Conclusive Evidence Accuses the World Health Organization of Crimes Against Humanity: A Reporter’s Overview
Image Caption: A reporter captures a student struggling to walk with crutches at the entrance of a secondary school.💉🩼🧑🏼🦯♿️
图片说明：记者在中学门口拍摄学生拄着双拐艰难行路💉🩼♿️🧑🏼🦯
Translation: “The unelected World Health Organization, colluding with the CCP and international criminal forces, driven solely by profit, tramples on life and intentionally poisons. / Reporter: Han Rongli”
与中共及国际黑恶势力同流合污唯利是图的的非民选机构世卫组织，践踏生命、蓄意毒害。/ 记者：韩荣利
突發新聞：世界
衛生組織
2025年釋出
自閉症疫苗
報告-無視絕大多數證據
麥卡洛基金會
自閉症報告仍然是迄今為止最全面的科學評估。
尼古拉斯·赫爾舍，英里/小時
昨天23:27
BREAKING: World Health Organization Releases 2025 Autism-Vaccine Report - Ignores Vast Majority of the Evidence The McCullough Foundation Autism Report remains the most comprehensive scientific assessment to date. NICOLAS HULSCHER, MPH YESTERDAY AT 23:27
by Nicolas Hulscher, MPH Today, the World Health Organization released its report, Vaccines, Thimerosal, and Autism Spectrum Disorder: Evidence Review 2010–2025. Predictably, the WHO repeats the same pre-scripted conclusion it has delivered for two decades: that childhood vaccines pose no risk for autism. But when this new WHO document is compared to the McCullough Foundation’s Determinants of Autism Spectrum Disorder—a rigorous, comprehensive synthesis of 308 studies across epidemiology, mechanistic biology, toxicology, environmental exposures, and clinical patterns—it becomes unmistakably clear that the WHO has reached its conclusion not by disproving anything, but by refusing to examine the majority of the evidence that actually matters.
Scope of Evidence: WHO’s 36 Studies vs. 308 Studies in the McCullough Foundation Report The WHO bases its entire global position on just 36 studies—17 on thimerosal and nineteen on various vaccines. This tiny slice of the literature is treated as though it represents the full scientific record. The McCullough Foundation report evaluates 308 studies, including 136 vaccine-related studies examining exposure patterns, toxicology, timing, adjuvant effects, cumulative dose, and immunological mechanisms. This contrast is not merely quantitative. It represents two opposite approaches to evidence:
The WHO narrows the evidence until no safety signal can be detected.
世衛組織縮小了證據範圍，直到無法檢測到安全訊號。
The McCullough Foundation broadens the evidence to include all domains relevant to causation.
McCullough基金會擴大了證據範圍，包括了與因果關係相關的所有領域。
As a result, each review inhabits an entirely different scientific universe.
因此，每篇評論都存在於一個完全不同的科學宇宙中。
世衛組織的資格標準排除了檢測因果關係所需的確切類別
世衛組織報告的結論被納入其方法。 它系統地過濾掉揭示生物危害的證據型別，包括：
WHO’s Eligibility Criteria Exclude the Exact Categories Needed to Detect Causation The WHO report’s conclusion is baked into its methodology. It systematically filters out the types of evidence that reveal biological harm, including:
機械學和生物學研究
mechanistic and biological studies
鋁輔助和毒理學研究
aluminum-adjuvant and toxicology research
mitochondrial, oxidative stress, and neuroimmune pathways
線粒體、氧化應激和神經免疫途徑
動物模型animal models
case reports and case series
案例報告和案例系列
ecological analyses
生态分析
and most importantly: all vaccinated-versus-unvaccinated research
By excluding these domains, the WHO guarantees that no mechanistic pathway, no biological plausibility, and no clinical reality can enter the conversation. The McCullough Foundation report, by contrast, centers these mechanisms, demonstrating how genetic susceptibility, immune dysregulation, toxicant exposure, and clustered vaccine doses can converge during vulnerable neurodevelopmental windows.
Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Evidence: WHO Includes Zero — Our Report Includes All 12 Studies Perhaps the most revealing omission is this: The WHO did not include a single vaccinated–versus–completely unvaccinated study. This is not because these studies lack rigor or relevance. It is because the WHO’s criteria intentionally exclude them. Meanwhile, the McCullough Foundation report includes all 12 vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated studies, which collectively show unvaccinated children are consistently healthier across every domain with lower rates of:
autism孤独症
ADHD
learning disabilities学习障碍
asthma哮喘
allergic disease
過敏性疾病过敏性疾病
chronic illness慢性病
胃腸道疾病gastrointestinal disorders
neurodevelopmental delays
神經發育遲緩
The WHO removes the only datasets capable of showing what happens when children receive no vaccines at all.
世衛組織刪除了唯一能夠顯示兒童根本沒有接種疫苗時會發生什麼的資料集。
證據權重：世衛組織提高了無效發現並埋下了積極訊號
即使在證據庫中，世衛組織的分級系統在結構上也是有偏見的。
Evidence Weighting: WHO Elevates Null Findings and Buries Positive Signals Even within its small evidence pool, the WHO’s grading system is structurally biased.
證據權重：世衛組織提高了無效發現並埋下了積極訊號
即使在證據庫中，世衛組織的分級系統在結構上也是有偏見的。
Studies showing no association—often relying on administrative codes or near-universal vaccination—receive “moderate” or “strong” certainty ratings.
研究表明沒有關聯——通常依賴行政法規或近乎普遍的疫苗接種——獲得了「中等」或「強」的確定性評級。
Studies showing any positive association—even large, well-designed ones—are automatically downgraded to “very low” certainty with “high risk of bias.”
This creates a self-fulfilling framework where null studies are treated as definitive and positive studies are treated as flawed—even if the methods are better.
世衛組織忽視了自閉症科學的兩個支柱：累積劑量和迴歸
世衛組織的報告忽略了疫苗-autism研究中最重要的兩個現象：
累積疫苗暴露
世衛組織對個別疫苗進行單獨評估。 它沒有檢查：
The WHO Ignores Two Pillars of Autism Science: Cumulative Dosing and Regression The WHO report overlooks two of the most important phenomena in vaccine-autism research: Cumulative Vaccine Exposure The WHO evaluates individual vaccines in isolation. It does not examine:
Developmental Regression The WHO completely ignores regression—a central defining feature of vaccine-induced ASD and a phenomenon repeatedly temporally associated with periods of intense vaccination. The McCullough Foundation report, by contrast, treats cumulative exposure and regression as essential, documenting decades of clinical patterns that the WHO simply chooses not to acknowledge.
Conclusion The WHO’s 2025 review is not a comprehensive autism assessment. It is a tightly restricted statistical exercise, intentionally engineered to prevent detection of vaccine-related risk by excluding the exact forms of evidence that reveal it. This is no surprise given that the Gates Foundation and the GAVI Vaccine Alliance are among the top 3 financial contributors to the WHO:
The McCullough Foundation’s 308-study report is a truly comprehensive ASD evidence synthesis, integrating epidemiology, biology, toxicology, environmental science, mechanistic plausibility, and—critically—the full vaccinated-versus-unvaccinated research record. Thus, we believe our conclusion stands as the most accurate to date:
Combination and early-timed routine childhood vaccination constitutes the most significant modifiable risk factor for ASD, supported by convergent mechanistic, clinical, and epidemiologic findings, and characterized by intensified use, the clustering of multiple doses during critical neurodevelopmental windows, and the lack of research on the cumulative safety of the full pediatric schedule.
The McCullough Foundation’s 308-study report is a truly comprehensive ASD evidence synthesis, integrating epidemiology, biology, toxicology, environmental science, mechanistic plausibility, and—critically—the full vaccinated-versus-unvaccinated research record. Thus, we believe our conclusion stands as the most accurate to date:
Combination and early-timed routine childhood vaccination constitutes the most significant modifiable risk factor for ASD, supported by convergent mechanistic, clinical, and epidemiologic findings, and characterized by intensified use, the clustering of multiple doses during critical neurodevelopmental windows, and the lack of research on the cumulative safety of the full pediatric schedule.
尼古拉斯·赫爾舍爾，MPH
麥卡洛基金會流行病學家和基金會管理員
支援我們的使命：mcculoughfnd.org
請考慮關注McCullough基金會和我在X（前身為Twitter）上的個人帳戶以獲取更多內容。
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation Support our mission: mcculloughfnd.org Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse) is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
确凿证据指控世卫组织反人类罪 记者综述
Conclusive Evidence Accuses the World Health Organization of Crimes Against Humanity: A Reporter’s Overview
Image Caption: A reporter captures a student struggling to walk with crutches at the entrance of a secondary school.💉🩼🧑🏼🦯♿️
图片说明：记者在中学门口拍摄学生拄着双拐艰难行路💉🩼♿️🧑🏼🦯
Translation: “The unelected World Health Organization, colluding with the CCP and international criminal forces, driven solely by profit, tramples on life and intentionally poisons. / Reporter: Han Rongli”
与中共及国际黑恶势力同流合污唯利是图的的非民选机构世卫组织，践踏生命、蓄意毒害。/ 记者：韩荣利
突發新聞：世界
衛生組織
2025年釋出
自閉症疫苗
報告-無視絕大多數證據
麥卡洛基金會
自閉症報告仍然是迄今為止最全面的科學評估。
尼古拉斯·赫爾舍，英里/小時
昨天23:27
BREAKING: World
Health Organization
Releases 2025
Autism-Vaccine
Report - Ignores Vast Majority of the Evidence
The McCullough Foundation
Autism Report remains the most comprehensive scientific assessment to date.
NICOLAS HULSCHER, MPH
YESTERDAY AT 23:27
https://open.substack.com/pub/petermcculloughmd/p/breaking-world-health-organization
by Nicolas Hulscher, MPH
Today, the World Health Organization released its report, Vaccines, Thimerosal, and Autism Spectrum Disorder: Evidence Review 2010–2025. Predictably, the WHO repeats the same pre-scripted conclusion it has delivered for two decades: that childhood vaccines pose no risk for autism.
But when this new WHO document is compared to the McCullough Foundation’s Determinants of Autism Spectrum Disorder—a rigorous, comprehensive synthesis of 308 studies across epidemiology, mechanistic biology, toxicology, environmental exposures, and clinical patterns—it becomes unmistakably clear that the WHO has reached its conclusion not by disproving anything, but by refusing to examine the majority of the evidence that actually matters.
https://open.substack.com/pub/petermcculloughmd/p/breaking-world-health-organization
作者：Nicolas Hulscher，MPH
今天，世界衛生組織釋出了其報告《疫苗、硫毒和自閉症譜系障礙：證據審查2010-2025》。 可以預見的是，世衛組織重複了二十年來得出的相同預先編寫的結論：兒童疫苗不會對自閉症造成風險。
但是，當這份世衛組織新檔案與麥卡洛基金會的《自閉症譜系障礙決定因素》進行比較時——這是對流行病學、機械生物學、毒理學、環境暴露和臨床模式的308項研究的嚴格、全面綜合——很明顯，世衛組織得出的結論不是透過反駁任何東西，而是拒絕審查大多數真正重要的證據。
證據範圍：世衛組織36項研究與麥卡洛基金會報告中的308項研究
世衛組織的整個全球立場僅基於36項研究——17項關於硫柳汞，19項關於各種疫苗。 這一小部分文獻被視為代表了完整的科學記錄。
McCullough基金會的報告評估了308項研究，包括136項與疫苗相關的研究，研究暴露模式、毒理學、時間、佐劑效應、累積劑量和免疫機制。
這種對比不僅僅是數量上的。 它代表了兩種相反的證據方法：
Scope of Evidence: WHO’s 36 Studies vs. 308 Studies in the McCullough Foundation Report
The WHO bases its entire global position on just 36 studies—17 on thimerosal and nineteen on various vaccines. This tiny slice of the literature is treated as though it represents the full scientific record.
The McCullough Foundation report evaluates 308 studies, including 136 vaccine-related studies examining exposure patterns, toxicology, timing, adjuvant effects, cumulative dose, and immunological mechanisms.
This contrast is not merely quantitative. It represents two opposite approaches to evidence:
The WHO narrows the evidence until no safety signal can be detected.
世衛組織縮小了證據範圍，直到無法檢測到安全訊號。
The McCullough Foundation broadens the evidence to include all domains relevant to causation.
McCullough基金會擴大了證據範圍，包括了與因果關係相關的所有領域。
As a result, each review inhabits an entirely different scientific universe.
因此，每篇評論都存在於一個完全不同的科學宇宙中。
世衛組織的資格標準排除了檢測因果關係所需的確切類別
世衛組織報告的結論被納入其方法。 它系統地過濾掉揭示生物危害的證據型別，包括：
WHO’s Eligibility Criteria Exclude the Exact Categories Needed to Detect Causation
The WHO report’s conclusion is baked into its methodology. It systematically filters out the types of evidence that reveal biological harm, including:
機械學和生物學研究
mechanistic and biological studies
鋁輔助和毒理學研究
aluminum-adjuvant and toxicology research
mitochondrial, oxidative stress, and neuroimmune pathways
線粒體、氧化應激和神經免疫途徑
動物模型animal models
case reports and case series
案例報告和案例系列
ecological analyses
生态分析
and most importantly: all vaccinated-versus-unvaccinated research
最重要的是：所有接種疫苗與未接種疫苗的研究
透過排除這些領域，世衛組織保證沒有機械途徑、沒有生物學合理性，也沒有臨床現實可以進入對話。
相比之下，麥卡洛基金會的報告以這些機制為中心，展示了遺傳易感性、免疫失調、有毒物質暴露和叢集疫苗劑量如何在脆弱的神經發育視窗期間收斂。
By excluding these domains, the WHO guarantees that no mechanistic pathway, no biological plausibility, and no clinical reality can enter the conversation.
The McCullough Foundation report, by contrast, centers these mechanisms, demonstrating how genetic susceptibility, immune dysregulation, toxicant exposure, and clustered vaccine doses can converge during vulnerable neurodevelopmental windows.
接種疫苗與未接種疫苗的證據：世衛組織包括零——我們的報告包括所有12項研究
也許最明顯的遺漏是：
世衛組織沒有包括一項接種疫苗的研究——而不是完全未接種疫苗的研究。
這並不是因為這些研究缺乏嚴謹性或相關性。 這是因為世衛組織的標準故意排除了他們。
與此同時，McCullough基金會的報告包括所有12項接種疫苗與未接種疫苗的研究，這些研究集體表明，未接種疫苗的兒童在每個領域都始終更健康，比率較低：
Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Evidence: WHO Includes Zero — Our Report Includes All 12 Studies
Perhaps the most revealing omission is this:
The WHO did not include a single vaccinated–versus–completely unvaccinated study.
This is not because these studies lack rigor or relevance. It is because the WHO’s criteria intentionally exclude them.
Meanwhile, the McCullough Foundation report includes all 12 vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated studies, which collectively show unvaccinated children are consistently healthier across every domain with lower rates of:
autism孤独症
ADHD
learning disabilities学习障碍
asthma哮喘
allergic disease
過敏性疾病过敏性疾病
chronic illness慢性病
胃腸道疾病gastrointestinal disorders
neurodevelopmental delays
神經發育遲緩
The WHO removes the only datasets capable of showing what happens when children receive no vaccines at all.
世衛組織刪除了唯一能夠顯示兒童根本沒有接種疫苗時會發生什麼的資料集。
證據權重：世衛組織提高了無效發現並埋下了積極訊號
即使在證據庫中，世衛組織的分級系統在結構上也是有偏見的。
Evidence Weighting: WHO Elevates Null Findings and Buries Positive Signals
Even within its small evidence pool, the WHO’s grading system is structurally biased.
證據權重：世衛組織提高了無效發現並埋下了積極訊號
即使在證據庫中，世衛組織的分級系統在結構上也是有偏見的。
Studies showing no association—often relying on administrative codes or near-universal vaccination—receive “moderate” or “strong” certainty ratings.
研究表明沒有關聯——通常依賴行政法規或近乎普遍的疫苗接種——獲得了「中等」或「強」的確定性評級。
Studies showing any positive association—even large, well-designed ones—are automatically downgraded to “very low” certainty with “high risk of bias.”
顯示任何正相關性的研究——即使是大型、設計良好的相關性——都會自動降級為「極低」的確定性，並帶有「高偏見風險」。
這創造了一個自我實現的框架，其中零研究被視為確定性，陽性研究被視為有缺陷——即使方法更好。
This creates a self-fulfilling framework where null studies are treated as definitive and positive studies are treated as flawed—even if the methods are better.
世衛組織忽視了自閉症科學的兩個支柱：累積劑量和迴歸
世衛組織的報告忽略了疫苗-autism研究中最重要的兩個現象：
累積疫苗暴露
世衛組織對個別疫苗進行單獨評估。 它沒有檢查：
The WHO Ignores Two Pillars of Autism Science: Cumulative Dosing and Regression
The WHO report overlooks two of the most important phenomena in vaccine-autism research:
Cumulative Vaccine Exposure
The WHO evaluates individual vaccines in isolation. It does not examine:
發展迴歸
世衛組織完全忽視了迴歸——疫苗誘導的ASD的核心定義特徵，也是與強烈疫苗接種期間反覆相關的現象。
相比之下，麥卡洛基金會的報告將累積暴露和迴歸視為必不可少，記錄了世衛組織選擇不承認的幾十年臨床模式。
Developmental Regression
The WHO completely ignores regression—a central defining feature of vaccine-induced ASD and a phenomenon repeatedly temporally associated with periods of intense vaccination.
The McCullough Foundation report, by contrast, treats cumulative exposure and regression as essential, documenting decades of clinical patterns that the WHO simply chooses not to acknowledge.
Conclusion
The WHO’s 2025 review is not a comprehensive autism assessment. It is a tightly restricted statistical exercise, intentionally engineered to prevent detection of vaccine-related risk by excluding the exact forms of evidence that reveal it. This is no surprise given that the Gates Foundation and the GAVI Vaccine Alliance are among the top 3 financial contributors to the WHO:
McCullough基金會的308研究報告是一份真正全面的ASD證據綜合，整合了流行病學、生物學、毒理學、環境科學、機械學的合理性，以及至關重要的是完整的接種疫苗與未接種疫苗的研究記錄。
因此，我們相信我們的結論是迄今為止最準確的：
The McCullough Foundation’s 308-study report is a truly comprehensive ASD evidence synthesis, integrating epidemiology, biology, toxicology, environmental science, mechanistic plausibility, and—critically—the full vaccinated-versus-unvaccinated research record.
Thus, we believe our conclusion stands as the most accurate to date:
Combination and early-timed routine childhood vaccination constitutes the most significant modifiable risk factor for ASD, supported by convergent mechanistic, clinical, and epidemiologic findings, and characterized by intensified use, the clustering of multiple doses during critical neurodevelopmental windows, and the lack of research on the cumulative safety of the full pediatric schedule.
The McCullough Foundation’s 308-study report is a truly comprehensive ASD evidence synthesis, integrating epidemiology, biology, toxicology, environmental science, mechanistic plausibility, and—critically—the full vaccinated-versus-unvaccinated research record.
Thus, we believe our conclusion stands as the most accurate to date:
McCullough基金會的308研究報告是一份真正全面的ASD證據綜合，整合了流行病學、生物學、毒理學、環境科學、機械學的合理性，以及至關重要的是完整的接種疫苗與未接種疫苗的研究記錄。
因此，我們相信我們的結論是迄今為止最準確的：
聯合和早期常規兒童疫苗接種是ASD最重要的可修改風險因素，在趨同的機械學、臨床和流行病學發現的支援下，其特點是密集使用，在關鍵神經發育視窗期間分組多劑，以及缺乏對完整兒科時間表的累積安全性的研究。
Combination and early-timed routine childhood vaccination constitutes the most significant modifiable risk factor for ASD, supported by convergent mechanistic, clinical, and epidemiologic findings, and characterized by intensified use, the clustering of multiple doses during critical neurodevelopmental windows, and the lack of research on the cumulative safety of the full pediatric schedule.
尼古拉斯·赫爾舍爾，MPH
麥卡洛基金會流行病學家和基金會管理員
支援我們的使命：mcculoughfnd.org
請考慮關注McCullough基金會和我在X（前身為Twitter）上的個人帳戶以獲取更多內容。
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Support our mission: mcculloughfnd.org
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse) is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.