CONTEXTUALISATION: THE SEPTEMBER 22ND ANNOUNCEMENT

 “The US HHS’s Doubledown on Acetaminophen (or Tylenol)”, and we ought to begin with some contextualisation, looking at the announcement on the 22nd of September. Well, speaking from the Roosevelt Room, President Donald Trump and US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr announced bold new actions to confront the autism spectrum disorder (ASD) epidemic in America, which has surged nearly 400% since 2000 and now affects 1 in 31 American children.

First, the US Food and Drug Administration (or the FDA) will act on a potential treatment for speech-related deficits associated with ASD. The FDA is publishing a Federal Register notice outlining a label update for leucovorin for cerebral folate deficiency, which has been associated with autism. This action establishes the first FDA-recognised therapeutic for children with cerebral folate deficiency and autistic symptoms.  The change will essentially authorise treatment for children with ASD, with continued use if children show language, social, or adaptive gains. Following the label update for ASD, state Medicaid programs will be able to cover leucovorin for the indication of ASD, in partnership with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Finally, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) will launch confirmatory trials and new research into the impact of leucovorin including safety studies.

Now, it is very key to note that leucovorin is not a cure for ASD and may only lead to improvements in speech-related deficits for a subset of children with ASD. In addition, leucovorin would have to be administered under close medical supervision and in conjunction with other non-pharmacological approaches for children with ASD (e.g., behavioral therapy).

Then the second point of contextualisation to highlight from the announcement on the 22nd of September is that HHS stated that it will also act on acetaminophen. In essence, the FDA responsibility was to issue a physician notice and begin the process to initiate a safety label change for acetaminophen (or Tylenol and similar products). HHS would also have the responsibility of launching a nationwide public service campaign to inform families and protect public health.

TRUMP OPPOSES HEPATITIS B VACCINE FOR BABIES, & WARNS OF METALS IN VACCINES

Now one of the striking details mentioned by prescient Trump in the course of the tylenol-autism link announcement is that he questioned the rationale of giving an infant a Hepatitis B vaccine, as well the many dangerous metals, like aluminium and mercury in vaccines. Now, he proceeds to advocate for spacing out vaccines, as opposed to eradicating them in their entirety, which is not as fundamentalist and accurate a response to vaccines as I would argue is necessary. However, his remarks are considered in the context of a world and American society where people still have the freedom to exercise the choice to take a vaccine even when they are told about their harms. But, I am hoping to see and praying for this more fundamentalist and emphatically anti-vaccine approach to become more intrinsic to US health policy, because, we have spent a lot of time challenging the rationale behind vaccine science, and also disproving their claimed efficacy (including here on The War Room, and LN24 International at large) for us not to advocate for progressing towards a direct refutation of the necessity or plausibility of vaccines.

Nevertheless, here is why it still matters that Trump is perhaps the first president in US and world history to raise concerns about the Hepatitis B vaccines of the first day out of the womb, and also the presence of metals like aluminium and mercury in vaccines. First, central to the vaccine agenda and hoax, as far as it relates to children, is the idea that the many vaccines that parents are being compelled to allow for their children are somehow necessary. Following his rationale, within hours or when a child is born, a child is subjected to pharmaceutical intervention: more specifically, a new newborn’s eyes are smeared with erythro-mycin ointment, and a newborn is given the Hepatitis B shot.

However, erythromycin ointment is to prevent gonorrhoea or chlamydia infections of the eyes; and so, why would a newborn need this if the mother does not have these sexually transmitted illnesses? Furthermore, Hepatitis B is also a sexually transmitted disease, and from IV drug abusers, and so why would a newborn need this if parents are healthy and do not have Hepatitis B? Especially since parents are tested for these illnesses! In essence, the logic behind the alleged necessity of these interventions is really about treating newborns for illnesses they do NOT have – because there is literally nothing causal and therefore expressly necessary that would warrant these pharmaceutical interventions. Therefore, in questioning the rationale behind giving newborns the Hepatitis B jab, President Trump is exposing the deceptive reasoning behind it, and subsequently disrupting the vaccine enterprise’s profit stream that is built on the backs of babies.

