Firestarter wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 5:04 pm
This is all the more suspicious against the background that HPV vaccines (that have been marketed as cancer vaccines) are known to reduce fertility in women (maybe more on that in a next post)
The following “scientific” report from 2017 suggests that the controversial HPV vaccine causes lower birth rates. This study analysed information gathered in National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, representing 8 million 25 to 29-year-old women in the US between 2007 and 2014.
Birth rates in the US have recently fallen to record lows from 118.1 in 2007 to 104.5 in 2015 per 1000 females aged 25–29.
See the birth rates in the US from 1995 to 2015.
One factor could be the vaccination against the human papillomavirus (HPV) that “coincidentally” was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2006 and recommended for females aged 11–26 (and since 2011 also for males of the same age group).
Adverse effects of the HPV vaccine include menstrual disturbances and mood swings. Shortly after the HPV vaccine was licensed, reports of women experiencing Primary Ovarian Failure (POF) emerged.
The estimated incidence of POF for females under the age of 40 is 1 in 100, but this could be considerably higher because it’s masked by the birth control pill. Between 10% and 30% of women with POF also have (other) autoimmune disorders.
61% of women who had not been poisoned with the HPV vaccine had been pregnant at least once, compared to only 35% of women who were poisoned with the HPV vaccine. The difference was especially large for women that had been married. Of the married women 75% that didn’t get the vaccine gave birth, while only 50% who were poisoned with the HPV vaccine had been pregnant.
The pregnancy frequency decreased with increasing numbers of HPV vaccine shots.
See (part of) Table 3 - Ratios of having been pregnant for women who received an HPV shot versus women who did not.
See (part of) Table 5 - Births of females aged 25–29 in the US, by number of HPV shots.
This suggests that at least part of the reason for the recent decline in US birth rates is caused by the HPV vaccine. Why did it take so long before this link was found (some studies have even denied this link)?
If all married women had been vaccinated with the HPV vaccine, the number of married women having conceived could have fallen with another 1 million.
There are other (possible) causes for the lower birth rates...
Higher employment rates (of women) decreases birth rates.
No epidemiological study on the influence of Aluminium (a component of vaccines) on fertility exists but Karakis et al in 2014 found an association between prenatal exposure to Aluminium and death of the (unborn) baby.
There could also be a link between Aluminium exposure and POF.
Gayle DeLong – A lowered probability of pregnancy in females in the USA aged 25–29 who received a human papillomavirus vaccine injection
(2017): https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10 ... 18.1477640
Does anybody find it surprising that in one of those great examples of "science", the study was "retracted"?!?
The least they could do is come up with a good explanation for deleting the report. Instead they came with the story, we got complaints...
we were alerted to concerns about the scientific validity of the study...
All of the post-publication reports we received described serious flaws in the statistical analysis and interpretation of the data in this paper, and we have therefore taken the decision to retract it
They forgot to detail a single "flaw" in their motivation...
Big pharma trolls have attacked the author of the report, Gayle DeLong. The frustrating thing is that while they don’t have any evidence to defend the genocidal HPV vaccine, their ad hominem attacks do succeed in discrediting the study.
Now we can't even read the story anymore...
The big pharma trolls first quack that Gayle DeLong isn’t even a medical doctor but only an “economist”. DeLong did a statistical analysis of the data. If we take this kind of reasoning to the extreme only mathematicians should be allowed to do a statistical analysis.
I’ve regularly seen big pharma supporting “doctors” make the claim that after clean water vaccines are the cheapest health intervention. For evidence they regularly point to propaganda of the WHO, that isn’t backed up by any evidence. But we can’t really blame these doctors can we? They aren’t financial “experts” so wouldn’t know...
That the study contradicts all of the scientific studies on HPV vaccines that – supported and controlled by big pharma – concluded that HPV vaccines have no adverse effects at all.
So we can only conclude that these studies are biased, but instead they accuse DeLong.
No explanation on how HPV vaccines cause infertility.
Why would anybody doing a statistical analysis that shows that the HPV vaccine causes infertility, is expected to explain which poisons in the vaccines causes infertility?
Bizarrely that DeLong didn’t correct for contraception, with the addition of
https://www.skepticalraptor.com/skeptic ... -blogging/
In fairness, if the correlation is not positive but negative (i.e., HPV vaccination is associated with less oral contraceptive use), the results could be more robust than what Gayle found.
Surprise, surprise, after the insults, Gayle DeLong proved that HPV vaccines are associated with LESS contraceptive use (so the infertility cause by HPV vaccines is even larger):
https://www.ageofautism.com/2018/06/new ... ation.html
I find 51.5% of married women who did not receive the shot and 36.6% of married women who received the shot were actively seeking to prevent pregnancy. The 14.9% difference is statistically significant at the 1% level.
This finding suggests that a greater percentage of married women who received the shot should be conceiving compared with married women who did not receive the shot. However, my original study finds that married women who received the shot are less likely to conceive than married women who did not receive the shot. The finding of my original study is not the result of married women who received the HPV vaccine actively avoiding pregnancy more than women who did not receive the HPV shot.