• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The MMR Vaccine & Its Alleged Risks

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... nmmr05.xml

Vaccine officials knew about MMR risks
By Mark Watts and Christopher Hope
Last Updated: 1:55am GMT 07/03/2007



Government officials were made aware of some problems with a version of the MMR vaccine in other countries but still introduced it in Britain in the late 1980s, newly released documents show.

The MMR vaccine with the Urabe strain of mumps was first used in Britain in October 1988. It was blamed for the deaths of several children after being withdrawn by the Department of Health in September 1992.


Officials were aware of MMR vaccine problems in America, Sweden and Canada
Previously confidential documents released under the Freedom of Information Act show how officials gradually learned of the dangers of the Urabe strain MMR which caused encephalitis-type conditions, including meningitis. Involving swelling of the brain or of the lining of the brain or spinal chord, they can lead to brain damage, deafness or even death.

The papers show that many months before the Urabe MMR vaccine was introduced in the UK, officials were made aware of problems in America, Sweden and Canada.

The first warning came when an unnamed official at a meeting of the Government's Joint Committee of Vaccination and Immunisation in May 1987 "expressed his reservations concerning reported adverse reactions to MMR in the USA".

The second came in a letter from the Central Microbiological Laboratory in Sweden in September that year, where authorities reported "52 cases of febrile convulsions probably associated with MMR vaccination".

advertisement
Then, a Government working party on the introduction of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, learned of "a report of cases of mumps encephalitis'' in Canada at a meeting in Feb 1988.

The documents show that the statistical risk from Urabe MMR was considered to be low. The UK went ahead with its nationwide MMR programme in October 1988 in which 85 per cent of the triple-vaccinations contained Urabe.

The minutes of another meeting of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, in May 1990, show that there was "especial concern'' about "reports from Japan of a high level of meningoencephalitis associated with the administration of MMR".

The Government waited another two years before it decided to stop using Urabe MMR in 1992, after the manufacturers told officials that they would stop making it.

It was replaced with MMR II, which has a different mumps component. The minutes were obtained by the FOIA Centre, a specialist research company, on behalf of one of the parents of a child in a group bringing litigation at the High Court. The Government insists it acted swiftly as soon as it became aware of the dangers of Urabe MMR in September 1992.

Sir Liam Donaldson, the chief medical officer, told one of the parents in a letter: "As soon as the Department of Health had clear evidence that there was a risk with Urabe-containing MMR and that there was no such associated risk with a different strain of mumps virus (the Jeryl Lynn strain) used in an alternative MMR vaccine, the department moved quickly to discontinue use."

Prof Kent Woods, chief executive officer of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, confirmed that the UK authorities had been aware of "sporadic cases" in Canada. However, the risk of meningoencephalitis from Urabe MMR was lower than the risk of the same condition resulting from "wild-type mumps virus", he said.

Urabe MMR was withdrawn "following reports of generally mild transient meningitis caused by the mumps vaccine virus in some children who recently received the Urabe mumps vaccine containing products".

Norman Lamb, a Liberal Democrat MP, said he would be pressing the Department of Health to find out why the warnings were dismissed.

A Government spokesman said: "The UK investigated the evidence and acted promptly when this problem with Urabe strain of mumps vaccine was identified.

"On the basis of information obtained in studies, the UK was in a position to make an informed decision on whether to continue using the Urabe vaccine, as there was an alternative vaccine strain, called Jeryl Lynn, which did not appear to have the same risk.''

The spokesman added: "In 1992 the Committee on Safety of Medicine considered all of the evidence and concluded that the benefits of vaccinating with Urabe mumps strain vaccines still outweighed the risks."
 
Meningitis and not autism.

(which is awful; one of my friends died of it.)
 
sidecar_jon~ said:
A couple of times when anoyed by some mum acusening me of child abuse by haveing Harry have the MMR i have pointed out that they are relying on everyone else to have it so thier darling can be protected from desease.....

Aside wise i was astounded the hear that in USA its contructively compusory to have the MMR....No MMR no school, No school $500 fine or prison!!!!!!!... of course u have the choice to send to private school... as ever the poor dont get a choice, just a stick to beat them...

This is true. Before a child can be enrolled in a public school here in the States, the parent(s) must present evidence that said child has had the required vaccinations. As a child (many years ago! ;) ) I had to endure lots of needle jabs--but luckily one of them (not sure which) was just poured on a sugar cube and you sucked on the cube til it melted. It tasted so good I wanted to go back for seconds, until my mom told me I couldn't have another one!! :lol:

Of course the rationale for this is to prevent contagious diseases from taking over the schools! Kids are notorious for poor personal hygiene (such as regular hand-washing) and something like measles can spread like wildfire thru a school population--and unfortunately it only takes one infected child to create the problem.

I'm sorry for parents whose children have been adversely affected by vaccinations, but honestly I think the world would be a much more dangerous place without vaccines--I mean, who wants to endure a smallpox epidemic?! Even a century ago, many children didn't survive past their fifth or sixth birthdays--I don't think any parents want to return to those days, when you could pretty well expect to bury half your children!

And I was just reading an article about autism--it's in the April issue of Discover magazine. The writers had done lots of research on autism and think it may well be some kind of autoimmune and/or "neuroinflammatory" disorder.

Anyone who's interested might want to get a copy of the April 2007 Discover magazine and read the article--it's very interesting! I'm not sure whether this magazine is available outside the United States (??) but they have a website at www.discover.com.
 
There are people out there so luddite they would probably enjoy a smallpox outbreak...
 
Here we go again...

New health fears over big surge in autism
· Experts 'concerned' by dramatic rise
· Questions over triple jab for children
Denis Campbell, health correspondent
Sunday July 8, 2007
The Observer

The number of children in Britain with autism is far higher than previously thought, according to dramatic new evidence by the country's leading experts in the field.
A study, as yet unpublished, shows that as many as one in 58 children may have some form of the condition, a lifelong disability that leads to many sufferers becoming isolated because they have trouble making friends and often display obsessional behaviour.

Seven academics at Cambridge University, six of them from its renowned Autism Research Centre, undertook the research by studying children at local primary schools. Two of the academics, leaders in their field, privately believe that the surprisingly high figure may be linked to the use of the controversial MMR vaccine. That view is rejected by the rest of the team, including its leader, the renowned autism expert, Professor Simon Baron-Cohen.

The team found that one in 58 children has either autism or a related autistic spectrum disorder. Nationwide, that could be as many as 210,000 children under 16. The research is significant because that figure is well above the existing estimate of one in 100, which specialist bodies such as the National Autistic Society have until now accepted as correct. It is also significantly more than the previous highest estimate of one in 86, which was reported in research published last year in the Lancet.

Some experts who previously explained the rise in autism as the result of better diagnosis and a broader definition of the condition now believe the upward trend revealed by studies such as this indicates that there has been a real rise in the numbers of children who are affected by it. Although the new research is purely statistical and does not examine possible explanations for the rise, two of the authors believe that the MMR jab, which babies receive at 12 to 15 months, might be partly to blame. Dr Fiona Scott and Dr Carol Stott both say it could be a factor in small numbers of children.

Professor Baron-Cohen, director of the centre and the country's foremost authority on the condition, said he did not believe there was any link between the three-in-one vaccination and autism. Genetics, better recognition of the condition, environmental factors such as chemicals and children's exposure to hormones in the womb, especially testosterone, were more likely to be the cause, he commented. 'As for MMR, at this point one can conclude that evidence does not support the idea that the MMR causes autism.'

Baron-Cohen and his team studied the incidence of autism and autistic spectrum disorders among some 12,000 children at primary school in Cambridgeshire between 2001 and 2004. He was so concerned by the one in 58 figure that last year he proposed informing public health officials in the county.

Controversy over the MMR jab erupted in 1998 after Dr Andrew Wakefield, a gastroenterologist at the Royal Free Hospital in north London, said he no longer believed it was safe and might cause autism and inflammatory bowel disease in children. Many parents panicked and MMR take-up fell dramatically. More families opted to have their child immunised privately through three separate injections to avoid the possibility of their immune system being overloaded by the MMR jab, thus leaving them at greater risk of infections.

The medical and scientific establishment denied Wakefield's claim, described research he had co-authored as 'bad science', and sought to reassure the public, with limited success. Wakefield and two former Royal Free colleagues are due to appear before the General Medical Council next week to answer charges relating to the 1998 research. The trio could be struck off.

The doctors' disciplinary body claims that Wakefield acted 'dishonestly and 'irresponsibly' in dealings with the Lancet, was 'misleading' in the way he sought research funding from the Legal Aid Board, and 'acted unethically and abused his position of trust as a medical practitioner' by taking blood from children after offering them money.

A book to be published this month by Dr Richard Halvorsen, a London GP who provides single vaccines privately to babies of parents concerned about MMR, will fuel the controversy. It will present new evidence of children allegedly being damaged by vaccinations and linking increased autism to MMR.

But Dr David Salisbury, national director for vaccines and immunisation at the Department of Health, said last night: 'The evidence is absolutely clear. No published study has ever shown a link between autism and the MMR vaccine. It is absolute nonsense to suggest otherwise.'


http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/ ... 21,00.html

For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert...
 
So can they explain why its mostly prevalent in males?

When theoreticaly, girls get this jab too?????

Have they examined the incidence of ASD in the parents?

(thats the first place I would look)
 
MMR doctor admits ethics failing

The doctor who controversially linked the MMR vaccine to autism has admitted a poor grasp of the medical ethics surrounding work on children.

Dr Andrew Wakefield is appearing before the General Medical Council charged with serious professional misconduct.

Among the allegations is a charge that he flouted ethical regulations by taking blood samples from children at a birthday party in return for money.

Experts stress that MMR poses no threat to children's health.

Dr Wakefield's work, which appeared in The Lancet, has been disowned by the journal.

At the GMC hearing on Friday, Dr Wakefield was asked if he really thought he could carry out research on children without any constraint.

He told the hearing that he had obtained parental consent - and thought that was enough to press ahead.

However, he added: "I'm perfectly willing to accept my understanding was wrong."

Dr Wakefield should have obtained clearance from an ethics committee for his work.

He admitted that he was not aware of "detailed guidance" on the treatment of children provided by the British Paediatric Association.

He said his colleague Professor John Walker-Smith, who also faces serious professional misconduct charges, was the expert in this field.

Public confidence

The 51-year-old, who is now working in the US, is accused of violating ethical guidelines, and of acting against the clinical interests of the children who took part in his trial.

He is also accused of acting dishonestly in failing to disclose to the Lancet that he was advising solicitors acting for parents who had alleged their children had been damaged by MMR.

The GMC case is not examining the safety of MMR, designed to protect against measles, mumps and rubella.

The publicity surrounding Dr Wakefield's original research lead to a public crisis of confidence in the vaccine, and a fall in uptake rates.

Since then a series of studies have repeatedly concluded that the vaccine is perfectly safe, and uptake rates have begun to climb again, although they are still under the recommended 95% in some places.

The number of confirmed cases of measles has risen from 56 in 1998 in England and Wales to about 1,000 last year.

Also facing professional misconduct charges is Professor Simon Murch.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7342618.stm
 
You can get parental consent for `anything` if you try hard enough.

Why is he being employed in the US, surely they are aware of his record here?

or is this another example of the poor standard of US healthcare??
 
It's not what the papers say, it's what they don't
Ben Goldacre The Guardian, Saturday December 6 2008

Writing this column really scares me because I wonder whether everything else in the media is as shamelessly, venally, manipulatively, one-sidedly, selectively reported on as the things I know about. But this week the reality editing was truly without comparison.

On Tuesday the Telegraph, the Independent, the Mirror, the Express, the Mail, and the Metro all reported that a coroner was hearing the case of a toddler who died after receiving the MMR vaccine, which the parents blamed for their loss. Toddler 'died after MMR jab' (Metro), 'Healthy' baby died after MMR jab (Independent), you know the headlines by now.

On Thursday the coroner announced his verdict: the vaccine played no part in this child's death. So far, of the papers above, only the Telegraph has had the decency to cover the outcome. The Independent, the Mirror, the Express, the Mail, and the Metro have all decided that their readers are better off not knowing. Tick, tock.

Does it stop there? No. Amateur physicians have long enjoyed speculating that MMR and other vaccinations are somehow "harmful to the immune system" and responsible for the rise in conditions such as asthma and hay fever. Doubtless they must have been waiting some time for evidence to appear.

This month a significant paper was published by Hviid and Melbye in the December 1 issue of the American Journal of Epidemiology. They examined 871,234 children in a Danish birth cohort, comparing asthma in those who had MMR against those who didn't. MMR-vaccinated children were massively and significantly less often hospitalised with an asthma diagnosis, and used fewer courses of anti-asthma medication than unvaccinated children. This "protective" effect of the MMR vaccine was more pronounced for hospitalisations with severe asthma diagnoses.

Those results aren't just incompatible with an increased risk of asthma following MMR vaccination, they actually support the hypothesis that MMR vaccination is associated with a reduced risk of asthma in young children. Tick, tock.

And most astonishing of all is the tale of "the Uhlmann paper", or the "O'Leary paper". This came out in 2002 and claimed to have found evidence of vaccine measles virus in tissue samples from children with autism and bowel problems, to massive media acclaim.

As I've said previously, two similar papers, by Afzal et al and D'Souza et al, in 2006 found negative results on almost the same question, and were unanimously ignored by the media (even though D'Souza actively went out of his way to show how O'Leary et al got false positives).

Stephen Bustin is professor of molecular science at Barts and the London. He examined the O'Leary lab for the court case against MMR, as an expert witness for the drug company defendants. The case collapsed, and he was unable to discuss his findings. Then he was called to give evidence in the American "autism omnibus" case against the vaccine. The anti-vaccine movement did their best to prevent this. They knew what he had found: it appears to be incontrovertible evidence that the lab was detecting false positives.

Now Bustin has finally been able to write about what he found in O'Leary's lab. He published this month. Nobody who covered the original O'Leary paper has written about it. Not a soul will.

Measles cases are rising. Middle class parents are not to blame, even if they do lack rhetorical panache when you try to have a discussion with them about it.

They have been systematically and vigorously misled by the media, the people with access to all the information, who still choose, collectively, between themselves, so robustly that it might almost be a conspiracy, to give you only half the facts.

Today, I have merely given you some small part of the other half, and next week I will move on: but know that nobody else has.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... mr-vaccine
 
It's started again.....note the inflammatory headline.
Schoolgirl, 12, paralysed after receiving cervical cancer jab
A 12-year-old girl has become paralysed from the waist down after being injected with the cervical cancer vaccine, raising concerns about possible side-effects of the jab.

Ashleigh Cave suffered headaches and dizziness minutes after receiving the injection, and has spent the last eight weeks in hospital having lost the strength in her legs.
Her mother Cheryl believes that her daughter's mystery illness is directly related to the vaccine, which is being administered to 300,000 12 and 13 year old girls in Britain in an effort to cut down on rates of the fatal disease.
Several girls in the US have been diagnosed with Guillain-Barré syndrome, which can cause paralysis, after being vaccinated by a similar product, Gardasil.
But doctors have ruled that Ashleigh's condition is not connected to the vaccination, and health experts have insisted that the vaccine is safe.
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, the government agency responsible for monitoring drugs, said: "Guillain-Barré syndrome naturally occurs in the population. There is no good evidence to suggest that the Cervarix vaccine can cause [it]."
Ashleigh, from Aintree in Merseyside, collapsed several times in the days after receiving the vaccination at Maricourt Catholic high school on October 15. She was initially diagnosed with "vertigo and generalised myalgia, probably due to recent vaccinations" by doctors at Frimley Park hospital in Surrey before being admitted to Alder Hey hospital on Oct 22, where she has remained ever since.
There has reportedly been no improvement in her condition.
Mrs Cave, 37, said that she is sceptical of doctors' claims that the onset of her daughter's illness was unrelated to the vaccine.
"At first they tried to tell us she was imagining it because she was being bullied," she said. "They will not mention her illness and the vaccine in the same sentence."
The vaccination counters the effects of the human papilloma virus (HPV), which is transmitted through sexual contact. HPV is held responsible for around 70 per cent of all cases of cervical cancer, which kills more than 1,000 women in the UK each year.
It is hoped that the government-funded vaccination programme will save 400 lives a year. A catch-up programme will focus on girls aged 14 to 18 over the next two years.
 
US Court Rejects Claims That Vaccines Caused Autism
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/138876.php
13 Feb 2009

On Thursday, a special US federal court ruled in the case of three children that vaccines did not cause their autism; their families were claiming that the measles mumps rubella (MMR) vaccine, which contained the mercury-based preservative thimerosal, had caused their children to develop autism and several other conditions, including inflammatory bowel disease.

According to the Associated Press (AP), more than 5,500 claims have been filed by families hoping to get compensation through the government's Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, and this ruling comes as a blow to them and thousands of others who believe there is a link between childhood vaccines and autism.

The claims are filed with the "people's court", the US Court of Claims in Washington. This court is different to many others in that the claimants don't have to prove that the vaccines caused the autism, just that they probably did.

But Special Master George Hastings Jr, whose ruling in the case of one of the children, Michelle Cedillo of Yuma, Arizona, extended to 183 pages, said:

"Unfortunately, the Cedillos have been misled by physicians who are guilty, in my view, of gross medical misjudgment."

He said he had to decide the case by analyzing the evidence and not on sentiment. The Cedillos had claimed that a measles vaccine given to Michelle when she was 15 months old had triggered her autism, inflammatory bowel disease and other disorders that have left her considerably disabled.

The worldwide controversy about whether vaccines cause autism was triggered in 1998 by an article in The Lancet, where lead author Andrew Wakefield, a UK scientist, and colleagues linked developmental delays in children with the MMR vaccine. 10 of the 13 authors have sinced retracted the paper; Wakefield is among those who have not. A recent investigation by the UK paper the Sunday Times has alleged that Wakefield changed and misreported results in his research, creating the appearance of a possible link with autism.

The Sunday Times investigation team said that evidence presented to the General Medical Council (GMC) confirmed that in most of the 12 cases reported in the 1998 paper, the children's conditions, as described in the paper, were different from the descriptions in their hospital and GP medical records. The journal article claimed that the symptoms appeared within days of receiving the vaccines, whereas the records showed this was only true in one case, and in many of the other cases concern over the symptoms had been logged in the records before the vaccines had been given.

Lawyers for the three families whose claims have been rejected said they would be appealing against the Special Masters' decision.

The Cedillo family was represented by Kevin Conway of Boston; he told AP that they thought their evidence was "solid":

"There was certainly no scientific proof that vaccines caused autism, but that's not the standard; the standard is likelihood."

Another attorney, Tom Powers of Portland, Oregon, who is overseeing all the claims said the ruling was discouraging and it was a big step, but "it's not the last step".

Consumer groups who support the view that the vaccines caused autism were also not deterred by the ruling and continue to assert their case. Head of the National Vaccine Information Center, Barbara Loe Fischer said she thought it was a mistake to think that because these three families have not won their claim it has been decided that vaccines don't play a role in the development of autism.

There are other cases in the pipeline that argue a different connection. They will say that it was the preservative thimerosal, which contains mercury, and has since been all but phased out of vaccines, that caused their children's autism and other disorders. Powers told AP that these families are hoping to succeed.

SafeMinds, an autism advocacy organization, issued a statement following the court ruling. They said the ruling was based on "inadequate vaccine safety science available to the court" and said there was a conflict of interest in that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is both the "defendant in court" and also responsible for carrying out the vaccine safety research. They said this conflict of interest was sufficient to cast doubt on the "integrity of the National Immunization Program".

Director of SafeMinds and an advisor to the Petitioners Steering Committee of the US Federal Court of Claims, Jim Moody, said:

"The government has its thumb on the scales of justice."

"The Vaccine Injury Compensation Act passed in 1986 gave immunity to vaccine manufacturers and removed the incentive to create safer products. Meanwhile, the law only gives the illusion that parents will have their day in court. The process is dysfunctional."

SafeMinds says that the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) spends billions of dollars expanding immunization programs, and the HHS gives billions of dollars to pharmaceutical companies to produce vaccines for profit, and yet the CDC spends only 20 million on safety studies, which incidentally the families' lawyers have no access to and yet the government lawyers do.

Executive director of SafeMinds, Sallie Bernard, said:

"A neutral agency must initiate an extensive safety program, including studies of the health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated groups."

"Otherwise, trust in immunization will continue to deteriorate," she added.

The statement from the HHS said that the cases showed there is no doubt that autism places a heavy burden on families and that is one reason why the HHS:

"Continues to support research to better understand the cause of autistic disorders and develop more effective methods of treatment."

"The medical and scientific communities have carefully and thoroughly reviewed the evidence concerning the vaccine-autism theory and have found no association between vaccines and autism," said the HHS statement, which ends with:

"Hopefully, the determination by the Special Masters will help reassure parents that vaccines do not cause autism."

In 2009, the US government's Vaccine Injury Compensation Program agreed to compensate a 9-year girl, Hannah Poling from Georgia, whose family claimed her autism was triggered by vaccines she received as a baby. In that case the federal officials said that the vaccines had exacerbated a rare mitochondrial disease; but it gave hope to thousands of families who believe their children's autism was caused by vaccines.

According to US News and World Report, John Gilmore, executive director of Autism United, an association of advocacy groups based in Hicksville, New York, said that the Special Masters' ruling was "disappointing on a number of different levels". He said not enough research has been done either on vaccine safety or the causes of autism, and that the ruling gives a message that:

"Families that want to seek redress in the vaccine court have an extraordinarily high level of proof that they have to meet, which I don't think was the original intent of the legislation."

Click here for US Court of Federal Claims (search for "Autism Decisions and Background Information").

Sources: Associated Press, US News and World Report, HHS, SafeMinds, timesonline.

Written by: Catharine Paddock, PhD
 
Fall of Andrew Wakefield, ‘dishonest’ doctor who started MMR scare
David Rose, Health Correspondent

The doctor who sparked a worldwide panic over the MMR vaccine could be struck off after being found guilty yesterday of a series of misconduct charges related to his “unethical” research.

Andrew Wakefield, who in 1998 claimed an unfounded link between the vaccination and autism, “showed a callous disregard” for the suffering of children, subjecting them to unnecessary, invasive tests, a hearing found.

The General Medical Council (GMC) ruled that he abused his position of trust as he researched a possible link between the MMR vaccine, bowel disease and autism in children.

It found that Wakefield and two colleagues acted dishonestly and irresponsibly in carrying out research on children against their best interests and without official permission.

The GMC ruled that Wakefield, who was working at the Royal Free Hospital in London as a gastroenterologist at the time, did not have the ethical approval or qualifications to oversee the study, which involved children undergoing colonoscopies, lumbar punctures, barium meals and brain scans.

He was also found to have brought the medical profession into disrepute after taking blood samples from youngsters at his son's birthday party in return for payments of £5 and failing to disclose vital conflicts of interest.

He received £50,000 to carry out the research on behalf of solicitors acting for parents who believed that their children had been harmed by MMR, but could not account for how at least half this money had been spent.

He also did not declare any conflict of interest to The Lancet medical journal, which published the research.

The GMC found the charges against Wakefield, and the professors John Walker-Smith and Simon Murch were “sufficient to amount to serious professional misconduct”.

But as he delivered the verdicts, Dr Surendra Kumar, the panel’s chairman, was repeatedly heckled by distraught parents who support Wakefield and his former colleagues. One woman shouted: "These doctors have not failed our children. You are outrageous." She called the panel of experts "b******s" and accused the GMC of being a "kangaroo court". All three doctors deny any wrongdoing.

The study prompted a massive drop in the number of children being vaccinated against measles, mumps and rubella. Uptake of the MMR vaccine was 91 per cent before 1998, but by 2003 this had fallen to 79 per cent. In 2008 there were nearly 1,400 confirmed cases of measles in England and Wales — compared with 57 in 1997 — and nearly a dozen deaths had been officially linked to the illness.

Subsequent studies involving millions of children found no evidence of a link between MMR and autism.

The hearing sat for 148 days over a two-and-a-half year period, at a cost to the GMC, funded by doctors, of more than £1 million. It is the longest running medical misconduct case in the Council’s 147 year history.

Before yesterday’s hearing, 12 organisations, including the Medical Research Council, the British Medical Association and Faculty of Public Health, released a joint statement reaffirming their confidence in the jab.

“The undersigned believe that the MMR triple vaccine protects the health of children,” they said. “A large body of scientific evidence shows no link between the vaccine and autism.”

Wakefield was not present to hear the verdicts being read out but appeared to make a statement later, saying he was dismayed at the panel’s decision.

“I am extremely disappointed by the outcome of today’s proceedings,” he said.

“The allegations against me and my colleagues are unfounded and unjust and I invite anyone to examine the contents of these proceedings and come to their own conclusions.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_a ... 006525.ece
 
Lancet formally retracts 1998 paper linking vaccine and autism
http://www.physorg.com/news184336798.html
February 2nd, 2010 in Medicine & Health / Health

Medical journal The Lancet Tuesday withdrew a 1998 study linking autism with inoculation against three childhood illnesses, a paper that caused an uproar and an enduring backlash against vaccination.

The British journal said it was acting in the light of an ethics judgement last week by Britain's General Medical Council against Andrew Wakefield, the study's lead researcher.

"We fully retract this paper from the published record," The Lancet's editors said in a statement published online.

The 1998 paper suggested there might be a connection between autism and a triple vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella (MMR).

Other experts insisted the claim was spurious, but many parents in Britain were deeply alarmed and refused to have their children vaccinated.

The slump has yet to fully recover today and as a result there has been a rise in measles, placing unprotected young lives at risk, say doctors.

The scare over the vaccine also occurred in the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

In 2004, 10 of the paper's 13 authors distanced themselves from part of the study, publishing what they called a "retraction of an interpretation."

In last Thursday's ruling, the General Medical Council attacked Wakefield for "unethical" research methods and for showing a "callous disregard" for the youngsters as he carried out tests.

They included invasive procedures such as spinal taps and colonoscopies for which he had not gained ethics approval, and taking blood samples from children at his son's birthday party for five-pound (eight-dollar, six-euro) payments.

Wakefield was also accused of acting in a misleading, dishonest and irresponsible way in the manner in which he presented the research.

The two-and-a-half-year hearing was one of the longest in British medical history.

"Following the judgement of the UK General Medical Council's Fitness to Practise Panel on January 28, 2010, it has become clear that several elements of the 1998 study by Wakefield et al are incorrect, contrary to the findings of an earlier investigation," The Lancet said.

The original study looked at 12 children aged between three and 10 who had been referred to the department of paediatric gastro-enterology at London's Royal Free Hospital.

After a trouble-free early life, they developed bowel disease and developmental regression, including loss of communication skills.

The study suggested there could be a "possible relation" to the MMR vaccine, which is administered at around 18 months and again at the age of four years, and said further work was needed to confirm this "syndrome."

Running in parallel to the medical implications of the scare has been a long-running debate whether one of the world's most prestigious medical journals should have published the paper, ring-fenced it with clearer warnings or retracted it sooner when the flaws first became known.

Despite the furore, Wakefield remains a hero to some parents of children with autism, who portray him as victim of a witch hunt.

Autism is the term for an array of conditions ranging from poor social interaction to repetitive behaviours and entrenched silence.

The condition is rare but seems to affect predominantly boys.

Its causes are fiercely debated.

Theories range from exposure in the womb to the male hormone testosterone, environmental factors after birth and genetic factors, including "sporadic," or accidental, mutations as opposed to inherited ones that are passed down through generations.
 
Is he dying? He won't lie down...

MMR doctor Wakefield defends work
By Jane Kirby, PA
Wednesday, 7 April 2010

The doctor at the centre of the MMR row defended his work, saying the case against him was driven by a desire to "crush dissent".

Dr Andrew Wakefield said the General Medical Council (GMC) hearing was about protecting the Government's MMR vaccination policy and some of the GMC's findings on the case were "false".

The GMC resumes its hearing today into his research on MMR and autism.

It will decide whether he and two colleagues, Professors John Walker-Smith and Simon Murch, are guilty of serious professional misconduct and should be struck off the medical register.

The panel is expected to make its final decision in June but will hear submissions from GMC lawyers and representatives for the doctors in the next few days.

In January, the GMC ruled Dr Wakefield "showed a callous disregard" for the suffering of children and subjected some youngsters to unnecessary tests.

It said he "abused his position of trust" as he researched a possible link between the MMR vaccine, bowel disease and autism.

He also brought the medical profession "into disrepute" after he took blood samples from children at his son's birthday party in return for £5 payments.

The panel ruled all three doctors were guilty of undertaking research on children without approval from an ethics committee.

Dr Wakefield said in a statement issued yesterday: "We can prove, with extensive documentary evidence, that this conclusion is false.

"Let me make it absolutely clear that, at its heart, the GMC hearing has been about the protection of MMR vaccination policy.

"The case has been driven by an agenda to crush dissent that in my opinion serves the Government and the pharmaceutical industry - not the welfare of children.

"It's important to note that there has never been a complaint against any of the doctors by any parent involved in this case - only universal parental support and gratitude."

Dr Wakefield described his colleagues as "outstanding paediatricians and paediatric gastroenterologists".

He added: "Our only 'crime' in this matter has been to listen to the concerns of parents, act according to the demands of our professional training, and provide appropriate care to this neglected population of children."

A spokeswoman for the GMC said the panel would hear from GMC lawyers as to whether the facts already found proved meant the doctors were guilty of serious professional misconduct and, if so, what sanctions should apply.

"The panel will then hear submissions from the doctors' defence teams over the next few days," she added.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 37874.html
 
Doctor who triggered MMR vaccine scare is struck off
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 10:42 AM on 24th May 2010

Andrew Wakefield was found guilty of serious professional misconduct by the General Medical Council (GMC) at a hearing in central London.
He acted in a way that was 'dishonest, misleading and irresponsible' while carrying out research into a possible link between the Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine, bowel disease and autism, the GMC said.
He also 'abused his position of trust' and 'brought the medical profession into disrepute' in studies he carried out on children.
The GMC said there had been 'multiple separate instances of serious professional misconduct'.

Speaking in New York before the hearing, Dr Wakefield, 53, told the BBC he was not responsible for the resurgence in measles.
He said he 'categorically denied' suggestions that he had acted dishonestly, or against the best interests of children.
'What we did as physicians, as scientists, was to listen and respond to the concerns of parents about their very sick children, and to act appropriately in the children's best interests to determine what the nature of the problem was,' he said.
'Our duty as physicians, our absolute moral obligation, was to take the parents' concerns seriously and to investigate the concerns. That is what we did.'

Supporters said that his 'only crime' was to voice concerns about MMR which embarrassed the Department of Health.
But critics accused him of needlessly sparking a public panic which led to a prolonged slump in the number of children being vaccinated and a consequent rise in measles and mumps.

Dr Wakefield challenged his critics to 'talk about the science', and insisted the Government's decision to prevent parents opting for the single vaccine had been to blame for the rise in measles.
He said he had never opposed vaccination or claimed to have proof that MMR was linked to autism.
'I never made the claim at the time, nor do I still make the claim that MMR is a cause of autism,' he said.
'You are conflating the two things. You are conflating the link with autism with the overall review of the vaccine.'
A growing body of research appears to show no evidence of a link between MMR and autism.

etc...

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z0oq42HU4A
 
'...nor do I still make the claim that MMR is a cause of autism,' he said.

Is it just me or is that gibberish?

'You are conflating the two things. You are conflating the link with autism with the overall review of the vaccine.'

A statement which - true or otherwise - could just as easily be applied to his supporters as his critics, it seems to me.
 
Family win 18 year fight over MMR damage to son: £90,000 payout is first since concerns over vaccine surfaced
By Martin Delgado
Last updated at 11:35 PM on 28th August 2010

A mother whose son suffered severe brain damage after he was given the controversial MMR vaccine as a baby has been awarded £90,000 compensation.
The judgment is the first of its kind to be revealed since concerns were raised about the safety of the triple jab.
Robert Fletcher, 18, is unable to talk, stand unaided or feed himself.
He endures frequent epileptic fits and requires round-the-clock care from his parents Jackie and John, though he is not autistic.

He suffered the devastating effects after being given the combined measles, mumps and rubella vaccine when he was 13 months old.

The Department of Health had always denied that the jab was the cause of Robert’s disability.
But now, in a judgment which will give hope to hundreds of other parents whose children have been severely affected by routine vaccinations, a medical assessment panel consisting of two doctors and a barrister has concluded that MMR was to blame.
Robert’s mother Jackie said the money would help with his care, though she described the amount as ‘derisory’.

Her first application for compensation under the Government’s Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme was rejected in 1997 on the grounds that it was impossible to prove beyond reasonable doubt what had caused Robert’s illness.

But Mrs Fletcher appealed and in a ruling delivered last week, a new panel of experts came to a different conclusion.
In a six-page judgment, they said: ‘Robert was a more or less fit boy who, within the period usually considered relevant to immunisation, developed a severe convulsion... and he then went on to be epileptic and severely retarded.
‘The seizure occurred ten days after the vaccination. In our view, this cannot be put down to coincidence.
'It is this temporal association that provides the link. It is this that has shown on the balance of probabilities that the vaccination triggered the epilepsy.
'On this basis, we find that Robert is severely disabled as a result of vaccination and this is why we allowed the appeal.’

The ruling will reignite the debate over the safety of common childhood vaccines, although it makes clear that Robert’s case does not involve autism.

etc...

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z0xzHZU21T
 
The saga continues:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/05/vaccine-autism-study-report_n_805036.html

Report Linking Vaccine To Autism Was Fraudulent, Says British Medical Journal

AP/The Huffington Post First Posted: 01- 5-11 08:15 PM | Updated: 01- 6-11 04:45 AM

LONDON — The first study to link a childhood vaccine to autism was based on doctored information about the children involved, according to a new report on the widely discredited research.

The conclusions of the 1998 paper by Andrew Wakefield and colleagues was renounced by 10 of its 13 authors and later retracted by the medical journal Lancet, where it was published. Still, the suggestion the MMR shot was connected to autism spooked parents worldwide and immunization rates for measles, mumps and rubella have never fully recovered.

A new examination found, by comparing the reported diagnoses in the paper to hospital records, that Wakefield and colleagues altered facts about patients in their study.

The analysis, by British journalist Brian Deer, found that despite the claim in Wakefield's paper that the 12 children studied were normal until they had the MMR shot, five had previously documented developmental problems. Deer also found that all the cases were somehow misrepresented when he compared data from medical records and the children's parents.

Wakefield's recent book claims there is a connection between vaccines and autism that has been ignored by the medical establishment. He now lives in the U.S. where he enjoys a vocal following including celebrity supporters like Jenny McCarthy.

On Wednesday night, CNN's Anderson Cooper interviewed Wakefield, who acknowledged he had not read the latest analysis. Still, Wakefield defended his work against what he dismissed as "false allegations," suggested that Deer didn't actually conduct interviews with the parents, and characterized Deer as a "hitman" funded by the pharmaceutical industry. Cooper pointed out that Deer had signed a document asserting that he had no financial interest.

Deer's article was paid for by the Sunday Times of London and Britain's Channel 4 television network. It was published online Thursday in the medical journal, BMJ.

In an accompanying editorial, BMJ editor Fiona Godlee and colleagues called Wakefield's study "an elaborate fraud." They said Wakefield's work in other journals should be examined to see if it should be retracted.

Last May, Wakefield was stripped of his right to practice medicine in Britain. Many other published studies have shown no connection between the MMR vaccination and autism.

But measles has surged since Wakefield's paper was published and there are sporadic outbreaks in Europe and the U.S. In 2008, measles was deemed endemic in England and Wales.

Online:
http://www.bmj.com
If it's true, then Wakefield is not only guilty of fraud, but also the deaths and disease, associated with the parents wariness and failure to give their children the life saving vaccines.
 
The MMR scare was 'deliberate fraud' the British Medical Journal has said
The MMR scare was the result of a 'deliberate fraud' by Andrew Wakefield, the British Medical Journal has concluded and argues it was a 'hoax'.
By Rebecca Smith, Medical Editor 7:00AM GMT 06 Jan 2011

The now infamous 1998 research paper in The Lancet medical journal linked the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine to a new combined disorder of bowel problems and autism.

Public confidence in the jab collapsed but last year Wakefield was struck off the medical register with the panel saying he was callous and dishonest.

The British Medical Journal has reviewed the six million word transcript of the General Medical Council hearings, comparing them with the findings of investigative journalist Brian Deer and the research paper in the Lancet.

Huge discrepancies have been found between what was in the children's medical notes and what was published about them in the Lancet.

As a result, Dr Fiona Godlee, Editor of the BMJ, has accused Dr Wakefield of deliberate fraud and said the scare was a hoax on the scale of the Pildown man, which was for 40 years believed to have been the missing evolutionary link between ape and man.

She said: "The MMR scare was based not on bad science but on a deliberate fraud." She added that such “clear evidence of falsification of data should now close the door on this damaging vaccine scare.”

Other journals have printed letters and extracts from Wakefield and Dr Godlee has called for investigations into these, in case others need to be retracted as the original Lancet paper has been.

In an editorial, Dr Godlee, together with deputy BMJ editor Jane Smith, and leading paediatrician and associate BMJ editor Harvey Marcovitch, said there is “no doubt” that it was Wakefield who perpetrated this fraud.

They said: “A great deal of thought and effort must have gone into drafting the paper to achieve the results he wanted: the discrepancies all led in one direction; misreporting was gross.”

The Lancet paper claimed that 12 children were referred as consecutive cases to the Royal Free Hospital in London with symptoms of a 'new syndrome' described as enterocolitis and regressive autism and that these symptoms occurred after vaccination with the MMR jab.

However Brian Deer and the BMJ team found that:

– only one child clearly had regressive autism and three did not have autism at all

– five children had concerns recorded about their development on their records predating MMR vaccination

– claims that the symptoms appeared days after vaccination were found to be wrong and in some cases these started months later.

– nine children had normal test results from their bowel but this was changed to 'non-specific colitis'

– some patients were recruited through anti-MMR campaigners and the study was commissioned and funded as part of planned litigation against the jab's manufacturer.

Dr Godlee said in the BMJ: "Science is based on trust.
"Such a breach of trust is deeply shocking. And even though almost certainly rare on this scale, it raises important questions about how this could happen, what could have been done to uncover it earlier, what further inquiry is now needed, and what can be done to prevent something like this happening again.”

Dr Wakefield has always maintained he has done nothing wrong.
He was unavailable for comment.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healt ... -said.html
 
Doubtless the accusations of establishment conspiracy against messianic seeker of truth will follow immediately, but some of the behaviour listed is so utterly blatant it's hard to see how it could possibly be excused, defended, or explained away.
 
Spookdaddy said:
Doubtless the accusations of establishment conspiracy against messianic seeker of truth will follow immediately, but some of the behaviour listed is so utterly blatant it's hard to see how it could possibly be excused, defended, or explained away.

Oh, it will be. I will soon be battling the loons as they defend him on Indymedia.
 
ramonmercado said:
Oh, it will be. I will soon be battling the loons as they defend him on Indymedia.

Oh, bloody hell! Is Brian still shouting at everybody, or has he finally burst a blood vessel?

Oh, shit - you're not Brian, are you??!! :shock:
 
Spookdaddy said:
ramonmercado said:
Oh, it will be. I will soon be battling the loons as they defend him on Indymedia.

Oh, bloody hell! Is Brian still shouting at everybody, or has he finally burst a blood vessel?

Oh, shit - you're not Brian, are you??!! :shock:

No! 'es the Messiah!
 
The Tragedy Of The Fraudulent MMR Autism Link, A Personal Story
07 Feb 2011

In 1998 our boy with Asperger's Syndrome was 11 years old. A report came out in a prestigious British medical journal called The Lancet, linking the triple MMR vaccine with a significant raised risk of developing autism. For those of you who do not know, Asperger's Syndrome is a disorder within the autism spectrum.

As any parent with a child with autism will understand, before 1998 my wife and I were already walking around with a feeling of guilt - what did we do, was it my genes or hers, was there something during the pregnancy that increased his risk, was there some lifestyle factor we could have avoided to improve the quality of my sperm or her egg, did we bring him up wrong, perhaps we were giving him the wrong food? The list is long and the anxiety lingers for years.

I was a medical writer in 1998 and read the Lancet article about a study carried out by Dr. Wakefield in horror. I immediately recalled the exact dates our son had his shots (jabs) and racked my brain to try to remember whether any symptoms started appearing afterwards or before.

My wife and I talked incessantly about when the first signs and symptoms appeared and we both agreed that they started more or less when he was about 9 months old. "So, it could not have been the MMR jab...right? Surely, not. No, he already had it when he was born..."

It was not long, in fact just a few days before another thought started niggling in the back of both our minds. "Well, perhaps he already had Asperger's. But, wouldn't that have made him more susceptible to the devastating effects of the jab. Maybe if we had refused the jab, his symptoms might have been much milder, and his quality of life today would be much better."

I talked to doctors until I was blue in the face over the following years. I read every study there was on this subject. And none of them could find a similar link.

The world is full of conspiracy theorists, whose accusations continued feeding the doubt in the back of my mind.

Eventually, several years later, The Lancet announced that the 1998 study it published was not scientifically sound and that it was distancing itself from it. My doubt grew smaller, but did not disappear altogether. I could not rid my mind of the possibility there might be a powerful group of people or companies that were still controlling what we read. The heightened guilt my wife and I felt continued for over a decade.

This year the BMJ (British Medical Journal) published a series of articles that followed an investigation by Brian Deer, a well respected investigative journalist. Dr. Wakeman's studies were found to be fraudulent and probably motivated by money. The initial investigation had been incompetent - the journal wrote that the wolves were asked to check out the wolves.

Today, at last, I am sure it would not have made the slightest bit of difference if we had refused to vaccinate when our son was small. I am still a medical journalist and know that any conspiracy theories (I receive dozens of emails on this each day) are not based on any compelling data.

When scientists carry out a study, they need to be fully aware of the impact their findings may have on possibly millions of people around the world. Raising false hopes or unnecessary guilt and despair is irresponsible and incredibly cruel. As human beings, most of us struggle to do the best we can for our loved ones. Ignorant people forever make careless comments that the parents might not be strict enough, the child did not get enough attention, his diet is wrong, etc. However, ignorance simply means lack of knowledge. I can understand and forgive completely any hurtful comments that come from ignorance.

But for specialists, who supposedly know more about a particular subject than anyone else, to make claims that are later found to be false and based on vanity or personal gain is unforgivable - it is malicious and brutal.

I call on the millions of GPs (general practitioners, primary care physicians), pediatricians and psychologists/psychiatrists around the world, who are torn between their instinct to close ranks to protect those in their profession and help their patients, not to turn their backs on us, the patients and their loved ones. We need your feedback, information and comfort to be able to move on. Parents of children with autism really need to look forward - and more importantly, their children with autism need mentally healthy and positive parents.

The billions of dollars, Euros, Pounds and Yens that did not go into autism research between 1998 and today, because philanthropists, grant givers and government departments might have been distracted by these false findings, now need to go into autism research. We do not know whether a huge grant might have occurred during this period that would have achieved a massive breakthrough in this field if that study had not been published - if so, I name it a tragedy for babies with autism born yesterday, today and in the near future, and also for their parents, siblings and other close relatives.

"The Accused were Investigating Themselves"

Written by Christian Nordqvist (Editor in Chief and CEO of Medical News Today)

Article URL: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/215841.php
 
Increased autism rates crush vaccine hypothesis
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... hesis.html
05 April 2012
Magazine issue 2859.

CLAIMS that autism is caused by vaccines containing thiomersal have been floored by increasing rates of autism in children not exposed to the chemical.

No link has been found between autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and a mercury-containing compound known as thiomersal that is used in some vaccines. Nevertheless, since 2000, thiomersal has been phased out of most paediatric vaccines in the US. Now a report published by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that, despite this, the prevalence of ASD has continued to grow.

The data, from 13 areas in the US, reveal that in 2008, 11.4 kids aged eight per 1000 had an ASD compared with 6.4 per 1000 in 2002 - a 78 per cent increase. "Since the [latest data] came from kids who had vaccines [largely] without thiomersal, this factor plays no apparent role in the increased rates of the disorder," says Emanuel DiCicco-Bloom of the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in Piscataway, New Jersey, who was not involved in the study.

"Increases are likely to reflect better awareness of the condition," says Simon Baron-Cohen, director of the Autism Research Centre in Cambridge, UK.
 
There are two possible reactions to this in the anti-vax movement.

One: Denying that thiomersal has actually been removed from the vaccines, and it's all a conspiracy by big pharma, the medical profession, the government, etc, or

Two: Claiming that it's the vaccine itself (or some other component) that causes autism.

I suppose they might conceivably admit they were wrong, and change their stance on vaccination, but I doubt that's terribly likely.
 
Anome_ said:
There are two possible reactions to this in the anti-vax movement.

One: Denying that thiomersal has actually been removed from the vaccines, and it's all a conspiracy by big pharma, the medical profession, the government, etc, or

Two: Claiming that it's the vaccine itself (or some other component) that causes autism.

I suppose they might conceivably admit they were wrong, and change their stance on vaccination, but I doubt that's terribly likely.

I expect they will be back in action son Indymedia. I'll keep you all posted.
 
Uh oh...

MMR: A mother's victory. The vast majority of doctors say there is no link between the triple jab and autism, but could an Italian court case reignite this controversial debate?
By Sue Reid
PUBLISHED: 23:03, 15 June 2012 | UPDATED: 09:57, 16 June 2012

At nine months old, Valentino Bocca was as bright as a button. In a favourite family photo, taken by his father, the baby boy wriggles in his mother’s arms and laughs for the camera.

His parents look at the precious picture often these days. It is a reminder of their only son before they took him on a sunny morning to the local public health clinic for a routine childhood vaccination.

Valentino was never the same child after the jab in his arm. He developed autism and, in a landmark judgment, a judge has ruled that his devastating disability was provoked by the inoculation against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR).

The judgment in a provincial Italian court challenges the settled view of the majority of the medical profession — and could have profound implications in Britain and across the world.
Valentino’s parents, Antonella, 44, and Maurizio, 43, have been awarded £140,000, to be paid by Italy’s Ministry of Health and they plan a civil action against the Italian government that may get them £800,000 more.

‘But, of course, the money will never bring back the perfect and beautiful child of 15 months that we had before the doctors gave him the inoculation,’ said his mother this week at the family’s small but beautifully designed flat near Rimini in northern Italy.
‘We have a different Valentino today. We love him just as much, but our lives will never be the same again.
‘He is nine, but cannot speak, and only sings a little to himself. He cannot hold a pencil. He has a special teacher at school to help him and finds it difficult to mix with other children. What the future holds for him, or for us, we do not know.’

The story of Valentino Bocca is a tragic one. His family have agreed to reveal their identity for the first time as the outcome of their case became public last week. They spoke exclusively to the Mail because they believe other parents all over the world should learn what has happened to their son.

Autism covers a huge range of developmental disorders which affect a child’s communication, social skills, and ability to lead a normal life.
Families caring for severely autistic children say their lives are blighted. Care of sufferers and related disorders costs the British state billions of pounds a year.

The number of autism cases has soared over the past four decades — at the last count researchers found one in 64 British children have some kind of autistic condition — and there has been widespread speculation over the cause of this widespread curse on so many families. In the Eighties, only four in every 10,000 children showed any signs of autism.

Suspicion has long been directed by some parents at the MMR vaccine, a triple cocktail of the measles, mumps and rubella viruses, although the Department of Health and NHS doctors have argued forcefully that better diagnosis of autism and environmental factors are responsible for the extraordinary rise in the number of cases.

In 1998, a highly controversial article in the medical journal The Lancet written by Dr Andrew Wakefield made a connection between the MMR jab and autism.

His research methods were later discredited, but as a result of the article countless numbers of parents in Britain refused to let their children have the jab, and cases of measles — which is very occasionally fatal — went up significantly.

In recent years, public confidence in the MMR inoculation has returned, but the Italian court’s judgment could reopen the controversy. This week, Luca Ventaloro, the Bocca family’s lawyer who specialises in helping families with vaccine-damaged children, proclaimed that the Rimini court judgment was the ‘first public admission’ that the MMR vaccine could, in some cases, lead to a healthy child developing autism.

Crucially, it came after Antonio Barboni, a doctor of forensic medicine and appointed by the judge to independently advise the court, wrote a report saying that ‘in the absence of any other pre-existing conditions’ it is a ‘reasonable scientific probability’ that Valentino’s autism can be ‘traced back to the administration of the MMR vaccine ... by the health authority’.
Dr Barboni’s findings were endorsed by two other eminent doctors who examined Valentino, investigated his medical background, and gave evidence to the court hearing.

Judge Lucio Ardigo, awarding compensation to the family, agreed. He said it was ‘conclusively established’ that Valentino had suffered from an ‘autistic disorder associated with medium cognitive delay’ and his illness, as Dr Barboni stated, was linked to receiving the jab.

Lawyer Mr Ventaloro explained yesterday: ‘This is very significant for Britain which uses, and has used, an MMR vaccine with the same components as the one given to Valentino.
‘It is wrong for governments and their health authorities to exert strong pressure on parents to take children for the MMR jab while ignoring that this vaccine can cause autism and linked conditions.’

Claudio Simion, a leading member of the lobby group Association for Freedom of Choice in Vaccination (Comilva), adds: ‘The Rimini judgment is vitally important for children everywhere. The numbers with autism are growing. It is a terrible thing that the authorities turn a blind eye to the connection between the MMR vaccination and this illness.’

Long, complex article....

Most doctors continue to argue that this is merely coincidence and that no convincing mechanism to explain a link has been set out.
The Department of Health has insisted: ‘MMR remains the best protection against measles, mumps and rubella. It is recognised by the World Health Organisation as having an outstanding safety record and there is a wealth of evidence showing children who receive the MMR vaccine are no more at risk of autism than those who don’t.’

However, the Italian judgment clearly suggests this important debate is far from over.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ebate.html
 
The prevailing consensus in this thread bothers me and I've been meaning to post here for a long time.

I don't pretend to understand the merits or deficiencies of Dr. Wakefield's work. But after hanging out at Fortean Times and on Bill Corliss's site for a few years, it makes me very uneasy when a lone researcher arrives at an unpopular finding and is then completely pilloried by the scientific establishment. When he remains entirely unrepentant. Then the accusations of fraud and malfeasance start. History is littered with the ruined careers of people who turned out to be right, and anyone who thinks that the scientific establishment acts in a fair and balanced way to discern the truth is completely naive.

I work in the public health field and am not anti-vaccine by any stretch of the imagination. I dont work directly with vaccine programs or vaccine safety issues but I first became aware of concerns about MMR, Pertussis, and other vaccines back in the 80s and have been peripherally involved in a few meetings where the national level big wigs were holding forth. Vaccine safety issues are more complicated and nuanced than might be gleaned from information available in mainstream media.

There is long-standing medical consensus that MMR and some other vaccines do at least very occasionally cause neurological damage to both children and adults. I think it is fair to say that public health, clinical care-givers, the medical scientific establishment, the pharma industry, and the government have a huge interest in maintaining the status quo and mediating publicly available discussion about childhood immunization programs. There are of course a lot of nut job alarmists out there as well.

Given all that, I for one continue to withhold judgement on Dr. Wakefield. I think this is the only appropriate attitude for a Fortean to take. His conclusions may be entirely wrong, and I hope that they are, but it is not at all inconceivable that he is on to something.
 
Website warned over MMR claims
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19163717

Babyjabs.co.uk said the three-in-one jab may be causing "up to 10%"
y
Related Stories

Lancet accepts MMR study 'false'
MMR doctor 'broke research rules'
'No link' between MMR and autism

A website offering parents advice on vaccines has been ordered to remove information about the MMR jab after claiming it could be linked to autism.

Babyjabs.co.uk said the three-in-one jab may be causing "up to 10%" of autism in children in the UK.

But the Advertising Standards Authority ruled the claim was misleading and must not appear again, after getting a complaint.

The website was also told not to repeat other claims it made about MMR.

These included the suggestion that "most experts now agree the large rise (in autism) has been caused partly by increased diagnosis, but also by a real increase in the number of children with autism".

Another claim said the vaccine-strain measles virus had been found in the gut and brain of some autistic children, which supports many parents' belief that the MMR vaccine caused autism in their children.

Defence
Defending the claims, Babyjabs referred to a study from 2002 which concluded it could not be ruled out that there were some children who had an increased risk of autism if they were vaccinated.

The website, which promotes single vaccines, also cited The Truth About Vaccines, a book written by Babyjab medical director Dr Richard Halvorsen, which made similar claims.

In the judgement, the ASA noted that the website made clear that the original allegations of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism by Andrew Wakefield was "strongly rejected" by government and the medical establishment.

But it said consumers were likely to infer from the website's claims that the vaccine might have played a role in the "increase" of the number of children with autism.
 
Back
Top