GAD65, Diabetes, Autoimmunity And Autism
The Truth About Liz Szabo and USA Today RE Autism Coverage

Forbes Magazine Backs Merck Despite Corporate Fraud Allegations

Merck-buildingThank you to Hilary Butler for allowing us to excerpt this entry from Friday, June 29, 2012

There is no place for pro/anti vaccine divides, when it comes to allegations of corporate fraud.

Yet all across the media, the focus of the discussion about the Merck lawsuit is not to really discuss the issue, but to slap the "vaccine foes". The first example came out loud and clear in Forbes magazine. You don't have to read further than the title, to know where Gergana Koleva is heading. She is hoping Krahling and Wolchowski lawsuit is all lies, and so she plants a decoy story. Her article title was “Merck Whistleblower suit a boon to vaccine foes even as it stresses the importance of vaccines.” The URL, reads, "Merck whistleblower suit a boon to anti vaccination advocates though it stresses importance of vaccines."

Nothing like hanging out provaccine bias for all to see. But the problem is, Gergana seems to be blind to her own message, insisting that those who are calling out her bias, are guilty of "baseless criticisms". Medical history from 1998, stated that there was something badly amiss with the Merck Mumps vaccine. These two 2007 medical articles Brunell and Peltola are compulsory reading.

When journalists like Gergana, who claim to specialise on corporate fraud, bioethics and health, publish an article, readers would expect to enjoy a competent fleshing out of facts; a time line; the medical literature; the legal process; the facts about the Department of Justice; the history of the company including history of previous corporate frauds, and how corporate fraud affects us all in day to day life. Yet what they got from Forbes, was primarily a fingering of the "vaccine foe", which is particularly noticeable if you analyse the adjectives she used when describing the two "sides"; dripping doubt about the case, and dripping sarcasm, aimed at the "vaccine foes"....

After glossing over the case as fast as possible with minimal analysis, Gergana launched into her main mission, incorrectly stating that the "Department of Justice refused to rule on the case.” This was done in my opinion, to link her incorrect comment about the Department of Justice, to Merck's statement that the case is "without merit". A perception is thereby created in the reader's mind, that if the DOJ's investigation has found the case to be true, they would have joined with the whistleblowers. The slant of the article infers that because the Department of Justice did not join the case, and Merck said that the case is "without merit", ....there must be nothing to the case.

But is that what the Department of Justice said, and did? No....  Read the full entry HERE.

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

John Stone

Fever

I seemed to being blocked from commenting as well, either deliberately or because there was a technical fault.

Hard to express enough intellectual contempt for Gergana and White n' Nerdy.

Fever

I couldn't post a comment on Gergana's blog . I would have written : "Would you shed some light on the reasons the two former employees might be wrong ? Indeed, it is not so easy to engage in a trial with such a big organisation as Merck . What are these two virologists presently doing ? Are they working for a competitor ? ( see Connor :". However, US researchers are leading studies to develop an entirely new mumps vaccine, one that could potentially prove to be just as safe but much more effective." ) . Do they want to take a revenge after having been fired by Merck ..... ? Or are Merck's labs full of vaccination foes ?"
connor bamford supporting gergana's opinion the virologists may bee wrong has authored a shot article on his blog : http://ruleof6ix.fieldofscience.com/2012/06/mercks-mumps-vaccine-is-good-but-not.html he is suggesting the virologists are suing Merck hoping to gain a big sum of money (see connor's own comment) .....?????!!!!

Garbo

Oh, come on, Forbes EXISTS to defend corporations! They advertise themselves as "Home Page For The World's Business Leaders"! They only do journalism in the service of profit. They didn't uncover Bernie Madoff's schemes, Credit Default Swaps, or the impending doom of Lehman Bros., and they sure as heck aren't going to rock the pharma boat. I'm sure one of their reporters will write a book about the vaccine scandal once someone else has done the hard work to uncover the truth. After the market-related dust settles, they will then run "exclusive" excerpts of the executive mea culpa/image makeover in their magazine.

Carol

Original complaint: http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/06/27/MerckUnsealed.pdf

Amended complaint: http://www.rescuepost.com/files/june-mumps-suit-1.pdf

Barry

Main Stream media is the single biggest reason that people line up for vaccines at all.

These guys don't just work for big pharma, they were created by big phrama, for the express purpose of leading people down the garden path. I used to believe that the media was fair and honest, but my sons vaccine injury opened my eyes to this colossally corrupt enterprise.

Gergana Koleva is just one in a long list of media presstitutes, willing to lie to the public about anything she's told to. These so called "experts" are created whenever one is needed, with completely faked and/or overblown credentials designed to lend credibility to their message.

Main stream media doesn't deliver the truth, they are gatekeepers of the truth.

Bob Moffitt

Is it me .. or do I see a "pattern of corruption" with the CDC at the very center of that pattern?

Paol Thorsen is alleged to have swindled the CDC of a million dollars .. and .. so far .. the CDC has done absolutely NOTHING to recover the money .. nor seek any legal punishment for Mr. Thorsen.

Merck is alleged to have "defrauded" the CDC .. for at least a decade .. by falsifying research upon which the CDC relied upon to BUY MILLIONS OF VACCINES THAT MERCK KNEW DID NOT MEET THE "EFFICIENCY" STANDARDS OF THE CDC. Again .. so far .. the CDC has yet to take any action to recover the money .. nor seek any legal punishments for those who defrauded the government.

Unfortunately, at the very least .. these two incidents suggest the CDC has been very careless with the scarce financial resources they have been provided to "protect the public health" .. and .. the CDC's failure to seek prosecution and punishment of those who defrauded them is even worse .. perhaps even complicity to fraud.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)