I’m a very bad “anti-science” fearmonger extremist, I’ve been told on good authority, who doesn’t properly respect the miracles that are vaccines, or the gifts of the pharmaceutical industry more broadly — or whatever.
But I’ve got good company — like, for instance, Dr. Peter McCollough, one of the single most-published cardiologists in the world, who has penned nearly 700 peer-reviewed articles in respectable medical journals and who has lent his expert seal of approval as the “peer” who reviewed the following peer-reviewed study which compared the rates of the chronic and debilitating neurological illness, including autism, among non-vaccinated and vaccinated children enrolled in Florida Medicaid.
So I’ll take the slings and arrows as they come. In fact, I relish them.
Related: Pfizer Knew of COVID-19 Vax Risks to Breastfeeding Babies in April 2021
Via Science, Public Health Policy and the Law (emphasis added):
Preliminary studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children have reported that the vaccinated are significantly more likely than the unvaccinated to be diagnosed with bacterial infections, allergies, and neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs). The objective of this study was to determine the association between vaccination and NDDs in 9-year-old children enrolled in the Medicaid program. The specific aims were to test the hypothesis that: 1) vaccination is associated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and other NDDs; 2) preterm birth coupled with vaccination increases the odds of NDDs compared to preterm birth without vaccination; and 3) increasing numbers of vaccinations are associated with increased risks of ASD.
The study population comprised children born and continuously enrolled in the Florida State Medicaid program from birth to age 9. Vaccination uptake was measured by numbers of healthcare visits that included vaccination-related procedures and diagnoses. Cross-sectional analyses were performed to calculate prevalence odds ratios (Aims 1-2). A retrospective cohort design was used to compute relative risks specifically of ASD (Aim 3)…
1) vaccination was associated with significantly increased odds for all measured NDDs; 2) among children born preterm and vaccinated, 39.9% were diagnosed with at least one NDD compared to 15.7% among those born preterm and unvaccinated (OR 3.58, 95% CI: 2.80, 4.57); and 3) the relative risk of ASD increased according to the number of visits that included vaccinations. Children with just one vaccination visit were 1.7 times more likely to have been diagnosed with ASD than the unvaccinated (95% CI: 1.21, 2.35) whereas those with 11 or more visits were 4.4 times more likely to have been diagnosed with ASD than those with no visit for vaccination (95% CI: 2.85, 6.84).
BREAKING STUDY - Childhood Vaccination Associated with Autism, Learning Disorders, Seizures, Encephalopathy, and Tics
— Nicolas Hulscher, MPH (@NicHulscher) January 23, 2025
Vaccinated children 212% more likely to be diagnosed with at least one neurodevelopmental disorder (NDD) compared to unvaccinated children.
Comparison of… pic.twitter.com/WrSUhKvUGT
Related: Study: COVID-Vaxxed Kids SIX TIMES Likelier to Die Than Unvaxxed Peers
4.4 times greater likelihood of autism for vaxxed vs. unvaxxed kids is a gigantic correlation — which, in a functional Public Health™ system, would at least pique the interest of researchers and prompt immediate follow-ups to figure out what’s going on.
But we don’t have one of those functional systems, so what we get is contorted sophistry in the service of debunking the study and ad hominem attacks against the researchers who published and reviewed it.
Via Unbiased Science (emphasis added):
The study's fundamental flaws begin with its publication process. Legitimate scientific research undergoes rigorous peer review, where independent experts evaluate the methodology, analysis, and conclusions before publication in established journals. This work instead appeared on a WordPress blog that is not a peer-reviewed scientific journal, with review conducted by Peter McCullough, who has promoted medical misinformation*. The lead author, Anthony Mawson, has a documented history of retracted vaccine research. Combined with funding from an anti-vaccine advocacy organization (NVIC), these factors raise serious concerns about the study's scientific validity and reliability.
The study's legitimacy is fundamentally compromised by its publication venue (a WordPress blog) and funding source (NVIC, an anti-vaccine organization). Lead author Anthony Mawson has a pattern of conducting methodologically flawed vaccine research, with multiple retractions. This study was "peer-reviewed" by Peter McCullough, a known promoter of medical misinformation.
*Speaking of conflicts of interest, the quoted authority for this “Unbiased Science” “fact check,” ironically, is Bertha Hidalgo, Ph.D., (who, or the record is the Dr. Jill kind of doctor, as in not a real one). She served as a Post-Baccalaureate Trainee at Anthony Fauci’s NIAID early in her career before launching a media career for herself on the back of COVID terror and appearing in various corporate state media outlets to hawk vaccines.
Like her colleagues, she is Brought to You By Pfizer™.Hi @berthahidalgo I see you’ve sold yourself to @pfizer for some of that big pharma shill money. How much did they pay you for this? What’s it feel like having zero integrity? The countless sudden/unexpected deaths adding up are now on your hands, hope it was worth it. pic.twitter.com/SOur5yqycx
— Five Times August (@FiveTimesAugust) January 17, 2023
