Articles

Another antivaccine zombie meme: polio vaccine and SV40 and cancer, oh, my!

Another antivaccine zombie meme: polio vaccine and SV40 and cancer, oh, my!

The Internet has produced a revolution with respect to information. Now, people anywhere, any time, can find almost any information that they want, as long as they have a connection to the global network and aren’t unfortunate enough to live in a country that heavily censors the Internet connections coming in. In addition, anyone any time can put his or her opinion out on the Internet and it might be read by people on the other side of the planet. For example, it continually amazes me that my blatherings here are read by people in Australia and New Zealand, as well as Europe and pretty much every other continent. Before the Internet, there was no way I would ever have achieved my current measure of minor celebrity status (and I do mean minor). Now, with enough good (I hope) writing and some links from some popular sources, and I can make my opinion known worldwide.

The dark side of this is that cranks can also make their opinions known worldwide, and, all too frequently, they are much better at it than skeptics are. For example, this very blog used a generic, vanilla WordPress template for the longest time, only updating it a few months ago. Meanwhile crank websites like NaturalNews.com are decked out in the latest, greatest web accoutrements, complete with video. One other problem with the democratization of information is that there now exist what I like to call “zombie memes.” In the world of quackery and pseudoscience, these are pseudoscientific claims on the Internet that never die, no matter how often they are refuted. Generally, such memes/claims pop up, make a fuss, are refuted, and then disappear. Then a few months (or even a year or two) later, something will happen to resurrect them. Maybe it’s a clueless mortician cremating the remains of such a zombie meme during a rainstorm and letting whatever it is that resurrected the dead meme in the first place permeate the soil of a graveyard of dead memes. Maybe it involved injecting a glowing fluid into the corpse of the meme. Who knows? Who cares that much? All I know is that these zombie memes keep popping up again and again as though they were new.

Re-animator-imagem

Now that the World Wide Web (at least as we know it, in its graphically browsable form) is approaching its twentieth birthday, we now have enough perspective to see these things. Steve Novella pointed out one zombie meme just the other day about the MMR, as did a certain person well known to this blog. Just yesterday I noticed another of these zombie memes arising from the dead yet again to feast on the brains of the living and thus make them cranks too. (At least, that is the goal of their continual resurrection.) This one popped up at that online repository of all things quackery, NaturalNews.com, in a post by Mike Adams himself entitled Merck vaccine developer admits vaccines routinely contain hidden cancer viruses derived from diseased monkeys. Other versions of this meme pop up from time to time with titles like CDC Admits 98 Million Americans Received Polio Vaccine In An 8-Year Span When It Was Contaminated With Cancer Virus.

Let’s dive in, shall we?

Maurice R. Hilleman is a little-known giant in the history of vaccines in the 20th century, having developed 36 vaccines, more than any other scientist in history, of which eight are still used today. So successful was he that he has been credited with saving more lives than any other medical scientist of the 20th century. Consequently, it’s rather strange to see his name be such a critical part of the first antivaccine zombie meme I’m going to discuss, which Mike Adams promoted just yesterday. As a companion piece on NaturalNewsTV, he has a video, with text superimposed that says, “All vaccines contain foreign DNA, RNA, and proteins that may prompt allergies and autoimmune diseases from bacteria, fungi, yeast, bovine fetal serum, monkey kidney tissues, toxic metals, mercury, and aluminum, MSG, and corpse preservatives formaldehyde and formalin.” One can’t help but chuckle and note that formalin is formaldehyde in a neutral buffered solution. They’re basically the same thing.

Be that as it may, let’s see what Adams claims, along with many other cranks:

If you haven’t yet realized the truth about how vaccines contain hidden cancer viruses, prepare yourself to be shocked by the admission you’re about to hear. Decades ago, one of the most prominent vaccine scientists in the history of the vaccine industry — a Merck scientist — made a recording where he openly admitted that vaccines given to Americans were contaminated with leukemia and cancer viruses.

In hearing this admission, his colleagues (who are also recorded here) break into laughter and seem to think it’s hilarious. They then suggest that because these vaccines are first tested in Russia, their side effects will help the U.S. win the Olympics because the Russian athletes will all be “loaded down with tumors.”

For the record, this is the same vaccine that was given to tens of millions of Americans and promoted by the government. To this day, people still carry these hidden cancer viruses which have proven to be a boon to the cancer industry.

One notes that this most recent article by Adams is close to a verbatim republication of an article from two years ago by Adams. It regurgitates a claim that SV40 that contaminated some early batches of the polio vaccine in the late 1950s were the cause of the “cancer epidemic.” Other variants of this claim are that the polio vaccine was responsible for creating AIDS. The first is a distortion and exaggeration; the second is even worse.

3296_3_large

Before I discuss the actual content of the interview, I must note that it was apparently found by a man named Leonard Horowitz, who is quoted on Whale.to as having said, “The greatest lie ever told is that vaccines are safe and effective.” On a Whale.to page devoted to Horowitz, we learn that Horowitz is a world class conspiracy theorist who has written articles like Big Pharma/Lancet Scam: Vaccine-Autism Link Denied (coauthored with Mike Adams himself!), Watchdog Groups Say Death Toll From Vaccines Amounts to “Genocide” Surgeon General’s Letter in USA Today Assailed, and Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola. Nature, Accident or Intentional? (a credulous interview with Gary Null). His website, Tetrahedron Publishing Group, is replete with similar articles and hawks colloidal silver as well, while his own website bills him as a “Humanitarian, Clinician, Prophet, Scholar and Natural Healer Advances Global Healing.” On his other website, American Red Double Cross, Horowitz attacks the Red Cross and bills himself thusly:

Dr. Len Horowitz, internationally known authority in public health and emerging diseases, and the nationally syndicated radio talk show host of “The Insight Hour,” delves into the darkest side of drug-based medicine, including the mass killing and poisoning of people for profit and politics.

This led me to The Insight Hour with Dr. Leonard Horowitz and Stacy Kane and an effort by him called LOVE528, which he represents as central to the “musical mathematical matrix of creation.” Horowitz even has a hallowed entry in the Encyclopedia of American Loons, which describes the full breadth of his woo, as does his Wikipedia entry. He’s also known for publishing an article in Medical Hypotheses entitled Polio, hepatitis B and AIDS: an integrative theory on a possible vaccine induced pandemic.

First of all, it would help to know when this interview was done. Obviously, it had to be before 2005, because that’s the year Hilleman died at the age of 85. I did a bit of Googling, and this footage is allegedly footage cut from a production by medical historian Dr. Edward Shorter done for PBS WGBH in Boston. I can’t find the video online, but there is a book by Shorter entitled The Health Century: A Companion to the PBS Television Series, which was published in 1987. So presumably this interview with Hilleman likely took place sometime in the year or two before that, which is informative in that it tells us that the conspiracy theory that the polio vaccine was the origin of AIDS is at least 25 years old. No wonder it keeps popping up again and again. The jokes about cancer causation by the vaccine indicate that, similarly, the idea that the early batches of polio vaccines were contaminated with SV40 were around in the 1980s. In any case, this found footage was taken by Horowitz and woven into a conspiracy magnum opus of a film entitled In Lies We Trust: The CIA, Hollywood and Bioterrorism. (The complete segment begins just after the 2 hour mark.)

In any case, this appears to be the “money quote” that the antivaccine movement likes to cite:

Dr Edward Shorter: Tell me how you found SV40 and the polio vaccine.

Dr Maurice Hilleman: Well, that was at Merck. Yeah, I came to Merck. And uh, I was going to develop vaccines. And we had wild viruses in those days. You remember the wild monkey kidney viruses and so forth? And I finally after 6 months gave up and said that you cannot develop vaccines with these damn monkeys, we’re finished and if I can’t do something I’m going to quit, I’m not going to try it. So I went down to see Bill Mann at the zoo in Washington DC and I told Bill Mann, I said “look, I got a problem and I don’t know what the hell to do.” Bill Mann is a real bright guy. I said that these lousy monkeys are picking it up while being stored in the airports in transit, loading, offloading. He said, very simply, you go ahead and get your monkeys out of West Africa and get the African Green, bring them into Madrid unload them there, there is no other traffic there for animals, fly them into Philadelphia and pick them up. Or fly them into New York and pick them up, right off the airplane. So we brought African Greens in and I didn’t know we were importing the AIDS virus at the time.

Miscellaneous background voices:…(laughter)… it was you who introduced the AIDS virus into the country. Now we know! (laughter) This is the real story! (laughter) What Merck won’t do to develop a vaccine! (laughter).

If you listen to the actual interview (at around 2:15 in), you’ll see that it’s very clear that Hilleman, obviously aware of the conspiracy theories claiming that the AIDS virus derived from the virus used to make the early polio vaccine, was making a joke and that the people in the room during the interview realized it was a joke. That’s why they laughed. They were laughing at the conspiracy theorists. Those claims were clearly floating around in the mid-1980s, right at the height of the AIDS epidemic, before there was much in the way of effective treatment. So this part of the interview was cut from the show. One wonders how much else was cut from the show, given that generally only fractions of total footage make it into any documentary. (Remember Dr. Jay Gordon whining about how his extensive interview had been cut altogether from the PBS documentary The Vaccine War?) In any case, Shorter, hardly “hiding” the footage, deposited it all in the National Library of Medicine, where it is available to all. That’s how Horowitz found it and decided that Hilleman making jokes was “evidence” that he really did “bring the AIDS virus to the US,” as this post claims.

The-Walking-Dead-Breaking-through-fence

So what’s the real story? It is indeed true that back in the late 1950s, batches of polio vaccine were contaminated with a monkey virus known as SV40, which stands for “Simian Vacuolating Virus 40″ (hence Hilleman’s mention of that “damn vaculating agent that we have”) or “Simian Virus 40.” It was the 40th simian virus that Hilleman had discovered, hence the name. The polio vaccines developed by Jonas Salk and Albert Sabin in the 1950s were made by growing the polio virus in kidney cells derived from Asian rhesus monkeys (hence the reference to monkey kidney cells). Salk’s polio vaccine was a killed vaccine, in which the viral particles were inactivated with formaldehyde and the killed virus injected to produce an antibody response against the polio virus that could prevent infection with live polio virus. It contained very little SV40, because the formaldehyde also inactivated SV40. Sabin’s virus, on the other hand, was a live virus vaccine and was more heavily contaminated with SV40.

In 1959, a researcher at the National Institutes of Health named Bernice Eddy noticed that monkey kidney cells were dying without obvious cause. (Note that she was also a critical player in the Cutter incident, in which she discovered that the vaccines manufactured by Cutter Laboratories had live polio virus in them.) She made extracts of the cells and injected them under the skin of 23 newborn hamsters; within nine months 20 of them developed large tumors. Meanwhile, Hilleman and his collaborator Ben Sweet isolated the virus responsible and found SV40 was found in both the Sabin and Salk vaccines. It didn’t help that Eddy had brought her findings to Dr. Joseph Smadel, chief of the NIH’s biologics division, who made a huge mistake and dismissed the tumors as harmless “lumps.”

By 1961, there was significant concern among U.S. Public Health Service officials, as it has been found that as many as one-third of polio vaccines were tainted. As a result, although there was no evidence at the time that SV40 was harmful to humans, it was ordered that manufacturers find a way to eliminate SV40 from all future vaccines, which they promptly did. New procedures were developed to neutralize any SV40 and SV40-free African green monkeys were then used to produce the bulk of the vaccine instead of rhesus monkeys (hence Hilleman’s reference to green monkeys in his interview). Showing that no good deed goes unpunished, conspiracy theorists latched on to the African green monkeys as the vector through which the AIDS virus was brought into the U.S. via the new polio vaccines (hence Hilleman’s joke about “importing the AIDS virus”). These actions were all well and good, but the government didn’t recall the contaminated vaccine stocks and did not notify the public, because, as Hilleman later recounted, government officials were worried about a panic that might jeopardize the vaccine program. In any case, by 1963, SV40 had been eliminated from the nation’s polio vaccine stock. However, millions of people had received the vaccine.

But does SV40 cause cancer in humans? In a word, as far as we can tell, no.

Even early on, there were indications that this was unlikely. First of all, followup studies demonstrated that while injecting SV40 would produce tumors, ingesting it did not. Other studies showed that children receiving Sabin’s oral polio vaccine did not develop antibodies to SV40, as one would expect if they were being exposed. SV40 apparently passed through children’s GI tracts without ever causing an SV40 infection.

As the years went by, there were studies that reported finding SV40 in human tumor samples, which was obviously worrisome. The most prominent of these studies were by Michael Carbone at the NIH. In the late 1980s, he tested 48 human mesotheliomas and found SV40 by PCR in 28 of them. In 1990s, PCR “unleashed a wave of SV40” discoveries, including a variety of bone, brain, and hematopoietic malignancies, so much so that in 1997 the National Cancer Institute set up an SV40 working group, as described by ERV. The report stated:

In order to resolve why some laboratories detect traces of SV40 in mesothelioma while others do not, an International SV40 Working Group, which included the majority of laboratories studying SV40 in human tissues, was formed in 1997. Nine laboratories from the working group agreed to participate in a study, funded and organized by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Each group was given 25 paired-duplicate samples of human mesotheliomas, a single set of 25 normal lung tissue samples, and positive and negative control samples. All the samples were blinded (labeled so that the human tumors and controls could not be distinguished) and each laboratory used its particular assay for detecting SV40, many of which had been used to detect SV40 previously. The results, published in the May 2001 issue of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention (36), showed that none of the mesothelioma specimens was consistently positive for SV40.

That would be this paper.

For example, after Carbone had presented his evidence linking SV40 to mesothelioma, Howard Strickler, an epidemiologist at the NCI, and Joseph Fraumeni, director of NCI’s Division on Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics presented other evidence. For instance, PCR on 50 mesotheliomas from Armed Forces hospitals across the country found no SV40. Another study compared cancer rates in people born between 1947 and 1963, who were likely to have been exposed to contaminated polio vaccine, to people born after 1963, who were highly unlikely to have been exposed. There was no difference in cancer rates. This is a result that has held up, as studies performed eight years, fifteen years, and thirty years after SV40-contaminated vaccines had been given to children found that they had the same cancer incidence as groups not exposed to contaminated vaccine (for example, this study, this study, this study, and this study).

This story reminds me a bit of the Andrew Wakefield story in that these false positive results were most likely due to contamination with plasmid sequence. The SV40 and CMV promoters are very commonly used as a strong promoter to drive the expression of genes by plasmids, while the SV40 large T-antigen is commonly used to immortalize cell lines. Pretty much any molecular biology laboratory is likely to be swimming in contamination with SV40 and CMV sequences, much as the laboratory that was used to test Andrew Wakefield’s gut biopsy samples from autistic children was swimming in measles sequences. So very rigorous measures need to be taken if you’re going to look for these sequences to make sure the controls are all appropriate. As those of us who’ve ever done extensive PCR work know as well, even that isn’t always enough. Even the most careful scientist can occasionally be fooled by contamination problems when using PCR.

But what about the claim that the polio vaccine provided us not only with cancer-causing SV40 but with AIDS? This one is a lot easier to deal with because, unlike the SV40 fear mongering, which was built on a grain of truth, this particular myth is, as we say, right out:

In the 1990s, certain critics began to blame the testing of a live, weakened polio vaccine in Africa in the 1950s for the spread of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). Those behind the accusation argued that chimpanzee cells were used to create the vaccine, and that those cells had been contaminated with a virus that sometimes affects chimps: simian immunodeficiency virus, or SIV. When the vaccine was given to children in Africa, they argued, SIV mutated to become human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV, which causes AIDS.

The accusations, however, were demonstrably false for a variety of reasons. Most notably, the weakened polio vaccine was not made with chimpanzee cells, but with monkey cells. The vaccine was later tested using a technique that can detect viral DNA (the PCR technique, or polymerase chain reaction); it did not contain SIV or HIV.

Researchers at the University of Birmingham in Alabama demonstrated in 2006 that while HIV was in fact a derivative of SIV, chimpanzees in Cameroon that had been infected with SIV in the 1930s were the most likely source of the AIDS epidemic—decades before the weakened polio vaccine was tested in Africa.

So wait a minute. Was it the switch to green monkeys in wake of the SV40 contamination problem or was it the testing of live attenuated polio virus in Africa that created the AIDS virus? I just can’t keep the stories straight.

Whatever the case, the SV40 conspiracy theory can easily be looked at as a case of no good deed going unpunished. After all, for all the castigation of the “sloppy science” that led to the polio vaccine by quacks and cranks, scientists back then used the best tools they had at the time, and quacks tend to fall into the trap of looking at those times through the lens of the scientific techniques that are available to us today. Scientists didn’t have PCR to look for sequences of contaminating viruses; that technique didn’t become widely available until more than 25 years later. Think of it this way: Watson and Crick’s original paper demonstrating the double helical structure of DNA was only published in 1953, which is around the time the polio vaccine was being developed, and Marshall Nirenberg didn’t publish his paper in which he “cracked the genetic code” until 1961. (I used the paper as part of a journal club-style class I taught for graduate students. It’s a really clever paper.)

In a way, it’s astounding to me that scientists could accomplish what they did then, that Eddy could detect the contaminating virus in 1959, and that Hilleman could identify it as a distinct virus in 1960. Even if the SV40 contaminating the Salk and Sabin polio vaccines really did cause cancer (and the evidence thus far is that it did not), the government moved pretty quickly to fix the problem. Sure, you can criticize the NCI for not taking Eddy’s results as seriously as they deserved or officials responsible for the vaccine program for not recalling the contaminated vaccines. Those are legitimate criticisms, but, even in spite of those missteps, in less than two years the contaminated polio vaccines were gone, which is a pretty impressive accomplishment. Then, over the next few decades, scientists did periodic studies to try to determine whether there had been any ill effects from the SV40 contamination, particularly in terms of an increased incidence of cancer in people who had received the contaminated vaccine. They failed to find any.

