? 82% of pregnant women who took mRNA vaccine had miscarriage ?
(www.lifesitenews.com)
?️ STAT DEBATABLE LOL ?
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (148)
sorted by:
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"
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?