The national study, published today in a JAMA Health ForumTrusted Source research letter, is the first to evaluate the effects of the historic Dobbs v. Jackson ruling on permanent sterilization measures among young adults.

Looking at data from 113 million people across the United States, policy researchers from the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health and Boston University found an abrupt nationwide increase in tubal sterilizations and vasectomies among adults ages 18–30.

The increase in sterilizations was particularly sharp for young women.

In fact, the rate of sterilizations for young women nearly doubled…

The researchers found after the Dobbs decision there was an immediate increase of 58 sterilization procedures for women or about 5.31 procedures a month per 100,000 people. This is nearly double the previous rate of 2.84 procedures per month for women.

A 25-year-old nursing student named Jurnee McKay was recently asked why she decided to get sterilized, and she rattled off a long list of reasons why she never wants to get pregnant…

When Jurnee McKay, 25, imagines having children, a series of scary scenarios pop into her mind: the “horrors” of childbirth, risks associated with pregnancy, a flighty potential partner, exorbitant child care costs.

Abortion care restrictions are also on her list of fears. So Ms. McKay, a nursing student in Orlando, decided to eliminate the possibility of an accidental pregnancy. But first doctor she consulted refused to remove her fallopian tubes, she said, insisting that she might change her mind after meeting her “soul mate.”

Of course McKay is far from alone. Sadly, a study that was recently released by the Pew Research Center discovered that the portion of the population that is not interested in raising children has been getting larger…

Like Ms. McKay, a growing number of U.S. adults say they are unlikely to raise children, according to a study released on Thursday by the Pew Research Center. When the survey was conducted in 2023, 47 percent of those younger than 50 without children said they were unlikely ever to have children, an increase of 10 percentage points since 2018.

When asked why kids were not in their future, 57 percent said they simply didn’t want to have them. Women were more likely to respond this way than men (64 percent vs. 50 percent). Further reasons included the desire to focus on other things, like their career or interests; concerns about the state of the world; worries about the costs involved in raising a child; concerns about the environment, including climate change; and not having found the right partner.

So where in the world are all of these young people getting these ideas?

Could it be possible that they are being influenced to think this way?

Millions upon millions of our young people have fully embraced the values that politicians such as Kamala Harris have been preaching…

Resurfaced video shows Kamala Harris suggesting that young people should not have children due to climate change

She calls climate anxiety “the fear of the future and the unknown of whether it makes sense for you to even think about having children.”

Needless to say, a lot of young women that are getting permanently sterilized now will wish that they could reverse that decision later.

And any society that does not value marriage, family and children is not going to thrive for long.

Here in the United States, our birth rate has been below replacement level since the 1970s, and last year it dropped to a brand new all-time record low…

The rate in the U.S. has remained generally under or around 2.1 children per woman, or what is known as the “replacement rate,” since the 1970s. A rate of 1.62 in 2023 marks a new low and a sign of years of decline.

The only reason our population has still been growing is due to record levels of immigration.

Otherwise, our population would be steadily shrinking.

If we want to turn things around, we need a revolution in the hearts and minds of our young people.

Because right now large numbers of them do not value marriage and children at all…

When asked what it takes to lead a fulfilling life, the public prioritizes job satisfaction and friendship over marriage and parenthood. Some 71% of all adults say having a job or career they enjoy is extremely or very important in order for people to live a fulfilling life. And 61% say having close friends is equally important.

Only about one-in-four adults say having children (26%) or being married (23%) is extremely or very important in order to live a fulfilling life. A third say each of these is somewhat important. And 42% and 44%, respectively, say having children or being married is not too or not at all important.

Having a lot of money is viewed as extremely or very important for a fulfilling life by 24% of adults, while another 49% say this is somewhat important. About one-in-four adults (27%) say this is not too or not at all important.

Those that believe in population control have done a great job of convincing millions upon millions of our young people that having children is not desirable.

We have been trained to chase after money, but that is a road that does not lead to true happiness.

In fact, many of the wealthiest people in the world are also extremely miserable.

Please don’t buy into the lies that society is trying to sell to you.

Choosing to get sterilized is not the answer, and it is a decision that you could end up deeply regretting down the road.

Michael’s new book entitled “Chaos” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can subscribe to his Substack newsletter at michaeltsnyder.substack.com.

(Mercola)—While the propaganda machine insists the world will face dire consequences due to overpopulation, the data actually point us in the opposite direction, as infertility among both sexes is skyrocketing.

There are many potential reasons for that, from vaccines that impair fertility and endocrine-disrupting chemicals, to electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure. The the promotion of transgender ideology doesn’t help either, as children and young adults are literally having their reproductive organs surgically removed and/or made permanently dysfunctional with hormone therapies.

Soon enough population growth will plateau and begin to slide backward. Already, global birth rates are at a record low. According to World Bank data, the number of children born dropped 50% between 1960 and 2018.¹ Many countries also saw shocking birth rate decreases following the rollout of the COVID shots.

The Global Fertility Crisis No One Is Talking About

According to an April 2023 report² by the World Health Organization, infertility now affects 1 in 6 people globally. In the U.S., fertility problems affect 9% of men and 11% of women. Even among healthy couples under the age of 30, 40% to 60% fail to conceive in the first three months of having unprotected sex.³

A single in vitro fertilization cycle can cost between $15,000 and $30,000, and since your chances of conceiving is only 29% after the first cycle and 43% after six cycles, it can get very expensive. As a result, we may be moving into a future where only the rich will have the means to reproduce.

It’s not surprising, then, that one-third of American adults say they’ve used fertility treatments, or know someone who has.⁴ The problem, of course, is that infertility treatments are expensive. A single in vitro fertilization cycle can cost between $15,000 and $30,000.⁵

However, since your chances of conceiving is only 29% after the first cycle and 43% after six cycles,^6,7 the cost can rack up. As noted by Salon staff writer Matthew Rozsa,⁸ “I believe our species faces a future in which only the rich will be able to reproduce.”

Sperm Counts Are Plummeting Around the World

Sperm counts in men have trended downward for several decades already. According to environmental and reproductive epidemiologist Shanna Swan, Ph.D., author of the 2021 book “Count Down: How Our Modern World Is Threatening Sperm Counts, Altering Male and Female Reproductive Development, and Imperiling the Future of the Human Race,” average sperm counts among Western men in 2011 were less than half of what they were in 1973 (47 million per milliliter, down from 99 million/mL).⁹

According to Swan, if the curve of declining sperm counts continues, by 2045 the median sperm count will be zero,¹⁰ and couples desiring children will have no choice but to seek reproductive help.

Similarly, research¹¹ by Hagai Levine, professor of epidemiology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, shows sperm counts declined an average of 1.2% annually between 1973 to 2018, and the pace of decline is speeding up.

As of 2000, the annual rate of decline is 2.64%.¹² “We are facing a public health crisis and we don’t know if it’s reversible,” Levine told BBC news in a March 2023 interview.¹³ And to quote Rozsa again:¹⁴

“… once our average sperm count reaches less than 15 million per milliliter, the only people able to reproduce will be those who can afford expensive medical technology like in vitro fertilization (IVF) … (Levine places the threshold sperm count number at 40 million per milliliter.)”

Indeed, the emergence of a new class difference, where only the wealthy can afford to bear the cost of reproductive technologies, seems unavoidable at this point. As such, this trend will eventually have massive social justice implications.

Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals Impair Fertility

Swan believes endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are among the key culprits behind the infertility trend, as they directly interfere with the functioning of our steroid hormones, which are crucial for pregnancy and fetal development. Top offenders include phthalates and bisphenols found in plastics, personal care products, cosmetics, and processed and packaged food.

Many EDCs mimic hormones, effectively taking their place. But, of course, the chemical doesn’t function the way the natural hormone does, so whatever that hormone controls won’t function well either. As explained in the 2019 report, “Male Infertility and Environmental Factors”:¹⁵

“Classically the EDCs bind to the androgen or estrogen receptor triggering an agonist or antagonist action. These in turn lead to increased or decreased gene expression of sex-specific genes.

In addition, EDCs act on steroidogenic enzymes and the metabolism of hormones, for example, inhibit the activity of 5-α reductase, which is the most important enzyme in the production of dihydrotestosterone and hence the regulation of the masculinization of the external genitalia and the prostate. Furthermore, P450 enzymes in the liver that metabolize steroid hormones may be affected.”

As Swan told Salon magazine in April 2021,¹⁶ if there’s insufficient testosterone during the development of a male fetus, several problems may arise. For starters, his genitals may not develop properly. As he grows older, he may also not have sufficient sperm counts to be fertile. He’s also at increased risk for testicular cancer. Evidence of these ill effects are all around us. As noted by Swan:¹⁷

“We also see declines in testosterone in several studies around the world. We see increases in erectile dysfunction. We see increases in rates of genital abnormalities … We see increases in testicular cancer rates.”

EDCs can also fragment the DNA in sperm, which is a factor that can contribute to early-term miscarriages.¹⁸ Of course, women are also being adversely affected. Importantly, rates of diminished ovarian reserve are on the rise, which means a woman may not have enough eggs left to conceive when she gets older.¹⁹

‘Forever Chemicals’ Impair Reproductive Health

Another class of chemicals linked to lower sperm counts are per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), colloquially known as “forever chemicals,” found in grease- and stain-resistant products, including food packaging, clothing, personal care products and household items.

A 2022 study in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives found “a statistically significant association between exposure to a mixture of PFAS in early pregnancy and lower sperm concentration and total sperm count and higher proportion of non-progressive and immotile sperm” in male offspring.²⁰

PFAS have also been shown to disrupt reproductive hormones, delay the onset of puberty, and increase the risk of endometriosis and polycystic ovary syndrome in women.²¹

Pesticides Take a Toll on Fertility

Pesticides are another contributor. According to a November 2023 scientific review^22,23 in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, organophosphates and N-methyl carbamates — two common classes of insecticides — lower sperm counts. As reported in this paper:²⁴

“Across 20 studies, 21 study populations, 42 effect sizes, and 1,774 adult men, the pooled bias-adjusted standardized mean difference in sperm concentration between adult men more- and less-exposed to OP and NMC insecticides was -0.30 …

Although the pooled effect estimate was modified by risk of bias, insecticide class, exposure setting, and recruitment setting, it remained negative in direction across all meta-analyses. The body of evidence was rated to be of moderate quality, with sufficient evidence of an association between higher adult OP and NMC insecticide exposure and lower sperm concentration.”

Pesticides have also been linked to decreased fertility in women, as well as ovarian disorders, stillbirths, premature births and developmental abnormalities.²⁵

Are Vaccines Being Used to Reduce Fertility?

Vaccines may also be contributing to the infertility trend. As detailed in “Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda,” which features a documentary by the same name, the World Health Organization has been working on anti-fertility vaccines since the 1970s, and a UNICEF tetanus program was in the mid-1990s found to have used a tetanus vaccine laced with hCG.

HCG is the first signal that tells the woman’s body she’s pregnant. In response to this signal, her ovaries then produce progesterone, which maintains the pregnancy to term. By combining hCG with tetanus toxoid, it causes this crucial pregnancy hormone to be attacked and destroyed by the woman’s own immune system.

There’s reason to suspect the COVID shots can impair infertility as well. Doctors and scientists have warned the shots may cross-react with syncytin and reproductive genes in sperm, ova and placenta in ways that might impair reproduction.

At least one study^26,27 has confirmed that Pfizer’s mRNA shot impairs semen concentration and motile count in men for about three months. Women of all ages have also reported menstrual changes after getting the jab, which could have an effect on fertility.

Shocking declines in birth rates around the world after the rollout of the COVID shots seem to confirm there’s a problem. For example, German data showed a 10% decline in birth rate during the first quarter of 2022.²⁸ Between January and April 2022, Switzerland’s birth rate was 15% lower than expected; the U.K.’s was down by 10%; and Taiwan’s was down 23%.^29,30,31

In a July 5, 2022, Counter Signal article, Mike Campbell reported that in the five countries with the highest COVID jab uptake, fertility dropped by an average of 15.2%, whereas the five countries with the lowest COVID jab uptake saw an average reduction of just 4.66%.

U.S. data have also revealed a drop in live births. For example, provisional data from North Dakota showed a 10% decline in February 2022, 13% reduction in March and an 11% reduction in April, compared to the corresponding months in 2021.³²

EMFs May Also Be Involved

I believe EMF exposures are another significant factor for the observed decrease in male sperm count. Martin Pall, Ph.D., discovered a previously unknown mechanism of biological harm from microwaves emitted by cellphones and other wireless technologies via voltage gated calcium channels (VGCCs) embedded in your cell membranes.³³

VGCCs are activated by microwaves, and when that happens, about 1 million calcium ions per second are released. This massive excess of intracellular calcium then stimulates the release of nitric oxide (NO) inside your cell and mitochondria, which combines with superoxide to form peroxynitrite.

Not only do peroxynitrites cause oxidative damage, but they also create hydroxyl free radicals — the most destructive free radicals known. Hydroxyl free radicals decimate mitochondrial and nuclear DNA, their membranes and proteins, resulting in mitochondrial dysfunction.

During a 2013 children’s health expert panel on cellphone and Wi-Fi exposures, it was noted that “The testicular barrier, that protects sperm, is the most sensitive of tissues in the body … Besides sperm count and function, the mitochondrial DNA of sperm are damaged three times more if exposed to cellphone radiation.”³⁴

Writing in Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine, researchers also noted that many in vivo and in vitro studies have revealed the EMF exposure can alter reproductive function, including sperm motility, with effects varying according to the frequency, duration of exposure and strength of EMFs.³⁵

How to Protect Your Reproductive Health

While many of the key culprits may seem near-impossible to avoid, it would behoove you to give it your best shot if you want to have children, or want your children to be able to bear children:

• Avoid chemical exposures of all kinds, but EDCs and PFAS in particular. Examples of items that can contain these chemicals include canned goods, dental sealants, nonstick food wrappers, hard plastic cups and bottles, grease- and stain-resistant products and clothing, personal care products, shampoos, lotions and cosmetics.
• Ideally, eat whole unprocessed foods that you cook yourself as much as possible, and use all-natural unscented personal care and household products.
• Avoid pesticides by buying organic foods whenever possible.
• Avoid COVID shots, and for safe measure, any other gene-based “vaccines” as well.
• Limit your EMF exposure by connecting your desktop computer to the internet via a wired connection (remember to put it in airplane mode once hardwired), shutting off your home’s Wi-Fi when not in use (especially at night when you are sleeping), and minimizing your cellphone use. Ideally, work toward hardwiring your house so you can turn off the Wi-Fi at all times.

Sources and Resources

• ^{1, 9, 16, 17, 19} Salon April 4, 2021
• ² WHO Infertility Prevalence Estimates 1990-2021, April 3, 2023
• ³ NIH Infertility
• ⁴ Pew Research Center July 17, 2018
• ⁵ Forbes August 14, 2023
• ⁶ The BMJ 2016; 355: i5735
• ⁷ PathFertility, How Many Times Should I Try IVF?
• ^8, 14, 21 Salon December 12, 2023
• ¹⁰ The Guardian March 28, 2021
• ¹¹ Human Reproductive Update March-April 2023; 29(2): 157-176
• ^12, 13, 18 BBC March 27, 2023
• ¹⁵ Global Reproductive Health 2019; 4(2): e28
• ²⁰ Salon October 7, 2022
• ^22, 24 Environmental Health Perspectives November 15, 2023; 131(11): CID: 116001
• ²³ Salon November 16, 2023
• ²⁵ Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 2006; 4: 30
• ²⁶ Andrology June 17, 2022 DOI: 10.111/andr.13209
• ²⁷ Expose June 26, 2022
• ²⁸ Expose News July 18, 2022
• ²⁹ The Counter Signal July 5, 2022
• ^30, 32 Igor Chudov Substack June 25, 2022
• ³¹ SWPRS June 2022
• ³³ Rev Environ Health. 2015;30(2):99-116
• ³⁴ ElectromagneticHealth.org August 29, 2013
• ³⁵ Clin Exp Reprod Med. 2012 Mar; 39(1): 1–9

What might such a development mean for human society? A science communicator named Hashem Al-Ghaili just produced a fictional video that illustrates the disturbing potential. The video depicts the product advertisement of an artificial womb company called EctoLife that engages in the mass artificial gestation of human babies created by IVF, infants genetically engineered for eugenics purposes such as high intelligence, physical strength, and hair color.

The faux promotional for the industrialized baby farm coos, “Say goodbye to the pain of childbirth and birth-related muscle contractions. EctoLife provides a safe, pain-free alternative that helps you deliver your baby without stress. The delivery process is smooth, convenient, and can be done with just a push of a button.”

How interested are people in this dehumanizing potential? Very, it seems. Al-Ghaili’s video has already been viewed more than 1.6 million times on YouTube.

We don’t yet have artificial wombs available for human use. But the kind of experiments needed to allow industrialized baby farming are advancing at a breakneck pace. A researcher in China already genetically engineered babies for eugenics purposes. The International Society for Stem Cell Research—which establishes the voluntary ethical guidelines for experimenting on human embryos—in 2021 discarded its “14-Day Rule” that set a two-week time limit on such research, meaning that experiments on more-developed embryos and fetuses that would be required to perfect an artificial womb can proceed apace.

As to the ethics of the matter, many bioethicists swoon at the idea of bringing forth babies without the need for natural gestation.

How should we think about such a development? That’s a profound question. For now, let’s focus on how artificial wombs would denigrate the importance of natural motherhood.

Why? Gestation isn’t simply a matter of having a uterus. The gestational process itself is crucial to a baby’s healthy development and bonding with her mother. For example, a gestating baby can hear her mother’s voice and may begin the process of language development while still in the womb, which is why many experts recommend that pregnant women talk and sing to their baby. Beyond that, maternal bonding pre-birth can make for healthier post-natal development. As one recent research paper reported, “higher maternal bonding contributing to infant developmental outcomes, including higher attachment quality … lower colic rating, easier temperament, and positive infant mood.”

Little of that would happen in a “growth pod.”

“Mothers and babies don’t bond and develop attachments after birth but during the entire pregnancy,” Jennifer Lahl, president and founder of the Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, told me. “It cannot be outsourced to an unnatural environment without significant short and long-term consequences to mother and baby.”

Baby Farming Is Already Here

Many might object to EctoLife. But why? We are already desensitized to the moral values that would enable the commercial development of a mass birthing industry. Indeed, such a multibillion-dollar trade already exists. Commercial fertility companies charge want-to-be parents who cannot—or refuse to—become pregnant huge fees to grow and harvest a baby. This is often done by performing IVF and then implanting genetically tested embryos—as in the video—into the uterus of a surrogate mother who’s paid to gestate and give birth.

Surrogates receive little respect for their trouble. They aren’t even called “mothers” but are known in dehumanizing industry parlance as “gestational carriers.” These women are commonly denied any right to participate in the life of the child they carried and may have bonded with for nine months, and the baby loses contact with the mother with whom he or she bonded during the pregnancy. Surrogates may even be denied the right to simply hold the baby after birth.

Moreover, surrogacy contracts may require abortion if the baby has a perceived defect or is otherwise no longer wanted, a requirement that has led to bitter litigation. Nor is there necessarily a requirement that the baby-buying parents accept their special order. For example, a few years ago, an Australian couple paid a Thai woman to gestate two children but refused to take one home because he had Down syndrome.

A Washington Post story from a few years ago details how these technologies are commoditizing childbirth in the very ways that the fictional EctoLife commercial depicts:

“The multibillion-dollar fertility industry is booming and experimenting with business models that are changing the American family in new and unpredictable ways. Would-be parents seeking donor eggs and sperm can pick and choose from long checklists of physical and intellectual characteristics. Clinics now offer volume discounts.”

One California fertility center “is pioneering what some refer to as the ‘Costco mode of babymaking,’ creating batches of embryos using donor eggs and sperm that can be shared among several different families.”

Other than the artificial womb part and mass scale of the enterprise, how’s the commercial surrogacy industry materially different in morals and outcomes than the still-fictional high-tech baby farms?

Industrialized artificial womb baby manufacturing would undermine the essence and meaning of motherhood, which heretofore has been considered a special, and indeed, almost sacred calling. But our existing commercialized fertility business model is already transforming birthing babies into a crass gestational service industry complete with quality control and, even, the right to refuse delivery.

No wonder so many people have watched Al-Ghaili’s video. We are already inured to the dehumanized values for childbirth presented in the film. All that remains to go from inefficient surrogates to mass-producing infants is the perfection of the artificial technology.

Article cross-posted from our premium news partners at The Epoch Times.

Hagai Levine, first author of the research, noted that sperm counts dropped by 1.2 percent per year from 1973 to 2000. From 2000 to 2018, the decline was 2.6 percent per year, “which is an amazing pace,” he said.

The meta-analysis conducted by Hebrew University of Jerusalem researchers looked at 223 studies based on sperm samples from over 57,000 men across 53 countries. It suggested that the average sperm concentration fell from an estimated 101.2 million per ml to 49.0 million per ml between 1973 and 2018 – a drop of 51.6 percent. According to the Guardian, the counts fell by 62.3 percent during the same period.

“We don’t understand why we’re seeing this pattern, so I think it’s hard to be alarmist for an individual,” said Dr. Michael Eisenberg, a urologist focused on male fertility and sexual function at Stanford University and Stanford Health Care in California. He was not involved in the study.

