Bill Gates: Reduce CO2 By Depopulating With Vaccines

msante

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I wonder why he spoke about this. We know about this project of world depopulation, but why the PTB want it to go public at this moment? Is it a way to test the public reaction (or no-reaction) ?

It seems certain that they are making public their intentions to control/reduce the world population and that they are possibly at the same time testing the public's reaction, but this exposure is not being made openly but mounted on a carefully constructed narrative so as not to provoke mass repudiation. To this end, instead of talking about mass sterilization by force and through deception (as they have actually done in their experiments in India and Africa) they talk about "family planning", instead of talking about the institution of abortion as an invitation to live life under hedonistic standards and without assuming any responsibility (what the pro-abortion campaigns have really been) they talk about "freedom of choice" and "saving the lives of those women who have abortions in the underground".... In other words, what they are doing is hiding behind a false discourse that abuses a humanitarian, altruistic and compassionate terminology, a real discourse that proposes truly perverse ideas.

As always, the best lies are so precisely because they have bits of truth in them. Are we overpopulated? Possibly. Would it be healthier and more harmonious if human beings did not reproduce like rabbits and there was a greater consciousness when building a family/community? Possibly. Is the abortion issue a discussion about personal freedom? Maybe... The point is that the people behind these campaigns/operations are not (as they like to present themselves) superior beings seeking the good of humanity, but rather are puppets following the script written by those who clearly do not have the best intentions for humanity.

The most worrying thing is that, apparently, this discourse is penetrating more and more into society and that every day there seem to be more and more people willing to accept this general idea that "the end justifies the means" and that this problem should be solved by these "philanthropists/patrons".
 

Human

The Living Force
A recent per-reviewed paper indicates that at least 81.9% (≥ 104/127) of pregnant women experienced spontaneous abortion following mRNA exposure before 20 weeks, and 92.3% (96/104) of spontaneous abortions occurred before 13 weeks’ gestation:


We had a discussion here about the same original article (Shimabukuro et al.) the above one was set to correct, and @Gaby helped to explain why above numbers could be misleading.

and
So it's another example of how those against the vaccine should look before they leap in order to not discredit themselves.


Among 827 participants who had a completed pregnancy, the pregnancy resulted in a live birth in 712 (86.1%), in a spontaneous abortion in 104 (12.6%), in stillbirth in 1 (0.1%), and in other outcomes (induced abortion and ectopic pregnancy) in 10 (1.2%). A total of 96 of 104 spontaneous abortions (92.3%) occurred before 13 weeks of gestation (Table 4), and 700 of 712 pregnancies that resulted in a live birth (98.3%) were among persons who received their first eligible vaccine dose in the third trimester. Adverse outcomes among 724 live-born infants — including 12 sets of multiple gestation — were preterm birth (60 of 636 among those vaccinated before 37 weeks [9.4%]), small size for gestational age (23 of 724 [3.2%]), and major congenital anomalies (16 of 724 [2.2%]); no neonatal deaths were reported at the time of interview. Among the participants with completed pregnancies who reported congenital anomalies, none had received Covid-19 vaccine in the first trimester or periconception period, and no specific pattern of congenital anomalies was observed. Calculated proportions of pregnancy and neonatal outcomes appeared similar to incidences published in the peer-reviewed literature (Table 4).

It might not be the most encouraging of studies, but still, no need to distort its results.

On the other hand, I couldn't find more recent article with more of the results presented than those in the original one, but checking on the main author and seeing who's he working for, I kinda suspect if and when we'll see the true complete results of his study. :-/

Dr Tom Shimabukuro
Vaccine Safety Team Lead, COVID-19 Vaccine Task Force
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

Dr Tom Shimabukuro is the deputy director of the Immunization Safety Office at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Georgia. He is currently serving as team lead for the Vaccine Safety Team in CDC’s COVID-19 Vaccine Task Force.
 

Gaby

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
We had a discussion here about the same original article (Shimabukuro et al.) the above one was set to correct, and @Gaby helped to explain why above numbers could be misleading.
Here's an update though:

 

Human

The Living Force
Here's an update though:


It's about the same article Pierre posted; data manipulation in the Shimabukuro et al. original article occurred with using overall number of at that point 'finished' pregnancies (827) as a denominator, when in fact 700 of them received their jab in 3rd trimester when miscarriage "wasn't possible" (had no idea about that :shock:):

However, our analysis proved that these numbers were extremely misleading due to the fact that of the 827 completed pregnancies, 700 / 86% of the women had received a dose of either the Pfizer or Moderna Covid-19 vaccine during the third trimester of pregnancy, meaning it was impossible for them to suffer a miscarriage due to the fact they can only occur prior to week 20 of a pregnancy.

