses—four more than the nine expected—for every 100 pregnant women who received a COVID-19 vaccine during weeks eight to 13 in pregnancy, according to the study, which was published as a preprint on the medRxiv server.

Most people in Israel, including pregnant women, received the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

Pfizer did not respond by publication time to a request for comment.

The team behind the study includes Retsef Levi, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology researcher who was recently named to the committee that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on vaccines, and Dr. Tracy Hoeg, who works for the Food and Drug Administration.

The researchers analyzed electronic health records from Maccabi Healthcare Services, one of four organizations that provide health care to Israelis. They looked at 226,395 pregnancies that occurred between March 1, 2016, and Feb. 28, 2022. The primary analysis looked at fetal loss for pregnant women after dose one or dose three of a COVID-19 vaccine, with fetal loss including miscarriage, abortion, and stillbirth.

The researchers came up with an expected number of fetal losses based on a model that drew from data before the COVID-19 pandemic, then compared the expected number of fetal losses with those that occurred from week eight of pregnancy onward.

They identified 13,214 fetal losses after the COVID-19 pandemic started, compared with 12,846 fetal losses in the reference period, finding that women who received a COVID-19 vaccine during weeks eight to 13 in pregnancy experienced a higher-than-expected number of fetal losses.

“If you believe this result … every 100 women that you would vaccinate during weeks eight to 13, you are going to see close to four additional fetal losses,” Levi told The Epoch Times.

Keep reading

Did AI Almost Start World War III?

Recall that the Covid fiasco went into overdrive when Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London generated a wildly incorrect estimate of the fatality rate of the virus from China. He had two forecasts, one without lockdowns (death everywhere) and one with (not terrible). The idea was to inspire the replication of the CCP’s extreme methods of people control in the West. 

That model, first shared in classified realms, flipped the narrative. Once select advisors – Deborah Birx and Anthony Fauci among them – presented it to Trump, he went from opposing lockdowns to getting in front of the seemingly inevitable. 

Before long, every Gates-funded NGO was pushing more such models that proved the point. Masses of people observed the models as if they were an accurate reflection of reality. Major media reported on them daily. 

As the fiasco dragged on, so did data fakery. The PCR tests were generating false positives, giving the impression of an unfolding calamity even though medically significant infections were highly limited. Infections and even exposures were redefined as cases, for the first time in epidemiological history. Then came the subsidized “deaths from Covid” that clearly generated waves of misclassification that underscore the overestimation of the fatality rate.

Keep reading

SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and the Multi-Hit Hypothesis of Oncogenesis

Cancer is a complex and dynamic disease. The “hallmarks of cancer” were proposed by Hanahan and Weinberg (2000) as a group of biological competencies that human cells attain as they progress from normalcy to neoplastic transformation. These competencies include self-sufficiency in proliferative signaling, insensitivity to growth-suppressive signals and immune surveillance, the ability to evade cell death, enabling replicative immortality, reprogramming energy metabolism, inducing angiogenesis, and activating tissue invasion and metastasis. Underlying these competencies are genome instability, which expedites their acquisition, and inflammation, which fosters their function(s). Additionally, cancer exhibits another dimension of complexity: a heterogeneous repertoire of infiltrating and resident host cells, secreted factors, and extracellular matrix, known as the tumor microenvironment, that through a dynamic and reciprocal relationship with cancer cells supports immortality, local invasion, and metastatic dissemination. This staggering intricacy calls for caution when advising all people with cancer (or a previous history of cancer) to receive the COVID-19 primary vaccine series plus additional booster doses. Moreover, because these patients were not included in the pivotal clinical trials, considerable uncertainty remains regarding vaccine efficacy, safety, and the risk of interactions with anticancer therapies, which could reduce the value and innocuity of either medical treatment.

After reviewing the available literature, we are particularly concerned that certain COVID-19 vaccines may generate a pro-tumorigenic milieu (i.e., a specific environment that could lead to neoplastic transformation) that predisposes some (stable) oncologic patients and survivors to cancer progression, recurrence, and/or metastasis. This hypothesis is based on biological plausibility and fulfillment of the multi-hit hypothesis of oncogenesis (i.e., induction of lymphopenia and inflammation, downregulation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) expression, activation of oncogenic cascades, sequestration of tumor suppressor proteins, dysregulation of the RNA-G quadruplex-protein binding system, alteration of type I interferon responses, unsilencing of retrotransposable elements, etc.) together with growing evidence and safety reports filed to Vaccine Adverse Effects Report System (VAERS) suggesting that some cancer patients experienced disease exacerbation or recurrence following COVID-19 vaccination. In light of the above and because some of these concerns (i.e., alteration of oncogenic pathways, promotion of inflammatory cascades, and dysregulation of the renin-angiotensin system) also apply to cancer patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, we encourage the scientific and medical community to urgently evaluate the impact of both COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination on cancer biology and tumor registries, adjusting public health recommendations accordingly.

Keep reading

Rates of successful conceptions according to COVID-19 vaccination status: Data from the Czech Republic

Abstract

Background

Adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccination on human menstrual cycle characteristics have been observed, but limited data are available on the relationship between COVID-19 vaccination status and birth rates.

Objectives

Therefore, we used nationwide data from the Czech Republic to examine rates of successful conceptions (SCs), that is, conceptions leading to live births 9 months later, for women who were either vaccinated or unvaccinated against COVID-19 before SC.

Methods

Summary monthly COVID-19 vaccination and birth data for women in the Czech Republic aged 18–39 years were retrieved for the period from January 2021 to December 2023. The numbers of SCs per month per 1000 women were calculated for preconception-vaccinated or unvaccinated women, respectively, as well as the number of SCs per month per 1000 women for all women aged 18–39 years.

Results

During the study period, there were approximately 1,300,000 women aged 18–39 years in the Czech Republic, and the proportion of COVID-19-vaccinated women increased from January 2021 until reaching a steady state of around 70% by the end of 2021. At least from June 2021, SCs per 1000 women were considerably lower for women who were vaccinated, compared to those that were unvaccinated, before SC. Furthermore, SC rates for the vaccinated group were much lower than expected based on their proportion of the total population.

Conclusions

In the Czech Republic, SC rates were substantially lower for women vaccinated against COVID-19 before SC than for those who were not vaccinated. These hypothesis-generating and preliminary results call for further studies of the potential influence of COVID-19 vaccination on human fecundability and fertility.

Keep reading

17 Ways mRNA Shots May Be Fueling Cancer, Backed by Over 100 Studies

A comprehensive literature review by Mathilde Debord titled “COVID-19 mRNA vaccines can induce cancer in 17 distinct ways, according to over 100 studies was just published in Le Point Critique.

Drawing from over 100 peer-reviewed studies, it outlines 17 distinct biological mechanisms by which the injections may initiate, accelerate, or reactivate malignant processes.

1. Genome Instability

mRNA may be reverse-transcribed and integrated into host DNA, triggering mutations that initiate cancer.

2. Immune Escape

The spike protein binds and inhibits tumor suppressor genes like p53 and BRCA1, shielding cancer cells from immune destruction.

3. Impaired DNA Repair Mechanism

The spike protein interferes with essential DNA repair enzymes, increasing the risk of unchecked mutations.

4. Chronic Inflammation

Lipid nanoparticles and spike protein cause long-lasting inflammation, a well-known driver of cancer.

5. Dysregulation of the Immune System

Suppression of T cells and type I interferon weakens cancer surveillance and promotes immune evasion.

6. RNA Disruption

Codon optimization disrupts microRNA networks, destabilizing cell growth regulation and apoptosis.

7. Activation of Oncogenic Pathways

The spike protein indirectly activates MAPK and PI3K/mTOR signaling, fueling tumor growth and metastasis.

8. Tumor Microenvironment Alteration

Lipid nanoparticles accumulate in tumors, enhancing permeability and potentially accelerating cancer spread.

9. Awakening Dormant Cancers

Post-vaccination inflammation and immune disruption may trigger recurrence in patients previously in remission.

10. Alteration of Immune Surveillance

Modified mRNA blocks toll-like receptors, making tumor cells “invisible” to the immune system.

Keep reading

FDA, CDC advisers say lost pregnancies higher than expected following early mRNA vaccination

President Trump’s second-term agenda has been careful not to cast doubt on his signature first-term achievement, the development of COVID-19 vaccines through Operation Warp Speed, which congressional Republicans continue to laud and even claim was sabotaged by Pfizer to deny Trump a consecutive term despite his base souring on the therapeutics.

A new preprint study on mRNA COVID vaccines in early pregnancy, coauthored by top advisers to Trump’s Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, may fuel the splintering of the Make America Healthy Again movement as the jabs’ opponents ramp up pressure on Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to ban them.

Not yet peer-reviewed, the study analyzed hundreds of thousands of Israeli medical records on pregnant women in the three years before and after SARS-CoV-2 emerged in China, finding 43% more “observed-to-expected” fetal losses per 100 pregnancies — 13 instead of nine — when the first mRNA dose is taken between 8-13 weeks’ pregnancy.

Pregnant women who took a booster between 8-13 weeks lost an additional two pregnancies per 100, a “potential dose-response relationship,” the study said.

By using pregnant women who got flu vaccines between 8-27 weeks and women who received either vaccine before their pregnancy as “comparative controls,” the authors said they were able to show the association is unique to COVID vaccines. 

The former had a “consistently lower-than-expected observed number of fetal losses, likely the result of healthy vaccinee bias” – in which people with overall better health tend to have higher vaccination rates – while the latter had “according-to-expected or lower-than-expected numbers of fetal losses,” the study found.

It said “almost all” mRNA doses were made by Pfizer, whose own 2021 report to the FDA – which the agency hid for 16 months until a court made it public – shows 44% of women in Pfizer’s clinical trial lost their pregnancies.

Keep reading

Vindication For The Unvaccinated?

At a recent family gathering, I sat at the dinner table with a group of loved ones for the first time since the Covid-19 fiasco. Most of the cheerful discussion focused on the spectacular event of the week: my mother’s 100th birthday. 

I was the only person at the table who hadn’t had any form of flu for many years, while all of the guests had been ill to one degree or another. Almost everyone had tested positive for Covid at least once over the last few years with accompanying flu symptoms. Although no one in my family was hospitalized or died during the so-called pandemic; they all had been vaccinated repeatedly. As far as I know, my wife and I were the only ones in our families who didn’t get any Covid shot, and I haven’t been inoculated for anything in the last seventy years. 

On this happy occasion, the fear, masks, lockdowns, and accusations of the recent past had been mostly forgotten. It was not because the signs and symptoms of the disease had ended, nor that the call for vaccination or testing had been silenced. No one understood why they were still occasionally feeling unwell, with some continuing to report they’d been diagnosed with Covid. 

My view of healthcare has always been outside of the box, having practiced Traditional Chinese Medicine for many decades. I’d worked closely with medical doctors in treating some of their patients and also served as the chief medical officer of a volunteer fire department, appreciating life-saving emergency procedures of modern biomedicine. Through a range of experiences, I gained some knowledge of the causes and cures for suffering and illness.

Before the Covid fiasco, my alternative approach to illness had been respected; I’d shared my knowledge with whoever might ask. My medical perspective was no secret from friends and family. When my daughters were young, they weren’t vaccinated as there were no threats of deadly or debilitating diseases. This was in a place and time when vaccination for infants could be considered and refused, not done by rote. There was reasonable dialogue about the topic — and non-compliance certainly did not elicit threats of excommunication. 

As the specter of a pandemic arose, my opinion about vaccination became dangerous and irrelevant. 

From the outset, it was apparent that the claimed benefits of the new vaccines did not outweigh their risks. I openly said and wrote that the technology remained untested — though never advised anyone to refrain from inoculation — only counseling those who listened to remain fully informed.

It wasn’t complicated. Using genetic-based technology in developing a new drug that attempted to manipulate the magnificent complexity of the human immune system was at a minimum, a gamble. As easily demonstrated, this new technology embraced the bold assumption that human design was flawed and could be improved. It was premature to declare that this experimental treatment was safe and effective. We still don’t know the actual long-term effects — particularly over generations.

This simple and logical evaluation was considered preposterous by those who responded to the seemingly new disease with unbridled fear. The danger of the Covid flu was deemed sufficient to quell all reasonable responses about the risks of the vaccines. Suddenly, there was an eclipse of medical autonomy, and debate was scorned. The actions and motives of corrupted government agencies and their profit-oriented allies in Big Pharma were blessed by devious leaders, who deemed them altruistic and unquestionable. 

This atmosphere, developed and enforced in a haze of authoritarian dictates, created an unprecedented climate of hostility that infected all relationships. Because of my views and unvaccinated status, I rapidly became a pariah to my family.

Early on, when the fear tactics were in high gear, my cousin, who is an attorney involved in healthcare issues, sent a blistering email, condemning one of my first articles skewering the pandemic response. He left no room for dialogue and writing, it is the height of irresponsibility to add to the disinformation that is everywhere about the Covid vaccine. He concluded…

I am really upset that you have chosen to use your talents and thoughtful manner to give credence to the kind of wrongheaded rhetoric and conspiracy theories that feed the mass hysteria over accepting the reality that if we are to beat this pandemic, we need to not just take the vaccine if we want to, but take it on a societal level whether certain individuals want to or not. Your call for “transparency” just further feeds a certain, huge segment of the populations’ belief that they know better than the experts on this issue. They do not. You do not. I do not. But every reputable researcher and medical professional who has reviewed this data agree – it is safe, it is effective, and it is critical.

The venom exuded in response to my unwillingness to join in the mass delusion supporting vaccination was palpable. My crime was unforgivable.

Although we had been very close, all contact ended. However, it was not his unconscious, misdirected anger that troubled me, rather that he shared his views and wrath with my daughters, supporting their inclination to distance themselves from me because of my independent views. This wound with my cousin may never heal.

