Mary Voll: pediatric nurse has stillborn baby eight days after mRNA shot

TheCOVIDBlog.com
March 14, 2021 (updated April 5, 2021)

Mrs. Mary Pat Voll

UPDATED April 5, 2021 – Mary Voll has been cyberstalking our Editor-in-Chief since mid-March.

Just don’t understand why this woman will not move on in life. She has been stalking other websites owned by The COVID Blog Editor-in-Chief for over three weeks. She does it from four different IP addresses: 184.89.191.184, 174.227.14.64, 174.227.5.45 and 174.227.16.182.

Our analytics software has logged her every move, which has amounted to over 80 clicks and over 15 hours of browsing time. Though the traffic is appreciated, this amounts to cyberstalking from someone who is obviously not stable.

Florida’s cyberstalking law is enumerated at §784.048(d) Fla. Stat. We are forwarding the visitor logs to the Altamonte Springs Police Department.

UPDATED March 29, 2021 – Mary Voll playing with fire and the First Amendment

Our friends over at Health Impact News reported that Mary Voll attempted to get their website taken offline with a frivolous DMCA takedown complaint. They re-posted our story about the Voll’s on March 15. Health Impact News lost nine hours of web traffic after Amazon temporarily took their sites down. Mr. Brian Shilhavy, editor of Health Impact News, now has colorable claims for a potential lawsuit against the Voll’s for reporting a frivolous DMCA violation that caused economic loss.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held in 2015 that “parties must individually consider whether a work is a fair use before representing that the work is infringing in a takedown notice.” Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., 801 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir. 2015).

First, the Facebook screenshots are not copyrighted despite the Voll’s filing for a copyright on March 14. The process takes weeks and is highly unlikely to be successful because screenshots cannot be copyrighted. Second, the Voll’s deliberately and maliciously failed to consider fair use before requesting the DMCA takedown. Mr. Shilhavy, Health Impact News and the other websites on the network have prima facie causes of action against the Voll’s if they choose to pursue them.

We hope the Voll’s can find peace somehow. Frivolous DMCA takedowns are only going to lead to more turmoil for the family and land them in federal court. The feelings are understandable. But the First Amendment is inalienable.

UPDATED MARCH 28, 2021 – Voll’s apply to copyright screenshots

It appears Mary Voll and Jake Voll have filed some sort of copyright application for Facebook screenshots. The average copyright online application takes three months to process, thus there is still no “copyright” at this time. Despite the effort, and again, even if this long-shot application is approved, the Fair Use Doctrine, enumerated in the Copyright Act of 1976, as Pub. L. No. 94-553, 90 Stat. 2541, 17 U.S. Code § 107, applies to our article.

The screenshots in this article are “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, [and] is not an infringement of copyright.” Id. See the link in the subsequent update for more information. Further, the content contained in this article is screenshots from Facebook. A New York federal judge ruled in 2019 that screenshots of social media posts fall under the fair use doctrine.

“Even drawing all reasonable inferences in Plaintiff’s favor, it is evident…that Defendant’s use [of a screenshot] was fair as a matter of law. Defendant’s use was transformative, its use was reasonable in light of that end, the work was already published, and there is no plausible risk to any market for licensing of the original work. This is sufficient to make out an affirmative defense of fair use at the motion to dismiss stage.” Yang v. Mic Network, Inc., 405 F. Supp. 3d 537 – Dist. Court, SD New York 2019.

Any malicious, bad faith and/or frivolous attempts to disrupt our website in any way will result in litigation not only against Stone Eagle IP Holdings, but also those they represent.

 

UPDATE MARCH 17, 2021 – OUR EDITOR-IN-CHIEF WROTE AN EDITORIAL IN RESPONSE TO SOME OF THE THREATS AND HATE MAIL AS A RESULT OF THIS POST.

 

—ORIGINAL STORY—

 

ALTAMONTE SPRINGS, FLORIDA — We want to preface this article with the fact that we only publish these stories to bring awareness to the situation surrounding COVID-19 experimental shots. These stories are not meant to disrespect families or individuals. But social media posts are public, primary sources for journalists. The social media “vaccine photo phenomenon” is a trend in 2021. We have the responsibility to report. Now on to the story.

Mrs. Mary Pat Voll is a pediatric nurse in Altamonte Springs, Florida, according to her Facebook page. She posted a photo of herself holding a vaccine card, with the caption “pregnant and vaccinated” on February 22.

The fair use doctrine is enumerated in the Copyright Act of 1976, as Pub. L. No. 94-553, 90 Stat. 2541, 17 U.S. Code § 107. Our article and use of these screenshots are “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, [and] is not an infringement of copyright.”
She wrote that she considered all factual information and weeded out “conspiracy” before getting the first and second shots. Mrs. Voll was 21 weeks pregnant at the time. Her baby was stillborn eight days later, according to a subsequent Facebook post.

The fair use doctrine is enumerated in the Copyright Act of 1976, as Pub. L. No. 94-553, 90 Stat. 2541, 17 U.S. Code § 107. Our article and use of these screenshots are “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, [and] is not an infringement of copyright.”

Husband Jake Voll Facebook post

Mr. Jake Voll provided further information on the unfortunate event yesterday on Facebook. Jake said any relationship between the stillbirth and mRNA shots are “post hoc fallacy.”

The fair use doctrine is enumerated in the Copyright Act of 1976, as Pub. L. No. 94-553, 90 Stat. 2541, 17 U.S. Code § 107. Our article and use of these screenshots are “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, [and] is not an infringement of copyright.”
Little Ellie died from “a marginal cord insertion complicated by placenta previa resulting in fetal vascular malperfusion,” according to Mr. Voll. Marginal cord insertion is a pregnancy complication when the baby’s umbilical cord attaches itself to the wrong part of the placenta. Placenta previa is a further complication when the placenta partially or completely covers the cervix.

Photo of placenta previa via Mayoclinic.com

Fetal vascular malperfusion is yet another complication that obstructs blood flow to the fetus. Preterm birth, fetal mortality due to excessive bleeding, and stillbirths are some of the results of this condition. Emergency C-sections are required to potentially save the baby.

Syncytin-1 and pregnancy

Syncytin-1 is a protein essential to both placental development and function. Dr. Michael Yeadon is the former Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer of Pfizer. Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg is a German physician and epidemiologist. They filed a petition with the European Medicines Agency on December 1, 2020. It asked the agency to stay Phase III clinical trials of the Pfizer BNT162b mRNA shot and all other trials for experimental shots. The doctors said the study designs for said shots must be amended to conform with several requests that ensure integrity and safety.

The petition speaks about Syncytin-1 and pregnancy as one of the doctors’ primary concerns about the experimental shots.

Several vaccine candidates are expected to induce the formation of humoral antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. Syncytin-1…is responsible for the development of a placenta in mammals and humans and is therefore an essential prerequisite for a successful pregnancy, [and] is also found in homologous form in the spike proteins of SARS viruses. There is no indication whether antibodies against spike proteins of SARS viruses would also act like anti-Syncytin-1 antibodies. However, if this were to be the case this would then also prevent the formation of a placenta which would result in vaccinated women essentially becoming infertile. To my knowledge, Pfizer/BioNTech has yet to release any samples of written materials provided to patients, so it is unclear what, if any, information regarding (potential) fertility-specific risks caused by antibodies is included.

Read the full petition here. Dr. Yeadon and Dr. Wodarg were apparently on to something. Mrs. Voll gave no indication of health issues or pregnancy complications prior to the shots. She received the Pfizer or Moderna mRNA shot because those were the only two available in the USA at the time of her shot.

Pregnant and child-bearing women should not take these shots

Pfizer’s own fact sheet for emergency use authorization says that there is not enough evidence to advise pregnant and child-bearing women on getting the experimental mRNA shots.

Pfizer also says in its own clinical trial reports that women who are pregnant or wish to become pregnant should not take the shots (page 37-38: Exclusion Criteria). We covered the story of Dr. Sara Beltrán Ponce last month. She had a miscarriage days after receiving an mRNA shot.

There is no rational, intelligent reason for pregnant women or those wishing to become pregnant to take these shots. We hope Mr. and Mrs. Voll find peace somehow, someway. But at least their story may help someone else along the way.

 

Contact COVID Legal USA today if you’re facing mandatory vaccines for employment or fighting any other COVID mandates and restrictions. Follow us on Telegram.

 

Fight back against censorship. PLEASE SUPPORT US VIA PAYPAL.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
28 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Amy Sukwan
Amy Sukwan
2 months ago

My thoughts and prayers are to the Volls to find peace after this horrific loss. Post hoc fallacy is essentially saying that some babies are miscarried, so it was just bad luck. This is true. A way to find out if the vaccine is related to pregnancy outcomes would be to compare miscarriage and stillbirth rates of those vaccinated and those unvaccinated, a study which obviously hasn’t been done. The best that can be said is nobody knows. My personal observation is that many people can not accept that they willingly put something into their child that caused death or extreme injury. The emotional pain of such knowledge is too great to bear. But I do think this information should be out there so others can make their own choices. Regarding the Doctor’s concerns about placental formation, that is another thing. Many parents try for a rainbow baby shortly after the loss of a child. Will those vaccinated easily get pregnant again?

