Rep. Bill Posey Speaks on CDC Cover-Up Before Congress

Congressman Bill Posey speaks on cover-up of vaccine safety research results, destruction of documents and whistleblower Dr. William Thompson at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concerning the 2004 study in the journal Pediatrics purporting to show no association between age of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and onset of autism in children.

Highlight from the video (Thompson quoted by Posey):

“All the authors and I met and decided sometime between August and September ’02 not to report any race effects from the paper. Sometime soon after the meeting we decided to exclude reporting any race effects, the coauthors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the study. The remaining four coauthors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard-copy documents that we had thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can. However, because I assumed it was illegal and would violate both FOIA and DoJ requests, I kept hard copies of all documents in my office and I retained all associated computer files. I believe we intentionally withheld controversial findings from the final draft of the Pediatrics paper.”

trash-can

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

SB277 Opponents: Why Hold a Referendum on an Unconstitutional Law?

united-states-constitution

By Jake Crosby

If a law is unconstitutional, why hold a referendum on it? The constitution is meant to prevent the passage of laws that infringe on individual rights, even when such laws have support of 99% of the population. With 82% of Californians supporting SB277 which aims to revoke vaccine exemptions, a referendum will not strike down the law. Instead, the referendum will give rise to the perception that opponents view the law as constitutional when it is not.

Although the US Supreme Court has ruled that police powers of the state can trump individual liberties in its 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts ruling, it also put limitations on those powers. In its decision, the court stated that “general terms should be so limited in their application as not to lead to injustice, oppression or absurd consequence.”

Because SB277 seeks to mandate the routine immunization schedule recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for anyone seeking to attend a public or private school in California, the CDC should be legally considered to be part of the state. CDC’s conduct therefore reflects on the constitutionality of SB277, or rather its lack of constitutionality.

CDC has proven its lack of integrity on vaccine safety issues, having concealed proof of harm from mercury in vaccines. CDC’s top immunization official has lied to Congress, and the CDC has covered up evidence linking autism to the measles, mumps, rubella vaccine among other vaccine dangers according to a senior CDC scientist.

Despite CDC’s conduct and lack of integrity, SB277 fully mandates CDC’s immunization schedule and revokes all parental choice exemptions to it in California. Far from addressing the issues with CDC, Senator Richard Pan, a primary co-sponsor of SB277, sought to deny them by calling the senior CDC scientist who became a whistleblower against his own federal agency a “fraud.” So SB277 is unconstitutional, and is therefore illegal even when considering the police powers of the state as they pertain to individual rights.

Unfortunately, some lawyers have not considered the constitutionality of SB277 from every angle. Attorney Alan Phillips who specializes in vaccine exemptions stated that “courts can’t second-guess the legislature with respect to vaccine and infectious disease facts” in a letter addressed to “Concerned California Citizens.” Although Phillips was correct in saying that the right to attend school would probably not be a viable legal basis to strike down SB277, he was wrong to state that legislatures have carte blanche to invoke their police powers by revoking school vaccine exemptions. The Supreme Court’s 1905 ruling forbade exactly what SB277 will do: mandate a dangerous immunization schedule produced by a federal agency proven to lie about vaccine dangers as a punitive measure against those resisting the CDC’s vaccination policies.

A lawsuit that makes the previously described case against SB277 is how the law should be fought. Lawsuits predicated solely on parental rights, religious rights or the right to an education will likely be no more successful than a referendum for not addressing how SB277 constitutes an abuse of the state’s police powers. Such cases are perhaps the only the kinds of lawsuits SB277 opponents have approached attorneys with, hence their reluctance to take on SB277 and Attorney Phillips’ preference for a referendum.

Nonetheless, attorneys should examine SB277 with the understanding that there are limits on how a state can invoke its police powers via mandatory vaccination while also taking into consideration the behavior of federal agencies whose misconduct shows SB277 is an abuse of such powers. The case for SB277’s unconstitutionality and that of a similar law revoking the secular choice exemption in Vermont needs to be argued correctly to effectively maximize the possibility that these laws will die and never return from the dead.

As long as a referendum is in the works, however, such lawsuits may not happen. People will wrongly believe that opponents view SB277 as constitutional for organizing a popular vote on it, and an overwhelming vote in favor of SB277 is likely. Unlike judges, the majority of constituents will not have the chance to hear cases against SB277 – only support for SB277 from a media trained to lie by the CDC.

Judges, however, will have to hear cases against SB277 – if a lawsuit against SB277’s constitutionality is filed. The referendum could delay that and will end in failure. Properly argued lawsuits against SB277 and similar legislation are necessary to strike them down.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

Boycott The SB277-Legitimizing Referendum

no-referendum

“The nation voted for the Islamic republic and everyone should obey.” – Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini in Qum, Iran, 1979

By Jake Crosby

On Tuesday, the referendum on the new state law to eliminate school vaccine exemptions based on parental choice was cleared by the State of California to begin receiving signatures for a popular vote on the formerly named Senate Bill 277 (SB277). Yet the challenge to the law by ex-assemblyman Tim Donnelly has received the harshest criticism from some of the staunchest opponents of the law, who argue popular consent will only legitimize its existence. Opposition on the referendum’s Facebook page was so fierce, Donnelly himself responded with the following message:

“You are free to disagree with the referendum, but you are not free to organize against it on this page. I understand that some people have concerns, and we’ve answered them mostly in private messages, but time is short. The Referendum will not in any way affect any legal battles going forward. This is simply the people’s VETO. If you’d rather take another route forward, you are free to organize and pursue it. Godspeed.”

But “the people’s VETO” will more likely be “the people’s SUPPORT” as the press throughout California has been overwhelmingly supportive of the law thanks in no small part to journalism groups trained by the corrupt Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As a consequence, public opinion has been overwhelmingly favorable to the law. Unlike their legislators, California’s constituents would not have the opportunity to hear testimony against the law – only to hear what their CDC-trained media tells them. Enforcing the tyranny of the propagandized majority is the only likely outcome of the referendum.

Yet despite Tim Donnelly’s invocation of democracy as the referendum’s basis, his decision to not allow open discussion of the referendum on its Facebook page is anything but democratic. It looks more like an ex-politician’s ill-informed campaign.

How Tim Donnelly can reassure people that “The Referendum will not in any way affect any legal battles going forward” is also a mystery. An argument for any law is the idea that the majority of people would want it. No more would lawyers arguing against the law be able to claim that only lawmakers given millions in contributions from drug companies voted for the law. Legal battles against the law will face the extra burden of de-legitimizing direct votes by a constituency of 39 million people and of arguing why the opinions of a minority of opponents take precedence over those of a majority.

Everyone opposed to SB277 should also boycott its referendum, lest they want to give SB277 proponents the following reason to bolster support for the law:

“The state voted for SB277 and everyone should obey.”

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

Threats Prove Cartoonist Right About Vaccine McCarthyism

pharma

Editor’s Note: After two years, The Epoch Times’ blog section is now closed as the site is undergoing a redesign. All Epoch Blogs from Autism Investigated are still archived. There is exciting news to come about The Epoch Times pertaining to Autism Investigated.

By Jake Crosby

Above is a cartoon originally published on DailyKos by Keith Knight, author of the K Chronicles. Knight drew the above cartoon to bring attention to what he called the “New McCarthyism” – the hypocrisy and double-standard surrounding discussions about vaccines.

As anyone could have predicted, the thread was soon awash in nasty comments including threats so bad he eventually caved and removed the whole cartoon – proving Knight right about Vaccine McCarthyism.

“I took it down myself. A few comments crossed the line with me, so I took it down,” he reportedly said of the cartoon. “I can take the personal threats…but once it goes beyond that — ”

Making clear how inflammatory the vaccine issue was even when compared to other inflammatory subjects, he said:

“I may do a follow-up at some point, but for now I’ll stick to less inflammatory subjects like abortion, Israel/Palestine, and gun control.”

