Rita,

Last I heard the filmmakers are focusing on getting screenings. I assume it could take some months (since the first screening actually came nearly a month earlier than the originally scheduled Tribecca screening I also assume that could change).

I don't know if you are aware of the film Trace Amounts which focuses primarily on thimerosal and the CDC's handling of safety concerns regarding that vaccine component (and more evidence of corruption). It also includes some coverage of William Thompson's revelations. This is available now to purchase on DVD or stream.

I have been studying the chemicals allowed and endorsed by the EPA and FDA in our food,soil,air,water and pharmaceuticals. The conclusions of the Wakefield Study and many more like it, are not difficult to comprehend. If you pollute an organism, any organism enough, it will malfunction.

The diseases we are seeing in the medical community are not infectious in nature, they are the results of an organism not operating properly; autism, diabetes, heart disease, auto-immune disorders, developmental disabilities, behavioral disorders. The list is long.

These diseases are multi-causal. That is why we are unable to point to any one cause. The mechanisms of injury are complex. How dare we, as egocentric humans, think we understand the complexities of the human body and its metabolic processes?

The AMA was founded by chemical barons who understood natural cures could not be patented. Vaccines and pharmaceuticals do harm us. Pharmaceuticals are chemicals.

I recently read a study on the list of chemicals detected in fetal cord blood. It is my opinion, that we are all in varying states of pollution at this point. Some vaccine reactions are more overt than others, but all vaccines corrupt the immune system. That is what Dr. Andrew Moulden concluded and espoused. Sadly, he is dead. The doctors who stand up and tell the truth are dropping like flies. As long as people believe the party line, the truth is being censored by the media and messengers are being murdered,the majority of people will never know the sad truth.

Nancy Ryer RN,BSN

to Ronald Kostoff.

did the ingredient components of the vaccine change in the '90's that may have played a factor in causing side-effects that did not happen during the 25 years prior.

is there a way to find a list of ingredients 1971 and 1996.

The task and life of an honourable person is never easy.

I live in Australia and am one of perhaps millions around the world who feel we owe a great debt to Dr. Wakefield for his work & especially his courage over the years. How painful it must be to stand firm against the tsunami of hatred and fear that is pulling no punches in it's hysterical frenzy to utterly destroy the messenger. I have nothing but great admiration and thanks for this valiant pioneer & his supporters.

How can I get a copy of the doco?

HAVE WE MISSED THE 800 LB. GORILLA IN THE ROOM?

Wakefield's 1998 Lancet paper showed that "Onset of behavioural symptoms was associated, by the parents, with measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination in eight of the 12 children, with measles infection in one child, and otitis media in another. All 12 children had intestinal abnormalities, ranging from lymphoid nodular hyperplasia to aphthoid ulceration. Histology showed patchy chronic inflammation in the colon in 11 children and reactive ileal lymphoid hyperplasia in seven, but no granulomas. Behavioural disorders included autism (nine), disintegrative psychosis (one), and possible postviral or vaccinal encephalitis (two)." Thus, there is some implied association among behavioral symptoms/disorders, intestinal problems/inflammation, and the MMR vaccine.

The MMR vaccine was approved in the USA by the FDA in 1971 (https://vactruth.com/history-of-vaccine-schedule/). Given the publication date of Wakefield's paper, one would assume his work was done in the 1996-1997 time frame. Thus, there was a 25-year period between initial use of the MMR vaccine in the USA and Wakefield et al's initial observations of the above associations. One can ask: why did it take 25 years to recognize some potential association among the MMR vaccine, intestinal problems, and behavioral problems? Was the association too weak or non-existent during that period? Were only some of the associations observed? Was the full association observed, but for myriad reasons not reported? I personally find it inconceivable that the many thousands of pediatric clinicians and researchers would not have observed some types of associations had they existed in sufficient strength and numbers.

Some additional data will shed light on the probable answer to the above question. The doses of MMR vaccine given in the USA followed a step-function trend, as shown in (http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/43/Supplement_3/S141/F1.expansion.html). There were roughly seven million doses annually from 1971 to mid-1989, and approximately twice that number (because of a recommended second dose) thereafter. Autism began a noticeable increasing rise starting about the mid-1990s, paralleling the increase in glyphosate usage and cell phone subscriptions (http://www.medicaldaily.com/autism-rates-increase-2025-glyphosate-herbicide-may-be-responsible-future-half-316388);
(https://www.bellyarmor.com/radiation/health-risks/autism/).

Thus, it seems clear that the above association was not observed in the 25 year period (1971-1996) because some of the key components were not in place in sufficient strength. While I have identified glyphosate and RF radiation as potential contributing factors to the increase in autism, this does not rule out other potential contributing factors that may have co-existed as well. It appears that once these critical contributing factors were in place, the impact on the immune and other critical systems was sufficiently large to enable the MMR vaccine to effect the observed behavioral and intestinal problems characteristic of autism. This comports with the observation of the mothers of these children that the symptoms occurred soon after the vaccine was given. Could the autism have occurred without the MMR vaccine if the non-vaccine environmental components had become sufficiently large? Who knows; that was not the large-scale experiment we decided to run.

In summary, it seems to me that Wakefield was in the right place at the right time, at least as far as the contribution to science was concerned, not the contribution to his career. Unfortunately, the contributing factors other than MMR vaccine were starting to increase significantly at that time, and there wasn't sufficient data to view these other factors as sufficiently strong to potentially enable the MMR vaccine to play a significant role in the development of autism.

I would appreciate readers' comments on this scenario, pro or con.

Specter's comments are so preposterous and ridiculous, they don't rise to the level of being unfair.

Carol was quite right to repeat the quote from Michael Specter, a staff writer at the New Yorker. It includes this line, referring to Dr Andrew Wakefield:-

"This is a criminal who is responsible for people dying."

Dr Wakefield is neither a criminal, nor responsible for people dying. In the UK there were two child recorded measles deaths, post MMR vaccine intro. The children both had very serious co-morbidities which precluded them being vaccinated with live viruses, absolutely NOTHING to do with Dr Wakefield influencing the parents in any way. Besides, Dr Wakefield was always in favour of single measles vaccinations for children, in use in the UK for 20 years prior to MMR vaccine. It was not his fault the UK Government withdrew this NHS choice for parents.

For the record, there were FOUR recorded child deaths from MMR vaccine. The MMR Urabe mumps containing vaccine, injured an unknown number of children. It was nearly four years before this dangerous vaccine was withdrawn. The UK Government quickly instigated an official 'cover up', by suppressing the papers for 20 years.

There were NO measles deaths during the recent Disney outbreak, but a sizeable percentage of measles cases were measles vaccinated, even though the authorities have treated all persons without vaccine documentation as unvaccinated in the stats.

Dr Wakefield was working on an immunotherapy measles amelioration product when he was effectively banished from his Royal Free research position. Sadly the hospital still has the unused patent. This might have saved those two immune compromised children who died from measles.

I would like to put it to pharma sponsored journalists like Michael Specter, whether their paid smearing of all persons who express legitimate concerns about vaccines, are actually costing lives?

Powerful trailer.

Want to read something, if I can borrow a term, hilarious?

"It's shocking," Michael Specter, a staff writer at the New Yorker who has studied and written extensively about the issue, said when asked in a phone interview Tuesday about the screening. "This is a criminal who is responsible for people dying. This isn't someone who has a 'point-of-view.’ It's comparable to Leni Riefenstahl making a movie about the Third Reich, or Mike Tyson making a movie about violence toward women. The fact that a respectable organization like the Tribeca Film Festival is giving Wakefield a platform is a disgraceful thing to do."

Michael Specter, of course, is a journalist who wrote an article quoting Bruce Chassy without disclosing that Chassy takes money from Monsanto:

http://usrtk.org/gmo/journalists-failed-to-disclose-sources-funding-from-monsanto-a-short-report/

An excerpt from Dr. Thompson's statement read by Rep. Posey:

"....The MADDSP, MMR autism cases control study was being carried out in response to the Wakefield-Lancet study that suggested an association between the MMR vaccine and an autism-like health outcome. There were several major concerns among scientists and consumer advocates outside the CDC in the fall of 2000, regarding the execution of the Verstraeten Study. One of the important goals that was determined up front, in the spring of 2001, before any of these studies started, was to have all three protocols vetted outside the CDC prior to the start of the analyses so consumer advocates could not claim that we were presenting analyses that suited our own goals and biases. We hypothesized that if we found statistically significant effects at either 18 or 36 month thresholds, we would conclude that vaccinating children early with MMR vaccine could lead to autism-like characteristics or features. We all met and finalized the study protocol and analysis plan....

At the Sept 5th meeting [2001?] we discussed in detail how to code race for both the sample and the birth certificate sample. At the bottom of table 7, it also shows that for the non-birth certificate sample, the adjusted race effect statistical significance was huge.

All the authors and I met and decided sometime between August and September 2002, not to report any race effects from the paper. Sometime soon after the meeting, we decided to exclude reporting any race effects. The co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room, and reviewed and went through all the hardcopy documents that we had thought we should discard, and put them into a huge garbage can. However, because I assumed it was illegal and would violate both FOIA and DOJ requests, I kept hardcopies of all documents in my office, and I retain all associated computer files. I believe we intentionally withheld controversial findings from the final draft of the Pediatrics paper...."

Congratulations to Dr. Wakefield, Polly Tommey, and the rest of the team for getting this project completed. Wishing it the greatest success, and looking forward to viewing when it becomes available over here.