Last week, 14 year old Natalie Morton died just hours after receiving the HPV vaccine for cervical cancer.

Reports say she felt faint, passed out at school, and was unable to be revived by paramedics. Autopsy results released this week, reveal that she died from a malignant tumour, meaning the cause of death was unrelated to the vaccine.

Never mind that these are the facts being presented to us, the anti-vax lobby have latched onto this death as evidence that the HPV vaccine kills. They have even gone so far as to  call the autopsy report fake and the pathologist who conducted the autopsy a liar.

This from NaturalNews dot com.

Today, the mainstream media is reporting an obviously-fabricated explanation for her death. A pathologist is declaring that Natalie died from a “malignant chest tumor” that just coincidentally and suddenly killed her within hours after she received the cervical cancer vaccine.

The opinion piece, written by Mike Adams, goes onto suggest that the explanation is purely a cover up to protect the billion dollar vaccine industry.

He continues;

The continuation of global cervical cancer vaccination programs — which generate billions in profits — absolutely required blaming Natalie’s death on something other than the vaccine. Blaming it on cancer is very easy to do, since every person living today has cancerous micro-tumors in their body right now. All the pathologist had to do was locate such a micro-tumor in Natalie’s body, then dismiss the vaccine altogether.

As a lawyer friend of mine pointed out, these statements constitute serious defamation against the pathologist, in particular this statement;

“But why would a pathologist cover up the true cause of Natalie Morton’s death?..”.

And then this statement about the executives of the vaccine manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline;

“It takes a real cold-hearted CEO to watch your product potentially kill a 14-year-old girl in mere hours and then continue to recommend that same product to millions more”.

Then, in an even more preposterous link, the author suggests a statement by a GSK spokesperson which says “GSK’s deepest sympathies lie with the parents at this very sad time” is merely a Freudian slip since it contains the word “parents” and “lie”.

Good grief.

The editors of Natural News would be wise to fact check their stories and ensure they are not putting themselves at risk of defamation suits by allowing their contributors to make such accusations. Mind you, they don’t have a reputation for fact checking before publishing stories, as is evidenced by their recent publication about an alleged lawsuit challenging compulsory vaccination in the USA, which turned out to be a hoax. The retraction can be read here or is reproduced below.

“(NaturalNews) Editor’s Note: It has come to our attention that the following article is factually incorrect. It was written by a contributing writer, then approved by an in-house editor who did not catch the significant errors in this article. As a result of these significant errors, and due to our commitment to publishing only true and accurate information to the best of our ability, we have made an editorial decision to reject further articles from this author.

“NaturalNews deeply regrets this unintentional error, and we are brainstorming new ways to put in place tighter fact-checking oversight so that the same mistake does not happen again in the future. We thank all those who have brought this important matter to our attention, and we pledge to increase our efforts to reject stories that contain factual inaccuracies.

“For the record, what was factually incorrect about the story (which we confirmed by phone with a clerk of United States District Court of Trenton, New Jersey) is that no such injunction has been filed. Thus, the entire premise of the story was factually incorrect.

“Here at NaturalNews, we strive to bring you accurate, honest information on these topics, and we deeply regret the unintentional publishing of the inaccurate information that previously appeared in this article space.”

This also resulted in the AVN publishing and distributing an incorrect press release, which was never retracted, despite several people politely suggesting that this would be the right thing to do.

My mate even suggested that if the editors of Natural News have any money they might soon be separated from it.

One would expect, if you are accusing pharmaceutical companies of cover-up and fraud you might wanna check your own facts. Because one thing’s for sure, Big Pharma are certainly not lacking in money, legal muscle or time.

Subscribe to comments Comment | Trackback |
Post Tags: , , , , ,

Browse Timeline

  • @ somnambulism

    Many thanks for the basic punctuation. I can now read your crackheaded fuckwittery with gay abandon.

    Anally retentive? No I just like being able to read without difficulty. You can leave out apostrophes if you like (I am being generous).

    As for calling you a lazy prick – it’s one keystroke to put a capital at the beginning of a sentence, ensuring people can easily read your screed. So unless you a have a learning difficulty, yes you are a lazy prick or possibly a pretentious wanker seeking to rebel against the strictures of English grammar. But seeing as you did thereafter use capitals I contend you were being the former.

    Oh and I’ll start refuting when a)you make a point b) that point is backed up with some evidence c)when I think there might be a point to it.