Abortion clinics have been bombed, a member of Israeli parliament has been called a “war criminal” at an academic panel discussion, and the National Rifle Association’s famous slogan is “I’ll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead hands. Yet in Knight’s own experience, the vaccine issue is even more inflammatory than these other inflammatory issues.

The Daily Cartoonist weighed in on the situation with the following commentary:

“Expressing unpopular opinion is not for everyone. Side affects vary but may include pissing off people who think of themselves as tolerant, inflaming internet comment sections or receiving unwanted threats to oneself or family.”

Such threats were apparently fair game to one blogger who deeply despised Knight’s cartoon:

“The only heartening bit is how most of the commenters contribute to giving Knight a new sphincter.”

Direct those same kinds of threats at that very blogger, and watch the incitement turn to self-pity.

While the DailyKos took no apparent action against the trolls making the threats before the entire post was taken down, it has its own unique style of censorship like those of other left-wing, big government sites. The Huffington Post enforces censorship by removing articles without any explanation or warning. “Throwing a writer to the wolves” is what Salon did by retracting Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s “Deadly Immunity” article, according to the site’s own founder. But the preferred method of censorship at DailyKos is banning any commenter who argues vaccines cause autism.

If DailyKos was not directly involved in the removal of the post or even in the incitement of trolls (both of which I have a hard time believing), the site certainly created the perfect environment for the New McCarthyism Knight denounced to take root by banning people who would otherwise support him in the comment thread. Unlike at DailyKos, expressing different views will not get anyone banned from commenting at Autism Investigated; making threats will get a commenter banned.

So the cartoon is now posted here, and is here to stay.

Addendum: After one commenter’s reported experience with having comments censored at DailyKos, a decision has been made to not allow any comments that link to that site. If DailyKos will shut down discussion about topics routinely discussed here, then there is no reason to link any readers to that site only to be banned from commenting. Unless DailyKos overturns its policy of censorship, any submitted comment that links to DailyKos will be deleted. No exceptions.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

Read HuffPost-Censored “Trace Amounts” Review

11182234_1033170500043804_1044751554482490461_n

Just weeks after “Trace Amounts” was reviewed at The Epoch Times, The Huffington Post removed the below April review of the same documentary for reasons not even specified to the author. No explanation has ever been given for the removal, despite requests. With the recent promotion of “Trace Amounts” by actor Jim Carrey, now is a better time than ever to reproduce the film review that Huffington Post took down for no given reason.

Film Seeks to Compel Parents to Ask Hard Questions about Mercury and Vaccinations

By Tamar Abrams

There are few issues more polarizing these days than vaccines. Merely saying the word forces us to claim a side, often vehemently. Which is why it’s interesting that the filmmakers of Trace Amounts: Austism, Mercury and the Hidden Truth say, “Many people think we are anti-vaccinations. But once they see the film, they realize we are not.” A film that attempts to shine light on the dangers inherent in one component of vaccines without taking a stand against vaccines, Trace Amounts is earnest and geeky at the same time.

The film’s director, Eric Gladen, came to the issue through a personal experience. At the age of 29, he cut himself on a rusty nail and received a tetanus shot in an emergency room. Within a short time, he was seriously ill. He blames the illness on mercury poisoning from the thimerosal contained in the tetanus injection. Quitting his job as an engineer, he embarked on a crusade to get thimerosal removed from all vaccinations and injections. If the comprehensive research that followed had resulted in a film called Trace Amounts: Mercury’s Dangers, you likely wouldn’t be reading this blog. But Gladen’s major theory in the film is that the thimerosal contained in vaccines is a major contributor to the “epidemic” of autism in children.

Shiloh Levine, Gladen’s co-director, acknowledges that most childhood vaccines have not contained thimerosal since the early 2000s, but cautions, “It is still contained in flu shots, but most parents don’t know to ask about it. We want to help them make decisions based on an educated choice, especially since the CDC is not revealing everything they know.” The film is chock full of anti-mercury arguments: scientists and researchers give lots of opinions and statistics that certainly seem to show a strong connection between mercury and autism. And, given that it is possible to request flu vaccines that don’t contain thimerosal, parents might want to err on the side of caution. Of course there is a price for that: thimerosal-free flu shots cost an additional $3 dollars or more.

Gladen admits that for many, the film is initially a lightning rod in the vaccine debate. “Some people come to a screening and are not there with an open mind,” he says. “But after seeing it, they are just mad. It is clear that the CDC and others have severe financial stakes in not giving all the information they have. It is stunning to watch the audience reaction – they leave arguing with the CDC’s position, not ours.”

While Gladen insists he is not anti-vaccinations, he also understands those who take that position. “Anti-vaxxers are not crazy,” he says. “We need to turn the vaccine system upside down and correct the system. Injecting children with mercury is one of the bigger crimes against humanity.” He believes a third party should provide oversight to our nation’s vaccine program, ensuring its safety and accountability by the large pharma manufacturers.

Trace Amounts appears to be gaining followers, driven mostly by an endorsement from Robert F. Kennedy Jr and a grassroots community that is hosting screenings of the film. Gladen and Levine were recently in Washington DC to lobby members of Congress for legislation removing mercury from all medications. While they admit that it is an uphill labor, Levine quickly adds, “This is a labor of love. We live and breathe and eat Trace Amounts.”

Whatever side of the vaccination debate parents are on, we all share the common goal of ensuring our children’s well-being. Spending 90 minutes watching Trace Amounts wouldn’t do any of us any harm and might compel you to ask more questions the next time your child is scheduled to receive a shot.

See on The Epoch Times.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

Canary Party-Led Group Behind Failed SB277 Opposition

CCHCSolo

“Autism rates have continued to rise even though we are not using thimerosal in vaccines for children.” – Richard Pan, co-sponsor of CA SB277

“But there’s a hard bit of evidence here regarding the thimerosal argument. The rates in California never went down and as far as I can tell are still going straight up with no deceleration at all. And you’ve seen the Denmark numbers.” – Mark Blaxill, now founder and chairman of Canary Party

By Jake Crosby

One might say it was a repeat of what happened with the US congressional hearing failure of 2012-2013 – the undermining of a cause with the imposition of an ineffective strategy. That is what many Californians are saying happened at the State Assembly Health Committee hearing and in the general movement against Senate Bill 277, now a newly signed law that eliminates the choice to opt out of vaccination. As with the congressional hearing, a key witness Dr. Brian Hooker was prevented from speaking on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) malfeasance in covering up vaccine injury. The debacle over SB277 also bears the claw prints of the same leadership elements, chiefly those of a Minnesota-based PAC: the Canary Party.

Because media coverage of the bill was controlled by the CDC, testimony to the state legislature was all the more necessary to kill the bill. But kill effective testimony in favor of a “‘middle of the road’ strategy,” and the bill’s passing into law is practically imminent.

Such a strategy was taken by the organization through which Canary Party coordinates its activities relevant to SB277 in California: the “California Coalition for Health Choice” (CCHC). While trying to do damage control for Canary Party on Facebook threads, Canary Party’s State Director Sylvia Pimentel only revealed more negative information about her organization. Pimentel said she, Rebecca Estepp, Jude Tovatt, Dawn Winkler and Laura Hayes comprised the Canary Party leadership within CCHC that had input on the fight against the bill, despite previously admitting: “Laura and Dawn left the coalition a few weeks ago because they didn’t like the ‘middle of the road’ strategy that CCHC was morphing into.”

Pimentel further admitted that CCHC members were afraid of their own cause, “Some members were gun-shy about being publicly quoted because of possible push-back in their careers or private life for being ‘anti-vaccine’.” Moreover, one of Canary Party’s California leaders promoted vaccination. Rebecca Estepp – director of communications for CCHC – drew criticism for advocating “moderation” and promoting vaccination last year. Such an approach inherently conflicts with raising awareness of vaccine dangers.

Canary Party’s Dr. Toni Bark revealed to Autism Investigated that the other remaining Canary Party leader in CCHC – Jude Tovatt – was trying to discourage the coalition from tackling safety, corruption or fraud issues inherent to the vaccine program. Tovatt wanted to avoid the very facts that are most damning against SB277, making Canary Party responsible for the “middle of the road” strategy Pimentel admitted CCHC resorted to. Dr. Bark even said she suspected Tovatt is a shill.

The fallout from this strategy reached its climax at the Assembly Health Committee’s hearing on SB277. According to one eyewitness account reported in the AWAKE California Facebook group on how people were shut out of the hearing:

“I was with dr hooker when the guard asked for our names and then there were no seats left. But there were seats left, CCHC kept coming out and pulling people in. But we were closed out. Until I had two people from my regional group give up their seats timed with when the main guard was pulled away for a minute.”

The Facebook group member also said in that same post that CCHC falsely led people to believe that Dr. Hooker would testify, but he never did.

In response, Canary Party denied having any say in choosing speakers, asserting:

“The way the process works (or fails to work) in California is that groups who are opposing a bill put names forward on who they want to testify on their behalf, and the Committee Chair’s office decides who will be seated at the table.”

But a staffer from the Committee Chair’s office wrote in email that bill opponents chose who spoke for them at the hearing:

“The Committee does not organize testimony on either side of the debate. The author’s office organizes testimony in support and opponents typically organize amongst themselves and decide who will testify.”

Rather than explain why Dr. Hooker did not testify, Pimentel instead explained to a critic why he did not join CCHC:

“Dr. Brian Hooker was invited to join, but never responded. You are accusing me of sabotaging the fight – and that is absolutely obscene.”

That he would not join CCHC is hardly surprising given its ties to Canary Party and Canary Party’s history of undermining his congressional efforts. The troubled history following Canary Party’s Chairman Mark Blaxill also goes back long before he founded Canary Party.

Blaxill consulted for pharmaceutical companies while at Boston Consulting Group and now sits on the board of directors of the Initiative for a Competitive Inner City, funded by his former employer. He was an invited speaker at the 2001 Institute of Medicine meeting despite his lack of credentials, organizational leadership or publication record where he failed to disclose his concurrent BCG employment. He has also interfered in the omnibus autism cases, turning attorneys against expert witnesses and even throwing the case against thimerosal. He told Brian Hooker in 2007:

“But there’s a hard bit of evidence here regarding the thimerosal argument. The rates in California never went down and as far as I can tell are still going straight up with no deceleration at all. And you’ve seen the Denmark numbers.”

Yet research at the time showed there was a deceleration, and autism went down in Denmark after thimerosal was removed. Not surprisingly, SB277’s co-sponsor Senator Richard Pan channeled Blaxill’s talking point, “Autism rates have continued to rise even though we are not using thimerosal in vaccines for children,” Sacramento Bee quoted Pan as saying. It is hardly surprising that the coalition through which Canary Party conducted its activities in California took a “‘middle of the road’ strategy” to fighting a law that will now keep children from attending school for not being fully vaccinated according to CDC’s own aggressive immunization schedule.

While answering for Canary Party’s troublesome involvement in failing the opposition to SB277 on Facebook, Sylvia Pimentel grew increasingly agitated and defensive. At one point, she dramatically stated, “I have been accused of horrible things, so I have had no choice but respond. But now I will make my exit. Peace.” She returned a short while later to make a legal threat against a commenter. One cannot help but wonder if the outcome of fighting SB277 could have been different had CCHC’s leadership fought the law with the same level of zeal as Pimentel’s attack on some advocates she claims to share common cause with.

Meanwhile, SB277’s architect Richard Pan wants other states to follow California’s example:

“As the largest state in the country, we are sending a strong signal to the rest of the country that this can be done, that science and facts will prevail to make sound laws”.

Far from Canary Party/CCHC’s “middle of the road” approach, ensuring that science and facts prevail over the fraudulent science and lies spouted by Pan is the best way to kill bills like his. Time to stop supporting Canary Party.

See on The Epoch Times.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

Doctor Who Shined Light on Vaccine Injury Dies at 60

Dr. Jeff Bradstreet

By Jake Crosby

It comes with great sadness to announce the untimely passing of Dr. Jeff Bradstreet, a medical doctor and parent of a child who developed autism after vaccination. Having once stated at a conference that “autism taught me more about medicine than medical school did,” he has contributed heavily to the body of peer reviewed science implicating the vaccine schedule in autism’s etiology. He had produced research suggesting children with autism have a higher body burden of mercury as well as research detecting measles in a subset of children with regressive autism who received the live-virus measles, mumps and rubella vaccination. As such, he believed children who presented with these types of findings should be treated for them.

Dr. Bradstreet faced considerable scorn as a result of his research, practice and views. In 2004 his work was dismissed by the Institute of Medicine, which was paid by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to produce a report rejecting any association between autism and vaccination. He was also ridiculed for mercury detoxification treatment by a special master in vaccine court, where email evidence has since shown that petitioners’ attorneys advised by SafeMinds threw the case for the mercury-based vaccine preservative thimerosal causing the autism epidemic.

Then shortly after an FDA raid on his clinic in Buford, Georgia, Dr. Bradstreet was suddenly found dead. The FDA – which continues to maintain that thimerosal is safe despite contrary evidence produced by him and other researchers – would not comment on why its agents visited his clinic. An investigation is ongoing and a fundraising effort has been set up by his brother “To find the answers to the many questions leading up to the death of Dr Bradstreet, including an exhaustive investigation into the possibility of foul play.”

In the meantime, his brother requested that people not spread rumors or gossip about Dr. Bradstreet’s untimely death out of respect for his family. Autism Investigated will honor those wishes and will not approve any comments through moderation that do. May the circumstances surrounding Dr. Bradstreet’s passing be revealed soon, and may Dr. Bradstreet’s scientific contributions help lead to the end of the harm being done to so many children.

See on The Epoch Times.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

How Andrew Wakefield Alienated NAACP

NAACP_Logo_With_Cal_Tag

By Jake Crosby

How did potential congressional testimony of a senior federal scientist blowing the whistle on omitted research showing an increased risk for autism from vaccination among African-American children devolve into race-baiting by black separatists, alienating civil rights groups? Even worse, how did it come to be that civil rights groups like the NAACP of California actually start supporting California Senate Bill 277 and Senate Bill 792 that would keep children from whom any required vaccination was withheld for any reason out of school and daycare respectively? The probable answer lies in the activities of one de-licensed British doctor: Andrew Wakefield.

His hijacking of the story about US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) whistleblower Dr. William Thompson went far beyond releasing his name and surreptitious recordings of his voice without his permission. It also went far beyond tainting the story with Wakefield’s name, thereby alienating potential media coverage and possible congressional subpoena.

Wakefield also manipulated the message in a way that would be very appealing to a black separatist group like the Nation of Islam and very repulsive to civil rights groups like NAACP. Most notably, he did this by invoking the notoriously unethical syphilis experiment on African-American men in Tuskegee, Mississippi. The Nation of Islam has since popularized the Tuskegee invocation tactic that originated with Wakefield to denounce the SB277 bill, only to earn of the scorn of civil rights groups.

As reported in The Root, those groups put out the following message:

“Unfortunately, recent attacks on the measure have been vicious, unfounded, and distort the science and history of childhood immunization within our community,” a statement from the groups says, according to the Times. “Our organizations denounce assertions that vaccination of black children would be another Tuskegee experiment.”

And those groups include the following, according to The Root:

“The groups disputing [Nation of Islam Minister Tony] Muhammad’s comments include the California State Conference of the NAACP, the National Coalition of 100 Black Women, the Charles Drew Medical Society, the California Black Health Network and the Network of Ethnic Physician Organizations, the Times reports.”

Previously, Wakefield’s hijacking led to SB277’s co-sponsor Dr. Richard Pan painting the CDC whistleblower as “another Wakefield fraud.”  Now thanks to the message that originated with Wakefield and its appeal to the Nation of Islam, Pan has won some civil rights backing for his bill that he otherwise might not have had.

How ironic that the Age of Autism blog’s editor Dan Olmsted expressed disgust at the Nation of Islam’s involvement when he helped Wakefield broadcast the message that sat well with the Nation and not with the NAACP. Age of Autism has also been helping Wakefield promote a documentary he is making that would presumably resort to the same race-baiting tactic from when the whistleblower was outed.

Andrew Wakefield can already expect rave reviews from Louis Farrakhan and none from the NAACP.

See on The Epoch Times.

Correction: This post previously named Assembly Bill 2109 as eliminating vaccine exemptions for daycare facilities; the correct bill was Senate Bill 792. Autism Investigated regrets the error.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

Whistleblower Contact’s Attorney: Andrew Wakefield “Hijacked The Story”

bob-reeves
By Jake CrosbyIn a videotaped lecture given to the group “Moms in Charge,” de-licensed British doctor Andrew Wakefield defended his outing of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) whistleblower scientist William Thompson. While silently backing off from the previously dispelled claim that the disclosure was with Thompson’s permission, Wakefield suggested the outing was in cooperation with Thompson’s first point of contact outside the CDC: autism scientist and parent Dr. Brian Hooker. But like Wakefield’s earlier claim, his claim that his outing of Thompson was in cooperation with Hooker is in stark contrast to what really happened according to correspondence with an attorney he had been working closely with.

The below August 22nd-dated email sent to Brian Hooker by Attorney Robert Reeves – who has represented Hooker during his FOIA litigation against CDC and who also sits on the Focus for Health Foundation board with him – tells a story radically different from Wakefield’s. In particular, Reeves reveals that he and Hooker were trying to bring major media coverage for the whistleblower story when it was “hijacked” by Wakefield in contradiction to what he led Hooker to believe in previous discussions:

Brian,

Hoping to talk to you about the Andy Wakefield situation – Andy revealing WB’s name on Robert Scott Bell radio. If this happens it  is about as nonstrategic as you can get.  It may kill the major media’s willingness to report this.  Don’t forget they are all owned by Phama-vaccine.

The last we need is for this to be a story to the autism community which is what Andy is doing.  Andy said on our conference call Saturday that this was your story and he did not want to appear on any shows with you.  He is doing the exact opposite.  He has hijacked the story that you and Focus Autism have worked so hard to get out.

I am sure Barry will call Andy re this is you ask him.

You have to stop him again.  As I told you late last night I will be the bad guy if need be.  You may need to go on CNN or Fox if they are interested and tell your story about the WB and hopefully not have to reveal his name.  It is already out on some Facebook pages.

We need to reveal other things WB has said re things like the flu shot for pregnancy and the false Price paper.  Have you talked to Morgan Spurlock at CNN?

I am tired of setting here stewing since 7 am, so I am going to exercise, probably play tennis.  Will have my cell phone in my pocket, but if running may not hear or feel it, so you may have to call multiple times.

Bob

Unbeknownst to Reeves at the time, Thompson was already outed in a video hosted by Wakefield and further publicized by the Age of Autism blog less than an hour before Reeves’ email to Hooker. What followed days later was the sudden deletion and eventual retraction of his study that confirmed the same results linking early measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccination timing with autism that Thompson and colleagues found but omitted from publication a decade earlier. The whistleblower and the cover-up were no longer the prevailing story in major media coverage, Wakefield’s hijacking and the retraction of Hooker’s paper that soon followed were the new hot-topics instead. Rather than denouncing Wakefield for what he had done, Hooker rewarded Wakefield for betraying Thompson by cosigning a complaint with Wakefield that was sent to the CDC.

Since then, Wakefield’s hijacking has been used to push vaccine exemption-eliminating legislation. And despite Wakefield claiming in his talk that “things are going well,” no visible progress towards Thompson testifying before Congress has actually been made even though nine months have passed since his statement confirming his research misconduct allegations against CDC.

Wakefield’s solution to getting the story out is a documentary he started making and raising money for shortly after Thompson’s outing, which Wakefield promoted and continued to raise money for at his talk. In doing so, attendees of his talk were charged at a rate of $60-per-plate according to the Orange County Register. Previously, he led a two-month campaign to raise up to $230,000 for his documentary. Approximately 1% of that target sum was all that was raised by just 55 people.

Wakefield denied the documentary was financially motivated, but did not reveal the substantial amount of money he pockets from being president of the Strategic Autism Initiative that is reliant on contributions from the same community to which virtually all of his audience members belong. Keeping center stage to that community is what helps drive his financial success.

But perhaps Andrew Wakefield’s strongest motive for hijacking the whistleblower story comes from the misguided and egotistical notion that doing so will hasten his own historical absolving. Instead, it will be postponed because of what he has done.

See on The Epoch Times.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon

Salon Founder: “Deadly Immunity” Retraction “Smacks of Editorial Cowardice”

america-needs-its-own-

Photo credit: Salon.com

By Jake Crosby

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has an article up on his personal website that gives fascinating insight into the retraction of his piece “Deadly Immunity” by Salon.com, including a letter from the site’s founder. In his letter to Kennedy last month, Salon.com founder and former editor-in-chief David Talbot condemned Salon’s retraction of Kennedy’s 2005 article on the government cover-up of harm – such as autism and other developmental disorders – caused by thimerosal. The piece was retracted in 2011 by Salon’s then-editor Kerry Lauerman, who said at the time, “We’ve grown to believe the best reader service is to delete the piece entirely.” Talbot slammed Lauerman’s decision, saying – among other criticisms – that it “smacks of editorial cowardice”:

I was dismayed when I first heard that Salon had removed your article about the hazards of thimerosal from its web archives. As you know, I was no longer the editor of Salon when your article was published. And I am not an expert on the subject. But without taking a position on mercury preservatives in vaccines, I know enough about the debate — and about the pharmaceutical industry’s general track record on putting profits before people, as well as the compromised nature of regulatory oversight in this country when it comes to powerful industries — to know that “disappearing” your article was not the proper decision.

I founded Salon to be a fearless and independent publication — one that was open to a wide range of views, particularly those that were controversial or contested within the mainstream media. Removing your article from the Salon archives was a violation of that spirit and smacks of editorial cowardice. If I had been editor at the time, I would not have done so — and I would have offered you the opportunity to debate your critics in Salon’s pages.

In my day, Salon did not cave to pressure — and we risked corporate media scorn, advertising boycotts, threats of FBI investigations by powerful members of Congress, and even bomb scares because of our rigorous independence. Throwing a writer to the wolves when the heat got too hot was never the Salon way. It pains me, now that I’m on the sidelines, to ever see Salon wilt in the face of such pressure.”

Rolling Stone Magazine also published Kennedy’s piece, but never retracted it even after the magazine’s editors reviewed Salon’s explanation for the “Deadly Immunity” retraction and the book that prompted it: “Panic Virus,” by Seth Mnookin. It was Mnookin’s book that gave rise to the rumor that Rolling Stone secretly retracted Kennedy’s piece, which Rolling Stone has since dispelled.

Now that Mnookin’s self-described personal friend Kerry Lauerman has taken his editorial cowardice over to The Washington Post, Salon’s current editor-in-chief David Daley should do the editorially courageous thing and restore “Deadly Immunity” to Salon’s archives. Not doing so would make him just as much of an editorial coward as Lauerman.

See on The Epoch Times.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestFlattr the authorDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon