A tragedy, and a travesty

Nachman

For further details go to
http://www.wesupportandywakefield.com/
and sign the petition

Miranda Rose Smith

Dear Ms. Phillips: "Risible kangaroo court," "tragedy," "travesty," "monstrous injustice," "crucified." Can I have a little background information and a few facts? Thanks.

Abandon Ship!

Sorry to disagree Melanie, but Wakefield should have been struck off years ago. As a medic he has fallen far short of the standard, and as a scientist he is a disgrace (I speak as an experienced biomedical scientist myself).

However I'm afraid The Lancet should share some of the blame for this.

Nick

Wakefield's hypothesis has been throughly discredited by countless studies carried out since the publication of his Lancet paper.

There are mountains of published data that conclusively show there is no link between autism and the MMR vaccine. Wakefield was wrong. Time to move on.

daniel maris

Well on this I back you 100%.

The medical establishment have deliberately covered up the rise in autism which has reached epidemic proportions in many communities.

To what extent vaccines are/were implicated is difficult to say. We know that quietly after assuring us vaccines with mercury in them were perfectly safe, those vaccines have now been modified to remove the mercury.

We know Amish communities who don't vaccinate are remarkably free of autism.

This has been a politically motivated prosecution designed to stamp out free speech in medicine.

It is an horrendous kangaroo court verdict.

Charles

Ms Phillips: In your recent book, you say that one of the reasons why the world "has turned upside down" is because it disregards evidence.

Wakefield's hypothesis - that MMR is linked to autism - has been discredited in plenty of studies: the evidence says that Wakefield was wrong.

So why are you disregarding the evidence?

Paul

Oh for heavens sake MMR jabs clearly and self evidently do not cause autism. Levels of autism are gradually rising, possibly due to better diagnosis. Levels of MMR vaccinations went from less than 5% of the population to almost 100% in one year. If MMR did cause autism you'd expect to see levels of autism shoot up 20-fold a few years later. But we didn't so there is obviously not a causal link. This doctor took a very small sample and manipulated the results (allegedly).

freddie

Charles, it is you who are afraid of the evidence. Wakefield has been blocked from carrying out research. If the medical establishment aren't afraid of what he's find, why don't they let him carry on?

Oh, because, according to them, asking questions about a vaccine will put people off taking it.

Notice how they did that?

When will Wakefeld and others be given funding to look as this evidence properly?

Charles

freddie: On this one, there isn't any evidence that Wakefield is right. There is plenty that he's wrong. Lots of people have looked at the evidence, and they've tried to replicate Wakefield's result, but without success.

See also: Paul's point, above yours.

Jerry

Why are you still plugging at this? There is no evidence - I mean ZERO - for wakefield's theory; yet there is ample evidence of unethical conduct by him; apart from setting off a harmful public health scare in the UK he continues to peddle his snake oil theories on vulnerable and desperate parents in the US. He should have been struck off years ago and you should know better (ps I am a professional immunologist with absolutely no links to the vaccine or pharma businesses so I think I can be reasonably objective on this - for sure more than you are)

Michael

Wakefield performed unnecessary (painful) tests on children without proper consent, he paid young children at his son's birthday party £5 a time for blood samples (without their parents' knowledge), he tested a highly experimental vaccine on a child without informing that child's GP or making any note of it on the child's medical form. Do any of his defenders here think that was in any way appropriate? Would you be happy if it was your child having these things done to him? He was not struck off for being wrong, but for breaching some of the most basic principles of medical research. Coincidentally he happened to own a company making a rival vaccine (which would have sold much better if MMR was banned). So, in other words we should ignore all mainstream evidence because Big Pharma must have funded everything that isn't critical of them and instead accept unquestioningly everything Little( But Wants to Be Big) Pharma says.

Wakefield's study looked at 8 children. A Japanese study has been conducted which looked at 30,000 children and showed no link. Meta-studies of other papers (i.e. drawing together all available research) have shown no links. And a Japanese study of over 30,000 children has shown no link. If any of you think that a sample of 8 (carried out using deeply sub-standard methodology) is more likely to yield conclusive results than a study of 30,000 then I really don't know what else to say.

To the person who points out that the Amish don't vaccinate, I have this to say. They don't use computers either. By your logic, to live life the 'healthy natural Amish way', you should probably turn your computer off permanently. After all, who knows what health effects that might lead to (either for you or for your family). After all, the Amish don't use computers and they are healthy! Well, apart from being prone to outbreaks of measles, mumps and rubella, but after all those only kill a few people among the tiny Amish sects that refuse vaccination. And the small fact that there IS actually extensive autism among Amish people is probably important too (but I guess you probably think Big Pharma probably bribed the Naturally Healthy Amish People to lie about autism like symptoms).

http://autism.suite101.com/article.cfm/autism_among_the_amish

Ian G

If, perchance, someone found a wealthy benfactor to fund genuine research into the shape of the earth in order to prove its flatness, would we stop him? I we could prove that it was a scam, perhaps. If we could prove him clinically insane and irrational, perhaps.
If we can show that he is iredeemably incompetetant, perhaps.

