Tuesday, August 26, 2014
Age of Autism’s Dan Olmstead and Kent Heckenlively, among others, have been covering the developing story of a CDC autism study whose findings were allegedly altered. They reported that Dr. William W. Thompson—one of the authors of the 2004 CDC study that found no link between how early the MMR shot was administered and the development of autism—disclosed that he and others buried evidence about that study. In fact, according to a new study just published by Dr. Brian Hooker that was based on a reanalysis of the original data of the 2004 study, giving the MMR shot before 36 months increased the rate of autism in African American boys by a whopping 340 percent.
Provided the findings of Hooker’s study are correct, who at CDC and elsewhere in the government knew the authentic autism statistics in that study? Did the researcher or researchers act on their own, or were they ordered to change the findings? Were findings in other autism studies altered? Did Dr. Julie Gerberding, the head of CDC at the time (who now serves as the president of Merck’s vaccine division) know about the alleged tampering with the statistical analysis? Have any of the scientists who participated in the alleged tampering perjured themselves before Congress?
The story has yet to break on major networks and newspapers. CNN weighed in for about a minute, summoning, Dan Olmsted wrote, attorney Dorit Reiss to comment that even if the claims about the CDC study were correct, “which is doubtful, it would show that for most of the population MMR does not cause autism.” In what universe is that reassuring? Not surprisingly, CNN quickly yanked the clip from its lineup.
Add to the mix Congressman Bill Posey’s (R/Florida) disgust with what he calls CDC’s “incestuous” relationship with the vaccine makers. Will he help get to the bottom of this?
There’s a video hosted by Dr. Andrew Wakefield about the 2004 study and a petition to retract the study; click here to see both.