Time magazine used to report on issues with an unbiased perspective, but it seems they have been bought out by the American Medical Association, as well as others touting the benefits of immunizations, without truly revealing the negative side of vaccines. Now, things have shifted a bit in an exposé by Alice Park, titled “Whistleblower Claims CDC Covered Up Data Showing Vaccine-Autism Link” . Without intentionally doing so, the article, in one brief sentence, blows another hole in the 2004 study that whistleblower William Thompson exposed as a fraud.
Thompson issued a mea culpa statement to the mainstream press this past August, but with a little ‘oops,’’ Time magazine has revealed that the entire study is based on a lie.
Following is the sentence-fragment from the Time Magazine article:
“Now one of the authors of a 2004 study that found similar vaccination rates among children with and without autism…”
It’s tricky to spot it, since it goes by so fast while you are reading it, but allow me to explain.
When considering standard medical research demonstrating that children with and without autism have similar vaccine rates, we can come to one conclusion – vaccines didn’t cause autism. But this is an erroneous assumption, even though many children who were vaccinated didn’t develop autism.
Suppose; however, that you proved a virus in the bodies of 1000 children caused actual illness in only 160. Would you then say the virus couldn’t be the cause of illness, because some children didn’t get sick?
If you were a conventional researcher, this would be ludicrous. You’d be fired from any decent lab or medical university. You would obviously conclude, “Most children didn’t fall ill. But for those that did, the virus was the cause.”
If you were to apply this logic to vaccines, you might deduce that the many children who get a measles/mumps/rubella vaccine remain healthy, but for those that become sick – it is assuredly the vaccine which caused the illness. Vaccine researchers never say this, though. If they did, they wouldn’t be able to continue ‘testing,’ marketing, and promoting vaccines.
If we put it another way, 1000 children are vaccinated. Using a common medical parlance phrase – they had ‘similar rates of vaccination.’ Some of these children will develop autism and some will not. But if we were to believe the promoters of vaccinations, then we would believe them when they say that, “Therefore, vaccination couldn’t be the cause of autism.” Even if a thousand children have a particular virus in their bodies – some times the virus will cause them to be sick, and sometimes it will not.
This is common, and with kids (and even adults) harnessing stronger immune systems, they can fight pathogens without getting ill even when the pathogens reside in their bodies. However, you could not accurately proclaim that the virus being carried didn’t cause the flu, for example. Your body couldn’t fight the pathogen if indeed the virus was present and you got sick, which caused the flu illness.
A doctor could be asked this line of questions incredulously, by a thinking public concerning vaccines:
“The children who did get the flu—the virus was the cause?”
“But in the case of the vaccine, you didn’t say that.”
“A virus isn’t the same thing as a vaccine. In the case of the virus, we already know it causes the flu.”
“No, Dr. So and So, you don’t know that. Not by the standard you’re applying to vaccines. If 1000 children are vaccinated, and only some of them develop autism, you say the vaccine couldn’t cause autism, but—“
“I have to run. I’m late for a meeting at the CDC, and I have a golf game to catch. I’m meeting the CEO of a big pharmaceutical company that makes vaccines.”
So we now understand the following:
Researchers conveniently assume that autism is one condition with one and only one cause in all cases, but no conclusive evidence proves this. If it were so, it would be presented in multiple peer reviewed scientific journals, and it hasn’t been – because it simply isn’t so. You would be able to take a blood, urine, or a brain scan and know if someone was going to get autism, but that simply isn’t the case. There is currently no definitive diagnostic test, because autism is likely caused by environmental factors, as well as the interaction of vaccines on a compromised immune system in a young person.
The 2004 study that CDC whistleblower William Thompson confessed to falsifying—and thousands of other such studies—are all based on the identical propaganda.
However, these lies are spread over and over again, based on absolutely no scientific precedence. Medical ‘experts’ look in the faces of vaccine-damaged children, who have been injected with germs, adjuvants, and toxic chemicals and laugh or look the other way.
This article isn’t necessarily meant to prove that vaccines cause autism, but rather to reveal the potential connection between the two.
Let’s hope more real ‘whistelblowers’ on austim and its true potential causes come to the surface.