A Character Assassin Caught in the Act

By Dan Olmsted and Mark Blaxill

At the source of the General Medical Council’s (GMC) investigation and trial of Dr. Andrew Wakefield lies a man named Brian Deer. In his first Sunday Times article on February 22, 2004, Deer accused Wakefield of launching a “public panic” over the connection between the MMR vaccine and autism by failing to disclose his conflict of interest and participation as an expert witness on behalf of a group of families involved in vaccine litigation against the British government. Since then, Deer has alleged many things. Among them are the following: that he is an independent, investigative journalist; that he is not a complainant in the GMC investigation; that Wakefield is guilty of medical misconduct; and that Wakefield and his co-authors committed scientific fraud.

According to documents obtained by Age of Autism (Melanie Philips of The Spectator reported on these documents last month, but we provide for the first time a copy of the key document HERE and new information on Dr. Wakefield’s complaint against Deer; a copy of Dr. Wakefield's original 3/13 complaint to PCC is HERE and the addendum is HERE. Deer’s claim that he is not the complainant in the GMC investigation is false. In a February 25, 2004 email addressed to Tim Cox-Brown of the GMC, Deer first listed the GMC reference numbers of Drs Andrew Wakefield, John Walker-Smith and Simon Murch, and then wrote the following opening sentence.

“Following an extensive inquiry for the Sunday Times into the origins of the public panic over MMR, I write to ask your permission to lay before you an outline of evidence that you may consider worthy of evaluation with respect of the possibility of serious professional misconduct on the part of the above named registered medical practitioners”

This statement stands in stark contrast to claims Deer has recently made denying he was a complainant in the GMC investigation. On February 19, 2009, amid growing concern over claims that Deer had failed to disclose his conflict, Deer made the following statement on a public blog,

“the GMC’s procedures include monitoring media coverage for possible cases to be referred to fitness to practise committees. The GMC - following its own procedures – then approached me and asked if I had anything to substantiate what had appeared in The Sunday Times. I willingly supplied them with many of my files on the subject.”

In the copy of the document obtained by Age of Autism you can see for yourself that Deer is lying:

• He was not approached with an inquiry from the GMC, rather he approached the GMC himself and was “writing to ask [their] permission” to do so.

• He did not provide substantiation for an existing inquiry, rather he took the initiative himself “to lay before you an outline of evidence.”

• He did not presume that the GMC was following up on his article from three days before in pursuance of its own procedures, rather he urged they follow up on evidence “that you may find worthy of evaluation.”

• He did not merely respond to the GMC’s monitoring procedures, rather he sent Cox-Brown the GMC reference numbers for the three doctors, a clerical detail that only a complainant would think worthy of inclusion.

In her thorough report on Brian Deer’s role in the GMC trial, “A Deer in the Headlights”, Melanie Philips placed Deer’s introductory sentence to Timothy Cox nearly halfway through a lengthy article. We suspect that many may have missed this key statement. It proves clearly that while Deer has represented himself as an objective journalist, he has been reporting on a complaint that he made himself. Playing the dual role of journalist and complainant, Deer has misrepresented himself as an independent party. In the ultimate irony, Deer is guilty of the same offense—failure to disclose a conflict of interest—that he accuses Wakefield of committing. As one source close to the investigation commented, “that’s not just a smoking gun, that’s a video of Brian Deer pulling the trigger.”

In the years since his original article launching a widespread campaign of character assassination against Dr. Wakefield, Deer has written infrequently for The Sunday Times (before his February 8 articles accusing Wakefield and his co-authors of falsifying clinical records, Deer had written nothing for the newspaper since July 15, 2007) and has no other visible means of support. This previously unseen document demonstrates that Deer has lied about his role as a complainant in the GMC. It also raises a disturbing question.

If Brian Deer is lying about his role as a source of the GMC complaint against Dr. Wakefield, what else is he lying about?

Dan Olmsted is Editor and Mark Blaxill is Editor at Large for Age of Autism.

Comments

[Carolyn coughoin]

the bottom line is this. because of Wakefield and krigsman a d thoughtfulhouse my son can sit
still long enough to learn to read. pooping takes him 5 minutes not 70. he no longer throws himself against walls. he can stay at school all day. he can ask amazing questions about Obama and Lincoln and tornadoes and the center if the earth. so if this is not true I guess what thoughtfulhouse did treating his theoretical autistic enterocolitis was simply magic. Wakefield krigsman rimland and The first DAN Drs deserve the nobelmprize.

[sdtech]

Arthur:

This behavior of avoiding the issue is simply a passive aggressive approach unworthy of further response.

[John Stone]

tten and remove the camps

I believe you have conflated two separate issues. It has to be said that in 1983 the Sunday Times was a rather different newspaper, and it was sad that their advisor Hugh Trevor-Roper (Lord Dacre) should have fallen for the hoax, which was made primarily for financial gain rather than to deny the holocaust.

[tten and remove the camps]

Off Topic

Many years ago I remember that the Sunday Times produced the 'diaries' of Adolf Hitler to prove that the holocaust never happened and presumably the Jews, the Gupsies, the autistic children, the Poles, the British inhabitants of the Channel Islands, many French men and boys etc etc etc all decided by osmosis to go to the East and all meet up in concentration camps, kill themselves, flatten and remove the camps and plant a forest there. And of course blame that Deer man Hiltler!

But there was no Holocaust!

It seems as if the Sunday Times is engaging in a new anti holocaust operation. This time no body actually has autism or damaged bowels, autism or cancer or MS etc etc etc.

They are all becoming ill in some way they all know about and nobody else does to scam the public health services in the Western world. And they all blame that deer man Deer.

Of course the idea that trebling the vaccinations to cover serious things like the occasional runs and putting the worlds most toxic brain destroying chemical in the vaccines and ignoring signs like crying for half a day after ten vaccines as being in any way a problem is evident to the US government, the US vaccine regulators and anyone with ZERO brain cells and who want to ignore the honest ZERO generation epidemiology report of Verstraeten and take the Fifth Amendment to it with the aid of GSK as the new 'diary' of an 'honest' epidemiologist who himself admitted:

I cant sya anymore as I have just landed the top salry at the top vaccine company GSK.

[Theresa Cedillo]

"But it would be nice to get back to what the hell happened with the Omnibus case. To me it looks like the petitioners were the wrong cases, the experts were flakey, and the lawyers made a bundle. Maybe we should get angry about that."

Mr. Taylor - my daughter Michelle is one of the "test" cases. Our experts were not flakey. They are some of the most highly regarded in their respective fields. FYI Michelle's lawyers are being paid far below the rates an attorney working outside of the NVICP is paid. The US government sets their rate of pay. That pay comes out of the fund that makes up the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. And while you are looking at who gets paid what, you should look at the amount the respondent paid the SEVENTEEN expert witnesses they hired from around the world to defend the vaccine program. "Looks like the petitioners were the wrong cases". I'm not real sure what you mean by that, but I'd be happy to address it if you'd care to clarify.

Regarding Brian Deer - his time is up. He's been found out. He's a liar.

Theresa Cedillo

ps: thank you Kathleen :)

[kim]

look at this rude, uninformed principal commenting on an article about my family and saying we don't give "a rip about anyone else's kids" while quoting Brian Deer:
http://tinyurl.com/dkexk3
comment away if you so see fit!
Kim

[John Stone]

Arthur Taylor

This is what I read in the link provided:

"After a year-long investigation by The Sunday Times, the doctors’ disciplinary body has ruled that allegations facing Wakefield and the others, if proved, would raise issues about their registration and fitness to continue to practise medicine."

This by no means covers what Andrew Wakefield documents in his complaint. If you cannot see the difference this would suggest serious shortcoming in your powers of analysis.

I also note the innuedo here:

"In February this newspaper’s revelation that the research began with an undisclosed £55,000 deal between Wakefield and a firm of solicitors attempting to sue MMR manufacturers led to public uproar and the retraction of research, published in The Lancet in 1998, purporting possibly to implicate the vaccine."

This maybe loosely true but does not tell you that the £55,000 was actually paid by the Legal Aid Board to a Royal Free Medical School trust. The reader is plainly being put at a disadvantage here.

[kathleen]

Arthur, you baffle me?? We have pointed out MANY things here where Mr Deer has been caught lying. You are choosing to see what you want, and that's OK...for you. Um, as for hating BD???? I don't. Funny, that is what you decide to write as if automatically putting me on the negative side and him as the poor injured journalist....okay.
You can keep saying the sky is green and thre grass is blue...but it is not.

[Arthur Taylor]

Kathleen, I just spent far too long looking into this this afternoon, but when I did a Yahoo search I found this article by Mr Deer where he seems positively to draw attention to his role. http://briandeer.com/wakefield/gmc-announce.htm

I really do wonder what this is about. There does not seem to be any evidence of him lying at all. Someone seems to have gotten their shorts in a twist over him saying he is not the complainant - and the doctors body and their lawyers say the same. If he is lying, then they must be lying too, which I just don't buy. Lawyers don't lie over something that folk here seem to think is so easily found out.

Okay you hate Mr Deer. Fine. But it would be nice to get back to what the hell happened with the Omnibus case. To me it looks like the petitioners were the wrong cases, the experts were flakey, and the lawyers made a bundle. Maybe we should get angry about that.

[sdtech]

Arthur:

There is a difference between reporting the story and creating it.

[kathleen]

Arthur
(it does not look as if he is in any kind of retreat)
BD should not be in retreat, he SHOULD be seeking the truth for our children. What I noticed on his website is an action calling on parents in
America to "turn Wakefield in" for having a stethescope on his desk. I don't for one second believe that Dr Wakefield is a practicing doctor in America, but why are BD cross-hairs on him in Texas?? Isn't what BD suppose to be hoping for is a win in the GMC hearing so that the MMR vaccine can be vindicated (as YOU think with good science, I question the GOOD part in that)and Dr Wakefield will have been proven a fraud?? So why does BD website seem to seethe with hate for this man? More of a personal vendetta, and that is being kind. Is he still going after the makers of Vioxx? That would be NO, so what is so personal here? He was probably hailed as a hero during the Vioxx mess, now he stepped into the vaccine argument where he is NOT receiving the same amount of ego stroking as before.Or his ego stroking now comes from the WRONG side of truth and justice, and that is where BD has made his bed.BD is now a proven LIAR, so exactly what is it about him that you find so appealing? Appealing enough to come here and defend him. In fact, if I found out that someone I was defending was proven to be lying, I would be going to that person and wanting an explanation.

[Anna Ceberio]

For Dan Olmstead,

Just a crazy idea (maybe), but would it be possible to file a "crime against humanity" with the UN against Brian Deer and the GMC (we could do it against Paul Offit and the CDC too)? I think we need to take it to a political board that is not completely implicated in the vaccination mess (so US and UK political systems are out). I can't imagine of a worse crime than purposefully hurting children...

Anna

[Arthur Taylor]

I have to admit that this whole thread baffles me. So what if Mr Deer is a complainant, informant, entertainment, Catholic celebrant? Everything turns on whether the information he has given to this doctor's body is true or not. I would have to imagine that it must be, since otherwise it would not be holding hearings that have gone on so long. Having looked at Mr Deer's website http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-summary.htm it does not look as if he is in any kind of retreat, and if what he said in the Times was not true, then the lawsuit it would face would be beyond calculation. Dr Wakefield would not be complaining to a press watchdog. I deduce that what Mr Deer says is true.

What he said would have been checked and checked again by trial attorneys, before they ever mounted their case. They must have spent years on preparing the case.

As for his 'conflict of interest', I don't get it. Surely it's no different to Dr Wakefield continuing his enquiries, after making a complaint against the Brit Government for not allowing single vaccines. Is he now banned from further investigations.

The whole thing seems like a kind of hysteria. What I see is a quite old-fashioned news reporter whose onto a story. Nothing wrong with that.

Time will tell whether he has got it right.

[Editor's note: Perhaps you've missed the point Arthur, so allow me to make it plain for you. The point is that Brian Deer is a liar and has lied about his role in the GMC hearing in a way that calls into question his journalistic integrity. And if you take the time to read Dr. Wakefield's responses, it is also abundantly clear that Deer has misrepresented every fact of substance in his stories. As to the hearing, the reason it has gone on so long is not because the government (and Deer's) case is so strong, it is because it is breathtakingly weak. Strong cases make short trials. This trial is not about the truth, it is an inquisition, plain and simple.]

[kathleen]

The pride and joy Brian Deer expressed in his blogging of having played a part in the demise of Michelle's case ...
quote

Thesea,
I noticed that, too, and it was sickening. He was so prideful about striking down a child. I am not sure if I truly believe that the truth wins out in the end, but Toady (love that btw)will have to answer one day, it may be a dream to hope that he pays before he stops drawing breath in this world, but one CAN hope. He will have to ultimately answer one day....and certainly no sane person would want to be in his shoes at that time.
God bless you and your family.

[Theresa Cedillo]

The pride and joy Brian Deer expressed in his blogging of having played a part in the demise of Michelle's case (his having been contacted by HHS attorneys) will be nothing compared to the satisfaction I will feel to see this phony Industry toady fall, as he most surely will.

[kathleen]

The powers-that-be needed someone to initiate the case against Wakefield (they could not do that themselves now, could they) and found a village idiot to do the dirty job for them.-quote

You know, that is exactly what I was thinking while reading the 57 page amendment by Wakefield. Deer loves himself enough to fooled easily as long as someone is stroking his ego.

[Amber]

Even if Brian Deer goes down, like so many do in conspiracies (yeah, I said it) they still got their wonderful story of "Wakefield is terrible, vaccines don't cause autism" and reported it ALL OVER. More complete crap to report to serve their purpose, BUT STILL NOT THE TRUTH.

[Natasa]

Makes one wonder if this could simply be the case of the poor idiot Brian being nicely used by the GMC?

The powers-that-be needed someone to initiate the case against Wakefield (they could not do that themselves now, could they) and found a village idiot to do the dirty job for them.

Lets hope they turn on him now to cover their backs, and that he drags them down while drowning.

[Mark Blaxill]

Jerry has been escorted out of the building. So has another genius who compared Deer to Woodard and Bernstein.

[John Stone]

Jerry

It is very clear from the other documents in Wakefield's second complaint to the PCC, as well as the letter published here, that Deer was trying to exercise pressure to prosecute Wakefield. He was making the running, as several remarks suggest.

For instance on 1 July 2004:

"I trust that you will notify me, in whatever way is appropriate, of how my concerns are progressed."

Or 12 February 2007:

"I’ve several times previously written to the GMC, or to its solicitors, Field Fisher Waterhouse (FFW), regarding my investigations for the Sunday Times and Channel 4 into the serious professional misconduct in which the above named practitioners were involved, between mid-1996 and late 2001, while they were employed at the Royal free hospital, Hampstead. My first email was dated 25 February 2004, summarizing my findings as of that date. I’ve made my submissions as a matter of public duty.

"Although, quite properly, I’ve received no information from FFW, or from the GMC directly, it’s clear from open sources, such as court proceedings and press coverage, that some considerable investment has been committed to looking into the matters I’ve raised."

http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/03/addendum-to-complaintmar-20-2009dr-andrew-wakefield-filed-a-complaint-on-13th-march-2009-alleging-that-mr-brian-deer-fals.html

After all, it is one thing to have an investigation (as proposed by John Reid and supported by Wakefield who did not believe he had anything to hide) and another to mount a prosecution.