February 11 2009
Autism and
vaccines: allegations of scientific
misconduct
Judith Graham
The charge is explosive:
a British doctor who led the first
scientific study suggesting a link
between autism and the MMR vaccine
misrepresented data in
a prestigious medical journal.
The allegation appears
in an investigation published Sunday
in the Times of London and has raced
around the world since.
In the Feb. 1998
scientific report in the Lancet, Dr.
Andrew Wakefield and a dozen
co-authors noted that eight of 12
children who received the MMR vaccine
(for measles, mumps and rubella)
started developing autism-like
symptoms within days of being
vaccinated.
The assertion, allegedly
based on parents’ reports,
contributed to a sharp drop in MMR
vaccination rates in Britain
accompanied by measles outbreaks and
the deaths of several children.
But the claim
wasn’t backed by evidence,
says Brian Deer, the investigative
reporter who wrote the Times story.
His says his conclusions are based on
a review of medical records,
confidential documents,
communications with parents, and
testimony delivered during an ongoing
inquiry by Britain’s General
Medical Council into Wakefield’s
professional conduct.
Deer is in the U.S. this
week to deliver a lecture on his work
at the University of Michigan's C S
Mott Children's Hospital.
His sources indicate
that six children had pre-existing
problems before getting the MMR shot,
Deer told me over the phone today.
The Lancet report stated that
children's behavioral symptoms
started an average 6.3 days after
being vaccinated.
Three additional
children started evidencing
behavioral problems two to five
months after they were vaccinated,
not within days or weeks. Five
children didn’t have regressive
autism, as indicated in the study.
Wakefield's theory was
that measles in the vaccine caused an
inflammatory bowel disease that in
turn caused toxins to leak into
childrens' system and cause brain
damage. Several of the children
listed as having bowel disorders in
fact had no evidence of
abnormalities, Deer alleges.
Wakefield didn’t
answer Deer’s request for a
response before the articles were
published. But separately, he
released an extensive refutation of
the journalist’s findings
earlier this week.
In the six-page
statement,Wakefield asserted that his
work was scientifically correct,
denied misrepresenting data and
reasserted that the suggestion of a
link between the MMR vaccine and
autism was perfectly valid.
“There is absolutely nothing
either to withdraw or to apologize
for in this matter,” he wrote.
“Based upon the
parental histories of regression in
their children after MMR vaccine, the
known link between measles and brain
damage including autism and the
findings in the children, there was
and continues to be every reasonable
basis for suspecting a possible link
between MMR vaccination and autistic
regression,” he insisted.
Other scientists
strongly disagree. There’s no
credible evidence to support the
claim of any association between the
MMR vaccine and autism, according to
Dr. Gary Freed, director of general
pediatrics at the University of
Michigan and immediate past chair of
the U.S.’s National Vaccine
Advisory Committee.
Several researchers have
tried and been unable to replicated
results published by Wakefield, and
numerous large epidemiological
studies have shown “absolutely
no connection between the MMR vaccine
and autism,” Freed said.
This isn’t the
first time Deer has raised questions
about Wakefield’s work.
Indeed, supporters of Wakefield are
convinced he's on a mission to
discredit the physician.
Deer says his only interest is in
disclosing the truth behind
Wakefield's work.
Five years ago, the
journalist published stories showing
that the physician had been hired by
attorneys in 1996 to investigate a
possible connection between the MMR
vaccine and autism after parents
raised concerns.
That fact was not
disclosed to the Lancet editors. When
the journal learned of it, editors
investigated and published a
statement expressing regret. “We
judge that all this information would
have been material to our
decision-making about the
paper’s suitability, credibility
and validity for publication,”
wrote Lancet editor Richard Horton in
Feb. 2004.
A month later, 10 of the
13 experts listed as co-authors on
the Wakefield paper published a
separate statement in the Lancet
retracing their support for its
conclusions. “We wish to make it
clear that in this paper no casual
link was established between MMR
vaccine and autism as the data were
insufficient,” the experts said,
according to the New York Times.
The issue is significant
because many parents have grown
distrustful of childhood vaccines,
believing they’ve been
associated with a sharp rise
in autism cases. With more
parents opting not to immunize their
children, more children are
contracting preventable and
potentially dangerous childhood
illnesses such as measles.
Contacted in London, a
spokesman for the Lancet said the
journal had no comment
