swedish birthrate data: september update

Written by Joel Smalley on December 10, 2022. Posted in Current News

It seems having good quality data is not just an issue at my end of the analysis. El gato is struggling with good quality births data too.

Is it too much to ask for this data stratified by vax status? Yeah, of course it is. We wouldn’t want the truth to get in the way of the narrative, would we?

From El Galo Mato:

back in july i started tracking some worrying trends in swedish birth rates. this trend seems to be appearing all over the west/OECD but as i said then, sweden seemed a particularly good test subject because:

1. they provide good data
2. it goes back 25 years
3. they did not engage in much lockdown so that is not a confounding factor to the extent it is in most of the rest of the west
4. they had a high vaxx rate

there has been quite a lot of speculation about whether the covid vaccines are causing fertility issues and i have been, for some months, assessing two competing theories on the unprecedented drops in birth rate.

i summarized them in an update piece here and will use them verbatim (italic) because i think it’s important to make forward looking, testable hypotheses and them see how you do instead to trying to backfit ideas to data post facto.

this is the real test of a theory.

2 leading theories seem to have emerged:

1. this is the result of covid vaccine induced sterility/reduced fertility/sperm counts (as has been biologically documented in a number of places)
2. this is the result of a “summer shift” where the birth rates in 2021 deriving from a sort of “blackout baby” trend due to less travel and more staying home due to 2020 covid fears, lockdowns, and travel restrictions gave way to a “summer of re-opening” and everyone went on vacation instead of trying to get pregnant.

both fit pretty well temporally.

my hypotheses from july 9 (based on data thru may) was this:

unfortunately, it looks increasingly like the second option in the image above (rates staying low) is occurring and there is no amelioration in the birth trends. i have been trying very hard to resist this hypothesis because what it portends if it is correct is frankly appalling.

but, the data is the data and we must follow where it leads.

let’s take it from the top:

given the timing of both re-opening and the vaccine impulse, you’d expect this to manifest and intensify in Q1 2022 as the vaxx and “EU re-open” impulses turn 9 months old. as the young (key child bearing age) got vaxxed later, one would predict, if this were the cause, the big effect to hit in feb-apr of 2022.

as can be seen, birthrates plummeted and are down in excess of 11 percent from a year ago in september. (-11.7 percent) which is a new low and has kept the rate in this sort of new “low range.”

some of this might be attributable to a slightly high births figure in 2021 creating a difficult comp, but this is does not really appear to be a factor when one looks at past years vs this one in actual births per million. 2021 was not high. (you can see this in the LT data below as well)

as can be readily seen, 2022 is a wide divergence from the prior 3 years (the full extent of monthly data available) and that divergence has been widening.

it’s also apparent from this that births are highly seasonal and follow the same pattern year in, year out. the consistency of that pattern is both striking and useful as it allows us to extrapolate and compare this year to a longer timeframe to gain more perspective as a trailing 4 year comp is just not very much data.

the first 9 months of births in 2019, 20, 21 were 77.5, 77.6, and 77.4 percent of total year births respectively. this averages to 77.5 percent which i used to estimate full year 2022 from the 9 months so far. this estimate is red on the graphs to make clear that it is imputed, but given the high consistency of other data, i feel like this estimate is quite strong and unlikely to be off by much.

what we see is stark.

a drop of 8.2 percent for the year is more than 2X the magnitude of the largest drop in the last 25 years and that drop (-4 percent in 2011) was itself a huge outlier. we’re into ~4-5 std deviation territory here and this makes the possibility that this is random well under 1/10th of one percent as the spread is a pretty “normal” distribution.

this is a very loud, very significant signal.

something very, very unusual is going on and this reaction is FAR too large relative to 2021 to just be “a number of additional folks had babies in 2021 and so did not on 2022.” that number was pretty much nothing and as can be seen in the data below, even by recent standards, 2021 was not a high year for births.

and this has now gone on for a full 12 months post when “the great summer walkabout of 2021” took place and instead of getting better seems to be plumbing new lows.

this starts to point pretty hard at a biological effect, not a societal one. you’d be expecting to see a bump post walkabout, not a “pinned to the lows” outcome.

now, obviously, correlation is not causality no matter how closely it aligns. this is one of those maxims oft repeated and nearly as often ignored, so let us not do so here. the fact is that there is strong, a priori reason to suspect this effect.

firstly, we’ve seen hard data on sperm motility suppression from mRNA vaccines.

and deeply worrying in this is a mathematical divergence of median and mean (median normalized, mean remained suppressed) that implies that while some of this impulse is short lived, in a sub 50 percent subset it was durable. to account for the outcome ~1 in 5 would have needed to be durably sterilized (0 motility) or 2 in 5 would need 50 percent suppression. (full math work thru HERE)

that is a reason to suspect causality.

so too is widespread (and oddly swept under the rug by health agencies) disruption to female menstrual cycles by mRNA vaccines.

google search trends has become a far more powerful epidemiological and drug safety tool than many people realize.

this signal was “air horn at a zen retreat” loud.

it was clear enough that it was published in “nature”

NORWAY WARNED about it.

and yet health agencies (who would have lots of data that we do not and a far more granular look) seem (in unfortunate similarity to myocarditis claims) determined to suppress discussion of this topic.

even as their own databases flash red alerts

and country after country see this birth rate decline effect.

the “coincidence effect” seems to be truly endemic in the vaxxed world.

and at a certain point, this stunning silence and lack of curiosity on what is clearly a once in a generation if not a once in a century (barring wartime) effect on births becomes dispositive and begins to serve as indictment of, if not of culpability, then at least in complicity in covering up the issue.

this all fits in a pretty unpleasant manner. the timing fits, the effect size is huge, other compelling explanations are scarce, and we have a priori reason to suspect negative reproductive impact.

most worrying, this impact looks durable and the mechanism by which that would likely occur is auto-immune, a well known problem with mRNA based vaccines which do not teach immune systems to attack a pathogen but rather the recpient’s own cells by causing them to express proteins that look similar to infected cells.

if this goes too far, your immune system may wind up erroneously trained to see your own cells as foreign invaders and attack them relentlessly. there is no way to shut this miscalibration off once it starts and the affinity of mRNA jabs for testes, ovaries, kidneys, and heart have been documented.

as ever, we need to be a bit careful here and understand that this is not “gold standard” level data, but i fear that it is starting to get pretty compelling nonetheless.

as much as i dislike it, “vaccines induced fertility reduction” looks like the odds-on explanation at this point.

as i said in july:

this would be trivial for a country with health data like sweden or norway or denmark or israel to put to bed if they wanted to.

if this vaxx injury thesis is incorrect, then the best way to prove it is to release all the natality data by vaxx status and let us check it as it should be checked.

hell, i’ll volunteer and really would be dance in the streets overjoyed to find that this conculsion is incorrect because if it’s valid, we’ve just inflicted the most grievous health calamity the human race has ever experienced.

i cannot overstate how badly i want this not to be true to the point where even doing this research makes me unsettled, but if it is true, we need to know.

reality is not optional and even the hardest of truths are still truths and better polestars by which to plan that even the most pleasing of lies.

and so i renew the call to the governments and agencies that have the data needed to make this research definitive:

please release it and let’s get to the bottom of this.

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.