I am pleased to announce that a paper I authored with Jeet Varia, Ph.D., and Brian Hooker, Ph.D., of Children’s Health Defense (CHD) has been published as a preprint at Preprints.org. We will be submitting it to a peer-reviewed journal very shortly.
Our paper is titled “Hviid et al. 2019 Vaccine-Autism Study: Much Ado About Nothing?” and is freely downloadable. Here is the abstract:
Abstract
The controversy surrounding measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination and autism has been ongoing for over 30 years. It is rooted in the gaslit, parent-led, grassroots movements of the 1990s and was further fueled by a case-series clinical study in 1998 by Wakefield et al., which hypothesized a causal link between MMR vaccination, gut inflammation, and autism. This controversy cascaded through numerous observational studies and reports by the US Institute of Medicine (IoM), culminating in 2019 with a population-based observational study by Hviid et al. This study was hailed at the time by the US media and medical establishment as conclusive proof that the MMR vaccine does not increase the risk of autism, even among “genetically susceptible children”. However, as detailed in this critical review, Hviid et al. did not faithfully intend or interpret the data to test this hypothesis and, therefore, cannot possibly have falsified it. We elucidate methodological flaws, discrepancies, irreproducibility, and conflicts of interest for Hviid et al. We further conjecture that researchers who faithfully serve the status quo of a vaccine orthodoxy know how to design studies to produce the desired results. In addition, we further illustrate that the conclusion from Hviid et al. cannot be generalized to the CDC childhood vaccination schedule, salient features of which have remained oblivious to so many opinion leaders, regulators, mainstream media, and professional associations in the USA. Looking at the broader picture, in the post-COVID-19 era, stereotyping, social stigma, shunning, condescension, and polarization of parents who choose not to vaccinate their children have only been exacerbated and intensified. We would retort that health freedom, parental autonomy, and open, frank, and honest scientific debate, not consensus or censorship, are the only pathways to foster real advancements for true service to our children, families, and the wider society. On this basis, we would propose a moratorium on the stigmatization and dichotomization of the unvaccinated, the vaccine-injured, and vaccine critics, as well as an end to mandates for childhood vaccines for school entry.
Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., covered our paper for CHD’s The Defender in a piece titled “‘Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism’ Claim Built on ‘House of Cards,’ Authors of New Review Say“.
She quotes me expressing our hope that the paper “contributes to the paradigm shift necessary for serious discussion to finally be had in the mainstream discourse about the many legitimate concerns that parents have about childhood vaccinations.”
The article concludes with a quote from me saying, “It is past time for the medical establishment to start listening to the parents for a change and taking their legitimate concerns seriously instead of condescendingly dismissing any and all concerns about vaccination as unworthy of consideration.”
Read Burdick’s brief summary of our paper, and then please download and read the full paper for yourself to understand why the claim that studies have falsified the hypothesis that vaccines can contribute to the development of autism in children with a genetic or environmentally caused susceptibility is itself vaccine misinformation — or rather disinformation.
I also welcome your thoughts and feedback about our paper in the comments below!
Nobody paid me to put in the countless hours of research that went into this paper, for which I am the lead author, so if you appreciate the effort and would like to support my work, please consider donating to my current fundraiser here.
