“This sounds reassuring, but when American investigative journalist Jefferey Jaxen analysed a study by 21 authors analysing data from V-safe published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, he discovered they had manipulated the figures.”
Sally Beck, October 12, 2021
Using the Way Back Machine, it was possible to obtain the original table as published, which is shown below. The figures highlighted in yellow illustrate how potentially misleading the data usage was. The aim of this comparison was to show the numbers of babies lost to mothers who had the vaccine (12.6%) is comparable to the what would normally be expected without a vaccine (10-26%).
The problem with this original table was that 700 out of the 827 received their first vaccine dose in the third trimester and therefore should not be included in this row.
Hong Sun, Ph.D. Dedalus Healthcare, Antwerp, Belgium, pointed this out to the New England Journal of Medicine and they amended the data. However, it’s interesting to see how this data was amended (see below).
Is this simply another illustration as to the level of subterfuge being utilised in these dark days?
If so, then 12.6% vs 82% is a significant difference.
Leave a Reply