Latest CDC Vaccine Cover-Up

[steveh_131]

I would be curious to hear opinions, other than that of the resident psuedo-skeptic, on the other half of this - the CDC cover-up. It is becoming hard to ignore.

 

[gravitas73]

I'm not too knowledgeable on this topic, is this what Bachmann was attacking Perry about in the last election over forcing girls in Texas to take that one drug?

 

[steveh_131]

I'm not too knowledgeable on this topic, is this what Bachmann was attacking Perry about in the last election over forcing girls in Texas to take that one drug?

I believe you're thinking of Gardasil, which is an HPV vaccine targeted towards teenage girls.

While it has no ties (that I am aware of) to autism, it is widely known for plenty of other nasty side effects.

 

[T.Lex]

I would be curious to hear opinions, other than that of the resident psuedo-skeptic, on the other half of this - the CDC cover-up. It is becoming hard to ignore.

Depending on what the heavily edited guy really says, I don't think there is a cover-up. The data speaks for itself in the CDC report, just like the OP one (more or less).

 

[Dean C.]

Why wouldnt more scientists speak up? The scientific community as a whole is not known for covering up the fact that it is wrong generally they move foreward with the new correct way and leave the old ways or methods. That being said why would the government want to support vaccines that give people autism it just dosent make sense at all!!!! The government wants healthy people with jobs so they can pay taxes. Last time i checked there arent many people with autism totally healthy and paying taxes unless I am just totally wrong.

Think about out of the thousands of studies over this topic only two actual "doctors" say there is a correlation? This is a absurd idea to even begin with and I wont even touch the possible racial issues detailed. I have debated this issue with Steveh many times on INGO, posted many accepted and reviewed studies refuting the autism/ cancer corelleation and will continue to do so. Because if even one person listens to him and dosent vaccinate their kid and their kid catches an easily preventable disease then that is a tragedy in every regard.

 

[steveh_131]

Why wouldnt more scientists speak up? The scientific community as a whole is not known for covering up the fact that it is wrong generally they move foreward with the new correct way and leave the old ways or methods.

The 'scientific community' behaves as a herd, similar to any other group of people. The herd rejects any notion that vaccines might cause damage. Any member of the herd who disagrees is rejected from the herd. Pretty basic.

That being said why would the government want to support vaccines that give people autism it just dosent make sense at all!!!! The government wants healthy people with jobs so they can pay taxes. Last time i checked there arent many people with autism totally healthy and paying taxes unless I am just totally wrong.

The government has been pushing vaccines for a very long time, and has taken on much of the legal and financial liability associated with any damages from them. Read more here, if you care to become informed: National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

Additionally, the pharmaceutical companies are quite well connected in our government. CDC officials often move on to high positions in these companies once they leave the CDC. Corruption in favor of these corporations is to be expected.

Think about out of the thousands of studies over this topic only two actual "doctors" say there is a correlation?

Thousands of studies? Source?

These two 'doctors' pointed out a few possible links and suggested that we explore them further. Like I said before, Wakefield's research has been vindicated time and again. His results and statements have been misrepresented over the years to the point of being completely unrecognizable.

This is a absurd idea to even begin with and I wont even touch the possible racial issues detailed.

What is absurd? And why not touch the racial issues?

I have debated this issue with Steveh many times on INGO, posted many accepted and reviewed studies refuting the autism/ cancer corelleation and will continue to do so. Because if even one person listens to him and dosent vaccinate their kid and their kid catches an easily preventable disease then that is a tragedy in every regard.

Your understanding of this subject is quite limited. Let's not overstate your contributions to this debate.

Additionally, I have never told anyone that they shouldn't vaccinate their children. I remain skeptical about the autism/vaccine link. I think that there may be a relationship between the two, but I have doubts as to its significance.

However, the fact remains that vaccines carry risks. Serious risks. Permanent chronic conditions, brain damage and even death as a result of vaccinations are documented fact. Journalists, CDC officials, and psuedo-skeptics believe that we, the sheep, don't need to know about these risks. Individuals don't matter, only the 'herd' matters. I disagree. My child matters. Your child matters. Every child matters and they are all different. It is up to each parent to analyze their own situation, utilize the available information, and make the best choice that they can for their family.

Vaccinate or don't vaccinate, I honestly don't care. I do care that important information about these risks is actively being suppressed and concealed by people who claim to have our best interests at heart.

 

[1861navy]

Just like people say "the conspiracy theorists are just doing what pays the bills." The pharmaceutical corporations stand to lose millions of dollars if it is true that there is a link, just like they stand to lose millions of dollars if people understood that many vaccines have horrible side effects, and in some cases worse. Just like monsanto stands to lose billions every year if people find out that over use of round-up, gm food becoming more prevalent, etc. is affecting our health. More often than not, big companies, and those that rely on them, will go to the end of the earth to protect their pocketbooks.

 

[88GT]

Why wouldnt more scientists speak up? The scientific community as a whole is not known for covering up the fact that it is wrong generally they move foreward with the new correct way and leave the old ways or methods. That being said why would the government want to support vaccines that give people autism it just dosent make sense at all!!!! The government wants healthy people with jobs so they can pay taxes. Last time i checked there arent many people with autism totally healthy and paying taxes unless I am just totally wrong.

The way they've spoken out against global warming?

Sorry, as much as I want to believe that most scientific research endeavors are guided by the quest for knowledge, it's just not true. Who pays the bills? Vaccine manufacturers would lose a crap load of money. And the government doesn't care if people are healthy. It's about control.

Think about out of the thousands of studies over this topic only two actual "doctors" say there is a correlation? This is a absurd idea to even begin with and I wont even touch the possible racial issues detailed. I have debated this issue with Steveh many times on INGO, posted many accepted and reviewed studies refuting the autism/ cancer corelleation and will continue to do so. Because if even one person listens to him and dosent vaccinate their kid and their kid catches an easily preventable disease then that is a tragedy in every regard.

Every parent as the right to make informed decisions and weighed the decisions based on what's best for his family based on his priorities and evaluations of the information.

 

[T.Lex]

The way they've spoken out against global warming?

Sorry, as much as I want to believe that most scientific research endeavors are guided by the quest for knowledge, it's just not true. Who pays the bills? Vaccine manufacturers would lose a crap load of money. And the government doesn't care if people are healthy. It's about control.


Every parent as the right to make informed decisions and weighed the decisions based on what's best for his family based on his priorities and evaluations of the information.

^^^ This. Both of these, mostly.

Just to pile on, since this is the internet, there were "studies" that showed that smoking had healthy benefits, too.

The point of "doing science" is to figure out the stuff we don't know. We don't know what causes autism. We have some ideas, but we don't know how it all interacts. Heck, we don't even know if autism is one thing or a bunch of different things that all look kinda alike. (Actually, since we call it a "spectrum" I think that means it can be different things, but that's semantics.)

Personally, if it turns out there is a link between vaccines and autism-spectrum disorders, I don't think it is intentional. The pharma companies are trying their best to use the best science to protect people from preventable diseases. If it turns out there is a really bad side effect, then that's what it is - a side effect.

Clearly, if there is a link, it represents a small portion of the kids who get the vaccines. Does the risk outweigh the benefit?

As 88GT points out, that is up to the parent(s).

 

[steveh_131]

UPDATE:

Dr. William Thompson has confirmed publicly that he and his colleagues did, in fact, conceal data showing a correlation between early vaccinations and autism in African American boys.

http://www.morganverkamp.com/august...-relationship-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism/

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.

 

[88GT]

 

[Expat]

I am surprised this has come up again. I thought the matter had been settled.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/23/h...to-risk-of-autism-and-schizophrenia.html?_r=0

Older men are more likely than young ones to father a child who develops autism or schizophrenia, because of random mutations that become more numerous with advancing paternal age, scientists reported on Wednesday, in the first study to quantify the effect as it builds each year.

 

[level.eleven]

Whoopsie. While the quacks were secretly recording each other for their latest round of conspiracy theory bingo, their paper was yanked.

This article has been removed from the public domain because of serious concerns about the validity of its conclusions. The journal and publisher believe that its continued availability may not be in the public interest. Definitive editorial action will be pending further investigation.

A bad day for antivaccinationists: A possible retraction, and the ?CDC whistleblower? issues a statement ? Respectful Insolence

Have no fear, they'll be back.

 

[88GT]

Yes, control of information is a sure sign of intellectual integrity.

 

[T.Lex]

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.

Still interested in what the omitted data was.

 

[steveh_131]

Whoopsie. While the quacks were secretly recording each other for their latest round of conspiracy theory bingo, their paper was yanked.

Hold up now, level.eleven, first things first.

Before we begin I think we should take a moment to review all the times you were dead wrong in this thread, peppering your comments with your usual condescension, insults, and racism towards Chinese scientists.

Again, the conspiracy theory quacks provide the scientific community with a good laugh.

Some more analysis of this latest laugher.

There is a reason this was published in an open access Chinese journal without an impact rating.

They must crank out these whackdoodle papers to keep the scam alive.

This is the reason actual biostaticians laugh at this finding. It is the same reason Wakefield and Hooker didn't go public with their conclusion. This is just more spin on the too many to soon conspiracy theory. A desperate spin that includes race baiting.

Thankfully, there are actual epidemiologists and statisticians out there blogging about the bastardization of science.

When you are prepared to man up and admit that you were wrong, then perhaps your future comments would hold some weight.

 

[steveh_131]

Still interested in what the omitted data was.

Which part are you unclear on? He has been working with Dr. Hooker for some time now. He led Dr. Hooker to the spot to look for the omitted results. That's why he filed a FOIA request for this particular dataset and analyzed it.

 

[Streck-Fu]

I could not even provide a good a summary....other than the claims made in the OP are flat wrong: LINK

It has often been said that the parents promoting the idea that autism is a vaccine-induced epidemic are their own worst enemies. As the parent of a multiply disabled autistic child I can say without reservation that these groups are no friends to the majority of the autism parent community either. Nor are they friends to the real majority of our community: autistics. The vaccines-caused-an-autism-epidemic parents have refused to support any research which goes against their idea that autism is a vaccine-induced epidemic. They don’t support research into the prevalence of autism in adults. Likely because they worry that this will show that their epidemic idea is false. In the process we lose the chance to learn from the previous generations of autistics about what has worked and what has not. Information which is critical to this autism parent. These groups have failed to accept that the lower prevalence of identified autism in racial and ethnic minorities indicates that the prevalence numbers we so often hear are not the a true count of the fraction of our population that is autistic. Because to admit that is to admit that they are misusing the numbers they rely upon to claim an epidemic. Their lack of support has hindered attempts to improve identification and get appropriate services for autistics in racial and ethnic minorities. This is a point that is incredibly ironic given the way these groups are framing their recent news as you will see (or have seen if you read Ms. Ditz’ article linked above). On top of this they have produced a way over-the-top PR campaign about their news, demonstrating their deep hatred for the CDC. If I were to tell you that Andrew Wakefield is claiming that the CDC are worse than Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Pol Pot (because, you see, in Mr. Wakefield’s eyes at least those dictators were sincere), would you believe me? Would you think I was making this up? If I said that Mr. Wakefield has played the race card in a disgusting way, claiming that the U.S. vaccine program is a new Tuskegee experiment, would you believe me? You can skip down to the bottom if you want to see that discussion and video. I’ll start with the science.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGOtDVilkUc

 

[steveh_131]

I could not even provide a good a summary....other than the claims made in the OP are flat wrong: LINK

Apparently you haven't been watching the news (or reading this thread), but the official press release is out and the theories presented in the OP have been shown to be correct.

A brief summary, for anyone else who wants to link bloggers hypothesizing that none of this happened (before the confession went public):

1. Dr. William Thompson and his fellow CDC researchers did a study that showed an increased risk of autism in African American children who were vaccinated early in their childhood. This correlation may or may not have been significant, but it merited public disclosure and further research.
2. He and his colleagues sent a letter to the Director of the CDC (now the president of Merck's vaccine division) regarding this study, indicating that the results were troubling and that they needed to be addressed. You can find the letter here: https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-latest-cdc-vaccine-cover-up.html#post5247899
3. He and his colleagues introduced new filtering criteria that effectively removed the data that contributed to this correlation, then published the research.
4. Dr. William Thompson felt that what he did was wrong and damaging to science and medicine, so he shared the details of this cover-up with Dr. Brian Hooker.
5. Dr. Brian Hooker filed an FOIA request for the raw data behind this study and ran his own analysis, publishing it in a peer-reviewed medical journal.
6. Yesterday, Dr. William Thompson published a press release, through his lawyers, admitting to all of these things.

Again, for those who haven't read the thread, I'm still not totally convinced that vaccines are a major player in the Autism arena. And this study doesn't prove that they are.

It does show us that vaccines ought to continue to be researched for safety and efficacy.

It does show us that the CDC is not above lying to us about vaccines, or any other toxin that might cause autism.

It does show us that 'science', as worshiped by the psuedo-skeptics, really is for sale.

Parents, study up. Consider the pros and cons, not just the propaganda pushed by the mainstream media. Consider all of the information available and then make your own informed decision. Your child is not just a part of the herd.

 

[T.Lex]

Which part are you unclear on? He has been working with Dr. Hooker for some time now. He led Dr. Hooker to the spot to look for the omitted results. That's why he filed a FOIA request for this particular dataset and analyzed it.

I don't think that's actually what happened. The CDC doc was talking to Hooker for a long time, but his statement (especially the part about not consenting to being recorded) indicates he was not "working with" Hooker at all.

Regardless, my point is that data was omitted that suggested a link between race/gender, MMR vaccine before 36 mos, and autism. But, it does not specify what that data was. It a statistical thing? Is it a sample size thing? Is it a difference of a standard deviation or .1 of a std. dev.?

What he "admitted" to could be any number of things. I'd like to know specifically what was omitted and what impact it had on the results. Everything else is rhetoric. (Not that there's anything inherently wrong with rhetoric.)