by Ana Wolpin | May 16, 2026 | General
“In my experience, most people assume that clinical trials for childhood vaccines review safety for years, involve hundreds of thousands of children, and include a placebo control group so that outcomes in the group receiving the vaccine can be compared against the control group…
[T]he dark cold reality is that each time a childhood vaccine has been unleashed for injection into millions of children, its safety profile was, at best, unknown.”
—Aaron Siri, Vaccines Amen: The Religion of Vaccines
———————————————
What’s the Truth about Vaccines?
Part 1 of this article began an examination of statements made by Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH) in their whimsical hand-drawn quarter-page cartoon in the Port Townsend Leader shown at right.
We reviewed the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and the liability shield granted vaccine manufacturers which led to an explosion of the childhood vaccine schedule from a handful of shots to more than 70 doses by age 18.
We looked at Big Pharma’s capture of our regulatory agencies, the fraud and corruption in our medical establishment, and the construction of a mythology so entrenched that — like a religion — its core of zealous believers will not allow any challenges to its “safe and effective” dogma. We showed how the “Vaccines Amen” crowd, both locally and nationally, demand adherence to this gospel, denounce heretics, and impose censorship or worse on those who attempt to open up the conversation about evident dangers of vaccines.
We debunked the narrative — as asserted by public health agencies from the national Centers for Disease Control (CDC) all the way down to our local health department — that multiple injections of highly toxic concoctions are safe for our babies and children.
This article will share JCPH’s response to questions we sent them about their cartoon, including a request for sources/evidence to support their claims.
And we’ll take a look at the rise in vaccine hesitancy that likely provoked the creation of the cartoon, as well as the current battle to rein in the CDC’s bloated and dangerous childhood vaccine schedule.
First, let’s look at the facts in response to two more claims by our health department in their cartoon:
“So far, there have been no credible studies that link vaccination to chronic disease.”
and
“Vaccines are tested more than any other medicine you could give your kid.”
———————————————
Do Vaccines Cause Chronic Conditions?
“But someone told me that their kid got a chronic condition from a vaccine – what if that happens to me?”
There have been rumors that vaccines can cause:
• Autism • ADHD
• Diabetes • and more
Scientists have been researching these claims for decades. So far, there have been no credible studies that link vaccination to chronic disease.
Vaccines can actually reduce the risk of some chronic conditions, like long COVID, as well as reducing the risk of cancer from HPV and Hep B.
THE FACTS:
“I can’t think of an example where the unvaccinated child was not the healthier sibling. They typically did not develop these chronic illnesses that we’re talking about in terms of eczema and asthma and autism.”
—Elizabeth Mumper, M.D.
“What is causing the massive increase in autism and other chronic health conditions in children?
It comes down to toxins, toxins, toxins, compounded by limited nutrients that inhibit the body’s ability to detoxify. Where are these toxins coming from?
The number one source is vaccines. By injecting toxins directly into the body, you bypass the natural defense mechanisms that would normally exclude these harmful substances.
There is virtually zero autism in unvaccinated children.”
—Paul Thomas, M.D.
ARE there any credible studies that link vaccination to chronic disease? What about those pesky “rumors” that vaccines can cause autism and ADHD?
As shown in Part 1, in the 1999 CDC study comparing unvaccinated to vaccinated babies given hepatitis B shots, epidemiologist Thomas Verstraeten found increased risk not only for autism, but for sleep disorders, speech disorders, and neurodevelopmental disorders like ADHD. More than a “credible study,” it caused such panic that the CDC convened a two-day secret emergency meeting, followed by manipulation of the data to refute the link found.
Just as those findings were covered up, so have other studies been suppressed which demonstrate a link between chronic conditions and vaccines.
One obvious way to determine risk of chronic conditions from vaccines, as Verstraeten did, is to compare vaxxed versus unvaxxed children. Parents have been asking for these studies — which could easily prove or disprove vaccine-related injury and death — for thirty years.
The pat response to that request is that it would be unethical to deprive children of a vaccine in a comparative trial. That argument dissolves if one does a retrospective analysis, looking at health data already on record.
Using existing health data in a retrospective analysis is exactly what Verstraeten did.
For 35 years, the CDC collected a massive database of medical records called the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). Started in 1990, the closely-guarded VSD was comprised of electronic records from 13 healthcare organizations for nine million Americans. It contained vaccination histories, health outcomes, and subject characteristics for two million children. That is the database Verstraeten was given access to in order to analyze a possible link between vaccines and neurodevelopmental disorders like autism.
“Until around 2001, the VSD was maintained at the CDC,” Aaron Siri explains. “Until that time, independent scientists who are not devout vaccine zealots were able to obtain access to the VSD at the request of members of Congress and through other legal means. The issue for the CDC is that those scientists found that vaccines cause various harms. The CDC could not have that. So the CDC moved the VSD to a health industry trade association in 2001 to avoid having the VSD data subject to FOIA [Freedom of Information Act].”
Since then, despite repeated requests, and notwithstanding the enormous database at their disposal, the CDC has refused to do further vaccinated versus unvaccinated analyses.
And in 2025 the CDC dismantled the VSD entirely. That invaluable database no longer exists. By destroying the VSD, it can never be used again for retrospective studies.
Far from our health agencies “researching these claims for decades” as stated in JCPH’s cartoon, every subterfuge available has been used to prevent that research. It has fallen to independent researchers to do the studies.
In the first peer-reviewed, published study looking at the health effects of the entire childhood vaccination schedule, in 2017 Dr. Anthony Mawson, a professor of epidemiology and biostatistics, surveyed over 600 parents of homeschooled 6- to 12-year olds. This small pilot study, including 261 completely unvaccinated children, offered a taste of other studies to come.
Mawson’s survey found that vaccinated children had 4.2 times the amount of autism and ADHD, 5.2 times greater odds for learning disabilities, nearly 20 times the rate of ear infections, and 30 times greater odds of allergic rhinitis. Unsurprisingly, pressure was put on the journal Frontiers in Public Health to retract publication of the study after it received over 80,000 online views the weekend it was released.
In 2021, Neil Z. Miller and Dr. Brian Hooker, chief science officer at Children’s Health Defense, co-authored the study “Health effects in vaccinated versus unvaccinated children, with covariates for breastfeeding status and type of birth.” Examining medical records of 1,565 children from three pediatric practices, they found vaccinated kids were:
• 5 times more likely to have autism
• 4 times more likely to have allergies
• 13.8 times more likely to have gastrointestinal issues
• 17.6 times more likely to have asthma
• 20.8 times more likely to have ADHD
• 27.8 times more likely to have chronic ear infections
An even larger study, published in 2020, looked at records from Dr. Paul Thomas’ pediatric practice in Portland, Oregon. Thomas had observed over more than three decades that the higher the vaccination rates among children he cared for, the more office visits they had for illnesses and chronic conditions. In his 2016 book The Vaccine Friendly Plan Thomas wrote that of the 15,000 children then under his care, fully unvaccinated kids were “by far, hands down, by any measure, the healthiest kids in my practice.”
He stressed that for parents who chose not to vaccinate at all, their children had the least need for medical care: “These are healthy kids. They have a robust immune system.”
The publication of his book and his outspoken stance on parents’ right to exercise informed consent on vaccination choices provoked repeated attacks on Thomas and his practice. The Oregon Medical Board demanded that he scientifically demonstrate that his alternative vaccination schedule was “as safe” as the CDC’s.
“I literally laughed,” Thomas said. “They’ve never proven anything they’ve done as safer than anything else.”
Records over a ten-year period were examined for 2,230 children who had been born into his practice, providing full health histories since birth. Working with research scientist James Lyons-Weiler in an independently verified analysis, a wide range of health outcomes were reviewed and tabulated.
As with previous studies, the results shown below confirm higher rates of chronic issues in vaccinated as compared to unvaccinated children. In all fifteen categories analyzed, the vaxxed children had significantly higher rates of conditions like asthma, eczema, and allergies; behavioral and developmental issues; and infections of all types.
In 2020, five days after publishing this robust, peer-reviewed analysis providing unequivocal proof that his unvaccinated patients were far healthier than the vaccinated children in his practice, the Oregon Medical Board issued an “emergency order” to suspend Thomas’ medical license. The pretext — he was a “threat to public health.”
After over 250,000 views online, publication of the Lyons-Weiler and Thomas paper was also retracted in a haze of vague excuses. A 2021 book The War on Informed Consent: The Persecution of Dr. Paul Thomas by the Oregon Medical Board is yet another exposé of the vaccine industry’s influence suppressing unfavorable medical research and the efforts to destroy heretics who pose a threat not to public health, but to public vaccine policy.
These and many other studies are detailed in the New York Times bestseller Vax-Unvax: Let the Science Speak. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Brian Hooker compiled all the research that our health department says doesn’t exist — over one hundred studies in the peer-reviewed literature that consider vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations.
Their 2023 book, however, preceded a motherlode of vast proportions: Vax-Unvax data from the prestigious Henry Ford Health Foundation (HFHF).
In 2018, the lead researcher and head of Infectious Disease for HFHF, Dr. Marcus Zervos, took up the challenge to do a Vax-Unvax study after meeting with ICAN’s Del Bigtree and attorney Aaron Siri. A staunchly pro-vaccine doctor and proponent of mandatory vaccination, Zervos was certain that the results would demonstrate the superior health outcomes of vaccinated children.
So certain was he of what the data would reveal, he promised to publish the study regardless of the results.
HFHF’s sizable database yielded 18,468 subjects who met eligibility criteria for the study, the largest subject group yet in a Vax-Unvax analysis. Children were tracked over ten years.
Years went by before the study was finished. When all the data was analyzed, the results were not what Zervos expected. Impact of Childhood Vaccination and Long-Term Chronic Health Outcomes in Children: A Birth Cohort Study concludes:
“[I]n contrast to our expectations, we found that exposure to vaccination was independently associated with an overall 2.5-fold increase in the likelihood of developing a chronic health condition, when compared to children unexposed to vaccination.”
With results demolishing claims of vaccine safety, Zervos — who had pledged to publish them “no matter what” — reneged on his promise.
Zervos revealed on hidden camera that while the methodology and conclusions were solid, he could not face the likely repercussions if he disclosed the results:
“I think it’s a good study… but publishing something like that, I might as well retire. I’d be finished.”
He understood that challenging the medical orthodoxy would mean the end of his long and illustrious career.
Unable to convince Zervos to publish the study, Del Bigtree/ICAN tells the story in a powerful documentary, An Inconvenient Study. Released in October 2025, and winner of Best Film at the Malibu Film Festival, it is as much a tale of a medical system that demands adherence to its orthodoxy as it is a film shattering the myth that vaccines make kids healthier. Watch it here.
The Henry Ford data reinforces the consistent outcomes seen in smaller vax-unvax studies. Vaccinated children had:
• 5.6 times higher risk for neurodevelopmental disorders,
• 4.29 times more likelihood to have asthma,
• Three times higher risk for atopic diseases (like eczema),
• Nearly six times higher risk for autoimmune disorders — a category that includes over 80 different diseases,
• 2.9 times more motor disabilities,
• 4.7 times more speech disorders.
• Nearly four times more developmental delays,
• 6.6 times more acute and chronic ear infections.
Statistical comparatives were not even possible for some chronic conditions because there were zero cases in the unvaxxed cohort.
While over 600 vaccinated children in Henry Ford’s database had ADHD, diabetes, behavioral problems, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities, tics, or other psychological disorders, out of nearly 2,000 unvaccinated children, over ten years, there wasn’t a single case of any of these chronic conditions in HFHF’s system.
And at ten years of follow-up, 57% of the vaccinated cohort had at least one chronic disorder, compared with 17% in the unvaccinated.
These studies all looked only at chronic conditions. Even more disturbing is the statistical risk of death from childhood shots. In his 2024 book Vax Facts: What to Consider Before Vaccinating at All Ages & Stages of Life, Dr. Paul Thomas compares the risk of death between vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
Government data was used to calculate the risk on each side. A summary of the methodology can be seen here.
Infants given the hepatitis B vaccine at birth were found to be three times more likely to die than those who did not get the shot. As we will see below, for 99.9% of American infants the risk of actually contracting hepatitis B is zero.
Chicken pox was considered so mild a childhood illness that when I was a kid in the 1950s parents literally held parties to spread the infection and “get it over with.” The varicella (chicken pox) vaccine was introduced in 1995 not because chicken pox was devastating children’s health — unlike vaccines, it confers lifelong immunity and helps protect against cancer later in life — but for convenience. Vaccination saved working parents the hassle of their kids being out of school for a week. The Vax Facts graphic shows children are 160 times more likely to die if given the varicella (chicken pox) vaccine than if they are unvaccinated.
And so it goes with all other routine childhood shots. Most shockingly — in sharp contrast to the conventional rhetoric about polio saving lives — the risk of death from the polio vaccine was calculated at 4,600,000 times that of not getting vaccinated against polio. Risk of death from the disease is less than one in a trillion, while risk of death from the polio vaccine is greater than 1 in 214,973.
“This is hard to believe if you haven’t heard this before,” says Thomas. “For every single vaccine on the childhood schedule, your risk of death… just looking at death because that is what parents fear the most: I don’t want my child to die of this disease for which we have a vaccine, how could I live with myself?… your risk of dying from the vaccine far exceeds your risk of dying from the disease.”
———————————————
Rigorously Tested?
“I’m just not sure vaccines are worth the risk.”
Vaccines are rigorously tested to ensure their safety. In fact – vaccines are tested more than any other medicine you could give your kid.
Children have been successfully vaccinated for generations.
THE FACTS:
“[Vaccine] testing is not long-term, not double blind, not done with proper placebos. Our children are being experimented on.”
—Brandy Vaughan, former Merck rep and founder of the Council for Vaccine Safety
“I challenge every physician and scientist to read Turtles All the Way Down: Vaccine Science and Myth and make your best effort to shoot holes in the arguments it makes. I suspect that for the vast majority it will be an eye-opening experience.”
—Mary Holland, Esq., CEO of Children’s Health Defense
Is it true that vaccines are “rigorously tested to ensure their safety”?… that “in fact – vaccines are tested more than any other medicine you could give your kid”?
The myth that vaccines are the best tested of all drugs has been repeated for so many years, it is taken for granted by the medical establishment. Anyone researching this claim soon learns, however, that like so much of the official vaccine gospel, it has no basis in reality. Just the opposite is true.
A stark comparison of vaccine testing to the testing of other pharmaceuticals can be seen at a glance in this chart from the book Vaccines, Amen:
Like the risk of death comparisons, it seems unbelievable.
Vaccine manufacturers, by law, are required to describe their clinical trials on the package insert. Far from “rigorous”, the dearth of testing for many vaccines beggars belief. While other drugs have years of testing before licensure is granted, some vaccines have been approved after safety reviews of only days.
Vaccines have the worst — not the best — safety testing protocols of any pharmaceutical product. As we reported in our 2017 study guide, “gold standard” drug testing is not applied to vaccines.
It is instructive to look once again at the package insert of the HepB vaccine Recombivax HB as an example.
Pharmaceutical drugs are required to monitor subjects for years to prove safety. Not only was the duration of the Recombivax HB trial just five days, there were only 147 infants and children who took part.
And of the 147 subjects, most were healthy babies and children up to 10 years old — not newborns, who the first shot of this vaccine is foisted upon.
Beyond being underpowered (not enough subjects), the trial had no control group. None of the subjects were given a placebo to compare outcomes with. That, too, is not permissible in drug trials. But it is the norm for vaccines.
