The Game of Statistics and the Deaths of 104 Babies

 Amici,

You might have heard or read of a recent New England Journal of Medicine article on a study about spontaneous abortions and Covid "vaccines". The news was that out of 800-some pregnant women studied (827 to be precise), precisely 104 lost their babies after being "vaccinated". That's 104 dead babies which resolves to 12 percent of the total group of 827 studied. The New England Journal of Medicine says 12 percent mortality is acceptable compared to other vaccines, etc.

• In other words: The whole point was to say, "See, the Covid "vaccines" aren't as bad as all that."

Now, remember old Canadian Dr. Roger Hodgkinson's profound comment: "Statistics never apply to individuals. YOU may be IT! And if you're it, it puts a very different complexion on the event, does it not?" Consider how heart-broken those 104 women who lost their babies must be.

• And yet, there's more to this story. MUCH more. The manipulation of statistics.

• The Story Falsifies the Information

This story illustrates how the game of statistics is played. "Spontaneous Abortion" is a phrase that is used to refer to failed pregnancies ending BEFORE 20 weeks; AFTER 20 weeks of pregnancy, such a tragic event is called a "stillbirth".

1. So in this published study, of the 827 pregnant women, only 127 women were in their first 20 weeks of pregnancy.
   
2. Now comes the Kicker: ALL 104 "vaccine"-induced spontaneous abortions were suffered by women in their first 20 weeks!
   
3. And that means that's a "vaccine" mortality rate of 82 percent. Again: it is ALL of the total 104 babies of the entire study.

Think about this means. But there's more! When you dig through the report, you find that "A total of 700 participants (84.6%) received their first eligible ("vaccine") dose in the third trimester." Wait...what? What kind of idiotic test sample was this? A "sample" made up of two widely disparate groups of pregnant women! Clearly, the sampling was completely skewed, fraudulently so. It was "weighted" just as would be some hackneyed political poll. (Most political polling is propaganda designed to manipulate people.)

• So much for "science".

Conclusion

Being a pregnant woman and getting a Covid "vaccine" isn't smart, whatever trimester one is in. Not remotely. Especially – sadly, obviously – if you're under 20 weeks. It is flat-out murderous to your baby. (And evidence is building that the "vaccines" can apparently cause sterility, especially in women, though only time will show the extent of how true this is. Remember: should you think this sounds nuts, that it has been proven in the past that certain "vaccines" were used in some Third-World countries to actually sterilize the women there, so there is precedent.)

Yet if it is possible to have a "bigger issue" in this story, one has to step back reflect on the consideration that if they're willing to lie about something as straightforward, and important, as this 827 women study, what else are they willing to lie about regarding the entire Covid narrative?

Elephants remember

So do cats

Throughout the Covid Year (now "Years"?) we've been lied to on an incredible scale. Remember those early scenes from Wuhan China that showed masked people collapsing on the streets? That's never happened anywhere in the world. (To this day, we don't really know how many Chinese died, or even what they died of, as Wuhan is one of the most polluted places on Earth, and the first city to be wired for 5G.) But the images of collapsing people used to spread terror 'round the world.

Remember all the screaming how the high death rates in Tuscany and New York City, yet comparable mortality did not evince itself elsewhere? I had a German acquaintance back at that time last year just yelling at me over the phone about those Tuscany deaths proving Covid was a new Black Death – and nothing remotely came of it. (Needless to say, he's never apologized and we no longer are on speaking terms.)

Or remember the dire warning about how long the Covid virus could live on hard surfaces, and you had to be continually disinfecting your hands (very hard on the skin, that). I know that Tungsram, the Hungarian lighting company, started to spend millions on developing ultraviolet light disinfectant devices, but I don't know if the "bottom fell out of the market" for such or not. No one discusses this now, so I suppose there is no market for such items.

Or what about the whole mask business? I remember very well that during the California wildfires last year, the various CA and US government public health agencies (CDC, etc.) were urging caution, telling everyone how dangerous the smoke was and that Covid masks would not prevent you breathing in fire dust and soot, etc., from a forest fire. It was laughable. They betrayed themselves! But the media kept quiet about it, and the "Sheeple" took no notice. (A virus is supposed to be FAR smaller than fire soot particles, you see. So, if a mask cannot offer protection from that, then how is it supposed to stop a virus?)

And speaking of masks, how is it that "the average mask-wearer in the street" doesn't know what medical people know full-well: that in hospitals, hospital masks (the most usual Covid mask type for the general public) are not supposed to be worn after 20 minutes. 20 minutes of use and they're used up. That's the standard rule; masks have to be changed after twenty minutes. But here we are, adults and kids wearing these masks all day, and usually each mask for multiple days. (I only rarely change masks, but then I only rarely have to wear them. It's like a bizarre voodoo ritual, mask wearing; so much of the "Covid narrative" strikes me as "magic".)

Felines remember all this nonsense and want to know more. Is there lying? Definitely. Who is lying? The public health people, the governments, the Big Pharma. The Mainstream Media, as well (MSM). Why are they lying? Money is the motivation for Big Pharma, certainly; Moderna's first medical product was its Covid "vaccine" and it has made the computer tech/software company eight billion dollars. As for the others...? The Media support a certain social-political cultural narrative, and government is now, and always has been, interested in gaining ways to control and manipulate entire populations.

Cats look behind the scenes, as at this New England Journal of Medicine story. Behind the scenes cats hear mice moving about and chewing on the wood. But Canines drown all that out with their barking and barking at the Sheeple, "Move on, move on! Nothing to see here" and the Sheeple usually do, indeed (for now) "move on".

Bottom line: the New England Journal of Medicine article is yet another example of how nothing about the Covid narrative is right, my friends.

An Préachán

N.B. 

(Infor from: Jefferey Jaxen, investigative journalist in conversation at THEHIGHWIRE.com; Jaxen reported that a letter had been sent to the editor of the NEJM in April about this. Embedded in an article here at The Eponymous Flower.)