Liberal Forum

freeman » 01 Dec 2021, 8:07 am » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 8:07 am

I thought this deserved its own thread for young women to note, and particularly defenders of Big Pharma and the government agencies they "own", through regulatory capture.
Excerpts:
https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/study ... id-vaccine

"Study Shows That Up To 8 In 10 Women Had A Miscarriage After Getting The Covid Vaccine Before The Third Trimester"

"One particular finding – that related to miscarriages – has been seemingly overlooked (and perhaps even intentionally hidden, as some claim, since corrections were made to the report). But first, it’s important to keep in mind that miscarriages are defined as “the spontaneous loss of a pregnancy before the 20th week.” The general rate of miscarriages in the U.S. ranges from as low as 10% to as high as 26%, depending on the medical publication."

"However, this study is focusing specifically on how the Covid vaccine impacts pregnancy, including by trimester. So to more precisely calculate the miscarriage rate, we have to remember that miscarriages, by definition, occur before the 20-week gestation mark. This means that all 700 women who received the vaccine in the third trimester must be excluded from the calculation because they were already past being able to have a technical miscarriage. So really, 104 out of 127 women experienced a miscarriage. This means the miscarriage rate of women who received the vaccine in the first or second trimester is actually 81.9%, or 8 out of 10 women – way, way above the national average."
 

there is so many things that make this completely inaccurate, miscarriage due to social stress over pandemic restrictions can come in many forms disrupting the mothers' normal way of living.

Vegasgiants » 01 Dec 2021, 11:54 am » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 11:54 am

That they already had sufficient evidence that it was safe and effective 

What does it communicate to you that you got caught posting fake news?

The sheer stupidity of your conclusion is appalling, in light of the fact that vaccines generally take 10 years or more to properly evaluate safety (even according to your demigod Fauci).
The "news" regards a "study" and specifically the one that the FDA used as an excuse to give EUA to kill babies leaky non-vaxxes.
When any idiot can calculate the actual risk VS reward, particularly for those that bothered to prepare.
"Vaxx hesitant"? (or pragmatic, honoring survival instinct) VS vaxx regretful
 

freeman » 01 Dec 2021, 12:01 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 12:01 pm

The sheer stupidity of your conclusion is appalling, in light of the fact that vaccines generally take 10 years or more to properly evaluate safety (even according to your demigod Fauci).
The "news" regards a "study" and specifically the one that the FDA used as an excuse to give EUA to kill babies leaky non-vaxxes.
When any idiot can calculate the actual risk VS reward, particularly for those that bothered to prepare.
"Vaxx hesitant"? (or pragmatic, honoring survival instinct) VS vaxx regretful

You keep posting fake news from crapoy sources.  You make unsubstantiated claims.  You use YouTube videos as a source.  You got caught posting a study that was retracted.

You have zero credibility. 

You are dismissed 
 
 

freeman » 01 Dec 2021, 11:45 am » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 11:45 am

I know that because of mass psychosis vaccine adverse events are ignored and massively under reported in large part because they don't fit the narrative as well as because few people will spend the half hour to suffer the intimidation of filing one.
VAERS - Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System - less than 1% are reported

The ob/gyn office my daughter goes to has a big sign on the wall telling pregnant women to get vaxxed, even though pregnant women were specifically excluded from the vaccine trials. But are they going to turn around and go against the narrative, no matter what they observe, particularly if they work for a group that collectively conform to the "standard of care"? No. They don't want to loose their Ferraris to lawsuits. So the carnage will continue.
NIH deadly recommendations compared to those of COVID-competent professionals

Anecdotal crap on the innertubes....

 

OdeToJoy » 01 Dec 2021, 11:54 am » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 11:54 am

Covid-19: A paper on vaccination in pregnancy co-authored by Simon Thornley has been panned by experts around the world

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health ... -the-world

Thornley and Brock said papers published since the original CDC paper were “immaterial” to their analysis. They did not respond when asked to justify their recommendation to withdraw vaccines to large numbers of people without reference to other data.

It was published seven weeks before Thornley and Brock’s paper, but is not referenced.

"We have 11 studies, from 5 countries, done on more than 75,000 people vaccinated in pregnancy, and published either by reputable peer-reviewed journals or directly by health authorities, all of which find no link between Covid-19 vaccination in pregnancy and miscarriage or any other pregnancy complication,” said Dr Victoria Male, an immunologist who studies vaccines and pregnancy at Imperial College London

I guess you haven't noticed that truth has been panned, censored and banned by Big Pharma, through their bitches in government and at Google/YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and the legacy media, since the beginning of the pandemic.
How Google's ownership of weak or lazy minds works
Otherwise the pandemic would have been over by April of 2020. Just as it was recently, among the 5% vaxxed 230 million people of the state of Uttar Pradesh India, within weeks.
Secret formula eradicates COVID in India state of 230 million people
 
 

freeman » 01 Dec 2021, 12:08 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 12:08 pm

I guess you haven't noticed that truth has been panned, censored and banned by Big Pharma, through their bitches in government and at Google/YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and the legacy media, since the beginning of the pandemic.
How Google's ownership of weak or lazy minds works
Otherwise the pandemic would have been over by April of 2020. Just as it was among the 5% vaxxed 230 million people of the state of Uttar Pradesh India, within weeks.
Secret formula eradicates COVID in India state of 230 million people

You got caught posting fake news dude

Vegasgiants » 01 Dec 2021, 12:14 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 12:14 pm

You got caught posting fake news dude

you get caught all the time

FJB » 01 Dec 2021, 12:16 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 12:16 pm

you get caught all the time

Name once

Pengwin » 01 Dec 2021, 8:33 am » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 8:33 am

The question here is, why would it be a problem even if it was 10 out of 10, 100%?

Who is more valuable, the fetus or the woman who can make many of them?

In your view, neither has any value at all.

Pengwin » 01 Dec 2021, 12:28 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 12:28 pm

Of ultimate value?  No.

But of relative value?  Yes.

And it's entirely rational which one...

Situational ethics are affected by the wind.

KY Jelly on a tile floor is like that. Funny or tragic?

Pengwin » 01 Dec 2021, 12:47 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 12:47 pm

And Absolutist Ethics are but dogma...

We're all guilty of both.

Vegasgiants » 01 Dec 2021, 12:14 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 12:14 pm

You got caught posting fake news dude

So if a study posted in the New England Journal of Medicine that was drilled down into in the OP article, is fake news to you, what is real news to you?

(though I would agree if you claimed that journals are by and large information laundering operations for Big Pharma )
"Medical journals: “information-laundering for Big Pharma”

 
 

freeman » 01 Dec 2021, 12:56 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 12:56 pm

So if a study posted in the New England Journal of Medicine that was drilled down into by the OP, is fake news to you, what is real news to you?

(though I would agree if you claimed that journals are by and large information laundering operations for Big Pharma )
"Medical journals: “information-laundering for Big Pharma”

You posted a retracted study


Deny that

The country is turning against Fauci and Biden.

Bidens America is a wreck

freeman » 01 Dec 2021, 12:08 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 12:08 pm

I guess you haven't noticed that truth has been panned, censored and banned by Big Pharma, through their bitches in government and at Google/YouTube, Instagram, Facebook and the legacy media, since the beginning of the pandemic.
How Google's ownership of weak or lazy minds works
Otherwise the pandemic would have been over by April of 2020. Just as it was recently, among the 5% vaxxed 230 million people of the state of Uttar Pradesh India, within weeks.
Secret formula eradicates COVID in India state of 230 million people

Yes, distraction.  A common method to stop people from talking about the fact that author of the paper has pulled back support.

​something that distracts : an object that directs one's attention away from something else

Thornley, the author of the study, has since retracted the paper:

A 2021 paper which Thornley co-authored which linked mRNA vaccines, such as the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, to significantly higher rates of miscarriage was publicly criticized by the academic community throughout New Zealand, including the Head and other senior members of the university’s School of Population Health, for ignoring evidence that had already been published in a high-impact peer-reviewed research journal, and for a less-than-rigorous analysis of the data provided by the Center for Disease Control in the USA. The paper, which was published in a small journal edited by an American anti-vaccination advocate, was retracted in November 2021, with Thornley saying that he and his co-author had made a major mathematical error.
 

Deezer Shoove » 01 Dec 2021, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 12:49 pm

We're all guilty of both.

no I am not affiliated with your intellectual we. I am an innocent ancestor not corrupted by social narratives blocking my ability to navigate time occupying space specifically here.

The West is crumbling, while The East is on the rise.

Biden is the Patsy

Putin and Xi build hypersonic missiles......meanwhile

Biden wants to cut dicks off little boys and

sew them on little girls.

Putin and Xi create strong military alliances.....meanwhile.

Biden sends trannies into
foxholes with sewn on cocks

OdeToJoy » 01 Dec 2021, 1:03 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Dec 2021, 1:03 pm

Yes, distraction.  A common method to stop people from talking about the fact that author of the paper has pulled back support.

​something that distracts : an object that directs one's attention away from something else

Thornley, the author of the study, has since retracted the paper:

A 2021 paper which Thornley co-authored which linked mRNA vaccines, such as the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, to significantly higher rates of miscarriage was publicly criticized by the academic community throughout New Zealand, including the Head and other senior members of the university’s School of Population Health, for ignoring evidence that had already been published in a high-impact peer-reviewed research journal, and for a less-than-rigorous analysis of the data provided by the Center for Disease Control in the USA. The paper, which was published in a small journal edited by an American anti-vaccination advocate, was retracted in November 2021, with Thornley saying that he and his co-author had made a major mathematical error.

This whole plandemic and Great Reset require preserving the narrative. He's not the first guy to get threatened with his job. Just did a quick search (even though this paper is irrelevant to the OP of this thread which is a study published in NEJM) and found what I expected:
https://weehingthong.org/2021/11/17/sim ... pregnancy/

"It follows an email from Professor Robert Scragg, the head of the School of Population Health at Auckland University, which urged Thornley and his co-author, Aleisha Brook, to “immediately publicly retract their article”. Such an intervention is almost unheard of in academia.  Thornley told The Spinoff that he had issued a correction to the paper last week, but that “following the [Scragg] letter, I have decided to withdraw it”.

Why wouldn't he be allowed to correct it? Instead he withdrew it under pressure to keep his job. Same thing happens in our bureaucracies and academia whether regarding Pharma or climate.
So why don't you try actually reviewing the math about the NEJM paper of the original post?