Forbidden facts, p.1
Forbidden Facts, page 1
i “How do you refute officious government-promoted medical falsehoods and gaslighting? This book leads by example. With sardonic wit, de Becker carefully, calmly and objectively documents how government, industry and academia have colluded to create false narratives that seem definitive. Most of all, he invites readers to draw their own conclusions.”
—Robert Malone, MD, MS, physician, virologist, molecular biologist, and co-chair of CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices
“In an age when truth is buried beneath mountains of marketing, propaganda, and official narratives, de Becker delivers a much-needed roadmap to reality. Through gripping historical examples, he shows that when powerful institutions are faced with inconvenient truths, they don’t investigate; they ‘debunk.’ This provocative and rigorously referenced exposé empowers readers to evaluate original source material for themselves—distinguishing truth from manipulation, science from spin.”
—Pierre Kory, MD, MPA specialist in internal medicine, pulmonary diseases, and critical care medicine
“This book is a treasure trove of information that has been widely censored for decades. It is right on the mark.”
—Christiane Northrup, MD, multiple NYTimes bestselling author of Women’s Bodies, Women’s Wisdom
“Gavin de Becker has put his formidable investigative skills into this highly readable exposé of the US government’s history of hiding the harms of various substances. Just as The Gift of Fear became a classic reference work about violent behavior, Forbidden Facts is destined to become a classic about government concealment.”
—Peter A. McCullough, MD, co-author of Vaccines: Mythology, Ideology, and Reality
“Gavin de Becker is one of my favorite behavioral scientists on this planet. Blessed with peaceful humility, an expansive consciousness, and an intimate and intuitive relationship with what is, Gavin is able to communicate—with perfect clarity—the truth about issues that are enshrouded in the fog of dishonesty, manipulation, and mal-intent. Forbidden Facts cuts through these layers to reveal plain truths about government dishonesty, the actors who enable it, and the price that we pay in terms of lost health, lost happiness, and lost well-being.”
—Dr. Joseph Ladapo, author of Transcend Fear: A Blueprint for Mindful Leadership in Public Health, Professor, University of Florida College of Medicine, and Surgeon General of Florida
“If you ask nearly anyone whose paycheck depends on vaccine use or distribution (say, pediatrician, pharmacist, or former ACIP member), they would swear upon their paychecks that the history of vaccine science is a neat and tidy book of work. Gavin has compiled the evidence of the train wreck sold to the American people packaged as science and ethical medicine in an unforgettable, jarring presentation style that will leave you certain of their intent to commit mass deception.”
—James Lyons-Weiler, PhD IPAK/IPAK-EDU.org
ii
iii
Copyright © 2025 by Gavin de Becker
All Rights Reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without the express written consent of the publisher, except in the case of brief excerpts in critical reviews or articles. All inquiries should be addressed to Skyhorse Publishing,
307 West 36th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10018.
Skyhorse Publishing books may be purchased in bulk at special discounts for sales promotion, corporate gifts, fund-raising, or educational purposes. Special editions can also be created to specifications. For details, contact the Special Sales Department, Skyhorse Publishing, 307 West 36th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10018 or info@skyhorsepublishing.com.
Skyhorse® and Skyhorse Publishing® are registered trademarks of Skyhorse Publishing, Inc.®, a Delaware corporation.
Visit our website at www.skyhorsepublishing.com.
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available on file.
Hardcover ISBN: 978-1-5107-8595-3
Ebook ISBN: 978-1-5107-8596-0
Cover design by Brian Peterson
Book design by Geoff Towle
iv
v
If we are not able to ask skeptical questions, to interrogate those who tell us that something is true, to be skeptical of those in authority, then we’re up for grabs for the next charlatan—political or religious— who comes ambling along.
It wasn’t enough, Jefferson said, to enshrine some rights in a constitution or a bill of rights. The people had to be educated, and they had to practice their skepticism… otherwise, we don’t run the government, the government runs us.
— Carl Sagan
Contents
Author’s Note
Chapter One (8 minute read)
What’s Agent Orange Got To Do With It?
Chapter Two (9 mins)
Cancer from Baby Powder Gulf War Syndrome Silicone Implants Gulf War Illness Anthrax Vaccine Burn Pits SIDS
All Debunked!
Chapter Three (2 mins)
Vaccines Are the Greatest Idea Ever Conceived
Chapter Four (12 mins)
Forget About Autism
Chapter Five (2 mins)
Deceptive Duplicitous Distorted Double-Dealing Definitions
Chapter Six (6 mins)
Brain Damage by Any Other Name
Chapter Seven (12 mins)
RFK Jr & His Crazy Unhinged Questions
Chapter Eight (10 mins)
Seizures, Convulsions, Neurologic Disorders & Other Perfectly Normal Pastimes for Babies
Chapter Nine (15 mins)
Mercury
Chapter Ten (6 mins)
The Swine Flu Fiasco—Which One?
Chapter Eleven (14 minutes)
Vaccines Are the Greatest Idea Ever Conceived, for Real
Chapter Twelve (9 Mins)
Childhood Vaccines Have Saved 150-Million Lives
Chapter Thirteen (10 mins)
“Safe and Effective”
Chapter Fourteen (9 mins)
Let the Word-Games Begin
Chapter Fifteen (14 mins)
“If We Were a Group Working for Philip Morris, We’d Be Saying There’s No Relation Between Cancer and Smoking”
Chapter Sixteen (10 mins)
“We Are Kind of Caught in a Trap”
“We Have Got a Dragon by the Tail”
Chapter Seventeen (6 mins)
Trust the Media?
Chapter Eighteen (1 min)
If I Gave My Child All the Recommended Vaccines, Was That a Mistake?
Chapter Nineteen (2 Mins)
Ask Your Doctor
Chapter Twenty (3 Mins)
Crimes & Criminals: RICO
Chapter Twenty-One (1 Min)
Who to Trust
Appendix #1
Sampling of Published Papers on Covid Vaccine-Induced Cardiac Injuries to Young People
Appendix #2
Sudden Deaths of Healthy Young People
Appendix #3
Cheat Sheet for Ask Your Doctor
Appendix #4
News You Likely Missed
Appendix #5
Researching the Research
vi
Author’s Note
As you read this book, highlight anything you believe is not true. Then, make a note about what you determine is true. Without that second step, any of us might automatically discount or disbelieve accurate information simply because it differs from what we’ve heard or assumed. Hyperlinks () throughout this book link directly to original source material that can be assessed for accuracy and credibility. This way, each reader can decide what’s promotion, what’s marketing, what’s propaganda, what’s plain lies, and what is truth.
This book contains extensive favorable information about vaccines; it is not anti-vaccine or pro-vaccine. This book is about government deceit and suppression of truth.
1
Chapter One (8 minute read) What’s Agent Orange Got To Do With It?
The Earth is round, not flat, as everyone knows. And it rotates around the sun. Can we all agree on those two? Can we also agree that cigarette smoking causes cancer in some people? And gravity is the force that pulls objects toward the center of the planet?
There was a time when all these beliefs were hotly debated; today, they are all considered facts. Another thing everybody knows is that there is no link between childhood vaccines and autism. Everybody knows that notion has been debunked. Despite everybody being quite certain vaccines don’t contribute to autism, since that possibility has been debunked, just about nobody can answer these two simple questions.
Who debunked it?
How was it debunked?
Most people can’t answer even one of those questions, and that includes most pediatricians. Perhaps it was debunked so completely and obviously (known as being ‘thoroughly debunked’) that there’s no need to ever wonder how or why we are all so sure. It would be like questioning gravity, except that the theory of gravity can be tested by any of us all day long. The idea that the vaccine-autism link has been debunked is more like an article of faith, akin to Adam and Eve being the first two people on Earth.
But this is not religion; this is science, right? And that raises a third question:
Where did the idea that vaccines might be among the contributors to the increase in autism come from in the first place, such that it needed to be debunked?
For context, here are a few facts most people would agree aren’t at all controversial, since they come directly from Federal publi c health agencies:
In the 1950s, the rate of autism in American children was about one in 10,000. In the late 1980s the rate took off, so that by the year 2000, one in 150 children were diagnosed with autism. By 2023, the rate of autism in American children was one in 36. (In California, it’s currently one in every 22 children.)
Because these spiking numbers are so alarming, because this epidemic is so destructive to so many children and families, Federal public health authorities must have learned exactly what causes autism.
But they haven’t. (“Scientists don’t know exactly what causes autism spectrum disorder.” — National Institutes of Health)
Surely there must be effective drugs for treatment.
But there aren’t. (“There are no medications that treat the core symptoms of ASD.” — CDC)
Surely there must be wide agreement on what exactly autism is.
But there isn’t. There are no consistent biomarkers, no consistent physical characteristics, no blood or urine tests to confirm diagnoses — because autism is not a distinct disease. It’s called a disorder, and was previously called a syndrome — a collection of observed symptoms subject to interpretation. One doctor might diagnose autism, and another doctor seeing the same patient might say it isn’t autism, or say it’s mild autism, or say it’s nothing. Some children labeled and categorized with the diagnosis of autism appear to be fine, while others have dramatic and profound neurological disorders that require attentive care round-the-clock.
Though government scientists can’t hold firm to a definition of autism and don’t know what causes it, they claim with fist-clenching certainty to know what does not cause autism. How are they so sure? Because, as we’re all aware, any link between vaccines and autism has been debunked. Since you probably don’t know a single person who can say how it was debunked, or by whom, let’s get that foundational question out of the way now.
The possibility that any child’s autism could be linked to any vaccine or combination of vaccines was debunked by the Institute of Medicine (IOM).
What’s the Institute of Medicine? Many people assume it’s a prestigious government entity, but it’s actually a totally private organization that hires members of various professions to examine issues pertaining to public health. Though 2IOM is often paid by government, it’s also sometimes paid by private industry, including Pharma. As a private organization, IOM is not required to disclose how much it was paid for a given review, or who paid, or how much the hired experts were paid.
News media companies have tended to describe the Institute of Medicine as authoritative, independent, prestigious, respected, and the gold standard. IOM describes itself as unbiased, objective and evidence-based, and describes the experts it hires with words like esteemed and renowned, right up to distinguished and eminent. As you read on, it’ll be your call to decide how much trust to invest in IOM.
Similarly, you’ll decide how much trust to invest in me. On the one hand, I’m not a doctor, and on the other hand I’m not opining on medical science. I am a criminologist sharing information about corruption, crime and deceit, and I am a behavioral scientist sharing a few insights about human behavior and human nature. And I am a parent. I have followed my curiosity and skepticism, exactly as you can. In any event, the reader is not asked to trust me on anything, since citations with links to source material are provided throughout these pages.
Before we look at how and why IOM debunked the vaccine-autism link, let’s take a quick look at another claim they debunked, the claim that the biological weapon Agent Orange caused sickness in some Vietnam Veterans, and birth defects in some of their children.
Agent Orange might seem irrelevant to the vaccine-autism issue, however IOM used some of the very same people and applied the very same process to reach the same conclusion for both Agent Orange and vaccines. And in both instances, their debunking conclusions were extensively marketed to the American public in the same way.
A quick bit of history:
For almost ten years, the US military sprayed Agent Orange onto jungles and people in Vietnam. An ingredient known as TCDD is the most toxic form of dioxin, and causes severe injury, including malformations in test animals, and (no surprise) in people too.
When the US was accused of violating the Geneva Protocol that regulated the use of chemical weapons, our government argued that Agent Orange was not a chemical weapon. They called it an herbicide useful for destroying food crops and jungles that afforded concealment for the enemy. It wasn’t meant to hurt anyone, they insisted.
After studies showed that Agent Orange caused birth defects in test animals, the Department of Defense promised to reduce its use, though it would be years before it was officially suspended. Even the official suspension didn’t end it, alas, because some military units falsified reports to conceal their continued use of Agent Orange. Eventually the military really did stop using it in Vietnam because, well, the war in Vietnam ended. By that point, many returning veterans had reported debilitating health problems in themselves and their children, affirmed by ever-expanding and terrible toxicologic reports about TCDD.
To resist and reject these claims, the US Government wrote a check to IOM. Whether debunking the crazy idea that injecting mercury into children could possibly cause any neurological injury, or debunking the crazy idea that a military weapon containing dioxin could possibly be linked to health issues, IOM sang the same dreadful dirge. For example, they used the same approach in both scientific inquiries. (‘Scientific inquiry’ is a phrase that stretches those two words to the breaking point). They began both projects by setting forth what would not be included in their ostensibly deep explorations.
In their study of Agent Orange, IOM stated that they would not consider “toxicologic studies,” because, you know, what possible bearing could toxicology have on the topic of toxicity? Similarly, in their study of vaccine safety, their report stated at the outset that they wouldn’t “recommend a change in the licensure, scheduling, or administration of a vaccine.” Meaning, their deep and comprehensive study of childhood vaccines wouldn’t propose anything about the administration of… childhood vaccines.
After one of its many Agent Orange reviews, the Institute of Medicine announced their bold conclusion: Studies into the reproductive history of individuals who’d been exposed to dioxin were [wait for it…] needed. Studies were needed. Their subsequent Agent Orange reports of 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012 and 2014 all reached that same dramatic conclusion: Studies needed.
3 Finally in 2018, the gloves came off when the IOM reaffirmed that studies were needed, but this time recommended something new: “further specific study of the health of offspring of male Vietnam veterans.”
The bold font is theirs, by the way, because these folks wanted it clearly understood that when they conclude (five times) that further study is needed before they can conclude anything else, they really mean it. The closing words in their report didn’t pull any punches, perhaps because they never landed any punches in the first place.
“There are many questions regarding veterans’ health that cannot be adequately answered by examining superficially analogous exposures and outcomes in other populations. It is only through research on veterans themselves that the totality of the military service experience can be properly accounted for.”
I find nothing to ridicule in that intelligent sentence above — other than that it took the vaunted Institute 22 years to get there.
Though no parent would want the Government assessing childhood vaccines the same way it assessed Agent Orange, that’s exactly what happened. And both projects involved two of the same central figures from the CDC: Dr. Frank DeStefano and Ms. Coleen Boyle, PhD.
They did the job of ensuring that no link would be found between dioxin and most of the maladies reported by veterans and their children, thus denying veterans and their families any compensation. They were helped by a third person, Dr. Marie McCormick, also hired by IOM to debunk harms from both Agent Orange and later, childhood vaccines. A subsequent Congressional report about the Government’s deceitful debunking says it all right in the title:
