- The Facts:
In a recent lawsuit, the CDC admitted in federal court that they have no studies, evidence or science proving that vaccines don't cause autism.
- Reflect On:
Why did they lie for years about this? Why did they conduct a massive media campaign shaming those that questioned vaccines? Why did they invent the term 'anti-vaxxer' to put people who question vaccines in a negative light?
Update: Some are struggling to grasp the point of this article. It’s not a discussion of the difficulty of proving a negative, it’s the fact the CDC lied for years about something they claimed they factually and scientifically knew, when they did not. Again, the CDC claimed the science was settled, when in reality there was no science. THAT’s the story.
Update 2: Health Feedback, a “fact checking” organization, has claimed this story is fake news. Their argument is completely illogical and does not accurately address the actual claims in this article. They instead point to other facts to make a point they seem to feel pressured to make. We are preparing a report to showcase how Health Feedback’s review of this content is both false, irresponsible and misleading to the public.
This is truly a bombshell story when you understand the full implications of it, yet major media likely will not touch it. Headlines could read “In stunning lawsuit, CDC admits they have no evidence vaccines don’t cause autism” – but instead, crickets. Independent media organizations like CE are left to have to tell these stories, and at the same time risk more demonetization for telling the truth that the public should know. Of course, we also know that since independent media’s reach has been cut, getting stories like this out is very hard and relies on you, the dear reader, to spread the word.
As of March 2nd, 2020, the CDC has admitted in federal court documents that they do not have any evidence to support the claim that vaccines given to babies up to 6 months don’t cause autism. For years they claimed that the studies had been done, the evidence was clear, and that there was a consensus: “vaccines don’t cause autism.” Yet, this was a lie.
An organization called the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) was instrumental in bringing forth this admission. As they stated in their own press release:
In summer 2019, ICAN submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the CDC requesting “All studies relied upon by CDC to claim that the DTaP vaccine does not cause autism.” ICAN also submitted this same request for HepB, Hib, PCV13 and IPV, as well as requesting the CDC provide studies to support the cumulative exposure to these vaccines during the first six months of life do not cause autism. Despite months of demands, the CDC failed to produce a single specific study in response to these FOIA requests. ICAN was therefore forced to sue the CDC in federal court, where the CDC finally conceded, in a stipulation signed by a Federal court judge, that that it has no studies to support that any of these vaccines do not cause autism.
ICAN’s strategy was to focus on vaccines given within the first 6 months of a baby’s life as per the standard schedule as this is when autism can start to be diagnosed. It should further be reiterated that ICAN asked for studies to show that the cumulative exposure to these vaccines, i.e. how they react together in the body, does not lead to autism.
In short, the CDC provided a list of 20 studies that were to claim these vaccines did not cause autism, only, none of these studies proved that. Within the list of 20, the CDC provided 18 studies that had nothing to do with the vaccines ICAN was focusing on. This either means that the CDC does not have any studies, or they do not want to provide them. The other two studies were interesting. One was a review by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), which was paid for by the CDC. This study performed a comprehensive review of studies relating to the DTaP vaccine. It was looking to determine general adverse reactions to vaccines including whether or not vaccines do or do not cause autism. The IOM was unable to identify a single study to support that DTaP does not cause autism.
“Conclusion 10.6: The evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between diphtheria toxoid-, tetanus toxoid-, or acellular pertussis-containing vaccine and autism.”
What this means is that the CDC does not have studies that show there is no link between these vaccines and autism, thus the CDC cannot make the claim that vaccines don’t cause autism. This, of course, doesn’t mean they are saying vaccines do cause autism.
The last of the remaining two studies focused on antigens found in vaccines. This is the bacteria or virus used in the vaccines. The question was if there is more virus or more bacteria, would it increase the risk of autism? The study concluded that it made no difference how much bacteria or virus was used. Further, in the conclusion of the study they admitted that the study doesn’t prove that vaccines don’t cause autism.
“It can be argued that ASD with regression, in which children usually lose developmental skills during the second year of life, could be related to exposure in infancy, inicluding vaccines; however, we found no association between exposure to antigens from vaccinees during infancy and the development of ASD withh regression.”
Ultimately, the CDC was asked to provide studies to prove that vaccines given with the first six months of life do not cause autism. They could not provide any, not one.
So how. does the CDC make this claim on their website as you can see in the image below?
