NVIC Vaccine News

Amy Wallace & Yellow Journalism

By Barbara Loe Fisher
Published September 09, 2010 in Media

On October 17, 2009 I was at the Atlanta airport on my way back to Washington, D.C. when I stopped at a newsstand. Like most weary travelers waiting for a plane, I was looking for something to read that would give me a break from my work, which included, two weeks earlier, hosting the large Fourth International Public Conference on Vaccination 1 for an audience of 700 concerned scientists, health care professionals, journalists, legal experts, ethicists and parents from around the world.

Suddenly, my eye caught the distorted, photo-shopped image of a baby with the word FEAR in bold letters imprinted on the baby’s chest. I paged through Wired magazine 2  to find out who wrote the article and discovered it was a woman named Amy Wallace, one of the many journalists I had talked with in 2009, who had contacted the National Vaccine Information Center 3, a non-profit, educational organization I co-founded in with parents of vaccine injured children in 1982.

As I scanned the article to find out why it was entitled “An Epidemic of Fear: One Man’s Battle Against the Anti-Vaccine Movement,” I quickly realized it was a puff piece for vaccine patent holder, Dr. Paul Offit, who alleges that vaccine injuries and deaths are largely a myth.

Then, I saw my name. And then, I saw the words, “She lies.”

I felt a knot in the pit of my stomach as I read the unsubstantiated, unchallenged slur made by Offit against me. And in those two words “SHE LIES,” I knew that the propaganda tactic of character assassination was being used to attack the credibility of my nearly 30 years 4 of work as a vaccine safety consumer advocate.

Now, I have never met Amy Wallace. We have never shaken hands or shared so much as a cup of coffee together. We had one interview on the telephone in 2009. In a sworn statement 5 she stated that she did not use any quotes from our telephone interview in her Wired article. No, she didn’t.

She also did not tell Wired readers what I told her, which is that I have always encouraged everyone to become educated 6 about the risks of diseases and risks of vaccines and consult one or more trusted health care professionals before making an informed decision - just like every intelligent person should do before using any pharmaceutical product. Instead, Ms. Wallace said she based her description of me on a speech I gave at a conference, a speech that she did not attend. Nobody at Wired magazine called me while they were presumably fact checking Wallace’s article to ask me point blank, “Dr. Offit said that you lie. Do you have a response?” Wouldn’t a responsible journalist or editor have made some attempt to verify such a serious attack on another person’s character? No, Dr. Offit’s defamatory statement remained in the article, unchallenged.

I was left with two options: 1) I could ignore it; or (2) I could take action to defend my integrity. After consulting Jonathan Emord 7, a constitutional and libel law attorney, I selected option number two. I sought justice in a civil court, which is my constitutional privilege as an American citizen and my responsibility as the president of a non-profit organization, whose supporters depend upon the accuracy, honesty and integrity of what I say and do, as does everyone I know.

Requesting a jury trial in a U.S. civil court to sue for slander or libel is not for the faint of heart. You have to review and be prepared to defend the truthfulness of every statement you have ever made and every action you have ever taken in your life. You, your family, friends and colleagues could be subpoenaed and drawn into a potentially very public, drawn-out battle, especially if those you are suing are wealthy, influential and politically connected.

I had never sued anyone before and I certainly never thought I would find it necessary to sue a journalist. The majority of journalists I have worked with over the years have been honest men and women, who have taken care to do their research and fairly report the facts without prejudice, including accurately describing who I am and what I do.

This was different. I had never been defamed before and I knew I had no choice but to take steps to defend my integrity. I was confident that, if my case was presented to a jury of my peers, I would win. I had no doubt I would win on the facts because I do not lie and there was no evidence that could be produced to substantiate the defamatory statement made by Offit, amplified by Wallace, and printed by Wired magazine published by Conde Nast.

After Mr. Emord filed a Complaint with Demand for a Jury Trial 8 on Dec. 23, 2009 in a Virginia U.S. District Court asking for one million dollars in damages, we waited for a response from the defendants. When I read the Motion to Dismiss brief filed on Jan. 22, 2010 9 by the defendants attorneys, I could not believe what I was reading. That CYA brief is better reading material than anything I can write or say here.

Instead of providing one piece of solid evidence to support Offit’s defamatory statement, Wallace claimed I could not sue her because she is a resident of California. And Offit, who has no trouble keeping a straight face when he states flatly that it is absolutely safe for a child to get 10,000 vaccines at once and 100,000 vaccines in a lifetime, claimed he was simply having an emotional meltdown when he hysterically told Wallace “flatly” that I lie. And to draw attention away from the seriousness of engaging in libel per se, the defendants’ attorneys argued that “the quoted remark ‘she lies’ is not capable of being proven true or false” because the civil court system cannot prove whether vaccines do or do not cause harm.

In my Opposition to Motion to Dismiss brief filed on Feb. 3, 2010 10, Jonathan Emord and his associates brilliantly outlined why it is inconceivable that the self characterized “dispassionate, objective” Dr. Offit described by Wallace in her article as a “mild mannered” rational man of “science,” suddenly would have lost his mind when maliciously calling me a liar. Mr. Emord points out that it is far more logical to conclude that Dr. Offit knew exactly what he was doing.

Mr. Emord also makes a compelling argument that Ms. Wallace knew exactly what she was doing when she wrote an article “void of balanced criticism” that set me up for ridicule as a person “unworthy of any professional association.” Mr. Emord rightly stated that the libel lawsuit we filed was not about “the intellectual debate surrounding vaccination,” it was about proving before a jury of my peers that Offit and Wallace defamed me in order to discredit my long, successful public record of consumer advocacy to defend the informed consent ethic in medicine 11.

On February 12, 2010, the case was argued in front of Judge Claude Hilton, a Ronald Reagan federal court appointee. On March 10, 2010, a Memorandum Opinion 12 was issued by Judge Hilton granting the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.

In his opinion, Judge Hilton explained why he would not allow me to face my accusers in a court of law in front of a jury of my peers. First, Hilton said that protection of First Amendment free speech rights are “at their zenith” in this case because Paul Offit and I are public figures debating an issue of “substantial public concern.” Second, he said there would have to be a discussion about “which side of this debate has ‘truth’ on their side” and that would be impossible to prove based upon a “core of objective evidence.”

Third, Hilton offered the opinion that Offit’s allegation “cannot be reasonably understood to suggest” that I am “a person lacking honesty and integrity” and that Wallace and Wired magazine were only reporting Offit’s “personal opinion” about my “views” and none of the defendants intended to make a “literal assertion of fact” that I lie.

In other words, they really didn’t mean it.

Seriously. That was the substance of their main defense – they really didn’t mean it – and Hilton bought it. However, if all three defendants really didn’t mean it, as they claim in their legal brief, then, ethically, all three defendants should have stated so publicly in a clarification published in Wired magazine to correct the public record. That has not happened.

I weighed the option of taking the case to the federal Court of Appeals, where a three-judge panel would have reviewed Hilton’s opinion and had the opportunity to overturn it, as has happened in the past. However, if Hilton’s opinion were overturned on appeal, my case would have gone back to Hilton’s court for a jury trial and he would have been the presiding judge with an obvious bias.

So I did not appeal and moved on. However, Ms. Wallace continues to paint herself as the innocent victim of an uprovoked libel lawsuit, even as she becomes the shameful face of yellow journalism 13, a nasty, lowbrow kind of tabloid reporting that “exploits, distorts or exaggerates” to create “sensation and attract readers.”

In an August 30, 2010 article 14 published on the Internet, Wallace addressed fellow journalists about the difficulties of being sued for libel and complained about being called bad names by grieving parents of vaccine injured children, whom she had cruelly demonized in her article. Casting herself as a martyr with Offit for the cause, she said “The beast doesn’t tire, it seems, of taking whacks at those who dare to describe it” and suggested that she had been vindicated by Hilton’s opinion and the inclusion of her Wired article in an upcoming book on Best American Science Writing edited by a doctor with financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry, including vaccine manufacturers.

Sadly, Wallace is looking into a mirror when she describes the “beast.” She, Offit and Wired magazine have feasted on the shattered lives of vaccine injured children and their parents to sell magazines. They have taken delight in belittling vaccine victims and those who are trying to help them, while defending bad science and one-size-fits-all vaccine policies that create more vaccine damaged children every day. Amy Wallace, who wrote an article full of factual errors and silly quotes from a doctor hyping vaccine mandates like a used car salesman, is a classic example of the bully who can dish it out but sure can’t take it.

During the 1980’s, 1990’s and early 2000’s, I worked with award winning,15,16 truly professional print and broadcast journalists,17,18,19,20,21 who were committed to maintaining high journalistic standards and intelligently covering all sides of the multi-faceted vaccine safety issue. They did not sensationalize and dumb down the conversation to a black and white, “pro” and “anti” slugfest that is the hallmark of tabloid journalism.

There are fewer smart, responsible investigative journalists writing about the science, policy, law, ethics and politics of vaccination in America today. Perhaps that is because, today, health journalists are being warned by those in positions of authority to only report one side of the vaccine safety story.22

Do I regret my libel lawsuit, even though I didn’t get my day in court in front of a jury of my peers to prove who is lying and who is not? Not at all.

I know I did the right thing when I stood up to these schoolyard bullies, who are desperately trying to shut down all public discussion about vaccine risks, a subject that public opinion polls reveal concerns more than 50 percent of Americans today.23 Perhaps that is because, today, nearly everybody knows somebody who was healthy, got vaccinated, and then became sick or disabled for the rest of their life.

Doctors, journalists and judges in denial cannot change that harsh reality. It is a reality that the American people are not going to tolerate for much longer before they rise up, break free, and take back their health and their choices.


1 NVIC.org. Fourth International Public Conference on Vaccination: Show Us the Science & Give Us the Choice. Oct 2-4, 2009.  

2 Wallace A. An Epidemic of Fear: One Man’s Battle Against the Anti-Vaccine Movement. Wired. November 2009.  

3 NVIC.org.  

4 NVIC.org. Biography, Barbara Loe Fisher.

5 Wallace A. Declaration of Amy Wallace, January 22, 2010 in the U.S. District Court Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Motion to Dismiss by Amy Wallace and Conde Nast Publications, Inc. 

6 NVIC.org. About Us.

7 Emord, Jonathan. Biography.

8 Barbara Loe Arthur (aka Barbara Loe Fisher), Plaintiff, v. Paul A. Offit, M.D., Amy Wallace, Conde Nast Publications, Inc., Defendants. Civil Action No. 01:09-cv-1398. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Complaint with Demand for Jury Trial filed Dec. 23, 2009 on behalf of plaintiff by Jonathan W. Emord with Andrea G. Ferrenz, Peter A. Arhangelsky, Christopher K. Niederhauser of Emord & Associates, Counsel for Plaintiff.  

9 Barbara Loe Arthur, Plaintiff, v. Paul A. Offit, M.D., et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 01:09-cv-1398. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Motion to Dismiss filed Jan. 22, 2010 on behalf of defendants by John B. O’Keefe, Michael D. Sullivan, Seth D. Berlin of Levine, Sullivan, Koch & Schulz, Counsel for Amy Wallace and Conde Nast Publications, Inc. and John D. McGavin, Heather K. Bardot of Trichilo, Bancroft, McGavin, Horvath & Judkins, Counsel for Paul A. Offit.

10 Barbara Loe Arthur (aka Barbara Loe Fisher), Plaintiff v. Paul A. Offit, M.D. et al, Defendants. Civil Action No. 01:09-cv-1398. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion to Dismiss filed Feb. 3, 2010 on behalf of plaintiff by Jonathan W. Emord with Andrea G. Ferrenz, Peter A. Arhangelsky, Christopher K. Niederhauser of Emord & Associates, Counsel for Plaintiff.

11 Fisher, BL. The Moral Right to Conscientious, Personal or Philosophical Belief Exemption to Mandatory Vaccination Laws. National Vaccine Advisory Committee, May 2, 1997.

12 Barbara Loe Arthur, Plaintiff, v. Paul A. Offit, M.D. et al, Defendants. Civil Action No. 01:09-cv-1398. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.   Memorandum Opinionfiled March 20, 2010 by Claude M. Hilton, U.S. District Judge.

13 The Free Dictionary. Definition of “yellow journalism” from the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (2000). Also see the history of yellow journalism. 

14 Wallace A. Covering Vaccines: Science, policy and politics in the minefield. Reporting on Health. Annenberg School of Communication, University of Southern California. Aug. 30, 2010.  

15 Lea Thompson, Investigative journalist and producer of the Emmy award winning April 1982 NBC-TV documentary DPT: Vaccine Roulette plus news coverage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and licensing of DTaP vaccine in 1996.

16 John Hanchette. Investigative journalist and co-author of The Vaccine Machine, a series of investigative Gannett news reports in 1985 on vaccine risks, gaps in science and operational flaws in the mass vaccination program. And a follow-up Gannett investigative series Vaccine Nation in 1999.

17 NBC News “Now Show.” Investigative report on DPT vaccine risks, “hot lots” and VAERS. Melissa Cornick, Fred Francis, Producers. Katie Courac, Correspondent. Mar. 2 and Aug. 31, 1994.   Video Part 1: Video Part 2:  

18 Rock A. The Lethal Dangers of the Billion Dollar Vaccine Business. Money Magazine. Dec. 1, 1996.

19 ABC News. 20/20: Who’s Calling the Shots?  Jan. 22, 1999. Sylvia Chase, producer. 20 Bookchin D, Schumacher J. The Virus and the Vaccine. Atlantic Monthly. February 2000. The Virus and the Vaccine: The True Story of a Cancer-Causing Monkey Virus, Contaminated Polio Vaccine, and the Millions of Americans Exposed. St. Martin’sPress. 2004.

21 Williams V., Schucker M. Prevnar: A Vaccine Investigation. WFAA-TV (ABC-Dallas). Broadcast Feb. 21-22, 2001. Recipient of 2001 award from Investigative Reporters & Editors.

22 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sibelius quoted in an interview: H1N1: The Report Card. Readers Digest. March 2010.

23 Shute N. Parents’ Vaccine Safety Fears Mean Big Trouble for Children’s Health. U.S. News & World Report. March 1, 2010.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with an *

Name is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please enter a comment.
41 Responses to "Amy Wallace & Yellow Journalism"
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/10/2010 1:00:36 PM
Thank you Barbara for your continued bravery and courage. We thank you, and our children thank you.
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/10/2010 1:03:02 PM
Very well done on defending your good name. It's tough to do these days. What Ms. Wallace doesn't see is that the public, we, see this kind of stuff for just what it is. Big broad generalizations, like "she lies" ring loud bells in this day and age with instant access to specifics via the internet. If you want to make a broad generalization like that, you'd better have links to prove it! (Like you have in your article.) It is obvious to even the "part-time" observer and even my kids know better!
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/10/2010 1:30:12 PM
As a journalist and editor with over 20 years of experience, I applaud your lawsuit. I have never once published an article which I did not first run by all those quoted and mentioned in it. It would be reprehensible, disrespectful, and irresponsible. That woman is not a journalist in any sense of the word, as she does not practice either the ethics or the disciplines of the profession. I disagree strongly with the judge, as his decisions was not based on any sound legal footing: on the contrary it would be his responsibility to hold a jury and court hearings on course about the legal issues of the case. Perhaps he is not well trained or experienced enough to manage his courtroom. There is some argument in this case for the European system of training judges as a separate and rigorous legal education, enabling judges to work free of political and other influences that endanger the US system with elected and party appointed benches. As a journalist, I respect your work, the research you do, and your integrity in bringing these issues to the public for three decades. I can check the same facts you can, and so can anybody else. You don't lie.
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/10/2010 1:33:23 PM
I applaud your efforts! Fewer and fewer people are being fooled by the false science rampant in so much of today's "medicine". We need discussion and open scientific dialogue. Thank you for providing those, even when the self-serving opposition will not.
Commenter Name
Susan Goewey
Posted: 9/10/2010 1:37:30 PM
Unbelievable. Thank you for keeping up the good fight for the truth, Barbara.
Commenter Name
Robert Moxley
Posted: 9/10/2010 1:51:51 PM
Barbara Good for you for having the courage to take on these minions of Big Pharma. Libel law is so "free speech" oriented, that the sort of attack made on you goes unpunished. But then, such people as the good doctor will have their own special place in hell. Keep punching.
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/10/2010 2:00:11 PM
Good for you Barbara!! You are a brave woman and you are my hero. Thank you for fighting for the health of our children.
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/10/2010 2:05:23 PM
The work you have done and continue to do is amazing and it speaks for itself. Thank you for all that you do, Barbara.
Commenter Name
Bob Bevill
Posted: 9/10/2010 2:36:24 PM
Barbara, You will find that at the US District Court level, almost all of the judges will bend over backwards to accept the argument presented by Big Business / Big Media / Big Pharma, over the fundamental rules of law. At the Appeals Court level, the judges seem to take careful jurisprudence and legal precedence, and balance it in a fair and open-minded attitude. You will find your justice at the Appeals Court level. I personally have lived this for over 10 years. The district court that I dealt with continually bought into the "Alice in Wonderland" arguments of Big Business to ignore plain language rule of law and precedent, in order to help Big Business. I won on appeal - three times. Each time it would be kicked back to the District Court for them to take another crack at it, and each time they got it wrong, and I had to appeal it. On the fourth appeal, I drew a different three-judge panel, and they dismissed without review. Keep the faith. Bob
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/10/2010 2:53:20 PM
Thank you for holding your truth, despite the power and money controlled by the greedy uneducated, who have no basis for their hoax on the public, and continue to bully the children, elderly and pregnant with fear.
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/10/2010 2:53:31 PM
Thank you for what you do. Yesterday I asked an acquaintance how many siblings she had and she said 2 but one died of crib death. I asked if it was after a vaccine and she said the DPT and it was that same night. Parents never followed up about it. Doctor said it was a coincidence.
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/10/2010 2:53:43 PM
Thank you for taking this to court. Even though you did not win, I believe Amy Wallace will think a little harder next time. And shame on the judge for not letting a jury decide.
Commenter Name
Bill Sardi
Posted: 9/10/2010 3:14:57 PM
Poor Dr. Offit, never conceding any bias from his profit-making patents, anyone who stands in the way of his hallowed vaccines is a liar. I thought medicine and science was above all this. But I want to thank hi again for at least making an ass out of himself, promoting dangerous products on helpless children and telling parents to get out of his way. Nice guy. We need more like him so we can show the world what the vaccine industry is made of -- charlatans masquerading as scientists.
Commenter Name
Sally Rubin
Posted: 9/10/2010 3:35:35 PM
Having been through a long dragged out lawsuit, I applaud your courage to follow though with this, Barbara. It was the right thing to do. I'm sorry you didn't get your day in court.
Commenter Name
Mary Artemis
Posted: 9/10/2010 4:50:39 PM
HEY! Maybe they should get married. You know, we do the best we can. Courage takes us to the brink, then what happens is a reflection of the best that is in us (meaning the judge). Thanks for your courage in defending what is right and true. God asks for no more than that.
Commenter Name
Amy Murphy
Posted: 9/10/2010 4:51:52 PM
Paul "for profit" Offit has ZERO credibility among those of us old enough to have watched the shills for corporate "science" lurch down the pike over the last forty years. I only hope that young parents will do their research and realize how this scheme works. Thank you, Barbara, for all you continue to do -- and I believe you handled this disgusting situation with the utmost dignity,as you always do.
Commenter Name
Mary Artemis
Posted: 9/10/2010 4:53:48 PM
I hope Jonathan Emord is training replicators to carry on and expand on his work.
Commenter Name
Barb Wills
Posted: 9/10/2010 5:23:15 PM
Barbara, I admire so much your bravery and honesty. Thank you for continuing to fight the good fight. Bless You...Barb
Commenter Name
Elise Morris
Posted: 9/10/2010 5:24:27 PM
Thank you for your courage, Barbara. I am grateful for your integrity and tireless advocacy for our children and for the vaccine industry to be held up to the scrutiny they want to hide from. The judge's decision makes me sick. This is not justice, it is stonewalling by a judge who has too much power.
Commenter Name
michael framson
Posted: 9/10/2010 5:43:16 PM
Rarely.......does the truth ever get its day in court, on any of crimes that pharma, government perpetrate on its citizens. History will tell a very harsh story for those like Offit and Wallace and the judges who protect them.
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/10/2010 6:16:36 PM
I commend you Barbara for the journey you are on. I too had a situation whereby I chose not to appeal - I did this for the sake of my child and my own mental health. A few years later (again for the well-being of my child) in my next affidavit I wrote first and foremost that I had chosen not to appeal the judgement which allowed the current care arrangements to exist. Why did I do this? Because I needed to stand with my truth. How did this help me and my daughter? Two things: the lawyer opposing me could no longer harp on about the wonderful decision previously made (including against my will - annual flu vaccines for a child with a congenital heart deformity!) AND the next hearing a new Judge was appointed who ruled that my child could not be taken to live in another part of the country. YAY. I share this story WITH ADMIRATION FOR EVERYONE GIVING THEIR ENERGY FOR THE GOOD FIGHT - OUR CHILDREN DEPEND ON US. Love and light to all.
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/10/2010 8:40:49 PM
I wish what michael framson says was true, but I think history will only cover up the sad truth. Although I am very proud of you Barbara, I think the future holds little hope at all. Thanks for trying anyway.
Commenter Name
Jane Sheppard
Posted: 9/10/2010 9:54:43 PM
Barbara, I honor your courage and commitment! Thanks for not backing down and for all the amazing work you've done for so many years to expose the truth and help so many parents and children. The truth always prevails.
Commenter Name
Dr. Fred Blum
Posted: 9/10/2010 11:08:24 PM
When I read the original Wired article, my jaw nearly dropped with the blatant bias from Ms. Wallace. This was not a "journalist", seeking to understand a complex and controversial issue. This was someone with a preconceived opinion, seeking only to use her podium to spread that viewpoint. I had to ask myself repeatedly while reading it, "Are people really that gullible? Surely they can see the obvious bias, can't they???" It got even worse when, in the following issue, Wired dismissed all the letters criticizing or complaining about the article in the most condescending of tones. I wish I had the quotes here, but the tone was so superior, so dismissive of the probably significant number of letters expressing alternative viewpoints...I was shocked that they could have the gall to print it. Wired (a magazine that promotes itself as cutting edge) has shown itself to be nothing more than the lowest kind of trash. There is nothing more that they could ever write on any subject that could have credibility with me.
Commenter Name
Carol Burgess
Posted: 9/10/2010 11:10:23 PM
I am a physical therapist that has practiced with pediatrics for 30 years. I became aware of the dangers of vaccines before having children of my own. In fact, I treated the twins in the "Shot in the Dark". I appreciate your absolute devotion to safe vaccines and our rights as parents. I have two grown daughters that both have a very trimlined vaccine history. All that said, I had a subscription to Wired magazine last year. I intend to let the magazine know that I will not be renewing my membership based upon the mismanagement of the editorial process of the vaccine article.
Commenter Name
Sally O'Boyle
Posted: 9/10/2010 11:46:01 PM
I will no longer read WIRED and I will tell them why.
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/11/2010 4:44:09 AM
You are Appreciated by so many, you touch more lives than you will ever know. I am "facebooking" this story, and suggest everyone else do the same on all Barbara's articles.
Commenter Name
Sunshine L Brown
Posted: 9/11/2010 9:53:07 AM
I wish you had continued that appeal. I had read that article and was angered. She is a SLOPPY journalist and the lives of the children for whom you fight do not desearve this. Thank you Barbara!
Commenter Name
Anne Grace
Posted: 9/11/2010 11:20:22 AM
Dear Barbara, Thank you for all the work you do and may God bless you with health and stamina to continue it. There should be no sacred cows which we are forbidden from debating. Parents know their children and know when a vaccine has adversely affected them ,these concerns should not be brushed away. I only wish I had known of your work when my children were getting vaccines.I feel that by increasing the amount of vaccines given,the vaccine companies will precipitate their own end
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/11/2010 11:31:42 AM
Thank you, Barbara! I refer everyone who will listen to the NVIC website as an OBJECTIVE source of scientifically backed information about vaccinations. Keep up the good work. The world is a better place for it. The truth will come out and the REAL liars will one day be seen as such.
Commenter Name
Pat Warren
Posted: 9/11/2010 4:52:30 PM
Dear Barbara, I was appalled at what Dr. Offit and Ms.Wallace put you through. As a grandmother of a vaccine injured child, I know unequivocally what a horrendous hardship and pain it inflicts on the entire family and community of friends who are close to my grandson Milo. There is not a day that gone by that I wish I had known better or more about the vaccine and could have given my daughter advice on what to do about giving Milo his first shots. Milo was a month premature and his nervous system was still developing, when the doctor who administered the vaccine gave it to him. His regular pediatrician was on jury duty so the doctor on duty gave Milo the DPT shot while he was under the recommended weight. One hour after the shot, Milo had a seizure and has had them ever since. It caused his brainstem to become inflamed and he has irreversible brain damage. I applaud all that you do in order to inform parents to get as much information as they can get their hands on. I wish that my daughter and I had more information that fateful day that Milo was handed over to a doctor who is supposed to be a "healer." Even doctors are not educated enough about the vaccines they administer to their patients. It has been a journey -Milo, my grandson has taught my daughter and my family a lot. We are more informed now and are still learning all we can about how to care for Milo. At age 7, Milo cannot talk, walk, eat on his own. He has corticol vision blindness and no muscle stregnth. He will need constant care for the rest of his life because of the DPT shot. Keep up your great work - Dr. Offit needs to meet a few of the children who have been damaged by vaccinations. Pat Warre
Commenter Name
linda fortune
Posted: 9/12/2010 12:21:41 AM
My son was born "normal" and became "retarded" sometime in his first year. No doctor could ever answer why. Then he was drugged for 19 years and finally drugged to death, while in a group home. I suspect vaccine damage. I also worked in the Autism program with 9 of the most difficult to place children in the school system. School gave the parents a break from the stress of their children's condition even though school didn't really benefit their children. My teacher and we four assistants worked six exhausting hours a day to make a difference in those children's lives, but we couldn't because they were too damaged. I want to thank you Barbara! You are a voice we can trust. At a time when champions are few we want to encourage you to keep speaking the truth in love. With a vaccine injured child yourself, you have what Dr Offit and Amy Wallace don't have ...a heart! Thank you again.
Commenter Name
Kathleen Dunkelberger
Posted: 9/12/2010 9:01:28 PM
I guess this means we can call Paul Offit and others liars too and then use this case decision to defend ourselves! Yea...good news. Thanks for all you do and hang in there...the truth is already revealed...social change is not easy when we are dealing with years of indoctrination of the masses...AND billions and billions of dollars....
Commenter Name
Laura Cox
Posted: 9/13/2010 4:55:48 PM
Dear Barbara, I have referred many new parents to your site to become EDUCATED. I tell them to read everything and make up their own minds. Most tell me they choose to vaccinate, but either on a greatly altered schedule or reduce the number of vaccines their child will receive. I only wish I had known about your site and the information before my son was born 12 years ago. How different and healthier could his life have been. Like Hannah Poling, my son has an underlying mitochondrial disfunction. His immune system is a train wreck. Thanks for standing up for all of us who learned the hard way!
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/15/2010 5:48:45 PM
Barbara. Thank you for sharing this. What you have done and continue to do in the fight against vaccines and their safety is courageous and commendable! I also firmly believe in what you and the NVIC are doing. It makes me proud to hear that you stood up to them again, used your constitutional rights and fought for our children. Thank you again for all you do, what an inspiration you have been and continue to be to me. I am so thankful I realized the dangers of vaccines before my daughter was born. God bless
Commenter Name
Posted: 9/17/2010 5:18:21 PM
It was terrible that she slandered you. The history and story that you presented would have been much more effective if you wouldn't have shared your low opinion of her in return. Let the facts speak. Or let someone else add the the negative remarks (in third person)so you don't look like you are stooping. I am very interested to know your thoughts (and any links) to the CNN article stating that the rise in infant pertussis deaths in CA if the fault of all of us parents who decline to get our children vaccinated. Thank you - I enjoy your site.
Commenter Name
Posted: 11/15/2010 11:11:18 AM
Hi Barb, Ever heard of the "Stigma Plus" Doctrine? Section 1983 plaintiffs frequently assert that governmental action caused injury to their reputation in violation of procedural due process. More to injury than reputation, however, must be shown to support a Section 1983 procedural due process claim. In its 1976 decision in Paul:-) vs. Davis, the Supreme Court held that government defamation, no matter how seriously it damages a person's reputation, does not in itself work a deprivation of liberty. The claimant must also show that the defamation occurred in conjunction (plus) with the deprivation of some tangible interest. This has come to be known as the "stigma plus" doctrine. It has created numerous difficulties and uncertainties for both litigators and judges. Section 1983: West's Encyclopedia of American Law (full article) Section 1983 of title 42 of the U.S. Code is part of the Civil Rights Act of 1871. Formerly enacted as part of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 (www.legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Section+1983.com Check the Commerce Clause : Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution. The term commerce as used in the Constitution means business or commercial exchanges in any and all forms between citizens of different states, including purely social communication between citizens of different states by telegraph, telephone, or radio, and the mere passage of persons from one state to another for either business or pleasure. Medical License Types- Issued by state and local governments, medical licenses allow professional medical practitioners (MD) to operate. From: www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_License ... In most countries, only persons with a medical license bestowed either by a specified government approved professional association or a government agency are authorized to practice medicine. I am not an attorney, I am a child-parent advocate for special needs children and have one twin with vaccine damage(DTaP) Thank you for the years of hard work and the time you have unselfishly given to educate others without a means to get this info. on their own. Please send this info. to your (Stigma Plus) attorney and all others who are not aware of doctrine.
Commenter Name
Posted: 11/15/2010 9:51:03 PM
Thank you. Your work is saving lives and helping so many. Jen
Commenter Name
Posted: 3/1/2011 3:00:50 AM
Commenter Name
Posted: 3/1/2011 3:09:52 AM
Commenter Name
Heidy Claire
Posted: 8/28/2012 4:38:33 PM
Don't worry we the parents who have actually Observed vaccine injuries to our children KNOW you are right!!! We see with our own eyes the damage, and we know the greedy pharma moneymakers are lieing. We All know the truth. Which is they are lying And using FEAR to keep all their potential consumers taking the vaccines! I'm telling you pharmas lies will not keep the truth from the world. Heidi Farrell, RN, BSN,MPH
Make A Difference

NVIC is 100% funded by donations.

Connect with Us!

Ask 8 Information Kiosk

Explore FREE downloadable educational materials

NVIC Websites:
Opens in new tab, window
Opens an external site
Opens an external site in new tab, window