http://www.whale.to/v/vran2.html
In May of 1960, Dr. Ratner chaired a panel discussion, at the 120th
Annual Meeting of the Illinois Medical Society to review the increasing
rise in paralytic polio in the U.S. The proceedings were reprinted in the
August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal which exposed the Salk vaccine as
a frank and ineptly disguised fraud. One of the experts on the panel,
statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg, who went on to testify at
Congressional hearings, revealed how data had been manipulated to hide
the dangers and ineffectiveness of the vaccine from the pubic. Dr.
Greenberg explained that the perceived overall reduction in polio cases
was achieved by changing the criteria by which polio was diagnosed. (2)
The citation of the above quote (note 2) is to that well known medical
authority: "J.I. Rodale: The Encyclopedia of Common Diseases, Rodale Books
Inc., Emmaus Pennsylvania (1962). " It is so well known and respected that
my local public library has taken the 1976 edition (apparently the latest
one offered) off their shelves as being "out of date."
How nice of them...
Dr. Herbert Ratner did chair a panel discussion at the May 1960 meetings
of the IMS. The panel consisted of Dr. Herald Cox, the aforementioned Dr.
Greenberg, and Dr. Herman Kleinman. Of these, only Ratner and Kleinman
were MDs; Cox was Sc.D, and Greenberg, PhD [not that any of that matters].
The proceedings (edited from a transcript) were printed the August and
September issues of the Illinois Medical Journal (IMJ). Funny how only the
August issue ever gets mentioned.
I wonder why.
Yesterday, I read those articles at the University of Medicine and
Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ) over in Newark. Unfortunately, their
copier was down, so I could not make copies; but I did take notes. I did
notice that many of the web quotes from Dr. Greenberg's alleged 1962
Congressional testimony were paralleled in the 1960 panel transcript.
Hmmm.
Then I tried to track down the oft-cited 1962 HR 10541 at Seton Hall Law
School Rodino Library. But their Congressional Serial Set only goes back
to the 1970s. They sent me to the Newark Public Library, which has many
Congressional resources, but not this one. But the NPL did give me the
more correct citation: not HR 10541, but "Intensive Immunization
Programs", and "Y4in8/4:Im6." [don't ask me what that code means.] So, via
Lexus-Nexus, I found that Rutgers Gov Pubs had both a microfiche and a
hardcopy. Interestingly, reading the Nexus-Lexus copy, I noticed that
while the list of witnesses at the HR 10541 hearings included about 10
people, they did *not* Dr. Greenberg.
This morning, I went down to Rutgers and read the original hard copy of HR
10541. Fortunately their copiers were working.
First conclusion, intimated by the above "witness list": despite numerous
citations that he did, Dr. Greenberg did not, and I emphasize *did not*,
"testify at Congressinal hearings" on HR 10541.
I see. So this was a misunderstanding.
Rather, almost the entire text of the IMJ edited transcripts were
reprinted as pages 90-109 of the Hearing of the Committee on Interstate
and Foreign Commerce on "Intensive Immunization Programs." This should
have been obvious to anyone viewing the report as the actual Hearing
statements are printed in a different type face and font size than are the
attachments. {This is one of those hints they don't teach you in
Historiography classes}]. I say "almost entire text" because while the IMJ
originals do include in-text endnote numbers, the articles conclude with
the comment, "Bibliography available upon request." The House text has no
indication of endtnotes.
So only his testimony was included, while he was not present there in
person.
HR 10541 was passed (after House amendments {to exclude Christian
Scientists}, and with no Senate hearings), as the Vaccination Assistance
Act of 1962, US Statutes at Large 76:1155.
In the following discussion, page number citations will refer to the 1962
Congressional reprint of the 1960 IMS panel discussion.
[Aside: there are a few web cites to HR 10541 pages 110 and above. These
are to the reprint of an article from the Chicago Sunday Times magazine of
Mar. 5, 1961 [a highly respected medical source
], by Joan Beck,
entitled "The Truth About the Polio Vaccines: Do Salk Shots Really Prevent
Polio." It consists largely of direct quotes from the 1960 panel.]
Apparently the above quote from the 1962 Rodale Encyclopedia article (if
it is correct) is the earliest source of the claim that Greenberg
testified.
So this looks like the source of the error.
I can trace Web citations back to about 1996, but since many Web sources
liberally grab from each other, the trail of citations is unclear.
But to now the crux of the matter: at the 1960 panel discussion, reprinted
in 1962, Dr. Greenberg did say, "My primary concern, my only concern, is
the very misleading way that most of this data has been handled from a
statistical point of view" (1962:94), and he did use the word
"manipulated" once, ["A scientific examination of the data, and the manner
in which the data were manipulated, will reveal that the true
effectiveness of the present Salk vaccine is unknown and greatly over
rated" (1962:95)].
That is, Greenberg *did* call into question the effectiveness of the
vaccine [Rodale's above "ineffectiveness"].
Good.
However, in my reading, neither Greenberg personally, or the panel as a
whole, concluded that the "vaccine [was] a frank and ineptly disguised
fraud" or that "data had been manipulated to hide the dangers." Neither
the words "fraud" nor "danger" occur in the transcript.
Well, _I_ think that the vaccine was a frank and ineptly disguised fraud!
Indeed, Dr. Greenberg's final comment on the matter (and remember he was
speaking as a statistician, not as an MD):
"I am agnostic [to the effectiveness of Salk] like Dr. Kleinman. I am
sorry that I do not know what the effectiveness of the Salk vaccine is.
Since nothing else is available, there seems to be no alternative but to
push the use of it. I don't think we should do so in ignorance, nor too
complacently, believing that as long as we have some partially effective
there is no need to have something better. The USPHS is, in effect,
sayiong, "Let's face it: we were burned the last time by getting into this
business to quickly; so thius time we are going to be more cautious.' By
being more cautious, we may make a mistake by accepting a better polio
vaccine too slowly. And that's what i am trying to emphasize: They must
realize they are making this mistake possible. the issue must be pursued."
(1962:103)
Conclusions:
As noted above, Greenberg did note how data had been handled in a "very
misleading way." But he ascribed much of that to the mass media, singling
out a "recent Associated Press release" (1962:95), not to a 'medical
establishment' conspiracy [single quotes, my terms]
But 'medical establishment' constantly engages in fraud. Examples are dime a
dozen.
Greenberg did describe how the methods for calculating incidents of polio
had changed from 1955 to 1959. But at no point did he, nor anyone else on
the panel, ascribe this to malicious intent by a 'medical establishment.'
If nobody on the panel said this, it's too bad. The fraud is obvious. They
changed the definition of "polio". There was obviously malicious intent to
hide the increase in these types of symptoms due to vaccine.
Indeed, he explicitly commented that the post-1959 "*improved* methods of
diagnosis have prevailed" (1962:97) [my emphasis].
Greenberg did question the effectiveness of the Salk vaccine, but not of
vaccines in general.
And I question vaccines in general.
Indeed, Greenberg eagerly awaited both a live virus vaccine (more
effective), and an oral vaccine (as the primary route of polio infection
was oral).
They are all frauds!
The way the 1960 panel's discussion is today being presented is probably
even more "misleading" than the way the 1955-59 statistics were.
Who knows?
If you want to get a misleading idea to a mass market, there's lies,
damned lies, statistics, and then there's the web.
Keep up the good work, Yuri, it's always fun working with you.
tk
Thomas W. Kavanagh, PhD
Seton Hall University
Dept of Sociology/Anthropology
I'll do my best.
Yuri now admits that his purpose is to get misleading ideas to a mass
