‘Misdirection Tactic’ Used by Mainstream Media When Reporting Outbreaks
Many of the published mainstream media news reports outlining the recent outbreaks of measles and mumps in the US have blamed unvaccinated children for the problem.
All of the reports have strong, accusatory titles, with reporters repeatedly emphasizing the need for vaccination. They stress how parents who do not vaccinate their children are putting thousands of children at risk from potentially deadly diseases.
However, if you examine what is being written more closely, what they are actually saying is something entirely different. Hidden somewhere in the report will be a sentence with crucial information that many parents may miss. This information is hidden so well by the reporter that by the time most readers get to it, they will have been completely brainwashed by the rest of the information and are therefore unlikely to notice its significance.
This tactic is known as misdirection. 
Misdirection At Its Best
One particular news report that caught my eye refers to the recent outbreak of mumps in the state of Illinois. The website 5KSDK.com released a news bulletin titled Mumps Outbreak Caused by Vaccination Backlash. During the bulletin, a mother with fully vaccinated children is seen on film stating:
“All of my children have been vaccinated as scheduled their whole lives. I am a little disturbed that – eh – you know, if there is mumps here then that means that somebody’s children aren’t vaccinated.”
The news clip stated that:
“Health officials say a recent backlash against vaccines is helping aid the resurgence of the disease.”
The reporter continued by stating that nine of the reported mumps cases were students from the University of Illinois, Champaign.
Interestingly, the reporter then ended the report by stating that:
“All of those students have been vaccinated, but the vaccine is only 80 to 85 percent effective.”  (emphasis added)
This one sentence makes the whole report nonsensical, especially when you consider that both the mother used in the film and the report clearly blamed the unvaccinated population for the problem.
Yet More Misdirection
It appears that mainstream media are not only blaming the unvaccinated community for the current mumps “epidemic,” but also for the cases of measles that are being reported.
Or are they?
One article covering the measles outbreak in New York City reported that it is “the loons who refuse to vaccinate their children” who put everyone at risk. To make matters even worse, the article, which was published by The Daily Beast, titled Thanks, Anti-Vaxxers. You Just Brought Measles Back in NYC, was written by a doctor.
Let’s examine his article in more detail.
About halfway through his poorly written article, he stated:
“But now, shoppers in Boston-area supermarkets get to worry that they may have been exposed when they stopped by for groceries. Commuters in the Bay Area now have to contend with the possibility that they or their children may contract the illness because they happened to get on the wrong train. Over a dozen people around Los Angeles have been diagnosed with measles already this year, nearly half of them intentionally unvaccinated.” (emphasis added)
Now, if nearly half of the cases of measles were intentionally unvaccinated, then this would mean that over half of them were intentionally vaccinated!
He continued his report by stating:
“The explanation is simple, and is as accessible as the nightly news. Vaccine-deniers are responsible to the resurgence of once-eliminated illnesses. Their movement is responsible for sickening people. They are to blame for the word ‘outbreak’ appearing in headlines from coast to coast.”
He followed his accusation by adding:
“The anti-vaccine crowd may think they’re only making a decision for their own family. In fact, they’re threatening to make the rest of us sick. Refusing to vaccinate your children means you are contributing to a worsening public health crisis. There is no denying it, and there is no point in sugar-coating it.” 
I wonder, however, by the time readers had read the remainder of his waffle, just how many of them actually noticed that one sentence hidden at the end of a paragraph which changed the whole meaning of his article.
Let’s face it: if his article had been correct, this would mean that all parents choosing not to vaccinate their children would be putting the whole population at risk, including vaccinated children!
How could that be true if vaccinations protect children against disease?
Are Parents Being Fooled Into Believing Vaccinations Protect Children?
Parents have been fooled for many years into believing that by having their children vaccinated, it will protect them against deadly disease.
In fact, the CDC recommends vaccination, by stating the following information on their website:
“There’s no greater joy than helping your baby grow up healthy and happy. That’s why most parents choose immunization. Giving your baby the recommended immunizations by age two is the best way to protect him from 14 serious diseases, like measles and whooping cough.” 
However, this appears not to be the case, because yet another news report which I have chosen for us to examine says the complete and utter opposite. A report published by Wyoming News Source titled Anti-Vaccine Movement Puts Children at Risk stated that parents who refuse to vaccinate are irresponsible and are putting other children’s lives at risk. They stated:
“It’s important to note that the vast majority of children in Wyoming are properly vaccinated before they start school, and we commend their families for that. But just one unvaccinated child puts others at risk, whether that’s in the classroom or the emergency room. Some doctors won’t even treat unvaccinated children. The waiting room situation is just too fraught with risk. Parents who wisely vaccinate might think twice about taking their children to a place where they’d be at increased risk.”  (emphasis added)
Do they know something that we do not?
The Mayo Clinic Admits That Vaccines Do Not Work
It is entirely possible that they do. I say this because just a few days ago, a report was published by the Financial Post titled Vaccines Cannot Prevent Measles Outbreaks. Its author, Lawrence Solomon, reported on a paper written by Professor of Medicine and founder and leader of the Mayo Clinic’s Vaccine Research Group, Professor Gregory A. Poland, titled The Re-emergence of Measles in Developed Countries, which was published two years ago.
Describing the paper in huge detail, Solomon explained how Professor Poland had stressed that the reason the measles vaccine was not working was hidden in our genes. Solomon stated:
“ … Because different people have different genetic makeups, the vaccine is simply a dud in many, failing to provide the protection they think they’ve acquired.” 
According to Solomon, Professor Poland had reported that the re-emergence of measles was due to a failure to vaccinate as well as the failure of the measles vaccine.
Curious to know exactly what Professor Poland had written, I decided to research the report for myself. In the pre-edited version of the report, sure enough, Professor Poland had indicated that he believed that the re-emergence of measles was due to a failure to vaccinate, as well as the failure of the measles vaccine itself. However, he had also written the following very interesting couple of sentences:
“ … As illustrated in the Table, since 2005 these outbreaks have also occurred in the U.S. – with surprising numbers of cases occurring in persons who previously received one or even two documented doses of measles-containing vaccine. In fact, as of September 2011, the U.S. has had 15 measles outbreaks with 211 confirmed cases – the highest number of cases since 1996.”
Professor Poland acknowledged the fact that:
“Thus, while an excellent vaccine, a dilemma remains. As previously mentioned, measles is extraordinarily transmissible. At the same time, measles vaccine has a failure rate measured in a variety of studies at 2 –10%, and modeling studies suggest that herd immunity to measles requires approximately 95% or better of the population to be immune.” 
He indicated, however, that this may not be possible, because the vaccination cannot be administered to the immuno-compromised, pregnant woman and anyone who may be allergic to certain components of the vaccine.
For these reasons, he recommended that a new vaccination should be developed, stating that the following measures should take place:
“The practical answer to the dilemma of measles re-emergence is the development of better, next-generation vaccines. Given recent public opinion and large numbers of parents rejecting the current vaccine, combined with practical and immunologic limitations, new vaccines appear to be necessary. The ideal vaccine would require only one dose to be given at or soon after birth; it would lack contraindications and permit administration without highly trained health care personnel; it would be inexpensive, and heat stable.” (emphasis added)
(To read this report in full, refer to reference six at the end of this article, or, to purchase the final edited version of the paper, follow the link provided in this version.)
So, who is telling the truth and whom do we believe?
It is difficult for parents to know who is right and who is wrong when it comes to vaccination. It is even more difficult to know whom to trust.
As parents, it appears that we are ‘damned if we do and damned if we don’t.’
When Professor Poland stated that the new vaccination “would lack contraindications and permit administration without highly trained health care personnel; it would be inexpensive, and heat stable,” could he inadvertently have been saying that the current MMR vaccination does have contraindications, is not always being administered by highly trained health care personnel and is not heat stable?
The answer would depend on how you interpret what he has written.
However, if that is indeed what he meant to say, this would have huge implications for hundreds of thousands of parents who believe that the MMR vaccination was responsible for their children’s disabilities. It also has implications for the many parents whose children have died after receiving this vaccination.
Whatever the real truth is, these articles, reports and papers have certainly given us something to think about, haven’t they?