For years, parents were assured that the childhood schedule was grounded in rigorous science, backed by exhaustive safety studies, and overseen by responsible institutions. Doctors who questioned that narrative were treated as outliers, censured, and publicly shamed, even as chronic childhood illness skyrocketed and federal agencies continued to expand the schedule without proper justification. Now, a landmark lawsuit has shattered the illusion. Two pediatricians have shed light on a damning breach of integrity: that the U.S. health authorities never conducted the foundational research required to justify the 72-dose schedule they promote. This legal challenge exposes not only the scientific void beneath federal policy, but the culture of intimidation, retaliation, and censorship used to silence any physician who dared to look too closely. At this link, you can read the lawsuit in full: (Click Here)The publicly crowdfunded lawsuit targets the CDC and former director Susan Monarez for failing to test the safety of the full 72-dose childhood schedule. Attorney Rick Jaffe and the two plaintiffs explain, in their filing, that neither the CDC nor the FDA has examined how multiple shots interact when administered in close succession, nor whether the schedule is safe when taken as a whole. In short, federal regulators built an ever-expanding system on the assumption of safety—without producing evidence to support it. Parents were led to believe the schedule had undergone rigorous long-term evaluation, yet the lawsuit asserts that no such evaluation ever occurred. One of the plaintiffs, Dr. Paul Thomas, did what federal agencies would not: he conducted a peer-reviewed comparison of vaccinated and unvaccinated children using longitudinal data from his practice. His findings were clear. Children following the standard schedule experienced significantly higher rates of asthma, allergies, and ADHD—conditions that have quietly become normalized in modern childhood. Within five days of publishing these results, his medical license was suspended. The paper was also retracted. As Willamette Week gleefully reported in 2020, the Oregon Medical Board accused Dr. Thomas of posing an “immediate danger to public health”—a claim that said more about the board’s fear of real debate than about Dr. Thomas’ scientific integrity. His alternative schedule, and his evidence suggesting lower chronic illness among less vaccinated children, were treated as threats to the narrative rather than data. Meanwhile, the CDC produced no research refuting, or even engaging with, his findings.The second pediatrician in the lawsuit, Dr. Kenneth Stoller, faced retaliation for an equally principled stance. Dr. Stoller used genetic testing to identify children who might be more susceptible to vaccine injury—a method that should have been welcomed as a more thorough way to ensure safety. Instead, it put him squarely in the sights of regulators. For refusing to ignore individualized risk and for declining to force high-risk children into a one-size-fits-all protocol, the Medical Board of California revoked his medical license.The lawsuit, continuing on this theme, describes how ACIP’s ‘Category A’ designations make nearly every childhood shot a universal recommendation. Dr. Stoller’s case shows how rigid bureaucratic rules have replaced individualized care, removing the clinical judgement of physicians from the process. This is one of many examples where “consensus” is upheld not through evidence, but through punishment.The lawsuit reveals a striking lapse in federal oversight: since the enactment of the 1986 National Vaccine Act, HHS has been required to submit safety reports to Congress every two years. Over the span of almost forty years, not a single report has been submitted. Regulators ignored the law’s most basic accountability requirement, leaving national vaccination policy without legislative scrutiny or transparent long-term evaluation. The legal filing also revisits the Institute of Medicine’s 2013 remarks on the failure to analyse results against a control group: “No studies have compared the differences in health outcomes that some stakeholders questioned between entirely unimmunized populations of children and fully immunized children.” This observation came from the nation’s most authoritative independent scientific body.The lawsuit aims to dismantle the aforementioned “Category A” system, compel transparent research comparing fully vaccinated and unvaccinated children, restore genuine medical freedom, and establish that the CDC’s current framework is arbitrary, unconstitutional, and unfit for governing public health.The following video is a concise summary of the information above. Source: Done with Diligence (Facebook)Public understanding of these issues has long been shaped by aggressively pro-pharmaceutical commentators, including Dr. David Gorski. Science-Based Medicine—a rather ironically named outlet—published his hostile critique of Dr. Thomas, dismissing the research outright. Gorski tarred him with “healthcare professionals (…) who are very awful people, with very awful, unscientific beliefs,” yet his own writing offered little more than uncritical repetition of institutional talking points and an air of moral superiority.His portrayal of Dr. Thomas’s work as “dangerous” now borders on satire, since this lawsuit confirms the very questions Thomas raised were the ones the CDC neglected to address decades ago.This lawsuit and the events surrounding it expose a system that acts without evidence, punishes inquiry, ignores statutory obligations, and relies on disciplinary bodies and media enforcers to preserve an illusion of certainty. Doctors who attempt to fill the scientific void left by regulators are stripped of their livelihoods while the agencies tasked with safeguarding public health fail to produce the research necessary to justify their recommendations.Parents have every right to be angry. They trusted federal agencies to uphold the law and investigate safety. Instead, those agencies expanded the childhood schedule without conducting the foundational studies that Congress required, leading to undue harm. Former CDC leaders, who projected confidence while failing to meet even basic oversight standards, should be deeply ashamed of what is now coming to light. The Oregon Medical Board, which targeted physicians for asking uncomfortable questions, must not escape scrutiny either.This lawsuit vindicates all doctors whose careers were attacked for prioritizing individualized care and genuine scientific inquiry. Their courage stands in stark contrast to the regulatory bodies that enforced silence out of self-preservation or self-interest. And as the failures of institutions like PHAC, the CPSO, and other medical colleges become increasingly undeniable, the public’s demand for accountability will only continue to grow.Read the full lawsuit: (Click Here) (Donate)Children’s Health Defense — U.S. Doctors Sue CDC Over Untested 72-Dose Vaccine Schedule (Read here)Willamette Week — Prominent Anti-Vaccine Pediatrician Dr. Paul Thomas Has License Suspended by the Oregon Medical Board (Read Here. Please do NOT support)Science-Based Medicine — The Oregon Medical Board suspends the medical license of antivax pediatrician Dr. Paul Thomas (Read Here. Please do NOT support)We cannot carry this mission forward without you. Your support fuels our research, amplifies public awareness, and powers grassroots movements driving real, lasting change. To contribute, consider a paid Substack subscription or making a one time donation today.Support Our MissionThankyou to Wilma Brethour for bringing this important action to our attention. If you are in the Bancroft region, you can get involved with her excellent Freedom group by emailing your request to: wbrethour@hotmail.comRenowned pediatrician Paul Thomas, M.D., is challenging the one-size-fits-all vaccine narrative, both through this legal action and his book: The Vaccine-Friendly Plan (Click Here) Dr. Kenneth Stoller aimed to protect children from preventable vaccine harm, and for taking this stand he had his license revoked. Despite this, he is still fighting for medical freedom and integrity. Attorney Rick Jaffe is supporting the lawsuit and ensuring that the CDC is held accountable.
Landmark Paediatricians Lawsuit Against the CDC
Date:
