The Data is Clear: The More Vaccines You Give Your Child, the More Likely it is That They Will Develop Chronic Diseases Including Autism


Here’s a quick summary of my survey of the parents of 10,000 kids. The results agree with other studies that have been done. The medical community refuses to do these studies. Why not prove us wrong?

Executive summary

I surveyed the parents of 10,000 kids on a variety of common chronic health conditions.

For every single condition in my survey, vaccination raised the odds that the child would develop the condition; the more vaccines, the higher the risk.

My survey confirms the results of other research that has been done showing similar risk elevations for chronic neurological diseases (ND).

This is devastating for our kids. Vaccines are literally poisoning them. This is why the health authorities will never conduct such a study such as the ones I point out below.

In fact, in 2009, 10 members of Congress including Rand Paul, tried to pass a bill forcing NIH to do a study, but the bill never made it out of the first committee because they don’t want you to ever find out that they’ve been poisoning our kids for decades.

Anyone can replicate the study I did. It took me just 24 hours to run. I invite any mainstream “fact checker” in the world to validate the results; I have the contact info for all the parents.

If the CDC wants to resolve the question quickly, all they have to do is give Professor Brian Hooker access to the VSD and Medicaid databases. Why not do that? Don’t they want people to know the truth?

Finally, the most important thing is that none of the vaccines have been needed in America for the last 25 years. Pediatric clinics which eschew vaccines have uniformly better clinical outcomes than their peers who vaccinate in the same population of kids.

This is a long but very important article.

The results graphically

This graph was done by Matt Briggs, an independent statistician. It’s crystal clear: kids with more vaccines are more likely to suffer from chronic conditions.

The more vaccine shots, the more likely it is that your child will experience a chronic neurological disease such as autism. Graph was done by independent statistician William Briggs.

Odds ratio for each condition

Here is the summary of the survey. The right column is the odd-ratio for kids getting the condition with 10-15 vaccines compared with kids with no vaccines or Vitamin K shots. So if you got 10-15 vaccines, you are 4.5X more likely to develop autism than an unvaccinated child.

And we know from other studies (pediatric clinics with thousands of unvaccinated kids), that when you eliminate vaccination and the use of Tylenol, the autism rates drop to near zero. So this result isn’t a surprise.

Here’s the table:

You can download the survey, the record-level data and the analysis.

These results shouldn’t be a surprise at all. They are similar to other studies comparing vaccinated with FULLY unvaccinated kids (see the next section).

The bottom line: Kids with more vaccines are much more likely, not less likely, to have a large number of chronic neurological conditions.

For example, from the table above:

  • ADHD: 7x
  • Autoimmune disorders: 21x
  • Autism: 5x
  • Asthma: 9.3x
  • Epilepsy: 4x
  • Sinusitis: 33x

The largest signal was for sinusitis (33X more likely than fully unvaccinated); this basically is so rare in the fully unvaccinated that it causes the number to be high.

The vitamin K shot should always be refused

It is as devastating as giving your child a vaccine at birth as has been clearly pointed out in the Control Group study

In short, listening to your doctor was a huge mistake that your child will likely never recover from.

Check this out:

You shouldn’t be surprised by this; other studies found similar numbers

Here are other studies you should look at, all showing that the vaccines are significantly elevating the chance your child will get a chronic disease.

These are all published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. None of these studies have been retracted (even though Gorski would lie and claim they are retracted). I show the odds ratio for autism for comparison with my survey.

  1. Hooker: 5.03
  2. Mawson: 4.2
  3. Control group: Infinite. “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)”
  4. 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.”

The Thomas study shows similar results. The study was unethically retracted by the journal over the objection of the authors, i.e., the journal didn’t follow the COPE guidelines. They said that “the conclusions were not supported by strong scientific data” which is NOT a valid reason to retract a study once it is published. The journal retracted the paper after an anonymous person claimed (without any evidence) that the results could be due to fewer office visits by the unvaxxed. The author provided evidence that this was not the case, but the journal ignored the evidence. Why? Because the paper got 250,000 views, it had to be retracted because it was counter-narrative and too popular. Later, a new paper showed proof that the reason the journal gave for retracting the paper was clearly false. The journal decided not to admit they were wrong and did not reverse the retraction of the Thomas paper. This is corruption of the highest magnitude. Please complain here using DOI:10.3390/ijerph17228674. The authors of that study would love to debate anyone on the ethics of this retraction. Any takers?

  1. Paul Thomas: Showed generally consistent results overall. The study showed a RIOV of “developing autism” of 4.0 which dropped lower for more vaccines because kids are more likely to develop autism when they are younger and have had fewer vaccines.

