? 82% of pregnant women who took mRNA vaccine had miscarriage ?
(www.lifesitenews.com)
?️ STAT DEBATABLE LOL ?
Comments (148)
sorted by:
Morons won’t have a glass of wine while pregnant but have no problems injecting themselves with an untested experimental gene therapy drug.
^^^^My apologies, but this sounds like the script for a bad porn movie, or so I have been told.
This. The only explanation is these leftists wanted late term abortions.
Well... when you put it like that... I'll have another glass of wine.
My daughter is part of the 82%. She lost twins. Dr. said she had a blood clot between her uterus and the placenta and it ruptured. Her doctor said lots of twins miscarry...which I have no doubt is true. So they won't connect it to the vaxx. She's glad she had the vax and won't even consider that there is a connection....and she's not a crazy liberal....just an asleep Trump supporter.
My condolences on your family's loss.
Thank you so much!
So sorry for you loss. Here is some more information:
The antibody made to fight the spike protein also attacks Syncytin which your body makes to create and sustain the placenta. (Dr. Carrie Madej). The pregnancy cannot be sustained without the placenta that nourishes the fetus.
Now they are finding the spike proteins concentrating in the ovaries. May likely cause sterility. Also, the antibodies will still be there to attack future placentas. The earlier the pregnancy, the more chances of miscarriage. The 82% miscarriage is data that pertains to women who were < 20 weeks pregnant.
Also, the red blood cells normally are smooth, round and have a dimple in the middle. After the Covid jab, they become irregular, spikey and clump together causing blood clots. https://www.bitchute.com/video/bJukmmb7TMqz/
Thank you for this explanation. She has since become pregnant again and is due in September. Do you have any knowledge of the effects, if any of the vax on new borns? I know the mRNA hasn’t been around long enough to know the long term developmental implications. I pray every day for a healthy baby.
She could start using pine needle tea, vit d and c. There are a number of posts with protocols for the spike protein.
Do not recommend pine needle tea to pregnant women. Some species of pine like ponderosa pine (one of the most common pines in Colorado) are well known to cause abortions.
Most of the drugs that have a chance to fix spike protein issues like Ivermectin are contraindicated during pregnancy.
Unfortunately.
I also read dandelion tea would be helpful in combating vax effects
I’m surprised she conceived again. If her body continues to produce spike proteins I would not anticipate she can hold the baby to term. With the placenta rejection. Reports have been quite horrific.
Video: https://patriots.win/p/12j03rav4D/the-vaccine-is-dangerous-from-an/c/ 12:15 horrific miscarriage described. Bloody with brain spilt in half, mother vaccinated a month prior. Explains how people don’t report these to vaers because they were told it’s safe and can’t accept it not being safe as an option. Many adverse events in the clinical trials were “oddly delayed” Link to whole discussion: https://www.bitchute.com/video/TH2HAmTp40xq/
Prayers that won’t be the case for your families situation. That God might save you from such pains.
Frankly, I was surprised as well. She is 12 weeks til due date. Everything continues to look good with ultrasounds. I feel like I’m holding my breath until she arrives.
You could swim the ocean without taking a breath by the end your lungs would will be so strong. May you not hold your breath in vain
You're at the point where that's all you can do. There are a lot of promises in the Bible but many of them require certain behaviors from us.
I don't know of any concrete information yet. Time will tell....
I did read of a breastfeeding 5 months old infant that died after the mother received her second Covid jab.
Best of luck with everything.
She really should ask her doc why he approved of her getting the experimental drug while pregnant.
The college of obstetricians in my country came out with a specific recommendation that pregnant women should take it. Follow-up said half of those offered at pre-natal visits were saying yes.
WOW!
A lot of the medical community is now corrupt and working with the NWO.
Half declined is the headline.
Means half took it.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/half-of-pregnant-women-attending-maternity-hospital-decline-covid-19-vaccine-1.4569299
Both my daughters have the MTHFR gene mutation. It causes, among other things, coagulation issues. My older daughter had 3 miscarriages before they finally did the genetic testing to determine why. At least 3 months before my daughter attempts to conceive, she has to take regular doses of methylfolate. Perhaps your daughter should ask her ob to do the testing. No matter why it happens, its very difficult. It's why both of my girls have not had the vax even though they both work in healthcare.
