Dr Wang has never investigated any illness claimed to be associated with heavy metal exposure and has never been asked to do a formal epidemiologic evaluation of the hypothesis that the thimerosal could cause neurological disorders or autism.
He claimed that he did know that the VAERS database existed prior to being retained as an expert, but had never conducted any analysis on the Vaccine Safety Datalink.
Dr Wang?s knowledge of vaccines and thimerosal was limited to what he learned in 30 to 35 hours of meetings with defense attorneys and reading the relevant medical literature, most of which was provided by the defense attorneys.
Finally, Dr Wang only offered an opinion on the link between thimerosal and autism and not on the issues relevant to the case relating to other neurological disorders.
For some reason, I don?t think Dr Wang would fare too well if called upon to take the stand to disprove the opinions of the many established experts on the plaintiff?s team with their combined decades of research experience in this area of expertise.
Another drug maker expert in the case was Dr Chris P Johnson, who in her deposition agreed that, prior to the case, her experience with mercury poisoning cases was zero. She has had no experience related to mercury or its neurotoxic effects and conceded that she was not an expert on mercury or the effects of mercury exposure on the human body.
I hardly think Dr Johnson is a match for the experts above. In fact I think it would be grossly unfair to even throw this gal in the ring with the other heavyweights. I guess it just goes to show how much humiliation some people are willing to endure to make a buck.
Partnerships Between Industry and Regulatory Officials
In reaching decisions, officials within regulatory bodies seem more concerned about the impact of their decision on global vaccination policies than making an unbiased appraisal of the scientific evidence. In reviewing statements by these agencies, people need to consider the inherent conflicts of interest between the CDC, charged with investigating medical issues; the FDA, charged with regulating vaccines; the Institute of Medicine (IOM), which examines policy issues; and the vaccine manufacturers.
After an on-going investigation of several years, the Mercury in Medicine Report was published on May 21,
2003 by the Subcommittee on Human Rights and Wellness of the Committee on Government Reform, and included testimony from numerous experts. The report rendered a number of specific findings.
Most significant was its statement that, ?The CDC in general and the National Immunization Program are particularly conflicted in their duty to monitor the safety of vaccines, while also charged with the responsibility of purchasing vaccines for resale as well as promoting increased immunization rates.?
The report went on to say that the CDC due to its ?biases against theories regarding vaccine-induced autism,? had chosen to fund researchers ?who also worked for vaccine manufacturers to conduct population-based immunologic studies. . .? But most importantly, it identified Thimerosal as the culprit in plain language and in no uncertain terms:
?Thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines is directly related to the autism epidemic. This epidemic in all probability may have been prevented or curtailed had the FDA not been asleep at the switch regarding a lack of safety data regarding injected thimerosal and the sharper eyes of infant exposure to this known neurotoxin. The public health agencies? failure to act is indicative of institutional malfeasance for self protection and misplaced protectionism of the pharmaceutical industry.?
The CDC?s decision to promote the publication of research supportive of the vaccine industry to refute this report by a congressional committee, demonstrates just how far it will go to support its partners in crime.
Blatant evidence of this partnership can be found in a CDC plan to promote flu vaccine sales which detailed a
?7 step recipe for generating interest in, and demand for, flu (or any other) vaccination.? The document discusses the ?best recipe? that would foster interest and demand, including use of terms like ?very severe,?
?more severe,? and ?deadly? to ?motivate behavior? and increase sales. For any doubters, this evidence should confirm that the interests of the CDC and the industry are one and the same.
In addition, numerous articles published in medical journals between 2001 to 2004, were quoted as key studies relied upon by the Institute of Medicine, which as it turns out, were written by authors and researchers with direct conflicts of interest and real biases in favor of claiming that thimerosal did not cause injuries or autism. Many of the conflicts were not revealed by the authors at the time the articles were written in direct violation of policy rules pertaining to medical journals.
He claimed that he did know that the VAERS database existed prior to being retained as an expert, but had never conducted any analysis on the Vaccine Safety Datalink.
Dr Wang?s knowledge of vaccines and thimerosal was limited to what he learned in 30 to 35 hours of meetings with defense attorneys and reading the relevant medical literature, most of which was provided by the defense attorneys.
Finally, Dr Wang only offered an opinion on the link between thimerosal and autism and not on the issues relevant to the case relating to other neurological disorders.
Another drug maker expert in the case was Dr Chris P Johnson, who in her deposition agreed that, prior to the case, her experience with mercury poisoning cases was zero. She has had no experience related to mercury or its neurotoxic effects and conceded that she was not an expert on mercury or the effects of mercury exposure on the human body.
I hardly think Dr Johnson is a match for the experts above. In fact I think it would be grossly unfair to even throw this gal in the ring with the other heavyweights. I guess it just goes to show how much humiliation some people are willing to endure to make a buck.
Partnerships Between Industry and Regulatory Officials
In reaching decisions, officials within regulatory bodies seem more concerned about the impact of their decision on global vaccination policies than making an unbiased appraisal of the scientific evidence. In reviewing statements by these agencies, people need to consider the inherent conflicts of interest between the CDC, charged with investigating medical issues; the FDA, charged with regulating vaccines; the Institute of Medicine (IOM), which examines policy issues; and the vaccine manufacturers.
After an on-going investigation of several years, the Mercury in Medicine Report was published on May 21,
2003 by the Subcommittee on Human Rights and Wellness of the Committee on Government Reform, and included testimony from numerous experts. The report rendered a number of specific findings.
Most significant was its statement that, ?The CDC in general and the National Immunization Program are particularly conflicted in their duty to monitor the safety of vaccines, while also charged with the responsibility of purchasing vaccines for resale as well as promoting increased immunization rates.?
The report went on to say that the CDC due to its ?biases against theories regarding vaccine-induced autism,? had chosen to fund researchers ?who also worked for vaccine manufacturers to conduct population-based immunologic studies. . .? But most importantly, it identified Thimerosal as the culprit in plain language and in no uncertain terms:
?Thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines is directly related to the autism epidemic. This epidemic in all probability may have been prevented or curtailed had the FDA not been asleep at the switch regarding a lack of safety data regarding injected thimerosal and the sharper eyes of infant exposure to this known neurotoxin. The public health agencies? failure to act is indicative of institutional malfeasance for self protection and misplaced protectionism of the pharmaceutical industry.?
The CDC?s decision to promote the publication of research supportive of the vaccine industry to refute this report by a congressional committee, demonstrates just how far it will go to support its partners in crime.
Blatant evidence of this partnership can be found in a CDC plan to promote flu vaccine sales which detailed a
?7 step recipe for generating interest in, and demand for, flu (or any other) vaccination.? The document discusses the ?best recipe? that would foster interest and demand, including use of terms like ?very severe,?
?more severe,? and ?deadly? to ?motivate behavior? and increase sales. For any doubters, this evidence should confirm that the interests of the CDC and the industry are one and the same.
In addition, numerous articles published in medical journals between 2001 to 2004, were quoted as key studies relied upon by the Institute of Medicine, which as it turns out, were written by authors and researchers with direct conflicts of interest and real biases in favor of claiming that thimerosal did not cause injuries or autism. Many of the conflicts were not revealed by the authors at the time the articles were written in direct violation of policy rules pertaining to medical journals.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
