That lethal chorus keeps promoting COVID “vaccination,” vaccination overall, and many other methods of depopulation.
There is a nauseating irony in all the “liberal” screeching over Trump’s and RFK, Jr.’s steps against the cult of vaccination, since those steps (and the latter’s other public health campaigns) are just about the only sane and necessary measures taken by this warped administration.
“These are not outsiders raising doubts. The people who spent their careers building the measles elimination framework — at CDC, Johns Hopkins, PAHO, RIVM, and the WHO regional verification commissions — are the people who signed this paper.”
A preregistered systematic review in Expert Review of Vaccines found 70 vaccinated transmitters, 812 downstream cases, and one small study underneath the claim that MMR reduces onward spread.
The truth about the Flu Jab has long been censored. The earlier whistleblowers were removed in one way or another, as this video indicates, whilst the corporation that made the vaccine and tested it for ‘safety’ continues, to this day, to boldly promote it.
“mRNA vaccines ARE the future (subtext: whether you like it or not)”
“…it seems that New Zealand is stuck in a time-warp. Covid19 – now Covid26 – has every possibility of morphing into Covid27/28/29 until UN Agenda 2030 goals are reached. In view of the fast-approaching adoption of DigitalID in Australia, even with very little Nudge Unit tactics being deployed, public health is in serious jeopardy. Let me explain.”
A new book by Unbekoming: How a Century of Injection Created the Modern Allergy Epidemic
The child you watched press the epinephrine injector at the last birthday party was not alive in any other generation. One in fifteen American children today carries a peanut allergy severe enough to be life-threatening on accidental exposure.
“Neil Miller has been studying vaccines for more than four decades. One of the major areas of research he has contributed to focuses on unexplained and sudden infant deaths.
Read also the info on Australian Detective Chris Savage who blew the whistle on similar scenarios when, in the course of investigating infant deaths began to notice and record there had been vaccinations prior or just prior to death. He did lose his job of course for noticing such a connection. He believed parents were being wrongly charged with murdering their infants, charged with shaken baby syndrome, when all along they were vaccine injured. Vaccine injury it is said, swells the brain. (The videos at the link are long gone from YT … one found now on Bitchute, you may find more if you search but such info is disappearing fast now from the internet). EWNZ
by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO, AOBNMM, ABIHM Originally Posted at Vaxxter.com
“The first vaccine they thoroughly tested was Infanrix Hexa – a six-in-one vaccine manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) that is *supposed* to contain the following antigens: tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis toxoids; inactivated poliomyelitis viral strains 1-2-3; and hepatitis B surface antigen. Shockingly, Corvelva found NONE of these antigens in the vaccine, meaning, that NO antibodies to the intended antigens will be created.” (from the article)
A rare rodent-borne illness, “Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome”, appeared inside Pfizer’s 2021 post-authorization vaccine safety monitoring documents as a potential adverse event under observation.
The more doses, the higher the dementia risk. Note: take great care in what you consent to. Do read the link here on early onset & the other ‘safe and effective’ treatment… especially the comments made by relatives of the affected. They report the results & changes were very rapid. EWNZ Remember this post also: BREAKING: Early onset dementia is being caused by the COVID vaccine (~25X increase)
Microsoft founder Bill Gates continues with his crusade, as part of the mission of the Gates Foundation, to not only proliferate the use of vaccines but find new justifications to in effect, force them onto those skeptical or unwilling.
MANDATORY VACCINATIONS ARE BEING RAMMED THROUGH IN EUROPE RIGHT NOW! The globalist overlords in Europe just dropped the hammer. Mandatory vaccinations are no longer a “conspiracy theory” they’re shoving it down everyone’s throat with new laws and penalties that will make your blood run cold.
For decades, the question of whether vaccines are linked to autism has remained one of the most contentious and widely debated issues in public health.
A very important piece has just been written by linguistics professor Daniel Brody and his colleague Jun Ueda. It appears in the scholarly online journal Propoganda in Focus, which contains many articles examining manipulative and deceptive messaging. We encourage you to visit and share the site and article, but we reproduce it in full below also.
A peer-reviewed reanalysis of the Henry Ford Birth Cohort Study, published on 9 December 2025, shows that vaccinated children had significantly higher rates of chronic diseases compared to unvaccinated children.
The reanalysis, authored by John W. Oller, Jr., PhD; Daniel Broudy, PhD and Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, asserts that the original study’s statistical methods obscured large proportional differences in the data.
According to the reanalysis, vaccinated children were sicker across all 22 chronic disease categories listed, with autism-associated neurodevelopmental conditions occurring at 549% higher rates and childhood cancer at 54% higher rates in the vaccinated cohort.
The study followed 18,468 children between 2000 and 2016 from birth until 31 December 2017 to evaluate the health outcomes of vaccinated compared to unvaccinated children.
