Public Affairs Media Presents Haley Vs. Offit: A Virtual Debate About Vaccines
Parkinson’s, Autism, and Back To the Future



I am talking about Harris L Coulter too.


Yeah, I sent his book on; "Vaccination, Social violence, and Criminality; the Medical Assault on the American Brian." To my Senator McConnell. He is ours here in Kentucky after all, I have written and written - I have even gone to see him a couple of times at our local bank when he comes around wanting my vote.

And he did run on the platform that he would do what ever it takes to bring an end or at least help toward the drug problem that is just drowning our part of the country.


Just found this on the NVIC website. I've never read this before, but am glad I just did. What a remarkable man Harris Coulter was! A true visionary. This book, "DPT - A Shot In The Dark," was THE first book I ever read regarding the issues with vaccination. I cried buckets as I read through that book, realizing for the very first time in all it's bloody reality, the horror that our son went through, was all documented right there, and had happened to numerous other children:


"...But I didn’t know he was a visionary medical historian, who had chronicled the history of homeopathy and the epic philosophical battles waged during the history of medicine from ancient times to the present in what would become his formidable four volume series of books called “Divided Legacy.” When I talked with him on the telephone that day in 1982, I didn’t know that Harris had graduated from Yale in Russian studies; that he was fluent in Russian, Hungarian, French, German, Spanish and Latin and was a well known oral and written translater for the State Department and at the United Nations; or that he earned a masters degree in political science and a PhD in philosophy from Columbia University.

I just knew, after talking with him for about 30 minutes, that he was an independent thinker and fearless about critiquing bad science and flawed assumptions made by the medical profession. Fearless was something I already figured out was a pre-requisite for writing a book that would challenge long standing assumptions parents and doctors have had about the safety of mass vaccination policies.

So I asked him if he wanted to co-author a book with me. He said “yes” and arrived on my doorstep a few days later to outline our game plan. And from that day on, Harris Coulter and I embarked on a truth seeking journey about vaccine safety that would take us into a labyrinth, where the history of science, medicine, politics, economics, law, and ethics intersected..."

Interestingly enough, when my husband and I were browsing through many books at the Tattered Cover Bookstore in downtown Denver (after witnessing our son's vaccine reactions), this book LITERALLY flew off the shelf and landed on the floor in front of me. Stunned, I picked it up and knew I had to purchase it.

This book was a real eye opener and a primer for me as I began my decades long study into not just vaccines per se, but into the entire history re the allopathic medical model versus the homeopathic model.

I did not just research vaccination and arrive at where I am now, re vaccination. I studied the history behind allopathic medicine and its war with the homeopathic practitioners. What an education that was...

I would encourage anyone who has never read this book, to do so.


Cia, I have read a Shot in the Dark. Yes, The DPT caused some very serious adverse reactions, which is why it was eventually pulled. I don't recall receiving the DPT. I recall receiving vaccines for polio, smallpox, and tetanus. My brothers and I came down with whooping cough and I remember that we thought the whooping sound was funny. For small babies whooping cough can be life threatening, but for us it was a temporary discomfort and not a big deal. I don't know if we were not vaccinated for pertussis or if we were vaccinated but got pertussis anyways. I know that we were not vaccinated for measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, rotavirus, hep B, HIB or flu. We definitely came down with measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, and flu. If we came down with the others we must have fought them off without a significant problem.

In my comment I did not say that we were all ok. The addition of the word "all" changes the meaning. I do recognize they there have always been some adverse reactions, and wrote that "there should be a concerted effort to understand why some are especially vulnerable to harm, rather than sweeping vaccine injuries under the rug. And there must be the right to make choices. The drive for mandates is insane."

I'm not recommending certain vaccines or a certain schedule for anyone. I truly don't know what is best. Weighing the risks and benefits of vaccines is not simple. Dan and Mark have tried to do so in their book "Vaccines 2.0". If my kids were still children I would have read that book by now. I do still plan to read it but have been busy reading some other books first - so many good ones have come out over the past year. With any vaccine there are possible risks and with any disease there are possible risks. These risks can be short or longterm. All I can say is that people must have the right to make these decisions for themselves and their families, in consultation with the medical practitioners of their choice, and with full accurate information (which is currently not generally provided).

People I respect who have spent more time studying this than me allege that vaccines have never eliminated or even prevented any diseases. They have a right to that opinion, but at this time I don't agree.

What I object to is the opinion that if someone is not absolutely against all vaccines for everyone, that means that they are not against vaccine mandates, and also are probably chickens, afraid to say what they really think, afraid of the truth.

When Bobby Kennedy says that he wants policies that make everyone feel comfortable vaccinating, that is a far cry from saying that he wants everyone (or anyone) to be forced to vaccinate. What he is saying is that the current program is causing people to lose confidence in vaccines. The powers that be are so afraid to admit to problems, thinking they have to engage in coverup in order to maintain confidence. But this approach is backfiring, resulting in an erosion of confidence. More and more people are seeing adverse reactions being ignored and summarily dismissed, not studied, and seeing that the information we receive on vaccines is so slanted. And the powers that be think they can be influenced by financial interests without anyone noticing or caring.

Again, I'm fine with people speaking out to say that thimerosal is not the only problem in vaccines. I agree. We should not be disseminating the message that as long as we remove the thimerosal all vaccines are fine. Kennedy points out the corruption in many aspects of the vaccine program, including safety monitoring and vaccine approvals. He points out how many more vaccines people receive now compared with when he was growing up, and how the schedule expanded when the industry and medical providers were granted legal immunity that is not granted to any other industry. He is allying himself with Brian Hooker and William Thompson who are speaking out about doctored MMR research. He may have started out totally focussed on mercury, but clearly his concerns are expanding.

It bothers me that in recent years I see so much slamming of people who are working the hardest against vaccine mandates, for vaccine choice, and for acknowledgment of an autism-vaccine link and other vaccine injuries.

We are all going to have somewhat different opinions on science, medicine, and strategy.

So far nothing we are doing seems to be working well, but everything we are doing in combination has some effect.


"By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Tuesday, October 27, 2015
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz began the impeachment process against IRS Commissioner John Koskinen on Tuesday, accusing him of misleading the public and destroying documents that were sought under a congressional subpoena.

It was the latest move in the battle over the targeting of tea party groups at the tax agency."

The IRS brought before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee for misleading the public and destroying documents. How come they didn't let the IRS investigate itself (like they allowed the CDC to investigate itself when accused of misleading the public and destroying documents by their own senior scientist whistleblower William Thompson)?

What's more important to the United States Government House Oversight and Government Reform Committee? Alleged financial harassment of the Tea Party or alleged ongoing massive scientific and industrial collusion and corruption leading to the disabling and killing of America's and the World's children?


Good point, Barry. Remember when WHO, what, where and when was a part of journalism? Not now. They aren't saying WHO did it so that they can be held accountable. This is the new normal in America.

cia parker

A Shot in the Dark has many true case histories of many previously healthy children killed or brain-damaged by the DPT. It starts with a mom whose sister-in-law calls her to ask if she saw the Phil Donahue show about damage caused by the DPT. The mom gets her six-month-old vaxed that day with the DPT, and that night he goes into seizures, foams at the mouth, has copious diarrhea and vomiting, they call 9-11, but he's dead before he gets to the hospital. The whole book is filled with true stories like that, from the early '80s.

How many would have died of pertussis if they hadn't gotten the DPT? Many doctors between 1960 and 1980 said that pertussis had become so much milder than it had been in the nineteenth century that they did not recommend giving it routinely to all children, that it caused too much damage in too many. Sweden stopped giving it at all between 1979 and 1997, and, while 60% of Swedish children got pertussis during those years, there was an average of less than one death a year from pertussis. As recently as ten years ago it was considered the number one most reactive vaccine ever (I'm not sure if it is still, the hep-B, MMR, and HPV vaccines must be giving it a run for its money).

I reacted to the DPT at three months old with days of screaming, my brother two years later with beating his head on the bars of his crib. I disagree that we were all right then with just the DPT, smallpox, and polio vaccines (measles, then MMR a few years later). Many of us weren't all right, and for what? Pertussis would not have killed as many as were killed or brain-damaged by it.


Bayareamom quotes bobby Kennedy as saying, "“I don’t think it’s appropriate to force people to undergo, to have their children undergo a medical procedure in this country,” Mr. Kennedy said in a segment on KOIN-TV in Salem. “I think it’s against the tenets of our country.”"

Well, there you go. He's against mandates!

Bayareamom, you say that you are sick and tired of people being afraid of speaking the entire truth. Yes, people are often afraid of speaking the truth. On the other hand, there are people who have different opinions than you. It's not that they are afraid, but that they see things differently. No two people have exactly the same opinions.

So go ahead and speak the truth as you see it. But don't expect everyone to agree with you. And I think it's in everyone's interest to band together with all who are against mandates and for personal choice on vaccines.

There are many doctors, scientists, and govt employees who are afraid to speak out at all. That is terrible. That is not how RFK jr is. He is going way out on a limb, and I'm sure he is sacrificing career opportunities and encountering a lot of opposition and harassment. He is speaking major portions of the truth about vaccines.

I'm all in favor of educating him - tell him what you think. But to say he's not against mandates doesn't make sense to me.

And I'm not forgetting the many times people have been duped.


An EMT stopped to help a 7 year old girl who was choking to death. He got fired for doing that because it is against company policy to help someone without being called.


Someone should post the name of the company he used to work for. And the name of the low life that actually fired him.


This story in the news today perfectly illustrates the state of moral decay of the American health care system. An EMT stopped to help a 7 year old girl who was choking to death. He got fired for doing that because it is against company policy to help someone without being called. The little girl is on life support.
I guess the company can't send a bill if there isn't a call. It's all about money. THEY'D LET A CHILD DIE IF THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE SUCH THAT THEY WON'T BE PAID TO SAVE HER. We're not talking about an organ transplant (not that it would be right in that case either). We're talking about the Heimlich maneuver.



How quickly we all forget how DUPED we were in the past:


"...The guiding tenant for parents, who agreed to help develop the law, was to institute safety reforms in the mass vaccination system that would make it safer so fewer children would be injured or killed by vaccines and thereby in need of compensation. Toward this end, safety provisions were written into the law which included mandating the development of benefit-risk information materials for parents; a centralized reporting system to collect reports of adverse events following vaccination; the duty for vaccine providers to record adverse events as well as the manufacturer and lot number in permanent medical records; and the duty of government to insure the safest possible vaccines were being produced for use by the American public.

The parent-founders of NVIC believed that they were participating in the development of a law which, in the words of Dr. Martin Smith of the AAP, would give "simple justice to children." Congress made it clear to all parties involved in the law’s development, that it intended the system to be "expeditious and fair" to vaccine victims and their families and be unlike a trial in order to provide parents with a "non-adversarial" alternative to a lawsuit against vaccine manufacturers and physicians.

This guiding principal was reiterated in the legislative history by the 1989 Amendments in which the House bill directed the U.S. Court of Claims to make revisions in order "to provide for a non-adversarial, expeditious and informal process for the resolution of petitions filed under the Program." The 1989 House and Senate Conferee Report made it clear to both DHHS and the Court that Congress was not happy with the fact that proceedings had become complicated, time-consuming and emotionally draining for petitioners and stated "The re-invention of the adversarial process will serve neither to compensate injured children nor maintain the stability of the immunization program in the U.S."

Despite attempts by Congress to direct DHHS to fulfill congressional intent, we find in retrospect more than ten years after the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, after years of watching three out of four vaccine injured children be turned away from the federal vaccine injury compensation program, that our faith in the justice, equity, efficacy and basic integrity of this legislative remedy was seriously misplaced.

We maintain that the spirit and intent of the law, as Congress and the public envisioned it, has not been fulfilled. In our view, the principal reason for this failure of implementation is because the Department of Health and Human Service, which was on record as opposing the passage of this legislation (as was the Department of Justice), was given too much discretionary authority in the law to change the rules for compensation after the law was passed. Through the wielding of this discretionary authority, both federal agencies have worked together to weaken the ability of vaccine injured claimants to obtain compensation. The net result has been the creation of an uneven playing field that has often turned what was supposed to be a fairer, expedited, less traumatic, less expensive, no-fault alternative to a lawsuit against vaccine manufacturers and administering physicians into a highly adversarial, lengthy, traumatic and unfair imitation of a lawsuit conducted in front of a Special Master instead of a judge and jury.

Parents of vaccine injured children, who were asked to give their support to the development and passage of the law, were assured repeatedly during the several year process that the guiding spirit behind the law was to provide an alternative mechanism to a lawsuit that would even the playing field for vaccine victims in that there would be a presumption that the vaccine caused the child’s injury or death if no other cause could be found. The emphasis was on presumption and there was recognition that this presumption, in the absence of scientific data and certainty, would be in the plaintiff’s favor even if the end result would be that a few children would be compensated who were not, in fact, vaccine injured..."

If truth be told, we've been duped PRIOR to the formation of the vaccine injury court. We were duped into ever believing vaccines have helped save lives. Period.

I just found a quote by Mr. Kennedy, attributed to him during a television interview re Oregon's fight against vaccine mandates:

Here's his quote:

“I don’t think it’s appropriate to force people to undergo, to have their children undergo a medical procedure in this country,” Mr. Kennedy said in a segment on KOIN-TV in Salem. “I think it’s against the tenets of our country.”

But here's what he says consistently during his speeches:

He's FIERCELY pro vaccine and wants the public to feel comfortable utilizing the U.S. vaccine program.

There are no political doors opening up for Kennedy at this juncture and seriously, I don't think he's looking for any to open up for him at this point, so perhaps that's not an issue for him. And BELIEVE ME, I do understand his reluctance to go where his heart may be telling him at this point in time.

So once yet again, the TRUE message about the vaccination program is being watered down for a plethora of reasons. and I for one, am damned sick and tired of it.

Vaccines are harming more people than they're helping. We've traded what are/were benign diseases for most, for chronic auto immune disorder issues and a galaxy of chronic illnesses now in our children and adult populations. American children today are NOT as healthy as their counterparts were in previous generations.

I am sick and tired of people willing to dance around the bush and circle the wagons for FEAR OF SPEAKING THE ENTIRE TRUTH about any given issue, most especially about a program that is literally DESTROYING LIVES ALL AROUND THIS GLOBE.

I am sick of not being able to tell the truth about a lot of things, if truth be told, and I am damned sick and tired of people unwilling to RISK speaking the truth because of fear of repercussion, no matter what the cost.

This. Must. Stop.

I do not hang my hat on any one individual to speak FOR ME, or for my family.


That's the damned truth. Speak it loudly, say it forcefully, and people WILL hear you. What is it going to take for people to wake up? One out of every two children's lives decimated? FOR WHAT? For the measles? Chicken pox? Mumps?


For Bayareamom


I appreciate your point but it is different from the one the Bayareamom is making and the one that I was answering. I am sure that in the light of events he has to take on more and more, and to a considerable extent has. I suspect he began with mercury because it was what he knew most about.


I am answering For Bayareamom, for Bayareamom,

RFK Jr. has recommended on video online that parents go ahead and get their kids vaccinated - to just make sure that the vaccines don't have thimerosal. I don't remember which video it was at the moment. But I'm sure he said it.

I don't want to tear the man apart for making a mistake if that's what it was. I know what he's doing is VERY HARD and I appreciate his advocacy. It's a treacherous road we're on though. Literally, if we don't stop these madmen and women, we are facing extinction.

For Bayareamom


Where have you heard Mr Kennedy qualify his opposition to mandates by saying "but only in the case of thimerosal containing vaccines"?



"I think that Kennedy would support your choice. He is speaking out AGAINST vaccine mandates. He is NOT saying that it's ok to mandate the thimerosal-free vaccines."

Where in any speech, lecture or anything ON RECORD have you heard him state this? I hear you when you state you 'think' he stands for personal choice regarding medical procedures, including vaccination.

But THINKING someone MAY feel this way, does not equal HE DOES.

I would like to personally invite Mr. Kennedy to declare his official statement (whether it's here or another venue) FOR THE RECORD...on this issue.

Until then, I stand where I stand.

cia parker


I agree. There are excellent, effective homeopathic, herbal, and vitamin treatments to use in the treatment of any VPD, with none of the horrendous risks of the vaccines. In the case of dangerous symptoms like difficulty breathing, extreme pain, dehydration, or altered consciousness, I would seek conventional allopathic care and antibiotics in the appropriate cases. With the big exceptions of the flu and acellular pertussis vaccines, it's clear that the vaccines usually do work, but at what cost? Rates of polio, Hib meningitis, and measles dropped very quickly to almost zero as soon as the vaccines for them came into general use. But measles should rarely be prevented, there are better ways to prevent meningitis, but I am glad that polio was wiped out by the vaccines (in spite of the obvious reservations).

I know anthroposophical medicine says that the germ theory is nonsense, that the germs just migrate to where the degenerative process is already underway for reasons having nothing to do with the disease. That's silly. Many germs can cause disease, and the more virulent will make almost everyone in the environment sick, even very sick, despite being well-nourished. Usually new diseases, like H1N1 flu in 1918, new at the time, and Ebola. But it is still true that there are many ways to prevent and treat diseases without running the extreme risk of taking a vaccine. There were close to no fatalities among patients treated homeopathically during the Spanish flu epidemic of 1918-19. And I think it would be reasonable to go either way as to the tetanus series after the age of two (no pertussis) and the polio series IF polio came back here.

I would just like Kennedy to acknowledge that all vaccines are inherently dangerous beyond the mercury problem, maybe worth the risk for some at times, maybe not, but this judgment call should absolutely be left to the discretion of the individual. Kennedy must come out against mandates. Express it as a matter of human rights. No one can deny that vaccines sometimes (often) cause severe reactions, disability, even death. Against the Nuremberg code to compel anyone to do something which might kill him or his child.


"Please explain the dramatic reductions in Hib and meningococcal C mortality that just happened to coincide with the introduction of vaccination programmes"

Please explain the dramatic increase in autism, allergies, diabetes, other neurological and autoimmune chronic illnesses, infant mortality rate, etc., coinciding with the introduction of vaccination programs.

What's that? Correlation does not equal causation? You don't say.


Please explain the dramatic reductions in Hib and meningococcal C mortality that just happened to coincide with the introduction of vaccination programmes


You mean, these vaccine programs coincide with reductions that have been dramatically reported.

By the same people who report, that we are NOT in the midst of an autism epidemic.

The only coincidence I see, is that both claims are bullshit.


Bayaremom, I think that Kennedy would support your choice. He is speaking out AGAINST vaccine mandates. He is NOT saying that it's ok to mandate the thimerosal-free vaccines.


He's not going to say "that there is actually no proof that vaccines have saved even one life because the studies that would prove such a claim have never been done because he's not an absolute fool, maybe seriously deluded worrying about thiomersal when there are thiomersal free vaccine formulations available.

Do you really believe this Laura how can you in the face of all the epidemiological evidence of people not dying following the introduction of a vaccine: look at Hib, look at Meningococcal C vaccine, look at tetanus
"Vaccinating children against Hib has been very successful in cutting rates of Hib infections. From more than 800 confirmed cases a year in England in the early 1990s, the number of Hib infections has now fallen to fewer than 20 cases a year.
BTW there was a 3-6% mortality rate with Hib infections plus seriously damaged survivors
You look up the meningococcal C data. Do you really believe there is no evidence that any vaccine has ever saved a life???? Please explain the dramatic reductions in Hib and meningococcal C mortality that just happened to coincide with the introduction of vaccination programmes, I cannot believe that you can expect Mr Kennedy to make such a blatantly ridiculous statement


I don't believe vaccines have never saved one life, and it is unreasonable to expect Kennedy to say that. We need to accept that different people have different opnions, and work together towards common goals. A dogmatic black & white outlook on either side is wrong imho.

I don't believe it is a coincidence that the rates of autism and other immune and neuro disorders have increased in tandem with the expansion of our vaccine schedule. I don't believe it is a coincidence that parents have seen serious adverse events in their children following receipt of vaccines. I don't believe it is a coincidence that in my lifetime I have seen certain diseases disappear after vaccines were distributed.

In the course of my lifetime I have changed my mind about some issues that I felt strongly about. What we feel very sure of one day we may no longer believe a few months or years later. This is a reminder that tolerance of different viewpoints makes sense. What we think we know can change, based on knowledge an experiences.


"I want policies that make EVERYONE comfortable vaccinating..."

This is the statement that I have heard Mr. Kennedy say repeatedly and has given me pause as to what his real message truly is.

I just read Laura Hayes' most recent comment. I, too, was once pro vaccine. I stayed pro vaccine in spite of the fact that I'd had a dear friend at the time, before I met my now husband, warn me about the potential dangers with vaccination. I listened to her intently and although I understood HER feelings about vaccination, I was a young, single female at the time and didn't take much heed.

I then, years later, met my now husband, and by the time I became pregnant, I had determined we would vaccinate our child. I completely succumbed to the onslaught of fear mongering which plagues every soon-to-be parent on this planet. To not vaccinate our son would have been the unthinkable. He'll die if he doesn't get vaccinated! Chicken pox, mumps, measles...I thought about those diseases and although I had had ALL of these diseases and did just fine when I was sick, I still BOUGHT INTO THE FEAR.

So - I learned. I had to learn the hard way, by watching our newborn son suffer with horrendous reactions, reactions our then Denver pediatric staff, fully acknowledged, he was having. Petit mal seizures, high pitched screaming, lethargy, unwillingness to eat, somnolence...

...the list goes on, to finally our pediatrician stating emphatically that we could expect to see our son have issues with certain learning disorders once he started Kindergarten.

And he did. Eventually, he was diagnosed at Children's Hospital/Oakland as having profound dysgraphia, a higher order speech/language disorder and a true inability to understand math concepts behind math principles.

So this has been a real learning curve for us. The more I read, the more I understood that it wasn't just the mercury issue with vaccines. IT WAS SO MUCH MORE.

So - to Mr. Kennedy, I say:

I applaud your efforts re speaking out on this issue. I admire your willingness to speak on an issue that is so highly controversial.

But should the CDC EVER capitulate and rid itself of what they deem to be a 'few bad apples' in its midst, and should ALL mercury be taken out of every single vaccine...

...does not mean that the issues will then, at this point, be null and void, and we should all feel comfortable with this country's vaccine policies.

And I'm truly concerned that this is where Mr. Kennedy MAY be headed with his rhetoric. I have visions of something like this occurring, "Okay. We cleaned house. We got rid of a few bad eggs in the industry, we've taken all the mercury out of our vaccines. Now shut up and take your damned vaccines."

Something like that. And that scares the you know what out of me.

So this I will say: I don't care if ALL vaccines are deemed SAFE for every man, woman and child on this earth. I. Don't. Care.

There are PROVEN alternative ways to stay HEALTHY besides allopathic vaccination. And if I, our son, and/or my husband decide that other methods and treatments that exist, via either chiropractic, holistic, herbal, Chinese remedies, etc., so forth, will work better for US...

...we want the right to decide FOR OURSELVES which treatments WE feel comfortable with.

I will NEVER, EVER feel COMFORTABLE with ANY vaccine policy. I don't give a damn how 'safe' someone may tell me THEY feel I SHOULD FEEL about vaccines.

I DON'T CHOOSE VACCINES TO STAY HEALTHY. I WAS once very pro vaccine. I am no longer pro vaccine.

And I am never going to change my mind.


Stephanie Seneff's dire warning that one in two children will be autistic by 2025 has been repeated many times. So what will the human race look like in 2035?


There is no issue that is more important than the pervasive poisoning of our species and our planet through industrial, agricultural and pharmaceutical means.

Laura Hayes


Thank you for joining the discussion that is very important for our community to have.

When Mr. Kennedy first entered the foray, "kicking and screaming" as he likes to say, it was because he learned that vaccines contained mercury, an environmental pollutant and potently-harmful, in some cases deadly, toxic element that he focused on in other areas of his work.

Since that time, he has been made aware of numerous other potently-harmful, in some cases deadly, elements, chemicals, substances, and viruses of all sorts contained in vaccines. He has also been made aware of their synergistic toxicity.

Additionally, he shows us by what he says that he is clearly aware of the corruption that exists at all levels from vaccine manufacture to vaccine mandate...that not one level of the process is without corruption, deception, and fraud.

So, for him to continually chant the same tired mantra in every speech and during every interview at this point seems absurd, and should make one question why he won't now expand his mantra to something like this:

"I used to be fiercely pro-vaccine. As a matter of fact, I vaccinated all 6 of my children according to the CDC's recommended schedule, and I believed that vaccines had saved millions of lives. Knowing what I now know about the dangers and inefficacies of vaccines...about the fraud, deceit, and corruption that underlies them and keeps them propped up, and that are withheld from the unknowing and trusting public...and that there is actually no proof that vaccines have saved even one life because the studies that would prove such a claim have never been done...I can no longer say that I am fiercely pro-vaccine...I can no longer say that if I had a child born today I would vaccinate him or her according to the CDC-recommended schedule...and I can no longer state with any confidence that vaccines have saved millions of lives. I now know too much to make such statements any more."

An updated mantra would not have kept him from testifying in the states where he testified this past year, nor would it have kept him from speaking at the rallies where he spoke this past year. I think it would make what he says that much more powerful. He, like all of us, has had a learning curve, and he has learned a lot since he first began to speak about the mercury in vaccines. It only makes sense that he would update his message as he learns more and more. To not do so raises many questions in my mind.

If we are to protect our children, and ourselves, from government-mandated harm, and possible death, via vaccines, we must fully restore our individual and parental rights to decline vaccinations, rights which have wrongfully been taken from us. We have successfully made the case that vaccines contain dangerous, poisonous, and health-destroying ingredients, that vaccine failure is rampant, that vaccine injuries and deaths are real and increasingly common, and that vaccine-related fraud and corruption are obscene. Thus, to focus our efforts now on anything other than fully restoring our individual and parental rights, which includes banning vaccine mandates and repealing the egregious 1986 Act, is futile.

If Mr. Kennedy, and anyone else, thinks it is strategically best to focus on just mercury-laden thimerosal, consider the following. If one extrapolates forward, and if all mercury was removed from all vaccines, including during the manufacturing process, then what? We are still in an untenable situation. We are still living in a country where mandates are increasing, exemptions are being tightened and in many places being eliminated altogether, and vaccines will still be unsafe, in addition to still being ineffective. Yet, Americans would still be forced to accept scores of them, beginning in infancy, possibly in utero, to participate in society. So I do not understand how it is a wise or viable strategy to continue to focus solely on the one vaccine ingredient, thimerosal. That strategy will not keep us safe from vaccine mandates, and it will not restore our individual and parental rights to say no to vaccines as we see fit without government interference.


This is a very difficult situation. The government medical military industrial complex is driving this country straight toward a high cliff at breakneck speed. Acknowledge the cliff and they put a big red radioactive X on your back. Ignore it, and you're going over, with all the rest of us.


Sylvia - Perception is everything in mass media. If we want to make things harder on Kennedy, the fastest way is to go ahead and give the controlled mass media permission to interpret that vaccine safety advocates don't support Kennedy's message. Mass media won't stop to discern between the IMPRESSION of lack of support and the FACT that some vaccine reformists wish he would publicly take things a step further. You know that.

And the PTB would love to exploit any crack in the armor to make it look like he's just as unworthy of listening to as they've done with McCarthy and Wakefield. Most likely they are waiting for the right opportunity to present itself to do it, and it would be icing on the cake for "anti-vaccinists" themselves to hand them the opportunity.

Jenny Allan

From across the Atlantic Ocean, it would be wrong of me to comment on the 'detail' of Robert Kennedy jnr's public statements about vaccine concerns...........BUT.... I WISH very much we had even ONE UK prominent politician prepared to stick his or her head above the parapet and open up this, very important for humanity, subject to public discussion and scrutiny. I WISH.

cia parker

In his challenge, he says that Frank De Stefano poisoned the children in the MMR study who reacted with autism. ? It wasn't with mercury.


Whoa Jenny. No dissing, back-stabbing, and most certainly no Wakefielding going on here. A very valid issue was brought up, and we are discussing it. I am two for two: I have two children, both boys, who are now disabled for life because of vaccines. I will never shy away from saying that vaccine mandates are an obscene abuse of our most basic human rights and American freedoms. And I urge those who speak for us to take our concerns about mandates very seriously. I appreciate Robert Kennedy's advocacy very much. But that doesn't mean I won't question some of his statements, or ask deeper questions about some of his stances on Public Health Law. Respectfully, of course. But I am going to keep questioning everyone till the day I die because it is the most important issue my family faces.


That is true Jenny.
I guess we just need to be aware - always trying to see what is coming down the pipes.
The whole world as you know has gone mad!
So any future glass orb reading is very much needed.


Go ahead and ask him that in public - but before you do, think about all those political office doors that will close on him at that point, stopping all his attempts to educate others on the most easily comprehended, gateway issue into the perils of vaccine. If you close that first "domino-door" don't expect any of the others behind it to be opening up instead with some kind of welcoming smile. You'll be starting from square one, but with much harder concepts to convey, than the easy message that a poison, is a poison, is a poison. Go ahead and shoot yourself in the foot. I'm nothing but grateful for the part he has played in portraying one part of the message. Instead of dissing him, go out and find 15 more knowledgeable, famous, well-connected, rich, environmentally-aware, public-speaking attorneys who will take up the other 15 issues about why it's a bad idea to use vaccinations. Oh wait, I forgot - none of them will step because they will have seen that Kennedy was back-stabbed by the very population he went out of his way to help . . . the vaccination-safety advocates basically wakefield'd him.


Here it is:

NATIONAL ADULT IMMUNIZATION PLAN - from the National Vaccine Program Office - DRAFT REPORT

It's all right there...

HEALTHY PEOPLE 2020 - that's what they're calling this agenda.


"I hate to disagree, Cia. In a free country, you'd be right.
Look what happened in California. The government has set a goal to vaccinate everyone with whatever vaccines they manufacture. The Departments of Defense and Homeland Security are a part of the plan. They don't care what you or I or anyone else thinks or has seen or experienced, whether we live or live with extreme pain and disability or die. They just don't care. Colleen Boyle, Frank DeStephano, et al, have been given free reign - of terror - over this population and they have all the tools they need (human, media, laws, drugs, weapons) at their disposal to carry out their plan.

It's a real life horror movie. Happy Halloween one day early."

BINGO. Time to face the realities and quit assuming that the above just couldn't happen in the good ol' USA.

They've been planning this for YEARS. They're already targeting (and have been for some time) certain adults within our population. You want to work in a hospital setting, even though you have NO direct contact with ANY patients?

Get a flu shot or out you go.

I had a gal contact me when I was the CA Director. She was a book keeper. She worked for a major hospital, but her office was located just down the street from the main campus. The powers that be demanded she take a flu shot or be fired.

She found another job. She was one of the luckier ones who was able to find employment rather quickly, but others haven't been as lucky.

They're going after school teachers next; physicians who, up until recently were able to opt out of the flu vaccine mandates can no longer do so.

As Barbara Fisher stated during her rally speech, the time will come when we won't be able to ride a bus, train, or airplane, unless we have proof of having certain required vaccines. You want to renew your driver's license? Here's a list of vaccines you need before you do.

They won't be marching to your door, forcefully requiring you to accept certain vaccinations. No, they'll get you through the back door instead.

I believe the plan to fully implement an adult vaccination program is to be in place by 2020.

So much for the land of the free.

Betty Bona

Oh, I didn't mean my last sentence to sound the way it does. But I am sure others have become doctor manipulators the way I have. If I know a doctor doesn't think much of the argument that vaccines cause autism, then I don't mention it. I mention all the other things that will get me the treatment I want. It works, but I feel a bit deflated, as I prefer an open and honest relationship. It would be the same for me fully backing RFK Jr. It would be only partial disclosure of my position to the public, and I would prefer complete disclosure. Just like with the doctor and only telling him the things I suspect he might accept, I think the best way forward to educate the public is to start with the CDC fraud, which if fully exposed to the public, can hardly be denied.

Betty Bona

I'm speaking more of emergency mandates than the mandates passed in California. I really do believe the possibility of emergency mandates won't die a quick and easy death. It's not one we think about because there are no current emergency mandates, but I see them coming. We'll have to deal with it when it arrives. As to the non-emergency mandates like in California, I really do feel that the best way to stop them from spreading is to change public opinion. You know the CDC constantly manipulates public opinion by whipping up more "epidemics" and all the other lies they foist on us. We are in the enviable position of being able to manipulate public opinion with the truth. Let's do it. I still believe that will be absolutely necessary to defeat the mandates in California.

I understand what you are all saying about RFK, Jr. and what almost seems like being two-faced with his support of vaccines. I bought his book when it first came out, and have never been able to do more than crack it open for a minute or two. I'm sure it's good, but I tell myself I won't learn anything that I don't already know, and there are many other books that will enlighten me on things I don't know. Still, I suspect that one reason I don't read it is because I think I know more than he does, and I don't want to hear how we just need to get the thimersol out of vaccines to make them safe. I don't mean any disrespect at all, and I'm certainly glad the book was written. I just can't seem to calm my ego and emotions down enough to read the book. And after I paid for it. That's not like me!

