Health Impact News Editor Comments
Investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson has posted a recorded phone call she just had with Dr. Frank DeStefano, the CDC Director of Immunization Safety. Dr. DeStefano was a co-author with CDC whistleblower Dr. William Thompson on a 2004 study that originally was put forward as research showing there was no link between vaccines and autism. Dr. Thompson has come forward and revealed that data was withheld from the public that showed an increased risk of autism in certain populations, specifically African American boys. The CDC has already made a public announcement  admitting that they did withhold some data.
Dr. DeStefano has publicly stated that he will reveal the data again, but he is standing by the original study. A new audio recording of a conversation he just had with independent investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson can be heard here .
In this interview, Dr. DeStefano admitted that the CDC omitted a large group of African American children based on the absence of birth certificates. When Sharyl asked him about Dr. Thompson’s concerns about the data showing a stronger link between vaccines and autism he replied:
yeah, I mean at the time he did these analyses he did, you know, he did point out that in one group, you know in that larger group the the the measures of association [between MMR vaccine and autism] were higher than in the, uh, birth certificate group and, you know, we discussed that and for the reasons I mentioned, uh, we came to consensus that the, uh, birth certificate uh results were more valid.
The CDC’s response, which Dr. DeStefano also repeated in this interview, is that the absence of birth certificates among some children meant that key data, such as race, birth weight, the mother’s age, and the mother’s education was missing, but present among those with birth certificates, and therefore they were not included in the study.
Sharyl stated that she had a copy of a birth certificate with her as she was talking to him on the phone, and she asked:
Um, I was looking at one of the birth certificates and it doesn’t have – maybe you could find one that has birth weight, mother’s education, the one I’m looking at doesn’t have any of that on there.
Dr. DeStefano’s reply, or the lack of a reply from him and the CDC explaining exactly how they obtained this data, has opened up a lot of questions as to just how this data could have been available simply on the basis of a birth certificate.
Ah, I mean I don’t know what, which one you’re looking at, I mean we get to these data were, uh, you know, right from the birth, birth, uh, the Georgia birth certificate files that contained those data.
Sharyl then asked him why the excluded data would not be important enough to investigate further since it contained such a higher rate of autism. Dr. DeStefano’s reply was very typical of the bias that currently exists among CDC scientists when it comes to autism:
you know, autism, as you probably are aware, is a condition that really probably has its start while the child is still in the womb. And, you now, it doesn’t, some of the behaviors and such don’t come apparent, become apparent until maybe the child is one, two, three years old.
In other words, autism is completely due to genetic factors, and not environmental. Of course, this flies in the face of both scientific evidence, as well as the experience of many tens of thousands of parents who saw their completely normal child rapidly digress shortly after receiving vaccines. Even the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has paid out damages to children with autism  as a result of vaccines.
So Sharyl asked if this bias towards their view of the causative factors regarding autism in general skewed their view of the data related to vaccines:
Let me just, let me just interrupt what, before I lose that thought. So you already made up your mind regardless of what the stats show that if it, certain things show that it didn’t make sense, you wouldn’t, you would try to find out a way to…
to which Dr. DeStefano replied:
No, that’s not we said, I’m just saying, you know, you interpret, you interpret findings, also, you know, there’s the statistics, then you have to also interpret, bring in things like biological plausibility, how do you interpret these results?
So it would seem that Dr. DeStefano, who is not a whistle-blower, has come out with his own confession of bias and way of interpreting data so that it does not have to be shared with the public if it is not favorable with what they want to communicate regarding vaccines and autism.
Dr. William Thompson is a Whistleblower: “Whistleblower Lawyers of the Year” to Represent Him
While the mainstream media (MSM) has now been forced to cover this story , it is very telling that as they refer to Dr. Thompson, they are completely avoiding the term “whistleblower” and suggesting that his public announcement, prepared by his attorney, portrays him as an innocent, sympathetic scientist who was deceived and manipulated by Dr. Hooker during their phone calls. However, if this were the case, then why is the attorney representing Dr. Thompson known as one the top whistleblower protection attorneys in the nation?
Make no mistake about it, Dr. Thompson is a whistleblower. Here is what his attorney’s website states:
Named “Whistleblower Lawyers of the Year” for 2010 by Taxpayers Against Fraud, we are experienced litigators who bring qui tam cases under the False Claims Act, the IRS whistleblower law, and other federal and state laws for people who report fraud or abuse of the taxpayers by government contractors. Our lawyers have been deeply involved in these cases for 15 years, with extensive trial and appellate experience. We practice nationwide representing clients knowledgeable about fraud in the health care, military procurement, and pharmaceutical sectors, among others.
Why has Dr. Thompson hired this particular law firm to represent him? He obviously is not primarily concerned about the parents of vaccine-damaged children and what legal action they may take, he is concerned about the CDC and the federal government and what actions they may take against him for coming forward and revealing data that was withheld for over 10 years linking the MMR vaccine to autism.
Dr. Thompson has stated verbally in his recorded messages with Dr. Hooker, as well as in his prepared statement, that he regrets participating in this cover-up at the CDC, and that he is fully participating with Congressman Posey and his investigation into this cover-up. Here are some of his quotes from a recorded interview with Dr. Brian Hooker that are not being reported in the MSM:
“Oh my God, I cannot believe we did what we did. But we did.”
“It’s the lowest point of my career, when I went along with that paper. I went along with this, and we didn’t report significant findings.”
“I am completely ashamed of what I did. I have great shame now. I was complicit, and I went along with this.”
“I have great shame now, when I meet families with kids with autism, because I have been part of the problem.”
Watch the video yourself, and listen to Dr. Thompson’s voice, this senior CDC vaccine researcher, say these things:
The MSM can say whatever they want about vaccines not causing autism, and withhold much of the information being revealed at this time, but in the end it won’t matter. What will matter is what is decided in Congressional hearings and in a court of law.
In the meantime, if you want to learn more about vaccine safety, don’t trust the mainstream media. They are not concerned with you or the safety of your child. Those reporters who are, who truly want to investigate and find the truth, have already left the MSM, such as Sharyl Attkisson .
UPDATE: Sharyl Attkisson has posted another story on her interview with CDC Director of Immunization Safety Dr. DeStefano here . In this portion of the interview, Dr. DeStefano admits that vaccines can “rarely” trigger autism, but admits that the CDC is not planning to research why this happens in some children. Read More .
Previous Stories on the CDC Whistleblower:
Dr. Brian Hooker: Father of Vaccine-damaged Child and His Relentless Pursuit to Expose Fraud at the CDC 
Medical Doctors Opposed to Forced Vaccinations – Should Their Views be Silenced?
One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all “quacks.”
However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate. Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding “the science” of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines.
The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary.
Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions, and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position of the medical field.
In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position. Many doctors who consider themselves “pro-vaccine,” for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual.
Many doctors recommend a “delayed” vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule. Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot.
These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions.
In this article, I am going to summarize the many doctors today who do not take the most extremist pro-vaccine position, which is probably not held by very many doctors at all, in spite of what the pharmaceutical industry, the federal government, and the mainstream media would like the public to believe.