Dr David Salisbury
  
Viral 
 fear racket
''So a dangerous vaccine (MMR Urabe), a knowingly dangerous vaccine was introduced and ultimately proven to be dangerous and had to be withdrawn (6:00) in 1992.'' ~ Dr Andrew Wakefield
[The Fox in the Government hen house (Department of 'Health') so consequently 
chief hatchet man for 
 Allopathy Inc.  
He was in on the approval (and giving Glaxo legal immunity) of the proven 
dangerous Urabe MMR after it was withdrawn 
in Canada (see). 
See minutes: [pdf 8 March 1988]. Which 
would go some way towards explaining his persecution 
of Dr Wakefield, see
[2010 April. Video] 
Dr Andrew Wakefield - In His own words and his denial of MMR autism and 
bowel disease (read
Silenced Witnesses Volume 
II: The Parents' Story).  Also architect of Donegan 
persecution.]
"There is a pandemic of autism among children in the western world and it is spreading worldwide. ...... It has been caused by vaccinations of various kinds, but principally the MMR. This has been known to the pharmaceutical industry, the Western governments, and to the health and medical professions for decades but they have mounted one of the most slick and collusive denials and distractive tactics ever known."----Charles Pragnell
See: Psychopathy Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation
[2010 Jan] Read Silenced Witnesses Volume II: The Parents' Story and you will know MMR causes autism and serious bowel disease, while the governments have been lying through their teeth (as usual).
Lie of the decade from Department of Health: " The normal procedure for licensing was used for MMR and the vaccine was thoroughly tested before being introduced into the UK in 1988." MMR Top 10 truths and top 10 myths (This MMR vaccine, Trivirix/Pluserix was withdrawn in Canada (1988) after they proved it dangerous BEFORE they introduced it here! See: MMR timeline Dr Andrew Wakefield - In His own words).
Andrew Wakefield: More Questions for David Salisbury
[2014] Dr. Salisbury reply to Meningitis B vaccine question from Sandy Lunoe
[2013] Another rejection but parents maintain vaccine is linked to their son's death ''This story shows how utterly corrupt the system is. The then Principal Medical Officer and another doctor from the JCVI could both put themselves forward as experts, without any conflicts of interest, to assist the UK Vaccine Damage Payment Tribunal panel.'' ~ JABS
[2010 April. Video] Dr Andrew Wakefield - In His own words
[2010 Jan] False Testimony Denies Lancet Doctors a Fair Hearing Dr. Salisbury gave misleading testimony regarding the safety of the MMR vaccine and concealed information material to its safety from the public.
[2009 March] From the UK: The Betrayal of a Nation's Children By Martin Walker
Dr David Salisbury, UK Gov Vaccines Director - Ooops! Never Mind Me, I'm Basil 
Fawlty!
ONE CLICK RESPONSE David Salisbury
Vaccine Litigation
Doctor Questions David Salisbury On UK Measles Data
So who now is the Basil Fawlty of the MMR controversy?
[13 August – 24] The Utter Irrelevance of Professor Salisbury by Martin Walker
[2009 Jan] Secret British MMR Vaccine Files Forced Open By Legal Action
[Aug 2008] An open letter for the attention of David Salisbury from Alan Golding
[Media--Independent Feb 2002] MMR chief blames the media for jab 'errors'
See: 'Vaccines are Safe' lie Vaccine autism proven MMR Pluserix & Immravax (Urabe)
JOINT COMMITTEE ON VACCINATION AND IMMUNISATION  
 
 JCVI
JOINT 
SUB-COMMITTEE ON ADVERSE REACTIONS TO VACCINES AND IMMUNOLOGICAL PRODUCTS
[6 Feb 1987]  
 
 Salisbury,  
 Miller,
[6 July 1987]
  Salisbury, 
Meadow,
 
 
 Miller
[2 Oct 1987]  
 Salisbury, 
 Meadow,
 
 
 Miller
[8 March 1988] 
[copy 2] 
 
 Salisbury,
McDevitt, 
HULL,
 Meadow,
 
 
 Miller, 
Rotblat,
[6 Oct 1989] 
 
 Salisbury, 
Meadow,
 
 
 Miller
[17 Sept 1990] 
 
 Salisbury,  
McDevitt 
Meadow,
 
 
 Miller   
Quotes by Salisbury
The evidence on MMR is absolutely clear - there is no link between the 
vaccine and autism.---Professor David Salisbury, Department of Health 2008
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7545151.stm  
“They all only use benign placebos – we use the safest most pure vaccines as a placebo."---David Salisbury (source The Arnica Network)
"One of the first patients I saw [as a young doctor] was a 12-year-old boy who had come into hospital to die because his brain had been so devastated by the long-term effects of measles," he said. "And one of the first babies I had seen in the neonatal unit was one who had been damaged by congenital rubella. I don't need to see any of those again, but that will be the consequence of this drive for single vaccines."--Dr Salisbury
[Here is a denial classic.]
I asked you for evidence that demonstrated that 
deaths were actually caused by the Urabe strain, and you have singularly failed 
to provide any evidence whatsoever. You have provided media reports, opinions of 
parents, and decisions of tribunals or courts. These are not evidence of 
causality that implicates the Urabe vaccine.
  Nobody would disagree that deaths have been reported after MMR vaccines. But 
deaths after vaccination are very different from deaths caused by vaccination.
Dr David Salisbury, director of immunisation, department of health, 
London 19.03.07 
[2007] Parliament was given false MMR assurance
"This (MMR) is a safe vaccine."-------Dr David Salisbury, Government immunisation programme
Dr David Salisbury, national director for vaccines and immunisation at the Department of Health, said last night: 'The evidence is absolutely clear. No published study has ever shown a link between autism and the MMR vaccine. It is absolute nonsense to suggest otherwise.' New Health Fears Over Big Surge in Autism
Quotes re MMR Urabe that he approved:
"Up to 300 cases relate to this brand of vaccine - Pluserix - which was
banned by the Department of Health in 1992 after being linked with meningitis. This was two
years after an identical vaccine was banned in Canada."--Media  
"In 1990, scientists from the Queen’s Medical Centre Nottingham found
some children developed a form of meningitis after receiving it. But despite this
the Government went on using it for more than two years.  The Canadian
Government, also using the vaccine, immediately switched to a safer version. It was not
until September 1992 that the UK Department of Health issued pharmacists with emergency
supplies of a safer brand with instructions to withdraw existing batches."--Sunday Express
Quotes re Salisbury
The two of the three vaccine brands that were introduced in 1988 had 
to be withdrawn for safety reasons and yet Dr Salisbury in his statement to the 
GMC sums up by saying this is a vaccine with an exemplary safety record.  Well, 
if that is his idea of an excellent safety record then we have a very different 
perception he and I of vaccine safety. 
[2010 
April. Video] Dr Andrew Wakefield - In His own words question 1
    Where dies it leave the GMC if you are not guilty?   
Very good question on a very broad front.  They have some tough decisions to 
make.  One on the level of the case itself, and have they misinstructed their 
experts, are they going to have to retrench in a different set of charges.  They 
have to take time to structure those charges and get a response from their 
experts.  Are they going to be allowed to do that, I don't know, but it must be 
becoming obvious to them now that much of the original information they were 
given, was, had been, misconstrued, and basing their charges on that information 
has been in error.
    At another level they are under big pressure from the 
Department of Health, and David Salisbury in particular has been calling them on 
a regular basis urging them to prosecute this case more vigorously against me, 
be nastier, be meaner, throw more in, and I know this because we get sent the 
unused material, and so I took the opportunity (he didn't know this, I mean you 
get all the telephone conversations, all the conversation between people, all 
the draft reports which is an interesting advantage to us), so I was able to 
write to David Salisbury and was able to say I am now in a position to have read 
the unused material from the GMC, and I note your entreaties to them....He was 
furious, he contacted the GMC and said: "I didn't know they were going to get 
the unused material...you never told me, this is a disgrace!"   And the 
wonderful thing about that is that we get the documentation of that telephone 
conversation as well (laughs).
    So, you can see they are under a great deal of political 
pressure to prosecute this case and it is interesting in the public domain David 
Salisbury has said we don't want this to be seen as a vendetta on behalf of the 
Department of Health.  So, mixed messages.  
    PART TWO. The other dilemma they have is who do they 
represent in the end?  Because the GMC have historically stood for the patient, 
the patients rights, the patients protection from, for example, medical 
malpractice.  Well, who do they stand for now because we stand for the 
patients.  Everything we have done is in the best interests of the children.  
What they are representing and prosecuting is not on behalf of the children no 
parent ahs complained agaisnt us, but on behalf of the Department of Health, on 
behalf of the new kid on the block, 'the greater good.'   
    So here we have a body who has traditionally represented the 
patient, the victim, if you like, against the medical profession or againts 
medical malpractice.  Now they are defending the diktat of public health against 
the rights of the individual.
S    o they are in a real quandary, or if they are not they 
should be, about quite who they represent, because I know who I represent--the 
individual patient. [2010 
April. Video] Dr Andrew Wakefield - In His own words Question 3
.Dr Alistair Torres who was from the Scottish dept of health, and Dr Torres 
had been seconded onto the JCVI, effectively from Canada, 
and he had been brought in, at least in part, to advise on the introduction of 
MMR vaccine.  The experience in Canada was that they introduced a vaccine 
which contained a mumps component made up of a strain of the vaccine called 
Urabe, which was originally generated in Japan and they had run into problems 
with this vaccine.  It produced meningitis in children (1:43).  the 
mumps virus was identified in the brain of the children and the vaccine was 
pulled in Canada, it was pulled, it was stopped in 1997 (1:53), nonetheless this 
was the vaccine that was intended to be introduced into the UK a year later in 
1988.
    They changed the name, but the vaccine was identical, so 
it had gone from Trivirix to 
 Pluserix in the UK, an identical vaccine that had 
already been withdrawn for safety reasons, in Canada.
    Now Torres advised the JCVI not to introduce this vaccine 
because it was not safe.  He was overruled.  He said if you are going 
to introduce it then you should have active surveillance.  That is doctors 
or people going out and asking doctors--have you seen and cases of the following 
in the past month, not waiting for doctors to spontaneously report.  
Spontaneous reporting picks up 1-2% of those adverse reactions.....It is totally 
inadequate but they were totally overruled, not active surveillance (3:02).   
So they were going to intro a vaccine that has been withdrawn in other 
countries, known to be unsafe and they were going to have no active surveillance 
(3:08) for possible adverse events in this country.  Now this was done, he 
said, for competitive pricing reasons.  The strain of the vaccine that 
contained the dangerous mumps component was approx. 1/4 the price of the 
American MMRII made by Merck.  There had been no reports of meningitis using 
the Merck vaccine which contained a strain of mumps called Jeryl Lynn....So what 
we had was a cheaper vaccine that was known to be dangerous (3:47), so when the 
vaccines were licensed or the proposal to licence these vaccines, the JCVI or 
members of that committee (4:0) went to 
SmithKline Beecham (SKB) and said we want your vaccine.  
SKB said we are not happy about it because this has already been withdrawn in 
Canada, it has got this mumps component in it which is dodgy
    They said if we are going to do it then we want an 
indemnity, we want indemnity from prosecution for damage to children on the 
basis (4:27) of the receipt of the vaccine, and it appears that indemnity was 
granted, and Torres told us about this (4:33), and he said at the meeting, the 
girl there from SKB said we are immunising the children and the government is 
immunising us.
    So the vaccine was produced, licensed, given, and cases of 
meningitis started to appear.  they were recorded and documented in the 
minutes of the JCVI which are now available on line and have been obtained by us 
as part of our investigation.  More and more cases began to be reported, 
the Scottish dept' withdrew this vax, certain health areas rejected the Urabe 
containing vaccine but still the JCVI continued with it.  There was no 
