Merck Vaccine Fraud – 2nd US Court Case Over MMR Vaccine

a reply to: Aquariusdude

naturalnews.com?? You cannot be serious...

CDC researcher Poul Thorsen, who famously headed up the "Denmark Study" that many claim disproved any link between autism and vaccines, has been indicted in Atlanta by a federal grand jury on charges of wire fraud, money laundering and defrauding research institutions of grant money.

Poul Thorson is a scientist who formerly worked for the CDC, and over the last several years, he oversaw millions of dollars in grant money that was used to conduct research to "prove" that vaccines have no link to autism.

This is the classic "ad hominem" fallacy. What does any of this have to do with the study? He was one of 7 authors of the paper (and not even a leading author). I would ask you to explain the relevance but I just know I'm going to get a load of illogical twaddle in response.

a reply to: GetHyped

His name was in the middle of the study so was in fact heavily involved in the study... I supposed if it was CNN it would be more trustworthy? Right..Ill post the criminal complaint here as soon as I find it.

a reply to: Aquariusdude

He was not a leading author. Again, please explain how this has any bearing on the study. DO you have anything methodological to criticise? It was not even funded by the CDC. You're really clasping at straws here...

That’s right. Poul Thorsen was not the first author for either of these studies. He was not the last author, either. He was not the corresponding author; that would be Kreesten M. Madsen, MD, who was corresponding author on both the NEJM and Pediatrics papers. As it turns out, Thorsen was safely ensconced in the middle of the pack of co-authors. That’s why, when RFK, Jr. referred to the Pediatrics study as “Thorsen’s study,” he had to be either grossly ignorant or intentionally misleading (Take your pick.) Anyone who knows anything about how the scientific literature works would be able to spot that immediately just by looking at the abstracts of these articles. Trust me, if studies this large really were Thorsen’s babies his name would not have been relegated to fourth or sixth on the list of authors. Basically, Thorsen’s position in the author lists of these two papers indicated that, whatever leadership position he may have held at Aarhus University and in its vaccine studies group, he clearly was not the primary contributor for these studies.

...

This article was, however, published in November 2002. Given that it takes months, sometimes even a year or more, for a manuscript to go from submission to publication, this work had almost certainly been completed and was in the publication pipeline before Thorsen took over as principal investigator of the CDC grant. The Pediatrics paper, which was published after Thorsen went back to Denmark, lists its funding thusly:

"The activities of the Danish Epidemiology Science Centre and the National Centre for Register-Based Research are funded by a grant from the Danish National Research Foundation. This study was supported by the Stanley Medical Research Institute. No funding sources were involved in the study design."

That’s right. The Pediatrics thimerosal study was not even funded by the CDC! Even if it were, given that large epidemiological studies take years to carry out, it probably was in the last leg of its analysis when Thorsen showed up anyway. Even worse for the “guilt by association” crowd, all of the fraudulent charges to the grant are alleged to have occurred between 2004 and 2008, as described above–well after the Danish studies were published.

www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


List of all the studies he was involved in..All of them were autism vaccination studies.Nice try but he was in fact heavily involved in vaccinautism studies.

a reply to: Aquariusdude

It's as if you didn't even read the source I posted... What a surprise.

Still waiting for these methodological critiques from you.

In some of the studies he is listed as second author.. Take a look at the list.

a reply to: Aquariusdude

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Aquariusdude

It's as if you didn't even read the source I posted... What a surprise.

Still waiting for these methodological critiques from you.

I think we're done here.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Aquariusdude

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Aquariusdude

It's as if you didn't even read the source I posted... What a surprise.

Still waiting for these methodological critiques from you.

I think we're done here.

Yeah I think so too. No comment on the fact that he was second author of some of the vaccine \autism studies?.. Yeah I didn't think you would comment on that.

a reply to: Aquariusdude

1) You were trying to discredit the Danish study with an ad hominem attack on a non-lead author
2) You then moved the goalposts completely off topic to other studies with more ad hominems once your original argument was shown to be a load of baloney
3) I'm now having to repeat myself multiple times as you duck and dive and try to drag the discussion even further off topic with more spurious claims and ad hominems

Come back when you learn how to argue logically (I'm not holding my breath).

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Aquariusdude

1) You were trying to discredit the Danish study with an ad hominem attack on a non-lead author
2) You then moved the goalposts completely off topic to other studies with more ad hominems once your original argument was shown to be a load of baloney
3) I'm now having to repeat myself multiple times as you duck and dive and try to drag the discussion even further off topic with more spurious claims and ad hominems

Come back when you learn how to argue logically (I'm not holding my breath).

Right a criminal indictment into ONE of the leading authors of major vaccineautism studies is a Ad hominem attack right..

originally posted by: Aquariusdude

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Aquariusdude

1) You were trying to discredit the Danish study with an ad hominem attack on a non-lead author
2) You then moved the goalposts completely off topic to other studies with more ad hominems once your original argument was shown to be a load of baloney
3) I'm now having to repeat myself multiple times as you duck and dive and try to drag the discussion even further off topic with more spurious claims and ad hominems

Come back when you learn how to argue logically (I'm not holding my breath).

Right a criminal indictment into ONE of the leading authors of major vaccineautism studies is a Ad hominem attack right..

It is when the case in question wasn't connected in any way to the study he had a small contribution in.

originally posted by: Aquariusdude

originally posted by: Pardon?

originally posted by: Aquariusdude
I think combining the mumps, measles and rubella viruses is too much for a child to bear..They should be administered separately.

There was a study that showed significant correlation of autism rates with the introduction of fetal line cells in the vaccine manufacturing process In the U.K U.S and Denmark...They study also found DNA remnants much higher then normal in vaccines.

There are serious quality control issues that need to be addressed..Just because its a vaccine doesn't make it automatically safe. If you are a good parent you would do your homework on the vaccine your child will be injected with..Trusting companies like Merck blindly is extremely stupid..Many drugs have been pulled off the market years after they maimed killed many people..Even when the drugs were asserted as "safe" by the corporations pushing them on the unsuspecting populace.Even criminal investigation have been launched into some drug companies.. And with the vaccine court companies like Merck are not liable for damages caused by the vaccine..

Links to the studies please (I think I know the one you will link to...).

And you may be surprised to know that if a company releases a contaminated vaccine (or any medicine for that matter) they are very liable indeed.
The vaccine court only covers vaccine injury claims.
Not defective vaccines.

www.naturalnews.com...

98 million Americans were given polio vaccine contaminated with cancer-causing virus, admits CDC


Here is a case of severe contamination..It has happened before and I am sure its happening now...

What's the point of posting the study? You are obviously biased and ignore any data that shows you can be wrong..

That was in the 1960's over half a century ago and there hasn't been a single case of anyone actually being "contaminated" by the virus.

Get relevant please else you begin to look like you're clutching at straws.

The original study you were thinking of was by someone called who owns this company wasn't it?
avmbiotech.com...

I can't help you any more...

a reply to: xDeadcowx

If vaccines are truly for public health, and not for profit, then the money needs to be taken out of it. Im not talking about the money it costs people to get the vaccines, i'm talking about the insane profits that are made off of them.

That...right there is at the very heart of the matter.

I believe and have always believed that profit and medicine are odd bedfellows and never the twain should meet.

Profit in medicine is an insidious proposition when you stop and really think about it..people are at their most vulnerable when they are ill or in need of medical assistance and put our trust in the medical establishment to aid us.

The abuse potential, is not limited in its scope in the relentless pursuit for profits is staggeringly high, and of course as many of us either know or are starting to realise, is actually routinely abused, along with us the public who effectively become profit vectors, instead of ill people seeking assistance.

With the levels of money floating around medicine, it's little wonder to me that abuses are evident in every area of medicine...on a routine basis, from the mild rip off of overcharging 'customers', ordering unnecessary and costly tests and so on, to allowing people to die and suffer because they are judged not medically, from a medical point of view...but how profitable or unprofitable they are or aren't. If they are deemed to be a drain to profits, they are not treated at all, or receive sub-standard treatment, and are viewed as less than human.