For a clinical trial to provide meaningful safety data, several thousand subjects are needed, sometimes even tens of thousands. No pharmaceutical drug could possibly be approved with only 147 subjects after five days of monitoring and no control group.
Was there any SIDS on day 6 or 7 or 8? What about autism developing over weeks or months from a toxic load of aluminum crossing the blood-brain barrier (see Part 1)? What other long-term adverse affects might there be?
The post-marketing reports for Recombivax HB offer a glimpse of issues not seen in the 5-day clinical trial that the vaccine’s approval was based on: seizures, lupus, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (paralysis), neuropathy, multiple sclerosis, and encephalitis (brain inflammation), among many others.
The hepatitis B shot, with its 500 mcg of aluminum and residual formaldehyde, is recommended to be given within 12-24 hours of birth.
How at risk for hepatitis B is that newborn?
Requiring babies to receive three HepB shots is not only insupportable given the inadequate safety testing and post-marketing adverse reactions reported, it is especially egregious because most babies are not at ANY risk for contracting the hepatitis B virus in the first place. The virus is transmitted through sexual intercourse, dirty needles among intravenous drug users, and infection during childbirth by mothers who test positive for HepB.
Assuming a newborn isn’t having sex or sharing needles, the only possible risk is transmission from the exceedingly rare mother who tests positive for hepatitis B.
But pregnant women in the U.S. are routinely screened for hepatitis B at their first prenatal visit. Only one-tenth of one percent of pregnant women test positive for the virus: 0.1%. If a mother is not HepB positive, and the baby isn’t sexually active or a drug user, there is zero risk for that baby to contract hepatitis B.
For 99.9% of American babies, receiving a HepB injection is all risk, no benefit. And for that minuscule 0.1% who are at risk, less than 5% of those who do get infected experience permanent damage.
So why are all birthing women told their newborns need a HepB shot on the day they are born when nearly all are not at any risk? And then another shot at two months? And six months? Stories abound of hospitals threatening to call Child Protective Services (CPS) when parents refuse this day-one HepB shot.
That is the power of Pharma’s capture of the regulatory system, and of believers convinced that vaccines are always safe and effective, along with the equally pervasive mantra, “Vaccines Save Lives.”
The reality is that vaccines can take lives.
Just one example is of a family’s newborn son who died after being injected with RSV and HepB vaccines. “His parents did not want to get them but they were threatened with CPS so they complied.”
SIDS deaths reported to the CDC following vaccination is shown below for four common childhood vaccines, including hepatitis B. What was the benefit for those 410 mothers whose infants died after receiving HepB shots? How many of those babies were likely to die from the virus?
The HepB shot’s lack of safety testing is far from an outlier. Not a single vaccine on the childhood schedule has undergone the “gold standard” randomized control trial required of other drugs. None have been tested against a true placebo, which means that an accurate safety profile was never established.
Vaccine safety advocates have petitioned the CDC for proof of true placebo-based trials.
None exists.
In Vaccines, Amen, Aaron Siri shows the lack of proper controls and absence of placebo testing for every vaccine given through the first six months of life:
Much has been written about this lack of safety testing. In 2022 a group of Israeli researchers published the deepest dive yet. Along with other vaccine myths, Turtles All the Way Down: Vaccine Science and Myth, “examines in detail the institutional claims that vaccines are extremely safe and that their safety has been established by rock-solid science.”
With over 1200 references and 500+ pages, Turtles All the Way Down distills hundreds of peer-reviewed scientific papers, mainstream textbooks, the official publications of relevant government agencies, and manufacturers’ documents into an easy-to-read resource. The first part of the book is a systematic and thorough review of safety testing for every childhood vaccine.
The book’s final chapter, “The Vaccine Hoax,” summarizes their comprehensive investigation:
• Each and every one of the vaccines on the US CDC-recommended childhood schedule has been tested in clinical trials against another vaccine (or vaccine-like compound) that has a similar scope of side effects. Not a single one was tested against a true placebo, a neutral compound with no significant side effects.
• The clinical trials’ designers use this technique to cover up the high rate of adverse events expected with each new vaccine. Thus, the new vaccine can be declared “safe” and its side effects proclaimed “normal”, as the recorded side effects do not substantially exceed those of the other vaccine.
• When every new childhood vaccine is tested for safety against another vaccine, which itself was tested against another vaccine, which was tested against another vaccine, — well, you get the picture — it’s turtles all the way down.
• The use of this intentionally flawed trial methodology means that every vaccine on the US childhood schedule received FDA approval without a true measure of the actual magnitude of its adverse events.
“Current vaccine clinical trial methodology completely invalidates the claims that vaccines are safe and that they are thoroughly and rigorously tested,” they assert. “And pulling out that bogus card completely topples the childhood vaccine program’s house of cards.”
Again, the bigger question is risk-benefit.
People can accept that there may be risk from a vaccine — IF that risk is less than the risk from the disease it is targeting.
We’ve already seen the Vax Facts “Risk of Death” graph. In 2025 Physicians for Informed Consent published another analysis: Comparing 10 Disease Risks to Vaccine Risks.
It considers not just risk of death, but also risk of permanent disability. These combined risks from childhood vaccines for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough), polio, haemophilus influenza type B, varicella (chicken pox), hepatitis B, measles, mumps and rubella are compared to the risk of death or permanent disability from the disease itself.
Again, in every case the vaccine has caused more death and permanent disabilities than the disease it is designed to protect against.
While JCPH’s cartoon assures us that “children have been successfully vaccinated for generations,” the truth is that chronic disease, injury and even death outweigh any benefit received through vaccination. By every metric, most children have been damaged by vaccines far more than they have benefited by avoiding the disease.
Turtles All the Way Down final chapter, “Institutionalized Fraud,” closes its exhaustive investigation into the fictitious vaccine narrative with this chilling summation:
“The magnitude of these crimes is enormous — these entities are in way too deep to ever be able to admit any wrongdoing. They will do whatever is necessary to protect the great vaccine hoax. For them it is a matter of life and death — literally.
And so it is for us.”
——————————————
Our Health Department Responds to My Inquiry
Following the publication of the health department’s cartoon, I wrote to JCPH, requesting resources for the five statements explored in these two articles:
“Can you provide sources/evidence to support these claims in the cartoon/ad (links and/or attachments)?”:
1. “Our kids face more challenges to their immune system while playing outside than they do from vaccines.”
2. “We are exposed to more aluminum by eating a tomato than from getting vaccines!” (What information can you provide comparing the danger of ingesting aluminum to that of injecting it?)
3. “The type of mercury in vaccines – ethyl mercury – is NOT harmful to us.”
4. “So far, there have been no credible studies that link vaccination to chronic disease.”
5. “Vaccines are tested more than any other medicine you could give your kid.”
I also asked:
• Who developed the content for this cartoon/ad? JCPH or an outside agency?
• Has there been a reduction in childhood vaccine uptake in the county?
I received this friendly response from Public Health Communications Specialist Alyssa Zawawi:
Hi Ana,
Thanks for reaching out to JCPH! The ad you referenced was developed by JCPH. Here are some resources that support the claims you are asking about:
1. The American Academy of Pediatrics published this article about if vaccines can overwhelm a child’s immune system and includes data about how many antigens we are exposed to in our daily lives: https://www.aap.org/en/news-room/fact-checked/fact-checked-receiving-multiple-vaccines-does-not-overwhelm-a-childs-immune-system/?srsltid=AfmBOoom-T8q459schs1FxNVIcjzDGxznf9XzLFPYMy6MmCCDAHtrR62
2. This article from the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia’s Vaccine Education Center has information on the use of aluminum salts in vaccines and includes a section on ingesting vs injecting aluminum: https://www.chop.edu/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-safety/vaccine-ingredients/aluminum
3. The American Academy of Pediatrics writes about thimerosal (ethyl-mercury) in this article: https://www.aap.org/en/news-room/fact-checked/fact-checked-extensive-research-shows-thimerosal-is-safe/?srsltid=AfmBOoqCbGxbKslDV6IfEvk3RBKjgfvN_MgXKF4U6XIujSQyI6Is7O_X
4. Here are a few resources from the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia that talk about vaccines and chronic disease: https://www.chop.edu/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-safety/vaccines-and-other-conditions ; https://www.chop.edu/parents-pack/parents-pack-newsletter/feature-article-do-vaccines-cause-chronic-diseases
5. This article from Johns Hopkins School of Public Health outlines the vaccine testing and approval process: https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2025/how-the-us-ensures-vaccine-safety
You can also check out Washington State Department of Health’s Immunization Dashboard (https://doh.wa.gov/data-and-statistical-reports/washington-tracking-network-wtn/immunization-data/county-public-health-measures-dashboard). This resource has a lot of information on immunization trends over time by county. For more information on vaccination rates in Jefferson County, you can also reach out to our Health Officer, Dr. Allison Berry at aberry@co.jefferson.wa.us.
Best,
Alyssa Zawawi
Public Health Communications Specialist
Jefferson County Public Health
Not surprisingly, the cartoon developed in-house by JCPH is a compilation of talking points from pharma-funded pillars of vaccine gospel.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Vaccine Education Center and Johns Hopkins School of Public Health are powerful mouthpieces for the established narrative. Their ability to deny, obfuscate and manipulate information is formidable.
We’ve already addressed numbers 4 and 5 earlier in this article. But let’s look again at the issues raised by numbers 1-3 (already touched upon in Part 1) and how the health department’s trusted sources are misleading the public.
1. “Our kids face more challenges to their immune system while playing outside than they do from vaccines.”
The American Academy of Pediatrics explains that we’re exposed in our daily lives to far more antigens (small molecules found on bacteria and viruses that elicit an immune response) than are injected through vaccination.
But the number of antigens we are exposed to is not the primary concern. The vaccines’ highly toxic formulations injected directly into the bloodstream and bypassing complex natural defenses is what is at issue (see Part 1).
Why would the AAP create this misdirect to deny vaccine damage?
Children’s Health Defense details “The Real Agenda Behind American Academy of Pediatrics: Weaponizing Children’s Mental Health and Vaccines for Profit”:
“With a budget of more than $127 million and a staff of 475, the American Academy of Pediatrics functions as a corporate and government mouthpiece that touts the wares of drug, vaccine and formula manufacturers.”
The AAP’s funding from vaccine manufacturers includes Pfizer, Moderna, Merck and Sanofi. In contrast to pediatric practices primarily helping parents navigate routine childhood illnesses as they did when I was growing up, administering vaccines is pediatricians’ bread and butter today.
Every routine “well baby” or “well child visit” from infancy throughout childhood is focused on vaccination, with more than 70 doses on the CDC schedule. Pediatric offices are dependent on this vaccine-focused approach to sustain their practices.
As disclosed by Dr. Paul Thomas, pediatricians get paid not just for the vaccine itself — financial incentives for administering vaccines include kickbacks of up to $240 per visit. Thomas estimated that by honoring informed consent and offering patients in his practice a choice, “We were losing … over a million dollars in vaccines that were refused.”
In a 2020 paper Thomas co-authored with James Lyons-Weiler, “Vaccine Practice Payment Schedules Create Perverse Incentives for Unnecessary Medical Procedures – at What Cost to Patients?”, they write it is “clear that the financial incentives to vaccinate are now a matter of survival for pediatric practices.”
“With the financial incentive to vaccinate, and to give as many as possible, it is unsurprising that many pediatric practices discharge or refuse to accept new patients who do not agree to follow the CDC recommended vaccine schedule.”
The number of pediatricians refusing to care for children who do not adhere to the full CDC schedule is considerable. A 2020 survey of AAP members published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) revealed that half of pediatric offices report “a policy to dismiss families if they refused vaccines.”
Previous to 2018 the AAP had advised practitioners to “endeavor not to discharge” patients based on parental refusal to allow their child to be vaccinated. In 2018 that changed.
An AAP clinical report that year shifted policy guidance to support the practice of refusing care to families unless they vaccinate.
A JAMA Pediatrics opinion piece noted, “Clinicians who dismiss vaccine-refusing families seem to focus excessively on the interests of their own practice at the expense of their responsibilities to contribute to collective public health efforts.”
Despite those who argued that dismissal is ethically problematic — depriving children of pediatric care and undermining public health — the policy was rationalized as expressing “tolerance for diverse professional approaches.”
Refusing patient care supports diversity!
The AAP is so compromised that when the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recently recommended revising the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule in line with other developed nations — changing the status of hepatitis B, rotavirus, influenza, meningococcal ACWF, hepatitis A, meningococcal B and COVID-19 vaccines from mandatory shots to a choice made jointly by parents and providers through shared clinical decision-making — the AAP sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to reverse that decision.
Despite, for example, there being no justification for a HepB shot at birth for more than 99.9% of newborns, the AAP insists that the vaccine be required for all.
“Shared clinical decision-making,” says HHS, “strengthens the doctor-patient relationship, respects informed consent, and allows recommendations to reflect individual risk — while preserving access to every vaccine.”
That shared clinical decision-making, intended to rebuild trust in public health, is anathema, however, to the AAP. Any policy that might create vaccine hesitancy cannot be tolerated. The more shots, the more the organization and its members financially benefit.
——————————————
2. “We are exposed to more aluminum by eating a tomato than from getting vaccines!”
The article from Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia supporting this statement tells us that “we are exposed to more aluminum from food than from vaccines because the exposure from food occurs daily.” It compares the amount of aluminum in foods to that in vaccines, relying on the assumption that ingested aluminum and injected aluminum are equivalent.
Concealing critical information is a typical ploy of these institutional players. Nowhere does the article reveal, as Physicians for Informed Consent explain in Part 1, that (emphasis added):
“The ATSDR [Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry] oral aluminum limit is based on 0.1% of oral aluminum being absorbed into the bloodstream, as the digestive tract blocks nearly all oral aluminum (Fig. 2a). In contrast, aluminum injected intramuscularly bypasses the digestive tract, and 100% of aluminum may be absorbed into the bloodstream over time (i.e.,the proportion of absorbed aluminum is 1,000 times greater).
This Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia article was “reviewed by Paul A. Offit, MD.”
That helps explain the article’s deception by omission. Offit is the industry’s top “medical expert” propagandist, popularizing such lies as vaccines are the best tested of all products, far better than pharmaceuticals. The inventor of a rotavirus vaccine, with a $1.5 million research chair funded by Merck at Children’s Hospital, he is one of pharma’s most aggressive proponents for mandatory vaccination.
Among Offit’s many outrageous assertions is that vaccines are safer than vitamins. He is infamous for his statement that healthy infants could safely get up to 10,000 vaccines at once. He later upped that figure: “I would say you probably could get 100,000 vaccines every day.”
——————————————
3. The type of mercury in vaccines – ethyl mercury – is NOT harmful to us.”
The AAP article linked by JCPH to make this assertion is riddled with misinformation about the dangerous neurotoxin ethylmercury (thimerosal) in vaccines.
“AAP’s assessment of the best available evidence has always been, and continues to be, that thimerosal is a safe additive in appropriate amounts.”
A blatant rewriting of history, this has not “always been” AAP’s assessment. Prior to being completely subsumed by Big Pharma, in 1999 the American Academy of Pediatrics recognized the risk from and called for the immediate removal of thimerosal from infant vaccines.
Now the AAP is claiming they only called for thimerosal’s removal because the public mistakenly believed mercury in vaccines was dangerous and they wanted to make parents feel better about vaccinating their kids.
