For Immediate Release
Please freely disseminate with copyright intact
UnInformed Consent

CDC Calls Safety “Review” On Mercury in Vaccines and links to Autism.
February 4, 2004

UNINFORMED CONSENT, SEATTLE WA —  Flying on the heels of misrepresentations that the latest flu vaccine is safe, the CDC, (Centers for Disease Control), has called an 11th hour hearing with the US National Institute of Medicine, (NIM), an institute under the US National Academy of Sciences, (NAS), and a member of a fraternity of government agencies commissioned by the government that is funded by taxpayer’s money - agencies that are to oversee the safety of pharmaceuticals and medical practices marketed to the American public.

The US National Institute of Medicine, will hear only 20 minutes each of called experts and spend just one day reviewing virtually all vaccines containing the powerful poison Thimerosal, (ethyl mercury). Experts from all over the world will share studies and testimony about the safety of Thimerosal and autism used in vaccines, including this year’s flu vaccine, and many other medications, some undisclosed on labeling.

The hearing, being watched carefully by a large portion of the American public and experts alike, is scheduled Monday at 8:00AM – 5:30PM, February 9, 2004, will be held in the auditorium at the NAS Bldg at 2100 C Street, NW, Washington, DC 20418. go to NAS Agenda

The CDC has experienced waning credibility since the publishing of the ill-fated Verstraeten Study in the November 2003 issue of the peer-reviewed ‘Pediatrics’. The study was sponsored by the CDC and authored by Dr. Thomas Verstraeten stating there is no connection between Thimerosal and Autism.

Amidst disturbing allegations of excessive manipulation of data in the published Verstraeten study, Congressman Weldon formally requested Dr. Julie L Gerberding, one-year-old appointee and director of the CDC, to personally investigate the charges. go to Weldon letter

In the past few months the CDC launched a massive marketing campaign, making national headlines, claiming that not only was the flu vaccine safe but supplies of the vaccine were dwindling thus prompting long lines and anxiety among the public sector. The CDC has since recanted some of those claims.

The CDC campaign appeared to be in response to public claims by numerous scientists and doctors that the vaccine was for the wrong strain and contained 25 ug of thimerosal, (ethyl mercury), a powerful bio accumulative neurotoxin linked to recent epidemic levels of autism, speech delays and ticks in children and contributing to mental and immune disorders in a dramatic portion of the population.

Studies now show that the flu vaccine appeared to have little if any prophylactic affect and those who were vaccinated were 2 –3 times more likely to contract the flu, go to CDC study. The question of whether there was really a shortage or an over abundance of inventory needing purchase is still in heated controversy.

As the date of the NIM hearing nears, Dr. Mark R. Geier and associates, under congressional authority, have been continuing their two year effort to extract information from the CDC’s own Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System, (VAERS), to report their findings back to Congress and to the February 9th hearing with the NIM.

While Geiers continue to attempt to extract information from the CDC’s databases, the CDC continues to put up unreasonable roadblocks necessitating direct phone calls to US Congressmen for access.

“The CDC feels it necessary to provide two monitors per individual present, one to watch and the other to mark out information they feel we shouldn’t have under congressional authority,” says Geier. Serendipitously, during the most recent visit, the CDC governmental computer system crashed.

In December 2002, Geier testified before the US Congressional Committee for Government Reform that “they, (the CDC), seem to put up continually, additional steps, fees and hindrances. They seem to make the realistic possibility of ever getting access to the Vaccine Safety Database, (VSD), remote.” US Congressman Dan Burton, (R-IN), and then chair of the committee promised to ease this stonewalling in the future.

Geier is a physician, geneticist and vaccine researcher since 1970. He has been working with Congress and doing research for over 30 years as a board certified geneticist and has published in over 30 different peer-reviewed publications. He is among the experts who will be testifying at the NAS hearing on Monday.

Geiers originally stated the recently published CDC/Verstraeten study in the November issue of Pediatrics was watered down to cover up the true danger of mercury in vaccines. Now, according to Geier, they have discovered a major technical error in the calculation of mercury. It appears that Verstraeten may not have correctly counted the amount of mercury-free inoculations given in the study thus creating a 20% - 30% error rate - understating - the incidence of autism.

Neil Halsey of John Hopkins University, in a letter to Pediatrics, dated Dec. 17, 2003, stated the study is flawed and demanded an independent investigation. go to Halsey's letter to Pediatrics

In another letter to Pediatrics, accepted but not yet published, the Geiers demonstrated their findings, other numerous errors and have demanded an immediate retraction of the study from publication.

The author, Dr. Thomas Verstraeten, has been working for GlaxoSmithKline in Belguim since 2001 shortly after the first version of this study stunned government scientists, doctors and researchers. He has been unavailable for comment.

The National Institutes of Health, (NIH), last month faced similar accusations in hearings in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee and the House Government Reform Committee on the common practice these agencies have of collaborating financially with private pharma to promote pharmaceutical products in the marketplace.

In a series of reports by David Willman and Jon Marino in the LA Times last month, numerous drug related deaths were linked with NIH personnel and undisclosed relationships with pharma who produced the drugs in question. go to Dec 7th, 2003 LA Times story

According to the LA Times articles, very few NIH personnel disclose outside income. NIH directors receive salaries of $200,000 and up. In November 1995 the NIH felt this was not enough to attract quality personnel so, then-NIH Director, Harold E. Varmus wrote to all institute and center directors, rescinding "immediately" a policy that had barred them from accepting consulting fees and payments of stock from outside companies. This quietly facilitated lowering the ethics standards for NIH personnel allowing them to collect millions in addition to government salaries in consultant fees, stock options and speaking engagements without public disclosure.

In response to the LA Times articles a series of Senate hearings convened. On Friday, January 23, 2004, in the US Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human services and Education chaired by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), was told by the leader of the NIH, Dr. Elias A. Zerhouni, that effective immediately “no director has any outside biotechnology pharmaceutical relationship. Those have been stopped.”

Undaunted, Senator Specter asked, “Is there any reason why a governmental employee making as much as the vice president should not be required to fill out a public financial disclosure form? This subcommittee is prepared to do it if you don’t.” go to Jan. 23rd, 2004 LA Times story

The Food and Drug Administration, (FDA), (not to be left out of these popular compensation practices), after over a year of requests, were forced by the US Committee for Government Reform and it’s subcommittee on Human Rights and Wellness to look into identical accusations for its safety stance on the implantation of mercury in dental amalgam and the connection to mercury in vaccines this last fall.

In response to the congressional request, the FDA turned to the Life Sciences Research Office, (LSRO), a 40-year-old non-profit scientific organization in Bethesda, MD, which describes itself as a “widely accepted, authoritative source, independent from special-interest groups and politics” and producing “timely, comprehensive, state-of-the science review.” go to ADA coverage

However, a visit to LSRO’s website reveals a stunning cartel of who’s who of pharmaceutical interests, medical schools and government officials from their registry of fellows, alumni and board members to their disclosure of salaries and funding sources on their annual financial reports. go to LSRF website - financials

On December 12, 2003, the LSRO held a panel of American Dental Association, (ADA), reviewers on behalf of the review sponsors: the FDA, the CDC and the NIH. Although most experts, as per congressional wishes, testified to an alarming amount of science pointing to the basis of an epidemic of health issues, these organizations continue to report there is no basis for concern despite the showing of a video of mercury vaporizing from a 50-year-old amalgamed tooth at the beginning of the meeting. see smoking tooth None of the adverse testimonies were released to the public by the LSRO, the FDA, the NIH, the CDC or the ADA.