Latest Wakefield MMR Scandal

[twiglett]

message withdrawn

There's more research than Wakefield's out there as well. If they put their minds to it they may be able to find some sort of marker identifying children at risk- they could probably make a good stab at that now- I personally would have more confidence in the vaccination programme is they employed some common sense!

Most of my friend's kids had the MMR and I certainly would argue with them about it. I certainly don't think anyone should apologise for it - for most kids it probably is the right decision.
Last night my dh said something like it was disgraceful the way they were trying to shut Wakefield up, that it was a transparent cover-up and put-up job and that while MMR was clearly safe for most, it is possible that for some children it could trigger a reaction and wasn't it more sensible to look for a reason why it might in a few kids so they could be identified early. And I said, "I know someone who would agree with you on that"

Lol Aloha

Although I'm strongly anti vaccination for all I have to say that I would never think someone was a bad mother for vaccinating their child! All any of us is trying to do is protect our child- and we all do that in the way we feel most comfortable with. How could that make anyone a bad mother?

me too suedonim.

jesus that info about Nigel Druce is like something out of 1984. Makes my blood run cold

Whoops, just seen my typo - I meant to say that I would'NT argue with anyone who gave MMR! It almost certainly would have been totally fine for my ds but I (and just as importantly dh) felt that if single vaccinations were easily available, and we could afford them, then that was the route we'd choose.

I didn't expect much of a response to what I had said, but I was a bit surprised. People are always complaining that health professionals know nothing about autism, so I thought that a GP friend who DID pick up autism would be thought of positively, not written off.
I checked with her when I was talking to her last night - her own patient was not part of the class action but (the parent) wanted to be, and was ruled out when her notes showed she had been referred to SALT and for other assessments at 15 months (MMR was given at 18 months). So I got that wrong and I'm sorry. My friend had referred the little boy because the mother wass concerned. But her SIL was part of the class action and wanted my friend to be a witness for her as to her childs development - as they live within 2 miles of each other and see each other weekly and my friend is medical this was thought to be a 'good' statement to have, even though my friend had expressed concerns about her neices development for a while (she has classic autism and has never spoken, pointed, hardly smiled and made little eye contact with anyone but her parents, and mostly not with them either). She never regressed, she's been autistic from birth. My friend recognised it as her brother is also autistic (we became friends due to us both having grown up with autistic siblings - my brother has severe ASD and learning difficulties).

Would you have expected her to lie? Her SIL is clearly either looking for someone to blame or looking for a payout. It is a tragedy that her little girl is autistic, but it merely mucks around with the statistics and puts someone NOT damaged by MMR into a pool of people who could be - and therfore any study of these children would be skewed. My friend choosing not to lie to a lawyer (and risk being struck off as a doctor - when she is one of the few GP's who does recognise problems like this) and has caused a major family row, but she stands by what she did. She also, for the record, chose to give her son the MMR despite there being autism on both sides of the family, and he is fine, but that was her decision (and her dh's, of course).

Anyone see Question Time last night?
I was happy.
Almost everyone in the room and on the panel was saying everything we've been saying all week (except the poor labour MP who trotted out the same old pap, ah, bless...)

susanmt, in answer to your original question far below 'what would it take to convince us MMR is safe' - it wouldn't take much, actually. Just some serious research ON THOSE CHILDREN with measles in their gut. The research which has not been done, except by Wakefield. The reason everyone clamours for Dr Wakefield is that he's virtually the only one doing the research that needs to be done!

message withdrawn

sorry susanmt - no offence meant - I realise now from your second post that obviously your GP friend has far far more experience of autism than the average GP - wish mine had had!

and of course it is wrong for the SIL to try to lie and get compensation - very very wrong indeed, and I'm sorry your friend has been put in such a bad position

what is her view on thimerosal and jabs, btw? I don't believe that DS1 was damaged by the MMR itself, but I am far less certain about the effects of his earlier vaccines

Yes, I was grinning madly. I didn't mean to imply that it was only Wakefield either, was just being brief.
Yes, there were some stupid points made, but I was just so pleasantly surprised at the overall tone that I went to bed happy. I've long since given up trying to speculate over what goes on inside Tone's head. He's drinking at the Last Chance, as far as I can make out.

message withdrawn

I thought Mrs Thatcher was The master of pursuing a road to bonkers-land and beyond, but she was only playing at it compared to Tone. Can't believe I ever liked him.

susnmt- ahh that makes more sense (I couldn't work out why the lawyers would have accepted her as part of the class action if her case was weak). Does the SIL think there was regression following the MMR? What I mean is is she deluded or just greedy? I know its hard to answer as it all second hand- so don't worry. I just wonder whether she saw regression in stages. We did- well not regression. My son had some light sensitivity from birth (I think he was very interested in lights- hard to tell with a baby though), but he smiled at the right time, reached up at the right time, began to talk early blah de blah and then regressed and stopped developing after the eczema herpeticum. If he had had the MMR and regressed further would I have had a claim for compensation- or would it have not mattered as he was already autistic (if less severely) anyway? That's just a question for debate- quite a few people I have spoken to have said their child was showing some signs of sensory problems etc anyway- but that they were the completely knocked off track by the MMR (usually accompanied by physical problems). These aren't people who I would count as blaming the MMR, but they certainly think it contributed.