Sarah Jaquint
Sarah Jaquint
2 months ago
Reply to  Amy Sukwan

I agree with the first comment. This is all new and there are many unknowns. The facts should be reported so the public can make their own decisions. We can learn from these experiences.

John Smith
John Smith
2 months ago
Reply to  Amy Sukwan

Spot on. In my non-medical professional opinion, its hard for me to see how placenta previa and marginal cord insertion could have happened in the five days since her COVID jab. More than likely, these conditions predated the jab.

With that said, it is truly hard to understand the logic that would have a pregnant woman put a rushed to market vaccine with, in her own words, “limited data on … the vaccine in pregnancy” into her blood stream and that of her unborn child. Most women give up caffeine, alcohol, smoking, and any other substance which might have an impact on their unborn child during pregnancy.

Dr. John H
Dr. John H
2 months ago
Reply to  John Smith

It appears that she was 21 weeks pregnant, and miscarried 8 days after the 2nd shot which would be about 29 days after the 1st shot. If the damage began after the 1st shot, then it would have had about 29 days to manifest. Does anyone with knowledge in this area know if this type of vaccine induced damage could occur 29 days after the 1st vaccine?

SpecOps
SpecOps
2 months ago
Reply to  Dr. John H

This is the problem with 2 doses. Its almost like they want to ensure people can’t figure out if it was the first or the second.

Joy Lucette Garner
1 month ago
Reply to  Dr. John H

Exactly! And with the placenta, if something shocks it enough to limit or shut down its function, even VERY briefly, the baby would easily die. Normally, “placenta previa” is not a problem until labor, and both mother an baby will usually be fine with a c-section. “Placenta previa” just means that the placenta is “presenting 1st” at the birth, because it grew over the cervix, so this could be a very dangerous birth, (without help). But it’s not generally the reason for an earlier miscarriage.

Either the placenta was working and growing that baby, or it was not. In her case, the baby was growing just fine UNTIL the injections began. There is now a great deal of evidence that this new jab causes the human immune system to specifically target and ATTACK placental tissues, thus making women STERILE, because this effect is not limited to women who were pregnant when they got the shots. A non-pregnant woman can get this shot and later try to have a baby, but her body will now destroy the placenta tissue that she’s trying to grow for her baby. It will be one early miscarriage after another. Since the UN, (who is heavily involved in many population-reduction measures) and many other depopulationists are the ones pushing this jab the hardest, one has to wonder if this attack on fertility is an accident.

Dr I don’t want to be cancelled for this
Dr I don’t want to be cancelled for this
2 months ago
Reply to  John Smith

Medical doctor here:
placenta previa should not be an issue at 22 weeks gestational age because of normal placental migration (normal growth of placenta that should move away from the cervix by the third trimester). For these cases, we advise a follow up ultrasound at 32 weeks to ensure placental migration. (Previa is when the placenta covers the internal cervical os)— this should not be a problem until near birth. As for marginal cord insertion, same thing. The placenta grows throughout the pregnancy. We just follow it with ultrasounds over time to ensure adequate growth and then do c-Section if the previa etc does not resolve.

Basically anyone can have a previa or marginal cord insertion at 22 weeks- this can be a normal finding. Looks like a cover up to me.

Joy Lucette Garner
1 month ago
Reply to  John Smith

Placenta previa is NOT generally a problem UNTIL the actual labor. When it comes to MAINTENANCE of the placenta, if ANYTHING cuts off it’s function, even VERY briefly, the baby would die. It is certainly NOT beyond reason to consider the possibility the injection caused a shock that shut down the functioning of the placenta long enough to kill the baby. I honestly believe they came up with a diagnosis that they thought would run cover, to hide the real cause of this baby’s death. The ONLY “scientific” method of study OUTCOMES is to have a group of pregnant women who did NOT get exposed, and compare those outcomes to pregnant women who WERE exposed. But they will NEVER do this, because the TRUE scientific method would instantly expose the TRUTH.

EVERY TIME someone dies shortly after the CV jab, they IMMEDIATLY state it was just a “coincidence”. But HOW could they know this UNLESS they compare outcomes in those who did NOT take the shots? They will NEVER apply the ACTUAL scientific method to ANY of their “studies”. When Oxford wrote a paper about deaths after injection, they stated that they didn’t notice any “concerning pattern” in the FACT that almost 80% of the reported deaths after injection, occurred within HOURS of the injections!!!! So what it boils down to at Oxford, is that THEY are not concerned by hundreds of thousands of Americans dying within HOURS of injection. Their conclusion was that since so many VACCINATED people die in these ways, there’s nothing to be concerned about. Of course they never cited anything to show what % of people who are NOT vaccinated die in these ways. But they call this “science”.

SpecOps
SpecOps
1 month ago

Well said. This is one big lab experiment, and they cleverly ensured that its the people who volunteered for this shot. In the eyes of the slave owners, they are indemnified because they believe they didn’t force although they presented a well-framed choice based on manufactured fears.

Unless people get wised up to the fact that the plantation owners see us as farm animals to be exploited, tested upon, and disposed of quickly as possible once their usefulness as workers for the wealth of their masters is used up (hence the use of vaccines at care homes), these people will never ever get what those who follow this blog understand at some level.

Redpill
Redpill
1 month ago
Reply to  John Smith

its hard for me to see how placenta previa and marginal cord insertion could have happened in the five days since her COVID jab. More than likely, these conditions predated the jab.

However think about how many ultrasounds women have now days when they are pregnant. It’s hard to believe that if these conditions were there before the shot-they would have shown up on ultrasound. She was in her second tri-mester and there are signs such as spotting or bleeding. Placenta previa can be detected in late first tri-mester. They sound surprised that there was a problem. IMHO eithet she had really poor prenatal care or they just don’t want to face the fact they made a choice that turned out bad.

catt49
catt49
2 months ago

After other publicized miscarriages after receiving vaccines, since 2009 and not just from receiving a COVID shot, this woman really did not do her due diligence.

karafree
karafree
1 month ago
Reply to  catt49

This case shows you how deep and disturbing the indoctrination is. Even though she tried to employ some logic and look into the risks, she still could not stop herself from taking it. It’s heartbreaking and at the same time it’s outrageous. It’s also strange to me that this couple would post a photo on a public forum of them holding their dead baby. Their loss should be our gain in understanding the levels of evil being perpetrated on us, but of course, what’s it going to take to wake up from this nightmare, even they apparently haven’t woken up.

Dr. John H
Dr. John H
2 months ago

Please post a link to the Pfizer Fact Sheet referenced above.

Also, a neat trick – when you want to go to a specific page in a PDF, add #page=38 (or whatever page you want) to the end of the url link.

Sue H
Sue H
16 days ago
Reply to  admin

Clicked on the link. Took me to a locked page that said, “access denied. Apparently, Pfizer doesn’t want anyone to see the information now.

Dr. John H
Dr. John H
2 months ago

If anyone can find it, I recall reading in the European Pfizer covid vaccine fact sheet for providers specifically saying pregnant women should not get the shot.

SpecOps
SpecOps
2 months ago

Look up on Highwire run by Del BigTree on the Coming Covid Catastrophe and Geert Vanden Bosch who is about as pro-vaccine as they come warning everyone not to take the vaccine while the pandemic is ongoing.

Daniel
Daniel
2 months ago
Reply to  SpecOps

Del Bigtree TV producer with no medical , Admitted to misrepresenting figures using VAERs, Harasses medical proffesionals and of course is one of the biggest albeist shitheads around, equates autistics to dogs and chimpanzees and wore the star of David and made out that AVers were equal to holocaust victims. One of his scams was to sell people bricks for $100 – $500 a piece to do his new driveway to his $2,000,000 complex, yet peoole sycked it up making him a profit on each brick of around $90 – $ $490.

SpecOps
SpecOps
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel

Fair enough. This is the last time I am posting any suggestions here, since I guess everyone’s a scammer to everyone.

Daniel
Daniel
2 months ago
Reply to  SpecOps

As for Geert he hasn’t a clue what he’s talking about and he isn’t pro vaccine.

https://www.deplatformdisease.com/blog/addressing-geert-vanden-bossches-claims

Miss Allaneous
Miss Allaneous
1 month ago
Reply to  Daniel

You should listen to him & others, research, see the evidence & form your own opinion, not just spew monopolized, privately-owned MSM’s expected, typical anti-Truth, PRO-VAX PROPAGANDA.

Joy Lucette Garner
1 month ago

Hi, I can tell you exactly what the true “background noise” of birth defects is for babies that were NOT exposed to any vaccines during the pregnancy. It’s 0.29%. So, when you exclude pregnancy vaccines as a possible cause, 0.29% is the rate of birth defects from all OTHER possible causes.

The citation and quote (in this article) as to the “background” birth defect rates is incredibly strange. It states “2% to 4% and 15% to 20%”. There is no CONTEXT for any of these numbers, which is my first clue it’s clearly an UNSCIENTIFIC statement, and has nothing VALID to back it up. In the USA 50% of all pregnancies are vaccinated, and the risk of being born with one or more birth defects is now over 6%.

When these vax-makers compare birth defect rates seen in a new vaccine, they’re comparing rates against a population that’s ALREADY over 50% pregnancy-vaxxed! They call THIS the “natural background”. But it’s NOT “natural” because so many women get vaccinated during pregnancy. Our study, (seen at: thecontrolgroup.org) is the 1st one to document the outcomes in a group of babies with ZERO exposure to pregnancy vaccines, AND compare these outcomes against babies with a 100% rate of pregnancy vaccine exposure. It is HORRIFYING. Without pregnancy vaccine exposure, the risk of any birth defects drops to 0.29%. WITH exposure to pregnancy vaccines, the risk of one or more defects, (in any ONE baby) is 6.12%. If you count the birth defects individually, the risk of being born with any ONE birth defect, goes up to over 14%! And many of these were SEVERE defects, including microcephaly, cerebral palsy, missing organs, and/or extra organs, (duplicates).

So they ways they’re hiding these facts right now, are: (1) They REFUSE to do a study of outcomes in a group with ZERO vaccine exposure during pregnancy, and (2) They use outcomes in babies that WERE exposed to vaccines during the pregnancy as a “baseline” for “comparison” of outcomes for a new vaccine they want to market to pregnant women. So in a lab, this would be the same as injecting over half of the “control” mice with the drug, and then using THESE outcomes as your “control” baseline. They ALWAYS lie about the “controls”. They NEVER use REAL controls to establish a baseline for ANYTHING that they’re pretending to study. Every single study they do is INTENTIONALLY RIGGED, just like our last election.

So the more pregnant women they inject, the more of the general population is suffering from birth defects, and the more easily they can hide behind a high “background” in order to blur the true damage caused by their products. They are hiding behind the fact that all of the injuries vaccines cause are so universal now, that they call it “natural background” noise, and use this to exonerate vaccines. It’s disgusting. These are crimes against humanity that must be punished.

cat anders
cat anders
1 month ago

Prayers to the Volls for their loss of their baby girl. I hope she is able to find some peace knowing through her loss, she has been able to warn other pregnant women that this shot is not safe to take while pregnant, especially because the majority of patients under the age of 45 have a near-100% recovery rate with a mild, runny nose from COVID-19 WITHOUT any treatment. Why would she gamble with her life and her baby’s? So sad and tragic.

Shelly
Shelly
1 month ago
Reply to  cat anders

The sad thing is, she DOES think the shot is safe!! Clearly she wouldn’t have gotten it if she didn’t. And her husband obviously does as well, that is clear from his post. So they will probably keep telling women to go ahead and get it, their baby’s death had nothing to do with the vax. It is mind-boggling, the cognitive dissonance these people display with respect to the vax and deaths!! As the MD who posted above stated, those two issues are generally not a problem and often will resolve as the pregnancy progresses. And if they don’t, it’s typically not a concern until much closer to birth. I agree with the cover-up assessment. My pregnant cousin got the vax too…I’m not sure exactly how far along she was, I think close to 14-16 weeks. Remains to be seen how she will do. She posted a bunch of crap from someone who calls herself “your local epidemiologist” on FB. This supposed “epidemiologist” posted specifically that vax-induced antibodies “will NOT attack the placenta”. As an FNP myself, this made me incredibly angry!! There is NO POSSIBLE WAY she can state that with 100% certainly, yet she did exactly that on her FB page!! And those who are not medical people, or who do not spend much time doing medical-type research are not going to know this! I’m seriously considering sending her a message because what she is doing is just unconscionable! Ugh. I will be praying for peace and comfort for the Volls….I sincerely hope the vax doesn’t hinder her chances for a future pregnancy.

Tammy
Tammy
1 month ago

If your placenta is all ready compromised and the makers of the vaccine don’t recommend pregnant women getting the vaccine because it can affect the placenta why would you get the vaccine?

Phyllis
Phyllis
1 month ago

One thing I noticed was that the mom stated she went through 49 hours of labor. If she had a previa, wouldn’t she have been at risk for hemorrhage?
I am truly sorry for their loss..all so tragic..

28
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x