Early Bird Registration Ends 4/1 for VOR Conference on Person Centered Disability (Including Autism) Choice
Multi-Meme Look At 1 in 68 With Autism

Weekly Wrap: Fatal Conflict

AofA Red Logo Ayumi YamadaBy Dan Olmsted

The mainstream media covered this week's  CDC new autism data – 1 in 68 American children affected, up 29 percent in two years – without even realizing the conflict of interest at the heart of the story.

CDC is the agency that recommends and promotes the childhood vaccination schedule that so many parents know first-hand is the driving force behind the autism epidemic. The preposterous idea that there is no epidemic, or the equally ridiculous notion that it is impossible to tell, abets the CDC in avoiding culpability for what has happened the past 25 years.

But because the CDC has done such a good job of convincing the media that a vaccine-autism link has been discredited, most journalists don't realize the conflict staring them in the face. They don't understand that the CDC cannot be trusted with anything bearing on the cause or frequency of autism, that it can't be treated as a credible and disinterested source. It's amazing really: the folks that caused this train wreck by falling asleep at the switch are investigating the cause and counting the casualties, and the media treats it as gospel.

ChristieMost of the time, journalists "get" this concept -- vested interests must be disclosed and generally detract from the reliability of their claims. You could see that play out this week in Chris Christie's own internal investigation exonerating him from any culpability in Bridgegate. The big media outlets basically laughed him off the national stage, noting that his own lawyers used taxpayer money to absolve him while casting evidence-free aspersions on his "emotional" former chief of staff. (Emotional, hysterical women -- this sounds familiar!)

Yet the same day, the CDC gets away with the entirely unbelievable idea that it's unclear whether there is a real increase in autism, and never gets called on why this might serve their own purposes. That keeps the wolves from the door for a couple of more years until they can switch over to the DSM-5 and obscure matters once and for all.

Amplifying the problem is that these conflicts extend to the big media players who like to come across as ferocious watchdogs when it comes to traffic jams in Fort Lee, but have far too much at stake -- namely, pharma revenue -- and far too little intellectual curiosity to dig independently into the truth about the roots and rise of autism. Some of those journalists are just as conflicted as the CDC.

For one thing, many of the "experts" the news anchors turn to when the new numbers come out are doctors, and frequently pediatricians. That is the profession that implemented the epidemic, in my view, yet they are now helping the CDC hide the truth, whether deliberately or by being totally sunk in the orthodox quicksand.

Thus Dr. Richard Besser, not just a doctor and not just a pediatrician but the former acting BesserDirector of the CDC, for cripe's sake, is the person deemed most suited to explain it all to us on ABC's World News Tonight.

After Diane Sawyer grills Christie in a long interview, she says, "and next now tonight we turn to a startling new medical report about autism."

"Why the surge? It could be better diagnosis," Besser reports. "But experts do say there are more children with autism." Well there's your story right there, Rich -- why are there more children with autism?

"What's causing it? We know genetics play a role, that young autistic brains are physically different. But it's still a puzzle." Yes, because neither of those are causing a surge. In other words, no clue is offered as to why there are more children with autism.

Then comes the usual switch to the early intervention blather -- "doctors just aren't screening, but there's new technologies to catch it sooner." Eye tracking, new approaches to treatment -- taking autistic kids' love of trains to make them more social. Get them talking to each other about trains -- that's the ticket to responding to a damaged generation.

"Tonight, as those numbers are growing, so is the race to find out why,"  Besser reports over images of happy train-riding autistic kids.

No, it is not. The train wreck is right on track, and the race is on to hide the truth.


Dan Olmsted is Editor of Age of Autism. © 2014 AgeofAutism.com



Cherry Sperlin Misra

Seeing the photo of Chris Christie, reminds me of a statement by Dr. N. Parinandi PhD, who is a remarkable biochemist and has done some work related to mercury. Dr. Parinandi recounts that he was invited to go to Capetown, to study what is happening to a population that has a great deal of airborn mercury pollution, from many small coal fires. Dr. Paranandi was surprised by this. He said, "I dont have to go to Capetown; I can go to New Jersey or New York !"
Could this explain the high numbers of autistic kids in New Jersey ? Dont hold your breath waiting for that answer. When the CDC decides to study environmental causes of autism , they will go to guess where? - IDAHO !!!!


Funny how the CDC "discredits the autism vaccine link" yet here is their former chief, Dr. Julie Gerberding stating in an interview that their "IS" a link...


Also funny, is now the good doctor is El Presidente of the vaccine division at Merck...come to your own conclusions.