However, he pointed out that this should be a wake-up call to try and understand this trend as experts say weak sperm counts could take longer for men to have children. Thus, it can contribute to a possible reproductive crisis.

Meanwhile, the same team reported in 2017 that sperm concentration had declined significantly in the last 40 years. However, a lack of data from other parts of the world at the time meant the findings were focused on a region encompassing Europe, North America and Australia. The latest study included more recent data from 53 countries, and it has seen a massive decrease in Central and South America, Africa and Asia.

“I think this is another signal that something is wrong with the globe and that we need to do something about it. So yes, I think it’s a crisis, that we [had] better tackle now, before it may reach a tipping point which may not be reversible,” Levine said.

Previous studies have suggested that fertility is compromised if sperm concentration falls below about 40 million per ml. While the latest estimate is above this threshold, Levine noted that this is a mean figure – meaning, a significant percentage of men are likely below this threshold.

“Such a decline clearly represents a decline in the capacity of the population to reproduce,” he said.

COVID-19 vaccines lower men’s sperm count, a separate study reveals

Experts claim that endocrine-disrupting chemicals or other environmental factors may play a role in why men around the globe are impacted. According to some, smoking, drinking, obesity and poor diet might be blamed as well, and a healthy lifestyle may help boost sperm counts.

Richard Sharpe, an expert in male reproductive health at the University of Edinburgh, said the new data showed that the trend is a worldwide phenomenon. He said the decline could mean it would take longer for couples to conceive.

As to why this phenomenon has increased at such a fast pace, there could be a more recent factor. Back in June, a peer-reviewed study published in the journal Andrology showed that men who got vaccinated with Pfizer’s Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) injections were found to have massive decreases in their sperm counts. (Related: Study: COVID “vaccines” are devastating men’s sperm counts.)

Former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson wrote in his Substack account that the study was based on counts from men who donated sperm to three fertility clinics in Israel. “The Israeli paper offers hard evidence that the vaccines may present a systemic risk to men’s sperm counts. What was a conspiracy theory is now just a theory. Again,” Berenson said.

The study suggested that fully vaxxed men’s sperm counts will return to normal after about five months, but this claim was unsubstantiated. “The actual data in the paper do not really support the argument that sperm levels returned to normal after five months,” the writer explained. “In fact, by some measures, levels continued to decline.”

He pointed out that rather than acknowledging this fact, the authors offered the best possible spin on their data, while at the same time publishing the figures themselves near the end of the paper so that other researchers could see the reality for themselves.

Visit VaccineDamage.news for more news related to COVID-19 vaccines’ effects on male reproductive health.

Watch the video below about the study that found low sperm count in vaccinated men.

This video is from the InfoWars channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

• CONFIRMED: Sperm count in Western men is HALF what it should be; what is happening to the average American man?
• Pfizer DID NOT test its COVID-19 vaccine for possible effects on male fertility.
• Covid vaccine spike proteins attack male fertility, too.
• HUMANITY ALERT: Sperm count plunges 59% due to mass chemical feminization of men.

Sources include:

• TheGuardian.com
• Academic.OUP.com
• EuroNews.com
• USAToday.com
• AlexBerenson.substack.com
• OnlineLibrary.Wiley.com
• Brighteon.com
• NATURAL NEWS

• The first COVID shots rolled out in December 2020, and it didn’t take long before doctors and scientists started warning of possible reproductive effects, as the jab may cross-react with syncytin and reproductive genes in sperm, ova and placenta in ways that might impair reproduction
• According to one recent investigation, 42% of women with regular menstrual cycles said they bled more heavily than usual after vaccination; 39% of those on gender-affirming hormone treatments reported breakthrough bleeding, as did 71% of women on long-acting contraceptives and 66% of postmenopausal women
• Other recent research has found the Pfizer COVID jab impairs semen concentration and motile count in men for about three months
• Miscarriages, fetal deaths and stillbirths have also risen after the rollout of the COVID shots. In November 2021, Lions Gate Hospital in North Vancouver, British Columbia (BC), delivered 13 stillborn babies in a 24-hour period, and all of the mothers had received the COVID jab
• Many countries are now reporting sudden declines in live birth rates, including Germany, the U.K., Taiwan, Hungary and Sweden. In the five countries with the highest COVID jab uptake, fertility has dropped by an average of 15.2%, whereas the five countries with the lowest COVID jab uptake have seen an average decline of just 4.66%

The first COVID shots rolled out in December 2020, and it didn’t take long before doctors and scientists started warning of possible reproductive effects.

Among them were Janci Chunn Lindsay, Ph.D., director of toxicology and molecular biology for Toxicology Support Services LLC, who in April 2021 submitted a public comment¹ to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), highlighting the high potential for adverse effects on fertility.

I previously interviewed Lindsay in 2021. That article is not updated with the new information, but the interview (above) is a good primer for the information she shares below. In many ways, she predicted what we are now observing.

She stressed there’s credible evidence that the COVID shots may cross-react with syncytin and reproductive genes in sperm, ova and placenta in ways that might impair reproductive outcomes. “We could potentially be sterilizing an entire generation,” she warned.

Lindsay also pointed out that reports of significant menstrual irregularities and vaginal hemorrhaging in women who received the injections by then already numbered in the thousands, and that this too was a safety signal that should not be ignored.

