Antivaccination study a fraud

[JJM]

"Andrew Wakefield was paid by lawyers to undermine the MMR vaccine"
Link

Quote:

This should come as no surprise. Thanks to Brian Deer, the journalist who uncovered so much of Dr. Andew Wakefield's shady research and dealings, we now know that Wakefield was paid by lawyers before his infamous MMR [measles, mumps and rubella] study and that he failed to disclose this clear conflict of interest

The lawyers were pursuing a class action suit (in England) against vaccine producers, and they paid for "research" that supported their claims of harm. The published "study" scared many parents out of having their children vaccinated.

In related news- a British child recently died of measles, the first such death in 14 years.

[TobiasTheViking]

Thanks for this information.

Though i already knew(as almost everyone else here) that antivax is bunk, this is a very nice reference.

Thank you.

This will go straight on my site.

tomorrow anyways

[fuelair]

Hmm, sounds to me like Wakefield should receive a "booster" shot of highly active cultures of each of the three he researched and put on quarantine for 20 years or so.

[dissonance]

I could have sworn we already knew that, but I guess it was some other financial conflict of interest he had going. Charming guy, this Wakefield.

[Eos of the Eons]

Yeah, MMR never had mercury, and antivaxxers (who love to claim mercury in vaccines cause autism) are finally starting to realize that, quite slowly. Wakefield's explanation was tremendously more weak in comparision, along with that tiny group group of subjects and bad study design.

Canadians are studying toxins:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../National/home

I'm eyeing up the "agenda" behind this with great interest.

Quote:

While the government has never before undertaken such a widespread program, tests have been done involving a few hundred people looking at specific problems, such as contaminants in breast milk or mercury levels in those who eat fish caught for sport.

No comment on what actually came of those studies. Apparently nothing much?

We are living longer than ever before, with less diseases killing us than ever before, and people are fearing some toxins are making us all into mutants or something? I can only hope they identify what may really need to be looked at, or put some fears to rest. Why don't people stop smoking or drinking if they fear toxicity so much? Or should I be glad there's something else to distract people like antivaxxers from blaming vaccines for everything from autism to cancer? Then maybe kids can get back to being immune against preventable diseases?

This wakefield thing may have caused deaths, but antivaxxers still hail him as an unsung hero up against "big pharma".

Quote:

Wakefield, after studying only 12 children, said the measles vaccine might cause autism, and urged parents not to give their kids the vaccine. That caused a panic in England. Vaccine rates dropped, and measles cases rose.

http://quackfiles.blogspot.com/2004/...zation_21.html

Some other great links to articles on vaccination:
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.p...te/issues/C30/
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/gl/vaccines1.htm

[clarsct]

Yet, this study will be pointed at again and again.


*sigh*

It isn't about science, it's about belief. It is the fear that you, somehow, had something to do with your child's autism because we are SO goddamned obsessed with our children in this country.

It couldn't be you, it has to be those scary guys in the dark(white) trench(lab) coats that are doing all the bad stuff. We don't really know or understand what they are doing anyway, they could be doing anything!!!
*insert further hysteria*


Some lawyer smells money and some idiot fudges a number or two.


Bah.

As with anything we don't understand, superstition abounds. STDs are caused by sex and frogs are born of mud, as well.


Bah.

[Chris Haynes]

It gets better and better... Wakefield has dropped his libel lawsuit against Channel 4 Television and Brian Deer:
http://briandeer.com/wakefield/lawsuit-discontinues.htm

[Chris Haynes]

... there is more:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/medicine/story/0,,1983942,00.html

Quote:

The doctor who sparked the controversy over the safety of the MMR vaccine has dropped a two-year libel action against Channel 4, a fortnight after a high court judge ordered the disclosure of confidential documents to his opponents.

Andrew Wakefield sued Channel 4, 20-20 Productions, and reporter Brian Deer over a November 2004 Dispatches programme MMR: What They Didn't Tell You.

Lawyers estimate that the Medical Protection Society, the doctors' defence body which funded the libel claim, faces a legal bill of more than £500,000 for its own and the other side's costs of the case, which was due to go to trial next October

[blutoski]

Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons

Yeah, MMR never had mercury, and antivaxxers (who love to claim mercury in vaccines cause autism) are finally starting to realize that, quite slowly. Wakefield's explanation was tremendously more weak in comparision, along with that tiny group group of subjects and bad study design.

Aw, since when does a difference of opinion divide altmedders? You go to a trade show or health fair, and completely incompatible altmed treatments have booths right beside each other, no questions asked. As long as they're playing the 'small guy against big pharma' card to shill product, everybody's in the club.

However, I'm not sure that the antivaxxers were all unaware that Wakefield's MMR accusations were not about mercury - I think antivaxxers have always had subcults, and the Wakefield group were always "triple-jab" people.

Triple-jab theory is a more pernicious form of antivax, as it is not solved by changing preservatives, and specifically asserts that vaccination is not safe in any format.

[Eos of the Eons]

It's interesting that Wakefield also wanted to market alternatives to MMR, in the form of having 3 separate vaccines, among other things:
http://briandeer.com/wakefield/wakefield-patents.htm

Quote:

the hospital's medical school had already filed the first of what would become a string of extraordinary patent applications for anti-MMR products which, if they had any merit, could only have succeeded if MMR's reputation was damaged

http://briandeer.com/wakefield/wakefield-patents.htm

Quote:

Wakefield's claims for a safer measles vaccine, and treatments for bowel disease and autism, were not only bold, but were bizarre. The technology involved is of so-called "transfer factors", a now largely abandoned fringe conjecture based on a curious theory that special substances can be harvested from white blood cells. The Royal Free's recipe advised injecting mice with measles, extracting and processing white cells, injecting the result into pregnant goats, milking them after kid-birth and turning the product into capsules for kids.

http://briandeer.com/wakefield-deer.htm

It's a classic move amongst quacks. Scare parents away from one product and offer what they claim are "safe" alternatives.


Many sCAM folks try to say conventional products CAUSE what sCAM product claims to cure. With Gary Young's oils, they say conventional products cause cancer, and that Young's products are "all natural" and won't cause cancer. Gary Young also claims his oils can be used instead of vaccination.

Quacks and sCAM artists will be successful as long as they can make unsustantiated claims about their "competitors". It's good to see Wakefield, an MD, not get away with it. There needs to be standards maintained for science based medical care. Alties love a rotten MD. They say Wakefield is the victim in this.

[blutoski]

Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons

Alties love a rotten MD. They say Wakefield is the victim in this.

There's an expression:
"Quacks aren't necessarily good at lying to their patients; they're just good at finding patients who are willing to lie to themselves."

[Euromutt]

Originally Posted by dissonance

I could have sworn we already knew that, but I guess it was some other financial conflict of interest he had going. Charming guy, this Wakefield.

I think the first conflict of interest was revealed when it emerged that Wakefield's research had been funded by the plaintiffs' lawyers. Now it's been shown he personally took money from the lawyers as well.