No, I quoted the important part.
He lied. On paper. In an official CDC publication. An important publication. We’re not talking the effects of tertiary cigarette smoking on the field mouse population.
Anything else he says is suspect.
His religious belief in vaccination matters not. He’s no different than the climate ‘scientists’ who cheered on ‘Mike’s Nature trick’ and ‘hide the decline’.
I don’t have to subscribe to the ‘coverup theory’. He ADMITTED to the coverup. There’s no ‘theory’ there. It’s a coverup FACT.
What else have they covered up? Hmmm?
That’s just the data he personally admitted excluding. We have no idea about any OTHER data. If he felt compelled to eliminate one data set, do you think he was the only author? Who knows?
We know now that there is a policy of excluding data to meet ‘policy’ expectations. Any other paper by this author, or on this subject, from the CDC is suspect. Good luck with any FOIA on that though.
I see. Lied by omitting data which was suspect. Which really is suspect: if the numbers in that data from the Georgia study played out in the general population then it would be incredibly easy to verify - there would be a much larger percentage of black males with autism. Please show me anything that demonstrates that. Or even localized to Georgia.