Sandra Finley

2018-10-29 Water: pushing to block for-profit water extraction and bottling, right across Vancouver Island

 Water Merville (Strathcona, Campbell River, Comox)  No Responses »
Oct 312018
 
Residents packed the CVRD’s boardroom at a committee meeting in March to protest a proposed water bottling operation in the Merville area. File photo/Comox Valley Record

Campbell River area wants Vancouver Island united against commercial water extraction

Strathcona Regional District pushing to block for-profit water extraction and bottling

  • Mike Chouinard

If the proponent of a water bottling operation north of Courtenay is looking north for a new site, he might need to look a little farther.

Merville’s Christopher Scott MacKenzie and his wife were apparently already looking north to the Strathcona Regional District after the Comox Valley Regional District turned down his application in August, but he might have a tough time getting buy-in.

Not only is the SRD opposed to the idea of commercial groundwater extraction on principle, it wants the rest of the Island to join it in that stance.

RELATED STORY: Comox Valley Regional District defeats Merville water bottling operation application

Area C Director Jim Abram said the region cannot afford to allow commercial proposals for the extraction of water because of the need for communities to protect groundwater in a time of climate change and threats to water supply.

“It’s something that we should absolutely oppose,” he said. “This is just insane, so I’d hope that everybody will just not support this,” he said.

SRD directors tackled the issue in general rather than any specific business request on Oct. 25 after a letter from Merville resident Gillian Anderson, who wanted to call attention to the proposal. Area D Director Brenda Leigh said she does not support the idea of licences for the extraction of groundwater anywhere on Vancouver Island for commercial purposes such as water bottling, bulk water export or private sales.

“Water is a human right and a necessity for all life. When any corporate entity tries to commodify it and sell it for profit, it is a threat to our common, public right to water, and we have seen the results of this around the world when private corporations get control of public water sources,” she said.

Leigh successfully made a motion to contact the premier and the Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resources and Rural Development to advise them the SRD does not support approvals of licenses for the extraction of groundwater anywhere from aquifers on Vancouver Island to be sold for commercial purposes. The board also passed her motion to bring attention to the issue at the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) and the Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities (AVICC).

Leigh had attended the CVRD public hearing and heard strong opposition from residents of the area, who felt their groundwater was potentially threatened by the proposed bottling operation on Sackville Road.

“It was an overwhelming ‘no, you can’t take this water for our aquifer,’” she said.

Leigh also pointed out to the SRD board the licence was contingent upon the CVRD approving the bottling plant on site.

“Now he’s trying to split off the water bottling plant and take it somewhere into our regional district but still relying on the Sackville Road aquifer,” she said.

Leigh reiterated the proposal would still negatively impact the residents of the Merville area.

“We can’t allow this,” she said. “This is a public resource.”

Ron Kerr, one of the Campbell River directors on the board, worried the motion might be too restrictive in that it might also cover a brewery or juice company that might want to open a business requiring water. Abram responded that the motion simply covers bulk water export and sales.

2018-10-30 Dr. Paul Offit’s Promo for ‘BAD ADVICE’ Falls Flat; Robert F Kennedy challenges Offit to a Debate with Experts.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  1 Response »
Oct 302018
 
Who is Dr. Paul Offit?

Kennedy’s letter to Offit (the last heading below) lays it out.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Challenges Dr. Paul Offit to a Debate with Experts

AFTER reading that,  you can see him in  Haley vs Offit Debate:

https://www.gotyourflushot.ca/videos  Go to Bottom right corner   Haley vs Offit Debate

Includes graphs of declines in deaths from various infectitious diseases before the introduction of vaccines.

Dr. Paul Offit’s Promo for ‘BAD ADVICE’ Falls Flat

By the Children’s Health Defense Team

Dr. Paul Offit was at the National Press Club in Washington, DC last night peddling his new book, “BAD ADVICE: Or Why Celebrities, Politicians and Activists Aren’t Your Best Source of Health Information.” It is clear that Dr. Offit desperately wants to be the authority on vaccines. He already is the industry shill, but is he the authority? The opinion of the crowd in attendance at the event was a resounding NO.

Children’s Health Defense advocates, parents of vaccine-injured children, and scientists came from all over the United States to ask Dr. Offit questions. They pointed out in their respectful, thoughtful questions that they do their own research. Although Offit declined to take questions directly from the audience, it was a good day for parents everywhere to see Dr. Offit forced to have a moderator filter the written questions he did address down to the very basics so he could answer with one of his canned responses. And the harder questions from the group were never presented to him. Attendees also distributed the list of questions to those present at the event. Perhaps the media will use them to create their own list of probing questions to ask Dr. Offit?

[Parents] know that they don’t need self-proclaimed and industry-funded vaccine ‘authorities’ like Dr. Offit or other doctors who only listen to industry.

Offit’s rhetoric sounded old and tired. He implied that parents should only listen to his vaccine science from his sources, but educated parents know that there are other more enlightened doctors to talk to and listen to. They know that they don’t need self-proclaimed and industry-funded vaccine “authorities” like Dr. Offit or other doctors who only listen to industry. Doctors used to rely solely on drug reps who peddled their own studies to bolster sales of their drugs. Perhaps some doctors, who are witnessing the string of ill-fated pharma horror stories and lies—about Vioxx, the opioid crisis and the like—or who are seeing vaccine-injured children day after day, have begun forming their own opinions and reading science that has them questioning the industry mantra and blanket statements that all vaccines are safe all the time for all children.

Such opinions that differ from Dr. Offit’s are not from fringe doctors peddling treatments for autism as he implied last night.  In fact, Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor in chief of NEJM wrote in 2009 that “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor.”

The trusted physician and authoritative guidelines that Offit promotes were previously the only resource parents had to make health decisions.  According to Wired Magazine, an unforeseen outcome of making Medline – an online government database of 11 million biomedical abstracts – free was that it was discovered by the public.  This discovery has leveled the playing field in that the traditional mantle of physician authority has been shaken and for Dr. Offit, that is problematic.

Now parents have access to hundreds of thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies that contradict Offit’s infamous claims…

Once, parents could only turn to flawed papers published by government agencies or to other pharma-supported sources exhibiting blatant conflicts of interest. Now, however, there are many high-quality independent studies that display scientific integrity, use rigorous methods and present the research in ways that the public can understand. Now parents have access to hundreds of thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies that contradict Offit’s infamous claim that babies can safely receive 10,000 vaccines at once. The bottom line is that today’s intelligent parents don’t need a pharmaceutical tycoon physician from Philadelphia with a “gift of gab” telling them what the industry wants them to hear.

Offit Wins the Lottery

Offit is an industry insider who has made millions from a patent for a rotavirus vaccine that is now recommended for every child in the U.S.  To hear him tell it, the poor doctor was working away in a lab for the good of humanity, but in actuality, his years of vaccine work (supported by Merck) enabled him to win the lottery, as he told Newsweek when he sold his rotavirus vaccine patent.

Offit may be the mainstream bought-and-paid-for media darling, but he is losing ground with the public—and fast. “BAD ADVICE” is just another worn-out retread of every other book he has written. If things play out in the same way as with his other books, Offit’s pharma boosters will purchase “BAD ADVICE” in volume and give it to every doctor to push up its ratings on the bestseller lists. Offit’s book tells the masses to listen only to him and others like him, but people who attended last night’s event aren’t fooled. Parents who study science and make decisions for themselves and their families aren’t either.

And neither is Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.  Mr. Kennedy has tried many times to debate Dr. Offit, but he refuses, saying that RFK, Jr. is not an “expert.” Once again, Offit talks from his self-built bully pulpit. If Offit is the expert he claims to be, he would have an obvious advantage in a debate with Mr. Kennedy, but Offit’s silence and refusal to engage seem to be saying that Offit knows better.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Challenges Dr. Paul Offit to a Debate with Experts

Mr. Kennedy, in anticipation that Dr. Offit would again refuse a debate with him on the grounds that he isn’t an “expert,” has asked three leading scientific experts if they would be willing to debate Dr. Offit on the subject of vaccines and vaccine safety. Dr. Chris Exley, Dr. Christopher Shaw and Dr. George Lucier have all said yes. Children’s Health Defense hand-delivered a letter (dropped in below) to this effect from RFK, Jr. to Dr. Offit last night at the promo event for “BAD ADVICE.”

(INSERT by Sandra:  re Dr. Shaw  – – scroll down to the first video on

ALuminum as an adjuvant in vaccines.

Dr. Christopher Shaw at the University of British Columbia narrates a short video.

 

Dr. Offit, we are waiting on your reply to debate the experts on vaccines. If you refuse, the reason will be obvious.

 

October 29, 2018

Paul A. Offit, MD

Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia

3401 Civic Center Blvd.

Philadelphia, PA 19104

Dear Dr. Offit:

Your new book, Bad Advice: Or Why Celebrities, Politicians, and Activists Aren’t Your Best Source of Health Information, appears poised to repeat one of your favorite arguments, namely, that scientists are the sole trustworthy purveyors of health information. The notion that non-scientists, no matter how educated or credentialed, have nothing to contribute to discussions about health has been a running theme in many of your books and lectures, and particularly in the realm of vaccine safety.

This is the reason you give for continually rebuffing my requests that you participate in a public debate with me about vaccine safety. In recognition of the theme of your new book, I would now invite you to debate three top-flight and extensively published researchers whose academic standing and contributions to science are beyond dispute: Professor Chris Exley of the United Kingdom’s Keele University, Professor Christopher A. Shaw of the University of British Columbia (UBC) and Dr. George Lucier, former Director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences’ Environmental Toxicology Program. Drs. Exley, Shaw and Lucier are precisely qualified to dispute your reckless, dangerous and scientifically baseless assertions that aluminum adjuvants and mercury preservatives in our vaccines are harmless or even “beneficial.”

Dr. Exley, the Group Leader of the Bioinorganic Chemistry Laboratory at Keele University’s Birchall Centre, has devoted his lengthy career to understanding the toxicology of aluminum in humans and other biological systems. His groundbreaking article on aluminum in the brain tissue of deceased autistic individuals (published in March 2018 in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology) reported “some of the highest values for aluminum in human brain tissue yet recorded,” including unaccountably high amounts in young people. Dr. Shaw’s laboratory at UBC focuses on neurotoxins and neurological diseases ranging from autism to Alzheimer’s disease. Recent publications by Dr. Shaw and colleagues have raised a number of important questions about the toxicity of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines. Dr. Lucier has presented evidence to the Institute of Medicine and others that ethylmercury in thimerosal-containing vaccines “should be considered equipotent to methylmercury as a developmental neurotoxin.” Taken together, the three researchers’ findings highlight significant gaps in our understanding of vaccines’ potential relationship to the epidemics of neurodevelopmental disorders and autoimmune and chronic illnesses affecting so many of today’s children.

Your book title and press releases suggest that, in contrast to “celebrities, politicians and activists,” you consider yourself to be eminently qualified to furnish health information in a truthful and unbiased manner. I would like to take this opportunity to inquire as to whether your own substantial financial entanglements with the $52 billion vaccine industry—conflicts you deliberately conceal from your allies in the mainstream media—should disqualify you from representing yourself as a neutral and trustworthy voice in this contentious debate. You have accepted tens of millions of dollars from vaccine companies for your work as the primary spokesman for the industry. You occupy a chair at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia endowed with a $1.5 million grant from Merck, and you were a co-developer, with Merck, of the RotaTeq rotavirus vaccine.

Indeed, your financial conflicts of interest with the vaccine industry since the early 2000s, during your tenure on a key Centers for Disease Control vaccine panel, were the subject of two federal investigations. While sitting on the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), you voted to add a rotavirus vaccine to the CDC childhood vaccine schedule. You neglected to recuse yourself despite the fact that you had your own rotavirus vaccine patent in development. Six years later, thanks to the inclusion of rotavirus on the CDC schedule, you and your business partners were able to sell your patent for $186 million. This self-dealing transaction in which you effectively “voted yourself rich” was condemned by a 2003 congressional investigation and a 2008 investigation by the HHS Inspector General. Congressman Dan Burton described the “paradox” of the CDC “routinely allow[ing] scientists with blatant conflicts of interest to serve on influential advisory committees that make recommendations on new vaccines, as well as policy matters,” even though “these same scientists have financial ties, academic affiliations, and other vested interests in the products and companies for which they are supposed to be providing unbiased oversight.” When ACIP added your vaccine (RotaTeq) to the childhood vaccine schedule in 2006, policy-makers of the time acknowledged that the vaccine was “one of the most expensive” and potentially lucrative ever added to the schedule. Critics of the decision wondered why we were mandating a ruinously expensive and shoddily tested vaccine for tens of millions of children to combat mild illness that accounts for only a few dozen deaths in the United States annually.

You routinely talk about RotaTeq’s achievements, but you have never publicly commented on the elevated rate of agonizingly painful and sometimes deadly intussusception observed in recipients of RotaTeq nor on the vaccine’s contamination with DNA fragments from two porcine circoviruses known to cause serious wasting disease in pigs. Scientists and public health experts suggest that your vaccine may be infecting millions of children each year with these viruses. Since the vaccine was never properly safety tested against inert placebos, we may never know the truth.

In a 2011 interview on National Public Radio’s “Science Friday,” you denigrated “professional anti-vaccine people” for relying on “ad hominem attacks” rather than using science. Yet when you paint those who question your unsound and often wild assertions about vaccine safety as being “false prophets” and “slick charlatans,” while at the same time refusing to debate me or acknowledge the over 1500 peer-reviewed scientific publications cited in my book, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak, linking mercury and aluminum in vaccines and the exploding epidemic of chronic diseases and neurological disorders in children born after 1989, it is clear that you, in fact, strongly prefer the ad hominem route.

In August, 2008, you attacked a skeptical reporter, CBS’s Sharyl Attkisson in an article published in the Orange County (OC) Register (“Dr. Paul Offit Responds”), making “disparaging statements” about Attkisson. Two and a half years later, the OC Register was forced to publish a lengthy correction indicating that you had made a number of “unsubstantiated and/or false” statements. According to the OC Register, you untruthfully claimed that you had provided CBS News with the details of your financial relationship with Merck (after the network requested information about your speaking and consulting fees and past and future RotaTeq royalties), even though you had not furnished any of the requested information. In fact, you have repeatedly been cagey about your share of the RotaTeq royalties, stating only that it was “like winning the lottery.” Your net worth is currently reported to be $19 million—not bad for a physician employed by a hospital where the average physician salary ($144,200) is 9% below the national average.

A debate with Drs. Exley, Shaw and/or Lucier would provide you with a timely opportunity to answer your critics and defend your contentions about vaccine safety and to explain the etiology of the chronic health disorders now affecting 54% of American children. I look forward to your favorable reply.

Sincerely,

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman

Children’s Health Defense

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the World Mercury Project. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

2018-10-29 Fill in gaps on the Request for Investigation into Fraud & Obstruction of Justice, Vaccines and Autism

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  5 Responses »
Oct 292018
 

Re Vaccines and Autism,  I have been challenged on the objectivity of the information I provided in:

 Request USA Dept of Justice to investigate the allegations of fraud  committed by two of its lawyers.

I am happy to reply (two rolled into one).

reply to: I want “cause-effect” experimental data, not what someone “feels” or “believes”.   Includes background on “Vaccine Court”.

 

I did not,  but should have also drawn attention to the neurotoxicity of the particular form of aluminum (Aluminum Hydroxide) that is used in many vaccines, as an adjuvant.

If you want current and good information,  scroll down to the first video on

(2018-01-10)   ALuminum as an adjuvant in vaccines.

Dr. Christopher Shaw at the University of British Columbia narrates a short video.

UPDATE (Oct 30):  Dr. Shaw is one of the three experts in  Robert F Kennedy challenges Offit to a Debate with Experts.

The “fatally flawed” research of Mitkus,  which is relied on to justify the use of Aluminum in vaccines, is addressed in the posting.

The first postings I did about aluminum were in 2011;  I had been surprised to learn that aluminum is used in vaccines when, for decades we’d been told not to use aluminum cookware because AL is neuro-toxic.  Was that information just wrong?   If it was right, you would not inject it, and especially not into babies.   A lot has been learned in the seven years since 2011.  ALuminum, in its various forms, is not a “one size fits all”  ingredient.

2017-11-28 High Aluminum Found in Autism Brain Tissue

2018-09-23 How to End the Autism Epidemic, by J.B. Handley

You may not have time for these, from 2011:

2011-02-02 Important update re vaccinations. Aluminum

2011-02-01 The Impact of Vaccines on the First Two Years of Life by Edda West, VRAN

2011-02-01 Aluminum and Vaccine Ingredients: What Do We Know? What Don’t We Know?

Filling in the gaps:   I also needed to post more information on a critical player,  Dr. William Thompson:

2016-10-19 the CDC Whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson (Vaccinations and Autism)

 

Canadian Ted Kuntz’ involvement:

Out of the Shadows, by Ted Kuntz

 

Lastly,  if you might, but haven’t contacted the Person in the U.S. Dept of Justice who should be leading an investigation into the alleged fraud committed by two Dept of Justice lawyers,  the phone number and email address is in    My letter in support of an Investigation into fraud and obstruction of justice, Link between Vaccinations and Autism.

It makes it difficult for the Person NOT to do their job, if the whole world is aware and demanding that they do.

An Investigation into the Dept of Justice handling of the vaccine issue has the potential to be a first in bringing white collar crime around this issue to account.   It’s worth a few minutes of your time to send an email.      /Sandra

2018-09-10 Out of the Shadows, by Ted Kuntz (Vaccine Choice Canada)

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Oct 292018
 

“Ted Kuntz is a parent, an author, and a psychotherapist.

Much of the wisdom Kuntz shares comes from his journey to make peace with his son’s disabilities.

Kuntz has committed his life to helping to create a more peaceful world.”

 

THREE MINUTE VIDEO,   Ted Kuntz On The Industry’s Tactics of Coercion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu0d9EELXZo 

 

AUTHOR     (I have not read these books.  One is available as a free download.)

  • Peace Begins With Me
  • Making Peace with the Future: Planning for a Relative with a Disability
  • Dare to Question: One Parent to Another
  • 8 Weeks to a Better Relationship: Practical Tools, Strategies and Skills for Creating a Better Life Together

 

RECENT ARTICLE:

Out of the Shadows by Ted Kuntz

What the Vaccine Industry Must Do to Avoid Collapse

“I know that there are some people who are secretly afraid that the public
just can’t handle the truth, and that certain facts about vaccine injury
or worrisome research are best left in the shadows, or made public at the discretion
of an organization like the CDC. They worry that openly acknowledging
all the economic, social and scientific pieces of the vaccine picture
could frighten more people away from vaccination.”

~ Plum Remson

The ‘artificial immune stimulation program’, commonly referred to as vaccination, is experiencing a crisis. The level of crisis could quite reasonably be described as an ‘existential crisis’ as the number of parents who are questioning vaccine safety, effectiveness and necessity is growing at an exponential rate.

In response to this declining trust in vaccines, the medical industry is lobbying governments worldwide to impose vaccine mandates for education, employment, government benefits and even volunteerism. Will this action of imposing vaccinations by force stem the growing crisis, or will these strong-arm tactics accelerate the erosion of confidence in the medical industry? My response to this question is the result of my thirty years as a psychotherapist and as the father of a vaccine-injured child.

It is my contention that the vaccine paradigm is positioned for an imminent collapse. The main reason for the collapse is the growing awareness of the epidemic of neurological, physiological, and immunological injury witnessed post vaccination. Everyday more and more families learn of vaccine injury the hard way – after a vaccine negatively impacts the health of a child, family member, colleague or friend. When vaccine injury occurs, the rhetoric from financially and intellectually conflicted medical professionals, vaccines manufacturers, government agencies and media pundits rings increasingly hollow.

The Shadow

From a psychological perspective the medical industry has failed to deal with its ‘shadow’. For those not familiar with the psychological concept of the ‘shadow’, it is ‘the disowned, unloved, and repressed parts of oneself’. An individual is unable to attain emotional and psychological health unless and until he or she embraces his or her shadow side. According to renowned psychoanalyst Carl Jung, “Everyone carries a shadow and the less it is embodied in the individual’s conscious life, the blacker and denser it is.”

