There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.
If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.
| Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.|
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with !
200 Evidence-Based Reasons NOT To Vaccinate
| Needles are scary|
|Pricks against pricks|
200 Evidence-Based Reasons NOT To Vaccinate is a notorious, 200-example-long proof by verbosity of cherry-picked and blatantly misrepresented study abstracts, all in the preconceived attempt to simply arrive at the conclusion that vaccination is supposedly bad. 200 Reasons has been promoted heavily across the various fringes and quack watering holes of the Internet, not least through the many reposts of the list by its crank author, Sayer Ji.
200 Reasons contains very little context for each of the 200 "reasons", which are all shrunken down to a bias statement using scientific-sounding language, a hyperlink to the article, and information about the authors, publishers, etc. of the article - that is to say, to the average reader of this list, pure padding meant to make it look less shoehorned and more representative of research than it actually is.
None of the reasons given provide any meaningful analysis or context, reducing the list to nothing more than a really long and really tedious Gish gallop, most probably constructed via the renowned research method of typing in the search terms "vaccine" + "[scary word]" into Google Scholar and cherrypicking to your blackened heart's content.
And to anyone reading the .pdf itself (available at the bottom of this page), notice how it almost always says "- GMI Summary" (especially by the most scary sounding "reasons"). That is quack rhetoric for "this isn't what the study says at all", and clicking the link demonstrates this without fail.
Ji's description of 200 Reasons on GreenMedInfo starts with:
The media, your pediatrician, politicians and health authorities like the CDC and FDA claim that vaccines are safe and effective.
So why do hundreds of peer-reviewed studies indicate the opposite is true? Read, download, and share this document widely to provide the necessary evidence-based counterbalance to the pro-vaccination propaganda that has globally infected popular consciousness and discussion like an intractable disease. [....] This is the literature that the media, politicians and governmental health organizations like the CDC, pretend with abject dishonesty does not exist – as if vaccine injury did not happen, despite the over 3 billion dollars our government has paid out to vaccine injured through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund since it was inaugurated in 1986.
Ji manages to create both a straw man -- that health organizations claim vaccines are completely (rather than almost always) safe -- and a conspiracy theory -- that the opposing literature has been purposely ignored or even censored.
200 Reasons is similar to a metastudy, in that it reports on the research in a field.
Unlike most metastudies, 200 Reasons makes no conclusions or even in-depth analysis of research. Instead, it's really just a list of studies Ji could find that (if seen in the right light) make vaccines look bad.
Also unlike most metastudies, 200 Reasons includes a section on "cumulative knowledge", which would usually be called "metadata", and which would usually have some meaningful role in the study. Ji defines "cumulative knowledge" as:
Cumulative Knowledge is determined by ascribing a numerical value to the various study types weighted in descending order as follows: (1) Meta-Analysis; (2) Human Study; (3) Human: Case Study; (4) Animal: Transgenic; (5) Animal; (6) In Vitro; (7) Review; and (8) Commentary.
However, Ji never gives you a breakdown of which are used in any given case, and the math often doesn't add up. Ultimately, the "cumulative knowledge" is poorly defined and poorly arrived at, suggesting that the real goal is appearing impressive.
The 200 reasons
Responding to all 200 reasons would take an inordinate amount of time and effort. However, the first 10 reasons (presented below) are fairly representative of the quality of each of the reasons.
|38,787 adverse events including infant death (highest in 1-3 month olds) after vaccination were reported between 1991-1994. (The authors speciously claim SIDS and not vaccination caused these deaths). - GMI Summary|
Pubmed Data : J Pediatr. 1997 Oct;131(4):529-35. PMID: 9386653
|Actual title: "Descriptive epidemiology of adverse events after immunization: reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), 1991-1994", The Journal of Pediatrics
Yes, vaccines do hurt people, and might even kill them. However, such events are so rare that getting the vaccine is far, far safer.
Ji's statement appears to be taken from these lines of the article:
However, the article's conclusion states:
Basically, the article is pointing out that many of the adverse effects -- such as SIDS -- occurred (even without vaccination) at higher rates in the age group.
|DTP or tetanus vaccination increases the risk of allergies and related respiratory symptoms in children and adolescents. - GMI Summary|
Pubmed Data : J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2000 Feb;23(2):81-90. PMID: 10714532
|Actual title: "Effects of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis or tetanus vaccination on allergies and allergy-related respiratory symptoms among children and adolescents in the United States", Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics.
Ji appears to be referencing the following from the article:
Thus, there does appear to be some link between the DTP/tetanus vaccine and allergenic responses. However, the article's conclusion states:
|Neonate exposure to thimerosal mercury from hepatitis B vaccines may be a significant problem. - GMI Summary|
Pubmed Data : Am J Perinatol. 2009 Aug;26(7):523-7. Epub 2009 Mar 12. PMID: 19283656
See the main article on this topic: Thiomersal
Actual title: "Neonate exposure to thimerosal mercury from hepatitis B vaccines", American Journal of Perinatology
The article's body text (not included in abstract) states:
The article further states:
This is interesting for two reasons: First, at its worst, this only suggests against vaccinating post-birth infants. Second, most of the vaccines used contain higher mercury content than vaccines in developed countries did even before thiomersol was removed.
It's also interesting that Ji didn't bother to state what problems thiomersol was supposedly causing.A further problem with this claim is that, even if true (which it's not), thiomersal hasn't been used in most vaccines in the United States (and Europe) for 15 years. It was removed as a precaution, though it has not been proven to be significantly dangerous. The people who are most likely to read 200 Reasons face almost no thiomersal in their vaccines.
|Over 1,000 confirmed cases of vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia were reported between 1990-2008. - GMI Summary|
Pubmed Data : Vaccine. 2010 Nov 29. Epub 2010 Nov 29. PMID: 21126606
|Actual title: "Thrombocytopenia after vaccination: case reports to the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, 1990-2008", Vaccine
It's also important to look at the bigger picture. First, the article excludes 70 for not being plausibly induced by vaccines:
Second, over 10 million vaccines are administered each year to children under one alone. Over the 18 years in which the study examined, about 180 million children under would have been vaccinated. This gives us a rate of 1,440 cases/180,000,000 injections, or a rate of 0.0008%, which is ridiculously low.
|Over 600 cases of sudden infant death syndrome following vaccination were reported from 1990-1997. - GMI Summary|
Pubmed Data : Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2001 Jun-Jul;10(4):279-85. PMID: 11760487
See the main article on this topic: Anti-vaccination movement § SIDS
Actual title: "The epidemiology of fatalities reported to the vaccine adverse event reporting system 1990-1997", Journal of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
Ji appears to be referring to the following statement from the article:
Ji interprets this as meaning that the vaccines caused the other 50% of deaths. However, the study's conclusion states:
Furthermore, it's important to tease out the annual rate here. Let's assume that 600 deaths from SIDS were attributable to vaccines. The study occurred over an 8 year period. This would mean about 75 annual reported cases of SIDS purportedly "caused by vaccines". There are 2500-5000 cases of SIDS in the US every year, or about 70 per week.. In other words, you'd expect roughly 70 infants to die of SIDS within a week of any event in their lifetime. And if we add in the fact that babies get vaccinated far more than once, it seems like the deaths are likely coincidental.
|The risk of adverse events from the pertussis outweighed the risk of pertussis infection during the period of 1970-83 in children living in non-deprived circumsatnces [sic] in Britain. - GMI Summary|
Pubmed Data : Dev Biol Stand. 1985;61:395-405. PMID: 3835080
|Actual title: "Whooping cough and pertussis vaccine: a comparison of risks and benefits in Britain during the period 1968-83", Developments in Biological Standardization
Ji appears to be referencing the following line from the article:
It is one of the ironic victories of universal vaccination that disease is so rare. If we followed the advice of Ji, we'd see an the return of pertussis and a rise of risk. Until a disease has been eradicated, it is necessary to vaccinate.
|There is a highly statistically significant correlation between increasing number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates. - GMI Summary|
Pubmed Data : Hum Exp Toxicol. 2011 May 4. Epub 2011 May 4. PMID: 21543527
|Actual title: "Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity?" Human & Experimental Toxicology
This article, also reported in NaturalNews, was poorly designed. The first author, Neil Miller is an "independent researcher"; the second, Gary Goldman, an "independent computer scientist"; neither has specialized knowledge in vaccinations or toxicity, or even epidemiology.Since the 1950's when most vaccines started becoming available, infant mortality in the US has dropped by over 80%. So yes, there is a statistically significant correlation between vaccine doses and infant mortality; it's negatively correlated.
|Thimerosol-containing vaccines are associated with autism prevalence and measles-containing vaccines are associated with serious neurological disorders. - GMI Summary|
Pubmed Data : Med Sci Monit. 2004 Mar;10(3):PI33-9. Epub 2004 Mar 1. PMID: 14976450
See the main article on this topic: Geier family
See the main article on this topic: Thiomersal
Actual title: "A comparative evaluation of the effects of MMR immunization and mercury doses from thimerosal-containing childhood vaccines on the population prevalence of autism", Medical Science Monitor
This study was written by David and Mark Geier, who have an, er, interesting track record with vaccine-related studies and with medicine in general.Once again, Thimerosol. Once again, not used at all.
|Vaccination in infants less than 3 months is associated with an increased risk of sudden infant death syndrome. - GMI Summary|
Pubmed Data : Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 1995;9(3):263-70. PMID: 7557822
See the main article on this topic: Anti-vaccination movement § SIDS
Actual title: "Sudden infant death syndrome and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis-poliomyelitis vaccination status", Fundamental and Clinical Pharmacology
Straight from the abstract in the linked article:
So you shouldn't get your kids vaccinated because there is no statistically significant link to SIDS from vaccination? So who is this list marketed to, people that want to kill their kids? Well...
|Vaccination is associated with a rare autoimmune neurological condition transverse myelitis [sic]. - GMI Summary|
Pubmed Data : Lupus. 2009 Nov;18(13):1198-204. PMID: 19880568
|Actual title: "Transverse myelitis and vaccines: a multi-analysis", Lupus
From the article abstract:
For reference, that's 37 (supposed) cases over a 39 year timeframe. Out of about 400,000,000 vaccines given, 37 may have caused an adverse effect. When compared with the effects of most diseases, this is ridiculously small. Consider also the varying temporal association, which is inconsistent to the tune of multiple days to multiple months.Furthermore, causation and correlation. There are thousands upon thousands of conditions out there, if not millions. The odds of some study not showing a correlation with a rare condition of some form are effectively nothing.
- The list itself (RW-hosted version)
- Deconstructing “200 Evidence Based Reasons NOT To Vaccinate”, Science-Based Medicine
- Neil Z Miller, (see reason #7 above), has since doubled-down by self-publishing :
"Miller's Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers".
Some of Miller's other publications, (New Atlantean Press), involve clairvoyance.
- 200 Evidence-Based Reasons NOT To Vaccinate - FREE Research PDF Download!, GreenMedInfo
- Google Scholar is in itself an excellent search provider for studies - it's just being used by quacks in this case.
- For example, the Cumulative Knowledge on "Tumor necrosis factorα (TNFα) up-regulation" has only 4 articles but a score of 40. Somehow, each of those articles was in 10 categories, when only 8 exist.
- SIDS and babies