" />
Published On: Wed, Sep 24th, 2014

Hollywood Actor Targeted for Raising Concerns about Vaccine Safety and Efficacy

Christof Lehmann (nsnbc) : Hollywood actor Rob Schneider got first-hand experience about the fact that corporate capitalism is not democracy and that publicly raising concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy issues results in a swift lesson about the fact that freedom of speech is a right that is mitigated by the fact that one’s livelihood and income may be threatened by addressing issues of concern for a multi-billion dollar per year vaccine industry.

Freedom of Speech exists in these United States. That is, if one can afford Unemployment

Rob Schneider_Hollywood_USAThe U.S. insurance giant State Farm dropped Rob Schneider after the actor publicly raised concerns about well-known and well documented vaccine safety and efficacy issues, and in response to what appears to be a concerted and well-organized effort by pro-vaccine lobbies who urged State Farm to drop its association with the renown Hollywood actor and comedian.

The pro-vaccination lobbies social media sites, including Food Hunk, Science Babe and Chow Babe denounced Schneider of promoting pseudo-scientific claims and lobbied State Farm insurance policy holders to contact the insurance giant to demand that State Farm stop hiring someone who publicly states “dangerous opinions” about the issue. Chow Babe released a video, calling on the public to “stem the modern anti-technology tide”, and that it is time to end the “anti-vaccination movement”.

Positioning scientists, activists and celebrities who are raising awareness about serious vaccine safety issues as “anti-progress” or as “anti-vaccine” movement is a common strategy used by the pharma industry and the often industry-sponsored pro-vaccination lobbies.

The fact is, that the vast majority of the scientists, activists and organizations who are warning about vaccinations are not necessarily against vaccinations as such, but against serious vaccine safety issues, flawed ethics, incestuous relationships between the pharma industry and regulators, science by proclamation, and the systematic oppression of scientists and medical doctors who are pointing out these flaws.

Propaganda Video propagates the false Claim that Vaccine Safety Concerns are based on one flawed study

forced-oral-polio-vaccineThe Chow Babe video, for example, claims that campaigns against vaccination or for vaccine safety are based on “one single false study”. Meanwhile, nothing could be further from the truth. (watch the video here)

To mention but a few of the most serious concerns, studies, scandals and facts which the PRopaganda video attempts to omit with its claim about “one single flawed study”:

MRM_Vaccine Vile_Vaccines_Vaccine SafetyThe list could be continued, virtually endlessly. Other factors which support the calls of e.g. Hollywood actor Rob Schneider for attention about vaccine safety issues include the documented fact that pharma giants like Glaxo Smith Cline sponsor allegedly independent reports by government-linked think tanks such as the RAND Corporation, as documented by independent analyst Tony Cartalucci, in his article entitled Big-Pharma Vaccines Deemed “Safe” by Big Pharma Funded Study”.

Ph.D Candidate and military officer Baz Bardoe, who has a unique insight in e.g. the use of vaccines within military context warned in his article entitled “All Trials: because no test should go unheralded”, that the work of Dr. Peter Doshi and the independent Cochrane Collaboration stressed that:

“The current system. …. is one in which meager details of clinical trials published in medical journals, often by authors with financial ties to the companies whose drugs they are writing about, is insufficient to the point of being misleading”

Bardoe also noted that Richard Horton, writing as editor of the prestigious medical journal The Lancet, stated that:

“A study of the interactions between authors of clinical practice guidelines and the pharmaceutical industry……… found serious omissions in declarations of conflicts of interest. Almost 90% of authors received research funding from or acted as consultants for a drug company. Over half had connections with companies whose drugs were being reviewed in the guideline, and the same proportion indicated that there was no formal procedure for reporting these interactions.” He also wrote in 2004 that “journals have devolved into information laundering operations for the pharmaceutical industry”.

BigPharma_CashPills-100Misinformation, Incestuous Relationships between Industry and Regulators, and Industry Sponsored Trials.

This list, which also supports the warnings of Hollywood actor Rob Schneider who had the courage and integrity to speak out, probably anticipating that his use of “free speech” may have repercussions on his career and livelihood, could also be continued, almost ad infinitum.

A thought-provoking article by Efthimios Parasidis, who is an Assistant Professor of law at Ohio State University, entitled “Public Misinformed about Seal of Approval from FDA”, sums the problem up. Professor Parasidis is stating that:

“Between 2005 and 2011, nearly half of all new drug formulations in the US were approved without companies having to demonstrate a tangible benefit, such as relieving disease symptoms, extending life, or improving someone’s ability to go about normal activities”.

Capitalism_Corporatism_OC_SP_USAThese findings were documented in a paper by Nicolas Downing of Yale University and colleagues. The paper is part of a series of papers on drug approval processes, and was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).The team of researchers also found that nearly two out of five drugs approved by the FDA were brought to market after one single pivotal trial.

This is especially problematic when the trials are funded by the multi-billion dollar per year pharma industry, and conducted in rural communities in e.g. India, where those suffering adverse effects have no funds which would be even be remotely sufficient to mount legal challenges against transnational corporations who have virtually unlimited funding that exhausts the money of those who want to mount a legal challenge before it ever comes to court.

