Author Archives: Jake Crosby

Brian Deer Rejects Film Offer, Gets Mad He’s Not in Film!

A critical film about Dr. Andrew Wakefield – the first scientist to raise a connection between the Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine and autism – will soon be released. Yet the person mad about its release is his arch nemesis Brian Deer, who is credited with destroying Dr. Wakefield’s professional reputation. So angry was Deer that he even sent a letter and ultimatum to the documentary’s director.

The reason for Brian Deer’s anger? The documentary said he declined to be part of the film, when he did exactly that. When declining the offer, he even cited not being paid as his reason for doing so when he’s spent almost 15 years accusing Dr. Wakefield of being motivated by money.

The Facebook page of The Pathological Optimist provides details:

Miranda Bailey, the director of “The Pathological Optimist,” recently received a letter from journalist Brian Deer. For those who don’t know, Brian Deer was the journalist who originally investigated the paper published in the “The Lancet” written by Andrew Wakefield, and his colleagues. His reporting was instrumental to the UK General Medical Council’s investigation into Wakefield, which ultimately led to the loss of his medical license.

Read below as journalist Brian Deer “man-splains” to director Miranda Bailey how documentary filmmakers “should and should not behave.” He then goes on to accuse her of several fallacies before ultimately making demands and threats:

(From Deer’s letter): “If by midnight, Pacific, Tuesday, I have not received your assurance in these respects, or been offered by you a credible alternative plan to remedy the damage that your “documentary” inflicts on my reputation (presenting me, as you do, as too cowardly to defend my journalism), I will publish this letter to media, as well as to senior independent film makers, festival directors, and others who may be in a position to advise me. I give you four full days to decide and tell me what you are going to do.”

Brian Deer’s full letter is available to read using the link below along with Miranda Bailey’s response. We’re guessing that this is not the “apology” he was looking for.

Click here to read the full exchange between Miranda Bailey and Brian Deer. It’s comic gold.

Time for the folks behind The Pathological Optimist to reconsider who is pathological, and realize it’s not Dr. Andrew Wakefield.

Dr. David Gorski Falsely Denies Vaccine-Miscarriage Finding

Crooked cancer doc David Gorski‘s verbose posts can be completely demolished if you can find and refute the one sentence in his posts that attempts to make a real point. That is exactly what was done when Autism Investigated refuted his denying the significance of an association between miscarriage and flu vaccination that was published in a recent study. He falsely described the finding on his blog thusly:

an aOR [adjusted odds ratio] of 2.0 for the 1-28 day window of exposure to the influenza vaccine before miscarriage that was not statistically significant

However, the study itself directly contradicts Gorski’s assertion of insignificance. So AI’s editor took to Twitter to call him out.

And Gorski was also called out on his own blog. Gorski replied with an excuse:

When one writes blog posts in one’s spare time late at night, such things occasionally happen; one occasionally makes mistakes.

Yet none of his supporters caught the error either, including both a doctoral epidemiology student at Johns Hopkins and a Ph.D. epidemiologist. Despite correcting the error in one sentence, Gorski still has yet to correct it in another sentence in that same blog post:

Basically, the study found zero (that’s right: zero, nada, zilch) association between miscarriage and flu vaccination—with one exception: if the woman had consecutively received a flu vaccine containing the 2009 H1N1 virus. 

Never mind the overall adjusted odds ratio that Gorski now acknowledges as being significant. From there, Gorski’s case against the study falls apart: it was not a fishing expedition for statistical association. It found an association per study protocol and attempted to assess that association further.

Further study yielded an association in a subgroup of women who would already have a body burden of mercury from a prior vaccine, making them more susceptible than other women. But Gorski says this is evidence against the association being real!

For years, Gorski has openly supported government officials crookedly hiding scientific results and barring more research of mercury exposure from vaccines. He also claimed he would acknowledge that mercury in vaccines may cause autism if presented with certain evidence, only to refuse when confronted with that evidence years later.

Why Gorski lies about vaccination risks to children may be explained by his own ties to the pharmaceutical industry. But another factor could be much more personal – possible bitterness over his lack of children despite being in a heterosexual marriage. Perhaps the reason for this is biological and not by choice. If so, what better way for him to get back at society for his or his wife’s infertility than to spread lies that can lead to more miscarriages and brain-damaged children?

Support Josh Coleman Against Coward Richard Pan!

What a shock that the dishonest, hypocritical, child-poisoning shills of the vaccine industry love to troll, but cannot take being trolled. As a result of his activism, vaccine injury parent Josh Coleman now has charges filed against him by California Senator Richard Pan. Help Josh fight back!

From GoGetFunding:

We are coming together to support one of the bravest individuals in our movement. Joshua Coleman has been at the forefront of the fight for medical freedom with journalism that attempts to hold accountable those who are removing our parental and medical rights. In a sign of his effectiveness, Joshua is wrongly facing charges for alleged eavesdropping during a visit to Senator Pan’s office at the California State Capitol. An offer was extended to Joshua in court with the condition that he “stay away” from Senator Richard Pan. Joshua justifiably declined as he has exercised his right to free speech and journalism with integrity when aiming to get answers from Senator Pan. Those questions have gone unanswered and this legal circus is simply an attempt to keep those hard hitting questions at bay. He will not back down, WE will not back down. As he fights for all of us, we would never expect him to take on the burden of legal fees on his own. Let’s support Joshua Coleman in the fight!

 

Give Big Pharma Troll Craig Egan A Piece of Your Vaccine Injury Story!

Craig Egan is the big pharma troll protesting the Vaxxed tour bus. So why are parents of vaccine-injured children who show up at tour stops to tell their stories giving him food? He doesn’t need more food, he needs a reminder that the stories he shows up to belittle are real.

Parents should have something ready to give to Egan at the Vaxxed bus, like a photo of their sick child, to remind him of who and what he’s protesting. A photo would be the most obvious thing, though not the only thing that could be given to him.

Such items could also include a soiled adult diaper, stitches that were in your child’s head after he bashed his head through a window, broken glass, a chipped tooth, an anti-seizure medication bottle – the list is endless!

The fact is that Egan doesn’t go to tour stops to listen to parents’ stories. He doesn’t go there to debate. He only goes there to protest against people who were harmed by vaccines that show up to tell their stories. He’s not going to watch the videotaped stories posted online, so bring the stories to him. 

It’s not going to be done by giving him french fries or candy. If there’s one thing to know about a troll, it’s that you won’t defeat him with kindness. You defeat a troll by getting him at his own game: by trolling the troll. So give Craig Egan a piece of your story that he doesn’t want anyone to hear, especially himself.

EPOCH TIMES: Italy’s New Mandatory Vaccine Law Will Fuel A Populist Backlash

(Courtesy of Health Freedom Idaho)

Autism Investigated Note: A new day, a new epoch! Autism Investigated’s editor breaks his two-year hiatus from contributing to The Epoch Times to describe Italy’s growing populist movement against mandatory vaccination.

On July 28, a new law passed final approval in Italian parliament that will impose steep fines, school segregation and exclusion from daycare on families who refuse to vaccinate their children according to the Ministry of Health’s schedule.

In the months leading up to the law’s passage, the measure was met with stiff resistance and mass protest by opponents who correctly argue that the law would infringe on their personal liberties. With a strong populist opposition movement already surging in Italy—which opposed the new law—voters will undoubtedly be thinking about this law when they vote in next year’s Italian election.

Italy’s 5 Star Movement (Movimento 5 Stelle, or M5S for short) has been surging in Italian election polls and is already neck-and-neck with the ruling party: Italy’s very own Democratic Party (Partico Democratico).

M5S’s leader Beppe Grillo, like President Donald Trump, had already made a name for himself on television long before entering politics. A professional comedian, Grillo’s specialty was political satire. But M5S is no more a satire than Trump’s campaign was a reality show; M5S is now the most formidable populist opposition party in Europe.

MILLIONS OF ITALIANS PROTEST NEWLY PROPOSED VACCINE MANDATE from Francesca Alesse on Vimeo.

Last December, M5S played a major role in opposing constitutional changes proposed by then-Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi. They were voted down in a referendum by a 60 percent majority, resulting in Renzi’s resignation. Yet Renzi’s Democratic Party is still bold enough to lead the push for national vaccine mandates, despite what also happened in America.

Renzi’s political counterpart Barack Obama denied there were any reasons to not get vaccinated. Hillary Clinton made it clear in a tweet to her millions of followers that vaccination should not be questioned. California’s Democratic Party was also behind a state law signed by Governor Jerry Brown in June 2015 that stripped away religious and philosophical exemptions from vaccination.

By contrast, America’s own populist candidate Donald Trump said on a debate stage in front of millions of viewers that he supported spacing out vaccines and that he believed this would have a huge impact on autism. His then-opponent, former director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital, Dr. Ben Carson agreed with Trump about spacing vaccines out. Carson also later endorsed Trump during the primaries.

The voters who elected Trump and rejected Clinton knew where both candidates stood on vaccinations. Similarly, Italian voters will head to the ballots in next year’s election knowing that Italy’s populists stood up for their vaccine exemption rights while Italy’s Democrats stripped them away.

Jake Crosby is editor of the website Autism Investigated. Crosby has a masters in Public Health in epidemiology. In 2016, he worked as both a campaign field representative and as a volunteer to elect President Trump and other GOP candidates. He has also made freelance contributions to the Autism Media Channel and the Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Epoch Times.

Originally published on The Epoch Times

Peter Hotez Whines and Lies About Autism Investigated Meme on Houston TV

Scene from television station with Autism Investigated meme in background

After Chelsea Clinton came to Peter Hotez’s defense against Autism Investigated’s meme and other “threats”, he continued his whining and lying on Houston television. Hotez said anti-vaccinationists have a “twisted ideology,” and that his autistic daughter is under attack. In actuality, he is using her as the subject of a book he is writing to further his denial of her vaccine-caused autism. The television statement even said there were “implications of violence” the moment they cut to the meme, even though the meme implied nothing of the sort.

Local doctor targeted in vaccination debate

HOUSTON – Dr. Peter Hotez has spent his whole life working on vaccine development, but he world renown doctor now finds himself under attack.

“The anti-vaccine lobby has really stepped it up, both the frequency of their attacks against me and the tenor of the comments,” said Hotez.

The attacks are coming via Twitter, email and phone calls.

“They’re more personal, more mean spirited,” said Hotez.

They’ve even hurled implications of violence says Hotez, but this time the attacks have hit a new low, attacking his daughter who suffers from autism.

“It is very hurtful, but I try not to respond directly and I stick to the scientific evidence,” said Hotez.

Hotez says Texas has become ground zero for the anti-vaccine lobby. He claims their mission is to convince the world vaccines cause autism, and they are using his daughter Rachel as proof.

“There is no controversy, the science is clear,” said Hotez. “There is no link between vaccines and autism. It’s completely phony.”

Hotez is fighting back with a new book, “Vaccines Did Not Cause Rachel’s Autism”. He opens up about his daughter’s journey and how the family has dealt with Rachel’s autism.

The viciousness of the online attacks caught the attention of Chelsea Clinton who retweeted Hotez and offered her support for him and vaccination.

“I do have a lot of support in the science community,” said Hotez. “What I’m not hearing so much is in the way of support from the United States government.”

He says if Texas allows the anti-vaccine lobby to continue spreading lies, it’s children who will be at risk.

“They’re actually putting children in harms way just to support their twisted ideology and that’s something we have to go up against,” said Hotez.

© 2017 KHOU-TV

Chelsea Clinton Defends Peter Hotez From AI Meme “Threat”

Autism Investigated Note: Watch Milo’s 12 Steps to Destroy the Alt-Rightand read his new book Dangerous for a solid background on the “Alt-Right” which Autism Investigated has nothing to do with.

Chelsea Clinton defended Clinton-tied vaccine developer Peter Hotez from a recent barrage of “threats.” One of those so-called threats was a meme created by Autism Investigated and then shared on Twitter.

Peter Hotez’s sharing of Autism Investigated’s meme of himself is what would culminate in recent “Vaxhole of the week” Chelsea Clinton coming to his defense on Twitter. Hotez’s initial sharing of the meme appeared to prompt some hate mail he received, which he would share on Twitter two days later.

Chelsea Clinton apparently took Hotez’s remarks about a “minefield” literally.

Hotez didn’t correct her tweet about “threats.”

So Autism Investigated’s editor confronted Chelsea Clinton with one question.

Autism Investigated will keep readers posted about any updates. Whether she responds or not, the Clintons are still beholden to pharma.

INFOWARS: ENORMOUS BASIC LIES ABOUT VACCINATION

Why wasn’t this a gigantic story in the press? Why hasn’t the government investigated?

Q: Yes. That’s what I’ve been taught.

A: But you see, there is one vaccine (Hepatitis B) that is given to a baby the day it is born. The baby has no immune system of its own. In fact, some researchers say a child doesn’t fully develop his own immune system until age 12-14.

Q: Yes? So?

A: A vaccine can’t cause the desired “rehearsal” unless the recipient has his own immune system. That’s obvious.

Q: But that would mean the vaccine can’t work during those years when a child doesn’t have his own fully developed immune system.

A: Correct.

Q: But then all the experts would be wrong.

A: That’s right.

Q: What about the elderly? We constantly hear they must get vaccines because they have weak immune systems.

A: That’s another piece of fake information. Vaccines can’t make a weak immune system stronger. According to conventional wisdom, vaccines merely prepare a functioning immune system for a disease that will come along later. Actually, a vaccination given to people whose immune systems are weak can have a decidedly negative effect. The vaccination can overwhelm the weak immune system.

Q: But we have a great deal of information stating that vaccines have wiped out traditional diseases. The success rate has been remarkable.

A: Two points here. As Ivan Illich states in his book, Medical Nemesis: “The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.” (Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977)

Q: What’s the other point?

A: When the experts claim vaccines have wiped out traditional diseases, what are they really saying? They’re saying that the visible symptoms of those diseases are seen rarely now, compared with earlier decades. But why have those visible symptoms receded into the background?

Q: Yes, why?

A: It could be because those symptoms have been wiped out. But it could be because those symptoms have been suppressed.

Q: I don’t understand.

A: Consider the basic symptoms of measles. Rashes, fever. Conventionally speaking, are they simply the result of infection by the measles virus? No. The symptoms are a combination of infection AND the body’s immune system reacting to the germ. That reaction—the inflammatory response—is the body’s attempt to throw off the effects of the germ. THAT’S WHY WE SEE THE SYMPTOMS.

Q: Yes? So?

A: Vaccines contain toxic elements. Germs, chemicals like aluminum, formaldehyde. If these toxic substances weaken the immune system, then there will NOT be a full inflammatory response. The immune system won’t be capable of mounting that response. Therefore, the visible symptoms of the disease won’t appear, when the real disease comes along. Do you understand?

Q: Yes. The immune system is too weak to fight back.

A: The vaccination weakens the immune system. So when the measles disease actually comes along later, the person who received the vaccine won’t be able to fight it off easily. Therefore, you won’t see rashes and fever. The rashes and fever occur when the immune system is capable of mounting a full response.

Q: Therefore?

A: Therefore, after mass vaccination campaigns against measles, it will seem as if measles has been wiped out because, by and large, we don’t see the traditional symptoms anymore. But that’s an illusion. Measles hasn’t really been wiped out. Instead, people are now suffering from a weakened immune system, and symptoms of THAT will be different.

Q: That’s a disturbing idea.

A: Yes it is. Because now you’re talking about chronic illness, not acute measles which burns out quickly in the presence of a fully functioning immune system.

Q: Wait a minute. For a long time, millions of cases of measles have been reported in the Third World, where children’s immune systems are very weak. So the symptoms of measles WERE visible.

A: Yes. Let’s say those children’s immune systems were, at one time, barely strong enough to mount an inflammatory response. That’s why the rashes and fever appeared. But then, after vaccination with toxic elements, that wasn’t the case anymore. All those children were now “below the line.” When the measles came along, you could no longer see the symptoms. After vaccination, their immune systems were too weak to mount the inflammatory response. This isn’t “we wiped out measles.” This is “we replaced measles with chronic disease.”

Q: You seem to be saying we need to make people’s immune systems stronger. That’s the real answer. Then children will get the real diseases and overcome them—and then they’ll be immune for life.

A: Yes, absolutely.

Q: What medical “fix” will do that?

A: There isn’t any. Making a person’s immune system stronger is a non-medical situation. It involves better nutrition, better local sanitation, and other factors, none of which have to do with medical treatment.

Q: You’re also saying that a weak immune system opens the door to all sorts of disease conditions.

A: Correct. Vaccination can’t cure a weak immune system. The solution has to be non-medical.

Q: I don’t imagine medical experts like that idea.

A: That would be a vast, vast understatement.

Q: But there must be a medical solution to weak immune systems.

A: Why?

Q: Because if there isn’t, everything we’ve been taught is wrong.

A: And you can’t accept that?

Q: If I did accept that, it would mean the medical system has a large stake in keeping people’s immune systems weak.

A: And miles of propaganda tell you that couldn’t be true.

Q: Right.

A: Whose problem is that?

SILENCE.

Q: I don’t want to think about this. I’d rather bury my head in the sand. Let me shift the conversation to something you wrote about—the flu vaccine. This troubles me, too. You quoted author Peter Doshi, who published an article in the BMJ Journal. Can I quote you?

A: Feel free. Go ahead.

Q: “Dr. Peter Doshi, writing in the online BMJ (British Medical Journal), reveals one monstrosity.”

“As Doshi states, every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory samples are taken from flu patients in the US and tested in labs. Here is the kicker: only a small percentage of these samples show the presence of a flu virus.”

“This means: most of the people in America who are diagnosed by doctors with the flu have no flu virus in their bodies.”

“So they don’t have the flu.”

“Therefore, even if you assume the flu vaccine is useful and safe, it couldn’t possibly prevent all those ‘flu cases’ that aren’t flu cases.”

“The vaccine couldn’t possibly work.”

“The vaccine isn’t designed to prevent fake flu, unless pigs can fly.”

“Here’s the exact quote from Peter Doshi’s BMJ review, (BMJ 2013; 346:f3037)”:

“’…even the ideal influenza vaccine, matched perfectly to circulating strains of wild influenza and capable of stopping all influenza viruses, can only deal with a small part of the ‘flu’ problem because most ‘flu’ appears to have nothing to do with influenza. Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive’.”

“…’It’s no wonder so many people feel that “flu shots” don’t work: for most flus, they can’t’.” (end of Doshi quote)

“Because most diagnosed cases of the flu aren’t the flu.”

“So even if you’re a true believer in mainstream vaccine theory, you’re on the short end of the stick here. They’re conning your socks off.”

A: You have a question about this?

Q: More like a…it’s shocking. Deeply shocking.

A: It’s supposed to be shocking. Facts sometimes are.

Q: But how could this escape mainstream journalism? Why wasn’t this a gigantic story in the press? Why hasn’t the government investigated?

A: Why don’t you answer your own question?

Q: Because I’m afraid my answer would shock me.

A: And whose problem is that?

SILENCE.

This article first appeared at NoMoreFakeNews.com.

CDC Director Tweets Vaccine Indoctrination Video

Brenda Fitzgerald has just tweeted an indoctrination video about how great Rotavirus and pneumonia vaccines are, proclaiming vaccines one of the greatest achievements of the last decade. Meanwhile, vaccines were giving countless American children autism that entire time.

What did President Trump expect when he let such a person take that position? He campaigned on a platform of vaccine safety, which would require the CDC to stop lying about poisoning children. Yet he appointed exactly the wrong person for the job.

Has President Trump backed down from his promise to put together a vaccine safety commission, even though he insisted he wouldn’t? If he hasn’t, how will such a commission function with someone like Fitzgerald running CDC? She has nothing to lose from undermining such a commission. If Trump gets voted out and she gets replaced, she’ll just get her cozy job at pharma four years sooner.

A federal agency may work more efficiently if it’s run by someone who thinks like her subordinates, but in this case it’s efficiency for an evil purpose. The people working under Fitzgerald who are part of the problem should not be at CDC either. They belong at pharmaceutical companies, at best.

INFOWARS: HOW BIG PHARMA HIDES VACCINE DEATH

Adverse reactions can and do include death thanks to additives put in vaccines

Vaccine scientists and the public health community cautiously and occasionally will admit that vaccines can cause adverse reactions just like “any other medication or biological product.”


Although experts are less willing to openly disclose the fact that adverse reactions can and do include death, one has only to look at reports to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to see that mortality is a possible outcome. From 1990 through 2010, for example, VAERS received 1,881 reports of infant deaths following vaccination, representing  4.8% of the adverse events reported for infants over the 20-year period. Moreover, analysts acknowledge that VAERS, as a passive surveillance system, is subject to substantial underreporting. A federal government report from 2010 affirms that VAERS captures only about 1% of vaccine adverse reports.On the international frontier, the public health community—with the World Health Organization (WHO) in the vanguard—previously used a six-category framework to investigate and categorize serious adverse events following immunization (AEFI), including death. Guided by this tool, public health teams examined temporal criteria and possible alternative explanations to determine whether the relationship of an AEFI to vaccine administration was “very likely/certain,” “probable,” “possible,” “unlikely,” “unrelated,” or “unclassifiable.”

In 2013, the WHO’s Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety discarded the prior tool, ostensibly because users “sometimes [found it] difficult to differentiate between ‘probable,’ ‘possible,’ and ‘unlikely’ categories.” The WHO enlisted vaccine experts to develop a “simpler” algorithm that would be more readily “applicable” to vaccines. The resulting four-category system now invites public health teams to classify an AEFI as either “consistent,” “inconsistent,” or “indeterminate” with a vaccine-related causal association or as “unclassifiable.” Despite the patina of logic suggested by the use of an algorithm, “the final outcome of the case investigation depends on the personal judgment of the assessor” [emphasis added], especially (according to the tool’s proponents) when the process “yields answers that are both consistent and inconsistent with a causal association to immunization.”

In a 2017 letter in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, Drs. Jacob Puliyel (an India-based pediatrician and member of India’s National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization) and Anant Phadke (an executive member of the All India Drug Action Network) raise important questions about the revised tool. They describe an Orwellian Catch-22 situation wherein it is nearly impossible to categorize post-vaccine deaths as vaccine-related. This is because the revised algorithm does not allow users to classify an AEFI as “consistent with causal association with vaccine” unless there is evidence showing that the vaccine caused a statistically significant increase in deaths during Phase III clinical trials. By definition, however, any vaccine not found to “retain safety” in Phase III trials cannot proceed to Phase IV (licensure and post-marketing surveillance). The result of the algorithm’s convoluted requirements is that any deaths that occur post-licensure become “coincidental” or “unclassifiable.”

Drs. Puliyel and Phadke describe what happened in India when the country’s National AEFI committee assessed 132 serious AEFI cases reported between 2012 and 2016, including 54 infant deaths that followed administration of a pentavalent all-in-one vaccine intended to protect recipients against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, and Haemophilus influenzae type b infections. For babies who survived hospitalization, the committee classified three-fifths (47/78) of the AEFI as causally related to vaccines (with 47% of the incidents viewed as “product-related” and 13% as “error-related”), but they rated nearly all (52/54) of the deaths as either coincidental (54%) or unclassifiable (43%) despite mounting evidence that pentavalent and hexavalent vaccines are increasing the risk of sudden unexpected death in infants.

…doctors who “naïvely” accept biased reports on vaccine safety “are losing the trust of the public and in the process…endangering public health.

The absurdity and negligence inherent in the ultimately subjective WHO checklist have not escaped the attention of others in India and beyond. In a series of comments published in the journal Vaccine in response to the 2013 publication of the revised tool, commenters issued the following scathing remarks:

  • “Even if a healthy child dies within minutes following vaccination and there is no alternate explanation for the AEFI, even then the powers that be could easily declare that death as coincidental and not due to the vaccine, thanks to the new AEFI. This is dangerous ‘science’.”
  • “Amongst the 20 items of their checklist, no less than 15 (75%) are devoted to refute a vaccine-induced causality [emphasis in original]…. After all and as the authors confess with an astonishing ingenuousness, the main point is to ‘maintain public confidence in immunization programs.’”
  • “People understand that there are no true coincidences—only events that have been made to appear to be coincidental by either a genuine lack of understand[ing] of the overall facts leading to the ‘coincidence’ reported or by the deliberate suppression of the facts, including when…AEFIs that result in death are made to ‘disappear.’”
  • “It seems that huge business in [the] vaccine industry is affecting [the] science of vaccines and we are developing various ways to promote the business at the cost of human lives. …Going for a less sensitive tool for safety concerns is not only illogical but risky for the children of the world.”

Unfortunately, many vaccine proponents appear to be more concerned with forestalling “misconceptions” and “erroneous conclusions about cause and effect” than they are about preventing and identifying adverse events following vaccination. The result, as Dr. Puliyel argues, is that doctors who “naïvely” accept biased reports on vaccine safety “are losing the trust of the public and in the process…endangering public health.”