Lawsuit Slams CDC for Failing to Test 72-Dose Childhood Vaccine Schedule, By Mrs. (Dr) Abigail Knight (Florida)
A groundbreaking federal lawsuit filed last week accuses the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of endangering children by failing to study the cumulative health impacts of its 72-dose childhood immunisation schedule. Drs. Paul Thomas and Kenneth P. Stoller, both stripped of their medical licenses for challenging vaccine policies, along with Stand for Health Freedom, argue that this oversight violates federal law and constitutional rights, turning America's kids into unwitting subjects of an untested medical experiment. The suit, targeting CDC Director Susan Monarez, demands accountability for a program that administers more vaccines than any other nation while producing some of the sickest children in the developed world.
The plaintiffs are no strangers to the costs of dissent. Dr. Thomas lost his paediatric practice after publishing a study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children, only to see the study retracted under pressure despite peer review. Dr. Stoller's license was revoked for issuing vaccine exemptions based on genetic risks. Stand for Health Freedom, led by Leah Wilson, supports families struggling to secure exemptions for vaccine-injured kids, blocked by the CDC's narrow criteria. Attorney Rick Jaffe, representing the group, calls the lawsuit a challenge to the CDC's "structural failure" to test the full schedule, hoping to spark public demand for scientific rigour.
The CDC's childhood vaccine schedule, set by its Advisory Committee on Immunisation Practices (ACIP), evaluates individual vaccines for short-term risks but ignores their combined effects, despite decades of calls from the National Academy of Medicine for cumulative studies. The lawsuit labels this "deliberate ignorance," noting a 1984 Federal Register entry prioritising vaccine uptake over safety doubts. With the schedule ballooning from 24 to over 72 doses, chronic illnesses have surged; autism rates from 1 in 150 to 1 in 31, and over half of U.S. children now face chronic diseases, per the White House's MAHA Report. No other developed nation matches these figures.
The suit claims the CDC violates the Administrative Procedure Act by ignoring critical safety questions and breaches First Amendment rights by censoring dissenting doctors and denying parents informed consent. The Fifth Amendment is also at stake, as the schedule undermines parents' rights to direct medical care and children's bodily integrity. The CDC's rigid contraindications, limited to rare conditions like severe allergies, fuel state mandates that punish physicians like Thomas and Stoller for questioning the one-size-fits-all approach. Most vaccines fall under Category A (universal), with only COVID-19 and Meningitis B shots allowing shared decision-making.
Coincidentally, on the day the lawsuit was filed, HHS announced the revival of the Task Force on Safer Childhood Vaccines, dormant since 1998. The plaintiffs call this insufficient without comprehensive testing. The suit seeks a court order declaring the CDC's framework unlawful and mandating rigorous studies, aiming to restore medical freedom and public trust. The American Academy of Pediatrics, heavily funded by industry, has pushed back, suing HHS over revised vaccine policies and demanding an end to exemptions, which plaintiffs say values profits over kids.
Funded by crowdfunding, this case exposes a public health crisis: an untested vaccine regimen linked to rising childhood illnesses, enforced through state mandates and professional censorship. As the plaintiffs fight for transparency, the lawsuit challenges a system that, they argue, sacrifices scientific integrity for policy goals, leaving families and doctors to bear the consequences.
Comments