My Journey from Ignorance

WHILE RETURNING from the United Nations building where I heard NYU Professor Mary Holland (School of Law) nail the issues of constitutional and international law on the right to informed consent to the floor, to a standing ovation, I received an email from Mary ( To my delight). I read, in part:

“I  started reading your Ebola book last night.  Wow, you have evolved a lot in your thinking on vaccines in a VERY short period, based on your definition of ‘antivaxxers’ at bottom of 206, top of 207.  Have you written up how your views evolved so quickly?  It might be a helpful roadmap towards turning others around.  Was this all in connection with the autism book, or did your views changing precede that book?”

Looking at my book this morning, I turned to page 206, with trepidation, to find the younger, knowing me, trying to save the world by chiding and deriding people whom I have come to learn much more about in the past two years:

“Again and again with Ebola we see, from Guinea to the US, societies struggling with the ethical problem of the needs (and wants) of a few vs. the safety (and lives) on the many”.

Ok, that’s not too bad.  A bit uppity, but I cannot disagree. But it gets worse.

“With over 100 cases confirmed, the US is, at the time of this writing, at high risk of an epidemic of measles because the herd immunity is lacking due to a dogmatic antivaccination movement”.

I warned you.

Deplorably, I continue:

“The efficacy of the measles vaccine in protecting children against terrible diseases should be reason enough for parents to insist on vaccinating their children, but the so-called ‘anti-vaxxers’ (people who believe vaccines place their children at risk of developing autism) fail to consider the greater good: They put others at risk by not participating in national programs for the greater good.”

I really do not like my former self. Naturally, I continue, because I knew SO much before I actually looked into the studies and the data:

“This perspective is more than mere 20:20 hindsight; such occurrences of cultural and institutional amnesia are certain to recur as our society becomes more reliant and trusting in technology, and we forget to respect the awesome power of biology and Nature”.

I really don’t know this guy, I swear.

Mary Holland will certainly be remembered as one of the most staunch defenders of human rights, well, in the history of abuses in medicine. So back to Mary’s question:

“Have you written up how your views evolved so quickly?  It might be a helpful roadmap towards turning others around.  Was this all in connection with the autism book, or did your views changing precede that book?”

Here’s how and why my views have changed. First, I was really rather upset about the fact that CDC Director Thomas Freiden stated in his testimony to Congress that there were no mutations in the Ebolavirus that was driving the epidemic.  I was upset because I had the 396 mutations on my laptop at the very moment he testified to Congress.  I capture that moment in “Ebola“. My anger at the CDC increased when I attended a secret White House conference call, held by the Ebola Czar, in which I asked about the 396 mutations – whether they influenced the ability of tests to detect Ebola, or altered its virulence or transmissibility. In that call, the entire scientific community was lied to again by a CDC Scientist who claimed that the virus was “99.9999% identical to the strain from Zaire in 1995”, which was not true at all.  I capture both of those events in “Ebola”, as well as how the White House then asked the Associated Press to stop covering potential cases of Ebola in the US.  I even ask in that book whether that was “fascism”.

Fast forward a couple of months to where I had decided to write “Cures vs. Profits“. I felt that we had bungled our response to Ebola so badly that I wanted to cheer myself up and write a book on the successes in biomedical research.  Having participated in so many studies over the past two decades, I knew of many reasons that the public should continue to support biomedical research, and I was going to share all that I knew, and discover more. The first two chapters deal with “the bad stuff” – the doctors who cheat at medicare fraud, which robs other patients of needed funds for real medicine – and the biomedical researchers who cheat at their research studies.

I wrote my chapters out on grapefruit, on cancer vaccines, on prostate cancer robotic surgery, and then something happened: I wrote a chapter on ADHD overdiagnosis. I tell the story of the destruction of a promising career of Dr. Gretchen Watson.  Pharma sent a “Key Opinion Leader” to EVMS to debate her over her study, and the next day she was told her case load was canceled, that her colleagues were told that she no longer worked at EVMS, and that she was to expected to resign.  She refused, and won an appeal to HR.  But then someone floated a rumor that she manipulated her data in the 1996 study showing overdiagnosis.

The investigation revealed no flaw – well, a typo in an appendix – but the damage to her career was done. The good news is that Dr. Watson has decided to write of book of her own after reading my chapter on ADHD.  She now also serves on the Board at IPAK.

When I finished writing the rest of “Cures“, including chapters on the history of hormone receptor status in breast cancer, chemosensitivity assays, characteristics of good research scientists, and cancer vaccines, I found the book missing something.

So I decided to write a chapter on Vaccines.

I’ll let the chapter on vaccines speak for itself- it begins with tales of how wonderful vaccines are, how they save lives.  I went back to review the autism/vaccine link, fully expecting to review the Andrew Wakefield issue briefly, how his claims that MMR were linked to vaccines. I read the retracted study.

I found that Andrew Wakefield never claimed that the MMR might cause autism.  Instead, I found the study to suggest that it was a question worth looking into.

My digging around then led to my discovery of reports that someone at CDC had revealed that CDC had manipulated data on the studies designed to disprove Wakefield by omitting results with a positive association.

The more I dug into the issue, and then into the literature, the more I found the science of vaccines falling far short of the science needed to insure public health via any medical procedure given to millions. And this is where I leave the issue in “Cures“. I added an addendum that reviews four open controversies in vaccines that cause me to question whether vaccines can be called an unmitigated success in translational research.

In retrospect, I see that position as something of an understatement.

My understanding of vaccines was (obviously) limited, and I needed to grasp the risks involved. I needed resolution. So after I completed “Cures“, I began writing about what I had learned. I spoke with people with an open mind. I started to listen not only to what these evil, selfish “anti-vaxxers” had to say, I started to really think about the consequences of the additives. I began to question the over-arching claims of safety.

And via some new contacts, I made connection with Tony Lyons of Skyhorse Publishing. After a few chats, he, Louis Conte and I agreed that I should write a book on the Genetics of Autism. (I love Louis – and knowing what I know of him now, my bet is that he thought I was a good prospect – but somehow I can hear him telling Tony that Jack has ‘a way to go, but I think he’ll get there’. Thank you Louis for the confidence.

So in I dove, into 3,000 research articles on autism.  Not on vaccines – on autism.  I wanted to know if the basic science could in any way reasonably support a hypothesis that vaccines or their additives cause autism. The answer is a resounding “Yes, yes, and yes”. Other articles in this blog will give you an idea of some of the evidence that exists on the role of chronic microglial activation and autism, for example.

To the readers of “Ebola” who feel confused or hurt by my, and others’ ignorance, please remember that there is a Great Unknowing, even among professionals.  Think about it – all “Anti-vaxxers” with vaccine-injured children were once pro-vaccine. As I advised some 500 participants at the VIALs Health Summit in Atlanta, GA, do not argue with them – educate them. Your anger and frustration is warranted, but help them move from ignorance to awareness and understanding.

I took it upon myself to consider 3,000 articles on autism for “Causes” (due out in November).  (I skimmed 3,000, read >2,000, and cite >1,000). Look at what knowledge can do to a scientist who themselves feel cheated and lied to, someone who entrusted the CDC to perform objective science (See “The Tyranny of Pseudoscience“):

IMG_0609

The author at a CDC Rally, April 22nd, 2016.

 

IMG_0577

Educating the public and calling for Congress to Subpoena Dr. William Thompson at the CDC on the true nature of so-called “Science” conducted at the CDC on the link between vaccines and autism.

To My Fellow Scientists and Medical Health Care Professionals

I wrote “Ebola” in good faith, assuming that the position of the CDC on vaccines was based on sound science. It was unfathomable to me that

-Upon finding positive associations, CDC would routinely over-analyze data from studies until they could make associations go away, and when they could not succeed in doing that, they would simply omit the results;

-CDC would suspend an employee who drew these practices to the attention of then CDC Director Dr. Julie Gerberding (who subsequently took a position in charge of vaccine development at Merck);

-After CDC published these studies they called for an end to research on vaccine safety with regard to potential links to autism;

-CDC would ignore nearly all of the basic science that shows mechanisms of how neurotoxins in vaccines (not just MMR) could reasonably be expected to cause autism in some people;

-CDC’s position is based on ecological association studies, not randomized prospective clinical studies with proper controls.

-Our knowledge of vaccine safety is based on post-market surveillance;

-CDC would ignore all of the post-market surveillance on vaccine safety, claiming that the passively collected data in VAERS did not provide causal evidence;

-CDC would lie repeatedly under oath to Congress about the State of Science on the link between vaccines and autism;

-No one has ever conducted a vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study for association with negative health outcomes, including autism.

-CDC would communicate to the public that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism” on their website knowing full well that 6/12 vaccines on the schedule before the age of 7 have 0 studies one way, or the other, on whether they indeed may (or may not) contribute to the risk of autism.

I, like the rest of the world, relied on the CDC to be a reliable source of information on vaccine safety.  Yes, I vaccinated my children. I will not allow them to get the HPV vaccine. Here is why.

To the Parents of Vaccine-Injured Children who Regressed Into Autism

Your observations are the basis of a new era in vaccine science.  All science begins with observations. Help and relief is on the way. And there is nothing that can stop it.

IMG_0573
Dr. Lyons-Weiler (right) meets Marcella Piper-Terry (left) at the 2016 CDC Rally.
IMG_0611
Fellow Vaccine Risk Aware Protestors Calling for Congress to Subpoena Dr. Thomspson
IMG_8076
Dr. Lyons-Weiler meets the future Director of the CDC.

After the Rally, we enjoyed a summit at Life University hosted by VIALS. Here was our audience:

20160423_174651

Here I presented the CDC Schedule as backed by “Magic”, because no science exists on any link between 6 vaccines and autism, whereas some vaccines do, in fact have some studies that support association:

no science 2no science

That was a good day in Atlanta, GA. Here are the slides to share with your pediatrician:

VIALs health summit slides James LyonsWeiler MAGIC

CDCSCHEDULE
“MAGIC!!!”

 

 

Next stop, the United Nations:

 

20160426_13461620160426_151326

 

Dr. Lyons-Weiler attends a UN Session on Toxins in Our Children, April 26th, where Dr. Thompson’s revelations were shared with the world.


 

Mary Holland standing up for your rights to refuse medical procedures as a basic human right. To watch the unprecedented UN Session on Toxic Contamination of Children (4/26/2016), follow this link.

Mary Holland’s question to me was an important one:like many, if not most other professionals, I had argued my position on the vaccine/autism question from a position of ignorance.  They simply have not done their homework, and many have bought the CDC’s lies hook, line and sinker. They count on CDC to be honest and forthright. This include the AAP, the AMA, and, very likely, your pediatrician.

Most of them probably have not read a single study. They likely have never read the following words that Dr. William Thompson said to Dr. Hooker:

Thompson: “They don’t really want people to know that this data exists.”

Thompson: “…among the blacks, the ones that were getting vaccinated earlier, were more likely to have autism.”

Thompson: “It appears in the final publication is that race in general is downplayed. Of course it is.”

Thompson: “I actually think the most interesting results are the isolated, ones that don’t have their co morbid conditions. The effect is where you would think it would happen.”

Thompson: “I was just looking at—I was like, oh my God, I cannot believe we did what we did. But we did.”

Thompson: “The higher ups wanted to do certain things and I went along with it. In terms of chain of command, I was number four out of five. “

Thompson: “…Literally, everyone else got rid of all their documents, and so the only documents that exist right now from that study are mine.”

Thompson: “There are things that I haven’t even shared with you because I can’t prove it, and that’s what I struggle with. I don’t want to share things with you that I can’t prove, that there aren’t hard records. I am worried that the other four people will collude and say no, that’s not true.”

Thompson: “That’s what I keep seeing again, and again, and again where these senior people just do completely unethical, vile things and no one holds them accountable. “

Thompson: “The reason you don’t see anything else circulating on the study, it was five of us behind closed doors for two years.”

Thompson: “It’s the lowest point in my career that I went along with that paper.”

thompson_CDC
Dr. William W. Thompson

My book “Cures vs. Profits” tells more of the story of Dr. Thompson and Hooker. At this point, I am willing to go on the record and say that I have zero – ZERO confidence in any science coming out of the CDC Immunization Safety division. And no one else should trust their research, either.

In fact, nothing they publish can be trusted. Not merely because of what Thompson said.

I’ve read their studies.

They are atrociously unsafe ventures in data cooking, model overfit, sad excuses for “control variables”, use of multicollinear variables, the product of repeated data analysis to a desired result (no association). They are a mess.

The individual people in question include

RADM Anne Schuchat, Principal Deputy Director of CDC

Dr. Frank DeStefano, Director of the Immunization Safety Office

Dr. Coleen Boyle Director, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (NCBDDD)

Dr. Poul Thorsen (co-author on suspect CDC studies, wanted by HHS for embezzling over $1Million in funds that were to be used for autism research, living openly in Denmark).

and others.

In my research, I strive to remain objective. However, since 2004, when the research fraud at the CDC occurred, there have been over 1,000,000 cases of autism that potentially could have been prevented simply by splitting up the MMR into three vaccines, spacing the vaccines out, giving non-adjuvanted vaccines with 1 adjuvanted, screening for safe epitopes, removal of mercury from all vaccines, giving medical exemptions to parents who already have one autistic child (to avoid the genetic x environment interaction), dropping HepB until adulthood… so many simple things that could have been done to reduce early exposures to toxins. Where is the science for biomarkers to indicate which children might be most at risk of ASD due to vaccines?  Not done.  CDC called for no more science.

We Want Evidence-Based Public Health Policies, not Policies Based on Subjective Belief (aka “Magic”)

Right now, the so-called “Anti-vaxxers” I so woefully admonished in “Ebola” are not all “Anti-Vaxxers”. They do consist partly of some people who believe no safe vaccine could ever exist. I respectfully remind them that until the science is done to show that non-adjuvanted vaccines without mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, etc are tested, their knowledge claim is an untested generalization about all vaccines. Out of well-deserved distrust, they call for no more science on vaccine safety – because they know that some will be injured by that very research.

But the Vaccine Risk Aware movement also includes people who are 100% Pro-Vaccine Safety. They suspect that safe and effective antigen presentation systems can be designed, that use exposure at the skin (microdermal abrasion), with epitopes that do not induce autoimmunity. They believe that taking the toxins out will likely make vaccines safer. But they do not make such claims.  They call for more science, not less, but on newer options for inducing immunity.

To watch my presentation at the VIALS Health Summit State of Science on Vaccine Safety: Autism, in which I explain how the CDC’s claims that vaccines do not cause autism must be based on magic, follow these links: (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3).

Calls for Retraction of CDC “Studies”

Because CDC committed scientific fraud, the studies they performed should be retracted. IPAK has informed the journals of this, and we have sent them copies of “Vaccine Whistleblower, by Kevin Barry, Esq.

I urge all of my colleagues to view the movie #Vaxxed.  Call your local theater and ask them to screen the movie. If you consider yourself an objective scientist, read “Whistleblower“, and RFK jr.’s book, “Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak“.  Order “Master Manipulator” by James Grundvig, which tells the story of Poul Thorsen, a CDC collaborator wanted for absconding with autism research cash (given what CDC would have done with the money, Thorsen may be a hero, for all we know).  For a deeper timeline view on how long corporate corruption has eroded science in our most esteemed institutions like the CDC, read “Science for Sale” by David Lewis.

I ask my professional colleagues from all walks of science and medicine then to join us in our calls for retraction of the CDC’s false studies: DeStefano et al., Madsen et al., and Verstraeten et al.  I will not stop educating professionals about the fraud because we need evidence-based medicine, not medicine based on guesses, or hopes, or magic.  Babies are dying in the womb due to mercury in flu vaccine reserved for pregnant women; babies are born autistic due to immunoneuroexcitotoxicity; they are born with seizure disorders; toddlers regress into autism after learning language. And yes, it may be due to cumulative and interactive effects of toxic chemicals from agriculture, industry, our home, etc.  But we can reduce the toxins we expose our children to.  Right now, autism risk is 1 in 68, up from 1 in 3000 in the 1970’s.  Let’s have #theconversation.

MeetingCropped

 

Acknowledgements. I have literally thousands of people to thank for helping move from ignorance to awareness.  You know who you are. Thank you.

Please support VIALs with a generous donation.  Tell them Jack sent you!
To support Dr. Lyons-Weiler and his research associates at IPAK, visit ipaknowledge.org

VIALs health summit slides James LyonsWeiler MAGIC

59 thoughts on “My Journey from Ignorance

  1. Thank you, thank you, thank you. I am not a parent of a vaccine-injured child, although I have met many of them. What I am is a person who remembers with clarity the difference between right and wrong, who believes that citizenship implies obligations, and that those obligations are mandatory. I also have had a life-long interest in, and reverence for science (meaning science as a process of evaluating evidence). And you are right that our most crucial role in bringing sanity to vaccination policy as citizens is in educating the public. I do so at every opportunity. All the while I recognize that there are extraordinarily powerful and perfectly vile and dangerous forces at work against us, and those forces have the full backing of our federal government. To those folks citizenship is nothing more than a word in the dictionary.
    I find intriguing what you write about developing safe vaccines. Part of my total objection to all of them is that they bypass the innate immune system, but were that resolved, along with the removal of all toxic ingredients and contaminants, it may be possible to make something that does some good and little harm.

    Like

    1. Gary – you’re welcome. We need disruptive technology – Safe Natural Antigen Presentation Systems – SNAPS – but first we need to break the monopoly. We can no longer be duped into thinking that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe”. Ciao for now!!!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. You actively promoted something destructive and now you’re a hero because you’ve changed 1%.

        Reframe EVERYTHING.

        You don’t need SNAPS.

        Pasteur was wrong.

        Take a look into THAT conspiracy.

        😉

        Like

      2. Jennifer – epitopes from organisms cause antigenic response. Some are safe, and some are not. There are a group of medical doctors
        discussing abandoning adjuvanted vaccines with thimerosal, mercury, formaldehyde etc and screening for unsafe antigens. Until
        the science is done that show that SNAPs do not work, claims that they do not work are unfounded (as would be any claim that
        they will have to work). Safety is of paramount concern among these doctors – whose own children have been vaccine injured with autism.
        Antigens in viruses and bacteria can elicit natural immunity, to be sure, but those organism also include auto-immune causes epitopes.
        That’s why whole-cell anything is very dangerous. Still, some of the epitopes elicit antigenic responses but not autoimmunity.
        The question of SNAPs is an open question, but the science is being framed with due consideration of all concerns. I’ll be the first
        to say they do not work if they don’t. I’ll also be rather happy if they are shown to be effective.

        I will not personally benefit (i.e., profit) from their development, as that is against IPAK bylaws. But you can bet that if and when they
        are developed, we will be looking at rates of adverse events openly, and honestly. Thanks for your interesting comment.

        Like

      3. I appreciate the article, but I think you’re still a little over-confident, James. It comes across here and in the article in your false dichotomy between stop-the-science anti-vaxers and people who want research on “safe vaccines”. Those are not the only two groups out here, as I’m sure you know. Some of us understand that there are ethical issues to contend with, not to speak of spiritual. Not just questions of respect for bodily integrity and a non-authoritarian relationship to healthcare providers; but more fundamentally a basic appreciation of ourselves as part of and in relationship to the natural world. We understand as wildly hubristic the belief in our capacity to engineer our immune systems (or the world) to make it over in a way that is convenient for us. Your position comes across as that of a person who still wants to play with power – and believe me, I have been in that world. You will discover that it will inevitably bite you in the ass. That’s the point at which we are ready for something fundamentally different. A working with, rather than getting control of. I understand that may come across as vague right now, but I hope the fog clears. Otherwise, even your good intentions are just likely to lead to further disasters.

        Like

      4. D,

        I appreciate your viewpoint. However, I do not think you understand my position. For me, the hypothesis that we can design artificial antigen presentation systems that are both effective and safe has never been tested. We cannot know whether VLPs with made w/epitopes screened for both antigenicity and for homology to human proteins without mercury and without aluminum will be both safe and effective unless and until they are designed and tested. So if I am overly confident in anything, it is that I am confident that we are ignorant on whether safe & effective alternatives exist to vaccines. I stand firm in my ignorance as a reflection of the state of knowledge given the available data. That’s science, not optimism. I would hope that there is no dichotomy between “no science on artificial immunization ever” and people who want “safer” means of artificial immunization. However, there ARE some who believe (based on their understanding of the failure of vaccines) that no science should be done to study artificial means of immunization, for reasons you hint at – variables that science cannot control (spiritual energy in microbes, for example). I would hope that anyone working on new means of immunization keeps best intentions in both efficacy and safety in mind (safety first), follows existing best practices of science, and acts each day in a profoundly ethical manner. We cannot control the ethical impulses in each person involved – what I think of when you say “play with power”. Also, it’s one thing for me to offer to play a role in a new era in immunization science (screening pathogens for dangerous epitopes) and it’s another to think I can control what any of stakeholder do about the specific knowledge of which epitopes are dangerous. We have a different approach to epitope screening that should throw up red flags – and we have sent lists of epitopes to those trying to create Zika vaccines, for examples. It’s up to them to heed the warning about vaccine induced immunological damage at this point. Whether they will or will not – your guess is as good as mine. I do know that we cannot sit by and continue to allow profit motives be the primary dictator of the contents of vaccines and vaccine policies. Thanks for your input!

        Like

      5. D: You’ve spoken of the most fundamental truth in life: “. . . a basic appreciation of ourselves as part of and in relationship to the natural world.” We fail to recognize and appreciate this at our peril.

        Like

      6. James – I’m sorry, but you are so far down the engineer’s path of control and manipulation, that you don’t know the blind alley you’re in. The mistake you’re making is that of those whose minds have been captured to the agendas of power. A kind of intoxication that can’t even be discerned until the subject gets away from it, on return discovering it’s profoundly mind-altering effects.

        Whatever it is that heals us, and which can be encouraged by a gentle working-with, is much more profound than your agenda of fixing/improving/perfecting a machine.

        Find some time; be quite; listen; look inside. You’ll find something else. It may surprise you. Then, the task of life will shift.

        Like

      7. D -thank you for your opinion and input.

        You have not factored me in as a variable in your analysis. How is using natural antigens not “working with” a pathogen? You believe that lasting immunity is only possible via full-on infection, you are ignoring the tens of thousands of studies that show that antigenic epitopes induce immunity in mice. Your assessment is based on the low efficacy is existing vaccines. Not on science showing the alterantives to vaccines for artificial immunization are, or are not, efficacious and safe. I’d like to know as much as you with as little data!

        Mom died of breast cancer in 1972. I worked for years in a cancer center helping clinicians do research on cancer. I’m not in this for power, nor for wealth.

        Maybe one day you will see what I’m saying.

        Like

      8. You think I’m saying you’re interested in money??

        No, James. I’m saying your part of a system. You don’t know it with you good intentions, but you are playing the role of solving their technical problems and furthering that system of power.

        Waking up to some of the corruption is a step in the right direction, but you haven’t disconnected yourself. When you do, what the world needs will appear quite different.

        I think I’ll leave it here now as I don’t see that we are likely to make much further headway. But I do wish you a speedy journey.

        Like

      9. Oh, perhaps I will add, and maybe this might help on the way, that in the process it’s important to see the _thoroughness_ of the corruption. It’s not sufficient, but it is an important step. In that vein I highly commend to you Brian Martin’s web site on the suppression of dissent in science. He runs a Science, Technology and Society program at a university in AU: https://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/

        Relevant books are:

        “A Conspiracy of Cells” by Michael Gold
        (an excellent one page description is in part I of this paper: https://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/dissent/documents/AIDS/Pascal91.html)

        “Doubt is their Product” by David Michaels

        “Science for Sale” by David Lewis

        “Merchants of Doubt” by Naomi Oreskes

        “Moral Panic” by John Fekete

        and many more, but those are key texts.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Thank you SO MUCH for this article/essay. As a social scientist who focused on deviant behaviour (with a particular interest in corporate deviance/ white collar crime) I can’t begin to express my fears and frustrations with the corporate influence (take over?) and capture of governments and regulatory bodies. The very research institutions we rely upon for science in the public’s interest appear to have been hijacked by corporate interests (whether agricultural, pharmaceutical, or anywhere profits can be made at the expense of human and environmental health.

    We need more scientists like you who will defend science from such callous disregard for public safety.

    Robert Bright

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Thank you so much for your help and desire to see truth prevail, Dr. Lyons-Weiler. I greatly appreciate your open-mindedness and bravery. Here is an very good article that I read today that might interest you. The article is about various adjuvants in vaccines.
    There is so much important information starting to come out about vaccine safety. I pray that the CDC will be held responsible for their criminal actions.
    http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2015/03/29/vaccine-adjuvants-brain-effects.aspx?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=facebookmercola_ranart&utm_campaign=20160428_vaccine-adjuvants-brain-effects
    You might also enjoy reading Dr. Suzanne Humphries book, Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines and the Forgotten History. Dr. Humphries’ has some great lectures on YouTube as well.
    Blessings to you!

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Vaccination wasn’t created to eliminate smallpox, they knew the cause and the cure centuries before, it was purely designed to spread disease which it did, killing millions. As you can see with the two photos of vaccine production, with the quotes http://whale.to/a/smallpox_banners.html

    Cutting septic, animal & human germ ridden pus, into babies for over 140 years, spreading smallpox, leprosy eg into Hawaii http://whale.to/v/leprosy.html Syphilis etc, around the world.

    As you would expect.

    The fact they can suppress the true history of smallpox vax, and the true cause of autism, while giving 1 in 45 kids, millions, autism http://whale.to/vaccine/vaccine_autism_proven.html , and get away with it, is a sign of the true power of authority, http://whale.to/b/authoritarians_h.html Like they suppressed dozens of cancer cures http://whale.to/a/cancer_c.html and enforced chemo where 97% of patients are dead in 5 years http://whale.to/cancer/chemo.html

    Just statistics will demolish vaccination, such as the Measles vax where deaths declined by 99.4% before vaccination. http://whale.to/m/measlesdeaths1.html

    And the 70 year old Vitamin C cure for infections, also proves vaccination is nothing to do with preventing illness of deaths http://whale.to/a/vitamin_c_banners.html

    Whooping Cough http://whale.to/a/vitamin_c_whooping_cough.html
    Polio http://whale.to/vaccine/polio.html
    Meningitis http://whale.to/v/meningitis3.html
    Prevent cot-death http://whale.to/w/sids.htm

    It is naive to trust government medicine, given the fact ‘government’ has killed 300 million of us last century with wars http://whale.to/b/genocide_h.html , and has a covert, but well documented, thorough poisoning programme http://whale.to/b/covert_q.html chemtrails being the most visible.

    And we have shed loads of evidence showing we live in a Corporate run system, called ‘democracy’ but actually Fascist or a Pathocracy http://whale.to/b/political_mafia.html

    and it is obvious we are run by psychopaths http://whale.to/b/psychopaths_h.html , they lie, like Offit http://whale.to/v/offit1.html Deer http://whale.to/vaccines/deer_h.html

    the CDC is a very obvious vaccine corporate front for these companies, http://whale.to/vaccine/cdc.html

    It creates fear of viral disease which can all be traced to poisons and malnutrition, and easily curable with Vit C http://whale.to/a/infectious_scares.html

    Viral theory is so full of holes u could drive a bus through it, smallpox wasn’t contagious, like polio http://whale.to/c/virology_banners.html

    WHY VACCINATION CONTINUES EVEN THOUGH IT’S INEFFECTIVE AND DANGEROUS http://whale.to/vaccine/why_vaccination_continues.html

    VACCINATION IS CHILD ABUSE (BANNERS) http://whale.to/c/vaccination_is_child_abuse.html

    Like

    1. Whale to? As a cite? Really? The rants of an anti-semitic pig farmer? This is your idea of a valid source?

      Like

      1. But let me guess, the verbose, scientifically sparse ravings of an oncologist with a million conflicts of interest who spends more time typing the words “maybe”, “possibly”, “could have”, “may be”, etc., is just fine in your book?

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Thank you from a wife (once pro vaccine) of a vaccine injured husband. He got epilepsy after taking part in a vaccine trial later deemed unethical by Norewegian health authorities, and then severe ME after the hep. B vaccine. No compensation, of course. In Norway only Supreme Court rules in favor of the vaccine injured on rare occasions, and most people do not have the means to sue for damage in the first place.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. I am so happy you have joined this movement. May God bless your journey as you educate others. Thank you for your research. I’ve shared this article with like-minded friends to use as powerful ammunition for this (sometimes) lonely and disheartening position we take. I have a large circle of friends and acquaintances, but only a few of us have done the research and agree with you. At any rate, thank you.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I commend you however, it has taken far too long for scientist to see through the veil of the CDC lies and now we have millions of children with all types of diseases who will never have the freedom to live healthy normal lives. Because neither pediatricians or scientists would listen to parents, we are where we are now. And this kind of coverup continues in our food supply as well with GMOs declared safe and the science is settled. We must come together now to make it clear that those people who are responsible for this mess are sent to prison.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. As an informed mother of an unvaccinated 8-year old child (who is perfectly healthy and has never taken any allopathic medicine), I also say THANK YOU. Welcome outside of the Matrix! 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Thankyou.
    Well written article and aptly scathing.
    The health of our children is not for sale and we will not be subjected to forced or coerced medical procedures in 2016.
    It is a crime against humanity what has happened to millions of children now,including 3 of my own.
    I have seen and met people whose lives are forever impacted because they did what society expected and injected foreign biological agents and adjuvants into their once healthy children.
    Those same people are now attacked online,abused,called liars,have their names and images and locations published in the media.
    HATE crimes by the pharmaceutical industry.
    And there is NO compense nor justice for those drug pushing criminals who have harmed millions of Innocent children and destroyed lives.
    You’re correct in saying that it cannot be stopped now,what was never factored into Mans presumptive arrogance at attempting to fight microbes when we are genetically viral,is the power an angry mother has when her children are harmed or under threat.
    We will not be silent nor live in fear of being healthy and unmedicated.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Thank you for writing about your journey to understand the big bad world of vaccine science fraud. Most of us can’t imagine that anyone would deliberately lie in such a way that millions of babies could be harmed. Have you read the transcript of the Simpsonwood Meeting? If not, I think you would find that highly informative. From a secret meeting of 54 eminent scientists invited to CDC to discuss the problems they were finding with their vaccines and increased neurological incidents in children. The coverup has been going on for a long time. I thank you for speaking out boldly. I pray God will bless and protect you.

    Like

  11. Very informative article-Thankyou. Do you have any research/citations to prove that ‘babies are dying in the womb due to Mercury in flu vaccines’. I don’t doubt it but I would like to know if there is actual evidence to support it. Thankyou

    Like

  12. This might be my favorite article of all time! I also want to thank Mary for asking the question and thank Lou for challenging you and sending you on a journey to discover the science on your own. And I truly want to thank you for doing the research yourself, for years I brought studies and books to my pedi until I realized he never read one of them. Only repeats talking points. I’ve always found it the most ironic PR talking point term used to discredit our community and our stories by saying we are “anti science”. Ridiculous in my mind considering I’ve spent the last 14 years reading pubmed since my sons regression. Kudos to you, not just for doing the research but for not staying silent. It takes an incredible amount of courage without a personal stake to do. I really admire your integrity.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Chapnalli,
      Thank you so much, I am humbled by your statements. My personal stake has been my lifelong investment in the integrity of science, and to see policy placed before science induces a battle for an existence based on reality vs. one based on mythology. When people say I’m courageous, all I can think is how could anyone with the title “scientist” do anything other than objective interpretation? It’s not so much about me as it is about the lack of integrity in those who willfully mislead the masses. There are many others who came before me, sounding alarms, and they deserve massive amounts of credit. That includes those on the frontlines, the first scientists, like yourself, who have provided hundreds of thousands of observations that can no longer be ignored as first-order evidence for the hypothesis of vaccine-induced autism. The science that exists that has tested the hypothesis in a valid manner – and by this I do not only mean science that supports the hypothesis, but science done in a fair and impartial manner – needs to be identified and separated from the science that has been altered and manipulated. When the biostats community catches on to what has been done in the Destefano et al., Madsen, and Verstraeten studies, and when they read that IOM rejected 17/22 studies put forward by CDC as supportive, they will relentlessly tear those studies to shreds as examples of fraud never to be repeated. Lessons for future studies. Lessons for current scientists. The only choice we ever had was objectivity.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Thank you for writing tjis article. I used to be pro vaccine parent. Both my kids got some vaccines. That all changed when a healthcare professional gave my oldest a vaccine my husband and had decided our children did not need. We decided not to give the flu and chickenpox vaccine to our children. The doctor was informed and did not object. My daughter did not receive the first chickenpox vaccine. When it was time to get the booster, I told the doctor she did not get the first dose and we did not want the booster. By this time I had a 6 month old also. The doctor agreed. But the nurse came in and gave her the chickenpox booster. I was trusting, believing that as a parent they would not harm my child. The next day my husband recieved a call asking for any adverse effects to the vaccines. That is when we found out the nurse gave her something we said no to. I learned from that, since then I am now a nurse, and I inform my patients what they are receiving and if they don’t want it I don’t give it. I’ve also noticed a difference in the health of my children. My nieces and nephews who are all completely vaccinated, are always getting sick and needing antibiotics and going to the doctor. My children have not ever had an antibiotic and maybe get a cold once a year. This is of course an observation, but people swear vaccines are the best and their kids are always sick. I won’t give mu kids the flu vaccine, first because its really not effective. Studies havr shown this. Second I get sick from the flu vaccine and I don’t want the possibility of my kids having the same reaction.

