The Studies the CDC Refuses to Do This book is based on over one hundred studies in the peer-reviewed literature that consider vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations. Each study is analyzed, and health differences among infants, children, and adults who have been vaccinated and those who have not are presented and put in context. Readers will find information on: The infant/child vaccination schedule Thimerosal in vaccines Live virus vaccines The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine Vaccination and Gulf War illness Influenza (flu) vaccines Hepatitis B vaccination The COVID-19 vaccine Vaccines during pregnancy Given the massive push to vaccinate the entire global population, this book is timely and necessary for individuals to make informed choices for themselves and their families.

DISCLAIMER This book does not in any capacity mean to replace the original book but to serve as a vast summary of the original book. Summary of Vax-Unvax by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: Let the Science Speak (Children’s Health Defense) IN THIS SUMMARIZED BOOK, YOU WILL GET: Chapter astute outline of the main contents. Fast & simple understanding of the content analysis. Exceptionally summarized content that you may skip in the original book The book analyzes over 100 peer-reviewed studies on vaccinated and unvaccinated populations, presenting health differences among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. It covers topics like infant/child vaccination schedules, vaccines, and their impact on health. It is crucial for individuals to make informed decisions about vaccination.

A hard look at the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program and the families desperately trying to navigate their way through it. The Vaccine Court looks at the mysterious and often unknown world of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), the only recourse for seeking compensation for those who have been injured by a vaccine. The NVICP, better known as the ”Vaccine Court,” however, is not without controversy. Established by Congress as a direct result of the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, the NVICP was supposed to offer a no-fault alternative to the traditional injury claims filed in state or federal courts and was to provide quick, efficient, and fair compensation for those who have been injured by vaccines. The reality, however, is that many cases take several years or longer to complete and require tremendous commitment from families already pushed to the brink of bankruptcy caring for the vaccine-injured family member, only to discover that the end result is manipulated by the government in defense of the US vaccine policy. Mr. Rohde looks into the inner workings of the US Federal Claims Court and the NVICP. He interviews families who have filed petitions and won compensation, families who have been denied compensation, and families still waiting for a decision. By highlighting the journeys of these families—their efforts to find attorneys willing to represent them, the filing of their petitions, and the subsequent mountain of paperwork, medical records, and other documents that span years—Mr. Rohde exposes the bitter truth behind the NVICP. Through his thoughtful interviews and fact-finding research, The Vaccine Court sheds light on how the NVICP has evolved into something far more treacherous than what Congress envisioned with the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in 1986.

Every week, tens of thousands of children across America are injected with the DPT (diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus) vaccine. The law requires it, and most children will get four DPT shots before they are two years old. But what if one of the components of the vaccine was not safe? What if it caused not only pain, swelling, screaming, and high fever, but also shock, convulsions, brain damage, and even death? And, to make matters worse, what if there were a safer alternative but parents didn't know about it? Wouldn't the government require the drug manufacturers to produce the safer vaccine to protect the lives of the children who might otherwise suffer the shot's crippling side effects? The answer is, unfortunately, no. A Shot in the Dark is a chilling account of just how dangerous the whole-cell pertussis vaccine (the "P" part of the DPT shot) has proven to be. It provides accurate research into the history of the vaccine's development and usage. It exposes the roles played by the FDA and drug companies. It tells the tragic stories of the young victims of the vaccine. This book is also a guide for rightfully concerned parents who are looking for answers to important questions. What are the warning signs to look for to tell if your child is likely to be sensitive to the vaccine? What should parents ask their doctors about the vaccine and their child's medical profile? What is being done, here and in other countries, to combat this frightening situation? What can parents do now to help? A Shot in the Dark is a responsible, eye-opening look at a potential problem that every parent of every young child living in this country must face. Armed with the facts in this important book, parents will be able to make informed decisions about their real medical options. Book jacket.

Vaccines save millions of lives every year, and one man, Maurice Hilleman, was responsible for nine of the big fourteen. Paul Offit recounts his story and the story of vaccines Maurice Hilleman discovered nine vaccines that practically every child gets, rendering formerly dread diseases—including often devastating ones such as mumps and rubella—practically forgotten. Paul A. Offit, a vaccine researcher himself, befriended Hilleman and, during the great man’s last months, interviewed him extensively about his life and career. Offit makes an eloquent and compelling case for Hilleman’s importance, arguing that, like Jonas Salk, his name should be known to everyone. But Vaccinated is also enriched and enlivened by a look at vaccines in the context of modern medical science and history, ranging across the globe and throughout time to take in a fascinating cast of hundreds, providing a vital contribution to the continuing debate over the value of vaccines.

To preserve public vaccine policy, Dr. Paul Thomas was disbarred and discredited—discover how he was punished for pursuing the truth for his patients. On December 3, 2020, the Oregon Medical Board issued an emergency order to suspend the license of renowned physician Paul Thomas, MD. The ostensible reason was that Dr. Thomas posed a threat to public health by failing to vaccinate his pediatric patients according to the CDC’s schedule. However, the order came just days after Thomas published a peer-reviewed study indicating that his unvaccinated patients were the healthiest children in his practice. The medical board ignored this data despite having requested Thomas to produce peer-reviewed evidence to support his alternative approach. “Dr. Paul” started out practicing medicine the way he was trained to, which meant vaccinating according to the CDC’s routine childhood vaccine schedule. But then he went on a journey of awakening, becoming what he calls “vaccine risk aware,” and arrived at a place where no longer in good conscience could he continue “business as usual” with this one-size-fits-all approach. He left a private group practice to open his own clinic with the foundational principles of individualized care and respect for the right to informed consent. He wrote the Vaccine-Friendly Plan with Jennifer Margulis, PhD, to help parents navigate the decision-making process. Then the accusations from the medical board started coming. The War on Informed Consent exposes how the medical board suspended Dr. Thomas’s license on false pretexts, illuminating how the true reason for the order was that, by practicing informed consent, he posed a threat to public vaccine policy, which is itself the true threat to public health.

Antivaxxers are crazy. That is the perception we all gain from the media, the internet, celebrities, and beyond, writes Bernice Hausman in Anti/Vax, but we need to open our eyes and ears so that we can all have a better conversation about vaccine skepticism and its implications. Hausman argues that the heated debate about vaccinations and whether to get them or not is most often fueled by accusations and vilifications rather than careful attention to the real concerns of many Americans. She wants to set the record straight about vaccine skepticism and show how the issues and ideas that motivate it—like suspicion of pharmaceutical companies or the belief that some illness is necessary to good health—are commonplace in our society. Through Anti/Vax, Hausman wants to engage public health officials, the media, and each of us in a public dialogue about the relation of individual bodily autonomy to the state's responsibility to safeguard citizens' health. We need to know more about the position of each side in this important stand-off so that public decisions are made through understanding rather than stereotyped perceptions of scientifically illiterate antivaxxers or faceless bureaucrats. Hausman reveals that vaccine skepticism is, in part, a critique of medicalization and a warning about the dangers of modern medicine rather than a glib and gullible reaction to scaremongering and misunderstanding.