Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said Tuesday that President-elect Donald Trump has asked him to head a panel  that reviews the safety of vaccines. Kennedy is the nephew of President John F. Kennedy and a well-known vaccine skeptic. This news has worried vaccine experts and health workers, as they believe that the president creating such a panel could strengthen vaccine opponents’ beliefs that vaccines cause autism.

“President-elect Trump has some doubts about the current vaccine policy, and he has questions about it,” Kennedy said on Tuesday. Trump’s spokeswoman Hope Hicks later said that Trump is considering forming a committee on autism, but that nothing is certain yet. Kennedy has previously spoken out against vaccinating children, calling it a “holocaust.” In 2015, he spoke at the screening of a film that claimed a link between autism and vaccines, and said:

They get the shot, that night they have a fever of a hundred and three, they go to sleep, and three months later their brain is gone. This is a holocaust, what this is doing to our country.

JUST IN: Vaccine skeptic Robert Kennedy says he accepted Trump’s offer to chair panel on vaccine safety. https://t.co/BwuF0sJ2pv pic.twitter.com/17k85oXk8p

— Reuters Politics (@ReutersPolitics) January 10, 2017

The conspiracy theory that vaccines cause autism in children is believed to have its origin in a British study that was published in 1998. That study specifically named the vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella, MMR, as the villain. That study has been debunked. But in recent years, there have been some serious outbreaks of measles since some parents have declined to vaccinate their children.

Appointing RFK Jr. to head vaccine safety panel is like appointing David Duke to head panel on race relations. Disgusting & irresponsible.

— Seth Mnookin (@sethmnookin) January 10, 2017

Kennedy wrote an article on the subject in 2005 for the Rolling Stone magazine, in which he argued that the government is covering up the connections between autism and thimerosal, a preservative that used to be an ingredient in vaccines. But there is no evidence for that theory, and thimerosal was never used in MMR vaccines. The article was later deleted because of factual errors.

This theory has been debunked several times, and vaccine experts warn that delaying vaccinating children poses a real danger. Infectious disease expert at the University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Dr. Daniel Johnson, said that there are many systems constantly overseeing and reviewing the safety of vaccines, so it would be a waste of taxpayer money to create one more. He said denying vaccines could lead to “increased harm, illness and potentially death” from diseases that would easily be prevented by a shot.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump Taps Vaccine Skeptic Robert Kennedy Jr. to Lead Vaccine Safety Panel appeared first on Law Street.

Despite his transition into the White House, President-elect Donald Trump took time out of his day on Sunday to rehash the election results, going so far as to claim that millions of votes were cast illegally. He made the claim without citing evidence and despite an apparent consensus among election monitors that there was no indication of widespread voter fraud.

President-elect Trump’s comments came as popular vote counts began showing Hillary Clinton’s sizable lead in the popular vote. While Clinton lost the electoral college and the election as a result, it looks likely that she will have a popular vote lead of somewhere between 2.5 to 2.7 million votes, or about 2 percent of all votes cast. This appears to have troubled the president-elect, leading to his claim that enough votes were illegally cast to lose the popular vote.

In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2016

This unprecedented attack on the legitimacy of the same process that elected him president surprised many, particularly because earlier in the day, Trump sent out a series of tweets denouncing the recount effort organized by Green Party candidate Jill Stein. On Saturday, Trump tweeted that the recount effort was a scam.

The Green Party scam to fill up their coffers by asking for impossible recounts is now being joined by the badly defeated & demoralized Dems

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2016

Last week Stein began raising money to fund a recount in multiple key states, and on Friday, announced that she initiated the recount process in Wisconsin. The Clinton campaign said that it would join in the recount effort, although a lawyer for the campaign indicated that he did not expect the process to change the final outcome. However, that appears to have been enough to upset Trump, who went on to criticize Clinton in several tweets. Trump cited Clinton’s concession speech and statements made during the presidential debates to indicate that she was hypocritically challenging the election after criticizing him for doing the same thing during the campaign.

Just a few hours later, Trump claimed that millions of votes were cast illegally and then alleged that voter fraud occurred in several states. He also claimed that if the popular vote determined the outcome of the election he would have campaigned differently and won that as well.

