MMR
investigated: site visitor's views on the
troubles of Andrew Wakefield (1)
This page
is research from an investigation by Brian Deer for The Sunday
Times of London and the UK's Channel 4
Television into a campaign linking the MMR
children's vaccine with autism.
| Go to part I: The Lancet scandal | Go to
part II: The Wakefield
factor
Following
Brian Deer's reports in The Sunday Times on February 22
2004, visitors to this site had their say
Sunday
22 Feb 2004
Dear
Mr Deer,
I
would be more comfortable with your
article if it mentioned that GPs were
being paid public money, with
productivity-style arrangements, to
administer the MMR. Surely there is a
conflict of interest there, too.
Yours
sincerely,
Quentin
L.
Sunday
22 Feb 2004
Hi
Brian,
Was
wondering how you came to the conclusion
that the MMR was safe? It clearly is not.
Mothers Know their children and it cannot
be argued that regression following an
MMR jab is pure coincidence. It is fact
MMR is unsafe.
My
worry is that I believe you are well
known in undercover investigations
regarding medicines. Therefore if
pharmaceutical companies got wind of your
involvement of this investigation your
research is assumably flawed in that it
is obviously in their favour.
It
would be intersesting to know if you have
any information on the DTP-hib vaccine. I
have researched this for the past year
and my findings are horrific.
Are
you aware that the vaccine contains both
mercury and alumminium?
which
leads me to the question if we are being
told not to eat tuna in pregnancy as it
contains mercury (lethal poison) and to
avoid using deodorants as the alumminium
in them cause cancer then why is it
considered safe to inject both toxins
into the bloodstreams of our 2 month old
children?
I
have much more to say on the subject and
an investigation into the safety of the
DTP is urgently needed - are you the man
for the job or are your true findings
supressed and silenced in the financial
favour of the government and
pharmaceutical compamies as I'd suspect.
Dr's
advocate vaccines as they have a
financial gain. DTP-hib is the main cause
of cotdeath (refer to Dr. Viera
Schiebner) and dr's dismiss this as SIDS,
a handy explanation I'm sure you'll
agree.
please
respond
Mrs
Emma T
Sunday
22 February 2004
Mr
Deer,
Your
piece today is cynical and misleading.
The way your paper has presented it
dishonest. The funding issue does not
touch upon the question as to whether
there is a link between the vaccine and
bowel disease however much you and your
paper wish to establish in people's minds
- through tabloid style reporting that
gravely misuses words like 'truth' and
'facts' - that it does. The transparency
of the campaign to discredit Mr
Wakefield, and sustain those powerful
interests who clearly would do anything
to make this very real issue go away,
only serves to make plain that there is
an issue of science here that demands
proper research. That is the way to allay
parents' natural fears, not through
sensationalism masquerading as serious
investigative reporting. You have a fine
track record we are told, but this piece
is not responsible investigative
reporting; it is playing the dirty game
of others and your own reputation and
that of your paper will in time suffer
from having published it. It comes down
to an issue of trust and from today I
don't think I am able any more to trust
the Sunday Times.
Yours
sincerely
Kenneth
M
Sunday
22 February 2004
Dear
Sir,
Brian
Deer's article on page 12, 22.2.04,
threatens an epidemic of measles and
states that the rates of regressive
autism have remained constant since the
introduction of MMR. But what is the
incidence of autsim in children who have
had only single inoculations against the
three diseases? Perhaps they would write
in with the date of inoculations and the
date of onset so that we can complete the
picture.
Surely
it was in your colour supplement that I
read an article recently championing Dr
Wakefield's research?
Yours
faithfully,
Jenny
W, PhD
Sunday
22 February 2004
Dear
Brian,
Please
thank the Sunday Times for bringing the
issue of MMR and Autism to the forefront
of people's minds again. I expect you
realise that every time the issue is
raised more parents will decide not to
take the risk of immunising their child
with the MMR because any risk, no matter
how small it is perceived, is too great,
when it comes to your own child. No
amount of mud-slinging from the media
will convince parents that the jab is
safe. As you well know; all scientific
research is funded by someone, so it
could be said that anyone funding
research has something to prove, whether
it be Legal Aid Services or vaccine
manufacturers. (Did you fail to mention
who funded the Finnish Epidemiological
Study, which the Government used to
"prove" the MMR was safe?) (In
case you are interested, it was Merck
Inc. manufacturer of the MMR vaccine).
Perhaps in the interest of balanced
journalism you would like to sling a
little mud their way.
Yet
again nothing you have written proves
that the MMR does not cause Autism and
gut related problems, but I suspect you
know that already, don't you? The
Government has tried to convince us, the
Medical Establishment has tried to
convince us and lowly journalists, like
you have also tried but all have had to
revert to a witch-hunt againts Andy
Wakefield because that is all the
evidence you have.
Still,
carry on the good work - you do nothing
but good for our cause.
Deborah
N
Sunday
22 February 2004
Dear
Brian,
I
enclose the copy of a letter I have just
fired off to the Sunday Times, for your
information.
You
are liable to start getting more
mailings, from your article. I would like
to get mine in there as well - for your
information, as much as any other reason.
You may not, eg, be aware of a lot of the
material that is available on this
subject (I don't know if your
investigation was limited merely to Dr
Wakefield and his study).
My
main points:
(1)
Please continue to investigate this
matter, INCLUDING the role of thimerosal
(the alleged role of thimerosal) in
damage by vaccines. Which takes the
matter beyond just the MMR shot. The DPT
shot is the main culprit that should have
been investigated years ago, as to all
the damage it was wreaking. (See DPT: A
Shot in the Dark by Barbara L. Fischer
and Dr (PhD) Harris L Coulter (publ.
1985), eg; and Vaccination, Social
Violence and Criminality by Dr Coulter,
publ. 1990. Dr Coulter is arguably the
US's foremost medical historian, having
researched the medical literature for
years.
(2)
Please don't buy fully into the righteous
indignation pose of the medical
profession in this matter. They are too
wedded to their wondrous medical modality
to be truly open to ALL the facts about
the damnable downsides of vaccines, which
go far beyond just the Minimal Brain
Damage havoc they are wreaking (ADD/ADHD,
dyslexia, dyspraxia, etc., besides the
'autism spectrum disorder' range).
Vaccines are linked with
arthritis/arthralgia (& other
autoimmune diseases, like lupus),
allergies/asthma, CFS/ME, type 1
(juvenile) diabetes,
epilepsy/convulsions, multiple sclerosis
- I could go on. This is NOT a clear-cut
matter, of the benefits of vaccines
"far outweighing" the risks.
They do not.
And
it is not a clear-cut matter of either
vaccines or no protection. Besides
generally a healthy diet, there is
vitamin A/cod liver oil for measles, for
one (though most modern,
allopathic-trained doctors won't know of
this remedy); and a number of natural
anti-bacterials and -virals for the rest
of the childhood diseases, including
colloidal silver, olive leaf extract,
grape seed & grapefruit seed extract,
a number of mushrooms, garlic, etc etc -
in short, Nature is full of preventive
& protective & treatment
measures. A good naturopath could put you
on track in this investigation - if
you're open to continuing on in the
matter. Including, hopefully, finding out
that there is considerable value in the
childhood diseases, both in conferring
lifelong immunity to the diseases (which
the vaccines do not; in fact, they push
the 'catching' of them up into
adolescence and beyond, when the
conditions can be more severe), and for
mothers thereby to be able to confer
immunity to their offspring via the
placenta until their own immune systems
are mature enough to begin to handle them
themselves. So that all the evocative
pictures of babies with whooping cough we
are periodically bombarded with in a
scare tactic are because of, not in spite
of, the vaccine. And so forth.
There
is a big subject here, that you could get
yourself stuck into, as an investigative
journalist. I would ask you to be willing
to look beyond just the medical
profession's rebuttal to the periodic
charges of vaccine damage that are made.
You could be doing all of us - or at
least the public - a big favour, if you
did. For in the end, truth must out. And
the chips will have to fall where they
may.
Yours
for an open mind,
Stan
S.
Dear
Editor,
It
is good that the Sunday Times has seen
fit to put an investigative journalist
onto the subject of the MMR-autism
controversy. Presumably if he continues
his research into the matter beyond his
initial four-month's investigation, he
will find out such facts as that:
*
Vaccine strain measles virus has been
independently identified in the inflamed
GI tracts of children with regressive
autism. (Eg: In a stufy of 22 children
whose parents felt they had been made ill
by MMR, Dr Arthur Kingsman of the New
York University School of Medicine made
the same findings as Dr Wakefield's group
at the London's Royal Free Hospital; and
there a number of other similar
examples.)
*
Measles virus antibodies have been found
in the CSF of children with regressive
autism.
Are
these points evidence of causality? No.
But they provide a plausible biomolecular
mechanism for brain damage, from harmful
chemicals and other substances getting
into the blood stream (including the
mercury from the thimerosal that at least
used to be in the MMR shot here, and
still is in the US). Why isn't it
accepted by the health authorities as
worthy of investigation? Shall we guess -
and speaking of "conflict of
interest"? There is a built-in
conflict of interest when the same
authorities promoting vaccination are
also the ones monitoring the safety of
vaccines.
There
is also the little matter of the likes of
US House of Representatives David Weldon,
who is also an MD, in testifying at a
hearing on the MMR-autism controversy
before that country's Institute of
Medicine recently, revealing that he had
found out that altered datasets,
exonerating the MMR, were provided to the
IOM, but not made available to
independent researchers. So what's going
on? Hopefully, people like the Sunday
Times's investigative journalist will
continue their digging into the matter
for the public, which has a right to know
the true story about the safety of the
vaccines they are strongly encouraged to
have their children submit to. And then
let's see what the real answer is to the
Sunday Times's editorial position; to
wit: "What is best for our children
should be settled by facts and
transparency not by modern-day
superstition."
Yours
sincerely,
Stan
S.
Sunday
22 Feb 2004
As a
former Chief Executive in the NHS I have
been absolutely appalled at the credance
given until now to the Wakefield
'evidence', and the potential public
health hazard that its mass-publicity
attracted. I am so pleased that you have
done such good work on getting behind
this story and just wish that the real
evidence shown in your article was given
still more emphasis to parents making the
key diecisions on their childrens'
health. One final point, I wonder whether
Wakefield ever submitted his work for the
necessary ethical approval, if indeed it
was 'research', and whether in
consequence he duly declared the
financial and contractual commitments he
was signed into ? If you have not
reviewed this it may be another angle to
view in terms of this man's honesty and
ethical stance.
Sunday
22 Feb 2004
Dear
Brian,
Having
reopened the MMR debate in regard to
Andrew Wakefield, why not continue and
broaden your research into the context
and role the government has played in the
publication of vaccination stasticis?
Some
of which are:
1)
Data from epidemics ever since the late
1870' s show that in percentage terms,
more vaccinated people than unvaccinated
come down with the epidemic illness. A
recent BBC email news report indicated
that in the USA this winter, that of 93
deaths from flu only 33 were
unvaccinated.
Here
in England there is no such break down of
data such as the local epidemic of
measles in Wandsworth last year as to how
many were or were not vaccinated.
2)
The health department graphs, in its
vaccination campaigns, regarding the
benefits of vaccination only show the
trends for measles and mumps since such
vaccinations began in the late 1950's and
then the subsequent MMR jabs. If the
graphs showed the as these have evolved
since 1900, one would see that measles,
mumps, etc were on a continuous declining
trend throughout the 20th century. Such
that the decline may well have continued
without vaccinations since the 1950šs.
3)
Another area that is not considered is in
regard to the arbitrary cutoff dates by
which serious vaccination reactions are
excluded from being linked to a
vaccination. Given this arbitrary and non
standardised exclusion criteria, there is
no way of knowing how serious the issue
of MMR vaccination reaction really is.
The
answers and data relating to the above if
brought out into the wider public domain
would serve to bring out a more rational
debate both from the governmental health
bodies as well as from those who oppose
governmental health policies.
Yours
sincerely,
Jerome
W.
Sunday
22 February 2004
Dear
Mr Deer,
Your
thorough and persistent investigation
into the MMR scare is likely to save more
lives than you may think. (Sunday Times
February 22nd 2004)
As
you will know Measles is one of the five
leading causes of death in children under
five years of age in Sub Saharan Africa.
Last
autumn, I was asked to attend, as
President of the World Medical
Association Press Conference arranged by
the Ugandan Medical Association The
Ugandan Ministry of Health in active
partnership with the Ugandan Medical
Association were mounting a measles
vaccination campaign. They wanted to
achieve the highest uptake possible and
sought publicity for this. It was felt
that the support of the 'world's doctors'
might add some weight to their life
saving initiative.
The
Ugandan Press reflected the concerns of
the local communities which had been
intensified by the MMR scare in the UK
and had apparently contributed to the
lower uptake of the measles vaccine.
The
disproportionate 'scare' promulgated by a
group of doctors and apparently validated
by the "Lancet " which has been
one of the most respected international
medical journals, caused alarm,
professional conflict and uncertainty.
This must have resulted in significant
damage to the trust that the public place
in the medical profession's advice about
the need to protect children against the
hazards of measles.
It
will take some time to restore that
trust. By exposing the lack of scientific
evidence, the conflict of interest and
emphasising the absence of a proven
causal link between the MMR vaccine and
autism, you will help create an
environment in which parents and their
physicians will make more informed
decisions to ensure the welfare of
children not only in the UK but
throughout the world.
I am
very grateful for the work that you have
done.
Thank
you very much
James
A, MD FRCP FRCPCH
President
of the World Medical Association
Sunday
22 Feb 2004
There
is a conspiracy which the Government has
instigated over the last 8 years against
Dr Wakefield and his findings regarding
MMR. It has over the last few months cost
my son and thousands of other children
with Autism and Crohn's disease a right
to dispute the drug companies and the
Government's case by taking away Legal
Aid just before the cases are due to be
heard in court.
I
was advised in 1995 that my son could
have Legal aid so that a case could be
made against the drug companies. The case
is stronger now than it was then but the
Government lead Legal Aid have questioned
whether there is a case that can be
won.They judged it was a waste of funding
as the case could not be won, or so they
said. But surely this is not even justice
as the Government are one of the
interested parties in the cases as they
are as much to do with the NHS as the
drug companies. Our solicitors
representing other children were already
in contact in 1995 with Dr Wakefield and
he did not have any such funding.
I
had lengthy discussions with him in 1996
as we were trying to get samples of my
son's biopsy to him as he was visiting
Leeds to talk about his initial findings.
Even
then he told me that his superiors at the
London Free Hospital had told him their
funding, which was how the Hospital was
able to function ,was obtained from the
very drug companies he was researching
against. He had been warned several times
about this , even before his findings
were published , but he chose to continue
for the sake of these children.
He
told me he had found a strain of measles
in all the samples of biopsies from
children with Autism and Crohn's , his
goal was to prove that the strain was
that from the vaccine.This would ask the
question how was it there and why was it
in an area where these diseases had
begun.
In
2002 Dr Wakefield, having been hounded
out of this country by the Government and
their lapdogs in the Medical profession,
attended a Congressional hearing in
Washington and along with an independent
Irish doctor who was able to source the
exact strain of measles as the MMR with
no involvement from Dr Wakefield.
The
British government official at Congress
objected to the findings but it was a
major success to all of us fighting for
justice for our children.
Even
then the witchhunt has continued against
Dr Wakefield ,he is not Dr Frankenstein,
more Mother Teresa, but neither is Tony
Blair , Solomon.
Alastair
B.
Sunday
22 Feb 2004
Dear
Mr Deer,
I
read with great interest your article in
today's Sunday Times, headlined
"MMR: THE TRUTH BEHIND THE
CRISIS".
I
believed upon reading the headline that
the article would give some conclusive
proof about whether the three in one jab
was really safe or not, an issue that, to
my mind, remains unresolved. What was
printed was actually a complete
discreditation of Dr Wakefield's work,
upon the basis of a conflict of interest,
as he was receiving legal aid to support
a number of parents looking to sue the
drug companies who produce the
innoculations.
I
agree that Dr Wakefield was, at best,
naive to believe that the legal aid he
received was irrelevant to his research,
but does it completely discredit his
findings? You ask the question "Do
these findings stand in the wake of The
Sunday Times investigation" and
answer "The Editor of The Lancet
said yesterday the MMR/autism link was
"entirely flawed" and should
never have been published". Again,
this only highlights Wakefield's conflict
of interest, it does not conclusively
prove that his findings were totally
incorrect.
I
can only tell you my personal story:
I
have twin boys, Thomas and Jack, who were
born 28th May 1993. Up until the age they
were immunised, they developed completely
normally, developing language and playing
with toys appropriately (e.g..pushing a
car along a window ledge, turning the
pages of a book in sequence). For 24
hours after they were immunised with MMR
both children were quite ill. Jack, in
particular, was very poorly and drifted
in and out of consciousness for the
following 24 hours. He was very pale and
feverish and we were so concerned we
called the doctor to him. He told us it
was a normal reaction to the jab.
In a
matter of weeks after the innoculation,
both children regressed alarmingly.
Jack's behaviour was a cause for great
concern. He simply screamed all day,
pirouetted on the spot until he fell
down, or banged his head on the window.
Both myself and his mother had no reason
to make an association with MAR as this
was 1995 and there had been no
controversy surrounding the jab at all.
We were both completely aware though,
that his behaviour was dramatically
changing.
When
The Lancet paper was published I did sit
up and take note, as I had always found
it unusual that both my children had
reacted so badly to receiving the jab. By
this time, the children were 5 years old
and had both been diagnosed as autistic.
Jack severely so, as he had no language
(still doesn't today, aged 10). What also
intrigued me about the report was the
fact that both children suffered from
severe bowel problems, Jack more so, and
he is also more severely autistic. This
seemed to be too coincidental to me.
I
personally made a number of attempts to
contact Andrew Wakefield to find out
more. Finally I went to see his team in
the Autumn of 1999. When I visited the
Royal Free Dr Wakefield was very much in
the background. Dr Simon Murch was
infinitely more passionate about the
proposed link between my children's
autism and MMR. I do find it quite
surprising that Dr Murch has since
discredited Dr Wakefield's research.
My
children were both X-Rayed. Lumps of hard
waste were found to be blocking their
bowels. It was as if their systems
couldn't break down their food. The
gastroenterology department were
astonished that my local hospital had
never X-Rayed the children, despite the
fact that both had visited the doctor
several times with bowel problems and,
indeed, Jack had been admitted to
hospital at one point, as he had not
passed any waste for fourteen days.
Tom
and Jack were admitted to the Royal Free
Hospital in late January 2000, for
further investigation. They were given an
enema, to totally clear their system and
then were given a colonoscopy. I did not
deem this to be "invasive" as
you put it, as I simply hoped the
findings might help make them better.
When I was shown the pictures of my
children's colons, I was astonished. They
were presented to me along side a picture
of what a healthy colon should look like.
My children's were ruptured and
blistered. What caused this condition? I
still have no idea. Before the
colonoscopy I was asked if I would mind
if the medical staff took some tissues
from my children's guts during their
internal. They said they were looking for
evidence that the measles virus was still
in their system. I was told the results
would take about six months. Every time I
have phoned the Royal Free since I have
been told they cannot find any results of
this test. Usually I'm told someone will
call me back, no one does.
I
can only say that following the
colonoscopy and internal clear out Jack's
behaviour immediately improved. His eye
contact improved beyond all recognition
and he was much happier in himself,
undoubtedly because he felt so much
better. You will see, therefore, why I do
not feel as negative about the
colonoscopy as you may. Having a
difficult disabled child become even 5%
easier is priceless.
The
children's mother heard of the Alexander
Harris case after we came back from the
Royal Free. They suggested that she
contact her GP to find out the batch
details of the MMR that the boys had
received. These could be obtained from
Trafford General Hospital, who would have
distributed the vaccine. When we
contacted Trafford General we were told
that the records were lost.
Today,
Jack and Tom are ten years old. Tom is
high functioning, but has the emotional
age of a five year old. Jack has no
language, is still largely incontinent
and breaks out in a severe blistering
rash, akin to measles, at least twice a
year. The GP cannot diagnose this rash,
they are totally baffled.
As a
parent struggling to raise two severely
autistic children, I find it quite
upsetting when people criticise Dr
Wakefield's work. This is not because I
have had any personal dealings with him
(as I said, I was only in his company for
a matter of minutes, during which he said
very little). It is because, as yet,
people cannot prove that it was
inaccurate, only that there was some
underlying bias.
No
one in the media or government ever seeks
to clear up the issue of MMR, Autism and
Bowel Disease. You are an investigative
journalist Mr Deer, so perhaps you could
tell me why:
My
children were developing perfectly until
having MMR, yet now have severe bowel
problems and autism?
I am
unable to attain the results of the
biopsies taken at the Royal Free?
Why
the batch records of the vaccine
administered to my boys have been lost?
Why
Jack breaks out in a Measles like rash
twice a year, every year?
I've
seen many column inches written in
support of MMR and many millions of
pounds being spent on promoting it's use,
but never anything being done to answer
the questions I have. My life has been
totally shattered.
I
would appreciate your response.
Yours
Sincerely
Tony
G.
|