The AAP knew then and surely knows today that contents of unused thimerosal-containing vaccine vials are required to be disposed of as federally hazardous waste. What they are now calling “appropriate amounts” in thimerosal-preserved vaccines is literally 250 times the level classified as a toxic hazardous waste by the EPA. (See Part 1)
Proof that thimerosal is safe, they tell us, is that “autism rates actually rose after thimerosal was removed from childhood vaccines.” As we detailed in Part 1, toxic aluminum replaced the toxic mercury when thimerosal was removed from most (not all) childhood vaccines. Additionally, the number of doses on the childhood vaccine schedule nearly tripled. Of course autism rates rose.
In addition to the AAP lying about it’s past position on thimerosal in vaccines, again we see misinformation by omission.
No doubt the well-meaning folks at our health department believe and rely on this institutional fiction. But as more people are becoming informed, the vaccine religion’s foundations are wobbling.
——————————————
Vaccine Hesitancy On the Rise
and the Battle to Maintain Control of the Narrative
“I think we’re finding that a lot of the parents are informing themselves, and are less malleable in the office setting, because with the information age that we’re in, this information is available that wasn’t available before the doctor was the only source of information. You didn’t have any way to look it up. And now, people do. So, this may be a problem that extends into the future.”
—Dr. Joe Wiley, Lewis County Health Director
The young boy in JCPH’s cartoon has heard “rumors” that vaccines can cause chronic conditions like autism and asks, “What if that happens to me?”
The girl in the cartoon wonders if getting vaccines is “worth the risk.”
Despite the relentless barrage of safe and effective messaging, public health is now faced with the problem of parents accessing information beyond their doctors’ offices. Now capable of “informing themselves,” they are “less malleable” (manipulable).
As suspected, in line with the national trend, childhood vaccine uptake has been dropping in Jefferson County.
Looking at the Washington Department of Health Immunization Dashboard, a steady reduction in childhood vaccination rates following the not-so “safe and effective” COVID-19 injection fiasco is evident. For example, the HepB vaccine dose given at birth shows 72.8% uptake in 2022, declining to 53% in 2025.
Every county in the state shows the same trend.
Similarly, the dashboard shows drops in vaccine uptake for 19- to 35-month-olds in Jefferson County between 2021 and 2025 for these shots:
In Informed Choice Washington‘s March 18 newsletter, Gerald Braude covered a presentation given by former pediatrician and current Lewis County Health Director Dr. Joe Wiley to their Board of Health. The quote above describing the problem of parents being less “malleable” because they can now access their own information is from that presentation.
Wiley linked the precipitous drop in vaccination rates in Lewis County to multiple factors in this slide:
In his follow-up comments, he expanded:
“Not mentioned here, but some have noted that the pharmaceutical companies provide lots of funding… Lots of funding for medical journals and medical organizations make consumers suspicious. Some have also found that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 as suspicious because it exempts the pharmaceutical companies that make the vaccines exempt from liability should anyone be injured from the vaccine. And they fear that the pharmaceutical companies that are making the vaccines may take shortcuts because they don’t have to worry about liability.”
Much of his additional commentary focused on the COVID-19 debacle eroding public trust in vaccines.
“There’s a lot of lost trust among the population,” Wiley said. “The medical offices see it, I hear it from them, and you’ve probably seen it in your family, even, if not within yourself. And it seems like the available data that we’ve looked at here supports that vaccine hesitancy.”
While acknowledging that the available data supports vaccine hesitancy, public health agencies nonetheless see that as a problem. They persist in gaslighting us with assurances that mercury and aluminum in vaccines is perfectly safe, that vaccines are more rigorously tested than any other drugs, and that they do not cause chronic health conditions — all patently false assertions.
In Jefferson County, we continue to face censorship and dismissal when challenging that gaslighting.
Right after JCPH’s cartoon was published, the Port Townsend Leader rejected a letter to the editor directly responding to its claim about safety testing. The writer who submitted it described failure of government oversight in which a 1986 law mandating reports from a vaccine safety task force had been been ignored for forty years. The task force had never fulfilled its mandate and Congress never received a single biennial report on vaccine safety improvements that the law required. The Leader censored that information.
NextDoor also censored a conversation about our previous article, Part 1. A Free Press reader posted a link to the article. That elicited several comments of appreciation, agreeing with its content… but those were quickly overshadowed by a few people who then dominated the comments proclaiming that the information presented was false. No supposed inaccuracies were ever cited; the commenters just attacked the Free Press and its writers. The post was deleted soon after as “misinformation”.
At the monthly County Public Health Report broadcast on KPTZ on May 4, a listener asked Health Officer Dr. Allison Berry for a response to our article. Rather than address any of the substance, she, too, just used the convenient, dismissive “misinformation” label. No rebuttal of a single inaccuracy, just a long generalized diatribe about identifying misinformation online. That will be addressed in a separate follow-up article.
——————————————
On a national level, the stakes are far higher. The struggle to maintain control of the vaccine narrative has expanded from the kind of censorship and dismissal we are subject to locally to an intense legal battle in federal court.
As previously discussed, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and other organizations have sued HHS to prevent “shared clinical decision-making” on any of the childhood vaccines. For doctors and other health advisors to have honest conversations that acknowledge potential risks would increase vaccine hesitancy.
They have also targeted the CDC’s Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) which makes recommendations for vaccines on the childhood schedule.
Historically, ACIP had been comprised entirely of members with financial ties to pharma. All committee members had conflicts of interest, rubber-stamping every vaccine that came to them for approval.
A 2000 Committee on Government Reform report concluded:
“The CDC routinely grants waivers from conflict of interest rules to every member of its advisory committee… Four out of eight CDC advisory committee members who voted to approve guidelines for the rotavirus vaccine in June 1998 had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine.”
Dr. Paul Offit from Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, for example, was an ACIP member cited for conflict of interest in a hearing held by the Committee on Government Reform. As one of the rotavirus vaccine developers funded by pharmaceutical companies, he “voted on three rotavirus issues, including making the recommendation of adding the rotavirus vaccine to the Vaccines for Children program.” Getting that vaccine on the schedule earned Offit millions of dollars.
One of Robert Kennedy Jr’s first acts as new HHS Secretary was to replace the pharma-centric ACIP members with a balanced group of medical experts without conflicts of interest. It is that independent group which made the recommendation for shared decision-making that the AAP is opposing.
The new ACIP panel also recommended removing mercury from flu vaccines. And they voted to end the universal recommendation that all newborns receive the hepatitis B vaccine within 12-24 hours of birth. All those long-overdue recommendations were designed to restore trust in public health.
The AAP and other pharma-funded organizations have sued to reverse all those decisions.
And within hours of ACIP voting to discontinue the hepatitis B shot requirement for babies born to HepB-negative mothers, the West Coast Health Alliance (California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii) announced they, too, would reject the recommendation and continue promoting the automatic hepatitis B birth-dose.
In a final attack, the AAP’s lawsuit sought disbandment of ACIP.
In March, a U.S. District Judge issued a stay on all counts, which put a pause on all new ACIP recommendations and prevented the committee from continuing to meet. The judge did not issue the injunctions AAP sought to permanently block ACIP’s efforts, but that is still possible.
The ruling has been appealed, both by HHS and separately by the nonprofit Children’s Health Defense (CHD). Those appeals are pending.
In a counter-measure in January, CHD and five other plaintiffs sued the AAP, accusing it of running a decades-long racketeering scheme to defraud the public about the safety of the CDC’s childhood vaccination schedule.
The lawsuit alleges that the AAP:
• Promotes vaccine safety claims without comprehensive safety testing, including the absence of studies comparing health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children
• Suppresses and misrepresents scientific uncertainty, creating a “false certainty”
• Relies on a foundational fraud, a theoretical claim that infants could safely receive thousands of vaccines at once, despite no clinical evidence of the safety of that claim
• Uses its influence to punish dissenting physicians, damaging the careers of pediatricians who questioned vaccine safety claims
• Fails to disclose financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies that manufacture childhood vaccines
Among the plaintiffs are physicians whose professional reputations were harmed for opposing AAP’s guidelines, and the parents of four children who died or were injured after receiving routine childhood vaccinations. Dr. Kenneth Stoller, who lost his medical license in California and New Mexico after he granted medical exemptions to vaccine mandates, said “AAP turned pediatricians into vaccine delivery systems and destroyed the ones who asked questions.”
On April 3, AAP filed a motion to dismiss the RICO case; plaintiffs’ response is due on or before June 9.
This is the legal battle in play.
——————————————
Meanwhile, in the court of public opinion, increasing vaccine hesitancy shows that the pharma-medical complex is losing its stranglehold.
As public trust erodes, the AAP and other pharma-funded groups reveal their desperation — suing to continue HepB vaccination of newborns who have zero risk, trying to block shared clinical decision-making between parents and providers, fighting to keep neurotoxic mercury in the flu shot.
These are the institutions and organizations Jefferson County Public Health relies on for its messaging to our community. Given their denial of vaccine dangers in this recent cartoon, does our health department agree with the AAP’s efforts to prevent shared clinical decision-making, remove mercury from vaccines and force HepB shots on all newborns?
What is their position on pediatricians who refuse care to children whose parents decline vaccinations?
Those might be good questions for Health Officer Berry at her next public health update.
——————————————
by Ana Wolpin | Apr 12, 2026 | General
“According to the CDC and public health authorities, parents who choose not to vaccinate their children are typically highly educated. CDC data reflect that half of American school children are not fully vaccinated, and at least 1 in 88 toddlers are completely unvaccinated. Why would the parents of these children, comprising a large part of the nation’s brain trust, choose not to vaccinate their children?”
— Aaron Siri, from the foreword of “Vaccines, Amen: The Religion of Vaccines”
———————————————
“What’s the Truth about Vaccines?” asked Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH) in a quarter-page ad in the March 11 Port Townsend Leader. The hand-drawn, whimsical cartoon-style presentation and the ad’s content offered a light-hearted attempt to ease parents’ concerns about vaccinating their children.
“This is a JUDGEMENT FREE guide to learn about vaccines,” the ad opens with. “You don’t need to have your mind made up to start reading. BRING YOUR CURIOSITY!”
Among the statements made:
• “Our kids face more challenges to their immune system while playing outside than they do from vaccines.”
• “We are exposed to more aluminum by eating a tomato than from getting vaccines!”
• “The type of mercury in vaccines – ethylmercury – is NOT harmful to us.”
• “So far, there have been no credible studies that link vaccination to chronic disease.”
• “Vaccines are tested more than any other medicine you could give your kid.”
The health department’s ad comes at a time when childhood vaccination rates are dropping steadily across the country. Along with reduction in vaccine uptake, there is also a rise in the rate of parents seeking vaccine exemptions for their children.
In Part 1 of this article, we will explore the growing awareness causing this shift, share some local history on attempts to open up the conversation about vaccines in our community, and examine some of the statements above that our health department has made to reassure parents that they needn’t worry about common vaccination concerns.
Three Distinct Attitudes About Vaccination
Aaron Siri, quoted at the top of this article, is managing partner of the highest profile law firm handling vaccine-related cases in the U.S. Over the last decade he has deposed the world’s leading vaccinologists, challenged medical mandates, and won awards for vaccine injury cases. He has prosecuted over a hundred lawsuits against health agencies, successfully suing the FDA to release Pfizer and Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccine licensure documents, winning many cases restoring medical exemptions including for the U.S. military, and forcing transparency when the CDC refused to release hidden V-safe data tracking adverse reactions to the Covid-19 shots.
In this pursuit, Siri describes experiencing three categories of people:
• Parents who do not vaccinate. Parents who choose to forego vaccines, he says, are not only highly educated, but “often scientifically literate. Many are medical professionals. Leading scientists.” He quotes vaccine promoter Emily Brunson, PhD, who acknowledges: “When you look at hesitancy in the U.S., the group who is most likely to purposefully choose to not vaccinate are highly educated. In speaking with them, these are people who have read the primary literature themselves, and they’re correctly interpreting it.”
• Parents who do vaccinate. Almost all “have never really thought much about these products… they just go with the flow,” says Siri. “They often do what the media says good parents are expected to do—trust their doctors.” They are, however, open-minded and able to process new information. He finds that their “views are susceptible to change upon presentation of actual evidence.”
• The “Vaccines Amen” crowd. For these believers, the story that vaccines are a modern medical miracle — safe and effective! — is a sacred cow. “This is the group of parents, doctors and public health professionals—a small army of them—who have a fervent belief in vaccines,” says Siri. “When these beliefs are challenged, this crowd gets angry.”
Unable to “accept even official government data showing that many of their core beliefs regarding vaccines are false,” these zealots are incurious and entrenched. Their fanaticism is faith-based, akin to religious zealotry.
“They regurgitate canned answers they have never researched—essentially mantras,” says Siri. At their most extreme, “for those who refuse to adopt their beliefs, they demand that the refusers be censored, have their rights taken away, and be mandated to be injected.”
As this article will show, the claims made in our health department’s ad repeat medical dogma that has persisted for decades with no basis in reality. At best the narrative is a wishful fairy tale. At worst it is dangerous disinformation.
As Siri expresses, “I think most pediatricians, doctors and public health authorities mean well. They believe they are engaging in God’s work. And that is often the problem that makes them blind to reality.”
Is our health department simply “going with the flow,” unaware that the claims made in their ad are mythology? Or are they so entrenched in their fervent belief in the vaccine narrative that they cannot consider information that disproves the gospel?
‘Vaccines Amen’ Bullies and Gatekeepers in Jefferson County
In 2016, a documentary film disclosing a decade-long CDC cover-up created an uproar in the news, sparking a long-overdue national conversation. Senior CDC scientist turned whistleblower William Thompson revealed privately in 2014 that data linking the MMR vaccine (measles/mumps/rubella) to autism had been manipulated by the agency ten years earlier.
When top CDC officials learned that their 2004 study results showed a dramatic increase in autism after MMR vaccinations, they’d ordered Thompson and other scientists to destroy all evidence. The agency then had the research team revise the study parameters and manipulate the data to disprove a link. Ultimately, the only way they could eliminate the evident risk was to eliminate from the study the groups of children most likely to regress into autism following their shot. The fraudulent, re-worked study was then released to declare that it had proven MMR vaccines did not cause autism.
Believing the order to destroy data was illegal, Thompson secretly saved over 10,000 pages of documents. He would reveal them a decade later, conscience-stricken over the likely damage in ongoing vaccine injury the cover-up was causing.
The CDC had conducted the study in response to petitions from over 5,000 parents in vaccine court who had witnessed their children regress into autism from the MMR shot. When the fraudulent “results” were released, those petitions were dismissed with the stroke of a pen. The CDC announced: No more research money will be spent on this question; “the science is settled.”
This fraud was the subject of the shocking and controversial movie Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe.
Scheduled to premier at the Tribeca Film Festival, Big Pharma pressure forced its cancellation. The effort to suppress the film only gave it more publicity and heightened public interest. Screenings across the country opened a floodgate. A tsunami of parents started speaking out about their own children’s vaccine injuries.
Working with the film’s distributor and Rose Theatre owner Rocky Friedman, Annette Huenke (now a PTFP co-editor) set up a screening of Vaxxed in Port Townsend. A January 2017 date was set and Huenke wrote the theater a check as a deposit for the screening. Posters were printed and tickets went on sale, posted on the Rose Theatre’s Facebook page.
Within 24 hours of the film being announced, the screening which had been planned over months was canceled.
Both the Facebook post announcing the film screening and a comment it had generated were quickly pulled from the page. Owen Rowe, then director of the now-defunct Jefferson Community School and board member of the Food Co-op (he is currently a Port Townsend city councilman), was outraged that the theater would dare to screen that “fraudulent film” which he undoubtably had not seen. Before the post was deleted Huenke was alerted to the angry tirade shaming Friedman on the theater’s Facebook page.
In an apologetic exchange that Friedman had with Huenke after canceling the film, he said,
“I am very sorry that I caved to this and didn’t stand up to it. It was not pleasant for me or for the business that I’ve created. Actually, it was far worse than the death threat that I received when I was intending to show a movie by Michael Moore a long time ago… Please let me reimburse you for whatever expenses you have incurred – posters or other advertising.”
Far worse than a death threat?!
Self-appointed community gatekeeper Owen Rowe demonstrated the epitome of the angry zealotry that Siri describes. By threatening Friedman and the Rose Theatre, he’d eliminated the heinous possibility of people being exposed to information that challenged his beliefs — effectively demanding censorship to squelch independent thinking.
People Who Do the Research
Following that dramatic attack and cancellation, I joined a group of local folks concerned about censorship. We formed a vaccine study group that dove into the vaccination question with a great deal of curiosity. We met every week for the better part of a year to discuss books, films and other materials that were challenging the dominant “vaccines are a modern medical miracle” story.
The first shock for anyone just beginning this research was learning about the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.
In the 1980s, pharmaceutical companies were losing so much money settling lawsuits for vaccine injury (predominantly from the DPT shot – diphtheria/pertussis/tetanus) that the industry threatened to stop making vaccines unless the government shielded them from damages. Bowing to the pressure, in 1986 Congress removed all liability from drug companies for childhood vaccines they produced. This get-out-of-jail-free card, eliminating industry responsibility for safety, was unprecedented.
The 1986 act set the stage for the breathtaking industry capture, government cover-ups and bombardment of “safe and effective” messaging that followed.
With vaccine makers now absolved of all medical and legal liability when children die, become chronically ill with vaccine-induced disorders, or are otherwise disabled from vaccine injuries, pharma had a field day. Vaccines became Big Pharma’s most profitable product division almost overnight.
Not only did profits skyrocket because pharma was shielded from damages, they were guaranteed sales with zero marketing costs. Each new childhood shot approved was automatically added to the CDC’s Childhood Vaccine Schedule, with the assurance that tens of millions of children would receive them at routine pediatric visits. The CDC partnered with pharma as the primary purchaser, distributor and promoter of billions of dollars of vaccines annually.
A more-is-better free-for-all ensued.
While children had received just five vaccine doses in three shots in the 1950s and ’60s when I was growing up (none during pregnancy or in the first 12 months of life), by 1986 children were receiving 25 doses/12 shots. In the decades following the 1986 act the childhood schedule exploded to 73 doses/54 shots.
New vaccines were developed for illnesses like hepatitis B and rotavirus, for which there was little risk and which effectively had 100% survival rates for healthy American children. Mild illnesses which formerly helped strengthen developing infants’ and children’s immune systems were now vaccinated against, all fodder for pharma’s liability-free cash cow.
Pregnant mothers were injected, infants started receiving shots on their first day of life, and the practice of administering multiple shots — as many as ten doses in eight shots at one time (never tested in combination) in a euphemistically labeled “Well Child Visit” — became routine.
In my childhood years, autism, peanut allergies, ADHD, asthma, and other issues common among children today were virtually nonexistent. Back in the 1950s and ’60s we had some of the world’s healthiest children. It was a rude awakening, especially for those of us in the Baby Boomer generation, to learn that the chronic illness rate in U.S. children which had been negligible when we were kids had jumped to 12.8% in the 1980s, then to 54% by 2011.
More than one in two American children in the 2011 survey had a diagnosed chronic health condition such as an autoimmune disorder, diabetes or obesity, a neurodevelopmental disorder, or a mood or behavioral disorder. Today the percentage is surely even higher, but updated statistics are not available.
During my childhood we had one of the best infant mortality rates in the world. But after embarking on the world’s most aggressive vaccination program, the U.S. had twice as many first-day infant deaths as all 27 EU nations combined. An analysis of two decades of U.S. data (1990-2010) showed that infants who received the most vaccines had the worst hospitalization and death rates. And a 2011 study of data from 34 developed nations found that countries giving the least vaccines had the lowest infant mortality. [source]
With passage of the 1986 act, febrile seizures after vaccination, SIDS, autism, learning disabilities, food allergies and other chronic illnesses became normalized. Today the percentage of children carrying epipens, needing inhalers, and/or taking Ritalin, amphetamines and antidepressants is staggering.
Was the rise in all these chronic diseases and even deaths a direct result of the parallel exploding vaccination program? Did correlation equal causation?
Following the release of the film Vaxxed, parents came out of the woodwork wanting to share their stories of vaccine injury. The Vaxxed bus was born. Traveling to every U.S. state on the continent, its dedicated team video-taped thousands of stories of vaccine injury and death. More than 8,000 names were signed on the bus’ exterior of adults and children injured or killed by vaccines.
The common themes in stories parents recounted were eerie. Many described rushing their infants or toddlers to the ER with convulsions, 105° fevers, horrifying screams and seizures after their shots, only to be told this is normal… we see this all the time… it has nothing to do with the vaccines. In some cases, their children shut down immediately following the shots, stopped making eye contact, lost verbal communication. Others regressed more slowly into autism.
The worst were the SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) cases. Some within hours of getting vaccinated, and nearly all within a week of their “Well Baby” shots, would be found dead in their cribs after being put down for a nap. More on that below.
The HighWire was also launched around that period, hosted by Del Bigtree who had produced Vaxxed. A weekly podcast “dedicated to investigating our food, our air, our water, our drugs and our vaccines, with the mission of identifying and stopping the spread of man-made disease,” it is the media adjunct to the nonprofit Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) which is responsible for many of the legal actions described earlier.
Along with Vaxxed, other films and videos informed our discussion. Trace Amounts, explored the link between the mercury-based preservative thimerosal and autism. The documentary series The Truth About Vaccines covered a wide range of issues, and continues to provide up-to-date information about news in this field.
Several groundbreaking books were also published. Among the most important:
Our group learned about the suppressed 1999 study linking thimerosal in vaccines to neurodevelopmental disorders and to the exponentially-increasing autism rates, which as in the MMR/autism study, resulted in the CDC secretly reworking the data to cover up the association. It was a strategy we would see employed whenever findings challenged the “safe and effective” narrative.
We became aware of other toxic ingredients in vaccines as well as serious issues regarding safety testing. A further revelation involved suppressed studies comparing vaccinated children to unvaccinated.
These, along with more recent developments, will be expanded on below and in Part 2, with the examination of JCPH’s claims.
At the same time that decades of fraud, false narratives and industry capture were being exposed, the pharma-medical-industrial complex was aggressively pushing to eliminate all challenges to the vaccine narrative.
Pharma-funded politicians were advancing legislation to remove people’s religious and personal medical vaccine exemptions, and to deny children who were out of compliance with the CDC schedule access to public schools. We saw doctors and scientists who raised concerns about vaccine dangers get persecuted with a vengeance by the industry-controlled medical establishment. Any MD challenging the safe and effective narrative — even just for authorizing vaccine exemptions for patients — was attacked, marginalized, and in some cases lost their licenses.
By the time our vaccine study group wrapped up our research, over one hundred legislative bills were pending to eradicate vaccination choice in forty states, foreshadowing the Covid insanity to come.
Our group considered ways to broaden the conversation locally. We decided:
1) to seek another venue to host a screening of Vaxxed, and
2) to develop a study guide to share our research more broadly.
Given the sacred cow nature of the vaccine narrative, and the Rose Theatre experience, we knew there would be resistance.
What we got was full-blown censorship.
The Next Round of Gatekeeping and Censorship
The Uptown Theater was going through renovations and closed during this time period, so there was no possibility of Vaxxed showing there. But in addition to theater runs, viewings of the film were happening in gatherings all over the U.S. through an organization called Gathr. We reached out to local churches in an effort to find an alternative venue.
There, too, we were met with refusals. Not even the Unity Church or Quimper Unitarian would allow the film to be shown.
Over a period of several months our group developed a vaccine study guide — VACCINATION: Where there is Risk, there must be Choice. The guide summarized basic information being suppressed, providing an overview and starting point for anyone interested in researching the subject for themselves.
We created a print version of the guide, and working with the Port Townsend Leader’s advertising manager, arranged to pay for its inclusion as an insert in the newspaper. We were told that as long as our information was credibly sourced and could be confirmed through Google Scholar, it would be acceptable.
Everything in the guide was meticulously documented — including CDC links, National Library of Medicine studies, and vaccine package inserts — all substantiated through Google Scholar. However when Publisher Lloyd Mullen was given a copy, his note of rejection was swift:
“Unfortunately, we will not be able to print or insert your flyer in our newspaper.
The reason: correlation does not imply causation.”
Once again, allowing people to consider varied perspectives and then make up their own minds was not permitted. Mullen, representing democracy’s supposed Fourth Estate, was our community’s ultimate gatekeeper. This censorship was applied even when we submitted letters to the editor about vaccines. Our opinions, if they challenged local health authorities, were not allowed on the OPINION page.
Stephen Schumacher (also a PTFP co-editor now) would experience the same censorship several years later regarding the experimental mRNA Covid vaccines. First the Leader refused to print his and other community members’ letters to the editor if they challenged public health’s Covid messaging. Then, when Schumacher attempted to pay for ad space, that, too, was censored — a “business decision” he was told (see Of Covid Testing, “Misinformation” and Censorship).
An online version of our study guide is still posted. It contains even more information than the print guide did, with over 150 links to information and resources — articles, studies, videos and data. Many links, like youtube videos, have since been scrubbed, but current sources are linked throughout this article.
While the material covered in our 2017 guide thoroughly debunked the old talking points still being trotted out today by Jefferson County Public Health, nine years later the research is even more damning.
The devastating Covid psy-op perpetrated on a trusting public shook up many health professionals, causing them to question what other lies they’d been fed. Once they started digging into the larger vaccine narrative, the depth of betrayal in what they’d been trained to accept as gospel was profound.
As John Leake and renowned cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough explained in their 2025 book “Vaccines Mythology, Ideology, and Reality”:
“Prior to 2020, we had never questioned the sacred cow of vaccines. It was only in 2020, when we observed the stupendous chicanery of the COVID-19 rollout, that we began to wonder about the entire vaccine enterprise. Since then we have methodically studied the literature on vaccination…”
Investigations by formerly pro-vax doctors, scientists and researchers who had never considered questioning vaccine gospel have generated a whole new wave of exposés. Some of the information shared below is from new voices like these.
The health department asked that you BRING YOUR CURIOSITY.
We invite them to do likewise.
Again quoting Aaron Siri’s forward in Vaccines, Amen:
“You are about to learn things you can never unlearn.”
Examining Public Health’s “Truths” About Vaccines
Let’s now consider the claims in Jefferson County Public Health’s ad. Following each cartoon panel’s question and our health department’s answers are the facts.
Immune System Challenges?
“I heard that giving too many vaccines at a time can overwhelm my kid’s immune system.”
It’s natural to be worried about how much our kids can handle. The truth is, a child’s immune system can handle a lot!
Our kids face more challenges to their immune system while playing outside than they do from vaccines.
THE FACTS:
“Prior to the introduction of organized vaccination programs, ‘crib death’ was so rare that it was not mentioned in infant mortality statistics… By 1972, SIDS had become the leading cause of post-neonatal mortality (infant deaths occurring between 28 days and 1 year of life) in the United States.”
— Neil Z. Miller,
“Vaccines and sudden infant death: An analysis of the VAERS database 1990–2019 and review of the medical literature”
The death of any child is tragic. The sudden death of a formerly-thriving child is shocking. It was not until mass vaccination that the term SIDS — Sudden Infant Death Syndrome — even existed. SIDS is the most extreme example of how vaccines can sometimes overwhelm a child’s immune system.
Does correlation imply causation? Historically, parents had not been finding healthy babies unexpectedly dead in their cribs hours after “playing outside.” But that was the experience of some parents following vaccination.
As Neil Z. Miller observes above, following the introduction of national vaccination programs in the U.S., SIDS became the leading cause of infant mortality.
Like other dangers associated with vaccination, health authorities sought to explain away this new phenomenon. In his 2021 report “Vaccines and sudden infant death: An analysis of the VAERS database 1990–2019 and review of the medical literature,” Miller explains:
“Throughout the 1980s, sudden infant deaths continued to skyrocket. Parental concerns about an apparent link between childhood vaccines and SIDS reached a fever pitch. Many parents were afraid to vaccinate their babies. Authorities sought to reassure parents that vaccines are safe and claimed that sudden unexplained infant deaths (SUID) following vaccines were merely coincidental.”
New diagnoses were concocted, and sudden deaths were reclassified, a common strategy used by health authorities to obscure associations with vaccine damage. Even infants who showed extreme distress following injection — screaming, having seizures, collapsing, then dying within hours of their shots — were not classified as vaccine-induced deaths.
In a “Back to Sleep” campaign, parents were told that their babies’ sleeping position was the culprit — that they needed to be laid on their backs, not face down. In some cases, parents were subjected to investigations for child abuse, blaming their child’s sudden death on another new phenomenon, Shaken Baby Syndrome. Adverse reactions commonly seen after vaccination — extreme irritability, lethargy, poor feeding, breathing problems, convulsions, vomiting, and pale or bluish skin — were identified as symptoms resulting from parents violently shaking their babies.
Miller analyzed 2,605 deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) between 1990 and 2019. Of these, 17% of deaths occurred on the day of vaccination and 48 percent within two days. A full 78.3 percent occurred within seven days post-vaccination. All coincidences?
So how do impacts from vaccines being injected in children compare to environmental exposures they face when “playing outside”?
Humans have evolved for millennia playing in the dirt and being exposed to pathogens in the environment. The immune challenges a child faces in nature are met by a series of complex defenses. Four layers of the immune system come into play: skin, mucous membranes, lymphatic and blood.
As described by Thomas Cowan, MD, in “Vaccines, Autoimmunity, and the Changing Nature of Childhood Illness“:
“When we are healthy, enzymes in the mouth, acid in the stomach, and microbes in the lower gut will often destroy pathogens. If a pathogen escapes these first lines of digestive defense, then the villi will prevent their access to the bloodstream. If the villi are compromised, we have the physical barrier of the smooth muscular layer of the intestinal wall. In health, these systems function together to screen pathogens from the bloodstream. They are, in essence, guardians of our health.”
An intramuscular injection bypasses all these intricate protective mechanisms, sending the needle’s contents directly into the bloodstream. And often across the blood-brain barrier as well.
Looking at how vaccines can cause sudden infant death, Miller notes that “several theories regarding the pathogenic mechanism behind these fatal events have been proposed.” They include:
• inflammatory cytokines;
• toxic adjuvants (such as aluminum) that cross the blood-brain barrier; and
• biochemical or synergistic toxicity due to multiple vaccines administered concurrently.
This graphic illustrates one of these mechanisms — how toxic adjuvants (in this case aluminum) are transported by macrophages across the blood-brain barrier (BBB).
If a single vaccine can cause SIDS in a small percentage of babies, how many children might have damage on a lesser scale from the dozens of shots received in just the first year of life? Typically a “Well Baby Visit” consists of numerous vaccines all administered on the same day.
Parents are rightly concerned that multiple shots in one visit compounds the risk. As many as ten doses given in eight shots are now routine in pediatric practices.
An example is the six month “Well Baby Visit.” The CDC schedule calls for 6-month-olds to be injected with DTaP (diphtheria/tetanus/pertussis), Hib (haemophilus influenza type B), HepB (hepatitis B), PCV (pneumococcal), IPV (polio), Influenza (seasonal flu), Rotavirus, and COVID-19 vaccines.
As shown in this guide, those administering the vaccines are instructed on how to inject multiple shots into every limb.
It is true that “a child’s immune system can handle a lot”…
…but injecting the toxic load of a vaccine directly into a developing infant’s bloodstream, bypassing the body’s layered natural defenses, cannot even begin to compare to natural processes engaged when “playing outside.”
———————————————
Dangerous Chemicals in Vaccines?
“Aren’t there DANGEROUS chemicals in vaccines?
Are they even safe?”
Let’s take a look at some ingredients that can make folks nervous:
[1] ALUMINUM
Aluminum occurs naturally in the air, water and soil.
We are exposed to more aluminum by eating a tomato than from getting vaccines!
THE FACTS / ALUMINUM:
“Our calculations show that the levels of aluminum suggested by the currently used limits place infants at risk of acute, repeated, and possibly chronic exposures of toxic levels of aluminum in modern vaccine schedules.”
—James Lyons-Weiler and Robert Ricketson,
“Reconsideration of the immunotherapeutic pediatric safe dose levels of aluminum”
Folks SHOULD be nervous about aluminum being used in vaccines. Just because it “occurs naturally” does not mean a substance is safe. While aluminum is the most abundant metal in the earth’s crust, it is tightly bound with other elements like silica, and not bioavailable. It has no physiological role in the body, and whether ingested, inhaled or injected, isolated aluminum is toxic.
Eating or drinking aluminum can be harmful, but both the digestive system and the liver are able to filter it before it reaches the bloodstream, affording some degree of protection. Injecting aluminum through a vaccination bypasses these protections, placing it directly into the bloodstream.
Regarding the aluminum in that tomato, according to Physicians for Informed Consent:
“The ATSDR [Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry] oral aluminum limit is based on 0.1% of oral aluminum being absorbed into the bloodstream, as the digestive tract blocks nearly all oral aluminum (Fig. 2a). In contrast, aluminum injected intramuscularly bypasses the digestive tract, and 100% of aluminum may be absorbed into the bloodstream over time (i.e.,the proportion of absorbed aluminum is 1,000 times greater).” [source]
Aluminum is used in many childhood vaccines like HepB as an adjuvant, to provoke an immune response. It is known to cause brain damage at all doses. Aluminum poisoning has been linked to autism, SIDs, seizures, autoimmune issues, Alzheimers, neurological damage, impaired renal function, demyelinating disorders such as MS, and cancer. [source]
In the mid-1900s, the FDA established a maximum limit of 850 mcg (0.85 mg) of aluminum per vaccine dose. Then, based on a 1997 study of preterm infants receiving intravenous-feeding solutions, a safe level of exposure for injectables was shown to be a small fraction of that 850 mcg. Safety limits were now set for neonates at 4-5 mcg per kilogram of body weight, limited to 25 mcg aluminum per day (by regulation 21 CFR 201.323).
All injectable drug products were subject to this new limit… but not vaccines. Vaccines inexplicably remained at the 850 mcg limit.
The package insert for the Recombivax HB (HepB) vaccine shows its formulation contains 0.5 mg (500 mcg) of aluminum, with residual formaldehyde:
RECOMBIVAX HB® Hepatitis B Vaccine (Recombinant)
Suspension for intramuscular injection
Initial U.S. Approval: 1983
All formulations contain approximately 0.5 mg of aluminum (provided as amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate, previously referred to as aluminum hydroxide) per mL of vaccine. In each formulation, hepatitis B surface antigen is adsorbed onto approximately 0.5 mg of aluminum (provided as amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate) per mL of vaccine. The vaccine contains <15 mcg/mL residual formaldehyde.
The other HepB vaccine available for infants, Engerix, contains 250 mcg of aluminum. These vaccines are injected at birth, usually on day one, then again at 2 months and 6 months.
Manufacturer label information shows similar aluminum content in other childhood vaccines:
DTaP – 330-625 mcg. Administered at 2 months, 4 months, 6 months, 18 months, and 4 years.
HiB – 225 mcg. Administered at 2 months, 4 months, 6 months, and 12 months.
HPV – 500 mcg. Administered at 9 years, 10 years, 11 years.
Current vaccination schedules in which multiple shots are administered in a single visit exceed even the 850 mcg limit. For parents following the CDC schedule, aluminum injected at the 2-, 4-, and 6-month “Well Baby Visits” can exceed 1000 mcg. The CDC has NEVER safety tested this cumulative load received in multiple shots. Physicians for Informed Consent show aluminum content for the childhood vaccines:
Why does the 25 mcg limit apply for other injectables but not vaccines?
The mid-1900s study that determined the 850 mcg limit may present the answer to that question. The purpose of that study was not to determine safety — it was to find out the amount of aluminum needed to provoke an immune response. A 1947 document related to the manufacture of diphtheria toxoid states, “In all instances, the amount of aluminum used shall be the minimum needed to accomplish the purpose intended.”
In “Reconsideration of the immunotherapeutic pediatric safe dose levels of aluminum,” James Lyons-Weiler and Robert Ricketson note (my emphasis):
“FDA regulations require safety testing of constituent ingredients in drugs (21 CFR 610.15). With the exception of extraneous proteins, no component safety testing is required for vaccines or vaccine schedules. The dosing of aluminum in vaccines is based on the production of antibody titers, not safety science.”
If an adjuvant does not create an inflammatory response and antibodies are not produced, the vaccine essentially does not work at all. Given that aluminum in vaccines is in the hundreds of micrograms, it would appear that at levels which might be considered safe — 25 mcg or less — the adjuvant is unable to stimulate the production of antibodies.
And if antibodies are not produced, a vaccine cannot provide any protection against the disease targeted by the vaccine. It will not “accomplish the purpose intended.”
Therefore, the allowable dose “was based on immunological considerations — not on data demonstrating this amount to be non-toxic when injected into children. The limit was never intended to indicate an amount of aluminum that could be considered harmless to children.”
At the 4-5 mcg per kilogram of body weight or total 25 mcg per day limit applied in 1997 to other injectables, the aluminum load in even one shot should not be permissible. In The Vaccine-Friendly Plan, pediatrician Paul Thomas discusses the 250 mcg dose of aluminum in a single HepB shot:
“If your baby weighs 7 pounds at birth (approximately 3 kilograms), the FDA stipulations suggest that the maximum safe dose for that newborn is 15 micrograms, sixteen times less than what is given in one hepatitis B vaccine. Since infants may not be able to effectively rid their bodies of aluminum, the truth is that no amount of aluminum is safe. By giving infants this shot, according to the FDA’s own calculations, we are literally poisoning them.”
————————————
[2] MERCURY
The type of mercury in vaccines – ethylmercury – is NOT harmful to us. It prevents microbial growth in multi-dose vaccines.
No childhood vaccines contain mercury.
THE FACTS / MERCURY:
“[Thimerosal] is toxic… Mutagenic in mammalian cells.“
May cause “decreased offspring survival, and offspring nervous system effects including mild to severe mental retardation and motor coordination impairment.”
—from the manufacturer’s Material Safety Data Sheet
“Comparing toxicity in two forms of mercury is like comparing the benefits of being shot with a .38 caliber bullet rather than a .45 caliber bullet. Most people would prefer Door #3: no bullet at all.”
—Gavin de Becker,
“Forbidden Facts: Government Deceit & Suppression About Brain Damage from Childhood Vaccines”
Entire books have debunked the absurd statement “ethylmercury is NOT harmful to us.”
Mercury is the third most toxic element on earth, 500 times more poisonous than lead. Thimerosal is the trade name for the 50% ethylmercury solution used since the 1930s as a preservative in vaccines. Contrary to our health department’s claim, it is highly neurotoxic — dangerous enough to cause “decreased offspring survival” as Eli Lilly was required by law to disclose in its Material Safety Data Sheet for thimerosal.
New works have expanded on Robert F. Kennedy, Jr’s 2015 book on thimerosal mentioned earlier, not least the unexpected perspective of internationally recognized criminologist Gavin de Becker, quoted above. More than a review of the scientific literature, his best-seller Forbidden Facts: Government Deceit & Suppression About Brain Damage from Childhood Vaccines, documents how government, industry and academia routinely conspired to create a false narrative and deceive the public.
De Becker begins his chapter on mercury with this definition:
“A silvery white poisonous metallic element used in batteries and in the preparation of chemical pesticides.”
He continues,
“…and in vaccines given to children and pregnant women.”
Injected ethylmercury has been shown to deposit in the brain and other organs far more readily than the much-publicized methylmercury in fish, which pregnant women are warned to avoid.
A 2005 University of Washington study funded by National Institutes of Health compared brain mercury levels from injected ethylmercury (thimerosal) to equal amounts of orally ingested methylmercury. The study demonstrated that while ingested methylmercury generally remains in the bloodstream, injected thimerosal crosses the placenta and blood brain barriers at high levels. This is the exact mechanism Miller described in the SIDS report above, and shown in the illustration regarding aluminum.
Once deposited in the brain, thimerosal converts to inorganic mercury and remains trapped there, resulting in neuroinflammation. Autism and other neurological disorders are associated with this accumulated mercury in the brain.
Our health department tells us that thimerosal “is NOT harmful to us,” while also assuring us that it’s not in childhood vaccines. If it is so harmless, why would it have been removed from them?
That brings us to the seminal study about a possible link between thimerosal and autism mentioned earlier. In 1999 the CDC commissioned epidemiologist Dr. Thomas Verstraeten to do a study to put to rest concerns about thimerosal causing autism. The findings were so alarming—infants exposed to high levels of thimerosal during their first month of life had 7.6 times higher risk of autism diagnosis than their unexposed peers—that a secret emergency meeting was convened.
To avoid public scrutiny the June 2000 emergency meeting was not held at the CDC headquarters in Atlanta, but instead at the Simpsonwood Retreat Center in Norcross, Georgia. CDC and other government officials, university experts and pharma reps spent two days discussing the problems raised by this study and strategizing how they would hide the results from the public.
“The number of dose related relationships [between mercury and autism] are linear and statistically significant,” said Dr. William Weil from the American Academy of Pediatrics. “You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant.”
The attendees were then asked What should we do now?
The group identified as consultants “were unanimous in saying that additional research was needed.” An immunologist told the assembled participants that he’d just taken an emergency call in which he’d advised his daughter-in-law who had delivered his first grandchild not to accept any mercury-laced vaccines. Given the risk, his family was not going to get any of those shots.
At the end of day two, Dr. John Clements from the WHO’s Expanded Program on Immunization summed up the elephant in the room — any information leaking to the public that could lead to vaccine hesitancy was not permissible:
“My mandate as I sit here in this group is to make sure at the end of the day that 100,000,000 are immunized with DTP, Hepatitis B and if possible Hib, this year, next year and for many years to come, and that will have to be with Thimerosal containing vaccines unless a miracle occurs and an alternative is found quickly and is tried and found to be safe. So I leave you with the challenge that I am very concerned that this has gotten this far, and that having got this far, how you present in a concerted voice the information to the ACIP in a way they will be able to handle it and not get exposed to the traps which are out there in public relations.”
Given the “sensitivity of information,” sharing information outside that room was “embargoed”. Every page of the study was stamped “DO NOT COPY OR RELEASE” and “CONFIDENTIAL”. The full transcript of the Simpsonwood meeting was later obtained through a FOIA request.
Findings from the original Verstraeten Study shown above — “Increased Risk of Developmental Neurological Impairment after High Exposure to Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines in the First Month of Life” — never saw the light of day. Instead the CDC “massaged” the data and in 2003 released a reworked, fraudulent version of the study loudly trumpeting that thimerosal did not cause autism and other neurodevelomental problems. It’s the same playbook that CDC whistleblower William Thompson exposed decades later regarding the CDC’s study of the MMR vaccine and autism.
De Becker notes that the CDC, FDA and vaccine-makers came up with a “magnificently creative idea” to explain away “that ethylmercury was somehow not toxic”:
“They began to float a new idea: that ethylmercury is way different from other forms of mercury. Sure, it’s mercury — but it’s the gentle, benign, happy-baby mercury that’s not worth worrying about.”
The CDC’s cover-up of thimerosal’s toxicity included statements like:
“Thimerosal contains ethylmercury, which is cleared from the human body more quickly than methylmercury, and is therefore less likely to cause any harm.”
“The human body eliminates thimerosal easily. Thimerosal does not stay in the body a long time so it does not build up and reach harmful levels.”
Thimerosal has never been demonstrated to clear the body. As in the 2005 study mentioned above, as well as a more recent 2012 study by Croatian researchers, when thimerosal is injected it clears the bloodstream quicker than the ingested methylmercury in fish because rather than being filtered and excreted, the tiny ethylmercury molecules travel to vital organs and the brain. And while most of ingested methylmercury is excreted in a matter of weeks, injected ethylmercury in thimerosal metabolizes to the deadliest form of mercury known, inorganic mercury, and remains in the brain and organs for decades. As with lead poisoning, mercury loads are cumulative. [more info]
While the CDC refused to admit publicly that thimerosal in shots is neurotoxic, the US Public Health Service and American Academy of Pediatrics did call for the immediate removal of thimerosal from infant vaccines.
The CDC’s mantra “Mercury in Vaccines does NOT Cause Autism” persisted on their website and in other information they disseminated… at the same time announcing that mercury would be removed from childhood vaccines. Vaccine manufacturers were told to quietly phase out thimerosal from the childhood schedule, but stocks of existing thimerosal-preserved vaccines continued to be administered over a two-year period until they were used up.
As in the HepB vaccine mentioned previously, the new and improved thimerosal-free formulations typically substituted toxic aluminum for the toxic mercury.
While no longer in most infant vaccines, thimerosal has NOT vanished from the childhood schedule as claimed. It is still used in some flu shots and other vaccines. So in addition to fetal exposure in utero from flu and other shots given to pregnant mothers, children following the CDC’s vaccination schedule play the mercury lottery twenty times, getting their flu shots at 6 months, 7 months, one year, then annually every year until they’re 18.
RFK Jr’s 2015 compilation of hundreds of peer-reviewed studies erases any doubt that thimerosal is a potent neurotoxin that causes neurological damage, from tics to autism. In de Becker’s more recent research of the scientific literature, newer studies continue to show that exposure to ethylmercury can cause neurological injury, developmental problems, impaired language skills, and autism. The last review he cites is a meta-analysis:
“This review found 91 studies that examine the potential relationship between mercury and ASD autism from 1999 to February 2016. Of these studies, the vast majority (74%) suggest that mercury is a risk factor for ASD [Autism Spectrum Disorder], revealing both direct and indirect effects. The preponderance of the evidence indicates that mercury exposure is causal and/or contributory in ASD.”
He further notes that studies that denied a risk were nearly always generated by the groups promoting vaccination, rarely by independent researchers.
The claim by health agencies that injected ethylmercury is benign becomes even more inconceivable in light of the fact that the EPA classifies the thimerosal in vaccines as toxic hazardous waste. The limit for mercury in drinking water is set at 200 parts per billion per the EPA’s Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). The mercury in multi-dose flu shots preserved with thimerosal, injected directly into the body, is 250 times higher—50,000 parts per billion.
Thimerosal as a Vaccine Preservative, a summary prepared in 2025 for the CDC’s Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP), notes that “thimerosal-containing vaccines exceed the TCLP threshold by orders of magnitude and are classified as D009 Hazardous Waste.”
PharmEcology’s Disposal Guidelines for the 2025-2026 Flu Season spells out:
“[A]ny vaccine waste containing thimerosal as a preservative should be managed as a toxic hazardous waste. As a result, all full or partially used multi-dose vials of the seasonal flu vaccine should be disposed of as federally hazardous waste, waste code D009 for mercury.”
Shocking as it sounds, had the mercury-laden childhood vaccines that were phased out from 2000 to 2002 not been injected into babies and children, pharma would have been required to dispose of them as hazardous waste. But Jefferson County Public Health tells us that injecting that same thimerosal into developing infants is perfectly safe.
In the UK, Denmark, Austria, Japan, Russia, and all Scandinavian countries, vaccine makers are not permitted to use thimerosal in any childhood vaccines, including flu shots.
Criminologist De Becker observes that if the CDC’s patently false statements about thimerosal—the same ones made by our health department—were given under oath, the claimants would be accused of perjury.
————————————
Sadly, aluminum and mercury are not the only toxic substances in vaccines. Among other dangerous additives that should “make folks nervous” are:
Polysorbate 80. A surfactant (emulsifier) that enables other substances in vaccines like aluminum and mercury to cross the blood-brain barrier. It is linked to infertility, known to cause cancer, and banned from injectables in most of Europe.
Phenol/2-Phenoxyethanol. A germicide and potential allergen, used as a preservative. Neurotoxic and may cause lung and liver irritation, hormone disruption, and kidney and nerve damage;
Formaldehyde. Another preservative. Commonly used to embalm bodies, it is classified by both the National Toxicology Program and the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a known human carcinogen. It also oxidizes into formic acid, a neurotoxin which can damage both the liver and the kidneys.
Our vaccine study group’s 2017 guide provides an overview of the many ingredients disclosed in package inserts as well as undisclosed contaminants found in childhood shots:
The DTaP vaccine provides a good example of the toxic soup typically injected in just one shot.
From the 16-page package insert of Infanrix, a DTaP vaccine “indicated for active immunization against diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis as a 5-dose series in infants and children aged 6 weeks through 6 years”:
Along with other chemicals, DTaP formulations contain aluminum, formaldehyde and polysorbate 80. The polysorbate 80 helps deliver the aluminum into the brain and other organs; the formaldehyde has the potential to damage the liver and kidneys, as well as cause cancer. Depending on the manufacturer, the DTaP shot may also include bovine extract, monkey kidney tissue (suspected to contain SV-40, a cancer-causing virus), and neomycin sulfate or polymyxin B, both antibiotics.
At the core of the vaccine narrative, the notion that a vaccine only contains a small amount of virus, bacteria or other antigen in a neutral solution to mimic natural disease is a fairy tale. In any product except vaccines, injecting toxic metals and chemicals into children and most especially pregnant women and developing babies — at levels far beyond safe limits established by regulatory agencies — would be considered criminal.
———————————————
Part 2 will discuss the remaining claims in our health department’s ad. Are there “no credible studies that link vaccination to chronic disease”? Is it true that “vaccines are tested more than any other medicine you could give your kid”?
We will also share Jefferson County Public Health’s response to questions we sent them about the ad, including a request for sources/evidence to support their claims.
Finally, we’ll take a look at the rise in vaccine hesitancy that may have provoked JCPH’s creation of this ad, and at challenges being made to the CDC’s current childhood vaccine schedule. Efforts to rein in pharma’s capture of health agencies, medical groups and the vaccine narrative are causing a pitched battle, and the institutions entrenched in the religion of vaccines are doubling down to maintain their control.
by Ana Wolpin | Mar 6, 2024 | General
Administrators and elected officials in Port Townsend’s city hall are painfully familiar with charges of subverted public processes, and rightfully so. Sims Way poplars, the golf course, streateries, the pool — each of these controversial projects followed trajectories reflecting desires and preferred outcomes of those in power at the expense of transparency and honest efforts at citizen engagement.
Yet another attempt by the city to avoid transparency and manipulate public process has come to light.
In the course of exploring options for Port Townsend’s aging Mountain View pool, City Manager John Mauro and the city’s Director of Parks and Recreation Strategy Carrie Hite have told us there were only two choices. We “do nothing” and wait for the pool’s inevitable closure. Or the City of Port Townsend plus all the county’s taxpayers take on the massive debt of a grandiose $37-50 million aquatic center that citizens are calling the Taj Mahal (see articles here, here, here, here, and here).
Citizens asked repeatedly, What about renovating the existing pool? Mauro and Hite insisted that repairing and upgrading the pool would be prohibitively expensive — that the only option is a full-scale redevelopment of the entire Mountain View complex.
More than half a million dollars later, it turns out that reports provided by experts hired to evaluate the options show their assertion is untrue. And that those reports were kept not only from taxpayers, but also from the city council.
It took two citizens’ requests for documents that are supposed to be publicly available to uncover these suppressed reports.
They revealed estimates to completely refurbish and modernize the pool for $4-$5 million.
First Consultant’s Report
Last summer, the city commissioned Water Technology, Inc. (WTI) to evaluate the condition of the Mountain View pool and estimate the costs of remedying any problems found. WTI provides designs for new pools and the “refreshing” of old pools. In their field, which is primarily traditional construction methodology, they are considered a global leader.
WTI conducted an on-site investigation of the Mountain View pool and provided its report to the city six months ago on September 8, 2023. They found plenty of signs reflecting the age of the facility, the same problems we have heard about from city and YMCA staff, namely:
- leakage in the pool vessel;
- rippling in the pool liner;
- ineffective pool gutter;
- clogged drains;
- deteriorated pool deck;
- corrosion;
- lack of underwater lighting;
- insufficient HVAC ventilation;
- inefficient and problematic pump;
- deteriorated heat exchanger;
- absence of secondary disinfectant system;
- less significant issues such as ceiling bulbs needing replacement.
Example from WTI report of photos and written assessments (from Page 4 of PDF).
WTI estimated that all the deficiencies it found could be repaired and remedied for $2.875 million. For $3.5 million the Mountain View facility could be fully modernized, with complete reconstruction of the pool vessel, pool deck, piping, deck drainage and mechanical systems. They stated:
The newly constructed pool vessel will be designed and engineered to modern standards of quality and compliance and be supported by today’s advanced mechanical, filtration and water treatment systems.
The $3.5 million reconstruction would include:
- New lap pool of 3,400 square feet;
- Water depth zero to ten feet;
- Quartz aggregate finish with tile border and markings;
- Four lap lanes with starting platforms;
- Shallow water program area.
WTI did not intend to paint only a rosy picture. Their conclusion was clear, and certainly no surprise. New is better, if one can afford new…
There is a significant investment required to provide aquatic amenities to the community which are maintainable long-term. However, lower levels of capital inputs for repairs or renovations in the short-term often result in higher total expenditures in the long-term. This report finds the Port Townsend community would be best served, both programmatically and financially, with a new aquatic facility. A modern aquatic center can provide the durability and efficiencies to enable a more effective and sustainable facility over a lifespan measured in decades than the existing facility after repairs and renovations.
But do we have the resources for a Taj Mahal? With city finances currently falling off a “fiscal cliff”, essential services like water and sewer are at risk right now in Port Townsend. Does “living within our means” apply to governments in the least? Bureaucrats spending other people’s money without consequence for catastrophic failure has led many cities in this country to bankruptcy.
Second Consultant “Found Minimal Damage to the Existing Structure”
WTI’s report did not look into the condition of the building. For that the city retained the services of CG Engineering of Edmonds, Washington “to assist the City with determining the scope and cost of rehabilitating the pool building,” according to the firm’s October 30, 2023 Structural Assessment Report.
CG Engineering inspected the pool on October 10. Water staining was observed on the ceiling. But rotting damage was not found; the stains were superficial. “Roof decking appeared in good condition,” the engineers concluded. Rust and rust stains were also observed at locations around the building.
Dozens of photographs document CG Engineering’s assessment of the Mountain View Pool building’s structure. Page 10 of the 10/30/23 Structural Assessment Report.
Structural elements are in good condition. The concrete walls are in good condition. A pool equipment pad was corroded and deteriorated. A crack in the men’s locker room floor was a shrinkage crack and did not compromise structural integrity. The same conclusion was reached regarding observed hairline fractures in locker room walls.
Director of Parks and Recreation Strategy Hite (who holds neither an engineering degree nor a contractor’s license) has asserted that the pool is doomed and beyond repair partly because of the tunnel under the building.
Not so, concluded the engineers. Yes, the metal decking in the tunnel was severely corroded and had fallen away in several places. But “the decking appears to be non-structural and was likely formwork used during the original construction.” Cracking in the sidewalk slab directly above the tunnel was due to temperature differentials and did not compromise structural integrity, they said.
CG Engineering concluded:
Generally, we found minimal damage to the existing structure. Water staining and rust on the roof framing and steel connectors appeared superficial. The recently added vinyl roof coating appears to have been successful in temporarily preventing further water intrusion to the structural framing. Minor cracks in the concrete/CMU walls and concrete slabs appeared to be temperature and shrinkage related and should not affect the integrity of the structure.
CG Engineering’s recommended remedies came to an estimated cost of $536,643. There is only a partial cost of $300,000 estimated for a new roof which has been quoted elsewhere at $1.07 million. If the higher roofing estimate is accurate, that could bring the structural total to $1.3 million. And there is a to-be-determined line item for seismic retrofit. Seismic retrofits are not necessarily required and that appears to be the case for Mountain View since the city never asked any firm to estimate that cost.
Thus, based on these two consultant’s reports, the combined cost of remedying the building’s deficiencies and completely modernizing and upgrading the aquatic components comes to less than $5 million ($3.5M + $1.3M). Not the tens of millions we have been told it would take to provide a place for children to learn to swim and elders to recreate.
Why did city employees keep this news from the city council and the taxpayers who paid for those reports?
Why was public digging necessary to reveal this information?
Enter the Third Consultant’s Report
The WTI and CG Engineering reports, only recently disclosed, were respectively received by the city six months and four months ago. Both firms have decades of experience in these kinds of analyses.
From minutes of the August 8, 2023 workshop of the Healthier Together Aquatic Center steering committee we learn that these two reports were anticipated by mid-September. The minutes noted:
From minutes of the August 8, 2023 Healthier Together Aquatic Center steering committee meeting with Carrie Hite and eight others in attendance. The meeting focused mostly on using the creation of a Public Facilities District (PFD) as a funding mechanism for the proposed new aquatic center, and strategies for winning approval of a new tax ballot measure brought to county voters.
But upon receipt of WTI’s September 8 Mountain View Pool Evaluation and CG Engineering’s October 30 Structural Assessment Report, neither report assessing the possibilities for upgrading the pool and building was disclosed by the city. When both of the above reports revealed less than a $5 million price tag likely for full repair and renovation, it appears Hite and Mauro took another approach.
A third consultant’s report was commissioned. The city contracted DCW Cost Management, a generalized cost-estimating firm in Seattle with no specific expertise in pools, to do a “Cost Study.”
DCW’s Mountain View Pool Renovation Cost Study considers a different scope of work — pool renovation and total building reconstruction at $21 million.
Unlike the first two reports which present documenting photos and written analysis to remedy existing conditions, DCW’s Cost Study, obtained months later, shows no evidence that the firm assessed anything about the existing pool and structure. Other than saving and repairing some windows and exterior doors and repairing a roof drain, it appears that most if not all of the structure, and every system and all contents were to be replaced with new ones. We are told that “Cost [sic] are developed using existing as-built drawings.”
This cost study herein attempts to address the modernization of the existing facility to meet current code and for the pool to meet competition standards for Jefferson County students. The interior renovation includes new interior finishes, pool expansion and building extension, resurfacing of the pool deck, acoustic wall treatment to the natatorium, new plumbing where systems are broken, mechanical and electrical upgrades to current code.
No drawings or plans are shown, only costs. But reading through the 18 pages which include demolition, mass excavation, earthwork and other site preparation — even $153,000 in new landscaping — the impression is that they have taken a wrecking ball to the current building and used the existing as-built drawings to price out a complete rebuild.
Costs are delineated for components such as roofing ($1.07M), superstructure ($1.77M), plumbing systems ($2.67M), and heating, ventilation and cooling ($1.64M). Every pipe fitting, piece of tile and drain is itemized. There is a $1,530 line item for a 60 square foot “locker room graphic.”
We asked professional contractor Mark Grant of Grant Steel Buildings and Concrete Systems, Inc., who has scrutinized this study, for his impressions.
“Your interpretation is correct in that the DCW pool renovation cost study reflects nearly a complete tear down and rebuild of the entire facility. It is a stretch to refer to the scope of work shown in the DCW report as a renovation.”
He believes it’s prudent to add more for contingencies than is allowed for in the $4-$5 million total of the first two reports. But even another million or two will not come close to DCW’s $21 million rebuild price tag the city is claiming is an under-estimate.
Strategy: City Management Gaming the Public
In November 2023, as a member of the Healthier Together Aquatic Center steering committee, City Manager John Mauro acknowledged to the Jefferson County Commissioners that taxpayer funds in excess of half a million dollars had already been spent in pursuit of the “Taj Mahal” aquatic center project. Consultant fees and other trackable expenses have at this point amounted to over $721,000 — including more than $555,000 from the city, $105,000 from the county, and $50,000 from the Jefferson County Hospital District.
All has been spent in service of convincing the public that if we are to have a community pool in years to come, our only option is the fantastically expensive design presented in June of 2023.
In April of 2022 Mauro hired Carrie Hite to fill the city’s new Director of Parks and Recreation Strategy staff position. That role was created to direct the process and strategize the narrative to sell us on several large-scale city projects, including a lavish new aquatic center beyond our means.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent on staff time and consultant fees, presenting the community with this grandiose vision that would require new taxation. Hite and Mauro repeatedly dismissed what should have been the first consideration — expert analysis of the cost to rehabilitate and upgrade the existing pool and building.
When the Healthier Together Aquatic Center plan was unveiled five months after the steering committee first met, there was tremendous community pushback. Homemade “NO PT POOL TAX” signs appeared around the county (see closing photos). Local professionals challenged the city’s assertion that there was no saving the existing pool.
Public pressure pushed the city to finally hire firms to assess the pool and structure and do long overdue cost analyses on a rehab. No doubt Mauro and Hite were looking to justify the supposed impossibility of bringing the Mountain View facility up to snuff. And one would expect that the outlay of yet more consultant money would drive the city to choose the best qualified firms in the field to do the job.
Both initial contractors WTI and CG Engineering appear to have those qualifications. Both have decades of experience. Both made thorough assessments that are well documented.
It appears that when the first two reports did not support the steering committee’s agenda for their flashy new aquatic center, those reports were kept under wraps. A third consultant was hired, a general “cost management” firm. The new kid on the block was given a vastly expanded “tear down and replace'” scope of work.
This interpretation of events is borne out by exchanges between Carrie Hite and Port Townsend resident Musa Jaman, who submitted a request for documents analyzing repairs needed to upgrade the existing pool. In response to a Facebook post from city council member Libby Wennstrom about the pool, Jaman asked where she could get accurate numbers. Wennstrom referred her to Carrie Hite.
Jaman’s email to Hite on November 22, 2023 titled “Public document request” asked “about getting access to the document analyzing the existing pool issues and associated costs to take care of repairs and upgrades along with operational and general maintenance costs.”
Hite responded on November 28, stalling:
“I have forwarded your public records request to our public records officer… The full cost analysis report that we commissioned will not be ready until next week sometime.”
While two reports that performed the analysis Jaman had asked for were already in the city’s possession, they were not disclosed.
On December 12, 2023, Carrie Hite again demonstrated her qualifications as Director of Strategy. She sent Jaman an email explaining the delay, again ignoring the first two reports, and emphasizing her contention that rehabilitation of the existing pool would be even more expensive than the new, expanded 21-million-dollar estimate from DCW that was now in hand.
Hite wrote, in part:
Hi Musa:
I held your PRR as a continued request so I could email you the cost study that was completed by DCW…
The $21M estimate is based on what is visible and given the age and unknowns around the current structure, as well as the rising costs for construction, this number is likely a conservative estimate.
Despite the existence of two credible reports received months earlier proving there were more affordable options, strategist Hite did not reveal the WTI and CG Engineering documents when they were requested. Instead, she waited until the city had obtained another report to support her “too expensive to fix” narrative.
When documents were finally sent to Jaman, the first report — commissioned from “global leaders” in aquatic planning, design and engineering, WTI — was omitted. Only CG Engineering and DCW files were in the attachments Jaman received.
The September 8, 2023 WTI pool evaluation was uncovered separately through a Public Records Request (PRR) by a member of a new group that had formed, the All County Citizens Alliance. He learned of the report’s existence from the minutes of the August 8 pool steering committee meeting, filed a PRR for it, and shared the document with the group.
We try to keep it at a high level:
Obfuscation, half-truths and outright falsehoods
Following receipt of WTI’s report through the PRR, Jim Scarantino, “on behalf of the All County Citizens Alliance,” attended the January 8, 2024 City Council workshop. He delivered “good news” in a public comment about the two studies that had been withheld from the council:
Unfortunately, somehow [the reports] didn’t make it into your packets on November 13th, and later on when you considered the pool.
What those two engineering firms found was that there was minimal damage to the Mountain View pool. And that the building can be repaired for $536,000… And that the pool can be completely replaced and modernized with the latest modern equipment, including a new pool with a shallow entry for parents and children, for $3.5 million, for a total of $4.1 million.…
I don’t know why city staff didn’t notify you of that, but we’re happy to do so.
The responses from Carrie Hite and John Mauro that followed are a master class in verbal ju jitsu, misrepresenting, and false statements.
Hite explained that the WTI assessment is just a “partial report”:
It doesn’t include seismic or ADA or building structures, roof or anything that has to do with the building at all. And so we, the city, contracted out with CGI [conflated with DCW], which is a construction management firm and cost estimator.
And they came back with a $21 million number for the full meal deal. And that was a very high risk number in which to rehab the pool…
There was an additional report that Jim referenced, the CG Engineering in October.
It was just up [sic] the roof…
“Just up the roof” is not only garbled — if, as it appears from context, she meant their report was “just about (or for) the roof” — that statement is flat-out false.
As we have shown, CG Engineering supplemented WTI’s report on the aquatic component of the equation with a full “assessment of the Mountain View Pool building’s structure.” Along with roof replacement, their Structural Assessment Report includes concrete walls, steel pipe columns, concrete slabs, pool room structural elements, and mechanical access tunnels.
Seismic wasn’t requested, nor is it included in any line items in the $21 million “full meal deal” from DCW. It is true that ADA was not addressed, but according to DCWs cost study those add-ons would amount to just $9,990 for an ADA-compliant shower, ramp & detectors, and parking signs.
The “full meal” from DCW offered the easy out — $21 million! By changing the scope of work to a “tear down and replace,” the full meal became a smorgasbord. Far from the rehab option that the community had been requesting which the first two reports looked at, it was an all-you-can-eat buffet with $1,500 locker room graphics and $153,000 of new outdoor landscaping for our indoor swim.
“And that 21 million might be 26, might be 27,” Hite told council.
She then said that “the steering committee saw that [DCW] report,” but made “the recommendation not to put a dollar into the old pool, because we can’t get any state and federal money or grants or philanthropy for that old pool.”
She concluded:
So those reports are operational in nature. We try to keep it at a high level.
If you want the details, I’d be happy to send it to you. But we really tried to go through the steering committee first and keep it at a very high level and make some decisions based on the full report, not a partial report.
John Mauro jumped in:
Can I also add to that, that report has been available online for some time?…
And not to mince words too much, because I know this is a game.
But it’s easy to cherry pick numbers and manufacture a different truth.
A game it is. City Manager Mauro did not create the position of Director of Parks and Recreation Strategy to oversee a practical renovation of “that old pool.” Carrie Hite was hired to sell us a “very high level” new aquatic center.
And her “happy to send you the details” was for just one report, DCW’s full meal deal.
When the reports were requested, that $21 million “tear down and replace” cost study was the only one made available to council members. That is the one Mauro references that was online. To this day, it remains the only one of the three posted by the city.
The initial WTI and CG Engineering reports, totaling less than $5 million, are not disclosed on the city’s website. On the “Healthier Together” aquatic center web page under “Materials Available for Review,” there is no mention of the two firms’ analyses and findings that support sensible renovation and modernization of the existing pool.
Find the two buried reports at these links:
Water Technology, Inc.: Mountain View Pool Evaluation
CG Engineering: Structural Assessment Report
by Ana Wolpin | Sep 16, 2023 | General
In August 2022, incendiary events in Port Townsend brought social media posts by then 39-year-old Mayor David Faber to national attention. Internet writers began discussing tweets like this:
And this one, publicizing his ultra-low Rice Purity Test score (17/100) to demonstrate that, as “legally-required,” he is a “pervert and deviant”:
The Rice Purity Test is a 100-question survey that asks about a person’s experiences with potentially “risky” behaviors such as drugs, alcohol, sex, crime, deceit, and other deeds considered immoral or non-virtuous. Scored out of 100 possible points, the lower the score, the less virtuous. The average score is 60-75.
Another, about having sex with dead chickens:
At the October 17, 2022 Port Townsend City Council meeting, Port Townsend Free Press founder and ongoing contributor Jim Scarantino read some of the above tweets into the public record. While those social media posts may be old news to some, the story isn’t over.
Nearly a year later Scarantino was back with an update at the September 11, 2023 city council workshop. There were new tweets to be added to the record.
Following the workshop, Scarantino recounted on the Free Press‘s Facebook page:
“He makes such comments on a Twitter account that right up front identifies him as Mayor of Port Townsend. And he holds himself out as the Mayor while discussing city business on the same account where he also writes about masturbation. Not nice stuff to read, but this is the Mayor’s behavior in a public forum where he is representing the city of Port Townsend.”
Faber’s Twitter/X banner today is pictured below. The “cold feet” handle and licking dog are gone, replaced by a new photo, his political yard sign, and “Mayor of Port Townsend, WA” identifier.
Should we care about the tweets of David J. Faber, Mayor of Port Townsend? Why continue to bring them up? How did we get here?
The Backstory
The dive into Faber’s online persona began after the Free Press broke the story in August 2022 of 80-year-old Julie Jaman’s expulsion by the YMCA from our community swimming pool. That’s old news, too, but revisiting what unfolded provides important context for the mayor’s social media conduct.
Naked in the women’s showers after a swim, Jaman was shocked to hear a male voice. She became more upset when she looked past the flimsy shower curtain and saw a teenage boy in a woman’s bathing suit “helping” little girls with their swimsuits.
She didn’t know that Clementine Adams was a Y employee, a quite-obviously biological male who just months earlier had announced a new identity as a transgender woman. Jaman asked “Do you have a penis?” and demanded that Adams get out of the locker room. When management intervened, rather than de-escalate the situation, naked Jaman, dripping wet, was told that her reaction had been “discriminatory”. On the spot, she was banned for life from the pool she had been swimming in for 35 years.
The story went internationally viral, putting a magnifying glass on our little town. As the saga unfolded, Faber’s response as Port Townsend’s mayor brought him under intense scrutiny.
Less than a week after Jaman’s ouster, dozens of citizens showed up to give public comment at the next city council meeting. Two distinct groups spoke.
Those upset about Jaman’s treatment voiced discomfort over allowing biological men in women’s spaces. They requested that the city honor traditional safeguards for women and girls and work to develop a solution to meet all pool users’ needs. Some asked, why not allow for privacy and designate an all-gender space?
The second group attacked the first. Those asking to be safeguarded, they said, were “transphobes” and “haters”. “Trans women ARE women,” they chanted.
None of the concerns over Jaman’s abrupt lifetime ban or requests for privacy solutions at the city pool were addressed by the council. Instead, at the conclusion of public comments, Mayor Faber lectured that Port Townsend was a welcoming community, sternly rebuking those requesting consideration for private spaces as hateful and discriminatory. (Mayor Deflects Backlash Over Men in Women’s Showers at YMCA, Virtue Signals About Trans Rights Instead)
The only discussion among the council was a proposal to develop a statement “to formally support the Y and its staff.” In the days that followed, that “statement” was elevated to a Transgender Proclamation.
Local women’s rights advocate Amy Sousa tweeted the proposed proclamation out to her national audience and attempted to have an exchange with Mayor Faber. He responded with juvenile taunts and name-calling. Rather than discussing Sousa’s concerns, much like the group chanting at city council, Port Townsend’s mayor called her a transphobe.
“The transphobes have found me,” he tweeted out in response to her post. “Fuuuuuun”.
That wasn’t enough, there was more to say. Five minutes later he re-posted Sousa’s tweet that shared the proclamation, and responded with the nonsensical dismissal “Zoopity boop.”
“The mayor of Port Townsend doesn’t seem to think my concerns deserve respectful consideration,” Sousa wrote. “I think women/girls deserve the sex based provisions that our foremothers battled for centuries to attain, privacy, safety, & dignity for our BODIES.”
She later told media, “This is a little ridiculous to me that this is how the mayor is choosing to respond to women and girls who have legitimate concerns… he’s not taking these concerns with seriousness and the gravity that I think we are due.”
Sousa then organized a press conference to be held prior to the next City Council meeting, when the proclamation would be up for public comment. That event across from City Hall (covered in multiple Free Press articles – 1, 2, 3) brought yet more national attention after trans activists violently attacked the predominantly elderly women speaking, while Port Townsend Police watched passively from across the street. Citizens begging for help were told orders had come “from above” not to intervene.
Those who participated in the event were intimidated and assaulted; some were injured. They were locked out of the council meeting as well, unable to give public comment. Meanwhile inside City Hall, Mayor Faber descended from his dais and took off his mask to ceremoniously read the “welcoming” proclamation to a local trans “leader”.
Following the mob attacks and proclamation reading, a later tweet by Faber further inflamed the situation: “What an incredible night. The Port Townsend community showed up in beautiful fashion,” he wrote. “Tonight reminded me of why Port Townsend is home.”
While the police stood guard outside City Hall under orders “from above” to protect the mayor and council — not the citizens — during their special proclamation, below is what “home” had become for people speaking across the street that evening. “The Port Townsend community that showed up in beautiful fashion” looked like this:
How the Mayor Has His “fuuuuuun” on Social Media
This series of explosive events reverberated far and wide. Writers covering women’s issues took notice. After his puerile responses to Sousa and his “beautiful community” tweet the night of the assaults, they wondered what else Mayor Faber was broadcasting online.
Former New York Magazine and Penthouse contributor Mandy Stadtmiller was among the national writers to bring attention to Faber’s social media posts. The day after the city-permitted women’s rights press conference drew violent assaults from trans activists while police stood watching with detachment under orders not to protect them, she asked:
But first out of the gate was Substack writer Mattie Watkins. “This was supposed to be fun and snarky,” she wrote, “but as I researched David J. Faber things got progressively weirder and more serious.”
Watkins was the first to republish the tweets at the top of this article. Along with his sex with dogs and dead chickens comments, and the post that mayors are required to be filthy and deviant, she discovered Faber defending actor Paul Reuben, aka PeeWee Herman. Reuben had been arrested for masturbating in public and charged with misdemeanor possession of child pornography in 2002.
Faber’s tweet responding to someone claiming that Reuben had been targeted as part of a sting operation was that “PeeWee did nothing wrong.”
Yet in addition to masturbating in public, Reubens had confessed to possessing 170 images of children in sexual acts and positions.
Watkins also tagged this post:
In a follow-up article she asked “What does that mean?”
Social media influencer Vaush describes himself as a “dirtbag leftist” with an online presence geared predominantly to radicalizing young people. Watkins documents his insulting, aggressive and misogynistic attitude toward women.
Typifying that attitude, she says, are statements like, “I wish this dumb bitch wasn’t in high school so I could fully go off on her.”
And demeaning tweets like:
While degrading women is a common theme in “Vaush politics,” he is equally “notorious” for comments advocating pedophilia and lowering the age of consent, Watkins said. He influences his mostly young audience with messages that endorse the legalization of child pornography.
“What does this mean for Mayor David J. Faber?” she asked. “Well, he isn’t a complete idiot and is not on record agreeing with these specific ideas from Vaush. However, he also hasn’t condemned them and continues to align himself with Vaush as a whole.”
Faber Looks Amused
At the October 3, 2022 Port Townsend City Council meeting, Rebel News reporter Katie Daviscourt posed some of these same questions during public comments.
Daviscourt quoted Faber’s tweets about bestiality and asked him if his alignment with Vaush reflected his moral views. She asked if “his history of inappropriate and controversial tweets are a good representation of an elected official.” The mayor did not answer her queries. The video of the meeting reveals only a grainy flash of Faber grinning as she quotes his tweet, “As mayor, I am legally required to be a pervert and deviant.”
She asked, does the City Council stand by his comments or denounce his behavior?
The only councilor to offer a public response to citizens’ call for the city council to censure the mayor — and in some social media discussions, to remove Faber from office — has been Owen Rowe.
“I fully support our Mayor David Faber,” Rowe said. “I am entertained by his Twitter account, and do not understand that as in any way representing the city organization.”
Watkins notes that Vaush and his supporters “love to hide behind the ‘it’s a joke’ excuse.”
The File Grows
More of Faber’s online “humor” soon surfaced.
His post of a selfie wearing eye liner and mugging inside what appears to be a public toilet stall:
Delight over wasting a church’s money on prayer card mailings to his deceased mother:
And new tweets defending PeeWee Herman’s possession of child pornography and public masturbation. “I’ll say it again,” he wrote, “Pee-Wee Herman did nothing wrong.”
“In another tweet,” Scarantino informed council, “he said he adored this pedophile [PeeWee] for never losing his childlike innocence and joy.”
And “earlier in the summer,” Scarantino added, “between discussing housing policy and promoting one of the Financial Sustainability videos done by the city,” Faber was inspired to re-post someone else’s musings about masturbation:
“[I’m] thinking about that guy who died beating off at Pompeii” the post said. To which Faber commented, “Every day. Sometimes twice.”
“I don’t know what it says about the city that for over a year the council has known about this conduct and has not said one word about it,” Scarantino told council. “And as I pointed out over a year ago, were any other city employee to engage in such conduct, you’d have a very hard time disciplining them with your mayor doing things like this.”
“This is the mayor. The mayor,” Scarantino later emphasized. Not only does Faber use his Twitter account to discuss city business, “he even communicated with at least one state legislator.”
“Seriously, imagine if a police officer—make it the police chief—identified himself by his public position, then said that stuff. But apparently they approve of his conduct enough to let it go, even when reminded that he was still at it a year later.”
“What does that say for Port Townsend and the government of this city?” Scarantino asked the council.
Are all of our elected officials who chose to place young Faber in the mayor’s chair entertained by his mix of city business with tweets about bestiality, perversion, deviance, and the joy of masturbation? Do all of them find his public defense of pedophilia funny?
by Ana Wolpin | Jan 16, 2023 | General
Out of 39 Washington counties, Jefferson County rang in the new year with the dubious distinction of being the only “red alert” spot for Covid cases in the state.
We’ve reported extensively on the disinformation from Public Health Officer Dr. Allison Berry, our health department, and the Board of Health — all parroting a thoroughly discredited global narrative — and on the damage that has wrought on our community. This article will take a look at how our county is currently faring in the wake of nearly three years of a massive propaganda campaign to keep residents in a state of fear and anxiety, a campaign that shows no sign of easing up.
And we’ll compare two other counties that help flesh out the picture: neighboring Clallam County, also under the direction of health officer Berry; and Adams County, at the other end of the spectrum. Where Jefferson has the highest numbers for the case and booster metrics being tracked, Adams reports the lowest figures in the state.
The Washington State Department of Health (DOH) posted the maps shown here on their COVID-19 Data Dashboard on January 11. Data is updated weekly. Numbers of Covid cases are converted to rates per 100,000 so that there is equivalence between counties.
The map above, for the period between December 26, 2022 and January 2, 2023, shows the 7-day Covid case rate in Jefferson County at the start of the new year — 127 cases per 100,000 (41 reported cases in a population of 32,190).
Contrast this with the lowest case rate in the state: Adams County. The Eastern Washington county shown in blue reported only 2 Covid cases in a population of 20,450 or 10 per 100,000 during the same week. The third comparative, Clallam County, shows a case rate of 46 per 100,000 (35 people out of 76,770).
The colors on the map’s 39 counties vary from week to week as new data is reported. But it is not unusual for Jefferson County to be a red standout and for Adams County to have the lowest Covid cases, represented in blue. Clallam County typically is yellow or orange.
Which brings us to the second of Jefferson County’s “bests”:
JeffCo’s booster rates are also highest in the state
The charts below depict the dozen counties with the highest Covid bivalent (Omicron) booster uptake followed by the dozen lowest as of 1/9/2023. (The fifteen counties in the middle are not shown.) Jefferson County again tops the list of 39 counties, with the highest jab uptake in the state for bivalent boosters. The percentage of uptake is based on county residents eligible for the booster, defined as people aged 5 and above.
Below is the state map from the DOH dashboard showing the levels of uptake throughout Washington as of January 9 by color coding.
The increasing awareness that after a brief antibody response the shots soon offer no benefit and only cause harm has led to a national uptake rate of only 11% for the Omicron bivalent boosters. Adams County, with the lowest uptake in Washington’s 39 counties at 11.1%, reflects that national figure. But again we see that Jefferson County leads the state with a whopping 47.3% — nearly half of those eligible — receiving the shot. Clallam is third highest in the state at 36.5%.
More boosters —> worse outcomes
By now everyone should know that the mRNA injections do not prevent anyone from contracting Covid. But higher numbers of infections among the vaxxed than those who declined the shot? Is there a connection between high jab rates and high case numbers?
The phenomenon of seeing more cases among the jabbed is playing out globally. Not just in more Covid infections, but greater illness in general. Reports indicate that as strains have become less virulent hospitals are treating few Covid patients, but those who do seek medical care are people who got the shots. Especially those with multiple boosters.
One recent survey of hospital workers, conducted by Vaccine Safety Research Foundation founder Steve Kirsch, asked “What is REALLY going on in hospitals?” Kirsch summarized five key results (emphasis his):
- Hospital COVID wards are empty
- Emergency is not justified
- The only patients with COVID are the vaccinated
- Vaxxed doing worse than unvaxxed (< 10% disagree)
- More boosters —> worse outcomes (only 1% disagree)
The link to survey responses can be seen here.
Even mainstream media is acknowledging this problem, with headlines like these:
“Experts” continue to make excuses for negative outcomes. However the public can see that they have been lied to, and their increasing rejection of the shots reflects the crumbling narrative. Less and less people are opting for boosters.
But not in Jefferson County. According to the state dashboard, uptake of the latest bivalent booster rises here with each passing week (now at 47.3%, it was 32.1% at our last reporting). All local health messaging continues to push the jabs:
“Get up to date with your COVID-19 vaccinations,” says Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH) on its website.
Health Officer Berry also urges more shots at every opportunity, spouting demonstrable falsehoods:
“Thankfully we have a good vaccine… to reduce one’s likelihood of contracting the virus and passing it on to others,” Berry told the Peninsula Daily News in a story about winter cases on the rise. “The bivalent booster is still holding up strong against these variants,” she continued to misinform, “so if you have gotten yours, you are well protected.”
A study just published in December 2022 evaluating the bivalent shot in over 51,000 Cleveland Clinic employees found the opposite:
“The risk of COVID-19 also varied by the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses previously received. The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19 (Figure 2).”
Cleveland Clinic Figure 2: Risk of COVID-19 infections increases with number of doses.
Black = 0 doses, Red = 1 dose, Green = 2 doses, Purple = 3 doses, Orange = >3 doses
As we have documented in previous articles, the boosters not only are failing to protect — let alone protect well as Berry concocts — they create negative efficacy. The more boosters, the more likely you will elevate the risks of hospitalization and severe diseases rather than reducing them. ‘Negative Efficacy’ Should Have Stopped COVID Vaccine Recommendations in Their Tracks wrote The Epoch Times in November 2022.
Since we first reported on it more than a year ago, data has been pouring in confirming negative vaccine efficacy around the world — from Denmark, Iceland and other northern European nations to Britain, Scotland, Canada, and most recently South Africa. And with new variant XBB.1.5 (ominously dubbed Kraken) quickly overcoming Omicron as the dominant strain, any possible benefit of the bivalent Omicron booster even in the short term is completely negated.
But Berry continues to peddle the failed shot with the absurd assurance that “if you have gotten yours, you are well protected.” So well protected that our heavily-jabbed populace has the highest case rate in the state. Still, nearly half of Jefferson County’s population appears to believe her dangerous disinformation.
Is JCPH just exaggerating its numbers?
We’ve seen that Berry and our health department have ramped up fear over Covid cases at every opportunity. Is the high JeffCo case rate because our health department is over-reporting?
JCPH claims that the opposite is true — that the number of Covid cases is significantly under-reported. From their website:
“Jefferson County Public Health staff estimate that 1 in 12 COVID-19 cases in Jefferson County were reported to public health last week.”
Those reporting their Covid infections to the health department do not even come close to the actual number of cases, JCPH says. A previous estimate of under-reports was even higher: 1 in 15. From the cases that were reported, according to the JCPH website, the two-week case rate — the metric that they use for their visual risk meter — is 252 cases per 100,000 people (last updated 1/9/23).
The department’s website continues the local fear messaging it has been engaging in for nearly three years with this red alert:
Reinforcing that fear porn in JeffCo is our Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), a trio who also comprise nearly half of the county Board of Health (3 out of 7 BOH members). In October 2022, all but fawning over Berry’s autocratic pronouncements, they led the state in another dubious distinction. As Covid restrictions were dropped statewide and nationally — with Covid acknowledged as endemic and relegated to flu status — Jefferson’s BOCC was the only board in Washington state to officially extend its State of Emergency. We remain perpetually in official crisis mode, in an “Emergency Response to the Covid-19 Pandemic.”
How does Jefferson County’s messaging compare to Berry’s other jurisdiction, Clallam County, with the third highest booster uptake in the state?
And what about distant Adams County where the bivalent shot uptake is dead last, faring as poorly as the national average?
Clallam County: Notable Differences
To start with, Clallam’s commissioners reasonably discarded their emergency declarations as of October 31, 2022 — along with Washington State and every county board statewide except Jefferson.
The spell that Jefferson BOCC still appear to be under was not successfully cast over Clallam’s commissioners. While our BOCC gave Berry a bully pulpit for Covid “briefings” at every commission meeting — providing relentless bombardment of her fear narrative — Clallam’s electeds did not. Periodic “coronavirus briefings” were held in Clallam, but they were not weekly.
And the Clallam briefings were not amplified, as they were in Jefferson County, through a radio show. Not only was our young health officer’s rhetoric a constant feature at Jefferson BOCC weekly meetings, Port Townsend radio station KPTZ first elevated former health officer Tom Locke’s reports, then Berry’s, to a weekly community broadcast over the local airwaves. (The station did not air the county’s full meetings, only the Covid briefing segment.) True “programming” of the masses.
Clallam’s Health and Human Services “Coronavirus Information” webpage is far less bombastic than Jefferson’s. It offers a state hotline, a sidebar saying “Covid Cases Are Back Up!” with a link to order free at-home Covid tests, and a link to a separate Clallam County COVID-19 Dashboard.
The dashboard is also less aggressive than Jefferson’s Covid page. It provides the stats below and a couple of charts, directing people to the state DOH website for all other statistics.
A sidebar there has the standard Mask Up! and Get Vaccinated! messages. But significantly, there is no risk meter, no tally of weekly cases to generate anxiety.
With Berry overseeing both counties, Clallam endured the same damaging Covid orders as Jefferson, the most draconian in the state. Her two-county mandate requiring people to be vaccinated before being allowed to dine or drink indoors at restaurants and bars not only set a precedent for the state, it was the first in the nation. In Jefferson County, the BOCC embraced it with enthusiasm, and traumatized residents accepted it compliantly. But in Clallam, so many showed up to protest outside the commissioners hearing room at the courthouse, it took three hours to hear all the public testimony.
“More than 50 were against the mandate, called for Berry’s resignation or insisted she be fired by the county board of health,” according to a September 8, 2021 PDN article. And while there was no pushback from Jefferson County businesses, Clallam restaurants initiated a lawsuit, forcing the Proof of Vaccination Order to be rescinded.
The main platform in Clallam for Berry’s rhetoric was and continues to be the Peninsula Daily News, that county’s newspaper of record. Both the PDN and Jefferson County’s Leader have given her their full support, censoring letters and even paid ads that challenge the official narrative. Berry’s domination of the media and her ongoing disinformation, as quoted earlier, is surely a factor in the high booster rate in our neighboring county.
However we see less masking, lower jab uptake and fewer Covid cases in Clallam County. There are clearly more people in Clallam than in Jefferson paying attention to the actual data, rejecting our joint health officer’s fear messaging and thinking for themselves.
Adams County: Another World
As everyone who has traveled east of the mountains has noted, eastern Washington exhibited far less Covid hysteria than our side of the state.
According to the Washington DOH Covid dashboard, 68.7% of Adams County’s population had an initial jab and just 61.6% completed their primary series. While 42.3% received “any booster,” as described earlier only 11.1% have gone for the bivalent shot. Comparing those numbers to our two western counties:
Adams County – 68.7% / 61.6% / 42.3% / 11.1%
Clallam County – 77.7% / 71.6% / 65.2% / 36.5%
Jefferson County – 86.4% / 80.4% / 74.8% / 47.3%
With less initial primary series injections, and only a fraction of our booster uptake, Adams’ case numbers are also significantly lower, the correlation we are seeing worldwide. Their weekly cases are now in the single digits, two people out of a population of 20,450 at last report.
What kind of messaging about a continuing threat from Covid are Adams’ residents getting? In looking for information on the Adams County Health Department website, Covid is not even listed under their Public Health headings. You have to enter COVID-19 in the search bar to tease out three related links:
The Resources page doesn’t contain any information; it is comprised entirely of links to Washington state websites. The only local link is to the Adams County Facebook page. That page stopped reporting on Covid last summer, as is described below.
The Covid-19 Graphs page looks like this:
Nothing to see here. Literally a blank page. The yellow band at left accesses archived documents from early in the pandemic — a March 16, 2020 emergency declaration; a May 4, 2020 letter to the Governor stating the county’s compliance with state guidelines; a May 26, 2020 media release; a November 2021 press release about free Covid tests, an old booklet for phased re-opening of businesses.
The Covid-19 Update page does not have any Covid-related information.
In a general web search for “Adams County WA COVID-19” the only media coverage that comes up is a story about 43 cases tied to a wedding more than two years ago (November 2020). The county’s Facebook page mentioned above does show some case information, but it is five months old, last updated the week of August 8-12, 2022.
Since last August’s case numbers, there is nothing on any of Adams County’s websites about Covid. No graphs, no charts, no alerts. No statistics of any kind. No Mask Up or Get Your Vax messages.
Might there be a semblance of normalcy in Adams County? Based on what can be found online and what the Washington DOH Covid-19 dashboard shows, as far as Adams County is concerned, Covid is a non-issue.
As well it should be here, too, three years in. But still the hype, the alerts, the “emergency” persist.
The only statement coming out of Berry and our health department that may bear a kernel of truth is that just one in 12 or 15 people are reporting their cases. It wouldn’t be surprising if that ratio was even higher.
Why should we participate in the health department’s fear-mongering?
My household and numerous friends had bouts with respiratory illnesses in the last month. None of us tested, reported, or sought medical care. Was it Covid — Omicron, BA.2, BA.5, BF.7, BQ.1, BQ.1.1 or Kraken? Or some common cold or flu? What does it matter? The symptoms and severity are similar, sometimes identical, the treatments are the same. We all recouped at home as one would with any respiratory virus. As people everywhere have been doing for millennia.
The real illness in this community now is the relentless fear and anxiety that persists over normal health challenges that have been with us forever. Adams County got it right. Respiratory viruses have always been endemic and will continue to be with us in the future.
All the masking and injections in the world will not eliminate risk to the elderly, immune-compromised, and those with multiple co-morbidities. Conversely, overwhelming evidence shows these interventions are damaging immune systems and increasing risks. Having admitted a link from the shots to myocarditis in 2021, just days ago the CDC also finally acknowledged that Covid boosters are “possibly” causing strokes in people over 65.
Continuing to terrorize the public with risk meters and red alerts, telling us to test every time we have a sniffle, to mask up and get dangerous shots, is itself a sickness. What will it take to undo the brainwashing and trauma we still see all around us — most especially here in Jefferson County?
Public Health Officer Dr. Allison Berry dispensing fear
Unable to convince Zervos to publish the study, Del Bigtree/ICAN tells the story in a powerful documentary, An Inconvenient Study. Released in October 2025, and winner of Best Film at the Malibu Film Festival, it is as much a tale of a medical system that demands adherence to its orthodoxy as it is a film shattering the myth that vaccines make kids healthier. Watch it here.
The number of pediatricians refusing to care for children who do not adhere to the full CDC schedule is considerable. A 2020 survey of AAP members published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) revealed that half of pediatric offices report “a policy to dismiss families if they refused vaccines.”
This fraud was the subject of the shocking and controversial movie 
Bowing to the pressure, in 1986 Congress removed all liability from drug companies for childhood vaccines they produced. This get-out-of-jail-free card, eliminating industry responsibility for safety, was unprecedented.
Traveling to every U.S. state on the continent, its dedicated team video-taped thousands of stories of vaccine injury and death. More than 8,000 names were signed on the bus’ exterior of adults and children injured or killed by vaccines.
WTI’s report did not look into the condition of the building. For that the city retained the services of 
The WTI and CG Engineering reports, only recently disclosed, were respectively received by the city six months and four months ago. Both firms have decades of experience in these kinds of analyses.
