As soon as people started getting the death shots,

miscarriages among them

*immediately

shot to the 70s% range.

That later went up into the low 80s,

now it's revealed to be in the 90s.

But you don't believe everyone's been paying attention and monitoring all these audits for accuracy, all this time?

The fact that MSM refuses to talk about it at all is a good indicator it's all true.

The original study references the United States, VAERS, and v-safe, not the UK, I think.

Discussion

"This U.S. surveillance review of the safety of mRNA Covid-19 vaccines during pregnancy and the periconception period indicates that some pregnant persons in the United States are choosing to be vaccinated against Covid-19 in all trimesters of pregnancy.

Solicited local and systemic reactions that were reported to the v-safe surveillance system were similar among persons who identified as pregnant and nonpregnant women.

Although not directly comparable, the proportions of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes (e.g., fetal loss, preterm birth, small size for gestational age, congenital anomalies, and neonatal death) among participants with completed pregnancies from the v-safe pregnancy registry appear to be similar to the published incidences in pregnant populations studied before the Covid-19 pandemic.

Many participants in the v-safe pregnancy registry were included in the phase 1a (highest) priority group for Covid-19 vaccination owing to their work as health care personnel.

V-safe participation is voluntary, and registration information is not uniformly available at all vaccination locations, although information about the surveillance system is included on the EUA fact sheets for health care providers and patients."

This table on the same page won't render when copied here but this is who the v-safe people are.

Table 3

Characteristics of V-safe Pregnancy Registry Participants.*

CharacteristicPfizer–BioNTech VaccineModerna VaccineTotal

number (percent)

Total2136 (54.0)1822 (46.0)3958 (100)

Age at first vaccine dose†

20–24 yr17 (0.8)19 (1.0)36 (0.9)

25–34 yr1335 (62.5)1238 (67.9)2573 (65.0)

35–44 yr777 (36.4)560 (30.7)1337 (33.8)

45–54 yr7 (0.3)5 (0.3)12 (0.3)

Race and ethnic group‡

Non-Hispanic White1663 (77.9)1463 (80.3)3126 (79.0)

Hispanic164 (7.7)151 (8.3)315 (8.0)

Non-Hispanic Asian225 (10.5)138 (7.6)363 (9.2)

Non-Hispanic Black24 (1.1)26 (1.4)50 (1.3)

Non-Hispanic multiple races42 (2.0)30 (1.6)72 (1.8)

Non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaskan Native5 (0.2)1 (0.1)6 (0.2)

Non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander6 (0.3)3 (0.2)9 (0.2)

Missing data or participant declined to answer7 (0.3)10 (0.5)17 (0.4)

Timing of first eligible dose

Periconception: within 30 days before last menstrual period55 (2.6)37 (2.0)92 (2.3)

First trimester: <14 wk615 (28.8)517 (28.4)1132 (28.6)

Second trimester: ≥14 and <28 wk932 (43.6)782 (42.9)1714 (43.3)

Third trimester: ≥28 wk533 (25.0)486 (26.7)1019 (25.7)

Missing data1 (<0.1)01 (<0.1)

Covid-19 infection during pregnancy

No Covid-19 infection2084 (97.6)1779 (97.6)3863 (97.6)

Before vaccination32 (1.5)24 (1.3)56 (1.4)

≤14 days after first eligible dose of vaccination3 (0.1)7 (0.4)10 (0.3)

14 days after first eligible dose of vaccination9 (0.4)3 (0.2)12 (0.3)

That's the original study that was FAKED to HIDE the extremely high miscarriage rates.

Again: only a couple of months into the death-shot program the miscarriage numbers started OUT - at LEAST in the low 70s percent range.

If there were glaring errors in the real numbers someone among the hundreds of thousands reviewing them,

would have discovered them by now.

That’s if the data on who has been vaccinated is correct or not. If they can fudge the numbers for miscarriage, they can easily fudge the numbers on vaccination rates.

We have multiple studies now where they say “oopsie our bad” six months after they’ve been published in journals and used for decision making. I guarantee vaccination rates are being fudged for the agenda as well.