It was mostly meant to determine if the vaccinated really were healthier than the unvaccinated overall. That is what the doctor doing the study fully expected. That was the purpose. That is what Del Bigtree had requested. In that, it was stellar as the results proved otherwise.
The unvaccinated were mostly much healthier. And that is why the study was buried and not published as it would give the medical mafia and big pharma a giant black eye busting their lies wide open. This was not so much about autism...that requires a different type of study.
Yes but Dr. Jake insisted we "accept the null result", revealing he does not understand even the most basic principles of statistical hypothesis testing.
By contrast, did Dr. Paul Thomas' study have the data and methods to accurately detect and report what it concluded? I thought it did. So, should we trust the Henry Ford study data on increased chronic ill health and neurological damage in vaccinated younger children compared to unvaccinated group? Even though it was not capable of detecting a comparative higher autism incidence in that younger population? Like, don't condemn the whole based on a faulty part?
No, it did not. Plus Dr Paul's practice of medicine removed kids who were headed towards an Autism diagnosis from the vaccination program. As part of medical practice. So the signal was attenuated By virtue of saving kids from developing the condition Period
Doesn't this apply to ALL the findings? The unvaxxed kids weren't looked at long enough to diagnose them properly for every health condition. Your own analysis shows the vaccinated were followed longer & had more visits meaning they would be diagnosed more. This invalidates the entire paper not just autism!
I look forward to your analyses Dr. Jack. Thank you. I still have your pathogenic priming paper that I printed in April of 2020 : ) . Also, did you publish a paper on reverse transcription around that time? Just curious because that's one of the first things I looked up in April of 2020, in regards to "covid."
PS Goggle search is a piece of crap and a it's AI is a LIAR.
This is another reason they decided it would be best to not put the paper out for peer review. Others are also reanalyzing the data and coming up with much higher rations of sickness in the vaccinated cohort. Nice work!
Any chance the data was scrubbed of children with autism before it was shared with ICAN?
It’d be very interesting to know what Marcus Zervos’s advice is relating to vaccinations in his inner circle after performing that study.
"Misapplied Statistical Tools: Cox proportional hazards regression is not suited to analyses with sparse event counts. With only 24 autism cases, proportionality assumptions break down and hazard ratios lose interpretability."
"Instead of examining actual proportional incidence, Lamerato et al. relied on odds-ratio modeling ... Once the data are viewed through the proper lens — proportions per cohort, the same approach the original table already implies — the picture changes entirely. ... These signals emerge only when the data are analyzed proportionally, without the statistical distortions used in the original report."
Do you think their approach was appropriate for analysis of outcomes with sparse event counts.?
Metal sharpens metal and more information allows us to ask better questions to test. Henry Ford was a dam breaker. Now HHS needs to lean on other HMOs and health groups for a deeper and more broader analysis. Clearly, the unvaccinated are healthier (in the US) than the vaccinated cohorts. It is likely the same in countries outside the US.
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are not Nice To Have's - they are protected and codified in out Declaration of Independence - meaning that we are not required to submit to a medical "authority" without due process and suppression of rights.
Public health has allowed for the suppression and elimination of diseases based on contaminated water, contaminated food, early child examination and removal of toxic environmental loads. This is an infrastructure effect that public health has wrought - available to all and excluding no one. Vaccination, on the other hand, is presented as a right of passage (or even a sacrament) that must be taken up to be part of society - it is not infrastructural - it is a coercive mechanism that keeps pharma infrastructure humming.
We get to subsidize those that are poisoning us and our children.
T’was the night before Christmas
when all through the house
the only thing stirring
was Tony, the louse.
He was covered in blood
from his head to his knee
sucking blood from the children
for quite a large fee.
The stockings were hung
very close to his bed
and were filled with lice
some of them dead.
The children stayed nestled
all snug in the attic
with no understanding
of Tony, the fanatic.
Then out on the lawn
there rose such a clatter
that Tony sprang from his bed
like the crazy Mad Hatter.
Santa had come
with his sleigh full of wonder
and it wasn’t vaccine labs
that he did plunder.
He had brought a million
brand new books
that were all the same
in their weight and looks.
