Scaring People Out of Their Wits Over Pseudo-Pandemics (Swine Flu, Avian Flu, SARS, Ebola and now Zika)



Scaring People Out of Their Wits Over Pseudo-Pandemics (Swine Flu, Avian Flu, SARS, Ebola and now Zika)


Why Aren’t Public Health Organizations Like CIDRAP Warning Pregnant Women to Abstain from Aluminum or Mercury-containing Vaccines?”


A few days ago, I emailed out what I consider overwhelming evidence that debunks the Zika Virus/Microcephaly thesis (that is fast becoming “conventional wisdom”) that we have all been bombarded with over the past month. The email was in the form of an open letter, with documentation, primarily addressed to one of the leading thought leaders in epidemiology in America over the past generation, Dr Michael Osterholm.


Dr Osterholm has been a consultant to the World Health Organization (WHO), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Department of Defense (DOD), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). He has undoubtedly done valuable work in the epidemiology of infectious diseases over the years.


In my open letter, I asked Dr Osterholm, and the readers, “Why Aren’t Public Health Organizations Like CIDRAP Warning Pregnant Women to Abstain from Aluminum or Mercury-containing Vaccines?” I could have also asked Dr Osterholm, given the fact that lead and mercury have lethal synergistic effects on brain tissue, why aren’t public health organizations not warning lead-intoxicated children in Flint, Michigan to not be given mercury-containing flu shots? (CIDRAP is theCenter for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, a non-profit public health information group that Dr Osterholm founded and now directs. For more information on CIDRAP, go to


In the process of trying to understand CIDRAP’s mission, I watched its promotional video, which was designed to attract donors.


In the very first minute of the video, a breathless narrator says:


“One sneeze and the world implodes. Infection takes flight and the next pandemic is born; and our fears become a historical fact.”


The narrator quotes Osterholm as saying (totally contrary to the scary tone of the video),


“Our job is not to scare people out of their wits, it is to scare them into their wits. We are the super-planners, the “worst case scenario” strategists.”


The video can be viewed at:


For the better part of the last month, I have been doing extensive research into what might be behind the panicky reporting that the media has been doing about what I call “The Zika Virus Freak-out”.


<<<Something’s Rotten in Denmark>>>


As the readers of my Duty to Warn columns that discuss America’s over-diagnosed, over-vaccinated and over-drugged population have come to understand, there is “something rotten in Denmark” when it comes to public health policies.  (The phrase, “something’s rotten in Denmark” is a comment that I frequently heard from my German-influenced mother when something didn’t add up).


On Day One of the Zika Scare reporting, I very easily discovered that Brazil had, early in 2015, (when women were getting pregnant, ready to deliver in less than 9 months), mandated that henceforth, all pregnant women were to be inoculated with the aluminum-adjuvanted vaccine, an injected combination of foreign substances that contained antigens for diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (whooping cough). The generic name for the trivalent vaccine was DTaP (or TDaP). The product literature that comes with every batch of the vaccine says:


Sanofi PasteurPENTACEL DTaP IPV and HIB Combo Vaccine  
Data from Clinical Studies, Serious Adverse Events: Encephalopathy


GlaxoSmithKlineINFANRIX (DTaP) Pertussis Vaccine
Postmarketing Experience: Encephalopathy


 Encephalopathy is literally a “disease of the brain” which can be caused by many agents, including the neurotoxic, blood-brain barrier-toxic, mitochondrial-toxic substances aluminum, mercury and lead, which, in a sane, non-corporate-dominated universe would be contraindicated for pregnant women, fetuses and even babies whose immune systems, brains, bodies, blood-brain barriers, livers and intestines are immature, easily poisoned and very leaky.


Drug-induced poisonings of fetuses can easily occur at the earliest stages of brain and body development. One of the most infamous outbreaks of iatrogenic (medical-industry-caused) congenital anomalies produced the congenital anomaly called phocomelia , which is the term for shortened or absent limbs in babies born because their mothers had been prescribed the sedative Thalidomide in the late 1950s. What is happening in Brazil today is microcephaly which is a spectrum disorder that could present with a totally absent brain (anencephaly), an underdeveloped brain (microcephaly) or just neurological signs and symptoms that could be mis-diagnosed later in life as Autism Spectrum Disorder, ADHD, Oppositional Defiant Disorder, Learning Disorder, etc (all supposedly “of no known cause”).


The apparent motivation for Brazilian public health officials for instituting such a drastic measure as injecting known fetal toxins into pregnant women was the statistical increase in whooping cough cases over the preceding decade from less than one case per 100,000 population to 4 cases per 100,000, an pseudo-alarming increase of 500%!


Looking at the statistics rather than the human reality on the ground (ie that 99,995 Brazilians out of every 100,000 DID NOT get whooping cough in any given year), and knowing that 90% - 95% of the Brazilian population were already fully vaccinated, the public health officials innovatively (and very unscientifically) decided to inoculate pregnant women - and their very vulnerable fetuses – with a vaccine containing the well-known neurotoxic metal aluminum. For background data, see:


Concerned – and frustrated – that there seemed to be a lot of ignorance in the media about what they were reporting, I decided to present my concerns to Dr Osterholm.


My goal was to get his take on some of the facts surrounding the microcephaly outbreak. It was obvious to me that


“the most likely cause of the Brazilian outbreak of the usually rare fetal anomaly microcephaly was far less likely to be a mosquito virus, but rather the aluminum adjuvant in the DTaP shot. Aluminum is a neurotoxic metal that is toxic in parts per billion concentrations and could be predicted to be a cause of serious brain anomalies. Neuroscientists should be aware of the fact that there is no known safe level of either aluminum or mercury (or lead, for that matter) in the living tissues of any animal, especially immature fetuses These metals, as are many other synthetic chemicals that can cross the placental and blood-brain barriers are all mitochondrial toxins and fetuses should not be exposed to them.”


So far, all my efforts to inform scientists, healthcare journalists, editors, physicians, and even politicians have resulted in either dead silence or requests to “UNSUBSCRIBE”. And, as of this writing, I have received no response from Dr Osterholm.


So for this week’s column, I have decided to make my recent open letter to various members of the neuroscience, media and political communities, in case some of my readers might be able to help alert the public health community before it’s too late for some of the unaware pregnant women in Brazil who might otherwise be destined for inoculation with fetotoxic substances.


Below is my original open letter, which I wrote after I heard Dr Osterholm do a public radio interview. The letter was not meant to confront Dr Osterholm alone about possibly over-looking something important. He is only one of a multitude of other public health officials that seemed to be reading from the same script – and I happened to have his email address. Here is the correspondence:


“You and I have heard the endless numbers of reports from every media outlet in the world that have shown absolutely no recognition of the fact that aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines (TDaP specifically) were suddenly mandated in early 2015 for ALL pregnant Brazilian women (see articles below for the very flawed rationale for that extreme measure).


“The neurotoxic aluminum inoculations are by far the most likely reason for the sudden onset of microcephaly in Brazil – not the virus. Yet there has been – alarmingly so – no call from public health officials anywhere to stop the inoculations of pregnant women! The CDC and WHO are guilty of this oversight (or is itwillful ignorance?).


“I heard you on an MPR interview recently (when the Zika scare first came out). You urged caution in the rush to put out a lot of money and effort in developing a vaccine cure (for yet another virus that has only a weak correlation with microcephaly), but you also didn’t mention aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines that all the highly vaccinated pregnant Brazilian women had been mandated to receive.


“Aluminum, (not to mention the mercury in the recommended flu shots that the women may also have received), even in nano-concentrations, as you know, is not only damaging to vascular placental barriers and blood-brain barriers (both of which keep out toxins, DNA particles, viral particles and large molecules of all sorts from entering the fetus’s cerebrospinal fluid), but it is also directly toxic to cells, particularly to the mitochondria of all cells, especially the neurons of both the peripheral and central nervous systems.


“Therefore, the (microcephaly and the) widely advertised increased incidence of Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) in mosquito-infested areas are likely to have similar etiologies. (GBS is an autoimmune peripheral nerve disorder that is well-known to be caused by aluminum and/or mercury in vaccines.) To my knowledge, autoimmune disorders like GBS are never caused by viral infections, but the CDC and WHO have been unhelpfully correlating Zika with GBS, thus further fueling the Zika panic.


“But, as we in medicine occasionally point out (when it is to our advantage): correlation is not causation. The CDC and WHO are, to their shame, not pointing out that truism.


“So, given the open-mindedness that I perceived in your recent MPR interview, I’m sending you some of the details supporting the assertions above, so that you and hopefully a few other open-minded public health scientists can do the responsible thing and point out the errors in policy that have been perpetuated by those officials. It can be fairly asserted that they have been ethically (and possibly criminally) negligent in not warning the public (and especially pregnant women) about these issues.


“I am hoping that you will exert your influence and raise the awareness of your colleagues and the media to this critically important issue. I trust that you and a few or your hopefully enlightened colleagues (to whom I am cc’ing this message) will agree with the evidence and actions discussed below.


“I have been trying to do so with no apparent success.


“I hope you can help. Gary G. Kohls, MD, Duluth, MN”



And below is a follow-up email message that I sent to a number of interested parties a day or so later. I also included the open letter above.  Many of the interested parties were neuroscientists, scholars, health journalists, media outlets and parents of vaccine-injured children.


“I just emailed this challenge to widely published PhD epidemiologist Dr Michael Osterholm, previously director of the Minnesota Department of Health and current director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP), which seems to me to be a Big Business, pharmaceutical/vaccine industry-subsidized group that depends on big contributions from corporate “donors”. It looks like the organization is in the business of pandemic scare tactics that benefit certain industries and organizations like the CDC and WHO. I thought you all would be interested in seeing the email. I attached my last two columns with the emailing.


“PS: Below are two items excerpted from CIDRAP’s website that mention, in general, some of its stakeholders, but it doesn’t state how much money any of them has invested in the organization (it is not a public institution [although the organization is housed on the University of Minnesota campus], so there is no ethical or legal obligation for CIDRAP to reveal that information). GGK


“The CIDRAP website states: ‘Direct support from the University of Minnesota accounts for only 2% of the center's annual operating budget.’


“I suspect that the convenient (and possibly misleading) housing arrangement on the campus probably accounts for the 2% figure. Somewhere I thought that I saw that CIDRAP had an operating budget of $350,000,000. When I re-searched online to try to confirm that figure, I couldn’t find it. (See the membership dues farther below for more financial information.)


The following information is extractly directly from:

“Membership Levels:The CIDRAP Leadership Forum (CLF) offers a variety of benefits to CLF members. There are currently two levels of CLF membership which ensure that organizations of all sizes can connect to the intelligence they need when infectious disease threats emerge.

“EXECUTIVE Level Membership: Designed for multinational organizations, typically with a large base of employees, and non-governmental organizations with global health, humanitarian, and development missions that operate in regions where emerging infectious disease threats are high.


“Executive member organizations are in suchindustries as pharmaceuticals, health services delivery, financial services, medical devices, energy, critical infrastructure, transportation, logistics, large-scale manufacturing, international hospitality, and legal services.


“Executive member organizations are ones that seek private consultation to ensure large investments in preparedness and response are built on current authoritative intelligence.


“PARTNER Level Membership: Designed for growing businesses and professional organizations that need real-time access to the most reliable infectious disease available to inform critical decisions that must be made with confidence.


“Partner member organizations may have operations that supply product or services to large multinational firms or are professional associations that represent multinational, medium, and smaller firms whose employees work in industries and regions where emerging infectious diseases pose a threat to people and operations.


“INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT: Consider joining other leading foundations and corporations as an Underwriter


“Unrestricted support provided by Underwriters is essential to ensuring CIDRAP's capacity to deliver on its mission to reduce illness and death from infectious disease threats.”


Underwriter Support Levels

Principal: $250,000
Leading: $100,000
Major: $50,000
Supporting: $25,000

“CIDRAP is pleased to recognize organizations providing support of less than $25,000 with the Contributor designation.”


And here is one of the few responses that I received from a PhD virologist at the Johns Hopkins Center of Excellence in Influenza Research and Surveillance (JH-CEIRS). He very concisely said:


“I am not interested in any of your emails or thoughts.” A…



Naturally, I couldn’t resist sending off this reply to Dr A…:


“Dr A…, before I delete your email address, I want to ask you, as one scientist to another, if you are truly not interested in any of the documented scientific evidence that strongly supports the assertions made in the articles that I have sent to you? (I attach some others that were written by cutting-edge autoimmune researchers that you and your colleagues desperately need to read. That list of unbiased research scientists include Dr Chris Shaw, Dr Lucija Tomljenovic, Dr Yehuda Schoenfeld (ASIA researcher from Tel Aviv; ASIA= Autoimmune [auto-inflammatory] Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants) and Dr Romain Kroum Gherardi (Macrophagic Myofasciitis [MMF] researcher).


“Or did you simply, contrary to what good, unbiased scientists should be doing when confronted with new data that contradicts their deeply held notions (aka cognitive dissonance), refuse to read and consider the well-documented new data that was contained within the two articles that you apparently didn’t read.


“If your answer to both of those questions is “no”, then neither of us has much to say to each other, although I would appreciate knowing if the pro-Big Pharma influences at your educational  institution prevail at all levels.


“BTW: I hope that you are not so naïve as to believe that biased, corporate, profit-driven “science” is real science, for real science looks at all the evidence and then lets that evidence lead to conclusions that might anger those who are counting on “positive” results. Gary”