So I was challenged to watch twenty videos on the #HearUs tag and things of that nature by parents of autistic kids because supposedly, the parents are the ones actually personally affected.  Logic would dictate that actually, it is the Autistic kids/autistic kids/kids with autism who are the ones actually affected but I digress.

Score at the moment:  0/20 videos watched. No, I don’t believe vaccines cause autism.


So the first one I have chosen to watch is a woman called Gladys or at least, called Gladys for the purpose of this case study.   Name withholding for privacy reasons is a thing that is perfectly legitimate.  I do not know whether this mother did or did not.   I am simply saying that if she did then no blame attaches to this since claims stand or fall on their own merit.  So yes, I watched Gladys’ story.

So Gladys wants to share her story about her son being vaccine-injured (fair enough so far)   and Gladys tells us she followed the regular vaccine schedule (sure, fair enough  – I have no reason to dispute this) and not knowing what would happen to his health afterwards (okay, I do hope there is more to the story than this though) – and at this point, we’re at 0:16.

18 months and the MMR shot – sure, sounds reasonable.   I am pretty sure I know how this is going to go at this point.  I am pretty sure it will be claimed that the MMR causes autism on no other basis than the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy – but let’s give the video a chance.

So she describes him before the shot at 18 months and after the shot at 18 months but hang on a second here!  The regular CDC schedule is one dose at 12-15 months and then one through 4 years- 6 years.      So 18 months is not 12-15 months so did he follow the schedule or not? We’re at 1:01 at this point.

Turning the wheels non-stop of a toy – and what if that was fun for him? Did she ever think of that?   I’m not impressed with the extent of her tragedy so far.   Then she mentions that you could leave him on the carpet sitting there and he would stay there for hours.  Aren’t injuries supposed to be… well…injurious?

Yes, normal.  Regressive autism.  Still, we’re only at 1:49 so I am sure in the next few minutes, there will be more evidence than just the fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc.

So I have nothing to say regarding evaluation (other than good idea) and then she says she started researching.  Let’s see, shall we?    Pubmed:  Author, FirstName re: vaccines – NO ITEMS FOUND.  Of course – there never is.

Still, we’re only at 2:24 – I am sure by the time the video is finished, there will be more evidence than this.    Sure, she looked up autism and knew it was what he had – that much I do believe.

So diagnosis at 2.5 yrs after the regression at 18 months and 18 months is three months after the regular schedule of MMR.   I wonder which claim is true?I asked them to clarify this via commenting on this video with my Anon England account.

Silence for a few minutes.    So when her little boy is 2.5 yrs and one week old – she starts researching but I am not sure why  she didn’t publish the results of her experiment.  Still, we are only at 3:08 so I am sure there is more than this to be said.

Researching extra inventions that can be done is a good idea.   Off your budget – yes, this is why America needs a universal healthcare system.   Doing what you can afford which was GFCF diet – um, okay – I personally don’t see a problem here.    I am sure there will be more evidence than this though.    I am sure she has accounted for cofounders and confirmation bias though.  We’re at 4:05 though so she’d better get on with it.

Ah, now, 4:38 is interesting – since it consists of the person in the youtube video speaking out in support of homeopathy – the laws of physics and chemistry that make computers work mean that homeopathy cannot work – it is against ‘the laws of nature’ so this part of the video is amusing.

Not sure how you managed to make a change you could not afford.   We’re at 5:08 – I am sure she will tell us what the remedy was and will produce more evidence than this – that’s a lot to do in less than 3 minutes.

Re: The Dr Tinnus stuff?  No items found in Pubmed.  Of course.

First word the second day after the treatment.  But hang on, he “lost his words”, right? So he can’t have said his first word.   What is this “the treatment” anyway?  5:39 – and he’s been on this mysterious treatment for three years.    Since not using your real name counts (according to some) as hiding and not standing up for what you believe in – then I guess not saying what this mysterious treatment is counts as not really believing in it.

However, we are only at 5:48 so we might get an answer to any of this in the next minute.  Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc still – I am sure there will be more evidence than this in a few seconds.

Then Gladys opposes mandatory vaccination because of parental rights and they should decide what goes into their child.   Of course, that was the entire point of SB277 -the other parents have a right to decide whether virulent measles is something they want in their kids’ bodies or not.

Then  Gladys mentions that she thinks parental rights trump state rights as far as treatment goes.   First off, the state can choose what medical treatment you have to give your child  – it is usually filed under “medical neglect” and is generally one of those statutes.

Second, the state isn’t actually forcing you to do anything regarding your kids’ bodies – they are setting requirements on standards for their schools.    Choices having consequences is not the same thing as not having a choice unless the choice is “do x or jail.” – this is “do x or ME or homeschool.” so not force.  Those who can’t homeschool generally vaccinate their kids because they can’t afford measles or whatever either.

At 6:13 – she opposes 100% percent because she saw her child regress after a shot – I am sure there is more than this.  We’re almost at the end and someone who has done her research would surely know better than to commit the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy.

Yes, you do have an option.  Homeschool him – just like parents who have trouble with bullies or the curriculum have to do – now parents who homeschool because bullies? Those parents ARE being forced because it is objectively to do with their kids’ safety.

This? No.  This isn’t force.  Other children have rights too – the disease isn’t 100% safe or effective either – the vaccine is SAFER and vaccine injuries aren’t contagious.  Again, choices having consequences is not the same thing as not having a choice unless the choice is “do x or jail.” – this is “do x or ME or homeschool.” so not force.  Those who can’t homeschool generally vaccinate their kids because they can’t afford measles or whatever either.

So the score so far is:

1/20 videos – several errors and no more evidence than the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy with a strawman fallacy thrown in.  Force means I hold you down or hold a gun to your head – it does not mean “all children must wear a uniform to attend” or setting other conditions. Since it is only the logic we are concerned about here, the fact that uniforms aren’t injected is irrelevant.


Well, that’s alright.  Maybe Vaccine-Free Mom (Landee Crier) will have something better to say.  So we’re on B/20 videos.

So at 0:22 – y happened after x therefore y happened because of x.  The first-hand expert makes the first judgment call that it is a coincidence – this is topsy-turvy by the way. When you make  a claim that something caused X – it is up to you to prove it so shifting  the burden of proof fallacy is duly noted.

Okay, I am sorry about the asthma and lung problems.   “Really truly felt” – no amount of heartfelt belief makes something a fact- what I want is evidence.    Maybe if I check out her research?  Nope, no items found.

Still, we are only at 1:08 of a 7:22 video – maybe there will be more to come later on.

The argument by package insert makes an appearance at 1:13 – the package insert written by Big Pharma and regulated by the CDC – now you trust it?

However, the phrase she is referring to is no doubt the “adverse events” section – the bit where “adverse events are listed without regard to causality”  – you would think the difference between an adverse event, adverse reaction and side effect would be obvious with all that research – I don’t know why she hasn’t published the results of her experiment either.

Has she seen what tetanus a.k.a lockjaw can do?  But ER – good, yes.    Yes, of course.  No-one said that vaccines were 100% safe.

Researching more?  You can’t have – you didn’t research in the first place.   One would think you would have done this BEFORE in order to make an informed decision but never mind – did it include adverse events vs side effects vs adverse reactions?

And then shingles in her eye – so hold on.  If that was what happened with the weakened virus then why would you want to expose her to the full-strength virus?  Besides, this is breakthrough varicella – i.e. wild-type where the vaccine isn’t fully effective.  So you have 2 kids depending on herd immunity (which is a real thing – no matter how you FEEL about it) – these are precisely the kids we’re protecting with laws like SB277.

And as for the daughter? Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy.    So homeschool your kids if you’re that worried but your youngest and your daughter rely on herd immunity. As for “so many now”, um? So?  The antigen load is much lower now.

Of course, if there are the same problem ingredients that caused his reaction – he will get a medical exemption – nobody is asking you to set your kid on fire to keep others warm.  What we are actually trying to do is light a fire on a bitter winter’s night  before anyone dies of hypothermia – nobody expects the kid with his arm in a sling to help  gather twigs.

So N= 3 is a very small sample size. Wakefield’s 12-kid study had more than that and that was just a pilot study even done well – and no, Wakefield =/= Walker-Smith.   So they have a strong immune system and you’re worried about weakened, dead or pieces of pathogens?  Again, contradictory here.

As for the “I feel like they would be able to recover.”?    Umm…this is Bob and his army of fools:   Bob and his army of fools feel in their hearts of hearts that 1+1 = 20904.    Here is 1 thing, here is 1 other thing – there are 2 things here and not 20904 things because reality doesn’t “care” what you think.

They won’t get the gift of lifelong immunity from whooping cough.  Natural Immunity just means getting the disease.   Sure, there’s no guarantee – there is no guarantee that a drunk driver will get into an accident either.  Or a speeder.  I still think it is worth trying to encourage people to drive sober and at the speed limit.

Yes, vaccinated kids and unvaccinated kids will sometimes get these diseases. Sober drivers and drunk drivers will sometimes get into accidents – on the whole, I still think one of

Here’s the fact this video wants you to know: Of all the people who have contracted VPDs, none of them remember it killing them.   Here’s the fact the video doesn’t want you to know:  That’s because dead men tell no tales.

At 5:46 – regarding your own body?  Yeah, apart from the fact that Landee comprises herd immunity….

She is free to refuse vaccines since I don’t care what happens to her – she is an adult.   Her children, however, are not her and we have a responsibility to protect them even if that means from her.  To remind Landee, 2/3 of her kids depend on herd immunity.

Yes, you do have an option.  Homeschool  – just like parents who have trouble with bullies or the curriculum have to do – now parents who homeschool because bullies? Those parents ARE being forced because it is objectively to do with their kids’ safety.  This? No.  This isn’t force or dictatorship.

Other children have rights too – the disease isn’t 100% safe or effective either – the vaccine is SAFER and vaccine injuries aren’t contagious.  Again, choices having consequences is not the same thing as not having a choice unless the choice is “do x or jail.” – this is “do x or ME or homeschool.” so not force.  Those who can’t homeschool generally vaccinate their kids because they can’t afford measles or whatever either.

The state isn’t making that decision – the state is deciding requirements for attending school – another strawman fallacy. And it’s not belief – it is  fact. The flu shot, for instance, is not required under SB277 – so what is the point of bringing this up?   Flu vaccines are not like routine childhood vaccinations.

6:20-6:30 – NO.  First off, compounds are not elements.   Second, best avoid fish then and that comment is to do with the substance and not the route.     It isn’t mandated though, is it?   Read the law.   Choices having consequences =/= no choice.

Hep B can be spread via causal contact such as bites and flannels.  Landee is thinking of either HIV or Hepatitis C.  Through blood?  Toddlers BITE one another.    Yep, I do.    Since silent carriers and how chronic Hep B works. The pathogen can survive on one drop of blood for about a week.    You know those urban legends on how you get AIDS?  That is how you get Hep B.

Again, choices having consequences is not the same thing as not having a choice unless the choice is “do x or jail.” – this is “do x or ME or homeschool.” so not force.  Those who can’t homeschool generally vaccinate their kids because they can’t afford measles or whatever either.  If I want to maintain my choice then I will homeschool.  Problem solved.

Once more, choices now having consequences does not mean you no longer have a choice.

No scoring for this one because this is a bonus video.


Our next video is 2/20 from Jamie Melillo Juarez.

Cite for the 50% fatality chance before the age of 22 please.     Grand mal seizures is epilepy and is a co-morbid and is not autism per se.   Still need a cite for that  50% fatality from the diagnosis of autism please.   OCD is also a co-morbid – still need a cite for that 50% fatality from autism.

Mouth-noises are clearly the most important thing ever – except wait, they’re not.   And that isn’t autism per se, either. Still waiting for that cite.     In the meantime, did you consider AAC?  Does he really suffer from a lack of ability to talk or does Jamie suffer from his lack of ability to talk?

Ah, it all came from vaccine injury so you must have more evidence than Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, right?     6 vaccines just shy of his two year old birthday and then had 102 fever and seizures and then autism.  Febrile seizures or unprovoked seizures?  If fear of a seizure from a vaccine is a reason not to vaccinate then why is the fear of seizure from a disease (far more likely) not a reason to vaccinate?   As for being condemned  to live a life of discrimination – that is the fault of people doing the discriminating.

“People staring at him because he’s stuck in a wheelchair.”  No, people are staring at him because they are staring at him.  The wheelchair is just the excuse they come up with when you ask why they are staring.

Thousands of seizures.  That is called epilepsy.    Countless IEPs of people telling you  -this is a people-problem and a society-problem.  Not a vaccine problem.

2:02 – you must have more evidence than Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc – you’d best get on with it.

Hang on – I thought you said he had autism?   your son does not have autism – he has encelopathy.    It would be more likely with Natural Immunity – autism is not vaccine injury.   It was wrong when you were 23 – it is still wrong now.   Argument by repetition fallacy duly noted.

So a vaccine-injury that isn’t actually one (autism) that your child doesn’t actually have (he has encelaopathy) doesn’t qualify for NVICP  – I am not sure why this is supposed to be a problem.  It is not national free money court.

So hang on:

You’re still fighting to get the real diagnosis? Or he already has it?  Or it is autism?  Which of those is it?  Argument by repetition duly noted.

Argumentum ad Miscorderiam at 3:20 and the video finishes with another appeal to emotion and an argument by repetition.  And the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy is still just that.

Scoring:  I have now watched 2/20 videos for my assignment from the other disqus commenter.    And I still do not believe vaccines cause autism.


The next video I’m going to watch is TheHoneyRini – Vaccine Injury and Autism – I am sure these are two seperate things.   We start off with false balance.    Okay, twins were diagnosed with autism at 0:33 in.  Still got the rest of the video to go though and then autoimmune issues.   Is there proof that this actually was the cause?

I wonder what doctors she saw?  Because if that’s what the weakened virus does to them (except it didn’t because UNDERLYING), I don’t want them exposed to the full disease – herd immunity is what they need.

Of course there is no debate – they’re not safe for everyone. That’s why MEDICAL EXEMPTIONS exist.   Yes, 83 cases.   Vaccine injury + autism being compensated is no t the same the thing as the vaccine injury being autism.   No.   Bailey Banks and Hannah Polling do not count.  Autistic features =/= autism.    PDD =/= autism.  Non-autistic developmental delay =/= Autism.   Plus NVICP is lower burden of proof.

The rate has dropped as far as the immune system is concerned so we should see LESS  damage if this is the case.  Get on with more evidence than Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc please – oh.  Whoops, the video has ended.

Scoring:  3/20 – I still don’t think that vaccines cause autism.  And the fallacies have been listed above for your perusal.


Next video I watch is Vaccine Injury: My Story   by Mandy Corbett.  Only 1:49.
Just argument by assertion, repetition and Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacies. An average of one fallacy per 30 seconds – that’s almost impressive in a really twisted kind of way.

So scoring: 4/20 videos watched and I still don’t think vaccines cause autism.


So time to watch my 5th video – so I have watched the aforementioned 4 up to this point (plus a bonus one).    I have chosen “Ana’s Montage:  Vaccine induced autism” for this one.

The video starts with some music – fair enough.    We start with a baby (@0:43) who is doing a thing called “facial referencing” rather than actually making eye contact.    Looks at person’s nose then looks at their eyebrows rather than their eyes.   One sign of autism detected at nine months – that is three months BEFORE the MMR.   Another shot of her at nine months looking at the camera rather than making eye contact.

However, let’s watch the rest of the video – I am sure there will be more evidence than the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy since we are only at 1:22 out of 4:05.   More music – nice tune, by the way.

Appeal to pity makes an appearance.  This is a logical fallacy and not valid evidence.  Recognise this for what it is – it as an appeal to emotion to deceive you about the facts of the matter.

Have you met Miscorderiam Malcolm from BAAOF’s club? Malcolm is a terribly unlucky chap – his dog and cat died today and they don’t need to buy that crib after all – which is a damn shame.   Any tragedy you care to name has happened to Malcolm and his family.

When  Malcolm tells you this and tries to use this to persuade you that 1+1 = 3 because you have to feel sorry for him therefore he’s right…this is an appeal to pity and designed to tug on your heartstrings because he has no actual proof that 1+1 = 3.    Yes, you should feel sorry for him but no, you should not accept feeling sorry for him as evidence of his claims.

Then we get onto 2:23 of 4:05 – didn’t know what was happening or why.  Okay, and then you found out and have more evidence than just Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc  which you will present in the next minute or so, right?

And that “I cannot explain it therefore I can explain it” is internally inconsistent – never mind applying actual formal logic to this.    The answer is “We don’t know.”  – it is that simple for the question posed at 3:01- 3:29.

Ah, good, the answers come loudly and clearly at 3:30 – this MUST mean there is more evidence than Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy.  3:40 – Appeal to anonymous authority does not count – WHO are these doctors?  WHERE is their published research?  I need more evidence than  y after x therefore y is because of x.

No-one denied that this happened to your baby, either.   Besides, when you assert something caused something else – it is your responsibility to prove it.  “Shifting the burden of proof fallacy” is duly noted.

Ah, because of her routine childhood immunizations? You had better get on with more evidence since we are at 3:46 of 4:05.    Nope, the credits roll at this point.

Score:  5/20 videos watched.  I still do not believe vaccines cause autism.  This is in fact evidence against the hypothesis since the child was showing signs of autism a whole three months before the blamed MMR.  Even if it wasn’t evidence against the hypothesis – this video would still not be evidence for it because “after” is not a synonym for “because of”.

Still, there are 15 more videos to get through so there is plenty of time for more evidence.


So let’s watch video 6/20 and I watch “My Son’s Testimony of Vaccine Injury and Regression Into Autism.”  An internal contradiction is spotted straight away before the video even begins  (at the 0:00 mark) – this appears to be a woman.    Still, the video is 7 minutes and 10 seconds long so maybe the son will make an appearance later on and there is plenty of time for real evidence.

0:10 – a story about your son =/= your son’s testimony.   So he was walking around 11.5 months – okay.     1:27 – well, this lady still has most of her video to go through so I am sure she has more evidence than Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy.

It was gradual and you didn’t notice much – so how do you know you didn’t miss even more gradual  signs before that? Continually throwing tantrums at 18 months – what does this even mean?  6 tantrums a day? 12? 24?  50?

Appeal to Miscorderiam fallacy duly noted at 1:56. I am pretty sure the video is going to conclude with “I have no idea therefore I know it was the MMR.”        So you didn’t think to do something about the gut problem?  Up until this point, it sounded like Natalie was describing how horrible her life as a parent was.    The mention of her son not looking at her any more doesn’t actually tell me anything.    Still, we’re only at 2:10 so let’s carry on.

2:23 – 2:24 – did you rule out ear infections?   2:37 – So you didn’t spot autism before you knew what it was?  Your lack of knowledge prior couldn’t have had anything to do with the fact you didn’t spot it?

So your son had his MMR at 15 months and was diagnosed as autistic at three years old – so in other words, there was a gap of 21 months – so 1.75 yrs between MMR  #1 and the diagnosis of autism and the second MMR wouldn’t be given until 4-6.

3:22 – 3:23 – Did you think to offer sensory enrichment with the same texture as the walls?  3:24 – 3:26 – do you know for certain that he couldn’t communicate or did you decide that talking was the same as communication?  Did you ever try AAC?

3:27  – 3:40:  Argumentum ad miscorderiam makes an appearance again.   I don’t know if you tried AAC though or thought about autistic burnout.   What am I saying?  That would require Natalie to think about Natalie’s child who is not the same person as  Natalie.

3:41 – 3:49.   No, we know he was born that way.  Beliefs have nothing to do with it – the structure of the autistic brain is done in the second trimester which is before the third trimester with the Tdap vaccine.

3:50 – “Those words triggered me.  I am a mother – I know my child wasn’t born that way.”   Stop calling your child worse than a literal plague and then you get to use “triggered” as an excuse.   Stop it.  It is disrespectful to people with real triggers  and I don’t just mean veterans there – I mean, “I was triggered” is not an instant “I’m right” card.

Natalie Seneff researched everything, huh?  Let’s see:   No items found.     Oh well, we still have 14 videos to go through – I am sure one of those will have research.

For 4:00 to 4:10 – I am sure there is more  evidence than Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy.

Why should I believe Natalie over thousands of controlled studies?  Natalie  says it’s not true – they say it is true.  Unlike Natalie, however, they have evidence to prove themselves right.  The Cedillos said that it wasn’t true that their kid was born with autism too and yet her home video tapes show a kid who was showing signs of autism  before  the MMR.

Last time I checked, you gave birth to a baby and not a peer-reviewed journal.

If Natalie knows this  for a fact then she will be able to produce the evidence – comments are turned off on this video so I cannot ask for clarification.  She researched for 2 years straight? So where are the results of her experiment? What was the control group she used? How did she factually establish that it was a cause.

Strawman Fallacy makes an appearance at 4:59 – no responsible vaccine advocate denies that vaccines have risks – the point is that they are safer than the disease.  There is no reversing baby coffins because you didn’t get a chance to vaccinate either – so yeah, this is an appeal to emotion and two can play at that silly little game.   We’re at 5:10 – so not much time left to provide evidence.

“Don’t believe that stuff people are telling you except the stuff I am telling you.” REALLY?   And no, we do not need to do our own research – the person asserting the claim bears the onus of proving it.

5:53 – 5:54 – ah, the shill gambit. Poisoning the well fallacy duly noted. I am sure there is evidence for this.   Well, it is safe. And no, safe does not mean “no risks ever” – life has risks.

6:03 – yes, I do agree that you should know exactly what the ingredients are that you are placing into your children.   In fact, I think you should go further and know why they are there.

6:04 – 6:11 –  I know what’s in them.   I’m not sure what you want me to be scared of but your appeal to disgust fallacy is just that – a  logical fallacy.  (Meet Disgusted Donald from Bob’s Army of Fools.   Disgusted Donald thinks it is supremely icky that 1+1 = 2 and thinks it would be much less disgusting if 1+1 = 3.   It doesn’t  mater how disgusted Donald is about that answer.  1+1 STILL equals two.  Thank you, Donald.  You can go now.)

“If you have any questions – you can always go on facebook and send me a question” – nope, you make the claim on youtube – you back it up on youtube.

Oh, so you are actually autistic?  It is called genetics then.

7:02 – Natalie should be embarrassed about the “I will never back down”  comment because it just proves  pro-vaxxers right when we allege that they have decided to blame vaccines and damn the evidence!

Doesn’t matter how many times you tell us that vaccines cause autism – they don’t.  You have done your research so you know better than to commit a Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy.   This is an intentionally false statement a.k.a.  a lie.  Natalie is of course, entitled to be proud, unashamed and very loud about this lie but that is her affair.

For my part, I think it is disgusting to be proud to shout a lie from the rooftops.   After is not because of – how many times must I say this?  I could understand a pro-vax sheeple making this mistake but Natalie has done her research.

7:09 and the video ends.

Scoring:  I have watched 6/20 videos where the parents allege that vaccines caused their kids’ autism.    I still do not believe that vaccines cause autism.   This is the peripheral route by the way (emotion) when what I am looking for is evidence  – in other words, the central route a.k.a. logic.


Fine.  Maybe we’ll get something from “Max’s Regression into Autism after Vaccinations.”   This is video 7/20.  Let’s go through and see, shall we?  Let’s try it.

So we start with the video with Max aged  11 months and we have a baby boy taking what looks to be his first steps. 0:00 – 0:06 –  Max is doing facial referencing and not actually making eye contact –  first sign of autism detected.   This is a month before the MMR is given according to the regular schedule.

0:14 – Max at 12 months old looks at his sister’s cheek (facial referencing) rather than actually making eye contact – so we’ve had one sign of autism twice so far.     14 months old and still doing facial referencing at 0:31.

14 months – sensory issues re: fluorescent lights.  Sign of autism #2.

15 months – more facial referencing.   I have already been paying attention – he’s good at faking eye contact.  And eye contact is not the most important thing in the world in any case.

I cannot believe I am having this argument in 2016 but eye contact or lack thereof hurts precisely ZERO people – you need a much much much much better excuse than this to unleash a literal goddamn plague on your community which can and does kill people.

17 months – now, that was eye contact.  However, it was brief and fleeting – sign of autism right there.

This kid never made proper eye contact in the first place and the eye contact is about the parents.

Just because something happens immediately after (which it actually didn’t) … well, Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy again – after is not the same thing as because of.

26 months – he moves his head to the sound.   Clearly paying attention to you. Maybe the kid is avoiding eye contact because he’s old enough now to know that eye contact doesn’t help him listen.

Scoring:  I have now watched 7/20 videos.    This video claims that the regression happened immediately after at the end  except the video we saw shows otherwise.   So mutually exclusive claims there: Was it three months after or immediately after?  I posed this question to the youtuber for clarification.

There was a gap of three months between the vaccine and the regression.     I still do not believe vaccines cause autism – this video is also further evidence against the hypothesis since Max showed signs of autism before the MMR.


Still, we have a few more videos to go through still.   Maybe one of the videos from 8-20  will offer more evidence than after this because of this – I hope so, in any case.  So I type in “vaccine injury autism” into youtube and hope it suggests a video for me – which it does. It suggests Cynthia Stark’s “Autism: A vaccination injury” which is only 2 minutes and 24 seconds long.

We start with 0:02 and she complains about the fever and seizures and this is apparently “strongly” reacting to vaccines.  What does she think the full blown virulent pathogen will do to him if he reacts like that to weakened, dead, or pieces of pathogens.  That better be more than this for a vaccine injury.

This kid I actually believe was perfectly developing until his MMR at 12 months.  However, after is not because of.     A bunch of symptoms that happened after the MMR at 0:28 but I am still waiting for evidence of causality and not mere temporal connection.

“WAHH! My child doesn’t look me in the eye. ”   A dead child won’t look you in the eye either.   Stared at spinning fans? This is supposed to be a vaccine injury?  Vaccine injuries should actually be injurious and should actually be caused by vaccines.

Diagnosed with autism at 20 months after medical tests ruled out everything else.   Everything else being ruled out would include vaccine injury  being ruled out so this is  a kid who is not vaccine injured.

1:23 – 1:55 – Cynthia learnt wrong then.   Compounds are not elements.  As for alu….that is not a heavy metal.  “Toxins” are produced by living virulent things by definition.    If his impaired immune system cannot handle weakened, dead or pieces of pathogens then he is not going to handle the virulent pathogen that can actually fight back against his immune system.   Complaining about formaldehyde? REALLY?  There is no such thing as a toddler who can’t cope with formaldehyde.

And the video ends with the tired old nonsense about the CDC claiming smoking doesn’t cause cancer.   What actually happened in reality was that Big Tobacco claimed that the CDC said that and actors dressed up as doctors were used –  this is why you need to check the original source.

As for NVIC – not a reliable source.

Scoring:  I have now watched 8/20 videos that claim vaccines cause autism.   I still do not believe vaccines cause autism.   Indeed, the mother knows this kid isn’t vaccine injured since everything else has been ruled out.    I left a comment on the video to seek clarification regarding  complications.


Okay.  Time for video 9/2o which is  “Madison:  Before and After Vaccine Induced Autism”  This video is 8 minutes and 16 seconds long so I am sure that there will be time at some point in here to give us more evidence than the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

Oh look – Being a way too easy baby is one potential early sign of autism.  So 0-11 months and already showing signs of neurodivergence and she hasn’t had the much-maligned MMR yet.

1:43 – baby is doing facial referencing rather than eye contact – sign #2 of autism spotted.   I was promised evidence of vaccines causing autism.

2:14 – another pic of facial referencing rather than eye contact – this is still before the MMR as far as I can tell at this point.

2:28 – 2:34 – so the kid can handle a virulent pathogen.  She can handle dead or weakened or pieces then.  And more facial referencing rather than eye contact.

3:38 – Roseola is not a vaccine injury.

4:10 –   I am still waiting for more evidence than the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy.  Still, we’re only halfway through this video.

4:11 to 6:03 – now, I’m just annoyed.  Repetitive watching of the same episodes do not count as  vaccine injury.     I cannot ask for clarification due to the comment rules.

AUTISM ISN’T CONTAGIOUS.  Yes, we bloody know.  Measles is though.  Ignorance is…do you mean like this silly video where so far, I have been presented with nothing but a false cause fallacy?

“Many believe that vaccines are linked to autism, asthma SIDS and many others” So?  I don’t give a crap.  Many people believe that fairies live at the bottom of their garden too – they don’t.

7:19:  So?  After =/= because of.   I have already investigated – doesn’t matter what Madison’s mum believes either.  Vaccines are based on high-quality evidence and not something that lives at the bottom of your garden.

Scoring:  I have now watched 9/20 videos that claim vaccines cause autism and I still do not believe that vaccines cause autism.

Well…maybe video 10/20 will have more evidence than just the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy.

Let’s pick on Sonsdaughtersautism’s video entitled “Regressive autism/vaccine injury Brennan” and since this is a very short video at 0 minutes and 35 seconds. I am sure that  the Youtuber will appreciate the need to get to the point succinctly and will swiftly prove actual causality.

Nope.   Nothing.

Scoring:  I have now watched 10/20 videos and I still do not believe that vaccines cause autism.


So time for video 11/20 which is Mother Polley Tommey – “Vaccine Injury Destroys Lives so Listen to Parents, not Pediatricians”.  Let’s see – 4 minutes and 50 seconds should be enough.

0:36:   The seizure would be far more likely to happen from the much-adored Natural Immunity.

0:46 –  Yep.  Febrile seizures are very common.    By 7 years of age, 3-4% of children will have a febrile seizure.

1:14:  Appeal to pity.   Just because I feel sorry for you doesn’t mean you’re factually correct. I need actual evidence and something more than the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy.

1:55:  Autism is not a vaccine injury.  Ms. Polley  has done her research so she should know better than this.

4:10:  The video concludes giving me nothing more than the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy.


Videos 12-13 are much the same:  Nothing other than the Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Fallacy.

Scoring:  I have now watched 13/20 videos claiming that vaccines cause autism.   Not impressed by being told to read the package inserts regulated by the CDC and also that they are not to be trusted.  I still do not believe the claim that vaccines cause autism.