The U.S. Needs an Independent Vaccine Safety Organization Separate from the Corrupt FDA and CDC

Most Americans are oblivious to the huge annual burden of chronic illness, injuries and deaths linked to vaccines. Some of the blame for the public’s ignorance belongs to a complicit media that “pretends that vaccine-related injuries do not occur.” However, the lion’s share of culpability for the buried story likely rests with the two federal agencies charged with vaccine oversight—the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—both of which regularly engage in various forms of deception to uphold their bland narrative that vaccines are unambiguously safe. One of the most significant criticisms has to do with the FDA’s and CDC’s business-as-usual reliance on external experts with financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies and/or products that they are evaluating. Little has changed since a congressional Committee on Government Reform outlined this problem nearly two decades ago. The Reform Committee examined the doings of the FDA’s Vaccine and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), which determines whether new vaccines should be licensed, and the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which recommends vaccines for inclusion in the childhood vaccine schedule. The congressional committee noted that FDA and CDC advisory committee members and chairpersons own stock in the vaccine companies under consideration, as well as own vaccine patents. The CDC “grants conflict of interest waivers to every member of their advisory committee a year at a time and allows full participation in the discussions leading up to a vote by every member,” even if a member has a financial stake in the decision.

FDA Has Acknowledged That Vaccine Technology is Outpacing Ability to Predict Adverse Events

Recently, top-tier autoimmunity researchers described vaccine safety science as a “hazardous occupation.” In their view, this is because uncompromising vaccine proponents are instantly ready to mount vociferous personal attacks on anyone who raises questions about any aspect of vaccine safety, even if the questions are buttressed by impeccable, high-quality science. Vaccine safety was not always such a taboo topic. In 1961, a leading polio researcher put forth the view in Science that “even after licensing, a new vaccine product must be considered to be on trial” because of the many “new variables” that accompany large-scale vaccine production and rollout. A leading Food and Drug Administration (FDA) official contended in 1999 that modern advances in vaccine technology were rapidly “outpacing researchers” ability to predict potential vaccine-related adverse events” and argued for closer attention to safety issues from the earliest stages of vaccine development. “One of the important things is that the technology used to make these vaccines actually exceeds the science and technology to understand how these vaccines work and to predict how they will work,” stated Dr. Peter Patriarca, MD, Director of the Viral Products Division of the FDA Center for Biological Evaluation and Research (CBER). “So this has the potential for ending up in a situation which I call a 'black box' vaccine referring to a situation of unforeseen and unpredictable vaccine outcomes.” Dr. Patriarca also voiced concerns that with live attenuated vaccines “there is the potential for these vaccines, many of which have been poorly characterized, to recombine with viruses that may be present in the vaccine. Some of these viruses are latent and persist for a while, so it is very important to assure that these things are safe before they are given to people.” In the two decades since the FDA official’s prescient words of warning, numerous published studies have highlighted vaccine safety concerns that were either unexplored or neglected prior to the introduction of the vaccines in question.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Addresses Capitol Hill on Vaccine Safety Issues

Last week, 15 dedicated children’s health and medical choice advocates joined Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. on Capitol Hill to fulfill our promise to the community to provide crucial vaccine safety information to every member of Congress. Meetings with Congressional Members, Senators, and staff took place over a four-day time period to explain WMP’s six-step Vaccine Safety Project that details the actions necessary to introduce sound science and transparency to our vaccination program. Federally elected officials can no longer ignore the chronic health conditions—tied in no small part to adverse vaccine reactions—that currently affect over half of our nation’s children. Not only are these officials now aware of the conflicts of interest and inadequate science upon which the vaccine program is built, but they have been given a common-sense plan for enacting desperately needed changes that puts children’s health first.

American Academy of Pediatrics Attacks Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Vaccine Safety

American consumers, particularly parents, should be asking some hard questions about why the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and Immunization Action Coalition (IAC) apparently have no interest in improving vaccine safety. In the face of snowballing vaccine scandals—from fudged safety trials that use other vaccines as placebos, to persistent use of neurotoxic aluminum adjuvants, to the accelerated rollout of unproven vaccines that may be causing more problems than they solve—these and other vaccine advocacy organizations are not only turning a blind eye but are actively circling the wagons while beefing up public relations (PR) intended to stifle discussion. These PR efforts are on revealing display in an April 2017 IAC webinar on “Vaccines and the New Administration” that unsurprisingly singles out the activities of the World Mercury Project and its Chairman, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Due to the well-funded medical-pharmaceutical-media apparatus that endlessly repeats the mantra that all vaccines are safe for all people all the time, it is nearly impossible to get a fair hearing for common-sense questions about vaccine safety, no matter how urgent such questions may be. The biases apparent in mainstream discussions about vaccine safety have come into even sharper focus since the changeover from one political administration to the next. In February 2017, shortly after the inauguration, several hundred national and state-based organizations rushed to sign a letter lobbying President Trump to “redouble” efforts to drive up the vaccination rate. The IAC and the AAP were two signatories of that letter, which summarily dismissed concerns about vaccine risks as “disproven.”

55 Organizations Representing 5 Million Serve Legal Notice to HHS for Failure to Conduct Vaccine Safety Tests: Civil Action to Follow?

Each time a parent decides to have their child vaccinated, they do so believing that each vaccine has been rigorously tested for vaccine safety and efficacy. Equally, they are of the understanding that their child will be protected from deadly diseases once they have received the vaccine. In reality, however, vaccines are not being tested for safety before entering the market. This is because the creation of the 1986 National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program took all liability away from the pharmaceutical industry and transferred it to the health department. Due to these actions, it is now the responsibility of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to conduct all the safety testing that the pharmaceutical industry no longer has to do. Mr. Del Bigtree, producer of the film VAXXED which chronicles the revelations of a CDC whistleblower who revealed that data showing a vaccine-autism connection was covered up, stated on camera that: “We believe that there is a major failure of Health and Human Services (HHS) to do the appropriate safety tests.” Angered by what he believes to be the lack of science and appropriate testing being carried out by the HHS, Mr. Bigtree and the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN), supported by 55 organizations representing over 5 million people, have taken the unprecedented step of serving a notice to Mr. Don Wright, M.D., M.P.H., who is the acting secretary of the HHS department, demanding action to be taken. This notice, served on October 12, 2017, outlined exactly how the HHS department had failed in their duty to conduct the proper scientific research required to demonstrate vaccine safety. In serving this notice together, Mr. Bigtree and ICAN have recognized and made a stand, the HHS needs to be held accountable for their actions. If they do not address these concerns, Congress has given authority for Civil Action to be taken.

Dr. Brownstein: New Shingrix Vaccine for Shingles Fails 97% of Time

A recent article in the New York Times got me going–it was titled, “CDC Panel Recommends a New Shingles Vaccine.” The new vaccine—Shingrix—is manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline for adults 50 and older. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which is part of the CDC, now recommends Shingrix over the old shingles vaccine—Merck’s Zostavax. Amazingly, the new recommendations now state that adults who have received the older shingles vaccine should now get the new one. The article in the NYT states, "…clinical trials showed {Shingrix} to be about 98% effective for one year and 85% effective at preventing shingles for three years." I have written about the failure of the older vaccine-Zostavax—for many years. In those articles, I show you that Zostavax fails nearly 99% who take it. Naturally, anything that fails 99% who take it, should not be prescribed. Let’s look at the Shingrix data. A true statement about Shingrix is that it takes 34 people to be vaccinated with Shingrix to prevent one case of shingles. That means the drug failed 33 out of 34 who took it which is a 97% failure rate!

Does the Claim that Only 1 in a Million are Harmed by Vaccines Have Any Merit?

It is commonly believed that vaccines are safe. Many doctors and public health officials will tell you that serious adverse effects from vaccines are “extremely rare”—that they occur in less than “one in a million” vaccine doses given. One in a million. It sounds like pretty good odds that you would be fine. However, is this one in a million merely an idiom being used to convey the idea that the odds are very small, or is it truly a fact based on accurate and observable data?

Science Settled? 400 Scientific Studies Question Vaccine Safety and Efficacy

Vaccines: Are they safe? Are they effective? To help answer those questions is Neil Z. Miller, a medical research journalist and director of the Thinktwice Global Vaccine Institute. Miller has investigated vaccines for three decades and written several books on the subject, including: "Miller's Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers." "Miller's Review" was created in response to the common refrain that "there are no studies showing vaccines are unsafe or ineffective." Miller States: "I've been doing the research for 30 years. I know of literally thousands of studies that document concerns. My books all document those studies."

Dr. Brownstein and Other Medical Doctors Respond to AMA’s Opposition to Vaccine Research

The American Medical Association (AMA) has released a position statement that opposes the creation of a new federal commission on vaccine safety whose task is to study the association between autism and vaccines. “The AMA fully supports the overwhelming body of evidence and rigorous scientific process used by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices which demonstrate vaccines are among the most effective and safest interventions to both prevent individual illness and protect the health of the public,” William E. Kobler, MD said in a statement. Dr. Kobler is a member of the AMA Board of Trustees. Autism is occurring at epidemic rates. We now have over 1,000,000 U.S. children diagnosed with autism. Something in our environment is responsible for causing the autism epidemic. It is not due to genetics. Could it be the increasing numbers of vaccines given to our children? Why wouldn’t any rational person want to study this association? A simple study comparing vaccinated with unvaccinated children could help decide whether vaccines are responsible for causing the autism epidemic. But, the Powers-That-Be, like the AMA, do not want this study done as it may turn their world upside down. In response to the AMA edicts supporting more vaccines and stating that no further research is needed, I and my colleagues have released a reply to the AMA letter.

Scientist Critical of HPV Vaccine Censored from Commenting on NIH Website

As an employee of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), it is certainly within Dr. Mark Schiffman’s job description to write articles promoting human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines. After all, his employer owns patents on HPV vaccine production technologies and receives licensing fees from the sales of HPV vaccines. The HPV vaccine, Gardasil, based largely on technology developed at NIH and produced by Merck & Co., was approved by the FDA in June 2006. The NIH, funded by taxpayers, also maintains a forum for scientific discourse, called PubMed Commons which hopefully “will leverage the social power of the internet to encourage constructive criticism and high-quality discussions of scientific issues that will both enhance understanding and provide new avenues of collaboration within the community”. In December 2016, Dr. Schiffman and a few industry-paid consultants published an article titled “Carcinogenic human papillomavirus infection.” Dr. Lee responded to Dr. Schiffman saying: "Dr. Schiffman’s responses to my initial comment on the Primer needs a rebuttal to point out its misleading and obfuscating statements." Almost immediately, the discussion was effectively shut down by the removal of Dr. Lee’s comments. Does this not seem like a gross violation of the public trust in an organization such as NIH which has promised to ‘encourage constructive criticism and high-quality discussions of scientific issues’?