Mainstream Media Predictably Ignores Problems with JAMA’s New Vaccine Study

April 28, 2015
Category: Uncategorized

They say this is the final nail is in the coffin of the vaccine safety debate. But whose coffin?
Last week, JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association, published a study claiming to have found no link between autism and the MMR vaccine (MMR stands for measles, mumps, and rubella). The mainstream press immediately fell into line and triumphantly declared the case closed.
Here are some examples of the headlines that ran: “Study Rules Out Link Between Autism and MMR Vaccine even in At-Risk Kids”; “MMR Vaccine and Autism: Yet Again, No Link Exists—Even For Children At Risk For Autism”; Measles Vaccine Still Doesn’t Cause Autism; “Another Nail in Coffin of MMR-Autism Link.”
As we’ve pointed out previously, this sort of smugness is common to the proponents of vaccines. They want to appear perfectly objective and reasonable, but they vehemently dismiss legitimate questions regarding vaccine safety.
Since a critical examination of the JAMA study would require the media to qualify their one-sided narrative, the limitations of the study have not been a significant part of the conversation. We at ANH-USA thought we would take a closer look.
First, the study was funded jointly by the National Institutes of Health and by the Department of Health and Human Services, government agencies with a well-known agenda of insisting on the safety of vaccines. This extends to winning “hearts and minds” through propaganda campaigns created to instill confidence in vaccines, as we reported last week.
Second, as the authors of the study themselves point out, there are major problems with the methodology used—problems big enough to throw the results into question. The study used a sample of about 100,000 children, comparing vaccinated kids to an unvaccinated control group. To determine which children were vaccinated and which were not, the authors looked at a health insurance claims database: if a child’s parents were billed for a vaccination, then that child of course counted as vaccinated; if the child was not billed for a vaccination, then it was assumed that child was unvaccinated. But, as the study notes, this distorts the numbers because “children in [the] study who are considered unvaccinated may have received vaccines in settings such as schools or public health clinics in which claims were not submitted”!
The authors also note that their findings “may not be as applicable to more ethnically and socioeconomically diverse populations that have less access to health care services.” This issue is covered in one sentence of the study, but is a major concern. Last year, we wrote about the CDC whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson, who broke a decade of silence over the government’s deliberate concealment of the link between the MMR vaccine and a dramatically increased risk of autism, particularly in African American boys. If the sample used by the study is not representative of the American population, especially segments who could be at higher risk for developing autism, the results are thrown into question.
Taken together, these two methodological limitations show that this study is not the last word in the debate about vaccine safety. It is absurd to argue that vaccines cannot or should not be made safer, that dangerous ingredients should not be removed, and that a one-size-fits all approach must be forced upon unwilling participants. Sensible vaccine policy should be based on legitimate science and individual choice, not government mandates and bullying.

Share This Post

19 responses to “Mainstream Media Predictably Ignores Problems with JAMA’s New Vaccine Study”

  1. Truth59 says:

    Nor do they care what was done to the brilliant Dr. Wakefield and others who finally came forward to support him.

  2. Penni says:

    Just as their data is skewed, so are your comments regarding racial implications. Are you saying there are more autistic black children as a result of the MMR vaccine than white children? Really? Because I would personally LOVE to see THAT data.


    Why don’t vax makers take out the toxic ingredients?

    • Jerry Segers says:

      TARDISOFGALLIFREY – If the vaccine makers were to change anything in the formula of the vaccine then the FDA would declare that a new drug then require millions of dollars of new trials to prove that it was safe and effective. Thus is it the FDA that is ultimately responsible for maintaining the status quo. No company in their right mind would voluntarily make such a change. I ran into this problem when I discovered the plasticizers in the PVC tubing of a dialysis machine were causing my wife to break out in hives. I asked why they did not switch to non PVC tubing like other manufacturers. I was quietly and off the record told the above sorry story. My only recourse was to watch the color of the tubing and reject any that had started to turn yellow because the plasticizers were leaching out. Unfortunately it is not possible to reject the contaminated batches of vaccines because they all seem bad.

    • guest says:

      For decades the pharma industry has been saying the amounts were so small they were harmless. To remove them now would be an admission that they lied. Even if they qualified the removal by saying they were doing it at the request of the public, how many people would actually believe them?


        I suppose, and through “shedding” you can get and spread the virus in vaccines too.

  4. Mike7106 says:

    The medical pharma community is so busy insisting vaccines are safe that they don’t see the idiocy they regularly purvey. The big mystery of autism is a good example, Not too long ago “science” suggested that the children of above average intelligence parents from silicon valley were genetically more likely to become autistic. Today “science” is attacking above average intelligence parents for refusing vaccines for their children. At first the parents maxed out the “care/vaccines” for their children. Those same parents were the first to understand the harm vaccines are causing. In both instances the above average parents exceeded the average parent’s concern with their child’s health.
    The reason we have skin is to keep foreign materials from interfering with our metabolism. How presumptuous is it to insist it is safe to inject millions of infants, big and little, with concoctions of foreign materials? AND modern vaccines? Foreign materials to preserve the virus material. Foreign material “aluminum adjuvants” to over stimulate an infant’s immune system. Millions of tiny infants of varying maturity and fitness receive the same vaccine dosage of one, two, three, up to 8 or 9 vaccines. Bottom line? All provaxers are a danger to our children and society.
    Bodily processes are the result of human evolution. There are no bodily processes for vaccine materials and there never will be.

  5. Mike7106 says:

    VMAK – Vaccine Madness And Kainotophobia – Vaccine Maiming And Killing
    Just look around to see what know it all science is doing to our planet and now our children with vaccines. Think of all the unnecessary hysterectomies, mastectomies, and prostate surgeries. Do you get it? The processes of the human body are so complex, so interdependent, that entered drugs and vaccines are time bombs. We are chemical beings. The chemicals we need are sorted and distributed from the food we eat and the air we breath. Chemicals, such as aluminum adjuvants in vaccines, put into the body directly have no purpose and are basically left to their own devices.

  6. Mike7106 says:

    VACCINE MANTRA. “All vaccines contain neurotoxins, all neurotoxins are poisons.”
    Today’s vaccines ALL cause harm no matter how imperceptible. Vaccines are man’s presumptuous and greedy intrusion on perfection of his evolved bodily algorithms. The intrusions are causing the devolution of a large portion of the Human Race.

  7. CS says:

    Listing potential limitations as an end-all argument to invalidating a study without any discussion on why they may or may not cause notable bias within the study is literally the same agenda pushing this article accuses of others. The first limitation is probably a nonissue, as the kids in the nonvax group, with the nonvax community what it is today, would be unlikely to get a single vaccine even at a free clinic. The associated point would be disadvantaged getting all their immunizations at free clinics, which we can safely assume is a statistically insignificant number at best seeing as the second limitation is the lack of socioeconomic diversity in the study. To address the second limitation directly, it is both a blessing and a demon to the study. There are fewer confounding variables (socioeconomic status I think we can all agree has dramatic effect on many things that impact health) so for the given population it is easier to say with conviction that there is no association. Translating it to other populations is certainly more difficult and their numbers would likely be different in another group of people, but what does that really mean? Knowledge of polymorphisms is on the rise and there are measurable biochemical differences in things like drug metabolism, but even with known genetic differences they’re virtually always degrees of the same thing because of the obvious fact that people aren’t fundamentally that different. So if a huge study can’t find a single hint of a certain outcome, it is less likely a study on a different population will be different and extremely unlikely for it to be alarmingly different. The african american data brought up was done with improper statistics on an incomplete and small dataset and is not evidence of the contrary. Should more study be done? Absolutely, maybe there is a difference and we’ll learn something new about the processes involved, that would be good for everybody. These things don’t invalidate the study.

    • CS says:

      See how easy that was? You’re welcome, author who’s name I don’t care enough to find, I just did your job for you by actually discussing the limitations instead of simply accusing others of not discussing them.

  8. KT says:

    Look up the word “Pharmakia aka Pharmacy! This where the truth lies!

  9. Emily Matthews says:

    Vaccines aren’t the only issue in autism. Consider the huge effect of diet! Both pro-and anti-vaxers fail to consider diet and gut dysbiosis (GAPS). Dr. Campbell-McBride had a clinic treating autistic kids. 50% were vaccinated; presumable the vaccine tipped them over the edge into autism. The other 50% had never been vaccinated, yet were autistic. Thus we see the effect of not only the baby’s diet, but the mom’s and even the grandmother’s, due to epigenetics. It is interesting that Big Phude and Big Pharma are often one and the same…for example, Bayer produces GMOs and drugs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *