Dateline NBC on Dr Wakefield and the possibility of connection between MMR vaccines and autism

[Guest guest]

I just watched this, and here are some of my observations just on

this one show:

In the first segment, Matt Lauer suggests that it's a monumentally

bad thing for Dr. Wakefield to say that it might be a good

idea to give separate vaccines spaced out over time rather than all

three vaccines at once in the MMR.

The reporter Deer states that at some point, Dr Wakefield was

paid less than one million US dollars for his expertise, so that's

automatically a conflict of interest and he should be completely

discredited. Later, we are told that a vaccine supporter, Dr

Offit, has made millions (look it up; it made him rich) on Rotateq

vaccine, but only one very light question about whether that might be

seen as a conflict of interest.

Deer says " the idea that Wakefield is right, to me, is

inconceivable. There is no possibility that Wakefield is going

to be vindicated. " Doesn't that seem like a strange statement for a

reporter to make? And I would like to see where Deer's

paychecks are coming from.

Dr Offit states that Dr Wakefield has done a " tremendous amount of

harm " . No explanation of what this harm is.

The piece mentioned outbreaks of whooping cough and measles, but does

not say whether these outbreaks were in vaccinated or unvaccinated

children. Read up on it; there are many outbreaks of these " vaccine-

preventable " diseases in fully-vaccinated populations, and lots of

scholarly discussion about vaccine failures.

The American Academy of Pediatrics says " vaccines do not cause

autism " . How can they know this when nobody knows what DOES cause

autism?

In contrast, Dr Wakefield says " I don't know whether vaccines cause

autism. I know that it's a legitimate question that needs to be

asked, and I'm not going to walk away from it. "

There sure are plenty of corporations trying to make sure that he

can't ask the question.

[Guest guest]

The vaccine industry has serious problems with their science or lack there of.

None of the studies they've ever done answer the fundamental questions of safety

or effectiveness, at least from a scientific perspective.

Such a study would require a fully vaccinated and un-vaccinated group. Then

watch both groups over time for vaccine effectiveness and safety. Believe it or

not this study has never been done. The National Vaccine Information Center is

actually working to get the CDC to fund this exact study.

The other major problem is that the group that makes vaccine doing

recommendations and the group that ensures that those recommendations are safe

is the SAME GROUP!

This would be like if the group that prepared corporate financial statements was

the same group that made sure they weren't fraudulent.

Even worse some of the people in this group hold patents on the vaccines they

are simultaneously recommending and regulating.

--

>

> I just watched this, and here are some of my observations just on

> this one show:

>

> In the first segment, Matt Lauer suggests that it's a monumentally

> bad thing for Dr. Wakefield to say that it might be a good

> idea to give separate vaccines spaced out over time rather than all

> three vaccines at once in the MMR.

>

> The reporter Deer states that at some point, Dr Wakefield was

> paid less than one million US dollars for his expertise, so that's

> automatically a conflict of interest and he should be completely

> discredited. Later, we are told that a vaccine supporter, Dr

> Offit, has made millions (look it up; it made him rich) on Rotateq

> vaccine, but only one very light question about whether that might be

> seen as a conflict of interest.

>

> Deer says " the idea that Wakefield is right, to me, is

> inconceivable. There is no possibility that Wakefield is going

> to be vindicated. " Doesn't that seem like a strange statement for a

> reporter to make? And I would like to see where Deer's

> paychecks are coming from.

>

> Dr Offit states that Dr Wakefield has done a " tremendous amount of

> harm " . No explanation of what this harm is.

>

> The piece mentioned outbreaks of whooping cough and measles, but does

> not say whether these outbreaks were in vaccinated or unvaccinated

> children. Read up on it; there are many outbreaks of these " vaccine-

> preventable " diseases in fully-vaccinated populations, and lots of

> scholarly discussion about vaccine failures.

>

> The American Academy of Pediatrics says " vaccines do not cause

> autism " . How can they know this when nobody knows what DOES cause

> autism?

>

> In contrast, Dr Wakefield says " I don't know whether vaccines cause

> autism. I know that it's a legitimate question that needs to be

> asked, and I'm not going to walk away from it. "

>

> There sure are plenty of corporations trying to make sure that he

> can't ask the question.

>

>

>

>