The latest drop of pages from the secret Pfizer documents reveals that the pharmaceutical giant is fully aware that its Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccine” will soon result in mass depopulation of the world.
The June 1 dump contains a document called “reissue_5.3.6 postmarketing experience.pdf,” page 12 of which includes disturbing data on getting Pfizer’s Fauci Flu injection during pregnancy and lactation.
It turns out that 90 percent of pregnant women who took the shot ended up losing their babies. This is a shocking figure that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) apparently did not think twice about when granting Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to the jab.
“Pfizer states in the document that by 28th February 2021 there were 270 known cases of exposure to the mRNA injection during pregnancy,” reports Exposé News. “Forty-six-percent of the mothers (124) exposed to the Pfizer Covid-19 injection suffered an adverse reaction.”
“Of those 124 mothers suffering an adverse reaction, 49 were considered non-serious adverse reactions, whereas 75 were considered serious. This means 58% of the mothers who reported suffering adverse reactions suffered a serious adverse event ranging from uterine contraction to foetal death.”
Of 270 tracked pregnancies, Pfizer lost track of 238 of them
The latest batch of released Pfizer documents also contains a concerning revelation about pregnancies of which the company somehow lost track. Of the 270 pregnancies Pfizer was tracking, a shocking 238 of them just disappeared from the dataset.
Of the 33 pregnancies that Pfizer still tracked, a shocking 23 of them resulted in spontaneous abortion. Two resulted in premature baby death; two resulted in intrauterine death; one resulted in neonatal death; one is listed as “outcome pending;” and only one resulted in a “normal outcome.”
What this means is that almost every pregnant woman who takes Pfizer’s mRNA (messenger RNA) injections for covid will lose her baby. Conversely, only a tiny fraction of fully jabbed women will successfully deliver to term.
Keep in mind that some governments, including that of the United Kingdom, had quietly dissuaded pregnant women from taking Pfizer’s injections – at least up until recently.
“There are no or limited amount of data from the use of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2,” reads a now-altered U.K. government guidance entitled “REG 174 INFORMATION FOR UK HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS.”
“COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 is not recommended during pregnancy. For women of childbearing age, pregnancy should be excluded before vaccination. In addition, women of childbearing age should be advised to avoid pregnancy for at least 2 months after their second dose.”
The new version of the same guidance claims that pregnant women can take Pfizer’s injections, but only “when the potential benefits outweigh any potential risks for the mother and foetus.”
As of this writing, the UK government guidance is recommending that pregnant women take the Pfizer shots just so long as they have evaluated the risks involved. At the same time, these same authorities continue to tell pregnant women to avoid soft cheese, herbal tea, and vitamin supplements because they could be dangerous.
All of this just goes to show once again that governments cannot be trusted. They routinely dispense advice in the form of guidance that, if followed, will probably lead to injury or death. This is true both for vaccines and the covid plandemic itself.
“Covid is a cult and ‘Stay Safe’ is a mantra,” wrote a regular commenter at Natural News. “I personally saw through the delusion in the same way most churches are tools for keeping God as far away as possible from your life.”
“I would rather have the virus than the lockdown and that is a fact.”
by: Ethan Huff
Join: 👉 https://t.me/acnewspatriots
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of AC.NEWS
Disclaimer: This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). AC.News will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article www.ac.news websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner. Reprinting this article: Non-commercial use OK. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Discussion about this post