Tag Archives: Congress

Ask Congressman Chaffetz To Investigate Crooked Hillary Vaccine Lies

ap_jason_chaffetz_jef_150116_16x9_992

In a 15-minute video posted on YouTube of his speech to constituents of fellow Republican Congressman Dave Trott, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chair Jason Chaffetz discusses the many scandals of Democrat nominee for president Crooked Hillary Clinton. Those include the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) cover-up of vaccine side-effects which she has pledged to continue if she becomes president in statements to Scientific American earlier this month:

My opponent [Donald Trump] in this race has consistently discounted scientific findings, from his comments about vaccines to his claim that climate change is a hoax. These dangerous positions not only put Americans at risk, but can have long term impacts on our country’s growth and productivity.

As president, I will work closely with the talented physicians, nurses, and scientists in our US Public Health Service to speak out and educate parents about vaccines, focusing on their extraordinary track record in saving lives and pointing out the dangers of not vaccinating our children.

Last year, Crooked Hillary sent out a tweet likening vaccine skepticism to questioning the shape of the earth and the color of the sky. Her position has obviously not changed since. Although in 2008 she and Obama claimed to want to investigate the vaccine-autism link, it was all just political speak.

Crooked Hillary Clinton served in Obama’s cabinet with now-former Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who had gone on record saying her department was instructing media outlets to shun stories on vaccine dangers during the H1N1 scare. Her department later feigned ignorance of the veracity of the quote when questioned in a later news report. Crooked Hillary also arranged a meeting between Secretary Sebelius and Dr. Mark Hyman: a physician close to the Clintons who took credit for convincing Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to purge his book on mercury in vaccines of the book chapters on autism and media collusion (Kennedy has since released the complete edition). There is obviously quite a bit to investigate with respect to Crooked Hillary and vaccinations.

Please watch the full video of Congressman Chaffetz below, then thank him for investigating CDC and ask him to investigate Crooked Hillary’s role in the cover-up when she was Secretary of State. He can be contacted here; if she wants a new scandal to implicate herself in, she’s got one.

Please make sure she never gets anywhere near the White House by voting for Donald Trump to Make America Great Again!

Video: BMJ Editor Humiliated After Calling Autism-Vaccine Link a Fraud

At the NIH, the editor-in-chief of the BMJ Fiona Godlee gets stumped on video after calling the vaccine-autism link an “elaborate fraud.” BMJ Group was also sponsored by Merck and GlaxoSmithKline, pharmaceutical companies that made measles-mumps-rubella vaccines – a fact Godlee claimed she didn’t know. The university that initially launched an investigation based on her allegations has since dumped Godlee’s concerns:

“the net result [from an investigation] would likely be an incomplete set of evidence and an inconclusive process costing a substantial sum of money.”

Godlee has also tried to petition UK parliament, for which she was quickly rebuffed. But years later, a whistleblower from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed that it was the people who tried to dispute an association between autism and vaccinations who committed fraud. They threw evidence linking the two into a “huge garbage can.” Here is a larger excerpt of what the whistleblower said, read by Congressman Bill Posey:

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

See relevant outbound links below.

Article: Jake Crosby Challenges BMJ Editor-in-Chief Fiona Godlee

Full video of BMJ editor Fiona Godlee’s talk

Full video of congressional speech by Bill Posey reading whistleblower statement

Letting the Science Speak Against Mercury in Vaccines

Skyhorse Press

Skyhorse Press

Editor’s Note: Below is my review of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book “Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak” for The Epoch Times.

By Jake Crosby

Review: ‘Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak,’ Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (Skyhorse Press)

The vaccine preservative and title subject of the book “Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak” may not be as well-known as the book’s editor, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an environmental lawyer and son of the late attorney general Robert F. Kennedy. Yet the public’s lack of knowledge about thimerosal is perhaps all the more reason why this book is so important, especially since the paperback edition (to be released Sept. 1) now contains 17 previously-written chapters that were excluded from the hardcover edition for being “too combustible,” according to Kennedy.

Roughly 50 percent mercury by weight, thimerosal is labeled “very toxic.” Mercury is the most toxic non-radioactive element on earth and second overall. One would think those facts would be enough to end its use in any medicine once and for all, but if that were the case this book would never have been written. Despite the toxicity of mercury, it remains present in many routine vaccinations in the form of thimerosal, and its ongoing use remains staunchly defended by the vaccine industry.

The book’s subtitle, “The Evidence Supporting the Immediate Removal of Mercury—a Known Neurotoxin—from Vaccines,” makes clear this book is more than just a case for why thimerosal is dangerous. Kennedy makes a compelling argument for vaccines to no longer contain thimerosal, from its toxicity, to its lack of necessity, to its association with neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism, and finally to the neglectful and even fraudulent attempts to hide that association by government agencies and media outlets.

As a result of mercury’s ongoing use in vaccines, “we are gambling with population health through the same intervention that we use to protect it,” as Harvard neurologist Dr. Martha Herbert concisely stated in the book’s introduction.

Some chapters such as the one on the biological basis for thimerosal causing autism contain scientific terms that may be difficult to follow without knowledge of college-level biology. Such is the challenge of making a case for causality of a behavioral disorder at the cellular level. Yet this is a challenge the book takes on commendably.

There is a new chapter on Dr. William Thompson, the senior scientist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) who blew the whistle on his colleagues for hiding evidence of vaccines causing autism. There’s also a new forward by Congressman Bill Posey who recently read an explosive statement by Thompson to Congress.

The paperback edition of “Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak” has some of the same weaknesses as its hardcover predecessor. It is simply counter-intuitive to write a book outlining the proof for thimerosal’s role in causing autism only to cast doubt on that proof, as is done in the book’s preface by Dr. Mark Hyman. Kennedy and the other contributors to the book also still fall for the age-old trap of trying to prove they are not “anti-vaccine,” a burden no critic of the vaccine program should face or bother satisfying.

Overall, however, the book delivers well on its promise by making the case against the use of thimerosal in commonly administered, routine vaccinations by letting the science on the subject “speak” so to speak. That is something federal health agencies, media outlets and a myriad of special interests behind thimerosal’s continued use do not allow. For that reason, readers now have a unique opportunity to let the science supporting thimerosal’s immediate removal from vaccines speak to them by giving “Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak” a well-deserved read.

Jake Crosby is editor of the website Autism Investigated. Crosby has a masters in Public Health in epedemiology and is now pursuing a Ph.D. in epidemiology.

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

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

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

Highlight from the video (Thompson quoted by Posey):

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

trash-can

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

united-states-constitution

By Jake Crosby

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Canary Party-Led Group Behind Failed SB277 Opposition

CCHCSolo

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

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

By Jake Crosby

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

See on The Epoch Times.

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

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

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

Brian,

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bob

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

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

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

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

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

See on The Epoch Times.

SafeMinds’ President Supports CDC “Sock-Puppet”

Sallie

By Jake Crosby

Sallie Bernard is the president of an organization which claims to oppose the presence of mercury in vaccines and to raise concerns about autism’s association with vaccination – the Coalition for SafeMinds (Sensible action for ending mercury-induced disorders). Yet Bernard – who has not responded when questioned for this article – is still a board member of and fundraiser for Autism Speaks even after it has been dubbed a “Sock-Puppet For The CDC” by the SafeMinds-sponsored Age of Autism blog. The criticism was in response to a position statement by Autism Speaks proclaiming that vaccines don’t cause autism and urging that all children be fully vaccinated. Yet the week after the statement, Sallie Bernard was quoted in a press release about her plan to raise money for Autism Speaks’ Light It Up Blue Aspen campaign:

“Light It Up Blue Aspen raised a great deal of funds for Autism thanks to dedicated supporters like Sentient Jet. We look forward to another successful event that will have a positive impact on the families in our community and all the people living within the Autism spectrum disorder.”

Though Bernard did not respond to questions concerning her continual support of Autism Speaks, the event details shed further light on Bernard’s role in the fundraiser that was held on February 15th, 2015:

“Bid on luxury items from Aspen Magazine’s ‘shades of blue’ silent auction table or on one-of-a-kind live auction experiences while raising funds and awareness for Autism.  Hosted by Tom and Sallie Bernard along with honored and celebrity guests Olympic Gold Medalist Jonny Moseley, Dr. Laura Berman of Emmy winning CBS show, The Doctors and more!”

The ongoing support of Autism Speaks by SafeMinds’ president is less surprising when put into context. Despite public perception of SafeMinds as crusading against mercury in vaccinations, the group has done more to undermine such efforts. The organization gained notoriety for hijacking the 2012 congressional autism hearing after its lobbyist misrepresented a key organizer of the event to congressional staff that prevented him from testifying about the CDC cover-up of vaccine injury. The misrepresentation also caused the hearing topic itself to be changed away from the cover-up and to the vaguer “federal response” to autism’s rising prevalence instead. The same organizer SafeMinds effectively kept out of the congressional hearing also criticized the group for not supporting a worldwide ban of thimerosal – the mercury-based preservative in vaccines. SafeMinds was also implicated in the throwing of the autism omnibus that denied justice to 4,900 petitioners for vaccine injury claims and also tried to set up a security trap for two expert witnesses at its 2012 congressional briefing on the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

Back in 2004, SafeMinds was aware the Institute of Medicine (IOM) was operating in breach of its congressional charter at the behest of CDC only to later thank IOM for holding the very meeting SafeMinds initially protested against. That meeting would become the final precursor to the infamous 2004 IOM report that was produced to whitewash any association between autism and vaccines. When Autism Speaks put out a message concurring with the Institute of Medicine’s 2011 report denying vaccine dangers, Bernard remained on the board without making a sound.

In 2012 shortly before the congressional autism hearing, a former donor to SafeMinds asked her to step down from Autism Speaks’ board due to the organization’s views on vaccines. She reportedly demanded $1 million in return for her resignation; the donor refused. Bernard did not reply to questioning for this article when asked to confirm the amount of money she allegedly demanded. She did not make any attempt to justify her ongoing support of Autism Speaks either.

Yet Sallie Bernard was raising money for Autism Speaks right after the organization was called a “Sock-Puppet For The CDC” by a blog that SafeMinds sponsors. If SafeMinds’ president would remain on the board of a CDC sock-puppet group and continue to raise money for it, then perhaps she is a sock-puppet for the CDC herself.

See on The Epoch Times.

Elizabeth Warren Makes CDC Official Lie to Congress

n_qc_warren_150210.video_1067x600

By Jake Crosby

Senator Elizabeth Warren – in trying to make a dig at Senator Rand Paul for his remarks about vaccines causing “profound mental disorders” – ended up making a top Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) official lie to Congress. Dr. Anne Schuchat, director of CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, lied about vaccine dangers when cross-examined by Senator Warren. The false testimony was made in a hearing held on February 10th, 2015 by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, which has a history whitewashing CDC’s research misconduct.

Senator Warren asked Schuchat, “Is there any scientific evidence that vaccines cause autism?”

Schuchat said flatly, “No.”

Asked the same question again, only about whether there is any evidence vaccines cause “profound mental disorders,” Schuchat said,  “No, but some of the diseases we vaccinate against can.” She also denied preservatives like thimerosal are toxic at the levels found in vaccines or that the timing of vaccination incurs any increased risk of side-effects.

Schuchat also stated, “Vaccines do not cause autism.”

Schuchat’s dishonest remarks are contradicted by what was first acknowledged within her own branch at CDC at least 15 years ago, that vaccines indeed cause autism according to its own research findings. CDC researchers even prepared a formal scientific abstract of similar results from an earlier analysis that they intended to present at CDC’s Epidemic Intelligence Service Conference in 2000. Yet CDC denied these findings in a public presentation before the Institute of Medicine (IOM), which was commissioned by CDC to produce a report in 2004 denying any association between the exposure and the outcome in question.

Today, Anne Schuchat’s position is even less tenable now that whistleblower and senior CDC scientist Dr. William Thompson plans to testify before Congress’ House Science Committee about fudging a report to absolve the measles, mumps, rubella vaccination of a role in causing autism. The lead author of that report Dr. Frank Destefano who is currently director of CDC’s Immunization Safety Office even admitted there was a “possibility” that vaccines can cause autism in a recently recorded interview with journalist Sharyl Attkisson.

Why Schuchat would feel so emboldened as to give such blatantly dishonest testimony before the Senate is perhaps best explained by a congressional report released in 2007. The report sought to absolve CDC of wrongdoing in relation to its vaccine safety research concerning autism despite the proof to the contrary, and that report was produced by none other than the Senate HELP Committee.

No wonder the committee was so welcoming of Schuchat’s dishonesty; HELP has been a longtime facilitator of the lies her agency parrots.

See on The Epoch Times.

Correction: Dr. Schuchat’s testimony was not given under oath and was therefore not perjury as this article previously stated.

Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig on Vaccines – A College Grudge?

2CzVMQEr

By Jake Crosby

Some “journalists” spread misinformation denying the dangers of vaccines because they are trained to by CDC, for which they deserve none of the protections intended for a free press and should be fully investigated by Congress. For The New Republic’s newly-hired Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig – who wrote hit-pieces against Rand Paul and Chris Christie while ignoring Obama contradicting himself on vaccines – the most likely reason is a lot pettier. It goes back to her years as a student at Brandeis University where she seemed to have developed a personal grudge against your humble blogger: me.

When I was an undergraduate student at my and Bruenig’s alma mater of Brandeis University, I began an initiative to found a student group dedicated to raising awareness for autism spectrum disorders on campus. Bruenig wrote an article for a campus newspaper that gave sole credit for the founding of the club to someone else and none to me. This was in spite of the fact that Bruenig was well-aware of my involvement in the club, and it was I who originally introduced her to the person she credited. So I contacted the newspaper about the inaccuracy, and a correction was made to the piece. End of story, or so I thought.

The issue merely lay dormant until later that same semester when de-licensed British doctor Andrew Wakefield gave a lecture at Brandeis University to respond to the unfounded allegations of fraud and unethical research leveled against him. I organized the event and invited him to speak, even though my opinion of him has since lowered substantially for his recent outing of a CDC whistleblower. On Facebook, I invited everybody I knew from Brandeis to Wakefield’s talk. That included Bruenig, who was a Facebook “friend” of mine at the time. She never showed up.

A few weeks after his talk, I suddenly saw that she had written a hit-piece against Wakefield in the same student newspaper where she previously failed to credit me with the founding of the club. Her article repeated many of the false allegations he addressed in his Brandeis talk, which she never attended despite my invite to her. She also wrote that the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine’s link to autism was disproved, even though she referred to the link between vaccines and autism being under “debate” in her earlier article.

Apparently, she decided to take it personally that I requested her article be corrected for an inaccuracy that was not only her fault, but possibly intentional. She also appeared to have boasted of her plan on Reddit to write her attack on Wakefield days before his Brandeis talk that she never went to. Ultimately, I left a since-removed comment under her article pointing out how her attack on Wakefield related to her earlier denial of credit to my role in the founding of a club. End of story, or so I thought again – how wrong I was.

Fast forward four years, and Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig has started writing articles attacking critics of the vaccine program just two days after she began writing for The New Republic. She even cited the dishonest work of international fugitive Poul Thorsen, knowing full-well of his fraud indictment.

In a truly ironic statement, Bruenig explained what it would take for voluntary vaccination to “work” in America:

“Unless we can manage to leave self-interest on the back burner and pull together in favor of our society’s most vulnerable people mainly for their own sake…”

Would Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig be willing to make her interest in protecting her own health secondary to that of “society’s most vulnerable people”? I doubt it, especially if she would continue to hold a grudge from her days as an undergrad – a grudge stemming from something that was her fault.

Letting a grudge from four years ago shape your views on an important public health issue is about as self-interested as it gets. The New Republic is already declining, but it hit a new low with the hiring of Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig.

See on The Epoch Times.