Tag Archives: Rand Paul

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.

 

Elizabeth Warren Makes CDC Official Lie to Congress

n_qc_warren_150210.video_1067x600

By Jake Crosby

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

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

Schuchat said flatly, “No.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

See on The Epoch Times.

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

Elizabeth Stoker Bruenig on Vaccines – A College Grudge?

2CzVMQEr

By Jake Crosby

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

See on The Epoch Times.

Obama Contradicts Himself on Vaccines, Paul and Christie Get Slammed

nn_01sgu_obama_1309091

By Jake Crosby

Likely GOP presidential candidates Senator Rand Paul and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie are being slammed in the media for giving their own honest and consistent positions on the role of vaccination choice, with Paul further slammed for bringing awareness to vaccine injury. Yet it was President Barack Obama who gave contradictory stances on vaccinations in an interview he gave before the Super Bowl in the wake of the Disneyland measles outbreak.

In response to NBC’s Today Show co-host Savannah Guthrie, President Obama gave the following stance on vaccination (boldface mine):

“The science is, you know, pretty indisputable. We’ve looked at this again and again. There is every reason to get vaccinated, but there aren’t reasons to not.”

But then in that same interview, Obama gave as a reason to vaccinate the protection of people who have reasons not to vaccinate (boldface mine):

“…the folks who can’t get vaccinated – small infants for example or the people with certain, uh you know, vulnerabilities that, that can’t get vaccinated – they suddenly become much more vulnerable. They’re counting on us to create this protective fence because most people have been vaccinated.”

It was “certain…vulnerabilities” Obama cited as reasons for why some people cannot get vaccinated shortly after saying there weren’t any reasons to not get vaccinated. Obama then told viewers to listen to the CDC, even though a senior CDC scientist William Thompson recently came out as a whistleblower against the federal suppression of research results associating measles, mumps and rubella vaccination with autism in certain vulnerable children.

Yet the media is attacking Senator Paul and Governor Christie for making the argument that the decision to vaccinate cannot fall solely on the state. Christie’s office was even forced to release a follow-up statement hours after his comments. Rand Paul was further attacked for his commentary on adverse neurological side-effects from vaccination.

Meanwhile, the media praises Obama even after he gave contradictory opinions in the same interview on national television that went completely missed by his own interviewer. Such a glaring double-standard appears to be the fruits of an ongoing campaign by the Obama Administration to censor critics of government vaccination policy in media as first revealed five years ago by his then-HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius in an interview with Reader’s Digest:

“We have reached out to media outlets to try to get them to not give the views of these people equal weight in their reporting…”

HHS officials would later feign ignorance of the veracity of the above remark in response to queries by HDNet journalist Greg Dobbs. However, the CDC has been known to train journalists on how to report hot-button issues such as autism and vaccine safety in which CDC would clearly have a stake.

Whereas in the seventies it was the media that exposed the president’s role in the cover-up of the Watergate scandal, today the media is helping the president prolong the CDC cover-up of vaccine side-effects. That is more than evident in how mainstream media attacks Christie and Paul for their views while giving Obama a hall pass for his misleading statements about vaccine safety on NBC before he told viewers to listen to the CDC.

A chief instigator of the attacks on Christie is none other than the communications director of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Mo Elleithee, who said in the below statement:

“If he wants to actually be a leader, then he should stop bowing to junk science and take a cue from President Obama by showing leadership that promotes facts and keeps our children and our nation safe”

Ironically, it is Barack Obama who should stop bowing to junk science and show leadership that promotes facts and keeps children and our nation safe. Making consistent and non-contradictory statements would help.

Christie may not be ready to tackle the issue of vaccine safety the way Paul has, but both likely presidential candidates show much more competent leadership than that of the man currently sitting in the White House. The American people deserve far better than Obama or any presidential candidate who adopts DNC’s position on vaccines for that matter.

See on The Epoch Times.