The Highwire with Del Bigtree - TOP VACCINOLOGIST: CLINICAL TRIALS FAIL TO SUPPORT CLAIM ‘VACCINES DO NOT CAUSE AUTISM’

Episode Date: January 7, 2023

Informed Consent Action Network (icandecide.org) funded Lead Attorney, Aaron Siri, Esq., to depose and later cross-examine world-leading Vaccinologist, Dr. Kathyrn Edwards in 2020. Within the hours-long cross-examination she gave a shocking answer to the question; “Do childhood vaccine trials support the CDC’s claim that vaccines do not cause autism?” Regardless of your stance on the issue of Vaccines and Autism, her answer is a must-see.#EdwardsDeposition #GodmotherOfVaccines #VaccinesAndAutism #UntilProvenOtherwise #ICANlegalBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

There's a lot of newcomers to this so-called anti-vaccine movement or vaccine hesitancy movement that, you know, really believed in medicine, really believed in vaccines, but this COVID vaccine was so egregious, so poorly tested that they had to jump ship. I actually think the huge difference was this wasn't going to be given to babies, it was going to be given to them. When Donald Trump said, the first people I want to get this totally experimental product, never been in a human being, basically almost killed every animal in an animal trial for the last 20 years, it's going to be the doctors, the frontline doctors, you get it first. Suddenly,

there was a bunch of them that said, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, why me? I mean, why me? And so I think that has changed the culture here. But now there's a real, you know, desire to compartmentalize the COVID vaccine issue. And then really just say it's only COVID vaccine, not the childhood vaccine program. Don't make a mistake. That was brilliantly tested. That is so well done. We know those are completely safe. This is an anomaly. In fact, there's been tweets out. by guys like Martin Koldorf, who I totally respect that, you know, are part of the Great Barrington Declaration, but now, you know, they're on shaky ground. They know this COVID vaccine is a disaster, but they also want to uphold the sciences. They know it. And so they're tweeting out things like,

you know, you'd find to be against the COVID. Here it is. The MMR vaccine is very effective at preventing measles. It does not cause autism. In 2019, after plummeting vaccine rates, the Samoa measles outbreak killed 83 of 5,697. In fact, he's making these statements because he's trying to say COVID vaccine bad, childhood vaccine, good. It's okay, Martin, I get it. You have never really done any investigation into this. This is a part of the orthodoxy you've been a part of. It's really hard to let go of it. But this is the work that we do. I'm about to show you a brand we just released, a press release. And by the way, if you were just simply a member of our newsletter, which all you have to do right now is just go down on the page at the high wire,

just type in your email and now you'll be sent every time there's a breaking news story, a legal story, or if you just want all of the facts that we've delivered on our show today, on Monday, you get every piece of evidence we have, every study that McCullough talks about, the entire study is in your hands. You get to have the evidence in your hands. We're calling it the high wire protocol, total transparency and journalism. We want everyone else to do it. But if you aren't a part of our newsletter, then you're not a part of that process. You are not helping us advance how news should be happening. Now what you will find out is today we took the Catherine Edwards. Catherine Edwards let me hold on here. I got a giant book to explain this to you.

This is the Bible on vaccines. Plotkin on vaccine. Plotkin's vaccines. Now we have a total deposition, complete deposition of Stanley Plotkin, the god for the vaccines. But look at the other names up there and you will find that Catherine Edwards is a part of this. In fact, she's the godmother of the vaccine program. There's barely a vaccine on the schedule for children that she wasn't a part of the clinical trials. I've told you before, when you're donating to the high wire, part of what you're doing is helping, you know, nearly half of the proceeds that come in go to our legal work to sue the CDC, FDA, to get involved in personal cases.

We stopped the Washington, D.C. minor consent for vaccine bill, where they were trying to allow children to vaccinate themselves without parental approval. We broke that law and shut it down, fighting for the military. We had a huge show about that, just go back and watch the show right before the holidays. But what I want to say is this. One of the things we do is Aaron Siri is, by far, I think, the most talented lawyer when it comes to doing depositions and doing cross-examinations of science and specifically vaccine specialists. So there was a case about autism and a child that got autism, as they believed right after,

vaccination and Catherine Edwards was brought in as the specialist to say that that's not true. Now, if you're brand new, this is why I'm sharing with you, you're probably asking, well, there's the COVID vaccine. What about the childhood vaccines? They've been tested, you know, correctly, right? Well, this is what they tell us. The studies have been done. We know, just as Martin Colvert, Coldoor, so confidently said, vaccines don't cause autism. The science has been done. Well, while she was on the stand, Aaron Siri got into that example. exact question in this case that happened in Tennessee. You are going to have, by the way, we just posted on our website hours and hours of both the cross-examination which you're about

to watch, I mean the deposition which happened over Zoom and then the cross-examination which happened in a courtroom. Here's what I do is just go to the high wire. You just go down and click on, I guess they call it the hamburger there, the I can legal, click on that. Boom, that button takes you to, you got the Stanley Plotkin depositions there, but now we also have the Catherine Edwards cross-examinations, but the highwire.com slash I can't legal will also get you there very easily. Okay, this is just a couple minutes because this is so revealing and this should for, I mean, this is important to everybody that has a child, everyone that's ever been a part of this vaccine program, get ready for what I think is again one of the most important depositions

ever done. Listen to this. If you're going to, uh, design a clinical trial of a vaccine giving to children 18 months or younger. How long would that clinical trial need to be to determine whether the vaccine caused autism? The, in general, the autism is is generally diagnosed somewhere within the first couple years of life. And I think maybe the meantime is about two years depending upon the severity. So I think that, however, I think that most of the going theories would suggest that autism is really a prenatal event and not an event that happens after the child is born. So I think that what you're asking me is a little bit of a loaded question. And so I will answer in that that the vaccine trials that are conducted always.

have a tail of about a year that is required for the manufacturers to follow the patients. For the vaccines licensed, you know, by the year 2000, how many children would you estimate need to be in those clinical trials to detect whether the vaccine caused autism by 18, 18 months, and how long would the trial need to continue after 18 months of age? I can't give you those numbers off the top of my head exactly how they would be. And I think that, I think one of the, you know, when you have a rare event, although, you know, autism is now felt to be about 1.5% of the population when you have a rare event, and particularly when it was, it might have been more difficult to diagnose earlier in an earlier time,

then I think it takes larger numbers, but I can't give you that number, sir. Now remember, she is involved in designing the trials and being a part of the trials for the vaccine program as we know it. She is literally at the top of the field. But let me explain to you, for those of you that we do get in the weeds on this show.

We are not going to just try and zip through this. I want you to understand what's happening here. Here is the question. Autism is said to be very rare. She says it's about 1.5% of the population. So one and a half people out of 100. Remember, back in the 1960s, autism was said to be one in 10,000. We are now inside of one in 100, okay, as far as she's admitting to, but the data is that's not

being actually accurate. If you look at the national data, we have some of it here. They say the U.S. autism rate is one in 44. However, the New Jersey rate where they do better record keeping is one in 35 among eight-year-old children. And so by eight years old is usually when you've collected all those that would have autism. They're at 1 in 35. And look at this, boys with ASD outnumbered girls 4.2 to 1. You can only imagine the math. I'll be in my head, I can't, but if we're at 1 in 33 and it's four times more prevalent boys, you're talking 1 in 18 boys, 1 in 20 boys somewhere in there for you mathematicians

out there is being diagnosed with autism in the United States of America, up from 1 in 10,000. So now the question is, when you, Catherine Edwards, are here on the stand or are planning to be on the stand and say that vaccines don't cause autism, what was the size of the trial that you did to determine that? And how long was it? These are the two questions he's bringing her. Because if, let's say, one in 33, let's say roughly three out of 100 would get autism in a vaccine trial, how many would we need in the placebo group and in the vaccine group in order to determine with statistical significance that it is being caused by the vaccine. Now, she says I don't know the number and I don't either. I'm not a specialist. I would say thousands. In fact, I would say if you did a study like

Moderna had with 30,000 people for the coronavirus vaccine or Pfizer had 46,000 people, half of which got the placebo and the other half got the vaccine, that would about do it. That would about do it. And if the timeline, you know, and by the way, how many were in the most recent MMR that we give our kids, the measles months rebella vaccine, less than 1,000. Not 30,000 like Moderna, not, you know, 46,000. So Martin Koldorf, when you're like, I hate the COVID vaccine trials, but I love the childhood vaccine. Really? Really? Because I would have dreamed that the MMR got that many people in a trial. But here's the issue. So you don't have enough kids in the trial to determine whether there's a statistical problem. And now what about the duration? How long did you track them? Because if autism only appears after

vaccination, as she said, usually in about two years, but honestly, we don't fully get the full group till about eight years old, you would have to imagine this trial would have to be at least four years long if you're going to rule out the potential for a vaccine to cause autism. Well, with MMR, how long was the trial? Guess what? It wasn't four years. It wasn't four months. 42 days with less than a thousand kids. This is the problem, Martin Koldorf. This is the problem with this ideology. The trials haven't been done.

The question is, is Aaron Seary talented enough to get this person knows exactly what he's trying to get out of her to admit. Yet never did the proper trials to be able to make that statement. Can he do it? Just watch. Given what you know about clinical trials, would you agree with me that the clinical trials lied upon to license the vaccines given for Yates were not designed to determine

whether these projects caused autism when given to an infant or toddler out of below the age of 18 months. I think those trials were likely not powered to answer that question. I don't recall the actual number that were enrolled in the in the MMR vaccine trials. And so I can't say that definitively. that, you know, but I would trust that it likely was not large enough. And that's why large database studies are needed to really assess that in a phase four assessment. So it sounds like, you know, you would agree there weren't, they probably, as you said, are unlikely to be improperly powered. And they would have needed to review safety long enough as well to determine. to capture enough children in the experimental and control group that had or didn't have autism

in order to make an assessment of whether the product caused autism, correct? If an adverse event were to occur associated with vaccines, that if it were an uncommon event and if it was not diagnosed until later, then you would need a larger number of sample size and a longer period to assess that. I am not saying, however, by answering yes to your questions that I believe autism, that vaccines cause autism. So I just want to make sure that you understand what I'm saying. Never asked that question. Absolutely.

I think the record's clear on that. How long would safety have to be tracked in the clinical trials allotted upon to license the vaccines yeast received in order for them to have determined whether the vaccine caused autism? Object to form the question. You may answer doctor if you have any answer. I'm not going to answer it. I've already answered the question. I don't recall that you have not provided any period of time. Are you saying you don't know the period of time? I said, please.

I said that the studies that were involved in the licensure of MMR did not provide an adequate number of patients that had been followed for four years to determine a rare event that would happen four years after vaccination. That's what I'm saying. According to your profile, you have done most of the period of little trials relied upon to license many of the vaccines, correct, on the market? Yes, sir. Okay. So you're highly experienced conducting clinical trials, correct?

I'm highly experienced conducting clinical trials. And you're familiar with many of the clinical trials that relied upon to license many of the vaccines currently on the market, correct? I am. In your opinion, did the clinical trials relied upon to license the vaccines that Yates received, many of which are still on the market today? Were they designed to rule out that the vaccine causes autism? No. You've badgered me into answering the question the way you want me to, but I, I, I, I, I think that that I've, that's probably the answer. Is it, is that your accurate and truthful testimony?

Yes. Thank you. I don't know. I hope you don't have to be a geek to really get into that. I mean, that is absolutely stunning. By the way, the footage we put up is the raw footage. It is unedited. We cut that down.

That's about, I don't know, 20 minutes, 30 minutes of Aaron having to work her into that position where she finally just gives up the ghost. tells the truth. And so we're going to continue to edit pieces that. But it's all a part of what I can does. We send Aaron in. We sent them for weeks to be a part of this case and funded that to happen so that we can now have this as evidence for newspapers and news agencies. And we hope that other groups write about this incredible deposition because that's how change is made. And we hope that Rand Paul gets a chance to see it. And by the way, take these clips as we make them and send them to your representatives and say this is why I want you to end mandates. Vaccine mandates cannot

happen under this wishful thinking type of science that's going on. It does not work. And by the way, I want liability back on the manufacturers. If the FDA and this head, you know, is going to be a part of our regulatory agencies, then no liability protection. Let's see how many MMR vaccines we're all forced to take when all liability for injury, when we finally maybe do a study like she said, should be done in the databases of the world, which, by the way, the CDC has refused to do the comparative vaccinated versus unvaccinated study we've been asking for for a long time. She said that'd be the only way you would know. And here it is, folks, not a single one of the childhood vaccines that are in your children's

schedule. They're all right there. None of them was ever tested against the saline placebo. So Moderna's COVID vaccine, saline placebo, because we've threatened to sue. They actually changed that. Same thing with Pfizer, but not your childhood vaccines. no saline placebo, no long-term study that went beyond six months. And by the way, ultimately never enough kids in order to see the issues that we're seeing

skyrocket all through our population. So we're going to continue to bring you more and more information throughout the year because so many of you are brand new to this. Many of us need to revisit this because now that we watch COVID happen right before our eyes, a lot of this is going to make a lot more sense to you. This is how it's always been done. It's a shell game. They're liars. They're cheaters. And our lives are being put at risk.