Taking Back Our Stolen History
A ‘Study’ Performed by a Student Working on his Master’s Degree in Medicine ‘Morphed’ into an Apparent Evidence Piece that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism”
A ‘Study’ Performed by a Student Working on his Master’s Degree in Medicine ‘Morphed’ into an Apparent Evidence Piece that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism”
A ‘study’ performed by a student working on his Master’s degree in Medicine in 2014, Luke E. Taylor, “a ‘Pediatric Registrar’ at the Children’s Hospital …

A ‘Study’ Performed by a Student Working on his Master’s Degree in Medicine ‘Morphed’ into an Apparent Evidence Piece that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism”

A ‘study’ performed by a student working on his Master’s degree in Medicine in 2014, Luke E. Taylor, “a ‘Pediatric Registrar’ at the Children’s Hospital at Westmead in Sydney, Australia.” published with co-authors, ‘morphed’ into an apparent evidence piece that “vaccines do not cause autism”!   That’s not what whistleblower Dr. William Thompson found, tried telling CDC and then disclosed as a whistleblower!

Here is the link to Taylor’s paper as published in the journal VACCINE.

The Taylor et al paper was based in subjective epidemiology data rather than in actual scientific biology and scientific human physiology.  There’s a HUGE difference, especially with interpretation of data and biological research science to the point where biases inadvertently or intentionally may creep into a study’s design and conclusions, in my opinion.  I’m not alone in that assessment.

Here’s a quote from Robert Kennedy Jr. (Esq., World Mercury Project) in the Foreword of the book Vaccine Whistleblower: Exposing Autism Research Fraud at the CDC:

Dr. Thompson told Dr. Hooker that whenever the CDC finds an adverse effect from vaccines, the agency supervisors assemble CDC scientists in a room and order them to massage the data until they have devised a gimmick for eliminating the unwanted signal.

Therein is the authoritative significance and difference between actual, factual science and vested-interest consensus science!  Also, that’s the probable reason for the CDC and/or the FDA not performing vaccinated versus non-vaccinated children’s health status studies, I offer.

Independent vaccinated vs. unvaccinated studies have been done and the results alarmingly indicate vaccinated children’s health problems are significant!  Here’s an example:

Boys vaccinated as neonates had threefold greater odds for autism diagnosis compared to boys never vaccinated or vaccinated after the first month of life. Non-Hispanic white boys were 64% less likely to have autism diagnosis relative to nonwhite boys. Findings suggest that U.S. male neonates vaccinated with the hepatitis B vaccine prior to 1999 (from vaccination record) had a threefold higher risk for parental report of autism diagnosis compared to boys not vaccinated as neonates during that same time period. Nonwhite boys bore a greater risk.

(Source: Vaccine Safety Commission)

In a forwarded email apparently written by Gary Kohls, he clearly discusses “Epidemiology vs. Biology” below:

Epidemiology vs. Biology

All the science included in the Taylor study, as narrow as the scope of the studies are, was epidemiology. Scientists are looking at data, in this case medical records and vaccination records of children, and they’re analyzing them to look for patterns and relationships. But, there’s a different kind of science that’s more revealing. It’s biological science, the kind Vaccine Papers referred to in the above quote. It’s science looking at living things and how they actually respond to other things. In the vaccine-autism debate, we have a growing body of biological science. It’s compelling, and it’s all very recent. We have mice studies where the mice are injected with vaccine ingredients, producing devastating results. And, we have clear biological plausibility for how, exactly, a vaccine can cause autism in a child.

Source: Gary Kohls forwarded email July 3, 2018

The KEY problem Mr. Kohls obviously points out—actual biology vs. epidemiology studies—is the defining difference, plus a default factor I say, in just about every vaccine ‘safety’ study authored, published and promoted by vaccine acolytes and those federal and state health agencies, including the World Health Organization, who push consensus pseudoscience regarding vaccines and ginned-up stories of conquering diseases, especially communicable infectious diseases which practically ‘died out’ long before vaccines to ‘conquer’ them were introduced into the consumer healthcare marketplace.

The following charts were produced by Raymond Obomsawin, PhD
National Aboriginal Health Organization, October 2009
http://preventdisease.com/news/09/111009_infectious_disease_decline_vs_vaccinations.shtml

No vaccine for tuberculosis in USA!

Pertussis vaccine introduced in 1948

 

Influenza vaccine widely administered in USA in 1980s

 

Measles Mortality Rates in England & Wales were reduced greatly before the Measles vaccine was introduced in 1965

The above FACTS indicate the U.S. Congress apparently was misled—and over lobbied—about passing the 1986 Vaccine Law [2].  The adverse repercussions affecting two plus generations of children’s health are dramatic, so it’s high time that law is revisited, corrected—but better still, repealed—since there are great indications that RICO charges should be brought against the CDC, FDA and pharmaceutical companies who manufacture unsafe vaccines without proper testing while publishing ‘puff’ scientific literature to mislead everyone.

Didn’t the U.S. Supreme Court rule in 2011 that “vaccines are unavoidably unsafe”?  SCOTUS’s ruling vaccines are unavoidably unsafe was right on since most vaccines contain formaldehyde, aluminum, polysorbate 80, thimerosal (ethylmercury) either added to multiple dose vaccine vials or as a residual processing element,  foreign DNA, diploid cells (aborted fetal cell lines) [3], especially those given to infants and toddlers!

Isn’t it time to drain the pharmaceutical/vaccine swamp?

References:

Resources: