Will repeat, doubt RSV would pose such a threat if the newborn was left alone, no jabs, and let mom' s passive immunity work as it has ever since we climbed down from the trees. And that probably holds true for the host of other jabs given to neonatals. If RSV is as prevalent as advertised mom more than likely is well primed with antibodies to protect her infant.
My wife worked for a lipid clinic in the Tex. Med. Center and the had a nutritionist there to advise their patients on life changes. They also inventoried all their meds and culled out the ones needing culling
A key thing not being mentioned in the discussions on the RSV vaccine being added to the schedule is that it is not a "required" vaccine to go to school, whereas most of the other vaccines ACIP approved in the past many parents have no way to opt out of (along with it being a monoclonal antibody rather than a vaccine).
'Post-market vigilance' warranted, does not inspire confidence. Great it is not required to attend school, but how much will this shot be pushed regardless? Is it a first line of defense or kept for a limited population?
I saw similar Red Flags being pointed out by Dr. Retsef Levi in the latest RSV Monoclonal Antibody RSV injection approval hearings, yet it was still approved. Dr. Cody Meissner pointed out that only 300 infants die from RSV each year in the USA and all those babies had comorbidities associated with their deaths. Nearly everyone has natural antibodies to RSV, including Pregnant women, because it is so common. It is unnecessary to inject Pregnant women with a Monoclonal Antibody RSV product. Pregnant women will pass their naturally occurring antibodies to their babies and further protect the infants through breastfeeding. Monoclonal Antibodies work best for active infections and not for use prophylactically. Why are we injuring so many to try to save so few?
We need to rethink prenatal care. Test for nutrient deficiencies that create harm for the mother to be as well as the new infant. Top of that list is Vitamin D and not what are the current recommendations of NIH which are grossly under stated. In 2009 Dept of Agra published an analysis of nutrient deficiencies in the American population that demonstrated the vast number of Americans that were deficient. Totally ignored. Hospitals are rushing to expand their preemie wards, and not address the root cause which is a healthy prenatal gestation period without detrimental lifestyle issues and not receiving mRNA injections. If NIH would have the courage to run a study on Vitamin D blood levels and incidents of adverse medical conditions, hands down the mothers to be with over 50 ng's would deliver the healthiest babies. Japan delivers healthier babies than the USA by far and life span is 10% higher than USA Go RFK Jr. Get the job done!
Injecting mothers and babies with RSV is a band aid approach and does not address the root causes.
I heard on a podcast the other day that vitamin D as vital as it is, can contribute to plaque in the arteries. I wish I could think of the Chiropractor's name, he mentioned vitamin C, and one more, maybe it was lack of K2, all can contribute to calcium buildup in blood vessels.
We are both on the same page. The issue is that D is extremely important for good health and the K2 issue should not be a problem. Saying D will create plaque is a negative and is easily managed. Over stated.
Right, and D helps to repair tears in the arteries. However, high D levels mean more Mg is needed as well as Zinc. D toxicity is rare, but D needs enough magnesium and K2 to remove plaque from the arteries and joints and drive calcium to the bones. We are bombarded with messages to take this or that supplement, with no emphasis on how different vitamins work together, this information is crucial. Just like taking zinc for a long time, can result in a copper deficiency.
Medical doctors are trained to treat patients with usually a time limit of 15 minutes during a visit, just enough time to converse for a few minutes, take some vital statistics and hand out a prescription. Doctors don't have the time to spend hours with every patient to determine their diet and lifestyle....and this is what it takes to really help patients achieve results.
Most shots are invasive medicine penetrating the five layers of skin designed to protect the bloodstream from contamination. Good health stems from a nutritious diet and a healthy 24/7 lifestyle...as Hippocrates advised 2400 years ago.
Agreed, but with all of our resources today, people need to be their own first line of defense. Take the best care or yourself that you can so you don't have to rely on big medicine. I understand some things aren't avoidable, but eating right and exercise are a good start.
Exactly...I am healthy in my nineties, because I decided years ago to learn about real health...and have spent 64 years on the path. I am not into invasive medicine. with its drugs and vaccines.
