Can a Biased Journalist Produce Objective Work?

Can a Biased Journalist Produce Objective Work?

In the past three years, Health Freedom Idaho has grown. HFI has successfully pushed back against liberty stealing statutes and rules, particularly those surrounding vaccines, and in the process made their presence known. Due to this, the media is beginning to take notice.

We have been told that an Idaho Statesman’s investigative reporter, Audrey Dutton, is writing a feature story on Health Freedom Idaho. In addition to requesting information from Health Freedom Idaho leadership directly, she made public records requests to obtain the names and contact information of members and individuals who testified at the recent rules hearings. She has been sending requests for interviews to Health Freedom Idaho members. We want our members to know that Dutton obtained this information through a public records request, NOT from HFI.

Ms. Dutton has publicly stated her bias against parents who opt out of some or all vaccinations. She has determined that the vaccination debate is settled despite hundreds of published peer-reviewed studies that call the safety and efficacy of vaccines into question and despite the demonstrable lies and distortions uttered by vaccine proponents. Her opinion is that parents opposed to some or all vaccination are unjustifiably fearful and/or misinformed.

your bias is showing Audrey Dutton
Public Post from Dutton’s Facebook Page

They like to say, “The science is settled. Vaccines are safe and effective.” But is science ever settled? Ask some real scientists and I’m sure they will tell you that science is never settled but is always ongoing. It takes a great amount of arrogance to claim you know it all and there is nothing more to the story. 

Janet Levatin, MD

 It also takes a great amount of ignorance given that federal law recognizes vaccines injure and kill some recipients and research shows that 6% of pediatricians do not follow the CDC guidelines for their own children and 13% do not plan to follow the guidelines in the future. A whopping 21% of pediatric specialists planned to reject at least one vaccine for their future children. But most don’t talk about it because they are threatened with the removal of their licenses and harassed by their state medical boards if they do.

Yes, some parents opt out of some or all vaccines for their children and recently their voices have grown stronger as parents educate themselves on the matter and realize their right to direct the upbringing of their children is being threatened all across the nation through draconian legislation and more. Bureaucrats in Idaho have already trampled parental rights codified in Idaho statute. 

vaccine hesitancy unanswered questions

Why Do Parents Hesitate to Vaccinate?

Ms. Dutton has been emailing Health Freedom Idaho members asking for an interview about their vaccine choices. But why would anyone want to talk with her when she’s already determined that those who decline vaccines are simply doing so out of fear and ignorance. And isn’t a parent’s desire to protect his or her children the most important reason to decline a medical intervention admitted to cause injury and death?

“…many parents in Idaho are opting out of measles/mumps/rubella vaccinations for their children…. The reason they balk usually isn’t religious or because of underlying health problems. It’s fear.” 

Audrey Dutton March 8, 2015: “Idaho Parents Increasingly Gun-Shy Over Getting Shots For Their Children.”

One is left to wonder the basis of this assumption and why it matters. A parent has the natural right to care for their child as they see fit. They can choose whether to vaccinate or not – for any reason, or for no reason at all. That said, religion, underlying health problems, documented scientific dangers of vaccines, bad experiences of friends and loved ones, and fear are five justifiable reasons to question whether the potential benefits of vaccinating are worth the risks and spiritual objections. – Health Freedom Idaho


Let’s examine the description (in part) of the MMR II, made by Merck & Co, Inc.

MMR II (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Virus Vaccine Live) is a live virus vaccine for vaccination against measles (rubeola), mumps, and rubella (German measles). MMR II is a sterile lyophilized preparation of (1) ATTENUVAX (Measles Virus Vaccine Live), a more attenuated line of measles virus, derived from Enders’ attenuated Edmonston strain and propagated in chick embryo cell culture; (2) MUMPSVAX (Mumps Virus Vaccine Live), the Jeryl Lynn (B level) strain of mumps virus propagated in chick embryo cell culture; and (3) MERUVAX II (Rubella Virus Vaccine Live), the Wistar RA 27/3 strain of live attenuated rubella virus propagated in WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts. {1,2}

The growth medium for measles and mumps is Medium 199 (a buffered salt solution containing vitamins and amino acids and supplemented with fetal bovine serum) containing SPGA (sucrose, phosphate, glutamate, and recombinant human albumin) as stabilizer and neomycin…. Each dose of the vaccine is calculated to contain sorbitol, sodium phosphate, sucrose, sodium chloride, hydrolyzed gelatin, recombinant human albumin, fetal bovine serum, other buffer and media ingredients, and approximately 25mcg of neomycin….”

MMR II, made by Merck & Co, Inc.

Certainly Ms. Dutton cannot fault loving parents for not wanting to inject those ingredients into their healthy children. There is not a single study proving the safety of injecting all those ingredients. Is Dutton unaware of this fact?


Many individuals believe vaccines are unclean and defile the temple (their body) because of the injection of modified viruses and bacteria, toxic contaminants and ingredients, and the fact they are cultured on aborted fetal tissues and animal tissues.

What do all these ingredients mean to someone with possible spiritual objections? There are at least two answers to this question. One is the issue of abortion. The other is the multiple biblical references to introducing foreign substances into the body.

Wistar RA 27/3 is listed and referenced with WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts. These are scientific terms and labels. Here is the reality of what they represent:

“The rubella virus clinically named RA273 (R=Rubella, A=Abortus, 27=27th fetus, 3=3rd tissue explant) was then cultivated on the WI-38 aborted fetal cell line. A later research paper by Stanley Plotkin [vaccine developer]  would reveal that 40 more babies were aborted after RA273 was successfully isolated, with virus strains taken from 34 of them.[13A] This means a total of over 80 separate, elective abortions recorded were involved in the research and final production of the present day rubella vaccine: 21 from the original WI-1 through WI-26 fetal cell lines that failed, plus WI-38 itself, plus 67 from the attempts to isolate the rubella virus.” – Children of God for Life, Vaccines and Abortions.

For patients and parents with strong objections to abortion, this information could weigh heavily on the decision of whether or not to use products that contain aborted fetal tissue such as vaccination. (More information on aborted fetal tissue in vaccines)


The second potential religious or spiritual objection relates to foreign substances being introduced into the body. Many believe the Bible commands we not defile the temple God has created.

“Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.”

(I Corinthians 3:16-17)

Alarming research out of Italy documents not only the dangerous ingredients intended to be contained in vaccines but dozens of other toxic contaminants from lead to glass. The independent studies show there are more toxins in these biologics than the CDC is disclosing:

There are many other sources of information on the toxic ingredients contained in vaccines such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for information on vaccine ingredients:

The bottom line is vaccines contain a variety of ingredients, both intended and unintended that may toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic and even fertility impairing  – from aluminum to formaldehyde to polysorbate 80 to more. It is easy to understand how many parents might view these as a violation of God’s commandment.


To address the issues of underlying health problems and fear, let’s look at more information provided by the vaccine maker. 

MMR II, made by Merck & Co, Inc. (in part): 


  • Hypersensitivity to any component of the vaccine….
  • Do not give MMR II to pregnant females…
  • Anaphylactic or anaphylactoid reactions to neomycin…
  • Febrile respiratory illness or other active febrile infection.
  • Patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy.
  • Individuals with blood dyscrasias, leukemia, lymphomas of any type…
  • Primary and acquired immunodeficiency states…
  • Individuals with a family history of congenital or hereditary immunodeficiency….


  • Adequate treatment provisions, including epinephrine injection (1:1000) should be available for immediate use should an anaphylactic or anaphylactoid reaction occur.
  • Excretion of small amounts of the live attenuated rubella virus from the nose or throat has occurred in the majority of susceptible individuals 7 to 28 days after vaccination.
  • As for any vaccine, vaccination with MMR II may not result in protection….
  • The health-care provider should provide the vaccine information required to be given with each vaccination to the patient, parent, or guardian.
  • The health-care provider should inform the patient, parent, or guardian of the benefits and risks associated with vaccination.

Manufacturers report that there are vaccine reactions that include getting measles from the vaccine…and chronic conditions such as diabetes, arthritis, brain swelling, paralysis (temporary or permanent), seizures, lazy eye and more…

The vaccine package insert contains a large section on adverse reactions, some of which include: Panniculitis, atypical measles, vasculitis, pancreatitis, diabetes mellitus, thrombocytopenia, anaphylaxis and anaphylactoid reactions, arthritis, arthralgia, myalgia, encephalitis, encephalopathy, subacute sclerosing panencephalitis, Guillian-Barre Syndrome, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (adem), transverse myelitis, febrile convulsions, afebrile convulsions or seizures, ataxia, polyneuritis, polyneuropathy, ocular palsies, paresthesia.”

Given all this information, the description, the contraindications, and the precautions, doesn’t some fear seem warranted? And given these risks, does Dutton really think it is her place to declare the science settled, not to mention shame parents for well-placed fear?


Ex-Vaxxer NOT Anti-Vaxxer

This category of people who decline vaccinations, those who were once pro-vaccine only to experience the downside first hand, is likely the largest. Despite the fact that less than one percent of vaccine adverse reactions are reported, there have been over 87,000 reports of adverse reactions to the MMR vaccine to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System from the US and it’s territories. And if only 1% of reactions are reported, there could be as many as 8,700,000 reactions.

Despite official reassurances that vaccine injuries are rare, parents who’ve seen their children hospitalized, stricken with chronic illnesses, paralysis, seizures, or blindness are not going to continue vaccinating. Siblings are spared the potential damage and parents are shamed for being anti-vax when they should receive our sympathy. In reality, they were pro-vaccine until they watched their child suffer and/or die. To add insult to injury, parents are shamed and targeted after vaccination injury by friends, family, and media. Many suffer in silence, raising a child with chronic illness or vaccine-induced physical challenge.

Yes, parents opt-out for religious and moral reasons as well as previous vaccine injuries. Others, faced with the decision of vaccination, having read the medical literature to truly understand the risks and being left with many unanswered questions as vaccines are not subject to the gold standard of double-blind, placebo-controlled rigor, they utilize the vaccine exemptions available through Idaho statute. 

Exemptions due to the Unanswered Questions

Access to information regarding vaccines has become increasingly difficult due to censorship by big tech and the mainstream media who according to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., received a combined $9.6 billion in revenues from pharmaceutical companies in 2016 alone. Information, statistics and basic risk versus benefit analysis of vaccinations are getting harder to research. 

For example, parents seeking to find out how many children died in the last measles outbreak in 2019 are redirected to the CDC website. However, after scouring page after page there is NO INDICATION how many U.S. children died in the highly contagious measles outbreak. *It was ZERO for those still looking for the answer.* 

Health officials, doctors, and mainstream media claim that 1 in 1000 children will die from measles but before the introduction of the measles vaccine, the reported number was 1 in 10,000. Thanks to public health measures such as sanitation and clean drinking water as well as access to healthcare and nutrition, the rate declined from 13.3 per 100,000 in 1900 to .2 per 100,000 in 1963, before the measles vaccine was introduced. No children have died from measles in the US in last 2 decades.

Some of the many unanswered questions: 

  • Why aren’t vaccines tested according to the gold standard with double-blind placebos?
  • Why are they the only product that is one size fits all?
  • If vaccines are so safe, why is there zero manufacturer liability? 
  • Why is the US the only country that gives the Hep B vaccine on the first day of life?
  • Why is it that after vaccine manufacturers received a liability-free pass, the vaccine schedule exploded to more than 70 doses of vaccines?
  • Why does the US give the chickenpox vaccine, when the UK and many other countries don’t, because it’s been proven to cause shingles, which is more dangerous?
  • Many scientists have raised the alarm on the amount of aluminum in vaccines. Why doesn’t the CDC address their concerns?
  • Why did the ACIP committee recently approve the new Hep B adjuvant despite the safety signal of a myocardial infarction?
  • Why are all four major vaccine makers (Merck, Sanofi, GSK and Pfizer), who have all been convicted of fraud, given a free pass when it comes to vaccines? Merck created the deadly drug Vioxx and is currently being sued for fraud relating to the Shingles vaccine, MMR vaccine, and Gardasil vaccine, their products are mandated for school entry?
  • Why do we give 26 vaccines in the first year of life to infants with immature immune systems that cannot even mount an immune response to vaccines?
  • Where are the safety studies on vaccines that were supposed to be conducted and submitted to the Department of Health and Human Services to ensure the vaccine’s safety?
  • Find more questions here.

While we are flattered that time and resources are being spent trying to figure out how a small grassroots effort could grow into an outspoken voice of freedom and liberty in Idaho – answer, because we speak the truth and it resonates – these above questions deserve a thorough examination. Is Dutton willing to ask them? What’s more, the only group possessing unfettered influence at the state and national level is the pharmaceutical industry, that is where the focus of investigative reporting should be. Dutton must possess a great deal of cognitive dissonance to believe that the same industry that has paid billions in fines for fraud and is the largest lobbyist and contributor to political campaigns in the nation, is trustworthy when it comes to vaccines even though they have no liability for these products.

Our question is whether an already opinionated journalist like Audrey Dutton is capable of reading the medical literature herself, talking to doctors and scientists with genuine concerns, investigating reported injuries and deaths after vaccines and writing a thought provoking and honest piece of journalism? Or will she simply regurgitate what conflicted officials, doctors, and vaccine stakeholders have fed her? We think educated readers know the answer to those questions.

Our question is whether an already opinionated journalist like Audrey Dutton is capable of reading the medical literature herself, talking to doctors and scientists with genuine concerns, investigating reported injuries and deaths after vaccines and writing a thought-provoking and honest journalism piece? Or will she simply regurgitate what conflicted officials, doctors, and vaccine stakeholders have fed her?

Leave a Reply