Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: P-Marlowe

Well, I’m just glad that it is only the Pfizer vaccine that had this issue. And really, they only followed 50 pregnant women. I’m sure if they had used a larger sample size the percentages would have been in the normal 10% to 15% range. And this was probably for the older Pfizer version, not the latest one that received approval from the FDA.
.
.
.
.
Dang. With that kind of logic I could be a Vax Pimp. And/or a liberal!


67 posted on 08/17/2022 12:58:20 PM PDT by 21twelve (Ever Vigilant. Never Fearful.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: 21twelve; Jane Long
I’m sure if they had used a larger sample size the percentages would have been in the normal 10% to 15% range.

You’re sure? Maybe it would show more than 44%. The fact is that once they had this study, they should have stopped all pregnant women from getting the jab. Instead they RECOMMENDED IT!

Women of childbearing age were never in danger from the virus. But they were are are in danger from the jab. They never should have given it to a single woman of childbearing age. They also should never have given it to children. But then that would have lessened their profits.

69 posted on 08/17/2022 1:08:01 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (I got the <ΙΧΘΥΣ>< variant. Catch it. John 3:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson