1008
Comments (104)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
27
SenorTrumper 27 points ago +27 / -0

Got a credible source for this?

28
deleted 28 points ago +28 / -0
14
Colonel_Chestbridge 14 points ago +14 / -0

It went from 4 to 23. So it’s not up 336% in the total population, just up from the amount of adverse reactions from a few weeks ago. A bit misleading headline.

14
DonJr2024 14 points ago +14 / -0

Yeah this site has gone to the absolute lowest common denominator of "news". I 100% believe the "vaccine" doesn't belong anywhere near a pregnant woman. But the quality of the articles we post around here is complete garbage.

12
theblackprince 12 points ago +12 / -0

Shit like this should be deleted once it's found out to be misleading. All of the whining about MSM hypocrisy and an inability to do the right thing when they're wrong, but it's just as bad here. Nuke fake news threads. This one will be stickied for 2 hours.

4
Colonel_Chestbridge 4 points ago +4 / -0

Wait. You mean gateway pundit isn’t a reliable source of news?

7
20KAG20 7 points ago +7 / -0

Small numbers mean big jumps in percentages.

I would like to know how many pregnant women took it to get 23 miscarriages though.

7
try4gain 7 points ago +7 / -0

4 to 23 is actually 475% increase

100% increase for 4 is 8

300% increase for 4 is 16

2
LawfulSilentMajority 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yep, I dug that deep too and came to report here but looks like I should have just had some more faith in you guys and scrolled the comments first.

FYI, the US has released some better data that compares to the background population rate which is much more useful. The downside is that the latest data reported is only through mid February so a very small sample size and obviously not much for long term effects. Look for Vsafe Covid pregnancy registry on something other than google or you'll have a heck of a time finding the reported results. (Links below)

We are thinking of having another baby soon so I've been watching all of this unfold and waiting for good data. As apprehensive as I am about the vaccine, getting Covid while pregnant is also a miscarriage risk and I'd feel terrible if it went that way. Ideally, enough other people catch Covid or get the vaccine to push herd immunity so there's almost no chance of getting it and she doesn't need to worry about getting either.

Links:

CDC notice about the status of the Covid vaccine and pregnancy:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations/pregnancy.html

Vsafe pregnancy registry info:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/vsafepregnancyregistry.html

Results:
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-02/28-03-01/05-covid-Shimabukuro.pdf

2
Colonel_Chestbridge 2 points ago +2 / -0

Skepticism and doing your own research is always a good thing. Thanks for this info.

In my view, waiting for herd immunity on COVID, whether through vaccines or infection, is the way to go if you are worried about her catching COVID while pregnant. Shitty as it is, seems like your choices are between something with a known miscarriage risk, and something with an overall unknown risk on multiple fronts. I would stay away from the vaccine since it could have long term effects that are far more significant than risks to a short-term pregnancy. But no one really knows for sure.

Good luck, friend.

13
FLIBS 13 points ago +13 / -0

What's up with all the heart and lymph node reactions / deaths?

18
Imransgarage 18 points ago +18 / -0

High chance of allergic reactions re lymph.

That’s why they had been looking at mRNA vax. mRNA signals “live” infection so the body responds strongly to it.

Read the vax trials, lots of lymph swelling.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
2
ADAM_SCHITT 2 points ago +2 / -0

So am I reading it right that between the 3 vaccines, pfizer, astrazeneca, and unspecified, there have been almost 600 deaths? Shouldn't that be a problem??

9
freundwich 9 points ago +9 / -0

You mean that clickbait article didn't convince you?

4
Examiner1776 4 points ago +4 / -0

It's prudent to believe exactly 0 headlines that you read online

3
SenorTrumper 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yeah, maybe me dumbf?

1
Tagappliedfork 1 point ago +1 / -0

I just clicked through the sources until I reached the UK government report but I'm at work ans can't read all seven or whatnot.

3
5
Juantinntwo 5 points ago +5 / -0

I may not be the brightest crayon, but could using a random data point like say 5 spontaneous abortions between Jan 1 and Jan 24th as a baseline be misleading when looking at numbers over multiple other weeks/months? It could be a lower than normal 24 days as your baseline, or a higher than normal secondary point of data. It could also be just random flux. I can’t make any decisions from what this gives and it looks like something the left would share around.

Regardless, this stuff is not approved by the FDA, the makers have immunity from all accountability of adverse reactions, and all of that sketches me out. I’m not getting it and if my wife was pregnant right now, I would not allow her to get it either.

4
pushbackv2 4 points ago +4 / -0

Sorry for not providing any context. It's all I could find in terms of data.

Yeah, it looks really cherry picked to me too. I just wanted to provide something tangible that would either support the claim or discredit it.

Your reasoning is exactly where I'm at too. The pharma immunity was the biggest tell for me. Ain't touching that with a ten-foot pole.

2
LawfulSilentMajority 2 points ago +2 / -0

There's also the fact that they're continuously vaccinating a larger portion of the population and the rate is increasing, so you'd expect an increase in the absolute total.