The pro-vaxx propagandists are going to have a hell of a time “debunking” this one, although they’re already on the case (more on the coming up). The “debunking” will escalate, surely, if they can’t achieve their preferred objective when it comes to inconvenient narratives of getting it sufficiently suppressed and memory-holed.
Related: Pfizer Knew of COVID-19 Vax Risks to Breastfeeding Babies in April 2021
The study followed kids enrolled in government healthcare from ages 0-9 to suss out any correlation between the number of vaccine appointments and incidence of neurological disorders.
The result was a shocking, if not surprising, 4.4-fold higher rate of autism among children with 11 or more vaxx visits to the state vs. those with none.
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).”
Related: Study: COVID-Vaxxed Kids SIX TIMES Likelier to Die Than Unvaxxed Peers
The “debunking” leads with vicious character assassinations of the involved parties, including Dr. Peter McCollough, one of the most frequently published and cited cardiologists the world over who was previously a revered clinician and researcher in good standing with the medical establishment until he started saying true things about COVID and the “vaccines.”
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.”
*We’re meant to take seriously “peer-reviewed” science, we’re extolled, as the gold standard — except when we’re not, because reasons, like Democracy™ or whatever.
Shut your mouth, bigot! Don’t ask obvious questions like: Why, when you incessantly insisted on following peer-reviewed science, have you suddenly turned on it because it doesn’t match your narrative?
Now, the whole conflict-of-interest, hidden-angle criticism is rich coming from the quoted authority in this biased “Unbiased Science” rebuttal, TV and social media Doctor Bertha Hidalgo (a Ph.D, not a medical doctor), who works for various corporate state media enterprises as a STEM Diversity™ mascot and was a Post-Baccalaureate Trainee at Fauci’s NIAID at the turn of the millennium.
Related: Corporate Media Pushing ‘Holiday Heart Syndrome’ Propaganda
But yes, it’s the brave guy who sacrificed his reputation in the minds of retarded NPCs everywhere, who had his medical license threatened for telling the truth, demonized non-stop by Dr. Bertha’s employers, who has the conflict of interest here.
Ben Bartee is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs.
Follow Armageddon Prose. Also, keep tabs via Twitter.
Support independent journalism with a one-off, hassle-free “digital coffee” tip.
Bitcoin public address: bc1qvq4hgnx3eu09e0m2kk5uanxnm8ljfmpefwhaw
