Peter Hotez: Hero of One Spooky Dude

Holy encephalitis Batman!!

Arthur Caplan’s synopsis of Peter Hotez’s book “Vaccines Did Not Cause Rachel’s Autism.”

“In 1994, Peter J. Hotez’s nineteen-month-old daughter, Rachel, was diagnosed with autism. Dr. Hotez, a pediatrician-scientist who develops vaccines for neglected tropical diseases affecting the world’s poorest people, became troubled by the decades-long rise of the influential anti-vaccine community and their inescapable narrative around childhood vaccines and autism. The alleged link between the two was first espoused in a fraudulent scientific paper, long since retracted, but the story shows no signs of letting up. As a result, we’ve seen deadly and disabling outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases around the country, and Texas, where Hotez lives, is at particular risk.
In Vaccines Did Not Cause Rachel’s Autism, Hotez draws on his experiences as a pediatrician, vaccine scientist, and father of an autistic child. Outlining the arguments on both sides of the debate, he examines the science that refutes the concerns of the anti-vaccine movement, debunks current conspiracy theories alleging a cover-up by the CDC, and critiques the scientific community’s failure to effectively communicate the facts about vaccines and autism to the general public, all while sharing his very personal story of raising a now-adult daughter with autism.

“A uniquely authoritative account, this important book persuasively provides evidence for the genetic basis of autism and illustrates how the neurodevelopmental pathways of autism are under way before birth. Dr. Hotez reminds readers of the many victories of vaccines over disease while warning about the growing dangers of the anti-vaccine movement, especially in the United States and Europe. A former US Science Envoy for the Department of State, he also explains what’s at stake if the movement continues to gain ground. Opening with a foreword by leading medical ethicist Arthur L. Caplan, this book is a must-read for parent groups, child advocates, teachers, health-care providers, government policymakers, health and science policy experts, and anyone caring for a family member or friend with autism.

“When Peter Hotez–an erudite, highly trained scientist who is a true hero for his work in saving the world’s poor and downtrodden–shares his knowledge and clinical insights along with his parental experience, when his beliefs in the value of what he does are put to the test of a life guiding his own child’s challenges, then you must pay attention. You should. This book brings to an end the link between autism and vaccination.”–from the foreword by Arthur L. Caplan, NYU School of Medicine”

And who is Arthur Caplan?

Parental Rights according to Professor Caplan

“If the parents won’t do it, I think it’s the responsibility of the state or the government to do it,” said Caplan. “The presumption should be not listening to what parents who don’t want to vaccinate are saying, but starting out with a presumption that kids have a right to fight off deadly diseases, that kids who can’t be vaccinated have a right to protection. How do we move public policy forward from there?”

Reference: Caplan AL. Do Children Have Vaccination Rights? Medscape Oct. 22, 2018.

Parental Rights as traditionally viewed in American jurisprudence

“But it is precisely this ‘long held legal right to make informed, voluntary decisions about pharmaceutical products and medical procedures that carry risks for their children,’ says Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), that is ‘all that stands between parents and exploitation of their children by those in positions of power in society with a personal or professional vested interest in forcing every child to use pharmaceutical products that are not safe or effective for every child.’

For more on the increasing encroachment on parental rights to protect their children from pharmaceutical exploitation:

Vaccine Wake Up Call for Parents: Your Children Are Being Taken

The deeper I dig, the worse this nightmare gets. We go from one bad actor to a worse actor in this battle between parents and undue interference from pharmaceutical giants, aided and abetted by a corrupt medical industry and even more corrupt governments. Well. It’s tough at this point to tell who is more corrupt. Or who is who? Are we governed by legislators or the drug industry? Are doctors healers or drug salesmen?

The New Religion of Peer-Review

Jeffrey Jaxen has given me my reply to the sanctimonious comments I’ve often heard, “I only use evidence-based, peer reviewed studies to inform my health care decisions.”
 
Really? Read much?
 
I propose two strategies that will bring about a better, more timely outcome when wading through the reams of information in your decision-making process. You won’t have to wait 30 years and watch countless people suffer and die, or become a cautionary tale yourself, to better know your answer:
 
1. Go with overwhelming eyewitness reports, for example, the epidemic of autism. It works in a court of law. There are thousands of parent eye-witnesses. Ask them what they think. Too many parents are witnessing the destruction of their children, and too many of them have the same story, to chalk it all up to coincidence. They didn’t put their heads together in a secret meeting (think CDC) to cook up a nefarious, anti-vax conspiracy in order to bring down Western Civilization as we know it.
 
2. Learn how your body works. Anything that disrupts basic human biology is probably something to approach with caution. Risk benefit analysis needs to be done soberly.
 
As an example, in the case of statins (one of my favorite drugs to despise) they block the critical mevalonate pathway. They block nutrients the body makes to nourish — wait for it — THE HEART!! And so statins weaken the heart, sometimes irreversibly, with no known medication that can bring that weakened heart back to health. The condition statins are supposed to treat, blocked arteries, is reversible with proper nutrition, exercise, and targeted supplements.
The use of statins makes vibrant health impossible. No studies have shown they save lives or extend lives by more than maybe a day or two. Read Dr. Malcolm Kendrick’s book “Fat and Cholesterol Don’t Cause Heart Attacks and Statins are Not the Solution.” the works of Dr. Peter Langsjoen, and The Western A Price Foundation, for a full explanation of this problem. Statins come with a host of serious, potentially life threatening, vastly under-reported (DDB: doctor dismissive bias) side-effects, some irreversible, even ater discontinuing them.
Like Rabdymylosis.
Basically, your skeletal muscles melt, you turn into a pile of jello, and you risk kidney failure. It can start well after you stop taking statins, can happen very quickly and is life threatening. Kind of reminds me of the psychiatric drugs prescribed to treat depression which increase the risk of suicide. For a full treatment of why that happens, read Dr. Peter Gotzsche’s book, “Deadly Medicine and Organize Crime; How big pharma has corrupted healthcare.”
 
Crazy right? No. Standard operating procedure in the drug industry, which has twisted the results in statin studies for decades. Risk benefit analysis grade on statins: Fail. Risk benefit analysis on vaccines. Fail.
 
Who actually thinks these people, who regularly play with the peer-review process to increase their profits at our expense, are suddenly going to become angels when they are manufacturing vaccines, where they have ZERO liability? At least with statins, you can sue them. Although. That won’t give you your melted muscles back.
 

The science is settled….right?

Excerpted from “How to End the Autism Epidemic” by JB Handley

“David Kirby, former New York Times investigative journalist and the award-winning author of Evidence of Harm, is the only journalist I have seen who actually understands the extreme limitations of the completed science, and here’s how he explains it:

” ‘To begin with, it is unscientific and perilously misleading for anyone to assert that ‘vaccines and autism’  have been studied and that no link has been found. That’s because the 16 or so studies constantly cited by critics of the hypothesis have examined just one vaccine and one vaccine ingredient.… It is illogical to exonerate all vaccines, all vaccine ingredients, and the total US vaccine program as a whole, based solely on a handful of epidemiological studies of just one vaccine and one vaccine ingredient. It is akin to claiming that every form of animal protein is beneficial to people, when all you have studied is fish.’ “