withdrawal of this vaccine until finally a study was grudgingly done in 
Nottingham where they found a much higher risk of meningitis with this vaccine 
(5:33) than had previously been predicted by passive surveillance, and the 
vaccine was withdrawn overnight, and it was only withdrawn overnight because it 
was leaked to the press.
    It appeared in a newspaper and suddenly the vaccine was 
pulled.  So a dangerous vaccine, a knowingly dangerous vaccine was 
introduced and ultimately proven to be dangerous and had to be withdrawn (6:00) 
in 1992. 
 [2010 
April. Video] Dr Andrew Wakefield - In His own words question 1
On May 4th 1990, the minutes of the JCVI, headed by Professor Salisbury, contain reference to some concerns. One might expect these concerns to relate to the vaccine’s safety. Not so. The JCVI expressed concern that details of the vaccines dangers are to be published in the UK, thereby exposing the problem and causing a scare (JCVI Minutes 4 May 1990 Article 9.2g.) So, just to run through that one again, the JCVI members were concerned about the Japanese data being published and the public being warned, but apparently unconcerned about the fact they had licensed a vaccine that is associated with meningitis. [Aug 2008] An open letter for the attention of David Salisbury from Alan Golding
By 1993, parents seeking help with one aspect of MMR's adverse reactions, a novel new condition of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) followed by regressive autism, began to attend the Royal Free Hospital. As these children began presenting there, Dr Wakefield contacted the DH to inform the head of vaccine and immunology Dr David Salisbury that he considered MMR could be creating a public health crisis and asked for a meeting. It took Salisbury almost six years to arrange such a meeting. [2010 Feb] Counterfeit Law: And They Think They Have Got Away With It By Martin Walker
[Millions are spent by the government (taxpayer) so they can market the 
products of the drug industry more effectively.  See
Dr. 
 Buchwald MD quotes re fear research.] 
The other considerable matter which Salisbury onanistically droned on about 
was his department’s determination to understand public perception of the 
various vaccinations. He introduced this matter by suggesting that no one else 
(no other government) in the world was able to track the take-up and public 
perception of vaccines in the way that the British government could. The data on 
public perception of vaccine was massive, he said. The survey methods were 
infinitely sensitive, the government even knew what newspapers respondents read. 
In all, Salisbury and his colleagues had carried out 30 surveys into the public 
outlook on vaccination, costing millions of pounds.
    Listening only lethargically to this ‘evidence’, one might be moved by it. 
‘The government really is interested in the public experience of 
vaccination’, an observer might think. Of course nothing could be further from 
the truth. All this data, all these surveys, all these millions of pounds have 
been spent in order to advance the marketing of vaccines and to plan public 
relations strategies which will ensure that the public accept the vaccine 
programme without question. This is nothing to do with science, this is jury 
rigging. The Utter Irrelevance 
 of Professor Salisbury by 
 Martin Walker
The refusal to cross examine might appear risky, in that it seemed to let 
Salisbury off the hook with respect to important and simple questions such as: 
‘Why did it take you two years to respond to Dr Wakefield’s first communication 
with you, which warned the DoH of a public health crisis over MMR?’ and ‘Why did 
it take six years for you to organise a meeting with Dr Wakefield to discuss his 
ground breaking research?’ and finally, ‘Did you intend to suggest in your 
evidence that Dr Wakefield was trying to blackmail the Department, by suggesting 
he would precipitate a public health crisis unless you gave him money for 
research?’
    All the facts relevant to the charges against Dr Wakefield, Professor Murch 
and Professor Walker Smith will of course be given in evidence by the defendants 
themselves. If they remain accused. Dr Wakefield, in particular, will be able to 
inform the panel about the considerable evasion indulged in by Professor 
Salisbury and the Department of Health from the time that they were first 
informed of the epidemic of adverse reaction to MMR. The Utter Irrelevance 
 of Professor Salisbury by 
 Martin Walker
Whale large banners 
 MMR 
 Urabe  
Bowel disease 
 Vaccines are adequately tested 
MMR deaths 
 Vaccine 
 autism proven