[ness31]

Wait, so this infamous study that has everyone up in arms is about Gardasil? I thought it was about the MMR vaccine.

[Sivad]

You're talking about the Wakefield case study I think. They railroaded that poor fucker, they accused him of fraud and other heinous crimes but it was all bullshit. The public health establishment is crooked as hell.

All of the documented evidence and testimonies submitted to the General Medical Council, upon which GMC issued its guilty verdicts against Dr. Wakefield and his two co-defendants in 2010, were subsequently forensically assessed by the UK High Court in March 2012, in the appeal of Professor John Walker-Smith, the senior clinician and senior author of the Lancet case series. The High Court determined that the verdicts of professional misconduct and ethics violations were unsupported by the evidence.

Indeed, the adjudicated evidence refutes the case against Dr. Wakefield; the documents and testimonies demonstrate that there is no evidence whatsoever, to support the charges of professional misconduct, much less the accusation of fraud. The accusation of fraud was hurled by the Editor-in-Chief of the BMJ, a medical journal whose corporate ownership is intertwined with the vaccine manufacturing Behemoths, Merck – with whom BMJ signed a partnership agreement in 2008 – and GlaxoSmithKline which provides additional financial support to BMJ. Among their numerous vaccine products, Merck and GSK manufacture the MMR vaccine.

My commentary is buttressed with details from the High Court decision (2012); transcripts of testimony before the General Medical Council (2007- 2010); documents and testimony that have been judicially adjudicated; the sworn deposition of the Deputy Editor of the BMJ with internal BMJ emails(2012); internal correspondence by CDC officials and CDC-commissioned scientists (2000-2009, some uncovered in 2011; new documents obtained in July 2017); the suppressed finding of CDC’s first large-scale epidemiological study (1999) and a transcript of the closed door meeting of the Epidemic Intelligence Service at Simpsonwood (2000); a transcript of the closed meeting of the US Institute of Medicine Committee on Immunization Safety Review (2001); the U.S. Grand Jury criminal indictment of Dr. Poul Thorsen (2011); transcripts of the UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (1988); a confidential report Re: Infanrix hexa submitted by GlaxoSmithKline to the European Medicines Agency (2012) documenting sudden infant deaths; Cochrane Collaboration MMR reviews (2003, 2005, 2012); HHS Inspector General investigation report – CDC advisory panel corruption (2009); CDC scientists letter of complaint about “rogue interests” “questionable and unethical practices” (2016).

[ness31]

That is a very long article with many, many links. I haven’t even scratched the surface. Is that what people like Drlee would call antivax propaganda?

At a cursory glance it seems there are questions surrounding injections of many vaccines at once. That seems reasonable..

Edit - having said that, being the misanthrope that I am, I reckon the explosion of autism has more to do with non existent parenting than any vaccine..but that is another thread

[Godstud]

The public health establishment is crooked as hell.

Only your personal opinion, and that's pretty weak-sauce. LAME.

I reckon the explosion of autism has more to do with non existent parenting than any vaccine

It probably has more to do with people actually diagnosing it as such. It's now being reported as such.

[ness31]

But of course..

[Sivad]

Vera Sharav is the author of the article and she's hardly a crank, she's a well known medical rights advocate who has exposed a lot of corruption and other awful shit.

The explosion in autism is mostly due to changes in diagnostic criteria. Vaccines may be causing autism in some small subgroup but there's no hard evidence for it. The only thing I'm certain about on this issue is that establishment cannot be trusted. There's just too much incentive to deceive, I'm sure some of the deception is due to well-intentioned paternalism, but a lot of it has to do with careerism, money, and politics.

That is a very long article with many, many links.

It's a good case study in institutional corruption that provides a rough overview on how massive the corruption is and how it works. So it's worth the read even if you're not all that interested in vaccine safety.

[Godstud]

Vaccines may be causing autism in some small subgroup but there's no hard evidence for it.

There is no correlation, whatsoever. That's why these people are CRANKS. You saying so doesn't make it so. The science is in, and your pseudoscience is irrelevant, and unscientific.

People like you are buying into bullshit propaganda designed to make you doubt science. Ignorance is bliss and that's why the uneducated buy into this so much. It's a fake hypothesis promoted by morons.

http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4026.pdf

https://www.historyofvaccines.org/conte ... use-autism

[Sivad]

NIH Director Dr Bernadine Healy speaks to Sharyl Attkisson about autism susceptibility

[Drlee]

I think the only thing that can reasonably be said about this issue is that it'll seem crazy if/until a connection is found between vaccines and something bad, after which the people who didn't want to vaccinate their kids would look prescient instead of crazy.

This is the inevitable result when we politicize these sorts of things. You are correct. This is what would happen. The real issue is not whether but how much. If we found some smoking gun the danger would be that though we correct the problem with formulation, the mental midgets who have been crowing with no scientific reason for a decade would believe that they have been right all along.

