And, sure enough, they even have “studies” that support their conviction that expectant mothers should jab for the good of their unborn babies. As I have commented on here, here, here, and here, one should take such studies, that toot Covid-19 jabs, with a pound of salt…
We have now, in the second half of 2022, a sudden tsunami of “studies” that unequivocally state that Covid-19 vaccination of moms-to-be is not only absolutely safe, but somehow even beneficial for the unborns’ health, like multivitamins or something. Aren’t they stretching credulity with such miraculous results? Let’s comb through all the evidence at hand in order to form our opinion on the subject:
My hands are literally trembling as I write this, but here goes. In these 32 pregnancies, there were:
23 spontaneous abortions
2 spontaneous abortions with intra-uterine death
So, 25 of the 32 pregnancies with known outcomes resulted in a miscarriage, a rate of 78%. Note that miscarriage normally occurs in only 12-15% of pregnancies
2 premature births with neonatal death
1 spontaneous abortion with neonatal death
1 normal outcome
Note that this only adds up to 29 known outcomes, but then they note that “two different outcomes were reported for each twin” and then they talk about “fetus/baby cases as separate from mother cases.” I have no idea how to interpret this explanation of outcomes, so it may have been one or two less (or more) deaths then.
So, of the 32 pregnancies they knew the outcome of, 87.5% resulted in the death of the fetus or neonate.
Even if the other 238 pregnancies end up with healthy babies born, this result correlates with V-safe database monitoring results (see below).
Jessica writes: “Data from Rambam hospital in Haifa reveal a stillbirth, miscarriage and abortion (SBMA) rate of 6% among women who never received a COVID-19 vaccine, compared to 8% among women who were vaccinatedwith at least one dose (and never had a SARS-Cov-2 infection). That’s a statistically significant odds ratio of 1.36 (CI 1.0-1.9), meaning your odds of having a stillbirth, abortion or miscarriage are 1.36 times higher if you are vaccinated.”
We can see that:
a) the vaccinated mothers had much higher rates of SBMA than unvaccinated (there were only two vaccinated women in Feb. 2021):
b) The rate of SBMA has not been elevated throughout 2020 and until the arrival of Covid-19 shots for pregnant women:
Israeli Ministry of Health: vaccination rates from December, 2020. Dark green is first dose, light green is second dose.
This evidence would suggest that Covid-19 infections by itself do not cause a discernible elevation in SBMA rates and the Covid-19 “vaccinations” do cause elevated rates of SBMAs.
“CDC’s own statistics prove beyond statistical doubt that the higher dose Moderna vaccine causes 42% MORE miscarriages, compared to the Pfizer vaccine, casting doubt on CDC’s claim that both are “safe for pregnancy”.The explanation is, likely, that we are seeing a dose-response relationship!”
As Dr. Ah Kahn Syed comments, “Igor is 100% correct that this shows a definitive and significant increase in miscarriage risk for Moderna compared to Pfizer. The risk ratio for this is 1.43 (43% increased) and the p-value is 0.00000019. That is, the probability that this effect happened by chance given these numbers is 1 in 5.4 million.”
That is, instead of 3.3% for Pfizer and 4.7% for Moderna shots, the actual miscarriage rates have been 10.0% for Pfizer and 14.% for Moderna, if calculated correctly. Lauren Zauche’s CDC team included vaccinated in the second and third trimester in the denominator for the calculation of miscarriage rates for the first trimester - a totally absurd proposition!
In his post on 2022.10.21, Dr. Ah Kahn Syed also points out that, on top of the fraudulent miscarriage rates advertised by the CDC, in their V-safe data presentation they also claim that the background rate of major birth defect is 3-5%, whereas, in fact, it is about 2%:
The CDC are going to gaslight you that the risk of major birth defects is “within historical limits”.
This is what they just published:
This is the chart conveniently labelled “Background rate 3-5%”. This is a lie. The background rate for severe birth defects in developed countries is less than 2% (see here and here):
There are reports coming from all corners of the world in regard to the overall drop in birth rates within 9 months of the Covid-19 “vaccination” campaigns for would-be-mothers in the first trimester. For example, in Germany:
According to preliminary results, around 486,700 children were born in Germany from January to August 2022. This was 7% fewer births than in the comparison period on average for the years 2019 to 2021. The decline in the months of January to April was particularly striking (according to incomplete information -9%). In May, the decline slowed down significantly to -1% and then increased again: in June to -4%, in July to -8% and in August to -7%. In West Germany the number of births fell by 5.9%, in East Germany including Berlin by almost 11.8% (excluding Berlin 11.9%). So far, the number of births of second children has fallen at an above-average rate (-9.2%); the decline was 6.0% for the births of the first children and 4.8% for the third and subsequent children.
Even more alarming reports from Taiwan with 23% drop year over year in live birth in May 2022:
Switzerland as a whole: across all cantons, the number of live births fell by an incredible 17.5 percent compared with the same period last year. If you compare the first six months of this year with those in the year before the pandemic, there is also a minus (around 11 percent).
However, the greatest decline is reported for city of Basel: 28 percent fewer newborns - that is the Swiss peak value.
As the last argument, a comment from Dr. Ah Kahn Syed to this very post:
“It's ludicrous that the Viki Male's of the world keep pushing the idea that COVID is associated with stillbirth therefore the vaccine must be able to prevent stillbirths, yet the vaccine doesn't prevent infection. The latest meta-analysis she quoted was entirely built around one study which had major biases, and showed the "benefit" was entirely confined to the uninfected women. Ergo, it was nothing to do with COVID. Ergo, it was a massive confounder. The confounders in her data are almost entirely confined to low SES and higher smoking rates.”
As far as the aforementioned evidence suggests, the Covid-19 infections do not affect much the mothers-to-be and their gestating babies. Whereas Covid-19 vaccinations in the first trimester are strongly associated with miscarriages, birth defects and the overall live birth rate reduction around the world.
In further support of the opinion that Covid-19 infection is not nearly as dangerous for women of childbearing age than Covid-19 shots, at least in terms of cardiovascular health, read my post from 2022.10.15 “COVID-19 is SEVEN Times More Dangerous for Myocarditis Than Vaccine?”
Not to be discouraged by reality on the ground, the “studies” started arriving, just-in-time, suggesting that we shouldn’t believe our lying eyes - all is good and nothing to worry about, and Covid-19 jabbing is better that not jabbing:
The data are compelling that the toll on children and pregnant women fromfossil-fuel–driven climate change and air pollution is large and growing, affecting immediate and long-term health. Interventions — which are, in many cases, cost-saving — exist to address the causes of climate change and air pollution and the disparities that they have created.
We analyzed the odds of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine in the 28 days prior to spontaneous abortion compared with the odds of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine in the 28 days prior to index dates for ongoing pregnancies. A COVID-19 vaccine was received within 28 days prior to an index date among 8.0% of ongoing pregnancy periods vs 8.6% of spontaneous abortions (Table 1)
First, the study only concerned itself with the correlation of a vaccine shot within 28 days of miscarriage, and even then there is a clear pattern of higher odds of miscarriage having received a jab, progressively with later gestation periods (6-8, 9-13 and 14-19 weeks). Had they tracked the jabs for the whole first trimester, the data could have been more damning. And yet, the study concludes that “Spontaneous abortions did not have an increased odds of exposure to a COVID-19 vaccination in the prior 28 days compared with ongoing pregnancies”. Don’t believe your lying eyes! Maybe this will explain why: every author has been funded by Pfizer and the study itself funded, designed and data interpreted by CDC!
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Lipkind reported serving on the Pfizer independent external data monitoring committee for the COVID-19 vaccine. Dr Naleway reported receiving research funding from Pfizer for an unrelated study. Dr Vesco reported receiving research funding from Pfizer for an unrelated study. No other disclosures were reported.
Funding/Support: This study was funded by contract 200-2012-53526 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Role of the Funder/Sponsor:The CDC participated in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
We conducted a population based retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, which provides publicly funded healthcare to all residents, including services relating to prenatal and obstetrical care. The provincial birth registry (Better Outcomes Registry and Network (BORN Ontario))21 was used to identify the study population—after extracting records for completed pregnancies between 1 May and 31 December 2021, we extracted the corresponding births to create distinct records for each live birth and stillbirth, including multi-fetal pregnancies. We excluded births to non-Ontario residents and births from pregnancies conceived less than 42 weeks before the end of the study (ie, last menstrual period date after 10 March 2021) to avoid cohort truncation bias caused by overrepresentation of preterm births close to the end of the study period.22 We also excluded any records with gestational age <20 weeks and birth weight <500 g, or following pregnancy termination, as these events are not systematically collected in the registry (see supplementary table 1 for additional details of data sources).
Results Among 85 162 births, 43 099 (50.6%) occurred in individuals who received one dose or more of a covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy—42 979 (99.7%) received an mRNA vaccine. Vaccination during pregnancy was not associated with any increased risk of overall preterm birth (6.5% among vaccinated v 6.9% among unvaccinated; adjusted hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.08), spontaneous preterm birth (3.7% v 4.4%; 0.96, 0.90 to 1.03), or very preterm birth (0.59% v 0.89%; 0.80, 0.67 to 0.95). No increase was found in risk of small for gestational age at birth (9.1% v 9.2%; 0.98, 0.93 to 1.03) or stillbirth (0.25% v 0.44%; 0.65, 0.51 to 0.84). Findings were similar by trimester of vaccination, mRNA vaccine product, and number of doses received during pregnancy.
Conclusion The findings suggest that vaccination against covid-19 during pregnancy is not associated with a higher risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, or stillbirth.
Except, they specifically EXCLUDED the first trimester miscarriages. Oops!
This is the precise study on which Dr. Ah Kahn Syed commented above: “…one study which had major biases, and showed the "benefit" was entirely confined to the uninfected women. Ergo, it was nothing to do with COVID. Ergo, it was a massive confounder. The confounders in her data are almost entirely confined to low SES and higher smoking rates.”
Among 1,249,634 delivery hospitalizations during March 2020–September 2021, U.S. women with COVID-19 were at increased risk for stillbirth compared with women without COVID-19 (adjusted relative risk [aRR] = 1.90; 95% CI = 1.69–2.15). The magnitude of association was higher during the period of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance than during the pre-Delta period.
What are the implications for public health practice? Implementing evidence-based COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination before or during pregnancy, is critical to reduce the impact of COVID-19 on stillbirths.
Except, again, they omit the first trimester miscarriages:
As well: “…it was not possible to assess vaccination status in this analysis. However, because COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective,***** and COVID-19 vaccination coverage among pregnant women was approximately 30% as of July 2021,††††† most women with COVID-19 at delivery were likely unvaccinated.”
They seem to not be able to make up their mind which way to lie: either the jabs are safe-and-effective, or the 30% jabbed is such a small number that it can be safely ignored? In any case, in the “Delta period” (where many more women would have been jabbed) the risk ratio is 5 times higher, “pre Delta”- only 1.5 times higher:
Here, March 2020–June 2021 is considered “pre Delta”, July–September 2021 is “Delta period”. Isn’t it something to ponder, CDC? “Nah...”
Covid Placentitis: Statement from the RCPI Faculty of Pathology and the Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
The Faculty of Pathology and Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists can confirm there have been 6 cases of stillbirth and one case of second trimester miscarriage caused by SARS-CoV2 placentitis since January 2021 in Ireland.
The 6 cases are on a background of a total of 11 cases of SARS-CoV2 placentitis identified in Ireland since the start of the pandemic. Results to date, from the baby’s deaths, indicate a link with the B.1.1.7 variant of concern which may explain why this finding was not a significant feature of the 1st and 2nd waves in 2020. It may also partially explain why it is not a clear feature of COVID-19 infection in the international literature to date, which largely dates from COVID-19 cases seen in 2020. This condition appears to occur a relatively short time after contracting COVID-19 infection, ranging up to 21 days from experiencing symptoms. Maternal COVID-19 symptoms varied from none to moderate. Gestations involved ranged from 20- 36 weeks.
How very peculiar! So, “this finding was not a significant feature of the 1st and 2nd waves in 2020? It is not a clear feature of COVID-19 infection in the international literature to date, which largely dates from COVID-19 cases seen in 2020?”And only after they started “vaccinating”, this suddenly became a thing? Dare to connect the dots?
Question Is prenatal exposure to maternal BNT162b2 messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccine associated with adverse outcomes at birth or in early childhood?
Findings In a population-based study including 24 288 singleton live births, the risks of preterm birth and small birth weight were similar between newborns prenatally exposed and unexposed to maternal vaccination.
Meaning Maternal BNT162b2 vaccination in pregnancy was not associated with detrimental outcomes to the offspring.
Conclusions and Relevance This large population-based study found no evident differences between newborns of women who received BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination during pregnancy, vs those of women who were not vaccinated, and contributes to current evidence in establishing the safety of prenatal vaccine exposure to the newborns. Interpretation of study findings is limited by the observational design.
As the study only looked at the health of live-born to the vaccinated vs unvaccinated mothers, no conclusions can be made about miscarriages due to vaccinations. On the other hand, the study does NOT find any increased risk of NOT being vaccinated to the live birth outcomes.
Please let me know what you think and whether I missed any important studies on this issue.
It's ludicrous that the Viki Male's of the world keep pushing the idea that COVID is associated with stillbirth therefore the vaccine must be able to prevent stillbirths, yet the vaccine doesn't prevent infection. The latest meta-analysis she quoted was entirely built around one study which had major biases, and showed the "benefit" was entirely confined to the uninfected women. Ergo, it was nothing to do with COVID. Ergo, it was a massive confounder. The confounders in her data are almost entirely confined to low SES and higher smoking rates.
My niece is a Respiratory Therapist who had to take the jab to keep her job.She was also pregnant and then had a miscarriage. Today she sent me a photograph of her face with a terrible red outbreak of shingles spread out from her left temple to her eye socket and across the bridge of her nose. Was this horrible outcome worth her job? She could loose sight in that eye. I am so sorry for her and the grief she is enduring. It's not over yet.
It's ludicrous that the Viki Male's of the world keep pushing the idea that COVID is associated with stillbirth therefore the vaccine must be able to prevent stillbirths, yet the vaccine doesn't prevent infection. The latest meta-analysis she quoted was entirely built around one study which had major biases, and showed the "benefit" was entirely confined to the uninfected women. Ergo, it was nothing to do with COVID. Ergo, it was a massive confounder. The confounders in her data are almost entirely confined to low SES and higher smoking rates.
My niece is a Respiratory Therapist who had to take the jab to keep her job.She was also pregnant and then had a miscarriage. Today she sent me a photograph of her face with a terrible red outbreak of shingles spread out from her left temple to her eye socket and across the bridge of her nose. Was this horrible outcome worth her job? She could loose sight in that eye. I am so sorry for her and the grief she is enduring. It's not over yet.