WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

335

(post is archived)

[–] [deleted] 3 pts

This vaccine is killing people and it’s dangerous. That said, this article is one of the most blindly ignorant pieces of garbage science that I’ve ever seen in my entire life.

And that’s on top of the fact that it doesn’t even make any sense. This author’s interpretation of what they read in someone else’s article is so misguided and so ignorant that it’s beyond comprehension to me that anyone would post this article here. Actually, no, unfortunately, it isn’t, and that’s my main gripe with people here, who I otherwise align with but who frustrate me to no end with their stupidity.

This is why we have no credibility with the outside world. They point at stuff like this and say that we are spreading misinformation.

But that’s exactly what this article is.

I can look past the logical disconnect of an author trying to say that “they“ are trying to “bury” information in an article that went out of his way to put that very same information on a chart in the article in question. They didn’t have to even bring it up or mention it but went out of their way to put the information on the chart in the article. That’s the opposite of burying. Considering they didn’t even have to attach the chart or the data, but I can look past that, that’s just minor stupidity.

The author of this article linked here has absolutely no idea how they chart the different types of pregnancies or what the terminology is for them and why that number is not surprisingly high and why they differentiated between the different types of pregnancies that the author clearly does not understand. At all. Their interpretation of the article is misleading.

I don’t think it’s on purpose I think it’s out of ignorance. Go read the article in question. Go read it. I guess if you have to do an Internet search for what the different pregnancy terms mean, then go ahead and do it.

No, the New England Journal of Medicine didn’t hide information by ignoring it while INCLUDING THE INCRIMINATING DATA IN A CHART.

We all know the main stream media sucks and that they lie to us on a daily basis.

But for as bad as they are, a writer like this wouldn’t last 10 minutes at the Washington post or the New York Times. This is beyond stupid. If the author were a leftist I’d probably suspect dishonesty and malice, but they seem like the heart is in the right place so I shrug it off as ignorance. But we shouldn’t shrug that off. Stuff like this should not be posted here. And yet we do it, literally every day stuff this stupid or worse. We deserve the fact that no one ever believes us about anything ever.

Some dumb motherfucker in one of the Q subs the other day posted a list of deaths he blamed on vaccines. Included in that list was terminology for deaths from things like cancer, lymphoma, leukemia, strokes, accidents, blunt trauma, and the list goes on and on. He blamed all 15,000 or so deaths on vaccines because all of the people on the list have been vaccinated. Getting stabbed in an alley or run over with a car included. This is exactly what we criticize the Covid maniacs for doing. Remember when Covid morons blamed every death on Covid as long as the person tested positive for Covid or was suspected of having Covid? This is our version of that. And yet I see that exact same shitty information and repeated here daily. And then I get attacked as if I’m not against this vaccine or is if I don’t realize this thing is dangerous and killing people. Of course the fuck it is. But I want us to prove our case not look like fucking idiots.

Not only did that dumb motherfucker post that here, he posts shit like that every single fucking day that makes us look like retards for opposing this vaccine.

This is so disappointing to me because it makes me realize that none of you people actually care about whether or not we get it right. Whether or not we actually help people with good information to combat the lies we see every day in the main stream media. You just want your Internet points. And people like me who take this shit seriously get labeled as suspicious because I resisted and I fight back because I want the truth, I don’t want bullshit, I want us to get it right. We should be the one to get it right because they aren’t. They lie, deliberately, every day, to the American people. We are supposed to be the one to get it right. But I see the rampant reckless ignorance on this forum and others every single fucking day and drives me bonkers. And then I’m the asshole for wanting us to be better. This is why we lost our republic.

[–] [deleted] 2 pts (edited )

The issue seems to be in how the numbers are presented.

Something like 35K women enrolled in the reporting system reported being pregnant. Out of that number, the study called just over 5k. They were able to contact, confirm, and use data concerning concluded pregancies 827 of those women.

This is not comparing 100 or so miscarriages out of a group of 35K; if it was, I’d conclude the jab stopped miscarriages because that would be a shockingly low rate. Miscarriages occur in about 10-20% of all pregnancies (hard to get an exact number).

Miscarriage is the loss of pregnancy before 20 weeks. After that, it’s a stillbirth. So including third trimester numbers might be interpreted as dishonest on its face.

Out of those 827 women, 96 experienced a miscarriage prior to 13 weeks. 104 pregnancy losses total. 700 of the confirmed live births occurred for women who got the vaccine in their third trimester. Doing the math, that means out of 827 women who were contacted, 127 women got the jab in the first or second trimester. Of them, 104 of them lost their pregnancy. That’s where the number in the article is coming from.

So, both numbers are right. Overall, 12% of women lost a pregnancy. But most of the women contacted got the jab in the third trimester, so the first trimester rate is higher than it should be.

There could be issues with data point selection, ie, women with a loss might have been more willing to talk to this study. They might have pulled a very unrepresentative sample. But that is a HUGE departure from the even the most extreme normal miscarriage rate.

ETA: the other issue might just be length of time. They need to do an apples to apple comparison; track women who got it to the conclusion of their pregnancy. If you got it in the first trimester, in the past say three months, but they’re just looking at “finished” pregnancies, then of course they are excluding any woman who hasn’t had a miscarriage. Which could be throwing the numbers off as well.

[–] 0 pt (edited )

Yep and you'll get idiot responses from assholes like purge 2020. His brain was purged.