What do you mean I “don’t agree with the paper”? I didn’t find any fault with it. Apart from the fact that it doesn’t address comorbidities, it’s fine as far as it goes. I’m suggesting that, if the CDC or anyone else is using that paper to suggest that being pregnant exposes you to a level of risk from COVID that merits taking a minimally-tested vaccine, then they’re not just twisting the facts, they’ve broken the facts on the wheel and chucked the remains in the river.
You implied that pregnant women are “at high risk” of dying from COVID (“Kids growing up without a mother is no joke”).
That paper clearly shows that pregnant women are not at measurably higher risk of contracting and dying of COVID compared to other women in that agegroup; and furthermore that that risk (a) accounts for less than 2% of their all-cause risk and (b) is comparable to their risk of being killed by vaccination … although since nobody has bothered properly testing the vaccine on pregnant women, we have to assume that risk of vaccination death is the same as for the population at large. That paper also shows, surprisingly, that their child is not at risk either. Did you even read it?
The paper you quoted suggests that this doesn’t happen.
You don’t need to be an epidemiologist to look at statistics and make sense of them.