by Brian Shilhavy
Health Impact News

This past week Representative Bill Posey entered a statement by CDC whistleblower Dr. William Thompson regarding fraud and the CDC MMR vaccine studies into the Congressional record. This should have been headline news, but it was largely ignored and not reported in the mainstream media. Here is the CSPAN coverage and the text of the statement by Dr. William Thompson of the CDC.

My primary job duties while working in the Immunization Safety Branch from 2000 to ’06 were lead or co-lead three major vaccine safety studies—the MADDSP MMR Autism Cases Control study was being carried out in response to the Wakefield Lancet study that suggested an association between the MMR vaccine and an autism-like health outcome. There were several major concerns among scientists and consumer advocates outside the CDC in the fall of 2000 regarding the execution of the Verstraeten study.

One of the important goals that was determined up front in the spring of ’01 before any of these studies started, was to have all three protocols vetted outside the CDC prior to the start of the analyses so that consumer advocates could not claim that we were presenting analyses that presented our own goals and biases. We hypothesized that if we found statistically significant effects at either 18 or 36 month thresholds, we would conclude that vaccinating children early with MMR could lead to autism-like characteristics or features.

We all met and finalized the study protocol and analysis plan. The goal was to not deviate from the analysis plan to avoid the debacle that occurred with the Verstraeten thimerosal study published in Pediatrics in ’03. At the September 5th meeting, we discussed in detail how to code race for both the sample and the birth certificate sample.

At the bottom of Table 7 it also shows that for the non-birth certificate sample, the adjusted race effect statistical significance was huge. All the authors and I met and decided sometime between August and September ’02 not to report any race effects for the paper.

Sometime soon after the meeting, we decided to exclude reporting any race effects, the co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard copy documents that we had thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can. However, because I assumed it was illegal and would violate both FOIA and DOJ requests, I kept hard copies of all documents in my office and I retained all associated computer files. I believe we intentionally withheld controversial findings from the final draft of the Pediatrics paper. (quote from Dr. William Thompson of the CDC)

It has been known since 2014 that Dr. Thompson has turned over many documents to Congressman Posey. Congressman Posey, however, does not chair any of the committees that have the authority to convene a meeting and have Dr. Thompson testify.

Are There Enough Honorable Members of Congress to Act on This Cover-up?


Congressman Dan Burton (now retired) testifying at the last Congressional hearing on autism back in November of 2012. Image from CSPAN.

Now that the fact that the CDC has allegedly committed fraud and attempted to destroy evidence linking the MMR vaccine to autism, will the public become enraged enough to demand that there be a Congressional hearing to investigate this alleged fraud? Will be there enough honorable members of Congress willing to step forward and go against the powerful Pharmaceutical Industry and their incestuous relationship with the CDC to demand a full investigation?

The CDC is the largest purchaser of vaccines from the pharmaceutical companies in the world, buying billions of dollars worth of vaccines each year. (See: CDC’s Purchase of $4 Billion of Vaccines a Conflict of Interest in Overseeing Vaccine Safety.)

Should we trust this agency to oversee vaccine safety?

Also, can the public trust Congress when it comes to vaccine safety? In 1986 the U.S. Congress passed legislation removing all legal liability for injuries and deaths due to vaccines for pharmaceutical companies. These vaccines cannot survive in a free market, and when the lawsuits became too numerous, they blackmailed Congress by threatening to stop making vaccines unless Congress gave them total legal immunity from any harm caused by vaccines. This law has been upheld by the Supreme Court.

Today, if one is injured by a vaccine, they must sue the Federal Government, funded by taxpayer funds, and try to collect funds for damages from the National Vaccine Compensation Program, and a special “Vaccine Court.” (See: GAO Report on Vaccine Court Reveals Vaccine Injured Victims Not Being Helped.)

What does the CDC Whistleblower Know About Vaccine Studies and Fraud?


It has been about a year now since Dr. Thompson’s revelations about the alleged CDC cover-up has gone public. Here is the original video:

Here is Dr. Thompson’s call to Congress, now 1 year old:

Take Action: Tell Congress to Hold Hearings and Subpoena Dr. William Thompson the CDC Whistleblower

Will Congress finally take action?

Dr. Brownstein recently reported that Congressman Jason Chaffetz is going to hold hearings this fall and invite Dr. Thompson to testify, but that he must be subpoenaed in order to tell the truth:

The only way Dr. Thompson’s story will be heard, under oath, is at a Congressional hearing. Congressman Jason Chaffetz is going to hold hearings on this matter this fall and invite Dr. Thompson to testify. It is important that we all contact the Congressional Oversight and Reform Office (reporttoogr@mail.house.gov ) and request that he subpoena Dr. Thompson. Dr. Thompson will not be able to speak freely unless it is under subpoena. Why, you may ask does Dr. Thompson need to be subpoenaed? Because the CDC will not let him speak out without a subpoena.

See: Dr. Brownstein: CDC’s Dr. Thompson Needs to be Subpoenaed to Testify Before Congress

The Autism Action Network has also setup a page to take action and notify your representatives:

Action Alert: CDC Scientist: Records showing MMR/Autism connection destroyed


Medical Doctors Opposed to Forced Vaccinations – Should Their Views be Silenced?


One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all “quacks.”

However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate. Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding “the science” of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines.

The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary.

Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions, and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position of the medical field.

In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position. Many doctors who consider themselves “pro-vaccine,” for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual.

Many doctors recommend a “delayed” vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule. Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot.

These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions.

In this article, I am going to summarize the many doctors today who do not take the most extremist pro-vaccine position, which is probably not held by very many doctors at all, in spite of what the pharmaceutical industry, the federal government, and the mainstream media would like the public to believe.