Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

This isn't a debate. This is a confession. Australian Senator Alex Antic just asked a regulator a simple question: How many gold-standard, placebo-controlled trials are behind the childhood vaccine schedule? The answer will leave you speechless. They admitted they can't provide a number. The justification? It's "ethically questionable" to... test vaccines against a true placebo once a treatment is "established." Let's be clear: They are injecting millions of our children with products that have never been tested against an inert saline placebo in long-term trials. Their defense is that the science is "contextual" and the "real-world" evidence is enough. But without that gold-standard comparison, how can we ever truly know the long-term safety profile? How can we quantify the risk vs. benefit without the most basic scientific benchmark? They've replaced the cornerstone of evidence-based medicine—the placebo-controlled trial—with an appeal to authority and decades of "we just know it works." This is a staggering admission that the entire foundation of childhood vaccination relies on a different, lower standard of proof than what is demanded for every other medicine. This isn't conspiracy. This is what they said, under oath. Demand better science.show more

Camus

460,714 subscribers

223,624 views • 8 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Health & Wellness

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

The foundational narrative of vaccine safety is crumbling under the weight of a single, inconvenient question: "Where are the placebo-controlled trials?" A recent Australian Senate hearing exposed the shocking truth that the public health establishment has worked tirelessly to conceal. When asked how many placebo-controlled studies support the childhood vaccine schedule, regulators were left stammering, unable to provide a single example. Their defense? A convoluted, ethically-based excuse: once a vaccine is on the market, it is considered "unethical" to test new ones against a true saline placebo. Why? Because you would be "denying" children an "established" effective product. But this is a circular logic trap of the highest order. As revealed in the powerful new documentary An Inconvenient Study, this creates a perpetual "bait-and-switch." New vaccines are only tested against older vaccines, which themselves were never tested against a true placebo. The entire schedule is built upon a house of cards, with each new product leaning on the safety assumption of a prior, equally un-validated one. The film brilliantly illustrates this with the "Whiskey Study" analogy: - To test if whiskey causes car accidents, the gold standard is a trial against water. - The vaccine industry's method? Test whiskey against vodka, and when both groups crash, declare whiskey "safe" because it was no worse than vodka. They have never done the water test. This is the "gold standard" that isn't. This is the "mountain of science" with a gaping, placebo-shaped hole at its core. For decades, the public has been told a story of absolute safety and rigorous testing. Now, as officials struggle to answer basic scientific questions, that story is being exposed as a carefully constructed myth. The questions are finally being asked. The answers, or the stunning lack thereof, are changing everything.

The foundational narrative of vaccine safety is crumbling under the weight of a single, inconvenient question: "Where are the placebo-controlled trials?" A recent Australian Senate hearing exposed the shocking truth that the public health establishment has worked tirelessly to conceal. When asked how many placebo-controlled studies support the childhood vaccine schedule, regulators were left stammering, unable to provide a single example. Their defense? A convoluted, ethically-based excuse: once a vaccine is on the market, it is considered "unethical" to test new ones against a true saline placebo. Why? Because you would be "denying" children an "established" effective product. But this is a circular logic trap of the highest order. As revealed in the powerful new documentary An Inconvenient Study, this creates a perpetual "bait-and-switch." New vaccines are only tested against older vaccines, which themselves were never tested against a true placebo. The entire schedule is built upon a house of cards, with each new product leaning on the safety assumption of a prior, equally un-validated one. The film brilliantly illustrates this with the "Whiskey Study" analogy: - To test if whiskey causes car accidents, the gold standard is a trial against water. - The vaccine industry's method? Test whiskey against vodka, and when both groups crash, declare whiskey "safe" because it was no worse than vodka. They have never done the water test. This is the "gold standard" that isn't. This is the "mountain of science" with a gaping, placebo-shaped hole at its core. For decades, the public has been told a story of absolute safety and rigorous testing. Now, as officials struggle to answer basic scientific questions, that story is being exposed as a carefully constructed myth. The questions are finally being asked. The answers, or the stunning lack thereof, are changing everything.

