There are two lines of text at the end of that PSA. School shootings are preventable when you know the signs. Vaccine injuries are preventable when you know the signs. That alone is powerful statement. The Autism speaks PSA "Its time to listen". We are gaslighted and denied both.

Teresa, thank you so much for bird-dogging this vital information. I would know nothing if it weren't for your efforts and persistence. Your ability to distill it down to information that my brain can process is just priceless! Thank you, Thank you, Thank you.

When I go to the WAPO site, this is what I see: "Keep supporting great journalism by turning off your ad blocker. Or purchase a subscription for unlimited access to real news you can count on." I start choking which becomes gagging which then leads to cursing the bastards for claiming "great journalism"........"to real news". Unlimited access to their shit, I can do without.

Today I feel like a tugboat. Gary Odgen you resemble a tug boat too.

Karen Brant, Considering where many of us started on this journey of trying to figure vaccines, vaccinations, the Vaccine IQ Test is extremely relevant not only to those with autism but to the "herd". 54% of the "herd" is chronically ill with about 20 chronic health issues* which were only present in 12% of children in 1988; before our children became overloaded and made toxic with aluminum and ethyl mercury and a host of excepients no one should inject into a child, sheep, dog etc. Laura quite simply doesn't want any more of us to join "that herd". When you join "that herd" your life is no longer yours. It's becomes how do you fix what was once so wonderful and unbroken, from the carnage that vaccines create in too damn many of us. CDC, AAP, California take "your herd" and shove it!

"NOT ONCE" " I [Wakefield] interviewed him and asked: “At those meetings where all of the people from the industry, and the people from the World Health Organization (WHO), and UNICEF, and you are all around a table discussing vaccination policy for the developing world, did you ever discuss safety?” He said, “Not once.” That is certainty in the real world. "NOT ONCE", "NOT ONCE" ---A clear and present danger to the planet. “…any possible doubts, whether or not well founded, about the safety of the vaccine cannot be allowed to exist in view of the need to assure the vaccine will continue to be used to the maximum extent consistent with the nation’s public health objectives.” Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Federal Register Vol 49 No 107 June 1, 1984

Terresa, you and Megan have been carrying the gastro-microbiome torch for a long, long time. Maybe someday a medical school will invite you to give a lecture to first year medical students on how to not make people ill. Thank you

In typical allopathic approach to medicine she was given a dose of steroid to suppress the rash. That alone could have lead to a somewhat predictable tragic outcome of forcing the dis-ease deeper into the body. Cured yesterday of my disease, I died last night of my physician. Matthew Prior

Somebody post on AOA the Stephanie Fester post. I don't do farcebook. Liz thanks for that link. From that article: But when things are false, we dramatically decrease it and we show the other side of the story, [check, we do that] and that’s because the debate has to happen,” she said. [Absolutely--Kennedy and others have been trying for years to have that debate] “The way you can say something is false is you have to be able to say, ‘Here’s the true side of the story,’ and we want that debate to happen [Yes, Yes, we want that] — so that people do get educated [Educate before you vaccinate] and understand that the science is [is never] settled.” Thats why its so very debatable.

Human Rights Rubicon--Maybe the question is: What does Pharma Not Own?

I certainly started in the "uninformed vaccinator" category, until..........., and then I started asking questions, but still uninformed. I finally asked, could vaccinations be causing these seizures and I was told emphatically NO. UNTIL, until I heard a radio interview with Barbara Loe Fisher. I was no longer ignorant, uninformed, unknowledgeable, I was FURIOUS. If the government and medical community are not going to "honest and forthright" about an invasive medical procedure performed on healthy children which could lead to injury and death then what else are they not honest about. TOO MANY TO COUNT and I have been counting for a long long time. And here we are today with 45% of adults somewhere between uninformed, but not quite ignorant with concerns about vaccine safety. With Laura's, Kennedy's, Bigtree, Kim, Stone, Conrick, Cia, Gary you're in there HELP, it will be 60% before too long. Even Eindeker points us to studies which lead to more questions about the ground so reverently protected.

Thank you Kim--your words break my heart like no photo.

Someday I hope to have one of those conversations. Could really make my day.

Sounds like the older lady is part of the 45% and growing adults who have doubts about vaccine safety. BREAKING NEWS from the pool and Cathy Jameson was there to report it. Did you have to fight other reporters to scoop the story?

Eindeker--as a parent who knows vaccine injury, you push my buttons, really push my buttons. Is that your intention to provide your set of facts and deny the reality that vaccinations injure and kill? If Eindeker were the Pope, it would be your religion that one must believe---or else? Would it be the religion of science? Where are you going Eindeker with your comments? You said "spurious grounds as “religious belief”? In my neck of the woods, "religion" was defined for the purposes of immunization--" any system of beliefs, principles or ethical values." No permission from God, the Torah, Koran, a rabbi or priest needed. No permission from Pope Eindeker required. My "system of beliefs" does not include vaccine injury or death. It doesn't include injecting mercury or aluminum into anyone. My system of beliefs includes that I will make mistakes and try to inform myself so that I can make informed decisions on as many matters whether elections or what it takes to be healthy. I just want healthy children, a doctor I can trust, a government that is isn't in bed with industry and a good cup of coffee or beer with friends. My "belief"--do unto others as you would have do unto you. I try my best to live that way. What does Eindeker want and believe ?

There are plenty of really fine doctors and scientists who know right from wrong, but at the same time Nazi doctors and scientists wore white lab coats too. From this paper--https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/radiation/dir/mstreet/commeet/meet13/brief13/tab_d/br13d2.txt The Saturday Review editorial, "Human Guinea Pigs and the Law," (6 October 1962, p. 55) expressed the same concern for individual rights, opening with a reiteration of the first rule of the Nuremberg Code, which stated that human subjects most give consent voluntarily. The SR went on to complain about the attempts of the drug companies and the medical profession to quell debate about this issue and to call on Congress to pass legislation to protect the patient's right to be informed of the nature of her medical treatment. Here we are today--2019-- and the "medical profession" is by far the loudest voice (and the Drug Industry behind the scene) for removing, violating the Nuremberg Code of Informed Consent. As I said Nazi doctors wore white lab coats too. God Help Us!

Aimee, You asked, Has Big Pharma bought everyone?" Yes! Big Medicine with Big Pharma has brought us the Medical Industrial Complex which works with the Political Industrial Complex which relies on the media to maintain the status quo. Excerpts below from this article: https://www.hbs.edu/competitiveness/Documents/why-competition-in-the-politics-industry-is-failing-america.pdf It’s important to recognize that much of what constitutes today’s political system has no basis in the Constitution. As our system evolved, the parties—and a larger Political Industrial Complex that surrounds them—established and optimized a set of rules and practices that enhanced their power by erecting barriers to entry -- ways to keep out new competitors -- thereby diminishing our democracy. Examples of this includes controlling access to the general election ballot, partisan gerrymandering, and the Hastert Rule, which puts partisan concerns above legislating for the public interest. In a healthy competitive environment, industry actors compete to deliver desired outcomes for their customers—in this case the citizenry—and are held accountable for the results. In any other industry, ignoring such a large group of customers would make a competitor vulnerable to new competition. Political rivals who fail to serve the public would be replaced by new competitors who do. But the politics industry is insulated from the usual market pressures to serve customers better, and because the barriers to entry have been made so very high, new competition cannot emerge. Free from regulation and oversight, the political industrial complex continues to expand and grow while the nation fails to make progress on solving its problems and serving the needs of its people. Yet despite this, the duopoly is never held accountable for its dismal results. In politics, accountability would mean voting party leaders and many legislators out of office if progress is not made. However, since there are only two major parties who compete by dividing up and serving partisan voters and special interests, voting out individual legislators means replacing them with others from the same party or the other party because the duopoly constitutes the only viable options within the current political structure. Nothing really changes. The only thing either party has to do to win the next election is to convince the public that they are only slightly less worthy of derision than the one other choice that the voter has when they go to the ballot. It is therefore in the duopoly's interest to incite citizens to vote based on anger and fear. This amplifies partisanship and further disadvantages third-party candidates, independents, and moderates. In such a system, polarization is a feature, not a bug. The failure of politics has persisted because the normal checks and balances of healthy competition have been neutralized. It’d be one thing if this large industry were delivering value to its customers — which is supposed to be us, the citizenry. But the political industry is much better at generating revenue for itself and creating jobs for itself while treating its customers with something close to disdain. Kind of like the cable TV industry on steroids. Customer satisfaction with the political industry is at historic lows. Fewer than a quarter of Americans currently say they trust the federal government. In terms of popularity, it ranks below every other private industry. That includes the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries, the airline industry — and, yes, cable TV. The political industry’s most important customers are also its wealthiest: industries like healthcare, real estate, and financial services; also, labor unions and lobbyists. Average voters and current non-voters, the majority of citizens, have little or no influence on policy or outcomes. Recent research supports these conclusions about where customer power actually lies. In 2014, researchers at Princeton and Northwestern University examined congressional action on 1,779 policy issues. Their finding: “When the preferences of economic elites and the stands of organized interest groups are controlled for, the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” Our political system will not be self-correcting. It doesn't matter who we elect, indeed it doesn't even matter the quality of the candidates, because it is a systems problem, involving multiple factors that are self-reinforcing. The core idea here is that Washington isn’t broken; Washington is doing exactly what it’s designed to do. Many well-meaning reform ideas—such as term limits, electing better candidates, promoting bipartisanship, instituting a national primary day, improving civics education, establishing bipartisan issue-advocacy groups, and others—won’t matter much absent changes in the underlying industry structure: States should move to a single primary ballot for all candidates, no matter what their affiliation, and open up primaries to all voters, not just registered party voters. Ranked-choice voting will ensure that no candidate is elected with less than majority support, resulting in the election of candidates with the broadest appeal to the most voters. Drawing legislative district boundaries must be non-partisan to eliminate artificial advantages for the party in control. Current requirements for participation in presidential debates are unreasonable (for anyone except the Democratic and Republican nominees) and anticompetitive. Legislative and governance rules must align the process with the public interest and reduce the ability of parties to control Congressional deliberations and outcomes simply for partisan gain. A focus on money alone will not transform our political system. The real answer is to reduce the attractive return on investment that donors currently enjoy. The top two parties should always be operating under a potential threat from competitors that better serve the public interest. Solutions-oriented, independent campaigns would bring critical new competition to politics, and can be powerful change agents. Today, it is difficult to run outside the duopoly, and even more difficult to win outside the duopoly. Concerned voters should seek out and actively support such independent candidates.

