Two political operations funded through separate, undisclosed money streams poll-tested the attack before anyone died. Six days later, a Pennsylvania governor announced two "measles deaths," blamed Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and the pre-written message deployed within hours — for deaths the state has never shown measles caused. Here is how the machine was built, and who financed it.
Start with the sequence, because the sequence is the story.
On August 10, 2026, President Trump signed an executive order rewriting the federal childhood vaccine schedule — splitting the combined MMR shot into separate doses and loosening school-entry requirements. It was, by design, provocative.
Seven days later, on August 17–18, Public Policy Polling fielded a national survey of 525 registered voters. It was commissioned jointly by two organizations — Protect Our Care and 314 Action — and it measured public opinion and, more consequentially, electoral damage: which vaccine messages, tested against Republicans, moved voters against them. The organizations published the result on August 19 and named the frame themselves. “Vaccines are on the ballot,” said 314 Action’s president. Vaccine policy, the group declared, was now the GOP’s “greatest existential and political liability in the midterms.”
The message was built. It needed a trigger.
On August 25, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro convened a national press conference inside Penn Medicine Lancaster General Health’s Women and Babies Hospital and announced two “measles-associated deaths” — the first the Commonwealth had reported in thirty-five years. He blamed Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Donald Trump for the deaths and called them preventable.
Within hours — inside the same news cycle — Protect Our Care issued a statement declaring that Trump and Kennedy had “blood on their hands,” and ending with the words: “Mr. Kennedy, f---ing resign already.”
The trigger had arrived. The pre-tested message deployed on schedule.
This is not an allegation that anyone knew, in advance, that two people would die. It is the plainer and more unsettling observation that a standing apparatus — a poll fielded a week earlier, a purpose-built anti-Kennedy unit staffed nine months before, a message already selected for maximum partisan effect — does not require foreknowledge of a death to convert that death into a national weapon within hours. It only requires that the machine be built and waiting. It was.
And the death at the center of it was not what the podium said it was.
What the evidence does not show
Here is what the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has released about the two deaths it announced to the nation: almost nothing.
It has not released the immediate or underlying cause of death for either decedent. It has not released the clinical course, the comorbidities, the diagnostic assay used, the strain or sequencing data, or the documentation verifying vaccination status. Its stated reason — protecting patient privacy — does not explain the withholding, because none of that information need identify anyone. An assay type identifies no one. A cause-of-death classification identifies no one.
What did emerge came not from the state but from the Lancaster County Coroner, Dr. Stephen Diamantoni, who told local media his office had handled “no measles deaths.” The one death that was folded into the state’s August 25 announcement and actually reached his office was an infant who died of a laceration of the spleen. Measles antibodies were present in postmortem testing — but the consulting forensic pathologist, in the coroner’s account, did not believe the death was measles-related. The second announced death does not appear in the coroner’s records at all; the state has not clarified whether it was ever a coroner case.
Then the state’s own spokesman conceded the distinction the entire dispute turns on. Pennsylvania, he explained, uses the term “measles-associated” when laboratory or epidemiologic evidence of measles is present — even where measles is not assessed by the medical certifier or coroner to be the immediate cause of death.
Read that carefully, because it is the most important fact of this entire episode. The state announced “the first measles deaths in thirty-five years” using a classification that does not require measles to have caused death. A governor stood at a hospital podium, attributed two deaths to his political opponent’s policies, called them preventable — and his own department later acknowledged that its terminology does not establish measles as the cause of either one.
No evidence has been produced that measles caused these deaths. The state has declined to produce it. And there are very specific criteria involved in ascertaining measles deaths with certainty, which I cover in my recent piece below.
The Measles Certainty Gap
The scientific question is no longer whether measles vaccine material can be shed from a recently vaccinated person. It can. Vaccine-strain measles RNA has repeatedly been recovered from urine and respiratory secretions; in a published case, vaccine-type measles virus was actually isolated from a child’s throat. Yet that fact is routinely blurred with a…
The one death examined by the county’s statutory death investigator was classified as something else entirely. That is not a conspiracy theory. It is the documented state of the record, conceded in part by the state itself.
Republican County Commissioner Josh Parsons put it in the words the coroner’s findings support: the infant “died with measles, but not from measles.”
The political certainty ran far ahead of the medical evidence. That gap — between what was announced and what can be shown — is where everything else in this story lives.
The machine was already running
Protect Our Care did not react to Lancaster. It had been running a national anti-Kennedy campaign for more than eight months by the time the deaths were announced.
On December 9, 2025, the organization announced an expansion of a program it calls “Public Health Watch,” with a stated mission “to counter the Trump-RFK Jr. war on public health.” Its leadership was drawn from corporate-accountability war rooms and progressive political campaigns; its named staff include no physicians and no epidemiologists. Clinical credibility is contracted in from the outside when needed — as it was at the August poll rollout, which featured Dr. Paul Offit.
The same credential reappears elsewhere with its political context stripped: days after headlining the Protect Our Care call, Offit was on Democracy Now! introduced simply as a children's-hospital physician — the authority intact, the sponsorship that had just deployed it unmentioned.
This matters because it tells you what kind of organization produced the “blood on their hands” statement. Protect Our Care is not a public-health body that occasionally does politics. It is a political communications operation — its chair, Leslie Dach, came from Edelman, the world’s largest PR firm, and Obama’s HHS; its president, Brad Woodhouse, is the former communications director of the Democratic National Committee and former president of the opposition-research super PAC American Bridge 21st Century. It describes its own method as a “campaign mentality,” and runs a daily war-room call it has operated for years.
And it does not stand alone. Its polling partner on the August survey, 314 Action, is a separate organization built to elect scientists and doctors as Democrats — and one that, in its own words, had just concluded vaccine policy was the GOP’s “greatest existential and political liability in the midterms.”
Two organizations. One pre-tested message. Released less than a week before a governor stood at a podium and supplied the news event the message was built for.
What the poll actually was
It is worth being exact about the survey at the center of this, because the full instrument is now public — and it settles the question of what it was for.
Public Policy Polling surveyed 525 registered voters nationally, August 17–18, with a margin of error of about 4.3 percent. Readers can weigh the sample for themselves. What matters is the shape of the questionnaire, because a poll designed to measure opinion and a poll designed to test attacks do not look alike — and this one is visibly both, in two halves.
The front half asks real questions and reports real answers: whether voters support routine childhood vaccination (76 percent do), whether they approve of the executive order (58 percent disapprove), whether doctors or the president should set the schedule (71 percent say doctors). Those are legitimate opinion measures. They are not the story.
The back half is the story. Beginning at question nine, the instrument stops asking what voters think and starts feeding them pre-written statements, each introduced with the words “Critics say,” then measuring one thing: whether hearing it makes the respondent feel more or less favorably toward “Republicans in Congress.” That is not an opinion survey. That is a message test — four attack lines written, fed to voters, and scored for how far each drives them from one political party. Here are the four, in the pollster’s own words:
The measles line (Q9): “Critics of this executive order say that it’s especially dangerous at a time where the US is already experiencing an outbreak of Measles and several other diseases… Measles was declared eliminated in the United States in 2000 but has now returned as vaccines have been reduced.” — 50% less favorable.
The autism line (Q10): “Critics say that the Trump administration ignored the scientific evidence… and followed debunked misinformation about autism’s link to vaccines instead.” — 61% less favorable.
The 30-year-system line (Q11): “Critics say the Trump administration overturned a system of childhood vaccines that has been in place for over 30 years… successful at… eradicating measles.” — 51% less favorable.
The cost line (Q12): “By undoing the recommendations… parents who want these vaccines may pay significantly more—additional copays and visits.” — 54% less favorable.
Every one of the four moved voters against Republicans by between 50 and 61 percent. That is not the residue of an opinion poll. It is a ranked menu of attack lines, and the menu was validated as a weapon a week before it was needed. The measles line — “measles has now returned as vaccines have been reduced” — was tested, scored, and confirmed to work on August 18. Six days later, Pennsylvania supplied a measles death to point it at.
Then comes the question that removes any remaining doubt about the target. Question thirteen does not mention the executive order at all. It tests an attack on the Secretary personally:
“If you learned that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and members of his family would financially benefit from decisions he makes about vaccines and vaccine policy, would that make you… less likely to support his policies?”
Fifty percent said much less likely. The operation was not only pre-testing how to blame Republicans for measles — it was pre-testing a corruption frame aimed directly at Kennedy, measuring in advance how far a “he profits from your children’s vaccines” message would move voters against the man it wanted gone. That question was in the field on August 18. The war room that commissioned it declared him a child-killer with “blood on his hands” on August 25.
None of this is improper in the narrow sense. Advocacy groups test messages; that is what they do. The point is not that a rule was broken. The point is that a message-testing operation — run by two political organizations, aimed at one party and one cabinet secretary, seventy-five days before a midterm — was dressed, when its selected findings hit the news cycle, as a public-health poll about science and safety. The instrument was honest about its purpose on a page most people never read. It was the packaging that lied.
Follow the money — to two sources, not one
Here is where the story and the ongoing accounting of what happened, and is happening, needs to move next.
Protect Our Care files no IRS Form 990 of its own. It cannot, because it is not an independent legal entity. It is a fiscally sponsored project of the Sixteen Thirty Fund — a 501(c)(4) administered by the for-profit consultancy Arabella Advisors, and one of the largest dark-money vehicles in American politics. Its federal committee is registered, in black and white, as “Protect Our Care a Project of Sixteen Thirty Fund.” The Sixteen Thirty Fund does not disclose its donors. Politico reported that in a single recent cycle it spent well over a hundred million dollars to boost Democrats, including a single anonymous donation of tens of millions; OpenSecrets and the New York Times have documented the network moving well over a billion dollars since 2009. George Soros’s Open Society Policy Center is among its documented top donors.
That is one stream of undisclosed money. It is not the only one, and it is not even the largest one behind the poll.
314 Action runs its own non-disclosing arm — described, in Scientific American, as “dark money” in its own sector. Its 2024 revenue more than doubled, to $6.3 million. And the largest documented check into it that year came not from Soros or Arabella but from House Majority Forward — the dark-money affiliate of House Democratic leadership’s super PAC, led by a former Pelosi aide — which gave $2.5 million, its first-ever donation to the group. A further $1 million arrived, timed to a pair of Oregon Democratic primaries, from the super PAC of the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC.
So the two organizations that jointly commissioned the pre-tested vaccine message run on two entirely separate streams of undisclosed money: one the Arabella–Sixteen Thirty network in which Soros is a documented donor, the other House Democratic leadership and the pro-Israel lobby. No common paymaster is visible at the entity level. What they share is not a funder. It is a product — the poll — and a moment.
This is the honest shape of it, and it is more durable than a single-villain story. Anyone who claims the campaign against Kennedy is “the Soros network” can be refuted by pulling 314 Action’s tax return, where the biggest check is Pelosi-adjacent money. The defensible claim is the one the documents actually support: at least two distinct dark-money operations, from unrelated sources, converged on the same pre-tested message against the same target at the same time. Convergence, not a conductor. It does not require a secret meeting to be real, which is exactly why it cannot be waved away by disproving one.
The machine, on camera, six days early
You do not have to take my characterization of what this operation is. Its own leaders described it — on video, in their own words — six days before the deaths.
On August 19, 2026, the same day the poll was released, Protect Our Care and 314 Action held a joint press call. The recording is public, and Protect Our Care’s own published description states its purpose plainly: a call announcing “findings from a new national survey on Trump and RFK Jr.’s latest assault on childhood vaccines and what it means politically for Republican lawmakers who are complicit.” Not what it means for public health. What it means politically for Republican lawmakers. That is the organization’s own framing of its own poll.
Protect Our Care’s president, Brad Woodhouse, opened the call and removed any doubt about the register. “We are in a public relations period here,” he said. “We’re in a political period here. And so we filled in a poll that just came out of the field yesterday.” He described the two organizations as having “worked together in common cause… ever since RFK Jr. was nominated to be HHS secretary” — the partnership dated, by its own account, to the beginning of Kennedy’s tenure, not to any outbreak.
Then he walked through what the poll had found and what had been selected from it. “All four of the negative messages about the executive order move voters against Republicans,” Woodhouse said. “Just the fact of what Trump is doing means that 50 to 54% of those in this poll say makes them view Republicans less favorably.” He named the clock it was tied to: “What is it? 75 days before the election.”
This is the crucial point, and it is on the tape rather than in my inference: the messages were not being tested to inform the public. They were being tested, ranked, and selected for their power to move voters against one political party, seventy-five days before a midterm. Four messages went in; the winners came out; the frame was set. All of it before Lancaster.
And the emotional shape of that frame — the one that would be deployed within hours of the August 25 announcement — was already being built on the call. The panel’s clinical voice, Dr. Paul Offit of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, put the mechanism plainly: the way to move public opinion, he said, is suffering itself. “It’s the viruses and bacteria that are doing the educating… enough children still haven’t suffered or been hospitalized or died yet to convince people that it’s really important to be vaccinated.” The frame being assembled was endangered children, hospitalization, death, and Republican culpability — a package complete in every part except a real-world instance to attach it to.
Six days later, Pennsylvania supplied the instance.
Let’s be clear about what this does and does not show. It does not show that anyone knew two people would die, or that the deaths were staged, or that the timing was coordinated in advance. Nothing here supports that, and I do not claim it. Offit’s remarks about Pennsylvania on this call concern Governor Shapiro’s refusal to implement the August 10 executive order — a public document nine days old — not any death.
What it shows is narrower and sturdier: the message was built and waiting. A poll-tested, party-targeted “deadly consequences” frame was assembled on camera, by name, on August 19, and needed only a triggering event to deploy at scale. When the trigger came, the deployment took hours — because the writing was already done. That is not foreknowledge. It is pre-positioning. And pre-positioning is exactly what a permanent, professionally staffed war room exists to do.
Why Kennedy, and why now
Step back and ask the question every investigation eventually asks: who benefits, and what is actually threatened?
The answer is not hidden. It was written down — by the industry itself.
A document that surfaced in mid-2025, presented as the minutes of an April 3 meeting of the Biotechnology Innovation Organization’s Vaccine Policy Steering Committee, records the pharmaceutical trade group discussing its response to Kennedy’s arrival at HHS.
The provenance of this document is disputed, and the reader should weigh both sides. BIO flatly denied producing it: a spokesperson said “the purported memo was not produced by BIO,” that the organization had “never seen or heard of this document,” that it “does not accurately represent the spirit, strategy, or mission of BIO’s work,” and that BIO is “aligned with Secretary Kennedy and the President’s mission to ‘Make America Healthy Again.’” The journalists who published it were unable to independently authenticate it. One detail complicates the denial without resolving it: the minutes quote Scott Gottlieb — a Pfizer board member and AEI fellow — saying “MAHA is a cover for an anti-vaccine campaign,” a characterization consistent with his public positions. Whether that makes the document authentic or merely well-constructed cannot be settled from the text alone. What follows quotes it as what it purports to be — a contested document — not as established fact.
Its contents, read plainly, are not a fever dream of coordination. They are mostly the ordinary anxieties of a threatened industry — with one line that is not ordinary at all. The minutes record the conclusion, verbatim, that “it is time to go to The Hill and lobby that it is time for RFK Jr to go.” They record a member from a vaccine developer reporting that investors “are leaving until the next data read out,” that there is “no opportunity to raise capital in the current environment,” that the approval pathway had become “unpredictable and politicized.” They record vaccines as “the #1 priority” at the organization.
Set aside every contested characterization and one fact remains: a pharmaceutical trade association discussed lobbying to remove a sitting, Senate-confirmed cabinet secretary. Whatever else that is, it is a statement of motive from the party with the motive.
And the motive is structural. Kennedy’s stated agenda — restoring manufacturer liability, requiring long-term placebo-controlled safety trials, removing conflicts of interest from federal vaccine advisory committees — is an existential threat to a specific and lucrative arrangement. Since 1986, federal law has shielded vaccine manufacturers from most product-liability suits. That shield, and the advisory-committee structure that populates the recommended schedule, and the guaranteed federal purchasing that follows a recommendation, together form the financial architecture of the vaccine business. An HHS secretary who questions any load-bearing beam of it is not raising a policy disagreement. He is a risk to the model.
You do not need a memo to see the interest. But the memo, if genuine, says the quiet part in the industry’s own voice.
The state has its own interest, and it wrote it down too
Return to Pennsylvania, because the governor who convened the Lancaster press conference is not a neutral party to vaccine policy either — and, like the industry, he put his interest in writing.
Executive Order 2025-02, which Shapiro signed in October 2025 as the predicate for the state’s vaccine-communications push, contains a recital that no national outlet quoted in its coverage of the deaths: “the Commonwealth manufactures more than one-half of all vaccines administered in the United States.” The same order directs the Department of Health to build a state vaccine program with measures that “capitalize on Pennsylvania’s national leadership in vaccine research, development, and manufacturing.”
That is not the language of a neutral health measure. It is industrial policy written into a childhood-vaccine directive.
And the subsidies are real, and large. Under Shapiro, Pennsylvania has announced hundreds of millions in state support to pharmaceutical and vaccine manufacturers — including an $800 million GSK expansion in Marietta, Lancaster County, whose own state-issued release brags that “one in four Americans are administered a vaccine supplied from the company’s Marietta location,” and a $10.6 million grant the governor personally announced to a Sanofi flu-vaccine plant sixty days before Lancaster.
None of this was disclosed at the August 25 podium. A governor whose administration had staked hundreds of millions and an executive order on the state’s position as America’s vaccine manufacturer stood in a hospital and attributed two deaths — deaths his own department could not classify as measles-caused — to the federal official dismantling vaccine mandates. The interest was not hidden. It was signed, dated, and posted on the state’s own website. It simply went unmentioned when it mattered.
The enforcement layer
There is one more component, and it is the oldest. Before the poll, before the war room, before Lancaster, there was the machinery for deciding which voices on this subject the public would be allowed to hear at all.
In 2021, a British-founded nonprofit, the Center for Countering Digital Hate, published a report naming twelve people it blamed for the majority of online vaccine “misinformation.” The list was cited from the White House podium and fed into platform enforcement — even though Facebook itself, examining its own data, put the named individuals’ share of vaccine-content views at “about just 0.05%” — roughly five one-hundredths of one percent — and said there “isn’t any evidence to support” the report’s central claim. The platform acted on the list anyway. That is the template: a private designation, amplified by government, executed by platforms, with each actor able to say it ordered nothing.
That machinery did not retire. Internal CCDH planning minutes from January 2024 — leaked to journalists Paul Thacker and Matt Taibbi and published in October 2024 — record the organization committing to run one to three “roundtables” with Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, the Gates-funded body that finances vaccine distribution worldwide, “bringing public health figures back into our public accountability asks” because “anti vaxx has fallen off the radar.” A February entry confirms the first roundtable ran. In the same January meeting, the chief executive’s final recorded remark reads, verbatim: “RFK — black ops being set up to look at RFK. Nervousness about the impact of him on the election. We may be asked to comment, particularly from antivaxx.”
The minutes do not say who was setting up the black ops; the passive construction is left unresolved. What is on the record is that a vaccine-financing alliance and a deplatforming operation were coordinating campaign work aimed at “anti-vaxx public health figures” in an election year — an arrangement that appears in neither organization’s public filings.
This is the layer that decides whether anyone questioning the Lancaster announcement gets to be heard, or gets labeled the thing the machinery exists to suppress. The same designation that removed twelve people in 2021 is the designation now available to apply to anyone who asks why a state announced measles deaths it cannot document.
The other bloc
It would be dishonest to describe this apparatus as omnipotent, or as acting without opposition of its own. It is not one-sided, and saying so is what separates an account from a polemic.
At the same time this network operates, the federal government it opposes is bringing its own considerable power to bear against it. In late August 2026, the Treasury Department was reported — by three sources, in the New York Post, describing internal deliberations not yet executed — to be preparing audits that could strip the tax-exempt status of major left-aligned nonprofits, with George Soros’s Open Society Foundations facing an estimated $163 million exposure. The Justice Department has been separately reported to be investigating the same foundation. Open Society has called the effort an illegal attempt to punish disfavored work.
That belongs in this account, plainly, because it changes what this story is. This is not a lone reform secretary being crushed by an all-powerful dark-money machine. It is a conflict between two heavily resourced blocs — an advocacy-and-censorship apparatus running on undisclosed money on one side, and the tax and prosecutorial power of the federal government on the other. Kennedy is not the underdog in that fight; he holds HHS, and the administration he serves in is drafting a nine-figure action against the largest funder on the other side. Both sides are using serious instruments. The value of documenting the advocacy side is not that it is uniquely powerful. It is that its money, its coordination, and its timing are undisclosed — and the public is entitled to see them.
What honest inquiry now demands
None of what follows requires believing any particular thing about vaccines. The efficacy of the MMR vaccine is not the question this piece raises, and it does not need to be settled to answer the question it does raise. The question is whether a public-health event was converted into a political weapon before the evidence behind it was produced — and the record says it was.
Three demands follow, one for each interested party, and each is answerable through ordinary public process.
To the Pennsylvania Department of Health: release, for each of the two Lancaster decedents, the immediate and underlying cause of death from the death certificate, the clinical course, the diagnostic assay and any strain or sequencing data, and the vaccination-status verification. The federal case definition permits several bases for a confirmed measles classification. The public is owed the actual basis for each attribution — de-identified, which resolves the stated privacy concern entirely.
To Protect Our Care and 314 Action: publish the pollster contract, the full question wording, and the internal memoranda for the August 17–18 survey; and disclose the largest funders of the campaigns that produced the “blood on their hands” package. An organization that has publicly declared a sitting cabinet secretary a killer of children can be asked who paid for the message that said so.
To the Biotechnology Innovation Organization: BIO has said the April 3 minutes were “not produced by BIO” and that it had “never seen or heard of” the document. Take that denial at face value — and then answer the question it leaves open. Did BIO’s Vaccine Policy Steering Committee meet on or around April 3, 2025? Were the individuals the document names — including a Pfizer board member quoted in it by name — participants in BIO vaccine-strategy discussions during that period? A denial that a specific document is authentic is not a denial that the meeting, the participants, or the position occurred. BIO can lay the matter to rest by addressing those directly.
To the Pennsylvania Department of Health’s Vaccine Education Advisory Workgroup: publish the full membership, minutes, and outside vendors of the workgroup established under Executive Order 2025-02, along with member conflict-of-interest declarations — including for its program of “tailored outreach to populations at higher risk.” A state that has designated certain communities for special messaging attention should be willing to show the public who designed the messaging, and who was paid to.
Coda
The most effective influence operation is not the one that lies. A lie can be checked and refuted. The effective one selects true facts, packages them for maximum emotional force, times them to a news event, and pushes them through a distribution network that presents as independent voices while sharing sponsors, staff, and message discipline. That is what a permanent, professionally staffed war room is built to do. It does not need a conspiracy. It needs a trigger.
On August 25, it got one. Two people were dead, according to the state — their families owed, at minimum, the actual clinical record of how. What the country received instead was a pre-tested political package, released within hours, produced by two separately-funded organizations running on unconnected undisclosed money, with no physicians among their combined leadership, built eight months in advance, and ending with an instruction to a cabinet secretary to resign.
The evidence that measles caused those deaths has still not been produced. The apparatus that told you it did was ready before the question could be asked.
That is the story. The receipts are public. Whether they are pressed — through records requests, ethics complaints, and the release of the actual cause-of-death findings — or whether the war room’s version is simply allowed to stand, will decide whether the next such press conference receives more scrutiny than this one did.
Related: The same August 25 press conference sits at the center of a second, adjacent story — the coordinated pressure, across two states, on America’s largest Plain community. Pennsylvania runs voluntary “buggy clinics” and a persuasion program its own director described as working “over generations”; New York has repealed religious exemption outright and fined three one-room Amish schools $118,000. That investigation is here: The Amish Are Being Targeted in Two States. Pennsylvania Calls It Outreach.
The Amish Are Being Targeted in Two States. Pennsylvania Calls It Outreach.
How the same institutional network that helped New York end religious exemption entirely — and fine three one-room Amish schools $118,000 — is now running what its own director called a “multi-generational” persuasion campaign against America’s largest Plain community
Every factual claim in this piece links to a primary source: Pennsylvania’s own executive orders and agency releases, FEC and IRS filings, published reporting in Politico, the New York Post, Scientific American, LancasterOnline and the Philadelphia Inquirer, Meta’s newsroom, and leaked documents published by named investigative journalists. Where a document’s provenance is unconfirmed — as with the BIO minutes — it is identified as such. Where the record is silent — as with the cause of death the state declines to release — that silence is itself the finding. For corrections email sayerji@greenmedinfo.com.
This is the same tactic used during Covid; I can't believe people still go along with this! It's not measles; it's TDS!
Excellent reporting!