I read MTHRFR as "motherfucker" and I can't unsee it.
That's exactly what I always call it, the motherfucker gene. Lol.
That’s what I read too, does it mean something else?
I have the gene too, and had trouble conceiving. That's exactly what I call it as well! :)
Thanks for the information. My daughter is in healthcare too...a pharmacist. SMDH...
Lol that sucks about her profession. No matter how sick she gets, she won’t be able to come to grips with the truth. Most people, especially young people, just aren’t willing to take such a huge ego defeat. Her entire world is based on trust in the system.
The red pill is just too hard to swallow for some people, even upon death or injury. I hate to be a stick in the mud, but I really don’t see this turning out well for her or her reproductive chances in the future.
The damage is done. You cannot undo these vaccines. It’s never coming out.
Do they have problems with taking B complex vitamins?
No, they both also have B vitamin deficiencies and take supplements.
I assume she knows to supplement with methyl-folate, rather than synthetic/folic acid?
Yep. I said that.
So sorry for your loss. Prayers for your family.
Condolences for your lost family. With all the blood clot issues with vaccines for the doc to blame a clot is telling.
This wasn’t them by chance? Miscarriage Twins lost: https://patriots.win/p/12igvb4M1I/when-will-these-people-wale-up-p/c/
No, this isn’t her story. And thank you.
Fauxci has gone into hiding.
No, They have been working on mRNA vaccines since at least 2009 if not earlier. I read through a study a couple weeks ago when doing some research on those types of vaccines that was being used to "vaccinate" people for birthcontrol purposes.
how about instead of being an asshole you just do simple search like this one?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=mRNA%20vaccine&page=2
Yes, I would know because I actually read and study shit and do my research especially on vaccines. I've researched these damn things for over 10 years.
These vaccines are not designed to target specific DNA. Not sure what your asking in terms of what was said here. Maybe you replied to the wrong person? The vaccines are designed to target RNA to make your cells create spike proteins against specific viruses (or whatever they claim it targets) when in reality it just destroys your organs, tissues etc. It causes your body to attack itself, hence why people are having typically different reactions because everyone's body is different.
I do find it interesting that the "younger" group are all having heart issues; while there have been some older people its mostly happening in the young people. Not sure why though...
The covid swab, from my understanding is to leave nanoparticals behind which go to your brain. Again, I don't know the whole thing on that but I do know with people being able to put magnets on their bodies, and some people are able to put them all over their body and it sticks, there are definitely nanoparticles of some kind in there and they seem to spread or be reproduced somehow in the body. There is a lot with this...
The satanic ritual books that 8kun anons dug on a couple years ago suggested that they usually read their incantations to Lilith, not Moloch, when conducting a ceremony to the send the soul of an aborted baby to the demon world.
But it might as well be Moloch.
Updoot for attention to detail, anon.
Yep, if anyone wants to know why feminism was chosen to destroy the world, its because the demon Lilith is like the inverse of how a godly woman is supposed to be.
They are creating a world in a demon's image.
Men of Faciwad's stature are in short supply.
Mods please sticky, I could not believe that the % was that high, but reading the article and the details it is the truth. YES, YOU READ THAT RIGHT 82% MISCARRIAGES.
Summary of how they get 82%: 827 total women who are pregnant are in the study. 700 of them had the vaccine in the 3rd trimester. 127 of them had the vaccine within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy (first trimester). Of the 127 woman who were pregnant and had the vaccine in the first trimester, 104 of the 127 pregnancies were lost.
Here is the gofile link of the table: https://gofile.io/d/KxDWCr
"Spontaneous abortion is the loss of pregnancy naturally before twenty weeks of gestation. Colloquially, spontaneous abortion is referred to as a 'miscarriage' to avoid association with induced abortion."
Important part of table 4: "†Data on pregnancy loss are based on 827 participants in the v-safe pregnancy registry who received an mRNA Covid-19 vaccine (BNT162b2 [Pfizer–BioNTech] or mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) from December 14, 2020, to February 28, 2021, and who reported a completed pregnancy. A total of 700 participants (84.6%) received their first eligible dose in the third trimester."
And so when you link the definition of spontaneous abortion with the data, that means the 700 pregnant women who received their first eligible dose in the third trimester, it is impossible for them to have a spontaneous abortion, because this only occurs within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy.
So then we have 127 eligible women left who have the possibility to have a spontaneous abortion, and 104 of those 127 women had spontaneous abortions. Unless they labeled terms incorrectly, that does look like 104 out of 127 eligible pregnant women in their first trimester experienced spontaneous abortion or "miscarriage". The other 700 women can't even have a spontaneous abortion, and the author of the article rightfully says they might as well have been 700 men.
So what do they call it when the woman loses the baby in the second or third trimester. I’ve heard it happening from this bioweapon just can’t find an example of hand. Will start marking when they are after 20 weeks seeing as it bears significance.
I think there is a different term for that, "Stillbirth"
Thank you. Understanding the terminology is a good portion of the battle. I appreciate you taking the time to respond.
So whats a normal percentage for loss in that time frame?
30%-1% depending on the week and age, most women in the trials were in their 20's or early 30's I think, and out of the 127 women that were less than 20 weeks pregnant, I doubt more than less than 25% of the 127 women were less than 5 weeks pregnant, so you could do some weight calculations and guesses to see how much worse the vaccine is for women in early pregnancy.
https://www.shortform.com/blog/chance-of-miscarriage-by-week-full-chart/
This is the study they linked to:
http://web.archive.org/web/20210630220634/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33882218/
It says something a little different.
"Among 3958 participants enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry, 827 had a completed pregnancy, of which 115 (13.9%) resulted in a pregnancy loss and 712 (86.1%) resulted in a live birth (mostly among participants with vaccination in the third trimester). Adverse neonatal outcomes included preterm birth (in 9.4%) and small size for gestational age (in 3.2%); no neonatal deaths were reported."
Made me a little confused cause it doesn't seem to say that? Maybe that is why they took the article down? Here is the article in wayback:
http://web.archive.org/web/20210630201622/https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/huge-red-flag-medical-researchers-bury-data-showing-82-miscarriage-rate-in-vaccinated-women
Here's my Gofile that explains the data with ironclad proof that it's 104/127.
https://gofile.io/d/SwMjht
They are trying to lie and deceive with statistics, they are very smart and very evil. "How to lie with statistics" Bill Gates wasn't joking around with that book comm.
The summary of it:
"From the limited data they have, regarding the 3,958 women enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry who were vaccinated: 827 of the 3,958 had a completed pregnancy. 700 of the 827 women received their first dose in the third trimester. There were 104 spontaneous abortions, 712 live births, 1 stillbirth, and 10 induced abortions among the 827 completed pregnancies.
The “third trimester” assumes the baby is still alive. Therefore, those 700 women are incapable of having a spontaneous abortion, because a spontaneous abortion can only occur within the first 20 weeks of gestation.
Therefore, of the 827 women who reported a complete pregnancy, there were 127 total women who were pregnant who were eligible as a possibility to have a spontaneous abortion. Of the 127 total women left who are capable of having a spontaneous abortion, 104 of the 127 women had spontaneous abortions
If you wanted the info stickied, you should've made it into a mind numbing meme.
Not being mean, just stating facts.
Or, like a functional fucking adult, you can link to the actual study (https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2104983?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub++0pubmed) which is publicly available and free to read, and realize the author is fake and gay and that the unnamed oncologist is a figment of her imagination.
No, it are not 827 total women who are pregnant in the study. It are 3958 women, who are pregnant in the study. 827 is the number of women who had ended their pregnancy in the sample time window of the study (Vaccinated between february 28 and march 30), natural or otherwise.
so it is actually 104 of 1224 pregnancies. Research is hard.
The data they gathered on spontaneous abortions was from the women (827) who's pregnancies ended within the study window. Since that is the case, then it is correct in saying 104/827 had spontaneous abortions.
The misrepresented data is that 96 of these 104 spontaneous abortions occurred in the 1st trimester which is much greater than the usual percentage of spontaneous abortions occurring in the 1st trimester vs the 2nd and 3rd. The 1st trimester is critical as this is where organogenesis occurs, and drugs (both pharm and rec) have the most effect on the fetal development. Source: yuuge med fag.
