Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Mar 1 14 tweets 7 min read
New cheese 🧀🧀🧀

For those enquiring about whether hospital episode statistics confirm an increase in miscarriages... the data is early.
NHS data only goes up to March 2022.

It's massively confounded but read on.

Here is "bleeding in early pregnancy" (O20)
7-sigma increase
NHS episode statistics 2017-2022:
"Ectopic pregnancy" ICD code O00.
7 sigma increase.
NHS episode statistic 2017-2022:
"Maternal care for fetal problems"
ICD code O36.
4.7 sigma increase

There are others, e.g. diabetes (7.1 sigma increase)
But there are two codes which behave very oddly, that based on the other codes you would expect a rise but are either the same or lower number of episodes.

There is an explanation so hold on...
Here is "spontaneous abortion" aka miscarriage.
The miscarriages are higher than the previous year (when there were more pregnancies) but lower than the previous years.

What's going on?

Why did miscarriages fall so dramatically in 2020?
The clue lies in O04 - complications of induced abortion. These *halved* suddenly in 2020. Why?

In 2020, the same NHS who told you to stay at home if you had pneumonia also told you to keep out of the hospital for your abortion.
Where abortion care moved to the community it did not generate a hospital episode, so the number of hospital episodes went down.

The same with miscarriages.
Good luck getting the information on miscarriage numbers outside of hospital since 2020. Conveniently the ONS "do not hold this information"
So all we can say is that under the likely same circumstances, hospital managed miscarriages are 5% up on the previous year, and we do not know how many were managed in the community.

We can try and adjust for the drop in 2020 which would look a bit like this... Years 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 data has been adjusted upwards
What we can say though is that many of the complications of #pregnancy that must be managed in hospital, such as ectopic pregnancy, have increases that are unprecedented (7-sigma).

Despite a drop in birth numbers.

That's a massive safety signal.
And remember that most of the COVID vaccinations given in pregnancy were in the 2nd-3rd trimester, where they don't influence miscarriage rates.

A *doubling* of the miscarriage rate from 10% to 20% in 10% of pregnancies would give a graph that looked something like...

And even without adjusting for community cases, if 5% of women received a COVID vaccine in the first trimester and the miscarriage rate doubled from 5% to 10% you would get a 5% rise from the previous year's numbers.

Exactly the figure seen (see ALT text for calculation) NHS total pregnancies are around 600,000 per year registered
Source for the above all taken from NHS digital hospital admitted care activity:

@ClareCraigPath @joshg99 @MartinNeil9 @RealJoelSmalley @EthicalSkeptic @boriquagato

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Jikkyleaks 🐭

Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Jikkyleaks

Mar 3
Extracorporeal cheese 🧀🧀🧀

Did anaesthetists (intensivists) who openly declared their hatred for "antivaxxers" on social media send them on a pathway to death?

This could be bigger than the #midazolam scandal.

That was the damning table. But for background let's just wind back a bit.

@caz_sampson is a self declared ICU anaesthetist. In the UK, anaesthetists run the ICUs. In the US they tend to be called intensivists.

Notice Caz's horns on her profile picture - we'll come back to it Image
Caz is a associate of the #muttoncrew who follow @SwaledaleMutton and their affiliates whose job is to "counter disinformation".

One of their techniques is to label people they don't like "antivaxxers" without defining that term.

Caz hates antivaxxers.
archive.is/5VqVw Image
Read 20 tweets
Mar 1
What I've discovered over the last 3 years of this long con is that when I reveal something that is confronting but true, the #muttoncrew trolls are rolled out in force.

This is the second intensivist that is upset that they don't understand baseline miscarriage rates
So, here's a question for you #MidazolamJohnny

When Zauche presented this chart on behalf of the CDC was she misrepresenting the data, as you seem to think?

[Src: page 32: cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/…]
The pregnancy data is not only made more complicated than it needs to be, but has been thoroughly misrepresented.

More on this here with references to the recent work by @sonia_elijah @MaryanneDemasi and @jathorpmfm

Read 4 tweets
Feb 26

Yesterday I put out a very important tweet thread with exclusive information on #pregnancy.

This was the thread.
I need your feedback!
This will take just a few seconds of your time.
The polls are only open for 1 day.
This is a #mousesurvey in 4 parts. Please answer all 4 questions if applicable.

Did you see this thread (i.e. the first "Cheesy debunk" tweet with the cheese emojis🧀🧀🧀) on your timeline or in your mentions?
If you saw the thread do you remember retweeting the first (cheesy) tweet?
Read 6 tweets
Feb 26
Cheesy Debunk 🧀🧀🧀...

HUGE red flags over this #pregnancy and #miscarriage paper, which is absolute junk.

We're going to dive in and show you why this should never have been published and anybody associated with it will be forever tainted.
Here's the first red flag.

Redacted tables. I have never seen this in more than 20 years reviewing papers.

This is from the actual pdf on the Hum Reprod page for the paper.
Now we're going to have to assume (because the titles are redacted🤦‍♀️) that the first forest plot shows the #miscarriage rate in each study. The bigger the square the more the weighting in the study - generally more for bigger studies.

The two largest raise a massive red flag
Read 32 tweets
Feb 25
.@doctor_oxford uses her social media platform to push vexatious complaints against another doctor, due to her undeclared vested interests.

This is absolutely against @gmc_uk rules.

@doctor_oxford must realise that any member of the public can now file a complaint against her for acting with impropriety and disrespect on social media, undermining the public's trust in doctors.

She presumably doesn't realise she has done this.
Many of these narcissistic doctors have no idea that their pushing of a failed gene therapy vaccine, which has caused so much damage, is further undermining the public's trust in doctors.

Look at this poll result
Read 7 tweets
Feb 23
Holy Bat cheese. 🧀🧀🧀

The #ChatGPT confirms that #FastEddie Edward Holmes and the University of Sydney conspired to cover up an article referencing the PRRA epitope of the #modernagate furin cleavage site - in 2018.

Hold onto your hats!
The DOI referenced by the #ChatGPT does not exist. How so? The Chatbot is sure is exists. It knows everything.

This is the DOI search:

It goes to another paper altogether
The chat bot confuses itself and repeats the same DOI
Read 21 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!