Vaccine promoters claim that vaccinated kids are healthier (part 2).

Those pro-vaxxers crack me up!

Yesterday, I posted a study that they use all the time to show that vaccinated kids are healthier than unvaccinated.

I clearly demonstrated that this study was simply another junk science.

The whole thing was fabricated and false from the very beginning.

I broke down the study to show that vaccinated kids are in fact not healthier than unvaccinated, that this study was bad science.

But that vaccine pusher troll posted a link to the exact same study that I just covered to prove that I was wrong!!

You read it right, they posted the same fake study to show that I do not what I am talking about!

Just another proof that those trolls do not read and do not understand science at all. If they would have read the study and broke it down, they would have understood that it contains conceptual flaws.

But those trolls do not care. We are wrong, they are right!

The funny thing is that last week I used a study that was published in 2000 that clearly demonstrates that unvaccinated kids are healthier, that those kids do not have neurological disorders.

The same troll claimed that this study is too old and therefore irrelevant. That was the argument used to discredit me!

And then they posted a study published in 2000 showing that vaccines do not cause autism and neurological issues!

This is incredible, isn’t it?

My paper is irrelevant because it was published in 2000. But their paper is the best science because it shows that vaccines do not cause autism.

I did not know that the date of publication matters that much in science!

Anyway, enough of this stupidity. Let’s get into another paper that is repeatedly used and mentioned by the vaccine pushers to show that vaccinated kids are healthier is this one:

“The effectiveness of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination in the prevention of pediatric hospitalizations for targeted and untargeted infections: A retrospective cohort study” published in Hum Vaccin Immunother in 2017.

You can find the PubMed link below:

At first glance, if you do not take the time to fully break down the paper, you would believe that the MMR vaccine is amazing.

Indeed, the authors demonstrate that kids who got the MMR vaccine had much fewer infectious diseases and much fewer respiratory diseases.

For example, among all the children included in the study, 262 unvaccinated kids got infectious diseases as opposed to only 70 who got 2 doses of the MMR vaccine.

In addition, 424 unvaccinated kids got respiratory diseases as opposed to 183 children who received 2 doses of the MMR.

That is impressive, isn’t it?

Let’s get the MMR vaccines for all our children!

Not so fast! 😊

If you dig deeper into the design of this study, you would see that it contains major conceptual flaws that render the results completely irrelevant.

The authors state:

“2302 of these children (20.9%) did not receive the MMR vaccination, 5392 (49%) received one dose, and 3310 (30.1%) received 2 doses of this vaccine.”

But they also mention:

“Moreover, at the moment of the research, no data on other vaccinations were available, so that we were not able to adjust the analysis for possible confounders.”

Did you read this carefully?

If you look more into this statement, you would realize that the authors designed the study to obtain the results they wanted.

They considered unvaccinated kids to be the ones who did not receive the MMR. That was the only criteria they considered.

In other words, they did not care if the kids receive the Hep B, Rotavirus, DTaP, HiB, PCV13, IPV, or flu vaccines. All those vaccines are recommended before the MMR based on the CDC schedule.

My point is that I have met literally hundreds of parents who initially followed the American vaccine schedule. But they realized that their kids were not the same afterward and decided to no longer vaccinate them.

Those kids were vaccine injured and therefore, their immune systems were damaged by the toxic amount of poisons that were injected in them.

I have seen several of those kids, and they tend to be sicker.

Thus, if the parents stopped vaccinating their kids before they were supposed the get the MMR vaccine, they would be included in the unvaccinated kids.

Do you see how crazy this is?

So, my question is:

Is it possible that what the authors of this study observed was the results of vaccine injuries?

They admitted they did not consider the vaccination status except if they received or not the MMR vaccine.

Therefore, the “unvaccinated” kids were sicker because they were vaccine damage!

Having worked in the field of epidemiology and science, I can guarantee you that the authors knew the vaccination status of the children for the other vaccines.

But because they would not have obtained the results they wanted, the omitted this important piece of information.

Omitting data in a research paper is very, very common, and to me is borderline fraudulent and unethical. If you know the truth, why don’t you say it?

You see, today, “science” has nothing with real science, but everything to do with money.

Every 2 or 3 years, researchers fight to get their grants renewed, or they have to close doors.

Studies have shown that about 90% of the science published today is fabricated, false, biased.

And then, the authors conclude:

“It is interesting to note that data from this research suggest that the effect of MMR vaccination is mainly due to the measles component, and not to all 3 components of the MMR vaccine.”

This statement alone shows that the researchers are biased in their opinions and they wanted to prove their points.

There is absolutely nothing in this paper that supports this claim, nothing.

Sure I am not really sure why they stated it was the measles component that gave the benefit to the kids.

It is intriguing to me that over the last 2 years or so, we have heard a lot about the MMR vaccine being the medical tool that will save the world of all those outbreaks when those outbreaks are caused by the vaccine itself…

Sometimes I am wondering if this is just a coincidence or not…

At the end of the day, this study is junk science. And if people use it to claim that vaccinated kids are healthier, show them this post 😊

God bless y’all 😊

Dr. Serge

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *