In 2002, well-known vaccinologist Paul Offit claimed there was no evidence that receiving “thousands” of vaccines could overwhelm or weaken a baby’s immune system.
I spent most of my working life in a high-risk technologically complex industry where things can go catastrophically wrong if not managed with common sense and a rational understanding of the facts. I am not a medical professional, but I do have a reasonable understanding of human physiology, anatomy & biochemistry. I am shocked and horrified at the fact that individuals with ideologies approaching that of a religious fervour such as this irrational obsession to vaccinate against everything could have risen to positions of such great power in health decision making. The practitioners of the medical profession need to wake up to themselves and vomit these people out of their industry before they do any more damage to human life and health.
I've seen this happen countless times in medicine. The initial idea is reasonable and practical—a small nudge to the immune system allows the memory of the foreign invader to endure. But decades later, the medical-industrial complex takes over, and before you know it, we are injecting all sorts of immune stimulants and toxicants into tiny babies without conducting adequate trials to assess the safety of combinations and co-administrations. It's insane. I'm actually not opposed to some childhood vaccinations, but this schedule is out of control. I mean, if Plotkin says so, then it cannot be too "controversial" can it?!
Maryanne, thank you for your insightful and thoroughly researched article. Your ability to tackle such a polarizing topic with clarity and balance is a testament to your reputation as a credible and respected journalist. I appreciate the depth of evidence you’ve presented, which opens the door to meaningful discussions about the current trajectory of childhood vaccination programs.
As someone who has long been skeptical about the over-reliance on pharmaceutical interventions, I am particularly struck by the parallels between the issues raised in your article and my own observations. The explosion of childhood vaccine schedules, especially in countries like the United States and Australia, seems to correlate alarmingly with a sharp rise in conditions like autism. In the 1970s, autism was a rare diagnosis, with rates estimated at around 1 in 10,000. Today, in Australia, it has surged to an astonishing 1 in 24. While correlation does not necessarily imply causation, this stark increase demands urgent, unbiased investigation.
Your mention of Hannah Poling’s case resonates deeply in this context. While it is often stated that vaccines do not cause autism, her case illustrates a more nuanced reality—that certain children with underlying vulnerabilities may be more susceptible to harm from multiple vaccines administered simultaneously. Given that these underlying conditions are not always apparent before vaccination, it raises the uncomfortable but critical question: how many children may unknowingly share such vulnerabilities?
The admission by figures like Stanley Plotkin that the vaccination schedule is “too crowded” reflects a long-overdue acknowledgment of the risks involved. While combination vaccines are being touted as the solution, it is disconcerting to see that safety studies often lack placebo controls or the long-term follow-up necessary to capture delayed or cumulative effects. Parents deserve transparency and rigorous science, particularly when the stakes involve their children’s health.
Additionally, the correlation between infant mortality rates and the number of vaccines required in developed nations further reinforces the need for a precautionary approach. If countries with lighter vaccination schedules, like Denmark, achieve similar or better health outcomes with significantly fewer doses, why is this not informing international policy?
Your reference to adverse events associated with combination vaccines, such as Infanrix-Hexa®, highlights another concern. It’s troubling that parents are often not made aware of the elevated risks when these vaccines are co-administered with others like Prevenar-13®. The growing body of evidence suggests that administering multiple vaccines in one visit can overwhelm a child’s developing immune system. This possibility aligns with concerns raised by Dr. Peter Gøtzsche about the long-term impact of adjuvants and antigen load, particularly in non-live vaccines.
The data you’ve shared underscores the need for a paradigm shift in how vaccine safety is evaluated and communicated. Current practices, driven largely by pharmaceutical interests, seem less concerned with long-term safety than with ensuring adherence to increasingly crowded schedules. Until independent, large-scale trials with extended follow-ups are conducted, the public will continue to question the true cost-benefit balance of such aggressive vaccination programs.
Maryanne, your work is invaluable in sparking these necessary conversations. As we grapple with the ethical and scientific complexities of childhood vaccination, your commitment to evidence-based reporting is a beacon of integrity. I urge you to continue exploring this issue, particularly the growing body of research suggesting a link between childhood vaccines and the rising rates of autism. We need courageous voices like yours to challenge entrenched dogmas and demand accountability from the institutions entrusted with safeguarding public health.
I am not an expert by any means, but just common sense tells me that it's highly doubtful these 'cocktail' injections like described above (diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough, polio, hepatitis B & Hib) have been tested at all, let alone, the ambiguous, "adequately" tested mantra.
Plus, from what I can read, all of the vaxx Pharma companies are rolling the dice on mRNA as a transport medium. And that's been tested and proved safe and effective, right?
In the US, it's hopeful RFKjr will bring in some common sense. I hope that could also include letting parents, people, chose for themselves which, if any, vaccines they will agree to.
That’s right, the hexavalent vaccine was never tested against a placebo - the TGA admits this in FOI - the regulators only request the new vaccine be tested against an existing vaccine, which masks safety signals.
It’s a hard decision for any parent. I remember my grandma born in 1892, showing me old photos … a line up of 6 children outside a London house - about 8 yr olds and she pointed 3 who died of diphtheria. That was pre vaccines
But then we have moved to move and more as global statistics of incidence and science improves in the world laboratories
As a young mother today I might be much more wary of over vaxing than in early 1980s when I made informed decisions
I think that's what all of this comes down to. Parents are being robbed of making informed decisions - there has been a widespread violation of informed consent.
Yes informed consent is being challenged with every private script for PAXLOVID c $1200 per course. These people are in standard risk popn as high risk get PBS access.
Does the prescribing doctor explain that contrary to the marketed info derived from EPIC-HR of 86% in rolling trial of 2000+
EPIC-LR was abandonned at 2000+ participants where only 51% efficacy failed to statistically better placebo. WHY the simple explanation is that in standard risk population natural immunity is higher so the persons enrolled and given placebo were more likely to recover from COVID and thus not meet statistical criteria v pax recipients.
So INFORMED CONSENT must include info that in standard risk ie healthy under 70s there is no evidence of that Paxlovid is effective.
Same with vaccines we need to judge the actual placebos characteristics in making informed consent about age group, health status breakdown and as noted placebo is not even used in baby vaccines merely the ever decreasing mathematical equivalence
I think I would be very hesitant these days. In the 80’s we trusted doctors and just did what everyone said to do. But now if I was asked I would not mother. Three out of four of my children had learning difficulties with ADHD.
I do value your writing, Maryam. Vaccination has become such a complicated problem and the regulatory bodies, governments and health professionals have made it all so messy with big Pharma calling the shots. Doctors are so compromised by their connections to big Pharma. It really is time for a halt and more information from health professionals. Childhood vaccines have been around long enough for sone more rational thought on the issue.
I spent most of my working life in a high-risk technologically complex industry where things can go catastrophically wrong if not managed with common sense and a rational understanding of the facts. I am not a medical professional, but I do have a reasonable understanding of human physiology, anatomy & biochemistry. I am shocked and horrified at the fact that individuals with ideologies approaching that of a religious fervour such as this irrational obsession to vaccinate against everything could have risen to positions of such great power in health decision making. The practitioners of the medical profession need to wake up to themselves and vomit these people out of their industry before they do any more damage to human life and health.
I've seen this happen countless times in medicine. The initial idea is reasonable and practical—a small nudge to the immune system allows the memory of the foreign invader to endure. But decades later, the medical-industrial complex takes over, and before you know it, we are injecting all sorts of immune stimulants and toxicants into tiny babies without conducting adequate trials to assess the safety of combinations and co-administrations. It's insane. I'm actually not opposed to some childhood vaccinations, but this schedule is out of control. I mean, if Plotkin says so, then it cannot be too "controversial" can it?!
FFS, won't these a*holes ever give up. Hopefully RFK Jr will force them to prove safety.
Maryanne, thank you for your insightful and thoroughly researched article. Your ability to tackle such a polarizing topic with clarity and balance is a testament to your reputation as a credible and respected journalist. I appreciate the depth of evidence you’ve presented, which opens the door to meaningful discussions about the current trajectory of childhood vaccination programs.
As someone who has long been skeptical about the over-reliance on pharmaceutical interventions, I am particularly struck by the parallels between the issues raised in your article and my own observations. The explosion of childhood vaccine schedules, especially in countries like the United States and Australia, seems to correlate alarmingly with a sharp rise in conditions like autism. In the 1970s, autism was a rare diagnosis, with rates estimated at around 1 in 10,000. Today, in Australia, it has surged to an astonishing 1 in 24. While correlation does not necessarily imply causation, this stark increase demands urgent, unbiased investigation.
Your mention of Hannah Poling’s case resonates deeply in this context. While it is often stated that vaccines do not cause autism, her case illustrates a more nuanced reality—that certain children with underlying vulnerabilities may be more susceptible to harm from multiple vaccines administered simultaneously. Given that these underlying conditions are not always apparent before vaccination, it raises the uncomfortable but critical question: how many children may unknowingly share such vulnerabilities?
The admission by figures like Stanley Plotkin that the vaccination schedule is “too crowded” reflects a long-overdue acknowledgment of the risks involved. While combination vaccines are being touted as the solution, it is disconcerting to see that safety studies often lack placebo controls or the long-term follow-up necessary to capture delayed or cumulative effects. Parents deserve transparency and rigorous science, particularly when the stakes involve their children’s health.
Additionally, the correlation between infant mortality rates and the number of vaccines required in developed nations further reinforces the need for a precautionary approach. If countries with lighter vaccination schedules, like Denmark, achieve similar or better health outcomes with significantly fewer doses, why is this not informing international policy?
Your reference to adverse events associated with combination vaccines, such as Infanrix-Hexa®, highlights another concern. It’s troubling that parents are often not made aware of the elevated risks when these vaccines are co-administered with others like Prevenar-13®. The growing body of evidence suggests that administering multiple vaccines in one visit can overwhelm a child’s developing immune system. This possibility aligns with concerns raised by Dr. Peter Gøtzsche about the long-term impact of adjuvants and antigen load, particularly in non-live vaccines.
The data you’ve shared underscores the need for a paradigm shift in how vaccine safety is evaluated and communicated. Current practices, driven largely by pharmaceutical interests, seem less concerned with long-term safety than with ensuring adherence to increasingly crowded schedules. Until independent, large-scale trials with extended follow-ups are conducted, the public will continue to question the true cost-benefit balance of such aggressive vaccination programs.
Maryanne, your work is invaluable in sparking these necessary conversations. As we grapple with the ethical and scientific complexities of childhood vaccination, your commitment to evidence-based reporting is a beacon of integrity. I urge you to continue exploring this issue, particularly the growing body of research suggesting a link between childhood vaccines and the rising rates of autism. We need courageous voices like yours to challenge entrenched dogmas and demand accountability from the institutions entrusted with safeguarding public health.
Excellent observations Gaz, I share your curiosity on these issues. I will keep exploring and I greatly appreciate your support. 🙏🙌
A very important article. Obviously concurrently administering a large number of vaccines into a tiny baby will overwhelm the immune system.
Well, it's not that obvious to Offit....he reckons a baby could take 10,000 at a time. lol!
Perhaps the good doctor should try giving himself 10,000 in one hit and then let him get back to us all.
Excellent idea
I am not an expert by any means, but just common sense tells me that it's highly doubtful these 'cocktail' injections like described above (diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough, polio, hepatitis B & Hib) have been tested at all, let alone, the ambiguous, "adequately" tested mantra.
Plus, from what I can read, all of the vaxx Pharma companies are rolling the dice on mRNA as a transport medium. And that's been tested and proved safe and effective, right?
In the US, it's hopeful RFKjr will bring in some common sense. I hope that could also include letting parents, people, chose for themselves which, if any, vaccines they will agree to.
That’s right, the hexavalent vaccine was never tested against a placebo - the TGA admits this in FOI - the regulators only request the new vaccine be tested against an existing vaccine, which masks safety signals.
Top Notch graphics in all your stories DocM ! They really contextualise the message. You are such a wonderful storyteller.
Well, I wish I could take credit, but I steal them off the likes of Aaron Siri and others 🙄…. Some get circulated on X and the authorship is lost.
It’s a hard decision for any parent. I remember my grandma born in 1892, showing me old photos … a line up of 6 children outside a London house - about 8 yr olds and she pointed 3 who died of diphtheria. That was pre vaccines
But then we have moved to move and more as global statistics of incidence and science improves in the world laboratories
As a young mother today I might be much more wary of over vaxing than in early 1980s when I made informed decisions
I think that's what all of this comes down to. Parents are being robbed of making informed decisions - there has been a widespread violation of informed consent.
Yes informed consent is being challenged with every private script for PAXLOVID c $1200 per course. These people are in standard risk popn as high risk get PBS access.
Does the prescribing doctor explain that contrary to the marketed info derived from EPIC-HR of 86% in rolling trial of 2000+
EPIC-LR was abandonned at 2000+ participants where only 51% efficacy failed to statistically better placebo. WHY the simple explanation is that in standard risk population natural immunity is higher so the persons enrolled and given placebo were more likely to recover from COVID and thus not meet statistical criteria v pax recipients.
So INFORMED CONSENT must include info that in standard risk ie healthy under 70s there is no evidence of that Paxlovid is effective.
Same with vaccines we need to judge the actual placebos characteristics in making informed consent about age group, health status breakdown and as noted placebo is not even used in baby vaccines merely the ever decreasing mathematical equivalence
I think I would be very hesitant these days. In the 80’s we trusted doctors and just did what everyone said to do. But now if I was asked I would not mother. Three out of four of my children had learning difficulties with ADHD.
Diphtheria deaths dropped long before the vaccine came along. Thank better santitation, nutrition, and living conditions.
I do value your writing, Maryam. Vaccination has become such a complicated problem and the regulatory bodies, governments and health professionals have made it all so messy with big Pharma calling the shots. Doctors are so compromised by their connections to big Pharma. It really is time for a halt and more information from health professionals. Childhood vaccines have been around long enough for sone more rational thought on the issue.