Tag Archives: Gop Debate

Autism Investigated Wishes Senator Rand Paul A Speedy Recovery

Senator Rand Paul – doctor, vaccine choice advocate, and Autism Investigated’s pre-Trump favorite for president – has been brutally assaulted by a Democrat. The Democrats are of course those wonderful folks who have stripped vaccine exemption laws in two states and counting. The same people whose views are antithetical to liberty don’t have much respect for different opinions, what a surprise! Yet Paul’s attacker is claiming the attack was not political. Yeah, sure…

Poor Senator Paul can’t get a break from political violence. Just earlier this year, he narrowly managed to avoid being shot by a crazed Bernie supporter who opened fire on a baseball game of Republican congressmen.

Though Autism Investigated never endorsed Rand Paul, we can all respect him for speaking out in favor of vaccine choice. Democrat and most Republican presidential candidates were towing the party line. So please watch the below segment in his honor.

Autism Investigated does not agree with Paul on the merits of vaccines, but is grateful to him for standing up to vaccine mandates. May Dr. Rand Paul have a speedy recovery so he can get back to defending our liberty on the Senate floor. We need our rights protected now more than ever.

 

LIVESTREAM: THE PRESIDENTIAL INAUGURATION OF DONALD TRUMP

Watch Live: Presidential Inauguration of Donald Trump & Mike Pence (Friday, January 20, 2017) #TrumpInaugural

Donald Trump Inauguration Day

The Inauguration of Donald Trump as the 45th President of the United States – Presidential Inauguration Donald Trump

Donald Trump Inaugural speech

Addendum: Autism Investigated’s past coverage of Donald Trump’s road to the White House, from beginning to end

Dr. Ben Carson Endorses Donald Trump for President

AI ENDORSES DONALD TRUMP TO MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

Trump Backs Vaccine Safety, Calls Other Candidates “Bought”

Gov. Pence – Opponent of Eli Lilly and HPV Vaccine Mandate

Livestream: Republican National Convention 2016

First Presidential Debate Livestream: Donald Trump vs. Crooked Hillary

Fight Crooked Media, Donate to the Donald Trump Campaign!

Vice Presidential Debate Livestream: Gov. Pence vs. Corrupt Kaine

Second Presidential Debate Livestream: Donald Trump vs. Crooked Hillary

FINAL Presidential Debate Livestream: Donald Trump vs. Crooked Hillary

END THE AUTISM EPIDEMIC! VOTE FOR DONALD TRUMP!

DEPLORABLES PREVAIL!!!

trump-clinton-and-the-deplorable-picture-x750

Autism has become an epidemic. Twenty-five years ago, 35 years ago, you look at the statistics, not even close. It has gotten totally out of control.

I am totally in favor of vaccines. But I want smaller doses over a longer period of time. Because you take a baby in — and I’ve seen it — and I’ve seen it, and I had my children taken care of over a long period of time, over a two or three year period of time.

Same exact amount, but you take this little beautiful baby, and you pump — I mean, it looks just like it’s meant for a horse, not for a child, and we’ve had so many instances, people that work for me.

Just the other day, two years old, two and a half years old, a child, a beautiful child went to have the vaccine, and came back, and a week later got a tremendous fever, got very, very sick, now is autistic.

I only say it’s not — I’m in favor of vaccines, do them over a longer period of time, same amount.

But just in — in little sections. I think — and I think you’re going to have — I think you’re going to see a big impact on autism. – Donald Trump, GOP Presidential Debate, September 16, 2015

Vaccines: Tantrum-Based Medicine

If there is one lesson to learn about the industry of unsafe vaccines – or as I like to say, the vaccine industry – from Vaxxed cameraman Josh Coleman’s encounter with millionaire vaccine industrialist Paul Offit, it is that vaccines are a medicine based on tantrums, not science. Not only is such behavior the norm for Offit, but the entire vaccine industry he belongs to.

It tells people to listen to doctors, while trying to strip the medical license of any doctor that encourages caution when vaccinating. Likewise, the vaccine industry claims people should dismiss any evidence that doesn’t appear in “peer-reviewed” journals. But when yet another study showing vaccines to be unsafe is published such as the first peer-reviewed analysis comparing autism in vaccinated children to unvaccinated children, the vaccine industry throws a whiny, “throw your toys out the pram”-style fit on Twitter to get it pulled. So embarrassing was that campaign even for vaccine apologists that Discover Magazine had condemned it.

Enter the aetiology of Kent State biology professor and “Science”Blogger Tara C. Smith’s Twitter fit. She ordered scientists to boycott Frontiers journals as retaliation against its publication of the vaccinated versus unvaccinated study:

Yet after ordering scientists to stop submitting papers to Frontiers journals and to stop reviewing studies for them, this genius scientist actually complained that its journals are a “niche for science denialism” and that its peer reviewers are “unqualified”:

What nonsense. If her concerns with Frontiers journals really were scientific, the last thing she would do is discourage scientists from reviewing papers for them or submitting articles to them. What she along with the rest of the vaccine industry really wants is to whine, blog and tweet until every study that challenges her positions is retracted, every doctor who holds conflicting opinions is de-licensed, every critic is shooed away and every child who has not been subjected to the government’s iatrogenic vaccine schedule is barred from school.

Like its allies in the mainstream media, the vaccine industry has learned little from the results of this past election. The public loss of trust in vaccinations will only grow, regardless of how many studies the vaccine industry gets fraudulently retracted or how many fraudulent studies it publishes.

Discover Magazine Rips Attacks on Vaxxed/Unvaxxed Study

dsc_logo

Editor’s Reminder: Send this letter to Frontiers in Public Health to tell them to reinstate the study that showed unvaccinated children had significantly fewer diagnoses of autism and other chronic disorders if the journal wants to keep its National Library of Medicine index. You can write them here: editorial.office@frontiersin.org

For years, Discover Magazine has been a mainstay of extremely dishonest “science” reporting on the vaccine-autism connection. So it was very surprising to see an article featured there that correctly called out the “selective skepticism” of the Twitter campaign against the only peer-reviewed vaccinated versus unvaccinated study of autism. The author of the piece had previously slammed the study’s deletion on Twitter.

Should We Defend the Scientific Consensus?

By Neuroskeptic | November 30, 2016 1:11 pm

Earlier this week, Frontiers in Public Health published the abstract of a paper called ‘Vaccination and Health Outcomes: A Survey of 6- to 12-year-old Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children based on Mothers’ Reports’.Based on an online survey of 415 mothers involved in the homeschool movement, Mississippi-based researchers Mawson et al. reported that vaccination is associated with a much higher rate of neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism.

dreams

Hoo boy.

The Mawson et al. paper led to a lot of controversy, not least on Twitter. On Monday, many people, myself included, tweeted concern over seeing such a piece in a peer-reviewed journal. Frontiers, the Swiss publisher of the journal in question, took to Twitter to say that the article “was provisionally accepted but not published” and that “In response to concerns raised, we have reopened its review.” Minutes later, the paper disappeared, and if you visit its URL now, you will find nothing but an error message. (Here’s a copy, though.)

untitledSo, mission accomplished? Is the removal of this paper a victory for good sense over the irrational theory of vaccine denial? Or is it, on the contrary, censorship of a brave dissenting voice?

I don’t think it’s either, really, but this case does raise interesting questions about how we judge science. Is it right to object to a paper just because its results fly in the face of most previous research?

Everyone agrees that it is fair to critique a study on the basis of the methods. And many people did criticize the methodology of the Mawson et al. study, pointing to serious problems such as the small sample size (relative to the huge studies showing vaccines are safe [Editor’s Note: will post follow-up article dismantling said “studies”]), the purely self-report measures, and the potential for recall and selection bias

Yet I don’t think that so many people would have been so critical of Mawson et al.’s methods if it weren’t for the nature of their findings. Studies suffering from the same flaws, or worse, get published all the time across many fields. Twitter doesn’t explode over every bad study. So isn’t there a risk that scientists are selectively sceptical, scrutinizing studies that challenge the consensus?

On the other hand, it’s true that the scientific consensus exists for a reason. As I said in one of my first-ever posts, we should beware the myth of the Galileo-like lone scientist who turns out to be right while everyone else is wrong:

All of our most popular myths about science are Robin Hood stories – the hero is the underdog, the rebel, the maverick who stands up to authority… the hero is a denialist. Once, this was realistic. Galileo was an Aristotelean cosmology denier; Pasteur was a miasma theory denier; Einstein was a Newtonian physics denier. But these stories are out of date… Science has moved on since the time of Galileo, thanks to his efforts and those of they who came after him, but he is still invoked as a hero by those who deny scientific truth. He would be turning in his grave, in the earth which, as we now know, turns around the sun.

In fact, it’s fair to say that if we were to reject everything that challenges the scientific consensus, we would be right to reject them in the vast majority of cases. But however accurate the consensus is, science is not supposed to be a matter of consensus, but a process of observing the world. The only thing that should matter, in judging science, is the quality of those observations, i.e. the strength of the methodology.

Two days before the date of the article, its author criticized the journal’s misconduct in removing of the study from its website:

Indeed, it isn’t. Please send Autism Investigated’s letter to Frontiers in Public Health to have them reinstate this study as soon as possible if they want to avoid losing their National Library of Medicine index.

TELL FRONTIERS TO PUBLISH MAWSON OR LOSE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE INDEX

frontiersinpublichealth

Just one week after it was accepted for publication, the below study showing increased autism diagnoses in vaccinated children compared to unvaccinated children was pulled from the journal’s website. Please send the letter below to the publisher urging reinstatement of the study’s publication: editorial.office@frontiersin.org

Dear Frontiers,

I write to protest your ongoing censorship of legitimate scientific research accepted by one of your medical journals currently indexed in the US National Library of Medicine’s archives. That research lends credence to the fact that vaccines are causing the autism epidemic, a concern voiced repeatedly by President-Elect Donald Trump.

On November 28th, Frontiers in Public Health deleted the scientific abstract of Vaccination and Health Outcomes: A Survey of 6- to 12-year-old Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children based on Mothers’ Reports by Mawson et al. This study found that the odds of a diagnosis for autism or other related neurological disorder was significantly higher in vaccinated children than in unvaccinated children. The abstract was deleted after the study was already accepted for publication – a violation of your open access policies.

You are now considering blocking the paper’s publication even after post-peer review acceptance, thanks to online attacks from Twitter users who have neither read the study nor produced any inside knowledge about the study that would prove its findings to be invalid. You also lied to its readers that the publication was “provisionally accepted,” yet the abstract before it was deleted simply listed the study as “accepted” alongside a digital object identifier before it was taken down: http://www.autisminvestigated.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Screen-Shot-2016-11-28-at-09.36.00.png

Your guidelines also state that a study is not uploaded online until after final acceptance: http://home.frontiersin.org/about/review-system

Particularly disturbing is that this is happening in spite of the election of Donald Trump, who said in last year’s Republican Debate that “Autism has become an epidemic.” He subsequently elaborated:

“Just the other day, two years old, two and a half years old, a child, a beautiful child went to have the vaccine, and came back, and a week later got a tremendous fever, got very, very sick, now is autistic.

I only say it’s not — I’m in favor of vaccines, do them over a longer period of time, same amount.

But just in — in little sections. I think — and I think you’re going to have — I think you’re going to see a big impact on autism.”

This study helps confirm what President-Elect Trump expressed concerns about. The same Twitter users who slammed Mr. Trump for his vaccine remarks are also trying to bully you into not publishing this vaccinated versus unvaccinated study. Please do not let that happen.

Any journal or academic publisher that retroactively deletes a study accepted for publication from public domain and reverses its decision to publish based on political pressure from social media is undeserving of index in the National Library of Medicine. In January, President-Elect Trump will be in charge of all US federal agencies, including NLM that currently lists your publications.

Sincerely,

[your name here]

screen-shot-2016-11-28-at-09-36-00

Gary Johnson Supports Mandatory Vaccination

sddefault

I’ve come to find out that without mandatory vaccines, that the vaccines that would in fact be issued would not be effective. – Gary Johnson, Vermont Public Radio, August 24th, 2016

Like Green Party candidate for president Jill Stein, former New Mexico governor and Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson has said he supports mandatory vaccination. In an interview with Vermont Public Radio, Johnson said he supports government mandates  of vaccines – a stark reversal from a tweet from five years ago. He went even further to say that if the issue of vaccine mandates became a federal one, he would “side with science” and require vaccination as president.

Ridiculously, some vaccine skeptics actually said they would vote for Johnson over GOP nominee Donald Trump despite the fact that he had spoken out for years about the dangers of vaccines. He reiterated those concerns both in the second GOP presidential debate as well as in an interview just four months ago. Johnson – in stark contrast – only had a tweet to suggest a somewhat reformed position on vaccines, and now he has even reversed himself on that.

Perhaps worst about Johnson’s reversal is the hypocrisy inherent to his libertarian politics. Libertarians pride themselves on protecting individual liberties, yet Johnson has now said he would allow the government to make decisions for its citizens about what can or cannot be put into their bodies. Such a position would at least follow a certain logic within the socialist philosophies of Jill Stein, Bernie Sanders and Crooked Hillary Clinton, but not in the philosophy of a candidate trying to sell himself as the third-party, liberty-loving alternative to the two-party system.

Yet he has heaped praise on the most prominent politicians of the political elite/progressive left while heaping smears on Donald Trump. Earlier this summer, Johnson called Barack Obama a “good guy” and Crooked Hillary a “wonderful public servant.” In contrast, Johnson said he could never support Trump because of “all the things he had said” – presumably including his remarks on vaccination. Johnson’s running mate Bill Weld was even more nauseating, calling Trump a “huckster” while describing a “bond” with Crooked Hillary. And in an apparent effort to pander to Bernie Sanders’ supporters, Johnson said he agreed with 73% of what the socialist senator says. The political divide characteristic of this election cycle is not between two-party and third-party candidates, but between the political establishment and Donald Trump.

If the choice was not clear enough before, it could not be clearer now. Johnson would sell out your rights and require vaccinations while Trump has said he would push for safer vaccinations as president. Apart from the fact that Johnson has no realistic chance of becoming president anyway, the only candidate for whom a vote would truly be a vote for vaccine safety is Republican nominee Donald Trump. A vote cast for a candidate other than Trump is a vote that helps enable a Crooked Hillary win, and that would be the worst possible outcome of all.

Crooked Hillary Clinton – “I believe in science!”

la-1469126158-snap-photo

In her sleep-inducing nomination speech at the Democratic National Convention, Crooked Hillary Clinton appeared to cryptically attack Donald Trump for his stance on vaccinations by saying he does not believe in “science.” While she only specifically mentioned climate change, it would appear to anyone who has followed this issue that she also meant vaccines.

Early last year on Twitter, Crooked Hillary Clinton had this to say about the questioning of vaccine safety:

The science is clear: The earth is round, the sky is blue, and . Let’s protect all our kids.

Later that year in the second GOP presidential debate, Donald Trump expressed a very different view:

Autism has become an epidemic. Twenty-five years ago, 35 years ago, you look at the statistics, not even close. It has gotten totally out of control.

I am totally in favor of vaccines. But I want smaller doses over a longer period of time. Because you take a baby in — and I’ve seen it — and I’ve seen it, and I had my children taken care of over a long period of time, over a two or three year period of time.

Same exact amount, but you take this little beautiful baby, and you pump — I mean, it looks just like it’s meant for a horse, not for a child, and we’ve had so many instances, people that work for me.

Just the other day, two years old, two and a half years old, a child, a beautiful child went to have the vaccine, and came back, and a week later got a tremendous fever, got very, very sick, now is autistic.

I only say it’s not — I’m in favor of vaccines, do them over a longer period of time, same amount.

But just in — in little sections. I think — and I think you’re going to have — I think you’re going to see a big impact on autism.

Now fast forward to the Democratic National Convention that just happened, where Crooked Hillary accuses Donald Trump of not believing in “science”:

I believe in science…Now, you didn’t hear any of this from Donald Trump at his convention….But we already know he doesn’t believe these things.” 

The choice between Donald Trump and Crooked Hillary is as clear as a choice between vaccine safety and continued lies about risks from those vaccines. So this November, get out and vote for Donald Trump to be our next president and Make America Great Again!

Autism Investigated Shuts Down Bernie Sanders, Censorship Candidate

BN-MG647_Bernie_DV_20160125145318

I think the evidence is overwhelming that vaccines do not cause autism. And it really is a little bit weird for Trump – who, I presume, has no medical background – to be raising this issue. And obviously it is a concern. When somebody like that says it, you’re gonna find thousands of people now who are gonna hesitate to give their kids the shots, and bad things may happen. – Bernie Sanders, The Rachel Maddow Show, September 17, 2015

Donald Trump is the only good presidential candidate on the vaccine issue, that’s why Autism Investigated endorses him. However, there is only one candidate who trashed Trump for speaking out for vaccine safety despite similar concerns expressed by the two doctors in the same GOP debate, who calls for censorship of the issue, who said the evidence against vaccines causing autism is “overwhelming” despite being approached with the overwhelming evidence for an association by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and another physician and who even called unvaccinated children killers. That candidate is far-left extremist, race-baiting demagogue, Democratic Party presidential candidate and ice cream flavor poster boy Bernie Sanders. And because he encourages censorship, any comments of support for his candidacy will not be allowed at Autism Investigated from here on out.

Look at a quote from him on his Senate page: “if I have a kid who is suffering from an illness who is subjected to a kid who walks into a room without vaccines that could kill that child and that’s wrong.” For someone so concerned about protecting children who would have adverse reactions to vaccines, he sure does not think it is wrong for children to be needlessly poisoned as a result of the vaccine program’s lies.

At the time Sanders made that statement, the governor of Sanders’ home state of Vermont said he would veto any bill that would rid the state of its philosophical vaccination exemption. But two days after Sanders formally announced his presidential candidacy in the Democratic Party primary on May 26th, the governor signed into law a bill that did just that – making Vermont the first state to repeal its philosophical vaccine exemption. California would shortly follow.

Most bizarrely about Bernie Sanders, he seems to be surprisingly well-liked among vaccine skeptics considering he’s a bona fide vaccine liar. The managing editor for the self-styled vaccine safety and Democrat-edited blog Age of Autism actually wrote that “Sanders represent[s] a chink in the armor of the status quo” of censorship, even though he called for censorship of this issue. Even more disturbing is how Autism Investigated has come under fire by Bernie supporters on Facebook for supporting Trump. And when you remind them what Bernie Sanders has said, they completely dismiss it. Here is what one person responded when Autism Investigated pointed out that Sanders likened Republican candidates to mental patients and trashed Trump for speaking out for safer vaccines:

Trump IS crazy…so Sanders sayingthat isn’t really mocking…it would be stating facts..I know as a Trump supporter…those are something you don’t ever get to hear…facts!

When this post about Trump reiterating his stance for vaccine safety in a recent interview was shared in the vaccine skeptic Facebook group AWAKE California, a Bernie troll came in and called people “fascists” and “bigots” for supporting Trump before she was finally banned. The lies that Trump is a bigot, racist or fascist are commonly pushed by Sanders and his supporters, who have also backed the violent shutdown of Trump’s rally in Chicago. One of Sanders’ terrorists even tried to rush Trump on stage in Ohio before being stopped by Secret Service. If Sanders’ supporters have done all this, it’s not difficult to imagine them infiltrating vaccine skeptic forums to mislead people into thinking Sanders is a good candidate when he is the polar opposite.

The bottom line, however, is this: any candidate who supports shutting down the only candidate who supports vaccine safety and discussion of vaccine safety altogether does not deserve a forum of support on any website that supports vaccine safety and certainly not in Autism Investigated’s comments, Twitter feed or Facebook threads. When DailyKos banned linking vaccines to autism in its discussion threads, Autism Investigated responded by banning any comments that link to Kos to prevent readers from posting over there only to be banned for their views. Autism Investigated will do the same here by trashing any comments and blocking any Twitter accounts that post anything supportive of Bernie Sanders in AI’s discussions.

That said, anybody can still comment here regardless of which candidate they support, just take your support for the ice cream man elsewhere. For example: if you submit a comment citing leftist blogs like HuffPo and Salon to falsely portray Sanders as some sort of crusader against big pharma even though both sites actively censor vaccine safety, your comment will be canned. There are plenty of places like the Age of Autism blog where you are more than welcome to advertise your support for Sanders, as that site already has a habit of praising the horrible candidates who are the Democrats with its nauseatingly obsequious outreach to Hillary Clinton.

If you are upset that you are being “censored” for your support of Bernie Sanders, don’t be angry with Autism Investigated. Be angry with Sanders for supporting censorship of this issue and causing this new rule to be imposed on all his supporters here at Autism Investigated. Big pharma has given him more money than any of the remaining Republican candidates for a reason. And in case you love Sanders so much that you have to see him pushing censorship of the vaccine issue to believe it, here is the video of him doing just that:

Bernie Sanders is now shut down at Autism Investigated. No feeling the Bern here.

Trump Backs Vaccine Safety, Calls Other Candidates “Bought”

478c50db-c48e-4802-a962-6c8e48a213cb-large16x9_Donald_Trump

A recent interview further highlights why Autism Investigated endorses Donald Trump for President. On April 3rd, investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson sat down with the Republican presidential front-runner. In that interview, he said,”there could be something to the theory that these massive doses that are given to children have an impact on autism” and that “we have to be very, very careful with vaccines.” He also said the other candidates are “controlled by special interests” and “bought off with campaign contributions.” As of March 21st, pharmaceutical manufacturers have given $215,477 to Hillary Clinton, $64,175 to Bernie Sanders, $63,018 to Ted Cruz, $7,625 to John Kasich despite being dead last and a measly $531 to Donald Trump.

Trump on Vaccines and Viewer Questions

Trump fielded a number of viewer questions during “Full Measure’s” Sunday sit-down. He was asked about his views on vaccinations, advice he gave to his children, advice he ignored from his children, mis-characterizations from the media and, simply, why he would make the best choice for president.

What’s your position on freedom of choice regarding various vaccines that could be dangerous for some children and why is the mere discussion of making vaccines safe censored?

“It’s the most unbelievable discussion I’ve ever been involved in. If you say anything about vaccines that is slightly like holding back the hate mail, the level of vitriol, it’s incredible when you see it. First of all, I’m a big believer in vaccines. But there could be something to the theory that these massive doses that are given to children have an impact on autism. There could be something to it. Now some people say no, some people say yes, I’d like to see studies. The bottom line is they have to get vaccinated. When I was going to school as a young guy, polio was a really big problem and vaccines knocked it out. So the vaccines are very important, but we have to study the vaccines and we have to be very, very careful with vaccines.”

What’s some of the most important advice you’ve given your kids?

“That’s an easy question. No alcohol. No drugs. No cigarettes.”

Is there advice you’ve been given sometime that you wish you would’ve taken that you didn’t take?

“Well, Ivanka [my daughter] and my wife Melania will say ‘now be presidential,’ because sometimes I’ll hit back very hard and it doesn’t sound presidential. But my retort to that is, if I didn’t, you know I started off with [17 Republican challengers] and we have two left. I have two left. And frankly, if I didn’t hit hard I think you’d be interviewing probably somebody else.”

What mis-characterizations has the media saddled you with?

“I think I’m a very nice person. I love people. I like to help people. And I think the media makes me look like a mean person. And I think I’m a nice person. I love people. I love to help people.”

Why do you think you should be elected president?

“Because I can do the best job. I’m the only one that will make America great again. I know the other candidates. They’ll never bring us to the promise land. They’ll never make great trade deals. They’ll never great with the military. They’re controlled by special interests. I’m not. Again, I’m not taking money from anybody. If I don’t win. I really see a lot of problems for the country. There’s some many problems for the country that a politician, number one, can’t solve, and number two, won’t solve because they’re bought off with campaign contributions.”

Contrast the above to what other candidates have said about vaccines, like what Democrat front-runner Hillary Clinton ($215,477 from pharma) tweeted:

The science is clear: The earth is round, the sky is blue, and #vaccineswork. Let’s protect all our kids. #GrandmothersKnowBest 

Ted Cruz ($63,018 from pharma), Trump’s main primary rival, told USA Today:

Of course children should be vaccinated, this issue is largely silliness stirred up by the media.

John Kasich ($7,625 from pharma) told Ohio’s Dayton Daily News:

You have to get vaccinated. This is not a choice. Are you kidding me?

The socialist and far-left extremist Bernie Sanders ($64,175 from pharma) who’s entire platform is more intrusive government like the corrupt vaccine program is the worst candidate of them all. In fact, he is the only candidate who actually criticized Trump for his stance on vaccines in an MSNBC interview with Rachel Maddow following the September GOP debate:

I think the evidence is overwhelming that vaccines do not cause autism. And it really is a little bit weird for Trump – who, I presume, has no medical background – to be raising this issue. And obviously it is a concern. When somebody like that says it, you’re gonna find thousands of people now who are gonna hesitate to give their kids the shots, and bad things may happen.

Yet Age of Autism’s managing editor was dumb enough to describe Sanders as “a chink in the armor of the status quo” of censorship, even though he openly supports censoring discussion of vaccine dangers. AoA has also praised Hillary’s “autism plan” with the vaccine debate-censoring Huffington Post and even expressed a desire to work with her. Worst of all, AoA has trashed Trump – repeatedly. They are guilty of continuously misinforming their readers about where the candidates stand on this issue, even though the right choice in this presidential race is more obvious than ever. If the issue of vaccine safety is an important enough issue to make or break a vote for any particular candidate, then the only candidate who deserves the vote is Donald Trump.