Gary Goldman, PhD - Exposing Problems with Chickenpox Vaccine
 

On March 17, 1995, with little public fanfare, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved another vaccine, and this was subsequently added to the nationís childhood immunization schedule.  Gradually, one by one, states passed laws mandating that each and every infant be inoculated at age 12 months with the newly approved live virus, to help protect against a common childhood disease.
    From 1995 through late 2002, I served as a Research/Analyst in a program, supported by a grant from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), designed to study the effects of this newly licensed vaccine in a geographical region of some 300,000 residents. Several years after the program began, positive aspects of vaccination were allowed to be published in scientific journals; however, I noticed that data I had collected suggesting that adverse effects might well be associated with the vaccination program were being handled quite differently. A preliminary trend suggested that the vaccination itself might have the potential to spawn a widespread epidemic among adults of a disease far more serious than the one being inoculated against.  When CDC-affiliated health authorities learned this, they began to take action, including legal steps, to prevent my making these findings known to the scientific community and the public.
    But whenever research data and information concerning potential adverse effects associated with a vaccine used in human populations are suppressed and/or misrepresented by health authorities, not only is this most disturbing, it goes against all accepted scientific norms and dangerously compromises scientistsí professional ethics.  And so, to expose and warn against what I believe to be just such abuses of ethics and public trust, I have written the book you are about to read.----- Gary S. Goldman, Ph.D.  Computer Scientist/Research Analyst


http://www.injectionbook.com/pages/1/index.htm

1.  Info on Gary's job as Research/Analyst "insider" who was assigned to
study a specific disease in a local community

http://www.injectionbook.com/pages/2/index.htm

2.  Website describes events once he started to see Shingles increased in
vaccinated
http://www.injectionbook.com/pages/2/index.htm

3. Fiction book based on his research - see below
http://www.injectionbook.com/pages/1/index.htm

4.  LA County Notice to Cease & Desist & Gary/lawyer response

5.  Supporting Abstracts including 3 Abstracts written by Gary Goldman
exposing the problem (WHICH were REFUSED by US Medical Journals and finally
published in Europe's Vaccine Journal

6.  NEW MEDICAL JOURNAL
http://www.vaccineveritas.com/pages/1/index.htm
Medical Veritas ("latin for truth")
The International Journal of Medical Truth
(I will send an extra email on this)
If you know researchers who would like to actually get their research
published on the truth
If you write and would like to write for this journal - contact Gary
Goldman, PhD



http://www.injectionbook.com/pages/2/index.htm

Rashes of Controversy 
 
Foreword

In and of themselves, numbers have a certain intrinsic value.  Ultimately,
however, when numbers represent "people," their meaning can take on far
greater significance.

 

The book you're about to read had its origins several years ago, when as an
epidemiological researcher I began to ask, "Why?" about some surprising
(and controversial) numbers I'd started to gather during an important
population-tracking project that monitored the course of a certain disease
after widespread vaccination against it began.

I might have just shrugged those figures off, passed them on to my
superiors, taken my paychecks and kept quiet.  But I couldn't do that,
because I knew that each of those surprising, undesirable numbers
represented nothing less than a suffering person.  And I hope my telling
you this will help you understand why I had to write this book, because
it's not primarily about the numbers that started it, but about the hurting
people those numbers represent - about, actually, the potential millions
more people who may even come to include you who read it.  Without the
information this book contains, you would have likely remained ignorant
about why potential millions may suffer in a disease epidemic that is being
predicted for the years ahead of us, based on those very "unwanted numbers"
I discovered.

 You see, along with other experts who have reviewed the studies I made, I
am convinced that this book's "numbers" have been soundly arrived at.  Yet
though that's important, my most crucial task will be to tell the story
behind the numbers, and to relate that story primarily in a narrative told
in clear, non-scientific, human terms that can be understood by as many
people, whether scientifically knowledgeable or not, as possible.

 Not that the science behind the numbers is unimportant.  For those
interested in and trained evaluating and analyzing the science of the
numbers, I've interspersed supporting documentation and technical
explanations, in the forms of charts, articles published in scientific
journals and other materials throughout the far-less-technical running
story-narrative I've written for the "general" reader.  I've provided more
such matter in detailed appendices, to be found at the back of the book.

 I've tried in the story-narrative to clearly and simply define any
technical terms that may be unfamiliar to general readers, in most cases as
soon as these terms occur.  So, as you read the story-narrative, please
feel free to skip over whichever medical-scientific supports may prove
difficult for you to "make head or tail" of; they're included for the
benefit of those science-minded readers who are fully able to read,
appreciate and interpret them.

Indeed, the most important human issue this book raises involves not the
numbers it reports, but the depth of human anguish that may be imposed on
people, without their knowledge or consent, by an elite few who may
intentionally or unwittingly abuse their positions of authority. 

 As a research/analyst "insider" who was assigned to study a specific
disease in a local community chosen as representative of a sample U.S.
population, I certainly recognize the positive influence of vaccines and
the beneficial role vaccination against numerous diseases has played in
public health.  Yet I am deeply concerned that all vaccines be developed
and used as safely as possible; I also believe we can always find room for
improvement in that regard.  Thus, I have written this book hoping that you
will be moved by what you learn within these covers to join me in striving
to encourage future reforms in vaccine-related medical research and practices.

Certain health authorities - including some of the very same people who
encouraged, welcomed and published, in prestigious medical journals like
The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), virtually all my
positive findings about the vaccination we were studying, - wanted me to
tell only half the story you're about to read.  It seems now that they'd
like to "cover up" what I'm going to expose to you in this book.


But it is my firm conviction that people like you have a right to know,
when certain medical interventions are adopted, even mandated by law, how
these interventions may affect the population at large - especially when
such interventions may result in suffering for you and your loved ones. So
I have moved forward despite health authorities' objections to write and
publish the side of the story they aren't eager for you to learn.  And when
you've read it, I'm confident that you'll understand why I'm dedicating
this effort to people like you, those you love and care for most, here in
America and throughout the world.


Introduction


On March 17, 1995, with little public fanfare, the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) approved another vaccine, and this was subsequently
added to the nation's childhood immunization schedule.  Gradually, one by
one, states passed laws mandating that each and every infant be inoculated
at age 12 months with the newly approved live virus, to help protect
against a common childhood disease.

 

From 1995 through late 2002, I served as a Research/Analyst in a program,
supported by a grant from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), designed to study the effects of this newly licensed
vaccine in a geographical region of some 300,000 residents. Several years
after the program began, positive aspects of vaccination were allowed to be
published in scientific journals; however, I noticed that data I had
collected suggesting that adverse effects might well be associated with the
vaccination program were being handled quite differently. A preliminary
trend suggested that the vaccination itself might have the potential to
spawn a widespread epidemic among adults of a disease far more serious than
the one being inoculated against.  When CDC-affiliated health authorities
learned this, they began to take action, including legal steps, to prevent
my making these findings known to the scientific community and the public.

 

But whenever research data and information concerning potential adverse
effects associated with a vaccine used in human populations are suppressed
and/or misrepresented by health authorities, not only is this most
disturbing, it goes against all accepted scientific norms and dangerously
compromises scientists' professional ethics.  And so, to expose and warn
against what I believe to be just such abuses of ethics and public trust, I
have written the book you are about to read.

 

n      Gary S. Goldman, Ph.D.

Computer Scientist/Research Analyst

 

In 1994, anticipating the approval of a new vaccine, the highest health
authorities in the U.S. authorized and set in motion, at taxpayers'
expense, what would be a 10-year (and possibly longer) population study
project.  This project would monitor a specific childhood disease that
hadn't previously been targeted by vaccination, and study the effects of
this vaccination on the community.  But let me ask you: As a concerned
citizen and taxpayer.

 

.           Wouldn't you think that before such a project began, careful
attention would be given to devising methods of collecting data that would
allow researchers to detect both positive and negative (or deleterious)
trends that might possibly arise during the study of the newly licensed
vaccine?

