L’affaire Wakefield: BMJ’s Objectives

The objectives of the BMJ campaign were: To disqualify the scientific merit of the Lancet study; To delegitimize Dr. Wakefield’s entire research oeuvre; To convince the medical community that Dr. Wakefield must be shunned; To demonize Andrew Wakefield as a pariah; To . . . Continue reading →

L’affaire Wakefield: Erosion of Public Trust

The Wakefield controversy encapsulates the erosion of public trust in industry- dominated medicine Public assurances about the safety of drugs ingested by pregnant women, was based on a long held “scientific axiom”; namely, that drugs cannot cross the placenta to cause harm . . . Continue reading →

L’affaire Wakefield: Two challenges threatened vaccine orthodoxy

Two challenges threatened vaccine orthodoxy, galvanizing vaccine stakeholders to mobilize Wakefield lent validity to that distrust in government assurances that all childhood vaccines and vaccination schedules are proven safe. CDC’s first large-scale scientifically sound CDC epidemiological study, analyzed the medical records of . . . Continue reading →

L’affaire Wakefield: A Vaccine-Injury Lawsuit Posed a Serious Financial & Political Threat

A class action vaccine-injury lawsuit, would pose a serious financial and political threat The discovery process of such a lawsuit, would undoubtedly uncover documents in company and government files; documents that would likely reveal safety hazards concealed from the public; they might, . . . Continue reading →

L’affaire Wakefield: Murdoch’s Sunday Times Vilification

How the Wakefield vilification campaign was initiated by a Murdoch editor seeking “something big [on] MMR”; how it was hatched and launched in Murdoch’s Sunday Times Dr. Wakefield was caught in the crosshairs of Rupert Murdoch’s global news media empire[103] whose journalistic . . . Continue reading →

L’affaire Wakefield: Commissioned Cochrane MMR Reviews

Commissioned Cochrane Collaboration MMR reviews: 2003, 2005, 2012: Both the UK and US governments played a pivotal role in the effort to discredit the Wakefield Lancet study. One approach was to commission MMR reviews, by the reputable Cochrane Collaboration, whose policy on . . . Continue reading →

L’affaire Wakefield: UK Officials Add Momentum

High ranking UK government officials propelled and added momentum to the Murdoch-initiated slander campaign against Dr. Wakefield. The editor of the Lancet provided legitimacy to the vilification of Wakefield. First was Dr. Evan Harris, a physician and member of the House of . . . Continue reading →

L’affaire Wakefield: Children’s Confidentiality Breached

Children’s confidentiality breached with impunity As a Murdoch-commissioned reporter, Deer gained access to numerous influential sources Doors to confidential information that Deer would not otherwise have obtained – including confidential medical records – were opened. Deer was essentially providing the ammunition to . . . Continue reading →

L’affaire Wakefield: The “crimes” for which he publicly lynched have nothing to do with medicine

The “crimes” for which Dr. Wakefield continues to be publicly lynched have nothing to do with medicine, ethics or science: his “crimes” posed a financial threat to stakeholders in vaccines Andrew Wakefield (a) Dr. Wakefield’s public statements at a public press conference . . . Continue reading →

L’affaire Wakefield: 2012 High Court decision demolished the entire case of “elaborate fraud”

The 2012 High Court decision demolished the BMJ editor’s entire case of “elaborate fraud”: The High Court decision in the appeal of Professor Walker-Smith covered all of the most serious medical ethics charges that were brought against Professor Walker-Smith, Dr. Wakefield and . . . Continue reading →

L’affaire Wakefield: Conflicts of Interest Corrupted GMC Panel & Proceedings

Conflicts of interest corrupted the GMC panel & proceedings; the case was built on a pivotal false premise, without which there was no case The GMC first appointed Professor Dennis McDevitt, a clinical pharmacologist, to chair the fitness to practice (FTP) panel . . . Continue reading →

L’affaire Wakefield: The charges against him & his two co-defendants

The charges against Dr. Wakefield and his two co-defendants: subjecting vulnerable children to research under the guise of clinical care. The key charges & verdicts were as follows: (1) “The children described in the Lancet paper were admitted for research purposes under . . . Continue reading →