#DefendingBobsSon / #RobertDeNiro's Support of @VaxxedTheMovie at @TribecaFilmIns / #corporatesocialresponsibility
Legendary actor, Robert De Niro, has a son on the autism spectrum. As a Special Educator in my fourteenth year of work in the field and using basic common sense, I question if heavy metals and other legally inserted preservatives in vaccines have any place in a child's developing brain. I know that the first five to six years are the formative neurological years of development, though it is said that the brain continues to grow and prune till the mid to late twenties of a person's life. That said, neurological studies point to the 'plasticity' or malleability of the brain to be able to re-wire itself, and in effect literally have the potential to change its physical condition, much like a muscle that is
worked out at the gym.
it?
Is there a 'controversy' over what is put into vaccines? Rather than take a position against protecting human kind from the ravages of disease, I have taken the position of 'safety over profit.' Does 'safety over profit' mean that we turn our backs on such societal viruses as ebola or measles? Or does it mean that we the people hold our government agencies (the gatekeepers) and the pharmaceutical companies themselves to being exemplary stewards of reforming vaccines?
Have I vilified pharmaceutical companies or have I continuously extended an olive branch to them? Do they deserve an olive branch? I don't think so, but they are billion-dollar companies with so much clout and monetary influence in so many private and public areas that it has become impossible to reign them in. They are above the law. Their financial influence and 'revolving door' set-up with
governmental agencies keeps it this way. All said, a way out has been created for them, yet they are not choosing to take it. The way out is to adhere to 'safety before profit.'
How much money is enough? What is the measure of a companies success? What is the measure of success in and of itself? Do the ends justify the means or is it more important to focus on process?De Niro came out publicly in support of a documentary called 'Vaxxed,' which became officially selected as part of the Tribeca Film Festival. Apparently, some '#DeepPockets prevailed and managed to get the film festival to not only pull the documentary out of the selection, but to even have Mr. De Niro to reverse his open support of the movie. Still, Mr. De Niro, who is not against vaccinations, released a statement on the value of starting a responsible and respectful discussion on the matter. This statement was published by the Los Angeles Times on March 25, 2016.
" “Grace and I have a child with autism and we believe it is critical that all of the issues surrounding the causes of autism be openly discussed and examined," he said, referring to his wife and their child Elliot, in a statement sent to reporters Friday."
Can a respectful discussion occur? Or will talk be filled by a theater of special interests view points? How can the mainstream media have an objective discussion on the topic if pharmaceutical companies are running advertisements on their channels? How can politicians have a say wether heavy metals and carcinogenic preservatives found in vaccines if they are receiving money from pharmaceutical industries directly or through third parties? Are their multiple conflicts of interests hamstringing discussion?
This is how freedom dies. This kind of censorship robs the land of sincerity and genuineness, and replaces it with corporate greed and double standards.
For more, go to http://www.CoachBill.US
Twitter.Com @CoachBill007
Instagram: CoachBill007
Youtube: CoachBill007
Comments