The Miscarriages are Real

New data from Israel confirms the increased risk of miscarriage with COVID vaccination

This will be a short one today. I promise.

If you have been following the series of articles I have written on the (overly) complicated story of calculating miscarriage rates after any pharmaceutical is introduced to the pregnant population - but specifically the mRNA COVID vaccines - you will know that the serious people in this space have contended that the miscarriage rate has approximately doubled.

I have been saying this since 2021, when the CDC released a really shitty and confusing study on the “V-safe registry” that didn’t tell us anything at all, but was used to confuse people for 4 years. After seeing the twitter space bombarded with people who want to divert the narrative I wrote this two weeks ago.

Part of the reason to publish that is that is contains a list of the articles I have written on this very subject. I am confident that it will stand the test of time, outline who is poisoning the well and yet provide a consistent conclusion on the impact of the COVID vaccine rollout on miscarriage rates.

That is, miscarriage rates are around double what they should be.

The last article in the main series is this one:

And the main finding from the analysis that was performed to write the article (which was complex and not found elsewhere) is here:

That chart is a type of “survival analysis” and I explained in the article that, although it was an inappropriate way of conducting comparisons of miscarriages - because it overestimates the miscarriage rate - if you used the same technique for both cohorts you will actually see the difference.

Instead, what the pharma companies do is that they use one method to overestimate the background miscarriage rate and another method to estimate the miscarriage rate when their drug is rolled out, so you don’t notice that it is causing miscarriages.

Then, so that they can easily hide a miscarriage rate up to 20% and nobody will bat an eyelid they claim (like Viki Male here) that the normal background rate of miscarriage after a confirmed pregnancy was 20%.

It isn’t.

In order to obfuscate, complicate and confuse, the pharma companies - and the useful minions who are paid millions of dollars to influence pregnant women and their doctors without declaring it…

….use data that is either confounded by multiple factors, or totally unverifiable, to reinforce the idea that the COVID vaccines were perfectly harmless in pregnancy despite failing animal studies.

The original Pfizer animal studies for Comirnaty showed a doubling of fetal losses, note the “historical data” used to underplay the finding which was in a controlled trial and therefore shouldn’t have mentioned historical data.

So what’s new?

Well here we get to the new news, after I have been saying the same old old news for 4 years.

A blockbuster new study has been released by Josh Guetzkow and Retsef Levi which blows the lid off the COVID vaccine miscarriage data. Note that these are not “fringe researchers”. Retsef Levi has just been appointed to the CDC’s ACIP committee and Josh is an assistant professor in criminology.

And there has definitely been a crime committed.

You see, one of the main problems with the many reports that get pumped out by researchers - who are invariably linked to pharma companies either via research grants or direct payments - is that they cherry pick data that is unverifiable and shows what they want to show.

Such as this recent paper, which has this doozy at the end in the “conflicts” section that most people don’t read.

So they get away with selling junk - like telling us that the rate of birth defects didn’t increase after the COVID vaccines when the CDC data told us otherwise.

But now they are stuck, because Josh and Retsef have now published their data from Israel and they don’t have conflicts with the Pharma industry.

And their paper is a bombshell because it does one thing that nobody else has done - it compares to a directly comparable cohort who had flu vaccines in pregnancy.

And that cuts through all the confounders we normally see that complicate miscarriage risk assessments from observational data (such as women who smoke being less likely to take vaccines in pregnancy). The reason for that is because the same type of person who will take a COVID vaccine in pregnancy will almost certainly be the type of person who will take a flu vaccine in pregnancy - same age, smoking status, parity, obstetric history etc.

And what did it show?

Well, here’s the chart from the paper

And if you look carefully and spend some time you will see that the flu vaccine cohort has a “lower than expected” miscarriage risk and the COVID vaccine cohort has a “higher than expected” risk. The “expected” rates are similar.

No biggie, obviously, because it’s within the range of the “historical” rates, right?

Wrong. Of course you can't lower the miscarriage rate with a flu vaccine so what you are seeing is that the flu vaccine cohort represents the correct “baseline” to compare the new vaccine to. The “expected” rate is higher because it represents a different group of people than those who would take a vaccine in pregnancy.

When you compare these two vaccine cohorts, which are comparable (unlike the many other papers that we have discussed previously), you get something much more dramatic.

And it’s even more obvious in colour, so here it is.

Miscarriage rates by week taken from Guetzkow et al and compared directly between COVID and Influenza vaccine arms

For the stats people this is a very statistically significant difference in rates of miscarriage (with a p-value of 0.00085)..

And guess how much that little blip in the COVID vaccine rates is compared to the flu vaccine?

Approximately double.

Like we’ve been telling you for over 2 years, in multiple articles with multiple data sources.

But don’t worry, the TGA and MHRA and FDA are all over this. They’ve been monitoring the miscarriage rates in real time since the vaccine rollout started.

They have, haven’t they?

Pregnant women deserve better than “trust us” science