Thanks for this! I'm hoping to get back to the writing desk and continue on this topic soon..
Note, IF this is primarily a temporary phenomenon. Then it would suggest a recovery approx 9 months after the END of the initial (1st & 2nd) vaccination campaign. BUT then another fall corresponding to 8-9 months after the booster campaign!
At least in Germany, the booster campaign was a briefer/swifter rollout, so it should be even easier to recognise the correlation.
Rikard's point about other regions/countries with lower vax uptake is also important. Unfortunately most countries don't release monthly/quarterly births data promptly, which eaves us to wait until 2023 to get a clearer picture on births from 2022.
Next questions are, are these findings consistent on a greater scale? Does it look like this in SA and SE Asia, US, Canada? Is there any correlation between degree of injectees and degree of decline?
For if we were to find that these effects are specific to Europe/North America... well, that's smoking gun, isn't it?
Attempted genocide by way of "vaccine" is an act worthy to met with a rain of thermonuclear death upon the nation or nations guilty of it. If it was to be proven that a specific nation was behind this, I wouldn't hesitate if I was leader of a nuclear capable nation to use my entire arsenal of ABC-weapons on centers of industry, agriculture and population.
Sadly, the West totally lacks leaders willing to go to the wall for their own people and culture, and weak or extinct peoples have no say in their own future no matter what ideology or faith one cleaves to.
Well, I think we might find out one way or another. My money is on US gov't funding for whoever is willing to do their bidding, and it's kinda hard to pin-point it on any one individual.
I would, however, caution against modifying the gov't vs. people distinction. Historically, this was done after WW2, and I think it's the right thing to do.
Hence this part: "...the West totally lacks leaders willing to go to the wall for their own people...". They would rather collude with places like China and Saudi to make money for them and for global capital, than put their own people first and foremost.
I'd say that's pretty much the core of governements vs. their people.
Also, re the comparability across other places: I would suspect that to be the case in mRNA-vaxxed places (Japan, South Korea), but I haven't come across a systematic analysis (yet).
Thank you so much for this document. That is enormous help for us, who try to get larger picture of the issue. I wish there was work like yours done on the rest of countries across the globe. Much appreciated.
One small correction though - perhaps something to address and fix in the future updates: the flag shown on pp.77-80 is, wrongly, flag of SLOVAKIA (ex-part of Czecho-SLOVAKIA), population ca 5.5M. Live births in SLOVAKIA have not been analysed in this document. While the flag is Slovakian, the data on those pages is as stated in the text, for SLOVENIA (ex-part of Yugoslavia, population ca 2.1M).
That might very well be. Also, I think most of these depopulisers don't realise that vaxx uptake seems to be highest among their most devout followers.
Oh, you know, it's just one of these things: imagine, for the sake of the argument, a stereotypical 'city-dwelling liberal "family"' as portrayed by whatever TV program you care: two same-sex parents, one adopted 'project child', a dog and four turtles.
On the other side of the hypothetical arrangement, imagine a large, multi-generational Hispanic family. By sheer weight of demography, the latter will eventually win out.
If you throw in vaxx uptake among the former, well, it simply speeds this process up, perhaps considerably so.
Here in the USA I sometimes quip on the invasion force (European Colonists) deserves an equally hostile response (Most Hispanics are Indigenous Americans). Just because this will play out over centuries its hard to notice. Of course, anyone who can adapt to the biology of this continent (even some Europeans given their closeness to the land, definitely not those living in the cities you mention) will have the upper hand post political extinction event.
We will all be judged on our ability to take care of ourselves, like everywhere on this planet here quite soon. Can't happen in the cities, and like the great cities of the Aztecs, will disappear.
Low vaccine uptake for starters. Women having 6 to 8 children, from an early age second. Thoroughly ehtno-centric cultures not Hell-bent on cosmopolitan delusions of one world order (apart from islamic faith but that acts as a superstructure on top of the demos). Resource-strong - neither place is really lacking natural resources. No real winter compared to Europe and North America - meaning year-round agriculture is fully possible with minimal effort. Lots of opportunity for multiple energy sources once enough capital and knowledge can be accumulated for an industrial revolution of their own (mainly parts of Africa lagging, the arab/islamic world has left the starting blocks). Real-life experience with existential threats and crises in all levels of soceity - not even the leadership is insulated against loss and lack. Virtually no feminism, cult of rights, or postmodern universalist -isms corroding and destroying society. Culture s a real living part of being human, and not a commodified exploitable resource as in the capitalistic West.
I have reviewed some of the agribusiness methods and that soil is also degrading, all other points you raise are interesting. There is this fellow in Africa who had a lot of elephants shot and killed to the benefit of agriculture, he is claiming to be the savior of civilization. But the elephants were essential in a sustainable ecosystem.
I will have to think on your points thanks for the comment.
I don’t quite understand why you ascribe particular importance to spontaneous pregnancy terminations in the first trimester. Why would the magnitude of that number affect the seriousness of the birth-rate declines being reported?
