90%? That doesn't pass the sniff test. As an elementary school teacher, I work with lots of vaccinated women. Birth rate seemed normal in the past year.
Hospital my daughter worked at had 11 nurses lose babies. 4 unvaxxed but exposed to the vaxxed (his observation). My daughter was unvaxxed but lost hers also. All had the same doctor which is why it is becoming a class action law suit.
This is serious shit. Maybe your location got the control doses?
90% was a typo - this came out when originally reported on - the article and data this came from clearly come out to 9% and was typo'd in one place to 90%. Don't get me wrong - 9% is CRAZY chance of miscarriage for a vaccine with 12% efficacy to lower the affects of the COOF... which you have a .02% chance of dying from. Fookin plandemic
Out of 270 pregnancies they only report outcomes for 27. 26 were spontaneous abortions + 1 normal birth. 5 pending. Data for the other 238? It isn't there...
Thanks for that dig. I think the headline should instead say, "90% of vaccinated pregnant women lost their data." Which is still bad, but not necessarily as bad.
Obviously that was what they were aiming for when they used the vax. Even justifying the use of a vax that could cause that to a woman is ludicrous and painted in bloody greed.
The problem with the concept of “safe” is that its based on someones retrospective opinion, not based on some kind of standard that was in place before the study began.
90%? That doesn't pass the sniff test. As an elementary school teacher, I work with lots of vaccinated women. Birth rate seemed normal in the past year.
Hospital my daughter worked at had 11 nurses lose babies. 4 unvaxxed but exposed to the vaxxed (his observation). My daughter was unvaxxed but lost hers also. All had the same doctor which is why it is becoming a class action law suit.
This is serious shit. Maybe your location got the control doses?
Maybe. Canada seems to be doing much better than targeted red states.
90% was a typo - this came out when originally reported on - the article and data this came from clearly come out to 9% and was typo'd in one place to 90%. Don't get me wrong - 9% is CRAZY chance of miscarriage for a vaccine with 12% efficacy to lower the affects of the COOF... which you have a .02% chance of dying from. Fookin plandemic
NSCWIC!!!
9% miscarriage rate isn't even high or abnormal. It entirely depends on what stage of pregnancy we're looking at.
Out of 270 pregnancies they only report outcomes for 27. 26 were spontaneous abortions + 1 normal birth. 5 pending. Data for the other 238? It isn't there...
5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-authorization Adverse Event Reports. Page 12. *From the documents the FDA tried to keep from you until 2097. https://phmpt.org/.../11/5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf
Thanks for that dig. I think the headline should instead say, "90% of vaccinated pregnant women lost their data." Which is still bad, but not necessarily as bad.
Obviously that was what they were aiming for when they used the vax. Even justifying the use of a vax that could cause that to a woman is ludicrous and painted in bloody greed.
Eschew all pharma and most medical.
Comirnaty isn't available in the USA, correct?
The problem with the concept of “safe” is that its based on someones retrospective opinion, not based on some kind of standard that was in place before the study began.
http://old.reddit.com/r/PfizerData
My god even if you considered the lab rat tests valid that is NOT an acceptable sample size by any means.
WHY WOULD ANYONE EVER BELIEVE ANYTHING FROM THE CDC, PFIZER, NIH, AMA GOVERNMENT AGENCY OR ANY OTHER LARGE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY EVER AGAIN!
THEIR TIME IN A BARREL WILL HAPPEN!
The Rule of 42
‘when the potential benefits outweigh the potential risks’, like never?