Corrupt CDC EXPOSED: Vaccine-Induced Autism Cover Up and Modern Eugenics

So if this is so clear, why did Rolling Stone retract Kennedy's article? Its easy, HIS was the junk science.  Just google Thimerosal and you'll get many pages sowing not only no relationship between autism and vaccines but none between autism and even methylmercury let alone ethylmercury that is in Thimerosal (which was removed from vaccines as a precaution in 2001 yet autism rates have not declined).  So worth removing to be safe, but there is no evidence that it was the cause of any problems and good science showing no correlation.

Given that we're on a dinar site, check this out: http://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-ingredients/thimerosal#.V4rZFVevLiw

It includes analysis of the largest mercury poisoning known, which happened (accidentally by famers making bread from grain that was fumigated with METHYLmercury) in Iraq in 1971.  That event lead to vast health problems including deaths, but no autism cases.

Look you do not know why Rolling Stone did what they did ....Have you ever heard of a pay off! i DO NOT DISMISS ANYTHING UNTIL I GET ALL THE FACTS!..YOU ARE FREE TO GET ALL THE VACCINES YOU WISH BUT FOR THOSE WHO ARE CONCERNED FOR THEIR CHILDREN'S SAFETY  PLEASE DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK ...I WILL SAY NO MORE!
NOW DO YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW  OR ARE YOU COMFORTABLE LIVING IN YOUR BUBBLE YOU DECIDE...
http://www.autisminvestigated.com/letting-the-science-speak/
Letting the Science Speak Against Mercury in VaccinesEditor’s Note: Below is my review of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book “Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak” for The Epoch Times.
By Jake Crosby
Review: ‘Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak,’ Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (Skyhorse Press)
The vaccine preservative and title subject of the book “Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak” may not be as well-known as the book’s editor, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an environmental lawyer and son of the late attorney general Robert F. Kennedy. Yet the public’s lack of knowledge about thimerosal is perhaps all the more reason why this book is so important, especially since the paperback edition (to be released Sept. 1) now contains 17 previously-written chapters that were excluded from the hardcover edition for being “too combustible,” according to Kennedy.
Roughly 50 percent mercury by weight, thimerosal is labeled “very toxic.” Mercury is the most toxic non-radioactive element on earth and second overall. One would think those facts would be enough to end its use in any medicine once and for all, but if that were the case this book would never have been written. Despite the toxicity of mercury, it remains present in many routine vaccinations in the form of thimerosal, and its ongoing use remains staunchly defended by the vaccine industry.
The book’s subtitle, “The Evidence Supporting the Immediate Removal of Mercury—a Known Neurotoxin—from Vaccines,” makes clear this book is more than just a case for why thimerosal is dangerous. Kennedy makes a compelling argument for vaccines to no longer contain thimerosal, from its toxicity, to its lack of necessity, to its association with neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism, and finally to the neglectful and even fraudulent attempts to hide that association by government agencies and media outlets.
As a result of mercury’s ongoing use in vaccines, “we are gambling with population health through the same intervention that we use to protect it,” as Harvard neurologist Dr. Martha Herbert concisely stated in the book’s introduction.Some chapters such as the one on the biological basis for thimerosal causing autism contain scientific terms that may be difficult to follow without knowledge of college-level biology. Such is the challenge of making a case for causality of a behavioral disorder at the cellular level. Yet this is a challenge the book takes on commendably.
There is a new chapter on Dr. William Thompson, the senior scientist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) who blew the whistle on his colleagues for hiding evidence of vaccines causing autism. There’s also a new forward by Congressman Bill Posey who recently read an explosive statement by Thompson to Congress.
The paperback edition of “Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak” has some of the same weaknesses as its hardcover predecessor. It is simply counter-intuitive to write a book outlining the proof for thimerosal’s role in causing autism only to cast doubt on that proof, as is done in the book’s preface by Dr. Mark Hyman. Kennedy and the other contributors to the book also still fall for the age-old trap of trying to prove they are not “anti-vaccine,” a burden no critic of the vaccine program should face or bother satisfying.
Overall, however, the book delivers well on its promise by making the case against the use of thimerosal in commonly administered, routine vaccinations by letting the science on the subject “speak” so to speak. That is something federal health agencies, media outlets and a myriad of special interests behind thimerosal’s continued use do not allow. For that reason, readers now have a unique opportunity to let the science supporting thimerosal’s immediate removal from vaccines speak to them by giving “Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak” a well-deserved read.
Jake Crosby is editor of the website Autism Investigated. Crosby has a masters in Public Health in epedemiology and is now pursuing a Ph.D. in epidemiology.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Epoch Times.

GypZ wrote:Look you do not know why Rolling Stone did what they did ....Have you ever heard of a pay off! i DO NOT DISMISS ANYTHING UNTIL I GET ALL THE FACTS!..YOU ARE FREE TO GET ALL THE VACCINES YOU WISH BUT FOR THOSE WHO ARE CONCERNED FOR THEIR CHILDREN'S SAFETY  PLEASE DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK ...I WILL SAY NO MORE!
NOW DO YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW  OR ARE YOU COMFORTABLE LIVING IN YOUR BUBBLE YOU DECIDE...

You are such a text book case of confirmation bias.  You have NO facts about some pay off to Rolling Stone but you assume that is a valid explanation of their retraction anyway.  You dismiss the idea that they retracted the article as it turned out to be bad science.  You are the one in a bubble, a conspiracy bubble.  Just because someone says something on the internet, that does not make it true.  "doing your homework" does not mean going to all the conspiracy sites you favor to confirm your bias.

Thimerosal was removed from all but 2 adult flu vaccines in 2001, so where is the huge drop in autism over the past 15 years?  Scientists are humans and make mistakes and are biased etc just like anyone else, but over time poorly run studies or poorly analyzed results are weeded out.   So far the link between vaccines and child health problems is anecdotal and actual studies on this issue have yet to show a correlation.  Given the seriousness of the issue further study is certainly warranted and is on-going.

Is autism actually going up?  Maybe, but a lot (maybe not all) of this claimed rise is due to reclassification.  In 1980 the diagnostic manual was changed drastically to use Autism Spectral Disorder, i.e. a wide range of disabilities.  By picking the right data you can show correlation from that to almost anything.  Check out the amazing correlation of this rise to the sales of organic foods here.

Here is one that shows the rise of school children with autism very closely matches the reduction in the schools classification of "intellectual disability" but the sum of the two is much more (though not completely) constant.  

I wouldn't say the issue is solved, but "skyrocketing autism rates" that is so commonly seen in the conspiracy press, seems largely to be myth.  Finding the actual cause (or causes) will of course be the key here.

THAT WAS A METPHOR WHAT I SAID GET IT STRAIGHT  . You can derive whatever you wish from what i write .......The issue here is not Rolling Stone ...WHO EVER SAID ROLLING STONE WAS A BOOK OF FACTS ..IS THAT WHAT YOU BELIEVE .. GO GET YOUR SHOT I THINK YOU NEED ONE TO BALANCE OUT YOUR HEAD...nOW MY GRANDCHILDREN WONT BE GETTING VACCINES THAT ARE NOT SAFE...DO YOU JUST LOVE TO ARGUE? LIFE IS SHORT AND SO AM I AND MY WORDS WILL BE THAT TOO,TO YOU MY FRIEND!

Professor receives grant for vaccine study, then warns the public against that very same vaccine

Posted by Lou on July 18, 2016
Posted in: Canada, ljf, Medicine, Neuroscience, Neurotoxins, Science, Scientism, Vaccines, Virus. Leave a comment

Anyone that promotes this vaccine should be forced to take this vaccine on national TV along with all his/her extended family!  While they are at it, shoot them with the 46 vaccines that children receive before age two. If they can’t do that in front of everybody don’t listen to what they say.

Source: Professor receives grant for vaccine study, then warns the public against that very same vaccine – NaturalNews.com
http://www.naturalnews.com
by: J. D. Heyes
July 18, 2016

(NaturalNews) It doesn’t seem to make sense to apply for a publicly-funded grant to study the effects of a certain vaccine, receive the grant, and then warn everyone against that vaccine. But that’s what one Canadian researcher did recently.
As reported by Canada’s National Post, Montreal-based social scientist Genevieve Rail of Concordia University received a $270,000 grant to study the HPV (human papillomavirus) vaccine – and then condemned it, saying the country should establish a moratorium on its use.
Rail, who is under fire from critics along with the federal agency that gave her the grant, also said that there is little proof that HPV causes cervical cancer, despite the findings of a Nobel Prize-winning study by a German scientist five years ago that unearthed the link.
Establishment medical types are lambasting Rail’s public attacks, calling them seriously misinformed. Critics also said that her remarks are bound to undermine a priority public health program in the country, while wondering aloud how the Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR) could provide her with grant money in the first place.

