Preprint Article Version 2 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

COVID-19 Vaccines: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function

Version 1 : Received: 24 September 2022 / Approved: 28 September 2022 / Online: 28 September 2022 (03:50:35 CEST)
Version 2 : Received: 30 December 2022 / Approved: 30 December 2022 / Online: 30 December 2022 (09:39:28 CET)

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

Thorp, J.A.; Rogers, C.; Deskevich, M.P.; Tankersley, S.; Benavides, A.; Redshaw, M.D.; McCullough, P.A. COVID-19 Vaccines: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function.Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. Thorp, J.A.; Rogers, C.; Deskevich, M.P.; Tankersley, S.; Benavides, A.; Redshaw, M.D.; McCullough, P.A. COVID-19 Vaccines: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function.Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.


Objectives Assess rates of adverse events (AE) after COVID-19 vaccines experienced by women of reproductive age, focusing on pregnancy and menstruation, using data collected by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database. Design Population-based retrospective cohort study. Setting US and global entries in US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). Participants CDC VAERS entries from January 1, 1998 to June 30, 2022. Interventions None. Main Outcome Measures A proportional reporting ratio analysis is performed using data in the VAERS system comparing adverse events (AE) reported post-COVID-19 vaccines with that of post-Influenza vaccines. Results COVID-19 vaccines, when compared to the Influenza vaccines, are associated with a significant increase in AE with all proportional reporting ratios of > 2.0: menstrual abnormalities, miscarriage, fetal chromosomal abnormalities, fetal malformation, fetal cystic hygroma, fetal cardiac disorders, fetal arrhythmias, fetal cardiac arrest, fetal vascular malperfusion, fetal growth abnormalities, fetal abnormal surveillance, fetal placental thrombosis, low amniotic fluid, preeclampsia, premature delivery, preterm premature rupture of membrane, fetal death/stillbirth, and premature baby death (all p values were much smaller than 0.05). When normalized by time-available, doses-given, or persons-received, all COVID-19 vaccine AE far exceed the safety signal on all recognized thresholds. Conclusions Pregnancy complications and menstrual abnormalities are significantly more frequent following COVID-19 vaccinations than Influenza vaccinations. A worldwide moratorium on the use of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy is advised until randomized prospective trials document safety in pregnancy and long-term follow-up in offspring.


COVID-19 vaccines; menstruation; pregnancy outcomes; Influenza vaccines; VAERS; stillbirth; miscarriage


Medicine and Pharmacology, Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Comments (5)

Comment 1
Received: 30 December 2022
Commenter: Claire Rogers
Commenter's Conflict of Interests: Author
Comment: Addition of data, clarification of figures, and detailed explanation of the VAERS reporting system requirements at the recommendation of journal editors.
+ Respond to this comment
Comment 2
Received: 25 February 2023
Commenter: Carrie L. Gillen Moon, MS, M(ASCP)
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: This paper discusses the speed of vaccine rollout and the use of VAERS to access COVID and flu vaccine publicly reported adverse effect differences. The COVID vaccine rollout did occur at a much higher rate and with fewer years of study, but this vaccine type had already been studied for other uses and tried for years previously. The study was also able to move faster because production of the vaccine did not rely on earlier more time-consuming methods of production due to being mRNA-based instead of antigen-based vaccine. The first mRNA therapeutics company was actually founded in 1997. Therefore this therapeutic mode is not as new as the public generally believes it to be.

This study used the VAERS, an open access self-report system of adverse event data, to show a 57-fold increase in miscarriage and an even greater increase in menstrual problems comparing COVID vaccines and Flu vaccines. I just used the same system and found the miscarriage rate to be a 6-fold increase, not 57. A completely explainable increase due to the hysteria that was generated around the vaccine. If I adjust for just 2018-2023 the difference is 22-fold. If I adjust for all vaccines vs COVID the difference is 13-fold. If I run the same data for just menstrual problems alone the difference is 13-fold. At no point in my search, after changing the keywords many times, did I find any count as high as described in this paper, but all reports were consistently higher.

All categories exceed the CDC's 2-fold threshold, but are all self-reported and in direct opposition to a great number of real world studies on pregnant women from around the world, ie. when an actual study is performed, there is no effect of the vaccines, but when we allow literally anyone to log onto their home computer and report, you get this increase. The reality is, even in America with excellent healthcare, 1 in 4 pregnancies ends in miscarriage. On average there are about 1,000,000 miscarriages per year in the USA. The current number reported but not proven to have been caused by the vaccine is 1381 by my own search using the word "miscarriage" using VAERS, that would be a 0.14% miscarriage rate for the COVID vaccine if you could even prove it was the cause, which you can't. This study summarizes data for multiple birth and fetal issues, preterm, genetic, and other abnormalities as discrete calculations. But all were reported based on an individual's suspicion, not on any piece of evidence. These are conditions that the general public has difficulty understanding and assigning cause to. In fact, often their own physicians cannot pinpoint the cause. That can make people search for one on their own.

The VAERS does not contain proven effects and cannot be used to prove that any vaccine causes any of the issues reported. In fact to use it, you must click a box saying you understand this before accessing the data. I think no rational person would, previous to the COVID vaccine, have self reported their fetuses' and infants' vast array of disorders as due to the flu vaccine since 80 years of it makes people pretty certain it wouldn't be the cause. But an entirely new virus and vaccine would make people fear it was the cause. The difference in fears surrounding the flu vaccine, in use now for over 80 years, versus a brand new type of vaccine released and in many situations forced onto the public during a pandemic that raged on every screen and infiltrated American lives like no other in history (with the notable exception of the 1918 flu pandemic) is simply incalculable. But any rational person would consider the fear to be much higher, perhaps 57-fold higher?
+ Respond to this comment
Response 1 to Comment 2
Received: 25 March 2023
Commenter: Vesa Raiskila
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: Comment to Carrie L. Gillen Moon

"All categories exceed the CDC's 2-fold threshold, but are all self-reported" Er... healthcare providers can also report AEs and in some cases are required by law to do so.

"when we allow literally anyone to log onto their home computer and report, you get this increase"

The argument here seems to be that for some mysterious reason, people (including healthcare providers) decided to create a vast number of false reports to VAERS in connection with Covid vaccines. Apparently, in no case can the reports manifest the kind of warning signal that should alert medical authorities to problems with these injections!

Incidentally, here in Finland (as in may other highly vaccinated countries) the situation is the same: the number of serious adverse events, including deaths, reported about Covid injections vastly exceed those reported about any previous vaccine, including the disasterous Pandemrix swine flu vaccine. And I know from personal experience that creating such a report is not a straightforward or quick task: I created one about a 48-year-old woman who died six days after having a Covid injection. Following a post-mortem, a pathologist for the Finnish Institute of Health and Welfare determined that the vaccine indeed was a contributor to her death.
Comment 3
Received: 5 March 2023
Commenter: Scott Kiley
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: Claire L Gillen Moon,
The great thing about this fake pandemic, common sense can allow many people to connect the dots. Let me explain.
1. There were therapeutics known from the start. The EUA was obtain fraudulently. With wide use of the therapeutics, no pandemic. This fact should trouble most people with any common sense.
2. They never investigated the origin. Well of course not. This virus was made made with our tax payer dollars. Do the initial lies bother you? Was it released intentionally? While China locked down hard, they still allow travel out internationally. Seems like they were trying to spread the virus.
3. How about the extreme censorship. Does that trouble you? The brightest Doctors being hunted and threatened for sharing life saving information?
4. How about this first, pharmacies denying doctors IVM and HCQ. Raise any flags for you?
5. Oh yeah, and then there is Pfizer requesting the FDA conceal for 75 years their trial data. Why would they do that? I thought this vaccine was a miracle for humanity. Surely you'd want to share the data? Have a look at Naomi Wolf's team of 3000 volunteers who analyzed these documents. Pfizer knew of massive injury including death and rolled out anyway. Is the part of that excellent healthcare in the US that you refer to?
6. How about the fact that children have zero chance of death and yet the CDC added this bio-weapon jab (20 of them from 6 months to 18 years) to the childhood schedule. Do you see any problem here?
7. How about the coordinated message of, get the jab to save grandma, get the jab and you will not get covid, get the jab and you will not transmit. This was the basis for the vax passport and yet it was known the injection never was even tested against transmission and infection. It does neither. Total sham.
8. Fauci lied to us repeatedly. Read Robert F. Kennedy's book, The Real Anthony Fauci. Give it a read.
9. How about all of the sudden deaths, incentive pay to give injections, incentive pay to hospitals to follow life ending protocols? Any problems here?
+ Respond to this comment
Comment 4
Received: 8 March 2023
Commenter: Damon McClure
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: I would like to personally thank the Authors of the paper and others like it. Your work has enabled people like myself to help educate others on the dangers of the covid drugs and help stop people from taking more.

I hope you all start looking into the shedding aspect and not just the spike protein but the potentially the lipid nanoparticles and the mrna because if it is then it needs to be acknowledged and researched to be understood.

When Peter McCullough was interviewed online by Australian senators Gerard Rennick, Craig Kelly and Alex Antic, it was raised about the blood abnormalities abd structures. Worse yet the person raised that while originally it was only the jabbed but had started to appear in the unjabbed as well. At 1hr 9m 30sec this is raised but not addressed.

Going forward others raised this and than the following Italian study got me to fact check this myself

Unfortunately it appears to be very real and between my jabbed and unjabbed social circles there are serious concerns

Plenty of photos of our bloods
+ Respond to this comment

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our Diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
* All users must log in before leaving a comment
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 5
Metrics 0

Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.