I missed QT last night (had been up since 2.45am with ds1- that's autism for you!) what happened? Apparently its on Trevor McDonald tonight. Paul shattock has been interviewed.

message withdrawn

Ahh its quite sweet really - they still trust Tone. And Dave with his "If it was unsafe surely there would already be clear evidence." - err BSE? HRT? thalidomide? Bill Ree is obviously a bit thick (blimey Bill even the vaccine manufacturers admit that some children are brain damaged by vaccines). The govt have really managed to instil the "mothers are looking for someone to blame and make a quick buck" attitude into Joe Public haven't they? Sad really as having an autistic child generally screws your finances up for years and anyway you don't have the time or energy. Oh well.

Knowing that the truth about BSE came out does make me hopeful - someday we will get to the bottom of it. I rather hope DTP takes over from MMR though as I think it will be far easier to show a link there.

Jimjams (I just love your name BTW) - the SIL, as far as I can gather, is just looking for an explanation. She refused to accept that her dd was not developing normally, though my friend said it was scarey to see her insisting the kid was smiling, talking etc when she clearly was not - she thinks her SIL was in total denial and then when the MMR came along she latched on to that as an explanation when nursery/HV/family were expressing ongoing concerns about her daughter's development. I know my mum has been through hell trying to find some kind of explanation for my brother's autism, his is caused (they think) by fragile X syndrome, and as she gave hi mthe faulty X chomosome she feels really guilty about it, even though this was 27 years ago, and there was nothing that could have been done then or now for it). We did all get tested to see if we were carriers (my sisters and me) and, very, very luckily none of us are.

As she had hardly seen her GP and had had no referrals to specialists, my friends SIL was able to get to be in the class action as she said there was a regression at 18 months. My friend said she didn't see this, her neice never talked, or pointed (friend very clear on this, once spent 3 days on the trot with SIL to look for pointing), and looking back at videos says there was no clear change after MMR.

Its a hard one. Having seen it in my family, I know how much people want an explanation. I think for a lot of people there is an explanation but for many more it will just be 'one of those things' - the hardest thing to accept, as I know from my Mum.

dinosaur - I've never asked my friend about thiermosil and jags, I will do nevt time I speak to her. My dh (also a GP, I'm surrounded by them aaaaaarrrghhhhhh) thinks there is something in it and at his surgery parents are now offered infarix if they want it and are given info about the two types of DTP available. Most still go for the ordinary one (generally thought to be more effective) but a few have had infarix, if there is rheumatoid/LSE/other autoimmune condition in the family. We've gone thiermosil free with dd2 (had second imms yesterday) as there is rheumatoid on both sides of my family and I'm already showing signs of RI myself. DH thinks there is a lot more in that explanation for autism than in MMR, and would love to see some good research about MMR too - though not by Wakefield. He's not trusted by doctors and so for research to be taken seriously by the medical community it would probably have to be done away from Wakefield and the Royal Free, just to be seen to be different.

Argh, better go spend some time with my children.

BTW enjoying having a sensible debate on MMR for a change!!! Normally on the internet I feel like a pariah cos my kids have had it (had to leave an attachment parenting site I once used as I was attacked for having my children immunised) but as usual on Mumsnet, I feel among friends, just friends with a different opinion to me. Now, who's going to phone Gina and ask her opinion on vaccinations .......

sorry for the typos!! Main one being that I am developing Rheumatoid Arthritis, not Irthritis!

Thanks Susanmt.

BTW my DS2 has had the MMR - but I waited until he was two and a quarter and I was absolutely sure that he had no signs of autism by then. But I will not be letting baby no 3 have the thimerosal containing versions of DTP.

Thanks Susanmt.

BTW my DS2 has had the MMR - but I waited until he was two and a quarter and I was absolutely sure that he had no signs of autism by then. But I will not be letting baby no 3 have the thimerosal containing versions of DTP.

Having said all that, I don't personally spend a lot of time thinking about the reasons why DS1 is autistic. I have a suspicion that an unfortunate collision of DNA perhaps made him more susceptible to it than most, and then various things that happened to him have perhaps acted as triggers.

Jimjams - you mentioned earlier the biassing of scientific research by drug-company funding. I thought you might like to see this article from the latest New York Review of Books. It arrived only today and I've only glanced at it, but it looks interesting. here

Susanmt- that's sad- the none acceptance I mean. I've seen it occasionally- but I have to say it is rare. My closest friends all went through the same thing I did- trying to get people to listen to us. I think I've written before on here about how I used to buy autism books secretly from Amazon and then hide them under the bed as my Mum/dh/friend that I had spoken to about it would have a real go at me if they saw me reading them. Unfortunately the medical profession in general seems to assume we are all in denial- when in my experience that's the rarer case.

I don't think anyone thinks that MMR is the main explanation - I did read somewhere that about 10% of autism is reckoned to be genetic and 90% environmental (obviously with a genetic predisposition). That seemed a bit high to me. I think sometimes it can depend on which part of the spectrum you are talking about. HAving said that Walsh looked at people from accross the spectrum (dx of autism, AS and PDD-NOS) and 499 out of 503 of them had metallothionein problems - that may be the predisposition. There must be normally developing children out there with metallothionein problems- it would be interesting to see what different environmental factors had affected them. I'm sure there are many different ways to autism.

Ds1 was tested for Frag X- glad he didn't have it as DS2 had been born by that time.

Dinosaur- I feel the same way about ds1's road to autism- he had an unfortunate series of events and the result was autism. I'm only interested in what caused it so that I can avoid exposing ds2 (*and any other kids we had) to increased risk. My son's autistic and always will be- I don;t feel any guilt for that- I alwasy acted in what I thought was his best interests, but I would if ds2 became autistic becuase I hadn't carried out enough research.

The whole vaccination thing isn't just about autism now. remember I am training to be a homeopath. Not many homeopath's vaccinate their children. The view of health is just different from that of allopathic doctors.

Thanks for that link Oldiemum- I'm going to have to read it later as now I have to make guten free bread. Blasted bread machine blew up earlier this week!

From the latest What Doctor's Don't Tell You Publication:

WHAT DOCTORS DON?T TELL YOU - E-NEWS BROADCAST No. 71 - 26 Feb 2004

MMR AND DR WAKEFIELD: Anyone spotted the hypocrisy?

An 'exhaustive investigation' by the London Sunday Times has revealed that Dr Andrew Wakefield, who put forward the theory that the MMR vaccine could cause autism, was at the time being funded by solicitors who were seeking evidence to use against the vaccine manufacturers.

In effect, Dr Wakefield was being hired as an expert witness, not unusual for any specialist. But to leap from that to the conclusion that the link between MMR and autism was "entirely flawed", as suggested by the journalist involved, seems a step too far.

It also raises the ethical standard to a level that would find most of medicine lacking. Most medical studies are funded by a pharmaceutical company, the ultimate beneficiary of the findings, while the medical bodies which evaluate the safety and efficacy of drugs are filled by experts who have shares in pharmaceutical companies or who sit on their boards.

The UK's chief medical officer of health, Dr Liam Donaldson, said that, even leaving aside any possible conflict of interest, medical experts have always felt that Wakefield's hypothesis was bad science.

This would be experts such as those on the Medical Research Council, which has reviewed Wakefield's findings on three separate occasions. Its most recent review, in 2001, concluded that there was no evidence of a causal link.

Yet some of these experts act as advisors to the vaccine manufacturers. As one apologist put it: "It was inevitable that the vaccine manufacturers would seek advice from leading authorities in the field (who happen to sit on the MRC). These have only become advisors to the drug companies because of the allegations against MMR."

In other words, they are expert witnesses, just as Dr Wakefield is for the parents whose children have been permanently damaged. If Dr Wakefield's findings are fatally flawed because of his expert witness status, then the MRC conclusions must be equally flawed. We await a full exhaustive investigation.

• At WDDTY, we've always maintained that a possible link with autism is only one of the areas of concern about the MMR vaccine. Our accusation that the UK government has constantly misled the British public about the safety of the vaccine has never been answered. To discover more about the vaccine, and the government's role in a cover-up, read our Vaccination Bible and special report, What the Government Doesn't Tell You About the MMR Vaccine. To order both today, click on this link: www.wddty.co.uk/shop/details.asp?product=335

And according to todays Indie Wakefield never hid the funding anyway.

I know jimjams it seems odd - here was someone with an autistic child who had a member of the medical preofession with personal experience of autism prepared to vouch for her - when there are people out there like you who are fighting to be listened to. It took years for my parents to get a diagnosis for my brother, when they were shouting about all that was wrong with him. They also had 4 doctors come into the house when my db was seriously ill developing diabetes and who said he had the flu, when my parents could smell the ketones on his breath and pointed it out to the doctors! Think my dh hs learned to be such a good doc (I know, I'm biased) in part because of the terrible experiences my family had - it taught him how to listen to patients and parents. Hopefully part of what you are doing is educating the medical professions - certainly it was your info on thiermosil which has changed standard procedure in dh's practice, so its one teeny acheivment (in the midst of all your huge ones).