Round 2: CDCs Poul Thorsen Lying in Plain Sight
By John Gilmore
A US government-financed research group in Denmark lied about the role of the Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine in causing autism in a highly-publicized and influential study, Autism Rate Among Danish Children Reported in A Population Based Study of Measles, Mumps and Rubella Vaccination and Autism. The authors claimed that, “This study provides strong evidence against the hypothesis that MMR Vaccination causes autism,” even though the data in the study clearly shows that children who got an MMR vaccine had a 45% higher rate of full-syndrome autism than children who were not vaccinated, and a 31% higher rate of less severe forms of autism. This data can be seen at this link below, Table 2.
Last week we presented evidence that the same US-government financed operation in Denmark fabricated evidence in an influential study to cover-up the role of mercury in vaccines causing autism. Both studies were prepared by a research group led by Dr. Poul Thorsen, a Danish epidemiologist hired by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to produce a series of studies looking at health outcomes in Danish children. Several of the studies looked at the role of vaccines in causing autism, and all the studies prepared under Thorsen’s direction concluded there was no connection. In 20011 Thorsen was indicted by the US Attorney for allegedly embezzling $2 million from the CDC. He is currently a fugitive.
Vaccine safety studies are pretty straightforward. You look at one group of people who get a vaccine, and then you look at a group who did not get the vaccine. If there is more of a health problem in the group who got the vaccine than those who didn’t, then there very well could be a problem with the vaccine. Simple.
But the Thorsen group didn’t do the study using the straightforward, conventional way. The data showed a much higher number of autism cases in the MMR vaccinated group than in the unvaccinated group, and If they did it the usual way they would have had to conclude that the MMR may cause autism. So instead of comparing cases of autism, they compared “life-years” with autism, and “life years” without autism. In short that means if a child was 8 years old at the end of the study period and that child was diagnosed with autism, when he was 6, he would be counted as 2 “life-years” with autism, but 6 “life years” without autism. If it sounds silly and confusing it is, by design. They had to come up with a way to avoid showing that they had found a greater rate of autism among the children who got the MMR. And this is the method they chose to do it.
Last week we discussed how the Thorsen group provided a third-rate study with abundant indicators of possible data fabrication to absolve mercury in vaccines from having a causal role in autism. They appear to have done a similar job for the MMR. These two studies have had a powerful influence on US Autism research priorities, vaccine policy and provided much of the pretext for the dismissal of more than 5000 cases in the National Vaccine injury Compensation Program. The wiley Dr. Poul Thorsen continues to elude the Department of Justice, the FBI, the CIA, the NSA and all the other apparatus of the federal government. The rest of the authors are Danish. One of the authors, however, Diana Schendel, Ph. D., is still employed by the CDC. It would be fascinating to hear her explanation of why the team chose to present the information in an unconventional way that arrived at the exact opposite conclusion that conventional epidemiological methods would have produced. Of course, the finding of no correlation was politically expedient, and it provide a pretext for assaulting the work of Andrew Wakefield,the English researcher who the hypothesized a possible connection between the MMR, autism and bowel disease. Perhaps, Dr. Schendel could clarify how this happened if she was invited to testify under oath at the hearings of the House Committee on Government Operations and Reform on the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program scheduled for November. The studies she worked on with Thorsen have profoundly influenced NVICP policy and are therefore highly relevant to the hearings, and unlike Thorsen the feds could probably locate Schendel.
Moreover, there is a clear pattern of data fabrication and concealment in the studies the CDC had Thorsen prepare, and all the subterfuge has the same result: hiding the clear role vaccines have in causing autism.
Autism Rate Among Danish Children Reported in A Population Based Study of Measles, Mumps and Rubella Vaccination and Autism, Madsen KM, Hviid A, Vestergaard M, Schendel D, Wohlfahrt J, Thorsen P, Olsen J, Melbye M., New England Journal of Medicine. 2002 Nov 7;347(19):1477-82
John Gilmore is a founder and executive director of the Autism Action Network, a national 501(c)(4), non-partisan, grassroots advocacy organization engaged in a range of issues including health access, special education, rights of the disabled, vaccine rights and safety, and research funding. Mr. Gilmore has more than ten years of experience organizing state and national legislative efforts.
He lives in Long Beach, New York with his wife Jennifer and his two sons, Jack, and Luke who has developmental delays as a result of a vaccine-induced encephalopathy.
Mr. Gilmore has a Master’s In Public Policy from the Goldman School of Public Policy at U. C. Berkeley. He also teaches politics and media studies to undergraduates in New York City.
"Poul Thorsen, a Danish scientist well known for his autism research, has landed a spot on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General's most wanted fugitives list. Thorsen is wanted on 13 counts of wire fraud and nine counts of money laundering and is currently awaiting extradition from Denmark, where he is believed to be hiding, officials said. He is accused of having stolen over $1 million dollars in federally awarded grant money, which he used to buy a half-million-dollar home in Atlanta, Ga., a Harley Davidson motorcycle and two cars.
Thorsen, a visiting fellow at the Division of Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities at the time, was a recipient of two federal grants issued by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention in 1999 and 2007 for research involving infant disabilities, autism, genetic disorders and fetal alcohol syndrome. The grants were initially awarded to the Danish Medical Research Council, a Danish government body, which later changed its named to the Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation. Thorsen later became the principal investigator responsible for administering the money, according to his indictment.
The agency also found that Thorsen had opened an account with the CDC Federal Credit Union. The invoices requested that the money be transferred there.
The first sign of suspicious activity came in 2009 when DASTI contacted the CDC over a letter it received with an official CDC letterhead asking for reimbursement for ongoing research. The letter purported that there was a remaining balance of $894,000 in the grant, according to HHS Office of Inspector General Special Agent Derrick Jackson. After confirming that the grant had already been spent, the CDC launched an investigation. It found that the letter and several prior invoices sent to the Danish agency were fraudulent and contained forged signatures of CDC employees...."
