Response to Comments on PubPeer About Our Review of the Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Study Discussed at the US Senate Hearing on September 9, 2025 Chaired by Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin

Comments at PubPeer.com critiquing Oller, Broudy, and Hulscher (2025) are addressed here. The comments came either from an anonymous human, or possibly an AI ‘bot, known only as Anisotoma glabra. The remarks claimed to be about our peer-review of Lamerato et al. (2022-2025), but contrary to what was written or implied: (1) we did take time into consideration in all of our statistical analyses of the Lamerato et al. data; (2) the 16,511 vaccinated individuals were, it is true, seen more frequently and followed-up over longer periods of time than the 1,057 unvaccinated participants, but this was caused entirely by the CDC vaccine schedule requiring the vaccinated cohort to receive a median of 18 vaccines while the unvaccinated individuals were receiving exactly zero, 0, doses; (3) Lamerato et al. found that the CDC vaccine schedule is causally associated with 22 of the defining symptoms of the autism spectrum — refuting the CDC’s long-standing mantra that “vaccines do not cause autism”; (4) all of the contrasts we highlighted between the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts, contrary to the PubPeer claims were and are statistically significant because of the size of the contrasts and the number of individuals in the two cohorts (all of this, according to the Central Limit Theorem of statistical mathematics and probability theory); and (5) the reviewer appears unaware that linguistics as the science of human language logically supersedes all the other sciences of meaningful sign systems — including mathematics, logic, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, genetics, epigenetics, proteomics, etc., along with all the research in medicine and pharmaceuticals — since they all ground their existence in human language capacity.