When it comes to vaccines, the CBC is living in a world of absolutes. Vaccines are “safe and effective.” No questions. No controversy. It’s black and white. Everyone who can should be vaccinated. Vaccinated children are immune to disease. Unvaccinated children spread disease. Vaccinated children are thriving. Unvaccinated children are dying.
In the real world, more and more parents no longer believe this narrative. There is increasing skepticism about the safety and efficacy of vaccination. In fact, studies have shown that the better educated parents are, the more likely they are to abstain from the recommended vaccine schedule.
The CBC can’t understand this. The CBC has inundated us with stories featuring experts all vouching for the safety of vaccines. We are told repeatedly that, “The science is settled.” No further research or discussion is needed. Everyone believes, or should believe, in this miracle of modern medicine.
“An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation,
Nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.”
– Mahatma Gandhi
Of course, this isn’t authentic journalism, nor is it real science.
Authentic journalism means telling the truth, however uncomfortable or inconvenient that may be. Honest, ethical reporters do more than simply regurgitate talking points from vaccine proponents. They truly investigate why an increasing number of parents, professionals and scientists are vaccine hesitant. Authentic journalism does not ignore the vaccine injured.
Real science is never settled. Real science asks hard questions and demands honest answers. Real science asks – Is what we are doing working? Real science is committed to discovering the truth, not selling medical products and an ideology. Real science engages with humility, not hubris.
The reality is that what the CBC reports about vaccines and what the science says about vaccines isn’t the same. The CBC isn’t engaged in honest journalism when the topic is vaccines. It’s about marketing a product for the for-profit medical industry. It’s about selling an ideology, regardless of the merits of this ideology. It’s about turning our children (and soon adults) into captive-markets for the pharmaceutical industry. It’s about manufacturing fear and creating dependency on vaccine induced immunity.
We Need a Sophisticated Discussion
We need a sophisticated discussion that moves beyond simplistic and often vitriolic rants on anti-vaxxers. We need a conversation that instead offers an in-depth examination of the benefits and risks of individual vaccine products.
We also need to help people to understand the difference between vaccination and immunization. These words are used interchangeably, even by so-called ‘experts’. These words are not the same. Vaccinated children can become infected and are therefore not immunized; and unvaccinated children can be healthy and free of infection.
We need a clear definition of what constitutes immunity, and a critical assessment of the merits of the inferior and temporary protection provided by vaccine products.
We need to examine whether vaccinated children have better overall health than unvaccinated children and not simply whether there are fewer cases of measles or mumps.
We need to hold thoughtful and intelligent discussions on what level of risk justifies violating our legal and ethical right to informed consent, the removal of parental rights to make medical decisions for their children, and the loss of bodily sovereignty (my body, my choice).
We need moral guidance on the ethics of the demonization and discrimination of naturally immune children that is prevalent today.
We need to discuss why vaccine products do not undergo the same level of rigorous safety testing required of every other medical product and why vaccine manufacturers are not legally and financially liable for the injuries and deaths caused by their products.
We need to question why in today’s society, every topic except vaccines, can be openly discussed and debated and differences respected.
“I feel as though I have been transported to Wonderland,
or some scary totalitarian state, where the truth cannot be spoken.”
– Dr. Malcolm Kendrick
We need to decide whether humans are free and sovereign beings or simply chattel of the state.
We also need to discuss who will be held responsible when we finally acknowledge what an indiscriminate vaccine schedule has done to the health of humanity. Is it the fault of the vaccine industry who made the unsafe products, the professionals who bullied their patients into accepting the products, the politicians who eliminated the right to informed consent, the media who religiously disseminated the vaccine propaganda, or the parents who blindly trusted what they were told?
But these questions and considerations would undermine the narrative that all vaccines are safe and effective for all people. This would invite complexity into the black and white world of vaccine ideology. Questions would foster doubt, when the last thing the vaccine industry wants is doubt. Doubt would impact the bottom line. We also know that in order for vaccines to work, everyone must believe. Or so we are told.
It seems that we are trapped within a dystopian nightmare where it is impossible to examine whether any vaccine, for any disease, may be associated with or cause any degree of harm. There are many people at the CBC who are doing everything they can to make sure that everyone believes, that everyone participates in this holy ritual, and that thoughtful and intelligent conversation about vaccination doesn’t happen.
In such a state, it becomes impossible to keep ourselves and our children safe.
It’s time we had thoughtful evidence-based conversations. It’s time to make wise decisions rather than reactive decisions. It’s time that health was more important than profit.
It’s time that the CBC did their job.
Ted Kuntz
Additional responses to CBC Marketplace:
Del Bigtree Reveals All To Pro-Vax Reporter – The HighWire – “On New Year’s Eve, while spending time with my wife and family, I received an email from the Canadian Broadcasting Company. It was clear that they were planning some sort of hit piece about me and others in the Medical Freedom Movement on their show “Marketplace.” There are those that would say I should avoid inquiries like this. But I think there is no better way to ring in 2020 than a healthy dose of the truth. Here is my response, and their original email is below.”
Is CBC’s ‘Marketplace’ Planning a “Spy vs. Spy” Hit Piece on IPAK and James Lyons-Weiler, PhD For Educating the Public on Science? – James Lyons-Weiler, PhD – “On New Year’s Eve, I received an email from a Katie Pedersen from CBC News informing me that CBC news had sent an undercover reporter to a VIP event following the VIE event in Washington, DC. I had a conversation with a man who represented himself as being interested in how best to organize vaccine risk awareness in the Western Provinces of Canada.”
CBC Marketplace’s Constructed Narrative Falls Even Further Apart – James Lyons-Weiler, PhD – “I have made it clear that I never said “Now we have a quid pro quo”. The recording clearly is “SO THERE IS NO quid pro quo.” Their video editing, including their caption placement, clearly manipulate viewers leading to the impression that the reporter and I came to some arrangement. Never happened.”
See the Evidence: Scientist Calls Out CBC’s “Marketplace” with Grave Allegations of Compromised Journalistic Integrity – James Lyons-Weiler, PhD
The HighWire with Del Bigtree – January 23, 2020 – video – Marketplace segment starts at 42 minutes in.
‘NO EVIDENCE’: THE TRUTH ABOUT GARDASIL – HPV Shocker with Dr. Tenpenny; W.H.O. On Gardasil Side Effects; CBC Marketplaces’ ‘Nothingburger’; Dr. Bob Sears Joins Del In Studio; Melissa Floyd on “The Vaccine Conversation”
Open Letter to CBC: Your Reply to Dr. Jackson’s Concerns Over Incorrect Information on Aluminum by Marketplace Contains More Incorrect Information on Aluminum – James Lyons-Weiler, PhD – “The CBC’s reply to Dr. Jackson contains gravely misleading and potentially dangerous misinformation on aluminum toxicity. We are taking the opportunity to share their misleading and misinformed response and to enumerate the errors they have made, in interpretation of the scientific literature on aluminum, important misinterpretations of published research, and a clear misunderstanding of the dynamics of aluminum clearance from the human body.”
CBC Responds to Dr. Lyons-Weiler, Dr. Lyons-Weiler Responds Back – James Lyons-Weiler, PhD