Posted by: Carol | November 01, 2013 at 01:43 PM
Note: regarding the March 7, 2002 letter to Congressman Dan Burton, the correct spelling is "Elizabeth Birt".
Posted by: Jim Thompson | October 05, 2013 at 02:43 PM
Herr Doktor Eine "Decked" Deker still refuses to face facts.
1) The Madsen study is by Poul Thorsen - an author who is wanted by US authorities on fraud charges relating to the studies he was commissioned to write for the CDC - including the study in question - "Eindeker" still refuses to accept that the study is tainted in any way.
He just does not address the issue.
So here is the question for you - should we accept a study by an author wanted by authorities on fraud charges relating to the monies he charged for writing such studies and when the study in question is opaque about how the authors "adjusted" the figures?
He clings to the straw the Madsen/Thorsen study can be considered reliable when in fact the "books were cooked".
2) Any vaccine can cause an autistic condition - as Thorsen and the CDC no doubt knew when the Thorsen/Madsen study was commissioned.
So this study compares vaccinated children to vaccinated children - and cooked the books at the same time and found no difference in either group.
Jenny Allan has made the same point in a different way - regarding ths allegedly unvaccinated children who will have had other vaccines so were vaccinated and not unvaccinated.
He also complains that Magill Univerity epidemiologist Suissa found an association between the vaccine and a higher rate of autistic conditions in the children who had the MMR vaccine compared to those who did not when looking at the raw data used by Madsen/Thorsen.
But the good Herr Doktor is unhappy because he says he does not agree.
As any vaccine can cause an autistic condition that begs the question of how it was that Thorsen and his buddy Madsen did not find an association?
3) And the comment about removing mercury from vaccines is inappropriate.
"Eindeker" asks did the autism rate decrease when mercury was removed? What he does not ask is what was happening at the same time. Well that question can be answered by reference to what the Jick & Kaye 2001 results demonstrated when changes in the vaccine schedule are factored in [see graph below].
As each vaccine is added the numbers diagnosed with autistic conditions increased in step changes. It looks like a case of "robbing Peter to pay Paul" or more like Peter and Paul got autism instead of only Peter.
It is the same error made with the Madsen paper - looking at just one vaccine when it is vaccinated and unvaccinated who should be compared:
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | October 05, 2013 at 11:55 AM
And, incidentally, more and more vaccines use neurotoxic aluminum compounds as adjuvants i.e. included as active ingredients to increase immunogenicity, for God's sake! I wonder whether Herr Doktor Eindecker knows anything about that?
Posted by: Mercky Business | October 05, 2013 at 10:53 AM
Eindecker, we know that the CDC had evidence that mercury in vaccines is not safe.
We know that scientists with integrity called for the removal of heavy metal mercury in vaccines way back in 1999. “…the Public Health Service, the American Academy of Pediatrics and vaccine manufacturers agree that thimerosal-containing vaccines should be removed as soon as possible.”
We know that a CDC scientist admitted, during congressional testimony on November 29, 2012, that CDC still allows heavy metal mercury preserved vaccines:
“Mr. POSEY. You told me you only had two studies related to vaccines,
vaccinated and unvaccinated, so you must figure two studies
must have some weight. I am running out of time quickly here.
You mentioned that you only have thimerosal in multi-vial. Why is
Ms. BOYLE. I was actually going to get that information for the
Mr. POSEY. Okay. Because I would think if they only have it in
multi-vial, if they eliminated having it in all the other vials, there
was a reason.
Ms. BOYLE. There is definitely a reason, so I was going to clarify
that. There are single-dose vials and multi-dose vials.
Mr. POSEY. And they took it all out of everything but the multidose
Ms. BOYLE. That is correct.
Mr. POSEY. How many multi-dose vials are there?
Ms. BOYLE. I can provide you that information.”
See http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/2012-11-29-Ser-No-112-194-FC-Hearing-on-Autism.pdf , page 50.
We also know that children and pregnant women still receive Thimerosal preserved flu vaccines. We know that 84 million doses are recommended as “safe” for children and pregnant by the CDC and FDA. We know that the CDC buys and distributes them for use in children. See http://www.ageofautism.com/2013/08/the-cdc-buys-and-distributes-heavy-metal-mercury-preserved-flu-vaccines-for-children.html .
Posted by: Jim Thompson | October 05, 2013 at 10:30 AM
It was originally Samy Suissa, a professor epidemiology at McGill, who asserted in a letter to NEJM (which they refused to publish) that the rate of autism was 45% higher in the group which had MMR.
Admittedly, the Danish data has been wobbly from the beginning (quoted differently in every single study) with the latest 2013 study being outrageously different. The impression is of a gang of scientific fraudsters manipulating the data from one study to the next to obtain whatever conclusion they needed for political reasons but without there being any consistency between them. Several of these people probably belong with Thorsen in jail.
Posted by: Mercky Business | October 05, 2013 at 08:00 AM
"So the association between Thimerosal (a vaccine constituent) and autism that was presented at Simpsonwood was ignored." So why Jim has it been removed from the vast majority of US vaccines 10 or more years ago and much earlier in other countries and what has been the effect on the autism rate ?? Nowt as they say over here, but please show me evidence that removing Hg has decreased the autism rate, it's a serious question that I never see answered on the AoA.
Mr CHS see you're name checking me again, thanks, I thought you had gone off in a huff, something along the lines of "No. None of the figures in Madsen are agreed. They clearly could all be eyewash and it seems they are." and then you have the audacity to accuse me of " the anonymous internet folk like the Eindekers who will not accept evidence of what is going on even when it is in their faces", can you reconcile these 2 statements?
Going back to the original posting re MMR will someone please justify John Gilmore's statement " that children who got an MMR vaccine had a 45% higher rate of full-syndrome autism than children who were not vaccinated" because I cannot see any justification anywhere in the paper that supports that, perhaps Mr CHS could explain?
Jenny yes I agree with you that the paper only refers to children vaccinated/unvaccinated with the MMR, but the title does state that.
Posted by: Eindeker | October 05, 2013 at 07:24 AM
Of course there are the paid whisperers in the media. Mnookin, Willingham etc (actually dozens of them joined the fray over Jenny McCarthy).
Bernie Marcus whose money evidently links the CDC and Autism Speaks might be another in the billionaire category.
Posted by: John Stone | October 05, 2013 at 07:17 AM
Does Bill Gates get his own category - being a billionaire 'n all?
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | October 05, 2013 at 06:55 AM
Who are the kinds of people responsible for the continuing pandemic of autistic conditions?
1) CDC employees/researchers and other government health officials;
2) the anonymous internet folk like the Eindekers who will not accept evidence of what is going on even when it is in their faces;
3) medical professionals who fail to scrutinise the evidence and question government health officials;
Feel free to add your category.
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | October 05, 2013 at 06:54 AM
Benedetta, yes Bob Chen is still listed as a CDC employee.
And after this meeting (June 7-8, 2000 at Simpsonwood Retreat Center in Norcross, Georgia) Bob Chen and Frank DeStefano published an article in 2001 that claimed “Currently, the weight of the available epidemiological and related evidence does not support a causal association between MMR vaccine, or any other vaccine or vaccine constituent, and autism.” See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11700148
So the association between Thimerosal (a vaccine constituent) and autism that was presented at Simpsonwood was ignored.
And another person at the Simpsonwood meeting was Roger Bernier. Look at how he talks about “protecting information” and “machinery in place for considering these data.”
“I'm Roger Bernier, the Associate Director for Science in the National Immunization Program... So we are asking people who have done a great job protecting this information up until now, to continue to do that until the time of the ACIP meeting. So to basically consider this embargoed information. That would help all of us to use the machinery that we have in place for considering these data and for arriving at policy recommendations.” See Simpsonwood (June 7-8, 2000 at Simpsonwood Retreat Center in Norcross, Georgia) at http://www.safeminds.org/government-affairs/foia/Simpsonwood_Transcript.pdf pp 5, 113.
Finally, Liz Burt wrote a letter to Congressman Burton (March 7, 2002) about possible perjury by Roger Bernier during his congressional testimony on July 18, 2000. “As you can probably tell from my comments I am extremely distrustful of individuals at CDC and FDA. They have a history of outright lying. In addition, when possible they engage in the distortion of facts to suit their purposes.”
Posted by: Jim Thompson | October 05, 2013 at 04:10 AM
So I've spent the most part of my day reading about autism and have kinda struck a gold mine. A little background about myself first. I'm from Somalia and if you have been keeping up with the latest news buzz about autism I'm sure you are aware of the epidemic rise of autism within our community in Minneapolis.
As I was watching a news clip on youtube of a Somali women speaking about her autistic son I was suddenly drawn to her skin color. I noticed the usual signs of someone who uses skin bleaching creams and it hit me than that that was the reason why the Somali community experiences such a high rate of autism. For most dark skinned females pregnancy darkens our skin and with time this discoloration disappears on its own. But my culture, much like most African cultures, bleaches their skin at an alarming rate not only during pregnancy but while breastfeeding. The main reason why bleaching creams are banned in America is due to the high levels of mercury and these women are exposing their children to mercury at an alarming rate! I've read many articles that state mercury in vaccines might be linked to autism but no where was there a single article making the connection between autism in Somalia communities and the use of skin bleaching agents. Now if a sophomore in college like me is able to make this connection I'm sure the CDC could easily find the cause of autism. But for the obvious reason of self destruction they allow this epidemic to ruin many lives.
Posted by: Asha | October 05, 2013 at 02:54 AM
And where is Chen now?
Still working for the CDC, but moved around to another position?
Posted by: Benedetta | October 04, 2013 at 01:48 PM
Jenny Allan, this email further implicates the integrity of this shell game in the Danish autism report:
“From: Yeargin-Alisopp, Marshalyn [CDC]-
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 2:36 PM
To: Cordero, Jose
Cc: Schendel, Diana; Murphy, Catherine; Boyle, Coleen; Decoufle, Pierre; Thorsen, Poul; Yeargin-Allsopp, Marshatyn; Sinks, Tom
Subject: Proposal for study of MMR vaccine and autism in Denmark
Jose, As we discussed on Friday, we have become aware through Poul Thorsen of an exciting opportunity to study the role of MMR vaccine and autism using several registries/existing studies and the repository of biologic specimens and laboratory capabilities in Denmark. Attached below is a proposal for such a study. Poul will be leaving on Thursday to travel to Denmark where he will be meeting with the PIs for the proposed study on June 6th. We would like to be able to have Poul say whether it is likely that CDC (NIP) can fund the study, if NIP is interested. The proposed budget is included; there may be additional sources of funding (in addition to NIP) but we are not certain at this time. Unfortunately, the DD Branch does not have much (if any) $$ to fund the study, but we do have the expertise that we have developed due to the autism surveillance in Atlanta and the MMR/autism case-control study. I will be out of the office tomorrow, but you may contact Diana or Poul if you have questions. Thank you so much for considering this proposal.
See http://www.vaclib.org/sites/vap/cdc-spinach-autism-20070301.htm .
See also http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/04/indicted-researcher-poul-thorsen-autism-speaks-original-trailblazer.html and http://www.putchildrenfirst.org/chapter5.html.
So one important question is this: Was the statistical nonsense in the referenced Danish reports accepted by the CDC because they were desperate to cover-up the following findings? From Simpsonwood 2000:
“I'm Bob Chen, I'm Chief of Vaccine Safety and Development at the National Immunization Program at CDC…I'm Roger Bernier, the Associate Director for Science in the National Immunization Program [CDC]…I'm Tom Verstraeten, EIS Office at National Immunization Program [CDC].
Tom Verstraeten: For the overall category of neurologic developmental disorders …That's an increase of .7% for each additional microgram of ethyl mercury. For an example, if we would go from zero to 50 micrograms of ethyl mercury, we would have to multiple these estimate by 50, so that would give us an additional increase of about 35 %, which is pretty close to the point estimate for this category.
Bob Chen: We have been privileged so far that given the sensitivity of information, we have been able to manage to keep it out of, let's say, less responsible hands, yet the nature of kind of proliferation and Xerox machines being what they are, the risk of that changes. So I guess as a group perhaps, and Roger, you may have thought about that.
Roger Bernier: You may have given a copy, but I think if we will all just consider this embargoed information, if I can use that term, and very highly protected information, I think that was the best I can offer.”
See Simpsonwood transcript at http://www.putchildrenfirst.org/chapter5.html
Posted by: Jim Thompson | October 04, 2013 at 06:02 AM
We know the data was eyewash because of John Gilmore's earlier article
and one on vacciantion news by Ed Yazbak
Posted by: Mercky Business | October 03, 2013 at 08:09 AM
Dear Eine "Decked" Eindeker,
You now sound very angry in your post but it is the parents of children injured by these vaccines who should be angry with you.
No. None of the figures in Madsen are agreed. They clearly could all be eyewash and it seems they are.
The paper is by an author on the most wanted list for alleged financial fraud against the CDC.
The paper has never been replicated but it is contradicted by others.
It should be retracted.
It is over Dear Eine "Decked" Eindeker. Move on and accept like the Director of the US CDC did and the US HRSA that any vaccine can cause an autistic condition:
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | October 03, 2013 at 07:23 AM
"Do we both agree there were 537,303 children in the study, 440655 vaccinated, 96648 unvaccinated?"
Sorry to labour the point, but the 96648 children were stated to have not received MMR vaccine, but might well have received other vaccinations, including some containing the mercury preservative Thiomersal. An epidemiological study, (or statistical analysis as I prefer to call it),is only as good as its initial design parameters, in this case hopelessly skewed towards a predetermined result and littered with variables.
It is UNSCIENTIFIC to call this cohort group of children 'unvaccinated'. In fact, as another commenter (Jim Thomson) pointed out " the authors said “We treated vaccination as a time-dependent covariate. The children were assigned to the nonvaccinated group until they received the MMR vaccine.”
In other words some 'unvaccinated' children went on to receive the MMR vaccine during the study, making the results completely meaningless, since autism can take many years to diagnose.
It is noteworthy, to remind persons about that other 'Madsen et al' study, (also involving Poul Thorsen), which apparently found that mercury in vaccines actually PREVENTED autism!! They piously 'adjusted' their results. Some things are quite simply unbelievable!!
Posted by: Jenny Allan | October 03, 2013 at 06:30 AM
"Es scheint, wir haben eine eindeker "decked"."
Please don't flatter yourself Mr CHS, and thanks but no thanks for your unsubtle offer of a strawman, I find the straw is often contaminated by farmyard waste.
But joking apart please tell me where on this logical path you fall off the rails, I want to understand.
Do we both agree there were 537,303 children in the study, 440655 vaccinated, 96648 unvaccinated?
OK with that? So let's move to the bottom of Table 1 add to numbers of children using age of diagnosis numbers and we get:
AD: Vaccinated 269, Unvaccinated 47
Other ASD:Vaccinated 352, Unvaccinated 70
(Jim there is NO timeline in these numbers so there is no "dynamic control")
Are we in agreement with these figures Mr CHS, all in Table 1?
If so move to Table 2 (sharp intake of breath Mr CHS??) and
you'll see the corresponding numbers are different:
AD: Vaccinated 263, Unvaccinated 53
Other ASD:Vaccinated 345, Unvaccinated 77
Hold on this is no smoke & mirrors snake oil conspiracy Mr CHS, as is explained in the footnote to Table 2:
"The distribution of cases of autistic disorder or other autistic-spectrum disorders according to vaccination status differs from that in Table 1 because, in this analysis, children who were vaccinated after the disorder had been diagnosed were classified according to their vaccination status at the time of the diagnosis (i.e., as unvaccinated)."
ie some unfortunate children were diagnosed with ASD's before receiving the MMR vaccine. Now Jim & Mr CHS how do you deal with these?? The paper's authors correctly re-classified these as "unvaccinated" for the purpose of analysis as clearly the MMR had no relationship to developing autism. Is this wrong, if so please explain why & how you would handle these cases (6 for AD and 7 for other ASD from the data).
So there's a step wise analysis of how to calculate a simple incidence from the paper without any need for "dynamic control" tell me where it's wrong I'd love to see your logic. As I originally stated there is no difference in either the AD or other ASDs rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.
Posted by: Eindeker | October 03, 2013 at 04:45 AM
Kinda’ baffling to me, they were able to locate Osama bin Laden, but can’t locate Dr. Poul Thorsen, a Danish epidemiologist hired by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). I have a gut feeling those active in the search really do not want to find him!!!!!
If found he would probably spill the beans regarding the jiggling of data to get the results that the CDC was after. Just speculating!!!
Posted by: cycle3man | October 02, 2013 at 10:09 PM
Yeap, will need lots of stanchions
Posted by: Benedetta | October 02, 2013 at 09:47 PM
I would say that the left line might be a bit too long -- and so I suggest that ropes will be neede to be place about like those lines at Disney world that are kind of maze like.
Posted by: Benedetta | October 02, 2013 at 09:42 PM
Just so you know that the CDC had directly on its payroll in Atlanta the alleged fraudster Poul Thorsen here is a paper by Poul Thorsen giving his address in Atlanta and his department at the US CDC in Atlanta and his personal CDC email address at the CDC in Atlanta:
And here is Thorsen's personal CDC email address given with the paper: PCT9@CDC.GOV.
Thorsen remains on the "most wanted" list and for fraud and not for his boyish looks or lack of charm.
How many other Poul Thorsen types work at the CDC in Atlanta? Don't know but they sure seem to know that any vaccine can cause an autistic condition whilst pretending that is not a proven fact:
Will all those who are crooks at the CDC form an orderly queue on the left and those who can prove they are not form the queue on the right. Anyone not sure can join the queue on the left - because if you are not sure then how can anyone else be?
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | October 02, 2013 at 06:00 PM
Es scheint, wir haben eine eindeker "decked".
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | October 02, 2013 at 04:08 PM
Both Diana Schendel (CDC) and Poul Thorsen (most wanted list) are included as coauthors (2012 and 2013) here (see https://www.thieme-connect.com/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-0032-1316443 ) and here ( see http://www.torna.do/s/Thorsen-P/ ) .
According to this link (see http://pure.au.dk/portal/en/persons/id(2163da2c-859c-46e1-b464-d1c36b753696).html ), Diana Schendel works at Bartholins Allé 2, building 1260, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
According to one of the manuscripts received in 2012, the address for Poul Thorsen was listed Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Lillebaelt Hospital, Kolding, Sygehus Lillebælt, Skovvangen 2, 6000 Kolding, Denmark.
Using the directions mode for Google map gives a driving time between these locations at about 1 hour and 7 minutes.
Maybe the US Department of Justice can ask the CDC employee Diana Schendel if she still has contact with Poul Thorsen and knows where he currently resides.
To contact the US DOJ go to http://www.justice.gov/usao/gan/contact/index.html .
Posted by: Jim Thompson | October 02, 2013 at 08:22 AM
Eindeker here are some questions for you. Note of course that the Madsen paper was procured for the US CDC and authored by Poul Thorsen who is wanted by US authorities for fraud:
1) can you cite a single study replicating the Madsen paper's results using the same data?
2) do you agree replication is an essential part of the scientific method and one way of exposing frauds?
3) can you cite any studies which specifically contradict Madsen's results?
Just to help you here are some specimen answers:
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | October 02, 2013 at 04:15 AM
Eindeker you again appear to mislead.
You took the total numbers of vaccinated and unvaccinated children from the unadjusted Table 1 figures.
You again try to give the impression you were using figures from Table 2.
You then mixed those figures up with the "adjusted" figures for numbers of cases in Table 2.
That is how you came up with your rates of autistic conditions. And you then claim they are the same in vaccinated and unvaccinated.
But for a second time here you want to give the impression you took your figures from Table 2.
This is aside from the fact that you cannot tell from Table 2 or the rest of the paper exactly how those Table 2 figures were calculated - how they were "adjusted".
And Madsen has never ever come forward to explain the criticisms or discrepancies.
Not very impressive for scientific peer review if Madsen cannot answer the criticisms.
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | October 01, 2013 at 09:14 PM
Eindeker, I respectfully disagree. There is no data to support the shift from “vaccinated” to “unvaccinated” in table 2.
The controls are dynamic with time and so they are “cooked” by the authors without accounting for bias. The fact that one of the authors is now on the most wanted list adds to that interpretation.
Thank you for raising the question. Maybe Dianna Schendel can help with supporting data. See http://pure.au.dk/portal/en/persons/id(2163da2c-859c-46e1-b464-d1c36b753696).html .
Posted by: Jim Thompson | October 01, 2013 at 08:22 PM
Eindeker - answer this - any vaccine can cause an autistic condition - confirmed by the CDC Director and the US HRSA:
This means any "study" looking a just one vaccine like MMR will never find any difference. It just compares vaccinated with vaccinated.
It means the CDC knew the Madsen study was pointless before they even paid a cent of US tax dollars to Thorsen to arrange it.
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | October 01, 2013 at 08:21 PM
Thank you for your reply, I think the actual autism diagnoses are those in Table 2: the text at the start of the Results section says "A total of 537,303 children were included in the cohort ........ Follow-up of 5811 children was stopped before December 31, 1999, because of a diagnosis of autistic disorder (in 316 children), other autistic-spectrum disorders (in 422)"
The discrepancy between Table 1 numbers and Table 2 numbers is explained in the footnote to Table 2:
"The distribution of cases of autistic disorder or other autistic-spectrum disorders according to vaccination status differs from that in Table 1 because, in this analysis, children who were vaccinated after the disorder had been diagnosed were classified according to their vaccination status at the time of the diagnosis (i.e., as unvaccinated)."
I think that is reasonable, ie if a child was diagnosed with an ASD before MMR vaccination then they should be placed in the unvaccinated cohort with respect to association of vaccine status and autism diagnosis.
Re Mr CHS yes well ignoring the vague ad hominem slights the number of cases I used ARE unadjusted with the totally logical exception given above. You refer to mixing numbers of children from Table 1 with "adjusted Table 2 figures", sorry but read again, I didn't, look at the column headings in Table 2 it's "Number of cases", nothing to do with adjusted values.
So I still ask Mr Gilmore to justify the graph he used when the ASD rates from the data are the same.
Posted by: Eindeker | October 01, 2013 at 06:26 PM
"In short that means if a child was 8 years old at the end of the study period and that child was diagnosed with autism, when he was 6, he would be counted as 2 “life-years” with autism, but 6 “life years” without autism."
With some of the comments here, I'm not clear on whether they were counting years pre and post MMR or years pre and post autism diagnosis, or doing some of both in their calculations?
But either way, one would think those that want to be convinced there is no difference in autism rates between vaccinated vs. never-vaccinated groups would question why all the mathematical gymnastics, changing of endpoints and entry points, the multiple study generations, destruction and hiding away of public data sets, and such occurs? It only makes the "uneducated" parent that much more suspicious and makes the lives of vaccine providers that much more difficult, doesn't it?
Posted by: Jeannette Bishop | October 01, 2013 at 05:56 PM
Possibly this will help. Look at the cumulative data of "Age at diagnosis of autistic disorder" category, for all age groups, given in table 1 with the percent given in parenthesis.
The table 1 totals for the "Age at diagnosis of autistic disorder" category for “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” do not reconcile with table 2. There are cumulative numbers of 269 and 47 in table 1 but then 263 and 53 in table 2.
Why is the “unvaccinated” group larger in table 2? Why is the "vaccinated" group smaller in table 2? Perhaps because, as the authors stated they “…treated vaccination as a time-dependent covariate” in the risk analysis (found in table 2).
You raise good questions. Unfortunately Poul Thorsen will not come the U.S. to help explain this difference because he is one of the most wanted. See https://oig.hhs.gov/fraud/fugitives/profiles.asp .
Posted by: Jim Thompson | October 01, 2013 at 04:08 PM
As Eindeker says "Jim it's worth nailing this". Yes it is. It is worth nailing Eindeker. The internet is riddled with Eindekers.
He did not [as he claims] use the "simple numbers of children, as published at the top of Table 2".
He used the numbers of children published at the top of Table 1. He then transposed them and inserted those figures in the "adjusted" figures in Table 2 as if the Table 1 figures had a direct relationship to the "adjusted" Table 2 figures.
Once you start "adjusting" figures you cannot just transpose the raw figures over and mix them all up and claim it is all the same thing.
Table 2 does not set out the Table 1 figures. There is a good reason for that. The Table 2 figures are "adjusted" so there is no direct correspondence between the Table 1 figures and the Table 2 figures.
As the Mcgill University epidemiologist Suissa noted about Madsen's Table 2: "In this case, the adjustment for age could have been artificial. It would be useful then to present rates on subjects 24-29 months since vaccination and on the unvaccinated (crude rate ratio 2.5) stratified by age. Otherwise, one could be tempted to conclude that the figure is in fact suggestive of an association between MMR vaccination and the risk of autism."
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | October 01, 2013 at 03:16 PM
From Eindeker's analysis of the Madsen et al epidemiological data:-
"A child is classified as unvaccinated until they receive the MMR, after that they are classified as vaccinated."
Have these stated to be 'unvaccinated' children received any previous vaccinations other than the MMR? If so they can hardly be described as 'unvaccinated'
Posted by: Jenny Allan | October 01, 2013 at 02:02 PM
I recall that Boyd Haley mentioned one Denmark/ Thorsen study that concluded that
after removing Thimerosal from the vaccines, the Denmark Autism rates went UP, not DOWN and UP by a factor of 20.
Simply the magic of epidemiology, a criminal mind... and plenty of money from the CDC.
Posted by: cmo | October 01, 2013 at 01:46 PM
"Can you believe that people in the United States Government is hiding such stuff that affects every human being not just in the United States but -- as in WHO going world wide -- Can you imagine there are people like that -- and they just keep on keeping quiet forever, and ever, and ever! No breaking point!"
Well I guess the good news is these "people" are very few in number and they are working for the most powerful as well as RICH semi-human people on this earth. 99% of the WORKERS at CDC and HHS are decent humans who would not directly or indirectly murder us and our children.
In fact if you examine the events that preceded Simpsonwood you will see a decent extensive study of the VAERS database showed UNEQUIVOCALLY that vaccines were causing neurodegenerative disease. This study was done with a lot of rank and file support. Once the higherups in Big Pharma and Industrial Medicine got hold of the study they destroyed all the evidence and redid the study to show no cause.
This was but one more instance of Industrial Medicine murdering us with knowledge-aforethought. It has been going on in the USA at least since the Rockefeller clan captured the medical profession circa 1900.
"Vaccination" is at base all about trust. These "people" have demonstrated time and time again we cannot trust them. Help save the children DO NOT VACCINATE.
Posted by: Lou | October 01, 2013 at 01:44 PM
Jim it's worth nailing this, and its not meant to be a tit for tat e-mail thread, but you're not correct in how I'm analysing the data. The paper clearly uses "person-years" which is a difficult concept, used presumably to allow the hazard ratios to be calculated for the onset of autism and the gap between vaccination and autism diagnosis.
However when I looked at the data I deliberately did not use this but simple numbers of children, as published at the top of Table 2.
You say the numbers further down in Table 2 are "cooked" as they are a "dynamic control group", however those are not the data I'm using.
What I used were total numbers of children as shown in Table 2: VACCINATED CHILDREN (N=440,655); UNVACCINATED CHILDREN (N=96,648). A child is classified as unvaccinated until they receive the MMR, after that they are classified as vaccinated.
These numbers (440655 & 96648) are not a "dynamic control group" as you describe it, they are independent of time, which is just as John Gilmore asked for, that's why I did the analysis.
You say "In terms of a scientific “control” this is a sham. The adjectives “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” (in table 2) are meaningless." Please explain why the terms vaccinated and unvaccinated are meaningless terms, seems quite simple to me they either did or did not receive MMR vaccine, irrespective of when they received this or when they were diagnosed with autism.
Posted by: Eindeker | October 01, 2013 at 11:48 AM
Re: Linus Pauling
I like his book "Vitamin C and the Common Cold" published in 1970. Amazing read, and a reminder that politics have ruled medicine for decades and beyond. If people took vitamin C even just to help with colds, it is capable of having a financial impact on the over-the-counter medicine industry. But the doubtmakers came in and used that little term "no significant difference." When translating "significant difference" to actual numbers in the population, Pauling showed that even by his adversaries' definition the numbers of work time & earnings affected were astronomical!
So when talking about autism, what does "no significant difference" mean in human worldwide population terms? In autism, would that be tens of millions vs hundreds of millions, several million vs tens of millions, or hundreds of thousands vs millions in lives devastated? 3-5 times that many when counting immediate family members impacted by it for perhaps a lifetime and @ $3,000,000 per patient? NONE of it is acceptable, but lets do get to the bottom of the math.
Thank-you Jim Thompson for your insight re: statistics and the info re: the non-control group.
Here's a tidbit of interesting math: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=evidence-based+estimate+of+patient+harms+james
So many Alex S's out there now, albeit in different wings of the hospital, who maybe did not rage quite so much against the dying of the light, and so haven't been heard.
Posted by: Jenny | October 01, 2013 at 10:37 AM
Eindecker, you said
“Top of Table 1 gives total vaccinated children 440,655 unvaccinated children 96,648. Table 2 gives number of vaccinated autistic children 263, autistic unvaccinated children 53.”
The issue here is that the numbers in table 2 were “cooked” as a dynamic control group. Again, the authors said “We treated vaccination as a time-dependent covariate. The children were assigned to the nonvaccinated group until they received the MMR vaccine.”
In terms of a scientific “control” this is a sham. The adjectives “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” (in table 2) are meaningless.
Posted by: Jim Thompson | October 01, 2013 at 06:03 AM
"Vaccine safety studies are pretty straightforward. You look at one group of people who get a vaccine, and then you look at a group who did not get the vaccine. If there is more of a health problem in the group who got the vaccine than those who didn’t, then there very well could be a problem with the vaccine. Simple."
That's precisely what I did John and there is no difference, adding both ASD's together gives rates of 13.797/10,000 for vaccinated children and 13.45/10,000 for unvaccinated.
Jim, no I have not used the confusing "person-years" in the paper, just a straight "were they vaccinated or not & did they get an ASD diagnosis or not".
They paper is quite clear "A total of 537,303 children were included in the
cohort" & "440,655 (82.0 percent) had received the MMR vaccine" There is no time-line in the control group, just simple yes/no answers. That's why I did the simple calculation from the figures, why they did not present this in the paper I don't know. This analysis is ideally suited to a Chi squared test for testing for significance, but in any case the Autism rate was numerically lower in the unvaccinated group.
I'd just like an explanation behind the figures in John's graph, as has been requested by another poster. Because I don't see any justification for it from the data in the paper.
Posted by: Eindeker | October 01, 2013 at 03:52 AM
This is the simplest explanation we have seen yet of the fraud:
And then we have this:
And what that means in short is that the children with autistic conditions whose condition is not linked to the MMR vaccine - the "background" cases used for comparison in these statistical "tobacco science" studies - are likely to have gotten their autistic condition from another vaccine.
But if you compare MMR caused autism cases against the "background" it then becomes much more difficult to see any difference.
Or as we put it to make it simple "If you go shopping and compare all the candy in one store with all the candy all other stores you are likely to find its all candy."
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | October 01, 2013 at 02:29 AM
Son in recovery: Many thanks to you. I hope Anonymous and Wikileaks will care.
Posted by: Truthseeker2 | September 30, 2013 at 10:54 PM
"We have Paul Offit calling this Nobel prize winner -- Linus Pauling- whose name is known to all high school chemistry and science students --- the biggest quack ever!"
Doctor Linus Pauling is one of the finest minds this world has EVER seen. Doctor Pauling has SOLVED every problem he has focused his mental prowess on. Doctor Pauling was denied at least four Nobel Prizes on political grounds.
Doctor Pauling and Doctor Mathias Rath have given us the KEY to the prevention and treatment of most CVD by elucidating the pathomechanism of atherosclerosis.
In brief they posit that the state of sub-clinical scurvy that most of us exist in, CREATES the atherosclerosis to help keep us from bleeding to death at a very early age; the down side is of course an early death from the same atherosclerosis. Get your vitamin C daily intake up to IMO about 3 grams and you will OBVIATE most of CVD as well as a whole raft of other disease.
"As they researched their book ASCORBATE, Hickey and Roberts began to wonder if Pauling's offense had been to discuss openly the properties of a substance that threatens the profitability of medicine. If the claims for vitamin C are correct, it might replace many lucrative and expensive medications." ASCORBATE: The Science of Vitamin C Note not only medications but also PROCEDURES such as by-pass and stent surgery the bread and butter of CVD surgeons. In fact one may say that a few grams of vitamin C/person/day could DEVASTATE the CVD Industry and greatly harm Rockefeller's depopulation program.
Of course doc profit has been propagandized all his worthless life to believe we only need the RDA of 60 mg/day of vitamin C and every worthless child destroying "vaccination" ever created to remain healthy.
Posted by: Lou | September 30, 2013 at 08:59 PM
Eindecker, look at the report on the Danish children (page 1478, N. Engl J M ed, Vol. 347, No. 19, November 7, 2002). "The children were assigned to the nonvaccinated group until they received the MMR vaccine. From that date, they were followed in the vaccinated group." See http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021134 .
So the control group was both a function of time prior to vaccination and time after vaccination?! A dynamic control group which is not a control group at all. Chi squared differences are meaningless.
Posted by: Jim Thompson | September 30, 2013 at 08:50 PM
Eindeker you say "This gives autism rates per 10000 children for vaccinated individuals 5.968 and for unvaccinated 5.4838. No significant difference by Chi Square.
