Should We Feel Confident Trusting the CDC?

By Dr. John Reizer

Author of The Target List Audiobook

The question that has been repeatedly asked of me through the years by readers of NoFakeNews is: Should We Feel Confident Trusting The CDC?

I have read numerous articles that have attempted to tackle this subject and of course, I have viewed the movie VAXXED that for all intents and purposes crushes any credibility this regulatory agency claims to have with regards to overseeing the safety and effectiveness of vaccine products that continue to be manufactured by pharmaceutical companies.

According to the CDC, they are a government regulatory agency that works to protect the American public.

The CDC claims it is completely free from the outside influences of corporations and it has no conflicts of interest that could possibly influence its policy-making decisions.

But can Americans really feel confident that this regulatory body is assessing information and writing policy recommendations that affect all healthcare consumers without biases and that the regulatory body is completely free from the outside influences of the pharmaceutical corporations and others that regularly donate monetary funds to them?

The links below give me some reasons to believe conflicts of interest regularly occur:

Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Safety Research – Gayle DeLong

Conflicts of Interest Report in Vaccine Policy Making by Congress

Ethical Violations of the CDC cited by The Office of Inspector General

The CDC Foundation (From Their Website)

“Established by Congress as an independent, nonprofit organization, the CDC Foundation is the sole entity authorized by Congress to mobilize philanthropic partners and private-sector resources to support CDC’s critical health protection mission.

“The CDC Foundation helps the CDC save and improve lives by unleashing the power of collaboration between CDC, philanthropies, corporations, organizations,, and individuals to protect the health, safety, and security of America and the world. Since 1995, the CDC Foundation has launched approximately 1,000 programs and raised over $740 million. The CDC Foundation managed over 300 CDC-led programs in the United States and in more than 130 countries last year.

“Because CDC is a federal agency, all scientific findings resulting from CDC research are available to the public and open to the broader scientific community for review. Funding for CDC’s work provided through the CDC Foundation is not contingent on the outcomes of research or other scientific activity being favorable to one or more partners. The CDC Foundation works with the CDC to ensure that programs will have a meaningful impact for CDC and public health, and complement CDC’s priorities and ongoing work.  The CDC and CDC Foundation each have review procedures in place to safeguard against possible conflicts of interest.”

In my considered opinion, the CDC Foundation seems to be a clever way for corporations, many of which are drug and vaccine makers to influence the regulatory agency with regards to specific products.

Take a few moments to read this article that discusses in great detail the conflicts of interest the CDC had concerning giving advice to healthcare consumers about the anti-viral, Tamiflu.

CDC’s Gift Review Process (From their Website)

“CDC ensures that when we engage with the private sector, we are good stewards of the funds entrusted to us. We maintain our scientific integrity by participating in a gift review process that is rigorous and transparent. CDC’s gift acceptance policy requires a comprehensive gift review prior to accepting a gift. This includes CDC Foundation (CDCF) gifts and gifts given directly to CDC, whether they are monetary or non-monetary. On May 1, 2014, CDC implemented a unified process for reviewing and documenting possible conflicts of interest (COI) related to gifts provided to CDC via CDCF. In April 2015, CDC extended the process to include the review of all monetary gifts directly provided to CDC. In 2016, this process was strengthened and institutionalized in the most recent revision of the CDC’s gift policy. From 2017 to today, CDC has focused on refining its gift review processes to ensure that the acceptance of gifts continues to be legally and ethically sound.”

Are you kidding me? Do people really believe that many of these donors are not influencing the CDC?

 

Funding Received in Fiscal Year 2019.Congressional Appropriations-$7,339,025,000. CDC Foundation-$13,221,109; Direct Gifts-$12,670,712;

 

The list below represents a history of CDC Foundation corporate donors and partners. Notice the incredible number of pharmaceutical companies included within the list. How can the CDC and our government write there are no conflicts of interest taking place?
  • Abbott Laboratories
  • 360 thinc, ltd.
  • 3M
  • 3M Pharmaceuticals
  • AB Biodisk
  • Abbott Laboratories
  • AbbVie Inc.
  • Academic Press
  • Accenture
  • ACE Construction Group
  • Acme Cargo Express Singapore
  • ActionSprout
  • Adis International
  • Adobe
  • Advanstar Communications, Inc.
  • Advantage Healthcare, Inc.
  • Aetna, Inc.
  • Affimedix, Inc.
  • AFLAC
  • AG Communications, LLC
  • Agilent Technologies
  • AGL Networks LLC
  • AGL Resources, Inc.
  • AirTran Airways
  • AkzoNobel N.V.
  • Alaska Center for Pediatrics
  • Alere North America, Inc.
  • Allergan, Plc
  • AlphaGraphics
  • Alston + Bird, LLP
  • The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology
  • American Petroleum Institute
  • Amgen Inc.
  • The Analytica Group
  • Analytic Services Inc.
  • Annar Diagnostica
  • Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield
  • Anthem, Inc.
  • Apatel.com, Inc.
  • Appalachian Power
  • Applied BioCode, Inc.
  • Applied Biosystems
  • Arch Chemicals, Inc.
  • Ark Sciences, Inc.
  • Arrowsmith Consulting, LLC
  • Ascend Media
  • ASI Holdings Inc.
  • Astellas Pharma US, Inc.
  • Astra Merck, Inc.
  • AstraZeneca PLC
  • AT&T Corp.
  • AT&T Georgia
  • Atkinson & Associates, LLC
  • Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Company
  • The Atlanta Journal Constitution
  • Atlanta Magazine
  • Autodesk, Inc.
  • Aventis Pasteur
  • Aventis Pasteur Limited
  • Aventis Pharmaceuticals

CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL LIST OF DONORS

 

How are healthcare consumers supposed to have confidence in the advice the CDC publishes about vaccines and other pharmaceutical products when the regulatory agency receives funding, either directly or indirectly, from a large consortium of pharmaceutical companies that manufacture products the CDC are writing policies on?

 

Understanding The Real Dangers Associated With Vaccines

By Dr. John L. Reizer

Founder of NoFakeNews

Contrary to popular belief, vaccines are not safe and do not make us healthier, and there is an enormous body of research that backs up my premise. (1)

We have all been told this incredible lie by the powers that be that vaccines have eradicated diseases on this planet and that without these medicinal concoctions the world would be a very sickly place and human life would have succumbed long ago to a wide variety of plagues. For those health practitioners that are aware of the truth, it’s frustrating to see and hear this type of nonsense.

Whenever I write or speak openly about the truth about vaccines, I get lots of people that tell me that without vaccines, polio and other diseases would still be around today. What these individuals fail to realize is that they are the recipients of inaccurate information. They are parroting and re-parroting the same disinformation to others and have no idea what the heck they are talking about.

Most people do not realize that virtually all the major diseases that have vaccines tied to them had already diminished in their intensity or, for all intents and purposes, disappeared prior to the vaccines being introduced. (2)

In the case of polio, the disease, prior to the introduction of the vaccines (Sabin and Salk), had been reported and recorded in concert with aseptic meningitis and the Coxsackie virus. After the introduction of the vaccines, polio cases were recorded exclusively as aseptic meningitis and other convenient diagnoses. The cases of these other diseases suddenly skyrocketed while polio seemingly disappeared. At least that is the way it appeared to be in the eyes of an unsuspecting group of healthcare consumers. (3)

Many of us have an extremely difficult time questioning officialdom. This also rings true when we examine the decision making tendencies of healthcare consumers worldwide. A lot of people do not want to go against the advice of public health agencies that have been established by governments to protect the welfare and safety of its citizens. People generally have a problem with going against health advice that has been released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). As a result of this agency and others like it that are on record stating vaccines are safe for public consumption and pose no serious health risks to children and adults, more people than ever before are voluntarily receiving vaccinations. And people are receiving these manufactured drugs for an increasing number of conditions.

The beliefs most of us have, to a large extent, have been etched into our psyches by the corporately owned mainstream media (MSM) companies that continue to have plenty of biases with regards to the subjects they report on. But why does the MSM promote the petrochemical agenda to its viewership? Besides the most obvious reason, that advertising revenue generated by pharmaceutical advertising campaigns is extremely profitable to said companies, there are far more nefarious reasons that these powerful companies continue to promote the vaccine and drug industry. You have to do your own research to uncover these other reasons and a good place to begin is by looking up information about media ownership in the United States and throughout the world. They don’t make it easy to connect the dots so to speak, but if you put in your due diligence, the other reasons become very clear to researchers.

In the case of the pro vaccine agenda, the MSM has had a big role in convincing healthcare consumers about the supposed value of many vaccines as well as the risks associated with not receiving said drugs. Currently, in the United States, it’s virtually impossible to watch a television program without being bombarded with advertising that promotes prescription drugs and specific vaccines that are supposedly designed to protect human beings from pneumonia, shingles, hepatitis, influenza, and the list goes on and on. In addition to commercials, the content of most news programs includes regular daily segments that discuss vaccines and the great benefits they are affording humanity. Let’s understand what the heck is going on here; people are relentlessly being bombarded with vaccine propaganda that is disguised to look like science. It’s not science. It’s a carefully written marketing campaign that appears regularly, like a soap opera, in both commercial and news programming formats. It’s marketing that has been backed by the best scientific research money can buy. (4)

The vaccine industry, like the petrochemical industrial complex, is a protected science. It’s a taboo subject that most healthcare professionals wouldn’t even think of questioning in a public forum. But there are some brave medical doctors and other professionals that have put their licenses and lives on the line to bring out the truth to people. They are tired of seeing innocent children and other healthcare consumers being unnecessarily harmed. They have embraced the challenge of speaking out against a protected domain while trying to maintain credibility in their respective professions. Good luck with that! I write with experience when I tell readers that this is quite a daunting task.

What do you think about this subject?

Disclaimer

The health information that has been written on this website is not intended to replace a professional relationship between a patient and a health care specialist nor is it intended as medical advice. Readers are encouraged to make health care decisions based upon their own independent research!