All Episodes
Previous
Aug. 20, 2025 - The David Knight Show
27:34
Vaccine-Autism Study Exposed as Fraud
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
There's been some new interesting information about the link between the MMR vaccine and autism.
It turns out, and Children's Health Defense has a story, it turns out that some of their scientists have looked at this, and they've produced their own paper in response to the gold standard that has been sold by the medical community and the mainstream media since 2002.
Supposedly, this 2002 study debunked any link between autism and vaccines and now these people have looked at this study coming again from the New England Journal of Medicine the usual suspects you can usually count on this kind of garbage coming from them they said the question of vaccines and autism desperately needs to be put back on the table this is a peer-reviewed research letter by a children's health defense scientist calls into
question a 2002 study at the New England Journal of Medicine that officials always use as their strong evidence of no link between the MMR vaccine and autism.
A decades old study, however, does not support rejecting the causal link between the measles, mumps, rubella vaccine.
They say in the new stuff, they said it's simply math.
And they did the scientific study wrong.
It was done by the usual people.
I said, when you look at these studies, any of these studies, the first question you should have is, Quibono, who benefits from this, right?
And of course, when it's coming out of the New England Journal of Medicine, you know that it's the pharmaceutical industry and the medical communities that are behind this.
The pediatricians are pushing this.
The AMA is pushing this.
And they are embedded with the.
pharmaceutical companies.
Javalonsky and Hooker called for the study to be replicated after correcting for errors.
They said there's problems with measurements of certainty, contradictions in numbers presented in the study's table, and a flaw in the method used to determine risk.
I wonder if this thing was done by Peter Navarro.
It sounds like his tariffs.
They said a landmark publication in one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world whose erroneous conclusions have reverberated through news outlets and doctors' offices alike.
like for the last 23 years is shown to be invalid by the most basic form of arithmetic.
Do they get anything right about this study is more of the question.
I would like to see them go back and revisit the Framingham study, which I've had the doctor that did the surgery lecture me on that many times to say, it proves that you need to have statins.
And it's like, I'm somewhat skeptical of that, which makes me wonder if this is being used so much by the medical community.
Who funded it and to what purpose?
The problem is not that we were sold $69 billion a year in vaccines based on faulty analyses that riddled our children with toxins, left them in chronic and debilitating disease state, if not death.
The problem is that we bought it.
The New England Journal of Medicine paper by Madsen and others is one of the key studies cited by vaccine advocates to say that it is a myth that there is a link between these vaccines and autism.
They did this 23 years ago.
They said there was a lot of mounting evidence showing a link.
And of course, if you just looked at the explosion of autism at that point in time, you knew something was happening.
But again, the report from, you know, the reply, I should say, from the mainstream media is, don't look at this.
You know, they get very upset if anybody talks about doing a study.
It's like, what do you have to hide?
And, you know, well, it's all been done.
The science is settled, blah, blah, blah.
Well, if it's scientific, then you should be able to replicate that.
And you shouldn't have a concern about somebody doing another look at that.
They analyzed, you know, this settled science came from the same group that did the computer model for COVID that showed it going up forever and didn't give the same output twice.
Well, that was the Imperial College of London, but New England Journal of Medicine is just as bad as they are.
They said they looked at 537,000 children in the Danish healthcare system.
They separated them into vaccinated and unvaccinated groups.
The problem was that they didn't normalize this.
They said when they looked at it, they said the risk of autism was the same in both groups.
There was no association with a child's age at the time of vaccination or the time since vaccination or the date of vaccination and the development of autism.
But this study has become a cornerstone publication to say that there is no connection to autism.
But the two people, two scientists from Children's Health Defense said that the study results as presented show that the authors are ninety five percent confident that the recipients of the MMR vaccine are anywhere from forty seven percent less likely to get autism to twenty four percent more likely to be harmed by the autistic disorder.
Think about that.
Okay, they're nearly one hundred percent confident that they don't have a conclusion here because if you can go anywhere from forty seven percent less likely to twenty four percent more likely to have autism, that is so wide that you can't have any confidence in this study.
Yeah, that's quite a swing.
Imagine somebody comes and says, I've got a great investment for you.
Now, you might be 47% likely to make double your money, or maybe you're 24% likely to lose it all.
I'm not exactly sure.
I don't know how we're doing this, but Yeah, they've got confidence that they don't really have a conclusion here.
So.
It doesn't even make sense.
Yeah, they said, this is strong evidence of a need for more evidence.
So, problems with how the study was conducted, they said.
They had also a statistical adjustment.
They used this to correct data to account for biases, confounding factors on limitations in the data.
The authors didn't share their detailed model for the kind of statistical adjustment that they did, which would have been appropriate given that the adjustment changed the safety signal to its opposite.
It changed it from leaning toward harm to leaning toward protection.
So all they do is they come in and wave their hands and say, well, when we initially did this, it looked like it was causing autism, but then we applied a statistical correction, and now it shows that it doesn't.
Well, once I massaged the data.
Yeah, exactly.
It made it, so it didn't.
They said the study's authors are confused about the size of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated cohorts.
The number of vaccinated versus unvaccinated individuals with autistic disorder and other autism spectrum disorders varies between these tables.
For example, reanalyzing unadjusted data from one of their tables indicated with a 90% confidence that children who received the MMR vaccine had an 18% greater incident of autistic disorder or other autism spectrum disorders.
They said the original Madsen paper is foundational to the pharmaceutical industry canard that quote.
vaccines don't cause autism.
However, the numbers literally don't add up.
And you can see how they're massaging the data and they don't tell you the factors that they've applied here.
They just give you the end conclusion.
There's no science in this.
And folks, this is the whole reason.
This is when you look at what they do with the quote unquote science of virology about the existence of viruses.
They never do real science on any of these viruses.
They've not isolated them.
They have not isolated something and then exposed a population to it and see the disease develop.
That's never, never been done.
Many doctors are saying we no longer believe that in any of this virology stuff.
The study was also done at the beginning of an explosion in autism rates when fewer vaccines were recommended to children and when there were fewer other possible toxic exposures as well.
And so there's yet another lawsuit that's been filed against RFK Jr.'s CDC over the failure to test cumulative effect of a seventy two dose childhood vaccine schedule.
Think about that.
It's six dozen vaccines.
And what they're saying is you have barely, if you have at all, tested the individual vaccine.
But you've never even attempted to test for safety the combined effect of these 72.
And so there's a lawsuit there saying the agency has not done its job.
And of course, the CDC is under HHS.
It's directly under Susan Mares.
You remember her, she was put in, first they brought in somebody who was not so friendly to vaccines and the industry was not happy with that.
And he was told by the Trump administration when he was on his way to the hearing, don't bother to show up.
We've withdrawn your name.
And they put in in his place Susan Monarez who has.
has been put there from working for BARDA, which is like the biological equivalent of DARPA.
Very dark, very sinister work that they're doing there.
And what she has been focused on at BARDA was artificial intelligence designing mRNA drugs, the very thing that Trump began his administration with, with Stargate, if you recall.
So I looked at this and I thought, well, this is just a...
They put somebody in there that looked like it was going to be a win for skeptics.
Instead, what we wind up with is an AI mRNA person who's going to be there.
Well, she is at the CDC.
So the lawsuit has been.
I was going to say, isn't it funny how that keeps happening with the Trump administration?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Isn't it funny how all these people that are supposed to be on our side, they get in there and immediately change gears?
Yeah, or they don't get in, yeah.
Cash Patel, Dan Bonjino.
Yeah.
Funny.
Exactly.
CDC demands proof of harm while refusing to conduct the studies that could provide it.
That is exactly what we see from these people over and over again.
You know, when you get a natural substance, so we've got to have some studies or you can't say this or that about it, but they won't do the studies.
They won't fund those studies.
They don't care.
So they say, well, there's no studies because they don't fund them.
And then they shut it down.
According to the study, when you consider how much of the medical field is about knowing which drugs interact with which ones, it's shocking that they haven't done any studies to see if these 72 vaccines can interact with each other.
Yeah, oh, absolutely.
Or to see what the cumulative effect is of all the adjuvants and preservatives and things like that.
Because it's becoming more and more as time goes on that babies are just not capable of really clearing these things out of their system.
That it accumulates in them at a much higher rate and a faster rate than it it would in an adult because they don't have a fully developed system to flush these kinds of chemicals and toxins out.
Well, it's one of these things like the masks, right?
Even if their science were correct in terms of viruses and stuff, then that means that the masks were ludicrously inefficient.
It'd be like a hurricane fence trying to keep out mosquitoes, you know.
But when you look at like the hepatitis B vaccine, which they want to give newborns, it's like just test the mother.
and see if she's got hepatitis B. If she doesn't have hepatitis B, you don't need to give that to the baby.
It's ridiculous.
It's truly evil.
Yeah.
According to the complaint, the CDC violated the First Amendment free speech and Fifth Amendment due process clauses of the U.S. Constitution, as well as the Administrative Procedure Act, which agency actions are considered to be arbitrary and capricious if they have failed to consider an important aspect of the problem.
Well, I mean, what would we have left of the government if we took out everything that was arbitrary and capricious?
There wouldn't be much left of government, would there?
It'd fit in the Constitution, I guess.
Lawsuit is now asking to force the CDC to study the childhood vaccine schedule and the interactions.
They said the lawsuit is bringing to light critical facts about the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule about which most parents are unaware.
The schedule is essentially an experiment on our children, one that becomes increasingly concerning as more shots are added and combination vaccines introduced.
They added the COVID shot, the MRNA Trump shot to the childhood schedule.
On Friday last week, HHS announced that it is reinstating the task force on safer childhood vaccines.
The lawsuit describes this as an encouraging small first step, but said that it still does not address the lack of safety testing of the entire vaccine schedule.
They said this case exposes structural failure of the institution.
Now what it exposes is the fact that these institutions are riddled with corruption and they are captured by the industries that they're supposed to be regulating.
Individual vaccines undergo limited FDA testing and neither the FDA nor the CDC has ever required or conducted safety testing of the cumulative childhood schedule that is now 72 doses.
They said to expose the data on harm caused by vaccines would destroy confidence in the program.
The program is more important to them than whether or not it actually helps children.
It's what we were talking about, the iron law of bureaucracy.
And also about corruption for the people that the bureaucracy is actually working for is not the public, but it's working for the people who have created this stuff.
The FDA is there to make sure that they are free to do anything and to give them legal cover to do anything.
Our plaintiffs live the reality of this unproven vaccine recommendation schedule.
It's two doctors who have filed this, two doctors who actually did some science and for publishing these results.
they had their licenses taken away.
Thomas lost his pediatric practice after publishing data comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
Stoller had his license revoked for writing medical exemptions based on genetic risk factors.
Doctors who do such research and dare publish it will have the research ultimately retracted even after being published through a rigorous peer review process.
In my case, said Thomas, a few days after this study was available online, the Oregon Medical Board had an emergency meeting immediately suspended my license claiming I was a threat to public health.
You notice they don't claim he's lying.
Yeah.
They don't come out and say, You're telling falsehoods.
They just said, You're a threat to public health.
They're right.
Because public health is not about individual health.
It is this nebulous thing that exists for its own benefit in order to dominate us.
And to me, that wording is a tacit admission of, yeah, okay, you're right about this.
Sure, there's a connection here.
However, we're prioritizing what we think is important.
We think that if you were to put this out there, that people would stop getting vaccines and that would lead to more problematic outcomes for us.
Yes.
Yes.
They don't want people to be able to make an informed decision.
That's right.
Especially parents, because that's the other part of the lawsuit.
They say that it also affects the Fifth Amendment for parents because it deprives parents and children of life, liberty, or property.
and that it denies parents their, quote, fundamental liberty interest in directing their children's medical care and children's fundamental right to bodily integrity.
Because they know that if you confront a pediatrician with this stuff and refuse to do this, the pediatrician is likely to report you to see CPS.
And just like the Oregon Medical Board revoked this doctor's license, CPS will come in to try to revoke your parenthood, take your children away from you.
They said this framework denies the existence of medically vulnerable children, while the CDC refuses to recognize any category of vaccine vulnerable children despite mounting evidence that they exist.
And of course, as we reported in the last couple of weeks, the American Academy of Pediatrics is now engaged in a campaign to remove religious exemptions.
They want to come after the First Amendment for parents as well.
They want to say that you can't refuse to get vaccines because they were the product of an abortion or something like that.
Texas Attorney General is now suing Eli Lilly for bribing doctors to prescribe high-profit drugs.
And of course, Eli Lilly is the giant pharmaceutical company that Trump went to to get the head of HHS for his first term.
That was Alex Cesar, the CEO of Eli Lilly.
He was the one who ran the so-called pandemic.
Now, Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing Eli Lilly for allegedly bribing doctors to prescribe their most profitable drugs, especially the weight loss medications, but also other prescriptions that were there.
He says that the result of this, by getting them to pick the more expensive drugs, has resulted in millions of dollars in claims, Medicare claims in Texas that have been made at taxpayer expense.
When you look at what they do, the first hand experience that I had with this Elquist thing, you know, it's a blood thinner thing to stop blood clots.
And the medical community, they're all just like, oh yeah, that's the one thing that you use.
You know, they have been so thoroughly propagandized by Pfizer that that's what they sell and the doctor said he had a patient who paid thousands of dollars a month to get this blood thinning medication and it's like that's ridiculous there's a lot of things out there that can thin your blood and not even prescription pharmaceuticals but that's what they do they work with them to say this is the one that you want and look we've got study here you know So
these are the GLP one weight loss medications, Manjaro and Zepp bound that are produced by Eli Lilly.
He claims that they are engaged in an illegal kickback scheme.
He said Eli Lilly fraudulently sought to maximize profits at taxpayer expense and to put corporate greed over people's health, just like with the opioid epidemic.
Plaintiffs include the state of Texas and Health Choice Alliance LLC, a New Jersey-based research organization.
In addition to Manjaro and Zeppbound, the complaint named a dozen drugs sold by Eli Lilly to treat conditions including migraines, eczema, leukemia, and breast cancer.
Eli Lilly offered illegal incentives to Texas medical providers for prescribing their drugs.
Listen to this.
Including free nurses.
What is that?
And reimbursement for support services.
Hey, I got a free nurse for you.
How do you manage that?
Just an indentured servant?
Yeah, I guess they take the salary of the nurses.
Eli Lilly in 2023 tested its Manjaro shots on kids as young as six.
This is the GLP-1 drugs, that family of drugs.
Several lesser known GLP-1 drugs can be prescribed off-label for children, but of course this hasn't been tested for that.
Texas's new lawsuit follows in October.ber 2024 suit that the state and the health choice alliance filed against major insulin vendors including Eli Lowley for overcharging and so and also a kickback scheme this seems to be standard operating procedure with pharmaceutical companies whether you're talking about insulin or whether you're talking about opioids or you're talking about now these weight loss drugs and then finally we have inside mrna vaccines You've got Robert
Redfield, who was the CDC director for Trump in his first term.
This guy is coming out now and kind of fessing up.
But from the things that he's saying, he ought to go to jail.
He said, quote, we turned the body into a factory with no clear controls.
And if you go back and look at the archives, I said that publicly when they started talking about that.
If you remember, they had...
Yeah.
Yeah.
They said, they went, Trump set up this little dog and pony show, and he had all these pharmaceutical executives come in and sit at the table.