I see John Stone was able to get some comments on over at this Forbes site that Kathy gave us. He is outnumbered with Dorit and Lilady and some guy whose name ends in poop (how fitting)

John said journalism has been reduced to intellectual infantilism.

I think that is going into my book of favorite quotes from the Age of Autism right now.

Jim Thompson

Kathy, now that the fifth and fourteenth amendments of U.S. Constitution have been put aside for Pharma, Paul leads the charge to assault the first amendment rights of citizens and families.

kathy blanco

Be prepared to puke...paul offit wants to control the lies and propoganda...see what i mean?

Jim Thompson

Re: Dr. Richard Besser’s statement “Tonight, as those numbers are growing, so is the race to find out why.”

Here is the CDC’s timeline for removing mercury (Thimerosal preservative contains 50 percent mercury by weight) from flu vaccines. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/thimerosal/thimerosal_timeline.html

Is that a race--or a slow crawl to the bank for Pharma?

Dr. Besser, mercury kills brain cells!

Terri Lewis

I've been one who gave up on the mainstream media. . .pretty much in its entirety. . .at least several years ago. It is, as noted in the comments elsewhere here, literally run by a handful of people and we hear what they want us to hear. When anything else slips through (Sharyl Attkisson, for example) it doesn't last for long. It is either buried quickly or mocked.

What to do?

If we can't take back the msm (or until we do) we are left with the alternative media. What's really scary to me is how little people understand the total corruption of the msm and continue to rely on it. . .people I would otherwise consider intelligent.

No answers, really, as we all tear our hair out. . .at least I am!. . .over a set of facts which is almost unbelievable, until you realize we no longer live in a free country. . .and haven't had a free (mainstream, trusted) press for. . .ages.

We can always share information here, but we are well aware that many won't listen to that because AoA has been positioned (by them, of course) as an "unreliable" source!

God help us. I really don't think anyone else is up to the job.

Jeannette Bishop

I'm too far gone I guess. I want to ask if there can be many in the mainstream who are unaware of how controlled what they report on is? Though if I were a 20-something somebody entirely different in personality newly entered into a media career, I might be buying all of it, but at least in politics, the agenda in questioning some candidates was so scripted and with so much urgency to control the discussion...they had to have been thoroughly instructed or aware somehow not to let a particular candidate talk about certain issues. How many in the mainstream media, particularly now, are likely to be vaccinating or planning to vaccinate their children?

I don't know Christie and some sources I considered alternative media are down on him also (I've heard he is pretty harsh on those that dissent with him in his state?--if anyone from New Jersey views things as otherwise maybe I'll question this media source more), but I can't help suspecting the mainstream attack indicates mainly he is being put under pressure to go along on something, or they are attempting to scratch him off the list (this early?) of potential presidential candidates. That's how far gone I am anyway...

Maybe it doesn't matter overall, but the CDC members' initial urgency to figure out the Bricks Township New Jersey cluster--I used to assume it was due to a disconnect between divisions in the CDC, maybe was--but I wonder if they were hoping to find some "other" environmental cause to blame for what they possibly already suspected or knew. If they had, would that have been blamed or protected too? I guess the question is at the top level of control are they protecting generally all corporate returns with what seems to be an elitist disregard for the effects on the few or maybe even the many or just their main "disease prevention" product?

Theresa 66

I was really p.o.'d about "the race to find out why" also, Bob Moffit. The only thing they are racing toward is covering up all this hell and a cushy pharma/gov job down the road. Most of us parents are in the race of our lives, trying to find / afford the doc's ( few ) who will help. So I guess some people are racing, just not mainstream medicine, media,or government.

Laura Hayes

Spot-on, Dan. You have such a way with words. I have shared this article with many in hopes that they will better understand how and why the CDC continues to refuse to admit to what they've done, and why Americans can't listen to a word that comes from the CDC if they value the health and well-being of themselves and their children...most especially when it comes to vaccines.

Interestingly, I was having a conversation with a mom yesterday who had never seen the video clip of Mark Blaxill explaining how the CDC had purposefully manipulated numbers after studying the surge of autism in Brick Township, NJ in the late 90s to COVER-UP what was happening there and across the nation. Just below is an email I sent out to a number of people on 7/7/11 to share this short video clip of Mark, and the link to it. He shows that the CDC did in fact figure out what was going on, and then went to great efforts to hide it, saying to hell with all of the children and families who will suffer. They made a purposeful decision to cover-up the truth to protect themselves versus admitting to what they'd done by recommending such a toxic/lethal vaccine schedule. They continue on their evil path today with some of the same players still running things at the CDC. Here's my email from 7/7/11:

"Here's a little clip of Mark Blaxill (co-author of "Age of Autism" ....great book). He and the other author, Dan Olmsted, spoke in Sacto last Oct. Compelling talk, to say the least. Anyway, here is a 9-min. clip that clearly explains the CDC's cover-up of what they discovered back in Brick Township, NJ, back in the late 90s. You might recall that Rick Rollens of Granite Bay testified before Congress that the same #s for the prevalence of autism (1 in 132) existed across the country from Brick, NJ, to Granite Bay, CA. Brick is blue collar, GB is white collar. Different water, different environmental toxins......but SAME vaccines being given to the kids, and a tripling of them starting about 1989. Like Mary Holland's paper, this data shows that the government knew what was happening and it shows the extreme measures that the government (namely the CDC, the FDA, and HHS) have gone to to HIDE the evidence that vaccines cause autism. Ponder how this manmade epidemic could have been avoided if the government officials in charge of keeping an eye on VAERS and "clusters" springing up (everywhere) had been forthright and not beholden to Big Pharma. Too sick to even contemplate. Your tax dollars hard at work, and more of your tax dollars will be needed to pay for 2 generations, and counting, of damaged kids."


Michele Obama, there is no more free speech in USA

Hey just had an idea. I wonder how the free speech highest ranking countries correlate with autism cases. Hmmm....

Not an MD

Please don't denigrate Governor Christie, Dan. He is the only reason doctors in New Jersey are not being forcefully vaccinated against influenza on an annual basis as a matter of state law-- the only reason-- as the NJ Assembly and Senate tried to push such a bill through twice already. Governor Christie is more of a friend than foe. His health department also made the only correct decision that a particular child with an egg allergy didn't have to receive an annual flu shot in order to attend school.

Betty Bona

I'm with you, Bob. How do they sleep at night? According to Kathy's link, there are 118 people controlling the media (and I can imagine that many without consciences), but there must be hordes who see what's going on. Some, like Sharyl Attkisson, try to make changes within the system. I wonder how many others have tried, only to give in and become part of the machine. What miserable lives those people must have!

Jeannette Bishop

It's all one corporation.

Michele Obama, there is no more free speech in USA

That youtube video Kathy linked to should be on as many Facebook accounts and linked to as often as possible (lol until Facebook censors it)

Michele Obama, there is no more free speech in USA

Whoooooaaa! Kathy Blanco that is so e frightening information you bring to our attention.

World Press Freedom Index 2013: USA ranks 42nd.
World Press Freedom Index 2014: USA ranks 46th.

"The ranking of some countries has also been affected by a tendency to interpret national security needs in an overly broad and abusive manner to the detriment of the right to inform and be informed."
This may be the country of the First Amendment but the hunt for leaks and whistleblowers has meant attacks on journalists , whistleblowers, chilled is sent and serves as a de fact warning to those who would.... Think of Katie Couric, anyone who dares speak out.....this is truly horrific.
See "No Country for True Journalists. US QPlummets in Free Press Rankings."

 Bob Moffitt

""Tonight, as those numbers are growing, so is the race to find out why," Besser reports over images of happy train-riding autistic kids."

The word "race" is particularly offensive .. a far better descriptive word for what Besser and his colleagues, both medical as well as media .. are pursuing would be "ruse" .. defined by Webster's as:

"stratagem, trick, or artifice"

Hence Besser and ABC's "stratagem" use of video images of happy train riding autistic kids.

How do they sleep at night?

Anne McElroy Dachel

Kathy Blanco's video is chilling.
Network executives sit on corporate boards...
"It's not illegal to falsify the news. . . "

This is why studies will never show a link and no one will ever care about conflicts.

They're leading us on the road to national destruction because over a million disabled children will overwhelm social services and they just keep on coming.

Betty Bona

So, Kathy, are we doomed? We're 32nd in the world on press freedom? Wow!

kathy blanco


This is the only reason our message is not being heard.

kathy blanco

read this from http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/news-articles/public-airwaves-myth/75018

NOTE, we have power, look at last paragraph....this is how our message must be heard...petition the fairness doctrine!!!!

Late last month, the FCC released a revised edition of a manual entitled “The Public and Broadcasting: How to Get the Most Service from Your Local Station,” which broadcast stations are required to provide to any member of the public who requests a copy. The manual asserts, without any citation to legal authority, that station licensees are trustees of the public's airwaves.

The concept of public ownership of the airwaves is repeated over and over without a close examination as to whether the notion has any legal basis or makes any sense. As Franklin Delano Roosevelt once said, repetition does not transform a lie into the truth.

If you review the record, it is clear that Congress never intended for the public to control the airwaves. Here, for example, is Sen. Clarence Dill, one of the co-authors of the Radio Act of 1927, on the subject of ownership of the airwaves: “The government does not own the frequencies, as we call them, or the use of the frequencies. It only possesses the right to regulate the apparatus. We might declare that we own all the channels, but we do not.”

Or take the late Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas. He debunked the argument that the government can control broadcasters because their channels use airspace by comparing broadcasters to people who speak in public parks—like the airwaves, also in the “public domain.” He added, “Yet people who speak there do not come under government censorship.”

Even the Congressional Research Service, which conducted a study of the problems raised by proposals to assess fees from broadcasters for use of the spectrum, concluded that “the notion that the public or the government owns the airwaves is without precedent. We find no case that so holds. Furthermore, when enacting the Radio Act of 1927, the Congress specifically deleted a House-passed “declaration of ownership.”

But if these arguments are not persuasive, think of the utter impossibility of anyone owning the airwaves. The radio frequency spectrum cannot be seen, touched or heard. Like sunlight and the wind, it has existed since the beginning of time—long before any person was around to claim it as their own. The spectrum—actually pulses of energy at different frequencies—cannot be contained, or divided, or held in any way. So how can anyone own or control it? The very idea is preposterous.

How, then, has the government been able to regulate broadcasting? Actually, the FCC's paternalistic control of radio and television slipped in the back door as an unwanted byproduct of a regulation that is, in fact, necessary for orderly use of the electromagnetic spectrum. (Yes, even those of us who advocate a hands-off approach to FCC regulation of broadcasters agree there is a place for some government supervision.) Without the FCC's rules on who can use what part of the spectrum, chaos would reign—signals would crash into each other, and clear communication could be impossible.

The late Harvard Law School Professor Louis Jaffe hit the nail squarely when he said: “The popular cliché that the broadcaster is using the public's airwaves is a vague, indeterminate concept. I think we would have heard little of it had not the existing technology required regulation of broadcasting to avoid interference. For, in one way or another, we all use air and space. To speak of owning such resources is a solecism.”

But the FCC, created to be the traffic cop of the airwaves, has taken on the role of a morals and vice squad. In the process, the electronic media, one of the most important voices in our society today, have been deprived of a basic constitutional right to freedom of speech.

None of this denies that the spectrum does have a special character, or that broadcasters have a special responsibility to use it in a way that is beneficial to society. In any event, the public still has recourse to stop a broadcaster that is doing a poor job. For one thing, there's that dial. Every time you change the channel, you are, in effect, voting for or against a station's programming. The public can also file petitions to deny a broadcaster's license at the FCC.

But the public does not own the airwaves. The spectrum is there, whether it is used or not. Only when it is enhanced by broadcasters filling the airwaves with information and entertainment does it have any value at all to the public. With their talent, technical knowledge and financial resources, broadcasters have increased the value of the spectrum for everyone. Without a signal, supplied by your local broadcast station, the airwaves are just so much empty space.

kathy blanco

o...My husband and I are sitting here this morning and thinking, what can we do about the one in sixty eight that the CDC (WHICH IS BOGUS LIES because it should be more kids counted) just came out... One thinker mom says talk to the pediatricians...tell them to read the package inserts....I think they are a little too far gone for that...aka....their business suicide awaits if they do such....how come the public is not informed...??

Look....why is this happening?...Have you ever heard the saying, if it's not on TV it's not true? THE MEDIA IS NOT SERVING THE PUBLIC INTERESTS.

And how are they getting away with that?

We need to get back the airwaves...hold the stations accountable to have divergent opinions on vaccine issues...are they suppose to do that? OF COURSE THEY ARE...

Every eight years stations go up for renewal of their licenses and right to operate...

But now, it's a rubber stamp process...they are getting away with MURDER...literally.

Until we get back our airwaves...everyone is going to believe that vaccines are safe in every instance, and that we are nuts, cookoo...for having a SCIENTIFIC divergent opinion.

How are we going to go after the big media corporations?

How do we get our right to be heard?

We need to make sure the FCC really has teeth in their policies.

We need to contact our congresspeople to make that happen.

Can all the autism organizations sue for their right to speak of this divergent opinion?

Any lawyers out there, anyone willing to bring this up? Do stations that make so much money using the public airwaves, but so plainly fail to educate viewers on the issues facing them, really deserve to have their renewals rubber-stamped?

We are being silenced...don't you all get that? "We justify the practice granting the free licenses because allegedly they fulfill a public interest obligation..."



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.)