Just receieved this:
A statement by Dr Andrew Wakefield
The Sunday Times and the Dispatches programme of 18th November raise a
number of issues in relation to MMR, autism and events at the Royal Free
Hospital. Since many of the claims by journalist Brian Deer have been
demonstrably false and there in no objectivity in the manner of their
intended portrayal, I declined to participate in any way in the making of
the Dispatches programme. In addition, vulnerable parents have complained of
being "tricked" into participating in the programme. I was not invited to
comment on the Sunday Times article prior to its publication.
The claim appears to be that, whilst at the Royal Free
Hospital, I was developing a new vaccine to compete with MMR and that I
conspired to undermine confidence in MMR vaccine in order to promote this
new vaccine, and that this represented a conflict of interest. This is
untrue. The facts are that: no vaccine or anything resembling a vaccine was
ever designed, developed or tested by me or by any of my colleagues at the
Royal Free Hospital; it has never been my aim or intention to design,
produce or promote a vaccine to compete with MMR; my genuine concerns about
the safety of MMR are wholly unrelated to any desire or opportunity to
develop a competing vaccine; there was no conspiracy as insinuated by the
Sunday Times article; there was no conflict or interest, actual or
perceived.
In contrast, it was our intention, at one stage, to conduct a formal
therapeutic clinical trial of a compound that might have the ability to
promote the body‚s immune response to measles in order to assess the effects
of this therapy upon the disease in children with regressive autism and
bowel disease. This compound is known as Transfer Factor and whilst there is
a large scientific literature on this subject, the nature and mechanism of
action of Transfer Factors are largely unknown.
The Transfer Factor that was intended for use in the trial was to be
against measles virus. I have urged and continue to urge parents to have
their children vaccinated against measles using the current vaccines. This
would be in direct conflict with the intentions that are part of the claim
that I was developing a new vaccine to bring onto the market. Whether a
Transfer Factor could ever protect children against measles is entirely
speculative and is something that was never studied or pursued by me or any
of my colleagues.
The Channel 4 programme implies commercial aspirations for personal
gain. In fact, the aim of the patent was to generate funding for the
research programme and a new Centre for Gastroenterology at the Royal Free
Hospital. This can be substantiated by contemporaneous documentation.
The patent application was motivated by two main factors. First, it
was felt that there may be difficulty in raising traditional grant funding
for cutting edge, controversial work that was vulnerable by virtue of the
fact that it might conflict with perceived wisdom and the commercial
interests of others. Secondly, there was, and is, a government-led emphasis
on commercial exploitation of discoveries within the medical school.
The full response of Andrew Wakefield is at this new website below.
MMR: the Questions
www.mmrthequestions.com
MMR: the Questions is brought to you by a group of scientists, other
professionals and parents who believe that there is sufficient evidence to
warrant further research into the issue of whether exposure to measles
containing vaccine increases subsequent risk of a range of developmental
disorders and / or gastro-intestinal problems.
The purpose of the site is to provide
· Access to relevant scientific materials
· Links to other sites of interest
· A distribution medium for relevant information.
This website also provides a means for scientists to respond in the
public domain to any perceived misrepresentations of their work, their
motivations and their professional integrity.