Vaccine/autism CT discussion

[000063]

Ok so he acquired funds dishonestly (politician type tactic) and fudged some data on the The Lancet paper (another politician type tactic).

What's to say his current study should not at least be looked at? As allot of people on this planet behave in a certain way and then change do they not? Can we not give him the benefit of the doubt?

Btw apologies for thinking he was beyond reproach

Bribing kids for blood samples and lying in research papers are not a "politician tactic".

http://briandeer.com/mmr-lancet.htm

And no, we shouldn't, given that he was partially responsible for a major drop in shots, and therefore indirectly responsible for risking the lives and health of who knows how many kids.

 

[000063]

It was 30 seconds or a time dilation, as soon as I posted up you posted the reply; because I refreshed the page almost instantly!

And yes i did Google him but obviously forgot to include keywords like fraud Ect my bad i am guessing

I noticed "Dr." was missing the second I opened up his Wikipedia page. I didn't include "fraud", just his name.

 

[zooterkin]

It was 30 seconds or a time dilation, as soon as I posted up you posted the reply; because I refreshed the page almost instantly!

There was a post within a minute of yours, but it wasn't the one you responded to, which was about 8 minutes later.

 

[robcasey]

•Dr. Wakefield is the co-author, along with eight other distinguished scientists from institutions like the University of Pittsburgh, the University of Kentucky, and the University of Washington, of a set of studies that explore the topic of vaccinated versus unvaccinated neurological outcomes using monkeys.
All of whom rejected Wakefield and removed his name as co-author of the research.

So the research is still good then?

 

[Dcdrac]

And you might want to read this

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...your-conduct-was-irresponsible-and-dishonest/

 

[zooterkin]

By three months, I assume you mean three years, and by published in Neurotoxicology, I assume you mean withdrawn before publication, right?

Aw, you guys are just so picky.

 

[Dcdrac]

Wakefield is not longer a Dr and should not be pretending to be one.

 

[000063]

•Dr. Wakefield is the co-author, along with eight other distinguished scientists from institutions like the University of Pittsburgh, the University of Kentucky, and the University of Washington, of a set of studies that explore the topic of vaccinated versus unvaccinated neurological outcomes using monkeys.
All of whom rejected Wakefield and removed his name as co-author of the research.

So the research is still good then?

I don't know. What research are you referring to? What are you quoting?

 

[Acleron]

Wrong again. There were always remedial classes for such children, at least in UK schools.

That must have been in only some schools. My own schooling (cough, 50-60s) was heavily streamed, those who didn't do well were grouped together and received the worst teachers.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Can you provide a link please, if i am wrong about him i most humbly apologize

Dr. Andrew Wakefield reveals real story behind vaccines, autism and more

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035513_Andrew_Wakefield_vaccines_autism.html#ixzz2CCYumhhI

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: Absolutely, in the High Court in the UK, the long awaited outcome of John Walker Smith's appeal.
People who don't know, John Walker Smith is one of the founding f
athers of pediatric gastroenterology in the world, he is an outstanding physician and very, very well respected and a leader in the field, a teacher of so many of today's young pediatric gastroenterologists. Back in 1998 we published in the Lancet on the discovery of a new bowel disease in children with autism and an association in time that the parents had made with MMR vaccine and for that, for those efforts, he was in an effort I think to get me to stop vaccine safety research, to send a message to everybody else, he lost his medical license along with me. He was allowed to appeal, I couldn't afford to but he was funded to appeal and he was completely and utterly exonerated in the high court. The judge issued a resounding condemnation of, I think in legal terms, at least in my opinion, the way in which the General Medical Council's case was handled. Asking why would a man of this caliber even consider taking a risk in effect. That's my reading of the opinion, but you know some of the criticisms of the GMC were very, very harsh and it may interest the readers- here you may think that there would be experts in research and experts in pediatric gastroenterology and child psychiatry sitting on the panel to judge this doctor, but there weren't. There were two lay people, one general practitioner with no experience in research, and rather than having a child psychiatrist they had an adult psychiatrist and rather than having a pediatrician they had a geriatrician. So right from the outset you can see how flawed the process was.

Research Brian Deer, Wakefield's accuser.

 

[Estellea]

What a waggery. I'm old and sagacious enough to remember when there was NO special education in schools. Mainly because there was no NEED for it. There wasn't a plethora of children who suddenly became unable to "communicate" between the ages of 1 1/2 and 2. A "retarded person" was a "curiosity." As a child you were sternly told not to stare. It was an extremely rare instruction.

