Sinking RFK Jr.'s Nomination With the Polio Mythology
Attacking RFK by defaming his attorney will be a strategic mistake.
In my previous post, "The War on RFK Jr Has Begun," I showed how the media is paving the way to stop RFK's nomination to head HHS by publishing stories on the threat from rabies and raw milk. (Rabies being the alleged great success of vaccination, along with polio and small pox.) And in "Trump, the Anti-Fluoridation Candidate" (Nov 11), I refuted the mainstream endorsement of water fluoridation, which RFK rightly considers a hazard to health.
In the last couple of weeks, the pro vaccine media believes they found a chink in RFK's armor—his attorney, Aaron Siri. You can find Aaron's articles here, and his lawfirm here.
I befriended Aaron Siri in 2010. But now, the world knows Aaron as "Robert F. Kennedy's lawyer." In this post, I'll briefly apprise everyone of the busy couple of weeks that Aaron has had in attracting media attention. Here again, the intention of the "captured" industries and their media whores is to tarnish RFK's reputation before his confirmation hearings in the Senate. But as anyone who's familiar with Aaron knows, he's the nation's most formidable attorney and advocate for medical freedom, and vaccine choice in particular.
If anyone doubts me, have a look at Aaron's two-hour presentation in Minnesota on Sept 10, 2023. He challenges the efficacy of each vaccine recommended by the CDC for children K through 12th grade. And he does it without reading from a script. His sources are from the literature published by the CDC and vaccine makers, and even shows how, for some diseases, vaccinated students spread the pathogen more than the unvaccinated.
Aaron had also participated in roundtable discussions which challenged the safety and efficacy of the Covid-19 vaccines, led by US Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI). The first meeting was held on November 4, 2021, where Aaron spoke at the 3 hour, 19 minute mark on the video. Johnson's press release directs you to the Youtube video, but as you can see, Youtube eventually censored it. But the full 4 hour event can be viewed here:
The second rountable discussion was held on December 8, 2022. Aaron's turn to speak at this 3 hour event is early, at the 12 min. mark.
Viewing these samples, you can readily see that if Aaron is asked to testify along with RFK, it would rebound to the detractor's detriment. However, in a senate hearing, each senator controls his/her time, and many use their time to pontificate and disparage witnesses they dislike, often without giving the witness a chance to speak. Since millions of Americans will watch this confirmation hearing, it would be Aaron's or RFK's best chance to bypass the media filter with their best evidence on vaccination, fluoridation, or the other issues challenging the drug and agricultural industries.
So they can expect that senators will quote world-renowned scientists asserting that RFK as HHS Secretary would be a threat to the nation's wellbeing (etc.). Instead of getting into the weeds of the science, that will be their line of attack—credentialism.
My suggestion for RFK and Aaron (if he also testifies) would be to preempt that tactic by delivering their evidence to each senator on the confirmation committee WEEKS BEFORE THE HEARING IS HELD. Consequently, when a senator says, for example, "Mr Kennedy, I haven't seen any evidence to support your claim about . . . . ", Kennedy can reply, "Senator, I already sent you the studies that supports that question some weeks ago. Did you read it? Did you find any scientists who were able to dispute it?"
Senators are unable to debate the science with Siri or Kennedy, so they'll draw the discussion away from the science, and dwell on hyperbole, alleging that they want to deny life saving vaccines for children, or quote from scientists with ties to vested interests. My preemption strategy would help our guys draw senators into the science and away from typical senatorial demagoguery.
What evidence should our guys cite? I think front and center should be the CDC finally admitting in federal court that it has no studies disproving a link between vaccination and autism. On March 2, 2020 the CDC signed a court stipulation that identified a list of the studies they have relied upon to support the statement that vaccines do not cause autism. The list reveals that the CDC has no studies absolving the following vaccines of a role in causing autism: diphtheria, tetanus acellular pertussis (DTaP), hepatitis B (HepB), polio (IPV), haemophilus influenza b (Hib), and Prevnar 13 (PCV13).
Aaron Siri was the attorney representing the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN). ICAN's effort began with a Freedom of Information Act request in 2017 that led eventually to a lawsuit filed in December of 2019.
The lawsuit resulted in a stipulation signed by the CDC in which it admitted that only one vaccine, the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR), and one vaccine ingredient, thimerosal—a mercury-based antibiotic once used in most vaccines given to American children—have ever been studied for a role in causing autism. A study of the DTaP mentioned by CDC concluded, "The epidemiologic evidence is insufficient or absent to assess an association between diphtheria toxoid-, tetanus toxoid-, or acellular pertussis-containing vaccine and autism."
This admission also indicts the media covering the hearings. With few exceptions, for over two decades, the media was, and still is, complicit in gullibly echoing anything the CDC claims, especially about vaccination—medicine's sacred cow. And to this day, promoting the CDC’s falsehood disputing the vaccine-autism link was the most repeated lie by the media.
By contrast to lack of studies, there have been numerous studies affirming a vaccine-autism causal link. Many are cited in RFK's book. More recently, by others such as J.B. Handley last September, and by Steve Kirsch last month.
We've also heard RFK make the point that "Not a single routine childhood vaccine was licensed for use in the U.S. based on a long-term, placebo-controlled trial."
The world's (supposed) top expert on vaccines, Dr. Paul Offit, called RFK a liar and conspiracy lunatic. But Offit then got his head handed to him by attorney Aaron Siri in this August 3, 2023 substack post.
RFK also notes that the "justification" for enacting NCVIA in 1986 (i.e. PL-99-660) was made clear to Pres. Reagan when he asked the CDC why they cannot just make vaccines safe for use. CDC answered: "vaccines are inherently unsafe." RFK said that assertion is repeated in the language of the legislation, which indemnifies vaccine makers from tort awards and prohibits lawsuits against them.
Just for the record, that legislation was coauthored by Barbara Loe Fischer (DPT at that time, now NVIC), Jeff Schwartz (president of DPT, D.C. lawyer and lobbyist for pharma), AAP, and ACIP and sponsored in Congress by life-long pharma whores, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Sen. Oren Hatch (R-UT). Reagan had resisted enacting NCVIA for years, calling it a "new entitlement," which in conservative language means that the public should not fund it. Indeed, Reagan warned us in 1961 that, "One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It is very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project."
Students of the history of collectivism will also recognize that calls for increasing the power of the state over the individual is always couched in terms of the "public good" and "protecting the public." The covid mandates had awaken many Americans to this subterfuge.
At any rate, Kennedy and Siri would be well-armed at the hearing with medical studies, and the preemption strategy might be the way to victory. Because witnesses are at a disadvantage at senate hearings—a circus that rewards shameless self-promotion and showboating.
The Week That Was For Aaron Siri
The recent political demagoguery started when NBC News blasted RFK Jr. for wanting to study a possible connection between autism and childhood vaccines. Why? Because NBC claims the connection has been "debunked" by "hundreds of studies." On December 8, Siri refuted everything that NBC claimed with his Substack post:
Perhaps the media researched Aaron Siri by this time and realized it can defame RFK by defaming Aaron. On December 13, NBC stuck again with this story: "McConnell defends polio vaccine after report that RFK Jr. adviser sought to revoke approval"
And on the same day, the NY Times joined in with this lengthy hit piece, also by aligning itself with the legendary polio vaccine: "Kennedy's Lawyer Has Asked the F.D.A. to Revoke Approval of the Polio Vaccine." The subtitle read, "Aaron Siri, who specializes in vaccine lawsuits, has been at Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s side reviewing candidates for top jobs at the Department of Health and Human Services."
Aaron effectively rebuked NBC on the same day on his "X" account.
The story may have legs going into this week. On the local WNYC radio program On Monday on the Brian Lehrer Show, Aaron and his polio petition were briefly mentioned at the 38 min. 40 sec. mark.
And on Monday Dec 16th, the network evening news programs picked up the polio story, alleging RFK Jr. wants to revoke the vaccine's license. And they trace it to Aaron's petition to have the vaccine's safety studies reviewed.
The mainstream media obviously smells blood in the water. But Aaron correctly realized that most people today erroneously think of the vaunted polio vaccine as the one Jonas Salk had developed. But we have a different polio vaccine today. Yet Salk's vaccine doesn't deserve the adulation it received by the mainstream media, either then or now.
You will no doubt encounter people over the age of 75 claiming that the polio epidemic of the 1950s was devasting and real. But as my 26-page article from 2006 proves, what was "real" was the hype from public health "experts" and their media whores. Yet some of the truth had leaked out:
The New York Times on May 11, 1956, reported on Supplement No. 15 of the Poliomyelitis Surveillance Report for the year which showed 12% more paralysis in 1956 than in 1955. By January 1, 1957, 17 states had rejected their supplies of Jonas Salk's "anti-paralytic" polio vaccine. During this year very nearly half the paralytic cases and three-quarters of the non-paralytic cases in children between the ages of 5 and 14 years occurred in "vaccinated" children.
My article contains source materials—much of it from contemporary newspaper stories—on the Salk vaccine which you won't find anywhere else. The supposed polio epidemic in the 1950s was statistical fiction. It was never a paralytic disease prior to Salk. The causes of paralysis still exists today, and it has never been caused by a virus.
For those who don't want to read all 26 pages of my article, I'll close this post by excerpting a few tidbits from it. Perhaps it might suffice:
Polio disappeared in Europe during the 1940s and 1950s without mass vaccination, as it would have happened here. But in 1952, when paralytic polio naturally dwindled to a level comprising merely a third of all polio cases, federal health authorities had artificially swelled the polio statistics by combining it with the larger numbers of non paralytic, 'unspecified' and 'abortive' polio cases—whose symptoms are no more serious than a bad cold.
Referring to the Illinois Medical Journal of Aug./Sept 1960: After 1955, with the introduction of the Salk vaccine, health officials did the reverse. They hid the rising cases of paralysis under polio's socalled clinical twins—Coxsackie virus infection and septic meningitis. Thus it was only after the Salk vaccine began that virus confirmation tests could distinguish polio from its clinical twins. But ironically, it was the Salk vaccine itself which accounted for the rise in paralysis, often seen in the very limb in which it was injected.
Indeed, the New York Times on May 11, 1956, reported on Supplement No. 15 of the Poliomyelitis Surveillance Report for the year which showed 12% more paralysis in 1956 than in 1955. By January 1, 1957, 17 states had rejected their supplies of the Salk 'anti-paralytic' polio vaccine. A year after the vaccine was introduced, the report noted that very nearly half the paralytic cases and three-quarters of the non-paralytic cases in children between the ages of 5 and 14 years, occurred in vaccinated children.
In November 11, 1955, the AP reported that English authorities in July, 1955, canceled the Salk vaccine programs as 'too dangerous', and all European countries, with the exception of Denmark, had discontinued their Salk programs. Canada also postponed its Salk vaccine program on July 29, 1955. By January 1957, 17 states had rejected their supplies of Salk's vaccine.
Referring again to the Illinois Medical Journal, the medical panel concluded that, "prior to 1954, large numbers of these cases undoubtedly were mislabeled as paralytic polio." If that were not enough, in order to make Salk's vaccine look even more effective, vaccine promoters in government had to show that it was also wiping out non-paralytic polio cases. Thus, while paralytic polio cases seemed well buried under the names Coxsackie [virus infection] and septic meningitis after 1955, in similar fashion, non-paralytic polio acquired a new name—aseptic meningitis! Thus, as reported by the CDC, this “new” disease—consisting of cold symptoms leading to complete recovery—went from zero to over a hundred thousand cases immediately after the Salk vaccine was introduced, while non-paralytic polio cases magically declined from seventy thousand to zero that same period.
Removing the word "polio" from the name of any disease after 1955 was among several cynical attempts to make the Salk vaccine appear to have eradicated polio. It's a tribute to the ‘talents’ of vaccine promoters that this vaccine and it's inventor retains legendary status—despite the CDC having admitted to the statistical flim-flam in 1977:
An early vaccination critic and lecturer on the science of Natural Hygiene Barry Mesh, had written to the CDC asking why aseptic meningitis was not reported nationally before 1960. Dr. Michael B. Gregg, Deputy Director of the Bureau of Epidemiology of the CDC (in 1977) surprised Mr. Mesh by admitting the following:
"The reason aseptic meningitis was not reported separately before 1960 is that most cases of aseptic meningitis observed by clinicians up to the early 1950's were considered non-paralytic poliomyelitis or meningitis of obscure etiology." [Note: obscure etiology means 'of unknown cause or origin.']
Dr. Gregg's full and complete letter is posted here:
How many is "most cases?" Hundreds? Thousands? How many cases of aseptic meningitis were misdiagnosed as nonparalytic polio before the Salk vaccine? Once again, no one knows. Dr. Gregg also indicated that these faulty diagnoses (of nonparalytic polio) were based on observation, not laboratory confirmation. Thus with no diagnostic tool other than their "clinical eye," doctors were encouraged to diagnose 69,457 cases of nonparalytic polio between 1951-1959.
Dr. Gregg's letter officially confirmed the "hoax" that there was a polio epidemic. Through Dr. Gregg, the CDC was essentially admitting that since the Salk vaccine had begun to be used in 1955, the huge swing from the incidence of polio to aseptic meningitis following that year indicated that (1) prior to the vaccine, clinicians had been over-diagnosing poliomyelitis in most instances when they had really been cases of aseptic meningitis, or just cases involving a bad cold, and (2) the apparent decline in polio due to the Salk vaccine was merely an artifact of diagnostic methodology.
The diagnostic flim flam was the key to the hoax. As I explained:
At the aforementioned panel discussion in 1960, Dr. Greenberg also blew the whistle on the modified diagnostic criteria for polio. Prior to 1954, the diagnosis of spinal paralytic poliomyelitis in most health departments followed the World Health Organization definition: "Signs and symptoms of nonparalytic polio with the addition of partial or complete paralysis of one or more muscle groups, detected on two examinations at least 24 hours apart." But beginning in 1955, the criteria changed to conform more closely to the definition used in the 1954 Salk field trials: "Unless there is residual involvement (paralysis) at least 60 days after onset, a case of poliomyelitis is not considered paralytic."
Obviously, more cases of paralysis had a chance to recover within 60 days, than in 24 hours. During the panel discussion, Dr. Greenberg commented, "This change in definition meant that in 1955 we started reporting a 'new' disease, namely, paralytic polio with a longer lasting paralysis [than what was required before 1955]. As a result of these changes in both diagnosis and diagnostic methods, the rates of polio plummeted from the early 1950's to a low in 1957." (a decrease of 23,500 cases from 1955 to 57.)
And the disease itself was hyped to appear as a monsterous leviathan that would doom our nation. And yet,
According to Muir's Textbook of Pathology, 9th Edition, 1972, polio cases WITHOUT paralysis are about 20 times as common as paralytic cases. And that, "such cases are difficult or impossible to recognize on clinical grounds alone, since they simulate minor gastrointestinal or respiratory infections from other causes"—not unlike a severe cold. "Up to 95% of all polio infections are inapparent or asymptomatic" (pg 8 http://www.cdc.gov/nip/publications/pink/polio.pdf).
Medical manuals report that most cases of polio are of a minor nature, the symptoms, if any, being fever, malaise, drowsiness, headache, nausea, vomiting, constipation, or sore throat in various combinations. The disease may last from 2 to 10 days, with recovery being rapid and complete. The more serious forms produce stiffness and pain in the back and neck and occasionally paralysis of some parts of the body, usually temporary.
Boyd's Textbook of Pathology (8th Edition, 1984) states, "90-95% poliovirus infections are inapparent"—which means the virus doesn't produce any symptoms of disease in almost all people who are infected with poliovirus. Among the 5-10% who do exhibit symptoms, the virus causes "a mild disease of headache, nausea, and fever. A few cases progress to aseptic meningitis, consisting of pains in the back and neck, ending in rapid and complete recovery. In less than 2% of total cases, poliovirus infection causes flaccid paralysis, frequently with [...] loss of muscle enervation, which may be prolonged and is often irreversible."
Even the alleged microbial cause of polio has yet to be established.
Conventional medicine believes that polio is caused by a microbiological agent—poliovirus—for which a vaccine would be an appropriate preventative of the disease. Yet the viral mechanism to account for paralytic polio has yet to be established. (Similarly, the chemical mechanism for most viral diseases, including smallpox, have yet to be described.) While scientists can isolate the virus from tissue, and believe they know which part of the virus is responsible for attacking the nervous system, virologist Jonathan Weber, senior lecturer at the Royal Postgraduate Medical School in London—in an essay arguing that HIV is the cause of AIDS—wrote in the New Scientist (May 5th, 1988, page 32) that, "…the relationship between the virus and paralytic polio is still [merely] an epidemiological association; the majority of infections with polio virus do not lead to paralysis, the clinical manifestation of the illness."
The epidemiology also eludes us.
On the Phil Donahue Show ("Dangers of Childhood Immunizations," Jan.12, 1983), Dr. Mendelsohn pointed out that polio does not occur in the Third World where only 10 percent of the people have been vaccinated against polio or anything else.
In 1958, Israel had a major "type I" polio epidemic after mass vaccinations. There was no difference in protection between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. (Hearings before the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, 87th Congress, Second Session on H.R. 10541, May 1962, p.94) In 1961, Massachusetts had a "type III" polio outbreak and "there were more paralytic cases in the triple vaccinates than in the unvaccinated."
My article also posits things which might have caused symptoms of polio in the 1950s. I didn't mention pesticide use, but a very comprehensive case for it was written by Jim West in his extraordinary paper, Pesticides and Polio.
My article also shows how paralysis can occur, which is not cause by a virus. In other words, why were there paralytics in the 1950s as well as today? Here are some references:
The Poison Cause of Poliomyelitis And Obstructions To Its Investigation. by Ralph R. Scobey, M.D. Archive Of Pediatrics (April, 1952) [Arch Pediatr. 1952 Apr;69(4):172-93.]
Is Human Poliomyelitis Caused By An Exogenous Virus? by Ralph R. Scobey, M.D. Science (1954) v51, p117 [Arch Pediatr. 1954 May;71(5):139-50.]
Is the cause of poliomyelitis always the same? Arch Pediatr. 1953 Jun;70(6):185-202.
Is the public health law responsible for the poliomyelitis mystery? by Ralph R. Scobey, M.D. From Archive Of Pediatrics (May, 1951). [Arch Pediatr. 1951 May;68(5):220-32.]
Poisoning as the cause of poliomyelitis. Arch Pediatr. 1950 Oct;67(10):462-82.
Will The Poliovirus Eradication Program Rid the World of Childhood Paralysis?
There have been many publications debunking the polio story and the Salk vaccine. I don't think Aaron Siri or Bobby Kennedy would have any trouble defending their actions to make vaccines safer. Even with the polio vaccine that's used today.
Indeed, the medical fraud that's been revealed during Covid should make many Americans receptive to the allegation of fraud during the polio scare of the 1950s. Their only problem is the format of the senate hearings, which I think could be overcome with my preemption idea. At least I hope so.
end