What is surprising to me, given that most people know the vast profits generated by the pharma and medical industries, how anybody could even begin to trust anyone connected with the medical industry.

In my opinion, all profit should be removed from medicine...all of it.

a reply to: MysterX

Absolutely agree with that..

originally posted by: damwel
a reply to: pryingopen3rdeye

There will be a lot of sick children because these idiots won't get them vaccinated. Everything is not a conspiracy. It's fun to suppose but not when a child that depends on you to protect them.

yes and because the child depends on you, you should not so readily subject them to experiments,

vaccines are still experimental, thats a fact, that is not debated. the whole reason this argument even exists is because of that fact. if you think that is not a fact then clearly you are not knowledgeable in this field and should not be making such a decision as whether or not to vaccinate as you do not know what you are dealing with,

as someone who IS aware that vaccines are still considered experimental in the scientific field, i DO think some vaccines are good, and some are still too risky. but more importantly i support the right to choose, people like you who have no idea that vaccines are experimental yet would have our government make them mandatory are the most dangerous people in a democracy.


and as for children getting sick? vaccines made me sick when i was a child, permanent liver damage, as diagnosed by my doctor. so your not winning with that line of thought either.

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: xDeadcowx

If vaccines are truly for public health, and not for profit, then the money needs to be taken out of it. Im not talking about the money it costs people to get the vaccines, i'm talking about the insane profits that are made off of them.

That...right there is at the very heart of the matter.

I believe and have always believed that profit and medicine are odd bedfellows and never the twain should meet.

Profit in medicine is an insidious proposition when you stop and really think about it..people are at their most vulnerable when they are ill or in need of medical assistance and put our trust in the medical establishment to aid us.

The abuse potential, is not limited in its scope in the relentless pursuit for profits is staggeringly high, and of course as many of us either know or are starting to realise, is actually routinely abused, along with us the public who effectively become profit vectors, instead of ill people seeking assistance.

With the levels of money floating around medicine, it's little wonder to me that abuses are evident in every area of medicine...on a routine basis, from the mild rip off of overcharging 'customers', ordering unnecessary and costly tests and so on, to allowing people to die and suffer because they are judged not medically, from a medical point of view...but how profitable or unprofitable they are or aren't. If they are deemed to be a drain to profits, they are not treated at all, or receive sub-standard treatment, and are viewed as less than human.

What is surprising to me, given that most people know the vast profits generated by the pharma and medical industries, how anybody could even begin to trust anyone connected with the medical industry.

In my opinion, all profit should be removed from medicine...all of it.

I can accept profit in medicine if it works as vaccines do.
I can't accept profit in "medicine" that doesn't work though.

originally posted by: Aquariusdude

So there aren't any measles cases happening then?
There's the evidence but keep your eyes wide shut and you'll be fine.


Yeah and not a single death from a limited outbreak...Meanwhile there are almost 100 confirmed cases of deaths from the mmr vaccine and 0 deaths from measles from in the past 12 years..

I think the Merck lawsuit is more about all those who received 2 doses, but still contracted either measles or mumps. In other words, they sold a bunk MMR vaccine offering protection that didn't work.

I've actually been watching global measles and mumps outbreaks for 2-3 years, reading articles. In some places like Canada or the UK, Merck holds a monopoly over vaccines and adults who were fully vaccinated with Merck's MMR vaccine still contracted measles or mumps. In some cities the measles outbreaks are 50/50. 50% among those never vaccinated and 50% among those fully vaccinated with 2 or more doses of Merck's MMR vaccine.

Anyone is more than welcome to backtrack articles for 2 years...

flutrackers.com...
Measles Global Outbreaks: Articles Around the World

flutrackers.com...
Mumps Global Outbreaks: Articles Around the World
Scroll thru listings

In the United States people don't always know which pharmaceutical company made the vaccine they got. They just get a shot and don't ask what brand. But in British Commonwealth countries, where Merck holds a monopoly, adults fully vaccinated with two or more doses are getting measles and mumps. Example: The hockey league outbreaks.

Hey, if Merck sold a bunk vaccine, then they deserve to be sued.