2 Inconvenient Studies

Vindication: From The Truth Campaign 1997 to McCullough 2025

Introduction

When The Truth Campaign printed its fourth issue in March 1997, we published words that have echoed for almost thirty years:

“Vaccination – one of the greatest medical frauds in history.”

That issue carried detailed essays by Catherine O’Driscoll, Patrick Rattigan ND, and myself showing that routine immunisation could induce encephalitis, auto-immune disease, and developmental regression. We wrote that “vaccines do not prevent disease or immunise, they sensitise… vaccines can cause encephalitis… and encephalitis has many diverse symptoms, ranging from acute to chronic.” (Whilst something of an overstatement then - as immunity is stimulated during vaccination - vaccines often fail to induce a level of immunity claimed by the manufacturers, and lead to a general greater morbidity than the populations who remain unvaccinated. They also carry a risk of serious harms and death as a potential consequence.)

---

Ethical and Legal Considerations

My views on vaccination remain fully consistent with the established ethics and laws that govern nursing, medicine, and all allied health professions.

The choice to vaccinate is a personal medical decision — not a political one, and it cannot be mandated.

Under the Mental Health Acts and the Mental Capacity Act, every individual who has the capacity to decide has the legal right to make that choice freely and to be fully informed before doing so.

It is unlawful to coerce, entice, threaten, or mandate any medical procedure, including vaccination.

At present, vaccination studies have not yet proved safety, and efficacy figures are often over-estimated.

For that reason, anyone considering vaccination must be honestly informed of these facts so they can exercise true informed consent — the central principle of ethical medicine.

Caveat: Always seek medical advice on any health intervention, including vaccination. My views are my own. My professional status remains unaffected. As a registered nurse, I continue to uphold the Professional Code of Conduct required of my profession. Some may regard that as contradictory, but I see it as an affirmation of integrity: adherence to evidence, ethics, and lawful consent.

For the record, I have never administered a single vaccine in my entire nursing career — only one or two tetanus-toxoid injections during my clinical training in the 1980s — and have always maintained that true informed consent is the cornerstone of ethical medical practice.

---

In The Truth Campaign we warned that most vaccine injury “does not present as an acute reaction and goes unrecognised or mis-diagnosed as a diverse array of other problems because it is brain damage.” That statement alone, dismissed as alarmist in 1997, is now almost verbatim in modern scientific language in the 2025. See McCullough P A et al., Determinants of Autism Spectrum Disorder (2025) DOI 10.5281/zenodo.17451259

McCullough and colleagues write that:

“The totality of evidence supports a multifactorial model of ASD in which genetic predisposition, neuro-immune biology, environmental toxicants, perinatal stressors, and iatrogenic exposures intersect to produce the phenotype of a post-encephalitic state.”

They conclude that “combination and early-timed routine childhood vaccination constitutes the most significant modifiable risk factor for ASD.”

See The Highwire: Episode 448: TIDAL WAVE OF TRUTH

---

The parallels between 1997 and 2025

• The Truth Campaign said: “Vaccines disarm and unbalance the immune system.”
  McCullough et al. describe: “Antigen, preservative, and adjuvant induced mitochondrial and neuro-immune dysfunction.”

• The Truth Campaign said: “Vaccination causes brain palsy and reduces our ability to think laterally.”
  McCullough confirms: “Aluminium adjuvants trigger chronic neuro-inflammation, oxidative stress, and mitochondrial dysfunction.”

• The Truth Campaign said: “The introduction of routine immunisations coincides with an ever-alarming increase of degenerative disease.”
  McCullough records a 32 000 percent rise in autism since 1970, mirroring the expansion of the childhood vaccine schedule.

The mechanism we proposed – immune overload leading to a post-encephalitic state – is now fully described in molecular terms as mitochondrial collapse, oxidative stress, and inflammatory brain injury.

---

The human evidence

In 1997 we published case histories of regression following vaccination. We noted that animals and humans displayed the same neurological and behavioural syndromes. McCullough’s review repeats those patterns in its section “Case Reports and Case Series of Vaccine-Triggered ASD.” It cites Kanner’s 1943 observation of regression after smallpox vaccination, Fudenberg’s 1996 report of fifteen children developing autism within a week of MMR, and the Poling (2006) case in which a healthy 19-month-old girl suffered mitochondrial failure and developmental collapse after multiple vaccines.

Each description fits what we called “post-vaccine encephalitic regression” – the loss of language, sociability, and cognition following fever and convulsion.

---

The numbers

When The Truth Campaign addressed the issue, autism was roughly one in 500. The CDC now admits one in 31. McCullough’s Figure 1 plots vaccine doses per child against autism prevalence – both curves climbing in exact parallel. We forecast that such a pattern would emerge once mass infant immunisation became routine.

---

The methodological flaws

We wrote in 1997 that: “The vaccine manufacturer’s greatest defence is the delayed reaction. You can’t prove it’s vaccine damage, and that’s where the vaccine companies have the upper hand.”

McCullough’s report states the same in updated language: “Neutral association papers were undermined by absence of a genuinely unvaccinated control group—with partial or unverified immunisation even among those classified as unvaccinated.” The core problem has never changed: studies built on incomplete data and no inert placebo.

---

The suppressed continuum

The recent Henry Ford Health System child-health study, completed in 2020 and revealed during the September 2025 Senate hearings, appears to corroborate McCullough’s conclusions. It reportedly found higher rates of asthma, auto-immune disease, and neuro-developmental disorders in vaccinated children. The lead author allegedly called it “a good study” but too sensitive to publish, fearing career destruction. The institution later dismissed it as flawed. It is precisely the kind of suppression we described in 1997 when we wrote: “Doctors and nurses have no idea what they are really involved in… the vaccine companies have everything to lose by the free availability of this information.”

See the documentary An Inconvenient Study by the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) - which is entirely funded by voluntary donors. In it, is shown that no vaccine on the US childhood schedule has ever been tested with an inert placebo; safety is assumed, not demonstrated.

McCullough concludes: “No study has evaluated the safety of the entire cumulative paediatric vaccine schedule for neuro-developmental outcomes.”

The study was conducted well and showed compelling evidence that vaccinated children have a higher morbidity than unvaccinated children. Simply many more chronic illnesses than the control group. The study was conducted by a highly experienced team, the lead author of which stated that he considered it a thorough and compelling study, but refused to publish because it would end his career. His organisation - the Henry Ford Health System have since claimed the paper was not published due to methodological flaws. Other commentators such as McCullough have disagreed that the paper is fatally flawed. It remains a significant paper that also vindicates those who have been calling for such a study for decades.

---

The lineage of dissent

The McCullough paper may seem new, but the critique is as old as vaccination itself. Nineteenth-century humanitarians such as Alfred Russel Wallace, the Anti-Vaccination League, and early antivivisectionists all warned of untested medical compulsion. In the 1980s and 1990s, Vernon Coleman’s Plan 2000 network revived that debate, linking animal-rights activists, natural-health researchers, and medical whistle-blowers. The Truth Campaign emerged from that lineage, documenting data long before internet-based public platforms existed.

By 1993 we were already collating research on aluminium adjuvants, thimerosal toxicity, and immune-mediated brain injury. What McCullough et al. have now formalised in academic language is what we and others were observing and recording three decades earlier.

---

Why this matters

Public-health agencies continue to chant “safe and effective,” citing studies that compare one vaccine to another instead of to a neutral placebo. Yet the McCullough review concedes that the cumulative safety of the full schedule has never been tested. Until such work is performed, safety remains an assumption, not a proven fact.

This is not about triumph or vindictive satisfaction. It is about history catching up with truth. In 1997 we asked only for transparency, proper study design, and informed consent. Instead, independent voices were smeared, while the predicted epidemic of neurological disorders became a statistical reality.

Today, with autism, autoimmune disease, and chronic illness at unprecedented levels, the data finally match what those early warnings foresaw. The pattern is consistent, the mechanisms are understood, and the moral responsibility can no longer be deferred.

Nearly three decades after The Truth Campaign was dismissed as fringe, the same arguments now appear in the scientific record under institutional banners. That is vindication enough.