Letter from Hilary Butler re: Simon Murch and MMR

Letter from Hilary Butler re: Simon Murch and MMR

 

                 Online Conference Center

 

Return to Vaccination News Home Page (for best results, right click to "open in new window")

Subscribe to the Vaccination NewsLetter

View past & current Scandals (columns by Sandy Mintz)

Search This Site using keywords

 

Dear Sir,

Simon Murch makes a salient point, which he would do well to review more carefully. He stated: ..."there has been no proper large scale study with controls, published in a respected, peer-reviewed journal." proving that the MMR causes autism. What a pity he had not read everything on this site, and in this article, also published today http://www.redflagsweekly.com/yazbak/2003_nov01_1.html

Murch alleges that the "unprecedented volume of medical study on a worldwide basis" proves that the vaccine is safe. The problem with this carefully worded obfuscation, is that his first comment applies to his own argument as well. A "large volume of study" stating that the vaccine is safe, does not mean that those studies are "proper" or have valid "controls". Every single article published so far, supposedly proving his point, has had serious scientific flaws, which have been rebutted by reputable scientists, yet the publishing journals refuse to print the rebuttals. Any thinking person would want to know why that was. Except that unless you surf the net, you won't know that there is even any debate.

Take another "study" in Pediatrics to be pre-released today "co-inciding" with Murch's statement. This too, will show that the vaccine is safe. The problem is that both the original VSD study from Feb. 2000, and the transcripts of the Simpsonwood meeting (obtained under the FOA) found that exposure to more than 62.5 micrograms of mercury in vaccines within the first three months of life could make children more than twice as likely to develop autism than children not exposed. This official information is available to the public on http://www.safeminds.org and www.factsformedia.com . But why has it never been in medical journals?

Dr. Tom Verstraeten who was the lead investigator in the original study is one of the authors of the new article. Although he is now employed by vaccine-manufacturer giant GlaxoSmithKlein, the article fails to disclose the clear conflict of interest, as required by Pediatrics guidelines. Why is that?

More and more, this looks to fully informed observers, very much like the "orchestrated litany of lies" that so disgusted Peter Mahon when wading through the offically released "smog" obscuring the reasons for the Erebus disaster. And most people now, as then, are so blinded by the "wood" from the vested interests, that they cannot see the actual trees. So the last question has to be: "When is the media going to do some real, in depth journalism on the issue, as opposed to automatic reportage?"

Sincerely,

Hilary Butler.

Tuakau.

NEW ZEALAND

Return to Vaccination News Home Page (for best results, right click to "open in new window")

DISCLAIMER:    All information, data, and material contained, presented, or provided here is for general information purposes only and is not to be construed as reflecting the knowledge or opinions of the publisher, and is not to be construed or intended as providing medical or legal advice.  The decision whether or not to vaccinate is an important and complex issue and should be made by you, and you alone, in consultation with your health care provider.