[grey_whiskers]

Doesn’t matter.

You can’t handwave away a miscarriage right after the jab at 3 months along by pointing and jibbering about “but muh 4.5 months miscarriage by a 45-year-old crack addict!”

This is why averages are not your friend, unless you have a sample known to be homogeneous with respect to all confounding factors.

[palmer]

I agree a three month miscarriage rate to a three month vaccine recipient would be a much better comparison, The main problem is there are no procedures in place to get the data other than haphazard reporting in VAERS. This is just a draft https://www.fda.gov/media/150356/download but I'm sure a lot of the requirements under "SYSTEMATIC APPROACH FOR REVIEW OF SAFETY INFORMATION (§ 312.32(b))" are already in place. The adverse event data is supposed to be gathered and analyzed rigorously.