Obama Grants Immunity to CDC Whistleblower on Measles Vaccine Link to Autism

originally posted by: thebtheb


I really don't think it's ever been proven that vaccines rid the world of small pox, polio etc. Everyone does accept this, and if true, I can certainly understand their support for vaccines. But there doesn't seem to be any real proof of this. Measles had gone way down years before the measles vaccine.

Nope, that was the MORTALITY of measles. Which coincidences with better hygiene in hospitals, for example.

Small pox, polio - both declined in Europe and elsewhere at the same time they did here, even while the vaccine wasn't being used that much elsewhere. Of course you've heard this before, as someone ends up saying it in every vaccine thread. So you either believe it or not, or question it or not. But since it's one of the major reasons people are so supportive of vaccines, it deserves a really close look at. From what I've researched, I don't think it can be assumed that vaccines necessarily stopped all these diseases.

Why not?

originally posted by: GetHyped

originally posted by: GetHyped
Is there a non-nutjob source for this? All I am getting is conspiracy websites.

a reply to: GetHyped

I had thought global research.ca was a credible source but perhaps not - so I searched .gov, found "H.Res.117 - Recognizing the importance of vaccinations and immunizations in the United States."

This vaccination bill was introduced in the House on 02/13/2015 - and immediately referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Says a lot, imho. ...A week later, it was sent to the health subcommittee. Presumably with marching orders.



To confirm: Thompson was taped without his knowledge, and his name and the tapes were made public without his knowledge. The source and info appear credible.

Whistleblower Confirms Wakefield Outed Him Without Permission

Despite denying it in the comments here, Andrew Wakefield has released the identity of a whistleblower from CDC without his permission according to a statement from the whistleblower himself. In that statement released today and reproduced below, CDC whistleblower Dr. William Thompson confirms he had no choice over publicizing his name or recordings of his voice and was not even aware he was being recorded (fifth paragraph boldface mine):

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

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: ManFromEurope

Here's a credible source with great info. ...There are 3 whistleblowers, not one. Charges are being laid against Merck. Unfortunately, it looks like the Regulatory Capture issue is not being addressed. But you can't have everything.

Charges are that Merck:
1. "Failed to disclose that its mumps vaccine was not as effective as Merck represented,
2. Used improper testing techniques,
3. Manipulated testing methodology,
4. Abandoned undesirable test results,
5. Falsified test data,
6. Failed to adequately investigate and report the diminished efficacy of its mumps vaccine,
7. Falsely verified that each manufacturing lot of mumps vaccine would be as effective as identified in the labeling,
8. Falsely certified the accuracy of applications filed with the FDA,
9. Falsely certified compliance with the terms of the CDC purchase contract,
10. Engaged in the fraud and concealment describe herein for the purpose of illegally monopolizing the U.S. market for mumps vaccine,
11. Mislabeled, misbranded, and falsely certified its mumps vaccine, and
12. Engaged in the other acts described herein to conceal the diminished efficacy of the vaccine the government was purchasing."

Merck Has Some Explaining To Do Over Its MMR Vaccine Claims

Merck, the pharmaceutical giant, is facing a slew of controversies over its Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine following numerous allegations of wrongdoing from different parties in the medical field, including two former Merck scientists-turned-whistleblowers. A third whistleblower, this one a scientist at the Centers for Disease Control, also promises to bring Merck grief following his confession of misconduct involving the same MMR vaccine.

The controversies will find Merck defending itself and its vaccine in at least two federal court cases after a U.S. District judge earlier this month threw out Merck's attempts at dismissal. Merck now faces federal charges of fraud from the whistleblowers, a vaccine competitor and doctors in New Jersey and New York. Merck could also need to defend itself in Congress: The staff of representative Bill Posey (R-Fla) -- a longstanding critic of the CDC interested in an alleged link between vaccines and autism -- is now reviewing some 1,000 documents that the CDC whistleblower turned over to them.

The first court case, United States v. Merck & Co., stems from claims by two former Merck scientists that Merck "fraudulently misled the government and omitted, concealed, and adulterated material information regarding the efficacy of its mumps vaccine in violation of the FCA [False Claims Act]."

a reply to: soficrow

The fact that anti-vax and conspiracy websites are the only ones reporting this makes me deeply suspicious about the credibility of the claims. I mean, come on, if Obama did such a thing it would be all over the news.

The original cdc whistleblower claim was thoroughly debunked (snopes has a good tl;dr) so this latest claim (and sources) is highly suspect.

a reply to: GetHyped

...if Obama did such a thing it would be all over the news

Reports say his administration granted immunity - and no, it would NOT be "all over the news." Governments, Big Pharma and NGO public health agencies have nothing but vaccines to fight viral infectious disease. Just vaccines, and they're sticking with 'em.

However they are formulated or delivered, vaccines will remain the most effective tool we possess for preventing disease and improving public health in the future.

TRANSLATION: We have nothing else to help you.