    Apology where?

  • @somnambulism
    None of your posts were deleted – posts here are moderated and yours was caught in the spam filter because it had urls in it. This is a common problem. Be very careful before you go accusing people of censorship, unless you have evidence as you may end up with egg on your face.


    If you are so keen to find double blind cross overs RCTs for vaccines, and you are unable to wait for me to come home from work, then search PubMed or Medline. I am not your research assistant. Since you seem to know so much about vaccines I assume you know this database well. I suspect however from your language (“Big Pharma Shill”) and references to that studies in PubMed will not satisfy you as the type of evidence you are after. And further, the RCT dble/blind demand? Please try not to be so predictable. This phrase is written in the anti-vax mantra under “9 questions to stump pro-vaxers“. I know the modus operandi of the anti-vaxers, because I have studied it. Next you’ll be bringing out the Illuminati card.
    As such, your rants and allegations of censorship, lead me to believe that you are not here to learn, you are not interested in scientific fact, you are only interesting in trolling to waste my time. So I will not look for papers for you on PubMed. And I will not respond to sentences written in super caps lock.


    If you wish to get a response, you are going about it the wrong way. I suggest you take a look over @Skepdick’s comments, who although disagreed with a lot of things on this site, did it in a (relatively) polite and inquiring manner.

    Ironic that you comment that trolls are born on this site.

  • somnambulism(its ironic. geddit?)

    And how funny is it that the one post i submitted, that was lacking profanity, and actually had some alternative links to, has been deleted. No doubt because they actually had some merit. I ask for legitimate double blind controlled studies, that are referenced and not authored by a bigpharma shill. No response. If you had any integrity at all, you would answer my questions with this so called science that you spout off about, but can’t show(if not for my benefit,then for the benefit of people who visit this blog and want answers).
    The fact that you cant provide these, and that you delete posts that have merit, proves that you are more concerned with keeping up appearences, than actually getting to the bottom of the issue at hand. It also proves to me that you cannot provide the studies i ask for, probably because THEY DONT EXIST. ALL these studies would have conflicts of interest no doubt. Sites like this are where trolls and shills are born.
    So vaccinate your kids, drink lots of flouride, and when your academic pompery crumbles around you,and you get depressed because of the bullshit life you live, throw a cocktail of paxil, zoloft and prozac down your neck. Because according to you,and the quackery that you live by, these are all things that “science” says are good for you.

  • somnambulism

    And the fact that you refer to this as a game maggie, makes me think that you are missing the point. This is site of scepticism is it not? lets start again. Can you please provide me with relevant links to prove my “ranting and raving” redundant. then i will happily walk away and re-evaluate my “crackheaded fuckwittery”

  • somnambulism

    Maggie, i have no desire to set up my own website. I am content to research.Yes i ranted, yes i raved. But i am humble enough to admit that. The reason i found this site was because i am searching for answers. But if you and your cheerleaders on here cant provide any referenced, double blind control studies that support your claims(saying you have university level immunological qualifications does’nt cut it, i’m afraid), by an author that has no ties to any pharmaceutical interests, then you’re post is as arbitrary and ranty as mine. Please, i implore you guys, show me the money. As much as i came across as a fuckwit, i do have good intentions believe it or not. And whale is far from my only point of reference. But i find it hard to believe that there is nothing contained on that site that has no merit at all.

  • somnambulism

    No worries bloganaut.Just one question, who appointed you as grammar and punctuation police, you twat. I noticed how you have’nt refuted anything that was being discussed. So go back to your English literature lecture, and pontificate about how good you are about at starting sentences with capital letters, and using comma’s and parentheses. You anal retentive stickler.And i love how you refer to me as a “lazy prick”, when you would’nt have the first fucking clue about who i am, you presumptuous, self absorbed wanker. I’m not writing a novel here, nor am i submitting a term paper. So i think the punctuation is superceded by the point i was trying to make. I think anyone can follow what i was trying to say, so to refer to it as “crackheaded fuckwittery” makes you look like an obtuse, pompous idiot who is quite prone to “fuckwittery” himself.

    In case you did’nt read the previous post i made, i APOLOGISED for my approach. Maybe i had my rags. Maybe i was having a bad hair day. Either way, i apologised. Anyway, go and have a hot shower. Your hypocrisy is fouling up the air.

    So apart from unnecessarily criticising my grammar, have you got anything of value to offer this blog?
    ps Gee, i hope i didnt make any punctuational errors this time bloganaut. I would hate to think that you judge a human being, by a rushed lack of punctuation. Because that would more or less qualify you as a narrow minded tosser. I’m quite sure that on a good day, we would probably swap stories and ideas in a far more constructive manner. ONCE AGAIN I APOLOGISE FOR MY ORIGINAL POST. NOW CAN WE GET BACK TO THE SCIENCE, BECAUSE THAT IS WHY I AM HERE.

  • I think perhaps @somnambulism should set up his/her own website, there he/she can rant and rave to their heart’s content and cite Whale to whenever they like.

    Abusing people and citing Whale to as evidence means you automatically lose the game

  • somnambulism

    yeah right, like wikipedia is a pristine, flawless bastion of truth. i’m a busy guy. dont waste my time. it is a well documented fact that the diseases vaccinations were created for were in decline long before vaccinations were developed(as a result of better sanitation and living conditions).
    and i noticed you have’nt provided any links to refute my arguments. apart from the tenuous scopies law reference. pretty much anything i research on wikipedia is “read with a grain of salt(if you will).
    that is f#$%ing laughable.
    here is an interesting article that is referenced and poses some interesting questions for you guys to consider and look into.(even though the author is’nt a scientist as such, she refers to respected scientists)
    by the way, i apologise for my heavy handed, derogatory post to maggie. maybe i could have taken a more tolerant, easy going approach. i feel very passionately about this subject. however that should’nt cloud my judgement. if any of you can prove to me that vaccines are safe and harmless(with double blind controlled studies and trials , that are’nt authored by “scientists” with conflicts of interest) then i will retract my statements fully, and unequivocably apologise to you all for being an ignorant, yet verbose wanker.

    ps: here are 2 videos. one is about the collusive nature of government and big pharma(even though it deals with psychiatry and psychotropic drugs, it shows the corrupt nature of big pharma, and how they have virtual carte blanche and immunity from prosecution for the harm they have caused to countless individuals. as they have with vaccinations as well)
    the second is a presentation on the links between thimerosal and autism by a dr david ayoub. please get back to me with your thoughts and refutations.
    regards to you all,

  • @somnambulism,

    No, not illiterate. Just a lazy prick who can’t be bothered using punctuation so it makes it easy for others to follow the absolute crackheaded fuckwittery that you are spewing.

  • Chris

    Oh, yes he did!
    Dear somnambulism, please look up Scopie’s Law.

  • reasonablehank

    @somnambulism: did you just do what I think you did?

  • somnambulism(its ironic. geddit?)

    sorry, credibility

  • somnambulism(its ironic. geddit?)

    oh, and furthermore, i dont require the words of a poorly researched bimbo to back up my claims. here is one of hundreds of links i can provide. not just off this website either( cos i know you’ll shitcan it and try to undermine its gredibility to save face)

  • somnambulism(its ironic. geddit?)

    oh and i’m not illiterate. habout should read how about. (an innocent typo)

  • somnambulism(its ironic. geddit?)

    jesus f#$@ing christ, habout your pomposity maggie. so are you saying that pharmaceutical companies don’t ever “cook up” data and skew numbers to support their claims that their products are safe(its called creating a market dipsh&%)? you are a brainwashed,ignorant parrot, who is cherry picking.there are an enormous amount of whistleblowers and people from within the industry(i could provide numerous links, but f*&% it, i’m wasting my time on a facile minded prat like you) that have stepped into the spotlight and exposed these murderous, money grubbing bastards for what they truly are. respected Phd doctors, professors, immunologists who have been researching this for over twenty years. people who dont need to piss in their own pocket and gloat about their “university level” education, to try and undermine what people who question the establishment, are trying to say. you are either a brainwashed, arrogant fool, or a collusive shill, working for someone else’s agenda(and probably getting paid well to do it).

    i know so many people that have refused to vaccinate(read poison) their children. and these were’nt decisions taken lightly. they were made after extensive research. and you know what? these kids are just fine thankyou very much. they have’nt been pumped full of thimerosal(a compound that is 49% mercury. one of the most toxic and immuno-suppressing elements known to man. and dont give me your programmed response about it being as safe as a tuna sandwich. it is well documented that some of these vaccines contain up to 50 times the safe recommended ppm of mercury). or squalene for that matter(an oil found in a lot of foodstuffs, such as olives, safe to consume; not so safe to inject).

    i suppose you think that flouridation of the water supply is beneficial and harmless too(even though it was used in russian gulags, and nazi concentration you think they gave a s#$% about their teeth?)
    see the problem with people like you, is that you are mindless repeaters, that are so intoxicated by their high priced “education”, that they can’t face the fact that a lot of what they have been taught is corporate propaganda, that serves a bigger agenda that they are unaware of. but their precious ego’s won’t allow them to think critically, and question the bullshit they have been fed. or face the fact that they spent 4-6 years at a tertiary institution, to help perpetuate a massive lie.

    so when it comes time for you to stop admiring your own transcending colon, maybe you can de-programme your feeble bird brain, and start actually doing some critical thinking. maybe then you will come across the abundant data that is out there, that will shatter your lame arguments into a thousand pieces.
    love and kisses,

    p.s $4 billion in the US alone? that pales into insignificance when compared to the annual profits of GlaxoSmithKline alone you peabrained halfwit. a pisslame argument if i ever heard one. and if you summon up the braincells required for an intelligent response, i will inundate you with links to the point where your humiliation will be there for anyone who visits this blog to see. now go and eat about 50 family sized humble pies. fool

  • Hi JD,

    So you don’t think that Mike’s writings go onto to support the big natural medicine market which is worth over 4 billion dollars a year in the US alone? His newsletters are sponsored by alt. med. companies including Chia Seeds and Ancient Minerals – so I think you’ll find he does have some vested interest in promoting alternative medicine.

    Don’t be fooled, “Big Homeopathy” is worth a huge amount of money especially when it is not even required to contain a pinch of active ingredient. Imagine that – being able to sell “magic” water or sugar pills for a hugely inflated price! I would be laughing all the way to the bank, what a fantastic scam!

    You say I am “either sheep” or have “researched biased views” to conclude that vaccines are safe? I don’t think I even mentioned the safety of vaccines in this post, but thank you for bringing it up! Yes, in fact I do think vaccines are safe and my evidence for this comes from large scale clinical trials and data collected after the introduction of vaccines into the market place. I also have a pretty good knowledge (university level) of immunology so I am quite comfortable with the concepts and principles of vaccination and immunisation.

    Thanks for your comments

  • JD

    Naturalnews is one of the few reliable sources of information. It is pure with no financial ties to sway opinions. For example: Who would you most likely believe first? A car salesman who has to sell to make money (big pharma) or a salesman who gets paid hourly (Mike adams, except worse he doesn’t get paid) ? If you think the vaccines are safe then you are either sheep or have researched biased reviews of it. The end

  • GSK could, conceivably, sue for libel under English law, but it would be a bit of a double-edged sword. If they sue, then anti-vaxers would claim that they are clearly using the law to silence opposition and cover up their role. If the don’t sue, then they are clearly admitting they were trying to cover it up.

  • Ken McLeod

    It certainly is a clear case of defamation, and I hope the pathologist sues the pants off NaturalNews. Americans don’t seem to understand that English defamation law is very different to US law, and the defendant will have to prove his case, and face huge expenses on losing.


  • NaturalNews never fact-checks. How could they? They print very few facts. I submit that the only reason they printed a retraction in the case you mention is that they lied about the actions of a NJ court. Perhaps someone alerted the judge.

  • Stuff big Pharma if I were the pathologist I would be going them for libel in the UK 🙂

  • There is no precedent as far as I know, but as you have also pointed out with the Singh case as an example that this could be deemed libelous. I doubt “Big Pharma” would even bother to follow it up – the point is the reckless statements made by this author are not always without consequence and that one should be careful in with what they publish on-line. We all have our own opinions, but this does not place written word out of the reach of the law.

  • Simon Singh wrote his infamous article in a “free comment” section of a newspaper but Justice Eady decided the “facts” stated within it meant that it didn’t qualify as just comment and was therefore defamatory – and Singh didn’t even claim dishonesty on the BCA’s part, Eady just interpreted it that way.

    I see Mike Adams has got “opinion” in brackets in the headline. I imagine Judge Eady could conclude, however, that the statements within the article are statements of fact (and they make explicit claims of dishonesty and intent) and therefore these too could easily qualify as defamatory.

    But is there any precedent for Big Pharma suing those who spit bile at them on a regular basis?