• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of, and finding treatments for, complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia, long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

CDC whistleblower reveals cover-up linking MMR vaccines to autism

Daisymay

Senior Member
Messages
754
http://www.naturalnews.com/046535_MMR_vaccines_autism_CDC_whistleblower.html

CDC whistleblower reveals cover-up linking MMR vaccines to autism in African-Americans

Natural News is currently investigating a breaking story based on a CDC whistleblower stepping forward with shocking proof of an incredible cover-up. According to information available so far, it appears the CDC knowingly engaged in a medical conspiracy to deliberately hide from the public damning evidence about MMR vaccines causing a very large increase in autism among African-American babies.


If what we are hearing so far is true, it means the CDC has deliberately run a decade-long cover-up which condemned tens of thousands of African-American children to a life of autism caused by MMR vaccines. It would also mean the CDC has engaged in a shameless conspiracy to hide the truth about the damage caused by vaccines, confirming the agency's primary mission of protecting pharmaceutical profits even at the expense of human life.

This story is potentially the greatest scientific conspiracy in the history of modern medicine. Accordingly, you can expect the entire mainstream media to completely censor the story and try to pretend it never happened.
 

SilverbladeTE

Senior Member
Messages
3,043
Location
Somewhere near Glasgow, Scotland
Evidence is required. it's easy to claim especially for ad revenue...but, we won't hear the main media talking about such because *they are up to their asses in the multi-layered evil that is Corporate Fascism*

Murdoch's lot held over $350 million in shares of GSK, makers of, MMR vaccine...Murdoch's son was a non exec director of...GSK!
that is par for the course by these elite wahoos. Ya think they will expose stuff that will cost them money long term/big?
nope, they will play all kinds of games, including making false allegations to fool gullible, make money off that somehow, and oh have another article about "new drug stops cancer!" complete crap but pushed up shares they already have and they make a mint!

But great evils are not impossible, Vioxx killed at least 55,000 Americans, many put the figure at least 80,000+

and hey we are victims of a conspiracy anyone who doesn't realize that should jam their head up their ass and do the Heinz Bean big band bum trumpet gas dance :p

Conspiracies are how the world really *works*, ask Julius Caesar

we will see if this is just drivel to keep revenue coming in for jerks, or factual.
 

alex3619

Senior Member
Messages
13,810
Location
Logan, Queensland, Australia
As has been said, we need facts. Whistleblowers are how conspiracies are often blown, and big conspiracies are destroyed by insiders who have the evidence. That is the key, the evidence. We do not know that its real ... yet.

I have long said that to reveal a conspiracy you need a whistleblower or a damning paper trail. We can expect the powers that be to attack the whistleblower. This will happen whether or not the story is for real. If it is accurate then I hope more people will come forward.

Of course I have not missed that if this is real then it may have implications for ME. Yet we still need concrete evidence, which is lacking for ME .. except for the CDC scandals we faced in the 90s.
 

zzz

Senior Member
Messages
675
Location
Oregon
Note that the video that is at the center of all of this is narrated by Andrew Wakefield, who makes reference to his own previous work in the field. If you look up Andrew Wakefield on Wikipedia, you find an article that begins:
Andrew Jeremy Wakefield (born 1957) is a British former surgeon and medical researcher, known for his fraudulent 1998 research paper in support of the now-discredited claim that there is a link between the administration of the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, and the appearance of autism and bowel disease.[1][2][3][4][5]

After the publication of the paper, other researchers were unable to reproduce Wakefield's findings or confirm his hypothesis of an association between the MMR vaccine and autism[6] or autism and gastrointestinal disease.[7] A 2004 investigation by Sunday Times reporter Brian Deer identified undisclosed financial conflicts of interest on Wakefield's part,[8] and most of his co-authors then withdrew their support for the study's interpretations.[9] The British General Medical Council (GMC) conducted an inquiry into allegations of misconduct against Wakefield and two former colleagues.[10] The investigation centred on Deer's numerous findings, including that children with autism were subjected to unnecessary invasive medical procedures,[11] such as colonoscopy and lumbar puncture, and that Wakefield acted without the required ethical approval from an institutional review board.

On 28 January 2010, a five-member statutory tribunal of the GMC found three dozen charges proved, including four counts of dishonesty and 12 counts involving the abuse of developmentally challenged children.[12] The panel ruled that Wakefield had "failed in his duties as a responsible consultant", acted both against the interests of his patients, and "dishonestly and irresponsibly" in his published research.[13][14][15] The Lancet immediately and fully retracted his 1998 publication on the basis of the GMC's findings, noting that elements of the manuscript had been falsified.[16] Wakefield was struck off the Medical Register in May 2010, with a statement identifying deliberate falsification in The Lancet research,[17] and is barred from practising medicine in the UK.[18]

In January 2011, an editorial accompanying an article by Brian Deer in BMJ identified Wakefield's work as an "elaborate fraud".[1][19][20] In a follow-up article,[21] Deer said that Wakefield had planned to launch a venture on the back of an MMR vaccination scare that would profit from new medical tests and "litigation driven testing".[22] In November 2011, yet another report in BMJ[23] revealed original raw data indicating that, contrary to Wakefield's claims in The Lancet, children in his research did not have inflammatory bowel disease.[24][25]

Wakefield's study and his claim that the MMR vaccine might cause autism led to a decline in vaccination rates in the United States, United Kingdom and Ireland and a corresponding rise in measles and mumps, resulting in serious illness and fatalities, and his continued warnings against the vaccine have contributed to a climate of distrust of all vaccines and the reemergence of other previously controlled diseases.[26][27][28] Wakefield has continued to defend his research and conclusions, saying there was no fraud, hoax or profit motive.[29][30]

I have boldfaced one of the more striking paragraphs.

So this whole story is being pursued by someone who has been proven to be a fraud, and in fact proven to have falsified data in this very subject area. He was barred from practicing medicine in the UK - a pretty serious measure.

Now he wants us to believe that a story very similar to his original fraud is true. The evidence we are shown is quite amateurish (the archaic countdown intro tries and fails to be melodramatic), and could have easily been made up by a few people. No proof of anything is presented.

Again, look at the last paragraph quoted above. This article is not just the idea of someone at Wikipedia; it is thoroughly documented with references to original sources. This is a very well-known case. For those interested in more details, there is a lot more to the article.

Andrew Wakefield is a dangerous man with no credibility, who perpetrated a fraud that cost the health and lives of many, and which still has influence today.. There is absolutely no reason to believe any unsubstantiated claims from him, such as this one.
 
Last edited:

alex3619

Senior Member
Messages
13,810
Location
Logan, Queensland, Australia
If you look at the paper their is an increased risk in white males too, but its only at 60% or so. This is relative risk, I do not know the actual percentage in terms of population prevalence. Yet the risk is more than tripled for African American male children under 24 months if I am reading it correctly.

There needs to be either evidence that this paper was based on fabricated data, or urgent new clinical research that is independent of the CDC. Further, the CDC needs to be investigated, even if they did nothing wrong and this is all fabrication - because yet again the trust in the CDC is damaged. Yet again.

If this is deliberate fraud by the CDC then I expect a trillion dollar class action lawsuit is pending. Yet because of the high stakes then any degree of trust in the CDC or those making these claims has to be mitigated by their vested interests. Trust has to be earned.
 

Valentijn

Senior Member
Messages
15,786
The paper and the journal it is in both look pretty solid. And they claim that the data analazyed came directly from the CDC, which is easily verified.

I have to say, the paper itself looks rather shocking.

Though I'm not sure how they're tying that into a whistleblower, aside from perhaps a warranted claim that previous researchers didn't analyze the data in the same way and potentially even dragged their feet a bit in not looking deeper into the abnormalities which they did find.

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/br...s-cdc-scientists-covering-vaccine-autism-link seems to have a bit more info, and far less flowery language and sensationalism :p
 

natasa778

Senior Member
Messages
1,774
The paper and the journal it is in both look pretty solid. And they claim that the data analazyed came directly from the CDC, which is easily verified.

I have to say, the paper itself looks rather shocking.

Though I'm not sure how they're tying that into a whistleblower, aside from perhaps a warranted claim that previous researchers didn't analyze the data in the same way and potentially even dragged their feet a bit in not looking deeper into the abnormalities which they did find.

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/br...s-cdc-scientists-covering-vaccine-autism-link seems to have a bit more info, and far less flowery language and sensationalism :p


according to that article:

According to Dr. Hooker, the CDC whistleblower informant -- who wishes to remain anonymous -- guided him to evidence ...
...Dr. Hooker has worked closely with the CDC whistleblower, and he viewed highly sensitive documents related to the study via Congressional request from U.S. Representative Darrell Issa, Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The CDC documents from Congress and discussions that Hooker had with the whistleblower reveal widespread manipulation of scientific data and top-down pressure on CDC scientists to support fraudulent application of government policies on vaccine safety ...

Very good article, thanks for posting!

I look forward to hearing more on this story - as Alex said the stakes are enormous and it is paramount that all this is verified.
 

ukxmrv

Senior Member
Messages
4,413
Location
London
Andrew Wakefield is a dangerous man with no credibility, who perpetrated a fraud that cost the health and lives of many, and which still has influence today.. There is absolutely no reason to believe any unsubstantiated claims from him, such as this one.

I don't agree with you on Andrew Wakefield. I think he has been a victim of a smear campaign by Brian Deer and whoever pays his bills.

Some of his colleagues were also attacked by the GMC and one later vindicated by the High Court. They found that the GMC was wrong.

"Professor John Walker-Smith and Professor Simon Murch both helped Dr Wakefield carry out the research.
Professor Walker-Smith, who is 73 and has been retired for the past 10 years, was found guilty of serious professional misconduct and struck off the register. Professor Murch was found not guilty of serious professional misconduct despite there not being ethical approval for the research."

The High Court though overturned the GMC's action Prof Walker Smith's

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/c...tor-wins-battle-against-being-struck-off.html

"A High Court judge quashed the finding of professional misconduct against Professor Walker-Smith, who had carried out some of the tests for the controversial paper that suggested a link between the MMR vaccine and autism.
Mr Justice Mitting also called for the reform of the General Medical Council's disciplinary hearings after the lengthy battle by Professor Walker-Smith to clear his name."

Dr Wakefield is also persuing this legally. Not every doctor has the money or backing to go to the High Court to clear his name.

Don't believe everything you read from Brian Deer, the Sunday Times or other vested interests.

It may be that Dr Wakefield is wrong but it still doesn't justify the misinformation and vilification of him.
 

SilverbladeTE

Senior Member
Messages
3,043
Location
Somewhere near Glasgow, Scotland
Do folks have ANY idea how corrupt the UK (and US) system is?
Wakefield wasn't murdered because they needed to publically destroy him, put the fear of God into anyone for threatening the corrupt sick system we have

and it's 50 billion a year not 20, if everything is so perfect, why are the vaccine contracts with governments so secret?
why does commercial confidentiality over rule public safety and accountability?



Vaccine-Industry-heirarchy2.jpg
 

natasa778

Senior Member
Messages
1,774
If you look at the paper their is an increased risk in white males too, but its only at 60% or so. This is relative risk, I do not know the actual percentage in terms of population prevalence. Yet the risk is more than tripled for African American male children under 24 months if I am reading it correctly.

There needs to be either evidence that this paper was based on fabricated data, or urgent new clinical research that is independent of the CDC.


The authors of the original paper explicitly stated that a large number of cases (those exact ones that, when included in the analysis, now show greatly increased risk) were excluded for purely admin reasons, and stated (but did not show in b&w numbers) that when those cases were taken into account the results did not differ from those presented as final.

"However, we did not find any significant differences in demographic characteristics or cognitive level between case children who were included and those who were excluded from the study...

So someone is lying their socks off it seems...


quote from a friend: ... "Cochrane identified the problem with the DeSefano paper too - they evidently did not trust the exclusions despite the paper's protestation that the excluded group were excluded for administrative reasons, and were homogenous with the included cases."
 
Last edited:

Sidereal

Senior Member
Messages
4,856
It appears that the original CDC paper added a bogus exclusion criterion whereby cases who didn't have a valid State of Georgia birth certificate were excluded from the study. This reduced the sample size dramatically, resulting in a loss of statistical power to detect a relationship between MMR and autism. Also, they had analysed the genders together but the relationship appears to be present only for African-American boys but not girls.

This whole thing reminds me of the British CBT/GET studies for CFS where inclusion criteria are rigged so as to dilute the sample into meaninglessness to produce the desired result.
 

Iquitos

Senior Member
Messages
513
Location
Colorado
Note that the video that is at the center of all of this is narrated by Andrew Wakefield, who makes reference to his own previous work in the field. If you look up Andrew Wakefield on Wikipedia, you find an article that begins:


I have boldfaced one of the more striking paragraphs.

So this whole story is being pursued by someone who has been proven to be a fraud, and in fact proven to have falsified data in this very subject area. He was barred from practicing medicine in the UK - a pretty serious measure.

Now he wants us to believe that a story very similar to his original fraud is true. The evidence we are shown is quite amateurish (the archaic countdown intro tries and fails to be melodramatic), and could have easily been made up by a few people. No proof of anything is presented.

Again, look at the last paragraph quoted above. This article is not just the idea of someone at Wikipedia; it is thoroughly documented with references to original sources. This is a very well-known case. For those interested in more details, there is a lot more to the article.

Andrew Wakefield is a dangerous man with no credibility, who perpetrated a fraud that cost the health and lives of many, and which still has influence today.. There is absolutely no reason to believe any unsubstantiated claims from him, such as this one.

"a fraud that cost the health and lives of many" -- Oh pu-lease!!! Talk about an absurd exaggeration! What lives has Wakefield's research cost?

Wakefield is a dangerous man alright. To the vaccine industry! Brian Deer was paid to do a character assassination of Wakefield and get him out of research. The extreme overreaction to his research should raise the red flag for anyone familiar with research and the differences of opinion that can arise from research. Reminds me of how the establishment in UK also took Sarah Myhill's license, for recommending to another doctor that a patient get Vit B12 shots, until she fought back and regained it. Of course, she was not as big a threat to the drug companies so she was able to get her license back.

I have read Wakefield's research and this article mischaracterizes it something awful. Using Wikipedia as a "source" of infomation is extremely foolish! It can be "updated" daily and has been, going back and forth as an attack or refutation of that attack.

I would agree that the naturalnews source is no better. That does not negate the fact that the CDC was captured long ago by BigPharma and BigBusiness in general. And the corporate-owned media has a long record of not rocking the boat when it comes to those who pay big for all those drug ads.

If there really is a "whistleblower", I hope that information comes out. I find it plausible.
 
Back