to be a little in love with Ben Goldacre?

[entropyglitter]

Just read 'bad science' (finally) and I think I am in love.....

my favourite bit was Gillian McKeith thinking that oxygen (generated by chlorophyll) in your gut is not only plausible, but at all a good idea....

presumably this is at the same time as main lining anti-oxidants (which had been shown to increase your risk of disease rather than decrease it).

Deer wasn't writing for the Times though was he? He was writing for the BMJ.

Does that mean that you are not surprised by the BMJ acting unethically?

There are other issues too on top of the publishing of information from confidential medical records - might I recommend the Lewis Report again?

I might have got the wrong end of the stick but according to Deer's response here the 'confidential' information was supplied by Wakefield via Lewis, who I see is not an impartial party in this but is someone who is closely linked to Wakefield.

This is the article from the BMJ outlining how Wakefield intended to make mony from the whole vaccine crisis.

Seeker do you really think people are so gullible as to believe the Royal Free and its gastroenterology department were in cahoots to pull off a cunning plan to take on Big Pharma and compete for government contracts to supply vaccines? PMSL

And they were going to do this by manufacturing a scandal that would mightily piss the government (their future customer) off?

And then they were going to make up loads of vaccine in their high tech registered and licensed production site (which doesn't exist) and make packet by selling a product that already exists. (There is a perfectly good single measles vaccine already on the market.)

Does that sound like a good business plan to you? Perhaps they were going to ask Merck or GSK to subcontract the production and distribution for them? I bet that would go down well.

"yes chaps will bang out a few million of those for you, just as soon as we've finished this lawsuit against us that you are acting as an expert witness in"

This is the stuff of (not very good) films.

And your source on that one? Is it by any chance Brian Deer? Excuse me whilst I guffaw.

(No need to link I've seen the patent many many times and it is still always in the name of the Royal Free and is not for a product that could compete with MMR)

I'm curious about how the Royal Free was expecting to get this product licensed? I mean after having mightily pissed off the government by exposing them for endorsing the Urabe vaccine (which noone seems to want to talk about cos they'd rather talk about film scenarios and birthday parties).

www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3347742/Early-fears-about-MMR-in-secret-papers.html

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1544592/Vaccine-officials-knew-about-MMR-risks.html

What is it they say again about the MMR? Ah yes it has an impeccable safety record .

The urabe strain was discussed ages back. The current MMR is not the urabe strain one and therefore to say it doesn't have an excellent safety record because of issues with a different vaccine strain would be odd.

the currrent mmr is the one which was described as having 'inadequate safety testing' by the Cochrane report (which you are so very fond of, NG)

following on from the deliberate introduction of a vaccine known to have an unacceptably high serious side effect rate, couple dwith the government's absolute refusal to accept that any side effects could actually be down to that vaccine, to then introduce a new vaccine, with inadequate safety trials, and insist it is absolutely safe is a little odd, don't you think?

and to expect the public to just say 'oh yes, it is safe - the government says so' in the face of official reports saying they can draw no such conclusion is a little odd too.

but hey ho. each to their own.

Ah I see Deer has changed his story mind on what the infamous patent was about .

I guess even he is willing to admit that it was risible.

Does anyone else feel a bit odd when reading Brian's chatty, dialoguey, tabloidy, sensationalist writing style in the BMJ?

He makes an awful lot of claims in there that it would be nigh on impossible for peer reviewers to check.

And all that stuff about hurrying to wards and skipping into rooms is plain weird. This the BMJ - a supposedly extremely serious medical journal, not a red top.

NG some of the Lancet children received the Urabe MMR.

Now I don't know about you but I don't see folks saying this version of the MMR has a fabbo safety record.

I see them talking about 'MMR'.

And I agree with silverfrog - glossing over the decision to introduce a known to be dangerous drug takes the .

There are families today who are living with the consequences of that decision. Real people. Shall we just gloss over them too? Or shall we call them names like 'cranks' and 'conspiracy theorists' and 'antivaxxxxxers'?

I suppose we should be thankful that at least the manufacturer decided they had to stop production of that MMR - god only knows how long the UK government would have gone on using it for otherwise.

If I had a child on the spectrum and I believed that to have been caused by MMR, I would probably be furious at Ben Goldacre and Brian Deer for successfullly discrediting what I believe to be the dause of my child's condition.

But the person I would be most furious with is Wakefield.

He behaved in such an odd and unconventional manner, even if you do not believe the C of I accusations, his conduct is what has led to the connection being widely discredited and disbelieved.

Good lord.
I have a child on the spectrum. I believe the mmr was one of many things involved.
I would not be angry at anyone - goldacre, deer, Wakefield, Katie price, who helped me to get to the bottom of what happened. It should be interesting. But my only concern is helping my son going forward.

None of the shit throwing, smart arse, sneer and counter sneer that characterises this 'debate' is of any help to me or him. It just makes people who enjoy being superior and vile have a good time.

But please, please try and avoid taking this debate to a new low by dragging me and my son, and others like us into this. You really have no idea what this feels like

Silverfrog the urabe strain did not have "serious" side affects. Febrile convulsions are not "serious" scary yes, not serious. My DS has had 20 of them and my DD had 4. Even the asceptic meningitis is not considered serious as it has no longterm affects. The urabe strain is still being used in other countries as it is more effective and cheaper than the JerryLynn.

I can't see where Deer has changed his mind about the single vaccine patent, as the patent was for a single vaccine which is the 97 patent which if you actually read it seems to be for a bit of everything not just a single vaccine.
Are you still in denial about the single vaccine patent.

Pag

I did not say "parents of children on the spectrum should be furious at Gokdacre and Deer and Wakefield"

I said I would be.

I've only skimmed through this thread so apologies if it's already been mentioned, but Time magazine listed Wakefield as being third on their list of all-time science fraudsters last week, and I think that is what history will remember him as, no matter what his dwindling band of supporters think, and regardless of his last ditch and ultimately doomed attempt to sue his detractors.

And I repeat, you cannot possibly know how you would react.
It is a pretty bizarre situation.

I quite understand why you assume that. I am telling you you cannot possibly know. The experience shifts everything.

I don't mean to sound argumentative but the bollocks spouted about us parents including all the 'looking for something to blame' shite is exhausting.

I wish people would stop trying to speak for my situation is all really. It is hard enough.

Pag

Of course, experience changes everything.

But what's the point of anyone commenting on any thread unless they have direct exoerience of it? We all do it, all the time. And that's what makes debate on MN and in RL.

I refute that I have dragged this "debate" to a new low with my opinions. I really do not know what it feels like, but I am a sentient human being who loves her children who has experienced some harrowing medical scares and I can talk about how I think I would react.

And the point about blaming....I never said blame. You did,

I stand by the assertion that I would be cross with Wakefield because if he is right his own behaviour has led to massive investigations and he has been discredited. That would make me cross because now his research area is fringe. If I felt he could find answers, I would wish that he had not done some of the stupid, stupid things he did (as outlined in the BMJ article) and yes, I would be cross that funds are not being allocated to his field of research anymore. To the point where he is begging for donations of the internet. Again, something that would make me cross because it makes him look like such a rank charletan.

Beach - I agree that the tone of the Deer penned BMJ article is more Vanity Fair than serious medical publication.

"I don't mean to sound argumentative but the bollocks spouted about us parents including all the 'looking for something to blame' shite is exhausting.

I wish people would stop trying to speak for my situation is all really. It is hard enough."

Nobody has said anything about looking for something to blame. Nobody is speaking for anyone.

This has probably moved on a bit now, but this article, regarding the ethics of the blood taking and the procedures on children, here shows that Wakefield admitted "I'm perfectly willing to admit my understanding was wrong".

I find the hero-worship of Wakefield truly disturbing. He admitted errors, yet people continue to maintain here that 'no rules were broken.' (Beach)

He isn't 'begging on the internet'

The justice fund was set up by parents.

I find the notion that we should ignore the Royal Free's work, on the basis of claims made by Brian Deer, about Dr Wakefield's conduct and the Royal Free gasteroenterology team's ability to diagnose bowel disease, most strange.

Yeah, let's ignore science that can help children in distress because a journo thinks he know more and better than the medical team caring for those children and for those children's parents.

It all comes back to Brian Deer doesn't it? The BMJ, the GMC, the accusations about the patent (which is held by the Royal Free).

Bit odd that Deer as complainant for the GMC didn't let them know about this 'fraud' on the part of the Royal Free team.

I wonder why he decided to write tabloidy articles for the BMJ rather than have his concerns dealt with in the proper fashion by the GMC. Most odd.

Of course if this claim were to be part of the GMC hearing Deer would have to make all his sources and documents available.

It seems he prefers to take pot shots from the comfort of a tabloidy article .

So, how is everyone getting on with the Lewis Report?

Beach it was not 'science that can help parents in distress'.

It was work that had 'fatal' conflicts of interest (declared or undeclared), and that among other things seriously breached medical ethics. Wakefield has admitted the failings on the medical ethics himself.

Sweetlily sorry but a couple of quotes totally out of context and a badly written article aren't going to shed much light are they?

Sorry but that article makes it sound like he had obtained permission from the parents to use samples of control children for research, but that the Royal Free didn't have clearance from the Ethics Committee for the actual research project on children with bowel disease.

I can see how people would lap it up though.

I don't agree with your analysis there Beach . He was found to be in breach of ethical standards - the BBC don't need to quote out of context or put any spin on it. The facts speak for themselves.

And the Conflicts of Interest whether declared or not (and I'm not sure a 'paper trail' is actually declaring a COI) were too damaging.

Please will someone explain to me how Wakefield's 1997/8 patent application does not represent a conflict of interest?

Ah I see Sweetlily also knows better than the parents of the children and the Royal Free team .

And a whole bunch of other people including the FDA.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3174969/

abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/health&id=7353260

clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00881452?term=NCT00881452&rank=1