| Author |
 Topic  |
|
laura_c_a
341 Posts |
 Posted - 02/02/2010 : 13:14:10
|
I would like to thank (and give a big hug if that's not "too emotional") whoever wrote the "Establishment betrayed its agenda with MMR vaccine" article in the Scotland on Sunday.
At last, someone else who has had the courage to write what mothers like myself have been saying over the last decade. Government take note - I know I'm not the only one who agrees with the article.
I shall forward the article onto everyone who has questioned as it explains my thoughts perfectly.
Well done to the author and thanks again. |
 |
|
|
informed
Ireland
59 Posts |
Posted - 02/03/2010 : 01:42:58
|
Doctor Wakefield will always have the support from Irish parents of children who believe that the MMR vaccine triggered brain damage/ bowel disease /diabetes mellitus/arthritis etc in their children.
If you google irishhealth.com you will see that we have over 15,000 people who have been diagnosed with bowel disease i.e crohn's
disease /ulcerative colitis most of them are young people!!
There are also thousands of children in Ireland with special needs who are on the autistic spectrum.
Thousands of children with juvenile arthritis /big increase in children with diabetes mellitus (type 1) listed as possible side effects in the MMR manufactures information i.e. SPC.
To say that the MMR vaccine is safe for everyone IS A LIE.
Lazy journalists need to do some research i.e. speak to some of the parents of these children.
Doctors need to start medically screening children prior to vaccination for allergies and to ask if there is a strong family history of autoimmune disease before injecting three live viruses
into an infant or when offering a booster shot to an older child
with a compromised immune system.
Irish Vaccine Informed Parents/
Irish Colitis & Crohn's Support.
|
|
|
|
Rosemary
United Kingdom
2025 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2010 : 09:24:29
|
MMR doctor proved right in week he was condemned as 'dishonest'
In the week that the doctor at the centre of the controversy over the MMR vaccine and autism was called “dishonest, irresponsible and callous” by a medical disciplinary board, a new study has been published that suggests he could be right all along. Researchers in New York have discovered that children with autism spectrum disorder also had inflammation in the ileum, part of the small intestine – the exact same discovery made by Dr Andrew Wakefield, who may now lose his medical license following a 30-month hearing at the General Medical Council. Wakefield noted that the children he saw also had been given the triple MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine, and he speculated that it might be the cause. After the publication of his paper in The Lancet in 1998, vaccination rates dropped dramatically as parents in the UK refused to have their children vaccinated. The new study, from the New York University School of Medicine, discovered that 143 children with autism spectrum disorder also suffered from chronic gastrointestinal symptoms, and inflammation in the small intestine. As the vaccine is compulsory in the US, where the children live, it is reasonable to assume that most, if not all, were vaccinated – although the researchers do not suggest that it was the cause of the inflammation they detected. (Source: Autism Insights, 2010; 2: 1-11).
http://www.wddty.com/mmr-doctor-proved-right-in-week-he-was-condemned-as-dishonest.html |
|
|
|
Seonaid
United Kingdom
1174 Posts |
|
|
jabsadmin
1005 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2010 : 16:25:54
|
http://www.vaclib.org/sites/vap/uk-mmr-vaccination-rates-before-1998-20070605.htm
Vaccine Autoimmune Project for Research and Education (VAP)
Archived on VacLib.org 2Apr09
MMR Vaccination Rates in the United Kingdom Before 1998
By F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
The Herald published an article titled “Parents of Autistic Children 'Feel Guilty' Over MMR (1) on March 30, 2007.
The following is not a commentary on the article or the study on which it was based. It is in response to one statement: “After Dr Wakefield's article was published in 1998, immunization levels of MMR dropped…”
* * *
I have carefully researched immunization levels in the United Kingdom prior to 1998. The following information is based on two Department of Health documents that I obtained via www.doh.gov.uk.
They are:
A: “NHS Immunisation Statistics, England: 1997-98” [Accessed in 2003 at www.doh.gov.uk/pub/docs/doh/imstat98.pdf]
B: “Immunisation against Infectious Disease 1996. The Green Book” - Measles, Mumps and Rubella chapter, p. 125 – 146 [Accessed in 2003 at http://www.doh.gov.uk/greenbook/greenbookpdf/chapter-22-layout.pdf]
Reference B was published before the Wakefield article but shortly after a rather significant national vaccination effort.
The officially recommended and available primary pediatric vaccination schedule in the UK was:
D/T/P and HIB*, Polio: First dose: 2 months
Second dose: 3 months
Third dose: 4 months
Measles/mumps/rubella (MMR) 12-15 months
*The HIB vaccine was added in 1992-1993.
The following table is a replica of Table 5 from Reference A.
It lists the number of children (x1000) who completed the primary series of vaccinations every year between 1988-89 and 1997- 98.
Check here for table:
http://www.vaclib.org/sites/vap/uk-mmr-vaccination-rates-before-1998-20070605.htm
DTP and Polio vaccines had been in use for years before the introduction of the MMR. HIB statistics started in 1993-94.
Proportionately more children were vaccinated during the 3 years that followed the introduction of a new vaccine: 1988 to 1991 for the MMR and 1993 to 1996 for HIB. It is likely that children older than 2, who received MMR for the first time, were included in the statistics for the first 3 years listed, when more than 1 million children a year were vaccinated.
It is not clear why the number of children receiving 3 doses of DTP/ Polio vaccines and one dose of MMR vaccine, decreased between 1994 and 1998, as shown in the following table, also based on Table 5 of Document A.
It should be noted that Pre-1998, the drop in vaccination rates was substantially more significant for the MMR vaccine.
Check table two here:
http://www.vaclib.org/sites/vap/uk-mmr-vaccination-rates-before-1998-20070605.htm
When one compares 1994-95 with 1997-98, the percent decrease (16.1) in the number of children receiving MMR vaccinations (1 dose per child) is 222% larger than the average percent decrease (5.0) in the number of children receiving 3 doses of Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis and Polio vaccines.
English parents have historically been concerned about the safety of the whooping cough vaccine. Many have also questioned its effectiveness. The result was that pertussis vaccination rates dropped to 30% in the late 70’s. (Document A: Figure 1)
“In the case of pertussis, coverage rates have regained the ground lost in the mid-1970’s due to public anxiety about the safety and efficacy of the vaccine. The recent fall in MMR coverage may be the result of similar concern over the vaccine.” (Document A: 2.1.1)
It is evident from the above that while 19,000 (3.3%) fewer children received 3 doses of pertussis vaccine in 1997-1998 than in 1993-1994, some 87,000 (13.6%) fewer children received one dose of MMR vaccine during the same period.
Conclusion: Thousands of British parents were not in favor of MMR vaccination before Andrew J. Wakefield published his original study in The Lancet in February 1998.
This is a fact.
Reference
Henderson D. Parents of Autistic Children 'Feel Guilty' Over MMR- The Herald, March 30, 2007. Available at http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.1296611.0.0.php
F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
Falmouth, Massachusetts
April 20, 2007
VAP © 2007
|
|
|
|
jabsadmin
1005 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2010 : 16:36:03
|
http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/whereilive/4910172.Dad_s_fury_over_autism_inquiry/
Warrington Guardian
Stockton Heath dad slams GMC verdict
12:50pm Friday 5th February 2010
A FATHER has slammmed the General Medical Council after it found the doctor who first suggested a link between MMR vaccinations and autism had acted unethically.
David Thrower, who believes his son, Oliver, aged 22, became autistic after being given a measles jab at 15 months and the MMR vaccination aged four, said: “Oliver was developing normally and learning new things all the time until he had his measles jab.
“He then lost words and skills and stopped learning. We saw his development stop and go backwards.
“He gradually began to improve but regressed dramatically after his MMR jab. He now has to have a special diet because of bowel problems and he has no self help skills.”
In 1997, 59-year-old Mr Thrower, who lives on Ackers Lane, Stockton Heath, became aware of Dr Andrew Wakefield’s research and his 1998 Lancet study, which linked MMR to regressive autism and bowel disease and led to the longest misconduct inquiry ever held by medical regulators GMC.
He and colleagues Dr John Walker-Smith and Dr Simon Murch were charged with offences relating to research they had conducted during the 1990s at the Royal Free Hospital in Hampstead, north London, concerning the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, introduced in the late 1980s, and its supposed links to autism in children.
It was alleged he carried out invasive tests on 12 youngsters and paid children £5 for blood samples at his son’s birthday party.
Dr Wakefield’s study caused vaccine rates to drop, which resulted in a rise in measles cases.
In a hearing on Thursday, the GMC said the actions of Dr Wakefield were ‘dishonest’ and ‘irresponsible’, that he did not act in the best clinical interest of those children included in the study and that he ‘failed in his duties as a responsible consultant’.
The GMC case did not investigate whether Dr Wakefield’s findings were right or wrong, but focused on the methods of research.
Mr Thrower, who attended the hearing, condemned the findings and added: “My view is the GMC inquiry was misplaced and has not heard all the evidence from some of the witnesses. The medical establishment is determined to try to destroy Dr Wakefield’s credibility.
“I think what it has done is frame the doctors on massive technicalities when they always acted in the best interests of their patients and focused fully on making them better and finding out what affected them.
“I’m confident scientific advances will continue and that we will get to the truth in the end. I fully accept the need to vaccinate children but those vaccines must be 100 per cent safe.”
|
|
|
|
Aasa
Canada
734 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2010 : 01:26:38
|
This whole GMC "hearing" made me sick to my stomach and has led to some "bad words" between me and some of my teacher colleagues, who were too quick to hang Dr. Wakefield based on news reports, without knowing anything about "the other side of the story", and apparently unwilling to even consider that side. I don't know what it will take to open people's eyes to the spin that is being foisted upon them.
Aasa |
|
|
|
Aasa
Canada
734 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2010 : 01:33:12
|
I want to thank David Thrower for being one of the first people to help open my eyes to various vaccine/autism issues cerca 2004/2005. There was a rather long paper that he had posted on the Internet, that dealt with the effects of vaccines, that really made me stop and think, and want to spend more time researching what he had written about.
Thank you, David, for inspiring some of us,
Aasa |
|
|
|
Rosemary
United Kingdom
2025 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2010 : 08:26:20
|
Dr. Tenpenny on Vaccines
VACCINE INFORMATION YOU WON'T HEAR FROM YOUR PEDIATRICIAN
Dr Wakefield's Inquisitioners Have Their Day
By Dr Sherri Tenpenny
February 14, 2010
I’ve been asked many times over the last few weeks to share my opinion on the verdict of the U.K’s General Medical Council (GMC) about Dr. Andrew Wakefield and the retraction of his 1998 article, “Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children” by the medical journal, Lancet. The many inquiries fall into four basic questions. go here
http://drtenpenny.com/Wakefield_Inquisitioners_Have_their_day.aspx |
|
|
|
jabsadmin
1005 Posts |
Posted - 02/19/2010 : 14:18:01
|
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/british-doctor-resigns-as-head-of-austin-autism-251756.html
Statesman
British doctor resigns as head of Austin autism center
Dr. Andrew Wakefield, defending his medical license in England, directed Thoughtful House Center for Children.
By Mary Ann Roser
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Updated: 11:43 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 18, 2010
Published: 8:43 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 18, 2010
Facing the possible loss of his medical license in England, Dr. Andrew Wakefield has stepped down as executive director of the Thoughtful House Center for Children, an autism education and treatment center for children that he helped found in Austin in 2005.
Last month, a panel of the General Medical Council, which regulates doctors in the U.K., found that Wakefield was dishonest and irresponsible in conducting research on children in England a dozen years ago. The panel also said Wakefield showed a "callous disregard" for children at his child's birthday party in 1999 when he had blood taken from them and paid them about $10 each. He later joked at a conference about the children being "paid for their discomfort."
Wakefield's 1998 work, published in The Lancet, a prestigious British medical journal, fueled a worldwide scare over vaccines and autism. The Lancet retracted the study earlier this month.
Thoughtful House would not answer questions about Wakefield's departure. By Thursday morning, he was removed from the center's staff list, and the center issued a statement when asked whether Wakefield had resigned.
"The needs of the children we serve must always come first," it said. "All of us at Thoughtful House are grateful to Dr. Wakefield for the valuable work he has done here. We fully support his decision to leave Thoughtful House in order to make sure that the controversy surrounding the recent findings of the General Medical Council does not interfere with the important work that our dedicated team of clinicians and researchers is doing on behalf of children with autism and their families. All of us at Thoughtful House continue to fight every day for the recovery of children with developmental disorders."
Wakefield, who is in his early 50s, helped draw musicians and other celebrities to the Thoughtful House, where he was said to be in charge of research.
Parents who brought their children to the clinic said they saw him as a persecuted hero whose staff helped their children improve. The parents said they believe in the theory he advanced in the Lancet paper — that some children might develop a form of autism and gastrointestinal disease from exposure to the combined measles-mumps-rubella vaccine.
Other researchers have widely disputed the theory. Mainstream practitioners also oppose many of the alternative treatments at Thoughtful House, including chelation — the use of chemicals to remove metals from the body.
Starting April 7 in England, Wakefield will go to the next level of hearings before the General Medical Council, which will decide whether he is guilty of serious professional misconduct and whether he should be sanctioned, which could include losing his medical license.
Wakefield does not have a U.S. medical license.
Last month, he told reporters outside the medical council's office in London, "The allegations against me and against my colleagues are both unfounded and unjust. I repeat, unfounded and unjust, and I invite anyone to examine the contents of these proceedings and come to their own conclusion."
maroser@statesman.com; 445-3619
|
|
|
|
Aasa
Canada
734 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2010 : 03:13:55
|
The last I heard, Dr. Arthur Krigsman is leaving Thoughtful House also. What is going on there?
|
|
|
|
Seonaid
United Kingdom
1174 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2010 : 22:57:59
|
Wakefield Moving into New Leadership Role in Autism Community, Leaving Thoughtful House.
http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/02/wakefield-moving-into-new-leadership-role-in-autism-community-leaving-thoughtful-house.html
By Dan Olmsted
Dr. Andrew Wakefield announced today his intention to move on to a new phase of leadership in the autism community as he also prepares a more aggressive defense of his scientific accomplishments in the wake of a ruling from the U.K.’s General Medical Council (GMC). That ruling, which charged Wakefield and two pediatric gastroenterologists with misconduct, was followed shortly by the retraction of a 1998 case series report by Wakefield and his colleagues from London’s Royal Free Hospital in The Lancet. “There has been an extraordinary outpouring of support from the autism community in response to the events of the last two weeks”, Wakefield told Age of Autism in an exclusive interview. “The most exciting part of it has been the opening up of an entirely new sort of opportunity that will allow me to continue my work on behalf of autism families.” Wakefield said he would provide more specifics on the nature of that opportunity soon. “In addition, I will now speak publicly to refute the findings that have been made against me. I know my necessary silence on these issues has troubled many parents in both the U.K. and the U.S. But I’m ready now to get back on the front foot and publicly contest the false accusations that have been made against me, my colleagues, and indirectly The Lancet children. It’s been long overdue.”
Wakefield, previously the Executive Director of Thoughtful House, had been a senior scientist in charge of an ambitious primate research program on vaccine safety. The first paper from this project was published online on October 2, 2009 by Neurotoxicology (see HERE: http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/09/blockbuster-primate-study-shows-significant-harm-from-one-birth-dose-of-a-mercurycontaining-vaccine.html ) who then decided unexpectedly on February 12 not to proceed with publication in the print edition (like The Lancet, the journal Neurotoxicology is owned by Elsevier, a division of Reed Elsevier PLC). Many autism advocates have expressed the concern that the attack on Wakefield has been part of a broader campaign for the suppression of science, including the primate project (see HERE: http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/02/mark-blaxills-opposing-view-in-usa-today-on-vaccine-fear-mongering.html ). Earlier this week, Jane Johnson of Thoughtful House released the following statement. “We fully support [Dr. Wakefield’s] decision to leave Thoughtful House in order to make sure that the controversy surrounding the recent findings of the General Medical Council does not interfere with the important work that our dedicated team of clinicians and researchers is doing on behalf of children with autism and their families.”
Wakefield expressed optimism that by working with the support of a larger set of autism organizations he would be able to focus attention back on the exploding population of affected children and their families, “which is where it belongs”, he emphasized. “I have always followed the principle that good medicine, and ultimately good science, begins and ends with the patient. We need to remember that the purpose of medical science is not to serve the medical industry but rather the interests of the patients the industry serves.”
Dan Olmsted is Editor of Age of Autism.
|
|
|
|
Joan
United Kingdom
541 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2010 : 14:07:27
|
Laura says
"I would like to thank (and give a big hug if that's not "too emotional") whoever wrote the "Establishment betrayed its agenda with MMR vaccine" article in the Scotland on Sunday."
I know it was one of the best and I'm sure it was Bill Welsh a scottish granddad who had great input there. Whilst he and I were outside the GMC on the finding of facts, Bill and I were arranging for mother and child to be interviewed and photographed by various papers in Scotland.
|
|
|
|
Seonaid
United Kingdom
1174 Posts |
|
|
Seonaid
United Kingdom
1174 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 17:58:47
|
Trisha Greenhalgh's Competing Interests in Wakefield Case
http://bit.ly/cH0d38
By John Stone
Prof Trisha Greenhalgh, whose analysis of the controversial Wakefield Lancet paper, was published by Sunday Times journalist Brian Deer on his website (HERE: http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-greenhalgh.htm ) has received more than £1.4m in grants from the UK government’s Department of Health since 2003.
When Deer’s original allegations were published in the Sunday Times in February 2004 they were supported by the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, and the Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson. Prof Greenhalgh failed to disclose either her government funding or her assistance of Deer when earlier this month she published an article in British Medical Journal criticising the Lancet’s delay in retracting article (HERE: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/340/feb02_4/c644 ). Nor have BMJ so far published the letter (see below) pointing out her unfortunate omissions.
Greenhalgh’s reading of the paper was not only contested by Andrew Wakefield (HERE: http://www.rescuepost.com/files/autismfile_us33-wakefield.pdf ) and Carol Stott (HERE: http://jabs.org.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3605 ) on one side of the MMR controversy, but also implicitly by prominent Guardian science journalist Ben Goldacre on the other. Goldacre wrote in a 2005 award winning article (HERE: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/jan/28/mmr-vaccine-ben-goldacre ):
"...people periodically come up to me and say, isn't it funny how that Wakefield MMR paper turned out to be Bad Science after all? And I say: no. The paper always was and still remains a perfectly good small case series report, but it was systematically misrepresented as being more than that, by media that are incapable of interpreting and reporting scientific data."
Goldacre’s opinion apparently led to bad feeling between himself and Deer (HERE: http://briandeer.com/solved/gazette-large.htm ).
Greenhalgh’s analysis projected a hypothesis onto the paper which was not partof its design and may have indirectly influenced the decision of the General Medical Council who decided that paper was not an early report, as stated, but a bungled version of a more formal scientific paper, commissioned by the Legal Aid Board, which the defence always insisted was never undertaken.
This is the text of my letter to BMJ, so far unpublished by them:-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Trisha Greenhalgh: competing interests"
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Prof Greenhalgh
[1] does not disclose any competing interests. She has, however, contributed a controversial article
[2,3] attacking the 1998 paper
[4] to journalist Brian Deer's website. Although not disclosed here by Greenhalgh or in the accompanying article by Deer
[5], Deer was named as a complainant against Andrew Wakefield in the High Court by Mr Justice Eady, who stated [6]:
"Well before the programme was broadcast [Mr Deer] had made a
complaint to the GMC about the Claimant. His communications were made on 25 February, 12 March and 1 July 2004. In due course, on 27 August of the same year, the GMC sent the Claimant a letter notifying him of the information against him."
Since 2003 Greenhalgh has benefitted from more than £1.4m in research
grants from the Department of Health [7]. When Deer's original allegations were published in the Sunday Times in February 2004 he was supported by the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, who told ITV
8]:"There is absolutely no evidence to support this link between MMR and autism. If there was, I can assure you that any government would be looking at it and trying to act on it. I hope, now that people see that the situation is somewhat different to what they were led to believe, they will have the triple jab because it is important to do it."
and by Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, who told the BBC3
 :"I don't think that spin and science mix. If they are mixed, it is a very unfavourable position for children's health. Now a darker side of this work has shown through, with the ethical conduct of the research and this is something that has to be looked at."
and Jeremy Laurance reported in the Independent
[9]: "At the Department of Health, which has striven for the past six
years to bolster public confidence in the vaccine, joy is unconfined at the discrediting of Andrew Wakefield, as the researcher responsible for the scare."
Meanwhile, Health Secretary John Reid asked the GMC to investigate
[10].I express concern that conflicts that go up to the highest ranks of government are still conflicts, that the government itself is not a
disinterested player, and has not behaved like one. At the same time Prof Greenhalgh's research has benefitted hansomely from its largesse. I believe there should be an inquiry.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
'We Still Believe in Wakefield'
