Posted on 03/24/2014 8:51:13 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax
In 1998, British Doctor Andrew Wakefield published research findings in Britain's famed medical journal The Lancet linking autism to a children’s vaccine (MMR) for measles, mumps and rubella. The doctor’s claims resulted in a panic as they “…triggered a slump in immunization levels, outbreaks of infectious disease and worldwide public worry.”
In 2004, London Sunday Times reporter Brian Deer revealed that Dr. Wakefield had literally MADE UP the research which showed autism resulting in a matter of days after children had been vaccinated. Deer found that a group of attorneys was paying Wakefield large sums to discredit the MMR vaccine. The attorneys planned to profit from lawsuits filed against the companies which made it.
Coach is Right is proud that staff writer Michael D. Shaw is, according to the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), “responsible for what is arguably the best…in-depth assessment of the investigation of [the Wakefield] research to the eventual retraction of the Wakefield paper…”
Here is the Shaw article as it appeared on HealthNewsDigest.com:
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
bump
Apparently you lack any kind of comprehension.
1. I did not blame vaccinations. I did not “blame” anything or anyone. I reported what the parents said.
2. You have no idea whatsoever about what I do or do not know about the family’s home life. It is absurd for you to make such an assumption, to do so demonstrates extreme carelessness with facts.
3. Yes, I gave an anecdote, a FACTUAL anecdote. I did NOT say that the vaccine caused the problems, that is your overactive imagination talking.
4. No, I did not give the name of the vaccine or the age of the boys when it happened because I was not trying to prove anything, only commenting that I knew someone who reported a situation similar to what trapped in LA reported.
You apparently have a problem. I wonder what caused yours. Disclaimer, I am certain I do NOT know and I am not blaming vaccines or anything or anyone else.
The trouble with assuming that we (as an advanced technical society) already know everything necessary to answer all questions and solve all problems is that we get into this sort of conundrum.
Both sides might well be right.
Full disclosure: I am not an MD, nor have I had any formal biological training of any sort. I do have some familiarity with medical subjects simply as a result of longevity.
It may be that the problem is simply one of genetics, and predisposition to certain diseases and biological malfunctions as a result of uniquely individual DNA.
Otherwise, why don't ALL infants receiving the MMR vaccine suffer the same tragic consequences?
This raises other questions. Do all multiple births have identical DNA? I don't know. If the answer is yes, then...
Has there been a single incident of identical twins or triplets receiving the vaccine, and only one of the set resulting in autism? If not, why not?
For the medically and genetically savvy out there, there are further questions.
Are the fingerprints of identical multiple births really 100% identical? Is their DNA?
The observation that if 99.9% of a population derive real lifesaving benefits from a vaccine does not justify prohibiting the entire population from that benefit is well taken. Not ethically; not morally.
Unfortunately there is probably no test available currently to determine a negative predisposition to past or future recipients of this vaccine.
But the real tragedy of the families adversely affected cannot be allowed to justify the elimination of the benefit to the overwhelming majority of others.
Anecdotes are NOT evidence... that is my point. It adds NOTHING to any conversation about SCIENCE to throw in nonsense
I might take you more seriously if you did not throw in nonsense about claiming to know things you could not possibly know and claiming that I said things I did not say.
Anecdotal evidence has a very important role in medical science.
Nonsense
“The expression anecdotal evidence refers to evidence from anecdotes. Because of the small sample, there is a larger chance that it may be unreliable due to cherry-picked or otherwise non-representative samples of typical cases.[1][2] Anecdotal evidence is considered dubious support of a claim; it is accepted only in lieu of more solid evidence. This is true regardless of the veracity of individual claims.”
Double blind studies are considered important in medicine
And you have put words in my mouth that were never written.
you told an anecdotal story which I pointed out was anecdotal. I said one cannot conclude post hoc ergo proper hoc anything from that. That is a true statement.
You through out an anecdotal story on a thread about vaccinations and a fellow who committed fraud and withdrew his paper and is generally considered a quack because of his fraud.
You are just plain nuts, aren’t you?
Took a while to find it, and the link no longer works, but here is the article:
UK Sunday Times Ordered to
“Remove MMR Journalist’s Stories”
. . .on Dr. Wakefield from Paper’s Web Site
Work by Reporter Brian Deer is at Center of Investigation Being Conducted by Medical Regulators
The Press Complaints Commission (PCC) of London, an independent body that oversees journalism fairness in the UK, has issued an interim order calling for the Sunday Times to remove stories written by Brian Deer about Dr. Andrew Wakefield from its web site. Dr. Wakefield had filed an extensive complaint with the PCC regarding errors of fact in Deer’s reportage on the MMR vaccine and its possible relationship to autism. The General Medical Council (GMC) in the UK is presently hearing evidence involving Dr. Wakefield and two of his colleagues following a complaint to the GMC by Deer himself. The PCC decision today appears to indicate there are questions about the accuracy of the Deer stories.
The PCC complaint by Dr. Wakefield provides clear evidence that Deer’s allegations of “data fixing” by him are false. The complaint also accused Deer of an undisclosed conflict of interest since Deer also failed to reveal in his articles that he was the person who made the original complaint to the GMC, misleading the newspaper’s readers over the accuracy of his reporting.
“Given the ongoing nature of the dispute,” Stephen Abell of the PCC wrote, “the articles should be removed from the newspaper’s website until this matter has been concluded. This would not be an admission of any liability on the part of the newspaper.”
Although media are expected to respond promptly to complaints through an informal process, the Sunday Times took more than three months to answer detailed issues raised by Dr. Wakefield, and called upon legal representation to write the paper’s response. Despite this the paper’s management have failed to produce any evidence of “data fixing” by Dr. Wakefield. In its letter to Dr. Wakefield regarding his complaint against Deer, the PCC “expressed concern at the initial slowness of the newspaper’s response.” The PCC said it delayed a complete ruling until it has a fuller accounting of all information submitted to the GMC, but that the outcome of the GMC hearing is notrelevant to a final decision by the PCC.”
Your statement that the data was “falsified” is clearly a lie and ruins your credibility.
What age did they have the vaccines?
I am ASD and I was vaccinated. See! Proof!
I also ride a bike so bike riding causes autism. See! Proof!
Ironically, my wife was a pre-school teacher and she evaluated ASD kids by seeing if they acted like me.
I was not the one who said the data was falsified. It was the reason why the article was pulled. Walker ADMITTED to falsifying the data. At least read about the case before making such a comment. You do not know what you are yapping about
“A now-retracted British study that linked autism to childhood vaccines was an “elaborate fraud” that has done long-lasting damage to public health, a leading medical publication reported Wednesday.
An investigation published by the British medical journal BMJ concludes the study’s author, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, misrepresented or altered the medical histories of all 12 of the patients whose cases formed the basis of the 1998 study — and that there was “no doubt” Wakefield was responsible.
“It’s one thing to have a bad study, a study full of error, and for the authors then to admit that they made errors,” Fiona Godlee, BMJ’s editor-in-chief, told CNN. “But in this case, we have a very different picture of what seems to be a deliberate attempt to create an impression that there was a link by falsifying the data.”
Britain stripped Wakefield of his medical license in May. “Meanwhile, the damage to public health continues, fueled by unbalanced media reporting and an ineffective response from government, researchers, journals and the medical profession,” BMJ states in an editorial accompanying the work.”
nicely played
Not sure exactly but they were small boys when I first met them and they already had severe problems. The mother just said that the official story is that the vaccines don’t cause that but she thought it strange that both her sons were normal until taking the vaccine and then both developed severe problems and apparently will be a burden on someone as long as they live.
Of course I can’t say whether the vaccines caused it and it is possible that there is no common cause for both boys but logically it would seem that the odds favor a common cause of some kind. It could be a combination of two things that they both have in common and maybe the vaccine is not either of the two. I doubt that anyone will ever be certain what caused this tragedy. There was a time when it would have been labled as demon possession and no one would have doubted it.
It seems an odd age for getting them vaccinated.
What seems an odd age? I told you I am not sure of the age. I could ask the parents the next time I see them.
Any age where you would notice the child becoming autistic. Normally autism is identified around 4-6 years old. Vaccines are usually finished before then.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.