 

.           Wouldn't you think that if deleterious effects of vaccination
did begin to surface - effects far worse than those caused by the common
childhood disease being vaccinated against - medical authorities like those
at our nation's Centers for Disease Control would be eager, in the
interests of public health and safety, to devise additional studies, with
perhaps improved methods and controls, that might either confirm or
disprove the existence of such effects?

 

.           Wouldn't you think that if evidence did support these
deleterious effects of vaccination, and if scientific literature also
alluded to such effects, and in addition described the biological mechanism
involved in the ill-effects, that the CDC might move quickly to re-assess
the recommendations for vaccination, which may have been made under faulty
assumptions that no such adverse effects would result?

 

.           Wouldn't you think that both the CDC and the local public
health department that uncovered the ill-effects would encourage
publication of balanced research that objectively included both positive
and negative findings, based on careful analysis of project data and studies?

 

.           Wouldn't you think that if findings showed that vaccination of
all healthy children against this common disease might cause a far worse
disease outbreak - of epidemic magnitude, mass suffering and enormous cost
among adults - the nation's foremost health authorities would feel
compelled to modify their vaccination policy, or at least to alert the
public to the possibility that this epidemic might loom in our nation's
future?

 

            By now it's likely that, just as I did when they crowded my
mind, you answered, "Yes" to all these questions.

 

            Yet you may be surprised and even distressed, as I was, to
learn that certain prominent health authorities' answers to these questions
seemed to be anything but "yeses":

 

.           That when I began my research on this project, for which my
considerable past analytical experience had amply qualified me, I was given
only negligible information about the nature or medical background/history
of the disease whose effects among the population I was to study.

 

.           That my superiors gave me no information about any prior
critical studies suggesting that the vaccination program might have
deleterious effects - even though, as I later learned, medical journals had
already published such literature.

 

.           That my superiors provided me with little guidance about what
kinds of study methodology they might prefer, so I had to exercise
considerable personal initiative and discretion to learn about the disease
and devise methods to correlate and analyze numerous project data.

 

.           That when I did come to realize that the program to vaccinate
every child to prevent this common childhood disease also might adversely
impact adults, who would experience increased incidence of a disease that
was potentially far more serious and life-threatening than the one being
vaccinated against, my superiors (1) severely criticized my preliminary
findings and hypothesis; (2) virtually ordered me to forsake this line of
investigation altogether; (3) urged me to wait another year before
presenting updated findings, when I persisted with my probing and analysis
of these matters; and (4) even withdrew the support of an expert who had
assisted me in a prior investigation I had initiated of these concerns.

 

.           That by the end of 2001, after I had initially been encouraged
to develop manuscripts and contribute toward publications highlighting
benefits resulting from vaccination, three manuscripts based on my research
that supported adverse effects of vaccination had been  neglected by my
superiors for one to two years, despite my repeated requests to have them
reviewed and passed on to higher authorities at the CDC.  (Interestingly,
and perhaps more revealing, my superiors saw fit to release for publication
the same day they were submitted, or at most after several weeks, all
positive data and other reports I or they contributed that showed benefits
of the vaccination program.)

 

.           That my colleagues and superiors not only declined my offer to
include them as co-authors of these manuscripts about the adverse effects
of vaccination, after I resigned for conscience's sake from the project in
October 2002, the public health department pressured the county legal
department to threaten legal action against me, in an attempt to prevent my
subsequent independent efforts to publish these findings in scientific
journals.

 

            Despite these threats, I've decided to make public the very
circumstances surrounding this cover up, in the very book you're reading -
a book that you'll find is part true medical mystery, part expose, and in
part an urgent call to public awareness and action.

 

            As this book, based on my eight years' experience on the
project, unfolds, you'll read how.

 

.           My project superiors' actions (and inactions) made it seem as
if they wanted to hear no distressing news whatsoever concerning the
vaccine, only "good news" that mimicked existing results in other studies.

 

.           When I brought my project superiors what I and (later) other
renowned (and independent) epidemiological researchers considered
preliminary evidence suggesting that the very vaccination program they had
seemed so intent (though with inadequate forethought) on pursuing might
well trigger a massive epidemic of a far worse disease, my superiors and
the CDC tried to employ (improperly, I believe) various statistical methods
and other means, to (1) discredit my evidence, then (2) cause me to abandon
my further investigation of this disastrous possible outcome, and then (3)
suppress both scholarly and general public knowledge of it.

 

.           But perhaps insufficient forethought about the possible effects
of vaccination wasn't what was at fault at all.  When I considered another
factor - that the federally funded vaccination campaign actually paid for
all vaccinations administered to qualified children, which meant that the
pharmaceutical companies, using both the CDC and public health departments
as distribution channels for vaccine, would be enriched monetarily for each
inoculation - I found it not unrealistic to conjecture this possibility:
that these combined interests may have been quite willing to allow the
epidemic I warned of to spread.  Why?  Because perhaps they even had hoped
soon to profit from the epidemic's spread and subsequent cure, via another
vaccine, currently under trial by the same pharmaceutical company that
provided the initial childhood vaccine.

 

            In fact, readers of this book may come to hold public health
agencies accountable for promoting universal vaccination that could
potentially cause a painful disease epidemic of many years' duration among
adults - one far worse than the childhood disease they're currently
vaccinating against.  And readers may come to consider these agencies
guilty of profiting from the suffering of countless thousands (even
millions) of American people.

 

            By now you may be wondering how and why a non-medical doctor, a
scientist like me with a Ph.D. in Computer Science, a Bachelor of Science
degree in Engineering and many creative achievements as a "bits-and-bytes"
person, has come to write a book like this, about a field remote from my
experience prior to this project?

 

To clearly analyze and discern disease trends that might have passed by
other eyes unnoticed, maybe it took someone from outside the field of
epidemiology (the science that deals with the incidence, distribution and
control of disease in populations, or, as another simple definition puts
it, the science of the occurrence of human disease) - someone who could
think outside the field's "traditional boxes.".

 

Maybe it took someone who'd suffered, as I had, from the excruciating pain
caused by the disease that I feared would be sparked by the vaccination of
every child - someone who felt physically ill, as I did, even imagining the
suffering others might endure while a vaccination-spurred epidemic of this
disease raged.

 

Maybe it took someone to write this book whose conscience was sufficiently
bothered that individuals and groups with special interests might enjoy
enormous profits at the expense of huge numbers of other people's suffering.

 

Maybe it took someone whose sojourn in the world of medicine had led him to
fear that what he saw of this project might be but the tip of a sinister
iceberg, one made up of corporate greed and influence-peddling, of medical
arrogance and worst of all, of precipitous, and in this case nearly
heedless, medical experimentation on a largely unwary public.

 

Thus, though this book will deal mainly with my specific research
experiences and findings concerning one particular vaccination's
potentially frightening outcomes, I believe the issues raised can by
extension be applied to future research that may also have profound effects
on this nation's health and wealth. For I've come to suspect that even the
eyes of some of today's leaders in "objective science" can become clouded
by the age-old "cataracts" of money, power and reputation.

 

I've come to suspect that even some of today's most eminent men and women
of science and medicine might turn crassly confident and come to think that
if the vaccines or medications they recommend for diseases should cause
adverse reactions and create other diseases - well, they'll be able to find
other vaccines or medications for those, too, in an endless cycle involving
more and more diseases, to be cured and prevented by more and more
pharmaceuticals.

 

I've come to consider it possible that, if some leaders become blinded by
private and public money, humans suffering in large numbers may diminish in
their eyes to mere collections of blots on statistical charts.  And if so,
such leaders might well, if they're not stopped, continue experimenting on
humans en masse, to our hurt.

 

Even as I share these fears with you let me make several key matters clear.
 First, I am not writing this book to decry all vaccination of all children
against all diseases.  Vaccination against many potentially serious
diseases has proved a great blessing to mankind.  Yet I am convinced, by my
research concerning the specific common childhood disease that I studied,
that the scientific community as well as the general public must maintain
an attitude of constant alertness and vigilance that will ensure that all
new medicines, vaccines and procedures are thoroughly tested and determined
to be safe in light of all possible outcomes - positive and deleterious -
before huge numbers of people are subjected to them and state laws mandate
them.

