Fake vaccine data - go to jail!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3146788/Ex-Iowa-State-University-scientist-gets-four-years-prison-altering-research-HIV-vaccine-mixing-RABBIT-blood-human-blood.html 

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/847589  

In a previous post I opined that we need a Sarbannes-Oaxley law for vaccines. There is, apparently, some form of accountability for fraud when using federal funds for research - the above headlines demonstrate that. Though given the growth of blogs like Retraction Watch  (among other reasons) my inner skeptic suspects this is the tip of a Titanic-sized iceberg. 

The Merck whistleblower lawsuit is about efficacy, not safety. But any Sarbannes-Oaxley (SOX) law for vaccines should include provisions to hold corporate heads accountable for fraud in either efficacy or safety. But to prove either allegation would be difficult given the conflicts of interest embedded in so much research, including research in vaccines. 

Safety data on vaccines is incomplete, at best, because they are never tested against a control group of unvaccinated individuals. Not just people who do not receive the vaccine in question - but people who have never been vaccinated, period. In the bizarro world of vaccine research all manner of epidemiological studies are done all concluding that vaccines are "safe and effective" all while violating the important principle of having a comparison group of unvaccinated individuals. It's not like they aren't out there. Well, at least for the time being there are unvaccinated people - but as we continue to lose our freedom to determine what medical treatments we will, or will not accept, it will become harder to find people who have not been vaccinated - and this will obfuscate and confuse any attempt to answer the question of vaccine safety and efficacy. 

In the world of vaccine research it is acceptable to violate another principle of scientific study - the use of a placebo (an inert, not biologically active substance). In vaccine research, the "placebo" may be the diluent of the vaccine, which has multiple ingredients (any of which are biologically active by design) with the antigen in question removed. The point of the placebo is to be biologically **inactive** so a true comparison can be made about the safety and efficacy of the substance in question. 

The current vaccine schedule (for anyone - child or adult) has never been studied in toto. Single vaccines are deemed "safe and effective" by policy makers saddled with conflict of interest and are added to the "schedule" which itself has never been tested for either safety or efficacy. We worry about poly-pharmacy - people being harmed by being on multiple medications simultaneously yet have not a care in the world about injecting people with multiple vaccines multiple times?! Cognitive dissonance and selective reasoning is an amazing thing to behold. And also very frightening. 

This isn't research. It is manipulation. It isn't science. It is assumption. 

We all deserve better.