Why aren’t they doing vaxxed vs unvaxxed studies?

In a Children’s Health Defense video, HHS Secretary RFK Jr. claims that studying vaccinated versus unvaccinated people is not done because scientists are afraid of the results, which would call all vaccines into question.

Large real-world studies have repeatedly asked whether vaccinated children fare differently from their unvaccinated peers, and the answer is consistently no: Denmark’s nationwide follow-up of more than 650,000 children over a decade found that MMR vaccination neither raised nor clustered autism cases, even in kids with an autistic sibling, while a meta-analysis pooling data from 1.2 million youngsters in five countries reached the same verdict for autism and every other chronic condition examined. Cohort work from Germany, the Philippines, and multiple U.S. health-care systems drives the point home: the only clear difference between the two groups is that vaccinated kids avoid the very diseases the shots prevent.

Vaccines work by giving the immune system a quick practice test: the harmless antigen in the shot looks no different to your body than the thousands of antigens you breathe, eat, or touch every day, so learning to fight it does not “overload” immunity but simply adds another entry to the memory bank. Extensive study shows no evidence that vaccinated children develop more allergies, autoimmune problems, or developmental disorders; what they do gain is reliable protection against serious infections that can scar lungs, damage brains, or end lives.

Put together, the scientific literature shows that vaccinated-versus-unvaccinated comparisons have been done, placebo studies do exist where ethical, and neither line of evidence supports the claim that vaccines harm children. The real-world outcome is straightforward: vaccination makes kids healthier by keeping dangerous diseases away, while avoiding shots offers no health advantage at all.