‘Someone was really sleeping’

Rail, who has a doctorate in kinesiology – the study of body mechanics and movement – received the grant in order to study HPV vaccination “discourses” and how they affected teenagers, using both interviews and drawings.
“This is akin to funding research that purports to show tobacco smoking does not cause lung cancer,” said Eduardo Franco, head of cancer epidemiology at McGill University, according to the Post. “And that tobacco cessation, rather than helping reduce risk, is actually causing harm … CIHR would not fund such a study, would it?”
Dr. Marc Steben, a family physician in Montreal, and head of the Canadian Network on HPV Prevention, was even more direct.
“I don’t know who was on her (grant awarding) jury,” he said. “Someone was really sleeping.”
It wasn’t clear from the Post report whether anyone at CIHR was aware of Rail’s viewpoints prior to awarding the grant some four years ago.
The controversy started after Rail and a co-author, Abby Lippman – a professor emeritus at McGill University – published an opinion piece in Le Devoir newspaper that questioned the safety of the HPV vaccine and whether it was of any real benefit. The piece also urged the Canadian national government in Quebec to end HPV vaccination until it could be fully vetted and its safety established by an independent investigatory body.
In additional to Rail, others have criticized the HPV vaccine lately as well. The criticism has come from divergent sources – from Catholic boards of education to a newspaper article that was supposedly discredited, the Post reported. However, Rail’s views stand out because of her position at her university, and because she received public funds to study the vaccine and surrounding issues.

‘I’m sort of raising a red flag’

Rail and Lippman voiced some of the same views at the World Congress on Public Health that was held in India in February. The pair also led a workshop that encouraged participants to be “on the offensive against the vaccine,” while hinting that “politicians are paid off” by Big Pharma and other interests to put such public health policies in place.
In an interview with the Post, Rail said that she does not regret her public statements. Rather, she noted that she wants her comments to help drown out the “dominant discourse” regarding the vaccine.
She also noted that some of the parents among the 170 interviews she conducted during her four-year study into the vaccine, said they believed the shots had caused some serious medical side effects.
“I’m sort of raising a red flag, out of respect for what I’ve found in my own study, and for the despair of parents who had totally perfect 12-year-olds who are now in their beds, too tired to go to school,” she told the Post. “Yes, we’re going against the grain, and we are going against those who are believed, i.e. doctors and nurses and people in public health.”
Sources:
News.NationalPost.com
RealFarmacy.com
Science.NaturalNews.com


Thanks to: https://talesfromtheloublog.wordpress.com

http://www.ageofautism.com/2015/01/recent-italian-court-decisions-on-vaccines-and-autism.html

