pull down to refresh

As I’ve continued to work in this space over the last six years I now realize that there are over 800 autism causation studies in the English language focused on the U.S. It’s daunting to think about trying to wrap one’s head around a field that large. So most public health officials just grab a favorite study here or there to justify their biases and that is exactly the wrong way to approach this topic. There has to be a better way of working through the available knowledge on this issue.
Now I believe that I’ve figured out how to map the entire field of autism causation studies (about 850 papers in all) in one article. If you sat down to read each article individually, it would likely take you several years. But as I will show below, you don’t necessarily have to do that. There is a way to move through all of the literature at a meta level that I believe leads to the right answer and a viable plan for how to stop the autism epidemic. …
In the early 1980s, vaccines were so harmful that vaccine manufacturers routinely lost in court. They lobbied the US Congress to pass the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act to give themselves liability protection. And they pinky-swore to make vaccines safer but there was no legal mechanism in the bill to enforce that promise so they never did.
Pharmaceutical companies proceeded to add as many vaccines as possible to the schedule. Prior to 1986, there were 3 routine vaccines totaling 7 injections. Today the CDC’s Maternal and Child and Adolescent vaccine schedules include 19 vaccines requiring 76 injections with 94 total doses of antigen (I’m actually less worried about the antigens than the other ingredients in the shots). …
The key study that helps us to understand the relative impact of the different toxicants that contribute to causing autism was led by Sally Ozonoff at UC Davis and it was published in 2018. Using a brilliant study design she showed that up to 88% of autism cases are characterized by autistic regression — the child was developing normally and then suddenly over the course of hours, days, or weeks the child lost eye contact, speech, and the ability to socialize with others. This suggests an acute toxic exposure and we now have eyewitness testimony from hundreds of thousands of parents that the acute toxic exposure that preceded the autistic regression was a “well baby” vaccine appointment with a pediatrician.
The holy grail in autism research is to find vaccinated vs. unvaccinated studies. Thankfully there are now six good studies that we can rely on. …
So that leaves us with six very good vaccinated vs. unvaccinated studies that show that vaccines cause autism. Vaccination in general seems to increase autism risk about 4-fold (the range across these six studies is 3.002 to 8.63). Vaccinating premies (OR = 14.5), vaccination + c-section delivery (OR = 12.5), and vaccination in the absence of breastfeeding (OR = 18.7) causes autism risk to skyrocket. That’s what’s causing the autism epidemic, according to the best available scientific evidence.
The takeaway from all of this is that the entire field of autism research is a shambles. Parents of autistic children are spending what little money they have to fund proper scientific research while corporations, foundations, and the government use their considerable power to cover up the causes of the epidemic.
The good news is that tens of thousands of parents appear to have figured it out. The best available scientific evidence suggests that we can stop the autism epidemic by only allowing beneficial vaccines on the market (a couple of live virus vaccines) and giving them, if at all, under conditions of informed consent at later ages when the body’s immune system can respond appropriately. Reducing the over-use of c-sections and birth drugs and supporting breastfeeding are also likely to produce large reductions in the autism rate. Somewhat smaller but still significant reductions in the autism rates are also likely through reducing all toxic exposures (including air pollution, pesticides, endocrine disruptors, other pharmaceuticals, etc.) for everyone.
Here’s the entire story in one infographic: I cannot seem to grab this image to put here, please refer to the article
Out of the almost a thousand research papers that look into the cause of autism, only about six look into it appropriately. The author, in his Ph.D. Thesis and in years afterward went through all of the thousand papers and winnowed them down to six, only six that had any value at all, due to, shall we politely call them, fiscal restraints. The economy here is that the demand for this kind of study is extremely low due to the possible effects it would have on the state big Pharma and all of their hangers-on. None of the other 994 studies found any useful information at all, but they keep getting the money for the research rather than go for the true cause of the problem with autism. Thanks to this article for the solid information. You may want to go directly to the end of the article for the infographic that shows the whole process this author went through to arrive at his conclusions. FTS
I remember some of the covid treatment studies were setup so preposterously that they were clearly designed to not find any effectiveness of "alternative" treatments.
Some gave doses of medicines at levels known to be toxic. Others gave just one component of what was meant to be a regiment of several treatments.
To a lay person, they just see that an enormous number of studies didn't find anything. It's not like any of us have the time or expertise to dissect every medical study.
reply
This guy boiled it down to whether there was a real control group or not. The control group was the totally unvaccinated children and the treatment group was the vaccinated children. Only six out of about a thousand peer-reviewed papers were finally winnowed out. The only reason, apparently, for not having more is that the researchers were forever cut off from research funds if they were seriously working with vaccines. That is the political means being used in a economics situation. It may also be the reason RFKjr gets turfed out pretty damn soon, now.
reply
Yeah, I've read about that issue before. It is a tough empirical issue, because unvaccinated kids are unlike vaccinated kids in a bunch of different ways.
reply
Yes, usually in health outcomes. The well vaccinated kids seem to have all sorts of problems with their bodies and minds, starting from peanut allergies to the made-up ADHD or ADD.
Two of my kids got by with much lesser vaccinations and medicine than the third. My third kid had pneumonia when he was only 4 months old and his blood oxygen dropped to what they told me was 48%, which was near-fatal. He spent two weeks under a tent in the hospital getting a steady drip of medicines. He is now the least healthy of the three. We tried to limit vaccines as much as possible.
reply
Wait but are the six studies themselves double blind RCT trials?
reply
Yes, it looks like it. At least that is what this author reported in his thesis.
reply