Posted on 08/20/2022 5:55:15 PM PDT by Qiviut
Ah, you're from Massachusetts. I begin to see the (liberal) problem.
How about you? You a citizen?
Of course.
Yes, of course it’s a red herring. I have repeatedly called out Fauci as a liar here on FR and you know it. I have also repeatedly stated that men can’t get pregnant.
I know one of your fellow trolls has called out Fauci; but I don't remember you doing it: or, more importantly, *when* and *why*.
Are you going to call out HHS for their tomfoolery? And with it, own the idea that the leadership is corrupt, and therefore, pronouncements made under their leadership are not to be given the presumption of truth (which would include..."studies")
Ah, but you did start out defending Korey’s claim that 78% of pregnancies ended in miscarriage in 2021. It’s quite plain to anyone reading this thread.
Give the exact post # I made that said so.
If you are now backing off defending Korey’s 78% claim, after consideration, that is a reasonable stance to adopt. So what exactly is your position now?
My position is that you're a troll.
The actual claim is, not that 78% of pregnancies ended in miscarriage in 2021.
Corey didn't claim that.
He was analyzing a study from Pfizer which they had tried to have hidden for 75 years.
The 78% figure, comes from
The pregnancies in the study
Which were known when the study started
For which an outcome to the pregnancy was reported to the study
Since there were 270 pregnancies in the study, and 232 of them had no outcome reported, Pfizer wasn't tracking very well.
Pfizer cannot claim. 25 terminated pregnancies out of 270 in the study: to do so would be to ASSUME all the non-reported pregnancies, went to full term.
For the known results, you have to adjust the denominator to remove the lost-to-followup cases.
That's what he did.
So he claimed, of the known pregnancies in that study, for which an outcome of the pregnancy was reported, 78% of those resulted in dead babies.
Which is not the same as 78% of all pregnancies nationwide in 2021 ended in miscarriage.
I already provided a breakdown by ethnicity, etc. Now you want me to do more of your research for you?
You didn't do your own research to my satisfaction: if a large share of US births is illegal aliens, and they didn't get the clot shots, then your canard "how come births went up" is partially falsified. Same applies to other ethnic groups / age, geography, and the timing of the births / pregnancies relative to the clot shots. Just using an overall percentage isn't gonna cut it.
Ah, now we come to the heart of your tricks. Demanding more and more proof, none of which you will accept. Reminds me of the old “Ashli Babbitt isn’t really dead” conspiracy theory you guys were pushing, the one in the Sham Wow Guy video you kept posting over and over again here claiming she was a crisis actor, as were the EMTs and her family, the blood was fake, the window she tried to climb through was actually a “movie set window” installed the night before, etc.
You're projecting about demanding more and more proof.
And I largely haven't commented on the Ashli Babbit shooting at all, except that it's odd the guy who appears to be involved got a rubber-stamp sham investigation clearing him.
But those are YOUR lies, again, troll: pulling in every possible conspiracy theory and mistake, and insisting that everyone pushing against the clot shots necessarily has investigated and accepted ALL of them.
Get rekt.
Me? From Massachusetts? LOL! I drove through a corner of it once, but didn’t stop. Tennesee gal here.
See, those mince pie hating Puritans just couldn’t get along with each other. They kept arguing amongst themselves, splinter groups would move off in a huff, and this kept happening until the ones heading southward ran smack dab into the Cavaliers and (gasp) intermarried with them. Oh well, all that arguing and moving and banishing and going without mince pie at Christmas was getting old anyway.
Of course I’ve called out Fauci. For lying, for funding GoF research in that leaky Wuhan lab, and more.
>>>>Ref your “Give the exact post # I made that said so.”<<<<<
In your post #29 you tried to claim that “illegal immigrants” explained the increase in births in 2021 despite 78% of pregnancies among vaccinated women supposedly ending in miscarriage. In none of your posts have you stated you doubt Kory’s extraordinary claims. It certainly appears you defend his claims in all your posts.
>>>>Re your “The actual claim is, not that 78% of pregnancies ended in miscarriage in 2021.”<<<<
No, of course it isn’t and I never said it was. Kory’s claim is that 78% or 87.5% of pregnancies ended in miscarriage among vaccinated women in the Pfizer study, and then goes on to quote “shocking” and “plummeting” declines in birth rates (actually births, but he says “birth rates”) during the first three months of 2022 in cherry picked locations.
Kory first claimed 78%, then 87.5%. His clickbait headline screams “Massive Miscarriage Rates Among Vaccinated Pregnant Women”. He also carries on about “disastrous impacts on fertility” and says:
“And this is where it gets even more horrifying. Birth rates are plummeting in many countries around the world, but the way in which they are plummeting is unprecedented.”
Then he goes on about how “during the first quarter of 2022, birth rates plummeted by 14%” in Stockholm.” The official Swedish site says the number of births during the first six months fell by 6.7%. Of course that’s not “horrifying” enough for Kory, so he cherry picks and goes with Stockholm’s first three months instead, giving no link citing his source.
Next he picks Germany’s first quarter births.
And yet...
So, what was happening with COVID-19 vaccinations when the January babies were conceived, back in April 2021?
According to the official data, roughly 9 million 18-59 year-olds (20 per cent) had received a single jab. Of those, just 1.8 million (4 per cent) were double-vaccinated.
Eligibility restrictions were dropped in early June, and by month’s end the number of double-vaccinated people in this group had surged to nearly 16 million (35 per cent).
Prior to that, a spokeswoman for Germany’s statistics office told CheckMate, “predominantly elderly people and vulnerable groups were vaccinated”, making a connection between births and vaccinations “very unlikely”.
Natalie Nitsche, a research scientist from the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, cautioned that despite the “striking” correlation between births and the vaccine rollout, this was “of course no indication of a causal relationship”.
If such a relationship existed, she said, there should be a gradual decline in births. “But we don’t see this, all three months have about the same number of births”.
And while the monthly data reveals a large, 17-per-cent fall in January 2022 (relative to 2020), subsequent drops in February (7 per cent) and March (9 per cent) were smaller.
Dr Nitsche also pointed to vaccinated countries such as Serbia and France to note that crashing birth rates were not a “universal phenomenon”.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-15/fact-check-germany-birth-rate-decline-not-vaccines/101237438
Next, he moves on to Switzerland and Hungary (skipping France, of course — French data do not further his agenda!). I could not find 2022 data on births for the US, but so far all looks pretty normal in Connecticut:
Who knows about other states. Connecticut was the only one to pop up in my search for US births. I’m not going to try to chase down all 50 states over Kory’s nonsense.
Whatever, Korey is making a huge assumption tying the births to vaccine rollouts 9 months prior, as if these women got vaccinated around the same time they got pregnant and just as the vaccines rolled out. What about all the women who were already 2, 3, 4, months, etc. pregnant? Their babies would have been born earlier, back in 2021. As for those who got vaccinated while pregnant later in 2021, births of their babies would not yet have occurred in the first three months of 2022.
>>>>Re your “He was analyzing a study from Pfizer which they had tried to have hidden for 75 years.”<<<<
Again, it was the FDA, not Pfizer, who wanted the records sealed. Even Kory says so in his first sentence, although he cutely calls it the “PFDA”. We’ve already been over that.
>>>>Re your “The 78% figure, comes from The pregnancies in the study Which were known when the study started <<<<
Apparently, you have also forgot the initial phase of the Pfizer trials excluded pregnant women, so the pregnancies either were not yet known, or the women became pregnant after receiving the first dose. We’ve already been over that, too. There were no known pregnancies when the study started.
>>>>”Since there were 270 pregnancies in the study, and 232 of them had no outcome reported, Pfizer wasn’t tracking very well.”
Yes, no outcome for 232 of the pregnancies had yet been reported when that page was generated. The 232 were still pregnant. Whether there was *never* any outcome reported is unknown. It could well be another case of “the army of researchers” not finding the pages or pages where the outcomes were reported yet. (Presumably, he means Naomi’s “crowdsourced” amateur researchers who have already proven to make outrageous mistakes.)
>>>>Re your “Pfizer cannot claim. 25 terminated pregnancies out of 270 in the study: to do so would be to ASSUME all the non-reported pregnancies, went to full term.<<<<<
Yet Korey would have to ASSUME 78% - 87% of the total 270 pregnancies, including those other 232 pregnancies, ended in miscarriage to claim “massive miscarriage rates” and carry on about “horrifying” drops in fertility.
>>>>>Re your “For the known results, you have to adjust the denominator to remove the lost-to-followup cases.
That’s what he did.
So he claimed, of the known pregnancies in that study, for which an outcome of the pregnancy was reported, 78% of those resulted in dead babies.”<<<<<
Wrong. The total number of “known pregnancies” in the study was 270. 0ut of that total of 270, the number of “known outcomes” at the time that page was generated was 32. Korey claims 29 ended in miscarriage, but admits he has trouble counting. It was actually 28. He uses “known outcomes” not “known pregnancies” as the denominator, which is beyond ridiculous. So, there were 28 known miscarriages out of 270 known pregnancies, or 10.4% — at the time that page was generated.
Remember the page where 3 out the subset of 50 women who were reported to have become pregnant after the first dose miscarried? At least that was the number of miscarriages within a subset of known pregnancies. Which is the only “known known” from Naomi Wolfe’s “research”. That’s a rate of 6%, below the normal rate of 10% - 20%. How about a pro-vaxxer blog headline screaming about how the vaccines “lower the miscarriage rate”? I’d call BS on that, too, because of the small sample size and because we don’t know the outcomes of the other 47 pregnancies for sure — these pages are snapshots in time as the study progesses.
To refresh your memory:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1559949374381244416.html
>>>>Re your “You didn’t do your own research to my satisfaction: if a large share of US births is illegal aliens, and they didn’t get the clot shots, then your canard “how come births went up” is partially falsified. Same applies to other ethnic groups / age, geography, and the timing of the births / pregnancies relative to the clot shots. Just using an overall percentage isn’t gonna cut it. “<<<<
How about you do some of your own research? Where is your proof that “a large share of US births is illegal aliens”? Let alone a large enough share to make up for a “massive” loss of pregnancies among vaccinated citizens and legal residents due to 78% - 87.5% ending in miscarriage?
The latest estimate (2018) I could find for percentage of US births to illegal aliens was 7.5%:
https://cis.org/Report/Births-Legal-and-Illegal-Immigrants-US
I never said an overall percentage would cut it. I said that if the vaccines truly caused such a “massive” rate of miscarriage as 78% (or 87.5%, take your pick), how could the number of births have increased in 2021? I stipulated that not all pregnant women had been vaccinated and that not all would have had a due date before the end of the year. But surely, given such a catastrophic miscarriage rate of 78% among vaccinated women, there would not have been an increase in births for the first time in seven years.
Re Ashli Babbit, I thought the same about the rubber stamp clearance of the cop who shot her. Note I never said you commented on that story, only that your demands for more and research and proof remind me of some of the posters on those threads. And here you are again demanding more research and saying I had not done research “to your satisfaction”. Lol. You offer none at all, just silly insults and name calling. You keep throwing out red herrings in the form of illegal immigrants and men having babies and questioning my citizenship, Massachusetts, Fauci, and so on. All distractions.
You did not like the other studies I provided links to (JAMA, NEJM), yet defend what Pierre Kory writes in his SubStack.
I wonder if Kory and his buds at Frontline Doctors should change their name to Frontline Grifters or Frontline Swindlers? Yeah, it’s Time magazine, which I do not find trustworthy, and it’s an obvious hit piece, but if even some of this stuff in this story is false or fake, why haven’t they sued Time for libel?
tl;dr
Hayahaha!!!! You make a long post then claim tldr. Rofl!
Excuses, excuses, excuses.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.