‘We’ll Just Get Rid of All the Whites’ Says Pro-Vaxxer Prof of Pediatrics

by Sep 21, 2017Health & Vaccines31 comments

To "solve" the "problem" of target vaccination rates not being reached, one professor suggests getting rid of whites who research and think for themselves.

Pro-vaxxers very much dislike the fact that in the US an increasing number of parents are thinking for themselves, doing their own research, and making the decision not to comply with the CDC’s recommended vaccine schedule. Well, one professor of pediatrics has a proposed solution to this perceived “problem”: eliminating the white population in the United States.

Here is the first paragraph of YouTube description for the above video, from the National Meningitis Association:

The National Meningitis Association (www.nmaus.org) hosted a panel discussion, Achieving Childhood Vaccine Success in the U.S., before its 2016 “Give Kids a Shot” Gala on May 9, 2016. The panel addressed a range of issues including parents who opt out of childhood vaccine requirements, physicians who stray from the recommended vaccine schedule, and the role of the media in creating or removing barriers to vaccine success.

One of the panelists was Carol Baker, M.D., Professor of Pediatrics, Molecular Virology and Microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. She referred to the fact that studies show that parents who don’t vaccinate their children are not uneducated or poor. On the contrary, they tend to be well educated and affluent. It is precisely because they do their own research and think for themselves that they are choosing not to vaccinate.

So here is Dr. Baker’s proposed solution to what is indeed a peculiar problem for apologists of public vaccine policy (starts at about the 53 minute mark in the above video):

So I have the solution. Every study published in the last five years, when you look at vaccine refusers — I’m not talking about a little hesitants, most of them we can talk into coming to terms — but refusers; we’ll just get rid of all the whites in the United States.

She goes on to describe the problem as being with the “educated” whites, whom she suggests are not actually educated by placing the word in air quotes. They just have degrees on their walls, she says, which doesn’t mean they’re actually well-educated. That’s true, of course, but applies equally to her own M.D.

Note that nobody in the room objects to her statement that whites in the US should be gotten rid of in order to “solve” the “problem” of vaccine rates not being where apologists of public policy would like them to be. They all just go on listening to her and nodding their agreement with what she’s saying, even after she just gets done suggesting that what they need is for people who to do their own research and think for themselves to be eliminated from the equation. 

Note that I am not implying that minorities have no interest in doing their own research or cannot think for themselves. Race is only relevant to the vaccine issue to me inasmuch as biological diversity relates to the science (e.g., members of a certain ethnic group being at higher risk for a particular disease or adverse reaction to vaccination). It is Dr. Baker who is unwittingly implying this by mischaracterizing parents who choose not to vaccinate as somehow being ignorant. It may be true that whites tend to be more highly educated and affluent than other Americans and that most parents who choose not to vaccinate are white, but it is Dr. Baker who is attributing the decision not to vaccinate to race. I absolutely reject her implication that minorities who are educated enough to research the science for themselves and and wealthy enough to be able to dedicate the time necessary to do so would choose differently simply because of the color of their skin.

One might be tempted to dismiss her remark as a “joke”. But note the earnestness in her face as she talks about this perceived “problem”, including as she is making that racist statement.

This ought to send chills up the spine of every liberty-loving, free-thinking individual in the country.

Furthermore, as a thought experiment, imagine if it was blacks who tended to be more highly educated and more affluent, rather than whites: would it be tolerable for a college professor to declare that the solution is to just get rid of all the blacks? Why, therefore, is this somehow deemed acceptable when it is said of whites?

Just astonishing.

Did you find value in this content? If so and you have the means, please consider supporting my independent journalism.

About Jeremy R. Hammond

About Jeremy R. Hammond

I am an independent journalist, political analyst, publisher and editor of Foreign Policy Journal, book author, and writing coach.

My writings empower readers with the knowledge they need to see through state propaganda intended to manufacture their consent for criminal government policies.

By recognizing when we are being lied to and why, we can fight effectively for liberty, peace, and justice, in order to create a better world for ourselves, our children, and future generations of humanity.

Please join my growing community of readers!

 

Download my free report 5 Horrifying Facts about the FDA Vaccine Approval Process.

Download my free report 5 Horrifying Facts about the FDA Vaccine Approval Process.

Related Articles

31 Comments

  1. newbielibertarian

    This is amazingly bad, it’s not funny, and it’s an inappropriate racist statement. “Get rid” of the whites? What does that mean? And who is the “we” in “we should get rid of the whites”?

    P.S.: I’m not white and I find this comment racist as hell!

    Reply
    • Barliman

      I am not sure what your laws are over there- but in Australia we have serious laws against hate speech.

      What this silly wench is proposing is the inverse of Hitler’s program (he wanted to purge Germany of everyone except Aryans- she proposed purging the US of Aryans- and leaving everyone else alone.

      There is a very good argument to be made that this woman is not fit to hold a medical licence and should be de-registered.

      I am not 100% clear as to the way this works in the US- but it would be easy in Australia to mount a case that she was not fit to practice.

      You are there, I am not. Go for it.

      Reply
      • Sukijopa

        Australia also has some of the most oppressive laws for mandatory vaccination, and has suggested doctors and nurses who say anything negative about vaccines be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

    • Thermopylae

      This gal proves the Bible is absolutely correct
      It really is possible for a jackass to speak
      Should we condemn her for her stupidity?
      Or just marvel at her ability to form words.

      Hannah Poling was a healthy normal precocious child for the first 18 months of her life. She will now receive more than 1.5 million dollars for the first year of her life care. In addition, the family will receive more than $500,000 per year to pay for Hannah’s care for her entire life. Estimates are the the total will come to $20 million.

      Why? It was PROVED in court that she became autistic after receiving vaccines for 9 diseases in one doctor visit (measles, mumps, rubella, polio, varicella, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, and Haemophilis influenza). You will NEVER know the details of this proof because the government had the proceedings sealed.

      Should we wonder what the government is hiding?

      Reply
  2. Anne Nans

    This is so disturbing, Jeremy. Thanks for posting.

    Reply
  3. Anke Zimmermann

    Unbelievable! Thank you for your research and writing Jeremy. Let’s see if we can’t splash this all over facebook etc.

    Reply
  4. Barliman

    If anybody thinks that 10 minutes is adequate time to give proper informed consent in a difficult situation, they need a reality check.
    The big problem is that we have grown used to twisting our definition of “adequate medical care” to that which suits the profit requirements of the insurer.

    The same situation exists in Australia, and one prime tactic I recommend to my Australian friends is that we all insist on such minutely detailed information that every single potential risk outlined on the current (not future cut down versions) package inserts that there is no way their doctor can do anything but lose money or offer consent that does not meet any basic requirements.

    The matter needs to be pushed to the brink of creating impossibly expensive and unfundable needs fo rinformed consent- or making it dead clear to the doctor that he has not provided adequate consent and he will be held responsible for any bad outcome.

    Doctors are no longer acting as the allies of their patients- they have different income priorities. They need to understand that the price for that choice is the price of wondering how many days it will be until another patient launches a lawsuit against them.

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      Consider that, at last here in the US, it isn’t the patient who pays the doctor, but a third party. The patient is in effect not the doctor’s client. The doctor has to make the third-party payer happy to obtain reimbursement, which means not deviating from a “standard of care” determined by bureaucrats with no knowledge of the patient’s individual condition.

      Reply
      • Barliman

        However, the medical ethics around patient care still stand. Working in that system must be a nightmare for all.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        If you mean medical ethics should still stand, certainly; but in practice, medical ethics are routinely violated, e.g., the right to informed consent when it comes to the practice of mass vaccination.

    • Edmond

      So true. Great comment. Doctors are just pharmaceutical wending machines. The true care for a patient has been lost. It’s all about profits. Oncology field is the best example. No oncologist would ever undergo chemo, yet they give it to their patients every day. More chemo, more money. Really disturbing state of affairs in our medical world.

      Reply
  5. sabelmouse

    i think he’s somewhat mistaken about the thinking abilities of white people.

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      Do you mean me? If so, please see the paragraph beginning “Note that I am not implying…”

      Reply
      • sabelmouse

        no, the proff.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        Oh. I was confused because you wrote “he” not “she”! Thanks for clarifying.

      • sabelmouse

        i missed something. not the first time either ;)

  6. sabelmouse

    for different reasons white supremacists do say all sorts of things about poc.

    Reply
    • Al

      And vice versa, whats your point?

      Reply
  7. Judith Osterman

    Of course it was a joke, but absolutely racist since it implies that only whites are independent-minded and erudite enough to do their own research. I couldn’t watch the whole discussion: I cut off just as Dr. Lee was complaining about the non-existent prioritization of anti-vaxxers on the internet.

    Reply
  8. Bill Meyer

    Bunch of Fascists who will not open testing protocols and vaccination safety test results.
    Too many facts out there. First hand experience.

    Let’s do a first hand test. You take the vaccination jab, I don’t… we infect both of us with Flu and see who recovers fastest.

    Many friends changed to my way of treating because year after year I recovered and was back at work in two days and they were in bed for two weeks.

    Reply
  9. Tibetanfightingchipmonk

    Everyone on that Panel is either a liar are uneducated, and or is a COWARD to be in a ILVE Debate with people who know the DANGERS OF VACCINES. Put up or Shut the Fuck Up COWARDS. I am talking to you #PaulOffit #DoritRubensteinReiss

    Reply
  10. drew..

    While I agree that the word choices are stunningly poor, especially given the nature of the dialog about media training, the bigger issue is that these people are openly discussing a process that is proving to be killing people at worst, destroying lives at the very least. Lies and manipulation. They use terms of war.

