December 6, 2014

Cassandra Grantham of MaineHealth/VaxMaineKids.org Makes False Vaccine Safety Claims on MPBN's Maine Calling

Hey Mainer's... you know that ours is the next state to have a target painted on its vaccine exemptions by Offit and CHOP Co., right?  Meet Cassandra Grantham, Maine's very own Offiteer.  She is telling some whoppers about vaccine safety research.

Remember last year when Kim Spencer went on a local news broadcast and tore into Dr. Koren Boggs for claiming that there were "several" domestic and international studies that compared vaccinated children to unvaccinated children and found vaccination did not increase the risk for autism?  And remember that it pissed me off so much that I made a video rant about it and we demanded a retraction?

Boggs would not make a public retraction of her false claims, but she did privately admit on facebook to her friends that she was wrong.  Sort of.  About part of what she said.  Pitiful.

This week Cassandra Grantham of MaineHealth and Vax Maine Kids takes center stage in making up the same bogus claim on Maine Public Broadcasting.

On MBPN's Maine Calling, Host Jennifer Rooks lead a completely uncritical "panel discussion" with three of the women who are on the "lets cripple the philosophical exemption" team in Maine, Dr. Laura Blaisdell, Dr. Amy Belisle and Cassandra Grantham.

You will remember two of these ladies as some of the participants in the screening of the Invisible Threat that I unloaded on last summer.  Back story here: Invisible Threat, Ugh.

During the episode of Maine Calling, Ms. Rooks asked Cassandra Grantham, "What kind of research is out there about the safety of vaccines?"  Grantham's response was the same stunningly fraudulent claim that Boggs made last year.  Actually, her claims were worse.  That there were new vaxxed/altvaxxed/fully vaxxed studies (my fantasy study) that showed no link between autism or other risks and vaccination.


Absolutely amazing.  She just completely fabricated completely non existent research, and does it with such confidence!  Who could doubt her!

Actually... she might be on to something.  We could save BILLIONS in research spending by just speaking research into existence instead of having to go through the costly and time consuming process of actually doing research.

I think I will do that right now!  Watch carefully...

So what's really great is that many organizations have put a lot of time and effort into understanding the profound impact of beauty on the world, and there have been several recent studies that have come out showing that I am THE most attractive woman in New England.  Further they recommended that funding should be directed toward a program to make my life as comfortable as possible to preserve my rare beauty.

There!  Research done, not a penny spent!  I also heartily agree with the recommendations of these fine scientists, whose names I can't remember, because they are scientists and you are not so don't question it.  Science has spoken.

Following the screening of Invisible Threat last summer, Ms. Grantham actually emailed me and said she wanted to have an exchange on my concerns.  I thought, "hey great... a good faith person who actually is following through on the creating a dialogue BS that the vaccine industry reps usually don't mean at all."  I gave her just a taste of the problems I had with the vaccine program, and a lengthy note or two on how her VaxMaineKids.org web site was so full of false information that it would have to be taken off line with in minutes of the repeal of the vaccine injury act or they would be sued into oblivion.   But as soon as I gave her a rundown of just the start of the problems that needed to be address, and asked how she would like to proceed with the exchange, she suddenly changed her mind and decided she didn't want to talk with me any more.  I will put up the email exchange in another blog.

But as a preview as to what a propagandist this woman has turned out to be, her website states, "No other medical study anywhere in the world has ever found a link between vaccines and autism. Not one."  I sent her the list of studies that linked vaccines and autism, and she said she only accepted peer review studies.  An admission that either she does not know what peer reviewed studies are or that she is a bad faith player who was cornered and gave a BS answer.  I have to assume she never even opened the link.  Mind you this is a MaineHealth web site, one of the largest health corporations in the state.

So today I finally got the time to write to Cassandra, call her out on her bold face lie, and ask her to cite these vaxxed v. unvaxxed autism studies or retract her claim.  I have copied MPBN, MaineHealth, a Maine Rep. who called into the program, and Dr. Blaisdell, who sat quietly by and allowed Grantham's lie to go unchallenged.
Subject: False Vaccine Safety Claims made by MaineHealth on MPBN's Maine Calling
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 16:45:00 -0500
From: Ginger Taylor <GTaylor@HealthChoice.org>
To: Cassandra Grantham 
CC: Laura Blaisdell, Mark Vogelzang MPBN, Jennifer Rooks and Jonathan Smith MPBN, Rep. Andrea Boland, Andrea Dodge Patstone MaineHealth


Ms. Grantham,

This week on MPBN's Maine Calling, in response to a question about vaccine safety, you made the following claim:
MPBN: “Cassandra what kind of research is out there about the safety of vaccines?”

Cassandra Grantham: “So what's really great is that is that many different organizations have put a lot of time and effort into understanding the safety and efficacy behind vaccines and there have been several recent studies that have actually come out looking at associations between vaccinations and different situations that kids may find themselves in, autism being one of them, but many others. And of course we can't do studies that actually force families not to immunize their children so that we can look at what we would call it a randomized controlled trial, it's just not fair. So what we have been able to do is look back over time at different populations of children and we've actually found that kids who are immunized, completely immunized with all of the vaccines according to the the schedule that Dr.
Blaisdell was mentioning the one that recommended by the CDC, that they have no higher risk of getting autism and some of these other developmental challenges that families face than those kids that delayed or did not receive any immunizations at all. So we're finding that there is research that is now delving deeper into this topic and actually proving that the CDC's recommended schedule is safe and it does work and it doesn't increase risks of other situations for kids.”
To the best of my knowledge, this is a false claim, as no such research exists.  This as testified to by Dr. Coleen Boyle, Director of CDC's National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities during the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee hearing 1 in 88 Children: A Look Into the Federal Response to Rising Rates of Autism on November 29, 2012.  In response to a question whether or not autism risk had been studied in vaccinated v. unvaccinated children Dr. Boyle stated, "We have not studied vaccinated v. unvaccinated."  http://youtu.be/O_GrCAzpA_0?t=9m20s (please see the notes in the video that addresses the claims made by Dr. Koren Boggs that such research exists in further detail.)

My understanding of the history of this topic is that the first such request for a study was made by the FDA in 1981 after they removed mercury from over the counter products.  FDA declined to ban it from vaccines, asking CDC to first do a vaccinated v. unvaccinated study to see if it increased health risks, however CDC declined to perform the study.

The autism and vaccine injury communities have been asking for such a retrospective study to be done for more than a decade now, and health authorities have continued to refuse.  Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) introduced the Comprehensive Comparative Study of Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Populations Act of 2007 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.2832:) to force NIH to do such a study, and reintroduced such legislation in the years since.  In response to what he learned from Dr. Boyle during the 2012 hearings, Rep Bill Posey (R-FL) joined with Maloney and introduced H.R. 1757, The Vaccine Safety Study Act (https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/2013/04/26/extensions-of-remarks-section/article/E576-1) that would again compel HHS to perform the study that you claim already exists. 

The bill was not passed, nor to my knowledge has any vaccinated v. unvaccinated research on autism or any other developmental disabilities been published since Dr. Boyle offered her testimony before Congress.

As such it is appropriate for you to either produce the citation for this research that the vaccine injury community has been lobbying for, or to retract your false safety claims on MPBN for the product line you are representing.

Your false claims are only made more egregious by the fact that you have publicly stated in the Portland Press Herald that, "Eliminating the philosophic [vaccine] exemption is the ultimate goal."  It is my belief that you are purposely lying to the public in order to remove parental rights and deny Maine children a Free And Appropriate Education in order to promote sales of a product line whose lack of safety is thoroughly documented both by the federal government and the product packaging itself.  This type of propaganda sales campaign should not be tolerated by any responsible medical professional, health organization, media outlet or legislator. (http://www.pressherald.com/2014/08/14/state-legislators-to-seek-stronger-vaccine-laws/)

I await your response,

Ginger Taylor, MS
Mother of a vaccine injured child
Co-author of Vaccine Epidemic
Media Director
HealthChoice.org
Facebook
Twitter
818-402-9672
Why aren't people vaccinating?  I will say it again and again and again.  Because the liability protection given to vaccine interests has very visibly corrupted the vaccine program to the bone.

Many of their claims are garbage.  To the point that their sales teams can pose as "public health interests" go on a supposedly thoughtful, intelligent program, make absurdly fraudulent, easily vetted, vaccine safety claims, which go completely unchallenged by the media, and there is literally no official recourse that the public can take to shut them down or hold them accountable for lies.

Case in point, the ONLY means of recourse I have, as a member of the public and the mother of a vaccine injured child, to address this false claim, for which she should be fired and MaineHealth should be sued and put under review by the state, is to write the above letter.  One of probably a thousand letters on vaccine fraud that I have written in the ten years since my son's vaccine induced brain damage.

And MPBN and Maine Health, and Vax Maine Kids and Dr. Blaisdell and anyone associated with this event at all is free to just ignore the complaint, or tell further lies to cover up this lie that was told to cover up the decades of lies and obfuscation being delivered to the American public.

Perhaps if they don't retract this, I will have to get really, really serious with them and write another letter.

Update:
Ms. Grantham has responded:

Subject:
RE: False Vaccine Safety Claims made by MaineHealth on MPBN's Maine Calling
Date:
Mon, 8 Dec 2014 19:31:25 +0000
From:
Cassandra Grantham 
To:
'Ginger Taylor' <GTaylor@HealthChoice.org>
CC:
Laura L. Blaisdell , Mark Vogelzang, Jennifer Rooks and Jonathan Smith, Rep. Andrea Boland, Andrea Patstone 


Hello Ginger ~Thank you for listening to MPBN’s Maine Calling Show – it is great to know that we have reached such a wide audience with important vaccine messages.  I want to clarify that I do not represent any product line or company other than MaineHealth, which is a health system which supports on-time childhood immunizations.  I have never been paid by or consulted for a pharmaceutical or medical intervention company or agency. Please see below for MaineHealth’s official statement regarding childhood immunizations.   

 MaineHealth supports the health, safety and well-being of infants, children, adolescents and young adults.  We believe that vaccinating children on-time, as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), and the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG), is one of the best ways to reduce vaccine-preventable diseases in our communities and keep children safe and healthy.

 In regards to my statements about vaccine safety, I based those on these studies. 

1.      http://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476(13)00144-3/abstract  

2.      http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2013/The-Childhood-Immunization-Schedule-and-Safety.aspx

3.     
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2014/06/26/peds.2014-1079.abstract

 I will not respond to future emails on this subject.

 Furthermore, I request that you cease and desist using my image on your blog, Facebook page and other websites you support and represent.
 

Cassandra
 

Cassandra Cote Grantham, MA

Program Director

Childhood Immunizations and Raising Readers

Community Health Improvement

MaineHealth
...

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message, including any attachments, is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and prohibited from unauthorized disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message and attachments.

In short, I work for MaineHealth, here are some unrelated studies so I can pretend like I am giving an answer, while not actually citing a vaxxed/unvaxxed study, stop using my picture, and I am not talking to you any more.

Reminder that her web site says, "Vax Maine Kids is a safe place for Maine parents to discuss their concerns and ask tough questions.  We promise to always give respectful, evidence-based answers you can trust."

So much for that.

But for more irony/entertainment/fuel for your fury, the ONLY study she actually cited was by FRANK DESTEFANO!!!

Just bullet pointing the things that should be noted here on her :

1. OMG DESTEFANO?!

- DeStefano took a tiny piece of vaccines in this junk study, the part we are least worried about causing problems, studied to see if that correlated to autism.  DeStefano: "I have extablished that the spices in apple pie do not correlate to obesity."  Moms: "Ummm... yeah... we were worried about the sugar, the butter and the crust.  Or the pie as a whole.  Because you are recommending our kids eat a crap load of pies, and our kids are getting really fat."

- Grantham is misusing the junk study exactly the same way everyon else uses it. "The spices in apple pie are not linked to obesity, therefor eating four apple pies in one sitting is not linked to obesity."

- Grantham goes further beyond the misuse of this study by claiming it compaires vaccinated and unvaccinated children.  Mind you, the word "unvaccinated" does not even appear in the paper.  Nor do the words, "CDC," "Schedule," or the phrase, "fully vaccinated."  Therefore, it is difficult to see how Ms. Grantham could be both earnest and competent and put this paper forward to defend her MPBN claims.

- DeSoto's critique of the study reports that it did not correctly match cases, and is invalid. http://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476(13)00662-8/fulltext (and the Journal even links to her critique from the link Grantham provided)

- FRANK DESTEFANO HAS BEEN CAUGHT HIDING THREE DIFFERENT AUTISM LINKS IN HIS WORK AT CDC AND IS CURRENTLY THE SUBJECT OF A CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION FOR FRAUD!  Here is the rundown for those who want to get current on the developments.  (Yet Grantham refers to his work while trying to defend the integrity of the vaccine program.  This is me right now.)

- Frank DeStefano, in Sheryl Attkisson's interview with him about the charges against him claimed that it was not possible for vaccines to cause autism, then four days later changed his statement, admitting that he has never looked to see if vaccines can cause individual cases of autism, and that is something that someone could look into.  HE IS THE HEAD OF THE CDC IMMUNIZATION SAFETY OFFICE... HE IS THE ONE WHOSE JOB IT HAS BEEN TO LOOK INTO THIS FOR MORE THAN A DECADE! (insert Mugatu)


- The report actually reports that there is NO VACCINATED V. UNVACCINATED RESEARCH. She actually sent me proof of my claim that I didn't know about.  Thank you Ms. Grantham for further indicting yourself. From page 19 of the pdf:
"The committee’s literature searches and review were intended to identify health outcomes associated with some aspect of the childhood immunization schedule. Allergy and asthma, autoimmunity, autism, other neurodevelopmental disorders (e.g., learning disabilities, tics, behavioral disorders, and intellectual disabilities), seizures, and epilepsy were included as search terms. Furthermore, the committee reviewed papers on immunization and premature infants.
In summary, few studies have comprehensively assessed the association between the entire immunization schedule or variations in the overall schedule and categories of health outcomes, and no study has directly examined health outcomes and stakeholder concerns in precisely the way that the committee was charged to address in its statement of task. No studies have compared the differences in health outcomes that some stakeholders questioned between entirely unimmunized populations of children and fully immunized children. Experts who addressed the committee pointed not to a body of evidence that had been overlooked but rather to the fact that existing research has not been designed to test the entire immunization schedule." 

- The report says that it has evaluated doing such studies, that they would be doable, useful, but expensive, time consuming and difficult, so they don't recommend them.  Here is their full statement on vaxed v. uvaxed studies. 
"Initiation of New Prospective Observational Studies
Observational studies are another form of clinical research that can provide useful insights and information that may be used to answer research questions. The committee reviewed opportunities to study groups that choose not to vaccinate using a prospective cohort study design. However, such a study would not conclusively reveal differences in health outcomes between unimmunized and fully immunized children for two main reasons. First, to be informative, cohort studies require sufficiently large numbers of participants in each study group and the sample populations often suggested for use in a comparison of vaccinated and unvaccinated children (such as some religious groups) are too small to adequately power a comparative analysis, particularly in the case of rare adverse health outcomes. Because meaningful comparisons require thousands of participants in each study group and less than 1 percent of the U.S. population refuses all immunizations, the detection of enough unvaccinated children would be prohibitively time-consuming and difficult. 
Such a study would also need to account for the many confounding variables that separate some populations from the average U.S. child, including lifestyle factors and genetic variables. To be useful, a comparison would require children matched by age; sex; geographic location; rural, urban, or suburban setting; socioeconomic group; and race/ethnicity.
The committee acknowledges that large-scale, long-term studies of infants through adulthood would be informative for evaluating health outcomes associated with immunization. A new research initiative, the National Children’s Study, is a multicenter, congressionally funded effort that meets these criteria. Although such studies would be the optimal design for evaluating long-term health outcomes associated with the childhood immunization schedule, they would require considerable time and funding, and the committee did not find adequate epidemiological evidence to recommend investment in this type of research at this time."
 Skimming through the report, it seems to be full of comedy gold, like this gem: "The committee identified concerns among some parents about the number, frequency, and timing of immunizations in the overall immunization schedule. These concerns were not expressed by clinicians, public health personnel, or policy makers in the committee’s review."

"Well Jim, the customers are not buying because they don't trust the product, but the salesmen are fine with the product, so screw the custmers!"  Of course the salemen are happy, they can lie about the product, don't have to know the true safety profiles, can't be sued and THEY GET PAID!

Astonishing how these people believe this approach will increase vaccine uptake.  Crazy pills.

3. Safety of Vaccines Used for Routine Immunization of US Children: A Systematic Review

- The ONLY reference to the "unvaccinated" is in a discussion of an Italian study on the flu shot and ER visits and referred to kids who has not received a seasonal or H1N1 flu vaccine.

- The ONLY discussion of autism in the paper is in regard to the MMR vaccine, no unvaccinated populations studied.

So Grantham has not only proved herself wrong, she has proved herself either incompetent to read medical literature, a bad faith player or both.

I responded to her with the following email:


Subject: Re: False Vaccine Safety Claims made by MaineHealth on MPBN's Maine Calling
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 15:37:29 -0500
From: Ginger Taylor <GTaylor@HealthChoice.org>
To: Cassandra Grantham 
CC: Laura L. Blaisdell, Mark Vogelzang, Jennifer Rooks, Rep. Andrea Boland, Andrea Patstone, Jonathan Smith


Ms.  Grantham,

None of the citations you offer contain any research on autism risk, or any other developmental disabilities, in vaccinated v. unvaccinated children, which is the claim you made on Maine Calling.  Again, no such publish research exists in any form. 

I therefore demand a retraction of the fraudulent safety claim by yourself, MaineHealth and MPBN.

I will not cease using your image, as this is a very newsworthy story and the professional headshot of a medical corporation employee making false claims about the product safety of the pharmaceuticals that it sells is fair use of this image.


Ginger Taylor, MS
Media Director
HealthChoice.org
Facebook
Twitter
818-402-9672

As Ms. Grantham has informed me that she is not talking to me any more, I assume I will not be hearing from her again.

So as is appropriate, I have asked MPBN to retract the statement, and review the issues at play with new eyes.

Subject: Request for Retraction of False Vaccine Safety Claims on MPBN's Maine Calling
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 16:12:12 -0500
From: Ginger Taylor <GTaylor@HealthChoice.org>
To: Mark Vogelzang <mvogelzang@mpbn.net>, Jennifer Rooks and Jonathan Smith <talk@mpbn.net>, Jonathan Smith <jpsmith@mpbn.net>
CC: Cassandra Grantham <COTEC1@mmc.org>, Laura L. Blaisdell <BLAISL@mmc.org>, Rep. Andrea Boland <sixwings@metrocast.net>, Andrea Patstone <PATSTA@mainehealth.org>


Ms. Rooks, Mr. Smith and Mr. Vogelzang,

On your December 1 episode of Maine Calling, Cassandra Grantham, a representative of MaineHealth, made a fraudulent safety claim on your show.  I have copied you on the my email exchange with her, which details the false claim, my correction of the false information as supported by the Congressional testimony of the head of the CDC's Director of the National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, and my request to Ms. Grantham for her to cite the multiple studies that she claim exist or retract her claim.

As you can see, she has failed to produce any research comparing autism rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations and failed to retract her claim.

I there for request that Maine Calling retract Ms. Grantham's claim in the same format which it was offered, noting the false claim on the archived version of the interview if MPBN chooses to leave it online.

I further strongly encourage Maine Calling to perform an honest evaluation on why vaccine rates are low in Maine and falling nationally.  As the educated mother of a vaccine injured child, I can attest to the real reason.  It is because the liability protection given to the entire vaccine industry in 1986 has resulted in massive corruption in the vaccine program.  Ms. Graham's behavior on your show is case in point.  Medical providers and medical industry representatives can make any safety claims that they choose, even completely false claims, because there is no accountability mechanism in place for the public to hold them accountable for false claims.  Even when a child is killed by a vaccine after a false claim like this is made to a parent coercing them into administering a vaccine that they would not have otherwise agreed to have delivered to their child, there is no recourse to hold anyone accountable, or even force them to stop making these false claims.  So false claims like this one, once spoken by someone claiming to hold authority in vaccinated, simply continue to circulate and be repeated. 

No doubt Ms. Grantham's false claim will now be circulated by those who have heard your program, even medical professionals who administer vaccines to children.

The vaccine show you did with these three women on December 1, was not just about vaccine rejection, it is the REASON for vaccine rejection.  It is a real time example of how and why vaccine interests are alienating and loosing the public trust by abusing the public trust.  Your guests correctly reported that the exodus from the vaccine program is being lead by educated parents who have serious misgivings of the safety and trustworthyness of the vaccine program, while they themselves were making false claims about the safety of the vaccine program, thereby proving the untrustworthy of the vaccine program.  And MPBN is participating in this corruption by allowing false claims to made on your platform with out challenge or correction.

I hope that the irony that a show you aired to raise confidence in the vaccination is actually destroying trust in the vaccination is not lost on you. 

Now this claim of Ms. Grantham is merely one of many problematic statements made by herself, MaineHealth, VaxMaineKids.org and Dr. Blaisdell, and I would be happy to go over the false information that they are sharing with the public under the guise of serving the public if you decide to do a proper investigation of the fraud taking place in the vaccine program both in Maine and at the federal level.