“The Real Anthony Fauci”
they all seemed to say
and when the louse read it
he faded away.
Have a wonderful, amazing
Christmas Day- Maurine Meleck 12
How profound 😂 I’ll follow the hatter me thinks.
Another great analysis, Jack.
It was mostly meant to determine if the vaccinated really were healthier than the unvaccinated overall. That is what the doctor doing the study fully expected. That was the purpose. That is what Del Bigtree had requested. In that, it was stellar as the results proved otherwise.
The unvaccinated were mostly much healthier. And that is why the study was buried and not published as it would give the medical mafia and big pharma a giant black eye busting their lies wide open. This was not so much about autism...that requires a different type of study.
Yes but Dr. Jake insisted we "accept the null result", revealing he does not understand even the most basic principles of statistical hypothesis testing.
By contrast, did Dr. Paul Thomas' study have the data and methods to accurately detect and report what it concluded? I thought it did. So, should we trust the Henry Ford study data on increased chronic ill health and neurological damage in vaccinated younger children compared to unvaccinated group? Even though it was not capable of detecting a comparative higher autism incidence in that younger population? Like, don't condemn the whole based on a faulty part?
No, it did not. Plus Dr Paul's practice of medicine removed kids who were headed towards an Autism diagnosis from the vaccination program. As part of medical practice. So the signal was attenuated By virtue of saving kids from developing the condition Period
Been trying to answer that mystery for dayz. Thanks.
James-always the best writings. Thanks.
Doesn't this apply to ALL the findings? The unvaxxed kids weren't looked at long enough to diagnose them properly for every health condition. Your own analysis shows the vaccinated were followed longer & had more visits meaning they would be diagnosed more. This invalidates the entire paper not just autism!
No response?
Still no response?
Still no response?
I look forward to your analyses Dr. Jack. Thank you. I still have your pathogenic priming paper that I printed in April of 2020 : ) . Also, did you publish a paper on reverse transcription around that time? Just curious because that's one of the first things I looked up in April of 2020, in regards to "covid."
PS Goggle search is a piece of crap and a it's AI is a LIAR.
This is another reason they decided it would be best to not put the paper out for peer review. Others are also reanalyzing the data and coming up with much higher rations of sickness in the vaccinated cohort. Nice work!
Any chance the data was scrubbed of children with autism before it was shared with ICAN?
It’d be very interesting to know what Marcus Zervos’s advice is relating to vaccinations in his inner circle after performing that study.
"Misapplied Statistical Tools: Cox proportional hazards regression is not suited to analyses with sparse event counts. With only 24 autism cases, proportionality assumptions break down and hazard ratios lose interpretability."
...
Oller et al recently published "A Peer-Review of Oller et al's paper the Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Study Discussed at the Senate Hearing on September 9, 2025". https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/breaking-peer-reviewed-reanalysis AND https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/125
"Instead of examining actual proportional incidence, Lamerato et al. relied on odds-ratio modeling ... Once the data are viewed through the proper lens — proportions per cohort, the same approach the original table already implies — the picture changes entirely. ... These signals emerge only when the data are analyzed proportionally, without the statistical distortions used in the original report."
Do you think their approach was appropriate for analysis of outcomes with sparse event counts.?
Metal sharpens metal and more information allows us to ask better questions to test. Henry Ford was a dam breaker. Now HHS needs to lean on other HMOs and health groups for a deeper and more broader analysis. Clearly, the unvaccinated are healthier (in the US) than the vaccinated cohorts. It is likely the same in countries outside the US.
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are not Nice To Have's - they are protected and codified in out Declaration of Independence - meaning that we are not required to submit to a medical "authority" without due process and suppression of rights.
Public health has allowed for the suppression and elimination of diseases based on contaminated water, contaminated food, early child examination and removal of toxic environmental loads. This is an infrastructure effect that public health has wrought - available to all and excluding no one. Vaccination, on the other hand, is presented as a right of passage (or even a sacrament) that must be taken up to be part of society - it is not infrastructural - it is a coercive mechanism that keeps pharma infrastructure humming.
We get to subsidize those that are poisoning us and our children.
Once again, THANK YOU! This is a very much needed, and timely analysis.