Dr. Andrew Wakefield is suing Brian Deer and BMJ's Fiona Godlee for defamation..

[Firestormm]

Here you go: http://forums.phoenixrising.me/show...eld-sues-the-BMJ-in-Texas&p=233670#post233670

 

[floydguy]

Excellent retort from Deer to Lewis's complaint: http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2012/01/brian-deer-responds-to-david-lewis-complaint/

There are two threads running about this - darn confusing don't you think?

You don't sound very supportive. Regardless of what you think about the autism issue I fail to see how a major win by Deer and the London "establishment" helps us. Personally, I'd like to see a major scandal so that the swamp might be drained at least a little bit. Who knows who else might be sucked into vortex?

 

[currer]

You don't sound very supportive. Regardless of what you think about the autism issue I fail to see how a major win by Deer and the London "establishment" helps us. Personally, I'd like to see a major scandal so that the swamp might be drained at least a little bit. Who knows who else might be sucked into vortex?

Do you think the BMJ want to help people with ME, firestormm?

They have not published anything about the rituximab study, for example, even though their sub-editor attended the Invest in ME conference and heard the research at first hand.

 

[Daffodil]

What ever happened to free speech? Dr. Wakefield HAS to win.

 

[taniaaust1]

Well, the question the court is going to answer is "Did Andrew Wakefield fraudulently manipulated his study", as the BMJ claimed. And the answer to this is probably going to be a "no".

I agree with what Tony said with that part of his post.

I do strongly believe Dr Wakefield can win a "defamation suit" cause some of what I know was said/published about his study participants was so untrue (later actually proven to be untrue but of cause they didnt make a big deal about it and follow up and publish what was said was found to be untrue) and there is no doubt it has majorly tanished his rep. No one could say it hasnt.

 

[Firestormm]

Do you think the BMJ want to help people with ME, firestormm?

They have not published anything about the rituximab study, for example, even though their sub-editor attended the Invest in ME conference and heard the research at first hand.

What the heck has that got to do with this thread?!

 

[Firestormm]

You don't sound very supportive. Regardless of what you think about the autism issue I fail to see how a major win by Deer and the London "establishment" helps us. Personally, I'd like to see a major scandal so that the swamp might be drained at least a little bit. Who knows who else might be sucked into vortex?

Hi Floyd,

When you say 'helps us' what do you mean? In what way might you think a 'win' for Wakefield/Lewis helps 'us'?

If you read the links to Deer's site from leftbrainrightbrain that I posted and read the complaint from Lewis broken down as it is and about those tick sheets for the children's gut biopsies and how they were taken as evidence for something that was not even there - and then you look at what Lewis is claimed was said as being 'fraud' (which didn't actually claim that at all) - this law suit is destined to undermine Lewis and even Wakefield even more than they have been to date.

It was at best ill conceived and at worst damn stupid. Those tick sheets are evidence that was allegedly 'lost' and now Lewis has provided it to Deer and the BMJ. And that alone is bad for Wakefield. But the complaint from Lewis is terribly put together and as I said on the other thread - with all the links provided - it is no surprise that the BMJ are no doubt feeling rather smug about it all now.

If this was meant to be some attempt at resurrecting a reputation - then it sucked. Sorry but it did. Still we shall see what happens in court I suppose.

 

[Lou]

Quote: What the heck has that got to do with this thread?!

Some could see it as a trend, a pattern of behavior, carrying the water for the medical establishment.

 

[floydguy]

Hi Floyd,

When you say 'helps us' what do you mean? In what way might you think a 'win' for Wakefield/Lewis helps 'us'?

If you read the links to Deer's site from leftbrainrightbrain that I posted and read the complaint from Lewis broken down as it is and about those tick sheets for the children's gut biopsies and how they were taken as evidence for something that was not even there - and then you look at what Lewis is claimed was said as being 'fraud' (which didn't actually claim that at all) - this law suit is destined to undermine Lewis and even Wakefield even more than they have been to date.

It was at best ill conceived and at worst damn stupid. Those tick sheets are evidence that was allegedly 'lost' and now Lewis has provided it to Deer and the BMJ. And that alone is bad for Wakefield. But the complaint from Lewis is terribly put together and as I said on the other thread - with all the links provided - it is no surprise that the BMJ are no doubt feeling rather smug about it all now.

If this was meant to be some attempt at resurrecting a reputation - then it sucked. Sorry but it did. Still we shall see what happens in court I suppose.

