reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Robert Kennedy Junior fired the advisory committee on immunization practices. A video shows the committee discussing a new hepatitis B vaccine and the potential for administering it simultaneously with other adjuvanted vaccines. One member states there is "no data" to support a recommendation, and another says that mixing multiple adjuvanted vaccines is not done in Europe. Despite this, the committee votes unanimously to support the recommendation. A committee member expresses concern about a "myocardial infarction signal," noting the risk of acute myocardial infarction in the trial was thought to be seven times greater with the new vaccine. The speaker claims the FDA rubber-stamped the vaccine knowing it causes seven times the amount of heart attacks and was never tested for simultaneous administration with other vaccines, yet the vote was unanimous. The speaker asserts Dynavax celebrated the unanimous recommendation, leaving doctors blind to the risks and turning patients into a test group.

Bill Gates and WHO promoted the DTP vaccine, which was withdrawn in the US due to safety concerns. Despite this, it was given to African and Asian children. Danish scientists found that girls who received the vaccine were 10 times more likely to die from various illnesses. The vaccine's dangers were not noticed for 30 years due to lack of placebo-controlled trials, highlighting a widespread issue in vaccinology.

Congress investigated ACIP over two decades ago, finding conflicts of interest. In 2002/2003, four of five people who added the rotavirus vaccine had direct financial interest; one voted the rotavirus vaccine onto the schedule and sold his rotavirus vaccine for $186 million. Congress found that 97% of ACIP members had undisclosed conflicts. According to the speaker, a critical issue is adding new vaccines without pre-licensing safety studies. In 1986, there were 11 vaccines on the schedule; now, children must take 69 to 92 vaccines to stay in school in some states, none of which have been safety tested in pre-licensing placebo-controlled trials. The speaker states that the people in charge are now gone, and new, credentialed scientists and physicians will be brought onto the ACIP panel to do evidence-based medicine and make objective public health determinations based on science.

Changes to ACIP are occurring after over two decades of congressional investigation. In 2002/2003, a government oversight committee found conflicts of interest, citing that four out of five people who added the rotavirus vaccine to the schedule had direct financial interest in it. One individual voted the rotavirus vaccine onto the schedule and then sold his rotavirus vaccine in development for $186 million. That year, Congress stated that 97% of ACIP members had undisclosed conflicts. The speaker claims that adding new products to the schedule without pre-licensing safety studies is malpractice. In 1986, there were 11 vaccines on the schedule, but now children must take between 69 and 92 vaccines to stay in school in some states, and none have been safety tested in prelicensing placebo-controlled trials. The speaker states that the people in charge are now gone, and new credentialed scientists and physicians will be brought onto the ACIP panel to do evidence-based medicine and follow the science.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, Every Child by Two, and pediatrician Dr. Paul Offit are trusted voices in vaccine defense, but CBS News found they have financial ties to the vaccine industry. The vaccine industry gives millions to the Academy of Pediatrics for various purposes, but the totals are kept secret. Wyeth gave the Academy $342,000 for a community grant program, and Merck contributed $433,000 the same year the Academy endorsed Merck's HPV vaccine. Sanofi Aventis, a maker of 17 vaccines, is also a top donor. Every Child by Two admits to taking money from the vaccine industry, but wouldn't disclose the amount. An official from Wyeth and a paid adviser to big pharmaceutical clients have been listed as the group's treasurers. Dr. Offit holds a $1.5 million research chair funded by Merck and holds the patent on an anti-diarrhea vaccine he developed with Merck. Future royalties for the vaccine were sold for $182 million. The American Academy of Pediatrics, Every Child by Two and Doctor. Offit wouldn't agree to interviews, but all told CBS they're upfront about the money they receive and it doesn't sway their opinions.

Four companies, Pfizer, Merck, Blackstone, and Sanofi, are responsible for producing all 72 vaccines. However, these companies have a history of criminal activity, collectively paying $35 billion in fines for falsifying science, defrauding regulators, lying to doctors, and causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. For instance, Merck's product, Vioxx, was sold as a headache pill but caused heart attacks and killed around 120,500 Americans. Despite this, they only paid fines and faced no jail time. It is hard to believe that these companies, known for lying and cheating, are honest when it comes to vaccines. The vaccine industry is immune to lawsuits, making it the perfect place for these companies to avoid consequences.

The speaker states that a board was fired for being a "sock puppet" for the industry it regulated. In 2002, a government oversight committee held hearings about the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), finding that 97% of its members had undisclosed conflicts of interest. As an example, the speaker claims that when the ACIP approved the rotavirus vaccine, four of the five members had direct financial interests in it. One member, Paul Offit, allegedly voted to add the rotavirus vaccine to the schedule while he had a rotavirus vaccine in development. The approved vaccine was withdrawn due to causing intussusception. Offit's vaccine then replaced it. The speaker claims that Offit and his business partners sold that vaccine to Merck for $186 million.

The speaker claims that when the rotavirus vaccine was approved, four out of five board members had direct financial interests in it, working for the companies that made the vaccine or receiving grants to do clinical trials on it. One board member, Paul Offit, allegedly voted to add the rotavirus vaccine to the schedule while he had a rotavirus vaccine in development. The speaker says that because it's now on the schedule, his developing vaccine is virtually guaranteed to get on the schedule. The rotavirus vaccine that Offit voted on was withdrawn within a year because it was causing intussusception in kids. Offit's vaccine then replaced it. The speaker states that Offit and his business partners sold that vaccine to Merck for $186,000,000. The speaker says that Offit told Newsweek that he won the lottery and that it's been said of him that he voted himself rich.

"Well, we fired that board because they were it was an utterly it was just an instrument. It was a sock puppet for the industry that it was supposed to regulate." "They said that 97% of the people on that board had undisclosed conflicts, many of them that had disclosed conflicts as well." "rotavirus vaccine was approved by that board, and there were five members of that board at that time, and four of them had direct financial interests in the rotavirus vaccine." "The one they voted on, that he voted on, within a year it had to be withdrawn because it was causing this really disastrous disease in kids that is often lethal, called intussusception." "he and his business partners sold that vaccine to Merck for a $186,000,000. He told Newsweek that he won the lottery."

In 2007 trial, the placebo contained a toxic agent, affecting the comparison between vaccine and control groups. Both groups had 3% new autoimmune conditions, but it was dismissed. The lack of questioning raises concerns about vaccine safety. Comparing the 3% to general population rates would be logical. Individuals like Julie Gerberding and Peter Marks, who have ties to big pharma, may overlook such issues. Gerberding's move from CDC director to Merck's vaccines president with a $4,000,000 bonus raises ethical questions.

The speaker states the vaccine recommendation panel has been under attack for 20 years. A 2002 congressional investigation allegedly found 97% of panel members had conflicts of interest with the pharmaceutical industry. One instance cited four out of five members working for a company when they approved its vaccine, and one voting member held a patent on that vaccine, later sold for $186 million. The speaker says the goal is to ensure the panel consists of individuals without conflicts of interest who are not profiting from their votes. The speaker claims that since the panel's inception in 1986, the vaccine schedule has expanded from 11 doses of five vaccines to 69 to 92 doses of 19 vaccines, none of which have been tested for safety. The speaker asserts this is malpractice and aims to ensure all vaccines are tested for safety so physicians and patients understand the risk profile and benefits of each vaccine.

Nick, what does the Maha crew need to do and what do the people need to be demanding? First, we have to look in the past. Back in the nineteen fifties, they removed the Qatar polio vaccine for ten deaths. They removed the swine flu vaccine of nineteen seventies for twenty to fifty deaths. They removed the Rhoda Shield vaccine in 1999 due to ten cases of bowel obstruction. So regardless, it doesn't even matter. These vaccines have far surpassed the threshold for withdrawal of a product. There's just no argument. The data is there. There is no reason to deny it. People need to act accordingly with the data.

In the early 1980s in the United States, there were only three routine vaccines: DTP, MMR, and OPV, totaling seven injections for childhood, plus the adult and pregnancy schedules, which did not exist at the time. Manufacturers of these three products either stopped making them or went out of business due to injuries and the financial liability associated with those injuries. Typically, when a product harms people, a company would respond by making a better, safer version. The speaker notes that, for vaccines, Congress chose a different path. Instead of compelling manufacturers to improve safety or compensate victims, the United States Congress decided to provide immunity from liability. In 1986, Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which granted immunity to manufacturers for liability not only for those three early vaccines but for virtually all other vaccines made thereafter, including all childhood vaccines. The speaker emphasizes the contrast between the standard industry response to harm (improve the product) and the legislative approach taken with vaccines (immunity from liability). The implication highlighted is that this immunity allowed vaccine manufacturers to continue selling products despite injuries, shaping the broader vaccine landscape beyond the initial three vaccines.

Dr James Dunchwander, a physician with dual board certifications in emergency and integrative medicine, has spent 32 years evaluating thousands of children. He notes that parents, to their dying breath, say a vaccine caused their child to descend into autism, or a vaccine caused their child's neurologic disorder, asthma, eczema, or food allergy. He acknowledges a huge disconnect between what these parents are telling us and what is taught in the field. As an ER physician, he warns that ignoring mom or dad is perilous, but he is not here today to debate the safety and efficacy of vaccines. He will, however, challenge each member of the room to that debate and challenge the CDC, the NIH, and any university to a public forum, but he believes it will never happen because “The science isn't there.” He states that the biggest cause of vaccine hesitancy in this country is the lack of true vaccine science. He asks the committee to please the community council and to do their job. He admits he used to naively think that ASAP based all their recommendations on rigorous study of multiple trials determining safety and efficacy, but has since learned that ASAP is simply participating in an industry-wide phenomenon he terms junk science. He contends that junk science has allowed, with respect to colleagues in the room, the presentation of papers and studies that would never pass the rigors of a peer-reviewed journal if they were on any subject other than vaccines. He cites an example: a GSK paper on their MMR vaccine in which ten percent of these healthy 12-year-old babies ended up in an emergency room in six weeks, and two and a half percent of them developed a new chronic medical condition. He notes this was not compared to a placebo group or a delayed vaccine group, but to the current MMR two vaccine, describing the situation as the moral equivalent of comparing ten shots of whiskey to nine shots of whiskey and a shot of vodka, and saying vodka doesn’t cause intoxication. He also asserts that junk science allows vaccines we know don’t work to be doubled down, increasing the dose and frequency. He recalls seeing the committee in the last meeting look at the pneumococcal vaccine and say it doesn’t work, yet leave it on the schedule and leave it up to clinicians to determine whether to give it to a patient. He finishes by stating, “Please do your job.”

Key points discuss alleged vaccine safety concerns and political influence. An anecdote describes a two-year-old who “went to have the vaccine and came back and a week later got a tremendous fever, got very, very sick, now is autistic.” “President-elect Trump was very thoughtful on the issue. He asked the chair commission on vaccine safety.” “Vaccine safety.” The plan was to “chair and to assemble a vaccine safety committee that would look at the safety of the various vaccinations.” In March 2017, there was talk in the White House about whether “vaccines weren't a bad thing” with Robert Kennedy Jr. advising against it, to which the speaker replied, “no. That's a dead end. That would be a bad thing. Don't do that.” Finally, it is claimed Trump took “a million dollar contribution for his inaugural party from Pfizer” and appointed “Alex Azar and Scott Utley,” “Pfizer's handpicked candidates,” who “killed the vaccine safety commission.”

Vaccines are not subjected to true placebo-controlled trials before licensure. The DDP vaccine was pulled in the US due to lawsuits against drug companies. Wyeth, now Pfizer, requested full immunity from liability for all vaccines from the Reagan administration in 1986, threatening to leave the vaccine business. The company claimed they were losing $20 in downstream liability for every dollar of profit. When asked to make vaccines safe, they responded that "vaccines are unavoidably unsafe." This phrase is in the statute granting them immunity and was cited in the Brusowitz Supreme Court case. The industry obtained immunity by convincing the president and Congress that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe.

Vaccines are not subjected to true placebo-controlled trials before licensing. The DTP vaccine was pulled due to lawsuits against manufacturers like Wyeth (now Pfizer). In 1986, vaccine manufacturers requested immunity from liability from the Reagan administration, threatening to exit the vaccine business. They claimed they were losing $20 in liability for every $1 in profit. When asked to make vaccines safer, they responded that vaccines are "unavoidably unsafe." This phrase is in the statute granting them immunity and was upheld in the Brusowitz Supreme Court case. The industry obtained immunity by arguing to the president and Congress that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe.

The speaker claims a committee experienced typical conflict, but a specific conflict was particularly obvious. The Office of Inspector General and Congress investigated and urged change, but nothing happened. The speaker asserts this group committed medical malpractice by approving vaccines, increasing the number from 11 in 1986 to 69 and then 92. They state that, except for the COVID vaccine, none had pre-licensing safety trials with a true placebo. According to the speaker, these vaccines were introduced without safety studies, meaning the risk profiles are unknown. The speaker attributes this to corruption and agency capture.

A well-respected nurse practitioner shared a transcript of a secret meeting involving 52 vaccine industry officials and representatives from regulatory agencies like the FDA and CDC. This meeting was held off-campus to avoid freedom of information requests. They discussed a study using the Vaccine Safety Datalink, which analyzed hepatitis B vaccinations given within the first 30 days of life. The study found that children vaccinated during this period had an 1135% higher chance of later autism diagnoses. Autism rates have dramatically increased, from 1 in 10,000 in previous generations to 1 in 34 today. The meeting's transcript was published in Rolling Stone and Salon, but both outlets later withdrew the articles, marking the start of a conflict with the pharmaceutical industry.

Excitement surrounds the discussion of Pfizer's top-selling drugs as of 2019, which includes four medications and one vaccine. The clinical trials for these drugs involved long-term safety follow-ups, often lasting several years with placebo control groups to assess various health impacts. In contrast, the vaccine Prevnar had only a six-month safety review, using another vaccine as a control rather than a true placebo. This raises concerns about the thoroughness of safety evaluations for childhood vaccines, which are administered multiple times in the first six months of life. The disparity in study lengths suggests that economic interests may drive pharmaceutical companies to minimize safety testing to expedite market entry, raising questions about regulatory oversight.

Various vaccines are being linked to multiple industries. The motive behind this is money. The companies are earning $60 billion annually from vaccine sales, but a staggering $500 billion from selling remedies for vaccine-related injuries. This includes medications for diabetes, ADHD, asthma, seizures, and more. It's a profitable business strategy: make people sick and then provide them with lifelong treatments.

Various vaccines are being linked to multiple industries. The companies behind these vaccines are making $60 billion annually from vaccine sales, but they are also making $500 billion from selling remedies for vaccine-related injuries. These remedies include diabetes medication, Adderall, Ritalin, Advair inhalers, albuterol inhalers, and anti-seizure medications. It seems like a profitable business plan: make people sick and then sell them lifelong treatments.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, Every Child by Two, and Dr. Paul Offit are trusted voices in vaccine safety, but CBS News found they have financial ties to the vaccine industry. The vaccine industry gives millions to the Academy of Pediatrics for conferences, grants, medical education, and building costs. Wyeth gave $342,000 to the academy for a community grant, and Merck contributed $433,000 the same year the academy endorsed Merck’s HPV vaccine. Every Child by Two takes money from the vaccine industry, and its treasurers have included an official from Wyeth and a paid adviser to pharmaceutical clients. Dr. Offit holds a $1.5 million research chair at Children's Hospital funded by Merck and holds the patent on Rotatec, an anti-diarrhea vaccine he developed with Merck. Royalties for the vaccine were sold for $182 million. The American Academy of Pediatrics, Every Child by Two, and Dr. Offit say they are upfront about the money they receive and that it doesn’t sway their opinions.

The speaker says a board was fired for being a "sock puppet" for the industry it regulated. In 2002, a government oversight committee held hearings about the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), stating that 97% of its members had undisclosed conflicts of interest. The rotavirus vaccine's approval was cited as an example, with four out of five board members having direct financial interests in it. Paul Offit, who frequently speaks about vaccines, voted to add the rotavirus vaccine to the schedule while developing his own. After the rotavirus vaccine was mandated, Offit's vaccine was guaranteed to be on the schedule. The approved vaccine was withdrawn due to causing intussusception in children. Offit and his business partners then sold their rotavirus vaccine to Merck for $186 million.

Doctors at the Federal Communicable Disease Center acknowledge that the flu vaccine and its recommended dosage are ineffective; in a larger dose, it can be harmful. Nevertheless, the flu vaccine is still recommended for older people and the chronically ill. A senate subcommittee headed by Abraham Rebikoff charged that the federal government wasn’t doing a good enough job of informing the public about ineffective vaccines. Scientists at the Division of Biologic Standards test vaccines for potency and safety before licensing them for public use. However, the division does not determine the effectiveness of the vaccine. That is left to the manufacturers. A case in point is the influenza vaccine. Four scientists in charge of work on the flu vaccine during the 1960s found it to be ineffective, and they refused to give it to their own families. Two were transferred to other work, a third left the division, and over the entire ten-year period, not one word of their unfavorable findings was allowed to be published. But a more serious case involving the relationship between the leaders of the division and their scientists involves the adenovirus vaccine, a vaccine given to thousands of American soldiers to prevent certain cold-like symptoms. When it was shown that the vaccine contained a contaminant which caused cancer in laboratory animals, it was taken off the market. But that was three years after the division’s own scientists had pointed out the danger. Doctor Murray justifies the use of the vaccine by saying it took three years to examine the evidence against it. "It is more important to use the vaccines than to take them off the market and remove the agent." "It is more important to use the vaccines" "than to take them off the market" "and to remove the agent." Thus, for three years, American troops were injected with a cold-preventing vaccine, which was causing cancer in laboratory animals. And some of the division’s scientists who charged they were prevented from publishing results of experiments which show some of the vaccines to be ineffective. "It's the control officer in 1960 who has grave doubts about the potency of influenza vaccine. These doubts were made known to the director of the division and through the proper channels."