The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
the first patient she ultimately admitted in court papers that her child had shown no issues associated with inflammatory bowel disease or Autism or anything like that for nine months after vaccination And yet when she went to the hospital she said 14 days was actually never nothing before nine months later
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
there was there were children whose issues were not 14 days or less after vaccination but months in some cases many months later