1. Judy Wilyman Report
Head of the School of Health and Society
University of Wollongong
3 April 2017
Open Letter copied to UOW Vice-Chancellor, Paul Wellings,
Dear Professor Yeatman,
My PhD thesis that investigates the science and politics of vaccination policies debunks the claims that are being made by the Australian government about the safety, efficacy and necessity of vaccines. Yet in 2016 – one week after my PhD thesis on the science and politics of the Australian government’s vaccination policies was published – you promoted the government’s claims on the UOW website (Heather Yeatman’s comment) and 60 other UOW academics signed their name to your opinon.
When are you going to tell the public that you have never read my in-depth thesis on this topic and you have never completed your own in-depth research on the science and politics of vaccination? Your colleagues have signed their names based on their faith in your role as the Head of the School of Health and Society. However, your stated conflict of interest as president of the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) precludes you from presenting your personal opinion of vaccines on the University of Wollongong website. This is because the PHAA supports pro-vaccination lobby groups such as the Stop the Australian Vaccination Network (SAVN) and the Australian Skeptics Inc (a non-scientific lobby group) who use abuse, ridicule and false information in the mainstream media to suppress (and defame) academics and professionals who present the medical literature that questions the use of vaccines. They also prevent professionals and parents from discussing vaccines in public venues in Australia by targeting the venues. SAVN and the PHAA are supporting the suppression of academic information. See the attached poster that was presented at the almost 100% industry funded National Immunisation Conference organised by the PHAA in 2014.
Further, the University of Wollongong, allowed known members of these lobby groups (some who had no connection with UOW) to use the University’s procedures to make false allegations about my vaccination research that were subsequently published in the mainstream media with my name. One example was Dr. John Cunningham, an orthopaedic surgeon in Melbourne, who made false and unsupported allegations about my whooping cough research that were investigated by UOW. He is an activist for the SAVN lobby group and he made these allegations in 2014 – this was 8 years after my whooping cough research was completed at UOW and my Master of Science (Population Health) degree awarded.
UOW investigated these allegations in 2014 even though John Cunningham was a known activist with the SAVN lobby group and it was 8 years after the whooping cough research project was completed and the degree awarded.
John Cunningham, an activist for SAVN, was also given a voice in the Australian media in 2016 to write several derogatory articles about the assessment of my PhD research, even though he has no special qualifications in immunisation or involvement with UOW’s assessment process. Further, he was not required to provide any evidence for his comments in the media about the assessment of my thesis. To date no evidence has been provided for his false claims in the media and my PhD is published on the University of Wollongong website. Here is the link to my open letter to you (and UOW academics) requesting that you provide the evidence for John Cunningham’s false claims – http://vaccinationdecisions.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Letter-re-JCs-article-in-the-Australian-161214.pdf
To date you and your colleagues have remained silent to my requests on this important health issue even as the Federal government moves to introduce compulsory vaccination for all childcare centres and pre-schools in Australia. The information you are promoting on the University of Wollongong website is false and unsupported by the medical literature. Your colleagues are entitled to know the truth. I will provide you with this 5 min video that summarises the evidence in my PhD thesis and here is a link to the new documentary series “The Truth About Vaccines” which you can view free if you sign up before the 12 April 2017.
Your comments will have a significant effect on human health in the future and the concerned community is waiting for your reply to this information.
Dr. Judy Wilyman
The Science and Politics of the Australian Government’s Vaccination Program
Academics at the University of Wollongong – Open letter
Copied to UOW Vice-Chancellor, Paul Wellings
Dear Professor Heather Yeatman,
Previously I have made you aware of the factual errors in the comments that you have made on the UOW website regarding the safety and efficacy of vaccines. It is a serious issue when universities refuse to debate the scientific arguments in an important health issue and your silence on this issue is not acceptable to concerned parents. I would like to provide you with this link to a new free documentary series called The Truth About Vaccines which involves interviews with 60 vaccine experts who will examine the evidence for and against vaccination for multiple infectious diseases.
I hope that you and your colleagues will sign up to this series and hear the objective information they are providing on this topic. A university that will not debate the scientific evidence in a PhD thesis is not promoting integrity in academic knowledge. I have described this situation in my global newsletter titled: Newsletter 155 The University of Wollongong and the Truth About Vaccines (http://us8.campaign-archive2.com/?u=f20605fde3732e41929f4a3f2&id=ad28c444bd&e=fec8337d3c)
Again the concerned community looks forward to your response.
Dr. Judy Wilyman
2. Natural News: The astonishing TRUE story of a CDC criminal conspiracy and the international fugitive from justice who faked vaccine research
If you don’t know the story of Poul Thorsen, CDC vaccine researcher, fraudster, con artist and international fugitive from justice, you don’t know the real story about the CDC at all. (And the vaccine industry hopes you never find out…)
The best book on this subject is called Master Manipulator – The Explosive True Story of Fraud Embezzlement and Government Betrayal at the CDC by James Ottar Grundvig. You can find the book at this Barnes & Noble link.
The book features a foreward by famed investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson and an introduction by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. from the World Mercury Project.
I strongly urge you to get this book. Amazon.com also has it available in hardcover or kindle editions.
Every member of Congress should be required to read this book. It’s that explosive. It tells the shocking but true story of deep corruption and criminality inside the CDC… a story the entire corporate-run media (CNN, NYT, WashPo etc.) deliberately covers up to deceive the American public.
Here, I’m reprinting the Foreward and Introduction to give you a taste of what you’ll find in the book. What you’re about to read here will astonish and anger you because it pulls back the veil on a criminal cabal known as the CDC that’s engaged in a felony racketeering operation that should be investigated under RICO Act laws.
Read on and decide for yourself… (if you cite any of the text below, be sure to give credit to the book called “Master Manipulator” by James Ottar Grundvig).
FOREWORD BY SHARYL ATTKISSON
Today fraudulent research and corruption are sadly becoming more commonplace. The case of Poul Thorsen, for example, stands out in terms of shameless audacity—stealing grant money meant for autism research. His actions only add to the questions of alleged corruption surrounding the Danish Studies designed to erase any association between vaccines and autism, sponsored by the world’s premier public health agency: the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
One might expect fraud and corruption in government, but many Americans will be surprised to hear of it inside the CDC, the same agency that fumbled the arrival of Ebola virus on US shores in 2014. The fact that the CDC would contract with the likes of Dr. Thorsen on crucial research of vaccines and autism, and never consider setting aside his findings after his twenty-two-count criminal indictment, speaks to the waning credibility of the world’s premiere public health agency.
INTRODUCTION BY ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR.
Statistics don’t lie, the saying goes, but statisticians do. As an environmental lawyer and veteran of hundreds of legal battles with some of the world’s biggest polluters, I know that statistical—or epidemiological studies—are the go-to weapon of industry junk scientists. These hired guns—so called tobacco scientists—know that “fixing the science” or an epidemiological study is as easy as lighting up a smoke. For example, one could easily design an epidemiological study to “prove” that sex does not make one pregnant. The trick is simply to get rid of all the pregnant people before one analyzes the data. Now you have a study that shows lots of people having sex without consequence. Voila! That’s one of the many tricks CDC’s star biostitute, Poul Thorsen, used to deceive the public about the evidence linking mercury laced vaccines to autism. Prior to conducting his MMR study, Thorsen used “exclusions” to eliminate children with autism from the target population. Employing this and an inventory of other magician subterfuges, Thorsen authored a Danish study that CDC, for years, has been presenting as its gold standard evidence that thimerosal doesn’t cause autism.
This is a story of how CDC used a con man to gull the public and ended up getting conned itself! Poul Thorsen is a world-class villain whose manipulation of health data gave CDC and big pharma what they wanted: a report clearing thimerosal of any possible role in the autism crisis. His story merits a book length expose because the fraud he casually helped orchestrate has had a monumental impact on the health of millions of children globally.
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) most often cites Poul Thorsens crooked research as the final word on the controversy linking vaccines to autism. CDC rarely mentions that Poul Thorsen is the subject of a twenty-two-count, 2011 indictment by the U.S. Department of justice for wire fraud and money laundering in connection with more than $1 million in research grants that he pilfered from CDC while he ginned up fraudulent studies to “prove” that vaccines don’t cause autism.1 His crimes have won him a mug shot on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) “most wanted” list.2 Thorsen’s former employer, Aarhus University—Denmark’s university hospital system—permanently expelled him from practice in 2010.The fact that he is roaming free in Denmark and is easy to find, despite the federal indictment, indicates a lack of enthusiasm by HHS to file the necessary extradition papers and press for his capture. The agency has good reason to fear that a public trial would expose the pervasive corruption throughout CDC’s vaccine division and the fragility of the science supporting CDC’s claims about vaccine safety.
