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 vaccine” New 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)