The study, referred to as the Lamerato et al study, has never been published in a journal. However, at the Senate hearing, Attorney Aaron Siri, who had received a copy of the study in early 2020, revealed data from the study: (view the X item at expose-news.com)
Siri testified at the Senate hearing, “The study began by explaining it set out to reduce vaccine hesitancy by assuring parents the CDC vaccine schedule is safe. Instead, these researchers found that the vaccinated children have 4.29x the rate of asthma, 3.03x the rate of atopic disease, 5.96x the rate of autoimmune disease and 5.53x the rate of neurodevelopmental disorders, which included 3.28x developmental delay and 4.47x speech disorder. All of these findings were statistically significant.”
“There were also other conditions for which there were numerous cases in the vaccinated group but zero in the unvaccinated group, hence a rate cannot be calculated, including brain dysfunction, ADHD, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities and tics,” Siri added. “for example, there were 262 cases of ADHD in the vaccinated group and none in the unvaccinated group.”
Related: Aaron Siri’s written submission to ‘How the Corruption of Science has Impacted Public Perception and Policies Regarding Vaccines’, Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, 5 September 2025
On 9 December, John Oller, Daniel Broudy and Nicolas Hulscher published their reanalysis of the data collected by the Lamerato et al study. The difference between the two studies is the way the data is analysed. The Lamerato et al study used odds-ratio modelling, a statistical approach that masked large disparities. Oller et al used a comparison of proportions per cohort approach. The same data analysed in different ways produced dramatically different results.
The abstract of the Oller et al study said:
Of the 22 chronic disease conditions studied, proportional contrasts always favour the unvaccinated. The most dramatic contrasts occurred in asthma, autism, autoimmunity, ADHD, brain dysfunction, mental health disorders, behavioural disability, developmental delay, learning disability, intellectual disability, speech disorder, motor disability, tics, other disability disorder, neurological disorder, and seizure disorder. At ten years of follow-up, 57% of the vaccinated cohort had at least one chronic disorder, compared with 17% in the unvaccinated.A Peer-Review of the Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Study Discussed at the Senate Hearing on September 9, 2025. (2025). International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research , 4(1), 1609-1646. https://doi.org/10.56098/vse7qq65
The following is Joel Smalley’s summary of Oller et al’s reanalysis. Smalley also posted a short video on Substack to explain the difference between the original study and the reanalysis. We are unable to embed videos uploaded onto Substack. You can watch the video by following THIS link.
Key Results
A peer-reviewed reanalysis of the Henry Ford Birth Cohort Study (18,468 children, 2000-2016) comparing vaccinated (16,511, median 18 vaccines) vs unvaccinated (1,957) children found:
Headline findings:
All 22 chronic disease categories showed higher rates in vaccinated children
Autism-associated neurodevelopmental conditions: 549% higher in vaccinated group
Childhood cancer: 54% higher in vaccinated group
By age 10: 57% of vaccinated children had developed at least one chronic disease vs only 17% of unvaccinated
Most elevated conditions included:
Autoimmune disease: 12× higher
Neurodevelopmental disorders: 13.5× higher
Speech disorders: 9× higher
Asthma: 6.5× higher
Several conditions appeared only in vaccinated children: ADHD, diabetes, brain dysfunction, behavioural disability, learning disability, intellectual disability, and tics.
Hulscher argues that the original study’s statistical methods (odds-ratio modelling) masked these disparities, particularly where the unvaccinated group had zero cases.
Daily this post tops the list of views. It peaked in August 2020 with 50K. That peak began in April 2020 with 18K (think plandemic). All time views are 176+ K. Doesn’t that tell you folk were waking up somewhat at that crucial time? It is currently peaking again. The lesson to be learned is, read the independent research … it’s not necessarily conspiracy. Question everything and don’t be fooled by Gates and his ilk. They are long time depopulation advocates and not ashamed to admit it. If they calculate the planet can’t sustain us all, IMO then, ‘they’ should volunteer to stand by their principles and leave the planet first … MAiD perhaps? …..
If you haven’t seen the article check it out below ….
“The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation created the GAVI alliance to push vaccinations on the poorest parts of the developing world in the name of “saving lives” and stopping disease.
In particular, Bill Gates expects to take credit for wiping out polio worldwide by making it one of his primary issues. But at what cost?
In April 2012, I reported on a disturbing claim in the Indian medical press that some 47,500 children had been paralyzed as a direct result of the polio vaccination campaign that had swept through their populous country. India’s National Polio Surveillance Project found that a sharp rise in the cases of non-polio paralysis correlated with areas where doses of oral polio vaccine were also increased. Worse, children afflicted with polio vaccine-derived non-polio paralysis “were at more than twice the risk of dying than those with wild polio infection,” according to Indian officials.”
(Click on the image to view the video at Rumble.com)
EWNZ comment: we all saw the little clips of the vaccine info sheets with nothing on them! I know folk who requested ‘what’s in the Kool Aid before they’d consent … they couldn’t say of course because they didn’t know! We also know of those who regrettably fell for the coercion/bluff and suffered for it! Hear the truth folks on the lies you were spun. Straight from the horse’s mouth so to speak!
The 9-hour deposition of Dr. Stanley Plotkin, conducted on January 11, 2018, by attorney Aaron Siri in the Matheson v. Schmitt child custody case in Michigan, features Plotkin—author of the standard textbook Plotkin’s Vaccines and a key developer of the rubella vaccine—testifying under oath as an expert witness supporting vaccination. The questioning systematically probes Plotkin’s career, vaccine development processes, and safety data gaps. Key topics covered include: Plotkin’s historical experiments on vulnerable populations, such as orphans, children with mental disabilities, and prisoners in institutions, which he described as “common practice” at the time; the use of aborted fetal tissues in vaccine production admitting involvement with over 100 fetuses and detailing organ harvesting for research; financial conflicts of interest, including payments exceeding $30 million from pharmaceutical companies like Merck and Sanofi; and significant shortcomings in vaccine safety studies, such as the absence of saline placebo controls in trials for vaccines like MMR and hepatitis B, limited post-vaccination monitoring (often under 5 days), and no large-scale, long-term studies on cumulative effects of the childhood schedule. Plotkin repeatedly deferred to his textbook for evidence but admitted uncertainty on specific study details, later prompting him to advocate for better pro-vaccine organization and defenses against critics. . ⚔️ Everything You Need To Know About the Deep State, UN, WEF, WHO, Great Reset, Agenda2030, Depopulation and More: www.DeepStateTruth.com
For over a century, vaccination has been repeatedly linked to severe neurological injuries including brain damage — with many modern studies showing a 3 to 7 fold increase in common chronic illnesses
To dodge this massive liability, all research into vaccine injuries (and many other catastrophes like Agent Orange) was suppressed so that health authorities could claim there was “no evidence” of vaccine harm
Another scheme was to redefine the brain injury as “autism” rather than encephalitis (which the U.S. government was legally required to provide injury compensation for)
Previously, children with significant vaccine brain damage were referred to as “mentally retarded.” However, after a multi-decade campaign cancelled “retarded” they were instead diagnosed as autistic — a vague term which blurs severe and minor disability together, thereby effectively concealing the severe cases from the public’s awareness
This article will reveal the manipulative techniques and wordplay that have been used to conceal vaccine injuries from the public’s awareness, as now is the time when we can at last end this atrocity
I’ve long believed that public relations (propaganda) is one of the most powerful but invisible forces in our society. Again and again, I’ve watched professional PR firms create narratives that most of the country believes, regardless of how much it goes against their self-interests.
What’s most remarkable is that despite the exact same tactics being used repeatedly on the public, most people simply can’t see it. When you try to point out exactly how they’re being bamboozled by yet another PR campaign, they often can’t recognize it — instead insisting you’re paranoid or delusional.
That’s why one of my major goals in this publication has been to expose this industry. Once you understand their playbook — having “independent” experts push sculpted language that media outlets then repeat — it becomes very easy to spot, and saves you from falling into the traps most people do. The COVID-19 vaccines, for instance, were facilitated by the largest PR campaign of our lifetime.
One of the least appreciated consequences of this industry is that many of our cultural beliefs ultimately originate from PR campaigns.1 This explains why so many widely believed things are “wrong” — if a belief were actually true, it wouldn’t require a massive PR investment to instill in society. Due to PR’s power, the viewpoints it instills tend to crowd out other cultural beliefs.
In this article, we’ll take a deeper look at what’s behind one of those implanted beliefs: “vaccines don’t cause autism.”
VIDEO: HOW AUTISM LABELS HID BRAIN INJURY (click on the image to watch at odysee.com
The Frequency of Vaccine Injuries
When vaccinated and unvaccinated children are compared, chronic illnesses are 3 to 7X as common in the vaccinated individuals. Because of this, there is a longstanding embargo on ever conducting this type of research (allowing the status quo to remain that “no evidence exists” between the vaccine and the injury).
Recently, Senator Ron Johnson revealed that a robust study comparing vaccinated children to unvaccinated had been conducted at a premier medical institution in 2020, but due to the results it showed, despite previously committing to publishing the paper, its authors chose not to, due to how much it violated the medical orthodoxy.
It’s important to note that beyond these results being earth-shattering, they are also entirely in line with every other long-term comparative study that has ever been done on vaccines — all of which I synopsized here (along with the characteristic signs that allow one to identify the frightfully frequent vaccine-injured children).
