It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pregnancy and the Vaccine

page: 3
72
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 01:20 AM
link   
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

This is what is happening now as well. In the UK the Scientists were agaisnt the idea of healthy 12/15 year olds being given vaxs, yet politicians, top health officials were for it and they went agaisnt the vaccine advisory.

There are now some claims that FDA had ordered Pfizer to do more studies on the side-effects of their Covid vaccine on children’s hearts. They ordered those studies to continue until 2027.

Than they wonder why more if not many in the world are likely to be vax hesitant? and we are trusting some companies with a sketchy track record.
edit on 30-9-2021 by HawkEyi because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 02:10 AM
link   
a reply to: 1947boomer

You yourself screwed your facts 1 in 8 end in miscarriage before they even know they are pregnant. At 6 weeks when you hear the heart beat it drops even further, After 12 weeks that goes down to next to none unless something drastic happens(1 in 100,000 end in spontaneous- and it's due to outside factors 99% of the time). Like the woman is injured, poisoned, or has an incompetent cervix. Or other health reasons that often don't involve the actual fetus.


Second those totals don't even add up to the almost 4k you listed.. so what happened to the rest that did NOT COMPLETE the pregnancy?

Secondly; Tony Fauci himself said in the course of 6 months ONLY 20,000 babies were born verses the 320,000 a day prior to vaccines.

And last but not least the article was more then just twisted number of births but scewed numbers. Yes a baby born dead after 20weeks is a still birth not spontaneous abortion which the baby itself can still be alive just to weak to live long after birth. At 23 weeks it's considered a preme, with low risk of survival and 26 most NICUs are equip to handle. With better results yoy.

That article pointed out a lot of lies in the research itself. Including rolling back time just to justify a shot that caused a miscarriage to "pretend" it's safe.

Yeah, I have been studying this crap longer then covid. As a specialist, I will tell you the birthrate itself has dropped 450% world wide. Which isn't just because of lockdowns.
edit on 30-9-2021 by BlackArrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 04:59 AM
link   
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

As I've been saying...just wait until November, just one short month away now.

November is when the first 'vax babies' will start being born (or not). I'm pretty sure this is one of the reasons the feds have had a full-court-press on getting everyone vaccinated before then. I hope and pray this prediction is wrong, but if it's not there will be a backlash of unimaginable proportion which will follow. It will be the final death nail in the 'vaccine's' coffin.



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 06:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe
a reply to: Brotherman

I guess not surprised so much as aghast, angered and appalled.
Hence, putting the thread in the Pit.


at least you won't have to post that reminder to everyone, you know the one.

but this is horrific. CDC is actively trying to kill unborn babies. Or is the New England Journal of Medicine not a credible outfit?



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 06:39 AM
link   
So, technically, the cvax is the new morning after pill? I wonder how that's going down in Texas.



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

It’s so reputable the usual suspects are avoiding this thread like the plague. They know there’s no defence for this genocide!



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 09:43 AM
link   
On platforms like tik-tok and rumble there are tons of videos of babies born to vaccinated mothers who are saying strange things about them. To paraphrase one mother: "these babies are different, those born during this pandemic. I already have 2 children but if they were like this one (recently born) I would be the mother of a single child." Some are reporting black eyes and others saying these babies are non=stop activity and learning to crawl and walk at extremely early ages. Guess we shall see what we have wrought as these children grow older.



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 09:58 AM
link   


Yeah, I have been studying this crap longer then covid. As a specialist, I will tell you the birthrate itself has dropped 450% world wide. Which isn't just because of lockdowns


Care to expand?




Some are reporting black eyes and others saying these babies are non=stop activity and learning to crawl and walk at extremely early ages. Guess we shall see what we have wrought as these children grow older.


Evidence?



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 10:54 AM
link   

A shocking new study published in the New England Journal of Medicine reveals that when pregnant women are given covid vaccinations during their first or second trimesters, they suffer an 82% spontaneous abortion rate, killing 4 out of 5 unborn babies.


Genocide.



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
On platforms like tik-tok and rumble there are tons of videos of babies born to vaccinated mothers who are saying strange things about them.


I wouldn't be surprised if Adolf Hitler DNA strand is one of the ingredients in the vaccines...



edit on 56095630am302021Thu, 30 Sep 2021 11:56:05 -0500 by imitator because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackArrow

Not to disparage your post or anything, but one thing confuses me:

Yeah, I have been studying this crap longer then covid. As a specialist, I will tell you the birthrate itself has dropped 450% world wide. Which isn't just because of lockdowns.

How can one have over 100% decline? Wouldn't a 100% drop mean no babies were being born? So are 3.5 times the normal birthrate being "unborn" or something?