Secondly, metals in vaccines are actually a massive health concern. Dr Toby Rogers PhD exposed the fact that the FDA and CDC approved aluminum as ‘safe & effective’ in vaccines, based on a study of only 4 rabbits that was riddled with issues – and yet, this is the study that the FDA and CDC rely on. In this study, they promptly lost the results from one of the rabbits. So the study is actually based on just 3 rabbits. But, the results in the rabbits were nevertheless of great concern.

In essence, the rabbits were killed after 28 days and the Aluminum Adjuvants are still there. At the endpoint, Aluminum retention in the body and organs was 94% for Aluminum Hydroxide and 78% for Aluminum Phosphate. The theory and narrative told by the FDA and CDC has always been that the body excretes the Aluminum through the urine and is therefore harmless. BUT, Dr Toby Rogers explained that nothing could be further from the truth. Injected heavy metals actually stay in the places in the body you would expect, which include the kidneys, the liver, the heart, the lymph nodes, the bone marrow and  the brain.”

And so, clearly the study by the CDC and the FDA was terrible to begin with but also produced results that were concerning. BUT, despite this, the FDA and CDC declared the presence of metals in vaccines to be safe and effective. It is beyond absurd because the science is so terribly bad that anybody who reads that study would not want to inject their children with Aluminum Adjuvanted vaccines. And that’s just one ingredient amongst hundreds in these vaccines, as far as metals are concerned. Here’s more from Dr Toby Rogers.

RFK JR: TYLENOL NOT JUST LINKED TO AUTISM, BUT ALSO ADHD AND LIVER TOXICITY

Then, in a recent announcement this month of October, and in doubling down on the tylenol issue, Secretary Kennedy announced that Tylenol is NOT just linked to autism but also ADHD and liver toxicity in children. Let’s kindly revisit that moment.

THE POINT OF CONTENTION: IS ACETAMINOPHEN A CAUSE OR DRIVER OF AUTISM?

So, all that we’ve discussed and heard thus far contextualises the contribution from the White house as far as tylenol (and vaccines) are concerned. Which then brings us to the point of contention. Now, for clarity, what is NOT the point of contention (at least for the purpose of our discussion is that the FDA recognises that acetaminophen is often treated as the only tool (or most recommended tool) for fevers and pain in pregnancy, as other alternatives (e.g., NSAIDs) have well documented adverse effects; which is why the FDA is also partnering with manufacturers to update labeling and drive new research to safeguard mothers, children, and families – this is not the point of contention we will focus on, because acetaminophen certainly has health risks (which we will highlight as we proceed), and these are health risks that do not warrant a defence, and rather necessitate a shift away from a reliance on pharmaceutical drugs as a means of pain or fever relief – especially in young children.

Then, what IS a point of contention that we ought to address for the purpose of our discussion, looking at the The US HHS’s Doubledown on Acetaminophen (or Tylenol) is one that began with a crucial concession from the White House concerning acetaminophen, and it is that the FDA recognises that there are contrary studies showing no association between acetaminophen and autism.  Thus, given the conflicting literature and lack of clear causal evidence, the HHS stated on the 22nd of September that it wants to encourage clinicians to exercise their best judgment in use of acetaminophen. As such, the point of contention lies with the conflicting literature, and this is precisely what we’ll talk about, by asking the question of whether acetaminophen is a root cause of driver in the autism or neurodevelopmental health issue discussion.

To begin our focus on this point of contention, I’d like to prove not only that tylenol had already been a focus in the autism debate years before the announcement from the White house in September, but I’d also like to prove that the studies even years back were showing that tylenol played the role of increasing chances of autism after vaccination, as opposed to being a primary cause itself. Kindly watch this excerpt from a 2023 interview conducted by the Children’s Health Defence.

Once again, President Trump raised the alarm about the dramatically rising prevalence of autism, and he emphasised that it must be caused by something in the environment. He mentioned acetaminophen and hyper-vaccination as prime suspects. Now, while president Trump and HHS Secretary also spoke about the suspect of large vaccine bundles administered to infants, their medical advisors (which include Drs Jay Bhattacharya, Marty Makary, Mehmet Oz, and Dorothy Fink) focused their remarks exclusively on Tylenol, and almost did not mention vaccines.

But, here is what I’d like for us to collectively reconsider. First, there have been studies that examined Tylenol among the potential causes of autism, including studies by the McCullough Foundation, led by Dr Peter McCullough, who is among the people at the forefront of performing an exhaustive investigation of autism. These studies have found little evidence to warrant regarding Tylenol as a prime suspect in autism causation. In fact, it would seem that interest in the purported Tylenol-Autism link has recently been piqued within the same institutions that have long vehemently denied that autism is linked to childhood vaccination.

Thus, the totality of circumstances suggests that Tylenol is more of a red-herring than a true suspect. Now, this is not to say that tylenol is an exceptional pharmaceutical product, rather, it is to say that studies do not support it emerging as a primary cause of autism. In fact, I find it interesting that the recent study pointing to Tylenol is from Havard – the same institution that brought us the brain death definition to cover up for the disastrous second heart transplant that took place in Brooklyn, New York; and has resulted in the murder of many patients who are claimed to have been so-called brain dead.

Secondly, since it became a widely used, over-the-counter drug in 1960, Tylenol has been the only recommended medicine for relieving pain and reducing fever in pregnant women and infants. Generation X (which are those born between 1965-1980) was exposed to Tylenol in utero, and their  mothers often gave it to them to lower their fevers from frequent earaches. And yet, in a 1970 birth cohort, autism was virtually unknown. BY CONTRAST, the trend of dramatically increasing autism began in the late eighties, following the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. This Act granted liability protection to vaccine manufacturers, which was followed by a rapid proliferation of the number of shots on the childhood schedule.

So, what does this mean? I think it means that tylenol – at best – is a driver (or worsening agent) of neurodevelopmental issues, but not the root cause. Let’s begin with Prenatal Exposure. The most comprehensive review to date, by Prada et al, evaluated tylenol use during pregnancy: 27 studies found a positive association with neurodevelopmental disorders (in particular ASD/ADHD). Then, 9 studies showed no link, while 4 studies suggested protective effects. But, we also ought to consider that autism was never or rarely ever diagnosed at birth. In every study, it emerged years later—typically ages 2–8, the very same window when children are loaded with many vaccines. Meanwhile, none of these papers we referenced accounted for vaccination as a confounder. This shows prenatal Tylenol exposure may predispose children, but the neurological injuries are detected during the vaccine years.

Similarly, when we look at Postnatal Exposure to tylenol, a study by Schultz et al (in 2008) found that children given Tylenol after MMR vaccination were about six times more likely to later be diagnosed with autism. In those who regressed (meaning who lost previously acquired skills), the risk was nearly fourfold, and in those with clear post-vaccine complications, the risk spiked to over eightfold. By contrast, ibuprofen showed no association. In addition, Yengst et al (in a 2025 study) found that in a Medicaid cohort of over 674,000 children, repeated episodes of fever, ear infections, or other “Tylenol-triggering” illnesses were linked to a two and a half-fold higher risk of autism. Among girls with multiple fevers, the risk climbed to nearly fourfold.

Taken together, these studies reveal a consistent pattern: which is that autism risk intensifies in the post-vaccine period, when febrile reactions are most common, and tylenol use in this context may amplify the likelihood of developmental regression. This is considering that tylenol depletes what is called gluta-thione, and this is the body’s master antioxidant/detox system, exactly when the brain faces inflammatory/oxidative stress (such as fever, seizures, or immune activation). Now, some pediatric practices have actually recommended Tylenol before vaccine visits “just in case,” meaning that children who take tylenol before shots arrive with defenses already depleted as the shots provoke fever/immune activation—thus priming the children for worse outcomes. Ergo, tylon is a driver (or worsening agent) but not the cause of neurodevelopmental issues.

CONTRASTING THE CHILDHOOD VACCINE SCHEDULE WITH TYLENON IN THE CAUSATION DISCOURSE

So, that is what studies reflect concerning tylenol’s capacity as a root cause in neurodevelopmental issues – and especially autism. Let’s proceed to contrast this with the childhood vaccine schedule. You’d recall that on the 9th of September, attorney Aaron Siri testified before the US Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations during the hearing titled: “How the Corruption of Science has Impacted Public Perception and Policies Regarding Vaccines.” In his sworn testimony, Siri revealed the results of a long-hidden study from the Henry Ford Health System in Detroit, MI. This is the largest vaccinated vs unvaccinated birth cohort study ever conducted in the United States (looking at 18,468 participants). Children were tracked from birth over a 10-year period. The data were drawn directly from electronic medical records — the gold standard for real-world health outcomes.

The study’s official title is (quote): “Impact of Childhood Vaccination on Short- and Long-Term Chronic Health Outcomes in Children: A Birth Cohort Study.” The measures and outcomes of this study come directly from the testimony of Aaron Siri, who presented these findings under oath in the US Senate, as unfortunately, the study is not yet publicly available (again, considering that it was largely hidden for the longest time).

The key findings from the Henry Ford Health System study found that, compared to unvaccinated children, those who received one or more vaccines had dramatically higher rates of chronic illness; specifically 329% more asthma, 203% more atopic disease, 496% more autoimmune disease, 453% more neurodevelopmental disorders, 228% more developmental delays, and 347% more speech disorders. In light of these findings, Aaron Siri testified that all of these findings were statistically significant. And even more striking is that, in conditions where unvaccinated children had zero cases (and this is looking at conditions like brain dysfunction, ADHD, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities, and tics), there were hundreds of cases among the vaccinated group!

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

The AAP Declared War on Vaccine Choice

AAP recommended removing all religious exemptions for vaccines

The American Academy of Pediatrics last month officially recommended removing all religious exemptions for vaccines—pushing for government-mandated shots regardless of faith. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) called for an end to all religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions for children attending daycare and school in ALL 50 States in the U.S. This is a very dangerous and telling admission that vaccines are not about protecting the population… it’s about controlling the population and stripping parents’ rights to make decisions for their children. The American Academy of Pediatrics has abandoned science, betrayed parents & pushed dangerous child mutilation. They urged removing religious vaccine exemptions, promoted puberty blockers for kids & endorsed gender transitions.

RFK Jr’s CDC Kicks Out Tyrannical AAP After Push to Remove Exemptions

In a stunning reversal of power, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)—the same group that recently demanded the elimination of all personal and religious vaccine exemptions nationwide—has been expelled from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) vaccine policymaking process. Dr. Susan Monarez, confirmed by the Senate in 2025 as CDC Director, now leads the health agency’s day-to-day operations under the oversight of U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. According to an email from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the AAP, along with more than a half-dozen other prominent medical organizations, has been kicked out of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) workgroups, which play a central role in shaping the nation’s vaccine recommendations. The AAP’s authoritarian demand to erase centuries-old religious protections and force medical compliance as a condition for education was a dystopian overreach—one that now has cost them their seat at the table. The latest development comes on the heels of a June 2025 decision by HHS Secretary Kennedy to fire the entire ACIP—accusing them of being too closely aligned with vaccine manufacturers—and replace them with a new group that includes vaccine-skeptical voices.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Profiting from Childhood Sickness

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the major professional association of North American pediatricians, has overseen the rising rates of chronic illness and medicating of American children over recent decades. With 67,000 members in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, AAP distinguished itself during Covid-19 for its strident insistence that children’s faces should be covered and they should be injected with modified RNA vaccines, despite knowing from early 2020 that severe Covid-19 was very rare in healthy children. Funded by sources including Moderna, Merck, Sanofi, GSK, Eli Lilly, and other pharmaceutical companies, the AAP’s members are the cornerstone of the rapidly increasing paediatric pharma market in North America – by far greater than any other region. As a professional organization dedicated to ensuring income for its members, the AAP is like any similar professional association or union and acts in this manner.

The erosion of trust in the medical field, which has been ongoing since 2020, is thankfully dispelling the myth that organizations like the AAP are driven by a selfless desire to serve the greater good, rather than prioritizing the interests of their own members. The recent release of the AAP’s priorities, which were crafted by its own members, is likely to further fuel this mistrust, and although the approach may seem unusually harsh, it will ultimately contribute to the strengthening of public health by laying bare the motivations of those who stand to gain from the escalating rates of illness, and shedding light on the ways in which they profit from it.

AAP sets Priorities to Ensure Long-Term Profit

The American Academy of Paediatrics is actively working to strip parents of their authority in deciding whether to vaccinate their children with commercially produced substances, largely sponsored by pharmaceutical companies that fund the AAP’s initiatives. This move is absurd except to the ultimate beneficiaries – including paediatricians and pharmaceutical manufacturers – exert substantial influence over the US Congress through hefty campaign donations. Notably, the AAP’s efforts to promote or facilitate chronic disease in children essentially guarantee a lifelong struggle with these conditions, thereby creating a steady stream of loyal pharmaceutical consumers. As profit-driven entities, pharmaceutical companies are dedicated to maximizing their revenues, with CEOs and executives tasked by shareholders to prioritize financial gains. By pushing for such policies, the AAP is effectively serving as a willing accomplice, enabling pharmaceutical companies to reap substantial benefits from the creation of a lifelong customer base.

The AAP considers that bodily autonomy is subservient

The AAP considers that bodily autonomy is subservient to State-imposed requirements and that the post-World War II human rights of non-coercion and informed consent are subservient to the opinion of someone receiving money to perform an injection. Its approach coincides with the pre-War technocracy movement or medical fascism (in which a declared ‘expert’ decides on imposing healthcare measures rather than the patient themselves choosing it). However, before discussing bodily autonomy and coerced medicine further, it is worth commenting on the priority list of the AAP overall, as it is fascinating, coming from a group that insists publicly on prioritizing the health of children.

AAP is prioritizing medicalization over preventative measures

The American Academy of Pediatrics is actively pushing to eliminate parental rights and religious exemptions for childhood vaccinations, but notably, their top ten priorities fail to address the alarming rise in obesity and autism epidemics that are wreaking havoc on children’s health. Despite the CDC sounding the alarm on the extraordinary proportions of autism cases, the AAP is solely focused on identifying and managing these conditions, rather than investigating their causes. Nowhere on their list of priorities is there a mention of tackling the root causes of the soaring rates of chronic illnesses in children. The closest they come is a vague reference to reducing the cost of insulin injections for kids. By prioritizing medicalization over preventative measures, the AAP is turning a blind eye to the devastating decline in health status among the very population they claim to serve, with diet and physical activity levels being glaringly overlooked.

Unsurprisingly for a purely marketing organization, but inconsistent with a science-based healthcare body, the priorities include nothing regarding very obvious concerns of the impact of over 70 vaccinations, with their associated adjuvants and preservatives, now given to children by ten years of age. This number has grown from just a few 40 years ago in association with the deterioration in child health outcomes. The only interest expressed in vaccines is to remove choice from those concerned about such things, and force compliance. For a society of thinking, truth-seeking people this would be extraordinary.

Parents are seen as an Obstacle to Return on Investment

Many parents are uncomfortable with the role of cells harvested from induced aborted fetuses, often still alive at the time of harvesting. Again, many AAP members may believe the rhetoric that this is untrue, but nonetheless it is factual. It is how we derive cell cultures to develop many vaccines, so the DNA of these dead unborn humans can still contaminate the injection. The AAP, as an institution, officially holds that cultural and religious concerns arising from this should be overridden. So, in the end, the AAP’s argument seems to come down to one of two possible drivers. Either (1) they have an ideological belief that they should simply be the authority or decision-makers on children’s healthcare rather than parents (a medical-fascist approach), or (2) they see their role as promoting an extremely lucrative market for their sponsors, from which they also directly benefit, and setting children up for an entire lifetime of chronic illness and pharmaceutical consumption. It is challenging to decide which is less noble. A third possibility is also possible. Most AAP members are simply going with the flow and have not actually stopped to think through the implications of their union’s policies. However, the motivation for willfully ignoring rational thought probably does come down to a mixture of money and ego, which goes back to the two potential drivers mentioned above. There are tens of thousands of doctors who disagree with these medical associations but are too afraid to speak out.”

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

 So, 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 promised 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).

Meanwhile, no one in a position of authority bothered to measure the impact of the growing vaccine schedule on the health of children. Most regulators were auditioning for a job with Pharma because that’s where the money was said to be. Politicians also depend on Pharma donations for their re-election campaigns. While the mainstream news media get most of their revenue from Pharma advertising so they were never going to bite the hand that feeds them. And so, ultimately, big pharma invested heavily in public relations to lay siege to any remaining pockets of resistance.

Now, during this time, mercury (also known as thimerosal) was grandfathered in as “Generally Recognized As Safe” (or GRAS by the FDA) because it was easier to do that than actual safety testing. Aluminum adjuvants were allowed with only minimal safety testing — which included 1 man, 3 rabbits, and ever-moving goal posts on what constitutes “safe”. And so, the gold rush was on so vaccine manufacturers were free to add whatever they wanted to vaccines and they would all be approved because the regulators and the medical industry were captured by big pharma.

It was against this backdrop and historical context that the autism rate skyrocketed in the 1990s and has continued to increase ever since. At the same time, rates of life-threatening allergies, autoimmune disorders, asthma, childhood cancers, diabetes, and epilepsy soared too and those are probably vaccine injuries as well. But autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is more costly than those other conditions because it’s a lifelong disability with no known effective natural treatment (while some parents have been able to recover their children through holistic and alternative therapies but the percentage who are successful in doing so is still in the single digits). And so, in the US alone, the country went from having autism rates of 1 in 10 000 in the 1970s, to 1 in 31 in 2025. All of this correlates with the amount of vaccines that have been progressively added into the immunisation schedule.

And yet, autism is characterised as merely a mental disorder under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (or DSM-5), which is the standard classification of mental disorders used by mental health professionals in the United States – as OPPOSED to a vaccine injury. Here’s why, and what is progressively being done about it.

Now, what Nicole Shanahan just outlined is the problem with autism exclusively being defined as a mental disorder and what is being done to bypass that and establish a link between vaccines and autism. But, at the point when the correlation between vaccines and autism was becoming undeniable, the people who created the autism epidemic had no interest in conceding to wrongful conduct, and instead delayed progress in curbing autism rates by pretending to look for the cause, when they already knew it. But (of course) they also had to make sure never to “find” the actual cause because then the flow of research funding would stop and lots of these doctors and scientists would go to jail for their culpability in vaccine injuries. And so,  an entire industry was created to cover up the autism epidemic!

AN INDUSTRY WAS CREATED TO COVER UP THE AUTISM EPIDEMIC, STARTING WITH BOGUS STUDIES

To begin with, this industry focused on overwhelming academia and society with bogus studies. In fact, Since 2000, more than twenty scientific studies have concluded that there is no association between vaccines and autism. The most widely cited studies are: the Fombonne and Chakrabarti study (from 2001); Madsen et al. (2002; and 2003); Makela, Nuorti, and Peltola (also in 2002); Smeeth et al. (2004); Honda, Shimizu, and Rutter, (2005); Schechter and Grether (2008); and even Tozzi et al (2009) – and this is not even all of them. But the idea is to show that these were supposedly studies from varied authorities, covering a broad scope of research.

BUT… most of these are studies that claim no association between MMR or thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism, which is odd because the CDC’s own internal research shows that both of these types of vaccines do indeed cause autism. You find this in the statement from William Thompson and 2014, and the SafeMinds analysis of FOIA documents that were obtained from former CDC researcher turned GSK executive Thomas Verstraeten.

Doubling down on the blowing the whistle in bogus studies, Pediatrician Dr Joel “Gator” Warsh says the Science is NOT settled on vaccines and autism – despite the so-called research. He adds that when you go look at it, the research is literally just on MMR and thimerosal… but, you cannot make a claim about vaccines and autism when you have NOT studied all the vaccines in the first year together, and you haven’t studied vaccinated versus unvaccinated children. And before we view the video excerpt, I’d like to kindly ask that you pardon the alcohol analogy, and extrapolate the broader principle in the discussion, about the fallacious nature of how autism studies were conducted.

That said, there have also been studies that com[ared the state of health between fully vaccinated and unvaccinated children, including cases like the McDowell triplets. And so, there is a growing body of empirical evidence that not only disproves bogus studies claiming there is no causal link between autism and vaccines, but studies that also detail the actual causal link.

MEANWHILE, STUDIES ALREADY DISPROVED “GENES” AS THE LIKELY CAUSE FOR AUTISM

Perhaps one of the most aggravating discussions on the cause for autism is that on genetics (as we’ve discussed on previous occasions here on ‘The War Room’). And it is aggravating because in pretending to study the cause, big pharma and its collaborators went as far as to point the blame for autism on genetics – thus implicating parents as the potential originator of a gene that has caused their children a neurological challenge. Conveniently though, what is left out by vaccine manufacturers in this narrative is how the autism causing gene would have gotten to the parent in the first place – seeing that autism was not always part of the infirmities observed in society, in the same way cancer was not always part of the infirmities observed in society.

ANd o, you can imagine my excitement when I found that In 2011, a comprehensive study of twins and autism showed that autism is not primarily a genetic disorder… AND YET, this appears to have made no difference in the trajectory of the industry and perceptions on autism. In more detail, in the early 2000s, as the autism rate soared, political leaders in California wanted to better understand what was happening. So California contracted with sixteen of the best geneticists in the US and gave them access to all birth records in the state. They produced a study titled “Genetic heritability and shared environmental factors among twin pairs with autism” (and this study was conducted by Hallmayer et al., in 2011) and it is the most comprehensive study of twins and autism to date. They found that genetic heritability explains at most 38% of ASD cases; in two places they explain that this is likely an overestimate. So at least 62% of autism cases (and likely significantly more) are caused by something other than genes. HOWEVER, when this study came out, the search for the gene(s) as a cause for autism had already become a large and very profitable industry, and this study showing that autism is NOT primarily genetic was simply brushed aside!

HOW VACCINE MANUFACTURERS TRIED TO DEBUNK THE LINK BETWEEN AUTISM AND VACCINES

Now, flooding academia and society with bogus studies was not the only arrow in the big pharma propaganda quiver; ambitiously, they also corrupted medical literature through going after those researchers and medical practitioners who were frank about the links between autism and vaccines. And in a very famous case, in their efforts to “debunk” the causal link between the vaccines and autism, the pharmaceutical and vaccine enterprise claimed that the only reason people believe vaccines cause autism is because a disgraced British doctor, named Andrew Wakefield, published a fraudulent 1998 study claiming they did and then made everyone start hallucinating that vaccine injuries were occurring, Let’s talk about this.

In essence, whenever the subject of vaccination and autism is raised (particularly within medical circles), you will immediately be told (often in a condescending manner) some variant of a narrative on how Andrew Wakefield was a dishonest doctor who was bribed by lawyers to torture children and publish a fraudulent and deeply flawed study that falsely linked vaccines to autism. You’d also be told that his allegedly abhorrent actions deeply violated the profound trust that people place in scientists, and he even tricked people into believing vaccines cause autism. And so, even though his study has been totally discredited and he lost his medical license for the gross misconduct he committed, his fraudulent study cemented the lie that vaccines cause autism, and despite all the data that is published in modern medical literature, nothing can undo the profound damage that Wakefield did to science, which means the medical and pharmaceutical industries have legitimacy to prevent such an occurrence from being repeated. This is basically the ideal that vaccine manufacturers pedal in an effort to “debunk” the causal link between vaccines and autism.

Now, this narrative on Andrew Wakefeild touches on a key point concerning propaganda. One of the most common ways the corporate propaganda apparatus (known as the PR industry) persuades the public is by sculpting the narrative best suited for swaying public opinion and then blasting it on every media platform while any opposing viewpoint is forbidden from being aired. These lies then become entrenched and everyone starts to independently repeat them as though the idea were their own (we saw this during the COVID plandemic).

In the cause of the vaccine and autism issue, and since Wakefield’s study was published in 1998 (a year after pharmaceutical television advertising became permissible), the study was able to initially gain immense traction in the press (as the media had not yet been bought out). BUT… a few years later, when that pharmaceutical television advertising monopoly had established itself, Andew Wakefeild’s study was suddenly being debunked on every platform. In fact, during that time, Sharyl Attkinson, who was a popular journalist and national news anchor for CBS shared that in the early 2000s, the pharmaceutical industry, feeling the pressure negative coverage of disastrous vaccination programs was creating for them, lobbied to prevent future negative coverage, and after this happened, it became impossible for her to air well produced segments which were critical of any vaccine initiative. Recently she even shared how the CDC was co-opted in this, especially when they went as far as to re-define the word “vaccine” in order to legitimise the COVID jabs.

WHAT THE ANDREW WAKEFIELD SMEAR CAMPAIGN EXPOSES ABOUT PRO-VACCINE PROPAGANDA

Now, there are three critical points to infer from Andrew Wakefield’s experience of being labelled persona non grata after publishing a study that linked vaccines to autism. First, the smear campaign against Andrew Wakefeild was a means through which vaccine manufacturers cemented the lie that no one had ever thought to associate vaccination with brain injuries prior to Wakefield’s study (and hence that all subsequent associations were a product of Wakefield tricking them into seeing a connection that was not there). But, of course,  this is clearly not true because the reason Wakefield did the study was because he was approached by parents who already thought vaccines caused their child’s autism.

Furthermore, in early medical literature (prior to vaccine injuries becoming a taboo subject), many doctors over the decades had actually reported brain damage and characteristic neurological injuries (e.g., cranial nerve palsies) following vaccination that mirror what we see in vaccine-injured children in the present – and so, Andrew Wakefeild was not some petty non-conformist; he rather happened to discuss on autism as neurological injury, while his study made waves because it echoed the experiences of many parents. In fact, you’d recall this excerpt from the documentary titled ‘AUTISM (An orchestrated Crisis)’, which echoes those very concerns even in the present.

So, the second point to infer from the smear campaign against Andrew Wakefeild is that it was conducted to give a very clear warning to every academic journal and researcher to never consider publishing anything that was critical of vaccination (as otherwise they would be raked over the coals for decades by the entire media apparatus like Wakefield was). For a while, this worked as intended (e.g., many scientists have confided to public figures that they know that autism is linked to vaccination but cannot publicly study it) and since Wakefield’s study, virtually no studies have been conducted on vaccine injuries, and of those that were, none could ever be published in a (quote un quote) “reputable” journal.

Then, finally, and equally aggravatingly, the smear campaign against Anndrew Wakefield was also used to cement the lie that the allegedly few incorrect, or fallacious and “doctored” studies that get through are immediately removed, whereas in reality this is not at all true. For example, trial participants and clinical investigators for the HPV and COVID vaccines repeatedly provided proof that fraudulent data was published but the academic journals never even issued a correction of those studies. You’d recall we also discussed, here on ‘The War Room’ how there was fraud detected in Pfizer mRNA vaccine clinical trials studied, and we even looked at a whistleblower’s testimony of how she was fired for exposing this issue to the FDA, while the FDA did nothing to address it. But, here is Dr Andrew Wakefeild discussing how, even in the present and recent history, the CDC covered up evidence and destroyed documents proving that the MMR vaccine caused autism and put millions of children at risk of serious permanent neurological injury.

VACCINE-INDUCED NEUROLOGICAL INJURIES WERE LONG KNOWN TO BE PREVALENT

Now, the claim that Andrew Wakefeild published a fraudulent study that somehow made people start hallucinating that vaccine injuries were occurring ignored that brain injuries were a longstanding problem of vaccination! For example, a 1982 NBC news program revealed that many parents were having children develop “post-pertussis ence-phalo-pathy” after taking the DPT vaccine. But, for some reason, most doctors refused to report this, even though medical knowledge about severe reactions to the whooping cough vaccine went back as far as to the early 1930s, while report after report had been published in medical journals since then. For instance, in 1948, two American doctors reported on case histories of many children who had been brain damaged or died from DPT vaccines in Boston. The following year, another doctor surveyed pediatricians across the country and found still more. Well, those studies have progressively been less discussed, in a world where pharmaceutical companies captured the media, and as a result, this orchestrated a selective amnesia when it comes to the history of vaccines.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso