Andrew Wakefield Struck off

[ShadeofViolet]

here

If you're all so upset about Brian Deer, I presume you've reported him to the Press Complaints commission, NUJ, News Corp ombudsperson? What was the outcome perchance?

If only say, the Daily Mail or, I don't know, Private Eye, would strike the balance and give an objective view on MMR / Wakefield. Maybe with a special investigation or getting one of their star columnists to write 'a mother knows' style op-ed.

What are Carol Vorderman's science qualifications by the way? Or Ian Hislop's?

Didn't Wakefield say this morning on the Today Programme that he has incontrovertible proof that the MMR has caused autism in some cases? Did I hear that?

In which case, wow, he has really thrown in his lot with the anti-MMR camp, hasn't he? I guess nothing to lose at this point.

I also clicked randomly on one of the links supposedly vindicating the 1998 paper... and it didn't .

Thanks to all for the links to Brian Deer -- I missed all that before now!!

without Deer and his blatant lies (and yes, most of it is lies and misrepresentation), there would have been no GMC case.

why the GMC chose to believe the lies, rather than the witnesses they brought for the prosecution who, by telling the truth, ended up being witnesses for the defence (maybe that is why he didn'tbringhis own - he didn't need to!) is anybody's guess.

has anyone here read the cryshame transcripts of the hearings?

they do make very interesting reading

Maranello, thank you for oyur concern. dd1 is no longe in pain, mosrtly because I listened to the "mavericks". But still, if I have to take her to the doctor (for standard stuff - chicken pox, ear infections, splinters - normal childhood stuff) I get fobbed off when I say she is ill. I am firstly asked how I know (dd1 is now verbal but not reliably so if in new situations) do they ask all parents this? I ahve been sent home with her in real distress before, as the doctor said the distress was due to her being afraid of the doctors surgery (she isn't). And I have had doctors say she is unexaminable wheh she wouldn't sit still for the doc to look in her ear (she was 3 ffs! do all 3 year olds sit nicely when in huge pain?!) when iit was quite eaasy to get her to sit still, if they would et me be involved.

LIfe isi shit when you have a child who cannot speak adequately for themselves.

And even shittier whn thepeople who try to speak up for htem, and make their (the children's) lives easier are hounded.

jeananddolly shall you and I retire to the pub and have a nice quiet pint away from this increasingly conspiracy-theory-riddled thread?

My sister in law worked at the GMC until recently - she didn't like it there very much, but in her 7 years of employment she never mentioned how HORRIBLY CORRUPT they apparently are {hmm}

Leonie, would you feel the same way if Deer had investigated a Dr whose practices you disapproved of, been supported by an MP and said Dr was subsequently struck off by the GMC?

Apologies Dittany you all seem so au fait with 12 years' media coverage of the MMR / autism hoax that I felt comfortable with not explaining every little thing.

Private Eye's coverage of MMR

Carol Vorderman on the MMR.

I was only trying to be 'objective' and point out that the media has not been on a wakefield witch hunt and has in fact been highly supportive of the discredited link between MMR and autism. Despite all evidence to the contrary.

novicemama - hell yeah! Make mine a glass of lager/lime...it plays havoc with my gut brain but man I need it.

I have to bring the kid though (he's had all his jabs)

There are pages and pages on Brian Deer's website about his investigation of Wakefield, the gist of most his allegations are in this article.

silverfrog, no, i don't think they do ask all parents that. i know when my (obviously not-yet-verbal) 7mo is poorly, why wouldn't you know with your dd? and i'd be pretty cross too to be fobbed off over something as painful and unpleasant as chicken pox and ear infections.

oh, and my 2.7yo would NEVER sit still while a strange doctor poked around in his ear. i think that's a very understandable reaction

Not so sure AW has been silenced - and as for Mavericks - I am all for them (am one myself actually) but in this case it has to be done ethically and correctly else it will never stand up to scrutiny.

I am aware that all AW called for was further evidence to support his suspicions/opinions in the original published study - however to make the leap in the press conference to suggest not to use MMR was surely sheer stupidity - and smacks more of a man out to make a name for himself rather than out of concern for anyone's children. As soon as he did that then surely it was always going to go the way it has?

For that, linden, you have to blame the editor of the lancet.

bepfre the press conf, it was discussed what to say when that question came up (as it was always going to)

Wakefield said form the start that he would say that. the others had a different answer.

when the question duly came, the Lancet editor (Horton? sorry, am crap with names) directed the question to Wakefiled. He KNEW how wakefield wuld answer, as he had already been told. he could have deflected away form that situation. and he didnt. he set Wakefield up to take the blame for it all.

sorry for typos (again!) - typing from phone

dittany - a medical doctor is perfectly entitled to call themselves doctor. Should GP's refrain from using the title 'Dr' unless they complete a phd?

... and my husband, who has a PhD, doesn't use 'Dr' very much. People find it misleading as he's not a medical doctor. So when can people use 'Dr' then?

To be fair on Ben Goldacre, I get the impression that he found the press to be the bad guys in the whole MMR debacle, rather than Wakefield. Not that I particularly like Wakefield, you understand.

The Lancet Editor didn't "set Wakefield up to take the blame for it all" in any way. Wakefield, by what he did, how he did it and what he said bears the responsibility for the blame here. Wakefield was the one who chose to use those words in the press conference after all.

yes, and he had alwyas said that that is what he would say.

there were 12 other people there who could have been asked ot answer that question. and the whole media furore would have ben averted.

wakefield stood by what he thought (and found), said what he thought (and found), and has been crucified for it ever since.

Silverfrog - yes I believe it was Horton - but AW still said it - even though he knew other work was being published that questioned his hypothesis - it was still a premature 'throw away' comment and he must have realised what would happen as a result of saying it?

Silverfrog - I am sorry to hear about your DD - can't imagine what it is like.

What Snorbs said. Why would the editor of a medical journal take that question? You would naturally direct it to the paper author.