Note: it’s possible that vaccines may be causing transgenderism, homosexuality, and many other conditions. I didn’t even think of that when I drafted the survey

Another Internet survey of 13,000 people showed a similar result, the unvaccinated were much better off in all areas measured in the survey (red bars always dramatically smaller):

Comparison unvaccinated-vaccinated

We’ve even known about the link for nearly 100 years!!

The controls on my survey

There were controls to detect bias (birth defects, genetic disorders) which were not elevated proving that the survey was not biased. The OR for these conditions were both close to 1 exactly as we predicted.

The survey is analyzed using odds-ratios so the mix of vaxxed vs. unvaxxed is completely irrelevant.

So it doesn’t matter that 12% of the kids in my survey were unvaccinated. It simply means that I only had to survey 10,000 kids to get a decent comparison group; if others did their survey, they’d have to survey nearly 1M kids to find the same number of unvaccinated kids as I did. So I am able to do studies that are impractical for most other people to do.

The only way to attack my survey is to show that the parents all colluded and lied about their kids.

To defend against this attack, I have the contact info for each respondent and invite any fact checker to verify all the entries are accurate provided if you check, you have to publish the results.

The survey took 2 hours to write and was fully executed in 24 hours. The results were not shown to the public until after the survey was completed, making it impossible to game the results. All the data was collected on Airtable so that there would be a record of any data manipulation.

It is astonishing to me that none of the people who argue that vaccines don’t cause neurological diseases (ND) will do such a survey and show that the data I collected is inaccurate. Why won’t they do that?

Stopping the misinformation spreaders is easy! The CDC could have done this anytime in the last 25 years if they wanted to show people the truth.

Why won’t the CDC simply open up access to the VSD and CMS databases so we validate the results ourselves? Why hasn’t the CDC ever used VSD to do the same study? They’ve had 25 years to do that and never did. Why?

Are there any other studies?

We aren’t aware of any study, comparing the fully unvaccinated vs. partially or fully vaccinated kids that doesn’t have similar numbers.

When you read the peer-review literature carefully, you’ll find that they always consider the “unvaccinated” group to have kids without the particular vaccine under study.

So when they compare the MMR vaccine, they compare it to the kids who didn’t get the MMR vaccine. So it’s like comparing the autism rates of kids who got 28 vaccines with the rates of kids who got 27 vaccines. This is how they hide the signal. They design studies which are designed to fail.

Just because they don’t find a signal, it doesn’t mean that it isn’t there. It just means their study design didn’t find the signal.

They will NEVER compare the chronic disease rates in kids who got all recommended vaccines (well over 50 shots, many with multiple vaccines) vs. completely unvaccinated kids. It simply has never happened.

The excuse that unvaccinated kids are too hard to find is ridiculous. The Amish have thousands of such kids and there are hundreds of such kids that can be located in a heartbeat. All they have to do is call me and I’ll be happy to help.

A new study will be coming out soon

There is another study with around 50,000 kids that was done. It’s not published yet, but the results confirm the studies that were done above: the more you vaccinate kids the greater the difference in chronic diseases vs. the unvaccinated.

The medical journals will likely reject the study because it goes against the narrative. The study was done by a well known researcher.

Do vaccines cause autism?

Yes. More on that in an upcoming article. If you remove the vaccines and Tylenol, the rates of autism drop to near zero.

The 2007 Generation Rescue survey

In 2007, Generation Rescue (GR), an organization that is trying to alert Americans that vaccines cause autism, hired a third party polling firm (SurveyUSA) and paid them $200,000 to do a survey. The advantage to using a third party to do the survey is that GR cannot manipulate the results.

Like my survey, the GR survey found significant elevations for all diseases and conditions.

In the summary report, GR noted the following lack of interest by the CDC in doing any studies comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated kids:

No studies have ever been done to compare ND rates of children who received vaccines with those who received no vaccines, which is what our survey accomplished. Moreover, no studies have ever explored a link between vaccines and ADHD, despite the fact that 1 in 13 U.S. children have this diagnosis (versus 1 in 150 for autism).

The glaring absence of a study to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated children for ND rates caused Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) to introduce this bill to compel the National Institutes of Health to do such a study.

Those statements are as true today as they were 16 years ago.

No public health authority has ever done such a survey. Ever.

I predict that such a survey will never be done because they don’t want the truth to be known.

Members of Congress tried to get a bill to force the NIH to do just **ONE** study. The bill was immediately killed in committee.

The bill, H.R.3069 — 111th Congress (2009-2010), was introduced on June 26, 2009 with 9 co-sponsors including Ron Paul. It never made it out of committee.

Here’s the summary:

Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), acting through the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), to conduct a comprehensive study to: (1) compare total health outcomes, including the risk of autism, between vaccinated and unvaccinated U.S. populations; and (2) determine whether vaccines or vaccine components play a role in the development of autism spectrum or other neurological conditions.

The bill would have forced the NIH to do just ONE study.

Why would anyone be opposed to finding the truth?

The answer is simple: because our government simply does not want anyone to know the truth.

People would go nuts if they found out that the CDC has been harming our kids for decades with these vaccines and not telling anyone. It would destroy all faith in the mainstream press, the medical community, Congress, and US government agencies. So they killed the bill and there is no press about it. All silenced by the mainstream media.

Some people will gaslight you into believing that surveys are not “science.” That is false.

In fact, Professor Anders Hviid, an author of the highly cited Denmark study which claims that vaccines don’t cause autism, was so proud of his nationwide questionnaire study on COVID that was published in Nature that he pinned it to his Twitter profile; he’s the senior author on that study!

Professor Hviid then blocked everyone from viewing his tweets within 24 hours after I emailed him to ask him for his data.

If these surveys are all wrong, where are their surveys done by a reputable independent polling firm with no conflicts of interest showing the “correct” numbers?

The silence and lack of interest tells you everything.

In 2005, here’s what the CDC Director Judy Gerberding said about doing surveys comparing vaccinated vs. fully unvaccinated

Here’s what Judy Gerberding, the CDC Director said in 2005:

I think those kinds of studies could be done and should be done.

Let’s speed this up. Let’s look for the early studies that could give us at least some hypotheses to test and evaluate and get information flowing through the research pipeline as quickly as we can. So we are committed to doing that/

We think we will be able to provide more accurate information in the next year or so than we’ve been able to do up to this point. And I know that is our responsibility.

Guess what happened? They did nothing.

Why didn’t they just run exactly the same poll that Generation Rescue did in 2007? Just employ a different third party respected research firm to replicate their study and see if they get similar results. That would have been easy and a great start. Total cost: $200,000.

Instead they did nothing…. nothing!

It reminds me of Sgt Schultz:

When An AM or PA see something they know is wrong, or against the rules. : r/AmazonFC
The CDC doesn’t want to know what is going on. If they were honest, why not run exactly the same poll that GR did and show the results are different? Why not give Professor Brian Hooker and Dr. James Lyons-Weiler full access to VSD and Medicaid to do their research? I’ll pay for their time. It would cost the CDC nothing, nothing!

Is the CDC hiding the data? Absolutely! Here’s proof.

If the CDC was honest and had nothing to hide, they would give researchers such as Professor Brian Hooker, James Lyons-Weiler, and other scientists who have published papers on autism in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, free, full, unfettered access to the VSD and Medicaid databases to do research.

But they won’t.

They never will.

Because hiding the data is critical.

And that tells you everything you need to know, doesn’t it?

A few other things you should know

Here’s my handy list of other things you should know:

  1. Here is a complete list of necessary vaccines: <this space intentionally left blank>
  2. Have you ever wondered why vaccines work so well? Check out the graphs here. You’ll find this most interesting.
  3. None of the vaccines used in America today were ever tested against a true placebo (saline shot). This was noted in Turtles all the way down and has never been disproven.
  4. There are no post-marketing studies of vaccine safety for any vaccine in America that prove the vaccines are safe. Only the states have the data and they aren’t sharing the data or doing the studies. See my article on data transparency for details and also my article “Is it safe?” for details on why that is.
  5. Did you know CDC doesn’t have the vaccination record-level data for any vaccine from any state? So the CDC can’t know if the vaccines are safe. They could ask the states to provide these records, but they are too shy to ask the states for the data. I got this directly from the head of Media Relations at the CDC. I was floored.
  6. The states aren’t doing the safety analysis either. When I contacted California State Epidemiologist Erica Pan, she ghosted me immediately after I asked her, “Do you believe in data transparency?”
  7. None of the states make record-level public health data public. If they do that, we’d improve clinical outcomes. There’s no study showing keeping this data secret improves clinical outcomes. I believe that they keep this data hidden to cover the harms caused by vaccines. I’d love to be proven wrong. Simply open up the records.
  8. A lot of people believe that vaccines have eliminated many diseases and are a net benefit to society. I’ve yet to see the proof of any of that today. While it “sounds” plausible, the risk benefits of each vaccine are dynamic and depend on the current morbidity and mortality of the disease relative to that of the vaccine. Where is the data on that? I haven’t seen it. Have you? There should be an on-going annual evaluation of risk vs. benefit for each vaccine. This has never been done. Why not let us into the VSD to make these assessments instead of blindly assuming vaccines have no risks?
  9. If your child has autism, you can reverse it in some cases. Here’s what Scott Shoemaker did to cure his son. Unfortunately, doctors who know how to treat your child have to keep a low profile or they will have their license revoked. The medical community doesn’t want it known that autism can be reversed at all.

Original source: