Who coined the term anti-vaccine or anti-vaxx?
The derogatory term “anti-vaxxer,” which has been championed by the media and the medical industry’s experts who function as the media’s talking heads, are merely people who question the efficacy and safety of a heavy-loaded vaccination schedule for children.
And this does not represent a small group of dissident individuals and parents. Rather it represents hundreds of thousands, or perhaps millions, of people in the US alone.
We might consider mainstream news sources, such as the New York Times, once a highly respected newspaper, now becoming a propaganda vehicle for “manufacturing consent.”
In his book Public Opinion, political journalist Walter Lippmann, coined the expression “the manufacture of consent,” which was later further elaborated upon by Noam Chomsky in his critically acclaimed book Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media published in 1988. Chomsky defines the mass corporate media as
“effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions and self-censorship, and without overt coercion.”
The media refuses to accept that those who have been vaccine damaged, or who have children who will suffer for the remainder of their lives from adverse vaccine events, have a legitimate right to speak their truth rather than being labeled as hysterical or crazy.
All of these individuals and parents were pro-vaccine until they or their child became vaccine-injured.
Can you imagine that if you were a victim in the covert Tuskegee experiment carried out by the CDC, and you were one of the people who had syphilis who could have been easily treated but weren’t because you were a guinea pig and the federal agencies wanted to track how the infection would spread, and if you question the CDC’s wisdom, then you are therefore an anti-government subversive.
You would be judged as anti-authority and therefore a delusional person.
Similarly the CDC and the media, which has drunk the vaccine regime’s Kool Aid, is attempting to cast a net around those who oppose their authority by labeling them anti-vaxxers.
There is perhaps no other area of so-called scientific progress that has relied upon more deceptive and misleading research and a distortion of facts and statistics than in modern medicine’s religious belief in vaccines as a miracle to protect the world’s population from infectious diseases.
The distortion and exclusion of scientific evidence, the reliance upon cherry-picked studies and blatant corruption behind the vaccine research to further vaccination campaigns and compliance inquisitorial assaults on the medical voices of reason who demand honest and open dialogue about vaccine safety and efficacy has turned into a media war.
Popular scientific consensus has yet to tackle the growing uncertainty gap to identify the most probable causes of childhood neurological disorders and increasing rates in asthma, allergies and autoimmune conditions, including the role that toxic vaccine ingredients such as adjuvant aluminum compounds may play in these epidemics.
According to Dr. Stephanie Seneff at MIT, the autism rate can be projected to reach 1 in 2 boys in the next five years.
Unfortunately the Vaccine Deep State is silent over this urgent debate. And even with all the scientific evidence, the mass media continues to parrot the CDC’s mantra that there is no further debate to be pursued as to whether vaccines contribute to neuro-developmental disorders.
Doctors and Scientists Who Question Vaccines are Silenced
If you have read the opinion pieces in the New York Times, Washington Post or listen to television commentators, you will be left with the impression that there are no evidence-based facts to offer a legitimate challenge to the assumption that all vaccines are effective and safe.
Nevertheless there is a large group of board certified pediatricians, immunologists, toxicologists and research scientists who have reviewed volumes of peer-reviewed literature to support their criticisms of what the media wants us to believe.
But you will never see anyone from this group cited in mainstream publications or invited on multimedia. Rather, the media has created the illusion that only a small group of activist parents and renegade physicians oppose vaccines. In turn, they are attacked with the unfounded charge that they put society’s health at risk.
One recent example occurred in Israel.
Prof. Yehuda Shoenfeld is one of the most respected immunologists in Israel who now heads a center for autoimmune diseases at Sheba Medical Center, Israel’s largest hospital. He is also a member of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities and serves on the editorial board of dozens of medical journals.
Some regard him as “one of the most prominent world experts in autoimmunity.”
But now he is being viciously attacked by a group of Israeli doctors who accuse him of being a danger to public health because he has questioned vaccine safety. This group wants Dr. Shoenfeld silenced because he has written extensively on the role of aluminum adjuvants leading to a condition he has called “autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants” or ASIA.
Not surprisingly, much of the assault against Dr. Shoenfeld is being fueled by the Vaccine Deep State in the US, primarily by two of the media’s pro-vaccine poster children, Dr. Paul Offit at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and his partner in vaccine propaganda law professor Dorit Reiss at the University of California.
Reiss also blogs her opinions to discredit anti-vaccine voices for the Times of Israel and has contributed to fomenting opposition to Dr. Shoenfeld. She is also one of the leading legal supporters for California’s regressive vaccine mandates. Both Offit and Reiss are advocating for Dr. Shoenfeld’s removal from his hospital position and his sitting on medical journal boards.
Dr. Shoenfeld is an example of what happens to any scientist, physician and even journalist who questions vaccination. Therefore, how can we trust anything written about vaccines in the mainstream media? That is the conundrum.
Where is Journalistic Integrity?
We can ask journalists six basic questions to determine their journalist integrity and honesty.
- Have you interviewed the leading vaccines critics within the medical community?
- Have you honestly investigated the scientific literature to review the toxicological evidence about vaccines’ harmful effects?
- Have you reviewed the actual transcripts of the CDC’s senior immunologist Dr. William Thompson who provided evidence that the MMR is associated with autism yet this was systematically covered up by the agency?
- Have you reviewed Robert Kennedy Jr’s release of the Simpsonwood meeting transcripts that provided conclusive evidence that the CDC’s own research showed a vaccine mercury-autism connection and this too was intentionally concealed from Congress and the public?
- Have you reviewed the politics behind the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and the subsequent Vaccine Injury Compensation Program to understand how the pharmaceutical industry received a pass to avoid being held legally accountable for vaccine injuries?
- Have you interviewed and sought documentation from any of the following medical doctors and researchers Drs. Suzanne Humphries, Nancy Banks, Brian Hooker, Lucija Tomljenovic, Lawrence Palevsky, Christopher Exley, Tetyana Obukhanych, among many others Each of these individuals were pro-vaccine before that found reason to explore the actual published science?
This is only the beginning of what needs to be done before citing or interviewing any the most ardent pro-vaccine advocates such as Paul Offit, Senator Richard Pen or Dorit Reiss. And we have yet to find any mainstream journalist whatsoever who has made an effort to investigate any of the above.
The CDC’s Public Relations Marketing Efforts Funded by Taxpayers Which Educates Journalists
To sustain the nation’s vaccination rates, to preserve corporate profits, and to keep Americans convinced that vaccines will protect their children from infectious illnesses, the CDC requires a dynamic marketing and public relations apparatus.
The tentacles of the government’s health agencies are not only wrapped around the mainstream media but also the entertainment industry.
Unknown to the general public and many in the medical profession is the existence of the CDC’s sophisticated public relations operations. Tax dollars are spent to train journalists to defend the federal agencies’ and pharmaceutical industry’s national and state vaccine agendas.
This broad network of journalists are employed by mainstream media companies, magazines and newspapers, and freelancers and provide the CDC with a virtual army of publicists to propagandize its message.
Threats, fear mongering, and outright hatred written towards vaccine opponents are commonplace in the mainstream journalism’s narratives. What they all share in common is a glaring ignorance or denial of an enormous body of scientific literature that calls the CDC’s lies and deception about vaccine safety into question.
One vehicle for manufacturing consent is the CDC-Association of Health Care Journalists (AHCJ) joint fellowship program.
Scores of health editors, writers and reporters throughout the nation’s leading media corporations and publications—MSNBC, NPR, New York Times, Reuters, the Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle to name a few on the fellowship’s webpage—have passed through the CDC’s Atlanta campus for a week’s worth of intense instruction in national public health policy.
According to the AHCJ’s fellowship information, journalists are indoctrinated in conventional federal health policies regarding epidemiology, global disease prevention, pandemic flu preparedness, vaccine safety and autism.
They also receive training in “navigating databases such as the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey and CDC publications” to assist their research and writing.
Afterwards journalists return to their publications to propagandize the CDC’s ideological talking points to increase vaccination compliance and receive notices and pre-written scripts about stories to report for their news outlets.
The CDC’s close relationship with the media has been in place for at least two decades.
For example, during the 2004 National Influenza Vaccine Summit, then director of Media Relations at the CDC and spokesperson for the National Immunization Program, Glen Nowak, presented the agency’s “Seven Step Recipe for Generating Interest In and Demand for Flu Vaccination.”
His Powerpoint presentation outlines a concise public relations campaign, along a timeline covering the flu season, for journalists and media agencies to follow for the sole purpose of increasing flu vaccination rates.
The outline includes specific periods during the flu season when the media is recommended to induce and increase public fears about the pending dangers of influenza and even possible death.
In defense of the CDC’s PR efforts, Nowak publicly stated on National Public Radio that the vaccine
“manufacturers were telling us [CDC] that they weren’t receiving a lot of orders of vaccine for use… It really did look like we needed to do something to encourage people to get a flu shot.”
Five years later, during the H1N1 swine flu non-epidemic, we observed and reported how the CDC’s flu propaganda storyline recommendations continue to be put into practice to the letter by the New York Times, Washington Post and almost every large television news network.