Fwd: CDC & thimerosal: fraud & child abuse by some CDC officials

[Guest guest]

" luckypig "

Wed, 24 Dec 2003 19:35:26 -0500

CDC & thimerosal: fraud & child abuse by some CDC

officials

 

Dear Dr. Rhonda Smith,

 

As reported in a recent newspaper article (1), your statement that " Most of the

mercury-containing preservative, thimerosal, was eliminated from flu vaccines

after 1999, though some manufacturers use it in trace amounts, said Rhonda

Smith, spokeswoman for the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). " appears to be

inaccurate. The CDC's own delineation of flu vaccines and thimerosal (2)

indicates that 3 flu vaccines contain thimerosal and specifically lists as

" thimerosal free " a different two flu-vaccines that contain only " trace amounts "

of thimerosal, whereas a CDC webpage (3) states that " Yes, the majority of

influenza vaccines distributed in the United States currently contain thimerosal

as a preservative. "

Importantly, recent research has shown that 3 thimerosal injections can increase

the rate of autism by a factor of 20 (4-6), and an infant, toddler, or young

child who receives a thimerosal-containing flu shot is *likely* to have

additional thimerosal injected via other vaccinations (7), thereby further

increasing the likelihood of developing autism or an autism-associated

neurologic disorder. Despite the increasing evidence that thimerosal injections

induce adverse neurologic sequelae in susceptible infants, the CDC continues to

assert that thimerosal injections do no harm (8).

I believe:

A. Your statement that thimerosal was eliminated from flu vaccines is inaccurate

and should be corrected to the media. Furthermore, the CDC's assertion that

thimerosal injections are " safe " constitutes fraud based on what appears to have

been deliberate distortion of CDC studies originally published as RL Davis et

al, then as Verstraeten et al. Please consider a Republican Congressman's

summary of CDC data-fudging (9), then as failing to mention the Geier and Geier

findings (8; 5-6).

B. The CDC's fraudulent manipulation of data (eg, 9) and the CDC's official

stance that thimerosal is " safe " will contribute to an increased rate of

thimerosal injections and will thereby increase the number of children and

families neurologically injured by thimerosal.

C. The CDC's stance and ongoing misstatements about thimerosal by certain CDC

spokespersons therefore can and should be classified as child abuse in accord

with any and all local, state, and federal statutes regarding injuries to

children.

Teresa Binstock

Researcher in Developmental & Behavioral Neuroanatomy

P.O. Box 1788

Estes Park CO 80517

usa

 

References:

1. Don't panic about flu, some advise

Common sense goes a long way toward maintaining a strong immune system.

http://www.pe.com/lifestyles/healthandfitness/stories/PE_Fea_Health_chiro1223.58\

63d.html

2. Flu Vaccine 2004 Mercury Content

http://www.safeminds.org/NewChart.pdf

3. http://www.cdc.gov/nip/flu/thimerosal.htm

Does the influenza vaccine contain thimerosal?

Yes, the majority of influenza vaccines distributed in

the United States currently contain thimerosal as a

preservative. However, some contain only trace

amounts of thimerosal and are considered by the

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be

preservative-free. Manufacturers of preservative-free

flu vaccine use thimerosal early in the manufacturing

process. The thimerosal gets diluted as the vaccine

goes through the steps in processing. By the end of

the manufacturing process there is not enough

thimerosal left in the vaccine to act as a preservative

and the vaccine is labeled ‘preservative-free’.

 

4. A quote from researcher David Geier, MD, PhD: " We went to Atlanta, " he

continues, " to the CDC, and looked at the VSD [Vaccine Safety Data] data. There

is

thimerosal-containing DTaP [diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine] and

thimerosal-free DTaP, so we asked a question: Among children that got a minimum

of

either three consecutive thimerosal-containing DTaPs or three consecutive

thimerosal-free DTaPs, was there a difference in the number of autism cases in

the two

groups? We found mega differences. More than 20 times higher. The rate of autism

in the children that got more than three doses of thimerosal-containing DTaP

vaccines was much, much higher. Almost all the children that have autism in

that group were the ones that got the thimerosal-containing DTaP vaccine. The

more

thimerosal the greater the cases of autism. "

--O'Meara KP. CDC Study Raises Level of Suspicion.

http://www.insightmag.com/news/573542.html

5. Geier DA, Geier MR. An assessment of the impact of thimerosal on childhood

neurodevelopmental disorders. Pediatr Rehabil. 2003 Apr-Jun;6(2):97-102.

6. Geier MR, Geier DA. Neurodevelopmental disorders after thimerosal-containing

vaccines: a brief communication. Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2003 Jun;228(6):660-4.

available at: http://www.safeminds.org/Geier_2nd_article.pdf

 

7. Which vaccines currently contain thimerosal aka ethylmercury and which do

not:

http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm

and

http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm#2

8. http://www.cdc.gov/nip/flu/thimerosal.htm

Is it safe for children to receive an influenza vaccine that contains

thimerosal?

Yes. There is no convincing evidence of harm caused

by the small doses of thimerosal in vaccines, except

for minor effects like swelling and redness at the

injection site due to sensitivity to thimerosal.

9. Regarding thimerosal's adverse effects and CDC fudging of data

Letter from Congressman Dr. Weldon to director of CDC:

October 31, 2003

Julie L. Gerberding, M.D., M.P.H., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

1600 Clifton Road, N.E.

Atlanta, GA 30333

Dr. Julie Gerberding,

I am writing to follow up on our conversation about the article (Verstraeten et.

al.,) that will be published in the November 2003 issue of Pediatrics. I have

reviewed the

article and have serious reservations about the four-year evolution and

conclusions of this study.

Much of what I observed transpired prior to your appointment a year ago as the of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). I am very

concerned

about activities that have taken place in the National Immunization Program

(NIP) in the development of this study, and I believe the issues raised need

your personal

attention.

I am a strong supporter of childhood vaccinations and know that they have saved

us from considerable death and suffering. A key part of our vaccination program

is to

ensure that we do everything possible to ensure that these vaccines, which are

mandatory, are as safe as possible. We must fully disclose adverse events.

Anything less than

this undermines public confidence.

I have read the upcoming Pediatrics study and several earlier versions of this

study dating back to February 2000. I have read various e-mails from Dr.

Verstraeten and

coauthors. I have reviewed the transcripts of a discussion at Simpsonwood, GA

between the author, various CDC employees, and vaccine industry representatives.

I

found a disturbing pattern which merits a thorough, open, timely, and

independent review by researchers outside of the CDC, HHS, the vaccine industry,

and others with a

conflict of interest in vaccine related issues (including many in University

settings who may have conflicts).

A review of these documents leaves me very concerned that rather than seeking to

understand whether or not some children were exposed to harmful levels of

mercury in

childhood vaccines in the 1990s, there may have been a selective use of the data

to make the associations in the earliest study disappear. While most childhood

vaccines

now only have trace amounts of mercury from thimerosal containing vaccines

(TCVs), it is critical that we know with certainty if children were injured in

the 1990s.

Furthermore, the lead author of the article, Dr. Thomas Verstraeten, worked for

the CDC until he left over two years ago to work in Belgium for GlaxoSmithKline

(GSK),

a vaccine manufacturer facing liability over TCVs. In violation of their own

standards of conduct, Pediatrics failed to disclose that Dr. Verstraeten is

employed by GSK and

incorrectly identifies him as an employee of the CDC. This revelation undermines

this study further.

The first version of the study, produced in February 2000, found a significant

association between exposure to thimerosal containing vaccines (TCVs) and autism

and

neurological developmental delays (NDDs). When comparing children exposed to

62.5 µg of mercury by 3 months of age to those exposed to less than 37.5 µg, the

study

found a relative risk for autism of 2.48 for those with a higher exposure level.

(While not significant in the 95% confidence interval for autism, this meets the

legal standard

of proof exceeding 2.0.) For NDDs the study found a relative risk of 1.59 and a

definite upward trend as exposure levels increased.

A June 2000 version of the study applied various data manipulations to reduce

the autism association to 1.69 and the authors went outside of the VSD database

to secure data from a Massachusetts HMO (Harvard Pilgrim, HP) in order to

counter the association found between TCVs and speech delay. At the time that

HP's data was brought in, HP was in receivership by the state of Mass., its

computer records had been in shambles for years, it had multiple computer

systems that could not communicate with one another (Journal of Law, Ethics and

Medicine Sept. 22, 2000), and it used a health care coding system totally

different from the one used across the VSD. There are questions relating to a

significant underreporting of Autism in Mass. The HP dataset is only about 15%

of the HMO dataset used in the February 2000 study. There may also be

significant problems with the statistical power of the HP dataset.

In June of 2000 a meeting was held in Simpsonwood, GA, involving the authors of

the study, representatives of the CDC, and the vaccine industry. I have reviewed

a

transcript of this meeting that was obtained through the Freedom of Information

Act (FOIA). Comments from Simpsonwood, NJ meeting include: (summary form, not

direct quotes):

• We found a statistically significant relationship between exposures and

outcomes. There is certainly an under ascertainment of adverse outcomes because

some children are just simply not old enough to be diagnosed, the current

incidence rates are much lower than we would expect to see (Verstraeten);

• We could exclude the lowest exposure children from our database. Also

suggested was removing the children that got the highest exposure levels since

they represented an

unusually high percentage of the outcomes. (Rhodes)

• The significant association with language delay is quite large. (Verstraeten);

• This information should be kept confidential and considered embargoed;

• We can push and pull this data anyway we want to get the results we want;

• We can alter the exclusion criteria any we way we want, give reasonable

justifications for doing so, and get any result we want;

• There was really no need to do this study. We could have predicted the

outcomes;

• I will not give TCVs to my grandson until I find out what is going on here.

Another version of the study - after further manipulation - finds no association

between TCVs and autism, and no consistency across HMOs between TCVs and NDDs

and speech delay.

The final version of the study concludes that " No consistent significant

associations were found between TCVs and neurodevelopmental outcomes, " and that

the lack of

consistency argues against an association. In reviewing the study there are data

points where children with higher exposures to the neuortoxin mercury had fewer

developmental disorders. This demonstrates to me how excessive manipulation of

data can lead to absurd results. Such a conclusion is not unexpected from an

author with a serious, though undisclosed, conflict of interest.

This study increases speculation of an association between TCVs and

neurodevelopmental outcomes. I cannot say it was the author's intent to

eliminate the earlier findings of an association. Nonetheless, the elimination

of this association is exactly what happened and the manner in which this was

achieved raises speculation. The dialogue at

the Simpsonwood meeting clearly indicates how easily the authors could

manipulate the data and have reasonable sounding justifications for many of

their decisions.

The only way these issues are going to be resolved - and I have only mentioned a

few of them - is by making this particular dataset and the entire VSD database

open for

independent analysis. One such independent researcher, Dr. Mark Geier, has

already been approved by the CDC and the various IRBs to access this dataset.

They have requested the CDC allow them to access this dataset and your staff

indicated to my office that they would make this particular dataset available

after the Pediatrics study is published.

Earlier this month the CDC had prepared three similar datasets for this

researcher to review to allow him to reanalyze CDC study datasets. However when

they accessed the datasets - which the researchers paid the CDC to assemble -

the datasets were found to have no usable data in them. I request that you

personally intervene with those in the CDC who are assembling this dataset to

ensure that they provide the complete dataset, in a usable format, to these

researchers within two weeks. The treatment that these well-published

researchers have received from the CDC thus far has been abysmal and

embarrassing. I would also be curious to know whether Dr. Verstraeten, an

outside researcher for more than two years now, was required to go through the

same process as Dr. Geier in order to continue accessing the VSD.

You have not been a part of creating this current situation, but you do have an

opportunity to help resolve this issue and ensure that confidence and

trustworthiness in

the CDC and our national vaccination program is fully restored. I would ask that

you work with me to ensure that a full, fair, and independent review is made of

the VSD

database to fully examine this matter. I would like to meet with you at your

earliest convenience to move this process forward.

Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to working with you on this

urgent matter of great importance to our nation's most precious resource, our

children.

Sincerely,

Dave Weldon, M.D. [R-Fla]

Member of Congress

-----------

cc: Julie L. Gerberding, M.D., M.P.H., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

1600 Clifton Road, N.E.

Atlanta, GA 30333

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photos - Get your photo on the big screen in Times Square