Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Jan 17, 2018 in Uncategorized | 0 comments

Ingestion of Folic Acid may be beneficial in pregnant women against Autism

The article below, published in Environmental Health Perspectives, examined possible beneficial action of folic acid intake during pregnancy in protecting the baby against Autism disorder spectrum associated with pesticide exposure.  It seems a reasonable precautionary action to recommend routine adequate folic acid intake in pregnant women in Nigeria, going by the widespread indiscriminate use of pesticides here.


Combined Prenatal Pesticide Exposure and Folic Acid Intake in Relation to Autism

Authors: Rebecca J. Schmidt, Vladimir Kogan, Janie F. Shelton, Lora Delwiche, Robin L. Hansen, Sally Ozonoff, Claudia C. Ma, Erin C. McCanlies, Deborah H. Bennett, Irva Hertz-Picciotto, Daniel J. Tancredi, and Heather E. Volk




In the U.S about 4.4 billion pesticide applications are applied each year in and around homes, resulting in about 80 percent of people’s exposure occurring indoors [1]. Children and women of childbearing age who are planning to become pregnant are particularly vulnerable to harm from exposure. Previous studies have linked pesticides, particularly agricultural pesticides, with development of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in children. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 1 in 68 children in the U.S. have an ASD. For boys specifically, the estimate is 1 in 42 with an ASD[2].

Previous studies have shown that folic acid (FA) supplementation protects against neural tube defects like spina bifida, and some studies have shown a reduced risk for ASD in children whose mothers took supplements containing FA[3]. The CDC and the U.S. Preventive Service Taskforce already recommends that all women of childbearing age consume at least 400 mcg of FA daily[4]. However, few studies have examined how FA intake among women experiencing environmental exposures, particularly to pesticides, may be especially beneficial for reducing ASD risk in their offspring.


To examine whether maternal intake of FA influences the association between pesticide exposure and ASD in children.


Children born in California between 2000-2007, who were enrolled in the Childhood Autism Risks from Genetics and the Environment (CHARGE) study and were either clinically confirmed to have ASD (394) or not (282), participated in this study at 2-5 years old. Information on maternal household pesticide exposure (self-applied sprays, flea products, etc.) and FA intake 3 months before conception and during the entire pregnancy were obtained through interviews. FA intake was measured as high (> 800 mcg), median (800 mcg) and low (<800 mcg). Daily exposure profiles to commercial agriculture pesticides like organophosphates and organochlorines, for the same time period, were generated using California’s extensive database and reports on pesticide use, known as PUR data. Information on work-related exposure to pesticides were also obtained but few mothers experienced work exposures during the analysis time period (3 months pre-conception and entire pregnancy).


Compared to the mothers of non-ASD children, mothers of children with ASD were less likely to report taking >800 mcg of FA during their first month of pregnancy and more likely to be exposed to household pesticides both indoors and outdoors.
The odds of offspring developing ASD were greater among mothers who had both low FA intake and indoor pesticide or any agricultural exposure compared with mothers who had either low FA intake or pesticide exposure.


Overall, this study shows that the likelihood of ASD associated with pesticides in children was reduced among mothers who had high FA intake (>800 mcg) near the time of conception. Therefore, increasing FA intake among mothers exposed to pesticides may provide protection from adverse neurodevelopment outcomes like ASD.


All pesticides sold or distributed in the U.S. are required to be registered and regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). According to an analysis done by the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides and the National Center for Healthy Homes, of the 28 most widely used agricultural pesticides, 18 are associated with reproductive issues[1]. There is increasing evidence that certain pesticides play a crucial role in negatively affecting neurodevelopment and some may even contribute to the development of ASD. A 2014 CHARGE Study found that mothers exposed to organophosphates, including chlorpyrifos, during pregnancy experienced a 60% increased risk for ASD.

Indeed, chlorpyrifos in particular has been studied extensively, and sufficient evidence indicates that there are no safe uses for the pesticide. This was confirmed in EPA’s November 2016 revised human health risk assessment of chlorpyrifos. By the time this risk assessment was released, EPA had already begun working towards a ban on the production and use of the pesticide, establishing a final decision deadline of March 30, 2017. Unfortunately the agency reversed their course, deciding against a ban, on March 29, claiming scientific uncertainty.

EPA’s work on the revised human health risk assessment is commendable. The extensive scientific evidence of harm the agency has compiled on chlorpyrifos is sufficient to issue a ban. The agency needs to heed their own scientific findings and protect young children and future generations from neurodevelopmental harm.

More research is needed to further investigate the association of prenatal nutrient intake and associations with pesticide exposure and risk for ASD. In addition to informing issues related to pesticide policies and regulations, further research may inform decisions on whether or not federal public health recommendation on FA intake should be adjusted for women of child bearing age. While FA intake was not found to entirely eliminate the risk for ASD in this study, it did reduce the risk, suggesting that increasing FA intake in women, especially those exposed to pesticides, may reduce ASD incidence among their offspring.


[1] Pesticides. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from–Prevention–and-Solutions/Pesticides.aspx

[2] Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Updated 2016, July 11. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from

[3] Brief report: are autistic-behaviors in children related to prenatal vitamin use and maternal whole blood folate concentrations? US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health, October 2014. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from

[4] Folic Acid. Updated 2016, December 28. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from


Please follow and like us:
Read More

Posted by on Sep 29, 2017 in Uncategorized | 0 comments

National Toxicology Program Finds Cell Phone Radiation Induces DNA Damage

National Toxicology Program Finds Statistically Significant Increased DNA Damage in Rats and Mice
After Exposure to Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation

Scientists from the National Toxicology Program presented their data on the genotoxicity of cell phone radiation in rats and mice at the annual meeting of the Environmental Mutagenesis and Genomics Society held in Raleigh, North Carolina from September 9-13, 2017.

DNA damage was significantly increased in:

In the frontal cortex of male mice from CDMA and GSM cell phone radiation,
In peripheral leukocytes of female mice from CDMA only, and
In the hippocampus of male rats from CDMA only.

There were no significant increases in micronucleated red blood cells in rats or mice.

The authors concluded that, “exposure to RFR [radio frequency radiation] has the potential to induce measurable DNA damage under certain exposure conditions.”

This information was first shared on Dr. Moskowitz blog SaferEMR. EHT has asked for the presentation materials to share with the public.

The study also found carcinogenic effects after long term exposure to cell phone radiation. In 2016 National Toxicology Program scientist released these findings:

Increased incidences of glioma (a rare, aggressive and highly malignant brain cancer) as well as schwannoma (a rare tumor of the nerve sheath) of the heart were found in both sexes of rats, but reached statistical significance only in males.
Increased incidences of rare, proliferative changes in glial cells of the brain and in Schwann cells (nerve sheath) in the heart of both sexes of rats, while not a single unexposed control animal developed these precancerous changes.
Results from this study clearly show that biological impacts occur at non-thermal exposures like those that take place from cell phones today.

Read more about the National Toxicology Program Study here


National Toxicology Program Finds Cell Phone Radiation Induces DNA Damage

Please follow and like us:
Read More

Posted by on Aug 22, 2017 in Uncategorized | 0 comments

An interview with Robert Kennedy Jr. on vaccines, August 14, 2017

August 21, 2017

STAT News: An interview with Robert Kennedy Jr. on vaccines, August 14, 2017

STAT News: An interview with Robert Kennedy Jr. on vaccines, August 14, 2017

This Q & A interview was conducted by STAT News reporter, Helen Branswell (H), with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (B)  on August 14, 2017.

H: So when I had first approached you for this interview, the question I wanted to ask you related to the Vaccine Safety Commission. You had announced in January that you were going to head it, after you met with then President Elect Trump. It’s been a number of months now and there hasn’t been any public discussion. He made some comments in February about being interested in looking into autism but there hasn’t been anything else since. so we’ve been wondering, where does this stand? So I guess my first question to you is: Are you going to be heading a Vaccine Safety Commission set up by the White House or by President Trump?

B: I’ve had no discussions with the White House specifically about the Vaccine Safety Commission probably since February.

H: Okay

B: I’ve spoken with the White House about other issues relating to vaccine safety and I’ve had a number of follow up meetings.

H: Can I ask you who you met with?

B: Well I’ve met with high level officials in the White House and they’ve arranged meetings for me with HHS and White House officials and various agency officials including [NIH Director] Francis Collins and [NIH Principle Deputy Director] Lawrence Tabek, Tony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Infectious Disease, Linda Birnbaum, Director of the National Institute of Developmental Health Sciences, and Dr. Diana Bianchi, the head of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Health and Human Development.

H: Right

B: And then over at FDA, I met with Peter Marks, Director of the Center for Biological Evaluation and Research (CBER) and Dr. Scott Winiecki, from the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Dr. Wiley Chambers, also from CBER, and some other officials there.

H: Ok

B: I can’t remember, at this moment, all of the people that we met with but I’m happy to send you a list of names.

H: And this is since the change of the administration?

B: Yeah, the White House officials and HHS officials accompanied me and arranged the meeting. I did it at their request.

H: At their request? Theirs?

B: Yeah

H: But who is they?

B: The White House

H: Okay. All right. So you said you’ve had no discussion since February about the Vaccine Safety Commission. Do you think that…

B: Again, not specifically about the Commission.

H: Okay. Do you think that idea is dead? Do you think it’s in abeyance?

B: I don’t know. You’d have to ask the White House. It may be that it’s evolved. I’ve been told that the President is still interested in this issue and that he wants me to have further meetings with the regulatory agencies and with the White House. Like I said, I have not talked to anybody in the White House about the Commission.

H: Okay. Do you think that there is the possibility that the Commission is going ahead but not with you on it?

B: Again, you’d have to ask the White House.

H: Okay. So you know, in February, I was doing some research in preparation for this, and I saw a story that Politico ran in February in which you had mentioned that after you made the announcement. You later spoke with the President and the two of you, I think, agreed that, and the expression used was that you’d ‘gotten out over your skis’ on this issue. Do you think you were not meant to announce it or was it perhaps that discussions internally hadn’t been finalized? What does that mean?

B: Are you saying that I spoke with President Trump, and that he—

H: It was a Politico story from February, I can send a link, that was a follow up to where this issue was going and it quotes you saying that you had talked to the President after having disclosed that this Commission was going to be set up and that there was some discussion between you, and that you, and it wasn’t clear if it was you or the two of you or the issues, had gotten out over its skis. Is that not a term that you used in relation to this issue in question?

B: Well it’s not something that the President ever said to me.

H: Okay. Had he been okay with—

B: Do you want to talk about vaccine safety or vaccine science at all?

H: I haven’t finished asking questions about this. Are you disappointed that, so far, there hasn’t been a commission set up to do what you said you were going to be doing in January?

B: The Commission was not my idea. I was asked to chair a Commission and I agreed that if a Commission were created, that I would do that, I would take on that task. But, you know, that’s up to the White House and how they want to handle this issue.

H: Right. Okay.

B: It wasn’t my idea. I am happy with any steps that are taken to make vaccines safer and to improve the scientific integrity of the process. And to reform the process so that vaccines are subject to the same kind of safety scrutiny and safety testing that other drugs are subjected to. We need, prior to licensing vaccines, to do gold standard safety testing like every other drug requires, before approval.

H: Right

B: We need to do double blind placebo testing. We shouldn’t be able to limit safety testing on vaccines to three or four days, or a couple of months, when every other drug requires five or six years of safety testing. Because the consequences, particularly when injecting mercury or aluminum into babies, the consequences may be latent. In other words, the condition may not manifest or be diagnosed until age three or four. The current protocols, allow safety testing periods that are sometimes as short as 48 hours. Those are not going to disclose the kind of dangers that the public and the regulators ought to know about.

H: Okay

B: Many of the vaccines that are currently approved had five or six days of safety testing. That means that if the child has a seizure on the sixth or seventh day, it’s never seen. If the child dies [after the sixth day], it’s never seen. If the child gets food allergies or ADD or ADHD, which don’t manifest for four or five years, or autism, which usually isn’t diagnosed until age four, the regulators will never see that prior to licensing the vaccine.

H: Well, If something happens four or five years outside of an event, how do you know what event to attribute it to?

B: Well the answer to that question, of course, is double blind placebo testing. You have a control group and you have a study group. [The study group receives the drug and the control group receives an identical looking pill that is inert. Researchers then compare long term health outcomes and look for disease clusters].

H: Yes. Sir, that’s done all the time. That’s done. That is done all the time.

B: It’s not done for vaccines. It is, of course, required for other drugs but not vaccines.

H: What, double blind placebo testing? Sure it is. Sure it is.

B: It’s not required for vaccines.

H: Vaccines are tested that way all the time.

B: You’re wrong about that. It is not required for most vaccines. I know this is surprising to you and it’s shocking to most people, because people and  journalists such as yourself assume that vaccines are encountering the same kind of rigorous safety testing as other drugs, including multi-year, double blind placebo tests as other drugs. But the fact is, vaccines don’t. And the reason for that is because they’re classified as “biologics”.

H: Right, but I’ve read a lot of vaccine studies. They are double blind placebo tested.

B: You’re wrong about that. They’re not required to do double blind placebo tests. Now, I don’t know of any [children’s] vaccine that actually has done true [inert placebo] double blind placebo testing. In any case, none of them have more than a few months of double blind placebo testing. This will not allow you to spot illnesses like autism that aren’t diagnosed for four or five years.

H: Okay…

B: Second of all, in most vaccines, for example the Gardasil vaccine, they don’t use true placebos. In other words they don’t use inert placebos. For example [in the case of] Merck’s or Glaxo Smith Kline’s [HPV] Gardasil vaccines, they tested them for six months against an aluminum adjuvant that is highly neurotoxic. So if we don’t use a true placebo how can you determine whether the vaccine is safe?

H: Okay. Could we move actually back to the question I wanted to ask? I had some questions that I want to ask. It’s a Q and A. I ask the questions. That’s the way it works. You answer the questions or don’t answer if you like. I was wondering, in the time since you spoke with the president in January and were asked to chair the Vaccine Safety Commission, the senior HHS positions have been filled. They appointed Brenda Fitzgerald at CDC and Francis Collins was reappointed as Director at NIH, Scott Gottlieb to FDA and Jerome Adams as Surgeon General. All of them are on the record as supporting vaccines, and very supportive of vaccines. I was wondering if that is disappointing to you if you would have hoped for different people or people with a different mindset in those positions?

B: Well I would prefer regulators who are willing to look at the science and who are conversant with the safety science, who are familiar with the vast library of scholarly literature published and available on Pub Med which indicates that many vaccine ingredients, particularly aluminum and mercury, can pose a threat to children.

H: Right. So…

B: And as I said I’ve been having meetings with the regulators and urging them to read the literature.

H: And I did want to ask you as well, if you had any qualms about doing this work with President Trump. People who are concerned about the environment find this administration very unsettling. Given that, I was wondering if you had any qualms about working with him, because you’re so renowned as an environmentalist.

B: I don’t like President Trump’s environmental policies and I would not endorse them. I would say that the Trump administration is essentially destroying 30 years of my work on environmental issues and the work of many other people. I’ve written extensively on that and I think people understand that my position is clear, and that my work vaccine safety public health and child safety is not an endorsement of his President Trump’s environmental policy.

H: Have you made your position known to him? Have you had the chance to express those views to him?

