Q: Who is behind this site?
A: It doesn’t matter. This is just about the research. Either it supports the thesis that vaccines are associated with autism or it doesn’t.
Q: Seriously. I wanna know.
A: We know you want to know, but it is not about us. If you know, you know. We are not important.
For the last several decades the vaccine safety discussion has become about qualifications, expertise, conflicts of interest, cult of personality, and bias. We no longer wish to participate in those bad faith discussions. For the sake of the argument, assume that we are completely unqualified, have no expertise whatsoever, are being paid large sums of money, are worshiped/scorned by the masses (whichever makes us less trustworthy), and are irredeemably biased. It truly doesn’t matter. Either the research stands on it’s own, or it doesn’t. We are leaving behind ad hominem arguments and all the other logical fallacies applied to this discussion.
Q: How do I know I can trust this site?
A: You don’t. And you don’t have to. This site exists so you don’t have to trust anyone making any vaccine-autism link claims anymore if you don’t want to. You can read the research directly from the journals and draw your own conclusions.
Q: But you wrote the site!
A: We actually wrote almost none of it. The only place that you will find us editorializing is in the “Welcome” post that you see on entry that gives context to the site, this “FAQ” page, and a few of the category headers when we could not find a good definition in the literature that gives the reader context. We will be working further on the content headers to find published papers and medical textbooks to remove the few notes we have in there. The rest of the site is just the research, and highlighted quotes in the papers that we want to bring to your attention so you can understand why it was included in this list.
Q: I have never read research before. How do I use this site?
A: Read the title and intro information of any paper. If you are interested, click the title to read who published it, who wrote it, who they work for, and the “abstract” that is the summation of the whole paper. That page will include highlighted text that we wish to call your attention to, and it may also include important excerpts from the paper. If you still want to read more, click on the name of the paper in blue highlights to link to the online version, either on PubMed.gov, which is the US National Institutes of Health research database, or to the journal itself. Pubmed only lists the abstracts, but also has links to the full papers most of the time. Some of the time those full papers are behind a paywall, but some are free. If we were able to find a full version that was free, we linked straight to the full version.
Additionally, when you read the title of a paper on the site, you will note that to the left is a list of keywords that paper is categorized under. If you want to see all the papers associated with any of those topics, simply click the term to be linked to the list of papers that touch on that topic.
Q: OK, I figured out how to use it, but I don’t understand the medical lingo. How do I make this make sense?
A: This science can become complicated, but it is not rocket science. This is material you CAN LEARN, at least partially. Learning takes time and effort, but even a small amount of study here can teach you enough to recognize when you are being lied to by the “experts.” We recommend that when you get to a term you don’t understand, that you go to the OpenMD Dictionary and look up the term. We have provided some definitions for you on the top of each category to help you get started. For example, when you click on Cytokines, you will have the simplest explanation of what a cytokine is that we can find, and the source, “A substance that is made by cells of the immune system. Some cytokines can boost the immune response and others can suppress it. – NCI Dictionary of Cancer Terms, U.S. National Cancer Institute, 2021”.
Q: How do I reach you to tell you how much I appreciate your work?
A: We LOVE free praise. Email us at: Admin at How Do Vaccines Cause Autism dot org
Q: How do I reach you to tell you how horrible your work is?
A: We LOVE free peer review. Email us at: Admin at How Do Vaccines Cause Autism dot org
Q: I sent you information to be considered, when will it be posted?
A: The site is updated at least quarterly, so information received today will be vetted and, if it is determined that it should be included, will be posted by July 1.
Q: But CDC, AAP, HHS, NIH, and all the other public health entities that I talk to says that there is no link between vaccines and autism, and lists the research proving it, right?
A: These claims are false, and this site answers those false claims with more than 200 citations. There is not one study that “disproves” that vaccines can cause autism. There are only papers that FAIL TO FIND AN ASSOCIATION.
When you read this list of papers that fail to find an association between vaccines and autism from the AAP with 36 citations to support their claim that “Vaccines are not associated with autism”, note their disclaimer that, “This is not an exhaustive list—vaccine safety studies are constantly being conducted and published and may not be reflected here. Experts closely evaluated the methods and data analyses that produced the results described before accepting these studies for publication in scientific journals.“
They don’t give you all the research. HowDoVaccinesCauseAutism.org gives you the research they ignore and hide.
Imagine that a hundred eyewitnesses report the murder of a man by a well know, highly decorated and largely beloved law enforcement official. Then imagine that the legal authorities send out 256 different teams of investigators to look into it from a myriad of different angles. Then pretend that 220 of those teams file reports that offer dozens of different pieces of evidence to suggest that the suspect is guilty, and 36 reports are filed where there is no link found between the respected man and the murder.
Would any legal authority be taken seriously that ignored the 200 plus reports of evidence against the suspect, and held a press conference saying, “We have 36 reports from teams that didn’t find evidence of his guilt in the places that they chose to look, so we are exonerating the suspect. Case closed!”
Q: Why don’t you include any of the research that fails to find an association between vaccines and autism?
We don’t include said research because we are doing what AAP and CDC have done, only include the papers that we use to argue our position, that vaccines are strongly associated with autism. If you want to see AAP or CDC‘s evidence of their claims, you may visit their resources.
It is up to the reader to make up their own mind on who makes the stronger case.
Q: Isn’t that biased?
A: Yes. We are biased. Our bias is clearly stated. Everyone has a bias and pretending that there is an unbiased source on vaccine/autism causation is naive. This is a life and death debate, where trillions of dollars are at stake. The only potential unbiased opinions on this matter than we can think of would be aliens or angels, as they are likely neither subject to human disease states or biological vulnerabilities, nor in need of US Dollars.
Q: Aren’t there unvaccinated children with an autism diagnosis?
A: YES! That is because vaccines are not THE cause of autism, they are A cause of autism. The one thing that everyone seems to be able to agree on is that autism has multi-factorial causation. Epigenetics, the interplay between genetic predisposition and environmental exposures, are widely discussed in the autism causation debate.
While genes may load the gun, exposure pulls the trigger, and in modern living filled with chemical exposures, there are more and more trigger pulls happening from many sources. It is our position that the the current CDC vaccine schedule is the biggest bolus dose of chemical exposures that a young children receive, and thus the most likely culprit in the autism epidemic.
Q: I think your evidence is weak. Why don’t you have more powerful studies?
A: Because PhRMA and HHS have ALL the money. We have five dollars. They set the research agenda, which is designed to exonerate them from any wrong doing. And even then they cannot escape indicting vaccines. If you are unsatisfied with the research you see here, join families in demanding that the questions we want examined are studied, and that the populations we want information on are investigated. For example, does Pertussis containing vaccine cause autism? We have no study on that, and we don’t set the research agenda. What is offered here is what exists in the research paradigm that the pharmaceutical funded industry will allow.
