https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29889622/#affiliation-1"A lowered probability of pregnancy in females in the USA aged 25-29 who received a human papillomavirus vaccine injection
Gayle DeLong 1
Abstract
Birth rates in the United States have recently fallen. Birth rates per 1000 females aged 25-29 fell from 118 in 2007 to 105 in 2015. One factor may involve the vaccination against the human papillomavirus (HPV).
Shortly after the vaccine was licensed, several reports of recipients experiencing primary ovarian failure emerged. This study analyzed information gathered in National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which represented 8 million 25-to-29-year-old women residing in the United States between 2007 and 2014.
Approximately 60% of women who did not receive the HPV vaccine had been pregnant at least once, whereas only 35% of women who were exposed to the vaccine had conceived. For married women, 75% who did not receive the shot were found to conceive, while only 50% who received the vaccine had ever been pregnant. Using logistic regression to analyze the data, the probability of having been pregnant was estimated for females who received an HPV vaccine compared with females who did not receive the shot. Results suggest that females who received the HPV shot were less likely to have ever been pregnant than women in the same age group who did not receive the shot. If 100% of females in this study had received the HPV vaccine, data suggest the number of women having ever conceived would have fallen by 2 million. Further study into the influence of HPV vaccine on fertility is thus warranted."
"Statement of Retraction
Following review and publication of the article, we were alerted to concerns about the scientific validity of the study. As a result, we sought advice on the methodology, analysis and interpretation from a number of experts in the field.
All of the post-publication reports we received described serious flaws in the statistical analysis and interpretation of the data in this paper, and we have therefore taken the decision to retract it. The author has been notified of our decision."
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15287394.2018.1477640If this isn't Big Pharma ghost-writing fraudulent complaints against the article, why are there no details as to who did the complaining and specifically what the complaints against the article were? In light of
a million Americans having died completely unnecessary and easily preventable deaths from COVID-19, we can likely all guess at the reason by now.
In light of
major medical journals publishing fraudulent "trials" retracting sound article by some of the most highly respected scientists/doctors in the world, can there be much doubt that it is just more information laundering by medical journals for Big Pharma?
"Medical journals: “information-laundering for Big Pharma?”