Gary--"What really drives me up the wall are the cutesy, snowflakey voices they deliver their propaganda in." Sort of like Tokyo Rose https://www.history.com/news/how-tokyo-rose-became-wwiis-most-notorious-propagandist

Saw this comment on another site critical of NPR: "NPR gives public broadcasting a bad name. To be honest, it should acknowledge it’s a state broadcaster on a leash." Dan you are sorely missed!

If Dan were here today, he would choke or laugh. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=688366420 NPR GUIDELINES O COMPLETENESS of story We do our best to report thoroughly and tell stories comprehensively. We won't always have enough time or space in one story to say everything we would like or quote everyone we would wish to include. But errors of omission and partial truths can inflict great damage on our credibility, and stories delivered without the context to fully understand them are incomplete. Our journalism includes diverse voices that reflect our society and divergent views that contribute to informed debate. When we find that we can't deliver all the answers to important questions, we explain what we don't yet know and work to fill any gaps in our reporting. Telling the full story There's always more news than we can report on any platform. So we aim to produce well-rounded news coverage that reflects the most important information the public needs to know, and gives our audience a varied sense of what's happening in our society and around the world. Guideline: Our coverage should reflect the true complexity of the world we live in......

Thank you John. NPR (National Pharma Radio) has only gotten more disgusting. National Propaganda Radio fits as well. I'm sure Dan was disgusted as I was when "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me" furthered the witchhunt, villification of Dr. Andrew Wakefield. Every host, every reporter on NPR is disgusting. NPR has dug themselves a grave and history will write the epitaph for their demise. The sooner they are gone the better. Shankar Vedantam uses his NPR Hidden Brain to attack parents who have read the science and alter their vaccinations accordingly. Most recently was this ---https://www.npr.org/2019/07/18/743195213/facts-arent-enough-the-psychology-of-false-beliefs which ironically he discusses confirmation bias. Shankar Vedantam demonstrates this repeatedly in his segments. The Spokane station is only one in the entire NPR network which had the integrity that all of NPR pathologically lack. https://www.spokanepublicradio.org/post/inland-journal-april-18-2019-vaccine-safety-pt-1-del-bigtree.

Re the MSNBC interview: In the age of censorship (AOC) Marianne Williamson clearly realizes the rules of baseball in a free society have changed. Using another baseball comparison she got a nice hit into left center and is standing on first. She learning how to swing when interviewers throw her fast balls. Now I want to see her steal second from Big Pharma and the DNC. She will be interesting to watch.

In the age of censorship, those questions are not allowed to be asked. And........ there will be consequences, serious consequences for those who ask the wrong questions. In a world where the media has done its job as the Fourth Estate: Who is Paul Offit? Who is Poul Thorsen https://childrenshealthdefense.org/advocacy-policy/criminal-conduct-poul-thorsen/

Six years and a half a month ago this is still one of the best. This video that Barry brought to our attention. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wwDPcNdxJQ When will censors make it disappear. Some really good comments from the rebel alliance.

Fiona--I know Ronan knows his sister loves him. Someday I hope he will know just how brave she is. Ronan has indeed help shape your character.