Re: Top-selling author says flawed vaccinations caused Gulf War disease

From: PF Riley (pfriley_at_watt-not.com)
Date: 08/29/04 

Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:52:24 -0700

More complete bull*** from John, recognizable immediately because of
the usual features of such bull***.

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 10:39:45 +0000 (UTC), "john"
<nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> wrote:
>
>http://www.sundaypost.com/news4.htm
>
>Top-selling author says flawed vaccinations caused disease

False appeal to authority.

>Scientist blasts MoD over Gulf War Syndrome
>By Iain Harrison
>
>AN award-winning scientist says his research into Gulf War Syndrome counters
>claims by the MoD that it doesn't exist.

False appeal to authority. He is to be believed without actually
analyzing his data because he is a "top-selling author" and an
"award-winning scientist?"

>Dr Ken McClure, now a best-selling author, investigated the claims of ill
>veterans while researching his latest novel, The Gulf Conspiracy.
>
>The ex-molecular geneticist with the Medical Research Council says his
>findings point towards flawed vaccinations as the cause of the controversial
>condition.
>
>Edinburgh-based Dr McClure considered submitting his thesis to the ongoing
>Gulf War Syndrome (GWS) inquiry.
>
>But he reneged amid fears sceptics would dismiss this as a publicity stunt.

No, his real fear is that his "data" wouldn't stand up to public
scrutiny. It's far easier to make wild claims and back them up with
appeal to authority and conspiracy claims than to actually prove what
you claim.

>In a frank interview with The Sunday Post, Dr McClure reveals how he came up
>against a wall of silence when he began probing the cause of the disease.

Yes, again the conspiracy of the "establishment" against the lone,
dedicated researcher working long hours in his lab to find The Truth
that "they" don't want you to know. Don't these morons realize how
stereotypical and laughable this has become?

>"Around 250,000 veterans are adamant their illness is a direct result of
>their service in the first Gulf War," he explains.

And during the majority of human history most people thought the sun
revolves around the earth. So what?

>Crucial
>
>"But the MoD, backed by the medical establishment, insist the range of
>symptoms reported rules out the possibility of a single syndrome being
>responsible.
>
>"This is crucial because without the recognition of a single condition there
>can be no compensation paid out. In my opinion, this is completely wrong.

Again, the "establishment" has a sinister reason to say he's wrong
(i.e., to save money). Could it be that this author has a good reason
to claim he's right, too? (To make money?) Nahh... of course not!
Conspiracists don't need to make a living! They dedicate all their
time for free in order to find The Truth!

>"GWS is similar to Aids in that there is no single disease called Aids.
>Sufferers contract a wide range of 'Aids-related conditions' which can
>include tuberculosis and pneumonia, which attack the immune system.

No, this is a poor comparison. There IS a disease called AIDS.

>"I began looking for a single thing which could have destroyed the immune
>system of Gulf War veterans.
>
>"I concluded that the only thing it could have been was the vaccines given
>to troops.

At last, we see what a poor scientist he is. No scientist would EVER
say in a case like this that "the only thing it could be is..." It's
called tunnel vision. Look into it.

>"However, when I asked questions about the cocktail of drugs within the
>vaccines I was told some were classified under the Official Secrets Act."

Ah, the conspiracy again.

>He claims his findings developed even more significance when the MoD
>admitted to him that 72 per cent of veterans' medical records had gone
>missing since the war ended.

Likely a lie on McClure's part. The journalist reports this hearsay,
but fortunately get's the MoD's comment as well (later on).

>French troops
>
>Dr McClure hit upon his vaccine theory after studying available data from
>two "control groups" - soldiers not given the vaccine who did go to the Gulf
>and soldiers given the vaccine but who did not go to the Gulf.
>
>"Some people claim Saddam's chemical and biological weapons are to blame for
>the condition while others say it's down to depleted uranium," adds Dr
>McClure.
>
>"Yet the first group I looked at were French troops who would have been
>exposed to those. None of them came down with Gulf War Syndrome.
>
>"They did not receive the vaccine prior to going out because their
>commander-in-chief did not trust it. So what does that suggest?

Oh, then most certainly there must be a problem with the vaccine if
the commander-in-chief of the French army didn't trust it!

>"I also studied a second control group that included a considerable number
>of soldiers who'd been given vaccines but did not go out. They did develop
>GWS symptoms.
>
>"Within this group is Scottish-born GWS sufferer Alex Izett, whose hunger
>strike led to the inquiry into the disease being set up.

Gosh, you mean the second group wasn't from France? Hardly a matched
comparison, is it? A retrospective case-control study is hardly
conclusive to begin with, but did he really admit to introducing yet
another major form of bias?

>"The fact he, and many others like him, are now suffering from GWS surely
>completes the case against the vaccines.

Surely? Now I'd really like to know what "award" McClure has won for
science! He doesn't know crap about proving hypotheses!

>Very ill
>
>"The technicalities of what went wrong do not matter, but the fact all these
>people are very ill does. They should be treated properly and with
>compassion.
>
>"I knew it would be interesting investigating Gulf War Syndrome, but I was
>extremely surprised by my findings.
>
>"But whether it was caused by a rogue vaccine, contamination of the vials,
>or was merely a mistake is something for other scientists to determine."

No, first to determine is whether his hypothesis, suggested by a
poorly matched retrospective case-control study, has any merit. Step
one: Release your data for peer-review.

>Although Dr McClure's latest novel - which is currently flying off the
>shelves in the US - is fiction, he says it's "not far removed from reality".

Ah, selling well thanks to your propaganda sales pitch.

>"I discovered the Army had been working with the HIV virus prior to the
>first Gulf War, although I couldn't find out why.

Oh, I'm sure the reason they won't tell you is because they are hiding
some sinister conspiracy, and not because it's none of your business.

>"That's what I took as the starting point for the book, with the vaccines
>being contaminated, but I'll probably never know how close to the truth it
>is."
>
>While acknowledging some veterans of the 1990/91 Gulf conflict have become
>ill, the MoD dismiss suggestions that veterans from other countries suffer
>less ill health than their UK counterparts.
>
>Major study
>
>Ironically, they cite findings published by the Medical Research Council,
>for whom Dr McClure worked, which said veterans from several coalition
>countries consistently report suffering more symptoms than non-Gulf
>veterans.
>
>A spokeswoman added, "The MoD has commissioned a major study into the
>possible adverse health effects of the administration of a combination of
>vaccine or nerve agent pre-treatments during the 1990/91 Gulf conflict.
>
>"Preliminary test results were published in April 2003 and indicated no
>apparent adverse health consequences. Full results are expected to be
>published later this year.

So the MoD will release its data, but McClure won't. As McClure would
say, "So what does that suggest?"

>"Medical records of service personnel have not gone missing. Details of
>vaccinations given in theatre were not, in all cases, transferred to
>individual medical records on return to the UK.
>
>"The MoD have acknowledged this and improved procedures have been put in
>place."

And there you have it.

>The Gulf Conspiracy is published by Allison & Busby, £12.99, ISBN
>0-7490-0614-5.

Plug for more sales at the end.

Good luck, McClure. I'm sure you'll make plenty of money, and prove
nothing.

PF