Loc: Waterloo, NY
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 CDC official, his name was Ed Travatan who was in the National Immunization program basically came down hard on Thompson and said you will not publish this result unless you can have a tic expert verify the result and basically what Dr. Travatan was trying to do was trying to dissuade Thompson from publishing the results in the first place. He wanted it in the background, he wanted it to never see the light of day.
Dr. G: And if you're called upon you have the documentation to support what you're asserting…
Dr. H: Oh, absolutely, yea I have the documentation, I also have Dr. Tonya Popavic who used to be the Associate Director for Science for the entire CDC. She was like one of the number two in the second tier but directly below the CDC director who said that what Thompson had to do was empathize the non statically significant relationship, those things that showed that thimerosal wasn't in the clear and downplay those few relationships that showed that thimerosal was causing harm.
Dr. G: So top level officials at the CDC directed him to downplay the relationship that he was observing in his research?
Dr. H: That is correct and it was so transparent that Dr. Thompson with his 2012 paper he went to the Journal of the American Medical Association and tried to get it published there ... The reception that he got from the peer reviewers was laughable. They basically said when CDC tries...sees a relationship that they don't like they try to downplay it, they try to do everything in their power basically to convince the public that this isn't a true statistically significant relationship even though it is.
Dr. G: So the peer reviewers saw that the paper was attempting to water it down and they basically said we're not buying it.
Dr. H: They're not publishing it, so they had to go to a second tier journal in order to get that research published. The Journal of the American Medical Association basically called foul on the CDC .
Dr. G: Now in your recorded conversation with Dr. Thompson do you talk about this mercury issue in tics and does he talk about what happened?
Dr. H: Not only do we talk about the relationship between mercury and tics but he also wanted me to launch a campaign basically suing CDC science against them showing, hey there are four publications that have CDC direct ties that shows that mercury causes tics in boys, why is this still in the flu shot.
Dr. G: So if you were to interpret the dynamics of the circumstance, basically this guy is having private conversations with you and he’s saying they're not letting me reveal what I have found in my research. Can you please get that data and get it out to the world? So do you feel that he was having an issue of conscience trying to do the right thing even though he was in an environment that would not permit it?
Dr. H: Absolutely, he wanted the truth to be revealed. He wanted the truth to be revealed about mercury and tics. He wanted the truth to be known about the MMR and autism and the day my paper was published, that MMR paper was published, he said he called me up and he said, you have vindicated me, the results are out. He figuratively breathed a sigh of relief that this thing that he had been hiding for all those years since 2001 was finally brought into the forefront and was actually published, and so it was a crisis of conscience for Dr. Thompson, he tried to alert chief cdc officials about these relationships and he was shut down summarily and instead of anybody, including all the way to the top, the CDC director at the time was Dr. Julie Gerbidin, shut him directly down and instead they made it an issue of his psychological state and said look, he's unstable, HR recommended that he get counseling, that he see a counseling psychologist, and that's traditionally what the CDC does. If someone falls out of line and is not spewing the party line of this CDC, then they become a personnel problem
Dr. G: What does the CDC say as their signature on their emails "Saving Lives, Protecting People." ...that's their moniker, yet there's now documentary evidence that they're doing exactly the opposite of that and then when somebody mentally breaks down, because they have an issue of conscience as a scientist who's charged with finding the truth and can't reveal it, they now think they need counseling.
Dr. H: They need counseling, these are crazy people, so instead of saving lives and protecting people it's saving programs and protecting profits. Exactly, that is what they are trying to do. People need to understand CDC functions as a for profit company. They are taking money, taxpayer dollars, they're buying vaccines, they're distributing those vaccines to the state public health department and then they are getting reimbursed for that distribution. If vaccine rates fall off, CDC loses money.
Part 4, Dr. Brian Hooker
Dr. G: So, Dr. Hooker, you're a research scientist, your Ph.D. is in biochemical engineering and you know something about toxicity especially because a lot of your career was spent cleaning up the environment from toxins. What can you say to us about Gardasil and what's in Gardasil and what you think of that particular vaccine?
Dr. H: The Gardasil vaccine is loaded with aluminum, upwards to 750 micrograms of aluminum per shot, okay, and they're giving the Gardasil vaccine down to girls and boys of 9 years of age...nine years old, there are some pediatricians, some physicians are giving it as early as 9 years of age. Aside from the fact that Gardasil was never really tested on that population, aluminum does not belong in human body. It just doesn't, there is no purpose for it, it has been tied to aminoplex (spelling?) in the brain, it is increases risks of neurological difficulties, the immune system doesn't know what to do with the aluminum atom, and so what we're doing is through a series of shots we're introducing not micrograms but milligrams of this toxic substance into girls and boys. It's incidents and we're seeing that Gardasil is having the highest amount of adverse reactions reported of any other vaccine that's on the market. It is truly a dirty vaccine. Now if you look at the number of reports of adverse events of Gardasil it is similar to the number of reports of adverse events to the birth control pill Yaz. Yaz was on the market several years ago and there were over 13,000 reports of adverse events from Yaz and so the FDA made the decision to pull Yaz out of the market, okay. Gardasil has been on the market since 2007 and it's far eclipse adverse event reporting that was made in conjunction with the Yaz but yet instead of pulling Gardasil out of off the market, or trying to do rational testing or trying to change the formulation to eliminate aluminum exposure, instead what they're doing is now they're looking at trials to give Gardasil at birth, so instead of giving Gardasil to a 9, 10, 11 year old child, they're giving it to, they want to ultimately give Gardasil to an infant.
Dr. G: So, let me get this straight, it has the highest reporting of adverse reactions events of any vaccine,
Dr. H: that is correct.
Dr. G: and the reaction to that is not only keep it on the market, but to now give it to infants instead, or in addition.
Dr. H: In addition to give it to infants. In the public health community a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, and so if they can get that baby at a well baby visit then they feel like they're going to have better vaccine compliance if they can pop that into an infant rather than trying to coax an adolescent and their families to come to a physician, so that's why they're doing it.
Dr. G: Why do they put aluminum in them in these vaccines, what's the purpose of it from a say if you're a vaccine advocate here's why we put aluminum in them?
Dr. H: Aluminum in the formulation in vaccines basically stimulates a non specific immune response. So if you add it, it's called an adjuvant and when you add an adjuvant to vaccines that dramatically magnifies the immune response that the antigen, the HPV virus particle that's in that vaccine that drastically increases the response and it basically tricks the immune system into thinking that it has a bigger problem than it actually has. The problem with that is when you trick the immune system in that you get a prolonged immune response and you get an immune response that's improper for the human body. Not only does Gardasil when you have the quadrivalent Gardasil that has four different types of the human papa...virus and then you have the 9 valent vaccine that has 9 different types, not only is that completely unnatural in the way that the human immune system responds, we just don't, in nature we don't inject antigens directly into our body, 4 at a time, 9 at a time, that's completely improper, that's not how the immune system works but now we add an adjuvant like aluminum, that dramatically magnifies the response so the response is prolonged, the response is much more severe so you start to see auto immune immunity in the men and women that are getting this vaccine.
Dr. G: Wow, and if they have the adjuvant does that mean they could reduce the amount of antigen and save some money?
Dr. H: If they have the adjuvant literally there is another adjuvant that's used in vaccines called squalene and the term for squalene inside the CDC is Hamburger Helper because it can extend it. You can take a small amount of antigen and you can add adjuvant to it and it will magnify the response so that so you can save money, you hit the nail on the head, you can save money by adding that aluminum which is completely toxic to human physiology.
Arty turns 11 this summer.