Wakefield found guilty by the GMC

[manfrom]

Finally the GMC stands up and takes the right decision:

www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/jan/28/mmr-doctor-fail-children-gmc

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]

Mso do you actually read the links you post?

If you do, do you try to understand the meaning of them and how they relate to what is being said here or do you just put your own spin on them, knee jerk reaction style?

The reliability of the O'Leary lab was confirmed by the latest Hornig study BTW. I don't think making out that O'Leary has crap procedures when his findings support Wakefield but just dandy ones when they support a (badly designed) study which is used to exonerate MMR (despite failing again to replicate Wakefield's work) holds much water really.

(Wakefield hasn't patented a rival vaccine. He patented a transfer factor designed to treat vaccine damage. This is particularly pointless misinformation.)

Talking of spin;

"As an aside, even if this paper's results are correct, surely this is a reason to vaccinate (presumably with the most reliable method of protection, I.E. MMR?"

WTF?

This beats the best spin the British government itself has ever been able to come up with I reckon.

How is it possible to read a paper which shows an association between close temporal exposure of particular viruses and brain damage and then come to the conclusion that the best way to protect predisposed children from this damage would be by exposing them to the viruses in question at the same time?

The alternative conclusion is; develop screening processes, use single vaccines as indicated.

[IthoughtI'dhearditallbutthisonetakesthe emoticon]

[worriesaboutcriticalthinkingstandardsinsciencetoday]

And these are the folks who think us parents aren't able to grasp the science.

I heard this on Radio 4 once. A doctor (who? heaven knows) said it outright: we know that measles and mumps caught in the same year can predispose to autism so we should vaccinate against them at the same time.

Nobody pulled him up on it. Ludicrous.

Gosh you're offensive mso. You know there;s no link between autism and MMR. Really? How? You do understand that autism is not one thing? Even those kids whose parents were told by their paediatricians that their regression was prob linked to MMR (I've met a few) - you know those doctors are mistaken do you? Without even going near an autistic child? Wow.

" tell me, as anyone died of autism recently?"

Actually the death rate is higher for people with autism. No doubt you don't give a monkeys, but some of us do. The death rate is particularly high for measles in a well fed western child, perhaps the autism death rate is higher? Or does that not matter?

Sorry is NOT particularly high for a well fed western child (from measles), despite hysteria to the contrary.

He brought medical profession into disrepute.However,he has a large following of conspiracy theorists who support him regardless.

saintlydame had a v interesting chat with my new vet (who is a very venerable old vet!) wrt to new research that is pointing to a fallacy in the way that vaccines work: that it is not the (and you'll ahve to totally forgive my lack of scientific terminology here) amount of antibodies (is it that?) in vax that increase efficacity (increasing and increasing said stuff has lead to increased use of the preservatives that are one of the main probs with vaccines) but rather the (can't remember the word he used, i'm good aren't i?) thing that our cells do with them.

new 'pure' vax available for pets don't contain nearly as many of the heavy metals etc, but he said that this research would take ages to filter through all the necessary protocols to human vaccination.

if you got any of that you are a genius as i'm being clear as mud as you know, slightly hoping you already know about this...

How did he bring the medical profession into disrepute?

Supposedly he used the wrong diagnosis. Last week the new criteria for diagnosis was revealed (as a first draft). They are using the same scheme as Wakefield.

He supposedly ordered clinically unnecessary tests. Yet if you read the consensus for treatment of gastrointestinal disorders in autism published in pediatrics in January you find that he followed that (judging by symptoms described in the hearings).

He doesn't have a large following of conspiracy theorists. The people shouting outside the GMC were parents. Including the parents of the supposed victims. Don't you find that a bit odd? Or would you be happy for your child not to receive treatment for a painful condition because it didn't fit in with the political agenda.

Oh that's interesting sophable. I did read somewhere (no idea where) that thimerosal was removed from animal vaccines years before it was removed from childhood vaccines (of course it's still in some). It sounds from your vets comments that that might have been true.

Of course there was this US study which confirms the detection of measles virus in the inflamed guts of children with developmental problems who had been observed regressing after exposure to measles containing vaccines.

www.thoughtfulhouse.org/pr/measles-virus-in-bowels-of-autistic-children.php

It hasn't been published.

Some of us here will jump to the conclusion that it hasn't been published cos it is probably crap.

Some of us here will feel concerned for the integrity and scientific honesty of medical journals in the west today. (But then feel naive when they remember that the bread and butter of said journals is pharmaceutical advertising and that Elsevier have the monopoly on what does and doesn't get published).

(Beach prepares pot in which she puts a pound every time she is called a conspiracy theorist by posters who never seem to post anything of any depth. Shit I missed a few earlier).

I knew I shouldn't have read any posts on this site and I have been trying to resist posting as I get so at the ability of people to think that they are really bright by disbelieving dozens of studies by well educated intelligent people which prove that vaccines are safe ( well as safe as anything is). then link one or two badly designed studies by bad scientists saying that there may be a link.

Please everyone read Bad Science by Ben Goldacre. All of your nutty anti science woo will be answered in that book.

Sorry, rant over, I've had a bad day.

Think logically;

Vaccine damage causing the (alleged) increase in autism is an interesting theory. But it has been disproven (check Bad Science for details)

These studies have been peer reviewed and published in academic journals for scrutiny

Do you really think, that in a "Nanny State" country like ours with "'elf and Safely" culture where people doing pancake races aren't allowed to run any more, there is a huge "Big Pharma" conspiracy, from government scientists, politicians, Gps, nurse, literally thousands of people???

Erm who is suggesting that vaccines are causing the increase in autism?

I'm not. Wakefield isn't.

Autism isn't one thing (for the millionth time).

At least we get the hypothesis right (which seems beyond those so keen to dismiss a link for some children with a particular clinical presentation). It does help to test the correct hypothesis.

If you want to know about the influence of big pharma ask your GP to answer some honest questions about statins (helps if you convince them you won't be taking them anytime soon either). You'll probably find a view very similar to that expressed by this GP. At least in my experience.

There is also no free lunch an organisation of doctors- started in the USA, now here too. My old GP was a member (since left his practice). He was probably the best GP I had- I trusted him (and I didn't know he was a member of no free lunch).

Pound in pot.

Agree with MrsT. If you are going to call us nutters (unfortunate term in the circumstances) at least try to understand what you are disagreeing with. Or even what we are saying.

Go on, would make it a bit more useful for all of us.

Thanks for your replies Beachcomber - would it be possible to ask you (and any other poster) how you would be able to get resolution/closure on this issue?

From a research point of view - there's a lot to be said about the body of evidence that points favourably to vaccination for the majority of individuals. I know that no vaccine can ever be 100% 'safe' in terms of side effects. Science is not static, human biology is complex and varied.

If a child becomes infected with measles we have no way of knowing how the disease will progress and the health implications for that child and anyone else who becomes infected as a result.

I believe AW made an error when he questioned the routine use of MMR (a surprise to his colleagues?)at the press conference which then unleashed the huge media maelstrom (people who poorly report scientific stories, who love a good scare and care little for actual facts and the consequences).This is the same maelstrom who now in the main gleefully report his downfall whilst distancing themselves from any responsibility in the fall of vaccine uptake and the rise in measles cases.

Would we still be having this conversation if the right support were in place for autistic children and their parents?

AW's questioning of the routine use of MMR was not a surprise to his colleagues as he had indicated before the press conference that if asked, that would be his answer. His colleagues had said they would not say the same. When the question came, the head of the RF (who knew what the answer would be) directed the question at Wakefield.

He had been seeking an audience with the dept of health before the press conference to express his concerns, but they had refused to meet him.

I am sure MMR is safe for the vast majority of children, I don't think that is in doubt.

Closure for me would be that being safe for the vast majority of children is not the same as being safe for all. And that those children who end up in HDU after MMR (and I know a few) should then be properly investigated. Closure would mean that gastroenterologists in the UK should follow the consensus published by pediatrics last month on diagnosis and treatment of gastro-intestinal problems in autism - ironically Wakefield did. Currently it is almost impossible to get NHS treatment for gastro -intestinal issues if you have a child with autism. A neurotypical child wouldn't be left with an ulcerated gut, why should an autistic child?

Closure for would be that a doctor should be allowed to question vaccination safety without fear of being struck off. That's my biggest concern out of the whole affair. If you look at what Wakefield actually said - it was very little. He has repeatedly reminded people he is talking about a small subgroup of the autism population. He has repeatedly said MMR is safe for the majority. He has told people t vaccinate and said his own children have been vaccinated with the MMR (which is more than Tony Blair managed )

I wonder what they are so scared of. He didn't even say don't vaccinate he said use singles (and no not his singles before someone repeats Brian Deer without actually reading the patent application for themselves).

Closure for me would be the department of health being able to have the same sort of dialgogue/conversation as you see going on at autism conferences. Where the potential role of vaccinations is discussed without hysteria. It's pretty much accepted that given the immune system issues that seem to go with autism for some children a vaccination will have played a role in their development of autism. Maybe not that many children, but for some, yes. It would be good to see that recognised and those children treated (and sensible decisions made about their siblings vaccinations) rather than their mothers (usually mothers) demonised.

I think we would not be having the conversation if there was recognition of the different pathways children take to autism. To be able to discuss ds1's regression with an NHS neurologist 9 years after it happened was really helpful.

Support, however good will never make up for the fact you have an adult who cannot speak or live independently who was developing normally. But proper medical investigations and discussion can help I think.

Many parents feel utterly let down. They trusted the medical profession and feel that they were dropped as soon as their child needed medical support.

So I'm presuming that you disagree with views like this:

"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."

and this:

"But as no official attempt has even been made, it's probably because there is no funding for a study that would find an unvaccinated population to be physically and mentally healthier with less atopy, less auto immune disease and many, many, many fewer children on the ASD spectrum."

which have been expressed earlier in the thread then? leaving aside the fact that the only vaccine children are likely to receive with thimerosil is the flu vaccine, which most children have never had (although both of my sons have this year. they're fine by the way, well ahead of their ages in reading and conversational skills).

Your sons may not have had thimerosal. My eldest son did (he's 11 - and at the time he receieved baby jabs they contained thimerosal- there are lots of older people with autism ). Personally I'm not sure I would blame thimerosal on a rise in autism - that's probably down to many factors - and 'a rise in autism' is a nonsense in many ways as it's not one thing- what types of autism are rising??? That needs to be answered before any numbers game is played.

I suspect thimerosal has played a role in some cases of autism. Many children with autism appear to have a malfunctioning heavy metal detoxification system (to put it in simple terms) so it is certainly possible. There's also no need for thimerosal to be in a jab. Make them single dose, then they're safer. I can't see why anyone would particularly want to inject any form of mercury into a baby's blood stream when it's not necessary. I would campaign for the safest possible vaccinations. Which wouldn't include thimerosal (and as it has been removed from baby jabs would appear others agree).

Anyway thimerosal has been removed from routine baby jabs so moves in the right direction there and is being investigated -see here for example and is certainly discussed at conferences - so the role of thimerosal is certainly interesting for my son's cohort but not so much for children born today.

There's this as well which was surprising. And interesting given the male:female ratio is 4:1 for autism.

And anyway it's ridiculous to say 'oh my sons had thimerosal and they're fine'. One thing that is coming out of the research into autism and environmental factors is that the timing is crucial - it's a developing brain - exposure to something at one stage may not have any effect whereas at a different time it might have. Also of course there are individual differences. Just because one child can metabolise thimerosal and excrete it, doesn't mean another can.

So do you agree or disagree with the two statements i posted above, the first stating that all cases of autism are caused by vaccination in one form or another and the other stating that unvaccinated children would be noticeably 'healthier' and less autistic in a population study?

Hi MrsT: you don't need this advice but don't be goaded!

Those statements are from me, and I think I'm right in saying I walk this road much further than you. It's true to say I don't know a fraction of what you know about autism and bowel conditions, but I usually mean "conditions on the ASD spectrum" when I say autism.

I'll say it again: I think more children are diagnosed with autism and autistic spectrum disorders because of vaccinations. I'm not afraid to say it.

It just goes to show there are a variety of views on this side of the debate -- just as there are on the other side. After all, Andrew Wakefield is not anti-vaccine either: neither, I do believe, is Jackie Fletcher, the founder of JABS.

There's no earthly reason why MrsT should agree with me: and no reason why disagreeing with me undermines her very well informed opinions.

(although me disagreeing with her might undermine my own, I should add!)

In fact Beach and Mrs T, and Pagwatch when she posts, are the only ones who do make me rethink my stance and possibly soften it somewhat. I'm afraid being called a nutter and irresponsible has very little impact indeed.