James Coyne “lays waste” to PACE trial in Edinburgh
Sasha summarises Professor James Coyne's recent no-holds-barred talk on the PACE trial and points you to the slides, video, audio and transcript.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Andrew Wakefield removed from Britain's medical register

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by leelaplay, May 25, 2010.

  1. natasa778

    natasa778 Senior Member

    what Mark said!

    anyone interested in more a book is just out http://www.amazon.com/Callous-Disregard-Autism-Vaccines-Tragedy/dp/1616081694

    another very tragic thing in this whole saga is the actual kids (now teenagers and adults) from those first MMR cases, especially those who received the-shortly-after-quietly-pulled-off-the-market-government-records-sealed Urabe strain of MMR. I believe many/most of Wakefield's original patients were those kids. The amount of damage is horrendous. Many of them are in wheelchairs, very severely autistic requiring 24-hour care, many still in nappies, with very severe gut problems.

    Karin, from what I know Wakefield was going to, are was already in the initial phases, of collaborating with Feudenberg (spelling?) who was trying to develop human serum-derived transfer factor as treatment for neuroimmune disease. There was some super exciting promising initial results, but for some reason (funding, politics, both) the research never took off. what a SHAME. Today there is bovine colostrum-derived transfer factor out there, and that is helpful for many, and should be studied more and trialled asap imo...

    btw and somewhat unrelated, I know of a good number of kids who regressed into autism following single measles vaccine, and one who regressed following single rubella vaccine, so separating them is not a complete answer of course. Imo with the MMR a susceptible person just stands much less of a chance of pulling out on the other side unharmed…
  2. Athene

    Athene ihateticks.me

    Dear Karin, Mark and Adam,

    Wakefield never actually advocated single vaccines and never had any involvement with developing vaccines. He was a medical doctor in full time clinical practise, not a medical or scientific researcher. Vaccines are developed by people who work in pharmaceutical companies, not by doctors busy treating patients!

    At a press conference after the publications of the fateful case series paper, he was asked "would you vaccinate your child with the MMR?" and he said "I think I would want to hold off until there was more information". That is the closest he came to "advocating" anything. That was all he ever said publicly on that topic.

    Finally, the single thing that upsets me most about this is the fact that all the reporters in the world call him "discredited" and imply that his medical research has been proven wrong. The report rfom the latest inquiry was quite clear that NOT A SINGLE ELEMENT OF HIS MEDICAL CONCLUSIONS HAVE BEEN PROVEN FALSE and that the only allegations against him which were deemed correct related to his use of money. He received funding from the NHS to do some clinical research and he found he could complete that with less funds than he needed, so he used the small surplus to do an additional test on the children, with their parents informed permission. It was still part of the project and it was still aimed at figuring out how to help those kids.

    Yes, he should have been more meticulous in reporting his use of the money, which was less than 250,000 sterling, but he was not exactly embezzling funds for personal gain.

    The oft-quoted research project which "proved" the MMR is completely safe, on the other hand, was run by a man who subsequently vanished with 2 million pounds and turned out not to have actually performed any research whatsoever. He just sucked his pencil in front of his computer and made it all up, the patenents, the study group, the results, the statistics, everything. And where is all the press hoo haa about him?

    By the way I am now waiting for that journalist who set out to bring Wakefield down to log on here and abuse me with personal insults, just as he did last time.
    The fact that the anti-Wakefield camp cannot tolerate freedom of speech should tell you all you need to know about them, really.
  3. Rosemary

    Rosemary Senior Member

    Must Listen to Dr Rima and Dr Wakefield!
    Dr. Rima Reports - Internet Radio - Sunday Night, May 30, 2010

    Special Guest: Firestorm Center Andrew Wakefield, MD

    10 PM to Midnight Eastern Time (US)
    9 PM CT, 8 PM MT and 7 PM PT


    More information on Dr. Rima Reports:

    Dr. Rima's guest: Dr. Andrew Wakefield, MD
    Truth Seeker
  4. JT1024

    JT1024 Senior Member

    Dateline covers Dr. Wakefield

    In the US, Dateline is covering Dr. Wakefield:

    Matt Lauer continues his reporting on autism with an exclusive interview with Dr. Andrew Wakefield, the controversial British doctor who said he found a possible link between autism and one childhood vaccine, who made headlines this week after being stripped of his license to practice medicine in Britain. See web-exclusive videos and related links. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032600/
  5. Rosemary

    Rosemary Senior Member

    Further responses are needed to Evan Harris in the BMJ: After Wakefield: the real questions that need addressing

    If you are interested please read the article below and then go to rapid responses


    Published 26 May 2010, doi:10.1136/ bmj.c2829
    Cite this as: BMJ 2010;340:c2829


    After Wakefield: the real questions that need addressing
    Evan Harris, former Liberal Democrat science spokesman


    Have medical journals and hospital ethics committees yet got their act together?

    In February 2004 I got a call on my mobile from a journalist at the Sunday Times saying he wanted to talk to me about the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine and autism. I said firmly that I didn’t have any concerns about MMR, I didn’t want to assist a scare story, and if I did want to talk about public health it wouldn’t be to the Sunday Times, given the paper’s record on HIV and AIDS coverage. "Too bad," said the man. "I have an exclusive expos about Andrew Wakefield’s undeclared conflicts of interest surrounding his original 1998 Lancet paper." "Hang on a sec," I said. "I’ll get Dr Harris on the line."

    That was when I first encountered investigative journalist Brian Deer. Within a week we were in the Lancet offices explaining to a stunned editorial team what lay behind that fateful 1998 paper. 1

    Brian Deer had discovered that Andrew Wakefield was being paid by the legal aid board to provide an expert opinion for plaintiff lawyers in a legal suit against the manufacturers of MMR, and that at least some of the children who were claimed to be "consecutive patients referred to the paediatric GI clinic at the Royal Free" were part of the class action. 2 Deer also had a freedom of information response from the research ethics committee of the Royal Free Hospital showing the applications and related correspondence ( http://briandeer. com/mmr/royal- table.htm) for ethical approval of the Lancet study. My experience on a local research ethics committee, and on the BMA’s medical ethics committee, helped me recognise that of more concern than financial non-declaration and double payment ( www.gmc-uk.org/ Wakefield_ SPM_and_SANCTION .pdf_32595267. pdf) was the grossly unethical nature of the research and the inadequacies of the ethical oversight, and these issues were what I discussed first in my subsequent meetings with the General Medical Council. When the GMC published its findings of fact 3 against the researchers, which amounted to serious professional misconduct, 4 the most frequent and most serious related to the ethical propriety of what was done to the children.

    This week the GMC struck Dr Wakefield off the medical register, but this result cannot bring an end to the matter. A number of key questions are raised by the scandal, and there is no certainty that this case was isolated or unrepeatable.

    (1) Why did the ethics committee at the Royal Free, which is charged with the responsibility of protecting patients (and it’s hard to think of a more vulnerable group than children with autism) allow researchers to perform lumbar punctures and colonoscopies on children in a research project, when even the research standards of the day made it clear that any test more invasive than a blood test needed to be in the child’s best interests?

    (2) Why did the Royal Free, after the Sunday Times revelations, tell the Lancet that it saw no ethical wrongdoing, a view entirely demolished by the GMC? 5 Was there a chronic failure in ethical oversight at that hospital and, if so, what other patients were put at risk?

    (3) Indeed, although the Lancet paper dealt with 12 children, an abstract published by the same group in Gut 6 mentioned 30 children undergoing these invasive tests, while a later paper 7 in the American Journal of Gastroenterology suggested that 60 children were investigated at least to the extent of ileoscopy and biopsy. Should those papers not be expunged from the publication record as the Lancet paper has now been?

    (4) The Lancet cleared the researchers of any ethical misdemeanours after its rapid "investigation" that merely involved asking the authors for an explanation 8 and then settled for partial retraction by part of the authorship. 9 By contrast, the GMC found proof beyond reasonable doubt that the study was unethical. Only after the GMC published its findings did the Lancet retract the entire article 10, accepting that the assurances for the hospital were unreliable. Will the Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE) now take a view on how this case was handled and how future ones ought to be handled?

    (5) Should we not now raise ethical peer review to the same level as statistical peer review? If at the time of accepting the 1998 paper the Lancet editor or the paper’s peer reviewers had required not merely the assertion that the study had ethical approval, but a copy of the protocol and the patient information sheet that had been approved, that paper would never have been published. Such an approach would not only expose ethically questionable research*surely at least as important an issue as ensuring statistical integrity*but also raise the ethical standards of researchers and ethics committees. In 2008 COPE issued guidance 11 on what to do if a manuscript claims that ethical approval is not needed, but not about providing even a minimal check on whether ethics approval was complied with.

    I raised these concerns, and others, on the record in March 2004 in the House of Commons when, having set out the bad practice that seemed to have taken place, I urged the government to investigate the issue. 12 The minister, in reply to the debate, made it clear that the government was hoping that the GMC would deal with it and rejected the idea of any inquiry. But the GMC was only ever going to look at the professional conduct of the treating or investigating doctors, not at any of the issues raised above.

    Now that the GMC proceedings are over and findings of fact are on the record for all to see, there is an urgent need to see what really happened beyond the professional conduct of the doctors involved. It is time to forget about Andrew Wakefield and time to start asking whether medical journals and hospital ethics committees have, over the past six years, got their act together.

    Cite this as: BMJ 2010;340:c2829

    Competing interests: EH was Liberal Democrat Health Spokesman from 2001 to 2003 and Liberal Democrat Science Spokesman from 2003 to 2010. He has received funding for travel to several scientific conferences from pharmaceutical companies but has not received any renumeration from the pharmaceutical industry. Prior to 2005 he undertook an unremunerated Industry and Parliament Trust Fellowship programme with GlaxoSmithKline. He has no shares or financial interests in the pharmaceutical or healthcare industries. He assisted (unpaid) the Sunday Times in their investigation of Dr Wakefield with advice and an article on the medical ethics aspects of the story.

    1.Wakefield AJ, Murch SH, Anthony A, Linnell J, Casson DM, Malik M, et al. Ileal-lymphoid- nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Lancet 1998;351:637- 41. [CrossRef] [Web of Science] [Medline]
    2.Deer B. Revealed: MMR research scandal. Sunday Times, 22 February 2004.
    3.General Medical Council. Fitness to practise panel hearing 28 January 2010. www.gmc-uk.org/ static/documents /content/ Wakefield_ _Smith_Murch. pdf .
    4.General Medical Council. Determination on serious professional misconduct (SPM) and sanction. www.gmc-uk.org/ Wakefield_ SPM_and_SANCTION .pdf_32595267. pdf .
    5.Hodgson H. A statement by The Royal Free and University College Medical School and The Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust. Lancet 2004;363:824. [CrossRef] [Web of Science] [Medline]
    6.Wakefield A, Murch S, Anthony A, Linnell J, Thomas J, Berelowitz M, et al. Autistic enteropathy: a new inflammatory bowel disease? Gut 1998;42(suppl 1):A85.
    7.Wakefield AJ, Anthony A, Murch SH, Thomson M, Montgomery SM, Davies S, et al. Enterocolitis in children with developmental disorders. American Journal of Gastroenterology 2000;95:2285– 95. [CrossRef] [Web of Science] [Medline]
    8.Horton R. A statement by the editors of The Lancet. Lancet 2004;363:820- 1. [CrossRef] [Web of Science] [Medline]
    9.Murch SH, Anthony A, Casson DH, Malik M, Berelowitz M, Dhillon AP, et al. Retraction of an interpretation. Lancet 2004;363:750. [CrossRef] [Web of Science] [Medline]
    10.The editors of The Lancet. Retraction*Ileal- lymphoid- nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Lancet 2010;375:445. [CrossRef] [Web of Science] [Medline]
    11.Committee on Publication Ethics. Guidance for editors. http://publicatione thics.org/ files/u2/ Audit_research_ guidelines. pdf .
    12.MMR vaccinations and autism. House of Commons debates, 15 March 2004, 10:01pm. www.theyworkforyou. com/debates/ ?id=2004- 03-15.128. 0.
  6. Athene

    Athene ihateticks.me

    "Why did the ethics committee at the Royal Free, which is charged with the responsibility of protecting patients (and its hard to think of a more vulnerable group than children with autism) allow researchers to perform lumbar punctures and colonoscopies on children in a research project, when even the research standards of the day made it clear that any test more invasive than a blood test needed to be in the childs best interests?"

    Hmm, Evan Harris, AKA "Dr. Death", the politician who advocates euthanasia and campaigns for the legalisation of late term abortion. Apparently he doesn't think OAPs and foetusus are more vulnerable groups than children with autism.

    Colonoscopy is the required procedure to diagnose colitis and failing to do so would once have been calssified as professional negligence. Nowadays, a diagnosis of autism automatically denies a child any right to gastrointestinal investigation or treatment because the gastroenterologists are afraid of being struck off.
  7. Rosemary

    Rosemary Senior Member

  8. Rosemary

    Rosemary Senior Member

    The hidden hand of powerful forces

    Doctor's Diary: Conspiracy theories and the GMC's recent ruling to strike professors Andrew Wakefield .and John Walker-Smith off the register.

    It is not necessary to be a conspiracy theorist to recognise that the General Medical Council's recent ruling to strike professors Andrew Wakefield and John Walker-Smith off the register had the fingerprints of the medical establishment all over it. They had, it was alleged, brought the profession into disrepute by showing a callous disregard to the children in the (in)famous study investigating the possible role of the MMR vaccine in inducing a regressive variant of autism associated with severe bowel symptoms.

  9. Rosemary

    Rosemary Senior Member

    Parents demand official safety inquiry

    The parents of a boy diagnosed with severe autism shortly after he received the MMR jab today called for an official inquiry into the vaccine's safety.

    Martin and Anne Hewitt, from north London, are among thousands of parents with damaged children who believe they are being denied the full facts about the jab years after it was introduced.

    Their son Thomas, now 16, is in constant pain because of a stomach condition which has been linked with the jab. He was 13 months old when he was diagnosed with autism.

    The couple were among more than 1,000 parents who attempted to take legal action against the manufacturers of the MMR vaccine. The bid failed because their legal aid funding was withdrawn. Mr Hewitt, 64, a former academic, said only about 1 million has been spent on research into autism compared with the estimated 10 million cost of the GMC litigation against Dr Wakefield.

    He said: Probably the vaccine caused our son's autism and bowel disease. Doctors found the MMR virus in his gut. There has to be a public inquiry now.

    Callous doctor who claimed MMR jab causes child autism is struck off
  10. Rosemary

    Rosemary Senior Member


    Meet Dr. Andrew Wakefield, Author of Callous Disregard, in London June 17th
    (Managing Editor's Note: You can read Dr. Wakefield's complete analysis of the "Lancet 12" in his new book, Callous Disregard from Skyhorse Publishing. Visit Dr. Wakefield's website HERE.)

    Exclusive from the Autism File Magazine An Audience with Dr Andrew Wakefield

    The Autism File magazine would like to announce an exclusive ticket-only event in central London on Thursday 17th June from 4pm. The venue will be announced to ticket holders two days before the event.

    Dr Wakefield will be signing copies of his bestselling book Callous Disregard which will be available at the event to each ticket holder. Following the signing, Polly Tommey, Editor-in Chief of the Autism File magazine, will announce plans for the new Autism File UK editorial team. Dr Wakefield will then chair an extensive question and answer session with members of the audience.

    Places will be limited and tickets allocated on a first come first served basis. Entry will be strictly by ticket only.

    All enquiries to events@autismfile.com and please visit our Facebook Event Page at http://bit.ly/awjElr
  11. Athene

    Athene ihateticks.me

    Today I was reading about the history of mad cow disease.
    The UK government knew of the first deaths from the disease in 1986 yet denied there was any danger to human health right up to 1994, when the first three humans died of Creuzfeld-Jakob disease.

    They have been denying the dangers of the MMR and the measles virus on the same basis: THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC "PROOF" IT IS DANGEROUS, THEREFORE IT IS SAFE.

    In the case of mad cow disease, the German chancellor was the first to point out that this logic is flawed, in fact it is completely illogical.
    In the case of MMR the Japanese government has been the first to decide that a lack of proven danger is no proof of safety by banning the MMR.

    The truth of mad cow disease came out eventually. The truth about autism will come out eventually, too. It may take years, but the truth will come out.

    By the way, John Walker-Smith is in Turkey at the moment receiving a very prestigious international award for his contribution to medicine. Not everyone is against him. Some people understand what he has done for our sick children.
  12. leela

    leela Slow But Hopeful

    Couchland, USA
    Doesn't it seem a little odd, even a little suspicious, that both Sarah Myhill and Andrew Wakefield are being railroaded in the UK?
    I don't love to wear my conspiracy hat (tin foil's not good for you after all) but it seems like there is a scary resistance to those
    trying to look squarely in the face of this family of illnesses. Are people *that* afraid that we might have to actually change a whole
    toxic thread in the fabric of our our society and thinking in order to stay healthy and sane?
  13. lansbergen

    lansbergen Senior Member

    The UK BSE Inquiry Report is archived at

  14. lansbergen

    lansbergen Senior Member

  15. muffin

    muffin Senior Member

    The attacks on Dr. Wakefield really burned my behind. My then 4 month old niece had seizures after her DTP vaccine. Of course her pediatricians blamed fever on those seizures but she was within the 5 day after effects of the vaccine. We finally got one of them to agree that the Pertusis part of the vaccine was most likely to blame. After that, we refused all of the vaccines except those that were truly necessary like Polio. NO MMR or any other of the new, not yet tried and true, vaccines.

    So do I believe that those huge number of vaccines given to babies/children MAY be one of the causes of autism? Yes! Does anyone remember having kids in their classes/schools that had Autism? I mean the older folks and not the younger ones. ALL of my friends who are in the 40 and over group never saw Autism. We also never saw ADD or the other neurological problems that are seen too frequently in kids now. If a kid was "hyper" they were just labled as troublemakers or seeking attention or the class clown. BUT, none of those kids from my generation were true HYPER or ADD. I have to blame the number of vaccines and the contents of those vaccines for many of these "new" childhood issues.

    When I was in grad school, we were required to have a booster MMR shot or we were not allowed back into school. Well, fast forward ten years from that MMR shot and I came down with CFIDS. I have long wondered if there was any correlation between that MMR booster and the CFIDS I got ten years later.

    Let's hope that Dr. Wakefield lands in a good place and his attackers are shown to be wrong. It always seems that those who are out on the bleeding edge of research (like Dr. Cheney) are the ones that get attacked. And it is always those that have a financial interest or are stupid enough to stay stuck in the "world is flat" mindset.
  16. Rosemary

    Rosemary Senior Member

    Vaccines have destroyed lives for decades and the UK Government tried to cover it up

    Vaccines have destroyed lives for decades and the UK Government tried to cover it up


    Taken from the first page of Rosemary Fox’s amazing book Helen’s Story: Amazon.co.uk: Rosemary Fox: Books

    “In September 1962, Rosemary Fox took her eight-,month-old daughter Helen to the doctor’s to be vaccinated against polio, blissfully unaware that she was condemning her happy, healthy baby to a life of sickness and convulsions. In 1973, when Helen was assessed as having the mental age of just three, Rosemary began a campaign for compensation for vaccine damaged children. It would take 27 years.

    Back in 1973, the British Governments view was that the severe damage caused to some children by smallpox, polio, or measles vaccinations was a small price from freedom of disease, and those cases received little publicity. Rosemary and 600 families with whom she formed The Association of Parents of Vaccine Damaged Children were condemned for causing the public to question the safety of vaccination.”
  17. Rosemary

    Rosemary Senior Member

  18. Rosemary

    Rosemary Senior Member

    News from Autism One

    Rebecca Fisher: Pharma Blowhard or Concerned Citizen?

    You can't be a parent in this community without
    bumping into them. Every article, TV program,
    blog or radio show brings them out in force. The
    mention of "autism" or "Dr. Wakefield" brings
    them scurrying out from under their rocks
    snapping and snarling and spitting about the
    wonders of vaccines and their self-anointed roles
    as concerned citizens in protecting the pubic health.

    It's a scam and we all know it. Most of the
    bloggers, poseurs, and self-ordained autism
    experts have ties either directly or indirectly
    to pharma or mainstream medicine (which is really
    one and the same thing). Age of Autism has done a
    remarkable job outing

    Orac and shedding light on the soft underbelly of the vaccine apologists.


    Rebecca Fisher of the UK has been very busy lately.
    Blogging under the title "JABS Loonies - Justice,
    Awareness, Basic Support and Mind Blowing
    Stupidity," Rebecca recently left the Internet
    safety of anonymity to engage in more concrete
    acts of aggression against our community.

    Rebecca's current mission is attempting to
    frighten, bully or pressure venues Dr. Wakefield
    is scheduled to speak at on his current book tour
    into canceling the event. Hotels are under siege
    by email, fax, and phone demanding they cancel Dr. Wakefield's appearance.

    For a week before this past Saturday, Rebecca
    attempted to intimidate the Phoenix Ritz-Carlton
    site of Dr. Wakefield's latest talk into
    capitulation. To their credit the Ritz told her, in essence, to take a hike.

    Rebecca, who also blogs as Becky Fisseux, will
    continue to act in a dangerous and reckless
    fashion until she is outed and her connections to pharma publically revealed.

    Still the attacks will continue until we take
    legal and other appropriate actions necessary to
    incur real costs on those who spread lies and misinformation.

    Our Sponsors


    Visit Our Sponsor

    Jeff Bradstreet, MD, MD(H), FAAFP
    Dan Rossignol, MD, FAAFP
    Scott Smith, PA
    Creation's Own and ICDRC
    3800 W. Eau Gallie, Ste 105
    Melbourne, FL 32934
    321-259-7222/ fax

    Drs. Bradstreet and Rossignol are two of the
    finest physicians treating children with autism
    today with a wealth of knowledge and experience recovering children.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page