Summary of Wakefield/MMR/GMC events/verdict

[Sheri Nakken]

Summary of Wakefield/MMR/GMC events/verdict
January 28 & 29

my comments posted to the article - go there and post yours..........

Drug companies can experiment on your children with vaccine studies and after their fake studies continue to experiment once the vaccine is approved and injure and damage and kill your children, but a doctor who is concerned to find out why children h......ave autism and that autism also involves their bowel, is unethical? He can draw blood from children as control subjects and drug companies can do the same, but it is OK for them. Has any parent complained??? NO.
There is no justice...................

Sheri Nakken, RN, MA
http://vaccinationdangers.wordpress.com



Medical Council Says Wakefield "Failed in His Duties," Was Dishonest.

Multiple news outlets are reporting that Britain's General Medical Council has come down harshly on Dr. Andrew Wakefield's MMR research, saying he "failed in his duties as a responsible consultant" and was dishonest and irresponsible in describing research published in the Lancet.

Yorkshire Evening Post (no comment section)

The Independent (add your comments)

Sky News (add your comments)

______________

http://www.autismone.org/content/paper- ... cs-frcpath
"That Paper" by Andrew Wakefield

__________
http://www.autismone.org/content/devils ... cs-frcpath

Title: The Devil's in the Detail by Andrew Wakefield, MB, BS, FRCS, FRCPath
________

A Statement from Generation Rescue in Support of Dr. Andrew Wakefield
http://generationrescue.org/wakefield_statement.html

http://www.thoughtfulhouse.org/pr/GMC-response.php
Statement on UK General Medical Council from Thoughtful House (foundation set up in US by Wakefield)

http://www.nationalautismassociation.or ... 012810.php
PRESS RELEASE
Parents of Children with Autism Call Decision in Wakefield Trial a Threat to Medical Integrity

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8485793.stm
longer statement from Andrew Wakefield to the BBC today

_______________
A Short Form FAQ About the Wakefield GMC Case

January 28, 2010
http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/01/a-sh ... -case.html
Below is a short form FAQ about the GMC case of Dr. Andrew Wakefield and colleagues Professor John Walker-Smith and Professor Simon Murch

Did the Ethics Practices Committee of the Royal Free Hospital NHS approve Dr. Wakefield and colleagues' proposal for research biopsies to be conducted on children which ultimately resulted in publication by the Lancet?

YES . The Ethical Practices Committee of the Royal Free Hospital NHS Trust approved proposal # 162-95 before any biopsies were collected for the case study on the Lancet 12.
Was the 1998 Lancet article based on a research study or a case study?

The Lancet article was based on a case study. Case studies do not have control groups.
Did the 1998 Lancet case report say that the MMR vaccine causes autism?

NO. The Lancet case report reads, "We did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome (autistic enterocolitis) described." The Lancet case report ends with a call for additional research. "We have identified a chronic enterocolitis in children that may be related to neuropsychiatric dysfunction. In most cases, onset of symptoms was after measles, mumps, and rubella immunisation. Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine."
If the Lancet case report did not say MMR vaccine causes autism, what did some of the co-authors partially retract in 2004?

Nothing. Some of the original co-authors partially retracted an interpretation despite the fact that it never existed in the case report.

The co-author's partial retraction reads, "We wish to make it clear that in this paper no causal link was established between MMR vaccine and autism as the data were insufficient. However, the possibility of such a link was raised and consequent events have had major implications for public health. In view of this, we consider now is the appropriate time that we should together formally retract the interpretation placed upon these findings in the paper, according to precedent."

Again, the original case report itself never interpreted the data as establishing a causal link between MMR and autism, so there was no "causal" interpretation to retract.
If the Lancet case report did not say MMR causes autism, and if his collection of biopsies for research purposes was pre-approved by the Ethical Practices Committee, why is there a case against Dr. Wakefield (and colleagues)?

Medical authorities in the UK (and the United States) do not like it when licensed medical professionals ask questions about vaccine safety. Licensed medical professionals and medical researchers who question vaccine safety are more difficult to dismiss than parents who notice adverse reactions after vaccination.

The prosecution of Dr. Wakefield, Professor Walker-Smith and Professor Murch is an example and warning to other licensed medical professionals and researchers. The warning is clear: if you question the safety of a vaccine, you put your license and career at risk.
Does industry have anything to gain by prosecuting Dr. Wakefield, Professor Walker-Smith and Professor Murch?

Yes, possibly. Industry may use the prosecution of Dr. Wakefield and colleagues in an effort to argue that the MMR vaccine is safe. Merck manufactures both MMR vaccine and Proquad vaccine. In 2009, Merck eliminated the option of single dose Measles, Mumps and Rubella vaccines when they announced they are discontinuing the manufacture of those monovalent vaccines. Now that the single dose option is no longer available, Merck's would benefit if the public perceived MMR's 3-live-viruses-in-1-shot as a safe option for customers wary of Merck's new 4-live-viruses-in-1-shot Proquad.

Additionally, in internal emails regarding Vioxx in Australia, Merck employees discuss "destroying" doctors critical of their products "where they live". MMR is a Merck product. Dr. Wakefield, Professor Walker-Smith and Professor Murch all lived in the UK at the time this study was conducted.

_________________________
http://www.rescuepost.com/files/100120- ... aint-1.pdf

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
(Breach of duty of honesty and candor; False Testimony; Misuse of Professional
Position, Failure to Disclose Conflicting Interest, False Expert Testimony)

call upon the General Medical
Council (GMC) to investigate the conduct of Drs. Richard Horton, Arie
Zuckerman, Michael Pegg, and David Salisbury in the Fitness To Practice (FTP)
hearing against Drs. Andrew Wakefield, Professor John Walker-Smith, and
Professor Simon Murch. As set forth more fully below, Drs. Horton, Zuckerman,
Pegg, and Salisbury breached their duty of candor to GMC and violated Good
Medical Practice (GMP) guidelines by giving false and misleading testimony
during the investigation and at the FTP hearing. Drs. Horton, Zuckerman, and
Salisbury abused their professional positions of responsibility and trust by
attempting to censor research critical of vaccine safety and interfere with relations
between lawyers and scientists. Dr. Salisbury gave misleading testimony
regarding the safety of the MMR vaccine and concealed information material to its
safety from the public.
____________________
studies that back up Dr. Wakefield?s 1998 study.

http://www.talkaboutcuringautism.org/me ... n-2009.pdf

___________
http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/01/nake ... eberg.html
Naked Intimidation: The Wakefield Inquisition is Only the Tip of the Autism Censorship Iceberg
------------------------------------------
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
http://vaccinationdangers.wordpress.com/ & http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm
ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases Reality
Next classes start January 27 & 28