Tag Archives: Institute Of Medicine

FAKE NEWS: FOUR VACCINE LIES FROM SCIENCE MAGAZINE

facebook-share

Science Magazine is fake science news and lies routinely about vaccine safety like the rest of the damn mainstream media and major science journals. Here’s four examples from their dishonest post “Four vaccine myths and where they come from” by one of their hired liars Lindzi Wessel. Autism Investigated will not refute all the lies because there are too many, just the major ones below.

“False: Vaccinations can cause autism”

Citing further concerns about ethics and misrepresentation, The Lancet retracted the paper in 2010. Shortly after, the United Kingdom’s General Medical Council permanently pulled Wakefield’s medical license.

The truth is, all those findings against Wakefield and his paper were completely overturned in a court decision that said the GMC used “faulty reasoning” and came to “wrong conclusion”(s). Even The Lancet acknowledges this.

[Brian] Hooker reanalyzed the data in 2014 and claimed CDC had hidden evidence that the vaccine could increase autism risk in black boys. In fact, CDC noted in the paper that rates of vaccination in the oldest age group were slightly higher in kids with autism.

Wait, what about for black kids? The CDC didn’t cover up effects for race because they reported effects for age? That’s a logical conclusion to draw, according to Science Magazine?

“False: Mercury in vaccines acts as a neurotoxin”

Science Magazine completely dismisses Kennedy’s damning Deadly Immunity article of mercury in childhood vaccinations. The excuse was the ghostwritten retraction by the pedophile-defending Salon.com site. Science never went into the details of the retraction because it would show it to be worthless.

Science Magazine continued:

In 2001, well before Kennedy’s article or his related book, thimerosal was removed from all childhood vaccines in the United States except multidose vials of flu vaccine.

What it left out was that in 2004 those flu vaccines were recommended for pregnant women in the first trimester of pregnancy, which has since been linked to autism. It then went on to characterize autism declining post-thimerosal removal in Denmark as a “misinterpretation of epidemiogical data.” Actually, it’s seen in a graph of epidemiological data:

“False: Mercury in vaccines acts as a neurotoxin”

Remarkably, this entire section didn’t focus on work of any other doctor or scientist. It was merely an attack on the physician-son team Dr. Mark and David Geier, taking as gospel smears from the Institute of Medicine and the Maryland Board of Physicians. The Institute of Medicine was revealed in Kennedy’s own article as coming to a foregone conclusion about thimerosal being safe, and being paid to do so. The Maryland Board of Physicians was successfully sued by the Geiers for intentionally violating their confidentiality. Dr. Geier has also responded to the allegations publicly.

Will Science condemn hormones and genital mutilation for “transgender” autists and acknowledge that there are only two genders? Doubtful.

“False: Spreading out vaccines can be safer for kids”

This section is entirely based on the talking points of millionaire vaccine industrialist Paul Offit. He is not only conflicted, but is also an unhinged maniac who said children can safely receive 10,000 vaccines at once. There is no comparison between a vaccine which contains loads of toxic ingredients injected directly into the body and antigens blocked by the human body’s natural defenses.

There is no room for the benefit of the doubt with Lindzi Wessel and Science Magazine. They are simply lying, along with the rest of the mainstream fake news.

Please form that vaccine safety commission soon, President Trump. We need it now more than ever.

UPDATE: Autism Investigated Video!

JAMA Must Correct Study As Linking Flu Vax to Autism

jamapediatrics_Hooker_2017_le_170006.pdfjamapediatrics_Donzelli_2017_le_170007.pdf

Click each letter to enlarge.

Since the journal JAMA Pediatrics published a study which showed an association between flu vaccine and autism despite concluding there was none, scientists have published letters in the journal to complain. One of those was by Dr. Brian Hooker, biochemist and autism father who was the first person contacted by the CDC’s vaccine safety whistleblower William Thompson.

The study found an elevated risk for autism from flu vaccination in pregnant women during the first month of pregnancy. Yet the authors attempted to explain this away with incorrect statistical methods and then issued the flawed recommendation that no changes in vaccination policy should be made. In 2004, the CDC expanded its flu vaccine recommendations in pregnant women to include the first trimester of pregnancy. Many cite this an an explanation for why the reported CDC prevalence of autism – generally speaking – did not decline as the mercury-based preservative thimerosal had been removed from other vaccines. Thimerosal remains in multi-dose vials of flu vaccine given to pregnant women.

In Denmark, the reported autism prevalence went down by as much as a third as thimerosal was removed from childhood vaccines there during the 1990s. The elevated risk for autism associated with influenza vaccination during the first trimester of pregnancy was 20-25%. The potential implications of such a finding is profound.

The study was conducted by Kaiser Permanente, a Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) that is in partnership with the CDC and other HMOs in a heavily guarded federal research project known as the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). JAMA journals’ publisher the American Medical Association sent a press release applauding a 2004 report from the Institute of Medicine that the CDC paid to have whitewash associations between vaccines and autism. The involvement of such institutions in the conduct and publication of such a study should only diminish public confidence in its integrity, along with its flawed conclusion and recommendation.

Nonetheless, the conclusion and recommendation should still be corrected. JAMA Pediatrics can be contacted here.

(H/t Age of Autism)

12-Year-Old Scientist Indicted for Vaccine-Autism Link Cover-Up

8a31b746-ef5a-4d69-a097-e5d51e40eed7.format_jpeg.crop_1920x1008_0,16.resize_1200x630.format_jpeg.resize_610x.inline_yes

Photo Credit: FBI Archives

This post is a vaccine skeptic’s satirical response to a viral video made by 12-year-old Marco Arturo, who presented the “Evidence That Vaccines Cause Autism” as nothing more than blank sheets of paper in order to disparage people who acknowledge that vaccines actually do cause autism.

12-year-old US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) scientist Marco Arturo was indicted after committing fraud by covering up crucial evidence that vaccines cause autism when crafting his review, “Evidence That Vaccines Cause Autism.” The report – sponsored by the CDC and published by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) – concluded:  “The evidence favors rejection of causation.”

Findings omitted from the report showed that in African-American children, those who had an autism spectrum disorder were more than twice as likely to receive a measles-mumps-rubella vaccination before three years of age compared to their neurotypical counterparts. They also showed that children who received the highest doses of mercury from vaccinations in their first month of life were 7-times more likely to receive an autism diagnosis than those who received no mercury during that same time period.

But since the vaccine injury-liable CDC paid the researchers to say vaccines were “well, pretty safe,” according to IOM committee chairwoman Marie McCormick, those results were unacceptable. “We are not ever going to come down that it is a true side-effect,” Dr. McCormick said in a secret meeting. And so they didn’t, but the results were so daunting that scrubbing them was difficult.

“It just won’t go away,” Arturo’s CDC colleague Thomas Verstraeten wrote in email. Ultimately, they made the association between the highest exposure category for mercury and autism go away by combining that category with weaker categories. They then claimed they “lost” the original data so that no researchers could replicate it, but in reality they just threw it all into a big garbage can in Arturo’s backyard.

Unfortunately, he and his other colleagues were later ratted out by a senior CDC scientist who was initially in on the scheme with them. So Arturo took $2 million in embezzled CDC grants and fled to Denmark where he now currently awaits extradition from. If convicted, he faces a 12-year prison sentence: equivalent to his entire lifetime.

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.

Doctor Who Shined Light on Vaccine Injury Dies at 60

Dr. Jeff Bradstreet

By Jake Crosby

It comes with great sadness to announce the untimely passing of Dr. Jeff Bradstreet, a medical doctor and parent of a child who developed autism after vaccination. Having once stated at a conference that “autism taught me more about medicine than medical school did,” he has contributed heavily to the body of peer reviewed science implicating the vaccine schedule in autism’s etiology. He had produced research suggesting children with autism have a higher body burden of mercury as well as research detecting measles in a subset of children with regressive autism who received the live-virus measles, mumps and rubella vaccination. As such, he believed children who presented with these types of findings should be treated for them.

Dr. Bradstreet faced considerable scorn as a result of his research, practice and views. In 2004 his work was dismissed by the Institute of Medicine, which was paid by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to produce a report rejecting any association between autism and vaccination. He was also ridiculed for mercury detoxification treatment by a special master in vaccine court, where email evidence has since shown that petitioners’ attorneys advised by SafeMinds threw the case for the mercury-based vaccine preservative thimerosal causing the autism epidemic.

Then shortly after an FDA raid on his clinic in Buford, Georgia, Dr. Bradstreet was suddenly found dead. The FDA – which continues to maintain that thimerosal is safe despite contrary evidence produced by him and other researchers – would not comment on why its agents visited his clinic. An investigation is ongoing and a fundraising effort has been set up by his brother “To find the answers to the many questions leading up to the death of Dr Bradstreet, including an exhaustive investigation into the possibility of foul play.”

