“A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of the truth” — Albert Einstein
The wisdom of this observation is borne out by empirical evidence demonstrating that so-called “authoritative” sources of medical information are thoroughly corrupted not only by industry manipulation but by government officials, and biased, financially conflicted academic gatekeepers of medical science — i.e., “expert panels” and journal editors. The most lucrative areas of medicine are the most corrupted by financial conflicts of interest. Our recent focus continues to be the untouchable subject; namely, the largely corrupted vaccine information base. The history of vaccines has been fashioned by eradicating inconvenient historical facts.
For me, the most troubling aspect of the corrupting influence of the powerful vaccine lobby is its apparent success in having averted the focus of the medical profession and academia: from the spiraling number of vaccine-injured children whose existence these authorities deny. However, evidence of their existence is demonstrated by the fraction of those who have been compensated by The U.S. Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).
- The VICP has received 18,652 petitions for compensation for vaccine-injured children (and some adults) [This number represents at most 10% of actual serious vaccine injuries.]
- Of these, 1,236 had died. The following deaths (double-digit or greater) include: 696 deaths attributed to DTP vaccine; 129 deaths due to the flu vaccine; 81 deaths due to DTaP; 61 deaths due to MMR; 57 deaths due to Hepatitis B; 32 deaths due to DTaP-Hep BIPV; 28 deaths due to OPV (polio) vaccine; 14 deaths due to HPV.
- VICP has compensated 5,680 vaccine injured children in the amount of $3.5 billion — $3,488,760,578.73
- From January to October 2, 2017, VICP received 1,213 petitions for compensation by vaccine-injured children (and some adults). The amount compensated in 2017 was $252,650,932.78
Public trust in professed authoritative sources for information about vaccine safety has evaporated because the “authoritative” government and non-government agencies have consistently misrepresented the safety data. Internal documents, obtained over the years through FOIA requests, have uncovered the concealed evidence that government officials eliminated damning vaccine safety data from the vaccine information base.
(1) The latest uncovered layer of corruption in the professional sources of medical information was reported by Retraction Watch (November 2017). A study by Victoria Wong at The Queens Medical Center in Hawaii, reports that two-thirds of “top tier” medical journal editors are receiving kickbacks from drug/vaccine manufacturers.
“When examining the roles of conflicts of interest in academic publishing, most research focuses on transparency around the payments authors receive. But what about journal editors? According to a new Peer J preprint, two-thirds of editors at prominent journals received some type of industry payment over the last few years – which, at many journals, editors are never required to disclose.”
The study included complete Open Payments data (2013 to 2016) for editors of the top five journals from each of seven disciplines. The study found that within each medical specialty, editors received more in payments from industry than the average doctor; there were wide ranges as to the amounts. It appears that these gatekeepers of science failed not only to comply with disclosure standards that they demand of authors of scientific studies, journal editors fail to adopt any professional guidelines to prevent blatant financial conflicts of interest from corrupting the medical literature.
Among the numerous examples of corrupted science that can be attributed to the illegitimate intervention by journal editors who are financially tied to pharmaceutical companies, is the case of an Israeli study headed by Dr. Yehuda Shoenfeld, an internationally acknowledged, foremost expert on autoimmune disorders.
(2) The Shoenfeld study, Behavioral Abnormalities In Young Female Mice Following Administration Of Aluminum Adjuvants And The Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Gardasil, was first submitted to the Journal of Human Immunology where it languished for 8 months and was then rejected by the editor-in-chief, Dr. Racke. According to the American Academy of Neurology, Dr. Racke received personal compensation from EMD Serono, a subsidiary of Merck, the manufacturer of one of the HPV vaccine.
The article was then published in the journal Vaccine (January 2016), until it was summarily withdrawn by that journal’s editor-in-chief, Dr. Gregory Poland, who is chairman of Merck’s safety evaluation committee for vaccine trials.
- Not only were there no protests of foul play from members of the medical academic community, the rejections by the editors were used as ammunition, by cyber hit-squads to tarnish some of the scientists who authored the report.
(3) A recent report in EBioMedicine, (2017) by a team of scientists headed by Dr. Peter Aaby provides confirmatory evidence of vaccine-related harm:
“It should be of concern that the effect of routine vaccinations on all-cause mortality was not tested in randomized trials. All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis. Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infections.”
The Introduction Of Diptheria-Tetanus-Pertussis And Oral Polio Vaccine Among Young Infants In An Urban African Community: A Natural Experiment,” Søren Wengel Mogensen, Andreas Andersen, Amabelia Rodrigues, Christine S Benn, Peter Aaby. [Funded by the Danish International Development Agency. Full Text]
- Dr. Peter Aaby established the Bandim Health Project, a Health and Demographic Surveillance System site in Guinea-Bissau in West Africa, which he has run ever since. In 2000, he was awarded the Novo Nordisk Prize, the most important Danish award within health research.
(4) An article by Peter Doshi in the BMJ, “The Unofficial Vaccine Educators: Are CDC Funded Non-Profits Sufficiently Independent”? (November 2017) sheds light on “the tangled [opaque] financial relations between CDC, vaccine manufacturers, and vaccine advocacy organizations”.
The focus of this article is three highly profitable, non-profit organizations – Immunization Action Coalition (IAC) Every Child By Two (ECBT), and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). These organizations present themselves as independent “vaccine educators”; they claim that they are reliable sources of information. The evidence, however – as Peter Doshi has documented, reveals that these organizations disseminate promotional vaccine propaganda, serving as covert lobbyists for their government and corporate financial benefactors upon whom they depend:
- Immunization Action Coalition lists vaccine manufacturers AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Pfizer, Sanofi Pasteur, and Seqirus among its “supporters and partners.” And IAC received over $2 million from CDC.
- Every Child By Two received over $800,000 from non-government sources and between $220,000 and $275,000 from CDC.
- American Academy of Pediatrics’ recent tax filings indicate lists GlaxoSmithKline, MedImmune, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi Pasteur, and Sequirus – Mead Johnson Nutrition, Merck, Nestle and Pfizer provided at least $1 million. The US government provided $16 million. Since 2009, AAP acknowledges, CDC provided $20 million.
The aim of these three vaccine-lobbying promotional organizations is “to increase the federal government’s budget to keep up with the rising cost of the growing vaccination schedule.” (See CDC 2017 Recommended Schedule Birth through 6) These “advocacy” organizations also actively lobby in support of dictatorial compulsory vaccination policies that would eliminate non-medical, philosophical and religious vaccination exemptions.
(5) Elizabeth Hart pointed out (in a BMJ “rapid response”) to Doshi’s article, that there are far deeper underlying corporate/political forces that dominate global vaccination policy. Thanks to their non-governmental status, as (so-called) “non-profits” they are able to brush off requests for disclosure about the source of their money. Hart points out that ECBT was founded by Former First Lady Rosalynn Carter and Former First Lady of Arkansas, Betty Bumpers; ECBT was also helped financially by the Clinton administration.
Tax-exempt foundations, such as the Carter Foundation, the Clinton Foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and many more — are closely tied to the pharmaceutical industry, serving as propaganda conduits. They have been instrumental in promoting aggressive vaccination policies that have generated a vastly lucrative global market for vaccines. According to a MarketsAndMarkets Press Release: the vaccine market generated $34 billion in 2017; it is expected to increase to $49 billion by 2022.
(6) In May 2017, Peter Doshi reported that contrary to the government assertions that its monitoring of adverse effects linked to vaccines is rigorous (having adopted the rigorous sounding term, “pharmacovigilance”) in fact, the FDA/CDC Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) captures only 10% of actual adverse events following vaccination. What’s more, the CDC website was inaccessible to the public for an undisclosed period of time. He noted that the problem was not temporary:
“I first alerted officials about the problem a month ago on April 25. When the problem persisted for three more weeks, I decided to write about it for The BMJ, where I work. The website remains misconfigured today, on day 28 (at least; I only know when I discovered the problem, not when the problem actually started).
“The climate for discussions about vaccines is already hostile, and a website address that does not function properly only adds fuel to the fire. At the same time of the outage, the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases (NFID) told more than 750,000 people in a large social media campaign to promote vaccination that “vaccines are safe.” One of the graphics developed for the campaign depicts VAERS as a pillar assuring vaccine safety. Today, this pillar appears to be hollow. (The Scientist, 2017}
(7) In March 2015, investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson (formerly CBS science reporter) discovered that CDC had removed more than a year’s worth of vaccine injury compensation data from the vaccine injury court, which had increased 55% in “a little over one year”. [Govt Wipes Recent Vaccine Injury Data From Website]
It is chilling to bear witness how an educated class of professionals have abandoned their moral compass and discarded intellectual integrity, by accepting, as they do, the dogma dictated by collaborating vaccine stakeholders, who declare themselves to be “authorities”.
(8) An article in the Toronto Star (Nov. 9, 2017) by Maya Goldenberg is typical of those who invoke trust in authority, much like faith-based trust in religious authority:
“scientific consensus on vaccines“, she says, should convince the public to accept the flu shot, and “also childhood vaccines and vaccines for older adults, such as shingles“.
“Consensus statements earn their legitimacy through rigorous debate and scrutiny by expert communities of scientists. The methods include the negotiation of conflicting views in academic conference settings and in expert journals, peer review and the replication of findings”.
In my compilation, Betrayal of Public Trust & Institutional Corruption: Vaccine Safety Ratings & Vaccine Science Falsified, I focus on the hijacking of vaccine “science” by stakeholders in the business of vaccines, who effectively control the content of information regarding vaccines, and the channels for disseminating filtered promotional information — in both professional journals, the mass media and the internet. Indeed, the BMJ has partnerships with both Merck and GlaxoSmithKline. The latter has also formed a partnership with GOOGLE.
These partnerships and multiple collaborating consortia were established to ensure that the public is continuously reassured that vaccines are proven “safe and effective“, and vaccines are the best defense against infectious disease.
For decades medical “authorities” recommended that women take hormone replacement assuring them that HRT was safe and protected long-term health. That widely adopted standard of care turned out to be wrong. In the largest clinical trial to date, a combination estrogen-progestin pill (Prempro) was found to increase the risk of serious conditions, including *Heart disease *Stroke *Blood clots and *Breast cancer.
Marcia Angell is a member of the faculty of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School and the former Editor in Chief of The New England Journal of Medicine. (June 2017)
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is a vital public agency. It is responsible for ensuring the safety of the foods we eat and many of the medical treatments we receive, and thereby regulates about a quarter of the nation’s domestic economy. I strongly believe in the FDA’s mission, and respect the many FDA employees who are dedicated to carrying it out.
But there is growing evidence that the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER, pronounced “cedar”), the part of the agency that regulates prescription drugs, has become the servant of the industry it regulates. This has resulted in the sale of drugs of uncertain benefits, some with serious side effects, and in the agency’s failure to respond promptly to evidence that a drug is dangerous. There is no better example than the agency’s decision to allow the diabetes drug Avandia to remain on the market after having determined three years ago that it increases the risk of heart problems and despite the existence of a similar drug that appeared safer. Even after revelations that the drug’s maker, the British company GlaxoSmithKline, suppressed indications of problems and biased its research in Avandia’s favor, the FDA remained reluctant to pull the drug. By the end of August it was still unclear whether the agency would remove Avandia from the market.1
CDER also does not fulfill its obligation to oversee the marketing of prescription drugs, thus permitting misleading drug ads and illegal practices such as drug companies inducing doctors to prescribe drugs for uses that have not been approved by the FDA. Although nearly every major drug company has paid enormous fines to settle charges of illegal marketing (Pfizer’s recent $2.3 billion fine—for illegally promoting its painkiller Bextra and three other drugs—is the current record), they evidently consider the fines the cost of doing business, since the same practices keep recurring with little interference from CDER.
Americans use enormous amounts of prescription drugs. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, 3.9 billion drug prescriptions were filled in the US in 2009, an average of 12.6 per person. Most people over age sixty-five take at least three prescription medications daily. Since the FDA is what stands between the public and an aggressive, profit-driven industry, its independence from the industry it regulates is of fundamental importance.
This is not an issue that receives much attention from Daniel Carpenter in his imposing new book, Reputation and Power: Organizational Image and Pharmaceutical Regulation at the FDA, nor does the related question of whether CDER is doing its job of ensuring that the drugs we take in such huge quantities are really safe and effective. Instead, Carpenter, a professor of government at Harvard, spends 752 dense, exhaustively documented pages telling the reader virtually everything else about the FDA—its history, procedures, personalities, and politics. Like much academic work on public and social policy, it strives to be impartial. But it sees complexity even when it is not there (some things about the FDA are quite simple), and it remains oddly aloof from the issues that most matter.2 Its main value is as a reference work.
Here I’ll discuss the problem that Carpenter largely neglects—how to ensure that CDER, free of industry influence, protects the public from unsafe and useless drugs…..
Despite evidence of harm–including the suicide of a 7-year old Gabriel Myers– the FDA, which is charged with ensuring the safety of children in drug trials, fails to maintain a record of children enrolled in commercial drug trials.
By contrast, after the suicide of Gabriel Myers , a seven-year old boy in foster care who had been prescribed three powerful psychotropic drugs in a dubious clinical trial, George Sheldon, Florida’s Secretary of the Department of Children and Families, examined the records of children in State foster care and found a high percentage being drugged with psychotropic drugs:
“Not only was the percentage high, it was not really known. And, in more than a third of known cases, required approval permission documents were missing.”…
PBS: The Medication of Foster Children
Multiple Industry-Saturated Collaborating Partners Set the Agenda for Vaccination Policies
Note from the World Mercury Project Team: This article concludes our seven-part serialization of Vera Sharav’s exposé on the complex and widespread corruption that exists in the vaccination program, the deceptive practices by officials of “authoritative” international public health institutions and further evidence of the callous disregard for the plight of thousands of children and young adults who suffer irreversible harm. As one reads all seven parts, it becomes abundantly clear that the revolving door between regulators (charged with protecting the health of citizens) and pharmaceutical companies should close. Links to previously published parts one through six are at the bottom of this segment.
European Commission boosts vaccine research with £30 Million projects: ADITEC
“Advanced Immunization Technologies will accelerate the development of novel and powerful immunization technologies for the next generation of human vaccines. €30 Million of European Commission co-funding will enable ADITEC to establish a strong platform for innovation in a key area for human health.
A consortium of scientists from 42 research and industry bodies in 13 countries will work together on the project, which will work on a wide range of crucial aspects of vaccination; from basic research and new technologies to clinical trials and public health. The support for this project underlines the importance of the vaccine sector in effective healthcare, and gives a boost in a key innovation area for the European health industry.” (News Alert: Brussels, September 2011)
Accelerated development of vaccine benefit-risk collaboration in Europe (ADVANCE) (2013)
“Vaccines are one of the most effective public health measures…Immunisation prevents two to three million deaths worldwide every year from diseases such as diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough) and measles. In Europe, one of the greatest barriers to the wider uptake of immunisation is distrust, among some sections of the public, of immunisation programmes. This is due largely to fears surrounding vaccine safety…resulting in outbreaks of vaccine-preventable infectious diseases that had almost disappeared.
ADVANCE brings together the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and the European Medicines Agency, as well as national public health and regulatory bodies, vaccine manufacturers and academic experts, the ADVANCE project will develop and test methods and guidelines in order to pave the way for a framework capable of rapidly delivering reliable data on the benefits and risks of vaccines that are on the market.”
The UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) chaired by Professor Andrew Pollard, has recommended that the UK switch to hexavalent vaccines for babies. This recommendation disregards the risks for babies – including the risk of sudden infant deaths that have been linked to multi-valent vaccines, [see Appendix 8] Prof. Pollard is Director of the Oxford Vaccine Group, noted for its active role in vaccine development and testing on behalf of industry. He is also a Trustee of the Jenner Vaccine Foundation. Dr. Norman Begg, Vice-President and Chief Medical Officer of GSK Biologicals, the manufacturer of Infanrix Hexa, is also a Trustee of the Jenner Foundation.
The common thread and longstanding intertwined connections that bind vaccine stakeholders is demonstrable in the case of Dr. David Salisbury, former Director of Immunisation at the Department of Health, who was the chief architect of the UK children’s vaccination program from 1986 to 2013, was a leading promoter of Pluserix in 1988. In 2013, Dr. Salisbury chaired the panel that appointed Prof. Pollard to chair the JCVI.
He then left to become chair of the Jenner Vaccine Foundation on which he sits with Prof. Pollard and Dr. Norman Begg – GSK Chief, Scientific Affairs, and Public Health. He is President of the International Association of Immunization Managers (IAIM). (Read more: Not published in the British Medical Journal: the dangers and conflicts of Infanrix Hexa, 2017)
A Concerted Push For Compulsory Childhood Vaccination Is Fueled By Fear-Mongering
A headline in The Guardian (July 2017) announced a Small Decline In MMR Vaccination Rates Could Have Dramatic Effect, Experts Warn. It went on to declare: a 5% drop in measles, mumps and rubella vaccinations could cause a threefold increase of measles cases, costing the public sector millions, US study shows.” The article quotes Professor Andrew Pollard, Director of the Oxford Vaccine Group and Chair of the JCVI who stated:
“Immunisation is something that many people think of as personal, but it is actually part of being in a society.” A similar view was expressed by BMJ Editor-in-chief Dr. Fiona Godlee in a BBC interview (2017), when she invoked “the need for herding as opposed to individual choice.”
- The Supreme Court has ruled (2011) that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe”
The US National Vaccine Injury Program has adjudicated 5,581 vaccine-caused injuries – including 1,234 claims for vaccine-related deaths from vaccines recommended by CDC’s Childhood Vaccination Schedule, and plaintiffs received compensation. [See Appendix 4]
- If, as the Supreme Court determined, that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe”, it is morally abhorrent to coerce parents who are rightly concerned about exposing their babies and young children to possible serious adverse effects – including deaths.
The CDC vaccination schedule is particularly aggressive compared to all other national policies. The CDC 2017 schedule requires U.S. children – from birth to age 6 – to receive 50 doses of 14 vaccines. Infants in the US are exposed from birth to age 2, to 24 vaccine doses, combining 8-in-1 vaccines to be given to infants 2, 4, and 6 months in a single visit. Babies receive 36 vaccine doses before they are 18 months old. The schedule includes vaccines against diseases that rarely occur in developed nations.
Notwithstanding CDC assurances to doctors and the public that these combinations are perfectly safe, none of the combinations in the CDC childhood vaccination schedule have ever undergone proper safety studies — as was acknowledge by the Institute of Medicine Report (2013):
“key elements of the entire schedule—the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at administration of vaccines—have not been systematically examined in research studies… to consider whether and how to study the safety and health outcomes of the entire childhood immunization schedule, the field needs valid and accepted metrics of the entire schedule [sic] and clearer definitions of health outcomes linked to stakeholder concerns (the “outcomes”) in rigorous research that will ensure validity and generalizability. ” [Highlight added]
What’s more, a report by CDC and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Mixed Exposures Research Agenda (2014) acknowledges that:
“Mixed exposures may produce acute or chronic effects or a combination of acute and chronic effects, with or without latency. Other exposures in combination with certain stressors may produce increased or unexpected deleterious health effects… exposures to mixed stressors can produce health consequences that are additive, synergistic, antagonistic, or can potentiate the response expected from individual component exposures.”
If mixed environmental exposures to toxins pose serious risks to adults, how can CDC claim that the mixture of toxins injected into infants poses no risk?
The truth is that CDC’s childhood vaccination schedule was configured to promote industry’s financial interest in maximizing vaccination utilization. However, CDC recommendations violate medicine’s foremost precautionary principle “First, do no harm.” The evidence of infants being harmed following administration of multiple vaccines has been uncovered in CDC documents.
The following CDC acknowledgment of the possible lifelong debilitating brain damage following vaccination with the CDC-recommended DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis) should give pause. It appears on CDC’s otherwise upbeat website assurances about the safety of all vaccines.
Any child who had a life-threatening allergic reaction after a dose of DTaP should not get another dose.
Any child who suffered a brain or nervous system disease within 7 days after a dose of DTaP should not get another dose.
Several severe problems have been reported after a child gets MMR vaccine, and might also happen after MMRV. These include severe allergic reactions and problems such as:
Long-term seizures, coma, or lowered consciousness
Permanent brain damage
However, public health, and medical “authorities” who pretend that no evidence of harm due to vaccines exists; they continue to deceive the public with reassuring propaganda. The media continues to disseminate “fake news” about the life-saving attributes and safety of all vaccines; promotional campaigns push the flu vaccine, the HPV vaccine, and the ever inflated CDC childhood vaccination schedule.IOM Report (2013): “…key elements of the entire schedule—the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at administration of vaccines—have not been systematically examined in research studies… to consider whether and how to study the safety and health outcomes of the entire childhood immunization schedule…”
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was created in 1988 because there were so many vaccine-related injuries and lawsuits against manufacturers. Congress absolved vaccine manufacturers from all liability and created the NVICP to compensate vaccine-injured children.
Since its inception, the NVICP received 1,234 claims for vaccine-related deaths; of these 696 deaths were linked to the DTP vaccine, 127 deaths to the flu vaccine, 81 deaths were attributed to the DTaP, and 61 deaths were linked to the MMR.
The Drumbeat Toward Mandatory Vaccination: A Most Sinister Public Policy Direction
It is especially troubling to note the sinister direction that our “democracies” are headed towards. The position of both Professor Pollard and Dr. Godlee are antithetical to the moral stand articulated by Dr. Hamish Meldrum, the chairman of the British Medical Association, who called proposals for compulsory vaccination “a Stalinist approach.” He stated (in 2008) that forcing parents to vaccinate their children, by eliminating free choice was “morally and ethically dubious.”
Currently, government regulators in Italy, France, Germany, Poland and Australia have embarked on an aggressive drive to eliminate parental choice by adopting mandatory vaccination policies. A case involving compulsory vaccination was filed with the European Court by the European Centre for Law & Justice.
It would appear that those in positions of influence in academia and journalism /media, and those in positions of authority in government, have learned nothing from 20th century history of coercive public health policies – forced sterilization, forced abortions – that were enacted across Europe and the US, ostensibly for “the greater good”.
Have we learned nothing about the debasement of medicine by the willing participation of medical doctors from elite universities, who formulated and implemented the medicalized mass murder of disabled children?
It was doctors who declared those children to be “unfit” to live.
“Aktion T4 could not have happened without the willing participation of German doctors”.
That history cannot be erased from memory or from the historical record.
(Read: The Nazis’ First Victims Were the Disabled, The New York Times, Sept. 13, 2017)If, as the Supreme Court determined, that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe”, it is morally abhorrent to coerce parents who are rightly concerned about exposing their babies and young children to possible serious adverse effects – including deaths.
WMP NOTE: This concludes of our seven-part series of Vera Sharav’s exposé. Previously published articles: Sharav’s Introduction to the full article, L’affaire Wakefield: Shades of Dreyfus & BMJ’s Descent into Tabloid Science, outlines her well-researched and documented belief that, “Public health officials and the medical profession have abrogated their professional, public, and human responsibility, by failing to honestly examine the iatrogenic harm caused by expansive, indiscriminate, and increasingly aggressive vaccination policies.” Part One focuses on how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the vaccine industry control vaccine safety assessments, control the science of vaccines and control the scientific and mass channels of information about vaccines. In Part Two Ms. Sharav interprets the complex web of internal CDC documents, revealing how key CDC studies and CDC-commissioned studies were shaped by use of illegitimate methods. Part Three takes a closer look at the Brighton Collaboration and the extraordinary influence these stakeholders have in the business of vaccines and their power to control the science and research and manipulate reports to further their own interests.Focusing on the HPV vaccine, in Part Four Ms. Sharav explores how a global network of government/academic and industry stakeholders can suppress information about genuine scientific findings and, when needed, engage in corrupt practices to thwart the airing of information about vaccine safety issues. CDC’s childhood vaccination policy rests on the denial of safety hazards posed by vaccines and CDC officials are intent on shielding the policy and vaccination schedule at any cost. Part Five examines documentation and internal correspondence that reveals how CDC used its influence and subsequently rejected scientific studies that contradicted the sacrosanct vaccine safety mantra. From major methodological flaws and inconsistencies, to outright fraud, in Part Six of this 7-part series, Vera Sharav reveals much about corrupted vaccine literature including journal editors who knowingly facilitated fraudulent research articles to influence vaccination policies that put thousands of children at risk, and depriving them of living normal lives.
More about the author: Vera Sharav is a Holocaust survivor and a fierce critic of the medical establishment. This article was originally published at www.ahrp.org. Stat news recently published an article about her and her work.
When historians write about the Vaccine Decades (1976–2020), there are two names that will live in infamy: Dr. Frank DeStefano, and Dr. Coleen Boyle.
In the 1980s, Congress mandated Agent Orange studies. Frank and Coleen ended the studies two years early, ensuring that “no link” would be found between illnesses being reported by injured veterans and dioxin. The early termination of the study allowed the US Department of Veterans Affairs to deny any connection between Agent Orange and medical problems, preventing veterans and their families from qualifying for compensations. Here’s your hurt, what’s your hurry. The Boyle/Destefano team bamboozle was outed by Admiral Zumwalt who went to the President and laid out the science in a classified report (now declassified):
“Without exception, the experts who reviewed the work of the Advisory Committee disagreed with its findings and further questioned the validity of the Advisory Committee’s review of studies on non — Hodgkin’s lymphomas .”
“a decision which should have been based on scientific data was reduced to vague impressions”
[One impartial review team’s results were] “a stunning indictment of the Advisory Committee’s scientific interpretation and policy judgments”
“1987 Followup Examination Results,” described statistically significant increases in health problems among Ranch Handers including all cancers”
“The work of the Veterans’ Advisory Committee on Environmental Hazards, as documented in their November 2, 1989 transcript, has little or no scientific merit, and should not serve as a basis for compensation or regulatory decisions of any sort.”
“the Air Force could just as easily have concluded that the health problems associated with the Ranch Handers were not necessarily related to eating beer nuts.”
“Shamefully, the deception, fraud and political interference that has characterized government-sponsored studies on the health effects of exposure to Agent Orange and/or dioxin has not escaped studies ostensibly conducted by independent reviewers, a factor that has only further compounded the erroneous conclusions reached by the government.”
The Zumwalt report concluded:
“It can, in my judgment, be concluded, with a very high degree of confidence, that it is at least as likely as not that the following are caused in humans by exposure to TCDD: non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, chloracne and other skin disorders, lip cancer, bone cancer, soft tissue sarcoma, birth defects, skin cancer, lung cancer, porphyria cutanea tarda and other liver disorders, Hodgkin’s disease, hematopoietic diseases, multiple myeloma, neurological defects and auto-immune diseases and disorders.
In addition, I am most comfortable in concluding that it is at least as likely as not that liver cancer, nasal/pharyngeal/esophageal cancers, leukemia, malignant melanoma, kidney cancer, testicular cancer, pancreatic cancer, stomach cancer, prostate cancer, colon cancer, brain cancer, psychosocial effects, and gastrointestinal disease are service– connected..”
President Clinton called Admiral Zumwalt “the conscience of the US Navy”. In fact, Zumwalt’s report is used by veterans seeking compensation. Zumwalt’s son was exposed to Agent Orange and died of lymphoma in 1988.
Boyle and Destefano’s Role in Agent Orange Pseudoscience
The CDC study (which lists no authors) that was published did not study any specific mechanism by which Agent Orange might have caused health issues in veterans. Instead, it studied dioxin levels in Vietnam veterans compared to non-Vietnam veterans. The 646 Vietnam veterans studied by CDC who all served in units that were most likely exposed, did not have elevated levels of dioxin as compared to non-Vietnam veterans. This retrospective study seeking differences of levels of dioxin nearly two decades after exposure is a type of epidemiologic study with only a long shot at success. The aims of the study were to determine whether military records could be “used to identify US Army Vietnam veterans who were likely to be exposed to the herbicide Agent Orange”.
Dioxin is stored in fat. The study measured dioxin levels in serum. Given the CDC’s failure to detect evidence for increased exposure in the 1980s, the ill-posed study was initially used as justification for no further science on the possible effects of exposure.
The analysis and conclusions were also blasted by a Congressional Report:
Human Resources and Intergovernmental Relations Subcommittee, US House of Representatives: The Agent Orange Coverup: A Case of Flawed Science and Political Manipulation. 101st Congress, 2d Session, House Report №101–672. Washington, DC: Govt Printing Office, 1990.
What else has the Destefano/Boyle team failed to detect?
Under their watch, studies conducted ostensibly to test the hypothesis of a link between vaccines and autism have consistently failed to detect any association. Are they competent enough, given the debacle of their failed study in 1988, to run the hopefully entitled “Immunization Safety Office” (which ignores the differences between Vaccination and Immunization) and the “National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities”?
It is my professional opinion that no, neither of these individuals is sufficiently competent to be involved in vaccine safety science and interpretation of studies.
Further, it is my professional opinion that both are guilty of intentional and scientific fraud, perpetuated repeatedly and consistently, to hide the association between vaccines and neurodevelopmental disorders.
(1) Boyle informed Congress that no studies have been conducted that compares the rates of autism in vaccinated and unvaccinated Americans. Yet the CDC website clearly reads “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism”. How could any competent scientist make such as stunning conclusion when the science required to answer the question has not been conducted?
(2) Destefano removed results showing increased risk of autism from on-time MMR prior to presenting to the Institutes of Medicine, and prior to publishing the fraudulent study known as “Destefano et al., 2004”. Two subgroups are missing: African American boys, and isolated autism. The latter group had increased risk, included boys and girls from any race, who had no other conditions other than autism. That means “anyone”.
Dr. William Thompson confessed his role in allowing false reports to be published both in audio recordings to Dr. Brian Hooker, and in statements from his lawyers. He was put on leave after reporting his concerns to then CDC Director Julie Gerberding, who put him on suspension for breaking rank. Dr. Walter Orenstein is also implicated in the cover-ups. See vaxxedthemovie.com and youtube.com/watch?v=hlxdWfTLHH0
(3) Boyle personally attempted to reconfigure the study design of that same study in an attempt to make the association of on-time MMR and autism go away. The team played with study design after knowing the increased risk of autism had been found, which is not allowed in objective research. They worked very hard to attempt to make the association go away. They play games with birth certificates and age-group definitions. Nothing worked. So they simply removed the results:
(4) DeStefano admitted to journalist Sharyl Attkisson that (a) they removed the results because they did not believe them, and (b) that vaccines may be responsible for autism in susceptible individuals (See Sharyl Attkisson’s capture and hear the confession to her here).
“I guess, that, that is a possibility,” said DeStefano. “It’s hard to predict who those children might be, but certainly, individual cases can be studied to look at those possibilities.”
(5) DeStefano has participated in other publications in which he outlines how association studies should be conducted. He says that covariates must be “corrected for”, and that finding covariates that cause associations between vaccination and adverse events to disappear after the association is first found and then lost due to such corrections somehow exonerates vaccines. This is poppycock. If birth weight, mother’s age, mother’s income, gestational age, etc. cause a loss of significance of vaccination status, the correct model selection procedure is to look for interactions between vaccines and the covariates — especially because they can be functionally related to adverse events from vaccines. If the interaction terms are significant (which could easily be, given that mother’s income, age, gestational age, and birthweight may all correlate to nutritional status), the result is pointing to covariates that make vaccination an increased risk. This is elementary linear modeling, and any studies that “correct for” covariates without also studying, and reporting, the interaction terms is hiding the effects of vaccines interacting with other variables.
Given these realities and the fact that this and other equally damning information has been available for at least three years, it simply is unconscionable that Destefano and Boyle remain in their positions at the CDC. We cannot have incompetent individuals unable to conduct and properly interpret science standing in the way of helping America deal with the explosion of neurodevelopmental disorders — and the full suite of consequences currently being experienced in schools and homes all around the country……
Literature instructs migrants how to enter Europe, evade authorities
Illegal migrants are being provided with guidebooks published by a George Soros front group, Hungary’s chief security advisor has told state media.
According to György Bakondi, an unnamed German civil society organization (NGO) has been supplying literature to migrants that instructs them on the best methods and pathways for reaching European soil, as well as directions how to deceive authorities and elude border security systems….
First they totally destroy their homelands, then they shepherd the refugees to destroy the homelands of those who paid for it. Is this organized crime or what?
The Central Bank of Russia (CBR) boosted its holdings of gold by almost 20 metric tons last month, with reserves reaching 1,857 tons. It has increased its holdings every month since March 2015.
Russia is now among the top five gold holders after surpassing China, which reportedly holds 1,843 tons. Over the last 15 years, Moscow and Beijing have been aggressively accumulating gold reserves to cut their dependence on the US dollar.
“Interestingly, both Russia and China publicize and promote their accumulations of gold and publicly refer to gold as a strategic monetary asset. They make no secret of this. But on the flipside, the US does the opposite, and constantly downplays the strategic role of gold,” Singapore’s BullionStar precious metals expert Ronan Manly told RT in December.
The US claims to be the largest holder of gold with 8,134 tons, but according to Manly, that number is impossible to verify.
“The entire story around the US gold reserves is opaque and secretive. There has never been a full independent audit of the US gold reserves, and the custodians of the gold, the US Mint and the Federal Reserve of New York, will not let anybody into the vaults to view the gold or to count it,” Manly told RT….
Could this be the answer to FBI Director Chris Wray’s call for broken device encryption?
In what appears to be a major breakthrough for law enforcement, and a possible privacy problem for Apple customers, a major U.S. government contractor claims to have found a way to unlock pretty much every iPhone on the market.
Cellebrite, a Petah Tikva, Israel-based vendor that’s become the U.S. government’s company of choice when it comes to unlocking mobile devices, is this month telling customers its engineers currently have the ability to get around the security of devices running iOS 11. That includes the iPhone X, a model that Forbes has learned was successfully raided for data by the Department for Homeland Security back in November 2017, most likely with Cellebrite technology.
Big, if true, but not exactly the answer Wray, and others like him, are seeking. Cellebrite claims it can crack any Apple device, including Apple’s latest iPhone. This is a boon for law enforcement, as long as they have the money to spend on it and the time to send the device to Cellebrite to crack it.
It won’t scale because it can’t. The FBI claims it has thousands of locked devices — not all of them Apple products — and no one from Cellebrite is promising fast turnaround times. Even if it was low-cost and relatively scalable, it’s unlikely to keep Wray from pushing for a government mandate. Whatever flaw in the architecture is being exploited by Cellebrite is likely to be patched up by Apple as soon as it can figure out the company’s attack vector. And, ultimately, the fact that it doesn’t scale isn’t something to worry about (though the FBI doubtless will). No one said investigating criminal activity was supposed to easy and, in fact, a handful of Constitutional amendments are in place to slow law enforcement’s roll to prevent the steamrolling of US citizens….
What about israeli intelligence’s ability to wiretap american citizens? How long have they known how to do this?