4 in 10 COVID-Jabbed Women Report Menstrual Irregularities

As it turns out, early reports of menstrual irregularities were not a fluke. More recent investigations have confirmed that, indeed, many women experience menstrual irregularities after the shots. As reported by NBC News in mid-July 2022:²

“An analysis³ published Friday in the journal Science Advances found that 42% of people with regular menstrual cycles said they bled more heavily than usual after vaccination. Meanwhile, 44% reported no change and around 14% reported a lighter period.

Among nonmenstruating people — those post-menopause or who use certain long-term contraceptives, for example — the study suggests many experienced breakthrough or unexpected bleeding after their COVID shots.”

Other categories of people reporting abnormal breakthrough bleeding included 39% of those on gender-affirming hormone treatments, 71% of women on long-acting contraceptives and 66% of postmenopausal women.⁴

Older women, those who used hormonal contraception, had been pregnant previously, or had diagnoses of endometriosis, fibroids or polycystic ovarian syndrome were more likely to experience heavier bleeding than normal after their shots.

Are Menstrual Irregularities Inconsequential?

It’s worth noting that the COVID trials did not ask female participants about their menses, and didn’t collect any data on reproductive impacts. Yet, despite this clear lack of data collection, the official narrative is that everything is fine — the shots are safe and won’t impact fertility.

Just how do they know? They don’t, and that’s what makes such claims so egregious. Making matters worse, media reporting these findings continue to insist that post-jab menstrual irregularities are “normal” and not a sign that reproductive capacity is being impacted. For example, Science writes:⁵

“Clarifying the issue is vital. ‘It’s important to know about,’ says Victoria Male, a reproductive immunologist at Imperial College London. ‘Let’s say you got the vaccine and the next day you felt really dreadful the way some people do.’

If you hadn’t been informed of the chance of fever, muscle aches, and other effects that quickly dissipate, ‘you would be really worried,’ she said. Illuminating the chance of menstrual irregularities and confirming they aren’t a health risk also helps combat widespread misinformation that COVID-19 vaccines impair fertility, Male and others say.”

Again, no one knows whether the shots affect fertility or not for the simple fact that it hasn’t been studied. No study means no data, which means no knowledge. It’s that simple. Any claims to the contrary are based on pure guesswork, and guessing is not science.

And, while a woman’s menstrual cycle can fluctuate, abrupt changes have historically not been brushed off as inconsequential. On the contrary, suddenly abnormal menses has been listed as a potential sign of things like:^6,7,8

• Uterine and/or cervical cancer
• Bleeding disorders
• Thyroid dysfunction and/or pituitary disorders affecting your hormonal balance
• Infection and/or disease
• Perimenopause

Menstrual Cycle Length Is Also Affected

Research⁹ published April 1, 2022, in the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology, also found an association between the COVID jab and changes in menstrual cycle length. The change was small — about one day shorter than pre-injection after the second dose — and was not deemed to be of any great concern. Still, in my mind, the change indicates that something is happening. The question is what?

Infection Can Suppress Ovarian Function

Some investigators have suggested the menstrual irregularities seen in female COVID patients and the COVID-jabbed alike may be attributed to an immune response to the spike protein.

Back in January 2021, a Chinese study¹⁰ published in Reproductive BioMedicine Online found that 28% of unvaccinated women of reproductive age diagnosed with COVID-19 had a change in the length of their cycle, 19% had prolonged cycles and 25% had a change in menstrual blood volume.

The researchers hypothesized that “the menstruation changes of these patients might be the consequence of transient sex hormone changes” caused by a temporary suppression of ovarian function during infection.

Dr. Natalie Crawford, a fertility specialist, has suggested that the menstrual irregularities seen in female COVID-19 patients may be linked to a cellular immunity response, and since the COVID shot instructs your body to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which your immune system then responds to, the effects of the jab may be similar to the natural infection.¹¹ In a 2021 BMJ editorial, Male, quoted by Science above, presented a similar view:¹²

“Menstrual changes have been reported after both mRNA and adenovirus vectored COVID-19 vaccines, suggesting that, if there is a connection, it is likely to be a result of the immune response to vaccination rather than a specific vaccine component. Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) has also been associated with menstrual changes.

… Biologically plausible mechanisms linking immune stimulation with menstrual changes include immunological influences on the hormones driving the menstrual cycle or effects mediated by immune cells in the lining of the uterus, which are involved in the cyclical build-up and breakdown of this tissue. Research exploring a possible association between COVID-19 vaccines and menstrual changes may also help understand the mechanism.”

That doesn’t mean menstrual irregularities are of no consequence, though. After all, it appears we’re dealing with a manmade virus, and the mRNA in the shot that programs for spike protein production is genetically engineered on top of that.

Perhaps this is why a greater percentage of women report menstrual irregularities following the COVID jab, compared to the percentage of women who experience irregularities following natural infection?

It may also be worth looking into the parallels between the blood clotting disorders reported — both in some COVID-19 cases and post-COVID-19 jab — and Von Willebrand disease,¹³ a chronic condition that prevents normal blood clotting, thus resulting in excessively heavy periods.

Miscarriages, Fetal Deaths and Stillbirths Have Skyrocketed

Menstrual irregularities aren’t the only safety signal. Miscarriages, fetal deaths and stillbirths have also risen after the rollout of the COVID shots. In November 2021, Lions Gate Hospital in North Vancouver, British Columbia (BC), delivered an astonishing 13 stillborn babies in a 24-hour period, and all of the mothers had received the COVID jab.¹⁴

In a typical month, there may be one stillborn baby at the hospital, making 13 stillbirths in 24 hours highly unusual. Scotland has also experienced an unusual rise in infant death rates. During September 2021, at least 21 babies under 4 weeks old died — a rate of 4.9 per 1,000 births. Historically, the average death rate among newborns in Scotland is about 2 per 1,000 births.¹⁵

Yet, despite stillbirths going up after the introduction of the COVID jabs — as opposed to rising beforehand — studies linking stillbirths to SARS-CoV-2 infection have been used to encourage pregnant women to get the shot.¹⁶

So, basically, it’s been discovered that the infection itself can cause stillbirth (and we know the spike protein of the virus is the part that causes most of the problems), yet they want you to believe that the spike protein produced by the shot will somehow have a protective impact on pregnancy.

This line of reasoning falls apart even further when you consider that scientists are now saying post-jab menstrual irregularities are likely due to immune responses that arise in response to both the virus and the jab. If that’s true, then why would the COVID shot not also be able to cause stillbirths to the same or greater degree than the virus?

There Are No Data to Support COVID Jab for Pregnant Women

Health officials are adamant that pregnant women get a COVID-19 injection, but the data don’t support its safety. The CDC-sponsored study¹⁷ published in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) that was widely used to support the U.S. recommendation for pregnant women to get injected was corrected in October 2021, with the correction stating:¹⁸

“In the table footnotes, the following content should have been appended to the double dagger footnote:

‘No denominator was available to calculate a risk estimate for spontaneous abortions, because at the time of this report, follow-up through 20 weeks was not yet available for 905 of the 1224 participants vaccinated within 30 days before the first day of the last menstrual period or in the first trimester. Furthermore, any risk estimate would need to account for gestational week-specific risk of spontaneous abortion.'”

COVID Jab Affects Male Fertility Too

Other recent research^19,20 has found the Pfizer COVID jab also “temporarily impairs semen concentration and motile count” in men. As noted by the authors:²¹

“The development of COVID-19 vaccinations represents a notable scientific achievement. Nevertheless, concerns have been raised regarding their possible detrimental impact on male fertility …

Thirty-seven SD [semen donors] from three sperm banks that provided 216 samples were included in that retrospective longitudinal multicenter cohort study. BNT162b2 vaccination included two doses, and vaccination completion was scheduled 7 days after the second dose.

The study included four phases: T0 — pre-vaccination baseline control, which encompassed 1–2 initial samples per SD; T1, T2 and T3 — short, intermediate, and long terms evaluations, respectively. Each included 1-3 semen samples per donor provided 15-45, 75-125 and over 145 days after vaccination completion, respectively …

Repetitive measurements revealed −15.4% sperm concentration decrease on T2 (CI −25.5%-3.9%, p = 0.01) leading to total motile count 22.1% reduction (CI −35% – −6.6%, p = 0.007) compared to T0.

Similarly, analysis of first semen sample only and samples’ mean per donor resulted in concentration and total motile count (TMC) reductions on T2 compared to T0 — median decline of 12 million/ml and 31.2 million motile spermatozoa, respectively … on first sample evaluation and median decline of 9.5 × 10⁶ and 27.3 million motile spermatozoa … on samples’ mean examination. T3 evaluation demonstrated overall recovery without …

This longitudinal study focused on SD demonstrates selective temporary sperm concentration and TMC deterioration 3 months after vaccination followed by later recovery verified by diverse statistical analyses.”

As with women’s menstrual problems, the authors blame these adverse effects in men on a “systemic immune response” to the COVID shot. However, while they claim men’s’ reproductive capacity will recover in about three months, this could still be a tremendous problem.

Remember, the mRNA shots are recommended at three-month intervals for the original series, and boosters are now being recommended at varying intervals thereafter. If you destroy a man’s sperm for three months every time he gets a COVID shot, you’re significantly reducing the probability of him fathering a child for a good part of any given year.

Massive Depopulation Underway

Whether accidental or intentional, the fact of the matter is that we’re now seeing an abrupt drop in live births along with an equally sudden rise in excess deaths among adults. The end result will be a reduction in the global population.

That seems inevitable at this point, and the timing of these trends correspond with the release of these experimental COVID gene transfer injections. For example, Germany recently released data showing a 10% decline in birth rate during the first quarter of 2022.²²

The live birth rate graph for Sweden looks much the same:^23,24

Other countries are also seeing unexpected birth rate reductions, nine months after the start of the mass vaccination campaign against COVID. Between January and April 2022, Switzerland’s birth rate was 15% lower than expected, the U.K.’s was down by 10% and Taiwan’s was down 23%.^25,26,27

In a July 5, 2022, Counter Signal article, Mike Campbell reported concerns expressed by Hungarian MP Dúró Dóra during a Parliamentary speech:²⁸

“In January this year, something happened that has not happened for decades. The birth rate fell by 20% compared to the same period last year. And what is even more worrying is that the fertility has also fallen — something not seen since 2011 …

[A] researcher at the KRTK Institute of Economics points out that this drastic decline came just nine months after the COVID mass vaccinations began in Hungary.”

After looking into further, Campbell discovered that in the five countries with the highest COVID jab uptake, fertility has dropped by an average of 15.2%, whereas the five countries with the lowest COVID jab uptake have seen an average reduction of just 4.66%.

The U.S. is also showing signs of a drop in live births. Provisional data from North Dakota shows a 10% decline in February 2022, 13% reduction in March and an 11% reduction in April, compared to the corresponding months in 2021.²⁹ Below is a chart from Birth Gauge³⁰ on Twitter comparing live birth data for 2021 and 2022 in a large number of countries.

[click to enlarge]

Take Responsibility for Your Health

At this time, women are not being warned about the risks for miscarriage, menstrual irregularities and the potential for fertility problems and stillbirths, even though all of these safety signals are glaringly obvious. As obstetrician-gynecologist specialist, Dr. James Thorp, told The Epoch Times in April 2022:³¹

“I’ve seen many, many, many complications in pregnant women, in moms and in fetuses, in children, offspring, fetal death, miscarriage, death of the fetus inside the mom… What I’ve seen in the last two years is unprecedented.”

Tragically, doctors are under a worldwide gag order. They steer patients away from the COVID shot at the risk of losing their medical license. This puts patients in an incredibly risky situation, as most rely on their doctors to tell them the truth. Few expect doctors to lie or hide life saving information from them simply to protect their own career. So, we’re in unprecedented times in more ways than one.

What this means is that you have no choice, really, but to do your own research and gauge the risks as best you can. There are tons of data out there — data that the mainstream media won’t touch, and if they do, they still insist adverse events aren’t a sign of danger. In such situations, you simply have to put on your thinking cap and think it through for yourself.

As of July 15, 2022, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) had logged 1,350,947 adverse event reports following the COVID jab, including 29,635 deaths,³² and there’s evidence that reports are being deleted from the system by the thousands. You can learn more about that in “Thousands of Deaths and Adverse Reactions Deleted From VAERS.”

The safety signals coming from the COVID jabs exceed anything else in medical history. No drug or vaccine has ever been associated with as many injuries and deaths, including harm to the unborn.

At this point, it appears we’re looking at a certain depopulation event. The question then is, are you willing to accept the risks? Are you willing to risk your fertility, even if only temporarily? Are you willing to risk the life of your baby? Are you willing to risk your own? If not, the answer is simple. Don’t take the jab, and if you’ve already taken one or two (or three), never take another.

• ¹ SoundCloud Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay CDC ACIP Public Comment April 23, 2021
• ² NBC News July 15, 2022
• ^3, 5 Science July 15, 2022
• ⁴ Yahoo News July 17, 2022
• ⁶ Cleveland Clinic Abnormal Menstruation
• ⁷ NIH Menstrual Irregularities
• ⁸ Menopause Now June 18, 2020
• ⁹ Obstetrics and Gynecology April 1, 2022: 139(4):481-489
• ¹⁰ Reproductive BioMedicine 2021 Jan; 42(1): 260–267
• ¹¹ The Defender April 28, 2021
• ¹² BMJ 2021;374:n2211
• ¹³ Mayo Clinic Von Willebrand Disease
• ¹⁴ The Phaser November 18, 2021
• ¹⁵ BBC News November 19, 2021
• ¹⁶ WDSU November 24, 2021
• ¹⁷ N Engl J Med 2021; 384:2273-2282
• ¹⁸ N Engl J Med 2021; 385:1536, Correction October 14, 2021
• ^19, 21 Andrology June 17, 2022 DOI: 10.111/andr.13209
• ²⁰ Expose June 26, 2022
• ²² Expose News July 18, 2022
• ^23, 25, 28 The Counter Signal July 5, 2022
• ²⁴ Twitter Havard Skjaervik June 27, 2022
• ^26, 29 Igor Chudov Substack June 25, 2022
• ²⁷ SWPRS June 2022
• ³⁰ Twitter Birth Gauge June 3, 2022
• ³¹ Epoch Times April 27, 2022
• ³² OpenVAERS data as of July 15, 2022

At least it WOULD BE sending warning bells if corporate media picked it up. They won’t. Just as the scientists who conducted the research and the governments who had them do it, corporate media will bury this study faster than they buried studies proving Ivermectin’s efficacy against Covid-19.

The study, cited at Wiley.com, revealed that those who had been fully vaccinated experienced −15.4% sperm concentration decrease on average between 75-120 days post-injection. They followed up with their research subjects at 150 days and claim they had recovered, but here’s the thing. The study did not provide statistics nor context in their short statement of recovery. Specifically, they state:

“T3 evaluation demonstrated overall recovery. Semen volume and sperm motility were not impaired.”

In the world of science, details matter. The phrases “overall recovery” and “not impaired” could be construed in one of two ways. It could mean that the test subjects returned to their previous sperm concentration, or it could mean that there was no further decline from the T2 state. They did not define their terms. They did not provide real numbers. This is extremely concerning, especially when we consider they dedicated a mere 13-words to try to tell people everything worked out in the end.

Even if the best-case scenario of the study tells us sperm concentration returns to normal, this is still a major concern. The last thing America needs right now is another fertility issue, temporary or not.

Another questionable aspect of the study is that they did not release data on sperm concentration prior to the jabs. This could just be sloppy work (it would behoove a scientist to know sperm concentration before and after injections) or it could be an intentional omission. Their first reported test results start two weeks after injections.

Vaxx-pushers like Bill Gates have been linked to depopulation agendas for decades. Sometimes, they even come out and directly say it. Those who used to work almost exclusively in the shadows are becoming bolder with their proclamations. It’s as if they believe they are untouchable and that their machinations are now forgone conclusions.

Many have long speculated about the jabs being part of a depopulation agenda. While the focus is usually on killing people, another aspect of depopulation is preventing people from being conceived in the first place.