UVC: Ted Kuntz: How Denying Vaccine Injury Causation Puts Us All at Risk
The inaugural Understanding Vaccine Causation Conference, convened by World Council for Health Steering Committee Member, Shabnam Palesa Mohamed, took place on Feb. 5, 2022. The WCH Law and Activism Committee brought together legal practitioners, doctors, scientists, and jab victim data and advocacy groups to explore a key question: How are jab adverse events proved?
Ted Kuntz joined the Data & Advocacy panel to share his presentation, How Denying Vaccine Injury Causation Puts Us All at Risk.
[00:00:05] Shabnam Palesa Mohamed: we’ll be moving on then to Ted Kuntz from Vaccine Choice Canada, and I believe he is here with us. To tell you a little bit about Ted, he is a father and grandfather, a medical choice activist, an author, and an educator. His journey to examine the claims of the vaccine industry began after his son, Joshua, who’s neurologically injured by the DTP in 1984. Kuntz is the current president of Vaccine Choice Canada.
[00:00:35] Ted you a very, very warmly welcome. Thank you very much for joining us. We appreciate your time and your passion with this particular subject. The topic you have chosen to speak about is how denying the vaccine injury causation puts us all at risk. You have about 15 to 20 minutes followed by Q&A. The mic is yours.
[00:00:58] Ted Kuntz: Well, thank you for inviting me and thank you for this important topic. The denial of vaccine injury. Didn’t start with Covid, it’s been here the entire time and it’s a topic that has not been allowed to speak about. And so the fact that you’re giving voice to vaccine injuries is critically important and where we need to go if we’re gonna have an ethical medical system.
[00:01:19] So, Denying Vaccine Injury Causation Puts Us All At Risk. So, I use this as a way of introducing myself. So this is my son, Joshua. As you said, in the opening comments, the introduction, is that Josh was damaged by his very first vaccine shot, the DPT shot in 1984.
[00:01:39] Josh developed an uncontrolled seizure disorder that he lived with his entire life. He passed away in 2017 as a result of his, vaccine injuries. I have spent more than 30 years researching the vaccine literature because I needed to understand, first of all, what happened to my son.
[00:01:59] And then second of all, I needed to bring awareness to other parents of the risks of vaccination that were being withheld or denied. I felt a responsibility, to other parents to help them make an informed decision.
[00:02:13] What I came to recognize is that I did not make an informed decision. I did not do my due diligence. I didn’t do my homework. I accepted on faith that vaccines are safe and effective. That’s the mantra. I accepted the mantra. And I have since learned otherwise.
[00:02:32] The perspective I want to bring is broader than Covid. As I said, I believe that we’ve been living with the medical paradigm that is unwilling to acknowledge the injuries caused by vaccines. And when we are unwilling to acknowledge the injury, we actually put others at risk.
[00:02:48] And so the most ethical and safest way, to move forward is that we have to admit that, vaccines are not safe for all people. And I would question whether the paradigm has been adequately tested to actually prove its safety, in the first place.
[00:03:05] So I want to talk about concerns about vaccine safety testing, the reporting of vaccine injury, the role of parents and professionals, and then share some conclusions. And I like this quote, be aware of, half-truths you may have gotten a hold of the wrong half.
[00:03:20] So let me just share, first of all, some overall concerns that I have about the monitoring of vaccine safety. First of all, vaccines are not safety tested using the same standards required for all other pharmaceutical drugs. Now, this is often a surprise to people. They just assume that vaccines are tested by the same rigorous standards of other pharmaceutical drugs. And they’re often shocked to find out that that’s not the case.
[00:03:45] Vaccines are classified as biologics and they allow standard of safety testing that I believe is grossly inadequate. But it’s clearly not the same as the other pharmaceutical drugs. The primary method to evaluate the safety of vaccines is actually the monitoring of adverse events after the vaccine has been licensed for use.
[00:04:06] And this was a quote from Dr. Eric Rubin, and it was recently a statement that he made in reference to the Covid vaccines. But I would suggest that it’s equally could be applied to any vaccine. “We are never going to learn about how safe a vaccine is until we start giving it.” And so I think it’s important that we recognize that the reporting of adverse events is actually critical to the way that vaccine safety is being determined. And I would suggest the fact that that’s what we’re relying upon is already flawed to begin with.
[00:04:36] These are three serious concerns around vaccine safety. First of all, this is around I’m in Canada. And so I’m using Health Canada, but this is effectively international standards.
[00:04:48] None of the vaccines on Health Canada’s recommended childhood vaccination schedule was tested against a neutral placebo. This information was determined by ICAN, the Informed Consent Action Network. Del Bigtree’s group, who did a deep dive into all of the safety testing of all of the vaccines and the childhood vaccine schedule and determined that none of them, zero of the vaccines, was tested against the neutral placebo.
[00:05:15] What we also know is that childhood vaccines are actively monitored for safety for only a few days or at most a few weeks before they are licensed for use. And again, this is often a shock to people to understand how short is the active monitoring period for vaccine adverse events.
[00:05:35] I would suggest that this is not enough time, I think it’s pretty obvious, to show whether a vaccine causes auto-immune, neurological, or developmental conditions, and other chronic diseases.
[00:05:44] And so this is just an example to compare how a pharmaceutical product is tested compared to the way childhood vaccines are tested. So I use as an example, Viagra. So the safety testing period for Viagra was conducted over a 10 year period with thousands of subjects before it was licensed for public use. There was both a subject group and a control group. The control group received an inert placebo, a sugar pill that looked identical to the pill given to the subject group. After 10 years, the researchers compared the data to determine if the product was both safe and effective.
[00:06:19] Now compare this with the safety testing of childhood vaccines licensed for use in Canada. This is the period of active monitoring for safety prior to licensing. So with a Hep-B by Merck, it was actively monitored for five days and included only 147 participants in their study. The D tap was monitored for eight days, polio for three days, the pneumococcus for seven days, menningicoccal for seven days, the MMR was monitored for a whole 42 days and included 342 children, the Hep-B was monitored for four days, Hib for three days, rotavirus for eight days, influenza for four days. You know, this should shock us that this is the active monitoring period for the testing prior to licensing.
[00:07:04] Our public health officials claim that the artificial stimulation of the immune system with injected ingredients, what we call vaccination, is the safest, most effective, and best way to protect our children and communities. The problem is that there was no robust evidence to support this claim. And that’s not my opinion. That’s the opinion of the US Institute of Medicine. They wrote a few years ago, “few studies have attempted a global assessment of the entire sequence of immunizations or variations in the overall immunization schedule and categories of health outcomes. And none has compared entirely unimmunized populations with those fully immunized for the health outcomes of concern to stakeholders.”
[00:07:52] In 2011, the Institute of Medicine reviewed 155 health conditions that may be associated with the varicella tetanus, hepatitis B, and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines. The IOM decided that there were too few scientifically sound studies to determine whether or not vaccines cause any one of more than 100 serious brain and immune system problems, including multiple sclerosis, arthritis, lupus, stroke, SIDS, autism, and asthma. So what this is saying is that the studies don’t exist. And so we have made assumptions about safety without actually having verified it using evidence.
[00:08:36] If you take the time to read the vaccine information inserts, which every parent and every individual who is receiving a vaccine should, but that’s often not encouraged or even discouraged. What you will discover is that they clearly state that the vaccines have not been tested for their ability to cause cancer, to damage an organism, to damage the genetic information within a cell, to change the genetic information of an organism, to impair fertility, or to cause long-term adverse reactions.
[00:09:10] In 1987, the US Congress, as part of the 1986 act, that gave, vaccine manufacturers, legal immunity for injury and death caused by their products. Congress mandated the Department of Health and Human Services to continuously improve the safety of vaccine products and report on their progress every two years. In 2018, in response to a freedom of information request, which also came from ICAN, the department admitted that it had failed to file a single report to Congress on the improvement of vaccine safety.
[00:09:47] So even though it was a requirement by Congress over that 30 some odd year period, not a single report had been filed.
[00:09:55] So vaccines are the only product, medical or otherwise, where a manufacturer is not legally responsible for injury and death caused by their products. The result of this legal immunity is that no one is held responsible when injuries and deaths occur. And this is a significant problem.
[00:10:17] A consequence of this legal immunity is that there is no legal or financial incentive for the vaccine industry to make their products safer even when there is clear evidence that vaccines can be made safer.
[00:10:32] So what’s the role of parents in the safety testing? Well, the reporting of adverse events, as we’ve identified here, is absolutely critical to the monitoring of the safety of vaccines. And yet when parents report that their child has been injured by a vaccine, this is the kind of response they get. Oh, it’s just a coincidence. This is a normal response. The injury would have happened anyways, or the loss of ability would have happened anyways. You have poor genes. You’re looking for somebody to blame. And it couldn’t have been the vaccine. And I know this because these are the things that I was told when I asked my doctor to acknowledge that my son was vaccine injured. And I got all of these explanations about why it couldn’t possibly be the vaccine.
[00:11:24] I think we also have to look at how medical professionals, the role they’re playing in the failure to acknowledge vaccine injury. First of all, they’re not trained to recognize vaccine injuries. And they’re often actively discouraged from reporting vaccine injuries.
[00:11:37] Dr. Trozzi Dr. Phillips in Canada have acknowledged how difficult it’s been to file vaccine injury reports pertaining to the Covid vaccine. Most professionals have been educated to believe that vaccines are safe and therefore there’s no point in reporting something because it couldn’t possibly be the vaccine. The reporting is voluntary and there’s no accountability when professionals fail to report vaccine injury.
[00:12:03] When my son was injured, I insisted that the family physician who administered the shot report the vaccine injury, and he refused. He said that there was no way that he was going to make that report.
[00:12:14] I think what we have to recognize is that it appears that there’s more interest in protecting the vaccine paradigm than there is an actually protecting the individual health of citizens. And this is a statement out of the Federal Register in the United States back in 1984 when there was doubts raised about the safety of the MMR vaccine. They put in their federal register that any possible doubts, whether or not well founded about the safety of the vaccine, cannot be allowed to exist. And if you read it further, what they basically say is that for the safety of the community we cannot acknowledge that vaccines are unsafe.
[00:12:50] I’m sure many of you are aware of this study that was conducted by the US Department of Health and Human Services that found that fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.
[00:13:00] And this was a statement by Dr. Larry Palevksy, who said, “It didn’t appear that the scientific studies that we were given were actually designed to prove and test the safety and efficacy. And that conclusions made about vaccine safety and efficacy just did not fit the scientific standards that I was trained to uphold in my medical school training”.
[00:13:20] And this is the case for many doctors. When they begin to actually do the dive, they discovered that the evidence is not there. And the same with us as parents. When we actually do our homework, we discover that what we’re dealing with is more ideology than evidence-based medicine.
[00:13:38] For decades, vaccine safety advocates like myself have been calling for studies comparing vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations to measure overall health outcomes. And public health institutions, including Health Canada, have refused to conduct such studies. I suggest it concern all of us when the medical establishment is unwilling to do the most basic research needed to confirm whether vaccinated children are healthier than unvaccinated children.
[00:14:06] The bottom line is there is no substantive evidence that children who receive the current vaccine schedule are healthier than children who do not. And in fact, there is a growing body of evidence that it’s the unvaccinated who are healthier than the vaccinated children.
[00:14:20] I would suggest that the testing should be even more rigorous. Given that vaccines are given to healthy children, the safety testing ought to be even more rigorous than is required for other pharmaceutical products. But this is not so.
[00:14:35] The safety testing of vaccine products is less rigorous, it’s incomplete, and protocols appear to have been intentionally designed to prevent identifying long term adverse effects. And I think all we need to do is look at the injection for the Covid vaccines, which includes genetically modified or manufactured mRNA. A never before utilized technology with unknown and potentially life altering consequences. This means that the Covid vaccine testing is effectively human experimentation.
[00:15:04] There’s no disagreement about that. As those participating in the Covid injection are participating in the human experiment. The problem is that is not being made clear to those that are participating. They think the testing has already been completed and the results are already determined.
[00:15:21] And so the question I want, I want to ask is, do we really want to know? Do we really want to know if vaccines are safe? Do we really want to know if they’re effective? And do we really want to know if they’re necessary? And I would suggest that, given the unwillingness to look at this critically and with an open scientific mind, I would suggest that the answer is no, that we don’t really want to know.
[00:15:44] This is me signing my son’s name to the VAXXED bus that made a tour through the United States. If any of you have the opportunity to see the VAXXED bus, every square inch of that bus is covered with the names of people that have been vaccine injured. It really is a moving memorial to a vaccine injury.
[00:16:06] It brings someone to tears to witness the amount of injury that is not being acknowledged. And I think we have a responsibility to have the conversation we’re having today to say, we’re dealing with products that are not appropriately tested and when that happens, we put us all at risk.
[00:16:26] You know, one of the questions that I wrestle with is how many more children were harmed, because of the failure to acknowledge my son’s vaccine injury. I think this is a part of the medical system that is the most, it is celebrated as being the highest miracle of modern medicine and I would suggest it’s the most flawed. And if the trust in the medical system is going to be sustained, we have to look seriously and courageously at the impact that vaccines are having.
[00:16:59] Shabnam Palesa Mohamed: Thank you, Ted Kuntz from Vaccine Choice Canada for a comprehensive presentation that I think also very effectively takes us into the history of vaccines and provides cogent reasons why we need to critically analyze and objectively analyze the safety and efficacy of not just the Covid-19 injections, but in fact, all vaccines along the schedule in different countries around the world.
[00:17:25] I want to ask my colleague, Mark Trozzi, to come in with a comment before we move to Q&A, Mark?
[00:17:34] Dr. Mark Trozzi: Thanks Shabnam. And thank you very much, Ted, for that presentation.
[00:17:38] For those of you not from Canada or in the Canadian circle, you might not know Ted. Ted is a real- been a great leader in this movement. Been dealing with this long before people like myself woke up to it.
[00:17:50] I just wanted to support, I mean, I went to medical school, I learned a lot of stuff there, there’s a lot of good stuff I learned there, but I have to say from that experience, our training in immunization was minimal. It was really dogmatic, almost cultish. I see it now. I didn’t see it then.
[00:18:10] When they launched Covid and began corralling humanity into this forced injection, which is even worse than the vaccine Ted is talking about prior, it led me down that rabbit hole. And when I looked at testimony of leaders in the vaccine industry, it became very obvious that we had been very deceived. So, you know, before they launched this atom bomb called the Covid injection, they were firing shots at us already. And I think for anyone who questions that there’s any validity that who’s been indoctrinated in the way I was, just look into the subject of adjutants.
[00:18:49] And again, thank you so much Ted, really appreciate you.
[00:18:52] Ted Kuntz: Thanks, Mark.
[00:18:53] Shabnam Palesa Mohamed: Ted, do you want to respond to anything Mark’s mentioned? I mean, the fact that he’s mentioned the very lack of training in medical school is certainly a cause for alarm, but that’s been the status quo for many, many years and it appears deliberately so. Your thoughts?
[00:19:08] Ted Kuntz: Well, and that was my experience. You know, when I first began to engage my family physician around my son’s injury, you know, he was completely in denial. He said vaccines are safe and effective, you’re misguided. As I said, you know, you’re looking for somebody to blame, et cetera, et cetera.
[00:19:21] I was a graduate student at the University of British Columbia. I had access to the medical libraries. And so I did a deep dive into the reading, the medical research, and I would photocopy it and I would bring it to the physician. And very quickly he said, “Ted, you actually know more about this topic than I do? Or any other physician that I know.”
[00:19:41] And what I came to understand is that just as Mark has said, is that they are taught how to deliver the vaccine schedule. They’re now taught how to deal with vaccine hesitant parents, but they’re not taught to recognize or treat vaccine injury. There’s even an unwillingness to acknowledge it because there’s such a commitment to that paradigm that there’s an unwillingness to question it.
[00:20:05] One of the, essays that I’ve written in my book Dare to Question is, are we dealing with science or are we dealing with religion? And the answer that I would give is that is faith based, it’s not evidence-based. And it has lost its moral compass. It has lost its ethical basis a long time ago.
[00:20:24] And I would suggest that professionals in the medical system have responsibility to reclaim that. And the first way to reclaim is saying this practice has to be evidence-based.
[00:20:34] Shabnam Palesa Mohamed: Absolutely. And I just want to also mention before asking you a couple of questions that your son Joshua is certainly a hero in his own right. Certainly to you, that’s very clear, but to everyone who’s able to see the passion with which you conduct your work in advocacy. May he rest in peaceful power.
[00:20:54] Ted, I want to talk about some questions that I’d previously asked Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in an interview I did with him for TrialSite News about the legislation. That it appears has deliberately put in place to be able to enable or to enable the industry to function the way it does. And that’s, you know, the CARES Act, the prep Act, it’s all of those acts that are notorious for their, you know, stifling of transparency and accountability. What sort of progress has been made in challenging, for example, immunity related legislation in Canada, for example, anywhere that you know of?
[00:21:32] Ted Kuntz: Well, I would agree with you. I think the Act in 1986 that granted the vaccine industry legal immunity from injury or death, or for the harms caused by their products was a huge mistake. And it has unleashed, you know- there was just a growth of vaccines that were pushed out onto the market after that, and then compelling legislators to impose those upon our children.
[00:21:56] And it’s, from a business model, you know, it’s a brilliant model is that they get to push out product with no liability. In Canada, the situation is even worse, is that I’m not aware of any successful case of being able to claim for vaccine injury, because in Canada the practice has been not only do you have to prove causation, but you have to prove negligence.
[00:22:18] And if those administering the vaccines are following the recommended schedule, it’s virtually impossible to prove negligence. So, you know, there is no financial or legal accountability in my country. And I would suggest that the only way to get integrity back into the vaccine industry is they have to be personally held liable, financially, legally, criminally, when they cause harm.
[00:22:43] Shabnam Palesa Mohamed: Very important point to raise there and certainly eyebrow raising on the topic of negligence as it relates to causation.
[00:22:51] In the US there is a vaccine injury quasi court, at best.
[00:22:56] Ted Kuntz: Right.
[00:22:57] Shabnam Palesa Mohamed: And the number of people, and I was doing this research last year, that successfully attain some form of compensation, albeit not enough, and there’s certainly no admission of liability, not from a legal perspective in any case, is around 40%. And it could have grown since then or maybe it’s less. Is there some sort of quasi court in Canada as well that operates like this? And if so, how many people have been compensated for the pain and suffering or damages?
[00:23:28] Ted Kuntz: Well, first of all, Canada is of the G 20 nations. There’s only two nations that don’t have a vaccine injury compensation program, and that’s Russia and Canada. Our prime minister introduced a vaccine injury compensation program specific to Covid last December but we’re yet to see the results of that, whether in fact it’s a program that has any integrity.
[00:23:51] But with regards to the other vaccines on the childhood schedule, there is no vaccine injury compensation program in Canada, therefore there’s no vaccine injury court. You know, it doesn’t exist in Canada. We don’t have vaccine injury, therefore we don’t need to have a compensation program. At least that’s the perception that I- the politicians that I have approached on why we don’t have a compensation program in Canada.
[00:24:17] Shabnam Palesa Mohamed: Ted, there’s a question here from Derk Vessel. Do you already work with the Children’s Health Defense?
[00:24:23] Ted Kuntz: Well, I’ve had some good conversations with Children’s Health Defense and National Vaccine Information Center and the Australian vaccine group. I mean, as part of my work as President of Vaccine Choice Canada, I liaise with the other organizations globally who are committed to the same cause of protecting our children.
[00:24:42] Shabnam Palesa Mohamed: There’s another question here for you, Ted. You zoned in on this one earlier on when he spoke about the doctors that don’t want to speak out. And Simon Powell’s question is, what are some of the methods of suppression that doctors face when they try and tell the truth? One of them could be license revocation, there could be others. Could light be shed on some of these? Ted, do you know anything about that? What kind of methods of suppression doctors face, and maybe we can bring Mark in to comment as well.
[00:25:08] Ted Kuntz: Well, I think Mark probably has a more firsthand experience, but I would suggest it’s shaming- is the first thing, is that you’re, it’s suggested to you that it’s so clear that vaccines are safe and effective, that you’re not allowed to question it.
[00:25:22] So if you even try to question it you’re marginalized as somehow being a quack. And so it’s all part of avoiding accountability in this industry and- but Mark, I think you’re in a much better place to talk about exactly what stops doctors from acknowledging vaccine injury.
[00:25:42] Dr. Mark Trozzi: Well, thanks Ted. So prior to Covid, already it’s a very cult-like subject in medicine. You don’t discuss it. And if you question it you’re a quack. It’s just, it’s bizarre how it is just believed that vaccines can only be good among clinicians.
[00:26:03] So that was before the rollout of this. Now with this, they took it to a whole other level. So you know, going back a few months into the Covid phenomena, in a conversation I think about masks or about a PCR test, like where I was doing a lot of homework, my chief of one of my emergency departments said, Mark, it is not our job to question public health.
[00:26:26] So, that’s the way it was going. Now, of course, my case and our friend Patrick Phillips are a little different. In my case, I decided I was basically going to leave and just join the full-time fight against this. Patrick did a very ethical thing and stayed and tried to take care of the patients.
[00:26:48] Now, in Patrick’s case, he has been accused of the crime of completing vaccine adverse reaction forms. He has had his license constantly under pressure. And to boot, the reports that he’s handed in have been thrown out. They have been negated. People have been actually called by the public health official and told the doctor was wrong, what happened to you wasn’t from the Covid injection. It’s just so extreme, it’s criminal, and it’s very culty.
[00:27:23] Shabnam Palesa Mohamed: Thank you for that, Mark. And I wanted to say thank you to you, Ted. There’s been a great demand for your slides that we’re going to request a copy from you. We will be able to share with all participants, and those who registered.
[00:27:35] And of course, just to remind you that this conference of causation is being recorded. So you will have access to it afterwards. I think this is a great demand for copies of the recording as well. And that of course tells us if we need to be hosting subsequent Understanding Vaccine Position Conferences.
[00:27:52] Ted, thank you very much for contributing your time, your passion, and your commitment, not only to this pivotal conference, but to help science and the truth in your country and around the world.
[00:28:05] Ted Kuntz: Thank you. Thank you for your good work and thanks for inviting me, giving voice to my son’s experience.
[00:28:11] Shabnam Palesa Mohamed: You’re most welcome. It is indeed an honour.