If he was just wrong-headed but rational, then his research would, eventually, prove him wrong to himself.

Vested interests like to charge their opponents with incompetence. Incompetence is easy to allege at a civil level and much, much harder to prove at a forensic level.

Does anyone know whether there are any studies into there compound vaccines and there effects? E.g. Gulf War Syndrome. Has anybody looked for similarities and links?

Matt

I can't believe the people citing Wakefield as some sort of martyr. He was paid £450 000 of public money through oegal aid by a solicitor to find a health problems relating to MMR. To this end he conducted some very unethical research on children (thanksfully only a small sample) which involved overly invasive procedures such as lumbar puncture. He then, quite incorrectly, asserted that MMR can cause autism and IBS, and in doing scared large numbers of parents away from the MMR vacine, thus leaving their children at risk of easily preventable disease. Oh yeah, and all the while he was patenting his own singole jab angainst measles. IMO, he should have been struck off years ago. I can't believe certain peiople still hold him in such esteem.

Joe (PhD Genetics)

If measles vaccine was available as a killed virus I would vaccinate my kids. The live modified virus used in MMRs may cause low grade disease which infects the brain.

daniel maris

The studies being quoted as "discrediting" Wakefield are often paid for by the vaccine companies themselves or by committees controlled by the companies. They are not independent verification.

I am not saying Wakefield is right, I am saying the government has been misleading the public for decades. Firstly, no vaccine is "safe". You only have to read the accompanying info leaflet to see that is nonsense. Secondly, the government assured us vaccine with mercury in it was safe, but then began to remove mercury from vaccines. Thirdly, I don't personally beleive this nonsense about autism rates rising because of better diagnosis. That is absurd. We are talking here about autism that compromises a child's ability to function. There has been huge rise in such cases and I am sure that coudl easily be established if the medical opinion formers would allow us to.

We are lied to about measles deaths as well. The impressino is given that the (very few) children dying from measles are otherwise normally healthy children. This is a complete lie. In nearly every case their health has already been severely compromised by such diseases as leukemia.

As for the Amish communities, the point is that there is a much lower incidence of autism within them and that needs to be accounted for. If - as the medical establishment appears to imply - autism is simply a natural genetic condition with no environmental causality then we would expect autism rates to be similar, all else being equal.

I will be interested to see what has happened over the last few years. It would be interesting to find out. My suspicion is we might well see some decline after the removal of mercury from vaccines.

Of course it is quite possible that there is complex causality going on here.

daniel maris

The "gradual" rise that Paul speaks of is nonsense. See this from MSBN:

"Cases skyrocketing
Studies done in the 1960s indicated that autism was quite rare, affecting only about one person in every 2,000 to 2,500, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Other research in 1970 put the figure at one case per 10,000, Johnson says.

Precisely how many people have autism today is unknown. But estimates suggest there are five to six cases of autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) per 1,000 people, says Johnson. That roughly equates to as many as one case out of every 166 people."

In other words cases increased by at least 500% just as vaccination for a range of diseases became common. It's a stupendous rise.

Nick

Joe, with your PhD in genetics you should know very well that exposure to rubella can be devastating to children in utero.

There is no evidence that the attenuated Wistar strain of rubella virus in the MMR vaccine can 'infect the brain'.

Not getting your children vaccinated is, at best, irresponsible, and at worst profoundly stupid. Don't rely on herd immunity.

Nick (PhD biochemistry, 15 years postdoctoral research experience, thanks for asking)

Cliff from Australia

Ms Phillips, how do you think scare campaigners wrapped in their white lab coats should be treated? In the case of climate change, apparently they should be hounded out of science. In the case of the MMR vaccine, on the other hand, they should be given medals.
Wakefield was unscientific and motivated by gain. What basis is there for asserting the GMC ran a kangaroo court? The earlier findings were detailed and elaborate and established an overwhelming case of misconduct.
People need to move on from this now. Public health is too important to be sacrificed to the likes of Wakefield with his base motivations.

Dixon

If I am allowed to have this comment posted all I want to say is that I do wish you would quietly let this one drop Mel. We all make mistakes. By banging on about it you only discredit your wisdom on other topics about which you certainly appear to be right. Indirectly, you also discredit us, your supporters. Time and again, on the topic of AGW in particular, trolls without arguments resort to the simple and, I'm afraid, effective tactic of bringing up your position on this topic.

lila

The establishment and all it's pomp and circumstance can make out to the general public that black is white. Good for you Mr Andrew Wakefield for sticking to your guns, there should be alot more people like you. Well done also Melanie for seeing through the blanket of smoke.

Nick

Daniel Maris: "The studies being quoted as "discrediting" Wakefield are often paid for by the vaccine companies themselves or by committees controlled by the companies. They are not independent verification."

This is total nonsense. The studies were funded by the taxpayer via Government research councils and funding agencies.

Don't believe me? The sources of funding are listed in the acknowledgments of the published material. You would do well to read it.

Incidentally, I also recommend reading the 15 May 2010 edition of New Scientist. The cover headline is "Age of Denial: Why so many people refuse to believe the truth". It seems highly pertinent here. It even has a section on vaccine denial (along with other loony conspiracy theories such as Holocaust denial, AIDS denial, 9/11 denial, climate change denial, evolution denial and tobacco denial).

John Richardson

"Would you be happy if it was your child having these things done to him? "

...asks Michael at 4:52pm
Good question.

What if there are even worse things that could happen, though ?

Vaccinations.
Population.
Injecting infant children.
Billionaires.
Billionaires giving billions of dollars to the UN to spend on a vaccination program.
It's complicated all right.
What's it all about ?
Who do you trust ?

For those who want to know from the horse's mouth what is going on, why not go to You-tube and listen to Mr Gates' presentation yourself ?
Try this...

'Bill Gates EXPOSED! Wants Depopulation Through Vaccines!'

The version I refer to above is only 3 minutes 20 seconds long.
Not too long.
Free.
In English.
A public presentation by Mr Gates himself.
If you do not have 3 minutes 20 seconds, don't bother.
Just hand over your children to be vaccinated.
You are not a 'conspiracy nut'.
Or a fear monger.
Not you.

I reckon, from experience, 1 out of 25 will have the time.

Andrew Carver

Wakefield undoubtedly caused much suffering among the children in this study let alone the ones who have suffered and died from measles. Shame on you for defending this awful man. He is dishonest and unethical.

Richard Dell

Sorry, Melanie, but while your cultural compass is mostly accurate, your technical compass is not quite so good, and you have got this one badly wrong.

daniel maris

Further to my suspicion that autism rates might be declining, now mercury has been removed from vaccines, take a look at this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/is-autism-declining_b_55869.html

This shows significant decreases following removal of mercury.

I think the picture might be as follows:

- Vaccination is inherently not "safe". There are risks in directly injecting modified pathogens into the organism and some people might be particularly vulnerable. That would seem to be common sense.

- The increasing vaccine load, with many more vaccines than before could be a factor that compromises the immune system.

- The presence of mercury in vaccines presented a further significant risk factor.

Jo

Wakefield was struck off for performing unnecessary tests on disabled children without clearance from an ethics committee - in what way is that "monstrous injustice"

KB

Nick,

With your PhD in biochemistry I thought you would be more au courant with the medical literature.

Perhaps you can cite the studies that have replicated Wakefield's exact methodology and refuted his results. Let me help you: only one such study exists and it was published in 2009. An extraordinary state of affairs considering the flak coming from both sides, don't you think.

(KB PhD not biochemistry.)

daniel maris

Nick - The fact that you lump together all those "denials" shows how reluctant you are to examine the truth. Just take tobacco. I have never seen satisfactorily explained why Japan which had the highest per capita cigarette consumption also had the greatest longevity of industrial nations.

The central fact here is we have a huge, huge real increase in autism that is unexplained.

Now the vaccine hypothesis may be wrong, but I am much more interested in finding what is the cause of the autism than in persecuting someone who may or may not have got it wrong.

You and others here who used to favour putting mercury in vaccine (you're not telling me you ever opposed it are you?) should give up persecuting Wakefield and start asking some serious questions about the causality of autism.

Miranda Rose Smith

Dear Cliff: You took the words right off my keyboard. Thanks and bravo!!!!

Donalbain

He gave children at a birthday party money in exchange for blood samples. In what universe is that ethical behaviour?

Paul

Daniel - yes 500% is a big rise which I think is due to more awareness. It could also be related to the introduction of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 which gave a reason for people to get a daignosis of autism - as did the Disability Allowance which has also seen a massive rise in the numbers registered for all sorts of illnesses.

If MMR caused autism there wouldn't have been a 500% rise there would have been a 3,000% rise.

See if you can see a relationship in these graphs:

http://www.hhs.gov/asl/images/fig2.gif

http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/Vaccines/noMMR.html

NR

If Wakefield has been struck off for inhumane treatment of children that's one thing (and a good thing!). Just don't confuse that with his conclusions being correct or not. If scientists are going to be banned for coming up with unpopular results which are hard to verify then we're heading into dangerous places. I'm not defending the guy but can we at least acknowledge that Brian Deer might have a conflict of interest? He writes for the Sunday Times which is owned by Murdoch who sits on the board of Glaxo who ... manufacture the single-jab MMR. There are many conflicts of interest in this story and unfortunately the idea of a debate on the merits of the science has been completely lost.

Myra

Andrew Wakefield is a hero and in less corrupt times would probably have been nominated for a nobel prize. He still might....

Israel

From Livejournal.com has this in comic form:

http://tallguywrites.livejournal.com/148012.html

Wakefield has mad a lot of money in the US over the last few years and has appeared on shows like Oprah pushing his discredited theories.

Hopefully all the celebrities who have sat by him and fallen for his lies will now find a credible scientist to support in the future.

Frank P

NR

Yours is the voice of reason in this Tower of Babel. Excellent observation, if you mind me saying so!

Navigating by surface sight as the tip of the iceberg shows; can be extremely hazardous; unless you are a hoary old captain of The Good Ship Experience in the Ocean of Life, with a few scars on your sharp end (so to speak).

The truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth is now almost impossible to discern in this morass and miasma of vested interests and personal venalities. As for the science - well! What with the government liabilities (and those of the Pharmas) emanating from this mess; what that would cost either or both in the event of Wakefield being found to be even half right,was always going to result in a one-sided fight. I still share Melanie's concerns and admire her tenacity; I'm not as sympathetic to AW as she is, as he provided much ammunition himself, for those who wished to discredit him to shoot him with. The confused parents are the ones deserving of sympathy, support and guidance - sadly lacking in both the educational and medical establishments in this regard. I can vouch for that in personal terms as a grandfather. There is still the odour of dead rat pervading in this affair and, regardless of Wakefield's shortcomings, in my book it is definitely not case closed!

And if that volcanic explosion of metaphors doesn't ground all your flights of fancy, then carry on with your debate, folks. I'm still listening, but giving the 'tip of the iceberg' a very wide berth. :-)

Charles

Andrew Wakefield has had twelve years to replicate his original findings at a much larger scale, but has not done so.

Some hypotheses stand, but this one didn't: that's how science works.

Pip

Another tragedy, Rifqa Bary, the young teenage apostate who ran away from her home in Ohio, is now fighting cancer.

Why is this story not in the mainstream media?

Tiberius

Knowing your position on the climate change illusion, Melanie, I am amazed at your stance over this deception.

Neil Craig

I believe Wakefield is wrong & that this is a matter of inevitable random variablity in small samples. However he is not more wrong that is the alleged "evidence" for catastrophic global warming, passive smoking, AIDS as an infectious disease, LNT (theory that low level radiation is harmful), cholesterol, mobile phones & salt are equally harmful. And we don't see Prof Jones being struck off for anything.

Moreover what he has actually been accused of appears much more like diligenty reasearch than anything remotely fraudulent. By comparison in the 1st four listed there has been considerable deliberate fraud or suppression of data by people on the public payroll. Indeed the very same BMA who struck him off have not only been engaged in producing fraudulant figures on passivecsmoking (that it kills 1,000 people in the UK) but have then gone on to endorse the contradictory & even more fraudulent figures produced by politicians (the 1,000 a year in Scotland alone claimed by the Scottish first minister).

The difference between Wakefield's scare & the others is that that the others all serve "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." (Mencken) whereas his has been an uncommon inconvenience to the bureaucrats.

Whatever is said of Wakefield it cannot be honestly claimed that any of his BMA accusers have so much as 1% as much integrity as he.

Verity

Writes Miranda Rose Smith Dear Ms. Phillips: "Risible kangaroo court," "tragedy," "travesty," "monstrous injustice," "crucified." Can I have a little background information and a few facts? Thanks.

Ms Phillips is a columnist, not a reporter. You need to understand the distinction. These are two separate areas of journalistic activity.

However, do not despair! For facts, we have Google, which you will find at the top right hand corner of your screen!

daniel maris

Here's a link that argues persuasively the figures for Denmark show a marked decrease in autism cases following withdrawal of mercury from (most) vaccines.

http://www.safeminds.org/research/Hviid_et_alJAMA-SafeMindsAnalysis.pdf

I think a lot of people here just assume they are being told the truth by the Department of Health, vaccine companies and the medical establishment. If the truth was being told they would admit firstly that the children who die from measles and other childhood diseases already have severely compromised health.

Paulinus

Neil Craig

The BMA doesn't strike anyone off, it's a trade union. Did you mean the GMC?

If you make such an elementary error is there an reason to take any notice of anything you say?