    This IS A WAR, and one that will bring blood to the streets if they do not back off.

    Reply
  11. Goldie

    This is what happens when a third party becomes the payer who works for the doctors own bottom line not the client. Perhaps that’s why the greatest doctors are behind us.
    Instead we got employees in white coats reading a computer that tells them what to do with rarely any physical assessment skills and people are dying from preventive or treatable diseases because of it.
    It’s comical how they make informed healthy nurses wear masks that are unhealthy to work with building up moisture and using it as shame. Great way to treat good nurses when there a short supply of ” good nurses.” The only ones the clients will lose confidence in is the ones treating them this way and show their ignorance and vindictiveness probably don’t by corporate.

    It was corporate doctors that pushed for mandatory heath care over money. That immediately drove cost up who anyone working before remembers,

    Aside from a little thing called a CONSTITUTION and informed Consent they do not work for the insurers but the client! Who do they think they are?
    They are nothing but salesmen for manufacturers.
    With that how can anyone take them seriously or have confidence. Confidence perhaps that they will kill them for profit especially if they are informed or WHITE. And you wonder why alternative medicine is getting more popular.

    By the way there is no vaccine for the most common bacterial meningitis.

    I also have no doubt anyone they vaccinate that has adverse effects they will have to clue how to treat it or prevent further injury.
    I have confidence they will try to deny and cover it up including those who have and will die by their hands,

    Where is the conference for these adverse effects or questions about the toxic adjuvants in them and how much is too much?

    Nearly 2000 Adverse Events Reported to VAERS
    As of 2015, nearly 2000 serious adverse events following the meningitis vaccination were reported to VAERS; of these cases, 99 were deaths. Experts estimate that vaccine injuries reported to VAERS are chronically underreported and likely represent anywhere from one to ten percent of the actual cases which occur nationwide. Taking the conservative estimate, if ten percent of all adverse events are reported, this translates to nearly 1000 deaths associated with the meningitis vaccination over the course of roughly 15 years. In comparison, the CDC reported 550 actual cases of meningitis in 2013; if ten percent of these cases were fatal, this translates to 55 deaths per year, or 825 deaths in 15 years. Do the benefits outweigh the risks of the meningococcal vaccine side effects?

    Reply
  12. Edmond

    I watched pretty much the entire video. First, it’s pure pro-vaccine propaganda – there is not one opposing view (not even in the audience. If this is a debate, why invite only pro-vaccine supporters? Are they afraid they may not have answers to the anti-vax concerns?) Second, if they are all vaccinated then why are they so afraid of catching a disease from the unvaccinated? After all they are “protected,” aren’t they? If vaccination does not protect against those who are unvaccinated then what’s the point of vaccinating? Third, their denial of “no link between autism and vaccines” and push for “vaccination of pregnant women” … boy oh boy, where do I even start with this one? Their ideas of controlling MSM, social media, churches, schools, businesses, indoctrination of young children, etc. surely sounded no different from the former USSR communist propaganda I grew up in and the thread is not only our freedom of speech but our entire existence. No scientist serious enough who reads the insert of vaccine ingredients can sleep peacefully at night knowing it’s being injected to everyone from newborn babies to pregnant women to young and old. What has happened to this country?

    Reply
  13. themisthios

    The Kalergi Plan is supported and promoted by academics and politicians across the western world. This is academia telling us that.

    Reply
  14. richard feibel

    someone brought up rabbis and jewish .yes; i would like to know how many are anti vaxxers in the jewish community and especially the ultra orthodox jew’s feel about this. its seems from my knowledge that they would be very anti ! anything that interfers or changes the natural body is not allowed.

    Reply
  15. Ed

    If being un-vaccinated is dangerous, the “problem” will take care of itself. Those who refuse to vaccinate will bring on their own extinction.
    Tyrants always go after the intellectuals first.

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      Somehow, homo sapiens managed to thrive prior to the invention and widespread use of vaccines, and also managed to reduce 90% of infectious disease mortality prior, too.

      Reply
  16. Sam Michaud

    It’s funny, stupid ironic! This panel thinks they are the educated people! There is only one of two choices about these people! One, they really don’t know who they are promoting their propaganda lies for, or even that, that is what they do. ( Meaning propagandising).
    Or they are the new natzi party!

    Reply
  17. carol cannon

    “Today you’re getting 3 vaccines…And Paul Offitt said, “Don’t offer it. Well, it’s up to your mother. It’s up to your parents. Just give it!” ~ And these ignoramuses want to know why so many parents object?!!!

    “We can certainly go further than immunization mandates, for instance France and Italy have criminal laws fro certain vaccines.”

    “Once the exemptions are removed, I think they do the job reasonably well.”

    I’ve listened to the whole BS!!! The chyron under each name should include the amount each of these people are being paid by Big Pharma!!!

    Reply

Share your thoughts.

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares
Share This