I had a dilemma when Covid started. In May of 2010 I suffered a very aggressive form of Guillian-Barre which was not diagnosed early enough to prevent the axonal damage. I was 59. In less than 24 hours I was paralyzed from the neck down. Seven specialists all asked me if I had a vaccine. I did not. But the week prior I had just recovered from several days in bed with the flu. A neurologist decided to administer immunoglobulin at the fastest rate I could handle but the hospital had none and had to order it in. After the 3rd day of getting the antibodies, I knew it worked but the damage was done. Six months in hospital, three of which I was wheelchair bound, two years rehab and I can walk (something like a robot), I have no small motor movements in my hands, but considering all, I am self-sufficient. Sold my law practice and started working part time from home long before Covid. When it hit, I faced the possibility of getting the Covid flu which might trigger the GBS or get the vaccine, which interestingly, all doctors in 2010 told me never to get. However, my family doctor said I would be "safer" getting the vaccine. He said there was no indication of GBS as a side effect. He talked my husband into it, but I was not convinced and did not get the vaccine. I decided to take my chances. When I did get Covid (twice) I was lucky enough to get Ivermectin and I followed the Front Line Covid Care protocol and not a cake walk, but we recovered and neither my husband or I have any long Covid issues. I must say, we take much better care of ourselves now - reduced our stress, eat healthy, (no more coffee and donuts on the run), and I continue to use my Power Plate which really helped my recovery. My point in this long diatribe: I am glad GBS is being recognized as a possible side effect and that people can make those informed decisions we should have been able to make from the start.
On CHD website they had a story of a misfortunate man, Mike, a Canadian school bus driver, who after his fourth booster developed transverse myelitis, with two lesions on his spinal cord, that the docs say are inoperable. They admit the shots triggered it, but they refuse to report it for fear of losing their careers. It is heart breaking. Surely, some doc somewhere can help him, and the fact that he can't sue is appalling, not that money would be enough, but he could buy an electric chair and have some mobility. Fauci really has sent so many into one of the circles of hell.
I think vaccinating any pregnant women for anything is wrong. We know that anything we eat, any pill we take goes directly to the baby. If there is no information on how it could potentially effect the baby vaccines should never be given. The end.
Maybe it is needed for very vulnerable kids, but not the robust. We can't normalize vaccines for the majority as they do undermine the natural immune system in the long run, we know this.
Thank you for sharing this timely report. As I understand it, it calls for further study of the concerns the VARS data raises re RSV vaccines for pregnant women.
My impression was that the ASIP RSV considerations centered on protection of newborns. That where mothers had been vaccinated for RSV, the infant would have acquired immunity. If not, protection should be considered.
In that this study identified some mothers suffered adverse issues from the RSV vaccines and there were reported issues and even deaths among the fetuses, these findings may impact maternal recommendations and care.
If I am following this, the ASIP review of the monoclonal antibody 'vaccines' for newborns is particularly timely.
The IMA has scheduled their weekly seminar next Weds to touch on (I'm not clear as the exact topic) pregnancy concerns. I'm hoping they'll cover these findings.
When I combine these findings with precious few others and add in "The Bolus Theory" by Marc Giardot which oversimplified exposes the likelihood of an injection circulatory system rupture drastically changing the titration calculations, I'm thinking why take the chance. By my measure the potential cure is worse than the potential disease. A couple other worth while considerations. Why inject a cure for a disease you do not have and the injections are toxic. Why inject toxic substances into one's body ?
I firmly believe it is time to re-educate the public and the doctors as to the importance of good nutrition. Most doctors were never taught in medical school how important a good diet was, along with all the facts and figures that go along with staying healthy. Adults today need to be introduced to healthy eating, perhaps through incentive programs with their medical insurance carriers. Young mothers to be should be educate regarding the important of their health, and the health of the baby, not just a pamphlet to read, but a sit down class where they learn the effects poor diet has on the baby.
Will repeat, doubt RSV would pose such a threat if the newborn was left alone, no jabs, and let mom' s passive immunity work as it has ever since we climbed down from the trees. And that probably holds true for the host of other jabs given to neonatals. If RSV is as prevalent as advertised mom more than likely is well primed with antibodies to protect her infant.
Not without reinventing prenatal care.
My wife worked for a lipid clinic in the Tex. Med. Center and the had a nutritionist there to advise their patients on life changes. They also inventoried all their meds and culled out the ones needing culling
A key thing not being mentioned in the discussions on the RSV vaccine being added to the schedule is that it is not a "required" vaccine to go to school, whereas most of the other vaccines ACIP approved in the past many parents have no way to opt out of (along with it being a monoclonal antibody rather than a vaccine).
'Post-market vigilance' warranted, does not inspire confidence. Great it is not required to attend school, but how much will this shot be pushed regardless? Is it a first line of defense or kept for a limited population?
but the schools will require it anyways. That is how they are, they want to cover their butt.
There is/was only one option and that is/was to take your kids out of school and home school them.
I saw similar Red Flags being pointed out by Dr. Retsef Levi in the latest RSV Monoclonal Antibody RSV injection approval hearings, yet it was still approved. Dr. Cody Meissner pointed out that only 300 infants die from RSV each year in the USA and all those babies had comorbidities associated with their deaths. Nearly everyone has natural antibodies to RSV, including Pregnant women, because it is so common. It is unnecessary to inject Pregnant women with a Monoclonal Antibody RSV product. Pregnant women will pass their naturally occurring antibodies to their babies and further protect the infants through breastfeeding. Monoclonal Antibodies work best for active infections and not for use prophylactically. Why are we injuring so many to try to save so few?
Your final question is the PROFOUND question we SHOULD be asking, and seeking answers to.
We need to rethink prenatal care. Test for nutrient deficiencies that create harm for the mother to be as well as the new infant. Top of that list is Vitamin D and not what are the current recommendations of NIH which are grossly under stated. In 2009 Dept of Agra published an analysis of nutrient deficiencies in the American population that demonstrated the vast number of Americans that were deficient. Totally ignored. Hospitals are rushing to expand their preemie wards, and not address the root cause which is a healthy prenatal gestation period without detrimental lifestyle issues and not receiving mRNA injections. If NIH would have the courage to run a study on Vitamin D blood levels and incidents of adverse medical conditions, hands down the mothers to be with over 50 ng's would deliver the healthiest babies. Japan delivers healthier babies than the USA by far and life span is 10% higher than USA Go RFK Jr. Get the job done!
Injecting mothers and babies with RSV is a band aid approach and does not address the root causes.
I heard on a podcast the other day that vitamin D as vital as it is, can contribute to plaque in the arteries. I wish I could think of the Chiropractor's name, he mentioned vitamin C, and one more, maybe it was lack of K2, all can contribute to calcium buildup in blood vessels.
That is Big Pharma BS! They can’t sell their drugs if you are healthy!
It won't take long for you to research what happens calcium in the body when K2 is deficient, look it up before declaring baloney.
They highlight the negatives to continue to discredit Vit D and its role in staying well. Yes K2 is important.
Dr. Berg is a chiropractor, he promotes good nutrition, why would you think 'they' highlight negativities?
We are both on the same page. The issue is that D is extremely important for good health and the K2 issue should not be a problem. Saying D will create plaque is a negative and is easily managed. Over stated.
Plaque is created as a response to an inflammatory condition in the arteries. Not D as far as I know.
Right, and D helps to repair tears in the arteries. However, high D levels mean more Mg is needed as well as Zinc. D toxicity is rare, but D needs enough magnesium and K2 to remove plaque from the arteries and joints and drive calcium to the bones. We are bombarded with messages to take this or that supplement, with no emphasis on how different vitamins work together, this information is crucial. Just like taking zinc for a long time, can result in a copper deficiency.
That explains why I have no plaque in my arteries and have a HDL of 90! A D of 70 ng’s! In my senior years and take all the supplements you mentioned!
You are lucky, also avoiding seed oils helps.
Not lucky! I work on it and reject processed foods and try to do all the right things. Exercise, Avoid stress. Eat Organic and no Omega 6 meat.
Yup agree balance is everything! That’s why nutrient blood tests are a must but ignored.
That is because conventional medicine only deals with pill pushing for the most part.
Sub equatorial humans have Vit D levels in the 100 range. Yes the recommended levels are grossly understated. I agree, go RFK, (and Dr Malone!).
Baloney!
K2 and D are synergistic! But we don’t want to spin it as being a negative!
Now that people are paying attention, vaccination is starting to look like Russian Roulette with 3 in the cylinder.
Medical doctors are trained to treat patients with usually a time limit of 15 minutes during a visit, just enough time to converse for a few minutes, take some vital statistics and hand out a prescription. Doctors don't have the time to spend hours with every patient to determine their diet and lifestyle....and this is what it takes to really help patients achieve results.
Most shots are invasive medicine penetrating the five layers of skin designed to protect the bloodstream from contamination. Good health stems from a nutritious diet and a healthy 24/7 lifestyle...as Hippocrates advised 2400 years ago.
Agreed, but with all of our resources today, people need to be their own first line of defense. Take the best care or yourself that you can so you don't have to rely on big medicine. I understand some things aren't avoidable, but eating right and exercise are a good start.
Exactly...I am healthy in my nineties, because I decided years ago to learn about real health...and have spent 64 years on the path. I am not into invasive medicine. with its drugs and vaccines.
I had a dilemma when Covid started. In May of 2010 I suffered a very aggressive form of Guillian-Barre which was not diagnosed early enough to prevent the axonal damage. I was 59. In less than 24 hours I was paralyzed from the neck down. Seven specialists all asked me if I had a vaccine. I did not. But the week prior I had just recovered from several days in bed with the flu. A neurologist decided to administer immunoglobulin at the fastest rate I could handle but the hospital had none and had to order it in. After the 3rd day of getting the antibodies, I knew it worked but the damage was done. Six months in hospital, three of which I was wheelchair bound, two years rehab and I can walk (something like a robot), I have no small motor movements in my hands, but considering all, I am self-sufficient. Sold my law practice and started working part time from home long before Covid. When it hit, I faced the possibility of getting the Covid flu which might trigger the GBS or get the vaccine, which interestingly, all doctors in 2010 told me never to get. However, my family doctor said I would be "safer" getting the vaccine. He said there was no indication of GBS as a side effect. He talked my husband into it, but I was not convinced and did not get the vaccine. I decided to take my chances. When I did get Covid (twice) I was lucky enough to get Ivermectin and I followed the Front Line Covid Care protocol and not a cake walk, but we recovered and neither my husband or I have any long Covid issues. I must say, we take much better care of ourselves now - reduced our stress, eat healthy, (no more coffee and donuts on the run), and I continue to use my Power Plate which really helped my recovery. My point in this long diatribe: I am glad GBS is being recognized as a possible side effect and that people can make those informed decisions we should have been able to make from the start.
On CHD website they had a story of a misfortunate man, Mike, a Canadian school bus driver, who after his fourth booster developed transverse myelitis, with two lesions on his spinal cord, that the docs say are inoperable. They admit the shots triggered it, but they refuse to report it for fear of losing their careers. It is heart breaking. Surely, some doc somewhere can help him, and the fact that he can't sue is appalling, not that money would be enough, but he could buy an electric chair and have some mobility. Fauci really has sent so many into one of the circles of hell.
So why did RFK Jr's new team, which includes you, just authorize this jab for newborns?
I think vaccinating any pregnant women for anything is wrong. We know that anything we eat, any pill we take goes directly to the baby. If there is no information on how it could potentially effect the baby vaccines should never be given. The end.
Then why did the ACIP just vote to okay the RSV vaccine for children?!
Maybe it is needed for very vulnerable kids, but not the robust. We can't normalize vaccines for the majority as they do undermine the natural immune system in the long run, we know this.
And for the elderly! And these 2 groups are showing the worst side effects.
About 50 years!
Can pregnant women be tested for antibodies as they will pass them to the infant, then absolutely no need for those shots.
Thank you for sharing this timely report. As I understand it, it calls for further study of the concerns the VARS data raises re RSV vaccines for pregnant women.
My impression was that the ASIP RSV considerations centered on protection of newborns. That where mothers had been vaccinated for RSV, the infant would have acquired immunity. If not, protection should be considered.
In that this study identified some mothers suffered adverse issues from the RSV vaccines and there were reported issues and even deaths among the fetuses, these findings may impact maternal recommendations and care.
If I am following this, the ASIP review of the monoclonal antibody 'vaccines' for newborns is particularly timely.
The IMA has scheduled their weekly seminar next Weds to touch on (I'm not clear as the exact topic) pregnancy concerns. I'm hoping they'll cover these findings.
Hope all are set for a great 4th.
Trust is a precious commodity and when it comes to healthcare, both Big Pharma and the government, have recklessly squandered it.
When I combine these findings with precious few others and add in "The Bolus Theory" by Marc Giardot which oversimplified exposes the likelihood of an injection circulatory system rupture drastically changing the titration calculations, I'm thinking why take the chance. By my measure the potential cure is worse than the potential disease. A couple other worth while considerations. Why inject a cure for a disease you do not have and the injections are toxic. Why inject toxic substances into one's body ?
I firmly believe it is time to re-educate the public and the doctors as to the importance of good nutrition. Most doctors were never taught in medical school how important a good diet was, along with all the facts and figures that go along with staying healthy. Adults today need to be introduced to healthy eating, perhaps through incentive programs with their medical insurance carriers. Young mothers to be should be educate regarding the important of their health, and the health of the baby, not just a pamphlet to read, but a sit down class where they learn the effects poor diet has on the baby.