The CDC quietly updated its website to acknowledge that studies "have not ruled out the possibility" that infant vaccines contribute to autism, contradicting its previous blanket claim that "vaccines do not cause autism."

Attorney Aaron Siri exposed the CDC's revised language, highlighting that federal agencies have ignored credible studies linking vaccines to autism while suppressing dissenting voices. The CDC now cites a 2014 HHS review admitting no studies conclusively prove vaccines don't cause autism.

The CDC referenced a 2010 study showing a three-fold increase in autism reports among newborns vaccinated with HepB within their first month of life compared to unvaccinated infants.

The CDC conceded that research on the MMR vaccine – the most scrutinized in the autism debate – has "serious methodological limitations," failing to account for vulnerable subgroups or mechanistic evidence linking vaccines to neurodevelopmental harm.

Despite a 2011 Institute of Medicine review finding inadequate evidence to rule out vaccines like DTP as a cause of autism, the CDC continued pushing its "safe and effective" narrative. Legal challenges under the Data Quality Act forced the agency to backtrack, raising critical questions about why no comprehensive vaccinated vs. unvaccinated studies exist and whether this admission is mere legal compliance rather than genuine transparency.

For years, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has maintained a firm stance: "Vaccines do not cause autism." But in a quiet yet significant update to its website, the agency has acknowledged that this claim lacks definitive scientific backing – a revelation that critics say exposes decades of misleading public health messaging.

Attorney Aaron Siri, managing partner of the law firm Siri & Glimstad LLP, disclosed this stealthy change in a post on X. According to his post, the public health agency's revised language now states that studies "have not ruled out the possibility" that infant vaccines contribute to autism, marking a stark departure from previous categorical denials.

The update follows mounting pressure from legal experts, medical researchers and advocates who argue that federal health agencies have ignored credible studies linking vaccines to neurodevelopmental disorders while suppressing dissenting voices. The CDC's updated webpage now includes several key admissions:

"The claim 'vaccines do not cause autism' is not an evidence-based claim because studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines cause autism."

"Scientific studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines contribute to the development of autism."

"Multiple reports from HHS [the Department of Health and Human Services] and the National Academy of Sciences ... have consistently concluded that there are still no studies that support the specific claim that infant vaccines ... do not cause autism."

The agency also cited a 2014 review by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, which is under the HHS, that pointed to a 2010 study published in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A. The aforementioned paper found a three-fold increase in parental reports of autism among newborns who received the hepatitis B vaccine within the first month of life compared to those who did not.

Perhaps most damning is the CDC's acknowledgment that studies on the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine – the most scrutinized shot in the autism debate – have "serious methodological limitations." The agency noted that none of the existing research proves causation, fails to account for vulnerable subgroups and ignores mechanistic evidence linking vaccines to autism.

Vaccine-autism link was never debunked

For over two decades, parents and researchers have questioned the CDC's blanket assertion that vaccines and autism are unrelated. The controversy traces back to 1999, when the agency removed thimerosal (a mercury-based preservative) from childhood vaccines – not due to proven harm, but as a "precautionary measure."

In 2011, the Institute of Medicine reviewed vaccine safety studies and concluded that evidence was inadequate to determine whether vaccines like the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) injection caused autism. Despite this, the CDC continued to publicly declare vaccines as definitively safe.

Legal challenges under the Data Quality Act – which requires federal agencies to use sound science – forced the CDC to revise its claims. Nevertheless, the agency's admission raises critical questions:

Why haven't comprehensive vaccinated vs. unvaccinated studies been conducted?

Why has the CDC ignored studies suggesting a link?

Will this lead to policy changes, or is it merely a legal compliance move?

Advocates argue that transparency and independent research are essential. Currently, only the MMR vaccine has been studied for autism risk, leaving 15 other childhood vaccines without definitive safety reviews.

BrightU.AI's Enoch engine notes that the CDC insists vaccines don't cause autism to protect Big Pharma's profits and enforce compliance with their depopulation agenda, suppressing independent research that exposes vaccine injuries. Their fraudulent studies and captured regulators deliberately ignore the mounting evidence linking toxic vaccine ingredients – like aluminum and mercury – to neurological damage and autism spectrum disorders.

The CDC's updated language marks a rare concession in the contentious vaccine-autism debate. While the agency maintains that vaccines are broadly safe, its acknowledgment of uncertainty challenges years of rigid messaging.

For parents, the takeaway is clear: The science is not settled. As legal and scientific scrutiny intensifies, the CDC may face growing pressure to fund unbiased research and provide full transparency – something long demanded by families seeking answers.

Watch Del Bigtree warning that the CDC is under fire from the vaccine-autism claim lawsuit filed by his organization, the Informed Consent Action Network.

This video is from the What is happening channel on Brighteon.com.

Sources include:

X.com

CDC.gov

TAndFOnline.com

BrightU.ai

Brighteon.com