I am King. I am running for House District 63 in Bozeman, Montana. I think I came in
watching this movie with an open mind and I think vexed the story regarding the CDC and
cover-up, etc. I came in with an open mind. I have a lot of friends who are either veterinarians
or scientists of one nature or another. And I think a lot of people have been labeled
as anti-vaxxers. The folks who I met and talked with tonight, they're not against vaccination.
They're against vaccinations that are harmful to the children in our communities and our
families. And I think what struck me most of all was how much vitriol there is regarding
people who are quote-unquote anti-vaxx when they're not. One of the suggestions actually
made in the movie was to separate the MMR vaccine because there's a great significant
statistical correlation between the MMR and the rise in autism. And it's immediate. One
of the commenters who had a son who was diagnosed with autism said it was like a switch. And
within a week after the MMR, and these cases were over and over and over now, I think the
movie probably showed more, the more dramatic cases, the more serious cases. My first degree
is in economics with an emphasis on statistics. So that struck me as a little awkward. But
at the same time, you cannot deny some of the things. There were four things that came
out of that movie that they suggest people do. One is, of course, talk to your legislators,
your congressional representatives, and so forth. However, one of them was separating
the MMR because it's demonstrated to be more safe from a statistical standpoint. These
are not unreasonably request. And of course, one of them, the big one, the big one is to
have a, remind me of the doctor's name. Wakefield? Is it Dr. Wakefield? Wakefield or Dell Victory?
The producer. The doctor who is the whistleblower. Oh, William Thompson. Okay, Dr. William Thompson.
William. William Thompson, okay. So I believe the third item on the list was to subpoena
Dr. William Thompson, who is the whistleblower at the CDC, to subpoena him before Congress
and have him testify before Congress with what he found, the data, the original data, and
the doctor data by the CDC. These are not unreasonable requests. And as a statistician myself, as
an economist, I have a hard time believing that we would not want to face the truth.
If you're going to go out and dance, you're going to face the music and dance, you have
to hear the rhythm. You have to hear the melodies. You have to hear the harmonies. My other degree,
by the way, is in music. So that's why I bring this up. I think it's a perfectly fair allegory.
If you're going to face the music and dance, you can't do it. You have to listen to the
music when you dance to it. It's all right. You have to listen to the music when you dance
to it. You have to listen to the music when you play it. You have to listen to the music
when you direct it. You have to know what you want to hear from the score. So why are
we afraid to face the data, to face the facts? As an economist, I published a paper years
ago on the demand for M2 money. I think it's in the circularies of M2 money. M2 money is
money amounts greater than $100,000. Of course, when it went to peer review, I got beat down.
I got beat down horribly. I'll never forget my sister saying, oh, you can never handle
such and such because everyone will tell you you're wrong. Well, here's the problem
with that statement. It's untrue because when we produce a scientific study, the purpose
of that study is so that other people can look at the same data, replicate it, demonstrate
that, yes, this is a valid theory. That's the scientific process, and that's not what
this movie has shown. It's not what the scientific community at the CDC has done. So the whole
point of the scientific study is that other people can take it, replicate it, duplicate
it, and say, yes, this is a viable theory. We can accept this as scientific theory. Maybe
not scientific fact, but as scientific theory, yes. So I don't think it's unreasonable to
expect or to demand that Congress bring Dr. Thompson in to testify as to what he found.
I think it's perfectly reasonable. I also believe that it's reasonable now that, again,
like I said, these folks aren't anti-vaxxers. They want to be able to work collaboratively
and cooperatively with their doctor. They have that right in their doctor-patient relationship
so that they can put these vaccinations in because veterinarians will actually talk about
what's called herd health, so the health of the herd. I've seen what happens in a brucellosis
outbreak. I've seen what happens when dogs suffer from parvovirus because they weren't
vaccinated in a timely fashion. It's detrimental. Polio is detrimental on the human body.
We have to have the ability to vaccinate people against measles, mumps, rubella, and a whole
school of other things that affect our human condition, our human bodies. But we have to
have that informed consent to say, yes, this is a safe vaccine. We need to show that we
can drastically reduce. When you're seven to eight times more likely as an African American
receiving the MMR vaccine between ages 12 months and 18 months, there's a problem in
that data when it jumps out at you that they are seven to eight times more likely than other
groups to suffer from autism and result in a diagnosis of autism. I think that's wrong.
Before today, did you know that there wasn't ever any study comparing vaccines versus vaccination?
I did not. I did not. Even in economics, we do the same thing. We study what happens
in it. It's called a population comparison. It's a very simple comparison. So you study
one population against another population. So in medical studies, it's a placebo against
the drugs. I did not know that either. I did not know that either because I often, when
we refer to vaccines, it's a pharmaceutical product. So we make the assumption that it's
tested under the same rigors of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are not.
