Great analysis, I really really wonder why the v-safe data is guarded and inaccessible. Would a FOIA request for access to anonamised v-safe data not be required to be granted?
My sister is pregnant and had the first Pfizer. I really want good data to be able to advise her about the second shot she has scheduled very soon
Sorry to see you in Twitter jail but thanks for the Telegram breadcrumb so that I could find you here. Keep it up! I spend lots of time on Substack now between Alex Berenson, Boriquagato (El Gato Malo of Twitter fame) and Rounding the Earth our stats expert! The comment community is vibrant and no censorship. I upload a link to all on Twitter. I will let folks know you are here.
Thank you for publishing this!!! I looked at the study showing the 82% rate a while back and posted to Instagram… needless to say I got put in Insta jail for it 🙄 Such important information that people are just not getting 😭
Yes, it was extremely irresponsible to even include that data in the study (which really implied 100% as you correctly pointed out, since no viable pregnancy could have completed in that time-frame).
I wonder why all of the studies on v-safe data are so bad? Are they purposefully giving it to incompetent researchers? The statistical mistakes you pointed out are things you should know not to do even with high school math. Anybody with first-year statistics should for sure know not to do these things.
Really, just adding up percentages calculated with changing numerators.... I bet if they reached a result of 150% they would not have realized something is seriously wrong with their calculation.
Do you need any statistical background to be a medical researchers? I guess the big clue is that they will claim a treatment "shows no benefit" when reaching an outcome of RR = 0.6 p=0.051
Correct. I would hate to think that, having access to the later data in June when they published, they had advance knowledge of the upcoming rates and consciously or subconsciously made a calculation that was in keeping with the later raw data that they had in front of them
Confirmation bias on the part of good actors ?? Possible …. But birth rates have plummeted. What about all the high misscairage rates and still births we have heard about from nurses and OBGYNS?
I find it difficult to believe Naomi wolfe and her team are a limited hangout. Stew peters yes. Have you contacted all the Relevent Substack writers as well as ICAN and Childrens health defense ?
"Participants who received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine preconception or before 6 weeks’ of pregnancy were entered into the analysis at 6 weeks’ gestation whereas participants who received their first eligible dose at or after 6 weeks’ gestation entered the analysis in the week they received their first eligible dose."
But they only get entered into week 6 if their pregnancy is still "active", and they could have been vaxxed from the periconception period up to weeks 6 to <7. I'm not a medical person but there would have to be some sort of survivor bias here? Is that a standard way of using study data?
I wrote a comment but it didn't post, I was wondering if you can share anything you know about Chinese vaccines and how do they affect our health long term? Most stuff I found online is related to Western ones but I can't find any real info on Sinovac or Sinopharm and what they really do to a human bodies in the future? Thanks! Wish you all the best!
I wish I knew! I suspect they are less problematic than the mRNA vaccines but obviously will have zero efficacy (because all the Cov vaccines have zero efficacy) and risk ADE. Beyond that they are probably not a major problem
No don't take them. anything that causes you to make that much spike protein is very bad for you. Plus the antibodies you make to the vaxx induced spike protein are not protective. We only find high levels of those, such as you make with vaxx, in the sickest, most severe cases of natural infection. The spike protein itself attacks your endothelial cells, your entire vascular system. Most people already had cross reactive t cell immunity from other coronavirus such as the one that causes the common cold. Before vaxx distribution 80% of all + pcr test were asymptomatic or mild. And nearly all the cases that were severe were elderly and those w 4 or more comorbidities. For an average healthy person, it's 99.8% certain your immune system will have no problem recognizing parts of the virus and mounting an immune response that is actually protective, unlike the one made by the vaxx
This looks like a solid analysis. The adding of percentages this way with changing denominators is simply inexcusable- It is difficult to imagine the deficit of mathematical skill it takes to think this is an appropriate way figure out overall percentages- it is the kind of mistake a 5th grader might make.