Like you stated in the discussion before (link above), stating that jabs during 1st trimester of pregnancy lead to 80%+ miscarriages is also misleading because the denominator (127) again is not the correct one, as can be seen from Correction of the original article (emphasis added).

Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons (Original Article, N Engl J Med 2021;384:2273-2282). In the Results section of the Abstract (page 2273), the third sentence should have read, “Among 3958 participants enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry, 827 had a completed pregnancy, of which 115 (13.9%) were pregnancy losses and 712 (86.1%) were live births (mostly among participants vaccinated in the third trimester),” rather than “…of which 115 (13.9%) resulted in a pregnancy loss and 712 (86.1%) resulted in a live birth (mostly among participants with vaccination in the third trimester).” In the first paragraph of the Discussion section (page 2277), the parenthetical in the third sentence should have begun, “(i.e., preterm birth, small size, …,” rather than “(e.g., fetal loss, preterm birth, small size, ….” In Table 4 (page 2280), the double dagger symbol in the Spontaneous abortion row should have followed “Spontaneous abortion: <20 wk15-17.” The “Published Incidence” cell in the same row should have read “Not applicable,” rather than “10–26,” and the “V-safe Pregnancy Registry” cell should have read “104,” rather than “104/827 (12.6)‡.” In the table footnotes, the following content should have been appended to the double dagger footnote: “No denominator was available to calculate a risk estimate for spontaneous abortions, because at the time of this report, follow-up through 20 weeks was not yet available for 905 of the 1224 participants vaccinated within 30 days before the first day of the last menstrual period or in the first trimester. Furthermore, any risk estimate would need to account for gestational week–specific risk of spontaneous abortion.” The article is correct at NEJM.org.

Authors of the re-analysis paper state (emphasis added):
Using information from the article, we derived the periods of pregnancy in which women were first exposed to the vaccine, and hence approximate counts of women who were at risk of spontaneous abortion after receiving the mRNA product: those exposed before 20 weeks’ gestation. Live births occurred in 712 women (724 infants, including 12 multiples), with 700 (98.3%) first exposed to the vaccine in the third trimester, and only 12 women exposed before 26 weeks’ gestation. Although many more women in the study were vaccinated before 20 weeks, the outcomes of their pregnancies were largely not available and could not have resulted in a livebirth within the study timeframe. The available results of this cohort only captured outcomes in ~8% (96/1,132) and ~0.8% (14/1,714) of women in the first and second trimesters, respectively.
and also that they arrive to their numbers 81.9%-92.2% using only those data from the original study, which are very far from complete sample (as stated in the quote above):
The study indicates that at least 81.9% (≥104/127) experienced spontaneous abortion following mRNA exposure before 20 weeks, and
92.3% (96/104) of spontaneous abortions occurred before 13 weeks’ gestation (Table 4, footnotes).[4]
This is a very high proportion of pregnancy loss observed in those exposed to the mRNA vaccination before 20 weeks’ gestation, ranging
from 81.9–91.2% (n = 114–127)
, which is significantly different to baseline estimates from other studies (11.3%, n = 79,978 [6]; p < 0.001),
being 7- to 8-fold higher than expected (p < 0.001).

Both articles presented their 'findings' in a misleading way, IMO, so I concluded my previous post with:
On the other hand, I couldn't find more recent article with more of the results presented than those in the original one, but checking on the main author and seeing who's he working for, I kinda suspect if and when we'll see the true complete results of his study. :-/
 

gottathink

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Well, he could have been thinking of "new vaccines" (maybe a birth control vaccine??) to lower population growth and not specifically to lower the population that is already here. But knowing what we know about vaccines and Bill Gates' questionable activities, whatever either of them have to offer to the people can't be good.

Also it seems that increasing standards of health, as Gates says he wants to do, would only make people more fertile because being sick and malnourished only makes you less fertile, less able to carry to term, with higher rates of infant mortality.
I feel like Bill Gates is operating on para logic that he has been programmed with. It makes sense to him but it doesn’t make real sense. He thinks he is improving health but he is actually promoting the extermination of health.

As opposed to Bjorn Lomberg who has talked about reducing the population is best achieved by educating women and providing good childhood nutrition. This drops birth rates as more healthy children survive and become productive problem solving humans that live longer, and there are less of them. This makes sense.

It appears Bill Gates thinks he knows what he is talking about but he strikes me as an individual who does not have authentic thoughts, he is just using a prescribed lexicon. The man has bats in his bell tower.
 
Last edited:

dennis

Jedi Master
I cannot predict the final outcome of this puzzle but I have a bad feeling that, having progressed this far with the flying vaccinations, these people will not quit, and that means perpetual "vaccinations by insect" that contain whatever our would-be masters desire. I think we are doomed.

It may be time to look into essential oils as an aid to protection, as well as avoiding things that attract them.

 

dennis

Jedi Master
Entomology professor Walter Leal and postdoctoral researcher Zain Syed, UC Davis Department of Entomology, found that nonanal (pronounced "no-nan-al") is the powerful semiochemical that triggers the mosquitoes’ keen sense of smell, directing them toward a blood meal. A semiochemical is a chemical substance or mixture that carries a message.
“Nonanal is how they find us,” Leal said. “The antennae of the Culex quinquefasciatus are highly developed to detect even extremely low concentrations of nonanal.” Mosquitoes detect smells with the olfactory receptor neurons of their antennae.



Nonanal, also called nonanaldehyde, pelargonaldehyde or Aldehyde C-9, is an aldehyde. A colourless, oily liquid, nonanal is a component of perfumes. Although it occurs in several natural oils, it is produced commercially by hydroformylation of 1-octene.[2]

 

Benjamin

Dagobah Resident
RT:

Bill Gates discusses cooperation with Pakistan Army chief

Islamabad reiterates commitment to Gates’ public-health initiatives in second call this week

Apr. 30, 2022

The influential chief of the Pakistani Army, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, has held a phone conversation with billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates, reassuring him that Islamabad is committed to working with the Microsoft co-founder’s foundation on eradicating polio and other global health initiatives.

In a phone call that took place on Friday, Gates praised the Pakistan Army for “supporting the country's polio drive and ensuring proper reach and coverage,” while Bajwa said that “credit goes to all involved in the process,” according to a Saturday statement by the Inter-Services Public Relations.

Gates also commended Pakistan's efforts in battling the Covid-19 pandemic, as Bajwa again attributed it to a “true national response” by multiple agencies. The army chief applauded Gates' global health efforts, and reportedly assured the philanthropist of “continued cooperation.”

On Tuesday, the country’s newly elected prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, also had a phone conversation with the billionaire philanthropist, receiving reassurances that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) will continue supporting Pakistan’s government to help ensure that no child is at risk of being paralyzed by polio.

The country had gone more than a year without a single new polio case – a feat that Gates hailed after traveling to Islamabad to meet with Pakistan's then-Prime Minister Imran Khan in February – but in April officials confirmed two new infections in 15 months.

Pakistan’s parliament elected Sharif as prime minister last month, after Khan was ousted in a no-confidence motion. Khan had claimed that his cabinet was overthrown in a plot arranged by the US and that Pakistan was being handed over to an “imported government led by crooks.”

Pakistan has endured an uphill battle to inoculate children against polio, partly because of anti-vaccination conspiracies. Militants have targeted public-health workers, and the police protecting them, to disrupt vaccine drives. A female worker administering polio shots in northwestern Pakistan was shot and killed in March.
 

Ruth

The Living Force
It's about the same article Pierre posted; data manipulation in the Shimabukuro et al. original article occurred with using overall number of at that point 'finished' pregnancies (827) as a denominator, when in fact 700 of them received their jab in 3rd trimester when miscarriage "wasn't possible" (had no idea about that :shock:):
It looks like the terms are confusing. Apparently losing a baby up to 20 weeks is called a miscarriage. Once gestation passes 20 weeks it becomes a stillbirth. The baby is still lost. I sometimes wonder whether this information wasn't deliberately left as confusing to encourage more pregnant women to take the jab. It would be just like people pushing the jab to do that.
 
Top Bottom