It would have been much easier for me to win the so-called popular vote than the Electoral College in that I would only campaign in 3 or 4–

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2016

states instead of the 15 states that I visited. I would have won even more easily and convincingly (but smaller states are forgotten)!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2016

Serious voter fraud in Virginia, New Hampshire and California – so why isn’t the media reporting on this? Serious bias – big problem!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 28, 2016

Glenn Kessler, the fact-checker at the Washington Post, quickly refuted Trump’s claims and gave his statement a “four-Pinocchio” rating, which is reserved for particularly brazen and false claims. While the exact source of Trump’s statements remains unknown, the claim that millions of non-citizens voted illegally has been making its way around some right-wing media sites.

One of the most notable examples of this argument came from the conspiracy website Infowars, which cited a Twitter user and self-described voter fraud expert who made claims about fraud before election data was even available. The site Infowars is run by Alex Jones, a well-known conspiracy theorist who, among other things, seems to believe that no one died in the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. During the campaign, Jones had Trump on his radio show and after the election, he claimed that Trump called to thank him for his support.

Based on all available evidence, claims of widespread voter fraud are false. Trump’s statements have been criticized by independent monitors and election officials alike. California Secretary of State Alex Padilla said in a statement on Sunday:

It appears that Mr. Trump is troubled by the fact that a growing majority of Americans did not vote for him… His unsubstantiated allegations of voter fraud in California and elsewhere are absurd. His reckless tweets are inappropriate and unbecoming of a President-elect.

ProPublica, a nonprofit investigative news outlet that coordinated a massive effort to monitor the election across the country, also refuted the claim in a series of tweets.

We had 1,100 people monitoring the vote on Election Day. We saw no evidence the election was “rigged” no matter what Stein or Trump say. /1

— ProPublica (@ProPublica) November 27, 2016

Whether Trump genuinely believes that millions of illegal votes were cast or, as many critics speculate, whether he was using his tweets to distract from other potentially damaging reports–such as the conflicts of interest that Trump will face once in the White House–remains to be seen. However, given that the president-elect has openly challenged the legitimacy of the election, it’s possible that his comments may lead to further calls for recounts.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Without Evidence, Donald Trump Suggests Millions Voted Illegally appeared first on Law Street.

Remember last year when we told you that the Hershey’s Company was plotting to make all British-chocolate-loving Americans’ lives harder by making it virtually impossible to buy “authentic” Cadbury chocolate in the U.S.?

Well the conspiracy doesn’t stop there!

In a special Easter web exclusive of “Last Week Tonight,” comedian John Oliver paid homage to his favorite type of online video by creating his own mind-blowing YouTube conspiracy theory video that ties Cadbury Creme Eggs to the Illuminati.

Yes the Illuminati!

Oliver claims he can link the illuminati to the fondant filled chocolate egg that he says “tastes like mermaid placenta covered in candle wax,” by just following the money.

With the help of a few graphics and a bit of ingenuity, Oliver followed a trail of conspiracy breadcrumbs that linked the movie “Miracle on 34th street” to Germany, Bono, and a plot to take over the world.

In the end Oliver declares that, “Cadbury Creme Eggs appear in our stores for the financial benefits of illuminati elites such as Jay Z, Beyonce and Al Sharpton.”

Even though Oliver admits that most of his theory is probably “completely false,” it’s still pretty amazing and creepily kinda makes sense.

But don’t take my word for it. Watch the full video below, and judge for yourself.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post John Oliver Confirms Our Suspicions That There is a Cadbury Conspiracy appeared first on Law Street.

This election year is the year of the conspiracy: Antonin Scalia’s lack of autopsy prompted some to think he was murdered by President Barack Obama, Donald Trump is supposedly part of the Democratic Party’s attempt to  infiltrate the GOP to make it destroy itself, and now some people are theorizing that Ted Cruz is none other than the Zodiac Killer.

The Zodiac Killer… we all know him as the infamous and mysterious serial killer who wreaked havoc in California in the 1960s and early 70s–who killed five people for sure but may have killed as many as 37. The killer also sent letters to California papers with coded messages, referring to himself as “Zodiac.”

A tweet in 2013 seems to be the origin of the theory, according to the Daily Dot, which traced the meme.

#CPAC Alert: Ted Cruz is speaking!! His speech is titled: ‘This Is The Zodiac Speaking’

— Red Pill America (@RedPillAmerica) March 14, 2013

As Cruz became more famous so did the theory. There is even a hashtag dedicated to the similarities between the two: #ZodiacTed.