I mentioned this in support of the findings, for these (typically un/derreported) 'events' would, in all likelihood, render the 'vaxx impacts fertility' debate moot: if, under pre-Covid circumstances, 43% of all women (as that cited paper suggests) experience this, then a, say, dramatic rise in these spontaneous first-trimester terminations would further underscore the decrease of live births.
“If serious efforts were made to clarify the situation, close cooperation between clinics and medical specialists could provide valid information for the urgently needed re-evaluation of the risk-benefit assessment, which is obviously not wanted under the great influence of politics and pharmaceutical industry.”
The suppositions the report’s author is making about when factors like lockdown might be expected to have affected birth rates, and when not, are perfectly reasonable. But we shouldn’t have to make such suppositions: the medical profession could clarify how much of this is biologically lower fertility, and how much might be other factors (after all, there have been many disruptions these last 30 months). Doctors know whether their patients who are trying to get pregnant can’t.
It’s regrettably reasonable to assume that the reason for the silence is pro-vax narrative preservation, but again, it’s inexcusable that they’re making us guess.
You're more than welcome, and I should've been clearer, I suppose.
If anything, these first trimester issues would underwrite the live birth decline (as in 'underreporting factor').
I'm with you in terms of 'we shouldn't have to do this': I'm a historian, and I'm not supposed to do this (but then again, there's quite a bunch of us non-experts on Substack and elsewhere who are doing what others--journalists--aren't doing: their job.)
I agree "spontaneous pregnancy terminations in the first trimester" (early miscarriages) are key and very difficult to track with available data. Raimund Hagemann's paper may be overly rigid in its application of a 9 month post-vax window - I consider a shorter 8 month time lag more appropriate.
Ha, thanks for the reference, I shall have a look.
Re Hagemann's paper and his choices: agreed, but I'd add by way of 'splainin' this (at least to myself, that is), that you work with the data you have, right? I'd also think that were he to factor these issues into his analysis, it's quite easily dismiss-able for the obvious reasons.
That said, all I wanted to do is point to the under-reporting (bias) in the data.
Thanks for this! I'm hoping to get back to the writing desk and continue on this topic soon..
Note, IF this is primarily a temporary phenomenon. Then it would suggest a recovery approx 9 months after the END of the initial (1st & 2nd) vaccination campaign. BUT then another fall corresponding to 8-9 months after the booster campaign!
At least in Germany, the booster campaign was a briefer/swifter rollout, so it should be even easier to recognise the correlation.
Rikard's point about other regions/countries with lower vax uptake is also important. Unfortunately most countries don't release monthly/quarterly births data promptly, which eaves us to wait until 2023 to get a clearer picture on births from 2022.
I agree on the preliminary nature of these issues. I also fear that repeat dosing might further complicate matters (muddy the waters) here.
We'll find out, eventually, both if there's a correlation as well as if it will still matter in a few years…
Next questions are, are these findings consistent on a greater scale? Does it look like this in SA and SE Asia, US, Canada? Is there any correlation between degree of injectees and degree of decline?
For if we were to find that these effects are specific to Europe/North America... well, that's smoking gun, isn't it?
Attempted genocide by way of "vaccine" is an act worthy to met with a rain of thermonuclear death upon the nation or nations guilty of it. If it was to be proven that a specific nation was behind this, I wouldn't hesitate if I was leader of a nuclear capable nation to use my entire arsenal of ABC-weapons on centers of industry, agriculture and population.
Sadly, the West totally lacks leaders willing to go to the wall for their own people and culture, and weak or extinct peoples have no say in their own future no matter what ideology or faith one cleaves to.
Well, I think we might find out one way or another. My money is on US gov't funding for whoever is willing to do their bidding, and it's kinda hard to pin-point it on any one individual.
I would, however, caution against modifying the gov't vs. people distinction. Historically, this was done after WW2, and I think it's the right thing to do.
"...gov't vs. people distinction."
Hence this part: "...the West totally lacks leaders willing to go to the wall for their own people...". They would rather collude with places like China and Saudi to make money for them and for global capital, than put their own people first and foremost.
I'd say that's pretty much the core of governements vs. their people.
Ha, thanks for reminding me: I apparently didn't read it that way…
Also, re the comparability across other places: I would suspect that to be the case in mRNA-vaxxed places (Japan, South Korea), but I haven't come across a systematic analysis (yet).
Thank you so much for this document. That is enormous help for us, who try to get larger picture of the issue. I wish there was work like yours done on the rest of countries across the globe. Much appreciated.
One small correction though - perhaps something to address and fix in the future updates: the flag shown on pp.77-80 is, wrongly, flag of SLOVAKIA (ex-part of Czecho-SLOVAKIA), population ca 5.5M. Live births in SLOVAKIA have not been analysed in this document. While the flag is Slovakian, the data on those pages is as stated in the text, for SLOVENIA (ex-part of Yugoslavia, population ca 2.1M).
At some point those wanting to reduce the population will realize they are risking an extinction event.
That might very well be. Also, I think most of these depopulisers don't realise that vaxx uptake seems to be highest among their most devout followers.
Their very own extinction...
Oh, you know, it's just one of these things: imagine, for the sake of the argument, a stereotypical 'city-dwelling liberal "family"' as portrayed by whatever TV program you care: two same-sex parents, one adopted 'project child', a dog and four turtles.
On the other side of the hypothetical arrangement, imagine a large, multi-generational Hispanic family. By sheer weight of demography, the latter will eventually win out.
If you throw in vaxx uptake among the former, well, it simply speeds this process up, perhaps considerably so.
Here in the USA I sometimes quip on the invasion force (European Colonists) deserves an equally hostile response (Most Hispanics are Indigenous Americans). Just because this will play out over centuries its hard to notice. Of course, anyone who can adapt to the biology of this continent (even some Europeans given their closeness to the land, definitely not those living in the cities you mention) will have the upper hand post political extinction event.
We will all be judged on our ability to take care of ourselves, like everywhere on this planet here quite soon. Can't happen in the cities, and like the great cities of the Aztecs, will disappear.
Oh well, I doubt our cities will make for as nice and good-looking ruins, though.
Hahahaha! That's an interesting take on it.
Excellent observation.
Outside of Africa and the Middle East yes.
What makes those areas exempt?
Low vaccine uptake for starters. Women having 6 to 8 children, from an early age second. Thoroughly ehtno-centric cultures not Hell-bent on cosmopolitan delusions of one world order (apart from islamic faith but that acts as a superstructure on top of the demos). Resource-strong - neither place is really lacking natural resources. No real winter compared to Europe and North America - meaning year-round agriculture is fully possible with minimal effort. Lots of opportunity for multiple energy sources once enough capital and knowledge can be accumulated for an industrial revolution of their own (mainly parts of Africa lagging, the arab/islamic world has left the starting blocks). Real-life experience with existential threats and crises in all levels of soceity - not even the leadership is insulated against loss and lack. Virtually no feminism, cult of rights, or postmodern universalist -isms corroding and destroying society. Culture s a real living part of being human, and not a commodified exploitable resource as in the capitalistic West.
And not blindly trusting politicians.
I just came across this idea which is information about the Africa idea start minute mark 26:17.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWZhZ9E8OJI
I will take a look, that sounds interesting.
Thanks for sharing!
I have reviewed some of the agribusiness methods and that soil is also degrading, all other points you raise are interesting. There is this fellow in Africa who had a lot of elephants shot and killed to the benefit of agriculture, he is claiming to be the savior of civilization. But the elephants were essential in a sustainable ecosystem.
I will have to think on your points thanks for the comment.
I don’t quite understand why you ascribe particular importance to spontaneous pregnancy terminations in the first trimester. Why would the magnitude of that number affect the seriousness of the birth-rate declines being reported?
I mentioned this in support of the findings, for these (typically un/derreported) 'events' would, in all likelihood, render the 'vaxx impacts fertility' debate moot: if, under pre-Covid circumstances, 43% of all women (as that cited paper suggests) experience this, then a, say, dramatic rise in these spontaneous first-trimester terminations would further underscore the decrease of live births.
I understand now, thanks.
As you quote above:
“If serious efforts were made to clarify the situation, close cooperation between clinics and medical specialists could provide valid information for the urgently needed re-evaluation of the risk-benefit assessment, which is obviously not wanted under the great influence of politics and pharmaceutical industry.”
The suppositions the report’s author is making about when factors like lockdown might be expected to have affected birth rates, and when not, are perfectly reasonable. But we shouldn’t have to make such suppositions: the medical profession could clarify how much of this is biologically lower fertility, and how much might be other factors (after all, there have been many disruptions these last 30 months). Doctors know whether their patients who are trying to get pregnant can’t.
It’s regrettably reasonable to assume that the reason for the silence is pro-vax narrative preservation, but again, it’s inexcusable that they’re making us guess.
You're more than welcome, and I should've been clearer, I suppose.
If anything, these first trimester issues would underwrite the live birth decline (as in 'underreporting factor').
I'm with you in terms of 'we shouldn't have to do this': I'm a historian, and I'm not supposed to do this (but then again, there's quite a bunch of us non-experts on Substack and elsewhere who are doing what others--journalists--aren't doing: their job.)
I agree "spontaneous pregnancy terminations in the first trimester" (early miscarriages) are key and very difficult to track with available data. Raimund Hagemann's paper may be overly rigid in its application of a 9 month post-vax window - I consider a shorter 8 month time lag more appropriate.
See my post here: https://lostintranslations.substack.com/p/menstrual-changes-and-very-early
Ha, thanks for the reference, I shall have a look.
Re Hagemann's paper and his choices: agreed, but I'd add by way of 'splainin' this (at least to myself, that is), that you work with the data you have, right? I'd also think that were he to factor these issues into his analysis, it's quite easily dismiss-able for the obvious reasons.
That said, all I wanted to do is point to the under-reporting (bias) in the data.