Sometimes you’ll hear people say things like, “Don’t have sex with somebody if you’re not willing to raise a kid with them.” Perfectly valid, if I’m to be completely honest. You may not want to be on hormonal birth control due to its slew of moderately pesky to potentially severe side effects, you may both feel discomfort from or have allergic reactions to condoms, or you might not want to allow a man access to your body without a lifetime commitment.
Indeed, sex opens up the door to a host of complexities – whether that’s the potential for the woman to become pregnant or for either the man or the woman to pass along a sexually-transmitted infection (STI or STD). Thankfully, there are modern inventions that can protect you from contracting an STI (like condoms), but experts do admit that some of the best options are abstinence or choosing your partner more wisely.
So, by the same token, what if when having sex with a man who received the Covid-19 vaccine, you could also be exposing yourself to adverse vaccine reactions? You may not be vaccinated for any number of reasons, but even if you’re totally Covid jab-free, it turns out your man could pass some potential problems onto you.
Isn’t Vaccine Shedding Just a Conspiracy Theory?
Recently, new evidence emerged which suggests – but doesn’t necessarily prove – that aerosolized antibodies from mRNA Covid-19 vaccines can be transmitted from vaccinated to unvaccinated individuals. It’s called “passive immunization,” and at face value, it sounds like it could be a net positive, right? If someone has “immunity” and passes it along to you, then you’re that much more protected from the virus! But it’s not so simple.
Some critics, like podcaster Joe Rogan, have pointed out how the very nature of this “vaccine” likens it more to experimental gene therapy than your typical vaccine. It’s true, what we’re currently dealing with are mRNA vaccines, not live attenuated vaccines. The latter contains a weak form of the virus that is meant to cause an immune response upon injection and therefore provide future immunity.
Live vaccines can indeed shed from vaccinated to unvaccinated. This doesn’t discount the positive aspects of live vaccines, from protection against cholera to chickenpox, but it’s worth bringing up since some who are virulently pro-vaccine will shut down any opposition based on viral shedding. It can be a reality and shouldn’t be disregarded as a right-wing conspiracy theory. After all, many of the vaccine skeptics of the past were actually left-leaning, but I digress.
You may be asking how mRNA vaccines factor into the equation. As you may know, mRNA technology has been around for a long time. Messenger RNA is a molecule containing a recipe that directs cells to produce a protein. Encapsulated by a protective bubble made of lipid nanoparticles, it enters your cells, your cells read the recipe, and then an immune response is built. Essentially, mRNA technology rewrites the way your cells function so that you can inherently prevent disease through protein production.
The spike protein-based vaccines developed to fight against Covid-19 were fast-tracked despite potential stability issues or problems with that protective bubble. As such, studies have emerged suggesting that mRNA jabs can interact with and change DNA. For instance, we know that the Covid shot wasn’t developed to interact with the human liver, and yet in a Swedish study, researchers discovered that the vaccine was altering liver cells.
Then, in a Pfizer Japanese biodistribution study, news emerged that the spike proteins could travel from the injection site through your blood and accumulate in unintended tissues and organs like the spleen, adrenal glands, ovaries, bone marrow, and again, the liver.
Many vocal advocates for Covid-19 vaccines shut down discussions around myocarditis. But research emerged that mRNA vaccines can cause “markedly elevated levels of full-length spike protein” in blood, “unbounded by antibodies.” Indeed, it’s still rare, but rarity shouldn’t dismiss concerns. We also know now how the mRNA vaccine has been linked to menstrual irregularities and potential birth defects. Again, these are cell-altering technologies we’re talking about here.
Yes, mRNA Vaccines Can Be Transmitted from “Vaxxed” to “Un-Vaxxed”
With all of that in mind, let’s revisit passive immunization. The study conducted at the University of Colorado confirmed the phenomenon of Covid-19 vaccinated parents transmitting antibodies via respiratory droplets to their unvaccinated children.
Chief Scientific Officer at Children’s Health Defence Brian Hooker explained that this shedding can elicit autoimmunity and “all sorts of reactions” in the unvaccinated because of a similar “molecular mimicry between the COVID-19 Ig [immunoglobulin] antibodies and human proteins.”
What this means is that even the unvaccinated could be subjected to spike protein toxicity in their bloodstream or other bodily tissues if the proteins in the mRNA vaccine are transmitted via aerosols. This isn’t the first instance that viral shedding has been reported but then memory-holed by media.
A 2022 paper by French pharmacist and biologist Helene Banoun, who worked at the French Institute of Health and Medical Research, notes that Covid-19 vaccine mRNA can pass transplacental barriers and can be excreted through your bodily fluids like sweat, sputum, and breast milk. She raises the question that vaccine mRNA could be present in semen as well, though transmission that way hasn’t been studied yet.
What’s more, a confidential document from Pfizer, obtained through a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request actually suggested that unvaccinated people can be exposed to the contents of the jab via air or skin transmission. They even reference that a person could possibly have an adverse reaction, as though they had had the vaccine, from this exposure.
Indeed, shedding was described as a possibility during Pfizer’s clinical trial period. This could have been especially pertinent information for mothers, since they flagged “exposure” to the vaccine from “a male family member or healthcare provider who has been exposed to the study intervention by inhalation, or skin contact” should be reported during pregnancy or breastfeeding.
Some Anecdotes Submitted to VAERS May Shock You
Skeptics may dismiss anecdotal evidence, but reading submissions to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from unvaccinated individuals about their own experience after having sexual relations with vaccinated people should at least elicit some raised eyebrows.
Keep in mind that adverse events from immunizations and medications are severely under-reported to the FDA. Less than 1% of all adverse events to vaccines and less than 0.3% of all adverse events to drugs are reported and filed in VAERS.
“I am actually not the recipient of the Moderna vaccination. However, my husband was vaccinated, and I feel that I have had adverse affects since [sic],” wrote one 35-year-old woman from Ohio under the VAERS ID 17000309. “Shortly after him being vaccinated, my menstruations have been much longer than they were previously. My normal cycles are between 4-5 days. One month in particular my cycle lasted 9 days. I believe that was the longest one, but all the others since his vaccination have been longer than my normal. In addition, I have had spotting between my cycles and have had bleeding occur during sexual intercourse, which is not typical or normal for me.”
A 42-year-old woman from Maine (VAERS ID 1708052) wrote that two days after her husband got the Moderna vaccine, she had night sweats, body aches, and chills, and her period randomly started up again after it had just ended. Then, it lasted for a month. She asserted that a co-worker whose husband got the Johnson & Johnson shot experienced a similar issue.
“Wife described a putrid metallic odor coming from my body and had an allergic reaction after kissing me. She experienced numbness and tingling on her face and lips as well as hives on her face and neck that was treated with Benadryl,” wrote one vaccinated 37-year-old man from Washington under the VAERS ID 1101209. “These symptoms went away after a few hours, but she was unable to come in close proximity to me until the next day. Also experienced, soreness around injection site, body aches, fatigue, flushing of face, headache, light headedness. All of these symptoms subsided within approximately 36 hrs. after time of vaccination with plenty of rest [sic].”
We understand that it’s mechanically possible. We’re assured that it can be rare. We have access to anecdotal accounts and formally-submitted accounts in VAERS, but we do also know how under-reported adverse events are to begin with. So isn’t viral shedding at least worth bringing up so that we can promote further exploration and research in the medical industry?
In the quest to advance modern medicine, we shouldn’t shy away from tough topics just because they may go against preconceived biases. As is the case with women’s reproductive health issues, we do humanity a disservice by under-studying certain conditions and symptoms.
It can feel as though there’s a controlling force in both the media and the scientific community to silence the possibility of viral shedding from being questioned at all. The responsible thing to do would be to put politics aside and do a bit more due diligence on understanding how certain genetic therapies work before pushing them on the masses.
Support our cause and help women reclaim their femininity by subscribing today.