About two months ago an autism parent published a study: a “reanalysis” of a CDC dataset. That study: Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination timing and autism among young african american boys: a reanalysis of CDC data.
Here’s a screenshot of how the article looks online today (click to enlarge):
The retraction reads:
The Editor and Publisher regretfully retract the article [1] as there were undeclared competing interests on the part of the author which compromised the peer review process. Furthermore, post-publication peer review raised concerns about the validity of the methods and statistical analysis, therefore the Editors no longer have confidence in the soundness of the findings. We apologise to all affected parties for the inconvenience caused.
Previously, the editors had an “expression of concern” about the article:
The Publisher of this article [1] has serious concerns about the validity of its conclusions because of possible undeclared competing interests of the author and peer reviewers. The matter is undergoing investigation. In the meantime, readers are advised to treat the reported conclusions of this study with caution.
Further action will be taken, if appropriate, once our investigation is complete.
Comment on
Brian Hooker. Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination timing and autism among young African American boys: a reanalysis of CDC data. Translational Neurodegeneration 2014, 3:16.
An excellent discussion of this study and the questions raised by it can be found at MMR, the CDC and Brian Hooker: A Guide for Parents and the Media
—
By Matt Carey
Left Brain Right Brain 
Anyone want to place bets on whether or not this will get the conspiracy theorists to shut up about it?
Of course not – they’ll continue to tout the study as “certified & absolutely 100% factually correct” much like they still trumpet Andrew Wakefield’s work….
Heh, only a *fool would take you up on that bet.
The anti-vaccine groupies and the conspiracists are doubling down now…still loyal to the discredited Brian Hooker.
* I’m not a fool. 🙂
Apart from say-so statements, Which long-term studies provide the uncontestable statistical evidence that vaccines provide valuable support to the body’s immune response and prevent the diseases they are claiming to protect against ?
Since that evidence is overwhelming, you have already rejected it. Perhaps you could provide evidence to support your point of view. You can’t. So this conversation is over.