Voting Himself Rich: CDC Vaccine Adviser Made $29 Million Or More After Using Role to Create Market

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

So thats how its done. You patent a vaccine and then you use your position in organization that
can recommend and even mandate that vaccine, and then you become a millionaire. Voila!

Voting Himself Rich: CDC Vaccine Adviser Made $29 Million Or More After Using Role to Create Market By Dan Olmsted and Mark Blaxill February 16, 2009



Dr. Paul Offit of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) took home a fortune of at least $29 million as part of a $182 million sale by CHOP of its worldwide royalty interest in the Merck Rotateq vaccine to Royalty Pharma in April of last year, according to an investigation by Age of Autism. Based on an analysis of current CHOP administrative policies, the amount of income distributed to Offit could be as high as $46 million.

There is nothing improper about receiving compensation for a patented innovation; but the extraordinary valuation placed on CHOP’s patents raise concerns over Offit’s use of his former position on the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to help create the market for rotavirus vaccine -- to effectively vote himself rich.
....
Unlike most other patented products, the market for mandated childhood vaccines is created not by consumer demand, but by the recommendation of an appointed body called the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).
In a single vote, ACIP can create a commercial market for a new vaccine that is worth hundreds of millions of dollars in a matter of months.
For example, after ACIP approved the addition of Merck’s (and Offit’s) Rotateq vaccine to the childhood vaccination schedule, Merck’s Rotateq revenue rose from zero in the beginning of 2006 to $655 million in fiscal year 2008. When one multiplies a price of close to $200 per three dose series of Rotateq by a mandated market of four million children per year, it’s not hard to see the commercial value to Merck of favorable ACIP votes.

...Four months before Offit was appointed to ACIP in October 1998, the committee had voted to give the rotavirus category a “Routine Vaccination” status, in anticipation of an FDA approval of RotaShield (oddly, ACIP made this vote before the FDA approved Wyeth’s RotaShield vaccine on October 1, 1998). Shortly after Offit’s term began, there were several additional votes involved in establishing the rotavirus vaccine market and Offit voted yes in every case. In May of 1999, the CDC published its revised childhood vaccination schedule and rotavirus vaccine was included. This series of favorable votes clearly enhanced the monetary value of Offit’s stake in Merck’s rotavirus vaccine, which was five years into clinical trials.

....

This Dr.'s votes helped to establish a requirement for a vaccine that he had personal financial interest in. Once the vaccine was mandated, he became a millionaire.

[tabatha]

1. Don't trust them - especially during the Bush years.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. The nerve of some people.

[barbtries]

3. he should not have been voting

on his own vaccine. that is a conflict of interest.

[liberal N proud]

4. Who would stay in a hospital named CHOP?

[Celebration]

5. good point! n/t

[trotsky]

6. When all else fails, character assassinate.

Great Bush-league tactic! Go Democrats!

These attacks on Dr. Offit are nothing new. He's been a real thorn in the side of the anti-vax movement for years, and since they can't counter his facts, they have to bash him personally. Here's an article which helps put these vitriolic attacks in context:

Offit ultimately declined to be interviewed on camera for the piece. “It was very clear they were writing a negative story. None of us were going to be on camera for that because their bias was clear. Their bias frankly from the day they started to cover this vaccine-autism controversy has been clear. I don’t think anybody in their right mind would have gone on that program knowing where Sharyl Attkisson’s coming from.”

“Do we ever hide information? Of course not. I have declared my potential conflicts of interest regarding my relationships with Merck on the development of the Rotavirus vaccine ever since I was on the (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices) starting in 1998. Every time I’ve written an article, whether it was for the New York Times or the New England Journal of Medicine, I’ve declared that, because I’m not ashamed of it. Quite frankly, I’m proud of it. I’m the co-inventor of a vaccine that’s currently in five developing countries and clearly has already made a difference in this country.

...

I asked him whether, given how much money he made because of a vaccine, he is the best person to advocate for vaccine. Even if we assume he’s never done anything improper, does he have the credibility to convince the public?

He says yes, because he has the knowledge of how vaccines are tested and created, because he’s been behind the curtain at pharmaceutical companies — things a strictly academic scientist wouldn’t have access to. He admits his vaccine made him wealthy, but he says he spent 25 years trying to develop it because he wanted to save kids.

More at the Insight Autism blog.

[Why Syzygy]

29. Isn't this admitting the charges?

He says yes, because he has the knowledge of how vaccines are tested and created, because he’s been behind the curtain at pharmaceutical companies — things a strictly academic scientist wouldn’t have access to. He admits his vaccine made him wealthy, but he says he spent 25 years trying to develop it because he wanted to save kids.

He was privy to "behind the curtain" information, why? He knew someone? Why was he the one chosen to profit from this hidden knowledge? :shrug: Guilty.

[trotsky]

31. LOL - are you kidding?

So if someone becomes an expert in something, and invents a product that saves countless lives, they shouldn't profit from it?

Love the "Guilty" verdict, though. Nice touch. :eyes:

[arikara]

7. I believe that most of these vaccines are snake oil

and do far more harm than good.

The mercury and aluminum they put into them is only one problem with them. Vaccines also contain things like micro-organisms- either bacteria or viruses, chemical substances meant to increase the immune response to the vaccine called adjuvants, chemical substances which act as preservatives and tissue fixatives, which are supposed to halt any further chemical reactions and putrefaction of the live or attenuated biological constituents of the vaccine. All the constituents of vaccines are toxic. They are loading young children with more and more toxins that are being injected directly into their bloodstream. People just keep accepting it with no thought and many even turn on the ones who have questions. Unbelievable.

[uppityperson]

8. I am stumped here. Do you know what a vaccine is, what it does?

A vaccine against a virus contains...yes, attenuated virus since that is what the body reacts to to make antibodies against that virus. Would you rather have a vaccine contain....what? Nothing to promote the development of antibodies? You could maybe find a cow with cow pox and go milk it to get "naturally" vaccinated against small pox.

People "may even turn on the ones who have questions"? Or maybe those who spout disinformation based on fears rather than any scientific proof?

Vaccines are not "injected directly into their bloodstream". Wrong. Totally wrong. No. Wrong. Not "directly into their bloodstream". that is heroin, or IV fluids, or maybe a blood transfusion, but not vaccines.

Good grief.

[arikara]

9. And so it starts.

n/t

[uppityperson]

10. Indeed. You do not address the falsehoods, merely say I "turn on those with ??s" I have ??s too.

Yet you did not address any of those. Being against a vaccine because it contains the attenuated or dead virus to promote a body to develop antibodies against the virus so later when they run across the live virus they can fight it off? Being against a vaccine because it...vaccinates and prevents diseases? Unbelievable indeed.

Is this the only reply you have? Unbelievable.

[arikara]

22. My apologies I did not have time for this as

I had to go out for the day. However the information is out there for anyone who shows any curiosity in the subject beyond mainstream sources. The fact remains, with iatrogenic complications being one of the leading causes of death and illness, a person needs to be proactive and not blindly believe and follow everything allopathic medicine and pharmaceutical companies dictate.

One thing I've noticed is that the most fervent vaccine proponents have a rather unfortunately Rovian habit of twisting and spinning the words and intent of anyone who has the temerity to question, often resorting to downright rudeness. I won't be bothered with that, if the rhetoric becomes nasty or insulting I put the offender on ignore. Life is too short to put up with assholes.

Here is a tiny sampling of information out there

Research findings now available from many sources are indicating that vaccinations interfere with the body's immune system development and make people more susceptible to diseases, not less. There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that childhood diseases, most of which are harmless, are critical stages in the development of a strong, fully functioning immune system. An immature immune system needs to develop naturally, by fighting off the illnesses that occur in childhood.
- Conscious Health: A Complete Guide to Wellness Through Natural Means by Ron Garner
- Available on Amazon.com

When legions of parents began to complain that their children had become ill soon after their vaccinations, while still controversial, the government studied the situation and in 2001 began to gradually phase thimerosal out of the vaccinations. Even with this gradual removal, however, the damage was done. Now there are countless new cases of autism, with more emerging every day, and there are also millions of other children with very serious cases of the other 4-A disorders, which are also partly due to the unsafe vaccinations.
- Healing the New Childhood Epidemics: Autism, ADHD, Asthma, and Allergies: The Groundbreaking Program for the 4-A Disorders by Kenneth Bock
- Available on Amazon.com

In addition to the toxic reactions that vaccinations with thimerosal appear to have caused, subsequent live-virus vaccinations may have also caused problems. These vaccinations, which contain small amounts of living viruses, may have directly created infections-through viral material-in children's gastrointestinal tracts.
- Healing the New Childhood Epidemics: Autism, ADHD, Asthma, and Allergies: The Groundbreaking Program for the 4-A Disorders by Kenneth Bock
- Available on Amazon.com

Compelling evidence is available that the development of the immune system after contracting the usual childhood diseases matures and renders it capable to fight infection in the future. The use of multiple vaccines, which prevents natural immunity, promotes the development of allergies and asthma. A New Zealand study disclosed that 23% of vaccinated children develop asthma compared to zero in unvaccinated children.
Cancer was a very rare illness in the 1890's.
- A Physician's Guide To Natural Health Products That Work by James A. Howenstine, MD
- Available on Amazon.com

Rubella Vaccine: Does not confer lifelong immunity as a natural mild infection does; 80% of army recruits in one study contracted rubella four months after vaccinations against it. Smallpox and Tetanus vaccinations have been linked to A.I.D.S.. Swine Flu Vaccinations: The misnomer for a man-made plague that causes severe paralysisandheartfailure, which immediately killed 1600 persons vaccinated in 1976; cross-reacts for spinal cord paralysis/Guillaine-Barre syndrome; and may cause death years later from cancer or heart failure.
- Anti-Aging Manual: The Encyclopedia of Natural Health by Joseph E. Mario
- Available on Amazon.com

It has been hypothesized by researchers at Duke University in North Carolina that the particular combination of pesticides, such as organophosphates and carbamates, along with the solvents and toxic metals and other chemicals in the anthrax and botulism vaccinations soldiers were injected with, could have brought about more nerve damage than any one of these substances could have done individually.
- Toxic Overload: A Doctor's Plan for Combating the Illnesses Caused by Chemicals in Our Foods, Our Homes, and Our Medicine Cabinets by Dr. Paula Baillie-Hamilton
- Available on Amazon.com

These vaccinations, which offer little protection against yearly flu virus strains, are heavily promoted by the CDC, Public Health Department and most physicians. Many hospitals have made flu vaccinations of the elderly a part of routine admission orders. This, in my view, is criminal.
Some forms of mercury, such as methylmercury, phenylmercury, and ethylmercury, are very fat-soluble. This means that an obese person can sequester a considerable amount of mercury in his or her body fat, as well as in his or her nervous system.
- Health and Nutrition Secrets by Russell L. Blaylock, M.D.

[beam me up scottie]

23. So do you always take credit for another person's work?

Plagiarism is a crime and posting bullshit from sites like http://www.breakthematrix.com/content/More-children-damaged-from-anti-vaccination-hype">this should be.

[arikara]

28. Wht?

wtf???

bye bye

[TechBear_Seattle]

26. "Research findings now available from many sources..."

Except that the research is not based on long established research methodologies and has never been accepted for peer review, and the "many sources" all spout varied nonsense about how science is evil and a tool to supress "miracle cures" like homeopathic remedies and rare herbs picked by shamans in the Andes.

Until and unless you can provide references to ACTUAL research from RELIABLE sources, then I call you a quack.

[Why Syzygy]

30. What do you call someone with blind faith in a flawed government? nt

[trotsky]

32. No one like that posts in this forum, that's for sure.

That's just a strawman accusation leveled by people who can't argue the facts.

[Why Syzygy]

34. Not from this perspective.

I see people defending with a blind faith the government agencies who have been entrusted with our welfare. The GOVERNMENT controls "science". Any research into stem cells during GW? Nope. How about global warming? Scientists were fired! The current government, by, for and of the Corporation, determines what amounts to "science". Defending said "science" under all situations is blind faith in the government who sponsors it. Calling it straw man doesn't make it so. :eyes:

[trotsky]

35. Then you are imagining things.

No one here defends "with a blind faith" any government agency or pharmaceutical company. You are 100% totally wrong if you believe that. Sorry.

[cosmik debris]

36. LOL! The GOVERNMENT controls "science" ROFL!

Which government?

You know science doesn't end at our shoreline, right?

There is scientific research being conducted on six of seven continents right now. And you seem to believe that our government controls research in China, Japan, India, S. Korea, Germany, Italy, France, Britain, Ireland, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Brazil, and Argentina.

Do you realize just how silly that sounds? You don't really believe something so silly do you?

[TechBear_Seattle]

37. Only six continents?

Eurasia, Africa, North America, South America, Antarctica (there are several permanent and seasonal research stations there) and Australia. Yup, six continents.

Which is the seventh?

[cosmik debris]

39. OK you got me.

I'm old school. I counted Europe and Asia as two continents. That's the way it was taught when I went to school.

And I did not count Antarctica because much of the research there actually is government controlled but not just OUR government.

[trotsky]

41. WTF?!?!

Who combined Europe and Asia into one continent when I wasn't looking?

[cosmik debris]

42. It's them young punks--they think they know everything.

Pluto is not even a Planet anymore. They re-write history just to make themselves look smart. Some day their kids will do the same thing to them.

[SidDithers]

38. Whan an incredibly American-centric view...

tell me, do only Americans do science? Or are you suggesting that the Bush cabal controlled science done in other countries as well?

Sid

[Why Syzygy]

40. There are a lot of things that are legal

and allowed in other countries which are prohibited here. *Sciences* don't match up?

Not just our government. Ever hear of a few noted *scientists* dying in prison? Those governments as well.

I don't know how anyone can argue that meaningful research/development/study is done independent of government interference.
Just isn't true.

[uppityperson]

33. "Life is too short to put up with assholes."

"And so it starts."

You insult, then explain "One thing I've noticed is that the most fervent vaccine proponents have a rather unfortunately Rovian habit of twisting and spinning the words and intent of anyone who has the temerity to question, often resorting to downright rudeness. I won't be bothered with that, if the rhetoric becomes nasty or insulting I put the offender on ignore."

If calling you on your inaccuracies is "rovian habit of twisting and spinning the words and intent", then how about you just put me on ignore right now? Or, would you like to answer my questions?

Let's try it again:

You say "Vaccines also contain things like micro-organisms- either bacteria or viruses, chemical substances meant to increase the immune response to the vaccine called adjuvants, chemical substances which act as preservatives and tissue fixatives, which are supposed to halt any further chemical reactions and putrefaction of the live or attenuated biological constituents of the vaccine. All the constituents of vaccines are toxic."

I say "Do you know what a vaccine is, what it does?

A vaccine against a virus contains...yes, attenuated virus since that is what the body reacts to to make antibodies against that virus. Would you rather have a vaccine contain....what? Nothing to promote the development of antibodies? ...Vaccines are not "injected directly into their bloodstream". Wrong. Totally wrong. No. Wrong. Not "injected directly into their bloodstream". that is heroin, or IV fluids, or maybe a blood transfusion, but not vaccines."

You say "and so it starts" then proceed to not answer my questions or the inaccuracies I pointed out (like vaccines are not injected directly into the bloodstream).

So, what about "do you know what a vaccine is, what it does?" or that bit about "injected directly into their bloodstream"?

[tabatha]

12. Yes, and I believe that for most children

with good immune systems, nutrition, etc - they can overcome things like mercury, about which pregnant mothers are WARNED.

Young children replace cells so fast, that possibly they can --- in general --- overcome these toxins fairly rapidly. They also probably have the highest level (in their lives) of the agents in one's body that expel toxins. Hence, healthy children will not show adverse reactions to toxins - and if tests are not properly constructed, vaccines with toxins can get a clean bill of health.

However, it is the kids with compromised immune systems, uncommon genetics, poor nutrition, etc who can be harmed by these toxins. Their bodies cannot handle them. Hence, the documented adverse changes from before to after vaccine application.

[beam me up scottie]

15. .

[SidDithers]

20. Yeah. That polio vaccine. What a scam...nt

Sid

[cosmik debris]

27. You say: "All the constituents of vaccines are toxic."

Do you realize just how incredibly uneducated that makes you appear?

[flyingobject]

11. Good Ole' Boy System - Old Fashioned Crooked Unethical Way to Profit

fitting of the Bush Administration's self serving attitude.

There are thousands of doctors who could have served at the CDC who
did not have this gigantic conflict of interest.

[kickysnana]

13. The Bitter Feud over LYMErix; Big Pharma Takes on the Wrong Little Osp

(This vaccine destroyed lives in up to 30% of the recipients and it was never outright banned, only withdrawn. The corruption did not stop at the door of the US agencies put in place to "do no harm".

http://www.whale.to/m/lymerix8.html
Posted July 6, 2001
Pamela Weintraub is a former staff writer at Discover, former editor-in-chief of Omni Internet, and the author of 15 books on health and science.

Whatever the answer, it was under the umbrella of the Dearborn criteria that LYMErix journeyed through the product pipeline and finally received a pass from FDA scientists in the Versailles Room of the Bethesda Holiday Inn in May of 1998. But the stamp of approval was about as ambivalent as members of the committee had ever seen. In fact, despite the go-ahead, concerns were legion. Some panel members wondered whether the OspA vaccine would prevent accurate diagnosis of Lyme disease caught after protection wore off. Others worried that LYMErix might cause relapses in those with previously diagnosed Lyme disease, or worsen symptoms in those with current Lyme disease. The biggest concern was voiced by the chief investigator, Allen Steere. Findings from his lab at Tufts University suggested the possibility that LYMErix could cause a particularly onerous form of treatment-resistant Lyme arthritis in people with a gene called HLA-DR4, present in about 30 percent of the U.S. population and linked to severe rheumatoid arthritis. Published a few months later in the journal Science, Steere's evidence, while circumstantial, showed a striking resemblance between a portion of the OspA molecule and the human protein, LFA-1. In genetically susceptible individuals, Steere's theory went, T cells primed to attack OspA might also recognize and attack human cells lined with the "molecular mimic," LFA-1. The result, Steere suggested, might be autoimmune disease, in which T-cells continued their attack on the mimic even when OspA was gone. <1>....

Government watchdogs say the problem may be conflict of interest, an issue recently investigated by the General Accounting Office, an arm of Congress. In a two-part report released this month (posted online at www.gao.gov/new.items/d01755.pdf and www.gao.gov/new.items/d01787r.pdf), the GAO found no profound conflict, stating that "federal agencies generally meet requirements for disclosure and review of financial interests related to Lyme disease." Yet patient advocacy groups hold that, while not illegal, the potential conflicts of interest on the part of decision makers are of concern. According to "Conflicts of Interest in Lyme Disease," a report from the Lyme Disease Association to which this reporter contributed, the Dearborn panel setting the disease definition had particular potential for bias. Indeed, the nine voting consultants hired by CDC included a scientist holding the patent for OspA; the inventor of the canine Lyme vaccine, Lymevac; the CDC scientist named as inventor of the "P37/FlaA protein antigen," with potential for use in next generation vaccines and diagnostic tests; and Allen Steere, who was both an author of the study used to generate the case definition and lead investigator for clinical trials of the vaccine.
The problem may be conflicts of interest within the FDA.

As to the FDA panel that approved LYMErix in 1998, the report highlights a State University of New York at Stony Brook scientist given voting rights by the FDA. According to the official transcript, this researcher disclosed a consulting relationship with the pharmaceutical manufacturer and received a waiver. However, the transcript does not mention that the scientist and his colleague, also a researcher at Stony Brook and a voting member of the panel, were principals of a company with a product line directly dependent on the availability of the OspA vaccine.

[Wilms]

14. Like Rumsfeld did.

http://chancelucky.blogspot.com/2006/04/donald-rumsfeld-vaccine.html

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

16. Wilms?

Hey!

:hi:

[semillama]

17. You do know that posting any links from whale.to instantly invalidates your point, right?

Seeing as that's an anti-semitic website...and the guy who founded it seems to believe in David Icke's theory that the British Royal Family are actually Reptilian Aliens.


Thought you might want to know that before you try to use them to bolster anything you're arguing again.

[kickysnana]

18. Thanks for the heads up, (I think.) I will look into the site.

I know nothing about whale.to, or why this article is there.

I googled for an article about LymeRix from an author of her reputation.

It was a horrible time. Healthy people would get the vaccine and end up sick within hours. They would tell their doctors and the doctors would check and them it was a coincidence and the next dose would either give them a massive heart attack, this horrible autoimmune disease or both within about 24 hours.

We wrote, faxed and flyered trying to warn people and those in charge but we found no platform until enough patients did the class action.

With the new laws that shield them from liability and make vaccination more mandatory I can only see further disaster because nobody was held accountable.

Some things coming out are good but some are dangerous. I hate for my family to be the guinea pigs in this.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

19. I see several references to the GAO in your post - your post itself is solid

In fact the GAO references back up your post pretty well.

And I don't see anything "anti semitic" in your post.

[LeftishBrit]

25. It's not the post that's antisemitic; it's the whale-to site - and that's not all that's

wrong with that site.

Here's a post I made about it a few weeks ago.


They are against ALL allopathic medicine - not just vaccines. One of their priceless gems is: 'Big Brother promoted the disease theory of fraud and plagiarist Pasteur'. They also promote a wide variety of the more insane conspiracy theories, ranging from chemtrails to the idea that the Tavistock Institute is practicing sinister 'mind control'.

Also some of the people they link to are dodgy in the extreme. One is Eustace Mullins, an extreme right-winger who has defended the Nazis, and spreads the ancient propaganda that Jews drink blood of 'innocent gentile children' at religious ceremonies. Another is Henry Makow, whose linked articles include such lovely titles as:

The Illuminati Conspiracy against God

The Devil's Work: Feminism and the Elite Depopulation Agenda

How I became a Mensch: After Feminism Stole my Identity

The CIA, Homosexuality and Underdevelopment

Does a Satanic Cult Rule the World?

"Protocols of Zion" is the NWO Blueprint


And one called "Tolerance": A Devious Attack on Your Identity

including such lines as:


"
For centuries the Masonic central bankers who control Western society and culture have been pushing "tolerance." Why?

...The four major collective forces are: Race, Religion, Family and Nation. They are the four pillars of our human identity.

How do you undermine them? Certainly a frontal attack would meet with spirited resistance. Instead you promote "tolerance" which destroys these collective forces by erasing the differences between them.

Thus you have ecumenicalism in religion, miscegenation in race, and regionalism (i.e. EU, NAU) in nation states. You destroy family by erasing gender differences.

At this stage, the Masonic bankers perceive Christian and Islamic nations as their principal adversary. But eventually all national, racial and religious identity will come under their gun.

"Tolerance" is applied selectively. We tolerate what undermines these collective forces but we have "zero tolerance" for efforts to resist or uphold them.

...Gay activists can plot the end of "hetero-normative" society but the EU censors Poland for "homophobia" because it doesn't allow public schools to promote homosexuality.

...In our "tolerant" world, homosexuals are tolerated but heterosexuals are not.

ZERO TOLERANCE FOR HETEROSEXUALS

In the one-race, one-religion, one-world government, we are to have one sex as well. The bankers are creating a homosexual society by blurring the line between masculine and feminine.

In 1973 the Rockefellers had the American Psychological Association change the definition of homosexual from a disorder to an normal lifestyle choice. If you google "Rockefeller Foundation" and the APA, you will get about 500,000 links, indicative of how the bankers buy "scientists" and other "professionals" by the tonne.

Some psychologists protested this banker takeover. One was Ray Johnson, who wrote that the APA "has been seized by political activists who have little regard for science or the democratic process. Since the seventies, the American Psychological Association has lobbied the government, filed court briefs, and engaged in and promoted boycotts on behalf of ..the ERA, unrestricted abortion (including abortion for children without parental notification and consent), sex and racial-ethnic discrimination, and homosexual politics."

The APA is lobbying to have homosexuals declared "a protected minority." It engages in intimidation and propaganda. It threatened with boycotts "states whose citizens passed APA disapproved laws regarding homosexuality. It has supported efforts to introduce programs into the public schools to "reduce prejudice" aimed at so-called "gay, lesbian and bisexual youth" or "prehomosexual" children." "American Psychology: The Political Science"

Does this sound like "tolerance" to you? The APA is vehemently against "conversion therapy" because they can't have homosexuals reverting to heterosexuality. That implies there is something wrong with homosexuality!
...

Let's resist by strengthening our identities: sexual, national, religious and racial, respecting but not deferring to others."
----


A website that endorses such far-right vileness should not be trusted!

[varkam]

21. Olmstead has had a hard-on for Offitt for quite some time...

well, and anyone else who thinks that vaccines don't cause autism.

I mean, I'd believe you...but neither you nor Olmstead has any credibility at this point.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/09/dan_olmsted_destroys_yet_another_irony_meter.php

[flyingobject]

24. he said it was like winning the lottery

It was his job to protect the public, but instead he participated in
a huge conflict of interest.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

43. ironically some idiots are saying Dr. Wakefield got rich (due to a salary of $200,000)

considering what Doctors usually make, this is not what you call a plan
to get rich.

[muriel_volestrangler]

44. It was 200,000 pounds, not dollars; and that's about twice what a UK hospital consultant makes

see eg http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/reports/politics/nhs_emails_20070131.shtml

[Why Syzygy]

45. UK£ 200 000 = 286,120 U.S. dollars ref: google. nt

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

46. "create the market for rotavirus vaccine -- to effectively vote himself rich."

gigantic conflict of interest.

With so many doctors in the country, they had to pick the one who
was selling something to vote on approving what he was selling.

Then he became a multi millionaire.