Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

973

(post is archived)

[–] • 5 pts

Don't have an answer to your question, but last week my midwife said that women who take the shot in their first trimester have a 83% chance of miscarriage.

[–] • 2 pts

Not surprised. I expect birthrate among whites fell off a cliff and exploded for non-whites. Also expecting a sizable decrease in fertility among whites.

[–] • 1 pt (edited )

The white cattle taking the vaccine is in vast majority leftist, so not only were they already culling themselves before by not having children but now the few of them who do want to have them will not be able to.

100 years from now the only white people around will be hardcore ethnocentric conservatives, and that's a good thing!

[–] • 0 pt

I hope you're right on the demographics of things.

[–] • 3 pts

More than 8 in 10 couples, where the woman is under 40, will conceive naturally within a year of having regular unprotected sex.

Regular unprotected sex means having sex every 2 to 3 days without using contraception.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/infertility/diagnosis/

In most cases, it takes a year of having sex about every 3 days without contraception before a doctor will look at you for infertility and start running tests to diagnose it. Vaccine has only been put 9 months or so.

I'm pretty sure if you are getting pregnant and having vaccine induced miscarriages/ stillbirths that would prolong the diagnoses a bit - doctors are reasonable though, I would think 2 or 3 in year might ring the alarm.

It's far too early for official data.

[–] • 0 pt

I'm pretty sure if you are getting pregnant and having vaccine induced miscarriages/ stillbirths that would prolong the diagnoses a bit

That's my point. Six months is more than enough to understand the early indications of fertility. Especially if miscarriages and fertility rates is significantly reduced. You also seem to forget what "average" actually means. If the top half still stands out, then it too means something. If those numbers are in decline or absent, it in of itself is also likely very telling.

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

Any trusted information available on fertility rates among the injected (by race? )? Been long enough we should know. I'm guessing no data means it is bad and hidden.

A normal diagnosis of infertility is at least 12 months. Miscarriages usually prolong the diagnosis (since one can get pregnant, chances of infertility are lower). No trusted source is collecting data of people who reasonably could still be fertile as they have not been diagnosed as infertile and despite what you may have learned in school, getting pregnant is actually difficult in most cases. .

I'm sure the data will be bad and hidden but any reliable source of this data won't be available for at least 12 months after vaccinations start, realisticly you are looking at 2-3 years until any reliable data because the first people to get vaccinated were old. In Australia most fertile aged women (aside from nurses and doctors etc) have only just started getting vaccinated very recently, and for any increase in infertility data to mean anything you need a decent chunk of vaccinated men/women being past the at least 12 month window. I say again if the vaccine is causing miscarriage rather than simply making people infertile the 12 months prior to diagnosis could stretch out much further. Reliable figures are 2-3 years away on infertility.

HOWEVER, what you could be looking at is live birth rates compared to previous years. They will make excuses to explain away any dips I'm sure ("people don't want to bring a baby into a world like this") but with lockdown boredom one would expect an increase in ("Oops! Babies'") live births from 9 months after lockdowns began up to 9 months after lockdowns ends. A steady rate of live births to me during this period would indicate unrealiable evidence of a decrease in reproductive health, and a decrease would be strong unreliable evidence. But unreliable evidence of reproductive health is better than no evidence of infertility.

Miscarriage data is extremely unreliable because most go unreported. You could look at still birth data but I suspect like most women, vaccinated women are more at risk of miscarriage than still birth - probably just a much higher risk of miscarriage but if they don't report it for the usual reasons women don't report them or because they don't realise they had one because their peroids have been longer, heavier and more painful since vaccination (as some social media accounts have reported) we may never know.

[–] • 2 pts

There are many data points that are missing and very easy to find if you have access to the data. It is crazy to me that even something as fundamental as "deaths by county per month" isn't easily accessible in 2021. there is absolutely an agenda, something like this would take very few man-hours.

[–] • 2 pts

It’s pretty early to tell that. Fertility has been declining anyway before all of this.

[–] • 2 pts

Its even worse. Data that was available five years ago isnt anymore. You are getting less info because people are asking more questions.

[–] • 2 pts

If there ever was to be an attempt to cull the population, of course they would also have to control the flow of information about it.

They would also need to have a massive propaganda machine in place to get the people to go along with it. Lets not forget socially and legally leaning on those that say no.

All of these things are happening. The evidence we are living the scenario so many feared and tried to warn us about is becoming damning.

The people arnt ready to start shooting yet though.

[–] • 2 pts

This information has always been propagandized and has never been completely reliable.

Many countries vastly over report their populations as a means of making them a less desirable target.

This also lends itself to an NWO Great Reset plan for when they want to claim a billion or more people died from something and all they will have to do is "fix" the erroneous reporting stating that the new zombie virus, or whatever, killed the imaginary people.

The vaccine has barely been available for 9 months, so you wouldn't expect to see any numbers for this issue, yet. This is the first clue that the news reporting on the issue is dishonest. We still have another 9 months to answer this particular question with any kind of certainty. However, we also face the problem that millions of people are faking vaccine cards all over the world, so the reported numbers will reflect LESS than reality.

The primary concern regarding fertility is the fact that the S Spikes from the vaccine bind to ACE 2 receptors in a way that interferes with ovule meiosis and spermatogenesis. This has been tentatively confirmed by a few reports.

By the end of this year, what you should be looking at are the number of vaccinated dead.

Personally, I posit that the SARS COV 2 genomic sequence is fraudulent and the reference genome produced by the Wuhan Institute of Virology has never actually been double checked. "De novo" sequences have been produced, but,as far as I can tell, they used the Wuhan reference Genome to produce it, making it a suspicious result. Furthermore, Microsoft has complete control of the negative control lists, meaning they filter out all undesired results. I maintain that we are still talking about 20% of the common colds caused by coronaviruses.

Last year, when the pandemic was purportedly in full force, the flu was completely eliminated and there did not seem to be any extra deaths.

This year, IF the vaccine is deadly, we should see a blip up in extra deaths. However, that is only if the effects are acute.

Really, what I expect to see is that the vaccine results in creating higher hypertension rates, which results in a variety of health problems, but is already the leading cause of death. If you wanted to murder millions of people without getting caught, this would be the way to do it because cause of death would already appear to be the average leading cause of death.

Someone needs to sequence a SARS COV 2 sample in the middle of a stadium, live on YouTube for us to be able to trust it, and they'd have to be not connected to the Internet (the sequencing machines).

In the same manner, someone needs to perform all of the appropriate chromatographic scans of multiple batches of vaccines to determine what the heck is in them. Are some placebos? Are some different mRNA sequences than others? Are some something different, entirely?

We really have no way of knowing because the people telling us what SARS COV 2 is and what is in the vaccines are the same people who have been caught lying every step of the way about everything.

Notice they call it "COVID Vaccine" and not a "SARS COV 2" vaccine. This is an important distinction. If the vaccine doesn't protect against SARS COV 2, then it is not, in any way shape or form, helping stop the pandemic.

[–] • 2 pts

Good reply. Thank you. But also want to point out fertility rates are not the same thing as birth rates. Though obviously low fertility rates will eventually drive down birth rates.

There are many indicators which can set expectations of coming birth rates.This is why I am asking about fertility rates.

[–] • 1 pt

The vaccine hasn’t even been around a year, and gestation is 9 mos. No, it hasn’t been long enough to garner reliable statistics

[–] • 0 pt

It's been around for pretty much exactly a gestation period. I would expect that means right now is the time we should start seeing some of the first data on this. Sure it will take a longer period of data to draw definitive conclusions but we should be getting a first look now.

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

That’s not how data gathering works. You can’t even get accurate population information from a major city more recently than four years ago, let alone something as specific as how, why, and when women give birth

[–] • 0 pt

Only true for birth rates. Already addressed.

[–] • 0 pt

Except that it takes 3-4 years to get accurate population information for major cities. What you’re asking for is far more specific but you expect it sooner. The fact that it’s not happening yet isn’t proof of anything