Opinion: Invalidity of counterfactual models of mortality averted by childhood vaccination

I express and support the opinion that all models that purport to calculate the mortality (infant mortality in particular) averted by vaccine programmes are invalid because they are based on inputs of vaccine efficacy and pathogen prevalence and virulence that are themselves invalid. Even with ideal testing, the counterfactual number of deaths from a presumed pathogen if the targeting vaccination programme was not implemented is impossible to calculate reliably because it is contrary to biological reality: the deaths of concern are always complex non-linear events that involve several interacting contributing factors that do not have additive effects. Furthermore, infant mortality factors other than vaccination are highly variable and overwhelmingly more important than any presumed vaccine benefit; predominantly, deleterious effects of nutritional deficiencies and of relentless exposures to challenges from toxic living environments. The underlying cause is so-called failed-state extreme poverty due to structural financial exploitation that is not being addressed. There is no known example of a drop in measured infant or child mortality temporally associated with the rollout of a childhood vaccination programme. Independent studies suggest that, contrary to dogma, excess infant mortality (not averted infant mortality) is associated with vaccine programme rollouts and maintenance. Using yearly infant all-cause mortality rate directly, I estimate approximately 100 million vaccine-rollout-associated infant deaths 1974-2024 worldwide, with the caveat of concomitant largescale economic transformations. I conclude, overall, that the longstanding industry of infant vaccination programmes is a baseless fraudulent enterprise of exploitation.