Major medical institutions just are not getting the message. The science is not only not settled: The question is the most important neglected question in medical science - ever.
Outstanding article, James. Thank you. Some of my favorite parts:
"The refusal to even acknowledge these [vaccinated vs. unvaccinated comparisons]—let alone critique them in good faith—reveals not scientific caution but institutional bias....
The Science Is Not Settled. It Has Been Censored....
....that [Hopkins] narrative is not only scientifically incomplete—it is demonstrably false...
Science is not a consensus enforced by omission. It is not a weapon used to shame parents into silence....
Science is a process—a dynamic, self-correcting, and transparent one. It requires that inconvenient evidence be explored, not erased. It requires that questions be welcomed, not stigmatized.
The vaccine-autism connection has not been disproven. It has been politically and institutionally suppressed."
Of course they don't get the message. They are not paid to tell the truth. They are paid to hide the truth. What John Hopkins and others are doing is intentional deception and should treated as criminal negligence. Criminal negligence is when a person acts in disregard of a serious risk of harm that a reasonable person in the same situation would have perceived. Criminal negligence includes an action or omission of an action. Offenses that may result from criminal negligence include endangerment of a child. I hold that the actions of our universities, medical institutions, and most healthcare professionals meet this definition.
absolutely! It's incredibly frustrating that criminal negligence has been normalized in our society today. Corporations do it all the time and NOBODY GOES TO JAIL! Corporations pay a fine and they just write it off as cost of doing business.
If we would start prosecuting individuals who are criminally negligent and give appropriate punishments for the mass murders these people are committing, the madness would STOP right now. Make Public Drawing and Quartering Great Again!
In all the cases of toxic products producing harms we ignore the fact that Pharma adopted Rockefeller model with chemicals where Precautionary Principle is replaced with assumption of safety and onus to demonstrate harm put on the public w lawsuits. It's all criminal.
Scorecard Global Authority for chemical safety.. data collection ended w "safe air" at Ground Zero and public access ended when UC Davis pulled offline in 2020.
"Basic Testing to Identify Chemical Hazards
If an industrial chemical is allowed by law to be released into the environment, most people assume that it must have been tested and evaluated for its potential risks. Unfortunately, this is simply not true. Keeping chemical hazards under control requires information about what kinds of hazards each chemical poses.
If the basic tests to check on a chemical's toxicity haven't been conducted, or if the results aren't publicly available, current laws tend to treat that chemical as if it were perfectly safe.
For the chemicals being used in large quantities, Scorecard tells you whether or not eight basic types of tests for health and ecological effects have actually been conducted, based on the public record. "
Fantastic article. I cannot wait to share it! However, I am confused about the following:
"Autistic children had an 8-fold lower mean mercury level (0.47 ppm vs. 3.63 ppm), suggesting impaired excretion and a possible susceptibility to mercury retention. Among children with severe autism, levels were even lower (0.21 ppm), reinforcing the idea that differential detoxification mechanisms may play a critical role in ASD vulnerability."
If children with autism were found to have an 8-fold lower mean mercury level, doesn't that mean they are excreting and not storing? It sounds counter-intuitive but I assume I am misinterpreting the text?
That confused me at first, too. But apparently mercury being put into hair is considered an important avenue of excretion that autistic children are failing to use, and an indication that they are failing to use other avenues pf excretion. I imagine that the science behind this belief is explained in the article cited; I think the peer reviewers would have required an explanation (backed up by cites) to be added, if the article's authors hadn't provided one.
This article is a tour de force! Great work! And a great update to retired neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock's 2008 research review, "The danger of excessive vaccination during brain development: the case for a link to Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD)".
I think there are many different possible pathways to autism, with a variety of "stepping stones" that can "mix and match"; and particular stepping stones may be omitted in a particular child's case. We need to learn from the science of ecology and abandon western medicine's old, foolish "one cause per disorder" thinking. How about we stop talking about "finding the cause of autism" and talk instead about "understanding the interacting factors that lead to autism"?
It's refreshing to see Deisher's work included in a discussion of the research. If she's correct that all vaccines manufactured on human fetal cell lines are particularly prone to cause/contribute to autism -- that would explain why the big epidemiological studies "find no evidence that MMR causes autism." The percentage of autism-vulnerable children in the no-MMR group, who received other human fetal cell line vaccines, would approximately equal the percentage of autism-vulnerable children in the MMR group.
About Nevison's report on temporal trends and environmental factors . . . If you access Additional File 1 and examine all the graphs, several things emerge:
(1) The polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) (Figure S19) aren't so interesting after all.
(2) The curve for glyphosate use on U.S. corn and soy is an excellent match for the autism prevalence curve (Figure 6), but glyphosate's curve lags behind the autism curve about 5 years. Nonetheless, glyphosate's role in autism needs careful evaluation because of the evidence that abnormal gut microbiome plays a big role in autism, and the evidence that glyphosate in GMO foods decimates human gut flora.
(3) The curve for % probability of obesity among U.S. women matches the autism curve well (Figure S21), but the obesity curve precedes the autism curve by about five years. Is there a connection between the government's promotion of obesity-producing low-fat, high-carbohydrate (e.g. corn and other grains) diet, glyphosate contamination of corn and other grains, and autism among children born to overweight U.S. women?
(4) It's true that the there's a good match between the curve for cumulative amount of aluminum vaccine adjuvants given to U.S. children and the autism curve (Figure S7a). But there's an even better match between the cumulative number of vaccines given to U.S. children and the autism curve (4 graphs presented as Figure S8), particularly when you look at the graph for 18-month-olds (the highest age shown). (I suspect Nevison had to "hide" the Figure S8 graphs in the Additional File, and not mention in her Abstract what these graphs show, in order for her research to be published.)
I recommend researcher William Walsh's book "Nutrient Power: Heal Your Biochemistry and Heal Your Brain" for anyone interested in autism. (In spite of its self-help-sounding title, this is a rather technical book intended for medical practitioners as well as the public.) Walsh believes autism is an epigenetic disorder. His chapter on autism and its treatment is an eye-opener. Among the autistic patients he studied, 95% had the metabolic disorder "undermethylation" (which Walsh and colleagues have figured out how to treat -- or perhaps I should say compensate). Recently I came across a different researcher who thinks that over-supplementation of folic acid during pregnancy leads to some babies becoming undermethylators. In my opinion, epigenetics of autism, undermethylation, and folic acid supplementation would be three good foci for research about causative factors in autism.
Well, I've written a very long comment here, but I'm the mother of an autistic child, one of those vaccine-industry-annoying moms who's "done her own research" (gasp!) and it's rare that I have an opportunity to "dig into the details" about the causes of autism with other people who want to do that.
Thank you for all of your effort, dedication and courage. This is the most comprehensive and easy to understand article I have read in my 20+ years of following the research on the topic of vaccines and autism. My 2 vaccine-injured (one on each end of the ASD spectrum) children are 27 and 25. By the time I got 3/4 of the way through reading, I had tears in my eyes. (So many of us live with knowing the whole autism epidemic could have been avoided. It's like witnessing a crime and yelling about it without being believed.) Your work is intensely appreciated.
Excellent article. A nice summary with references. I have read nearly all of these articles and have the same opinion as you. This science is not settled at all!
In fact the science around vaccines bears a strong resemblance to Tobacco Science. Same playbook.
PS the first several paragraphs have a few repeated phrases. I can send you my fixes (from using chat gpt).
PS. In addition to Hooker 2014, also cite Hooker 2018. In the former he is open to criticism of using a cohort analysis for a case control study. His 2018 paper corrects this. The 2014 paper was forced retracted but the 2018 paper is still standing!
Outstanding article, James. Thank you. Some of my favorite parts:
"The refusal to even acknowledge these [vaccinated vs. unvaccinated comparisons]—let alone critique them in good faith—reveals not scientific caution but institutional bias....
The Science Is Not Settled. It Has Been Censored....
....that [Hopkins] narrative is not only scientifically incomplete—it is demonstrably false...
Science is not a consensus enforced by omission. It is not a weapon used to shame parents into silence....
Science is a process—a dynamic, self-correcting, and transparent one. It requires that inconvenient evidence be explored, not erased. It requires that questions be welcomed, not stigmatized.
The vaccine-autism connection has not been disproven. It has been politically and institutionally suppressed."
Thank you. Restacking.
Of course they don't get the message. They are not paid to tell the truth. They are paid to hide the truth. What John Hopkins and others are doing is intentional deception and should treated as criminal negligence. Criminal negligence is when a person acts in disregard of a serious risk of harm that a reasonable person in the same situation would have perceived. Criminal negligence includes an action or omission of an action. Offenses that may result from criminal negligence include endangerment of a child. I hold that the actions of our universities, medical institutions, and most healthcare professionals meet this definition.
absolutely! It's incredibly frustrating that criminal negligence has been normalized in our society today. Corporations do it all the time and NOBODY GOES TO JAIL! Corporations pay a fine and they just write it off as cost of doing business.
If we would start prosecuting individuals who are criminally negligent and give appropriate punishments for the mass murders these people are committing, the madness would STOP right now. Make Public Drawing and Quartering Great Again!
This is a very thorough article. Great reference material. Many thanks!
2 months ago Andy Wakefield did an interview with Del Bigtree on the Highwire. I enjoyed hearing the story from Wakefield's perspective.
https://rumble.com/v658chd-episode-405-andrew-wakefield-the-real-story.html
In all the cases of toxic products producing harms we ignore the fact that Pharma adopted Rockefeller model with chemicals where Precautionary Principle is replaced with assumption of safety and onus to demonstrate harm put on the public w lawsuits. It's all criminal.
Scorecard Global Authority for chemical safety.. data collection ended w "safe air" at Ground Zero and public access ended when UC Davis pulled offline in 2020.
"Basic Testing to Identify Chemical Hazards
If an industrial chemical is allowed by law to be released into the environment, most people assume that it must have been tested and evaluated for its potential risks. Unfortunately, this is simply not true. Keeping chemical hazards under control requires information about what kinds of hazards each chemical poses.
If the basic tests to check on a chemical's toxicity haven't been conducted, or if the results aren't publicly available, current laws tend to treat that chemical as if it were perfectly safe.
For the chemicals being used in large quantities, Scorecard tells you whether or not eight basic types of tests for health and ecological effects have actually been conducted, based on the public record. "
https://web.archive.org/web/20120917041002/http://scorecard.goodguide.com/chemical-profiles/chems-profile-descriptions.tcl#safety_assessment
Probably the best red pill article on vaccines and autism I’ve ever read. Definitely sharing and saving it. TY
https://www.pro-informedchoice.com/autism/ an archive of resources
Johns Hopkins is completely captured by Pharma/DoD/CIA
Fantastic article. I cannot wait to share it! However, I am confused about the following:
"Autistic children had an 8-fold lower mean mercury level (0.47 ppm vs. 3.63 ppm), suggesting impaired excretion and a possible susceptibility to mercury retention. Among children with severe autism, levels were even lower (0.21 ppm), reinforcing the idea that differential detoxification mechanisms may play a critical role in ASD vulnerability."
If children with autism were found to have an 8-fold lower mean mercury level, doesn't that mean they are excreting and not storing? It sounds counter-intuitive but I assume I am misinterpreting the text?
That confused me at first, too. But apparently mercury being put into hair is considered an important avenue of excretion that autistic children are failing to use, and an indication that they are failing to use other avenues pf excretion. I imagine that the science behind this belief is explained in the article cited; I think the peer reviewers would have required an explanation (backed up by cites) to be added, if the article's authors hadn't provided one.
Ok, that makes sense. Thank you!
This article is a tour de force! Great work! And a great update to retired neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock's 2008 research review, "The danger of excessive vaccination during brain development: the case for a link to Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD)".
I think there are many different possible pathways to autism, with a variety of "stepping stones" that can "mix and match"; and particular stepping stones may be omitted in a particular child's case. We need to learn from the science of ecology and abandon western medicine's old, foolish "one cause per disorder" thinking. How about we stop talking about "finding the cause of autism" and talk instead about "understanding the interacting factors that lead to autism"?
It's refreshing to see Deisher's work included in a discussion of the research. If she's correct that all vaccines manufactured on human fetal cell lines are particularly prone to cause/contribute to autism -- that would explain why the big epidemiological studies "find no evidence that MMR causes autism." The percentage of autism-vulnerable children in the no-MMR group, who received other human fetal cell line vaccines, would approximately equal the percentage of autism-vulnerable children in the MMR group.
About Nevison's report on temporal trends and environmental factors . . . If you access Additional File 1 and examine all the graphs, several things emerge:
(1) The polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) (Figure S19) aren't so interesting after all.
(2) The curve for glyphosate use on U.S. corn and soy is an excellent match for the autism prevalence curve (Figure 6), but glyphosate's curve lags behind the autism curve about 5 years. Nonetheless, glyphosate's role in autism needs careful evaluation because of the evidence that abnormal gut microbiome plays a big role in autism, and the evidence that glyphosate in GMO foods decimates human gut flora.
(3) The curve for % probability of obesity among U.S. women matches the autism curve well (Figure S21), but the obesity curve precedes the autism curve by about five years. Is there a connection between the government's promotion of obesity-producing low-fat, high-carbohydrate (e.g. corn and other grains) diet, glyphosate contamination of corn and other grains, and autism among children born to overweight U.S. women?
(4) It's true that the there's a good match between the curve for cumulative amount of aluminum vaccine adjuvants given to U.S. children and the autism curve (Figure S7a). But there's an even better match between the cumulative number of vaccines given to U.S. children and the autism curve (4 graphs presented as Figure S8), particularly when you look at the graph for 18-month-olds (the highest age shown). (I suspect Nevison had to "hide" the Figure S8 graphs in the Additional File, and not mention in her Abstract what these graphs show, in order for her research to be published.)
I recommend researcher William Walsh's book "Nutrient Power: Heal Your Biochemistry and Heal Your Brain" for anyone interested in autism. (In spite of its self-help-sounding title, this is a rather technical book intended for medical practitioners as well as the public.) Walsh believes autism is an epigenetic disorder. His chapter on autism and its treatment is an eye-opener. Among the autistic patients he studied, 95% had the metabolic disorder "undermethylation" (which Walsh and colleagues have figured out how to treat -- or perhaps I should say compensate). Recently I came across a different researcher who thinks that over-supplementation of folic acid during pregnancy leads to some babies becoming undermethylators. In my opinion, epigenetics of autism, undermethylation, and folic acid supplementation would be three good foci for research about causative factors in autism.
Well, I've written a very long comment here, but I'm the mother of an autistic child, one of those vaccine-industry-annoying moms who's "done her own research" (gasp!) and it's rare that I have an opportunity to "dig into the details" about the causes of autism with other people who want to do that.
https://www.pro-informedchoice.com/autism/ An Archive of resources on vaccines and autism.
Very well articulated article. Thank you for your effort.
Thank you for all of your effort, dedication and courage. This is the most comprehensive and easy to understand article I have read in my 20+ years of following the research on the topic of vaccines and autism. My 2 vaccine-injured (one on each end of the ASD spectrum) children are 27 and 25. By the time I got 3/4 of the way through reading, I had tears in my eyes. (So many of us live with knowing the whole autism epidemic could have been avoided. It's like witnessing a crime and yelling about it without being believed.) Your work is intensely appreciated.
Excellent article. A nice summary with references. I have read nearly all of these articles and have the same opinion as you. This science is not settled at all!
In fact the science around vaccines bears a strong resemblance to Tobacco Science. Same playbook.
PS the first several paragraphs have a few repeated phrases. I can send you my fixes (from using chat gpt).
PS. In addition to Hooker 2014, also cite Hooker 2018. In the former he is open to criticism of using a cohort analysis for a case control study. His 2018 paper corrects this. The 2014 paper was forced retracted but the 2018 paper is still standing!
Why are these data being ignored and suppressed?
It's called Applied Science , you know the stuff that grounded the space shuttle for 15 years.
Department of Virology at best halfwits.
Do the math