Aaron Siri on childhood vaccines

Senator Ron Johnson: "I truly believe that he may be the most consequential attorney in my lifetime"

May 01, 2026

Dear Church Leaders (and everyone else)

Not least further to this post…

Credentialism exposed

September 15, 2025

Read full story

…this recent presentation from US civil rights lawyer Aaron Siri is well worth a look:

I guess the “MMR vaccination” box comes from YouTube…

By way of context, here is a reminder of an exchange between Siri and Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) featured in the above Credentialism exposed article:

[Blumenthal] Mr Siri, we’ve been talking about medical issues... You’re not a medical doctor are you?
[Siri] No, sir
[Blumenthal] And you’re not an immunologist or a biologist or any kind or…
[Siri] Or a vaccinologist. No, but I depose them regularly, including the world’s leading ones with regards to the vaccines.
And I have to make my claims based on actual evidence when I go to court with regard to vaccines. I don’t get to rely on titles.

Aaron Siri’s full slide deck from his recent presentation can be found here.

The YouTube video features a lengthy introduction from Senator Ron Johnson, who says of Siri, I think with good reason, “I truly believe that he may be the most consequential attorney in my lifetime”.

The transcript below, along with occasional links, comments and additional information, starts from around 14 minutes in. Given the context, I have used US spellings.

Like a lot of things, the situation in relation to chronic health is worse in the US than the UK, but there are many and various things that any country can learn from Siri’s presentation.

One of the most striking things to me is the stark contrast between reality and what is portrayed to us by our authorities, including governments, public health authorities and the media…

Here is an outline of the presentation.

Introduction
How we got to where we are
An epidemic of childhood chronic disease
Vaccine context
A bold claim
Inadequate safety testing
Recommended reforms
Exaggerated benefits
Summary
Concluding thoughts

It is fairly long, but I think worthwhile, and I don’t have plans to post much else in the next few days…

Introduction

[Aaron Siri] There is an urgent need to make all kinds of changes at HHS if we’re going to address chronic health issues in this country. And one of those major changes we need to address… are reforms regarding vaccines…
A few disclaimers…

I’m the managing partner of Siri & Glimstad. It’s a law firm with over 100 individuals, and we have many practices... [and] I believe we have the largest vaccine practice in the world that does not represent pharmaceutical companies.
I’m also the host of Informed with Aaron Siri.
And I wrote a book… Vaccines, Amen.

If Amazon is any guide, Vaccines, Amen has been well-received in the US…

…and the UK:

Once you see the evidence, you cannot unlearn the truth

How we got to where we are

I’m going to go through some basics… and then we’re going to get into some of the some of the evidence and details, because the evidence matters. It’s critical.
[The manufacturers or the administrators of] vaccines have immunity for… the injuries they cause… Vaccines are in fact the only product in America... where I can’t bring a lawsuit to claim [that]… had you made that product safer, this child would not have a cardiovascular issue… a neurological issue… an immunological issue… would not be dead. It’s the only one. And that’s because of a law called the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.

As the law states:
“No person may bring a civil action against a vaccine administrator or manufacturer… for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death.”
And, as the US Supreme Court confirmed when there was an attempt to challenge this… blanket of immunity:
“We hold that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act pre-empts all design defect claims...”
Those are claims that you could have made the product safer.
“…for injury or death caused by vaccine side effects.”
That is the law of the land.

How did this law come about…?
Leading up to 1986, there were only three routine vaccines: MMR [measles, mumps and rubella], DTP [diphtheria, tetanus and polio], and OPV [oral polio vaccine]. That’s it. Three routine childhood vaccines. That’s the whole schedule in 1986 right there up on your screen. Actually, that’s a 1983 schedule. There wasn’t another one created till 1989.
The amount of harm and injury caused by those three products was so great that every single company making those vaccines went out of business or stopped making them.
Now lots of industries face this crossroads…
Remember when there was asbestos in building materials…? What did they do? Did they leave the asbestos in? Just give [those responsible] immunity and say, “Hey, you keep selling that stuff. Buildings are really important. You can keep selling.” No, they forced them to make a better, safer product.
How about when gas tanks were exploding…? Di they give [those responsible] immunity? And say, “Oh, cars are really important. Can’t get people to the hospital… We’re just going to give you immunity.” No… make a better gas tank.
Go industry by industry. Find me an industry, and I’ll find you a crossroads they faced at some point in history. Even baby powder… the thing you all thought was so safe…
The point is that Congress in its wisdom did something different with vaccines [that] it did not do with any other product. It said to the companies, “You know what we’re going to do? Instead of making you… create a better, safer product, we’re just going to make it so nobody can sue you. No matter how many kids you kill or injure, even if you could have made the product safer.” Vaccines are the only product that has that permanent liability. And Congress didn’t just give them immunity for OPV, DTP, and MMR. It gave it for any other routine childhood vaccine developed thereafter…
Congress, to its credit, I think, understood that it [had] eliminated the way you assure product safety… the economic self-interest of the company. Who here has stock… a retirement account…? Where do you want your stock to go? Up or down…?
[And] who else wants it to go up? Wall Street does, the investors do, the CEO does… everybody down the chain that has stock options in the company. Everybody has an alignment of interest for the company’s stock to go up. And that conforms corporate conduct. It drives how they make decisions. It drives how they conduct (for example) clinical trials… how they do post-licensure safety… how they do recalls… you name it.
Normally, the profit incentive… that economic self-interest… is a good thing because it drives the company to make a better, safer product… and test it before it goes out to market and so forth. [And] Congress recognizing… I hope this is the reason… that it [had] eliminated that economic interest… that market incentive… [broken] the economic self-interest of pharma companies to assure the safety of… vaccines… instead… added… a section to that law… the National Childhood Vacine Injury Act… which I will call the 1986 Act… called the “mandate for safer childhood vaccines”.

