Category: Politics

Posted on

What a Recent FOIA Court Case Really Says

March 8, 2020: On March 5, a nonprofit organization made public their court filing regarding the failure of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to produce information relevant to their Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request. I’m very familiar with the topic, with people involved, and with FOIA (having used it myself many times over the last 20 years). Because I am not directly involved, but realizing the importance of the process and the outcomes; I wanted to give a Hawk’s views – that of the 3,000 feet up and zeroed in.

The Case itself: The Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) made requests of the CDC through the FOIA process. In the press release, ICAN notes the CDC after many months failed to respond to FOIA requests to provide “All studies relied upon by CDC to claim that the DTaP vaccine does not cause autism.” ICAN also made the same request for HepB, Hib, PCV13 and IPV vaccines. They further asked that the CDC provide studies to support the claim that “cumulative exposure to these vaccines during the first six months of life do not cause autism.”

Why would ICAN do this? After all, its been 20 years of drama around this topic and the government says its ‘settled science’ that vaccines do not cause autism. Having become involved in this issue in 1999 while working for Congress, I realize exactly why and thought I would explain from my perspective. The data the CDC posts on their website, the studies they have conducted and funded, do not truthfully provide a scientific underpinning for their claim that ‘vaccines do not cause autism.’ Just because they say it does, does not make it so. If I look up at the sky and say it is lime green, just because I say it is, does not make it so. If I write on this page that President Trumps’ hair is his natural color and it not chemically enhanced, that does not make that a factually accurate statement.

Zeroing in on ground level: The facts are that the CDC has only investigated and published studies on MMR, thimerosal, and a couple of other ancillary topics (and in my personal view, done that poorly – but that would be a digression). The CDC and their colleagues – have not shown that all vaccines given in the first six months of life individually or as a group have no connection to the epidemic increase of autism rates or the dramatic increase of chronic health conditions in children born since 1988. They have not shown this, because they have not studied this. If CDC had, the document they submitted to the court in response to the court filing by ICAN would be very different. What did the CDC provide in response to the federal court’s stipulation order? They provided the same series of 20 papers and reports they always provide or post, none of which are actually responsive to the requests. To take a page out of former Congressman Trey Gowdy’s recent news interviews, related to political activities, I’ll draw a picture – after 21 years of funding, after 9 months of waiting for the FOIA response, after going to a federal court, the non-profit organization ICAN was handed a basket of stale, moldy apples when it had asked for a basket of fresh peaches.

In the2012, publication by the National Academy of Sciences, Ellen Wright Clayton, Chair Committee to Review Adverse Effects of Vaccines wrote, ” The Institute of Medicine (IOM) was charged by Congress when it enacted the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in 1986 with reviewing the literature regarding the adverse events associated with vaccines covered by the program, a charge which the IOM has addressed 11 times in the past 25 years. Following in this tradition, the task of this committee was to assess dispassionately the scientific evidence about whether eight different vaccines cause adverse events (AE), a total of 158 vaccine-AE pairs, the largest study undertaken to date, and the first comprehensive review since 1994.

The committee had a herculean task, requiring long and thoughtful discussions of our approach to analyzing the studies culled from more than 12,000 peer-reviewed articles in order to reach our conclusions, which are spelled out in the chapters that follow. In the process, we learned some lessons that may be of value for future efforts to evaluate vaccine safety. One is that some issues simply cannot be resolved with currently available epidemiologic data, excellent as some of the collections and studies are. ” They go on to provide more scientific guidance, ” Some adverse events caused by vaccines are also caused by the natural infection. These effects often cannot be detected by epidemiologic methods, which typically cannot distinguish between the adverse events that are caused by the vaccine itself and the decrease in adverse events due to the decreased rate of natural infection. In addition, even very large epidemiologic studies may not detect or rule out rare events. Subgroup analysis or more focused epidemiologic studies, informed by as yet incomplete knowledge of the biologic mechanisms of vaccine-induced injury, may be required. Examining mechanistic evidence to assess causation is also challenging. Many of the case reports the committee reviewed simply cited a temporal relation between vaccine administration and an adverse event. Association, however, does not equal causation. More is required. The proof can be relatively straightforward, as when vaccine-specific virus is recovered from the cerebrospinal fluid of a patient who develops viral meningitis a few weeks after receiving the vaccine. Alleged adverse effects that appear to be immune-mediated, as many of them are, are more challenging, in part because the biology is not completely understood.

One potentially useful line of inquiry as science advances is to assess whether the vaccine recipient who suffers harm had a preexisting susceptibility to that particular adverse event as such studies may provide insight into the mechanisms by which such events occur. The committee is aware of the work funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to study such individuals and looks forward to their findings. Most individuals, for example, who develop invasive infection from live vaccine viruses have demonstrated immunodeficiencies. Our work was also complicated by the wide variation in the case reports regarding what other tests had been done to rule out other potential causes. To improve the utility of these reports, periodically convening a group of experts to suggest guidelines, based on the best available science, for providing mechanistic evidence that a particular adverse event was caused by a vaccine may be useful. These guidelines could be made available on the Web, and perhaps more important, shared with clinicians who report cases to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System so their reports can be as complete and useful as possible. ”

The Committee published these findings:

The framework allows the committee to “favor rejection” of a causal relationship only in the face of epidemiologic evidence rated as high or moderate in the direction of no effect (the null) or of decreased risk and in the absence of strong or intermediate mechanistic evidence in support of a causal relationship. The committee concluded the evidence favors rejection of five vaccine–adverse event relationships. These include MMR vaccine and type 1 diabetes, diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTaP) vaccine and type 1 diabetes, MMR vaccine and autism, inactivated influenza vaccine and asthma exacerbation or reactive airway disease episodes, and inactivated influenza vaccine and Bell’s palsy. The evidence base for these conclusions consisted of epidemiologic studies reporting no increased risk; this evidence was not countered by mechanistic evidence.

The literature supporting several of the causality conclusions discussed
in the previous section indicates that individuals with certain characteristics
are more likely to suffer adverse effects from particular immunizations.
Individuals with an acquired or genetic immunodeficiency are clearly recognized as at increased risk for specific adverse reactions to live viral vaccines such as MMR and varicella vaccine. Age is also a risk factor; seizures after immunization, for example, are more likely to occur in young children.

The report is thorough and massive. The Cliff notes section, i.e. the chart of vaccines, suspected adverse events evaluated in the data and their findings is more than 600 pages into the report. On page 684, the National Academy of Sciences’ prestigious panel reported that in looking at autism as an adverse event from DTP, DTaP, or TT, the epidemiological assessment was “insufficient”, the mechanistic assessment was “lacking’ and the causality conclusion was “inadequate”.

As an aside, in the same table, the panel finds the mechanistic assessment for MMR and autism “Lacking’ but uses the epidemiological assessment to reject causation.

If you do nothing more than read the chart TABLE D-1 Causality Conclusions Organized by Chapter and Adverse Event which begins on page 674 of the report, your eyes will be opened. When you read how many suspected events have not been studied by the CDC (or anyone else) even with all of the billions of dollars since 1989 that have been directed towards this. The list of suspected events are not isolated incidences, but adverse events reported often enough to raise the red flag and warrant the committee investigate.

Having read this finding, the tenants of evidence-based reporting that the CDC is obligated to follow; the statements on their website AND their public information campaign should have changed in 2012 (and it did not). The CDC, Dr. Sanjy Gupta, and everyone in public health should not be able to say (since 2012) with a straight face that the question of autism and vaccines is settled science (which is a ridiculous unscientific statement anyway). To do so is simply a false statement when the preeminent committee within the scientific community published a report in 2012 which concluded that on one set of vaccines (Diptheria, pertussis, and tetanus) given multiple times to infants the question of causation remains unanswerable because the scientific evidence is lacking. Who will be held accountable? If Congress does not engage in oversight, these misdeeds will continue.

According to the law, if the CDC had data on the vaccines in question they were obligated to provide it. They did not, so, in short, but not providing any relevant studies, and providing the National Academies 2012 report they have shown themselves to be misrepresenting the facts of autism and vaccines to the public. They have by default admitted their data are insufficient to answer the question.

Why does this matter? Setting aside the parent bully technics that have taken place over the last 20 years by public health agencies and officials, as well as social media; setting aside, the miscarriage of justice in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, let’s pull the lens back out to 3,000 feet – if the CDC has intentionally or by neglect posted scientifically invalid information on their website about this topic, what else on their site is inaccurate?

If there is any take away from the current infectious disease drama playing out daily in the media, the information posted on the CDC website is the ‘trusted source’. It is where doctors, nurses, families, and policymakers and the world go for information about coronavirus, measles, autism, HIV, and the flu. They have a duty to the public to have only fact-based, scientifically substantiated information on their website. We are not Cuba or Russia, or Venezuela – the agency has a legal obligation not to get caught up in politics or propaganda and stick with the tenants of fact-based, scientifically substantiated information on all topics on their webpages.

Thank you to ICAN and the partnering organizations for staying focused on evidence gathering and being willing to take the agency to court when they do not comply with FOIA law. The families of the vaccine-injured need a “Judicial Watch” equivalent to keeping focused on seeking the truth; and not giving up even when the social media giants suspend free speech, bully the parents of injured children, and elected officials ignore their duty to conduct oversight.

At the end of the day, what this FOIA Case Really Says that after more than 20 years, the question of a link between acquired autism and vaccine injury remains an open question. That inconvenient evidence-based truth is not present on the CDC’s website.

Always,

Beth

Disclaimer: This opinion is purely my own personal view and does not represent the opinion or view of any organization, entity, or person that I am currently working with or have worked with in the past.

Posted on

Looking at the Suggested ‘Scarlet A’ for Unvaccinated Kids through the Lens of Ryan White

Today I saw a Facebook posting that reminded me of the 1980s and the 1640s.  The posting was one of many ill-informed, potentially fake and hate-filled railings against parents who have made a medical or religious decision not to vaccinate their child with the Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR) vaccine.  This particular posting suggested that unvaccinated children should wear a skull and crossbones marking to identify them as unvaccinated.  The posting suggested it be on the child’s forehead, which is why I think it may have been a propaganda posting because hopefully no American actually posted something so egregious. I worry we are quickly devolving as a society over the measles matter.  I will not call 626 cases of measles in the US over the course of four months in a population of 330 million an epidemic because it is not. 

The Scarlet Letter: As the day went on, the comment stuck in my mind.  This is not the Boston of the 1640’s depicted in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s “Scarlet Letter” a work of fiction in which a woman is forced to wear the Scarlet “A” on her clothing to announce to all in the public that she is an adulteress. Can we even imagine an America in which everyone who for instance has speeding tickets has to wear on the front of their clothing a Scarlet “S” when in public; or someone who has a sexually transmitted disease has to wear a Black X.  As I write this, I am reminded of how Hitler forced people who were Jewish to declare their religion by wearing a Star of David on their jacket, setting them up for persecution and discrimination. Do we really want to persecute unvaccinated children?

Ryan White:  It is also not 1984 when a young boy named Ryan White developed HIV/AIDS from a blood transfusion he received to manage his hemophilia.  In 1985 after his Mom prevailed in court against the Kokomo, Indiana school district that had refused to allow Ryan to attend public school, Ryan shared how he was verbally abused and harassed.  If you are too young to remember HIV/AIDS in the 1980s and early 1990s and how the public and politicians treated those who were infected, it is not one of those times we as a nation can be proud of.  Many from school officials, to politicians, to families and the general public who feared the ‘unknowns’ associated with HIV/AIDS, stood in judgement of those who contracted the disease from sexual activity especially if they were gay men.  Ryan’s case was different, he was a teenager who did nothing ‘wrong’ in the eyes of society.  He was young, middle class, white, and from the Heartland of our country.  He could have been the young boy next door to any of us.  I remember discussions about Ryan and the fear that he might infect classmates. This was about the same time there was a circulating story that the government could not rule out that if a mosquito was flying around and landed on and drew blood from an HIV/AIDS infected individual; and then flew off and landed on someone else that they would not infect that second individual.  The fear of just being in the room with someone with HIV was real. 

In the early 1990s, after having worked with Dr. Richard Krause, the former Director of the NIAID during those early HIV days; I learned a great deal about our ‘microbial’ world. He had retired from the NIH to go to Emory; which proved not to be a good fit for him, so he returned to the NIH as a Senior Scientist at the Fogarty International Center where I got to know him.  In 2005, in the tribute that Dr. Krause wrote about his friend Mac McCarty, the “last survivor of the three-man team that demonstrated that genes are made of DNA” (and not protein as many originally thought). Dr. Krause quoted Dr. McCarty’s paper, “The 1944 paper on pneumococcal transformation begins: “Biologists have long attempted by chemical means to induce in higher organisms predictable and specific changes which thereafter could be transmitted in series as hereditary characters.” All that, and then some, has come to pass: witness the human genome, recombinant DNA technology, and genetically engineered animals that produce complex proteins such as human antibodies.”(1)

In 1968 and 1971, Dr. Krause and his colleagues’ studying rabbits and immune response to immunization reported:

“A number of variables are known to influence the magnitude of the immune response including the chemical and physical nature of the antigen, the method of immunization, prior sensitization to the same or a similar antigen, and the genetic background of the animal. Furthermore, these factors may either amplify or limit the wide variability in the characteristics of the immune globulins which are produced.” (2)

“Certain rabbits immunized with streptococcal and pneumococcal vaccines produce high concentrations of antibodies to the carbohydrate antigens.  These antibodies may have a remarkable molecular uniformity, and studies on their primary structure are currently underway. Since only a small percentage of random-bred rabbits produced uniform antibodies in quantities which were sufficient for extensive structural studies selective breeding of these special rabbits was begun in order to increase the number of rabbits which respond in this way.” (3)

Scientists like Dr. Krause recognize that the different rabbits responded differently to the vaccines they were studying based on several factors including genetics and prior exposures. His 1971 report focused on increasing the stock of animals that would be useful in research; however, the two papers highlight key factors that can be translated to our understanding of the human response to vaccines – different people respond differently based on numerous factors including genetics, environmental factors, and prior exposures.

It is why we cannot have a one sized fits all vaccine program.

It’s About Preserving Rights:  One of the reasons I am vocal about the rights of parents to make medical decisions whether to or not to vaccinate is because I believe in liberty.  I also believe in religious liberty. Our nation was founded on the premise of liberty.  I have twice sworn an oath to protect and preserve the Constitution. It is not an oath that ended when I left government service. We must stand together and protect parental rights and religious liberty. I did not get involved in investigating the state of our vaccine policies in the United States, and concerns about vaccine injury because someone I loved suffered a serious reaction to a vaccine, but initially because it was my job.  I stayed engaged when it was no longer my job because it is a moral obligation to continue seeking truth and justice. 

Doesn’t the MMR Vaccine Protect the Vaccinated? Government authorities, Merck the vaccine manufacturer in the United States and doctors who appear on television promoting vaccines all say that the MMR is great. The public has been told that the vaccine is safe and effective. If the vaccine is everything that it is promoted to be, given the high immunization rates nation-wide the herd immunity public health officials promote as the goal to protect those who cannot be vaccinated has been met.

The suggestion that parents who have obtained medical or religious exemptions to measles (MMR) vaccination must be forced to vaccinate their child to protect those who can’t be vaccinated is a perverse view of public health.  Parents with children too young to be vaccinated, or with medical conditions that preclude getting the MMR have suggested that their rights to take their child out in public during an outbreak is more important than the rights of parents of unvaccinated children. They seem to ignore the reality that the MMR is a live virus vaccine and can shed measles virus (as well as Mumps and Rubella) for months after given.  We do not know if the increased number of measles cases in the US in 2019 is at all related to vaccine strain measles because so far, there are no journalists asking the tough questions, like whether or not those diagnosed with measles have been tested to confirm the strain of measles, to determine if it was brought in from Israel, Honduras, or the Philippines or if it originated in the US from wild-type measles. So far public health authorities have failed to report if they are testing and if so to make those test rules public.

I would suggest that it is the responsibility of the parents of a child who is unvaccinated because of age or medical condition to protect that child.  It is not your neighbor’s job to protect your child, nor the parent of another child, but yours.  Measles is not the bubonic plaque. It can be deadly but typically is not.  And even if Measles was a deadly disease in the US in 2019, taking away the rights of others, labeling unvaccinated children so they can be discriminated against and bullied is not the answer. Demonizing the parents, advocates, and medical professionals who speak out about vaccine injury and call for improved quality and a restoration of parental rights is not the answer.  And it is not the fault of Dr. Andrew Wakefield! (The misinformation campaign about Andy is a story for another day.)

Is our Nation Lost?  Our civilized society is devolving quickly into a nation that bullies parents, threatens $1,000 fines and jail for the failure of parents to compromise religious belief and vaccinate their child. Local and national media outlets dutifully report about the measles outbreak and shame parents who have not vaccinated.  I have seen repeatedly reporters on Fox News who promote themselves as conservatives, and anti-abortion shame parents for not giving their kids the MMR vaccine without acknowledging (or maybe oblivious to the reality) that the MMR is produced on two cell lines developed from tissue that was taken two aborted human fetuses. Can you be anti-abortion and pro-MMR?  I  have watched some of my favorite local media anchors (who happen to be African American) push the vaccine without acknowledging the CDC Whistleblower who saved the data covered up by his colleagues in the Atlanta MMR study that showed a statistically significant increased risk of autism to African American boys based on the timing of the vaccine (before 36 months).  I have yet to see a single outlet have a true discussion that is fair and balanced. Where are the interviews with parents of kids who were injured by the MMR and compensated in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program?  It is as if investigative journalism has been banned when it comes to the measles outbreak. The power of Merck and the pharmaceutical industry to control news stories is real.  Think about all the moneys the networks make at local and national level from drug ads.

Is the great experiment of our Constitutional Republic going to be lost because our federal government in the 1980s took away the rights of parents to sue Merck, the maker of the MMR and to sue the doctor, nurse, or pharmacist who injected the vaccine only to have that assault on civil liberty compounded by forced vaccination by the state and local authorities?

Ryan White’s legacy with HIV/AIDS turned out not to just be about getting to attend public school.  His legacy lives on every year at the NIH where it is mandated that each agency track how much money is spent on HIV/AIDS. He short life lives on every time we fight against discrimination and bullying.  And his legacy lives on when we promote the rights of every citizen.

It is my hope that we can move past the fear-mongering and hysteria, the name-calling and divisiveness of the propaganda campaigns online and in the news and in statehouses across the country.

Always,

Beth

Sources Cited

1.         Krause RM. Obituary: Maclyn McCarty (1911-2005). Nature. 2005;433(7024):372. doi: 10.1038/433372a. PubMed PMID: 15674278.

2.         Braun DG, Eichmann K, Krause RM. Rabbit antibodies to streptococcal carbohydrates. Influence of primary and secondary immunization and of possible genetic factors on the antibody response. J Exp Med. 1969;129(4):809-30. PubMed PMID: 5766948; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC2138622.

3.         Eichmann K, Braun DG, Krause RM. Influence of genetic factors on the magnitude and the heterogeneity of the immune response in the rabbit. J Exp Med. 1971;134(1):48-65. PubMed PMID: 5558071; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC2139032.

Posted on

An Attack on Free Speech We Cannot Ignore

Lovers of Liberty got black roses yesterday from Rep. Adam Schiff via a letter he sent to the CEO of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg and Sundar Pichai of Google. The letter makes it clear that the California Democrat seeks to limit the free speech online of American parents and groups who use their inalienable right to free speech and open expression granted to us by our Creator and spelled out in our nation’s founding documents when it comes to discussing vaccinations.

The Bloomberg News story reported that ” Google’s YouTube unfurled a change in the way it recommends videos — an automated system that has been criticized for promoting misinformation. YouTube said it would start cutting videos with “borderline content” that “misinform users in harmful ways” from its recommendation system. “

Mr. Zuckerberg, whose wife, Dr. Priscilla Chan is a pediatrician famously posted a picture in 2016 of him taking his daughter to the pediatrician and talking about vaccines on his page. In a 2016 Time article, it was suggested that he would do well to ‘shut down’ pages.

It does not matter if you have safety concerns about vaccines or if you are pro-vaccine, or have no opinion, your liberty is being attacked all the same. Today it is a suggestion to block free speech of people who talk about vaccines, tomorrow it might be people who talk about climate change, or abortion, or immigration, or domestic violence. The real issue at hand here is that a legislator is promoting the idea to very powerful businesses that speech should be limited.

Remember, vaccine injury, rare or not rare is a reality. It became such a problem to the vaccine industry due to the lawsuits they were loosing in the early 1980’s that they joined with the medical establishment and got Congress to pass the National Vaccine Injury Protection Act of 1986 which abridged your freedom to seek legal recourse and provided liability protection for the manufacturers and the health professionals who administer vaccines. About $4 billion dollars has been paid out to the vaccine injured in this program. Sadly, the program has many problems and many of the vaccine injured – the collateral damage of the vaccine mandates are not compensated. That is a conversation for another day.

What do I mean by mandates? I mean that the US government provides recommendations and the states create mandates that force parents to get their kids vaccinated if they want them to be able to go to daycare or school. In three states, religious liberty has been taken away. In California, where all but medical exemptions have been removed, there is now a discussion led by Senator Pan to remove even the medical exemption. So if state Senator Pan (who is a physician himself) gets his way, the child with a compromised immune system, who has a mitochondrial disorder, or who is allergic to an ingredient may be forced to be vaccinated in order to attend a public school their parents pay very high taxes to support! 

You may be asking yourself why would someone have a religious objection?. There are religions that oppose the use of all medicines. I will not judge them, as religious liberty is a tenant of our nation’s foundation. There are others who object on religious grounds to some of the ingredients – after all, there are cow, pig and human DNA included in various vaccines. In the Measles vaccines (MMR and MMRV) there are two aborted fetal tissue cell lines. It is vile to suggest that a family who has strong feelings about the right to life and opposes abortion should be forced to inject their babies with vaccines that contain aborted fetal tissue cell lines. Likewise for anymore who opposes the consumption of pork on religious grounds or beef to be forced to inject their child with a vaccine that contains these animals’ DNA.

Social Media is a modern form of free expression that many of us enjoy. It has helped us build bonds with friends and families who live near and far. It has helped us developed groups in which we can share like ideas and discuss topics with friends and online acquaintances. It is a place in which businesses promote products and politicians are able to promote their agendas. Its frustrating enough to learn over the last couple of years about the political bias within some of the social media companies and the manipulation of information based on political ideology; but to suggest that people and groups who have an honest discussion about medical injury aka vaccine injury should be shut out because some do not believe the risks are real, is absurd. Think about issues that many presumed not to be true, but turned out to be real: The cancer link to – glyphosate in Monsanto’s Roundup comes to mind immediately. The issue of lead in drinking water and paint; child abuse by Catholic priests; and mercury in fish. Think about the issue of PTSD and TBI in our returning military and the high rate of suicide. What if someone in government convinced Facebook and other social media sites cut off those who talked about these issues? is it far fetched, no.

What now? Well, I hope that the thousands of families in Rep. Schiff’s district who have concerns about vaccine safety especially those with vaccine injured families members demand a meeting immediately.

When Government and Media Join Forces Look Out! As a nation, we should by now recognize the warning signs. When the government – in this case, the public health officials begin a fear mongering campaign, our antenna should go up. When you see wall to wall coverage about a topic -be it flu shots or the measles outbreak, listen carefully to the word crafting and do your own research. A story about 1 in 4 kindergarteners – tied to the measles outbreak was a misdirect. The study was about kids not being fully immunized before starting school. It was not specific to measles. Are 200 cases of measles in a nation of 330 million really a crisis?

There is no honest discussion taking place about how many of those who contracted measles were vaccinated and got the disease anyway, too little focus on what it means when an international traveler brings an infectious disease into the US; and no discussion about the failure of the vaccine to provide lifelong immunity.

What is really happening is that government officials and the media have colluded to force members of the public to take a specific action, in this case, get a vaccine. They don’t remind you that the measles vaccines are live virus vaccines and a child will shed the viruses for months afterward – potentially spreading the diseases. So the mom who goes online hysterical that her 7 months old might get measles because some other mom didn’t get her child the measles vaccine totally gets it wrong – its the kid who just got vaccinated who is more likely to shed the virus and give your child vaccine strain measles. Could it be that the government creates the measles outbreak by pushing the vaccination programs so aggressively? It’s also very convenient that these all seem to happen when state legislators have before them bills to curtail personal liberty of their citizens.

We cannot ignore attacks on free speech. I may not like what you say, but I will defend your right to say it – that has to be our mantra as people if we are to preserve liberty. I have twice taken an oath to protect the Constitution. Taking that oath means something that I do not take lightly. I have been in countries in which free speech is not acknowledged, I never want to see that happen in the United States of America. #Liberty #FreeSpeech.

US Flag

Posted on

Drug and Medical Industry Influence in Politics – The Facts.

6 January 2019

In the 25+ years that I have worked in and around government in the Washington, DC metro area I have had a ringside seat to the power of industry money on two of three branches of government as well as the ‘fourth estate’ the media. This blog will provide a summary of evidence on one of these three areas – industry money and power brokers and the legislative branch. There are two segments of the health industry who wield serious influence on Capitol Hill – the pharmaceutical industry through their powerful trade association (PhRMA) as well as through each of the individual companies; and medical doctors and their professional trade associations. PhRMA ranks third in lobbying expenditures in 2018 behind the US Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Realtors. In February 2017, Senator Bernie Sanders said that Big Pharma , “What’s going on is that the pharmaceutical industry owns the United States Congress. I would admit it’s not just Republicans. They have a huge influence over the Democratic party as well.” (http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2017/02/08/Sanders-Charges-Big-PhRMA-Owns-United-States-Congress)

Lobbying in and of itself is not wrong or bad.  (After all, I am a registered lobbyist.) In fact it is an important process for legislators and legislative staff to hear from experts about the issues of the day – a way to gather evidence on all sides of issues. The great challenge for legislators is to balance the needs of the people they represent against the desires of the industries whose representatives walk through their doors, who they rub shoulders with each week in Washington and at fund raisers across the country.

What has happened over the last two decades in the pharmaceutical industry however is much more than just straight out lobbying. Currently, there are more than 1,400 individuals registered to lobby on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry. That is almost a three to one ratio to elected officials on Capitol Hill. The industry has the power to alert this army of lobbyists each morning of their talking points of the day, and those individuals call on their former bosses, good friends, and key offices.

According to OpenSecrets.org – the amount of money the Pharmaceutical industry spent on lobbying grew from just over $60 million in 1998, to over $216 million in 2018. In 2018, the PhRMA the trade association spent more than $21 million lobbying, while top vaccine manufacturers spent the following:

  • Pfizer (formerly Wyeth, and formerly American Home Products)- $9.3 million
  • Merck – $5.9 million
  • Novartis AG – $5.33 million
  • Abbvie Inc. – $4.28 million
  • GlaxoSmithKline – $3.64 million
  • MedImmune LLC (AstraZeneca) – $1.57 million
  • Sanofi – $3. 89 million
  • Barr Labs, Inc. – $1.32 million
  • CSL Limited – $990,000
  • Seqirus Pty Ltd
  • Protein Sciences Corporation

It was always interesting to see who would attend our hearings when vaccines or thimerosal (mercury) was going to be discussed. Whenever mercury was a subject, I could count on seeing the lobbyist for the American Dental Association in the back of the hearing room and would seem him chatting with members of both sides of the aisle before and after hearing. Anytime vaccines were the topic, there was three long-standing vaccine industry lobbyist in attendance. I witnessed an event in the Senate in which these lobbyists managed to shut down a Senate hearing related to vaccine injury legislation before it even began. Their power shut down a year’s worth of bipartisan/bicamaral negotiations.

Back in 2003, Congress passed legislation that included a $2 billion a year boost to the pharmaceutical industry in Medicare. This legislation went through the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee. Early the next year, Committee Chairman, Louisiana Congressman Bill Tauzin announced he would be retiring at the end of the session. The day after retiring from Congress, he took over the top job at PhRMA for a reported $2 million dollar a year salary. (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/11714763/t/tauzin-aided-drug-firms-then-they-hired-him/#.XDJX81xKi70) and (https://sunlightfoundation.com/2010/02/12/the-legacy-of-billy-tauzin-the-white-house-phrma-deal/)

Donations: A second way that industries and often more powerful way that industries wield their influence is through political donations. The donations of a company’s employees and Political Action Committees (PAC) are easily tracked through legally required reporting. Some politically focused donations are more challenging to track, including event sponsorship, soft money support, and monies to local, state, and national political parties.

In 2018, $16,502,354 was donated by the Pharmaceutical industry to federal level  election candidates, PACs and outside groups. Just focusing on what can easily be tracked, the following are the political contributions by the same companies, their employees and PACs also provided by OpenSecrets.org:

Company201820162014
Pfizer$1,846, 612 $2,236,666 $1,566,961
Merck 933,303 896,232 972,009
Novartis 497,694 542,547 495,690
Abbvie 922,851 944,861 687,700
GlaxoSmithKline 479,480 734,619 622,226
MedImmune (AstraZeneca) 568,097 790,342 810,283
Sanofi 685,431 1,012,092 927,580
CSL Limited 87.006 86,663 54,540
Pharmaceutical Research &
Manufacturers Of America 		418,694 381,552 247,550

There are most than 1.1 million physicians in the United States. When a medical doctor or dentist reaches out to their member of Congress on a health issue, their opinion likely carries more weight than that of a single non-medical professional. In 2018, health professions spent $68 million on lobbying. The American Medical Association ranked 9th in lobbying expenditures for 2018, spending more than $15.5 million. (Exceeded by Alphabet, Inc., Blue Cross/Bue Shield, American Hospital Association, and the Open Society Policy Center.

When doctors and dentists donate to a campaign and garner donations from one or more of the dozens of professional medical associations, they are even more powerful. In 2018, health professions PAC donations to federal candidates exceeded $23 million.

The top health professions PAC was the American Society of Anesthesiologists with more than $2.85 donated in the 2018 election cycle to federal candidates, leadership PACs, political parties, and outside groups.  They also spent more than a half a million on lobbying.

There are several groups who gather the data from official sources and make them available for search and analysis. They include OpenSecrets.org and FollowtheMoney.org. ProPublica has also done an incredible job of researching these issues. Take the time to look at these sites for yourself and be informed.

During big issues like health insurance reform, the Medicare reform back in 2003 and throughout the vaccine injury and vaccine-autism discussions over the last 18 years, manufacturers, their lobbyists, the trade associations of both the manufacturers and medical doctors joined together to pool their power and influence – they developed talking points and organized their members to reach out to their legislators.

During the health insurance reform (ObamaCare) process associations even funded lengthy fellowships for doctors, nurses and others to work in legislative offices to shepherd the legislation. I know this because I met with many doctors and nurses who took time off from their ‘day job’ to spend 6-12 months in Washington working in Senate offices.

Political donations and lobbying are not always bad. Legislators rely on donors to fund their election and re-election campaigns. I am not one that endorses the idea of government-funded political campaigns. Political parties rely on donors to support their activities. There is a point, however, when that financial support moves from the support of past activities and foundational values to swaying the current or future actions. Finding and maintaining a healthy balance remains a top need for the legislative branch.

Always,

Beth

Posted on

We are Getting Played on the Russia Collusion but Not in How You Might Think!

17 July 2018:  The United States of America is a Democratic Republic and sometimes referred to as a Constitutional Republic.  The meaning of our words can matter greatly in particular in discussing what type of a country we are at this time in our history.  The point of this blog is not to expound upon these terms, rather to explore this, please start with a 2016 opinion piece by Eugen Volokh in the Washington Post which is available here:  https://tinyurl.com/ybnv9tsg.

For months the American public has been subjected to daily political discourse about Russian collusion in our 2016 presidential election.  In fact, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) has twice in the past year issued indictments for Russian intelligence operatives. The indictments accuse Russian spies of spying. The latest indictment is available here:  https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download

What is important about this latest indictment is that it (1) names the spies (which may prompt other individuals to make connections not previously made); (2) confirms that cyber attacks and cyber thefts occurred, and (3) reminds us why using non-secured email accounts and private servers for official government (including classified or sensitive information) is against federal policies.  There is zero chance that any of the 25 indicted Russian spies will returned to the United States to face prosecution.  Even if Russian law allowed this (which I understand it does not); the United States Justice and State Departments have been unable in 7 years to convince Denmark (a nation we have an extradition treaty with) to send Dr. Poul Thorsen back to the US to face prosecution for 22 counts of wire fraud and money laundering – related to theft from the CDC grant which produced the autism and vaccines are not linked studies (discussion for another day). If they cannot get a single doctor back from a friendly nation; they a not going to get two dozen Russian intelligence operatives back on US soil.  There is an entirely other line of discussion about how if by some miracle this happened, the fact that the FBI destroyed devices for Secretary Clinton, returned others, and failed to take possession of the DNC or DCCC servers that lawyers representing the defendants could get the case thrown out because the devices could not be presented.  The DOJ was clear in stating that the evidence did not show that any of the acts resulted in changing a single vote in the election.  Which I’m pretty sure was intended as a taunt to the Russians.

Yesterday, John Brennan tweeted that he felt that President Trumps’ performance in Helsinki was treasonous.  Setting aside the crazy place we are in as a society when a Former CIA Director is tweeting; and that he has become one of the most vitriolic political tv pundits against a sitting president; he also admits that in 1976 he voted for a communist in the presidential election. One has to wonder how he made it through Senate confirmation, and why he was even selected to be CIA Director in the first place given that he voted for a communist party candidate for president.  An interesting article about Brennan in the American Thinker can be found here: https://tinyurl.com/y7fktjh8 .  One might wonder who is working to destabilize our country more?

I digress from my original topic on purpose – to show how easily we can be distracted from what is really important – protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States and all that we as a People hold dear.  Our lives, our liberties, and our ability to pursue happiness.    Even before, but currently while all of this attention has been focused on whether the Trump campaign ‘colluded’ with the Russians to win the election; the real attack on the USA has been hiding in plain sight.  Communist operatives have been chipping away at our liberty by influencing our thought process.  Think about this – politicians and the media now frequently use the term ‘workers’ instead of work force or the word employees.  The radio personality Chris Plante repeats it in his tongue in cheek remarks.

There is always a battle to protect our democratic republic – to protect democracy against communism. And yes, to protect capitalism.  Why, because communism is an evil, like a cancer on liberty -it always seeks to grow and take over. In our civilized society, we shy away from using such strong language – but it is a truth we should not ignore.

So, what exactly is communism?  It is a political theory espoused by Marx and Lenin (and Putin, the Castros in Cuba, Xi and the Politburo in China, the Kim family in North Korea, and the leaders of Laos and Vietnam) in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party. (The Communist Party) In short, it is a way of life in which the citizens of a country have no liberty, no true control over their own destiny. The Communist party replaced a monarchy with a small group of people of their own choosing who make decisions about every aspect of the citizenry’s lives – from where you go to school, to career pathways, to what type of medical care you get, to where you live.  There is no religious liberty, no freedom of speech, and neighbor is encouraged to spy on neighbor.

The US post World War II efforts to protect our nation and the planet from the evils of communism focused on ‘containment’.  It is the very reason NATO exists.  In recent years, the attempts to expand communist rule are present, Communist China is building new islands to expand its territory, after re-exerting its authority over Taiwan and Hong Kong; and Communist Russia grabbed Crimea.  Russia exerts its power over Europe during the winter with threats to cut off their hearing oil supply. This manipulation has direct effect on activities at the United Nations and other global governing bodies.

Less obvious grabs of power have been happening for many decades.  Socialism has its foothold around the planet.  And why is that a problem? Because socialism is a stepping stone to communism.  In fact, it is espoused in Marx’s theory as the transition phase between capitalism and communism.  For decades we have heard for instance that we as a nation are wrong for not having a single payer health system, aka Medicare for all, or National Health Service (such as Canada and most or all of the Europe.).  Nationalizing our health care would be a major mistake in my opinion because it will take away the freedom of Americans to select not just who delivers their care, but what type of care they will receive.  For those of us who prescribe to a different philosophy of healing, or who promote the rights of those who choose a different path, these will be eliminated because only the dominate force (mainstream allopathic aka conventional drug centric) medical model. (This too is a topic for another day).

Nationalizing any sector of our society or industry is destructive to every other aspect.  Government managed systems are notoriously inefficient, with bloated budgets and if they had to compete in the open market would fail. It is one of the reasons there is so great a discussion about how to provide better care for our veterans – because the VA as great as the mission is, have become inefficient because it is so big, with too many layers of management.  Long waits, corruption, waste, fraud, and abuse – all symptoms of the greater problem – that government managing an entire sector of our society is not optimal.

As much as I was outraged at the manipulation of the Democratic National Committee to deny Senator Bernie Sanders a fair chance at the nomination; I was almost relieved, because Senator Sanders was never a democrat. He caucused with the democrats and was even given a chairmanship at one point.  Sen. Sanders was always a socialist running as an independent to be elected to House and then Senate. He knew to have any chance at being elected President he had to join the democratic party.  As soon as he lost the nomination, he quit the democratic party.

There is a lot happening in the US that we do not attribute to a promotion of communist ideals, but they are.  Anytime religious liberty, journalism, freedom of speech are attacked, curtailed, or undermined, communism gains ground.  When Democrats seeking public office compete against each other to be ‘the most progressive’, liberty is losing.  When Nico LaHood, a democratic district attorney in Texas was defeated in the democratic primary in large part due to a million-dollar investment in the campaign by George Soros who felt Nico was not liberal enough, communism was the real winner.

In April, Franklin Bynum ran unopposed to win the Democratic nomination to become a criminal court judge in Houston. He is running as a socialist.  This New York Times article lists many others running at all levels of government running for office.  https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/20/us/dsa-socialism-candidates-midterms.html

Rep. Joe Crowley, a top democrat in the House lost his primary to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who is a ‘democratic socialist’, who promotes socialist/communist perks – guaranteed jobs, guaranteed housing, guaranteed health care, etc.  An article in the Washington Times took the gloves off a bit.  https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/27/alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-socialism-makes-her-enem/

Democrats across the country were quick to jump on board and claim a little media time by being supportive of Alexandria including Senator Elizabeth Warren and New York City Mayoral Candidate Cynthia Nixon.  The DNC sang her praises as the future of the democratic party.  All of this before she had much media attention and before we learned that she misrepresented herself in the campaign.  She did not grow up in the working-class neighborhood of the Bronx she will represent, but in Westchester County attending Westchester schools; going to Boston University and interning for Sen. Ted Kennedy.  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5905247/Girl-Bronx-Alexandria-Ocasio-Cortez-actually-grew-wealthy-Westchester-County.html She worked on Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign before moving back to the Bronx and setting her sights on Congress.  She gained further notoriety in bashing Israel on Front Line:  https://www.jta.org/2018/07/16/news-opinion/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-criticizes-israel-occupation-palestine . After getting tripped up in the interview, she back peddled a bit and claimed she was not an expert in geopolitics, which some call into question given her major in college was international relations.

The truth is that the Russians and other communist are laughing at us right now because we do not realize as a nation how much we have compromised our Constitution and liberty.  When Congress takes away the rights of Americans to sue big companies when a child is medically injured, Communists laugh; when legislators introduce bills to nationalize health care, communists laugh; when there are protests in the streets calling for the elimination of ICE (and politicians join in) Communists laugh; when legislators across the country mandate medications as a condition of school participation, communists laugh; when government officials seek to control the free market system with price controls and crop subsidies, Communists laugh. When billionaires promote programs in which everyone gets a salary, Communists laugh.

Communists will not take over the United States of America through a frontal assault or direct invasion; rather they seep in like the dark, slowly. You may not notice at first that the sun is setting, you have to be listening to hear the changing songs of the birds and the bugs to be aware of the coming dark.  The warning signs are there, but we miss them if we do not listen.

Communism is sneaking into our society and President Trump is not the one at fault.  He is not the ‘bad guy’ in all of this.  I think he could have handled himself better yesterday; but yesterday was nothing in the big picture of the communist proselyting in the United States to convert a freedom loving people to slaves of a communist politburo who promise free health care, free college, government jobs for all, mandatory minimum wages, and abolishment of the rule of law.

President Putin, I am sure is laughing with his communist cronies, the old KGB ‘intelligence operative’ knows President Trump knows the Russian cyber attacks and spying were sanctioned. He knows that we know they spy in the US and around the world, the same way we spy on Russia and around the world.  (Didn’t President Obama have to apologize to Germany’s Chancellor Merkle for listening to her calls and the calls of her government ministers?) Putin is laughing at how fickle Democrats are about communism.  In 2012 President Barrack Obama laughed at Mitt Romney about his concern about Russia during a presidential debate (as did Senator and then Vice President Joe Biden as well as Sen. John Kerry.).  President Obama’s Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seeking to play off a marketing campaign for a US office supply store took a ‘reset’ button to a meeting with the Russian, he laughed at the foolish ploy (and that her translators bungled the translation so badly did not help either).  Some Democrats promote ideals of communism – with government management of so many sectors of society; but when President Trump doesn’t attack President Putin publicly, they go ballistic.

Putin laughs when billionaire Michael Bloomberg, who took a page out of the communist playbook to change the law to suit his own desires –so he could be mayor of New York City for a third term; begin promoting gun control. (He further showed his allegiance only to himself by changing political parties not once, but twice.)  Why does Putin laugh?  Because, when you take the guns away from law-abiding citizens, he knows the government can take control.

In 1963, President John F. Kennedy stated, “There are many people in the world who really don’t understand, or say they don’t, what is the great issue between the free world and the Communist world.  Let them come to Berlin. There are some who say that communism is the wave of the future.  Let them come to Berlin.  And there are some who say in Europe and elsewhere we can work with the Communists.  Let them come to Berlin.  And there are even a few who say that it is true that communism is an evil system, but it permits us to make economic progress.  Lass’ sie nach Berlin kommen. Let them come to Berlin.” 

I have been to Berlin and to Russia.  I understand with all my soul what President Kennedy meant. 

Republicans are not free of the communist influence either.  Republicans have and continue to participate in promoting programs and crafting new laws that chip away at the Constitution, at our liberty.

In 1980, President Ronald Reagan stated, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.”

President Reagan also stated, “I’ve always believed that this blessed land was set apart in a special way, that some divine plan placed this great continent here between the oceans to be found by people from every corner of the Earth who have a special love for freedom and the courage to uproot themselves, leave homeland and friends, to come to a strange land. And coming here they created something new in all the history of mankind – a land where man is not beholden to government, government is beholden to man. 

Our Constitution should be the ‘true north’ on our compass that directs our actions as a government and as citizens. Maybe it’s time to pause and study our founding documents and refocus our efforts as a nation to preserve and protect our ‘true north’.    https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution

To paraphrase President Reagan, Communism denies the God-given liberties that are the inalienable right of each person on the planet, indeed, they deny the existence of God.

Please do not let yourself get too distracted by the bright and shiny objects (ie news stories) distracting you from what is really important.

Always,

Beth Clay