Texas High Court Hears Wakefield Appeal
SCOTUS Affirms Recovery of Attorney's Fees in Vaccine Cases Under Broad Circumstances

Did VICP former Director Geoffrey Evans Share Private Patient Medical Information with Dr. Paul Offit?

HipaaBy Lou Conte

I recently received an audiotape  of an American Academy of Pediatrics sponsored teleconference that Dr. Offit held with other physicians in November of 2008. Dr. Offit spoke on the tape spoke about the HHS decision to concede that Hannah Poling, a petitioner in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding, suffered vaccine injury leading to encephalopathy with “features of autism.” 

In the audiotape, Dr. Offit criticized the decision to compensate Hannah Poling based on information provided to him in a conversation with Dr. Geoffrey Evans.  Dr. Evans, the former Director of the Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation, is the man who ran the Division  since the inception of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in 1989 before retiring at the end of 2012. The Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation reviews the medical aspects of all petitions to the VICP and makes threshold decisions about whether to settle cases or to contest them.

Dr. Offit clearly stated that he  spoken to Dr. Evans about the case.  Dr. Evans appears to have shared confidential information about Hannah Poling’s case with Dr. Offit who then told other doctors. 

Listen to Audio File Here

(If you have difficulty with the audio file, the unofficial transcript is at the end of this post. Please note, we BLEEPED the medical diagnosis information that Dr. Offit discussed to preserve patient privacy.)

This leads me to ask the question: Did the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Fail to Protect Those “Least Able to Help Themselves”?

The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.
                                                                                                                               Abraham Lincoln on corporations

Does the pharmaceutical industry influence government to such an extent that officials in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) failed to act in the public interests?

The VICP falls under the Health Resources and Services Administration, a department under the Secretary of Health and Human Services. According to the VICP website:

The VICP was established to ensure an adequate supply of vaccines, stabilize vaccine costs, and establish and maintain an accessible and efficient forum for individuals found to be injured by certain vaccines. The VICP is a no-fault alternative to the traditional tort system for resolving vaccine injury claims that provides compensation to people found to be injured by certain vaccines. The U. S. Court of Federal Claims decides who will be paid. Three Federal government offices have a role in the VICP:

•    the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS);
•    the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ); and
•    The U.S. Court of Federal Claims (the Court).

The VICP is located in the HHS, Health Resources and Services Administration, Healthcare Systems Bureau, Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation.

As a co-author of Unanswered Questions From the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in the Pace Environmental Law Review [1], I have studied the VICP in great detail. My interest in the functioning of the VICP flows from my 29 years of working in New York’s courts.

I have been fortunate to observe many unique court programs over the years -- everything from Drug Courts to Domestic Violence Courts. This experience has afforded me some perspective on the program.

Those who have worked in the VICP report that it started with great promise but has since betrayed that promise. There are cases where federal judges have noted that the Special Masters who preside over vaccine injury hearings have a “proclivity to demean” petitioners expert witnesses. “Allowing this type of unprofessional conduct to continue has had significant adverse consequences on the Vaccine Act Program.”  (*29 - United States Court of Federal Claims, No. 07-60V, Filed: November 28, 2011, FRANK HARRIS, Parent of JORDAN HARRIS, a Minor, Petitioner, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent).

As we learned while doing the investigative work that resulted in Unanswered Questions, the program lacks transparency. Not one family reported VICP follow up on their child’s vaccine injury. After twenty-five years of deciding vaccine injury cases, the program has never described the health outcomes of those people whom it compensated.

The VICP is a black box.

Many of those critical of the VICP have concluded that the program no longer offers meaningful hope to those seeking relief for vaccine injury because of the pharmaceutical industry’s influence.
In considering this point of view, I came upon The National Foundation for Infectious Diseases. The NFID, “is a non-profit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization founded in 1973 dedicated to educating the public and healthcare professionals about the causes, treatment, and prevention of infectious diseases.”  A review of the organization’s website shows that the NFID accomplishes this mission by emphasizing vaccination.

The NFID is, according to Director Len Novick, 75% Pharma funded as stated in this email exchange with me:

12/25/2012 23:16:46

Louis Conte
Funding from Pharmaceutical companies

Dear Sirs:
Does your organization accept money from Pharmaceutical companies? If so, what percentage of your budget do these funds amount to?
L. Conte       


In response to your inquiry, NFID does apply for unrestricted educational grants from a variety of sources.  Funding to support NFID programming derived from pharmaceutical companies represents approximately 75% of revenue.

Len Novick
12/25/2012 23:16:46

The NFID supports the pharmaceutical industry, which produces vaccines. And, in return, the industry supports the NFID.  Many of the people involved in NFID-sponsored programs are government employees. What effect does pharmaceutical industry influence have on the professional ethics of government officials responsible for vaccine policy?

The last NFID Conference was held in early March 2013 and featured the organization’s annual Clinical Vaccinology Course. Vaccinology is defined, more or less, as the study of vaccine development.

On the faculty roster were Dr. Walter A. Orenstein, MD (Emory Vaccine Center), Dr. Larry J. Pickering, MD (National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) and Dr. Neal Halsey, MD (Johns Hopkins, Bloomberg School of Public Health). Many of these people have weighed in on the autism-vaccine controversy at different times, all proclaiming no link. These mainstream medical professionals from government (Pickering) and outside government (Orenstein and Halsey) receive government funding for their work. They also teach the Vaccinology course that the pharmaceutical industry underwrites.

To be fair, the faculty roster was not limited to those with government connections. Also lecturing this year was Seth Mnookin, author of The Panic Virus. Mnookin taught a 45-minute segment on “Communicating about Vaccines”.

Another presenter at this year’s Vaccinology course was Dr. Geoffrey Evans, MD, who recently retired from  the US Department of Health and Human Services. As I explained at the start of this article, he is the former Director of the Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation.  Dr. Evans is the man who ran the Division  since the inception of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in 1989 before retiring at the end of 2012. The Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation reviews the medical aspects of all petitions to the VICP and makes threshold decisions about whether to settle cases or to contest them.

In 1998, Dr. Evans co-authored an article on brain damage following MMR vaccination.[2]  Dr. Evans and the other authors used cases from the VICP in a medical outcomes study – something that Holland, Krakow, Colin and I called for in Unanswered Questions. His article Acute Encephalopathy may have been the last meaningful paper the Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation published, as its employees have not published any serious medical outcome studies on vaccine injury since. [Save one article reporting that vaccination can cause a form of shoulder injury that might require physical therapy).

The Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation reviews all cases – and case files are detailed and voluminous - that move through the VICP. Dr. Evans himself signed off on virtually all the compensation awards. It would be virtually impossible for Dr. Evans to not have  known that significant numbers of compensated vaccine injury cases featured autism. The Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation must have recognized that vaccine injuries often include autism.  This is clear from a 2009 email Mr. David Bowman of HRSA sent to journalist David Kirby regarding a VICP vaccine injury claim including autism:

“In response to your inquiry, HRSA has the following statement:

The government has never compensated, nor has it been ordered to compensate any case based on a determination that autism was actually caused by vaccines. We have compensated cases in which children exhibited an encephalopathy, or general brain disease. Encephalopathy may be accompanied by a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures.

Some children who have been compensated for vaccine injuries may have shown signs of autism before the decision to compensate, or may ultimately end up with autism or autistic symptoms, but we do not track cases on this basis.”

Mr. Bowman must have received his information on case records from the Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation, which Evans directed.

Dr. Geoffrey Evans is the man who knew.

Dr. Evans knew that autism or “autism-like symptoms” were common “sequelae” or consequences of vaccine injury. It is likely that he knew of cases of autism as a vaccine injury from the MMR-induced encephalopathy article he co-authored in 1998.

Was Dr. Evans associated with people in the pharmaceutical industry before leaving government, as he has been since?

Like many organizations, the NFID regularly honors those who uphold the values of the profession.  It gives an annual award to a scientist who has made outstanding contributions to the understanding of infectious diseases or public health. This year Paul Offit received The Maxwell Finland Award for Scientific Achievement for his outstanding work in the pediatric vaccine arena and his ongoing commitment to vaccine advocacy. Dr. Offit received the award at the same March conference that featured Dr. Evans in the Vaccinology course.

Is there any proof that Geoffrey Evans was unduly influenced by people like Dr. Offit before leaving government?  The audio file is an indication of exactly what is not supposed to happen.

Communicating confidential information about pending petitions before the VICP violates the Program’s rules and basic notions of due process.   Dr. Evans gave Dr. Offit privileged access. It should be noted that the authors of Unanswered Questions were not afforded the kind of access that Evans gave Offit. We were advised that we would need $750,00.00 to fund copying and labor costs and that we would have to wait five years for redacted information. All Dr. Offit had to do was pick up the phone. 

Now, years later, we find out that Dr. Evans is an instructor in the clinical Vaccinology course run by an organization honoring Dr. Offit, that receives most of its funding from pharmaceutical corporations.

Dr. Evans’ career in government should have been devoted to studying vaccine injury – as he did in his 1998 paper – and making sure that its victims were compensated for the harm they suffered while serving the greater good. Dr. Evans must have known that “autism-like symptoms” were common outcomes associated with vaccine injury.  Yet, for all of these years, Dr. Evans never reported this critical finding.

When Holland, Krakow, Colin, and I investigated the compensated cases for Unanswered Questions, we had access to a small percentage of the approximately 1,400 cases compensated cases of vaccine injury including brain damage and seizures. Yet we found autism to be a common vaccine injury outcome among those families we were able to contact from available public records.

When the VICP created the Omnibus Autism Proceeding in 2002 to aggregate 5,000 cases of vaccine-induced autism, HHS did not advise petitioners or the public that HHS knew that vaccine injury was closely correlated with autism.  The Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation and even the Special Masters who presided over the Omnibus Proceeding acted as though autism was something entirely new to the Program.

It wasn’t. Unanswered Questions showed unequivocally that the VICP had been compensating children for vaccine injuries that included autism for over twenty years. David Bowman’s email on vaccines and autism reveals this understanding.

If Dr. Evans or others at HHS dispute the close correlation of vaccine injury and autism that we found in Unanswered Questions, we renew our request that the Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation open its books.  As we recommended in Unanswered Questions, a complete and independent assessment of the health outcomes of those people compensated for vaccine injuries is critical and long overdue. It is time to get a complete, unbiased picture of what vaccine injury looks like.

Did Dr. Evans, a government employee in the Department of Health and Human Services, ever consider that the information in his files at the Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation could spare a nation’s children now reeling from an autism rate of 1 in 50? We don’t know. But consider the mission of HHS:

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is the United States government’s principal agency for protecting the health of all Americans and providing essential human services, especially for those who are least able to help themselves.

That sounds like  Dr. Evans was obliged to acknowledge the truth about what he observed as vaccine injury. Imagine if Dr. Evans had reported that there was a strong correlation between vaccine injury and autism fifteen years ago. 

Why didn’t he?

Could it be because the pharmaceutical industry has influenced government so much that officials failed to act in the interests of those least able to help themselves?

Lou Conte is  a co-author of Unanswered Questions From the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. He has over 29 years of law enforcement and investigatory experience. Louis is the father of triplet boys, two with autism.

Unofficial Transcript:

“Hi, good morning, Dr. Offit, thank you very much for all the work you’ve done. Um, I just wanted to ask, my understanding was that this was a government concession not a ruling by the court. In your opinion, why would the government concede this case?”

Dr. Paul Offit:

I think and that is they’ll certainly the people at HRSA and VICP will say exactly what you said that we didn’t make a decision and that to me is legal language. I mean you, to me, make a decision to concede but why would they do it? I talked to Geoff Evans about  this, who is in the Vaccine Injury Court Program and he said that that um he just felt  that it wouldn’t do well in an evidentiary hearing. In other words that the father was a neurologist, the father actually was the first author on a paper reporting his daughter’s having a ***************** and and worsening with these vaccines. He said that you know it was nine vaccines at once. There is a common belief that not certainly any common wisdom or data showing you know that or revealing that vaccines given in bulk or in large numbers to a child with a ******************** um you know that would be a problem um and so they just didn’t think they would do well in an evidentiary hearing so they conceded it.

I think it was a terrible mistake and I’ll tell you why I think it was a terrible mistake.  I think the child probably didn’t have a ********************* . I mean if you look at the um the paper that was reported and they have you know at least the genetics of her story she doesn’t have a ************. She has a  ************. And think had it gone to an evidentiary hearing that would have been very clear. She would never have been compensated. So it just tells you how sloppy I think that they don’t and lazy that this court is. They just say they they just decide things the way lawyers decide. (Unsure) if you can make an argument that sounds biologically plausible and get an expert can make that argument and “expert” I put in quotes. That’s enough to concede.

I’m appalled by the lack of rigor that this court has consistently shown in the last few years.”

Foot note 29
United States Court of Federal Claims, No. 07-60V, Filed: November 28, 2011, FRANK HARRIS, Parent of JORDAN HARRIS, a Minor, Petitioner, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent

29 The court was impressed by the fact that all of the experts proffered by the parties had outstanding and relevant professional credentials. The Special Master, however, found that
Dr. Kinsbourne expressed opinions that are outside of his field of expertise, such as the toxoiding process. Within Dr. Kinsbourne’s ostensible field of expertise, pediatric neurology, he was much less knowledgeable than Dr. Wiznitzer, who continues to practice pediatric neurology.
Dr. Kinsbourne’s unchallenged reference to written warnings of the manufacturer of the DTaP vaccine was not an “opinion” about the “toxoiding process,” he simply was repeating the manufacturer’s superior knowledge about those products. In addition, and more important, the Special Master’s condescending mischaracterization of Dr. Kinsbourne’s bona fides is out of line. Dr. Kinsbourne is not “ostensibly” a pediatric neurologist. See id. at *35. No lesser academic institutions than Oxford University, Duke University Medical Center, the University of Toronto, Harvard Medical School, Boston University, and Tufts University have recognized Dr. Kinsbourne as an expert in this field, contrary to the views of the Special Master. Pet. Ex. 22 at 1-2. The Special Master also misrepresented Dr. Kinsbourne’s current position in the New School in New York City, where he teaches neuroscience, not psychology, as the Special Master implies. Compare id. at 2 with Harris, 2011 WL 2446321 at *4. Finally, the Special Master emphasized that Dr. Kinsbourne is “well-known” to special masters, because he testifies frequently in the Vaccine Program for petitioners. See Harris, 2011 WL 2446321 at *4. Of course, the Special Master made no mention of the fact that the same is true of Dr. Wiznitzer. The Special Master’s proclivity to demean petitioners and their experts when he differs with their opinions is not unique to this case. See e.g., Porter v. Sec’y of HHS, No. 2010-5162, 2011 WL 5840315 at **13-15 & n.4 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 22, 2011) (O’Malley, J. dissenting) (discussing this Special Master’s “remarkable” opinion for “the sheer number of references to credibility, demeanor and veracity” and character attack on an expert with whom he disagreed); Dobrydneva v. Sec’y of HHS, 94 Fed. Cl. 134, 147 (2010); Campbell v. Sec’y of HHS, 90 Fed. Cl. 369, 383-84 (2009). The modest hourly compensation that physicians receive for rendering a professional medical opinion, based on decades of experience, does not compensate them for argumentum ad hominem disguised as “credibility determinations.” Professional careers of physicians are built and maintained based on their reputation in the medical community and among their peers. What rational, established physician would want to risk an assault on their credentials and professional standing to render an opinion in a Vaccine Act case under these circumstances? The undersigned judge has seen other cases where knowledgeable physicians have declined to render a relevant, if not dispositive opinion, because they did not want to be subject to such “credibility determinations.” See Record in John Doe 21 v. Sec’y HHS, Docket No. 02-0411V (Dr. Lydia Eviatar, M.D., Professor of Pediatric Neurology at the Long Island Campus of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine declining to testify in remand proceeding before the same special master). Allowing this type of unprofessional conduct to continue has had significant adverse consequences on the Vaccine Act Program. 

7:15 am–4:00 pm Registration
7:15 –8:00 am Continental Breakfast
8:00–8:15 am Welcome and Introductions
Susan J. Rehm, MD
National Foundation for Infectious Diseases
Bethesda, MD
Opening Session
Moderator: Mark J. Mulligan, MD
Emory Vaccine Center
Decatur, GA
8:15 am An Overview of Vaccinology
Walter A. Orenstein, MD
Emory Vaccine Center
Atlanta, GA
9:00 am Communicating about Vaccines
Seth Mnookin (Author, The Panic Virus)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, MA
9:45 am Questions and Answers
10:15 am Coffee Break
Session 1: How Vaccines Work
Moderator: Mark J. Mulligan, MD
10:30 am Protective Immune Responses to Vaccines
Paul A. Goepfert, MD
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Birmingham, AL
11:00 am What is in Vaccines and Why?
Alison C. Mawle, PhD
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Atlanta, GA
11:30 am Questions and Answers
12:00 pm Lunch (on your own)
Session 2: The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
Moderator: Monica M. Farley, MD
Emory University School of Medicine and Atlanta VA Medical Center
Decatur, GA
1:00 pm Update on Vaccine Recommendations
Larry K. Pickering, MD
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Atlanta, GA
1:45 pm Questions and Answers
Session 3: Childhood and Adolescent Immunization Issues
Moderator: Larry K. Pickering, MD
2:15 pm Adolescent Immunizations: Strategies for Success
Amy B. Middleman, MD, MPH, MSEd
Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, TX
2:45 pm Recent Changes and Future Challenges in Meningococcal Vaccines
Elizabeth C. Briere, MD, MPH
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Atlanta, GA
3:15 pm Coffee Break
3:30 pm Respiratory Syncytial Virus: Approaches to Disease Prevention
H. Cody Meissner, MD
Tufts University School of Medicine Floating Hospital for Children at Tufts Medical Center
Boston, MA
4:00 pm Communicating with Parents about Vaccination
Noni E. MacDonald, MD
Dalhousie University, IWK Health Center
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
4:30 pm Questions and Answers
5:00 pm Adjourn
7:15 am–4:00 pm Registration
7:15–8:00 am Continental Breakfast
7:15–7:50 am Meet the Experts Roundtables
Saturday Keynote Presentation
Moderator: Monica M. Farley, MD
8:00 am Pneumococcal Vaccines Across the Lifespan
Matthew R. Moore, MD, MPH
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Atlanta, GA
8:45 am Questions and Answers
Session 4: Adult and Adolescent Immunization Challenges
Moderator: Monica M. Farley, MD
9:15 am Immunizations in Older Adults
Kenneth E. Schmader, MD
Duke University Medical Center
Durham, NC
9:45 am HPV Vaccines: Implementation and Safety Issues
Lauri E. Markowitz, MD
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Atlanta, GA
10:15 am Coffee Break
10:30 am Immunization of Healthcare Personnel: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Jane F. Seward, MBBS, MPH
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Atlanta, GA
11:00 am Communicating with Healthcare Professionals
Patricia A. Stinchfield, RN, MS, CPNP
Children’s Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota
St. Paul, MN
11:30 am Questions and Answers
12:00 pm Lunch (on your own)
Session 5: Childhood Immunization Challenges
Moderator: Larry K. Pickering, MD
1:00 pm Pertussis Vaccine Update
Mark H. Sawyer, MD
University of California, San Diego
La Jolla, CA
1:30 pm The Effect of Combination Vaccines on the Vaccine Schedule
Patricia A. Stinchfield, RN, MS, CPNP
Children’s Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota
St. Paul, MN
2:00 pm Rotavirus Infection and Prevention
Evan J. Anderson, MD
Emory University School of Medicine
Atlanta, GA
2:30 pm Questions and Answers
3:00 pm Coffee Break
Session 6: Special Vaccine Issues
Moderator: Walter A. Orenstein, MD
3:15 pm Safety in Numbers: Understanding Post-Licensure Vaccine Safety Monitoring
Claudia J. Vellozzi, MD, MPH
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Atlanta, GA
3:45 pm Controversies and Hot Topics in Vaccine Safety
Neal Halsey, MD
Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health
Baltimore, MD
4:15 pm Legal Obligations Including Compensation for Vaccine Injuries
Geoffrey Evans, MD
US Department of Health and Human Services
Rockville, MD
4:45 pm Cost-Effectiveness of Currently Recommended Vaccines
Lisa A. Prosser, PhD, MS
University of Michigan Health System
Ann Arbor, MI
5:15 pm Questions and Answers
5:45 pm Adjourn
SUNDAY, MARCH 10, 2013
7:00-9:00 am Registration
Continental Breakfast and Panel Discussion
Moderator: Susan J. Rehm, MD
7:00 am Increasing Vaccination Rates through the Immunization Neighborhood
Kelly L. Moore, MD, MPH
Tennessee Immunization Program
Tennessee Department of Health
Nashville, TN
Nichole Bobo, RN, MSN
National Association of School Nurses
Silver Spring, MD
Nancy Ivansek, PA-C, MA
Cleveland Clinic
Cleveland, OH
Michael D. Hogue, PharmD
McWhorter School of Pharmacy
Samford University
Birmingham, AL
Sunday Keynote Presentation
Moderator: Walter A. Orenstein, MD
8:00 am Influenza Vaccine: Strains, Supply, and Schedule: Giving the Right Dose at the Right Time
Wendy A. Keitel, MD
Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, TX
8:45 am Questions and Answers
Session 7: Clinical Cases in Vaccinology
Moderator: Susan J. Rehm, MD
9:15 am JoEllen Wolicki, BSN, RN
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Atlanta, GA
10:45 am Coffee Break
Session 8: Special Populations
Moderator: Mark J. Mulligan, MD
11:00 am Immunization in HIV and Other Immunocompromised Children and Adults
Lorry G. Rubin, MD
Cohen Children’s Medical Center of New York
Hofstra-North Shore LIJ School of Medicine
New Hyde Park, NY
11:45 am Communicating with Underserved Populations
Julie Morita, MD
Chicago Department of Public Health
Chicago, IL
12:15 pm Travel Vaccines: Don’t Leave Home Without Them
Jay S. Keystone, MD, MS (CTM)
Toronto General Hospital
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
1:00 pm Questions and Answers
1:30 pm Adjourn



Has Offit ever approved of any vaccine court award? Even vaccine manufacturers concede that their products can cause serious harm.


My concern for the world our children will inherit grows each day. Worse still, the possibility that ignorant, incompetent, corrupt, uncaring, and at times evil individuals like these may have taken away our great privilege and most basic dream- watching our children grow and have children of their own.
As I write in almost every letter to our so-called governmental representatives: WE ARE BETTER THAN THIS!
Thank you Lou.

Farmer Geddon

Have any laws been broken here ?
Please tell me Offit can be prosecuted for this !

Mr Offit , if you are reading , please make sure you keep all your own vaccines and that of your entire family fully up to date . In fact it would be my singular greatest pleasure if you would allow me to administer yours for you , 10,000 at a time ! Scoundrel bar none . Criminal .


End the Vaccine Injury Compensation Court and allow people to sue for vaccine injuries--that is, sue pediatricians, hospitals, drug stores, schools, and pharmaceutical companies.

Paul S

Quote from Article: “In the audiotape, Dr. Offit criticized the decision to compensate Hannah Poling based on information provided to him in a conversation with Dr. Geoffrey Evans”

My Comment and Thoughts: I recently spent 10 days in a Hospital. During this stay there was a myriad of testing performed in an attempted to to determine the cause of my medical problem. Upon release from the hospital I tried to get copies of both the test reports and DVD copies of the actual test data and/or copies of Xrays. I explained to those responsible for controlling all this information in the hospital that I wanted this information for my personal file. It is hard to imagine the number of hoops I had to jump thru, because of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) privacy law http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/ and regulations in order to get copies of medical test information sent to me, in spite of the fact all the test were run on me!
It seems to me the passing of Hannah Poling’s personal medical information, by Dr. Geoffrey Evans to Dr Paul Proffit (Offit) without the Polling family’s HIPAA release, was against the law and I have a feeling there are grounds for a legal action. These doctors play fast and loose with those of like mind and give those with different views a very hard time when trying to access data that should be readily available to both the medical profession or other persons gathering data for a study.

Another such case took place in Great Briton, with the release of the medical files of “The Wakefield 12” to the scum bag reporter, Brian Deer.


If it's of interest, Dr. Poling comments here on an article about Hannah authored by Offit: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc086269

Offit's reply follows. He says that his information came from the transcript of the DHHS concession.


@ottoschnaut: Wonder what Brian "Those Children Don't Have Bowel Disease" makes of the vaccine that just came out, that supposedly addresses bowel disease symptoms in autistic children: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/04/26/vaccine-developed-to-fight-gut-bacteria-and-autism-symptoms/

IAngus Files

Dr Offit needs a reality check ...Jake proved that...


Birgit Calhoun

I felt that in autism cases the vaccine court chose special masters who were the least likely to be experts on the subject of autism. It's actually neither here nor there what Hannah Poling had. In her case it was all important how the father's expertise measured up to the special masters' expertise, and in this case they couldn't compete.

As I see it there is damage to the mitochondria in all victims of mercury poisoning. So all people who get a whole slew of vaccines at the same time probably get deranged mitochondria. It's just that young children and old folks have a harder time repairing the damage.

As to Dr. Offit, he needs to be more honest to himself and others if indeed he has a conscience.




John Stone

Excellent and important report Lou. When it suits them the PTB toss people's private details about like flotsam. We saw that in the UK. John


Dear Lou and AoA- thank you for this story. There is no comparable reporting in the "MSM" regarding Dr. Offit's apparent COIs, or about some of the statements he makes about vaccine safety which seem at odds with reality. ie- the 10,000 shots remark, vaccines never cause medical injury beyond redness at injection site, etc

Another interesting "Offitism" is his publicly stated opinion that the "vaccine scares" originated with a a DC area TV station report in the 1980's about pertussis shot. He certainly credits Dr. Wakefield with blame for vaccine refusal, and he ignores the powerful FDA warning labels that discuss side effects such as acute encephalopathy. Offit also studiously ignores and discounts all anecdotal evidence describing regression and gut disease in temporal proximity to vaccination (after)- despite the established protocol in pediatric medicine that parent observations are a key source for diagnostic information for infants.

Dr. Offit receiving confidential patient data without authorization, if true, would be problematic. No one has sufficiently made clear to me how the parallel situation seemed to occur with Brian "Those Children Don't Have Bowel Disease" Deer's access to confidential patient data.


Good article "LOU-" This needed to be written for a very long time.

"At the very beginning the National Vaccine Compensation Court meant well." Yes, yes of course it did; right up to the very minute the ink dried.

The people lurking in and around the vaccine manufactures never intended this court to be helpful - only Congress and the parents thought so.

1987 my child was injured (too stupid to know my other child had been too - and my hubby), and I can assure you there was nothing easy about the allusive National Vaccine Compensation Court.

Back in 1986 (?) Barbara Lou Fisher and the rest ended up in front of the TV Cameras and that word "autism" came up then too. They were saying then that the DPT shot caused not autism, but autism like symptoms. Sigh, I did not know what autism was -let alone autism like symptoms. However: I sure know what it is now!

Evans could have stopped the huge added volume of new vaccines in the 90's by doing his job. That is a lot to lay at the MAN'S feet. But it sure looks like that is right. What punishment would be considered justice for a crime so horrible that caused 1 out of 50 kids to develop autism.

Soooo, Dr. Offit does not think that Hannah had a ************ - I assume the fill in the blank word was "mitochondria disorder." Instead he thought she had a ******* Ahhhh come on tell me what Dr. Offit thought she had?

And I agree with Dr. Offit by the way, Hannah did not have mitochondria disorder-----but after 9 vaccines that it damaged her hypothalamuses that runs all those little mitochondria-- well she does "NOW"..

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.)