To For Danchi
It would be nice to have a name.

You logic is not sound. I continue to ask people do they understand President Powers as laid out in the Constitution. Please read up on that subject and you will see the real limitations ANY person who sits in the White House has placed on them. I'm not going to defend every person who has ever been President but what I will say is Clinton, Sanders, and the others manned up and said outright their position on Vaccines-they support the program. Trump, on the other hand has used the emotions and frustrations of the Pro-Choice/Anti-Vaxx community for his own selfish purposes-to garner support. Just by hanging in the air like a dangling carrot the words:

Vaccine Cause Autism

Pro-Choice/Anti-Vaxx community rallied to his support. Since no MSM or anyone was pinning him down and asking for clarity he continued this---sucking more people in until the support for his Anti-Vaxx movement took on a life of it's own. But the real bug a boo is:
TRUMP NEVER COMMITTED TO A PRO-CHOICE/ANTI-VAXX CAUSE. Someone created the illusion and people just fed into it. Because the powers that be have come down on him he has had to clarify himself. Part of the illusion of Trump is that he's this maverick (shades of John McCain) an outsider when the reality is---he isn't and he's had to prove it. He has now provided clarity to his position not only his personal beliefs regrading vaccines but what he would do as President:

“His views are clear . Trump says “he favors vaccines”. He’s say’s he’s not Anti-Vaxx and
"The bottom line is they have to get vaccinated."

"Trump says he favors vaccines"
The Science of President Trump
http://blogs.scientificamerican(dot)com/guest-blog/the-science-of-president-trump/.

“Viewer question: What’s your position on freedom of choice regarding various vaccines"
Trump NEVER ANSWERED the question. He said:
"First of all, I’m a big believer in vaccines".
"The bottom line is they have to get vaccinated."
https://sharylattkisson.com/trump-on-vaccines-and-autism-pro-vaccine-but-cautious/

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 3, 2014
I'm not against vaccinations for your children, I'm against them in 1 massive dose. Spread them out over a period of time & autism will drop!

Donald Trump quotes: Vaccines, Ebola and Universal Health Care
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:f1MgXxCjOnIJ:outbreaknewstoday.com/donald-trump-quotes-vaccines-ebola-and-universal-health-care-52395/+&cd=40&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Via Twitter:

“If I were President I would push for proper vaccinations but would not allow one time massive shots that a small child cannot take – AUTISM.”

“To all haters and losers: I am NOT anti-vaccine, but I am against shooting massive doses into tiny children. Spread shots out over time.”.
So Trump is against the combo shots. He is for spreading out the toxins over a long period of time. Yea, that's work.

You may not like the positions of the other candidates but at least you know where they stand. Trump, on the other hand, didn't have the decency to provided clarity until he was backed into a corner with very specific questions which demanded very specific answers:

-If I were President I would PUSH for proper vaccinations but would not allow one time massive shots that a small child cannot take.
-First of all, I’m a big believer in vaccines.
The bottom line is they have to get vaccinated".

Trump has strung people along and they have invested so much of their emotional being in him, they cannot accept the betrayal to the point of making excuses as to why he has to say the things he's saying: the medical mafia won't let him speak or the elite is holding him back. Whenever a person loses someone, even a political candidate, that is a loss-a hole has been created, just like a death and it takes great effort to fill that space but first there has to be acceptance that Trump was NEVER one of you and he NEVER wanted to be one of you. He only wanted to use you-like all candidates.

I've read a lot of comment boards and the reality of Trump is setting in because of the Attkisson interview and his other comments. Someone said this feels like a death and it is. Many are in the early stages of the grieving process. Eventually I think many people will realize that Trump was never worthy of their support in the first place.

Barry/Joanne,

"Vaccines have been linked with a myriad of chronic diseases and disorders; this includes diabetes, autism, ADD/ADHD, asthma, eczema, autoimmune conditions and allergies, just to name a few. What do these all have in common? They all require extensive pharmaceutical intervention. Sure, the vaccines themselves might only account for 2.5% of the profit, but how much profit is gained from treating these other long-term (and in some cases life-long) conditions? Is the pharamceutical industry creating lifelong customers through vaccines?"

While the pharmaceutical companies may in fact be creating lifelong customers through vaccines, I do not believe it is DELIBERATE, as your statements imply. I believe the companies would be happier if there were no adverse effects. But, they have a problem. Most of their products, including vaccines, drugs, and other, have numerous adverse effects associated with them, and to stay in business, they have to downplay these effects to the public.

I believe you are missing the strategic plan for vaccines. It is one of their products that has almost limitless potential for growth. Consider the potential market for biowarfare agent and other viral/bacterial vaccines? There are three general classes of biowarfare agents: bacteria, viruses, toxins (http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/6/843.full). Let's focus on viruses. As I stated in a previous post: "It has been estimated that there are at least 320,000 viruses that infect mammals (http://mbio.asm.org/content/4/5/e00598-13), with the potential of being transmitted from animals to humans (zoonoses, like the SARS pandemic)."

Now, not all of these can be used as biowarfare agents; certain properties are required, such as transmissibility and pathogenicity. The problem is that we have not characterized these properties for most of the 320,000 viruses mentioned above, and therefore we don't know how many could be used as potential biowarfare agents. Additionally, we don't know how many viruses are serious threats from natural transmission. The CDC/USDA identifies about a hundred (https://extranet.fhcrc.org/EN/sections/ehs/hamm/chap5/section10.html).

To 'protect' against diseases from these agents, vaccines are being developed either for post-exposure or for pre-exposure administration. It takes years to develop and test a vaccine, and, whether for pre-or post-exposure administration, would require large amounts of vaccine to be available in case of a pandemic, however caused. In other words, large amounts of each vaccine would have to be stockpiled even for post-exposure administration, since the window for 'effectiveness' closes rapidly.

So, we are talking about a vaccine market of unimaginable proportions, if the general public can be persuaded that these vaccines are required for protection. It seems to me we are in the initial phases of a 'conditioning' program to accept the validity of vaccines, with childhood vaccinations. The more we are led to believe vaccines are necessary and beneficial, with minimal harm, the more vaccines we will receive. It is no different from our being 'conditioned' to accept myriad wireless devices.

With each additional vaccine, our resistance to acceptance decreases. Given the potential viral threats, we could probably be persuaded to take THOUSANDS of vaccines for pre-exposure 'protection', or stockpile THOUSANDS of vaccines for post-exposure amelioration. So, statements in the Press about ten thousand vaccines being possible to administer, while being made to sound ludicrous, may in fact portend what we have in store for the future. I suspect that's the real game: once our 'conditioning' is complete, then the vaccine spigot can be fully opened, and we will be immunized against every virus that poses any sort of realistic threat. So, multiply today's 2.5% of the market estimate by a factor of ten or a hundred (or more), and you begin to see the real potential of vaccines for the pharmaceutical companies. And, no side-effects are required; the side-effects are the icing on the cake for them in terms of profits!!!

Barry, if I understand Dr. Wakefield's own account correctly, he believes the fierceness of the effort to discredit him may have been due, in part, to UK government liability, because they may have released the vaccine manufacturers from liability in advance, as they had in the case of the Pluserix MMR vaccine, which was ultimately discontinued because it caused meningitis in children receiving it. (After assurances that it was perfectly safe?) He was anticipating a battle with pharmaceutical companies. He did not expect betrayal from his own government, and only later understood the likely UK government stake in the matter.

Just like our own government is on the hook here in the US after releasing vaccine manufacturers from liability. I don't believe it was pharma dollars that caused California to mandate vaccines, Elizabeth Warren to participate in an extended lying session, and so many other leaders to behave in such a disappointing way.

They are behaving as if maintaining public confidence in the vaccine program were a matter of national security; understandable given the consequences of acknowledging the truth, but not excusable. They should have more faith in the capacity of our nation to come together to deal with the truth and all of the consequences.

Barrie,

"At 25 billion, vaccines account for a measly 2.5 % of that trillion dollar cash machine. Which from a financial perspective, makes the income from vaccines darned near close to irrelevant."

Vaccines have been linked with a myriad of chronic diseases and disorders; this includes diabetes, autism, ADD/ADHD, asthma, eczema, autoimmune conditions and allergies, just to name a few. What do these all have in common? They all require extensive pharmaceutical intervention. Sure, the vaccines themselves might only account for 2.5% of the profit, but how much profit is gained from treating these other long-term (and in some cases life-long) conditions? Is the pharamceutical industry creating lifelong customers through vaccines? The profits accumulated from the treatment of all of the other conditions that vaccines might be a co-factor in creating is actually very relevent.

***********

Thank you, that was exactly my point. I just didn't spell it out.

No successful business would ever work this hard, to protect 3% of it's your total income. It makes no sense. Unless of course, that 3% has a whole lot to do with creating the other 97%.

If this is in fact the case, then we basically have a generation of children who have been intentionally poisoned, just so someone could turn them into life long customers.

And it's not hard to understand why the people behind this crime, are so desperate to keep that truth from the parents of those defenseless children.

The vaccine market is a growth market. Whatever they are making presently, it is obvious that they plan on mandating a good many more vaccines and making it so that you need to have them to work, travel, medical care, pensions...to them there is still room for growth. Can you just imagine the horrific state of the nation if this comes to realization. Our children are sick enough and Alzheimer's is growing. So many people will become debilitated it is literally unsustainable.

Just to add..

With regard to the neologism 'contraspiracist', the third type extends to those who automatically designate Vaxxed, Wakefield, De Niro etc as ‘necessarily’ anti-vaccination.

In my opinion, the pro-vax extremist's worst mistake was to brand Wakefield as anti-vax. As a result, his otherwise non-extreme position with regard to advocating a single measles vaccine has actually set the bar for anti-vax extremism. Consequently, no matter how moderate and reasonable a viewpoint may be that questions vaccine policy, it will always be regarded as extreme by those opposed since it is highly unlikely to be less confrontational than Wakefield’s.

And so now we have De Niro asking pretty reasonable – if not always sufficiently informed – questions. It is the job of those opposing him to make him sound utterly unreasonable and deluded. If he manages to keep his cool and continue asking reasonable questions – such as wanting to have the issue properly debated etc – he should succeed well.

Danchi

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/noah-gray/trump-autism-vaccine-_b_1424116.html

Why Does Donald Trump Think Vaccines Cause Autism?

Contraspiracist -

1. A person who assigns a truth value to the rejection of a statement purely on grounds that its claims appear far-fetched, conspiratorial, exaggerated etc.

2. A person who employs this reasoning as a tactic to reject, or divert attention from, an opposing opinion.

3. A person who assumes that one who holds contrary opinions to theirs is necessarily a conspiracist, an extremist etc.

Han,
“Donald Trump has spoken out on vaccination and autism on many occasions prior to his presidential candidacy .”

Yes he has in 2007 and 2012. Here is what he said:
http://www.ageofautism.com/2007/12/trump-did-not-f.html
Here's more of what Trump had to say about autism and vaccinations:
"When a little baby that weighs 20 pounds and 30 pounds gets pumped with 10 and 20 shots at one time, with one injection that's a giant injection, I personally think that has something to do with it. Now there's a group that agrees with that and there's a group that doesn't agree with that."

Referring to his and his wife Melania's 22-month-old son Baron, Trump continued: "What we've done with Baron, we've taken him on a very slow process. He gets one shot at a time then we wait a few months and give him another shot, the old-fashioned way. But today they pump the children with so much at a very young age. We do it on a very, very conservative level."

The above is the same comment/story every vaccine site has been posting since Trump said the words he thinks vaccine has something to do with Autism. It is not current but they continue to post it as if it was. He has not moved from this statement. He’s created variations of it but he has not said any more. Trump, since 2007 is what we called back in the day---TALKING LOUD AND SAYING NOTHING.

-He has not stated he supports Parental Choice.
-He has not stated he supports changing the vaccine mandate.
-He has not stated he in anti-vax or pro choice. In fact he has stated he’s Pro-Vaccine and has said emphatically I am not Anti-Vax.
-He has not stated in any way shape or form any policy changes he would recommend. In fact, he hasn’t made any policy statements.

“His views are clear .
Yes, they are. Trump says “he favors vaccines”. He’s say’s he’s not Anti-Vaxx and
"The bottom line is they have to get vaccinated."

He knows "vaccines and autism" go together like "strawberries and cream" .
You can also say his views go together like oil and water.

“I suspect he doesn't the issue to derail his very successful campaign so far”
I suspect you are suffering from a little cognitive dissonance.

“If he gets in , then lets see what he says & does.”
Did you take civics or government classes in school? Do you understand Presidential Powers? Policy changes are made with the votes from the Congress and the Senate. The voted officials in Washington have no less than 3 pharm lobbyist assigned to them. That’s their gravy train and they are not about to jump off to help anyone who messes with that. So if it’s comes down to those congress and the senators keeping their nice government jobs, with all the privileges and bennies for life and jumping on board with Trump or anyone to thrown down with the pharmaceutical industry who at the drop of a pin can destroy their careers. It’s not happening. PLUS, they in no way will sabotage the possibility of getting one of those Eric Cantor consultant type millionaire jobs if they get booted out of office or just want off the hill.
It comes down to being about the Benjamin’s.

You and the others can talk about the elite, the medical mafia who are holding Trump back from speaking his mind on vaccines, not willing to accept the reality HE HAS SPOKEN HIS MIND ON VACCINES and also he has TAKEN ACTION ON HIS BELIEFS. His children, all of them, are vaccinated. On extended schedule, but vaccinated. Who are these no name- faceless people of the medical mafia and the elite you and a couple of others talk about on this and other sites? Maybe we can email them and ask them to ease up on Trump so he can speak his mind on vaccines.

-This is the reality you can’t face. Trump is no champion on the Pro-Choice/Anti-Vaccine cause. Period.
Let Trump be Trump in his own words:

-First of all, I’m a big believer in vaccines.
**********The bottom line is they have to get vaccinated.**********
-When I was going to school as a young guy, polio was a really big problem and vaccines knocked it out. So the vaccines are very important, but we have to study the vaccines and we have to be very, very careful with vaccines.”

“Viewer question: What’s your position on freedom of choice regarding various vaccines"
Trump NEVER ANSWERED the question. He said:
"The bottom line is they have to get vaccinated."

-alter vaccination schedules to avoid autism: Trump says he favors vaccines, but giving children smaller doses over a longer period of time. He has blamed vaccines for causing autism in children. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-science-of-president-trump/

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 3, 2014
I'm not against vaccinations for your children, I'm against them in 1 massive dose. Spread them out over a period of time & autism will drop!

If I were President I would push for proper vaccinations but would not allow one time massive shots that a small child cannot take - AUTISM.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 27, 2014
Push: to move (something) in a specified way by exerting force; shove; drive:

He is Trump-Hear Him Roar:

“First of all, I’m a big believer in vaccines.
**********The bottom line is they have to get vaccinated.**********”

Clear. Concise. Succinct.

Thank you, Dan, and God bless Robert DeNiro (and all other autism parents). I really think we're getting close to a tipping point. Vaxxed, and the Today interview, will lead us to that tipping point. I think there are a whole lot more people now who have become skeptical of the official narrative. No telling what will happen when the house of cards begins to fall. Dubya and Cheney got away with unspeakable crimes, as did Clinton-Gore, Inc. But the CDC crimes have so deeply wounded Americans rather than people far away, that it is bound to be a cathartic, and probably ugly, process.

@ Kendra
That old ped doc certain sounds as if he had much life experience. He probable remembers those past times when many lived squalid conditions. The measles virus is an immunosuppressant, so it is no wonder that back then children may have survived that infection but then succumbed to pneumonia etc. Even though those times have passed (and better condition brought down the death rate, well before measles vaccinations where developed) that ped doc knew it was important not to mix measles vaccs with any other live vaccine because of those dangers. Attitudes have changed much but I remember listening to a midwife (or some similar type of visiting community nurse) explain that measles used to be considered a ''harvester'' disease. In the early part of the century (guess she was born round about the Great War) it used to take away those few children who would sooner or later die anyway. Although I admit it sounds terribly dispassionate today -when today’s antibiotic treatments may have saved some of them, this was the late 1950's when people didn’t mince words and was talking about her early experiences and emphasizing that children no longer died from measles – and that was over fifty years ago. I think you and I agree: We don't live in an age, where even single shot measles vac is better than non for the general population. It doesn’t invoke the primary immune response and mothers don't pass on their antibody to their babies etc.

Here's The Schedule in all its toxic color glory; pass it on.

http://www.sdiz.org/documents/schedules/12_0-6yrs-schedule-pr.pdf

Kendra, Fascinating indeed, thanks!

John Stone and Tim Lundeen. You both might find it interesting that an old ped doc that I used to live next door to used to talk to me about all this. He told me once that the only time he worried about his little patients regarding measles, mumps, or rubella was when one of them contracted two of them at one time. He said the only adverse outcomes he saw in his nearly 50 years of practice was exactly when they contracted more than one of these at a time.

So, he said he had used the single vaccines as each one came out and separated them by 6 months or more, to alleviate his own fears about those 3 illnesses being introduced to close to one-another. He said when the triple vaccine came out in 72 (MMR)he was livid. His exact words to me were "Who was the Moron who decided to put the exact 3 diseases together in a vaccine that we NEVER want to see together in the wild illnesses. He predicted that MMR was disaster after disaster waiting to happen. He refused to use the MMR ever in his practice and continued with singles at least 6 months apart.

Eventually, he said that undue pressure was being applied for his office to use the triple but he refused. Then he said the insurance companies, with pressure from the manufacturers refused to compensate for singles and would only reimburse for the triple and the singles became almost impossible to get his hands on. He retired instead. He was already considering it and he said that just pushed him over the edge.

When I explained the entire Wakefield affair to him, he laughed and said "not only was he on to something, but it was something I predicted would happen decades ago. Combining any of those three AND the fact that they are all live-virus vaccines is pure stupidity."

Tim

"I think the main reason Wakefield had to be demonized was for suggesting that children should get one vaccine at a time, and that vaccine should be for a single disease."

That is one very significant aspect of the affair - in the UK in 1998 all the components of the vaccines MMR and DPT were available seperately and on the NHS and Andy advocated something within the present policy (indeed he was supporting it). They switched the tables on him because that was not where the industrial plan was heading. It is a very important way of denying choice by bunching products together (even before you get to mandates which we don't have in the UK).

But I believe an even bigger reason for taking Wakefield out was that he was prepared to give the parents an honest hearing and that was something which could never be allowed to happen. In the UK doctors like Waney Squier face professional destruction for listening to parents about potential vaccine injury: evidence which would be perfectly acceptable in US courts. We do things differently in the UK. In the US there are doctors who can still help over vaccine injury. In the UK the policy enforced by the GMC is that it is only theoretical possibility but doesn't ever happen. Anyone who diagnoses vaccine injury is in deep doo-doo.

I think the main reason Wakefield had to be demonized was for suggesting that children should get one vaccine at a time, and that vaccine should be for a single disease. This strictly limits pharma profits: the most they could make per child through the age of 5 would be 31 doses, compared to the 49 the CDC currently recommends. Devastating -- and also hard to get parents to come in every two months, so compliance/uptake would be much lower.

So Vaxxed makes the same suggestion: one disease at a time, spaced out. Devastating to pharma.

The CDC lying they can just ignore as they have all along, and do their best to see it die out: that's been working for them. That vaccines cause autism in some kids they have their talking points.

But limiting the rate at which shots are given: that can't be allowed to reach the public.

This is probably one of the reasons they are working hard to defeat Trump.

DeNiro against the mob. This should be good.

More good discussion:

http://www.jeffereyjaxen.com/blog/watch-investigative-journalist-sharyl-attkisson-destroys-offit-hollywood-reporter-in-a-few-simple-tweets

Sharyl Attkisson on Imus discusses Vaxxed, De Niro, Congress:

https://audioboom.com/boos/4430948-sharyl-attkisson/embed/v4?image_option=full&link_color=%2355ACEE&source=twitter_card&utm_campaign=detailpage&utm_content=card&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&autoplay=1&auto_play=true

I hope that link works (it's currently on top of her twitter feed).

She mentions that she's hearing that leadership is shutting down attempts by members to hold hearings on topics like calling William Thompson.

Great points, Dan!

This week Amy Goodman and Thom Hartmann called out the corporate media for not covering the Democracy Spring. I would like to know where the progressive media is on this issue.

Thompson is to Dr Wakefield, what Chelsea Manning is to Julian Assange, what Edward Snowden is to Glen Greenwald.

Where are these guys?!!! HELP US PLEASE!!!

A truly elegant piece, thanks Dan Olmsted.

I think that Robert De Niro could very well be reading all of the debates here. After all he may (has) have found himself between a rock and a hard place. If one one spends much of one's own time and effort to promoting something like the Tribeca Film Festival one doesn’t want to see it mired with bad publicity. So, I hate to say it but I think I would have made the very same decision -if I had been standing in his shoes. There is a lot of wisdom in the saying that He who fights and runs away, may live to fight another day as dead heroes can't achieve anything no more. He must have become aware -if he reads AoA that the Listserv terribles have now got him on their watch-list (oh horror and dread). Ready to phone him or his publicity agent or anyone else, that they think they may be able to put pressure on. However, having an autistic son himself and having now experience what it is like to be on the receiving end, of what his fellows have suffered like Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey. Those cog -wheels must be turning inside his head. No parent, that sees though the fog-of-greed will sit back for long.