Again, not disparaging, just trying to understand. This interests me.

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

The Paper from the NIH claims out of 827 pregnancies, 115 aborted.

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).


That makes about 12% or so of the pregnancies which is BAD! What is really bad is the conclusions that do not recognize that 10-12% is BAD!

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.


The study is reference by the OP's link is HERE.

It seems the initial link in the OP is misleading.

Cheers - Dave
edit on 9/30.2021 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackArrow



Yeah, I have been studying this crap longer then covid. As a specialist, I will tell you the birthrate itself has dropped 450% world wide.


The only way you can have a decrease of greater than 100% is if you are comparing a statistical value between two points in time where both values are still greater than zero and your reference point is the later of the two points. A blanket statement of a statistical value going negative is otherwise not possible.

For example, if 500 widgets are produced in January, and only 100 widgets are produced in June, then there has been a 400% decrease in the production of widgets between January and June. In other words, production of widgets is down to 20% of what it was in January.

Not disagreeing with your post, just offering this for clarity.

ETA - In this specific case, I would be very interested to learn what those two points in time are. This would be very relevant and add extra emphasis to your point. That's a very telling number!






edit on 9/30/2021 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Thanks, that helped a little. I guess I'm just not used to seeing decrease percentages calculated like that. A 50% drop would mean only half as many, and a 75% drop would mean a fourth as many.

Kinda blew my mind there...

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

You didn’t read it properly. Here, I’ll do it for you.

"Out of the 127 women receiving vaccines during their first or second trimesters, 104 spontaneous abortions occurred before their pregnancies hit the 20-week mark. These are indicated as “spontaneous abortions” in the table. “

The extra 700 pregnancies are just there to skew the figures, you can’t have a ‘spontaneous abortion’ after 20 weeks according to their own data. Deliberate misrepresentation of statistics.

Still no sign of the Vaxzis, what a surprise.




edit on 30/9/21 by Grenade because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Grenade

No sign of the Vaxis because it's final and irrefutable. The question now is who is culpable for this apocalypse. Or perhaps we already know how this is going to play out.



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

You didn’t read it properly. Here, I’ll do it for you.

"Out of the 127 women receiving vaccines during their first or second trimesters, 104 spontaneous abortions occurred before their pregnancies hit the 20-week mark. These are indicated as “spontaneous abortions” in the table. “

The extra 700 pregnancies are just there to skew the figures, you can’t have a ‘spontaneous abortion’ after 20 weeks according to their own data. Deliberate misrepresentation of statistics.

Still no sign of the Vaxzis, what a surprise.



I read the actual site, not second or third hand blogging info....


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).


So, I really don't see where I read anything wrong. The NIH Site Here which the OP article quoted contain the above text, I bolded the statements. So where did I read the NIH information incorrectly when it's plain as day in the link? 827 had a complicated pregnancy of which 115 ended in pregnancy loss.

That's roughly 1/7th dead or 12-14% dead correct? Maybe you didn't read the original article ;-)

I want to see the jabs stopped before it kills 90% of the population. I don't disagree that the jab is causing spontaneous abortions, I just disagree with hyping up the numbers to suit a particular bias. You know, deny ignorance, right?

Cheers - Dave



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

You’re misinterpreting and misrepresenting the data. I can’t make it any more clear.

Try one again, open the study on the NIH website. It clearly states the figures I’ve provided for you multiple times.

As I and everyone in this thread can clearly see you’re incapable of admitting defeat and are blinkered to the truth.

Good luck, my new approach in the face of idiocy is to ignore it. Our conversation is over.

edit on 30/9/21 by Grenade because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

One of the side effects affecting young childbearing women with the moderna jab is that cause spontaneous periods after the shot, it is not a hear say and is not just a rare thing.

When my daughter took her first shot of moderna, she woke up the next day with very bad cramps and that same day she got her period, even when she was not due for another week, she was not pregnant soo no damage done, but she found out later that a lot of her co workers young females had the same side effects with moderna.

I do not see anything been published about this and pharma is not talking.

This is a very important issue for mothers to be expecting while they get the jab, specially moderna.



posted on Sep, 30 2021 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

You’re misinterpreting and misrepresenting the data. I can’t make it any more clear.



How can I do that if I am quoting the actual link? Don't you have that backwards in that you are actually misinterpreting the article based on another article that is more suitable to your bias? Like I said, the NIH article is the NIH article, I quoted it directly. I don't agree with their downplaying deaths and the jab is NOT safe by any stretch of the imagination. That does not however allow anyone to make up unsupported numbers to push an agenda on either side.

Cheers - Dave




top topics



 
72
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join