NEJM: Global Warming Causes Stillbirths, Birth Defects, Infant Heart problems

  • Reading time:17 mins read
You are currently viewing NEJM: Global Warming Causes Stillbirths, Birth Defects, Infant Heart problems

Finally, you can laugh a bit

by Igor Chudov

Okay, enough birth rate sadness, let’s lighten up a bit. We have a long road ahead of us, we cannot be sad all the time, so it is time to smile.

We have some climate change news.

Remember that a couple of days ago, I asked, why is the birth rate in Germany dropping? What is going on with a 23% drop in live births in Taiwan? Why are births dropping 10% in Switzerland this year? Why is the UKHSA vaccine surveillance report not reporting live births since February, for which it showed a 10% year-to-year drop in live births and nothing since?

Fortunately, science has the answer for us. These baby problems have a known cause. It is climate change. Here’s an amazing article. It came out just in time for the birth rate scandal, which is obviously just a coincidence.

This article refers to a study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, a prestigious bellwether of medical science and a guide to all doctors worldwide.

The article explains that global warming may cause many problems in developing and unborn children. “All children are at risk”, says the study. Some of these problems are very familiar to us, and I am glad that scientists finally could attribute them to global warming.

Let me list them, coming verbatim from the NEJM article:

The article, further, admonishes physicians to be aware of the new medical consensus:

Protection of children’s health requires that health professionals understand the multiple harms to children from climate change

So if parents ask their doctor, why are their children having heart problems, neurological issues, etc, the doctor would be able to cite the NEJM article and explain how those problems are caused by climate change.

One of the two co-authors of this global warming article, Kari Nadeau, is a well-published scientist who also published an interesting study explaining why vaccine-induced immunity is better than natural immunity. That study was, purely coincidentally, financed by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It also contradicts everything that we know from practical experience, of course. What else did you expect?


Financing of such authors by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, obviously, is nothing to worry about. I also wonder, how can Kari Nadeau be equally good at writing on matters of immune imprinting and vaccinology, as well as on totally unrelated matters of climate change? I am not sure.