What part of what she said was not a fact?
The logic is incoherent. You can't string together unrelated statements without context, attach a conclusion that has no relation to what you said, and then say it's accurate. Imagine someone making the following argument:
"There were no Black senators in 1800. There were no Black senators in 1900. There were no Black senators in 2000. And I'm supposed to trust a Black man to be president in 2008???"
An argument like that is pure bullshyt, even though the individual statements are technically "factual", because the implications with no context are ridiculous and the logic is just wrong.
covid vaccine trials did not include pregnant women
The initial trials did not include pregnant women, but it was almost certain that catching Covid would be much more dangerous to a pregnancy than taking the vaccine as the vaccine is just coding for a tiny piece of the Covid virus with far fewer effects on your body. However, at least 23 women in the initial trial did become pregnant shortly after receiving the vaccine with no ill effects, and concurrent with the regular vaccine studies they were doing animal studies that showed the vaccine had no negative effects on pregnancies.
Since those initial studies last year, they have now done at least three studies of pregnant women receiving the vaccine not to mention tens of thousands of pregnancies that are being tracked through the regular vaccine distribution. All studies show no negative effects from the vaccine.
Studies Confirm COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Safe, Effective for Pregnant Women
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104983
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/m...des-2021-02/28-03-01/05-covid-Shimabukuro.pdf
You bolded what I said and then tried to argue with a completely different point.
