Bloomington Alternative On "Poisoned Profits" By Philip and Alice Shabecoff
Dr. Sears, Dr. Wakefield and TACA at Autism One

The Difference Between You and Me

Night and day Managing Editor's Note: Meet Julie Obradovic at Autism One this weekend.

By Julie Obradovic

I am growing increasingly tired of the real reasons there is such controversy regarding vaccines and Autism being misconstrued to make me look pathetic. Alison Singer's attempted explanation at Yale earlier this month (HERE) is a perfect example.

Contrary to what she suggests, our differences are not due to the internet. They are not due to desperation or the traumatization of having a child with Autism coupled with the need to blame someone. They are not due the media or the anti-establishment-toxic-earth movement. They are not due to the dismissive attitude of society and physicians who for years believed bad parenting was to blame.They are not due to an inability to simply accept clear science. They are not due to lack of an education or ability to think rationally. They are not due to being taken advantage of. They are not due to the cult of celebrity.

Wrong. Sorry. Not even close.

Turns out, the real difference is not quite so superficial and insulting. It is simply this:

1. You believe the government (the Department of Health and Human Services) has the legally protected right to research, develop, patent, license, supervise, judge, approve, recommend, mandate, and profit from a product (vaccines) that they produce in partnership with a private entity (the pharmaceutical industry). You further believe they have the right to simultaneously oversee the quality, safety and efficacy of this product, and that they objectively do so. You even further believe that they have the right to fund and conduct studies used to defend their product and policy in a court that they serve as judge and jury over in the event you are harmed by it; and moreover, that if they do find in your favor, they have the right to award you compensation at their discretion using money that was secured by a tax you paid on the product when you purchased it and/or were mandated to use it. And finally, you believe this should be protected by law; that neither the government nor the private entity should be held criminally or financially responsible for negligence in the event it maims or kills you.

I don't.

This system only exits because of flawed legislation that did not foresee its unintended consequences, failing to craft the specific language necessary to address the context in which it was enacted. No way, no how, is this American, and it is my deepest belief that the only reason it continues in practice today is that the American public simply doesn't know about it. I would even go so far as to suggest our own legislators don't know about it. We were founded on a system of checks and balances precisely because we know that power and money corrupts, and yet have created a system in the name of public health that allows it to happen under legal protection, a system that generates billions of dollars in profit. Essential, independent science simply cannot exist under this umbrella, nor can truly independent oversight. The legislation needs to be amended; the system needs to be corrected; and the mandates need to be lifted. Then and only then will we have any hope of finding the truth and truly protecting the public's health.

2. You believe the only protection the consumer needs to be afforded in the aforementioned situation is trust. People should simply trust that those given such enormous power and protection are honorable, ethical, and responsible human beings with families of their own who would never abuse it or put profit over safety primarily because they are smart, went to prestigious medical institutions, and are at the top of their field. You do trust them. And you trust that there are just too many of them involved to all be bad, somehow making the system safe from corruption based on numbers. This is the one point people rely on to debunk the "conspiracy theorists".

I don't.

First of all, trust is earned. So is respect. I don't care what letters you have after your name. You're smart? Great. So am I. I'm not impressed, nor am I intimidated. Smart doesn't mean ethical. And some of the smartest people I know are also those with the least common sense.

Second of all, the revolving door between the private sector and those charged with protecting the public's health is shocking, the conflicts of interest staggering. One needs only look  to see some of these "trustworthy" individuals involved in such conflicting roles. When they leave public service, they either go to work for the sector they were just regulating, or they go and teach the private sector how to work the system. And then there's Paul Thorsen, a paid CDC researcher who participated in key scientific studies regarding vaccines and Autism who is now under investigation for allegedly stealing millions of dollars from the very institution in which he performed his research. Behavior such as this is not trustworthy. It may or may not be criminal, but it is not responsible and does not instill any confidence in me what-so-ever that they do indeed have my child's best interest at heart. Sorry, it doesn't.

And third of all, there are not as many people involved as everyone would like to think. There are only a handful of appointed leaders and researchers (who operate amid atrocious conflicts of interest) with a tremendous amount of responsibility: to lead the entire medical community, to protect the public at large, to oversee the safety and efficacy of the very vaccines they need to ensure are used, and to protect their policies (aka, themselves). As we are witnessing, it is not possible to serve all of these roles simultaneously. Further, these leaders cooperate with one another under the same umbrella of protection, funneling down their policy recommendations using science they control (deciding who will research what, with what funds from whom). Truly all it takes to generate desired outcomes that become widely accepted is to perform less than adequate safety studies, to fund selective science that can come to no other conclusion than what is desired, or to simply ask researchers to manipulate the data for them when it doesn't.

This culture of corruption in the scientific community is not a product of fantasy; it is a sad reality society is becoming increasingly aware of as more and more investigations are launched. Fake medical journals. Phony research. We hear about this everyday.

In the case of Thimerosal, the evidence points to the same: charging one man with finding potentially the worst man-made medical mistake of all time, a mistake his leadership would be held accountable for with financial, criminal and foreign policy consequences beyond comprehension; using email correspondence to communicate with supervisors about the troubling findings; calling a private meeting with an elite group to discuss them and what to do next; taking 3 more years to finally publish the findings; going from clear statistical significance to dumbfounded ignorance after manipulating the data; locking up the original data sets to prevent them from being independently verified (possibly destroying them, a felony as they are tax payer funded); using a neutral study and a ridiculous one from Denmark to exonerate themselves; and then calling upon the IOM to regurgitate their findings, as they freely admit in their words they will .

