Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, he was able to explain in great detail why and how the vaccine would cause anaphylaxis and blood clotting in certain people, both of which have since been confirmed and resulted in deaths; and he seems to understand the mechanism that could result in the inability to form a placenta, so I can't discount what he's saying just because snopes tells me to. Would you entrust your daughter's fertility to snopes? Who is even behind snopes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Michael Yeadon (scientist and former Pfizer VP), along with a coalition of other scientists, filed legal
petitions with the FDA and EMA (European equivalent) in December urging them not to approve the vaccines until further research was done w/r/t several issues. One of the issues was how the vaccine mechanism would adversely affect a woman's ability to form and maintain a placenta. He went into detail regarding the scientific basis for his concern. While I'm not a scientist, it seemed like sound reasoning to me, but obviously his warning was not heeded by either agency. He also warned about the anaphylaxis and blood clotting issues, so it seems like he knows enough to be taken seriously at least.
Hearing all of the accounts on this thread makes me think of Dr. Yeadon's concerns because menstruation is essentially the shedding of the uterine lining (a potential placenta). It would be interesting to find out the difference between the rate of miscarriages pre-Dec2020 vs post-Dec2020.

Antivaxer rubbish.

Yeadon's title was not "chief scientist of Pfizer," "chief scientific officer of Pfizer," or "vice president of Pfizer." The division he ran had nothing to do with vaccines or infectious disease and at the time of its closure in 2011, was focused on developing compounds that targeted asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Pregnant women are being vaccinated now. If this caused problems with the placenta, we would be hearing about it now. I haven't, have you?
And I'm not discounting the menstrual cycle effects. I've had 2 Pfizer shots, and my cycles have been a little off. But to claim effects on the placenta without actual evidence is a bit too far.

I'm not "claiming" anything. I'm saying there's a reasonable doubt, and I'm not going to risk my daughter's fertility until this trial period is over and we have more data. Just going by the anecdotes on this thread and the voluminous anecdotes in VAERS, I believe my hesitancy is justified and rational.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, he was able to explain in great detail why and how the vaccine would cause anaphylaxis and blood clotting in certain people, both of which have since been confirmed and resulted in deaths; and he seems to understand the mechanism that could result in the inability to form a placenta, so I can't discount what he's saying just because snopes tells me to. Would you entrust your daughter's fertility to snopes? Who is even behind snopes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Michael Yeadon (scientist and former Pfizer VP), along with a coalition of other scientists, filed legal
petitions with the FDA and EMA (European equivalent) in December urging them not to approve the vaccines until further research was done w/r/t several issues. One of the issues was how the vaccine mechanism would adversely affect a woman's ability to form and maintain a placenta. He went into detail regarding the scientific basis for his concern. While I'm not a scientist, it seemed like sound reasoning to me, but obviously his warning was not heeded by either agency. He also warned about the anaphylaxis and blood clotting issues, so it seems like he knows enough to be taken seriously at least.
Hearing all of the accounts on this thread makes me think of Dr. Yeadon's concerns because menstruation is essentially the shedding of the uterine lining (a potential placenta). It would be interesting to find out the difference between the rate of miscarriages pre-Dec2020 vs post-Dec2020.

Antivaxer rubbish.

Yeadon's title was not "chief scientist of Pfizer," "chief scientific officer of Pfizer," or "vice president of Pfizer." The division he ran had nothing to do with vaccines or infectious disease and at the time of its closure in 2011, was focused on developing compounds that targeted asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Pregnant women are being vaccinated now. If this caused problems with the placenta, we would be hearing about it now. I haven't, have you?
And I'm not discounting the menstrual cycle effects. I've had 2 Pfizer shots, and my cycles have been a little off. But to claim effects on the placenta without actual evidence is a bit too far.

