If vaccines don't cause autism,
then how do you explain all this evidence?
We see an odds ratio of 5 when comparing autism in vaxxed vs.
unvaxxed in MULTIPLE studies. The before:after odds are even
more extraordinary. How can we ignore all this evidence?
STEVE KIRSCH
JUN 17
12-Year-Old Goes Viral After 'Exposing' Vaccine Austism Link |
Teen Vogue
Executive summary
Here’s my favorite short list of evidence that can’t be
explained if vaccines don’t cause autism. Does anyone think
I’m wrong and can explain the list?
The list (in no particular order)
Here is a list of some of the most compelling evidence I’ve
run across.
If there is a hypothesis that is a better fit to this evidence
than vaccines cause autism, I’d love to hear it.
Madsen study: Even in this heavily flawed study, the raw data
showed a strongly elevated risk of autism. So they never
showed the raw data odds ratio (did you know that the rate of
autism was 45% higher in the vaccinated group than the
unvaccinated group?) and the paper only showed the adjusted
numbers! That’s unethical. You can read the flaws in this
study that was widely cited to prove that there was no
association here. Over 1,000 scientists didn’t see anything
wrong with the study! It’s really stunning how easily bad
science propagates into the mainstream. Note that this is the
single best study that is cited to prove that vaccines don’t
cause autism and it is deeply flawed. The authors wouldn’t
provide the underlying data and refused to answer any
questions. Is that the way science works?
214 papers in the peer-reviewed literature linking vaccines
and autism: Autism mom Ginger Taylor compiled a list of 214
studies showing the link between vaccines and autism. Here’s
the list as a single download.
Wakefield 1998 paper: Wakefield’s retracted paper reported
that “We investigated a consecutive series of children… Onset
of behavioural symptoms was associated, by the parents, with
measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination in eight of the 12
children, with measles infection in one child, and otitis
media in another.” So 66% of the cases were associated with
the MMR vaccine.
The 2022 Morocco study: 70% of the 90 parents surveyed
affirmed that the first autistic features appeared after
vaccination with the MMR vaccine. The rates are nearly
identical to the 66% rate in the Wakefield study.
DeStefano paper evidence destruction: CDC scientist William
Thompson was ordered by his bosses at the CDC to destroy ONLY
the evidence linking vaccines and autism. Furthermore, the
race subgroup analysis showing the link was omitted from the
paper which is also unethical. When Congressman Bill Posey
tried to get Thompson to testify in Congress, they shut him
down so there was no testimony. This coverup was what
convinced Wakefield that he was right: vaccines cause autism.
More about the DeStefano paper in this article.
Simpsonwood meeting: CDC scientist Thomas Verstraeten did a
study in 1999 linking thimerosal with autism. They tried to
make the autism signal go away. They couldn’t. The original
signal was a RR=7.6 which is a huge signal. See my article for
details and a link to the original Verstraeten study.
Paul Offit lied to RFK Jr. about thimerosal: RFK Jr told me
the story personally, but now, it’s on the Joe Rogan podcast
Episode #1999. Start listening at 23:00. The punchline is at
28:33. Basically, the ethylmercury in the thimerosal makes a
beeline out of your blood and deposits into your brain (unlike
the methylmercury in fish which has a harder time entering
your brain so it stays in your blood longer). Offit tried to
convince RFK that the mercury gets excreted by referring to a
paper. When RFK brought up the Burbacher study, there was dead
silence on the line because Offit knew he had been caught in a
deception. In short, thimerosal can seriously damage people’s
brains. Vaccines are not supposed to cross the BBB. This
creates biological plausibility needed for causality.
The CDC study showing how the measles vaccine caused permanent
brain damage
The most remarkable paper showing the MMR vaccine causes
permanent brain damage is this 1998 paper Acute Encephalopathy
Followed by Permanent Brain Injury or Death Associated With
Further Attenuated Measles Vaccines: A Review of Claims
Submitted to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
It is written by CDC authors and has not been questioned or
retracted and cited by 90 papers.
This excellent Substack article shows the statistically
significant peaks at days 8 and 9 after the shot. That’s
causality.
So the CDC knew in 1998 that the measles vaccine was causing
brain damage. But the paper said that the relationship “may
exist.” Right. No other way to explain the data if it wasn’t
causal.
This gives us more biological plausibility.
Studies of the vaxxed vs. unvaxxed
Studies of the unvaxxed vs. vaxxed all show a significantly
higher rate of autism and other chronic diseases in the
vaccinated (roughly 5X or more for autism).
Paul Thomas study showed that the unvaccinated did better on a
wide range of health outcomes and that the more vaccinated you
were, the more office visits you had.
Hooker: 5.03 odds ratio for autism in the vaccinated vs.
unvaccinated.
Mawson: 4.2 odds ratio for autism in the vaccinated vs.
unvaccinated (666 in this study)
Control group: 82 odds ratio for autism in the vaccinated vs.
unvaccinated. “For those with zero exposures to post-birth
vaccines, pre-birth vaccines, or the K shot, the total rate of
autism in the entire CGS is 0% (0 of 1,024)” Doing an OR
calculation relative to my survey of 10,000 children: OR=82
CI:5.1197 to 1315 z statistic: 3.114 Significance level. P =
0.0018.
Lyons-Weiler: The study was too small to assess autism risk,
but showed better health outcomes among the unvaccinated than
the vaccinated in other conditions. See this article which
notes that the unvaccinated had better compliance to their
wellness checks than the vaccinated which eliminates a common
argument that anti-anti-vaxxers use. It says, “the
unvaccinated families made their well-child visits with
greater frequency than the vaccinated families.”
A new study of 50,000 kids (submitted for publication but not
yet published) shows the same odds ratios for chronic diseases
as the Hooker and Mawson studies. The author is well respected
and the dataset is very large.
The Generation Rescue (GR) study that was done on June 26,
2007 showed that vaccinated kids were significantly worse off
in every category they looked at. “For less than $200,000, we
were able to complete a study that the CDC, with an $8 billion
a year budget, has been unable or unwilling to do.” Where is
the CDC survey? Nowhere to be found! They simply don’t want to
do it. Read the survey and see this article for more
information. GR couldn’t tamper with the study or manipulate
the results because it was done by a third party survey firm
with no conflicts of interest. If the drug companies didn’t
like the result, they could have easily commissioned a
different polling company. But they didn’t!!! Or maybe they
did and simply chose not to publish the results because they
were so bad. In any event, the lack of a poll showing the
opposite of the GR poll is very very problematic for the “safe
and effective” narrative.
There are large cohorts with a no vaccination policy which
have NO autism
The Amish: We couldn’t find an Amish child with autism who
wasn’t vaccinated or adopted.
A large clinical pediatric practice I am personally very
familiar with has eschewed the use of all vaccines and
acetaminophen and achieved a zero autism rate over the past 25
years even though autism rates were skyrocketing in adjacent
clinics. Furthermore, despite the lack of vaccination, the
kids were also uniformly healthier than the kids in any of the
surrounding clinics. This means that we can end the autism
epidemic merely by altering individual choices we make.
Unfortunately, this clinic cannot “go public” with this
information because the medical boards would take away their
license to practice medicine because they failed to push the
vaccines on their patients like they were told to do by the
medical establishment.
There are other pediatric clinics in the US which eschew
vaccination. For example, at Homefirst Medical Services, “We
have about 30,000 or 35,000 children that we've taken care of
over the years, and I don't think we have a single case of
autism in children delivered by us who never received
vaccines.” What makes this believable is that other clinics
who didn’t vaccinate reported the same results.
My survey of the parents of 10,000 kids showed more vaccines
mean that an autism diagnosis is more likely.
The Homefirst clinic in Chicago run by Mayer Eisenstein had
tens of thousands of patients and not a single case of autism
over 47 years. He died in 2014.
From this article in UPI:
In the past, public-health officials have said such an
approach [surveying the public to look at health outcomes in
vaccinated vs. unvaccinated] would be impractical due to low
numbers of never-vaccinated children, but this column found
tens of thousands of such children -- beginning with the Amish
-- in various locations in the United States. In our anecdotal
and unscientific reporting, the rate of autism seemed
strikingly lower in never-vaccinated children, …
But this column identified several groups that might fit the
bill -- from the Amish in Pennsylvania Dutch country to
homeschooled children to patients of a Chicago family
practice.
"I have not seen autism with the Amish," said Dr. Frank
Noonan, a family practitioner in Lancaster County, Pa., who
has treated thousands of Amish for a quarter-century.
"You'll find all the other stuff, but we don't find the
autism. We're right in the heart of Amish country and seeing
none, and that's just the way it is."
In Chicago, Homefirst Medical Services treats thousands of
never-vaccinated children whose parents received exemptions
through Illinois' relatively permissive immunization policy.
Homefirst's medical director, Dr. Mayer Eisenstein, told us he
is not aware of any cases of autism in never-vaccinated
children; the national rate is 1 in 175, according to the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "We have a fairly
large practice," Eisenstein told us. "We have about 30,000 or
35,000 children that we've taken care of over the years, and I
don't think we have a single case of autism in children
delivered by us who never received vaccines. "We do have
enough of a sample," Eisenstein said. "The numbers are too
large to not see it. We would absolutely know. We're all
family doctors. If I have a child with autism come in, there's
no communication. It's frightening. You can't touch them. It's
not something that anyone would miss."
The before:after odds measures
The before:after odds measures are the most stunning pieces of
evidence there is for vaccines causing autism. Many parents
notice a sudden, dramatic change in their child shortly after
vaccination. But the funny thing is, none of them noticed this
right before the appointment with the pediatrician to get the
shot. It’s simply nearly impossible to achieve a disparity
like this if the shots are safe.
This isn’t observer bias either. If a child suddenly developed
autistic behaviors right before the doctor appointment to get
vaccinated, you can bet the first thing out of the parent’s
mouth would be telling the doctor before the shot of the
sudden change. What pediatrician in the world can recall that
ever happening?
Yet we are inundated with stories of parents saying their
child got a fever right after the shot, the parent may have
given the child Tylenol (which makes everything worse), and
within hours, the child is never the same.
These clearly aren’t anti-vaxxer parents who believe Wakefield
because if they were, they wouldn’t have vaccinated their
child!!! So there is no way to ignore these reports.
Pediatrician Doug Hulstedt statistics: He had 150 autism
patients, about half where the parents linked the autism to
the vaccine. He said there were 44 cases where autism signs
developed very quickly. In every single case, the regression
happened after a vaccine shot rather than in the days or weeks
before a vaccine appointment. That is statistically impossible
if the vaccine is a placebo. But even more devastating is that
you cannot find a pediatrician in the world where the
before/after stats are comparable. Why not? If the vaccines
are safe, every pediatrician should have comparable stats and
it would be impossible to find a single Doug Hulstedt.
My survey of parents of 300 autistic kids showed a 0:66 odds
for getting autism the month before a vax shot vs. within a
month after a shot. This is in remarkable agreement with Doug
Hulstedt’s numbers.
Other evidence
Autism is brain injury. The only things that could cause such
an injury is a pathogen that is either injected, ingested,
inhaled, or absorbed by the skin. There may also be a genetic
cause. This limits our solution space.
There is not a single cause for autism. If you remove the
major causes (e.g., vaccination, use of Tylenol, etc.), autism
will still happen, but at a much lower rate.
The pathogen must be relatively new because autism rates
didn’t “take off” until 1983. In 1983, the Centers for Disease
Control ("CDC") recommended a total of 10 vaccines for our
children up to the age of 5. In 2007, the CDC recommended 36,
an increase of 260%, or 3.6x. You can see the slope change at
both those dates in the graph below.
California's Autism Explosion: An Eyewitness Perspective —
NCSA
This rapid climb was not due to a change in criteria to
diagnose ASD. Such a change would create a quick step function
and just shift the existing line upwards; the slope wouldn’t
change.
Also, this growth isn’t due to a genetic issue because genetic
traits don’t replicate exponentially over short time periods
like this.
The fact that we can dramatically reduce the rate of autism by
withholding all vaccines suggests that the vaccines are the
major driver.
Distortion of truth
When people on the other side of the argument have to lie and
distort the truth to make their point, you really have to
wonder why they have to do that.
For example, For example, Matt Carey when he wrote about
William Thompson’s study, he claimed that there was nothing
wrong with excluding the RACE subgroup analysis from their
published paper or being ordered to destroy ONLY the documents
that were related to the RACE subgroup analysis (i.e., to ONLY
destroy that data that goes against the CDC narrative).
Carey excels at gaslighting people who don’t know how science
works. He wrote another article which deliberately
misrepresented the results of the Generation Rescue survey
(Matt claimed they showed the opposite of what they actually
did). Nobody can read the results of the GR survey and think
that the vaccines are bad. But he deliberately didn’t link to
the source so you can’t easily check out that he’s lying.
As a result, none of the comments pointed out the huge
misdirection.
Professor Anders Hviid had to create a bogus study which was
designed not to find a signal. And when I notified him that
another paper proved that his underlying data was inaccurate,
he ignored me. When I asked to see the data, he blocked me.
Lots more in my article.
Finally, in general, the anti-anti-vaxxers will not engage in
a civil dialog to discover the truth. That should be very very
concerning.
Can they simply “explain away”everything in this article? Can
we talk about it?
Even more evidence
The admission of a top autism expert
Finally, the biggest piece of evidence comes from James
Lyons-Weiler who got a call from one of the top autism experts
in the world. He told James that “We all know vaccines cause
autism. We just aren’t allowed to talk about it.” He was
referring to his fellow autism experts.
If they admitted this, they would lose their funding, their
job, their license to practice medicine, their hospital
privileges, their board certifications, etc.
That’s why I can’t get a debate and when I try to reach out to
these experts they ghost me.
And that’s why there are never the before:after studies and
why all there are so many studies are designed to not find a
signal.
Summary
Science is about matching hypotheses to data to which
hypothesis is best able to explain all the data.
It’s clear that there have been studies which have been
deliberately or inadvertently designed to not find a signal.
This doesn’t mean there isn’t a link; it simply means the
study was inadequate to find the link or the underlying data
was compromised.
The thing is that if there really is not a link, then no
matter what you do, you won’t find a link.
But the problem they have is that there have been other
studies which show very clearly that vaccines cause autism
that cannot be explained away because the signals are too
strong.
Furthermore, I was unable to find a single study showing that
the fully vaccinated had better health outcomes than the fully
unvaccinated. Judy Gerberding, the former head of the CDC,
promised to do such a study in 2005.
Twenty years later, that study has still never been done.
So in the meantime, the precautionary principle of medicine is
pretty clear on what we should be doing: nobody should be
getting any vaccines. |