Dr. McCormick:...."[CDC] wants us to declare, well, these things are pretty safe on a population basis." (p.33)

Dr. Stratton:..."The point of no return, the line we will not cross in public policy is pull the vaccine, change the schedule. We could say it is time to revisit this, but we would never recommend that level. Even recommending research is recommendations for policy. We wouldn't say compensate, we wouldn't say pull the vaccine, we wouldn't say stop the program." (p.74)

Dr. McCormick..."we are not ever going to come down that [Autism] is a true side effect..."(p.97)

You are welcome to believe this is all a big misunderstanding, quote mining, or business as usual that doesn't implicate any wrongdoing; just don't ask me to. And do not ask me to trust and excuse this behavior to such depths that I fail to investigate the potential of their actions partaking in the demise of my child's health. Her medical history speaks volumes about their trustworthiness and concern for her safety.

4. You believe all of this is an acceptable situation that should be upheld by law in order to protect the greater good, and that as good citizens, we all should, too.

I don't.

As good citizens we should be outraged, not to mention ashamed of ourselves for being so intimidated by infectious disease and the pharmaceutical companies that promise to protect us from it that we are willing to so easily give up our rights and be at their mercy. To parrot Benjamin Franklin, those who sacrifice liberty to gain safety have neither.

5. You believe the science funded and conducted by the DHHS, pharmaceutical companies, vaccine patent holders and government witnesses (there exists no widely accepted study without this level of participation and conflict) thus far on the potential role between vaccines and the onset of Autism Spectrum Disorder and other health outcomes (for which they will be held accountable) is objective and adequate as it stands right now in both quantity and quality to dismiss a link between the two.

I don't.

There is not enough space in this article to explain why, but a detailed explanation can be found through the series of articles I wrote here at Age of Autism on the 14 Studies. I've read, analyzed and presented every single study multiple times. What you call clear science, I call crap. And no, I'm not willing to accept crap when it comes to my child.

5. You believe everything about Autism is a coincidence: the dramatic rise in incidence; the parallel increase in vaccinations given at the same time; the similarities to mercury poisoning; the ratio of boys to girls; the identification of this new disorder in 1943; the timing of the onset of symptoms; the anecdotal evidence of parents; the original CDC findings; the recovery of children who are treated medically; and more.

I don't.

Science is rooted in observation, and yet, every observation here listed is casually tossed aside as a cosmic lining up of the stars. There is nothing scientific about calling all of this coincidence and explaining it away with unproven excuses (see your list in the second paragraph)…and crap.

6. You believe studying 1 ingredient of more than 50 and 1 injection of more than 20 (over 36 vaccines in all) in the first 2 years of life qualifies as a thorough investigation of a potential link between Autism and vaccines, and further that the conflicts of those conducting those studies are irrelevant.

I don't.

This is not even up for debate. The inadequacy of what has been studied speaks for itself, and rather than fairly address it, you choose to side with someone who calls it, "moving the goal posts" by demanding further investigation. This is not moving the goal posts; it's finally identifying the end zone. Not only are the studies that have been conducted thus far inadequate to exonerate those 2 things, they haven't even come close to addressing the exponential factors that could be correlated or causal, such as cumulative dosing, timing, medications, susceptibilities and more. For crying out loud, the most basic of studies, one that uses a control group, hasn't even been done.

7. You believe it is not only safe, but necessary to maintain and promote the current recommended childhood vaccination schedule in spite of the fact that it has never been tested for safety in or out of the context of the real world setting in which it is applied (with multiple vaccinations being administered at once).

I don't.

This is what you call a clear scientific experiment. It should be presented that way to parents.

8. You believe epidemiology is acceptable to rule out causation (as the biological investigations we have thus far are so weak and limited it is impossible to exonerate either Thimerosal or the MMR from them).

I don't.

Epidemiology in fact, can never rule out causation and at best only points in the direction of correlation if the right questions are asked, like say, is there a different rate of Autism among those who are vaccinated and those who are not, or is there a difference in health outcomes among those who received no thimerosal and those who received the most possible at varying ages, or what's the effect of all kinds of mercury exposure on a baby. It is a highly manipulated form of science that is terribly unreliable for finding susceptible populations, precisely what we are trying to find in the case of Autism.

9. You believe a man who has never treated a patient with Autism is qualified to write a book and be a spokesperson for the medical community about Autism, emphatically reassuring the world what doesn't cause it: the very product that has made him rich. You also trust him so much that you have chosen to partner with him in the formation of a foundation for which you do public speaking (reassuring vaccine manufacturers who sponsor you their product is safe and you are on their side), a foundation that in its mission statement claims to investigate all potential causes of Autism, except vaccines.

I don't.

Anyone who could so confidently proclaim that the necessary science to investigate this issue has not only been done, but has been done objectively, asking the relevant questions in both quantity and quality to come to the conclusion that not only is there no connection, but that no further study is needed, insulting parents who believe otherwise...well, that's not somebody I could work with. And that's not a position anyone, regardless of what they think about the possible connection, can honestly and responsibly come to based on the evidence we have today.

We can agree to disagree, Ms. Singer, we really can. I can respect those who don't see eye-to-eye with me. But I beg of you, can you please have the decency to present the reason why we disagree accurately?

You believe the system is structured to find the answer objectively, and that the current science we have is adequate, unbiased, and thorough enough to do so.

The difference between you and me?

I don't.

Julie Obradovic is a Contributing Editor to Age of Autism.




You should really research all the infectious diseases that vaccines are supposed to prevent. Then you'll find out that your child is NOT at all at risk of dying from Rubella. This innocuous childhood disease is only dangerous to an unborn fetus of a pregnant woman who lacks immunity to Rubella. Lifelong immunity to Rubella is usually conferred by a single exposure to the virus. Most females used to get Rubella as children, which served to protect their future unborn children.


"Thanks to modern medicine, my children will not die of whooping cough, diptheria, tetanus, mumps, rubella. They will not go deaf or become infertile from measles. Because I have protected them.

And I am proud of that fact. Because I understand how science works."

Thanks to the special interests behind the application of modern medicine, some unfortunate children will have their lives ruined. I am not proud of that fact. Because I understand how politics works.

Einstein once said that science is a wonderful thing, as long as you don't have to make your living at it (paraphrasing a bit...). Mix science and politics and you have a runaway train. As long as you get to ride you can't see if some poor kid got tossed on the tracks.

Vaccines kill some kids. Perhaps not many. Anything more than zero is nothing to be proud of.

Julie Obradovic

Hi Paul,

According to the 2007 CDC recommended vaccination schedule, a child is supposed to receive this many injections by age 2:

HepB 3 (possibly 4)
Rotavirus 3
DTaP 4
Hib 3 (possibly 4)
Flu 2
Varicella 1
Hep A 2

This total is actually 26-28 (if the 2 extra doses of HepB and Hib are given), but because there are brands that combine HepB/Hib for example, in addition to the fact birthdate affects the possible number of flu shots, I chose the lower number of 20 in my article.

For verification, you should check the CDCs website. I hope this helps.


michael framson

Paul, here's the recommended vaccination schedule for Oregon

There are 21 injections, 3 orals, 14 bacterial and viral diseases.

How do you define an uncontrolled, unscientific experiment on mankind.......THE RECOMMENDED VACCINATION SCHEDULE.

How do you define "doctors lining up to stick things in babies without regard for the consequences," THE RECOMMENDED VACCINATION SCHEDULE.

Calling a spade a spade.

Cynthia Cournoyer

"Like doctors are lining up to stick things in babies without regard for the consequences."

This strikes at the heart of Julie's article. The consequences of owning up to what is going on would be so horrible that it is unthinkable. The consequences of the truth in this matter would change our society so immensely that people can't even begin to entertain the idea that we could harm a baby. To protect the babies, we must think the unthinkable.

Paul Smith

I don't think it is me that is confusing the number of vaccinations/injections but the author of this piece.

I quote.

"You believe studying 1 ingredient of more than 50 and 1 injection of more than 20 (over 36 vaccines in all) in the first 2 years of life..."

1 ingredient in 50+
1 injection in 20+.

It's not the number of vaccinations or the ingredients within them I'm questioning but the statistics given on the number of actual injections given before 2.

I think the number of injections has been exaggerated for effect to make the vaccine schedule seem more alarming than it actually is.
Like doctors are lining up to stick things in babies without regard for the consequences.

John Stone


We don't have an identical schedule in the UK (for instance, no Hep B or chicken-pox vaccines), however, you may be confusing the number of shots with the number vaccines - and of course multi-vacs are a means of denying choice. Actually, in the UK we now have 19 vaccines by 4 months including 7 at 4 months, and 21 by 12 months and 25 by 13 months.

John Stone, UK Editor

Paul Smith

How do you arrive at an injection number of 20+ before being 2 years old please?
This seems like scare-mongering to me and doesn't relate to the actual vaccine schedule I have seen.

My 14 month old daughter has just had her last vaccinations until she goes to school in 3-4 years (one of which was the dreaded first MMR one no less!).

I would have to check for definite but I'd put her total number of actual injections given so far in the region of 8-10 (at the most).

Which of course doesn't tally with your 20+.

I'm in the UK. My daughter has had the standard vaccine schedule advised by doctors and government.

If 20+ is accurate why does the American system need to give double the injections of the UK protocol?


Vaccines are good,though somethings are not safe enough. We since we used it and went thru HIN1, I believe that we can invent the right vaccines for our human being.


Mara sounds like just the type of consumer that advertisers love to leverage. Play to that mothering instinct to protect, their need to feel socially superior, and absolve them of responsibility for actually investigating the substances injected into their children. Perception vs. reality.

Sounds just like me a decade ago, and countless-hours-of-reading ago... even though I'd spent time in an ad agency library with books on consumer behavior, like "Subliminal Seduction." It's a slick sell that taps into primal fears.

Any other consumer product has a warranty. Product complaints are investigated. With vaccines, most adverse events are ignored, denied, or cherry-picked -- guaranteeing that product improvements take years, or never happen.

Those who bray "just a coincidence" merely spotlight their intellectual laziness, ethical void, and unscientific unwillingness to look at inconvenient posits that forbode unpopular and unprofitable conclusions.

michael framson

Thanks Julie for illuminating once again, the profound differences between "them" and "us." We know too much to buy the garbage "they" keep trying to sell.

Jorge, you would benefit from a great deal more reading. You can start by reading Barbara Loe Fisher's 1991 vaccination expose "A Shot in the Dark." Like I we're not buying their crap anymore.

John Stone

Mr Denver's point while scarcely original is deeply offensive and malicious. The point about this game is that all vaccine injuries are inherently deniable and the institutions demand that parents who are not armed to do this - however educated or qualified - need to prove it (and they have to be able to devote time and energy which they barely have). In other words the system is inherently warped, as - in my opinion - is Mr Denver and his pal Signor DeForce (supposing they are different people).

Jorge DeForce

--sure, autism can happen by not vaccinating, if you have just the right amount of oxidative stress or infectious load...or can brew up autism just fine...vaccines just put that all in one vile for convenience of damage.

Ok, now I'm a little confused. I get that people perceive a correlation between "the jab" and onset of autism but now you're saying that it's actually dozens (perhaps hundreds of variables). I might have some faith that people are accurately reporting the timeline (within a certain error) between exposure to a vaccine and the onset of autism. However if it is as multi-factorial as you seem to be saying - I admit that makes it considerably less likely that what is being observed is strongly correlated.



That is the whole point! I think most folks here know that all the anecdotes in the world don't add up to proof--but they most certainly do add up to an indication that the possibility of a connection needs real and serious, unbiased study--which has so far NOT been done--and officials apparently just refuse to do it.

The only research that can settle this dispute is a vaccinated versus never vaccinated study, and/or possibly a study of a significant number of monkeys subjected to the same vaccine schedule (with the same vaccine formulations) as we are subjecting our children to.

Given the complete absence of either of these studies, the folks who say the "science has spoken" and "correlation does not equal causation" are just blowing smoke--and feeding the fires of doubt and distrust because it is human nature to trust one's own eyes, and eyewitness reports, over potentially fudged epidemiological statistics and "experts" who weren't, and still aren't, there observing and living with these kids--before regression, after regression, and in many cases during and after some degree of recovery.

The fact that many of these so-called "experts" have been caught in outright lies, have outrageous conflicts of interest, are often ill-informed and unknowledgeable about many aspects of the controversy, and are continually dismissive of parental eye-witness reports of everything from vaccine reactions to behavioral changes in response to "unproven" treatments certainly doesn't create an environment of trust.

If you can't trust a person to tell the truth and treat you with respect, then you are hardly going to be willing to trust that person's advice regarding any decision that could affect the health and well-being of your children.

I don't think anyone has asked the CDC or anyone else to accept "all the anecdotes" as proof of anything. When folks here ask, "how can you ignore?" they are saying, how can you NOT look seriously and honestly at the question of how vaccines affect children's health, when there are so many observations suggesting there is a possibly huge problem.

Their answer is, "we have."

Folks here are saying, "No, you haven't. You haven't researched this question honestly, openly, fairly, or seriously--by any stretch of the imagination."

And contrary to the skepticos' assertions that only illiterate or ignorant folks could think the science isn't done--the people saying that the research has NOT been done actually include many well-educated folks with college degrees--in science!

Theresa O

Driving down the Jersey Turnpike, I sometimes see billboards for DUI attorneys. I often wonder who they are. Now I know: John Denver! "Your honor, although my client's consumption of five tequila shots my client's hitting a pedestrian with his car occurred in rapid succession, there is no causal relationship. It's just a coincidence."

another parent

Mara said : "Thanks to modern medicine, my children will not die of whooping cough, diptheria, tetanus, mumps, rubella. They will not go deaf or become infertile from measles. Because I have protected them.

And I am proud of that fact."

Protected them how? Dang she left out the best part!

If she means she protected them with witches spell or a talisman then I want in. If she means a vaccine then she should be arrested for child abuse, inflicting pain and allowing an unnecessary medical procedure, not to mention the possible long term injury she could have caused.

You leave a child in the unlocked car while you go smoke crack with your john in a sleazy motel, whether or not the child suffers any injury you will be arrested and your child taken from you, you injecting bottles of toxins into your child is the same thing.

Theresa O

Jorge DeForce and John Denver--maybe you'd be right, except that they're not just anecdotes. Hannah Poling's vaccine injury, for example, was published in the Journal of Child Neurology (a peer-reviewed journal) and won her compensation in court. It's more than a little disingenuous to claim that every vaccine injury reported by a parent is merely an anecdote with no causal relationship.

kathy blanco

sure, autism can happen by not vaccinating, if you have just the right amount of oxidative stress or infectious load...or can brew up autism just fine...vaccines just put that all in one vile for convenience of damage.

Jorge DeForce

I think John Denver is making the very salient point that there is a chance that all the perception that all of the vaccine caused autism injuries reported are coincidence.

Put it another way. How does the specific argument "How can you ignore all the anecdotes?" for vaccine cause autism differ from the "How can you ignore all the anecdotes?" for alien abduction.

This is not, a troll by any means.


Great post! You know you're doing well when skeptics take notice and issue personal attacks... you are growing your fan base with your logical, succinct position. Expect to get some more mud slung at you, and wear it with pride.


John Denver;
Are you making fun of some of the stories about vaccine injuries here? Are you making our stories into something simple without looking at what we are saying?
If not please explain further.
If so you are a troll.

Jonh Denver

I hear you sister. Those guys are so wrong. I remember that my kids were very healthy, then some doctor in black I met during a party reminded me I should vaccinate my kids. Two months later, my oldest son had a soccer injury. Coincidentally, the nurse that cured his injury turned out to be a health worker who received money for that endeavor.

I spent countless nights awake regretting and crying knowing that if I didn't get my kids vaccinated, my son wouldn't have gotten hurt. I think doctors are all about money and don't care about about kids being in pain.

Jorge DeForce

--I ask you, are you brave enough to re-read Julie’s article with an open mind?

I suppose what I don't see is much of merit in the article. Most of it doesn't even qualify as an argument. More kind of just a bunch of assertions - with virtually no links to or how or why they are true - and no reason why all other assertions are rejected.

In fact considering how much "trust" is a theme in her posting I'd say that she is asking for considerably more trust into the process by which she decides vaccines get developed, approved, promoted, etc... than doctors, government and 'Big Pharma'


Twyla - excellent post . . .


"They will also not develop autism. Because I have protected them, by avoiding all vaccines."

@Kristina, too bad autism isn't caused by vaccines.

Alison MacNeil

Julie O.- I'm a big, big fan. I hope you will keep going and going on this. Your writing is so clear and powerful. I am so glad your voice is out there expressing my thoughts exactly (well my thoughts if I could articulate them as well as you do...)Brilliant piece. Thank you

LJ Goes



Vaccines or no vaccines, my children will not die of whooping cough, diptheria, tetanus, mumps, rubella. They will not go deaf or become infertile from measles. They will also not develop autism. Because I have protected them, by avoiding all vaccines.

And I am proud of that fact. Because I understand how science works. And I am grateful to the people who warned me and got me looking into the science before I had kids.

Northern Girl

its all about everyones perspective. if i hadn't had a son in 1994 I would probably think you were all crazy too, but something happens when you draw lucky 1 out of 150.
my older NT kids (well if you count bipolar, addict as NT-- he is smart as shit) believe if their brother hadn't been born they would of not been aware of this discussion and vaccinated their own children into the spectrum. we are healthier for being part of this community.
Bendetta stay strong you know the truth about your daughter. Be her advocate and get her the help she needs. bipolar is all about inflamed glutamate receptors got to calm them down.


Thanks, Northern Girl for telling me this;

I am so very sorry for both of your children and your pain.

But at the same time, I see I am not the only one.


Hes right your right she,s right no no no im right i saw my son fall with my very eye,s dont treat me like i am an idiot i am not i am an informed responsible parent i suffer every day knowing that if i had not vaccinated my son he would not have fallen , but my god he fell and i am here to keep him upright , what will he do without his mother this thought terrifies me every day of my life , we will get what we need for our children , because our love knows no fear , thankyou Julie for this piece


Michael Drejer,

I can understand your desire to get comfort from your current situation. However, these parents here are very mad because they watched their kids go from being completely healthy and vibrant to very sick and faced with a lot of struggle in just about every area of their lives.

Maybe you're not interested in looking at what happened, but we are because we do not want any other children to get sick. My kids, for instance, are fully vaccinated so I really have absolutely nothing to gain when I say that my oldest child has been injured by vaccines. I have nothing to gain by asking the government to at least go back to the vaccine schedule that we had in the early 1980's.

Also, once the mainstream medical community can realize that it is toxins that trigger most cases of Autism (genetics play a part, of course in our ability to detoxify) then they will focus more research on preventing Autism whilst treating the Autism that is already out there with a great deal of efficacy. This may not be pleasant for you to hear, but as parents, we will not stop fighting for our kids. Never ever. So, I would urge you to seek the help of a DAN doctor or, if you are perfectly happy with the way things are, maybe you should stay away from discussions about causes of Autism.

I really hope you are able to do what is best for you while accepting that we must do what is best for our children and for future generations.

Finally, to say that Autism existed before vaccines were invented is quite narrow minded, in my opinion. The cases of Autism were extremely rare and they are growing exponentially at a rate that is related to increases in vaccines and toxins in our environment. Yes, it is possible to get Autism without any vaccines at all, but we must consider what else the individual has been exposed to and what their ability to detoxify is like.

Also, vaccines aren't only responsible for Autism...they are also responsible for an alarming growth in Asthma (number one killer of children), allergies, adhd, learning disabilities, and possibly other conditions. Should we accept those as well? I hope not.

I agree that we are not having any calm discussions on the matter....there is a lot of anger and many underlying issues for that anger. I would love for us to have the top doctors and scientists get together and debate this publicly without any editing by the biased media, but that's not going to happen any time soon because there is just too much money on the line and there are a few select people who have too much to lose so they'll stop this from happening for as long as they can.

Northern Girl

My older son is a drug addict and bipolar. if not for being born in 1988 he would of probably been autistic.
The genetics are the same the trigger just not as strong as his younger bro born in early 90's
I treat them the same. Their spect scans were almost identical.
I have tho about returning to nursing but kno it is not possible due to the vax requirements. Its like a police state in the hospitals now.


Do you see what we are up againest.

Maria's attitude is the norm. It really is. she vaccinates and all is fine (really I am not sure why she is even here on this blog?) And so she goes blissfully down the road never even seeing the accidents around her. And if she did, she would not think for a second it could happen to her. This is how the house (CDC) stakes the odds and gets people to play. Where was it we read 1 out of 3 kids are sick in the US. The Maria's of the world think they will always win - they think the odds are in their favor. 1 out of 91; or 1 out of 5 and the Maria's would still think they could beat the odds.


Mara, the question of whether the risks of our current vaccine program are greater than the risks of the diseases cannot be answered so simply. There are two sides to this equation, and the current approach seems to be to keep piling on more and more vaccines at a very early age even where the risks of some of the diseases (e.g. Hep B at birth) are very small, and with no regard for the risks of the vaccines. The risks of the diseases are being exaggerated, while the risks of the vaccines are being swept under the rug.

The worst case of croup any of my children ever had was after my daughter received the MMR and varicela vaccines on the same day. She had a febrile seizure a couple of days later, followed by a month of fever and coughing. But we are very lucky. She is neurotypical, unlike some children I have read about who received additional vaccines at the same time (such as DPT or flu shot w. thimerosal) or who had greater susceptibility to vaccine adverse events.

It’s not enough to just say “diseases are dangerous”. We have a generation of children affected by very high rates of serious lifelong immune system related conditions such as asthma, severe allergies, bipolar, ADHD, autism, and type 1 diabetes resulting from the immune system attacking the pancreas. Our government refuses to do a study comparing health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Our government is not studying vaccine injured children to better understand susceptibility, prevention, and treatment of vaccine injuries.

And, yes, autism is related to immune system dysregulation, as shown by a growing body of published peer reviewed research.

I grew up before most vaccines existed. My generation was vaxed for polio and smallpox, but we all came down with full blown cases of measles, mumps, chicken pox, flu, German measles, and whooping cough. I never knew anyone who suffered lasting effects of these illnesses. Yes, there are rare serious events, but not enough to justify cavalier disregard of vaccine injuries.

Mara, please read Mark Blaxill and Barbara Loe Fisher’s series of articles beginning here
You have a lot to learn.

Mara, I am quite sure that Julie is “brave enough to accept any criticism”, but your comment actually does not contain any criticism of her article, only the blanket statement that whooping cough is bad and you are protecting your kids with vaccines. Your concluding statement, “Because I understand how science works” shows that you actually do not understand the science of which we speak. You are looking at things in a totally simplistic way: diseases are bad, therefore vaccines are good – in any combination, even with untested neurotoxic ingredients such as aluminum -- even two dozen vaccines before the age of two, which is unprecedented in human history. I ask you, are you brave enough to re-read Julie’s article with an open mind? Because clearly you don’t get it. You actually don’t understand that which you are feeling so sure of.

Cynthia Cournoyer

I know of a family whose 2 vaccinated children got worse cases of whooping cough than the two unvaccinated children in the same family. The mother did not feel like she protected them from whooping cough.

Don't forget, vaccination (small pox) is more than 200 years old. So, very old cases of autism are not necessarily free of vaccine suspicion.

Autism may be here to stay, but can we please put it back to 1 in 10,000 instead of one in ~60?

So if autism can be triggered by "environmental factors" beyond our control, what if we are injecting those environmental factors? Can we please stop that, at least?

Sallie Elkordy

My interview with Dr. Wakefield:

Sallie Elkordy

This article is superb.


Proposed Legislation: “ALL VACCINES ARE BANNED”

My name is Sallie Elkordy and as a concerned parent, I have written legislation in response to constant legislative proposals to increase the number of Vaccines required of children (one NY State Assemblyman even had the gall to proposed 70 required vaccines for girls and 67 for boys up through the age of 18). None of us have the resources to combat each and every legislator's proposal, which may threaten our children's wellbeing, HENCE:

Proposed Legislation: "ALL VACCINES ARE BANNED" unless they can be scientifically proven to meet these two criteria: FIRST: DO NO HARM and SECOND: ARE BENEFICIAL TO THE RECIPIENT'S HEALTH. The burden of proof will now rest on the shoulders of those who would propose vaccines. Research to this end, must be conducted by those who do not stand to profit from the outcome.
Were these; the above criteria, established for the H1N1 Vaccine (Swine Flu Vaccine), it could never have even been offered (nor administered, nor mandated). Nor could Gardasil (HPV) have been offered or administered.

My view on vaccine choice: Vaccine "Choice" presumes that you are making an educated assessment as to whether the vaccine(s) offered are good for you or your children. Education is not enough, because it can't compete with the one-sided message the Main Stream Media is flooding the airwaves with. There will always be people who accept vaccines because of this; thereby, potentially paying a huge price for their ignorance. These ignorant people and their children must also be protected. Doctors cannot be relied upon to present a balanced perspective on these vaccines either (unfortunate, but true), so "choice" in it's truest sense, in the case of Vaccines, is not an accurate representation of the situation as it exists.

Note: Please refer to the National Vaccine Information Center ( for questions you may have about vaccines. This organization exists to inform parents and the general public about vaccine safety. Visit also Truth About Gardasil (.org), for the alarming realities of the HPV vaccine, currently being promoted for and injected into our daughters.


To your health!,
Sallie O. Elkordy

My daughter, Mary Elizabeth Elkordy and I have co-founded the PEACE PARTY (all caps, face book group), a N. Y. State Political Committee. Our mission: Peace, Human Rights, Civil Liberties and Respect. A Gubernatorial candidate will be running in NY and possibly elsewhere in an effort to gain ballot access for the 2012 Presidential elections. Redirecting the course that our country is headed, is the basic tenet of our actions. Please JOIN US!

Jill Fenech

Say it sister. Say it. Amen.


There's another difference between Alison Singer and you.

Unlike you, Singer has little regard for the feelings of others and manipulates them in order to get what she desires. She has no trouble lying or violating the rights of other people in order to achieve her goals and sees her self-serving behavior as permissible. On the surface, she can be very charming and is adept at manipulating others. She's quite good at conning people and shows no remorse. She only has contempt for others' feelings of distress.

The above description also fits the profile of a sociopath. Come to think of it, it also sounds a lot like Paul Offit. But maybe it's all just "coincidence."


Are you brave enough to accept any criticism, or only praise?

Julie, I'm a mother just like you. I have two wonderful darling children who are the light of my life. Both of them had croup this week, which (thanks to modern medicine) is a minor annoying illness.

But as I watched them cough and wheeze, I thought about what it would be like to watch them suffer with whooping cough. Have you ever seen that? I have. It's horrible.

Thanks to modern medicine, my children will not die of whooping cough, diptheria, tetanus, mumps, rubella. They will not go deaf or become infertile from measles. Because I have protected them.

And I am proud of that fact. Because I understand how science works.

Michael Drejer

You want the truth, here's the truth!

You can find arguements on both sides telling the other side is wrong and flawed. And no one listens to the other side, people believe what they want to believe and that's not going to change, especially not when people get agitated.

Fact: autism existed before vaccines were invented. So if vaccine hadn't been invented yet, what caused autism then?

And while people continue to throw mud at each other, those autistic children grow up... what then? There is no cure, and the people who were supposed to help them are fighting a battle where no one is listening to what the other side says. Pointless? very much.

You don't? That's a pretty negative attitude.

Personally, I do.
I do believe that autism is here to stay.
I do believe that if given the proper support and understanding, people with autism can learn to live decent lives, without being looked upon as someone that's damaged.
I do believe that people with autism can contribute to society in meaningful and dignified ways.
I do believe there is more than one factor that causes as diverse a condition as autism.
I do believe we will achieve a lot more by working together instead of trying to discredit other people. In the end we all want the same (I hope), to better understand autism and give the people and families affected by it ways to make the most of it.

It hurts me deeply to read all the angry posts around the internet, on both sides, about a condition which I too am affected by. It has been a part of me my whole life, but I'm not interested in knowing why, I really needed someone to tell me it would be all right and help me understand how best to deal with it.

Bystanders get run-over too

Excellent summary. The thing is we don't see this sort of an analysis making it to main stream media. In any debate that we've seen on TV, those from the autism community (the last one was JBH, Kim and Dan on CNN/NBC? some months back?) simply get shouted down with counter arguments about them being anti-vaccine, anti-science and the usual dumbed down reasons. But then I wonder if any of the clever folk all over the blogosphere who relentlessly vilify and beat down on AoA, even if they read this, would ever question their own presumptions or stop to think beyond their reductionist arguments.

This whole issue about vaccines and children's health has become something like religion - you are either a believer ( the majority) or a non-believer (the minority -antivaxer?). The irony here is that the "believers" in this case claim that 'science' is their god (and vaccines are gift of..didn't Bill Gates say recently that vaccines are a 'miracle'?) and cannot get themselves to question it/him. Meanwhile the "non-believers" out here, are accused of being 'anti-science', 'emotional', 'irrational' and whatnot for pointing it out that same scientific method cannot lead to the truth if its not free of unethical influences, of meddling human greed, dishonesty, and fear.

The majority always wins and minority is usually right.

Theresa O

Incredible piece, Julie. Thank you for writing this.


Excellent, excellent job!!!!


Wow! This is absolutely outstanding. I'm going to send it to my Congressmen, Senators and Obama... Maybe one of them will actually listen.


Bendetta, please email me as I have some info that might be helpful to you. A of A, you have my permission to give her the email address connected to my posts. Thanks!

P. Jennings

In this article, Julie says, "Science is rooted in observation"

Maybe it SHOULD be.

Maybe it USED TO be.

But it hasn't been that way for a long time.

What is called "science" these days almost never includes observation. Certainly doctors reject it wholesale -- think about all the videos of children regressing right after getting a whole load of shots.

Certainly post-docs in labs don't use observation, they can't. They are basically "slaves" of whoever runs the lab. And if the head of the lab isn't very, very observant then how much can be lost?

The CDC can't possibly be very "science" based if the head of it, Sebelius, has NO medical or scientific background. She is a POLITICIAN.

There is no "science" is the so-called science world these days.

All of the moaning coming out of JAMA and similar sources, asking "Why doesn't the public believe science" can be answered by saying, "Because it ISN'T science."

There is no 'there' there.



MinorityView, I read that most limb amputations in Haiti were due to infections.

We'll never know how many of those diphtheria cases occurred in people who were vaccinated for it.

Cynthia Cournoyer

Great article Julie!
The difference is we care about individual children. By caring about each child and finding out how each child may not benefit from vaccines would translate into a healthier population overall.

Too horrible to imagine. That is a very strong motivation for the status quo.


on the piece where you are all supposed to get vaccinated and get your children vaccinated because if you don't...the diseases will come back...

how about if we all pause a moment and consider Haiti.

In Haiti, there wasn't a drop in vaccination. There was an earthquake. Then many people without housing and without adequate food and water. And outbreak of diphtheria. So is this disease caused by a vaccine deficiency or by lousy living conditions?

Here is an analysis of how the CDC publicists have been lying about the disease numbers, too.

If they lie about one thing, they will lie about whatever else they want to lie about.


Excellent points!!

I was thinking about the video shown by Allison Singer in which people sign a petition to do away with water simply because they don't question it and assume that it is valid and that they can trust the nice lady offering the petition at an environmental affair. This seems much more like how we accepted vaccines without question than like how parents approach biomedical treatments, with research and due diligence.


wow! excellent summary as to the issue, Julie. Alison Singer can suck it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I blogged recently that my 28 year old daughter suffered psychosis, and we discovered she has bipolar.

She probably had bipolar every since she recovered from Kawasaki's at two years old. Looking back on her childhood I saw swings in mood from just mad all day at nothing - to being in a very good enthusiatic mood. Oh and Then her teen years - deep depression at home sitting in her room only to be the life of the party with her friends at school. Nothing really inbetween.

But I was too focused on my son, his stroke, his autism, his poor fine motor skills, his speech, his social skilss; where as my daughter was at top in her class, winning awards, in the Pi beta honor society -winning the state's writting award, see how it could be missed! See how I could ignore it all while I morned my son.

Three Hep B's, two years ago caused the widening of that small crack that existed in my daughter. She took all three inspite of me telling her to just take one. Why, because she was being bullied by nursing school. Right after the third one all her joints stiffened up even worse (she was already having trouble to begin with) her blood test said high sed rates, and high C reactive proteins. To finish her off - I found out during all this - that she was bullied into taking a flu shot at her work place. They said that if she came down with the flu and did not have the shot they would not pay her sick days. Well they are giving her - her sick days now!

Now I am researching bipolar just like autism. John Hopkins University and Cleveland Clinic from biopises says the cause is --- Oh please guess;

I bet you can:

It is a mitochondria disfunction in the hippocampus region of the brain.

Diets for bipolars;

Oh please guess, I bet you can!!!

Low carb diet and stay away from sugar.

All the medicines for bipolar to keep them going into psychoisis are epileptic medicines.

My husband and my asperger son has not been understanding at all. They think she is just taking too many drugs. Well hell no!

It is not the medicines that make her think her wound in her hand might have gotten bugs in it. They had to operate on it futher by the way. They had to clean out a pocket of infection and put three big stitches in it.

It is not the medicines that make her lose track of time. Or straighten out the family's bandage basket for 8 long hours.

She is suppose to go back to work next week. She has to drive an hour to get to work. How in the hell is she suppose to do that?

My son finally understands a little more because I sat him down last night when he mentioned his sister needs to quite takeing so much medicine. I told him that this stuff she is suffering is just like his seizures. As a matter of fact she is taking the same seizure medicine that he was on 'Lamicatal" The same one he became allergic to called "Steven Johnson Syndrome"

So, I say it is also vaccines and all my neighbors and all my friends, and all the people in the hospital look at me - I know what they are all thinking:

That is right:

She is blaming the vaccines when in fact it is just bad genes.

Well it is bad genes, that showed up because of bad vaccines and bullies.


Right on, Julie! Excellent piece. I would love to see you debate Allison Singer - you'd mop the floor with her.

Chris O'Connell

Wow...this is a great summary of the vaccine - autism controversy...(I completely agree with the author. I have read most, if not all of the "scientific" studies on both sides of this debate and can come to no other conclusion). The science dismissing a link between vaccines and autism is flawed, misleading, fraudulent and corrupt. There are way too many conflicts of interest and absolutely no checks and balances in the pharmaceutical / government vaccine "business". Furthermore, safety testing is seriously lacking, if not downright negligent. The general public is becoming more and more aware of this situation. I believe that there is a revolution headed this way like a freight train, and I can't wait for it to knock down these self-serving assholes who continue to put our children at risk.



Bob Moffitt

Great comments Julie.

I have to give Alison and her cabal credit .. they have absolutely no shame.

Apparently Alison does not care that TWO
pig viruses have been found to contaminate Merck's rotavirus (Offit) vaccine and is kept on the recommended schedule because the FDA "has no evidence that pig viruses are harmful to humans". Who does Alison believe is going to serve as guinea pigs to discover if, in fact, pig viruses are harmful?


People often say that - "you think all these people are involved in a conspiracy?" No, I don't. I think, by and large, it is much less sinister than that.

Sometimes things in life, such as this, are so horrific, so devestating that some people are simply unable to entertain their possibility. They simply do not want to believe so they refuse to dig any deeper than what the few who are manipulating data tell them. Add to that the fear that the very act of questioning could contribute to an epidemic of infectious disease and you have effectively silenced geniune concern.

I think this is what is happening with Autism and vaccines.

The Danish and Vaerstratten studies, among the first that were done, were riddled with data manipulation. Later studies were Meta analysis including these. This gave the general impression of safety to the medical community, who then stopped asking questions. That was all they needed, a few rotten studies to stop the medical community from asking questions. Pediatricians could now give a sigh of belief, as they'd been hoping they had not been harming children with these vaccines. Of course, most pediatricians did not actually read all the studies, as the don't have time to read every study on pediatric health issues that is published. There's not enough time, so they just read the abstracts. You can't see the signs of glaring data manipulation if you just read the abstracts. Yet, when some people in posititions of importance actually read the studies, Former Rep. Dr. David Weldon (R-FL) and Dr. Bernadine Healy, former Director of National Institute of Health, they were horrified by what they found and spoke out.

Then the few in positions of power who know go to the media. They tell them "the studies" time and time again show no link. Of course the media doesn't evaluate the quality of the studies itself (would they even know how?). Then they are told that since they are proven safe, if the media continues to give voice to people who say their children are damaged by vaccines and and their is an epidemic due to plummeting vaccine rates it will be their fault. Nobody wants that responsibility on his or her shoulders, so media stops asking questions too. It is easier to believe people in while coats and to tell yourself hundreds of thousand of parents telling the same story do not speak from personal experience of tragedy, but merely want someone to blame.

And that is how to get so many people to unwittingly participate in your cover-up. Some truths are so horrific that nobody wants to believe them and they will look for any justification provided not to have to.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

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.


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.)