A recent study did NOT show vaccines cause autism, but RFK Jr. keeps pushing the lie.
Yet again, anti-vaccine activists self-published a “study” to spread disinformation and profit off fear.
This newsletter is free, but it’s able to sustain itself from support I receive from a small percentage of regular readers. If you value science-based information, consider upgrading to a paid subscription:
A special thanks to the skilled data informaticist and epidemiologist Dr. Katie Suleta for collaborating with me on the below (especially as I messaged her at godforsaken hours her time while I am still in India):
Did the paper “Vaccination and Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Study of Nine-Year-Old Children Enrolled in Medicaid” actually show there is a relationship between vaccines and autism?
Absolutely not.
In fact, the paper can’t conclude anything at all–about vaccinations or neurodevelopmental disorders. Yet it’s being circulated by the same people who have been profiting off of anti-vaccine disinformation for decades to undermine millions of data points that show there is no causative relationship between vaccinations and autism.
Yes, that includes RFK Jr. and his anti-vaccine organization, Children’s Health Defense (CHD).
Coincidentally, this paper was published Friday January 24, 2025, and the Senate hearings for his potential confirmation as HHS Secretary start this week, January 27, 2025. He’s using the article as some “gotcha” moment as though it’s proof life-saving medical interventions are harmful—when it is nothing of the sort. It gets better: the entire “editorial” board of this website work for CHD.
The timing was intentional: legitimize anti-vaccine claims he has made millions of dollars off of, and ensure he gets installed in our Federal leadership.
It is CRITICAL that everyone does everything in their power to prevent that. Call Senate officials. Share this article with them and everyone you know. Emphasize that this is nothing more than disinformation for anti-science profiteers, and share that widely.
This “study” contradicts the robust body of evidence that shows there is NO causal relationship between vaccines and autism.
Let’s discuss the most glaring issues with the paper itself:
First, the approach used by the authors can’t even tell you whether one thing (vaccines) caused another (neurodevelopmental disorders, NDD). Why is that?
It’s an observational study—meaning data are “observed” to look for patterns. None of the data are controlled in this situation, so you can’t analyze how they are related to each other.
More than that, the entire data set is based solely on historical Medicaid billing claims data for children in Florida from 1999 to 2011.
In simple terms, these are old receipts for what Medicaid paid for qualifying healthcare services. Medicaid, if you’re unfamiliar, is health insurance for low income individuals or other qualifying people. It is administered state-by-state so coverage and plan details vary. The article compares billing codes related to medical visits for vaccinations and billing codes that may or may not be related to diagnoses for various NDDs, including autism spectrum disorder (ASD).
That means the data isn’t directly linked to actual clinical diagnoses or medical procedures. It’s also a very specific population demographic: people of low income in a specific state who qualify for state-level financial assistance for healthcare.
Think about receipts you’ve gotten, or your own insurance claims explanation of benefits. They do not detail what procedures you received or what diagnoses you were given, right? And they certainly can’t tell you how those listed items are related to each other.
The authors are trying to fabricate a connection that doesn’t exist.
The article also fails to analyze, address, or even acknowledge serious confounding factors, like:
Parents who vaccinate their children are more likely to seek healthcare broadly. That means those parents and kids are also more likely to go to healthcare providers for evaluation and diagnosis for ASD or other NDDs. In contrast, parents who do not vaccinate their children often do not go to healthcare providers regularly, or seek “practitioners” who offer services not covered by Medicaid (like naturopaths, homeopaths, etc). Refusal to vaccinate is tied to other anti-science behaviors. If parents aren’t bringing their children to the doctor, they aren’t going to be diagnosed with ASD or related disorders.
The authors completely ignore the improvements in recognition and diagnosis of NDDs following the publication of the DSM-IV-TR in 2000. The DSM-IV-TR clarified how to identify and diagnose ASD based on the expanded criteria of the DSM-IV, published in 1994. That means increased incidence is a function of more cases with less stereotypical presentations finally being recognized. Why did the authors mention the change but not correct for it? They didn’t even compare their Medicaid claim data to baseline rates of ASD diagnosis. If you’re curious, population-level prevalence of ASD changed from around 1.16% in 2007 to 2.00% in 2011, essentially the same change in prevalence as data they claim “shows” vaccines cause autism.
There was no correction for health conditions that predispose someone to NDDs. While they do some pathetic “analysis” of preterm birth data, they omit comorbidities associated with preterm birth, familial history of NDDs, and multiple other factors known to be actually associated with developmental disorders.
The population is children enrolled in Florida’s Medicaid program. This is a specific geographic group and a specific socioeconomic group with unique behaviors and challenges. These are families struggling with low income and limited resources, and may not have the ability to seek specialist visits to get complex disorders evaluated and diagnosed. That alone should tell you that you can’t generalize anything–even if the data were usable–to the broader population that has more consistent healthcare access.
There is no actual data about how many and which vaccines are administered. It is solely based on coding for healthcare visits linked to vaccination procedures. This doesn’t confirm anything about actual vaccine administrations. They claim their unvaccinated group is fully unvaccinated, but that is not actually confirmed–they make that assumption based on the lack of Medicaid billing codes. Perhaps the family was not on Medicaid, received vaccines, then qualified for and applied for Medicaid? As such, the entire data set is irrelevant.
And finally? You can’t say something caused another thing using observational data, especially this type of data, which isn’t corrected for any major variables. The fact that these individuals think that’s true should tell you they don’t understand scientific research.
This article was published by the same organization that funded the study.
You might be asking, why was this study published in the first place with all these flaws? Well, because the “journal” (using that term liberally) is not actually a scientific journal.
It is a website masquerading as an academic journal created in 2020 by science-rejecting contrarians to amplify papers that would not be published in credible journals or were previously been retracted. It’s owned by IPAK-EDU LLC (remember that) and is known for publishing medical conspiracism and fringe views without scientific scrutiny.
There is always a potential for bias with studies, especially if they’re funded or conducted by people or organizations with predetermined positions on vaccination. These biases can impact study design, data interpretation, and conclusions. The editors are notorious anti-vaccine activists with something in common. See if you can spot it:
Editor-In-Chief is James Lyons-Weiler, also happens to be the founder of the organization that publishes the journal, IPAK-EDU LLC. He has long made false claims about COVID-19 vaccines and vaccines in general. In addition to this conflicts of interest, he is also a listed author at Children's Health Defense.
Editorial board members include:
Brian Hooker, the Chief Scientific Officer for Children's Health Defense and editorial of another antivaccine journal.
Peter McCullough, a former cardiologist who had his medical certification revoked for spreading dangerous anti-vaccine lies. He is a listed author at Children's Health Defense.
Mary Holland is a lawyer (no expertise in science, scientific data, or research) and the CEO of Children's Health Defense.
Russell Blaylock is a retired neurosurgeon, not a scientist, and is listed on Children's Health Defense website as an author.
Paul Thomas is a former physician whose license was suspended in 2021. He has close ties Children's Health Defense and has stated that he would “be okay not vaccinating his grandkids.”
Surprise! The journal editors all work for RFK Jr’s Children’s Health Defense.
Weird, huh? They all work for RFK Jr.’s anti-science activist group, Children’s Health Defense. The same organization that made 23.5 million dollars in a single year promoting false claims about vaccines. The same organization that has undermined health measures that save millions of children every year. The same organization that is directly tied to a measles outbreak in Samoa that killed dozens of children.
David Gorski reported on Lyons-Weiler before: “[his] assertions only seem reasonable until you see exactly what sort of “journal” he's running. He openly states that he's rescuing “wrongfully retracted” papers.” The journal staff consists of anti-vaccine activists that brag about amplifying retracted papers. If that isn’t a red flag already, it should be.
The authors have had similar papers retracted for flawed methods and conflicts of interest
Anthony Mawson is the first author, supposedly the President of Chalfont Research Institute, a non-profit with no website and 2 employees: Anthony and his co-author Binu Jacob. Mawson has a very suspicious CV in which he lists himself as a reviewer for multiple journals outside his scope of expertise, and has no training in infectious disease or biomedical science.
In 2017 these same two authors published a similar article about the vaccination status of homeschooled children and ASD in Frontiers of Public Health which was retracted. The Journal of Translational Science (JTS) republished it only to also retract it. JTS is a predatory journal for its practices: it solicits manuscripts from unqualified people and does not have peer review.
That article was blasted for flawed methods, conclusions, and authorship. The cast of characters around Mawson illustrates the bias of the paper. For example, Brian Ray, founder of the dubious National Home Education Research Institute, is also a coauthor on the retracted paper. (Note: Retraction Watch is an invaluable resource).
It is apparent that Mawson and Chalfont are hired research guns paid to lend credibility to shoddy methods and conclusions, inspired by the groups funding the research.
Prominent anti-vaccine organizations funded this study in order to make money and undermine life-saving medicines.
The Funding Statement reads: “This research was funded by the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC.org). The publication cost of this study was partially offset by The National Vaccine information Center (NVIC.org) and by IPAK (ipaknowledge.org).”
If you’re not familiar, The National Vaccine Information Center is a notorious antivaccine organization. The Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge (IPAK) conveniently OWNS the “journal” publishing the study it’s funding. That’s definitely not a conflict of interest, right?
Interestingly, every large-scale study, including longitudinal and epidemiological analyses show that there is NO causal link between vaccinations and autism or other neurodevelopmental disorders.
For a taste of how much data this encompasses, here is a selection:
A cohort study including 467,450 children born in Denmark between 1990 and 1996 analyzed the association between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism. There was no increased risk of autism or autism spectrum disorders among vaccinated children compared to unvaccinated children.
Another nationwide cohort study of 657,461 children born in Denmark between 1999 and 2010 and followed up for an average of 8.6 years evaluated whether measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine was associated with an increased risk of autism. There was no increased risk of autism among children who were vaccinated, including among those with risk factors like a diagnosed sibling (funnily, genetics is actually associated with ASD).
A retrospective cohort study of 537,303 children representing 2,129,864 person-years of study. 82% of the children received MMR vaccines and autism outcomes were compared between groups. There was NO difference in risk of autism between vaccinated children and unvaccinated children. There was also no association between age at the time of vaccination, time since vaccination, or date of vaccination and development of autism.
A retrospective cohort study of over 500,000 children in the US assessed safety of measles- and pertussis-containing vaccines among children 4 to 7 years old with diagnosed ASD. It found no increased risk of adverse events or exacerbation of autism-related symptoms following vaccination, including fever or emergency room visits.
Another retrospective cohort study from the United States of 95,727 children who received the MMR vaccine with older siblings (with and without autism). There was no link between MMR vaccination and risk of autism, even for children with a sibling with autism.
An epidemiological analysis of 498 children with autism or autism-like disorder prior to and following the MMR introduction in the UK. Prevalence of autism was the same between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. Age of diagnosis did not differ, and onset of symptoms of autism were not linked to when they received MMR vaccination.
A comprehensive systematic review of 338 studies found no increased risk of autism related to: the MMR vaccine, thimerosal, mercury, or vaccination in any capacity.
A global review including large-scale epidemiological studies and smaller investigations; using data from hundreds of thousands of children, millions of vaccine doses, across the United States, Denmark, Sweden, and the United Kingdom found NO relationship between vaccination status, autism diagnosis, autism rates before and after introduction of the MMR vaccine, and no plausible mechanisms in which thimerosal or vaccines could cause autism.
A systematic review of 67 studies involving millions of children assessed overall vaccine safety of the US immunization schedule. The analysis concluded that vaccines are safe, adverse events are rare, and routine vaccines like MMR, DTaP, Varicella, and others have no relationship to developing autism, type 1 diabetes, or other health conditions.
A scientific review evaluated claims about vaccines and autism and the notion that vaccines overwhelm the immune system. The conclusion? There is no evidence to support these claims and they lack biological plausibility based on how the immune system works.
A systematic review of 10 primary studies assessed potential links between thimerosal, thimerosal-containing vaccines, and ASD. Studies ranged from large-scale cohort to case-control studies from the United States, Sweden, and Denmark. There was no relationship between vaccines and ASD. Authors emphasized that studies with robust methodologies consistently show vaccines are safe, whereas those claiming to find links to vaccines and autism routinely have substantial biases, conflicts of interest, and methodological flaws.
Whew! That’s a LOT of data that all show the same thing: vaccines are safe, save lives, prevent harmful illnesses, and do not cause autism.
This paper, with serious methodological flaws and major conflicts of interest is not remotely more trustworthy than decades of data including millions of children.
This article was published so RFK Jr. can weaponize it during his HHS Secretary confirmation hearings
Why is this being published now when decades upon decades of data have tried and failed to connect vaccines and autism?
I’ll give you a hint: the Senate confirmation hearings are starting this upcoming week for RFK Jr. as HHS Secretary. He is the common thread. He founded and was the CEO of the Children’s Health Defense and continues to be linked with them. He makes millions of dollars through his anti-vaccine activism through CHD, his ties to vaccine lawsuits, his books, and his speaking engagements.
We are at a critical juncture of whether objective reality and robust evidence will be tossed aside from conspiracy theories, power, and money. If RFK Jr. and his dangerous anti-science rhetoric is legitimized, the entire world will be put in danger.
This “study” was published by a cadre of anti-vaccine activists, funded by anti-vaccine money, in an anti-vaccine outlet, authored by a scientist-for-hire with a record of paper retractions for anti-vaccine disinformation. The publication is merely an attempt to give their false claims a veneer of legitimacy, but it’s also allowed them to gain power, influence, and momentum.
That’s exactly the situation we are in with one of the most dangerous anti-science individuals poised to take over our leading health agency. RFK Jr. is wholly unqualified to speak on any scientific topics, much less lead HHS.
We need public health leaders that use high-quality research with rigorous scientific standards to shape policy, not those who lie, cherry-pick shoddy methods to push ideological agendas, and undermine credible science and health.
Do not be fooled. RFK Jr. is a threat to humanity, and has been for decades.
Now, more than ever, we all must join in the fight for science.
Thank you for supporting evidence-based science communication. With outbreaks of preventable diseases, refusal of evidence-based medical interventions, propagation of pseudoscience by prominent public “personalities”, it’s needed now more than ever.
More science education, less disinformation.
- Andrea (and Katie)
And if you’ve been following along my trip in India (I am still “on vacation”) — here is a dose of cuteness: some baby Indian rhino love. The greater one-horned rhinoceros lives in a very restricted range in the Himalayan foothills through Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, and India. It is currently listed as vulnerable on IUCN, and they look much different than the white rhino of Africa.
Katie Suleta, DHSc, MPH, MS, is a trained epidemiologist with a background in infectious diseases and health informatics. She works as a regional director of research in graduate medical education and is a science writer.
ImmunoLogic is written by Dr. Andrea Love, PhD - immunologist and microbiologist. She works full-time in life sciences biotech and has had a lifelong passion for closing the science literacy gap and combating pseudoscience and health misinformation as far back as her childhood. This newsletter and her science communication on her social media pages are born from that passion. Follow on Instagram, Threads, Twitter, and Facebook, or support the newsletter by subscribing below:
Thank you for sharing your expertise and especially for the timeliness of this article relative to the senate confirmation hearings.
I appreciate you so much. I shared your post on IG about this in my stories. I don't know how many people bothered to "Tap to Read." I need to put the work in and share all the slides because I know a lot of people won't put the work in. And even then, many will exit the second they read something that doesn't align with their tightly held beliefs. One friend laughed. My kneejerk response was to trade barbs, but in the end I opted to do nothing and block her. I had already unfollowed her due to her ungenerous attitude towards those in poverty. To laugh at a post calling BS on this "study" was just willful ignorance. I'm not going to argue with someone who is determined to be wrong. Especially when the magnitude of evidence showing vaccines don't cause Autism is so vast.
I'm a Special Ed teacher, so I've worked with students on the Autism Spectrum over the years. They're delightful, full of life, love, and capable of so much. That anyone would risk children's lives, risk them getting truly severe, life-altering disabilities to avoid a potential Autism diagnosis is utter madness.