WHILE RETURNING from the United Nations building where I heard NYU Professor Mary Holland (School of Law) nail the issues of constitutional and international law on the right to informed consent to the floor, to a standing ovation, I received an email from Mary ( To my delight). I read, in part:
“I started reading your Ebola book last night. Wow, you have evolved a lot in your thinking on vaccines in a VERY short period, based on your definition of ‘antivaxxers’ at bottom of 206, top of 207. Have you written up how your views evolved so quickly? It might be a helpful roadmap towards turning others around. Was this all in connection with the autism book, or did your views changing precede that book?”
Looking at my book this morning, I turned to page 206, with trepidation, to find the younger, knowing me, trying to save the world by chiding and deriding people whom I have come to learn much more about in the past two years:
“Again and again with Ebola we see, from Guinea to the US, societies struggling with the ethical problem of the needs (and wants) of a few vs. the safety (and lives) on the many”.
Ok, that’s not too bad. A bit uppity, but I cannot disagree. But it gets worse.
“With over 100 cases confirmed, the US is, at the time of this writing, at high risk of an epidemic of measles because the herd immunity is lacking due to a dogmatic antivaccination movement”.
I warned you.
Deplorably, I continue:
“The efficacy of the measles vaccine in protecting children against terrible diseases should be reason enough for parents to insist on vaccinating their children, but the so-called ‘anti-vaxxers’ (people who believe vaccines place their children at risk of developing autism) fail to consider the greater good: They put others at risk by not participating in national programs for the greater good.”
I really do not like my former self. Naturally, I continue, because I knew SO much before I actually looked into the studies and the data:
“This perspective is more than mere 20:20 hindsight; such occurrences of cultural and institutional amnesia are certain to recur as our society becomes more reliant and trusting in technology, and we forget to respect the awesome power of biology and Nature”.
I really don’t know this guy, I swear.
Mary Holland will certainly be remembered as one of the most staunch defenders of human rights, well, in the history of abuses in medicine. So back to Mary’s question:
“Have you written up how your views evolved so quickly? It might be a helpful roadmap towards turning others around. Was this all in connection with the autism book, or did your views changing precede that book?”
Here’s how and why my views have changed. First, I was really rather upset about the fact that CDC Director Thomas Freiden stated in his testimony to Congress that there were no mutations in the Ebolavirus that was driving the epidemic. I was upset because I had the 396 mutations on my laptop at the very moment he testified to Congress. I capture that moment in “Ebola“. My anger at the CDC increased when I attended a secret White House conference call, held by the Ebola Czar, in which I asked about the 396 mutations – whether they influenced the ability of tests to detect Ebola, or altered its virulence or transmissibility. In that call, the entire scientific community was lied to again by a CDC Scientist who claimed that the virus was “99.9999% identical to the strain from Zaire in 1995”, which was not true at all. I capture both of those events in “Ebola”, as well as how the White House then asked the Associated Press to stop covering potential cases of Ebola in the US. I even ask in that book whether that was “fascism”.
Fast forward a couple of months to where I had decided to write “Cures vs. Profits“. I felt that we had bungled our response to Ebola so badly that I wanted to cheer myself up and write a book on the successes in biomedical research. Having participated in so many studies over the past two decades, I knew of many reasons that the public should continue to support biomedical research, and I was going to share all that I knew, and discover more. The first two chapters deal with “the bad stuff” – the doctors who cheat at medicare fraud, which robs other patients of needed funds for real medicine – and the biomedical researchers who cheat at their research studies.
I wrote my chapters out on grapefruit, on cancer vaccines, on prostate cancer robotic surgery, and then something happened: I wrote a chapter on ADHD overdiagnosis. I tell the story of the destruction of a promising career of Dr. Gretchen Watson. Pharma sent a “Key Opinion Leader” to EVMS to debate her over her study, and the next day she was told her case load was canceled, that her colleagues were told that she no longer worked at EVMS, and that she was to expected to resign. She refused, and won an appeal to HR. But then someone floated a rumor that she manipulated her data in the 1996 study showing overdiagnosis.
The investigation revealed no flaw – well, a typo in an appendix – but the damage to her career was done. The good news is that Dr. Watson has decided to write of book of her own after reading my chapter on ADHD. She now also serves on the Board at IPAK.
When I finished writing the rest of “Cures“, including chapters on the history of hormone receptor status in breast cancer, chemosensitivity assays, characteristics of good research scientists, and cancer vaccines, I found the book missing something.
So I decided to write a chapter on Vaccines.
I’ll let the chapter on vaccines speak for itself- it begins with tales of how wonderful vaccines are, how they save lives. I went back to review the autism/vaccine link, fully expecting to review the Andrew Wakefield issue briefly, how his claims that MMR were linked to vaccines. I read the retracted study.
I found that Andrew Wakefield never claimed that the MMR might cause autism. Instead, I found the study to suggest that it was a question worth looking into.
My digging around then led to my discovery of reports that someone at CDC had revealed that CDC had manipulated data on the studies designed to disprove Wakefield by omitting results with a positive association.
The more I dug into the issue, and then into the literature, the more I found the science of vaccines falling far short of the science needed to insure public health via any medical procedure given to millions. And this is where I leave the issue in “Cures“. I added an addendum that reviews four open controversies in vaccines that cause me to question whether vaccines can be called an unmitigated success in translational research.
In retrospect, I see that position as something of an understatement.
My understanding of vaccines was (obviously) limited, and I needed to grasp the risks involved. I needed resolution. So after I completed “Cures“, I began writing about what I had learned. I spoke with people with an open mind. I started to listen not only to what these evil, selfish “anti-vaxxers” had to say, I started to really think about the consequences of the additives. I began to question the over-arching claims of safety.
And via some new contacts, I made connection with Tony Lyons of Skyhorse Publishing. After a few chats, he, Louis Conte and I agreed that I should write a book on the Genetics of Autism. (I love Louis – and knowing what I know of him now, my bet is that he thought I was a good prospect – but somehow I can hear him telling Tony that Jack has ‘a way to go, but I think he’ll get there’. Thank you Louis for the confidence.
So in I dove, into 3,000 research articles on autism. Not on vaccines – on autism. I wanted to know if the basic science could in any way reasonably support a hypothesis that vaccines or their additives cause autism. The answer is a resounding “Yes, yes, and yes”. Other articles in this blog will give you an idea of some of the evidence that exists on the role of chronic microglial activation and autism, for example.
To the readers of “Ebola” who feel confused or hurt by my, and others’ ignorance, please remember that there is a Great Unknowing, even among professionals. Think about it – all “Anti-vaxxers” with vaccine-injured children were once pro-vaccine. As I advised some 500 participants at the VIALs Health Summit in Atlanta, GA, do not argue with them – educate them. Your anger and frustration is warranted, but help them move from ignorance to awareness and understanding.
I took it upon myself to read over 3,000 articles on autism for “Causes” (due out in November). Look at what knowledge can do to a scientist who themselves feel cheated and lied to, someone who entrusted the CDC to perform objective science (See “The Tyranny of Pseudoscience“ https://jameslyonsweiler.com/2016/03/13/the-tyranny-of-pseudoscience/):
Educating the public and calling for Congress to Subpoena Dr. William Thompson at the CDC on the true nature of so-called “Science” conducted at the CDC on the link between vaccines and autism.
