VACCINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX published BOGUS STUDY trying to debunk vaccine autism connection, but study was riddled with flaws

• Critics say the Danish study on aluminum in vaccines used flawed methodology by comparing children with similar aluminum exposures instead of comparing vaccinated versus unvaccinated children, weakening the ability to detect meaningful health risks like autism or autoimmune conditions.
• Researchers excluded key data groups and tracked health outcomes only up to age 5, potentially omitting late-onset diagnoses and early signs of aluminum-related harm; critics argue this underestimates risks and skews results toward “no effect.”
• Over 34,000 children were excluded from the analysis for receiving “implausible” numbers of aluminum-containing vaccines before age 2—raising concerns that the study deliberately omitted high-exposure cases most likely to show adverse effects.
• Independent experts argue prior research contradicts the study’s findings, pointing to evidence linking aluminum to neurotoxicity, immune dysregulation, and increased asthma risk, and calling for unbiased, biomarker-based studies to examine aluminum’s true impact on child health.

Bogus study claiming no link between aluminum in vaccines and autism riddled with flaws, rendering the whole study meaningless

A most-likely pharma-funded, faked and falsified study that was recently published in the Annals of Internal Medicine claims there is no link between aluminum in vaccines and 50 negative health outcomes, including autism, asthma, and autoimmune disorders. While mainstream media outlets like NBC News touted the findings as reassuring evidence supporting vaccine safety, critics argue the study is deeply flawed and fails to properly investigate the true health effects of aluminum exposure.

The study supposedly analyzed health records of approximately 1.2 million children born in Denmark between 1997 and 2018. Researchers compared health outcomes based on the aluminum content in vaccines administered to these children.

Here’s the rub. Realistic critics such as Dr. Brian Hooker of Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and renowned aluminum researcher Dr. Chris Exley say the comparison was essentially meaningless. Instead of contrasting vaccinated versus unvaccinated children or those with high versus zero aluminum exposure, the study compared children who received vaccines with slightly different — but still similar — aluminum levels. The difference in exposure was just one milligram, which Hooker called insufficient to detect any real health disparities.

The authors concluded there was no increased risk of autism, autoimmune conditions, asthma, or allergies associated with vaccine aluminum. Lead author Anders Hviid defended the study, stating that aluminum salts used in vaccines are not equivalent to elemental aluminum and asserting that the research provides “robust evidence” for vaccine safety. He also explained that a true control group of unvaccinated children was unfeasible due to their scarcity in Denmark.

However, experts argue that key methodological choices severely weakened the study’s credibility. James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D., pointed out that researchers excluded children who showed early signs of aluminum-related health issues, like chronic illness before age two. He likened this to erasing the very evidence the study was supposed to detect. Additionally, more than 34,000 children were excluded from the study due to receiving what researchers called an “implausible” number of vaccine doses — a red flag critics say was ignored instead of investigated.

Another major criticism is the limited follow-up period. Researchers only tracked health outcomes until age five, despite the fact that many developmental and autoimmune disorders, including autism, are typically diagnosed after that age. This likely led to underreporting of health conditions. In fact, autism rates in the study were reported as 1 in 500, far lower than Denmark’s national average, which suggests substantial under-diagnosis within the study timeframe.

Critics also noted that the researchers did not test actual aluminum levels in children’s bodies using biomarkers like blood or hair samples. Instead, they assumed aluminum exposure based on vaccination records, without verifying whether the assumed doses were accurate or absorbed.

These shortcomings stand in contrast to other studies linking aluminum adjuvants to neurotoxicity and immune dysregulation. For instance, a 2023 U.S. study found a 36% higher asthma risk in children who received over three milligrams of aluminum from vaccines.

Dr. Exley and others suspect industry bias may have influenced the Danish study, especially as scrutiny of aluminum in vaccines grows under U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Critics like Lyons-Weiler warn that studies designed to reassure rather than investigate are misleading the public. “The public deserves honest science, not carefully crafted headlines,” he said.

Bookmark Vaccines.news to your favorite independent websites for updates on experimental gene therapy injections that lead to autism, developmental disorders,  infertility, turbo cancer and Long-Vax-Syndrome.

Sources for this article include:

ChildrensHealthDefense.org

ACPJournals.org

NBCNews.com