Sorry for the confusing memo. The later study done by the Geiers 
analyzed the entire VAERS database, not just the sample that they were able 
to copy by hand at CDC headquarters, so that the AAP was not able to counter 
its conclusions on methodological grounds. Its conclusions were also more 
damning with regard to correlation between the amounts of thimerosal and 
autism incidence. After this study was published, the AAP turned toward 
using false evidence from fraudulent studies. After all, they do have to C 
their respective As. The vaccine makers had a friend in the Senate named 
Bill Frist, who slid a non-liability clause for them into an anti-terrorism 
bill. But the pediatricians are still liable, as there are now (and were) 
published studies showing probable cause, and they continued (and continue) 
to use many times the number of vaccines than was medical precedent up to 
the early 1980s.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chandler Davis" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: The Really Big Lie About Autism

> Jonathan, I try but I can't understand what you're saying.  So the
> Geiers did a later study you did not tell us about in your article
> dated 2004?  It must have differed in its conclusions, from what
> you DO tell us.  Shall we assume, as the later study was not
> attacked by AAP, that it had conclusions less threatening to
> vaccinators?  Then how do we interpret your continuing to
> disseminate your 2004 article?  Do you believe what you said then,
> regardless of any change of heart the Geiers may have had?  Very
> confusing.
> Chandler Davis