HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Video & Multimedia (Forum) » NEW! Audio of CDC Whistle...

Wed Sep 17, 2014, 01:23 PM

NEW! Audio of CDC Whistleblower Thompson's Call to Congress

CDC scientist, Dr. William W. Thompson:

"Because the CDC has not been transparent, we've missed 10 years of research."
"Really what we need is for Congress to come in and, ya know, say give us the data..."
"I have a boss who's asking me to lie..."

Excerpts from tweets. Full transcript (1:22) to be posted when available.




Published on Sep 17, 2014

Dr. William Thompson, CDC insider and whistleblower on 13 years of vaccine-autism fraud, appeals to US Congress to take action.

YOU SHOULD TOO! Please get this link to YOUR CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVE NOW.

23 replies, 3918 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 23 replies Author Time Post
Reply NEW! Audio of CDC Whistleblower Thompson's Call to Congress (Original post)
proverbialwisdom Sep 2014 OP
cab67 Sep 2014 #1
proverbialwisdom Sep 2014 #2
cab67 Sep 2014 #3
proverbialwisdom Sep 2014 #4
cab67 Sep 2014 #5
proverbialwisdom Sep 2014 #6
truedelphi Sep 2014 #7
cab67 Sep 2014 #8
truedelphi Sep 2014 #9
cab67 Sep 2014 #11
truedelphi Sep 2014 #12
cab67 Sep 2014 #14
truedelphi Sep 2014 #15
proverbialwisdom Sep 2014 #10
truedelphi Sep 2014 #13
proverbialwisdom Sep 2014 #16
truedelphi Sep 2014 #17
proverbialwisdom Sep 2014 #18
truedelphi Sep 2014 #19
truedelphi Sep 2014 #20
proverbialwisdom Sep 2014 #21
proverbialwisdom Sep 2014 #22
proverbialwisdom Sep 2014 #23

Response to proverbialwisdom (Original post)

Wed Sep 17, 2014, 02:17 PM

1. What bullshit.

The "link" between vaccines and autism is dead. Dead dead. Doesn't stink anymore dead. Stake through the heart, head cut off, mouth stuffed with garlic dead. And the CDC was not the only organization that helped dispatch it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cab67 (Reply #1)

Wed Sep 17, 2014, 03:35 PM

2. What's your background? Here's a statement by the CDC scientist in the video.

http://www.morganverkamp.com/august-27-2014-press-release-statement-of-william-w-thompson-ph-d-regarding-the-2004-article-examining-the-possibility-of-a-relationship-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism/

NEWS

August 27, 2014 Press Release, “Statement of William W. Thompson, Ph.D., Regarding the 2004 Article Examining the Possibility of a Relationship Between MMR Vaccine and Autism”


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - AUGUST 27,2014

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM W. THOMPSON, Ph.D., REGARDING THE 2004 ARTICLE EXAMINING THE POSSIBILITY OF A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MMR VACCINE AND AUTISM


My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where I have worked since 1998.

I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.

I want to be absolutely clear that I believe vaccines have saved and continue to save countless lives. I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefits.

My concern has been the decision to omit relevant findings in a particular study for a particular sub­ group for a particular vaccine. There have always been recognized risks for vaccination and I believe it is the responsibility of the CDC to properly convey the risks associated with receipt of those vaccines.

I have had many discussions with Dr. Brian Hooker over the last 10 months regarding studies the CDC has carried out regarding vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes including autism spectrum disorders. I share his belief that CDC decision-making and analyses should be transparent. I was not, however, aware that he was recording any of our conversations, nor was I given any choice regarding whether my name would be made public or my voice would be put on the Internet.

I am grateful for the many supportive e-mails that I have received over the last several days. I will not be answering further questions at this time. I am providing information to Congressman William Posey, and of course will continue to cooperate with Congress. I have also offered to assist with reanalysis of the study data or development of further studies. For the time being, however, I am focused on my job and my family.

Reasonable scientists can and do differ in their interpretation of information. I will do everything I can to assist any unbiased and objective scientists inside or outside the CDC to analyze data collected by the CDC or other public organizations for the purpose of understanding whether vaccines are associated with an increased risk of autism. There are still more questions than answers, and I appreciate that so many families are looking for answers from the scientific community.

My colleagues and supervisors at the CDC have been entirely professional since this matter became public. In fact, I received a performance-based award after this story came out. I have experienced no pressure or retaliation and certainly was not escorted from the building, as some have stated.

Dr. Thompson is represented by Frederick M. Morgan,Jr., Morgan Verkamp, LLC, Cincinnati, Ohio, www.morganverkamp.com.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proverbialwisdom (Reply #2)

Wed Sep 17, 2014, 07:16 PM

3. Beyond my basic literacy and ability to read the peer-reviewed literature,

I hold a PhD and specialize in vertebrate biology. I work on the evolutionary history of a particular group of vertebrates based on fossil, morphological, and genomic data. That doesn't make me an expert in epidemiology, but I know enough about biology, biochemistry, and statistics to know what does and what does not qualify as a correlation.

I also know enough about the scientific community - I count myself as a member, having been a faculty member at a research university for 15 years - and would regard any claim of a conspiracy, or concerted effort by Powers that Be to silence scientific work, as nonsense. Scientists are temperamentally incapable of keeping things secret for very long. Even private corporations that limit what their employees can say (petroleum exploration or pharmaceutical companies, for example) can't keep things secret as long as non-industry-based funding is available.

If, as Dr. Thompson claims, data were omitted from an earlier paper, they should be published. There are formal mechanisms for doing that. It would be interesting to see how they match up with everything else the whole world has learned since 2004.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cab67 (Reply #3)

Wed Sep 17, 2014, 08:55 PM

4. This post sounds like a different person wrote it, as contrasted with the earlier remarks.

If, as Dr. Thompson claims, data were omitted from an earlier paper, they should be published. There are formal mechanisms for doing that. It would be interesting to see how they match up with everything else the whole world has learned since 2004.

Welcome to DU.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proverbialwisdom (Reply #4)

Thu Sep 18, 2014, 08:12 AM

5. This is consistent with my earlier statement.

There is no causal link between vaccines and autism. This has been demonstrated repeatedly. The nature of his claim - that a correlation between vaccines and autism existed in a subset of the population his group studied - would, at this point, be like the claim that mean annual temperatures have been anomalously low in the eastern United States over the past couple of years. It may be true, but doesn't really outweigh the massive amount of evidence that global mean annual temperatures have shown a marked upward trajectory over a longer period of time.

So I stand by my claim that the vaccine-autism link is on the same "scientific" level as global warming denialism, the view that HIV doesn't cause AIDS, creationism, and using hypnosis to recover memories of alien abduction. One can find people with advanced degrees, and backgrounds at prestigious institutions, who support all of them. They, too, may claim that the evidence supporting their side has been censored from the peer-reviewed literature by a cabal of academic purists uninterested in looking controversy in the eye, or by groups with a big stake in the outcome (e.g. companies making anti-retroviral drugs). Claims of censorship or conspiracy in the scientific community are always going to set off the bullshit detector of anyone who knows how scientists actually work. Extraordinary claims needing extraordinary evidence and all that.

If, as Dr. Thompson claims, evidence for such a link was omitted from an earlier paper, it should be published. I can't evaluate his claim (or re-evaluate my own view, which is based on what's been discovered by published research over the past couple of decades) otherwise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cab67 (Reply #5)

Thu Sep 18, 2014, 02:38 PM

6. Familiar with this? I apologize for the graphics in the video, maybe just close your eyes and listen



CDC Whistleblower Dr. Thompson on Thimerosal and Pregnant Women
Published on Aug 27, 2014


Here's a glimpse into the backstory (with corroboration). BRAVO REVIEWERS 1, 2, 3, although I don't pretend to understand their analyses:

http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/08/our-story-so-far-both-mmr-mercury-laced-vaccines-cause-autism.html

(ignore the title)
By Dan Olmsted is Editor of Age of Autism
Posted by Age of Autism at August 28, 2014


...Thompson himself reported that he was under tremendous pressure to absolve thimerosal at all costs and run and rerun the analyses to remove the association between thimerosal exposure and tics.

Consequently, when the severely compromised manuscript was submitted to the New England Journal of Medicine for consideration for publication, it was soundly rejected with the following comments from the peer reviewers:

Reviewer 1: In this paper, the authors seem to be hoping for and wanting to demonstrate lack of relationships. When a relationship does emerge, the authors essentially downplay it, even though…a) The authors argue for how strong the dataset is earlier in the paper and b) the authors explain why SEM is superior to alternative analytic techniques.

Reviewer 2: The authors’ conclusion that “thimerosal is not a major causal agent for tic disorders (p. 13),” is not in accordance with their own data. That is, it is not reasonable, on the one hand, to argue that the use of SEM reduces the probability of Type I error, and then, on the other hand, to ignore the one significant, positive finding because of “the lack of biological plausibility of such a relationship.”

Reviewer 3: In general, the arguments presented on page 13 that findings on the tic outcome variable were not seen as sufficiently persuasive to completely dismiss those findings. Only one citation is provided. Further, in the absence of complete heritability, evidence of heritability does not (as the authors seem to suggest), rule out gene-by-environment interactions or even direct environmental effects...If the authors are to convince skeptical professionals, parents, or public policy-makers of their point, they would be well-advised to address the purported mechanisms of effect that have been proposed.

The manuscript was then submitted to and rejected by the Journal of the American Medical Association before it was finally picked up by the Journal of Pediatrics Psychology and was published in 2012.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cab67 (Reply #5)


Response to truedelphi (Reply #7)

Fri Sep 19, 2014, 11:44 AM

8. The formaldehyde issue is a non-issue.

Formaldehyde is present throughout the environment, and is even generated by humans metabolically. Infants have something like 50 to 70 times the amount of formaldehyde in their vaccines already in their bodies.

The studies you mention were thus not "flawed" at all.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cab67 (Reply #8)


Response to truedelphi (Reply #9)

Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:34 PM

11. You're using a straw man argument

I never said formaldehyde was harmless. I'm not about to chug a bottle of it. In sufficient doses, it's toxic. But the trace levels used in some vaccines are much smaller than what we encounter from environmental sources.

The same is true for almost anything we encounter, from X-rays to sodium. This isn't "Big Industry" speaking; I work at a university and get all of my funding from public sources (e.g. NSF).


I would like an apology for the way you mischaracterized my argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cab67 (Reply #11)


Response to truedelphi (Reply #12)

Sat Sep 20, 2014, 08:35 PM

14. You did mischaracterize my argument.

The substances in feces and urine are toxic, whether or not they are produced by our bodies. So is carbon dioxide. Saying that formaldehyde is made by human bodies does not, in any way, say it's healthful or without risk.

My point was, is, and remains that the minute traces of formaldehyde in vaccines are too small to pose a real threat. This is different from saying formaldehyde, writ large, is not poisonous.

Most parents would allow a doctor to take an x-ray of their injured child. X-rays are deadly radiation in sufficient doses. Same principle applies.

Again, your apology would be appreciated. Otherwise, we're done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cab67 (Reply #14)

Sat Sep 20, 2014, 09:02 PM

15. Well, then we're done, as it was proven that mercury and formaldehyde were undesirable in terms of

Even small amounts being directly injectioned into the body's blood stream back in the 1930's and 1940's, back before Big Corproations captured the science labs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #7)

Fri Sep 19, 2014, 03:12 PM

10. This thread is about statements by whistleblower Dr. William Thompson on his own CDC research career

involving 1) the MMR and 2) thimerosal. Is it your intent here to distract or muddy the waters?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proverbialwisdom (Reply #10)

Sat Sep 20, 2014, 04:57 PM

13. And the methodology that is used here is exactly as that described in

The book "Toxic Sludge is good for you!" an activists handbook to how to deal with the nefarious tentacles of the Mainstream PR firms.

That book sheds light on who these people are, and where they come from.

From the first paragraph of the Amazon book review: "Common Courage’s number one seller blows the lid off of today's multi-billion-dollar propaganda-for-hire PR industry, revealing how public relations wizards concoct and spin the news, organize phony "grassroots" front groups, spy on citizens and conspire with lobbyists and politicians."
####

Notice how they muddy the waters in a consistent way.
This happens again and again in their dialogues here on DU - always the same handful that are doing this.

Real people occasionally learn something from a controversial subject. These critters never learn.
Not one small thing. They even repeat the mantra that Wakefield told people not to vaccinate their children. Wakefield never said any such thing. But they insist he did.

In one case, where I laid out how I had cured a health problem with a probiotic formula, and avoided surgery, one of the more fatuous of these folks insisted I have the surgery anyway!?!?!?

How does one do that? If you cure a health situation, no doctor is going to agree to do surgery. After all, doctors do not do surgeries on non-existing conditions. Was I supposed to do the surgery myself?!?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #13)


Response to proverbialwisdom (Reply #16)


Response to truedelphi (Reply #17)


Response to proverbialwisdom (Reply #18)


Response to proverbialwisdom (Reply #18)


Response to truedelphi (Reply #20)

Sun Sep 21, 2014, 07:38 PM

21. IMO, 'supportive' posts containing multiple incorrect and unsourced statements are counterproductive

even when nonchalantly presented as stream of consciousness opinion. And by the way, no surprise, I reject your framing. Science isn't "corrupted," broadly speaking, IMO. Science will sort this out. Count on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cab67 (Reply #3)

Wed Sep 24, 2014, 03:02 PM

22. RE: "It would be interesting to see how they match up with everything else..."

Yes, indeed, and who's up on this outside of the narrowest segment of the scientific community? Why, the parents, a diverse group with many even warring factions, but tremendous collective insight and crowd sourcing capabilities.





Mayo Clinic Discovers African-Americans Respond Better to Rubella Vaccine
Published on Feb 26, 2014


Somali Americans develop twice the antibody response to rubella from the current vaccine compared to Caucasians in a new Mayo Clinic study on individualized aspects of immune response. A non-Somali, African-American cohort ranked next in immune response, still significantly higher than Caucasians, and Hispanic Americans in the study were least responsive to the vaccine. The findings appear in the journal Vaccine.

MORE: http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/09/the-vaccine-truth-loudly-whistled-.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cab67 (Reply #1)

Fri Sep 26, 2014, 03:56 AM

23. You might be interested in this summary.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/09/tomfoolery-over-the-cdc-whistleblower-insel-reacts-at-the-iacc.html

Dangling by a Thread in Washington: Insel Prevaricates Over the CDC Whistleblower

By John Stone
September 25, 2014


"I wish I knew more about that particular instance."

The excuses are wearing thin. Here is a transcript of the remarks of Thomas Insel, National Institute of Mental Health director, regarding the whistleblowing activities of Centers for Disease Control employee William Thompson at the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee meeting two days ago (view video here.):

“Again this is not for the IACC since that committee is not here in full. This is not a meeting to decide anything we are going to do in regard to policy and I wish I knew more about that particular instance. I don’t. I can tell you that the 2004 PEDIATRICS paper was one of about fourteen papers in the IOM (Institute of Medicine) review and there have been another multiple papers since then that have weighed in on this all of which the IOM have said in 2011 are consistent with not finding a relationship between vaccination and autism. What the IOM doesn’t say and what nobody has said in a way that I find intelligible (?) is that there could still be the rare cases in which that could occur and what we need to think about is how one would investigate that if that were the case.”

<>

However, when Insel reverts to the IOM review he demonstrates his weakness.

John Stone is UK Editor for Age of Autism.
Posted by Age of Autism at September 25, 2014


COMMENTS

Posted by: Jim Moody | September 25, 2014 at 06:30 PM

The IOM has NOT dismissed MMR-autism causation based upon CDC’s “fourteen studies.” The IOM 2012 report on vaccine adverse events specifically looked at whether MMR can cause “secondary autism.” (http://www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/Research/VaccineAdvEffectReview/Working-List-of-AEs-January-10.pdf) “‘Secondary’ autism or autistic features arising from chronic encephalopathy, mitochondrial disorders and/or other underlying disorders will be considered by the Committee. For “Primary” autism, VICP has asked the IOM to consider the review of the medical literature post Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism (2004) report. In particular, VICP is interested in the Committee’s review on more recent theories of ‘neuroinflammation’ and ‘hyperarousal/overexcitation of the immune system via multiple simultaneous antigenic stimulation.’”

IOM actually considered 22 studies in examining evidence of causality between MMR and autism. (http://www.commed.vcu.edu/IntroPH/Communicable_Disease/2012/adverseffectsVaccines.pdf page 145). IOM REJECTED 12 of these studies, i.e. they “were not considered in the weight of epidemiological evidence because they provided data from a passive surveillance system lacking an unvaccinated comparison population or an ecological comparison study lacking individual-level data.” IOM REJECTED five more of these studies, ironically including the now infamous DeStefano (2004), because they “had very serious methodological limitations that precluded their inclusion in this assessment.” Left with only five studies, they waffled, concluding that the available evidence “favors rejection” of a causal association. It will take a comprehensive, rigorous, and “beyond reproach” vaccinated vs. unvaccinated comparison to finally, and scientifically, resolve the causation issue. Oh, but Dr. Insel illegally blocked such a study at a January, 2009 IACC meeting. Given the collapse of CDC’s “studies” supposedly exonerating MMR, it is little wonder that CDC ordered IOM not to even look at the evolving mercury science. IOM’s rejection of CDC’s contrived “studies” exonerating mercury would have been considerably more harsh.

Second, Dr. Insel has obviously "forgotten" that IOM DID actually make a finding way back in 2004 that “rare” (another waffle word) autism cases could be caused by vaccines. The 2004 ISR report concluded in part: “A genetically susceptible subset of children who develop autism following vaccinations is offered as one theoretical explanation for the findings in epidemiological studies of no association between vaccination and autism. . . . Absent biomarkers, well-defined risk factors, or large effect sizes, the committee cannot rule out, based on the epidemiological evidence, the possibility that vaccines contribute to autism in some small subset or very unusual circumstances.” (http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10997 pp. 8, 11).

Dr. Insel has defied the express command of Congress to find the “cause (including possible environmental causes) . . . prevention . . . and treatment” for autism. The legislative history made absolutely clear that he was to research vaccines as cause. He has worked tireless to ignore this mandate and deny any role for vaccines and autism causation, most especially by blocking research on biological mechanism and on the rate of autism in unvaccinated children. Such deliberate ignorance leads to denial, and now to coverup – yet science will continue to reveal the truth; not whether vaccines cause autism, a settled question, but how much autism they have caused.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread