CDC vaccine science covers up giant conflict of interest

CDC vaccine science covers up giant conflict of interest

by Jon Rappoport

October 24, 2016

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

If you wanted to buy a product, and the main source of research on the product was the company selling it, would you automatically assume the product was safe and effective?

But you see, that’s the just the beginning of the problem. Suppose the company’s research was cited thousands of times in the press, as the authoritative standard of proof—and anyone who disputed that research was labeled a conspiracy theorist and a quack and a danger to the community and an anti-science lunatic.

Would you begin to suspect the company had some awesome media connections? Would you suspect some very powerful people were backing the company?

This is exactly the situation with the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Read these two quotes:

“The government’s Vaccine for Children Program (a CDC organization) purchases vaccines for about 50 percent of children in the U.S.” (The Atlantic, February 10, 2015)

“The CDC currently spends over $4 billion purchasing vaccines [annually] from drug makers…” (Health Impact News, October 24, 2016)

However, the CDC is also the gold standard for research on the safety and efficacy of vaccines. It turns out an unending stream of studies on these subjects. And the results of those studies are dutifully reported in the mainstream press.

Do you think, under any circumstances, the CDC would publish data showing vaccines are ineffective and dangerous? They’d be cutting their own throats.

“Well, we spend $4 billion a year buying vaccines from drug companies, but guess what? These vaccines are often dangerous…”

Every time you read about a CDC study on vaccines, keep this obvious conflict of interest in mind.

When, in 2014, William Thompson, a long-time CDC researcher, publicly admitted he and his colleagues had buried data that would have shown the MMR vaccine increases the risk of autism, he was throwing a stick of dynamite into the whole CDC operation. He was also saying, in recorded phone conversations, that the CDC was lying about vaccine safety in other studies.

This is why major media refused to cover or investigate Thompson’s claims. This is why they spread a blanket of silence over his revelations.

Thompson was threatening a $ 4-billion-a-year enterprise.

The CDC is both a PR agency for, and a buyer from, Big Pharma.

power outside the matrix

Speaking of PR, would you like to see an example of how the CDC promotes the yearly flu vaccine by lying egregiously about flu deaths in the United States?

In December of 2005, the British Medical Journal (online) published a shocking report by Peter Doshi, which created tremors through the halls of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), where “the experts” used to tell the press that 36,000 people in the US die every year from the flu.

Here is a quote from Doshi’s report, “Are US flu death figures more PR than science?” (BMJ 2005; 331:1412):

“[According to CDC statistics], ‘influenza and pneumonia’ took 62,034 lives in 2001—61,777 of which were attributable to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.”


You see, the CDC has created one overall category that combines both flu and pneumonia deaths. Why do they do this? Because they disingenuously assume that the pneumonia deaths are complications stemming from the flu.

This is an absurd assumption. Pneumonia has a number of causes.

But even worse, in all the flu and pneumonia deaths, only 18 revealed the presence of an influenza virus.

Therefore, the CDC could not say, with assurance, that more than 18 people died of influenza in 2001. Not 36,000 deaths. 18 deaths.

Doshi continued his assessment of published CDC flu-death statistics: “Between 1979 and 2001, [CDC] data show an average of 1348 [flu] deaths per year (range 257 to 3006).” These figures refer to flu separated out from pneumonia.

This death toll is obviously far lower than the parroted 36,000 figure.

However, when you add the sensible condition that lab tests have to actually find the flu virus in patients, the numbers of flu deaths plummet even further.

In other words, it’s all promotion and hype.

“Well, uh, we say that 36,000 people die from the flu every year in the US. But actually, it’s closer to 20. However, we can’t admit that, because if we did, we’d be exposing our gigantic psyop. The whole campaign to scare people into getting a flu shot would have about the same effect as warning people to carry iron umbrellas, in case toasters fall out of upper-story windows…and, by the way, we’d be put in prison for fraud.”

The CDC must turn out a steady stream of outrageous lies about the need for vaccines. If they didn’t, they’d have no way to justify the billions of dollars they spend every year buying the vaccines from drug companies.

Since the sold-out major media won’t connect these dots, I and others need to.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

24 comments on “CDC vaccine science covers up giant conflict of interest

  1. swo8 says:

    Good point, Jon.

  2. Jonathan Hughes says:

    A vaccine is what is obscene. Glyphosate they do contain. Poisons the body, and the brain.

  3. Elaine says:

    Can you clarify please? You said 2001: 257 cases of flu. But then you said: 1979 to 2001 it averaged 1348 cases a year. So are you saying 2001 was a very small year for the flu?

    • Rod says:

      Yes, 2001 was apparently the lowest year. Notice in the parentheses after the 1348 average, it says “(range 257 to 3006)”. So the highest yearly total was 3006 and the lowest was 257, in 2001.

  4. blavatsky3 says:

    Nice Post, We need to link it to things like MORE PTRIATISATION as the RATS jump SHIP.

    As we get closer to the TRUTH… USA and Australia will try to pick WAR with RUSSIA and other countries that oppose FORCED VACCINATION….

    • blavatsky3 says:

      How do I edit a post with spelling errors ???
      Nice Post, We need to link it to things like MORE PRIVATISATION as the RATS jump SHIP.

      As we get closer to the TRUTH… USA and Australia will try to pick WAR with RUSSIA and other countries that oppose FORCED VACCINATION….
      watch Tony Abbott from Australia is like a psychophrenic in a straight jacket trying to regain the Prime Minister post in Australia so he can be a pawn to try and provoke Russia into a WAR….despicable

  5. blavatsky3 says:

    Remember FORD exonerated Tricky Dicky
    Remember OBAMA exonerated Tricky Bush

    inhouse GAMES of TREASON have to STOP .. FULLSTOP

  6. skedaddle says:

    I’m dismayed by the number of healthy adults (not elderly) I’ve seen lately lining up for flu shots. I can somewhat understand a frail older person getting scared by the constant media drumbeat but I’d hate to think I would have ever been scared of the flu in the prime of my life. I’m not scared of it now and my prime is a bit past.

    The uselessness and danger of the vaccines is a whole other topic that you can’t even broach with these people without them sticking their fingers in their ears. The brainwashing is astonishing.

    • jacobite2015 says:

      That’s because people love and trust their doctors so much. Their trusted physician will tell them how safe the flu shot is and that it’s not a bad idea to get the shot “just to be on the safe side.” Of course, there’s the usual physician fearmongering story of how a young, healthy person that they know succumbed to the flu virus (“…if he/she would have only taken the flu shot,” the very superior doctor will say).

      So, on one side of the spectrum you have people too lazy to do any research and therefore implicitly trust their doctor for all of their medical decisions (the easy way out, and IMO, the wave of the future). On the other hand, you have the M.D.s who’s alliance and homage is with Big Pharma and believe the “science is settled” when it comes to vaccine & medical drug safety.

      And doctors love this control with their patients and feel like they’re something special to dictate the vaccines & drugs they need to take. Find me a medical doctor who *does not* recommend the flu shot and I’ll sell you prime land on the dark side of the moon.

  7. Rod says:

    whenever someone asks if I’m getting a flu shot, I say “no, I don’t want the flu”. They can swear up and down that you can’t get the flu from the flu shot (though they admit you may have “flu-like symptoms”, so what’s the difference?), but the last time I felt like I had the flu was right after my last flu shot. That was 14 years ago. I haven’t been sick for more than a day at a time since, and never as bad as after the shot..

    • Theodore says:

      Like! I am going to use that line!

      Then, I’m going to double-down and say, “Ask me again.” …”No, I don’t want the geee-onnn-beret.”

  8. blavatsky3 says:

    So, is it fair to say that ZIKA VIRUS PLUS Whooping Cough Vaccine given to pregnant mothers is the CAUSE of Micro-Encephalopathy ?

  9. And the way I see it, Jon [and sorry for reiterating the same clapped out notion],

    Is that is how big the “tin” is for Thompson?

    He has proved that he is an unscrupulous man otherwise he would never have buried the data in the first place or, at least, come out swinging right at the start. None of this, “I was raped thirty years ago but I “forgot”” baloney works for me. You are either honourable or dishonourable.

    So, perhaps there’s more to the Thompson personal story. Maybe the die-hard fanatic that “supported the company ’til death” got wind on an early retrenchment in the offing. Just a “theory”, but a plausible explanation for his “action”. What was he to do? After he had joined Mephistopheles perhaps that’s when he had learned to play “hard ball”. If he was to make a “small” (emphasised) Media splash, that should be enough to put the frighteners on the CDC and their hallowed “tin” to save his sorry ass indefinitely, right?

    Thus, the bottom line, the only way you are going to see a “change in direct” is by outbidding the CDC, in my opinion. No “mystery celebrity” is gonna jump to the rescue and “Robin Hood”, when you learn the real story, was all bullshit.

    In summary, those who have suffered vaccine injuries, have loved ones that have been hurt or just feel “strongly about it” have one final indignation. The only way you are going to get Thompson to act affirmatively is to PAY FOR IT unless “god” works in mysterious ways. If the CDC “tin” is $4 billion, I guess that’s the target to aim for….!


    • Dante says:

      You are definitely right about Thompson not coming out swinging, in all fairness to him though he did take some efforts even threatening to reveal the real manipulated data if put in front of the IOM. Along with writing letters to the higher ups. I think he probably felt true guilt and most likely fear. That whole situation sounds like it would be overwhelming for any normal person. Unfortunately I think that you are right about no one swooping in to outbid as well. For now I will put the popcorn back in the cabinet and say a prayer for the lawyers. I hope they win.

      • You appear to still be wide asleep, Dante.

        “Fear”….piffle, unless you are referring to the fact he was shit-scared of being “left out in the cold”. Guilt, no. Embarrassment at having to “come clean”….maybe!

        As for lawyers….the system was built on that farce. Maybe fairies exist after all.

        • Dante says:

          Maybe the sudden reach out by Thompson after all this time was related to self preservation. I also think that all the evidence Thompson provided is legit. I may very well be wide asleep. I am still putting all of my chips on the lawyers though.

  10. Christine says:

    I remember seeing the ads for vaccines on billboards when driving through the black neighborhoods in our town. This was during the Clinton administration.

  11. Deborah says:

    Great article Jon. It is a problem for me to even think we would mandate a product which has no liability to manufacturer and has documented side effects and claim of harm & death…HOW DOES THIS HAPPEN?

  12. Cathy says:

    Then there’s the whole issue of having no liability whatsoever for damage caused by any of their vaccines. Not to mention the fact that the studies they are actually required to do on vaccines are not the gold-standard double-blind placebo-controlled studies required of other pharmaceuticals.

    Why work to make anything safer, let alone effective, when you have a liability-free product, control the media and government pushing and even mandating the product, and any of your product that’s actually shown to be too dangerous for even this toxic country, can be pushed on so called “third world” countries? Ca-ching, ca-ching for big pharma…

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.