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.
|