Look what you have seen in this thread. We have at least one idiotic poster who claims that epidemiology is not a science. That some might believe him is what is scary.

[Rancid]

I feel like the only vaccine I don't really care about if you decide to get it for you and your kids or not, is the flu vaccine. In fact, I feel like I remember hearing the US and Canada are hte only countries on the planet that engage in mass flu vaccination.

Anyone know the truth of hte matter here?

[Drlee]

That is true. For financial and other reasons other nations suggest a more targeted approach. The large numbers of participants in the US also keeps the price down. The decision to recommend the vaccine for everyone over 6 months was a strategic one, driven mostly by the desire for a good policy.

There are more targeted recommendations in the US and Canada as well. For example those over 65 or with COPD.

The recommendations have little to do with the answer to this question:

In a perfect world, what percentage of your population would you like to see receive the flu vaccine?

I get it every year and have for a long time. Why? Because I am acutely aware of the numbers. Now that I am over 65 I get the geezer vaccine. Real flu, not the flu most people think they have when they have a bad cold, is a serious disease. I am happy to take a shot at not getting it or giving it to others. But then I am exposed numerous times every year because of my clinical work. People who deal with the public, teachers....etc....take your choice. There is a very substantial reward over risk potential to getting the vaccine.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

But @Drlee, haven't you heard about that one website (scroll past the links to the interview with the Sector Commander of the Alien Space Brotherhood Fleet from his spaceship and the photographic evidence of Bigfoot) that talks about ADJUVANTS and ADDITIVES in vaccines (those words are so big and complicated for us non-scientist guys that there's no way we could determine that certain claims about them are pure horseshit or not!!), proving that medicine is a FAKE science?
#Soros #TooSmart #vaccineconspiracy #MedicineIsALie #SmokingGun #ObamaIsResponsible

[Prosthetic Conscience]

You're talking about the Wakefield case study I think. They railroaded that poor fucker, they accused him of fraud and other heinous crimes but it was all bullshit. The public health establishment is crooked as hell.

All of the documented evidence and testimonies submitted to the General Medical Council, upon which GMC issued its guilty verdicts against Dr. Wakefield and his two co-defendants in 2010, were subsequently forensically assessed by the UK High Court in March 2012, in the appeal of Professor John Walker-Smith, the senior clinician and senior author of the Lancet case series. The High Court determined that the verdicts of professional misconduct and ethics violations were unsupported by the evidence.

Indeed, the adjudicated evidence refutes the case against Dr. Wakefield; the documents and testimonies demonstrate that there is no evidence whatsoever, to support the charges of professional misconduct, much less the accusation of fraud. The accusation of fraud was hurled by the Editor-in-Chief of the BMJ, a medical journal whose corporate ownership is intertwined with the vaccine manufacturing Behemoths, Merck – with whom BMJ signed a partnership agreement in 2008 – and GlaxoSmithKline which provides additional financial support to BMJ. Among their numerous vaccine products, Merck and GSK manufacture the MMR vaccine.

Nice misdirection there. You claim Wakefield was 'railroaded', and then point to the court case of someone else. Wakefield's conflicts of interests and ethics violations were, of course, his, not someone else's. The High Court was only looking at Walker-Smith's case. Wakefield remains struck off. That court case commented:

"As Mr Justice Mitting observed in his judgement, 'There is now no respectable body of opinion which supports (Dr Wakefield's) hypothesis, that MMR vaccine and autism/enterocolitis are causally linked'.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17283751

The BMJ's publisher is "a wholly owned subsidiary of the British Medical Association", the professional association of 160,000 doctors in the UK.

The GMC found that Wakefield had flouted the rules in pursuit of his theory – and profit. At the centre of the case against him is the ethical conduct of the trial which resulted in the Lancet paper. The panel found he had subjected 11 children to invasive tests such as lumbar punctures and colonoscopies that they did not need, without ethical approval.

But investigations revealed more. In June 1997, before the paper was published, he filed a patent as one of the inventors of a vaccine for the elimination of measles virus and for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease.

In February 1998, the same month as the Lancet paper, he applied for ethical permission to run a trial of a new potential measles vaccine and set up a company called Immunospecifics Biotechnologies Ltd which would produce and sell it. The father of one of the children he had seen with developmental problems and bowel disease would be the managing director. Wakefield tried out the new vaccine on the child, without mentioning it in the medical notes or telling the child's GP. He was also found to have unethically arranged for his son's friends to have blood samples taken from them during his birthday party – for which he paid them £5 each.
...
The GMC looked into the cases of eleven children who were entered into the trial. Many rules had been broken. Wakefield's contract was for "experimental gastroenterology" and he was not allowed to treat children, but he ordered tests and procedures that were not necessary for their health. In the interests of proving Wakefield's theory, children were given lumbar punctures in the spine, colonoscopies and barium meals – all significant procedures. Children were enrolled who did not fit the strict criteria for entry to the trial and they had not come from a GP who was referring them because they needed treatment.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... mr-vaccine

Wakefield was out for profit, and completely disregarded professional ethics. Ironically, to sell a vaccine.

[Drlee]

Yes Baluba. I have heard of those websites. I am just personally committed to suppressing them because I take government money and corporate money and spend some of my own. I also have a cat and I don't have to tell you what that means.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

A cat you say? You fiendish devil! Vaccines are made of cats, aren't they?! @Sivad and his horseshit posts were right all along!

[Suntzu]

We cured mental retardation with autism!

[Drlee]

We cured mental retardation with autism!

That is actually kinda' funny.

[ness31]

Ah ha. So this Wakefield person is behind Vaxxed and has that McCarthy actress on side. Ok, I’m starting to get a bit of a picture as to the agitators in this controversy.

As Prosthetic Conscience pointed out he was de-registered for good reason. I’m curious, if he hadn’t been so unethical and perhaps had done things correctly would we now be having a different discussion? It’s a shame he let himself and others down..

[Drlee]

As Prosthetic Conscience pointed out he was de-registered for good reason. I’m curious, if he hadn’t been so unethical and perhaps had done things correctly would we now be having a different discussion? It’s a shame he let himself and others down..

You mean if there really was significant and carefully reviewed data that showed there was a link between some vaccines or components thereof to ASD? Of course we would. But no such data exists.

CDC Says:

There is no link between vaccines and autism.

Some people have had concerns that ASD might be linked to the vaccines children receive, but studies have shown that there is no link between receiving vaccines and developing ASD. In 2011, an Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on eight vaccines given to children and adults found that with rare exceptions, these vaccines are very safe.

A 2013 CDC study [PDF – 204 KB] added to the research showing that vaccines do not cause ASD. The study looked at the number of antigens (substances in vaccines that cause the body’s immune system to produce disease-fighting antibodies) from vaccines during the first two years of life. The results showed that the total amount of antigen from vaccines received was the same between children with ASD and those that did not have ASD.
Vaccine ingredients do not cause autism.

One vaccine ingredient that has been studied specifically is thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative used to prevent contamination of multidose vials of vaccines. Research shows that thimerosal does not cause ASD. In fact, a 2004 scientific review by the IOM concluded that “the evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal–containing vaccines and autism.” Since 2003, there have been nine CDC-funded or conducted studies[PDF – 357 KB] that have found no link between thimerosal-containing vaccines and ASD, as well as no link between the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine and ASD in children.

Between 1999 and 2001, thimerosal was removed or reduced to trace amounts in all childhood vaccines except for some flu vaccines. This was done as part of a broader national effort to reduce all types of mercury exposure in children before studies were conducted that determined that thimerosal was not harmful. It was done as a precaution. Currently, the only childhood vaccines that contain thimerosal are flu vaccines packaged in multidose vials. Thimerosal-free alternatives are also available for flu vaccine. For more information, see the Timeline for Thimerosal in Vaccines.

Besides thimerosal, some people have had concerns about other vaccine ingredients in relation to ASD as well. However, no links have been found between any vaccine ingredients and ASD.

If a scientist could, by careful peer reviewed studies, show that there was some causal relationship between a vaccine or vaccines in general and ASD they would be seen as heroic by the public health community. They would be wealthy overnight. They would be the darling of attorneys from coast to coast. A best selling book would earn them millions. They would create, virtually overnight, a market for vaccines that did not have such results; the creation of any one of which would make the pharmaceutical company that did it immensely rich as said vaccine would go from generic to patent protected.

The notion that they would would be ruined is absurd.

Don't think people are not looking. One of the suppositions by antivaxers is that nobody is looking. This is nonsense. What is not happening is a major investment in new studies to try to disprove older studies that have already been peer reviewed and the data confirmed sufficiently. I doubt anyone here would advocate their tax money going into a study to show that cigarettes cause lung cancer. That is established beyond a reasonable doubt. The money can simply be spent better elsewhere.

[ness31]

I doubt he would have dedicated his life’s work to something he didn’t think he could eventually achieve. He himself stated there was no causal relationship between the two..
The fact that others couldn’t reproduce his results doesn’t mean much tbh. I know that’s how science works, you need to be able to reproduce and replicate etc, but there could be a zillion reasons why Wakefield and others wouldn’t want that to happen. So the fraud charge as such seems a bit trumped up..

Did Wakefield count on all those other other issues of misconduct to destroy him? Probably not. Why he felt comfortable using kids as lab rats and not disclosing financial conflicts of interest is anyone’s guess, but maybe he felt it was the norm.

I’d say there was a bit of ‘railroading’. Sivad isn’t the loon you all want him to be

Oh, and even though this Wakefield fella isn’t a proper doctor anymore, I don’t believe for one sec he doesn’t have an army of people carrying on his reasearch with him in the shadows. And the next time they appear, they won’t be railroaded. That’s the scary bit..