B: Well in my initial meeting with him we had that discussion and he’s known my position for many years. Prior to his presidency I litigated against President Trump on environmental issues. I testified two weeks ago before an EPA hearing in opposition to the administration’s gutting of the Clean Water Act. I don’t think there’s any question with him or with any member of the administration that I’m opposed to Scott Pruitt and I’m opposed to walking away from Paris and I’m opposed to the subversion of the Clean Water Act, so I don’t think President Trump or anyone in the administration or anywhere in the country has any doubts about where I stand on those issues.

H: Right

B: If President Trump asked me to serve on a commission on fracking or on pipelines or global warming, I would do it. If I can make improvements in child health, if I can protect American children and prevent injuries and make vaccines safer, as safe as possible, and prevent injuries to these subsets, these population subsets who are vulnerable to injuries, particularly from mercury and from aluminum, I will do whatever I can and talk to anybody that I need to, including you—

H: (laughs) Okay

B: —to improve child health, the health of American children.

H: Can I get back, and I think this will probably be my last question, you’ve mentioned mercury a lot of times. Thimerosal is not in most vaccines given to children at this point and in fact has not been in childhood vaccines at this point since 2001, I believe. You know, studies have also shown that since it has been taken out autism rates have increased which would suggest that there isn’t correlation. And that’s what most scientists would say. But why do keep talking about mercury when children aren’t getting exposed to it in a childhood vaccine?

B: That is an industry talking point. That just simply isn’t true.

H: (laughs)

B: Mercury was taken out of three pediatric vaccines, DTaP, HiB and hepatitis B in 2003 but the same year, the CDC recommended flu shots for pregnant women and for children at six months of age and during every year of life. In the past 13 years, since 2004, most flu shots were loaded with mega doses of mercury and by the way—

H: —it’s only in multi dose vials and it’s not in single vaccine that’s packaged in a syringe already, and it was never in the live, attenuated vaccines.

B: Well here’s the numbers, and the numbers change every year and Thimerosal levels have trended downward in the past five years but 2007 was typical [of the years prior to 2012]. In 2007 there were 128 million flu vaccine doses manufactured in this country, and only 11 million were Thimerosal free. Over 90% of vaccinated Americans received huge, huge doses of mercury—not “trace amounts” as the industry likes to claim. “Trace amounts” means less than one microgram. The flu vaccines contained 25 micrograms which is 25 times “trace amounts” and over 31 times EPAs safe exposure levels for an average six month old male baby and potentially hundreds of times the levels that would be safe for a growing fetus.

B: So today, in the last three or four years, that [128 million] number [of Thimerosal loaded flu shots] has been reduced to 48 million. So today there are around 48 million Thimerosal containing doses, so about a third, were loaded with mercury.

H: And when you say this year, are you talking about 2016 or 2017?

B: Yeah, the 2016-2017 flu season. So that’s 48 million people, including pregnant women and little babies who are getting mega doses of mercury. That’s a national health crisis right there. Mercury is 100 times more neurotoxic than lead. Why would you inject that into a little baby or pregnant women? It’s insane. And mercury has never been safety tested.

H: Mmm Hmm

B: So anybody who tells you that mercury is safe, the question I would ask for them is “Can you show me a study?”. If fact, William Egan, [Acting Director of the Office of Vaccines Research and Review in CBER in the FDA], testified before Congress and was asked by Committee Chairman Dan Burton “Has there every been a safety test on Thimerosal?” and he acknowledged that there has not.

H: There’s been an IOM report that concluded that there was no risk from the amount of Thimerosal in vaccines.

B: No. No. No. IOM’s 2004 report did not exonerate mercury. The only thing IOM did was look at a series of epidemiological studies that had been recently created by CDC and these papers only dealt with one issue, which was autism. So all of the other injuries, that are known to be associated with Thimerosal including ADD, ADHD, SIDS, speech delay, language delay, [OCD, anorexia, mental retardation, depression] narcolepsy, tics, allergies, sleep disorders, Tourette’s Syndrome and many others. None of those have ever been studied.

H: Uh

B: And IOM never claimed that Thimerosal was safe. In fact I talked to Kathleen Stratton from IOM and Marie McCormick [at Harvard School of Public Health at the time] and said “Why aren’t you looking at these other injuries?” and they said “The CDC told us not to”.

H: Okay

B: CDC only wanted IOM to study autism. And the reason for that is, of course, because they had created these three phony Danish epidemiological studies and one widely discredited study of American autism data. IOM based its report principally on those defective studies. IOM never, ever exonerated Thimerosal from those other injuries. That is, again, industry propaganda which you are parroting and you should not be doing that. You should be looking at the science for yourself.

H: Right

B: I’m happy to sit down with you and walk through the science. I’m happy to debate anybody on the science and I can tell you, if they debate me, they will lose and it’s not because I’m a good debater. The science on this side is overwhelming.

H: Right. Ok. Ok. Thank you. I am good. I need to speak to my editors. I will send you a copy of the audio from the conversation and I will keep Freddie abreast on where things stand in terms of timing of when my story might run and I thank you for your time.

B: Thank you

H: Okay good bye

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the World Mercury Project. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

Please follow and like us:
Read More

Posted by on Aug 22, 2017 in Uncategorized | 0 comments

Minamata Convention on Mercury came into force this week (Aug. 16)

Minamata Convention on Mercury
came into force this week

The United Nations Environment Program’s Minamata Convention on Mercury came into force on August 16th. The aim of the Convention is “to protect the human health and the environment” from mercury releases. The treaty holds critical obligations for Parties to ban new primary mercury mines while phasing out existing ones and also includes a ban on many common products and processes using mercury, measures to control releases, and a requirement for national plans to reduce mercury in artisanal and small-scale gold mining. In addition, it seeks to reduce trade, promote sound storage of mercury and its disposal, address contaminated sites and reduce exposure from this dangerous neurotoxin. One thousand delegates and around 50 ministers will assemble in Geneva, Switzerland, September 24th-29th, for the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties to celebrate the new Convention and to lay the groundwork for its success.

Please follow and like us:
Read More

Posted by on Aug 20, 2017 in Uncategorized | 0 comments

FRANCE: Official list of ‘endocrine disruptors’ published

The list features more than 1 000 insect killer and sanitation products

The French government has published an official list of pesticide products currently in circulation suspected of containing ‘endocrine chemical disruptors’.

The list features more than 1 000 insect killer and sanitation products, including publicly available brands such as Baygon, Raid, and Stop Insectes.

The list publication – from Ecology minister Nicolas Hulot and Agriculture minister Stéphane Travert – comes just weeks after the European Commission (EC) voted on the definition of the chemicals known as ‘endocrine disruptors’ (known in French as perturbateurs endocriniens (PEs)).

The chemicals are said to be found in everything from pesticides to cosmetics, food, and children’s toys, and critics say the chemicals negatively affect the workings of the endocrine system in humans and animals, including the pituitary gland, thyroid, adrenal glands, ovaries, testes, and the pancreas.

They are also said to exacerbate problems such as obesity, cancer, and diabetes.

France was pivotal in helping the EC’s definition vote pass, after the country changed its previous stance against, and decided to support the vote. It had previously agreed with the other opposing countries – Denmark and Sweden – that the definition did not go far enough to protect the environment or the public’s health.

The vote will now enable France to remove affected products from the market, and stop new such products being sold.

However, critics such as the NGO Générations Futures, maintain that the EC’s definition does not go far enough, and is calling on European deputies to vote against the 4 July decision, which it says does not address existing rules on pesticide use.

To date, the NGO’s petition on the subject has attracted over 10 500 signatures.


Please follow and like us:
Read More

Posted by on Jul 12, 2017 in Environment and Health, Uncategorized | 0 comments

Transcript of Press Conference on Vaccines and Autism – Kennedy and De Niro

Press Conference, Robert K. Kennedy, Jr. and Robert De Niro National Press Club, Washington, DC

The press conference can also be viewed through Facebook Live
Press Conference Transcript

Good morning everybody, I’m Sharyl Attkisson.

