Latest Wakefield MMR Scandal

[twiglett]

message withdrawn

Well done Twigglett

I'd like to know - if there was a public inquiry about this (which I think there should be even though I am pro-vacc and my children have had all their vaccines to date except Hib boosters) AND the result came back that MMR was totally safe, then would those of you who currently don't beleive it is safe accept this verdict?

I'm interested in knowing what it would take to convince you?

In defence of a controvertial point of view, I have a friend in Yorkshire who is a GP. SHe has both a SIL and a patient who were part of the class action about MMR who wanted her to confirm that their children were developing normally prior to MMR, when she had talked to the SIL about asking for tests on her dd who was clearly autistic from birth, and had referred the patient for specialist input before MMR. Both wanted her to give written evidence on the behalf of their children - basically wanted her to lie. There are a lot of people out there with strong evidence that MMR could have damaged their children (and please dont come down on me for saying 'could have', but there are also people either looking for an explanation or jumping on the bandwagon, which weakens the whole case for those who have a genuine need to be further investigated. If it has happened there, then it must be happening all over the country.

thanks jim jams - feel a bit clearer on the thimerosil issue now. Sounds like it is worth avoiding at almost all costs.

OOOOPS sorry badly misplaced winky!

Oh and we have gone for thiermosil free with dd2 since I found out about it on this site and ... more importantly, dh's surgery now routinely offers thiermosil free jags if parents want it - thanks to Mumsnet!

message withdrawn

susanmt- I would be very interested in what your friend saw before MMR. IME GP's are not good at recognising problems in young children. It's difficult to comment without knowing your friend or the mother concerned.

Well any vaccination carries risks so I doubt the MMR would ever come out 100% safe. Ds2 isn't vaccinated but partly because I'm not convinced by vaccination at all (partly- mainly becuase I think he is at particular risk). I wouldn't vaccinate with MMR as I personally no longer believe in vaccinating against childhod illnesses.

There - no rant. I don;t have a problem with peole believing whatver they like about MMR. I just hate being told that mothers are looking for someone to blame. I find that incredibly offensive (you haven't said it).

before having an autistic child I worked as a professional- my opinions were listened to, if sometimes debtated. Now I'm considered a simpleton - all becuase my child is autistic. I get spoken to in words of one syllable.

I have to say I do find it unlikely that the child whohad been referred for secialist input pre-MMR would be included in a class action. That doesnt make any sense (unless the MMR produced bowel disease or something).

susan, it's not just mums who have doubts about mmr. There are also lots of scientists (esp in USA) with doubts. I work in health science and many of my colleagues think that there may be something going on - most of all, we would like to be allowed to see and do the meaningful research and to find out why some children are having these reactions. Nobody can really deny what Wakefield found in the guts of those children. Truth is being pursued here - who knows whether something else caused the bowel and autism conditions in those children, but if no-one with any serious funding is prepared to investigate it in THOSE children, then suspicion will remain.

Yes exactly. I have no idea whether the MMR caused those children to become autistic. Or whether they had something else going on which meant that the became autistic and developed bowel disease and also were then unable to deal with the measles in the vaccine so leading it entering the guts and spinal fluid. I have no idea. No-one does as the research hasn't been done. What is clear is that clinical research needs to be carried out on autistic children.

I know that my son had a regression following eczema herpeticum. I also know following recent tests (which we paid for) that his levels of sigA are sub optimal. This apparently has immune consequences (and gut consequences). I would quite like someone to examine him clincally to see what is going on. But that's never going to happen. You get an autism diagnosis, you get told that you just didn't notice that your child was a wierdo because you're a mother whose obviously in denial (never mind that you happened to be the first person to notice that something was wrong and you were ridiculed for suggesting it) and you get sent on your way. Autism has been shown to be a biological condition but it still isn't treated as one. Imagine if epilepsy was treated as behavioural/psychological.

Another newspaper article.

Oh and I've just heard that the possible chickenpox link may not be relevent although full statistical analysis has not yet been carried out.

Blair is 'sneering' at autism parents

Feb 24 2004

By Rhodri Phillips, The Journal

An autism expert in the North last night condemned the Government for
sneering at concerned parents after the Prime Minister dismissed fears of a
link between the MMR triple jab vaccine and autism.

Mr Blair yesterday claimed it was time for an end to the controversy over
the combined measles mumps and rubella jab after allegations over the
weekend that the original research into a link, by Dr Andrew Wakefield,
could be compromised by a conflict of interests.

Dr Wakefield caused a storm when he first linked the measles, mumps and
rubella jab to autism in an article in the Lancet in 1998. The UK MMR
vaccination rate then stood at 90.8pc of children but had fallen to 84.1pc
by 2001-2.

But it has now been claimed that Dr Wakefield was also being paid at the
time to research evidence to support a legal action by parents who thought
their children had been damaged by the vaccine.

Mr Blair said yesterday: "There's absolutely no evidence to support this
link between MMR and autism. If there was, I can assure you that any
government would be looking at it and trying to act on it.

"I hope now that people see that the situation is somewhat different to
what they were led to believe. They will have the triple jab because it is
important to do it."

But Paul Shattock, director of the autism research unit at Sunderland
University, said last night: The Government has got to carry out thorough
research on this.

"They have attacked Dr Wakefield personally but they are not able to attack
the science.

"All the trials demonstrating the vaccines' safety were paid for by the
manufacturers. I would suggest they are the people with the vested
interest. Dr Wakefield does not have a vested interest."

Mr Shattock has a 33-year-old son with autism. His son's autism is not
linked to the vaccine but he said: "The government has sneered and derided
parents who are understandably angry, agitated and distressed. All they
want is a proper investigation but Blair wants it stopped. His record on
MMR is not a good one.

"The government's research has looked at figures and doctors' notes but
they have not looked at patients and they have not talked to parents of
patients."

And other North parents of autistic children also dismissed Mr Blair's
comments.

Doreen Westcott, of Ridley Avenue, Howdon, North Tyneside, has a
12-year-old daughter, Jane, and does not believe the government should
force parents to give their children the MMR jab.

She said: "I don't think anything has really changed. I think the jab is
wrong and if Tony Blair tried to tell me Jane had to have it I would just
say no.

"It should be the choice of the parents whether they decide to use it or not."

Kevin Cole, of Annitsford, Northumberland, who has a three-and-a-
half-year-old daughter, Jenni, said: "If Dr Wakefield had a dual interest
in this, the administrators at the hospital would have spotted it straight
away.

"So I think it is a set-up - the Government trying to discredit him."

Lancet editor Dr Richard Horton has said he now regards Dr Wakefield's
findings as "entirely flawed" and Health Secretary John Reid called on the
General Medical Council to mount an inquiry into the claims.

But Dr Wakefield said: "It has been proposed that my role in this matter
should be investigated by the GMC. I not only welcome this, I insist on it
and I will be making contact with the GMC personally in the coming week."

Another newspaper article.

Oh and I've just heard that the possible chickenpox link may not be relevent although full statistical analysis has not yet been carried out.

Blair is 'sneering' at autism parents

Feb 24 2004

By Rhodri Phillips, The Journal

An autism expert in the North last night condemned the Government for
sneering at concerned parents after the Prime Minister dismissed fears of a
link between the MMR triple jab vaccine and autism.

Mr Blair yesterday claimed it was time for an end to the controversy over
the combined measles mumps and rubella jab after allegations over the
weekend that the original research into a link, by Dr Andrew Wakefield,
could be compromised by a conflict of interests.

Dr Wakefield caused a storm when he first linked the measles, mumps and
rubella jab to autism in an article in the Lancet in 1998. The UK MMR
vaccination rate then stood at 90.8pc of children but had fallen to 84.1pc
by 2001-2.

But it has now been claimed that Dr Wakefield was also being paid at the
time to research evidence to support a legal action by parents who thought
their children had been damaged by the vaccine.

Mr Blair said yesterday: "There's absolutely no evidence to support this
link between MMR and autism. If there was, I can assure you that any
government would be looking at it and trying to act on it.

"I hope now that people see that the situation is somewhat different to
what they were led to believe. They will have the triple jab because it is
important to do it."

But Paul Shattock, director of the autism research unit at Sunderland
University, said last night: The Government has got to carry out thorough
research on this.

"They have attacked Dr Wakefield personally but they are not able to attack
the science.

"All the trials demonstrating the vaccines' safety were paid for by the
manufacturers. I would suggest they are the people with the vested
interest. Dr Wakefield does not have a vested interest."

Mr Shattock has a 33-year-old son with autism. His son's autism is not
linked to the vaccine but he said: "The government has sneered and derided
parents who are understandably angry, agitated and distressed. All they
want is a proper investigation but Blair wants it stopped. His record on
MMR is not a good one.

"The government's research has looked at figures and doctors' notes but
they have not looked at patients and they have not talked to parents of
patients."

And other North parents of autistic children also dismissed Mr Blair's
comments.

Doreen Westcott, of Ridley Avenue, Howdon, North Tyneside, has a
12-year-old daughter, Jane, and does not believe the government should
force parents to give their children the MMR jab.

She said: "I don't think anything has really changed. I think the jab is
wrong and if Tony Blair tried to tell me Jane had to have it I would just
say no.

"It should be the choice of the parents whether they decide to use it or not."

Kevin Cole, of Annitsford, Northumberland, who has a three-and-a-
half-year-old daughter, Jenni, said: "If Dr Wakefield had a dual interest
in this, the administrators at the hospital would have spotted it straight
away.

"So I think it is a set-up - the Government trying to discredit him."

Lancet editor Dr Richard Horton has said he now regards Dr Wakefield's
findings as "entirely flawed" and Health Secretary John Reid called on the
General Medical Council to mount an inquiry into the claims.

But Dr Wakefield said: "It has been proposed that my role in this matter
should be investigated by the GMC. I not only welcome this, I insist on it
and I will be making contact with the GMC personally in the coming week."

And whilst I'm at it- the Wakefield statement

Statement received from Dr Andrew Wakefield:

Serious allegations have been made against me and my colleagues in
relation
to the provision of clinical care for children with autism and bowel
disease, and the subsequent reporting of their disease.

These allegations have been made by journalist Brian Deer who has
expressed,
in front of witnesses, his aim of destroying me.

All but one of the allegations, which are grossly defamatory, have been
shown to be baseless. One allegation remains against me personally.

That is, that I did not disclose to the Lancet that a minority of the 12
children in the 1998 Lancet report were also part of a quite separate
study
that was funded in part by the Legal Aid Board .

It is the Lancet's opinion but not mine that such a disclosure should have
been made since it may have been perceived as a conflict of interest.
This
is despite that fact that the funding was provided for a separate
scientific
study.

It needs to be made clear that the funds from the Legal Aid Board were not
used for the 1998 Lancet study, and therefore I perceived that no
financial
conflict of interest existed.

The Lancet defines a conflict of interest as anything that might embarrass
the author if it were to be revealed later. I am not embarrassed since it
is
a matter of fact that there was no conflict of interest. I am, however,
dismayed at the way these facts have been misrepresented.

Whether or not the children's parents were pursuing, or intended to pursue
litigation against the vaccine manufacturers, had no bearing on any
clinical
decision in relation to these children, or their inclusion in the Lancet
1998 report.

It is a matter of fact that there was no conflict of interest at any time
in
relation to the medical referral of these children, their clinical
investigation and care, and the subsequent reporting of their disease in
the
Lancet.

As far as the 1998 Lancet report is concerned, it is a matter of fact that
we found and reported inflammation in the intestines of these children.

The grant of £55,000 was paid not me but to the Royal Free Hospital
Special
Trustees for my research group to conduct studies on behalf of the Legal
Aid
Board. These research funds were properly administered through the Royal
Free
Hospital Special Trustees.

The Legal Aid research grant to my group was used exclusively for the
purpose of conducting an examination of any possible connection between
the
component viruses of the MMR - particularly measles virus - and the bowel
disease in these children. This is entirely in line with other studiesthat
have been funded by the Legal Aid Board (latterly the Legal Services
Commission) and reported in the BMJ . If and when this work is finally
published, due acknowledgement will be made of all sources of funding.

It is unfortunate that, following full disclosure of these facts to the
editor of the Lancet, he stated that in retrospect he would not have
published facts pertinent to the parent's perceived association with MMR
vaccine in the 1998 Lancet report. Such a position has major implications

for the scientific investigation of injuries that might be caused by drugs
or vaccines, such as Gulf War Syndrome and autism, where possible victims
may be seeking medical help and also legal redress.

Health Secretary John Reid has called for a public enquiry. I welcome this
since I have already called for a public enquiry that addresses the whole
issue in relation vaccines and autism.

It has been proposed that my role in this matter should be investigated by
the General Medical Council (GMC). I not only welcome this, I insist on it
and I will be making contact with the GMC personally, in the forthcoming
week.

This whole unpleasant episode has been conflated to provide those opposed
to
addressing genuine concerns about vaccine safety with an opportunity of
attacking me - an attack that is out of all proportion to the facts of the
matter.

I stand by everything that I have done in relation to the
care,investigation
and reporting of the disease that I and my colleagues have discovered in
these desperately ill children.

My family and I have suffered many setbacks as a direct consequence of
this
work. As a family, we consider that our problems are nothing compared with
the suffering of these children and their families. For the sake of these
children, this work will continue.

Jimjams, I think your point about treating autism as a behavioural/psychological disorder is a very pertinent one.

RE. susanmt's post below about her GP friend.

I actually asked our GP whether she thought my son was autistic before he had the MMR. She dismissed my concerns out of hand! She thought that autism equals classic Kanner's syndrome autism, and so because DS1 showed some signs of social interaction/eye contact etc. she said he couldn't be autistic (he wasn't finally diagnosed as autistic until he was three and a half).

So whilst it is quite possible that the parents might have seen warning signs before the age of 15 months, it would take a pretty spammed up GP to be able to say categorically that the children were definitely autistic before that age.

Before I read further and see anything else, I didn't want an argument, just to stick my oar in, I kind of thought that was allowed? "IMHO" means just that.

Angeliz: There have been several news articles, in different papers accusing parents of "forgetting" to go back for the single jabs, misinformation? Notably I have never read or heard of a shortage...

I do believe there will be some children affected by MMR just as there will be some affected by other vaccines and medicines.

The government will say whatever they like and to get at the truth would take a more knowledgable person that I could ever hope to be. I am just a simple mum, I do the best for my boys and hope it all works out in the end? This government especially won't be happy until it handholds us through life, telling us now that GM foods are safe - yeah right!

And Jimjams I don't know anyone who took the single jabs or whose child regressed after MMR, nor does anyone I know know of anyone. I don't know why that is and it is not just one area of Scotland we are talking of here but where my friends and cousins live.

For the record, I do know someone who's child regressed after mmr. I also know some single jabsters.

message withdrawn

Okay folks, I bow out, the bullying has worked. I think in future I shall just read up on anything I need to know about my ds twins rather than come on here.

I thought we were allowed to express our opinion and expected to be corrected and pointed in the direction of information if thought wrong. What I didn't expect was nastiness and for everything I said to be taken out of context and generalised. At no point did I say ALL parents, I was being specific to the ones directly involved and interviewed. I do believe not enough research was done I don't believe enough research is done on a lot of important issues. I was concerned at the amount of mothers upset, I guess I shouldn't have bothered myself.

Oh well, you live and learn. Bye! Oh and I wasn't a troller, baiter, whatever - God that is just paranoia.

message withdrawn

i have no idea what to think anymore. dd2 hasnt had her mmr as she is a sicky child. she had her baby jabs but instead of having then in the recommended timescale she had them at 3months, 6months and 11months. within weeks of having her Hib at 11months she was called for a booster, yeah ok, she needs a booster within 2 weeks of last jab? still not had it done, told them i didnt think it needed to be done that quick and to let her get over her other jabs first. suprisingly havent had any other reminders about jabs.
when, if any, is a reasonable age to give the mmr? is it safe for older children? are the risks reduced? dd2 is now 17months and hasnt been ill for a month or so now so maybe she'll have it soon, i just dont know.

Jimjams, did you see yesterday's Evening Standard? Big article in it about how parents of austistic children who are refusing the MMR are being accused of Munchausen's and having their kids taken away. They are being told that they have caused their kid's autistic symptoms and one woman whose son was being investigated by Wakefield has actually had her son taken into care. This war on Wakefield is truly nasty and now children are 'collateral damage'. There are quotes from Alexander Harris and from a psychologist called Lisa Blakemore-Brown of Brunel University who is quoted as saying "These accusations are rife. I know of more than 20 cases."

And Paula, two points, one is that the above story might give you a clue as to why parents of autistic children are so sensitive about suggestions that they are making things up, and also, yes, there is a shortage. We've all told you from our own direct experience that there is a deliberately engineered shortage of mumps vaccine in an attempt to force us all to use the MMR. Don't you believe us either?

The headline was "MMR 'Witch-hunt'"

Paula all i would say is that if you cant take it-don't dish it out! You have a right to express your opinion and we have a right to reply! It's obviously what you expected anyway,(this response), so why complain!

BTW, i don't see you have been bullied!

misdee, why did you give the baby jabs later and more spaced?
I have been thinking about that with my next one (as i read more i become more worried and would like to not have them all done when baby is so small!).