I'm not "claiming" anything. I'm saying there's a reasonable doubt, and I'm not going to risk my daughter's fertility until this trial period is over and we have more data. Just going by the anecdotes on this thread and the voluminous anecdotes in VAERS, I believe my hesitancy is justified and rational.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, he was able to explain in great detail why and how the vaccine would cause anaphylaxis and blood clotting in certain people, both of which have since been confirmed and resulted in deaths; and he seems to understand the mechanism that could result in the inability to form a placenta, so I can't discount what he's saying just because snopes tells me to. Would you entrust your daughter's fertility to snopes? Who is even behind snopes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Michael Yeadon (scientist and former Pfizer VP), along with a coalition of other scientists, filed legal
petitions with the FDA and EMA (European equivalent) in December urging them not to approve the vaccines until further research was done w/r/t several issues. One of the issues was how the vaccine mechanism would adversely affect a woman's ability to form and maintain a placenta. He went into detail regarding the scientific basis for his concern. While I'm not a scientist, it seemed like sound reasoning to me, but obviously his warning was not heeded by either agency. He also warned about the anaphylaxis and blood clotting issues, so it seems like he knows enough to be taken seriously at least.
Hearing all of the accounts on this thread makes me think of Dr. Yeadon's concerns because menstruation is essentially the shedding of the uterine lining (a potential placenta). It would be interesting to find out the difference between the rate of miscarriages pre-Dec2020 vs post-Dec2020.

Antivaxer rubbish.

Yeadon's title was not "chief scientist of Pfizer," "chief scientific officer of Pfizer," or "vice president of Pfizer." The division he ran had nothing to do with vaccines or infectious disease and at the time of its closure in 2011, was focused on developing compounds that targeted asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

He also claimed that COVID would fizzle out last year and that we wouldn't see a second wave.

There is no link between blood clots and infertility at this point. Just wild speculation that one side effect must mean there are others.

Anonymous wrote:Well, he was able to explain in great detail why and how the vaccine would cause anaphylaxis and blood clotting in certain people, both of which have since been confirmed and resulted in deaths; and he seems to understand the mechanism that could result in the inability to form a placenta, so I can't discount what he's saying just because snopes tells me to. Would you entrust your daughter's fertility to snopes? Who is even behind snopes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Michael Yeadon (scientist and former Pfizer VP), along with a coalition of other scientists, filed legal
petitions with the FDA and EMA (European equivalent) in December urging them not to approve the vaccines until further research was done w/r/t several issues. One of the issues was how the vaccine mechanism would adversely affect a woman's ability to form and maintain a placenta. He went into detail regarding the scientific basis for his concern. While I'm not a scientist, it seemed like sound reasoning to me, but obviously his warning was not heeded by either agency. He also warned about the anaphylaxis and blood clotting issues, so it seems like he knows enough to be taken seriously at least.
Hearing all of the accounts on this thread makes me think of Dr. Yeadon's concerns because menstruation is essentially the shedding of the uterine lining (a potential placenta). It would be interesting to find out the difference between the rate of miscarriages pre-Dec2020 vs post-Dec2020.

Antivaxer rubbish.

Yeadon's title was not "chief scientist of Pfizer," "chief scientific officer of Pfizer," or "vice president of Pfizer." The division he ran had nothing to do with vaccines or infectious disease and at the time of its closure in 2011, was focused on developing compounds that targeted asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, he was able to explain in great detail why and how the vaccine would cause anaphylaxis and blood clotting in certain people, both of which have since been confirmed and resulted in deaths; and he seems to understand the mechanism that could result in the inability to form a placenta, so I can't discount what he's saying just because snopes tells me to. Would you entrust your daughter's fertility to snopes? Who is even behind snopes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Michael Yeadon (scientist and former Pfizer VP), along with a coalition of other scientists, filed legal
petitions with the FDA and EMA (European equivalent) in December urging them not to approve the vaccines until further research was done w/r/t several issues. One of the issues was how the vaccine mechanism would adversely affect a woman's ability to form and maintain a placenta. He went into detail regarding the scientific basis for his concern. While I'm not a scientist, it seemed like sound reasoning to me, but obviously his warning was not heeded by either agency. He also warned about the anaphylaxis and blood clotting issues, so it seems like he knows enough to be taken seriously at least.
Hearing all of the accounts on this thread makes me think of Dr. Yeadon's concerns because menstruation is essentially the shedding of the uterine lining (a potential placenta). It would be interesting to find out the difference between the rate of miscarriages pre-Dec2020 vs post-Dec2020.

Antivaxer rubbish.

Yeadon's title was not "chief scientist of Pfizer," "chief scientific officer of Pfizer," or "vice president of Pfizer." The division he ran had nothing to do with vaccines or infectious disease and at the time of its closure in 2011, was focused on developing compounds that targeted asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Pregnant women are being vaccinated now. If this caused problems with the placenta, we would be hearing about it now. I haven't, have you?
And I'm not discounting the menstrual cycle effects. I've had 2 Pfizer shots, and my cycles have been a little off. But to claim effects on the placenta without actual evidence is a bit too far.

Anonymous wrote:Well, he was able to explain in great detail why and how the vaccine would cause anaphylaxis and blood clotting in certain people, both of which have since been confirmed and resulted in deaths; and he seems to understand the mechanism that could result in the inability to form a placenta, so I can't discount what he's saying just because snopes tells me to. Would you entrust your daughter's fertility to snopes? Who is even behind snopes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Michael Yeadon (scientist and former Pfizer VP), along with a coalition of other scientists, filed legal
petitions with the FDA and EMA (European equivalent) in December urging them not to approve the vaccines until further research was done w/r/t several issues. One of the issues was how the vaccine mechanism would adversely affect a woman's ability to form and maintain a placenta. He went into detail regarding the scientific basis for his concern. While I'm not a scientist, it seemed like sound reasoning to me, but obviously his warning was not heeded by either agency. He also warned about the anaphylaxis and blood clotting issues, so it seems like he knows enough to be taken seriously at least.
Hearing all of the accounts on this thread makes me think of Dr. Yeadon's concerns because menstruation is essentially the shedding of the uterine lining (a potential placenta). It would be interesting to find out the difference between the rate of miscarriages pre-Dec2020 vs post-Dec2020.

Antivaxer rubbish.

Yeadon's title was not "chief scientist of Pfizer," "chief scientific officer of Pfizer," or "vice president of Pfizer." The division he ran had nothing to do with vaccines or infectious disease and at the time of its closure in 2011, was focused on developing compounds that targeted asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Michael Yeadon (scientist and former Pfizer VP), along with a coalition of other scientists, filed legal
petitions with the FDA and EMA (European equivalent) in December urging them not to approve the vaccines until further research was done w/r/t several issues. One of the issues was how the vaccine mechanism would adversely affect a woman's ability to form and maintain a placenta. He went into detail regarding the scientific basis for his concern. While I'm not a scientist, it seemed like sound reasoning to me, but obviously his warning was not heeded by either agency. He also warned about the anaphylaxis and blood clotting issues, so it seems like he knows enough to be taken seriously at least.
Hearing all of the accounts on this thread makes me think of Dr. Yeadon's concerns because menstruation is essentially the shedding of the uterine lining (a potential placenta). It would be interesting to find out the difference between the rate of miscarriages pre-Dec2020 vs post-Dec2020.

Antivaxer rubbish.

Yeadon's title was not "chief scientist of Pfizer," "chief scientific officer of Pfizer," or "vice president of Pfizer." The division he ran had nothing to do with vaccines or infectious disease and at the time of its closure in 2011, was focused on developing compounds that targeted asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Anonymous wrote:I'm not trying to scare anyone, and I'm not an anti-vaxxer. My family and I are up-to-date on all of our shots. My husband and I even got the pfizer covid vaccine. Why can't people talk about real, rational concerns about the vaccine without being ostracized? I feel like I'm living in the twilight zone. Also, how could you possibly know there's zero change in miscarriage rates?

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Michael Yeadon (scientist and former Pfizer VP), along with a coalition of other scientists, filed legal petitions with the FDA and EMA (European equivalent) in December urging them not to approve the vaccines until further research was done w/r/t several issues. One of the issues was how the vaccine mechanism would adversely affect a woman's ability to form and maintain a placenta. He went into detail regarding the scientific basis for his concern. While I'm not a scientist, it seemed like sound reasoning to me, but obviously his warning was not heeded by either agency. He also warned about the anaphylaxis and blood clotting issues, so it seems like he knows enough to be taken seriously at least.
Hearing all of the accounts on this thread makes me think of Dr. Yeadon's concerns because menstruation is essentially the shedding of the uterine lining (a potential placenta). It would be interesting to find out the difference between the rate of miscarriages pre-Dec2020 vs post-Dec2020.

Yeadon's title was not "chief scientist of Pfizer," "chief scientific officer of Pfizer," or "vice president of Pfizer." The division he ran had nothing to do with vaccines or infectious disease and at the time of its closure in 2011, was focused on developing compounds that targeted asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.