They make that claim with no scientific backing and with no evidence. It’s simply a statement. Even if they have evidence that the MMR vaccine doesn’t cause autism, it doesn’t mean other vaccines don’t. For years, the CDC falsely claimed that “vaccines don’t cause autism.” In turn, those that questioned vaccines were called anti-vaxxers, unscientific and extreme about their views, yet were they wrong to claim that vaccines may cause autism? Were they wrong to question the safety of vaccines? Sure, this does not prove that vaccines do cause autism, but that’s not the point. The point is instead of doing the proper research and ensuring the public vaccines are safe, the CDC chose to lie and start a campaign of ridicule against those that questioned vaccines.
“We Don’t Know”
One could argue that if the CDC was being responsible and honest they would have said “we don’t know” when it comes to whether or not vaccines are linked to autism. This is in fact the correct response to the question “do vaccines cause autism?” This has been the correct response since many years ago when people began asking the question. Instead, the CDC elected to claim that the science shows vaccines don’t cause autism, which was unscientific and dishonest.
The detail that hits close to home for us here at CE is that fact-checkers have been handing out false claims about our vaccine content, stating that “vaccines don’t cause autism.” This has led to a reduction in our reach and the near-complete destruction of our business due to demonetization. Yet, where did these fact-checkers get their information from? The CDC? And now we know, the CDC never had the evidence to make the claims they made about all vaccines, and the fact-checkers were in fact wrong or truly misinformed. These false claims from the CDC have also effectively led to creating a culture of blind vaccine acceptance even though there is no evidence they are safe.
This leads to the challenge not many are realizing about fact-checking organizations like Snopes, or the ones that work on Facebook; what they do, is turn to major organizations and the government to get their ‘facts.’ And those facts overrule anything brought forth that challenges those ‘facts.’ So essentially fact-checkers are merely purveyors of facts produced by governments and major corporations. Some also happen to be paid by major corporations.
“The most recent data from CDC shows that 1 in 36 children born this year in the USA will develop autism,[…] This is a true epidemic. If the CDC had spent the same resources studying vaccines and autism, as it did waging a media campaign against parents that claim vaccines caused their child’s autism, the world would be a better place for everyone.”
The CDC complains that those raising concerns about vaccine safety are unscientific and misinformed,” […]“But when we asked the CDC for studies to support its claim that ‘vaccines do not cause autism,’ it is clear that their claim is not grounded in science.” – Del Bigtree, Founder of ICAN
One thing you will also notice is that fact-checkers never address the studies provided that do link vaccines to autism. Instead, only studies from experts they deem worthy are to be taken seriously. There is an abundance of science showing that vaccines could be linked to autism, in many different ways. Take aluminum for example, A study published in 2018 discovered high amounts of aluminum in the brain tissue of people with autism:
Human exposure to aluminium has been implicated in ASD with conclusions being equivocal , , , . To-date the majority of studies have used hair as their indicator of human exposure to aluminium while aluminium in blood and urine have also been used to a much more limited extent. Paediatric vaccines that include an aluminium adjuvant are an indirect measure of infant exposure to aluminium and their burgeoning use has been directly correlated with increasing prevalence of ASD . Animal models of ASD continue to support a connection with aluminium and to aluminium adjuvants used in human vaccinations in particular .
The fact that aluminum in adjuvant form does not exit the body as aluminum in our own food, for example, is one of multiple ways that scientists have shown how vaccines could be implicated in the onset of autism. You can read more about vaccines and aluminum specifically, here.
This is not the first time in history that major health organizations, scientists and doctors claimed that something was safe when it wasn’t. Look at cigarettes, agent orange, and DDT. These were just a few that became common knowledge after many people brought awareness forward about the dangers associated with these products. All the while, the companies who owned them, and their cronies fought to claim these people were unscientific, liars and wrong.
Are we seeing this now with vaccines? It sure seems to be following the same pattern. One thing I always look at is if major organizations cannot answer the simple question, and instead turn to ridicule, name-calling and media campaigns to cast doubt, then you know they are hiding something. In my feeling, the CDC knows full well the dangers of vaccines, and they are buying time to figure out how to keep themselves clean for when the cards fall. Because they will.
This, of course, is all part of a greater awakening that is taking place amongst humanity right now as we collectively move from a state of childhood into adulthood. Empowering ourselves as individuals, changing our relationship with the earth, each other, and ourselves. Shifting the way we idolize and put money above everything else. Of course, seeing past the deceptions of today is an early step in this evolution of consciousness. I outline all of this in my 4 part video series about these ongoing changes.
Ghislaine Maxwell Arrested By FBI on Charges Connected To Jeffrey Epstein
What Happened: Jeffrey Epstein’s confidant Ghislaine Maxwell was arrested this morning in New Hampshire according to FBI spokeswoman Adrienne Senatore. At this time, charges against Maxwell are sealed, and prosecutors have scheduled a midday press conference in New York to provide more details on the case.
Charges against Maxwell came almost a year after Epstein was arrested by FBI agents on July 6, 2019. Jeffrey Epstein allegedly killed himself in a federal jail in August 2019, although many believe he was killed given he could name many high profile figures connected to his ring.
Why It Matters: Maxwell is heavily connected to sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein who operated a sex/pedophile ring that tailored to high profile individuals, business people, entertainers and politicians.
Her arrest may be important in helping to bring down more people connected to the ring which include Hillary and Bill Clinton amongst other high profile names.
Humanity is in a process of ‘Breaking the Illusion’ we have come to accept about our reality. We have been living from a collective story that states we elect good people into government, and they act on our best interest. This categorically is not the case, and part of our collective awakening to creating solutions that can make our world thrive is waking up from this illusion we have chosen to accept.
People are beginning to learn en masse that high profile figures are involved in such acts like extreme occult rituals, sex trafficking and pedophilia, and they are beginning to wonder why. They are also beginning to question why we put our trust and support in people who operate in this manner.
We have interviewed a survivor of elite pedophile rings like the one Epstein and Maxwell ran. Her name is Anneke Lucas and you can watch her full testimony here on CETV.
You can also watch a recent documentary called Out of Shadows that explores this topic in detail on CETV as well.
Read more about Epstein ad Maxwell here.
Environmentalist Censored For Shifting His Opinion On Climate Change
- The Facts:
Forbes.com deleted a new article from environmentalist Michael Shellenberger. His perspective on climate change shifted, and he decided to write about it. Forbes wasn't having it.
- Reflect On:
Why are we deciding to censor different perspectives as opposed to explore them? Is our emotional intelligence so undeveloped collectively that we cannot have civil conversations?
What Happened: Michael Shellenberger, a long time environmentalist who has been in the trenches helping to save the world’s last unprotected redwoods, co-created the predecessor to today’s Green New Deal and led an effort to keep nuclear power plants operating in order to prevent a spike of emissions, has shifted his perspective on climate change. Prior to today, he was holding the perspective that we must be alarmed about the fact that the world will end in a short amount of time if we don’t act to reduce carbon emissions immediately.
He shifted his opinion based on exploring emerging science on the subject. He then went on to write a book called Never Apocalypse, which seeks to help explore what we can do to better our environment from a grounded and accurate point of view, as opposed to alarmism.
He wrote an article on Forbes website titled “On Behalf of Environmentalists, I Apologize For the Climate Scare.” Two days later, Forbes decided to remove his article.
Why It Matters: The fact that Forbes removed an article that was grounded, calm, well written and explored new conversations illustrates the emerging culture of ‘censor anything that can get us in trouble’ or ‘censor anything that doesn’t agree with mainstream conjecture.”
We’ve come into a time where our collective lack of emotional intelligence is surfacing deeply for us to address. When we disagree on something, we struggle to explore things together. When a company says something they feel might get them in trouble, they run away in fear that the angry mob will come after them.
All that happened here was a man wrote an article that brought some new light to a conversation that has been very polarized and is causing people to react out of emotion instead of logic and the heart. Instead of listening and exploring, censorship ensues.
The Takeaway: I spoke at a high school here in Toronto last year. At the end of my talk, many students came up to me to talk, discuss ideas and share feedback. The vast majority of them explained to me that they were terrified that the world was going to end in just a few years. They felt they had no future because of the acts of generations prior who were causing CO2 levels to rise so high that the world would end.
I thought to myself, wow, an entire generation of kids being pushed into fear, anxiety and depression based on information that isn’t even accurate. This information was created by politicians and pushed out by media. Scientists categorically do not agree with the idea that the world is coming to an end as a result of CO2 emissions. Yet not enough people are telling people this, most of media is staying silent on other perspectives and censorship even shuts down opposing ideas.
What type of world will we create if we can’t discuss basic ideas? What type of world will we create when we choose to run, hide and censor as opposed to having important conversations? How can we stop identifying so deeply with positions, so that we can be more free to shift ideas when new information helps us understand things better?
I made a film last year called Regenerate: Beyond The CO2 Narrative. After 10 years of researching and investigating climate change, I came to many conclusions that I felt needed to be shared, yet were extremely rare in public discourse. One of the most important aspects of Regenerate was that we simply are looking at our environment from such a limited point of view that we can’t identify the real issues we face, and that our level of thinking, or consciousness, is completely disconnected from the solutions required to truly shift our relationship with earth. Thus, we are creating solutions that never truly address making the environment cleaner or better long term.
I encourage you to check out the film trailer below, and if you wish to watch the film, it’s available on our member platform called CETV. You can start a free 7 day trial to watch it if you like. We also discuss this story in more detail in episode 2 of The Takeway, an orignal show we have on CETV.
Soft Drink Companies Caught Using Big Tobacco’s Playbook To Lure Young Children
- The Facts:
Documents obtained by researchers clearly outline the unethical and immoral actions Tobacco companies used to 'hook' kids onto sugary drinks. They use the same tactics they did for smoking.
- Reflect On:
Why do and have our federal health regulatory agencies allow such products to be approved as safe for consumption when they are clearly linked to a variety of diseases, like cancer?
Many moves made by multiple big corporations are extremely unethical, immoral, and downright shocking. These corporations have completely compromised our federal health regulatory agencies, and it’s quite clear that they do not care about the health of the human race and will do anything when it comes to the success of the products they manufacture, including taking illegal and/or immoral actions.
One of the more recent examples comes from the tobacco industry. Companies within the industry used colors, flavors, and marketing techniques to lure and entice children as potential future smokers. They actually used and applied these same strategies to sweetened beverages starting as early as 1963, according to a study conducted by researchers at UC San Francisco.
As the Sugar Scientists point out:
The study, which draws from a cache of previously secret documents from the tobacco industry that is part of the UCSF Industry Documents Library tracked the acquisition and subsequent marketing campaigns of sweetened drink brands by two leading tobacco companies: R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris. It found that as tobacco was facing increased scrutiny from health authorities, its executives transferred the same products and tactics to peddle soft drinks. The study was published in the March 2019 issue of BMJ.
“Executives in the two largest U.S.-based tobacco companies had developed colors and flavors as additives for cigarettes and used them to build major children’s beverage product lines, including Hawaiian Punch, Kool-Aid, Tang and Capri Sun,” said senior author Laura Schmidt, PhD, MSW, MPH, of the UCSF Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies. “Even after the tobacco companies sold these brands to food and beverage corporations, many of the product lines and marketing techniques designed to attract kids are still in use today.” (source)
The new papers, which are available in the UCSF Truth Tobacco Industry Documents Library, a subset of the UCSF Industry Documents Library, reveal the close and tight knit relationships between the big tobacco and big food industries. In fact, in the 60s and 70s, these companies conducted taste tests with mothers and their children to evaluate sweetness, colors and flavors for Hawaiian Punch product line extensions. The children’s preferences were prioritized.
Kool-Aid Joins Marlboro
Meanwhile, tobacco competitor Philip Morris had acquired Kool-Aid, via General Foods, in 1985. The company flipped its marketing audience from families to children, created its “Kool-Aid Man” mascot, and launched collaborations with branded toys, including Barbie and Hot Wheels. It also developed a children’s Kool-Aid loyalty program described as “our version of the Marlboro Country Store,” a cigarette incentives program. (source)
“The Wacky Wild Kool-Aid style campaign had tremendous reach and impact,” said first author Kim Nguyen, ScD, MPH, who is also with the UCSF Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies. “Lots of kids in the ’80s dreamed of getting swag from the Wacky Warehouse. What is really ‘wacky’ is that the Kool-Aid kid program was modeled after a tobacco marketing strategy designed to build allegiance with smokers.”
The tobacco giant also acquired Capri Sun and Tang, and used similar child-focused integrated marketing strategies to drive those sales.
“The industry claims that these tobacco-inspired marketing strategies are not actually targeting children and should be excluded from these industry-led agreements,” said Schmidt. “But the evidence cited in our research shows that these product lines and marketing techniques were specifically designed for and tested on children.” (source)
The UCSF Industry Documents Library was launched in 2002 as a digital portal for tobacco documents. Today, the library includes close to 15 million internal tobacco, drug, chemical and food industry documents used by scientists, policymakers, journalists and community members in their efforts to improve and protect the health of the public.
At the end of the day, it’s important to recognize that government health authorities and the corporations we buy our food from, among other things, really don’t care about us. This has become extremely evident, as they are responsible for the sharp rise in numerous diseases. It’s not uncommon to see parents buy their children products similar to the ones listed above, and that’s due to mass brainwashing and the fact that we’ve been made to feel that these products are actually safe. This is why awareness is so critical.
Have You Been Seeing Crows? What The Crow Symbolizes (More Than Just Death)
The other morning I ran out to my car to grab my purse when I heard the loudest “CAW” from...
“The Level of Stupidity Going On Here Is Amazing” – Nobel Laureate For Science On Covid-19 Lockdown
As many of you reading this may already be aware, a number of prominent scientists around the world have been...