Fauci admits to 'the menstrual thing'

• Dr. Fauci (aka “the Science”) has now admitted that “the menstrual thing” is linked to the COVID shots
• He persists in asserting that the “thing” is temporary, despite huge and mounting evidence to the contrary
• Another conspiracy theory gone west! (that is to say, it’s not actually a conspiracy or a theory)
• Why now? Maybe because of a recent study that confirms women’s experiences?
• This study showed, among other things, that 66% of postmenopausal women had breakthrough bleeding following the shots
• The study failed to do a long-term follow-up without explaining why, even though the authors stressed that COVID infection can have long-term effects on menstrual function

“The menstrual thing is something that seems to be quite transient and temporary.” So said Dr. Anthony Fauci last week in conversation with Fox News. Indignant comments on the broadcast segment were quick to follow:

“How temporary? Mine are now so bad that I need a hysterectomy.”

“So, it is indeed a thing. Funny how I lost friends last year for posting about how the vaxx affect women’s menstruation.”

“My wife who has been regular as far as that goes all her whole adult life suddenly gets 2 periods a month and very high flow ever since her work forced her to get the jab. No doubt what caused it.”

“That is a big lie, I had a friend that had her period for six months straight. My other friend has her period for 10 to 20 days at a time. Both are at the heaviest they ever had.”

Why is Dr. Fauci admitting this now when previously, any association was rubbished and people who persisted in claiming otherwise suffered the consequences?

There is no evidence that any of the vaccines are causal factors in those who experience irregularities in their menstrual cycles after receiving any of the shots, nor is there any evidence that the vaccines cause fertility problems. The CDC has stated that currently available vaccines are safe for those who are pregnant or may become pregnant.  (Politifact, April 2022)

This was the universal mass-media response. As for the science, the most that was admitted was that it might be a good idea to investigate. (Good idea or not, that did not happen – and Fauci is now reiterating this most excellent advice.)

Responding to the thousands of reports to the MHRA (the UK equivalent of VAERS) regarding menstrual irregularities following the COVID shots, Dr. Peter English, a retired consultant in communicable disease control, insisted last year that, 

It is vanishingly unlikely that vaccination, including Covid-19 vaccination, would have this effect, and women should not be worried that vaccination might cause problems with their periods.

He reached this conclusion due to the fact that “period problems are extremely common, so over any chosen time-frame you would expect many women to experience such issues.” In other words, women who had issues prior to the shots suddenly decided to attribute them to the vaccine. 

Dr. Sue Ward, Vice President at the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, added that “psychological wellbeing” (presumably the lack of) could be responsible for what women were “anecdotally” experiencing, which could be due to “something as all-consuming and life-changing as a global pandemic.” (But weren’t the shots supposed to end the pandemic, reassuring their happy recipients?)

Dr. Pat O’Brien, Vice President at the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, tried to be reassuring. He echoed Dr. English suggesting that since menstrual irregularities were common, women experiencing such a “temporary change” which “coincide[d] by chance” with the vaccine might assume that there was a connection.

He added that, 

We also want to stress that these perceived changes in menstrual cycle after having the COVID-19 vaccine should not be confused with an impact on fertility and the ability to have children. There is no evidence to suggest that COVID-19 vaccines will affect fertility.

Considering that more-or-less regular menstrual cycles are commonly believed to be highly associated with fertility (and with women’s health in general), that was a brave statement from Dr. O’Brien.

Dr. Christine Northrup, a former fellow in the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, did not agree. She told The Epoch Times that, 

Unfortunately, the menstrual problems we are seeing are far from transient and temporary. Many women have been bleeding daily or having heavy, irregular, painful periods for an entire year. And some of these are well past menopause. Something is way off here. 

Back to our original question: What changed to cause Dr. Fauci to admit that a problem once denied actually does exist?

Could it be a study published in Science Advances just a few weeks ago, a study that demonstrated significant levels of menstrual irregularities following the shots, including startling levels of irregularity in post-menopausal women?

Finally, some research (with caveats)

It was not the most promising of introductions.

