Scandals
- 02/17/04 (originally
published 02/10/04 at Redflagsdaily.com)
by Sandy Gottstein Mintz
Yesterday, the Institute of Medicine held its
controversial Immunization
Safety Review meeting re: autism and vaccines. I say
controversial because there was a good deal of protest over the
arguably premature timing of it.
Noteworthy among those questioning the
advisability of holding the meeting was Congressman Dave Weldon,
MD. In a letter to Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the CDC,
Weldon
wrote:
"I am writing to ask that you post-pone the February 9, 2004, Institute
of Medicine (IOM) Immunization Safety Review Committee meeting.
Pressing forward with this meeting at this time, I believe, will
further undermine the credibility of the Centers for Disease Control
(CDC) on matters of vaccine safety and do damage to the reputation of
the IOM. I believe the proposed date of this meeting, which you have
the ability to change, is in the best interests of no one who is
seeking the truth about a possible association between vaccines and
neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism...Recent actions and
statements by officials within the CDC’s National Immunization Program
(NIP) office, the timing of the IOM meeting, and the agenda for the IOM
meeting raise serious questions about the purpose, value and objectives
of this meeting...Presently, the NIP is engaged in what amounts to an
investigation of their own actions, which does not create an air of
confidence."
Not surprisingly, there was no delay of
the meeting, which was held yesterday, as originally planned.
While some in the media were reasonably
fair-minded, others were not. (Click
here
for articles on the meeting.) One article, however, in particular
stands out. The Cox News Service article,
Researchers
dispute risk of autism from vaccines, as reported in the Contra
Costa Times, is a shocking display of disrespect for both the
participants in the meeting and its readers.
Although there were
almost
the same number of researchers
who supported the claim that vaccines cause autism as opposed it, there
was not even a hint of that fact in this article. Mark Geier, a
geneticist with both an MD and a PhD, who with his son presented
compelling evidence against the vaccines (and who has been thwarted
in his efforts by the CDC), was not only NOT called a researcher, but
was referred to right after this sentence: "Some people who attended
the meeting refused to accept those findings." "Some
people"? "Refused to accept those findings", when their own
published research contradicted it?
Perhaps Cox News
Service does not care about those unlucky many or few who are being
harmed by vaccines. Perhaps they think by ignoring and
disrespecting hard-working scientists, they will go away. Perhaps
they do not care to report all sides of a story, believing it in the
public's best interests to molly-coddle and shield them from what may
be a terrible truth. But do they really think hiding from the
truth will protect their own children from harm? Do they really
buy into Public Health's apparent Ostrich Policy - that what you don't
know can't hurt you?
A foolish media is
an enemy of both the people and themselves. In a free society,
readers are dependent on hearing all sides of a story, not just the one
a given writer hopes and believes is the truth.
A foolish media
will lose its readers, as they have already begun doing, to the
pioneering Internet writers. They will probably live to regret it.
by Sandy Gottstein Mintz
"Eternal vigilance is
the price of liberty." - Wendell Phillips (1811-1884), paraphrasing
John Philpot Curran (1808)