by Jefferey Jaxen
Health Impact News
An original report by Truth in Media news organization, led by investigative journalist Ben Swann, has the public buzzing.
As the alternative media surges in popularity and integrity, it appears that Truth in Media has solidified its place as one of the world’s premier outlets reporting truth, reality, and life-saving information.
The organization’s recent documentary report titled Truth in Media: CDC, Vaccines and Autism strikes hard at the roots of a corrupt Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and an inhumane, criminal vaccine industry. Perhaps for the first time, viewers are able to witness the full magnitude of large-scale, multi-level vaccine research fraud.
The documentary lends solid evidence that the MMR vaccine lacks the proper safety studies originally entrusted to the CDC.
It is important to understand the seriousness of Swann’s recent report. Against a backdrop of rising autism rates, widespread vaccine injury and the rapid loss of medical consent, the U.S. mainstream media has been complicit.
There has been essentially zero reporting to alert the public of the current epidemic of vaccine injury exponentially increasing.
In addition, the mainstream media has continually engaged in astroturfing campaigns against those speaking out and reporting on the right to exercise individual medical choice in the face of mandatory vaccination laws currently sweeping the U.S.
Former scientists who worked for the CDC speak out in new documentary on CDC corruption.
The Background to the Vaccine Cover-up
It was in 1986 that President Reagan signed into law the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. This act opened the flood gates to reckless pharmaceutical practices by protecting drug companies from the legal repercussions of their dangerous products. Amidst a growing rate of autism, the 1990s saw multiple studies beginning to question if there was a link between immunizations and autism rates in children. In the U.S., the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) shot was being given to infants between 12 and 18 months of age. The CDC entered the picture to conduct its own in-house study to determine if the timing of the MMR vaccine was associated with the increase of autism being seen in children at the time. The findings of the CDC’s study was published in 2004 in the journal Pediatrics revealing, as Swann reports:
In short, the finding of the CDC study was that there really was no greater correlation for young children who were given the measles, mumps, rubella vaccine and the rest of the population with autism.
However, in 2014 Dr. William Thompson, a senior scientist at the CDC and one of the lead authors of 2004 MMR-autism study came forward. Thompson issued a statement admitting he and his coauthors committed research fraud to cover up the link between the MMR vaccine and an increased prevalence of autism. Swan reports that Dr. Thompson:
“…hired a whistleblower lawyer and then released to congress thousands of pages of documents, charts, tables, power-points — evidence that what the CDC published in the journal Pediatrics was a heavily manipulated version of what they had actually found during the course of their study.”
Bombshell Revelations Showing Massive Corruption in the CDC
It is at this point in the documentary that Swann begins to piece together bombshell evidence quoting directly from Dr. Thompson’s whistleblowing documents Truth in Media has acquired.
After running a race analysis using the collected data, Dr. Thompson “reportedly gets his first results showing strong and significant results, for ‘isolated’ cases in blacks” on December 19, 2001. It is at this point in the timeline that Dr. Thompson finds that African American males under the age of 36 months who where given the MMR vaccine show increase risks of autism. Swann reports that two months later, the study’s co-authors meet and make a decision not to report Dr. Thompson’s findings:
On February 13, 2002, race results are removed from spreadsheets. And then by April 17, the ‘isolated’ term is no longer used and replaced by the term ‘co-morbid.’ Timing results are introduced to the spreadsheet but not at the 36-month cutoff.
According to the CDC, the data collected and studied were from two groups of children encompassing all children who were initially recruited for the study and then a subset of children who had a birth certificate. Quoting from Dr. Thompson’s documents from July 2, 2002, Swann reports:
The unadjusted [all children in the study] race effect was statistically significant…That is the main reason why we decided to report the race effects for only the birth certificate sample.
The documentary report goes on to highlight more bombshell evidence regarding research protocols. While studying the vaccine adjuvant thimerosal prior to the 2004 MMR study, the CDC changed their research protocol “no less than five times” to get more favorable results according to evidence and research by Brian Hooker Ph.D. The research flipflop became a public embarrassment and point of contention for the CDC’s public research integrity and trust. To avoid similar research issues, CDC officials and co-authors approved a strict set of protocols finalized on September 5, 2001, for their 2004 MMR-autism study. Speaking during the report, Dr. Hooker states:
The records that I obtained from Dr. Thompson showed that the CDC scientists did not like the effects that were being elucidated using the original protocol about two months after that protocol was set.
A Congressman’s Plea to Expose Corruption
During his recent speech in the U.S. House of Representatives, Florida Congressman Bill Posey read from Dr. Thompson’s documents stating,
All the authors and I met and decided sometime between August and September 02 not to report any race-effects for the paper. Sometime soon after the meeting we decided to exclude reporting any race-effects. The co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the study. The remaining four coauthors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard copy documents that we had and thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can.
Congressman Posey concluded his appearance before the U.S. House by stating:
Mr. Speaker I believe it’s our duty to ensure that the documents Dr. Thompson provided are not ignored. Therefore, I will provide them to members of Congress and the House Committees upon request. Considering the nature of the whistle blower documents, as well as the involvement of the CDC, a hearing and a thorough investigation is warranted. So I ask, Mr. Speaker — I beg, I implore my colleges [sic] on the appropriations committees to please, please take such action.
No action has been taken to date. Swann’s document represents what amounts to the first, public investigation and conversation beginning around the actual evidence and documents from Dr. Thompson. The findings are real and the implications are of historical importance.
Watch Ben Swann’s full investigative report here.
Comment on this article on VaccineImpact.com.
Previous Stories on the CDC Whistleblower:
How the Government has Earned $3.5 BILLION from the Claim that Vaccines Don’t Cause Autism
CDC’s Purchase of $4 Billion of Vaccines a Conflict of Interest in Overseeing Vaccine Safety
CDC Autism Scandal: Tsunami of Anger is Brewing and About to Explode
Former Staff Lead on Original Congressional Investigation Looking at Vaccine Injuries Speaks Out on CDC Fraud
CDC Director of Immunization Safety Admits Bias and Withholding Data Linking Vaccines to Autism
MSM Marginalizes CDC Whistleblower Story on Vaccine-Autism Coverup
CDC Whistleblower: Mercury in Vaccines Given to Pregnant Women Linked to Autism
CDC Responds: Admits Omitting Vaccine Data Linking Vaccines to Higher Rates of Autism
CDC Whistleblower Emerges: Admits Coverup on Vaccine Link to Autism
CDC Whistleblower: CDC Covered Up MMR Vaccine Link to Autism in African American Boys
CDC Caught Hiding Data Showing Mercury in Vaccines Linked to Autism
More Coverage:
The Vaccine Autism Cover-up: How One Doctor’s Career was Destroyed for Telling the Truth
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.