I will discuss this soon, but here is a press release from the attorney representing William Thompson, a CDC researcher involved who appears to have spoken with vaccine antagonistic activists Andrew Wakefield and Brian Hooker about work he had performed on autism.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE-AUGUST 27,2014
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM W. THOMPSON, Ph.D., REGARDING THE 2004 ARTICLE EXAMINING THE POSSIBILITY OF A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MMR VACCINE AND AUTISM
My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, where I have worked since 1998.I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.
I want to be absolutely clear that I believe vaccines have saved and continue to save countless lives. I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefits.
My concern has been the decision to omit relevant findings in a particular study for a particular sub group for a particular vaccine. There have always been recognized risks for vaccination and I believe it is the responsibility of the CDC to properly convey the risks associated with receipt of those vaccines.
I have had many discussions with Dr. Brian Hooker over the last 10 months regarding studies the CDC has carried out regarding vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes including autism spectrum disorders. I share his beliefthat CDC decision-making and analyses should be transparent. I was not, however, aware that he was recording any of our conversations, nor was I given any choice regarding whether my name would be made public or my voice would be put on the Internet.
I am grateful for the many supportive e-mails that I have received over the last several days.
I will not be answering further questions at this time. I am providing information to Congressman William Posey, and of course will continue to cooperate with Congress. I have also offered to assist with reanalysis of the study data or development of further studies. For the time being, however, I am focused on my job and my family.Reasonable scientists can and do differ in their interpretation of information. I will do everything I can to assist any unbiased and objective scientists inside or outside the CDC to analyze data collected by the CDC or other public organizations for the purpose of understanding whether vaccines are associated with an increased risk of autism. There are still more questions than answers, and I appreciate that so many families are looking for answers from the scientific community.
My colleagues and supervisors at the CDC have been entirely professional since this matter became public. In fact, I received a performance-based award after this story came out. I have experienced no pressure or retaliation and certainly was not escorted from the building, as some have stated.
Dr. Thompson is represented by Frederick M. Morgan,Jr., Morgan Verkamp, LLC, Cincinnati, Ohio, http://www.morganverkamp.com.
Mr. Thompson has been called the “CDC Whistleblower” by the groups promoting the idea that vaccines cause autism.
—
By Matt Carey
Left Brain Right Brain 
Reblogged this on Nature Study in the City and commented:
Whisteblower??? No. illegally recorded dude? yes.
Not always. In some states a person may intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication when the person is a party to the conversation. It depends on the statute in state where the intercept occurred.
You’re right, thanks for pointing that out. Still, its a slime-ball thing to do without consent. (if it were me, i’d be weighing my options on a civil law suit. )
http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/georgia-recording-law
And the law in Brian Hooker’s home state, where he most likely made the calls is?
Ironic how in a discussion of unreported data you leave that out.
Thank you!
Did you believe the WMD lies too? Most people fell for that one.
How about the 40 year lie that saturated fat causes heart disease? It seems we all fell for that one..
I’m not following your point Paul.
It’s the old, “sometimes people lie. So what you are believing is a lie” false logic.
Let’s take a more direct logic. Andrew Wakefield lies. He’s been doing it for at least 17 years. Want me to give examples? I’ve got them.
Wakefield lied to Thompson. He used Thompson. Wakefield lied to the public when he presented his first video as the voluntary statements of a whistleblower.
Paul wants to believe what Mr. Wakefield wants him to believe. OK. Free country and all that. People are free to be misled. I’m not going that route.
I see. I couldn’t figure out that he was making an argument, I guess because there is no logic there. (I’m autistic Paul, you need to be more direct, and makes some sense.)
Its like saying because one car mechanic padded your bill, its a given the pharmacist will replace your meds with placebo.
?
What are you going on about? And if it is about the MMR vaccine, what about the other studies in the UK, Denmark, Japan, Australia and Canada? Are they all wrong about African American males who were vaccinated between 18 and 36 months?
“Did you believe the WMD lies too? Most people fell for that one. ”
And in that scenario, Mr. Wakefield would be who exactly? Colin Powell? Cutting and editing the evidence he gives to make us believe what he wants us to believe?
Not falling for it this time.
I never fell for them, even if you did, Are you absolutely sure we should trust your judgment, Matt?
I never even considered whether you would want to trust my judgment. Given your posts, it’s pretty clear that you won’t. But I’ll you believe yourself to have an open mind and that’s part of what has allowed you to see what I don’t in this. Part of the ironies that come up in these conversations.
instead of focusing on the fact that the CDC LIED about the link between mmr, African American boys, and autism, you want to talk about whether or not it was ok to record a conversation. ‘Merica. Yet, when the owner of a basketball team is having a private conversation which affects NOBODY’S health, he loses his team and it’s national news. ‘Merica.
Actually, I spent nearly 6000 words discussing this entire story recently, including a discussion about the data. Did you miss that? So there’s no “instead of” but “in addition to”. Also, I note that there’s no “CDC lied”. You are taking the word of some unethical people who are placing their own agenda on top of the recent events. Read the statement above, or read it again, as apparently you are missing key information.
You saw the statement. Pretty clearly even Mr. Thompson doesn’t think the data show that the MMR vaccine is causing a dramatic increased autism risk in African American children. He states that children of all races should be vaccinated. He states that this is a scientific dispute, he does not say fraud or lying. He agreed to the author’s consensus as to what would go in their paper 10 years ago. Now he wishes that one result–one rather weak result–should be made public and discussed. Discussed. Not used as a springboard for attacks on vaccines by people with agendas who are misrepresenting that very result.
Or did that pass you by?
I will not apologize for calling out Brian Hooker and Andrew Wakefield for their unethical actions in this matter. Nor do I plan to stop. If you wish to have a real discussion about this, go ahead. If you are just doing a drive-by complaint, well, I’ve seen that over and over and will see it again.
Seems to me that you didn’t understand what Mr. Thompson is trying to convey. He states, in general terms and for all the vaccines, that children should be vaccinated. The question is not if we should vaccinate our children, the question is if it makes sense to do it when they are so young. Some of this vaccines are administered to newborns, just a few days old, before there immunologic system has completely develop. What will be the risk of waiting until they are older than 36 months? at least for some of the vaccines that are questionable, like MMR, and for all the vaccines until they are at least a couple of months old.
” the question is if it makes sense to do it when they are so young”
And that is in his statement where, exactly? You appear to be projecting.
“The question is not if we should vaccinate our children, the question is if it makes sense to do it when they are so young”
Really? Where does he say that?
If you take Mr. Hooker’s result as somehow a valid demonstration of MMR causing autism (which would mean you have a rather low threshold for what amounts to “valid”) you would then have to accept that delaying vaccines is problematic. There is no increased risk in his calculation for vaccinating at 12 months.
“What will be the risk of waiting until they are older than 36 months? ”
If you are that ignorant, why are you making these statements? The risk is of increasing the fraction of the extremely vulnerable population which is open to infection. Not only are you putting more children at risk, you are increasing the likelihood of an outbreak spreading.
Delay MMR to >3 years old and the all infants and toddlers now create a pool of unprotected individuals.
“at least for some of the vaccines that are questionable
Because it is a given that the MMR is questionable? Well, at least we know you are highly biased. As well as, apparently, very ignorant. Or are you making recommendations that would put all infants and toddlers at risk knowing the actual risk? Not a calculated risk which is obviously a spurious result. A known risk.
And thus we see the mindset that Mr. Wakefield has fed with his highly dishonest approach to this study.
” at least for some of the vaccines that are questionable, like MMR, and for all the vaccines until they are at least a couple of months old.”
The children that were vaccinated during the recommended timeline about fifteen months instead of waiting until age two were fine. The only issue seemed to be a subset that were vaccinated late.
Why is the MMR questionable? It has been in used in the USA since 1971. If there was a casual relationship between the MMR and autism it would have been noticed much earlier than Wakefield’s questionable study.
“The children that were vaccinated during the recommended timeline about fifteen months instead of waiting until age two were fine. ”
And Mr. Hooker’s analysis doesn’t say that those vaccinated later are “not fine”. it says that in an uncontrolled analysis there is a possibility of a concern. One which is not present in the full analysis.
“Pretty clearly even Mr. Thompson doesn’t think the data show that the MMR vaccine is causing a dramatic increased autism risk in African American children.”
You may alleged that but you seem to forget that Dr Thompson actually said, ““Oh my God, I did not believe that we did what we did, but we did. It’s all there… This is the lowest point in my career, that I went along with that paper. I have great shame now when I meet families of kids with autism, because I have been part of the problem.”
Or did that pass you by?
Pretty clearly Dr Thompson is not saying what you’re saying.
Yep. I will go by the statement Mr. Thompson made for public consumption which has not been edited without his consent. If you wish to take what Mr. Wakefield edited for you and then add your own interpretation, be my guest. Don’t ask me to say you are right.
Mr. Thompson appears quite upset about not bringing these data to the public’s eye. A matter of possible intellectual honesty. That’s vastly different than saying “we harmed kids for 10 years” which is what the editing Mr. Wakefield has done is leading people to believe.
If he felt that the MMR vaccine were actually resulting in autism in African American boys, would he recommend that children of all races be vaccinated?
Do you have the full recording? If so, please post it for us all to discuss. I’ll go on what Mr. Thompson has told the public. Not the fragments that dishonest people who lie and cheat whistleblowers prepare for me. That’s me. You go with a different standard if you wish.
Matt, you’re spinning what Dr Thompson has told the public because you apparently have a closed mind on the subject.
Well if that were true you could actually dissect what I said and make an argument rather than an accusation. Oh, and here’s that whole “open mind/closed mind” thing I was expecting.
So, I’ll ask you again, where does Mr. Thompson say “the question is if it makes sense to do it when they are so young”? Pretty simple. But instead of answering that or the other substantive discussion points I raised, you go on the attack.
I think you can find places where others will complement you on your open minded approach and not challenge you to actually have an open mind.
Matt, I dissected what you said at August 31, 2014 at 01:49. You audaciously alluded that Dr Thompson doesn’t think that the data showed the MMR vaccine is causing a significant increased risk of autism.
Yet Dr Thompson is obviously completely guilt ridden in the audio recording and his words do not reflect in anyway reflect what you allude his written statement to mean to you.
In fact, it’s pretty clear that what you say is precisely the opposite of what he says. Which begs the question; If you so confident in your beliefs, why do you feel the need to spin what Dr Thompson has said quite so blatantly to convince people of your beliefs?
Answers on a postcard please!
So, Mr. Wakefield and Mr. Hooker call dedicated public health professionals worse than Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot, and this is “audacious”? You have a very strong bias and it is showing.
Mr. Thompson says exactly what he regrets and what his concerns are. I’ll quote it again
and
I set aside the framing of this that was put forth by Mr. Wakefield and Mr. Hooker. I realized writing this that many people are very attached to that framework. But I decided to work from scratch on this. I knew that I would almost certainly wake up to read that Mr. Wakefield’s supporters would call this “spin”.
So, you accept the version of events by people who (a) recorded Thompson and outed him against his will, (b) put out a PR video that is remarkably biased, (c) have lied on multiple occasions about the original study and I am the one who is “spinning” the message?
Would you be so kind as to point me to your statement distancing yourself from the ugly race-baiting attack that is the video? Since you are so offended by spin, you must have made that clear.
Sorry, I left a link out of the comment above. It was added after I submitted it.
And why, Matt, do you insist on referring to as ‘Mr’ Thompson and not Dr Thompson? Is it to try and downplay his credibility?
Oh, and why have you felt the need to spend so much time ‘framing’ your other articles on this subject? I’m sorry to burst your bubble but its pretty clear that you doth ‘frame’ your audacious opinions a little too much..
Anyone reading here who is aware of ‘Rank’s Intensify/Downplay Schema’ will spot what your doing a mile off. You way too obvious dude! And it doesn’t help your case that you are being constantly referenced by the infamous troll Dorit Reiss.
Oh dear, was that your credibility I heard going out the window?
this question comes up occasionally. Usually in the form like you just presented it, as a complaint.
I chose a few years ago to reserve “Dr.” for practicing medical personnel. After choosing this criterion, I noticed that the New York Times has the same criterion. So I’m good with my choice.
Most of my professional career has been working with other Ph.D.’s. This includes IBM Research. Calling someone “Dr.” just wasn’t done. I can tell you that even sitting at a table with Gerd Binnig , no one called anyone “Dr.”. I never met Benoit Mandelbrodt, also of IBM Research, but I heard he went by “Benny”.
I do not ask nor require people to refer to me as “Dr. Carey”, even though I hold 5 degrees and have 14 letters I could put after my name. Those are not fellowships, by the way, like FAAP. Those are letters referring to the degrees.
I have broken this pattern for two people I can think of in recent history. One is Dr. Yeargan-Allsopp. She is a civil rights pioneer who holds an M.D.. While I don’t know if she’s a practicing physician, she is someone who has spent more than 10 years working to help people my kid. And she’s been viciously attacked by a fellow autism parent and his fraud partner. I’m good with calling her Dr.. If you want to call me inconsistent, go ahead.
I note you framed your comment as a question but it really isn’t. It’s an attack. On something really tiny. I guess we are done here. But go ahead and use this on Facebook and twitter and elsewhere to claim I have no credibility. It says more about you than it does about me.
Dr. Carey has little patience with those who flaunt their non-medical Phd’s on medical subjects. His PhD is in physics and would be satisfied with being known as “Matt Carey, PhD.”
Does that answer your question?
So, Matt, it’s pretty clear your saying it’s ok for you to spin what Dr Thompson says because you think Wakefield and Hooker are spinning things too. Interesting reasoning!
Carry on audaciously putting words in Dr Thompsom’s mouth and quoting him out of context so that it becomes obvious to everyone who reads your blog what you are doing.
PS – if you bias had been less obvious it would be harder for people like me to point it out. Thanks for that!
If you want to know what I think, you can ask. But you chose to tell me. That’s very common. If it’s clear to you that I think something that I don’t, that explains why many things can be “clear” to you when they are false.
You give vacuous attacks. I give substantive responses. Very much a pattern I’ve seen over the years from others: Raise the noise level and try to drown out the message.
Though all that would be mute if you could produce Hooker’s medical license. Do you have that information? Is he a licensed medical practitioner?
Are you trying to change the subject away from Matt’s audacious spinning Dr Thompson’s words by any chance?
8 comments and you still are just trying to provoke. That’s fine. I wouldn’t have lasted this long writing if I let that get to me. I’ve asked many times for you to actually discuss, though. I’ve been quite open to hearing what you had to say. I just wanted you to actually say something.
Paul would like readers to know that he believes I am infringing on his free speech rights. In his complaints (which were held in moderation queue) he again fails to actually take part in the discussion.
Paul has had ample opportunity to express his opinion and take part in the conversation. I can not and will not try to infringe on his free speech. I do not, however, feel that he has the right to take up more of my time or that of the readers here. Free speech isn’t “I will keep writing the same thing over and over until I provoke a bad response”. But, Paul will no doubt take the opinion that he somehow has “won” that I can’t stand the heat or something. That’s pretty typical.
agreed
Well I just don’t trust the CDC at all now. They deliberately hid information in an effort to manipulate public sentiment. That so much is unquestioned. And now they’ve lost trust.
How well hid was it if Hooker was able to get all of the data?
It took Hooker almost a decade to get the info under FOIA, genius. The CDC is honest and transparent. Sucker. Stupid fool.
You don’t need a foia to get the dataset. One needs to follow some simple rules for in an application process described by the CDC. No one applied for years and eventually they took the information for this specific dataset off the web.
Hooker only applied for access because someone told him to.
As to the genius crack– derogatory comments about intelligence are not welcome here. You want to stigmatize my kid, go elsewhere.
Really? How does one get a restricted dataset with a FOIA?
Answer, one does not. One applies for access. The dataset he used was available since the 2004 CDC paper was published. CDC finally took down the link last year because they had no interest. The link is back up telling people how to get access.
Why do you think it took ten years? He has always said it was the thimerosal, not the MMR vaccine. For all we know he just requested that data a couple of years ago, and has been spending that time torturing the data.
Hooker is now, let’s say, demonstrating ignorance and telling people that the CDC his the dataset.
I contacted the CDC last week about this dataset and was informed that they would put instructions on how to get access *back* on the web.
And you had complete trust in them two weeks ago, I suppose?
“That so much is unquestioned.”
By you. Why did you not question it?
It all deducts down to values and perspective.We believe what we want to believe; whether the situation involves a very wealthy bigot or a lifelong bureaucratic biologist. Critical thinking is a very powerful and sometimes detrimental attribute. The situation in question is not whether a government agency deliberately omitted scientific information that directly impacted and continues to impact the general population. The question is whether the general population will allow themselves to imagine that this is possible, and if this is possible, what is the motive/motives and from whom would the decision to cover such information come from. Think outside your own subjective ideology and comfort zone for a few minutes; seriously, think objectively for a few moments. What would be the driving factor behind covering up information that could give hundreds of thousands of people, families and parents closure to their child being different? Could it be the fact that we are better off not knowing? Would information of this caliber add fuel/significance to years of invalid accusations? Would valid news of this magnitude perpetuate mass pandemonium and revolt from the general population? Could this mishap from a tested vaccine be from a short cut motivated by profit motive in the greatest capitalist country in our ever so integrated global economy? Could a very influential political figure be the broker between pharma company (that maybe cut corners in order to save billions) and a government ran and regulated FDA and CDC? I would objectively consider all of these questions to be relevant to this situation. If history has taught us anything, it has proved that when necessary governmental entities have and will supersede the best interest of the people to insure the best interests of those who stand to profit financially; and in some cases protect a certain standard of living for everyone involved. I expect that my perspective will come under direct scrutiny and may be seen as radical or even as a conspiracy theory. I assure you that my views are in line with none of these. Autism may never affect anyone on this thread, but if it does I can assure you that closure, no matter how deep or deceptive or painful it may be, will be a welcome piece to the puzzle.
” Think outside your own subjective ideology and comfort zone for a few minutes; seriously, think objectively for a few moments. ”
I suggest you do the same. As in why do you assume that others in this discussion don’t think objectively or leave their comfort zone? Seems like you hard staying firmly in yours.
I don’t say this without reason. You later write.
” Autism may never affect anyone on this thread, ”
Get out of your comfort zone and scroll up to where it says “autism blog” and stuff about autism news, science politics and stuff like that. Read other pages on this blog where you will see that the owner (me) is the parent of an autistic child. The founder is the parent of an autistic child. Autistics have written for this blog.
“Autism may never affect anyone on this thread, but if it does I can assure you that closure, no matter how deep or deceptive or painful it may be, will be a welcome piece to the puzzle.”
Wow, that is not even wrong. You might try reading this blog for a bit.
I have read all 23 responses to this piece, and I must say that I have read them over and over again trying to figure out who takes what stand on the issue. I must make it clear that I am very confused! It is my perspective that several contributors to this thread are just argumentative to the fact, with no real insight, perspective or scholarly acumen. If you want to argue about cats and whether they have nine lives, I find an uneducated Facebook post to be adequate. In the mean time if you would like to rebuke my questions in a pragmatic and professional way other than copying and pasting a statement and briefly making unprofessional (squirly) emotional accusations, I may continue to entertain this other wise wasteful exchange. Also, please feel free to help me understand your individual positions on this topic, because I am confused as why any parent with a child who has been effected by the CDC and the decisions that openly omitted devastating evidence, would or could even consider taking sides with any of these fascist bureaucrats.
You seem concerned.
What’s getting lost, is what the scientist, Dr. William Thompson said. Whether he said it in private without knowledge of being taped is irrelevant. He said it with full intention of helping out the anti-vaxxers. He doesn’t seem to believe himself that “vaccines do not cause autism.” I do believe you have to take it under consideration that he knows more than he told Hooker.
Either he has lost his mind, become irrational, or he attempted to leak information to the outside. Somehow, he doesn’t seem to believe the party line.
It isn’t lost, merely temporarily misplaced. I’m planning on writing on this if I don’t tire of these events in general.
Thompson is on tape giving tips to an anti vaccine activist on how to frame a discussion n a way to frighten people. He has volunteered to work on future vaccine autism studies. I’m not of a mind that given his actions he would be a good choice.
“I have read all 23 responses to this piece, and I must say that I have read them over and over again trying to figure out who takes what stand on the issue”
I meant read the other articles in this blog. You can start with these:
https://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/category/politics/iacc/
Dr. Carey is a public member of the IACC.
“Also, please feel free to help me understand your individual positions on this topic, because I am confused as why any parent with a child who has been effected by the CDC and the decisions that openly omitted devastating evidence, would or could even consider taking sides with any of these fascist bureaucrats.”
Is your child an African American male who received their MMR vaccine between 24 and 36 months? Because that is the only affected demographic.
By the way, I am a parent of a child who suffered seizures from a disease before its vaccine was available. I know from personal experience the diseases cause disabilities. If you have evidence that the MMR vaccine (because it is the vaccine being discussed) caused more harm than measles, feel free to share. But it is not Dr. Hooker’s paper.
