Merck's Mumps Fraud Gets Closer to a Jury
By Dan Olmsted
In order to be approved and stay on the market, a drug needs to be both safe and effective. That's not asking so much, is it, given the billions that drug makers rake in every year, especially from the monopolistic, government-indemnified vaccine program?
But based on that scorecard, the MMR vaccine is now batting 0 for 2 and looking more forlorn than the Red Sox in September. Senior Scientist William Thompson from the CDC stepped forward last month to call BS on a major CDC study exonerating the mumps, measles, rubella shot as having any connection to autism.
Now a U.S. District Court judge has refused to dismiss a case brought by two Merck scientist-whistleblowers who allege Merck -- the only manufacturer of the MMR in the U.S. -- committed wholesale fraud to hide the truth that the mumps component no longer works as promised. That, they allege, is a crime against the U.S. government -- and ultimately taxpayers like you and me -- which spends hundreds of millions of dollars to buy the vaccine each year.
No wonder the judge let the case proceed (along with parts of a second, related class action suit): The evidence is strong, including a one-page internal Merck memo that outlined exactly what researchers were supposed to do to get the desired result, no matter the real data. Next up: demands by the whistleblowers for "discovery" of other internal Merck documents and data.
Stay tuned: If this gets to a jury -- and the whistleblowers give no indication they can be bought off for a measly few million bucks -- there could be hell to pay. Or at least a few billion. Strike 3!
Here's a CNN iReport on it: Merck's Motion to Dismiss Denied in Mumps Whistleblower Suits
These whistleblowers are heros, and I will keep praying for them. For justice, for truth. My son is not a casualty. Thank you to the whistleblowers!
Posted by: Cel Reese | September 10, 2014 at 02:19 AM
Re 'the Hooker model' - and voila, Deisher's paper appears... See, it's working already.
Posted by: Flahute | September 10, 2014 at 12:10 AM
Benedetta- True, perhaps too far ahead for next week but "go big or go home".
I never thought we'd see the events of the last 2 weeks develop as they have. A tsunami of lawsuits appears likely and perhaps a re-examination of how regulatory oversight should operate.
Anyway, I was just pointing out the varied linchpin laws that underlay varied industries (many similar chemicals and toxicological effects) activities and perhaps a way that these industries/laws can be unwound from the relatively
unscrutinized position(s) they currently occupy.
There seems to be a strange PR message that emanates from these oversight agencies or industries that often do not quite mesh with their studies or report findings. Further- since the CDC is a research arm that collects fundamental (mostly national) disease statistics and characterizes them, they will not investigate varied issues until there is sufficient public (as well as policy/political) pressure to do so. The vaccine-autism progression is a suitable case in point as CDC undertook several studies in the 1990's and 2000's to provide 'definitive data'.
The events of the last week suggest their agency is fundamentally incapable of providing robust integrity-based science on a significant topic. Since it appears to be a systemic problem, it calls into question some/much of their work and findings.
My point in illustrating the alternative path is to utilize FOIA data, give it to a citizen-based or objective group(s) to properly assess and provide context. This is the "Hooker model". I thoroughly expect his findings to resurface at some point, as should Wakefield's.
Since Thompson, in his opening statement, corroborates Hooker's conclusions of significant increased risk; this fact seems to have escaped the provax bloggers who've focused inordinately on parsing out nuances, questioning screenshots, and essentially engaged in character assassination. This is the "BMC vs Wakefield model" and the media blackout over the current CDC debacle that folks seem stressed over is simply aimed at information suppression (ie, 'nothing to see here').
At the very least, publicly funded data and information should be publicly accessible, not an additional funding stream for industry.
Posted by: flahute | September 09, 2014 at 09:04 AM
I am sick of the lies. Clearly, some children are considered collateral damage in the war against disease. Sadly, those children are now vaccine damaged children who are costing the tax payers billions a year. When or when will the public wake up?
Posted by: Lenore | September 09, 2014 at 01:16 AM
We need a carrot/bounty of cash to the first Journalist to have the #CDCWHISTLEBLOWER story out on National Media.
MMR RIP
Posted by: Angus Files | September 08, 2014 at 06:47 PM
Reading through some of the court documents, I have 2 thoughts that come to mind immediately (and there is the whistleblower part of it, and then the classaction part of it):
1. The parts of the suits that were dismissed, don't seemed to have been dismissed because they weren't necessarily valid, but that "the plaintiffs failed to invoke the law of any particular jurisdiction", followed by a legal reference, followed by this comment in parenthesis (granting leave to amend the complaint where plaintiff failed to specify the state laws they invoke) and also that there were no plaintiffs from all the states on which they were acting on behalf of.
In either of those cases, it seems like there is a door wide open for future litigation, though I could be completely misinterpreting it, since I'm certainly no lawyer.
2. The whistleblower suit, though "unsealed" in 2012, is still not completely unsealed. The unsealed paperwork is still redacted, with the judge specifying certain paragraphs will remain sealed indefinately! The unsealed paperwork is so revealing in itself, what, exactly, was so inflammatory or incriminating beyond that that it needed to remained sealed?!
Posted by: Jenny | September 08, 2014 at 06:41 PM
This mumps case should bring law suits from all of the young adult males infected . That's when the liability will step in, there is no protection under the law when they willfully deceived the public. I knew it, my doctor knew it. We had son's titers taken to avoid second shot, far too high for measles, ZERO for mumps, and Zero for rubella. The year, 2000.
Posted by: barbara | September 08, 2014 at 03:25 PM
Cough, cough, Elizabeth Cohen, regarding this enterovirus going around, mentioned that she wants parents to use a fancy, scientific thing called antennae. I guess she wants them to shut it off though, if its anything to do with autism.
Posted by: jen | September 08, 2014 at 11:55 AM
flahute: Way ahead of yourself -- We will be lucky -- I mean God looked down and moved his heaven and earth - to move the stone hearts that resides in the offices of the CDC and could only move -- 1.
Lucky to barely scratch at this problem. We will be lucky to get a bandaide on the vaccine scheldule.
I hate to be negative -- you are looking at other things that now we are going to fix -- but we have not got this fixed yet -- and IT alone is really --- really ---- Huge.
Posted by: Benedetta | September 08, 2014 at 10:29 AM
Who would have thought? As we witness proceedings which hasten the possible reversal of the NVIC act, it seems likely that at least several more things should occur.
1. I wonder how Merck et al would handle having most of the world's population filing class action lawsuits against them? $1T might not be enough. The WHO and/or Bill Gates ought not to be feeling too good since they've provided the worldwide infrastructural distribution network for this 'product'.
2. While NVIC is dismantled, how about tackling the weightier and more likely more damaging Clean Water Act exemptions that the energy/fracking industry obtained in mid 2000's.
3. Further, why not revisit Monsanto's claims on glyphosate (=Roundup herbicide, 1970's) and their GMO 'patented life' firewall obtained in the early 1990's.
These latter two issues represent cases that essentially protected the industry(s) from the closer scrutiny they deserved. THis is also while oversight agencies (ie, EPA, USDA, etc) were essentially hamstrung with budgetary constraints, institutional manipulation, and stovepiped information from wider public access.
4. This wider access is what Aaron Schwartz (Demandprogress, CreativeCommons, etc) were trying to achieve- that publicly funded research should also be publicly accessible and more rigorously vetted.
While Samsel & Seneff (2012-13) essentially hypothesize/outline the likely human and ecosystem effects that largely unregulated glyphosate application caused, the co-use with GMO products on a global scale has climate change, health, and geopolitical implications. In other words, much bigger than the US borders. And it isn't just Seneff publishing in a rather low impact factor journal, glyphosate/GMO are recognized problematically on within wider academic groups such as Purdue's Hubner and U Mich Vandermeer.
Perhaps Rob Knight at CU Boulder with their gut microbiome project is investigating this...or should be.
The fracking stuff is a tougher sell since we've long been engaged in domestic energy security and policies towards that end. However, because the EPA and attendant oversight agencies have their hands full, the energy and nat gas industry largely get a free ride with virtually unregulated drilling and apparently widespread regional (ground)water contamination.
THis fracking nonsense likely requires a regional study of epidemiological (and ecosystem) impacts caused by low levels of diverse contaminants. There are perhaps many such studies ongoing, but Boston Hospital (?) and the Silent Spring Institute tied cancer clusters to consumption of water containing low levels of mixed wastes.
Posted by: flahute | September 08, 2014 at 08:59 AM
We need a new flu shot each and every year...
but for some reason they use the same mumps virus for over 40 years as nothing ever changes ?
Many times the mumps cases are so mild that children will have antibodies to the disease as the parents never even knew the child had the problem.
Posted by: cmo | September 08, 2014 at 08:57 AM
Elizabeth Cohen of CNN, lip sync this: "Vaccines are effective. Vaccines are effective. Vaccines ..."
Posted by: Dan Burns | September 08, 2014 at 08:08 AM
CHS
There is obviously no trick that these people wouldn't use to re-seize the initiative not to mention the opportunity defraud taxpayers of many more billions of dollars. Yes, everyone has to be on their guard.
Posted by: John Stone | September 08, 2014 at 07:38 AM
"Next up: demands by the whistleblowers for "discovery" of other internal Merck documents and data."
Ah .. yes .. the critical "discovery" process .. that is denied petitioners in the vaccine cartel's sham Vaccine Court .. where Special Masters hear only that information the cartel wants them to hear.
If this does get to a "discovery" process .. an already shaky Humpty Dumpty will fall a lot faster .. and .. a lot harder.
LET THE REAL GAME BEGIN!!!!!!
Posted by: BoB Moffitt | September 08, 2014 at 07:32 AM
I'm still having a hard time believing the MMR history, marketed from the sound of it mainly through mumps vaccine mandates. How come there were no other competing mumps vaccines if this was such a brilliant idea? The risk/efficacy of a single mumps vaccine didn't measure up? Mumps vaccine could only be commercially viable if grouped with other vaccines, and then the weakest component mandated to have a market? And how was Hilleman/Merck so persuasive anyway? And we get this type of safety regulation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYcxIrs4oyk
And then enters competition with MMR with not so good results with the Urabe mumps strain...
And with MMR initially approved on such standards, there wouldn't be any regulatory problem with Merck reformulating mumps antigen counts a couple of times without undergoing additional safety testing:
http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/02/olmsted-on-autism-autism-explosion-followed-big-change-in-mmr-shot.html
So it seems pretty likely to me they first increased the mumps antigen count because they saw that component losing efficacy. Then why the reduction a few years on into the autism epidemic? The whistleblowers' report seems to suggest mumps efficacy didn't magically get better.
Also, while all this reformulation was going on they try throwing in varicella antigens and we get Pro quad. Were they thinking things could only go up from here? Adverse events from that vaccine had to be broken to the public through this venue before acknowledged:
http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/04/olmsted-on-au-1.html
This quote: “He said the interference appeared to involve only the chickenpox and measles viruses – ‘there is no such effect for the mumps or rubella vaccines administered locally at the same time,’" seems likely oversimplifying things.
And all of this founded on an ill-conceived mandate (if any other kind of mandate can be found).
Posted by: Jeannette Bishop | September 08, 2014 at 07:15 AM
Dan,
Will that mumps case get anywhere? How will it be papered over?
How is it we suddenly have an Ebola “outbreak” and it is coming to the USA too?
The Ebola outbreak is quite a coincidence – senior CDC scientist Dr Thompson has been talking with Dr Hooker for 10 months about the CDC knowing the MMR vaccine causes autism. The Ebola “problem” was introduced gently to the US public earlier in the year.
Now we have an Ebola “outbreak” in the west just when Hooker’s paper has been published and the admissions about the CDC knowing the MMR vaccine causes Autism issue are breaking news.
And today’s news of a “vaccine” will of course be certain to shut up editors about MMR causing autism.
Of course to test a new vaccine and a new drug one needs a clinical trial. But people tend not to get Ebola – it has been pretty quiet for a very long time – until now.
And suddenly they ship the sick people off to the USA instead of treating them where they got sick with all the attendant risks of spreading the disease.
Seems a gift for WHO and the CDC but who wrapped it and how long ago?
So it is impossible to supply to Africa an emergency medical unit and equip it to treat the victims? They have to be shipped back to the USA with all the risk of spread of the disease? Isn’t that reckless?
And what a miracle that so many of the “victims” have managed to survive. “Don’t worry – the US government and CDC will save you”.
Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | September 08, 2014 at 06:08 AM