    Like

    1. I too got sick from the flu vaccine many years ago.
      Now that I’m a Sr. The Dr. Is always asking me if I want the flu or pneumonia shot. I decline. I am lucky. I never get colds. Is it because I don’t get the shots. I don’t really know. But I’m not about to risk it.

      Like

      1. Johanna: I, too am a senior citizen. It seems like everywhere you go these days, someone is trying shove the flu shot into you. I don’t think I’ve ever had the flu, and haven’t been sick in eleven years, since I stopped eating all industrial food. I refuse all vaccinations. I’ve done pretty exhaustive research, and in my judgement they are, and always have been, quackery. They entirely bypass the point of entry for infectious diseases, and in so doing, alter the immune response; and they contain dangerous toxins, such as mercury and aluminum, which should never be used in medicine for any reason. I am convinced that they key to human health lies in the composition and diversity of the gut microbiome, and I’ve worked very hard to keep my colon critters happy. Expect to see pharma filing patents on firmacutes and all the rest of them, because they are beginning to smell money in them.

        Liked by 1 person

  14. I appreciate your story about your journey. This article mainly speaks to autism in regard to vaccines, but what is your take on vaccination leading to other auto-immune diseases in children? My child was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes 3 months after I finally allowed her to get the MMR (after fully vaccinating for the first 6 months of her life, then no more until age 2, then only 1 shot at a time, about 1/year after that).

    If you have the time and inclination to discuss this with me please reply here or email me.

    Like

  15. Hi James, very important article. If you don’t mind I’m throwing you another idea that possibly you are not familiar with, mainly because it’s related to the very new information of the states of water. It’s actually a bit beyond my comprehension or maybe more than a bit, but here’s what I was reading, http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/environmental-toxins/water-stressors-and-blood-flow/.

    As far as being courageous by writing and speaking up, as you mentioned you can have your career ruined by doing this, so yes, you are courageous. When the credibility of the CDC is in question, science is put on hold apparently. The financial liabilities would be incalcuable. The damage done already is.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. We have an obligation to not allow science on autism to be permanently parked “on hold”, for the convenience of the comfort of a few at the CDC who have misled everyone. In this study, autism is reported to be at 7% – SEVEN PERCENT.

      http://www.fasebj.org/content/30/1_Supplement/151.6.short

      http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/study-asks-folic-acid-autism-39034552

      Folic acid may indeed play a role where MTHFR mutations are found – which is everywhere. Including, by the way, in Brazil – where prenatal vitamins with folic acid were unleashed on a population om 2011. Microcephaly started way back in 2012.

      Babies w/MTHFR mutations or other mutations might not be able to handle the increase toxic load in the earlier & greater number of vaccines – and the other toxins in our environment.

      I am among the rapidly growing number of scientists who are not content to allow the powers that be to continue to add to the stack of cards.

      Liked by 1 person

  16. Thank you for this, very encouraging article. I’ve been researching this for many years, and it became more intense with becoming a grandparent 4 years ago. Thankfully my two kids have listened and my two grandchildren are both totally unvaccinated and very healthy. There is an interesting side of the story that I’m not sure if you have had the chance to look at yet (besides the toxins, heavy metals, and first hand accounts from parents which is more than enough for me) but I find very much a part of the whole picture. I’ve heard so many say that millions of lives have been saved by vaccines and its the best medical advancement of medicine ever etc. I just find that to be another part of the manipulation (the other is repeating over and over that they are safe). For example, measles had dropped dramatically before the vaccine came on the market, and with polio they changed the definition so it appeared the vaccine was making the numbers drop. In the meantime we had major changes in sanitation, standard of living, nutrition and the big change of indoor plumbing. There is also a fear mongering with some of these diseases. I grew up in a time when we all got the measles, my classmates, my siblings, my cousins etc etc. If you can youtube the episode of the Brady Bunch where the whole family got the measles, thats how it was. I know that there are rare cases when some children die, but for most its not like they portray it in the media and medical ads that try to scare parents that have never had the measles. Then they point to countries that children do die, but don’t add the fact that these children are dying of many diseases and malnutrition. I think of vaccines as a very old medical intervention that needs to be rethought, like really can’t we come up with something better so we can “first do no harm”?

    Like

  17. James Lyon Weiler: Glad you’ve learned and changed your mind, glad you’re speaking out. However, as the parent of a twice-vaccine-injured child, I have to say I’m not gonna volunteer my child for any experiments looking for new, safe vaccine technology. To hell with the whole idea. How about we stop vaccinating and then concentrate on fixing all the vaccine-injured kids. (Yeah, I’m bitter.)

    Like

    1. Who can blame you. However, the science of artificial immunization has been made stagnant by those holding out on the the actual state of the vaccine safety science. They used pseudocience to hide the association between vaccines and autism. I can imagine a more thorough victory for them than to cause the American public to lose confidence in science, removing our best tool available to fight the charlatans and shamwizards that currently hold the keys to the CDC.

      Like

      1. Here is the problem James, it is not just Autism and it is not just vaccines. And hiding uncomfortable truths even at the cost of human lives is standard operating procedure for big pharma and the alphabet agencies in bed with them. When SV40 was discovered in the Polio vaccine, they knew this was a cancer causing virus and Bernice Eddy said we would see a cancer epidemic in 40 years and we are living it now. A few at the top decided not to recall any tainted vaccines and not to tell doctors, clinics or Americans. Why? Because they did not want people thinking that vaccines could be unsafe, even though the SV40 tainted Polio virus was indeed unsafe. Who knows how many millions were murdered because of that vaccine.

        When it was discovered that Factors VIII and VIIII were tainted with the AIDS virus, a few at the top decided to not tell doctors, patients, and the public and ended up giving nearly every hemophiliac in the world AIDS. And because they didn’t know they passed it to others, loved ones. Around 15,000 in the U.S. alone were knowingly given AIDS. Law suits still exist today, but the government is simply waiting for them to die so it will go away. They did not want the America public thinking the blood supply could be “unsafe”, though it was indeed unsafe. Now instead the CDC tries to argue that SV40 has not been proven to cause cancer in humans, yet it is used in laboratories to induce soft-tissue cancers in animals in order to test cancer drugs. They have not found an animal yet, in which it will NOT cause cancer and we know SV40 has been found in soft tissue cancers. Even in children, which begs the question, is the vaccine still tainted, did they use the old vaccine as the seed for the new one, or has it altered our genetics to the point we are passing a cancer causing monkey virus to our children through conception and birth?

        Greed and protection of power are historically stronger than the life and health of their fellow human beings. Never ever to be trusted again. There is still a little Kool-Aid stain on your mouth.

        Like

  18. Thank you, a thousand times, thank you, for your INTEGRITY, which is sorely lacking in so many these days. My oldest child got the full range of vaccines, minus Pertussis after having a bad reaction to the first. Thankfully he had no serious (neurological) vaccine injuries, but he does have terrible asthma and skin allergies and there are no allergies in my or his father’s families. I have always wondered if the vaccines were responsible for overstimulating his immune system. My middle children were partially vaccinated with no ill effect, and my youngest will not be vaccinated unless things change. I am a retired RN, and weary of having my competence attacked any time I raise the question of vaccine safety. One does not have to be an “anti vaxer” to be viciously attacked – one only needs to step out of line a tiny bit, by suggesting an alternative schedule, or by acknowledging vaccine injury. That fascism from the pro vax crowd, together with the Hep B vaccine’s addition to the schedule for all newborn infants, are what opened my eyes and began my questioning. We need more people like you, people who have indisputable credentials, to be doing just what you’re doing. Thank you also for the very informative articles. We all need to increase our knowledge if we’re to successfully fight the lies and deception.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. THANK you from the bottom of my heart for having the courage to stand up and speak out on this issue. Our son, now 23 years old, suffered horrendous vaccine reactions as an infant, starting with his first vaccine, the Hep B vaccine, given to him at just 12 hours of age. They gave him the Hep B vaccine even though I’d tested negative for Hep B prior to giving birth. Since I knew the test results, we had no idea they would go ahead and vaccinate him. Why on earth would they even test me for Hep B if they were going to give him that vaccine anyway? Our son suffered with severe jaundice shortly after that vaccine was given to him. During my third trimester, a nurse convinced me that I absolutely had to have a tetanus shot because of a very mild cat scratch which hadn’t even broken my skin. Within one or two weeks after the DTP shot (whole cell – this was 1993), I went into pre-term labor.

    Even given all the above, it took us until our son was four months old to realize he was having severe vaccine reactions (all duly noted in his medical files). We were PRO vaccine until this happened. We quit vaccinating our son when he was six months of age and have never regretted it. Our son was left with severe learning disabilities, but thankfully, with homeopathic treatment and intensive academic tutoring, he is now attending college and doing very well.

    I have always said that it would take not just the parents screaming out about this issue, but the very pulse beat of the medical and scientific communities to open their HEARTS and minds to this horrific and catastrophic situation.

    We need more like you to speak out! Thank you so much, again.

    Like

  20. I have spent some time researching vaccines as I once was on board completely about giving them to my children. However, they are grown now and the amount of vaccines they got was about 1/4 of today. It has been a process but I am beginning to believe that “vaccines were never necessary” and “have done way more harm than we even have an inkling to.” They may have started out for the right reasons but even if a child doesn’t seem to show ANY visible harm, doesn’t mean he hasn’t been harmed. Look at all the diseases and problems today. Our kids are at risk! We live in such a toxic world yet the drug companies “just want to give our little ones more toxins” Does that sound like a company “that is looking for the truth?” Of course not.
    I know people that have NEVER given their child a shot and they are very healthy!!!!

    Like

  21. Dear James,
    Thanks a lot for your story on how you came around. You are courageous! We need more medics/scientists to come out and discuss this. I especially appreciate your activism. I am still early in my working life and I am gathering the courage to not be decimated by the establishment for thinking differently. In France, recently there has been a call by a retired Professor of Medicine, Prof Henri Joyeux, to sign a petition for a moratorium regarding HPV: http://sanevax.org/french-petition-hpv-vaccines/..he has since been stripped of his medical license by the government. Also, I wonder if you have seen a Danish reportage that was aired on the national TV regarding side effects against HPV vaccination: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO2i-r39hok . What most people may not know is that since that time, the Drs who were seeing these patients have published a study on their findings. Since then, the European Medicines Agency (the equivalent of the FDA) have launched a review on the subject only to conclude that the vaccine is ‘safe’. The Drs in the hospital in Copenhagen have since been criticized heavily for their research and their credibilities have been heavily questioned (few know this outside denmark since it has been reported only in danish news).
    These are difficult times for us working in this area… it calls for creative means to really get the information out to people so that there will be a tipping point in society where the majority of people are empowered to question old standing paradigms regarding their own health.

    Like

    1. Iko,
      Thank you for the comment. I do not feel brave. I feel as though I am doing science.

      We must remain objective and open-minded to our biases if we are going to be able to understand the world around us.

      I am appalled at the actions deemed acceptable by numerous individuals and organizations. It seems they would like to criminalize discussions or decisions based on knowledge from science. Take, for example, all of the evidence published to date that points to numerous specific mechanisms by which aluminum, mercury and other toxins may induce autism in some people. In my latest book, I found a wealth of information among the peer-reviewed studies not conducted by CDC. These studies are all cited at the book’s companion web site: The Environmental and Genetic Causes of Autism.