By the way, Jarret, also read this:
https://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2014/08/26/autism-atlanta-mmr-serious-questions-and-also-how-brian-hooker-and-andrew-wakefield-are-causing-damage-to-the-autism-communties/
It is the 6000 word blog post that Matt Carey told you about.
I hope you don’t tire of it. But I can see how you would. Yes, I’ve heard that tape. Either he’s got a mighty guilt complex, or…I don’t know. Sometimes whistleblowers are whistleblowers for a reason. What he said in that tape, I like, but that is because I have my own agenda. I do, I’ll admit. Same as it always was. Probably dumb as hell, but, I’m tired, too.
The next IACC is on the iceberg of autism with the co-existing conditions below, isn’t it? That is a GOOD thang…I’ve always seen it..surprisingly. I think being a teacher, and having that behavior lab every day just made it apparent. Kids are complicated…and those special kids, especially so. Never boring…
I wasn’t a behaviorist, or I was for only 7 months…the behavior lab is the part you don’t learn about teaching in college, and that has nothing to do with the subject you teach.
http://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/regressive-autism-reported-twice-often-among-african-american-children
I looked for the study, this is possibly it but I can’t tell. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3738832/ They don’t link to it directly.
It has been tweeted twice among #CDCwhistleblower hashtags that I saw.
From Autism Speaks Article:
“Developmental-behavioral pediatrician Adiaha Spinks Franklin found differences in reported regression rates among children with autism. ”
“…However, Dr. Franklin was the first to tease apart regression rates by ethnicity. She found a rate twice as high among African American children as Caucasian children.”
I am not a crank…or, too much of one. Just putting what I perceive to be respectable science out there.
You have my permission to delete this post or any post I write.
thiomersal + WWThompson, Pub Med…weird…
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Thompson+WW%5BAuthor%5D+thimerosal
Why did he get all jacked up on that audio? “Thimerosal causes tics…mantra.” “autism-lite” That’s big stuff.
Also, found the study by Spinks-Franklin reporting Black 2x’s like to regress. http://www.pas-meeting.org/press/Tues/Spinks-Franklin%20Developmental%20regression%20752881%20Tues%20revised.pdf Truthfully don’t have the brains to know if it concerns the disputed study. Sometimes it takes days for some things to sink in.
The first thing lost in any war is truth. Deception, confusion and lying are on warp-speed. Eugenics is practiced now under the name of genetics, bio-tech, etc. Study what the high ranking members of the ruling class have said about killing or reducing the population down to less than one billion, How does this relate to vaccinations? Vaccinations are a small tool (soon to be much larger) in the hands of the ruling class to reduce population. Stop being so naïve! What humanity is faced with is how to stop or slow down an overpowering death cult.
“Vaccinations are a small tool (soon to be much larger) in the hands of the ruling class to reduce population.”
The way they do that is by assuring parents that their children have a better chance of growing. They will no longer have to give birth to six kids with the hope that two or three survive childhood.
The best way to stop rampant population growth is to educate women, and make sure their kids stay healthy. This why countries that used to known for large families (like Ireland and Italy) now have two or three kids, not a dozen (like my stepmother’s Norwegian grandparents).
You might want to stop with the conspiracy theories and educate yourself on what is happening in the world. One good place to start is Hans Rosling’s GapMinder website:
http://www.gapminder.org/videos/will-saving-poor-children-lead-to-overpopulation/
Here is some simple Science. Since we knew in 1980 that less than 1 in 15,000 children had autism we effect immediately go back to the vaccine schedule of 1980. We do this for 5 years and see if the autism rates decline. Every single major pharma player is guilty and convicted of Criminal and Civil fraud and no human should be mandated to do business with known Criminals. Our son was vaccine injured. The entire idea of a vaccine injury court is disgusting. The CDC & FDA are grossly negligent and to date the double blind placebo studies of vaccines — where the alternate placebo is not another vaccine or full of known toxic adjuvants are undone. We are shooting pregnant women with DTAP & FLU vaccine and neither is FDA approved for use in the pregnant and then we are telling said women their children were born with Autism after they were injected with known NEURO TOXINS while pregnant. Sorry, this is not science this is a schedule of death and we have some of the sickest children on the planet full of auto immune disease of every single kind.
“Since we knew in 1980 that less than 1 in 15,000 children had autism”
We did? Could you provide a source? One that shows the prevalence of autism, using today’s standards, for children born in 1980?
I’ll answer for you–you can’t.
“we effect immediately go back to the vaccine schedule of 1980. We do this for 5 years and see if the autism rates decline.”
So, we make a big increase in the exposure to mercury (thimerosal) that infants are exposed to? Because that is exactly what you are proposing. I take it, then, that you don’t believe in the idea that thimerosal causes autism? If so, good for you. That idea has been thoroughly tested and, yes, thimerosal does not increase autism risk.
” this is a schedule of death”
Curious, do you admit to being anti-vaccine or do you hide behind the “I’m pro safe vaccine” label?
I would describe after reading his statement given that he is talking to government. That he has found issues with data being suppressed .. this is the one paragraph that matters and to me that is what I would call a whistleblow .. when someone admits that a government organisation has “omitted statistically significant information”
“I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.”
“I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics.”
There is a difference between “statistically significant information” and biologically significant information. Thompson knows this. He wrote, “The fact that we found a strong statistically significant finding among black males does not mean that there was a true association between the MMR vaccine and autism-like features in this subpopulation.”
Thompson’s co-authors understood the difference between “statistically significant” and biologically significant. There’s no plausible biological explanation for why (contra Wakefield) MMR vaccine would not increase the odds of ASD in white boys or girls, black girls, or black boys who were vaccinated on time, but would increase the odds only in African-American boys who were vaccinated late. Accordingly, Thompson’s co-authors suggested that the observation was due to “an artifact of immunization requirements for preschool special education attendance in case children.”
Fortunately, we now know that MMR did not increase the risk for ASD even in individuals who are already at high risk in a study of 96,000 children. [Jain A et al. Autism occurrence by MMR vaccine status among US children with older siblings with and without autism. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2015 Apr 21;313(15):1534-40.]
The wise traditions podcast interviewed the person who produced the movie vaxxed… Apprenently in California it is a two party consent state wrt recordings… Oregon is not, and the person who recorded Thompson drove to Oregon every time to legally record the conversation , unbeknownst to Thompson… The legal rules are, it is always the laxest states rules involved that rule, meaning it didn’t matter what Ohio’s rules were…
But Thompson was given warning before anything was made public… He was told to seek out an attorney, and obtain whistleblower status to protect his job. He wasn’t blindsided by the Revelation.
The producer of the movie does not describe himself as anti vaccine, but rather pro vaccine safety.. in favor of fully transparent discussions, removing safety testing from producer to independent testing, and removing conflicts of interest. Those are not terrible objectives.
You are incorrect. Thompson was not told to seek out an attorney. Per the conversations that were released, after one conversation with Hooker, Thompson panicked that he was about to be betrayed and sought legal counsel.
He was wise to do so.
Heard anything from him in the past few years? No, you haven’t. If he actually believed vaccines were causing autism, he would have stepped forward.
The producers of VAXXED are liars. How they describe themselves is irrelevant. One of the producers has stated publicly that no amount of evidence would ever lead her to believe that vaccines are safe. It’s hard to be “pro vaccine safety” when you don’t believe in vaccine safety.
Perhaps you should peddle your “simple truth” to people who didn’t actually follow the story.
“It’s hard to be “pro vaccine safety” when you don’t believe in vaccine safety.”
It is hard to question the safety of vaccines when you believe that the “science is settled” and that “vaccines are safe”.
Ah, the “I am open minded and you aren’t” argument. Pretty typical of the anti-vaccine community (together with the “oh, did you call me anti-vaccine? Well, then I don’t have to listen to you.” response)
Where did I say the science is settled. Oh, that’s right, I didn’t. But, the science is OVERWHELMINGLY against vaccines causing autism. OVER WHELMINGLY.
Gee, I guess I could pretend to be “open minded”, while secretly hiding my disdain for vaccines. But, I don’t. I make decisions based on the evidence available. And I look at ALL the evidence. As demonstrated by hundreds of posts where I analyze studies on both sides.
Which is better than what you are doing–surfing the web and trying to cast doubt and confusion where you can.
You make comments with ZERO evidence or arguments to back up your claim. But, hey, if just one person is left with misinformation by your efforts, it’s a success for you, right?