Also: Dr. Makis' X account (nitter version, which works for non-X members) is https://nitter.poast.org/MakisMD/
Edit: and here's the nitter version of STEVE KIRSCH's account, since HE's the one who posted these links, not Dr. Makis. I'll be turning myself in to the proper authorities (Idiot police?) any time now. -- https://nitter.poast.org/stkirsch/
Below, the collection of studies, which were apparently collected by RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker, Ph.D. --
https://kirschsubstack.com/p/9-studies-vaxxed-vs-unvaxxed-all
Anthony R. Mawson, et al., “Pilot Comparative Study on the Health of Vaccinated and Unvaccinated 6 to 12-year-old U.S. Children,” Journal of Translational Science 3, no. 3 (2017): 1-12, doi: 10.15761/JTS.1000186
Anthony R. Mawson et al., “Preterm Birth, Vaccination and Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Cross-Sectional Study of 6- to 12-Year-Old Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children,” Journal of Translational Science 3, no. 3 (2017): 1-8, doi:10.15761/JTS.1000187.
Brian Hooker and Neil Z. Miller, “Analysis of Health Outcomes in Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children: Developmental Delays, Asthma, Ear Infections and Gastrointestinal Disorders,” SAGE Open Medicine 8, (2020): 2050312120925344, doi:10.1177/2050312120925344.
Brian Hooker and Neil Z. Miller, “Health Effects in Vaccinated versus Unvaccinated Children,” Journal of Translational Science 7, (2021): 1-11, doi:10.15761/JTS.1000459.
James Lyons-Weiler and Paul Thomas, “Relative Incidence of Office Visits and Cumulative Rates of Billed Diagnoses along the Axis of Vaccination,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 22 (2020): 8674, doi:10.3390/ijerph17228674. (I’m still trying to locate the republished article after the journal unethically retracted this paper; the journals hate papers exposing the fraud.)
NVKP, “Diseases and Vaccines: NVKP Survey Results,” Nederlandse Vereniging Kritisch Prikken, 2006, accessed July 1, 2022.
Rachel Enriquez et al., “The Relationship Between Vaccine Refusal and Self-Report of Atopic Disease in Children,” The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 115, no. 4 (2005): 737-744, doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2004.12.1128.
In the future, the childhood vaccine schedule will be ZERO. NONE. Because it will be seen for the chronic disease inducing construct that it is!
It is a [CRIME against children!]
Cancer as well.
Yeah!
We need only compare to the American Amish community.
I am grateful to them for being here.
I'm not a time traveler from the future, but I would imagine that once the medical community has been purged of the fraud, new, safe vaccines will be developed (properly tested).
Interestingly enough, the reason for adjuvants like aluminum and mercury being normalized in the first place was to get institutional approval. You see, there's no good way to prove effectiveness by traking the patients post-injection; the result were most often inconclusive. But they had to prove effectiveness to get approval from bodies like the FDA. So they added toxic irritants to stimulate an inflammatory response and called them "adjuvants."
This means that safety is a technical impossibility because toxic materials are deemed necessary. So it's not only the medical community, but also regulatory bodies that need serious reform.
Completely reformed. Our Rockefeller medical/ Pharmaceutical system is corrupt, and for profit only. COVID proved this.
I'd prefer cures to disease vs "vaccinations." For example, if something like Ivermectin can just knock out Measles, why would you need a vaccination? If you happen to get it, and it's a serious case, take an essentially harmless drug, be cured, move on. No rolling the dice with injections of anything into your bloodstream. And if you don't get any of the "vaccine preventable diseases" as they stand now, you don't get any drugs!
Good point.
Many really intelligent people believed the media, so I don't blame people for following along. I was lucky that I worked in the public health field and knew their approach to Covid flew in the face of what we had been taught. It felt creepy, like Darth Vader was taking over the planet.
"knew their approach to Covid flew in the face of what we had been taught. "
All they (science) had to do was introduce the mask and 6-foot social distancing rule; as a result, I became completely noncompliant. 🤡 Got physics??
Everyone you know got childhood vaccines unless they were amish or born within the last three years.
From all I've seen and I've been looking, ALL VACCINES FROM THEIR BEGINNING ARE BOGUS.
Bingo.
Most third world countries don't use the last 9 vaccines added. Big Pharma, our government and MSM (the money makers) have hypnotized Americans into thinking they are safe.
safe, effective AND necessary
name checks out
Vaccines are slow murder. Everyone pushing them should be stripped of their right to practice medicine.
stripped? More like arrested! Kash patel, go get them!! Arrested - and deported to ukraine! Hehez
Toxic vaccines are nothing new. People have been talking about them destroying their children for decades. Sadly, nothing was done and a good portion of our population has been neurologically and cognitively impaired. Now hopefully RFK will be able to stop the attacks. The entire medical industry was made criminal when the Rockefellers took over and banned every type of remedy but their own. We are fortunate that enough alternative therapies have a growing culture of research and availability.
My mother learned about the dangers of childhood vaccines back in the early 90s. In her wisdom she chose to not utilize them for any of her six kids. At 2/3, I was the last to receive any, the four kids born after myself have received none in childhood, but I can’t be sure what they’ve chosen to utilize as adults.
My daughter took her newborn in to a chiropractor for a checkup. The chiro said she could tell within 30 seconds of exam if the child was vaccinated.
I got chiropractic care my entire pregnancy and took our baby in to get adjusted within 5 days of being born. People don’t realize what trauma occurs during delivery and having the chiropractor check them out helps with so much.
Go on....
Because the kids were delayed and autistic or what
Walmart is selling Ivermectin at my local store now. It is disguised as Lice Treatment but it is called Ivermectin Lice Treatment. Live are parasites. I know it is a little off of this subject, but we know it is not..
I've been using the horsepaste from the feedstore for four yrs😉
based iver fan
I'm seeing it on the Walmart website as a lotion. Is that what you are referring to?
Yes. Still interesting. Lots of woke at my Walmart. Knowing they stock horse paste makes me chuckle. Gonna go to the pharmacy and ask where the ivermectin is at.
Over the years at the Walmart by me, I am on their list. I pay and do not steal. If the alarm dings I just keep walking. Wouldn’t wear a mask and I encouraged a black woman to expose she is racist.
Don't ask for Ivermectin - ask for "horse paste"! LOL!!
States Allowing OTC (Over-the-Counter) Ivermectin for Human Use As of mid-2025, four U.S. states have enacted laws permitting ivermectin (formulated for human use) to be sold without a prescription:
Tennessee – First to approve OTC sale in 2022.
Arkansas – Passed legislation in March 2025 authorizing OTC sales.
Idaho – Gov. Brad Little signed the law (SB 1211) in April 2025; it became effective immediately.
Louisiana – A law (SB 19, Act 464) took effect June 20, 2025; while pharmacists can dispense OTC, it requires adhering to a standing order and using a screening tool.
States Considering or Proposing Similar Legislation:
New Hampshire, North Carolina, South Carolina, Missouri, Kansas, and Pennsylvania have lawmakers pushing for OTC availability.
Notably, Pennsylvania's SB 601 has been introduced to authorize OTC ivermectin for human use.
That’s why I am sick, when I was very young g the creeps gave me vaccines in order to go to schools. I developed scoliosis which later a stupid doctor placed me a Harrington Rod in my back since 1993. Painful but I could manage because I am very slim.
Some of these seem to have been removed already! Insane.
These types of "studies" aren't doing anyone any favors. The info within is taken from PHONE INTERVIEWS, no actual data aside from asking questions was done.
Then, you scroll down and look at who was asked the questions: Results Socio-Demographic characteristics of respondents The information contained in 415 questionnaires provided data on 666 homeschool children. Table 1 shows the characteristics of the survey respondents. Mothers averaged about 40 years of age, were typically white, college graduates, with household incomes between $50,000 to $100,000, Christian, and married. The reasons for homeschooling for the majority of respondents (80-86%) were for a moral environment, better family relationships, or for more contact with their child or children.
Are you kidding? 666 Homeschool kids?
I don't disagree with the findings, but the methodology is absolute bullshit.
things you can not make up
bkmk thanks
Which couple vaccines would be beneficial to give the baby?
None
NONE ARE BENEFICIAL
First two studies I read had a sample size of 666 individuals.
I'm not in any way advocating for the use of vaccines, but I think you don't really understand what "peer review" means.
Not only that, but at least one of those papers were retracted after publication, and most of these have been funded by antivaccine advocates.
This is not stuff anyone should be using to try to convince them that vaccines are dangerous.
Also, if you don't trust the thousands of peer reviewed research papers and articles that say vaccines are safe and effective, why do you use "peer reviewed" here like it matters? I hope you'll actually be able to talk about the papers and science involved here in something more than just pointing at the fact that they exist as evidence they're right, because if you use this with normies, you'll likely get a lot of pushback on it.
If all you want is to convince yourself or others that already distrust vaccines that vaccines are dangerous, then these might help do that...🤷♀️
But if you're trying to convince anyone that trusts vaccines and western medicine or are even neutral to it, then this is going to work against you. All they're going to do is focus on the funding (known anti-vaccine groups and advocates) or on the discredited/retracted studies.
All in all, this will probably hurt our goals, rather than help.
Again, I'm not advocating for vaccines, I just think this is, well, just not a very good effort at showing the dangers. Known anti-vaccine advocates funding it, papers being retracted after publishing,etc...
Just my own measuring stick, but I try viewing from the other side of the aisle, to see if they're actually something that would convince me or not.
So pretend that the roles were reversed.
If someone came to you, trying to convince you that vaccines were safe, and they used articles sponsored by Merck or some other vaccine manufacturer, where the data was self reported, and at least one of the studies was retracted after publication...would that really inspire a lot of confidence in you that those articles and studies and reports were true and believable? There are tens of thousands of peer reviewed papers saying vaccines are safe and effective. Does the fact that it's peer reviewed make it true? Does it even matter, ultimately, if you don't trust the process or the people involved?
If not, then why do you expect any of this to convince anyone that vaccines are dangerous? Because you just really want it to?