Tag Archives: Nyt

New York Times Lies Autism and Vaccines Were Studied in 15 Million Kids

Carroll The New York Times

Aaron Carroll, MD, MS is a pediatrician and contributor to The New York Times, Credit: Writer Junkie

For every vaccine promoter who drops a whopper of a lie, another comes along to top it. Who better than The New York Times in direct response to President Trump’s statements on vaccination? In The Times’ published and then republished article “Not Up for Debate: The Science Behind Vaccination,” pediatrician Aaron Carroll wrote:

There is simply no scientific evidence that links vaccines to autism. Many, many, many studies have confirmed this. The most recent Cochrane systematic review of research on the MMR vaccine included six self-controlled case series studies, two ecological studies, one case crossover trial, five time series trials, 17 case-control studies, 27 cohort studies and five randomized controlled trials. More than 15 million children took part in this research. No one could find evidence that vaccines are associated with autism.

a statistically significant link found at this point would almost have to be a false positive, given the millions of children already studied.

Contrary to Carroll’s article, 15 million children were not studied for an increased risk for autism from vaccination. The review objective makes that clear:

To assess the effectiveness and adverse effects associated with the MMR vaccine in children up to 15 years of age.

The review analyzed studies relevant to the overall safety and effectiveness of the vaccine. Studies relevant to autism were only a fraction of those in the review. Does it confirm vaccines don’t cause autism as Carroll said? No.

The methodological quality of many of the included studies made it difficult to generalise their results.

Here were the review’s actual conclusions:

The design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, both pre- and post-marketing, are largely inadequate. The evidence of adverse events following immunisation with the MMR vaccine cannot be separated from its role in preventing the target diseases.

“Largely inadequate” – that’s what the review concluded about vaccine safety. Carroll cites this review to declare vaccination “not up for debate.” It’s doubtful a doctor with a master’s in “health services research” misread the review abstract. This is someone who would describe himself as “immersed in the science of vaccines”:

It would be better for our vaccination policy for this not even to be a topic for debate, certainly not by those who aren’t immersed in the science of vaccines.

He completely distorted that science, and he’s a total liar. His article should be retracted by The New York Times, not that this crooked newspaper ever will.

Teenage Science Fraudster Is Released on Parole After Showing Remorse

This post is a satirical update from a previous post of Autism Investigated’s two years ago, which was also a satire. The above photo and below quotes of Marco “Arturo” Zozaya are actually from a recent (fake news) New York Times article about him, where he admits his video denying vaccine injury was “quite rude.” The hyperlinks below go to actual stories of fraud by vaccine officials. 

“I look back on it and see that I was actually quite rude,” Mr. Zozaya, now 14, told the parole board about when he refused to show remorse upon his 2016 conviction.

Initially sentenced to 12 years of hard time, Zozaya was released on parole after serving two years. His convictions included embezzlement of federal grants and destruction of evidence that vaccines cause autism.

Convicted at 12, he was expected to serve prison time until the age of 24. That would have put him away for half his life. However, his age, good behavior and subsequent remorse for what he had done were all factors.

The fact that he was on the autism spectrum himself also helped. Zozaya spent most of his time in his cell just keeping to himself.

“He didn’t give us any trouble,” a corrections officer who wished not to be named told Autism Investigated.

“I was really disappointed,” Zozaya told the parole board of he and his co-conspirators’ actions to junk research and intimidate scientists. “I wish honestly that people were as much into science as they are into shutting people down.”

Tell Congresswoman Baloney She Deserves To Lose Her Seat

Office of Congresswoman Carolyn B. M(B)aloney

NY PostA campaign spokesman for Rep. Carolyn Maloney said the congresswoman now “does not believe there is a link between vaccinations and autism.”“Congresswoman Maloney believes in the efficacy and safety of vaccines. She was at the forefront of efforts to protect funding for vaccines in the Affordable Care Act,” the rep said.

And subsequent Post editorial:

It’s a small win for science that Maloney’s admitting the truth[AI note: as if!]. It’ll be a bigger one if she (and others who did the same) apologizes for promoting a deadly myth.

Will wonders never cease? Actually, it seems they just did. The mystery appears to have been solved by a NY Times reporter, of all people.

The last time Autism Investigated asked readers to contact her office years ago, you were all told to be polite. Don’t worry about politeness this time. Express yourself however you deem fit (no threats, of course).

Call Congresswoman Baloney’s DC office, mention the NY Post article and tell them she deserves to lose her seat in the Democrat primary: 202-225-7944

NYT Blames Flu Shot Drop on Trump’s Latino “Hostility”

Couldn’t it just be that flu shots are crap?

Here is the Media Research Center synopsis of NYT’s flu shot debacle:

During Monday’s edition of At this Hour, guest host Brianna Keilar brought on New York Times Health and Science reporter Donald McNeil Jr to discuss the flu epidemic sweeping the nation. McNeil suggested that the President has a racial prejudice against Hispanics that has caused an 8 percent drop in the number of Hispanics who have received flu shots.

Tucker Carlson has also weighed in.


Donald McNeil is not new to vaccine controversies, nor is the comic gold he has produced in showing his idiocy about them. That includes the below 10-year-old email that scrupulously reminded an autism parent of what he called credential-fabricating vaccine doc Paul Offit.

—–Original Message—–
From: Donald G. McNeil Jr. mcneil@nytimes.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 3:34 PM
To: J.B. Handley
Subject: Age of Autism
 
Mr. Handley:
 
Someone at Age of Autism was nice enough to send me a reference to your post.
 
I don’t mind being called completely and utterly clueless, a kool-aid drinker, and so on.   Freedom of speech, “sticks and stones…” and all that.
 
But I did learn something about your own abilities as a journalist.  If you’ll trust my notes and want to correct these statements, you are welcome to:
 
1. I did not tell you I was writing a review.  I told you I was writing an article about the book [Autism False Prophets, by Paul Offit], and its effect on the debate.
 
2. What you said about the death threats and Offit was: “I’ve received, not death threats, but emails threatening my physical safety on numerous occasions.  I just don’t complain about them to all the world like a giant pussy.”   And you condemned them, as you say.
 
3. I did not say that “Looking at unvaccinated kids would be immoral.” I said: “Leaving kids unvaccinated (ie, in order to study them) would be immoral.”  Sounds similar, but there’s a huge difference.  In an email to me, you accused me of saying the first.  I cleared up the misunderstanding in my reply email.  In your subsequent Age of Autism piece, you simply repeated the misquotation, because it made me look stupider than the truth would have.
 
Thanks,
 
Donald McNeil
mcneil@nytimes.com
 

Read this Age of Autism post by JB Handley for details, and get ready for more laughs!

Crooked Hillary Hijacks Autism to Smear Donald Trump

202d32515bd8a74fd5e305564859e4069627decc

Remember that old lie from last year that Donald Trump mocked a reporter for his disability? Crooked Hillary has now stretched it even further to say that Trump is prejudiced against people with autism, even though the reporter’s disability is totally unrelated to autism.

Her justification? Because Donald Trump’s imitation of the reporter involved movement of the hands, and some people with autism flap their hands. Ergo, people with autism can’t live in “Trump World.”

She even made an entire commercial out of it: sob story and all.

Not surprisingly, her ad does not include any video footage of the New York Times reporter Trump supposedly mocked: Serge Kovaleski. Watch the video below and see how comparable Kovaleski’s demeanor is to Trump’s imitation.

There is no comparison. Donald Trump did not know the reporter was disabled and had not spoken to him in 30 years. Any memory would have been smothered by the countless legions of reporters Trump spoke to since that time. Yet the Clinton Campaign is actually trying to dupe viewers into believing that Trump was not only mocking the reporter for his disability, but people with autism for theirs as well.

Though the campaign ad is hardly a new low for the Clinton Campaign with all its lies, crimes and Trump rally-targeting violence, the chutzpah is notable. Crooked Hillary is using autism to rehash a debunked and unrelated lie against a candidate who has promised to address that disability as the public health problem it poses, while her autism “plan” involves denying it’s a problem by funding an adult prevalence study on the basis of one conducted and then disowned by the British government. And of course, she has attacked his acknowledgment of that fact that vaccines are poisoning babies into autism as being “dangerous”. Of course, she is dangerous in many more ways than just one.

Now she is trying to court votes against her opponent who will do something about the problem of autism from the people who are the victims of it. Her strategy is yet more lies. Don’t let her succeed!

Vote for Donald Trump to Make America Great Again!

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.