It’s time to move on, but we all know that the antivaccine cranks and quacks won’t, except temporarily. Once zombie memes are established, be they about vaccines, quackery, 9/11 conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, or involving other demonstrably bogus assertions, they are nigh-impossible to kill once and for all. Indeed, maybe “zombie” is the wrong word for them. After all, even in The Return of the Living Dead (in which they were the most indestructible), zombies could still be destroyed by reducing them to fine ash using a crematorium. (At least in The Walking Dead, all it takes to kill a zombie is a good head shot.) I rather suspect that antivaccine zombie memes would only be made stronger and more widely dispersed by such utter destruction. On second thought, that is a lot like the zombies in The Return of the Living Dead.

In any event, I fully expect that this particular meme will continue for the rest of my life, with the same few articles evolving only slightly, showing up periodically, being Tweeted all over the Internet, and spread all over Facebook, being refuted, and disappearing for a while, only to show up again later. Zombie memes never die. They always rise again. If readers of this post share it in response to seeing this particular zombie meme, perhaps this post can become a zombie meme too, but as a force for good. And I promise you that I will never, ever eat your brains.

Unless I’m really hungry, that is.

Posted in: Vaccines

Leave a Comment (82) ↓

82 thoughts on “Another antivaccine zombie meme: polio vaccine and SV40 and cancer, oh, my!

  1. Bobby Hannum says:

    I really like having the pictures throughout the article. I wish that more of the posts were somewhat more amenable to having photos in them.

  2. cphickie says:

    Perhaps a smartphone app is needed that lets us select the countering meme from a dropdown menu and then generate the appropriate response (with a choice of several boilerplates) to paste into our intelligent replies countering those of the decepticons at AoA. In terms of taking down these zombies, we’d then have an effective, simple weapon we all could use.

    1. Nick Theodorakis says:

      Maybe not so much a smartphone app but perhaps a curated collection of refutations to common anti-vax claims. For example, an aerospace engineer from a message board I frequent has a website (clavius.org) that has a collection of articles debunking moon-landing conspiracy claims, so when someone shows up with some claim about why they think we didn’t send men to the moon, usually one could point to a specific page on that site that has already answered the question. Another example might be the talk.origins archive (for anti-creationist claims).

      1. calliarcale says:

        Clavius rocks. I’ve been considering setting up something like that in my blog, though it would never be as comprehensively wonderful as Clavius (which is so good, it got plagiarized extensively by Richard Hoagland — who was in the uncomfortable position of having to defend NASA against the moon hoax people so that he could continue claiming to see alien structures in Apollo photos).

  3. Lawrence says:

    An Anti-Anti-Vax App…..I’d be all over that!

  4. Tsu Dho Nimh says:

    I met Hilleman in the mid 1970s at a conference … any interview with him would have to be heavily edited for family viewing.

    He was vulgar, profane, abrasive, domineering and reportedly a right bastard if you crossed him. But he was also brilliant and dedicated. The man got results. He made sure his staff got what they needed for their work.

    1. David Gorski says:

      I had heard that about Hilleman, that he was abrasive and domineering, with a tendency towards crude humor. I also heard that he didn’t hesitate to fire people whom he considered to be doing substandard work and in fact had a little “trophy” area of toy heads that he kept, one for each person fired. However, the people who worked for him, I also heard, were fiercely loyal to him.

    2. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

      I read Paul Offit’s Vaccinated, a biography of Hilleman’s life, and it did make a point of describing his crass, profane and overbearing work style – as well as his multitudes of life-saving vaccines. Good book. The discussion of why he went into private industry was interesting – it was the best and fastest way to save the most lives.

  5. Samantha Fenski says:

    Great, David!! Thank you for taking the wind out of the anti-vaccine-ists sails! It is hard to believe that this meme has gone around for so long without a response from SBM, but I am glad your finally wrote it.

    Dr. Gorski, one question, you praise skeptics and their ability to not fall victim to anti-vaccinists, but those skeptical of the Government’s opinion of 9/11 (or Syria or Iraq) are conspiracy theorists. How do you reconcile your obedient nature as government mouthpiece with your inherent appreciation for skeptics? Readers, or at least you yourself, believe you to be some kind of authority on medicine because you are a medical doctor. Would you acknowledge the authority of architects and engineers to inform you on building issues? http://www.ae911truth.org/

    1. David Gorski says:

      Very amusing, a 9/11 Truther. When it comes to 9/11 discussions, I much prefer http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com.

      1. Samantha Fenski says:

        Surely you jest, Gorski. That blog is not maintained by anyone but a student in Washington. If that is your source, then SBM is a joke.

        James B.
        My blogs

        The Chief Brief
        Screw Loose Change
        About me

        Gender Male
        Industry Student
        Location Bellevue, Washington
        http://www.blogger.com/profile/01475924582753322002
        Chief is a combination software geek from Washington State and retired Chief Warrant Officer from the Army National Guard (thus the clever name). A recipient of a BA in Russian and East European studies and an MBA from the University of Washington, his interests include foreign affairs, economics, politics, technology and languages. Polite inquiries and job offers will be answered at chiefb-at-gmail.com

        See Gorski, this is why people don’t take you seriously. But you think it is funny citing asinine sources like screwloosechange.blogspot.com.

        1. Samantha Fenski says:

          This is a gem, Gorski. So you think that the writer of Screwloosechange is a good source for information?!??? The Chief Brief is another one you’ll love (pssst! it’s run by the same guy as screwloosechange) http://thechiefbrief.blogspot.com/

          The Chief Brief
          WE’RE NOT ARROGANT, WE’RE JUST SMARTER THAN YOU.
          ABOUT ME

          JAMES B.
          Chief is a combination software geek from Washington State and retired Chief Warrant Officer from the Army National Guard (thus the clever name). A recipient of a BA in Russian and East European studies and an MBA from the University of Washington, his interests include foreign affairs, economics, politics, technology and languages. Polite inquiries and job offers will be answered at chiefb-at-gmail.com

          That site is a joke and through association, so is this one. Have a reasonable discussion Gorski! Humility is a virtue

        2. Harriet Hall says:

          In the first place, Dr. Gorski did not cite that blog as an infallible source of true information. He merely said he prefers the discussions there to the discussions by 9/11 truthers.
          In the second place, you attacked the source rather than the content. You tried to disparage the writings of that blogger by implying that he is not an authority, but you didn’t even give a single example of anything he said on his blog that is wrong.

        3. windriven says:

          “See Gorski, this is why people don’t take you seriously.”

          Hey, wait. Most of us writing in these pages are people and most of us take Gorski seriously. Even Jay Gordon more or less takes him seriously and I’m 78% sure Gordon is a people.

          All that aside, the rest of your comment is an unusual blend of ad hominem and sort of a backflipped (dis?)appeal to authority. Creative. But not compelling.

        4. David Gorski says:

          See Gorski, this is why people don’t take you seriously. But you think it is funny citing asinine sources like screwloosechange.blogspot.com.

          Sad that a student can run rings around the “best” that 9/11 Truthers can produce, then.

          In any case, this blog post was not about 9/11. Your comments are so far off topic that they clearly constitute threadjacking. No more. Stick to the topic of the post. Do you have anything intelligent to say about vaccines, SV40, Maurice Hilleman, and/or cancer?

    2. windriven says:

      There is a wide gulf between skepticism and cynicism.

      “Would you acknowledge the authority of architects and engineers to inform you on building issues?”

      If there was a broad consensus among structural engineers, that would be one thing. A few architects wobbling off into the weeds is quite another. I could dig up the names of a variety of physicists who converse nightly with one or another god, who believe in perpetual motion machines and even a few who bought into cold fusion. That doesn’t make perpetual motion real, it makes those physicists nuts.

      But comfort yourself with this: governments today can’t keep their most potent secrets under wraps for more than 48 or so seconds. If ()Dubya ()Cheney ()Rumsfeld ()Steven Colbert actually orchestrated the attack you can rest assured that somebody’s going to bootstrap their 15 minutes of fame by blowing the whistle.

    3. Chris says:

      “authority of architects and engineers”

      As a structural engineer, it is my opinion that an architect or engineer that refuses to believe steel looses structural integrity when heated is an idiot who must have been asleep in their material science class.

    4. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

      Conspiracy theorists are pseudoskeptics, not true skeptics. The difference is the degree to which expertise is appreciated and respected by true skeptics, while pseudoskeptics use logical fallacies to defend a pre-ordained conclusion.

  6. Iraqui Truther says:

    Man whose WMD lies led to 100,000 deaths confesses all
    Defector tells how US officials ‘sexed up’ his fictions to make the case for 2003 invasion

    A man whose lies helped to make the case for invading Iraq – starting a nine-year war costing more than 100,000 lives and hundreds of billions of pounds – will come clean in his first British television interview tomorrow.

    “Curveball”, the Iraqi defector who fabricated claims about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, smiles as he confirms how he made the whole thing up. It was a confidence trick that changed the course of history, with Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi’s lies used to justify the Iraq war.

    He tries to defend his actions: “My main purpose was to topple the tyrant in Iraq because the longer this dictator remains in power, the more the Iraqi people will suffer from this regime’s oppression.”

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/man-whose-wmd-lies-led-to-100000-deaths-confesses-all-7606236.html

    1. David Gorski says:

      The topic of this post is neither 9/11, the Iraq invasion, WMD, or anything like that. Such comments are too far off topic and constitute obvious threadjacking. Stick with vaccines, SV40, and cancer, please, or topics closely related.

      Oh, and no sockpuppets, Samantha. This will be your only warning about that.

  7. Adam Morrison says:

    I decided to brave up and follow the link to Natural News’ article and I’m stultified by the insanity from the article and commentators. Particularly the ‘natural’ cures for cancer comments. It’s as if they think every doctor and pharmacist is a Sniddley Whiplash-esque villain twirling their mustaches.

    Idiots.

  8. You have readers in all continents. Antarctica? :) (And I wouldn’t be surprised if you did.)

    I’m convinced that these zombie memes occur throughout pseudoscience for two reasons. First, they have no evidence supporting their viewpoint, so just keep repeating the lie over and over and over, and people will believe it, if only because of false balance issues. And second, they assume that those of us skeptical of this pseudoscience fall asleep or something, and will ignore them on the 10th resurrection of the zombie meme.

    Otherwise, why would they keep doing this? Maybe I should invoke Einstein (or Ben Franklin, or AA, or some ancient Chinese proverb): “Insanity–doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

  9. Alia says:

    On a side note, the first polio vaccine was invented by Hilary Koprowski. And when he arranged to get 9m doses of polio vaccine to his home country, Poland, people stood in long lines to get their children vaccinated, such was the fear of the disease.

    And yes, he was also accused of creating AIDS as a result of his vaccine trial in Congo in 1950.

  10. windriven says:

    I would posit, indulging perhaps overly much in amateur psychology, that the memes persist because they resonate with a number of different groups for different reasons. These groups would include:

    Those who have sought medical treatment but for whom that treatment failed;
    Those who have sought medical treatment but for whom no (further) treatment exists;
    Those who have an innate distrust of science for whatever reason (philistines and luddites);
    Paranoid delusionals who think some iteration of The System is out to get them.

    I’m sure there are more. My point is that each of these alone is likely a group small in number and alone might not support these memes over long periods of time. But the memes resonate with enough small groups that those memes are able to retain currency. I’m not sure that we can ever eliminate any of these groups so the likelihood of eliminating the memes seems small. That is what makes it so important to counter those memes at every opportunity.

    1. duggansc says:

      Frankly, I’d say that there’s probably a good number who also simply don’t trust some to have not screwed up. No big conspiracy, but someone not detecting an issue with shipped vaccine or equipment. Our medical system is good, but those occasional bobbles such as the Therac-25 or preemptive removal of teeth in children make people willing to believe that someone screwed up majorly somewhere along the way.

      I did my part debunking the SV40 thingie when someone was posting it on Facebook among my high school friends (the girl in question has two autistic children and she and I frequently fence online between me posting SBM articles and her posting items from Natural News and the like indicating that it was all her fault for getting her children vaccinated). I’d have to dig around for where I found the tidbit, but one of the articles I quoted to her indicated that the false results from the tumors was also traced back to a lancet being used repeatedly without adequate sterilization, meaning that one positive sample led to the next several being positive. Still bunk, however it happened.

      1. windriven says:

        True enough. But it is a long leap from ‘somebody once screwed up’ to ‘I’m going to trust my health to the crazy cat lady on the corner’. Not saying there aren’t people who make that leap.

        1. duggansc says:

          {nods} I was addressing your query more from the perspective of “why do people believe that vaccines sometimes wind up with harmful stuff in them” rather than “Big Pharma is out to get you. Trust my crazy cat lady guru instead”. I think there’s a much larger number of people in the first category than the latter.

          “Never attribute to malice what is obviously just blatant stupidity” and all that.

  11. lagaya says:

    Even in HL Mencken’s time, he couldn’t get rid of false information that he had written as a joke (The Great Bathtub Hoax). How much harder today!

  12. Dave says:

    People believe what they want to believe, even when the authors themselves admit that what they have said in the past is untrue.

    1. windriven says:

      That’s certainly true for some, Dave. Some people, once they’ve taken a position, never change no matter the evidence. I don’t understand how a life thus lived is worth the trouble.

  13. Leo Campos says:

    Reading through this I come across this cartoon this morning: http://abstrusegoose.com/537

    Very apropos.

  14. jasmin says:

    Where have your articles been hiding! I just ran across your little gems, and all I can say is thank you, thank you, thank you. Being a first time mom, I have been berated by many a mom who were shocked that I allowed my child to be vaccinated. Their reasoning: “well on Facebook…” What the crap!? Facebook? Well, heck, if someone posts it, it must be true. Right?

  15. Catalin Oancea says:

    This is the first page I came across when searching for the SV40 virus. No wonder, it’s maintained by a doctor and his pet cattle of fans who applaud him for his wonderful job of exposing those anti-vaccine “morons” who question everything. Come here, come all, get your conscience soothed by this wonderful illusionist of “science” and don’t forget to conform to everything your government and your best pals, the filthy rich doctors, tell you.
    I guess to you people it means nothing that cases like GSK selling anti-depression medicine in the USA caused people to kill themselves, Dr. Oz vaccinating Piers Morgan and getting sick from the same thing he was vaccinated against (flu shot), and the latest great stunt from the guys that really want you to be in your best health, the Gardasil case. But wait, let the good doctor answer and calm you down before you actually read something; let him filter out the bad and the insane, there is nothing to worry about, I am just a nut who doesn’t know what he’s talking, but you, oh great doctor, you went to medical school, you must know what you’re talking about. I bet you do, those dollars speaking to you every night, they must tell you something that’s worth destroying the lives of people with your indoctrination.
    Liar and COINTELPRO. How many of your friends are around this blog to show people how great of a medical expert you are?
    Also, did any of you notice that the flu season begins when people start taking flu shots because the media and all your gurus advise it? Nah, that’s totally unrelated. It’s really sad how you people believe that we have a flu season because viruses “evolve”, when all they do is modify them and inject them back into the population. I mean, they are making more money than you can ever conceive; sure they want you to be healthy. You will all get what you deserve, some more than others, for trusting these people blindly; sad, but true.
    Now go ahead and tell me that I don’t understand how vaccines work. I bet you vaccinate yourself, mister doctor.

    1. Harriet Hall says:

      What a sad mixture of misinformation and ignorance! This blog is maintained by several doctors who all independently reached the same conclusions about vaccines based on the evidence. No “illusion” is involved. None of the authors of this blog are “filthy rich.” Anti-depressants reduce the risk of suicide; when the warnings about suicidal thoughts (not completed suicides) in adolescents first came out, the number of prescriptions dropped and the suicide rate went UP. Everything you say about vaccines is demonstrably wrong, but I won’t address the anti-vaccine lies and distortions here because we have done that ad nauseam in previous posts. I must say, the idea that the flu virus doesn’t evolve but is modified by vaccine manufacturers and injected back into the population, thereby causing new flu epidemics, involves a degree of paranoia I hadn’t encountered before.

      No, you don’t understand how vaccines work. And all of us get all the recommended vaccines on schedule. I recently got the high-dose flu shot, and I’ve had both versions of the pneumonia shot, the Tdap booster for pertussis, and even the shingles vaccine. We want the best protection for ourselves, our families, and our patients, and the evidence shows that vaccinating on the recommended schedule is the best way to achieve that protection.

      It’s obvious that when you were searching for the SV40 virus and found this page, you were not interested in learning the facts, but were only interested in confirming your anti-vaccine bias.

      Unwillingness to trust the consensus of experts is not usually very wise. It’s a bit like refusing to put oil in your car because you think the auto maintenance experts are trying to mislead you and make big bucks by selling you oil, and you think oil will damage your car.

      1. It’s a bit like refusing to put oil in your car because you think the auto maintenance experts are trying to mislead you and make big bucks by selling you oil

        More like forcing you to put metal-corroding ethanol fuel in your car to buy votes from the cornbelt. Oh and they DO make big bucks selling you oil.

        Sorry Harriet, you wont find a lot of “I’ll just do what the good doctor tells me” patients these days, people are more aware the medical establishment is out to empty the patient’s pockets .

        1. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

          More like forcing you to put metal-corroding ethanol fuel in your car to buy votes from the cornbelt. Oh and they DO make big bucks selling you oil.

          Your analogy fails since vaccines prevent disease. The best analogy might perhaps be the use of a good anti-rust protective coating.

          Merely because someone makes a profit doesn’t make it evil. You for instance, make a profit treating your patients. Of course, in your case, “evil” is less a factor than “arrogant ignorance” since your use of CAM demonstrates your inability to realize the treatments are inert. In some cases, particularly in cases of competition, it’s a sweet spot – companies make a profit, while consumers can purchase from a variety of low-cost alternatives. Needs are met, people are employed, and generally our lives are easier because of it. Vaccines are such a sweet spot – Big Pharma makes a small profit, fewer people die of preventable diseases. What’s the problem? Do you want to go back to the “god old days” of iron lungs, polio braces, and babies choking to death due to untreatable pertussis? Why is this better?

          Sorry Harriet, you wont find a lot of “I’ll just do what the good doctor tells me” patients these days, people are more aware the medical establishment is out to empty the patient’s pockets .

          How are vaccines, generally covered by the state, and given with minimal profit and sometimes a loss by the doctor, “emptying patients’ pockets”? The patient saves an enormous amount of money shelling out what, $15 for a vaccine, compared to a stint in the hospital for measles, mumps, rubella, polio, pertussis, Hib-B, tetanus or any other vaccine-preventable disease.

          Further, most of the health-preserving recommendations are essentially free – eat fruits and vegetables, get exercise, don’t smoke, get enough sleep. Even where I live, with national health care coverage and excellent insurance, my health care costs would cost me almost nothing because I follow my doctor’s advice. If more patients followed conventional health advice, they wouldn’t face expensive medical costs (and if the US had a real health care system, those costs would be even lower as they would be broadly funded through taxes).

        2. Andrey Pavlov says:

          Actually, I am personally surprised by how many patients say exactly that. I always try and engage my patients and explain to them what is going on and why, and a lot of times I get a chuckle and a smile and they say “you’re the doc, doc! Whatever you say goes! You’re the expert so do what you gotta do.” I honestly have slight ambivalence towards that. On the one hand it is nice to have my expertise recognized and deeply humbling to have such trust (which actually makes me work even harder to make sure I’ve got it right) on the other, I wish that people would engage more and become more educated and proactive about their health.

      2. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

        But wait, let the good doctor answer and calm you down before you actually read something

        Yeah, but what are you reading? The systematic distortions of Gary Null and his merry band of misinformationists, who will sell you garlic capsules and virgin coconut oil as an alternative? Keep in mind – they rely on your fear and your ignorance of the science of vaccination to ensure you buy their products. They say they care about, and have real solutions to your health fears, but they have no proof that it works.

        you went to medical school, you must know what you’re talking about.

        The thing is, going to medical school actually does teach you things. You learn about biology, chemistry, physics, immunology, how the body actually works, and from that perspective you can understand why vaccination makes sense and should be effective. If you don’t have a comparable education, even a basic understanding of anatomy and physiology, how can you claim you are making an evidence-based decision to reject vaccines? Or that they are dangerous? And that’s not even getting into the specifics of this particular issue, because the interactions of vaccine, antigen, virus, cancer and individual genetics are all quite specific, well-beyond the understanding of even an undergraduate student in biology, let alone someone with no biology at all. I realize I’m not a medical expert, I can’t be a medical expert, and that it takes years to truly grasp the science and that I can’t and don’t want to spend that time – so I don’t pretend I’m an expert. I defer to them. And the experts say – vaccination is a safe and effective way to prevent specific illnesses. Including influenza!

        Also, basic science suggests that you vaccinate in proximity to ‘flu season because you need that time to determine what the likely circulating strains will be, and because we haven’t yet found a way to grow adequate amounts of viral particles quickly, we’re always under the wire to infect the eggs (‘flu particles are grown in hundreds of millions of chicken eggs…slowly), filter out the influenza virus, kill it, package it, mix in the adjuvants so a smaller amount of vaccine is still effective, and distribute it. Your observation is akin to seeing conspiracy that snow “just happens to show up” when it gets cold.

        I got my vaccine last week by the way. I feel fine.

    2. Deavman says:

      “…wonderful job of exposing those anti-vaccine “morons” who question everything. ”
      I would like to congratulate you on your amazing writing skills proving exactly that.
      Your post was sarcasm, right ? It was..right ?.Please tell me that it was…Pleeeease.

  16. Jesse says:

    http://jvi.asm.org/content/77/9/5039

    Wake up sheep. The number one killer of humans is government… see Hiltlor, Stalin, Mao. Its happening here now.

    1. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

      Did any of those leaders provide a comprehensive vaccination program for their citizens, and then use it to kill off the millions of people it didn’t want? Hitler created a specific infrastructure that worked and starved people to death. Mao’s millions of deaths were due to incompetence, taking people away from fields during a critical harvest period, for multiple years, and instead attempting to smelt iron ore using backyard furnaces (which, it turns out, you can’t do). People melted down pots, tools, doorknobs, silverware, any bit of metal, in furnaces fed with furniture, timber, books, and anything else that would burn, for years, instead of gathering the bumper-crop of grains growing in their fields at the time. Because Mao didn’t know how metal refining worked. I’m not up on how Stalin killed people (mass migrations to break up ethnic groups I believe). But irrespective – none of them used a vaccination program. And SV40 is currently being debated, as a possible carcinogenic viral infection, that despite massive epidemiological research is still an open question. If a government wants to kill people in large numbers, it doesn’t appear to use vaccination. I think you are seeing malice when there is, at worst, ignorance.

      And why would the US government want to kill its own people? What drives this massive “vaccinate to exterminate” program that nutjobs like you think is occurring? Why not just thaw out smallpox and drop a couple vials off at O’Hare or JFK airports, 12 Monkeys-style?

      1. Chris says:

        Both Stalin and Mao managed to kill millions of people through starvation with Lysenkoism.

        Though one good thing came out of it. When my dad was making use of his GI Bill after WWII, a new poultry expert came to teach and do research at his land-grant university. The military veterans who made up a huge portion of the students convinced the new professor to teach them Russian, which he was more than happy to do. Especially since he left Russia because he wanted to work in real biology.

  17. Jesse says:

    Oh of course your site is censored because youe against freedom.

    1. Chris says:

      Why? Because your comment is not automatically approved?

      Every single one of mine is put into moderation, and the admins here don’t know why. Perhaps you should learn patience, and considering the link you gave and its accompanying comment: some reading comprehension.

    2. Catalin Oancea says:

      I know what you are saying, I can relate. I posted a comment to one of the replies I’ve got to my comment above and it must’ve hit a sensitive chord because it never got published. And I also “like” these tools who try to sweep these issues under the rug with replies like the one from Chris. But I don’t really care that much, I know how you people operate: lies, propaganda, deceit, silencing of witnesses, manipulation of evidence and so on. You have a drugged up population, what to expect from them, sudden realization of the mess they are in? A drug addict will deny addiction until he feels the sting of death.
      It’s not like we are trolls or posting inflammatory comments, you simply are control freaks and don’t like the truth because, if understood and accepted, you are left without your income source. When you sell lies to make money, you will fight against anyone trying to expose you. This mentality is so old, we have a most perfect example in the Bible:

      “22 So he sent into Macedonia two of them that ministered unto him, Timotheus and Erastus; but he himself stayed in Asia for a season.
      23 And the same time there arose no small stir about that way.
      24 For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, which made silver shrines for Diana, brought no small gain unto the craftsmen;
      25 Whom he called together with the workmen of like occupation, and said, Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have our wealth.
      26 Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands:
      27 So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth.
      28 And when they heard these sayings, they were full of wrath, and cried out, saying, Great is Diana of the Ephesians.” – Acts 19:22-28

      You see how verse 27 begins? He cares more about his craft than his goddess, which he tries to cover by spewing false praises after revealing his true concern first, losing his job. I bet mister doctor is very dedicated to the medical establishment because it’s this wonderful and magnificent thing, not because he will lose his job otherwise. Come on, post this you coward, let’s see who is the one trying to cover things up. If this gets posted, mister doctor has some dignity after all, which he should direct towards his patients by telling them the truth.

      1. Chris says:

        “And I also “like” these tools who try to sweep these issues under the rug with replies like the one from Chris”

        Excuse me? If you had been around and paid attention you will have learned that when they revamped the blog, some people are always put into moderation and they can’t figure out why. Read this:
        http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/about-science-based-medicine/help-with-logging-in-commenting/

        Also, all those who post for the first time are put into moderation to prevent spam. That is why Jesse’s first comment was put into moderation. And if you can toss aside your paranoia and actually read the link I gave you will see this:

        Everything in moderation: why some comments are held back

        There are two possible reasons. Neither of them is “censorship.” If your comment is being held back, it’s because:

        1. Another bug. Some comments are being held for moderation (approval), and we don’t know why. This one is probably a Jetpack bug, and appears to be out of our control, but will likely be fixed by WordPress in time.
        2. We look at all first-time commenters. Again, SBM is run by volunteers, so please be patient. We do not reject comments for being critical or even rude.

        Also, a wee observation: This is not “Bible Based Medicine”, it is “Science Based Medicine.” You would go farther if you actually posted a journal article much like Jesse did… just don’t cherry pick your data like Jesse did.

      2. Chris says:

        I just glanced at your first comment, and see you came here because: “This is the first page I came across when searching for the SV40 virus.”

        Might I suggest you read this article by a virologist:
        http://www.virology.ws/2010/04/13/poliovirus-vaccine-sv40-and-human-cancer/

        Note that it says: “By 1963 screening procedures were instituted to ensure the absence of SV40 in poliovirus vaccines. ” It seems that the problem was found and corrected fifty years ago.

        Then you said this site is: “maintained by a doctor.” Which is in error, one that you would not have made if you had gone to the top of the page and clicked on the words “About SBM.” There you would have been shown a drop down menu which listed the editors, contributors and the link I gave you earlier just above that explained the issues with automatic moderation.

        Then in your fist comment, and this one you resorted calling us:

        pet cattle
        filthy rich doctors
        Liar and COINTELPRO
        tools
        drugged up population

        I don’t know what kind of parenting, etiquette education or other experience you have had, but name-calling is not a way to assure polite treatment by others. Insults, along with Bible verses, are not a valid form of evidence, and are not part of any honest discussion.

        You are welcome to present any evidence that you feel is contrary to the above article. But if you cannot do that, then please get some real science education and lessons in civility.

        1. Catalin Oancea says:

          You are basically telling me to offer you evidence from publications that are sustained by the same people that make the vaccines. The same companies pay for the “unbiased” studies and ask for the opinion of doctors who are heavily invested in the pharmaceutical industry and who can even be on the board of directors. This is exactly the same thing like the evolution fraud: produce evidence from publications sponsored by the same people who practice in those fields. What do you expect from them, to actually admit that they are wrong and that we don’t need them? It’s like me owning an auto company and everyone I ask about the safety of my new car are the people who have invested in the stock market in my company; they want to make money, of course they will promote my new car as the safest thing on earth.
          You accuse me of not being civil, but you seem to ignore the way this article is written. So, besides being a tool, you are a hypocrite too. You are obviously not stupid, you are just a tool, you are only deceived and too emotionally invested to attain discernment. Unfortunately, what I was describing by those words is the truth: the pet cattle who can’t wait to have their conscience soothed by someone with a diploma (going beyond the medical profession) and who have been indoctrinated into a submissive attitude toward authority, the doctors are filthy rich because their money is filthy (very few actually deserve the money they earn), liars and COINTELPROs are everywhere on these kinds of “science” websites and the drugged up population is just a fact, a lot of people are on medication, be it legal or illegal.
          You implied that I was referring to the site when this thing can’t be deduced from my comment; I mentioned this page and then I said IT is mainted by a doctor. In all honesty, I don’t remember what I was referring to, the page or the site as a whole; you were quick to judge, but I don’t really care, that’s what you are taught in those schools anyway, to nitpick any comment and to turn it against your opponent. That’s what Debate is for, isn’t it? Make sure you burry your opponent in “ad hominems” and ad nauseams while you earn points for your argument; in the meantime, you don’t learn anything from what the other person has to say, it’s just scoring points in your head anyway.
          And what can be interpreted as paranoia is just a distrusting attitude towards most people because of the way they think. Most of you have a mental block, like a repressive memory that you are too afraid to access. You can’t free yourselves from your thought patterns, that’s why you need to be brought down and shaken real hard. You desperately need your reality to dissolve before your eyes to see the truth, “…and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8:32).

          1. Chris says:

            Catalin Oancea:

            You are basically telling me to offer you evidence from publications that are sustained by the same people that make the vaccines. The same companies pay for the “unbiased” studies and ask for the opinion of doctors who are heavily invested in the pharmaceutical industry and who can even be on the board of directors

            Prove it.

            Please tell us which of the pharmaceutical companies paid for the studies listed in Dr. Racaniello’s virology blog article. Be sure to directly quote the three papers showing the authors’ company affiliations. Thank you.

            To help you, these are the three articles listed in the blog post I linked to:

            Garcea, R., & Imperiale, M. (2003). Simian Virus 40 Infection of Humans Journal of Virology, 77 (9), 5039-5045 DOI: 10.1128/JVI.77.9.5039-5045.2003

            López-Ríos F, Illei PB, Rusch V, & Ladanyi M (2004). Evidence against a role for SV40 infection in human mesotheliomas and high risk of false-positive PCR results owing to presence of SV40 sequences in common laboratory plasmids. Lancet, 364 (9440), 1157-66 PMID: 15451223

            PEDEN, K. (2008). Recovery of strains of the polyomavirus SV40 from rhesus monkey kidney cells dating from the 1950s to the early 1960s Virology, 370 (1), 63-76 DOI: 10.1016/j.virol.2007.06.045

            1. Catalin Oancea says:

              You can imagine I don’t have the time to search every article, every word and to start investigating everything, it will take a lot of time and I won’t achieve much because even when the evidence stares you in your face, you will still deny it. I know this to be a fact because I have people around me that I can communicate face to face with, delivering much more information than through a comments section, and they still deny it all.
              I was just trying to wake some people up and to make them realize that the world they are perceiving is not what it seems to be. Really, I don’t have to be a doctor or a very learned man to see something wrong with using monkey kidneys and aborted babies to grow stuff and then injecting that stuff into humans. Almost all the modern pharmaceutical industry is based on I.G. Farben, who was tied to the Zyklon B gas. You want to tell me that those people suddenly grew a conscience…yeah, right. It’s only money and death, they don’t care about you, they don’t want you to get better or treat you because of the money they make; and I’m not talking here about the doctors at the base of the pyramid, they are just deceived, with all their good intentions, but there is a very true saying: “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”.
              I will use the car analogy again: do you think my intention is to make a good car that you can buy cheap? How will that benefit me if your car runs flawlessly for 50 years? Yeah, people will tell me how great my car is, but that won’t pay for my stuff. It will be a great thing if that car runs for a maximum of 10 years and you have to visit a mechanic once or twice a year to buy spare parts. Who makes the parts? Me.
              You should listen to this with an open mind: http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1081. You live under the impression that people like me are trying to destroy the great achievements of modern medicine, but all I see is death, disease, lies and people that bury their head in the sand because their sleeping at night depends on them not being bothered with other problems, they already have enough. I am not the enemy here, but you are indoctrinated to perceive me like that. You should watch 1984, it is very revealing to what is happening today, especially the scene at the public gathering where they are all screaming at the screen.

              1. Chris says:

                It was a very simple request. It was three papers, and it would take less than a minute to find them on PubMed and check its authors. You could have just answered the question in the time to type your nonsensical reply.

                You made a claim, therefore you need to support that claim. So in the future provide the links to the evidence for your claims. And again, insults and name calling are not viable substitutes for scientific evidence. Many of us are also not doctors, but we are smart enough to find the science and link to it.

                At this moment you need to provide proof you are not a computer programmed to troll blogs with rude obnoxious conspiracy mongering comments that cannot pass the Turing Test. So either answer my simple question, or go find some other blog to troll.

              2. Sawyer says:

                I hesitate to give any more attention to this comment than it deserves, but this is one of the best qualifiers for “Name That Logical Fallacy” I’ve seen in a long time. I’ve counted at least six, but they are so intricately woven together it’s tough to spot all of them.

                On the bright side, this level of irrationality guarantees that Catalin would indeed pass a Turing test. Let’s not accuse her of being a robot, Chris! :)

              3. Chris says:

                My point about failing the Turing Test was that the responses to my comments had very little to do with their content. Especially my explanation with links to this site’s comment moderation issues.

                Irrationality is a guaranteed way to fail the Turing Test, because it has to show intelligent behavior.

              4. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

                You can imagine I don’t have the time to search every article, every word and to start investigating everything, it will take a lot of time and I won’t achieve much because even when the evidence stares you in your face, you will still deny it.

                And you think the solution to this issue is to provide no evidence whatsoever, no articles, no investigation? What do you do when your car runs out of gas, punch a hole in the gas tank?

                I was just trying to wake some people up

                Just so you know, calling people sheep or liars isn’t the best way to “wake people up”, particularly on a blog focussed on scientific evidence. Something, something, cast the first stone, something something.

                Really, I don’t have to be a doctor or a very learned man to see something wrong with using monkey kidneys and aborted babies to grow stuff and then injecting that stuff into humans.

                Three points:
                1) You are talking about the scientific difficulties that confronted doctors who were attempting to develop vaccines; it’s not the doctors fault that at the time they conducted their work there were no alternatives available to them. Fortunately there are now.
                2) Fetal cells and monkey kidneys were used when researching vaccines several decades ago. They aren’t currently used to produce vaccines.
                3) Even if fetuses and monkey kidneys were used to develop vaccines (which they aren’t), that doesn’t mean vaccines are ineffective or dangerous. Not to mention, the ethical issues are hardly clear-cut. Which is less ethical, hundreds of millions of babies dying of preventable diseases, or taking cells from an already-aborted fetus to develop effective, safe vaccines to prevent those hundreds of millions of deaths? I would suggest that this is perhaps a complicated question.

                I will use the car analogy again: do you think my intention is to make a good car that you can buy cheap? How will that benefit me if your car runs flawlessly for 50 years?

                People aren’t cars, they are far more complicated, with an evolutionary history that makes them devilishly complex to intervene with. Far from being intelligently designed, humans and the world-over are quite clearly the product of a “good enough” process that doesn’t care if individuals, or even whole species live or die. Only humans are in a position to do things like control reproduction to reduce overpopulation, to develop vaccines to prevent childhood death, to decide that fetal cells are to ethically problematic to be used in vaccine production. God, if he is interested in these issues, didn’t see fit to tell us about them.

                You live under the impression that people like me are trying to destroy the great achievements of modern medicine, but all I see is death, disease, lies and people that bury their head in the sand because their sleeping at night depends on them not being bothered with other problems, they already have enough.

                Out of curiosity, how many people do you think smallpox had killed before vaccination caused it to go extinct? How many babies has pertussis killed, before and after the licensing of the vaccine?

                That delightful site you linked to, by the way, doesn’t consider the hard questions dealt with by doctors every day. How do you keep alive someone wth a fence post through their chest? Or a type-I diabetic? Or a type II diabetic? Instead it dwells upon the meaningless etymological roots of the word pharmacy, claiming it to be “witchcraft” (completely ignorning the fact that it’s the very opposite). Did you know the origins of the word “Catholic” is “universal”? Are you a Catholic? Because if not, then you should be – it means universal!

                Also, I don’t have a TV that monitors my daily activity. I can readily access websites and news programs that criticize the government and provide enormous amounts of (sometimes even accurate) dissenting information. You are presenting arguments and claims that are convincing to you. If you want to pretend this is a discussion, you need to present claims convincing to others. So far you’re not.

              5. Chris says:

                WLU: “People aren’t cars, they are far more complicated, with an evolutionary history that makes them devilishly complex to intervene with.”

                What is interesting about that analogy is that I had my car in the shop for several days due to an electrical issue. The problem was that the dash lights would flicker off for a second, very similar to the flickers of lights we have had just before the power in our area would go out during a recent storm or breaker failure (two power failures in a week). I wanted it looked at since as a teenager in the late 1970s I was in a car with friends when the car just stopped because the electrical system failed in the middle of no where… I did not want to repeat that experience.

                So I took it in, and they tried to find a reason, but they could not find it. Just like the dealer said a dozen years ago when it was under warranty and the speakers would produce a buzz if I hit a bump, and only when the lights were on. Absolutely no reason found.

                But they did notice a screw was missing, ordered a new one and tightened all of the electronic board bits down. They hoped it solved the issue, including the buzz after road bump bit, that even they had noticed… thinking it was a short when things got jiggled.

                Well the dash lights no linger flicker… but I hit a bump in the road and the speaker buss returned. Le sigh. And cars are less complicated than humans. Catalin Oancea still needs to provide actual verifiable evidence for his assertions.

          2. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

            You are basically telling me to offer you evidence from publications that are sustained by the same people that make the vaccines

            This is basically you saying “the only valid evidence is that which supports my pre-existing opinion”. In which case, you might as well stop paying lip service to science, evidence or data completely and just say you are uninterested in facts because you don’t care if you are right or wrong.

            This is exactly the same thing like the evolution fraud: produce evidence from publications sponsored by the same people who practice in those fields.

            You’re a creationist on top of this? That’s sad, but it does show your complete immunity to evidence. How do you feel about the fact that creationism sustains itself solely by lying to people? There is a comprehensive list of such claims maintained here, and essentially any objection to evolution you may ever have heard can be found there. I doubt you will click on the link because you don’t care what is real or true – you just care about never having to change your mind. There’s a certain simplicity to this approach, it means you can ignore a whole bunch of complicated information. But surely you have been wrong in the past, even about something as simple as directions, or ingredients in a recipe? Surely you have mis-remembered the plot or cast of a television show or movie? Surely you must realize that human memory is faillable, and even the best-reasoned argument can be wrong if based on faulty information.

            How do you know you have the right informationn, let alone that you can understand it well enough to be certain of your conclusions?

            What do you expect from them, to actually admit that they are wrong and that we don’t need them?

            Yes, particularly in aggregate. There are far more rewards in science for being iconoclastic and producing data that contradicts pre-existing beliefs than merely confirming what came before (if you have good quality data at least). As an example, see the findings of the Women’s Health Initiative, which were surprising, widely-advertised, contrary to the desires and profits of Big Pharma, and rather embarassing to the doctors recommending hormone replacement for their patients.

            It’s like me owning an auto company and everyone I ask about the safety of my new car are the people who have invested in the stock market in my company; they want to make money, of course they will promote my new car as the safest thing on earth.

            Two points:
            1) That’s why we have an independent government body that oversees safety and certification for automobiles (and the FDA, CDC and related bodies for health)
            2) If you make a car that is bad enought, the people who own your stocks will use their stocks to vote you out of leadership (incidentally, if you’ve got stocks you wouldn’t own the company, you would lead it).

            Unfortunately, what I was describing by those words is the truth: the pet cattle who can’t wait to have their conscience soothed by someone with a diploma (going beyond the medical profession) and who have been indoctrinated into a submissive attitude toward authority, the doctors are filthy rich because their money is filthy (very few actually deserve the money they earn), liars and COINTELPROs are everywhere on these kinds of “science” websites and the drugged up population is just a fact, a lot of people are on medication, be it legal or illegal.

            Nope, this is your opinion. And why do you think that the editors, authors and commenters are COINTELPRO agents merely because they disagree with you? How do you reconcile your beliefs about the “filthy greedy doctors want to shove medications down your throat” with scientific articles like this one, or this one, or this one? Or recommendations to exercise, lose weight and eat better as a means of reducing medication for type II diabetes?

            Incidentally, we’re not really having a debate. You are asserting, without proof, that we are all counterintelligence personnel representing a corrupt medical system. And you appear to have difficulty with the concept of “citations”. Or “atheism makes your bible quotes meaningless”.

      3. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

        Between the Bible quote and the comment on addiction, I’m not sure what is being said here. Censorship is bad? If you’re not logged in, your comment appears to simply disappear. You do have a pre-existing comment on this thread here though. Are you talking about that comment? If so, you weren’t censored, you were impatient. If not, then you might want to send an e-mail to the editors to try to figure out what happened.

      4. Andrey Pavlov says:

        Bible references, Zyklon B, 1984? Wow.

  18. herpout@yahoo.com says:

    Eugenics! Why has there not been a long term saftey study on vaccinations with a control group? Why did the Lancet publish an article and then retract it (peer reviewed), relating vaccination to Autism? Dr. Wakefield never gets “lame stream” coverage for his side of the story. Autism, ADHD, and other neurological disorders exploding, with no “medical” explination but injecting aluminum, formaldehyde, mercury and Triton is “safe” in babies.
    Why did the CDC practice Eugenics on the Blacks in Tuskegee with Syphillus?
    Why did our tax payer dollar fund Eugenics in Guatemala on prisoners with Syphillus?
    Why did FDA allow Bayer to sell HIV contaminated medications in Europe and Japan?
    Why do pharmacutical companies staff the boads of the FDA, CDC and WHO?
    Why is there a “vaccine Court”? Why are Vaccine manufactures of the hook for any damage caused by their product?

    To speake to your point about government just putting small pox on us, That would cause total anarchy and they would lose control. Parts of the government wants controled chaos…and we don’t have our Hitler yet.
    GOVERMENT IS THE NUMBER 1 KILLER OF PEOPLE… go ask the native Americans.

    Thanks for posting and having a healthy debate.

    1. Chris says:

      Your questions are mostly addressed in the articles listed here:
      http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/reference/vaccines-and-autism/

      There is also a search box at the top of this page if you wish to learn about many of those specific questions. If you put “andrew wakefield lancet” in the box you’ll get several informative articles. Though you might be interested in the ones on the second page titled The Lancet retracts Andrew Wakefield’s article and The fall of Andrew Wakefield.

      As for this: “Why has there not been a long term saftey study on vaccinations with a control group?”

      Well, the same reason that makes the Tuskegee study now illegal. If you ask why that kind of study has not been done and follow with Tuskegee and Guatemala studies, it is a sure sign you do not have a clue about the issues. That includes the definition of the word “eugenics.”

      “Why did FDA allow Bayer to sell HIV contaminated medications in Europe and Japan?”

      Perhaps because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is an American agency and does not have jurisdiction over a company in Switzerland. You might want to learn some geography, and how laws in one country do not work in another country.

      “GOVERMENT IS THE NUMBER 1 KILLER OF PEOPLE… go ask the native Americans.”

      Which government? Smallpox, measles and other European diseases reduced the native Americans by 90% between 1492 and 1700. Was it the Spanish, English, French, Portuguese, Dutch, Russian or some other government? Perhaps you should also work on learning some history.

      “Thanks for posting and having a healthy debate.”

      What you posted is not a “debate.” It is a list of accusations not related to the above article, and provided no evidence. Here is some reading material to help you discuss those accusations with more data:

      Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond

      1491 and 1493 by Charles Mann

      The Belmont Report

      Polio: An American Story by David M. Oshinsky

      Vaccinated, The Cutter Incident, Autism’s False Prophets and Deadly Choices by Paul Offit

  19. Dave says:

    Herpout
    The reason for the vaccine court was that a few years back there was only one drug company willing to manufacture the DPT vaccine and there was felt to be danger of that company refusing to do so because it was not economically feasible. The laws regarding liability with vaccines were passed to ensure that the country would continue to have a supplier.

    The British Medical Journal had a long article a few years back about Wakefield and his whole sordid affair with the MMR vaccine. Personally I’m surprised the guy’s not in jail. It would be very instructive for you to read this piece.

  20. Mindy says:

    Science based medicine? Here you go. It’s science!

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10472327/

    1. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

      Real science doesn’t look at a single 14-year-old paper and proclaim it a win. It would look at other papers as well. For instance:

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/9450713/?i=2&from=/10472327/related
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/9776244/?i=3&from=/10472327/related
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/12671021/?i=4&from=/10472327/related
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/12509399/?i=5&from=/10472327/related

      Do you know where I got these? They were all links in the “related citations” section of the paper you cited. You can tell from the URL.

      Of course, one could simply also search for this on pubmed:

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15322523
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16963733

      Even the Russians think it’s a stupid idea:

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21384596

      There is a theoretical risk that SV40 could impact human cancers, but to date there is very little good evidence to support it as a real risk. However, if one cherry-picks the few, and rather old positive citations, one can create a perception of risk where none is warranted. But one would have to be dishonest to do so (and ignore the fact that the current polio viruses distributed in the US are killed-type, not live, and thus pose little risk of infection if there were even any SV40 in them – which there isn’t).

    2. Sawyer says:

      I’m really curious which quack website featured SBM this week, or if they reached some sort of magic threshold in Google. These thread-bump comments appear to growing exponentially without increasing in quality.

  21. Catalin Oancea says:

    I wanted to post a few other documentaries and videos so that the people who happen upon this page can be informed on both sides of the story. I don’t want to enter in any debate with the hirelings and fans of this website. It’s not that I can’t, but I won’t, it will take too much time and most of them are already beyond the point of actually thinking for themselves. I have entered in debates with atheists before and they are the most miserable of all human beings; most, not all, there are normal people out there among them. I should’ve known better than to post those other comments and should’ve posted this only.

    http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?v=13EAAF22CDA367BB3C2F94D2CD90EF7B
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZs1V8mpcoY&feature=youtu.be
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yS46BWqZx9M
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aePfr-mftXs
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGsSEqsGLWM
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iM-oYmLoIw

    I will repost this link also, so they are all gathered in one place: http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1081.

    When all is said and “debunked” by these people with scientific education and their papers and journals, one thing remains that cannot be contested: the pharmaceutical industry is making HUGE money selling drugs to people. The medical system is proving a failure by not only not treating disease, but actually creating it.

    “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called” – 1 Timothy 6:20

    Take care, little children, and don’t be intimidated by these “wise men” and their diplomas. God be with you.

    1. Chris says:

      Well that is amusing. If you had actually read the article on this page, you would understand that Mike Adams and Natural News are not taken seriously here. And, well, neither are you.

      “God be with you.”

      Which one? The one that wants us to use our brains to prevent diseases, or the one that likes to see children suffer and die from measles, polio, tetanus, etc? I think yours is the latter, and I would like to keep that evil god away from my family.

      1. Catalin Oancea says:

        Sorry, I should’ve said the Lord Jesus Christ to clear up any misinterpretation.

        1. Chris says:

          So where did he go to medical school, and why does he think kids should get polio?

        2. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

          The same Lord Jesus Christ who said “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear” (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)? Do you keep slaves? Because clearly Jesus thinks it is just fine.

          1. Chris says:

            Considering where polio is still endemic, I would believe his deity is the same one that want men to shoot healthcare workers providing polio vaccines (who are usually women) and little girls who are in school getting an education. Basically “big strong” men who are afraid of science and females.

    2. WilliamLawrenceUtridge says:

      If you consider one side of the story to be “science, biologists and doctors”, and the other side to be “Natural News” and Youtube videos, then you’re clearly an idiot. The CBC and Australian equivalent are not doctors, they are not researchers, they are at best journalists who might interview the right researcher. However, journalists’ incentives are set up to sell controversy and ratings, not to tell the best truth based on the best evidence. If given a choice between Doctor A, who believes cancer is best treated through chemotherapy then surgery, and Doctor B who believes the cancer should be treated through surgery then chemotherapy, the news is more likely to go to “Diploma-Mill-MD-From-The-Cayman-Islands Doctor” C, who thinks cancer is a conspiracy by Big Pharma to sell more drugs, because Doctor C stirs more outrage and sells more advertising space (or in the case of public broadcasting, gets a budget increase from the government because ratings went up, or gets the reporter a promotion for the same reasons). If you can’t distinguish between scientific reasoning and journalistic reasoning*, if you can’t see why a pubmed article is superior to a youtube video, you don’t know enough for us to pretend this is a real discussion. Since religion appears to be your thing, how would you feel discussing transubstantiation with someone who replies “your beliefs are clearly wrong because they fail to take into account Lord Shiva’s opposition to the dwarf of unreason”?

      the pharmaceutical industry is making HUGE money selling drugs to people. The medical system is proving a failure by not only not treating disease, but actually creating it.

      Yes, Big Pharma exists to make a profit. But making a profit doesn’t mean their products don’t work. Vaccines prevent infection, on a statistical basis. Antibiotics, absence resistence, will kill bacteria. Apomorphine will make you vomit. Acetaminophen will relieve pain and fever (and cause hepatotoxicity). All of these are profitable, all work. Profit does not invalidate medical care, it is a pernicious influence that needs improvement (a fact that the medical world is well-aware of). Perhaps you should speak to your congressperson about increasing the resources avaliable to the FDA, or some sort of alternative means of testing novel drugs (I suggest that the company must give the money to a third party, usually a university or hospital, who run the trials and are free to report the results without interference). And while you’re at it – add in something about making it illegal to advertise directly to consumers.

      And of course, the fact that medicine has been HUGELY successful at treating the main killers of adults and (particularly) children means people are now pursuing quality and quantity of life. Here is where we are seeing the worst offences of Big Pharma, an unfortunate side effect of controlling or eliminating some truly horrible diseases.

      “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called” – 1 Timothy 6:20

      “O Catalin, unless you already believe in the Bible, nobody gives a shit about quoting it” – William 15:35 (GMT)

      Take care, little children, and don’t be intimidated by these “wise men” and their diplomas. God be with you.

      Why do you think people believed in God for 2,500 years, but life expectancy only increased with the advent of scientific medicine? I mean, we’ve had the bible since what, 100 AD, imperfect, inaccurate and miscopied though it has been since its inception (quick questions – how many commandments are there? How do you feel about Jesus saying slavery is OK? Why do you think God saw fit to first create smallpox, then allow humans to drive it to extinction?) Why did it take 1,800 years between the arrival of God (for the third time? I never understood where the holy spirit came into play) and the arrival of vaccination for human health to improve? Why is the improvement of human health so strongly linked to people with diplomas, when we had people with collars (priests, in case you are slow) for much, much longer than that? What was it that made priests utterly ineffective at improving life expectancy, but diploma-bearing doctors so much better at it?

      Your faith in God may be misplaced, may I suggest taking a course in biology instead?

      *The former bases conclusions on evidence used to predict and test in an iterative process that sometimes goes wrong but is gradually corrected as more evidence accumulates and is publicly shared and replicated; the latter treats everything as a story with heroes and villains, and “truth” as at best an opinion that can vary. Here’s a hint – when discussing the physical world there are objective truths, and the physical world doesn’t give a damn about your opinion.

  22. TaraHanrahan says:

    Perhaps the most concerning detail here is the fact that “the government didn’t recall the contaminated vaccine stocks and did not notify the public, because, as Hilleman later recounted, government officials were worried about a panic that might jeopardize the vaccine program.”

    The live virus in these vaccines was known to cause cancer in hamsters, and they continued to inject citizens with it for a further 2-3 years.

    I don’t know what to say . . . this is supposed to be an article debunking the mistrust of government backed vaccine programs!

    The government backed vaccine programs have clearly earned their reputation, and anyone who is concerned about the content and effects of vaccines absolutely has the right to be, and good reason to be as evidenced in this article.

    1. Harriet Hall says:

      Hamsters are not people. There was no evidence that it was harmful to people. They made the right decision: they didn’t cause a panic, and no one was harmed by the contaminated vaccine.

      1. CT Jaynes says:

        Source of your information Harriet? Or should I just trust you? lol

        1. Chris says:

          Um, let me take a wild guess: the above article and the links to the research contained it it.

        2. Harriet Hall says:

          My information that hamsters are not people? I’m afraid I can’t cite a study for that. :-)

  23. CT Jaynes says:

    So when the vaccine gave me the flu, I should just call that ok? I didn’t have the flu before the flu-shot…

    1. Chris says:

      How do you know it was influenza? Was it instead one of the 200 viruses that cause colds?

      Also, it takes two weeks for the flu shot to fully protect your system. Perhaps it was incubating in your system a day before you got the vaccine, or you were exposed the day or so afterwards.

    2. Harriet Hall says:

      The vaccine did not give you the flu. It can’t possibly do that. Ever heard of coincidence?

Comments are closed.