by Tom Stavola and Robin Rebrik Stavola
In response to the article written by STAT news on March 31, 2017: https://www.statnews.com/2017/03/31/vaccine-skeptic-protest/
It is time to expose the operative who surreptitiously gathered information and subsequently published an exceptionally fallacious, deceitful article concerning the Revolution 4 Truth movement and its participants.
It appears that this individual – who doesn’t deserve the honor of being named – utilized ostensibly old, recycled arguments, laden with mythology.
Let’s begin with the initial title of the erroneous piece.
“Kennedy cites discredited conspiracy theories on autism”
To whom or to which entity are you referring when you utilize the term, “discredited?” It certainly cannot be the hundreds of studies throughout the medical literature demonstrating causal relationships between vaccine administration and neurodevelopmental disorders, one of which is autism. This leads me to the conclusion that those who are “discrediting” must not be objective, independent scientists. More than likely, the person is referencing doctors inhabiting the governmental health agencies guilty of regulatory capture with the pharmaceutical industry. These are scientists who possess the knowledge to conduct objective studies but have not done so, due to political and financial conflicts of interest.
The word conspiracy is incorrectly utilized. The definition of conspiracy is, “a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.” Can you explain precisely what secret plots Kennedy cited to conduct illegal or harmful activity? This happens to be exactly what the governmental health agencies are guilty of; namely, their hidden agenda to derive profits from the destruction of the health of millions of Americans (well – it was hidden – and they continue to viciously assault us in attempt to remain inconspicuous).
She continues, “Several dozen activists who reject the robust science supporting vaccinations.”
I pose the following inquiries in response to this fallacious assertion:
What is the criterion you have subjectively established for the usage of the word, “robust?”
And, do you understand the meaning of the word, “science”?
Apparently, the criterion for the usage of “robust” isn’t very robust, given the science to which the person refers falls into one of the following categories: pharmaceutically funded, making it highly susceptible to inherent bias; ridden with improper methodologies (e.g., improper end points, poor/selective sampling, data manipulation) thereby skewing results in favor of their predetermined conclusions; and, conducted by doctors who are financially or politically incentivized to arrive at a vaccine friendly conclusion. Interestingly enough, none of the aforementioned categories utilize the gold standard of medical science with vaccines – the definition of robust. Can I ask this person: where are the double-blind, placebo controlled, synergistic, longitudinal prospective studies? Where are the retrospective studies juxtaposing unvaccinated and vaccinated cohorts? Answer: non-existent.
The “robust science supporting vaccination” does not meet the threshold of rigorous scientific standards that is utilized for all other pharmaceutical products. If you attach the word “robust” to science that has not been conducted truthfully, objectively, and independently, then you’ve described “pseudo-science” – the type of science you apparently support.
“cover up supposed links between vaccines and autism — an allegation that has been thoroughly discredited.”
Again – at this point – we have established that the individuals doing the “discrediting” are not worthy of the title, “scientists” in light of the fact that they do not conduct real science – they’re pseudo-scientists. Real science leads us to the innumerable studies implicating various vaccine ingredients with neurotoxic outcomes, inflammation, immune dysregulation, and brain damage – that is, autism. I need not do the work for you – search through any scientific database, if you truly want to learn the truth.
The person then asserts the following ridiculous mouthful:
“vaccines are essential in preventing the spread of potentially fatal infectious diseases. When too many parents fail to vaccinate their children, it can jeopardize entire communities — with people whose immune systems are compromised due to illness or chemotherapy most at risk.”
I present to you a challenge: provide me a list of at least 10, independent medical studies demonstrating that unvaccinated individuals were the causative agents in inducing infectious disease transmission. Conversely, I can present to you countless studies displaying the fallacy of vaccine induced herd immunity, and that vaccinated populations – up to 100% uptake rates – continue to experience infectious disease. Vaccines improperly simulate the human immune system and therefore are incapable of precluding disease contraction upon exposure. Vaccines STIMULATE certain parts of the immune system but they cannot adequately SIMULATE it. No rigorous scientific study has ever proven the effectiveness of vaccines in disease prevention.
Further, vaccines are immunosuppressive, making those vaccinated susceptible to illness, thus threatening the immunocompromised. Unvaccinated, healthy people do not pose a risk. There’s more to this, but I suppose I should not delve deeper.
The next quote is another winner:
“One advocate held a sign saying “Polio was a false flag” and “Jonas Salk was NOT a hero,” referencing to the virologist who developed the first safe and effective polio vaccine that experts consider to be one of history’s greatest public health triumphs.”
It has become quite apparent that the author has done zero research concerning vaccines. I’d highly encourage researching the conditions preceding and following the introduction of the polio vaccines; namely, the diagnosis criteria, and consequently the skewed statistics due to alterations in naming conventions. To put it simply, polio is still alive and well today – it’s merely under different titles.
Let’s continue onward with this highly enlightening piece.
“The tone was deeply emotional and paranoid”
The descriptor, “emotional” seems to imply that the assertions are not fact based, which isn’t true, as explained heretofore. Paranoia also implicates a mental state antithetical to reality. This accusation is blatantly false. Since when do – 1) Hundreds of studies communicating the shortcomings, ineffectiveness, and dangers of vaccines, and 2) On record evidence of governmental corruption / fraud concerning the largest medical cover up in history, via the CDC’s own head scientist – convey a message of paranoia? The unfounded, emotional assertions emanate from the vaccine proponents – truth be told.
“Several others held signs saying “No vaccine mandates.” In fact, while states generally require children to be immunized before enrolling in school, there are no federal mandates, and no plans to impose them. Most states let parents opt out of vaccinating their children for medical or religious reasons, and 18 allow opt outs for philosophical reasons, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.”
There are no federal mandates because states are given jurisdiction over the vaccine mandating process. State legislatures either mandate vaccines, or state health departments issue regulations which can act similarly to mandates. Furthermore, if you or a loved one have not suffered a vaccine injury (at least, one you can clearly recognize), it is highly unlikely that you’re aware of exemptions. Media, school nurses, pediatricians – you name it – do not inform people of their rights to refuse vaccination. So while these statutes exist, very few are using them. As for medical exemption, it is so narrow, that is not a helpful exemption at all. The doctors are afraid to use the exemption on children who have had a vaccine adverse reaction.
“No forced vaccination. Not in America.” -speaker Barbara Loe Fisher. Fact check: That’s not happening nor is anyone trying to make it happen”
The person states that there is no forced vaccination in America, however, if you understood the word mandate you would understand that kids cannot attend school without receiving their mandated vaccinations. Taking an exemption is NOT possible at all in 3 states and the other states don’t make it easy.
“They were supposed to wear blue if a loved one had died from a vaccine injury, but STAT didn’t see anyone in the group wearing that color.”
Poor scientific observation here. You are sampling approximately 300 people among a US population of well over 300 million. It is unlikely that one would find a high number of deaths within the aforementioned number of people. The VAERS database – which contains less than 1% of actual adverse events (even per the FDA’s numbers) – yields enough vaccine induced deaths to shock anyone. The numbers for death are astronomical compared to all other pharmaceutical products (which are ironically MORE rigorously tested)!
“People can get compensation through that system if they’re able to meet strict requirements in showing a vaccine did, in fact, cause their injury.”
The vast majority of people who file a claim for compensation are rejected – and these are people who have scientifically verifiable vaccine injuries. However, if the injury is not perfectly congruous with the extremely narrow subjective definitions prescribed by biased, corrupt individuals, you will not be awarded compensation. The fact that there have been nearly $4 billion in awards since the late 1980s speaks volumes regarding the extreme danger of vaccines – the real value should be in the trillions.
“That preservative has never been in many key vaccines and was taken out of other childhood vaccines in 2001. Research shows it is not harmful in low doses.”
Incorrect. The ingredient to which the person refers is thimerosal. It is still present in certain vaccines: DTaP, meningococcal, Japanese encephalitis, and the injected influenza. To analogize: a small amount of rat poison ingested requires immediate medical attention – it’s an emergency. Now, envision one of the most hazardous substances known to man – mercury (in any form), INJECTED, not ingested by a human. Low dosing is irrelevant. A small amount of poison will still deleteriously affect you.
All said – to whoever decides to craft an article on the vaccine truth movement – conduct some research prior to issuing erroneous, uncorroborated, assertions which decrease your credibility.