Parts 1 through 4: Interview of Dr. Brian Hooker, Bioengineer, Associate Professor of Biology
Interviewed for Vaccines Revealed docu-series by Dr. Patrick Gentempo
Streamed March 2, 2017. I do not know the exact date Dr. Gentempo interviewed Dr. Hooker. http://www.vaccinesrevealed.com/order/
Dr. G is Dr. Patrick Gentempo
Dr. H is Dr. Brian Hooker
My name's Brian Hooker and I have a Ph.D. in Biochemical Engineering. I've been involved in biotechnology research for over 25 years now. Currently Associate Professor of Biology at Simpson University and also Science Advisor for the Focus For Health Foundation. Prior to that, I worked in areas of Environmental Restoration and also Plant Genetic Engineering when I was a Senior Research Scientist at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. I am the father of an 18 year old son who was damaged by his infant vaccines and he has autism.
Dr. G: So Brian, your a Ph.D. in Biochemical Engineering. What type of work have you done over your career?
Dr. H: Over my career as a BE, I started working in environmental restoration. I was working primarily on EPA superfund sites, the sites that are considered the most contaminated and the most toxic in the United States, and so I worked in developing strategies using natural micro organisms that would degrade the contaminants, eat the contaminants and then release things that were innocuous.
Dr. G: For a period of time you were working and doing research for the US government, correct?
Dr. H: That is correct, yes. I worked for National Laboratory actually in Eastern Washington and the National Laboratory was co-located at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, which is a superfund site. It's one of the most laden with toxic waste sites in the country, taking some of the legacy waste, some of the waste that had been there for years and years and converting it to benign substances before the waste actually reached the Columbia River. We were running out the clock, trying to make sure that when, what we call these plumes of toxic waste would travel through the groundwater, we would want to be able to clean them up before they became a hazard to humans that were in, and animals in the environment, that all in that area were relying on the Columbia River.
Dr. G: Now you've also published several Papers, if I read your bio correctly, you have over 60 peer reviewed Papers to your credit?
Dr. H: That is correct. I started publishing as a part of my Ph.D. dissertation back in 1990 and I've continued to publish doing work starting out in environmental restoration, then I did some work in plant genetic engineering and ultimately where I am now at Simpson University. Then primarily I'm doing epidemiology research and something that is near and dear to my heart that is the connection between vaccines, vaccine components and neurodevelopmental disabilities like autism.
Dr. G: What got you interested in vaccine research?
Dr. H: What got me interested in vaccine research primarily was my son's adverse reaction to vaccines. We believe he had an adverse reaction and cumulative adverse reaction from all the vaccines that he received from two weeks of life all the way to his 15 month well baby check up and that's when he had his most severe reaction and we curtailed vaccination at that time. Because of that I became deeply interested in the connection between vaccines primarily I started out with the vaccine component Thimerosal. Thimerosal is about 50 percent mercury by weight, and it's used as a preservative in still in the flu shot. At that time it was used in three of the childhood vaccines that my son received and he was on a single day, and I didn't know this until after he had had his adverse reaction to vaccines, but on a single day he was receiving over 100 micrograms of mercury which vastly exceeded the EPA guidelines and the FDA guidelines for a single dose of mercury for an infant of his size. Even if he had received one of those vaccines when he was an adult, as an adult in order to correctly process that mercury based on the EPA guidelines, he would have had to weigh 550 pounds and he didn't weigh 550 pounds, he started out as an 8 pound infant and it just over whelmed his system.
Dr. G: It seems somewhat ironic that your career has been spent detoxifying the environment and yet you have a child who now has been vaccine damaged because of the toxic substances that went into the ecology of his system.
Dr. H: It's very ironic. I started out my career, I'm still doing environmental restoration as a part of my career and yet one of the most toxic things that I ever encountered was handling the body fluids from my son because he was detoxifying mercury and other components that are in vaccines, including aluminum, including formaldehyde and when I originally, when my wife and I originally made the decision to vaccinate my son, we had no idea that these poisons were in these vaccines in such high quantities. If I would have known what I know now, there is absolutely no way that we would have anybody touch him with any type of vaccine or any type of vaccine component and anything that enters his body as a practice now, anything that enters his body we look at the packet insert. We make sure that there's anything if there's anything that's questionable that that particular medication, that therapeutic, does not enter my son's body. We trusted the medical establishment because of my background, I grew up in a public health family. My mother served as a public health nurse for many, many years and we were taught that vaccinations were safe, there were efficacious and I remember when my son was being vaccinated for things like Chicken Pox thinking oh how convenient, he's never going have to get the Chickenpox, and he'll never have to miss school and, but little did I know, the toxic storm that at that point was going on in his body.
Dr. G: That was 18 years ago, now given what the vaccine schedule is today and the contents of the vaccines, how do you think he would have responded?
Dr. H: If we had vaccinated today, given the bloated CDC vaccine schedule, I really don't know if my son could have survived that. I think, you know, you hear of infants dying of within hours, days after receiving their two week, two month, four month, six month vaccines. I believe that he very well could have been one of those cases because his system, the schedule was so relatively innocuous in 1998 as compared to what it is today and his system couldn't even handle that and so knowing the toxins that are going in, knowing the multiple doses of vaccines that are going in left arm, right arm, left leg, right leg, in a single doctor's visit, I don't see how he could have survived.
Dr. G: Now, we'll talk about the science surrounding all of this or maybe the lack of science surrounding all this, but from the personal side here you are a young couple at that point you have a child and the child becomes vaccine damaged, how has that altered the course of your life and the experience of family?
Dr. H: Having a vaccine damaged child is basically living at ground zero of a nuclear explosion everyday, 24/7. Things that happened in our life were so drastically altered by my son's vaccine injury. We planned to have other children and because of his vaccine injury and because of the some of the moral choices we would make and not vaccinating our other children, we decided that it wasn't a choice that we could make. We couldn't look at him and say I'm sorry your vaccine damaged and your siblings dogged a bullet. So we did not have other children and part of the reason was because of the 24/7 care that my son needed. My son sleeps an average of 3 to 4 hours a night and so my wife and I have to take shifts, she stays up late with him, I wake up early with him. There's a constant battle in terms of deciding what type of supplementation we're going to give him, what type of therapies we're going to use for him, what type of individuals we're going to allow into our household that might provide care for him, because my wife does need to break away to do grocery shopping, to take care of our family's personal needs and so it is such a drastic alteration of life to see autism modeled in the press as oh these children are a little weird or a little geeky or they're just a little bit different than the mainstream society. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Dr. G: So you're a well credentialed research scientist with multiple degrees, publications, patents, etc., is there any doubt in your mind that the vaccines caused his autism?
Dr. H: There is no doubt in my mind that the vaccines that my son received caused his autism. There is absolutely no doubt. We saw the regression, we saw the implications of every vaccine that he received on the schedule. It seemed as if every vaccine that he received would cause more damage and then we would see a little more damage and as new parents we didn't really have a baseline, we did not have other siblings that we could compare my son's development to. I remember teaching my son how to crawl and having a conversation with another parent and that parent saying, well you know how kids just pick up things on their own, and I scratched my head, I was stymied, like my son doesn't really pick up anything on his own. We've taught him to sit up, we've worked hours to get him to sit up, we've taught him to roll over, we've taught him to crawl, we've come up with games, moving blankets around so it would force him to crawl. We worked to get and hit every milestone and the milestones that we did hit we're all abolished when he received his 15 month vaccines. Before my son's 15 month vaccines he had language, he was speaking, we have him on video saying short phrases referring to the dog next door which was one of his wonderful passions when he was one years old. Then all of that is lost. There are things that we have captured my son doing on video before his 15 month vaccines that he still cannot do to this day.
Dr. G: Is he verbal today?
Dr. H: No, my son is nonverbal. He has a few words he can say, mama, daddy, yes, no and that's really just about it. He does understand language, we can give him simple commands and we're working through communicating with him through an Ipad, but other than that, there is no expressive language.
Dr. G: So I think you're to be commended with your wife on an extraordinary expenditure of energy and emotion to adapt your entire lives for the needs of your son. It's really incredible. What is the financial impact?
Dr. H: The financial impact is immense. The outlay that you never see that is never talked about in the media is the shear damage that my son can do to physical property. Things having to be replaced, things that he needs. He has his routines and his certain videos that he has to watch, but he also doesn't understand that if he breaks those videos that they have to be replaced. If he puts a whole in the wall, and he has been in severe pain and unfortunately where he is not violent against other people but he's self injurious, so he'll knock his shoulder up against the wall, he'll put a whole in the wall, we have to get the hole in the wall repaired and then on top of that, many of the therapies that we use with him are not covered by insurance, obviously the over-the-counter supplements, the things we have taken on to keep his primarily his gastrointestinal system which is, you know what's screwed up from stem to stern you know from his esophagus, all the way down to his rectum, we had problems and so medically we have to address that. So the financial outlay is immense. In order to provide for my family and provide for this sort of intense drain on our budget, then not only am I a professor at a university but I also run a consulting firm, I consult for multiple clients and I teach adjunct at a community college. So I'm juggling three jobs and having a family in order to provide financially because of the train wreck that autism is.
Dr. G: So, a little bit of a touch question, do you ever reflect on how life would have been different for you and your family if this didn't happen?
Dr. H: That's a really good question, I reflect on that on a regular basis. This year the beginning of the semester when I had students come in for their classes was rather hard on me because this would have been the freshman year of college that my son would have started if he hadn't have been vaccine damaged and seeing these young adults come in, take their classes, buy their books, study, interact with their peers, go have a good time, go to movies, drive a car, all of these things that my son cannot do, it really, really hit me hard this year. It was the first time that I had actually encountered that. We've homeschooled my son since he was four years old. We had a bad experience in a public preschool and at that point we decided that we would withdraw him from the school district, and so we chose to homeschool him but, this was the first time I interacted with students that were the same age as my son and saw the, just the complete difference, going home and helping my son with his Barney videos, watching Barney, watching Bob the Builder, watching things that just are not age appropriate for an 18 year old whose voice has changed, who's developing a beard. These are just not the things that you plan in life.
Dr. G: So with this obviously if you had understood the nature of vaccines, the risks of vaccines, the components of vaccines and especially with your education and academic background, you had had the to make other choices perhaps at least the opportunity to weigh it out and decide if this was the right thing or not and you've now done a good bit of research and in the vaccine community, in the autism community, you've become a very strong advocate for getting the truth out there, where has this lead you this journey to discover, why does the public not know about this, why do parents not know about this, why is it maybe a bad idea that the government wants to mandate that children get vaccinated? So talk about that journey a little bit.
Dr. H: Well my journey started in 2001. That's the first time that the Institute of Medicine (IOM) which is a part of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), that was the first time they convened a meeting and they specifically convened a meeting regarding Thimerosal, the mercury containing preservative that was in three of the series of vaccines that my son received, that's the first time that there was every any type of public meeting where parents could participate, parents could send in comments. I was on the west coast, the meeting was in the east coast but, I was firing away emails to the NAS, I was following the research at the CDC which at that point, even though the CDC had not officially published any research on Thimerosal, we knew because of some of the things that were being leaked out, that the CDC had found a relationship between Thimerosal containing vaccines and autism, especially within the first month of life. The CDC was actively working to cover that up with very dubious statistics and I knew something was dead wrong and I was, with the internet really starting to grow at that particular point in time, the early 2000's, I was starting to meet other parents, other families, other people that were going through the same nightmare in their own personal lives that my family was going through and so I became active. In my past research I had done a lot of statistics. When you clean up a superfund site and you say it's clean, you have to prove it to some level of certainty . So I had developed an expertise in statistics and I tried to and I believe was successful in applying that expertise to the epidemiology that the powers that be, the CDC, the NIH, the things, and the FDA, the things they were relying upon in order to somehow proclaim in a very religious fashion that Thimerosal was safe. We knew that it was preposterous that anybody would say mercury, in any form, was safe to inject into an infant's body. We knew that and so the eyes were on the NAS, the IOM did deem that they could not rule out a relationship between T containing vaccines and neurodevelopmental disabilities and then the race was on. The CDC was trying to cover up this relationship. I was actively at that point calling CDC researchers, giving my input on their studies, studies that they were doing in the United States, studies that they were planning to do in Denmark, Italy, the UK. The CDC was so desperate that at that time to find any population of children that would somehow indemnify Thimerosal that they were going to Greenland. They were looking at cohorts of individuals with autism in Greenland to somehow to use that particular population to say there's no relationship between the Thimerosal that you get in the infant schedule in the United States and autism. They were completely desperate and so I knew at that particular point in time I had to get involved.
Dr. G: Wow, ... quite a journey because you ended up in communication with CDC scientists and most notably probably, Dr. Thompson. So you had a series of conversations now that have now been made public and some of them were recorded and were made public and it's kind of out there and people are seeing you know kind of behind the curtain. Can you speak to those conversations and what Dr. Thompson revealed to you?
Dr. H: Dr. Thompson was one of the scientists that I interacted with very early on in an official capacity. When I contacted the CDC's public liaison, she referred me to Dr. Thompson and another physician by the name of David Shay, who was working with Dr. Thompson at the time and so we had several very abrupt conversations, the CDC didn't like what I was saying, I received a cease and desist letter in 2004 from a CDC attorney saying that I was no longer allowed to contact these scientists, that the only recourse that I had was through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
Dr. G: Why do you think that they felt so threatened that they had to cease and desist just to have conversations with their own scientists from one person who's got expertise in biostatistics and others and saying hey I want to talk to you about this. Why were they so threatened by that?
Dr. H: I knew because of my background in statistics, I knew what they were doing. I knew that they were actively working hard to bury a relationship that they didn't want to go public and I knew that the reason why they were doing that, I had recovered emails via the FOIA...
Dr. G: For those that don't understand that FOIA is the Freedom of Information Act, the CDC it's a government entity and we the citizenry have rights to get disclosed, not all of information is available to us but a lot of information is available to us so you filed this request for FOIA and if they honor the request they'll give you certain documents, so what did you find?
Dr. H: I received documents early on from the CDC and I found that in the background the chief scientists in vaccine safety were trying to preserve the vaccination program. They had no intent to help children but everything was focused on oh, we have to preserve the vaccine program and we have to keep that going. And there's also...
Dr. G: Why do you think that is? Why do you think they seemed so hell bent, these are scientists supposedly they are serving the cause of humanity. Why do you think they were hell bent on preserving the vaccine program as compared to reporting the data as they saw it?
Dr. H: The CDC acts as a vaccine company. They buy 4.6 billion dollars worth of vaccines every year from pharmaceutical companies and they take those vaccines and they distribute them to the state health departments.
Dr. G: Literally, the CDC purchases over 4 billion dollars worth of vaccines themselves?
Dr. H: That is correct, that is one of the things
Dr. G: So they're a purchasing agent also not just a researching entity but a purchasing agent?
Dr. H: They are a purchasing agent and they're extremely conflicted. They did not want vaccination rates to go down primarily because if vaccination rates went down they would not be reimbursed for the vaccines that they were buying to be distributed by state public health departments. So, it's big business. It's big money. 4.6 billion dollars were on the line and that's when you see a scientist talking about the nebulous well, we have to keep the vaccine program going, we can't damage the vaccine program, when you see a CDC scientist saying that, basically what they are saying in the background is we need to get our reimbursement of that 4.6 billion.
Dr. G: So you start submitting your first FOIA requests, what comes back?
Dr. H: The first FOIA requests that I submitted were in 2004 and just to backup, the primary reason I was submitting those requests was because CDC had cut off any scientist to scientist contact that I had with Thompson or any of the other scientists in the vaccine division so, my only recourse to get information from CDC was via the FOIA and I started to submit requests and one of the first things that came back was a big cheat on a study that had come out of Denmark.
Dr. G: A big cheat, what does that mean?
Dr. H: Cheat. It means that they used statistics to lie about the autism incidents in Denmark.
Dr. G: That's an extremely bold statement so you're asserting it like with full certainty, so why do you say that?
Dr. H: I have full certainty that what they did, somebody got the big idea that autism rates were increasing in Denmark even though they had removed Thimerosal from the vaccines in 1992. So therefore if there was a connection between Thimerosal and vaccines and the autism epidemic, then you should have seen numbers go down in Denmark. Okay? What they did was they published false data showing a very false increase in the incidence of autism in Denmark. But it came to data that was in 1999, 2000 and 2001 when the oldest kids were actually able to get an autism diagnosis and there was a steady downward trend. So what CDC did in connection with the Denmark researchers is that they recommended that they remove the last data point so the only thing that you would see was an upward trend and the autism diagnosis after they removed Thimerosal from vaccines and we know, historically, we know now that's what is called the Mardsen study, it came out in 2003 in the Journal of Pediatrics (JOP) and historically that study has been debunked but I actually got the emails where they made the decision that they were not going to put the last data points in the study because they indeed showed a downward trend and that was counter to CDC policy to keep Thimerosal in vaccines.
Dr. G: So let me get clear, you've actually seen emails where they said we're going to remove certain data points to give a false impression of autism rates so people will not draw the correlation between Thimerosal, in this particular case Thimerosal and autism?
Dr. H: You have to understand the CDC never puts that type of verbiage in an email. They will never say something like that. But they had a coauthor from Denmark who was saying these data sets, these data points are important and but we need to include them in the publication and then the principle investigator who was at the CDC at the time said no, we have to have a discussion and we may have to remove that data and we know historically, if you go back to the Paper, they removed the information that would have shown a downward trend, not an upward trend, but a downward trend after they removed Thimerosal in vaccines.
Dr. G: And was there any reason given for the removal for the person at the CDC advocating no, no, we need to remove that data, did they give a reason?
Dr. H: No.
Dr. G: Just the fact that it had to be removed.
Dr. H: There was no evidence, there was no reason, there was no scientific reason to remove that data point. The data point was clear. It was data from 2000 and 2001. It needed to be included because it showed the rates were going down. So there's no scientific reason to do that.
Dr. G: So now, this is roughly 2004 or so (Dr. H: That's correct.) so now you're seeing the first evidence, I'm talking about evidence, not speculation (Dr. H: Right) that they are literally manipulating data, omitting information to get a certain outcome impression in their data that they want to release publicly? (Dr. H: Right.) What happened after that?
Dr. H: The information started tumbling in from the CDC and one of the things you know people have asked me before why did you FOIA the CDC so many times. Well, it was easy. All I had to do was shoot off an email and the CDC would process the information and at first the information was coming back in a very, very timely basis. I would get information maybe five, six months after submitting the request, which in government terms, was a short period of time. I was analyzing the information along with David Guyer who is a very prolific scientist who works with his dad, Mark Guyer, who published many, many studies on Thimerosal and we would go through the information together just glean anything that we could that would show the evidence of fraud, evidence of manipulation or evidence of taking whole data sets and hiding them from the public and that's probably the thing that stuck out the most was what CDC was trying to do, they were coming up with their own fraudulent studies and then by law they were supposed to supply the data so independent scientists could check their work but what they were doing in the background was they were playing a shell game so they could hide that data so nobody could get access to the data, reanalyze the studies and show the faults and the fatal flaws in their science.
Dr. G: So you were extrapolating these conclusions by teasing out bits and pieces from all the FOIA information that came back to you?
Dr. H: That is correct.
Dr. G: What kind of volume are we talking about? How much stuff are they sending you?
Dr. H: I've probably received, I'd say 500,000 pages of documents.
Dr. G: 500,000 pages?
Dr. H: Some of them are redacted, redacted means that the information is blocked out and removed, some are actually just full clean copies of information. I received a contract between the CDC and the IOM regarding their final meeting in 2004 which basically put the nails in the coffin in terms of the government's response on Thimerosal in vaccines.
Dr. G: How so?
Dr. H: The 2004 IOM, the committee met in February of that year and they submitted a report, the report came out in May and not only did they say that there was no conclusive evidence showing a relationship between Thimerosal exposure and autism, but they also went further in an unprecedented move and they said that no research should be done further on this particular link and you know when somebody's saying no research should be done on a particular link, that they're trying to hide something.
Dr. G: Wow, what's going through your mind at this point? It's 2004, you're the father of an autistic child, you have basically done the research and math to say this much mercury went into his body, that's an extraordinary amount of toxicity and that my child is autistic, it's disrupted and transformed my entire life, my wife's life, our family, etc., I'm a research scientist, and you've got a background in statistics and you start getting this information and you see literally the malfeasance and now I could understand the (inaudible) saying wow this is really wrong, etc. but what's going on in the kind of the psycho emotional side that you're seeing this and realizing the damage it's done to your family and that they're trying to hide this stuff. How did that feel?
Dr. H: It was very, very difficult. Between 2004 until about 2007 I literally for my own emotional stability, I took a break in 2007 and I curtailed some of my FOIA activities just because I needed to rest. When you look at that much evil in the face on a regular basis and you know people are lying wholesale about a large portion of children in our society, it's very, very difficult to sleep at night. I didn't realize that the government entities could be as evil and corrupt as the CDC was and still is, and so I worked very, very hard to get the information to some level of closure. I put out a website with another autism dad who's actually very, very active in community, J.B, Handley. J.B. and I published a website called Put Children First .org and many of the information requests and many of the responses to the information requests that I received were put out on that website and it had an entire narrative specifically at that time regarding Thimerosal in vaccines. I also had, I just was starting to come to the grips with the fact that the CDC was studying Thimerosal in vaccines because they were trying to put down the furor that was in the public regarding children's exposure to mercury. What that meant was that there was an entire vaccination schedule, there was an entire laundry list of other components that because there was no furor about the CDC wasn't studying. Okay, so that threw everything regarding the vaccination program in doubt.
Dr. G: And you have to imagine, so here you are this huge government institution that has the public trust and that they are also buying 4.6 billion of vaccines a year that they are actually a purchaser of billions of dollars of these things to imagine that if they said oops, we made a mistake. How could they possibly admit to that but now you're pinned in a corner in a respect because we will lose the faith of the American people, we will be under extraordinary attack but if we continue to try and protect and hide the results that we know to be true, more kids are being damaged and families destroyed every single day.
Dr. H: It just flat out appeared from the documents that I received via the FOIA that the CDC didn't care. There was such a huge level of callousness and enmity for the parents of affected children.
Dr. G: So when you say evil, that's what you mean.
Dr. H: Not only did I hate the CDC but the CDC hated parents like me. They hated anybody that would question the status quo. Anybody that would rail against the advisory committee for immunization practices and the schedule that they put out every year. Anybody that would raise a stink against that. I was calling my congressional official, I was calling my two senators, they were conducting their own independent investigations. At that time Dr. David Weldon was a member of Congress, he was running his own independent investigation. I was working with his office on that investigation and so the CDC instead of looking at that and responding appropriately and saying we have a problem, we have not only a public relations problem but a scientific and a grave medical problem. They continued to cover up and they became very, very polarized against anybody that like I said would rail against the status quo.
Dr. G: Now 2004, 2007, you're crawling through huge volumes of documents, you're seeing this as you referred to it as the face of evil and now in 2007 you need to take a break. What happens then?
Dr. H: In 2007 I took a break from the activity, I finished my career up at the National Laboratory and made the decision to move on.
Dr. G: Well incidentally this is interesting, while this is going on you're working for the government.
Dr. H: That is correct.
Dr. G: The government hired you because they felt your credentials as a scientist, researcher, etc. in your area of expertise, they felt that you were worthy of employment for that. In the meantime you're looking at what the government's doing in a different branch of the government and seeing all this malfeasance and now you know you couldn't write this story in a novel to make it believable. Now 2007 you decide you're going to leave that government position or you're going to move on to another phase of your career and take a break from all this activity in reviewing the CDC's activities.
Dr. H: That is correct, I suspended the activities in 2007. I also then concluded my career as more of a prolific researcher scientist in 2009. I left the National Laboratory and then became a part of the faculty at Simpson University in 2010. I felt there was an intense amount of scrutiny that National Laboratory was a great environment to do research but it was also in and of itself it was a pressure cooker of a job and having those types of responsibilities and having a special needs child at home and a wife who has sacrificed her career to take care of a special needs child at home, then I needed to have a change.
Dr. G: So now what happens, when did you reengage, what encouraged you to re engage in this?
Dr. H: I started my job at Simpson University in 2010 and very early on I contacted Mark and David Guyer and wanted to talk to them about some of the FOIA requests that I had done at the very beginning back in 2004. I felt like there was more information available. The CDC had done a level best job of withholding, redacting, marking out information that I felt was vital and would expose more of the lies in terms of the studies that the CDC was saying was reliable evidence to show that vaccines and vaccine components were safe. In conversation with the Guyers, we decided to sue the CDC.
Dr. G: You sued the CDC?
Dr. H: Yes July, 2011 with my attorney Bob Reeves. We filed a suit against the CDC for withholding information for the four first FOIA requests that I had ever submitted. These had to deal with studies on Thimerosal that involved Denmark, studies on Thimerosal that involved the UK, and several internal series of documents that I was trying to get from the CDC and at first I felt that this would be a very, very simple endeavor and that I had seen the documentation, we were in the Obama Administration. At the beginning of his administration he had filed a presidential order to say that entities like the CDC needed to err on the side of being able to release, err on the side of openness and so I was using that even as some of my exhibits in the lawsuit so I thought okay the CDC will see this and they'll finally release those documents. But instead what ensued was a two year fight against the CDC, tooth and nail, where we were filing motion after motion and then they would file motions not only to, not only against what we had filed as evidence, but motions to vacate previous decisions that the judge had made.
Dr. G: Really, so the judge had ruled on some motions and they wanted him to vacate those rulings.
Dr. H: Right, right, at that point in time the judge was ruling that the CDC turn over documents that had been improperly withheld, documents that had been improperly redacted and the CDC was trying to vacate those motions and the fight ended almost exactly two years later in July, 2013 and during that particular period of time the CDC had to release about 500 pages, more pages of documents because of the order of the federal judge and then we finally, rather than having to go through the appeals process with the case, we finally came up with a settlement with the CDC but the thing that stood out was the CDC was fighting tooth and nail not to release this information.
Part 2 - Dr. Brian Hooker
Dr. G: In 2014, you start to having phone conversations with Dr. William Thompson of the CDC.
Dr. H: That is correct.
Dr. G: So give me the lead up to that, so how did those communications start because you been in communication with him since the early 2000's, right?
Dr. H: That is correct.
Dr. G: So then what happened that got him to get on the phone with you?
Dr. H: As part of the lawsuit some documents surfaced that showed in the background Dr. William Thompson talking to CDC attorneys and actually attorneys who were fighting against my son in vaccine court, they were having these conversations behind the scenes as early as 2003 and 2004. To this day I have no clue why Dr. Thompson would be talking about my son's particular vaccine injury case, and so I emailed him, I was furious, and I didn't care if the CDC said that I couldn't email CDC scientists. I looked up his email address and I started emailing him and saying how could you talk about my son's case behind his back, how could you use that in order to curtail my conversations with CDC scientists, how could you use that against me, and I think I wore him down because low and behold you know I probably sent him three or four emails over the period of three or four months and then in November of 2013, I receive a phone call, I look down, it's a 404 area code, it's the CDC. I'd received harassing calls from the CDC FOIA office before and anonymous phone calls from the CDC before, so I knew not to pick up the phone. I didn't want to deal with what could be at the other end of the line but my curiosity got the best of me and I did a reverse phone lookup and low and behold it was Dr. William Thompson.
Dr. G: What happened when you got on the phone, what did he say?
Dr. H: We actually had a very, very polite conversation. One of the first things he asked was about my son and how my son was doing and he was almost apologetic in tone and this was somebody that was very, very different than the phone conversations that I had had with him back in 2003, 2004. He was a different man, he was a changed man and I could tell that right away just by sort of a conciliatory tone and it took about two phone conversations for him to say I know you're looking for information, I know you want to get into the central repository of vaccine safety data from the CDC, you're going about it in all the wrong ways, here's what you do.
Dr. G: He wanted to help you?
Dr. H: He wanted to help me get data sets so somebody on the outside could independently analyze the data sets and see first hand the flaws of the CDC.
Dr. G: So basically, he knew that there was something wrong with the way they were analyzing the data and he knew that you were looking to try to get that data to analyze it independently of the CDC but he also knew that you weren't going about it in the right way and he was giving you guidance.
Dr. H: That is correct and very, very quickly he showed me how to submit a release for a public data set and by law the CDC when they use federal funds to do a vaccine study they have to come up with a public data set that the general public, primarily scientists on the outside, can have access to and through his guidance, by January 2014 I was swimming in data that I never knew existed.
Dr. G: Wow, what motivated him, what did he see from the inside that made him want to help guide you from the outside?
Dr. H: He was motivated and this came out December 2013, January 2014 time frame, he knew that the CDC was doing bad statistics. He knew and he was telling me that the CDC was actually lying about the relationship between vaccines and autism.
Dr. G: You used the word lying, ...so knowingly were lying about the, what data they were reporting relative to vaccines and autism.
Dr. H: Right, he knew that not only, it started out a little more innocuous and he was talking about the flaws and the methodology that the CDC was using and then all of a sudden the conversation turned on a dime and we were talking about fraud.
Dr. G: Wow, do you think his conscience got to him, what do you think happened?
Dr. H: I think that this is something that had been brewing in his conscience since 2004 since when he saw just very, very specific blatant fraud by his superiors at the CDC and this is what he was reporting to me and he wanted to make sure that somebody on the outside knew that this fraud had taken place, and the that way he wanted to go about doing that was to give me the data and to publish, for me to publish the results in peer reviewed scientific literature that showed yes, there is a relationship and we started out with the MMR vaccine, which I undertook in trepidation because I was not an expert at that time regarding the MMR but we started out with a study that was fraudulent and flawed that he did in 2004 and he said I want you to reanalyze that data set
Dr. G: So just to get clear because this is very dramatic, a research scientist at the CDC who's involved in the autism study in MMR autism relationship which was one of the prime studies to debunk the relationship, because Andy Wakefield was completely discredited over, his minor assertion in the beginning that there might be a relationship here and then everybody says ... that it's been disproven that there's a relationship between the two, the CDC study, etc. This was something that was a milestone study and the guy who's on the research project contacts you and says please get this information and reanalyze it.
Dr. H: That is correct. He was the lead statistician on this particular study, the first author was Frank DeStefano who was and still is the head of the Immunization Safety Office (ISO) at CDC. One of the authors was Colleen Boyle, who is pretty much second in command at the CDC. She's a head of one of the major centers The National Center for Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities. Another chief researcher Marcia (inaudible), and then a postdoc who was just on loan from her university. The five of them colluded to cover up the results, several different alarming results that showed when you get the MMR on time you are indeed more susceptible and more likely to get an autism diagnoses than when you delay it until after three years of age.
Dr. G: Wow, so again strong words, colluded that literally and did Thompson talk about this collusion that these people got together and eliminated data from the study to make it appear a certain way?
Dr. H: He would talk about it in a very vague terms but he did use the word collude and he used very, very strong language to say that the data that the data that were published were completely fraudulent, that they had embarked upon the study and he started to share documentation, documentation of how the study was supposed to be done in the first place and then he guided me through the steps on how they deviated from that plan because they saw relationships between the MMR and autism and they did not want to publish them.
Dr. G: The hair on the back on my neck is literally standing up right now, so here you are and incidentally you've had numerous conversations with him for which were recorded so that you have documentary evidence to say these conversations are real (Dr. H: That's right.) and it's validated that these things were said and many more things that weren't recorded but the point is so here you are the parent of an autistic child who has the course of your entire life altered because of vaccines that your child was given and you're on the phone now with a research scientist from the CDC who publishes with other coauthors a Paper and he's the lead guy on the statistics for the Paper and is basically saying that there is collusion between these authors to misrepresent the data to try to show that there was not a relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism and yet the reality is that if you look at the data they had there is, and so now you are saying not only how are you affected but because of the collusion how many other families out there are sitting there with autistic kids because this information was never represented properly or truthfully.
Dr. H: The CDC knew about these relationships as early as November 7, 2001 because I have the memo that says November 7, 2001 and it delineates these relationships and it shows a positive relationship with the MMR and autism among African Americans, it showed an association with what the CDC terms isolated autism, that's kids like my son that got autism but didn't have any other types of co-morbidity like cerebral palsy or mental retardation that just basically regressed into autism there were strong statistically significant relationships CDC knew about it November 7, 2001 and you look at how many kids have been born since then, how many kids have been diagnosed with autism since then and how many kids actually got the MMR on time and how many lives, how many families could have been saved.
Dr. G: In your wildest dreams do you think you would have ever gotten to the point where you're on the phone (inaudible) with a CDC scientist who's on the autism study with MMR calling you and talking to you and basically saying reanalyze this data please and saying there is collusion between the scientists that there's fraud in the way that they're representing the data that you are a family that's affected. You know in 2001 you already reviewed that they were hiding things, I think you said November 7, 2001 that there was email traffic that you got through FOIA, all these years, all these kids getting vaccinated and one of the things, that I know because I've had conversations with you previously and I've watched Vaxxed, etc., but one of the things is that what they showed in this study was that if you delayed the use of the MMR vaccine the risk of autism goes down precipitately, correct?
Dr. H: That is correct.
Dr. G: I mean it was an obvious thing and they didn't even want to report that, they could have just said hey we have new data delay this but then it would admit that the people who followed the schedule in the beginning, have autistic kids as a result of their recommendations so they couldn't admit it.
Dr. H: The CDC would never go on record and admit that, so they chose to cover it up and what they did is they sat on that information for a year and a half, they would meet weekly, these five scientists would meet on a weekly basis, they would have Thompson rerun the data, reanalyze the data, he could not make the effect go away.
Dr. G: Even trying making the effect go away by reanalyzing the data or using different statistical manipulation, he still couldn't make it go away.
Dr. H: He couldn't make that information go away and so what they decided to do specifically with the African Americans, was they said we will only rely on race data for those individuals that have a valid State of Georgia birth certificate. So it took that population and it reduced it by almost a half, it became half as large and everybody that knows statistics knows that if you have a smaller sampling size you lose statistical power, you lose the relationship and so they used that, there was no good reason to say that oh we got race data from birth certificates because the race data was in all the school records for all the children that were participating in that study. The only reason they did that was to reduce the statistical power the scientists that were Thompson's superiors said run it this way and see what happens and low and behold when they eliminated those kids, the relationship went away.
Dr. G: And there could be no logic, they're saying oh I know one way we can reduce the sample sizes, if they don't have a Georgia birth certificate, as if that changes them genetically somehow, if that changes their species, why should it matter what birth certificate they have to the study and the population in the study. Is there any rational?
Dr. H: There is no effective rational for that. There is no scientific reason for that. It is clear cut that what they wanted to do was reduce the statistical power so they could make that relationship go away and when they were able to do that, Dr. Coleen Boyle and Dr. Frank DeStano called a meeting, said bring in all of your information regarding the effect with African Americans and we are going to throw it away, we are going to destroy that information. I don't have the exact day that they met but it was between September and October 2002 so that they've been sitting on that data for about eight months and they decided that they would trash can that data and if you look at the information that the CDC had after the trashcan meeting, those results were nowhere to be found. They buried them.
Dr. G: Whoa, Dr. Thompson who was on the study affirms that this shredding party, if you will, happened?
Dr. H: Dr. Thompson was there at the shredding party. Interestingly enough the superior who ordered the shredding party, Dr. Coleen Boyle, decided not to attend that particular meeting so her fingerprints were all over the meeting but she would not do the dirty work.
Dr. G: So literally these scientists on this project got together ordered together by their superiors to get together and said we want to eliminate this data and we are literally going to shred or discard, dispose of this data so we have no record of it.
Dr. H: That is correct, that is a violation of the Federal Records Act of 1950 as amended in the 1970's they were taking federal records that information could have been considered federal information and they instead of handling it properly and archiving the federal records, they destroyed it.
Dr. G: And when you look at the study it obviously isn't there and then they can say it's nowhere to be found except they didn't count on the fact that Dr. Thompson kept a copy.
Dr. H: Dr. Thompson knew that he would be legally liable for destroying that information so he retained his own copy of not only the hard copies but he also had the electronic copies of the hard drive of his computer and that's what ultimately what he shared with me.
Dr. G: This is kind of a pretty damming situation for these CDC officials because if I understand correctly Congressman Posey in Florida has a copy of this in his safe and there trying to call Dr. Thompson as a whistleblower to appear in front of Congress and talk about this fraud and deception.
Dr. H: That is correct. Dr. Thompson during the conversations that we had I wanted Dr. Thompson to do two things. I wanted him to hire a whistleblower attorney and declare federal whistleblower status so that he had the protections that were afforded by that particular status. He did that, he ended up getting one of the top whistleblower attorneys in the country in order to represent himself. The second thing that I wanted him to do was reach out to Congressman Bill Posey. Bill Posey has been sympathetic regarding the autism vaccine issue since he took office I believe in 2012 and so when he took office, when he took over he was a friend of our community and Dr. Thompson then went to him with large bins of information, physically took bins of information to Bill Posey's office, set those down and shared all the records that he had shared with me up to that point in time and we're talking about tens of thousands of pages of documents that showed CDC fraud that showed CDC (inaudible) inclination that when they found a positive relationship that showed a tie between a vaccine or vaccine component and autism that they would either bury the relationship entirely by throwing it in the trash can or they would downplay the relationship and make sure that the final publication had verbiage that said there's nothing to worry about, there's nothing to worry about the MMR, there's nothing to worry about Thimerosal, so indeed instead of changing the vaccine schedule to err on the side of safety they changed the vaccine schedule to err on the side of more profits for the pharmaceutical companies and themselves acting as a vaccine company.
Dr. G: Wow, I'm basically speechless so I can't imagine what's going on inside of your mind cause you're wearing all these hats, first of all your like the investigator who's discovering all this, you have a child that's vaccine damaged, you're a research scientist yourself so you understand these things on a deep level as far as how this could be pulled off and how they could pull the wool over one's eyes and you were also cognitive to the fact that there are children damaged every single day right now because this information is not public. What do you feel inside?
Dr. H: I was completely conflicted, when my head hit the pillow at night I would think about the lives that could be saved if this information was made public and I would try to weigh that against continuing the relationship with Thompson and other documents that he could funnel from the CDC to me in order to you know bring the CDC down which is you know I think it's still a worthy goal and if something needs to happen we need complete reform in the CDC. Thompson himself told me that vaccine safety didn't belong in the CDC or in the Department of Health and Human Services as a whole, it needed to be moved out, it needed to be an independent agency so, I weighed that effecting change against CDC and being able to reform this so somebody somewhere could know that the CDC came clean versus how many people were diagnosed with autism today. How many people are going to be diagnosed with autism tomorrow. How many people are going to comply blindly with a bloated vaccination schedule that's a recipe for disaster, it's a grand medical experiment. It hasn't been researched properly and the research that has been done shows grave danger for people who follow that vaccination schedule and so I was very, very conflicted. I also worked early on, it was never really palatable for me to record phone conversations with Dr. Thompson especially without his knowledge. I did not want him to know that I was recording these conversations because I wanted him to speak honestly, I wanted him to repeat some of the things that he had said to me in conversations with me that I had not recorded and so I had two attorneys working with me to make sure that what I was doing was not illegal. Now, I life in California, California is a two party consent state so it is illegal to record somebody without their knowledge. I'm next door to Oregon so two of the calls that were recorded were made in Oregon, another one of the calls was made in Virginia which is a one party state and then the final call was made in Illinois which is a one party state and so I needed to protect my family, I wanted some type of proof that this had happened. I wanted some type of evidence, some type of timestamp that said we had these conversations, this is definitively Bill Thompson revealing this information to me. This isn't me with a pile of information this was me with a government employee who's making admissions of collusion to commit fraud by senior CDC officials and that's why I recorded those calls.
Dr. G: And not only is it government employee it's not like some ad...(inaudible) person going I don't know what's going on in the other room over here it's the guy in the center of it basically he's one of the guys on the study but here's the thing out in the world when you mention autism and vaccines, oh, but that's been disproven, they look at you like you're some kind of idiot oh, that's been refuted, that's been scientifically proven, so now people are lining up saying now I don't have to worry about this that's all been disproven because of what's been put out and they are vaccinating these kids and literally even if you decided that you wanted to vaccinate which is probably based on everything that we know not a good idea but even if you decide I want to do it literally if they just reported the data and they delayed in the administration of the MMR vaccine that would reduce the risk you're taking by a lot according to the data that that study originally gathered.
Dr. H: That is correct. If you look at the original data and I did the analysis, I did the analysis in January and February of 2014 I saw that the risk for African American males that received the MMR on time was three times greater than African American males that got the MMR vaccine after three years of age.
Dr. G: Three times greater?
Dr. H: Three times greater. There was three times as much autism.
Dr. G: It's not like a 15 or 20 percent, it's three times more likely to get autism if they vaccinate before 36 months as compared to after?
Dr. H: That is correct, that is correct.
Dr. G: In the African American population.
Dr. H: That is correct.
Dr. G: And that's what they said, we're going to bury that data, we're going to dispose of that data, we're not reporting it at all but it's in the original.
Dr. H: It's in the original study. It's in their data and it was I attempted to publish that information. I had a publication accepted in the Journal of Translational Neuro.... (inaudible). It's a journal that I had published in before. We went through peer review, the article appeared in print. At the end of July of 2014 and low and behold when the entire whistleblower story broke, and this broke in around August 21, 2014, it took about four days and the Journal took my Paper down from the web site so it was no longer, at first they said
Dr. G: Did they full retract it or did they just don't put it up?
Dr. H: They published a statement, they took the Paper completely down, they published a statement saying the results of this Paper would have a negative effect on public health.
Dr. G: The truth has negative effect on public health and we can't let that happen.
Dr. H: So, we can't let them happen, about 24 hours later they instead changed that and said that I had undisclosed conflict of interests, which was rubbish, which was completely fabricated.
Dr. G: What's your conflict of interest? What monetary gain do you get by publishing this data, but what I'm hearing is they never said that your statistical analysis was wrong.
Dr. H: No.
Dr. G: So they basically were trying to find other ways (inaudible) it went through peer review they said this is properly done (Dr. H: Right) so they're looking for different angle to try to discredit the Paper.
Dr. H: Ultimately the Paper was put I like to call it on time out, because you know kids get time out and have to go sit in the time out chair, so my Paper was put in time out for about six weeks and during those six weeks I argued back and forth with the Journal regarding why it should be published, why my science was sound. They sent me back a paragraph description from one of their editors saying that my science was unacceptable. I rebutted that paragraph, they never sent a response to that and then on October 3rd, they completely retracted the Paper.
Dr. G: And of course no coincidence that when the whistleblower story comes out there's no (inaudible) profile of that, that's when your Paper gets retracted.
Dr. H: That's when my Paper gets retracted.
Dr. G: .... because your science was fine when they published it. How do you control the outrage and how do you not let it eat you up inside, it's really almost unthinkable?
Dr. H: It is very...very, very difficult to respond to be able to let things like that go and it was difficult, it was a difficult step for me to forgive Thompson, I mean in the first place. I mean I felt like he alone, by sitting on this as long as he did is culpable for a large amount of damage to society. There are a lot of families who have been shattered and I really did have to let it go and my wife, Marsha, was instrumental in you know what you need to let this thing whole thing go and getting my Paper retracted, I never got detention in school, I never had anything big like that happen, I've never had a Paper retracted and so having that was a real psychological blow to me and I just had to let it go but the silver lining was I was contacted by several scientists that said look we know what you've gone through, we want you to republish that data because that data needs to be in the public domain and they've provided an opportunity, this whole Paper will be republished, actually in a much more expanded form and laying out the logic of why my results are correct and why the Paper should never have been retracted in the first place and it's coming out in a book I believe in the Fall of 2017 that's published by Elsevier Scientific, one of the very reputable publishing companies (Dr. G: I know who they are, sure.) and I've had my day in the public domain, I will have my day in the public domain and I count myself worthy of some of the scars that were endured by great people like Andy Wakefield.
Part 3 of Dr. Hooker's interview:
Dr. G is Dr. Patrick Gentempo, Dr. H is Dr. Brian Hooker.
Dr. G: In your conversations with Dr. Thompson the autism issue wasn't the only issue that came out, there's an issue with mercury and tics …
Dr. H: It's very interesting when you go to CDC's website and they have a specific website on thimerosal what they report is that there is no incidence of harm and that there is no harm caused by thimerosal except for occasional redness and swelling at the injection site . Nothing could be further from the truth and we don't have to go to independent literature to find that out. We go to CDC's literature. Thompson wrote a study that was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2007 and he looked at neurotypical kids, these are kids with no developmental delays, no malities, their ages were somewhere between 6 and 10 I believe and what they did is that they split the group into a high exposure group that had thimerosal vaccines and a low exposure group that had a lesser amount of thimerosal and they looked at all of these different psychological and neurological battery tests and what they found was a very, very profound difference in the number of boys that had tics in the high thimerosal group versus the numbers of boys that had tics in the low thimerosal group. ...It was statistically significant the relative risk was above 2.0 which means that it would argue in a court of law, so boys that were receiving the lion's share of thimerosal in their vaccines were at least twice as likely to have tics and show tics ... evaluated by an independent professional ...this isn't just due to parental reporting but an independent professional who’s trained to see these types of issues was observing these children over a three hour period and those that exhibited tics again the high thimerosal group had a lot more tics in boys than the low thimerosal group. The study that they didn't do they didn't have enough thimerosal control, so you could imagine if you had a control that wasn't exposed to mercury at all that the difference would probably be significant....Not only, the Thompson study came out in 2007 but the Verstraeten study that the CDC used to bury the connection between vaccines and autism had a corollary... and it basically said that in one of the ... tested they showed a strong relationship, statistically significant again, between thimerosal exposure and tics.
The CDC had a hand in a UK study they were actually ultimately responsible for the funding decision for the UK study where they came out in 2004 that also showed a relationship again between thimerosal and tics and this time they looked at boys and girls together, they didn't separate them out but it was statistically significant. Add on to that another study that Thompson did, he was extremely emphatic that thimerosal was causing tics especially in boys and so he did another study in 2012 that was published with a graduate student by the name of Jack Bareil ... and again a strong statistically significant relationship between thimerosal and tics in boys.
In what he described was this systematic watering down of any result that he had if there was a statistical significance. ... He described it to me on the phone and he also shared documentation where there were memos written about his paper specifically on why he should not publish the result on thimerosal and tics. A chief C