Stop Calling It Autism. Start Calling It Vaccine-Induced Encephalopathy

fredwiggy · Friday at 01:30 AM

3 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Not to mention most people don't really know for certain if their dad was their biological dad.

Currently only the female line is sure.

I'm in favour of DNA testing at birth for all kids and their father being positively identified.

Doesn't even cost much these days.

Trust goes a long way in relationships. Some have bad intentions, use, cheat, betray, because that's all they know. This can make others think all are untrustworthy, when in actuality, many can be trusted but not in every way. Some withhold the truth because it might hurt the other person's feeling, although it isn't betrayal as in cheating. They say everyone lies, and this is true, but some lie about everything and hide things which are important, like fidelity or finances. Most people don't go into relationships and have children thinking they might not be theirs. That would be really bad, and the endgame would be no trust throughout the relationship, which is the most important thing. Thinking your dad isn't your dad would ruin many families, so most don't go through their lives with that thought. Most can usually tell if their children are their own, so don't even think about it. If there is doubt, you shouldn't get married in the first place or have children.

rattlesnake · Friday at 09:22 AM

8 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

A Doubling of Children with Severe Disabilities

It isn't "just" autism

Source: https://www.malone.news/p/a-doubling-of-children-with-severe

Excerpts from dr Malone's article posted below

= = =

Secretary Kennedy gave his first press conference, which was focused on autism. Although what he had to say was immediately vilified by mainstream media, he didn’t say anything completely wrong or was an untruth. In fact, the word vaccine never left his mouth.

The big elephant in the room with autism research is that in 2013, the DSM-5, or Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, which is the primary classification system for mental health conditions used by clinicians and researchers in the United States, decided to broaden the definition of autism to include those who have what they previously called “subtypes” of autism compiled into what is now known as “autism spectrum disorder” (ASD) and removed autism as a stand-alone diagnostic from the DSM-5.

Over the late 20th and then early 21st century, some researchers began to question whether autism was a spectrum. In 1994, the definition of autism expanded in the DSM-IV - to include conditions once considered separate from autism. In 2013, The various subtypes (including Asperger’s syndrome) were unified under the single diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), explicitly framing autism as a continuous spectrum. As herein lies the rub. No data shows that these “subtypes” have the same patterns of behavior or even the exact etiology.

...

The consequence of combining multiple disorders or syndromes into a single diagnosis was a significant increase in autism cases since 1994. This is not to say that the percentage of autism hasn’t grown - it has, but it can also be true that the new ASD criteria also increased documented cases.

...

Beyond the question of autism, why have the rates of children with disabilities doubled over the past fifty years?

It is hard to believe this is all due to better diagnoses and reporting.

Secretary Kennedy is right. Something or things is (are) poisoning our children. It is making them susceptible to diseases, as well as chronic conditions, all of which can lead to less quality of life and even early death.

Furthermore, these environmental toxins are causing neurologic damage. There is a compounding effect of so many toxins and insults to the brain resulting in neuroinflammation, which leads to neurological development issues (see my past substack here on glyphosate). This can happen in the developing fetus and the child.

This is unacceptable.

Mainstream media, big pharma, big food, big Ag can scream, they can threaten, they can even try to get Secretary Kennedy fired, but in the end, they have to step out of the way and let HHS do its job.

= = =

It can be summed up in one word: poisoning.

rattlesnake · Friday at 09:28 AM

8 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

What makes low grade DNA?, although it doesn't exist. Does this mean some people are worth more than others, better "humans" perhaps? Would this mean we should have our DNA tested before we "breed" with others? This would mean those that think this way actually think they are from a better "grade" of DNA than others, that they're somehow worth more as humans and those with this low grade need to be forced to not breed with others of better grade DNA, as their children could come out "wrong".

This is the epitome of narcissism, actually thinking others are inferior because they didn't have parents of better DNA. I'm guessing good health means you had better parents, better DNA, and those with bad health had wrong DNA and it wasn't their lifestyle that hurt them?

If you look at many of our world leaders, they are full on narcissists, thinking mainly of themselves and that they can do whatever they want and get away with it, as history has proven. This doesn't mean they have better DNA, but that their parents were also narcissists, neglectful, abusive or spoiling in their actions, which made them became narcissists themselves.

People have been breeding for generations, and no one knows all about their family trees besides word of mouth, which isn't accurate and which can hide how their family history really was. Some think because their parents were okay, that all of their relatives must have been from "good" DNA also, not realizing they could have murderers, sociopaths and serial killers in their family history without ever knowing it.

Funny how some here stick up for others of the same ilk, others who are prejudiced or racist but because they said something they liked, automatically they're okay.

This idea of "genetic inequality" is part of the problem.

So many people are told that the reason they have debilitating diseases is because it's "in their genes", which amounts to telling them it's basically their own fault. The next step (already pushed by some leaders such as Trudeau) is euthanasia, i.e. the "culling of the weak".

kwilco · Friday at 07:07 PM

On 4/16/2025 at 12:44 PM, Red Phoenix said:

If SIDS is the cover-up for vaccine-injured deaths, then Autism is the cover-up for vaccine-injured children

Source: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/stop-calling-it-autism-start-calling

= = =

They say autism is just being better diagnosed.

That’s a lie. And it’s hiding one of the greatest medical crimes of our time.

The truth is this: what was once a rare congenital disorder has now become a diagnostic dumping ground for brain-injured children.

They weren’t born autistic. They developed autism symptoms—after medical intervention. And we’re losing sight of this.

To understand autism, it is imperative that we go back to the source of the original term, which is what we’ll do in today’s article.

TL;DR:

The original definition of autism referred to rare cases of children born disconnected from the world—profoundly withdrawn, nonverbal, and unable to live independently.

But today, “autism” has become a catch-all label that often includes vaccine-injured children who were developing normally until a sudden regression.

What we now call “autism” is frequently vaccine-induced encephalopathy—brain damage misdiagnosed as a behavioral condition.

This article reveals how a rare disorder was rebranded into a spectrum to hide the consequences of pharmaceutical injury.

You can read the full - lengthy, very worthwhile and well-researched - article here

> https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/stop-calling-it-autism-start-calling

= = =

That's misinformation disguised as concern. Autism is a neurodevelopmental condition, not a cover-up for “vaccine injury.” Countless rigorous studies have found no link between vaccines and autism. Spreading this false narrative endangers public health and stigmatizes autistic people.

kwilco · Friday at 07:09 PM

Yes, the study that originally claimed a link between vaccines and autism has been thoroughly discredited—both scientifically and ethically.

Here are the key facts:

The Study: It was a 1998 paper by Andrew Wakefield, published in The Lancet, which suggested a link between the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine and autism.

Flawed and Fraudulent: The study had:

A sample size of only 12 children.

No control group.

Cherry-picked and falsified data.

Undisclosed financial conflicts of interest (Wakefield was funded by lawyers suing vaccine manufacturers).

Consequences:

The paper was retracted by The Lancet in 2010.

Wakefield lost his medical license due to serious professional misconduct.

Scientific Consensus:

Over 25 large-scale, peer-reviewed studies have found no causal link between vaccines and autism.

Health organizations worldwide—including the CDC, WHO, NHS, and American Academy of Pediatrics—have confirmed vaccines are safe and do not cause autism.

So yes, not only was the original study disgraced, it also sparked a damaging wave of anti-vaccine hysteria that continues to harm public health today.

rattlesnake · Friday at 07:23 PM

11 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Yes, the study that originally claimed a link between vaccines and autism has been thoroughly discredited—both scientifically and ethically.

Here are the key facts:

The Study: It was a 1998 paper by Andrew Wakefield, published in The Lancet, which suggested a link between the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine and autism.

Flawed and Fraudulent: The study had:

A sample size of only 12 children.

No control group.

Cherry-picked and falsified data.

Undisclosed financial conflicts of interest (Wakefield was funded by lawyers suing vaccine manufacturers).

Consequences:

The paper was retracted by The Lancet in 2010.

Wakefield lost his medical license due to serious professional misconduct.

Scientific Consensus:

Over 25 large-scale, peer-reviewed studies have found no causal link between vaccines and autism.

Health organizations worldwide—including the CDC, WHO, NHS, and American Academy of Pediatrics—have confirmed vaccines are safe and do not cause autism.

So yes, not only was the original study disgraced, it also sparked a damaging wave of anti-vaccine hysteria that continues to harm public health today.

Metals in vaccines cause autism:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X17308763
http://vaccinepapers.org/high-aluminum-content-autistic-brains/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X17300950

kwilco · Friday at 07:29 PM

16 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

Metals in vaccines cause autism:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X17308763
http://vaccinepapers.org/high-aluminum-content-autistic-brains/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X17300950

Govt studies:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21993250
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23609067
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25377033
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24995277
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22099159
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17454560
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19106436
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21299355
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21907498
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11339848
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17674242
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21993250
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15780490
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12933322
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16870260
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19043938
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12142947
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24675092
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25198681
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17454560
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3878266/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3364648/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3774468/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3697751/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3173748/

Pathetic - you like always have no idea of how utterly stupid you are. You clearly have not followed up peer reviews on any of those they are all discredited - you should also look at various medical publications for the history of both these papers and the cranks who wrote them. Check the dates too - you are being fooled - not difficult in your case.

You need to learn about sources and how to research rather than just search - "PubMed lists studies—it doesn’t endorse junk science. The vaccine-autism link has been debunked over and over. Only fools continue dragging up discredited trash.

rattlesnake · Friday at 07:54 PM

24 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Pathetic - you like always have no idea of how utterly stupid you are. You clearly have not followed up peer reviews on any of those they are all discredited - you should also look at various medical publications for the history of both these papers and the cranks who wrote them. Check the dates too - you are being fooled - not difficult in your case.

You need to learn about sources and how to research rather than just search - "PubMed lists studies—it doesn’t endorse junk science. The vaccine-autism link has been debunked over and over. Only fools continue dragging up discredited trash.

I understand where you are coming from.

Red Phoenix · Saturday at 12:16 AM

5 hours ago, kwilco said:

That's misinformation disguised as concern. Autism is a neurodevelopmental condition, not a cover-up for “vaccine injury.” Countless rigorous studies have found no link between vaccines and autism. Spreading this false narrative endangers public health and stigmatizes autistic people.

cdemundo · Saturday at 12:30 AM

Yawn.

Red Phoenix · Saturday at 12:42 AM

2 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

Yawn.

A good night's sleep will cure that condition, but whether it will wake you up remains to be seen...

simon43 · Saturday at 01:09 AM

Well, there certainly is 'low-grade DNA' (although that's not a medical term of course). Just look at the result of inbreeding within the Royal families of Europe over the past few hundred years. Intellectually-inadequate (slow-brained). As for the huge levels of inbreeding within Pakistani communities, don't get me started on that one.

Thousands of years before doctors even knew about DNA, they knew that it was not a good idea to marry your cousin and have offspring etc. They also knew that the same principle could be applied to other animal and plant species. (This is why Nature created some flowers only to have male or only female parts, so that pollinators were forced to pollinate with pollen from other plants, and not flowers on the same plant).

As humans, it seems that we are fine to 'cull' the weak plants and crops, striving through genetic modification to produce healthy and strong crops with 'good DNA', but we don't apply that to the human species. Of course, this is the principle of Eugenics, and discussion of it is tainted by its links to the Nazis.

Darwin postulated about the Survival of the Fittest, which is Nature's way of ensuring strong and healthy species. But apparently it doesn't apply for humans because we actively go against that idea. Surely (IMHO) the end-game is decimation of our species.

Humans also encourage 'bad DNA' by breeding pets, such as pug dogs, boxer dogs and the like which accentuate bad DNA, with such animals plagued by medical problems solely caused by our desire to breed IN bad DNA, not breed it OUT.

I'm looking at all this from a purely scientific viewpoint - there are of course ethical considerations.

But none of the above addresses the OP topic - what causes autism? The idea that vaccinations cause autism has been proven (see other posts) to be total <deleted>. Of course, there are some who have adverse (and sometimes very severe) reactions to vaccinations, but the % is miniscule. Whereas the OP rightly points out the growing % of those with autism.

I have an open mind about the causes of autism, and it's good to continue this thread discussion

Update: Just to put the 'vaccination causes autism' claim to bed, peer-reviewed stats indicate that autism is generally a genetic condition (so 'bad DNA').

The autismspeaks website states:

Research tells us that autism tends to run in families, and a meta-analysis of 7 twin studies claim that 60 to 90% of the risk of autism comes from your genome. If you have a child with autism, you are more likely to have another autistic child. Your other family members are also more likely to have a child with ASD.

Changes in certain genes or your genome increase the risk that a child will develop autism. If a parent carries one or more of these gene changes, they may get passed to a child (even if the parent does not have autism). For some people, a high risk for ASD can be associated with a genetic disorder, such as Rett syndrome or fragile X syndrome. For the majority of autism, multiple changes in other regions of your DNA increase the risk of autism spectrum disorder. The majority of these DNA changes do not cause autism by themselves but work in conjunction with many other genes and environmental factors to cause autism.

impulse · Saturday at 01:35 AM

On 4/16/2025 at 7:43 PM, MalcolmB said:

I had three Covid vaccines and I feel fine.

You're lucky. My quality of life took a nosedive the day after my 2nd Pfizer.

simon43 · Saturday at 08:31 AM

Coincidentally, there is an interesting article about Autism on the BBC website:

Here is the link (if it's allowed):

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20250415-the-genetic-mystery-of-why-some-people-develop-autism

rattlesnake · Saturday at 08:40 AM

8 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

One example of many, from 2009. Trust Th€ $ci€nc€™.

Pfizer to Pay $2.3 Billion for Fraudulent Marketing

American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Company Inc. (hereinafter together "Pfizer") have agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice, to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from the illegal promotion of certain pharmaceutical products, the Justice Department announced today.

Pharmacia & Upjohn Company has agreed to plead guilty to a felony violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act for misbranding Bextra with the intent to defraud or mislead

Pfizer has agreed to pay $1 billion to resolve allegations under the civil False Claims Act that the company illegally promoted four drugs – Bextra; Geodon, an anti-psychotic drug; Zyvox, an antibiotic; and Lyrica, an anti-epileptic drug – and caused false claims to be submitted to government health care programs for uses that were not medically accepted indications and therefore not covered by those programs. The civil settlement also resolves allegations that Pfizer paid kickbacks to health care providers to induce them to prescribe these, as well as other, drugs.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-largest-health-care-fraud-settlement-its-history

johng · Saturday at 09:17 AM

33 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

Pfizer to Pay $2.3 Billion for Fraudulent Marketing

Safe and effective !

33 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

the illegal promotion of certain pharmaceutical products

Safe and effective !!

35 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

caused false claims to be submitted to government health care programs

Safe and effective !!!

34 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

Pfizer paid kickbacks to health care providers to induce them to prescribe these, as well as other, drugs.

Safe and effective !!!!

Will B Good · Saturday at 09:20 AM

7 hours ago, impulse said:

You're lucky. My quality of life took a nosedive the day after my 2nd Pfizer.

How odd.....my improved considerably.

bbbbooboo · Saturday at 09:21 AM

hmmm… maybe they can beat some sense into each other?

richard_smith237 · Saturday at 09:41 AM

On 4/18/2025 at 7:03 AM, Red Phoenix said:

On 4/18/2025 at 12:24 AM, richard_smith237 said:

As evidenced by a number of the posters on this forum (and in this thread) - I think the rates of autism used to be higher !

Expand

The autism rate continues increasing relentlessly, now up to 1 in 12.5 boys in the most recent California survey

And this is precisely why your commentary consistently misses the mark - it leans on shallow soundbites and cherry-picked stats instead of engaging with any real critical thought.

For clarity: my original comment was a joke aimed at the conspiracy-addled dimwits who genuinely believe this nonsense. But instead of clocking the satire, you took it at face value and ran with a tired, misinformed narrative - one I’ll now dismantle with a little common sense.

Over the past 50 years, the reported rate of autism has increased significantly, but this rise is largely due to changes in how we define, diagnose, and understand autism rather than a true surge in how many people are actually autistic.

Earlier definitions were narrow, often recognising only the most severe cases. But over time, autism has come to be understood as a spectrum, capturing a wider range of traits and behaviours - including those previously overlooked or mislabelled.

Updates in diagnostic manuals (like the DSM), along with greater public and professional awareness, have led to more people being assessed and diagnosed.

Other factors contributing to the rise include improved access to services that require a formal diagnosis, and "diagnostic substitution" - where individuals who might once have been diagnosed with other conditions (such as intellectual disability or language disorders) are now recognised as autistic.

While there’s ongoing research into potential biological or environmental causes, most of the increase can be attributed to broader criteria, better tools, and more awareness, not a true spike in prevalence.

Hence - the statistic you presented is a utter pile of rubbish... perhaps you were one of those who went undiagnosed... :whistling:

johng · Saturday at 10:00 AM

16 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

While there’s ongoing research into potential biological or environmental causes,

Nothing to do with "safe and effectives" though right ?

couldn't be them for sure for sure, the science has been proven although ongoing studies continue ?

richard_smith237 · Saturday at 10:11 AM

8 minutes ago, johng said:

27 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

While there’s ongoing research into potential biological or environmental causes,

Nothing to do with "safe and effectives" though right ?

couldn't be them for sure for sure, the science has been proven although ongoing studies continue ?

Correct - the increase in autism has nothing to do with vaccines... The fallacy here is the false causality - implying that because autism rates have risen over time, vaccines must be the cause.

This is a classic example of post hoc ergo propter hoc, where the assumption is made that because one thing (vaccines) happens before another (autism diagnoses), one must be causing the other. It’s an illogical leap.

There is no credible evidence linking vaccines, including the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine, to autism. Decades of research - including large-scale studies, peer-reviewed journals, and extensive reviews by reputable institutions like the CDC, WHO, and NIH - have found no correlation.

The initial study that started this whole controversy, led by Andrew Wakefield in 1998, was fraudulent and thoroughly debunked. He lost his medical license, and the paper was retracted.

As for “ongoing studies,” yes, research is always happening - but it’s not because scientists are still exploring this old discredited theory. It’s because science never stops looking for new insights, not to prove a false link that’s already been debunked.

So, no, vaccines aren’t the problem. The rise in autism is more likely tied to better recognition, broader definitions, and improved diagnostic practices.

But... that doesn't stop the nut-jobs spreading baseless conspiracy theories when the science is clear.

rattlesnake · Saturday at 10:34 AM

22 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Correct - the increase in autism has nothing to do with vaccines... The fallacy here is the false causality - implying that because autism rates have risen over time, vaccines must be the cause.

This is a classic example of post hoc ergo propter hoc, where the assumption is made that because one thing (vaccines) happens before another (autism diagnoses), one must be causing the other. It’s an illogical leap.

There is no credible evidence linking vaccines, including the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine, to autism. Decades of research - including large-scale studies, peer-reviewed journals, and extensive reviews by reputable institutions like the CDC, WHO, and NIH - have found no correlation.

The initial study that started this whole controversy, led by Andrew Wakefield in 1998, was fraudulent and thoroughly debunked. He lost his medical license, and the paper was retracted.

As for “ongoing studies,” yes, research is always happening - but it’s not because scientists are still exploring this old discredited theory. It’s because science never stops looking for new insights, not to prove a false link that’s already been debunked.

So, no, vaccines aren’t the problem. The rise in autism is more likely tied to better recognition, broader definitions, and improved diagnostic practices.

But... that doesn't stop the nut-jobs spreading baseless conspiracy theories when the science is clear.

RFK broke this issue down recently in an interview. The first three sentences are pretty self-explanatory. Let's pick up this discussion in a few months.

“None of the vaccines that are given during the first 6 months of life have ever been tested for autism—the only one was the DTP vaccine.”

“And that one study that was done, according to the National Academy of Sciences, found that there was a link.”

“They threw out that study because it was based upon CDC’s surveillance system, VAERS, and they said that system is no good.”

“That begs the question, why doesn’t CDC have a functional surveillance system?”

“We’re gonna make sure they do have a functional surveillance system.”

“They don’t do pre-licensing safety testing for vaccine. They’re the only product that’s exempt. So what they say is, if there are injuries, we’ll capture them afterward.”

“But they have a system that doesn’t capture them.”

“In fact, CDC’s own study of its own system said it captures fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries.”

“Why have we gone for 39 years and nobody’s fixed it?”

“We’re gonna fix it.”

“We’re gonna have gold standard science … we’re gonna publish all of our datasets, which CDC has never done.”

“We’re gonna do replication of all our studies, which CDC has never done.”

“We’re gonna publish our peer review, which CDC has never done.”

Will B Good · Saturday at 10:46 AM

12 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

RFK broke this issue down recently in an interview. The first three sentences are pretty self-explanatory. Let's pick up this discussion in a few months.

“None of the vaccines that are given during the first 6 months of life have ever been tested for autism—the only one was the DTP vaccine.”

“And that one study that was done, according to the National Academy of Sciences, found that there was a link.”

“They threw out that study because it was based upon CDC’s surveillance system, VAERS, and they said that system is no good.”

“That begs the question, why doesn’t CDC have a functional surveillance system?”

“We’re gonna make sure they do have a functional surveillance system.”

“They don’t do pre-licensing safety testing for vaccine. They’re the only product that’s exempt. So what they say is, if there are injuries, we’ll capture them afterward.”

“But they have a system that doesn’t capture them.”

“In fact, CDC’s own study of its own system said it captures fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries.”

“Why have we gone for 39 years and nobody’s fixed it?”

“We’re gonna fix it.”

“We’re gonna have gold standard science … we’re gonna publish all of our datasets, which CDC has never done.”

“We’re gonna do replication of all our studies, which CDC has never done.”

“We’re gonna publish our peer review, which CDC has never done.”

Just taking one line.....no pre-license testing........

Preclinical Testing: Before human trials, vaccines are tested in laboratories and on animals to assess their safety and potential to elicit an immune response.

Clinical Trials: Vaccines that pass preclinical testing proceed to human clinical trials, which occur in three phases:

Phase 1: Involves a small group of volunteers to evaluate safety and determine appropriate dosage.

Phase 2: Expands the study to more participants to further assess safety and begin evaluating effectiveness.

Phase 3: Involves thousands of participants to confirm effectiveness, monitor side effects, and compare the vaccine to commonly used treatments.

These trials are conducted under strict FDA guidelines to ensure the integrity of the data and the safety of the participants .

FDA Review and Approval: After successful clinical trials, manufacturers submit a Biologics License Application (BLA) to the FDA, providing comprehensive data on safety, efficacy, manufacturing processes, and labeling. The FDA thoroughly reviews this information before granting approval .

Post-Licensing Monitoring

Even after a vaccine is approved, monitoring continues through systems like:

Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS): Collects and analyzes reports of adverse events that occur after vaccination.

Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD): A collaboration between the CDC and healthcare organizations to monitor vaccine safety and conduct studies about rare and serious adverse events.

Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Project: Conducts clinical research on vaccine-associated health risks .

These systems ensure ongoing evaluation of vaccine safety and effectiveness in the general population.

The U.S. has a comprehensive and stringent process for vaccine safety testing before and after licensing. Claims suggesting the absence of pre-licensing safety testing are unfounded and contradict the established procedures upheld by the FDA and CDC.

rattlesnake · Saturday at 10:54 AM

7 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

Just taking one line.....no pre-license testing........

Preclinical Testing: Before human trials, vaccines are tested in laboratories and on animals to assess their safety and potential to elicit an immune response.

Clinical Trials: Vaccines that pass preclinical testing proceed to human clinical trials, which occur in three phases:

Phase 1: Involves a small group of volunteers to evaluate safety and determine appropriate dosage.

Phase 2: Expands the study to more participants to further assess safety and begin evaluating effectiveness.

Phase 3: Involves thousands of participants to confirm effectiveness, monitor side effects, and compare the vaccine to commonly used treatments.

These trials are conducted under strict FDA guidelines to ensure the integrity of the data and the safety of the participants .

FDA Review and Approval: After successful clinical trials, manufacturers submit a Biologics License Application (BLA) to the FDA, providing comprehensive data on safety, efficacy, manufacturing processes, and labeling. The FDA thoroughly reviews this information before granting approval .

Post-Licensing Monitoring

Even after a vaccine is approved, monitoring continues through systems like:

Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS): Collects and analyzes reports of adverse events that occur after vaccination.

Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD): A collaboration between the CDC and healthcare organizations to monitor vaccine safety and conduct studies about rare and serious adverse events.

Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Project: Conducts clinical research on vaccine-associated health risks .

These systems ensure ongoing evaluation of vaccine safety and effectiveness in the general population.

The U.S. has a comprehensive and stringent process for vaccine safety testing before and after licensing. Claims suggesting the absence of pre-licensing safety testing are unfounded and contradict the established procedures upheld by the FDA and CDC.

Great, so everything should be just fine, then. I will gladly admit any mistake of mine if applicable.

newbee2022 · Sunday at 01:34 AM

On 4/16/2025 at 6:44 PM, Red Phoenix said:

If SIDS is the cover-up for vaccine-injured deaths, then Autism is the cover-up for vaccine-injured children

Source: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/stop-calling-it-autism-start-calling

= = =

They say autism is just being better diagnosed.

That’s a lie. And it’s hiding one of the greatest medical crimes of our time.

The truth is this: what was once a rare congenital disorder has now become a diagnostic dumping ground for brain-injured children.

They weren’t born autistic. They developed autism symptoms—after medical intervention. And we’re losing sight of this.

To understand autism, it is imperative that we go back to the source of the original term, which is what we’ll do in today’s article.

TL;DR:

The original definition of autism referred to rare cases of children born disconnected from the world—profoundly withdrawn, nonverbal, and unable to live independently.

But today, “autism” has become a catch-all label that often includes vaccine-injured children who were developing normally until a sudden regression.

What we now call “autism” is frequently vaccine-induced encephalopathy—brain damage misdiagnosed as a behavioral condition.

This article reveals how a rare disorder was rebranded into a spectrum to hide the consequences of pharmaceutical injury.

You can read the full - lengthy, very worthwhile and well-researched - article here

> https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/stop-calling-it-autism-start-calling

= = =

There should be a new section on AN:

Truth Conspiracy 🤣

newbee2022 · Sunday at 01:35 AM

On 4/16/2025 at 6:44 PM, Red Phoenix said:

If SIDS is the cover-up for vaccine-injured deaths, then Autism is the cover-up for vaccine-injured children

Source: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/stop-calling-it-autism-start-calling

= = =

They say autism is just being better diagnosed.

That’s a lie. And it’s hiding one of the greatest medical crimes of our time.

The truth is this: what was once a rare congenital disorder has now become a diagnostic dumping ground for brain-injured children.

They weren’t born autistic. They developed autism symptoms—after medical intervention. And we’re losing sight of this.

To understand autism, it is imperative that we go back to the source of the original term, which is what we’ll do in today’s article.

TL;DR:

The original definition of autism referred to rare cases of children born disconnected from the world—profoundly withdrawn, nonverbal, and unable to live independently.

But today, “autism” has become a catch-all label that often includes vaccine-injured children who were developing normally until a sudden regression.

What we now call “autism” is frequently vaccine-induced encephalopathy—brain damage misdiagnosed as a behavioral condition.

This article reveals how a rare disorder was rebranded into a spectrum to hide the consequences of pharmaceutical injury.

You can read the full - lengthy, very worthwhile and well-researched - article here

> https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/stop-calling-it-autism-start-calling

= = =

Hogwash

Red Phoenix · Sunday at 01:39 AM

1 minute ago, newbee2022 said:

Hogwash

Good to learn about your personal hygiene, but I wonder what this has to do with the topic discussed.

newbee2022 · Sunday at 01:43 AM

3 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

Good to learn about your personal hygiene, but I wonder what this has to do with the topic discussed.

I wonder where you copied/paste this nonsense?

newbee2022 · Sunday at 01:51 AM

On 4/16/2025 at 6:44 PM, Red Phoenix said:

If SIDS is the cover-up for vaccine-injured deaths, then Autism is the cover-up for vaccine-injured children

Source: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/stop-calling-it-autism-start-calling

= = =

They say autism is just being better diagnosed.

That’s a lie. And it’s hiding one of the greatest medical crimes of our time.

The truth is this: what was once a rare congenital disorder has now become a diagnostic dumping ground for brain-injured children.

They weren’t born autistic. They developed autism symptoms—after medical intervention. And we’re losing sight of this.

To understand autism, it is imperative that we go back to the source of the original term, which is what we’ll do in today’s article.

TL;DR:

The original definition of autism referred to rare cases of children born disconnected from the world—profoundly withdrawn, nonverbal, and unable to live independently.

But today, “autism” has become a catch-all label that often includes vaccine-injured children who were developing normally until a sudden regression.

What we now call “autism” is frequently vaccine-induced encephalopathy—brain damage misdiagnosed as a behavioral condition.

This article reveals how a rare disorder was rebranded into a spectrum to hide the consequences of pharmaceutical injury.

You can read the full - lengthy, very worthwhile and well-researched - article here

> https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/stop-calling-it-autism-start-calling

= = =

It's just copy/paste nonsense from an unreliable source.

Hogwash by Alu-Hats or other conspiracy groups.

😕

newbee2022 · Sunday at 01:57 AM

On 4/18/2025 at 12:24 AM, richard_smith237 said:

As evidenced by a number of the posters on this forum (and in this thread) - I think the rates of autism used to be higher !

Go testing

Sign In

Stop Calling It Autism. Start Calling It Vaccine-Induced Encephalopathy

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Red Phoenix

johng

TallGuyJohninBKK

Posted Images

TL;DR:

TL;DR:

TL;DR:

TL;DR:

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Recently Browsing 0 members

Topics

Popular Contributors

Latest posts...

Popular in The Pub

ASEANNOW

MORE INFO

POPULAR AREAS

CONTACT US