Professor Christopher Exley in January 2018 on the "Deafening Response" to his Aluminium in Brain Tissue in Autism Paper
Rebuttal to Ocala (Florida) Newspaper Vaccine Op-Ed from Dr. William Gaunt

Scurrilous, Misleading Attack On Prof Christopher Exley By The Sunday Times

image from www.keele.ac.ukby John Stone

An attack on leading aluminium toxicity expert Christopher Exley in the Sunday Times yesterday begins with the false claim in the title that his funding has been halted. This seems like a blatant attempt to mislead: what was halted the week before last after political pressure was a Go Fund Me page for supporting his research, while the Keele University website has remained open for donations. Another false claim is that there were no controls for his autism brain study. While there were no "normal" brains in the study there were comparisons:

"The aluminium content of brain tissues from donors with a diagnosis of ASD was extremely high (Table 1). While there was significant inter-tissue, inter-lobe and inter-subject variability the mean aluminium content for each lobe across all 5 individuals was towards the higher end of all previous (historical) measurements of brain aluminium content, including iatrogenic disorders such as dialysis encephalopathy [13][15][16][17][18][19]. All 4 male donors had significantly higher concentrations of brain aluminium than the single female donor. We recorded some of the highest values for brain aluminium content ever measured in healthy or diseased tissues in these male ASD donors including values of 17.10, 18.57 and 22.11 μg/g dry wt. (Table 1). What discriminates these data from other analyses of brain aluminium in other diseases is the age of the ASD donors. Why, for example would a 15 year old boy have such a high content of aluminium in their brain tissues? There are no comparative data in the scientific literature, the closest being similarly high data for a 42 year old male with familial Alzheimer’s disease (fAD) [19]."

Professional concerns about the use of aluminium adjuvants in vaccine products are by no means unique to Prof Exley and colleagues.

The professional attack in the report is led by Andrew Pollard who is said to be a professor of "paediatric infection": it does not mention Pollard's manifold roles as leader of Oxford Vaccine Group, which develops vaccines with the industry (mostly containing aluminium), as chair of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation which recommends vaccines to the British schedule, as leading adviser to the British and European licensing agencies, and board member of the Jenner Vaccine Foundation. In July 2017 he also called in the Guardian newspaper for compulsory vaccination without disclosing any of these roles. Real investigative journalists might be asking what research Pollard has ever undertaken into the safety of aluminium adjuvants in vaccine products which he helps develop, recommend and license?

John Stone is British editor of Age of Autism

Comments

Jenny Allan

URGENT EMAIL FROM CHRIS EXLEY - HIS UNIVERSITY HAVE SUSPENDED HIS RESEARCH DONATIONS PORTAL
''I want to bring you up to date with some recent developments.
The first is that someone in the highest level of management at Keele ordered the disabling of my donations link without any prior notice to me.
While this action has already been shown to be an error on their behalf they have refused to address this issue before 'next week'.
In the meantime please pass on this information to all potential donors and be informed that I will be back in touch once a new donations portal is available.
Thank you for your patience.
Many of you will have seen the article about me in The Sunday Times. In spite of the fact that the 'journalists' concerned were in possession of all the facts they chose to write only lies.
The names of these liars are; Shanti Das (shanti.das@sunday-times.co.uk) and Jonathan Leake (jleake@sunday-times.co.uk), do feel free to ask them about their article.
I have written to the two 'scientists' quoted in the article, I have copied my emails to them below;
Good Morning Dr Pollard, andrew.pollard@paediatrics.ox.ac.uk
You are quoted in an article in the Sunday Times yesterday as saying that some of the research coming from my group was 'unusable' and 'bad science'.
It would be helpful to us if you could tell us which research you are referring to. Which aspects of the research are unusable and which are bad science."
Thank you
Prof Christopher Exley
https://estore.keele.ac.uk/product-catalogue/faculty-of-natural-sciences/school-of-life-sciences/aluminium-and-silcon-research-group-donations
I've checked the Keele Silicon and Aluminium research link and it is indeed presently disabled. This is apparently a response to the Sunday Times Article.

From the Times article (Quote):-
"Arne Akbar president of the British Society for Immunology …said the fact Exley received money from an anti-vaccine group represented a ‘total conflict of interest’

I am NOT anti-vaccine and do not belong to any so called anti-vaccine 'group'. I make no apologies for campaigning for vaccines to be effective and as safe as possible. This seems to bother those persons and corporations which benefit both personally and financially from the sale of vaccines. The profits are enormous.

Patricia

to me there seems only one way to fight this Murdoch Pharma battle and that is as a United front of Like minded Scientists and Doctors. i know that Exley and Wakefield have met at Conference in Jamaica some years ago. they are both being targeted now.

Amanda Dew

Surely, in science, when an expert in the field, such as Exley is asking for further research to elucidate the potential mechanisms of his original and highly worrying findings, the response should be to find the funds to prove or disprove his belief that aluminium appears to be neurotoxic. This would give more credibility than discrediting him. According to the WHO the only ‘proof’ that aluminium adjuvants are safe is based on algorithms of expected safety levels of ingested aluminium. I know who I would put my faith in. Please support Professor Exley. He is the voice of common sense.

Anna Watson

To support Chris Exley's research at Keele

https://estore.keele.ac.uk/product-catalogue/faculty-of-natural-sciences/school-of-life-sciences

Hans Litten

Posted by: Frederic Chopin | April 08, 2019 at 09:13 AM

Like the controls used in the Gardakil-HCG testing in Denmark ?
Is that what you mean ?

Kyles mom

1) Who makes money selling the aluminum
That is in vaccines? Are they another silent lobbyist here.
2) google horse vaccine adverse reactions
3) google sheep aluminum adverse reacrion
Livestock more valuable than human children
Finally clearly one reason for the 100% mandatory vax coverage is to eliminate control groups. So they cannot have it both ways. But they are happy to paradox us.

George Henderson

The argument that "there were no controls".
Because it is so easy getting brains from healthy young people?
It is very unlikely that the controls used - who were KNOWN TO HAVE VERY HIGH ALUMINIUM LEVELS - would give a false result. Think about it.
It's not controversial that aluminium is associated with brain diseases. That's why aluminium pots and pans are so rare today. What is unknown is a range of mechanical detail explaining the correlation with disease, which interventions if any are preventive (Magnesium? Silicon?) and whether the Al in vaccines makes a significant contribution, given that Al is so ubiquitous.

Shelley Tzorfas

It wasn't until the 2000's that I saw case after case of high school kids suddenly dropping dead during some sporting event at school. These kids were uniformly forced to see their pediatricians to get check ups and reviews of excellent health and bring them to school to be able to participate in sports. Their pediatricians knew these kids well most of the time. They saw them regularly at 2, 4, and 6 months. They saw them at 4 or 5 years old, saw them for yearly flu shots, ear infections and other illnesses. They saw them in 5th or 6th grade for Meningitis and HPV shots. Saw them again and again.
Parents MUST ask themselves, "If my child's brain has a lot of Aluminum, should I allow him to play football?" The current idea is that the body cannot break up Aluminum that's been injected, so it travels with white blood cells as outlined in Forrest Maready's books. Others have been studying this and coming up with similar results. Wherever you are injured, the white blood cells travel to and render help. The Aluminum travels with the white blood cells so that if your head is banged, the aluminum travels to the brain. I am not particularly a football fan but I never heard of young men getting Alzheimer's- like symptoms or what is classified today as CTE. Their brains are slip-sliding away.

Gayle DeLong

The article in the Sunday Times reminded me that I wanted to contribute to Dr. Exley's fine work. Thanks, John, for including the link that still works. Thanks to the Sunday Times for the reminder!

Morag

4 Paws ,all claws out, in an attempt to discredit Professor Exley, with the usual chucking about from the gossip mongering sector, with" Yon smelly stuff" getting dropped from a great height !
Are The Planetary Health ,depart-mental dudes , having a group" Herxheimer Reaction ?" at the very thought, that aluminium in vaccines might not be as safe as expected and or indicated, and requires further investigation?
I thought media reporting was meant to be accurate,with unbiased integrity and independent?
Unless they are using "The Comedy Version " of their professional roles and responsibilities , with media standards of Codes of Conduct similar to using;
Rikki , MP, Masterclass Youtube .
I'm sure independent scientists won't put up with that tosh getting chucked around!

Carol

So the idea is that normal brains used as controls would have a higher aluminum content than the 60 elderly brains (39 suffering from dementia) from a previous study? That's more or less ridiculous. Prof. Exley has addressed the control issue:

"We discussed control tissues but the only available were not age-matched and nor were they true controls as the donors were individuals in their 40s and 50s who died of a certain disease or condition. No age-matched healthy donor brain tissues were available. However, we have more data on the Al content of human brain tissue than anyone else and so we are in a position to compare our autism data with other data relating to almost 100 human brains. This is how we can come to our judgement that the values measured were some of the highest values ever measured in any individuals.”

And as Vaccine Papers notes:

"It is acceptable and meaningful to use the elderly subjects in House 2012 as controls. There are two reasons for this:

1) Al brain levels increase with age and

2) Al brain levels are elevated in Alzheimers disease.

The 60 elderly (and mostly demented) subjects therefore must have higher Al brain levels than healthy, younger people. Using the 60 elderly subjects as controls is therefore conservative in that it is biased towards finding lower Al in the autistic subjects. Accordingly, a finding of higher Al in the autistic brains will have heightened validity. In other words, if the autistic brains have elevated Al compared to the mostly demented elderly brains, then we can be extra-confident that the autistic brains have elevated Al levels."


And since when have pharma trolls become so dainty about controls?

annie

RFK Jr’s poignant words:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2308844876029587&id=1797590283821718

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2285620635098006&id=1411189272541151

Frederic Chopin

It wasn't a false claim that there were no controls in his autism brain study. There were no controls in his autism brain study. That's one of the major criticisms of his paper.
It's eerily similar to the Gatti vaccine nanocontamination analysis. AV researchers just don't like controls.

Elizabeth Hart

So the Murdoch media / Sunday Times is at the forefront again in pushing vaccination propaganda...

You're right Bob Moffitt, there are no 'real investigative journalists' now... Instead we're dominated by a corporate media serving its own interests, supported it seems by taxpayer-funded public broadcasters such as Australia's ABC and SBS, and the BBC in the UK.

It is staggering that there is no investigation into the conflicts of interest of the Murdoch Media, e.g. its association with the Murdoch Children's Research Institute in Australia, an organisation which is involved in vaccine development, and which is funded and supported by News Corp and Foxtel.

And remember that it was the Murdoch media in Australia, e.g. tabloids such as the Daily Telegraph etc, which campaigned for mandatory vaccination, with their No Jab, No Play campaign being obligingly adopted by politicians across the political spectrum here, and enacted as the No Jab, No Pay law. Murdoch media influence is calling the shots literally... You couldn't make it up.

We are living in remarkable times with an ever-increasing number of vaccinations/medical interventions being foisted upon the community, without proper 'informed consent'.

There is a massive global network to explore, i.e. Big Pharma (GSK, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi Pasteur, CSL/Seqirus etc), the WHO, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Vaccine Confidence Project, GAVI, CDC, NIH, universities/academics, doctors, shady lobby groups and vaccination committees, the journal industry, and of course the corporate media. We do not have an effective 'fourth estate' to shine a light in dark corners, instead the mainstream media has been co-opted by the vaccine industry, including The Guardian, New York Times, etc, etc...

Most citizens in the general community have no idea how they are being hoodwinked, exploited, and most likely damaged by the gross over-use of lucrative vaccine products.

This is a huge international political scandal in our so-called liberal democracies, and we need transparency and accountability NOW.

KATHRYN BERG

How ironic that there were complaints of no "normal" brains in the study.

Isn't pHARMa the one who won't do true placebos in their "safety" studies?

Insert eyeroll here!

Bob Moffit

"Real investigative journalists might be asking what research Pollard has ever undertaken into the safety of aluminum adjuvants in vaccine products which he helps develop, recommend and license?"

Unfortunately .. there are no "real investigative journalists" in what passes for a "free press" media today. NONE. The few that would dare to ask what research Pollard has ever undertaken into the safety of aluminum soon find themselves marginalized .. their "voices" silenced by corporate media executives or such ..

I suspect "investigative journalism" is NOT TAUGHT in today's journalism schools … it has been replaced by teaching ADVOCACY JOURNALISM .. where journalism students are graded on their acceptance of prevailing narratives .. global warming, vaccines, abortion, whatever the issue and preferred narrative might be … rather than an "investigative journalist" .. a "journalism advocate" is much preferred and far more likely to find employment in mainstream media.

Of what use is a "free press" that voluntarily surrenders that "freedom" in order to maintain one's career opportunities?

Grace Green

Jenny,
Your last point is absolutely right. If parties do things which are not in their own financial interests, and even have a cost to them, then "Someone" must be paying them. We all have a good idea who that might be in this case.

Jenny Allan

I find it puzzling GoFundMe pulled the plug on voluntary donations from those members of the public, who wished to support the research of Professor Exley and his team. GoFundMe takes 15% for their administration costs and commission and this is paid by donors upfront on top of their donation money.

The appeal target was £100,000 ( around $130.000), but the appeal was halted after around £5500 was raised and the money returned to donors. The 15% upfront admin and commission charges were also returned separately. In all GoFundMe lost more than $1000 in commission and would have spent a great deal of time and effort returning donors cash.

GoFundMe is actually a private business, and a very profitable one. Professor Pollard plainly has considerable 'clout' when it comes to allocating public funds for research purposes, but privately raised funds are technically none of his business. I would be interested to know what inducements, if any, were offered to GoFundMe to terminate this appeal. I believe a binding contract was made with Keele University and the money raised legally belongs to them, regardless of how much of it was returned to donors. I did not ask for or want a return of my donation.


Linda1

Thank you for the truth of the this matter. We are witnessing the global rise of fascism.

Jenny Allan

You might be interested in Professor Exley's recent response in the BMJ 4 April 2019:-
https://www.bmj.com/content/365/bmj.l1161/rapid-responses

Rapid Response by Christopher Exley, Scientist, Keele University, UK
Re: Prevalence of cervical disease at age 20 after immunisation with bivalent HPV vaccine at age 12-13 in Scotland: retrospective population study.
Quote:-
"It will be many years before data become available to show whether or not vaccination against HPV has any benefit for cervical cancer above and beyond the tremendous successes achieved by the cervical screening programme. In the interim years we should be using information available not only to look at the possible benefits of vaccination but also to test the safety of vaccination.
I am a scientist and I do not care for 'policy' dressed up as research. The authors have privileged access to human data and it should be used judiciously to cover all aspects of both efficacy AND safety of this vaccine. If the authors are not willing to do this then can I ask them to make their database available to others who will do this."

Thank you Professor Exley. We are here to support you and Keele University in this very valuable research. We too 'do not care for 'policy' dressed up as research.'


Jenny Allan

What particularly angers me is the withholding of funding by the UK and EU Research Funding Councils. The UK taxpayers contribute to these and should have a say. Instead, corporate and political interests, including unelected Members from the Lords Chamber, are calling the shots. There's plenty of Pharma cash getting funnelled into defending vaccines, including press and media campaigns, and research deliberately skewed or misleadingly presented to the public, but almost none into safety research like Professor Exley's.

We should be even angrier since safer alternatives to aluminium and mercury are perfectly feasible. Pharma companies, which have no liabilities for vaccine damage, just can't be bothered with making vaccines safer. It's so much easier to 'shoot the messenger', as happened with Dr Wakefield and the MMR vaccines. Meantime, autism cases continue to rise.

The BBC, which enthusiastically promotes vaccines and 'rubbishes' safety issues, is forgetting its constitutional duty to be impartial. By deliberately broadcasting what amounts to advertising propaganda for the very profitable vaccine manufacturers, they are also breaking the law banning the BBC from deliberate corporate advertising.

If you wish to donate to Professor Exley's research, please use the official Keele University donation link, rather than send the money direct to Professor Exley. That could get him into trouble with the UK tax authorities.

Angus Files

Anyone that speaks and sees the truth silenced, Professor Exley another warrior, willing to put it all on the line for speaking what we ALL think and know is the TRUTH!

Thank you Professor Exley

PHARMA FOR PRISON

MMR RIP

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.)