Sadly, people who lie about the reality of the obvious danger of vaccines are likely to get their comeuppance.

Even though you recognise the absence of special needs children while you were in school, you still fail to comprehend the import of this. Precisely Clay, there were no laws then to provide special needs children with any education; they were sequestered away in institutions or hidden at home. The advent of disability laws and changes in diagnostic criteria have simulaneously made special needs people more visable and more counted. I worked with adult autists in the 1980s and 90s, half of whom were already over the age of fifty and lived in group homes so the public didn't see them. Your contentions fail on so many levels Clay and all the wishing harm on us "naysayers" isn't going to change the reality.

Ok so he acquired funds dishonestly (politician type tactic) and fudged some data on the The Lancet paper (another politician type tactic).

What's to say his current study should not at least be looked at? As allot of people on this planet behave in a certain way and then change do they not? Can we not give him the benefit of the doubt?

Btw apologies for thinking he was beyond reproach

Good grief I thought you had to be a Poe with that nonsense. Who says his monkey studies haven't been looked at and disemboweled for the duplicitous rubbish they are? http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_...op-autism-after-routine-cdc-vaccinations.html

Don't be an apologist for one of the world's most reviled medical frauds.

•Dr. Wakefield is the co-author, along with eight other distinguished scientists from institutions like the University of Pittsburgh, the University of Kentucky, and the University of Washington, of a set of studies that explore the topic of vaccinated versus unvaccinated neurological outcomes using monkeys.
All of whom rejected Wakefield and removed his name as co-author of the research.

So the research is still good then?

Why do people like you always have to inflate the importance of researchers who feed your biases? These were not distinguished scientists, one was a graduate student for crying out loud, four had vested financial interests in the outcome (which was blatantly massaged) and only one can be considered a decent investigator who has unwisely associated himself with sleazes. The research isn't good, and if you read the blogpost link I provided and follow all the other links, they explain in excrutiating detail why this is crap science.

Este

 

[Acleron]

Dr. Andrew Wakefield reveals real story behind vaccines, autism and more

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035513_Andrew_Wakefield_vaccines_autism.html#ixzz2CCYumhhI

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: Absolutely, in the High Court in the UK, the long awaited outcome of John Walker Smith's appeal.

People who don't know, John Walker Smith is one of the founding fathers of pediatric gastroenterology in the world, he is an outstanding physician and very, very well respected and a leader in the field, a teacher of so many of today's young pediatric gastroenterologists. Back in 1998 we published in the Lancet on the discovery of a new bowel disease in children with autism and an association in time that the parents had made with MMR vaccine and for that, for those efforts, he was in an effort I think to get me to stop vaccine safety research, to send a message to everybody else, he lost his medical license along with me. He was allowed to appeal, I couldn't afford to but he was funded to appeal and he was completely and utterly exonerated in the high court. The judge issued a resounding condemnation of, I think in legal terms, at least in my opinion, the way in which the General Medical Council's case was handled. Asking why would a man of this caliber even consider taking a risk in effect. That's my reading of the opinion, but you know some of the criticisms of the GMC were very, very harsh and it may interest the readers- here you may think that there would be experts in research and experts in pediatric gastroenterology and child psychiatry sitting on the panel to judge this doctor, but there weren't. There were two lay people, one general practitioner with no experience in research, and rather than having a child psychiatrist they had an adult psychiatrist and rather than having a pediatrician they had a geriatrician. So right from the outset you can see how flawed the process was.


Research Brian Deer, Wakefield's accuser.

Wakefield wouldn't recognise truth or reality if it was written on a truck that ran over him.

The appeal of Smith had little to do with the guilt of Wakefield. And here is what the judge in the Smith appeal had to say about the charlatan.

“Dr Wakefield’s statement and subsequent publicity had a predictable adverse effect upon the take up of MMR vaccine of great concern to those responsible for public health,” Mitting J said.
“There is now no respectable body of opinion which supports his hypothesis, that MMR vaccine and autism/enterocolitis are causally linked.”

And remember, there never was a respectable body of opinion linking the two, just Wakefield.

 

[Estellea]

Dr. Andrew Wakefield reveals real story behind vaccines, autism and more

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035513_Andrew_Wakefield_vaccines_autism.html#ixzz2CCYumhhI

Research Brian Deer, Wakefield's accuser.

Yes Brian Deer conducted a brilliant piece of investigative journalism into Wakefield's fraudulent activities. That's what investigative journalists do Clay. If Wakefield was so squeaky clean as you would have us believe then none of Mr. Deer's well-substantiated claims would have stuck. But since you have Wakefield struck off the GMC, papers retracted, no one will hire him and is now left to internet schemes to support himself and reduced to giving appearances in park gun sheds and taco restaurants and on the other hand Brian Deer who is an invited keynote speaker at numerous universities and professional conferences, two-time winner of the prestigious British Press Award and a sought-after journalist, I'm sure your conspiracy-addled mind can do wonders with this striking dichotomy.

Este

 

[Dcdrac]

andrew wakefield is a fraud and not a Dr nor a respected researcher.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Japan

It was later discovered that some of the vaccines were administered after their expiry date, and that the MMR compulsory vaccination was only retracted after the death of three children and more than 2000 reports of adverse effects.[112] By 1993 the Japanese Government had paid $160,000 in compensation to the families of each of the three dead children.[112] Other parents received no compensation because the government said that it was unproven that the MMR vaccine had been the cause, and they decided to sue the manufacturer instead of suing the government.[112] The Osaka district court in Japan ruled on 13 March 2003 that the death of two children (among numerous other serious conditions) had been indeed caused by Japan's strain of Urabe MMR.[102][115] In 2006, the Osaka High Court stated in another ruling that the state was responsible for failing to properly supervise a manufacturer of the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine, which caused severe side effects in children.[116]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_controversy#Wakefield_Lancet_paper_controversy

 

[Dcdrac]

Clayton wikipedia is naot an acceptable source for much thee days.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Yes Brian Deer conducted a brilliant piece of investigative journalism into Wakefield's fraudulent activities. That's what investigative journalists do Clay. If Wakefield was so squeaky clean as you would have us believe then none of Mr. Deer's well-substantiated claims would have stuck. But since you have Wakefield struck off the GMC, papers retracted, no one will hire him and is now left to internet schemes to support himself and reduced to giving appearances in park gun sheds and taco restaurants and on the other hand Brian Deer who is an invited keynote speaker at numerous universities and professional conferences, two-time winner of the prestigious British Press Award and a sought-after journalist, I'm sure your conspiracy-addled mind can do wonders with this striking dichotomy.

Este

Newly-revealed documents show that on December 20th, 1996, a meeting of The Inflammatory Bowel Disease Study Group based at the Royal Free Hospital Medical School featured a presentation by Professor Walker-Smith on seven of the children who would later become part of the group of patients Dr Wakefield wrote about in his 1998 The Lancet paper (which was later retracted by The Lancet).

Remember, Dr Wakefield has been accused of completely fabricating his findings about these same children in his 1998 paper, but these documents reveal that fourteen months before Dr Wakefield's paper was published, two other researchers -- Professor Walker-Smith and Dr Amar Dhillon -- independently documented the same problems in these children, including symptoms of autism.

Thus, Dr Wakefield could not have "fabricated" these findings as alleged by the British Medical Journal, which now finds itself in the position of needing to issue a retraction, or it must now expand its accusations of fraud to include Professor Walker-Smith and Dr Dhillon... essentially, the BMJ must now insist that a "conspiracy of fraud" existed among at least these three researchers, and possibly more, in order to back up its allegation that Dr Wakefield's study results were fabricated.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/031116_Dr_Andrew_Wakefield_British_Medical_Journal.html#ixzz2CCoG7HSQ

 

[Estellea]

Japan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_controversy#Wakefield_Lancet_paper_controversy

What does this have to do with your claim that autism is caused by vaccines?

Right, that's what I thought.

Este

 

[Dcdrac]

natural News another crakcpot website.

 

[zooterkin]

Japan



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_controversy#Wakefield_Lancet_paper_controversy

Since you're quoting that page (out of context, of course, we expect no less) I assume you believe what's there? For example:

Autism rates continued to rise in Japan after the discontinuation of the MMR vaccine, which discards any large scale effect of vaccination, and means that the withdrawal of MMR on other countries is unlikely to cause a reduction in autism cases. The Japanese Government doesn't think that there is any link between MMR and autism and by 2003 it was still trying to find a combined vaccine to replace MMR.