Account Navigation

Account Navigation

Currency - All prices are in AUD

Currency - All prices are in AUD
 Loading... Please wait...
Autism Coach

Covering Up The Autism/Vaccine Connection - Buried Data, Fudged Pro-Vaccine Studies & Criminal Rent-A-Docs

Posted by on






Many Studies Suggest Possible Vaccine-Autism Links




The Astroturf Propaganda Campaign








CDC claims “no link” between vaccines and autism

A Small Sampling












(Critics: the study is not to be believed.)

FDA list of thimerosal-containing vaccines



















Read: CDC Vaccine Information Statements

The Spin









Highlighting Rent-A-Doc, Dr. Gilbert Ross, Convicted Felon, Executive Director Council of Science and Health, Former Member of the CDC Vaccine Advisory Board

In the news recently the media is citing the American Council of Science Health (ACSH), calling for the Columbia University to sever ties with Dr. Oz, primarily because he is calling for GMO Labelling (labelling foods that are genetically modified so consumers can make an informed choice).  Dr. Ross Gilbert, executive director of ACSH, and who served on the CDC vaccine advisory board, inexplicably did not lose his medical license after he was convicted of a large Medicaid scam:


The clinics reportedly scammed the government by conducting (and being reimbursed for) unnecessary procedures and tests on "indigent patients." In addition to the prison sentence, Ross had his medical license revoked (it has since been reinstated). He began working for the ACSH in 1998."

So reading between the lines, it seems likely that Ross was cut a deal to keep his medical license in exchange for being a heading up a fake but official looking organization created to promote the agenda of pharmaceutical companies, the AMA, and the government.

How Studies Refuting the Vaccine/Autism Connection Fudge Their Data

As with almost all studies that dispute the link between vaccines and autism, there are two statistical “tricks” used to remove association.

– Hiding data, in this case through age of test
– Not discussing obvious results and focusing on areas where impact is not seen
– Comparing unrelated items to make invalid conclusions

For number 1, Dr. William Thompson of the CDC revealed that the age of the MMR had a large impact. The impact is before 36 months of age. In this study they look at well before (age 2) and well after (age 5). This could mask the problem, especially since you would be looking for a small population size, less than 1% of the total children.

Second, In the initial discussion they reveal that 2% of children had an older sibling with ASD, but only 1% of these children had ASD themselves. This states that the risk of autism in a younger sibling is cut in 1/2. This is extremely significant and brings the question of, what was different with these kids, how did they cut the autism rate in HALF. There is no way these doctors did not notice this. They made it the first sentence of the results, yet the wording is such that it is not obvious on the first reading.

The study then reveals that the MMR vaccine rates were lower and more delayed for the children with siblings with autism. This screams there is a significant relationship between the two. So how did the study not see it and why did they not discuss this?

That brings us to number three, When they go to look at risk of the MMR they compare against the total population, this has the effect of diluting the connection. The previous findings should have had them compare the MMR rates for children with older siblings with ASD (994) that;

– had ASD (134)
– did not have ASD (860)

By doing this I can already tell you there is a statistically significant relationship. Unfortunately the full data set would be needed to prove this and getting that may be difficult.

This is not to say the paper is not true, it just does not tell the whole story and is misleading. A more accurate conclusion should be, ¨For the population of children that are at risk of autism there is a statistically significant risk of autism.¨

So here is why that study should not end the debate once and for all. Statistical studies can exclude groups, include groups and make all sorts of adjustments so that outcomes can be manipulated. Additionally these studies are only in regards to MMR and autism. The MMR is not the only vaccine implicated in autism or reported to have resulted in autistic spectrum disorders. This is a very narrow view that does nothing to actually disprove a causal link. These are simply numbers. Contrast that with multiple studies linking not only the MMR, but Hepatits B and combination administrations of various vaccines with abnormal anomalies found in autistic children as well as increased rates of autism.

So red flag number one would be: This study only focuses on MMR vaccine and does not indicate what vaccine or vaccines were implicated in those that received an autism, PDD, or Aspergers diagnosis.

Red flag number two: While it makes sense to speculate that the potential for increased susceptibility to ASD would increase among siblings with potential similar genetic predispositions, there is nothing in this study that narrows down who has similar genetic predispositions. If genetics are implicated in ASD (vaccines aside) then this study does nothing to even prove a genetic link regardless of vaccination. Yet we know from other studies that there are specific gene mutations more prevalent in children with ASD.

Red flag number 3: The categorization of children with autism in this study is based on having at least two ICD codes. These codes include diagnosis for autistic disorder, specified pervasive developmental disorder and unspecified pervasive development disorder. This is quite a broad categorization that encompasses a vast array of symptoms, severity of symptoms and most important causative factors. By this vague method of categorizing “autistic” children the study can very well be including children with developmental delays or cognitive dysfunction where vaccination was never implicated as a causative factor. A more accurate study would be of children with regressive autism, in which the regression followed closely after vaccination. If you read up on those reporting ASD as a result of vaccination, there is a very common story and pattern that occurs very shortly after vaccination including, inconsolable high pitched crying/screaming, arching the back, loss of eye contact, loss of speech, inflammatory bowel disease with chronic diarrhea and foul stools, seizure disorders, toe walking, stimming, sensory issues etc. While issues with social skills, speech, coordination can all be developmental disorders, the vast majority of those reporting vaccine induced autism encompass the former symptoms listed above.

Red flag number 4: If you read the discussion, you will see there are variables that can potentially effect the accuracy of this study. Variables that can alter study outcomes are present in all studies, especially statistical studies such as these.

Red flag number 5: No information on gender in relation to siblings etc. is present. Autism is 5x more prevalent in boys.

Red flag number 6: This study used children not only administered MMR trivalent but monovalent vaccines AS WELL. It is well known among doctors conscientious about vaccine injury that administering monovalent (single antigen) vaccines greatly reduces the incidence of vaccine adverse reaction. Many of those with a previously injured child were known (prior to Merck discontinuing distribution) to opt to use monovalent vaccines with subsequent children.

While we have studies, evidence, and successful court cases showing plausible METHODS of causation between vaccination and autism, we are being told to rely on questionable statistical data as our proof of no link. These studies do nothing to disprove the known issue (and valid reason for compensation) of vaccine induced encephalopathies. They don’t disprove that vaccines interfere with gastrointestinal bacteria. They don’t disprove known mechanisms of vaccine induced autoimmune disorders. They don’t disprove the evidence of abnormally elevated titers of vaccine antigens in autistics. The list goes on and on…..This study addresses one vaccine, one adverse event and a questionable sample group. I find it very timely that this study is plastered everywhere the night before the education committee vote. The media always focuses on this one vaccine, this one condition and always brings up Jenny McCarthy and Andrew Wakefield (who’s study btw has been replicated and never directly implicated MMR). They never address the long list of other adverse conditions and deaths attributable to vaccines. They never address the lack of safety studies on the full childhood schedule, nor the lack of true placebo in pre-licensure studies. The issue here isn’t just autism. The fact that this one issue is the sole focus of the entire complex issue of vaccines should also be a red flag to anyone seeking the truth.

Why Not Being Able to Sue Vaccine Companies Violates the U.S. Constitution and is Leading to More Constitutional Violations

At the base of the ethical issue that we must face is what “Informed Consent” means. If it means you cannot say “NO!” for any medical intervention then it has no meaning.

Those who demand the use of force to deny anyone the right to Informed Choice are condoning a clear violation of international law. They ought to read the Nuremberg Code.

When the world was reorganized after the horrors of WWII, one of the most important legacies left to us by the Greatest Generation was revitalized law forbidding medical tyranny. The hanging of the Nazi doctors for crimes against humanity settled the question:


When Congress unlawfully abrogated our First Amendment right to redress for vaccine injuries, the United States became an accomplice to this crime against humanity.

I discuss the legal precedents here:

Response to the Autism Holocaust Epidemic Deniers

In spite of what is plainly obvious to anyone who has friends family and acquaintances, the rate of autism has skyrocketed and we now face a national crisis of how to care for all the autistic individuals approaching adulthood.  Here is a good response to these naysayers. 

Vaccines’ risk-reward ratio has not yet truly been accurately determined, because adverse reactions are:
(1) grossly under-reported — perhaps 1 in 10, or less;
(2) range from severe or fatal to moderate or subtle;
(3) often conveniently discounted as coincidence, though social media acts as an ever-growing repository of significantly similar post-vaccination empirical observations.

“Risk vs. reward” is merely a sterile restatement that an undetermined percentage of infants, children and results are considered acceptable collateral damage in the government’s mismanaged war on disease. If you or your child fall victim to a vaccine “risk,” incurring lifelong health damage and/or disability, you might in hindsight decide that taking the remote risk of enduring a week-long disease would have been a much better choice. Particularly when you learn that the CDC and vaccine manufacturers do not perform any research on medically treating vaccines’ adverse effects or learning how to prevent more people from becoming injured.

Apropos of the obfuscatory “better diagnosis” hypothesis, here’s a study to consider — in addition to realizing that:
(A) society is scrambling to accommodate the huge new wave of autism cases because no systems are in place for the “hidden horde” that exists only in corporate and government-funded PR;
(B) physicians, educators and parents cannot have been so dull-witted to have ignored the painfully evident symptoms of autism.

Misinformation Being Spread in Media About California Measles Outbreak - No-One Died Contrary to News Reports

This was reported by journalist and former CBS news reporter, Sharyl Attkisson.  In an attempt to force parents to vaccinate their program and justify an unsafe vaccination program, recent media reporting has implied or stated that the California measles outbreak resulted in many deaths. Further, many reports and blogs have implied there have been many U.S. measles deaths in recent years.

One notable example is an article published in by Paul Hamaker who is described as a “chemist and mathematician” (and also is referred to as “Bryan” Hamaker on the applicable web page).

In an article dated April 21, 2015, Hamaker writes “The point of the [MMR] vaccine is to prevent deaths from measles, mumps, and rubella like the recent episode of child deaths in California.” [emphasis added]

But were there actually any child deaths in California?

It was a fact that we easily checked by consulting the Centers for Disease Control. According to CDC, there have been no deaths associated with the California measles outbreak; neither children nor adults.

Furthermore, CDC reports state there have been no deaths associated with any of the dozens of measles outbreaks in the U.S. in recent years.

comments powered by Disqus