You're still re-peddling this trash maga propaganda after we covered it thoroughly in another thread? Privately asking questions was not an admission that he knew it caused miscarriages, when follow-up studies showed that to be false and Trump's CDC still recommends the covid shot to pregnant women
today.
"This is a resurfacing of a claim that's been fact-checked repeatedly since 2021 — it's built on a well-documented statistical error, not a cover-up.
The claim: That the Shimabukuro et al. NEJM study (April 2021) reported a 12.6% miscarriage rate but "raw data" actually showed 82%, and that Fauci/CDC/NEJM concealed this.
Why the 82% figure is wrong:
The study followed 827 pregnant people in the CDC's v-safe registry who got vaccinated at various points in pregnancy — including about 700 who were vaccinated in their
third trimester. Critics arrived at "82%" by:
- Discarding the ~700 third-trimester women (who obviously can't miscarry — miscarriage by definition is an early-pregnancy loss),
- Then dividing pregnancy losses only by the small subset of first-trimester women who had already reached a completed outcome by the study's cutoff date,
- While ignoring the much larger group of first-trimester women whose pregnancies were still ongoing (i.e., not yet miscarried, not yet reason to worry) when data collection ended.
That's a denominator-selection error: if you only count pregnancies that reached an outcome by an early cutoff, you systematically exclude all the
successful, still-ongoing pregnancies, and artificially inflate the loss rate. FactCheck.org, Lead Stories, and independent statisticians have all walked through this same math error going back to 2021 — it's not a new finding, it's a recycled miscalculation now being attached to newly released congressional documents.
On "Fauci covering it up": Fauci's released texts reportedly show him raising a private question about miscarriage risk in January 2021 — before the CDC's actual pregnancy-safety data had been collected and analyzed. Privately asking a question is not the same as possessing proof of harm and hiding it. The Shimabukuro study went through a correction for a methodology issue, but corrected/revised methodology is normal scientific process, not evidence of fraud — and the corrected analysis still didn't show an elevated miscarriage signal.
Broader evidence: Multiple large studies since 2021 (not just this one paper) have looked at miscarriage rates in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated pregnant people and found no meaningful difference from background rates, which independently run around 10-15% in the first trimester.
Bottom line: The "82%" and "abortion shot" framing is a statistical artifact from cherry-picked denominators, not what the underlying data shows. It's the same claim that's been debunked multiple times since 2021, now recirculating with a new hook (Rand Paul/Ron Johnson document release) attached."