We are at war here with the CDC and Pharma. I'm not much of a historian, but it is my understanding that war leaders need to be excellent strategists who are able to keep their egos and emotions from interfering with their best judgment. Mr. Kennedy is currently speaking strongly against the mandates in California and potential mandates elsewhere. He is positioned better than most of us to expose the fraud at the CDC. Even if we don't win with a constitutional argument avoiding all mandates at this point, we may be able to change public opinion possibly enough to effectively avoid mandates in California and elsewhere. We're not then estopped from raising the constitutional argument. It's like a negotiation but different. No one is going to tell us that we had our opportunity to raise other issues but didn't, so too bad. Those issues can be raised at any time, and I think better after we change some minds. Maybe at that point there will be others ready to pick up the fight where Mr. Kennedy stops, or maybe Mr. Kennedy will be more on board with what some of the more extreme among us want by then. I say we set aside our egos and emotions and work as a team to educate the public. Don't forget, we do currently have other speakers, like Barbara Loe Fisher, who take a much stronger stance. Once people begin to question the CDC, they may actually listen to someone other than RFK, JR. First we need for them to listen at least to him, but please don't let our opportunity fade away because we can't put aside our egos and emotions to get the job done. Just think of all the things you have had to suffer through when working with a doctor who only partially understands autism treatment. Sometimes I walk out feeling like I'm a bit dirty and maybe want to cry, but I have the treatment I want in my hand. It's exactly the same thing here.


"But there are SO MANY of us now, that I don't think they could force any vaccine on the entire population..."

I hate to disagree, Cia. In a free country, you'd be right.
Look what happened in California.
The government has set a goal to vaccinate everyone with whatever vaccines they manufacture. The Departments of Defense and Homeland Security are a part of the plan. They don't care what you or I or anyone else thinks or has seen or experienced, whether we live or live with extreme pain and disability or die. They just don't care. Colleen Boyle, Frank DeStephano, et al, have been given free reign - of terror - over this population and they have all the tools they need (human, media, laws, drugs, weapons) at their disposal to carry out their plan.

It's a real life horror movie. Happy Halloween one day early.


Cia, I don't understand how there can be any doubt that Kennedy is against mandates when he has traveled around the country adressing state legislatures to speak against mandates. He says that removing parental choice would destroy the last barrier and give "rapacious" pharma companies unfettered access to our children. Surely that is a bad thing, not something he's in favor of.

I can imagine how it feels like a blow to the gut when he says he is so pro-vaccine. At the same time, I think that our vaccine program is like drunk driving - out of control, reckless, too fast, too much too soon. All driving has some risk, but we are willing to take some risk for the sake of transportation. We are willing to take reasonable risks, but not drive without working brakes or without headlights at night. I feel like when anyone who speaks out about vaccine concerns is called "anti-vaccine" it's like calling Mothers Against Drunk Driving anti-driving. And Laura, as I recall your kids were born at the height of the thimerosal period. Maybe without mercury and with fewer vaccines they might have done better. I'm sorry, those are just my thoughts but I don't know what I'm talking about.

I grew up at a time when we received only a few vaccines for a few serious diseases and we did ok. To me, vaccines in moderation seem ok, but there should be a concerted effort to understand why some are especially vulnerable to harm, rather than sweeping vaccine injuries under the rug. And there must be the right to make choices. The drive for mandates is insane.

Betty Bona

Makes me wonder what they're planning with that H5N1 stockpile! And on the squalene/polysorbate 80 adjuvant, here's a frightening look at a similarly adjuvanted fast-tracked flu shot for those over 65, probably coming our way later this year. It has MF59.

I thought these adjuvants were completely unacceptable in the US. Now they are slipping one in for the elderly. Maybe no one will notice that many of them come down with chronic illnesses or die. I am sure no company would offer this vaccine without protection from liability. Some of the elderly are completely unaware of any issues with vaccine safety and simply do whatever their doctor tells them or maybe they are required to have a flu shot for inpatient hospitalization. It makes me shudder.

John Stone


Perhaps evenmore terrifying is that they make vaccine for a disease which doesn't exist.

cia parker


I think one problem is that most people think we vaccinate against "killer" diseases which, if we didn't, would kill a lot of children. Kennedy should know better, but he doesn't seem to be willing to confront this misperception at this time. Three of his children have asthma because he got them the DPT. No doubt. One in nine American children now has asthma, so you have to look at several thousand deaths a year from asthma, millions of life-threatening ER visits, and compare that to the much lower risk of disability or death from the natural disease (now, that hasn't always been the case). If a thousand children a year were to die if they weren't vaxed, and only one hundred were permanently injured or killed by the vaccine, then you could see strongly recommending the vaccine (but still allowing free choice). Most people don't know how pertussis and measles, mumps and chickenpox, are usually mild, self-limiting diseases, and that's one thing we need to teach them. Also the need to shelter infants at home for their protection, not blithely expose them to everyone because we live in the modern, "disease-free" age.

The dangerous VPDs are diphtheria, tetanus, meningitis, and polio. High-dose vitamin C will treat all of them, as well as the appropriate homeopathic remedies. The vaccines for them are often dangerous, but the diseases can be devastating. But since both facts are true, there should never be any mandate for the vaccines. Diphtheria and polio are gone at least for right now. I'd like to see a study done on the rate of any form of meningitis if the child involved never got any pertussis vaccine. It would probably drop to the low rate of 1940, I think the steep increase was because the pertussis vaccine as the DPT came to be given routinely to all children after 1948.

But there are SO MANY of us now, that I don't think they could force any vaccine on the entire population, because it's so easy to point at examples of people we know who were severely damaged by a similar vaccine. Most people can respect that.

cia parker


I disagree that mandates are inevitable. The only states in which they have existed up until now are the very poor, ill-educated states of Mississippi and West Virginia, and now the not-so-poor but woefully ill-educated California. We have not had them and the sky has not fallen in. I don't think they will be successful in getting them legislated in many other states.

John and Twyla, Everyone is welcome in our movement, but our trust must at a minimum be reserved for those who openly and clearly oppose mandates. Everyone must continue to have the right to refuse any and all vaccines. Why did RFK refuse to say he was against mandates at Autism One? Why does he make these slips about mercury in the MMR? Why did Jenny propose going back to the vaccine schedule of 1983? Great, DPT and MMR, no one could have any problem with that, right?

I'm all about education and then permitting everyone to make the vaccine decisions which seem appropriate to them. The vaccines do usually protect against the targeted disease, and anyone that terrified of measles or pertussis should be free to take the huge risk of the vaccines for them. Those aware of the immense damage they too often do should be free to refuse them. If polio came back in the US, I would do a lot of research on the situation at that time to decide whether or not I thought getting my daughter the vaccine was the wisest thing to do. I got our puppy the distemper and parvo vaccines recommended by Dr. Jean Dodds, two each, and will get the IMRAB rabies vaccine she recommends at the end of November. I think they work, I also think they often cause cancer and autoimmune disease in our pets.

It shouldn't be that hard to ask RFK at the next possible opportunity if he is against mandates. That is the next step, and the knowledge is essential for placing our trust in him.

Laura Hayes

To add to Sylvia's latest comment, I will share a thought of mine that I have posted in similar form before in an AoA comments section:

As the mother of vaccine-injured children, I become infuriated when I hear people spout off that they are "fiercely pro-vaccine". That is analagous to telling the mother of a child who was injured or killed by a drunk driver that you are "fiercely pro-drunk driving". Millions of us parents worldwide are giving firsthand testimony that our children were permanently harmed, and in many cases killed, by vaccines, and then someone has the audacity to continue to state over and over again that they are "fiercely pro-vaccine" right in front of us, without at least pairing it with "but I am fiercely anti-mandate". To state this pro-vaccine mantra in today's world filled with the vaccine-injured and vaccine-killed is horridly insensitive and I find it intolerable.

Betty Bona

When we speak of "no mandates", I think we need to distinguish between everyday mandates and mandates to cover emergency situations. Another thing I think we need to realize is that even though we speak of our constitutional right to "no mandates", we need to realize that our constitutional rights are always subject to interpretations. Thank goodness women can vote now, but that was a fairly recent reinterpretation of the constitutional right to vote. In other words, just because we know we have a right doesn't mean we win with that right. Movements to reinterpret the constitution are frequently not successful until they gain the support of a significant portion of the population. That's why I think our first step should be to awaken the public to the corruption at the CDC and to the lack of a tort based correction system to keep the products safe. That's what Kennedy is doing. In a way, we're negotiating with the rest of the population who believes that the only way to be safe from disease is to mandate vaccines because those crazies believe in conspiracy theories and aren't doing their part to protect the population. We need to let them in on what we know.

I am very afraid of any mandate, whether everyday or emergency. Did you know that the CDC is stockpiling an H5N1 vaccine with ASO3? That's the squalene/polysorbate 80 adjuvant that caused narcolepsy in the European version of the H1N1 vaccine in 2009. Also most likely involved in Gulf War Illness. I am terrified that the stockpile exists, but most of the public would be happy to know that the CDC is planning for a future epidemic and that emergency mandates could be enforced if need be. We are a small minority and would not likely win if we take the position of "no mandates - ever".

In law, adjudication on a constitutional claim is a last resort. If there is any other way to solve the dispute, the Court decides without ruling on the constitutional issue or sends it back down to a lower Court to resolve the dispute under a statute, equity, or whatever and leaves the constitutional question undecided. I realize that in California, we are at a point where the constitutional argument may need to be made, but even then, it would deal with the everyday mandates and not any possible emergency mandates - constitutional claims are always framed as narrowly as possible. And I don't know if you could get an injunction. Maybe the whole case would take years. It's not a pretty situation. Anything we can do to bolster support for our position and get the public on our side would be wonderful. It would be much better if we could change the statute rather than attempt a constitutional challenge.

I am probably more out there than many on this site. I worry about weaponized mycoplasma (Niolson), an XMRV type retrovirus or some other stealth virus (Mikovits), and I can't wait to read and also dread the possibilities I will find in the book Greyone recently mentioned about Plum Island in the comments to Theresa Conrick's recent microbiome piece. I also worry about altered DNA. Unraveling all my concerns will take years and years. Others might call me paranoid, but I believe what I believe. I like the way John frames the fight I find myself in now as "pursuing justice for our children, civil liberties, an end to public bullying, an end to the corruption". I can't possibly expect to solve it all now, but that shouldn't stop me from making slow progress. I can still embrace Mr. Kennedy even though I do think there is a possibility that he hasn't yet accepted that no vaccine is safe, and may not be willing to take the position that no mandate is ever appropriate. How else are we going to educate the public quickly? Sometimes I send people to this blog, and they tell me that we get our science from very different places. I've got no other clue on educating the public, but I think there are many people who are ripe for educating. We need someone like Mr. Kennedy to help us do some educating. I don't believe it's the right time to tackle all of my concerns at once. I really do look like a nutcase to most people! If I tackle only one thing at a time that is gaining support, there may be some progress. Incidentally, I think a constitutional amendment might be necessary to outlaw all emergency mandates, but that's not a possibility at this time. I really can't afford to be exclusive. My "one of us" crowd is prohibitively small. I've learned to live with that.


For many of us who have vaccine injured or vaccine killed children, hearing someone who has researched the massive corruption at the CDC refer to themselves as "fiercely pro-vaccine" is akin to a Holocaust historian referring to themselves as fiercely pro-Nazi. Just sayin'. I know we are not allowed to compare our situation to the Holocaust, but as a mother, as well as a volunteer in the community who has witnessed the complete and total devastation that vaccine injury causes, it sure looks like Holocaust from where I sit. Only this one targets all religions, all races. I am not trying to nit-pick Mr. Kennedy's involvement. I am SO grateful for what he has done for us. But I want to explain WHY it hurts so much when he says these things. It hurts because he KNOWS. He knows that our kids (the ones who survived and live) suffer and struggle. He knows that their God-given futures have been cruelly torn from them, and have left them dependent and vulnerable to a world that often does not want anything to do with them. It hurts that he can see what our kids have been thru, and say he is fiercely pro-vaccine. That hurts much more than those who say that, but have no idea how dirty and corrupt the system is, and how often vaccine harm.

John Stone


I am not really sure that I am "one of us". My own view is that in pursuing justice for our children, civil liberties, an end to public bullying, an end to the corruption, we should be able to tolerate a range of opinion. It is evident to me at least that in courageously taking on Frank DeStefano over MMR and autism RFKjr has gone well beyond the mercury brief. As far as I can see he has said most of it - I thought he said that mandates breached the constitution, that protection from liability was absurd. He attacked the Vaccine Injury Act. It is the whole corrupt system which allows something like the mercury to happen, and he pretty much said it. And he toured the country opposing the extension of mandates.


If Bobby Kennedy is not against vaccine mandates, why did he just spend months touring the country speaking out against these mandates to dozens of state legislatures?

Here is his speech in Vermont:

Yes, he does start out by saying that he is pro-vaccine, that he had his kids vaccinated, and that he thinks there should be state and federal policies that maximize vaccine coverage. But he then goes on to say that our vaccine program is totally corrupt. He talks about:
- The CDC is a cesspool of corruption.
- When he was a boy he got 5 vaccines; his kids got 59.
- These new vaccines started being added to the schedule in 1989 after Congress passed a law providing a shield from liability, making vaccines much more profitable.
- The committees making decisions to add vaccines are NOT independent scientists, researchers, advocates focussed solely on public health. Most of them are vaccine industry insiders, many with direct financial stakes in vaccines being added to the schedule (e.g. Paul Offit). These decisions are not being made exclusively with the health of children in mind.
- The other relevant division of the CDC is the immunization safety office whose job is to ensure safety and efficacy. For many many years this group has been cranking out ginned up studies - always population/epidemiological studies which are notoriously easy to manipulate. Epi studies can't show safety. You can design a study to show cigs don’t cause cancer or sex doesn’t show pregnancy – just exclude from the study anyone who is pregnant or has cancer. That’s what the CDC has been doing with these 19 epi studies that supposedly show that these vaccines are not causing all these neurological disorders. [19 studies - that's not just the ones about thimerosal]
- Dr. William Thompson handed over thousands of documents - not just a smoking gun but a wildfire that will burn the CDC to the ground. Dr. Thompson says he and his colleagues have been ordered for years to manipulate data, lie, bury vaccine adverse events, cover up any link between thimerosal, ADHD, autism, speech delay, tics…
- Merck, which has a monopoly on the MMR, is under investigation because whistleblowers have said they were required to gin up sham studies to prove the efficacy of the MMR. [MMR has no thimerosal in it.]

In conclusion, Kennedy says that all the barriers that would normally protect a child from a rapacious industry (pharma) have been leveled:
- The trillion dollar pharma industry spends more on political lobbying than any other industry, double what is spent by the next biggest, oil and gas.
- Regulators have become sock puppets, a subsidiary of big pharma, classic captured agency.
- News industry compromised - 70% of ad revenue comes from pharma during non-election years.
- Congress has taken away the jurisdiction of courts. Can't sue, no discovery of documents, no depositions, no class actions.

So, Kennedy says: "THE ONLY THING LEFT THAT PROTECTS THAT CHILD FROM THAT COMPANY, THE ONLY BARRIER STANDING, IS THE PARENT, AND NOW THEY WANT TO TAKE THE PARENT AWAY. And this isn't just happening in Vermont. They took 139 measles cases, and they parlayed it nationally into this movement where there's 101 of these bills in 38 states rich now, all at the same time, all a heavily orchestrated campaign to remove parents from the equation…"

He then goes on to say that most so-called anti-vax parents have a vaccine damaged child, and they don't want to give the same vaccines to a younger sibling, but if they ask a doctor for a medical exemption the doc says no because the CDC says it couldn't happen.

Now I ask you, if you didn't know anything about these issues and you listened to that speech, would you feel like, "Wow, I'm going to go out and get my kid a half dozen vaccines now! I have so much confidence in our vaccine program because of RFK jr's enthusiastic reassuring words!"?

Yes, he tends to focus on thimerosal. And I don't like it when he sometimes seems to imply that thimerosal is the only problem. But he also is so outspoken and eloquent about the overall corruption, safety issues, and the problem of more and more vaccines being added for the wrong reasons, i.e. financial influence/profits.

And keep in mind, mercury is his background. He started off researching mercury in the environment. And mercury in vaccines is a huge issue. His book with all the research it pulls together is such a valuable resource. No one person can do everything. He has researched this aspect in great depth. Are we criticizing him for not researching all aspects of vaccines in depth?

And I think that the more he is involved, the more he does see that thimerosal is not the only problem.

Again, he has traveled around the country speaking out against mandates. How can we doubt whether he is against mandates?

We are for choice on vaccines. That means that people who are totally 100% convinced that the CDC schedule is safe and necessary should not be able to force my child to receive those vaccines. But this should also mean that we respect other people's choices to get vaccinated. Are we going to have a litmus test requiring people to be completely against all vaccines or else be viewed as enemies?

Bobby Kennedy is speaking out on very important vaccine issues and deserves our applause and appreciation. Yes, tell him that thimerosal is not the only issue, but also thank him for his hard work. He is courageous and intelligent. He could be either sitting at home being lazy or engaging in some more lucrative activity. He is opening himself up to so much mud slinging from the other side. He deserves gratitude from our side. He is one of the only prominent people around speaking out about vaccine problems.

Heather Kovac

I appreciate RFK Jr's taking the time and energy to try to educate people about corruption at the CDC and mercury in vaccines - but I also get a pit in my stomach whenever he says he is pro-vaccine and that vaccines have saved millions of lives. After the untold millions of lives that have been devastated by vaccines I can't even imagine that any agency involved or the pharma companies that own them could EVER be considered trustworthy again. The whole system is corrupt and continues on because people still believe in the germ theory that vaccines and all allopathic disease treatment is based on. Until the vaccine theory is shown to be illogical and false we will be wasting our breath on the details of what's in vaccines and how many and at what age they should be given. I have been studying vaccines and HEALTH for over 27 years and have two vibrantly healthy vaccine-free children. I find it hard to believe that RFK,Jr. after all he has learned from the parents that "dragged him - kicking and screaming" into this fight and all of the research he has read regarding mercury could be so adamantly and "fiercely PRO-vaccine". At the very least he needs to be against mandates to even begin to speak for me.

Betty Bona

I want to feel secure that I and my family will never be subject to mandatory vaccines as well. I just don't think that is a goal that we can reasonably expect to achieve in a reasonable timeframe. Mandates have been a possibility in this country (at least in emergencies) for years, and I don't think we can get that off the books in short order. I want to take the path that will have the best potential to result in change in how vaccines are viewed by the public and the politicians as quickly as possible, because I believe that will result in the greatest change in our public vaccine program. I would love to say, "abolish all mandates or potential for mandates, and I only want to choose people for my team who say the same", but I'm pretty sure we wouldn't accomplish as much as we would if we achieve a lesser goal of waking up the public to the dangers of vaccines. I'm being realistic. Once we've changed public opinion and threatened the vaccine program, maybe that's the time to be more selective about which exact position we support. Maybe that would be a more opportune time to attempt to abolish mandates. Congress just avoided the next debt crisis, so who knows what other strange and unexpected things might happen. Really, I think a constitutional challenge will arise from the current mandates, and if we have a political climate where vaccines are viewed less favorably, there is a better chance of winning that challenge. If the challenge were to occur now, I'm not at all sure it would prevail. We've got someone who is willing to help us expose the CDC for the criminals they are. Let's go with it. It's a lesser included victory if we win the public's distrust of the CDC.

Bayareamom, I have always had a fear that I would need to treat a cancer in myself or my kids and be prevented from accessing the treatment I want. It gives me nightmares. I hate the loss of freedom we have in this country, and I don't trust anyone in power to act in a way that represents the people rather than the bottom line. First I want to end the sickening of our population with vaccines, and then we can tackle the rest of it. Even then, I think it will require a long and concerted effort to see improvements in our actual freedoms. If we scream "Give me liberty or give me death" now, I don't think we get liberty.

cia parker

I think Kennedy has a mental block about the MMR. If it had mercury, then it would fit into his campaign to get all mercury out, problem solved. I think it causes him insuperable cognitive dissonance that the live vaccines have no mercury, never did, and yet they still often cause disability and even death. There is simply no way to fix the problem, and yet no way to wake most Americans up to that fact in the near term, no way to play politics with this issue. And so he makes these Freudian slips, saying that the MMR has mercury because he REALLY wishes it did.

Michelle Ford

No mandates, not ever, period.


"So my concern is that he has put himself out there as being "our voice", then he needs to speak up for parental rights to say NO to any and all mandates."

AGREED. And until he addresses the issue of freedom and parental rights, he does not speak for ME.

cia parker

Jenny is really not one of us. She has said positive things about vaccines in general, is just against what injured Evan and the other kids she sees around her. I don't think she's well-informed on all the reasons that all vaccines are inherently dangerous, and I don't think she'd come out and say it if she were.

I think there are unchanging laws of human immunity which make all vaccines dangerous. All vaccines are meant to artificially provoke the immune system into mounting a strong reaction and producing the desired antibodies. And it's an immutable law that causing inflammation leads to a number of different and damaging results, encephalitis and sensitization to vaccine ingredients being two of them. Yes, inflammation as a part of the immune system's repertoire of protective offenses is necessary. Artificially provoking, as in the case of vaccines,is unwise and often gets out of hand.

My awakening came about ten years before my daughter was born. I had not yet put all the pieces of my own vaccine injury together. I read a book called Dr. Pitcairn's Natural Health Care for Dogs and Cats, and was absolutely flabbergasted by his chapter on vaccines, all of which he thinks are too dangerous to be given to our pets, for the same reasons as those which apply to humans, although in this case it's cancer and autoimmune disease rather than autism and autoimmune disease which are the big issues. I was stunned. As you say, most of us started out believing that vaccines were safe, effective, and necessary. I read the chapter many times, and I was convinced that he was right. At that time, vaccine for humans were of little interest to me: I went for decades without getting any shot or even thinking about it. I never got a flu shot, though my poor parents did every fall (causing Alzheimer's in my mother and paralysis in my father).


I mirror the concerns stated by Laura and others here that as much as I appreciate RFK Jr.'s advocacy to weed out corruption at the CDC, my blood runs cold when I hear him say that people should feel comfortable with the mandatory schedule once the mercury is gone. I will never allow anyone I have authority over to ever get another vaccine. Mercury or no mercury, that ain't gonna happen! So my concern is that he has put himself out there as being "our voice", then he needs to speak up for parental rights to say NO to any and all mandates. As our Vice President would say "it's a big fu*%ing deal!"

cia parker

I agree with Laura. We need to ask him at every public appearance if he is against vaccine mandates. No quibbling. No, there has never been and will never be a situation in which vaccine mandates would be necessary or reasonable. If the bubonic plague or a new Spanish flu returns, then fine, you want the vax, get it, and then you'll be safe. But you'll never have ANY right to force anyone else to make the same choice. NO right to make someone else take the risk of neurological or autoimmune (etc.) damage which can be caused by ANY vaccine. I believe that every shot is dangerous and can kill or cause permanent disability. Or it can cause minor damage which is never connected with the shot, but you're damaged none the less. Who can examine his own brain or immune system to determine if they're just as healthy as before the shot?

Kennedy just a week or two ago said something which sounded as though he thought the MMR had mercury in it. Is he really well-versed in vaccines, or just in the problems of thimerosal?

He's a politician, and will fight to keep from stating any opinion which would alienate a lot of voters. Mercury in vaccines is a safe issue, one which most people think is a thing of the past. Last week Dorit said that only the rabies and smallpox vaccines ever caused encephalitis. I realized a little later that it was safe for her (and Merck who used them as safe examples)to admit to encephalitis in those two cases, because the smallpox vaccine is no longer given and the disease is gone; rabies is a disease that very few people ever have to worry about, and most people go from cradle to grave without ever being bitten by a possibly rabid animal.

What if he IS playing both ends against the middle, the way Dr. Sears does? Totally pro-vaccine in public so as to appeal to the vast majority of conventional Americans, but anti-thimerosal to appeal to anti-vaxxers (or vaccine questioners, if you will), and a stance that would not turn off the conventional Americans? Until he publicly states that he is AGAINST vaccine mandates, I don't think we can trust him. Yeah, it will turn the sheep against him, but this is a question of human rights. And no, we don't have to have him. The truth is enough and it will set us free.

Betty Bona

I agree with you that parents should have the final say on which vaccines we allow in our children's bodies. I just look at the way to get there differently. There are cases where a parent is ordered to provide cancer treatment for their child rather than to continue a traditionally unacceptable course of something like laetrile. Whether you believe that is appropriate or not, those court cases have occurred and will continue to occur. Although cancer treatment is not mandated and things have definitely changed in recent years, I imagine that every parent faced with the decision to avoid traditional therapy will worry about the possibility that their decision will not be acceptable to people in a position to file a D&N. There have always been times when the State overrules the parent's decision, whether for the benefit of the child or for the greater good. In those cases, the parent's best hope is to prove that their decision is actually in the best interests of the child and will not harm the greater good. We are looking at mandates. It's like there is already a presumption that these vaccines are in the best interests of the child (minus a medical exemption) and furthers the greater good. In my mind, the best way to fight this, whether in court or not, is to prove that these vaccines are not in the best interests of the child and will not further the greater good. Thus I see our first step as proving that the science indicating vaccines are safe and effective is fraudulent. Go after the CDC. Even if you were in court trying to prove that the mandates violated the constitutional rights of parents, I believe that a piece of the case would be to prove that the science of the CDC is fraudulent. If the court believes, like so many people do, that the only way to have a safe society is to have a vaccinated society, then this interest in having a safe society might override the parent's constitutional right. We have to show that vaccines are not safe and effective. I don't think there's any other way, and I feel sure that this is the first step.


"...If that's not our messaging, how will we ever achieve what we need to remain a free society free of medical tyranny?"

Betty's comment was articulate and thought provoking and she makes some valid points, but I think what concerns me the most about some of Kennedy's message is the overall bigger picture and what he's NOT saying...

...and that is the right to live in a free society without government coercion when making medical decisions for myself and my loved ones (should they need me to do so). Whether or not I choose to use chemo and/or other mainstream methods to treat cancer, or whether I choose to travel to Sanoviv to use a combination of mainstream and alternative measures to treat cancer - should be MY decision.

I remember what Justina Pelletier's family went through (how can we forget?). Justina's parents went through a nightmarish ordeal as they witnessed their daughter's kidnapping, simply because they disagreed with physicians at Boston Children's Hospital over their daughter's diagnosis. They fought tooth and nail to get their daughter back; to this day, Justina's health is still an ongoing issue.

I know how tempting it is to applaud and cheer whenever ANYONE who has 'celebrity' attached to his/her name lends a sound bite to our cause. But we are speaking about a much bigger issue! We are LITERALLY losing our freedoms at an appalling rate in this country and it needs to STOP.

Dr. Benjamin Rush has stated, "...the time will come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship to restrict the art of healing to one class of Men and deny equal privileges to others; the Constitution of the Republic should make a Special privilege for medical freedoms as well as religious freedom."

NO ONE individual has the right to tell me, my husband or our son what to put into our bodies in the name of health. As someone stated during the rally (I believe it was Barb Fisher), people need to quit using physicians who worship junk science. Until that junk science gets exposed for what it truly is, this issue is never going to be resolved.

There are forces at work here of whom have NOT your best interests at heart. Believe me, most of these individuals know damned well that organic food is best for you and that vaccines are not the end all, be all, to good health. They know.

I have the right to question anyone's motives who cannot, or will not, answer a simple question, such as...Are you pro mandate? Would you be pro mandate should ONLY mercury be taken out of every vaccine?

How do you feel about aluminum and all the other ingredients in vaccines? Do you understand the vaccine manufacturing process? Do you understand that some ingredients do not legally need to be included in vaccine inserts?

We just cannot afford to be short-sighted when it comes to the loss of our freedoms in this country. But again, this issue is NOT about whether one is pro vaccine, anti vaccine, or somewhere in between.



I'm with Laura on this. It is so obvious where RFK jr stands on vaccines. It would be nice to hear him come out and say it!



"It would be nice to know that, but I think we have quite a ways to go before that becomes the most important issue."

That is the most important issue. Right now.

Laura Hayes


Thank you for your very thoughtful response :)

I feel incredibly strongly about the urgent nature of what is at stake, and our side's messaging is critically important to achieving our goal, which in my view, is the complete restoration of individual and parental rights to make any and all medical decisions for oneself and one's children without one iota of government interference. If we don't achieve that goal, our efforts will be nothing more than academic and completely futile.

It is a God-given right, and the most basic fundamental human right, to decide that which we allow or don't allow into our bodies and those of our children. To quote Mary Holland, "Without that right, what meaningful right do we have?" It has been taken from us in this country, in violation of The Nuremberg Code and in violation of other international codes of ethics to which the U.S. has agreed.

State by state, and now even at the federal level, the vaccine profiteers want to completely eliminate our right to say no to scores and scores of vaccines. California has already fallen, and I'm quite sure that other states will fall in the coming year if things don't change. Without the right messaging, we are in big trouble. You know, I know, most AoA readers know, and Mr. Kennedy knows that it most certainly is not just the mercury in vaccines and a few bad apples at the CDC that are the problem. It's SO MUCH MORE and ALL roads lead back to fully restoring individual and parental rights with regard to any and all medical decisions. Period. If that's not our messaging, how will we ever achieve what we need to remain a free society free of medical tyranny?

Betty Bona

I don't see anything in Mr. Kennedy's NY Times opinion piece that makes me fear that he is pro-mandatory vaccines. Sure, he states again (and I am really getting tired of it) that he is pro-vaccine, but I think his speeches are changing over time. This latest speech contained an indication that he may believe vaccines contributed to asthma in three of his children. Although he didn't say that directly, in his earliest speeches he never alluded to the fact that the dangers of vaccines may have touched his own family. The fact that he won't state his opposition to mandatory vaccines in every situation doesn't surprise me. Most people who aren't as knowledgeable (ha, so I say) as I am can envision an emergency type situation where they would support a mandate. I'm not sure I can, but maybe my imagination is overruled by my feelings, similar to yours, that vaccines are never the answer and are inherently and always dangerous. He is a lawyer from a political family after all. I'm sure he has thought through the state interests vs individual interests and can still imagine a situation where he would feel that state interests might require a mandate, just like most of the reasonable people that I try to convince. The idea I get from him is that we should make vaccines safe and clean up the corruption so that people will voluntarily get the vaccines. I don't see a problem with asking him to clarify his intentions on mandatory vaccines - whether he might support them only in an emergency or whether he might support them in general. It would be nice to know that, but I think we have quite a ways to go before that becomes the most important issue. His position on that may actually change as the months go on. I know you say we don't have time, but what's the alternative that we do have time for?

In a perfect world where we had many other options, I might not object if others wished to reject Mr. Kennedy as a spokesperson. He could be stronger in his arguments against vaccines and he still isn't clear with the thimerosal/MMR issue, but I do think, even with other options, it divides us, and I don't see a lot of other options. I believe that we won't make any progress at all until we expose the corruption at the CDC, and I don't see how we're going to make progress on that exposure without people like RFK, Jr. (and we need more than just him). One other thing that I have been told is that people shut out all of my arguments as ridiculous conspiracy theories as soon as I mention what's going on at the CDC. Maybe other moms are more convincing than me, but I'm afraid people just aren't going to listen to something that goes so counter to what they have always believed without a feeling that other respected people are saying the same thing. This is our first battle - to expose the corruption. If you don't trust anyone who doesn't believe like you do, we're very limited in the number of spokespeople we can count on, and not everyone in the movement feels like you and I do. I say we should embrace him as a spokesperson until we see that he is actually taking a position that is counter to our interests. What choice do we have? I don't see a bunch of people with his type of notoriety lining up to join us. People like you, Laura, have been invaluable and excellent at framing the issues, but we need even more of you and we need more people who command attention by the simple fact of who they are. I welcome Mr. Kennedy into the fight as I welcome parents of vaccine injured children who still believe that some vaccines are valuable. Without that welcoming, we are horribly divided.

I was also at the AutismOne conference when Kennedy spoke. Though I was not blown away by his knowledge of vaccine injury and was disappointed in his reluctance to completely reject the current vaccine schedule and make an anti-mandate statement, I thought at the time that he was a valuable addition to the fight. Maybe some of us can't live with him, but I don't think any of us know how to live without him. I don't think we need to make him say that no vaccine or medicine should ever be mandated. There is just to much case law where medical treatments have been mandated, whether right or wrong. That's the world we live in.


"...Mercury is NOT the only issue. And at this point, I'd venture to guess that RFK is somehow playing both sides against the middle. I smell an agenda. It goes like this: All Hg is removed from vax, the CDC gets a slap on the wrist or even replaced and then all is well. Vaccine mandates are fine because after-all, "they have saved millions of lives" and Bobby is "fiercely pro-vaccine." Vaccines have not saved one life in my view and it absolutely cannot be proven that this is the case.

I've smelled said agenda ever since that 2012 AO standing room only talk RFK did in Chicago. The minute he comes out against all vaccine mandates and stops demanding that everyone know he is "fiercely pro-vaccine" then I will gladly take all of this back and profusely apologize to him and stand with you all in appreciation and adulation of him. And I will be GLAD to do it. But as things stand right now, my gut tells me we're being used and duped by him. I pray to God I'm wrong."

Completely agree.

I have shared a few private emails with other individuals involved with this issue regarding my concerns as to the 'real' message Mr. Kennedy is relaying. I, too, have noted his CONSISTENT statements that a) he is PRO vaccine (and proudly states he vaccinated ALL his children, but now acknowledges that some of his children suffer with asthma; and b) that he wants polices that make everyone COMFORTABLE vaccinating."

I cringe every time he says these things. My husband once said to me, "Should vaccines ever be truly deemed safe for everyone, ACCEPTING THEM SHOULD STILL AND ALWAYS BE...


And Dawn: I just read your letter at your website (which I did not know existed). Your letter is FANTASTIC. Would you consider posting it over here? I would have provided the link, but felt that should be your decision.

Dawn Winkler

I am wholeheartedly with Laura Hayes and I find it sad that people so quickly jump up and down with excitement and applaud any celebrity who throws their hat into this arena before careful consideration of their actual knowledge and commitment to the cause.

Back in 2012, I was present at RFK's speech at the Autism One conference in Chicago. I will never forget the deafening silence in the room that only moments before erupted multiple times in clapping, cheer and standing ovations. What caused the deafening silence? And for many of us, a sick, disgusting feeling in the pit of our stomachs? RFK's refusal to answer one question at the very end. What was the question?

Do you support a parent's right to say NO to any vaccine regardless of mercury content?

He refused to answer. REFUSED. Everyone left the room in a state that I rarely witness people in. It was awkward. Obtuse. Horrifying.

While I am grateful when any celebrity can get some MSM time and get our message out, what is his message??? He confuses the mercury issue all the time and makes it seem like MMR contains Hg when it in fact never did. He made the statement "I want policies that make EVERYONE comfortable vaccinting." WHAT???????????????????????????????????????????? He made this statement in the speech in Atlanta.

I'm sorry, but stop speaking out both sides of your mouth Bobby. I will NEVER be comfortable vaccinating no matter what vaccines do or don't contain or what regulatory agency gets throttled or who they are replaced with. There will never be a regulatory agency "transparent" or "trustworthy" enough for me want to inject vaccines that ultimately cause Th1/Th2 imbalance into myself or my child. Read Vaccine Illusion by Tetyana Obukanhych if you'd like to understand why.

Mercury is NOT the only issue. And at this point, I'd venture to guess that RFK is somehow playing both sides against the middle. I smell an agenda. It goes like this: All Hg is removed from vax, the CDC gets a slap on the wrist or even replaced and then all is well. Vaccine mandates are fine because after-all, "they have saved millions of lives" and Bobby is "fiercely pro-vaccine." Vaccines have not saved one life in my view and it absolutely cannot be proven that this is the case.

I've smelled said agenda ever since that 2012 AO standing room only talk RFK did in Chicago. The minute he comes out against all vaccine mandates and stops demanding that everyone know he is "fiercely pro-vaccine" then I will gladly take all of this back and profusely apologize to him and stand with you all in appreciation and adulation of him. And I will be GLAD to do it. But as things stand right now, my gut tells me we're being used and duped by him. I pray to God I'm wrong.

We simply don't have time right now for half truths and convolution of what is really, really simple. No medicine, vaccines or otherwise, should be MANDATORY OR FORCED. I have NEVER heard RFK utter those words.

Laura Hayes


If only we had time to be giving people breaks...we don't.

The concern that I, and many others, have with Mr. Kennedy is his sole focus on thimerosal. His messaging seems to imply that if the mercury-laden thimerosal was removed from vaccines, the vaccines would then be safe. That is not true, and therefore, such messaging is dangerous.

Below is a favorite quote from a colleague that I have shared before. It sums up the danger of stating only partial truths and of not exposing all of the safety and efficacy problems with vaccines, not to mention the lack of need for them, and the danger of not focusing on the many risk-free ways to protect, maintain, and enhance one's health without the use of risk-laden vaccines:

"As long as vaccines are perceived to be harmless, then mandates will be considered to be harmless. Just an inconvenience. They will just be forcing people to do something good for them they don't like, like eating your vegetables.”

This is the path I fear Mr. Kennedy is heading towards...i.e. if the thimerosal is removed from vaccines (as though it's the only problem with vaccines)...then vaccines will be fine, and mandates are okay and a good idea. (He certainly does not state any opposition to vaccine mandates, or support for the parental right to refuse one, some, or all vaccines for their child, in this editorial of his:

Our most basic and fundamental human right to refuse vaccines is under fierce attack and being eliminated at a breakneck pace. We do not have time to be giving people breaks at this point in time.

Betty Bona

Let's give RFK, Jr. a break. He was dragged into this debate "kicking and screaming", and he has done a wonderful job of bringing attention to the corruption. He has spoken against mandates, so I think it's obvious he doesn't support them. He has highlighted the fact that the vaccine court takes away our constitutional right to a jury trial. As a lawyer, he couldn't support something and say it's unconstitutional in the same breath.

I don't think we should try to mold his speeches into what we believe should be said. Maybe he knows more about how to be heard in the political arena than we do. I, personally, have had very little success convincing people of the dangers of vaccines, not for lack of personal knowledge. Early on in just about any discussion I have with a vaccine proponent, the issue of past "successes" comes up. They tell me how vaccines have been the "greatest public health achievement of all time". I can't stop myself. I launch into all the reasons why vaccines have been a failed public health program from the beginning, and I lose them. That's it. They shut down and don't listen to another word I say. I know too much, and I can't make myself say that those early vaccines saved countless lives. I know too much with a scientific background and years and years of research into the mechanisms of actions of vaccinations and all the pitfalls for immune system damage. Ten or twelve years ago, when I first suspected my child was injured by vaccines, I would never have argued that all vaccines are harmful, but I was willing to listen to arguments to that effect. I'm sure those who have RFK, Jrs' ear continue to educate him on vaccine science, and I'm sure some believe as I do. Maybe he will come to my way of thinking in time or maybe he won't, but I don't think we should demand that he take positions he is not yet ready to take. He is more effective as a passionate speaker discussing the corruption and the evils of mercury that brought him into this debate in the first place. There are other speakers who can take it further.


Will Kennedy back anyone that is not of the Democratic party?
I found it bothersome to me - that he - I believe is backing -- the grass is green vaccine are safe Hilary.

Laura Hayes


I caution you not to be so sure that Mr. Kennedy is against vaccine mandates. There are many things that Mr. Kennedy has never actually stated publicly, but for which people make assumptions, as with your assumption that he is against vaccine mandates. We need to be careful not to give credit where credit is not yet due, especially on such a critically-important point.

And vaccine mandates ARE the crux of the matter. In a free society, there can NEVER be vaccine mandates, medical mandates, or forced medicine of any sort. In a free society, the safety profile of a medical treatment or procedure is irrelevant. What is relevant is the freedom to decide and choose what one does or doesn't allow into one's body, or that of one's child. Period. Without that right, what meaningful right do we have?

In my 2nd rally speech here in CA in opposition to SB277 (, I talked about how The Nuremberg Code nullifies and forbids vaccine mandates. The Nuremberg Code should have superseded and overturned the 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts decision. 1947 should have marked the year that immoral and unethical vaccine mandates were forever banned. But it didn't. And until we ban vaccine mandates, and all forced medicine, we will forever be fighting these same battles against medical tyranny which profoundly threaten each and every one of us.

It is my sincere hope that Mr. Kennedy will very soon boldly and publicly announce that he is FIERCELY OPPOSED to vaccine mandates, and that he will heroically call for a permanent ban on them. It is also my sincere hope that he will publicly call for the immediate repeal of the 1986 NCVIA. If not, then he and I are not fighting for the same things, not at all.

Laura Hayes


I was never "pro-vaccine". Listen to the beginning of my radio interview with Jeanie Keltner for a recap if interested:

I don't agree that "we were all" pro-vaccine. What we were was improperly informed, and therefore unknowingly ignorant, thanks to a many-decades-long propaganda campaign filled with LIES that were then taught as truths in our schools, by our doctors, and in all forms of media.

John Stone


I think it is always an important point that we were all "pro-vaccine" to start out with - everyone got here through injury, almost no one out of long-term ideological opposition, and many have thought what we need is greater care, fewer products etc. In fact, if you go back even to the beginning of the decade very few of us were flying the "anti-vaccine" flag and it suited our opponents to box us into that corner.

A few months ago I wrote a comment on David Healy's blog in reply to Scientific American correspondent John Horgan, which I think offers a helpful historical perspective - Horgan was proposing that it was alright to challenge experts providing, of course, you weren't Jenny McCarthy:

"John Stone says:
April 7, 2015 at 4:45 am

"There some interesting points here but it largely mistakes the issue. Crucially, in the context, Jenny McCarthy is not, was never, an anti-vaccinationist – she was a celebrity mother who witnessed vaccine injury to her child and became a campaigner for vaccine safety (actually she has been more or less forced into silence on the matter for several years). It has been part of the gambit of government and industry to characterise parents campaigning for vaccine safety as “anti-vaxxers” when for the most part they were parents or grandparents who had witnessed damage to their children from products they had been persuaded to use: it is true that recently the mistrust between such parents and “public health” has become so great that many have become radicalised into anti-vaccinationists, but it is not where it started and not what Jenny McCarthy is.

"And of course this is not for the most part about science at all but about denying damage. If Jenny wants to talk about what happened to her kid they will make it very difficult for her to work (hate material will appear in Time magazine, even NY Times and Washington Post reminding people shock-horror that she was a Playboy Centrefold)). And what people like Mooney, Mnookin and Gorski (Goldacre too) are doing is ad-hominem with bells on. This is not about hard headed science at all, it is about making people shut up, and marginalising them socially and professionally: it is about skewing the data by socially repressive techniques (even if some of the participants are too stupid to realise what they are doing). On the Sense About Science website there used to be an article about the necessity of driving people talking about vaccine damage out of the mainstream media (a project in which they have long since succeeded).

"And what we are talking about is not like physics at all (or the bits of physics that have stood the test of time): there is no central unchanging law of human imunity which underpins the project – there are only industrial products injected or sometimes swallowed, which may not be as effective or safe as the manufacturers would have us believe, and the evidence is usually of a statistical kind which can be distorted or lied about (there would be an unending supply of documentable examples), while the bodies that license and prescribe them are in bed with the industry. It is quite true that it should not need a scientist to penetrate this farago: any competent investigative journalist could do it.

Meanwhile, it is kind of obvious that vaccines can cause encephalopathies and other types of organic damage (to the gut for example) and that insufficient care is taken. These are the cruise missiles and drone helicopters of the war on the diseases, billions of them are deployed each year and the people in charge don’t want to know about the collateral damage. If you actually care about science the data in vaccinology is let’s face it mostly junk.


Thank you so so much to all who attended, planned, organized, and/or spoke at this protest and rally!!!


Laura and Cynthia - I am sure that RFK jr. is against vaccine mandates. That's why he traveled around the country speaking to so many state legislatures when these mandates were being proposed. He has spoken out eloquently about how corrupted the system is, lacking normal checks and balances such as tort and malpractice liability, lacking independent oversight, influenced by pharma $, and how this means that parental choice is the last thing standing between our children and pharma companies, the last thing preventing unfettered access.

I don't know whether or not he is for repealing the 1986 act.

cia parker

So why doesn't he tone down his enthusiastic support for vaccines in general? He's called out the fraudulent De Stefano, so he's left the fold of safety forever. The pharma crowd and its status quo love De Stefano almost as much as they revere Dr. P. Why not just stop pretending like he agrees that vaccines are the number one greatest invention of all time, cut his ties, and become honest? What group is he trying to court?

cia parker

I agree, Laura! RFK prefaces every statement by making clear that he's totally pro-safe-vaccine (what a non sequitur). So if they take every atom of mercury out of all the shots, is he then going to be willing to mandate them for everyone? What is his opinion on all the children disabled by the mercury-free MMR? And by vaccine encephalitis unconnected with mercury?


There is another very dark aspect to consider and that is that the US government already has laws in place that gives the government power to force mass vaccination upon declaration of a public health emergency.


I am very grateful for and heartened to see RFK Jr's tireless advocacy. But I too am concerned that he seems to stop at the edge of thimerosal when the problem with vaccines in public policy is so much bigger. He has said that it is safe to vaccinate as long as there is no thimerosal in the shots. That is a big problem. He also seems to be saying that he is for mandates, as long as government agencies are cleaned up. Laura's questions are very important. No matter how "cleaned up" public health authorities and the research becomes, global citizens must always have a choice when it comes to how they will live and that includes what medicine and medical interventions they will take for themselves and their children. These principles are absolute prerequisites for freedom and democracy that The United States should be a shining example of. Instead, the US government with their international corporate cronies are leading the way in promoting tyranny here and abroad. This must be vigorously opposed. Overt and covert coercion tactics and the push for mandates must be made illegal in all free societies. I hope that RFK Jr. will reconsider and broaden his position.

John Stone

Hi Eindeker

Just this minute replaced it with an explanation.


Hi John

Just out of interest what happened to the other post you repeated this week alleging DeStefano "lost" 100's of VAERS on intussusception with Rotarix? I also did a search last night and only found just over 100 cases, I assume because the post has gone together with the comments pointing out the error you think the NVIC got its numbers wrong?

John Stone


Surely, it is evident that despite his caution last year that Mr Kennedy has taken on board the issue of MMR causing autism - he has accused Frank DeStefano of poisoning children. Also he has challenged the Vaccine Injury Act which is the foundation of the present mandate system - he has also challenged the authority of the ACIP and the system for mandating vaccines (and the manifold corruption behind it).

Bob Moffitt

@ Laura Hayes

"To Mr. Kennedy:

Do you support vaccine mandates?

Do you support individual and parental rights to decline vaccination?

Do you support the repeal of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act?
While I personally applaud .. and .. firmly believe our community at AoA .. greatly appreciates RFK's courageous .. truth to power .. condemnation of "Mercury' exposure in our global environment .. especially RFK's .. relentless condemnation of "mercury" .. in global vaccines ..


Having said that .. I think most AoA followers would agree .. RFK .. NEVER .. misses an opportunity to "self-proclaim" himself .. "pro-vaccines" .. indeed .. very proud of "having vaccinated all of his children".

And so .. now that YOU .. (Laura Hayes).. raised the questions .. I personally find it ODD that RFK has never been asked those critical questions .. that I believe most AoA followers would like to have answered?

Is it ONLY the "mercury" in vaccines?

Just asking .....

Cynthia Cournoyer

I think it's great to bring attention to autism in a way that is ultimately devastating to the status quo on vaccines. Preferably, I personally hope that this would extend to all vaccines, all ingredients and all schedules.

I would also want to know that all speakers would support complete opposition to any mandates, present or future and that they would support the repeal of the 1986 Injury Act. Especially the most famous speaker. I'm not sure how he really feels on these specific things.

Darrel Crain

So grateful to Mr. Kennedy for calling out CDC leadership to answer for their involvement in massive scientific fraud. I am hoping that Kennedy will continue chasing the mass vaccination story down the rabbit hole. The whole foggy fairy tale of vaccine supremacy -- vaccines changed the course of history, vaccines are effective at preventing disease, we need vaccines to prevent diseases from roaring back in pandemic fashion -- these pervasive myths must be righteously challenged in every conversation about vaccines. For too many folks, the illusion is that we just need to get the bad ingredients out of the shots and then birds will sing, healthy children will laugh and play, and doctors will be revered once more for their wisdom in dispensing medical interventions we mere peasants (parents) are too dumb to understand.


More here:

Laura Hayes

To Mr. Kennedy:

Do you support vaccine mandates?

Do you support individual and parental rights to decline vaccination?

Do you support the repeal of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act?


Thank you so much RFK! And all the courageous people who spoke or attended.


"...Where were the holistic health practioners – doctors – M.D.’s and especially N.D.’s – Nurses Against Mandatory Vaccination, homeopaths, acupuncturists, chiropractors, nutritionists and all professionals who should understand that our right to informed consent/medical choice is being severely threatened. All those who should understand that the path to health is not vaccination!! Are they discouraged, intimidated, coerced, or just apathetic?!..."

That's what I was wondering.

On another note, I just finished viewing Brother Tony's speech (which was awesome, as were all the others). Toward the end of his speech, Tony remarked about his conversation with Elijah Cummings. Tony stated that he had given Elijah documentation detailing the findings of William Thompson and asked Elijah to review the documents and get back to him.

Two days later, Tony says, Elijah gave him a call. Tony states that during that call with Elijah, Elijah stuttered around and stated he was 'pro vaccine.' Elijah then stated that he felt that Tony, Kennedy, Jr., and others had fallen in with the 'crazies' that believe all this stuff about the CDC and vaccines.

Clearly, Tony was NOT at all pleased with Elijah's comments and they hung up.

I've read more than a fair share of comments on the Web re the fact that people are hanging their hopes on Elijah with some sort of a hearing re the Thompson issue. I think it's fair to say at this point that this is not going to happen.

However, after listening to all of these speeches (they really were terrific), I do feel fired up and can see that there will be a ground swelling of support from numerous grassroots movements, ready to take up and continue the cause for TRUTH regarding the vaccine issue.

(I have to say that Tony's speech was really powerful. I sat here, smiling, as I watched him speak. God bless him.)

Dawn Loughborough

Everyone was sooo great! The love, passion, and hope was enormous. Thank you all for yourcontributions!!


Thank you RFK jr. and all the other speakers at the rally! Especially thank you to the rally organizers!! I watched the rally clips from tannersdads twitter links he posted as it was in full force!!Thank you Tim(tannersdad)!!!

Anita donnelly

Please know all of you who sacrificed so much to speak or attend that those of us who could not go were with you in spirit. We will show this on YouTube and share it on social media. I so wanted to go and will do all I can to share the information.

Gary Ogden

To Kathy Sincere: I wholeheartedly agree with you; this was the best speech I've ever heard Barbara Loe Fisher give. So powerful. All the speakers were outstanding, but the other highlight was RFK's statement printed above; it brought a whoop and a cheer from me. Nothing more beautiful and powerful than truth. The co-authors of the Pediatrics paper are criminals. They have maimed and killed children, and in a nation where right is rewarded and wrong is punished, they would be punished. They have no moral compass.

Jeannette Bishop

Video of much of the 10/24/15 event:

6:40 Marcella Piper-Terry
15:08 Barbara Loe Fisher
23:06 Ron Cummins
26:16 Toni Bark
36:48 Eric Gladen
43:28 Alan Phillips
48:35 Tony Muhammed
1:00:15 Robert F. Kennedy Jr.


Once again, I admire RFKjr so much. Are there any links to news pieces on this rally, or a better video of his speech?


God bless RFK Jr. What a great dare! Thank You sir for your incredible support. As You can read here, it truly means a lot to us, parents of the vaccine injured.

Denise Anderstrom Douglass

Words cannot express how grateful I am to Robert F. Kennedy,Jr., for his unflagging devotion to this cause -- and to the Constitution of the United States of America.

Jeannette Bishop

Thank you a million times, Mr. Kennedy, for staying with this issue, and thank you to many who supported and attended the rally!

I also hope more video is to come.

I just listened (thanks to NVIC)to the V-IAL PSA for the hepatitis B vaccine:

It's a pretty effective example of what should be the "informed" part of the threatened principle of "informed consent."

Kathy Sincere

I forgot one person! Dr. Judy Mikovits, co-author of "Plague", attended the rally at the CDC. Thank you, Dr. Mikovits.

Kathy Sincere

I am a 68 year old mother of four vaccine-injured adult children, one of whom has died from his injuries. I attended the march at the CDC on October 23 and also the rally at Grant Park, Atlanta, on the 24th. Each and every speaker gave an absolutely impassioned, inspiring talk on many different aspects of the “Truth and Transparency” movement regarding vaccines.

I am so thankful to RFK Jr. for attending and his outing of Frank DeStefano. I have listened to most of Barbara Loe Fisher’s speeches on the internet; this was absolutely her best one ever. It moved me to tears. ALL of the speakers were terrific – Dr. Toni Bark, Ronnie Cummins from Organic Consumers Association, Michelle Ford from the Vaccine Injury Awareness League (VIAL), Minister Tony Muhammed, vaccine rights attorney Alan Phillips, and anyone else I may have missed. The Refusers played great music for us! The video of this event needs to be posted somewhere for all to see/listen to - on youtube, NVIC, AoA. It certainly wasn’t on our blacked-out media.

What disappointed me was the low turnout for each event. I came from Colorado, representing Colorado Coalition for Vaccine Choice, and really expected several thousand instead of several hundred participants. I know that parents of vaccine-injured children are stressed out, financially and emotionally. They don’t have the ability to just pick up and go.

Where were the holistic health practioners – doctors – M.D.’s and especially N.D.’s – Nurses Against Mandatory Vaccination, homeopaths, acupuncturists, chiropractors, nutritionists and all professionals who should understand that our right to informed consent/medical choice is being severely threatened. All those who should understand that the path to health is not vaccination!! Are they discouraged, intimidated, coerced, or just apathetic?!

These meetings and speeches cemented my resolve to never stop, never give in, never be coerced until they drag me off to a FEMA camp. God Bless America, because this is certainly a BRAVE NEW WORLD (read the book).


I f'g love it! He's fearless- it's the right approach! sometimes you just have to take a stand. Things are falling apart. I mean in the schools when you have so many children so disturbed you have to start calling out things. Of course there are more than vaccines involved with children's health but it's definitely a part of it!

Sheree Kren

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. - There are no available words I could use to thank you from the bottom of my living soul for the enormous dedication and service you have contributed on this issue, and your Water Keeper Project. You are one of the very last of the true American Heroes.
So very grateful that you have the wisdom and the knowledge to carry the important message forward on behalf of all of us, but especially America's children.

Angus Files

And to all the autism parents who attended,no doubt against all odds,thanks,and thanks to speakers and Mr Kennedy.

Having just attended our own local demo/rally last week ,I am still pumped and more annoyed than ever,not only for my own son, but I seen all the young mums and dads with very,very sick kids ,one 6 year old had ,autism,cerebal palsy,leukemia,and had a bag on her..done by fuckers like De Stefano..through greed...enough had it!!



Just WOW! What a hero.


Was Dr.Tony Bark a speaker? I can't find any reference. I found the message discouraging, "the media, the politicians, the doctors are all bought" I think they missed another point, if they aren't "bought" they are discredited and otherwise neutralized. From nobel prize winners, neurologists, gastroenterologists, no matter what the level of brilliance or education, they either sell their souls or pay the penalty.

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.)