- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Fauci and Covid Vaccine During Pregnancy
Posted on 8/18/26 at 10:17 am to Ingeniero
Posted on 8/18/26 at 10:17 am to Ingeniero
quote:
82% of women did not miscarry after being vaccinated in the first trimester. Lots of those pregnancies were still ongoing, meaning they did not miscarry. The only way for a pregnancy to be "completed" before full term is to have a miscarriage (in this context)
I understand. I think that was an extremely misleading stat to put in the results section of a report. I think it was put it bc it fit the narrative that miscarriage rate was around the average knowing the data set was not complete.
I am also digging into the the first full data set now and I will say I’m curious why 20 wk gestation or halfway point was utilized and not the normal trimester approach with the 1st trimester (<13wks) clearly being where the vast majority of miscarriages occur.
This post was edited on 8/18/26 at 10:39 am
2
Posted on 8/18/26 at 10:42 am to STEVED00
If you want I can provide you with even more recent studies of over 100k pregnant women and vaccination at different points in pregnancy. But I have a feeling it won’t really matter
This post was edited on 8/18/26 at 10:44 am
Posted on 8/18/26 at 10:44 am to lsupride87
Sure. Send a link.
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:04 am to SECSolomonGrundy
quote:
If anybody in our times deserved to be tarred and feathered, it's Fauci.
The fact this has 20 downvotes is crazy to me.
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:08 am to grizzlylongcut
I think it’s the inconsistencies, as most do see Fauci as a villain
Tar and feather Fauci, but celebrate the man that put Fauci in charge and gave him a medal? Just strange
Also, this specific instance for Fauci which is the premise of the thread is based on a lie
Fauci is absolutely a villain who deserves punishment, but we once again let the politicians off the hook who were the true POS that held all the power
Tar and feather Fauci, but celebrate the man that put Fauci in charge and gave him a medal? Just strange
Also, this specific instance for Fauci which is the premise of the thread is based on a lie
Fauci is absolutely a villain who deserves punishment, but we once again let the politicians off the hook who were the true POS that held all the power
This post was edited on 8/18/26 at 11:09 am
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:08 am to STEVED00
quote:
I reviewed and still feel like they were pressured/coerced/shamed for no real benefit and questionable results. Does that make you upset?
The actual study didn't back up your claims, so you pivoted to "feelings", huh?
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:27 am to STEVED00
The rate of miscarriages from just regular pregnancies is incredibly high. This following citation is from Williams Obstetrics, a residency level textbook:
So from what you linked, I think the rates are in line with earlier studies, and anecdotally, the rates are likely closer to 50% (quoting my wife here).
Women, in general, have a high rate of miscarriage in the 1st trimester regardless. There is nothing in the data you presented that actually suggests what you think.
quote:
Rates for miscarriage vary according to the study population. In pregnancies aged 5 to 20 weeks’ gestation, the incidence ranges from 11 to 22 percent and is higher in earlier weeks (Ammon Avalos, 2012). To evaluate rates starting at conception, Wilcox and colleagues (1988) studied 221 healthy women trying to conceive through 707 menstrual cycles and found a miscarriage rate of 31 percent. This study found that two thirds of these losses are early and clinically silent. Currently, certain factors are known to influence clinically apparent miscarriage. However, it is unknown if these same factors also affect clinically silent pregnancy loss.
So from what you linked, I think the rates are in line with earlier studies, and anecdotally, the rates are likely closer to 50% (quoting my wife here).
quote:
Unless I read this wrong, if a woman got the vaccine in the first part of her pregnancy then she had a very high rate of miscarriage, where as, if they received the vaccine at the end then an extremely low rate of losing baby. Yet the vaccine was recommended for all pregnant women.
Women, in general, have a high rate of miscarriage in the 1st trimester regardless. There is nothing in the data you presented that actually suggests what you think.
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:33 am to lsupride87
quote:
Also, this specific instance for Fauci which is the premise of the thread is based on a lie
There were concerns about vaccine and pregnancy by medical community and the latest round of hearings confirm that. There is no lie.
I also thought this was funny from the study you linked
quote:
Importance Data about the safety of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy are limited.
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:37 am to STEVED00
quote:There were theoretical possibilities in a text message. The next message he sent was saying the data is not showing any risk that support the theoretical possibilities
There were concerns about vaccine and pregnancy by medical community and the latest round of hearings confirm that. There is no lie.
The recent news cycle was 100% a lie pushed by Rand Paul and other prominent republicans. It was very unfortunate
This post was edited on 8/18/26 at 11:38 am
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:46 am to lsupride87
quote:
Fourth, there were few individuals who were vaccinated in the first trimester among individuals who completed pregnancies in the study period. Because Norway and Sweden do not recommend vaccination during the first trimester except for particular high-risk groups, those exposed to vaccination during the first trimester are likely to constitute a highly selected group. Thus, it was not possible to provide any evidence regarding adverse events associated with vaccination during the first trimester. Most individuals in the cohort were vaccinated during the third trimester, which may have limited the assessment of fetal growth restriction.
Also from the link you posted. Norway and Sweden did not recommend 1st trimester vaccination unless extremely high risk. Interesting since they are safe and effective.
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:47 am to STEVED00
quote:
I think that was an extremely misleading stat to put in the results section of a report.
None of it was misleading. The title literally told you it was "preliminary analysis". They gave you the date range. They gave the total women participating. They gave you the total number of completed pregnancies within the timeframe.
All the information was available in the analysis.
quote:
I am also digging into the the first full data set now and I will say I’m curious why 20 wk gestation or halfway point was utilized and not the normal trimester approach with the 1st trimester (<13wks) clearly being where the vast majority of miscarriages occur.
You don't "dig" very well. The 20 week cut off was the follow up period, not the 1st trimester defintion.
quote:
A total of 96 of 104 spontaneous abortions (92.3%) occurred before 13 weeks of gestation. No denominator was available to calculate a risk estimate for spontaneous abortions, because at the time of this report, follow-up through 20 weeks was not yet available for 905 of the 1224 participants vaccinated within 30 days before the first day of the last menstrual period or in the first trimester. Furthermore, any risk estimate would need to account for gestational week–specific risk of spontaneous abortion.
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:54 am to Salmon
Recommendations were made on the preliminary analysis.
Hell the study that pride posted clearly said that 1st trimester vaccination was NOT recommended in the area where the survey was conducted.
Hell the study that pride posted clearly said that 1st trimester vaccination was NOT recommended in the area where the survey was conducted.
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:57 am to STEVED00
Oh you want just 1st trimester results? Ok
LINK
And again
Can’t wait to see the goalpost move, AGAIN
LINK
quote:
JAMA Network Open — 2025: “First-Trimester mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination and Risk of Major Congenital Anomalies”
This is a nationwide French cohort of 527,564 live-born infants, including 130,338 (24.7%) whose mothers received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine during the first trimester.
LINK
And again
quote:
246,259 pregnant women total
* 83,475 (33.9%) received a first COVID vaccine at some point in the study period.
* 43,981 were classified as “recently vaccinated”—vaccinated from 28 days before conception through 120 days after conception.
* Their median gestational age at vaccination was 6 weeks (IQR 0–12 weeks).
Can’t wait to see the goalpost move, AGAIN
LINK
This post was edited on 8/18/26 at 11:59 am
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:58 am to STEVED00
quote:Another lie
Recommendations were made on the preliminary analysis.
EUA status was not pulled for pregnant women until studies concluded
Posted on 8/18/26 at 11:59 am to STEVED00
lsupride87 has an Anthony Fauci bobble head he jerks off to daily.
Posted on 8/18/26 at 12:00 pm to LSUA 75
And yet another lie 
I hate Fauci, and I hated him before hating him was cool
I hate Fauci, and I hated him before hating him was cool
Posted on 8/18/26 at 12:01 pm to lsupride87
Even in that second Norway & Sweden study you posted, about 33% were vaccinated in the first trimester. Even ignoring the fact that "not recommended" isn't the same as "is dangerous for," there's plenty of data that shows there are no problems with it.
Posted on 8/18/26 at 12:03 pm to Ingeniero
quote:Dont tell Steve
Even in that second Norway & Sweden study you posted, about 33% were vaccinated in the first trimester.
Posted on 8/18/26 at 12:04 pm to lsupride87
quote:
Objective To evaluate the association between first-trimester exposure to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and the risk of major congenital malformations (MCMs), across 75 individual MCMs grouped by 13 organ systems.
MCMs are in children actually born, correct? This doesn’t seem like it has anything to do with miscarriages but I’m still reading it.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News