Tag Archives: Diana Schendel

ROGER STONE: President Trump Should Keep His Promise on Vaccine Safety

Stonecoldtruth.com

Autism Investigated Note: Below is an article from noted political operative and longtime Trump ally Roger Stone, urging President Trump to form a vaccine safety commission as he promised. Autism Investigated endorsed Donald Trump for president two years ago for his statements against vaccine injuries. Since the inauguration, Autism Investigated has called on President Trump to not appoint Brenda Fitzgerald CDC director and has also asked him to extradite CDC fraudster Poul Thorsen to the US.

(By Roger Stone) Donald J. Trump cares about people and especially for the citizens of the United States of America. He sacrificed more than most can ever know in order to do his utmost to make America great again. He and his family are to this day suffering the slings and arrows of an out-of-control political class that seeks nothing less than their total destruction. As his first year draws to a close, however, his list of achievements impresses even his harshest critics. Cutting red tape, rebuilding our military, and restoring respect for America worldwide are but a few of his dozens of monumental achievements, but there is still much more work to do.

President Trump also stands against corruption and seeks to shine truth wherever he can in his desire to drain The Swamp.  The Swamp is not only the embedded political class and the federal bureaucracies but also corrupted special interests that seek their own gain at everyone else’s expense.  Big Medicine and Big Pharma are two such special interest that have shielded their own from scrutiny by gaming the system and gaslighting their victims.

Only a couple of months into his presidency, in March 2017, Donald Trump launched a special commission to investigate the opioid crisis that is wreaking havoc across the United States.  He declared it a national emergency and has taken on Big Medicine and Big Pharma by calling them out.

Roger Stone

Roger Stone, stonecoldtruth.com

While on the campaign trail, then Candidate Trump promised to do whatever he could to help end the opiate scourge upon America, and he kept true to his word regardless of the pressures put upon him. Post-election he promised to appoint a special commission to investigate vaccine safety, however this is an important promise he has yet to keep.

There are significant studies that call into question the Status Quo party line that vaccines are safe. While the technology of applying a vaccine to preemptively shield against an illness is well studied and has proven efficacy, the actual industry of creating the vaccines that get pumped into Americans has undergone less scrutiny.

Through out his public life President Trump has repeatedly questioned the safety of vaccinations. While president elect he said he would appoint a commission headed by Robert F Kennedy Jr. the son of former attorney general and US Sen. Robert Kennedy to study the safety of the growingly mandatory vaccinations in widespread use in this country

Contrary to the oft-repeated claim that vaccines are safe and effective, statistical evidence has piled up showing them to be potentially toxic. They may cause injuries greater than the public realizes and sometimes can be riskier than catching the diseases the vaccines are supposed to stop.  Mounting testimonials are piling up from suffering families who are absolutely convinced that a vaccine destroyed their child’s life.

Incredibly California congressmen Adam Schiff has sponsored a House Resolution that incredibly claims that no US citizen has ever been damaged by vaccination and that the US government has never paid out a penny to any citizen damaged in this manner. This is akin to sponsoring a House Resolution which claims that the Holocaust never happened. In fact, the US government has paid out more than $3.5 billion to individuals damaged by vaccinations that we are told are safe. Schiff’s groveling for big Pharma campaign contributions is just another reason why I say ” if it’s Schiff- flush it !”

It is not only the young who are at risk. A recently published study showed that the H1N1 flu vaccine was associated with a seven-fold increase in miscarriages when administered to pregnant women. The suffering that this vaccine has caused expecting mothers is unimaginable. Where is the press coverage on this finding? Why isn’t the CDC directing the flu vaccine not to be given to pregnant women?

Fake News Media outlets refuse to cover the vaccine controversies because they receive enormous revenue from advertising on behalf of pharmaceutical companies. Some of the most watched programs on Mainstream Media receive up to seventy percent of their ad revenue from Big Pharma and Big Medicine.

Perhaps the CDC is not the protector of public health it is mandated to be, but is rather more a protector of itself and its own vested interests. It has now been three years since Dr. William Thompson, a CDC scientist who co-authored several studies claiming that vaccines were safe admitted that he and fellow CDC scientists committed fraud with the destruction of government records, because the data showed a clear correlation the vaccines cause autism.

In 2014 Thompson confirmed what many vaccine safety advocates had been saying for years: the CDC is a cesspool of corruption and corporate influence.

A recent report by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s World Mercury Project on the activities surrounding the criminal indictment of former CDC fraudster, Poul Thorsen, clearly shows that CDC staff aided, abetted and helped cover up Thorsen’s schemes to create fraudulent research for the benefit of the government’s defense in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, otherwise known as “Vaccine Court.” The outsourced fraudulent science by indicted Danish scientist, Poul Thorsen, is still being used to deny compensation to families who brought claims in the Vaccine Court that their children developed autism following vaccine injuries.

Thousands of families had their cases alleging vaccine induced autism in the “Omnibus Autism Proceedings” dismissed in the Vaccine Court based on the science that Thorsen authored as well as that of Dr. William Thompson now admits it was also fraudulent.

More than 5,000 cases thrown out of Vaccine Court deserve to have the hearings they were never granted and the families deserve compensation. Instead of being treated fairly, with respect and compassion, the government treated them as road kill and allowed them to be victims of the greatest scientific and legal fraud in the nation’s history. Despite this the so-called Vaccination Court has ordered the payout of over $3.5 billion to US citizens damaged by vaccinations.

Thorsen never filed the necessary documents to receive approval for his fraudulent studies from an Institutional Review Board, manipulated or excluded data in studies—just as Thompson says CDC researchers did—and then stole more than one million dollars from U.S. taxpayers. Poul Thorsen has been under a 22-count indictment and remains a fugitive from the Office of the Inspector General of the Secretary of Health and Human Services and U.S. DOJ for over six years. He continues to live openly in Denmark, a free man, working on projects still funded by the CDC and NIH.

CDC researchers have maintained regular contact with Thorsen. In fact, Thorsen long-time CDC scientist girlfriend, Dr. Diana Schendel, retired from the agency and today works at the same Danish university where Thorsen committed his crimes. The fake science he published has never been retracted and is still used to claim that vaccines are safe, effective and not linked to autism.

On Thorsen: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., WMP 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.”

Fraudulent research, failing to follow ethical standards, theft of taxpayer dollars, cover-ups, destruction of data, families denied justice, federal warrants that sit for years while fraudster scientists laugh at America, vaccine injuries that result in children with brain damage, lost pregnancies, and even deaths.

No one ever thought draining The Swamp would be easy, as the vested interests are not going to go quietly. President Trump didn’t do himself any favors by allowing his Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, M.D. to appoint pro-vaccine Brenda Fitzgerald, M.D. as CDC Director and Administrator of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) in July of 2017.

While it is true President Trump has been besieged on all sides precisely because he is upsetting the corrupt Status Quo, he undermines his own support by allowing partisan agenda driven individuals into positions of power. In April 2017 Fitzgerald, then commissioner of the Georgia Department of Public Health, demonstrated that she does not have the impartiality required to be ultimate head of an investigation into vaccines by stating “Immunizations are the best way to protect infants and children from childhood diseases, like whooping cough and measles that can be life-threatening at young ages”, and “It is critical for parents to talk to their child’s doctor to ensure they are up-to-date on immunizations, because no child should have to suffer a vaccine-preventable illness.” These do not sound like the words of someone with an open mind towards investigating vaccine safety.

Now that he’s got the Deep State on defense, he should press his advantage by fulfilling his promises that gained him cross-party support that helped get him elected. He must move forward with his promise of appointing Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to lead a special commission to investigate vaccine safety, a Vaccine Safety Commission. This special commission should be empowered with the access and support necessary to take their investigation where ever it may lead.

American newborns, children, their families and the very fabric of American society relies on President Trump acting quickly to uncover the real truth about vaccine safety. If it is true that some of today’s vaccines are unsafe, then delay means needless continued suffering and destroyed lives.

Sources:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/01/donald-trump-robert-f-kennedy-jr-vaccines

http://fortune.com/2017/02/16/donald-trump-autism-vaccines/

https://morningconsult.com/2017/04/20/despite-campaign-rhetoric-trump-mostly-silent-vaccine-policy/

http://www.nature.com/news/trump-s-vaccine-commission-idea-is-biased-and-dangerous-1.21310

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/01/trump-taps-vaccine-skeptic-to-chair-committee-on-vaccine-safety/512708/

https://www.fiercepharma.com/vaccines/trump-administration-picks-pro-vaccine-cdc-director

https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2017/07/07/Secretary-Price-Appoints-Brenda-Fitzgerald-as-CDC-Director-and-ATSDR-Administrator.html

https://www.standard.co.uk/stayingin/tvfilm/dispatches-trump-the-doctor-and-the-vaccine-scandal-everything-you-need-to-know-a3533746.html

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/robert-f-kennedy-jr-trump-vaccine-safety-commission-235058

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1389/change-vaccination-schedule-children/

https://www.gachd.org/cdc-georgias-early-childhood-vaccination-rates-among-nations-highest/

Originally published on stonecoldtruth.com

CDC Cover-up’s Ivan Oransky Conceals BMC Violation

ivan-oransky

By Jake Crosby

 

Some journalists are just ignorant; Ivan Oransky is not. He is Vice President of the “Association of Health Care Journalists” (AHCJ) – an organization of “journalists” funded by vaccine industry-tied groups dedicated to helping the CDC carry out its cover-up into the media. He also co-edits the blog “Retraction Watch,” which gleefully reported on the withdrawal of Dr. Brian Hooker’s paper that reported the very relationship between MMR and autism that CDC omitted from its original study. Oransky knows full well BioMed Central (BMC) breached policy when it pulled Dr. Hooker’s paper, but did Oransky report that, even though his blog reported on the removal of Dr. Hooker’s paper? Of course not, but he inadvertently revealed his knowledge of it in the email exchange I had with him after he vehemently defended the article’s deletion. Oransky also defended drastically altering my comment on his blog, grossly distorting what I said. (See full email exchange below)

After Oransky’s blog wrote about the pulling of Dr. Hooker’s paper without reporting about the BMC violation, CNN wrote an article from the same perspective as Oransky’s blog the very next day. CNN also added that Dr. Hooker’s paper was removed in a note above every relevant CNN iReport – without noting the BMC violation – disabled editing on the iReport CNN linked to from its article. What more can you expect when, as written elsewhere, Oransky’s wife is a writer/producer for none other than CNN?

Earlier this year, millionaire vaccine industrialist Paul Offit – who advised CDC’s immunization program while the fraud the whistleblower described was taking place – announced at AHCJ’s annual meeting that there should be “journalism jail” for journalists who write stories about debate on vaccines i.e. who try to report on the cover-up honestly. AHCJ gave pharma PR agent Trine Tsouderos an award for her hit pieces against notable scientists opposed to adverse vaccine side-effects like Dr. Boyd Haley. Over the years AHCJ has invited other co-conspirators such as Brian Deer, Walter Orenstein, Alison Singer, Diana SchendelArthur Allen and Seth Mnookin to its annual conference. Mnookin and Oransky were old college friends; they also have dishonesty in common. Additionally, AHCJ has even teamed up with CDC to train reporters to disseminate its propaganda – no doubt in line with former HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ statement about telling media outlets not to report on vaccine dangers.

As Congress investigates the CDC for fraud like that revealed by the whistleblower William Thompson, Congress should also investigate CDC’s collusion with “journalists” like Ivan Oransky, AHCJ and related people and groups who don’t abide by journalistic standards and therefore do not deserve any press freedom protections. Such people should be fully investigated as co-conspirators and any investigation that leaves them out or fails to recognize them as such will be wholly inadequate.

The below email exchange demonstrates that all the more:

On Monday, September 1, 2014, <info@autisminvestigated.com> wrote:

Hi,

The text of my comment was altered to make it look like I said something I didn’t:

“How come no one is reporting that I believe BioMed Central’s take-down of Dr. Hooker’s article is a violation of the publisher’s own policies on article removal?”

This is what I really said:

“How come no one is reporting that BioMed Central’s take-down of Dr. Hooker’s article is clearly a violation of the publisher’s own policies on article removal, which states such action is only done under the explicit avoidance of threatened legal claims”

I don’t want anyone to report what “I believe,” I want journalists to report what actually happened. It is clear from BioMed Central’s policies that the take-down of Dr. Hooker’s article was a violation of them. Reporting on the take-down without reporting on the violation lends undue legitimacy to the censorship of a scientific paper.

Sincerely,

Jake Crosby, MPH
Editor, Autism Investigated
www.autisminvestigated.com

 

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Re: Mangled comment misquotes me.
From: Ivan Oransky ivan-oransky@erols.com
Date: Mon, September 01, 2014 7:29 pm
To: “info@autisminvestigated.com” info@autisminvestigated.com
Cc: “adam.marcus1@gmail.com” <adam.marcus1@gmail.com>

 

What you said left out most of BMC’s actual policy, and that leaves it as your belief that they violated said policy. Your choice is to have it as is, which conforms to our comment policy, particularly the part about unverified allegations, or have it deleted altogether. You’re welcome to post whatever version you want elsewhere.

 

On Monday, September 1, 2014, <info@autisminvestigated.com> wrote:

It’s not my “belief,” you can view the entire policy on BMC’s website and see for yourself that it contradicts the excuse for pulling the paper: http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/permanency 

I also said I wanted others to report on this – not on my opinion of it. So the wording still misrepresents what I said, even without taking verification into account.

 

Subject: Re: Mangled comment misquotes me.
From: Ivan Oransky ivan-oransky@erols.com
Date: Mon, September 01, 2014 8:18 pm
To: “info@autisminvestigated.com” info@autisminvestigated.com
Cc: “adam.marcus1@gmail.com” adam.marcus1@gmail.com
We included the entire policy, which you neglected to do and which contradicts what you wrote, along with both statements about why the paper was removed, which you also neglected to do. Your choice is still to have it as is, or simply deleted. Just let us know which you would like.

 

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 12:46 AM, <info@autisminvestigated.com> wrote:

No, it backs up what I wrote, and I explain that fully. You neglect to explain how it’s contradicted at all. I included the entire policy in a screenshot on the webpage I linked to along with the statement that was more specific, contrary to your claim that I didn’t. You chopped the second half of my first sentence, making it less immediately clear how the policy was violated. It’s also misleading to portray me as asking why nobody is reporting that I believe a certain way about this issue, as opposed to simply asking why nobody is reporting on the issue itself.

By mangling my comment this way, are you trying to make me want you to delete my comment?

 

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Re: Mangled comment misquotes me.
From: Ivan Oransky ivan-oransky@erols.com
Date: Tue, September 02, 2014 3:56 am
To: “info@autisminvestigated.com” <info@autisminvestigated.com>, Adam
Marcus <>

The second half of that sentence, “which states such action is only done under the explicit avoidance of “threatened legal claims,” is incorrect and misrepresents BMC’s policy. The part of the policy in question: “…in the exceptional event that material is considered to infringe certain rights or is defamatory we may have no option but to remove that material from our site and those sites on which we have deposited the material in question.

BioMed Central therefore reserves the right to cease to make available articles that it has been advised are potentially defamatory or that infringe any intellectual property right, or are otherwise unlawful.”

The two relevant notices also make it clear that your original comment’s claim that “However, Dr. Hooker’s paper was only taken down on the excuse of ‘possible undeclared competing interests'” is also incorrect.

You continue to have two choices: Leaving the comment as is, or have it deleted.

Ivan Oransky, MD
Vice President and Global Editorial Director, MedPage Today http://medpagetoday.com
Co-Founder, Retraction Watch http://retractionwatch.com
Founder, Embargo Watch http://embargowatch.wordpress.com
Adjunct Associate Professor, New York University’s Science, Health, and Environmental Reporting Program
Vice President, Association of Health Care Journalists
Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine
http://twitter.com/ivanoransky
917-359-2113

 

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:52 PM, <info@autisminvestigated.com> wrote:

Actually, it is correct and is an accurate representation. The reason of “threatened legal claims” is the reason BioMed Central gives for striking articles, that was not the reason it gave for striking Dr. Hooker’s article. That’s clear in this “open access” publisher’s policy you partially quoted.

The more specific notice made it clear that “undeclared possible competing interests” was the reason for the paper’s removal and that “validity” and “public interest” were concerns supposedly stemming from that. Regardless, none of these are “threatened legal claims” – the actual reason BioMed Central gives for striking articles according to policy. Since this was not the reason given for striking Dr. Hooker’s article, his article was therefore deleted in violation of that policy.

One of my readers – ironically the one who told me to contact you – said your misrepresentation of my comment as asking why no one is reporting “that I believe” a certain way about an issue makes me look “unhinged.”

Is that your intent? Either censoring me or making me look unhinged, but giving me a choice between the two so you can then claim you did one or the other with my approval? Sure looks like it.

Jake Crosby, MPH
Editor, Autism Investigated
www.autisminvestigated.com

 

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Re: Mangled comment misquotes me.
From: Ivan Oransky ivan-oransky@erols.com
Date: Tue, September 02, 2014 7:22 pm
To: “info@autisminvestigated.com” info@autisminvestigated.com
Cc: Adam Marcus <adam.marcus1@gmail.com>

You wrote that removal “is only done under the explicit avoidance of ‘threatened legal claims.'” The policy actually gives two other reasons for removal: “that material is considered to infringe certain rights or is defamatory.” That makes “only” incorrect, and a misrepresentation of the policy.

Our only intent is to verify claims in our comments, and the claim your comment made is incorrect. You continue to have two choices: Leave the comment as it is now, or delete it.

Ivan Oransky, MD
Vice President and Global Editorial Director, MedPage Today http://medpagetoday.com
Co-Founder, Retraction Watch http://retractionwatch.com
Founder, Embargo Watch http://embargowatch.wordpress.com
Adjunct Associate Professor, New York University’s Science, Health, and Environmental Reporting Program
Vice President, Association of Health Care Journalists
Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine
http://twitter.com/ivanoransky
917-359-2113

 

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 1:41 PM, <info@autisminvestigated.com> wrote:

Well given that “threatened legal claims” are what the publisher says it hopes to avoid when taking down articles for either of those reasons, “threatened legal claims” are essentially the publisher’s only reason for taking down articles. Since none of what you quote was given in the publisher’s excuse for pulling Dr. Hooker’s article, will you at least finally acknowledge its deletion was in violation of the publisher’s policy for article removal?

Well you’re not acting like that’s your intent by treating verified facts as unverified claims. Nor are you acting like that’s your intent by giving me this ultimatum of either allowing you to keep my butchered comment up as is or having it deleted altogether without replacing it with a corrected version. As you can see from my comment submission (attached), your representation me as asking why others aren’t reporting “that I believe” a certain way is not only “unverified,” but plainly false.

commenttoretractionwatch 

 

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Re: Mangled comment misquotes me.
From: Ivan Oransky ivan-oransky@erols.com
Date: Thu, September 04, 2014 10:51 am
To: “info@autisminvestigated.com” info@autisminvestigated.com
Cc: Adam Marcus <adam.marcus1@gmail.com>

Your two choices for this comment remain: Leave the comment as it is now, or delete it. If you want to submit future comments, you’re more than welcome to do so, but they too will be subject to our comments policy.

Ivan Oransky, MD
Vice President and Global Editorial Director, MedPage Today http://medpagetoday.com
Co-Founder, Retraction Watch http://retractionwatch.com
Founder, Embargo Watch http://embargowatch.wordpress.com
Adjunct Associate Professor, New York University’s Science, Health, and Environmental Reporting Program
Vice President, Association of Health Care Journalists
Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine
http://twitter.com/ivanoransky
917-359-2113

On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:38 PM, <info@autisminvestigated.com> wrote:

Why the silence on BMC’s violation of its own policy?

You clearly did not follow your own comments policy in the way you edited my comment, which I do not approve of. That said, I won’t approve of you deleting it without putting up a corrected version either.

Looks like you and BMC both have trouble following your own rules.

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Re: Mangled comment misquotes me.
From: Ivan Oransky ivan-oransky@erols.com
Date: Thu, September 04, 2014 5:55 pm
To: “info@autisminvestigated.com” info@autisminvestigated.com
Cc: Adam Marcus <adam.marcus1@gmail.com>

To repeat: You misrepresented BMC’s policy, and you misrepresented the reasons they stated for the removal. You then based the “violation” allegation on your misrepresentations, which made the allegations inaccurate. We then edited your comment so that it no longer included those misrepresentations and inaccuracies.

You are free to post a new comment, as has also been mentioned in this thread, that will also be subject to our comments policy. If that is what you mean by “corrected version,” you’re welcome to submit one. Your choices for the already-posted comment, however, remain the same as they’ve been throughout this exchange.

Ivan Oransky, MD
Vice President and Global Editorial Director, MedPage Today http://medpagetoday.com
Co-Founder, Retraction Watch http://retractionwatch.com
Founder, Embargo Watch http://embargowatch.wordpress.com
Adjunct Associate Professor, New York University’s Science, Health, and Environmental Reporting Program
Vice President, Association of Health Care Journalists
Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine
http://twitter.com/ivanoransky
917-359-2113

 

Finally, I responded:

Here’s what you said:

“You wrote that removal ‘is only done under the explicit avoidance of ‘threatened legal claims.'” The policy actually gives two other reasons for removal: ‘that material is considered to infringe certain rights or is defamatory.'”

In your priggish and failed attempt to correct me on BMC’s policy for removing articles, you inadvertently showed that the take-down of Dr. Hooker’s article did violate BMC’s policy. BMC provided no such reasons for deleting Dr. Hooker’s article in either statement, even if you count whatever possible concerns that were raised from the reason of “possible undeclared competing interests” as reasons as well.

Don’t expect any more comment submissions from me.

 

I’ve never heard anything back since.

 

Jake Crosby is editor of Autism Investigated. He is a 2011 graduate of Brandeis University with a Bachelor of Arts in both History and Health: Science, Society and Policy and a 2013 graduate of The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services with a Master of Public Health in Epidemiology. He currently attends the University of Texas School of Public Health where he is studying for a Ph.D. in Epidemiology