I find it ironic that the media, the British government, and leaders in medical academia jumped on board attacking and destroying Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s reputation based on “fraud” charges related to a study he conducted about the link between the measles vaccine and autism.
It is ironic for a number of reasons. How can the British government, itself drowning in deception at every level, dare accuse anyone of fraud?
The panel assembled by the government and academia to judge Wakefield, ironically, dares to speak of fraud, yet their main complaint is that his findings “might endanger the 'sacrosanct' vaccine program,” not that his principal findings were wrong. In fact, several independent researchers found the same measles vaccine-related colitis that he described.
A recently released charge by the British Medical Journal editors is that Wakefield was poised to get huge profits from a product stemming from his research results. I am not here to defend Wakefield, rather, I demonstrate the double standard regularly practiced by his vocal critics.
Virtually every paper published on drugs, such as statins, is authored by individuals having financial links to as many as three to four pharmaceutical companies each. The same is true of papers published by major journals extolling vaccine efficacy and safety. They know these papers violate every ethical principle known, yet they are published in some of the most prestigious journals.
Abundant evidence has shown that these very same people destroy the reputations of anyone producing evidence, no matter how well researched and of the highest ethical standards, if it in any way endangers this vaccine program. It is ironic that these accusers speak of “blatant fraud,” when virtually all of the vaccine safety evidence they use abundantly is fraudulent by careful design.
Ironically, even their outcry of the effect of Wakefield’s paper is deceitful. They scream that it caused vaccine rates to fall below the 80 percent level needed for “herd immunity,” when they know that no one has ever proven his paper was the cause.
A growing number of British have suffered from vaccine complications, and they are rightly concerned about vaccine safety. When there was a small outbreak of measles in this country, as few as 300 cases, they screamed it was an epidemic and millions were at risk of dying. In fact, in similar outbreaks studies found that 90 percent of the affected children had been fully or partially vaccinated, and most had mild infections.
When I grew up there was no measles vaccine and everyone in my class got the measles and no one died or suffered serious harm. To imply our society is at risk of millions of deaths should vaccine rates drop is a blatant lie used to scare parents into over-vaccinating their children. They use the same scare tactics based on manipulated data to terrify the elderly into getting a flu shot every year.
Read more from Russell Blaylock, M.D.
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
7 comments:
Baloney on the last paragraph, at the very least.
My sister had the measles in about 1956 after it was passed around her class in grade school. I got it from her. She developed measles encephalitis (a brain infection caused by the virus), spent almost six months in the hospital and was made totally deaf.
It sounds like the guy who wrote this is a fraud, too. Wakefield was proven to be a fraud for a variety of reasons, not just the one thing that Blaylock mentions in his article. How about we start with the fact that the parents in Wakefield's study, when contacted, said that Wakefield misrepresented the facts about their children? How about the fact that he simply made up results to suit his agenda?
The fact is that Wakefield's study is a fraud. The fact is that there is no evidence that vaccines cause autism. Those are facts that can't be disputed by anyone with any knowledge of the subject.
Those who defend the deceitful Dr. Wakefield are purposely blinding themselves to the facts on this issue.
I have said this to other people and you can think what you want... there isn't as much money is healing or curing any disease as there is in keeping it going and reaping in the dough on meds and treatments. The phamacudical companies will never let THEIR cash cow die.
Sorry, 1:19, you're simply wrong. In fact, vaccines do "cure" diseases. It's far cheaper to give a kid a polio vaccine than to treat a kid who has polio and, if that kid survives, to give that person the aids he will need to survive in life.
So the very fact that vaccines were introduced contradicts your views pretty convincingly.
Marc,
you think the pharmaceutical companies WILL let their cash cow die?
7:51 -- what's their "cash cow"? These companies make money by producing effective drugs. If any company could produce a drug that cured cancer or AIDS or even simple viral infections like colds, these companies would increase their wealth dramatically.
There is no secret conspiracy to keep people sick in order to make money from them. As I stated above, the very fact that vaccines were developed proves this. It costs far less to administer a vaccine than it does to deal with a disease. According to your "logic," vaccines would never have been developed because drug companies don't want to lose their "cash cows" of treating polio, pertussis, measles, chicken pox, etc.
50 years ago Dr. Blaylock would have told us cigarettes were good for you.
Post a Comment