      I believe it is only a matter of time before everyone knows that there are certain individuals who are at the highest risk of developing autism due to vaccines. As more vaccines are added to the schedule, larger numbers of kids will be injured. We need to address the risk by finding biomarkers of risk to keep kids out of harm’s way. We need to respect parent’s rights to choose, after being provided with full information, not the biased information provided today. And professionals whose careers are damaged due to the oppressive majority, who would like all information on vaccine risk to disappear, should be respected and left alone. The “other side” thinks they can win this battle via legislation, rule-making, and other moves that will force vaccines. When they strip us of our rights, we the people will push back. We will outlaw direct-to-consumer marketing in the United States. We will pass health freedom laws that re-assert our natural and constitutional rights to individual sovereignty over our bodies, and our children’s bodies. We will repeal laws that protect pharmaceutical companies and medical doctors from liability. And we will hold those in government agencies who hid data, altered results, manipulated studies to make it appear as though no association exists between vaccines and autism accountable. Pharma is behind the 120 pieces of legislation put out in one year to push for vaccine mandates around the US. That is where we live. They have gone too far, and we will do clawbacks of profits if necessary to take care of the million or so families whose children have suffered autism as a direct result of CDC attempting to mislead the public with pseudoscience.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Indeed I think you have a big and important battle ahead of you in the States, where the pharmaceutical industry has had a very influential role in crafting legislation. It is unfortunate to see the debate framed between vaxxers and antivaxxers, the latter often being framed as irrational and ignorant. That is why, scientists who can argue back with facts need to come out and somehow find their voice amidst the cacophony of confusion. Perhaps scientists and doctors who are critical of vaccination should come together to form their own Union of Concerned Scientists?
        The EU is going the way of the US, and is becoming highly susceptible to lobbying. But culturally, the inhabitants are philosophically more inclined to being autonomous and resent the influence of multinationals that operate on the concept of neoliberal economic policies. We have highly critical programs on national tv highlighting the dangers of GM food, pesticide usage etc. The only last frontier to be crossed is vaccination. No one yet dares discuss this openly. It is amazing how scared people are (it”s ok to fight Monsanto, but not to fight GSK???). By parading as the saviour of children’s lives.. the pharmaceutical industries have had a monopoly over people’s bodies
        Having said that, the latest polls in France have showed that public confidence in vaccines have dipped greatly and this I think is a positive change, since the younger generation is much more prone to question their doctors judgment at the time of vaccinating their kids than ever before. As you said, people are fighting back in the US and I shall add also here in Europe.
        As scientists, I feel we need to specifically bridge the gap between citizens and the health care professionals. If we can provide data, graphics, reports, books etc etc that are convincing and credible so that doctors could just begin to question the paradigm, that would already be a step in the right direction. We really need to target doctors.. I think a synthesis of all that scientific data is crucial, so I thank you for doing just that in your book. I’ll be checking it out and hopefully build upon it in the future.

        Like

    2. Do I have this right? “Only” 12 studies show an association between certain vaccines and autism? If so, what are the 3,000 studies you talk about?

      Like

      1. I hate to be dense but it seems like the book “causes” is about the fact that both environment and genes can cause autism. What I am trying to tell people is if there are any double-blind, placebo-controlled studies linking autism with vaccines. I believe (from what I gather) that these are the only type of studies that are really valid and can be disputed. Are any of your sources these kind of studies?

        Like

      2. Perhaps James can enlighten us on this, but double-blinded studies cannot show an association if the specific group that are at risk is a minority and are therefore drowned out statistically speaking in the study. That is why precision/individualized medicine, ie knowing who is susceptible and who is not is really crucial. Unfortunately we are not there yet and those who are at risk will suffer terrible consequences. The real problem is that as a result of the assumption that vaccines are ok for everyone (based on those trials) rather than a detailed study of the children who have indeed been vaccine injured, we are not even doing the scientific studies necessary to really prove that vaccines are not safe for everyone. It’s a complete failure of acknowledging the problem which precludes a real solution to be found.
        An example, not related to vaccination is the case of thyroid disease. Double blinded studies have time and time again shown that therapy with T4 or levothyroxine is efficacious in treating hypothyroidism. However, many patients complain that the drug never worked for them, yet the studies show that it does. Who is right? Do we ignore the patients as being psychosomatic? Studies have now shown that indeed, almost up to a third of people with hypothyroidism have a genetic polymorphism that makes them less efficient converters of T4, the pro hormone, to T3, the active hormone. These patients actually do so much better on T3 therapy, which doctors for years have been hesitant to prescribe, due to ‘lack of evidence’.
        My point being that we must question, even the basics of how trials are conducted. At least that should be the spirit of objective science.

        Like

      3. ASD is now close to 2%. We should be able to see association, and there are a number of study designs that can enhance that. For example, double blinded studies of risk of autism in families with at least one biomarker for genetic risk of autism would provide a more certain answer. But I question if that is necessary anymore. To the numerous studies that DO show ‘association’, in one form or the other, there are also the initial results of association in numerous studies published by the CDC that they had to work very hard to make disappear. Since we now know that CDC worked for years on some studies to make associations go away, using model overfit (‘correcting for’ multicollinear variables), changed study designs off protocol, re-analyzed the result myriad ways until the found the result they wanted, ignored interaction terms, and when that all failed, simply removed the significant results, we can reasonably take each instance of their own unpublished results as further evidence of association. We are told that doing vaccinated/unvaccinated studies are unethical, because it would be to deny certain persons from protection against infectious disease. Remarkable, we’ve been told that we can’t find unvaccinated people to include in retrospective studies. All of this assumes that vaccination yields improved health outcomes, and therefore begs the very question of such studies. The book Jabbed! present data from studies in Europe that show better overall health in the unvaccinated. It is unethical to subject millions of people, none of whom have specifically consented to be part of vaccine studies, to an uncontrolled experiment and use post-market surveillance. Retrospective studies are among the weakest types of studies, most easily manipulated. Re-classifying vaccines as New Drugs would help clarify. If vaccines are safe, there should be no resistance to the re-classification: randomized prospective clinical trials will reveal efficacy and safety rates.

        Another important type of study that should be done are “injured” vs. “uninjured”. The fact that denialists refuse to accept the association results and the massive number of mechanistic studies that show how vaccines may in fact cause autism in some people, and that CDC worked to hide positive association results, means that all of the science that should have been done 15 years ago must be done now. With “injured” vs. “uninjured” (e.g., “ASD” vs. “Neurotypical”, we could seek risk biomarkers that could indicate which individuals should not receive vaccines. Such a study could report the % liability for each vaccine type. Serious adverse events rates could be curtailed (VAERS underestimates by at least a factor of 1,000). We could reduce rates of autism dramatically. While studying risk biomarkers, we could also formalize the study of diagnostic biomarkers – and monitor kids for early medical evidence of serious adverse events. We could also formalize the study of treatment biomarkers – indicators of which pathways to treatment may alleviate symptoms in specific individuals – i.e., personalized medicine.

        Before any of this important work can be done, we must accept what the totality of the science says: that vaccines may indeed induce autism in some people. See envgencauses.com for >1,000 peer-reviewed studies referenced on autism in “Causes”.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s