You're most welcome to this talk. Now,
this is not medical advice. Never start
anything or stop anything or take any
medications or vaccines or not take them
based on what we say on this channel.
This is for educational purposes only.
But it is pretty mind-blowing stuff.
We're going to be looking at this paper
here, impact of childhood vaccinations
on short and longterm
health outcomes in children, a birth
cohort study. The full PDF is freely
available.
Now, um I would now tell you where this
paper is published, but this paper is
not published, but it was submitted to
the Senate hearing as uh evidence. This
is the hearing here.
Uh and you can listen to the whole thing
at at your leisure. It's all uh it's all
on that link there that I've posted. Now
um let's get straight on to the results
and see if you want to listen to this
video. This is the study here. How how
this is the title of the hearings. How
the corruption of science has impacted
public perceptions and policy regarding
policies regarding vaccines. Now there's
no question in my mind that there's
corruption in science. So I would agree
with the the heading here. Uh after
multivariate analysis. Now this is not
co vaccines. This is just any childhood
vaccination. After multivariate
adjustment, 57% of vaccinated children
develops at least one chronic health
condition. So the kids that were
vaccinated, 57% at least one chronic
health condition. In the unvaccinated
group, it was 17% developed a chronic
health condition. So we see according to
this paper
way more chronic health conditions
developing in vaccinated versus
unvaccinated children.
That's why I was so careful to say don't
do or not do anything based on this
video. It's purely for academic
purposes. But the results are really
quite staggering. Let let me give you
some more. uh exposure to vaccine was
independently associated with an
increased risk of developing a chronic
health condition. The hazard ratio 2.53.
In other words, basically two and a half
times more likely. And the researchers
were 95% certain that the actual result
was between 2.16
and 2.96. So they said 2.53, which seems
well, it is in the middle, isn't it? So
there you go. Um this is chronic health
conditions. Now of course this is
telling us nothing about how these
vaccines protect against the particular
infection that they are giving the
vaccine against. It tells us nothing
about that. It's purely telling us that
this vaccinated co cohort according to
this unpublished study but submitted to
the Senate um that they they get more
long-term conditions.
Um strange this has not been published
yet. I believe I believe this came out
in 2020. The results came out in 2020. I
only heard about it yesterday when I was
actually talking to Jimmy Dor about
this. I hadn't hadn't heard about it.
Unless you're following the US Senate
hearings quite closely, you would you
would probably miss this. Now, um
exposure to vaccination.
Um overall the development of a chronic
health condition occurred more often in
the group exposed to uh exposed to
vaccines versus unexposed to vaccines.
And the probability of this result
arising by chance is one in 10,000.
So um very unlikely this arose by
chance.
Um and so so there we are. Um this is
this is the risk ratio 2.48
for a more likely in the exposed group
that's the vaccinated group than in the
unvaccinated group. Um more to come I'm
afraid
this is the uh looking at independent uh
independently association with an
increased risk of in other words after
the vaccine compared to the unvaccinated
group uh they were uh 4.2 two five four
and a quarter times more likely to get
be diagnosed with asthma
in the 10-year follow-up. Again,
confidence limits 95% sure was between
3.25 and 5.95.
So, over four times more likely to be
diagnosed with asthma if the in the
vaccination group. Autoimmune disease uh
nearly five times more likely to be
diagnosed.
Uh pretty wide distribution there of uh
confidence.
Autotopic disease that's basically
likely to get allergist to various
things. Uh three times more likely to
get it. Hazard ratio three. Eczema 1.3.
I mean if you like you could call that
like 303% more likely or you could call
that 479% more likely. It's just
different ways of expressing the same
thing. neurodedevelopmental disorder in
the vaccinated group uh 53
times more likely to to get it. That
included mental health neur
developmental disorders including
developmental delay and speech
disorders. Ear infections over six six
and a half more than six and a half
times more likely to get ear infections.
Chronic ear infections over five and a
half times more likely to get those.
Anaphylactic reaction nearly nine times
more likely to get those. Asthma attacks
and bronos spasm 6.3
times more likely. That's that's the
risk ratio, but it's it's basically the
same slightly different calculation. Uh
and there were no chronic health
conditions associated with uh an
increased risk in the unexposed group.
So in all cases what this is saying in
all cases the exposed group that is the
vaccinated group were more likely to be
diagnosed with these long-term health
conditions during a follow a 10-year
follow-up.
Um this exposes a huge limitations of
course in most studies that are done on
this where the follow-up is 30 days
which of course is laughable. you're not
going to develop very unlikely to
develop a chronic health condition in 30
days. But in 10 years, of course, as
we've seen, chances are much much
higher.
Um, statistical comparison could not be
conducted for certain conditions such as
diabetes and attention deficit
hyperactivity disorder because there
were no cases in the unexposed group.
So, the unexposed group didn't get any
cases of diabetes or ADHD.
Um, so they didn't feel they could do a
comparison.
10-year follow-up, the overall
probability of being free from a chronic
health condition at 10 years followup.
So 43% in the group exposed to a
vaccine,
83% in the unexposed group. Just show
you a graphic of this actually that
might make a bit more sense. So um,
basically here we have the uh the group
that weren't vaccinated.
So this is this is um 10-year chronic
disease free survival. So these are
patients that are free of chronic
diseases. So we see in the nonvaccinated
group a much higher percentage were free
of chronic diseases whereas in the
vaccinated group a much higher
proportion got a chronic disease. And we
can see that the difference gets greater
with time.
Makes you wonder what it would be like
in a 15-year follow-up. But that's the
10-year follow-up. As the distance the
difference between the two groups gets
greater with time, again, meaning the
30-day follow-up that these vaccine
trials normally give is is ridiculous.
Totally uh ridiculous.
So, the probability of being free of a
chronic disease, 43% in the exposed
group, uh 83% in the unexposed group.
And of course you want to be of have
have high a probability as as possible
of not developing a chronic disease. And
again chance one in 10,000
but that arose by chance.
Uh so basically that result is
phenomenally unlikely to arise by
chance. Few more links there to YouTube
videos about this. Now where did this
paper come from? Well uh this is the
site here committee on homeland security
and government affairs. Now, it's a PDF,
so it hasn't actually got a a link, but
um if you if you just search Henry Ford
vaccine study, you'll get it. And you
can download like me, you can download
the PDF because it was entered into the
records uh of the hearings.
So, get the full PDF for yourself. Uh
and it's it's it's actually a very
intelligible paper, I must say. Um very
intelligible. Um, I'll just show you
again. It's, uh, here.
Um, pretty easy to read, pretty
straightforward. There's the abstract.
Um,
with some of the basic figures in it,
and it goes on to explain a lot of the
detail. Over the past 30 years, the
prevalence of chronic health conditions
in children has increased. According to
a 2011 study, approximately 43% of
children in the United States, 32
million have at least one of the 20
chronic health conditions assessed in
the study. Despite this, there is a posy
of published data determine contributing
factors.
It's basically a it's like a
epidemic, isn't it, of chronic disease
in kids. Where is the curiosity
about this?
So overall
increased risk in the vaccinated group
um and for those specific conditions uh
clear increase in risk according to this
data. So this is the study object of the
study to compare the short and long-term
health outcomes with a captured payer
environment. basically it's everyone in
the Michigan Henry Ford uh insurance
scheme. Um but that's good because it
means they can follow them up of
children exposed to one or more vaccines
compared to those unexposed.
So, integrated health care systems in
Michigan, the Henry Ford system, which I
believe is the biggest or the second
biggest provider in Michigan,
uh 18,000
18,468
children were recruited born between the
year 2000 and the year 2016.
Um, yeah, they're all enrolled in the
health insurance plan, Henry Ford plan
in Michigan. main outcomes development
of a chronic health condition over time
as we've seen much higher in the
vaccinated group sadly. Um the results
um so they had 18,468
consecutive subjects. Uh 1,957
had no exposure to vaccines.
Uh but the group that were exposed to
vaccines of course was much higher
16,115. Of course, the statistics take
this fully into account and that is a
big enough number to get these good
statistics as we've seen uh very low p
values meaning the results were
incredibly unlikely to have arisen by
chance. So it's a fairly big number
study this um yeah quite quite quite
large numbers in exposed subjects the
medium number of vaccines was 18
and and of course this is 2020 um I
believe the schedules in the states now
giving even more vaccines than that um
which some people are concerned about
um
and remember this this is not co
vaccines this is just childhood
vaccinations
so um interquartile range. The middle
50% have between 2 and 28 vaccines.
Heck, so that means the upper quartile
had more than 28. Um anyway, the the the
uh median number was 18. Conclusion,
this study found that exposure to
vaccination was independently associated
with an overall 2.5fold increased risk
in the likelihood of developing a
chronic health condition.
when exposed when compared to children
uh unexposed to vaccination. The authors
say this suggests that in certain
children exposure to vaccination may
increase the likelihood of developing a
chronic health condition particularly
for one of the conditions mentioned.
Now as I said this study is not
published. Um there seems to be a a
reluctance to publish it for some
reason. And I have no idea why that
might be. You might have some ideas on
that. Let me know what you think. Um,
but it's now in the public domain
as a submission to Senate, which is why
I feel free to talk about it. And and
the video there's hours hours of video
on it as well. So obviously uh this
study's been what's the expression?
Fact checked.
And uh the fact checkers don't like it.
So, is this study flawed?
Um,
lots of things are poo pooing this study
saying it's the
it's a load of rubbish. Um,
so
this likely demonstrates that when a
child has a medical condition, parents
sought health care. So the main
counterargument seems to be that in the
children that were vaccinated, they went
to health care providers more often for
longer, therefore were more likely to be
diagnosed of a condition. But believe
me, if your child's got diabetes, you're
going to seek health care advice. If
your child's got asthma, you're going to
seek healthare advice because if you
don't, they're going to die. And
parents, of course, are going to take
them to to health care providers. So
that that's quite a good argument
against the idea that the vaccinated
ones were their diseases were detected
more because these are diseases that
require medical diagnosis and medical
treatment otherwise the children very
often would simply die. They would not
be with us anymore. Uh in fact many
conditions evaluated in this study are
serious and cannot be self treated. Yeah
that's what this is this is directly
from the authors such as asthma,
diabetes, anaphilaxis or asthma attacks.
I mean, heck, you know, you can die from
asthma attacks, no problem at all. It's
a life-threatening emergency or can be
warning warranting urgent medical care.
We nonetheless conducted several
sensitivity analyses to explore the
influence of healthcare utilization, in
other words, how likely you were to go
to healthare in order to improve the
internal validity of this study and
minimize the potential of ascertainment
bias. So was it that in the vaccinated
group that they were ascertained as
having more medical conditions?
According to the researchers not Cox
proximity hazard analysis which is
statistical tool that they used in this
the association between vaccine and
development of a chronic health
condition was independent of these
factors. Therefore our findings do not
appear to be due to uh differential use
of healthcare resources. So that if true
would undermine uh the factchecking
arguments factchecking arguments that
that I've read. Um this pub study needs
to be published and opened up to global
peer review and needs to be repeated in
other cases. The authors do say as far
as they're aware this is the only study
where there's been complete
um an evaluation between those
vaccinated and those not vaccinated at
all.
That would seem obvious to me and I sus
suspect obvious to you, but apparently
it wasn't done until this study came
along. As I say, this tells you nothing
about how they're protected from
specific diseases.
So, what we have here is a risk benefit
analysis being protected
from some specific diseases versus
developing a chronic condition. And of
course if you develop asthma or diabetes
or autoimmune disease you could have
that for life.
So this needs to be done fairly
urgently. Uh as I say do not take any
vaccines based on what I say. Do not not
take any vaccines based on what I say.
This is purely for academic educ
educational purposes. But it is rather
interesting isn't it? Let's get it
published. Let's get it peer reviewed.
Let's get replication studies done and
then we'll know more than we know now.
Primmaacia
uh interpretation of this study
is a great concern and questions really
quite fundamentally
um a lot of things that are accepted as
healthcare axioms but maybe it's good to
ask the fundamental questions.
Yeah, that's free to ask questions, but
uh let's be very slow to to act on them
until we know exactly what we're talking
about.
So, there you go. Purely academic video.
Bless you and thank you for watching.