I cannot understand for the life of me why any woman (pregnant or not) or man of child bearing years get any jab that they know little about, no nothing of it’s contents or have any “real clinical trial data” concluding it to be safe, effective or possible even dangerous. There is no logic in my mind to allow an unknown drug to be jabbed into mine or anyone’s body under those conditions. If my employer told me I had to get the jab to keep my job there would still be no reason for me to comply especially since mandating them was illegal. Sorry I don’t understand…..FEAR AND LIES OF EXTREME MAGNITUDE ARE POOR REASONS! 🧐🤥
Raw data is the only thing I trust. Without it the conclusions are probably pharma bull****. As 90% of published work is wrong, you also need corroboration by multiple independent sources. Then I would believe it. Until then it is just worthless propaganda.
"And of course there was the inevitable triumphant tweet from an academic who has been prominent in promoting previously flawed studies to try to convince pregnant women to get the covid vaccine". How can they sleep at night? But then I used to ask myself that about Tony Blair.
Need to nab in this urgent comment. I think the MHRA did release their pregnancy report internally around late Jan - Feb 2022 and from the skeletal info I have, it looks super bad. If this is correct, it looks like their were over 11,000 Yellow Cards issued for these pregnant women based on MHRA data entries around that time. I actually found roughly 50,000 excess references used in which I mapped based on 1 Yellow Card + average of 3.29 reactions giving roughly 11,600 Yellow Cards. Wow!
So the data is available below in a post which you kindly reposted before so in the main graphic, check out the weird bump in June 21, right around the time of the Vaccine Monitor release. Now look at the larger bump begining late Jan 22. This is not good news.
Way to follow-up on these researchers/spin doctors!
Another Substacker, Fabian Spieker, recently reported on the curious timing of respiratory distress among newborns, showing a steep rise temporally-linked to COVID shots [ https://vigilance.pervaers.com/p/chart-of-the-day-newborns ].
It would appear that this Nature Communications study was meant as "cover" for the temporal-linkage of rising infant respiratory distress to the COVID shots.
The validity of published peer reviewed papers is becoming a joke, for me it already is, the study designs are so poor you can get any result you want. I certainly will not be making any health decisions based on this nonsense. I do worry about people that do not realize that most peer reviewed literature is wrong and the risks they are taking by believing it to be true. There is no getting through to this group and I make less effort with each passing day to open their eyes.
I think it is extremely generous to call this "study" a study, and ditto for "flawed".
These narrative outpourings from the corrupted organisations purporting to publish "science" are not flawed but deliberate attempts to confuse, disrupt and pervert the course of justice by We the People against these monstrous and murderous organisations currently known as Big Pharma.
What I find particularly disconcerting is the discrepancy found in the supplemental tables under Table 1. It states that seven mothers who were initially listed as unvaccinated were documented as having received the vaccination before delivery. Which way is it? This raises serious questions about the credibility of this study.
Science is based on being able to reproduce results and have others go over your assumptions and workings. That must be part of the setup of any study, in this context - how can we provide our data and working out for others to check. Otherwise you get results as in the Madsen paper of 2002, though without the possibility of checking, on MMR vaccination and autism where the raw data shows the vaccinated have higher chance of autism yet without mention of that or explanation some slicing and dicing of that data results in the opposite, though not with statistical significance.
What I find depressing, frustrating and ire provoking is that such as the Australian government are still to this day promoting the false narrative and removing freedoms, imposing restrictions on the basis of it.
As a new instance I today received a communication regarding the Lands Services Office in Adelaide where I learned that access to the public is dependent upon the public being able to produce proof that they have been 'fully' vaccinated against Covid 19.
In this venue I imagine I'm preaching to the converted and don't need to point out the egregious wrongs of this.
But can I point this out: after all this time WE are still not organised. Have no focus. Have no central point. We still are a wishy washy distributed 'loony fringe'.
i.e we are losing. We are losing. Such as the above are quite literally enshrined now in custom, rule and regulation.
Can someone, anyone, please indicate where sensible hopeful 'fight back' might be observed, communicated with, joined even?
For myself I can offer: https://covidhonesty.com Goes back a few years now. Last update 2022. That gives an idea.
But this is serious. This is lunacy. A monster sleeping beneath the surface. At any time the lunatic authorities could lock the whole population up, cripple trade, work, business, society, everything and anything. Destroy the whole country. Incarcerating and damaging on all sides. They did this before. They are all primed to do it again swifter than ever before. They could do it overnight.
It has me crying in frustrated rage...
It is our little civil parallel with the monstrous evil insanity of the Kiev regime that has killed 500,000 of its own people in ostensibly an effort to make their lives better by ethnic cleansing the Donbas, part of their own country.
Though done differently it is precisely the same utter disregard for people, logic, reason, truth, sanity that pertains here.
And we, en masse, seem as willing to bear this madness as those poor Kiev Ukrainians.
Additional discrepancies appear in various sections of the paper, adding to the overall concern about the accuracy and precision of the data. One notable instance is the conflicting information regarding severe COVID cases. While the main body of the text suggests a total of 26 severe cases, Table 2 later indicates only 16 cases. Moreover, the discrepancy in the number of subjects raises further red flags. The authors mention following 221 pregnant women in the main body of the text, with 151 unvaccinated and 70 vaccinated. However, conflicting information in Table 2 reports 199 subjects, and Table 1 in the supplement indicates 186 subjects.
This inconsistency is indicative of a lack of thoroughness in the study's reporting. It is crucial for each table to be meticulously revised to reflect accurate totals, either through the inclusion of missing data categories or the addition of clear footnotes to explain and rectify these discrepancies. Ensuring consistency and transparency in reporting is essential for the credibility and reliability of the research findings.
Viki Male the resident shill on a mission for her employers to target any pregnant woman to accept experimental injections into their bodies. What is the going rate nowadays for 30 pieces of silver.
I keep wondering what epigenetic consequences might arise in future generations, now that so many pregnant women have succumbed to the jabberwocky propaganda.
I cannot understand for the life of me why any woman (pregnant or not) or man of child bearing years get any jab that they know little about, no nothing of it’s contents or have any “real clinical trial data” concluding it to be safe, effective or possible even dangerous. There is no logic in my mind to allow an unknown drug to be jabbed into mine or anyone’s body under those conditions. If my employer told me I had to get the jab to keep my job there would still be no reason for me to comply especially since mandating them was illegal. Sorry I don’t understand…..FEAR AND LIES OF EXTREME MAGNITUDE ARE POOR REASONS! 🧐🤥
Thanks for this Norman. Your skills and diligent efforts are invaluable to us all.
Raw data is the only thing I trust. Without it the conclusions are probably pharma bull****. As 90% of published work is wrong, you also need corroboration by multiple independent sources. Then I would believe it. Until then it is just worthless propaganda.
"And of course there was the inevitable triumphant tweet from an academic who has been prominent in promoting previously flawed studies to try to convince pregnant women to get the covid vaccine". How can they sleep at night? But then I used to ask myself that about Tony Blair.
It is interesting that for my Masters dissertation I have to make all raw, anonymised data available.
Why is this not a requirement for scientific publications?
Need to nab in this urgent comment. I think the MHRA did release their pregnancy report internally around late Jan - Feb 2022 and from the skeletal info I have, it looks super bad. If this is correct, it looks like their were over 11,000 Yellow Cards issued for these pregnant women based on MHRA data entries around that time. I actually found roughly 50,000 excess references used in which I mapped based on 1 Yellow Card + average of 3.29 reactions giving roughly 11,600 Yellow Cards. Wow!
So the data is available below in a post which you kindly reposted before so in the main graphic, check out the weird bump in June 21, right around the time of the Vaccine Monitor release. Now look at the larger bump begining late Jan 22. This is not good news.
https://feldmans.substack.com/p/are-the-mhra-releasing-all-of-their
Way to follow-up on these researchers/spin doctors!
Another Substacker, Fabian Spieker, recently reported on the curious timing of respiratory distress among newborns, showing a steep rise temporally-linked to COVID shots [ https://vigilance.pervaers.com/p/chart-of-the-day-newborns ].
It would appear that this Nature Communications study was meant as "cover" for the temporal-linkage of rising infant respiratory distress to the COVID shots.
The validity of published peer reviewed papers is becoming a joke, for me it already is, the study designs are so poor you can get any result you want. I certainly will not be making any health decisions based on this nonsense. I do worry about people that do not realize that most peer reviewed literature is wrong and the risks they are taking by believing it to be true. There is no getting through to this group and I make less effort with each passing day to open their eyes.
Rather than angry, I feel overwhelmingly sad for the people who trust this "science" and are consequently injured / injure others.
I think it is extremely generous to call this "study" a study, and ditto for "flawed".
These narrative outpourings from the corrupted organisations purporting to publish "science" are not flawed but deliberate attempts to confuse, disrupt and pervert the course of justice by We the People against these monstrous and murderous organisations currently known as Big Pharma.
Owned, of course, by all the usual suspects.
What I find particularly disconcerting is the discrepancy found in the supplemental tables under Table 1. It states that seven mothers who were initially listed as unvaccinated were documented as having received the vaccination before delivery. Which way is it? This raises serious questions about the credibility of this study.
Science is based on being able to reproduce results and have others go over your assumptions and workings. That must be part of the setup of any study, in this context - how can we provide our data and working out for others to check. Otherwise you get results as in the Madsen paper of 2002, though without the possibility of checking, on MMR vaccination and autism where the raw data shows the vaccinated have higher chance of autism yet without mention of that or explanation some slicing and dicing of that data results in the opposite, though not with statistical significance.
What I find depressing, frustrating and ire provoking is that such as the Australian government are still to this day promoting the false narrative and removing freedoms, imposing restrictions on the basis of it.
As a new instance I today received a communication regarding the Lands Services Office in Adelaide where I learned that access to the public is dependent upon the public being able to produce proof that they have been 'fully' vaccinated against Covid 19.
In this venue I imagine I'm preaching to the converted and don't need to point out the egregious wrongs of this.
But can I point this out: after all this time WE are still not organised. Have no focus. Have no central point. We still are a wishy washy distributed 'loony fringe'.
i.e we are losing. We are losing. Such as the above are quite literally enshrined now in custom, rule and regulation.
Can someone, anyone, please indicate where sensible hopeful 'fight back' might be observed, communicated with, joined even?
For myself I can offer: https://covidhonesty.com Goes back a few years now. Last update 2022. That gives an idea.
But this is serious. This is lunacy. A monster sleeping beneath the surface. At any time the lunatic authorities could lock the whole population up, cripple trade, work, business, society, everything and anything. Destroy the whole country. Incarcerating and damaging on all sides. They did this before. They are all primed to do it again swifter than ever before. They could do it overnight.
It has me crying in frustrated rage...
It is our little civil parallel with the monstrous evil insanity of the Kiev regime that has killed 500,000 of its own people in ostensibly an effort to make their lives better by ethnic cleansing the Donbas, part of their own country.
Though done differently it is precisely the same utter disregard for people, logic, reason, truth, sanity that pertains here.
And we, en masse, seem as willing to bear this madness as those poor Kiev Ukrainians.
I do not understand.
I do not.
I don't understand.
I cannot comprehend it at all.
Additional discrepancies appear in various sections of the paper, adding to the overall concern about the accuracy and precision of the data. One notable instance is the conflicting information regarding severe COVID cases. While the main body of the text suggests a total of 26 severe cases, Table 2 later indicates only 16 cases. Moreover, the discrepancy in the number of subjects raises further red flags. The authors mention following 221 pregnant women in the main body of the text, with 151 unvaccinated and 70 vaccinated. However, conflicting information in Table 2 reports 199 subjects, and Table 1 in the supplement indicates 186 subjects.
This inconsistency is indicative of a lack of thoroughness in the study's reporting. It is crucial for each table to be meticulously revised to reflect accurate totals, either through the inclusion of missing data categories or the addition of clear footnotes to explain and rectify these discrepancies. Ensuring consistency and transparency in reporting is essential for the credibility and reliability of the research findings.
Viki Male the resident shill on a mission for her employers to target any pregnant woman to accept experimental injections into their bodies. What is the going rate nowadays for 30 pieces of silver.
I keep wondering what epigenetic consequences might arise in future generations, now that so many pregnant women have succumbed to the jabberwocky propaganda.