What are the health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children?
Which group fares better?
For years parents, children’s health advocates, and vaccine safety activists have been asking the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to answer this question. They’ve literally been begging the CDC, in person, in tweets (#DoTheStudy), on television, and in the newspapers, to study health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
But for just as many years the CDC has turned a blind eye. When pressed, CDC scientists insist that studying the health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children would be “unethical.”
Their argument has long been that vaccines are so categorically good for children—and for public health in general—that a study that divided some children into a non-vaccinating group would jeopardize America’s health.
Health advocates have countered this argument with a simple fact: the current vaccination schedule has now caused so much damage for so many families, like this one, this one, and this one, that there are now hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of parents who are choosing to forgo some or all vaccines with younger children.
These families have the full support of their doctors, like this one, this one, this one, this one, this one, this one, this one, this one, and all of these, as well as these. So there’s actually nothing “unethical” about analyzing the health outcomes of unvaccinated children.
Many scientists inside the CDC itself, like these two, and this one, suspect or even know definitively that our current over-bloated childhood vaccine schedule is causing health problems, including brain damage and immune damage, including Guillain-Barré syndrome, type 1 juvenile diabetes, and lupus, for some children. Despite the fact that we know that over-vaccination can cause damage but we don’t yet know how to identify the children most susceptible to suffering from adverse events in the days or months following vaccination, the CDC continues to refuse to fund a study of a statistically significant number of participants to compare health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
Every person in America should want this study done. Especially those in the vaccines-are-all-good-for-all-children camp.
In fact, those advocating for the current CDC childhood vaccine schedule should be the most vocal about getting research done comparing health outcomes of a large cohort of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children as soon as possible.
After all, if they are correct that our current schedule is more beneficial than harmful, a study of health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children would prove definitively, once and for all, that over-vaccination is not causing health problems. Right?
I need to pause for a moment and point out the obvious: This is not about being pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine. Those labels are short-sighted and misleading. Whether you vaccinate your children according to the current CDC schedule, choose to follow a more relaxed and gentler vaccine schedule, or do no vaccines, we are all on the same side: pro-kid, pro-health, and pro-vaccine safety.
Which brings me, finally, to this new study conducted by Brian Hooker, Ph.D., of Simpson University and Neil Z. Miller, an independent researcher and author of Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers.
This new study, published in the peer-reviewed science journal, SAGE Open Medicine, did not get any funding from the CDC. It compares the health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
Analysis of health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children: Developmental delays, asthma, ear infections and gastrointestinal disorders
In it, the researchers point out that the number of vaccines given to infants and small children in America has increased significantly since the early 1990s, when a birth dose and infant series of hepatitis B and an infant series of Haemophilus influenzae type B vaccines were added to the recommended schedule. Most older adults don’t realize that children born in the United States today receive over four times the number of vaccines that children born in the 1970s received. This includes a recommendation for pregnant women to get one to two flu shots, as well as a vaccine against pertussis, diphtheria, and tetanus. American children today receive vaccines for the following diseases, all during the first two years of life:
Hepatitis A and B
Haemophilus influenzae type B
Using data from three medical practices, the researchers analyzed the health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children born between November 2005 and June 2015.
Specifically, they were looking at incidence of:
- Developmental delays
- Ear infections
- Gastrointestinal disorders
This was a small study, based on the medical records of 2,047 children, of which 31 percent had received no vaccines by age one, and 69 percent had received at least one vaccine.
In their analysis of health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children, the researchers found that vaccination before age 1 was associated with an increased risk of developmental delays, asthma, and ear infections but not with gastrointestinal disorders.
This research dovetails with other data suggesting that the more a child is vaccinated the worse his health outcomes are likely to be. Children’s Health Defense, a nonprofit dedicated to children’s health, has found nearly 60 studies that corroborate this research.
Paul Thomas, M.D., my colleague, co-author, and friend, has clinical data from his practice that also highlights the poorer health outcomes of over-vaccinated children. Dr. Thomas shared this data in a letter he wrote responding to a biased, unfavorable, and inaccurate article published about him in Portland’s Willamette Weekly:
What if that information would stand in stark contrast to the accepted paradigm, and be so unbelievable it would almost certainly be rejected at face value?
This is the dilemma I faced, which led me to accept an interview with Willamette Week.
Unfortunately, here is the data I presented they chose not to publish:
Of the 3,345 patients born into Integrative Pediatrics since June 2008, the autism rates are as follows:
Out of 715 unvaccinated children, just one was diagnosed with autism.
Out of 2,629 Vaccine-Friendly Plan (alternative schedule), just six were diagnosed.
Compare these rates to the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention vaccine schedule rate of 1 in 45 children being diagnosed with autism.
The above data was obtained by an independent pediatrician, neonatologist, and informatics expert, commissioned to pull the data, at the request of those wanting to know the outcomes for my practice.
Now you know why I want everyone to know about this. What should our response be to information like this? I suggest we all demand studies that compare the nonvaccinated and the partially vaccinated to those fully vaccinated according to the CDC schedule.”
America’s current public health policies are failing
At least 54 percent of America’s children are suffering from chronic health problems.
The average American child receives 17 rounds of antibiotics by age 20.
At least 1 in 54 children has autism, according to the CDC.
Over-vaccination, over-use of antibiotics, and over-exposure to neurotoxins like glyphosate, aluminum, and even acetaminophen (the main ingredient in children’s Tylenol) are all undoubtedly playing a role in the current health crisis among America’s children.
Lyn Redwood, R.N., a vaccine safety advocate, has testified in front of Congress and met with government officials at the CDC and the FDA about this issue. “This is critical research but it’s not enough. We need larger-scale studies, and we need to dig deeper. We need to have access to larger databases,” Redwood, who is president of Children’s Health Defense, insists.
The problem, she continues, is that researchers who want to do this type of work lose their funding and get attacked.
“Clinicians everywhere are seeing bad outcomes with their own patients. The kids who are vaccinated are not as healthy. It’s really sad. But people are starting to wake up. They’re seeing with their own eyes that the children who do not follow the CDC vaccine schedule are healthier. They’re not on antibiotics. They don’t have epi-pens. They can eat foods without going into anaphylactic shock. They have far fewer ear infections.”
Rick Kirschner, N.D., President of the Naturopathic Medicine Institute, says we need more well designed placebo-controlled vaccine safety studies. “This study is a drop of necessary interest in what should be a surging ocean of interest in vaccine safety,” Kirschner tells me. “The failure to prioritize the safety of the vaccine schedule is a dark mark against a greedy industry with far too much control. It’s time for government bodies to show a much greater interest in vaccine safety.”
Yes, we need larger-scale studies. But in the meantime, we also need to make judicious and evidence-based changes to the current vaccine recommendations.
Until we have a vaccine schedule that puts necessity, safety, and efficacy first, it is a reasonable choice for new parents to forgo some or all infant vaccines.