“Unholy Coalition”: How Common Concerns, Chronic Disease, Biotech Trolls and State Terror Act as Unifying Forces Between Vaccine Safety and Anti-GMO Activism
There’s a particular plot twist in epic films that never fails to yank at my heartstrings even if the scene in question is over the top, hammed up or riddled with historical inaccuracies: that moment when all seems lost, yet against all odds, disparate forces gather together in a unified front to battle evil.
Since Scotland recently declared a ban on GMOs and since Skeptic astroturfer and dual Monsanto/vaccine defender David Gorski has repeatedly flogged a Braveheart analogy for—as he puts it— the “unholy coalition” of the vaccine safety movement, one scene from that the film comes to mind. It’s the moment when Irish conscripts stop in the middle of the battlefield to shake hands with the Scots to the dismay of dastardly Edward I.
To Gorski—aka Murdoch blogger “Orac” (Murdoch owns National Geographic which runs ScienceBlogs which hosts Gorski)— the comparison between vaccine safety activists and rebel Scots isn’t meant to be flattering because, as some recall, William Wallace gets drawn and quartered and the Scots independence movement failed, an idea that clearly fills Gorski’s mercenary little heart with glee.
But the scene still gets me every time… even though that historical moment of transnational male bonding never actually happened.
It would be nice if it did. It would be great if human beings were never weak, short-sighted and had enough clarity and courage to see common ground between embattled causes. All the same, sometimes the impossible comes to pass and seemingly different political movements discover aims in common and shift into loose allegiance. I think this is happening in regard to the vaccine safety and anti-GMO movements. The March Against Monsanto website recently reposted a GreenMedInfo article by Dr. Kelly Brogan titled Naturopathic Doctor Connects the Dots Between GMOs and Vaccines:
As discussed earlier on this website, a debate has brewing throughout the holistic health and clean food movements about whether to include the “green our vaccines” and GMO free movements together, or to keep them separate so as not to turn certain segments of people off to the cause.
Despite the fact that the government has paid out more than $3 billion to people who have suffered vaccine related injuries since 1988, anyone who speaks out on vaccine additives runs a great risk of being labeled as a “conspiracy theorist.”
Recently one doctor, Kelly Brogan, offered up her two cents on the issue in this op-ed from GreenMedInfo.
“I’ve never been very politically minded. I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I’ve never been arrested and I don’t like to get in trouble. I do like, and always have, to think for myself. I’m a natural skeptic and pragmatist,” she begins. “That’s why I advocate for consumer empowerment and thoughtful decision-making about what we put in our bodies.”
Brogan continues, discussing how nature has evolved over many, many years and how human medicine and other practices such as genetic engineering have given rise to a “war” against nature and its healing prowess. We’re just now discovering how to work with nature to create better systems of healing, she says.
Brogan goes on to question the type of thinking that gave rise to today’s current system of trying to “outsmart” our natural immune systems:
“Pharmaceutical companies and doctors think they can outsmart immune systems that have evolved to coexist with microbes, to be primed and educated by them. We are at war with infectious disease, and as a consequence, our fear and malice toward bacteria and viruses have lead us to compromise and alter our immune systems with pathogens entering our bodies through our muscles, accompanied by toxic additives that cripple our natural immune function and cause chronic inflammation.”
Meanwhile, there is a clear pattern of suffering being caused both from using genetic modification in a laboratory (along with Roundup and other poisons) on our crops, and using vaccines packed with chemical preservatives, especially on the overloaded dosage scheduling we use now, Brogan asserts. And a huge lack of long-term, independent testing on both GMOs and vaccines.
Brogan’s full post in GreenMedInfo describes a litany of virtually identical biotech industry abuses that impact both movements and lead to very similar types of damage and repression. As indicated in the article above, this wasn’t the first time March Against Monsanto sources have explored the connection between vaccine injury and adverse effects of pesticides and GMOs. I’ve seen many more discussions like this on MAM’s social media threads, whether in reference to the CDC Whitleblower scandal, the Kenyan infertility vaccine scandal, or the string of suspicious deaths of naturopathic doctors like Jeff Bradstreet.
It might not be quite time to set a wedding date between movements. It’s obviously better in terms of battle strategy to remain a hydra and maintain separate camps. But at this point in time, it should be abundantly clear that we’re all standing in the middle of the same battlefield.
The allegiance between causes might appear nebulous and not all may be on board, yet the connection seems grounded in a common instinct to protect human health, human rights and ecology against a vicious corporate takeover with ramifications far greater than both causes.
The only sizeable differences between the two movements— aside from March Against Monsanto having a noticeably larger number of college- and grad school-aged activists who may or may not have children— is that those who oppose vaccine mandates are mostly seeking safer, voluntary shots and a far more transparent and accountable public health apparatus. Meanwhile, those opposing GM food tech tend to make no concessions whatsoever to any conceptual benefits the technology is said to provide.
So most anti-GMO advocates are just that (“anti”), while most vaccine safety activists aren’t anti-vaccine. Though some among the latter— either due to jaundice towards mainstream methods of preventive medicine in general or because family members have been severely injured or killed by vaccines— will likely avoid vaccines for the rest of their lives. Those advocates may add a footnote that vaccines should still be made safer for those who want them, but, with few exceptions, the anti-GMO movement has no footnotes. Contrary to what Neil DeGrasse Tyson and other stealth biotech peddlers claim, GM tech is nothing like old fashioned hybridization and the risks of changing the genetics of seeds so far outweigh any hoped-for advantages that activists wouldn’t mind seeing the entire industry taken apart.
As Kelly Brogan argues, the similarities between movements are far greater than the disparities. Like vaccine safety and autism recovery activists, the anti-GMO movement also covers the gamut— rich and poor, vegan and omnivore, every race and walk of life, pro-gun control/right to bear arms, political left and political right (yes, there are right wing anti-GM activists) and everything in between. Internal differences may sometimes cause friction but the centers hold nonetheless. It’s a standing testimony to the genuine grassroots status of each and the very thing which terrifies the biotech industry. As a result, both movements have seen nearly identical takedowns on scientific whistleblowers, and both have had to wade through endless troll attacks—usually sourced from the same centralized astroturf fronts— accusing advocates of being “irrational anti-science” proponents, threats to life and progress, and branding both movements as “elitist” on the idea that the very poor can’t easily access or afford organic or alternative autism recovery approaches.
The charge of elitism is especially ironic considering the corporate crimes that led to 1/3 of American children living in poverty and considering that well-funded corporate entryists continuously attempt to hijack bits and pieces of these causes while surgically removing from the message any meaningful opposition to corporate abuse of power. In fact, like the Braveheart storyline, both movements are having problems with the “nobles.” The vaccine safety movement has had to suffer through the nauseating ascent of Autism Speaks’ billion dollar pharmaceutical industry-appointed board and agenda and endure another camp of industry-backed self-advocates who act as a PR brigade for drugs and shots and claim that autism is a “gift” while being appointed to government posts. Then the food safety movement has had to endure the nauseating ascent of corporate-approved power vegans and their Soylent-Greenwashed support of Monsanto-tied Bill Gates’ schemes to hijack the sustainable food cause.
For vaccine safety and autism recovery advocates, the affinity with March Against Monsanto has always come easily for the very simple reason that when parents of vaccine-injured children strive to get every last trace of GMO food, pesticides and dangerous additives out of children’s diets and environments, children get better. Diet alone will rarely lead to total recovery and other measures often come into play, but a clean diet is still central.
Also when those of us with injured children read the science on adverse effects of GMOs and Glyphosate, the overlaps with the cellular damage caused by vaccines are screamingly evident. For instance, it becomes clear that the “farm proximity” theory of autism causation is not necessarily a competing hypothesis to vaccine causation but may be reciprocally complimentary since both effects likely compound each other and damage common cellular pathways.
Another reason vaccine injury families often go organic is that we, as parents, can never die. Our children have been genetically modified after all, and may always need us.
For all these reasons and more, vaccine safety and autism recovery advocates attend March Against Monsanto events, struggle to afford organic food on top of the massive costs of recovery protocols, sign up for alerts, sign petitions, speak out on the dangers of the biotech conglomerate, and scoff at the shills promoting GM tech, many of whom—like Gorski— do double duty as vaccine mandate pushers.
The affinity is so natural that the cointel-trolls don’t even bother feigning passion for vaccine safety cause in order to plant doubts about GM criticism within the community. They may try to sow divisions in other ways, but we’re a lost cause as far as being swayed into thrall with the toxic agro industry or Big Junk Food.
But there’s been plenty of effort to do the reverse— cobble together an awkward “Pro-Vaccine Mandate/Anti-GMO” astroturf front to drive a wedge between potential allies and make events go the way of the Irish charge at Falkirik—with one colonized, exploited force attacking another at the behest of the exploiters and both remaining under the boot forever after.
The vaccine safety arena has already seen climate change proponents like Naomi Oreskes stumping for vaccine mandates—akin to colonized Welsh conscripts at Falkirik taking down the colonized Scots with high tech arrows. It’s another irony, since what is vaccine-induced autism other than a case of man-made internal bio-climate change which industry front groups try to explain away with the claim that ice caps (or human neurology, immune system integrity, etc.) have always been melting at the current rate?
But in the case of anti-GMO, the very conciseness of the movement’s goals—to eventually eradicate GM technology—may have prevented industry from playing both sides against the middle earlier on as it had with climate change activism. Climate change activists have always been forced to take a more moderate approach (can’t ban cars overnight and so forth) and were therefore left open to being drafted into greenwashing scheme and repeatedly presented with ugly temptations to grovel for amnesty and media coverage by selling out parallel movements.
But regarding industry’s posture towards GMO opposition, it was simply all-out war from the start because anti-GMO advocates have already won. The greatest danger to industry is that over 90% of the public wants, at the very least, labeling. Because of this, it seems industry’s entryism mission was mostly to disrupt, destroy or convert the anti-GMO front, not draft pliant advocates willing to trade bits of integrity for the chance to make a few small gains or appear on TV.
The upside is to the anti-GMO movement being under extreme fire may be that this weeds out the activist-shill hybrids who would compromise the cause into the ground. For Mark Lynas, the limelight grubbing putative “founder” of the anti-GMO movement, there was no partial decamping from Monsanto opposition. He had to turn 100% belly up, yet maintained his post as climate change science hero because many media-sponsoring industries have found ways to profit from greenwashing, but far fewer with big media PR budgets have found ways to profit from anti-GMO.
Still, not all who waver from a consistent message are shills. Since young, childless hipsters have been a primary target of PR efforts to sell a binary view of the vaccine debate as either “for or against” disease prevention as GreenMedInfo and March Against Monsanto pointed out, chances are that several anti-GMO activists who seem fervently convinced of the irrational evil of vaccine safety critics are at least sincerely biased. But, since Monsanto accidentally disclosed that it has an entire department devoted to “debunking” the opposition – transparent code for online trolling and “native advertizing”—chances are also pretty good that many “pro-vax/anti-GMO” proponents are security industry contractors.
GMO-defending trolls run thick in the anti-GMO world, but as far as driving wedges between similar causes, measures to insert vaccine defenders within the anti-GMO movement to prevent an activism cluster may have come too late: the industry media had already spent too much time negatively analogizing anti-GMO advocates with vaccine safety advocates to the point that both groups were easily able to recognize common enemies and familiarize themselves with troll rhetoric. And so, in this chapter of history, the Scots and the Irish might actually shake hands on the battlefield—thanks in part to astroturfers.
Just as a side note, vaccine safety advocates get to be “Scots” in this equation only because we’re on the bloody bottom of the environmental movement heap with the arrows directly trained on our heads in several not-so-proverbial ways
For one, the vaccine safety cause has been turned into the ultimate controversy ballast that no other movement—no matter how similar its aims— wants to take on lest the alliance weighs down its own cause. This is why it may not yet be time to celebrate a movement marriage: wedges will yet be driven, people will get cold feet and the rest because hanging around the vaccine safety advocacy world is rapidly becoming more dangerous, largely due to the centralized campaign to outlaw vaccine resistance and alternative recovery strategies. For this reason, certain filmic feudal parallels start to emerge as the state appears poised to take children away from noncompliant parents. This has already happened sporadically around the country (here, here and here), though several professional observers and advocacy groups are concerned that compulsory vaccine legislation in California and other states could usher in a program of mass child displacement.
Politicized child theft is a form of oppression that could be likened in a certain sense to the law of Prima Noctis depicted in the film. Like the battlefield bonding scene, this didn’t really happen at the time of William Wallace, though it once existed along with other medieval practices like a noble’s right to keep the children and grandchildren of tenants in bondage or disembowel serfs to warm their feet. For the sake of the modern child-snatching analogy, these things arguably served the same purpose—to demoralize occupied populations, “disrupt intergenerational cultural transmission” of information, silence and disband coalitions.
But silence and division probably aren’t great strategies at the moment. Because of the increasing privatization of Child Protective Services which involves perverse incentives from both federal sources and corporate kickbacks, it’s unlikely that such a policy would be limited solely to vaccine enforcement. Not only has child welfare become much like the private prison industry which has made the US #1 in the world in human captivity, the prison industry is directly investing in it. It’s basic supply side economics and state child removal is a growth industry.
This should be a concern for all environmental and consumer activists who’ve already seen official resources thrown into disrupting their respective movements. With the coining of bogus, weaponized psychiatric diagnoses like “orthorexia nervosa”—a “pathological” drive to avoid industrial food additives, GMOs and the long list of chronic diseases caused by same—and the addition to the DSM V of Somatic Symptom Disorder – roughly defined an “excessive preoccupation with health”— anti-GMO activists may eventually find themselves in similar straits even if they’d never hooked up with the vaccine safety arena.
As absurd as these labels sound, they could easily be criminalized by proxy and may have been designed to do just that. Legislative and diagnostic incursions on civil and parental rights could pry an entering wedge through either attacks on food freedom or medical freedom and take both down together. In other words, parents could be as quickly accused of “abusing” their children by subjecting them to an overly crunchy diet as they could of denying their children vaccination and these policies could cut their teeth and snowball from either direction. And God forbid anyone take a child to the doctor claiming symptoms or conditions were caused by exposure to GMOs, vaccines or pesticides. That trap has been laid as well in the new DSMV addition of “Factitious Disorder Imposed on Another,” aka “Medical Child Abuse.”
The way that CPS currently operates, it doesn’t really matter if the original grounds are eventually exposed as ludicrous since, once the agency has an entry point into private spheres, it can simply reverse engineer other grounds because dependency court operates outside the rule of law—there is no jury or genuine discovery, reporting parties are not mandated to testify, etc.
The Maine state child snatching case of Alorah Gelleron’s infant son came very close to those straits since the baby was taken by authorities due to an excerpt of an article posted on the USDA website that happened to be written by Monsanto-sponsored nutritionist, W.H. Dietz.
The above should be seen as a case of the biotech industry directly reaching into consumers’ lives and dictating what children can be fed in an enforceable manner. Dietz essentially claims that goat’s milk formula is dangerous and inferior to Monsanto-tainted baby formula, which Gellerson’s son was forced to consume until the family fought back. Although, in theory, CPS might have accepted the baby being given organic store-bought formula, as a very young single mom still living with her own mother, Gellerson—who had been making baby formula with the help of the family’s goat— could not afford it. Effectively, this was a GM-fatwa and Big Ag and Big Food were the law for a time in the Gellerson’s lives.
The Gellerson story and other reports on child-snatching due to medical cannabis activism and official disagreement with naturopathic cancer and other treatments have gotten both vaccine safety and food safety advocates equally up in arms. In a broad sense, both movements stand on the same sides of many issues as Kelly Brogan and others have argued. Sayer Ji of GreenMedInfo put it well in an article linked earlier:
If you look closely you'll see the exact same concerns [between the anti-GMO and vaccine awareness movements]: the violation of informed consent, the neglect of the precautionary principle, predominance of industry propaganda over actual science, the revolving door between government regulators and legislators and industry, and the undermining of the fundamental right of bodily self-possession, the keystone of health freedom.
Adriana Gamondes is a Contributing Editor to Age of Autism and one of the blog’s Facebook administrators.
One great thing about gmo/herbicide concerns is it helped spawn alternative media, so there is more ability to voice concerns about vaccines.
That Ronnie Cummins from the Organic Consumer Association spoke at the CDC Rally was meaningful.
When voices unite they can amplify,
As it did with the Keystone XL hearing in Nebraska (video clip).
Posted by: Greyone | November 10, 2015 at 02:05 PM
Golf very popular,and is a big draw for tourism, so quite happy for anyone who wishes to upgrade the facilities, such as Donald has.It is not the game of the rich in Scotland, as there are so many Golf courses around Scotland.Donald, was just pushing his luck, as you would expect, looking for more and more for his money,by objecting to the wind farm.For me the North Sea is a bleak looking sea, no Islands or Hills to be seen from shore, a few elegant wind turbine blades, turning gracefully,off shore,in the wind ..no harm..to anyone ..except the pro-big-nuclear lobbyist's ,which Scotland is trying to rid the country of, Trident and nuclear energy. Donald is still, pumping the dollars into Scotland big time, keep them rolling Mr Trump.
Posted by: Angus Files | November 07, 2015 at 06:36 PM
Angus-- Even if autism rates go down under the reign of King Donald, I'm still not sure Scotland would appreciate having their entire country turned into a luxury golf club.
Posted by: Adriana | November 07, 2015 at 04:25 PM
Scotland is also rejecting fraking ,along with the GM,they can all FRAK OFF. The vaccine issue is more imbedded, and will take Trump`s homecoming,to become King Of Scotland "The Donald" ,after he becomes your President, to sort the vaccine issue out...watch this space.
Posted by: Angus Files | November 07, 2015 at 02:25 PM
Adriana, as the new unemployment statistics come out (which seem fairly pro-Obama), it simply occurs to me that once your eyes are opened to the corruption in the area of health, it really makes you distrust any of what the agencies say. Of course the media are only too happy to play along and not question critically. Are there really more jobs for the young? Have more people simply given up looking for employment? Same with the autism question. Is it really true that we have always had high autism cases but they were somehow hidden by different diagnostic names? They are admitting that Alzheimer's is very much increasing and this cannot be genetic.
The games played by the government and media are very predictable. All I know is that if they would lie about health, they would lie about anything and do not deserve our trust.
Posted by: Truthseeker2 | November 07, 2015 at 01:18 PM
The scientific overlap is considerable with vaccines and GMOs. Anyone who 'gets' the toxicity of vaccines and not GMOs has not dedicated the same time to researching it (and vise versa). Likewise, there's another constituency considered as 'crazy' as (us) so-called anti-vaxxers and that's the hundreds of thousands of people globally fighting toxic energy.
Electromagnetic fields too are part of the autism mix. Again, it's there for anyone in the scientific literature.
But Messaging is all in 2015. Back in 1992 in Silicon Valley, I envisioned the Internet as the great leveler, power to the people, access to truth - a way to directly tell our leaders where we wanted to go. Trouble is, we have no leaders and Corporations still manage an extraordinary sway over the Message. We need to be Creative & Persist.
Posted by: Art of Autism | November 06, 2015 at 11:55 AM
"corporate-approved power vegans" ??? Huh?
Good article except that strange comment.
Don't tell me Bill Gates is vegan! "Say it isn't so Joe!"
Posted by: Sun~Rose | November 06, 2015 at 03:45 AM
In Vermont didn't the same legislators who took away the philosophical exemption, then pass a bill for GMO labeling. Any political alliance would have avoid that kind of debacle. I can see an alliance as a way of neutralizing the anti-vaccine mandate people, we'll give you what you want with the GMO labeling and maybe even with banning GMOs in certain crops or places; but that means you have to cease with the resistance against our vaccine policies. I have to say that generally people who get the vaccine poison thing also get the GMO poison thing because many vaccine injured children simply cannot eat GMO food, along with a host of other things that are allergens like wheat, dairy, and soy. Many of us had to clean out our pantries decades ago. But is the reverse true?
Greening vaccines will not get rid of the antigen effect. ( I'm referring to that Japanese study where after 8 antigens the mice developed autoimmune disease.) We want health freedom, we want choice. I am all for a large health freedom movement that includes an end to all vaccine mandates as well as GMO labeling or banning of GMO crops. I am not for a movement that so called "greens" vaccines but keeps in place draconian mandates with no freedom of choice to refuse a vaccine without losing education or other rights.
Posted by: kapoore | November 05, 2015 at 05:47 PM
Interestingly, David Gorsky (Orac) claims Nat Geo has nothing to do with scienceblogs and yet the app has that black rectangle with the inner yellow lines that is National Geographic.
Posted by: Reader | November 05, 2015 at 04:17 PM
David Gorsky at "Science"blogs is snivelling that the poor pro industry shills have people upset with them and making FOI requests etc. Apparently Jake wrote a mean article about him and Offit has had "death threats." . Offit family had Jake removed from a public meeting and mischaracterized a touch on the shoulder. How do these people sleep at night? They have actually offed doctors who treat children and yet they snivel about accountability questions. I think more and more people are seeing how sick and disabled the children are now and at the same time, they are pushing extremely hard against personal rights (medical freedom).
Posted by: False scientists... | November 05, 2015 at 03:03 PM
John-- I should have been clearer that modern Scotland is hardly a sweeping analogy for biotech activism. A country under assault from violent corporate expansionism would fill that bill better, so the Scots parallel is limited to circa 1300. Back then they no shots, no GMOs, no anemic referendum but lots of arrows and trolls.
Posted by: Adriana | November 05, 2015 at 01:49 PM
@Jenny wrote: "For that matter, as long as the push for mandates continues and the coverage of objective science and shilling continues, eventually the clean energy advocacy groups will fall in line to support the vaccine freedom movement for the same reasons that the non-GMO movement will eventually see the light."
I really hope you're right.
Since Americans have been rapidly getting sicker for the past several decades to the point that children-- for the first time in a century-- are expected to have shorter lifespans than their parents, it's hard to understand why the insurance industry hasn't collapsed already if we assume that healthy policy holders are the key to insurers' profits. But it always bothered me that, even in the middle of the financial collapse, insurers saw a massive (>50%) profit increase in 2009. I wanted to understand how it could be possible for the insurance industry to profit from illness and found a few hints, especially if the idea is extended to pharmaceutical investments: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/j-wesley-boyd-md-phd/health-insurance-industry_b_573520.html
"The life and health insurance industries would seem to have obvious interests in keeping people healthy. However, in this week's American Journal of Public Health, we report the results of a study showing that life and health insurance companies in the US and abroad are heavily invested in fast food.
Just how big is the insurance industry's investment in fast food? U.S., Canadian and European-based insurance firms hold at least $1.88 billion of investments in fast food companies.
Among the largest owners of fast food stock were United States-based Prudential Financial, Northwestern Mutual and Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company and European-based ING.
Northwestern Mutual and Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company both offer life insurance as well as disability and long term care insurance. Northwestern Mutual owns $422 million of fast food stock, with $318 million of McDonalds. Mass Mutual owns $366 million of fast food stock, including $267 in McDonalds. Prudential Financial, which sells life insurance and long-term disability coverage, has total fast food holdings of $355 million, the biggest stake being $197 million of stock in McDonalds..."
Posted by: Adriana | November 05, 2015 at 12:43 PM
I hadn't noticed the Scottish move but the interesting reality is that because GMO produce has to be labelled in the UK it is virtually never sold in the shops anyway - I have certainly never seen it in London and I doubt whether it is any different Scotland: on the other hand I could easily see the London government try to change the rules (for instance if we were to exit the EU) and this maybe why. Unfortunately, as we know the Scottish government remains completely indifferent to vaccine damage. I don't think there care much about anything.
Posted by: John Stone | November 05, 2015 at 12:40 PM
Whether proponents of GMO labeling and vaccine safety want to be combined or not, they are. I often see "critical thinking" books which come to the sober conclusion, after much deep thought, that GMOs and vaccines are very, very good and only morons think ofterwise. Sometimes these books equate concerns about GMOs and vaccines with AIDS denialism.
Posted by: Carol | November 05, 2015 at 12:23 PM
Kapore-- You make some key points and I completely agree that, in the current state of things, the vaccine safety cause is the most embattled-- why we're the "Scots" in terms of the movie analogy.
But for the exercise of exploring common ground-- which MAM has been engaging in repeatedly-- there's a cumulative effect factor involving GMOs-- namely that human beings have to eat everyday and, as you mentioned, GM seed spread is nearly impossible to contain and the food supply is becoming infected. Then Dr. Brogan's original post itemizes several reasons why avoiding GMOs is becoming increasingly difficult-- for instance that big organic companies use GMO vaccines (which humans are also exposed to as another reader mentioned) on livestock. These big players constantly push to soften organic standards.
