It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

CDC 'cover up' of vaccine autism link as explained by Andrew Wakefield

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 03:56 PM
The Del Bigtree interview I posted got some interesting comments. Specifically I was interested in the comments regarding how/why the CDC may or may not have covered up/hidden evidence showing a link between certain vaccinations and neurological illness.

Andrew Wakefield gives his explanation here:

YouTube (I can't embed on mobile).

I find it interesting he also says the parents he began his research on did not start off as 'anti vaxxers'. I also find it interesting that the AV label is used as a deflection from discussing this subject.

EDIT: I should add, I am not asking you to not vaccinate your children, as has previously been suggested. I'm asking you to question what you think you know to be true.
edit on 31-3-2016 by and14263 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 04:12 PM
a reply to: and14263

Thank you for posting this and I wanted to say I agree with you saying you are not asking people not to vaccinate. I am not anti-vaccine, but I am pro-choice in that people have a right to make their own decisions regarding vaccinations and any decisions about THEIR body.

posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 04:18 PM

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: and14263

Thank you for posting this and I wanted to say I agree with you saying you are not asking people not to vaccinate. I am not anti-vaccine, but I am pro-choice in that people have a right to make their own decisions regarding vaccinations and any decisions about THEIR body.

I feel this way, too. And I have vaccinated all my kids as recommended by their pediatrician. Yet my 'pro-choice to vax or not' views have been seized on, here at ATS, as an opportunity to label me anti-vax.

I find that approach to be so marginalizing -- I can't help but consider it to be a red flag.

posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 04:58 PM
a reply to: and14263

Videos on mobile is like copy/paste whole link, delete all before and including "v=" then type in the code [yvid ] and end tag [/yvid ] without spaces..

I'm all for choices that go for your own body. This includes knowing what goes in your body.
I was always healthy never sick.. Then the army gave me like 17 needles all at once. I had no idea what was in them. We all got them like assembly line. So step step shot on right shoulder and another guy to your left. Then 2 more steps and two more injections.. You get to the end and they make you sit down.. I soon found out why.. I've never felt so sick/dizzy/out of it weird in my life..

My immune system has never been the same since. Including and not sure it's related my thoughts becoming right brained artsy, when before I was left brained math guy.

But what I do actually think is related is my immune system seems to be attacking myself now and generally doesn't function as well. It's almost like I'm allergic to myself.

Again not sure it's related just noticed before army none of this, after army I itched many nights most of the night. Antihistamines work sort of but depressing my nervous system works much better.

Not really sure but my best guess is: injections/body hacked changing immune response/immune system out of whack/body hurting itself or hyper allergic response..

Otherwise I never ever get allergies. Pollen and dust have no effect on me.

Grain of salt just what I think happened, based on timing and little more.

My brain was already 20 years old so I doubt autism like effects would effect me as strong as a 8 month old little precious baby.

edit on 31-3-2016 by Reverbs because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:18 PM
a reply to: and14263

I'm unable to watch the video at the moment.

This is not an area that I have done much research on, so take all of this with a few grains of salt...

My two cents....

Our son is a bit over four years old and so far he has received all vaccinations to date (he has a few more to go over the next several months). I will say that while at no point did I seriously consider not vaccinating him, I did have some concerns (although it's possible this is just the worry that comes along with a lot of other worries for first time parents).
For us, it was a simple risk-vs-reward. We had heard from some people here and there that vaccines can cause this or that, but we also realized that the vast VAST majority of children that are vaccinated suffer no long term affects. So to us there was little risk vs the reward that we are drastically reducing the chance of our kid coming down with __________ some day.

I will say that I do believe that there are some babies/children born that have a predisposition (for lack of a better word) to react badly to vaccines that most other children receive with no ill affects. I just think that that percentage is so remarkable low. (I do believe that in the future, some sort of DNA test of newborns will be able to screen for those who have a higher likely-hood of reactions.

As far as mandatory vaccinations? I have to say I am against that. Firstly, people can/should offer advice to parents but until "they" are proven to be 100% infallible (which is an impossibility) it should be ENTIRELY up to the parents to decide.

When it comes to schools requiring vaccinations is where things get a little hazy for me and although my opinion isn't completely solidified, I am leaning in support of this requirement.

posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 07:38 PM
thanks for posting, the info is out there for those searching for it.

posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 03:59 AM
Let's go through the video step by step.

Firstly the introduction, Wakefield wasn't "cut off after he published his study" he was disbarred quite a few years afterwards as it was found he acted unethically and fraudulently. The study was published in 1998 and he was stripped of his medical licence (in the UK only it has to be noted, he can practice outside of the UK if he gets himself recertified but that would mean he'd have to do some work) in 2010.
In fact, after Wakefraud's press conference (having a press-conference for such a small "study" was very unusual in itself) where he lied about the "study's" conclusion, the media plastered it all over their front pages causing a drop in the uptake of the MMR (and a subsequent rise in measles a few years later).

So we're only a few seconds in and there the first bit of dishonesty.

Next Wakefraud talks about a cover-up by the CDC in respect to autism in African-American boys.
What cover-up?
What he's basing this on was a study by the CDC which was "re-analysed" by Brian Hooker and published in the Translational Neurodegeneration journal via BioMed Central.
Brian Hooker, who isn't a statistician nor a medic, he's a bioengineer, manipulated the freely available data (if it wasn't and isn't freely available then where de he get it?) to show an increase in autism of 340% post MMR.
The data didn't show that at all and the study was retracted.
"as there were undeclared competing interests on the part of the author which compromised the peer review process. Furthermore, post-publication peer review raised concerns about the validity of the methods and statistical analysis, therefore the Editors no longer have confidence in the soundness of the findings."