To My Fellow Scientists and Medical Health Care Professionals
I wrote “Ebola” in good faith, assuming that the position of the CDC on vaccines was based on sound science. It was unfathomable to me that
-Upon finding positive associations, CDC would routinely over-analyze data from studies until they could make associations go away, and when they could not succeed in doing that, they would simply omit the results;
-CDC would suspend an employee who drew these practices to the attention of then CDC Director Dr. Julie Gerberding (who subsequently took a position in charge of vaccine development at Merck);
-After CDC published these studies they called for an end to research on vaccine safety with regard to potential links to autism;
-CDC would ignore nearly all of the basic science that shows mechanisms of how neurotoxins in vaccines (not just MMR) could reasonably be expected to cause autism in some people;
-CDC’s position is based on ecological association studies, not randomized prospective clinical studies with proper controls.
-Our knowledge of vaccine safety is based on post-market surveillance;
-CDC would ignore all of the post-market surveillance on vaccine safety, claiming that the passively collected data in VAERS did not provide causal evidence;
-CDC would lie repeatedly under oath to Congress about the State of Science on the link between vaccines and autism;https://jameslyonsweiler.com/2016/03/27/you-know-nothing-about-autism-john-snow/
-No one has ever conducted a vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study for association with negative health outcomes, including autism.
-CDC would communicate to the public that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism” on their website knowing full well that 6/12 vaccines on the schedule before the age of 7 have 0 studies one way, or the other, on whether they indeed may (or may not) contribute to the risk of autism.
I, like the rest of the world, relied on the CDC to be a reliable source of information on vaccine safety. Yes, I vaccinated my children. I will not allow them to get the HPV vaccine. Here is why.
To the Parents of Vaccine-Injured Children who Regressed Into Autism
Your observations are the basis of a new era in vaccine science. All science begins with observations. Help and relief is on the way. And there is nothing that can stop it.
Here I presented the CDC Schedule as backed by “Magic”, because no science exists on any link between 6 vaccines and autism, whereas some vaccines do, in fact have some studies that support association:
That was a good day in Atlanta, GA. Here are the slides to share with your pediatrician:
Next stop, the United Nations:
Mary Holland standing up for your rights to refuse medical procedures as a basic human right. To watch the unprecedented UN Session on Toxic Contamination of Children (4/26/2016), follow this link.
Mary Holland’s question to me was an important one:like many, if not most other professionals, I had argued my position on the vaccine/autism question from a position of ignorance. They simply have not done their homework, and many have bought the CDC’s lies hook, line and sinker. They count on CDC to be honest and forthright. This include the AAP, the AMA, and, very likely, your pediatrician.
Most of them probably have not read a single study. They likely have never read the following words that Dr. William Thompson said to Dr. Hooker:
Thompson: “They don’t really want people to know that this data exists.”
Thompson: “…among the blacks, the ones that were getting vaccinated earlier, were more likely to have autism.”
Thompson: “It appears in the final publication is that race in general is downplayed. Of course it is.”
Thompson: “I actually think the most interesting results are the isolated, ones that don’t have their co morbid conditions. The effect is where you would think it would happen.”
Thompson: “I was just looking at—I was like, oh my God, I cannot believe we did what we did. But we did.”
Thompson: “The higher ups wanted to do certain things and I went along with it. In terms of chain of command, I was number four out of five. “
Thompson: “…Literally, everyone else got rid of all their documents, and so the only documents that exist right now from that study are mine.”
Thompson: “There are things that I haven’t even shared with you because I can’t prove it, and that’s what I struggle with. I don’t want to share things with you that I can’t prove, that there aren’t hard records. I am worried that the other four people will collude and say no, that’s not true.”
Thompson: “That’s what I keep seeing again, and again, and again where these senior people just do completely unethical, vile things and no one holds them accountable. “
Thompson: “The reason you don’t see anything else circulating on the study, it was five of us behind closed doors for two years.”
Thompson: “It’s the lowest point in my career that I went along with that paper.”
Dr. William W. Thompson
My book “Cures vs. Profits” tells more of the story of Dr. Thompson and Hooker. At this point, I am willing to go on the record and say that I have zero – ZERO confidence in any science coming out of the CDC Immunization Safety division. And no one else should trust their research, either.
In fact, nothing they publish can be trusted. Not merely because of what Thompson said.
I’ve read their studies.
They are atrociously unsafe ventures in data cooking, model overfit, sad excuses for “control variables”, use of multicollinear variables, the product of repeated data analysis to a desired result (no association). They are a mess.
The individual people in question include
RADM Anne Schuchat, Principal Deputy Director of CDC
Dr. Frank DeStefano, Director of the Immunization Safety Office
Dr. Coleen Boyle Director, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (NCBDDD)
Dr. Poul Thorsen (co-author on suspect CDC studies, wanted by HHS for embezzling over $1Million in funds that were to be used for autism research, living openly in Denmark).
In my research, I strive to remain objective. However, since 2004, when the research fraud at the CDC occurred, there have been over 1,000,000 cases of autism that potentially could have been prevented simply by splitting up the MMR into three vaccines, spacing the vaccines out, giving non-adjuvanted vaccines with 1 adjuvanted, screening for safe epitopes, removal of mercury from all vaccines, giving medical exemptions to parents who already have one autistic child (to avoid the genetic x environment interaction), dropping HepB until adulthood… so many simple things that could have been done to reduce early exposures to toxins. Where is the science for biomarkers to indicate which children might be most at risk of ASD due to vaccines? Not done. CDC called for no more science.
We Want Evidence-Based Public Health Policies, not Policies Based on Subjective Belief (aka “Magic”)
Right now, the so-called “Anti-vaxxers” I so woefully admonished in “Ebola” are not all “Anti-Vaxxers”. They do consist partly of some people who believe no safe vaccine could ever exist. I respectfully remind them that until the science is done to show that non-adjuvanted vaccines without mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, etc are tested, their knowledge claim is an untested generalization about all vaccines. Out of well-deserved distrust, they call for no more science on vaccine safety – because they know that some will be injured by that very research.
But the Vaccine Risk Aware movement also includes people who are 100% Pro-Vaccine Safety. They suspect that safe and effective antigen presentation systems can be designed, that use exposure at the skin (microdermal abrasion), with epitopes that do not induce autoimmunity. They believe that taking the toxins out will likely make vaccines safer. But they do not make such claims. They call for more science, not less, but on newer options for inducing immunity.
To watch my presentation at the VIALS Health Summit State of Science on Vaccine Safety: Autism, in which I explain how the CDC’s claims that vaccines do not cause autism must be based on magic, follow these links: (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3).
Calls for Retraction of CDC “Studies”
Because CDC committed scientific fraud, the studies they performed should be retracted. IPAK has informed the journals of this, and we have sent them copies of “Vaccine Whistleblower, by Kevin Barry, Esq.
I urge all of my colleagues to view the movie #Vaxxed. Call your local theater and ask them to screen the movie. If you consider yourself an objective scientist, read “Whistleblower“, and RFK jr.’s book, “Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak“. Order “Master Manipulator” by James Grundvig, which tells the story of Poul Thorsen, a CDC collaborator wanted for absconding with autism research cash (given what CDC would have done with the money, Thorsen may be a hero, for all we know). For a deeper timeline view on how long corporate corruption has eroded science in our most esteemed institutions like the CDC, read “Science for Sale” by David Lewis.
I ask my professional colleagues from all walks of science and medicine then to join us in our calls for retraction of the CDC’s false studies: DeStefano et al., Madsen et al., and Verstraeten et al. I will not stop educating professionals about the fraud because we need evidence-based medicine, not medicine based on guesses, or hopes, or magic. Babies are dying in the womb due to mercury in flu vaccine reserved for pregnant women; babies are born autistic due to immunoneuroexcitotoxicity; they are born with seizure disorders; toddlers regress into autism after learning language. And yes, it may be due to cumulative and interactive effects of toxic chemicals from agriculture, industry, our home, etc. But we can reduce the toxins we expose our children to. Right now, autism risk is 1 in 68, up from 1 in 3000 in the 1970’s. Let’s have #theconversation.