| | | Mathematics is a precise business. We essentially have % uptake stats for live births with 78% of mothers refusing any covid vaccine. It doesn't actually say that 78% of mothers refused any covid vaxx. It says that of the mothers who had live births, 78% did not get a vaxx. It gave no information about mothers who had miscarriages.
In Aotearoastan-Zimbabwe, about 95% of eligible people got vaxxed. The frighteners were on pregnant women. If the numbers given were correct, about 95% of pregnant women got vaxxed in AZ.
I know different countries had very different vaxxing rates. But if USA had half the pregnant women getting some vaxx then the miscarriage rate might be shockingly high and not shown in those figures you gave.
Because normal miscarriage rates are around 20%, a LOT of miscarriages could be due to vaxx and the 20% might not be spectacularly different. If miscarriages went to 25%, an obstetrician/midwife might not even notice. Each professional handles several at a time, not hundreds or thousands.
Suppose an obstetrician handles 100 pregnancies at a time. They would expect 20 miscarriages normally. If half their patients are vaxxed and ALL the vaxxed lost their babies, that would mean 30 miscarriages instead of 20. If only 10% of the vaxxed lost their babies because of the vaxx, that would mean 25 miscarriages instead of 20 over several months. An obstetrician might or might not notice that.
10% is a huge failure rate!! Suppose it is only 5% miscarriage rate, then it would be 23 miscarriages instead of normal 20. I doubt that would be noticed.
This seems to be true: How true that is, we'll never know, but given the way most Dr's have worked to deny any vaccine-related injuries so far, I feel nearly certain the vast majority would have done their best to shut down any ideas of this the mother would have entertained. So I expect the mothers would be told "It's normal. Have a nice cup of tea and a lie down until you feel better." It's less trouble to just call it "normal". With 23 instead of 20, sweeping under the rug is the easiest option.
If mothers thought the vaxx would give a 5% extra miscarriage rate, they'd think twice about that! And there's still the non-fatal harm to be accounted for due to spiking the embryos/blastocysts/what have yous.
The data should be very easy to get. It's amazing that epidemiologists haven't got super precise numbers pinned down - 18 months ago.
The fact that we're even bothering with the useless vaers numbers shows how hopelessly handled the calamity has been.
Mqurice |
|
