CDC Clears the Way for Massive Zika Virus Payday and a Brand New Mandated Vaccine

by Scott Creighton

UPDATE: (H/T Kevin Scott King) This is just another example of biased industry sponsored research which appears to be a growing trend in America today.

—-

“Given the recognition of this causal relationship, we need to intensify our efforts toward the prevention of adverse outcomes caused by congenital Zika virus infection…

Moving from a hypothesis that Zika virus is linked to certain adverse outcomes to a statement (?)that Zika virus is a cause of certain adverse outcomes allows for ….  the development of a Zika virus vaccineNew England Journal of Medicine

So this isn’t a fact? It isn’t proven? This is merely a “statement”? What conclusion can we draw from that?

While Robert DeNiro goes from daytime talk-show to daytime talk-show saying he regrets pulling Vaxxed from the line-up of his Tribeca Film Festival, the CDC has cobbled together a new study that purports to use a new type of evaluation process to determine a causal relationship between the Zika Virus and microcephaly. The report was written by CDC authors and forms the basis of their new conclusion.

On the CDC webpage, the fraud is evident if you take the time to read it:

“This study marks a turning point in the Zika outbreak.  It is now clear that the virus causes microcephaly.” study

“The report notes that no single piece of evidence provides conclusive proof that Zika virus infection is a cause of microcephaly and other fetal brain defects.” CDC announcement

“This cautious approach toward ascribing Zika virus as a cause of birth defects is not surprising, given that… no flavivirus has ever been shown definitively to cause birth defects in humans,4 and no reports of adverse pregnancy or birth outcomes were noted during previous outbreaks of Zika virus disease in the Pacific Islands.5,6″  study

So there is no concrete proof of causality, no flavivirus has ever caused this type of birth defect and previous Zika outbreaks never resulted in increased cases of microcephaly in effected populations.

So their conclusion stands in direct conflict with all of that, yet they still published their findings and thus, the debate is over.

This conclusion of theirs clears the way for Obama’s 2 billion dollar combating Zika fund which includes at least 200 million dollars for the development of yet another soon to be mandated vaccine. A pricey vaccine which will not be given away for free mind you, even though taxpayers pay for the R&D. Here are the three major elements of Obama’s 1.8 billion dollar request to fight Zika from this past February.

Vaccine development: $200 million of the requested funds would be dedicated to Zika and chikungunya virus vaccine development. Both diseases are primarily spread by the Aedes aegypti mosquito.

Foreign aid: Obama requested $335 million in aid to countries with ongoing Zika outbreaks, particularly in South and Central America and the Caribbean.

Puerto Rico: $250 million would be allocated to Puerto Rico, which declared a state of emergency last week. There are currently 22 people in the U.S. territory with Zika virus, including one pregnant woman. (By comparison, there are currently only 51 people with Zika in the continental United States, including one sexually transmitted Zika case in Texas.)

At the moment, there are 42 nations or territories which are “threatened” by Zika. Imagine the windfall profit margins Big Pharma would reap on that one vaccine. That one vaccine you and I pay for thanks to the CDC’s new study, mind you.

The press, understanding their role in all of this, is already busy parroting the old Global Warming line about “the debate is over. The consensus is in. There is a connection so shut up you naysayers”

“While there isn’t yet “conclusive proof” that the mosquito-borne virus causes severe birth defects, health officials asserted that the totality of the research thus far clearly shows that there is a causal connection…” Huffington Post

I am reminded of a quote from Michael Crichton.

“I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.” Michael Crichton

Again, the vapid conclusions of the MSM aside, if you simply take the time to read the study you will find they repeatedly state there are to be various “positive” outcomes of their finding a connection between the Zika virus and supposed increase in microcephaly cases in Brazil (read Jon’s work on the subject from back then. He shows their numbers were VASTLY inflated). These “positive” outcomes, they seem to be saying, justify the bad science surrounding their study. In conclusion, they make it very clear this is more an inference based on existing work than it is a new scientific finding:

“Thus, on the basis of a review of the available evidence, using both criteria that are specific for the evaluation of potential teratogens9 and the Bradford Hill criteria40 as frameworks, we suggest that sufficient evidence has accumulated to infer a causal relationship between prenatal Zika virus infection and microcephaly and other severe brain anomalies. Also supportive of a causal relationship is the absence of an alternative explanation…”

The absence of an alternative explanation is not proof of a causal relationship nor should it suggest one. That is absurd. Decades ago, autism was blamed on “emotionless mothers” and in the absence of an alternative explanation, that ridiculous and misogynistic diagnosis remained intact. Clearly that was not in any way proof of a causal relationship nor should it have supported that conclusion yet it did, in those dark age days.

Let’s be clear on one thing. Though there has been a little time between the initial reports of the Zika outbreak in Brazil and now, we haven’t forgotten just how flawed their original conclusions were in the first place. This is the problem that Big Pharma and their lackys at the CDC have been facing when it comes to creating a new fear-based profitable “crisis” for them to present a solution for.

“Out of nowhere, a month ago, we were told there was an outbreak of microcephaly in Brazil: over 4,000 cases of babies born with small heads and brain impairment. (now that number has jumped to 7,000)

The Brazilian researchers then went in and took a closer look at that figure. They walked it back and said there were, at best, only 404 confirmed cases of microcephaly.

Going from 4,000 cases to 404 cases was a revelation. It means there is no reason to claim, so far, that there is an epidemic of microcephaly.

Then, another stunner. Of the 404 cases, only 17 “had a relationship with the Zika virus.” Therefore, obviously, there was no Zika-causing-microcephaly story, either.

Even in those 17 cases, the mere presence of the Zika virus was no evidence the virus was causing microcephaly in 17 babies. A virus has to be more than “present.” It has to be there in huge numbers in an individual human. And the Brazilian researchers haven’t provided any evidence that Zika was present in huge numbers in any of the 17 babies.” Jon Rappaport, Feb. 2016

Even the new breathless reporting on this subject has to point out the “epidemic” level of the outbreak is anything but:

“The biggest outbreak of the disease is centered in Brazil, where about 7,000 babies with reported microcephaly have been born since 2015. Health officials there have investigated and confirmed that 1,113 babies do indeed have microcephaly or other defects, while so far confirming that 2,066 do not. The rest remain under investigation. ” Huffington Post

That’s the updated version of the story and it matches up pretty well with Jon’s evaluation. Why would they say there are 7,000 babies with microcephaly and link to an article that makes that statement, only to say in the next sentence that 2,000 of them DO NOT have microcephaly and only 1,113 have it… or SOMETHING ELSE?

Is that how science works these days?

Talk about fuzzy math. It doesn’t get any fuzzier than that.

Sounds to me like they are doing their level best to makes sure they don’t report the fact that only 404 cases of microcephaly have been confirmed in Brazil during the time frame they researched and of those, only 17 were found to have a presence of the Zika virus in their systems.

Those numbers do not imply a causal relationship, do they? And even the updated versions don’t seem to bear it out.

Yet, as the CDC study itself suggests, there are plenty of reasons for them to infer a causal relationship (based on their weak science and “consensus” conclusions)… even if one has yet to be proven. about 1.8 billion of them to be specific:

The head of the House Appropriations Committee on Thursday turned down the Obama administration’s request for emergency funding to fight the Zika virus, citing a pool of funding leftover from the Ebola virus.

Federal health officials had requested $1.8 billion to combat the Zika virus both in the U.S. and abroad. Most of that money would have gone to the Health and Human Services Department (HHS) for research into vaccines and diagnostics of the relatively unknown disease, which is largely spread by mosquitoes and has infected dozens of people in the U.S. since spreading from Latin America.” The Hill, Feb. 18th, 2016

We live in a bizarre world, don’t we? Everything is pretty much the opposite of what it appears.

We have a strong case that over vaccination may in fact be extremely harmful to children, and yet we can’t talk about that and various films are not even allowed to be seen in polite society because they make the argument that those out there charged with protecting the population from harm are working for and with those companies doing that harm.

And here we have that same agency, working diligently to provide the necessary pretext in the creation of yet another dangerous vaccine to combat what was previously considered a harmless bug which will be mandated like all the others soon enough.

It’s bizarre until you start looking at the machinations of the world in the context of “we have to run government like a business” and then you understand. You see it all so clearly.

“Okay, boys, this is what we have. Some cases of microcephaly in Brazil. Not many confirmed cases. So, first thing, we have to blow that number up. Get rolling on that. Next, we have this harmless dud of a virus, Zika, which we can find in all sorts of people anywhere in the world. It means nothing, of course, but we’re going to make it mean something. We’re going to claim it causes microcephaly. Wow. Even I’m blown away by the sheer audacity of that. Once we make this spurious connection, we can say women all over the planet are at risk. We can say the virus is spreading and we can confirm that through testing— because, as we know, it’s already there. It’s been there forever. Anywhere. Everywhere. And we say, you see, this virus that causes a horrible birth defect is spreading and popping up in a dozen, 20, 40, 70 countries. Now we’re in business.” Jon Rappoport

The problem with running government like a business is, in the end, you can’t separate the one from the other. There’s a word for that.

This new CDC “study” is a fraud. It’s a sham. It tells you as much if you care to read it. It is neoliberal activism masquerading as science and unfortunately, that is quickly becoming the standard model these days.

This study serves the interests of Big Pharma and no one else. Well, no one except perhaps the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) perhaps:

With such a massive list of major pharmaceutical companies amidst ALEC’s ranks, it should come as no real surprise that ALEC would be one of the driving forces behind the recent spate of “mandatory vaccine bills” popping up all across the country. Indeed, its motto should be “Personal Choice For Corporations. Government Enforced Mandates For People.”

Remember, it was ALEC that crafted the “model” legislation “Immunization of Minors On TANF,” legislation that would have required parents on TANF assistance to require proof that their children were fully vaccinated according to the “recommended” levels. If those families did not show proof of their child’s vaccination, those families would lose their TANF benefits. Activist Post

It is a bizarre world we live in, but there is a logic lying just beneath the surface. It’s a cold calculating logic. A business logic. And it’s become our government’s logic. It’s their world and we just live in it.

(For my mailing address, please email me at RSCdesigns@tampabay.rr.com)

output_95f0q7

15 Responses

  1. Reblogged this on deinvestiture.

  2. Excellent article and this new Virus fraud is especially interesting in light of this article;
    http://www.naturalnews.com/053663_scientific_literature_fabricated_studies_Big_Pharma.html

    with the Lancet itself proclaiming that as much as half of all scientific research and literature is fraudulent. And if they’re willing to admit up to 50%… then I’ll wager it’s actually much higher.

    The Lies are becoming so outlandish, so brazen now. It’s a sign of desperation.

    • Understand your concerns, but not sure “Natural News” is a great source.
      http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/NaturalNews

    • that’s an interesting article. thank you

      • You bet. I think the admission is huge news. At least 50% of scientific studies are bullshit. So when the news reports; “Doctor’s claim, or Scientist say…” flip a coin to decide whether to believe it or not.

        I’d bet it’s more like 75+%. And it would also be a safe bet to assume the more potential profit to be gained/lost based on findings the higher % of fraud. Which means if it’s big enough to hit MSM then it’s fraudulent. So you can put your coin back in your pocket…

        FYI. The Lancet is the premier peer-reviewed medical journal in the world.

        • Actually, on this topic, I’d have to say that the vast majority of general scientific publications out there are not financially motivated. Most at this point are just academics trying to maintain their careers. It would be a stretch to suggest that 75% are fraudulent. The vast majority are not fraudulent at all, but a disturbing number in recent years are lazy and flawed. Even publications surrounding things like the nucleic acid sequences of Zika viruses are usually very accurate. I can attest to that in that one can use the published research and develop an assay to amplify and detect the virus and it is very reliable. That is not to say that researchers don’t make mistakes, and that still others actually lie about their research, but it is a very small subset of directed reports and political declarations that somehow drive gigantic asymmetries in prioritizations and funding that are only weakly supported in scientific literature that are alarming to me.

    • That is indeed an interesting article.
      Here’s the direct Lancet link to Richard Horton’s original:
      http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2815%2960696-1/fulltext?rss%3Dyes
      With Zika it’s an even more blatant fraud and the MSM is clearly in for a pound.

      • an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness

        Yeah, from an inside view, that sums it up fairly well.

  3. Well done Scott. Sharing.

  4. $200M + $335M + $250M = $785 million. As if that wasn’t questionable enough,… So where’s the other &1.2 billion – the lion’s share – going? I would be SHOCKED if it were never accounted for.

  5. I wish I could argue against your conclusions. As someone actually involved with these efforts and with direct and detailed knowledge at the molecular level, I sadly have to agree with you. I even argued with you about Ebola at one point (under a different name). I have since come to realize I was wrong, and the nonsense going on with taxpayer funds diverted into useless government research is parasitic and systemic. I can attest to the fact, however, that most people working directly in the business of creating diagnostics and vaccines for the latest cash cow “emergency” really believe in what they are doing, even at pretty high levels in both business and government (there are an alarmingly high number well educated people with disturbing tendencies towards faithful zealotry), and why they are doing it. Most of those that don’t are just doing it to pay the bills because they don’t see another immediate employment option and they can live with it the same way any average American’s son or nephew might be a machine gunner in Iraq and able to remind themselves that it was just a job when they mowed down a few dozen poor folks who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. The thing I can’t get around is why we spend billions upon billions of dollars on the latest low frequency emerging medical “emergency” and never even consider the emergency of providing for the millions of poverty-stricken and starving people on our continent alone, much less the other areas (eg, Africa, Mideast) we spend so much money on pretending to help by trying to deal with the least of their actual problems (eg Ebola, MERS). Something doesn’t add up, or does if you throw away a few pre-programmed notions of how the world is currently operating.

  6. As a follow-up, to be fair to both the funders and researchers involved in “saving the world” from the next scientifically challenging headline, regardless of its true danger, and to their motivations, it’s helpful to remember that the vast majority do not actually (really) care about the Zika virus (or insert any other timely biological emergency) any more than they care if 99% of people living eight blocks from them are starving. The Zika virus is something they can use their technical knowledge upon and prove their scientific, organizational, political (insert any other) prowess upon, and that is why they are interested in it. For the most part, it is an opportunity to succeed in a competition against their fellow professionals and against nature itself. Helping anybody is not really part of the equation, thus no interest at all in the mundane notion of feeding starving people who have no money to pay nor energy for praise and exultation.

    • Well the part so few understand is that corrupt individuals somewhere up the chain always intend from the outset to abscond with a significant amount of the money supposedly being devoted to whatever phony problem they have conjured up. These things are run as money frauds from the git-go. Not to understand that is not to understand the Reagan Era

      • Most along the chain – even many who benefit directly and work hard to ensure these “problems” (usually called “crises”) remain “important” – think or convince themselves they are real and they truly believe they are doing good work. They are the most difficult to deal with because they are the middle decision makers whom many, many people report to,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: