Who’s harming whom?: Misconduct charges brought against Andrew Wakefield
I have been reading through the numerous news reports about four charges relating to unprofessional conduct that have been brought against Dr. Andrew Wakefield, whose 1998 research study published in The Lancet suggested a link between the MMR vaccine and the onset of autism and gastrointestinal problems.
Charlie was born in 1997 and we knew that his skills were not developing by 1998. We have constantly been aware of Dr. Wakefield’s name and research all the time that we have sought to help Charlie. In looking back to Charlie’s babyhood, my husband and I can see how his development was different from that of typical babies—for instance, he lacked joint attention and did not develop language, though he babbled—and think that he has always had autism. When Charlie was five and due for another round of vaccines (MMR, DPT, polio), we nonetheless decided that he not take them and sought an exemption. A few weeks ago, we decided to have nine-year-old Charlie receive the three vaccines that he had not taken four years ago, in order to enter his new school district.
Three jabs in the arm and…………nothing happened. By which I mean, no gastrointestinal issues, no fever, no loss of skills, just the same bright-eyed boy.
But back to Dr. Wakefield.
The charges are being brought by the General Medical Council, which regulates the medical profession in the UK and are, according to an article in the Daily Mail:
that Dr Wakefield published “inadequately founded” research, failed to obtain ethical committee approval, obtained funding “improperly” and subjected children to “unnecessary and invasive investigations.”
The Irish Independent further notes Dr. Wakefield’s research
is said to have done more damage than anything published in a scientific journal in memory. It caused alarm about MMR vaccine, immunisation rates slumped and cases of measles, mumps and rubella soared.
Moreover, in 2004 it was discovered that, at the time that Dr. Wakefield was preparing the research that would be published in The Lancet, the doctor was being paid by lawyers for parents of children thought to have been damaged by the vaccine. The lawyers, the Irish Independent noted, were looking for evidence to use in sueing the vaccine manufacturers.
He received £55,000 (€80,000) [$101,310] from the Legal Aid Board which was paid into his research fund, but which he did not disclose to his co-researchers. He was accused by ‘The Lancet’ of failing to declare a conflict of interest that could have influenced his findings. Editor Richard Horton said if he had known in 1998 about the conflict of interest he would never have published the paper, and he partially withdrew it in 2004. John Reid, Health Secretary at the time, called on the GMC to hold an inquiry.
The Daily Mail noted that, after Dr. Wakefield’s research was published, “uptake of the vaccine for children aged under two [fell] from around 92% in 1995/96 to 82% in 2002/03.” Outbreaks of measles have occurred in areas of the UK where very low amounts of children received the vaccine.
Dr. Wakefield now resides in the US and is a researcher for Thoughtful House in Austin, Texas. If found guilty of the General Medical Council’s charges, Dr. Wakefield could be struck off the registry.
Learning about these charges against Dr. Wakefield—-the statement that an MMR/autism link is “tough to prove” by Dr. Stephen Walker, who is conducting a research study on such a connection—-Charlie’s lack of a reaction to getting the vaccines: It is all making me wonder if the “evidence” in a book like David Kirby’s Evidence of Harm is doing more harm than good.
11 opinions for Who’s harming whom?: Misconduct charges brought against Andrew Wakefield
Sharon
Jun 12, 2006 at 9:43 am
I have a friend who is about to have a baby girl. She has two NT boys and followed the vaccine schedule reccommended by her pediatrition. Since she has come to know me, my boys and autism, she is worried about her baby girl. She has decided NOT to let her have ANY vaccines until she is 2. She is concerned since she knows that when girls have autism, it is usually in the more severe forms.
I have tried to talk to her about it. Since her boys will be at school and bringing every germ home to their sister. I have also tried to tell her that less girls have autism than boys. Now how many kids will have to die from severe cases of childhood diseases because they have only heard theories without proof?
laurentius-rex
Jun 12, 2006 at 10:49 am
Never mind Wakers being struck off (My GP was struck off for sexual misconduct) I’ll warrant there are many autism quacks practising under dubios state licentiates, who would never even make the register in the UK.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Jun 13, 2006 at 5:58 am
One also has to wonder about autism practitioners in the US—-
Autism Vox » Let’s not make Wakefield a martyr
Jun 28, 2006 at 11:18 am
[…] Dr. Michael Fitzpatrick of spiked and author of MMR and Autism: What Parents Need to Know argues that he does not think that Dr. Andrew Wakefield, the doctor whose name is most linked with the MMR/autism theory, should be struck off the medical register by the General Medical Council (GMC). In Stop witch-hunting Wakefield , Dr. Fitzgerald notes that There is a danger that the prosecution of Dr Wakefield, which is not expected to start until next year, nearly a decade after the launch of the scare, will turn into a witch-hunt. This would play into the hands of Dr Wakefield in his self-indulgent posture of victimhood and encourage his supporters to move even further down the road towards canonising him as a martyr. It also reflects a degree of bad faith in the medical establishment as it attempts to compensate for its failure to respond effectively to the anti-MMR campaign at an earlier stage. The GMC charges fail to identify Dr Wakefield’s most important offence: this was not that he produced poor-quality science, but that instead of substantiating his improbable hypothesis, he embarked on a public campaign against MMR that could not be justified scientifically. But this campaign demanded a prompt and forceful challenge in scientific and political terms, not disciplinary measures 10 years later. […]
Autism Vox » A mother worries: Should I gave my girl the MMR jab?
Jul 3, 2006 at 5:33 am
[…] You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Related Posts: “This was not about autism”…Disabledocide…WhyI Worry About Charlie on the Bus…Raising sums for Son-Rise…Mother accused of killing autistic daughter…Katherine McCarron’s mother a flight risk?…What’s so funny?… […]
Autism Vox » In which I disagree with David Kirby
Nov 7, 2006 at 3:00 am
[…] Without getting into my own political proclivities or what I think about vaccines and autism (that’s in this post), I wish to note one aspect of Kirby’s article that I am in complete disagreement with. […]
Autism Vox » How To Treat Autism According to Dr. Wakefield
Feb 5, 2007 at 1:15 pm
[…] Dr. Wakefield faces a General Medical Council hearing for misconduct this year. It has also been also recently reported (see the articles written by journalist Brian Deer) that, two years prior to his published study on a link between the MMR vaccine and autism, Dr. Wakefield had begun to receive payments from the very lawyers who were pursuing lawsuits against vaccine makers on behalf of autistic children in England (see Buying Results: On Bias in Research). […]
Autism Vox » The Vaccine-Autism Urban Myth
Feb 6, 2007 at 5:07 pm
[…] When I was enrolling Charlie in the school district in the town we now live in back in May, I discovered that a letter stating our “religious grounds” for objecting to his being vaccinated was not going to be accepted without having to take things much farther. We were desperate, not because we have an autistic child, but because we needed to make sure that Charlie was in a school placement as his old school was closing, and the fear he underwent when we kept him out of school in November of 2005 seemed to us much worse than any threated from a vaccine. Late last spring, Charlie received the shots he had not had at the age of 5. He looked at the nurse sticking the needle in his arm, maybe winced a bit. There was no crying and we walked out to the car, and that was that. […]
New Study Casts Doubt on Leaky Gut Theory of Autism
Mar 17, 2008 at 4:46 pm
[…] “leak” into the gut and affect the brain. A major proponent of this theory was Dr. Andrew Wakefield; the “leaky gut” theory (which is a theory) led to parents trying special diets (such […]
Legal Standards, Science, and the Cause of Autism
Mar 27, 2008 at 1:33 am
[…] disowned the paper and Wakefield is to appear before the General Medical Council (GMC) on “alleged irregularities in his research methods,” as the March 27th BBC News notes. Specifically, Dr. Wakefield (who has sometimes been […]
Biomed, Anecdotal Evidence, and Thoughtful House
May 4, 2008 at 10:34 pm
[…] the controversy about Wakefield and his theories about autism causation and the misconduct charges against him in the UK, go here, here, and […]
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: