Wakefield's colleague should not have been struck off over MMR Research.

[Spidermama]

Poor man caught up in a hysterical witch hunt.

www.telegraph.co.uk/health/children_shealth/9128147/MMR-doctor-wins-battle-against-being-struck-off.html

I'm afraid that I was one of the few who didn't think Andrew Wakefield should have been hounded out. There was evidence that some children did suffer effects from the MMR vaccine, and it never inspires me when it is politicians declaring something to be safe when a member of a knowledgeable profession calls for caution.

MMMM
But he was cleared because it was deemed that what he was doing was assessing symptoms, not true research
and that the GMC needed to sharpen up its act

the outrageous claims of Mr Andrew Wakefield are still not supported by ANY evidence and the hysteria over MMR has led to hundreds of children in the UK getting measles which is a HORRIBLE disease.

he only went to court to get his pension reinstated in the long run

There was no actual evidence that some children did suffer effects from the vaccine. It was all pure coincidence and could be attributed to other factors. I for one have seen friends of mine still scared to death to vaccinate their kids because of this research.

He can enjoy his retirement in peace, very comfortably I suspect!

Talkin, which claims were those?

Also, hundreds of children were getting measles even before Wakefield so you can't really blame that on him.

if you read the reports - Private Eye, the Guardian and the Lancet - there is a good reason Wakefield is no longer a doctor
and Measles instances in the UK rose significantly because of the MMR panic he caused
and actually looking at the statistics
www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1195733833790
the case with Mumps is even worse

I'm asking which claims you feel were outrageous and not supported by any evidence.

If you look at the reported cases for measles on HPA for a few years earlier then you will see that there were more cases then than there were in the years after.
Wrt mumps iirc that big outbreak in 2005 was mainly among university students so can't really be blamed on a drop in the uptake of MMR 6 years earlier - in fact I think it was actually blamed on the ineffectiveness of the mumps component of the vaccine which has had to be tweaked quite a few times and still is the least effective of the three.

bumbley
he said that MMR caused autism - no evidence
he said that MMR caused stomach problems - no evidence
he lied about his sample selection
he lied about how blood samples were taken (paying children at his sons party)
he lied about the number of children in his study
basically the whole lot was a load of hokum, should never have been published (the journals have retracted, apologised and changed their editorial policies)
let alone publicised.

That's the problem, he didn't actually say that MMR causes autism.
He didn't say it caused 'stomach problems'
What lies did he tell about his 'sample selection' or the number of children in 'his' study?

I think you should read the Lancet paper itself and the transcript of the press conference to clear things up a bit for you. Always best to work from facts rather than sensationalist stories in newspapers IMO.

thread hidden
he is not worth my breath

TalkinPeace2 - perhaps it should have been worth being better informed before you opined. There were no lies. He reported the temporal connection the parents made. He was concerned about the safety record of the MMR which wasn't spotless at the time and called for the continued use of single vaccines. He told his superiors that was what he would do before he did it. He had releases for the blood samples taken at the birthday party but didn't follow paediatric guidelines - he never lied about it, in fact he spoke about it openly.The High Court's ruling confirms that there were no lies about the sample selection - which goes to your ignorance on the subject. The "hokum" of gut involvement with autism is now generally and widely accepted - if you had an child afflicted you might be more up to date. The high court judge threw out the GMC's judgement because of the process and the wrong conclusions they reached. All of the charges. Quashed. You will find that there are some very well informed people that post on this subject - you are not one of them sadly. This is a vindiction for the doctors - a slap for the BMJ and Brian Deer and a boost for the ability of Doctors to treat and to research without fear of career destruction. It will be better for everyone that you do not post again on the subject - you have nothing to say.

Well now that is splendid news.

John Walker-Smith's successful appeal does not negate the stark fact that the original study was improperly performed with a statistically insignificant sample by a co-author who was seeking personal financial gain from his research.

"he said that MMR caused autism - no evidence." No, he didn't. He said that he believed that for a subset of children there were increased risks from combined vaccines, and recommended that single vaccines be available to children from certain groups. There are people who are far more knowledgeable on this subject than I am and who can write more elequantly about it, but the general belief here was that for some children, there was a predisposition to autism, and that for those children there may be certain triggers which, if avoided, may prevent regression. There is a difference between that and saying that mmr "causes" autism. The only people who made the claims that mmr caused autism were the tabloid press.

"he said that MMR caused stomach problems - no evidence." again you are wrong. The study conducted found evidence of measles in the gut of children with autism - I have even less knowledge on the exact science of this but it is now a proven and recognized fact that there is corallation between autism and gut problems.

Wannabe

What is your source for this statement?

DreamingofSummer I don't know about Wannabe but my source is the FDA.

They fast tracked a drug for treating gut problems in children with autism last year - there is hope based on current evidence that the drug helps alleviate both gut problems and symptoms of autism in some children.

Beachcomber

I meant a hard link or citation please.

This isn't too hard to search. There are dozens if not hundreds of papers on this now and Ian Lipkin at Columbia who famously damned the Lancet paper in 2005 also cites it in his recent work on gut problems related to autism. Anecdotally there are thousands of parents that can tell you in excruciating detail about it - but in case you might want to walk the ill informed path of Unimaginative...an apt name...and simply spout the same old "it's rubbish they wanted to make money off their pain" mantra here is a link that will get you started:

www.newscientist.com/article/dn19011-gut-bacteria-may-contribute-to-autism.html

It's an Imperial College Study. The link will point you in the direction that will yield plenty of material to read. Historically, doctors have known about the connection between brain damage and gastro problems. Chronicling the phenomenom in a more scientific manner appears to be more recent - one of the first papers was the Lancet's by Wakefield, Walker-Smith et al - which based on the High Court's recent ruling should be "unretracted" if one takes at face value the reasons that the Editor retracted it in the first place.

Thereitis

Thanks for the link. But how does this exonerate Wakefield?

DreamingofSummer, there is an ever increasing acceptance in scientific circles in the United States, that various hypothesise put forward by the Royal Free team are of merit, and that treatments that take them into account have success.

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

And now we have Professor Walker Smith cleared of misconduct.

supporter of wakefield here.

Would just like to add that I have yet to meet anyone who has had measles and been left brain damaged. I am 47 years old. I remember 2 of my brothers had measles.

Maybe we were lucky, but I believe there is as much hysteria over effects of having measles as there is the effects of not having the vaccination.

Single doses for those who choose would have been the best way forward.

Another supporter of Wakefield here.

He struck me as a guy with integrity who genuinely thought he was on to something. I didn't like the swift way he was silenced.

DreamingofSummer - I didn't realise you were seeking to either damn or exonerate him. Foolishly I thought you were actually interested in the way that science has embraced the idea that there may be gut involvement in children who have autism. That involvement may be a precusor or it may be a result - that is unclear. Obviously scientists and doctors are searching for an explanation for this - there are lots of theories. The Lancet paper suggested, in a case series, that a number of children displayed intestinal disease - one that seemed new. What in the world does a doctor who describes this need to be exonerated from? Why does a doctor who says his children were vaccinated but he is concerned about a vaccination which had been withdrawn by a number of countries previously need to be exonerated from saying he had concerns about its safety? DreamingofSummer have you actually followed this story or are you relying on the half truths and conventional wisdoms of others who you ape to make your point? I have met plenty of doctors who actualy no nothing about these issues but argue ferociously without actuallu understanding the context and circumstances of events that happened fifteen years ago. Judge Mitting has now given every parent who watched in horror while a miscarriage of justice occured and a mischaracterisation of a group of doctors took place the permission to be cross at the ill informed poorly conceived superficial remarks of people like you. It's was never about exoneration. No crime was committed save for the slanders and libels that were repeated with glee. I have had enough of listening or reading them.