Let's just call a spade a spade, 'kay?

originally posted by: soficrow
a reply to: GetHyped

...if Obama did such a thing it would be all over the news

Reports say his administration granted immunity - and no, it would NOT be "all over the news."

What reports? You haven't posted a single credible source yet.

Governments, Big Pharma and NGO public health agencies have nothing but vaccines to fight viral infectious disease. Just vaccines, and they're sticking with 'em.

This is not only false but your claim makes no sense whatsoever. So apparently Obama's administration has given the guy immunity but there's some big coverup? What?? You mean like when the original whistleblower's claims totally weren't covered by the MSM? Oh wait, they were.

Is "coverup" the new dog whistle word for "I don't have any credible sources"?

However they are formulated or delivered, vaccines will remain the most effective tool we possess for preventing disease and improving public health in the future.

TRANSLATION: We have nothing else to help you.

Er... "Most effective" does not mean "nothing else will help you". Don't be so silly.

Let's just call a spade a spade, 'kay?

Let's just call a rumour that the Top Minds (tm) of ATS didn't even bother to fact check what it is, 'kay?

Edit: Hah! It's even been covered by Snopes already:

www.snopes.com...

Notably missing from the article were a number of key details: when the purported "immunity" in question was proffered, why such protection would be required, why the story was reported in early February 2015 and not when the immunity status was granted, and who might have specifically granted immunity to Thompson.

Moreover, the lack of detail encompassed another inconsistency. If Thompson's statement truly constituted whistleblowing in the manner in which it has been framed, any future statements he might opt to make would likely fall under laws and statutes designed to protect
whistleblowers. But even that purely hypothetical scenario doesn't appear to be relevant to the claims made by Thompson, as his statement pertained to a dispute over whether collected data was statistically relevant to the overall findings of the research in the 2004 study. Thompson now believes the decision to omit the data was detrimental to the sum of the research, but invoking the specter of "immunity granted" implied a level of ongoing criminality investigation that appeared to be non-existent.

Ultimately, the Daily Caller's claims were vague and unsourced, with no information appended to support them. Were Thompson to testify about his 2014 statements, there is no indication immunity would be necessary to shield him from any potential prosecution. And if it were necessary, extant whistleblower protections laws would likely sufficiently cover him. However, Thompson's statements through a lawyer in August 2014 seemed to indicate he does not consider himself a whistleblower and he has not faced any retaliatory action from his colleagues at or the administration of the CDC.

The Daily Caller did not respond to a request for additional information.

The lack of critical thinking and basic fact checking in this thread is shameful.

a reply to: GetHyped

"The fact that anti-vax and conspiracy websites are the only ones reporting this" just proves that lawsuits make boring headlines - and more importantly, that vaccinations are considered to be a matter for the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, not public health.

There’s no doubt Merck was hit with an anti-trust lawsuit by 2 former employees and Merck’s efforts to have the case dismissed have been denied so far - this and other related cases are reported on law360. If you want to track the status, search "Pennsylvania Eastern 2:10-cv-04374."

As the employee’s lawyer states, “This case is not about science. We don't need to show the science and the efficacy of the vaccine. All we need to show is that Merck concealed information to keep the government purchasing hundred of millions of dollars of the vaccine.”

Again, charges are that Merck:
1. "Failed to disclose that its mumps vaccine was not as effective as Merck represented,
2. Used improper testing techniques,
3. Manipulated testing methodology,
4. Abandoned undesirable test results,
5. Falsified test data,
6. Failed to adequately investigate and report the diminished efficacy of its mumps vaccine,
7. Falsely verified that each manufacturing lot of mumps vaccine would be as effective as identified in the labeling,
8. Falsely certified the accuracy of applications filed with the FDA,
9. Falsely certified compliance with the terms of the CDC purchase contract,
10. Engaged in the fraud and concealment describe herein for the purpose of illegally monopolizing the U.S. market for mumps vaccine,
11. Mislabeled, misbranded, and falsely certified its mumps vaccine, and
12. Engaged in the other acts described herein to conceal the diminished efficacy of the vaccine the government was purchasing."

The 42-page document is available here for your perusal:

Case 2:10-cv-04374-CDJ Document 61 Filed 09/05/14

....Relators allege that their former employer, Defendant Merck & Co., Inc. (“Merck”) fraudulently misled the government and omitted, concealed, and adulterated material information regarding the efficacy of its mumps vaccine in violation of the FCA. The United States declined to intervene in this action, filing a Notice of Election to Decline Intervention before this Court on April 27, 2012.

But you're right - I didn't do a thorough search before posting - catching up now. If I'm wrong I will admit it, but so far, looks like the truth is out there.

a reply to: soficrow

I thought we were talking about the Obama administration giving immunity to a whistleblower regarding vaccines causing autism (you know, the topic of the thread). Have we moved the goalposts onto another topic already?

a reply to: GetHyped

See above - still searching. Might have to contact Representative Posey directly for more info.

originally posted by: zinuru
I'm having a daughter in May.. Hmm..

To vaccinate.. Or

Not to vaccinate?

That is the question..

*does more research*

It was a tough decision for us. We vaccinated, but not on the doctor's schedule. She is up to date, but we waited longer between vaccinations and never did more than one on any given day. BTW, she is fine, bright and probably the most socially conscience child you would ever meet. That is not to say I wasn't nervous with every needle, but I am grateful that she is now protected.

originally posted by: GetHyped
Is there a non-nutjob source for this? All I am getting is conspiracy websites.

I think you have stumbled on the DUH! moment of realisation when you dig into these stories. I will now be labelled a shill or a big pharma boy. As per usual this story makes no sense whatsover when transposed over to the UK (or any European country with a state health system) where the financing and health system is different.......but that's yet another DUH! moment that flies over the heads of the anti vaccers.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: soficrow

The fact that anti-vax and conspiracy websites are the only ones reporting this makes me deeply suspicious about the credibility of the claims. I mean, come on, if Obama did such a thing it would be all over the news.

The original cdc whistleblower claim was thoroughly debunked (snopes has a good tl;dr) so this latest claim (and sources) is highly suspect.

Heard. That my thought exactly. Was reading some of the posts then I'm gonna see what site the sources lead to. My guess is it's all infowars type places. (Aka made up bs)



Just a REAL stat that should be mentioned. Did everyone know, that up until the vaccines started 90% of American born people caught measles by the age of 18??!!??!!



90% of Americans caught measles. Most survived of course, but still. Only 60 years later (guessing 60 but y'all get the point) I don't know a single person who has had the measles. Not one. Now I'm sure there are some who did catch it, but it damn sure ain't anywhere near 20% even. So vaccines work. You can't attribute a 97% drop in the infection rate to cleaner hospitals... The same cleaner hospitals that are responsible for a huge chunk of illness getting passed around even today.

Now could batches have gotten screwed up and hurt people?? Prob..definately in the early stages. Plus people arnt adding in that the kid could be who was "flawed". That the same vaccine that would have worked normally on 99.9% of the population. Had a bad reaction to the kids specific immune system.




The vaccine scare is stupid. Vaccines make our immune systems stronger for life unlike antibiotics who more directly attack the bacteria.

a reply to: soficrow

When the lies are too big.....

originally posted by: neveroddoreven99
a reply to: Witness2008

So, don't breast feed either.

What does breasting feeding have to do with thimerosal as a preservative in vaccines?

Try to remember that eating a thing is different than injecting it into muscle.

originally posted by: ManFromEurope

originally posted by: thebtheb


I really don't think it's ever been proven that vaccines rid the world of small pox, polio etc. Everyone does accept this, and if true, I can certainly understand their support for vaccines. But there doesn't seem to be any real proof of this. Measles had gone way down years before the measles vaccine.

Nope, that was the MORTALITY of measles. Which coincidences with better hygiene in hospitals, for example.

Small pox, polio - both declined in Europe and elsewhere at the same time they did here, even while the vaccine wasn't being used that much elsewhere. Of course you've heard this before, as someone ends up saying it in every vaccine thread. So you either believe it or not, or question it or not. But since it's one of the major reasons people are so supportive of vaccines, it deserves a really close look at. From what I've researched, I don't think it can be assumed that vaccines necessarily stopped all these diseases.

Why not?

Nope, CASES of measles down before vaccines, and yes of course mortality too. From what I see, mortality had also been down for quite awhile in North America.

Why not? Because there is no proof - there is none. Show me the science, please. People say anti-vaxxers are anti-science, but I see a lot of blanket statements on the other side with no science to back it up, no studies, and this in my opinion is one of them.

a reply to: thebtheb

Who needs science. Common sense is all it takes. Injecting aluminum, mercury, formaldehyde and various other toxins into the bodies of babies is just stupid. The industry needs to go back to the science and find another way. Perhaps providing single dose injections?

a reply to: soficrow

To all those people who laughed and said anti vaccine people are nuts......HA....HA.....HA. I love the excuse......Well we can just see it better now......FOOLS.




Back 20 years medical experts knew what autism was and in the last 20 years it has continued it's scary rise. Look at the Amish and ask yourself why do they have such low autism rates.......YA.

delete

Folks, this is what happens when government unites with business.

It appears the original source of granting immunity came from the Daily Caller.

dailycaller.com... ss/
The reporter Patrick Howley does not cite his source.

The website Ben Swann.com questioned where this information came from as well.

"Ben Swann.com spoke with members of The Canary Party regarding the report by the DC. The Canary Party stated that “there are suspicions about the source of this report.” As of the publishing of this article the DC remains the only source of the alleged immunity."

benswann.com...

This does not disprove it happened but it sure got picked up by certain sites as gospel and spread like wildfire.