80% of vaccinated women had miscarriage? Is this an issue with this particular vaccine, or does this happen when pregenant women get a vaccine of any type in the first trimester?
Tmi512, what's your take on this re: women having miscarriages in first trimester after getting the vaccine
- Thread starter GhostOfMatchesMalone
- Start date
80% of vaccinated women had miscarriage? Is this an issue with this particular vaccine, or does this happen when pregenant women get a vaccine of any type in the first trimester?
At this point I have a hard time arguing otherwise.
The timing is impeccable
Once again, you didn't read the article.
Here's is the Abstract at the top of the first page:
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Many pregnant persons in the United States are receiving messenger RNA (mRNA) coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) vaccines, but data are limited on their safety in pregnancy.METHODS
From December 14, 2020, to February 28, 2021, we used data from the “v-safe after vaccination health checker” surveillance system, the v-safe pregnancy registry, and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to characterize the initial safety of mRNA Covid-19 vaccines in pregnant persons.RESULTS
A total of 35,691 v-safe participants 16 to 54 years of age identified as pregnant. Injection-site pain was reported more frequently among pregnant persons than among nonpregnant women, whereas headache, myalgia, chills, and fever were reported less frequently. 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. Although not directly comparable, calculated proportions of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in persons vaccinated against Covid-19 who had a completed pregnancy were similar to incidences reported in studies involving pregnant women that were conducted before the Covid-19 pandemic. Among 221 pregnancy-related adverse events reported to the VAERS, the most frequently reported event was spontaneous abortion (46 cases).CONCLUSIONS
Preliminary findings did not show obvious safety signals among pregnant persons who received mRNA Covid-19 vaccines. However, more longitudinal follow-up, including follow-up of large numbers of women vaccinated earlier in pregnancy, is necessary to inform maternal, pregnancy, and infant outcomes.
I mean, when have they ever been caught lying to push an agenda?
The CDC’s rep has been ruined and they have only themselves to blame. If they want to push their numbers they need to find a new messenger.
It's now to the point where if the usual suspects in the media immediately denounce something, I tend to believe it's real.I mean, when have they ever been caught lying to push an agenda?
I would defer to an obstetrician for this one. However, my personal findings of just people that I’ve known who were pregnant and took the vaccine was that none of the babies have had any issues. The sample size is very small though and of course long term issues we may not know for decades.
Well this was about vaccines for pregnant women during the first trimester specifically. I saw many dems claiming this was fake news because the first trimester is when most/all miscarriages happen so any vaccine in that time frame is bad.
Then @fatman76 links to the CDC saying no worries, good to go LOL
What is the FDA going to do when they approve this. Just cover up most of the data showing its a poison to many people? I figure that will be their tactics.
I'm gonna put my tin foil hat on for a minute....
Has always checked in the bowels of the infrastructure bill to see if there's anything slipped in there that changes disclosure rules for the FDA when approving a drug or vaccine?
I've always maintained they are dragging their feet on getting FDA approval to wait and see how many people will take the vaccines anyway, and when they feel everyone that wants to has, THEN they approve them. And we all find out just want the side affects are.
BUT.....maybe their plan is to change the rules so they don't have to disclose that at all. Not sure how it would work, but seems an interesting (and unfortunately relevant) question to ask.
It wouldn't surprise me if they just ignore the rules and give some BS reason why many things weren't listed. They are mostly crooks there.