My mother, who had cordially disagreed with me on vaccination, balanced his bias with sound advice to her granddaughters. She urged them not to be harsh, suggesting that whatever differences they see, these were not worthy of destroying their relationship with their father. Thanks to her wise counsel, the love my daughters and I share has survived.

This and similar events had been left smoldering. In the spring of 2025, at this happy gathering celebrating my mom’s longevity, to my surprise, the topic turned to Covid. (My cousin was not there.) Conversation comprised mostly of personal accounts of suffering and confessions of a lack of understanding of why the virus persisted. 

My sister said she’d attended a lecture at a local college on the history of the social response to mass infection. She described the common human responses and behaviors to past epidemics and pandemics, including how scapegoating was a dominant and destructive response. 

Managing to remain quiet until all had acknowledged these horrors of the past, I spoke up, voicing a simple question: Did the recent Covid pandemic fit this pattern?

Keep reading

Miscarriage and Pregnancy Loss Rates 43% Higher Than Expected After Covid Vaccination, New Study Finds

Dear readers, I am delighted to share with you the fruits of a massive research project I’ve been working on, which is the reason why you haven’t heard from me in a very long time.

I quickly realised after I started working on it that I would have to prioritise it at the neglect of posting here. I got so swept up in it that I didn’t even have time to post about my Process 1 vs Process 2 work. I hope you will agree it was worth it.

I will start with the key findings and then try to explain the methodology in plain language. The paper is based on analysis of electronic health records (EHR) from one of Israel’s largest health insurance funds. For those of you who would rather read the paper itself, here’s a PDF.

Key findings

Here are the key findings (as summarised in a post on X).

Women vaccinated in early pregnancy (weeks 8-13) had a higher-than-expected number of foetal losses:

  • Dose 1 = 3.9 more per 100 women [43% higher than expected: 13 vs 9]
  • Dose 3 = 1.9 more per 100 women [19% higher than expected: 12 vs 10]

Late pregnancy losses were a big part of the signal.

Among all women, 1.1% lost their pregnancy after week 24, compared to 2.7% of women who received dose 1 in early weeks, and 1.8% of women who received dose 3 in early weeks.

Keep reading

The Czech data reveals the truth about the COVID vaccine. Is that why no epidemiologist or infectious disease expert will touch it?

Executive summary

There is no vaccine more important than the COVID vaccine.

And there is only one publicly available database that reveals the truth about the safety and efficacy of the COVID mRNA vaccines: the Czech record level data.

The dataset should be a goldmine for epidemiological analysis—arguably the best available dataset to evaluate COVID vaccine safety and efficacy in a real-world population.

Yet, every epidemiologist and infectious disease expert on earth avoids this database like it was infected with a deadly virus.

AFAIK, I’m the only guy who has analyzed it using an objective, conservative analysis method.

It took a whole hour or so to write the code and run the analysis.

The analysis shows the shots were neither safe nor effective. It’s all crystal clear from the Czech data.

Here’s the cool thing. All you need is one plot. No rocket science degree required.

I’ve asked AI to opine on why I’m the only guy who wants to look at the data.

The smoking gun graph: the one plot that tells the story instantly

Below is the cumulative all-cause mortality (ACM) death counts of everyone under age 80 in the Czech Republic. The cohorts are FIXED composition cohorts defined by whether or not the person was vaccinated as of 6/14/21 (the enrollment date). Source data. The cohorts are naturally matched. No scaling was done or needed.

Keep reading

Canada’s top doctor, who pushed COVID jabs and masks, resigns from her position

Canada’s top medical adviser, known for her promotion of masking and COVID vaccines, is stepping down as chief public health officer.

Dr. Theresa Tam will resign on June 20 from her role as Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer (CPHO), ending her eight-year tenure during which she forced Canadians to follow dangerous COVID regulations, including masking and taking the experimental COVID shots.

“I’ve been in this role for over eight years now, so I think it has been an absolute privilege and honour. I never thought at the start of my career that I would end up here,” Tam told The Globe and Mail.

“Looking back, I put every ounce of my energy into this job. But I think it’s a purposeful job. It’s serving the public,” she continued.

Tam’s replacement has not been named.

In the early months of 2020, Tam became well-known by Canadians for leading the country’s response to the COVID “pandemic” and pushing arbitrary and dangerous regulations.

Initially, Tam assured Canadians that masking was unnecessary, ineffective, and could even pose health threats.

However, shortly after, Tam changed her policy, telling Canadians that they should even wear masks during sex. LifeSiteNews has published overwhelming evidence that masks are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID and can cause myriad health issues.

Additionally, Tam promoted experimental COVID vaccines for Canadians as young as six months old despite having no long-term studies on its effects.

LifeSiteNews has published an extensive amount of research on the dangers of the experimental COVID mRNA jabs that include heart damage and blood clots.

Keep reading