Andrew Wakefield

[Lila-Zen]

Faces GMC charges

[Flora]

Been listening to this on the news all morning. It was only a matter of time before this happened...It makes me so sad The ###### are just doing this to discredit him further.

[gladysmay]

hasnt more recent research suggested their could be a link?

[mossgrove]

hasnt more recent research suggested their could be a link?

 

Yes and no. A scientist at Andrew Wakefields US Institute has found the measles virus inthe stomachs of some post-vaccination children, which Andrew Wakefield says vindicates his original position.

 

As far as I can tell there only seem to two main 'facts' , but there are at least a little contradictory

 

1. A small but significant number of children experience some kind of regression/onset of Autism post-MMR

 

2. Studies looking at the overall incidence of Autistic children in the vaccinated/non-vaccinated population have consistently failed to find any link.

 

And this has led to the current stand-off.

 

 

Simon

[Suze]

I always (sort of ) felt that because the initial findings of wakefields study were so controversial.........and would have prompted numerous court cases and pay outs, that the government did all they could to discredit them.Perhaps if as much time effort and money had been put into fully researching wakefields findings,instead of discrediting them, we all maybe a little clearer about the mmr/autism connection.But it just seems that they want to bury this once and for all and Andrew Wakefield with it.My worry is that this may put off other researchers looking into the possible causes of autism . , and funding for such research.

Edited June 12, 2006 by Suze

[LizK]

As far as I can tell there only seem to two main 'facts' , but there are at least a little contradictory

 

1. A small but significant number of children experience some kind of regression/onset of Autism post-MMR

 

2. Studies looking at the overall incidence of Autistic children in the vaccinated/non-vaccinated population have consistently failed to find any link.

 

And this has led to the current stand-off.

 

However if the MMR triggered a more severe form of autism earlier in children who would have otherwise developed autism (maybe HFA or AS) at a later age then both facts would be true. AFAIK though no-one is looking into the possibility that MMR or measles may be a trigger for something that would happen anyway or that it might cause a more severe form of autism in a very small no of children. Most seem to be working on the theory that MMR itself causes the autism and without it the child would have remained NT

 

Lx

[Flora]

My worry is that this may put off other researchers looking into the possible causes of autism . , and funding for such research.

 

Suze, that's exactly what I think they are doing too. There is absolutely no conclusive evidence either way, and loads of other researchers on other areas 'have got it wrong' but you don't see them being taken to court You'd think that because nothing is clear but there is apparent cause for concern that they'd want to get to the bottom of it.. but no.. they want to stop Andrew Wakefield in his tracks and subsequently prevent anyone else wanting to touch this are of research with a barge pole.

Edited June 12, 2006 by Lauren

[KATHY BLAIR]

I find it hard to say for certain whether Wakefields research was conclusive or not. I remember at the time of having Rachael's mmr thinking though, if she gets older and has autism I will never know for certain if the mmr has done it or not. The decision to vaccinate though was not in doubt, because to me the risks of these diseases was too great a chance to take.

 

So here I am, and Rachael has autism. Do I think that or have anydoubts that MMR may have been the cause? Absolutely not. Despite my misgivings at the time and thinking that I may blame MMR if she had - I have never considered it at all. Rachael had autism long before she had MMR, I know that. I am more worried about the antenatal care I received when I was vomiting severely at 5 weeks pregnant, admitted to hospital from 7-15 weeks, continued to have vomiting throuhgout the pregnancy and no one considered the effect this was having on my baby! That she was allowed to go to 40 weeks + 14 days before delivering and that she was delivered by emergency caesarean after prolonged 1st stage labour. In my support group there is a mother whose baby was delivered in similar circumstances the day after Rachael in the same hospital (we remember each other from being on the same postnatal ward)and she too has autism, although much more severely than Rachael!

 

I suppose what I am saying is that there are many,many potential causes for autism out there and no single cause has been identified. Is there something in our children that is being triggered by these external factors? I haveno doubt from the evidence I have heard, that some children may be affected by MMR. But would they have been affected if they had caught these actual viruses, would they have been affected to some degree anyway?

 

There are still too many unknowns around autism - this condition is increasing in the child and adult population steadily, and it is time the whole outlook on autistic spectrum disorders changed - end of story!

[mossgrove]

However if the MMR triggered a more severe form of autism earlier in children who would have otherwise developed autism (maybe HFA or AS) at a later age then both facts would be true. AFAIK though no-one is looking into the possibility that MMR or measles may be a trigger for something that would happen anyway or that it might cause a more severe form of autism in a very small no of children. Most seem to be working on the theory that MMR itself causes the autism and without it the child would have remained NT

 

Lx

 

I think that is where the problem lies. I don't honestly believe that there is conclusive evidence that children who regressed/reacted to MMR would have remained NT had they had single vaccines of no vaccination at all. The two sides are arguing over this when infact there should be more research into what exactly does happen post MMR to children who suffer a reaction.

 

 

Suze, that's exactly what I think they are doing too. There is absolutely no conclusive evidence either way, and loads of other researchers on other areas 'have got it wrong' but you don't see them being taken to court You'd think that because nothing is clear but there is apparent cause for concern that they'd want to get to the bottom of it.. but no.. they want to stop Andrew Wakefield in his tracks and subsequently prevent anyone else wanting to touch this are of research with a barge pole.

 

Unfortunately it has become too polarised. There are people who belive that anyone who is in favour of the MMR must be partaking in a capitalist consiracy on behalf of the drug companies to ignore the evidence infront of them (Which I don't believe) and another school of thought that says Andrew Wakefield is a self-serving charlatan (which isnt true either). A case of everyone talking and nobody listening at the moment.

 

Simon

Edited June 12, 2006 by mossgrove

[kaz]

I know that. I am more worried about the antenatal care I received when I was vomiting severely at 5 weeks pregnant, admitted to hospital from 7-15 weeks, continued to have vomiting throuhgout the pregnancy and no one considered the effect this was having on my baby! That she was allowed to go to 40 weeks + 14 days

 

That could be me typing how my pregnacy was with my son Daniel, I also had Daniel vacinated (as well as both my daughters both of whom are NT) with the MMR and don't regret it. (saying that i am very glad i can no longer have children as i would not like to have to make that decission again now)

 

More research has to be put into this, about after todays annoucment in the news i can not see that happening, which is a shame for all the children involved and the children who have to grow up with AS.

Edited June 12, 2006 by kaz

[call me jaded]

2. Studies looking at the overall incidence of Autistic children in the vaccinated/non-vaccinated population have consistently failed to find any link.

 

They haven't found a causal link.

[baddad]

Well - Hot on the heels of that new research getting press coverage we get this... Not the usual establishment return of trotting out the same old non-specific 'studies', and far more threatening for poor old AW, the sacrificial lamb...

Whatever the significance of AW's study, the TIMING on this is just too convenient - the debate blows up again, and a week later there's an announcement that AW is (possibly? - no definites that I saw in the article) going to be hauled over the coals about a case that has been 'static' for years? Sort of draws the attention away from that new study, and undermines it in just about the most NON SPECIFIC way imaginable - don't attack the new data, just do another hatchet job on the data you've been chipping away at for the past eight years!

Politicians, don't you just love 'em? [And anyone who doesn't think the GMC is run by politicians is labouring under a misapprehension, as Mr Bevan and Ms Castle both amply demonstrated when they tried to slip one past them!]

 

L&P

 

BD

[jen]

If you read the study Andrew Wakefield states that there needs to be further studies into the area and autism. If the GMC were going to review him and strick him off they would of done it by now.

The GMC will only bring the study to light again and affect the MMR take up hence I do not think they will investigate him.

 

 

Jen

[oracle]

There is no way that 'they' were ever going to allow a link between the MMR and autism. There is no way that they will ever come clean and say that the mercury in the first jabs is also linked in some way. It's all to do with money and corruption. Can you imagine how much they would have to pay out if there was a link

 

Been waiting for this to happen for some time

 

Oracle

[Lucas]

For them to 'pay' there would have to be something 'wrong' with being Autistic. It could be said that there are in fact hundreds of different unrecognised neurotypes that are each caused by many different factors, some within our control and some that are not. Some can cause severe disability in certain enviroments(like Autism does) but allow for strengths that depend on that neurotype.

 

If lightbulbs gave off radiation which caused me to develop a neurotype that makes me crave sugary food, could I get a payout from Homebase for the disability this causes me? I would be vulnerable to obesity and diabetes in certain enviroments, yet more successful in others as a result of this neurotype.

 

I remember there was a study in the US a few years back to find a link between Mercury and Autism(where Autism seemed to be defined solely in the context of severe mental retardation) and the data ended up showing those with higher Mercury exposure had high IQs. Can you claim compensation for having a higher IQ? Typically you would have to be made disabled by an agent to claim victimhood over it, you can't do that if you are not made disabled but instead get a higher IQ.

 

If an enviromental agent is proven to cause Autism, you still have to prove that Autism is bad. Could I fight for justice and compensation if I was exposed to an agent that made me Neurotypical when I didn't want it? Who would sympathise with me?

[Pippin]

I still dont understand why its being dubbed a witch hunt! AW was being paid by one side in a potential legal case which could have netted him a lot of money. he failed to register a conflict of interest. That is against the GMC rules....full stop. If anyone were paid by the pharmaceutical companies and their research showed the opposite then I'm certain there would be an outcry for them to be struck off. The GMC timing may not be good but their reasoning is perfectly acceptable.