Time Magazine accidentally reveals greater autism fraud
by Jon Rappoport
September 2, 2014
Time Magazine (8/28) is covering the ongoing CDC whistleblower scandal. (“Whistleblower Claims CDC Covered Up Data Showing Vaccine-Autism Link,” by Alice Park)
In one piece of one sentence, without meaning to, the article blows another hole in the 2004 study that whistleblower William Thompson exposed as a fraud.
A hole beyond what Thompson has admitted to in his public mea culpa statement of August 27th.
What Time Magazine revealed demonstrates that the entire study is based on a lie.
Here is the sentence-fragment from the Time article:
“Now one of the authors of a 2004 study that found similar vaccination rates among children with and without autism…”
There it is. For people who can see it.
According to conventional medical researchers, demonstrating that children with and without autism have similar vaccine rates means: vaccines couldn’t cause autism. Because many children who were vaccinated didn’t develop autism.
But suppose you proved that 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?
Not if you were a conventional researcher. You would say, “Well, of course, most children didn’t fall ill. But for those that did, the virus was the cause.”
Applying this line of thinking to vaccines, you could say, “Well, many children who get the MMR vaccine remain healthy. But for those who fall ill and are diagnosed with autism, the vaccine was the cause.”
Naturally, vaccine researchers don’t say that. If they did, they’d never work again.
“So, Dr. X, you’re saying that 1000 children were vaccinated. They all had ‘similar rates’ of vaccination.”
“Yes, correct.”
“And some of these children developed autism, and some didn’t.”
“That’s right.”
“Therefore, vaccination couldn’t be the cause of autism.”
“Correct.”
Let’s consider this situation: A thousand children have a particular virus in their bodies.”
“Sure. All right.”
“Some of those children go on to develop the flu, and some don’t.”
“Yes, that would be a standard situation.”
“Therefore, you’d say the virus couldn’t have caused the flu, because some children didn’t get the flu.”
“No, I wouldn’t say that at all.”
“What would you say?”
“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. X, you don’t know that. Not by the standard you’re applying to vaccines. Let’s review. If 1000 children are vaccinated, and only some of them develop autism, you say the vaccine couldn’t cause autism, but—“
“I have to go now. I’m late for a meeting at the CDC, where we’re writing up our millionth press release claiming vaccines are perfectly safe.”
It gets much, much worse. Here is the crux:
Researchers conveniently assume that autism is one condition with one and only one cause in all cases.
But there is no conclusive evidence, after all these years, that autism is a single condition. If such evidence existed, you would see it presented, front and center, in the definition of autism, contained the in the psychiatric bible of mental disorders, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM).
The evidence would appear in the form of a physical diagnostic test for autism. A blood test, or a brain scan, or a genetic assay.
There is no such definitive test. It isn’t there.
Instead, autism is entirely defined by a cluster of behaviors.
There is a reason for that.
There is no defining diagnostic test.
Therefore, saying autism is a single physical condition is belief and opinion and surmise and “could-be” and “everybody knows”, fabricated as fact.
Therefore, saying “autism” has one cause is also an opinion fabricated as fact.
Therefore, saying that vaccines don’t cause “autism” is meaningless—because the label “autism” doesn’t refer to a specific defined condition.
However, saying vaccines cause damage is true.
Use this label or that label to name the grave damage—the labels don’t matter.
Except to the devious game players who invent the labels and thereby exonerate vaccines.
The 2004 study that CDC whistleblower William Thompson confessed to falsifying—and thousands of other such studies—are all based on the same fundamental fraud.
In a sane world, as opposed to the lunatic world of disease research, you would only declare you’ve found a single condition if you could put forward an accurate physical test for it.
That test would, for every patient examined, show whether he had the condition. Yes or no.
Assuming you could do these things, you could then and only then try to rule out vaccines as the cause of the condition.
Until then, you would remain silent. You wouldn’t construct devious vaccine studies. You wouldn’t lie every day of your research career. You wouldn’t pretend to knowledge you didn’t have. You wouldn’t work hand in glove with paid propagandists to assure the public, and in particular, parents of vaccine-damaged children, that injecting germs and toxic chemicals is safe and effective.
You would remain silent and you would do no harm.
Jon Rappoport
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com
Thanks Jon! Very well explained! I like this kind of articles. Pure logic!
On a side note, I just read that Polly Tommey, Director of Autism Media Channel, told there are more whistleblowers coming out,” — One guy spoke about Gardisil. He said, ‘You can forget about MMR—Gardisil is one of the biggest crimes ever.
Sounds interesting!
Great catch, Jon!
Because vaccines cause brain damage (and other organ damage that may not show up for decades) autism is just a cover-all term. Each individual’s brain damage may be slightly different then someone else’s . Manifesting in a hundred different ways. Some may have repetitive movements. Others may get ME or CFS or Mental Retardation or ADD or OCD or cancer. That’s where the confusion comes in. They cause physical damage and usually brain damage, but where, when, how, and what are often not exactly the same. This makes it easy to deny that there was any connection or cause and keeps people running around in circles trying to “cure” all these seemingly separate diseases like Lymes and Gulf War Syndrome, and even Aids and the new HIV-Negative Aids which is super debilitating but not always lethal. And lets add in polio, ALS, MDA, and weird stuff like Rhetts Syndrome. But cures are never found because researchers working in the dark never figure that the vaccine did it so they look everywhere but there.
Very good comment. It makes a lot of sense!!!
Jon, didn’t the researchers also say that the autism was an artifact of vaccine requirements for entry into preschool? (Preschools do not require vaccinations, of course, just public schools.) Isn’t that sentence about both groups having similar vaccination rates also contradicting that backpedaling statement about the African American children perhaps having more vaccines for preschool or at a younger age that other kids? Regardless of what Time printed, their statement about preschool requirements is really odd since the first MMR is 12-15 months… long before any preschool. Isn’t it easier just to tell the goddamn truth?
Love you Jon! Thank you and keep it up.
From a sickened father with son who has mild autism.
Drug companies. [there will be indictments], mark my word.
I should show this to the woman who asked me last week why I haven’t had my daughter “fully vaccinated”.
She asked me that on the same day you wrote the first article about the CDC whistleblower so I showed her that article.
“But the doctor told me when my son had Chickenpox that if the sore near his eye popped it would cause him to go blind” and “if the vaccine helps 98 people out of 100 it’s ok”.
“Easy to say. What if one of the two it injured was YOUR child?”.
Think. And that’s the just the tip of the iceberg.
Thanks for spreading the truth Jon.
Dr. Datis Kharrazian has written about Autism in his book ” Why Isn’t My Brain Working ” and his best seller ” Why do I still have thyroid symptoms” book. It appears that there is an immune system dysfunction that creates an autoimmune attack on brain and nervous system that is triggered when some children are vaccinated. He appears to explain this fairly clearly.
This reasoning also makes since to me, especially after a friends son with autism was experimentally treated with cortisone based treatments and it really seemed to help.
Everyone would do well to watch this – the most informative documentary on vaccinations:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqsT5EoIk8U
Exactly as you say: two different standards so as to arrive at the answer you desire.
Smoking doesn’t kill all smokers, so shall we conclude that smoking is harmless? Most diseases, toxins or poisons do not affect all people to the same degree. That doesn’t mean that diseases, toxins or poisons are harmless. It’s just that sometimes you can’t see the damage immediately. It’s the same with vaccines. Vaccines are certainly not harmless just because everybody doesn’t get autism.
It’s bizarre to expect everyone to drop dead simultaneously from a vaccine and if they don’t then the medical profession declares the vaccine as “safe”. Never mind the all the ones who did die, because there a few left standing.
a man who cannot adjust to society is called a psychotic, and the boy in the Texas tower who shot 49 and killed 15 was one, although in the Marine Corps he got the o.k. to go ahead—it’s all in the way you’re dressed and if the beehive says the project protects the Queen and Goodyear Rubber and so forth, but the way I see it from this window his action was nothing extraordinary or unexpected and psychiatrists are just paid liars of a continuing social disorder. — Bukowski
http://monde-ecriture.com/forum/index.php?topic=4569.5;wap2
In fairness to Time Magazine, I do not read their article the way you do, Jon.
Whereas, they would have no choice but to and I agree that no viruses (known) are 100% effective in killing off their hosts in the short term. The great panic over ebola is dedicated to the high percentage of fatalities of the infected over a very short period.
Nevertheless, poisons are a who different ball park and game. Victorian poisoners added small doses of arsenic to food to induce chronic gastro enteritis over sustained periods eventually leading to the death of victims. However given a big enough dose of strychnine, for instance, 100% of those that ingested the substance would be dead in double quick time. For my understanding, mercury is a poison and this has presented a rather menacing quandary.
Why are those [of a group] that are given equal doses of a similar poison either affected in different ways or [seemedly] unaffected?
Because there are differences in susceptibility. Some people tolerate more poison than others at the outset.
Maybe, but there is a point where too much poison will kill any one, whereas too much virus will not.
Reblogged this on awcush and commented:
Love this from Jon