That’s the entire section of law right there. You see it on your screen. It was codified at 42 USC 300aa-27.
I view this one section of laws [as] basically underpinning all vaccine safety in America because… since the manufacturers don’t have an economic self-interest to do it… we’ve got to rely on our federal health authorities to do it. And this is the provision that mandated that they make the product safer… It basically is what put HHS… the Department of Health and Human Services… in which CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], FDA [Food and Drug Administration], NIH [National Institutes of Health] and so forth are located... in the shoes of the pharmaceutical companies. And it has three simple provisions.
The first provision [(a)], called the general rule, says the Secretary of HHS… currently Robert F Kennedy Jr… is responsible for assuring vaccines are safer in every possible domain… pretty much anything you can imagine: distribution… licensure… everything.
Section (b) creates a task force for safer childhood vaccines that is supposedly comprised of the heads of NIH, CDC and FDA. And its sole job is to make recommendations to the Secretary on how to improve vaccine safety.
Simple enough…?
And the third section [(c)]… requires that the Secretary of HHS… every two years… submit a… report to Congress on what HHS has done to make vaccines safer over the prior two years.
Again, simple enough.
Let’s just quickly go through, from bottom to top, what’s been done…
In terms of the [two-yearly] reports to Congress… [they’ve] never been submitted… And that’s the easy part… Government seems to be great at making reports all the time… but this one they’ve never made… not once. Federal lawsuits sued them for the reports. They admitted they’ve never done it. Hopefully that will change under Secretary Kennedy.
Then, separately, we wanted to see, on behalf of my client ICAN [Informed Consent Action Network]… this task force… We wanted to see all the recommendations… Pharma is not going to do it… HHS should do it. This task force should be making recommendations. Well, guess what… after a lawsuit and then more… legal work… we found out that the task force had submitted only one report ever to the secretary of HHS [on] how to improve vaccines. That was in 1998, and then it was… disbanded. Apparently, you don’t need to make any recommendations. They’re safe. The job was done. Even though most of the vaccines [now] on the schedule… weren’t even there yet.

Now Secretary Kennedy has… reinstated… for the first time since 1998… the task force for safer childhood vaccines. And we have provided on behalf of our client ICAN a letter to HHS on all the ways that vaccine safety should be improved. And we’ve asked this task force to please issue these recommendations to the Secretary to be implemented…
What I want to focus today’s presentation on is going through some of those recommendations. [Given] we’re in [Washington] DC… I was hoping some folks from the FDA, CDC and so forth might be here... I figured… maybe this was an opportunity to go through the recommendations we were making for changes across HHS and all the agencies… [and] you can read the recommendations in detail at the link [at the bottom of the above slide]…

An epidemic of childhood chronic disease

One more piece of backdrop… the epidemic of [chronic] childhood disease…
The data reflect that, in the early 1980s, under 10% of kids in America had a chronic health issue… [and] that currently we’re over 40%... some data… over 50%... and often multiple chronic health issues. The MAHA [Make America Healthy Again] report reflects the same data points, and it identifies four areas that… could be responsible for this increase in chronic health issues:

Food… Chemicals like PFAS [per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances]… forever chemicals, which fortunately have been declining since the 1980s… behavior… like exercise… and overmedicalization…

For example we’ve gone from that [left-hand diagram] CDC schedule in 1986… that’s what a child would receive on or before their first birthday… to this [right-hand diagram]… what a child would receive following the CDC schedule today… on or before their first birthday. That is the difference. And these are just the routine recommended vaccines. There are others that are not.
But let me go back one second… The MAHA report… what did it identify? What are the chronic health issues that have exploded?

When you look at the list… asthma, ADHD, allergies, atopic issues… go down the list… what you will find is virtually every single chronic health issue that has exploded has an aetiology in some form of immune system dysregulation. Even things… for example…like ADHD… that nobody thinks of as an immune [issue] What’s the immune system got to do with the behavioral issue?
Well, go look at the actual biological science and you will find that children with ADHD have various immune markers that reflect dysregulation. And that’s true basically across the board of almost all the chronic health conditions that have exploded.
And our federal health agencies can’t tell you why these have exploded. Have they studied [the vaccine schedule]? If you’re going to look for what might have caused the chronic health [issues] in the immune systems of the children of the United States across all religions, racial groups… demographics… whether they’re far up north in Alaska or [in] Key West [thousands of miles away in Florida]… [you] probably should start with the product you’re injecting over and over again… from three injections on or before the first year of age in 1986… the CDC schedule… to now… as of the… repeal of the recent changes… back to 29 injections on or before the first birthday, including in utero… meaning the mother gets the shot. I’m counting a few of those as well…

Again, this is 1983 [on the left]. The orange ones are the four on or before the first birthday. That’s the full schedule. So that includes not only the first year of life but also up to 18 years of age.
And this [on the right] is what it looks like today up to 18 years of age… following the CDC schedule.
They tell you… vaccines are a powerful pharma product… they can have systemic effects on your immune system. And we should believe it. And we should also make sure we properly study them.

[Also]… in terms of uptake… just to really give people a sense of you know where we were and where we’ve come in this short period of time… in 1983 the uptake of MMR… was 66% in America. DTP was 65%. OPV was 57%. [And] it was basically zero for all the other routine vaccines, because they didn’t exist.
This is the current uptake… over 90% now for the MMR, DTP and OPV equivalents, and very high for many of the others.
Okay, so that was a lot of material… just to… encapsulate it… on the one hand we have HHS responsible for vaccine safety… that includes all its agencies… because the companies no longer have the financial incentive to do it…
The other thing we have is an explosion in the vaccine schedule.
And then we also have an explosion in chronic health issues that have an aetilogy in immune system dysregulation and dysfunction.
And our federal health authorities still can’t explain what’s causing it…

Vaccine context

So with that backdrop… we’re going to take a look across the agencies… on what they’ve done to rule out or affirm that vaccines are safe… [and] are not causing this epidemic of chronic health issues. And if they haven’t done their jobs, I’m going to suggest ways for them to do their jobs.
I want to start with the impact of eliminating liability… I’m going to put some meat on it…
According to Money Inc, the four most profitable drugs that Pfizer sells… as of 2019 or [so]… [are in this slide which] reflects the clinical trial… relied upon for each of these four drug products.

