Study linking vaccine to autism was an elaborate fraud

[Jack]

Strong, very strong, words from the BMJ!


The first study to link a childhood vaccine to autism was based on doctored information about the children involved, according to a new report on the widely discredited research. (Various)


In an accompanying editorial, BMJ editor Fiona Godlee and colleagues called Wakefield's study "an elaborate fraud."

Given there is no vaccine for stupidity it looks a though we will have to wait at least another generation before these diseases are eradicated. The parents who still refuse to have their kids vaccinated still put the rest of the population in danger. They should be made to reimburse the NHS for the extra cost of treating their unvaccinated kids although how they can live with their consciences given the number of dead and diseased children their stupidity condoned I don’t know.

[Hibs Class]

I agree with much of your sentiment, but think that fear and ignorance are far more evident here than stupidity. Wakefield was very persuasive and convincing and it's understandable why many parents made the choices they did.

(Hopefully this thread won't degenerate into a defence of Wakefield and his actions / opinions - it would be misguided to take it in that direction.)

[EH6 Hibby]

I agree with much of your sentiment, but think that fear and ignorance are far more evident here than stupidity. Wakefield was very persuasive and convincing and it's understandable why many parents made the choices they did.

(Hopefully this thread won't degenerate into a defence of Wakefield and his actions / opinions - it would be misguided to take it in that direction.)

I agree with you that it was fear and ignorance that caused people to decide against vaccinating their Children, mainly ignorance though in my opinion. My son is 6 and a half, and I agonized over whether to get him vaccinated with the mmr, I even looked into getting the separate injections, but after looking into claims made by Wakefield and then the defence of the mmr jab, I realised that there was very little substance in the claims.

Andrew Wakefield should be ashamed of himself, not just for the amount of children who did not get vaccinated because of his claims, but for the families he appears to have manipulated to back up his claims, these families were coming to terms with their child being Autistic, and he has used that to his advantage.

[GhostofBolivar]

This is hardly news.

The total absence of any link between the MMR vaccine and autism has been widely known for some time - despite what idiots like Jenny McCarthy would have you believe.

http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/Jenny_McCarthy_Body_Count/Home.html

[Baw Baggio]

Wakefield wasn't the only one to blame...

http://www.badscience.net/2008/08/the-medias-mmr-hoax/

[lapsedhibee]

Can't most of these diseases be cured by homeopathy? :dunno:

[Phil D. Rolls]

I know that Private Eye, which had supported the guy that suggested there was a link has now changed its tune and apologised.

The rise is as likely to be down to greater awareness of Autism.

[lyonhibs]

Can't most of these diseases be cured by homeopathy? :dunno:

:bitchy::bitchy:

Ear Candles is where its at.

Now, where's Two Carpets when you need him :greengrin

[Twa Cairpets]

:bitchy::bitchy:

Ear Candles is where its at.

Now, where's Two Carpets when you need him :greengrin

:greengrin

The stupidity is in the reporting - sensationalist and without understanding. Ben Goldacre in Bad Science explains it a damn sight better than I ever could, but in a nutshell non scientific, credulous hacks in search of a good headline are not going to go in much for digging into any claims made if they sound good. The rebuttals by science carried out properly are not nearly as attention grabbing, so they dont get reported, and all people are left with is a memory of a headline.

A similar example was the girl who died shortly after getting the HPV vaccine - cue panic, withdrawal and headlines until a few days later it was shown it wasnt linked - too late the damage is done.

In addition, conspiracy theorists and those with a self-righteous gripe against what they term "allopathy" (a word so loaded with smugness and arrogant conceit I can hardly bring myself to type it) much prefer to uncritically pick up on the agenda of the the likes of Wakefield (and homeopaths, just to maintain my standard rant:wink:) and continue to propagate it so it becomes almost an accepted fact in the minds of many.

[discman]

:greengrin

The stupidity is in the reporting - sensationalist and without understanding. Ben Goldacre in Bad Science explains it a damn sight better than I ever could, but in a nutshell non scientific, credulous hacks in search of a good headline are not going to go in much for digging into any claims made if they sound good. The rebuttals by science carried out properly are not nearly as attention grabbing, so they dont get reported, and all people are left with is a memory of a headline.

A similar example was the girl who died shortly after getting the HPV vaccine - cue panic, withdrawal and headlines until a few days later it was shown it wasnt linked - too late the damage is done.

In addition, conspiracy theorists and those with a self-righteous gripe against what they term "allopathy" (a word so loaded with smugness and arrogant conceit I can hardly bring myself to type it) much prefer to uncritically pick up on the agenda of the the likes of Wakefield (and homeopaths, just to maintain my standard rant:wink:) and continue to propagate it so it becomes almost an accepted fact in the minds of many.



Ben top man read the chapter on mrsa? Agree with you paragraphs 1 and 3,however the issue of hpv a different kettle of fish!

Looked into it due to having 2 daughters who were of an age when they were due to get the vaccine, if ever a threat was hyped to the max. then hpv is it! :cool2:

[Twa Cairpets]

Ben top man read the chapter on mrsa? Agree with you paragraphs 1 and 3,however the issue of hpv a different kettle of fish!

Looked into it due to having 2 daughters who were of an age when they were due to get the vaccine, if ever a threat was hyped to the max. then hpv is it! :cool2:

Without going into the pros and cons of HPV (although you can probably guess my take on it), the point I was trying to make was that the reporting of the girls death, undoubtedly tragic though it was, was sensationalist in that it was unlinked to the vaccination as she had a serious underlying condition.

People remember the front-page headline of the Daily Mail or Express about "Vaccine deaths" or "killer drugs", not the page 13 report of "Er, actually it had nowt to do with it" two weeks later.

It happens time and time again - headline, sensation, boredom and then the truth comes out. People retain a kind of cultural memory of concern and scare, not of the often rather dull scientific facts supporting the truth of the situation.

The other one you get more and more aware of as you get into this stuff is the use and misuse of statistics. Again, Goldacres your man, but the difference between "50% rise in the risk of cancer if you eat chocolate" is very, very different from "Eat chocolate and you have a 50% chance of getting cancer".