Dr. Thorsen is one of seven co-authors and the data manager for the two leading foreign studies offered by CDC as the foundation for its claims that vaccines do not cause autism. For nearly a decade, critics have pointed out that CDC’s Danish studies are thinly veiled flimflam.3 Besides employing the threadworm gimmick of manipulating exclusions to selectively eliminate kids, on some studies, with autism diagnoses from the study pool,Thorsen and his co-author used another novel dodge to “exculpate” mercury-laced vaccines. Thorsen’s trick was not even a sophisticated brand of junk science, but it was a devastatingly effective way to deliver the conclusion CDC wanted. Thorsen’s Madsen et al. 2003 (“Madsen 2003”),4 purported to exonerate thimerosal—the mercury-based vaccine preservative as the causative agent in the autism epidemic by showing that autism rates in Denmark increased after the Danish government removed thimerosal from vaccines in 1992.5 But even the most casual critic could see that the increase in Danish autism was illusory since it was not actually based on an increased incidence of the disease. It was simply an artifact of Denmark’s new reporting protocols.
Here’s how Thorsen and his cronies pulled off this fraud: In 1993, the same year Denmark removed thimerosal-containing vaccines from distribution, it coincidentally required, for the first time, that outpatient autism cases be reported on the government s national disease registry. Prior to 1993, only inpatient cases were reported. These represented less than 10 percent of the total. Denmark’s new reporting protocols increased the reported autism incidence cases by nearly 1300 percent. Dr.Thorsen and his pals took advantage of that artificial rise to suggest that real autism incidence had increased following thi-merosal’s ban.The authors also violated established peer-review scientific protocols by deleting the entire 2001-year class of seven-year-olds from the final published version.6 That deletion was flagrant research fraud. The 2001 cohort was the first to be entirely free from thimerosal exposure in their vaccines. The subsequent analysis (Gronborg et al. 2013) of that data showed a steady decline in autism rates over a ten-year period following the removal of thimerosal in 1992.
Emails obtained under the Freedom of Information laws show that Thorsen, his co-authors, and CDC officials were all aware of these frauds when they published the study. Responsible journals, including Lancet and JAMA, rejected the Madsen study. It took a letter from the CDC’s Jose Cordero, then director of its new National Center for Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (NCBDDD),7 to strong-arm a lesser journal, Pediatrics, to finally publish the study. Pediatrics has earned notoriety as a frequent publisher of vaccine industry junk science. Pediatrics raises a substantial portion of its operating budget from vaccine makers. Pediatrics is the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which is notorious for its conflicts with big donors. In 2016, the AAP was forced to drop its multi-million donor, Coca-Cola, as it’s only “gold sponsor.” In exchange for $3 million over six years, AAP had been shilling for the sugary drink maker, which it called a distinguished company due to Coke’s commitment to “better the health of children worldwide. AAP only ended the mercenary romance when published exposes disclosed that Coke had been paying hired scientists to fix the science to “prove” that sugary drinks were not the culprit in the obesity epidemic.
At the 2007 National Academy of Sciences/Institute of Medicine (IOM) meeting, “Autism and the Environment: Challenges and Opportunity for Research,” Dr. Irva Hertz-Picciotti, an internationally renowned environmental epidemiologist from the University of California, Davis, criticized the Madsen 2003 study for deliberately blurring outpatient and inpatient data sets: “The study, therefore is not a rigorous design, because you cannot compare the before and after periods because of artifacts in how the database was constructed, and specifically how it changed over time.” When CDC scientists finally took an authentic look at the Danish autism data a decade later, they demolished the conclusions in Madsen 2003. CDC’s subsequent study, Gronborg et al. 2013, published in JAMA Pediatrics8 directly contradicted Thorsen and Madsen. Gronborg and her co-authors found a 33 percent drop in autism spectrum disorder incidence in Denmark following the withdrawal of thimerosal in 1992.
Thorsen was also data manager for Kreesten Madsen’s companion study on the MMR vaccine, Madsen et al 2002.9 That study used similar deceptive statistical devices and flawed data to “prove” MMR safety.10 That study employed CDC’s trademark ruse of including many children who were too young to receive the autism diagnosis, which at that point usually occurred at age four in Denmark. CDC epidemiologists have consistently used this ploy in their phony autism research to dampen the autism signal in various studies.The 2002 Madsen MMR study also included a substantial number of unvaccinated children and employed a suite of other statistical gimmicks to mask the association with the MMR vaccine and dampen the autism signal.
Having trained in CDC’s sophisticated fraud during his apprenticeship with the two notorious Madsen studies, it’s no wonder that Poul Thorsen felt so at ease stealing more than $1 million that CDC had directed Thorsen to spend on managing data for those and other studies.
As James Grundvig brilliantly points out in the pages that follow, without Poul Thorsen, there would have been no Danish studies for the CDC to misuse all these years as the spear tip for its propaganda campaign on vaccine safety.
However, Grundvig gives us more; Thorsen was not a lone bad apple. Grundvig shows that CDC insiders, including Dr. Frank DeStefano (Director of the Immunization Safety Office); Dr. Marshalyn-Yeargin-Allsopp (Head of the Developmental Disabilities Branch); Dr. Diana Schendel, a CDC epidemiologist research scientist and Thorsen s longtime girlfriend, who in 2014 took a permanent position in the epidemiology department at Aarhus University, where Thorsen committed the theft of autism research money; and Dr. Coleen Boyle (Director of the National Center for Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities) fully supported and orchestrated Thorsen s fraud. Boyle made her bones at CDC as lead investigator of 1984-1987 Congressional investigation of Agent Orange. In that post, Boyle and her team reported “no association” between the jungle defoliant dioxin and the grim inventory of rare cancers and autoimmune diseases that sickened tens of thousands of U.S. troops who fought in the war. Her work allowed the government to deny benefits and treatment for sickened soldiers for five years. In 1990, the Pentagon admitted during congressional hearings that Agent Orange was indeed the culprit.Today, Boyle is the director of CDC’s National Center for Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities. According to Dr. William Thompson, a seventeen-year CDC senior vaccine safety scientist and current CDC employee who recently filed for whistleblower status, Boyle and her team of researchers committed research fraud in a subsequent 2004 American study to conceal numbers suggesting that the MMR vaccine was associated with higher rates of autism in African-American children.
Poul Thorsen, the Master Manipulator, is the dark wizard of a federal agency that is steeped in corruption and compromised by financial entanglements with the pharmaceutical industry. Thorsen participated in a criminal conspiracy with his CDC bosses to distort science and fleece the American taxpayer. He then turned on his cronies and stole the money CDC paid him to conjure up his phony research. Thorsen’s greatest crime, however, is the epidemic of millions of children with developmental disabilities who are the legacy of his fraud.
Dr. Poul Thorsen should be arrested and brought back to the United States to stand trial and receive justice. If that happens, we might see those in the CDC who sponsored his fraud be held finally accountable.
1 “United States of America vs. Poul Thorsen” indictment, U.S. DOJ, April 13, 2011.
3 “Methodological Issues and Evidence of Malfeasance in Research Purporting to Show Thimerosal in Vaccines Is Safe,” Brian Hooker et ah, BioMed Research International,Vol. 2014.
4 “Thimerosal and the Occurrence of Autism: Negative Ecological Evidence From Danish Population-Based Data,” Kreesten Madsen etal., Pediatrics, September 1, 2003.
5 Dr. M. Hasse Letter to Commission of the European Communities, Committee for Proprietary Medicine Products, Re: “Organic Mercury Compounds as Antimicrobial Preservatives in Immunoglobulins,” January 22, 1992.
6 CDC internal email: “Application Tech Review” from Diana Schendel to Tom Horne, November 16, 2003.
7 CDC Letter from NCBDDD Director Jose Cordero to Jerold F. Lucey, Editor-in-Chief Journal Pediatrics, December 10,2002.
8 “Recurrence of Autism Spectrum Disorders in Full- and Half-Siblings and Trends Over Time A Population-Based Cohort Study,” Therese K. Groenberg et al,,JAMA Pediatrics, August 12,2013.
9 “A Population-Based Study of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Vaccination and Autism,” Kreesten Madsen et al., New England Journal of Medicine, November 7,2002.
10 “An Investigation of the Association Between MMR Vaccination and Autism in Denmark,” G. S. Goldman and F. E. Yazbak, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons,Vol. 9, Number 3, Fall 2004.
Read more in Master Manipulator – The Explosive True Story of Fraud Embezzlement and Government Betrayal at the CDC by James Ottar Grundvig. You can find the book at this Barnes & Noble link.
3. THE AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE: The ‘Vaccine Court’ Is Hazardous to Your Health
The vaccine-industrial complex has created a Kafkaesque system.
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act was passed in 1986, under the shadow of multi-million dollar jury verdicts against the makers of the Diphtheria Pertussis and Tetanus (DPT) vaccine. Congress announced that vaccine injuries and deaths are real and provided that vaccine-injured children and their families would be financially compensated. Part of the larger Vaccine Act, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) was modeled after workers’ compensation programs. It was to be a “no-fault” program.
Very well. As one of the earliest “vaccine attorneys”—a very limited practice niche—I know first-hand it didn’t work that way. I practiced in the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Program for more than 25 years after its inception in 1988, and have been personally involved in over 100 vaccine-injury cases. I represented an entire fragile population in omnibus proceedings. I was able to obtain reversal in the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals of the denial of compensation to a vaccine-injured child in a case that the government appealed to the United States Supreme Court as Shalala v. Whitecotton. It was the only Vaccine Act case to be argued before the United States Supreme Court until Sebelius v. Cloer in 2013, where I was co-counsel for the vaccine-injured petitioner, and guided the attorneys-fees litigation that the Supreme Court upheld on review against the government’s objection. I have seen the injured and their families cruelly oppressed.
From the passing of the legislation in 1986, the process has been rigged, one major step at a time, in favor of the vaccine-industrial complex. Policy makers nationwide are yearning, with financial support and lobbying from the pharmaceutical industry, for mandatory vaccination. Before further compulsory vaccinationlegislation passes—on a state or federal level—the failure of the VICP must be acknowledged and properly addressed. The VICP creates a classic moral hazard, granting immunity from suit to the vaccine industry while providing insurance against any loss. The vaccine-industrial complex has become a thriving giant; according to a 2013 report presented by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, nearly 300 vaccines were reported to be in development. Its lobbying money drives agency denial of the reality of vaccine injury, which in turn permeates policy decisions in a sinister fashion.
The Act originally provided for compensation petitions in the closest federal district court. The federal court would appoint a “special master,” with consent of the parties, to review the medical records and to recommend a decision for the court. The entire compensation process, even with court review, would only take 240 days. The “no-fault” outlook was designed to compensate even apparent vaccine injuries. Congress stated that compensation awarded “quickly, easily, and with certainty and generosity” would instill confidence in the vaccine effort. It all was too good to be true.
The so-called vaccine court is not what activist parents thought they had achieved. In the new tribunal that arose, no decision would be a precedent for the next. Inconsistent results would be acknowledged, accepted, and ascribed to differences in “world view.” The injured and their counsel (the latter economically oppressed by the program’s prohibition against private attorneys fees) encounter a Kafkaesque system. There is no institutional memory of the favorable decisions. Counsel find (and have empirically verified) that the choice of special master will tend to determine whether the petition for compensation can succeed, or will fall. “Risk” settlements are the predominate type of awards. A very small petitioners’ bar litigates against a determined and aggressive opponent to find an inadequate measure of justice. Limits on general damages and death enacted in 1986 are still the same. And the program churns on, taking years to litigate any meaningful issue. The injuries continue, and awards continue to be made, practically in secret.
The 1986 blueprint for quick relief did not even make the starting line. Before a single claim was filed, a barely publicized amendment removed vaccine injury jurisdiction from the Article III federal judicial branch and placed vaccine injuries into the Court of Claims. Renamed as the Court of Federal Claims, it is a “legislative court” under Article II. In constitutional terms, it is an executive branch agency.
By the time the VICP opened in 1988, eight “special masters” had been hired to preside in Washington D.C. over every vaccine injury case. The compensation tribunal was self-invented, and speedy adjudication was out the window. Hundreds of petitions were filed the day the doors opened. Thousands followed. Each master acquired a caseload of hundreds of cases. Many of the initial petitions were still pending ten years later.
The Department of Health and Human Services neglected its statutory duty to publicize the program. The original statute of limitations had to be extended. A flood of late petitions were filed by families that could not find counsel to file in time. In fact, a large percentage of the initial cases were filed simply because the families had learned about the Act from an article written by my law partner and I, that was published in the September 1989 issue of Exceptional Parent Magazine.The DOJ began to vigorously litigate against the injured. In 1989—ironically, with the stated goal of cooling the litigation—came an even worse constitutional blunder. “Technical amendments” formalized the new “Office of the Special Masters.” Congress vested this new “vaccine court” with rulemaking power, and with the unfettered discretion of a trial court. No longer did the masters “recommend.” Now, they adjudicated. The “inquisitorial” format, with none of the due process safeguards of the civil justice system, serves to protect the secrets of the vaccine industry. The record created in a proceeding is hidden from non-parties.
A state of symbiosis arose between the agency tribunal and the public health bureaucracy. These sister agencies appeared to regard families of the injured as criminals, trying to steal the government’s money. The vaccine court quickly developed an institutional hostility toward doctors and scientists who dared to challenge the orthodoxy of vaccine medicine. Doctors willing to help petitioners were criticized for being too eager to “blame” the vaccines. An unspoken premise is ever-present: to acknowledge vaccine injury is to undermine public acceptance, and to threaten “herd immunity.” The public health agenda is the tribunal agenda and the DOJ agenda as well.
As hundreds of early awards were being made under the “Vaccine Injury Table,” the government had an entrenched position: the program bureaucracy, represented by the DOJ, insisted that the Table’s listed and defined immediate-onset injuries “would have happened anyway.” And suddenly there came an administrative coup, accomplished by overt agency legislation.
The Act empowered the Secretary of Health and Human Services to “amend” the Vaccine Injury Table, and in 1995 the Table was eviscerated. The underlying concepts written into the VICP were abandoned and repudiated. No longer were DPT and MMR vaccines presumed to cause immediate brain injuries following vaccination. “Actual causation” instantly became the standard for recovery. Every case would now be litigated with expert witnesses, with the tribunal in firm control of the petitioners’ available resources.
The modern proponents of a restricted administrative state would be appalled. One wonders how much a newer Supreme Court would defer to the 1995 outlook that this was not a separation of powers problem, and not a violation of the Presentment Clause. And even this does not define the worst constitutional defect.
In passing the VICP, Congress created an insurance remedy. But the private rights of injured children previously could have been the basis for a civil injury action in state courts. The right to seek justice and a civil damages remedy has been supplanted by a statutory entitlement to share in a fund, paid by a 75-cent tax on every vaccine. This substitution of remedies cannot be reconciled with the constitutional right to a jury trial.
The Seventh Amendment jurisprudence of the Supreme Court requires a jury trial whenever private rights are passed-upon judicially. And judicial remedies are adjudicated in Article III federal courts. Only if the compensation Program was just an alternative remedy, would there be no Seventh Amendment violation. But the Supreme Court’s 2011 decision in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth told the vaccine-injured community—the original advocates for the Act — that their court remedy had not been preserved. The immunity finding was an astonishing judicial coup on the part of Wyeth.
Curiously, an injured petitioner can “elect against” the compensation program (in favor of what, nobody knows) any time after the 240-day limit has expired. And the Act even provides that a petitioner must “elect against” a vaccine court judgment to preserve the right to a civil action. Yet there is no meaningful civil remedy. The vaccine court is used by the vaccine program—ostensibly in service of the “public health”—as a forum to prove that there is no such thing as a vaccine injury. “Confidence” in the safety net has been subordinated to the promotion of false confidence in the vaccination effort itself.
The moral hazard of the vaccine program reflects failure of the traditional checks and balances. The evolution of the program demonstrates how oppression can occur when legislative power is vested in the executive branch. It reflects how the delivery of justice will suffer when judicial power is diverted away from the Article III courts of law. It reflects the danger of vesting that judicial power within the executive branch. Most of all, the entire system embodies the way that the lack of accountability leads to increased risk.
Today, the proponents of compulsory vaccination in state legislatures have the temerity to tell their colleagues that there is no such thing as a vaccine injury. This claim emboldens a potential assault on the American family, and against the right of medical choice and informed consent. The “public health” cannot be served to allow government officials to make the risk-benefit calculation for their most vulnerable constituents when those decisions are corrupted by the fiction that their decision has no potential for negative consequences.
This Friday, vaccine safety advocates are gathering for an event in Washington, D.C., to ask President Trump to examine the flaws with the VICP and create a separate, independent agency to fully evaluate and monitor vaccine safety.
Robert Moxley is a sole practitioner in Cheyenne, Wyoming. He has defended the right of conscientious and religious objection to mandatory vaccination in federal courts across the country.