SIDS, sudden infant deaths! It’s the vaccine, stupid, the vaccine causes SIDS, all vaccines! ‘How SIDS Became the Perfect Cover-Up for Vaccine Deaths The data was manipulated. Deaths were hidden.’

From routine vaccines all the way now to the Malone Bourla Bancel et al. Pfizer mRNA death shots…all place the infant at risk of SIDS.

How SIDS Became the Perfect Cover-Up for Vaccine Deaths

Start this excellent stack here:

‘

This infographic from The Lullaby Trust in the UK highlights common SIDS risk factors while showcasing how the ‘Back to Sleep’ campaign has been used to explain shifts in reporting trends. Although focused on the UK, it provides valuable insight into how similar narratives may have influenced SIDS classifications globally.

Introduction

Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) is the diagnosis used to define the sudden unexplained death of a child of less than one year of age.

This diagnosis is reached when the death of the infant, known as infanticide, remains unexplained after a thorough autopsy and detailed death scene investigation.

The peak incidence of SIDS occurs between 2-4 months of age.

SIDS remains the leading cause of infant mortality in Western countries, constituting half of all post-neonatal (1-12 months old) deaths.

In the following article, I will show how SIDS has been used to cover up an epidemic of infanticide in the United States. To do this, we will discuss:

• The history of infant deaths since the dawn of time,

• The statistically significant increase of infanticide in the 1900s,

• And the campaigns used to divert attention from medical interventions

This essay is sure to be a fascinating read, so please sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride.

Note: This will be a paid article; however, due to the brevity of the information, I will remove the paywall no later than one month.

Unorthodoxy is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe

The History of Infant Deaths

In 1st Kings chapter 3: verse 19, we have one of the earliest writings of infant deaths. In this story, we read about the two women in Israel with two children, yet one of the children died.

The verse reads, “And this woman’s child died in the night; because she overlaid it.”

Other examples of overlaying and accidental smothering from ancient Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Rome, European Middle Ages, Renaissance Europe, late modern period Europe, colonial America, and the American old South.¹

Infant deaths have been as old as antiquity.

However, they have always had a natural explanation.

Natural Causes of Infanticide

There have been three main causes for infant deaths prior to the 20th century. These natural and explainable causes are:

1. Pathological — Baby falls under disease

2. Murder — The infant is killed

3. Suffocation — The baby dies from not breathing

Infant deaths were overwhelmingly linked to infections, malnutrition, or environmental dangers. Deaths occurred from natural causes.

Many deaths were documented under causes like “failure to thrive” or “infantile convulsions.”

Suffocation, overlaying, smothering. From antiquity through the 19th century, it was the primary cause of infanticide.

In 1893, in the Edinburgh Medical Journal by Charles Templeman, Templeman reported that 399 infants were found dead in bed with their parents in Dundee from 1882 to 1891.

Templeman attributed these deaths to parental drunkenness and ignorant, careless mothers and he suggested that it become mandatory for infants to sleep separately from parents.²

Hence, cribs were used in the early 20th century.

Yet, the rates of infanticide did not decrease but increased significantly throughout the 20th century.

What happened in the 20th century?

What Happened In The 1900s?

The 20th century saw a massive shift in public health, medicine, and industry.

In medicine, we have, the rise of Pharmaceutical & Medical Interventions. From this, we receive:

• Vaccination schedules introduced (mid-1900s)

• Antibiotics introduced (1940s)

• Formula feeding promoted over breastfeeding (1950s-60s):

• Medicalization of birth (hospitals replaced home births):

We also saw the changes to the exposure to electromagnetic and radiation:

• Electrification of homes (early 1900s)

• Radio & microwave frequencies (1920s-50s)

• Television & mass communication signals (1950s-70s)

• Wi-Fi & cell towers (1990s-2000s)

There were changes to the environment that could have played a role in the health of infants:

• Soft mattresses & synthetic bedding

• Cigarette smoke exposure skyrocketed (1950s-70s)

Lastly, there were also increases in chemical exposure due to the Industrial Revolution. These changes exposed infants to more synthetic chemicals than ever before.

This section shows the value of understanding history and how it impacts our world. This perspective is the reason for my book, An Unorthodox Truth. Check it out if you want to know how the last 200 centuries have affected us today.

While there were many changes that impacted society in the 20th century, if we explore the link between medical interventions and SIDS, we see a quite damning connection.

The Rise of SIDS

Before the mid-1900s, infant deaths were not classified as SIDS. Instead, they were often recorded under broad terms like:

• “Overlay” (accidental smothering)

• “Failure to thrive” (infants failing to gain weight)

The term “Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)” was officially introduced in 1969, following a noticeable increase in cases of unexplained infant deaths.

This increase coincided with a major expansion of routine vaccination campaigns in Western nations, including the United States.

🚨 The Timeline That Changes Everything 🚨

For decades, they told us SIDS was a tragic mystery. But what if I told you this was no coincidence?

What happened next was an intentional manipulation of medical records—and the numbers prove it.

📉 Inside, you’ll uncover:
✔ How SIDS “emerged” the same time vaccine mandates expanded.
✔ Why thousands of deaths were reclassified to hide the truth.
✔ The suppressed government data they don’t want you to read.’