Jun 23, 2022·edited Jun 23, 2022Liked by Dr. Byram W. Bridle
Thank you, I will be saving this for future reference as I'm hearing of more couples facing infertility. I'm curious if the damage to the sperm is just mobility and count? Are we going to see more developmental delays or disabilities in babies of the mRNA vaccinated? Maybe not as obvious as Thalidomide, but more SIDS, cardiac, neurological, endocrine, etc. disorders. Which is why vaccine studies are supposed to be long term. This experimental mRNA on the world is heartbreaking.
Hi HeldFast. You make an excellent point. Only four parameters were assessed in this study. Two were clearly affected. A third almost reached statistical significance (only larger sample #s would definitively prove whether it is or is not affected). However, I am thinking the same thing. There is much more sperm biology that contributes to a child. A study of limited scope like this simply serves as proof-of-principle of harm; the true extent of the harm is yet to be defined.
I admit that I am not at all a data-analysis guru. However, the allegation that sperm counts and motility return to baseline by T3 seems a little suspect, based on the data in the table 2 on page 14.
Sperm concentration is still -15.9% (range -30% to 1.7%) and motility is -4.1 (range -8.2 to 0.1). Total motility count is -19.4% (range -35% to 0.6%).
To my admittedly simple mind, these numbers are not exactly reassuring. There is a whole lot of negativity there. What if you are one of the guys with a 30% reduction in sperm concentration? That’s hardly “back to normal.”
The authors state that the T3 reductions are “statistically insignificant.” Yeah, well they tested only 36 guys, right. Maybe if they check 360, they would find some statistically significant information. After all, it’s just the future of folks’ abilities to father children that we are talking about. Seems kind of important to follow up on.
Hi Copernicus. Thanks for raising this important observation. I agree 100%. As per an earlier comment, the variability of the data at the latter timepoint suggests that more than a few men still had obvious damage at 6 months post-inoculation. ...and more #s in the study might have tipped the balance in favour of statistical significance. Note that the p-value for one was just a hair over 0.05, with 0.05 defined as the cut-off for significance (which is the legitimate cut-off that is usually used).
What about the issue of using median vs average and the possibility that some % of men never recover sperm count and motility even if they never boost?
Hi Stanley. You are correct. In this study, the authors did not provide the raw data. However, the variability at the latest timepoint (~6 months) suggests there were at least several men whose sperm counts and motility had not recovered by then.
Jun 23, 2022·edited Jun 23, 2022Liked by Dr. Byram W. Bridle
You'd almost be tempted to think they were trying to trick us into creating fewer human lives. But surely not! I mean, there was that thing in India where Bill Gates has been denied entry because of something peddled over there that sterilized thousands of girls. And the tetenus shots in Africa that made women unable to carry a pregnancy because it took out HCG. But those were mistakes, right? Didn't the Gates Foundation and the Pharmaceutical companies say they were very sorry and promise never to do it again?
People can demand integrity and informed consent, but that does not guarantee that they will get it. Common sense shows the process was rushed and long term effects were not known. Anything after that, is just a gamble.
Therefore, my biggest takeaway is when you state, "You must take responsibility for your own health and that of your family." Being too busy, or not being able to think about it right now because it's too stressful, might be okay for one day, but to use that reasoning over and over again, is not being responsible.
You are the only one who is going to live within your own body for the rest of your life, and people cannot assume that someone is looking at their best interest, or will take care of you or compensate you if something goes wrong; both history and current events show, this isn't happening.
We all know how angry & frustrating it is to see crimes that others don’t see. And it’s challenging to hold emotions in check, and simply remember the old adage about attracting bees with honey not vinegar.
Over the years, I've seen a lot of people go into doctors feeling confident, but they they get razzle dazzled by fancy words, and shamed for not doing what they are told. And they crumble. Unless you are talking to HR at your employer, you don't need to give any reasons whatsoever for why you don't want the shot, or why you aren't getting it for your kid. Just say "No thank you." Say it calmly, and firmly. If they ask you more questions, just repeat yourself. "Oh, no thank you, but I'm happy to take home any supporting literature to that I can discuss with my family."
Keep in mind, they are probably going to put some ICM code in your file to mark you as non-compliant, which is why you should seek a doctor that is supportive of informed consent and medical autonomy.
Hi Ali. One of my pet peeves is when professionals resort to using their specialized lingo to, as you say, razzle and dazzle people. Anybody can do that. For example, I have met hobbyists that enjoy something that I am not familiar with and I cannot understand what exactly it is that they do because they 'showcase' the full extent of the technical lingo. The true sign of someone having deep expertise in a subject is their ability to distill what is important into language that the average person can understand. There isn't a single topic in this world for which that cannot be done. Shame on the physicians who hide behind their technical verbiage. I have also seen this used as a strategy by expert witnesses in court; if the lawyer starts walking them into a corner because they have lied about the science or don't understand it, they resort to technical gibberish to throw the lawyer and court off the trail.
totally agree. The other thing most people don't understand is that public health and many of the science communication techniques are using psychology to change your behavior. Obviously there are good reasons to try to get people to change their behavior, but the problem comes in when you don't realize that this is what is happening, so you are making emotional decisions, not logical ones. So, just don't go in the room trying to win a battle, unless you are battle tested and ready. Two years in, you should know where you stand, and stand tall. No justifications needed. Save your energy for the big battle to come.
And thank you for your leadership during this time!
Jun 23, 2022·edited Jun 24, 2022Liked by Dr. Byram W. Bridle
Absolutely, drop doctors that badger you to take these shots and find one who has a clue about their dangers. My doctor was pushy and annoyed that I wouldn't take his advice and get a shot. I won't go back to him. I fired him as my doctor.
I agree but that goes for any doctor pushing any vaccine, any medication and any treatment. Ask questions, research and advocate for yourself. Ali is correct that you don't have to explain yourself other than stating No Thank you.
That is wise. This is exactly what I see and hear often, and the impetus for my comment. Just because they know more medical knowledge in general doesn't mean that they are right about this situation in particular. It's best to not engage, and just say "No thank you" unless you've found a wonderful supportive doctor that does collaborative decision making, rather than dictating to you. Wishing you the best of health!
Thank you Dr. Bridle. I had a thought, what about the young boys who are going through puberty or younger? How could this affect their reproductive growth? This can't be good news.
Hi Sylwia. I agree 100%. There is no way that this technology should be used in boys until a lot more research has been done. This is precisely why at least 10-15 years of clinical studies are needed to address all the relevant questions. One of the greatest facades were the public declarations that cutting the clinical research process to less than one year would not compromise our scientific understanding of the safety of these inoculations.
Jun 23, 2022·edited Jun 23, 2022Liked by Dr. Byram W. Bridle
Excellent, clear and well-written explanation of this study. I too am curious about the quality of the sperm. Will the "vaccines" cause damage to the sperm and future progeny? What about the ovaries and the quality of the eggs? I too don't understand why people aren't questioning the past 2 years. Where is your line in the sand? As a former RN, my line was locking down healthy people. We were taught to quarantine people who had symptoms and were sick. I knew something was wrong then. You are right that you see very clearly what is happening once you form that boundary. A very important point of your article is that each person must take responsibility for their health and the health of their children. In Canada we rely heavily on doctors and medications to fix us instead of taking care of ourselves and each other.
Hi Vivian. You raise excellent questions. Questions that deserve to be addressed using the scientific method in the form of well-designed research studies that culminate with transparent dissemination of the results to the public.
Thank you. Yes! The public deserves transparency on all health care treatments. The Canadian Blood Tragedy came to my mind when all this began. I am especially disappointed and angry yet not surprised by the lack of ethics and care for others by the majority of the medical community. I applaud you speaking up. It is a very courageous act and thank goodness for you and other scientists, doctors and nurses who have spoken up. I don't know where we would be without all of you.
If a bolus of LNPs storm the Blood-testis or the blood-epididymal barrier, immune cells will destroy them and permeability of the endothelium will let Tcells in. Likely that sperm cell express hTERT and get attacked.
Marc, your article is excellent! I like your proposed mechanisms of harm. They certainly make scientific sense. Your rationale is very solid. As such, your hypothesis deserves to be put to the test. I wish that you worked as a regulator for Health Canada. We need regulators who will think about underlying mechanisms, ask the hard questions, and demand transparent answers from the manufacturers.
There's a recent article tying the Pfizer vaccine to Pericarditis and increase vascular permeability in the heart: " Pericarditis with Increased Vascular Permeability after
Hi Ali. Yes, potentially. There are multiple potential mechanisms that could lead to this. Remember, the mRNA vaccines are designed to get cells to manufacture and express the spike protein on their surface. If the lipid nanoparticle deliver vehicles get into any of the cells responsible for the production of sperm, or the spermatozoa themselves, these cells would become targets for autoimmune attack by the spike-specific antibodies and T cells that the 'vaccines' induce. Such a response would kill self-cells, leading to the release of other self-derived proteins in the context of inflammation. This is a recipe for potential spreading of autoimmune responses to other self proteins. Marc Girardot has been expressing his serious concerns about the COVID-19 'vaccines' causing autoimmunity for a long time. I agree with him. We really need our health regulators to take his concerns just as seriously.
Wouldn't this be a problem no matter which cells ingest the LNP's &/or express spike proteins - Immune cells will kill any cell expressing spike, and at least some % will be 'messy' where there's inflammation & cell contents spill out (or any inflammatory or aggressive immune activation even not mediated by spike protein expression)?
Also, I have been going through the case reports (currently sitting on a compilation of about 1,700 or so), I have noticed that there seem to be a bunch of reports of vax injuries reporting rhabdomyolysis, suggesting that this sort of cell destruction with leakage is happening, & that's even if the injection serum does remain at injection site (at least that was my layperson understanding).
One of my many concerns when they rolled out the shots… all of these new studies should have and would have been completed if the powers that be actually cared. Sadly they do not. Thank you for your interpretation of the study, great perspective.
So the children receiving this shot from 12 - 18 years old, starting puberty, how might this affect their development?? Or at the age of 5? Heck, what about the infants that have recieved this shot? Time will tell but I can't understand how any parent ignors the risks of the unknown.
Another call to a pharmacy -- same story about them damaging my kid... and not informing us of the risks (beyond a sore shoulder) EXCEPT that I am now finishing with I know you are not giving proper info to people who come in -- so what I am going to do is walk in there and have others I know walk in and ask what the side effects are... and RECORD the conversation.
So you better start informing people cuz if you don't we will have this on a recording and when kids or adults get damaged - we will come after you for not giving them proper information and we'll be seeking damages.
What I recommend is people actually go to pharmacies - ask for the side effects - record what they say -- then inform them that they MUST give proper information to EVERYONE otherwise we now have evidence that you did not disclose the risks -- and when the next kid/adult gets damaged... we come after you for damages.
You want an easy way to stop the carnage - I just gave it to you --- now take action.
I'd like the opinion of a lawyer on this. And keep in mind you can sue - but you may not win. However the other side has to go through the hassles of defending
Also end of the day this is not so much about winning in court - it is about using this strategy to inspire fear in the people injecting ... and forcing them to provide proper informed consent --- and not tell people 'we are only really seeing sore arms'
If they know they may be recorded --- they may be more forthcoming on what can go wrong.
Alternatively people can just continue marching around the block shouting 'Freedom!' That is working so well
Thank you, I will be saving this for future reference as I'm hearing of more couples facing infertility. I'm curious if the damage to the sperm is just mobility and count? Are we going to see more developmental delays or disabilities in babies of the mRNA vaccinated? Maybe not as obvious as Thalidomide, but more SIDS, cardiac, neurological, endocrine, etc. disorders. Which is why vaccine studies are supposed to be long term. This experimental mRNA on the world is heartbreaking.
Hi HeldFast. You make an excellent point. Only four parameters were assessed in this study. Two were clearly affected. A third almost reached statistical significance (only larger sample #s would definitively prove whether it is or is not affected). However, I am thinking the same thing. There is much more sperm biology that contributes to a child. A study of limited scope like this simply serves as proof-of-principle of harm; the true extent of the harm is yet to be defined.
I admit that I am not at all a data-analysis guru. However, the allegation that sperm counts and motility return to baseline by T3 seems a little suspect, based on the data in the table 2 on page 14.
Sperm concentration is still -15.9% (range -30% to 1.7%) and motility is -4.1 (range -8.2 to 0.1). Total motility count is -19.4% (range -35% to 0.6%).
To my admittedly simple mind, these numbers are not exactly reassuring. There is a whole lot of negativity there. What if you are one of the guys with a 30% reduction in sperm concentration? That’s hardly “back to normal.”
The authors state that the T3 reductions are “statistically insignificant.” Yeah, well they tested only 36 guys, right. Maybe if they check 360, they would find some statistically significant information. After all, it’s just the future of folks’ abilities to father children that we are talking about. Seems kind of important to follow up on.
Hi Copernicus. Thanks for raising this important observation. I agree 100%. As per an earlier comment, the variability of the data at the latter timepoint suggests that more than a few men still had obvious damage at 6 months post-inoculation. ...and more #s in the study might have tipped the balance in favour of statistical significance. Note that the p-value for one was just a hair over 0.05, with 0.05 defined as the cut-off for significance (which is the legitimate cut-off that is usually used).
What about the issue of using median vs average and the possibility that some % of men never recover sperm count and motility even if they never boost?
Hi Stanley. You are correct. In this study, the authors did not provide the raw data. However, the variability at the latest timepoint (~6 months) suggests there were at least several men whose sperm counts and motility had not recovered by then.
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/urgent-the-covid-vaccine-paper-on?r=nv14&utm_medium=ios
Aye. See also https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/additional-take-on-the-israeli-sperm which has some nice diagrams and an easy to follow explanation of the appropriate use of median vs mean.
You'd almost be tempted to think they were trying to trick us into creating fewer human lives. But surely not! I mean, there was that thing in India where Bill Gates has been denied entry because of something peddled over there that sterilized thousands of girls. And the tetenus shots in Africa that made women unable to carry a pregnancy because it took out HCG. But those were mistakes, right? Didn't the Gates Foundation and the Pharmaceutical companies say they were very sorry and promise never to do it again?
People can demand integrity and informed consent, but that does not guarantee that they will get it. Common sense shows the process was rushed and long term effects were not known. Anything after that, is just a gamble.
Therefore, my biggest takeaway is when you state, "You must take responsibility for your own health and that of your family." Being too busy, or not being able to think about it right now because it's too stressful, might be okay for one day, but to use that reasoning over and over again, is not being responsible.
You are the only one who is going to live within your own body for the rest of your life, and people cannot assume that someone is looking at their best interest, or will take care of you or compensate you if something goes wrong; both history and current events show, this isn't happening.
I simply refuse to take advice from anyone attempting to eliminate extremely low risk by taking on completely unknown risk.
Only a fool, or someone with with ill intent would advise such a course of action.
Now THIS is the kind of dispassionate, fact-based disclosure of what is happening that should resonate with those who are open to discussion.
For those who aren’t, many of us will wait patiently until you too start to question the “safe and effective” narrative.
Bravo Dr. Bridle!!
We all know how angry & frustrating it is to see crimes that others don’t see. And it’s challenging to hold emotions in check, and simply remember the old adage about attracting bees with honey not vinegar.
Another great, well-written article. Thanks Dr. B!
Over the years, I've seen a lot of people go into doctors feeling confident, but they they get razzle dazzled by fancy words, and shamed for not doing what they are told. And they crumble. Unless you are talking to HR at your employer, you don't need to give any reasons whatsoever for why you don't want the shot, or why you aren't getting it for your kid. Just say "No thank you." Say it calmly, and firmly. If they ask you more questions, just repeat yourself. "Oh, no thank you, but I'm happy to take home any supporting literature to that I can discuss with my family."
Keep in mind, they are probably going to put some ICM code in your file to mark you as non-compliant, which is why you should seek a doctor that is supportive of informed consent and medical autonomy.
Hi Ali. One of my pet peeves is when professionals resort to using their specialized lingo to, as you say, razzle and dazzle people. Anybody can do that. For example, I have met hobbyists that enjoy something that I am not familiar with and I cannot understand what exactly it is that they do because they 'showcase' the full extent of the technical lingo. The true sign of someone having deep expertise in a subject is their ability to distill what is important into language that the average person can understand. There isn't a single topic in this world for which that cannot be done. Shame on the physicians who hide behind their technical verbiage. I have also seen this used as a strategy by expert witnesses in court; if the lawyer starts walking them into a corner because they have lied about the science or don't understand it, they resort to technical gibberish to throw the lawyer and court off the trail.
totally agree. The other thing most people don't understand is that public health and many of the science communication techniques are using psychology to change your behavior. Obviously there are good reasons to try to get people to change their behavior, but the problem comes in when you don't realize that this is what is happening, so you are making emotional decisions, not logical ones. So, just don't go in the room trying to win a battle, unless you are battle tested and ready. Two years in, you should know where you stand, and stand tall. No justifications needed. Save your energy for the big battle to come.
And thank you for your leadership during this time!
Absolutely, drop doctors that badger you to take these shots and find one who has a clue about their dangers. My doctor was pushy and annoyed that I wouldn't take his advice and get a shot. I won't go back to him. I fired him as my doctor.
I agree but that goes for any doctor pushing any vaccine, any medication and any treatment. Ask questions, research and advocate for yourself. Ali is correct that you don't have to explain yourself other than stating No Thank you.
I always prefer - "Thank you, but not yet. I'll wait until the results of the human experiments come in."
I try to be careful in a disagreement with my doctor because a discussion can lead past my medical knowledge and then I can be made to look ignorant.
That is wise. This is exactly what I see and hear often, and the impetus for my comment. Just because they know more medical knowledge in general doesn't mean that they are right about this situation in particular. It's best to not engage, and just say "No thank you" unless you've found a wonderful supportive doctor that does collaborative decision making, rather than dictating to you. Wishing you the best of health!
Likewise.
I once said yes and meant no. I didn’t turn up for the bioweapon. I “forgot”.
Thank you Dr. Bridle. I had a thought, what about the young boys who are going through puberty or younger? How could this affect their reproductive growth? This can't be good news.
Hi Sylwia. I agree 100%. There is no way that this technology should be used in boys until a lot more research has been done. This is precisely why at least 10-15 years of clinical studies are needed to address all the relevant questions. One of the greatest facades were the public declarations that cutting the clinical research process to less than one year would not compromise our scientific understanding of the safety of these inoculations.
Excellent, clear and well-written explanation of this study. I too am curious about the quality of the sperm. Will the "vaccines" cause damage to the sperm and future progeny? What about the ovaries and the quality of the eggs? I too don't understand why people aren't questioning the past 2 years. Where is your line in the sand? As a former RN, my line was locking down healthy people. We were taught to quarantine people who had symptoms and were sick. I knew something was wrong then. You are right that you see very clearly what is happening once you form that boundary. A very important point of your article is that each person must take responsibility for their health and the health of their children. In Canada we rely heavily on doctors and medications to fix us instead of taking care of ourselves and each other.
Hi Vivian. You raise excellent questions. Questions that deserve to be addressed using the scientific method in the form of well-designed research studies that culminate with transparent dissemination of the results to the public.
Thank you. Yes! The public deserves transparency on all health care treatments. The Canadian Blood Tragedy came to my mind when all this began. I am especially disappointed and angry yet not surprised by the lack of ethics and care for others by the majority of the medical community. I applaud you speaking up. It is a very courageous act and thank goodness for you and other scientists, doctors and nurses who have spoken up. I don't know where we would be without all of you.
Hi Byram,
I mentioned that risk a few weeks ago here:
https://covidmythbuster.substack.com/p/can-vaccines-be-dangerous-to-pregnant
If a bolus of LNPs storm the Blood-testis or the blood-epididymal barrier, immune cells will destroy them and permeability of the endothelium will let Tcells in. Likely that sperm cell express hTERT and get attacked.
My 2 cents. Best. Marc
Marc, your article is excellent! I like your proposed mechanisms of harm. They certainly make scientific sense. Your rationale is very solid. As such, your hypothesis deserves to be put to the test. I wish that you worked as a regulator for Health Canada. We need regulators who will think about underlying mechanisms, ask the hard questions, and demand transparent answers from the manufacturers.
Thanks Byram.
Have you read the one on the BBB? Mike Levitt liked it a lot also.
https://covidmythbuster.substack.com/p/poking-holes-in-the-brain-blood-barrier
Scary stuff...but groundbreaking.
There's a recent article tying the Pfizer vaccine to Pericarditis and increase vascular permeability in the heart: " Pericarditis with Increased Vascular Permeability after
COVID-19 Vaccination" by Aikawa et al
https://doi.org/10.2169/internalmedicine.9407-22
And the bolus dynamics requires no validation that's exactly how drugs are delivered to organs...
can this cause auto-antibodies to sperm?
Hi Ali. Yes, potentially. There are multiple potential mechanisms that could lead to this. Remember, the mRNA vaccines are designed to get cells to manufacture and express the spike protein on their surface. If the lipid nanoparticle deliver vehicles get into any of the cells responsible for the production of sperm, or the spermatozoa themselves, these cells would become targets for autoimmune attack by the spike-specific antibodies and T cells that the 'vaccines' induce. Such a response would kill self-cells, leading to the release of other self-derived proteins in the context of inflammation. This is a recipe for potential spreading of autoimmune responses to other self proteins. Marc Girardot has been expressing his serious concerns about the COVID-19 'vaccines' causing autoimmunity for a long time. I agree with him. We really need our health regulators to take his concerns just as seriously.
Wouldn't this be a problem no matter which cells ingest the LNP's &/or express spike proteins - Immune cells will kill any cell expressing spike, and at least some % will be 'messy' where there's inflammation & cell contents spill out (or any inflammatory or aggressive immune activation even not mediated by spike protein expression)?
Also, I have been going through the case reports (currently sitting on a compilation of about 1,700 or so), I have noticed that there seem to be a bunch of reports of vax injuries reporting rhabdomyolysis, suggesting that this sort of cell destruction with leakage is happening, & that's even if the injection serum does remain at injection site (at least that was my layperson understanding).
One of my many concerns when they rolled out the shots… all of these new studies should have and would have been completed if the powers that be actually cared. Sadly they do not. Thank you for your interpretation of the study, great perspective.
Hi Todd, I couldn't agree more.
So the children receiving this shot from 12 - 18 years old, starting puberty, how might this affect their development?? Or at the age of 5? Heck, what about the infants that have recieved this shot? Time will tell but I can't understand how any parent ignors the risks of the unknown.
Perhaps society has now "solved" the teen pregnancy problem, at least among the injected...
That's a terrifying thought. But then again, maybe the rational, critical thinking genes will dominate throughout the world! Muahhahah 😄😉
thanks for all you do
Thank you for keeping us updated in this ongoing issue and for new information as it becomes available.
Another call to a pharmacy -- same story about them damaging my kid... and not informing us of the risks (beyond a sore shoulder) EXCEPT that I am now finishing with I know you are not giving proper info to people who come in -- so what I am going to do is walk in there and have others I know walk in and ask what the side effects are... and RECORD the conversation.
So you better start informing people cuz if you don't we will have this on a recording and when kids or adults get damaged - we will come after you for not giving them proper information and we'll be seeking damages.
What I recommend is people actually go to pharmacies - ask for the side effects - record what they say -- then inform them that they MUST give proper information to EVERYONE otherwise we now have evidence that you did not disclose the risks -- and when the next kid/adult gets damaged... we come after you for damages.
You want an easy way to stop the carnage - I just gave it to you --- now take action.
I forgot to mention ... I don't have any kids....
In the US you can't sue them unless you can prove fraud. It's undoubtedly the same in Canada.
I'd like the opinion of a lawyer on this. And keep in mind you can sue - but you may not win. However the other side has to go through the hassles of defending
Also end of the day this is not so much about winning in court - it is about using this strategy to inspire fear in the people injecting ... and forcing them to provide proper informed consent --- and not tell people 'we are only really seeing sore arms'
If they know they may be recorded --- they may be more forthcoming on what can go wrong.
Alternatively people can just continue marching around the block shouting 'Freedom!' That is working so well