I don't know the details of the Wakefield saga. All I am saying is that should Wakefield win it might reveal a pattern of corruption/incompetence with BMJ and the London "establishment" that has not exactly been on our side. If the foundation is shaken, it might disrupt the status quo and in some way be helpful to us. If Wakefield is shut down in a big way that will only embolden the shrink-medical-insurance-government complex to be even more hostile to other "nebulous" diseases such as ME.

Finally, I refuse to make any snap judgments about situations (especially where people are clearly suffering) I am not familiar with. I have several friends with MD/PhDs who think CFS is entirely a psychiatric condition. And I am sure many who have kids with autism have similar beliefs - with plenty of evidence to point to from the CDC & Simon Wessley. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones and all that...

 

[alex3619]

What ever happened to free speech? Dr. Wakefield HAS to win.

I am hoping that the truth wins, whether it be Wakefield or the BMJ. Now I don't have a lot of liking for the BMJ or their editorial policies, and very little respect left, but I don't want that to cloud my judgement on an issue by issue basis. It is fantastic that Wakefield finally gets to face his acusers. Provided a lot of testimony/evidence is not ruled out this is a win for free speach, regardless of the outcome. Bye, Alex

 

[Esther12]

I don't know much about the Wakefield issue, but I've always liked what I've read of Deer. He's happy to go on the attack with a lot of people, and doesn't seem afflicted by the deferential cowardice which defines so much UK science journalism. I don't see him as a part of the London medical establishment... he was keen to go after Wakefield's bosses in a way that seemed downright disrespectful to most British sensibilities.

re this new court case: This could have been covered, but... Why on Earth would Wakefield choose Texas, over London? Isn't UK the defamation capital of the world?

ps: Sorry, but I might not reply again to this thread as I often skip Wakefield threads automatically... I know this is a bit rude. Sorry.

 

[floydguy]

I am hoping that the truth wins, whether it be Wakefield or the BMJ. Now I don't have a lot of liking for the BMJ or their editorial policies, and very little respect left, but I don't want that to cloud my judgement on an issue by issue basis. It is fantastic that Wakefield finally gets to face his acusers. Provided a lot of testimony/evidence is not ruled out this is a win for free speach, regardless of the outcome. Bye, Alex

That's a bit optimistic. Wakefield had to move 5000 miles to a different country and wait X number of years. If there is any validity to his claims it most definitely does not say very much for free speech in the UK.

 

[alex3619]

Hi floydguy, I do agree that things are stacked against Wakefield. Its why I used the word "hope" and not "think". This is David and Goliath in a sense. If the trial evidence/testimony is made public, everyone will see each of the claims tested in an adversarial environment. Everyone learns. If its all private, confidential, hidden, then we are all losers. Bye, Alex

 

[floydguy]

Hi floydguy, I do agree that things are stacked against Wakefield. Its why I used the word "hope" and not "think". This is David and Goliath in a sense. If the trial evidence/testimony is made public, everyone will see each of the claims tested in an adversarial environment. Everyone learns. If its all private, confidential, hidden, then we are all losers. Bye, Alex

I am with you there. I look forward to both sides putting their best foot forward.

 

[SilverbladeTE]

Generally, the most expensive legal team wins, alas.

funny how it all leads back to the gut and vaccines, time after time....
If I were a betting man, I'd lay down a wager, that 100 years from now, vaccination is a mostly discredited branch of medical science, at least in the Public's mind, after revelations of gross f**k ups eventually emerge from behind walls of Corporate and ex-Cold War silence as catastrophy overwhelms pundits' lies.

Polio Vaccines, HIV, ME, GWS why did things got suddenly very "Cold War-ish" on us and later GWS, and some other things, in the 1980s?
why oh why the huge sh*tstorm of Fear Uncertainty Doubt, why the same familiar faces and names in so many of these things, why oh why...?
Was the time frame important...HIV? Was it HIV itself or merely research into that discovered the MOTHER of all scandals and screw ups, one so huge it coudl topple the entire System? And so, all vaccines from before then were "used up"...

used up...those who desperately cling to the notion that "cover ups and shady sh*t don't happen"...ever heard of Rudolph Hess?
Some 70 odd years ago, his plane crashed right near where I live.
Recently, his body was cremated, "used up", so no ghoulish neo-nazis could worship at his grave, or so the official line went.
Also made DNA identification of his remains impossible, wasn't that VERY convenient?
This item of mine of course, reinforces the belief that all ME/CFS folk are "conspiracy theory lunatics"...except Hess was real, his history one of the most bizarre and secretive occurences of all time
his death was NOT suicide, not even the German police believe that...and why would the Powers That Be bury this old item, why get rid of a dead man's remains, when WW2 ended so long ago, what the hell is so explosive or simply so lazy/fearful that the faking of Hess's imprisonment has ot be preserved?
If they'd do that for an old Nazi, what the hell would they do for a more recent scandal/screw up of huge proportions?
Wakefield is gawd damn lucky he wasn't given a "Dr Kelly special".


has all this been over screw up so bad those at the Top refused to accept it, so to "guide the poor sheeple twixt Scylla and Charybdis" they "blindfolded the crew", and had it buried by bamboozlement and bullshit in plain sight as is best done, as an exponential time bomb of genetic damage and sensitization spirals out of their stupid, control-obsessed little hands and minds....?

Those who fight monsters, may become monsters...

Fractals are amazing things, simple formula, when applied can grow ever into larger and more wonderful shapes.
One single, simpel seed, one tiny line of numbers and letters can grow amazing things.
Problem comes when you have one simple line of code, in the wrong place, at the wrong time...

What am I on about? well if if one person in 200 in CHina has direct lineage from Ghengis Khan, what if Ghengis had...some strange malady, some genetic malformation?
think of this another way:
what is the End game of injecting kids with vaccines IF those vaccines have contaminants or effects we do not understand, or chose to ignore....300, 3000 or three million years from now?

Homo Sapiens are like petrol-soaked moths with a cocaine addiction and dementia, living next door to a blast furnace....

 

[Undisclosed]

MODERATOR NOTE.

It was brought to our attention that there are two threads on this subject, therefore I have closed the other thread -- http://forums.phoenixrising.me/showthread.php?15538-Dr-Wakefield-sues-the-BMJ-in-Texas -- so the conversation can be kept to one thread.

Carry on -- Kina.

 

[ixchelkali]

On the other, now closed, thread Currer asked

I was almost going to say that I would now expect to see another outpouring of vitriol against Dr Wakefield in the press and broadcast media - however - wouldnt such a press campaign be contempt of court with a case now pending?

No, that wouldn't be contempt of court. In the US, there's no rule against publishing facts or opinions concerning a pending or ongoing court case, unless the judge specifically invokes a gag order on it.

 

[lookinglass]

What has both appalled me and intrigued me at the same time is the depth of venom directed at Andrew by some of the more lurid anti Wakefield blog sites. It appalls me that so many so called legal or medical "experts" have sunk to the depths of patently enjoying the whole process of tearing apart this mans reputation, both personal and professional, reducing it almost to a form of entertainment. I have to beg the question, what is it about Andrew Wakefield which prompts them to indulge in such debased and vitriolic "debate"?
On the one hand they are quick to condemn Wakefied as a "pathetic loser", a "washed up quack" etc etc. If they consider him to be so "irrelevent" why do they continue venting their spleen on such forums? Why do they feel the need? What motivates these people? Could it be that some of them are actually being paid to write this scurrilous rubbish, as has been suggested? It wouldnt surprise me.

It is also patently obvious that many Americans have a very distorted and uninformed view of the whole of the history of the MMR debate in the UK and of the show trial of the GMC. Neither do they understand the judicial system in the UK and why Wakefield has taken so long to fight back and why he decided to do so in the US state of Texas.

I also hope that such questions will be able to be fully answered in February.

 

[lookinglass]

BTW as an addendum to the above post. I have recently come to the conclusion that Fiona Godlee has a "master plan" in mind. Wakefield is only a part of it. She has employed the services of Brian Deer to assist her in this personal Agenda of her own making and it has now become a ful blown obsession. Briefly I am of the opinion that she views herself as a some form of Moral Crusader against what she has termed "institutional fraud and misconduct" in the research arm of the medical establishment.

I wonder what others think.

 

[Tony Mach]

Hi Tony Mach,

You are believing what Brian Deer has put into your head.

Well, I actually took the time to look at the talks of Andrew Wakefield before I made my judgement. I was quite critical of the MMR vaccine and shocked after I read about mercury in the vaccines. After looking at both sides (and the anti-vaxx side quite lacking in the fact department) I find you accusing me of basically being brainwashed a bit off, to say the least.

Did you on the other hand take a look at what Brian Deer has to say?