Victoria: Touching Ground
Dachel Media Update: NYT on Trump & Vaccine Safety

Will A Trump Win End the Current PHarma-geddon?

Trump babyBy J.B. Handley

Back in September, I wrote an AoA post where I expressed my support of Donald Trump for President for one simple reason: he stands with my son in telling the truth about what has been done to our children and the reality of the Autism epidemic.

A funny thing happens when you support a guy like Donald Trump: many of those closest to you think you’ve flipped a switch, and that your support must also mean you support every single thing that Donald Trump says and does.

To repeat what I said in September: I’m a single-issue voter, and I really mean that. I’m blind to every other policy issue and decision. Wall with Mexico? Tough talk with other countries? Xenophobic profiling? I simply don’t care. While I may not personally agree with some of Trump’s ideas or views (and I have faith that the most radical ones are unlikely to ever happen), none of them are as important to me as the over 1 million American children (and many more worldwide) who have had their lives destroyed by an out-of-control vaccine industry.

I voted for Barack Obama. Twice. I’d argue that anyone who joins me in being a single-issue voter must agree that Barack Obama has failed our kids 100%. Under his reign, things for our community and our children have only gotten worse.

Back in September, I assumed like most that Trump’s candidacy was a long shot. Like you, I squealed with delight when Trump brought up the truth about our kids in widely watched national debates. But, I figured it was just a moment in time.

How times have changed! And, I’m curious if we’ve all really internalized what’s happening here: the guy who is more than likely to be the Republican nominee for President speaks with an honesty about what has been done to our children that was nearly banned from national TV just a few years ago!!

Can we take a moment and remember just how powerful and on point some of the things Trump has said really are? Consider this:

“I’ve seen it,” he said at the second main-stage GOP debate on

“You take this little beautiful baby, and you pump — it looks just like it’s meant for a horse," he said of vaccines.


"We’ve had so many instances ... a child went to have the vaccine, got very, very sick, and now is autistic."

The GOP front-runner said he still supported certain vaccines, but in smaller doses over a longer period of time. Under current procedures, he said it's dangerous for the public. “Autism has become an epidemic, he said. “It has gotten totally out of control.”

Re-reading his quotes, it takes my breath away. Trump said those things with 30 million people watching!

So, as Trump heads towards a near-guaranteed Republican nomination (obviously anything can happen in politics, but it’s looking more certain by the day), I want to ask all of you a question: where is our community on Trump? Can we put our respective voter cards in a drawer aligning us with a single political party and all come together and endorse Trump? Can AoA, SafeMinds, Focus for Health, NAA, TTMR, Autism One, Generation Rescue, and all the other wonderful Autism organizations out there come together and support Trump for a single reason? Doesn’t Trump need our support? Don’t you think that Pharma is about to turn up the heat on Trump? (My personal guess is they finally roll out Bill Gates: Billionaire vs. richer billionaire.)

While I’m on the topic of Trump, in case anyone is listening, I wanted to offer up my own opinions about policy and legislative initiatives that I hope the Trump camp will consider to constructively untangle the Autism mess:


Order real science to be done by the NIH on both vaccinated versus unvaccinated children and animal models to test the hypothesis that the change in the rate of Autism has been caused by the growing vaccine schedule.


Work with CDC, NIH to establish “sensitive child” guidelines for vaccination. The “one size fits all” model for vaccinating children is inherently dangerous due to biological diversity, and we know plenty about risk factors for bad reactions to vaccine, including: autoimmune issue, GI distress, MTHfR mutation, etc. We also know a child on antibiotics or fighting an illness should never receive a vaccine. Let’s save the most sensitive kids where risks of vaccine injury are far higher.


An independent task force has to be established to look at and consider vaccination practices taking place in other first world countries. Why are we giving so many more shots than some other first world countries? Why does the ACIP exist? Why aren’t the conflict boundaries for adding vaccines to the CDC schedule more stringent?


Drug advertising on TV needs to be banned, as it used to be. Like hard alcohol. Like tobacco. If the U.S. and New Zealand are the only two countries in the world that allow advertising, shouldn’t that tell us something? It gives Pharma too much power, and they have abused it.

Eliminate the vaccine court and return plaintiffs to a normal process of being able to sue vaccine makers for injury. This is how it used to be, and the loss of checks and balances has been highly damaging.


The fact that a massive number of children and young adults are now suffering from Autism at a scale unlike anything we have ever seen must be acknowledged clearly by the government so that an appropriate response to the crisis can happen. What are these millions of children and their families supposed to do as they age out of support services? The denial of the scale of the epidemic is only hurting those most impacted by Autism and their families.

The next few months will be an amazing time for Autism families, I sincerely hope our community finds a way to convey their support for Donald Trump and the courage he is showing in telling the truth about our kids.

As I said in September: Trumps stands with my son, I stand with Trump!

JB Handley is a Founding Editor for Age of Autism and co-founder of Generation Rescue.


Ronald Kostoff


" ..."monetary value is assigned to disease, impairments, and shortened lives and weighed against the benefits of keeping a chemical in use...""

Two issues. First, the cost-benefit performers have to admit there is a link between the chemical and the disease, and include all the adverse effects in the analysis. They don't do this for vaccines, or non-ionizing radiation, or..... In my eBook, I did a very limited accounting of potential costs due to the CDC cover-up of the link between MMR vaccine and autism. It included only the African-American sub-group, not the isolated autism sub-group. I found a cost of about $400 billion. Add in the isolated autism sub-group, and I would guess the costs would be on the order of $1 trillion dollars. And, that's only for the USA. Which of the stakeholders wants to advertise those types of numbers, and, more importantly, be liable for those costs?

The second issue shows the limits of this type of cost-benefit analysis. I was once managing a large cost-benefit analysis of a particular biomedical program. I was discussing the analytic approach with the lead performer, a Professor of Medicine at a leading medical school. He cautioned me based on a study he had done with respect to the cost-benefit of smoking. It turned out that when one examined the actuarial tables of how long people lived in the absence of smoking, and when they tended to die after a lifetime of smoking, that there was actually a positive benefit/cost ratio to smoking. The reason is people tended to die, roughly on average, right before they started to collect pensions and social security. So, the government and industry saved one-three decades worth of retirement payouts.

Given the caveats, and being aware of the results, I think an honest and comprehensive cost-benefit approach would be useful. But, admitting the link between the toxic stimulus and the disease is the hard part, especially for the perpetrators.

Ronald Kostoff


" the E.P.A. has issued regulations restricting the use of only five industrial chemicals out of more than eighty thousand in the environment "

Here's a list of drinking water contaminants ( There are three questions that need to be asked, and answered: 1) which contaminants are missing, and why; 2) are the EPA recommended limits supported by science, or are they far higher than what causes disease like the FCC limits on non-ionizing radiation; 3) where limits exist, how frequently are the contaminants measured, and how accurately are they reported. DC had a water lead problem over a decade ago, and the EPA under-reported the actual levels by a significant amount.


In one of the recent debates, a man whose daughter was just shot by an Uber driver asked what the candidates would do to prevent gun violence. Clinton said she was opposed to the law that passed long ago that removed gun violence liability from gun manufacturers and sellers for a number of reasons, including that removing liability took away incentive for manufacturers to make safer guns.

Of course Congress removed all liability from vaccine manufacturers and sellers (ie doctors, nurses, pharmacist, or whoever else is now allowed to give them) in the late 1980s and they have no incentive to make or administer safe vaccines. But Grandma Bluesky doesn't seem to connect those dots and if she has she's not telling.


@Ronald Kostoff:

Thank you for posting the link re Dr. Hayes/atrazine. I am still reading through the article (absolutely incredble!).

Am now reading the below:

"...The E.P.A. approved the continued use of atrazine in October, the same month that the European Commission chose to remove it from the market. The European Union generally takes a precautionary approach to environmental risks, choosing restraint in the face of uncertainty. In the U.S., lingering scientific questions justify delays in regulatory decisions. Since the mid-seventies, the E.P.A. has issued regulations restricting the use of only five industrial chemicals out of more than eighty thousand in the environment. Industries have a greater role in the American regulatory process—they may sue regulators if there are errors in the scientific record—and cost-benefit analyses are integral to decisions: a monetary value is assigned to disease, impairments, and shortened lives and weighed against the benefits of keeping a chemical in use...."

..."monetary value is assigned to disease, impairments, and shortened lives and weighed against the benefits of keeping a chemical in use..."

Now just insert 'vaccine' in lieu of 'chemical,' and voila. Just makes me furious. We live in an extremely toxic world. The injustice 'by' man 'to' man, overwhelms the senses...


Dr. Kostoff,
Yes, I remember that article about Dr. Hayes. I think it may have been featured in an AOA post or mentioned by a commentor when it was published. Sometimes I look around at the complacency and apathy and wonder if I am too cynical. But really, as you point out about business as usual, you can't be too cynical. There is also corruption in Europe, but it seems that there the people have the power to influence their governments, at least to some extent for some issues. Maybe the difference, in addition to the fact that many of the polluters, exploiters and liars are American companies, is that the EU is made up of separate countries, each with a voice. Here the voice of the public that is not in a propaganda induced trance is systematically drowned out by one huge corrupt government/corporate conglomerate.

