ER Editor: As far as we recall, phase I and II trials of the mRNA Pfizer vaccine warned participants against having sex and precluded pregnant women. The article below reminds us of this.
So why is this even being allowed to happen?
The article below uses the word ‘sadly’ or its variant several times. We suggest replacing the emotion of sadness with sheer outrage.
Number of Women in the U.K. Who Have Lost Baby as a Result of COVID Vaccine Doubles in Just 7 Days: MHRA Data Shows
THE DAILY EXPOSE
All Global Research articles can be read in 27 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
It saddens us to have to report that as a result of receiving a dose of either the Pfizer / BioNTech mRNA vaccine or the Oxford / Astrazeneca Viral Vector (still mRNA technology), a total of twenty women have now had to suffer the grief of having a miscarriage and losing their unborn child.
Adverse reactions to both jabs reported to the MHRA Yellow Card scheme up to the 21st February shows that the number has almost doubled in just seven days when compared with the previous week’s data, which included adverse reactions to both jabs. As of the 14th February 2021, a total of eleven women had lost their baby, with three of those being due to the Oxford vaccine and eight of those being due to the Pfizer vaccine.
The MHRA Yellow Card data now shows that the Oxford jab has caused four women to sadly lose their unborn child, an increase of one on the previous weeks data.
However, the Pfizer jab has now caused, as of the 21st February, a total of sixteen women to sadly lose their unborn child, a figure which has doubled from the eight seen in the previous week up to the 14th February.
As of the 14th February, there had been 8.3 million doses of the Pfizer vaccine administered, with the Oxford jab lagging behind by 1.4 million at just 6.9 million doses administered. But fast forward to the 21st February, a further 1.1 million doses of the Pfizer jab were administered, and a further 1.5 million doses of the Oxford jab.
However, the number of adverse reactions to the Oxford jab is nearly double than what has been reported for the Pfizer jab, with 157,637 adverse reactions to the Oxford Jab being reported, compared with 85,179 adverse reactions to the Pfizer jab being reported as of the 21st February 2021.
Whilst the Oxford vaccine outnumbers the Pfizer jab significantly in terms of adverse reactions, the data now clearly shows the Pfizer jab to be much more dangerous when it comes to being administered to pregnant women.
But why is this happening?
Well, when the Pfizer jab was first approved for emergency use only in the United Kingdom, meaning the manufacturer is not liable for any harm or injury caused by their product, the Government’s advice was as follows –
There are no or limited amount of data from the use of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2.
Animal reproductive toxicity studies have not been completed. COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 is not recommended during pregnancy‘
‘For women of childbearing age, pregnancy should be excluded before vaccination. In addition, women of childbearing age should be advised to avoid pregnancy for at least 2 months after their second dose.
This was taken from a document released by the Government titled ‘REG 174 INFORMATION FOR UK HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS’, of which we reported to you back in December 2020.
However, the Government has since updated its advice within the document, for reasons unknown, to the following –
4.6 Fertility, pregnancy and lactation
There is limited experience with use of the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 in pregnant women.
Animal studies do not indicate direct or indirect harmful effects with respect to pregnancy, embryo/foetal development, parturition or post-natal development. Administration of the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 in pregnancy should only be considered when the potential benefits outweigh any potential risks for the mother and foetus.
So now we know why pregnant women have started to be inoculated with the experimental jabs because the Government quietly changed its own advice based on zero evidence to support it. Even going as far as to remove the recommendation that women of child bearing age be told to avoid pregnancy for at least two months after their second dose.
Statistically, these women stood no chance of suffering from serious illness due to the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus and the alleged resulting disease Covid-19. Now, sadly, they have to suffer the misery of losing their unborn children.
How many more women need to suffer a miscarriage to stop this madness?
All images in this article are from The Daily Expose
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.