In the meantime, his brother requested that people not spread rumors or gossip about Dr. Bradstreet’s untimely death out of respect for his family. Autism Investigated will honor those wishes and will not approve any comments through moderation that do. May the circumstances surrounding Dr. Bradstreet’s passing be revealed soon, and may Dr. Bradstreet’s scientific contributions help lead to the end of the harm being done to so many children.

See on The Epoch Times.

JAMA Study Implicates Early MMR Vaccine in Causing Autism

JAMA

Editor’s Note: The hyperlink to the study goes to an archived webpage because the full text version is no longer available on the JAMA website.

By Jake Crosby

A recent study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) that is widely touted to argue against the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine’s association with autism actually provides evidence for a connection. Based on computation from the study results for participants with non-autism spectrum disorder-diagnosed (non-ASD) older siblings, children who received a dose of the MMR vaccine before age five had a risk for ASD diagnosis by age five that was 48% higher than in children who did not in analyses that corrected for certain potential biases.

Where both groups received a dose of MMR vaccine – one largely before the bulk of autism diagnoses were made and one following it – the comparison is less likely to suffer from bias that might affect those involving children never vaccinated with MMR or those who received both recommended doses. Parents might be discouraged from giving a child a second dose of MMR or MMR at all if a child had a negative reaction to the first dose or to a dose of a different vaccine. Similarly, parents of children with autism may be more likely to take seriously concerns about vaccinations’ association with autism and more likely to withhold vaccines from their children. These potential biases make studying the timing of MMR vaccination in relation to autism preferable, though the authors of this study did not bother to do this. Nonetheless, the complete data sets from the study are needed to confirm whether the aforementioned association holds when controlling for other variables.

Yet the crude findings are similar to results from a study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that was published in the medical journal Pediatrics in 2004 and has also been cited to deny autism’s association with MMR. Those findings showed an odds of earlier MMR vaccination that was more than two-fold higher among African-American children with autism spectrum disorders compared to their non-ASD counterparts of the same race. According to study coauthor William Thompson who has come forward as a federal whistleblower, that finding was omitted from the published manuscript in breach of final study protocol. Pediatrics has refused to consider the paper for retraction, even though it should be considered according to the guidelines in publishing ethics that the journal claims to follow. Now what CDC researchers found more than a decade ago seems to only be confirmed by the results of this much larger study published in JAMA.

The troubling history of epidemiological studies used to disprove the MMR causes autism despite finding associations predates even the CDC study. A 2002 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and even larger than the recent JAMA study yielded results from which a 45% increased risk for autism associated with MMR vaccination was computed, despite concluding no connection. The scientist who computed that risk explained why the association was potentially meaningful in a letter to the journal, but the journal never published it. The principle investigator Poul Thorsen (who also found but did not publish results implicating mercury in vaccines in causing autism) of the NEJM study has since become a most-wanted international fugitive who was indicted on fraud charges.

Even after his indictment in 2011, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) included his study as one of just four to support the IOM’s position that MMR vaccination does not cause autism. Another IOM-cited study published in the Lancet in 1999 showed a relationship between timing of MMR vaccination and parental concern of child development in a sample of children with autism, according to a slide from an IOM-commissioned epidemiological review.

As the studies used to disprove an association between MMR and autism continue to mount, so too does the evidence favoring a causal relationship. A study in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry claiming autism rose as MMR was removed from use in Japan neglected the fact that the rise was correlated to single measles and rubella vaccines routinely given just four weeks apart. Another study published in JAMA in 2001 claimed that MMR vaccination coverage in California rose marginally while autism occurrence exploded, only for other scientists to then point out that the coverage of MMR vaccination given at younger ages also exploded.

The JAMA study is the latest such study to find an association while claiming to find none, and it probably won’t be the last. Its senior author and Drexel University epidemiologist Craig Newschaffer was previously quoted in 2007 by the LA Times as saying, “Those studies just kept piling up that showed no association between MMR or thimerosal exposure and autism…Among the scientific community, it’s pretty generally accepted that there is no link.”

How ironic that studies he cited to say there is no link actually found a link, and then his own study would later find the same.

See on The Epoch Times.

Correction: More information concerning the study results has since come to the attention of Autism Investigated, including the realization that some of the content originally in this post was not accurate. The article has since been updated.

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.

NYT’s Public Editor – A Public Relations Tool

new-york-times-vs-eli-lilly

By Jake Crosby

How could The New York Times publish “all the news that’s fit to print” when Eli Lilly’s board of directors member Ellen Marram also sits on the board of directors for The New York Times?

As evidence of this bias, The New York Times’ current public editor, Margaret Sullivan, recently bragged on her blog that Brendan Nyhan – former health policy research scholar for Johnson & Johnson’s philanthropic arm, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation – praised The New York Times for carrying on the vaccine-autism cover-up in print in the wake of Jenny McCarthy’s confirmation as co-host for “The View.” As my past investigations have shown, The New York Times does not follow its own ethics policy, and the public editor is nothing more than a public relations tool.

There is perhaps no better proof of this, however, then my below exchange with The New York Times’ Office of the Public Editor two years ago, after the newspaper’s ethically bankrupt reporter Gardiner Harris wrote an article in 2011 praising IOM‘s latest whitewash of the vaccine-autism link. The exchange ended with Sullivan’s predecessor, Arthur Brisbane, dismissing my complaint and essentially admitting The New York Times does not follow its own ethical guidelines.

Jake Crosby 9/6/11
to Public/NYT/NYT.

Dear Mr. Brisbane,

My name is Jake Crosby; I hold a BA in both history and health: science, society and policy and am also a student at the GW School of Public Health and Health Services studying for an MPH in epidemiology. I have also been diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome (autism spectrum disorder) and am a contributing editor to Age of Autism: Daily Web Newspaper of the Autism Epidemic.

I am writing to complain yet again about your reporter, Gardiner Harris, for his biased reporting in favor of the pharmaceutical industry when reporting on the vaccine-autism controversy while in possession of an undisclosed conflict of interest. Last year, I complained to your predecessor, Clark Hoyt, about the fact that Harris’ brother works for a firm that sells laboratory equipment to pharmaceutical companies. Hoyt wrote me back admitting that Harris assumed some of his brother’s clients are manufacturers of vaccines.

Yet since my complaint last year, Gardiner Harris’ name appeared in the byline of yet another story denying the vaccine-autism link that ran on August 25th; the title, “Vaccine Cleared Again As Autism Culprit,” speaks for itself.

As such, Harris is once again in violation of The New York Times “Ethics in Journalism” policy, which states:

“Similarly the journalist may be asked to affirm that to the best of his or her knowledge no household member or close relative has financial holdings that might reasonably raise doubts about the journalist’s impartiality. If such conditions arise, the staff member must alert newsroom management.”

http://www.nytco.com/press/ethics.html#affirming

This policy also includes brothers, as stated in the section, “Avoiding Conflicts Over Family”:

“A brother or a daughter in a high-profile job on Wall Street might produce the appearance of conflict for a business reporter or editor.”

http://www.nytco.com/press/ethics.html#B2

I was disappointed because I was left with the impression, following my first complaint to your newspaper, that Gardiner Harris was taken off the story because of his violations of The New York Times’ “Ethics in Journalism” guidelines. His name appeared in no byline of any such biased article about the vaccine-autism connection since my first complaint, until August 25th.

While Gardiner Harris is undoubtedly at ethical fault – having already been warned – I am open to the possibility that an honest fluke might have caused this article to somehow miss The New York Times’ newsroom management and make it to press, especially since The Times is undergoing a change in executive editorial leadership this month.

I look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely,

Jake Crosby
Contributing Editor
Age of Autism
www.ageofautism.com/jake-crosby

 Joseph Burgess of the Office of the Public Editor responded the next day, asking for my exchange with Clark Hoyt and senior standards editor Greg Brock:

Mr. Crosby, thanks for writing.  This might be an unrealistic request, but do you still have your correspondence with the previous public editor or Times staffers on this issue?  That would make it easier for us to process your email with The Times.

Best,

Joseph Burgess
Office of the Public Editor
The New York Times
public@nytimes.com

Note:  The public editor’s opinions are his own and do not represent those of The New York Times.

So I responded, forwarding my previous exchanges with Hoyt and Brock:

Dear Mr. Burgess,

It is my pleasure. Your request is a perfectly reasonable one; thank you for asking. Below, you will find my exchanges with both the previous public editor and Greg Brock, Senior Editor for Standards, who Clark Hoyt shared my complaint with.

Thank you for your prompt reply, and I look forward to further correspondence.

Best,

Jake Crosby
Contributing Editor
Age of Autism
www.ageofautism.com/jake-crosby

The next day, Burgess responded again – asking where Hoyt or Brock gave the impression that Harris was removed from covering vaccines and autism (even though I noted in my initial email that Harris’ name did not appear on the byline of any such article since my initial complaint):

 Mr. Crosby, thanks for writing back and for providing the emails.  Just so that I understand, what gave you the impression that Mr. Harris was removed from  covering this angle of his beat?  It doesn’t seem from my reading of the emails that either Mr. Hoyt or Mr. Brock came to the conclusion that there was a conflict of interest for Mr. Harris due to his brother’s professional interests.  If you could point me to a specific place where they may have given you that impression that would be greatly appreciated.

Best,

Joseph Burgess
Office of the Public Editor
The New York Times
public@nytimes.com

Note:  The public editor’s opinions are his own and do not represent those of The New York Times.

So I responded:

Dear Mr. Burgess,

It is – once again – my pleasure. The specific place where Mr. Hoyt and Mr. Brock gave me that impression was when I cited the ethical guidelines showing Gardiner Harris held an undisclosed conflict of interest in my last response to them, they did not take issue with any part of my interpretation. If they had, I think they would have said so to clarify the journalistic code of ethics for reporters at The Times. The fact that Mr. Hoyt and Mr. Brock did not appear to take any such issue, however, implied tacit confirmation of my points.  

That coupled with seeing Mr. Harris’ name absent from the byline of any further articles The Times ran about this controversy before August 25th left me with the impression up until then that silent action had been taken and that Mr. Harris had been effectively phased out of covering this angle of his beat, as you call it, for The New York Times.

Best,

Jake Crosby
Contributing Editor
Age of Autism
www.ageofautism.com/jake-crosby

Then after three days of back-and-fourth exchange with Burgess, Arthur Brisbane personally responded to my email to kill my complaint altogether. His excuse? “…ethic policy at The Times is open to interpretation…”:

Mr. Crosby: Thanks for your message. I have read through the history of your correspondence with Clark Hoyt and Greg Brock and also reviewed your current complaint. It seems to me that this matter was given an thorough review in the previous case. While the ethic policy of The Times is open to interpretation, I would concur with my predecessor on this. I don’t see a problem with Mr. Harris writing on the subject.

Again, thanks for letting me know of your concern.

Art Brisbane
public editor

In other words, The New York Times’ ethical policies can be spun any way The Times’ public relations “editor” sees fit, even if his “interpretation” is directly contradicted by the policy itself. Nonetheless, I responded asking for Brisbane’s “interpretation” of that policy:

Dear Mr. Brisbane,

It is my pleasure, and thank you for both reading my correspondence with Clark Hoyt and Greg Brock along with my current complaint.

I beg to differ with you that my previous complaint was thoroughly reviewed. Your predecessor did not make any reference to the ethical policies of The Times regarding conflicts of interest. In fact, his excuse for Mr. Harris not having a conflict of interest was contradicted by The Times’ ethical policies. If your reasoning is that the ethical policies of The Times are “open to interpretation,” then I would appreciate hearing what your interpretation of those policies would be and how you think they would absolve Mr. Harris.

Best,

Jake Crosby
Contributing Editor
Age of Autism

www.ageofautism.com/jake-crosby

I never received any word back. I sent follow-up emails to the newspaper’s executive editor Jill Abramson and publisher Arthur Ochs-Sulzberger Jr., but never received any reply from them either. Obviously, The Times’ ethics policy was not interpreted differently; it was flouted.

Eight months after my exchange, Gardiner Harris was re-assigned to India as a foreign reporter for The Times, where he came down with travelers’ diarrhea from eating a mango that the former public health reporter failed to wash. He continues to report from there to this day. Meanwhile, The Times continues to be complicit in helping the government whitewash away the scientific fact that vaccines cause autism in media as Ellen Marram of Eli Lilly – the company that introduced the mercury-based vaccine preservative thimerosal to the market – continues to sit on The New York Times’ board of directors.

As justification for this, The Times’ current public editor Margaret Sullivan states on her blog:

“It can be important to state both sides of an argument — but only when both sides are legitimate.”

But “legitimate” does not accurately describe the position on autism and vaccines by the IOM, which privately stated “…we are not ever going to come down that it [autism] is a true side effect…” before reviewing any evidence for or against, nor that of The New York Times which is based on such scientific misconduct.

Jake Crosby is editor of Autism Investigated and is diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder. He is a 2011 graduate of Brandeis University with a BA in both History and Health: Science, Society and Policy. He currently attends The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services where he is completing his candidacy for an MPH in epidemiology.