Del Bigtree: The Study That Was Hidden

Del Bigtree describes how established dogmas around medical science rest on deception and weak foundations. The growing recognition of this reality marks a shift away from institutional certainty toward closer scrutiny of study methods, long-term outcomes, and unpublished data. Bigtree puts particular emphasis on a four-year retrospective study at Henry Ford Health, completed in 2020, comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children that was not published—allegedly due to the implications of its findings.Watch the Full-Length InterviewDel Bigtree is a prominent media producer and public advocate known for his work in independent journalism and health discourse. As the founder of ICAN and host of The HighWire, he has built a dedicated following by challenging mainstream narratives and encouraging open dialogue. His work reflects a strong commitment to transparency, personal liberty, and informed decision-making, positioning him as a notable voice for those seeking alternative perspectives in modern public health conversations.Visit TheHighWire.comVisit ICAN Official SiteAn Inconvenient Study (Film)May 30 and 31st. Join Del Bigtree, Dr. Trozzi and a phenomenal line up of Medical truth and freedom leaders from the USA and world. Attend online or in person. More info↗ Attend Online or In-PersonThe People vs. Poison protest/rally against liability protection for glyphosate (Roundup). April 27, 2026 · 9:00 AM · U.S. Supreme Court, Washington, D.C. More info↗This interview with Del Bigtree is rich with insights, but we know time is limited. Below is a concise summary highlighting the key takeaways from our discussion for your convenience.Vaccine injury is widespread rather than rare. During the 2016 U.S. tour of Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe, audiences were asked at multiple daily screenings to stand if they had a vaccine-injured child, with roughly three quarters consistently standing across events.No placebo-controlled trials exist to establish vaccine safety. Dr. Marcus Zervos, head of infectious disease at Henry Ford Health, acknowledged after reviewing major medical databases that true saline placebo-controlled trials have not been conducted, limiting definitive conclusions about long-term safety.A large-scale vaccinated versus unvaccinated study was completed but not published. A retrospective study, conducted within the Henry Ford Health system over approximately four years and completed in 2020, was withheld by its lead researcher due to concern about its broader implications.Vaccinated children show higher rates of chronic and developmental conditions in the data. The study reported that vaccinated children were about 2.5 times more likely to develop chronic illness, with roughly sixfold increases in neurodevelopmental and autoimmune disorders.Long-term projections show a substantial divergence in health outcomes. By age ten, approximately 57 percent of vaccinated children in the dataset were projected to develop a chronic condition, compared to about 17 percent of unvaccinated children. This is likely an underestimate. Institutional pressure discourages publication of unfavorable findings. Concerns about professional consequences, program disruption, and reputational damage were cited as key reasons for withholding the study results.Belief in disease eradication shapes decision-making within the system. A strong commitment to eliminating infectious disease, described by Bigtree as a form of “god complex,” ensures continued conformity to established programs even when conflicting evidence is encountered.The absence of long-term safety trials limits detection of chronic effects. Without multi-year placebo-controlled studies, links between interventions and conditions such as autoimmune disease or neurodevelopmental disorders remain difficult to quantify.Financial structures and professional incentives reinforce conformity. Physicians operating within large hospital systems face income, institutional, and career pressures that discourage deviation from standardized practices.The COVID response highlighted systemic rigidity in medical practice. Restrictions on early treatment and reliance on centralized protocols reduced independent clinical judgment and exposed weaknesses in the current model.Public trust in medicine is reinforced through cultural narratives. Media portrayals and long-standing social norms position doctors as authoritative figures, reducing public willingness to question medical guidance.Restoring trust requires transparency and informed consent. A shift toward clear risk communication, acknowledgment of uncertainty, and individualized decision-making is necessary to rebuild legitimacy.An Inconvenient Study (Film)