Bruffin why don't you link to the primary source for Dr Chadwick's testimony? (I mean rather than a blog where only the first part of his testimony is cited.)
By which I mean the actual transcripts (which are from neither the GMC fitness to practice hearing, nor from the Walker-Smith appeal but from the Autism Omnibus Proceedings in the United States).
Chadwick gave testimony on day 10 of the proceedings. His presence (by telephone) was very bizarre as it was actually totally irrelevant to the proceedings - he hadn't worked with the technology in question, the patient in question, the lab in question, the samples in question and the results in question.
Chadwick's testimony begins at the bottom of page 5 and goes on until page 17. The quote below is what follows the part cited in bruffin's link, part of which she posted above.
The part I am quoting begins on page 14.
The transcript
MS. PATTON: Thank you, Dr. Chadwick. I have no further questions.
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
SPECIAL MASTER HASTINGS: Ms. Chin-Caplan, any questions?
MS. CHIN-CAPLAN: Just a few.
SPECIAL MASTER HASTINGS: Please go ahead.
MS. CHIN-CAPLAN: Thank you.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MS. CHIN-CAPLAN:
Q Good morning, Dr. Chadwick. My name is Sylvia Chin-Caplan, and I represent the Petitioner, Michelle Cedillo, in this case.
A Hi.
Q Hi. You're aware that Dr. Wakefield is not a witness in this case, are you not?
A I'm not aware of that.
Q Are you aware that the Kawashima Lab is also not the lab in question here?
A Well, I don't know the details of the case, to be honest.
Q When you were approached to testify in this matter, what were you asked to do?
A I was asked to provide a statement regarding the work I did for Dr. Wakefield relating to the autistic patients.
Q And did you ask why?
A Sorry. I couldn't hear that last question.
Q Did you ask why?
A Did I ask why? Because it was a case regarding the safety of the vaccine.
Q Now, you testified that you worked with in-situ PCR. Is that it?
A Yes. This was used before any of the autistic work was being undertaken. I did a few months of working on this methodology.
Q In-situ PCR?
A Yes. I did a few months at the beginning of my project with Dr. Wakefield, and I did a few months at the very end as well on in-situ PCR.
Q So this was all on in-situ PCR? Is that correct?
A The work that was in my thesis relating to autistic patients was using normal PCR, not in-situ PCR. The in-situ PCR work I performed was never written up.
Q I see. So the in-situ PCR is more specific than the regular PCR, isn't it?
A No, that's not the case.
Q It's not?
A No, it's not specific. Because of the methodology it's actually less specific so there's less way of being certain about what is being detected.
Q Okay. Doctor, did you at any time use TaqMan PCR?
A No. TaqMan PCR wasn't really available while I was doing the Ph.D. It was something which came afterwards.
Q I see. Are you aware that the case that we're dealing with involves TaqMan PCR?
A I'm not aware, no. No.
Q Are you aware that the lab that we're dealing with involves the O'Leary Lab in Dublin, Ireland?
A Okay. I've heard of that lab, but I didn't know that that was the lab that you were using in this case.
Q And you've had no relationship with the
Dublin lab, have you?
A No.
Q You have no knowledge of their procedures or the testing that was done there, do you?
A No. I mean, I'm aware of TaqMan PCR, but that's all I know about the O'Leary Lab.
Q And as of the date that you left Dr. Wakefield's lab, you had not utilized TaqMan PCR in an experiment, had you?
A No.
Q Doctor, is there anybody with you?
A No.
Q No? You're by yourself?
A Yes.
MS. CHIN-CAPLAN: Okay. I have no further questions.