Ronald Kostoff


"Glyphosate is presently a huge political issue that - no surprise - our media is not telling us about."

Good observation. Stephanie Seneff of MIT has written much about it, and its relation to myriad diseases, including autism. She states that glyphosate is synergistic with aluminum.

The second most widely used herbicide in the USA is atrazine. It also poses serious health risks. One of the most notable researchers who exposed some of these risks is Professor Tyrone Hayes. The following article is an excellent summary of the trials and tribulations he has faced in trying to expose the truth ( it shows the Government-Industrial-Media Complex (GIMC) at work in defaming anyone who has the audacity to reveal the truth, and the challenges and sacrifices an ethical researcher faces in doing what's right.

In researching my eBook about Pervasive Causes of Diseases, I came across countless articles like this over a wide spectrum of harmful products. I am starting to believe that, rather than being very rare occurrences, these situations are closer to Business as Usual when it comes to research with high commercial or political sensitivity. This is why, in Chapter 9 of my book, I question the credibility of the biomedical literature. There is too much manufactured research being published, and, as in the atrazine example, the complicity of the regulatory agencies allows the distortions to proceed unabated.


You know what the difference is between Sanders and Clinton with regard to vaccines? If both of them were presented with the truth and could internalize it despite all the propaganda they've been immersed in, Sanders would go, 'OMG, I have to fix this'. Clinton would go, 'OMG, I have to bury this'.

That's what I believe.



"Of course the poisoning by other means such as glyphosate, etc., is real -- but it's much more difficult to make a political issue at the present..."

Glyphosate is presently a huge political issue that - no surprise - our media is not telling us about.

Check out GM Watch. The EU is debating whether to renew the license to use glyphosate. Lots going on.

A few examples:

"France, Sweden, Italy and the Netherlands rebel against relicensing of Monsanto’s glyphosate"
Lorraine Chow
EcoWatch, March 7, 2016


"A number of European Union member countries are rebelling against the European Commission’s plans to approve the relicensing of glyphosate."

"The Guardian reported that experts from the EU’s 28 member states are scheduled to vote on relicensing glyphosate on Monday and Tuesday in Brussels, however the vote may be postponed due to reservations that several EU countries have over glyphosate’s health risks....

French Minister of Ecology Ségolène Royal urges for an outright ban on glyphosate herbicides across the EU, basing the decision over the IARC’s findings.

Similarly, The Guardian quoted Swedish environment minister Åsa Romson saying, “We won’t take risks with glyphosate and we don’t think that the analysis done so far is good enough. We will propose that no decision is taken until further analysis has been done and the EFSA scientists have been more transparent about their considerations.”

“We are raising concerns because our citizens are raising concerns,” Romson added. “They want to feel safe and secure with food and production in our society.”

The Netherlands also called for a postponement of the EU-wide decision with Marcel van Beusekom, a spokesman for the Netherlands agriculture ministry, commenting, “If there is no possibility to postpone the vote, then we will vote against the proposal.”

Commission officials told The Guardian that a vote would not go ahead if support for relicensing continued to erode.

“If we see that many states want to think it over or there is a growing [opposition], if there is not a qualified majority, I doubt that it will be put to a vote,” one official said. “The ball is in the member states’ court.”

Licensing for glyphosate ends in June and the European Commission is proposing to grant the herbicide a new 15-year lease.

This move by France and their EU partners is a major blow to Monsanto and other large pesticide companies “which rely on glyphosate-based herbicides for a large percentage of their global profits,” Sustainable Pulse wrote.

Indeed, as EcoWatch reported last month, glyphosate is now the “most widely applied pesticide worldwide.” The paper, Trends in glyphosate herbicide use in the United States and globally, revealed that since 1974, when Roundup was first commercially sold, more than 1.6 billion kilograms (or 3.5 billion pounds) of glyphosate has been used in the U.S., making up 19 percent of the 8.6 billion kilograms (or 18.9 billion pounds) of glyphosate used around the world.

The substance is so widely used that it is commonly found in British bread, German beer and the urine of people in 18 countries across Europe, The Guardian said, adding that the chemical is banned or restricted in large parts of Europe because of alleged links to health problems such as birth defects, kidney failure, celiac disease, colitis and autism.

The contradictory conclusions from THE IARC and EFSA regarding the potential carcinogenicity of glyphosate spurred 96 prominent scientists from 25 countries to write a letter in strong opposition to the EFSA report.

In addition, nearly 1.5 million people petitioning the EU’s health commissioner, Vytenis Andriukaitis, for a ban on the substance, Sustainable Pulse reported.

According to The Guardian, “an EFSA panel based its recommendation that glyphosate was safe enough for a new lease of life on six industry-funded studies that have not been fully published.”

This video from the Corporate Europe Observatory, a non-profit corporate lobbying research group, alleges that Big Food corporations and biotech companies, including Monsanto, might have intimate ties with EFSA:… [video here]"


"Overwhelming majority of Germans contaminated by glyphosate"

By Nicole Sagener, Translated By Samuel Morgan, 7 Mar 2016

The herbicide glyphosate can enter the body through food or drinking water. A new study has shown that the majority of Germans have been contaminated by the compound. EurActiv Germany reports.

A worrying three-quarters of the German population have in fact been contaminated by the controversial herbicide, according to a study carried out by the Heinrich Böll Foundation. The report analysed glyphosate residue in urine and it concluded that 75% of the target group displayed levels that were five times higher than the legal limit of drinking water. A third of the population even showed levels that were between ten and 42 times higher than what is normally permissible.

Glyphosate residue was recorded in 99.6% of the 2,009 people monitored by the study. The most significant values were found in children aged from zero to nine and adolescents aged 10 to 19, particularly those individuals raised on farms. Meat eaters also displayed higher levels of glyphosate contamination than vegetarians or vegans.

“The investigation confirmed the findings of the Federal Environment Agency, in regards to the majority of the population having glyphosate residue in their urine,” said retired veterinarian Monika Krüger, who supervised the study. The investigation was the largest of its kind ever carried out.

Krüger emphasised that these results show that further studies have to be carried out in order to fully understand the link between exposure to glyphosate and disease and other health problems.

Harald Ebner, a genetic engineering and bio-economic policy with the German Greens, warned that “now nearly every single one of us has been contaminated by plant poison, it is clear to me that no new authorisations for 2031 should be issued”.

(more of article at link)

Now, considering what is going on in Europe, who is monitoring the amount of glyphosate in American urine? NO ONE.

With all the $billions going to the NIH et al, how much has been allocated to measure American glyphosate contamination? Anyone know? Want to guess that it's ZERO?

Who in our government is calling for studies? NO ONE. Who is advocating for a ban on glyphosate?

No one, because Monsanto, together with Pharma and Big Telecom, owns our government.

Ronald Kostoff


"Which proves that this is not a representative democracy."

I'll give you another data point that shows the representativeness of our 'democracy'. I was examining the primary/caucus results this morning


Consider the Republican results in four states: Alaska, Texas, Virginia, Maine. The number of total votes per delegate is: Alaska/783; Texas/18633; Virginia/20916; Maine/809. So, in terms of influence in selecting a candidate, this year's Republican voter in Alaska has approximately 27 times the influence of a voter in Virginia. Ironically, we worry about voter suppression through VoterID Laws, but I don't see anyone making a similar issue about the above imbalance. No question that the motives behind VoterID Laws are undemocratic, but they may result in the disenfranchisement of perhaps a few percent. The above delegate imbalance provides an effective disenfranchisement of tens of percent.


Dr. Kostoff,
Which proves that this is not a representative democracy. Our government is chosen by a select few unelected people who remain in power no matter what the people think or want. The people do not choose anyone. The people are completely powerless.

Ronald Kostoff


"The people apparently want someone that the "Party" doesn't want."

Here's much, if not all, of the problem. I was reading the following article on Salon (
_people_who_have_prospered_thanks_to_911_and_i_was_one_of_them/), which deals with many groups that have profited from the 9/11 tragedy. One could write similar articles about those who have profited from the vaccine schedule expansion and its consequences, from the expansion of wireless communications and its consequences, glyphosate, atrazine, fluoridation, etc.

Now, of the leading Dem and Rep candidates, who has spoken against these Government-Industrial-Media Complex (GIMC)-based issues? There's really only two: Trump and Sanders. And, of the two, with all his bluster, Trump has been quite dovish (in relative terms) on foreign conflict issues, and has made some statements questioning vaccines. Sanders has been dovish on aspects of foreign adventurism as well. And, guess what? Trump has been attacked by the establishment, the media, and by the debate moderators more than any candidate I can remember. Sanders has not been attacked very much, but has basically been ignored by the media, and is constantly being undermined by the Democrat establishment.

I still believe, as I stated below, that Rubio was sent on a Kamikaze mission to sacrifice himself and destroy Trump at the same time by taking the level of discourse to a new low level. My interpretation of yesterday's election results is that the tactic appears to be working. Trump, in my view, performed below expectations, and Rubio really plummeted. Cruz was the benefactor. Whether this is temporary remains to be seen. The Michigan primary will be a good indicator of how permanent was the damage. It's hard for me to see how any one person can withstand an all-out assault from the GIMC for nine months, and still survive!


and con.


astroturf vs grass roots.

Look for these red flag words, and phrases as clues that who is talking is really telling lies: fraud, con, fraudster, the science is in, dis-proven, fake, fraudulent, discredited, undisclosed financial,hoax

This knowledge is compliments of Sharyl Atkinson


Re Trump:
there is no more convincing research than own experience, which apparently Trump has with regard to vaccine induced autism. Only the people, who don't understand how science works and how corrupted by corporate interests it has become, idolize opinions of so called scientific authorities, who very often are just drug pushers and dealers.


It's really something to watch our "democracy" in action. The people apparently want someone that the "Party" doesn't want. How interesting (who elected the Party to rule?).
I guess they allowed Trump in the beginning thinking he'd be a ratings boosting side show, easily knocked down for the real candidate. And now they're attacking him with everything they've got. Trotting out Romney (who cares what he thinks?) and McCain (ditto), etc. Not that they aren't entitled to voice their opinion. The problem with these characters is they're trying to tell the public what WE should think. Today it's all about Trump University. Does anyone think that the media and the Republican Party didn't know about Trump University's alleged problems 8 months ago? And, who knows what's true? While I'm listening to them rant and rave about Trump's fraud, my mind goes to other claims of fraud that I know for a fact are not, and other REAL frauds that are working in the CDC. So, what's true? All I know is this one big fascist circus.

Ronald Kostoff

David M. Burd.

"but a candidate on National TV cannot be denied."

What are the chances of that happening? Here's my take of the present situation.

Trump appears to be the only candidate who's made any sort of statement questioning the efficacy of the present vaccination schedule. What more could be expected of him at this point?

As I pointed out previously, he is under attack from all sides. The Press has taken a very hard line against him, amplifying and distorting any real or perceived miscues. The Republican establishment has started multiple efforts to deny him sufficient delegates for the convention. Even if he were to obtain sufficient delegates, who knows whether the rules would be changed at the last moment. I've seen that possibility addressed. Rubio has decided, or has been coerced, to commit political suicide by getting down into the gutter with Trump. The latter may not affect Trump's hard-line followers, but may dissuade those somewhat undecided.

The debates are of particular concern. They tend to be scheduled before significant voting events. They are designed for specific types of people, such as Cruz (a debating champion at Princeton), Rubio to a lesser extent, and people like Clinton and Obama as well. Trump holds his own, but that's really not his strong point.

I didn't see last night's debate, but from what I've read, he was quizzed far more than any other candidate. And, the questions appeared very detailed, with slides and even videos of his past statements. There were questions about some of his business practices.

Now, what people want to know about is what any candidate will do for jobs, national defense, foreign trade, health policy, and other related issues. It seems somewhat irrelevant to ask a person running a large company about minute business details. So, it seems to me the debates have become a stacked deck against Trump.

He can avoid the debates, but look at what happened in Iowa when he did. Attendance is essentially mandatory. So, he's really under enormous pressure and on the defensive. Given that background, why in the world would he unilaterally raise the issue of over-vaccination. That's extremely controversial, with no Congressional support, no media support, no support from the mainline medical community, and not much support from the electorate. That would only become a focal point for more fire, and given the image of anti-vaxxers that has been placed in the mind of the public by the Press and medical community, might become the straw that broke the camel's back. I don't see him raising ANY of the toxic substance issues I've raised in any of my previous comments, and in fact I see him trying to move somewhat more toward the center/mainstream to release some of the pressure.


Trump is a ego-inflated narcissist who is more worried about the length of his various appendages than about autism. It's clear he hasn't done any research at all on the subject.


In the news report I saw, Trump was just responding to a pretty odd insult that made about his 'appendages', by another man. If anything, an insult like that makes the insulter look classless. And quite frankly, pretty desperate.

So what exactly is it, that makes it so clear that Trump hasn't done any research at all on the subject of autism?


@ dnj3forever:
I am very sorry about the passing of your child. Very sad and tragic, when children die. Perhaps it is too late to save American population, as most young people are already physically and neurologically damaged by toxic vaccines. May be they won't be able to produce healthy offsprings, even if they manage to reproduce. May be Americans will share the fate of Maya Indians - i.e. will be degraded to primitive life in stone age era. And this destruction of US will be a direct effect of criminal, moronic, extremely corrupted politicians running US regime. But we won't know this for sure, before we try at all cost to save young generations of Americans by electing a politician not corrupted by establishment mafia. Only Trump is such politician at present time.


Never underestimate the power of people when they are pissed off. Trump is far from perfect but people feel played by the usual politicians by this point.

david m burd

correction; of course I meant "hundreds of millions of pounds of neurological pesticides" I left out "of pounds"

david m burd

Ronald Kostoff,

You cite as toxic assaults not even mentioned on the Candidate Trail:

"Vaccines and autism;
EMFs and brain cancer/leukemia/autism;
glyphosate and neurodevelopmental disorders;
etc, etc"

Of course you are right.

However, what can be grasped by the public is AUTISM (and the plethora of other Major Vaccine Injuries) has been overwhelmingly proven by hundreds of suppressed/ignored studies - and been obviously, and tragically experienced first-hand by scores of millions of families. And I do mean "scores of millions."

Of course the poisoning by other means such as glyphosate, etc., is real -- but it's much more difficult to make a political issue at the present (for instance, it's well known "polio" back in the 1950s was clearly caused by 100's of millions of neurotoxic pesticides every year cavalierly dispersed in and around a burgeoning population and into all the Ag foods of the time.

Bottom Line: The Autism Spectrum and the Multitude of Horrible New Damages are upon us, and the Child Immunization Schedule is a giant target that can be easily understood - IF THIS CDC CHILD IMMUNIZATION SCHEDULE is put on full view.

The CHILD IMMUNIZATION SCHEDULE displayed on national TV is worth a billion words. What is a TV network going to do if this is done by any Candidate? Black it out?!

All the print media such as major newspapers can refuse to reveal The Schedule - as they have for decades - but a candidate on National TV cannot be denied.


Reading Dr. Kostoff's comment I realized there is no science talk in the debates. Is there any discussion of science and technology at all? I haven't listened to all of them so I'm not sure. But it seems like with each election cycle, the public is being more and more removed from what matters and from reality itself. Remember when we used to talk about stem cells at least? There is none of that anymore. The only topics are about how to facilitate the rapid growth of the scientific mountain and how to make the results of scientific discoveries (including health care and drugs) available to all citizens and how to shun others (abortion). Other than that, the direction of science and technology, ongoing foundational influences on our culture, seem to be left out of the public square completely. THOSE decisions are not for us or for our elected officials, and probably even our Courts, to make. That is the untouchable realm of the scientists and engineers. Beyond just business, science itself has been placed above the common man's (and the elected government's) reach.


Ronald Kostoff; That is pretty much it in a nut shell.
It won't be Trump running against Hillary.

And has the email stuff gone away for her?

Cait from Canada

I agree with No way No how that "The only convincing you do by endorsing Trump is cementing the idea in many people's heads that vaccine-questioners are a crazy lot."

Trump is a ego-inflated narcissist who is more worried about the length of his various appendages than about autism. It's clear he hasn't done any research at all on the subject.

If you agree with his other positions, fine. But if you are only supporting him because you think he will be an ally to the autism community once in office, I suspect you are in for a major disappointment if he wins.

Ronald Kostoff

David M. Burd,

"Over the last 4-5 months of Candidate Debates (Republican and Democrat) the "moderators" by their thundering silence on vaccines and autism have made it clear they are in the pocket of the Vaccine Cabal."

The debate moderators, and the candidates themselves in their stump speeches and interviews, have exhibited 'thundering silence' on:

Vaccines and autism;
EMFs and brain cancer/leukemia/autism;
glyphosate and neurodevelopmental disorders;
etc, etc

All the candidates, except for Trump/Sanders, are supported in large part by corporate interests, as are the mainstream media. All that is important to these donors is that a candidate who will promote their interests wins the White House, irrespective of whether Democrat or Republican.

Up until a few weeks ago, Trump was considered as an oddity, not a serious candidate. His opposition was only moderately hostile. The South Carolina primary changed all that, the Nevada caucuses further strengthened the conclusions from SC, and the new national polls showing Trump pulling away from the rest of the field was the final straw for the donors.

At that point, I believe the real powers behind the media, the Republican establishment, and the other Republican candidates decided that Trump had to be quashed. How to do it? It appears to me they instituted a three-pronged attack. The media, which had been fairly easy on Trump, took a very hard line. Google Trump, and you will see almost all the (thousands of) article titles are mostly universally negative. The Republican establishment let it be known that they were starting anti-Trump movements to prevent him from getting a delegate majority before the Convention.

And, it appears that Rubio was selected to go on a Kamikaze mission against Trump. He had run a rather clean campaign up until that time, but he now reversed course and stooped to the lowest level possible in firing insults at Trump. That placed Trump in an untenable position, and given his natural instincts as a fighter, he went down to that level as well. The result is that both Trump and Rubio look very un-presidential at this point, and even if Trump were to amass enough delegates to be the nominee, I suspect he (and Rubio as well) has been sufficiently wounded to have little chance in the November election. Rubio is sufficiently young that he may try again in the future, but this is Trump's last shot because of his age.

While many pundits may view the current trends in the debates and stump speeches as uncontrolled and unplanned chaos, I believe it is deliberate and well-planned. The people and organizations that really control the media, the corporate world, and the candidates will never allow anyone in office whom they cannot trust to protect their interests.


I agree with no-vac. I also agree with with many thoughts/opinions from other commenters. It simply has come down to this for me: America has sold its soul to a bunch of bloodthirsty profiteers. All of the safeguards that have been put in place to protect children have been successfully destroyed or severely compromised. And as RFK pointed out, the last protection in place is the parent and we are witnessing state after state trying to do away with that. Trump is by far not the perfect candidate, but what are our options? The well being of America's future generations should be a priority, and judging by the health of my own kids, sadly one now deceased, I fear it might already be too late.


This amazing letter sums up the why of Trump.

david m burd


I agree. Only a new president, who will grasp actual knowledge, and who will confront the Vaccine Armageddon now upon us, can stop our country's destruction.

Autism and all the other deadly/destructive consequences of the The Schedule must be brought immediately to any Candidates who will listen, as I said in my earlier comment.

It's worth repeating: The American Public has been purposefully been kept ignorant of the Child Immunization Schedule, a document I call the most destruction document in history.
IF The Schedule is dramatically displayed by any Candidate, I can hear the "collective gasp" from the audience. When I show it to acquaintances or friends, they are ALL taken back by its implications.

david m burd

Over the last 4-5 months of Candidate Debates (Republican and Democrat) the "moderators" by their thundering silence on vaccines and autism have made it clear they are in the pocket of the Vaccine Cabal.

Such as Trump must be brought up to date by experts on the vaccine catastrophe now upon the U.S. These Scientists could be Boyd Haley or Russell Blayock, or lay experts such as Barbara Loe Fisher or JB Handley, or many others (including Dan Olmsted & Mark Blaxill).

Then, such a Candidate can aggressively broach and speak with authority, even ironically using the CDC's statistics against them, and talk about a large color Graphic Poster of the Child Immunization Schedule on vivid display (the Graphic that is NEVER shown by the media).

The Mainstream Media is hopelessly in the pocket of the Vaccine Cabal - it takes a Trump to bring crucial truth to the public to counter the thundering silence of the media or debate moderators.


I don't see any other candidate besides Trump, who can save the US now. And, if you can't save the children from massive poisoning with vaccines, you have no future as a country. Plain and simple. I already see that practically all young technicians who are employed by various utility companies are from Africa, Arab countries, Asia or Latin America. I don't see anybody born and raised in US among them. Why? Because Americans have been terribly poisoned by vaccines and can’t learn even a simple craft. About 80% of graduate students in hard sciences at US universities are foreign born, because young Americans are too brain damaged and too uneducated to qualify. Also US generals complain that about 90% of recruit candidates are mentally or physically retarded, hence don't qualify. They were all vaccines poisoned. If we don't halt this vaccination madness of Americans children to death or injury now, we are not going to have a country tomorrow. Only Trump can stop this corporate crime against the children. He understands gravity of the problem and is brave enough to take on the pharma mafia. Hence for me – only Trump 2016. This election is a battle for national survival.


Denise Ferraro:

That date means you have traveled a long, lonely, and hard road. I am so sorry!

I too have traveled a very long, lonely and hard road From what I see; that road still stretches still as far as I can see and I see a harder road for my children to have to travel. How I regret that.

For me the real date was 1982; my daughter had Kawaskis from a vaccine, only I did not know it.

I thought I might be on this road in 1986; after a vaccine and a few days after; my son's left ventricular of his heart swelled up.

I knew for a fact I was on this horrible road, and could not turn around in 1987 of Feb; when a vaccine reaction was immediate, my son becoming catatonic, and seizures.

It has been a lonely road filled with plenty of stops to complain to deaf ears, stubborn hard, accusing eyes, and heartless hearts. Filled with unsatisfying calls, and letters to Congressmen, doctors, lawyers, heads of federal agencies, peons working within the federal agencies.

Linda, J.R., Nicole Beurkens, Twyla; and every one else:

DO you understand that ALL those years when nothing was done was the time wasted that could have saved your children.

I was holding my baby in 1987, little vaccine injured thing, and looking at all the posters of new vaccines over the shoulder of our pediatrician; as he denied what had happened to my face. I knew more was coming; I felt terrible cause I knew what I knew,and there was nothing I could do; NOTHING. Do you know how that feels like? It makes you feel small like when you stand on the beach of the ocean.

It is not that they don't know, they do know; it is just they don't care.

Your kids could have been saved, and they(the powers in charge) never lifted a finger. Not just the 90s, but in 2000, and now it is well past 2010, fast approaching this second decade and time marches on.

At last a candidate that finally has said something, a lead candidate!

You must take this chance! All those years of waiting!

We are on the third generation of major injuries, and I will not/can not face some young mother that has just lost her child in death. I can not cry with another neighbor for the lost of her grandchild in death, and know I did not take this chance.

I cannot bear to watch a young Mother struggle to handle a child that I know is having absentee seizures, as she tries to grab her diploma for nursing; on stage.

I can not bear another of my old schoolmates to tell me that their grandie has autism, but oh; Oh, dear God, He is as smart as he can be, though. It will be on me not to take this chance.

I Love you all, and so sorry for what we old mothers have had to go through, and still have to go through. I am sorry that John Stone had to hunt for a safe place for his son to live I am sorry that Kim has three beautiful daughters, and she cried all day when she had to sign up for guardian ship for her oldest daughter. I am sorry, I am sorry, Oh God in Heaven I am sorry.
I Love you all, and so sorry for what the young parents have had to go through with, and still have such a long road to go. Of speech, behavior, attention problems, health problems and on and on.

I love our children that struggle to succeed in this world with the cards decked against them. Can my son get into all these vocational programs they are talking about? Can we get his math ACT score up to 19 so they will let him. How much will his EEG cost this month, so we might know - but not for sure if some day he might come off the seizure medicine.

We deserve better, We may deserve it but by God we have go to fight for it. And we must be fearless We can not be afraid of what if Trump does not mean it, or will hurt the country. That is a chance we take on every candidate anyway.

But after all these years, at last, at last; this one said for the first time ever --- he said, "vaccines cause autism"

Angus Files

Trump for me if I had a vote;vote for change vote for Trump.


Denise Ferraro

Danchi and J.R.
My son with Autism was born in January of 1990 at the very beginning of the Autism nightmare. I have been a democrat for most of my life. I voted for Obama twice! I have never heard a candidate for any office, let alone president, come out and pretty much say vaccines cause Autism. Trump said it in front of 24 million Americans on live TV!! Is he perfect? Absolutely not, but he is afraid of no one from what I can tell and frankly, his foreign policy stances are a lot more common sense than most of the other Republicans. So no, I'm not afraid we will wake up and he will have nuked Denmark! If you think the President of the United States can do nothing to stop the crimes that are being committed against humanity you are surely mistaken! The directors of the FDA and CDC serve at the pleasure of the President. He can direct them to investigate the fraud and malfeasance running rampant through those agencies. He can also order his justice dept to investigate and press charges when the monsters are identified. Why do you think the establishment is so afraid of a President Trump? Remember where the establishment gets all their money, especially MSM? The reality of the situation is that in November we will be voting for either Hillary or Donald! Speaking as a life long democrat, I'll take Trump every day of the week and twice on Sundays!!!

Sandy Gottstein

I wish I could support Donald Trump, but I agree with David Foster.


No way, no how,

You are 100% correct. The public is being played 24/7. They put Trump and Clinton up as the candidates from the beginning. They've been talking about Clinton succeeding Obama since Obama was elected. Trump has been front and center in the media since the beginning. We wouldn't be hearing about Trump at all if they didn't want to use him for something, either to win the presidency or to take a fall for Clinton. It's hard to tell exactly what they're up to, but they are definitely up to something. One thing is for sure - Sanders is the one who would combat corporate control and they are stopping him in his tracks by distracting the public while tagging him relentlessly with the scary word "socialist" (while they tax and tax and tax to channel hard earned wages back to the corporate behemoth government partnership).

Go Trump

J.R., Trump seems less interventionist than Hillary. Newsflash: congress is bought or blackmailed, that much is obvious now. One of those executive orders like Obama was trying for guns is needed and you will get that from no one except maybe Trump

Michelle B

When I heard Trump in that first debate say about vaccines and ASD what I had been telling anyone who would listen for years, I knew I'd vote for him!

For those of you who call Trump a racist--ask yourself this--do you live within an upper-middle class demographic with great schools far from any illegal immigrant issues? I'm guessing YES. For families like mine, who's children attended an elementary school with a ranking that plunged from 9 to 6 in TWO years (this happens when 20% of the school population are kids who don't speak ANY English upon entry) and who have to wait in line for 20 minutes at the grocery store's customer service desk to return an item behind 10 illegal immigrants who are sending their cash to Mexico, well, we've had enough.

Enough of the insurance companies, enough of the Pharma machine, enough of Big Food, enough unregulated illegal entry, enough of business as usual in D.C. It's time to shake things up!



I agree that Trump is the only candidate who has voiced our concerns about the effects of vaccinations on our children. He has spoken out about how he has friends whose children were affected by the vaccines and spiraled into an autism diagnosis. I also think he has the courage to stand up to the CDC, NIH, etc. and get to the truth of what happened to our children. However, I just read an article about his Health Reform plan. He is planning to change the Medicaid distribution of money to the states and turn it into a "block grant" program that will significantly reduce the federal money the states get for our children who rely on the Medicaid Waiver for all their services and supports. I hope this does not happen and I am upset that he has taken this position.

david m burd

@ J.R.

I emphatically disagree that a New President cannot bring about mammoth change of immunization policies, and indeed prosecute the criminally malfeasant Heads of the Vaccine Cabal.

There would be scores of millions, at least, of average citizens who would heed a brave, independent President who would have immense news coverage upon warning, and citing, about vaccine-damage (obviously, including the autism spectrum). It does not take a willingly ignorant Congress that has long been a whore to both Pharma and the NIH/CDC Vaccine Gangsters.

No way. No how.

For those who think Trump is the only candidate fighting big pharma's power grip, you might want to read this:

Bendetta posted Trump's words:
Trump: “We are not allowed to negotiate Medicare drug prices. Can you believe it? We pay about $300 billion more than we are supposed to, than if we negotiated the price. So there’s $300 billion on day one we solve.”

–Donald Trump, remarks at Plymouth State University, Holderness, N.H., Feb. 7, 2016

Well, have you actually listened to Bernie Sanders? He has not only said almost that exact statement, but he has also actually done several things as a senator to try to reign in pharma:

I get the cynicism and anger about what he has said publicly on vaccines--and I agree it is concerning--but when you consider that he is running for the democratic nomination--and like it or not, the majority of Americans still think vaccines are health-giving miracles and anyone who questions them is a luddite or a nut--speaking out against them isn't really a winning idea at this point.

Having groups and otherwise "progressive" figureheads from this movement of people questioning vaccine safety back Trump just reinforces the impression many people, especially imo most progressives, have that vaccine questioners are just ignorant fools. If you want to convince those who currently dismiss vaccine concerns that there are real and very significant questions that need investigation and answers--backing Trump is not the way to achieve that end, imo.

After the Tuesday caucus, I was checking the news to see what I could find about how Sanders was doing. It actually took some searching to find any report. Huffpo, Google news, Bing etc overflowed with reports about Trump and his wins. Report after report after report. Trump. Trump. Trump. Crickets when it came to news about the democratic caucuses--especially the Colorado and New Hampshire ones where Bernie won. I think there is a reason for that.

The ptb don't want the masses to hear what Bernie Sanders is saying because what he is proposing and what he is saying he wants to change is not to their liking. Unlike Trump, Sanders actually cares about the "little people." He treats all people with respect and dignity and seems to me to truly care about other people and our country. He has lots of good ideas and a lifetime of working and fighting for those ideas that show he isn't just giving lip service to whatever he thinks will get people's blood pumping.

Trump is an unpredictable loudmouth who has a deplorable track record in terms of his treatment of lots of other people (did you guys just miss his mockery of the disabled reporter?), concern for the environment, and ability to work well with others. He may be able to build extravagant hotels using other people's money and legal or illegal non-US workers, but I hardly find any of that history a qualification to become a political leader. I find much of what he says despicable and deplorable. From what I see, he appeals mostly to the worst side of human tendencies, not our higher ideals.

If the ptb really don't want Trump to get elected, then why is it that our mogul-controlled media is giving all their political coverage to him? Lately the only thing more common than pharma ads are stories about Trump. You might ask yourselves, why is that? And why is it that, in contrast, stories about Bernie Sanders are almost as rare as stories about vaccine-related injuries?

The only convincing you do by endorsing Trump is cementing the idea in many people's heads that vaccine-questioners are a crazy lot. Not tough to do since that is what most of them already think.


Isn't it ironic (for lack of a better word) that the best thing that the self-proclaimed "liberal" media can do for the environment, civil rights, and refugees, is tell the truth about vaccine-induced autism.

If not, Donald Trump will use this issue to shepherd his way into the White House.

We tried to warn them.


"It makes me sad to think that as a community we would not support the only candidate that has had the courage to say that he knows children that went in for their shots, got very ill, and were later diagnosed with Autism!!!"

Has it come to that???? A politician makes a statement, without a plan. A statement that's not supported with any specific details.....only a statement. The same statement he made in 2012 and has never elaborated on and has never publically made any more statement about until the next time he's running for office, is enough to say Well, that's my guy! If that's enough for you...fine. But don't say "it's sad people It makes me sad to think that as a community we would not support the only candidate that has had the courage to say that he knows children that went in for their shots, got very ill, and were later diagnosed with Autism!!!

What the heck does that mean? Have the "community" become so desperate that connecting the words: VACCINE----AUTISM----DAMAGE---I BELIEVE----out loud, is compelling enough. Isn't that the same as the CDC/PHRMA saying: VACCINES-----SAFE-----EFFECTIVE---DON'T CAUSE AUTISM----SAVED THE WORLD? There is no substance behind the CDC's statement which the "community" rejects on the basis of the research that has been done over the years by each individual. Where is your research on TRUMP? When vaccine true believers float the CDC's mantra about vaccines the "community" pretty much mocks those people and say "well, they haven't done the research" or "they need to wake up". The behavior here is the same.

Questions I have been looking on the net via the many Trump websites and research from 2012 that I have not found answers to:

-What's his plan to take on not only the pharmaceutical industry but also the members of congress and the senate who are financially supported by pharmaceutical money? Do you think it's wise to wait until he's in office to receive an answer?

Trump started talking abut vaccines in 2012 but he hasn't made any moves in the direction of disclosing the fraud and outright corruption of the various government agencies that are working to push mandatory vaccines on the public. Surely between 2012 and now he's had time to research the current information that reveals the fraud yet I have not read where he talks about Dr. William Thompson's confession that the CDC committed fraud by omitting vital information on how the MMR does create autism in Black Baby Boys. He's had time to talk about the British High court decision that exonerates Professor Dr. Walker Smith, who was one of the co-authors on the Wakefield report. The Lancet hospital medical histories were all written by clinician colleague Professor Walker-Smith-not Wakefield. Professor Walker-Smith was completely exonerated following his High Court Appeal in 2012. Judge Lord Justice Mitting took less than four days to demolish Deer's evidence and the panel's 'inadequate and superficial' handling of it. Dr Wakefield, by then effectively banished, from the UK, could not afford the costs involved in an appeal, and Prof Murch, who was permitted to keep his medical license, remains in a guilty but 'admonished' limbo. Why is he not talking about this?

If Trump wanted to expose the corruption in the industry why not provide Drs. Wakefield and Murch with the funding to launch their own court case in the UK therefore effectively eliminating the number one repeated claim that there is no connection between the MMR and autism. IMHO the foundation of the CDC/WHO corruption rides on the Wakefield Report. If Trump exposes that fraud-it would be the game changer. That would be money well spend for Trump and I'm sure with his legion of tax attorney's & accountents he could write it off his income tax.

-Why isn't Trump directly the MSM to sites such as these:
-124 Research papers supporting Vaccine/Autism Causation Ginger Taylor

-How about the work of the eminent Dr. Yehuda Shoenfeld who is know as the “Godfather of Autoimmunology” with over 25 textbooks to his name and hundreds of peer review papers. Dr. Shoenfeld has produced a body of research pointing to vaccines as a factor in the increase in autoimmune diseases.

Surely Trump must know about these because he's had about 4 years to hire people to read this info and report it to him-if he himself can't find the time to read it.

-Trump spent millions of dollars and hired a posse to go to Hawaii to find information that President Obama was not born there-so what's stopping him from funding an investigation into the CDC's fraud on Vaccines and the fact that they cause Autism as well as other diseases?

-I am looking for specifics on what Trump is saying and will do, what he knows and what is his plan to take on the industry. Not seeing anything specific, only the talking with no walking, I am alarmed that so many in the safe vaccine movement ( anti-vax, few vax-safer vax) are putting their faith in someone who is merely giving lip service. Have people become so desperate that they are willing to put critical thinking and common sense aside to support someone who has said essential nothing? What people don't realize is in order for ANY President to make such a significant change the obstacles to overcome are enormous:

-getting the support of the majority of congress & senate. From the lack of support Congressman Posey has had this may be impossible. Pharma owns both branches. Buying themselves a congressperson is the best investment corporations can make.

-Next obstacle-all the global trade agreements because close to 98% of all vaccines are manufactured in other countries. Globalist are not gong Allow Trump to mess with that and that's what's going to be Trumps downfall because he's talking abut bringing jobs back to the US and the globalist worked so hard to move them out of the US.

There are other considerations but you get the idea. What's his plan?

As a community-we should not dumb ourselves down because someone says something we want to hear. But if you think about it, Trump hasn't said ANYTHING. Some of the response to other comments I've made have been slightly on the acrimonious side and that's fine. No one likes their comfort zone shaken. Having family members with vaccine injured children I have seen the day to day struggles and the affects this challenge has on family life. I see how my cousin worries endlessly about her young adult autistic child, what's going to happen to her-especially if she's left alone.
Knowing the struggles and challenges ahead I don't understand why people are eagerly and willing to settle for a person who just makes a statement because he really hasn't even taken a stand on the issue--only lip service. I want better than that for my family members and all people who have been affected by vaccines. As a "community" we should be demanding "SPECIFIC" not only from Trump but all candidates in areas even beyond vaccine damage. As far as I can tell until Trump lays out what his plans, WHAT'S HE COMMITTING TO DO ---he's just dangling a carrot in front of a desperate community. It's called politicking.

Here's a thought. Let's compose a letter to Trump, send it to his campaign with specific questions on what will he do for the vaccine damaged children in the US, what is his plan to take on and clean up the CDC and FDA. What is his plan to get some kind of control over the influence the pharmaceutical industry has on the policy makers in Washington who represent corporations not the American people who elected them. This will be a start.


I agree with J.B. - Mr. Trump is my candidate because he is the only one who has spoken up for what happened to my son. Rubio is a staunch supporter of vaccines and Cruz is for parents rights, except for vaccines it seems, so neither one of them would give a damn about what happens to our kids. My second choice is Kasich, but I haven't been able to find out anything on his vaccine position-if any of you know please share. And don't even get my started on Sanders and Clinton, both of them seem to be in love with vaccines. I don't agree with everything Trump wants to do or says, but I think he is the best for our economy and he isn't going to let other countries walk all over us like the current President does. So Trump has our votes and the votes of my in-laws and everyone else I can convince. #Trump2016


As we all know Congress holds 99% of the power when it comes to this stuff. So unless we can get some NEW people in there who have open minds this idea that Trump could do much is laughable.
I'm surprised that no one is concerned about his admiration for Kim Jong-un assassinating rivals(“It’s incredible. He wiped out the uncle, he wiped out this one, that one. This guy doesn’t play games.”) and that Vladimir Putin is “highly respected”.
My son is vaccine injured and I LOATHE big pharma. I want change but the change we get with Trump may to find we are in WWIII because he decides on whim to invade someplace or worse drop a bomb. I prefer to get new people in Congress who take our rights seriously and will do something about it.


He's not afraid of big pharma...

Bob Moffit

@ Ronald

"Consider what's happening. The Republicans have a candidate who has energized the base, is winning and increasing the plurality so far, and has raised the turnout substantially. If any Republican has a ghost of a chance against Hillary Clinton, it is Trump .... Yet, the Press is almost solidly against him, and the Republican Party is mounting parallel major efforts to block his nomination"

Here are Trump's issues as you define them:

"No abortion; no legal requirement for hiring women and minorities; not comfortable with same-sex marriage; support keeping God in public sphere; weaken EPA regulations; stricter punishment to reduce crime; absolute right to gun ownership; kill Obamacare; low priority on green energy; no pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens; expand the military; support American exceptionalism; prefer market-led recovery to stimulus; vouchers for school choice."

Those positions .. on those issues .. comprise what has been the national Republican Party platform for decades.

The Republican "establishment" .. "talks the talk" .. every election year .. then after gaining political control of the House, Senate and even the oval office .. that same "establishment" refuses to "walk the walk" on just about every single issue you listed.

Especially on global "free" trade ..NAFTA, GATT, WTO, on and on .. where the Republicans are in lock step with the Democrats .. our national sovereignty .. our jobs .. our manufacturing base .. be damned.

Who do you think the Republican powerbrokers want to fulfill their promise to "build a wall" .. Rubio, Cruz .. who already occupy a Senate seat yet neither one has done anything substantial towards securing our borders .. or .. Donald Trump who began his campaign making securing our borders a high priority if he is elected .. all but forcing Cruz and Rubio to once again "talk the talk".

The last thing the Republican elite want is someone like Trump .. who is a true outsider .. not beholding to anyone for MONEY to fund future campaigns ..

That's why the Republican establishment is doing their best to STOP TRUMP .. even if their STOP TRUMP effort results in another four years a Clinton Presidency.

Just my opinion

Denise Ferraro

It makes me sad to think that as a community we would not support the only candidate that has had the courage to say that he knows children that went in for their shots, got very ill, and were later diagnosed with Autism!!! If you remember that was the very first debate, for all he knew he was ending his newly started political career right there!! He is the only one to stand up for our children! I'm sure he knew he was not going to gain any political points by answering that question honestly, yet he did. Why would he risk political suicide in the election and then not try to do something if elected! That doesn't make sense to me. For our family the only issue is Autism!! All 3 of my children that do not have Autism, my husband and I will be voting Trump in November. I would ask anyone not considering Trump to imagine another 4 years with Grandma Hillary. She's already made up her mind." The science is clear: The earth is round, the sky is blue,and #vaccineswork. Let's protect all our kids. #GrandmothersKnowBest!" We can't afford another 4 or 8 years of this!! Go Trump!!

David Foster

I think the viewpoint expressed in this article is a Monumental mistake and I would like to explain why.

One of the main challenges which will face any group which dares to suggest even the mere existence of any vaccine safety issues will be to convince others of their credibility. This is extremely difficult because the vast majority of health agency and government officials and citizens alike share the dogmatic belief that vaccines are perfectly safe and highly effective...the more the better and bring on the Zika vaccine!

For this reason I strongly suggest that we choose very carefully the media outlets, journalists, external groups, and candidates we engage and reference in these efforts. While some may already share our opinions on this particular issue, in my opinion that does not by itself mean we should ally ourselves with them.

One perfect example of this is Alex Jones. Many may disagree, but in my opinion it is not helpful for any vaccine safety advocate to ever cite or even mention anything coming from this man. While it is true that he is one of the few high-profile pundits who sees the truth about vaccines, he also "sees" a whole lot of other very wacky things which make it extremely easy for any casual reader to dismiss anything which includes his name.

Along these same lines, I cannot overstate how Huge (pun intended) a mistake it is to support Donald Trump simply because he agrees with us on any one particular issue.

This man is truly dangerous, and anyone who does not see that is, in my opinion, either plunging their head down a hole in denial, or is one of those Americans who find their darker side given license to freely express itself within the atmosphere of hate, misogyny, xenophobia, arrogance and hubris which surrounds this immature narcissist of a man child.

For context, is there any one here who thinks that the Japanese interment program during WWII was a Good Thing? If you do, please don't bother responding...I seriously have no interest in what you have to say. But seriously, Trump has already indicated his support for something very similar and with much less provocation. Where else do you think he would take us?

Hitler did some marvelous things for Germany's economy, culture and world standing, right up until the point where he decided to attack neighboring countries and then kill millions of Jews because he didn't like them.

Learn from history or you WILL be doomed repeat it.


The way I look at it is: with Trump we at least have a chance of a pleasant surprise. With anybody else - either side - it will be more business as usual and we all know what that is.


Democrats and other critics have hammered away at drug costs in recent months, raising investor concerns that future price cuts could hurt pharmaceutical and biotech companies. Biotech stocks tumbled last September after Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton tweeted her intent to tackle high prices.

And so, and so, what am I to think of either one?

Keep in mind the smirking smile on the Pharma boy CEO when he raised the price of a reasonable AIDs drug to very high price.

Could this break some of the power of the drug companies?


Ronald; Here is a stand that is different:

"Trump told a New Hampshire crowd on Monday night that "US$300 billion could be saved" by such negotiations.

"We don’t do it. Why?" Trump said. "Because of the drug companies." Trump leads in opinion polls among Republicans vying for their party's nomination for the Nov. 8 presidential election.

The Nasdaq Biotechnology index was off 0.7 percent in Tuesday afternoon trading, underperforming solid gains for the major U.S. stock indexes.

Again he says:
Trump: “We are not allowed to negotiate Medicare drug prices. Can you believe it? We pay about $300 billion more than we are supposed to, than if we negotiated the price. So there’s $300 billion on day one we solve.”

–Donald Trump, remarks at Plymouth State University, Holderness, N.H., Feb. 7, 2016

I once upon a time has the best of the best health insurance. A pharma called me in glee when my son's neurologist wrote out the prescription for Lamictal. I found out they were charging the health insurance company 5,000 dollars

I am so ashamed of myself; but my son got Steven Johnson syndrome from in and we had to discontinue it - and knowing the cost and knowing we were getting old and going to lose this good job - I was kind of alright with it.
So yean, no tears that the stock of a drug company went down.

go Trump

Thanks again JB. We live in a medical fascist nation at the present, with a 5,000 page secret trade agreement / treaty in Congress which will create world taxes and a world government that will control every bank account on the planet.

Perhaps Trump will release the vaccine records of his children and grandchildren... hep be at birth ??? flu shots for everyone every year ???

Perhaps compare vaccine schedules with the Putin family...

That would be a simple way to start the conversation. How could a candidate not bring up this children's issue???

How in the hell could you lose votes on the biggest medical fraud in history ???

Don’t really care about Trumps tax returns,

Ronald Kostoff

Bob Moffit,

" There are two questions I think critical during this primary campaign.

#1 .. All candidates should be required to answer the following questions:

a) Who should make the decision to vaccinate a child .. the child's elected State Legislators .. or .. the child's parent or legal guardians?

b) Who should make the decision to vaccinate adults .. public health officials under the coercive auspices of the Affordable Care Act .. or .. adults themselves?

2) All candidates should be asked what individual qualities they will rely upon when appointing oversight responsibilities to lead well-entrenched federal regulatory bureaucracies .. such as .. HHS, CDC, FDA, on and on."

Well, we've had ~15 televised debates, countless Town Halls, countless TV interviews, countless rallys with questions, etc. How many times have you heard either of these questions raised? Compare this number with the number of times questions were raised about jobs, terrorism, free trade, illegal aliens, increasing defense, etc, and you will get some idea about how high in the priority chain are those 'critical' issues you raise.

Ronald Kostoff

Bob Moffit,

" please identify Trump's "major positions" .. that are "not all that different from those of Cruz, Rubio or Kashich"?"

Here's a sampling, comparing Trump/Cruz/Rubio.

No abortion; no legal requirement for hiring women and minorities; not comfortable with same-sex marriage; support keeping God in public sphere; weaken EPA regulations; stricter punishment to reduce crime; absolute right to gun ownership; kill Obamacare; low priority on green energy; no pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens; expand the military; support American exceptionalism; prefer market-led recovery to stimulus; vouchers for school choice.

Yvonne Aileen

When Trump initially said those words, I was like, "ALRIGHT! Now the dialogue will start." Crickets... I can't support Trump because he is a liar and a buffoon, and he publicly ridiculed a disabled individual. And I don't trust him to do the right thing by my child, or my country. I stand with you, JB, but not him.

Denise Anderstrom Douglass

Well, thank you, J.B. Handley! I also voted for our current president twice, believing, like a fool, that he meant what he said about being the autism president. I also voted for Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren. All because I believed they would help my grandson and all the children and young adults like him. That was before she did her infamous interview of the CDC chief, or whatever that lady in a military uniform's title is. I regret all three of those votes, and for your reasons.

I changed my basically lifelong political party last summer, and yesterday I voted for Mr. Trump. So did a lot of people in my state. I hope your suggestion catches on!


I like Trump. I think he's real, and he does get
it about vaccines and autism.

You think Hillary C.or Sanders care? Am thinking: care or cares? Do they care Does he or she care. For the minute grammar is eclipsing my enthusiasm for Trump!


I think Trump is the only one that has the balls to stand up to Big Pharma. He's got my vote!

Bob Moffit

@ Ronald Kostoff .. you posted:

"Why would the Party establishment be so vehemently opposed to Trump? His major positions are not all that different from those of Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich ....."

Just curious .. please identify Trump's "major positions" .. that are "not all that different from those of Cruz, Rubio or Kashich"?

david m burd

@ Dr. Kostoff - You say:"Yet, the Press is almost solidly against him" (Trump, that is).

Might you expand on the Vaccine Carnage (my own description) mandated by the CDC Immunization Schedule for Children? As to "the Press" you cite, how do you get around their stranglehold on medical (mis)information?

I claim the U.S. CDC Immunization Schedule is The Most Lethal Document in the history of modern civilization.

I submit that Dan Olmsted/Mark Blaxill could get the attention of Trump - if they try.

Can you, Dr. Kostoff, or will you, make an attempt to inform Donald Trump (or other candidates) on what your advocate?

Jeannette Bishop

The two pluses I see in Trump are that he seems to draw a line at significantly disabling babies, and it seems he's less likely to tell you what you want to hear and then do otherwise (you know, he'll likely violate your rights or the Constitution in your face, instead of behind your back kind of thing).

In our debt-based, bankers-control-the-currency economy, the "rich" may be more enslaved (to the "goodwill" of the banks) on some matters than most of us are ...I think that includes Trump. He takes risks speaking out, but his polarizing nature might be why he seems to be able to, and I don't have any idea if he actually supports health freedom or just a less insane level of enslavement to pharma-based "healthcare."

(And I can't help thinking that less insane might garner more acquiescence than more insane...the boiling-frogs-that-we've-been kind of thing vs. a waking-up-to-the-state-things-maybe kind of thing).

The question I'm asking is, if everyone (but political insiders perhaps) stayed home on election days (or we only voted in local elections maybe) instead of voting in the presidential election process, would the outcome be any worse than where we've been since at least the JFK assassination?

Some say that our local elections are where we should be putting most of our time and resources politically, trying to get good people in office in each county and state. They might be right...if I had elected officials who wouldn't allow the stupid "smart" meter grid into our community continually polluting, I might be able to try to get out more and maybe even meet and get to know some of them well enough to make an informed choice since many of them aren't trying to campaign online (though that would be stretching for me to be honest)...and there has been effort to mandate them (the "smart" meters) nationally, but here some of us are, already pulsed hundreds of thousands times a day with varying levels of EM radiation (and wondering if I'll have any vaccine-free, radiation-free, pollution-free, hopefully generally healthy and happy grandchildren), and nobody held a vote on it that I'm aware. We have a fascist, criminal, war-waging against healthy people and families cartel forcing and assuaging its way into our homes from every means of influence.

Kristie Sepulveda-Burchit

Please keep us updated if autism nonprofit groups are endorsing Trump or any candidate.

I see the bigger picture. Getting big money out of politics is the key to curing things on multiple fronts including the nationwide push for vaccine mandates. Only one candidate with a consistent track record proposes to do just that and he is the only one that does. That is Bernie Sanders.


WOW Ronald Kostoff; that does appear to be the case.

I did not even vote last presidential election - Mitt Romney for all I could see except skin color the same as Obama.

So there you are; the establishment of both parties - are really - the establishment.

Sean Burke

I am down with Trump.

anita Donnelly

Whoever wins:
While you are at it why not ask for a few billion to fund alternative Drs toxicologists and dAN type Drs. Name dr Wakefield surgeon general. And Rfk Jr dept of epa. Those would be great starts!
And jail for everyone at the CDC and NIH who was complicit. And apology and reparations to all harmed.
And let's all call the White House comment line and Michele Obama and beg the president to take this on. He is a lame duck and this is the time to do it. Let's call boxer too for the same reason. They need to hear from us and they need to hear they are driving so many to trump.

Gary Huber

I'm almost convinced that Trump might be worth the risk. I tend to agree that it is hard to find a greater injustice in the mad world than the vaccine mess. But. Voting for Trump is like getting vaccinated. You just don't know. He is smart enough to see the problem. Does he really care? he understands that millions of sensible decent people without a racist cell in their bodies are totally fed up and infuriated at being called racist just because they want laws upheld and some sanity on immigration. They are sick of being told every day by the liars in the media that there is no difference between immigration and illegal immigration. Trump sees this. But does he really care? Judging from his past, I doubt it. He is a big government crony capitalist through and through. He cares only about Trump. His supporters love to say he can't be bought. Only because up til now he has been the buyer. He brags about buying politicians and always getting what he wants. Given he recent history of being on both sides of everything, how can we have any confidence he won't have another transformation and suddenly realize that vaccines are great? What will he do when he is no longer the buyer of influence but the seller? If his Soprano-type friends are told by big Pharma to help Donald to see the light what will he do? This is a real quandry. But the alternative is probably far far worse.

Birgit Calhoun

I certainly understand where you are coming from. My take is that it probably doesn't really mater for whom you are voting to become President. The President in my opinion can probably do very little to change things regarding vaccines unless you already know whom he or she chooses to nominate for the Supreme Court to hopefully repeal Bruesewitz v. Wyeth.

Any of the toxics and toxic metal legislation would have to be dealt with by the Congress, and considering how much pharma money goes there I can't see that anyone right now is interested in autism, no matter how much Trump likes to promote his views on that.

Go Trump

@Nicole if you want endless war and autism vote Hillary. If you won't status quo on autism then by all means vote for Cruz or Rubio. They are BOUGHT.

Ronald Kostoff

J. B. Handley,

"as Trump heads towards a near-guaranteed Republican nomination"

That's not clear at all to me. I have been voting in Presidential elections since Kennedy-Nixon, and the present turn of events on the Republican side is the most bizarre that I can remember seeing.

Consider what's happening. The Republicans have a candidate who has energized the base, is winning and increasing the plurality so far, and has raised the turnout substantially. If any Republican has a ghost of a chance against Hillary Clinton, it is Trump. Ordinarily, one would think any political Party would be overjoyed to have such a candidate, and would do everything in its power to promote and support such a candidate. Yet, the Press is almost solidly against him, and the Republican Party is mounting parallel major efforts to block his nomination. This, in spite of the reality that neither Rubio nor Cruz would have the slightest chance against Hillary Clinton.

Why would the Party establishment be so vehemently opposed to Trump? His major positions are not all that different from those of Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich, although obviously his tone is far different. Yet, the Press and the establishment have picked up on the miscues about the KKK support, even though Trump has disavowed it multiple times. The rationale is that Trump will not attract minority voters as a result of his statements.

Are you kidding me? Sanders is the one candidate who has spent part/much of his career on the front lines trying to improve the situation of minorities. If e.g. the African-American community would support anyone based on performance and personal willingness to fight (as opposed to willingness to talk), it would be Sanders. Yet, Clinton is winning the overwhelming majority of the African-American vote (so far, at least). Does anyone seriously believe that ANY of the Republican candidates would do better than Sanders against Clinton for minority votes, given their support for VoterID Laws and other mechanisms to restrict minority participation in government? This perceived racial/ethnic bias of Trump is a phony issue, meant to provide a rationale for denying him the nomination. It is clear the Party would rather lose in November rather than have Trump in the White House.

So, how does one explain this apparent contradictory situation? Here's my take. Trump has made statements that challenge the power and interests of those who really control this country. He has e.g., made statements questioning present vaccination policy; he has made statements questioning our invasion of Iraq; he has made statements questioning other aggressive military adventures. These types of statements challenge the power of the Government-Industrial-Media Complex (GIMC) I describe in my eBook, and it is they and their representatives who are funding these massive efforts (through the media and myriad SuperPACs) to remove Trump from the nomination. The GIMC, and the Republican/Democrat leaders that they own, would be equally comfortable with Hillary Clinton or Marco Rubio or John Kasich in the White House, and the Republican leaders would be more than willing to sacrifice the White House as long as someone acceptable to the GIMC IN EITHER PARTY gets elected. That essentially validates the view of many people that we really have ONE Party in this country, with two moderately different arms. The two arms differ typically on social issues, but when it comes to protecting the large corporate interests, the two arms are in solidarity. Think about who passed the 1986 Vaccine Act and the 1996 Telecommunications Act!

The challenges faced by Trump are little different from those faced by Bernie Sanders, although the tactics of the Press and the Democrat Party are quite different. The Press has basically ignored Sanders, and he is fading from lack of exposure. The Democrat Party has limited the debates and their timing to minimize Sanders' exposure.

Both Sanders and Trump threaten the iron grip the GIMC has on this country, and all the stops will be pulled out to insure these two candidates are not their Parties' nominees!


Dr. Wakefield is not and has never been a fraud, yet he is constantly called a fraud. Donald Trump has actually engaged in fraudulent activities, such as Trump University where people paid $25,000 to $30,000 and did not receive what they were promised; law suits are in process now. I believe that more and more bad stuff will come out about Trump as this campaign progresses. How will we look if major autism organizations endorse him? Just more fodder for the vaccine defenders, which will be used to tarnish everyone on our side of these issues.


First of all....anyone who believes one word of what is said on the media isn't paying much attention. Blacks know that the worst enemy and the most racist of all is right there in the government. The KKK is one of those organizations that conveniently appears to cover up the truly horrendous crimes of the government against Blacks--like the DeStephano study where the 300 % increase in autism was dumped in the trash can, and no one seems to care. I'm not saying that there weren't racial crimes in the south and that the civil rights act wasn't good... but that was then and it was under a more honest government. As far as I can see this current regime has blown it. I think it's unfortunate that Trump is naive in certain ways--like about Muslims. But you have to remember who has killed more Muslims than anyone in so called wars of liberation. It wasn't Trump. Vote for Hillary and you are voting for endless war. She is the pro-war candidate and that means lots of people will die with our tax dollars, and many will be Muslims. Paranoia is a higher state of consciousness--wish that weren't true. Our government is criminal----wish that weren't true. When you vote for most candidates they are just fronts for corporate interests and the people who walk the districts, work the phones, give the candidates little parties, and make their 300 dollar contribution are mere dust blowing in the wind. Once in office the candidates now pay allegiance to their true corporate masters. Only Trump is not bought because he is already rich. That is the way it is.


Thank you so much for this. It is where I am at as well.


There'e no way I could vote for or support that racist, sexist, temperamental, foolish, ignorant, bullying, lying failed-businessman-turned-TV-show-host for president - in spite of his several sound bites relating to vaccines and autism. If he did take up our cause, he would just make our cause look stupid - and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he does a political calculation and abandons our cause altogether. He says he is a truth-teller, but he often lies - such as when he first said quite clearly that he doesn't know who David Duke is, and then said that he didn't know who they were asking about because he couldn't hear well with the stupid ear buds they gave him. Let me know if he comes out with any actual plans relating to vaccines and/or autism.

Nicole Beurkens

This is an extremely short-sighted position, and it pains me that you would overlook this man's bigotry in favor of his stance on one specific issue. We cannot stand for the ignorance and racism this candidate promotes. If you think having him as president will make the world a better place for anyone's child with disabilities you are sorely mistaken. I've been a supporter of Age of Autism for many years, but cannot support the message you are promoting in this post.

Autism is an epidemic

I totally agree with you, JB! I'm also a 1 issue voter and nothing is more important right now than vaccines causing autism. I support Trump in honor of my son who is vaccine injured.


I just have one question and I'm not using this name because of Trump's recent apparent flub (or brain fart). I'm using it because it makes the point.

Would you all be willing to overlook everything else if it was David Duke who said that vaccines cause autism?


We are on the same page JB. If Trump is our only shot at this, I am voting for him. I really don't care about anything else he says. It has come to this - everyone else running for President looks like they are a cog in a huge political machine - very far removed from our reality. They will say anything they have to say to get a vote. I am from Michigan and now Hilary has come to save the day in Flint (per her commercial, anyway). Give me a break. Grandmothers Know Best - NOT! Is Pharma too big to fail? I don't see anyone else in the running that would be willing to take this on. That is the bottom line for me. Trump 2016 - yes!


"There is of course a mountain of evidence of malfeasance by the CDC over autism and vaccines - perhaps that is a good place to start."

This statement says it all. Real change can only begin when those in the highest positions of authority are charged/punished with the crimes they have committed, and the rampant scientific misconduct exposed. Then safeguards need to be implemented to protect children from government officials, the pharmaceutical industry, and legislators.Put medical decisions back where they belong...between the patient(parents) and their healthcare provider.

Trump 2016

Bob Moffit

I would like to know if the Canary Party supports Trump over other primary candidates? If so .. have they announced their support yet?

There are two questions I think critical during this primary campaign.

#1 .. All candidates should be required to answer the following questions:

a) Who should make the decision to vaccinate a child .. the child's elected State Legislators .. or .. the child's parent or legal guardians?

b) Who should make the decision to vaccinate adults .. public health officials under the coercive auspices of the Affordable Care Act .. or .. adults themselves?

2) All candidates should be asked what individual qualities they will rely upon when appointing oversight responsibilities to lead well-entrenched federal regulatory bureaucracies .. such as .. HHS, CDC, FDA, on and on.

After all .. the real power over the people lies within those well-entrenched federal regulatory bureaucracies .. and .. who is appointed to lead them is probably among the most critical decisions ANY new President will have to make.


It's never ending. Nothing has changed all of our lives as much as this has.
NOTHING ELSE MATTERS TO US AS MUCH AS THIS. So sorry if this makes us look selfish and stupid to other people who don't get it. I don't care. #Trump2016


For what its worth, this statement make you look smart, not stupid.


I agree with you JB. And I have two other voters in my house who do also.
It should be three other, but my twenty year old son who can't speak and has "autism" can't realistically vote.
Yesterday we took him to get a state ID for the first time. We are taking a trip on a plane soon. Mine and his first since 9/11 ( because severe autism dampens one's ability to travel or ability to live a somewhat normal existence). Anyways, the clerk at the dmv let us know his name would be submitted to the selective service. Which we have already dealt with that mental blow at eighteen that our son could never "serve" his country. She also asked if he would like to register him to vote. I wish...
His picture came out horrible as he was biting the inside of his lip because he is always getting canker sores that bother him. As soon as he was done with the picture he had to leave and sit in the car with his dad because he looked to be on the verge of a tantrum. I waited for my 20 year old's state ID. One of those smack you in the face moments. Which I've had a lot of with our "autism" life.
We left with our new state ID and headed over to the hospital lab to have some blood taken to monitor whatever his "autism" doctor wants to check on. How's his ASO-antidbase? And IgG, IgM, and IgA candidia problem looking?
It's never ending. Nothing has changed all of our lives as much as this has.
NOTHING ELSE MATTERS TO US AS MUCH AS THIS. So sorry if this makes us look selfish and stupid to other people who don't get it. I don't care. #Trump2016

John Stone

There is of course a mountain of evidence of malfeasance by the CDC over autism and vaccines - perhaps that is a good place to start.

Patience (Eileen Nicole) Simon

Real science must also focus on brain development, stages of brain development and the importance of brainstem sensory pathways. The auditory pathway is metabolically more active (and more susceptible to injury) than any other component of the brain. Maturation of the language areas of the cerebral cortex depends upon trophic neurotransmitters produced in relay centers of the auditory pathway.

At the last IACC meeting someone said "we" are only beginning to understand the brain disorder in autism. The "we" are only beginning, because "we" have neglected evidence published long ago in the medical literature about the special vulnerability of the auditory system to interference with aerobic metabolism by poisons (like mercury) as well as oxygen insufficiency at birth.

Will Trump be able to question medical authority? Or will he (like Obama and Elizabeth Warren) just give it over to the "experts" to begin again to do research. I know I am the smallest voice in the wilderness, but I will continue to try to ask for things that should be common knowledge (and common sense). Injections begin at birth, but only after the umbilical cord has been clamped and cut immediately after birth. "We" should not allow this hazard for an infant to begin breathing to continue.

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.)