Popular Articles
Today Week Month Year

After falsely claiming that covid vaccines are safe for pregnant women, NEJM issues correction admitting “no evidence”
By Ethan Huff // Sep 21, 2021

Back in June, the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) published a bogus study claiming that Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) "vaccines" are perfectly "safe and effective" for pregnant women to take. A few months later, the NEJM was forced to issue a correction.


Entitled, "mRNA Covid-19 Vaccines in Pregnant Women," the original study by Dr. Laura E. Riley, MD, made the claim that pregnant women should take Fauci Flu shots because "developmental and reproductive animal data from Moderna showed no safety concerns."

Riley further contended that there is "no biologically plausible reason that the mRNA technology would be harmful in pregnancy," even though the jabs have never been safety tested on expectant mothers – not even once.

This ridiculous fake science study was crafted in such a way as to sound as science-y as possible. The goal, of course, was to convince as many people as possible who read it to accept its false claims without even a second thought simply because it was published in the "reputable" NEJM.

It was later discovered, though, that Riley's claims were based on lies, and that there is actually "no evidence," according to a recent correction, that any of Donald "father of the vaccine" Trump's "Operation Warp Speed" injections are either safe or effective in pregnant women.

"At the time of publication of preliminary findings in the Original Article related to this editorial, the number of spontaneous abortions was 104 and there was 1 stillbirth," the correction reads.

"However, no proportion could be determined for the risk of spontaneous abortion among participants vaccinated before 20 weeks of gestation because follow-up information was not yet available for the majority of those persons."

Covid vaccination is genocide

As it turns out, Riley did not even present the data she included correctly. In the fifth paragraph of page 2342 of the editorial, Riley misreported the number of registry participants who reported a completed pregnancy as well as the number of spontaneous abortions and stillbirths that occurred post-vaccination.

This is the type of thing we have come to expect from the conventional medical establishment, which has proven over the past several years that it will stop at nothing to force its plandemic agenda on the masses.

The apparent assumption is that so few people will actually look into the false claims made that the Branch Covidians will be able to advance their agenda with minimal pushback.

Steve Kirsch, founder of the Covid-19 Early Treatment Fund (CETF), tweeted about the correction, noting that it is too little, too late now that potentially thousands of pregnant women already got jabbed based on Riley's false data or some other propaganda.

"Whoops," Kirsh joked about Riley's study falsely claiming that Covid-19 shots are safe and effective for pregnant women. "Took them months to respond to our group."

"In short, the CDC has no basis to recommend the vaccine to pregnant women. Will lack of evidence make a difference in the CDC recommendation? Of course not. We'll experiment on the public," Kirsh added.

Kirsh also pointed out that another admission was made in the correction about how "a relatively small number of completed pregnancies" were included in the data, making it incomplete.

"Shimabukuro et al. acknowledge the limitations in their ability to draw conclusions about spontaneous abortions, congenital anomalies, and other potential rare neonatal outcomes," he further quoted.

Another Twitter user added to the conversation by pointing out that not only were pregnant women excluded from the mRNA trials, but so were those with autoimmune disease or a compromised immune system.

"That was so wrong considering they said it was safe for all of us," this person wrote.

Another noted that a 30-year-old pregnant woman who took the jab experienced a large blood clot in between her uterus and amniotic sack just three days later. That clot was not present prior to the injection, suggesting it caused the clot.

Another thing worth noting is that Riley has glaring conflicts of interest in that she has accepted "personal fees" from drug giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). Riley lists these as "consult" (consultation) fees for the Moderna CMV (cytomegalovirus) vaccine.

Riley also takes in royalties "for parvovirus, rubella, herpes and varicella in pregnancy, as well as UTI," according to the "relevant financial activities outside the submitted work" section of her ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest.

Riley currently sits on the editorial board of the NEJM, by the way. This means that she holds sway over the other things that get published in the journal, calling into question its credibility as a reliable source for learning about the latest science.

Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) deception is everywhere, including in the medical journals. To keep up with the latest, visit Deception.news.

Sources for this article include:







Take Action:
Support NewsTarget by linking to this article from your website.
Permalink to this article:
Embed article link:
Reprinting this article:
Non-commercial use is permitted with credit to NewsTarget.com (including a clickable link).
Please contact us for more information.
Free Email Alerts
Get independent news alerts on natural cures, food lab tests, cannabis medicine, science, robotics, drones, privacy and more.

NewsTarget.com © 2022 All Rights Reserved. All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. NewsTarget.com is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. NewsTarget.com assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. Your use of this website indicates your agreement to these terms and those published on this site. All trademarks, registered trademarks and servicemarks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners.

This site uses cookies
News Target uses cookies to improve your experience on our site. By using this site, you agree to our privacy policy.
Learn More
Get 100% real, uncensored news delivered straight to your inbox
You can unsubscribe at any time. Your email privacy is completely protected.