The following points will be covered in my response (with ample excerpts from documented evidence, and Dr. Godlee’s editorials & press releases).

  1. What the Lancet article stated and what the criticism following publication was;
  2. A description of the clinical purpose of the study and the single non-clinical scientific component – a blinded re-analysis of the children’s biopsy tissues;
  3. How the GMC case against Dr. Andrew Wakefield, Professor John Walker-Smith & Dr. Simon Murch was contrived by powerful vested interests;
  4. What the charges and verdicts by the General Medical Council (GMC) were against three doctors who co-authored the Lancet article;
  5. How conflicts of interest corrupted the GMC panel & proceedings; the case was built on a pivotal false premise without which there was no case;
  6. How the irrevocable decision by the UK High Court (2012) in the appeal of Dr. Wakefield’s co-defendant, Professor John Walker-Smith, overturned all of the crucial GMC professional misconduct charges and verdicts for lack of evidence to support them; thereby shattering the BMJ editor’s allegation of “fraud” against Dr. Wakefield;
  7. What the real “crimes” for which Dr. Wakefield continues to be lynched are, and how they have nothing to do with medicine, ethics, or science;
  8. How a class action vaccine-injury lawsuit would pose a serious threat to government and Pharma;
  9. How the Wakefield controversy encapsulates erosion of public trust in industry-dominated medicine; it galvanized a major call to arms to combat distrust in vaccines;
  10. Two concurrent challenges threatened vaccine orthodoxy galvanizing vaccine stakeholders to mobilize;
  11. How the conclusion of three commissioned Cochrane MMR reviews are not supported by the reviewers’ own assessment of the evidence base; the Mayo Clinic reviews dispute MMR effectiveness;
  12. How the Wakefield vilification campaign was initiated by a Murdoch editor seeking “something big [on] MMR” and was hatched and launched in Murdoch’s Sunday Times;
  13. How high- ranking UK government officials and the editor of the Lancet were actively involved, adding weight and momentum to the slander campaign against Dr. Wakefield;
  14. How elementary standards of journalism were abandoned by a journalist who created the story by secretly filing the formal complaint with the GMC thereby providing the grist for his story line over a period of 8 years;
  15. How children’s confidentiality was breached with impunity;
  16. How Dr. Fiona Godlee argued in an editorial (2006) against the GMC prosecution of Dr. Wakefield, then in 2011, she led the charge in the vilification campaign;
  17. How the GMC panel found no evidence to support Deer’s allegation of “scientific fraud”;
  18. How Dr. Godlee declared Dr. Wakefield guilty of “scientific fraud” and “falsification” without citing a single instance of fraud or falsification; she apparently relied on a reporter’s say-so;
  19. Sworn testimony by BMJ Deputy Editor confirms that Deer’s articles were not peer reviewed contrary to BMJ’s false and deceptive declarations. BMJ provided an academic veneer to Deer’s articles, deliberately misleading the medical community and the public. BMJ also failed to disclose Deer’s role in creating the GMC case against Dr. Wakefield;
  20. Why the BMJ imprimatur was needed was needed to divert attention from evidence of far- reaching, scientific fraud in pivotal CDC-sponsored Danish vaccine studies uncovered in internal documents;
  21. What the seven objectives were that propelled the malevolent BMJ-led anti- Wakefield inquisition, & why it was far more lethal than the Sunday Times
  22. How Dr. Godlee rejected a substantive scientific commentary that refuted the charge of fraud and falsification;
  23. How histological grading sheets were distorted and deconstructed into “fake evidence”, and how the editor-in-chief expanded her dragnet accusing all of Wakefield’s co-authors, the Lancet editor, and the Royal Free Hospital, of institutional research misconduct;
  24. The GMC verdict was predetermined, driven by a coterie of powerful institutional stakeholders, whose pervasive institutional financial interests colluded to foment an inquisition: (a) the extensive pharma ties of the Murdoch media empire and Murdoch family, including the Murdoch Childrens Research Institute in Australia; (b) involvement of MedicoLegal Investigations, an arm of the Association of British Pharmaceutical Industries; (c) GMC corrupting conflicts of interest; (d) GMC expert witnesses’ conflicts; (e) BMJ’s undisclosed corporate partnership with Merck and its financial ties to GSK:
  25. What the GMC conflict of interest charges against Dr. Wakefield are; in light of the indisputable evidence of pervasive conflicts of interest in medicine, in what conceivable way are his conflicts different from the norm and practice? Evidence that refutes the COI charges against Dr. Wakefield;
  26. Summary of the facts: BMJ’s defamatory accusations are refuted by judicially adjudicated evidence; beyond BMJ’s overriding conflicts of interest, ethical and professional standards —International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (2008) and the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (2011), which Dr. Godlee is a member of – were violated;
  27. BMJ editor-in-chief provided an academic sheen to a public lynching; and she called for an end to the debate about an autism link to vaccines;
  28. A concerted push for compulsory childhood vaccination is fueled by a fear mongering campaign.

APPENDIX 1: Extracts from the UK High Court Decision in the appeal by Professor John Walker-Smith (March 7, 2012).

APPENDIX 2: Historical record of measles mortality, measles vaccine, & measles outbreaks;

APPENDIX 3: JCVI transcripts (1988 -1992) document deception & cover-up that shielded GSK’s defective MMR vaccine, Pluserix;

APPENDIX 4: Vaccine Damage Payments Act, 1979: Parliament debated government payment responsibility, 2000; 2015; National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program 1988-2017;

APPENDIX 5: Japan curbs vaccination requirements, bans MMR & consistently ranks high in health, life expectancy and low infant mortality;

APPENDIX 6: Reports document doctors committing suicides during stressful GMC FTP Proceedings;

APPENDIX 7: Commentary with original pathologists’ diagnostic evaluation of Lancet children’s biopsy slides submitted for publication by David L. Lewis, Research Microbiologist, National Whistleblowers Center, (September, 2011);

APPENDIX 8: GlaxoSmithKline dubious record of concealing the most harmful risks linked to its drugs and vaccines; confidential report (2012) reveals a litany of severe adverse effects linked to infanrix Hexa – including 36 deaths within days of vaccination;

APPENDIX 9: Corrupted vaccine “science”; evidence of outright fraud; manipulated safety assessments sacrifice children as collateral damage, to protect high utilization of vaccines;

APPENDIX 10: Cyber Propaganda – “weapons of mass deception”;

APPENDIX 11: Partial bibliography: peer-reviewed reports confirm vaccine safety hazards.