Written By Anas Attia
Just listen to the science! Just trust the data! …they shout.
But how much conclusive science and useful data is there about vaccination? Is vaccine risk truly studied and managed effectively? A new major study has startling conclusions, but first, what seems to be the problem with the science that we had?
As Dr. Paul Thomas recently put it in an interview on The Highwire, not all data is equal: “Why don’t you smoke a pack a day, and I’m gonna smoke two packs a day, and we’ll see which one of us dies next week. Oh! We are both alive, so that means cigarettes are safe.” A seeming embellishment, is in fact a comment on the type of data that supports the science conjecture dominating mainstream media today.
Contrary to popular opinion, the negative and non specific effects of vaccines have not been well studied. In the sense that, studies have overwhelmingly been devoid of true placebo comparisons and have very short safety reviews, typically between 4-42 days and typically funded and conducted by those who sell the vaccines. Virtually all vaccine safety studies use other vaccines as the placebo, hence Dr. Paul’s comment.
There are however a select few that compare vaccinated vs unvaccinated groups, like a small survey of 415 families with homeschooled children by Mawson et al., 2017  that compared vaccinated with completely unvaccinated children. The study reported an increased risk of many diagnoses among the vaccinated children including (condition, fold-increase):allergic rhinitis (30.1), learning disabilities (5.2), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (4.2),autism (4.2), neurodevelopmental disorders (3.7), eczema (2.9), and chronic illness (2.4).
A comparable study, Hooker and Miller 2020 , determined that there is an “increase in odds ratio (OR) in developmental delay (OR 2.18), asthma (OR 4.49), and ear infection (OR 2.13) in vaccinated children compared to unvaccinated children in a study using data from three practices.”
A limitation of these and other similar studies is that they rely on parental surveys, and have a small unexposed (placebo) group. Another independent study, this time from Germany (Schmitz et al., 2011)  reported no increases in adverse outcomes other than atopy (allergic disease). However, this was not a true placebo-controlled study, in fact they defined a child as unexposed to vaccines even if they were vaccinated for varicella, rotavirus, pneumococcal, meningococcal, influenza and others. Therefore not a true comparison between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups.
But on the 22nd of November 2020, a new independently funded study from Pittsburgh, PA was published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health  that compared statistically significant numbers of vaccinated and unvaccinated children, over a ten year period. The study also analyzed the effects of variable vaccination on outcomes, plotting relative incidence of doctor’s office visits and cumulative rates of billed diagnosis along the axis of vaccination.
So what of the study’s data?
3324 patients were included in the study, all of which were born into Dr. Paul Thomas’ practice between 1st of June 2008 and 27th of January 2019. The study population had similar proportions of males and females. Nearly all patients had been breastfed in both the vaccinated (96.6%) and the unvaccinated (98%). Among the vaccinated, 25.16% had a family history of autoimmunity, whereas among the unvaccinated, 31% had the same characteristic. The study population had a great diversity in vaccination uptake, allowing for the practical study of variable outcomes.
The authors utilized 10 analytical methods including Relative Incidence of Office Visits (RIOV) as a primary indicator, bolstered by comparative testing and various statistical analysis.
In the first analysis, where RIOV is grouped by diagnosis and compared between the vaccinated and unvaccinated found some startling results, not least of which is the lack of ADHD cases in the unvaccinated group.
Below is a summary of the results:
“Group A: Autoimmune Respiratory Illnesses. Large increases in office visits were found among the vaccinated group in this group of respiratory illnesses. (Figure A)”
“Group B: Attention Deficit/Hyperactive Disorder and Behavioral Issues. Large increases were found in office visits among the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated groups in outcomes in this group as well. The quartile representation shows large increases in ADHD and moderately large increases in behavioral issues (Figure B).”
“Group C: Ear Pain, Otitis media, and Eye Disorders. Issues with the ear showed a range of increases with vaccine acceptance over the quartiles; in the last quartile, the differences were all significant (ear pain (RIOV = 10.37), otitis media (RIOV = 7.03), and eye disorders (5.53) (Figure C).”
“Group D: Autoimmune Conditions of the Skin and Blood. Skin reactions commonly observed and sometimes attributed to vaccination showed consistent, moderate increases in RIOV in the last quartile of eczema (2.315), urticaria (4.81), and dermatitis (2.72) (Figure D).”
“Group E: Gastroenteritis, Weight/Eating Disorders, and Seizure. The RIOV of both gastroenteritis and weight/disorders increased over the quartiles with increased vaccine uptake, as did seizure (Figure E).”
“Group F: Speech, language, social, and learning delays showed variable but nonsignificant response over the axis of vaccination. Autism was only significant at the third quartile. (Figure F).”
The study goes on to explain this data overall, including a comment on Autism “Associations were found comparing the most vaccinated quartile for most of the outcomes with the exception of developmental delays and autism spectrum disorders.” This is expected given that families with children with autism may be inclined to opt out of the vaccination program, potentially reflecting a signal of informed choice by families excluding them from the higher vaccinated quartile.”
The results of analysis 2, Odds Ratio on Incidence of Diagnoses is similar overall to the RIOV analysis; “The absolute risk difference (ARD) is higher with all conditions in the vaccinated group.” And “Among all of the outcomes, allergic rhinitis and anemia had the highest OR; anemia, weight/eating disorders, and respiratory infection showed the highest absolute risk difference.”
The study continues with the remaining analysis methods, but a striking visual can be seen in the Results of Analysis 5, where the cumulative number of visits per diagnosis over the ten years is observed for both the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups.
“The visual impact of the cumulative office visit plots is striking; more so than other plots, the time element (day of life) provides an index by which to compare the accumulation of human pain and suffering from potential vaccine side effects (Figure 5).”
The authors comment on the data of the entire study and state: “We have found higher rates of office visits and diagnoses of common chronic ailments in the most vaccinated children in the practice compared to children who are completely unvaccinated. The data clearly show different odds of developing many of these adverse health conditions.”
“Vaccination appears to have had the largest impact on anemia and respiratory virus infection on the number of office visits in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated groups. Due to a small number of cases and corresponding low power, neurodevelopmental conditions and seizures are not well studied using the data available”
The study’s dramatic conclusion reads:
“We can conclude that the unvaccinated children in this practice are not, overall, less healthy than the vaccinated and that indeed the vaccinated children appear to be significantly less healthy than the unvaccinated.”
And it goes on to conclude: “Remarkably, zero of the 561 unvaccinated patients in the study had attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) compared to 5.3%  of the (partially and fully) vaccinated. … The quartile representation shows large increases in ADHD and moderately large increases in behavioral issues (Figure 4B). Both of these conditions had highly statistically significant relative incidences of office visit (ADHD, RIOV=53.74; behavioral issues, 10.28) (p<0.00001).”
Although it is imperative that the scientific community expands and elaborates on the findings, the results as they are simply cannot be ignored. A paper of this significance has rarely, if ever, made it through the challenges of academic funding or legislative framework. In fact the Oregon Medical Board suspended Dr. Paul Thomas licence, effectively closing the doors of the practice where this study was conducted five days after the publication of the study. Indeed, this part of the story merits its own examination.
The authors of the study further comment on societal risk, namely regarding virus co-infection. They state: “Our findings are consistent with the concern that vaccination may increase respiratory virus infection risk, clearly a grave concern in the age of COVID-19.”
Finally and seemingly in an attempt to address the expected resistance readers may have to the statistical conclusions made, the authors explain:
“Lifestyle differences between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups in this practice cannot explain the large difference in outcomes, and if they do, then it would be objective to conclude that everyone should adopt the lifestyle followed by the unvaccinated if they want healthier children.”
1. CDC. Report an Adverse Event to VAERS. 2020. Available online: https://vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html (accessed on 15 August 2020).
2. Mawson, A.R.; Ray, B.D.; Bhuiyan, A.R.; Jacob, B. Pilot comparative study on the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated 6- to 12- year old U.S. children. J. Transl. Sci. 2017, 3, 1–12.
3. Hooker, B.S.; Miller, N.Z. Analysis of health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children: Developmental delays, asthma, ear infections and gastrointestinal disorders. SAGE Open Med. 2020, 8, 1–11.
4. Schmitz, R.; Poethko-Müller, C.; Reiter, S.; Schlaud, M. Vaccination status and health in children and adolescents: Findings of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS). Dtsch. Arztebl. Int. 2011, 108, 99–104.
5. Lyons-Weiler J, Thomas P. Relative Incidence of Office Visits and Cumulative Rates of Billed Diagnoses Along the Axis of Vaccination. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(22):8674. 2020 Nov 22. doi:10.3390/ijerph17228674
6. Lyons-Weiler J, Thomas P. Correction: Lyons-Weiler, J., et al. Relative Incidence of Office Visits and Cumulative Rates of Billed Diagnoses along the Axis of Vaccination. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 8674. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(3):936. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18030936