CH/L – nsnbc 24-09.2014


Below is the video that prompted the problems Mr. Schneider encountered. Rob Schneider tweeted on his Twitter account“I hope the Wilber Theater in Boston (ONE SHOW THIS SAT GET TIX) doesn’t fire me for this completely factual video!” Video, courtesy of Canary Party

About the Author

- Dr. Christof Lehmann is the founder and editor of nsnbc. He is a psychologist and former independent political consultant on conflict, conflict resolution and a wide range of other political issues. In March 2013 he established nsnbc as a daily, independent, international on-line newspaper. He can be contacted at nsnbc international at

Displaying 16 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. Louis Conte says:

    Well done and factual. Thank you for calling attention to what was done here to Mr. Schneider – and why it was done.

  2. Thank you for such an honest and objective look at the events unfolding around State Farm and their recent decision to remove the ad featuring Rob from air and how it all took place. This certainly was a planned attach against State Farm and it continued on their FB page long after they took the ad off the air. One post on State Farm’s FB wall had nearly 500 comments (has since been delated by State Farm given how heated the debate became). It was clear that people involved have vested interest or are being paid, there were 2 people in particular that commented nearly 100-150+ times, no one without monetary reimbursement would waste their time doing that simply for the sake of online arguments & debates.

  3. Olive says:

    Wow what a bully! Boycott State Farm. There are other insurance companies!

    Good for you Rob!!!

    • pat says:

      Excellent solution, we are powerful and can fight fire with fire. Boycott all corporations that support harm of humanity, reveal and hold personally accountable the entities behind those industrial propaganda websites masked as social media used to manipulate public opinion to further force the corporate occupation of human life and health.

  4. Bridget says:

    Thank you for sharing this story! Great information!

  5. tlucas says:

    I have been with State Farm for 30 years. I am going shopping. BULLSHIT!

  6. Soc says:

    Thank you for making a very rare intellectual case for better vaccine regulation and on the issues of our republic’s lack of respect for opinion.

    That being said, the issue that we are dealing with is the intellectual-deterioration of our society. Sadly, people will read this and say “See! Vaccine baaaad.” In truth, we need vaccines because there are many individuals who are too immuno-compromised to have them and require crowd-immunity. So it is not that vaccines are bad, it is that they require more regulation and attention. However, because of the intellectual deterioration of our society, the use of logic to dissociate the two ideas (Vaccines =/= Big Pharma) is rare. Forced dichotomies (Pro-vaccine or Anti-vaccine, Republican or Democrat etc.) further contribute to this issue because there are always more than two ways of thinking of something (unless its tautologically defined to the contrary). I’m not saying that paying for vaccines is not profiting big pharma, I am saying that existing, traditionally-functional vaccines are still a necessity especially when considering the unfortunately immuno-compromised. So lobby for better regulation, but acknowledge the importance of the existing vaccines.

    • Debbie says:

      SOC… basically you could have made the comment much shorter, because it is exactly what both this article and Mr. Rob Schneider point out. It would have been far more constructive for the dialog to add suggestions about what to do to solve the issue of incestuous relationships between pharma industry and regulators, what to do to secure that trials are based on sound methodology, and how to remove legislation that prevents those who suffer a tort from seeking compensation – among many others, some of which are drawn up in this article and supported by statements from professionals like Dr. Pulijel, etc… It’s great to comment. Even greater to contribute problem solving initiatives to the debate.

  7. CS says:

    Thanks for this honest reporting! Love Rob Schneider! State Farm made a foolish choice.

  8. Dona says:

    Welcome to my world Rob. I got fired last December for refusing a flu shot. Despite the financial hit, I still wouldn’t change my decision. Some things are worth standing up for.

    • pat says:

      Bravo! Great to read that we are all beginning to stand as one regardless of the threat. The larger threat is in submitting to the tyrants.

  9. Mary Hirzel says:

    Tomorrow will be the first day, since 1977, that I will be without a State Farm policy of any kind.

  10. Nate says:

    Thanks for some great, honest reporting. Thank you for pointing out that to question aspects like the relationship between pharma and regulators, safety, flawed ethics, is not being “anti-science.”

  11. rawB says:

    Research Efficacy: when injected, did the body respond with an anti-body..? if so, you have Research efficacy..

    Clinical Efficacy: did the injected vaccine prevent the recipient from getting/developing the disease once exposed..? if so, you have Clinical Efficacy..

    Immunization: when we are “Naturally” exposed to something by ingestion or breathing it in.. our gut will engage the fighter cells (a part of the immune system) to fight the foreign antigens.. With immunization our bodies develop a life long defense..This is what happens when a mother breast feeds her child..It is shown time and time again that breast feeding is our best lifelong defense..

    Vaccination: are inter-muscular introduced.. this bypasses the gut where our body recognizes foreign/dangerous antigens.The GUT is the only way for humans to build our immune system for a life long protection.. Vaccines must always have repeat boosters because they do NOT build our immune system..

    The only thing that pharmaceutical companies have to show is that they have proven Research Efficacy..(produced an anti-body to the foreign antigen..

    There is NO PROOF of Clinical Efficacy on ANY VACCINE.. Research it and you will find that Research Efficacy is all that exist..

    Next time your doctor wants you to get a vaccine.. ask for the documentation on Clinical Efficacy.. You may have to educate your doctor on the difference between Research and Clinical Efficacy.. I had to inform my unaware doctor..

  12. LindaS says:

    I’m dumping my State Pharm insurance on Monday.

  13. Veri Tas says:

    Imagine if a naturopath treated even a single client, never mind 47,500 clients, and he or she developed paralysis following treatment. The naturopath would be jailed, the remedies banned forever.

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>