| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/05/2011 08:11:58 PM · #1 |
I thought I'd pass this link on because I've seen this conversation over the years here on DPC. It seems the sentinel study that linked autism with the MMR vaccine (and was withdrawn later by most of the authors) has been declared a case of fraud possibly done for financial gain. The lead doctor altered the medical histories of all 12 patients in the study.
I have to say I'm appalled and the real, actual damage done by this deception is large. A black mark on the medical community for sure.
Retracted autism study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds |
|
|
|
01/05/2011 08:25:38 PM · #2 |
Absolutely a black mark. Plenty of parents have chosen not to vaccinate based on this as well.
|
|
|
|
01/05/2011 08:26:56 PM · #3 |
| Previous discussion for hindsight giggles. |
|
|
|
01/05/2011 08:49:41 PM · #4 |
Ha. Thanks for posting this. I remember that thread...I was familiar with the idea of herd immunity and everything but hadn't reached the hilariously effective conclusion that abstaining was morally selfish. It is a pretty atrocious ethics breach, yes, but it almost feels like a lot of people's hysteria is being blamed on the study... people who want to wear tinfoil hats will always find a way to wear them. The study was somewhat dubious even before we knew it was bunk...
I'm not saying they aren't deserving of blame, but putting the onus on them for people being idiots is something altogether different. |
|
|
|
01/05/2011 08:53:11 PM · #5 |
I'm glad you passed this along,  DrAchoo. I had just read the article with great interest.
While childless myself, I have seen my close friends over generations, agonize over this decision. "Will these inoculations harm my children? or help them?"
My counsel always was, and is, ask your doctor and abide by that advice. Your doctor is the person who is trained to know the risks.
The thing that gets me about this latest revelation is that the former doctor, Andrew Wakefield, who falsified all the data to achieve a wanted pharmaceutical result was defrocked, back in May. It took until now, when a prestigious British medical journal actually took the trouble to detract his paper for this to be come public.
I realize that none of us on this forum can come to grips with this lapse in publication time, but dang it, somebody's got to be responsible for this time lapse.
|
|
|
|
01/05/2011 08:56:37 PM · #6 |
| It's been out for quite some time. Can't recall when the original paper was retracted. |
|
|
|
01/05/2011 08:59:19 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by bspurgeon:
It's been out for quite some time. Can't recall when the original paper was retracted. |
Correct, many months now. I think what's new here is the proof (or admission) that the doctor did this deliberately; it wasn't sloppy work or anything like that, it was out-and-out lying.
R. |
|
|
|
01/05/2011 09:16:27 PM · #8 |
| Maybe I'm just late to the game. The original article has actually been retrated for a few years now, but was not done because of accusations of fraud, but rather for methodology and errors found within the paper. That was the reasoning anyway. |
|
|
|
01/05/2011 10:19:54 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Maybe I'm just late to the game. The original article has actually been retrated for a few years now, but was not done because of accusations of fraud, but rather for methodology and errors found within the paper. That was the reasoning anyway. |
In addition, 10 of the original 13 authors of the study have renounced the article.
If convicted of fraud, perhaps the this Dr. Wakefield should also be charged with negligent homicide or manslaughter for all who have died. |
|
|
|
01/05/2011 11:08:17 PM · #10 |
| Did you know that 90% of children with autism had at least one time in their lives ingested potatoes? |
|
|
|
01/05/2011 11:28:27 PM · #11 |
In 2004 the CDC asked the IOM to study it (and the link between thimerosal-containing vaccines) and they said very clearly, "The committee concludes that the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism. The committee also concludes that the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism."
Also, first part of this article from 2004:
"Ten of the original 13 authors of a controversial 1998 medical report which implied a link between autism and the combined MMR vaccine for measles, mumps, and rubella, have retracted the paper's interpretations....One author could not be reached and two others, Peter Harvey and lead author Andrew Wakefield, refused to join the retraction."
It's about time the rest of the world caught up with what this guy started so long ago.
Message edited by author 2011-01-05 23:30:25. |
|
|
|
01/06/2011 11:54:01 AM · #12 |
One has to wonder why the British Medical Journal is still trying so hard to demonize Wakefield. At the same time, the scientific community will defend global warming research fraud and conspiracy. I've heard Wakefield speak, and he does not say there IS a link - he says the evidence he's seen suggests there may be a link, and it is worth further investigation. His concern relates more to the use of Thimerosal (contains Mercury) as a preservative, and the impact on an already weakened immune system of exposure to multiple diseases at the same time. The charges in the editorial are nothing new - I heard them at least 5 years ago.
IMO - do vaccinate. Even though the CDC has a list of "bad" batches of vaccines that are admitted to have damaged children's health, you have to weigh the odds of a bad vaccine dose against the odds / damage of the actual disease. But, take some additional precautions - don't do the vaccine if the child is ill, or just recovering from an illness; if possible, use vaccines that do not use mercury-based preservatives. Mercury is known to be bad magumbo that it is best to avoid. Also, you can do the MMR vaccination as 3 separate vaccinations - which I suggest would be safer than getting all three at once. Give time between them for the child's immune system to fully recover.
Bad science is bad science, but let's keep it to the science. A raving, lying, cheating, greedy bad scientist may actually be right about a discovery. His/her character does not necessarily discredit his/her science. It does, however, suggest a more thorough review of the science is prudent.
|
|
|
|
01/06/2011 01:29:10 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by dtremain:
...to demonize Wakefield. |
Generally speaking, the word "demonize" is used to indicate a situation where one party is distorting the other party's position in order to discredit him. Are you assuming that the fraud allegations are false (in which case I would agree with the term "demonize"? or are you misusing the word?
The autism/thimerasol link has been quite thoroughly studied. No other study could replicate Wakefield's findings and now we have a reason why.
In medical research, if you are found to fabricate results, your character is tarnished forever. It's pretty well the worst thing you can do to your own name in the field. |
|
|
|
01/06/2011 01:37:09 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by dtremain:
...to demonize Wakefield. |
Generally speaking, the word "demonize" is used to indicate a situation where one party is distorting the other party's position in order to discredit him. Are you assuming that the fraud allegations are false (in which case I would agree with the term "demonize"? or are you misusing the word? |
I mostly agree with you, though in this case, I find the adjective can still be appropriate as a way of clearly conveying that the actions were "evil" -- deliberately causing harm to others -- as opposed to simple incompetence, accident, or difference of opinion. |
|
|
|
01/06/2011 02:23:38 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by dtremain:
. At the same time, the scientific community will defend global warming research fraud and conspiracy. |
You tip your hand here my friend. When you can defend Doctor Wakefeild who first puts together a study based on twelve patients and then manipulates the data in " a deliberate attempt to create an impression that there was a link by falsifying the data" and has been condemned by every peer agency that has reviewed the case. Then you go and call global warming a "fraud and conspiracy"; I would guess based on the e-mail kerfufffle at East Anglia University where one team of researchers lead my Dr. Mann were sloppy in handling one data set and the conservative media had its "proof" of bias in global warming research. The National Academy of science later investigated and found that " was no credible evidence Mann suppressed or falsified data, destroyed emails, information and/or data related to the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, or misused privileged or confidential information".
When you bring up Thimerosal( a Mercury based preservative used from 1930 to 2003 ) as a reason not to vaccinate today, you have lost the argument before it has begun.
A contrarian viewpoint is good to have in the mix to check herd mentality, but when enough uninformed people are convinced to join the contraies that they make up an impediment to progress, it is time to ask them to either prove their case or stop spreading mistruths.
Message edited by author 2011-01-06 14:26:50. |
|
|
|
01/06/2011 02:58:50 PM · #16 |
I could never hope to sum up the situation more eloquently than  BrennanOBand DrAchoo have done. |
|
|
|
01/06/2011 04:33:13 PM · #17 |
| Is this a good time and place to start a Nikon vs Canon debate? :-DD |
|
|
|
01/06/2011 05:20:14 PM · #18 |
| Nobody's asking the really important question... what does Jim Carrey think about this? |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 11/12/2025 08:39:19 PM EST.
