It really doesn’t matter why it happened. The fact is that it did happen, and “incomplete compliance” was completely predictable (and permitted, via various silly rules). This sort of thing reminds me of the way dietitians tell fat people to “eat less”, and then berate them when they can’t: the prescription is not just faulty, it’s physically impossible in the first place.
Nature is what it is. Humans have this ridiculous habit of coming up with theories of the way Nature ought to work, and then throwing all their toys out of the pram when Nature fails to comply.
As for flu magically disappearing while COVID didn’t … well, there’s more than one possible explanation for that.
Bloody hell. Did you follow the link to their supposed “research” on which their recommendation is based? Basically they sent out some text messages to see if anyone had any problems. If an undergrad designed an experiment like that he’d probably get a D-. And where is their evidence suggesting that pregnant women are at high risk of COVID-induced miscarriage/stillbirth?
This stuff gets weirder by the day. Doesn’t anybody remember thalidomide? What happened to the precautionary principle?
While there is no compelling biological reason to expect that mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (either preconception or during pregnancy) presents a risk to pregnancy, data are limited.
“No compelling reason” to expect problems is not a good reason to assume that there are none, in any field, nevermind medicine. And yes, data are very limited indeed. So best not to take unwarranted risks, surely?
The pharmaceutical companies usually do a cost-risk analysis for these things, and future payouts are factored into the vaccine profits. From what we’ve heard, they pretty much have indemnity for any serious side effects from these Covid vaccines. If a few miscarriages/ stillbirths occur due to Covid vaccines then it is very likely that another factor will be blamed (probably Covid), or the narrative will run, “Well, if you didn’t vax then probably you would also have died along with your unborn child.”
But if there is any legal challenge made against the company, then, well, good luck…
A total of 389 women in the 15-39 age group have died “of or with” COVID since the beginning of 2020 in the UK. There are 11m women in that agegroup, which means their 12-month risk of death from COVID (about 20 per million) is somewhat lower than the risk associated with simply being pregnant, and in the same ballpark as the risk of complications from vaccination. Since their COVID risk is very low in the first place, the absolute decrease in risk resulting from vaccination is also very small, which means that the average all-cause risk of mortality for a 30-year-old woman (about 800 per million) is barely altered by her vaccination status. This becomes increasingly true for younger women.
So no, they’re not at “high risk”, or at least not high enough to justify taking additional risks. If the CDC can show that COVID has caused a measurable increase in miscarriages etc, then I’d like to see the evidence, but I suspect they just pulled that out of their ass.
I’m going with the numbers … of which there are none at all on the CDC page. Wouldn’t be the first time the CDC have deliberately distorted the facts. I can see nothing in the UK data that suggests that all that waffle on the webpage is even close to being true.
I’ll say it upfront: the CDC are, and have been for a while, purveyors of misrepresentation.
EDIT: interestingly, the NHS information on the same subject is rather more evenhanded than the US equivalent, admitting that there is little or no data on which to even base a rational decision:
This could simply be a reflection of the fact that fewer pregnant women in the UK are dangerously obese.
Well, I’ve read it, but I don’t see there’s any justification here for either the scaremongering tone of the CDC page, or the assertion that pregnant women are at “high risk”, or the pressure on pregnant women to get vaxed.
The crucial point here is that young healthy women, pregnant or not, are very unlikely to acquire a moderate-to-severe case of COVID in the first place. Only a small fraction of the women in the study tested positive for COVID (1.3%), and of that small fraction, an even smaller fraction had any adverse outcomes. In contrast, 100% of them would (hypothetically) be exposed to the risk of vaccination. The correct weighting of risks therefore takes the whole population (half a million) into account, not just those who tested positive for COVID.
There were nine COVID deaths among half a million women, which is the same as the death rate in the general population (and also comparable to the reported rate of post-vaccine death). Survival rate of the baby appears to be unaffected by COVID:
The paper states at least twice: “the absolute risks were low”. Again: nobody actually knows what the vaccination risk in pregnancy actually is. There has been no Phase 4 trial for pregnant women. It should be up to the individual whether they want to take on these (unknown) risks in order to reduce the possibility of outlier events, and the CDC page should make this clear. It would be an absolute disaster if some ‘long tail’ malfunction occurred with the vaccines.
Considering the shocking rate of obesity, diabetes and heart disease among the women being surveyed (and I notice there’s nothing in the health advice on the CDC page suggesting that women should take steps to avoid these diseases) the rate of poor outcomes was surprisingly low. The generally disastrous state of health of the US population complicates this sort of study, but they don’t appear to have tried to control for this.
It’s not my evidence it’s the US CDC position after they reviewed the peer reviewed literature and research studies. They quote multiple papers you can go and have a look.
Of course you are a qualified epidemiologist … … Definitely …Yup makes sense…You’ve been working years in the field like the professionals and reading up on all the latest research.
An obstetrician working in one of Sydney’s COVID-19 hotspots has called on pregnant women to get vaccinated, saying it’s “heartbreaking” delivering babies pre-term and separating newborns from mothers because of the virus
> Dr Bhagwanani explained how pregnant women who contracted COVID-19 had double the risk of having a stillbirth or being admitted to intensive care.
**> ** > She also said pregnant women had a higher risk of needing a ventilator or needing a pre-term delivery.
.
Something important to consider is that covid infection may not just affect the mother but also the baby (pre term delivery/higher rate of still birth ).
… Definitely …Yup makes sense…You’ve been working years in the field like the professionals and reading up on all the latest research.
