Julia Belluz’s name is a familiar one regarding this issue. I looked through her reporting over the last couple of years and I was struck by how unwilling she is to challenge anything an official says about vaccine safety. Her articles are rife with statements meant to shut down the debate:
“Large-scale studies involving thousands of participants in several countries have failed to establish a link between the MMR vaccine and the mental developmental disorder.”
“…many other studies have since discredited the idea.”
“In another of the most thorough studies to date, nearly half a million kids who got the vaccine were compared with some 100,000 who didn't, and there were no differences in the autism rates between the two groups.”
Belluz is one of the most prolific pro-vaccine journalists out there. (See more stories below.)
None of her articles honestly investigate the arguments on both sides of the debate. In her mind, there is no debate. She blindly relies on official denials as the final word, just like everyone else in the mainstream media.
It’s hard to understand the complete obeisance paid to health officials holding a study as proof of no link. No one ever bothers to look into the research we’re all supposed to trust. What if it was done by the vaccine makers? What if it’s merely an easily flawed population study? What if the researcher is on pharma’s payroll? What if there are a dozen studies that challenge the findings?
The reporters who willingly accept whatever a CDC official has to say about vaccine safety would never do the same thing with anyone else in government. There is expected to be skepticism when elected officials tell us things, but strangely, that isn’t the case when this issue is vaccines. Somehow we’re to believe that federal employees at the CDC only tell the truth.
In many of her articles on vaccines, Belluz went after Andrew Wakefield and his MMR study. I wonder how she would report the story of William Thompson and his claim of CDC cover up of a vaccine/autism link.
Notice the taxpayer money going to the CDC that is talked about in this article. This place is pharma's dream. I seriously wonder if vaccines cost the industry anything. I’d love to know much money is channeled into vaccine promotion through federal and state funding.
March 7, 2017, Vox.com: The Republican health insurance plan slashes funding for vaccines and public health
The American Health Care Act makes a number of changes to the Affordable Care Act that’ll likely disadvantage poorer and sicker Americans, and result in fewer people covered. But the plan also includes a subtler and very significant move for American health: the elimination of the largest fund for disease prevention in the federal budget, along with 12 percent of the budget for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, by 2019.
The ACA established the Prevention and Public Health Fund, which provides $14.5 billion over 10 years. The goal of the fund was simple: Boost public-health money, much of it for the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), to support activities that keep people from becoming sick with preventable chronic ailments like diabetes, heart disease, and cancer and infectious diseases that can be staved off with vaccines. ...
The federal vaccines program. The Section 317 vaccines program has been called “the backbone of our nation’s immunization infrastructure.” It ensures doctors get the vaccination doses they need, helps people who can’t afford vaccines gain access to them, and mobilizes responses to outbreaks like measles, among other things. It would lose half its funding, which is frightening at a time when vaccination rates are already down in some states.
At a time when life expectancy in the US has declined for the first time in decades, chronic diseases are affecting millions of Americans, and we are facing the risk of a new pandemic, America could use a strong public health force more than ever. Instead, Republicans are hoping to weaken public health.
Back in January, Belluz trashed Dr. Daniel Neides of the Cleveland Clinic for his dangerous, “anti-vaccine” views.
By the way, the "new pandemic" Belluz refers to in her current article is bird flu. (Mar. 3, 2017)
Belluz authored a resounding denial of a vaccine/autism link in the face of the possibility of a federal commission to look into the workings of the CDC, also back in January.
Rather than write about what's going on regarding vaccine safety, she labels all dissenters as "anti-vaccine." According to her, Kennedy and De Niro are "anti-vaccine crackpots" and exempting parents scare her. (Feb. 15, 2017)
Belluz has covered other diseases and their vaccines. She wrote about Ebola. (Dec 22, 2016)
Belluz supports CDC head Tom Frieden went it comes to vaccine safety (and has warned us about Donald Trump and Robert Kennedy, Jr.'s vaccine views). (Jan 16, 2017)
During the campaign, (Sept 16, 2015) Belluz attacked Trump for linking vaccines to autism.
Belluz has written lots and lots on vaccines and all of it is pro-industry/pro-CDC. She thinks every vaccine is good for us.
MY QUESTION FOR BELLUZ: In your recent story you wrote, "At a time when life expectancy in the US has declined for the first time in decades, chronic diseases are affecting millions of Americans, ..."
While you're worried about some kind of pandemic, you also point out that Americans are getting sicker and sicker, and our children may not live as long as we do. That is a pretty serious situation. What's the CDC doing about it? Are you aware that kids today are the sickest in history? We have a bloated vaccine schedule which many feel is a massive attack on a normal immune system. No one has ever looked into this, so I’m sure officials will say there is no link, but the simple truth is, as we vax and vax and vax, our kids get sicker, and sicker, and sicker.
Anne Dachel is Media Editor for Age of Autism.