reSee.it - Related Video Feed

For every 10,000 people given a mammogram, eight will die who wouldn't have from breast cancer. There is a 52% overdiagnosis rate with mammography, meaning many are treated unnecessarily. Safer options include ultrasound, which is definitive and radiation-free, and thermograms to detect metabolic activity. The speaker questions why annual mammograms are recommended, especially for those with dense breast tissue, as radiation from mammograms can cause cancer. A Cochrane review showed a zero net effectiveness rating for mammograms in node-positive cancers. The speaker suggests ultrasound and thermograms should be the standard.

After receiving trial documents, a Florida doctor noticed an 80% miscarriage rate in Pfizer recipients. Her practice delivers around 300 babies annually, with a 100% increase in miscarriages post-COVID vaccine rollout. She shared her data on doctor Jessica Rose's substack in 2022, highlighting the influence of big pharma on medical schools. This was discussed on American Thought Leaders with Janik Tellek.

This transcript centers on Erica Kirk’s family, focusing on her mother Loretta Fransby, who is also referred to as Mama Lowe. The speakers discuss her family and the public interest around Erica Kirk’s pregnancy. The conversation includes a claim that there has been a lot of talk about whether the woman in question has truly ever been pregnant, with one speaker asserting, “I’ve been pregnant five times. The first was a miscarriage, gave birth to four, so you bet your ass I zoomed in on that ultrasound screen.” The speaker notes a close-up of the ultrasound image and reveals that they conducted a deep dive into the stages of pregnancy, even though they had limited technology to zoom in on the original image. The speaker explains that based on the stomach size and what is visible, it would be safe to presume the ultrasound shown is a viability ultrasound, which determines if there is a heartbeat and can be performed as early as six weeks. They describe what a six-week ultrasound looks like versus an eight-week ultrasound, and mention that they wanted to compare those visuals to Erica Kirk’s ultrasound but could not zoom in on the provided image due to a lack of technology, describing the effort as a two-hour waste. The speaker adds that they learned at nine weeks babies hiccup—though hiccups do not produce sound. The discussion also touches on the significance of ultrasound appointments, noting that they are a big deal. They point out that Charlie is not seen in the video, though he could be behind the camera, and that the original audio was dubbed over, making it unclear whether there was any interaction. The speakers compare the situation to scenes often depicted in romantic comedies, where a partner’s absence from doctor appointments is a source of tension. The closing remark imagines Erica becoming angry if her partner, Charlie, misses an appointment, emphasizing “Those eyes!” as a reaction. In sum, the transcript covers: the family context around Erica Kirk and Loretta Fransby, public speculation about Erica’s pregnancy, a self-claimed deep dive into ultrasound timelines (six to nine weeks, including the fact that nine weeks can involve hiccups), the importance of ultrasound appointments, and the mystery surrounding Charlie’s presence in the video.

A CNN investigation reveals growing concern among scientists and government officials that ultrasound may not be entirely harmless and is potentially overused on pregnant women. They fear possible genetic damage to the fetus, potentially leading to cancer and subtle birth defects that might not appear for years. Geneticist Dr. Arthur Bloom notes early studies suggest diagnostic levels of ultrasound can damage human and rodent cells. Radiologist Dr. Doreen Rebiskind's research shows ultrasound exposure causes abnormal changes in cells, behaving similarly to cells damaged by X-rays. FDA officials admit they cannot definitively say diagnostic ultrasound during pregnancy is safe. An FDA study indicates that children exposed to ultrasound in utero have reduced birth weights. Experts suggest ultrasound should not be used for routine monitoring of low-risk pregnancies. Dr. Bloom estimates that over a million women receive unnecessary ultrasounds. There is concern that subjecting a female fetus to ultrasound near term could affect not only her cells but also all her eggs for the next generation. Ultrasound is used in scans, Doppler fetal monitors, and electronic fetal monitors. No controlled studies exist on the long-term effects of ultrasound on human development.

