However, I have a question. Why didn’t you bring up your idea about building bridges to the leaders of the antivax community? Did you think it wasn’t necessary (or have you changed your mind about it) because Dr Offit told you that he gets lots of positive feedback from the “silent majority”? I doubt it, because I don’t think this “silent majority” is news to you, since overall vaccine compliance in the US has thankfully remained very high.

Just wanted to point out that Dr. Offit is donating all the proceeds from “Autism’s False Prophets” to support autism research.

And he has even donated more with some extra help! See his comment here:

Both Mr. Handley and I each agreed to contribute $5,000 to an autism charity of which I approved. (This was my idea). The charity was the Center for Autism Research at UCLA,

I also agree that the Lancet, not the press, bears responsibility for the initial MMR story. The scientists themselves are obliged to get it right; while science is a dynamic process, and conclusions can come and go in time, there’s no excuse for analytical errors (poor methods & controls, bad statistics,etc.) The peer-reviewed literature is one of the important gatekeepers in the whole process, and the news media should be able to rely on it.

I have read three of this books. This one, the one on the Cutter Incident and Vaccinated, the biography of Maurice Hilleman. The latter was so engaging that I even read it while on the bus, even though I usually get nauseous while reading in cars/buses.