Autism Linked to Childhood Vaccinations

BREAKING: LANDMARK PEER-REVIEWED STUDY FINDS VACCINATION IS A MAJOR RISK FACTOR FOR AUTISM:

https://x.com/NicHulscher/status/2054605616618848537?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2054605616618848537%7Ctwgr%5Ecc09573fc4b189046a4cc2947787cad9e382f578%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fdailydeclaration.org.au%2F2026%2F05%2F18%2Fautism-linked-to-vaccinations%2F

Of 136 studies examining childhood vaccines or their components, 107 found evidence consistent with a link between vaccination and autism or other neurodevelopmental disorders.

A sweeping new peer-reviewed study has concluded that the cumulative childhood vaccination schedule is a modifiable risk factor for autism spectrum disorder — and that no government has ever tested whether the full schedule is safe for children’s developing brains.

The paper, published this month in the Journal of Independent Medicine, synthesised more than 300 studies covering genetic, environmental and medical risk factors for autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

Its lead author, Nicolas Hulscher of the McCullough Foundation, and co-authors, including cardiologist Dr Peter McCullough and Dr Andrew Wakefield, concluded that routine childhood vaccination — particularly when clustered in early infancy — represents a major modifiable risk factor within a broader causal framework.

“To date, no study has evaluated the safety of the entire cumulative paediatric vaccine schedule for neurodevelopmental outcomes through age 9 or 18 years,” the authors stated.

Their conclusion: “The totality of evidence supports a multifactorial model of ASD in which genetic predisposition, neuroimmune biology, environmental toxicants, perinatal stressors, and iatrogenic exposures converge to produce the phenotype of a post-encephalitic state.”

The study found that of 136 studies examining childhood vaccines or their components, 107 — or 79 per cent — inferred a possible link between immunisation and ASD or other neurodevelopmental disorders.

Just 29 found no association, and those, the authors argued, were undermined by a critical flaw: “absence of a genuinely unvaccinated control group, registry misclassification, ecological confounding, and averaged estimates that obscure effects within vulnerable subgroups.”