You can see… the clinical trials that the FDA relied upon to license each of them were multi-year placebo-controlled trials. Why? Well, the reason… I will tell you… it’s nothing to do with the FDA… has to do with the fact that the pharma company wants to know if the product is safe before it goes to market. Why? Because if it goes to market and causes substantial harm, what would happen? Lose money…. Again, which way do you want your stock to go…? So it wants to know…
This [slide] reflects the clinical trials allowed upon to license… vaccines given in the first 6 months of life… three times each.

And what you see is the safety review period… how long safety was reviewed after injection in each of those clinical trials and what the control was.
Who doesn’t believe those numbers…? I found it unbelievable the first time I saw it…
Let’s go through it…
Here’s the HepB vaccine… [for hepatitis B] the first one on the list. This is the package insert for Recombivax HB (there’s only… two licensed stand-alone HepB vaccines: Recombivax HB and Engerix B):

This is the package insert for Recombivax HB in which federal regulations are required to summarize a clinical trial relied upon to license [the product]… for the purpose of safety in section 6.1. And it says:
“In three clinical studies…”
This is the clinical trial relied upon to license this product for children...
“434 doses of Recombivax HB, 5 mcg [micrograms], were administered to 147 healthy infants and children (up to 10 years of age) who were monitored for 5 days after each dose.”
The first time I read this, I thought there’s no way this can be it. There’s no way they licensed this product to be given to millions of babies based on that. No control group, not monitoring safety long enough, and not enough kids in it. It’s useless…
We then FOIA-ed the FDA for the underlying clinical trial reports… you can go look at the underlying clinical trial reports [via the link]… [And] that’s it, folks. That is what the FDA relied upon.
You could also watch me depose Dr Stanley Plotkin about this clinical trial. Fun fact… when I deposed him, I didn’t know he was the principal investigator of this clinical trial. And if you watch the deposition, you see he too… seemed surprised when he looked at it… that it was only 5 days… [and] to me that reflects how safety is really an afterthought when it comes to these things.

Siri’s epic 9-hour 2018 vaccine court case deposition with Stanley Plotkin, who is sometimes known as the “Godfather of Vaccines”, can be viewed here.

The section on the Recombivax HB starts at 3:17:00.

You can also look at the FDA petition that we filed… and said, “Look, safe and effective... there’s probably some gray in that… but no control… five days of monitoring… 147 kids…? Come on. That’s got to be in the black. This is not sufficient…
By the way, the only other HepB vaccine, Engerix B, was licensed based on a clinical trial with four days of safety monitoring in its clinical trial.
Let’s do two other vaccines quickly…

Prevenar 7 [a pneumococcal vaccine]… again… given at two, four and six months of age to babies…
There was no Prevnar vaccine… no pneumococcal vaccine in the US… when this was [originally] licensed… meaning there should have been a placebo-controlled trial. There was no ethical reason not to do one.
Instead, the clinical trial relied upon to license Prevenar 7 PCV7 [PCV = Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine] had as the control an investigational meningococcal group C conjugate vaccine… meaning another experimental vaccine [which had not had a placebo-controlled trial].
I couldn’t make that up… even if you asked me to. I’d have never dreamed to say that… I would never say five days either… sounds crazy… but there it is.
By the way, if you… want to know what the FDA thinks about it, there’s a whole JAMA [Journal of the American Medical Association] article with a whole slew of FDA scientists who literally say:
“Prior to licensure… the control group in the main study received another experimental vaccine, rather than a placebo…”
…which they go on to lament and say [essentially] “Well, that could mask serious adverse events…” They say… you can go read it in JAMA yourself.
Here’s where it gets worse… PCV7 was then used as a control to license PCV13… Prevenar 13. And in that clinical trial, where they reviewed safety for 6 months… in babies who were primarily healthy… they found that…
“Serious adverse events…”
Which means something very serious… like death, hospitalization, permanent disability…
“…reported following vaccination… infants and toddlers… occurred in 8.2% among Prevenar 13 recipients and 7.2% among Prevenar [7] recipients.”
In my opinion, that should have made heads at the FDA figuratively explode with concern because… what was the baseline of safety? Prevnar 7… Was that proved to be safe? No.
Here you have these really high serious adverse events [for PCV13]… but because they were similar [to PCV7]… for regulatory purposes, it was deemed “safe”. In the real world, not so much.
Then Prevnar 13, which is used as the control to license Prevnar 15... And what was found in that clinical trial?
“Serious adverse events up to 6 months following vaccination with the 4-dose series were reported by 9.6% of the [PCV15] Vaxneuvance recipients and by 8.9% of the [PCV13] Prevnar 13 recipients.”
But what did the FDA and the manufacturer say? They said:
“There were no notable patterns or numerical imbalances between vaccination groups.”
Hence “safe” for the purposes of licensure…
I would… submit to you… [those vaccines are] not safe… not proven safe for the purposes of the real world… because it all comes down to Prevnar 7. It’s basically a little pyramid scheme of safety… at the bottom of which… your baseline has never been shown to be safe.

I am reminded of the book Turtles All The Way Down…

…the foreword, introduction and first chapter of which can be found here.

Last one [of the routine childhood vaccines]… DTaP vaccine [for Diphtheria, Tetanus and Pertussis (whooping cough)]…
There are two standalone DTaP vaccines… both licensed in a clinical trial where DTP [also for Diphtheria, Tetanus and Pertussis] was used as the control. DTP [has] never been licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial, and later studies of DTP have found that those who get that product die at multiple times the rate [of] those who do not. While they may have less deaths from diptheria, tetanus and pertussis, they have more overall mortality from things never expected from DTP.
This… is a seminal study done when they introduced the DTP vaccine in Guinea Bissau.