In just a moment Bobby Kennedy will lead the news conference and afterwards I’ll moderate a short segment of question and answer.

But first we have a brief excerpt, about three to four minutes long, with the former head of NIH, The National Institutes of Health, Dr. Bernadine Healy, who was also a member of The Institute of Medicine.


It sounds like you don’t think the hypothesis of a link between vaccines and autism is completely irrational.


When I first heard that there was a link between autism and vaccines I thought well that’s silly. Really, I mean I tended to dismiss it just on the superficial kind of reading, or you know just reading what was in the papers, no offense to the media.

So when I first heard about it I thought, well that doesn’t make sense to me. The more you delve into it if you look at the basic science, if you look at the research that’s been done in animals, if you also look at some of these individual cases, and if you look at the evidence that there is no link, what I come away with is the question has not been answered.

This is the time when we do have the opportunity to understand whether or not there are susceptible children perhaps genetically, perhaps they have a metabolic issue, mitochondrial disorder, immunological issue, that makes them more susceptible to vaccines plural, or to one particular vaccine, or to a component of vaccine, like mercury.

So we now, in these times have to, I think take another look at that hypothesis, not deny it. And I think we have the tools today that we didn’t have 10 years ago, that we didn’t have 20 years ago, to try and tease that out and find out if indeed there is that susceptible group.


Why is this important?


A susceptible group does not mean that vaccines aren’t good. What a susceptible group will tell us is that maybe there is a group of individuals, or a group of children, that shouldn’t have a particular vaccine, or shouldn’t have vaccine on the same schedule. I do not believe that if we identified a susceptibility group, if we identified a particular risk factor for vaccines, or if we found out that maybe they should be spread out a little longer, I do not believe that the public would lose faith in vaccines.

I think people understand a polio epidemic. I think they understand a measles epidemic. I think they understand congenital rubella. I think they understand diphtheria. Nobody’s going to turn their back on vaccines, but it is the job of the public health community, and of physicians to be out there and to say yes, we can make it safer because we are able to say this is a subset we’re going to deliver it in a way that we think is safer. So I think the public would respect that.


But public health officials have been saying they know. They’ve been implying to the public they know, there’s enough evidence, and it’s not causal.


I think you can’t say that. And part of the, I think, you can’t say that.


Do you feel the government was too quick to dismiss out of hand that there was this possibility of a link between vaccines and autism?


I think the government, or certain public health officials in the government are, have been too quick to dismiss the concerns of these families, without studying the population that got sick. I haven’t seen major studies that focus on 300 kids who got autistic symptoms within a period of a few weeks of a vaccine.

I think that the public health officials have been too quick to dismiss the hypothesis as irrational, without sufficient studies of causation. I think that they often have been too quick to dismiss studies in the animal laboratory, either in mice, either in primates, that do show some concerns with regard to certain vaccines and also to the mercury preservative in vaccines.

The government has said in a report by The Institute of Medicine, and by the way I’m a member of The Institute of Medicine, I love The Institute of Medicine, but a report in 2004, it basically said, do not pursue susceptibility groups, don’t look for those patients, those children who may be vulnerable.

I really take issue with that conclusion. The reason why they didn’t want to look for those susceptibility groups was because they’re afraid that if they found them, however big or small they were, that that would scare the public away.

First of all, I think the public is smarter than that. The public values vaccines. But more importantly, I don’t think you should ever turn your back on any scientific hypothesis, because you’re afraid of what it might show.

[Attkisson] Dr. Bernadine Healy.

(audience applauding)

As a reporter this is one of the most remarkable stories I have ever covered, and perhaps the most misreported. It has many of the same ingredients though, as many of the other fascinating stories that I, and other journalists have reported. It involves billions of dollars, allegations of government and corporate and political corruption and alleged coverups.

For today’s news conference I’d like to introduce Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Chairman of the World Mercury Project and avid environmentalist attorney with a Harvard degree and a masters in environmental law, who has successfully advocated for many environmental causes including helping Riverkeeper lead the fight to restore the Hudson River. Nico LaHood, Bexar County Texas criminal district attorney who reports seeing his son regress into autism, after a vaccination. Robert De Niro, Academy Award winner and father of a child with a neurodevelopmental disorder who regressed after a round of vaccination. Tony Muhammad, student western regional minister, of the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan, and The Nation of Islam. And Del Bigtree, Emmy award winning producer, and producer of the documentary Vaxxed: From Coverup to Catastrophe.

Mr. Kennedy.

[Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.]
Thank you Sharyl.

Though I, I want to thank everybody for coming here today. Thank Bob, and you know all the other speakers.

And this is, we’re going to announce a challenge today, and I want to talk about, about the issue a little, and how I got involved.

I got involved, because as the president of Waterkeeper Alliance, and as attorney for Hudson Riverkeeper and several of the other keeper movements, I was suing power plants, coal-burning power plants principally for emitting mercury, which we were concerned about the impacts on fish. FDA had said at that time that every freshwater fish in America had dangerous levels of mercury in its flesh. And it was coming principally from these power plants. And I was going around the country speaking about this, and almost, many of the times after I’d speak I’d be approached by mothers, by women, they were presentable, they were smart, they were calm, they weren’t hysterical, and they would say to me I, that you need to look, my child was injured by a mercury vaccine.

And if you really consider concerned about mercury exposures to children you need to look at that factor, because that is the largest source of exposure for our children. And I began reading the science, and I’m very comfortable reading science, I’ve had over 500 environmental cases, almost all of them involved a scientific controversy, and I couldn’t have won those cases if I weren’t willing to read science, so I read the science, and I read it intensively. And I was immediately struck by the huge gulf between what CDC and journalists were saying that the science said, and what the science actually said. And what I heard from journalists time and again, and what you hear, it’s like it’s repeated like a mantra, that the link between mercury, that mercury is safe, that the science proves it’s safe, that the link between mercury and vaccines, and neurodevelopmental disorders is non-existent.

So I want to show you here the studies that CDC and journalists, have said for years don’t exist. These are 240 studies that show that, and they’re by the best university scientists, by government scientists, by hospital scientists, all over the world, that say that mercury is neurotoxic, that it’s causing damage to our children, that when you give it to mice, when you give it to rats, when you give it to hamsters, pheasant, goats, cows, that they develop autism-like symptoms, or other neurodevelopmental disorders.

These studies show that mercury is linked to the cascade of pediatric neurological, neurodevelopmental disorders, that began hitting Americans in 1989. The birth cohort, the children who are born in 1989, who are the sickest generation of children in the history of our country. CDC says one out of every six of those children has some kind of neurodevelopmental disorder. 43% of them have a chronic disease. A neurodevelopmental disorder, or a food allergy, asthma, eczema, or juvenile diabetes, or an autoimmune disease. This is not normal. 43% of our children have a chronic disease, that is not normal.

It began in 1989. 1989 is the year that EPA says is the gateway year. That’s the year all of these epidemics began in that year. So, we know this, that genes do not cause epidemics. You need an environmental toxin. So the question that journalists ought to be asking, instead of just parroting what CDC’s safety assurance is, if it’s not the thimerosal in vaccines, then what is it? What is the toxin that touched every American demographic in 1989, from Cubans in Biscayne Bay, Miami, to Inuit in Homer, Alaska. And that affects boys disproportionately to girls. ‘Cause the toxic, that fingerprint for that is mercury.

Mercury impacts boys because testosterone amplifies the neurotoxic effect of the mercury molecule. And estrogen wraps the molecule and protects the female brain. So it’s mainly boys who got injured. And all of these diseases, ADD, ADHD, OCD, speech delay, language delay, misery disorder, all the sleep disorders and seizures, all of these things, and ASD and autism, are impacting boys disproportionately to girls. So you have to match the toxin.

A lot of people say well maybe it’s the glyphosate, from the pesticides, maybe it’s PFOA from flame retardants, maybe it’s ultrasound. There’s a number of hypotheses, they all should be investigated. But none of them has the timing, or the sexual dimorphism that we see that we need to explain, when we look at these disorders. So CDC and journalists for many years have been parroting the assurances that no science exists that actually links mercury to these illnesses.

Here I’m giving you 240 studies. 240 studies that are on PubMed, that make that link. We looked up thimerosal and these impacts on PubMed, and we got every study that we could find, we didn’t cherry pick them, we got all of them. So here are all of the studies that we found that link it to non-autism neurodevelopmental disorders. And other disorders like food allergies.

This pile is 81 studies, and I’ll let you see it, that link thimerosal exposure to autism. And this is the pile of studies that show thimerosal is safe zero, not one, none. None that even pretends to. So why is it that journalists have been telling us that there’s lots of science out there?

Because they’re accepting the word of C, of people at CDC, and CDC has to be, CDC had, you know, there’s four separate federal studies that have painted CDC vaccine division as a cesspool of corruption.

CDC is a vaccine company, it owns 56 vaccines. It sells 4.1 billion dollars of vaccines a year. The people who make decisions in that agency have also financial ties, and the inspector general of HHS found that up to 97% of the people who are making decisions about vaccine policy either own stock in vaccine companies, or are otherwise financially entangled, or maybe financially entangled with the vaccine industry. Oh, and this isn’t me saying it. It’s the inspector general of HHS.

So, as CDC has been telling reporters, for 13 years that there’s studies out there, and no reporter I know, whenever a reporter says to me, buddy, buddy it’s all been proven safe, I say tell me a study. ‘Cause what CDC says is not science. What your doctor says is not science. What NIH says is not science. Science is what appears on PubMed, and is written by research scientists. And that this is science.

But calling CDC and saying is Bobby Kennedy wrong about the science does not prove anything. I can tell you what they’re going to say, yeah he’s wrong.

But you journalists have a duty to do more than that. You have a duty to actually look and see what the science says yourselves. And nobody’s been willing to do this. No matter all of our pleading and begging from this whole community. I’m going to show you over here. Three weeks ago, we put a request on our website for mothers to send us stories that are much like Bob’s story, and much like the story that you’re going to hear from Nico LaHood, that they brought their perfectly healthy child in for a wellness visit, that the child got a series of shots, and some of them probably containing thimerosal, the child spiked a fever that night, 105 degrees, had seizures and within three months was brain dead.

Now, we said we put out just on our website, tell us if you have that story. Within 13 hours we had 6,100 women send us details of their particular story, and that’s what in these books.

This, this is, this is not science. What we’ve been told is not science. It’s more akin to religion, it’s an orthodoxy. That it can’t be challenged, it’s a taboo to talk about it. That anybody who talks about it is a heretic, and has to be harmed or marginalized, or called a anti-vax, and yet you know one of these stories is not science, two of them are not science, it’s anecdote. But 6,100 of them, you know ultimately science is, are case studies, that’s science. And this is 6,100 case studies here.

And you have to ignore, like all orthodoxies, this orthodoxy is anti-science, it’s cruel, it’s sometimes lethal, and it’s misogynistic. It requires anybody who adopts this orthodoxy to say that all of these women who say the know what happened to their child, that these stories have to be dismissed. That these stories are the stories of hysterics. That they’re wrong, that they don’t know what they saw. That we know better than they do, what they saw, and what they saw with their child. And that is misogynistic. And is, you know, and that’s what it takes.

So, what we’re doing, what Bob and I are announcing today, is, and we know that journalists don’t want to look into the science, so we are going to offer a 100,000 dollar reward, it’s called the 100K challenge, to any journalist or anybody else, who can come up with a single, who can point to a single existing study that says that it’s safe to inject mercury into little babies, or pregnant women at the levels that we are currently injecting them in the flu vaccine. And this isn’t a gimmick.

We have gotten some of the greatest scientists in America, independent scientists who are not part of this issue to, and they’re government scientists with extraordinary credentials and prestige, and internationally respected, who have agreed to act as judges in this contest. So that when you send us, and the rules are here, that we’re going to distribute you. When you send us this study that you say proves safety, we then submit it to those scientists, and if you’re right, we’re going to write you a check for a hundred thousand dollars.

You’re not going to be able to do it, the study doesn’t exist. You could not design a study that proved that mercury as safe to inject into kids, any more than you could do with lead. Mercury, and I’m going to tell you this, for many years CDC has been selling this canard to the American public and it’s been swallowed by American journalists, that the reason, you know because CDC is in a jam, ’cause CDC and FDA are telling pregnant women don’t inject, don’t eat tuna fish, or don’t eat other large fish while you’re pregnant, because the mercury content is dangerous, will harm your child. There’s no safe level of mercury.

So people have asked them for years, then why are you allowing or encouraging doctors to inject women, when they’re pregnant, with levels of mercury that are far higher than you can find in a can of tuna.

And CDC has made up an excuse for that, a rationale. What they’ve said is that the methylmercury in fish is less persistent in the body, and more toxic, or more persistent in the body and more toxic, than the ethylmercury in vaccines. So ethylmercury in vaccines will leave your body right away and it is not as poisonous. But CDC’s own scientists last month, published a massive data review and literature review, which proved that to be, that claim to be a hoax. Where CDC is now acknowledging through its own scientists that the, that the ethylmercury in vaccines maybe 50 times as toxic to the brain as the methylmercury in fish, and twice as persistent in the body. And yet that, you know that study that was published, by CDC scientists in a respected publication got zero coverage in the mainstream press.

So, you know, what we’re, we need to break this impasse, and I’m going to, I’m going to finish by talking about this. Democracy requires checks and balances, and government you know, one of the first thing that journalists learn when they go to journalism school is that people in power lie, people in authority lie. And it’s the job of journalists to check them. You can’t just take their word on stuff. Oh, and what we have today in our society, we have an industry you look at the pharmaceutical industry, pharmaceutical industry has paid eight billion dollars out in recent years for pharmaceutical drugs, for lying, for doing off-label marketing, for doing adulteration, for doing all kinds of bad things with their pharmaceuticals. What makes you think that they wouldn’t do the same thing with vaccines? Now, listen to this.

Congress receives more money from the pharmaceutical lobbies there’s more money spent on lobbying by the pharmaceutical industry than any other industry. There are more lobbyists on Capitol Hill from pharma, than there are Congressmen and senators combined. They pay, I’ve always fought the oil and gas industry on Capitol Hill and thought they were omnipotent, but pharma puts in double to lobbying what oil and gas does. They put in four times what defense and aerospace does. And it’s not just the republicans who take the money, which with those other ones it’s mainly republicans, democrats think it’s okay to take pharma money too. So they bought up Congress, they own the regulatory agency,
which has an arm of the industry.

These are the things, these are the institutions that are supposed to be standing between a rapacious industry, and a little child, our little children. So what’s left?

Well, the lawyers are there, right? No, because one of the favors that Congress did for this industry was to pass that VICA, the vaccine compensation act, which says that it’s illegal in this country to sue a vaccine company. So no matter how toxic the agreement, the ingredient, no matter how reckless the line protocols or procedures, no matter how grievous your child is injured you cannot sue them.

So there is no discovery, there’s no document searches, there’s no depositions, there’s no class action suits, there’s no multi-district litigation. They get a free ride.

So what is the last institution left that is still standing between our kids and that industry? It’s the press. And of course the press is going to tell the truth.

But no, for some reason the press has been co-opted. And I don’t think it’s simple as this. That pharma is now the single biggest contributor to network news divisions. Up to 5.4 billion dollars a year. So you look at a network news broadcast these days, and it’s just a vehicle for selling pharmaceutical products. And I was told by the president of one the biggest networks in this country that he was sympathetic with what I was asking which is to go on TV and talk about this issue. He believed I was right, but he could not allow me on his network, because he said, that he would have to fire any host who will have me on.

And it’s not just the mainstream media that’s accepting all this money, but the, you know, the so-called alternate press, which is supposed to be the antidote to corporate control of our media, Salon, Slate, Huff Post, Daily Beast, they won’t run any kind of debate or criticism of this issue there’s something wrong with that in a democracy. That the press, which is the final redoubt for public scrutiny of institutions and industry, has been completely removed from this debate. You cannot go on TV and talk about this. You cannot go into the press. You will be maligned, you will be marginalized as anti-vax, and this week the British Medical Journal, the editors finally had enough, and they put down their foot and they said that word anti-vax is a dirty word. And it’s used to shut people up on a debate that we should be having. And the journalists need to stop doing that, and they need people to start talking about this.

The reason people stop vaccinating is because their child was injured or they’ve lost faith in the program. And without journalistic scrutiny, journalistic scrutiny is required to make sure that this industry and these regulatory agencies serve the public interest.

And if you remove your scrutiny, and your editors tell you you cannot play this story, it’s not making our vaccine program stronger, it’s making it weaker. It’s making it, it’s gutting it out, because we know what happens. We know that this industry, if you suddenly remove scrutiny is not going to come to Jesus and find, you know, that it’s time to start telling the truth. You can’t imagine that that would happen.

So you know, I want to restate, which I say every time I speak that I’m pro-vaccine, but I want safe vaccines. I’m called anti-vaccine in every article written about me. But I’ve never ever made a single statement that could justify that label. Well, I want to get mercury out of the vaccines.

For 33 years I’ve been working to get mercury out of fish. Nobody has ever called me anti-fish. And because I want mercury out of vaccines, I should not be called anti-vaccine. But the reason I’m called that, is because journalists want to make this a binary argument. They want to say either you’re pro-vaccine, or you’re anti-vaccine, there’s nothing in between. There’s nobody like me who is pro-vaccine, but wants safe vaccines, wants to get mercury out, so that our children’s health can be protected. And that’s a rational, and it’s not, it shouldn’t be a radical idea. It should be something that should be getting support from journalists and journalists should be talking about it. But they don’t, so now today we’re offering you a hundred thousand dollars to start talking about this issue honestly.

Now, all of these people came to this issue from, and I wanted to bring up, Bob and I wanted to bring up a cross-section of people here. And but all of these people came to this issue from different perspectives. I came from my work on mercury, in as a litigator, an environmental litigator.

Nico came because he had a child. Two children who were vaccine injured. And he had, like us, we’re all pro-vaccine, but he had children who were vaccine injured. Del Bigtree came as a journalist, who was a producer of The Doctors, who tried to come to this issue and was told no, this is taboo, you cannot talk about it. And he left that, that show in disgust. Tony Muhammad came because he saw autism exploding in his communities, it is the black neighborhoods that are getting the thimerosal vaccines. And it appears to be that African-Americans are much more susceptible to vaccine injury than other Americans. So, but it’s the poor clinics in the urban neighborhoods who are getting these shots. If you’re living in a suburban neighborhood, you have people who are questioning your doctors, and saying I don’t want that. But if you live in a poor, if you’re in a poor clinic, they’re going to take the cheapest vaccines, which are thimerosal vaccines, and your ability to stand up to your doctor, the power to stand up doesn’t exist. So you end up taking them, and those kids are being grievously injured. And Bob De Niro, who came here because of censorship. Again, like Del, because he tried to play a movie that he saw, and there was an uproar, that ultimately he made the decision that it’s too much, it’s going to disrupt the festival and shut it down, but said this censorship is not good for America.
It’s not good for democracy. It’s not good for the public health. So, each one of these gentlemen is going to talk for about three to five minutes, and then we’re going to take Q and A, and I’m going to start with Nico.

[ Nico La Hood]
Well, I think it’s safe to say that you cannot manufacture Bobby’s passion. And like Bobby said we all got to the stage, everybody on this stage got here a different avenue, because we all had different journeys, we have different experiences and we have different opinions a little bit, but let me tell you what we stand for.

We stand here together for our agenda, which is threefold. We’re not here to advocate what we’re against. We’re here truly to advocate what we’re for. And here’s what we advocate for, every one of us on this stage, we are for our children. So since we’re for our children, we’re for your children. That’s a good thing to be for, can I get agreement from everybody?

Number two, we’re for truth. There should not be one person in America, or in this world that not should be pursuant to truth, and should be pursuing truth passionately. So we’re here for truth.

And number three, we’re here for safety.

Children, truth and safety, that is our agenda, and that’s what we stand unified here for.

For my family, I tell people we became an unintended experiment.

As Bobby told you I am the proud daddy of four children. For some reason God trusts me with four of his beautiful children. And our first two children were vaccinated per the schedule. We didn’t know any better, we didn’t question, we just listened, of course you vaccinate. Our first child at six months old, after the six month vaccination she broke out in hives. Tremendous hives, it’s an autoimmune disease, what’s that? She’s allergic to your wife’s breast milk. How ridiculous does that sound? But that was told to us. Everything but it could possibly have been something in the vaccine. We didn’t know to question, so we went forward with the schedule.

Our second child Michael was born. Vaccinated from the first day all children are vaccinated, all the way through the schedule. We saw some signs, but around the sixteenth month vaccines, which is the MMR between the 14 and 18 months, we lost our son.

That’s a fact, I don’t need anyone to tell me about that. You don’t know my kid the way my wife and I do. Our son, and we have the pictures, and we have the video to prove it, don’t take my word for it, was responding to his name, was looking, wonderful eye contact, was smiling, we kept his attention. He went to stimming, he went to losing eye contact, he went to quit responding to his name, and he went blank, immediately after.

Therefore, as a lawyer, I have to think about what happened. What intervening cause happened to our son, that caused this reaction? We didn’t drop him; we didn’t get in a car accident. What was it? When we looked back and no one said the vaccines, we traced it back objectively, not subjectively, objectively to the vaccines. That is our opinion, and we are entitled to that opinion.

As a lawyer, I am trained to follow evidence, and to examine evidence like Bobby is. And furthermore, I am trained and schooled to follow evidence wherever it leads me. You see the representative of the justice system, in all of America, not just in Texas, is Lady Justice. And one of the distinguishing characteristics of Lady Justice is she wears a blindfold.


Because forget politics, this is not republican or democrat, this is not politics, it’s about people. Forget genders, forget affiliations, forget your faith, forget it all. We are to wear the blindfold like Lady Justice, and follow the evidence wherever it leads us, not where we lead ourselves. So what we’re asking basically, what I’m asking you, as a daddy, that happens to be a lawyer, ’cause I’m a daddy first, is to wear the blindfold with us. Let’s just shelf all of our agendas, let’s ditch all of our opinions and our perceptions, and let’s put on a blindfold for our children, and let us passionately and unbiasedly, pursue truth, and hopefully God willing reach safety. Because our children deserve it. And Del will talk about that, we have to do better for our kids. So, I have a lot more to say, but I’m going to adhere to the three to five minutes, I think I’m already over. Thank you for being here, I really mean that sincerely. I really appreciate your attendance, and God bless you.

(Soft whispering)


[De Niro]
I’m glad I’m here.

I, I don’t really, I’m here for, because my son is within the autistic spectrum, and went through a, it’s been explained, I think everybody knows the story, so I won’t bore you with it again. I thought what Bobby said was great. It was eloquently said, I couldn’t have said it any better myself I agree with him a hundred percent, thank you.

(Audience applauding)


Reverend Tony Muhammad.

In the name of God, I bear witness there is no God but God. And it’s an honor for me to certainly be here, with this distinguished panel of powerful men, who advocate for truth. I would like to say on behalf of the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan and the grateful Nation of Islam, and on behalf of poor people, those poor people being black, brown, red and white. I have been blessed as of May of last year, after finding out about this study, of a scientist who works for the CDC as we speak. His name is Dr. William Thompson. Who admitted that he lied about a study he did. And it was brought to our attention by Mr. Kennedy, of whom I’m deeply, deeply grateful for him, and not just him, his family and their legacy. Because we’re taught that history is most attractive, and best rewarding in any research. And this has happened to us before. That the Tuskegee Experiment could be back and live and well and it took a Kennedy to shut down that experiment.

Now we have to ask ourselves as a community, could it be that it’s happening to us again? That 240% of black boys are more disproportionately affected by vaccines, when it comes to autism. Our community, the poor community don’t even know what that word means.

I have just finished the first half of a tour that I have been commissioned to go on, by the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan. And I have visited 30 urban cities. And the room are packed with poor people. And when the movie, or the documentary Vaxxed was shown, the screams, the cries from black mothers, who were poor. In St. Louis, Missouri, a black mother fainted after looking at the movie Vaxxed, and it took us minutes to revive her. And she said I knew it was the vaccines, but the doctors bullied me and told me that it was me genetically who gave that to my child. She said I’m crying because I’ve had a hysterectomy, because I refused to have any more children.

Something is wrong. And I just want to say to the press, as a spiritual man, I have to go there. Isaiah in the Bible, chapter 59, he says these words, he says truth has fallen to the streets, and justice stands afar off, and equity cannot enter. And it’s impossible for us to judge while the truth is being hidden. And it is your responsibility as Mr. Kennedy said, you are the last line of defense for truth.

But if you have been compromised then in the minds of the American people we are hemorrhaging because you have to muster up the courage to go behind these lines and vet out the truth for our children, and our children’s safety.

And I’m saying to you, that the black community is waking up in leaps and bounds and as you, the press now, is under attack, show us, show us, that we can trust you. Prove to us that you will leave no stone unturned, because the CDC has admitted that in the 1960s Elijah Muhammad told the members of the nation, do not take the polio vaccine. We are for vaccines, but we are very careful with what vaccines we take. And 30 years later the CDC admitted that the polio vaccine had in it SV40, that caused over 95 million American people to come down with cancer when in the early 60’s cancer was not a black disease. But we’re 12% of the population, and now we lead all category in cancer. So I’m standing here, not as a man who’s just for his people, and I am, don’t get it twisted. We have to speak for poor black, poor brown, poor red and poor white.

But I’m here with this distinguished body of men, that we will give our life for the truth. And so we hope that you the press will do your job, while the American public somewhat trusts you. For when this come out, in truth, the community is going to be upset.

I close to find in the 30 cities I’ve been in, when our community found out that our Congress voted to give the vaccine makers a pass on the very bill that Mr. Kennedy spoke of they was irate. I don’t care what the color is; the American public don’t even realize that Congress passed a bill that the vaccine makers cannot be sued. And if the vaccines are so safe, why have our government using the taxpayers’ money, covering up for a pharmaceutical industry that makes billions in profits, why won’t they stand up? And why won’t they stand behind their own vaccines? Why do we the American people have to pay for the mistake of the vaccine makers? That’s a crime in my opinion, and we must do something about it.

Therefore, I thank you and hope that this will lead you to going behind enemy lines in getting for the American people, truth.

(Audience cheering and clapping)

[Del Bigtree]
We may have to seek them out, and destroy them where they live. That was what came out in a court case against Merck when their product Vioxx was proved to cause heart attacks in over 50,000 people. That lawsuit, that case went behind the scenes into the emails and showed Merck knew that that drug caused heart attacks, and covered it up from the FDA, the American people and the world. And in an internal email they sent out, doctors that questioned the safety of Vioxx, we may have to seek them out, and destroy them where they live. Think about that.

How does a company like that continue to even work in the United States of America? Murdering over 50,000 innocent people. Some say that number could go up into the hundreds of thousands. Put it in perspective, we lost roughly 65,000 people in Vietnam and we marched in the streets. And we have a company that knowingly killed people, and still they work in this country. Better yet, they make most of our childhood vaccines.

We are the press. I worked on the daytime talk show, The Doctors, celebrating the best that medicine had to offer, the best doctors, the best science, the best surgeries, cutting edge techniques. And then I ran into the story of Dr. William Thompson, a whistleblower from the Centers for Disease Control, that laid out how they committed scientific fraud when it came to vaccine safety research. Didn’t just make that claim but backs it up with 10,000 documents including internal emails, spoke to Congressman Bill Posey, handed over those 10,000 documents, was also interviewed by Bill Posey. And Bill Posey stood before the US government, in front of the Congress, said we have a problem. We have one of our top scientists is providing information to me that we are lying to the American public, and that children are in harm’s way. The American people trust us, and he said in closing, please, please I beg you, we must subpoena Mr. William Thompson.

And yet, no newspaper covers that story. No news station covers that story. Nobody cares about a top scientist from the most important health agency in the world coming forward and saying we’ve committed scientific fraud?

What has happened to us? Why am I the only one that leaves a job because I refuse to have television tell me we can’t cover stories about innocent children being ruined and damaged? Stories you’ve heard here today. Respectable, beautiful people, telling their truth. And yet we let the pharmaceutical industry buy our advertising and control what we say.

At the heart, the foundation of media, of press, the same heart, and foundation of science, is one single idea; we must never stop asking questions. If we do, science is dead. If science believes it has the only truth, there will never be another Einstein; there will never be another breakthrough event. And if journalists stop asking the important questions, then there will never be the dream of the United States of America, because Thomas Jefferson said to us if we lose a free press, a press that can challenge the government, can challenge the tyranny of industry, hold their feet to the fire, then we will lose our freedom, and we will lose the United States of America.

They call us the fourth estate, the fourth branch of government, and we report concerned about the branches of government being bought out by industry. Senators and Congressmen that bow down to oil and gas industries or pharmaceutical industries as Bobby Kennedy has pointed out, now the most powerful lobby in Washington. But what about us? What about the fourth branch of government? If we have been bought out, if we cannot go back to our networks and say we must run this story. I don’t care that Merck’s going to follow this story with an ad for a drug and a ridiculous list of ticker-taped side effects and we giggle in our living rooms, who would buy that? We must stop giggling, because we are lying to the public. They believe we have a free press. They believe we are telling the truth. They believe we will cover a story when a top scientist says we have lied to the American people.

Journalists are the first ones to step up when a murderer is on death row and new evidence or a new witness steps forward. We say we must reopen this case; we cannot let an innocent man die, or an innocent woman die.

Well I’ll tell you right now, we have a new witness in Dr. William Thompson. We have new evidence in 10,000 documents that he’s provided, and you have great scientists and lawyers pointing out that it is impossible to say that vaccines are safe, it is impossible because we’ve paid out over 3.3 billion dollars in damages, paid for with taxpayer money, because the pharmaceutical industry has no liability. If we’ve paid out 3.3 billion dollars, how can we say that vaccines are safe? How can we say that vaccines are safe when we have a top scientist still working at the CDC? How can we say that they’re safe when you cannot provide a study that shows that the second most toxic substance on earth, the most toxic non-radioactive substance, has no studies saying that it can be injected into children, and pregnant women, into fetuses?

And we have a rise in childhood illness like we’ve never seen. Autism now at one in 45, up from one in 10,000. Asthma in every classroom. Anaphylactic food allergies, diabetes, eczema, the list goes on and on. That is not the classroom I grew up in. We have got to stop saying our children are so safe because of vaccines, our children are sick. We said it on The Doctors television show. This is the first generation of children that we believe will not live to be as old as their parents.

Isn’t that enough questions for the media? Isn’t that enough questions for science to do what is right? Not a single person up here today is trying to do away with the vaccine program. None of us have ever made anti-vaccine statements. We’ve made statements that we want science to do better. It has injured children of people sitting on this stage, that have stood before you to tell the truth. It has injured hundreds of thousands of parents’ children, telling the same story. Those are the facts.

Now it’s time to begin asking the appropriate questions. When brakes fail on cars, we don’t worry that we’re going to end all driving altogether. We say fix the failing brakes. We are saying fix the failing vaccines. Because no child should be allowed to be injured by anything not by disease or vaccines. And if we’re paying out 3.3 billion dollars in damages, we can do better!

We have cars that are driving down the streets by themselves. Any moment we may put a man on Mars.
And we are going to accept that vaccines have to injure some children? We can do better. And the only way we do is if every person with a pen in this room and everyone standing behind a camera in this room does the job that we studied, that we passionately believe in. That Thomas Jefferson remanded us to. To challenge the systems of government. To challenge the systems of industry. And do our job for the American people. For the children of this world. Please begin doing your job and pressure this industry to have better science. Because safe vaccines for everyone must be a priority. Thank you all for being here today.

(Audience cheering and clapping)

I want to, before Sharyl comes up, I just want to clarify something. I told you there’s no safety studies. But there are studies that CDC has created, CDC and industry, there are 19 studies that purport to say that thimerosal does not cause autism. That’s it, and they’re population studies, they’re not clinical, they’re not animal studies, they’re simply population studies, and they’re all very badly flawed. These are those studies. These are the studies that say that CDC studies, including three of these studies written by Dr. Thompson, the three lead studies, who now says that he was ordered by his boss at CDC to destroy evidence, to manipulate the data, to bury the evidence that showed that it was in fact causing illness to black boys, specifically black boys who received the vaccine on time, had a 250% greater chance of getting autism, than black boys who waited. So, and that, and he was told to come in, he and four other scientists were ordered by Frank DeStefano, the vaccine branch chief, to come into a conference room at CDC and dump that data into a garbage can and then they published that study, the DeStefano study, and found no effect. And that study has been cited 110 times on PubMed as the definitive evidence that vaccines don’t cause autism. These are all of those studies; this is the entire universe of their autism study. There’s no safety study that says, you know, it doesn’t poison you, it doesn’t kill you, it doesn’t cause all these other illnesses. These are exclusively autism studies, and it’s all they’ve got.

So and those 19 studies are described here, on these charts, and it goes through why each one of them has, is fraudulent. But even these studies, even these studies, which are CDC’s own studies admit that it causes tics, it causes tics, language delay, it causes mental retardation, it causes lower IQ in girls. So even the studies they use to defend it from autism are admitting it’s causing all these other illnesses. Nobody’s looking at this stuff.

Reporters need to look at this and they need to look at it in detail. Because you know this is what if this got, why did not a single mainstream reporter cover this story? You have a senior scientist at CDC who’s saying that everything’s fraudulent, we caused the autism epidemic.

That’s what he says. He says every time I see a family with an autistic kid I have great shame because we were at fault, that’s a quote. And nobody covered the story. There was just crickets in the American media.

Okay, I’m sorry, Sharyl.

No, thank you.

Question, Mike, please wait for a microphone, and then say your affiliation and name please.

Yeah hi, I’m Sara Reardon from Nature magazine.

I was wondering Mr. Kennedy if you’d had any more discussions with the Trump administration
about starting a vaccine commission?

No, I. I got called by the transition team on December 4th, and they asked me, the Trump had they said that the administration wanted to reach out to me, the president wanted to reach out to me, to see if I was willing to chair and populate a commission. And they didn’t, they wanted to make sure that before they made me an official offer that I was willing to accept it. I ended up talking with members of the transition team many times over the next month, and trading documents about what the commission would look like. I was told the president elect would call me over Christmas, he ended up calling me on January 4th.

We talked for 20 minutes on the phone. He asked me to come in on January 10th to talk to him, and I spent an hour talking to him that day. He said he knew many people who admit he thought, and who believed their children had been injured by vaccines and he wanted to make sure we had the safest vaccines, and that we had, you know, we had a, a regulatory process with integrity.

After, and they instructed me at that time, members of the staff to talk to the press about what we had said, which I did. Since then, and then, you know by the time I had, an hour later it had been walked back. I’ve been contacted three times by the administration since then and they tell me that they’re still going forward with a commission. I don’t know what’s going to happen, and I think what happens in the administration now is very obscure to anybody. But you know, all I can say is to tell you what the president told me. He specifically told me that he knew that the pharmaceutical industry was going to cause uproar about this and was going to try to make him back down, and he said I’m not going to back down. They tried during the campaign, and I didn’t back down then, and I’m not going to back down. But I can’t tell you what’s going to happen. All I can tell you is I will be here fighting for this issue whatever happens.

I’m Josh Major from Annapolis. Thank you for having this forum.

My question really is for Mr. De Niro. Sir, could you please discuss with us what happened when you announced the showing of Vaxxed at Tribeca? Could you discuss the role of the Immunization Action Committee? There was an article in The Guardian, quoting Alison Singer, who had said the Immunization Action Committee sprang into action to suppress the movie. What is the Immunization Action Committee, and what do they do?

[Robert De Niro]
I don’t know what it is. And it, that’s something I never heard. I haven’t heard, I’ll look, I’m curious about that, too. I heard it was filmmakers, some filmmakers, feeling that the film wasn’t worthy in a way. But it must have had more, I, you know.

I’ll look into that.

One more quick question.

Hi, Rob Dew from I have a two part question, I guess for each of you. Three hundred fifty organizations led by the American Academy of Pediatrics came out and wrote a letter to Mr. Trump saying they have unequivocal support for the current vaccine industry the way it’s run now. They have total support. What kind of pushback, you know, they haven’t even created a commission yet, what kind of pushback do you expect in trying to lead something like this? And Mr. De Niro is this something you could get behind, a vaccine safety commission, led by President Trump?

First of all, I would say this again but, the 350 I think, the AAP was the group that led that effort and got 350 health agencies to sign on. Many, the studies that they cited in there were these studies. And if, and you know I doubt if anybody actually read the studies, or very few of those people. But, the idea, why would anybody not want a vaccine safety commission?

That I think should be the question that everybody should ask. You know, the commission would be, as President Trump envisioned and me, it would be made up of Americans with the highest integrity, people who were household words. People who had not taken any position on this issue. Just to look at the science.

We, you know, we need a debate on this. And for anybody to say that they’re satisfied with the way that the vaccine program works today, where the vaccine program has paid out 3.3 billion dollars to people who admittedly were injured? To say that that can’t be improved on, that that record, that those children are just sacrifices for the greater good? That we can ask Americans to sacrifice their child so that some other child can remain free of measles? Maybe sacrifice them to death? You know, there’s not been a single child in this country that’s died of measles in a decade. But there’s been 69 children who have died from the measles vaccine and been compensated by the government. Is that acceptable? Is that what those 350 organizations think is acceptable? I don’t think so.

You know, if we had a commission we’d look at the science. Science is not subjective, it’s not my opinion. It’s objective. And the people that would staff, that would populate that commission would be people that all of you would know. None of them, particularly not even scientists. But people who just say wait a minute, this is either working or not, or we ought to be doing better.

So, you know, I don’t see why anybody’s scared of safer vaccines. I’m not out to hurt the vaccine program. I want to help it, I just want good science. I’ve been working for good science, for 33 years on every issue. I just, I don’t see how anybody has a legitimate objection having an, another set of eyes on the vaccine program?

[De Niro]
I am only concerned about this. Trump I don’t care about. If he does the right thing, he does the right thing. I don’t have to be connected with him. It’s about this, period.

Thank you all, thanks to the audience. Unfortunately we have to be out of the room at, a minute, two minutes ago, so thanks for attending. Thanks for The National Press Club and to the organizers.

Please follow and like us:
Read More