The dark tale about the scorpion catching a ride across a river on the back of a frog comes to mind. As they approached mid-river, the scorpion stung the frog, despite all his promises to refrain, and as they both began to sink, the frog said to the scorpion: Why did you do that?! Now we’ll both drown! I couldn’t help myself, said the scorpion; it’s my nature.
The video linked below (1) is the latest addition to the saga of Dr. Bill Thompson, the CDC whistleblower who a few months ago admitted publicly that the original data gathered in a CDC study of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism, published in 2004, showed a remarkable 340% higher probability of autism in African-American boys if they received the vaccine at the recommended 12 to 18 months, instead of at 36 months, but the incriminating data were then discarded, after the fact, by changing the parameters of the study – a highly unethical maneuver. This video is poignant in two ways: it provides the evidence that in the case of what they termed “isolated autism”, probability of autism diagnosis was actually higher across the board, irrespective of race; and it displays the documented decisions to re-format the study parameters – the study design – after the initial data collection.
The core of the validity of any study is the thought that goes into its design; the care taken to assure that the information gathered will yield the correct answer to the question asked. To change the design midstream, in response to displeasure with the initial results, is akin to a child brushing away the cookie crumbs from around the cookie jar after he’s pilfered a few to eat, except in this case it’s accountable adults, tasked with investigating a possible cause of what could easily be characterized as the most pressing national problem – the epidemic that is autism, brushing away data showing that American families – African-American, especially – are more likely to suffer the tremendous financial, social, familial and marital burden that autism can be, if their kids are given the MMR vaccine by the CDC’s recommended schedule, as opposed to delaying the shot ’til 36 months.
They’re adults. They know precisely what they’re doing, and they have a history of doing it. It’s apparently their nature – and, like children, they apparently feel they can simply get away with it, protected by the illusive stature of the walls of the CDC.
In 1999 the CDC discovered in its own in-house study, led by Dr. Thomas Verstraeten, a definitive correlation between the mercury in the expanding vaccine schedule and the rising incidence of speech and learning disorders and autism. (2) There’s even a revealed email between the researchers, titled: It Just Won’t Go Away (3), in which Dr. Verstraeten makes it perfectly clear that he’s made a valiant effort to disprove the correlation and failed, ending with the plea: “I haven’t yet found an alternative explanation… Please let me know if you can think of one.”
The communication has a tone of desperation. Indeed, the mindset must be quite disturbing, at a deep level – to see before you the evidence that the mercury in vaccines was causing an alarming and rising incidence of neurological disorders, including autism, but, forsaking both the basic tenets of science, which ostensibly you espouse, and the good health and performance of potentially millions of kids, you focus not on the cold reality of the findings, but on finding a way to change the outcome. That disturbance is what ultimately drove Dr. Thompson to expose the fraud surrounding the 2004 study.
It was at this point, after unsuccessfully trying to find an alternate explanation, if not earlier, that it was the absolute responsibility of the CDC to announce the findings to the American public, who were going about their daily business vaccinating their kids by the thousands, every day. The CDC, however – again, revealing its nature – redesigned the study – twice! – until they’d whittled the vaccine autism correlation down to statistical insignificance, at which point they announced that no link had been found. The nature of the fraud is astounding, the effect on the overall health of our kids despicable.
Four decades earlier – and who knows how many times in between – the same type of fraud was perpetrated. When the polio vaccine came out in 1954, it signaled the start of a period of assessment, comparable to a study, during which the true effectiveness of the vaccine at preventing the disease would be revealed. However, and once again, they changed the rules – drastically. In 1955, right after the vaccination program got under way, they radically redefined the diagnostic parameters of polio, followed soon thereafter by changes in labeling protocol (4), then by even more stringent technical requirements for a polio diagnosis. In short, they ultimately redefined not the disease, but the label, out of existence. That’s not disease eradication, that’s a con game. As a result of those changes, over the last sixty years a million cases of what would have been diagnosed as polio pre-vaccine – same symptoms – were given – and continue to be given – different labels.
The hubris is almost laudable. They even went so far as to change the definition of a polio epidemic, cutting almost in half the likelihood that any future outbreaks would be so labeled – as though suddenly, overnight, the disease had lost some of its importance. In a transcript of a panel of experts gathered by the Illinois Medical Society in 1960 to discuss the problems with the ongoing polio vaccination program (5), it’s described thusly:
“Presently , a community is considered to have an epidemic when it has 35 cases of polio per year per 100,000 population. Prior to the introduction of the Salk vaccine the National Foundation defined an epidemic as 20 or more cases of polio per year per 100,000 population. On this basis there were many epidemics throughout the United States yearly. The present higher rate has resulted in not a real, but a semantic elimination of epidemics.”
And that’s precisely what happened to polio: not a real, but a semantic elimination of the disease.
The nature of this beast is obviously nothing like its public face. On the inside it’s conniving and deceitful, in full defiance of its responsibility to us and to our kids.
About the author: Shawn Siegel has enough common sense to recognize a con game when he sees one, thus was compelled to begin researching after discovering that immediately following the release of the polio vaccine the CDC radically changed the definition of the disease. He now hosts a weekly radio/internet show, The Vaccine Myth: An Issue of Trust, on the Logos Radio Network.
2. Evidence of Harm, 2005, by David Kirby, pp 127 – 131.