But as far as overlaps, mostly what concerns me is that through making bogus, corporate-boardroom-concocted mental illness labels "by proxy," food actually can be mandated for children very much like shots. People in the vaccine safety community have had their children taken by the state over it, some making narrow escapes to other countries. In that sense, the potential for both communities to be preyed upon together becomes quite clear. I think we're seeing signs that the food safety movement recognizes the common danger.
Posted by: Adriana | November 05, 2015 at 12:08 PM
Actually, I was very curious about what the CDC's response would be. Whether they would risk double-down on a fraud or seek an out. I interpret stalling as leaning towards an out, which in the short-term may carry less risks. But in the long-term, I am not so sure.
Posted by: Greg | November 05, 2015 at 12:07 PM
Vaccine safety is an oxymoron. Vaccines are designed to cause inflammation, which is what causes the reaction to the vaccine antigens and produce the desired antibodies. And to continue the state of inflammation for as long as possible, the keep the immune system cranking out the desired antibodies. Once it stops doing that, vaccine protection ends and it's time to get a booster. Many people may be willing to accept that dangerous state in order to get protection against particularly common and dangerous diseases (although here I'd have to interject Like what?). But it is still the case that they have made a bargain with the devil which may or may not work out the way that they hoped. No vaccine is safe and it never could be safe, just from the very nature of vaccines.
Posted by: cia parker | November 05, 2015 at 11:42 AM
The difference between GMO and vaccines is that generally it's still possible to avoid GMO by eating organic, but in many cases it is not possible to avoid vaccines. You are not required to eat GMOs to receive an education. You are not required to eat GMOs in order to retain employment if you are a pre-school teacher or a nurse working for certain hospitals. No one threatens to jail the non-GMO eaters. No one calls them anti-GMOers. I am very pro-clean food, I am pro-labeling of GMO food, I am anti-bee killing pesticides. I am pro research into the effects of GMOs on the human body. I dislike the idea that our beautiful farmland is being possibly irreparably destroyed by genetically modified seeds flying around everywhere.
Still, I watched a show by a GMO website interviewing Toni Bark and the interviewer did not want to "discuss vaccines" and in fact used that very line. Clearly vaccines are more taboo topic than GMOs. We have to fight our own battle it seems and when we start to win then I expect the GMO crowd will hop on board. We are the political untouchables at the moment.
Posted by: kapoore | November 05, 2015 at 11:33 AM
" . . .because many media-sponsoring industries have found ways to profit from greenwashing, but far fewer with big media PR budgets have found ways to profit from anti-GMO. . . "
And even less in the alternative medicine / vaccine reform movements, I'd say, though maybe things are changing for both big food, and with some creativity, it could also change for vaccine manufacturing.
For instance, big food has already recognized the wider profit margin in selling organic food, so that they are buying up small start up companies because the market growth rate greatly outpaces any other of the laughably small profit margins on groceries in general, just to get a foot in the game.
Similarly, it surprises me that the vaccine development companies haven't seen the potential profits that could come with completely abolishing ANY vaccine mandates, both at the state or federal level. Both vaccine proponents AND vaccine freedom activists could have what they want and the pharmaceutical companies could then profit on developing and offering things like titer tests or functional immune system testing. If they get $50 for a vaccine, what anti-vaccine advocate wouldn't pay double that to ensure their family members didn't have to vaccinate, or had the freedom to vaccinate selectively? At this point no one is naive enough to believe titers tests are the sole way to gauge whether an immune system is more or less susceptible to disease. (One article I read discussed a research group documenting something like 250 different immune responses in the body.) The field is ripe for such testing products and for a pharmaceutical company to offer them offers the company the ability to diversify and pad their portfolios with a steady income base so that they are not as financially susceptible to the ongoing march of patent expiration. Instead of them having to continually pour money into quashing the maybe 10% of the population who might choose to avoid vaccines and lobbying congress on why people should not have control over their own bodies, that remaining 10% becomes a customer of their other desirable products, made available through abolishing mandates. With insurance coverage on it? Watch the profit increase even more.
On top of that, the part of government that wants to continue pushing Obamacare on the country benefits because that ponzi scheme will never work unless there are a certain amount of people healthy enough to support all the sickos. Same with insurance companies. 100% vaccine converage = 0 healthy people in the end = insurance industry collapse - both public and private. Abolishing mandates could theoretically increase insurance profits.
I liken it to the delays in sustainable energy development. Energy companies know that long term, their profits will be sustainably maintained by them entering the clean energy market. The infrastructure is much cheaper to develop and maintain, and getting cheaper as the science advances. Americans want jobs, even if they are blue collar technology maintenance ones. Investment bankers are starting to turn their backs on nuclear. While they take every step they can to delay clean energy guidelines down at the statehouse and maintain their foothold on dirty oil, energy companies are simultaneously partnering with solar energy companies to get their foot in the game as they shift gears, "greenwashing" not withstanding of course.
For that matter, as long as the push for mandates continues and the coverage of objective science and shilling continues, eventually the clean energy advocacy groups will fall in line to support the vaccine freedom movement for the same reasons that the non-GMO movement will eventually see the light. The fastest (but not the only) way for the power brokers in all markets to stop the dominos from lining up and subsequently knocking each other over is to repeal all vaccine mandates for school, employment, or anything else and refocus their profit vector on the cheaper-to-develop, sustainable, less controversial field of immune testing. Otherwise, the truth will continue to spread throughout all the industries that are currently following the shill and kill approach to damage control.
Posted by: Jenny | November 05, 2015 at 11:15 AM
FluMist, HepB vaccine, HPV and pretty much all the vaccines in development use GMO technology to alter the antigens or the adjuvants.
MMR contains albumin and a company called Delta Biotech was acquired by Merck in the early 2000's for their genetically modified human albumin which I believe got incorporated into MMR.
Just Label It! That goes for GMO foods and GMO vaccines.
We have a right to know what's in our food and our vaccines!
Posted by: Just Label It GMO Vaccines | November 05, 2015 at 09:16 AM
Thank you, Adriana. Dr. Stephanie Seneff, an MIT researcher, has done some very good work showing the biochemical pathway by which glyphosate (Roundup) disrupts the gut flora by disrupting the shikimate pathway in these crucial bacteria. What percentage of autistic kids have gut dysbiosis? I think it's pretty high. Her writing is highly technical, but worth soldiering through. Any one eating any conventional food is getting a dose of glyphosate with nearly every bite. It is not only in corn and soy beans, but is used now as a desiccant for wheat prior to harvest. USDA doesn't test for it in food (too expensive, they say), and what conventional food doesn't contain corn or wheat in some form? Natural allies, those of us working against vaccine mandates, and those working against GMO's. I am in both camps.
Posted by: Gary Ogden | November 05, 2015 at 08:46 AM
Another part of the battlefield, another Whistleblower.
Posted by: Greyone | November 05, 2015 at 08:26 AM
From above:- "To Gorski — the comparison between vaccine safety activists and rebel Scots isn’t meant to be flattering because, as some recall, William Wallace gets drawn and quartered and the Scots independence movement failed, an idea that clearly fills Gorski’s mercenary little heart with glee."
I suppose I fit into Gorski's blog as both a vaccine safety activist and a rebel Scot! .....but he is wide of the mark linking these different issues with the recent independence referendum where a majority voted to stay in the United Kingdom.
Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon did not ban the growing of GM food crops in Scotland. Such crops were already banned in Europe, several years ago. Recently, following a huge campaign by Monsanto, the EU voted to relax the ban, although individual countries within the Union were free to continue the ban. Unlike UK Prime Minister David Cameron, who is allowing GM crops to be grown in England, Nicola Sturgeon decided to keep the ban on GMO crops, in order to protect the 'green' integrity of Scotland's food and drinks industries. This was a brave decision, and in making it Ms Sturgeon incurred the wrath of the scientists working in Government plant research institutes, who are insisting GMOs will feed the world and are perfectly safe and trot out that old chestnut 'the science is in'. DON'T BELIEVE IT NICOLA!
Vaccine concerns have not yet surfaced in Scotland, with the exception of HPV vaccines. Parents of girls said to have become damaged by this vaccine are getting organised and are campaigning agaist it. There have been a few press articles, mostly on the internet.
Neither vaccines, nor GMOs, were part of the recent referendum campaigns for or against Scottish independence.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | November 05, 2015 at 06:38 AM