The Century of Evidence That Vaccines Cause Sudden Infant Deaths（疫苗導致嬰兒猝死的世紀證據）
The Century of Evidence That Vaccines Cause Sudden Infant Deaths（疫苗導致嬰兒猝死的世紀證據）
來源：Prepare For Change（為變革做好準備）
By Derek Knauss -
作者：德里克·克瑙斯-
May 16, 2025
2025年5月16日
STORY AT -A-GLANCE
故事一目了然
We’re always told that vaccines were a medical marvel that safely ended the dark age of infectious disease. However, when the actual records are examined, they often abjectly
我們總是被告知，疫苗是一個醫學奇迹，它安全地結束了傳染病的黑暗時代。然而，當檢查實際記錄時，它們往往令人沮喪
The Century of Evidence That Vaccines Cause Sudden Infant
Deaths Analysis by A Midwestern Doctor May 09, 2025
疫苗導致嬰兒猝死的百年證據分析
一位美國中西部醫生於 2025 年 5 月 9 日發表
Multiple doctors have linked the DPT vaccine to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), noting that SIDS peaks coincide with vaccination schedules at 2, 4, and 6 months
多名醫生將 DPT 疫苗與嬰兒猝死綜合征（SIDS）聯系起來，並指出SIDS高峰與2、4和6個月的疫苗接種時間表相吻合
Since at least 1933, the medical community has known that vaccines cause infant deaths. To conceal this, those deaths were renamed “crib death” and then “Sudden Infant Death Syndrome” (SIDS), eventually being attributed to infants not sleeping on their backs
至少從 1933 年開始，醫學界就知道疫苗會導致嬰兒死亡。為了掩蓋這一真相，這些死亡事件被改稱為 「嬰兒床死亡」，後來又改稱為 「嬰兒猝死綜合症」（SIDS），最後被歸咎於嬰兒沒有仰臥睡覺。
This revisionism is not supported by the existing evidence nor the historical changes in the frequency of SIDS. Most recently, SIDS rates have had an unprecedented decrease in tandem with the COVID-19 lockdowns reducing vaccination rates
現有的證據或嬰兒猝死症發生頻率的歷史變化都無法支持這種修正論。最近，隨著 COVID-19 封鎖降低疫苗接種率，嬰兒猝死症發生率出現前所未有的下降。
The vaccine most strongly associated with SIDS, DPT , was protected for decades by the government despite knowing a large body of evidence around the world showed it killed infants — particularly when an inevitable hot lot was released. Eventually, so many injury lawsuits were filed that in 1986, the government had to give blanket immunity to the vaccine manufacturers
與嬰兒猝死症關係最密切的（DPT）疫苗，儘管知道全世界有大量證據顯示它會殺死嬰兒 -- 尤其是當不可避免的熱批次被釋放出來時 -- 仍受到政府數十年來的保護。最後，由於有許多傷害訴訟，政府不得不在 1986 年全面豁免疫苗製造商。
This article will review the body of evidence showing vaccines cause SIDS and reveal the mechanism modern research has now repeatedly proven causes vaccines to trigger infant death failed to prevent those diseases, and worse still, frequently caused outbreaks and severely injured many of the recipients.
本文將回顧表明疫苗導致嬰兒猝死綜合征的證據，並揭示現代研究一再證明的機制，即疫苗引發嬰兒死亡亦未能預防這些疾病，更糟糕的是，疫苗經常引發疫情，並嚴重傷害許多接種者。
This in part resulted from the inherent toxicity of vaccines and in part because manufacturing challenges regularly resulted in hot lots being released. Rather than address this, the vaccine industry chose to create a variety of strategies to conceal those issues, such as enshrining the dogma “all vaccines are safe” and giving blanket legal immunity to all the “safe” vaccines.
這部分是由於疫苗的固有毒性，部分是因為製造挑戰經常導致熱批次的發佈。疫苗行業沒有解决這個問題，而是選擇製定各種策略來掩蓋這些問題，例如將“所有疫苗都是安全的”的教條納入其中，並對所有“安全”的疫苗給予全面的法律豁免。
The Toxicity Bell Curve
毒性貝爾曲線
When humans are exposed to toxins, the reactions to them are distributed such that severe injuries are much rarer. As a result, many of the more subtle, common reactions typically go unrecognized.
當人類接觸到毒素時，對毒素的反應是分佈式的，因此嚴重的傷害比較少見。因此，許多更微妙、更常見的反應通常不會被察覺。
Because of this, if a product causes a significant number of deaths (e.g., the COVID mRNA vaccines), that’s often the tip of the iceberg and far larger number of injuries lie under the surface (e.g., polling showed that showed 34% of those vaccinated for COVID reported minor side effects and 7% reported significant side effects).
因此，如果一種產品導致大量死亡（例如，新冠肺炎 mRNA 疫苗），這通常只是冰山一角，更多的傷害隱藏在表面之下（例如，民意調查顯示，34%的新冠肺炎疫苗接種者報告了輕微的副作用，7%的人報告了嚴重的副作用）。
Sudden Infant Deaths
嬰兒猝死
This sadly also holds true for infant deaths, and since its creation, the diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus (DPT) vaccine has been associated with those deaths. For example, in 2014, unmarked mass graves belonging to Irish orphans were discovered which belonged to a group of 2,051 children upon whom an early diphtheria vaccine was covertly tested in the 1930s.
不幸的是，嬰兒死亡也是如此，自創建以來，白喉、百日咳和 DPT 疫苗一直與這些死亡有關。例如，2014年，發現了屬於愛爾蘭孤兒的無標記亂葬坑，這些亂葬坑屬於20世紀30年代秘密測試早期白喉疫苗的2051名兒童。
Note: Early vaccine experiments (including DPT) were conducted in the 1960s to 1970s at Irish care homes, and the test subjects included babies and handicapped children.
注：早期疫苗實驗（包括DPT）是在20世紀60年代至70年代在愛爾蘭養老院進行的，測試對象包括嬰兒和殘疾兒童。
Likewise, as detailed by Sir Graham Wilson, in the early 1900s, there were over a dozen cases in the medical literature (and likely far more that weren’t documented) where groups of children received an incorrectly prepared diphtheria vaccine, and collectively, thousands became severely ill, with hundreds suffering an agonizing death.
同樣，正如格雷厄姆·威爾遜爵士所詳細描述的那樣，在20世紀初，醫學文獻中有十幾個案例（可能還有更多沒有記錄的案例），一群兒童接種了製備不當的白喉疫苗，總體而言，數千人患上了重病，數百人痛苦地死亡。
A wave of deaths hence followed DPT’s adoption, which like those following the COVID vaccines, became a “mysterious syndrome, ” initially being called “crib death” and then “Sudden Infant Death Syndrome” (SIDS). In turn, a few doctors saw this and spoke out against it.
因此，DPT 的採用引發了一波死亡浪潮，就像新冠疫苗接種後的死亡浪潮一樣，這成為了一種“神秘的綜合征”，最初被稱為“嬰兒猝死綜合征”（SIDS）。反過來，一些醫生看到了這一點，並表示反對。
• James Howenstine, M.D. in 2003 stated:
• 醫學博士 James Howenstine 在2003年表示：
“The incidence of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome has grown from .55 per 1000 live births in 1953 to 12.8 per 1000 in 1992 in Olmstead County, Minnesota. The peak incidence for SIDS is at age 2 to 4 months, the exact time most vaccines are being given to children. 85% of cases of SIDS occur in the first 6 months of infancy. The increase in SIDS as a percentage of total infant deaths has risen from 2.5 per 1000 in 1953 to 17.9 per 1000 in 1992. This rise in SIDS deaths has occurred during a period when nearly every childhood disease was declining due to improved sanitation and medical progress except SIDS. These deaths from SIDS did increase during a period when the number of vaccines given to a child was steadily rising to 36 per child. ”
"在明尼蘇達州的奧姆斯特德郡，嬰兒猝死綜合症的發病率已從 1953 年的每 1,000 名活產嬰兒中有 0.55 人死亡，增加到 1992 年的每 1,000 名活產嬰兒中有 12.8 人死亡。嬰兒猝死症的發病高峰期是 2 到 4 個月大的嬰兒，也正是兒童接種大部分疫苗的時間。85% 的嬰兒猝死症發生在嬰兒期的前 6 個月。嬰兒猝死症佔嬰兒死亡總數的百分比，已從 1953 年的千分之 2.5 上升到 1992 年的千分之 17.9。嬰兒猝死症死亡人數增加的期間，幾乎所有兒童疾病都因衛生環境改善和醫療進步而下降，唯獨嬰兒猝死症除外。這些因猝死嬰兒症而死亡的人數，確實是在每名兒童接種疫苗的次數穩定上升到 36 次的期間增加的。"
Note: It has always astounded me that the medical profession knows SIDS peaks at exactly 2, 4, and 6 months of age, but cannot connect that to childhood vaccines being given at the exact same time.
注意：醫學界知道嬰兒猝死併發症在 2、4 和 6 個月大時達到高峰，但無法將其與同時接種兒童疫苗聯繫起來，這讓我一直感到震驚。
• Robert Mendelsohn M.D. in his 1987 book “How to Raise a Healthy Child in Spite of Your Doctor” wrote:
• Robert Mendelsohn 醫學博士在1987年出版的《如何在不顧醫生的建議之下養育健康的孩子》一書中寫道：
“My suspicion, which is shared by others in my profession, is that the nearly 10,000 SIDS deaths that occur in the United States each year are related to one or more of the vaccines that are routinely given to children. The pertussis vaccine is the most likely villain, but it could also be one or more of the others. ”
"我的懷疑是，每年在美國發生的近 10,000 宗嬰兒猝死症死亡個案，都與一種或多種例行注射給兒童的疫苗有關。百日咳疫苗是最有可能的罪魁禍首，但也可能是一種或多種其他疫苗。"
Note: Although I believe pertussis (DPT) is the vaccine most strongly linked to SIDS, other vaccines also have an association (e.g., a 2007 VAERS analysis and a 1999, legislative testimony by Philip Incao, M.D. made compelling cases also linking SIDS to the hepatitis B vaccine).
注：儘管我認為百日咳（DPT）是與嬰兒猝死症（SIDS）關係最密切的疫苗，但其他疫苗也有關聯（例如，2007年的 VAERS 分析和1999年醫學博士 Philip Incao 的立法證詞提出了令人信服的案例，也將 SIDS 與乙型肝炎疫苗聯系起來）。
• In 1957, Archie Kalokerinos M.D., desiring to serve the people, requested to be stationed in the neglected rural Aboriginal communities, as their infant mortality rate was 10% (whereas it was 2% in the surrounding white communities). Many diseases were rampant there (pneumonia, severe ear infections, severe infant irritability, and a frequent inability to feed the afflicted children), but were ignored and blamed on the uncivilized habits of the mothers.
• 1957年，Archie Kalokerinos 醫學博士希望為人民服務，要求駐紮在被忽視的農村土著社區，因為他們的嬰兒死亡率為10%（而周圍白人社區為2%）。 許多疾病在那裡肆虐（肺炎、嚴重的耳部感染、嚴重的嬰兒易怒以及經常無法餵養受影響的兒童），但被忽視並歸咎於母親的不文明習慣。
Archie eventually realized these deaths were due to severe nutritional deficiencies and quickly saved many lives (e.g., by injecting IV vitamin C or giving zinc). After the infant death rate climbed to 50% following an infant vaccination campaign, he realized that in the same way infections depleted vitamin C, vaccines did too, and rapidly stopped the vaccination deaths with injected vitamin C. Additionally, he also discovered that vaccinating a child who was currently ill was frequently lethal (which, to varying degrees, has also been reported throughout the medical literature).
阿奇最終意識到這些死亡是由於嚴重的營養缺乏所致，並迅速挽救了許多生命（例如，通過靜脈注射維生素 C 或餵飼鋅）。在一次嬰兒疫苗接種活動後，嬰兒死亡率攀升到 50%，他意識到感染會消耗維生素 C，疫苗也會耗盡維他命C，於是迅速用注射維生素 C 的方式阻止了疫苗接種導致的死亡。
Note: Kalokerinos also found early breastfeeding was critical for infant health and preventing death, but unfortunately, colonial forces had shifted them towards formula — mirroring a pernicious trend seen globally. Many have since found breastfeeding counteracts many of the harms of vaccination (e.g., breastfeeding halves the rate of SIDS) — all of which is discussed here.
註：Kalokerinos 也發現早期母乳餵哺對嬰兒健康和預防死亡非常重要，但不幸的是，殖民地勢力讓他們改用配方奶粉，這反映了全球的惡性趨勢。自此之後，許多人發現母乳餵養可以抵銷許多疫苗接種的傷害（例如，母乳餵養可將嬰兒猝死症的發生率減半） -- 所有這些都會在此討論。
Later, he used vitamin C to treat many other conditions too (e.g., otherwise fatal measles cases) — something coincidentally also being done by another pioneering doctor in America.
後來，他也使用維他命 C 來治療許多其他病症 (例如，原本會致命的麻疹病例)，巧合的是，美國的另一位先驅醫生也在做這件事。
Note: Kalokerinos also showed that mothers accused of shaking their babies to death had in fact died of scurvy. Similarly, as I show here, the diagnosis “shaken baby syndrome” (invented in the 1970s) was frequently used to wrongfully convict parents whose children died in their sleep after vaccination. Many of these doctors’ experiences (especially for Kalokerinos) were summarized in a talk by Raymond Obomsawin:
注：Kalokerinos 還表明，被指控搖晃嬰兒致死的母親實際上死於壞血病。同樣，正如我在這裡所展示的，診斷“搖晃嬰兒綜合征”（發明於20世紀70年代）經常被用來錯誤地判定孩子在接種疫苗後在睡夢中死亡的父母。 Raymond Obomsawin 在一次演講中總結了這些醫生的許多經驗（尤其是對 Kalokerinos 來說）：
Note: Obomsawin also highlighted that when Japan moved the DPT injections from 3 to 5 months to 24 months of age, there was an 85% to 90% reduction in DPT brain damage and SIDS cases, and a 60% decrease in the overall infant mortality rate.
注：Obomsawin 還強調，當日本將破傷風（DPT）注射從3至5個月齡改為24個月年齡時，DPT 腦損傷和嬰兒猝死症（SIDS）病例减少了85%至90%，嬰兒總體死亡率降低了60%。
A Shot in the Dark
黑暗中的一擊
In addition to causing death, the DPT vaccine frequently caused brain injuries. As the media had not yet been bought out by the pharmaceutical industry (due to a 1997 FTC decision legalizing pharmaceutical television advertisements), programs critical of vaccination would occasionally air such as a 1982 one highlighting the profound disability being caused by the DPT vaccine.
除了造成死亡之外，DPT 疫苗還經常造成腦部受傷。由於當時媒體尚未被製藥業收購（因為 1997 年美國聯邦貿易委員會 (FTC) 決定製藥業電視廣告合法化），因此偶爾會播出批判疫苗接種的節目，例如 1982 年播出的節目，強調 DPT 疫苗會造成嚴重殘障。
Many parents with DPT injured children saw this program, called NBC and then were connected by NBC, forming “Dissatisfied Parents Together” one of the original vaccine safety groups, and in 1985, “DPT , A Shot in the Dark, ” was published. DPT , A Shot in the Dark highlighted that:
許多有 DPT 受傷兒童的家長看到這個節目後，打電話給 NBC，然後由 NBC 連繫，組成「不滿的家長團結會」（Dissatisfied Parents Together），這是最初的疫苗安全團體之一，並於 1985 年出版「DPT ，黑暗中的一擊」（DPT ， A Shot in the Dark）。《DPT ，黑暗中的一擊》強調：
• As early as 1933, there were published reports of infant deaths shortly after DPT shots, including some where autopsies attributed the deaths to vaccination.
• 早在1933年，就有關於DPT注射後不久嬰兒死亡的報導，其中一些屍檢將死亡歸因於疫苗接種。
• Simultaneous identical twin deaths are an extraordinarily rare event and are hence considered a gold standard for establishing causality, and in 1946, two twins died (on their backs) within 24 hours of their second DPT vaccine — something also shown in 1987, 2006, 2007, 2010, and 2013 case reports.
• 同卵雙胞胎同時死亡是非常罕見的事件，因此被認為是確立因果關係的黃金標準。1946 年，有兩對雙胞胎在接種第二針 DPT 疫苗後 24 小時內死亡（仰臥），1987、2006、2007、2010 和 2013 年的病例報告也顯示了這一情況。
• Researchers like Dr. William Torch (who analyzed 72 sequential SIDS cases and then over 200) showed that these deaths clustered shortly after vaccination — something which could not be explained by chance.
• William Torch 博士等研究人員（他分析了 72 個連續的嬰兒猝死症病例，之後又分析了超過 200 個病例）顯示，這些死亡個案都集中在接種疫苗之後不久 -- 這不是偶然可以解釋的。
• The FDA’s pertussis vaccine specialist, Charles Manclark had stated in 1976 that: “Pertussis vaccine is one of the more troublesome products to produce and assay. As an example, the pertussis vaccine has one of the highest failure rates of all products submitted to the Bureau of Biologics for testing and release. Approximately 15% to 20% of all lots that pass the manufacturer’s tests fail to pass the Bureau’s tests. ”
• FDA 的百日咳疫苗專家 Charles Manclark 曾在 1976 年表示： "百日咳疫苗是較難生產和檢測的產品之一。舉例來說，在所有提交給生物製劑局進行測試和放行的產品中，百日咳疫苗是失敗率最高的產品之一。在所有通過製造商測試的批次中，約有 15% 至 20% 未能通過生物製劑局的測試。"
• In 1978 to 1979, eleven infants in Tennessee died within eight days of receiving a DPT vaccine; nine had been vaccinated with the same lot — Wyeth #64201 — and five (four from that lot) died within 24 hours. Statistical analysis showed that such a clustering of deaths would occur by chance only 3% of the time; later estimates put the probability even lower — between 0.2% and 0.5%.
• 1978 年至 1979 年間，田納西州有 11 名嬰兒在接種 DPT 疫苗後 8 天內死亡；其中 9 名嬰兒接種了同一批次的疫苗 -- 惠氏 #64201 -- 其中 5 名 (4 名來自該批次) 在 24 小時內死亡。統計分析顯示，這種集中死亡的情況偶然發生的機率只有 3%；後來的估計則更低，介於 0.2% 和 0.5% 之間。
In June, CDC Director Dr. William Foege told the Surgeon General that while a causal link to those deaths couldn’t be confirmed, it also couldn’t be ruled out. Three weeks later, FDA official Harry Meyer cited Foege’s memo to reject Wyeth’s request to list SIDS-related risk factors as contraindications for the DPT vaccine, stating there was no medical basis or evidence that such labeling would prevent SIDS.
6月，CDC 主任 William Foege 博士告訴外科總長，雖然無法證實這些死亡的因果關係，但也無法排除。三週後，FDA 官員 Harry Meyer 引用 Foege 的備忘錄，拒絕惠氏將嬰兒猝死症相關的危險因素列為 DPT 疫苗禁忌症的要求，並表示沒有醫學根據或證據顯示這樣的標示可以預防嬰兒猝死症。
• Following this, in 1979 Wyeth’s senior leadership published a memo which stated future DPT lots needed to be distributed across the country (rather than sent to one place) so a repeat of the 1978 to 1979 incident would not occur again. Additionally, another cluster of SIDS deaths in Fresno California led to the local newspaper conducting an investigation that revealed widespread issues with hot DPT lots, had doctors in the area providence evidence DPT was indeed causing SIDS, and disclosed that a 1978 study on the safety of the DPT vaccine was buried after researchers discovered adverse reactions within 48 hours of immunization were 5000% higher than expected.
• 在此之後，惠氏的高層領導在1979年發表了一份備忘錄，指出未來的DPT批次必須分銷到全國各地（而不是送到一個地方），以避免1978年至1979年的事件重演。此外，加州弗雷斯諾市又發生一宗嬰兒猝死症死亡事件，導致當地報紙進行調查，發現熱銷的 DPT 疫苗普遍存在問題，該地區的醫生提供證據證明 DPT 確實會導致嬰兒猝死症，並揭露 1978 年一項有關 DPT 疫苗安全性的研究被掩蓋，因為研究人員發現接種後 48 小時內的不良反應比預期高出 5000%。
This damning indictment of the DPT vaccine led to national vaccine safety legislation being passed in 1986 (which sadly subsequently got co-opted and became nothing but a blanket liability shield for industry) and the whole cell DTwP vaccine eventually being replaced with the safer acellular DTaP vaccine.
這項對 DPT 疫苗的嚴重控訴，促使國家於 1986 年通過疫苗安全立法（可惜的是，這項立法後來被篡改，只成為工業界的全面責任保護罩），全細胞 DTwP 疫苗最終被更安全的無細胞 DTaP 疫苗取代。
Note: Since the DTaP vaccine costs more to produce, industry long resisted it and still gives DTwP to poorer regions like Africa.
注：由於DTaP疫苗的生產成本更高，該行業長期以來一直抵制它，仍然將DTwP提供給非洲等較貧窮的地區。
Whole Cell Pertussis in Africa Peter Aaby, a renowned vaccine scientist and promoter of vaccination, was commissioned by the WHO to study the effects of vaccines commonly utilized in charitable programs by the international community on infant mortality (studies which for context are almost never conducted). To his horror, Aaby discovered:
世界衛生組織委託著名疫苗科學家和疫苗接種推動者 Peter Aaby 研究國際社會慈善計畫中常用的疫苗對嬰兒死亡率的影響（就背景而言，幾乎從未進行過研究）。 令他震驚的是，Aaby 發現：
“DPT was associated with 5-fold higher mortality than being unvaccinated [DTwP increased deaths 3.93 times in boys and 9.98 times in girls]. No prospective study has shown beneficial survival effects of DPT . Unfortunately, DPT is the most widely used vaccine, and the proportion of people who receive DPT is used globally as an indicator of a country’s vaccination program performance.
“與未接種疫苗的相比，DPT的死亡率高出5倍 [ DTwP 使男孩的死亡率新增3.93倍，女孩的死亡率新增9.98倍 ] 。沒有前瞻性研究表明 DPT 對生存有益。不幸的是，DPT 是使用最廣泛的疫苗，全球接受 DPT 的人的比例被用作一個國家疫苗接種計畫績效的名額。
It should be of concern that the effect of routine vaccinations on all-cause mortality was not tested in randomized trials. All currently available evidence suggests that the DPT vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis. Although a vaccine protects children against the target disease, it may also increase their susceptibility to unrelated infections. ”
值得關注的是，例行接種對全因死亡率的影響並未在隨機試驗中進行測試。目前所有可用的證據都顯示，白喉、破傷風或百日咳三聯疫苗因其他原因致死的兒童可能多於因白喉、破傷風或百日咳而獲救的兒童。雖然疫苗可保護兒童免受目標疾病的感染，但也可能增加他們對無關感染的易感性。"
Aaby’s 2017 results were, not surprisingly, buried, and due to Bill Gate’s “donations” vaccination (including with DTwP) has become a greater and greater focus of the WHO. However, in 2019 Peter Gøtzsche, M.D., a renowned expert on research fraud (who has been a critical reformer in evidence-based medicine), then conducted a systematic review of the DPT program which concluded:
不出所料，Aaby 2017年的結果被掩蓋了，由於比爾.蓋茨（Bill Gate）的“捐贈”疫苗接種（包括DTwP）已成為世界衛生組織越來越關注的焦點。然而，在2019年，著名的研究欺詐專家 Peter Gøtzsche 醫學博士（他一直是循證醫學的關鍵改革者）對 DPT 計畫進行了系統審查，得出的結論是：
“Evidence tells us that it is likely that the DPT vaccine increases total mortality in low-income countries. ”
"證據告訴我們，DPT 疫苗很可能會增加低收入國家的總死亡率。"
Note: Aaby found the primary cause of these deaths was DPT inducing immune suppression and other infections later killing the infants (something which has also been observed with many other vaccines).
注：Aaby 發現這些死亡的主要原因是DPT疫苗誘導的免疫抑制和後來導致嬰兒死亡的其他感染（許多其他疫苗也觀察到了這一點）。
Dose-Response Relationships A key metric for establishing causality is demonstrating a dose-response relationship (e.g., more vaccines causing more deaths).
劑量 -- 反應關係，建立因果關係的一個關鍵指標是證明劑量 -- 反應關係（例如，更多疫苗導致更多死亡）。
On a national level, this has been shown by SIDS rates going up as the number of vaccines increased. Likewise, a 2011 study of the 34 nations with the lowest infant mortality rate (America being No. 34) showed an unmistakable relationship between total vaccinations and SIDS.
在全國層面上，隨著疫苗數量的增加，嬰兒猝死症的發病率也隨之上升。同樣地，2011 年針對嬰兒死亡率最低的 34 個國家 (美國是第 34 位) 所做的研究顯示，疫苗接種總數與嬰兒猝死症之間存在著明確無誤的關係。
Giving multiple vaccinations simultaneously (e.g., hexavalent vaccines containing DTP + Polio + Haemophilus Influenza B + Hepatitis B) has also been repeatedly shown to increase the risk of SIDS. For example:
同時接種多種疫苗（例如，含有DTP+脊髓灰質炎+乙型流感嗜血杆菌+乙型肝炎的六價疫苗）也一再被證明會新增SIDS的風險。 例如：
• When GSK’s hexavalent vaccine hit the market, SIDS cases were observed, eventually prompting a 2005 study of Germany’s adverse event database that found an increase in SIDS cases was associated with the vaccine.
• - 當葛蘭素史克（GSK）的六價疫苗上市時，出現了嬰兒猝死症病例，最終促使 2005 年對德國不良事件資料庫進行研究，發現嬰兒猝死症病例的增加與疫苗有關。
• A 2011 study of Italy’s adverse event database found hexavalent vaccines increased the risk of infant death 2.2 times in the 14 days that followed.
• 2011 年對義大利不良事件資料庫的研究發現，六價疫苗接種後 14 天內，嬰兒死亡風險增加 2.2 倍。
• A judge then forced GSK to release their confidential safety data which showed 90% of reported infant deaths occurred immediately following vaccination (again strongly suggesting an association).
• 一名法官隨後迫使葛蘭素史克（GSK）公佈其機密安全數據，該資料顯示，90%的嬰兒死亡報告是在接種疫苗後立即發生的（再次强烈表明存在關聯）。
• A later confidential 2015 report GSK gave to European regulators showed almost 52.5% of vaccine-linked deaths occurred within 3 days of vaccination, 82.2% within seven days, and 97.9% within ten days.
• 葛蘭素史克（GSK）2015年向歐洲監管機构提交的一份機密報告顯示，近52.5%的疫苗相關死亡發生在接種疫苗後 3 天內， 82.2% 發生在 7 天內，97.9% 發生在10天內。
• A 2012 VAERS analysis of all reported infant deaths found that infants who received twice as many vaccines at one time were roughly twice as likely to die or be hospitalized.
• 2012年，VAERS 對所有報告的嬰兒死亡進行了分析，發現一次接種兩倍疫苗的嬰兒死亡或住院的可能性大約是兩倍。
Similarly, since all infants receive the same vaccine dose, premature infants (being smaller) effectively receive a higher dose. In turn, that analysis also found the youngest infants were the most likely to die following vaccination.
同樣，由於所有嬰兒都接種了相同的疫苗劑量，早產兒（較小）實際上接種了更高的劑量。反過來，該分析還發現，接種疫苗後最年幼的嬰兒最有可能死亡。
Respiratory Arrest
呼吸停止
Infants can experience a cardiorespiratory event, such as an interruption of breathing or a significant slowing of the heart rate, following vaccination. In many cases, these events require CPR, and had the infant not been monitored at the hospital when it occurred, the infant would have likely died. This has been proven by decades of hospital studies of premature infants that all showed:
接種疫苗後，嬰兒可能會發生心肺事件，例如呼吸中斷或心率明顯減緩。在許多情況下，這些事件需要進行心肺復甦術，如果在發生這些事件時沒有在醫院進行監測，嬰兒很可能已經死亡。數十年來醫院對早產嬰兒的研究都證明了這一點：
• Roughly a third of premature infants experienced a cardiorespiratory event following vaccination (whereas virtually none did beforehand), and about a third of those then required respiratory support.
• 約有三分之一的早產嬰兒在接種疫苗後發生心肺事件 (而在接種疫苗前幾乎沒有)，其中約有三分之一需要呼吸支援。
• Those who were smaller or who had existing chronic diseases were more susceptible to these cardiopulmonary events (mirroring Kalokerinos’s observations).
• 體型較小或患有慢性疾病的人更容易發生這些心肺事件 (與 Kalokerinos 的觀察結果相同)。
• These events often recurred after subsequent vaccinations.
• 這些事件在隨後的疫苗接種後經常發生。
Note: I summarized 13 studies on vaccines stopping breathing here, including a recent 2025 trial.
註： 我在此總結了 13 項關於疫苗會停止呼吸的研究，包括最近的 2025 項試驗。
Remarkably, despite this complication of vaccination being recognized by the medical field, it has never been connected to SIDS and still is viewed as inconsequential relative to “immense benefits of vaccination. ”
值得注意的是，儘管醫學領域已經承認接種疫苗會產生這種併發症，但卻從未將其與嬰兒猝死症聯繫起來，而且相對於 「接種疫苗的巨大好處 」而言，這種併發症仍然被視為無足輕重。"
As such, an Australian group developed a way to monitor infants at home continuously and, like many others, was able to demonstrate non-fatal disruptions of breathing spiked following DPT and Polio vaccination (this is the most likely cause of SIDS) and that this disruption continued for over six weeks post-vaccination (hence overlapping with the typical period of death that has been observed to follow vaccination).
因此，澳洲的一個研究小組開發了一種在家裡持續監測嬰兒的方法，並且和其他許多研究小組一樣，能夠證明在接種 DPT 和脊髓灰質炎疫苗（Polio）之後，非致命性的呼吸中斷情況會激增 (這是 SIDS 最可能的成因)，而且這種中斷情況會在接種疫苗之後持續六週以上 (因此與觀察到的接種疫苗之後的典型死亡時間重疊)。
Most importantly, the breathing often had not fully recovered by the time the next vaccine was given.
最重要的是，在接種下一次疫苗時，呼吸往往尚未完全恢復。
Note: Some package inserts for DTaP vaccines list SIDS as a possible side effect.
注：一些DTaP疫苗的包裝說明書將 SIDS 列為可能的副作用。
What Causes SIDS?
導致嬰兒猝死症（SIDS）的原因是什麼？
When SIDS autopsies are conducted (detailed here), they typically find unusual changes such as acute congestion, edema and small hemorrhages in the brainstem and internal organs along with brain tissue infiltration by different immune cells.
當進行嬰兒猝死症屍體解剖時（詳見此處），通常會發現不尋常的變化，例如腦幹和內臟出現急性充血、水腫和小量出血，以及不同免疫細胞對腦部組織的浸潤。
Note: These findings mirror what Kalokerinos observed in the many autopsies he conducted (and attributed to bacterial LPS endotoxins). Likewise, a government pertussis specialist shared with me that some of these effects (e.g., vascular leakage) are also seen with pertussis toxin toxicity (which suggests the vaccine pertussis toxin may not be fully inactivated — something which was frequently an issue with previous lethal diphtheria hot lots ).
註：這些發現與 Kalokerinos 在他進行的許多屍檢中所觀察到的結果相同（並歸因於細菌 LPS 內毒素）。同樣地，一位政府百日咳專家與我分享，其中一些效應 (例如血管滲漏) 也見於百日咳毒素毒性 (這顯示疫苗的百日咳毒素可能未完全失活 -- 這也是之前致命白喉熱批疫苗常見的問題)。
One of the greatest dangers with vaccines is that they cause blood cells to clump together, creating microstrokes in smaller blood vessels. Certain parts of the brain are more vulnerable to this, and as such, specific cranial nerves (e.g., 6 and 7) will frequently display observable deficits after vaccination (e.g., the eyes turning inwards).
疫苗最大的危險之一就是會造成血球凝結在一起，在較小的血管中造成微小中風。大腦的某些部位較容易受到影響，因此，特定的頭顱神經 (例如 6 號和 7 號神經) 在接種疫苗後會經常出現可察覺的缺陷 (例如眼睛向內轉)。
Since a key area of the brain for ensuring automatic breathing is very close to the nuclei for the commonly affected cranial nerves, breathing is likely affected by those microstrokes as well.
由於確保自動呼吸的大腦關鍵區域非常接近常受影響的顱神經核，因此呼吸很可能也會受到這些微小中風的影響。
In turn, I suspect that the partial interruptions of respiration occur when there is a partial interruption of one side’s blood supply, whereas the full respiratory arrest occurs when both sides are affected. Similarly, the neurologist who discovered vaccination caused pathologic microstrokes also came across cases where a cranial nerve 6 deficit on both sides (implying both sides of the brainstem had a partial loss of blood flow) directly preceded SIDS.
反過來，我懷疑當一側的血液供應部分中斷時，會發生部分呼吸中斷，而當兩側都受到影響時，會出現完全呼吸停止。同樣，發現疫苗接種引起病理性微刺激的神經學家也遇到了雙側顱神經 6 缺損（意味著腦幹兩側都有部分血流損失）直接發生在 SIDS 之前的病例。
Note: Kalokerinos also believed the loss of automatic breathing came from LPS attacking the brainstem’s respiratory center and that vitamin C rapidly neutralized it, whereas I believe the hemorrhages, coagulation, swelling he saw were in part due to zeta potential changes and that the rapid improvements he saw following vitamin C were due to it restoring the physiologic zeta potential.
注意：Kalokerinos 也相信自動呼吸的喪失是由於 LPS 攻擊腦幹的呼吸中樞，而維生素 C 能迅速中和 LPS，而我相信他所看到的出血、凝血、腫脹部分是由於 zeta 電位的改變，而他在服用維生素 C 後所看到的快速改善是由於維生素 C 能恢復生理的 zeta 電位。
The Evolution of SIDS
嬰兒猝死症（SIDS）的演化
The Back to Sleep campaign (founded on the idea SIDS was caused by sleeping facedown and the infant then suffocating) is often heralded as one of the greatest successes in medical history since SIDS rates declined after it began — hence leading to that success being used to debunk the link between SIDS and vaccination. However, if you look at the actual data, a strong case can be made that drop was due to the TDwP to TDaP switch and then the reclassification of SIDS cases:
嬰兒猝死症（SIDS）是由面朝下睡覺和窒息所引起的），通常被稱為醫學史上最偉大的成功之一，因為嬰兒猝死症（SIDS）的發生率在運動開始後有所下降，因此這項成功被用來推翻嬰兒猝死症（SIDS）與疫苗接種之間的關係。然而，如果您檢視實際的資料，您就會發現一個很有力的論據，那就是嬰兒猝死症發生率的下降是由於 TDwP 改為 TDaP，然後將嬰兒猝死症病例重新分類所致：
Note: Somewhat analogously, the decline in Polio was likely due to nerve damaging pesticides being phased out when the vaccine was introduced, and most cases of paralysis being reclassified as no longer being polio.
注：類似地，脊髓灰質炎的下降可能是由於引入疫苗時逐步淘汰了破壞神經的殺蟲劑，大多數癱瘓病例被重新歸類為不再是脊髓灰質炎。
Since that time, the total infant death rate remained relatively unchanged, until in 2020 something extraordinary happened — the lockdowns led to America’s first significant drop in vaccination as well-child (vaccination) visits were “non-essential. ” At the time, many in the vaccine safety community predicted this would lead to an unprecedented drop in SIDS rates. Vaccination rates indeed dropped, and in tandem, deaths did as well:
自那時起，嬰兒總死亡率相對地維持不變，直到 2020 年發生了一件非比尋常的事 -- 疫苗封鎖導致美國首次大幅降低疫苗接種率，因為兒童健康（疫苗接種）門診變為‘’非必要‘’。當時，許多疫苗安全界人士預測這將導致嬰兒猝死症發生率空前下降。疫苗接種率確實下降了，同時死亡人數也下降了：
But only in children at the ages SIDS typically affects: Furthermore, due to the political climate in Florida in 2021, the state’s childhood vaccination rate decreased from 93.4% in 2020 to 79.3% in 2021. At the same time, all-cause infant mortality under one year of age in Florida also reduced by 8.93% (a reversal of the 2020 trend, where infant mortality had increased by 0.67%).
但僅限於嬰兒猝死症（SIDS）通常影響的年齡層兒童：此外，由於 2021 年佛羅里達州的政治氣候，該州的兒童疫苗接種率從 2020 年的 93.4% 降至 2021 年的 79.3%。與此同時，佛羅里達州一歲以下嬰兒的全因死亡率也降低了 8.93%（與 2020 年的趨勢相反，2020 年的嬰兒死亡率增加了 0.67%）。
A 14% decrease in vaccination coverage was associated with a 9% decrease in infant mortality, suggesting roughly half of the infant deaths in Florida could potentially be attributed to vaccinations.
疫苗接種覆蓋率下降14%與嬰兒死亡率下降9%有關，這表明佛羅里達州大約一半的嬰兒死亡可能與疫苗接種有關。
Conclusion “Something can be very obvious. I mean, what could be more obvious than the dead kid? It can be extremely serious and its existence not only be ignored, but denied, and unless this is understood, it is impossible to understand what my problem was. Now, I knew that these other places were having infant deaths too. Yet when I spoke to doctors, their response was almost universally hostile. So I was left to handle the problem by myself.”
~ Archie Kalokerinos
結論："有些事情可以很明顯。我的意思是，還有什麼比死掉的小孩更明顯的呢？它可以非常嚴重，而它的存在不僅被忽視，還被否認，除非了解這一點，否則不可能了解我的問題出在哪裡。現在，我知道這些其他地方也有嬰兒死亡。然而，當我和醫生談論時，他們的反應幾乎都是敵意的。所以我只能自己處理這個問題"。
~ 阿奇·卡洛基裏諾斯
One of the saddest things about vaccine injuries is that children lack the ability to communicate how vaccines have injured them or refuse further immunizations. In turn, one of the most heartbreaking things I’ve had to witness in medicine are children, in whatever way they can, trying to tell their parents or doctors and nurses that vaccines are hurting them, but are ignored and have something catastrophic happen after they are injected without their consent.
疫苗傷害最可悲的事情之一，就是兒童缺乏溝通疫苗如何傷害他們或拒絕接受進一步免疫接種的能力。反過來，我在醫學界所見過最令人心碎的事情之一，就是兒童無論以任何方式，試圖告訴他們的父母或醫生和護士，疫苗傷害了他們，但卻被忽視，並在未經他們同意的情況下注射疫苗後，發生了災難性的事情。
However, now that so many adults (who can communicate) have been injured by the COVID vaccines, the veil has been removed, and an awareness is forming around the potential consequences of vaccination. Secretary Kennedy is now at last beginning the long overdue evaluation of the safety of the vaccines given to our children, and it is imperative we do all that we can to support this investigation being allowed to proceed forward.
然而，現在有這麼多成年人（可以溝通的人）受到 COVID 疫苗的傷害，這層面紗已經被揭開，人們開始意識到接種疫苗的潛在後果。肯尼迪部長現在終於開始對我們的孩子接種疫苗的安全性進行早該進行的評估，我們必須竭盡所能支持這項調查的進行。
Author’s Note: This is an abbreviated version of a full-length article that takes a deeper look into the evidence linking SIDS to vaccination, which can be read here. Additionally, a companion article on exactly how vaccines cause microstrokes and neurological injuries can be read here along with a companion article which details all the evidence linking specific chronic illnesses and how to recognize the subtle effects of vaccination (which can be read here).
作者註：這篇文章是一篇長篇文章的縮寫，這篇文章深入探討了嬰兒猝死症與疫苗接種有關的證據，可以在這裡閱讀。此外，您也可以在此閱讀一篇有關疫苗如何導致微中風和神經損傷的文章，以及一篇詳述所有證據顯示特定慢性疾病與如何辨識接種疫苗的微妙影響的文章（可在此閱讀）。
A Note from Dr. Mercola About the Author A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician from the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate AMD’s exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and am grateful to share it. I also respect AMD’s desire to remain anonymous since AMD is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack.
Mercola博士關於作者的說明中西部醫生（AMD）是來自中西部的董事會認證醫生，也是 Mercola.com 的長期讀者。我很欣賞AMD對廣泛主題的卓越見解，並很感激與大家分享。我也尊重AMD保持匿名的願望，因為AMD仍在治療患者的第一線。 要瞭解更多AMD的工作，請務必查看Substack上的《被遺忘的一面》。
Sources and References：
資料來源及參考：
《澳洲營養與環境醫學院雜誌》，2004年12月1日
Fda.gov，包裝說明書 - INFANRIX
Virchows Arch. 2006年1月;448(1):100-4
Current Medicinal Chemistry 21(7)
Vaccine. 2006年7月26日;24(31-32):5779-80
Forensic Science Int. 2008年8月6日；179(2-3):e25-9
《醫學被遺忘的一面》，2024年7月12日
《醫學被遺忘的一面》，2024年3月31日
《健康選擇》，2020年6月18日
《Igor’s Newsletter》，2022年3月14日
來自默科拉醫生
Your Tax Free Donations Are Appreciated and Help Fund our Volunteer Website
感謝您的免稅捐款，並幫助我們資助志工網站
Disclaimer: We at Prepare for Change (PFC) bring you information that is not offered by the mainstream news, and therefore may seem controversial. The opinions, views, statements, and/or information we present are not necessarily promoted, endorsed, espoused, or agreed to by Prepare for Change, its leadership Council, members, those who work with PFC, or those who read its content. However, they are hopefully provocative. Please use discernment! Use logical thinking, your own intuition and your own connection with Source, Spirit and Natural Laws to help you determine what is true and what is not. By sharing information and seeding dialogue, it is our goal to raise consciousness and awareness of higher truths to free us from enslavement of the matrix in this material realm.
免責聲明：我們「準備改變」(PFC) 為您提供主流媒體未提供的訊息，因此可能存在爭議。我們所呈現的觀點、看法、聲明和/或資訊不一定由「準備改變」組織、其領導委員會、成員、PFC 的工作人員或閱讀其內容的人員推廣、認可、支持或同意。然而，我們希望它們具有啟發性。請謹慎閱讀！運用邏輯思維、你的直覺以及你與源頭、精神和自然法則的聯繫，來幫助你辨別真偽。透過分享資訊和播下對話的種子，我們的目標是提升意識，提升對更高真理的認知，從而將我們從物質世界矩陣的奴役中解放出來。
留言