The GAPS psychology book proposes three vaccination paths after a review of family history, gut testing and immune status. This is a description of the author’s initial proposal, not a validated schedule or a way to choose a child’s vaccinations at home. Its exact conditions and timing need to stay separate from current vaccine screening.[1]
How the Proposed Review Leads to a Path
The author calls for an appropriate panel to review the proposed assessment. She does not publish a scoring system or laboratory cutoff. The assessment guide explains those missing operational details, so the three categories should not be mistaken for a test result a parent can interpret alone.[1]
The First Proposed Path: No Vaccination Initially
She places several groups here: infants whose mothers have ME, fibromyalgia, digestive problems, asthma, eczema, severe allergies, autoimmune or neurological conditions; infants with eczema, asthma, digestive concerns or other signs she interprets as compromised flora and immunity; younger siblings of autistic children; and children with severe eczema, asthma, allergies, ADHD, epilepsy or insulin-dependent diabetes. This is her grouping, not an established list of vaccine contraindications.[1]
In the expanded German passage, she proposes reassessment after a few years. It does not specify age five. If immune deficiencies are no longer found, her proposal considers single vaccines at least six weeks apart. These numbers describe the proposal; the chapter does not present a trial validating that alternative schedule.[1]
The Second Proposed Path: Delay and Reassess
This category concerns infants with generally healthy mothers and no particular health problems of their own, but abnormal immune-test findings. She proposes reassessment after six to eight months and single vaccines after the abnormalities resolve. The passage gives a reassessment interval, not evidence for an indefinite routine of repeating every test every six to eight months.[1]
The Third Proposed Path: Standard Protocol With Single Vaccines
For healthy infants with healthy parents and normal findings, she describes a standard protocol using single vaccines only. That last condition belongs to her proposal. It should not be silently substituted for what a current standard schedule or a locally available product contains.[1]
An Initial Framework, Not a Finished Protocol
The 2020 physiology book again favors single vaccines and wide spacing. Its broader wording does not supply a validated replacement schedule either. Current clinical decisions concern a particular product and condition: temporary precautions and actual contraindications are not the same as the book’s broad family-history categories.[2][3]
| Question | Keep These Distinct |
|---|---|
| Who made the category? | The author’s proposal versus a current clinical contraindication. |
| What did the test measure? | A documented result versus an unvalidated prediction. |
| Which interval is stated? | The source’s suggested interval versus a tested schedule. |
| Which product is meant? | A named vaccine versus the general word “vaccination”. |
A Question About Applying the Categories
Does a Place in the Book’s First Group Settle a Child’s Care?
No. The proposal does not establish that eczema, a maternal condition or an autistic sibling identifies the same risk as diagnosed severe immunodeficiency. Bring the specific history to a clinician who can explain the actual product’s contraindications and precautions. Do not use these categories to stop medicines or build an alternative schedule.[3]
Your Next Step
Read the assessment article with the vaccination record beside you, and note which findings are diagnoses and which are questions. The MMR research comparison addresses autism risk separately. For a place to organize appointment notes, my Care Team Log is listed in the WFLI Shop.
References
- Campbell-McBride, N. Gut and Psychology Syndrome, expanded edition (2013; second German edition, 2015), Chapter 8, “Vaccinations: Does MMR Cause Autism?”, clinical observations, proposed assessment and policy argument.
- Campbell-McBride, N. Gut and Physiology Syndrome (2020), “Detoxification for People With Gut and Physiology Syndrome,” reducing exposure to man-made hazards and the vaccination recommendations.
- CDC. Contraindications and Precautions, current product-specific screening tables, accessed October 17, 2026.
Leave a comment