Natalie Palumbo: Autism, Wandering, and Avonte Oquendo
Age of Autism Named Top 125 Exceptional Twitter Account for Special Needs

Informed Consent and MMR Vaccination

MmrManaging Editor's Note:  Thank you to Elizabeth Hart for allowing us to excerpt  a post from her site Over-vaccination. "Challenging Big Pharma's lucrative over-vaccination of people and animals."

‘Informed consent’ and the Measles/Mumps/Rubella (MMR) vaccine – challenging the US Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices

As I have argued previously on, it’s likely that most children will be immune after the first dose of the live Measles/Mumps/Rubella (MMR) vaccine.

However, mass populations of already immune children are being arbitrarily revaccinated with a second dose of the live MMR vaccine because a small proportion of children may not have responded to the first dose.  

In other words, millions of children are being over-vaccinated with the second dose of live MMR vaccine.  Read the full post at Over-vaccination.


Elizabeth Hart

As mentioned previously, I have forwarded a letter regarding the Measles/Mumps/Rubella (MMR) vaccine second dose to Professor Ian Olver, Chair of the NHMRC Australian Health Ethics Committee.

Jillian Barr, Director of the NHMRC Health and Research Ethics Section, has acknowledged receipt of my submission and advised that this matter will be considered by the NHMRC Australian Health Ethics Committee at its next meeting in early May 2014.

In the meantime, I have forwarded another letter re MMR vaccination to Professor Olver and his AHEC colleagues. I have included a reference to "The Antibody Titer Law (Holly's Law)" in this letter. I appreciate that this law was brought to my attention by a comment on this thread (Vaccine Information).

My latest letter can be accessed on via this link:

I've also created a dedicated webpage to publicly record my correspondence with the NHMRC Australian Health Ethics Committee, see this link:

Elizabeth Hart

For information, I have now forwarded another letter regarding Measles/Mumps/Rubella (MMR) vaccination and 'informed consent', seeking accountability on this matter.

This latest letter is addressed to Professor Ian Olver, Chair of the NHMRC Australian Health Ethics Committee, and has also been individually forwarded to other members of this committee.

The letter can be accessed on via the following link:

Elizabeth Hart

Vaccine Information (March 13, 2014 at 05:38 PM)

Thank you for posting the link about Holly’s Law: The Antibody Blood Titer Test

I wonder how many parents in New Jersey have seen this pamphlet?

And why isn’t this information available to all parents, in accordance with the Authorizing Legislation of the US National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, Sec. 300aa-26, i.e. legal representatives of any child or any individual receiving a vaccine set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table should be provided with information on the vaccine, including "a concise description of the benefits of the vaccine" and "a concise description of the risks associated with the vaccine".

Also note this quote from 300aa-26 Vaccine information:

"(2) not later than 6 months after the date such materials are published in the Federal Register, each health care provider who administers a vaccine set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table shall provide to the legal representatives of any child or to any other individual to whom such provider intends to administer such vaccine a copy of the information materials developed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, supplemented with visual presentations or oral explanations, in appropriate cases. Such materials shall be provided prior to the administration of such vaccine."
Reference: 300aa-26. Vaccine information. National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program:

There's no benefit to the vaccine if the child/individual is already immune, which in the case of the MMR can be verified by an antibody titre test. And if any already immune child/individual is revaccinated they undergo the risks of revaccination for no benefit. But is anybody being informed about this?

I will pursue this matter further.

Mercky Business

Liars and scoundrels.

Jenny Allan

"In fact, a child's immune system is designed to cope with many different viruses at the same time, so a combined vaccine is a natural choice."

John Stone is correct about 'contradictions'. Have these persons ever heard of evolution or do they subscribe to 'grand design' theories? ......and what the heck is 'natural' about vaccines?

