Best of: Sir Crispin Davis and James Murdoch Leave GSK Board
Dr. Brian Hooker Speaks Out on Developments Concerning CDC Whistleblower Dr. William Thompson

Book Review: (Poul Thorsen) The Master Manipulator by James Grundvig from Skyhorse Publishing

Master ManipulatorPlease share this post on social media, on your blogs, in email to friends and family. Purchase this book this week to help the launch sales numbers, which leads to more shelves stocked!   Buy here.
By John Stone

A welcome for James Grundvig’s book about the Thorsen affair, The Master Manipulator , notwithstanding a certain irony in the title: Poul Thorsen, it must be said, was no Moriarty. In the end this is a tawdry saga of a man who went a little too far in defrauding an institution, the US Centers for Disease Control, which habitually rewarded dishonesty and mediocrity in the public service. We have been here before, for example with David Lewis’s exposé of the Environmental  Protection Agency in Science for Sale . This was certainly a place where Poul Thorsen fitted.

Many elements in this story are already familiar though Grundvig sheds a little light on the murky  corridors of power and influence. We learn how on secondment to the CDC Thorsen  steps into the breach to provide a data source of Denmark’s national disease registry, to which he had free access. The early part of this enterprise, as we know, was the autism vaccine cover-up: the CDC needed data and Thorsen had a fortuitous supply. It was against this background that Thorsen’s very grand sounding  research group North Atlantic Neuro-Epidemiology Alliance (NANEA) had been formed in 1999 (was he the Secretary General?): the basic idea seems to have been that the CDC paid the research group a lot of money while Thorsen had a free data source and could underpay and cheat his Danish employees.

It is not very clear how much of a role Thorsen actually played in the research: Kreesten Madsen, lead author of the two key autism studies used by the CDC and the Institute of Medicine in supposedly refuting a vaccine connection, denied to Grundvig that Thorsen had played any at all. This in itself – given the presence over Thorsen on the list of authors – suggests fraud. But in all probability the strategy for massaging the figures in the notorious MMR paper (which echoes that used at the CDC for the thimerosal paper by Vestraeten) came from the CDC’s veteran of the Agent Orange cover up, Coleen Boyle. Boyle wrote in a memo about  thimerosal and autism in April 2000:

“... "2. Since most of the dx's [diagnoses] are generally not picked up until the 2nd or 3rd year of life had you considered eligibility criteria of at least 18 months or 2 years?? What happens if you do this?" ....”

In other words: “Why don’t we dilute the autism data  for the vaccinated group using the cases that will not have been diagnosed yet to mask the effect that we all know about?”.

There is inevitably a lot of speculation about the role in all of this of Thorsen’s girlfriend and co-author, Diane Schendel. Schendel, an epidemiologist employed within the CDC, followed Thorsen out to Denmark. It seems plausible that she was actually sent out to keep an eye on him, which may have worked in the early years (which of course were the most critical for the autism/vaccine issue and the CDC). And as we learn from Grundvig it was only the retirement of Thorsen’s business partner in NANEA, Ib Terp, in 2005 that Thorsen started syphoning off huge sums of money for his own personal use. By that time the Institute of Medicine report was in and the autism/vaccine connection was supposed to be history. Schendel remained on in Denmark at Aarhus University - still closely (and perhaps anomalously) associated with the CDC but increasingly less associated with Thorsen.

Thorsen’s basic problem is that he does not seem to have been good at anything much: by all accounts he was a poor scientist, researcher and teacher, and he was not good with money – nor in the end was he a good fraudster. But unextradited by the US government, five years after his indictment, he remains (scandalously) a protected man.

James Grundvig’s book gives us many insights into thoroughly rotten culture which gave rise to this chilling, outrageous story.

John Stone is UK Editor for Age of Autism.

Comments

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

Jim Thompson

According this site, see https://oig.hhs.gov/fraud/fugitives/profiles.asp , “Thorsen is currently in Denmark and is awaiting extradition to the United States.”

Does anyone know if notification has been sent from the Denmark authorities to the U.S. authorities regarding any decision to extradite Poul Thorsen to the Unites States for trial?

See: “ARTICLE 16- The requested State shall promptly communicate to the requesting State through the diplomatic channel the decision on the request for extradition, and, if granted, the period the person sought has been under detention pursuant to the request for extradition.”

The U.S./Denmark extradition agreement is found at:
http://www.mcnabbassociates.com/Denmark%20International%20Extradition%20Treaty%20with%20the%20United%20States.pdf

Jeannette Bishop

Maybe I should say, we don't "have to" like I said in my last sentence, but I think many here feel like they can't help but do something to stop the lies and harm.

Jeannette Bishop

Dr. Kostoff,

I have to say you're making me less easy (and I wasn't even anywhere near at ease territory), and now I'll demonstrate, maybe unsurprisingly, that I'm too capable of going further than you might be going.

If there's an op, I don't think it would be to destroy the "crazy anti-vaxxers" credibility. I think it would more likely be to use us, and anyone else willing to go with us, to move towards something pretty powerful people want in the name of "cleaning things up" at the CDC.

It still doesn't seem to me like what's come out in this is anything unlike what the CDC has been doing at least since looking at thimerosal (after much harm done). Could some use the CDC's record against them at least in appearance, and ultimately against the right to health freedom? Maybe globally even? Possibly. Could they do that, without even actually aiming to at this moment?

The message that we must oppose all mandates seems good, the need for a revitalization of journalism seems good, ... the need for understanding the constructions and lies, fear-based motivators, pride-based motivators maybe, that formed whatever faith in vaccination (even if sometimes founded on something) probably needs to get out to... but how many want to go where a humbling view of human nature might become apparent... and I think there is need to get out the known alternatives for preventing disease morbidity too. Still we have to keep warning people in some way of the risks they've been unquestioningly taking.

John Stone

Ronald

I have read and read what you are saying but it is not at all obvious to me how the present sequence of events could be designed to be of advantage to the reputation of the CDC. They just look more and more odious. Even if it was some kind of long term dirty game that would scarcely reflect credit on them. And this is not from a naieve standpoint. I have watched all the government capers you talk about going back 50 years.

Noting that you have agreed that the most likely scenario is that it is more or less what it seems, perhaps I ought to acknowledge the lesser probability that it is something else - I suppose it just might be.

Ronald Kostoff

Linda1,

"The notion that the CDC would intentionally create this scandal is absurd."

Not absurd at all; which is not the same as saying that's actually what happened. Look, all we have are a very few pieces of fragmented data, with no context for the data and no 'chain of custody' for the data. We have one person's version of what happened (based on unanalyzed media), with no corroboration.

So, how could this miniscule amount of questionable data be reverse-engineered to determine what really happened? Well, one scenario is what you and John Stone seem to like. Thompson inadvertently told the truth about a conspiracy (in which he was a central player) to essentially a complete stranger, made an online confession (that he knew would go nowhere) before he was 'outed' by Hooker, and then was bought off by the CDC to change his story. Certainly that's possible, and may be even the most probable scenario. However, there are so many aspects of this case that stand out from the norm like a sore thumb (which I have documented in my previous comments on this thread), that I have tried to construct a scenario that makes the inexplicable more realistic. I would not rule out an intentional hoax. If the rumors prove to be true, the end result would be sheer disaster for the 'anti-vax' community, given the accusations they have made based on Thompson's 'revelations'. For the perpetrators of this possible hoax, Mission Accomplished!

Linda1

Dr. Kostoff,
The field is far from clear. It is crowded by an increasing number of very angry citizens. The notion that the CDC would intentionally create this scandal is absurd.

John Stone

Ronald

Of course, they always knew - as I commented about Coleen Boyle above. And, of course, the De Stefano paper was not alone in massaging the statistics - the only thing which was exceptional was that one of the authors temporarily and in private came clean. But their hands were dirty. The CDC directed the IOM secretly not to find anything and they duly commissioned the studies back through the CDC which found nothing:

http://www.putchildrenfirst.org/chapter6.html

Of course, they put Coleen Boyle, who had had such a success record with not incriminating Agent Orange on the job.

This BTW is article I wrote back in August 2014:

The CDC: the Detective Agency Which Could Never Find Anything

http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/08/the-cdc-the-detective-agency-which-could-never-find-anything.html

By John Stone

An interruption yester-evening from a troll styling themselves Sam Spade set me ruminating: no doubt the thoughts are not very original but some of them may benefit from re-stating.

And so to Mr Spade and his brief response to Kent Heckenlively’s ‘A Break in the Wall’:

"Bullshit. You people will murder a lot of children with this false story."

Perhaps the first thing to point out is that our ranks are almost entirely comprised of citizens who uncomplainingly did what was supposed to be the right thing in vaccinating their children: their views were not formed by ideology but by experience. The experience comprises not only the awful reality of what happened to their children after vaccinating but the way institutions deal with the issue. To even raise the issue of vaccine damage is also to raise the hostility and anger in every quarter.

This anger – Mr Spade’s anger – is not based on reason or knowledge. There is nothing inherently implausible in a pharmaceutical product injected into an infant or toddler causing damage: we have just been educated not to think that. Actually, a lot of even official literature acknowledges the possibility of damage it is just supposed to be vanishingly rare – unfortunately, the only thing that is guaranteed to make it rare is not good science but the waves of officially inspired hatred that will be triggered against anyone daring to stand up and say "This went wrong". The point about Mr Spade is that his rage is not determined by science but by institutions: institutions which are not happy to have their errors reported back to them, not happy if they fear that they can be detected. They will never find anything that they don’t want to, as Ed Yazbak pointed out years ago. It is not a question of whether we like the diseases, it is question of whether the products are as safe and effective as they should be, whether there are far too many of them etc.

The very thing that determines that the vaccine program is unsafe as well as unjust is this whipped up anger: we are not allowed to discuss the science – scientists who speak out must be shunned and persecuted, citizens who speak out must be declared intellectually incompetent. This anger constitutes social control not reasoned debate.

Actually, Bill Thompson or no Bill Thompson, the abysmal record of the CDC is there to be judged: they are corrupt; they are in bed with the manufacturers; they are hostile to anything which conflicts with their own policy; they are institutionally incapable of producing trustworthy science. They are there to be taken apart by any competent investigative journalist and any mainstream media outlet which has the will and the courage to do so. They would be finished in days. In the meantime - and I hope it won’t be very long now - everyone, including ‘Sam Spade’, will just have to go on putting up with us.

Ronald Kostoff

Grace Green,

" He will have no more credibility with either side."

So what; why would he care? If this whole affair was contrived (which is not out of the realm of possibility, especially if the latest rumors prove to be true), he did his job. The CDC is happy, the vaccine manufacturers are happy, and the 'anti-vax' community has suffered a serious blow. The field is now clear for major advances in adding many new vaccines to the schedule.

Ronald Kostoff

Jeannette Bishop,

There's another aspect of this case that has bothered me since day one. The CDC has roughly four billion dollars for distributing vaccines. That's probably their main organizational driver for placing a positive face on vaccines.

I would suspect they would have a good idea of the results of ANY vaccine study they conducted before they undertook the study, and they would be very reluctant to undertake a study that could shed a negative light on vaccines. The story with the infamous MMR study is that Wakefield suggested that timing of vaccine administration might be a problem, and the CDC decided to take his suggestion and explore the timing effects. Like Diogenes, pristine scientists only searching for the truth!

Given the access of the CDC to community resources (basically all the vaccine experts in the world, as well as Pediatricians and Immunologists who are on the front lines of administering these vaccines), I find it hard to believe they would not have known about a timing problem a priori. Any Pediatrician with a large group practice would have noticed patterns in groups at high risk for adverse effects, and they probably would have shared this with the CDC off the record. I find it hard (if not impossible) to believe they would have undertaken such a study if there were any chance that such large adverse effects would be demonstrated. At the very least, they would have designed the data gathering and analysis to mask such effects. The fact that they performed such a study leads me to be open to the possibility that the specific effect identified for the target groups might not exist, and the drama we have seen unfold since August 2014 could possibly have been a contrived hoax! Not saying that's what actually transpired, but I wouldn't rule it out.

Grace Green

Ronald Kostoff,
Yes, I agree that theoretically it could all have been a fabrication - weirder things have been said to me by government officials! My point is that if he now claims that it was a deliberate lie - not just a miscalculation which, as you rightly say is implausible - then he paints himself as someone not to be trusted. He will have no more credibility with either side.

Ronald Kostoff

Grace Green,

"if William Thompson's statements to Brian Hooker over the phone were not true then they were the most elaborate fabrication, because this story contains more than just statistics. There were emails, notes and letters passing one to another, many of which we've even seen copies of. And then the throwing of hard copies into the huge bin and burning them! They wouldn't have gone to all those lengths if it was just a misinterpretation of the stats. So if Thompson was now to claim that all that wasn't true it would completely wreck his credibility, and the new story would be unbelievable."

Could Thompson's recorded phone statements have been 'most elaborate fabrication'? Absolutely! I'm not saying they were, but they could have been. How many people from the Federal government have called you back in response to an inquiry that did not require a call, and then told you they had been part of a conspiracy to falsify data that would result in serious illness for hundreds of thousands of children? Doesn't that sound the least bit suspicious? Then, they follow-up this admission of guilt by remaining incognito for a couple of years? No disconnect there?

In terms of the 'emails, notes, and letters' you mention, what was their 'chain of custody'? Were they real, or were they fabricated? What was their context?

Again, given all the financial and people resources Thompson had at his disposal, I don't believe he would have made a computational error of that magnitude and consequence, given all the checking and re-checking that goes on in government for even the most trivial of minutia. When he transmitted those numbers, he knew at the time whether they were accurate or not. If he now presents computations showing those numbers were inaccurate (which I assume he would if the rumors turn out to be true), he knew that all along.

As I've posted previously, I believe the long-term goal of the vaccine industry is to administer THOUSANDS of vaccines over one's lifetime, to 'protect' against potential bioterrorism and naturally occurring zoonoses from the ~320,000 mammalian viruses. We are presently in the early stages of convincing the public that vaccines are necessary and valuable. The number administered has increased from a handful when I was a child to an order of magnitude greater today. Once people have been fully 'conditioned' to accept the necessity for vaccines, I can easily see the number administered increasing by at least another order of magnitude. Who was the prophet that stated 10,000 vaccines would not be harmful? While most readers probably considered that an outlandish statement, that might actually have been the first 'trial balloon' of what we can expect.

With those types of dollars at stake, the cost of a fabrication that I am postulating could be theoretically possibly would be no more than 'chump change'. I'm not saying this is what actually happened, but I would not rule it out!

Theresa Cedillo

Thank you for the great review John. Sharing everywhere.

Jeannette Bishop

Ronald Kostoff,

I agree it's very hard to have confidence that anything is what appears on whatever level one can understand events (for instance there are some questions out there about the validity of casting Snowden as a whistleblower and since "the solution" to NSA storing data was to have the corporations do it "for them" instead...I'm inclined to be suspicious there also).

But Thompson reportedly helped Brian Hooker access, and hinted he go through, the MMR data (Hooker says he was focused more on thimerosal, as some of the recordings also suggest) and waited for him to find the effect that the CDC didn't publish (does that maybe suggest he was hoping that something he couldn't reveal "legally" would get out) and Autism Media Channel waited for this to be published (online) in a small journal--if I remember the sequence--to release the video.

Brian Hooker often reiterates he feels Thompson is the main reason he got what he got through FOIA before that time (and yet they didn't have completely cordial interactions over the phone early on), so it kind of seems to me like Thompson might be more of a stickler for following rules than the average person in that climate would be.

The taped recordings are hard for me to see as pre-planned--I think they should have gotten better, or more focused discussion in one direction if so.

Thompson put out a press release (through a hired whistleblower attorney) confirming the crux of the CDC Whistleblower Revealed video and Dr. Hooker's publication. He gave Posey more details in thousands of documents (had them already turned over before the video release--did they give Thompson enough time to get thousands of documents after he was told he was recorded or was he already undertaking that step?).

No mainstream outlet touched this (only a public entry forum on CNN led to some reporting). Not even some of the "alternative" media sources touched this. So if an op, it seems it was only trying to move those watching.

Some here have speculated (me too) this might allow pinning too much blame on the MMR (which is already failing re mumps...maybe measles too) and may already be tagged as a vaccine they must replace. But in the points given to Posey, Thompson suggests that thimerosal exposure might play a role in the elevated autism risk found in those getting MMR essentially on time.

http://www.firstfreedoms.org/developments.html (1st paragraph under Conclusion)

It doesn't seem like Thompson had a clear cut direction he was taking to me. Neither to me did Brian Hooker.

"They" (the nebulous maybe multi-factioned PTB) first scared everyone with ebola (for whatever reasons, some relating to all this possibly).

Then "they" tried scaring everyone else to throw away theirs and our right to informed dissent through measles, but not until after hundreds of cases were ignored (during ebola and before). It sort of worked, too much in the short run in California, but I don't think enough to please "them."

And now we are hearing that MMR will likely be given another review that will likely find nothing. It sounds the same that "they've" done at every major possible point of change, regarding the autism epidemic anyway. Put out more "research" and give it a lot of press.

And I wonder if all the hard to explain (for me) press coverage of the pulling of VAXXED from Tribeca was just more of the same, "all would-be medical whistle-blowing filmmakers take note, this is how things are, and the rest of you agree. Yes, you do." or ??? (still doesn't make sense to me--I'm inclined to pray "thank you" every day that Tribeca pulled the film).

And where are we now? It seems to me we were hung out to dry long before all the stuff I listed here, and it seems like maybe more are aware of our plight (and theirs actually) and general vaccination problems since William Thompson. Not saying we are in a better place at this point, but maybe some others are or soon will be. Does it seem like "they" are heading for a better place, even in their own minds?

Gary Ogden

John: The idea that the CDC has turned Dr. Thompson, although well within the realm of capability of slimy outfits like Merck, just doesn't make sense to me for several reasons. 1. His supportive text messages to Carmel Wakefield. 2. His what appears to be genuine shame at what he has done in the phone calls. 3. The big garbage can. In the Congressional Record. Felony destruction of federal property.
Like Ronald Kostoff, I know that these folks are capable of anything they can get away with, and they are very skilled at getting away with anything, including murder, without giving it a second thought, since they have the full power and majesty of history's most powerful empire at their beck and call. The legacy of Allen Dulles and Cheney's goons.
But I'm still not buying it. Dr. Thompson would have no credibility left with anyone. So many people will be seeing Vaxxed that there is no putting the genie back in the bottle. What are your thought on this, John? Thank you very much for this fine review. I will be ordering the book soon.

Grace Green

Ronald Kostoff, if William Thompson's statements to Brian Hooker over the phone were not true then they were the most elaborate fabrication, because this story contains more than just statistics. There were emails, notes and letters passing one to another, many of which we've even seen copies of. And then the throwing of hard copies into the huge bin and burning them! They wouldn't have gone to all those lengths if it was just a misinterpretation of the stats. So if Thompson was now to claim that all that wasn't true it would completely wreck his credibility, and the new story would be unbelievable.

John Stone

Ronald,

It doesn't IMO work as an explanation - it doesn't make what's happened now look credible and there is documentary evidence that he was very unhappy in 2004. You make these people sound remarkably competent and astute. But that is not my impression at all (certainly not from the Thorsen story for example). They are obviously hugely protected by political and financial interests but really these guys don't look very impressive.

Ronald Kostoff

John Stone,

"I don't really see it. What would the CDC be gaining?"

I have been around the 'Black' world for too many years to believe ANYTHING I see or hear in the media. I could easily see the people who run the vaccine empire have their minions (including, but not limited to, the CDC) promote the idea of this 'insider' who tells all, builds up the hopes of the 'anti-vax' community, has this community commit themselves to films, books, etc, based on uncorroborated evidence, and then destroys the credibility of the 'anti-vax' community in the eyes of the larger public by having the 'insider' admit computational errors. Once the credibility is gone, the CDC (and especially those who really control it) have an open playing field.

I'm not saying that's what actually happened, but it's not out of the realm of possibility. Do you really believe a researcher like Thompson, who was first author on two papers that each received over 1000 citations, would a) make an error of such magnitude, b) not check the computations of such an important finding with other high-class statisticians, and c) make statements of such import about wrong-doing to essentially a complete stranger without having thoroughly vetted the accuracy of the computations? If, in fact, the findings turn out to be fallacious, I just have a hard time believing it was accidental.

"They had the guy on a string for years - he broke free and momentarily told it like it was, and now he's back in the fold, but he cannot unsay what he said, which was very damaging."

He made some statements over the phone that were taped, and some statements on his lawyer's Web site. Your interpretation, and that of most of the 'anti-vax' community, was that his statements were unprepared and 'told it like it was'. If true, they were very damaging. But, you're making the assumption they were true and unprepared. Maybe; maybe not.

I've studied the cases of many whistleblowers in many fields. The Thompson case makes me more uncomfortable than any of them because of its temporal trajectory. He placed statements on his lawyer's Web site and gave documents to Congress, knowing damn well Congress would never hold a hearing on something this explosive. This is not what happened with William Marcus, David Lewis, David Graham, Bradley Manning, Daniel Ellsberg, Edward Snowden, William Binney, other NSA whistleblowers, and whistleblowers in many fields.

Again, it could all be true, as you propose, but it is also possible that the whole thing was staged to destroy the credibility of the 'anti-vax' community in the eyes of the larger public, and give carte blanche to the vaccine purveyors.

Danchi

Ronald:
I agree, there is no way to know what the CDC is up to. I have personally felt they have been too quiet since the censoring of Vaxxed so I knew they had gathered their most devious employees to come up with something. The only path open to them is to make Thompson change his story and re-do the data---again. How many times has the study been redone? Rand, the Jain et al by the Lewin Group--all attached in some way to the government & the CDC. If Thompson making an about face after all the noise made about his confession that in itself will make the people distrust the CDC even more. Supposeably he was offered money of course and a foundation--people will see that as a bribe. The CDC's flim flam is being exposed. Their only weapon is controlling the message but given a recent study that only 6% of the population believe anything the MSM reports--I don't see how that's going to fly. They will of course activate their legions of celebrity doctors, their most egregious and devious trolls such as Dorit and company plus they will pay every small town online news outlet to post their message.

The way I see it is regardless if the Thompson Flip is a false flag--run with it. Post it on comment boards with the link to NN. Make sure you include the caveat that this is what has been reported but it is unconfirmed. Be pro-active. When there was a online call for mommy bloggers to tell their stories on various blogs-truthful or not-pro-choice and anti-vaxx people were ready when a story was found online, mostly online sites geared toward young Moms-they asked them were they part of the recruited Moms who were paid for their story. I think that strategy was effective because the facebook recruitment page disappeared. I think letting the populace know ASAP what the CDC's plan is-ever without confirmation.

James Grundvig

To Grace Green and others:
Why this book comes out now? Simple, whistleblower Bill Thompson coming out in July 2014 made the Dane Poul Thorsen relevant again. The manipulation of data on the Thompson-DeStefano study (I highly recommend seeing Vaxxed; I saw it a 2nd time yesterday) ties in with the timeline of the CDC buying mercenary scientists from Denmark to shoot down the MMR & Thimerosal Studies.
More...
CDC launched investigation with Aarhus University in 2009, after Julie Gerberding got her high paying job at Merck;
2009 Thorsen resigns from Aarhus University;
2010 Managing Director Aarhus U. publicly "disowns" and "bans" Thorsen from AU;
2011 US DOJ hammers Thorsen with 22-count indictment of stealing $1-2 million meant for Autism Research;
2012 Thorsen dodges a tax fraud claim (due to lack of evidence) at another Danish university for stealing $500,000;
2013 Thorsen (or CDC) imports Diana Schendel to work at Thorsen's old stomping grounds at AU;
2014 Schendel is granted full professorship and researcher at AU;
2015, it took this author to research the enigma that was Poul Thorsen (he's not one anymore), fly to Denmark to hound Schendel and get KM Madsen to go on record about many things.
This story is truly timely with Thompson and Wakefield's Vaxxed.
- From the Author

John Stone

Hi Ronald,

I don't really see it. What would the CDC be gaining? I am really not sure they are gaining much now. If someone officially denies something they have been heard to say off the record, aren't people more likely to credit the unofficial version. They had the guy on a string for years - he broke free and momentarily told it like it was, and now he's back in the fold, but he cannot unsay what he said, which was very damaging.It's not very much better than a confession in a Stalinist show trial. Maybe there was more carrot than stick in this case, but otherwise no difference.

It is obviously a ridiculous situation - and anomalous - where under the present US law the whistleblower ends up going back to work every day in the place the've blown the whistle on. The tug of conformity is going to be immense even if they are not threatened. But, frankly, it just looks even more corrupt.

Danchi

There are dozens of Autism parents and SIDS/ vaccine parents at each and every Trump campaign stop. I would suggest he bring a few onto the stage.

Not to start another Trump round but he made his position on vaccines very clear. People just don't ant to accept it. Here is what he told Sharyl Attkisson recently:

"Trump on Vaccines and Autism: Pro-Vaccine but Cautious"
https://sharylattkisson.com/trump-on-vaccines-and-autism-pro-vaccine-but-cautious/

"First of all, I’m a big believer in vaccines. But there could something to the theory that these massive doses that are given to children have an impact on autism. There could be something to it. Now some people say no, some people say yes, I’d like to see studies. The bottom line is they have to get vaccinated."
Donald Trump

How much clearer does the man need to make this? Please don't start with the mythical medical mafia holding him back of preventing him from speaking. If you take a good look at the man's personality---he lacks internal self control so if someone told him to shut up, he'd do the exact opposite because he couldn't help it.

go Trump

...of course the Hillary camp MIGHT soften up the vaccine schedule as not to harm our children,

as these children are badly needed to fight wars...

go Trump

I still wonder if Trump will bring up the vaccine issue in the near future on the stump. ...of course if he does, the mainstream media will not show that portion of such a speech.

What clearer distinction could there be between Trump and Hillary (or anyone else) than no damn vaccine mandates ??? ...A few vaccine comments on the CDC, Vaxxed, Thorsen, Simpsonwood & Verstraeten would move many Americans to the Trump camp.

The issue would paint everyone else into a very crappy corner...

There are dozens of Autism parents and SIDS/ vaccine parents at each and every Trump campaign stop. I would suggest he bring a few onto the stage.

Ronald Kostoff

Danchi,

"There are articles online stating Dr. Thompson has been handled".

If you remember, I made comments about DeNiro to the effect that his support for the film Vaxxed, and subsequent withdrawal, may have been a 'false flag' operation. That stimulated a number of vituperative comments. From the beginning, I have been even more concerned about the possibility of the Thompson revelations being a 'false flag' operation. That's why I always use the prefix 'alleged' in referring to his comments. The fact that he never made public revelations at the beginning like Snowden or Manning made me very suspicious about the credibility of his statements. That does not mean they are in fact not accurate; they may be, but the whole sequence of events leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

In truth, we have no idea as to the validity of Thompson's comments. There have been no independent adversary proceedings to validate his comments. We have recorded phone calls containing provocative statements about cover-up. So what; we have no idea of the context of these calls. While we believe they're on the up-and-up, how do we know they were not pre-arranged, or that Thompson did not know he was being recorded? We have thousands of pages of documents. How many (if any) have been manufactured; how many (if any) have been omitted?

While we would like to believe that the CDC misconduct was as stated by Thompson, we don't know for sure. A deal by the CDC as rumored would give perfect cover to the false flag operation, and have the same end effect of leaving the 'anti-vax' movement hung out to dry.

Angus Files

The one that got away scot free and with all the cash he needed...now if Trump gets in this might change.

Weird reading books like this as it is when a lot of us were very active with court cases in London and everywhere and still no justice we fight on.

Looks a great read and thanks for the review John.

MMR RIP

Jeannette Bishop

Thank you. The book sounds like an educational look at the character that the CDC gravitates towards (or is it gravitates in upon itself) to do the "good" (per Paul O.) studies.

Danchi

Thanks for the edit John. I'm never quite sure what is the information that really needs to be conveyed.

John Stone

Presumably, Thompson's scathing remarks about Thorsen and Schendel are past history now as well.

Danchi

There are articles online stating Dr. Thompson has been handled: http://www.naturalnews.com/053790_MMR_research_data_William_Thompson_vaccine_safety_science.html

Originally published April 25 2016
The vaccine empire strikes back: Rumors swirl that Dr. Thompson has been bought off by the CDC and will submit 'reanalyzed' MMR research to destroy vaccine safety skeptics
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) Rumors have been swirling over the weekend that the CDC is planning a major offensive against vaccine safety skeptics due to the remarkable popularity of the VAXXED documentary film. As censorship of the film spectacularly backfired, more people became aware of the "CDC whistleblower" Dr. William Thompson, the subject of the documentary film. Dr. Thompson publicly confessed to taking part in a scientific fraud at the CDC to alter data that linked vaccines to autism in African-American boys.

Now Dr. Thompson has been turned by the CDC where he is still employed, explained investigator Brian Hooker, PhD, in a panel discussion at the Manhattan Film Festival. According to Dr. Hooker, Dr. Thompson has been promised a large research foundation and a "major cash award" by the CDC to stay employed with the agency where his research is set to be "reanalyzed" to eliminate any link between vaccines and autism....

www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml

John Stone

Grace,

I have never heard this said. Prsumably, there is no court case anyway unless he is brought back to the US and charged.

Grace Green

Thanks, John, for this review. I'm a bit puzzled though about this book coming out now. Is this case not sub judice?

Ed Yazbak

GREAT READ INDEED.

Once I started "Master Manipulator", I was not able to put it down.

This book is an excellent well-documented report of a National scientific scandal that has been hushed very cleverly for way too long.

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.)