Ace2 are dense in ovaries and testes - ofc there is an effect which is not going to be positive - the hubris of these people is to believe / the exacting evil of those responsible
Thank you, this is clarifying, but the reality is still muddy, even to me. I agree - they should release the data. Please consider writing a letter to the Editor-in-Chief of Sci, Publ Health Pol & Law calling for the release of all of the data. Please see Brock & Thornley (Withdrawn due to social pressure and threats: https://www.publichealthpolicyjournal.com/general-5 ). The vaccine makers promised transparency. The odd hump you have revealed is seriously worrying. Your results seem solid but should be peer-reviewed. It would help a lot of people to give a toy analogy using chemotherapy and stages of cancer (1-4). Please email info@ipak-edu.org to connect.
Great work. Thanks. Keep it up. The Tom Shimabukuro & Lauren Zauche publications are deceptive, underhanded and likely purposely fraudulent. These docs are designated stooges bribed with first authorship in NEJM. My seven year old grandson could have written these two manuscripts better than these cheaters. I still maintain that both the Pfizer 5.3.6 post marketing analysis AND Shimabukuro BOTH have about an 80% miscarriage rate calculated on the basis of EXACTLY what is published in the albeit extraordinarily poor & confusing presentations. When one compares these two documents I suspect that Pharma did the ghost writing for Shimabukuro Vsafe 1 and the Zauche Vsafe 2. The best way to fix the corrupted medical industrial complex is to completely take it down. It should be completely destroyed by civil & criminal litigation. The perpetrators including physicians, journal editors, medical boards, big pharma, CDC & FDA must be tried in criminal courts and punished or this mass killing for profit will continue. We the people deserve better than these criminals.
It's definitely not 80% and bear in mind that the 5.3.6 is merely reporting adverse events so the denominator is mostly miscarriages. It's really important to get this right because the people pushing this stuff will destroy those who claim 80% for this reason. However one can be more circumspect and say that of those reported in the adverse event report 80% were miscarriages. It's a distraction tbh... A doubling of miscarriage rate is a massive story in itself
Dr LUKE MCLINDON who leads the fertility services at the Mater hospital (Brisbane) and is the principal investigator for a series of randomised controlled trials.
He just got sacked on Friday for not getting the jab and for trying to release his data on miscarriages, post the jab.
He has been investigating miscarriages in couples/women post vaccination. He said a normal miscarriage rate is between 5-14%, sometimes up to as high as 16%. But as he has been keeping stats since the introduction of the vaccine, he has found that 74% of women who are vaccinated are now having miscarriages 😳!
He is now part of ‘Doctors against Mandates’ initiative. A collaboration of Doctors who until now have remained publicly silent.
Yes and it shouldn't have been. But notice the media have now gone into overdrive to "fact check" this - quoting more false claims that "evidence shows the safety in pregnancy" yet when you ask for the evidence to be published openly, it is not. My article still stands.
What do you think of the pfizer clinical trials during pregnancy? They've just completed but haven't been written up yet.
350 participants for 175 women in Pfizer arm and 175 in placebo, with the placebos to receive Pfizer soon after study terminates. Also, women are only receiving vaccinations within gestational weeks 24 through 34 (though it also says from weeks 27 to 34).
To be honest I don't know why they bothered when they have Viki Male and Teresa Kelly to shill for them irrespective of the outcome and they can do what they want with the results, then get the NEJM to publish the whitewashed version.
350 participants completely fails any clinical trial power calculation. If they failed to detect a difference in deaths for 44,000 people of all ages at a time when something slightly like the original strain in protein conformation was circulating, 350 is a drop in the ocean. The power calculation at a rough guess would require about 200,000 people to detect a benefit in clinical outcomes in this age range. The number of miscarriages in this group would be off the scale but it wouldn't stop the "trial" other than - no doubt - to get everyone in the placebo group to switch before the end of the study just like they did in C4591001.
I have no words for these people other than to say that the Nuremberg code and Helsinki declaration on ICH-GCP were written to supposedly protect the public from them.
I think it's mainly so the media can trumpet the headline "Pfizer clinical trial in pregnancy shows no....."
I thought it was interesting that even with only 175 jabbed, it appears Pfizer was reluctant to have them jabbed prior to conception, within the 1st trimester or within most of the 2nd trimester.
PS - I'm subscribed to your telegram channel, but can't "join" group to comment. Is there an easy way for you to "verify" the request? No worries if it's a hassle, I know you're busy. Cheers
Great analysis. Please get in touch!
Great analysis, I really really wonder why the v-safe data is guarded and inaccessible. Would a FOIA request for access to anonamised v-safe data not be required to be granted?
My sister is pregnant and had the first Pfizer. I really want good data to be able to advise her about the second shot she has scheduled very soon
Yes an FOI is possible and I have been considering it. It's likely they will obfuscate though, which is what happens to the most important FOIs
V-safe FOIA requests never work.
Anyway, there is so much data now that anyone who still thinks the vaccines are safe simply hasn't been keeping up with the news.
https://gospelnewsnetwork.org/2021/09/14/dr-ryan-cole-reports-a-20-times-increase-of-cancer-in-vaccinated-patients/
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/08/30/american-scientists-confirm-toxic-graphene-oxide-and-more-in-covid-injections/
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/06/24/dr-peter-mccullough-reveals-the-covid-19-vaccines-are-bioweapons-and-a-cdc-whistle-blower-has-confirmed-50000-americans-have-died-due-to-the-jabs/
Welcome to Substack. Glad you are not relegated to Twitter character limit. You should also get on Telegram if not already there.
Please keep your thoughts going.
Thanks very much. I have a telegram account too. Substack seems friendly and the format is good.
Sorry to see you in Twitter jail but thanks for the Telegram breadcrumb so that I could find you here. Keep it up! I spend lots of time on Substack now between Alex Berenson, Boriquagato (El Gato Malo of Twitter fame) and Rounding the Earth our stats expert! The comment community is vibrant and no censorship. I upload a link to all on Twitter. I will let folks know you are here.
Thank you for sharing and reading! All these people are worthy of reading too!
Thank you for publishing this!!! I looked at the study showing the 82% rate a while back and posted to Instagram… needless to say I got put in Insta jail for it 🙄 Such important information that people are just not getting 😭
Indeed the 82% was incorrect as I've explained, but I suspect a limited hangout started that one
Yes, it was extremely irresponsible to even include that data in the study (which really implied 100% as you correctly pointed out, since no viable pregnancy could have completed in that time-frame).
I wonder why all of the studies on v-safe data are so bad? Are they purposefully giving it to incompetent researchers? The statistical mistakes you pointed out are things you should know not to do even with high school math. Anybody with first-year statistics should for sure know not to do these things.
Really, just adding up percentages calculated with changing numerators.... I bet if they reached a result of 150% they would not have realized something is seriously wrong with their calculation.
Do you need any statistical background to be a medical researchers? I guess the big clue is that they will claim a treatment "shows no benefit" when reaching an outcome of RR = 0.6 p=0.051
"I bet if they reached a result of 150% they would not have realized something is seriously wrong with their calculation." - correct!
I'm unsure who these people are but I do know their methodology is seriously flaky and the fact that they are not responding to requests is of concern
The funny thing is that they inflated the risk and reached a concerningly high value but still said "it's all good"
Correct. I would hate to think that, having access to the later data in June when they published, they had advance knowledge of the upcoming rates and consciously or subconsciously made a calculation that was in keeping with the later raw data that they had in front of them
Confirmation bias on the part of good actors ?? Possible …. But birth rates have plummeted. What about all the high misscairage rates and still births we have heard about from nurses and OBGYNS?
I find it difficult to believe Naomi wolfe and her team are a limited hangout. Stew peters yes. Have you contacted all the Relevent Substack writers as well as ICAN and Childrens health defense ?
Hi, sorry to keep posting to this aging thread.
Regarding the strange miscarriage rate behaviour for weeks 6 and 7, could it be due to how they bring the 904 women into week 6? From page 6 of supplementary appendix to Zauche (https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMc2113891/suppl_file/nejmc2113891_appendix.pdf):
"Participants who received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine preconception or before 6 weeks’ of pregnancy were entered into the analysis at 6 weeks’ gestation whereas participants who received their first eligible dose at or after 6 weeks’ gestation entered the analysis in the week they received their first eligible dose."
But they only get entered into week 6 if their pregnancy is still "active", and they could have been vaxxed from the periconception period up to weeks 6 to <7. I'm not a medical person but there would have to be some sort of survivor bias here? Is that a standard way of using study data?
You are correct
I wrote a comment but it didn't post, I was wondering if you can share anything you know about Chinese vaccines and how do they affect our health long term? Most stuff I found online is related to Western ones but I can't find any real info on Sinovac or Sinopharm and what they really do to a human bodies in the future? Thanks! Wish you all the best!
I wish I knew! I suspect they are less problematic than the mRNA vaccines but obviously will have zero efficacy (because all the Cov vaccines have zero efficacy) and risk ADE. Beyond that they are probably not a major problem
Do you think it's safe to take these chinese vaccines then? Do you think they can cause a potential miscarriage?
No don't take them. anything that causes you to make that much spike protein is very bad for you. Plus the antibodies you make to the vaxx induced spike protein are not protective. We only find high levels of those, such as you make with vaxx, in the sickest, most severe cases of natural infection. The spike protein itself attacks your endothelial cells, your entire vascular system. Most people already had cross reactive t cell immunity from other coronavirus such as the one that causes the common cold. Before vaxx distribution 80% of all + pcr test were asymptomatic or mild. And nearly all the cases that were severe were elderly and those w 4 or more comorbidities. For an average healthy person, it's 99.8% certain your immune system will have no problem recognizing parts of the virus and mounting an immune response that is actually protective, unlike the one made by the vaxx
This looks like a solid analysis. The adding of percentages this way with changing denominators is simply inexcusable- It is difficult to imagine the deficit of mathematical skill it takes to think this is an appropriate way figure out overall percentages- it is the kind of mistake a 5th grader might make.
great analysis... much appreciated.
Ace2 are dense in ovaries and testes - ofc there is an effect which is not going to be positive - the hubris of these people is to believe / the exacting evil of those responsible
Dear Dr Ah Kahn Syed, thank you for your brilliant analysis and post (which I’ve come across via Igor Chudov’s substack). Thank you for your work.
All the very best,
Paul
Thank you, this is clarifying, but the reality is still muddy, even to me. I agree - they should release the data. Please consider writing a letter to the Editor-in-Chief of Sci, Publ Health Pol & Law calling for the release of all of the data. Please see Brock & Thornley (Withdrawn due to social pressure and threats: https://www.publichealthpolicyjournal.com/general-5 ). The vaccine makers promised transparency. The odd hump you have revealed is seriously worrying. Your results seem solid but should be peer-reviewed. It would help a lot of people to give a toy analogy using chemotherapy and stages of cancer (1-4). Please email info@ipak-edu.org to connect.
Will do. I've been looking for you.
Study Shows That Up To 8 In 10 Women Had A Miscarriage After Getting The Covid Vaccine Before The Third Trimester | Evie Magazine
https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/study-miscarriage-rate-covid-vaccine?fbclid=IwAR2DNmZK4DOOaJHveKouRmJqFbthIO5Ma42DTvpygxAjtP0vZiSMKhyX8nI
They made the same mistake. If you have ability to comment on that page I would ask that you direct them to read this one.
Done, thank you.
Great work. Thanks. Keep it up. The Tom Shimabukuro & Lauren Zauche publications are deceptive, underhanded and likely purposely fraudulent. These docs are designated stooges bribed with first authorship in NEJM. My seven year old grandson could have written these two manuscripts better than these cheaters. I still maintain that both the Pfizer 5.3.6 post marketing analysis AND Shimabukuro BOTH have about an 80% miscarriage rate calculated on the basis of EXACTLY what is published in the albeit extraordinarily poor & confusing presentations. When one compares these two documents I suspect that Pharma did the ghost writing for Shimabukuro Vsafe 1 and the Zauche Vsafe 2. The best way to fix the corrupted medical industrial complex is to completely take it down. It should be completely destroyed by civil & criminal litigation. The perpetrators including physicians, journal editors, medical boards, big pharma, CDC & FDA must be tried in criminal courts and punished or this mass killing for profit will continue. We the people deserve better than these criminals.
It's definitely not 80% and bear in mind that the 5.3.6 is merely reporting adverse events so the denominator is mostly miscarriages. It's really important to get this right because the people pushing this stuff will destroy those who claim 80% for this reason. However one can be more circumspect and say that of those reported in the adverse event report 80% were miscarriages. It's a distraction tbh... A doubling of miscarriage rate is a massive story in itself
This was posted 27/July/2022: https://t.me/voices4choices/475
This is appalling AUSTRALIA!!!
Dr LUKE MCLINDON who leads the fertility services at the Mater hospital (Brisbane) and is the principal investigator for a series of randomised controlled trials.
He just got sacked on Friday for not getting the jab and for trying to release his data on miscarriages, post the jab.
He has been investigating miscarriages in couples/women post vaccination. He said a normal miscarriage rate is between 5-14%, sometimes up to as high as 16%. But as he has been keeping stats since the introduction of the vaccine, he has found that 74% of women who are vaccinated are now having miscarriages 😳!
He is now part of ‘Doctors against Mandates’ initiative. A collaboration of Doctors who until now have remained publicly silent.
https://www.doctorsagainstmandates.com/updates/
Thank god there are still some doctors with morals and values left in the world 💞
Yes and it shouldn't have been. But notice the media have now gone into overdrive to "fact check" this - quoting more false claims that "evidence shows the safety in pregnancy" yet when you ask for the evidence to be published openly, it is not. My article still stands.
Great article.
What do you think of the pfizer clinical trials during pregnancy? They've just completed but haven't been written up yet.
350 participants for 175 women in Pfizer arm and 175 in placebo, with the placebos to receive Pfizer soon after study terminates. Also, women are only receiving vaccinations within gestational weeks 24 through 34 (though it also says from weeks 27 to 34).
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04754594
To be honest I don't know why they bothered when they have Viki Male and Teresa Kelly to shill for them irrespective of the outcome and they can do what they want with the results, then get the NEJM to publish the whitewashed version.
350 participants completely fails any clinical trial power calculation. If they failed to detect a difference in deaths for 44,000 people of all ages at a time when something slightly like the original strain in protein conformation was circulating, 350 is a drop in the ocean. The power calculation at a rough guess would require about 200,000 people to detect a benefit in clinical outcomes in this age range. The number of miscarriages in this group would be off the scale but it wouldn't stop the "trial" other than - no doubt - to get everyone in the placebo group to switch before the end of the study just like they did in C4591001.
I have no words for these people other than to say that the Nuremberg code and Helsinki declaration on ICH-GCP were written to supposedly protect the public from them.
Thanks for the reply.
I think it's mainly so the media can trumpet the headline "Pfizer clinical trial in pregnancy shows no....."
I thought it was interesting that even with only 175 jabbed, it appears Pfizer was reluctant to have them jabbed prior to conception, within the 1st trimester or within most of the 2nd trimester.
PS - I'm subscribed to your telegram channel, but can't "join" group to comment. Is there an easy way for you to "verify" the request? No worries if it's a hassle, I know you're busy. Cheers