@AlexBerenson Let’s refrain from saying “really ugly miscarriage” and have some respect for human life. There is no way a vaccine caused placental abruption. This is coincidental. ACOG and MFM society recommend the vaccine for pregnant women.
@auvius@justinesherry@AlexBerenson “Ugly miscarriage” is the propaganda tip-off of the day. Who says that? No way in hell a vaccine caused placental abruption. This is purely coincidental. Would love to see the labs on the thrombocytopenia pt. There are many causes of this.
@auvius@justinesherry@AlexBerenson What do you mean? We are studying it right now? I was on a call this morning as part of the CDC vaccine study for pregnant women. How many people need to get a vaccine do you think to prove that it’s safe? And how many years should we study it before it’s deemed safe?
@auvius@justinesherry@AlexBerenson Based on what I have read it has not been rushed through. They followed every step. Its remarkable what science can accomplish with adequate resources.
@auvius@justinesherry@AlexBerenson With the way that mRNA vaccines work, if a vaccine did cause ADE or the elusive pathogenic priming, then infection with the virus would cause the same phenomena. And that would be quite a horrifying and detestation virus. There is dengue fever which has ADE.
@auvius@justinesherry@AlexBerenson I believe the RSV vaccine trial was in the 60s and it was an inactivated virus vaccine. Basically an inapp T cell response led to poor stim of NK cells and CD8. There was no MRNA vaccine technology at that time.
@auvius@justinesherry@AlexBerenson Also FWIW re vaccine safety. This mrna vaccine will probably prove to be one of the safest. Due to cold storage requirements, no chemical preservatives are req. So in theory we can expect less allergic and adverse reactions.
@auvius@justinesherry@AlexBerenson Pathogenic priming is a dog whistle used by anti vaccine people and is theoretical at best when it comes to covid 19. The RSV study is often sited when discussing this and the negative results are always misinterpreted and exaggerated.
@auvius@justinesherry@AlexBerenson I was very skeptical that a vaccine would work for a coronavirus. But have spent a lot of time and research and I now have a sliver of hope with the efficacy of the moderna and Pfizer vaccines. Also we have seen huge drop in number of quarantined healthcare workers at our hosp.
@auvius@justinesherry It’s also strange to me that people pick and chose which WHO recommendations they take as gospel. Especially when it comes to vaccinations. It seems people pick and chose what supports their belief and narrative.
@auvius@justinesherry Their basis seems to be “insufficient data to assess vaccine efficacy or risks associated with the vaccine to recommend them for use in pregnant women.” The CDC has an ongoing study of pregnant women who have received the vaccine. Hopefully we get some data from that soon.
@auvius@justinesherry Well they have no evidence for that recommendation. And in their rec they say “except for those at high risk of exposure or having a severe case.” And I’d say every pregnant women is in this category unless you live in a particularly isolated community.
@auvius@justinesherry There will never be a study to prove the safety of something like this in pregnant women. There is not a single medication on the market that says “studied in pregnant women and proven safe.”