They went around the table, and he had them all lined up in the order of how quickly they could do this.
And he's, no, that's not fast enough.
Next one.
That's not fast enough.
And he gets to Moderna, and they say, we can do it right now because we're going to use your body as a factory to manufacture this vaccine.
I said, well, what could possibly go wrong with that?
I said, that sounds like cancer.
How do you ever stop this thing?
And actually, what it reminds me of when I look at this, it reminds me, somebody mentioned it earlier, Fantasia, it reminds me of the sorcerer's apprentice.
How appropriate, you know, when you talk about pharmacea, the sorcerers.
This is basically, if you look at these marching brooms with their buckets of water, that's basically what they unleash on you with the mRNA vaccine.
I think this is the perfect analogy for the pharmacea.
You know, It just keeps coming and that's what the mRNA does.
It keeps multiplying and multiplying in your body as it is damaging your body, flooding your body with spikes, these spike proteins.
Yeah, that's the analogy right there.
And pharma marches on.
Now, Robert Redfield is going to tell us the truth about that finally.
Five years ago, where was he?
Okay, he was in a position to do something about it.
He was the CDC director.
And he wouldn't give you the obvious issue of it.
There's a very obvious issue with it.
Hey, we don't have any way to turn this off.
Where's the off switch?
We can't control this.
We just unleash it, right?
We do this pharmacea incantation injection and it's off to the races.
Well, there's probably a lot more money for him to be made being quiet back then, but now he's now he wants some headlines.
He also wants you to trust him.
So he's out there, he wants to sell bird flu pandemic and he's been doing that, but he's also the guy that's out there selling, it came from China now, right?
We didn't develop it.
It came from China, the virus did.
Well, he said, this is not that there is a virus.
Yeah, this is, yeah, if it was a virus, yeah.
Exposé News has the article about a new documentary called Inside MRNA Vaccines, the movie.
They say it's an unfiltered second opinion on the science behind MRNA technology to provide the public with information that corporate media will not cover about the development and global rollout of the MRNA vaccine technology.
Well, I hope that they get into the long history of this, but I have concerns about it.
since they have Robert Malone, who is another limited hangout guy.
But this thing had been developed for quite some time, the vaccine itself as well as all the lockdown and the tactics that they were going to use against us.
They had wargamed that from Dark Winter on, but the vaccine had been developed with BARDA and DARPA for quite some time before they rolled that out as well.
This premiered on the twelfth of August, this documentary features exclusive 3D animations and depth interviews.
I guess they show the MRNA unleashing the spike proteins like the marching brooms with their buckets of water, perhaps.
Professionals who expressed concern about potential gaps in data transparency, risk assessment, and long term safety associated with the rapid adoption of this platform, the documentary argues that while regulators and much of the scientific community maintain that COVID mRNA vaccines are safe and effective, the technology is rapidly expanding beyond pandemic response, including potential applications in the food supply.
Of course, Brooke Rollins, the person that Trump just put in and USDA, the first thing she did was to approve mRNA injections into chickens and pigs and beef into our food supply to supposedly protect them from bird flu.
MRNA, I think, is going to be the legacy of Trump.
I think people are going to, I think history is going to be on my side when it comes to Trump, because they're going to see that this guy was both the father and the funder of MRNA vaccines.
He has said over and over again how he's the one who created it.
He's the proud, I guess we should call him.
He's unable to stop himself from bragging about it.
Yeah.
Instead of being the founding father, he is the funding father of this abomination that we call the COVID vaccine, but mRNA in general.
*music*
The common man.
They created Common Core to dumb down our children.
They created Common Past to track and control us.
Their Commons Project to make sure the commoners own nothing and the communist future.
They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary.
But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
That is what we have in common.
That is what they want to take away.
Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.
It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide.
Please share the information and links you'll find at thedavidnightshow.com.
Thank you for listening.
Thank you for sharing.
If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.
▲
Export Selection