Comments on: Is Wakefield being shut up, or are Jenny and Jim trying to get publicity for his research?

By: David N. Brown

David N. Brown — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 00:06:02 +0000

Brian,
Bernard Rimland has been cited as suggesting a link between autism and vaccination in the 1960s. Of course, his immediate influence would have been American, not British. I think you misunderstood a bit: I said the drop started before 1998 (ca. 1996?), and I hadn’t considered the influence of his Crohn’s claims. What I think consensus accounts (esp. your own) show is generalized suspicions about MMR were in the air by ca. 1992, which as I recall is the date given in the LAB for when litigation was first considered.

I approach this issue from the background of a student of science and theology, and as a writer of speculative fiction. From this perspective, I’m reserved about drawing direct links between two manifestations of the same or similar ideas. I think a passage in Ecclesiastes could serve as a caution: “Nothing is done that has not been done before, and will not be done again.” In the present case, the idea that a vaccine caused autism (and popular acceptance of it) is explainable by repeated independent evolutions.

By: Brian Deer

Brian Deer — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 10:34:05 +0000

David B: I find your posts very interesting and constructive, but sometimes you’re not correct. MMR vaccination levels were NOT in decline prior to Wakefield. In the UK, the vaccinated 2 year olds figure was 92% prior to Wakefield. This was the highest ever figure.

The first fall – from 92 to 91% – followed Wakefield’s widely-publicised claims that MMR causes Crohn’s disease. This was just before the retracted Lancet paper. Thus, those perhaps somewhat less familiar than I am with Wakefield’s activities might mistake this to be evidence that there was a fall before him.

He is entirely responsible for the collapse in immunisation figures in the UK. Indeed, at his GMC hearing, his leading counsel was very clear in acknowledging the impact of his 1998 paper.

Moreover, there were no suspicions in the 1960s that vaccines cause autism. Previous concerns about possible neurological problems with vaccines never mentioned autism. I think (from memory) the US Coulter book in the 1980s may have one mention of autism on one page somewhere in a shopping list.

With respect, I think it’s important in this matter of health and safety that people don’t just extemporise off the top of their heads. If you have some evidence to substantiate what you are saying, this is your chance.

The vaccination figures are listed at the bottom of this page of mine:

http://briandeer.com/solved/story-highlights.htm

By: Phil H

Phil H — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 10:22:34 +0000

“And with the GMC being in the defamation plaintiff loving UK…”

If only honest men could be comfortable using the weapons of knaves…

By: AutismNewsBeat

AutismNewsBeat — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 09:46:46 +0000

I like this part:

Moreover, why now, after 12 years of inaction, did The Lancet and GMC suddenly act? Is it coincidence that the monkey study is currently being submitted to medical journals for review and publication?

Don’t they have that backwards? It seems to me that Wakers’ monkey study was timed to defend himself against the GMC’s investigation.

By: Clay

Clay — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 06:23:24 +0000

I wouldn’t mind if “they” shut him up, but yeah, this is just a pre-release promotional event to get press coverage for Dr. Wakefield’s upcoming paper. These people don’t give up.

By: FreeSpeaker

FreeSpeaker — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 01:32:40 +0000

Joseph: They are point blank accusing the GMC members of being in the pockets of vaccine manufacturers. That sounds like a pretty serious accusation to me, particularly coming from people with deep pockets

And with the GMC being in the defamation plaintiff loving UK….

By: _Arthur

_Arthur — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 23:59:30 +0000

“At no point to Ms. McCarthy and Mr. Carrey address the ethical violations that Dr. Wakefield was found guilty of.”

What ? They dont address the EVIDENCE ? Paint me any color but surprised.

By: Joseph

Joseph — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:49:54 +0000

They are point blank accusing the GMC members of being in the pockets of vaccine manufacturers. That sounds like a pretty serious accusation to me, particularly coming from people with deep pockets.

By: Socrates

Socrates — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:41:30 +0000

Jenny’s taken the place of the shaman reading the entrails. Planting seeds of Myths in the fertile soil of the parents’ anguish.

Wakefield is the Prophet and AoA the Cantor.

Our science can’t touch them. They have their own Holy Catholic theology.

By: David N. Brown

David N. Brown — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:21:17 +0000

“Dr. Wakefield himself put the idea in the public’s mind that the MMR was causing autism.”

This is giving him too much credit. Suspicions that vaccines cause autism can be traced back to the 1960s, before MMR existed. It seems to be well-documented that Wakefield was recruited by parents who already believed MMR caused autism. Also, I’m skeptical whether Wakefield even had as great a role in the MMR scare as is widely assumed. The numbers on vaccine uptake show MMR declining even before 1998, and the steepest drop was a few years later (something Goldacre has commented on). I suspect that, ultimately, Wakefield did not cause a scare so much as provide a convenient rationalization for it.