Wake up America #ZodiacTedpic.twitter.com/l7qqqXpDQk

— Griffin (@NotGriffinNope) February 2, 2016

This was an amazing moment from the #GOPDebate tonight. #ZodiacTedpic.twitter.com/4DUgyxAo2k

— Bill Wetzel (@billthebutcher2) February 26, 2016

People are starting to finally ask the real questions, like: if he isn’t the Zodiac killer, then why hasn’t he denied it?

If Ted Cruz isn’t the Zodiac Killer, then why hasn’t he denied it? https://t.co/jCm2uRWOux#ZodiacTedpic.twitter.com/3EWcxDoecx

— Esquire Magazine (@esquire) February 25, 2016

Public Policy Polling, a polling firm that made a name for itself by adding funny questions onto the end of its surveys, included a question about Ted being the Zodiac Killer in a recent poll in Florida.

We are finding many Floridians can not rule out the possibility, although few are convinced of guilt https://t.co/OPsWIl97Sy

— PublicPolicyPolling (@ppppolls) February 25, 2016

According to PPP, nearly 40 percent of respondents think it’s possible that Cruz is the famous serial killer–10 percent believe for sure that they are one in the same, and 28 percent just aren’t sure yet. On the other hand, 62 percent of Floridians don’t believe he is the Zodiac Killer (well, +/- the 3.1 percent margin of error).

Maybe they just haven’t seen the evidence yet.

Unfortunately, as the Washington Post reports, Ted Cruz is probably too young to be the Zodiac Killer. The first confirmed killing was back in 1968 when Cruz was a young negative two years old–according to his released birth certificate. But those things can be modified, right?

Ted Cruz also just wasn’t in the right place at the right time. He was born in Canada and the killings took place in California. And as a youngin, creating a cipher would probably have been far too advanced. However, what if the cipher was really just a bunch of baby babble? (Is that why it still hasn’t been broken?!)

I have no choice, though, to say that Ted Cruz is likely NOT the Zodiac Killer, but until he denies it, we really can’t rule it out completely.

Julia Bryant

Julia Bryant is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street from Howard County, Maryland. She is a junior at the University of Maryland, College Park, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Journalism and Economics. You can contact Julia at JBryant@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Ted Cruz Hasn’t Denied that He is the Zodiac Killer appeared first on Law Street.

Most of us use Facebook everyday, for a variety of reasons. We use it to share pictures, to chat with friends, and to, sometimes, share our political opinions. Prior to Facebook we may not have known that our childhood friend is voting for Donald Trump, or that our high school acquaintance has a really strong stance on the legalization of marijuana. But sharing our opinions on Facebook may not always be a good thing–researchers believe that many of us are creating virtual “echo rooms” in which we only see our own viewpoints, and shut out those who disagree with us.

Now, it’s no secret that many people limit their consumption of news to sources they agree with. But this kind of social media censorship appears to be a new revelation. A group of researchers from the U.S. and Italy published their findings in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on Monday. In order to reach their conclusions they analyzed publicly available Facebook data from 2010-2014.

Interestingly, the researchers determined that this may be how scientific misinformation and conspiracy theories are shared and gain ground. Because people are usually interacting on Facebook with people they agree with, it makes it more unlikely that an alternative point of view is discussed.

One of the phenomenons that the researchers studied was the dissemination of misinformation about climate change. The researchers also pinpointed the Jade Helm 15 conspiracy from last year, when some Americans believed that routine military operations in Texas were signs of an imminent takeover by the American government.

The researchers pointed to confirmation bias, which is when we seek out information to support our beliefs no matter how thin it is, but ignore contrary evidence, as a big part of the problem. The papers’ authors point out that this is dangerous, saying: “Massive digital misinformation is becoming pervasive in online social media to the extent that it has been listed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) as one of the main threats to our society.”

So, in light of these findings, how can conspiracy theories and misinformation become debunked? According to the researchers, trying to infiltrate the small subgroups in which the conspiracy theories are bouncing around will be ineffective. Instead, the researchers recommend trying to spread information more generally, to a larger audience,

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Facebook: Does it Make Us More Narrow-Minded? appeared first on Law Street.