SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> I'm not the only one who sees it
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1659717149

Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 08/05/22 at 09:32:29

Title: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/05/22 at 09:32:29

https://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/2022/08/athlete-deaths-are-1700-higher-than.html

http://https://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/2022/08/athlete-deaths-are-1700-higher-than.html

https://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/2022/08/athlete-deaths-are-1700-higher-than.html

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/05/22 at 11:11:17

Too bad you wont read. You don't see issue with them comparing only heart related deaths for active athletes 35 and under - To every "athlete" worldwide of all ages that died from all causes?

Initial data set:

1,101 sudden deaths among athletes under the age of 35."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17143117/

Compared to:

Data set of every "athlete" worldwide dead from any cause with no verification of vaccination:

https://expose-news.com/full-list-of-athlete-deaths/

The following chart shows the number of recorded athlete collapses and deaths between January 2021 and April 2022, courtesy of the linked list above –

What kind of assessment compares young athletic cardiac events to every single human death that ever was an athlete? Also no verification they were even vaccinated.

You think this guy belongs in a comparison of athletes that were in the "under age of 35" study?

23/04/2022 Italy
Stefano Tacconi (64), former Juventus Football goalkeeper. He attended an event on Friday and felt fine. On Sunday morning he felt unwell and was rushed to hospital. His condition rapidly deteriorated. It was reported that he might have suffered a brain aneurysm.

He among others way over age 35 are in the 1700% data set that had heart issues, yet he died from a brain hemorrhage. I imagine I am not the only one who sees it. But then again I actually look at the information.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/05/22 at 11:43:57

Okay, find a Coupla outliers.BFD, I know what I see and MANY MORE are dead

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/05/22 at 12:46:38

Okay, find a Coupla outliers.BFD, I know what I see and MANY MORE are dead

A "Coupla of" outliers?

How about hundreds, and before you say there aren't hundreds, somehow knowing without even looking, let's not pretend I don't already have a breakdown started, using your own evidence, that proves they are using many, many human athletes that aren't 35 and under.

This compares every human athlete of all ages and all forms of death to a group of 35 and under that were actually competing that only died from arrhythmia.

You want to know how many more are dead why don't you try actually reading one of your own sources and maybe, get this, one's that don't tell you what you want to hear.

Also why don't you care if they were even vaccinated? Shouldn't they have been vaccinated to be killed by the vaccination?

Here's the first batch of "Coupla outliers" from Your source, Name then Age, somehow these 70+ people should be in the "young athletes under 35" category for what reason?:

Neil Campbell (45)
Andrea Sciarrini (40)
Maria Garcia Alonso (43)
Kirk Herbstreit (52)
Rajesh Verma (40)
Stefano Tacconi (64)
Martin Braun (71)
Erik Volper (41)
Ryan Campbell (50)
Fatih Mumcu (43)
Steve Cumberland (57)
Eric Suguitan (36)
Matthew Lloyd (43)
Ed Jasper (49)
Tomas Van Den Spiegel (43)
Jeff Klein (42)
Cedric McMillan (44)
José Carlos Gozalbes (42)
Thomas Rottmeier (45)
Garrett Burnett (46)
Wayne Cooper (65)
Desai Williams (62)
Enrico Della Puppa (57)
Davide Piglia (44)
Unnamed (57)
Giovanni Tiberi (49)
Hannah Purvis (41)
Martin Hochertz (53)
Darco Degrussa (59)
Lee Mallinson (51)
Armin Michels (56)
Paul Michael Levesque (52)
Ovidiu Hategan (41)
Claudio Pagotto (55)
Unnamed (47)
Gianluca Nirchio (46)
Unnamed runner (49)
Fabio Suvieri (56)
José Gabriel Jiménez (39)
Jorge Luis Aceves Durán (59)
Maggie McMahon (37)
Dave Nichol (45)
Wayne Mackie (62)
Unnamed (63)
Barrington Patterson (56)
Unnamed (42)
Unnamed (57)
Tolo Quetglas (62)
Andrea Iannetti (51)
Trisha Paddock (46)
Tiziano Franchini (44)
Unnamed (70)
Leonardo Bianchi (66)
Bruce Tronolone (63)
Vincent Doffont (37)
Dave Sims (52)
Fernando Parodi (45)
Tomás Walsh (43)
Romano Marchesini (59)
Patrick Massar (67)
Brian Meeney (46)
José Ramón Suárez Santos (44) Jean-Luc Ribar (57)
Jean-Luc Ribar (57)
Frank Hartwig (55)
Dean Wallis (52)
Cuthbert Kwangwari (63)
Odalis Pérez (44)
Deion Sanders (54)
Justice Christopher (40)
Louie Traub (41)
Bruno Battistuta (60)
Jérôme Garens (39)
Gustavo Ramírez (63)
Shane Warne (52)
Paul Shefflin (40)
Stefano Rea (66)

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/05/22 at 13:31:22

Additional group from JoG's source "athletes under age 35" without verification of vaccine, from all types of death. Not exclusively cardiac issues.

Name then age, why are these people compared in the under age 35 with only cardiac issues category? I wonder why this could be.

Juan Pablo Diaz Noemi (44)
Fredy Antonio García Pérez (54)
Unnamed (60)
Grégory Boulanger (47)
Bruce Larson (58)
Alain Schmitt (62)
Nazareno Petesi (56)
Guido Pagani (69)
Rod Marsh (74)
Va’aiga Tuigamala (52)
Antonio Cuorvo (45)
Mauro Franceschini (39)
Stephen Spitzer (56)
Steve Black (64)
Detlef Pietsch (59)
Andrea Pelati (53)
Ángel Rogelio Galán Brioso (41)
Nicola Basile (39)
Unnamed (68)
Jeremy Giambi (47)
Roberto Callegari (54)
Harvey McDougle (37)
Nuno Moreira Faria (40)
Fernando Alaniz (49)
Dimitri Teslenko, (61)
Steve Finney (48)
Unnamed (67)
Ron Frederick (40)
Valentin Gherebe (43)
Ashley Gearhart (37)
Sakri Ramli (54)
Adam Holder (48)
Guy Laporte (69)
Ivo Santos (39)
Francesco Michalette (57)
Ted Anderson (53)
Luciano Tonello (70)
José Eduardo Santos (55)
Daniel Santos (36)
Szilveszter Csollany (51)
Josep Maria Pijuan (42)
Unnamed male (47)
Francesco Paderni (49)
Fernando Morales Sequeira (48)
Bud Jeffries (48)
Clark Gillies (67)
Cecilia Teri (42)
Jim Forbes (69)
Jamie Vincent (46)
Unnamed (38)
Maurice Grooms (50)
Lim Thian Meng (47)
Sean Rice (49)
Lucio Meneghetti (53)
Greg Kowalewski (47)
Serbegeth “Shebby” Singh (61)
David Sadowski (58)
Mugurel Stancu (52)
Nicolas Colsaerts (39)
José Manuel Camano (48)
Steve Stricker (54)
Everton Brilhante (39)
Tuku Zamil (50)
Marcel Reinders (56)
Mathieu Léonard (44)
Didier Ceulemans (37)
Claudio Brighenti (47)
Vincenzo Di Grande (40)
Marcelo De León (43)
Antonio Cassano (39)
Leonardo Della Nave (46)
Miguel “Monchy” Torres (42)
Agy Lena (38)
Vadim Khamuttskikh (52)
Lanny Gare (43)
Robert Boljat (50)
Ahmed Daham (56)
Hugo Maradona (52)
Michal Gurajdowski (40)
Daniel ‘Crunch’ Broussard (53)
Gawain Harding (54)
Lawrence Chongson (57)
Terry Morrison (70)
Poh Lip Meng (52)
Marcin Bukowski (40)
Michael James Penzel (64)
Miroslav Copjak (58)
Michal Rokicki (37)
Kimera Bartee (49)
Goran Sobin (58)
Damien Zemmouri (37)
Joseph Uichico (59)
Lauren Michele Way (37)
Taniela Moa (36)
Meaghan McGonagle (41)
Alexander Frolov (63)
Stefano Forgione (42)
Andrea Navoni (48)
Marco Bozza (43)
Maurizio Ruozi (51)
Roberto Valastro (42)
Sulamai Aukuso Lavea (48)
Lauren Anderson (41)
Matt Scherer (38)
Pavel Karpf (52)
Xavier Ziani (49)
Rob Woodward (36)
Carlos Daniel Monteverde (58)
Roberto Tusi (38)
Marcel Pielage (39)
Adham Al-Selehdar (53)
Romina De Angelis (43)
Ben Madgen (36)
CJ Hunter (52)

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Serowbot on 08/05/22 at 16:08:08

You're not the only one that thinks he sees it...
...but you all have an anti-vax agenda

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/jun/23/instagram-posts/claims-connecting-sudden-death-athletes-covid-19-v/

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/05/22 at 18:15:50

You should appreciate me. I'm leaving a Jab and all my boosters for some gullible lefty.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/05/22 at 22:49:56

Obviously space and time, math, facts or real humans don't matter.

Just make up a headline provide obviously false statistics and let confirmation bias run free.

How do all the names provided so far apply to the "Under 35, and dead from heart issues"?

Prove me wrong.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/06/22 at 13:41:26

Here's more from the "under age 35" list from JoG's source material. Oh and some of these people are alive.

Why if they are alive, are they listed as "athlete deaths"?

Lies don't matter if they support information you want to be true?

Stan Kwan (54)
Mirko Vlahovi[ch263] (48)
Andrew Parker (43)
Umair Siddiqui (45)
Artur Walczak (46)
Paul Dimattina (47)
Leon Taylor (36)
Christian Sportolloni (41)
Duggar Baucom (61)
René Richard (66)
Doug Jones (64)
Oscar Kuau Suta (37)
France Jonas (56)
Stefano Marconi (55)
Marlon Herrera (47)
Kim Suominen (52)
Denis Kovba (42)
Julio Lugo (45)
Pascal Joly (62)
Marcin Pater (46)
Zbigniew Korszun (48)
Michelle Goszko (44)
Jaros[ch322]aw Paco[ch324] (49)
Ivo Georgiev, 49
Jean-Arthur Tremblay (63)
Jean-Yves Artu (61)
Jörg Heinle (40)
Murphy Jensen (53)
Julio César Oliveira (49)
Willis Forko (37)
Pedro Feliciano (45)
Tom Greenway (38)
Ludwig Schmidt (56)
Sohrab Lutchmedial (52)
Eric Turner (41)
Luíz Antônio dos Santos (57)
Shawn Rhoden (46)
Alyaksandr Fedarovich (48)
Carlos Mario Brummich (60+)
Konstantin Wajgin (or Vaygin or Vaigin), (57)
Dusan Pasek (36)

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/06/22 at 16:27:49

It's cool. You're right, it's absolutely safe and Effective and ten year old kids aren't Havin strokes.
Take the shot, he said.
You can't get sick, he said.
Aaand, fully jabbed Awesome Joe sick
Again

The athletes clutching their chest and collapsing are just faking it, so his teammates can have a breather and figure out how to defend the goal better.

You can pretend that what is happening is not statistically significantly different from what we see in an average year if it makes you feel better, but I know better. A lot of people who took the jab know too.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/06/22 at 16:46:01

"It's cool. You're right, it's absolutely safe and Effective and ten year old kids aren't Havin strokes."

Nope, never indicated in any way this was true. However You present and defend the numbers where literally millions of children died, hundreds of thousands of soldiers, and now with your latest proof about 1.6 million athletes "under 35" have died. Even though many are over 35 and alive, but BFD right?

You point out the inaccuracies of others information but ignore completely your own information that is empirically false. Your sources are literally mathematically impossible, why would you expect anyone to take them seriously?

"The athletes clutching their chest and collapsing are just faking it, so his teammates can have a breather and figure out how to defend the goal better."

The hundreds of thousands your sources claim? The NFL, MLB, NBA, none of them or associated sporting venues, merchandising, investors, stat trackers are bringing this up? Why?

Fantasy Football a multi-billion dollar business with millions of active participants depend on and track athletic stats from the NFL in order to operate. No one has noticed the dramatic increase of NFL players dying?

Why?

