Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry

(Feel free to move this to another topic, or delete it entirely.  But please go easy on banning me.)

My wife (almost completely) swore off sugar some months ago, and the effects have been amazing.  Yesterday I googled what the "right" amount of sugar I should be eating each day, and my research led me down a mind-blowing rabbit hole about the dangers of high fructose corn syrup.  My research is still in its infancy, but I am convinced that HFCS is a highly addictive poison, and that those who peddle it have conspired to deceive the public, falsify studies, and pay off (or do worse to) anyone that stands in their way.

Years ago I remember watching the executives of the tobacco industry knowingly and blatantly lie about the addictive properties of cigarettes, and nicotine in particular.  Then I watched as they shifted their holdings more and more into foods, like Kraft for instance.  It was as if they were saying, "If we won't be allowed to have you be slaves to our cigarettes, we will find a way for you to be slaves to our food.  Either way, you will become our subscribers, and we will become rich off you, even if it means eventually killing you."

But I didn't realize at the time just how much food alteration could be done in order to cause real addictions.  Yes, I knew that salty foods, and fatty foods, and sweet foods have their base of "cravers".  (I have my own cravings.)  And I knew that the food industry fully understood what they were doing with caffeine, and why.  But now my eyes are open much more wide to the nefarious schemes that are in place to control media, influence scholarly "research", sway popular opinion, and adulterate the content of food.  I can see the deliberate devices that are used to mask HFCS and other harmful substances. I can see how we the people are led to believe the food we eat is healthy (or healthy enough), totally oblivious to what that food is doing to us, all the while conditioning us to want it more.

I can also -- in a very beyond-the-wall naive sort of way -- trace the money, and see just how powerful some of these uber-rich are.  I'm not against the rich.  But obviously not all wealth is honestly earned; and wealth has a way of corrupting those who have it or seek it, so that many throw away their integrity to amass more, using whatever mechanism is in their power -- or can be placed within their power -- and justifying any means, even if it means harming or killing innocent people, to get more.

The market is full of sickening garbage -- food pollution -- and the airwaves are saturated with enticing messages to consume that garbage.  I look around me and wonder how some of these people live, how they can allow themselves to become so overweight, so obese.  But then I look at myself and realize that it isn't always a question of discipline or will-power.  These people aren't pigs.  They're not gluttons.  They're just unwittingly eating foods and drinking beverages that alter the brain, that send invalid messages to the body, that develop and reinforce unhealthy addictions.

If you would have asked me a year ago if I believed the earth was flat, I would have laughed.  "Of course it's not flat."  But now I definitely know that it is.  I recognize in part the evil behind the great lie.  But I wasn't evil (at least I don't think I was) for believing that the earth was a globe.

The same can be said for people caught up in the lie -- fostered and promoted by a real conspiracy of greedy and powerful and downright evil men -- about the food we eat, the beverages we drink.  "Fat" people are mostly innocent people, who despite their real intentions (beginning every January first) are caught in an addictive trap.  Because they don't see what it is that is actually harming them, they fail to free themselves.

I post this with the hope that those in the know about food can 1) point out the lies we've been and are being told about food, and 2) show us how to eat healthy.

For instance, I now see that sugars are to be reduced in our diets, particularly refined sugars and especially poisonous HFCS.  What other harmful substances are in our foods?  What really is bad about GMOs, and how do we make sure we're getting the real stuff?

I can also see that going vegetarian would be a great thing.  I would love to do it.  But I have no idea how to really go about it.  I've tried (apparently not hard enough) several times, but it hasn't lasted very long.  I would love for there to be a topic/thread on how to do that, how to get started and how to maintain it.

And what about "organic"?  Sounds like a great idea, but I'm no millionaire.  Can it be done economically?  If it were just me, maybe.  But what about for an entire family?

Please don't get the impression that I'm some slobby slug that eats out of the garbage can.  I've always tried to eat healthy.  And for the most part (that might be overly generous), I've been able to do so.  But there are some humps I still have to get over, and I'm hoping this community can help me -- and everyone else -- do just that.

searching wrote:(Feel free to move this to another topic, or delete it entirely.  But please go easy on banning me.)

My wife (almost completely) swore off sugar some months ago, and the effects have been amazing.  Yesterday I googled what the "right" amount of sugar I should be eating each day, and my research led me down a mind-blowing rabbit hole about the dangers of high fructose corn syrup.  My research is still in its infancy, but I am convinced that HFCS is a highly addictive poison, and that those who peddle it have conspired to deceive the public, falsify studies, and pay off (or do worse to) anyone that stands in their way.

Years ago I remember watching the executives of the tobacco industry knowingly and blatantly lie about the addictive properties of cigarettes, and nicotine in particular.  Then I watched as they shifted their holdings more and more into foods, like Kraft for instance.  It was as if they were saying, "If we won't be allowed to have you be slaves to our cigarettes, we will find a way for you to be slaves to our food.  Either way, you will become our subscribers, and we will become rich off you, even if it means eventually killing you."

But I didn't realize at the time just how much food alteration could be done in order to cause real addictions.  Yes, I knew that salty foods, and fatty foods, and sweet foods have their base of "cravers".  (I have my own cravings.)  And I knew that the food industry fully understood what they were doing with caffeine, and why.  But now my eyes are open much more wide to the nefarious schemes that are in place to control media, influence scholarly "research", sway popular opinion, and adulterate the content of food.  I can see the deliberate devices that are used to mask HFCS and other harmful substances. I can see how we the people are led to believe the food we eat is healthy (or healthy enough), totally oblivious to what that food is doing to us, all the while conditioning us to want it more.

I can also -- in a very beyond-the-wall naive sort of way -- trace the money, and see just how powerful some of these uber-rich are.  I'm not against the rich.  But obviously not all wealth is honestly earned; and wealth has a way of corrupting those who have it or seek it, so that many throw away their integrity to amass more, using whatever mechanism is in their power -- or can be placed within their power -- and justifying any means, even if it means harming or killing innocent people, to get more.

The market is full of sickening garbage -- food pollution -- and the airwaves are saturated with enticing messages to consume that garbage.  I look around me and wonder how some of these people live, how they can allow themselves to become so overweight, so obese.  But then I look at myself and realize that it isn't always a question of discipline or will-power.  These people aren't pigs.  They're not gluttons.  They're just unwittingly eating foods and drinking beverages that alter the brain, that send invalid messages to the body, that develop and reinforce unhealthy addictions.

If you would have asked me a year ago if I believed the earth was flat, I would have laughed.  "Of course it's not flat."  But now I definitely know that it is.  I recognize in part the evil behind the great lie.  But I wasn't evil (at least I don't think I was) for believing that the earth was a globe.

The same can be said for people caught up in the lie -- fostered and promoted by a real conspiracy of greedy and powerful and downright evil men -- about the food we eat, the beverages we drink.  "Fat" people are mostly innocent people, who despite their real intentions (beginning every January first) are caught in an addictive trap.  Because they don't see what it is that is actually harming them, they fail to free themselves.

I post this with the hope that those in the know about food can 1) point out the lies we've been and are being told about food, and 2) show us how to eat healthy.

For instance, I now see that sugars are to be reduced in our diets, particularly refined sugars and especially poisonous HFCS.  What other harmful substances are in our foods?  What really is bad about GMOs, and how do we make sure we're getting the real stuff?

I can also see that going vegetarian would be a great thing.  I would love to do it.  But I have no idea how to really go about it.  I've tried (apparently not hard enough) several times, but it hasn't lasted very long.  I would love for there to be a topic/thread on how to do that, how to get started and how to maintain it.

And what about "organic"?  Sounds like a great idea, but I'm no millionaire.  Can it be done economically?  If it were just me, maybe.  But what about for an entire family?

Please don't get the impression that I'm some slobby slug that eats out of the garbage can.  I've always tried to eat healthy.  And for the most part (that might be overly generous), I've been able to do so.  But there are some humps I still have to get over, and I'm hoping this community can help me -- and everyone else -- do just that.

Hi, and welcome. 

This topic is a very important one. It is also important for me to point out that meat, dairy, seafood, eggs and all other animal products are just as dangerous and harmful as sugar, as well as being cruel to animals. Also, sugar is also mainly not vegan, because it is mixed with animal bone ash when it is produced on a large scale. 

Please read this thread for more info: http://ifers.123.st/t36-stop-eating-your-friends

I would suggest that you fully remove all sugar from your diet, and that if you need something sweet occasionally, have organic maple syrup or Sukrin (a natural sweetener made from pears, which diabetics can eat) instead. 

Over the coming weeks we will be posting more information from the old IFERS, so please check back, because we will be posting a lot of information about healthy and unhealthy foods. 

My other advice is that you only eat organic food, and that you avoid all chemicals and pesticides. The same is also true with regards to cleaning products, soaps, shampoo, bath foam, etc. Keep it organic and chemical free, and your body will thank you. Organic food is easily affordable when you don't have the expense of meat.

The Mnookin Virus Infects CBS and HuffPo

Seth Mnookin has spread his deceit to CBS and The Huffington Post, with the help of accomplices from both sources.

It is amazing just how much Seth Mnookin continues to be propped up as having credibility he simply does not possess. Now, thanks to two fellow opportunists - David Freeman and Neil Katz - we see that pharma’s censorship has taken over CBS and The Huffington Post, both of which have now welcomed the vaccine industry’s shameless pusher,Seth Mnookin. 

The latest example of this is a blog post he wrote for The Huffington Post’s new “Science” section comically titled:

The Autism Vaccine Controversy and the Need for Responsible Science Journalism

Seth Mnookin summed up the rant on his own blog:

In it, I talk about “the legacy of years of dispatches that created a false equivalency between verifiable facts and…outlandish allegations,” …

And given Seth Mnookin’s tendency to prefer outright lies to verifiable facts, it is not surprising what his biggest fear is:

I figure a worst-case scenario is the site uses the fig leaf of “balance” and posts another anti-vac screed in the next day or so…in which case, lesson learned.

The Atlantic Wire (a website of The Atlantic, edited by the nephew of John Stossel) ran a blog post celebrating Mnookin’s Huffington Post article, quoting Huffpo’s spokesman Mario Ruiz:

"We believe in providing a platform to bloggers from a variety of disciplines and points of view -- indeed, we welcomed Seth Mnookin’s critique, and regularly present multiple sides of hotly debated issues."

But Seth Mnookin tells a different story:

…I was somewhat surprised when a new HuffPo editor approached me about contributing to their about-to-be launched science section. It would be, he promised, a marked departure from what the site had featured in the past.

That editor, former WebMD writer David Freeman, was managing editor of CBS News’ “Health Channel” before joining HuffPo. Seth Mnookin has high praise for him according to The Atlantic Wire:

"[David] wanted me to contribute and was very vocal about the fact that this was going to be a pro-science section that adhered to strong standards. And David certainly has a good track record," Mnookin told us, adding that he'd worked with Freeman a bit a(sic) CBS. "From the first time we talked he's always struck me as someone who's incredibly smart and also very responsible. Again, my most optimistic reading is that Arianna wouldn't have hired someone like him if she wasn't interested in doing this the right way."

Last April, when Freeman “worked with” Mnookin at CBS, the network posted a talking point gallery on its website titled “10 deadly myths about childhood vaccines”:

What's the truth about childhood vaccines? Are they an effective way to safeguard kids against a range of potentially deadly illnesses? Or do they cause autism and other medical problems? Keep clicking as Seth Mnookin, the author of "The Panic Virus: A True Story of Medicine, Science, and Fear," separates vaccine fact from fiction with his list of common misconceptions. It's information that just might save a life.

Accompanying it was an article by Freeman’s colleague and then-cbsnews.com executive editor Neil Katz (just before he was hired by The Huffington Post as its new executive news editor). The title:

What autism, climate change and Obama's birth certificate have in common

It was posted on the very same CBS HealthPop blog that Freeman started and edited with Katz, to which Freeman also contributed biased blog posts riddled with vaccine industry talking points.

Katz’s hiring at HuffPo came right after David Kirby’s piece about the Pace Law Review – ignored by CBS - titled, High Rates of Autism Found in Federal Vaccine Injury Program: Study Says More Answers Needed. There hasn’t been another article like Kirby’s on HuffPo since. 

And New York Times writer Carl Zimmer, who I saw share a stage with Seth Mnookin in New York City last summer, blogged about Mnookin’s piece for Discover Magazine, in an entry titled “Huffington Post + Science. A New Leaf?” The implication being that The Huffington Post will become the latest addition to the vaccine industry’s collection of propaganda outlets.

Fiona Fox, director of the pharma-funded, UK-based Science Media Centre, championed the concept of justified censorship. (She not only denies a vaccine/autism link, she was also an outspoken denier of the Rwandan Genocide in which nearly one million people were systematically murdered with machetes in just 100 days.) Mnookin merely co-opted this concept of justified censorship to advance his newfound “science”-writing career, just as he co-opted every pharma talking point for his book. 

His lambasting of the true investigative journalism of Sharyl Attkisson is evidence of his bias. In his HuffPo piece, Mnookin smeared her for reporting evidence vaccines cause autism in a report for CBS five years ago. But since he claimed there was no proof, he said it therefore should not have been reported any more than a link between CBS News and rectal cancer.  Yes, “science writer” Seth Mnookin actually drew that parallel. A more accurate parallel would be if there were cases of rectal cancer that emerged in people after they swallowed their television sets as opposed to watching CBS News on them.

Given that Mnookin criticized Attkisson while he was under the editorial direction of two former CBS editors, it is now apparent that Attkisson took some flak for her cutting-edge reports at CBS. Even with Katz and Freeman gone, there are still those at CBS who would probably love to see her blockbuster reporting censored once and for all.

What Mnookin Considers “Responsible Science Journalism”

After booting me out of a public conference where he lied that I disrupted his past events, Seth Mnookin has lied about me yet again - this time claiming that he had nothing to do with my removal. In fact, in an interview he gave for a blog, he claims he might have preferred that I stayed:

I recently spoke at a medical research conference -- via Skype as my daughter had just been born -- and there was someone in the audience who was very vocally anti-vaccine, and who ended being taken out of the room for something I had nothing to do with, and in fact I probably would have preferred that he stayed -- but regardless, that was an upsetting incident to me.

That I was removed for something he “had nothing to do with” is not only a lie, but it was directly contradicted by the security guard who escorted me out of the hotel.

“You broke the rules! You were being disruptive!”

It was Mnookin who originally labeled me disruptive after I asked him a question during Q/A. Considering the fact that my presence was “upsetting” to Seth Mnookin is not a surprise, given two statements he has previously written about me online:

After the event, an audience member chastised me for ignoring the evidence that vaccines cause autism — and repeatedly cited Andrew Wakefield’s 1998…study in The Lancet as proof.

I would have preferred responding (& tried to), altho the person wanted to grandstand not talk at #PRIMR_AER11

The fact that those two statements are utter fabrications shows just how frustrated Seth Mnookin is by the points I made.

Interestingly, he never names me in his online writing; I am always “someone,” “an audience member” or “the person,” but never Jake Crosby. To Seth Mnookin, I’ve become a real-life Voldemort – the evil sorcerer in J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter novels – who must not be named.

I am not convinced Mnookin “would have preferred that stayed,” but I think he knows that cutting me off, shutting me up and kicking me out did not reflect well on him. And this is probably why he latched onto a story later that month in The New York Times that profiled the lives of two adults with Asperger Syndrome. Mnookin wrote three posts on his blog gushing over the article and then he even interviewed the author so as to write a fourth blog post.

The funny thing is, before the article came out, there were no posts about Asperger Syndrome on either of Mnookin’s blogs. In fact, The New York Times article he lauded was only the second in a series by Amy Harmon about adults with Asperger Syndrome, the first of which Mnookin paid no attention to. It looks like he was trying to rescue his image after throwing an individual with Asperger Syndrome out of his own event.

This is not the first time Mnookin has resorted to such a tactic. When news broke that Kim Stagliano’s daughter was being physically abused on the school bus earlier this year, Mnookin wrote a blog post professing sympathy for Kim’s daughter. Yet he did not sign or even link to Kim’s petition against the appeal of the school bus driver who allowed Kim’s daughter to be abused.

Then in an act of utter inappropriateness that revealed his true lack of empathy for Kim’s daughter, Seth Mnookin posted an addendum trying to justify his non-endorsement of Kim’s petition, suggesting it could be a prank like that by the pharma-funded Cato Institute’s senior fellows Penn & Teller. Mnookin explained that the magician duo had convinced environmental activists to sign a fake petition banning water. That is the extent of seriousness with which Seth Mnookin treats the abuse faced by children with autism.

Seth Mnookin’s empathy for people with autism is as false as his claim that he had nothing to do with my removal from his event last month.

Before Mnookin: A Variety of Views on CBS News

CBS Investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson followed the money that funded the front groups and talking heads of the vaccine industry – such as the AAP, Every Child By Two, and millionaire vaccine industrialist Dr. Paul Offit. And for that, unsurprisingly, the vaccine industry struck back.

There are people connected to the vaccine industry within CBS who do not care for Attkisson’s honest reporting. CBS Evening News medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook – also a HuffPo contributor, insisting vaccines are safe - relies on the vaccine industry as the source for his reporting.

Dr. LaPook has, in the past, skirted the Hannah Poling decision that her shots caused her autism, skirted safety concerns about the HPV vaccine, blamed the autism community for concerns about the H1N1 vaccine during the swine flu scare and said the autism omnibus decisions in vaccine court – designed to shield drug companies from litigation – should put a rest to this controversy, but won’t.

One year ago, when BMJ accused Dr. Andrew Wakefield of an “Elaborate Fraud,” Dr. LaPook tweeted:

Media fueled fears after Wakefield's '98 MMR-autism study. Media must now publicize the BMJ report that the study was doctored by the doctor.

A few months later, Seth Mnookin was allowed to contribute to the CBS News website “[i]10 deadly myths about childhood vaccines.”

But perhaps most telling was whom Dr. Jon LaPook interviewed following The Lancet’s retraction of Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s paper in 2010 - Columbia University Medical Center’s (CUMC) Anatomy Department Chairman, Dr. Michael Gershon.

Dr. Gershon said Dr. Wakefield’s paper shouldn’t have been published and that autism is genetic. What wasn’t said, however, is that Dr. Gershon’s wife Anne developed the chicken pox vaccine for Merck. Dr. Anne Gershon is a professor of pediatric infectious diseases at CUMC.

And Dr. LaPook is associate professor at the very same institution where the Gershons work. In fact, for as long as Dr. Michael Gershon has been on the faculty at CUMC, Dr. Jon LaPook has been either on the faculty, or a student at Columbia University’s College of Physicans and Surgeons.

So while it is not surprising that Dr. LaPook would interview his conflicted colleague at the university where they both teach, it is extremely ironic that the very source Dr. LaPook uses to justify his position - Dr. Michael Gershon - is the type of source Sharyl Attkisson would have exposed as a paid talking head for the vaccine industry.

Dr. LaPook has contributed to Katz and Freeman’s CBS [i]HealthPop blog, even coauthoring a piece with Katz himself. But perhaps most telling of all was that in early 2010, Dr. LaPooke became a member of the Association of Health Care Journalists (AHCJ), where Seth Mnookin is also a member as is his old college chum, Ivan Oransky, treasurer of AHCJ.

Scott Pelley + Pfizer + CBS Evening News = No More Sharyl Attkisson?

Lately, we haven’t heard from Sharyl Attkisson, CBS Evening News’ most fearless investigative journalist. Certainly, her reporting runs counter to the vaccine industry talking points used by other CBS writers Dr. Jon LaPook and Ryan Jaslow as well as former CBS editors Neil Katz and David Freeman. But her recent silence might also be due to major changes within CBS Evening News itself.

One change in television news that garnered much less attention than it deserved was the replacement of Katie Couric as anchor of CBS Evening News with 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley. Within weeks of the announcement that Couric would be leaving CBS to become a correspondent for ABC, CBS posted Seth Mnookin’s talking point gallery along with Neil Katz’s complementary article. 

Pelley’s journalism on vaccine-related topics is troubling to say the least. Hosting 60 Minutes, he played a major part in inflating the swine flu scare. And that is reflected in the program’s sponsorship. Before the 60 Minutes report even begins, you have to stare at nothing but a Pfizer logo for seven seconds.

In the 60 Minutes segment itself, Pelley is taken on a friendly tour through Sanofi-Pasteur’s H1N1 vaccine plant and does not challenge a government official on weighing the risks of the virus with the risks of the vaccine. When the official likened the benefits of the vaccine to wearing a seatbelt – ignoring the vaccine’s risks altogether – Pelley let it go unchallenged.

Bill Maher challenged Pelley’s coverage of this on The Huffington Post arguing that swallowing the seatbelt – rather than strapping it over your chest – would be a more apt analogy. Indeed, it would be.

But most disturbing of all is Pelley’s personal relationships. He sits on the board of directors of the International Rescue Committee, a non-profit organization which is, in-part, dedicated to the vaccination of children in the third world. Sitting on the board of directors with Pelley is Susan Susman, director of external relations for Pfizer, which sponsored Pelley’s 60 Minutes report on H1N1 vaccine production.

Katie Couric possesses no such ties and did not stop Sharyl Attkisson from conducting her dogged investigations. In contrast, no reports from Attkisson on autism and vaccines have come out since Pelley took over in June, while vaccine industry talking points were regularly parroted on the CBS website by Neil Katz and David Freeman before they took their bias to HuffPo.

Neil Katz + David Freeman + HuffPo + AOL = No More David Kirby?

But Neil Katz and David Freeman’s roles on HuffPo do not just reflect their contempt for Sharyl Attkisson, but now represent HuffPo’s autism-vaccine coverage in general.

While David Kirby remains a contributor to the site for which he has written an article as recently as November, he has not contributed a single piece on the vaccine-autism controversy since Neil Katz became executive news editor. In fact, no thorough investigations of this debate have run on the site since Katz’ hiring. There has been nothing from Jenny McCarthy or Age of Autism’s managing editor, Kim Stagliano. It was McCarthy’s past contributions to HuffPo which were lambasted in Mnookin’s hit piece.

David Freeman is now editor of the new  “Science” section, which he says will run content that was very different from what was run in the past. I take this to mean that pharma essentially has its own section dubbed “Science” in the HuffPo. Given that the site has already allowed plenty of industry voices to blog, including millionaire vaccine industrialist Paul Offit and vaccine industry original go-to guy Arthur Allen, it appears this deviation Freeman speaks of will be the addition of HuffPo “Science” to the vaccine industry’s collection of propaganda outlets at best. At worst, the entire site will be a new bastion of total censorship that prevents skilled journalists from contributing to this debate. Hopefully, that won’t be the case.

The takeover of the successful Huffington Post by AOL was probably the trigger for the hiring of editors like Katz and Freeman. AOL had a history of being friendly to the vaccine industry which continues to be shielded from vaccine liability by federal law.

Seth Mnookin’s Lies Unsustainable

Of course, if HuffPo and CBS choose to censor genuine journalism like that of David Kirby andSharyl Attkisson in favor of agenda-driven pseudo-journalism and blatant lies by vaccine industry pushers like Seth Mnookin, then that is CBS and HuffPo’s choice. But positions like Mnookin’s are unsustainable and bound to fail. The concept of justified censorship that he co-opted from Fiona Fox, denier of the Rwandan Genocide, may work for people conspiring to cover up vaccine injury, but not for journalists who want to maintain long-term credibility. But then again, how many credible journalists get their assignments from their Uncle Bob?

Whistleblower Scientist Accuses British Medical Journal of Institutional Research Misconduct

Actions of BMJ Editor and Reporter “More Tabloid News than Science” According to Dr. David Lewis, and “a Genuine Threat to Public Health”

WASHINGTON, D.C., Jan. 9, 2012 (SEND2PRESS NEWSWIRE) -- Dr. David Lewis, internationally known whistleblower and respected expert on institutional fraud, released a report today calling for a formal investigation into the practices of the British Medical Journal (BMJ), and specifically into the actions of its editor, Dr. Fiona Godlee, and Brian Deer, a reporter she hired to write a series of articles which appeared in the journal beginning on January 4, 2011.

The BMJ articles accuse Dr. Andrew Wakefield of committing scientific fraud in a 1998 Lancet publication he co-authored that brought global attention to a link many parents and physicians suspect may exist between autism and children who are genetically predisposed to adverse reactions from the Measles/Mumps/Rubella (MMR) vaccine.

The BMJ, Deer, and Godlee alleged that Wakefield fabricated a diagnosis of colitis in most of the 12 children described in The Lancet article — calling Wakefield’s work an "elaborate fraud" intended to create an "MMR scare" — so Wakefield could profit from a patent related to his research.

“Documents recovered from Dr. Wakefield's files during my investigation at the National Whistleblowers Center (NWC) - www.researchmisconduct.org - reveal that a pathologist associated with the study, Dr. Andrew Anthony, interpreted a number of the children's biopsies as evidence of colitis,” explained Dr. Lewis. “Altogether, the evidence contained in Wakefield's files suggested to me that the BMJ's fraud theory was more tabloid news than science.”

According to documents Lewis filed with Sir John Tooke, Vice-Provost for Health at the University College London (UCL) where The Lancet study was done, BMJ Editor Godlee responded to the Lewis revelations by “cherry-picking the evidence and coming up with a grand conspiracy theory involving ‘institutional research misconduct’. Alleged fraudsters now include University College London (UCL) administrators, the Royal Free Hospital, and all 13 co-authors of the Lancet study.”

UCL President Malcolm Grant notified Lewis that, because his charges were “so serious,” he urged Dr. Lewis to inform Dr. Godlee and Deer “at the earliest opportunity.”

Lewis also reports that Godlee has previously acknowledged the BMJ Group receives funding from the two manufacturers of the MMR vaccine, Merck and GlaxoSmithKline, and has testified in a Parliamentary inquiry that peer-reviewed medical journals are “the marketing arm of the pharmaceutical industry.” Lewis added: “Apparently scientists who question certain government policies and industry practices can be destroyed for a price. If so, this kind of tabloid science poses a genuine threat to public health.”

On January 3, 2012, Dr. Wakefield filed suit against the BMJ and Brian Deer (http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/01/04/BritMedJ.pdf ). Last September, Columbia University published a major study supporting the link Dr. Wakefield established between autism and enterocolitis ( http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3174969/ ).

Letters

http://www.salon.com/2005/06/25/thimerosal_2/

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. responds to a reader's scrutiny of key quotations in his article "Deadly Immunity." Plus: Grateful readers thank Kennedy.

The article “Deadly immunity” by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. centers around the June 2000 CDC meeting at Simpsonwood, the transcript of which supposedly reveals that a CDC study shows that thimerosal was the cause of childhood autism. However, many of the central and most damning statements in the article are mischaracterizations of some participants’ statements.

The most egregious error occurs in the article’s lead-in summary, and again on the first page of the piece. The article lead-in states, in part: “When a study revealed that mercury in childhood vaccines may have caused autism in thousands of kids, the government rushed to conceal the data.”

And the article elaborates, on Page 1: “According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency’s massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines — thimerosal — appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children.”

These two statement are false. Here is the direct quote by Mr. Verstraeten from the transcript of the conference regarding his study’s findings on a link between thimerosal and autism (Page 44): Tom Verstraeten: “This is the result for autism, in which we don’t see much of a trend except for a slight, but not significant, increase for the highest exposure. The overall test for trend is not statistically significant.”

Regardless of the validity of other parts of the article, the primary claim made in the article that the transcripts of the Simpsonwood conference show that Dr. Verstraeten asserted that “thimerosal … appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism” is simply false. Not only does Dr. Verstraeten never state that thimerosal is responsible for a “dramatic increase” in the disease as you claim he does, he does not even draw a relationship between thimerosal and a risk factor for autism. To be clear, on the correlation between thimerosal exposure and autism, he states, “The overall test for trend is not statistically significant.”

I take issue with other parts of your article as well.

Article, Page 1: “Dr. John Clements, vaccines advisor at the World Health Organization, declared flatly that the study ‘should not have been done at all.'”

This quote is erroneous on several levels. First, it says that Dr. Clements ‘DECLARED FLATLY that the study ‘should not have been done at all.'” This is false; he says (Page 247): ” … PERHAPS this study should not have been done at all.” Your intentional deletion of the word “perhaps,” which permits your inaccurate characterization of the statement as a “flat declaration,” dangerously undermines your credibility.

Further, you truncate the end of Dr. Clements’ quote in a way that radically alters its meaning. Here is the full quote (Page 247): John Clements: “And I really want to risk offending everyone in the room by saying that perhaps this study should not have been done at all, BECAUSE THE OUTCOME OF IT COULD HAVE, TO SOME EXTENT, BEEN PREDICTED [emphasis added]…”

You also cut-and-paste other quotes of Dr. Clements in order to create a new stream of speech that never existed. You wrote, “Dr. John Clements, vaccines advisor at the World Health Organization … warned that the results ‘will be taken by others and will be used in ways beyond the control of this group. The research results have to be handled.'”

This joins together two utterances that were actually distinct and separated, and, more perniciously, it also reverses their order of appearance to create the false impression that the second sentence refers to the first. Also, the word “other” is missing in the quote in the article (“used in OTHER ways”).

Here’s the real quotation from the transcript:

“But there is now the point at which the research results have to be handled [note — no italics], and even if this committee decides that there is no association and that information gets out, the work has been done and through freedom of information that will be taken by others and will be used in other ways beyond the control of this group.”

You may feel that the meaning is unaltered; I feel quite differently. But that’s not the point: The question is, why did you feel it necessary to distort the text, rather than letting readers see the unaltered original quotation?

Article, Page 1: “All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly ’embargoed.’ There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.”

This statement is terribly misleading. Here is the actual quote from the transcript (Page 256): Dr. Bernier: “I don’t think we can set a rule here because some people have gotten these documents. For example, some of the manufacturers were privileged to receive this information. It has been important for them to share it within the company with the experts there, so they can review it. Some of you may have questions. You may have been given a copy, but I think if we all just consider this embargoed information, if I can use that term, and very highly protected information, I think that was the best I can offer. If anyone else wants to make a suggestion, but I would say consider it embargoed and protected until it is made public on June 21 and 22 at the ACIP. There is a plan to do that.”

There is no explicit prohibition in this passage against making copies or taking papers from the conference. Most importantly is this statement: ” … consider it embargoed and protected UNTIL IT IS MADE PUBLIC ON JUNE 21 and 22 at the ACIP. There is a plan to do that.” That planned public release date was a mere two weeks after the conference. This puts the statements regarding embargoing the information in a radically different light than that implied, whereby the government was attempting to permanently conceal the study.

Article, Page 1: “But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data.” This statement is false. A reading of the transcript proves that almost the entire two days of the conference consisted of the presentation of findings, discussion of the study, and discussion of next steps to investigate the issue further. In fact, the consensus was to perform further research and investigation, not to suppress the results and terminate the line of inquiry.

I do not dispute that some unsettling comments were made at the conference, and the greatest irony is that the results that Dr. Verstraeten presents do implicate thimerosal in several childhood neurological developmental disorders — but not autism. This is tragic, because your flagrant errors will now have the effect of neutralizing some of the very important information that is coming to light on this issue. The issue under examination is of high importance, and you have now donated ammunition to those that would discredit the anti-immunization crowd. In this case, sadly, you may well deserve discrediting.

— Daniel Kirchheimer

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. replies:

We published the link to the Simpsonwood transcript, along with my article, so that readers could see the discussion for themselves. Mr. Kirchheimer is entitled to his interpretation. I disagree with it.

My piece didn’t state that Tom Verstraeten said he’d found “statistically significant” links between autism and thimerosal exposure at Simpsonwood, but that the Simpsonwood meeting was convened to discuss his earlier research, which did find a link. Verstraeten had been studying the Vaccine Safety Datalink database (compiled by health maintenance organizations to track reports of medical complaints, illnesses and other data related to vaccinations) to see whether there was evidence of a connection between exposure to thimerosal in childhood vaccines and a range of neurological disorders, including autism. Six months prior to Simpsonwood, in December 1999, Verstraeten sent his CDC colleagues findings showing a statistically significant association between thimerosal and many of those disorders, including autism. One Verstraeten e-mail alerting his CDC colleagues to his findings contained the now-infamous subject line, “it just won’t go away …” He attached a summary of data sets showing a troubling 7.62-fold increase in the incidence of autism associated with babies’ first Hep B shot. Later, in a February 2000 report, Verstraten found that at 3 months, fully vaccinated infants had received 62.5 micrograms of thimerosal, and their relative risk of autism was 2.48 — which would be considered a statistically significant association if presented in a court of law.

As my article noted, Verstraeten continued to work on the data, pre- and post-Simpsonwood, and over time the link to autism diminished, mainly because Verstraeten added and subtracted different population groups from his study. However, in the paper he presented at Simpsonwood in June 2000, “Risk of neurological and renal impairment associated with Thimerosal-containing vaccines,” he found a statistically significant association between exposure to the mercury-based preservative and a host of problems, including “unspecified developmental delay, tics, speech delay, attention-deficit disorder and neurodevelopmental delay in general.” He also found a “slight, but not significant increase” in autism in infants exposed to thimerosal, but he did note at Simpsonwood — on Page 43 of the transcript — that the data probably understated the true problem, because many of the children considered in the study were “just not old enough to be diagnosed” (autism is typically not diagnosed until age 3 or 4).

To Mr. Kirchheimer’s other points: The way I used the Clements quote did not change its meaning. I regret that two sentences of the quote were inadvertently transposed. The papers discussed at Simpsonwood were clearly embargoed - Verstraeten’s paper was stamped “Do not copy or reproduce” on every page - and there’s no evidence that the material was actually released two weeks later. Again, it’s a matter of interpretation how much of the time spent at Simpsonwood was devoted to advancing scientific inquiry and how much to “handling” Verstraeten’s troubling data. History has proven the CDC was more interested in making the data “go away” than getting to the bottom of it.

In fact, Verstraeten himself was troubled by the reaction to his work. In an e-mail to Harvard epidemiologist Phillippe Grandjean a month after the Simpsonwood meeting, he complained: “I have witnessed how many experts,looking at this thimerosal issue, do not seem bothered to compare apples to pears and insist that if nothing is happening in these studies then nothing should be feared of thimerosal. I do not wish to be the advocate of the anti-vaccine lobby and sound like being convinced that thimerosal is or was harmful, but at least I feel we should use sound scientific argumentation and not let our standards be dictated by our desire to disprove an unpleasant theory.”

I’m happy that my article has contributed to greater public awareness of what transpired at Simpsonwood and afterward, and I hope the CDC will heed the public’s call for more transparency.

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

The Death of Public Discourse and the Heavy Snow of Plausibility

“WARNING: This Site is Hazardous to Those Who Promote Censorship”

It is becoming apparent that all of the internet activity around vaccines and autism is frustrating those who support the “scientific consensus” that there is no connection between vaccines and autism.

On January 23, Evgeny Morozov wrote an article for Future Tense called “Warning: This Site Contains Conspiracy Theories” which proposes the notion that search engines should label and flag websites that engage in discourse about the potential link between autism and vaccines. Morozov suggests that Google and Bing install a “pop up message” advising readers to “check a previously generated list of authoritative resources before making up their minds.” Morozov’s support for censorship is particularly ironic given that he has written extensively on how authoritarian regimes have used the internet to further oppression. This article was followed up by Commentary by Dr. Kevin Pho on KevinMD.com in an article titled “Should Google censor anti-vaccine claims?” Dr. Pho described Morozov’s article as “fascinating.”

Is censorship really “fascinating”? History doesn’t usually record it that way. In fact, censorship is usually accompanied by oppression – as Morozov notes. I suspect that those who have suffered oppression – and censorship – do not sit around wondering how fascinating the experience was.

That the concept of censorship is so comfortably proposed by seemingly main stream people is of profound concern to me. It seems that those who support the vaccine program have convinced themselves that the program is above discussion and public discourse. Vaccines are all good and unquestionably safe. Those who make them, administer them and supply them are all beyond reproach. Bringing up the radioactive ‘autism’ thing really throws them into a tizzy. Not only is discussion of vaccines and autism found to be against “scientific consensus” but it is now supposed to be described as a “fringe theory.” If you talk about this issue, you are a member of a lunatic fringe. You are out there in the woods, looking for Bigfoot.

But are descriptions of vaccine injury associated with autism really crazy? Should discussion of vaccine injury and autism be verboten?

The vaccine program is a complex, multi-layered government and corporate program. It is a big part of Public Health Policy. As someone who works for a local government, it is my belief that Public Health Policy issues involve the public. That means conversation – what we used to call ‘public discourse.’ But with this program, no one is supposed to ask questions and the lecturers are above answering them. In fact, it has become fashionable to remove those who pose tough questions from lectures about how to promote the vaccine program. Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine industry spokes person who has made significant income from vaccines, has had a young journalist named Jake Crosby removed from two of his lectures and has called Mr. Crosby a “stalker.” Apparently, asking hard question gets you labeled a criminal and shown the door.

Interesting how censorship is immediately followed by oppression, isn’t it?

Back in May, you might recall that Mary Holland, Robert Krakow, Lisa Colin and I published a paper in the Pace Environmental Law Review called Unanswered Questions From the Vaccine Injury Compensation: A Review of Compensated Cases of Vaccine-Induced Brain Injury (http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol28/iss2/2/0). The paper showed that the US Government has been compensating children within the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) for over twenty years for vaccine injuries that involved brain damage and seizures. And quite remarkably, many of these children also suffered from the behavioral disorder that DSM-IV - but maybe not DSM-V - calls “autism.”

Isn’t it interesting that the US Government established a compensation program to deal with vaccine injuries? Some public discourse must have prompted Congress to do this back in the 1980’s. And in this government program, the Department of Health and Human Services has quietly acknowledged that vaccine injuries sometimes “include” autism and “autism-like symptoms.”

It seems that over the past twenty four years that when Dr. Geoffrey Evans, Director of the HHS Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation, and his staff sit down and screen all the claims filed in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program and look into individual cases, the “fringe belief” isn’t so fringe anymore. The cold, hard fact is that vaccine injury is indelibly linked to autism not because of the internet or because of conspiracy theories but because of the reality of vaccine injury. We found that there were a significant number of children compensated for vaccine injury who also had autism. This had been going for years before Dr. Andrew Wakefield, blamed by Dr. Offit for the creating the controversy, ever appeared on the scene. I find it “fascinating” that Dr. Evans didn’t think that this information should be disclosed during the Omnibus Autism Proceedings, the multi-year proceeding aggregating over 5,000 claims of vaccine-induced autism. Maybe Dr. Evans feared censorship and oppression.

All those compensated cases speak loudly and clearly to plausibility and against vaccine-induced autism being a “fringe belief.” And all of those vaccine injured children with autism have family members who talk about what happened to their children.

Interestingly, we found that Unanswered Questions was censored as well. The article was given to many, many mainstream news outlets. Many ignored the peer-reviewed article, but we also received feedback that indicated that reporters and journalists were instructed not to report on the findings. As one highly placed journalist told me, “I am stunned by what you found and what is going on here…but I am not allowed to cover this story.”

And now I read and article in the Vancouver Courier that Drs. Chris Shaw and Lucija Tomljenovic of the University of British Columbia (UBC) are beginning to draw fire from Dr. Offit for their recent work. Their November 2011 article in the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry describes correlations and possible causal links between increased exposures to aluminum adjuvants in vaccines and increased neurological problems. Dr. Offit has informed a reporter that the peer-reviewed paper “should never have been published.” He then went on to vent his spleen about Dr. Wakefield and the MMR controversy. The message was clear: the vaccine program is above question. And if you are inclined to ask questions, remember Dr. Wakefield.

Green College of UBC planned to have a lecture series on vaccine safety. But it seems that the criticism from Dr. Offit and his crew is having its usual chilling effect. The lecture series appears to be in jeopardy and may not run. Public discourse be damned. The vaccine program must remain above inquiry.

And now it seems that those who cloak themselves in “scientific consensus " want censorship brought to the internet as well. They will try to sell it as a reasonable measure at first – nothing more obnoxious than a pop-up statement. But that is just the beginning. And history tells us that it will not be too long before censorship’s next of kin – oppression – is on display. That is what those with “scientific consensus” really want. They want contrary research retracted, rebellious doctors sanctioned, and those who ask uncomfortable questions silenced. They want websites shut down and investigative journalists run out of town. They even want to end the epidemic by un-diagnosing the thousands that they finally got “better at diagnosing” over the past twenty years. They want all discourse about vaccine injury to end. And they will claim that “scientific consensus” permits them to do so.

But there is a problem. And it is a big one.

It has to do with the fact that people – parents – are observing their children getting sick and regressing after vaccination. Some of these children go on to develop autism. These experiences are real, important, and hugely worthy of investigation. And family members will talk about what they experience no matter what the censors do.

Last year some Young men came knocking at my door after the tenth snowfall of the winter and asked if they could make a few dollars shoveling my driveway. I wanted to ask them where they had been for blizzards one through nine but I censored myself and happily agreed to have them do the job instead of me. While they were out there, one of my sons with autism went out and played in the snow and began playing with them as well. The young men were great with my son and I made a point of thanking them for being such gentlemen and good neighbors.

Then one of them said, “I have a cousin with autism so I know what this is all about…You know my aunt swears that a vaccine made him that way.”

Try censoring that.

Vaccination – A Call for Parental Caution and Industry Reform

Please give careful attention to the following studies and references:

www.landesbioscience.com/special/Ahmad_Neuro_9781587066450.pdf#page=124

Institute of Medicine (as pro-vaccine as they come) report comparing various types of mercury exposure: www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/PublicHealth/ImmunizationSafety/Lucier.ashx. Note the “conclusions” section, in which it is recommended that ethylmercury (also know as thimerosal preservative, used in many vaccines, although less so than in the past) exposure be considered equivalent to methylmercury in neurotoxicity.

When rats were administered ethylmercury by injection, after 3 to 10 days brain concentrations of inorganic mercury were higher than in those injected with methylmercury, with diffuse concentrations in multiple organs, particularly damaging the kidneys. With a 20% increase in ethylmercury dose, ganglion damage and coordination disorders exceeded those of the methylmercury-treated rats (this accords with the IOM conclusion noted above) – See www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4091651. 

Also see www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3264864/, which suggests the exitotoxicity pathway by which injected ethylmercury may cause such brain damage. More research is needed to establish the chemistry and altered protein synthesis involved, but much is already known. – ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/41/1/79.full

The results are similar with infant monkeys -http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16079072, with dramatic results for motor coordination and root, snout, and suck reflexes -http://fedgeno.com/documents/delayed-neonatal-reflexes-in-primates-receiving-thimerosal.pdf

Then there’s this to make sense of the above: 



The aforementioned studies and video are more than sufficient to convince an open-minded researcher of the neurotoxic potential of thimerosal, particularly when administered in multiple doses. 

Some fetuses, infants, children, and even adults are more prone to an inflammatory response or to the types of epigenetic miscue that lead to dysfunction for a number of reasons, not limited to:

- Timing in relation to fetal/neural/organ development;
- Genetic predispositions including poor methylation of key genes (see www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/the-role-of-methylation-in-gene-expression-1070);
- Inability to effectively detoxify metals through feces, urine and skin.

Unfortunately, elimination of toxins and other epigenetic triggers before damage takes place is impossible for some of the compounds in vaccines. An observer may not see or otherwise detect the damage; perhaps it is too diffuse to critically affect one organ or system, or the individual in question has more of a vital amino acid, protein, or enzyme necessary to bond with and neutralize a particular contaminant. But that does not mean that damage – in the form of persistent inflammation and/or autoimmunity that will vary for every person – has not occurred.


One major problem with epidemiological studies of toxicological exposures is that they simply do not examine tissues in the lab, and no one – doctor, scientist, or parent – can predict which organ, system, or tissue will be most affected when an inflammatory or autoimmune response is induced, whether by vaccine or environmental toxin. Nevertheless, because of the prevalence of such toxins, we find ourselves in the midst of a pandemic of neurological damage and other serious health problems that affect nearly everyone in highly vaccinated populations, and the diverse nature of many of the diseases and syndromes related to such toxic exposures has often prevented direct implication of vaccines as a causative factor.

Study: Vaccinated Children Have 2 to 5 Times More Diseases and Disorders Than Unvaccinated Children

A German study released in September 2011 of about 8000 UNVACCINATED children, newborn to 19 years, show vaccinated children have at least 2 to 5 times more diseases and disorders than unvaccinated children.

The results are presented in the bar chart below; the complete data and study results are here. The data is compared to the national German KIGGS health study of the children in the general population. Most of the respondents to the survey were from the U.S.


Download and read the IAS1992study now.

---

Vaccinated Kids Have 2-5 Times More Diseases Than Unvaccinated

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2011/11/18/vaccinated_kids_more_diseases/










The study performed in Guinea-Bissau, shows a doubling of the mortality rate among infants vaccinated with a single dose of DTP vaccine. The mortality rate more than quadrupled after the second and third dose.

According to Age of Autism:

“VAERS data also show high infant mortality in the U.S. after DTP vaccination (much higher than from pertussis, diphtheria and tetanus together, hence it is clear that DTP vaccine is harming more children than saving.”

Due to the blatant facts, a safety panel is convening in Japan to investigate the connection between two widely used vaccines — Pfizer’s Prevenar and Sanofi Pasteur’s ActHIB — and the deaths of five children in the past month. At this time, Japan’s health ministry has ordered doctors to stop immunizing infants with the vaccines until full investigations are done and a conclusion is made.

The report of these findings first aired on BBC news in January 2011. The next time the story was aired on BBC in that same week, a massive attack and smear campaign began on the doctors involved in the study. Needless to say, no other media outlets aired or picked up the story which lead to no coverage in other countries including North America.

The following was written in an article outlining the story of the findings introduced by Dr. Aaby and his team. As you can see, the story is not available online any longer

“… [A] team of Danish and African medical sleuths have pieced together evidence that could change public health care forever. They have discovered that vaccines and vitamin supplements have unexpected effects – good and bad – on the immune systems of children.

It’s the first time a British journalist has visited the Bandim health surveillance unit, where Dr Peter Aaby and his team has toiled for more than 30 years – through wars, natural disasters and epidemics… Their health detective work has generated more than 600 scholarly articles in the world’s leading medical journals, and been responsible for the withdrawal of a potentially deadly measles vaccine by the World Health Organization.

But the WHO has not acted on the most explosive findings yet coming from Guinea Bissau.

They show that the world’s most commonly used vaccines can strengthen – or weaken – a child’s immune system in the long term, and affect their ability to fight off disease. The results directly challenge the WHO’s global health advice, followed by most countries in the developing world, and could mean that thousands of young lives, in Africa and beyond, are needlessly at risk.

We’ll hear from some of world’s most respected public health scientists who back Aaby’s findings. The documentary also asks why the WHO has not yet acted on the evidence generated so far. And whether safety tests for new vaccines and vitamin supplements, heavily promoted by donor agencies and pharmaceutical companies alike, are sufficiently far-reaching.”

As Dr.Mercola states on his website about vaccines and vaccine safety:

“A number of things are clear:

[1]There are risks inherent with all vaccines
[2]Long-term health outcomes post-vaccination are typically not studied
[3]When you or your child is injured by a vaccine, the risks are 100 percent, and you will have to deal with the consequences on your own, because those who make and give vaccines are protected from liability in civil court, and federal vaccine injury compensation is very difficult to get.

What’s worse, a U.S. Supreme Court recently decided to give drug companies total liability protection for injuries and deaths caused by government mandated vaccines.”

On a more positive note, many of us are beginning to shift quite drastically within our own lives and the effects these vaccines have on us and our newborns is lessening. Still, we may want to look into avoiding vaccines both for ourselves and our children as they are born.

Sources:


http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/03/24/disturbing-data-about-vaccinated-children.aspx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00x4013
http://journal.livingfood.us/2011/10/09/new-study-vaccinated-children-have-2-to-5-times-more-diseases-and-disorders-than-unvaccinated-children/

Dozens of Children Dead After UN Gives Tainted Vaccine in “Rebel” Held Syria

87 Published Works on Vaccines and Adverse Health Concerns 

Vaccines and Monsanto’s RoundUp Cause Autism: MIT Scientist Exposes Consequence of Glyphosate and Aluminum Cocktail

By 2025, half the kids born in the U.S. will be diagnosed with autism, according to Dr. Stephanie Seneff, Senior Research Scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. She, like many others says autism isn’t just genetic – it is almost surely due to environmental factors. Just a couple of those factors are Monsanto’s RoundUp (glyphosate) and heavy exposure to a cocktail of heavy metals, including aluminum.

---

BMJ investigation exposes corruption and conflicts of interest within the World Health Organization

This has come to a head today, on the publication in the British Medical Journal of a report and accompanying editorial [1,2] which focus on this issue. The report alone is voluminous, but here is a paragraph extracted from it that neatly sums up the issues:

‘A joint investigation by the BMJ and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has uncovered evidence that raises troubling questions about how WHO managed conflicts of interest among the scientists who advised its pandemic planning, and about the transparency of the science underlying its advice to governments. Was it appropriate for WHO to take advice from experts who had declarable financial and research ties with pharmaceutical companies producing antivirals and influenza vaccines? Why was key WHO guidance authored by an influenza expert who had received payment for other work from Roche, manufacturers of oseltamivir, and GlaxoSmithKline, manufacturers of zanamivir? And why does the composition of the emergency committee from which Chan sought guidance remain a secret known only to those within WHO? We are left wondering whether major public health organisations are able to effectively manage the conflicts of interest that are inherent in medical science.’

---

How the Government’s Vaccine Policy is Infected by Corruption

Regarding corruption surrounding the recommendation of influenza vaccines; there are no restrictions with regard to conflicts of interest for the employees of the CDC or for those of the FDA (Kuehn, 2010). Each employee of either agency is allowed to own stock in drug companies. There is of course the revolving door. The most blatant example of revolving door corruption may be the action of the former director of the CDC, Julie Gerberding. Gererding blocked the CDC's planned retraction of their recommendation for HPV vaccine after significant numbers of girls had died or been rendered paralyzed by the HPV vaccine. Soon after blocking the retraction, Gerberding was offered and took a position at Merck, the manufacturer of Gardasil, the world's best selling HPV vaccine, as head of Merck Vaccines Department (Reuters, 2009). It is a level of corruption that we would expect to see in only third world countries.

In 1993, the Comprehensive Childhood Immunization Act was signed into law by President Clinton. Among the various provisions of the law is one that provides for between $50 and $100 to be paid by the CDC to school districts for every 'Fully vaccinated' child in their district. Here again, we see the opportunity for corruption. Vaccine manufacturers, their shareholders, including government employees, and school districts have the opportunity to make money for themselves, or for their departments. Certainly employees of school districts won't be 'getting fat' on the CDC's $50 to $100, but clearly there is a greater likelihood that they may lose their job due to cuts if the coercion to have students vaccinated ceases.

As well as this, one of the few peer review studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated in an infected population concluded "according to reliable evidence the usefulness of vaccines in the community is modest" (Jefferson et al, 2005). Yazbak (2013) states "The fact that the number of influenza-related deaths among the elderly kept increasing while the flu vaccination coverage in that particular group was improving steadily and substantially -from about 20% in 1980 to around 65% in 2001- seemed to intrigue the lead author of the study, Lone Simonsen, Ph.D., a senior epidemiologist at the Institute," and "The following findings were noted:

For people 85 and older, the mortality rate did not change throughout the 33 yearly flu seasons
In those 65 to 74 years of age, the mortality rate remained the same between 1980 and 2001
The "flu-related mortality" in the elderly remained always less than 10 percent of the total number of winter deaths."

---

Lyme Disease Community Blows the Whistle on Corruption Within the CDC 

A pre-marketing campaign for the vaccine is already apparent. The New York Times editorial board heavily promoted the Baxter vaccine in a recent editorial. The article referenced an Op-Ed by Dr. Stanley Plotkin, who was described as a "leading vaccine expert" and "professor of pediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania," in which Plotkin said that he had been trying to "persuade manufacturers to make a new vaccine to help prevent some of the 300,000 new infections each year." He urged patients and physicians to write to the CDC and remind them of the need for a new Lyme vaccine, which would likely be recommended for a large part of the population of the United States. The editorial board concluded by saying, "It’s time to start writing those letters."

What the editorial board neglected to mention is that Dr. Stanley Plotkin is actually an "emeritus professor" at the University of Pennsylvania. His primary position is working as an executive adviser at the pharmaceutical firm Sanofi Pasteur, which is the largest company in the world devoted entirely to human vaccines. In addition, he's a consultant to most of the major vaccine manufacturers.

While news outlets like the Times receive funding through advertising from Big Pharma, the CDC is ostensibly an independent government agency acting to protect the public. Why would they have a financial stake in the vaccine? 

The New York Times best selling author Dr. Joseph Mercola says, "Conflicts of interest are rampant in the vaccination infrastructure. The same people who are regulating and promoting vaccines are also evaluating vaccine safety.

The CDC: A Truly Corrupt and Dangerous Organization

Flu Vaccines, pharma fraud, quack science, the CDC and WHO -- all exposed by Richard Gale and Gary Null

WHO scandal exposed: Advisors received kickbacks from H1N1 vaccine manufacturers

A stunning new report reveals that top scientists who convinced the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare H1N1 a global pandemic held close financial ties to the drug companies that profited from the sale of those vaccines. This report, published in the British Medical Journal, exposes the hidden ties that drove WHO to declare a pandemic, resulting in billions of dollars in profits for vaccine manufacturers.

The report was authored by Deborah Cohen (BMJ features editor), and Philip Carter, a journalist who works for the Bureau of Investigative Journalism in London. In their report, Cohen states, "...our investigation has revealed damaging issues. If these are not addressed, H1N1 may yet claim its biggest victim -- the credibility of the WHO and the trust in the global public health system."

---

Mega Corruption Scandal At The WHO

"For the past 6 months, one could barely switch on the television in the Netherlands without seeing the face of famed virus hunter Albert Osterhaus talking about the swine flu pandemic. Or so it has seemed. Osterhaus, who runs an internationally renowned virus lab at Erasmus Medical Center, has been Mr. Flu. But last week, his reputation took a nosedive after it was alleged that he has been stoking pandemic fears to promote his own business interests in vaccine development. Last week, his reputation took a nosedive after it was alleged that he has been stoking pandemic fears to promote his own business interests in vaccine development. As Science went to press, the Dutch House of Representatives had even slated an emergency debate about the matter." 

---

Vaccine Corruption

83 Cases of Autism Associated with Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensated in Federal Vaccine Court

The peer-reviewed study looked at cases of vaccine injury that have been monetarily compensated by the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. It was published today in the Pace Environmental Law Review. The study investigated approximately 1300 cases of childhood brain injury as a result of vaccines in which the Special Masters ruled for the plaintiffs, looking for references to autism, symptoms of autism or disorders commonly associated with autism. It reports that twenty-one cases actually stated “autism or autism-like symptoms” in the court records. The researchers then identified and contacted 150 more compensated families to find out whether the children had autism. They were able to find an additional 62 cases (greater than 40% of their sample) for a total of 83 cases of autism. In 39 cases (47%) there was confirmation of autism beyond parental report.

---

White House admits staging fake vaccination operation to gather DNA from the public

The White House has officially admitted that fake vaccination programs have been used by the United States as a cover for covertly stealing DNA samples from the public as part of the so-called "war on terror." The aim of the scheme, carried out in the Middle East, was to use DNA analysis to identify suspected terrorists who would then be targeted to be killed by the United States.

---

Tetanus vaccines found spiked with sterilization chemical to carry out race-based genocide against Africans

Tetanus vaccines given to millions of young women in Kenya have been confirmed by laboratories to contain a sterilization chemical that causes miscarriages, reports the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, a pro-vaccine organization.

A whopping 2.3 million young girls and women are in the process of being given the vaccine, pushed by UNICEF and the World Health Organization.

---

Merck falsified its mumps vaccine efficacy results, say former employees

Merck knowingly falsified its mumps vaccine test results to fabricate a "95% efficacy rate" say former Merck virologists Stephen Krahling and Joan Wlochowski in their shocking False Claims Act document.

Merck, of course, denies the claims, just like all the drug companies deny ever engaging in bribery, or using children for medical experiments, or ghostwriting "scientific" studies that get published in science journals, or conspiring to suppress competing generic drugsand so on. Yet, as history has shown, all the top drug companies areroutinely engaged in widespread criminal behavior, including conspiracy, fraud, bribery and more.

---

Government vaccine compensation payouts prove autism link

"What we did is we looked at the people who the government said are clearly vaccine injuries and awarded them compensation," said Lou Conte, the vaccine compensation recipient who helped coordinate the study.

"We asked the next question and that question was: Do some of these people also have autism?" said Conte. "We found that in 83 of the cases we were able to locate, the families report that their children have autism and symptoms of autism." (www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/health/new-study-...)

---

CDC scientific fraud: an update on Dr. Poul Thorsen who authored fraudulent study 'disproving' vaccine-autism connection and stole millions of dollars

One such liar is Dr. Poul Thorsen, a Danish scientist who was indicted for stealing millions of dollars from the CDC and using it to cover up vaccine dangers. Thorsen, as you may recall, was heavily involved in producing a stream of fraudulent studies that supposedly "disproved" the now-evident link between vaccines and autism. The CDC has also continually cited Thorsen's studies as "evidence" that vaccines are safe, declaring the debate to be over in light of their findings.

But, one by one, these and various other studies, including a prominent one published in the journal Pediatrics, are being called into question due to fraud and author conflicts of interest. And to make matters worse, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has yet to even follow through with its indictment of Thorsen, who continues to produce phony studies from his cozy position at Sygehus Lillebaelt Hospital in Kolding, Denmark.

Thorsen was later caught stealing money from the CDC and using it in his home country of Denmark to produce the infamous "Denmark Study," the holy grail that supposedly settled, once and for all, the vaccine-autism debate. Except it didn't. Thorsen was indicted by a federal grand jury in Atlanta, Georgia, on charges of wire fraud, money laundering and defrauding research institutions of grant money.

Bill Gates Henry Kissinger Depopulation Africa: Paralyzing Vaccine Deaths 47,500 With 50 More Children Recently Paralyzed With Bill Gates Meningitis Vaccine!

---

U.S., Italian Courts Award Millions for Vaccine-Autism Cases 

in Italy, a court has ruled that in an MMR-autism case, the evidence "has conclusively established that the young child is suffering from AUTISTIC DISORDER ASSOCIATED WITH MEDIUM COGNITIVE DELAY ascribed with reasonable scientific probability due to the administration of the vaccine MMR." See HERE.

Here is a link to the settlement document.

---

List Of Peer Reviewed Vaccine Research

No Studies Vaccinated VS Unvaccinated:

---

"The whole of this mass of medical testimony (and more) was known to the Royal Commission. Indeed, on page 617 of the Sixth Report, Mr. II. II. Taylor, F.R.C.S., handed in a table, on 4th May, 1892, which gives a list of nearly a thousand cases and deaths from the invaccination of syphilis."
- LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.

This table (3) gives a terrible record of the great increase in deaths from this horrible disease following upon the compulsory infliction of vaccination on the people.    It shows that the deaths from syphilis amongst the babies increased six-fold, whilst the population only increased one-quarter, in other words, the death-rate from syphilis amongst babies was increased four-fold. Nor is it likely that this table in the least degree exaggerates the deaths from infantile syphilis. The tendency amongst medical men would rather be to name some other disease as the cause of death, if it were possible to do so with accuracy. The facts given in this table are sufficient of themselves to condemn vaccination, and, indeed, the system of vaccination which had been practised for one hundred years is now universally condemned and aban­doned in the British Isles........It is hardly possible to avoid the conclusion that this slaughter of the innocents was in a great measure due to vaccination.
-[1921] Vaccination and the State By Arnold Lupton MP.

"Dr. Creighton found that in 1884, more than 1,733 of the vaccinated infants DIED OF SYPHILIS!"
TM Schippell ND

"It was long denied by medical men that syphilis can be communicated by vaccination; but this is now universally admitted, and no less than 478 cases of vaccine-syphilis have already been recorded."
-Alfred Wallace (1889)

"It is not now denied by the medical profession that vaccination is an exciting cause of infantile syphilis, and, according to the Registrar-General’s returns, Vaccination Mortality, No. 433, dated 1877, and Infant Mortality, No. 392, dated 1880, the increase in Infantile Syphilis, since vaccination has been compulsory, is fourfold."
-William Tebb

"Smillie (1952) related how in Rialta in Italy in 1861 no fewer than 46 children and twenty nurses were infected with syphilis from a donor who formed the start of a series of arm-to-arm vaccinations."
-Sir Graham Wilson (p107)


"First, that the danger of transmitting syphilis by vaccination is real and important, and cases of the kind not very uncommon; second, that inasmuch as a syphilitic vaccinifer may betray no sign of the disease, and that admixture of blood is not essential to infection, we as yet know of no safeguard against arm-to-arm infection; third, that it is possible for wholesale syphilisation by vaccination to go on "without even exciting a vaccinator's suspicions "—a fact which somewhat detracts from the value of the assurance of public vaccinators, who have vaccinated thousands and never seen a bad result, and who, as a rule, lose sight of their patients after the eighth day. ...............Mr. Hutchinson, be it understood, is a "firm advocate of compulsory vaccination," so that his evidence is the more unassailable ; yet he opines :—"there can be no doubt that the danger of transmitting syphilis is a real and very important one." His first series of cases he summarises thus:—"Twelve persons, mostly young adults, vaccinated from a healthy-looking child. Satisfactory progress of the vaccination in all. Indurated chancres on the arms of ten of the vaccinated in the eighth week. Treatment by mercury in all. Rapid disappearance of the primary sores; constitutional symptoms in four of the patients five months afterwards, the vaccinifer showing condylomata at the age of six months."  These cases, Mr. Hutchinson states, were brought to the notice of the medical officers of the Privy Council, and Dr. Seaton requested that he should investigate them. I call attention to this to disprove a widely current inaccuracy, an example of which I extract from Mr. Ernest Hart's  "Truth," to the effect that "No case of syphilis caused by vaccination has ever been discovered by the Medical Department of the State during the twenty years that it has supervised the vaccination of the kingdom."(The Truth about Vaccination," by Ernest Hart. 1880.)
-William J. Collins, M.D., B.S., B.Sc. 1883


"LYMPH, a colourless nutritive fluid in animal bodies" (Chambers’ Dictionary). How misleading to apply this term to a product of disease, used to produce another disease, and now admitted to be capable of transmitting some of the most horrible diseases which afflict mankind—syphilis and leprosy!"
-Alfred Wallace

"Depopulation should be the highest priority of U.S. foreign policy towards the Third World."
- Henry Kissinger

“If you proved vaccines were bad, a zillion-dollars would be spent to prove you wrong. If that didn’t work, more would be spent to discredit you, bury your intelligence beneath hundreds of pages of GOOGLE search results; and then there is always “COINTELPRO”–a top secret commercial enterprise that generates “Controlled Opposition” to whatever Madison Avenue wants you to believe.”
- Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz

"Did you know that the research information contained in the Physicians' Desk Reference the pharmaceutical bible used by M.D.s is supplied by the drug manufacturers themselves? Did you know that the FDA approves drugs not by actually doing the testing, but simply by reviewing studies submitted by the drug manufacturers? Did you know that a drug manufacturer needs to submit only two studies showing satisfactory results to get a drug approved by the FDA even if there are even more studies showing the drug causes adverse reactions in an unacceptably high number of cases? 


 Did you know that most of the articles discussing the efficacy of drugs that are published in medical journals are studies paid for by the drug manufacturer? And that often, as the New York Times reported last summer, the academic scientists listed as lead authors are often just "window dressing, to lend credibility to papers that are really the work of drug companies. The academic scientists' main role in such studies is to recruit patients and administer experimental treatments. The scientists or their universities are paid for this work."


And did you know that a study conducted by USA Today found that more than half of the experts hired to advise the government on the safety and effectiveness of medicine had a direct financial interest in the drug or topic were asked to evaluate?"
-Burton Goldberg 

www.alternativemedicine.com/

“The March 1999 ‘Vaccines’ feature in Parenting magazine provided all propaganda one would expect from a subsidiary of Time, Inc. Time-Warner, Inc., the parent company, is a corporate member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Time's president, Richard D. Parsons, and the Editor-in-Chief of TIME, Norman Pearlstine, are longstanding CFR members. One CFR published policy objective is substantial worldwide depopulation including half of the current U.S. population being targeted. This population reduction program is largely funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Merck Fund, both financially and administratively linked to the Merck pharmaceutical company--the world's leading vaccine manufacturer.”
-Dr. Len Horowitz, “Parenting with Deadly Timely Propaganda”

"A single vaccine given to a 6 pound infant is the equivalent of giving a 180 lb. adult 30 vaccines in one day."
-- Dr. Boyd Haley

'The (vaccine autism) evidence is now overwhelming, despite the misinformation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Institute of Medicine."
-Dr. Bernard Rimland, Ph.D. (2006)