The following is from an official NHS webpage about child vaccinations. Unless I have got this wrong they are stating newborn babies' immune systems are immature and immunity is initially acquired from maternal antibodies, supplemented by breastfeeding. Vaccines are necessary according to them, because these maternal antibodies are only temporary.
From above:-
"During the last three months of pregnancy, antibodies from the mother are passed to her unborn baby through the placenta.
This type of immunity is called passive immunity because the baby has been given antibodies rather than making them itself. Antibodies are special proteins that the immune system produces to help protect the body against bacteria and viruses.
The amount and type of antibodies passed to the baby depends on the mother's immunity. For example, if the mother has had chickenpox, she will have developed immunity against the condition and some of the chickenpox antibodies will be passed to the baby. However, if the mother has not had chickenpox, the baby will not be protected.
Immunity in newborn babies is only temporary and starts to decrease after the first few weeks or months. Breast milk also contains antibodies, which means that babies who are breastfed have passive immunity for longer. The thick, yellowish milk (colostrum) that is produced for the first few days following birth is particularly rich in antibodies.
Premature babies are at higher risk of developing an illness because their immune systems are not as strong and they have not had as many antibodies passed to them.
As newborn immunity is only temporary, it is important to begin childhood immunisationswhen your baby is two months old. This applies to babies who are either premature or full-term."

John Stone


Of course, that's what I said at the time:

"There are patently contradictions here. On the one hand we are being assured that children's immunes systems are of incredible robustness, and this is apparently stated as a fact. But if this was the case you might wonder why they needed to be vaccinated at all. Secondly, we are assured that the multiple vaccine products are tested to ensure their safety, because (presumably) the science that declares that their immune system is so robust cannot be relied upon. Thirdly, the extreme theoretical claim of Offit et al, is offered as evidence (but presumably no one is queuing up to test their child with the 10,000 vaccines claim).

"As to the point about the immune system being "designed", even if we accept the gloss of the mmrthefacts support team we have to answer: fine, but what happens when the digestive system goes wrong, and what happens when the liver goes wrong, and what happens when the immune system goes wrong...?"


"From the moment of birth a child's immune system is able to cope with the constant barrage of pathogens."

A child at birth is designed to be able to cope with a barrage of pathogens INCLUDING injected measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, hepatitis A. hepatitis B, pertussis, Hib, influenza, etc., etc., etc.

That's odd. Doesn't the public health community PANIC if a child is exposed to only ONE of those pathogens at a time? According to their own logic, vaccines are unnecessary because children are designed to fight many diseases at once, even 10,000 at a time. Oh, not THOSE pathogens? They only mean that children are designed from the moment of birth to cope with OTHER pathogens, but since they are able to cope with OTHER pathogens, it's ok to inject them with these pathogens that according to public health officials are a dangerous threat? And all of them at the same time?


Preach all you want to the choir -- I am so glad that after all these years we have a choir finally to preach too.

By listening to all that everyone says -- it has opened my eyes to how deep this rabbit hole really goes.


Back in the 70s in my microbiology classes any vaccine that required a booster was considered a very unsafe/ undesirable vaccine.

Unsafe - as a student I wished I understood more about the details of what unsafe meant.


Hi Taximom5,

“In 1996 to 1997, in an effort to reach the goal of measles elimination, every Canadian province and territory added a second dose of measles-containing vaccine to its routine immunization schedule”

This is what the Health Canada website states:

Routine childhood immunization: administer two doses of measles-containing vaccine (MMR or MMRV); the first dose at 12 to 15 months of age and the second dose at 18 months of age or any time thereafter, but should be given not later than around school entry.

I couldn’t find the schedule for BC at the time my son received his second dose but here is what is presently states:

The MMR vaccine is free and given to children in BC as part of a 2 dose series at ages:
12 months
4-6 years of age

So it is interesting to me that my son was vaccinated for MMR when they just rolled out the 2 dose program. Our neighbour’s son vaccinated in the same time frame (he was 2 weeks younger than our son) was also eventually diagnosed as being on the autism spectrum.

“Adverse reactions are less frequent after the second dose of vaccine and tend to occur only in those not protected by the first dose”

Perhaps a lot of reactions made the BC provincial health authorities change the timing of the second dose?
That certainly applies in our situation as my son regressed after the second dose of MMR along with 5 other vaccines and has zero titres.

Another interesting fact I found in my search is that:
Measles and Rubella has been a reportable disease in Canada since 1924, with the exception of a period from 1958 to 1969.
And Mumps had been a reportable disease since 1924 with the exception of a period from 1958-1986.

Unlike a few other diseases that were reportable and then weren’t and then were again, these three have no explanation next to them as to why they weren’t reportable during those times. I would like to know the reason.


What it comes down to is our kids are caught up in a web of greed. To the industry our kids are a market share are pregnant women and elderly. The CDC Vaccination Schedule has nothing to do with public health and everything to do with making money for investors and the industry. What makes this deal sweet is the deluded regulators like HHS Director Kathleen Sebellius have given their seal of approval by protecting and publically promoting the industry. Sebellius and her cronies at the CDC still believe this vaccine push is about protecting public health. Ha! Like the industry even cares.

The mainstream media also has the industries backs--look at the lucrative drug ads on the Nightly News. Do you think the execs at CBS, NBC or ABC are going to question them? There is no way these television networks are going alienate their sugar daddy big pharma. As long as they make lots of $$$$, they love Big Pharma. And any reporter who goes rogue and dares question the safety of vaccines on national television will be dealt with.

Lucrative secondary markets are created due an increase of children with auto immune, neuropsychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders. An emerging market for genetics screening and reproductive technologies like pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD)opens up...even though this is a slippery slope toward eugenics, that is ignored because there is an opportunity for more $$$$$ to be made. It's all for the greater good you see.

With the government greasing the gears, the machine roars on. Get out of the way or it will grind you up and spit you out. Meanwhile, the Pharma cartel, Wall Street and it's investors those working in the non profit arena get rich on the backs of our kids. Raise awareness. So much $$$$$ to be made...isn't autism grand!!

I would love to see the investment portfolios of those on the pro-vax side who so strongly defend vaccines and who attack us calling us "anti-vax and worse...this could reveal a lot about what their true motivation is....$$$$$

I think we should do all we can to expose the vaccine money making machine to other parents.

John Stone

Another gem from MMR the Facts website was the question and answer advice to give your child a second jab even if they had had a bad reaction to the first:

"Q My son had a sever[e] reaction to the first MMR jab. Does this mean that he is well protected from these diseases, or is a second dose still necessary?

"A If a child has responded well to the components of the vaccine the first time, he will not have a problem being exposed to viruses a second time.

"If he hasn't made protection to all three diseases after the first time, he will still be susceptible to those natural infections, and still needs the 2nd dose.

"Reactions after the 2nd dose are essentially the same as the first dose but if they do occur are even rarer. The advice is therefore that it is safe for your child to the 2nd dose in order that he is properly protected."

John Stone


You reminded me of an exchange I had with the National Health Service's 'MMR the Facts' team 10 years ago taking issue with a statement of the then Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson and subsequently reported in BMJ Rapid Responses:

"In an NHS leaflet...Sir Liam Donaldson, the Chief Medical Officer is asked: "Does MMR overload young bodies?" to which he replies: "Again, all the evidence refutes this. In fact, a child's immune system is designed to cope with many different viruses at the same time, so a combined vaccine is a natural choice."

"I asked mmrthefacts: "Is the CMO entitled to present this as a medically established fact rather than a theoretical proposition? What is the experimental evidence that all children are equally able to sustain multiple exposure? What does the CMO mean by "designed?"

"To which I had the reply (received 27 May 2004, 13.10):

""The CMO is entitled to present his statement about the immune system as a medically established fact rather than theoretical proposition. From the moment of birth a child's immune system is able to cope with the constant barrage of pathogens. As the CMO stated, this is what the..."immune system is designed cope tih (sic)..."As for example, the digestive system is "designed" to digest food and liver is "designed" to detoxify the blood. Part of the licensing process of any combination vaccine, such as MMR, has to show that the combination is safe and effective when administered to the age group for which it is intended. There is recent research from the US which supports this statement as it has specifically looked at the ability of children's immune systems, estimating that a child's immune system could cope with 10,000 vaccines any one time. Please see Offit PA et al (2002) Addressing parents' concerns: Do multiple vaccines overwhelm or weaken infant's immune system? Pediatics, 109 (1): 124-9

"Thanks Support Team"

Jenny Allan

I have noticed a significant recent change in those 'official' health measles alerts. Now they talk about 'inadequate' MMR vaccinations, i.e. only one dose of vaccine received.

In the UK 'booster' doses of single measles and MMR vaccines were not considered necessary when first implemented into the child vaccination schedule. Now, it seems boosters and multiple doses of MMR are necessary for complete immunisation. Indeed a Welsh health spokesperson stated multiple doses of MMR vaccine are completely harmless; this was during the Welsh measles outbreak Jan-May 2013.

This cavalier attitude to child vaccination safety makes me shudder. As far as I know there have been NO safety trials on multiple MMR vaccine doses. This reminds me of Paul Offit's assertion that children can be administered 10,000+ vaccines without harm. Perhaps Offit would like to test this on himself?

John Stone

Hi Elizabeth,

I very much like your approach of requesting explanations from the resposible officials.

Your account of the system is echoed in an article I wrote three years ago:


Elizabeth Hart

Autismmom (March 13, 2014 at 12:13 PM )

Thanks for the references and see more here:

Vaccine manufacturers are now pretty much protected from liability, and see vaccines as their salvation. Fresh 'crops' of children are coming through every year, prey for every lucrative vaccine product these companies come up with. In a developing 'cradle to grave' scenario, adolescents and adults are also being lined up for more questionable vaccines and revaccinations:

Vaccine industry greed is going to undermine the credibility of the vaccination schedule. All sorts of vested interests and empire-builders have a hand in setting up this massive global vaccine market for Big Pharma, including those you'd think should be protecting our interests.

I live in Australia where any challenge to vaccination practice is slammed by vaccination zealots, the media, the 'authorities' etc. I examine and criticise individual vaccine products from a layperson's perspective, and write letters to 'the authorities', questioning vaccination practice. (For example, re the MMR second dose, as well as my recent letter to the US ACIP, also see my correspondence to other 'authorities' on this matter: ) We need to take it straight to those who are accountable, put it 'on the record'.

My approach is not 'anti-vaccination', and I make no claims to having any expertise in vaccination/immunology. I'm just a citizen asking questions, as is my right in our democratic society. And there are a lot of dodgy things to ask questions about. There are also parties who want to stifle this questioning and maintain the status quo (see for example Ben Goldacre's Bad Science forum – a gatekeeper for the vaccine industry: )

It's startling the way this increasing load of questionable vaccine products (e.g. the HPV vaccine: ) is being imposed on the community at the behest of 'vaccination committees':

Really, I fear for future generations. Children are now being set up to be vaccinated every year for life with annual flu vaccines, plus a multitude of other lucrative vaccine products in the pipeline. The trusting general public is being trained that vaccines are magic bullets which can cure all ills with no adverse consequences. Is anybody really thinking about the long-term effects of all these medical interventions, the cumulative effect of all these vaccines, including adjuvants, excipients etc?

The alarm is being raised about the over-use of antibiotics, what about the over-use of vaccines?

Elizabeth Hart

Bob (Bob Moffitt | March 13, 2014 at 06:47 AM)

It would be interesting to know what’s happening with the Merck/mumps case or if it is just being buried…?

Also interesting that a measles/rubella vaccine (MR), i.e. no mumps, is being promoted by the GAVI Alliance in developing countries:


@Samaxtics: I don't think they did change the MMR schedule since your sons were born. I think some doctors got confused, because the original 1995 schedule called for the first MMR to be given at 12-15 months, rather than at 15-18 months, with a second dose to be given at 4-5 years. So some doctors were either confused or greedy, and gave the toddlers MMR at 12 months, then again at 15-18 months--and then many schools required a dose 12 months or less before starting kindergarten.

So a lot of kids ended up with THREE doses.

Vaccine Information

Holly died from encephalitis after second MMR dose.
Her parents spearheaded a law to permit tyter tests in lieu of the second dose.

Vaccine Information

Feline Vaccine Associated Cancers

Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force (2001 Report)


Thank you this article on over-vaccination. One of the references is to veterinary guidelines

Lots of good information here for humans and their pets. A couple of highlights from the Q&A at the end:

"52. Is there a risk of over-vaccinating a pet (e.g. injecting it too often, or using vaccines that are not required for the specific pet)?

Yes. Vaccines should not be given needlessly, as they may cause adverse reactions. Vaccines are medical products that should be tailored to the needs of the individual animal. Also, when administering bacterins it is advisable to give them at separate times rather than giving them together." (p. 32)

(good thing Paul Offit didn't go to vet school instead of becoming a pediatrician - would have cost him a fortune, not to mention his career)

"55. Can vaccines cause autoimmune diseases?

Vaccines themselves do not cause autoimmune disease, but in genetically predisposed animals they may trigger autoimmune
responses followed by disease – as can any infection, drug, or a variety of other environmental factors."

"29. May I vaccinate pregnant pets?

No. Vaccination with MLV and killed products during pregnancy should be avoided, if at all possible. There are exceptions,
especially in shelters, where vaccination would be advised if the pregnant animal has never been vaccinated and there is an outbreak of disease (e.g. CDV or FPV)." (p. 29)

Is the flu and pertussis such a danger to all pregnant humans that EVERY ONE of them should be vaccinated? A practice which is not only NOT RECOMMENDED but SHOULD BE AVOIDED for their pet dogs and cats?

Is your pet getting better medical care than your family?


Thanks for the links. I went to the "Shot in the Wallet" article and at the bottom where there are recent articles listed, under the article "Potential Rabies Vaccine Discovered", I see of the two comments that that article got, is one from Dorit Reiss, in which she says "Exciting!". LOL.
I don't know why I find that so funny.


I think one of the main reasons our kids are so heavily vaccinated is the push from Wall Street. At some point vaccines, which have always intergral to public health, became a commodity that translated to big bucks for investors. Money not public health became the motivator.

Getting a vaccine listed on the CDC immunization schedule translated to big $$$$ for the Pharmaceutical companies. They knew this and were quick to stack the CDC approval board (ACIP) with industry loyalists who they knew would grant approval of vaccines to the CDC schedule.

Over the years, the CDC immunization schedule became dangerously overloaded. Noone at ACIP bothered to seek studies the culmulative effects of all these shots on an infants neurodevelopment.

In a press release dated January 2013, the IOM casually mentioned: "However, the elements of the (CDC) schedule -- the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at which vaccines are given -- are not well-defined in existing research and should be improved."

What?? The CDC never studied the culmulative affects of all these shots on a child??? They have no idea if this approach is safe?? this is a HUGE admission!!

Here is the full IOM press release:

"IOM Report Details Strategy for Monitoring Safety of Childhood Immunization Schedule" January 2013

A few years ago, I started reading the business reports on the vaccine investment. Here are some excerpts from two articles calling vaccines money makers promoting vaccines investment:

"Vaccines and Their Promise Are Roaring Back"- New York Times By G. PASCAL ZACHARY, Published: August 26, 2007

"But in a stunning reversal, innovators today are chasing dozens of vaccines, stimulated by some recent high-profile successes. “People see vaccines as money makers,” says Paul A. Offit, chief of the infectious diseases section at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and the author of “Vaccinated,” a new book on Hilleman’s career."

"Across the industry, the research pipeline is bulging. Companies are spending billions trying to develop vaccines for various cancers, staph infections and malaria. “We are entering a new golden era of vaccinology,” says Gregory A. Poland, a vaccine expert at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn."

Full NYT article:

"A Shot in The Wallet"
by Ted Agres, Contributing Editor , 2009

"The global market for vaccines is projected to more than double from $16 billion in 2007 to $35 billion in 2014, far outpacing growth rates for most other pharmaceuticals, according to Scientia Advisors LLC, a Cambridge-Mass. consulting firm. This builds on a near tripling in sales from 2000 to 2008, according to the World Health Organization’s most recent report on vaccines and immunizations. Most of this expansion came from sales in industrialized countries of newer, more costly vaccines, which account for more than half of the total value of vaccine sales worldwide, WHO said."

I know I am preaching to the choir but our kids are the victims of extreme greed and turning what should be a life saver into poison.


When my sons were small (born 1996 & 1998) the schedule was MMR at 12 months and then again at 18 months.
After reading about some children with autism having high measles titres I had my both my sons tested a few years back. My son with who regressed with autism after his second MMR at 18 months had zero titres. My other son (NT) had some. We also tested them for varicella (neither had the varicella vaccine) as they have been exposed to wild type chickenpox and vaccine induced chickenpox and they had zero titres for that.

I wonder if a child doesn’t respond to the first shot, what the rate is of responding to the second. I also would like to know why they changed the schedule to first dose of MMR at 18 months and the second to be given around 4-5 years from the previous at 12 & 18 months.


I had titres checked for my child. Everyone else I mentioned this to thought that was "too invasive" and too much to have their children go through (easier just to revaccinate). Whether titres are truly indicative of immunity, I don't know. The point is, many school districts accept them in lieu of revaccination. My kid was immune--for that and for chicken pox (probably because of several exposures in addition to the vaccine as everyone knows how ineffective that actually is).

Anyway, it's considered so easy just to get another shot that no one even takes the blood test option, even after learning about it.

Jenny Allan

@Bob Moffitt
Yes in the UK mumps has become endemic in our universities and colleges. Most infected students have received MMR vaccine in infancy. During the same timescale as the ridiculously overhyped so called measles epidemic in Wales, said to involve around 1500 cases, (but officially confirmed cases numbered only around 250, most of which were recorded in April 2013), there were also around 50 confirmed mumps cases in Wales, mostly teenagers and young adults. This was NOT reported in any UK press or media outlets.

I DID inform the BBC about the situation with UK mumps, since the British Biased Corporation was principally responsible for broadcasting most of the ridiculous lies and misinformation about the grossly overhyped Welsh measles outbreak, including a little 'playacting' scene,involving Paul Offit on a US link, BMJ Editor, Fiona Godlee and veteran presenter Jeremy Paxman. The purpose of this exercise seemed to be progaganda in favour of forced (mandatory) vaccinations in the UK. Of course Dr Wakefield was blamed for 'teenagers' causing the measles outbreak, due to parental concerns raised by the 1998 Wakefield et al Lancet paper, resulting in low vaccination rates. The official measles infection figures actually point to a spike in the 1-4 year age group, a cohort stated to be more than 94% MMR vaccinated.

The 'teenagers' in Wales refused to be intimidated into getting extra MMR vaccinations; this caused a big financial headache for a S Wales health department, left with more than £100,000 worth of unwanted MMR vaccine doses. This did not stop the Welsh authorities from mounting a campaign to vaccinate babies over the age of 6 months. Thousands of parents complied with this, even though there was NOT ONE SINGLE confirmed measles case in babies under 1 year old. These babies will still receive their normal scheduled doses of MMR vaccine, at 15-18months and 4 years.

Apparently, Cardiff University had previously been complaining to the Welsh Health Departments about student mumps cases. A little bit of 'googling' confirms this situation is not confined to Wales, but is endemic in ALL UK universities. I could extrapolate here and suggest the mumps situation for young adults in US and elsewhere might be similar to the UK. My eldest grandson reported 5 of his 'mates' at a Scottish University contracted mumps. All had been MMR vaxed. They were warned this could cause sterility.

The official confirmed Welsh measles cases for April and May 2013 were not released until September 2013. There was an internet outcry over the previous confirmed cases amounting to only 8 for the first 3 months of 2013. The small print on accompanying the graphs and data stated SOME of the 200 odd April cases may not be laboratory confirmed. Remember MOST younger doctors in the UK will never have even seen a measles rash, far less be able to correctly diagnose one.

 Bob Moffitt

"However, the ACIP report on MMR vaccination appears to support Merck’s information re the high seroconversion rate after primary vaccination, particularly in regards to the measles and rubella components of the MMR vaccine, (although there appears to be some ambiguity about the effectiveness of the mumps component of the MMR vaccine)

I think the word "ambiguity" does not due justice regarding the problems of the "mumps component of the MMR vaccine." A better word would be "fraud".

Here is an article reporting allegations against Merck's mump vaccine "effectiveness":

"According to two whistle blowing former Merck virologists who filed a 2010Federal False Claims Act complaint two years ago in 2010 when the Act first passed, as of June 28, 2012, the scientist's complaint at last has been unsealed. The complaint reports that the corporate pharmaceutical vaccine manufacturer, Merck allegedly "knowingly falsified its mumps vaccine test data, spiked blood samples with animal antibodies, and sold a vaccine that actually promoted mumps and measles outbreaks."

The complaint accuses Merck of allegedly ripping off governments and consumers who bought the vaccine thinking it was "95% effective, according to the June 28, 2012 Natural News article."

Apparently .. if true .. Merck "knowingly falsified its mumps vaccine data" for TEN YEARS.

Has the US Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices held Merck accountable for this FRAUD? If not .. why not?

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.)