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 Assembly Bill 2109 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.

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 Crosby

In 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

JAMA Study Implicates Early MMR Vaccine in Causing Autism

JAMA

Editor’s Note: The hyperlink to the study goes to an archived webpage because the full text version is no longer available on the JAMA website.

By Jake Crosby

A recent study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) that is widely touted to argue against the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine’s association with autism actually provides evidence for a connection. Based on computation from the study results for participants with non-autism spectrum disorder-diagnosed (non-ASD) older siblings, children who received a dose of the MMR vaccine before age five had a risk for ASD diagnosis by age five that was 48% higher than in children who did not in analyses that corrected for certain potential biases.

Where both groups received a dose of MMR vaccine – one largely before the bulk of autism diagnoses were made and one following it – the comparison is less likely to suffer from bias that might affect those involving children never vaccinated with MMR or those who received both recommended doses. Parents might be discouraged from giving a child a second dose of MMR or MMR at all if a child had a negative reaction to the first dose or to a dose of a different vaccine. Similarly, parents of children with autism may be more likely to take seriously concerns about vaccinations’ association with autism and more likely to withhold vaccines from their children. These potential biases make studying the timing of MMR vaccination in relation to autism preferable, though the authors of this study did not bother to do this. Nonetheless, the complete data sets from the study are needed to confirm whether the aforementioned association holds when controlling for other variables.

Yet the crude findings are similar to results from a study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that was published in the medical journal Pediatrics in 2004 and has also been cited to deny autism’s association with MMR. Those findings showed an odds of earlier MMR vaccination that was more than two-fold higher among African-American children with autism spectrum disorders compared to their non-ASD counterparts of the same race. According to study coauthor William Thompson who has come forward as a federal whistleblower, that finding was omitted from the published manuscript in breach of final study protocol. Pediatrics has refused to consider the paper for retraction, even though it should be considered according to the guidelines in publishing ethics that the journal claims to follow. Now what CDC researchers found more than a decade ago seems to only be confirmed by the results of this much larger study published in JAMA.

The troubling history of epidemiological studies used to disprove the MMR causes autism despite finding associations predates even the CDC study. A 2002 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and even larger than the recent JAMA study yielded results from which a 45% increased risk for autism associated with MMR vaccination was computed, despite concluding no connection. The scientist who computed that risk explained why the association was potentially meaningful in a letter to the journal, but the journal never published it. The principle investigator Poul Thorsen (who also found but did not publish results implicating mercury in vaccines in causing autism) of the NEJM study has since become a most-wanted international fugitive who was indicted on fraud charges.

Even after his indictment in 2011, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) included his study as one of just four to support the IOM’s position that MMR vaccination does not cause autism. Another IOM-cited study published in the Lancet in 1999 showed a relationship between timing of MMR vaccination and parental concern of child development in a sample of children with autism, according to a slide from an IOM-commissioned epidemiological review.

As the studies used to disprove an association between MMR and autism continue to mount, so too does the evidence favoring a causal relationship. A study in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry claiming autism rose as MMR was removed from use in Japan neglected the fact that the rise was correlated to single measles and rubella vaccines routinely given just four weeks apart. Another study published in JAMA in 2001 claimed that MMR vaccination coverage in California rose marginally while autism occurrence exploded, only for other scientists to then point out that the coverage of MMR vaccination given at younger ages also exploded.

The JAMA study is the latest such study to find an association while claiming to find none, and it probably won’t be the last. Its senior author and Drexel University epidemiologist Craig Newschaffer was previously quoted in 2007 by the LA Times as saying, “Those studies just kept piling up that showed no association between MMR or thimerosal exposure and autism…Among the scientific community, it’s pretty generally accepted that there is no link.”

How ironic that studies he cited to say there is no link actually found a link, and then his own study would later find the same.

See on The Epoch Times.

Correction: More information concerning the study results has since come to the attention of Autism Investigated, including the realization that some of the content originally in this post was not accurate. The article has since been updated.

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

CA SB277 Bill Co-Sponsor Called Senior CDC Scientist a “Fraud”

Richard Pan

By Jake Crosby

In a tweet sent to over 3,000 followers, California State Senator and vaccine exemption elimination bill co-sponsor Dr. Richard Pan called senior Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) scientist-turned-whistleblower Dr. William Thompson “another Wakefield fraud.” Pan’s calling Thompson a “Wakefield fraud” was a reference to de-licensed British doctor Andrew Wakefield, who publicized Thompson’s identity and voice recordings without his permission in a series of videos released online. Yet the article linked to in Pan’s tweet concerned a paper authored by neither Thompson nor Wakefield, was never found to be fraudulent and which in no way detracted from what Thompson himself said in a public statement released last August:

“I regret that my co-authors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African-American males who received the [measles, mumps, rubella] MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.”

Richard Pan’s calling Thompson a “fraud” comes at a time when the California legislature is considering passing Senate Bill 277, co-sponsored by Pan. That bill would eliminate all statewide, so-called non-medical exemptions from the CDC’s recommended routine childhood vaccination schedule, which CDC defended by committing research misconduct according to a researcher who is still a senior scientist at CDC. That means that Pan’s bill would mandate that California schoolchildren be subjected to vaccine side-effects that CDC is covering up.

It is hardly any wonder why Thompson was called “another Wakefield fraud” by Pan, who in doing so proved himself as dishonest as the CDC’s ongoing fraudulent defense of its vaccination schedule. It does not matter that Pan is a medical doctor, because he is also a medical liar. His bill must be killed.

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

CA SB277 Bill Mandates Harm From CDC Cover-Up

9761447

 

By Jake Crosby

What if the state could fraudulently deny susceptibility of many patients to adverse vaccine side-effects and then force those same patients to subject themselves to unnecessary harm by getting vaccinated? That is exactly what California Senate Bill SB277 does by eliminating “non-medical” exemptions – exemptions for safety concerns dishonestly denied by the state.

Yet the bill has already passed the Senate Health Committee vote and has been endorsed by The LA Times and Sacramento Bee. Reporters from both newspapers have seen the documentary “Trace Amounts,” so both newspapers know that talking points like the “overwhelming scientific consensus” supporting the safety of vaccines are fraudulent. As the film made clear, it’s not just the presence of mercury in vaccines that is the problem – the complete removal of which in Denmark preceded a fall in autism prevalence. The dishonesty of the vaccine program in denying harm from that substance and other vaccines utterly destroys the credibility of federal immunization policy and should destroy any statewide attempt to make it mandatory. Chillingly enough, LA and Sacramento “journalists” support the bill anyway. That means they are not journalists, but propagandists for the cover-up who should be investigated as such.

Meanwhile, the politicians who vote in favor of the bill despite not having seen “Trace Amounts” should be voted out for failing their constituents. The bill’s architect Richard Pan should further lose his medical license for coercing people into subjecting their children to harmful immunization policies defended on lies.

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

“Trace Amounts” Documentary Leaves No Trace of Doubt

trace-amounts

By Jake Crosby

What if the most effective argument against vaccination mandates is not even a direct argument against mandates themselves? What if the most effective argument is simply shining a light on the corruption within federal agencies responsible for immunization policies states mandate and on the greater greed – not the greater good – behind the “trace amounts” of one particularly toxic vaccine ingredient?

That is certainly what energetic filmmaker Eric Gladen seems to be proving with nationwide screenings of his documentary “Trace Amounts” about the harm being done to children worldwide by the mercury-based vaccine preservative thimerosal. What began as his own personal struggles with mercury poisoning that he attributed to a thimerosal-laced tetanus vaccine mushroomed into a decade-long journey to uncover the troubled history behind this known neurotoxin and its connection to the autism epidemic affecting America’s children.

“Trace Amounts” has already been credited with the death of legislation proposing elimination of vaccine exemptions – notably in Oregon. The film’s effectiveness should be no mystery to anyone who actually has watched the documentary. It leaves no room for reasonable doubt about thimerosal’s causation of neurological disorders or efforts by the CDC to conceal that harm from the public. Since then, the “Trace Amounts” tour has made its way here to Texas where Texans’ rights to forgo vaccination are currently under legislative threat.

As the state legislature of California also considers a senate bill to eliminate vaccine exemptions, “Trace Amounts” is now making its way to the state capital of Sacramento. The bill’s supporters will have to answer to the fact that they are seeking to force people to subject their children to a vaccine schedule based on recommendations by a federal agency that covers up vaccine injuries. Just viewing the documentary’s two-minute trailer should be enough to worry rights-denying politicians like Richard Pan – the bill’s architect. He and others like him will have far more explaining to do to whoever watches the full documentary.

Addendum: 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