The concept of ‘shadow’ can be applied to the medical industry as well. The medical industry has a policy of disowning, denying and repressing its shadow. In this case its shadow is the significant harm being caused by vaccination. Our children today are both the most vaccinated in history and the most chronically ill. The number of chronically ill children suffering from conditions that were virtually unheard of in children three or more decades ago is threatening to collapse our education, medical, social support systems and families.

Rather than acknowledge the growing epidemic of autism, asthma, seizure disorders, diabetes, ADHD, learning disabilities, life threatening allergies, cancers, gastrointestinal and autoimmune dysfunction, the medical industry continues to chant the mantra of “safe and effective” and “coincidence”. The denial of vaccine injury is not the action of the occasional misinformed government agent, an uninformed media journalist, or an unethical medical practitioner. Rather, vaccine injury denial is a matter of medical policy.

“Notwithstanding manufacturer warnings to the contrary, childhood vaccines
were considered one of our greatest medical accomplishments of the Twentieth
Century. No one wanted to believe there was a darker more sinister side, likely
associated with vaccine ingredients that were contributing to a surge in infant
deaths, neurological disabilities and a growing list of autoimmune illnesses.”

~ Dr. Denton Davis, MD

A Policy of Denial

In 1984, the Federal Register, the official journal of the US Federal government that contains government agency rules and public notices, stated the following with regard to the polio vaccine:

“Any possible doubts, whether or not well founded,
about the safety of the vaccine cannot be allowed to exist.”

~ Federal Register, Vol. 49, No. 107

This blanket policy of denial not only still exists today, it is more firmly entrenched and stronger than ever. Dr. Paul Offit, the director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, has argued that negative or critical results from vaccine safety research and the stories of individuals injured by vaccines shouldn’t be made public as it may cause people to become ‘vaccine hesitant’.

Dr. Richard Pan, the State Senator who marshalled in mandatory vaccination in California and removed personal and religious exemptions, is introducing new legislation to criminalize those who make critical comments about vaccines using social media. What is made clear by the position of vaccine advocates like Drs. Offit and Pan is that the intention of the vaccine program is not to ensure that children are healthy. Rather, the intention of policies such as these is to increase vaccine compliance, in spite of the negative consequences.

What the medical industry fails to understand is that their unwillingness to acknowledge their ‘shadow side’, and their persistent and dogmatic repression of the harm that is being caused by a increasing vaccination schedule does not build trust, but rather erodes trust. The systemic denial of vaccine injury increases the feeling of being unsafe because we know there is something that the medical industry is hiding.

We generally trust the airline and food industries precisely because they acknowledge their mistakes and the harms that may occur. Imagine if the airline industry adopted the dogma of the vaccine industry and insisted that every plane crash was simply a “coincidence”, or claimed that there is not any significant plane crashes and that we are simply better at recognizing them. The trust in the airline industry would evaporate overnight.

Instead of honesty and accountability, the medical industry has adopted the strategy utilized by the Roman Catholic Church in the face of allegations of sexual abuse of children by clergy. Their denial and lack of accountability caused the harm to increase rather than decrease and resulted in a dramatic and profound loss of trust in the Church. A significant number of sexually violated and traumatized children were the legacy of this “cloak of secrecy.” This same outcome is the unavoidable destiny of the medical industry unless it chooses to acknowledge its shadow.

Abandoned Science

One of the most unfortunate aspects of denying its shadow is that the medical industry has abandoned its foundation in science and the scientific method. Instead of developing an evidence-based policy, vaccination has become dogma with all the ritual and fanaticism of a religious cult.

Rather than use science to in-form the medical community, governments and parents on vaccine safety and effectiveness, the medical industry has co-opted science to enforce con-forming. The medical industry has developed and nurtured a culture and a practice of repression, denial and deception and of ‘conning’ the public. Their goal is not health. Their goal is not truth. Their goal is not the advancement of medical knowledge. Their goal is conformance, compliance and profit.

The absence of real scientific evidence of vaccine safety and effectiveness leads
informed parents to conclude that the vaccination paradigm is ideology rather than
evidence-based medicine and more akin to religion than science.
Parents whose children have been harmed are no longer accepting the vaccine
ideology on faith. Their trust has been broken.

~ Ted Kuntz, Parent

What Will It Take for The Medical Industry to Avoid Collapse?

For the medical industry to avoid total and imminent collapse, a number of fundamental changes are required:

  1. Set the goal of the vaccine program as healthy children with healthy immune systems.
  2. Allow the science to speak for itself.
  3. Conduct independent vaccinated vs. unvaccinated studies.
  4. Conduct safety studies using a truly inert placebo. Currently none of the vaccines on the childhood vaccine schedule were tested against an inert placebo.
  5. Be open to acknowledging the harm caused by vaccination.
  6. Acknowledge the limitations of the artificial immune stimulation paradigm, as well as the limitations in our understanding of the impact of vaccine ingredients on humans.
  7. Commit to transparency. Allow safety data to be easily accessible to the public and other researchers.
  8. Recognize that vaccines are the current method being utilized to achieve the goal of healthy children. Be committed to the goal, not the method.
  9. Measure health. You can’t achieve what you don’t measure. Measuring vaccine compliance is irrelevant if children are not healthy.
  10. Support informed consent. Eliminate all vaccine mandates.
  11. Demand honesty, not denial and deception.
  12. Become legally accountable. Repeal the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) that gives legal immunity to vaccine manufacturers and the medical professionals who administer vaccines.
  13. Support compassion for vaccine injury, rather than the current culture of callous disregard. Generously compensate those who are vaccine injured.
  14. Mandate the reporting of vaccine injury and show respect for those who report vaccine injury.

Unless the medical industry becomes truly committed to health rather than profit, this basic tenet of modern medicine is destined to collapse. The unrecognized shadow will eventually destroy not only the vaccine program, but also our trust in the entire medical industry. There is only one way to avoid a total and complete collapse. The medical industry needs a good therapist.

Ted Kuntz

Ted Kuntz is a father, a medical choice activist, author, educator and retired psychotherapist. Kuntz’s journey to examine the claims of the vaccine industry began after his son Joshua was neurologically damaged by the DPT vaccine in 1984. Ted Kuntz is the author of ‘Dare to Question – One Parent to Another’. Kuntz’s son Josh passed away in February 2017 after a life of uncontrolled seizures and diminished capacity due to vaccine induced neurological injury.

A free copy of Dare to Question can be downloaded at www.daretoquestionvaccination.com

 

Join Vaccine Choice Canada

By joining Vaccine Choice Canada, you receive our internationally acclaimed newsletter twice a year as well as privileged access to our newsletter archive.

To support our educational and outreach work , please join Vaccine Choice Canada today. Sign Me Up!

 

 

2018-01-10 ALuminum as an adjuvant in vaccines.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  1 Response »
Oct 292018
 

https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/a-lone-fda-scientist-could-end-the-autism-epidemic/

A Lone FDA Scientist Could End the Autism Epidemic

By J.B. Handley, Co-Founder, Generation Rescue and Board Member, Children’s Health Defense

 

In a brand new published study, the only science vouching for the “safety” of injected aluminum adjuvant has come under extreme criticism by heavyweight scientists. Dr. Robert J. Mitkus — author of the misleading aluminum safety study from 2011 — could change the autism debate forever by telling the truth.

While you were (hopefully) enjoying the winter holidays, a study was published in the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry (it went online on December 27th) that could change the autism debate permanently. In fact, this new study placed the burden of proof for the safety of aluminum adjuvants used in vaccines so squarely on the shoulders of a lone FDA scientist — Dr. Robert J. Mitkus — that he alone could permanently change the outcome of the autism debate. Forever.

Aluminum science is moving at light speed

Science moves at a glacial pace. By scientific standards, what has been learned about the aluminum adjuvant from vaccines in just the past few years has been genuinely revolutionary, and should scare the daylights out of every parent on the planet. Mystifyingly, the first time ANYONE decided to test the impact, biologically, of aluminum adjuvant was 2007, where it was pioneered by Dr. Christopher Shaw at the University of British Columbia. I’ll let him explain:

It’s hard to put Dr. Shaw’s work in proper context. Our public health officials, signing off on a massive growth in the number of vaccines given to children, and therefore massive growth in the amount of injected aluminum, had never conducted biological studies to assess the safety of aluminum, which allowed Dr. Shaw to do something groundbreaking in 2007.

It also raises an obvious question: what have our regulatory agencies been relying upon to assess the safety of injected aluminum?

The answer: a single study published in 2011 by Dr. Robert J. Mitkus in the journal Vaccine.

About Dr. Mitkus

Dr. Robert J. Mitkus is a Computational Toxicologist in the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research at the FDA. He’s held that position since 2010. He’s also an adjunct professor in the School of Public Health at the University of Maryland. Previously, Dr. Mitkus was a “Mammalian Toxicologist” for the EPA, he received a Ph.D. in Toxicology from the University of Maryland in 2004.
Dr. Mitkus’ published study, “Updated aluminum pharmacokinetics following infant exposures through diet and vaccination” from 2011 is the Gold standard and the primary document the FDA relies upon to declare injected aluminum safe for use in infants. It is, quite literally, the SOLE defense the FDA and CDC cite for any concerns raised about injected aluminum. In fact, Dr. Mitkus’ study was in part a response to safety concerns about aluminum, as he writes in the Abstract of his study:

“Because concerns have been expressed by the public that aluminum in vaccines may pose a risk to infants, we developed an up-to-date analysis of the safety of aluminum adjuvants.”

As you can guess, Dr. Mitkus’ paper gave aluminum the “all clear” sign.

“…for infants, our study demonstrates that there is little risk for aluminum toxicity following immunizations administered according to ACIP recommendations even with maximal exposures to aluminum adjuvant. For the general population of infants, who receive less than the maximal dose, the risk is even lower.”

To the layperson, this study would probably be reassuring. To scientists who are closely studying the issue of injected aluminum adjuvant, and particularly to scientists who are doing their own biological studies of aluminum adjuvant, Dr. Mitkus’ study is somewhere between a professional disgrace and a fraudulent disaster, but I’ll let them explain.

Aluminum: A Primer

Recent science, completed all over the world, is pointing the finger at aluminum adjuvant injected into newborns as the probable cause of autism. Here’s a simple graphic to explain what has been learned:

Source: Vaccine Papers

 

I have written extensively about this topic, most recently just a few weeks ago.


In a nutshell, scientists all over the world have learned the following about aluminum adjuvant, most of it since 2010 (not a single one of these new discoveries or published studies was considered in Dr. Mitkus’ paper).

  1. From Canada, 2012: “Aluminum (Al) is highly neurotoxic and has been shown to impair both prenatal and postnatal brain development in humans and experimental animals.”
  2. From France, 2013: “However, continuously escalating doses of this poorly biodegradable adjuvant in the population may become insidiously unsafe, especially in the case of overimmunization or immature/altered blood brain barrier…”
  3. From France, 2015: “Thus alum and other poorly biodegradable materials taken up at the periphery by phagocytes circulate in the lymphatic and blood circulation and can enter the brain using a Trojan horse mechanism similar to that used by infectious particles. Previous experiments have shown that alum administration can cause CNS dysfunction and damage, casting doubts on the exact level of alum safety.”
  4. From France, 2016: “We conclude that Alhydrogel [aluminum adjuvant] injected at low dose in mouse muscle may selectively induce long-term Al cerebral accumulation and neurotoxic effects.”
  5. From England, 2017: “The amount of aluminum in the brain tissue was, I would say, extraordinarily high. Very high. My group has measured the aluminum content of probably more than one hundred human brains, and these brain tissues taken from the individuals with a diagnosis of autism were some of the highest we’ve measured bar none. The only ones we’ve seen that are similar were a recent study of familial Alzheimer’s. This in itself is a very important finding.”

So, versus ten years ago, scientists now know that aluminum adjuvant, when injected, can 1) impair brain development, 2) remain in the brain much longer than thought, 3) is brought into the brain by macrophages that grab the aluminum from the vaccine injection site and recirculate it, 4) may actually be worse when injected in small doses repeatedly (like it’s done during vaccination), and 4) there’s remarkably high levels of aluminum in the brains of people diagnosed with autism.Dr. Chris Exley, the author of this most recent study (#5, and the subject of my recent article) was so moved by the results of his study he said the following:

“I did not see a role for aluminum in autism. And I didn’t see a role for aluminum in vaccines in autism. I have to change my mind now on both of these. I have to change my mind that aluminum has a role in autism, I believe it now does. Now, because I have seen the same cells that we will see at an injection site carrying a cargo of aluminum into the brain tissue of individuals who died with autism I would now say that we have to think very carefully about who receives a vaccine that includes an aluminum adjuvant. We need to think carefully, is this vaccine a life-saving vaccine or not? If it isn’t, don’t have it with an aluminum adjuvant.”

That’s Dr. Chris Exley. He’s arguably the world’s leading expert on aluminum neurotoxicology. He just said he’d shy away from any vaccines containing aluminum. He now also believes “aluminum has a role in autism.” These are revolutionary things for scientists to be saying, and they’re being said by the leading scientists in their field.

 

Dr. Chris Exley discusses his study

 

One of the other leading aluminum scientists, Dr. Romain Gherardi, went on T.V. in France recently to talk about his work, the work that found vaccine aluminum showing up in the brain, and staying there. He was a lead or co-author of all three of the papers from France I cited above. Just listen:

Dr. Romain Gherardi

 

I wanted you to get a feel for Drs. Gherardi and Exley, and to hear from them directly. I want you to understand that these are two of the leading aluminum scientists in the world. I need you to appreciate the “weight” of their words, because then my comment makes more sense:

If science were pro wrestling, then Drs. Gherardi and Exley just body-slammed Dr. Robert Mitkus and his 2011 study so badly, he may never get up off the canvas.

 

 

Dr. Mitkus’ Paper — scientists are “empty handed”

What would be lost on the average layperson trying to make some sense of Dr. Mitkus’ work is the reality that the only biological science Dr. Mitkus considered in making his safety assessment was a single study that infused (rather than injected) aluminum citrate (rather than aluminum hydroxide) into adults (rather than babies). At least Mitkus acknowledges this difference in the paper, noting “The determinations of the kinetics of aluminum retention by Priest were based on experiments where human volunteers were given an intravenous injection of aluminum citrate. For vaccines, the injection is intramuscular, the aluminum is in an insoluble form (e.g., as the phosphate or hydroxide of aluminum), and muscle at the site of injection is considered to be a storage depot for aluminum.” It’s hard to put this seemingly minor detail in proper context:

In no other drug on the planet (except for vaccines) would safety standards ever be determined without using the actual product (aluminum hydroxide) administered in the proper way (intramuscular injection), into the proper patient population (infants). Of course, we now know that doing so has triggered devastating results (just ask Dr. Shaw, above).

Vaccine Papers, an excellent resource on this topic, provides some additional perspective on Dr. Mitkus’ study, citing one of its “fatal flaws”:

“The MRL [minimal risk level for aluminum] is derived from feeding experiments with aluminum salts, not experiments with injected aluminum adjuvant. The safety of injected aluminum adjuvant must be determined from experiments with injected aluminum adjuvant (insoluble and persistent), not ingested, water-soluble aluminum. Scientific studies have established that injected aluminum adjuvant has unique toxic properties and ways of moving around the body (“kinetics”) that are not the same as ingested water-soluble aluminum.”

And, Vaccine Papers provides a final refutation:

“Mitkus 2011 is the best scientific evidence vaccine promoters have for defending Al adjuvant safety. It is fatally flawed and incredibly bad. It is not based on any toxicity experiments with actual Al adjuvant. It ignores key studies that contradict the assumptions it is based on. And yet, government agencies (FDA, CDC) and vaccine promoters cite it as powerful and conclusive evidence of safety. Aluminum adjuvant nanoparticles are very different from dissolved aluminum ions. Consequently, the only scientifically-valid way to establish the safety of injected aluminum adjuvant, is by experiments with injected aluminum adjuvant. Studies of ingested, soluble aluminum salts cannot establish the safety of Al adjuvant. Models of only dissolved aluminum cannot be used to determine the toxicity of the particles. Ignoring the toxicity of Al adjuvant particles is scientifically indefensible. Why do the vaccine promoters rely on oral-ingestion studies to defend Al adjuvant safety? It is because they have no experimental research showing that injecting Al adjuvant is safe! They are empty-handed.”

In 2016, Neil Miller published a study in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons called “Aluminum in childhood vaccines is unsafe” where he too disassembled Dr. Mitkus’ study, stating it had “major flaws” including the fact that Dr. Mitkus studied “dietary aluminum fed to mice” and reiterated that, “to determine the safety of injected aluminum, scientists must conduct experiments with injected — not ingested — aluminum.” Miller concluded:

“Aluminum adjuvants are added to several vaccines to elicit a more robust immune response and increase vaccine efficacy. Infants and young children throughout the world receive high quantities of aluminum from multiple inoculations. Incremental changes to the vaccination schedule during the past several years significantly increased the quantity of aluminum in childhood shots. Numerous studies provide compelling evidence that injected aluminum can be detrimental to health. Aluminum is capable of remaining in cells long after vaccination and may cause neurologic and autoimmune disorders. During early development, the child’s brain is more susceptible to toxins and the kidneys are less able to eliminate them. Thus, children have a greater risk than adults of adverse reactions to aluminum in vaccines.”

The Body-Slam: “Critical analysis of reference studies on the toxicokinetics of aluminum-based adjuvants”

Just one week ago, this highly critical study of the safety standards used for vaccine aluminum adjuvant was published in the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry. The study, “Critical analysis of reference studies on the toxicokinetics of aluminum-based adjuvants” addressed the limitations of studies relied upon, in particular Dr. Mitkus’ study, by both the FDA and the CDC, to declare vaccine aluminum “safe” to be injected into children. The study authors included the aforementioned Dr. Romain Gherardi, and Dr. Chris Exley. They explained:

“To date, aluminum adjuvants per se have, perhaps surprisingly, not been the subject of any official experimental investigation, and this being in spite of the well-established neurotoxicity of aluminum.”

The study authors also mention a laundry list of countries who have produced studies implicating aluminum-containing vaccines in chronic illness:

“The occurrence of myalgia and arthralgia, chronic fatigue and neurological disorders following multiple injections of aluminum-containing vaccines against hepatitis B, tetanus and human papilloma virus (HPV) has been reported in many countries: Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, United Kingdom, Italy, Israel, Japan, Mexico, Portugal, and USA.”

The study authors made many of the same criticisms of Dr. Mitkus’ work that I have shared with you above from Vaccine Papers and Neil Miller. But, they did so in a prestigious journal, and they did so with the weight of their collective backgrounds. It would be a bit like Warren Buffet telling you that your business is a poor investment. The gist of their paper? None of the studies done to date on aluminum safety would properly answer if aluminum is in fact safe. (Remember, in all cases, the study authors of this paper have done their own biological studies of aluminum adjuvant, and found it to be highly neurotoxic.) Their conclusion:

“Both paucity and serious weaknesses of reference studies strongly suggest that novel experimental studies of Al adjuvants toxicokinetics should be performed on the long-term, including both neonatal and adult exposures, to ensure their safety and restore population confidence in Al-containing vaccines.”

Words like “paucity” and “serious weaknesses” are not words you want to hear when you are the CDC or the FDA, certifying that something is safe when it appears that’s not remotely true. Dr. Mitkus, are you listening?

The “Big 6” of aluminum science have stepped forward, changing everything

At great potential cost to their careers, it appears that six scientists — none American — have stepped forward to sound the alarm loudly about the extreme danger of aluminum, and perhaps initiate a reckoning of the true cause of the autism epidemic once and for all. Dr. Chris Exley of Keele University; Drs. Romain Gherardi and Guillemette Crepea of Université Paris Est Créteil; Drs. Christopher Shaw and Lucija Tomljenovic of the University of British Columbia; and Dr. Yehuda Shoenfeld of Tel Aviv University have all contributed to the understanding we now have of aluminum, and the way it appears uniquely able to trigger immune activation events in the brains of certain children, leading to autism. Looking at some of their quotes collectively will help you appreciate how bold their statements really are. This new scientific understanding of aluminum changes everything. For me personally, I feel like I finally have a plausible explanation for what happened to my son.

“Now, because I have seen the same cells that we will see at an injection site carrying a cargo of aluminum into the brain tissue of individuals who died with autism I would now say that we have to think very carefully about who receives a vaccine that includes an aluminum adjuvant. We need to think carefully, is this vaccine a life-saving vaccine or not? If it isn’t, don’t have it with an aluminum adjuvant.”—Dr. Chris Exley, Keele University (England), 2017

“Concerns about its [alum’s] safety emerged following recognition of its unexpectedly long-lasting biopersistence within immune cells in some individuals, and reports of chronic fatigue syndrome, cognitive dysfunction, myalgia, dysautonomia and autoimmune/inflammatory features temporally linked to multiple Al-containing vaccine administrations…In the context of massive development of vaccine-based strategies worldwide, the present study may suggest that aluminium adjuvant toxicokinetics and safety require reevaluation.” — Dr. Guillemette Crépeaux, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire d’Alfort (France), 2016

“Thus alum and other poorly biodegradable materials taken up at the periphery by phagocytes circulate in the lymphatic and blood circulation and can enter the brain using a Trojan horse mechanism similar to that used by infectious particles. Previous experiments have shown that alum administration can cause CNS [central nervous system] dysfunction and damage, casting doubts on the exact level of alum safety.”- Dr. Romain K. Gherardi, Université Paris-Est Créteil (France), 2015

“…it is somewhat surprising to find that in spite of over 80 years of use, the safety of Al adjuvants continues to rest on assumptions rather than scientific evidence. For example, nothing is known about the toxicology and pharmacokinetics of Al adjuvants in infants and children…Yet, in spite of these observations children continue regularly to be exposed to much higher levels of Al adjuvants than adults, via routine childhood vaccination programmes.” — Dr. Chris Shaw, University of British Columbia (Canada), 2012

“continuously escalating doses of this poorly biodegradable adjuvant in the population may become insidiously unsafe, especially in the case of overimmunization or immature/altered blood brain barrier.” — Dr. Romain Gherardi, Université Paris-Est Créteil (France), 2013

“Experimental research has showed that alum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. Thus, efforts should be put in clarifying the potential threat of alum-containing vaccines.”- Dr. Yehuda Shoefeld, Tel-Aviv University (Israel), 2013

“The problem with vaccine- derived aluminum is really twofold: It drives the immune response even in the absence of a viral or bacterial threat and it can make its way into the central nervous system. It is not really a matter of much debate that aluminum in various forms can be neurotoxic.” — Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic, University of British Columbia (Canada), 2013

What can Dr. Robert J. Mitkus do?

I firmly believe that Dr. Robert J. Mitkus, a federal employee of the FDA, can help unravel the autism mess. All he needs to do is tell the truth. He needs to admit that these scientists are right, that the paper being relied upon to vouch for the safety of injected aluminum that he wrote in 2011 is inadequate, in light of much more recent science about aluminum adjuvant, and that the regulatory agencies need to heed the warnings of these scientists, as they explained so eloquently in their recently published paper. It’s time for honest scientists to step up and do the right thing.

Addendum:

Here are two slides developed by the website Vaccine Papers that help explain the aluminum-autism connection, you can get your own copy right HERE.

 

J.B. Handley is the father of a child with Autism. He and his wife co-founded Generation Rescue, a national autism charity. He spent his career in the private equity industry and received his undergraduate degree with honors from Stanford University. He is also the author of “The Only Vaccine Guide a New Parent Will Ever Need” , “An Angry Father’s Guide to Vaccine-Autism Science”, and “7 reasons CDC employees should be “crying in the hallways”

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission

2018-10-24 Vaccinations, Autism, reply to: I want “cause-effect” experimental data, not what someone “feels” or “believes”. Includes background on “Vaccine Court”.

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Oct 282018
 

ARISING FROM:

2018-10-23    Vaccinations, Autism: Action Alert. Request USA Dept of Justice to investigate the allegations of fraud & obstruction of justice.

 

—–Original Message—–
From:  Alicia
Sent: October 23, 2018   7:56 PM
Subject: Re: Vaccinations & Autism, a break-through moment?

There have been numerous studies on immunization and autism. You seem to see a correlation although you have no data even for a correlation. Even if there were a significant correlation it doesn’t prove a cause-effect conclusion. A fact doesn’t change just because you don’t believe it.

– – – – – – – – – – – – –

From: Sandra Finley
Sent: October 24, 2018 1:13 PM
I understand what you are saying, Alicia.

In this case, the testimony of the specialists (the doctors who provided the facts) was manipulated, misrepresented, and lied about, by the two Dept of Justice (DOJ, U.S.) lawyers.   The lies became the basis for the court decisions that established “There is no link …”.

This is according to the evidence provided in the “Request for an Investigation”, which is worth reading.  A proper investigation would establish whether the facts provided to the courts were lies or facts.

The APPENDED elaboration may be helpful.  The couple mentioned will be moving to California from Germany, for 3 years (related to their business).  They are expecting a baby, their first, in March.

The vaccination schedule in the U.S. is heavier than it is in Germany.   It starts on day 1 of arrival on Earth.   The parents might, for instance, want the birth to be in Germany, under the German schedule, instead of in the U.S..   If they have information, they have a choice.

/Sandra

– – – – – – – – – – – – –

From: Alicia
Sent: October 24, 2018 3:57 PM

I want “cause-effect” experimental data, not what someone “feels” or “believes”. 

– – – – – – – – – – – – –

From: Sandra Finley
Sent: October 25, 2018 2:08 PM

Hi Alicia,

The CDC had “cause-effect” experimental data.  The data said  “There is a link”.   The top four scientists in the research were assembled and directed to manipulate the data to get a different outcome.   All copies of the original data sets were ordered to be destroyed.  One of the scientists did not comply with the order, and later blew the whistle.

So then we come to the whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson.

 

Thompson is named in the Request for Investigation, the  fourth paragraph from the end.

I think it likely he will be subpoenaed and cross-examined (as should happen), if the Investigation happens.

 

From the Request for Investigation:

 

Justice Scalia had no idea at that time that the government’s epidemiological judgments were the work of Dr. William Thompson (whistleblower) who has confessed to having committed fraud, Dr. Thorsen who the DOJ subsequently indicted for stealing $1 million of vaccine autism research funds, and Thomas Verstraeten, who has disavowed CDC’s characterization of his own study.  At the time the Supreme Court decided this issue, Dr. Thorsen had not yet been indicted, Dr. Thompson had not yet come forward as a whistleblower and the myriad irregularities of the Verstraeten study were still a well-kept secret.

 

There is a video clip of Thompson in this posting:

2016-10-19   the CDC Whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson (Vaccinations and Autism), Related to: Request for Investigation into U.S. Dept of Justice lawyers   

Earlier postings about Thompson:

2016-10-19 CDC Blocks Testimony by Vaccine Whistleblower in Medical Malpractice Case

2017-01-17 Vaccines. No doubt, serious fraud at the CDC. Brian Hooker, William Thompson. How are vaccines made? Henrietta Lacks. Attenuation. Anthrax.

There is important information in this posting – – you can easily verify, for example, that borax is an ingredient in some vaccines.  And the news alert from Health Canada to reduce all exposure of children to borax because of its toxicity.   But they put it in vaccines.

It is not my intention to change your mind about vaccines.

You present an argument:  I want “cause-effect” experimental data, not what someone “feels” or “believes”.

I respect you.   I think it is incumbent upon me to respond if I know that the CDC DID carry out large-scale data analysis.   Thompson’s subsequent whistle-blowing on the efforts that then went into removing some of the data (one of the tactics), in order to obviate the link between the vaccinations and autism are important.

I do not have more to offer.  I think the very best thing that can happen:  a transparent, honest Investigation done by competent people.

Best wishes,

Sandra

– – – – – – – – – – – – –

APPENDED

Hi,

As per our conversation.

 

Martina and Hermann  may be interested.  I am not saying that I know the answers.   I am offering up questions/information they may not be aware of.

 

It is up to you – – to them,  to do your own evaluation.

 

  •  Widely known and accepted, you confirmed:  the vaccine schedule in the U.S. is different than in other countries   (variables such as number of vaccinations received in total, age of infant when vaccinations are started, number of different vaccinations administered at one time, . . . ).

 

(the source of the “Hep B on day 1” and so on, is the official vaccination schedule.  The links to the sources are provided.)

  • The URL below is the document I recommend you read,  the Request for an Investigation (fraud and obstruction of justice).

 

The first reference to the “Vaccine Court” is in the second paragraph.  The U.S. has a “Vaccine Court”;  its purpose is to deal with vaccine injuries.  The rules under which it operates are not the same as in a regular court of law.  Every one of the G-7 countries, except Canada, has some kind of legal process for dealing with vaccine injuries.

The Request for an Investigation quickly gets into the role the different rules in their Vaccine Court played.   It’s “interesting” – – except that, to my way of thinking, (not intentionally) the different rules enabled the fraud, that culminated in  “there is no link . . . “.

The Request for an Investigation is by Robert F Kennedy Jr (as mentioned), and Rolf Hazelhurst (the name I didn’t remember).   Hazelhurst’s son, Yates, was vaccine-injured;  there are before and after home videos of Yates.    Rolf Hazelhurst is an assistant attorney general from Tennessee.

I searched for the above bit of information – – Hazelhurst’s profession – – found it in a document that includes a pretty good description of the Vaccine Court, see APPENDED.   It answers your question about who was prosecuting who, and why.    

        Request for an Investigation   https://childrenshealthdefense.org/child-health-topics/righting-wrongs/request-for-office-of-inspector-general-to-investigate-fraud-and-obstruction-of-justice/

As I say, Martina and Hermann may want to know about the vaccine situation in the U.S.

Also, California passed a law in the last few years, similar to some other U.S. states.   I do not know if there are challenges to it, or if it is being circumvented in some ways:   children may not attend school, public or private, if they have not been fully vaccinated, according to the State’s Schedule of Vaccinations.

/Sandra

APPENDED

The “Vaccine Court”   

If vaccines cause autism, you’d think “vaccine court” would be a great place to find the evidence for it. Compensated claims typically include extensive details about timelines, medical tests, and doctors’ opinions. They read more like case reports in medical journals than legal settlements.

Established through the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, the original purpose of the vaccine court (officially called the United States Court of Federal Claims special masters) was to quickly and expeditiously pay any claims made by American citizens for vaccine injury. The vaccine court is buried within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and when you petition the vaccine court because of a vaccine injury, you’re actually suing the federal government, and the lawyer representing the government (and therefore opposing your claim) will be a Department of Justice lawyer. Due process in vaccine court is nonexistent. there’s no jury, just a single court-appointed “special master” who hears your case and makes a decision.

Since 1989, when the vaccine court began to operate, these special masters have awarded more than $3.8 billion to vaccine-injured Americans (children and adults).4 Of the total cases filed since the court came into existence in 1998, there have been twelve hundred claims filed for death and eighteen thousand filed for injury. The DTP vaccine is the most common vaccine for claims to be filed against, with MMR in second place. Of the people who file claims with the court, approximately 34 percent end up receiving compensation; 2017 was actually the single biggest year for claims paid, with just over $282 million.

Rolf Hazlehurst, an assistant attorney general from Tennessee, has been an outspoken critic of the vaccine court, particularly since he had to fight his way through it as a claimant on behalf of his son Yates, who he believes developed autism as a result of his vaccinations. In a memorandum to the US Congress in 2013, Rolf Hazlehurst described the court:

Vaccine court is not a court of law. It is an administrative proceeding in which the most basic rules of law do not apply. In vaccine court, the Rules of Discovery, Evidence and Civil Procedure do not apply. There is also no judge or jury. In vaccine court, the American legal system has been replaced by what is known as a special master. A special master is an appointed government attorney.5

Why Does the Vaccine Court Exist?

This may seem like an elementary question, but it’s not. The purpose of the vaccine court is to protect the vaccine program, not to monitor vaccine safety or mete out justice. The year the vaccine court began operating—1989—is important to this story, because that’s also the birth year many point to as the beginning of a meteoric rise in the number of children with autism. Three other potentially monumental things happened in 1989: the hepatitis B vaccine was licensed, the Hib vaccine was licensed, and, for the first time, a second dose of the MMR vaccine was recommended for all American children.

When the vaccine court was established in 1986, there were only three vaccines given in the United States—DTP, polio, and MMR—and vaccination rates hovered between 50 and 60 percent nationally.6 Today, there are eleven vaccines for children, given in multiple doses, with vaccination rates hovering around 90 percent nationally. There is an enormous difference between the market the vaccine court was created to “protect” and the market today. In raw numbers there are nearly four times as many vaccine doses given each year to children than there were in 1986, even though the US population has only grown by 0.3 in that same time period.

Beginning in 1989, the US vaccine schedule quickly morphed from the one the vaccine court was created to support to a far larger schedule with more complexity. This isn’t a coincidence; the vaccine court removed all liability from vaccine makers, greatly altering the risk/reward calculation in their favor.

2017-11-28 High Aluminum Found in Autism Brain Tissue, Children’s Health Defense (Vaccinations)

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Oct 282018
 
November 28, 2017

High Aluminum Found in Autism Brain Tissue

New Study Indicates that Widespread Exposure to Aluminum Is Setting the Stage for Catastrophic Neurological Damage

Robert F. Kennedy Note: Dr. Christopher Exley’s study is on aluminum in the brains of 10 donors who had autism. They contained some of the highest levels of aluminum ever recorded in human brain, and the aluminum was found in the brain’s immune cells, the microglia and the cells which provide support and protection for the neurons, the glia. How does a 15 year old have as much aluminum in his brain as someone who is many decades older who has died of familial Alzheimer’s disease? Dr. Exley’s findings have shocking implications for today’s generation of children who receive 5,000 mcg. of aluminum in vaccines by the age of 18 months and up to 5,250 additional mcg. if all recommended boosters, HPV and meningitis vaccines are administered.

By the Children’s Health Defense Team

 

Scientists have been aware of aluminum’s neurotoxicity for decades. Although aluminum’s apologists have tried to shroud the metal’s risks in manufactured controversy, a growing number of reports by researchers in the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Israel, the U.S. and elsewhere has furnished substantive evidence linking aluminum to neuropathology, including the epidemics of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

Aluminum levels were particularly high in the male brains, including in a 15-year-old boy with ASD who had the study’s single highest brain aluminum measurement.

Dr. Christopher Exley—one of the world’s leading experts on aluminum toxicity—has shown that chronic intoxication with myriad forms of this “ubiquitous and omnipresent metal” is exacting a high price on human health. Dr. Exley and other aluminum experts such as molecular biologist Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic have confirmed that aluminum readily and actively traverses the blood-brain barrier to selectively accumulate in brain tissues, where it induces unwelcome changes in brain biochemistry. As Dr. Exley has noted, “There are no ‘normal’ levels of brain aluminum,” meaning that “its presence in brain tissue, at any level, could be construed as abnormal” [emphasis added].

Documenting Aluminum in the ASD Brain

In light of the fact that even minute amounts of aluminum can have adverse neurological consequences, Dr. Exley’s newest paper—which reports on the first-ever study of aluminum in ASD brain tissue—is groundbreaking. Published in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology, the paper documents some of the highest values for aluminum in human brain tissue ever recorded. Using a two-pronged study design (see box), the researchers measured and characterized aluminum deposits in brain tissues from five to ten ASD donors, most of whom died in their teens or twenties.

Study DesignQuantitative component: First, the investigators used graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry (GRAAS) to measure aluminum content in frozen brain tissue samples. Frozen tissue was available from one female donor (age 44) and four male donors (ages 15, 22, 33 and 50) who, when alive, had a confirmed ASD diagnosis. The researchers quantified aluminum levels in 59 tissue samples representing five different areas of the brain (frontal, parietal, occipital, temporal and hippocampal).

Qualitative component: Using a technique called fluorescence microscopy, the researchers visualized aluminum deposits according to their presence (a) inside versus outside the brain cells and (b) in the two types of brain tissue (grey matter versus white matter). For this component, fixed tissue samples were available for the same five donors plus an additional five donors diagnosed with ASD, including two females (ages 13 and 29) and three males (ages 14, 22 and 29).

What the research team found was startling. The study’s quantitative arm documented “consistently high” aluminum levels representing “some of the highest values for brain aluminum content ever measured in healthy or diseased tissues.” Specifically:

  • All five individuals had at least one brain tissue with a “pathologically significant” level of aluminum, defined as greater than or equal to 3.00 micrograms per gram of dry brain weight (μg/g dry wt). (Dr. Exley and colleagues developed categories to classify aluminum-related pathology after conducting other brain studies, wherein older adults who died healthy had less than 1 μg/g dry wt of brain aluminum.)
  • Roughly two-thirds (67%) of all the tissue samples displayed a pathologically significant aluminum content.
  • Aluminum levels were particularly high in the male brains, including in a 15-year-old boy with ASD who had the study’s single highest brain aluminum measurement (22.11 μg/g dry wt)—many times higher than the pathologically significant threshold and far greater than levels that might be considered as acceptable even for an aged adult.
  • Some of the elevated aluminum levels rivaled the very high levels historically reported in victims of dialysis encephalopathy syndrome (a serious iatrogenic disorder resulting from aluminum-containing dialysis solutions).

The study’s qualitative findings were equally concerning:

  • Across the 10 donors, the investigators identified 150 aluminum deposits. All 10 donors had aluminum deposits in at least one tissue.
  • Aluminum deposits were markedly more prevalent in males than females (129 deposits in seven males, averaging over 18 deposits each, versus 21 deposits in three females, for an average of 7).
  • In males, most aluminum deposits were inside cells (80/129), whereas aluminum deposits in females were primarily extracellular (15/21). The majority of intracellular aluminum was inside non-neuronal cells (microglia and astrocytes).
  • Aluminum was present in both grey matter (88 deposits) and white matter (62 deposits). (The brain’s grey matter serves to process information, while the white matter provides connectivity.)
  • The researchers also identified aluminum-loaded lymphocytes in the meninges (the layers of protective tissue that surround the brain and spinal cord) and in similar inflammatory cells in the vasculature, furnishing evidence of aluminum’s entry into the brain “via immune cells circulating in the blood and lymph” and perhaps explaining how youth with ASD came to acquire such shockingly high levels of brain aluminum.

The Importance of Glial Cells

There are three broad categories of non-neuronal (glial) cells, including astrocytes (which support neuronal signaling), oligodendrocytes (which create myelin) and microglia (responsible for repairing damage). In discussing their results, Dr. Exley’s team comments that the intracellular location of most of the aluminum in these non-neuronal cells was the “standout observation” for ASD.

…environmental factors can alter microglia function, negatively affecting brain development and synaptic connectivity; when this occurs during important developmental periods, there may be ‘consequences throughout life.’

Unlike other brain cells, the microglia (which represent about 10% of brain cells) are dedicated immune cells. Microglia also play a key role in the process known as synaptic pruning that takes place during vital phases of cognitive development in early childhood as well as adolescence, continuing into the late 20s. This process, which some observers have likened to “neural spring cleaning,” allows the maturing brain to shed “weak or redundant [neuronal] connections.” Given this and other important microglial functions, the microglia have attracted considerable research attention as key players in brain disease, including autism. (Astrocytes also have implications for autism, given the role of astrocyte dysfunction in seizures—a condition that is frequently comorbid with ASD.) A pivotal review article published in 2017 observes that “microglia are now known to be active participants in brain function and dysfunction” and notes that “aberrant [synaptic] pruning during critical developmental periods could contribute to neurodevelopmental disorders.” Evidence suggesting that the microglia are dysfunctional in ASD includes findings from postmortem ASD brain studies showing “altered microglial counts, morphology, and neuronal interaction” as well as altered expression of microglia-specific genes.

It is clear to many researchers that environmental factors can alter microglia function, negatively affecting brain development and synaptic connectivity; when this occurs during important developmental periods, there may be “consequences throughout life.” Aluminum exposure undoubtedly constitutes a dangerous environmental exposure, and Dr. Exley observes that “microglia heavily loaded with aluminum…will inevitably be compromised.”

The Most Pervasive Exposure to Aluminum

The study’s results strongly suggest that aluminum is entering the brain in ASD via cells that have become loaded up with aluminum in the periphery. Where is the aluminum coming from? One of the most pervasive routes of modern-day exposure to neurotoxic aluminum is via aluminum adjuvants in vaccines. (Vaccine manufacturers use aluminum adjuvants to intensify the vaccine recipient’s immune response.) Elsewhere, Dr. Exley has described the “migratory capabilities” of aluminum-based adjuvants “at sites distant to the injection site,” including the brain.

The extreme levels of aluminum found in the brains of the study’s teenage donors have alarming implications for the entire generation of highly aluminum-vaccinated children.

In the ASD brain paper, Dr. Exley and coauthors point out that the “burgeoning” use of aluminum-adjuvant-containing childhood vaccines “has been directly correlated with increasing prevalence of ASD.” A 2011 study by Lucija Tomljenovic and Christopher Shaw confirms that aluminum-containing vaccines are having crippling neurological consequences. Their analysis shows that children from countries where ASD prevalence is highest have the highest exposure to aluminum from vaccines; moreover, children’s increased exposure to aluminum adjuvants over the two decades starting in the 1990s significantly correlates with the increase in ASD prevalence in the U.S.  Counting the shots now pushed during pregnancy, highly vaccinated American children may receive up to 73 total vaccine doses by age 18, including multiple rounds of injected aluminum.

U.S. vaccines containing one or more aluminum adjuvants*

Infection or Illness Vaccine Manufacturer or Brand Name
Diphtheria-tetanus or tetanus-diphtheria DT
Td		 Sanofi
Tenivac; Mass Biologics
Diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis or tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis DTaP
Tdap		 Daptacel; Infanrix
Adacel; Boostrix
Haemophilus Influenzae type B Hib PedvaxHib
Hepatitis A Hep A Havrix; Vaqta
Hepatitis B Hep B Engerix-B; Recombivax
Human papillomavirus HPV Gardasil; Gardasil 9
Meningitis Meningococcal Bexsero
Streptococcus pneumoniae Pneumococcal PCV 13/Prevnar 13
Combination vaccines DTaP-IPV
DTaP-HepB-IPV
DTaP-IPV/Hib
Hep A/Hep B		 Kinrix; Quadracel
Pediarix
Pentacel
Twinrix

* Aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, aluminum salts, amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate (AAHS), potassium aluminum sulfate

Crucially, Dr. Exley and coauthors note that what “discriminates [their] data from other analyses of brain aluminum in other diseases is the age of the ASD donors” [emphasis added]. The extreme levels of aluminum found in the brains of the study’s teenage donors have alarming implications for the entire generation of highly aluminum-vaccinated children. Moreover, Dr. Exley’s other research has consistently shown that aluminum is the most significant contributing factor to Alzheimer’s disease. Given that it is no longer unheard of to see Alzheimer’s being diagnosed in people who are in their 20s, 30s, or 40s, it is not unreasonable to worry that a catastrophic new wave of AD may be about to compound children’s already heavy burden of ASD and other neurological disorders. Recognizing the risks, numerous researchers have called for a halt to the use of aluminum salts in vaccines. The powerful results of this study underscore the urgency of heeding this plea as well as eliminating exposure to other sources of neurotoxic aluminum.

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

2018-09-23 How to End the Autism Epidemic, by J.B. Handley

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Oct 282018
 

With thanks to the blog  https://www.jeffereyjaxen.com/

A Book Every Parent In America Is Reading

Note  (Sandra speaking);

I believe the book “How to End the Autism Epidemic”   was sent to:

  •  the Inspector General for the  American Dept of Justice
  •  the Senate Committee on the Dept of Justice
  •  the House Committee on the Dept of Justice
I regret I am unable to find where it was that I read or heard (video) it.

/Sandra

Picture

“I wish I didn’t have to write this book.” These were the words author J.B. Handley spoke to an over-capacity crowd attending his New Jersey book release event. The book, How to End the Autism Epidemic instantly entered best-seller status on Amazon, a position it held even before its official release, and is being viewed as one of the most complete compendiums telling the real story of autism, its causes mainstream medicine avoids discussing, the rise in its epidemic rates, facts about recovery and much more. In addition, the book has stamped into the public discussion irrefutable truths, at the legal, governmental and scientific levels, showing how our modern-day epidemic rates of childhood autism are being created and parents are purposely being left with little recourse. How to End the Autism Epidemic also doubles as one of the best published summaries to date of science from around the world, found in major journals and authored by world-renowned researchers, explaining the emerging science implicating aluminum adjuvant in the development of autism

When Generation Rescue co-founder Handley decided to take on the task of writing his book, he didn’t know at the time that future events would be set into motion to supercharge the atmosphere around its content and publication. How to End the Autism Epidemic, still unreviewed by any mainstream media publication or outlet, contains two further bombshell revelations. The first is the world’s opening look at the recent deposition of Dr. Stanley Plotkin, widely considered the father of modern American vaccine science. Plotkin’s shocking admissions and their significance to the public’s perception of the entire vaccine industry could be the source of a book in its own right. Handley writes that reading the deposition for the first time was “one of the more satisfying moments in my time as an autism activist.” The second revelation is the fraud and manipulation employed in the US Omnibus Autism Proceeding (OAP) that began in 2002 and concluded in 2009. The OAP was a complex solution offered up as an answer to the claims of autism caused by vaccination that were overwhelming the US vaccine court. Handley writes of the OAP, “…the vaccine court took more than 5,500 claims from parents alleging vaccines caused their child’s autism and put them into a single group. Six “test cases,” which were later narrowed to three, were singled out from these 5,500 claims, and the results of the test cases would impact the totality of claims made in the court.”

Hours before his book launch, Handley sat down for a special interview with Del Bigtree along with author and SiriusXM host Jenny McCarthy, Assistant District Attorney General in Tennessee Rolf Hazlehurst and chairman of Children’s Health Defense Robert F. Kennedy Jr., to discuss, among other things, the events and impact of the fraud that occurred during the OAP and Handley’s new book.

Hazlehurst’s son Yates was the second of the three trial cases during the OAP. Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, a world-leading pediatric neurologist and autism research scientist, claimed in his written testimony at the time that there was “no scientific basis” and “no sound evidence to support a causative relationship” between the MMR vaccine or mercury and autism. However, Dr. Zimmerman’s written testimony was specifically and singularly focused on only one child, Michelle Cedillo. Cedillo vs. HHS was the first of the three test cases, with Hazlehurst being next in line, comprising the OAP. Dr. Zimmerman also expressed his belief that there were rare exceptions in which a vaccine can trigger autism.

In a 2007 conversation with OAP Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney Vincent Matanoski and other DOJ attorneys present, Dr. Zimmerman explained how vaccinations could aggravate an underlying mitochondrial disorder to bring about encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder in certain subsets of children. The DOJ-Zimmerman conversation occurred on a Friday [June 15th.] Dr. Zimmerman was expected to testify in the Hazlehurst case on Monday [June 18th.] However, on Sunday, the day before his scheduled testimony, he was called and told he was no longer needed. Yet the DOJ went on to use Dr. Zimmerman’s singular, written testimony meant only for the Cedillo case as the backbone to argue vaccines don’t cause autism in the remaining test cases. There was no opportunity for cross-examination and the DOJ attorneys did not tell the judge that Dr. Zimmerman had additionally including underlying mitochondrial disorders, found to be present in other OAP test cases including Hazlehursts’. It’s interesting to note that years later Dr. Zimmerman’s theory was found to be correlated and the estimate now is that between 25 and 40 percent of children with autism have mitochondrial dysfunction.

In an affidavit Dr. Zimmerman’s writes:

“In my opinion, it was highly misleading for the Department of Justice to continue to use my original written expert opinion, as to Michelle Cedillo, as evidence against the remaining petitioners in the O.A.P.”

A breaking press release by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr and his Children’s Health Defense, is now spotlighting recently discovered evidence of the fraud perpetrated by both DOJ attorneys in the OAP. The press release is demanding the Office of the Inspector General and Congress to investigate the DOJ for fraud and obstruction of justice during the OAP. It states:

“Kennedy and Hazlehurst provide newly discovered evidence that the leading HHS expert, whose written report was used to deny compensation to over 5,000 petitioners in the OAP, provided clarification to the DOJ lawyers that vaccines could, in fact, cause autism in children with underlying and otherwise benign mitochondrial disorders.”

After obtaining depositions and sworn affidavits, Hazlehurst states:

“The DOJ intentionally and fraudulently misrepresented its own expert’s written opinion.  In order to prevent the expert from revealing the truth to other petitioners or the special master these DOJ lawyers canceled the expert’s oral testimony to keep him from stating his true opinion in public. In the process, the DOJ and HHS concealed critical material evidence of how vaccines can cause autism in some children”

In closing, Kennedy summed up the historical results of the OAP and the outcome of the alleged fraud committed by the DOJ during his recent interview with Del Bigtree by stating:

“Because of the fraud by the Justice Department, his [Yates Hazlehurst] case, and 5,400 other cases, Americans, lost their Seventh Amendment right to jury trials. They never got in front of a jury. They never got in front of a court…5,400 people whose children were a national sacrifice were never compensated.”

2018-10-26 CRA files appeal in multibillion-dollar tax case against Cameco, Saskatoon Star Phoenix

 Nuclear  No Responses »
Oct 262018
 

The Star Phoenix article does not mention the outrage of Canadians over “off-shoring” of taxable income by the wealthy.   The CRA has been taking a kicking;  lobbying didn’t work, so someone started Canadians for Tax Fairness.  Good on them!

Media – the CBC did a good job exposing the CRA,  2016-03-08 Canada Revenue offered amnesty.

Cameco does too much advertising in the Star Phoenix, for it to mention the wrath that might have helped the CRA do the right thing this time around – – an appeal of the Tax Court ruling in favour of Cameco.

Federal authorities demanded secrecy in no-penalty, no-prosecution deal to high net worth Canadians.

So, finally,  . . .

CRA files appeal in multibillion-dollar tax case against Cameco, Saskatoon Star Phoenix

Cameco Corp. says the Canada Revenue Agency is appealing a Tax Court decision that was in the company’s favour. (Photo by THE CANADIAN PRESS)

 

SASKATOON — Cameco Corp. says the Canada Revenue Agency is appealing a Tax Court decision that was in the company’s favour.

The Saskatoon-based uranium miner estimates it will take about two years for the Federal Court of Appeal to hear and decide the case.

Last month, Cameco says the Tax Court ruled its favour in the case which centred around its use of a subsidiary in Switzerland to sell and trade its uranium.

The CRA contended it was a sham established to avoid Canadian taxes, while Cameco maintained it was for legal and sound business practices.

Despite the CRA appeal, Cameco says it will be making an application to the court to recover costs incurred over the course of this case.

Cameco noted that decisions of the Federal Court of Appeal may be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, if the top court agrees to hear the appeal.

= = = = =  = = = =

CRA files appeal in multibillion-dollar tax case against Cameco

Cameco executives are “disappointed” that the Canada Revenue Agency is appealing parts of a decision in a multibillion-dollar tax case

Alex MacPherson, Saskatoon StarPhoenix
Updated: October 28, 2018
Cameco's CEO Tim Gitzel at the Touchdown For Dreams announcement, January 28, 2015. Spokeperson Marilyn Young who will have her 17th treatment for ovarian cancer and says the program is pretty much a wonderful dream in itself.
Cameco CEO Tim Gitzel Gord Waldner / The StarPhoenix
Share Adjust Comment Print

Cameco Corp. says it is “disappointed” that the Canada Revenue Agency chose to appeal a month-old decision that found the company does not have to pay back taxes on $483 million in revenue earned in 2003, 2005 and 2006.

“We hope to have a reasoned discussion with the CRA to see if we can reach a resolution for all years based on the principles laid out in the ruling,” Tim Gitzel, the company’s CEO, said in a statement.

The federal government agency’s appeal is the latest development in its long-running dispute with the Saskatoon-based uranium miner over billions of dollars earned by its European subsidiary over the last 15 years.

In a 293-page decision handed down last month, Tax Court of Canada Justice John Owen ruled that the company was within its rights to use Cameco Europe Limited to report uranium sales earnings in low-tax Switzerland.

Cameco called Owen’s decision a “vindication” of its view that the practice was legal and sound, and suggested it should be applied to the other tax years in question. CRA has issued reassessments for 2003 to 2012, with more expected.

That could lead to $8.4 billion in revenue being moved back to Canada, enough to saddle Cameco with $2.5 billion in taxes and penalties.

In its notice of appeal filed on Oct. 25, the CRA said Own “erred in fact and in law” by finding that the section of the Income Tax Act covering transfer pricing, the business practice Cameco used, did not apply in this case.

In an emailed statement, CRA spokesman Paul Murphy said he was prevented from discussing “the affairs of individual taxpayers,” but noted that the agency is “committed to protecting the tax base by ensuring that all Canadians meet their tax obligations.”

The CRA’s decision is likely to please the local advocacy group Saskatchewan Citizens for Tax Fairness, which has called for an appeal and urged the federal government to close “loopholes” that benefit large corporations.

Devan Mescall, a tax expert at the University of Saskatchewan’s Edwards School of Business, told the Saskatoon StarPhoenix earlier this month that anger about the decision should be channelled into lobbying for clearer rules.

“If you change the rules, the behaviour of these corporations will change as well,” Mescall said.

“We will continue through the appeal process and expect the appeal to be decided in our favour as well,” Gitzel said in the statement, which described Owen’s decision as “clear and decisive” in the company’s favour.

The company said Friday it expects an appeal to take about two years.

amacpherson@postmedia.com
twitter.com/macphersona

2016-10-19 the CDC Whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson (Vaccinations and Autism), Related to: Request for Investigation into U.S. Dept of Justice lawyers

 Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  2 Responses »
Oct 252018
 

World Mercury Project

Oct. 19, 2016

CDC Blocks Testimony by Vaccine Whistleblower in Medical Malpractice Case

Thomas Frieden, the director of the Center for Disease Control (CDC), has blocked CDC whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson, from testifying on scientific fraud and destruction of evidence by senior CDC officials in critical vaccine safety studies regarding the causative relationship between childhood vaccines and autism.

The medical malpractice case seeking Dr. Thompson’s testimony is on behalf of 16-year-old Yates Hazlehurst. The lawsuit alleges that Yates is autistic as a result of vaccine injuries.Attorneys Bryan Smith and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., of Morgan & Morgan, have been seeking to have Dr. Thompson testify in a medical malpractice case to explain how the CDC committed scientific fraud in a series of studies, which found no link between vaccines and autism.

In denying the request, Dr. Frieden said, “Dr. William Thompson’s deposition testimony would not substantially promote the objectives of CDC or HHS [Health and Human Services].”

Dr. Thompson, a 19-year veteran at the CDC and former senior vaccine safety scientist at the agency’s Immunology Safety Office, is the co-author of four key studies that the CDC widely touts to exonerate the MMR vaccine and vaccines containing the mercury-based preservative thimerosal, from being linked to autism. Thompson is currently employed at the CDC’s National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention.

In August 2014, Dr. Thompson revealed that the data underlying CDC’s principle vaccine safety studies demonstrated a causal link between vaccines and autism or autism symptoms, despite CDC’s claims to the contrary. According to Thompson, based upon interpretation of the data, “There is biologic plausibility right now to say that thimerosal causes autism-like features.” Dr. Thompson invoked federal whistleblower protection in August 2014.

Dr. William Thompson is listed as author or co-author on the principal studies—Thompson, et al. 2007, Price, et al. 2010, Destefano, et al. 2004—most widely cited to “debunk” the link between autism and vaccines. Thompson said that his bosses, including the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office Branch Chief Frank Destefano, specifically ordered him and three other CDC scientists to destroy data demonstrating vaccine induced autism in CDC’s seminal 2004 study—Destefano, et al. 2004. The data unexpectedly showed a 250 percent increase in autism among young black males who received the vaccine on time—before their third birthday—compared to those who waited until after their third birthday. The data also showed a significant link between the vaccine and isolated autism (autism in normally developing children with no other medical problems), the kind suffered by Yates Hazlehurst, who is mentioned below. According to Thompson, Destefano called his four co-authors into a room and ordered them to dump the damning datasets into a giant garbage can. The published study omitted those data sets. That study, now cited in 91 subsequent papers on PubMed as proof of vaccine safety, is the principle foundation stone of the theology that vaccines don’t cause autism.

In a series of taped statements, a deposition to Congressman William Posey of Florida and in statements issued through his personal attorney, Thompson confirmed that the data underlying the seminal 2004 Atlanta study, Destefano, et al. 2004, showed a causal association between MMR and autism for both African-American boys and for children suffering isolated autism. Thompson also asserted that CDC’s leading thimerosal studies, rather than demonstrating thimerosal’s safety, have consistently showed a causal relationship between thimerosal and tics, a family of grave neurological injuries that are a well-established feature of autism.

The medical malpractice case seeking Dr. Thompson’s testimony is on behalf of 16-year-old Yates Hazlehurst. The lawsuit alleges that Yates is autistic as a result of vaccine injuries, which occurred when the vaccines were improperly administered in 2001. Because of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Act of 1986 (VICA), Hazlehurst v. The Jackson Clinic is the only vaccine injury case that has gone to any U.S. court in 30 years.

Under the VICA and the 2009 Supreme Court decision Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, almost all vaccine injured children are barred from filing lawsuits in state or federal courts. Instead, their only legal remedy is to seek compensation under VICA in the so called “vaccine court,” the popular term which refers to the Office of Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, which administers a no-fault system for litigating vaccine injury claims. There is no judge, no jury and the most basic rules of law do not apply.

However, the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services subsequently admitted that during the Omnibus Autism Proceeding it secretly settled and sealed what potentially would have been one of the six test cases, Poling v. HHS after HHS conceded that the vaccines did indeed cause her autism. By conceding the Poling case and opposing the parents motion for complete transparency, HHS concealed critical evidence of how vaccines can cause autism.

Dr. Thompson wants to reveal the scientific fraud and destruction of evidence that took place in the studies that he co-authored. However, in accordance with the Whistle Blower Protection Act and other federal regulations, Dr. Thompson can not testify under oath without the permission of the director of the CDC, Dr. Thomas Frieden.

Hazlehurst’s attorneys, Smith and Kennedy, sought the permission of the CDC to allow Dr. Thompson to testify. The request on behalf of Hazlehurst specifically relates to the issue of causation, i.e. the issue of whether vaccines can cause autism, which the State of Tennessee Circuit Court Judge found to be both relevant and a proper basis for seeking the deposition of Dr. Thompson.

According to Kennedy, who argued before Tennessee Senior Circuit Court Judge William Acree that Dr. Thompson’s testimony was necessary, “Yates, and almost 5,000 other vaccine injured autistic children, lost their cases in vaccine court because CDC and the Justice Department submitted fraudulent science wrongly denying the vaccine-autism link.”

Kennedy explained that Dr. Thompson’s testimony was necessary to explain details of the fraud. “Dr. Thompson will also rebut defense experts’ testimony that Yates was not damaged because vaccines do not cause autism,” Kennedy said.

Accepting the logic of Kennedy’s argument, Judge Acree ordered on Feb. 5 that Dr. Thompson should be deposed. Following Judge’s Acree’s ruling, Smith filed a formal request to CDC to make Thompson available for deposition and trial testimony.

On Sept. 22, in a letter from CDC Director Thomas Freiden, CDC denied Smith’s request. Smith explained that “this denial was a disappointment but not a surprise, since the inescapable implication of Dr. Thompson’s testimony is that the agency fraudulently altered the science to undermine autism cases worth potentially $1 trillion in compensation ordered by Congress.”

Smith and Kennedy plan to immediately appeal the CDC’s denial to federal court.

“Since that original study data is only available from Dr. Thompson,” Smith explained, “We are very confident that a federal judge will order CDC to make Thompson available.”

Show Comments (1)
 Older Entries  Newer Entries