This is about a study done by Marcus Zirvos MD at Ford Medical Center. It is a top notch research medical center that strongly favors the use of vaccines and Dr. Zirvos believes in them too. He was talked into doing the study in order to prove his point, that the vaccinated should require less medical help than the unvaccinated. They had large numbers of both and since the babies born there are also cared for there they had all the records for both. So it was retrospective. He did the study and would not release the numbers or get it published. Now it has come out and in this documentary it is shown to more MD Phd’s and they agree that more should be done to nail this down.
I think it is past time to do actual science on this in an unbiased way to find out the truth. Do vaccines improve the health of kids? I have 5 kids and 13 grandkids and would like to know.
This is some of what the study showed:
Here’s what the study revealed:
• Vaccinated children were 4.29 times more likely 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.
• 5.5 times higher risk for neurodevelopmental disorders.
• 2.9 times more motor disabilities.
• 4.5 times more speech disorders.
• Three times more developmental delays.
• Six times more acute and chronic ear infections.
• In nearly 2,000 unvaccinated children, there were ZERO cases of ADHD, diabetes, behavioral problems, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities, tics, or other psychological disorders.
• The study’s conclusion is devastating. It states: “[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.”
To be fair I will copy the complaints of another researcher who criticised the study:
The unpublished Henry Ford Health study led or co-authored by Dr. Marcus Zervos, which examined correlations between childhood vaccination and chronic disease, has been harshly criticized for its flawed methodology and has been formally disavowed by Henry Ford Health. Below is a structured critical analysis:
Study Methods and Data
• The study compared the health outcomes of approximately 18,500 children, with a subset of about 1,900 unvaccinated children to the rest who received at least one vaccine. [1] [2]
• The main metric was the prevalence of chronic conditions such as asthma, eczema, autoimmune diseases, and neurodevelopmental disorders, based on medical record review. [2] [3] [4]
• Analysis involved statistical comparisons, but critically, the populations were not demographically or medically comparable. [5] [2]
Major Flaws and Errors
• Unmatched Cohorts: The unvaccinated children differed substantially from vaccinated children—being more likely male, more White, less likely premature, and less likely to have experienced respiratory distress at birth, among other variables. [1] [5] [2]
• Small and Uneven Sample Duration: Unvaccinated children not only formed a small sample, but many were followed for much less time (often only through age 3), before most chronic conditions would even be diagnosed—vs. 6.5 years average follow-up in the vaccinated group. [5] [1]
• Measurement and Comparison Error: The study lumped all vaccines together and failed to account for number, type, or timing of vaccines. It did not adjust for changes in vaccine schedules or medical guidance over time. [1] [5]
• Impossible Claims: The study claimed zero occurrences of several diseases and conditions, which is statistically impossible in a group of that size [1] [5]
• Confounding Factors: Established epidemiological practice demands close matching for socioeconomic status, underlying health conditions, and other major confounders; this was not adequately done. [2] [5] [1]
• Observational Bias: There was selection bias—as families who opt out of vaccines also generally differ in healthcare utilization and record-keeping, potentially suppressing diagnosis rates for chronic conditions in the unvaccinated group. [2] [1]
Discussion and Conclusions
• The study’s results—suggesting higher rates of chronic illness among vaccinated children—are undermined by the unmatched populations and short follow-up in the unvaccinated cohort. [6] [5] [1] [2]
• The usual caveats about correlation vs. causation, and the need for randomized or tightly matched cohort designs, were not sufficient to salvage analytical rigor in this case. [5] [2]
• Reputable biostatistical analysis, such as commentary from the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, found the study “severely flawed” and incapable of supporting its conclusions. [1] [5] [2]
• The data and statistical weaknesses mean any implications or policy inferences are unsafe, and Henry Ford Health described the analysis as “not remotely close” to institutional or journal standards. [7] [5]
Reasons for Non-Publication and Institutional Disavowal
• Henry Ford Health’s internal scientific review flagged the draft immediately with major concerns:
• Incomparable groups, inadequate adjustment for confounders
• Insufficient or flawed outcome tracking/time frames
• Improper lumping of vaccines and timeframes [5] [2] [1]
• The health system never submitted the draft for journal review as it was considered “deeply flawed,” and stated publicly that it failed the standards for scientific rigor and safety. [6] [5]
• Henry Ford Health has denounced claims that the study was suppressed due to political or reputational concerns, labeling this claim—spread by activists cited in Senate committee testimony—as “defamatory and troubling”. [8] [7] [5]
• Published statements from the institution indicate that the study was “never considered” for submission or legitimation, and that the draft shared publicly may have been altered outside the institution. [7] [8] [5]
In conclusion, the Henry Ford/Zervos study was never published due to deep and unfixable scientific flaws, was never formally suppressed for political reasons, and has been disavowed by Henry Ford Health as unworthy of public or policy influence. [4] [7] [2] [1] [5]
The biggest complaint I think was that the unvaccinated kids weren’t followed for as long. This could have been because they had no records because they weren’t sick. The vaccinated kids had all kinds of records. This is just me.
I think this is an important thing to think about if you’re going for longevity. It’s also very much in the news. You don’t have to read it, click on. And I think you should be able to get the vaccine even if it looks like a bad idea. You do you.
