Register to Listen to the February 27 - 28 Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices
Measles, Vaccination and Failure

Heidi Larson Calls For Vaccine Criticism To Be Prosecuted As Hate Crime

 

ReallyBy John Stone

Heidi Larson, the director of Vaccine Confidence Project, was seen and heard on the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire Show on Friday morning. Here is an extract:

HL: Well, I think the main thing is there most incredibly extensive safety around vaccines - the processes that go around vaccines,  the reasons there is quite a while between when vaccines are developed and when children actually get them is because the system has become more and more and more robust around safety. Frankly, partly because of the public cry  for this,  but it has always been that way from a safety perspective because the government frankly is accountaH larsenble and if it is recommending and requiring in some senses these vaccines in some senses it is not in the interest of the governments or the producer to be recommending something which is going to cause any damage. 

 VD: Should Facebook  take these private groups down?
 
HL: I think the issue with Facebook is a difficult one because on the one hand they are asked not to dig into  people's personal areas and on the other hand being asked to go and take things down so I think from a Facebook perspective its difficult to do that. From a public health perspective as we saw in the letter from Andrew Schifft (sic) to Mark Zuckerberg that this is something in the league of like hate crime....

Of course, it is hard to know where to begin. Heidi may pronounce herself satisfied with vaccine technology but frankly she is just emoting - and she has no right to take the matter out of the public's hands. To the best of my knowledge since I have been involved in these matters, the only attempts I have seen to reassure the public have been socially repressive. Obviously, we are in a situation of accelerating unpleasantness with every last measles case being hyped as if it was Ebola. But as readers will be aware when I quizzed the UK's outgoing Chief Medical Officer about the evidence basis for MMR safety she came out only with generalities and only named the very weak Luke Taylor "meta-analysis" for the safety of the products. Dame Sally could not cite pre-marketing trials against placebo (or any pre-marketing trials at all), she could only cite a paper published 26 years after the products were introduced in the U.K. 1988, while the earliest of the papers reviewed in it was published no earlier than 2002. It may be that this is what Larson had in mind: that before the public concern there had been no proper studies, and then there were the studies our governments did produce when they were in a corner - and these studies were anything but "more and more and more  robust".  As I wrote to Dame Sally:

Regarding the meta-review by Taylor 'Vaccines are not associated with autism' [5] which you cited I note that there are just six MMR related studies included all of which have major problems. Three of the studies show apparent protective effect of MMR vaccines against autism (Madsen 8% [6], Smeeth 14% or 22% [7] and Mrozek-Budzyn 83%!!! [8]) which suggests bias. Of the Madsen paper Cochrane 2005 warned [9]:

"The follow up of diagnostic records ends one year (31 Dec 1999) after the last day of admission to the cohort. Because of the length of time from birth to diagnosis, it becomes increasingly unlikely that those born later in the cohort could have a diagnosis"

It remains troubling that as with a number of studies from this Danish group the co-ordinator on behalf of US Centers for Diseases Control, Poul Thorsen, is wanted for financial fraud from the CDC, though not extradited to the US now after nearly 8 years [10].

Of the De Stefano paper Cochrane commented [9]:

“The conclusion, however, implied bias in the enrollment of cases which may not be representative of the rest of the autistic population of the city of Atlanta, USA where the study was set.”

And indeed in 2014 the paper was repudiated by one of the leading authors, William Thompson [11]:

“I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.”

The study by Smeeth [7] is compromised by its patchy data source, the General Practice Research Database where the autism rate represented is perhaps only one tenth of cases diagnosed [12]. Cochrane commented [9]:

“In the GPRD - based studies (Black 2003; Smeeth 2004) the precise nature of controlled unexposed to MMR and their generalisability was impossible to determine…”

It remains problematic whether the unvaccinated in this study were genuinely unvaccinated.

Of the Uchiyama study [13] Cochrane commented [14]:

“The cohort study of Uchiyama 2007 was potentially affected by a different type of bias, considering that the participants were from a private clinic and that definitions of applied Autistic Spectrum Disorders (ASD) diagnosis and of methods used for ASD regression ascertainment were not clearly reported.”

And the Uno study [15] will suffer from similar issues since the cases came from the same clinic. Moreover, in both instances the studies were far too small (904 persons and 413) to necessarily provide any clear result even if they had been better controlled.

All of this is not my fault, all I want is for government policy to be based on genuinely robust science, not aggressive public relations. If Larson really wants to talk about science she and the Vaccine Confidence Project need to address the failure of the HHS HRSA to monitor the safety of vaccines under the terms of the Vaccine Injury act for more than 30 years as exposed by Robert F Kennedy jr, Dr Zimmerman's affidavit about the suppression of evidence at Omnibus hearings, Del Bigtree's letter to the HHS HRSA covering many of these issues by highlighting the fact that no childhood vaccine seems to have been trialed against placebo ever. All this has come to pass in the US, but it is no less relevant to the British public. It cannot lead to trust if all the Vaccine Confidence Project want to do is intimidate people into silence. No scientific matter is ever closed, and particularly not this one. Meanwhile, our child population drowns in neurological impairment and chronic disease, and our health officials just shrug.

I do not know where "hate crime" comes in,  except that if you do not belong to the true religion in any respect you are likely to be excoriated, publicly humiliated like Lottie Daley, the token "anti-vaxxer", in the Derbyshire program. Daley had to face the scorn of her interviewer, but there is no evidence that Derbyshire knew anything about the topic beyond say a five minute briefing. Although it was mentioned that Dr Larson was an "anthropologist" is was not mentioned that she was not a medical doctor, and therefore not professionally accountable.

In a letter to the British Medical Journal earlier this month Elizabeth Hart noted in regard to an earlier BBC Programme:

Heidi Larson, an anthropologist and professor at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, is the Director of the Vaccine Confidence Project [5], although this is not acknowledged in the NY Times article cited by Janice Hopkins Tanne.

In September last year, the co-director of the Vaccine Confidence Project, Dr Pauline Paterson, was given a platform on the biased BBC Newsnight program 'Why the anti-vaccination movement is wrong'.

It was not disclosed on the BBC Newsnight program that the vaccine industry provides funding for the Vaccine Confidence Project. Other organisations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a foremost promoter of vaccine products [6], have also provided funding. Like BBC Newsnight, the NY Times also fails to disclose the conflicts of interest of the Vaccine Confidence Project in its 'anti-vaxxer' article. Similarly, the Nature journal fails to inform readers of Heidi Larson's and the Vaccine Confidence Project's conflicts of interest in her article 'The biggest pandemic risk? Viral misinformation'[7], referred to in the NY Times article.

I complained to the BBC that its editorial policy and standards had been breached in not disclosing conflicts of interest, and that the Vaccine Confidence Project was not clearly transparent about its funding sources on its website. I received a response from Adam Cumiskey, Newsnight's Chief Programme Producer. He did not accept the BBC had breached its policy or standards but acknowledged that, since the Vaccine Confidence Project began, its research team has received funding from a range of organisations including vaccine manufacturers GlaxoSmithKline and Merck, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, 3ie, Innovative Medicines Initiative and others.[8] In my view, this conflict of interest information should have been clearly disclosed during the BBC Newsnight program...

  1. As noted on the Vaccine Confidence Project 'About' webpage, listing the Research Team: https://www.vaccineconfidence.org/about/
    6. Bill and Melinda Gates pledge $10 billion in Call for Decade of Vaccines. (Undated press release on the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation website.) Also see news report on Nature: Ten billion dollars pledged for 'decade of vaccines', 29 January 2010: https://www.nature.com/news/2010/100129/full/news.2010.44.html
    7. Heidi J. Larson. The biggest pandemic risk? Viral misinformation. Nature. World View. 16 October 2018.
    8. Email from Adam Cumiskey, BBC Newsnight to Elizabeth Hart, 17 January 2019.

to which I added:

Elizabeth Hart [1] might also note that Heidi Larson , director of the Vaccine Confidence Project published as personal conflicts in May 2016 in BMJ Opinion [2]:

"Competing Interests: Heidi Larson serves on the Merck Vaccines Global Strategy Advisory Board and is a consultant to GSK on vaccine confidence"

It stands to reason that Merck and GSK would wish to enhance confidence in their products. I have never doubted it.

[1] Elizabeth Hart, 'Pharma-led chorus dominates the public debate on vaccination', 6 February 2019,
https://www.bmj.com/content/364/bmj.l312/rr-6

[2] Larson et al, 'Vaccine crisis in China—act now to rebuild confidence' BMJ Opinion 16 May 2016, https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2016/05/16/heidi-larson-et-al-vaccine-crisis-in-china-act-now-to-rebuild-confidence/

to which I added:

Elizabeth Hart [1] might also note that Heidi Larson , director of the Vaccine Confidence Project published as personal conflicts in May 2016 in BMJ Opinion [2]:

"Competing Interests: Heidi Larson serves on the Merck Vaccines Global Strategy Advisory Board and is a consultant to GSK on vaccine confidence"

It stands to reason that Merck and GSK would wish to enhance confidence in their products. I have never doubted it.

[1] Elizabeth Hart, 'Pharma-led chorus dominates the public debate on vaccination', 6 February 2019,
https://www.bmj.com/content/364/bmj.l312/rr-6

[2] Larson et al, 'Vaccine crisis in China—act now to rebuild confidence' BMJ Opinion 16 May 2016, https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2016/05/16/heidi-larson-et-al-vaccine-crisis-in-china-act-now-to-rebuild-confidence/

So, Heidi, after all that, what is the evidence base for MMR safety?

Comments

greyone

Greg,
"That sentiment is best served by ignorance with parents unthinkingly vaccinating their kids feeling they're doing the right thing. Anything that provides fodder for a debate that will likely lead to thinking critically about the issue hurts vaccination. "
Yes, I believe you are right. 100 percent.
But I suspect this U.S. blitz is less to persuade, than to provide political cover for legislators and public health authorities, to power mandatory profits for pharma according to very specific strategies.
It is about power, taken incrementally from the press, physicians, hospitals, parents and patients, and now, ultimately, the power of the public to discuss, discern, and make their own decisions.

Mark Wax

John:
My next post would be to highlight the American ( Heidi) transgressions of murderous proportion. But, I must respect the site's space constraints. Too numerous to codify.

Gary Ogden

David Weiner: A plutocracy is indeed what we have. A government of, by, and for extreme wealth. I learned something interesting today: the Congress actually has power, although they have never exercised it, over the Supreme Court. Article III, Section 2: "In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under Regulations as the Congress shall make." So Congress could regulate them, and they couldn't do a damn thing about it. I'm not holding my breath. If they weren't such a horse's patootie, they might actually do something of benefit to the citizens.

Bill

John Stone: It's a minor point, and I almost hate to make it, but it goes to AoA's credibility. The headline says she "calls for vaccine criticism to be prosecuted as hate crime". That's not really accurate, though. She DID *ask* if they were the same thing, i.e., "hate crime", and "vaccine criticism".
So, really, she did NOT say what the headline says she said.... Did she?.... Otherwise,
KEEP UP the GOOD WORK!

Debbie

Ah, until vaccines are tested for safety against a control group that's using a saline solution in a shot and the other one vaccine, and then those groups will be checked in on every year for about 15 years... expect them to be criticized.

Angus Files

l forget the trial the axe slowly falls on the CDC and all...

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/proposed-federal-budget-slashes-funds-to-epa-cdc-30285

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

The proposal would slash the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) budget by 12%, to $5.6 billion, compared to the 2017 level. Part of this cut would be achieved by moving programmes into other agencies, such as transferring the CDC’s occupational-health activities to the NIH. But other agency programs would see funding levels slashed, including a 43% cut to the agency’s $1.4-billion Public Health Preparedness and Response Program.

Pharma For Prison

MMR RIP

David Weiner

@R Prasad

You stated: "What you [greyone] commented is not only true for Vaccines, but for every major public policy. A few powerful and/or rich and/or influential are trying control the entire population in many different evil forms."

You have succinctly described the modern "democratic" state.

Pete

Another outstanding article by John, we are incredibly fortunate to have such an immense talent on our side.

Susan Welch

Censorship. JB Handley had said, a few days before his FB page disappeared, that he would not be posting anything for a while, but that he would leave the page up.

There were a couple more posts, I believe, before the whole lot disappeared. There have been rumours that FB has deleted it, but certainly no confirmation (that I've seen) of what has really happened.

No doubt we'll find out before too long.

TheAlmightyPill

@Sonja Grear

I agree, it is very disheartening. I have many similar friends. Modern education, however, is just a credential mill designed to select for the most obedient and conforming. It is a formal indoctrination into a set of fixed, axiomatic beliefs disguised as rational inquiry. This is exacerbated by the elevation of modern science to a religion, ie Scientism. Unlike traditional religions, its adherents lack the humility and self awareness of their belief systems. They anoint themselves Gods of rationality, with terrifying consequences.

Censorship

Is anyone else having trouble pulling up JB Handley's Facebook site ?


The blog appears to be intact.
https://jbhandleyblog.com/home/2018/12/6/bannedusatoday

Hans Litten

Posted by: annie | February 19, 2019 at 12:41 AM

Haha . the number of posts that have been blocked here because I didnt know that trick !

Susan Welch

https://anupstreamlife.com/4-ways-to-get-people-to-vaccinate/?fbclid=IwAR1UxkfOVs3q9L2VqGHVPi5iGTu7YrPpehEFX88covdc533hBp5k7_IvBsU

Sonja Grear, this excellent blog may go some way to explain the 'cognitive dissonance' of your colleagues.

John and Elizabeth, thank you both for your amazing research and persistence!

John Stone

Jeannette

You are right to point to the peculiar and evasive language. I am actually not clear from this how much Larson even knows about the topic: it may be easier to be reassuring if - dressed in a little brief authority - you do not know very much.

Morag

Vaccine risk versus benefit deliberations could be called, classified as Hate crime ? Did that just really get said on TV ?
Oh What, Oh dear , Oh really! That's a serious modular training deficiency! right there, that's sticking out like a sore thumb as well !
Where are the paperwork risk assessments?
Desk top studies, based on other desk top studies, statistics evaluations are not risk assessment data ?
wishfull thinking does not meet the scientific integrity threshold ?
Fractured standards of risk assessment ,skills and competencies , causing one heck of a commotion
in the Fire Brigade , Police,and NHS Hospital and community canteens! Get the damn risk assessments ready for inspection!
Silent alarm bells sounded for same in 1922 with great uncle Murdo MacDonald Assisstant Chief Constable for Hamilton . That's UK, not Fennell Ave East, Hamilton ,Ontario, Burlington Fire Dept A big hug and a cuddle for them . They get the job done, for sure!
Colour Blind Firemen are not allowed to be Firemen and Firefighters in the Fire Brigade .
"Oh Really, imagine that!"

ELO [ Electric Light Orchestra ] ALL Over The World You tube " Fit ForPurpose"

annie

Thousands protest in Italy, Poland, and Washington St USA. Nothing is more important than the scientific reality of what gets injected into children! Fu Schiff and fu Larson!!!

I used abbreviations for hope of publishing. Thank you AoA for all you do!!!!!!

Sonja Grear

What scares me most is that more than a few people with above average education have fallen into the "question safety and you are dangerous" camp. Some interactions with former facebook friends, two of whom I was once very close friends with: A man with a PhD in computer science stated in a facebook comment that Andrew Wakefield has the blood of millions on his hands. A guy with a PhD in math from Caltech tried to tear me apart for supporting the Childrens Health Defense (RFK Jr's organization) and told me that children are DYING of measles in Washington. A guy who has a bachelors in Physics personally and viciously tore into my statistics analysis ability after I pointed out the birth rates by age group from the CDC website and asked how it was possible that girls age 15-19 had cut their birthrates by over half from 2006 to 2017 due to "postponing marriage". And someone else gave one of those graphs showing a completely spurious correlation (you can get those if you have 1000 graphs to make a million different pairings), and said that because there is no reason to look closer into the pairing between margarine consumption and divorce rates in Maine, there is no also no reason to look into Gardasil uptake and birth rates. Scary stuff. BTW, I have bachelor's and master's degrees in math and am an associate of the society of actuaries.

Autism Investigated

"Hate crime" in the Jussie Smollett sense.

Kendra Pettengill

Bring it on! I'll hire Bobby Kennedy and maybe we and vaccines could finally get our day in court.

Gary Ogden

Colossal ignorance and perfidy on display here. I fail to understand how and why fascist ideology has captured the Left. Adam Schiff is a very dangerous man, even apart from the vaccine issue, and Heidi Larson is apparently a fan. We must push back against this evil as hard as we can, for it is as evil as anything which happened in the ’30’s and 40’s, or the 16th Century, for that matter.

Elizabeth Hart

John, re your reference to my rapid response in The BMJ relevant to Heidi Larson, and the BBC's lack of disclosure of conflicts of the Vaccine Confidence Project in the BBC Newsnight segment: 'Why the anti-vaccination movement is wrong'.

FYI, please see below the email I forwarded to Mr David Jordan, BBC Director Editorial Policy and Standards; and Mr Ric Bailey BBC Chief Adviser Politics on 17 December 2018. (I am pursuing this matter...)

Mr Jordan and Mr Bailey, conflicts of interest were not properly disclosed by participants in the Newsnight program Why the anti-vaccination movement is wrong. (Clip dated 20 September 2018: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06lmdyq )

I suggest the lack of disclosure of conflicts of interest contravenes the BBC's Editorial Values, e.g. 1.2.1 Trust, 1.2.3. Impartiality, 1.2.6 Serving the Public Interest, 1.2.7 Fairness and 1.2.11 Accountability: https://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/bbc-editorial-values/editorial-values

In the first instance, consider the participation of Dr Pauline Paterson, whose role is to address 'vaccine hesitancy'.

Dr Paterson is a co-director of The Vaccine Confidence Project at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, an organisation which receives funding from the vaccine industry. This conflict of interest should have been clearly disclosed when Dr Paterson was introduced by Emily Maitlis.

While The Vaccine Confidence Project is not clearly transparent about its funding sources on its website, examination of papers authored by Dr Paterson indicate The Vaccine Confidence Project has received funding from vaccine manufacturers including GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Merck[1], both of which companies are manufacturers of measles, mumps and rubella vaccines, and other vaccine products.

It appears GSK has also had high level influence on The Vaccine Confidence Project via the participation of Professor Sir Roy Anderson. In the State of Vaccine Confidence report 2015, Professor Sir Roy Anderson is listed as being on The Vaccine Confidence Project International Advisory Board. (See page attached.) As well as being Professor of Infectious Disease Epidemiology at Imperial College London, Professor Sir Roy Anderson's current bio notes he is also a non-executive director of GSK.[2] (Professor Sir Roy Anderson joined the GSK Board in 2007, and was reported to be seeking re-election in 2017[3] but doesn't appear to be currently listed as a director according to the GSK Board of Directors.[4])

Professor Heidi Larson is the Director of The Vaccine Confidence Project and, along with Dr Paterson, "established a global, internet-based information surveillance system on public concerns about vaccines and vaccination programmes".[5]

The BBC should investigate this 'Big Brother' organisation funded and influenced by the vaccine industry, whose best interests does it serve?

Professor Larson is an anthropologist and Dr Paterson has a PhD in epidemiology. I have seen no evidence that either of these people have expertise in the safety, including interactions and long-term cumulative effects, of the variety of vaccine products on international vaccination schedules. I suggest these people could be more accurately described as being involved in vaccine marketing, e.g. working to ensure compliance to ever-increasing lucrative vaccination schedules, and are not qualified to respond to citizens' concerns about vaccine product safety.

Mr Jordan and Mr Bailey, Dr Pauline Paterson's association with vaccine manufacturers such as GSK and Merck via The Vaccine Confidence Project should have been clearly disclosed during the Newsnight program, and failure to do so contravenes the BBC's Editorial Values.

What steps will be taken to redress this matter?

I look forward to your response.

Elizabeth Hart

References:
1. See for example the disclosures in Pauline Paterson et al. Reasons for non-vaccination: Parental vaccine hesitancy and the childhood influenza vaccination school pilot programme in England. Vaccine. Volume 36, Issue 36, 28 August 2018, Pages 5397-5401.
2. Bio for Professor Sir Roy Anderson, Imperial College London, as downloaded 17 December 2018: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/people/roy.anderson
3. GSK announces Board changes. 19 December 2016: https://us.gsk.com/en-us/media/press-releases/2016/gsk-announces-board-changes/
4. GSK Board of Directors, as downloaded 17 December 2018: https://www.gsk.com/en-gb/about-us/board-of-directors/
5. https://www.vaccineconfidence.org/about/#team as downloaded 17 December 2018

Angus Files

vaccination the only forced,coerced, pseudo-miracle that nobody wants.
When does no means NO! depends whats being refused by the looks OFFIT.

Pharma For Prison

MMR RIP

R Prasad

@greyone

What you commented is not only true for Vaccines, but for every major public policy. A few powerful and/or rich and/or influential are trying control the entire population in many different evil forms.

R Prasad

What next?

Labeling Non-GMO is a “hate crime”, and people mustn’t question dastardly and deadly consequences of GMO foods and must buy and eat them. Otherwise, you will be prosecuted for “hate crime” against GMO Foods, their makers and their PROFITS.

Also, people who buy Organic only foods should be prosecuted for discriminating against Pesticide ridden, Genetically modified and disease causing chemical foods. That’d be also a “hate crime”.

Shelley Tzorfas

Let's just pretend for a moment that lay people know what they are getting into. They are getting Aluminum, thimerosal/mercury, cancer prompting Formaldehyde, anaphylactic reactions from peanut oils, aborted human fetal cell DNA that is 60 years old and therefore capable of causing cancer, cells from pigs dogs rats monkeys cows insects, MSG ether chemicals related to moth balls, antifreeze ether polysorbate 20 and 80, antibiotics, yeast and other toxic substances in the so called name of health?Check...

Jeannette Bishop

I never did bring myself to get into the Offit and DeStefano word salad over the weekend, and now I'm stuck on the first paragraph quoting her here...

She says vaccines "have extensive safety around them"(?) partly because of public "cry" for this, so shut down the crying and let the "public" rest assured because whatever of the government interests "in some senses" that promote safety will still be there?

I'm thinking I'm just going to have to assume she just recommended to do your best to get around them (vaccines, that it), because the system is so well practiced at getting around responsibility for their "safety."

cia parker

I wish that all Western countries (and others) had freedom of speech and of the press guaranteed in their constitutions as we do. It would make it a lot harder for these abuses to take place. What happened to : "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it!"

Angus Files

So, Heidi, after all that, what is the evidence base for MMR safety?

Wonder what nugget the pathological liar can come up with that will convince one of us on here never mind all...they are certainly rattled and the rush to shut us all down for even thinking about vaccines and safety...Orwell would have been adding a few chapters or volume two..

Pharma For Prison

MMR RIP

annie

As one of the front-men for impeachment, it's no coincidence that Schiff is being used to promote vaccine safety science censorship. Aligning vaccine safety and efficacy discussions with all things "anti left-wing" is Phama's modus operandi . From "science" marches concerning climate change bearing vaccine injury denialists tag-alongs, to Pan maligning medical exemptions with white privilege, this is quickly becoming Pharma's "oldest trick". Meanwhile you have the actual real time example of Inslee declaring a state of emergency over a Brady Bunch episode at the same time Trump does the same over people seeking refuge. Are Washington parents going to be able to take Inslee to court for the same garbage premise? Afterall, we are talking about taking people's rights away? My guess is no. No corporate media outlet will report that obvious parallel. And as far as Hotez's (now Larson's) garbage attempts to call the victims of vaccine violence the purveyors of hate crimes, TMR's Crush crushes it:

https://thinkingmomsrevolution.com/im-not-afraid-measles-im-afraid-hatred/?fbclid=IwAR2GXEMgjvCh-PGjyMX9tsE5VbWh3orgd0XXML_xmz-cmvlRG4WlmGOhBIw

Any ethical person can plainly see who the real victims are!

Hans Litten

Posted by: John Stone | February 18, 2019 at 11:00 AM

The damaged children are literally everywhere now.
Go to the playgrounds, or the zoo's or the amusement parks like I did this weekend.
And you will see it there ! The children are being literally being chemically whacked to pieces and most people do not even know its occurring.

Shame on you Heidi and your safety lies ! You know the situation full well.

Let them lock down the internet, Let them criminalise "vaccine hate speech" for I truly do hate and fear all vaccination. I am fairly sure these moves should they make them are their death knell.

The tipping point is close now. Maybe the mumps trial or the Gardasil trial could be it.
When the vaccine program collapse comes, be sure to redouble all efforts to finish this off once and for all. And then the trials shall begin. Retribution will be ours.

John Stone

Jenny

Yes, and she states also “it is not in the interests of governments or producer recommending something which is going to cause damage”. In the case of “the producer” this is far from clear: not only do they have indemnity in the US and a captive market, they have very effective systems of denial - so they don’t much care. In the U.K. public access to the courts is effectively blocked by the politicised Legal Aid Agency, so pharma don’t fear really and the situation is no doubt similar in most other countries where the governments have been bought out. Of course, it is not in the interest of the deep state to recognise damage because apart from anything there is so much damage. And then of course there is the risk of being snarled at by Victoria Derbyshire.

But in what Goneril in King Lear calls “a wholesome weal” any government of integrity would recognise with horror what has happened and realise that it is humanly, economically unsustainable and must stop.

Greg
The US fell off this precipice before, with McCarthyism. Politicians now braying about "antivaxxers", selling fear and hate, leading into darkness. A push for control of social media, group blocks on twitter in US and Canada, and controlling the Facebook content in US and Great Britain. "Protecting" the public with jackboots, and pharma with golden gloves.

But greyone, you know what is the true irony of these incendiary remarks, calls for censorship, and hysteria about measles? They're likely to hurt the vaccination sentiment. That sentiment is best served by ignorance with parents unthinkingly vaccinating their kids feeling they're doing the right thing. Anything that provides fodder for a debate that will likely lead to thinking critically about the issue hurts vaccination. A recent study showed this, with parents being more likely to refuse vaccine and even after they were given provaccine information.


https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/pro-vaccine-messages-actually-backfire-study-finds-n41611

John Stone

Mark

I think all nations are subject to these hideous paroxysms from time to time though unfortunately it seems to have taken on global aspect now. Heidi, herself, btw is American and holds chairs not only at London School of Hygeine and Tropical Medicine but also University of Washington, Department of Global Health:

https://globalhealth.washington.edu/faculty/heidi-larson

(Access denied)

Jenny Allan

From Heidi Larson's statement above:-"The system has become more and more and more robust around safety. Frankly, partly because of the public cry for this, but it has always been that way from a safety perspective because the government frankly is accountable "

The first statement is an outright lie; the second is the truth.
It's time for our Governments to accept proper accountability for the neurological and other damage caused to our young people from vaccines.

Mark Wax

Ah yes, Great Britain. The folks that burned people at the stake for "heresy."

If we had lived in the sixteenth century, we must have been very religiously versatile in order to survive. And because of the unbreakable integration of religion and politics, this was never really possible. With each monarch, or new political situation, came different laws on what was heretical and what was not. A heretic under Henry VIII in 1520 would be praised from 1534 (H VIII – Act of Supremacy), burnt from 1539 (H VIII – Act of Six Articles), secure from 1547 (Edward VI), one of Bloody Mary’s victims from 1553, and favored from 1558 (Eliz. I). As explored, Catholics were not always safer than Protestants, either. It appears it was safest to remain loyal to the King/Queen before the Church in such a temperamental religious climate in sixteenth-century Tudor England.

In England, the burning of heretics ended in 1612 with the death of Edward Wightman; the country’s last execution for heresy (by hanging) occurred in 1697.

Yes, Heidi Larson longs for the good old days. She is a sycophant of the worst kind.

greyone

The US fell off this precipice before, with McCarthyism.
Politicians now braying about "antivaxxers", selling fear and hate, leading into darkness.
A push for control of social media, group blocks on twitter in US and Canada, and controlling the Facebook content in US and Great Britain.
"Protecting" the public with jackboots, and pharma with golden gloves.


Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
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.

Working...

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.)