Speaker 0 asked how many of his patients or pregnant women he knows experienced miscarriages after receiving COVID-19 vaccines. Speaker 1 responded with observational data from his practice. He said that in fall of the previous year, about 60% of pregnant patients in his practice were vaccinated, which he noted is commensurate with Florida’s overall vaccination rate of about 60–65–70%. Most of his pregnant patients received three injections, with very few receiving four or more, and the majority received their injections in 2021 and early 2022. He referenced a Substack by Jessica Rose from November 2022 that presents his data pictorially, and noted that his data runs from January 2020 to November 2022. In 2020, he observed many newly registered obstetric patients (represented by blue bars for first-trimester new pregnancies). He stated there were the most deliveries, suggesting a lockdown-related effect. He then discussed miscarriage rates. He noted that standard textbooks and articles quote a normal miscarriage rate of 13–15%, but he has never seen that clinically. A 2020 study by Nairt et al. reported the actual first-trimester miscarriage rate as 5–6%, and he considers that even that to be somewhat high. He reported his own average miscarriage rate in 2020 as 4% month-to-month. He stated that his miscarriage rate from year to year increased: in 2021, the average month-to-month rate was 7–8%, with a peak in November that year, when a non-clinical staff member told him there had been eight miscarriages in a single month in a practice that delivers 20–25 patients, a “huge number.” In 2022, the average month-to-month rate rose to 15% (up to November). In December 2022, there were 41 newly registered patients, and 13 of them lost their babies, which is 25% for that month. In January and February 2023, the rate remained high, and only normalized around June, with a subsequent slight rise and fall by September. Regarding whether the miscarriages were associated with vaccination, he said it is hard to determine: he could tell that about 60% of his patients were vaccinated, but many new patients had not yet appeared in his practice, since he is the sole clinician who asks every patient about vaccination, brand, and timing, as well as prior COVID infection. He noted that asking a patient who miscarries if they received an injection could come across as accusatory, so obtaining complete data is challenging. He concluded with the observation that the information is difficult to ascertain precisely and that not wanting a patient to feel blamed complicates collecting definitive links between vaccination and miscarriage.

I have 43 years of experience in high-risk obstetrics, seeing a large number of patients yearly. Stillbirth rates have decreased from 10 to nearly 6 in my career. In 2021, stillbirth rates for fetuses are alarming, with a rate of 29.3, indicating a significant deviation. Instances of stillbirths and fetal abnormalities are on the rise, possibly linked to the inflammatory effects of vaccines. Safety monitoring systems have not identified increased risks for pregnant individuals receiving vaccines. Inflammation in pregnancy can lead to harm, as known for decades.

The speaker claims the Shimabukuro study published in the New England Journal of Medicine on 04/21/2021, misrepresented miscarriage rates, reporting 12.6% when raw data allegedly showed 82% in women vaccinated during the first trimester. The speaker alleges conflicts of interest and misrepresentations by CDC Director Rochelle Walensky and Journal Editor in Chief Eric Rubin in publications intended to coerce pregnant women into taking vaccines. The speaker asserts that subsequent studies claiming vaccine safety during pregnancy are compromised by biased funding, institutional mandates, and threats to medical licenses. Pharmaceutical companies allegedly paid $1,060,000,000 to reviewers at leading medical journals between 2020 and 2022, corrupting the peer review process. Safety signals were allegedly ignored in at least six studies from CDC, FDA, and Pfizer. The speaker states their team published a study on 02/08/2025, identifying 37 adverse pregnancy outcomes significantly associated with COVID-19 vaccines. They cite a study documenting the vaccine traversing the placenta and producing spike protein in the placenta and uterus, and animal studies revealing destruction of ovarian reserve. The speaker urges halting funding to organizations like ACOG and SMFM and ending promotional campaigns for mRNA therapies in pregnant women.

- The speaker notes dated 07/25/2022, reporting on developments related to baby deaths and baby funerals. They reference the UK government website, and specifically Northampton NHS in detail mentioning children's funerals, noting that contracts for this area have appeared that were previously unseen. They point to contractfinderservice.gov.uk and advise looking for “children's and babies' funerals.” They identify several awarded contracts, including one for Hertfordshire, another for Hertfordshire specifically for baby funerals, and contracts awarded for Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS, and Leicester Hospitals NHS. - The speaker mentions that the WNHS is another organization involved for those who do not want to have Mexican arranged funerals, stating that they will do that for you now. - A doctor in Australia, Dr. Luke McClinton, is described as leading the fertility services at the Mater Hospital and as a principal investigator for a series of randomized controlled trials. He is also described as the president of the Australian Institute for Restorative Reproductive Medicine and is labeled as “the top doctor in Australia in this field.” - The speaker asserts that Dr. Luke McClinton was sacked on Friday for not getting the jab and for attempting to release his data on miscarriages post-vaccination. They state that he has until the following Friday to exit his private practice rooms, as he is no longer allowed to practice in public or private settings. - The speaker claims that Dr. McClinton has been investigating miscarriages in couples post-vaccination and states that the “normal miscarriage rate” is between five and perhaps as high as sixteen percent. They then claim that since the introduction of the vaccine, he has found that seventy-four percent of women who are vaccinated are now having miscarriages. - The speaker reiterates the statistic: “Seventy four percent of women are having miscarriages who are vaccinated.” They suggest that this statistic would explain why hospitals allegedly want to deal directly with crematoria, with vans taking multiple babies directly to the crematorium, bypassing funeral directors. The speaker emphasizes that they had previously mentioned these points.

The speaker discusses the risks of pregnancy and not giving birth to the child. Pfizer provided important data, revealing that out of 29 specific members in their study, 28 women did not have children. 23 lost their babies within the first 20 weeks, while the remaining 5 experienced stillbirth or fetal death. Only one child survived out of the 29. The speaker also mentions the number of viral particles in the mRNA vaccines, which is 40 trillion. They express concern about the potential harm to the immune system and urge people to stop taking the vaccines.

According to the speaker, mammograms cause harm, killing eight people out of every 10,000 screened who would not have died from breast cancer otherwise. The speaker claims there is a 52% overdiagnosis rate with mammography, leading to unnecessary treatment. They suggest ultrasound, which they say is definitive and radiation-free, and thermography as safer alternatives. Thermography detects metabolic activity and blood flow, followed by ultrasound if needed. The speaker questions the yearly recommendation of mammograms, especially for women with dense breast tissue, because the radiation may cause cancer. They cite a Cochrane review indicating zero net effectiveness for mammogram screenings in node-positive cancers. The speaker recommends ultrasound and thermogram as the standard.

I have 43 years of experience in high-risk obstetrics, seeing a large number of patients yearly. Stillbirth rates have decreased from 10 to 5.8-6 per 1,000 live births. In 2021, the stillbirth rate for fetuses is alarming at 29.3 per 1,000. Reports from Waterloo, Canada show 83 stillbirths out of 4,000 deliveries, with 13 dead fetuses in a 24-hour period. Vaccines are linked to inflammatory effects causing fetal harm. Safety monitoring systems found no significant risks for pregnant women. Inflammation in pregnancy can lead to damage, injury, and death, a known fact for decades.

The speaker claims that women who received the vaccine in the first trimester had an 82% miscarriage rate. They state that this is the same miscarriage rate observed in the Pfizer 5.3.6 post-market analysis.

Diagnostic ultrasound may pose dangers, despite doctors claiming there is no proof. Experimental studies allegedly show ultrasound can damage a child's biochemistry and immune system, and delay central nervous system maturation. According to the Oxford Child Cancer Study, there is an excess incidence of leukemia in children born to mothers exposed to diagnostic ultrasound during pregnancy. Ultrasound has replaced X-rays, which were previously linked to leukemia. Doctors may expose mothers to ultrasound without their knowledge or consent in four instances: using a Doppler stethoscope to hear the baby's heartbeat (continuous wave ultrasound), during ultrasound scans to view the baby's organs (intermittent wave ultrasound), guiding needles during amniocentesis, and during fetal monitoring. Mothers are encouraged to research ultrasound dangers, referencing government publications like the HHS's "Ultrasound Overview."

Despite it being treated as an obligation to do so, physicians reportedly do not know these facts. The speaker expresses strong frustration about the situation. The speaker cites a famous medical journal, the New England Journal of Medicine, describing a study of vaccine researchers and stating that “the 12.6 percent user rate” was reported, and that the paper claimed there was no problem with the vaccine based on that figure. Using that paper as a basis, the San Fujikawa Society or a similarly named organization promoted vaccination for pregnant women. However, the actual content of the data is described as follows: of 827 people, 700 were in the late stage of pregnancy, and 127 were in the early stage (first trimester). For the subgroup limited to those under 20 weeks’ gestation, i.e., the 127 individuals, the reported miscarriage rate was 82 percent. From this, the speaker argues that the vaccine is dangerous, given the result for the early-stage group. It is claimed that the data were hidden or obscured, and that the later report combined the late-pregnancy group of 700 with the early-pregnancy group of 127 to produce a 12.6 percent miscarriage rate, which was then published. The speaker concludes that even a major medical journal could be influenced by external financial pressures, resulting in biased reporting that supports the other side’s interests.

The speaker discusses a New England Journal of Medicine study from April 21, 2021, and an accompanying op-ed by Eric Rubin, Stephen Morrissey, and Rochelle Walensky, alleging they made false and fear-mongering statements about the risks to pregnant women, unborn children, and newborns if they didn't get vaccinated. This was allegedly done despite evidence suggesting pregnancy reduced maternal mortality and data showing the COVID-19 vaccine was the deadliest and most injurious vaccine ever released. The speaker claims the study, authored by 21 federal employees including Tom Shimabukuro, was biased. Out of 827 pregnant women in the study, they highlight a claimed miscarriage rate of 12.6%, which they argue is abnormally high compared to the normal rate of 3% at a normal booking visit. They allege that 700 of the women received the vaccine in their third trimester, but were artificially placed in the first trimester data. This allegedly skewed the miscarriage rate for women vaccinated in the first trimester to 82%, which is the same miscarriage rate seen in the Pfizer post-market data.

Speaker 0 explains that even the obstetrics and gynecology association has reportedly pushed to vaccinate pregnant women as a duty, but doctors are the ones who do not know the facts. They reference a highly regarded medical journal, the New England Journal of Medicine, which published a study claiming a 12.6 percent user rate for the vaccine’s research results. Based on that paper, the 三 富 士 川 学 会 then attempted to vaccinate pregnant women. In reality, among the 827 individuals involved, 700 were in the postpartum period, 127 were in the antepartum period, and initial data were from that group. Specifically, for the group limited to those under twenty weeks (twenty weeks or less), which is 127 people, the miscarriage rate was 82 percent. Therefore, the argument is that, going forward, one can see how dangerous the vaccine is from those numbers. The speaker contends that data were hidden and later mixed into the 700-person postpartum group, yielding a miscarriage rate of 12.6 percent. Because of this, the claim is that even a leading medical journal has been influenced by money to publish such conclusions. Overall, the points presented are: - The obstetrics field is described as advocating vaccination of pregnant women as a duty, while physicians allegedly lack awareness of the underlying facts. - The NEJM published a study deemed to show a 12.6 percent user rate, which the speaker implies is problematic. - The 三 富 士 川 学 会 vaccinated pregnant women, but the data show that among 127 women under twenty weeks, the miscarriage rate was 82 percent. - The speaker asserts that this information was hidden and later combined with data from the 700 postpartum cases to produce a 12.6 percent miscarriage rate. - The implication is that even a top medical journal can be swayed by financial influence, resulting in biased reporting.

The speaker asserts the "golden rule of pregnancy" is to never use unproven drugs or vaccines, a rule they claim was broken during COVID. They allege that Pfizer's post-marketing analysis of approximately 29 pregnant mothers showed a 97% pregnancy loss. They claim real-world data from hospital systems indicates a 50% to 67% pregnancy loss rate when women are vaccinated during pregnancy, leading to obscene stillbirth numbers and early pregnancy losses. The speaker attributes these losses to the toxic spike protein from vaccines crossing the placenta and harming the fetus. They state that vaccinating pregnant women was a mistake based on lies and that it is now known to be unsafe, especially for mothers and their children.

There is growing concern that ultrasound may not be entirely harmless. Some studies suggest that diagnostic levels of ultrasound can cause genetic damage and abnormal cell behavior. While experts have no evidence of harm to human fetuses, they advise caution and limited use of ultrasound until more is known. The FDA has conducted research on ultrasound and found that it may lead to low birth weight in babies. However, some experts believe that warnings about ultrasound are unnecessary and may cause unnecessary fear. Overuse of ultrasound is also a concern, with more than 50% of pregnant women receiving it, even when not medically necessary. Until more is known, it is recommended to use ultrasound sparingly to avoid potential long-term genetic effects.

According to the speaker, now that people are getting the documents from the trials, the miscarriage rate was eighty percent in the Pfizer trials, and they knew that. Obstetrician and gynecologist Dr. Kimberly Biss observed disturbing trends in her patients after the COVID-19 genetic vaccines rolled out in 2021. She noticed her miscarriage rate from year to year had gone up by a hundred percent. She began tracking and comparing her data in real time and published her findings on doctor Jessica Rose's substack in 2022. The speaker also claims that a lot of medical schools, 50 to 60% of their money probably comes from big pharma.

New pregnant women often consider ultrasound scans, which use high-frequency sound waves to create images of the fetus. While doctors generally deem ultrasound safe, concerns are emerging about potential long-term risks, including genetic damage and low birth weight. Some studies suggest ultrasound may cause subtle birth defects and affect fetal development, although no overt malformations have been detected. Experts urge caution, noting that ultrasound is often overused, with many low-risk pregnancies receiving scans unnecessarily. The FDA acknowledges it cannot guarantee ultrasound safety, and ongoing research is needed to understand its effects on human fetuses. Overall, while ultrasound is a valuable tool, its routine use should be reconsidered until more is known about its long-term implications.

The speaker claims the pertussis vaccine, recommended for pregnant women and family members to protect newborns, does not prevent infection or transmission. They state the pertussis vaccine is combined with tetanus and diphtheria, and now pregnant women are also urged to get the COVID and RSV vaccines, and sometimes hepatitis B, bringing the total to seven. The speaker asserts that none of these vaccines have been tested for safety on pregnant women and their fetuses.

Experts, including the speaker, believe that the COVID-19 vaccine is safe for pregnant women based on extensive research. The vaccines have been proven safe and effective in the general population, without affecting fertility rates. They also provide protection against COVID-19 for pregnant women. The speaker, if pregnant, would definitely get vaccinated as the risks of the vaccine are much lower than the risks of the disease itself. Even children are eager to get vaccinated to regain their normal lives. However, another speaker raises concerns about fetal and chromosomal malformations, premature births, and respiratory issues after mRNA injections. They accuse pharmaceutical companies of hiding information about the deaths of two babies due to transplacental exposure to the vaccine. They call for attorney generals to investigate these claims. The Moderna documents are said to contain similar shocking information.

The speaker says that even for obstetrics and gynecology societies, vaccination during pregnancy has been pursued as a duty, but physicians do not know the actual facts. They reference the New England Journal of Medicine, a famous medical journal, where a study of a vaccine’s adverse outcomes claimed that the user rate was 12.6%. Based on that paper, the Sanpeshikawa (Sanbushikawa) Association reportedly promoted vaccination for pregnant women as well. In reality, the data were as follows: of 827 people, 700 were in late pregnancy, and 127 were in the early stages (first trimester). When restricting to the 127 people who were under 20 weeks, the usage rate was 82%. Therefore, the speaker argues that this data reveals how dangerous the vaccine is, and that the data were hidden and mixed with high-profile 700-person data to produce the 12.6% miscarriage rate that was published. This is presented as evidence of a situation where even in medical journals, information was handled to favor the other side due to money and other influences.

The speaker recounts a past abortion experience at Planned Parenthood where a doctor pressured her to take a pill. After taking a pill at the clinic and additional pills at home, she says she delivered a baby in the bathroom and witnessed its heart beating before it stopped. She claims the abortion didn't go as planned and that Planned Parenthood makes patients sign a waiver releasing them from liability in case of death. The speaker says she experienced months of bleeding and was told it was normal. She went to the hospital with a fever and purple urine, where doctors discovered the placenta had remained inside her body, causing an infection. She says the nurse told her she would have died if she hadn't sought immediate medical attention.

Pregnant women who received COVID-19 shots experienced concerning effects, according to maternal fetal medicine expert Dr. Against Thorpe. The shots quickly spread throughout the body, crossing barriers like the placenta and blood-brain barriers in both the mother and fetus. Compared to the flu vaccine, COVID-19 shots led to more adverse events in women of reproductive age. Data showed a 27-fold higher risk of miscarriage and over twice the risk of negative fetal outcomes across six categories. Additionally, birth rates in several European countries dropped significantly after widespread COVID-19 vaccination. As a result, researchers are urging the immediate suspension of COVID-19 vaccination for individuals of childbearing and reproductive age.