Look up colers past, comments, is a shill. Do not interact with. *And if he's not a shill, he's not a good person anyway... so regardless.
I rarely see shills hitting threads so hard on this site.
The fertility issue with the vaxes is clearly one of the things the cabal is most determined to hide.
exactly
Not really tho? out of the 30% of pregnancies that miscarry, 19% fail after the 5th week, 9% after the 7th week, 2.5% after the 10th week and only 1.3% after the 13th week. So assuming those in the periconception stage just flew under the radar, a 96/8 ratio is kinda what you'd expect. Rounded to the accepted average of 19/1.3 we are looking at a 8.3% ratio versus a 5.8% ratio. This might actually be caused by the shock of the vaccine (it would've been helpful had they included more cross statistics about whether the miscarriages also had full-body adverse events), but it might simply be due to a relatively small population (it is after al not much outside of the expected variance you would expect with such a small sample), or a skewed window of observation that probably missed an few cases.
so you think 17% miscarriages in the 3rd trimester is normal? I haven't done much digging, but a simple google search says it is not.
I looked up the first two authors of the actual paper.
https://www.eventscribe.com/2018/NFIDFallCVC/ajaxcalls/PresenterInfo.asp?efp=SUhOV09EUVQ0MjE2&PresenterID=491468&rnd=2.500141E-02%20h%0D
https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/iccfasd/iccfasd-members/shin-y-kim-cdc
What's fake and gay about the authors? The article doesn't matter. Look at the paper. The oncologist's opinion doesn't matter, the facts do, and the facts line up exactly with what the article states.
Show me proof that the paper is not legitimate.
sorry, very obvious shill you are, read carefully:
"Spontaneous abortion is the loss of pregnancy naturally before twenty weeks of gestation. Colloquially, spontaneous abortion is referred to as a 'miscarriage' to avoid association with induced abortion."
Important part of table 4: "†Data on pregnancy loss are based on 827 participants in the v-safe pregnancy registry who received an mRNA Covid-19 vaccine (BNT162b2 [Pfizer–BioNTech] or mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) from December 14, 2020, to February 28, 2021, and who reported a completed pregnancy. A total of 700 participants (84.6%) received their first eligible dose in the third trimester."
And so when you link the definition of spontaneous abortion with the data, that means the 700 pregnant women who received their first eligible dose in the third trimester, it is impossible for them to have a spontaneous abortion, because this only occurs within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy.
So then we have 127 eligible women left who have the possibility to have a spontaneous abortion, and 104 of those 127 women had spontaneous abortions. Unless they labeled terms incorrectly, that does look like 104 out of 127 eligible pregnant women in their first trimester experienced spontaneous abortion or "miscarriage". The other 700 women can't even have a spontaneous abortion, and the author of the article rightfully says they might as well have been 700 men.
Again. this is what happens when you read a single fucking graph instead of the entire article. The sample size is 3987. all of them were vaccinated, as it was one of the 2 selection criteria. Out of these 3987, 827 saw their pregnancy end within the window of observation. Out of these 827, 700 belonged to the third trimester group (Which took up 1019 of the initial sample), and the rest belonged to the second and first trimester group (These being 1714 and 1224 respectively). So, 70% of the people in the third trimester saw their pregnancy end, while only .46% of the second semester group and 7.8% of the first trimester. So the number is 8.2%.
Don't ask me where the remaining 23 of the 127 went to, because I have no idea. I can only presume they either got a normal abortion, or were at the very end of the second trimester and gave birth towards the end of the observation window.
so I am reading your take, is the amount of miscarries in the 3rd trimester not alarming to you? I see a lot of energy focussed on proving another anon wrong, but what is your take on the study?
Agreed with your response. Also first trimester miscarriages are way more common Before week 12, I wonder how many were weeks 13-20 Vs before 12 weeks.
Either way the number of third trimester to have success only at 70% is definitely below the average success at that point of the pregnancy
Want = baby... Unwanted = non-human fetus thingy
Who needs condoms when they have a ‘vaxxine’ for pregnancy?
Aaaaanddd the article is fake and gay.
Allow me to disseminate, and do this weird thing that for whatever inexplicable reason very few people here are capable of doing: Research.
And from it we readily conclude that LifeSiteNews either got contacted by a severe dyslectic who miraculously got an oncology degree or just made shit up. Probably the fucking later because if you actually carry out source control, you'll realize they don't actually give you names to refer to, nor make any reference to a wish to remain anonymous despite this being peer review.
The author, who committed an argument from authority fallacy using a made up individual, simply can't read statistics to save her fucking life and outright misrepresents the numbers and perverts the conclusion. So lets tear apart the central claim:
"the researchers had stated there were only 104 miscarriages among 827 pregnant women who had received a COVID vaccine, but reported only in a footnote that 700 of the pregnant women had received the shot after 28 weeks. Losing a baby after 20 weeks is not considered suffering a miscarriage but a still birth, she stated."
So, out of 827 pregnancies that finished, 104 had spontaneous abortions (medical slang for a miscarriage), 96 of which happened in the first trimester. This is actually clearly stated in the study. There is no degree of obfuscation going on and only a blind person could read past this. It clearly, unambiguously states that 90% of the premature abortions noted in the end results are in the first 13 weeks.
But you see, the reason why this is such a retarded statement, is that it isn't 104 miscarriages out of 827 pregnant women who got the vaccine.
its 104 out of 3958 pregnant women who got the vaccine. 827 is the partition of participants who GAVE BIRTH in the scope of the study; it lasting approximately a month from February 28th (the start period of when individuals were seen as viable for the sample) to March 30th; kinda speaks for itself that not everyone surveyed would give birth in the period of a month, don't it?
The true number of 13<w pregnant women vaccinates vs miscarried is actually 96 vs 1224
I'm sorry where did you get the 3,958 figure? Edit: I see the it's found within the study.
It says 104 of the 127 pregnant mothers given the vax before 20 weeks miscarried. 104/127=82%. The article argues that the other 700 mothers were given the vax after 20 weeks and so their data should be disregarded.
Out of the 104 abortions, 96 (92.3%) occurred before 13 weeks gestation.
Aaaaand retards are downvoting the person doing actual research. Way to go GA!
I don't know why people are down voting you. They just like to fall for fake news I guess.
This is why it was pulled. These papers are very cryptic, mainly because the study isn't complete since a lot of these women haven't given birth.
So wicked, so evil.
Page Not Found...
Page not found.
I was looking at this page about 20 minutes ago and then I accidentally closed the tab. When I went to re-open it I got "Page Not Found"
As of within the past hour, the link no longer works. Did anyone manage to archive it? Or has it moved somewhere?
Article got censored apparently, It's now archived at
https://archive.ph/MvpxD
(had earlier been archived on Yandex, now that link is nuked too!)
Nice! And the full free paper can be found here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8117969/
https://web.archive.org/web/20210701034830/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8117969/
Jerk
What'd he do?
"Spontaneous abortion is the loss of pregnancy naturally before twenty weeks of gestation. Colloquially, spontaneous abortion is referred to as a 'miscarriage' to avoid association with induced abortion."
Important part of table 4: "†Data on pregnancy loss are based on 827 participants in the v-safe pregnancy registry who received an mRNA Covid-19 vaccine (BNT162b2 [Pfizer–BioNTech] or mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) from December 14, 2020, to February 28, 2021, and who reported a completed pregnancy. A total of 700 participants (84.6%) received their first eligible dose in the third trimester."
And so when you link the definition of spontaneous abortion with the data, that means the 700 pregnant women who received their first eligible dose in the third trimester, it is impossible for them to have a spontaneous abortion, because this only occurs within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy.
So then we have 127 eligible women left who have the possibility to have a spontaneous abortion, and 104 of those 127 women had spontaneous abortions. Unless they labeled terms incorrectly, that does look like 104 out of 127 eligible pregnant women in their first trimester experienced spontaneous abortion or "miscarriage". The other 700 women can't even have a spontaneous abortion, and the author of the article rightfully says they might as well have been 700 men.
did this article just get pulled? I have it loaded on one of my tabs and when i tried to pull it up again it says page has moved
Page is gone
What happened to the babies who didn't die yet? Are they being followed?
I do hope we eventually learn about their health status.
An anon would suspect that they will be in poor health, but I hope not. This is every bit as bad as a mom smoking crack while she's pregnant.
Also, the fathers of these children should not be absolved of responsibility either. The dads have a duty to educate themselves on how to guide their wives/girlfriends through this experience and that includes counseling them against the vax.
I'm guessing most will die shortly after birth. Many are dying just from nursing from their vaxed mothers, and I'd think prenatal exposure woul be far worse.
the studies I've seen suggest that the placenta is damaged in all vaxed women, so I don't see how a newborn could be very healthy if the placenta was damaged. Probably they will be born malnourished, unusually susceptible to disease, and face a lot of developmental problems if they ever make it to puberty.
Have you seen any studies on how many of those vaxed women who suffered a miscarriage, if any, have been able to conceive since. From what I've read the damage to the placenta and ovaries would potentially cause permanent infertility.
I have not seen such studies yet but I very much want to read them when they come out.
One member of this forum mentioned that her daughter had a miscarriage (post-vax) and subsequently became pregnant again... so I guess it's possible. One doctor I saw interviewed recently just emphasized how delicate the female reproductive system is and how lots of things need to work just right to bring a baby to term. As a fella, I sort of have to trust her on that....
Anway, I imagine that any toxin which is attacking the placenta/ovaries may well cause long-term damage. This is all very surreal...
I also want to see those studies. I hope the lady who lost twins has a healthy baby. It absolutely is surreal. Then throw in the apparent transmission and reports of loss just being around the vaxed, and the studies regarding syncytin and the spike protein concentration in the ovaries, and reports that now they know the spike protein is the actual toxin. . . Why in heaven's name would anyone do that to their baby?? We already have so many women who suffer unexplained infertility because the reproductive system is so sensitive, like you reported, so what happens going forward, especially as they target younger kids and teens.
it seems pretty clear they want to dramatically decrease the birth rate and population. And even if the vaxes just magically stopped today, they will have achieved that goal to a large extent.
The only positive thing I can see with it is that leftists/socialists are predominantly the ones getting killed and neutered by this thing, so perhaps society in 2030 will be considerably more conservative, high-IQ, and patriotic than it is now. There are other scenarios, however.
They removed the page, so I am assuming all these women got their babies back
page is down , sister in law lost her. baby after all the teachers around her got the vaxx
Condolences and prayers for your sister.
Reminds me of this: Apr 22 2021: “Nurse warns -- stay away from vaxxed people” https://www.bitchute.com/video/uNpRqMROrZQB/ Her web page with reports of bruising, allergic type reactions, women having unusual heavy bleeding with clotting, just from being in contact with the vaxxed -- http://www.truthunmasked.org/p/stay-away.html
Page Not Found The page you are looking for no longer exists or has moved.
Are any older male anons (over 40 let's say) starting to think that maybe we will have a responsibility to make more babies for the world once the covidiots have suicided?
I really thought my baby-making days were over but somehow we are going to have to repopulate the Earth, and only us unvaxxed people will be able to do it.
When commies ask for “papers please” you pull out a certificate with one word: STUD
it will be a tough burden to bear, but somebody's gotta do it, right?
He he. Im jealous.
I already have a large batch, but maybe when they get older I would consider a round 2.
????
Start working out.
Child support be damned!
It's the left those were not miscarriages those were planned free abortions.
https://web.archive.org/web/20210630201622/https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/huge-red-flag-medical-researchers-bury-data-showing-82-miscarriage-rate-in-vaccinated-women
Thank you for the archive! I was able to get the headline and read this one better than a different site that saved the pop up with it.
Made me think of this: https://www.oregon.gov/oha/covid19/Documents/DataReports/Epidemic-Trends-and-Projections.pdf Page 11. “For this report, Rainier assumed6 that a proportion of vaccinated individuals would be protected from SARS-CoV-2 infection 21 days after each vaccine dose: on average 58.0% of those vaccinated after the first dose, and an additional 24.4% after the second dose (for a total of 82.4%). Among vaccinated people not protected from SARS-CoV-2 infection, Rainier assumes roughly 20% to be protected from experiencing severe COVID-19 symptoms (i.e., hospitalization or death) but still able to transmit the virus.”
If after two shots only 82% are fully inoculated (I’m guessing from placebo more than natural resistance to poison) than all the inoculated women are vaccinated against pregnancy just as this doctor speculated:
April 24 2021: video interview from doctor who cares treated 900 people locally and horrified by results writes letter. Canada, https://www.rebelnews.com/whistleblower_doctor_speaks_out_after_first_nations_patients_experience_serious_vaccine_side_effects Highlights for this discussion: Talks about miscarriages. Placenta has a spike protein. Vaccinated against pregnancy?
I have to post my additional thoughts as a counter argument to what I've posted before. The 82% may actually be incorrect, here's the argument why:
1st trimester = 0-12 week, 2nd trimester = 13-28 weeks, 3rd trimester = 29-40 weeks, birth = 37-42 weeks
(spontaneous abortion/miscarriage = before 20 weeks), (Born before week 28 = extremely premature, Born before week 37 = premature)
Spontaneous abortion can happen in the 1st trimester, or the first half of the 2nd trimester.
There were "1040 participants (91.9%) who received a vaccine in the first trimester and 1700 (99.2%) who received a vaccine in the second trimester"
Assuming roughly half of the women in the 2nd trimester were less than 20 weeks pregnant, then that leaves us with about 1,890 (1,040+(0.5*1,700)) women who could have potentially had a 'miscarriage' after the vaccine. So far, of these roughly 1,890 women, there had been 104 miscarriages (96 of which happened before 13 weeks, so 8 happened between weeks 13-20) and 23 live births (I'm guessing).
This is where it gets tricky: We don't know how many more women were still within 20 weeks but have not had a miscarriage at the time of the data. We don't how many women passed beyond the threshold of 20 weeks and therefore did not have a miscarriage, but still haven't had the baby. As time goes on, miscarriage rates drop significantly, so 104 may not be far from the ending total number of miscarriages from the 1,890 total eligible women.
When the data is finalized, we would need to see the number of live births vs the number of miscarriages among those 1,890 eligible women. (What's very important and should be included for the number of miscarriages, is 1. The age of the mother 2. What week was the miscarriage)
(For instance, miscarriages after week 10 it's roughly 3% chance, and 5th week it's 19% https://www.shortform.com/blog/chance-of-miscarriage-by-week-full-chart/). So the week number is extremely important to look at, so we can compare vaccinated miscarriage rates with non-vaccinated miscarriage rates by the week, and see if they are normal or have a large difference.
I think the reason this sample of 127 women is skewed disproportionately towards miscarriages rather than live births, is because live births can only happen after approximately 40 weeks. Most of the women who were not in their 3rd trimester hadn't had a 'completed pregnancy' by the time the data was recorded. Most of the women who were less than 20 weeks pregnant have not had the chance to birth the baby, so this is why there are so many less (23) live births than spontaneous abortions (104) at the time of the data. (Dec 14th-Feb 28th data is only about a 10 week period).
BuT it's SaFe AnD eFfEcTiVe! The CDC said so!
The link goes to page not found, any info as to why?
Guys is there an alternate link, the one posted does not work. Thank you.
Wow the fucking article was scrubbed! Any archive it?
I just read it and went to send it to someone. It’s gone
The original article got censored but here is an archived version:
https://yandexwebcache.net/yandbtm?fmode=inject&tm=1625102032&tld=com&lang=en&la=1625063552&text=%22in+the+NEJM+study%2C+but+completely+misrepresented+in+the+way+the+data+was+presented+in+general%2C%E2%80%9D+Wheatley+stated+%22&url=https%3A//www.lifesitenews.com/news/huge-red-flag-medical-researchers-bury-data-showing-82-miscarriage-rate-in-vaccinated-women&l10n=en&mime=html&sign=360eadbd3687b66a4f26770177f0a404&keyno=0
I have saved the article offline in case it needs to get uploaded again.
Also here:
https://archive.vn/MvpxD
Wish it didn’t have that pop up window blocking the headline. Crazy how fast they got to this one. Cant have This information getting out.
Page not found they censored it
oblig - At least they didn't get covid
Page not found
Link is dead? What is the source and is it reputable and verified?
404 page not found
They are finishing what Margaret Sanger started!