Recent Italian Court Decisions on Vaccines and Autismy Mary S. Holland

Milan: 2014
On September 23, 2014, an Italian court in Milan award compensation to a boy for vaccine-induced autism.  (See the Italian document here.)  A childhood vaccine against six childhood diseases caused the boy’s permanent autism and brain damage.  While the Italian press has devoted considerable attention to this decision and its public health implications, the U.S. press has been silent.
Like the U.S., Italy has a national vaccine injury compensation program to give some financial support to those people who are injured by compulsory and recommended vaccinations. The Italian infant plaintiff received three doses of GlaxoSmithKline’s Infanrix Hexa, a hexavalent vaccine administered in the first year of life.  These doses occurred from March to October 2006. The vaccine is to protect children from polio, diphtheria, tetanus, hepatitis B, pertussis and Haemophilus influenza type B.  In addition to these antigens, however, the vaccine then contained thimerosal, the mercury-containing preservative, aluminum, an adjuvant, as well as other toxic ingredients.  The child regressed into autism shortly after receiving the three doses.  When the parents presented their claim for compensation first to the Ministry of Health, as they were required to do, the Ministry rejected it.  Therefore, the family sued the Ministry in a court of general jurisdiction, an option which does not exist in the same form in the U.S.Based on expert medical testimony, the court concluded that the child more likely than not suffered autism and brain damage because of the neurotoxic mercury, aluminum and his particular susceptibility from a genetic mutation.  The Court also noted that Infanrix Hexa contained thimerosal, now banned in Italy because of its neurotoxicity, “in concentrations greatly exceeding the maximum recommended levels for infants weighing only a few kilograms.”
Presiding Judge Nicola Di Leo considered another piece of damning evidence: a 1271-page confidential GlaxoSmithKline report (now available on the Internet).   This industry document provided ample evidence of adverse events from the vaccine, including five known cases of autism resulting from the vaccine’s administration during its clinical trials (see table at page 626, excerpt below). As in many other developed countries, government, not industry, compensates families in the event of vaccine injury.  Thus GSK’s apparent lack of concern for the vaccine’s adverse effects is notable and perhaps not surprising.  In the final assessment, the report states that “[t]he benefit/risk profile of Infanrix hexa continues to be favourable,” despite GSK’s acknowledgement that the vaccine causes side effects including “anaemia haemolytic autoimmune,thrombocytopenia, thrombocytopenic purpura, autoimmune thrombocytopenia, idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, haemolytic anemia, cyanosis, injection site nodule, abcess and injection site abscess, Kawasaki’s disease, important neurological events (including encephalitis and encephalopathy), Henoch-Schonlein purpura, petechiae, purpura, haematochezia, allergic reactions (including anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions),” and death (see page 9).
The Milan decision is sober, informed and well-reasoned. The Ministry of Health has stated that it has appealed the Court’s decision, but that appeal will likely take several years, and its outcome is uncertain.
Rimini: 2012
Two years earlier, on May 23, 2012, Judge Lucio Ardigo of an Italian court in Rimini presided over a similar judgment, finding that a different vaccine, the Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine  (MMR), had caused a child’s autism.  (See: Italian MMR Remini decision 2012)As in the Milan case, the Ministry of Health’s compensation program had denied compensation to the family, yet after a presentation of medical evidence, a court granted compensation.  There, too, the Italian press covered the story; the U.S. press did not. 
In that case, a 15-month old boy received his MMR vaccine on March 26, 2004.  He then immediately developed bowel and eating problems and received an autism diagnosis with cognitive delay within a year.  The court found that the boy had “been damaged by irreversible complications due to vaccination (with trivalent MMR).”  The decision flew in the face of the conventional mainstream medical wisdom that an MMR-autism link has been “debunked.”
[size]
Both these Italian court decisions break new ground in the roiling debate over vaccines and autism.  These courts, like all courts, are intended to function as impartial, unbiased decision makers.  The courts’ decisions are striking because they not only find a vaccine-autism causal link, but they also overrule the decisions of Italy’s Ministry of Health.  And taken together, the court decisions found that both the MMR and a hexavalent thimerosal- and aluminum-containing vaccine can trigger autism. These court decisions flatly contradict the decisions from the so-called U.S. vaccine court, the Court of Federal Claim’s Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.  There, from 2007 to 2010,  in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding, three decision makers, called Special Masters, found that vaccines did not cause autism in any of the six test cases, and one Special Master even went so far as to compare the theory of vaccine-induced autism to Lewis Carroll’sAlice in Wonderland.  The Italian court decisions contrast starkly with these U.S. cases based on similar claims.
How do we reconcile the difference between the U.S. and Italian decisions in similar cases?  What’s different about Italy?  Well, there may be many differences, but a critical one is that in the U.S., if someone loses in the government vaccine injury compensation program, she cannot sue the government in civil court; she can sue only the manufacturer.  In the U.S., her family would have to shoulder legal fees in a David and Goliath mismatch, pitting a global pharmaceutical behemoth against a family likely already suffering financially from serious health costs. 
Furthermore, since 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court has foreclosed potential cases and class action lawsuits to contest unreasonably dangerous vaccine designs, such as the use of thimerosal as a preservative or the simultaneous administration of multiple live viruses, such as the MMR.  Since the Supreme Court’s 2011 Bruesewitz v. Wyeth decision, no court in the U.S. can entertain vaccine design defect claims, the most likely legal actions to aggregate plaintiffs in similar circumstances against large, pharmaceutical defendants.Unlike American victims of vaccine injury, the Italian plaintiffs didn’t have to sue GSK; they sued the Ministry of Health.  In both the Milan and Rimini decisions, the plaintiffs won compensation based on findings that vaccines caused autism.  One might say that these cases achieved nothing more than a small payout for injured children.  But arguably the families, lawyers and medical experts behind these cases achieved far more.  They took the issue of vaccine-induced autism to impartial courts, and they got clear a clear judicial answer based on the evidence: vaccines cause autism. 
Are court decisions science?  Of course not.  There is a desperate need for more science on autism and the role that vaccines play, flimsy industry, medical and government retorts to the contrary notwithstanding.  But in the current absence of the necessary science on vaccines and autism, decisions of impartial judicial tribunals, based on extensive evidence and testimony, may be some of the best sources of information and insight we have.
Mary S. Holland is a Research Scholar at the NYU School of Law and chairs the advisory board of the non-profit organization Health Choice.[/size]

Court decisions on causation are nonsense.  You can not claim both that we have a desperate need for more scientific research to determine the cause of autism and that the court determined the cause to be vaccines.  If vaccines were the cause we would see a clear correlation between groups that do or do not get the vaccine, and no such correlation has been found, yet it should be clear and unmistakeable.  If Thimerosal was the case we should have seen a huge drop in autism when it was stopped (in the US) i 2001, but we don't.