By: Catherine J. Frompovich What is tobacco-science? you may be asking. Well, for those who don’t know the history of marketing cigarettes in the 1950s when, according to some researchers the apparent detrimental facts of tobacco use were known to that industry, cigarette makers used medical doctors in their advertisements to promote smoking cigarettes. What! You may be exclaiming. Yes, that’s factual and here are some links that document MDs huckstering cigarettes:
- More Doctors Smoke Camels Than Any Other Cigarette (Source)
- Doctors in all branches of medicine smoke Camels; “See how Camels agree with your throat”
- Advertisement images for cigarette smoking (Source)
You probably are aghast about what you are reading, and even may be thankful that the factual facts about tobacco smoking have prevailed, e.g., tobacco use can cause cancer and heart disease, and lead to and/or exacerbate many other health problems. Since factual information was no longer suppressed and finally made public knowledge in the 1970s when Congress got involved, those who become informed consumers can refrain from using tobacco and smoking, not as was promoted in advertisements. Something similar needs to happen with vaccines regarding adverse events and contraindications information on vaccine package inserts so consumers can make informed consent decisions – their right by law, in my opinion. In retrospect, what happened as a result of MDs’ deliberate support for tobacco smoking as enjoyable, pleasurable, yaddah, yaddah, yaddah, etc. – plus the outrageous ‘science’ that cigarette makers apparently came up with to promote such ridiculous hypotheses – generated terminology for bum-dope-science-information, which now is referred to as “tobacco-science”. However, tobacco-science is alive, well, and even thriving—and not related only to cigarette smoking anymore. Tobacco-science can apply to much of research that goes on in the field of medical science and other scientific endeavors. How can that be possible? Well, there are several reasons, but the most apparent are:
a. Vested interests needs for supplying ‘verifiable’ product worthiness, effectiveness, or efficacy (as in pharmaceuticals) for a marketing strategy/agenda, and b. Scientists seeking fame, plus funding for their ‘benefactor-approved and steered’ research, often published in medical journals Big Pharma companies own.
Nothing documents the above more than information surfacing recently about cancer research. According to the Los Angeles Times Business report “Science has lost its way, at a big cost to humanity” by Michael Hiltzik (October 27, 2013), billions of dollars’ worth of fraudulent information is surfacing as scientific facts. One example Hiltzik cites is cancer research. Of 53 landmark cancer research papers that were double-checked, only six (6) proved valid! Here’s an article that talks about some of those findings.  The heart-wrenching part about the above is that it deals with cancer research to which many folks contribute their money in the hopes of finding a cure. However, cures do exist and have for more than 75 years. They have been written about, only to be shot down and discredited by the medical profession. The skullduggery that was afoot to discredit cancer cures under the auspices of the so-called ‘cancer establishment’ was probed during the 1950s congressional investigation. The resulting report found there were alternative cancer cures that worked! That information is confirmed by The Fitzgerald Report of August 3, 1953 wherein Congressional Special Counsel Benedict F Fitzgerald rendered his candid report, which I devote an entire chapter to in my 2012 book, A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments. Special Counsel Fitzgerald straightforwardly reported about the establishment’s agenda to ‘kill’ natural healing methods for cancer that worked when he said,
Behind and over all this is the weirdest conglomeration of corrupt motives, intrigue, selfishness, jealousy, obstruction, and conspiracy that I have ever seen. 
What else is there? From 1946 to about 2007, the American Cancer Society is said to have invested about $2 Billion in research. Additionally, the National Cancer Institute is said to spend between $5 to $6 Million a year on cancer research. Cures exist—just embrace them! Why is the cancer establishment denying that natural cancer cures don’t work, when chemotherapy is effective in only 2 percent of late stage cancers? The obvious reason for denial is because most alternative cancer cures utilize resources that Big Pharma cannot patent and sell for thousands of dollars per treatment. Furthermore, natural cancer cures eschew radiation therapy because of the damage it does to the human body and the proclivity for inducing secondary cancers. Now, for the sixty-four-thousand-dollar question! If tobacco-science, intrigue, obstruction, and conspiracy go on in much of medical research, science and its politics, wouldn’t it be only natural to question the science behind vaccines, which has as its basic premise that vaccines are ‘safe’ and mandated “because they say so.” If vaccines were truly safe, they wouldn’t have to be mandated; people would be lining up to receive them without coercion; and, furthermore, the vaccine court wouldn’t be paying out billions of dollars in vaccine damage claims. Perhaps, nothing points to the need for investigating vaccine tobacco-science than the August 2013 disclosure to a member of Congress that the CDC’s epidemiologist Dr. Thomas Verstraeten, MD, (1999) reported that ethylmercury in vaccines (Thimerosal, 49.6% Hg) was contributing to elevated risks for developing autism, sleep disorders, and speech disorders.  But then, that information later – after the Simpsonwood Meeting in June 2000 – was reworked to create a new report saying there was no implication! By the way, Thimerosal still is in several vaccines, which I discuss in my new book, Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines. Keep in mind that there are no scientific studies supporting the safety of many of the ingredients in vaccines and how they interact with each other, i.e., synergistically. Furthermore, vaccines are not investigated to determine if they interfere with human reproduction or can cause cancer. Vaccine package inserts specifically say those studies have not been done. One would think the U.S. FDA would require them before approving any vaccine. Furthermore, the study that the CDC likes to hang its hat on for vaccines not causing autism was done in Sweden by a scientist, Poul Thorsen, who was indicted for embezzlement of CDC grant money. According to a press release,
The Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General has moved Danish Researcher Poul Thorsen to the top of their “Most Wanted OIG Fugitives” list. Thorsen was a top CDC investigator on autism.
“Any research linked to a person indicted for felony criminal activities should be suspect,” stated Eric Uram, SafeMinds Executive Director. If Thorsen is capable of the crimes listed in this indictment, he is easily capable of falsifying research results. If he is found guilty, CDC should disavow Thorsen’s research and revisit any policy determinations where it was used. 
However, that Thorsen study has not been retracted, but Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s cautionary findingspaper published in The Lancet was retracted despite the fact that the MMR vaccine and/or measles link in the gut have been implicated in autistic children by other researchers. Here are some examples:
I. New MMR link found to autism http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-123482/New-MMR-link-autism.html
II. New research links measles, autistic gut disorder http://www.autism.com/ari/newsletter/161/page6.pdf
III. Scientists fear MMR link to autism [Wake Forest University School of Medicine study results] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-388051/Scientists-fear-MMR-link-autism.html
According to Dr. Jay Gordon, MD, and The Blog, we find
“At Stanford University, 192 pairs of identical twins were studied in which one twin was autistic and one was not. Scientists found that genetics accounted for 38% of the risk of autism and environmental factors 62%.
“Our definition of autism has expanded from a genetic disorder originating in the brainto a possible interaction of immune and neuro-inflammatory disorders with genetics. Developing nervous and immune systems–before and after birth–are vulnerable to the thousands of toxins that surround us.
[CJF: Vaccines contain numerous toxins, which basically are environmental factors, since most are man-made, and pregnant mothers now are mandated to receive vaccines!]
“Of the more than 80,000 chemicals in use today, only 3,000 have been tested for their harmful effects.  [CJF emphasis added]
If we are to move forward and believe in science, we need better accountability and transparency, especially from those who have vested interests, i.e., Big Pharma and global vaccine manufacturers, plus those who promote them unconditionally in governments everywhere. Recently Novartis flu vaccines were banned in the following countries: Italy, Spain, Canada, and Switzerland. The reason: white protein particles were found in the flu vaccines. That’s serious ‘stuff’, which promotes serious health implications when injected into the body. There probably is more hidden vaccine science than we are permitted to know with some apparently and deliberately kept as “trade secrets”. Obviously, if we knew about them, we’d stay away from pharmaceutical products that are marketed and based upon tobacco-science. To elucidate further in the vein of tobacco-science that apparently is/was used to sell pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, the makers of Risperdal® agreed to a $2.2 Billion settlement “for unlawful acts including kickbacks in the advertisement of the anti-psychotic drug,” which included a criminal fine of $400 Million.  What was that about? Apparently for paying millions of dollars in bribes to the corporation that provided prescription drugs to nursing homes. Where is the science, plus studies, that validate nursing home patients need that drug? Can such tactics be one of the numerous factors affecting escalating costs for Medicare and Medicaid? Apparently, two other prescription drugs also were named due to having been promoted for “off-label” use, i.e., conditions not specifically approved for that drug’s use. How about TV and radio personality Dr. Drew Pinsky and his involvement with GlaxoSmithKline and the supposed unlawful promotion of antidepressant drugs? Were those drugs targeted toward children with ADD, ADHD, and Bipolar diagnoses? GSK was ordered to pay $3Billion as part of the settlement regarding kickbacks on drugs. Then in 2009, there was the $2.3 Billion that Pfizer agreed to pay to end the investigation of its advertising of drugs, specifically the painkiller Bextra that was taken off the market in 2005. I could list numerous hefty fines that the pharmaceutical industry has paid because of improprieties, many of which apparently are based upon tobacco-science or marketing strategies. Don’t forget, these companies also make vaccines. Furthermore, who receives those hefty fines, and how are those funds used? Shouldn’t there be an annual public accounting report for such income by the feds, with special accountability as to how those funds were distributed or used? Are they funneled into black ops operations?  According to the Digital Journal article “Op-Ed: Merck Caught Again in Vaccine Fraud” 
Merck virologists Stephen Krahling and Joan Wlochowski claimed in their unsealed 2010 complaint that they “witnessed firsthand the improper testing and data falsification in which Merck engaged to artificially inflate the [mumps] vaccine’s efficacy findings.” After a two year investigation the Justice Department has refused to rule on the case. Merck continues to deny the allegations.
The court case is Civil Action No. 10-4374 (CDJ) filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. [7a] Is the above court case ‘proof’ that some businesses are just too big to deal with legally? If so, that has to be addressed by Congress, and very soon! Going back further in time, there’s the SV-40 cancer-causing virus in the original polio vaccine [7b] that was given to millions of children, as verified by a congressional hearing in 2003. By all means,please watch the YouTube video of Dr. Maurice Hilleman talking about what was not admitted about vaccines, the SV-40 virus, and AIDS. The YouTube appears at the very beginning of the Op-Ed article listed above. You will not believe what you hear! So, why are the U.S. CDC/FDA so reluctant to even consider what apparently is or may be wrong with vaccine tobacco-science? Probably because of all the money that’s made for the U.S. government from vaccine patents owned by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Since licenses are doled out
To improve public health worldwide, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) grants licenses to organizations around the world to commercialize intellectual property invented by research scientists at HHS. This portfolio of patent applications, issued patents and unique biological materials includes technologies for influenza vaccines and diagnostics, all of which are available to qualified organizations, both commercial and non-profit. 
It all comes down, apparently, to control of humans and other resources, including scientific information, that fits the tobacco-science paradigm, which seems to be a money maker on the merry-go-round that exists within the medical sciences.