Camus

14,485 views • 9 months ago

"Never a Placebo-Controlled Group": How Our Children's Vaccines Were Licensed on a Foundation of Flimsy Science. We are told the vaccine schedule is the most tested and safest in medical history. But what if that claim collapses under the weight of the actual data? Attorney Aaron Siri delivers a stunning fact that should halt every parent and citizen in their tracks: "Almost all childhood vaccines were licensed based on trials in which safety was reviewed for days or weeks after injection, underpowered, not enough kids, and there was never a placebo-controlled group for a single of the routine childhood vaccines injected into children, not one of them." Let that sink in. Not one. The gold standard of scientific research—the placebo-controlled trial—was abandoned for the entire routine childhood vaccine schedule. Why the Double Standard? For prescription drugs, companies run years-long, placebo-controlled trials. Why? Not ethics—economics. They are liable for damages. A harmful drug means financial ruin. For vaccines, the incentive is perversely flipped. With liability removed, the corporate boardroom's bottom-line calculus is simple: do the absolute minimum required for licensure. The Hep B Example is Jaw-Dropping Proof. The Combovax HB vaccine, given to babies on their first day of life, was licensed based on a "trial" that: - Monitored safety for just FIVE DAYS. - Included only 147 children. - Had NO control group whatsoever. This isn't just inadequate; it's scientifically indefensible. The recent COVID vaccine trials, often criticized as rushed, were vastly more comprehensive than this. The Root Cause? The Liability Shield. There is no doubt: if vaccine manufacturers were financially liable for injuries, the safety science would be exhaustive. They would never risk their profits on such flimsy data. The absence of liability created an absence of scientific rigor. This isn't conspiracy. It's cold, hard corporate calculus, and our children are the ones living in the experiment. It's long past time to demand the same gold-standard safety proof for vaccines that we demand for every pill we swallow.

"Never a Placebo-Controlled Group": How Our Children's Vaccines Were Licensed on a Foundation of Flimsy Science. We are told the vaccine schedule is the most tested and safest in medical history. But what if that claim collapses under the weight of the actual data? Attorney Aaron Siri delivers a stunning fact that should halt every parent and citizen in their tracks: "Almost all childhood vaccines were licensed based on trials in which safety was reviewed for days or weeks after injection, underpowered, not enough kids, and there was never a placebo-controlled group for a single of the routine childhood vaccines injected into children, not one of them." Let that sink in. Not one. The gold standard of scientific research—the placebo-controlled trial—was abandoned for the entire routine childhood vaccine schedule. Why the Double Standard? For prescription drugs, companies run years-long, placebo-controlled trials. Why? Not ethics—economics. They are liable for damages. A harmful drug means financial ruin. For vaccines, the incentive is perversely flipped. With liability removed, the corporate boardroom's bottom-line calculus is simple: do the absolute minimum required for licensure. The Hep B Example is Jaw-Dropping Proof. The Combovax HB vaccine, given to babies on their first day of life, was licensed based on a "trial" that: - Monitored safety for just FIVE DAYS. - Included only 147 children. - Had NO control group whatsoever. This isn't just inadequate; it's scientifically indefensible. The recent COVID vaccine trials, often criticized as rushed, were vastly more comprehensive than this. The Root Cause? The Liability Shield. There is no doubt: if vaccine manufacturers were financially liable for injuries, the safety science would be exhaustive. They would never risk their profits on such flimsy data. The absence of liability created an absence of scientific rigor. This isn't conspiracy. It's cold, hard corporate calculus, and our children are the ones living in the experiment. It's long past time to demand the same gold-standard safety proof for vaccines that we demand for every pill we swallow.

Camus

38,809 views • 9 months ago

There are no double-blind, placebo-based randomized controlled trials for the safety of childhood vaccines. They don't exist because the people responsible for them decided not to do them. I know this because in 2017 Robert F. Kennedy Jr and I sat down at the NIH with Francis Collins and Tony Fauci and asked them. We said, we can't find a single placebo-based safety trial for any vaccine on the childhood schedule. Are you doing them, or are we just not seeing them? They told us they don't do those trials because they believe it is unethical to withhold what they consider a beneficial product from a control group. That is the logic. The faith that the product is so valuable that studying it rigorously would be unfair to the people in the trial not getting it. So they never study it. Every vaccine given to every child in America rests on an assumption of safety and nothing more. Marcello Foa

There are no double-blind, placebo-based randomized controlled trials for the safety of childhood vaccines. They don't exist because the people responsible for them decided not to do them. I know this because in 2017 Robert F. Kennedy Jr and I sat down at the NIH with Francis Collins and Tony Fauci and asked them. We said, we can't find a single placebo-based safety trial for any vaccine on the childhood schedule. Are you doing them, or are we just not seeing them? They told us they don't do those trials because they believe it is unethical to withhold what they consider a beneficial product from a control group. That is the logic. The faith that the product is so valuable that studying it rigorously would be unfair to the people in the trial not getting it. So they never study it. Every vaccine given to every child in America rests on an assumption of safety and nothing more. Marcello Foa

Del Bigtree

117,233 views • 1 month ago

🚨 Debunking Grok: Did you know the "gold standard" placebo-controlled trial for Merck's Varivax chickenpox vaccine wasn't a real placebo at all? The package insert calls it a "placebo,” but digging into the actual study documents (linked on the FDA site) reveals that the control group received an injection with ~45mg/mL of neomycin, a potent antibiotic that can cause severe reactions even when applied topically, let alone when injected intramuscularly. Only 956 kids total (465 "placebo") were monitored just weeks for safety. That is too short to detect rare events, and they rigged the control to hide reactions by not using a true placebo and instead using an antibiotic. This is how they "prove" safety. True inert saline placebo? Never done. Full clip from Del Bigtree & Aaron Siri breaking it down 👇 What do YOU think? Is this real science? ⬇️

🚨 Debunking Grok: Did you know the "gold standard" placebo-controlled trial for Merck's Varivax chickenpox vaccine wasn't a real placebo at all? The package insert calls it a "placebo,” but digging into the actual study documents (linked on the FDA site) reveals that the control group received an injection with ~45mg/mL of neomycin, a potent antibiotic that can cause severe reactions even when applied topically, let alone when injected intramuscularly. Only 956 kids total (465 "placebo") were monitored just weeks for safety. That is too short to detect rare events, and they rigged the control to hide reactions by not using a true placebo and instead using an antibiotic. This is how they "prove" safety. True inert saline placebo? Never done. Full clip from Del Bigtree & Aaron Siri breaking it down 👇 What do YOU think? Is this real science? ⬇️

The HighWire

14,363 views • 8 months ago

The Unsettling Truth: Not One Childhood Vaccine Was Tested Against a True Placebo In a Senate hearing, attorney Aaron Siri was asked by Sen. Ron Johnson to clarify the research behind childhood vaccines. His answer was staggering. Siri submitted a 66-page document to the Senate citing FDA clinical trial data. His finding? NOT A SINGLE routine childhood vaccine on the current CDC schedule was licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial where the control group received an inert saline placebo. The "control" groups were given another vaccine—which itself was not tested against a true placebo. This circular referencing means the entire schedule lacks a foundational gold-standard safety benchmark. Why does this matter? Because we are in the midst of a silent pandemic. A pandemic of chronic disease. Since the early 1980s, chronic illness in American children has skyrocketed from under 13% to over 50%. Most of these diseases—asthma, allergies, autoimmune disorders—are forms of immune system dysregulation. What has changed in that same timeframe? The childhood vaccine schedule. In 1986, when vaccine manufacturers were granted legal immunity, the schedule was 3 injections. Today, a child following the full CDC schedule receives 29 injections by their first birthday, including in utero. Every one of those vaccines was licensed by a company that knew it would not be liable for any injuries. In the face of a catastrophic rise in childhood chronic illness, is it not the most basic duty of public health to honestly and transparently investigate all environmental insults, including the exponential increase in vaccines? This isn't anti-vax. It's pro-science. It's a demand for the rigorous safety science our children deserve.

The Unsettling Truth: Not One Childhood Vaccine Was Tested Against a True Placebo In a Senate hearing, attorney Aaron Siri was asked by Sen. Ron Johnson to clarify the research behind childhood vaccines. His answer was staggering. Siri submitted a 66-page document to the Senate citing FDA clinical trial data. His finding? NOT A SINGLE routine childhood vaccine on the current CDC schedule was licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial where the control group received an inert saline placebo. The "control" groups were given another vaccine—which itself was not tested against a true placebo. This circular referencing means the entire schedule lacks a foundational gold-standard safety benchmark. Why does this matter? Because we are in the midst of a silent pandemic. A pandemic of chronic disease. Since the early 1980s, chronic illness in American children has skyrocketed from under 13% to over 50%. Most of these diseases—asthma, allergies, autoimmune disorders—are forms of immune system dysregulation. What has changed in that same timeframe? The childhood vaccine schedule. In 1986, when vaccine manufacturers were granted legal immunity, the schedule was 3 injections. Today, a child following the full CDC schedule receives 29 injections by their first birthday, including in utero. Every one of those vaccines was licensed by a company that knew it would not be liable for any injuries. In the face of a catastrophic rise in childhood chronic illness, is it not the most basic duty of public health to honestly and transparently investigate all environmental insults, including the exponential increase in vaccines? This isn't anti-vax. It's pro-science. It's a demand for the rigorous safety science our children deserve.

Camus

96,137 views • 11 months ago

I caught influencer doctor, Dr. Rubin, lying to the public. Shocker. First lie: Jim O’Neill wasn’t confirmed by the senate. The Truth: He was confirmed on 6/5/2025 by the senate. Second lie: Every vaccine has been tested in randomized placebo controlled trials. The Truth: No, they haven’t. Dr. Rubin even explains this in his video. They are often tested against other vaccines because it would be “unethical” to not give a child a vaccine. A true placebo would be a saline solution. What these “experts” need to ask themselves is why is it ethical to vaccinate an entire population without knowing the full safety profiles of these products? I learned how important placebo trials are in seventh grade. Do they not teach that anymore?

I caught influencer doctor, Dr. Rubin, lying to the public. Shocker. First lie: Jim O’Neill wasn’t confirmed by the senate. The Truth: He was confirmed on 6/5/2025 by the senate. Second lie: Every vaccine has been tested in randomized placebo controlled trials. The Truth: No, they haven’t. Dr. Rubin even explains this in his video. They are often tested against other vaccines because it would be “unethical” to not give a child a vaccine. A true placebo would be a saline solution. What these “experts” need to ask themselves is why is it ethical to vaccinate an entire population without knowing the full safety profiles of these products? I learned how important placebo trials are in seventh grade. Do they not teach that anymore?

Anna Matson

17,906 views • 7 months ago

The foundational science we're told to "trust" is built on a semantic shell game. A deep dive into vaccine trial methodology reveals a disturbing pattern of linguistic trickery that protects a status quo at the expense of public health. As researcher Toby Rogers points out, the core of the issue lies in three critically misused terms: 1. "Inert Ingredients": We're told additives like aluminum are "inert." But a 2014 study confirms what common sense suggests: both aluminum and ethylmercury are known neurotoxicants. They are not inert. They are not safe. The language is designed to deceive. 2. "Placebo": In any honest vaccine trial, the placebo should be a saline solution. But as Rogers highlights, the FDA and scientific journals have no regulations on what can be in a placebo. Manufacturers can—and do—use toxic adjuvants like aluminum in the control shot and still legally call it a "placebo." In approximately 2/3 of trials, they don't even disclose what's in it. 3. "Randomized Control Trial": The gold standard should be a double-blind study comparing a vaccinated group to a completely unvaccinated (saline placebo) group. This almost never happens. Instead, "control" groups are given older vaccines or shots full of aluminum. They actively avoid the one comparison that would reveal true harm: vaxxed vs. truly unvaxxed. Why? Because, as attorney Aaron Siri's analysis of 1,704 trials shows, such a study would undeniably show harms. The entire system is engineered to avoid that comparison. The most Orwellian proof? On page 9 of his official statement, a prominent pro-status-quo doctor claims that proper vaccinated vs. unvaccinated studies are "especially prone to bias" and "unethical." Think about that. They claim the only study that could provide a clear answer is both scientifically invalid and too dangerous to perform. It's a perfect, unassailable Catch-22. This isn't science. This is a carefully constructed fortress of logical fallacies and linguistic fraud. And as Toby Rogers concludes, this is the precise reason we are facing an unprecedented epidemic of autism and chronic disease. The evidence has been hidden in plain sight, buried under corrupted definitions.

The foundational science we're told to "trust" is built on a semantic shell game. A deep dive into vaccine trial methodology reveals a disturbing pattern of linguistic trickery that protects a status quo at the expense of public health. As researcher Toby Rogers points out, the core of the issue lies in three critically misused terms: 1. "Inert Ingredients": We're told additives like aluminum are "inert." But a 2014 study confirms what common sense suggests: both aluminum and ethylmercury are known neurotoxicants. They are not inert. They are not safe. The language is designed to deceive. 2. "Placebo": In any honest vaccine trial, the placebo should be a saline solution. But as Rogers highlights, the FDA and scientific journals have no regulations on what can be in a placebo. Manufacturers can—and do—use toxic adjuvants like aluminum in the control shot and still legally call it a "placebo." In approximately 2/3 of trials, they don't even disclose what's in it. 3. "Randomized Control Trial": The gold standard should be a double-blind study comparing a vaccinated group to a completely unvaccinated (saline placebo) group. This almost never happens. Instead, "control" groups are given older vaccines or shots full of aluminum. They actively avoid the one comparison that would reveal true harm: vaxxed vs. truly unvaxxed. Why? Because, as attorney Aaron Siri's analysis of 1,704 trials shows, such a study would undeniably show harms. The entire system is engineered to avoid that comparison. The most Orwellian proof? On page 9 of his official statement, a prominent pro-status-quo doctor claims that proper vaccinated vs. unvaccinated studies are "especially prone to bias" and "unethical." Think about that. They claim the only study that could provide a clear answer is both scientifically invalid and too dangerous to perform. It's a perfect, unassailable Catch-22. This isn't science. This is a carefully constructed fortress of logical fallacies and linguistic fraud. And as Toby Rogers concludes, this is the precise reason we are facing an unprecedented epidemic of autism and chronic disease. The evidence has been hidden in plain sight, buried under corrupted definitions.

Camus

143,760 views • 10 months ago

“Unless you're comparing a vaccine against saline, how can you say it’s safe?” Dr. Sherri Tenpenny just exposed Pharma’s “safe and effective” narrative as a complete sham. “There has never been—on any one of the vaccines that are currently given—a truly placebo-controlled trial where in one set of children they were given the new vaccine, and then the other set of children it was a true saline placebo.” “All of the vaccine trials are a vaccine compared to another vaccine,” Alex Clark: “How long were the majority of the safety trials done on the vaccines on the childhood schedule?” Dr. Tenpenny: “The average length of time is probably somewhere between 15 and 30 days.” “It’s been as short as 4 days.” “When they brought the first hepatitis B vaccine to market, they followed to see if there were any side effects for 5 days.” “The second hepatitis B vaccine that came to market, they followed side effects for 4 days.” “That is not a safety trial.” “It can take months to years to develop autoimmune diseases, neurological complications, other types of things like [gastrointestinal] disorders.” “Encephalitis can start right away, but it can be slow brewing for a long period of time.” Dr Sherri Tenpenny

“Unless you're comparing a vaccine against saline, how can you say it’s safe?” Dr. Sherri Tenpenny just exposed Pharma’s “safe and effective” narrative as a complete sham. “There has never been—on any one of the vaccines that are currently given—a truly placebo-controlled trial where in one set of children they were given the new vaccine, and then the other set of children it was a true saline placebo.” “All of the vaccine trials are a vaccine compared to another vaccine,” Alex Clark: “How long were the majority of the safety trials done on the vaccines on the childhood schedule?” Dr. Tenpenny: “The average length of time is probably somewhere between 15 and 30 days.” “It’s been as short as 4 days.” “When they brought the first hepatitis B vaccine to market, they followed to see if there were any side effects for 5 days.” “The second hepatitis B vaccine that came to market, they followed side effects for 4 days.” “That is not a safety trial.” “It can take months to years to develop autoimmune diseases, neurological complications, other types of things like [gastrointestinal] disorders.” “Encephalitis can start right away, but it can be slow brewing for a long period of time.” Dr Sherri Tenpenny

Children’s Health Defense

49,833 views • 7 months ago

🚨 Aaron Siri just blew the lid off the biggest vaccine lie ever. The claim of “661 placebo-controlled trials” for childhood vaccines? A COMPLETE FRAUD. ➡️ 567 trials had NOTHING to do with childhood vaccines. ➡️ 70 did not involve healthy children. ➡️ 21 used foreign or irrelevant shots. ➡️ The 3 left? None used an actual inert placebo. That leaves ZERO true placebo trials for vaccines on the CDC schedule. The science they promised us? Doesn’t exist.

🚨 Aaron Siri just blew the lid off the biggest vaccine lie ever. The claim of “661 placebo-controlled trials” for childhood vaccines? A COMPLETE FRAUD. ➡️ 567 trials had NOTHING to do with childhood vaccines. ➡️ 70 did not involve healthy children. ➡️ 21 used foreign or irrelevant shots. ➡️ The 3 left? None used an actual inert placebo. That leaves ZERO true placebo trials for vaccines on the CDC schedule. The science they promised us? Doesn’t exist.

Children’s Health Defense

228,266 views • 10 months ago

Vaccine Safety "Pyramid Scheme" Exposed: The Shocking Truth They Never Wanted You to See In an amazing presentation, attorney Aaron Siri drops a truth bomb that should be heard by every parent, doctor, and policymaker. He systematically dismantles the most common defense of the childhood vaccine schedule: the claim that they were tested against saline placebos. Siri reveals a chart, built from years of work and sourced directly from FDA documents, that tracks the clinical trials for every single routine injected childhood vaccine. The categorical finding? Not one. Not a single one. Here is the stunning reality: - No Saline Placebos: There has NEVER been a routine injected childhood vaccine licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial using an inert saline solution. - The "Pyramid Scheme" of Safety: Instead, new vaccines are tested against older vaccines, which were themselves tested against even older ones. This creates a "daisy chain" where safety is only ever compared to another product that also lacked a true safety baseline. - The Proof is in the FDA's Own Documents: The source for this chart is the FDA's website. As Siri states, "If you don't agree with this information... you're arguing with the FDA." Some of the most shocking examples: - Hepatitis B: The first vaccines for newborns were licensed with no control group at all. - PCV (Pneumococcal): The original Prevnar 7 was tested against another experimental vaccine—a practice Siri compares to testing a new cancer drug against another unproven cancer drug. - Polio (IPOL): The modern IPV vaccine, a completely different technology from the Salk vaccine, was licensed with a safety review of just three days and no control group. - MMR: The clinical trials for the current MMR II, which uses human fetal cell lines, used no control group. - HPV (Gardasil): The "placebo" used in trials for thousands of young girls was not saline. It often contained the aluminum adjuvant—a known neurotoxin with no therapeutic benefit—effectively rigging the trial to mask true adverse event rates. This rigged system allows serious adverse event rates in healthy children to creep into the 7%, 8%, and even 9% range in clinical trials. Because the control group gets a similarly reactive shot, the numbers appear "similar" and are deemed "safe," hiding the true risk. The bottom line: The entire childhood vaccine schedule rests on a foundation that has never been properly tested for safety against an inert placebo. The baseline safety profile for these products is, and has always been, unknown. This isn't an opinion. It's a fact documented by the FDA itself. If this doesn't make you question everything, what will?

Camus

473,721 views • 8 months ago

🚨URGENT- GROK WRONG ON VACCINES Attorney Aaron Siri systematically destroys Grok's assessments that saline placebos were used in pre-licensure trials for the childhood vaccine schedule. Grok was asked, “What vaccines on the CDC-recommended childhood vaccine schedule were tested against a saline placebo?” Grok answered…INCORRECTLY. Its claims of placebos were false. Aaron Siri: "Categorically, there has never been a routine injected childhood vaccine that was licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial. Nor were any control vaccines used for those trials anywhere down the chain licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial." Del and Aaron walk through each one meticulously, disproving Grok. This is a dangerous path, as those relying on Grok to be truthful are being misinformed on vaccine safety. Share this video. Tag Elon Musk. If xAI is to ever be trusted, we MUST ensure it is using good data to come to its determinations. As of now? It is not. SHARE. TAG. Elon Musk The link to the full chart in the comments below.

🚨URGENT- GROK WRONG ON VACCINES Attorney Aaron Siri systematically destroys Grok's assessments that saline placebos were used in pre-licensure trials for the childhood vaccine schedule. Grok was asked, “What vaccines on the CDC-recommended childhood vaccine schedule were tested against a saline placebo?” Grok answered…INCORRECTLY. Its claims of placebos were false. Aaron Siri: "Categorically, there has never been a routine injected childhood vaccine that was licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial. Nor were any control vaccines used for those trials anywhere down the chain licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial." Del and Aaron walk through each one meticulously, disproving Grok. This is a dangerous path, as those relying on Grok to be truthful are being misinformed on vaccine safety. Share this video. Tag Elon Musk. If xAI is to ever be trusted, we MUST ensure it is using good data to come to its determinations. As of now? It is not. SHARE. TAG. Elon Musk The link to the full chart in the comments below.

The HighWire

277,454 views • 8 months ago

📢"Nobody wants to hear there was no placebo." Have you seen "An Inconvenient Study" yet? Del Bigtree: "We're at a point now where the questions are being asked, and they are totally screwed. They're screwed because they don't have the answer anyone wants to hear. Nobody wants to hear there was no placebo. We can't have a placebo because we have vaccines that have already been approved, but they were approved without a placebo. And I'm telling you, it's scary, it's daunting. It's why this film is so important. This is an excerpt from the film that gets into exactly this, this bait and switch of, "We can't do a placebo trial because we already have a product available." WATCH NOW:

📢"Nobody wants to hear there was no placebo." Have you seen "An Inconvenient Study" yet? Del Bigtree: "We're at a point now where the questions are being asked, and they are totally screwed. They're screwed because they don't have the answer anyone wants to hear. Nobody wants to hear there was no placebo. We can't have a placebo because we have vaccines that have already been approved, but they were approved without a placebo. And I'm telling you, it's scary, it's daunting. It's why this film is so important. This is an excerpt from the film that gets into exactly this, this bait and switch of, "We can't do a placebo trial because we already have a product available." WATCH NOW:

The HighWire

16,346 views • 9 months ago

Why didn’t we do the most basic study when we had the chance? When these vaccines were being developed, why didn’t we run a proper controlled trial with one group receiving the vaccine, one group receiving a saline placebo, and then follow both groups long enough to see what actually happens? Long enough to observe autoimmune disease. Long enough to see neurological outcomes. Long enough to capture the kinds of injuries people are now reporting. That is just the way foundational science is done. And what’s striking is that this concern is no longer coming from the "fringes." More and more doctors are waking up to this reality, and the conversation is suddenly everywhere. It’s not being driven by anonymous bloggers or so-called “conspiracy theorists.” It’s being raised by some of the most credentialed physicians and scientists in the world. When the inventor of mRNA technology says we don’t have proper placebo trials, that matters. When the most published cardiologist on the planet says the absence of placebo trials is a serious problem, that matters. When one of the most published ICU doctors in the world raises the same concern, that matters. They cannot keep saying vaccines are safe with the kind of bravado they’ve been using for decades. We are changing that. Dr. Drew

Why didn’t we do the most basic study when we had the chance? When these vaccines were being developed, why didn’t we run a proper controlled trial with one group receiving the vaccine, one group receiving a saline placebo, and then follow both groups long enough to see what actually happens? Long enough to observe autoimmune disease. Long enough to see neurological outcomes. Long enough to capture the kinds of injuries people are now reporting. That is just the way foundational science is done. And what’s striking is that this concern is no longer coming from the "fringes." More and more doctors are waking up to this reality, and the conversation is suddenly everywhere. It’s not being driven by anonymous bloggers or so-called “conspiracy theorists.” It’s being raised by some of the most credentialed physicians and scientists in the world. When the inventor of mRNA technology says we don’t have proper placebo trials, that matters. When the most published cardiologist on the planet says the absence of placebo trials is a serious problem, that matters. When one of the most published ICU doctors in the world raises the same concern, that matters. They cannot keep saying vaccines are safe with the kind of bravado they’ve been using for decades. We are changing that. Dr. Drew

Del Bigtree

55,424 views • 6 months ago

Of the 661 studies often cited as proof that childhood vaccines are tested against inert placebos, a detailed breakdown reveals a shocking truth: not a single one was used to license a routine injected vaccine on the CDC schedule with a true saline placebo. Here’s the breakdown by Aaron Siri: ➡️ 567 studies were for non-routine vaccines (e.g., HIV vaccines). Irrelevant. ➡️ Of the remaining 94, 70 did not involve healthy children (e.g., HIV+ adults). Irrelevant. ➡️ Of the remaining 24, 21 did not involve a US-licensed vaccine or a control used to license one. Irrelevant. That leaves just 3 studies. But do they hold up? 1. Varicella (chickenpox) vaccine: Control group was injected with neomycin (an antibiotic), NOT an inert placebo. 2. Gardasil-4: The “inert” control group received everything in the vial except antigens and alum—including L-histidine, sodium borate, and yeast protein. NOT inert. 3. Gardasil-9: A small group received saline, BUT only after first receiving three doses of Gardasil-4. Not a true inert control. The result? ZERO trials with a true inert placebo were used to license any routine childhood vaccine. This isn’t just a statistical oversight—it’s a fundamental flaw in how we assess vaccine safety. Proper safety trials require: ✅ A true inert control (e.g., saline) ✅ Long-term safety review ✅ Sufficient power (large sample size) Not a single routine childhood vaccine on the CDC schedule meets all three criteria. When RFK Jr. highlighted this lack of placebo-controlled data, fact-checkers pointed to the same flawed list of 661 studies. After his analysis debunked them, the list was mysteriously expanded—perhaps hoping a larger number would obscure the truth. The truth remains: without proper controls, we cannot robustly quantify the risks of vaccines. Parents and physicians deserve transparent, high-quality data to make informed decisions.

Of the 661 studies often cited as proof that childhood vaccines are tested against inert placebos, a detailed breakdown reveals a shocking truth: not a single one was used to license a routine injected vaccine on the CDC schedule with a true saline placebo. Here’s the breakdown by Aaron Siri: ➡️ 567 studies were for non-routine vaccines (e.g., HIV vaccines). Irrelevant. ➡️ Of the remaining 94, 70 did not involve healthy children (e.g., HIV+ adults). Irrelevant. ➡️ Of the remaining 24, 21 did not involve a US-licensed vaccine or a control used to license one. Irrelevant. That leaves just 3 studies. But do they hold up? 1. Varicella (chickenpox) vaccine: Control group was injected with neomycin (an antibiotic), NOT an inert placebo. 2. Gardasil-4: The “inert” control group received everything in the vial except antigens and alum—including L-histidine, sodium borate, and yeast protein. NOT inert. 3. Gardasil-9: A small group received saline, BUT only after first receiving three doses of Gardasil-4. Not a true inert control. The result? ZERO trials with a true inert placebo were used to license any routine childhood vaccine. This isn’t just a statistical oversight—it’s a fundamental flaw in how we assess vaccine safety. Proper safety trials require: ✅ A true inert control (e.g., saline) ✅ Long-term safety review ✅ Sufficient power (large sample size) Not a single routine childhood vaccine on the CDC schedule meets all three criteria. When RFK Jr. highlighted this lack of placebo-controlled data, fact-checkers pointed to the same flawed list of 661 studies. After his analysis debunked them, the list was mysteriously expanded—perhaps hoping a larger number would obscure the truth. The truth remains: without proper controls, we cannot robustly quantify the risks of vaccines. Parents and physicians deserve transparent, high-quality data to make informed decisions.

Camus

59,416 views • 10 months ago

🚨 “There are NO saline placebo-controlled studies looking at the hepatitis B vaccine risk given to day-old newborns.” “Why?” “Here’s what you’ll be told by the… so-called authorities.” Dr. Suzanne Humphries exposes the excuses for why vaccines can’t be properly safety tested: “We’re told that it’s unethical to do a saline placebo study now because the safety was long ago established.” “Hepatitis B vaccines that we’re using today were licensed based on immunogenicity.” “[They’ve done] some short-term safety monitoring for a few days in some uber-healthy infants and a small group of premature, low birth weight infants for sure.” “[They’ve done] comparisons that sometimes used aluminum-containing placebos or other controls rather than pure saline.” “And we know that this is a common practice… by supposed vaccine scientists to use another vaccine that contains an inflammatory agent.” “They say because it will make it less obvious who received the placebo.” “And the other reason is ‘we don’t want to deprive the placebo group from something beneficial.’” “What a riot.” Dr Suzanne Humphries CHDTV Live

🚨 “There are NO saline placebo-controlled studies looking at the hepatitis B vaccine risk given to day-old newborns.” “Why?” “Here’s what you’ll be told by the… so-called authorities.” Dr. Suzanne Humphries exposes the excuses for why vaccines can’t be properly safety tested: “We’re told that it’s unethical to do a saline placebo study now because the safety was long ago established.” “Hepatitis B vaccines that we’re using today were licensed based on immunogenicity.” “[They’ve done] some short-term safety monitoring for a few days in some uber-healthy infants and a small group of premature, low birth weight infants for sure.” “[They’ve done] comparisons that sometimes used aluminum-containing placebos or other controls rather than pure saline.” “And we know that this is a common practice… by supposed vaccine scientists to use another vaccine that contains an inflammatory agent.” “They say because it will make it less obvious who received the placebo.” “And the other reason is ‘we don’t want to deprive the placebo group from something beneficial.’” “What a riot.” Dr Suzanne Humphries CHDTV Live

Children’s Health Defense

30,321 views • 1 month ago

"DTP was never licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial." ICAN lead attorney Aaron Siri, Esq., walks through the data showing that no routine childhood vaccine has ever been licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial. "You have Infanrix licensed based on a trial that used DTP as the control. DTP has never been licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial." - Aaron Siri "DTP is what we believe is the reason for the 1986 vaccine injury compensation program. That one was causing so many issues, sickness, death, injuries to children, that they're like, we can't make a profit, protect us from liability. There were other vaccines, but DTP was a disaster." - Del Bigtree ⤵️

"DTP was never licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial." ICAN lead attorney Aaron Siri, Esq., walks through the data showing that no routine childhood vaccine has ever been licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial. "You have Infanrix licensed based on a trial that used DTP as the control. DTP has never been licensed based on a placebo-controlled trial." - Aaron Siri "DTP is what we believe is the reason for the 1986 vaccine injury compensation program. That one was causing so many issues, sickness, death, injuries to children, that they're like, we can't make a profit, protect us from liability. There were other vaccines, but DTP was a disaster." - Del Bigtree ⤵️

The HighWire

44,302 views • 8 months ago

👉 If you don’t question vaccine safety after hearing this, there may be a problem… “There have NEVER been for any vaccine on the childhood recommended schedule, a TRUE inert, placebo, controlled clinical trial. What does that mean in plain English? It means they NEVER did any real science.” Mary S. Holland, Esq.

👉 If you don’t question vaccine safety after hearing this, there may be a problem… “There have NEVER been for any vaccine on the childhood recommended schedule, a TRUE inert, placebo, controlled clinical trial. What does that mean in plain English? It means they NEVER did any real science.” Mary S. Holland, Esq.

Children’s Health Defense

82,593 views • 1 year ago

Senator Alex Antic and John Ruddick are the only ones prepared to challenge the draconian no jab no play/pay policies. Australia is the only country in the world that financially punishes parents for not adhering to a childhood schedule that has never been properly tested with double blind placebo controlled trials. It’s a blatant violation of parental rights and medical freedom.

Senator Alex Antic and John Ruddick are the only ones prepared to challenge the draconian no jab no play/pay policies. Australia is the only country in the world that financially punishes parents for not adhering to a childhood schedule that has never been properly tested with double blind placebo controlled trials. It’s a blatant violation of parental rights and medical freedom.

Kat A 🌸

10,822 views • 17 days ago