Another lie.

Wakefraud says that the CDC changed the way that the 2001 study was analysed to show that there was no effect on the MMR causing autism.
Erm, no. See above.

Three lies so far and we're only a few minutes in.

Then Wakefraud stutters quite a bit as you can see how uncomfortable even he is having to play the race card...

Next Wakefraud omits a very important part about what started his "research" off.
He omits the fact (yes, fact) that he was approached by a lawyer, Richard Barr who was planning to sue the MMR manufacturers and given the names of some parents.
The parents didn't come to him, they were sent to him by the lawyers.
That's fact and it's in black & white.

A lie by omission.

Wakefraud "...what we met was more and more and more resistance..." nope.
He met no resistance. His "study" was published.
He only "met resistance" when it was found that he was a fraud.

How many lies are we up to now?

Wakefraud " a pharmaceutical industry with a driven agenda..."
So why had Wakefraud patented an alternative vaccine called Transfer Factor 9 months before publishing the study?
Wakefraud wanted to be part of that pharmaceutical industry obviously.
But he hasn't mentioned that.

Another lie by omission.

"Are there other doctors finding the same data that you have uncovered?"
Wakefraud answers yes then suggests that "people have been terrified" to try and replicate his findings.
Wrong, there aren't any studies which show the same thing and people have replicated his study (ethically) and found no link and that his "findings" were bogus.
Science has a very forgiving soul, if you can prove beyond all doubt that something does something then irrespective of people who don't want it to be true, it's accepted as science.
Wakefraud didn't and now cries conspiracy.
Please note that Rotashield, a rotavirus vaccine was pulled due to not working properly. That was discovered by scientists. Who are probably still in their jobs.

Lie number ?

And then, without actually being specific, he talks about specificity...
Quite bizarre.
And the "toxic ingredients" forgetting to add that toxicity is dose dependant.
Bad doctoring or being disingenuous????
"We will never know how in any one child...this constellation of (vaccines) produces the end-result"
Not quite, aside from anaphylactic reactions we know exactly what the end-result will be.
No autism from vaccines.

Would you count that as a lie?
I would.

Without a hint of irony (perhaps he's been living in his Texas mansion for too long so he's lost it) he suggests that someone needs to be prosecuted at the CDC.
What for? Fraud?
If so then I assume he would happily accept being prosecuted for the documented and irrefutable fraud that he committed but conveniently forgets to mention.

So there you have it, the same old, same old.
Lies and fraudulent behaviour is what Wakefield is good at (well he wasn't very good at the fraud as he got caught).

Stooping to anything to increase his fees for appearing on the anti-vax conference circuit yet putting absolutely nothing whatsoever back into research on autism.
What a guy.

And OP, are you really looking for the truth?

edit on 1/4/16 by Pardon? because: Formatting

edit on 1/4/16 by Pardon? because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 04:01 AM
Apologies for my wordy post above as generally medical science isn't about YouTube videos and since I know some of you would prefer some pictures to look at (a picture paints a thousand words and all that...) here's a little cartoon strip you may find enlightening.

posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 04:33 AM
a reply to: Pardon?

Thanks for putting in a lengthy reply, don't apologise for the length, it has content... Which as per norm I will take each point and research myself. There's a lot this time though so I'm going to be on this over the weekend by the looks of it.

posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 07:25 AM
I'm sorry but this anti-vaccination argument is part of a battle that will never be won.

I'm open to pretty much every theory out there, and trust me, I am convinced of a LOT of seedy parts played by Big Pharma etc., but I will never agree with those who are against vaccinations.

The reason is as simple as this:

Here in Australia, up until about 5 or so years ago, vaccinations were the norm. A vast majority of people vaccinated their children. There were little to no cases of any preventable diseases related to those that children are vaccinated against.

Over the past couple of years, there have been MANY cases of the German Measles, Whooping Cough (so many newborn babies have died..), and others. In countries like the U.S, Polio has COME BACK. And there is evidence to prove that these diseases have come back in areas where a vast amount of people DID NOT vaccinate their children.

The argument about vaccines causing Autism is also flawed. There is no evidence to prove that Autism rates have risen over the years because of vaccines, and not because of other environmental, genetic, social, or behavioural reasons. A lot of theories surround the idea that people are more aware of differences in their childs behaviour - about 20 years ago children were just considered 'unique' or different in their own way, nowadays everyone sends their child to a Psychologist for a diagnosis. Which is fine, if that's what you want. But I would rather not medicate my children unless absolutely necessary. And no - that does not include vaccinations. Vaccinations provide protection to just my children, but to everyone elses children. Herd immunity, guys...

posted on Apr, 2 2016 @ 09:39 AM
One of my three children is autistic. ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder) is basically a brain wiring issue. They aren't wired up the same way as a NT (Neurotypical) child. A very basic way to think of it is this.

Imagine all the NT people as a toaster. We are all wired to make toast (i.e. function a certain way) a person with ASD is more like a hair dryer. Is it possible for them to make toast? Probably but it will take a lot longer.

ASD makes certain parts of the brain not react the way a NT person does. That's why emotions and relating to people is extremely hard.

This being said even IF vaccines were to be directly linked to ASD I will take it over any of the many diseases these vaccines protect against which very well could have killed my child. ASD isn't life ending and a good deal of ASD people live full lives.

I would finally like to point out that part of the reason for the increase in ASD cases is better diagnosis criteria which help a lot of kids. Doctors have realized that not all kids with ASD are mute and rocking in the corner. There are varying degrees of severity.

new topics

top topics


log in