Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any medical concerns we suggest you consult your GP.
Wakefield found guilty by the GMC(256 Posts)
Finally the GMC stands up and takes the right decision:
Apparently there was heckling in court.
"One woman shouted: "These doctors have not failed our children. You are outrageous." She called the panel of experts "bastards" and accused the GMC of being a "kangaroo court". Another shouted: "This is a set-up."
So obviously they believe it's the right thing to do to falsify data and pay parents for blood samples at a kiddies birthday party....
[dons hat and flak jacket]
Manfrom don't you find it a tiny bit curious that the parents of the children that Dr Wakefield is being accused of mistreating support his actions totally, have never complained about him and indeed demonstrate on the street in support of him?
Don't you find it concerning that none of these parents has been allowed a voice at the GMC hearing?
Even more concerning is that a complaint is being filed against some of the key witnesses at the GMC hearing saying they gave false evidence.
No, actually I don't find it curious in the slightest.
Remember Justine Picardie's lavish feature on Wakefield in the Telegraph:
"...a handsome, glossy haired hero to families of autistic children...a likeable, lively family, of the kind you would be happy to have as friends, pitted against mysterious forces who have planted bugging devices and stolen patients' records in 'apparently inexplicable' burglaries..."
My heart breaks for all the parents with autistic children, but MMR didn't cause their autism.
It's not common practice for patients' families to be given a voice at GMC hearings. www.gmc-uk.org/concerns/hearings_and_decisions/an_introduction_to_adjudication.asp#who_makes
As to your link, I wouldn't believe too much from Dan Olmsted. There is no link between thimerosal and autism.
What a shame that the MMR / Autism debate has overshadowed the wider debate on vaccines and we are no closer to having an independent clinical study, using vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects, into the long term impact on our health of current cocktail of vaccines.
Oh well looks like you've got it all sorted out then.
You know that no child's autism has ever been triggered by MMR and you know that thimerosal has no role to play ever.
So what did happen to the thousands of children who have regressed following MMR, many of whom have similar case histories of recurrent ear infections, heavy antibiotic use, mitochondrial disorder, bowel problems and strange food allergies?
And why is the suffering of many of those children able to be alleviated when they are treated for vaccine damage?
What's Dan Olmstead got to do with a complaint against GMC witnesses? Did you read the document?
Oh gosh, why did they bother with any investigation when you already knew all the answers manfrom. How foolish of everyone....
Beachcomber have you heard of Occam's Razor? You sound like a moon landings conspiracist.
Please do tell. What is the "treatment" for MMR "vaccine damage"?
I think we should face the fact that although it was stated that the hearing wouldn't be passing judgment on the research itself, any other finding than this one would have been utterly catastrophic for public health policy and the pharmaceutical companies.
Beyond catastrophic. Just try to imagine the scenario if the findings had been different. It simply couldn't be allowed to happen.
Remember this complaint was made by a journalist with vested interests, and not by any parent of any child involved.
They still support him, very much so. There is such a lot of evidence that MMR and other vaccines cause profound problems in some children. When mothers report that their children are autistic without MMR, I'm afraid I believe it's almost certainly due to the earlier, infant vaccines and probably the mercury they contained.
Sausage, google the DAN protocol. I believe there are others. Don't make a judgement without looking into things. Don't claim you've looked into things when you haven't. Beachcomber doesn't sound like a moon landings conspiracist. Making judgements in ignorance, especially on people who really do know what they are talking about, is not clever or cynical, it's worthless.
I have never been able to understand why or how people who say they don't know what causes regressive autism and have never examined any child with regressive autism, can say with categoric assurance that the vaccine given a short time before regressive autism occurred did not cause it. How on earth do you know?
Of course, you don't know. It's ridiculous to imagine that you could. And necessary that you villify anyone who tries to find out.
manfrom, have you any experience at all with autism or are you just trying to support vaccination in general?
As pointed out the GMC hearing has nothing to do with the science itself.
So, regardless of the politics of all this, the science of the 1998 Lancet paper, and the subsequent research it has led to, remains unchallenged. Still, 12 years later.
Now my understanding of that science is as follows;
there is a small subgroup of children who are disposed to developing persistent measles infection, bowel disease and neurological symptoms after receiving the triple MMR vaccine.
Unfortunately all the large epidemiological studies in the world are going to struggle to shed much light on this because we are talking about a small subgroup. We seem to be swimming in studies like these all trying to find a way for the MMR to never have a serious side effect ever but there is a curious lack of studies which examine the children thought to be affected.
The only way to figure out what has happened to the children in question is to examine the children in question and perform clinical studies. Clinical studies that have been done implicate MMR and they remain unchallenged. The people who have performed these clinical studies have made themselves very unpopular and are being picked apart by the medical community, the press and the GMC. The science remains untouched though.
So what happens now? Will the government actually acknowledge that these children exist and run some tests, will they commission the much called for study on vaccinated and unvaccinated populations?
Or will they run with the "yeah but Wakefield took some bloods at a party and confused us over what was research and what was clinically required so that means everything he says about everything is wrong always" line that the GMC has handed to them?
In the meantime Dr Wakefield et al are working to help sick children as doctors are supposed to do and Dr Salisbury is hoping the public is stupid enough not to notice that in 12 years no-one has managed to fault the actual science.
Sorry forgot to say to sausagerolemodel it is very tedious when people mention Occam's razor, conspiracy blah, blah, moon being made of green cheese yada yada,anecdotes, blah blah, yada yada because it is meaningless twaddle that adds nothing to a discussion. It is all just copied from bloggers noise. Carry on if it amuses you .
Treating children with bowel disease and neurological symptoms is complex and varies from one individual to another. The first step is admitting that these children exist and that they do have these symptoms. The second is listening to their parents when they give their account of their child's health history. The third is having the wisdom, humility and respect to accept that as a doctor you don't know everything.
Let me know when you've got the above figured out and then we'll look at the rest.
Sorry I don't know why I said that. Very crass. I am very crass.
Anyway I agree with you Beach and Riven.
Have posted on other thread, thanks for drawing it to my attention.
Right must go and watch Wakefield's statement on the BBC do some work.
So what does ause autism yet?
And the answer BYW is nobody knows,in fact there isn't probably anything as a stand alone, current thinking refers to autisms,multiple causalities.
Wakefield looked at a tiny subgroup, but his research was reported as a generalisation. I read the reports and decided togive my ds3 the MMR, and I deply regret it, he regressed afterwards. Not as a stand alone cause I think, but a trigger perhsaps aswe have several cases of ASD in the family, including another child.
I'm not going to pretend I think MMR causes ASD in that group, because I don't know,there is a tendency to write off parental experience as coincidence which I dislike as I know some of these aprents and find the caccusations of jumping to conclusions etc don't fit them. I ahve read and heard their experiences with the trial for which the funding was pulled (why notlet it go ahead and clear it up? if its good enough for Iraq why not the ASD community?)
DS4 has had singles measles and will have single rubella when we can save up but I don't believe we should have to pay and opt between something we actively reject and nothing when it is available. most of the fallout from MMR could be solved by offering responsible educated adults a further option.
And funnily enough as I typed another MMR call came through the door
They know we have had single, they know our history
"My heart breaks for all the parents with autistic children, but MMR didn't cause their autism"
Wakefield never said it did, he said more research needed doing.
Yes, Goth, and who said that? And how do they know? Was it God, perhaps?
"Wakefield never said it did, he said more research needed doing. "
oh look, yet more research has been published. guess what it says...
Good thing is though that Dr Wakefield is continuing with the research that needs doing into this issue.
The next phase of the primate study is shaping up to be very interesting.
www.thoughtfulhouse.org/studies.php#basic for a brief description of the study on vaccinated and unvaccinated monkeys.
fourteenstudies.org/pdf/primates_hep_b.pdf for the initial results.
I believe the follow up is to be published soon.
This is going to take a lot of explaining.
"My heart breaks for all the parents with autistic children, but MMR didn't cause their autism. "
Oh save your pity.
You do know autism is not one thing don't you?
MMR didn't cause my son's autism for sure. And probably didn't cause 93% of autism cases. But a paediatrician was happy to a tell a friend she suspected it had a role in her child's autism (a child who ended up in HDU with very long seizures post MMR), and I have no reason to doubt the few people I've met who say their children lost speech aged 3 or 4 post MMR. Of course MMR may not have caused their 3 or 4 year old to regress, but no-one has suggested an alternative. And then of course there's the other child who ended up post MMR with in HDU with an encephalitis - unrelated apparently ..... Of course none of this proves any association with the MMR but I think the parents would suggest it should be considered. Research. From people with open minds maybe.
I'm not sure where you got the 'falsify' data from, and the GMC didn't actually have a problem with the payment at the kids birthday birthday (one charge they didn't hold against him). At least get your accusations correct!
that would be this study would it?
www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W81-4XC57CT-1&_user=10&_coverDate=10/02/2009&_rd oc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info%28%23toc%236641%239999%23999999999%2399999%23FLA%23displa y%23Articles%29&_cdi=6641&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=61&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion= 0&_userid=10&md5=4dfea2dc7075d6dd087413b80f4b8f3b#FCANote
oh look, it's been withdrawn. for being complete bollocks. what a surprise.
I love the way anti vaxxers dismiss wide swathes of credible scientific evidence but lap up what any old crank has to say as long as it happens to confirm their irrational prejudices. there's constant talk of more research, more research - but it's been done and there's no association. in the paper i posted a couple of posts ago, those who had mmr were actually less likely to be autistic...
of course the really hillarious thing about that study, apart from the cherry picking of evidence, the conflict of interest of the authors and the like, is that they were testing Hep B vaccine with thimerosal. but the Hep b vaccine used everywhere in the developed world, as you will notice from the description of the preparation they used in the experiment below:
is unpreserved - it doesn't even contain thimerosal in the first place - so they have artificially added thimerosal to the vaccine for the experiment. now why would you do that? i can't think of a good reason to actually increase the possible confounding factors in an experiment other than to try and extract some dodgy results. it's such a load of crap i'm stunned they managed to get it published in the first place.
Join the discussion
Please login first.