Dr Healy was duped, and corrected her mistake.

“Andrew” then claims I wrongly maligned “pro-vaccine doctors” as “shills”, but doesn’t give any details about who I wrongly maligned or what the truth is… other than “Andrew” saying I have no evidence… when the evidence was posted right where I used each doctor’s name.

Fombonne’s manipulation of using different databases as if they were one in his Canadian study is well known. Fombonne’s lucrative conflicted sideline as an expert witness for the vaccine industry is well known, while he purports himself to be an autism expert… his only real devotion in life is money, while he imposes life-long sentences on children & their families as more kids become autistic every day through an improperly administered & unsafe vaccination program that Fombonne fraudulently defends…

Yes “Andrew” joins the ranks of shills willing to injure & kill immune impaired children… the very ones that should be protected by herd immunity are the ones we injure and kill by directly injecting them with live vaccines they can’t defend themsleves against or vax toxins they are unable to metobolize properly or are susceptible to be damaged by.
Good job Andrew!!

Thank you for giving me the best laugh I’ve had all day. After sanctimoniously accusing pro-vaccine doctors of being shills for big pharma with no evidence other than the fact that without making the accusation, you’d have nothing at all, you cite a former tobacco lobbyist as one of your sources.

In a 2008 CBS News interview Dr Bernadine Healy said “Vaccines may cause autism” & “It is inexcusable that the proper research has not been done”

Dr Bernadine Healy – Vassar summa cum laude, Harvard Med cum laude, Director of the NIH, Professor of Medicine at Johns Hopkins, Chair of The Research Institute of The Cleveland Clinic, world renowned and respected. Her opinion on this issue should not be ignored & cannot be dismissed.

The shills or dupes always claim people looking at vaccines as a possible factor in the cause/rise in autism are anti-vaccinationist, anti-science, nutjobs… but they say this while they are unable to refute the evidence of vaccine harm, unable to explain autism’s cause & unable to offer a better correlation for rising autism rates than vaccines.

People like me, able to think critically when viewing many pieces of evidence, can see through the shill/dupe endless non-sensical ad hominem of anti-vaccinationist rhetoric and fear mongering. “Anti-vax” is not the reasoned postion we have, and the shills know this. It is about identifying those children who are susceptible to vax damage BEFORE they are injected. It is about making vaccines as safe as possible and using only those vaccines that are necessary. It is about putting science and the public interest back into the relationship between our regulatory agencies and industry.

Anyone who doubts our regulatory apparatus is corrupted only has to look carefully and completely at the Vioxx murders committed by Merck. The Lancet estimates 45,000 – 60,000 dead. Australian litigation revealed Merck executives and scientists knew Vioxx was killing people in 1996 and all through it’s marketing from 1999-2004. They lied to the FDA and the NEJM. Paid Elsevier to publish a FAKE peer reviewed journal with “studies” promoting Vioxx and Fosamax. Elsevier admitted publishing fake journals for 9 drug companies with 13 in the works, apologized for it, claimed they stopped all pubs & they wouldn’t do it again. Merck threatened scientists trying to expose the deaths Vioxx was causing. A JAMA published study in 2000 by Topol and Nissen showed Merck’s ignoring deaths in it’s own data given to the FDA and giving NEJM false data to match the safety conclusions it was reporting. The FDA ignored Topol/Nissen & 6 other peer reviewers. Merck scientist Alise Reicin did the threatening & is now a Merck executive. Merck did this, and much more, over ONE drug, that it KNEW WAS KILLING AND INJURING ITS CUSTOMERS. Vioxx displaced Naproxen garnering $11.5 billion in sales
Merck executives and scientists murdered for money, and did much more as the FDA stood by, then slapped Merck with congratulations for pulling the drug voluntarily after 5 years of helping Merck kill
Merck backed the killer drug pargluva during this time frame, partnering with Bristol Myers. Pending final approval Topol & Nissen (Cleveland Clinic) stepped in again using Merck data given to the FDA and demonstrated Pargluva was also a killer. In the middle of the Vioxx scandal the FDA asked Merck for more safety data. Merck and Bristol did not comply and walked away from Pargluva and their partnership without another word.
Merck also developed and marketed the USELESS Gardasil during the same timeframe as the Vioxx killings, pargluva fraud and attempted Vioxx cover-up. Merck executives and scientists bribed and lied and deceived their way to marketing the most expensive vaccine ever created. Bribed their way to mandates in 2 states (Va & Tx), fraudulently used epidemiology to “prove” HPV causes cancer, “partnered” with Glaxo and Astrazeneca to promote HPV/cervical cancer connections, even going so far as to tamper with the 2008 Nobel, half going to Zur Hausen for “discovering” HPV causes cervical cancer (it doesn’t, but that’s another long story, involving bribing doctors, scientists, and even showing the first cracks that I am aware of in PBS objectivity in their 2 interviews of Elizabeth Garner in 2006 by Warner and Brown)
On top of the all this known bad behavior, unpunished or even recognized by the FDA, Merck is trusted with making 12 vaccines. Does anyone here think Merck is not tampering with the system still to avoid the collapse of the Vaccine Court and the VICP through the overwhelming liabilities if autism is admitted to be caused by vaccines? Glaxo makes as many vaccines as Merck and has been bribing and paying off officials in England to nail Dr Andrew Wakefield for 7 years. Elsevier CEO Crispin Davis, his brother judge Nigel Davis, The Sunday Times owner James Murdoch, “reporter” Brian Deer, The Lancet editor Richard Horton. These top 2 drug makers are WEALTHY & UNSCRUPULOUS and I am sure partly fuel the shills coming onto these pages. Not the people that have been duped by the web of lies/deceipt, but the spinners. And there are quite a few spinners on this blog… the drug industry and our regulatory bodies cannot be trusted any longer. the system needs a serious makeover, including criminal statutes regarding bribing and taking of bribes… but back to my two cents…

That vaccines damage children and adults is a fact supported by the FDA CDC VICP. There is a huge difference of opinion on whatteh OBVIOUS correlation of the 20 year tripling of the vaccine schedule and the 20 year 33 fold increased prevalence of autism means. Shills claim there is no correlation, without being able to offer any viable explanation/correlation themselves for increasing autism rates. Genes cannot explain a rising prevalence of autism, FDA/CDC/APA/AAP all admit that changing diagnosis/better awareness CANNOT explain most of the rise (most of the rise in % of kids affected is real). Yet shills/dupes continue to resurrect the false notions of genetic causes and diagnostic changes being the major factors.

There is another correlation to rising autism, vaccine profits. Many toxins are added to increase per dose profit. Antigen is the most expensive and critical component of vaccines. Making antigen with genetically engineered bacteria and yeast (beginning in the late 1980s) increases profit margins but adds a slew of toxic materials to vaccines, including non-self DNA fragments, endotoxins, other cellular debris plus NOVEL toxins from altered bacteria.

In spite of the cost savings with genetic engineering, antigen is still expensive. Relatively cheap chemical adjuvants (like aluminum hydroxide or squalene & other adjuvant oils) are used to prolong and intensify an infants immune response to the antigen, allowing less antigen. Compounding the problems, adjuvants will also intensify and prolong an infants reaction to many immunoreactive contaminants that come along with genetically engineered antigen

Then there is the pile of fraudulent epidemiology (studies of records) that shows “no evidence”. Large scale studies of records are used because they can bury the low incidence of autism or have a study design to manipulate data and/or results. Also, epidemiology cannot prove anything, but can show a correlation, if the autism numbers were large enough, that would indicate clinical investigation is warranted. All of the major studies are simply manipulations of available data to get the pre-ordained result of finding “no evidence”. Fombonne’s infamous Canadian study is a perfect example of this insidious practice. Additionally Fombonne’s conflicts of interest as an expert witness defending vaccines against claims of causing autism are too great to ignore.

Large clinical studies (studies of children) using toxin-free vaccine against the current schedule are needed to find the truth. Dr Healy, Dr Yazbak and Dr Wakefield call for these studies, but the industry and the puppet bureaucrats of our regulatory agencies refuse to do such studies. They ignore the evidence presented by a few truly independent scientists and doctors attempting to point to the necessity of large human clinical studies through small studies of animals showing the harm vaccines cause (Hewitt, Magos, Hornig and many more).

But that is neither here nor there… I was just looking for instances of Miller spreading lies about Brian Deer. Who may actually bring legal action against him. What kind of lawyer libels a journalist in the UK?

Thanks for the article and the enlightenment

(1) “This is no short, easy answer” should read of course, “There is no short, easy answer.”

(2) The citation given after, “It is 16 pages long. It was written by a rather interesting retired professor…” should be [2] [3], not [6].

1) Dr. Wakefield (MB BS FRCS FRCPath) was a research gastroenterologist from the UK.

2) Dr. Wakefield is a husband, a father, and interestingly the son of two physicians himself. His mother was a GP and his father was a neurologist.

3) Dr. Wakefield’s training in medicine was solid.

Andrew Wakefield graduated in 1981 with a degree in Medicine from St. Mary’s Hospital, part of the University of London, one of the finest medical schools in Europe. He then trained as a gastrointestinal surgeon and qualified as Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons in 1985. His specialized training and residency in GI surgery lasted seven years. He eventually developed as a specialist in inflammatory bowel disease and Crohn’s disease. At the prominent Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine in London, Wakefield was a Senior Lecturer in Medicine and Histopathology and served as a key member on the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Study Group, University Departments of Medicine and Histopathology. Approximately two years after the 1998 Lancet paper, Wakefield was awarded the Fellowship of the Royal College of Pathologists in 2001 in recognition of his published research.

4) Dr. Wakefield is (in)famously the lead author of an “early case series report” (not a study) published in The Lancet in 1988 that reported that Lymphoid Nodular Hyperplasia (LNH) and enterocolitis were found in 12 ASD children.[1]

5) There were two key co-authors of the 1998 Lancet paper. Professor John Walker-Smith and Dr. Simon Murch.

6) Dr. Simon Murch was at the time of the 1998 Lancet study, Senior Lecturer in Pediatric Gastroenterology at the Royal Free and University College School of Medicine. Dr. Murch is now Professor of Pediatrics and Child Health at Warwick Medical School.

7) Professor John Walker-Smith served as “Senior Clinical Investigator” on the 1998 Lancet paper. His reputation is even more impressive. Walker-Smith, Professor Emeritus of Pediatric Gastroenterology, is perhaps the most eminent pediatric gastroenterologist in the world. He is essentially the founding father of the discipline of Pediatric Gastroenterology worldwide. Go ahead. Google this guy.

(8) Professors Walker-Smith and Murch are obviously eminently qualified pediatric gastroenterologists. Personally, I find it unlikely that they participated in malfeasance during the generation of this case series report. In addition, personally, I find it unlikely that Professor Walker-Smith, as Senior Clinical Investigator, would participate with Dr. Wakefield in egregious misconduct during the execution of this case series. If Wakefield did (and anything’s possible) he hid it well from Professors Walker-Smith and Murch.

9) Both Professor Walker-Smith and Dr. Murch support Andrew Wakefield.

10) ALL the parents of the children who were the subjects of the report published in 1998 in The Lancet have gone to great lengths to voice their support of Andrew Wakefield and have described him as a kind and caring physician.

(Isn’t it interesting that the sole source of the complaint that led to the GMC proceding against Drs. Wakefield, Walker-Smith, and Murch was by Brian Deer. Who is Brian Deer? What are his medical qualifications? Who does Brian Deer work for? Has Brian Deer ever written articals in The Sunday Times advocating for the pharmaceutical industry before? I’ll let you go look for yourself and reach you own conclusions.)

11) Dr. Wakefield never claimed in his case series report published by The Lancet in 1998 that the MMR vaccine causes autism (as the major news outlets have reported repeatedly and mistakenly). Dr. Wakefield did not even claim that the MMR jab causes colitis. Neither hypothesis was ever tested by Wakefield in his paper. Wakefield, Walker-Smith and Murch merely reported that they found LNH and enterocolitis in twelve ASD children.

–Demonstrating a causal relationship between the MMR jab and colitis or between the MMR jab and autism would, of course, be impossible in a case series report, by definition.–

12) Again, the 1998 case report by Dr Wakefield, Professor John Walker-Smith and Dr Simon Murch published in The Lancet did NOT state or claim that the MMR vaccine causes autism. The 1998 Lancet paper reads, quote, “We did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome (autistic enterocolitis) described.” …. “We have identified a chronic enterocolitis in children that may be related to neuropsychiatric dysfunction. In most cases, onset of symptoms was after measles, mumps, and rubella immunization. Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine.”

In other words, Wakefield et al. were in he early stages of proposing a hypothesis to test: “Can the MMR jab cause an insult or injury to the GI tract (observable as LNR or chronic enterocolitis)?” That is what they did. And that is a reasonable hypothesis to test.

13) Do I personally believe that Wakefield is a fraud or a quack or scumbag (or worse) as many pro-vaccine detractors have called him? Well, it is impossible for me to know, or any of us to know, with certainty. It is possible, either way. But, personally, and this is just my intuitive feeling; it seems to me after taking a detailed look at Wakefield’s background, that it is more likely that he is a good man, a well trained research gastroenterologist, and an empathetic physician (this really comes out if you read the testimony of the parents). Certainly, it was audacious to test a hypothesis that challenged the safety of the combination MMR vaccine, and thus the National Immunization Program, and thus one of the fundamental beliefs of Medicine (which is so profoundly influenced by the multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical industry).

14) The Feb 28, 1998 press conference to announce the publication of the 1998 Lancet paper played a big part in the origin of this controversy. And this may be the fault of several individuals, not only Wakefield. Apparently, the press conference was orchestrated by Wakefield’s boss, Professor Arie Zuckerman, the Dean of the Royal Free and University College School of Medicine. Zuckerman desired to bring fame to the College. [2] Zuckerman knew well how Wakefield felt about the combination MMR vaccine. And, yet Zuckerman directed the inevitable question about the combination MMR vaccine at the press conference directly to Dr. Wakefield. This is where, when asked, Wakefield infamously stated he thought monovalent MMR vaccines were more safe than the combination MMR vaccine. With that, the UK media circus took off. Which, one could argue, is the fault of the British scandal-loving media as much as Zuckerman’s fame seeking or Wakefield’s remark at the press conference.

15) Let’s be clear with the facts. Wakefield was not instructing parents or recommending that parents not vaccinate their kids. In fact, he was advocating for MMR vaccination. He simply stated that, in his opinion, the monovalent MMR vaccines were more safe than the combo vaccine. Furthermore, the monovalent MMR vaccines *were* available in the UK at the time (despite Paul Offit’s false statements to the contrary). In addition, Wakefield was not developing a competing MMR vaccine. That is ridiculous. This accusation was propagated by one Brian Deer. Andrew Wakefield is self-admittedly not an immunologist nor a vaccine scientist. He is a gastroenterologist.

16) How can anyone here have an informed dialogue about the allegations of misconduct against Dr Wakefield and Professor Walker-Smith and Dr Murch if they won’t read even one analysis of Wakefield et al’s position? If one is not open to considering the position and testimony of both sides of these serious allegations (Wakefield/Walker-Smith/Murch vs. Brian Deer and the GMC), then how can you say that you have done your homework? How can you say that you are fully informed?

I invite everyone reading this web page to read “On Second Looking into the Case of Dr. Andrew J. Wakefield” by William Long. Please read it critically (you should!). It is 16 pages long. It was written by a rather interesting retired professor [6] who taught religion, sociology, history and law. This is not Jenny McCarthy.

17) If anyone wants to hear Wakefield’s side of the story, here it is.[4] [5] [6] The latter two are very recent March/April 2010 video interviews where you can see and hear the man for yourself.

I will let readers decide for themselves if the following documents are compelling or not. And, please actually view these documents and interviews before you make judgments or post feedback (wouldn’t you ask the same for yourself).

*Lastly, I apologize for the length of this post. The events surrounding what happened during the production of the Wakefield et al. paper published in The Lancet in 1998 -are- complex. This is no short, easy answer.

——————————————————————-

[1] Wakefield, A. et al., Ileal lymphoid nodular hyperplasia, nonspecific colitis and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet 1998;351:637-641.

[2] “On Second Looking into the Case of Dr. Andrew J. Wakefield” by William Long, MDiv, PhD, JD

[3] Dr. Long holds a BA (honors) and PhD (Religion) from Brown University; and a JD from Willamette University College of Law (# 1 in the Class of 1999); and a MDiv from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, South Hamilton, MA (summa cum laude). Fascinating fellow. [ http://www.drbilllong.com/About.html ].

[4] “That Paper” by Andrew J. Wakefield.

[5] http://goldenhawkprojects.blogspot.com/

[6] http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/04/10/wakefield-interview.aspx