On The Contentious COVID-19 Vaccine Breast Milk Study
Yes, I decided to write about it. Bad news? Yes. Temporary? Maybe, but we don't exactly know.
A new peer-reviewed study in the journal JAMA finding traces of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine material in breast milk has created a social media thunderstorm. On one end is what seems to be utter silence—no comments from those who went on public television and urged everyone to get vaccinated. Among those who have been skeptical from the start, this study yet again proves we have a medical catastrophe on our hands with ominous implications.
Even when skeptics have been misled, discriminated against, and marginalized by those in power, it’s crucial to remain rational and clinical. It’s an admittedly difficult task given the understandable feelings of betrayal and exasperation.
The truth is, this study prompts far more questions than it answers. The design was far from comprehensive, leaving extraordinary uncertainty. For one, the sample in the study is incredibly small: a mere 11 women. Anyone with a basic understanding of statistics will know it’s nearly impossible to make definitive population-level extrapolations based on a handful of participants.
Nonetheless, that 5 out of 11 women were found to have trace amounts of mRNA in their breast milk for 48 hours post-vaccination raises serious concerns. If 1,000 or 10,000 women were studied, would they still find a large proportion of women with mRNA traces in their breast milk? Would the aggregate mRNA concentrations be higher or lower? Might there be a signal for sustained mRNA levels beyond 48 hours? The findings in a larger sample may be far worst. Or they may point in the opposite direction. We just don’t know.
As the authors state, this is the first study to find mRNA traces in breast milk:
“These data demonstrate for the first time to our knowledge the biodistribution of COVID-19 vaccine mRNA to mammary cells and the potential ability of tissue EVs [extracellular vesicles] to package the vaccine mRNA that can be transported to distant cells.”
It’s important to note, many harmful things can be excreted in breast milk: caffeine, drugs, alcohol, and medications. Mothers enduring postpartum depression can pass on the stress hormone cortisol through their breast milk to their infants. All this is to say, many harmful things are passed through breast milk. Traces of mRNA wouldn’t be the first. How harmful—if at all—mRNA is in comparison to other detrimental substances commonly passed through breast milk is a mystery.
I spoke to a top pediatrician in New York (who asked to remain anonymous) who has been on “team reality” from the start, and she guesses this news is likely harmless.
“We just don’t know. My gut feeling is that it is likely harmless after 48 hours. However, there’s very little evidence to help us definitively evaluate this risk. We certainly shouldn’t be mass-vaccinating breastfeeding women based on anybody’s hunches—mine included.”
On the other hand, other credible medical professionals have drawn more sinister conclusions. One such scientist is viral immunologist Dr. Byram W. Bridle from the University of Guelph. He infers this study underestimates mRNA levels due to temperature associations.
“[The authors] did not address the issue of mothers in these studies being asked to store their milk samples in their fridge freezers, which are at no more than -20 degrees Celsius. Remember, Pfizer’s ‘vaccine’ degrades if it isn’t stored at -80 degrees C. In other words, these authors likely underestimated the problem due to degradation of the mRNAs prior to them receiving the samples for analysis.”
The final conclusion of the study is a train-wreck of scientific messaging:
“We believe it is safe to breastfeed after maternal COVID-19 vaccination. However, caution is warranted about breastfeeding children younger than 6 months in the first 48 hours after maternal vaccination until more safety studies are conducted. In addition, the potential interference of COVID-19 vaccine mRNA with the immune response to multiple routine vaccines given to infants during the first 6 months of age needs to be considered. It is critical that lactating individuals be included in future vaccination trials to better evaluate the effect of mRNA vaccines on lactation outcomes.”
First, scientific conclusions cannot be derived from mere “belief” (there’s a different domain for this element of life). In the discussion of COVID-19 vaccines alone, how many times have scientists’ “beliefs” been derailed by reality (Fauci: vaccinated people will become “dead-ends” for the virus)? Jarringly, following the study authors’ stated devotion to vaccine safety, they warn the public of “potential interference” of mRNA in infants’ immune response to routine vaccines. This is quite alarming. The long-term implications are unknown, which ought to warrant a halt to a universal vaccine recommendation among breastfeeding women.
The initial vaccine trials were hardly rigorous enough to warrant universal recommendation in all groups. As has been widely documented, strong signals of myocarditis in men and menstrual irregularities in women weren’t captured in the initial vaccine trials. Now, compromised breast milk is the latest health implication that has been added to the list.
The question then becomes, why did the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommend COVID-19 vaccines to all breastfeeding women? Their updated recommendation this summer reads:
“COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for all people 6 months and older. This includes people who are pregnant, breastfeeding, trying to get pregnant now, or might become pregnant in the future. CDC also recommends COVID-19 vaccines for infants 6 months and older whose mother was vaccinated or had a COVID infection before or while pregnant.”
The agency didn’t just make this a simple recommendation. As author Justin Hart documented, they urged breastfeeding women several times on social media to get vaccinated.
Canada’s health authorities also made the same recommendation (pdf):
“On May 28, 2021, the committee updated its guidance to strongly recommend the use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant or breastfeeding populations, given the accumulated data on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in these groups and the emerging evidence at that time on risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the context of pregnancy.”
Yet again, we have discovered COVID-19 vaccine proponents made wildly speculative inferences based on limited preliminary data. Once a certain group of scientists at the forefront of media appeared to have formed a consensus on this matter, the mainstream press embraced their claims with little criticism.
Consider the Associated Press’s fact-check last year:
“Medical experts have said it is unlikely that the vaccine-related mRNA that is in Pfizer and Moderna shots can pass through to breast milk.”
Hopefully, mRNA traces in breast milk do indeed only remain within 48 hours after vaccination and are not toxic. Far more rigorous study ought to be conducted before we draw definitive conclusions. But one thing can be said for certain: Experimental products should not be universally recommended and mandated without a clear understanding of their safety and efficacy.
"[I]t’s crucial to remain rational and clinical... " Maybe you need to remain "rational and clinical" in order to maintain your standing and be listened to in a scientific and medical community that has become unmoored from any professional ethics and basic morality, and is showing itself corrupt at every level. The rest of us are completely free to express our dismay, grief and anger at the mounting carnage that no one in authority is showing the slightest inclination to recognize, much less stop or even slow.
In fact, the FDA continues to extend the harm further into the youngest ages and I understand there is talk about "vaccinating" the unborn. An open letter I drafted from the Medical Freedom Alliance to Commissioner Vasan demanding that the NYC Health Department remove patently false statements from their website pressuring parents to get their youngest children inoculated has gone unanswered, without even an attempt to justify the malfeasance and malpractice on display for all (https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vRS4zrON1wuaQvpVLIwH4GRsHznSqPEx1vaLE_jgqfPEtRagarqN2bcZ1fGD6E_eqoLa37j7e8VGQPm/pub).
"Anyone with a basic understanding of statistics will know it’s nearly impossible to make definitive population-level extrapolations based on a handful of participants." Uhm, yeah! And yet two years after this "vaccine" was rolled out and pregnant and nursing women not just advised but in many cases literally forced to take it as a requirement for their doctor and hospital to deliver their baby, this is the study we get--grotesquely underpowered with all the knowable and remediable flaws you mention!
Are the CDC and other government agencies, endowed as they are with vast sums of our tax money and the power and mandate to do so, funding the studies we need? Or are they instead giving grants to corrupt companies to create even more toxic forms of "viruses"? Rhetorical question! Why are the agencies who are supposed to protect the public seemingly (or quite obviously) working to harm and gaslight us?
Those speaking in terms of a "medical catastrophe" with "ominous implications" aren't expressing alarm solely on this study, their concerns are based on the reports of experts working with Naomi Wolf to sort through the Pfizer documents that the FDA tried to hide from the public for 75 years. There are the reports to VAERS that we know not only to be vastly underreported (by design) at the best of times, with evidence that the CDC is withholding, deleting and otherwise hiding the true number of reports, but which show unprecedented and tragic numbers of serious injuries and deaths, including miscarriages and stillbirths, illness and death of nursing infants. The CDC and FDA are ignoring these flashing signals from their pharmacovigilance system and refuse to say what stratospheric number will finally be recognized as a sign that something is wrong. There is the investigation in Scotland into the appalling number of young babies dying, the mounting evidence from across the world of births declining at alarming rates. There are the statistics leaked from the DoD database which they then tried to hide so clumsily and fraudulently.
I could go on and on with all the evidence that these so-called 'vaccines" are killing and maiming our fellow humans in appalling numbers, which might initially have been chalked up to Big Pharma's greed and incompetence, but at this point is hard not to see as an intentional democide given the almost universal refusal of those in authority to do anything other than push more and more people to take the poison.
By all means, maintain your rational and clinical objectivity, as hard as I suspect (and hope) it is for you to do so, but the rest of us will continue to cry more desperately and loudly into the wilderness in hopes of waking up the rest of us from the hypnotic trance they have allowed themselves to be put into by corrupt mass media, a corrupt medical establishment, and irresponsible practitioners.
I can't see a time when our collapsing medical system and scientific and academic institutions will ever be able to regain even a modicum of trust from the public. I know they have lost mine forever.
The “scientists and doctors” will always have beliefs that benefit their income. Big Pharmaceuticals throw their money around for a reason