Home Health Health Care, Part 2: Autism and the Persons Who Killed Dr...

Health Care, Part 2: Autism and the Persons Who Killed Dr Bradstreet


Jeff Bradstreet, MD, autism researcher, found dead in a river after FDA raided his lab

by Mary Maxwell, currently a candidate for US Senate

I am struggling in my campaign with the gap between my understanding of the world and my audience’s. I think the gap has to do with politeness. In polite society you are not supposed to talk about sin — except money-sin and sex-sin. Those two are always acceptable chit-chat. Come to think of it, those two are the ones the media loves.

For me, the big sins are torture and genocide. It shouldn’t be impolite to discuss these. In fact, any competent political scientist or historian of violence knows that ruthlessness is a winning trait. There are plenty of ruthless people and they do big, terrible things. They usually hide, however, either by using a deceptive cover-story for their actions or they hide their identity completely.


In Part 1 of this series on Health Care, I said Rockefeller was not the top guy.

The top guy, for whom the Rockefellers work, remains in hiding. The book Thy Will Be Done, by Gerard Colby and Charlotte Dennett, claims that Nelson Rockefeller virtually ruled Latin America (and used the Evangelical Churches in his rule!).  Why would he do all that for another person, his secret boss? I don’t know.

Colby and Dennett have laid it all bare about Nelson. I am pleased to lay bare anything I discover about medical genocide. And I urge you to yak, yak, yak about these things. Just throw politeness overboard.  Stupid, stupid politeness.

Medical Genocides

My research leads me to believe that there have been many medical genocides in the US in our lifetime. The Spanish flu of 1918, the polio epidemic of 1955, the use of Agent Orange on our soldiers (never mind on the Vietnamese population) in the 1970s, AIDS in the 1980s, Gulf War Illness in the 1990s, autism in the 2000s, appear to me to have been deliberately caused. Yes.

This article is about autism. Let’s start by looking at that horrible picture of Jeff Bradstreet’s body floating in a river in North Carolina. His autistic son had just graduated from high school and Dad was happy. The authorities tried to pass it off as suicide. His brother Tom started a Go Fund Me page to solicit money for an investigation. The authorities have since conceded that it is probably homicide.

Is this leading to any arrest? No. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist, or even an autism scientist, to know that his death is very likely a result of his getting close to a cure for autism. In the days leading up to his death his office was raided by the FDA. (Note: cancer curer Stan Burzynski says his clinic was raided by the FDA during patients’ visits, traumatizing them!)

Here is the Washington Post’s story, on July 16, 2015, headlined “Mysterious Death of Doctor Who Peddled Autism ‘Cures’ to Thousands”:

Since his death, however, the conspiracy theories have begun to crumble as evidence has emerged linking Bradstreet to a shadowy online industry in unapproved medicine.

Bradstreet’s Internet postings tie him to an unlicensed medical factory that was recently shut down for producing potentially contaminated vials of a supposed wonder “cure” called GcMAF.

The day before his death, Bradstreet’s own clinic was raided by federal and state authorities searching for the same untested and unapproved “cure.”

My first thought is that the “shadowy company” was possibly in on the FDA thing. The plot is often laid in advance, in order that “evidence” can be brought to court. Judges never seem to raise an eyebrow. But that’s a story for another day.

Note also WaPo’s referring to “potentially contaminated vials.” This puts the reader in the mind that the raiders, the FDA, exist for our protection. God knows, we don’t want contaminated vials!

Consumer Protection and the Commerce Clause

What is the FDA? The Food and Drug Act of 1906 was passed by Congress. In a later era, we had “consumer protection measures.”  For example, Ralph Nader in the 1960s fought for such legislation as “Truth in Lending.”  This mean that the bank has to tell you in writing what your total repayment over the years will be.

How does Congress have the constitutional power to regulate such things?  It is all chalked up to a particular clause in Article I, section 8, namely the 3rd clause. It says:

“the Congress shall have Power to … regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”

The key phrase is “regulate commerce.”  We Republicans want federalism protected, that is, we oppose the disappearance of states’ sovereignty. (I am a proud member of the Federalist Society in Washington, DC). We yell if a court interprets the Commerce clause to mean the feds can oversee manufacture, or labor conditions.  They should only oversee stuff that crosses state lines. i.e., commerce. Let the states regulate labor and manufacture to their heart’s content.

Note: if you want to know what the Framers had in mind in any clause, you go to James Madison’s notes. If you want to know how the US Supreme Court has interpreted any clause, you to go “US Constitution, Annotated.”

Roughly, the Framers had in mind that one state might try to overlord another in regard to trade so this clause was inserted to prevent that. Roughly, the US Supreme Court in its first 200 years affirmed Congress’s right to legislate broadly in regard to business. However, in the 1995 case of Lopez and the 200 case of Morrison there has been some setback. And Justice Clarence Thomas said the whole natter should be re-visited. I’ll say.

Can the FDA Prevent Manufacture of a Cure for Autism?

If you want to know what the law says (federal), Google for subject matter, such as FDA and USC (meaning United States Code). I did this and will quote just one paragraph from a huge entry at 21 USC 352:

(iii) the established name of each inactive ingredient listed in alphabetical order on the outside container of the retail package and …  except that nothing in this subclause shall be deemed to require that any trade secret be divulged, and … that this subclause shall not apply to nonprescription drugs not intended for human use.

Blah, blah, blah.

The FDA does not control the manufacture of a product, only its labelling. So what does it mean to say that the FDA has approved of a drug? The website of FDA.gov says:

“The mission of FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) is to ensure that drugs marketed in this country are safe and effective. CDER does not test drugs, although the Center’s Office of Testing and Research does conduct limited research in the areas of drug quality, safety, and effectiveness. [We have] responsibility for medical and radiological devices, food and cosmetics, biologics, veterinary drugs, and tobacco products.

“Some companies submit a new drug application (NDA) to introduce a new drug product into the U.S. Market.  [They must] submit evidence that it is safe and effective. A team of CDER physicians, statisticians, chemists, pharmacologists, and other scientists reviews the sponsor’s NDA containing the data and proposed labeling.”

I must admit I do not understand the grounds on which the FDA seized the property of Jeff Bradstreet. Often (I claim) it is just theft and physical intimidation of a doctor who is about to reveal a cure. “We can’t have that” – if we want a genocidal epidemic to continue.

What Is Autism?

The diagnosis autism was first made by Leo Kanner, MD, at Johns Hopkins in 1943. I think he was in on the deal. He found eleven cases.  Before that, there had been something called childhood schizophrenia in which the subject seemed withdrawn from reality. That child, however, did not have the symptoms that are famous today. Examples include:

The child cannot speak, the child has sensory overload (even a small sound may be deafening to him, even soft clothes may hurt his skin, the sights around the room may come to him in a jumble), the child has food allergies, the child has extreme bowel problems, the child acts obsessively in regard to certain things such as spinning the wheels on a toy.

In this article I am speaking exclusively of persons with severe autism, not high-functioning individuals. I do not think the two should be mixed by saying “He has ASD – autism spectrum disorder.”

The number of children diagnosed with autism increased dramatically in the 1990 and in a recent year was 1 in 68 newborn boys.

Mary Maxwell Says

Since I do not know of anyone but me who says these things I will “attribute” the statement to myself. I think the use of disease is just as ordinary a weapon as guns or spears. Why would a nation hold back if it wanted to defeat the enemy?  Why would an ambitious businessman hold back if he could eliminate a rival?

Please consider that all of these could easily have been done deliberately rather than by an act of Nature:

The London fire of 1666, the Bubonic plague in London in 1667, the outbreak of leprosy in Hawaii in 1866, the worldwide flu of 1918, the thalidomide injury to newborns in 1960, AIDS, autism, Williams syndrome, West Nile virus, and the recent increase in cancer.

Likewise, I think these diseases in plants and animals was also deliberate: the Irish potato blight, Dutch elm disease in the US, all instances of hoof and mouth disease in livestock, and all immunodeficiency syndrome in pets.

Before you say “Impossible!”, recall that the use of smallpox-laden blankets to kill America’ indigenous people has long been admitted to. (I actually think it was done without benefit of blanket.) And recall the Guatemala case.

Robert Bazell at NBC news tells of the Guatemala event.

“U.S. government medical researchers intentionally infected hundreds of people in Guatemala, including institutionalized mental patients, with gonorrhea and syphilis without their knowledge or permission more than 60 years ago.

“Many of those infected were encouraged to pass the infection onto others as part of the study.

“Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius offered extensive apologies for actions taken by the U.S. Public Health Service:

“The sexually transmitted disease inoculation study conducted from 1946-1948 in Guatemala was clearly unethical. … We are outraged that such reprehensible research could have occurred under the guise of public health. We apologize to all the individuals who were affected by such abhorrent research practices.”

There is no point your telling me that I mustn’t make claims until the evidence is in. I don’t need perfect proof; I’m only saying my interpretation is likely. Once you know how to hurt people biologically, you will use it just as surely as you use other developments in an arms race. Won’t you?

Indeed it is an extra clever way to operate – until now the miscreants haven’t got caught! This is because Americans are afraid to be impolite. Look how Hillary got away with – or should I say look how the United States got away with – defining the Guatemala event as “unethical” and as part of “research.”

Folks, it was not part of research. It was the real thing. See Slate’s semi-believable report of the event as a real experiment.

The Murder of Jeff

Folks also don’t like to say “Jeff Bradstreet was murdered.” You should say it.  Go on, practice it. If you don’t say it, it is much easier for such a thing to happen again. Clearly – could anything be clearer? – Jeff was murdered.

I guess there is a chance that a hunter shot him by mistake and then threw him in the river. We can’t be sure. But we do know Jeff was not suicidal, and that he loved his family and would not have made them see his dead body floating in a river.

Therefore, we should get up a posse to go searching for the killer.  Or a phalanx of District Attorneys to line up some indictments. Something! Anything! Don’t let it pass by (as we have done with dozens of whistle blower deaths).

Moreover, we should start to provide absolute protection for the cure that Dr Bradstreet was preparing. Some of his colleagues are aware of the formula, and you can’t blame them if they are in zip-up-the-lips mode today.

Does anyone remember that old human practice called solidarity? It works wonders. Always has, always will. It’s the way the human species gets things done when there is a bully afoot.

–Mary Maxwell, PhD, LLB is author of “A Balm in Gilead: Curing Autism and Awakening the Physicians” (2014). It is a free download on the Books page of her website www.MaryWMaxwell.com


Photo credit: http://healthmomentusa.com/



  1. Jeff Bradstreet’s Facebook page has a video that you may like to see. Here is a note from Brother Tom who is still on the case:

    It’s been exactly two years since my brother Dr. Jeff Bradstreet was murdered in North Carolina. He was a man who never gave up fighting for the truth while defending those who were wounded by vaccines and the onslaught of environmental toxins. His marching orders to parents was simple: “No one knows your child better than you….do your research and then find a doctor that will listen to you.”
    His love for his patients and families will never be forgotten. His research will continue to go on and his case will never be closed until we find the people who murdered him.

  2. Thank you, Mary! There’s a time for politeness and there’s a time for telling the ugly truth. Someone is responsible for the death of Dr. Bradstreet and someone or some group is responsible for the deaths of many other natural and holistic doctors and other practitioners. This number is at least in the 60s since Dr. Bradstreet’s murder. Someone is responsible for the “diseases” called autism, AIDS, polio, smallpox, and many others as well as various plant and animal “diseases.” I agree that Bubonic plague was also a manufactured disease. I believe the rich were feeling overwhelmed by the poor and hungry who would commit crimes, such as steal loaves of breads, etc., to try to stay alive and keep their families alive, or pick pockets, etc., and the plague was invented to thin the herd. Apparently, they weren’t able to keep the population of the poor low enough through other means, such as hanging, or throwing people in prison to rot, etc. (Personally, I’m beginning to believe all or at least most “serial killers” were also created by this group to frighten the populations and create the “need” for more police, more lethal police equipment, and more “crackdowns” and
    “tough on crime” initiatives, etc.)

    If only district and county attorneys, state attorneys, and federal attorneys weren’t some of the most corrupt people around. The agenda could not have progressed this far without them. I certainly wouldn’t want to count on them to bring justice into the situation.

    One of the biggest mistakes people make is to underestimate the malevolence of those who have set themselves “above” the rest of us. It’s hard to imagine how such people can exist because we assume that most everyone is like us. They’re not like us! Yes, everyone has dark and light, like the yin-yang symbol illustrates. It’s a matter of degrees or percentages.

    I believe the bigger picture has to be seen. Connecting the dots that reveal the big picture shatters belief systems and can cause extreme depression. Usually this is very temporary. Understandably, people are fearful about letting go of their illusions about how things work. It’s like trying to stand on a disintegrating foundation. But once the bigger picture is seen, the fear can be released. At that point we become empowered and can take action from another level.

    I believe a real, lasting solution takes all of us doing our own things and taking our own actions. Some peck away at one particular issue until the truth can be revealed about it, and some connect the dots between them. Some seem to keep on doing what they’ve been doing so that the whole thing doesn’t fall apart in a disastrous way. Some work toward creating new foundations to provide a more benevolent existence for us. I’m not sure that this method won’t lead to a better result than a more confrontational approach, although a confrontational approach may be the most useful method in some specific situations.

    • However, we go forward we definitely need truth tellers to counter the liars’ official explanations, “expert” opinions, and authoritative positions. Hopefully, more of us will be able to take our own benevolent actions consciously so that we won’t be swayed by the actions of the malevolent ones.

        • Neither the voters nor the authorities are ready for someone like me.

          I do have some of my own ideas about how I think a minimal government should work. First to go would be the labels. No more “parties.” And although I believe in some degree of flexibility in government to be able to adapt to changing circumstances, I would prefer to have a much more stable and secure situation people can depend on — no big changes every 4 to 8 years. Governments should be run with wisdom and compassion for all — not just citizens of one’s own country. The government I’m thinking of would be so minimal that no change in policies should be needed on a frequent basis. Representatives should never have to depend on special interests for funding and I don’t really see special interests rearing their ugly heads in such a minimalist system. I also don’t see a need for funding, as this is supposed to be a public service, not a popularity contest for the super wealthy to control.

          Regarding the Constitution, it’s my belief that the Preamble is the most important part and should have been used as a criteria filter for determining whether any proposed laws or acts fit. If we could reverse the damage, we might want to first define each statement in the Preamble on a consensus basis and then use that to determine which laws should be thrown out. It wouldn’t take many laws to maintain/sustain a fair and thriving society. By tossing out all the laws that are meant to protect the guilty, a substantial reduction would already be accomplished. Society isn’t really the correct word for what I’m trying to describe. I’m thinking of a situation where ALL individuals are valued. So when I say a “fair and thriving society,” I mean that all individuals should be thriving. If they’re not, then the government is not doing its job by allowing for conditions that make it possible for each individual to thrive. In other words, it’s my belief that if each individual isn’t thriving, it’s because obstacles exist. Governments have the responsibility to remove those obstacles. And we’re not talking about nature. One of the ways, the malevolent ones have manipulated us is by making us think nature is an obstacle to our thriving. It is not. Nature is benevolent. Many people would not agree with this, but I’m convinced of it. Seeming obstacles such as you discussed in this article are examples of the fact that this group, whoever they all are, have created all sorts of nasties and blamed them on nature so that the people would agree that we have to fight nature and we need scientists and engineers to do this for us because they are the “authorities.” Actually, they’re not authorities, but only patsies for the the powers that shouldn’t be who are always lurking behind the scenes and trying to run the show.

          Well, I don’t want to ramble any more, but do you see what I mean about neither the voters nor the authorities being ready for someone like me? There’s no room for real people in this type of political system. If you don’t believe me, listening to this interview with Tony Gambino might help explain it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYDo_sam1BI&t=2742s

        • Dear Spec, I replied to you at length but lost my text when I went to Google to verify that the Federation of Australia came into force on Jan 1, 1901. Yes it did.

          Was surprised that you think Bubonic is devious. Sydney has had that plague only once, and that was in 1900. Over 1700 people were locked up in quarantine. Do I think some of them had to be kept out of sight during the transition to Federation?

          NO COMMENT.

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion