Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that there is a witch hunt against Andrew Wakefield?

564 replies

MagalyZz · 24/05/2010 20:25

I just can't believe that they're still gunning for this guy!?

Whatever you make of his research, it WAS his research and he found what he found and he should be allowed to "suggest a link"

I have a child on the spectrum who had the MMR and I do not think the MMR had anything to do with it, but I do believe Dr Wakefield that a tiny percentage of people do react very badly to this vaccine.

Leave the guy alone ffs!!

OP posts:
Rockbird · 24/05/2010 20:28

He caused one hell of a lot of panic and worry to many many people, including myself who chose to give single vaccs as recently as a year ago. His methods of research were questionable. Therefore no, I don't believe we should 'leave the guy alone ffs'

Tootlesmummy · 24/05/2010 20:28

I disagree, sorry but because of the way he released his thoughts without having evidence to back it up all he created was hysteria resulting in people choosing not to vaccinate their children. In turn leading to a rise in measles.

If he had done his research and had it fully investigated and backed up then fine but he didn't so I think he should have been struck off. Sorry!

MsHighwater · 24/05/2010 20:29

It wasn't about results but about his methods which did not comply with the ethical standards required of him - and which he knew were required of him.

FairyMum · 24/05/2010 20:32

I think there should be an even bigger witch hunt against the way certain media reported his research.

FabIsGoingToGetFit · 24/05/2010 20:33

YANBU.

Tootlesmummy · 24/05/2010 20:33

But there has been proof since that there is no link as well so on both counts he should have been struck off!

And paying children at his sons birthday party £5 to take blood to me is outrageous.

nickytwotimes · 24/05/2010 20:35

I don;t think he should be left alone either - he did cause a lot of alarm and distress. However, I do think hte way the media ran with the story had a far bigger effect than Wakefield himself. (ie; I agree with fairymum!) ANd I don;t think the government helped matters by removing people's choice to use single jabs if they wished.
I am pro-MMR and didn;t hesitate to have ds immunised, but I totally understand why peole were so worried at that time.

elportodelgato · 24/05/2010 20:40

YABU, my DD caught measles at 10mo as a DIRECT result of low MMR uptake in my area in the wake of his completely discredited research. The impact his 'research' has had has been terrible - the return of measles which is a deadly illness and hospitalises one in 10 children who catch it. Disgraceful.

And Fairymum I agree that the media reporting was an absolute scandal. There were very few sane voices of reason and they were drowned out by terrible media scaremongering.

So yes, YABVU

Joonbug · 24/05/2010 20:41

Aside from what his 'research' was actually about, the way he conducted it was outrageous. He then caused hysteria with his 'findings'. I'm not surprised he's been struck off, it was absolutely the right thing to do.

scottishmummy · 24/05/2010 20:42

he breached ethical standards,obtained blood samples without parental consent for his own private research.which he had not obtained ethics committee clearance for. his behaviour and judgement fell below that expected of a consultant

notcitrus · 24/05/2010 20:43

What everyone else said. Yes, the media were also complicit in causing panic, but he fell way, way below the ethical standards expected of a doctor or scientist.

sausagerolemodel · 24/05/2010 20:54

YABU. He had many many chances to back down from his theory when time and time again he failed to produce any decent evidence to back it up. Instead he continued arrogantly scaremongering and stoking the flames of anxiety and hysteria, aided and abetted by media so desperate for a story they didn't want to look beyond the headline at the actual research.

WHO used to have a plan that measles would be eradicated globally by 2010. And because of him and the people who believed him, that goal has been ripped up.

More than 50 children die every single hour in Africa alone. Don't think for a second that how we deal with it here, or fail to, doesn't make us responsible.

If we're not part of the solution, we're part of the problem.

scottishmummy · 24/05/2010 21:00

wakefield has implied he is victim to systemic witch-hunt,and some supporters do buy into the conspiracy theory

in fact,his behaviour,judgement,conduct was not that expected of a consultant

BafanaBafana · 24/05/2010 21:01

He behaved irresponsibly and unprofessionally.

Btw, I think there are already several threads about this in the Vaccination section.

Original poster
MagalyZz · 24/05/2010 21:30

The studies to disprove his study all have such an agenda. There is a desperate need to disprove his research for the 'greater good'.

This vaccine is safe for 99.99% of people, and most people are completely fine with that.

OP posts:
ArthurPewty · 24/05/2010 21:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

RedRedWine1980 · 24/05/2010 21:36

It wasnt conclusive useful evidence though. I could conduct research that concludes baked beans contain radioactive waste and has been linked to spontaneous human combustion- doesnt make it right.

His 'research' was also unethical- research should be in the best interest of the greater good- this wasnt.

Original poster
MagalyZz · 24/05/2010 21:37

link please leonie?

It's unbelievable that people are so naive imo. The greater good is everything. and the tiny tiny percentage of people who react badly to this vaccine are just fish food.

If I had had a history of IBS, allergies, crohns, no WAY would I have risked it. And both my kids even the autistic one had their mmrs, so I'm not some 'conspiracy-lover'. I brought my dc2 for his 2nd mmr knowing he was on the spectrum.

OP posts:
greenbeanie · 24/05/2010 21:38

His research was wholly irresponsible. It was conducted to look at the link between bowel disease and autism. In the concluding paragraph it stated that there may be a link between MMR and autism when it wasn't even what he had been researching. He was also funded for a lot of his work - I'm not sure about this particular piece - by a company that produced single vaccines.

The blood samples that he used in the study were taken from friends of his children at their birthday party!! It is such a shame that it has caused so much needless distress and suffering for so many children.

There is no such thing as something that is 100% safe but his research was scaremongering on the largest scale. Who doesn't want to ensure that their child is safe from risk?

mrsruffallo · 24/05/2010 21:38

YABU

RedRedWine1980 · 24/05/2010 21:42

But even IF there was a link- what causes more harm, autism or measles mumps and rubella? All three can have serious complications and lead to disability.

sausagerolemodel · 24/05/2010 21:47

MagalyZz. Its not a case of fish-food. Its an extremely simple risk:benefit ratio.

If you don't have a vaccine that's 99.99% safe then instead you have a disease that kills children with alarming frequency. 99.99% is not perfect but very little in this world is, and it is so much better than the
alternative it doesn't bear thinking about.

saggarmakersbottomknocker · 24/05/2010 21:49

'But even IF there was a link- what causes more harm, autism or measles mumps and rubella? All three can have serious complications and lead to disability.'

Autism causes serious disability too.

FakePlasticTrees · 24/05/2010 21:50

does this help at all?

hocuspontas · 24/05/2010 21:55

Tony Blair did the most damage imo. He wouldn't say yes or no to whether baby Leo had had the vaccine so leading parents, quite rightly, to question his reticence. If Leo had had it then it would have been proof that he thought the research mumbo jumbo. By not saying anything it was assumed that Leo hadn't had it and that he believed the research.