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by MnSpring on 08/06/22 at 16:56:04

2E382F322A3F32295D0 wrote:

politifact.com/factchecks/

And Another place that tells LockTight what to say !
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOOOOLOL

"information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appeals to emotion or stereotypes)
to favor liberal causes. "

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/06/22 at 23:54:43

https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/24-year-old-top-irish-athlete-collapses-and-dies-on-pitch/

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/06/22 at 23:55:49

Excess Deaths,
But
No statistically significant difference

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/07/22 at 09:40:19

Just read something by someone who claims to know this guy. He said that currently and forevermore Dead guy had a preexisting heart issue and had to take time off a year or so ago. So maybe he would have died from playing the game, without the jab.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/07/22 at 12:30:18

Just because You didn't notice young athlete deaths before the vaccine doesn't mean it wasn't happening. Your observations are not indicative of the entire planets activates.

Again, you won't acknowledge that cardiac deaths were the number one killer of athletes for decades. You won't even look at what the percentage was prior to 2020, and even blame deaths from prior to 2019 on the vaccine.

You present "proof" and I can drop hundreds and hundreds of false claims from Your source, but BFD, just ignore it and toss up one more athlete as "proof". If you take away the hundreds of lies from Your source and toss in the One Athlete then the percentage increase is not %1700, its less than one hundredth thousandths on one percent.

The only way to get the numbers you claim are true is for us to ignore that millions of people are still alive. Do you realize how asinine that is?

Why won't you compare numbers from before the vaccine to numbers after the vaccine that do not have to include hundreds and hundreds of "outliers" that don't fit the "under 35" category?

Why use lies to show truth?

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/07/22 at 14:41:16

You are wrong I am well aware of athletes dying
Just not every day.
You are not the end all be all of WTF Is happening.
People are DYING because of The Jab.
I saw a report by a coroner.
Looked him up and Called him, just to see if he was for real.
He told me about what he is finding in the blood vessels and he had never seen anything like it before.
The same information is prevalent. Why You are not telling people that is what is going on? I don't know.

There have been a Coupla Big guys die,working out, in this heat. Happens. Every year.
But not like I am reading about
And the insurance companies are talking about
Excess Deaths
Duhh.
You can just ignore my posts, or wear yourself out,I seriously don't care.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/07/22 at 21:46:03

You are wrong I am well aware of athletes dying
Just not every day.

So far the information You have provided doesn't even equal 365 athletes. This last claim You tossed out has people who are Alive. Why you are ok with being told people who are alive are actually dead athletes I do not know. Lies are lies even if they say what you want to hear.

I saw a report by a coroner.
Looked him up and Called him, just to see if he was for real.

PM me his contact info and I will do the same, or let me know where I can find this report. If he has evidence it could be compiled and researched.

"The same information is prevalent. Why You are not telling people that is what is going on? I don't know."

Because it is not. Look at your latest source, hundreds of false claims. But BFD, that's not important, just pretend it's not full of lies. I already posted more realistic numbers with full breakdowns of verified patients, with vaccine batch numbers but you won't look at them, instead you make up statements I never made.

"And the insurance companies are talking about
Excess Deaths
Duhh."

Again, you won't read your own source material, that you posted 3 times, that clearly doesn't account for vaccinated as the reason. They actually indicate unvaccinated make up the higher percentage. But BFD, let's just ignore that and keep claiming, falsely, that insurance companies are saying vaccinated humans die more. No need to read your own material, just tell people that read it for you, that they are wrong.

Where are all the dead NFL players?
Where are all the dead NBA players?
Where are all the dead MLB players?
Where are the millions of dead kids?

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/08/22 at 06:27:52

https://nationalfile.com/covid-boosters-increase-risk-of-immune-system-disorder-and-should-be-discontinued-japanese-surgeon-says/

http://https://nationalfile.com/covid-boosters-increase-risk-of-immune-system-disorder-and-should-be-discontinued-japanese-surgeon-says/

https://nationalfile.com/covid-boosters-increase-risk-of-immune-system-disorder-and-should-be-discontinued-japanese-surgeon-says/

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/08/22 at 14:15:40

"vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia"

I won't even bother to go into what's wrong here, but as someone that has had thrombocytopenia my entire life, I can assure you it won't cause heart attacks.

So what about all those dead NFL players?
So what about all those dead MLB players?
So what about all those dead NBA players?

If all these athletes are dying, as You claim, from heart attacks, where are they?

Oh that's right, ignore the lies, ignore the questions (while complaining when people don't answer yours) and just find another article.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/08/22 at 17:41:27

BREAKING!
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANIES LYING!!!

‘Huge, huge numbers:’ insurance group sees …
https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/...
Jan 07, 2022 · Excess deaths are deaths associated with COVID-19 directly or indirectly. Even if COVID-19 is not listed as the cause of death on a death …

Life insurance company CEO says deaths are up 40
https://pandemictimeline.com/2021/12/life...
Dec 30, 2021 · According to IndexMundi.com, there are normally about 7,755 deaths per day in the USA, pre-covid. The 40% increase in mortality now …

U.S. life insurance companies see 40% death …
https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/u-s-life...
1 day ago · The vaccine will bankrupt all private health & life insurance companies, paving the way to a single payer system controlled by the Federal …

Life insurance companies report a sudden rise …
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/02/24/life-f24.html
Feb 23, 2022 · 23 February 2022 According to a report Wednesday in the Wall Street Journal, US life insurance companies saw nearly a 40 percent rise in

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/08/22 at 19:26:27

BREAKING You posted all this multiple times, it still hasn't changed. You wont read it, then you tell people that read it for you that they are wrong. This is like that false George Washington quote you want to keep telling us is true - no matter how many times you re-post the same information, it doesn't change the accuracy.

They don't attribute 40% increase to vaccinated humans. "Excess deaths are deaths associated with COVID-19 directly or indirectly"

How many of this 40% are young athletes? Are they all the athletes I posted here that are not under 35 and are alive?

What about all those dead NFL players? They aren't in these insurance numbers.
What about all those dead MLB players? They aren't in these insurance numbers.
What about all those dead NBA players? They aren't in these insurance numbers.

If all these athletes are dying, as You claim, from heart attacks, where are they? Why aren't they in Your own source material?

Why do you want us to ignore that millions of humans are alive and not dead?

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/09/22 at 08:08:24

Bad medical procedures are not tossed out because of their successes
But by their failures. The damage that is acknowledged in the underreported VAERS reports are serious enough to have brought earlier experiments to a halt.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/09/22 at 09:24:52

Bad medical procedures are not tossed out because of their successes
But by their failures.

I agree. But in this case there are, just in this thread alone, hundreds and hundreds of false claims. Just in this one article.

Where are the millions of dead kids?
What about all those dead NFL players?
What about all those dead MLB players?
What about all those dead NBA players?

Where are they?

"The damage that is acknowledged in the underreported VAERS reports are serious enough to have brought earlier experiments to a halt."

Except VAERS, along with every single one of your resources so far, do not verify vaccination. You are willing to blame vaccinations for deaths before it was even invented, so I can see why you blame it on unconfirmed deaths of people who could be alive that might have not even had the vaccine.

At this point anything that says vaccine = bad you accept as fact. Then when somebody reads your source for you, you tell them they are wrong. None of your insurance sources, (which is really the same one over and over but with a different headline), say the 40% increase is due to vaccinations.

I however will not sit here and have you show me hundreds of false claims and pretend they are truth, then pretend that 1700% isn't actually hundreds of thousands of dead children.

Where are all these dead kids?

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/12/22 at 09:51:16

More "Under 35" names that are over 35. No wonder they got a 1700% increase in heart attacks, if they don't consider age in an age-specific evaluation you can get any number you want.

Oh yeah and vaccination status was never verified, but that's no big deal either.

thingy Dodds (62)
Adrianna Piller (42)
Ingus Eiduks (61)
Robert Marcy[ch347] (44)
Andrea Cursio (42)
Unnamed (42)
Jorge Casas (56)
Puneeth Rajkumar (46)
Levent Selim (48)
Calvin T. Rockward III (38)
Mirco Adani (53)
Michaël Englebert (37)
Carl Madsen (71)
Mario Mingarelli (69)
Bruno Taffarel (56)
Unnamed (43)
José Sáenz Guerrero (53)
Hans-Günter Kinnen (65)
Alvino Santana (56)
Brian Gassaway (49)
Adans João Santos Alencar (38)
Badr Laksour (41)
Dr. Filippo Morando (37)
Christophe Ramassamy (54)
Heinz Steinbach (76)
Unnamed AH footballer (53)
Kaizzad Capadia (49)
Julija Portjanko (38)
Igor Nikulin (61)
Julia Nikolic (38)
Alessandro Cabrio (59)
Simone Bedodi (40)
Unnamed (59)
Unnamed Saint-James player (40)
Benoit Sabard (49)
Kota Ibushi (39)
Bern Bauer (61)
George Peterson (37)
Elias Abou Nassif (44)
Alexander Siegfried (42)
Ma[ch322]gorzata Gembicka (36)
Ernst Scherr (64)
Jorge “Acero” Cali (49)
Major Wingate (37)
Nicolás Martínez (65)
Todd Richards (54)

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by WebsterMark on 08/17/22 at 04:33:04

Chew on this:
https://amgreatness.com/2022/08/16/report-44-percent-of-pregnant-women-in-pfizer-trial-lost-their-babies-fda-and-cdc-recommended-jabs-for-expectant-mothers-anyway/

44%, 22 out of 50, pregnant woman in Pfizer trial had miscarriage. Typical number would be 10-15%. First off, who the hell would participate in the trial when you’re pregnant is my first question. Secondly if true why isn’t this front page news? Third, surely it should be relatively easy to find the number in the general population of pregnant women who took the vaccine and what the outcome was and does that match what they saw in the trial?
I’m not going to read 300,000 pages of documents to find the answers to some of those questions.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/17/22 at 05:32:23

Secondly if true why isn’t this front page news?

Because it is not true.

"Third, surely it should be relatively easy to find the number in the general population of pregnant women who took the vaccine and what the outcome was and does that match what they saw in the trial?"

Exactly. Tons more pregnant women took the Pfizer vaccine after it's public release than did during trials. We should have many, many miscarriages on record given this increase in vaccine administration.

Instead 2021 saw the highest increase in births since 2014.

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/birth-rate

If 44% of pregnancies resulted in miscarriages we should expect at an absolute minimum 7% drop in live births, but realistically much much higher, more like 30% given the number of vaccines administered.

Now I am not saying that I think the vaccine is "safe" for pregnant women. I am saying that there is no way 44% had miscarriages and we would still have the amount of live-births we do now.

But as we have seen here, if the lie says what we want it's ok to lie, and then spread that lie as fact.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by WebsterMark on 08/17/22 at 10:48:23

My comment about why if this is true why is it not front page news, is not false. As far as I can tell out of 50 women in the trials who were pregnant 22 had miscarriages. Apparently that’s very much an absolutely true statement as I’ve not seen anything to the contrary.

I never said that percentage carried over to the general population once the vaccine was released. However, you can’t look at live birth data and make the assumption that because there was no change or an increase in births, the vaccine did not increase miscarriages. I know for a fact, without getting into personal details, miscarriages are not always reported to doctors or any authority. The 10 to 15% average is an estimate I read from the article. Maybe the 5% range is to cover non-reported miscarriages. I have no idea.

But again, the point was, if during Pfizer trials, 44% of the 50 women who were pregnant in the trials had a miscarriage, that’s significant and should have widely publicized. If you’re saying that figure is not true, then tell me how you know that and what percentage of pregnant women during the trials had miscarriages or other issues with pregnancy.

Again, I’m not looking through 300,000 pages of data. I found the statistic interesting but not enough to takeoff work all day and read a bunch of documents.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/17/22 at 14:17:19

However, you can’t look at live birth data and make the assumption that because there was no change or an increase in births, the vaccine did not increase miscarriages. I know for a fact, without getting into personal details, miscarriages are not always reported to doctors or any authority. The 10 to 15% average is an estimate I read from the article. Maybe the 5% range is to cover non-reported miscarriages. I have no idea.

I think you can estimate that live-birth rates would decrease if an event caused a 29% increase in miscarriages - just because that increase is so high. Reporting wouldn't be the issue, I think we would just see fewer physically born babies. Lets say a new trial toothpaste caused miscarriages to double, then the exact same toothpaste was sold to the public. Wouldn't you expect a decrease in live births? I imagine the amount of unknown miscarriages would be well into the 60% of pregnant women in order for no change to be seen. Maybe that's true, I have no way to tell.

In this case the Pfizer trial medication is the same medication used in mass distribution. Why would there be fewer miscarriages by percentage once the vaccine was distributed globally?

As for the 44% of the women in the Pfizer trials I have to have the numbers audited 3 more times, but it seems that some of these women were still pregnant when the trials concluded. So how they ended up on this report as spontaneous abortion is the question at this time.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/17/22 at 18:07:17

Have we seen anything that might lead to an above average of pregnancies?
When you can't go bowling with your family on Friday night, you might retire to the bedroom.
People have been staying home, because places they wanted to go were closed, or maybe they demanded masks, and plenty of people just didn't get out during the great lockdown. Work, if it wasn't closed down, grocery store, home..

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/17/22 at 19:24:55

Have we seen anything that might lead to an above average of pregnancies?

A 44% increase of pregnancies would be needed to equally mitigate a 44% increase in miscarriages. No. Nothing supports that.

If the US population suddenly, just when Pfizer vaccines became available increased successful pregnancies at an astounding 44%, (that's 4345.9957 pregnancies per-day) then we would have seen a huge demand for maternity related products, like tests, etc. Nothing supports that level of demand. 4345 per-day.

People have been staying home, because places they wanted to go were closed, or maybe they demanded masks, and plenty of people just didn't get out during the great lockdown. Work, if it wasn't closed down, grocery store, home.."

This also greatly decreased physical interactivity of the most sexually active age-groups in the US, humans in their 20's and 30s. Sexual activity among youth was at an all time low, STD's have never been fewer. Pregnancy tests have never sold less.

44% fewer live births would surely be noticeable, and a 44% increase in pregnant women would also surely be noticeable. But then again, living humans should be calculated as dead, over 8million dead kids just from heart-attacks in 2021, 2k soldiers a day disabled, etc. - that math is supposed to be accepted. So sure lets say just when Pfizer became available incidentally 44% MORE humans in the US started getting pregnant.

But only right when Pfizer was released, not before during the lockdowns, or after.

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/17/22 at 19:34:21

Oh yeah, and there is this:

https://www.bu.edu/sph/news/articles/2022/risk-of-miscarriage-may-increase-during-the-summer/

A new study found that miscarriage risk in North America increased by 44 percent in late August, compared to late February, indicating the need to explore possible links between extreme heat and pregnancy loss.

Another 44%

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by WebsterMark on 08/18/22 at 05:39:23

The condition and outcome of 50 people in a clinical trial can’t be extrapolated to the nation’s pregnancy demographics. That’s too small a group and we have no idea how the 50 represented the nation as a whole. I’m not saying miscarriages increased 44% in the general population.

First off, who would sign up for a clinical trial when they’re pregnant? When I was a kid, young, newly married and poor, I agreed to a clinical trial for an asthma study. I got $1500 which was a fortune back then. But I wouldn’t say I and the others were a good representation of asthma sufferers as a group.

My question is did doctors who encouraged pregnant women to take the Pfizer vaccine know of or have an opportunity to see full reporting on the clinical trials? Or did they somewhat blindly follow CDC and AMA recommendations?

Title: Re: I'm not the only one who sees it
Post by Eegore on 08/18/22 at 07:40:33

"The condition and outcome of 50 people in a clinical trial can’t be extrapolated to the nation’s pregnancy demographics. That’s too small a group and we have no idea how the 50 represented the nation as a whole. I’m not saying miscarriages increased 44% in the general population."

I agree with that, but 44% is really high. We should have seen an impact unless just by pure coincidence there was a ton of high risk OB in that one trial.

"First off, who would sign up for a clinical trial when they’re pregnant? When I was a kid, young, newly married and poor, I agreed to a clinical trial for an asthma study. I got $1500 which was a fortune back then. But I wouldn’t say I and the others were a good representation of asthma sufferers as a group."

This is a good question. I have heard from a lot of trial participants that said they did it to help others. So who knows, even with a baby that could be. Or maybe a bunch of women that were hoping the medication would end the pregnancy. Who knows.

"My question is did doctors who encouraged pregnant women to take the Pfizer vaccine know of or have an opportunity to see full reporting on the clinical trials? Or did they somewhat blindly follow CDC and AMA recommendations?"

I would think they used the guidelines since that's why they are there. Since many of these Pfizer reports are results of legal action I imagine they weren't even available to practicing OBGYN.