Update: Some are struggling to grasp the point of this article. It’s not a discussion of the difficulty of proving a negative, it’s the fact the CDC lied for years about something they claimed they factually and scientifically knew, when they did not. Again, the CDC claimed the science was settled, when in reality there was no science. THAT’s the story.
This is truly a bombshell story when you understand the full implications of it, yet major media likely will not touch it. Headlines could read “In stunning lawsuit, CDC admits they have no evidence vaccines don’t cause autism” – but instead, crickets. Independent media organizations like CE are left to have to tell these stories, and at the same time risk more demonetization for telling the truth that the public should know. Of course, we also know that since independent media’s reach has been cut, getting stories like this out is very hard and relies on you, the dear reader, to spread the word.
As of March 2nd, 2020, the CDC has admitted in federal court documents that they do not have any evidence to support the claim that vaccines given to babies up to 6 months don’t cause autism. For years they claimed that the studies had been done, the evidence was clear, and that there was a consensus: “vaccines don’t cause autism.” Yet, this was a lie.
An organization called the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) was instrumental in bringing forth this admission. As they stated in their own press release:
In summer 2019, ICAN submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the CDC requesting “All studies relied upon by CDC to claim that the DTaP vaccine does not cause autism.” ICAN also submitted this same request for HepB, Hib, PCV13 and IPV, as well as requesting the CDC provide studies to support the cumulative exposure to these vaccines during the first six months of life do not cause autism. Despite months of demands, the CDC failed to produce a single specific study in response to these FOIA requests. ICAN was therefore forced to sue the CDC in federal court, where the CDC finally conceded, in a stipulation signed by a Federal court judge, that that it has no studies to support that any of these vaccines do not cause autism.
ICAN’s strategy was to focus on vaccines given within the first 6 months of a baby’s life as per the standard schedule as this is when autism can start to be diagnosed. It should further be reiterated that ICAN asked for studies to show that the cumulative exposure to these vaccines, i.e. how they react together in the body, does not lead to autism.
In short, the CDC provided a list of 20 studies that were to claim these vaccines did not cause autism, only, none of these studies proved that. Within the list of 20, the CDC provided 18 studies that had nothing to do with the vaccines ICAN was focusing on. This either means that the CDC does not have any studies, or they do not want to provide them. The other two studies were interesting. One was a review by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), which was paid for by the CDC. This study performed a comprehensive review of studies relating to the DTaP vaccine. It was looking to determine general adverse reactions to vaccines including whether or not vaccines do or do not cause autism. The IOM was unable to identify a single study to support that DTaP does not cause autism.
What this means is that the CDC does not have studies that show there is no link between these vaccines and autism, thus the CDC cannot make the claim that vaccines don’t cause autism. This, of course, doesn’t mean they are saying vaccines do cause autism.
The last of the remaining two studies focused on antigens found in vaccines. This is the bacteria or virus used in the vaccines. The question was if there is more virus or more bacteria, would it increase the risk of autism? The study concluded that it made no difference how much bacteria or virus was used. Further, in the conclusion of the study they admitted that the study doesn’t prove that vaccines don’t cause autism.
“It can be argued that ASD with regression, in which children usually lose developmental skills during the second year of life, could be related to exposure in infancy, inicluding vaccines; however, we found no association between exposure to antigens from vaccinees during infancy and the development of ASD withh regression.”
Ultimately, the CDC was asked to provide studies to prove that vaccines given with the first six months of life do not cause autism. They could not provide any, not one.
So how. does the CDC make this claim on their website as you can see in the image below?
They make that claim with no scientific backing and with no evidence. It’s simply a statement. Even if they have evidence that the MMR vaccine doesn’t cause autism, it doesn’t mean other vaccines don’t. For years, the CDC falsely claimed that “vaccines don’t cause autism.” In turn, those that questioned vaccines were called anti-vaxxers, unscientific and extreme about their views, yet were they wrong to claim that vaccines may cause autism? Were they wrong to question the safety of vaccines? Sure, this does not prove that vaccines do cause autism, but that’s not the point. The point is instead of doing the proper research and ensuring the public vaccines are safe, the CDC chose to lie and start a campaign of ridicule against those that questioned vaccines.
“We Don’t Know”
One could argue that if the CDC was being responsible and honest they would have said “we don’t know” when it comes to whether or not vaccines are linked to autism. This is in fact the correct response to the question “do vaccines cause autism?” This has been the correct response since many years ago when people began asking the question. Instead, the CDC elected to claim that the science shows vaccines don’t cause autism, which was unscientific and dishonest.
The detail that hits close to home for us here at CE is that fact-checkers have been handing out false claims about our vaccine content, stating that “vaccines don’t cause autism.” This has led to a reduction in our reach and the near-complete destruction of our business due to demonetization. Yet, where did these fact-checkers get their information from? The CDC? And now we know, the CDC never had the evidence to make the claims they made about all vaccines, and the fact-checkers were in fact wrong or truly misinformed. These false claims from the CDC have also effectively led to creating a culture of blind vaccine acceptance even though there is no evidence they are safe.
This leads to the challenge not many are realizing about fact-checking organizations like Snopes, or the ones that work on Facebook; what they do, is turn to major organizations and the government to get their ‘facts.’ And those facts overrule anything brought forth that challenges those ‘facts.’ So essentially fact-checkers are merely purveyors of facts produced by governments and major corporations. Some also happen to be paid by major corporations.
“The most recent data from CDC shows that 1 in 36 children born this year in the USA will develop autism,[…] This is a true epidemic. If the CDC had spent the same resources studying vaccines and autism, as it did waging a media campaign against parents that claim vaccines caused their child’s autism, the world would be a better place for everyone.”
The CDC complains that those raising concerns about vaccine safety are unscientific and misinformed,” […]“But when we asked the CDC for studies to support its claim that ‘vaccines do not cause autism,’ it is clear that their claim is not grounded in science.” – Del Bigtree, Founder of ICAN
One thing you will also notice is that fact-checkers never address the studies provided that do link vaccines to autism. Instead, only studies from experts they deem worthy are to be taken seriously. There is an abundance of science showing that vaccines could be linked to autism, in many different ways. Take aluminum for example, A study published in 2018 discovered high amounts of aluminum in the brain tissue of people with autism:
Human exposure to aluminium has been implicated in ASD with conclusions being equivocal , , , . To-date the majority of studies have used hair as their indicator of human exposure to aluminium while aluminium in blood and urine have also been used to a much more limited extent. Paediatric vaccines that include an aluminium adjuvant are an indirect measure of infant exposure to aluminium and their burgeoning use has been directly correlated with increasing prevalence of ASD . Animal models of ASD continue to support a connection with aluminium and to aluminium adjuvants used in human vaccinations in particular .
The fact that aluminum in adjuvant form does not exit the body as aluminum in our own food, for example, is one of multiple ways that scientists have shown how vaccines could be implicated in the onset of autism. You can read more about vaccines and aluminum specifically, here.
This is not the first time in history that major health organizations, scientists and doctors claimed that something was safe when it wasn’t. Look at cigarettes, agent orange, and DDT. These were just a few that became common knowledge after many people brought awareness forward about the dangers associated with these products. All the while, the companies who owned them, and their cronies fought to claim these people were unscientific, liars and wrong.
Are we seeing this now with vaccines? It sure seems to be following the same pattern. One thing I always look at is if major organizations cannot answer the simple question, and instead turn to ridicule, name-calling and media campaigns to cast doubt, then you know they are hiding something. In my feeling, the CDC knows full well the dangers of vaccines, and they are buying time to figure out how to keep themselves clean for when the cards fall. Because they will.
This, of course, is all part of a greater awakening that is taking place amongst humanity right now as we collectively move from a state of childhood into adulthood. Empowering ourselves as individuals, changing our relationship with the earth, each other, and ourselves. Shifting the way we idolize and put money above everything else. Of course, seeing past the deceptions of today is an early step in this evolution of consciousness. I outline all of this in my 4 part video series about these ongoing changes.