Category Archives: Science

INTRODUCING Vahe Demirjian – The Lancet Paper’s Very Own Child 11

This charming-looking young man was the 11th child in the landmark Lancet paper authored by Dr. Andrew Wakefield.

An inquiry from Autism Investigated to Vahe’s email address vahedemirjian@cox.net has not gone answered. Autism Investigated will update readers if that changes. Meanwhile, Autism Investigated encourages readers to write Vahe to tell him about your child’s struggles and what his dad Richard Demirjian’s horrific smear attack on Wakefield means to you. (dad’s phone and address found here)

Meanwhile, here’s a rundown of where he works and attends college, from Facebook:

He’s quite a prolific Facebook poster too. Here’s a sample of what he’s written:

Although today’s Democratic victories in New Jersey and Virginia have been interpreted by some as signs of anti-Trump energy, the exit polls released by NBC News make clear supporting or opposing Trump is not the main reason for Democratic victories in the governor races in New Jersey and Virginia because maybe some war veteran voters still think that Trump is temperamentally unfit to control himself when handling North Korea.

Clearly, he is doing well compared to most other people with autism. Maybe that’s worth reminding him of too.

Think Autism Investigated is too harsh? Think Autism Investigated is prying too much into the lives of the Demirjians? Watch the below video of what parents in the Demirjians’ home state can now expect when they walk their children to the school bus stop. Without a doubt, the vaccine people want to spread this all over the country. They’ve already done it in California by taking advantage of the Demirjians’ paranoia. California might even deny doctors the right to exempt schoolchildren from vaccination.

Facebook Vahe Demirjian: https://www.facebook.com/vahe.demirjian.1

Write Vahe Demirjian: vahedemirjian@cox.net

Call Richard Demirjian: 949 718 0180

Here is where he lives: 11 Canyon Terrace, Newport Coast, CA

Send them InfoWars’ video, and tell them what happened to your child. Also tell them that nowhere in this table from The Lancet paper does it say Vahe’s autistic symptoms began one week after vaccination as Demirjian claimed:

:

Therefore, Richard Demirjian must RETRACT his BMJ claim of fabrication or be rightfully regarded as dishonest for living this lie.

FOUND: Richard Demirjian, Father of The Lancet Paper’s Child 11

Richard Demirjian’s house: 11 Canyon Terrace, Newport Coast, CA

It’s happened folks. Richard Demirjian, father of The Lancet paper’s child 11, has been located! He lives in the above house high up in the hills of Southern California – 11 Canyon Terrance, Newport Coast to be exact. His phone number is 949 718 0180. Autism Investigated was able to find it all online, posted publicly.

Despite multiple left voice messages, Autism Investigated could not get Demirjian on the phone. He simply won’t speak to Autism Investigated, but maybe he could speak to you. Call his number.

If he doesn’t answer, and he most likely won’t, leave a message about what happened to your own kid. Also, ask him to take back his false allegation that The Lancet paper was wrong on when 11’s autism occurred. Do not be threatening, do not use abusive language. This is simply a teachable opportunity to politely tell Demirjian about the harm he has caused and how he can help make it right.

Otherwise, his name will forever be associated with the lies used to justify hiding vaccine dangers. He will also no longer be given the benefit of the doubt that he was deceived and instead be rightfully painted as a liar.

Autism Investigated VLOG: CureGear’s Epic Vaccine Troll Fail

Please watch the above video of how CureGear failed to troll anti-vaxxers and got trolled instead. And please don’t forget to subscribe to Autism Investigated’s YouTube channel!

Related:

CureGear Goes Full Crybaby Gear, Bans Autism Investigated

Calling All Anti-Vaxxers! Troll CureGear’s Vaccine Troll Attempt!

Now please go and read CureGear’s pathetic comment:

For those engaging in the vaccine debate, we deeply thank you for your passion and commitment to public health.

Please remember, vocal anti-vaxxers cannot be reasoned with. No amount of evidence will ever convince them otherwise. They simply ignore and reject scientific evidence that counters their arguments. Once a vaccine denier’s beliefs feel threatened, they will use personal attacks and insults. We try to delete these comments when we see them, but with so many in this post, it’s very difficult to do. 

Our goal with this shirt is to convince those on the fence. You probably know someone who just isn’t sure what to do. They aren’t vaccine deniers, they are simply hesitant. They’ve heard the fear mongering from the vaccine deniers, but they’ve also heard about the benefits from science, medical, and public officials. These are the people we should all aim to nudge in the right direction.

Anti-Vaxxers Are Right, “Vaccine Safety Advocates” Are A Farce

Yes, Autism Investigated said it. To say you are not anti-vaccine, but a “vaccine safety advocate” is to make yourself into a big farce. No offense to the people who identify with that term, but it’s true.

But before you attack Autism Investigated for the headline, ask yourself: what is a safe vaccine? What does one look like? What’s in it, and how would it be implemented?

The truth is you cannot answer those questions because the people behind vaccines refuse to answer themselves. They are the ones obligated to answer those questions truthfully, that they will not is not our problem. So why keep begging them too?

Over the years, nearly every major “vaccine safety” initiative has fallen flat. Hannah Poling is ancient history. Jenny McCarthy faded out of public view. And Andrew Wakefield “the fraud” is the so-called scandal.

One of the most self-destructive arguments against vaccines over the last 10 years has been “only MMR and thimerosal was studied.” It is saying that they were already ruled out, when in fact they were lied about being safe just like the rest of the vaccine schedule. It is a talking point championed by Generation Rescue founder JB Handley and rehashed most recently in his Highwire with Del Bigtree interview.

Autism Investigated has requested to go onto Del Bigtree’s show – not to attack JB or anyone else – but to argue why anti-vaccination is the right position. Not only is it right because vaccinations are dangerous and the outcomes of vaccination are horrific, but because the people behind vaccination are totally corrupt.

We can talk about the “safe vaccines” all we want. We can talk about how we want the miracle potion of the “safe vaccine,” but it doesn’t exist. We all know it, but we all don’t want to say it.

It is the life’s work of Autism Investigated’s editor to dismantle the vaccine program in its entirety. Its creation was a disastrous mistake. It must be opposed and so too should vaccines in their present and only conceivable form. That is why Autism Investigated is anti-vaccine, and that is why you should be too.

How A Smallpox Inoculation Campaign Killed Benjamin Franklin’s Son

The vaccine industry dismisses anecdotes of vaccine injury but loves to hijack anecdotes of infectious disease. One such example is Benjamin Franklin’s son, who died of smallpox while still a toddler. Pro-vaccinationists use this to bash anti-vaccinationists, pointing out that his son was not inoculated. Ironically, it was inoculation that likely spread smallpox to Franklin’s son and by-extension killed them.

Inoculation – poking people from puss extracted from smallpox postules – was the precursor to vaccination. The logic was that it was supposedly safer than catching wild smallpox. Even if so, inoculation had a deadly secret: inoculated people could spread the virus to uninoculated people without showing symptoms. This made smallpox much easier to spread.

So while Franklin’s son was not inoculated, people he came into contact with almost certainly were. So inoculated people shed the virus and Franklin’s young son caught it. Since he was already sick, smallpox was especially dangerous to him. As a result, Franklin’s son died at the age of four – killed ultimately as a result of inoculation. Yet it is still occasionally trotted out by pro-vaccinationists to make the case for vaccination. In reality, it is a cautionary tale that is historically analogous to modern vaccine safety issues.

AI Needs YOUR Help Tracking Down Lancet Father 11, Richard Demirjian

Letter from father to Brian Deer and Dan Olmsted, 2011 – BMJ Deceived Lancet Parent Into Attacking Dr. Andrew Wakefield, Citation 5

His name is Richard Demirjian. His alma mater is UC Berkeley, and he is an engineer. His wife’s name is Aida, and they apparently donated a large sum of money to found an autism charity in the early nineties. Autism Investigated has reached out to the charity, but there’s no obvious way to get through to him directly.

So Autism Investigated is reaching out to you the reader. We need help tracking down Mr. Demirjian and confronting him with the fact that he’s been misled by the British Medical Journal (BMJ). If you have any information about his whereabouts and/or contact information, feel free to post in the comments below.

It is not enough to out Mr. Demirjian, we need him to publicly take back what he is quoted as claiming in the BMJ. That has partially happened, but not fully happened. So we want BMJ’s sole parent witness to denounce the journal and take back what he said about Dr. Andrew Wakefield. Demirjian owes it to the entire autism community and to himself.

He and his wife did apparently commit $60,000 to found the California non-profit, Behavioral Intervention for AutismAutism Investigated has reached out to this group to hopefully get through to Mr. Demirjian. Any further help though would be greatly appreciated.

BioMedCentral Admitted to Scientific Fraud, Cover-Up of Vaccine-Autism Link By Pulling Brian Hooker’s Reanalysis

Maria Kowalczuk, “Research Integrity Manager” for Springer Nature – overseer of BMC

In the below 2016 email to Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)’s Iraxte Puebla, Dr. Maria Kowalczuk revealed that her publisher BioMedCentral committed scientific misconduct. In particular, she stated they deleted Dr. Brian Hooker’s MMR-autism reanalysis because his results implicated vaccines in causing autism. She also fabricated non-existent conflict of interest policies that he “broke.” And finally, she lied that his paper was subjected to post-publication “peer review” when it was summarily retracted after they demanded he conduct multiple studies!

Despite all that, Committee on Publication Ethics would later state that BioMedCentral “acted appropriately.” COPE’s chair is an adviser of the “research integrity” committee that Kowalczuk oversees.

Dear Iratxe,

Thank you for bringing this second complaint to our attention. We have reviewed our handling of this case and related correspondence again and we are of the view that BioMed Central has adhered to COPE Code of Conduct and COPE guidelines. As this complaint has not been brought by the author himself we are limited in what information can be divulged to a third party.

With regard to the specific questions from COPE, we provide a summary of our handling of the case below:

  • The article was received on April 17th 2014 and  published on August 27th 2014 in the journal Translational Neurodegeneration.

The article reanalysed CDC data and claimed to show a positive association between MMR vaccination and the risk of autism in Afro-American boys.

  • A reader flagged that there were undeclared competing interests related to the article: the author, Dr Hooker, was on the Board of Directors for Focus Autism which supports the belief that MMR vaccine causes autism.  We were concerned enough about the allegations and the content to remove it from the public domain immediately because of the potential harm to public health, and posted this message in its place as a temporary measure:

This article has been removed from the public domain because of serious concerns about the validity of its conclusions. The journal and publisher believe that its continued availability may not be in the public interest. Definitive editorial action will be pending further investigation.

The author was informed of this plan before we removed the article.

  • Our investigation concluded that the author did have an undeclared competing interest. We also found that the peer reviewers were also likely to have undeclared competing interests.
  • On August 29th, we removed the above notice,  reinstated the article and published this expression of concern:

The Publisher of this article [1] has serious concerns about the validity of its conclusions because of possible undeclared competing interests of the author and peer reviewers. The matter is undergoing investigation. In the meantime, readers are advised to treat the reported conclusions of this study with caution.

Further action will be taken, if appropriate, once our investigation is complete.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4150057/

The author was informed before we posted this Expression of Concern.

  • We obtained a further, independent expert peer review of the article because we were concerned about the original peer reviewers’ potential competing interests. That further peer reviewer reported concerns about the statistical methods used. We decided to retract the ­­­­­article with this notice on 3rd October 2014:

The Editor and Publisher regretfully retract the article [1] as there were undeclared competing interests on the part of the author which compromised the peer review process. Furthermore, post-publication peer review raised concerns about the validity of the methods and statistical analysis, therefore the Editors no longer have confidence in the soundness of the findings. We apologise to all affected parties for the inconvenience caused.

http://translationalneurodegeneration.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2047-9158-3-22

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4128611/

The author was given an opportunity to respond to all the concerns raised and was informed before we retracted the article.

Our actions were in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

 

We provide a point by point response to Mr Crosby’s specific points below:

“Publishers should work with journal editors to:

  • Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:
    – Editorial independence

All the actions were taken in consultation with and with the explicit agreement of the Editor-in-Chief of Translational Neurodegeneration. Editorial independence was not undermined at any stage.

– Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research

None of the above were raised as issues in the course of the investigation.
– Authorship

No authorship issues were raised in the course of the investigation.
– Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards

We took action to ensure integrity of the published record in light of the concerns regarding conflicts of interest and the methods and statistical analysis that came to light after publication of the article. We acted in a transparent way throughout the process.


– Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor

External post publication peer review, that involved the editor, was conducted when concerns were raised about the article.
– Appeals and complaints

  • Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
    • Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
    • Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
    • Maintain the integrity of the academic record”

BioMed Central policies comply with COPE recommendations and are accessible on our website. We regularly review issues that might affect our polices (sometimes in collaboration with COPE) and update our policies as necessary. Our Editors are required to follow our Code of Conduct for Editors and COPE Best Practice Guidelines. BioMed Central has a team dedicated to dealing with research integrity issues and maintaining the integrity of the scientific record.

Please do let us know if you need any further information or clarification.

With best wishes,

Maria

 

Maria Kowalczuk, PhD 
Biology Editor,

Research Integrity Group 

BioMed Central

Floor 6, 236 Gray’s Inn Road
London, WC1X 8HB

+44 20 3192 2000 (tel)               

+44 20 3192 2010 (fax)

E-mail: Maria.Kowalczuk@biomedcentral.com

BMJ Deceived Lancet Parent Into Attacking Dr. Andrew Wakefield

The British Medical Journal (BMJ)’s commissioned writer Brian Deer duped the father of the 11th child described in The Lancet paper into believing his son’s case was misrepresented. That father, Richard Demirjian, was led to believe the paper said his son’s autistic symptoms began weeks after vaccination when the report said no such thing. The Lancet paper was perfectly consistent with what Demirjian said happened to his son.

So Autism Investigated wrote BMJ editor Dr. Fiona Godlee about how Deer misrepresented Demirjian’s son. Yes, it was that Dr. Godlee who Autism Investigated’s editor confronted back in 2011.

Despite past history, she replied cordially:

Thank you for your message. Might you or Richard Demirjian send a rapid response to the article on BMJ.com. We can then ask Brian Deer to respond. Best wishes. Fiona Godlee

But two months after Autism Investigated submitted a rapid response at her invitation, she coldly rejected it:

I have now had an opportunity to discuss this with our lawyer. We will not be publishing your rapid response. It is highly defamatory of Brian Deer and the allegations you raise have already been refuted in detail by Brian Deer on his website. Best wishes, Fiona Godlee

When asked for details, Godlee gave no reply.

In any case, read the below response and see for yourself if it defames Brian Deer. It doesn’t, but it shows Deer and the BMJ defamed Wakefield – in large part by deceiving parent Richard Demirjian.

Lancet father 11 hammers a nail into the coffin of Deer’s fallacious allegations

Brian Deer republished his Sunday Times accusations in the BMJ knowing that they were refuted in Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s 58-page press complaint against him and against the newspaper that ran the article two years prior.(1) Deer’s justification for doing so was the GMC’s ruling in favor of his earlier accusations of unethical research.(2) He has also misled a parent of one of The Lancet paper children (child 11) into believing The Lancet paper misrepresented the child’s case, but the wording in The Lancet paper itself confirms that the child’s case was not misrepresented.(3) The GMC’s findings have been overturned,(4) and a letter from the parent corroborates that The Lancet paper accurately represented his son’s condition.(5)

Two months after the article was published, Brian Deer received a letter from the parent of The Lancet child 11 that directly contradicts Deer’s account. Yet no correction has ever been made in the BMJ.

In the first article of Brian Deer’s MMR series for BMJ, Deer wrote of The Lancet Child 11:

But child 11’s case must have proved a disappointment. Records show his behavioural symptoms started too soon. “His developmental milestones were normal until 13 months of age,” notes the discharge summary. “In the period 13-18 months he developed slow speech patterns and repetitive hand movements. Over this period his parents remarked on his slow gradual deterioration.”

That put the first symptom two months earlier than reported in the Lancet, and a month before the boy received the MMR vaccination. And this was not the only anomaly to catch the father’s eye. What the paper reported as a “behavioural symptom” was noted in the records as a chest infection.(6)

However, Deer’s claim that child 11 regressed before the vaccine was disputed by child 11’s father in the letter he wrote to Deer (that is currently posted on Deer’s website):

One of the incorrect statements in my son’s discharge report was that autistic symptoms were seen from 13-18 months, while the vaccination was at 15 months. This is clearly inaccurate as his symptoms began several months after the MMR, as reflected in my initial correspondence to the Royal Free requesting my son be included in the research study.(5)

In the private meeting between Deer and father 11 that was referenced in Deer’s article, Deer had apparently misled the father into believing The Lancet paper misrepresented his son’s case. In that same letter to Deer, father 11 echoed Deer’s false statement that The Lancet paper put child 11’s first autistic symptoms at one week after the vaccine when in fact, the paper makes clear that that was only when child 11’s first behavioral symptom (associated, as also described in Table 2, with recurrent “viral pneumonia”). The first symptom, that could have been any of a number of behaviors such as permanent or chronic change in sleep pattern, occurred after vaccination. The table father 11 referred to in The Lancet paper makes no mention of onset of first autistic symptoms.(3) Father 11 corroborates The Lancet paper and contradicts Deer’s BMJ article.

Despite Deer being told by father 11 directly that his son did not regress until after his vaccination, Deer made no effort to correct the misinformation in his BMJ article. On Deer’s personal website, he even continues to cast doubt on father 11’s account:

Which is true for child 11? Who can say, years later? The father says one thing, the medical records another. Nobody can time-travel back to the 1990s. And in lawsuits, it is the records that usually count. But, whichever version is right, Wakefield’s story was not. Neither can be reconciled with The Lancet.(7)

The fact is there is only one correct version: The Lancet paper account corroborated by father 11 twice, both in his correspondence with the hospital and with Deer. The incorrect version is the faulty discharge summary exploited by Deer to mislead. This is not the first time that evidence was submitted to BMJ that dismantles the article’s veracity post-publication.

When other evidence was previously brought to the journal in November 2011 that also supported The Lancet papers findings,(8)(9) Deer deflected by referring back to the GMC findings.(10) Though Deer cited them to add credibility to all his allegations, the findings themselves have been deemed unsustainable by an English High Court ruling.

In 2012, Justice Mitting overturned the GMC decision that The Lancet paper had misrepresented its patient population, was unethical and was part of a litigation-funded project.(4) By extension, the paper’s lead author Dr. Andrew Wakefield could not have been dishonest for not disclosing that the paper was funded by litigation or was part of that project when neither was the case.

In fact, the court decision refutes all the GMC findings that Dr. Wakefield broke any rule of professional conduct as laid out in GMC’s Good medical practice guidance.(11)(12)(13) Likewise, there is no existing justification for the paper’s retraction.(14) The Lancet knows this. When I confronted The Lancet ombudsman, Dr. Malcolm Molyneux, with the fact that the GMC findings that served as the basis for the retraction were killed, all he could say was:

In the retraction statement, the editors of The Lancet stated that “several elements of the 1998 paper by Wakefield et al are incorrect. In particular….’” The retraction then mentions the enrolment procedure and ethical clearance, but implies that there remain other elements on which the decision was based.(15)

As the above statement reveals, the ombudsman is unable to state a single reason for the paper to remain retracted. Furthermore, there can be no “other elements on which the decision was based” since the retraction statement only cites the GMC findings – now overturned.(14)

Of Brian Deer’s many false claims, among the most egregious is his deceiving father 11 and misrepresenting child 11’s case.

1.     http://www.autisminvestigated.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Complaint_to_UK_PCC1.pdf

2.     http://briandeer.com/solved/gmc-charge-sheet.pdf

3.     See Table 2: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(97)11096-0/fulltext

4.     http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2012/503.rtf

5.     http://briandeer.com/solved/dan-olmsted-child-11.pdf

6.     http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5347

7.     http://briandeer.com/solved/dan-olmsted.htm

8.     http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/09/re-how-case-against-mmr-vaccine-was-fixed

9.     http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/17/re-pathology-reports-solve-%E2%80%9Cnew-bowel-disease%E2%80%9D-riddle

10.   Deer dismissed slides from The Lancet paper co-author Dr. Andrew Anthony later supplied by Dr. David Lewis on the excuse that Dr. Wakefield could have tampered with them. The only supporting evidence Deer offered of tampering was the GMC’s ruling that Dr. Wakefield had been “dishonest” based on the disciplinary findings that were since overturned. http://briandeer.com/solved/david-lewis-2.htm

11.    See 12a, which proves Dr. Wakefield was not professionally obligated to disclose his personal connection to litigation or his patent application to the editor of The Lancet. http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/30191.asp

12.    See page 8, endnote 7, which refers to the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) rules for when Research Ethics Committee (REC) approval is necessary. (NRES link in endnote no longer works) http://www.gmc-uk.org/Good_practice_in_research_and_consent_to_research.pdf_58834843.pdf

13.    NRES rules prove Dr. Wakefield’s birthday party blood draws did not require REC approval because they were not done on patients, therefore falling outside GMC’s authority to make any judgement on the matter. http://www.hra.nhs.uk/documents/2013/09/does-my-project-require-rec-review.pdf

14.    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(10)60175-4/fulltext

15.    http://www.autisminvestigated.com/the-lancet-dr-andrew-wakefield/

“Science”Blogs About To Die After Giving Bloggers 2-Week Eviction Notice!

Goodbye “Science”Blogs!

Yes, it’s happening! Blogs exposed as pretending to be about “science” in a Two-Part Series eight years ago are finally gonna die! “Science”Blogs’ failing owner Seed Media Group no longer has the money:

A little over a week ago, Scienceblogs announced to us writers that they no longer had the funds to keep the site operational, and so they would be shutting down.

How hilarious! “Science”Blogs has given its own bloggers – including a few hacks who have been the subjects of Autism Investigated posts – a two-week eviction notice! Ouch.

As an Age of Autism contributor, Autism Investigated’s editor has exposed one blogger in particular for his extensive pharmaceutical ties after he claimed for years that he was independent. In other words, big pharma has tossed them all aside like the used condoms they’ve become!

“Science”Bloggers have cheered the censorship of scientific evidence of vaccine injury. They have also called for a boycott of journals that published such evidence. Furthermore, they have consistently campaigned against the academic freedom of scientists like yours truly.

That said, Autism Investigated will not link to any new domain of any former “Science”Blogger. Autism Investigated will throw any comments containing those links in the trash. Cut off their oxygen, and let them wither away into nothingness.

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