An interesting link on this is at: http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/06/robert_f_kenned.html
The arguements in it seem pretty reasonable. A couple of quotes: <quote> I decided to hold off a detailed post until I had read the report in question. Even so, I felt Kennedy's article had gotten off to a rather inauspicious start: In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Ga. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. Note the emotive language - an "isolated" conference center "nestled in wooded farmland. to ensure complete secrecy". Sounds suspicious, yes? Well, not really. Perhaps Kennedy should have read the actual full 286 page transcript of the meeting because then he would have learned (page 257) that it was only held there because there had been a Super Comp Computer Conference at the same time and that the Simpsonwood center was the only place available in Atlanta at such short notice. He might also have noted the closeted location had "created a spirit that (the meeting) benefited from". But that would have robbed Kennedy of his sensationalist opening, I guess. <end quote> another discusses the "cover up" directly <quote> And the conspiracy mongering didn't stop there. At the end of Kennedy's first paragraph is: All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left. Sounds shady, right? Wrong. Again, if you read the transcript you'll find the participants were actually told: .consider it embargoed and protected until it is made public on June 21 and 22 at the ACIP. There is a plan to do that. Completely different: it was only embargoed until official release later that same month. Kennedy seems intellectually dishonest in taking these non-issues and writing them up to make it sound as though there is something fishy going on. <end quote> Finally, let me quote a bit about the rise in autism in countries, after they banned mercury preservatives: <quote> I have full knowledge of studies in Denmark and Canada that show autism rates increasing even though thimerosal has been banned in those countries for years. <end quote> later, in the comments, there is a Japanese study quoted that shows similar results. So, why should we take JFK Jr's word on the "cover-up"? What is wrong with this critique? Would someone wish to bet me that if someone went to the report, they would be able to falsify this critique? The report is available via hyperlink from the website I quoted. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
