HHS Sec. Kennedy Calls for Retraction of Bogus Study on Aluminum in Vaccines
The Danish study being touted by the media as proving aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines cause no harm shows evidence of harm.
On July 15, a study out of Denmark was published in the Annals of Internal Medicine that the media have been glorifying as conclusively proving that aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines are not associated with any health harms.
The day after its publication, I wrote a detailed analysis exposing how the study was designed to find no association.
Then the study authors published a corrected version of their supplementary material, and Dr. Karl Jablonowski from Children’s Health Defense (CHD) noticed that the data show statistically significant evidence of numerous harms—including an increased risk of autism.
Yesterday, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. courageously published an article at Trial Site News slamming the Danish study for being designed to find no association and yet still finding evidence of harm.
He points out how the authors’ claim that they “did not find evidence” that aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines are associated with any of the health outcomes they considered is directly contradicted by their own data.
Kennedy called for the study to be retracted.
This is historic—an HHS Secretary calling out researchers for conducting a study systematically biased in favor of the null hypothesis, calling for its retraction, and insisting that real science be done as so many parents have long been demanding.
Kennedy incorporated Dr. Jablonowski’s observations into his article. Here’s what the HHS Secretary wrote about the evidence of harm indicated by the data in the corrected supplement:
The data show a statistically significant 67% increased risk of Asperger’s syndrome per 1 mg increase in aluminum exposure among children born between 2007 and 2018. Compared to the moderate exposure group, for every 10,000 children in the highest aluminum exposure cohort, there were 9.7 more cases of neurodevelopmental disorder, 4.5 more cases of autistic disorder, and 8.7 more cases of the broader category of autism spectrum disorder. Yet the authors gloss over these harms to children by claiming they “did not find evidence” for an increased risk.
I have verified the accuracy of Secretary Kennedy’s claim. That is indeed what the data show.
After having watched Dr. Jablonowski on CHD TV discussing his findings about the corrected supplement, I immediately downloaded the updated version and scrolled through it looking for significant positive associations.
As I noted in my July 16 analysis, the figure in the main paper of this study by Andersson et al. actually shows significant negative associations “despite the biological implausibility that injecting children with a known neurotoxin is protective against chronic diseases and disorders.”
As Kennedy remarks, “If the medical establishment truly believed these data, they would be recommending aluminum injections to children as a prophylaxis against neurological and autoimmune diseases.”
In other words, the findings of this study cannot be taken seriously. The authors offer no explanation for these findings, which is parsimoniously explained by the fact that to highlight the implausibility of their own findings would have conflicted with their transparent purpose of lending credibility to a predetermined conclusion.
Looking through the corrected supplementary data, that same pattern of significantly negative associations was manifest. Looking for the opposite, I noticed that Figure 4 showed a significant positive association between aluminum exposure and Asperger syndrome, with a hazard ratio of 1.67 among children born in the 2007 – 2018 birth cohort, meaning a 67% higher rate of being diagnosed with Asperger syndrome for every 1 mg increase in aluminum exposure.
But I didn’t see the other associations Dr. Jablonowski mentioned in the CHD interview. So, I contacted Dr. Jablonowski to inquire about it, and he generously took the time to walk me through the data so I could verify his reporting for myself.
In my haste to spot significant positive associations in the corrected supplementary data, I had overlooked a crucial detail.
The key data is in Figure 11, where you can see a hazard ratio of -9.73 (-14.05, -5.41) for neurodevelopmental outcomes in the medium exposure group.
That’s a negative association. I was assuming in my haste that the authors would show the hazard ratios for outcomes in the highest exposure group relative to the medium and low exposure cohorts.
Instead, they curiously reported the data showing hazard ratios for the low and medium exposure groups relative to the children who had the highest exposure to aluminum from vaccines.
What that hazard ratio therefore indicates is that children with the highest aluminum exposure from vaccines had a statistically significant 9.7 times higher rate of diagnoses for neurodevelopmental disorders compared to the medium exposure group.
The numbers in parentheses are the confidence intervals, and since the range does not include “1”, the results are considered statistically significant, meaning that the association is unlikely to be due to chance.
Accepting the study author’s own standards of evidence, therefore, we can be highly confident that this represents a true association.
Among children with medium exposure relative to those with the highest, the hazard ratio for autistic disorder is -4.49 (-7.24, -1.75), and the hazard ratio for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is -8.68 (-12.38, -4.98).
So, what the data show is a statistically significant nearly nine-fold higher rate of autism diagnoses among the children who were injected with the most aluminum.
Andersson et al. claimed they “did not find evidence supporting an increased risk for autoimmune, atopic or allergic, or neurodevelopmental disorders associated with early childhood exposure to aluminum-adsorbed vaccines.”
Yet there it is.
And the US Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services just called them out on it.
As Secretary Kennedy concludes,
For years, American parents have been calling for rigorous, transparent, and independently conducted science comparing the long-term health outcomes of children vaccinated according to the CDC schedule with those of completely unvaccinated children. Yet studies like Andersson et al. showed they had the data to make this comparison between vaccinated and unvaccinated children, but instead excluded and lumped data that made their insights opaque. These authors squandered an important opportunity to restore trust by animating an international scientific process to develop safer vaccines. By excluding unvaccinated children from meaningful analysis, obscuring raw data, and relying on hidden statistical assumptions, this study exemplifies the kind of institutional obfuscation that continues to erode public trust. What’s needed is not more statistical modeling designed to bury signals of harm, but independent research grounded in full transparency, methodological integrity, and the courage to confront inconvenient truths.
While Niklas Worm Andersson is listed as lead author of the study, the senior author (whose name typically appears last in the byline) was Anders Hviid, who was lead author of the MMR-autism study in 2019 similarly hailed by the media as conclusively proving no association. But as detailed in a paper I coauthored with Dr. Brian Hooker and Dr. Jeet Varia from CHD, that study, too, was systematically biased in favor of the null hypothesis.
The truth is that no study has ever been designed to test the hypothesis that vaccinating children according to the CDC’s schedule can contribute to the development of autism in susceptible subpopulations of children, and therefore the hypothesis cannot possibly have been falsified.
You can read our paper, titled “Hviid et al. 2019 Vaccine-Autism Study: Much Ado About Nothing?”, in the Journal of Biotechnology and Biomedicine.
The house of cards will tumble down. It is just a matter of time.
The pharma-funded mainstream media has been touting a recent study of the Danish health registry—Andersson, et al.—which purports to show that aluminum-containing vaccines are not associated with neurological injuries including autism and Asperger's.
In the accompanying article,…— Secretary Kennedy (@SecKennedy)August 1, 2025
If you haven’t yet, be sure to read my book The War on informed Consent, which features a Foreword by RFK, Jr. and illuminates how the regime of medical licensing is utilized to enforce vaccine orthodoxy while scientific data show that completely unvaccinated children are healthier.