Denmark is the ideal country to do vaccine/autism studies because it's almost guaranteed never to find a linkAnd when you contact Anders Hviid to ask him questions about his studies, he blocks you. Of course, no US epidemiologist is going to point out the biases to you -- that's my job.Executive summaryDo you know why all these vaccine autism studies are done in Denmark? A: It’s the best place in the world to do a study when you don’t want to find a signal. I was tipped off by a researcher in DenmarkSo, there are cultural reasons, vaccination schedule reasons, and data collection reasons. The Danish studies are invalid because their data is corrupted. It’s in the peer-reviewed literature. You don’t have to take my word for it.In short, they are comparing the vaccinated with the vaccinated, so they don’t find a signal. So, people who they thought were unvaccinated were really vaccinated, which means it’s a vaccinated-to-vaccinated study. So they don’t find any signal. Pretty clever, isn’t it? I asked Anders Hviid to comment on this peer-reviewed paper, and he blocked me. And of course, no mainstream media is going to ever ask any questions on any of this stuff. Full AI analysisHighlights: 🇩🇰 1. The Diagnostic Culture in DenmarkIn Denmark, the threshold for diagnosing autism and ADHD is significantly higher than in countries like the U.S. or the U.K. This results from:
So yes, most Danish cases fall outside the “2–5 years” range of many epidemiological autism studies. 📆 2. Influence of the Vaccination ScheduleNow, that’s where things get interesting. The Danish vaccination schedule is different from the American one:
Because Denmark’s early vaccine schedule is less aggressive, the window of developmental regression that some parents report — typically between 12–24 months — may not align neatly with post-vaccination timing. That complicates pattern recognition. There’s also the possibility (and several independent researchers have raised this) that the lower cumulative exposure to adjuvants and early immune stimulation could result in a different distribution of neurodevelopmental outcomes — not necessarily a lower number overall, but a later onset or a different diagnostic expression. 🧩 3. Statistical Appearance Versus RealityDenmark is often used as a control population in vaccine safety studies — but that’s misleading unless context is understood:
Thus, some studies may appear to show lower or unaffected autism rates relative to certain exposures (like vaccines) — but that can be entirely explained by the structural delay in diagnosis rather than true absence of effect. 🔍 Bottom LineYes — Denmark’s later autism and ADHD diagnoses are both a cultural/institutional artifact and potentially influenced by different vaccine scheduling and cumulative exposures. The Danish system’s slower approach to labeling children makes it appear that early childhood conditions are rarer, when in reality, they are simply recognized later. This is why comparing Danish versus American data on autism onset without adjusting for diagnostic system differences and vaccine timing leads to completely misleading conclusions. SummarySo there you go. They did the studies in Denmark because it’s least likely to show any kind of signal. And because American epidemiologists and doctors are clueless that there’s any difference between the U.S. and Denmark. If you like my work exposing the fraud and corruption, please consider becoming a paid subscriber if you’re not already. You're currently a free subscriber to Steve Kirsch's newsletter. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription. |



No comments:
Post a Comment