A new study titled “Association Between Aluminium Exposure From Vaccines Before Age 24 Months and Persistent Asthma at Age 24 to 59 Months” by Matthew F. Daley, MD, Liza M. Reifler, MPH et al, funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has confirmed that “aluminium compounds found in childhood vaccines are linked to an array of illnesses, including asthma, neurological disorders and the Big A: Autism.”
Between 2008 and the end of 2014, 326,991 children were immunized at one of seven different sites across the United States that participate in the Vaccine Safety Datalink, a network of health providers partnered with the CDC. Researchers gathered this information and then compared aluminium exposure to eczema prevalence.
“If there’s any relationship between aluminium and asthma, it could look different in kids with eczema than kids without eczema,” said Dr. Matthew F. Daley, one of the study’s lead authors.
Daley and his colleagues then investigated how many vaccinations each child received before the age of two, as well as aluminium exposure. They were able to assess disease risk in relation to the amount of aluminium injected in a child’s body using these data points.
It should be noted that a true vaccine-free placebo was not used in the study to make aluminium appear less harmful than it is. The health risks associated with aluminium exposure would have been even more striking if the study authors had compared vaccinated children to unvaccinated children.
Despite their best efforts, the study’s authors were unable to avoid a “positive association” between “vaccine-related aluminium exposure” and “persistent asthma” in children aged 24-59 months. Overall, children in the study who received 3 milligrams (mg) or more of vaccine-related aluminum had a 36% higher risk of developing persistent asthma than children who received other vaccines.
This study has one problem: that the authors still advocate for childhood vaccines stating in the study itself that “the safety and effectiveness of the childhood immunization schedule are supported by extensive scientific evidence.” Of course, one needs to remember that the study is funded by the CDC, so the study cannot bite the hands that feed it. So here, the questionable funding source should make us question as to the extent that the study is minimizing the side-effects of aluminium in childhood vaccines.
Dr. Daley, one of the researchers involved, issued a statement that, despite he and his team’s findings, he still believes that aluminium “is integral to many vaccines, enhancing immunogenicity and effectiveness.”
“Aluminum adjuvants have a well-established safety profile and are used in many vaccines given in early childhood,” and that he is “still going to advocate for vaccines as strongly as I did before we had these findings.”
Dr. Brian Hooker of Children’s Health Defense (CHD) notes that while the paper does point to aluminium as a problem, it fails because the CDC did not use a true placebo for comparison and also used the least offensive hazards ratio in the study’s abstract to make aluminium appear much less dangerous:
“A true comparison should be [done] between the maximum aluminum exposure at 2 years of age (which is about 4 mg total injected aluminum adjuvant) and a zero-exposure group.”
“In the paper I did with Neil Miller (SAGE Open Medicine, 2020), we saw an odds ratio of 4.49 (statistically significant) for asthma in vaccinated children versus unvaccinated children. This was limited to vaccines in the first year of life. The CDC seems to be confirming my results here.”
The corporate science and its hired scientists do not care that aluminium in vaccines is causing children to develop brain and neurological damage.
The study’s ultimate conclusion as presented is confusing in that it points to aluminium in vaccines as being dangerous while simultaneously writing it off as not being that big of a deal.
“It is a classic aluminium industry study appearing to surrender some possible toxicity of aluminium while actually delivering multiple messages signalling the safety of aluminium in general,” says Dr. Christopher Exley, PhD.