673
Comments (83)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
29
DrMcCoy 29 points ago +29 / -0

82% OF WOMEN < 20 WEEKS PREGNANT HAD MISCARRIAGE AFTER THE COVID VAX.

Medical Study published by the New England Journal of Medicine shows 82% Miscarriage Rate For Pregnant Women Vaxxed In First 2 Trimesters.

A study was done on women less than 20 weeks pregnant and the effect of the jab. But if you look at the women who participated, the majority were in their last trimester, but included in the results. Most of the women in the study were NOT < 20 weeks pregnant. The study and the New England Journal of Medicine are compromised.

Out of the 127 women who WERE < 20 weeks pregnant, 104 had miscarriages. That's how the 82% was arrived at. https://www.bitchute.com/video/cjQ2L5V8RO67/

4
AnonymousFrog 4 points ago +4 / -0

This is incorrect. They didn’t read the study. They only read the table, which is misleading.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104983

If you read the article you’ll notice that there were thousands of women in the study who had not completed their pregnancy. Of course those who had a spontaneous abortion would have. But there were many other women in their cohort who were still pregnant.

The denominator is not in that table. Which is why you can’t calculate the percent. Of the over eight hundred women who had a pregnancy outcome, the women who had the vaccine after the first trimester could not* have had a miscarriage by definition.

-1
NeedMoarPillows -1 points ago +1 / -2

Do you have a non bitchute link to this?

6
DrMcCoy 6 points ago +6 / -0

If you listen to the whole video, it shows the actual numbers and describes the study group. It appears to be sound information.

3
NeedMoarPillows 3 points ago +5 / -2

It really doesn't. Theres no real source given.

1
Im-Wide-Awake 1 point ago +2 / -1

But where is the actual documentation? Not just an Infograph

1
SmolPedeBestPede 1 point ago +1 / -0

The Infograph looks pretty convincing to me tbh.

4
aquasmurf 4 points ago +4 / -0

It took literally 30 seconds to find.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2104983

2
NeedMoarPillows 2 points ago +3 / -1

That literally says the opposite.

1
aquasmurf 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yet, here we are.

3
Cheesemaker 3 points ago +3 / -0

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33882218/ is actual journal publication. Note that the authors are intentionally misleading so if you read the summary it "appears" to say the exact opposite.

Infowars did a pretty good article on this a while back: https://www.infowars.com/posts/depopulation-alert-shocking-new-study-reveals-covid-vaccine-terminates-4-out-of-5-pregnancies-via-spontaneous-abortions/

0
NeedMoarPillows 0 points ago +1 / -1

You need to stop watching infowars, it's controlled opposition

2
Cheesemaker 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm not disagreeing especially for a lot of their videos, but this particular article is a good article looking at firm data.

1
polish_snausage 1 point ago +1 / -0

When you find one please share, I'm sure others would appreciate your research

1
NeedMoarPillows 1 point ago +2 / -1

I spent about two hours last night looking, but couldn't find anything but this guy saying it's true, no research, no actual study. He mentions a paper, but it doesn't seem to exist and he is just misreading the one he's looking at. If you listen to what he says, he just doesn't understand what he's reading.

1
polish_snausage 1 point ago +1 / -0

There's quiet a few things out there now... some are repeating this bloggers findings and others saying what your saying. Fog of war I guess.

I hope what your saying is the correct reading of the data 🙏.