Given the vaccines’ overall established safety generally and in relation to fertility and pregnancy . . . we opted for an observational and retrospective study design of vaccinated people rather than a prospective design with a control or crossover group of unvaccinated individuals.

The main questions the researchers set out to answer were:

• What proportion of women were actually affected by menstrual bleeding irregularities after the COVID shot? and,
• What proportion of non-menstruating women had breakthrough bleeding after the shots?

Unfortunately, the study did not examine how long-lasting the changes to menstrual bleeding were, even though the authors stressed that COVID itself could cause long-lasting changes, citing “studies and anecdotal reports [which] are already demonstrating that menstrual function may be disrupted long term, particularly in those with long COVID."

Frontline News contacted the study’s lead author asking for an explanation of this omission; a reply has not yet been forthcoming.

The results

The study identified a clear pattern of menstrual irregularities following the COVID shots. The main findings were:

• 42 percent of women with regular cycles bled more heavily following the shots,
• 66 percent of post-menopausal women experienced breakthrough bleeding,
• 71 percent of non-menstruating pre-menopausal women on long-acting reversible contraceptives bled after the shots,
• Approximately 50 percent of women with conditions that alter menstrual bleeding experienced heavier bleeding after the shots,
• 39 percent of women taking hormones for “gender-affirming care” experienced breakthrough bleeding,
• It made little difference whether women received the Pfizer or the Moderna shot.

Conclusions

The study’s authors were not surprised at their findings, writing that they “align with other recent studies that show significant menstrual cycle responsiveness to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.”

Nor did they appear overly concerned at these findings, writing, “Generally, changes to menstrual bleeding are not uncommon or dangerous, yet attention to these experiences is necessary to build trust in medicine.”

All the same, as most people know, bleeding that resumes after menopause is always considered a sign of something having gone very awry.

The authors also went out of their way to stress that the vaccine manufacturers were not to blame for not realizing that menstrual issues were associated with their products, because,

Vaccine trial protocols do not typically monitor for major adverse events for more than 7 days, and additional follow-up communications do not inquire about menstrual cycles or bleeding. Therefore, manufacturers had no way of addressing the extent to which this observation was a coincidence or a potential side effect of the vaccines.

Concerns raised

Increased bleeding is often distressing, and this is especially true when it comes to breakthrough bleeding among formerly menstruating people [sic], for whom this symptom can be an early sign of cancer. When possible side effects to a medical treatment are not shared with the clinical or patient population, it may lead to unnecessary, painful, and expensive diagnostic procedures.

By contrast, breakthrough bleeding for gender-dysphoric women was described in far more alarming terms: “Unexpected bleeding has other major and even life-threatening consequences,” the study’s authors wrote, citing the risks of “psychological distress” and even “physical harm” for confused women who want to believe they are men and are startlingly reminded that they are not.

The authors also noted that “queries about changes in menstruation are still not a standard part of vaccine trials despite recent calls for more study.” Hard to believe that Dr. Fauci’s calls for more study are falling on deaf ears, but stranger things have happened.

Meanwhile, totally coincidentally

A new drug! Cause for celebration – for Pfizer and new partner Myovant, which have already netted several million dollars for MYFEMBREE, the “first and only once-daily oral treatment for the management of heavy menstrual bleeding. . .”

Myovant’s Myfembree was approved by the FDA to treat heavy bleeding associated with uterine fibroids back in May of 2021 not long after Pfizer paid Myovant $650 million to get in on the action. (Pfizer will owe Myovant another $100 million once the FDA approves the drug’s use for endometriosis.)

A note of caution: Myfembree has a “boxed warning” (the new term for “black box warning,” and the highest level of caution assigned by the FDA) that it could cause cardiovascular complications: “Myfembree may increase your chances of heart attack, stroke, or blood clots. . .”

Will desperate doctors scrambling to find drugs to treat the “thing” nonetheless prescribe Myfembree to their patients? Or will they quietly explain that while clots and shots have nothing to do with each other, better safe than sorry?