Pfizer vaccine lowers sperm count, conspiracy theorists were right.
Posted on 30.6.2022 by Rav Arora
A new study published in the journal Andrology June 17 confirms another dark suspicion about Covid-19 vaccines: they harm male fertility. Specifically, the researchers found a drop in the number of sperm up to five months after the second dose of Pfizer’s mRNA Covid-19 vaccine.
Previously, any legitimate questions about the impact of the Covid-19 vaccination on fertility were dismissed by the perverse rhetoric of the “lack of evidence” (it is up to the defenders of a universally distributed medical product to prove that it is safe, and not the other way around). Then, a study has been publishedwhich obviously refuted concerns about male fertility.
“We now have evidence that should reassure you that the risk of vaccination compromising sperm count is extremely low”Dr. David Cohen, who specializes in reproductive medicine, told CNN.
“As vaccines contain mRNA and not the live virus, the vaccine is unlikely to affect sperm parameters”said study author Dr. Ranjith Ramasamy, director of the Reproductive Urology Training Program at the University of Miami.
After the publication of the study and the positive support from the scientific community, all concerns about male fertility were dismissed. Anyone who dared to question the study data or the longer-term effects was relegated to conspiracy theorist.
The study had an important limitation: the level of sperm would be examined for comparison only twice. The first time, before the first dose, and the second, 70 days after the second dose. What would happen after two months would remain a mystery, but a mystery not to be worried about, we were told.
The new study published in the journal Andrology went beyond 70 days and looked at the sperm counts of men who donated their sperm to three fertility clinics in Israel. The study had four phases: baseline control before vaccination, and short-term (15-45 days), intermediate (75-120 days), and long-term (>150 days) testing.
During the first phase (15-45 days), no significant changes in sperm concentration or motility were observed.
However, the interim evaluation (75-120 days) showed a temporary decrease of 15.4% in sperm concentration, which resulted in a reduction in total motile sperm count (TMC) of 22.1% compared to to the reference control before vaccination. The study authors concluded that the immune response induced by the Pfizer vaccine “is a reasonable cause for the transient drop in sperm concentration and TMC. »
This study is not without limitations. There was no control group of unvaccinated sperm donors to compare against. Also, only relative reduction rates were given, instead of absolute sperm counts. If the broader data paints an even bleaker picture, it is possible that it has been glossed over due to enormous public and institutional pressure to support unquestionably holy biotechnology (see the backlash to which Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg and his colleagues were confronted for publishing the studies on vaccinal myocarditis).
The biggest unanswered question in this study concerns the reproductive side effects associated with a booster shot. Study participants received a third dose, but data collection ended after the second injection. Moreover, these data relate only to the Pfizer vaccine. As we have seen for myocarditis, the Moderna vaccine has myocarditis rates several times higher (about 3-5 times) than the Pfizer vaccine. If the vaccine damage differential for myocarditis somehow matches the altered sperm count, that would be a medical disaster.
Vaccine fanatics have always dismissed concerns as ” conspiracy theory “. That vaccines are extremely ineffective at preventing transmission was once a conspiracy theory. The former journalist New York Times Alex Berenson was fired by Twitter for making this claim, and spreading others “fake news”.
Strong evidence showing that vaccines cause an unacceptable rate of myocarditis in men has also been bizarrely challenged, ignored and twisted (see Dr. Sanjay Gupta in the podcast The Joe Rogan Experience).
worry about “long term side effects”it was to speculate that the Earth is flat.
Vaccine advocates have made the grave mistake of assuming too confidently that the unknowns are entirely benign, and that any consideration to the contrary is blasphemous.
Science is not religious scripture – it is an ever-evolving process. With the new data, responsible scientists need to recognize this risk and weigh it against the potential benefits of vaccination (against serious illness and death). As a result, the propaganda campaign that “everyone from the age of 5 should get vaccinated” must be abandoned in favor of individual decision-making according to age.
A 30-year-old man looking to start a family may reasonably be deterred from getting vaccinated (or now getting a recall) given the new data; in contrast, a frail 75-year-old man with multiple co-morbidities would much rather be protected from the life-threatening consequences of Covid-19.
The question is whether public health authorities and top epidemiologists will re-evaluate their universal vaccination advice and honestly discuss the risks.
If not, we can say that “science is dead” with Nietzschean zeal.