The 82-page report, published Monday, reviewed over 300 autism studies that examined possible causes of autism, including genetic, environmental, toxicological and vaccine-related causes.
Of the studies, 136 focused on routine childhood vaccines or vaccine ingredients, and 107 (79%) of those identified links between vaccination and autism or other neurodevelopmental conditions.
Twelve of the studies compared fully vaccinated and completely unvaccinated children. All found better health outcomes among the unvaccinated group. [See link below].
Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher, the report’s lead author, told The Defender the report is “the most comprehensive synthesis on autism’s causes to date.”
Hulscher said that while approximately half of the studies the authors examined “focused on genetics, parental age, immune dysregulation, environmental toxicants, perinatal complications and gut-brain interactions,” none could account for the “rapid, stepwise rise in autism prevalence.”
Data published earlier this year by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showed that 1 in 31 U.S. children had autism in 2022 — up from 1 in 36 in 2020 and 1 in 10,000 in the 1970s. Hulscher said the sharp rise in autism diagnoses began after the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and the subsequent expansion of the childhood vaccination schedule.
“Vaccine exposure provides the precipitating trigger for neurodevelopmental injury in susceptible children,” Hulscher said.
John Leake, vice president of the McCullough Foundation and one of the report’s co-authors, said the “evidence that hyper-vaccination is the primary, modifiable risk factor for autism has been presented in published literature, but this reality has been obfuscated by powerful ideological and commercial interests.”
Mary Holland, CEO of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), said the report’s findings “are entirely consistent with CHD’s work and what thousands of parents have been reporting for decades.”
Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., CHD’s senior research scientist, called the review “astonishing.” He said it’s “no easy task to assemble such a large review, let alone in a field that is so heavily censored.”....