For other autism spectrum diagnoses same population numbers, 345 cases in vaccinated and 77 in unvaccinated giving rates per 10,000 of 7.83 and 7.967 respectively, again not significantly different". There is a difference, and therefore shows an increase in the vaccinated between the 2 groups, and was around the actual autism rate at the time of the study about .5% of the population, and continually increasing which therefore shows the expected increase of autism rates in the vaccinated if done today the rates would likely be 1.5 to 2% since autism rates have risen to about 2% of the population, and I do believe this is the point.
Posted by: Victor Pavlovic | September 30, 2013 at 07:44 PM
Well done anonymous seems the only way to get the truth these days, hat off big time
Posted by: Angus | September 30, 2013 at 06:57 PM
For many years we have all known the truth about vaccines and how they cause Autism.
We have watched our babies health deteriorate after each injection.
So when are the governments going to cease the cover-ups?
Posted by: AussieMum | September 30, 2013 at 06:42 PM
Benedetta my Mothers first cousin is Ewan Cameron who was Linus Pollings co author in CANCER AND VITAMIN C .
Like Dr Wakefield chased out of the UK ....
This link is not the original edition
God Bless them all..
Posted by: Angus | September 30, 2013 at 06:42 PM
Thanks for publishing my calculated simple incidence rates as was requested, I cannot see any error in my maths, the calculations are very simple crude incidence rates from data published in the paper; there simply is no difference in autism rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts. Since this study is so pivotal in discussions I think it behoves John Gilmore to explain the basis of the calculations used for the graphs without delay.
Posted by: Eindeker | September 30, 2013 at 05:16 PM
I'm tired of all this obvious evidence - I just e-mailed Anonymous and WikiLeaks!!!
Posted by: Son In Recovery | September 30, 2013 at 03:30 PM
Not to take away one minute from how on earth John figured this out and this is like all of this stuff just earth shattering news -- MY GOD!
But Go over to wiikipedia about
We have Paul Offit calling this nobel prize winner -- Linus Pauling- whose name is known to all high school chemistry and science students --- the biggest quack ever!
Cause Linus Pauling thought vitamin C was a good idea.
I will say one thing for the CDC they sure are able to get around and put their plugs in - every where
Posted by: Benedetta | September 30, 2013 at 02:40 PM
The original indictment of Thorsen reads:
"Beginning on a date unknown, but at least by in or about
February 2004, and continuing until in or about February 2010, in
the Northern District of Georgia and elsewhere the defendant, POUL l
THORSEN1 aided and abetted by others known and unknown to the Grand
Who are the "others known and unknown to the Grand Jury" . that aided and abetted his numerous acts of "embezzling" two million dollars of the US people's money?
Posted by: Bob Moffitt | September 30, 2013 at 02:17 PM
I'm assuming the "unvaccinated" group here is not never vaccinated?
Posted by: Jeannette Bishop | September 30, 2013 at 02:02 PM
Thanks for this article!
Is it Poul or Paul?
Posted by: Dana | September 30, 2013 at 01:20 PM
Sorry but your maths is wrong in calculating the crude incidence rate:
Top of Table 1 gives total vaccinated children 440,655 unvaccinated children 96,648.
Table 2 gives number of vaccinated autistic children 263, autistic unvaccinated children 53.
This gives autism rates per 10000 children for vaccinated individuals 5.968 and for unvaccinated 5.4838. No significant difference by Chi Square.
For other autism spectrum diagnoses same population numbers, 345 cases in vaccinated and 77 in unvaccinated giving rates per 10,000 of 7.83 and 7.967 respectively, again not significantly different
How have you got your values???
Posted by: Eindeker | September 30, 2013 at 01:16 PM
Thank you for writing about this!!
Posted by: Twyla | September 30, 2013 at 11:32 AM
John, this is riveting information, clearly expressed. But how did you derive the bar chart in this article? This is not a rhetorical question. The chart is the clincher. Please reply.
Posted by: Dan E. Burns | September 30, 2013 at 11:20 AM
Thank you for putting the truth out there.
The Thorsen studies should be retracted and an apology issued by the Journals that published them.
We are the victims of an incredible fraud and the perpetrators need to be held accountable.
Posted by: Louis Conte | September 30, 2013 at 11:13 AM
She probably spends most of her time at CDC now, since Aarhus seems to have greater attentiveness to ethics than CDC. Still, I wonder if she also has one of those cushy "two full-time jobs" arrangements. Maybe Poul is housesitting for her in Denmark?
Posted by: beth johnson | September 30, 2013 at 10:37 AM
Thank-you, this make this more understandable. I thought the first article was a little confusing.
Posted by: Jenny | September 30, 2013 at 10:25 AM
And to think if only they had used all that brain power to figure out why the MMR is causing autism in the first place. Is it the mercury in the DPT shot -- or is it mumps part of it too -- like in the Pertusis toxin?
If just in the last decade they had not wasted so much time -- we could have had some answers.
At least to know what to expect - is coming down the pipes -- like pace makers - or something.
My cousin who has diabetes is getting a pace maker today.
Like Geiger and Geiger said: If they could have got ahold of the data base they might link a lot of stuff to vaccines.
Can you believe that people in the United States Government is hiding such stuff that affects every human being not just in the United States but -- as in WHO going world wide -- Can you imagine there are people like that -- and they just keep on keeping quiet forever, and ever, and ever! No breaking point!
Posted by: Benedetta | September 30, 2013 at 09:43 AM
Diana Schendel - Publications Department of Public Health - Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine
Bartholins Allé 2
8000 Aarhus C
Direct phone: 87165752
Mobile phone: 21627137
Posted by: White Rose | September 30, 2013 at 07:49 AM