Category Archives: Fraud

Please Extradite Danish Fraud Poul Thorsen to the US, President Trump!

Office of the Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services

Last year, Autism Investigated’s editor publicly spoke out at the annual AutismOne  conference in favor of renewed efforts to push for extradition of vaccine-autism link “debunker” Poul Thorsen. This year, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is leading the push to do just that:

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and World Mercury Project Issue Report Regarding New Evidence of Ongoing Corruption and Scientific Misconduct at CDC

Kennedy hopes new evidence and a fresh look at criminal misconduct will result in law enforcement action, rigorous and transparent vaccine safety science, and safer vaccines.

In a new report released September 18, 2017, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and his team outlined various criminal acts on the part of employees and consultants for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) whose questionable ethics and scientific fraud have resulted in untrustworthy vaccine safety science.

Among other information, Kennedy has found additional evidence of criminal activity by the CDC consultant, Poul Thorsen, the author and principal coordinator of multiple CDC studies exonerating the mercury-based preservative thimerosal in the development of autism.

The new evidence, recently uncovered World Mercury Project, shows that Thorsen and his collaborators did not obtain permission from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) to conduct their research, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2002 and Pediatrics in 2003. In 2011, The Department of Justice indicted Thorsen on 22 counts of wire fraud and money laundering for stealing over $1 million in CDC grant money earmarked for autism research. The product of Thorsen’s work for CDC was a series of fraud-tainted articles on Danish autism rates that, today, form the backbone of the popular orthodoxy that vaccines don’t cause autism.

In 2009, when CDC discovered that Thorsen never applied for the IRB approvals, staff did not report the errors and retract the studies. Rather, FOIA documents show that CDC supervisors ignored the missteps and covered up the illegal activity.

This misconduct, undermines the legitimacy of these studies, which were used to refute vaccine injury claims in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP). The studies were also used in the NVICP’s “Omnibus” to dismiss 5000 petitions by families who claimed that their children had developed autism from vaccines. These claims, if settled in the claimants’ favor, would have resulted in payouts totaling an estimated $10 billion.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman, stated, “World Mercury Project calls upon Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, to extradite Thorsen back to the U.S. to face prosecution. We also call upon Secretary of Health and Human Services, Dr. Tom Price, to retract the Thorsen-affiliated autism research papers that are the fruit of illegally conducted research.”

Originally published at World Mercury Project

BREAKING: AI Demands Daily Beast Retract Paul Offit Post on Vaccine-Miscarriage Study

Paul Offit has written a post for The Daily Beast arguing that a CDC study of miscarriage and influenza vaccination should have never been published. He bases his argument on his own misrepresentations of the study’s results. Read Autism Investigated’s below letter to The Daily Beast’s editorial team demanding they retract Offit’s post.

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Paul Offit’s Article Misrepresents Study Findings, Should be
Retracted
From: <info@autisminvestigated.com>
Date: Sun, September 24, 2017 3:33 pm
To: editorial@thedailybeast.com

Dear Daily Beast,

Your contributor Paul Offit’s latest article “The Pregnancy Vaccine Scare That Should Have Never Been” makes multiple misrepresentations of a recent CDC study on influenza vaccination and miscarriage. Since these misrepresentations form the basis of his central argument that the study should never have been published, Offit’s article is fatally flawed and should be retracted by your publication.

Offit states about a recent study of miscarriage and flu vaccination that the study authors found no overall association with miscarriage and flu vaccination when they had:

“The CDC’s question prior to this study was “Does influenza vaccine cause spontaneous abortions?” The answer to that question was no. It was only after investigators sub-stratified their data to include those who had or hadn’t received a vaccine the previous year that they could find statistical significance.”

This is directly from the study, contradicting Offit’s claim:

“The overall adjusted odds ratio (aOR) was 2.0 (95% CI, 1.1–3.6)”

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X17308666

As someone who holds a degree in epidemiology (unlike Offit) and has analyzed the database used in this study (also unlike Offit), I can assure you that that is a significant association. The “95% CI” (confidence interval) excludes the number 1.0. Therefore, the answer to their study question would point in the “yes” direction.

This also demolishes his next point about the study, that the association was based on small numbers:

“After the CDC researchers had finished sub-stratifying their data, the numbers were small”, concluding the results due to “the curse of small numbers gleaned from a large database.” But even before the authors had computed their next association from a smaller sample, the association from their full study sample was already significant. But because Offit misrepresented the association as being insignificant, his point about the study’s findings being based solely on small numbers is also wrong.

His very first point was also wrong, too:

“Researchers had studied two influenza-vaccine seasons: 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. The problem of first-trimester spontaneous abortions occurred during the first season but not the second.”

The study itself makes clear this happened in both seasons: “This effect modification was observed in each season”

Because the majority of Offit’s points are based on his own misrepresentations – including all those that discussed the study findings directly – simple corrections are too mild. The entire post should be retracted by The Daily Beast, especially since the purpose of the post was to make the case for why the study should have never been published. In reality, The Daily Beast should have never posted this fatally flawed article by Paul Offit and should now retract it.

Sincerely,

Jake Crosby, MPH

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?

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.”

Dr. Peter Hotez Hopes to Mandate Vaccines by Importing Measles

Despite pushing for mandatory vaccinations, Baylor College vaccine developer Dr. Peter Hotez vocally opposed President Trump’s travel ban on multiple measles-endemic countries.

Last January, Hotez told Nature News:

“Scientific communities across the world need collaborators in these countries who can combat epidemics before they arrive in the US,” 

Never mind that the ban applies to citizens of those countries coming here, not US citizens going there. Nothing about Hotez’s statement suggests any priority given to preventing epidemics from arriving to the US. How can the US count on failed states like Somalia to prevent its people from bringing measles here without placing any restrictions on who comes here?

The ongoing measles outbreak among Somalis in Minnesota started when the ban on Somalian travelers was being stalled by activist judges. Now the travel ban on Somalia and other measles-endemic countries is finally allowed to go into effect (for now). That may hamper the virus’ ability to travel from Africa directly to the US.

It is less likely, however, to prevent the virus from spreading to the US through Europe like it did to California at the beginning of the migrant crisis. Yet European countries continue to open their borders to infectious migrants while stripping citizens of vaccine exemption rights.

Undoubtedly, people like Hotez want that repeated here. The Texas politicians who voted for a failed, privacy-invading bill that would publicize immunization rates in schools also overwhelmingly support sanctuary cities. Houston – whose mayor personally intervened to censor Vaxxed – is one of those cities.

If school vaccine coverage rates are published, why not also publish a percentage breakdown of each school’s population by national origin? That may be a better indicator of a school’s likelihood of having an imported measles outbreak. Nobody has to be identified either, but the vaccine industry would never push for that.

And why would they? If measles is stopped from entering the US through common sense immigration policy, that would kill the vaccine industry’s ability to challenge vaccine exemptions through mandatory vaccination. As Hotez told that crooked Vice reporter, he hopes measles gets brought to Texas so that legislators will be more likely to mandate vaccines:

“The only thing that’s going to stop this runaway train right now is a large measles outbreak,” 

That runaway train Hotez is referring to is not the measles itself, it’s exemptions from the vaccines that damage children’s brains. Hotez has a daughter with autism, so no prizes for guessing why he really wants vaccine mandates. His persistent anger at anti-vaccinationists is fueled by his denial that his daughter’s autism could have been vaccine-caused. The more likely measles gets imported, the more likely he can take that anger out on anti-vaccinationists by punishing us with vaccine mandates.

Now it all makes sense why he opposed the president’s travel ban while living in a sanctuary city for illegal immigrants. He wants to spread a measles epidemic to the US!

Europe “Must Learn to Live With Terrorism,” But Not With Measles?

European politicians are much more comfortable with mass murder than they are with a childhood illness.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan infamously said that, “Terrorism is just part and parcel of living in a big city.”  French President Emmanuel Macron said that terrorism will be “part of our daily lives for the years to come”. He even said, “We must learn to live with terrorism”. So we can learn to live with measles then too, can’t we? Wrong!

Macron is perfectly okay with keeping his countries’ borders open to any infectious foreigner while imposing mandatory vaccination on the French people. Germany and Italy are also going the same way, but not without mass protest in Italy.

Looking at the above map, is it any wonder there have been thousands of cases of measles in Europe in the past two years? The two worst hit countries – Italy and Romania – are directly in the paths of the two main routes of illegal immigration into Europe. But to vaccine poisoners, it’s as much coincidence as children losing all their speech immediately after vaccination.

Stripping citizens of their rights is not going to change the fact that the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine is a dangerous vaccine that destroys children’s brains. People will continue to take their chances with the measles as long as they are lied to about vaccine dangers.

Mandatory vaccines will also do nothing to stop the new wave of crime, terrorism and disease being imported into the continent. That depends on the patience of the European people. If the European leaders don’t re-establish their countries’ borders soon, their people will eventually grow fed-up enough to vote these arrogant politicians out of office.

Vice Reporter Blows Off Autism Investigated and Does One-Sided Hit-Piece

Arielle Duhaime-Ross, Vice News Tonight Reporter

After President Trump’s election, Autism Investigated got a little message from Vice News Tonight‘s Arielle Duhaime-Ross. She is a Canadian science reporter whose most notable story has been her smears of an astrophysicist for his “sexist” shirt.

After Duhaime-Ross requested to contact Autism Investigated and speak on the phone “informally”, Autism Investigated responded by requesting permission to tape-record the conversation. She agreed and even said she would tape-record too…only to never call as she said she would.

Then just this week, she produced a craptacular piece of “journalism” that is the perfect combination of left-wing, anti-Texas snobbery and vaccine-shilling propaganda. Way to lie to sources and blow them off, Arielle!

See our below exchange:

Hello Mr Crosby, 

I’m a correspondent for VICE News Tonight, a nightly news show that airs on HBO. As I’m sure you know, President-elect Donald Trump has expressed his support of the anti-vaccine movement in a series of tweets. Given that he’s now been elected, I’m curious if organizations or groups who oppose strict vaccine schedules for children or who oppose vaccines altogether are doing anything to prepare for his tenure as President. If you have some time, I’d like to chat with you on the phone, informally. Let me know if that works for you. Thank you.
11/22/2016 1:10AM

Autism Investigated
Hi, thank you for writing. I am willing to talk to you and plan on tape-recording our exchange. Look forward to talking. -Jake
Number is [REDACTED]. What day/time do you plan on calling?
11/22/2016 10:08AM

Arielle Duhaime-Ross
That’s fine. I’ll record the exchange as well if that’s alright with you. What time would you like to chat? And do you have an email address I can use to reach you?
11/22/2016 12:43PM

Autism Investigated
Not a problem. I could do before 5 today or after 2 tomorrow. You can reach me through the AI address: info@autisminvestigated.com

Arielle Duhaime-Ross
Thanks for sending me your email! Something has come up at work and I won’t be able to chat with you for a while. May I contact you again in the future when my schedule frees up?
It might be a while.

Autism Investigated
Sure, no worries.
Seen by Arielle Duhaime-Ross at November 22, 2016 1:30 pm

Arielle Duhaime-Ross
Thank you.

FIVE MONTHS LATER

APR 11TH, 12:55AM
Autism Investigated
Whatever happened to our phone call?

No response. She must’ve backed down when she realized she just lost her opportunity to quote-mine and misrepresent Autism Investigated.

It’s probably for the best that she never called. Just look at what this “science” reporter thinks of the biology of gender, for example:

 

 

Write New Child-Poisoner-in-Chief Brenda Fitzgerald

Write Brenda Fitzgerald on Twitter to @CDCDirector and tell her how you feel about her being new child-poisoner-in-chief at CDC.

Here are some ideas:

Tell her about your vaccine-injured child.

Tell her about the criminality of her agency and how you now regard her to be the chief mafia boss.

Tell her how all the science shows vaccines cause autism

Tell her how their 14 “studies” or whatever bullshit they cite doesn’t count as science.

Tell her that Dr. Andrew Wakefield was exonerated by the journal The Lancet.

Tell her mercury is still in vaccines.

Tell her Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is one of the most outspoken people against the cover-up by the vaccine program, even though his uncle signed it into existence.

Basically call her a liar, tell her the impact it has on children like yours and tell her you plan to make her job deservedly miserable. Also tell her that herd immunity is also a lie and that invoking it is basically telling people to sacrifice their children.

Just say anything you can think of so long as it’s not a physical threat. Also tell her that vaccines are inherently dangerous thanks to people like her. And also tell her that any benefit attributable to them was because of safety standards passed into law thanks to anti-vaccination activism.

Finally, tell her that the problem is and always will be vaccines. Their promoters, makers, sellers etc. totally lie about their risks and intentionally poison children for personal profit. As long as that is reality, you will never support vaccines. You could never be in favor of vaccines for moral reasons. And you will stand opposed to her as child-poisoner-in-chief for the duration of her tenure.