 

We must demand of our public health authorities that each individual
vaccine be evaluated separately and considered based on its own merits
and/or demerits, and not merely and automatically be regarded as safe just
because a majority of previously licensed vaccines have proved
cost-effective and successful and caused few adverse reactions.

 

Sadly, if you and I don't make ourselves aware of and "inoculate" ourselves
against the kinds of abuses of public money and trust this book exposes, we
may, sooner or later, find ourselves living in an age, not only of the
planned product obsolescence we now endure from profit-hungry
manufacturers, we may also experience an age of planned disease-and-cure
cycles bestowed on us by unethical medical authorities and pharmaceutical
firms.

 

What can we do to protect ourselves from such frightening possibilities?

 

I have taken the initiative to submit my three manuscripts, which my
superiors likely read but gave me no substantive feedback about, to
respected scientific journals that have agreed, after thorough review, by
their editorial staffs and scientific experts ("peers") in epidemiology, to
publish them.

 

Through my own research I've located and begun to share ideas and findings
with other scientists whose own highly regarded work echoes my concerns.
And I've found that some of these scientists have been waiting for years to
see just the kind of epidemiological data I've helped collect and analyze.
Hopefully, they and I will sound a cautionary alarm throughout the
scientific community.  I've also written this book to alert parents and
others (who may or may not have medical backgrounds) to dangers to our
health that we may face from overly optimistic propaganda promoted by
trusted institutions toward which we've often looked for preventatives and
cures.

 

Ultimately, whether medical and pharmaceutical leaders conduct research and
practice the healing arts ethically, may well depend upon the pressure
exerted on them as a result of expositions of unethical conduct regarding
the kinds of issues this book raises. And, as I will argue at greater
length in the pages that follow, truly objective vaccine research will only
become attainable when research data and results are allowed to be
corroborated among independent experts, immune from the influence of (a)
sponsoring agencies that selectively control which data and results are
reported, (b) vaccine profiteering motives, and (c) other conflicts of
interest.

 

My motivation for writing this book isn't to gain either prestige or
profit.  Rather, this work represents an attempt on my part to fulfill a
moral obligation to warn my own family, my friends, my community and the
world at large that we all may need to take a more active role in
decision-making that affects our own and our children's and grandchildren's
health.

 

This book issues in part a call that "ordinary" citizens should not give
carte blanche support or put "automatic" trust in all state-mandated
healthcare decisions and mandates that may be suggested by officials and/or
politicians.  It also is intended to alert healthcare and political
authorities about the potential consequences of a vaccination policy
they've set in motion, and to highlight the responsibility they may
ultimately bear for increased suffering and death, despite their perhaps
good intentions to improve public health on a mass scale.

 

I now urge you to read on with these thoughts in mind and weigh carefully
the evidence I bring to the pages that follow. I will make every effort to
state the evidence clearly enough even to cause you an "intra-ocular
trauma" - that is, to hit you "right between the eyes." The responsibility
will then rest with you, to act on what you learn, as your own informed
conscience leads you.

****
http://www.injectionbook.com/pages/9/index.htm
Los Angeles County Notice
to Cease and Desist Publication

AND Gary's response via lawyer
**********
FICTION BOOK

http://www.injectionbook.com/pages/1/index.htm
INJECTION

A fiction medical thriller currently. Perhaps reality in year 2009.
 
 
Use Order Form Below
 
 INJECTION is about behind-the-scene health issues and their effect on
people in a town called Sycamore Springs from 2001 to 2018. A healthcare
official with a hero complex convinces the community that a vaccine to
protect against a common childhood disease is safe, when in fact, it has
not been thoroughly tested. As events unfold, a deleterious effect caused
by vaccination surfaces. Health authorities attempt to cover up the
finding, but the results are tragic. This fiction account is based on
research by Gary S. Goldman, Ph.D., who served nearly eight years as
Research/Analyst on a project in a cooperative agreement with the Centers
of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).