But for now, I await a response on your retraction of this particular false statement.  I cannot imagine that MPBN would allow any medical professional, industry representative or government official to make such false claims about any other medical product line or medical program.  I don't expect Maine Calling to allow this to stand either.

Thank you for your consideration,

Ginger Taylor, MS
Media Director
HealthChoice.org
Facebook
Twitter
818-402-9672
Also as appropriate, I have contacted MaineHealth and asked for a review and retraction of their multiple false vaccine safety claims, disciplinary action against Ms. Grantham, and a clarification on their position to remove the rights of parents to decline vaccines that can cause disability, brain damage and death, and still send their children to school.
Subject: Information Requested on how to file a formal complaint against a Maine Health staffer for fraudulent claims
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 19:25:15 -0500
From: Ginger Taylor <GTaylor@HealthChoice.org>
To: William Caron , Kimberly Nemic 
CC: Rebecca Arseneault, Deborah Deatrick, MPH, Robert Frank, Katie Fullam Harris , Cassandra Grantham, Jonathan Smith, Joe Lawlor, Laura Blaisdell 


Dear MaineHealth,

This past week, Cassandra Grantham of MaineHealth appeared on MPBN's Maine Calling and made a fraudulent vaccine safety claim. She reported to the public that there are several studies comparing vaccinated v. unvaccinated children that find no increase risk of autism and other developmental disabilities in children vaccinated according to the CDC's recommended schedule. 

In fact, no such research has ever been published. 

I contacted Ms. Grantham and asked that she cite the research she claims has been undertaken, or retract her statement.  She not only failed to cite such studies, she actually cited a 2013 IOM report that confirmed that no such research exists in the medical literature, and that recommended against undertaking such research because of cost, time and difficulty.  She has also failed to retract her fraudulent claim and says she will not be responding to me on this matter again.

This is just the latest of several false vaccine safety research claims that Ms. Grantham has made on behalf of MaineHealth both in public and on the VaxMaineKids.org web site, a MaineHealth Childhood Immunizations Program project.  Several of these false statements have been brought to her attention over the last five months, and she has failed to properly address them.  I can therefore only assume that Ms. Grantham is a bad faith player and is purposefully misleading of Mainers on vaccine safety matters

This is made all the more egregious as Ms. Grantham has been quoted in the Portland Press Herald as stating that, “Eliminating the philosophic [vaccine] exemption is the ultimate goal,” of the work your organization is undertaking.  It is unconscionable that MaineHealth would make fraudulent safety claims in order to advance the agenda of removing parental rights and depriving children of a free and appropriate public education if their families decline to participate in a medical program that presents severe adverse health risks including disability, brain damage and death.

I wish to file a formal complaint against Ms. Grantham with MaineHealth.  I believe that it is the duty of MaineHealth to review and retract Ms. Grantham's false vaccine safety claims and to exercise disciplinary action against Ms. Grantham, as well as clarify the organization's position on the rights of parents to receive full and accurate vaccine safety and efficacy information, and practice uncoerced informed consent in vaccination.

I have forwarded the email exchanges with Ms. Grantham and MPBN below for your review.

I am publicly documenting this process here.

Please direct me to appropriate contact on this matter so I may offer a full account of the problem and offer MaineHealth my support in assuring that it is offering accurate, evidence based information on vaccine safety to the public.

Thank you,
Ginger Taylor
Brunswick, Maine


I have decided that this is going to be a test of the system.

A rep of a health management corporation makes fraudulent claims about the product line that the corporation is selling to the public, and for which it is taking insurance payments and government funding.  Is it possible to hold them accountable and force a review and retraction of their false claims, or does the 1986 Vaccine Act prevent the functioning of all public accountability?  As always, my money is on the latter, but we have to give them a chance to do the right thing, don't we?

November 1, 2014

Pharmacutical Sales Rep Paul Offit Teaches Doctors to Ignore Pharmacutical Package Inserts

Paul Offit teaches doctors to ignore pharmacutical package inserts, calling the medical information morally and ethically required be given to patients who could be harmed by said pharmacutical, "the bane of [his] existence."

Not something that the physician needs to use to fully understand the Rx they might offer to a patient, "the bane of his existance."

He is not a doctor, he is a pharma sales rep.

Why would you want to see a doctor who is trained by this man?  From the LAT:
"I know you doctors keep telling me that vaccines don't cause autism. If that's true, then why is it on this package insert?" he asked, playing the role of a parent who had read the blogs and heard the celebrities who connect the two.
Shifting in her seat, the designated victim shot Offit an unsure look.
Then she began citing studies and said that drug packaging inserts include many "temporally associated symptoms" that weren't necessarily caused by the vaccine.
"Why?" Offit pressed. "Why would they put that there — just to scare me?"
The doctor kept trying. "They're required by law," she said. "I actually didn't know the answer."
Offit broke character to explain: Drug companies must list any condition known to have occurred within six weeks of a vaccination, whether the medication caused the condition or not, and even if it occurs at the same level as with a placebo.
Package inserts are legal documents, not medical documents, he said, calling them "the bane of [his] existence."
"If you look at the original package insert for chicken pox vaccine, it says, 'Broken leg has been associated with this drug,'" he added.

October 24, 2014

Please Stop Redefining Autism to Suit Your Own Agenda

So over at TMR, The Eagle wrote a piece on the heat that she has been subject to because she used the word “recovery” in relation to her son's autism.

“I always grew up believing the F-word was something we didn’t say. But it turns out that in the autism world, the R word is definitely the bad word.
Recovery.
It’s all raising its ugly head as I am releasing my book, which has a tag line of “A son’s recovery.” Whoa!
“How dare you insinuate your son doesn’t have autism anymore? Just because he’s functioning, doesn’t mean the autism isn’t there.”
“You can’t ever recover from autism. No matter how well you’re doing, you’re always autistic.”
These are just a few snippets from people who don’t know me or my son, or our story, but have literally judged the book by its cover.”

I think a huge part of the problem is that people have redefined "autism" to mean what they want it to mean, then project that onto what other people are talking about.

So let's review what “Autism” actually is.

"Autism" is a group of behavioral symptoms which include impaired communication, impaired social interaction, and stereotyped behaviors.  Feel free to review the full DSM IV criteria here.

You need those BEHAVIORS to get an autism diagnosis.  Conversely, if you no longer have those behaviors, then according to the definition, you can no longer be diagnosed with "Autism."

But when parents or those with the diagnosis begin to redefine it as an experiential state, or spiritual condition or a state of mind or an "identity," and then foist that definition on others, then the madness begins. They can insist that even when the behaviors are gone the autism is still there... but it is just their opinion and something that does not fit the actual definition of autism.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for those who wish to expand on their experiences as a person who has an autism diagnosis.  God knows how helpful it has been to me to hear from communicative adults with an autism diagnosis on what their experience is in giving me ideas on what might be going on inside my son's mind, but those do not define autism.

Nor do my son's experiences define “autism.”  Nor to his physical maladies that are tied to autism define autism.  Because the definition of autism includes none of these things... no experiential descriptions, no medical conditions, no biomarkers nothing other than OBSERVABLE BEHAVIORS.  It is narrow, and crappy and inadequate in so, so many ways, but it is what it is.  ONLY a description of behaviors.   And those who want to go beyond that description need to either lobby that the description be changed to include those experiential, spiritual and medical phenomena, or make up their own term to describe the version of “autism” that they are talking about, so it does not get confused with other types of “autism” or foisted upon people who don't actually have the type of “autism” that they are describing.

And while families and individuals might be guilty of redefining the condition and then asserting that others should then be subject to their redefinition, the medical profession is the worst.  Because it is the job of science to actually be systematic and exact in the language that they are using to describe conditions, diseases and disorders.

If I hear that “autism starts in the womb” one more time, I am going to... I don't know... retreat to my back yard and start blowing bubbles all day long in a catatonic starefest.

When you show me that a fetus can have impaired eye contact or trouble speaking or difficulty in forming friendships while still in utero, then you can say that you think “autism” starts in the womb.  I'd even grant you a conversation based on the idea that “autism” starts in the womb if you could show me some ultrasounds with the unborn flapping a bit or trying to spin.  But as it stands... autism cannot be diagnosed in the womb because the behaviors are not there and AUTISM is strictly a behavioral diagnosis.

From NPR:

“Brain Changes Suggest Autism Starts In The Womb
The symptoms of autism may not be obvious until a child is a toddler, but the disorder itself appears to begin well before birth.
Brain tissue taken from children who died and also happened to have autism revealed patches of disorganization in the cortex, a thin sheet of cells that's critical for learning and memory, researchers report in the New England Journal of Medicine. Tissue samples from children without autism didn't have those characteristic patches.
Organization of the cortex begins in the second trimester of pregnancy. "So something must have gone wrong at or before that time," says Eric Courchesne, an author of the paper and director of the Autism Center of Excellence at the University of California, San Diego.”

So many assumptions and leaps there... but this is what my mind immediately jumps to...

That would be fascinating and helpful IF THE DIAGNOSTIC DEFINITION OF AUTISM INCLUDED PATCHES OF DISORGANIZATION IN THE CORTEX!  BUT IT DOESN'T!

It would even be very helpful to families like mine if it did, because then we could check some brains out and see if they have these actual physical anomalies and know whether or not our children had “Autism” defined by those terms and if not, we could know that our children didn't have “Autism” and move on to other areas to look for answers,

But it doesn't... because autism is ONLY BEHAVIORAL SYMPTOMS.

And... oh yeah... They only looked at 11 brains and only 10 of them had the cortical changes mentioned so no... you can't define “autism” to include cortical changes.  Just like you can't define it to have GI distress, because not all kids with and 'autism' diagnosis have GI problems and just like you can't define it as a vaccine injury because some kids with autism are unvaccinated and just like you can't define it as “Rain Man Syndrome because not all these kids have super powers, or define it as “seeing the world in a different way” and on and on and on.

Repeating... Autism is a crappy, narrow, barely useful diagnosis based on 70 year old, outdated information and ONLY on... say it with me.... OBSERVABLE BEHAVIORS!

Put 20 kids with an “Autism” diagnosis in a room and you are going to get 20 different sets of associated medical conditions, educational struggles and (insert almost everything else about a child)

We need to stop thinking of Autism as a disorder.. it isn't.  It is a symptom set.  It is like a fever, and caused by many different things.  Do I need to even insert the list in here?

So if Evan McCarthy lost his Autism diagnosis because he no longer fits the symptoms, and has graduated to “weird,” stop saying he still has autism or that he never had it in the first place.  He had the symptoms to qualify for a diagnosis, and then later he didn't.  You don't get to redefine “Autism” to suit your agenda.

If I might be so bold as to recommend a course of action... I consider the optimal response to, “My son lost his autism diagnosis!” to be:

“Yay!  I am so excited for you that he is doing so well!  Congratulations!  Please let us know what worked for him or any advise he has so that we can see if it might be something to help other kids who are diagnosed with autism!”

Because I seriously cannot believe in this day and age that anyone is still under the illusion that “Autism” is one thing.  It is junk like this in 2014 that makes me want to get on board with those who want to dump the obsolete “Autism” label all together.

Update:  And two weeks later Jerry Seinfeld announces that he has autism.  My considerably cynical thoughts about that on Age of Autism.

September 30, 2014

One of Our Moms Needs Help

Some of you may know autism mom, Melanie Baldwin, a founder of The Thinking Moms' Revolution and subject of Jessica's Lioness Arising blog post.


Melanie is a mom who is battling cancer for the third time.  She also has a son with profound autism.  The cost of caring for a child with autism is astronomical, but coupled with the cost of battling cancer, it's insurmountable unless they have help.

If you'd like to help, Melanie's Give Forward page can be found here.  

Thanks for reading, and please share!

September 2, 2014

My Op Ed in the Portland Press Herald on the Real Reasons for the Growing Vaccine Refusal

So in July, I was interviewd for an hour for an article on vaccine refusal in the Portland Press Herald.  I long story short, they did a hatchet job on me.  So I wrote an op ed response, and they actually printed it.

Please visit and comment.


"Maine Voices: Breakdown in accountability at heart of decline in vaccinations
Opposition to the current U.S. vaccination program is based on its failures, denial and bad law and policy.

BY GINGER TAYLOR

BRUNSWICK — I was interviewed for an Aug. 9 front-page article by Joe Lawlor, titled “More Maine families are skipping or delaying childhood vaccines.” What was published was a complete misrepresentation of the interview I gave him.

As I told Mr. Lawlor, I’m neither anti-vaccine nor opposed to vaccination, and I vaccinated my children. My opposition is to the current U.S. vaccine program, which has become corrupted by bad law and policy, the failure to disclose known risks to families, the failure to pre-screen children who are showing symptoms that they are at risk for vaccine reactions and the denial of vaccine injury cases – rather than the proper recognition, diagnoses and treatment of vaccine-injured children.

In 1986, Congress gave liability protection to all vaccine interests – pharmaceutical companies, government agencies, doctors, nurses, etc. – so no one in this country can sue for vaccine injuries or deaths. As a result of this disregard of Americans’ Seventh Amendment rights, a vaccine injury case hasn’t been brought before a jury in almost 30 years, there is no longer accountability in vaccine safety and the vaccine program has fallen into massive corruption.

The effectiveness of vaccines is overstated, safety claims made are overstated and parents no longer get accurate risk information. Instead, vaccine consumers are offered a single sheet of information in the doctor’s office that leaves out almost all of the side effects listed on the vaccine package insert, on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Vaccine Injury Table and the disorders that HHS has concluded can be caused by a given vaccine.

Doctors are not trained on federal guidelines for vaccine injury, nor are they required to know the side effects listed on the vaccine package insert. Therefore, few physicians know how to recognize adverse reactions in their patients. As a result, such cases are usually ignored or misdiagnosed and are rarely properly medically assessed, and patients can become victims of medical neglect for a lifetime.

Further, the vaccine schedule has tripled since 1986, so a child born today will receive more doses of vaccine by the time he’s 6 months old than I did by the time I went to college. There is almost no long-term safety testing of vaccines, and no safety testing of the overloaded schedule as a whole.

This breakdown in the U.S. vaccine program’s accountability to consumers is at the heart of the country’s decline in vaccinations, because when parents take the time to look into physicians’ safety claims, they find they’re being given incorrect and biased information.

Case in point: The claim that the vaccine-autism controversy began as the result of one debunked study is utter misinformation. In fact, more than 80 research papers demonstrate the associations between vaccines and autism, and the mechanisms by which vaccines can cause autism.

When Mr. Lawlor asked me why I believed my son was vaccine-injured, I directed him to the HHS Vaccine Injury Compensation Table and walked him through the symptoms of pertussis-vaccine-induced “encephalopathy,” the medical term for brain damage, which my son exhibited following his 18-month shots:

 Decreased or absent response to environment (responds, if at all, only to loud voice or painful stimuli).

 Decreased or absent eye contact (does not fix gaze upon family members or other individuals).

 Inconsistent or absent responses to external stimuli (does not recognize familiar people or things).

My son’s case is not unusual. Because few doctors have ever read the federal vaccine injury table, children exhibiting symptoms of vaccine-induced brain damage are often diagnosed with “autism” without ever being evaluated for this vaccine reaction.

The Press Herald has published a follow-up article and an editorial that make clear its agenda is to not investigate and report the facts on this issue, but to coerce families who have safety concerns into vaccinating according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommended schedule – against their better judgment, by removing their legal right to exercise informed consent in medicine.

Parents are not declining vaccines because of Jenny McCarthy or because of a 15-year-old British research paper. Parents are justifiably hesitant because the vaccine program has become overly aggressive, dosing is one-size-fits-all, promoters don’t disclose true risks to patients and program managers are not taking responsibility for helping the countless children and adults who have serious adverse vaccine reactions. Parents like me found out the hard way that once your child suffers a vaccine injury, you are on your own.

— Special to the Press Herald"

July 24, 2014

Invisible Threat: Ugh.

I've been gone for a long time doing Health Choice and media work... please forgive... blah blah blah...

So tonight I was down in Portland for some business meetings, and after the first Scott and I walked two blocks to Starbucks for a coffee.  I was at the table when he brought my drink and dropped a piece of paper in front of me.  "Look what I found on their bulletin board."


It was a flier for the new "hit" vaccine propaganda piece, "Invisible Threat."  (Since when to people who are in a film, review the film? Oh wait... HHS owns patents on the vaccines it licenses and recommends... forgot who I was dealing with.)

Watch the trailer below and be terrified that your child will die of disease if you don't vaccinate.

Invisible Threat Trailer from CHSTV Videos on Vimeo.

It is, of course the same old, same old, but with a twist this time.  This was not done by the vaccine lobby, this was done by unbiased high school students!

So I was all... "UGH... too bad I can't go, cause we gotta meeting.  And it starts in 12 minutes."

Then Scott was all, "Just drop me off and go, you don't even need to be at this meeting."  So I did that.

And there was a good reason to go... because I know a bit of the back story for this film.

You see I have a beloved friend and advocacy partner named Becky Estepp.  You all know Becky, she has been a regular on Fox News Channel, and lots of local San Diego area news pieces for years.  If you want to talk a parent in Southern California who can discuss the problems with the vaccine program, and its relationship to the autism epidemic, Becky is your go to gal.

Four years ago, she got a phone call from a high school boy from CHSTV, an awkward sophomore, who said they were making a documentary, and had some questions.  Becky had a long conversation with him, but could tell some of the things she was trying to teach him were a bit over his head.  Then she never heard from anyone on the film again.

Cut to this year when she sees the trailer for "Invisible Threat," and realized THIS was the project she was interviewed for. A totally biased piece, allegedly done by teenagers, that was a bit difficult to believe was done by teenagers.  Why did they not interview her for the actual film?  Great question... I wondered too!

We also wondered, "Kids made this?  Really?"  From my estimation, yes they did.  But it seems pretty obvious that they were lead around by the nose on what what and how to "investigate."  In fact we were told at the outset that one of the kids parents worked for Scholastic and "helped" the kids.  I am sure that Rotary "helped" too.  Also apparently the Gates Foundation, "helped"... so....

Fortunately there was a parking space right by the building and I whipped into my chair with one minute to spare before they started.  A very attractive lady from Vax Maine Kids (I think) explained that these kid had done two award winning documentaries, and were approached by The Rotary Club to do a pro-vaccine documentary.  The kids, of course, turned them down because they wouldn't do something like that, but then agreed to make one on their own terms where they would investigate the issues and then make their movie on what they had learned. (Yes they took the money.)

(P.S. Don't take your medical advice from Play Boy Bunnies, take it from teenagers?)

She explained that this was the first time the film had been shown in New England (Really?  They picked Portland, Maine?) and later explained that one of the reasons that it has not been widely distributed is because the children received death threats after the movie, just like poor Paul Offit (who we have asked for some documentation on these threats, a police report, anything, because, you know... if that shit is really happening, then NOT OK, and we would shame such people into oblivion for it... cause we are kinda sick of being called "baby killers" and being threatened with Child Protective Services as well.)

But apparently the death threats to children are not really a problem as they will be releasing the film broadly on August 1.  Not super clear.  I guess that arrests have been made and the problem is solved?

Of course my cynical self imagines the conversation:
"Well we premiered the film last spring, three days before the beginning of "Autism Awareness Month" to take headlines away from the vaccine injury problem, so aren't people gonna be all. "WHAAA?" if we don't release it until August, just in time for the back to school vaccine push?"
"Um... just tell them there were death threats so we had to hold off the release."  
I text all this to Becky and she is not convinced.  "Don't you think that if that really happened it would be all over San Diego TV?"  Becky makes great points (and is also very physically fit.)

Vax Maine Kids did say that they wanted open and respectful dialog on vaccines issues.  Well they have never contacted me or any of my loud mouth friends in Maine to have this open discussion, but I'll take her word for it that she means it for that event.

So the film begins, and it is all the same tropes.  It's all Wakefield's fault.  Your body is crawling with a bazillion creatures out to kill you.  Mothers of children who have died of "vaccine preventable" illnesses are beautiful and worthy of your compassion.  Mothers of children who believe vaccines cause their child's autism are into hippy dippy crap like rubbing oils on their kids and moving their limbs around to heal them.  The docs that treat their kids are unattractive quacks.  The docs that say vaccines are totally safe are attractive and established and should have angelic music behind them when they speak.  Paul Offit is the super smartest and objective guy ever and he thinks moms like me who write critical things on the internet about the vaccine program are "evil."  (Also, profiteers... which is hilarious and forces me to stifle a laugh.) MMR induced encephalitis is one in one million. (Wait... I thought vaccine injury in general was one in a million?)  And finally, VACCINES ARE SAFE, VACCINES SAVE LIVES, VACCINE REACTIONS ARE RARE, AND VACCINATION IS THE RIGHT CHOICE.

***UPDATE:
Apologies that this post is a bit of a mess.. wrote it at 3am.  I forgot the BEST part of the movie.  Parents who don't vaccinate are made analagus to THE TALIBAN!!

Yes... because every country on earth vaccinates... "except for one, THE TALIBAN!"  Then they point out that Talibanians killed polio vaccine workers.  They fail to point out that it was after the CIA used a fake vaccine campaign to harvest the DNA from Afgahan locals to find out if Osama Bin Lahadeen and family were in the area, which caused haters of The Great Satan to stop participating in vax programs and even attack them.  Because they assumed they were CIA.

Ergo, according to the NYT the CIA is runing vaccine uptake.

Also you are a Talabanian.

But this "documentary" is totally unbiased.***

So by the end of the film I think my blood pressure was 1000/1000.  I don't know why I let my self get so upset about this crap anymore... again... the New England premier and there were 20 people in the room.  And then they called the panelists (and moderator and projectionist) to the front of the room... And then there were 13 audience members... including me. (And from the chit chat at the end... clearly they were almost all friends of the panel/people working on vaccine uptake.)

So I did a little self-talk to calm myself down, which worked a little.  (Damn... I should not have had coffee before I went there.)  So I decided I would not talk, but if I did it would just be some mild questions at the very end.  Just to see where they really were on this stuff.

The panel was a very sweet gray haired older mother in a matronly dress who had lost her teen age son to meningitis, three pediatricians (two female and one male, now come to think of it, I can't remember if the second female was a doc... she didn't say much... might have been a professional advocate), and a former Maine epidemiologist.  One of the pediatricians was from my town, and is well known for publishing the most bone headed vaccines rah rah rah junk in our state via the Bangor Daily News.

Wait... I actually looked the event up.  Here is the panel:
"The public is invited to this free showing at 5 p.m. Wednesday, July 23, at the Portland Public Library. A panel discussion will follow the film. The expert panel will include: Larry Losey, M.D., of Brunswick Pediatrics, Laura Blaisdell, M.D., MPH, of Intermed Pediatrics and Researcher at Maine Medical Center Research Institute, Center for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Jeri Greenwell, parent and Maine advocate for the National Meningitis Association; Emily Rines, MPH, CHES Community Impact Director at United Way of Greater Portland, and Stephen Sears, M.D., MPH, Chief of Staff, VA Maine Healthcare Systems and former Maine State Epidemiologist."
The first question was from Vax Maine Kids pretty lady (I really should look up her name, but I don't wanna.  Also she had a great skirt on. *edit: Cassandra Grantham of VaxMaineKids.org) It was about social media.  (Here we go..) How did the internet, etc impact their efforts on vaccine uptake.  Then I had to sit through that, "Oh the horrible internet, blah blah blah conspiracies, yadda yadda, misinformation, The End." discussion.  I refrained from shouting that it was the 21st century and every document ever published (Unless it is covered under National Security... and even a lot of those that are covered under National Security) is on the damn internet, and that poo pooing internet information is now exactly equal to saying, "Don't read books.  Or anything printed.  Or hand written." any time before 1987.

None of them said that they had ever learned anything from the critics of the vaccine program.

(Crap... I just looked at the Vax Maine Kids web site.  I really should not have done that.  Did you know that, "the mercury in the preservative Thimerosal has never been shown to harm children or cause autism?"  Wow!  Not even once!)

It should come as no surprise that reasonableness on the issue was inversely proportional to the age of the panelist.

Small ray of light came from Dr. Blaisdell, who opened with, and repeated often, that she wants open dialog with parents, and does not want to push parents.  But later was discouraged that she repeated the absurdity that, "Aluminum is necessary for human life to function," (No.. it really isn't , its a neurotoxin ); she mocked the use of the word "toxins" (even making air quotes when she said it) telling people in that give me a break, condescending tone, "Please don't listen to people who talk to you about "toxins." (I guess she wants the field of Toxicology to shut down?), and claimed that the Jacobson v. Mass SCOTUS ruling said that states can force people to vaccinate (Clearly the woman has neither read it nor met Mary Holland.)

I had been such a good girl and held my tongue, but apparently I got to the "I feel like I'm taking crazy pills" moment because after Losey said the 25th awful thing (I don't even remember what it was, but I did learn from him that if I didn't like my ruling in the VICP that I could go to civil court and sue the vaccine maker.  He had never heard of Bruesewitz v. Wyeth) I let out a snort that I am sure sounded like an angry horse, and my hand involuntarily shot up (Insert joke about how there is probably a vaccine for that.)

(Seriously... ten years of this crap and they STILL can't get basic information about the real problems right?  They are STILL repeating this garbage? JB Handley made the point many years ago, if peds have not bothered to learn by now, it is their own fault.  They shouldn't be coddled any more.)

The only other audience participation up to that point had been a mom who had of course vaccinated her kids, and wanted to know if Maine's philosophical exemption was making it harder to get kids vaccinated and meet public health goals.  Blaisdell made the point that she didn't know, because detailed records are not kept, and not getting the Hep B is not a problem like not getting the Measles vaccine, but opt out rates are higher in states with those exemptions.  Losey, to his credit, recognized that getting rid of the exemption was impossible in the current climate, as the bills being considered in Augusta are all to loosen their hold on pushing parents to vaccinate, and, for at least now anyway, not gonna happen.

So this is toward the end of the panel discussion, and I just unloaded on them.  And not gracefully either.  The angry, talking 60 miles an hour Ginge burst out of me.  I explained that I was the mother of a vaccine injured child and... blah blah insert my creds here... and watching the movie (that they had all extolled) was hard for me because it contained so much that was false and incomplete and sucky.  (I didn't really say sucky.)

I don't even remember all I said, but I took them on/correct them on many of the things they said.  I do remember saying, in that give me a break, condescending tone, "Do you really think the decline in vaccine uptake is because of one British study that came out 15 years ago."  But the big points that I made where that the film addressed NONE of the reasons that we don't participate in the vaccine program any more, that I was going to go ahead and do a point by point take down of the film when it comes out in wide release, and that this does not even address (because they never address it) the real root of the problem, which is the vaccine injury liability they all have.  Which assures that they will never have to be put under oath to testify and be cross examined on all the stupid things they say. (No I didn't say that last part either.)

So Dr. Blaisdell addressed me very nicely/handled me, and asked me questions, so I was like.. "Fuck it... I am just going to keep talking as long as they will let me," which was a while.  But then she brought it around with a "well what would you recommend for us" giving me a final say... again, good, but totally handling me.

"How could I choose just one thing!" my brain screamed.

So I choose two.  Stop attacking "those people on the internet and listen to them/learn from the professionals/stop calling us anti-vaccine" and "realize that because of the vaccine injury and death liability protection you have, that you live in a bubble, with no accountability for what you say and do, that you get to believe whatever you want to believe about vaccines."

Oh... also they called me "passionate" a lot, which is a polite/dismissive way of noting that I am a super angry woman.  Which I am.

"Oppression makes a wise man mad."

And then I shut up.

And then their tone changed.  They were more balanced, they addressed me directly, and in the wrap up question, they suddenly acknowledged that safety is a problem, that they need to do more to avoid vaccine reactions, and parents like me must be engaged.

Of course we know what people really want, because they actually DO the things that are important to them.

So on the way out I made sure to sign the registry with my contact info, since engaging parents and learning how to avoid vaccine injury is important.  So I'm sure they will call, right?  I am sure my phone will be ringing off the hook tomorrow with questions like, "What are these eighty plus studies you mentioned about vaccine induce autism and their mechanisms?  What are the ways you think vaccine reactions can be avoided?  Where is this information from federal officials on vaccine injuries?  What was that you said about aluminum and the vaccine schedule not being safety tested?"

I think I will clear my schedule tomorrow.  And perhaps Friday in case they want to have lunch and look at my research.

And then I can spend the day surfing facebook because they won't call me.  Or anyone else like me.  Because they never do.  Because they don't have to.  The threat to them for harming children with their mis information and bad practices is not an "invisible threat" it is a non existent threat.

They get to do and believe whatever they want.  The only consequence is the occasional crazy mom showing up to rant at them.

Update!

Check below!  A doc that does what she says she wants... you know... words and actions!  Wow.

Second time evah a doc has actually followed up with me on stuff.  The first was like five years ago, a med student wrote me and said, "I disagree with everthing you say, but I do have one question."  That one question turned into years of conversations long into the beginning of his practice.

UPDATE!!!!

As my regular readers know, last week I suffered and massive brain hemmorage and died after attending a screening "Invisible Threat" a propeganda film made by HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS on the vaccine debate.

Well today, following a touching and heartfelt funeral (seriously guys, I had no idea how insanely you loved me... I was moved) They had to dig me up and readmit me to the emergency room, where I died again, after reading the follow up email I received from the Maine Health Department.

They said if I filled out a survey on the film they would send me my CME credits in two weeks.  FRIGGING CME CREDITS!!!

My next funeral will be held this Saturday at my house.  Bring chocolate chip cookies.

This was my reply:

Ms. Lawson,
After attending this event, I was stunned to get this email.
Let me get this straight... you are giving CME credits to medical professionals for watching a movie made by high school students?  Not medical professionals... minors.  We are talking about children.
Emphasizing... their highest qualification is that they graduated from Jr. High School.
It was FILLED with inaccuracies, partial information and compared people who don't vaccinate to the Taliban, but this is to be used for guidance in how to provide medical care?
How exactly does this qualify as advancing a medical education?  How are they qualified to teach medical professionals?
I await you response,
Ginger Taylor


UPDATE again...

So despite leaving two messages for Dr. Blaisdell in the last three weeks, no response from her.

But you know what I just noticed?  Paul Offit is listed as the "Science Technical Adviser" on the film.  But don't worry... just because the vaccine industry's defacto salesperson, who has made millions off his own vaccine patent is the guy providing them technical science advice, does NOT mean that this is unbiased.

Just to emphasize... Offit is in the movie, he is the guy who shaped the movie, and he also reviewed the movie.  JOURNALISM!!!

Final update:

Blaisdell never made good on her invite to talk.

It took me a full month to figure out why I was so incredibly angry at this documentary, when we face this kind of schlock so often that we are kinda desensitized to it.  It was because they are using kids to sell dangerous drugs to other kids.  No better than street corner drug dealers.

April 17, 2014

I Refuse To Be Enlisted Into The "Mommy Wars"

So the attack on vaccine resistant parents in the media this "autism awareness month" has been nothing like any of us has ever seen before.  Even Paul Offit has taken a departure from his oh so laid back and wise doctor act to get nasty on us.  Pharma needs not only for parents to be ok with the current recommended schedule, but to be open to the open ended vaccine schedule that will include the 200 or so vaccines they have in their development pipeline.  They do not want to come to terms with the fact that their market has reached it saturation point and it is all downhill from here for their vaccine profits.

So because they could not sell us, and because they could not bully us, they have now taken the tack of getting us to bully us.  As Meghan at LivingWhole.org so succinctly put it in her piece The Hate Debate, "...whether or not we vaccinate is now part of the “Mommy Wars.”  Setting mother against mother, to bully them into violating their evolutionary and God given instincts on how to protect their child, to do what Pharma says instead.
" As if mothers didn’t have enough things to be divided over, you’ve made it so that wherever we go be it daycares, schools, or playgroups we are ridiculed, judged, shunned, and our children as a whole are blamed for the re-emergence of diseases that never left and for spreading diseases they’ve never had. You made this a “Mommy War” issue when you somehow insinuated that a woman isn’t a good mother unless she vaccinates her child. You made this a mommy issue when I had to kneel down and explain to my three-year-old child why she was being discriminated against. You made this a mommy issue when you supported and promoted the following hateful belief system:

 “[On the topic of vaccines.] We owe it to our children–all of our children–to speak out against this dangerous and misguided parenting choice before more are infected with horrifying diseases that were extinguished decades ago. Choosing not to vaccinate is not yet another anodyne trend in personal parenting. It’s not a quirk; it’s a menace—and a growing one at that.” – Bethany via the Federalist Papers

 You know what makes a good mother, one who actually educates herself, questions what is put into her child’s body and makes an informed decision (whether she chooses to vaccinate or not). Call me a menace, call me a misguided parent, and blame me for spreading “horrifying diseases” that are actually neither horrifying nor extinguished. If it makes you feel better to fuel fire and spread hate than by all means proceed, as it doesn’t make your side of the movement look very good. I will neither hate nor discriminate against a mother’s decision on the issue of vaccination. No, I will not be part of the hate debate."

So I am here to say that I refuse to participate in the "Mommy Wars."  It would be very easy for me to judge parents who are not treating their child's "autism" medically, but I have no right.  Just as no one else has the right to judge me for my vaccine decisions.  

So if you see a child being physically abused by their parents, or cases of neglect where they are not being fed, clothed, housed and placed under the care of a health care provider, then please call child protective services and express your concern.  But if you just don't agree with a parents medical choices, especially because some crap mass media outlet dripping in pharma ads has tried to turn you into the vaccine patrol, time to take a deep breath, deprogram yourself, and stand down.

I support autism families who choose not to do biomed.  It is hard for me, it is not my choice, it is not what I want for their children, but I KNOW that it is not my decision to make for that child.  It is theirs.  And I have NO INTENTION on making their life harder, or even making them feel pressured, to do something that they are not comfortable with. 

I am horrified that any mother could write the things that I am seeing online to the effect of, "if they don't vaccinate they should have their kids taken away from them."  That is just flat out evil.  How any mother could wish that on another is horrifying.  I started my career in child protective services as a case worker, and even the abusive and neglectful parents... I was still rooting for them to get their crap together and be able to parent their children again.  It only happened in one of my cases in two years, but it still makes my cry when I think about that mother who was able to step up and be there for her daughter again.

I don't ever want to see a family ripped apart because of their medical choices.  And I don't want to make people feel bad for their earnest decisions.

With other autism moms, I listen like a friend, if I have something that might help them with what they are struggling with, I usually say something like, "I know of some new medical interventions that might help with his aggression/tummy trouble/attentional issues/etc, so lemme know if you are interested in exploring any of them," and then I leave it at that.  And if they never bring anything up, I don't either.  If they don't want to talk about their aggressive vaccine choioces, then I don't either.  And I support them in their parenting.

Are you a mommy?  Then I support you and want you to have the best chance at raising your little ones that you know better than anyone. 

I am not going to participate in the "Mommy Wars."