Erasing Encephalitis
A key theme of George Orwell’s book 1984 is that language defines a culture. If ideas aren’t present in language, the populace can’t conceive of them (which is why 1984’s ruling party eliminated words like ‘freedom’, ‘rebellion’, and ‘justice’ from the new language).
Another way language controls the public consciousness is through the use of ambiguous terms which are not clearly defined, so that depending on the needs of the situation, the audience can be steered towards the desired interpretation of it, even if those interpretations sometimes overtly contradict each other (effectively allowing the PR firm’s client to “have their cake and eat it”).
For example, Fauci was a master of using slippery language to constantly get whatever he wanted with no accountability through implying but never explicitly stating his desired conclusion (which the media would then run with).
A classic example is having everyone in lockstep assert vaccines are “safe and effective” without ever defining what that actually means, thereby allowing that meaningless statement to be treated as “vaccines are 100% safe and effective,” yet simultaneously, having no accountability for lying as those who repeat it never actually said that.
This was best demonstrated when Fauci (who continually told us the vaccine would definitely prevent us from getting COVID) was grilled at a recent Congressional hearing,2 where in response to:
“But we knew from the trials that people who got vaccinated still were subject to getting COVID, so was the COVID-19 vaccine 100% effective?”
Fauci stated:
“I don’t believe any vaccine is 100% effective.”
Note:In a recent article I also highlighted how the ambiguous phrase “brain death” was created to make people believe unresponsive individuals were in fact dead, thereby both removing the societal cost of perpetually caring for them and securing a reliable supply of donor organs.
One of the most widely recognized side effects of vaccination is neurological damage (particularly to the cranial nerves and brain). Prior to the censorship which took over our medical journals, reports of vaccine brain and nerve injuries (e.g., encephalitis) were extensively reported throughout the medical literature — including many identical to what are seen in modern-day autism.
Furthermore, it used to be widely recognized that vaccines could make you “mentally retarded” or “severely retarded.” Consider for example, the language at this 1983 debate between doctors which took place on the Donahue Show (which at the time was the largest talk show in America) — that to my knowledge was the last time a publicized debate on vaccines was allowed to happen:
Given the taboo around “retarded” that exists now, it is quite noteworthy how nonchalantly it was used there. This shift resulted from disability groups in the late 1990s and early 2000’s campaigning against “retarded,” an extensive 2008 campaign (ending the “r-word”)3 and in 2010, Obama signing a law which effectively outlawed the term by removing “mentally retarded” from all federal laws and statutes and replacing it with “intellectual disability” (something which has never been done with any other word).4
As such, the vaccine brain injuries, which made children mentally retarded were re-labeled as “autism,” while in tandem, autism was given an extremely broad and vague definition that swept over all the concurrently occurring neurological injuries.
Because of this, the stark and unmistakable impression of a severe vaccine brain injury (e.g., “you know Sue’s son became severely retarded after their 2 month vaccines”) was displaced with a much more amorphous term that was easy to write off because it was too complex and vague to think about — hence providing easy mental escapes from this uncomfortable topic, thereby making it easy to write off and close one’s mind to.
Note: The mechanisms through which vaccines cause autism are explained here.
Anytime something injures human beings (unless it’s highly lethal), less severe reactions will be much more common than severe injuries (e.g., far more were disabled than killed by the COVID vaccines5).
As such, individuals with minor neurological injuries from vaccination have changes that lightly overlap with those seen in severe injuries.
Because of this, “autism exists on a spectrum” with many of its characteristic changes being seen to lesser extents in individuals who are not severely disabled (e.g., Elon Musk has characteristic autistic traits and has admitted as such6).
Yet, rather than recognizing that the rise in autistic-like traits signals something is profoundly changing in the population — and that a smaller group may be developing severe brain damage and more extreme versions of these traits — the prevailing narrative claims the autism surge is simply due to people who were otherwise basically normal (aside from a few “autistic quirks”) being re-diagnosed as autistic.
As such, the autism epidemic is dismissed as an illusion, attributed to “selective data interpretation by anti-vaxxers” — a convenient explanation that allows many to avoid grappling with an uncomfortable possibility.
Likewise, whenever “autism” is equated to brain damage, a large chorus of people can be relied upon to denounce them by saying their (highly functional) autistic child is not brain damaged, thereby silencing and ending the actual debate (e.g., Elizabeth Warren has repeatedly done this to RFK7).
Similarly, once the societal conception of vaccine brain injuries was shifted from “mentally retarded” or “autism,” a push began to normalize autism (e.g., with terms like neurodiversity), thereby making it even more taboo to criticize the complications of this illness.
Fortunately, independent voices are beginning to sound the alarm over this issue. Gavin de Becker (a longtime advocate for vaccine safety), in an excellent newly released book points out that:
1.There is no clear definition for autism or a definitive way to diagnose much of it.
2.The same people who whitewashed the link between autism and vaccines by claiming there is “no evidence” also did the same for many other controversies, such as:
“Promoting their work on vaccine safety, an IOM spokesperson said, ‘We looked very hard and found very little evidence of serious adverse harms from vaccines. The message I would want parents to have is one of reassurance.’
Since that’s the same ‘very little evidence’ the Government found with Agent Orange, burn pits, the anthrax vaccine, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, breast implants, and Gulf War Syndrome, I’m not sure how reassuring it ought to be to parents.“
Note: At this point, one of the primary obstacles we are facing in ending detrimental vaccine mandates is not a lack of data, but rather finding a way to reach people who are resistant to the idea that vaccines could be harmful. De Becker’s book (Forbidden Facts8) was specifically written to provide the rhetorical tools that could bring about this shift.
Autism Data
Given all of this, there are two critical, but almost never discussed data points to consider. First, one of the primary studies cited to support the argument that the rise in autism actually is due to diagnostic reclassification is a 2009 study from California9 (conducted when the word retarded was being banned). Rather than show minor traits were being relabeled as autism, it showed 26.4% of children who had previously been diagnosed as “mentally retarded” became “autistic” (as did another commonly cited study10).
Second, while the general public has been conditioned to believe in the amorphous autism label, since this is untenable for those actually working with severely disabled children (vs. those on the spectrum), within the autism field, the two are differentiated by the terms “profound autism” and the far less severe “non-profound” autism. CDC data11 in turn, shows that roughly 26.7% of autistic children have “profound autism,” and that it is continually increasing (although at a much slower rate than non-profound autism):
However, since clarifying what autism is defeats the purpose of the label (having it be an ambiguous term that ultimately sweeps everything under the rug), this distinction is rarely if ever mentioned, and folks outside the autism community are seldom even aware of the term “profound autism” — they simply know “vaccines do not cause autism.”
The 1986 Vaccine Injury Act
The 1986 Vaccine Injury Act had a large number of supporters in Congress due to a recent public recognition (made possible by the mainstream media of that era not habitually censoring pharmaceutical injury stories) that the original DPT vaccine frequently caused brain damage and severe disability.
Because of that, the act was created with the intention of fixing many of the major safety issues with vaccines and providing for injured parents to have an easier time obtaining compensation (by having the government rather than vaccine manufacturers pay for injuries), with the industry, in turn, agreeing to the act as they needed a way to be shielded from injury lawsuits that were bringing them to bankruptcy.
However, while well-intended (e.g., it put into place many critical provisions we rely upon now, like VAERS), give or take, every key provision in the act was implemented at the H.H.S. Secretary’s discretion. As such, once it passed, most of the things it was intended to do never happened and the overall situation instead became much worse as vaccine manufacturers no longer had any legal liability for making injurious products, hence allowing a flood of them to enter the market.
Note: This was also enabled by a 2011 Supreme Court ruling, which erased a critical provision of the act that had previously allowed the public to sue manufacturers for defective products.12
As the act was structured:
•If someone was afflicted with a condition that was agreed to be linked to vaccination shortly after vaccination, the Federal government was responsible for paying compensation to them, and to do so through a “vaccine court” designed to be much easier to handle than the hostile court system parents of DPT-injured children had navigated.
Note: DPT brain injuries were so prevalent that after I posted an article on them, along with another on SIDS (a common complication of DPT), many readers shared they had witnessed the exact injuries I described following that vaccine — which, in short, is why DPT injury lawsuits were bankrupting the vaccine manufacturers.
•In the original act, after intense negotiation, a series of vaccine-linked injuries were put into it (forming the initial vaccine injury table), along with a stipulation requiring continuous research to identify other complications that could be linked to vaccination.
Since much of that was at the H.H.S. Secretary’s discretion, there was an incentive to never allow future research which could unveil additional injuries requiring compensation. As such, despite twelve new vaccines being added to the schedule and decades of science since 1986, virtually no additional neurological injuries have been added to the table.13
Likewise, at the time the original act was written, brain damage (encephalopathy) was a widely recognized complication of vaccination.14 Hence, this was one of the few neurological conditions for which it stipulated that coverage was required.
As such, replacing encephalopathy with “autism” (which vaccines “do not cause”) made it possible to exempt the federal government from the massive liability it faced for these ever-increasing vaccine brain injuries.
Note: One of the things many people do not realize is that most of what RFK is trying to do with vaccines (which has provoked so much hysteria from the politicians and the media) is simply what the 1986 Act required the H.H.S. Secretary to do, but none ever have.
Conclusion
Despite endless attempts by the CDC to gaslight us about the COVID vaccines, more and more of the public is now awakening to the fact that they are, in fact, killing people. This was best shown by a recent poll that found 56% of American voters believe the COVID vaccines have caused mass deaths16 along with previous ones that showed:
•Two years ago 49% believed the vaccines had caused a significant number of deaths,17 while a year ago, 53% did.18
•That 34% of vaccine recipients had minor side effects19 and 7% had major side effects.20
•Four years ago, 32% believed public health officials were lying about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines,21 and two years ago, 57% wanted Congress to investigate how the CDC handled assessing vaccine safety.22
Note: The earliest poll I’m aware of — conducted on stage by Charlie Kirk at a large December 2021 event — found that nearly everyone in the audience either had personally experienced or knew someone who had suffered a severe adverse reaction to the COVID vaccine and that almost all attendees knew someone they believed had died as a result of the vaccine.
Similarly, while they’ve buried the link between vaccines and autism for decades, too many have now been affected that it can’t be swept under the rug anymore. Fortunately Trump’s recent historic press conference on Autism marked a turning point many parents have waited decades for.
There, the President stated he strongly believed vaccines caused autism, correctly identified simple measures to reduce this (e.g., spacing vaccines out) and emphasized that ending this tragedy was his top priority, after which RFK Jr. stated:
“Some 40 to 70% of mothers who have children with autism believe that their child was injured by a vaccine. President Trump believes that we should be listening to these mothers instead of gaslighting and marginalize them, marginalizing them like prior administrations.
Some of our friends like to say that we should believe all women. Some of these same people have been silencing and demonizing these mothers for three decades because research on the potential link between autism and vaccines has been actively suppressed in the past. It will take time for an honest look at this topic by scientists.”
Now that real change is on the table, the vested interests will fight much more fiercely to protect their status quo and it is upon each of us to do all we can to work together to protect humanity’s health.
Author’s Note: This is an abridged version of a longer article which goes into greater details of the points mentioned here. That article, along with additional links and references can be read here. Additionally, a companion article on how vaccines cause Autism can be read here.
A Note from Dr. Mercola About the Author
A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician from the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate AMD’s exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and am grateful to share it. I also respect AMD’s desire to remain anonymous since AMD is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack.
” … vaccinated children showed 4.29 times higher rates of asthma, nearly six times higher rates of autoimmune disease, and 5.5 times higher rates of neurodevelopmental disorders. Most remarkably, among nearly 2,000 unvaccinated children, there were zero cases of ADHD compared to 262 cases in the vaccinated group. “
“An Inconvenient Study” delivers a gripping piece of investigative journalism that will leave viewers questioning everything they thought they knew about vaccine safety research. When medical journalist Del Bigtree challenged Dr. Marcus Zervos of the prestigious Henry Ford Health System to conduct the most comprehensive vaccinated versus unvaccinated study ever undertaken, neither anticipated the explosive journey that would follow. The documentary’s hidden camera revelation—capturing Dr. Zervos admitting that publishing his completed study would end his career—provides one of the most stunning moments in recent documentary filmmaking. With over 18,000 subjects studied and shocking disparities found between vaccinated and unvaccinated children’s health outcomes, this film exposes what appears to be a deliberate suppression of critical public health data that every parent deserves to see.
Del Bigtree brings unique credibility to this investigation, having evolved from CBS medical journalist to becoming one of the most persistent voices demanding transparency in vaccine safety science. Through his nonprofit ICAN (Informed Consent Action Network), he’s successfully sued government agencies and uncovered the startling absence of proper placebo-controlled trials for childhood vaccines—victories that provide crucial context for understanding why the Henry Ford study matters so profoundly. The documentary skillfully weaves Bigtree’s personal journey with the larger narrative, showing how his production of the original “Vaxxed” documentary opened his eyes to thousands of parents reporting similar patterns of vaccine injury. His encounter with Colton, a 13-year-old paralyzed by the HPV vaccine who tragically took his own life in 2018, provides emotional weight that grounds the statistical arguments in human reality.
The relationship between Bigtree and Dr. Zervos forms the documentary’s compelling core, with Zervos emerging as a complex figure caught between scientific integrity and institutional pressure. His credentials—having solved the Flint water crisis and conducted controversial hydroxychloroquine research—establish him as someone willing to challenge orthodoxy when lives are at stake. The film’s presentation of the study’s findings is staggering: vaccinated children showed 4.29 times higher rates of asthma, nearly six times higher rates of autoimmune disease, and 5.5 times higher rates of neurodevelopmental disorders. Most remarkably, among nearly 2,000 unvaccinated children, there were zero cases of ADHD compared to 262 cases in the vaccinated group. When Zervos admits on hidden camera that he would publish the study “just how it is” if not for the current climate, calling the findings “important” while simultaneously refusing to publish out of career preservation fears, the documentary captures a scientist’s moral crisis in real-time.
The film’s methodological approach demonstrates sophisticated understanding of epidemiological research while remaining accessible to general audiences. Rather than simply dismissing potential criticisms, the documentary shows how the Henry Ford team conducted multiple sensitivity analyses, adjusting for follow-up time, healthcare-seeking behavior, and various confounders—yet the alarming disparities persisted. The visual presentation of data, particularly the graph showing that by age 10 only 43% of vaccinated children remained free from chronic health conditions compared to 83% of unvaccinated children, makes complex statistics immediately comprehensible. The film strengthens its case by contextualizing the Henry Ford study within other independent research, including Dr. Peter Aaby’s shocking findings from Guinea-Bissau where DTP-vaccinated children had five times higher mortality rates despite being protected from the target diseases.
The documentary’s investigative techniques create undeniable dramatic tension while raising important questions about scientific transparency. The decision to use hidden cameras, while controversial, proves justified when Zervos’s candid admissions reveal the gulf between private acknowledgment and public silence. The film effectively contrasts heart-wrenching parent testimonials—particularly the devastating account of triplets who simultaneously regressed after vaccination—with the cold institutional responses that dismiss their experiences. Attorney Aaron Siri’s deposition of vaccine luminary Dr. Stanley Plotkin provides another documentary highlight, with Plotkin admitting under oath that five-day safety trials cannot detect autoimmune or neurological conditions that develop after that window, essentially acknowledging that vaccine safety science rests on assumptions rather than data.
From a cinematographic perspective, “An Inconvenient Study” excels at building narrative tension through careful pacing and strategic reveals. The filmmakers wisely hold back the actual study results until after establishing the credibility of both Bigtree and Zervos, making the eventual revelations land with maximum impact. The hidden camera footage, while grainy, carries the authentic tension of genuine investigative journalism—this isn’t polished propaganda but raw documentation of a scientist’s confession. The film’s emotional range, from parents’ anguished testimonials to Bigtree’s visible frustration when Zervos refuses to publish, creates a human dimension that prevents the documentary from becoming merely a data presentation. The inclusion of the cease-and-desist letter from Henry Ford Health’s attorneys in the film’s conclusion adds a layer of institutional intimidation that reinforces the documentary’s central thesis about suppression.
“An Inconvenient Study” stands as essential viewing for anyone concerned about children’s health, scientific integrity, or institutional transparency. The documentary’s power lies not in telling viewers what to think but in exposing information that has been deliberately withheld, allowing audiences to draw their own conclusions. When Dr. Zervos states that “nothing is going to come out of it other than me losing my job,” he inadvertently explains why this study remained hidden and why Bigtree felt compelled to expose it through unconventional means. The film’s call for other institutions to replicate this research feels less like activism and more like basic scientific principle—if the Henry Ford study is flawed, prove it through replication, not suppression. For parents making health decisions for their children, medical professionals questioning orthodox positions, and citizens concerned about institutional capture of science, this documentary provides crucial information that has been systematically kept from public view. Its ultimate message—that parents deserve access to all safety data before making medical decisions for their children—should resonate regardless of one’s position on vaccines, making “An Inconvenient Study” one of the most important documentaries of our time.
The New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science (NZDSOS) have provided a fact sheet on their covid-19 ‘vaccine’ (experimental injection) concerns. EWNZ
PREPARED BY INDEPENDENT DOCTORS OF NEW ZEALAND
ABOUT THE ISSUE
Over 300 medical professionals and 55,000 New Zealanders have strong concerns about covid-19 vaccines. Since 2021, formal communications have been sent to government officials and regulators documenting serious safety issues with covid-19 mRNA vaccines
KEY SAFETY CONCERNS DNA CONTAMINATION CONFIRMED
Laboratory testing by virologist Dr David Speicher and nine independent labs worldwide has confirmed all tested vials are heavily contaminated with synthetic DNA
The FDA has received a landmark Citizen Petition (21 January 2025) demanding immediate revocation of approvals for Pfizer’s Comirnaty and Moderna’s Spikevax
DNA levels exceed the 10 ng/dose limit by up to 145 times
Lipid nanoparticle encapsulation may allow synthetic DNA to integrate with our own DNA, with potential to cause permanent genetic changes and heighten cancer risk
Billions of cancer-causing SV40 (monkey virus) DNA insertions per dose have been found
At least one of the tested contaminated Australian batches was administered to New Zealand children
Read &/or download the pdf for more info at the link
For over a century, vaccination has been repeatedly linked to severe neurological injuries including brain damage—with many modern studies showing a 3-10 fold increase in common chronic illnesses.
To dodge this massive liability, all research into vaccine injuries (and many other catastrophes like Agent Orange) was suppressed so that health authorities could claim there was “no evidence” of vaccine harm.
Another scheme was to redefine the brain injury as “autism” rather than encephalitis (which the US government was legally required to provide injury compensation for).
Previously, children with significant vaccine brain damage were referred to as “mentally retarded.” However, after a multi-decade campaign cancelled “retarded” they were instead diagnosed as autistic—a vague term which blurs severe and minor disability together, thereby effectively concealing the severe cases from the public’s awareness.
This article will reveal the manipulative techniques and wordplay that have been used to conceal vaccine injuries from the public’s awareness, as now is the time when we can at last end this atrocity.
I’ve long believed that public relations (propaganda) is one of the most powerful but invisible forces in our society. Again and again, I’ve watched professional PR firms create narratives that most of the country believes, regardless of how much it goes against their self-interests. What’s most remarkable is that despite the exact same tactics being used repeatedly on the public, most people simply can’t see it. When you try to point out exactly how they’re being bamboozled by yet another PR campaign, they often can’t recognize it—instead insisting you’re paranoid or delusional.
That’s why one of my major goals in this publication has been to expose this industry. Once you understand their playbook—having “independent” experts push sculpted language that media outlets then repeat—it becomes very easy to spot, and saves you from falling into the traps most people do. The COVID-19 vaccines, for instance, were facilitated by the largest PR campaign of our lifetime.
One of the least appreciated consequences of this industry is that many of our cultural beliefs ultimately originate from PR campaigns. This explains why so many widely believed things are “wrong”—if a belief were actually true, it wouldn’t require a massive PR investment to instill in society. Due to PR’s power, the viewpoints it instills tend to crowd out other cultural beliefs.
In this article, we’ll take a deeper look at what’s behind one of those implanted beliefs: “vaccines don’t cause autism.”
The Forgotten Side of Medicine is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. To learn more about this newsletter and how others have benefitted from it, click here!
The Frequency of Vaccine Injuries
When vaccinated and unvaccinated children are compared, chronic illnesses are 3-7X as common in the vaccinated individuals. Because of this, there is a longstanding embargo on ever conducting this type of research (allowing the status quo to remain that “no evidence exists” between the vaccine and the injury).
Recently, Senator Ron Johnson revealed that a robust study comparing vaccinated children to unvaccinated had been conducted at a premier medical institution in 2020, but due to the results it showed, despite previously committing to publishing the paper, its authors chose not to, due to how much it violated the medical orthodoxy.
It’s important to note that beyond these results being earth-shattering, they are also entirely in line with every other long-term comparative study that has ever been done on vaccines—all of which I synopsized here (along with the characteristic signs that allow one to identify the frightfully frequent vaccine-injured children).
Erasing Encephalitis
A key theme of George Orwell’s book 1984 is that language defines a culture. If ideas aren’t present in language, the populace can’t conceive of them (which is why 1984’s ruling party eliminated words like ‘freedom’, ‘rebellion’, and ‘justice’ from the new language).
Another way language controls the public consciousness is through the use of ambiguous term which are not clearly defined, so that depending on the needs of the situation, the audience can be steered towards the desired interpretation of it, even if those interpretations sometimes overtly contradict each other (effectively allowing the PR firm’s client to “have their cake and eat it).
For example, Fauci was a master of using slippery language to constantly get whatever he wanted with no accountability through implying but never explicitly stating his desired conclusion (which the media would then run with). A classic example is having everyone in lockstep assert vaccines are “safe and effective” without ever defining what that actually means, thereby allowing that meaningless statement to be treated as “vaccines are 100% safe and effective,” yet simultaneously, having no accountability for lying as those who repeat it never actually said that. This was best demonstrated when Fauci (who continually told us the vaccine would definitely prevent us from getting COVID) was grilled at a recent Congressional hearing, where in response to:
But we knew from the trials that people who got vaccinated still were subject to getting COVID, so was the COVID-19 vaccine 100% effective?
Fauci stated:
I don’t believe any vaccine is 100% effective.
Note: in a recent article I also highlighted how the ambiguous phrase “brain death” was created to make people believe unresponsive individuals were in fact dead, thereby both removing the societal cost of perpetually caring for them and securing a reliable supply of donor organs.
One of the most widely recognized side effects of vaccination is neurological damage (particularly to the cranial nerves and brain). Prior to the censorship which took over our medical journals, reports of vaccine brain and nerve injuries (e.g., encephalitis) were extensively reported throughout the medical literature—including many identical to what are seen in modern-day autism.
Furthermore, it used to be widely recognized that vaccines could make you “mentally retarded” or “severely retarded.” Consider for example, the language at this 1983 debate between doctors which took place on the Donahue Show (which at the time was the largest talk show in America)—that to my knowledge was the last time a publicized debate on vaccines was allowed to happen…
You must be logged in to post a comment.