And what they found is that children that only got DTP… versus those that got no vaccines… died at 10 times the rate… statistically significant. And… there was another study in 2018 with a similar finding. And there’s a series of other studies that all make [a] similar finding.
We asked UNICEF about this… and, by the way, this is the most common vaccine in the world… DTP… We said [to UNICEF], “How could you distribute a product where the weight of the science shows that you’re killing more kids than you’re saving?” UNICEF sent us back a review from years prior to this study… that looked at the body of evidence [and] found most of the studies did show a deleterious effect… but said, “But… you don’t have a study that’s… randomized… where OPV wasn’t also given… and that wasn’t when there was already [the] vaccine in play for a long time...”
Well, it was ironic that the UNICEF… said that… and pointed to that 2014 review with those three arguments… because this 2017 study [on the slide]was specifically designed to address those three limitations… vaccines were given based on birth dates… so naturally randomized… they had a group that didn’t get OPV… and it was before there was any use of DTP… so not in a post-elimination environment. And in those optimal conditions, they found… 10 times the rate of death amongst the DTP-vaccinated kids.
So all available evidence reflects that DTP is killing more kids than it has saved. And because DTP is a licensed product, you can’t do a placebo-controlled trial. They tell you it’s unethical… meaning this is the best study the world will likely ever have… on whether the DTP vaccine is saving more kids than it kills. But yet DTP was the control for DTaP vaccine used here [in the US]…

A bold claim

I’ve given a few examples before I make my bold claim… because if I just mentioned [the] bold claim…
How many reporters are here? They’re going to fact-check and say… what I’m about to say isn’t true. But I assure you… it is categorically true… not because I’m saying it, but because it’s what the FDA documents specifically reflect. And if you go to Chapter 10 of Vaccines, Amen, you can pull up the FDA document for every single clinical trial.
Are you ready for it…?
Not a single routine injected childhood vaccine on the CDC schedule has ever been licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial.

I’m going to go a step further…
And when another vaccine was used as a control, that vaccine was never licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial.
That is a categorical fact.
And for any reporters out there, instead of calling Paul Offit when you run out of here… why don’t you actually go to Chapter 10 [of Vaccines, Amen] and look at the underlying FDA licensure documents that we spent 10 years clawing out of… FDA’s hands for yourselves... But you’re [probably] not going to… do that anyway… I’ve implored many reporters to do that... [they] never do…
This chart [on the slide above] reflects every single currently-licensed routine injected child vaccine between birth and six months. It shows the control that was used in the clinical 43 minutes trial to license that product… and when another vaccine was used… what was the control to license that vaccine… Down the chain… at the end of it… no placebo.
Remember we just did Prevenr 13… Then it went to Prevenar 7… And then it went to another investigational vaccine. We just did HepB. Neither had a control in the licensure for children. DTaP went to DTP… and so forth.
The same is also true of all of the routine injected childhood vaccines given between 7 months of age and 18 years of age…

Well… I might have to qualify that… because with the judge’s recent decision… reinstating the old vaccine schedule… [the] covid vaccine… for 12 to 15-year-olds… Pfizer did have a placebo control group… Again… it’s all in chapter 10 [of Vaccines, Amen]… it’s all in the FDA documents.

Inadequate safety testing

Now even if these clinical trials had [had] a proper control group… a placebo... meaning something inert [e.g. saline, i.e. without any of the vaccine ingredients]... they were still virtually useless for assessing safety because none of them reviewed safety for long enough… typically up to [only] 6 months.
These are all the vaccines given in the first six months of life… routine injected vaccines.

And you could see the solicited reaction… how long they gathered solicited reactions… and how long they gathered unsolicited reactions… in those clinical trials.
[But] when you’re injecting a baby… to know whether they have neurodevelopmental disorders, immunological disorders, dysautonomia… go down the list of the type of things we normally see vaccine injuries causing at our firm… the tens of thousands of folks who have contacted us… you’re not going to know that for a few years after vaccination.
These trials are patently insufficient… even if they were properly controlled, they don’t review safety long enough.
And then on top of that… even if they’re properly controlled and review safety long enough… they’re almost always underpowered. For example, 147 kids, even if you viewed safety for 5 years with a placebo control… if you’ve only got 147 kids that’s not properly powered to detect virtually anything. It’s useless.
[By way of illustration] I’m going to give you an example of a non-routine vaccine where the company had the financial incentive… dengue vaccine… [which] is not routine. You can hold the manufacturer liable…

They did a clinical trial in which they had six years… basically… for death against the placebo control for 30,000 kids.
You know what they found a few years into the trial… years into the trial…? Children under six had an increased risk of severe harm and death. So it is not licensed or recommended for children under six.
And for children over six, what they found is… if they never had dengue [a mosquito-borne disease prevalent in tropical and subtropical areas]… they again had an increased rate of death and severe disease. So [this vaccine] is only licensed and recommended for children who have had dengue [and] who are over six years of age.
What would have happened if they [had] only reviewed safety for even six months, with no placebo control group? Would they have found this…? No, they wouldn’t…
[But] this is the type of clinical trial that you would want. This is the type of clinical trial I believe happens when there’s a financial incentive to know if the product is safe. It’s just the way [the] economics work.
And I will tell you, by the way… had this product gone through one of [the shorter] safety reviews, it would probably be on the schedule. It might be a routine injected childhood vaccine. And you’d be told it’s safe and effective. Because how would you find out? How would you know? You can’t do a placebo-controlled trial after it’s licensed. They tell you that that’s unethical.
Speaking of ethics, here is what the British Medical Journal says about these trials when they’re not properly done.

“In some trials, placeos were omitted on ethical grounds. That is illogical because studies destined to produce unreliable results should themselves be considered unethical.”
And that is true of every single clinical trial relied upon to license a routine injected childhood vaccine. They are all, by this definition, unethical.

Recommended reforms

For the FDA

So here are the reforms I recommend for the FDA [which approves vaccines for use]:

[1] Absent public contrition, remove anyone in FDA’s Office of Vaccine Research and Review (OVRR) involved in licensing any routine injected childhood vaccine.
After you have unleashed these products on millions of children and you’re in this department and you’ve been part of that, unless you can publicly admit that you made a mistake, you’re going to be too conflicted to properly do your job going forward… respectfully…
[2] Notify practitioners…
The FDA should be sending notice to every single practitioner… pediatrician, family doctor, OBGYn…
…of the details of each trial relied upon to license each routine injected childhood vaccine.
They should know. They should understand. They could just pull up the package insert, but I’ve deposed endless pediatricians. They don’t know… [even though] they have their nurses do it... thousands of these things…
And:
[3] Issue minimum standards for licensure of vaccines.
And I mean real licensure standards… like what the controls should be, how long safety should be reviewed, proper blinding, and so on and so forth. That doesn’t exist for vaccines… certainly not for childhood vaccines. There was some guidance put out… for the EUA of covid vaccines, but that’s about it.
And then there’s a whole bunch of other recommendations in the task force letter below.

For the CDC

You might say… after licensure… [vaccines are] thoroughly and rigorously tested for safety.
Well, the CDC and HRSA [the Health Resources and Services Administration] are the agencies responsible for administering the vaccine compensation program. If you’re injured by a vaccine, you can bring a claim for an injury. You… don’t sue the manufacturer. You sue the Secretary of HHS. You sue the very same people who claim the vaccine is safe. I’m sure that doesn’t conflict HHS from doing safety studies that would show vaccines cause harm…
In any event, HRSA and CDC paid the IOM [the Institute of Medicine, now the National Academy of Medicine]… and try as [the] IOM could to please CDC and HRSA… to find that these vaccines do not cause what they said are the 158 most commonly claimed injuries from vaccines… that is what HRSA and CDC asked the IOM to review…

The IOM said [essentially], “Well, after we surveyed all the existing medical literature… five of [the studies]… we can reject that the vaccine is causally related [in causing the harm]. For 16, the evidence favors a causal relationship. But for 134 of the most-commonly claimed serious injuries from vaccines… per the CDC and HRSA… sorry folks, you haven’t done your job… studies don’t exist for us to reach a conclusion. This alone reflects the CDC is not doing what it needs to do in terms of vaccine safety. You don’t need more than this…
This gets even worse when you look at the studies cumulatively from 1991 to 2021…

Now I don’t want to debate autism, [but I’m going to use it] as the litmus test, [given] it is the issue they say they have most thoroughly and completely studied… more than any other vaccine injury. So if they haven’t done that, well, that probably reflects how well they’ve studied all the other injuries.

[Some clips are then played featuring various credentialed figures]
“We’re not sure as the scientific community what causes autism, but we know that vaccines do not.”
“Vaccines are really the one thing we have looked at… as causing autism.”
“We know that vaccines don’t cause autism. The science is clear.”
“Vaccines don’t cause autism.”
“I do not deny in any way that we need to do more about autism… but it has nothing to do with vaccines.”
“Let me be clear. Vaccines do not cause autism.”
“Vaccines don’t cause autism… Absolutely sure…”

I wonder how much money those talking heads have received from pharma companies.

I wonder too what they would say to the parents of the triplets featured in this post.

And how they would respond to the study on the unvaccinated Amish community that is highlighted in this section of this post:

Restoring trust in science and health? (part 2 of 2)

July 22, 2025

Read full story

Back to Siri…

Okay… So, vaccines don’t cause autism. And despite telling parents vaccines don’t cause autism… when surveyed, 40-70% of parents of the child who’s autistic still point to vaccines as the cause of their child’s autism.

And what vaccines do they point to? They point to the vaccines given in the first six months of life… these five injected vaccines given three times each… as well as one vaccine given after the first six months of life… no earlier than typically [age] one… the MMR vaccine.

So you would assume, since the CDC says vaccines don’t cause autism… [that] they have the studies to show that these vaccines… don’t cause autism…

[For context] the controversy around the vaccines started with… pertussis vaccine not… MMR vaccine. This is the 1986 Act, the National Child Vaccine Injury Act. And it… directed the Secretary of HHS to look at 11… presumably commonly claimed injuries… from… pertussis vaccine. What’s one of the ones [that they] asked HHS to study? Autism. That’s in 1986.
So [HHS]… commissioned the IOM…

And the IOM in 1991 said, “Sorry… can’t tell you whether pertussis vaccine does or doesn’t cause autism, because you haven’t done any studies.” Zero studies.
Fast forward to 2012… when the CDC and HRSA again commissioned the IOM to… look at the entire body of literature… whether pertussis vaccine causes autism. And what did the IOM conclude again? The same thing.

The IOM said [essentially], “Sorry, we could not find any study… zero… to support that… pertussis vaccine doesn’t cause autism. They only found one study… that… related to pertussis vaccine and autism… [and] that did find an association. So the only study the IOM could find with regards to pertussis vaccine and autism found an association between pertussis vaccine and autism.
But what did the IOM do? It threw it out. Why? because it lacked an unvaccinated comparison population. It’s funny how that happens…

When the study shows the vaccine… they want to say it’s safe… they never throw it out for [lack of an unvaccinated comparison population]…
Anyway, as the IOM said, the evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between diphtheria, tetanus, or acellular potassium-containing vaccines and autism.
This is me deposing Dr Stanley Plotkin, the world’s leading vaccinologist, specifically about that finding [NB the original fuller version is here]…
[Siri] This is an excerpt from the IOM’s report…
[Plotkin] Yes, okay.
[Siri] Can you read the causality conclusion with regard to whether DTaP and Tdap cause autism?
[Plotkin] The evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between diphtheria toxoid, tetanus toxoid or acellular pertussis-containing vaccine and autism.
[Siri] If you don’t know whether DTaP or Tdap cause autism, shouldn’t you wait until you do know… until you have the science to support it… to then say that vaccines do not cause autism?
[Plotkin] Do I wait? No, I do not wait. Because I have to take into account the health of the child.
[Siri] And so for that reason, you’re okay with telling the parent that DTaP… Tdap… does not cause autism, even though the science isn’t there yet to support that claim?
[Plotkin] Absolutely.
[Back to Siri’s recent talk]
Safe and effective…
But we didn’t stop there. On behalf of ICAN, we actually sent Freedom of Information Act requests to the CDC, and we said, “All right, maybe the IOM can’t find it… maybe the world’s leading vaccinologist doesn’t have them… but maybe the CDC has the studies…” After all, it’s their claim on their website that the vaccines don’t cause autism.

NB the CDC website has recently been changed from what it said at the time to which Siri refers:

And we said [to them], “CDC, give us the studies that reflect that DTaP does not cause autism… Prevnar… Hib [haemophilus influenzae type b]… each of the vaccines given three times each in the first six months of life…”
They didn’t give us a single study.
We sued them in the federal court, and, days before the initial hearing, we got a list of 20 studies from them.
[But] here’s the thing about that list of 20 studies. I called the DOJ [Department of Justice] attorney and I said… “We reviewed your list, and this lawsuit’s about the vaccines given in the first six months of life… [of] the 20 studies… actually 16 studies and four reviews that you provided… 19 of them have nothing to do with those vaccines. They’re all about… MMR vaccine or an ingredient that’s not in any of these products. And the twentieth one is the 2012 IOM report that we just reviewed… that looked for all studies relating pertussis vaccine and autism… and only found one… that found an association… but they threw it out because there was no unvaccinated control group.” I said, “Are you sure you want to settle based on these 20 studies?”
DOJ came back and said, “Yes.”

This is a… settlement agreement signed by me on behalf of my client [ICAN] by the DOJ on behalf of the CDC… entered as an order of a federal court… in the southern district of New York by the way…
And that is why I call my book Vaccines, Amen. There is what the public health authorities tell you. And then there is what they have to admit when their back’s against the wall in a federal lawsuit… what they have to admit when they’re in a deposition. Quite different than what you hear out of the public health apparatus…
Due to time constraints, I’m going to skip over this video, but this is me deposing… in a lawsuit specifically about vaccines and autism… Dr Kathryn Edwards, one of the four editors of the medical text about vaccines and autism. And in this clip, she again says… she’s got no studies for any of those vaccines that support [the claim that] they do not cause autism [see e.g. the section from 2:56:36]

[I have been using] autism… as a litmus test. Autism is the issue they say they have most thoroughly and completely studied… with mountains and mountains of studies... so high, so wide, so vast… there isn’t even a number big enough to count them…
But they don’t have those studies. [And] you only got that [admission from them] when their back was against the wall.
If that is the state of the science for the issue they claim to have most thoroughly studied, could you imagine what the state of the vaccine science is for the over-100 serious injuries that parents claim vaccines cause… often neurological or immune-mediated neurological disorders and immune-related issues… devastating injuries that we get calls about all the time at our firm… and represent families for…

These are the four safety systems that the CDC has. They could be useful to assessing safety, but that’s not how they’re used. None of them really compare against unvaccinated… Most of [them] are basically just [doing the equivalent of] comparing smokers with smokers… asbestos exposure with asbestos exposure. They don’t want to actually compare exposed to unexposed, which is the way you would do rudimentary science. You can read all about that in chapter 11 of my book.

NB There are also risks with vaccine ingredients such as polysorbate 80 and aluminium-based adjuvants. A fair trial would compare the vaccine in question with a genuine placebo such as saline.

The studies that do exist that compare children that have gotten vaccines with children that have gotten no vaccines… so zero… unexposed to one or more vaccines… some of them are small [and] they have constraints. They’re not funded by the government, so they have funding limitations. And they’re almost all retrospective. So, they’re all subject to confounders, but… they’re consistent.
This is a few of them. There’s about a dozen… I detail many of them in my book.

And what you’ll find is that these studies all find that children who have been vaccinated all have multiple rates of the chronic health issues that have exploded in the last 40 years… as compared to kids that have gotten no vaccines.

Exaggerated benefits

So, I would… submit that CDC has not done its job when it comes to vaccine safety.
And then… there’s the other side of the coin… the benefits… Because that’s what you’ll often hear... the benefits are so vast... so incredible that we can ignore these kids that we’ve injured and killed. They’re collateral damage…
This is an MMWR [Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report] report that I have cited back to me at every lawsuit I do about vaccines.

And what it claims is that… this is the most bold claim… that’s made about… childhood vaccines in America. Nobody makes as bold… a claim as this. So, I’m just going to go to the most extreme claim. And what this report claims is that, between 1994 and 2023, routine childhood vaccination will have prevented 508 million cases of illness, 32 million hospitalizations, and 1.1 million…approximately… deaths.
That’s a lot of life saved, if that’s true. And so… we should just ignore the whole safety issue…
But is it true? Is it possible that in the same way the CDC exaggerated how much study and work it has done to disprove [a link between] vaccines [and] autism, it similarly has exaggerated these numbers?
Take a look.
First, this review ignores all confounders. I’ll read you a quote from it.

“Factors other than immunization…”
…such as hygiene, clean water, sanitation, antibiotics, acute care, go down the [list]… anything you want…
“…might have contributed to lower disease risk in recent decades, and reductions resulting from these contributions have not been incorporated into the model”
It’s laughable science. You don’t ignore all the confounders. You’re supposed to do the opposite. You’re supposed to try and account for all confounders. It’s incredible.
The reason they can do this nonsense is because this doesn’t go through peer review. It goes through the CDC’s internal clearance process… anybody from the CDC… if you doubt that, go to your own website… or read my book where I quote the process to get something in MMWR. It has to align with the CDC’s policy. And if it doesn’t, it doesn’t end up in the MMWR. Talk about selection bias. That’s why it has no confidence intervals… because it’s junk science and the data is unreliable.
Let’s go through a few of the diseases… put some meat on the bone…

Diphtheria… this article claims that, between 1994 and 2023, 25,000 lives were saved [annually] in the United States from diphtheria. [Over 30 years] that amounts to 750,000… of the 1.1 million lives saved… something like 70%...
Well… here’s the problem with that claim: it’s nonsense. And here’s why.
The diphtheria vaccine only started being routinely used… in 1949. It’s the first year that the DTP vaccine was licensed. And in 1948 there were 634 deaths of diphtheria in the United States. [And] by the way, there was also the same number of births… around 3.67 million that year… as now. So it’s not even like we have different [sizes of] cohorts of children… it’s about the same size.
[And] yet this article is claiming that [in] 1948 when… we had parts of this country still like… developing countries… there would actually be 25,000 deaths, not 634 deaths…
[Moreover] diphtheria mortality declined by over 97% between 1900 and 1940. This chart on the right was issued by the United States Public Health Service report… it’s on the CDC website… in 1960. And what you find is that between 1900 and 1926… when the first diphtheria vaccine ever licensed came out… there was an over-80% decline in mortality. So… no question… nothing to do with [a] diphtheria [vaccine].
And then from 1926 to the 1940s, what the studies reflect… I’ve cited [them] in my book… you can read them… [is] that the parts of the country… that used a diphtheria vaccine versus those that didn’t… had the same reductions in mortality. Hence vaccines didn’t have [anything] to do with it... until you get to late 1940s. So at best you’re starting there. But somehow they are claiming 25,000 deaths from diphtheria… in the US versus a few hundred.
You know what’s kind of like diphtheria… scarlet fever. And they tried desperately to create a scarlet fever vaccine but never were able to. I submit to you… I’m speculating now… that, had they developed a scarlet fever vaccine, you’d be listening to public relations campaigns telling you that scarlet fever is going to kill everybody in America… everybody’s got to get a scarlet fever vaccine… you can’t go to school without a scarlet fever vaccine. And why do you want to be a murderer by not taking it? Oh, and 25,000 people a year would die from scarlet fever without the vaccine…

Hepatitis B… This article claims there were 3,000 lives saved [per year] from 1984-2023… which amounts to 90,000 [of the] 1.1 million… even though in 1980, before there was any HepB vaccine in America… zero… nada… there were only 294 deaths from hepatitis B. I don’t know how… he does that math.

And then there’s measles where, again, the report is claiming 2,800 lives saved a year in the US… The measles vaccine was first introduced in 1963. The mortality for measles had declined by over 98% between 1900 and 1963. There were about 4.2 million births per year in the years leading up to that. There are about 3.8 million births today…
I have no idea how one could possibly claim 2,800 lives saved when, back then, only around 400 lives were lost to measles a year, at a time when parts of this country were still like a developing nation. It ignores epidemiology, statistics, data, fact, reason, logic… and I go through it in my book in detail…
Also… [and] I’m not going to review this… [in any detail] but vaccine eliminating measles and mumps, rubella, and chickenpox… these febrile childhood infections…

The studies reflect that those that have had measles, mumps, chickenpox, rubella… have far less mortality from cardiovascular [disease] and cancers.

And if that data is true, and it’s consistent, we are probably well upside down [in relation to] our public health benefit from these products. There might be a reason that, unlike other pathogens that have come and gone through the ages, these did not…
[There is more information on] icandecide’s website… [and in] my book [Vaccines, Amen].
The benefits [of vaccines] are exaggerated…
This is a list of each of the vaccines that are routine injected… almost all of them.

And you can see for yourself the number of deaths year before. Every death is a tragedy. But if you really want to know the effect that vaccines have, what you’ve got to do is look at the mortality trend line before introduction of the vaccine… and then after introduction of the vaccine. If it’s not accelerating, why are you crediting the vaccine?
But not only do they… credit any reduction after introduction, they credit all of the decline from 1900 on as well. It’s incredible. I don’t know how vaccines do that. They’re magic.

Summary

Here [is a summary of] the reforms that I have suggested for the CDC.

Again…
Absent public contrition, remove anyone in CDC involved in vaccine safety, misleading reports, or promotion of vaccines.
Remove from the schedule all improperly licensed vaccines.
Make remaining vaccines shared clinical decision making.
To be clear, before you report that I want to eliminate vaccines, I said remove them from the schedule. I did not say not license them. Anybody should be able to still get a vaccine. It’s America. That’s freedom. You should be able to take the risks you want. But the government shouldn’t be promoting them like a pom-pom cheerleader without proper evidence.
Bring the vaccine safety data [VSD] link back in-house and make the deidentified data public.
That’s a database of over 10 million Americans’ health information along with their vaccination records. It used to be housed at the CDC. The CDC didn’t like that, because people could get access to it and actually do real studies. In 2001 they moved it out of the CDC so that you can’t get access to it. That should be reversed.
And they should…
Retract every MMWR article…
…like the one we just reviewed…
…where de-identified data is… not made public within 60 days...
And then there’s a whole host of other recommendations.
Moving on to HRSA… the agency that’s responsible [for] the vaccine injury compensation program as well as the CICP [Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program]… that’s for those injured by the covid vaccine.

We have submitted letters to Secretary Kennedy for both of those… to amend the vaccine injury table and… to bring them [into] conformity with federal law. For the CICP the statute says anything associated with the vaccine should be on the vaccine injury table. If it’s not on that table… good luck getting compensation. It’s almost impossible… getting it on a table is really critical to get even a modicum of compensation for those injured by these products. We hope that the Secretary and HHS will act on these petitions and update those tables. If not, we do intend to bring a lawsuit…

In terms of NIH reforms… pharma has plenty of money. We the people do not need to be subsidizing the development of products for pharma. NIH should be solely focused on the billions of dollars of our taxpayer money to only be invested in root causes, non-pharma interventions and replication of prior studies. Pharma could fund its own research. We don’t need to be subsidizing it.
They should prohibit involvement in vaccine development. We should… leave that to industry. For example, NIH should not have patents on the HPV vaccine Gardisil. That creates incredible conflicts. And you [can] see the [Task Force] letter… for more recommendations.

In terms of CMS, which administers Medicare and Medicaid, my recommendation would be that [there] should be no funding for or related to vaccines unless each state…
…respects the First Amendment...
…that means religious freedom as well…
…requires all hospitals and clinics to automate VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] reporting
They can track every vaccine. They have systems to track the movement of every vaccine from warehouse… you name it... But the one thing they can’t automate is the reporting of vaccine injuries? Come on! [The system has] already been created. They just don’t want to implement it…
And then…
…[makes] public all easily de-identified health data…
By the way, people are like, “Why would somebody have a religious objection to vaccines?”

Well, let me tell you, each dose of MMR and varicella [chickenpox] vaccine has literally billions of pieces of human DNA and cellular debris from the cell line of an aborted fetus. Again, to all the reporters out there, please look at the links… Don’t call Paul Offit... Read it… The evidence [is] right there….
[For reference you can watch from 7:43:10 here] my deposition of [Stanley Plotkin] the man who invented the rubella vaccine which… because… understand… viruses need to be grown in a cellular medium… and some of the viruses using vaccines are grown on the cultured cell of an aborted fetus… and you can’t just separate the virus from the cellular medium… that’s why it ends up in the body…
In terms of HHS-wide reforms…

[Number] one is that I would very much like it that if you want to be a public servant… be a public servant… which means a commitment to never work in a related industry after you leave your job…
HHS should be making available to the public all available health data in de-identified form. Of course, we should de-identify… protect everybody’s privacy, but it should be made available. There’s no reason not to do it. That’s what transparency is all about.
We should retract all studies where such data is not made public because it violates basic scientific method.
Require all study protocols to be posted prior to funding. I can’t tell you how many times in our FOIA requests and digging down we find changes in the study protocol as it progresses, but it’s all behind closed doors.
Design a study; post it; implement it; publish the results no matter what they show. That’s science.
FOIA should be properly funded and produce documents [in a timely fashion]…
Lift the 1986 Act and PREP Act immunity.
For [the] PREP Act… Secretary Kennedy can do that with a stroke of a pen tonight, but I don’t think the White House will let him… I can say that I’m not in government... but I’m speculating… I know of no other reason. I can’t imagine Bobby [Kennedy] wouldn’t do it, left to his own accord…
And for the [1986] Act, if it’s not a routinely recommended vaccine, you again could remove it from the vaccine injury table and then the manufacturers could finally be held accountable like every other product. But… as a federal judge said… that’s not good… and reversed making them non-routine… five of the vaccines, as you all know…

Concluding thoughts

We need to care about everybody.
We should care about kids who are going to be hurt by infectious disease, but we also need to care about children who can be harmed by these products. Every child is worthy of being cared about…
And let me tell you something else… it’s the abandoning...
There’s a reason that people have an issue with vaccines. Not because they just woke up one day and decided they just wanted for fun to take a position that might get them called an anti-vaxxer, a quack, anti-science… get their kids kicked out of school… get them thrown out of their jobs… have their kids excluded from playdates.
Who does that? I don’t know. Maybe a few people… but most people don’t… not the tens of thousands of families that contacted our firm… normal everyday Americans who did what they were supposed to… they got these products... You know who doesn’t call our firm about vaccine injuries? The so-called anti-vaxxers. You know why…? They don’t get vaccines…
When you abandon those people who trusted the system… that’s what breeds distrust. That’s what actually forms the core… the heart of a lot of these groups out there that people talk about… these anti-vax groups… They’re often just the families of children injured by these products who have been gaslit and abandoned. Those who don’t vaccinate… less so… in some respects.
[Let’s] put the safety back on the industry…
…by lifting immunity…
[Let’s] depolarise and depoliticize vaccines.
I agree we need to get vaccines out of politics. It should be purely medical. And the only way to do that [is to end] mandates. By mandating a vaccine, you make it political… By using the argument that a vaccine is safe and effective… to take away somebody’s civil individual rights… you made the safety and efficacy of that product a legal and a political issue… Everybody out there [is] not going to report that, I know, but that’s the truth.
That’s why statins… don’t have the political and legal overlays because [they are] not mandated. Even though… by the way… heart disease kills 800,000 Americans a year. And so… if you’re going to stop clogging the medical system… save the hospitals… maybe you should mandate exercise… mandate statins… [but] it’s intuitively destructive to individual liberty…
But somehow if you label it a vaccine... just take their rights away… Get [vaccines] if you want. That’s freedom. But don’t take away anybody’s right if they don’t want them. And most vaccines… I didn’t go through it in this presentation... I won’t because I don’t have time…. don’t stop transmission... Chapter nine [of Vaccines, Amen]...
End chronic disease...
You want to do that… you [have] got to address vaccines. That’s the truth. Because if you… look at the weight of the current available data on that basis… and I took the studies that compared kids with that are vaccinated with no vaccines… meaning exposed to unexposed… not [the equivalent of] kids who… smoke 12 packs a day with 20 packs a day… [And] the weight of that science… reflects that you [had] better address vaccines if you’re going to truly achieve the objectives that MAHA has.
I’ll end with this [slide] because I am a lawyer and so this is my pinned tweet:

And I show it to you because I believe it is [the case] that:
Mandates are the tool of bullies, criminals, and dictators. If a patient refuses a medical product after being conveyed its benefits and risks, then that is called informed consent. They were informed and did not consent. Mandating over this objection is immoral and illiberal.
Thank you very much.