Accountability

NY, NJ govs (one Dem, one GOP) clamp down on Ebola quaratine for returning health care workers, slam ever-changing CDC guidelines. That's because politicians are accountable to the people, unlike arrogant CDC. -0- Here's an idea -- if you've been...

How Mercury Triggered The Age of Autism

Conversation with the Authors of Plague

Autism Public Service Announcement

Canary Party Vaccine Court Video

A Glimpse into Autism

Meet Our Advertisers


Olmsted's Original UPI Series

  • The Age of Autism Tag

« LeRoy, PANDAS, Autism and EL - Will the real "Mystery Illness" Please Stand Up?- Part 2 | Main | General Medical Council Response to Successful Appeal of Professor John Walker-Smith »

Professor John Walker Smith Exonerated in Autism MMR Case

Walker-smith.jpg.displayThe following is an announcement from JABS .

Recent Age of Autism stories on the appeal include: The Appeal of Prof John Walker-Smith Against the United Kingdom General Medical Council (Wakefield Case) and The Walker-Smith Appeal, the British Media and the Boseley Problem.  More to follow.  This from JABS:

The GMC's massive abuse of process

The welcome decision to exonerate Prof. Walker-Smith is a clear indication that the GMC's case against the Royal Free doctors was manufactured to discredit any association between bowel disease, autism conditions and some of the parents' reported link to the MMR vaccine. The allegations levelled at Prof. Walker-Smith and the Royal Free team now have to be viewed with total scepticism as nothing more than a witch hunt by vested interests at the highest level in Government, media and the pharmaceutical industry.

This decision shows that:

1. The 1998 Lancet paper was an early report of cases seen in consecutive order on the basis of clinical need and nothing whatever to do with the separate Legal Aid Board funded project.

2. The children reported in the 1998 Lancet paper were very ill and did warrant serious clinical investigation and the investigations conducted were entirely appropriate for the children's needs.

3. The allegations of fraud based on this misconstruction, propagated by journalist Brian Deer, politician Evan Harris, the Murdoch press and the British Medical Journal (and rubberstamped by the GMC) are therefore also unfounded.

The decision vindicates Prof. Walker-Smith (one of two world pioneers of paediatric gastroenterology) after years of false allegations, which supports the ethicality of the Royal Free research and the integrity of the much disputed 1998 Lancet paper. The children were genuinely sick and properly investigated. 

Very serious questions arise about the basis of this prosecution:

a. We have to ask why this has happened? 

b. Was Prof. Walker-Smith unfairly targetted simply as a means to discredit Dr. Wakefield? 



c. Why was it necessary for the GMC to make out that very sick children were well? 

Background Information:

No parent of a child had complained. No child had been injured. Parents of children who had been treated at the Royal Free Hospital in London had nothing but praise for the way their children were cared for and treated by Prof. Walker-Smith and the other doctors. 

Parents reported that their children's conditions were not being taken seriously or treated appropriately by their own GPs or paediatricians. 

The 1998 Lancet report referred to eight of the twelve children's parents who directly associated the MMR vaccine with their children's medical condition. This association between MMR vaccine, autistic spectrum disorders and bowel disease warranted further investigation by the scientific community as called for by the publishing doctors. If MMR vaccines had not been mentioned within the report would there have been any criticism of the report and would a GMC hearing have taken place?

How the charges (the start of the witch hunt) were first thought of are described in Richard Horton's, book MMR Science and Fiction (p.7). Mr Horton was the editor of the 1998 Lancet publication.

"...In truth, they [the people bringing the charges] had not a clue where to begin. At a dinner I attended on 23 February, one medical regulator and I discussed the Wakefield case. He seemed unsure of how the Council could play a useful part in resolving any confusion. As we talked over coffee while the other dinner guests were departing, he scribbled down some possible lines of investigation and passed me his card, suggesting that I contact him directly if anything else sprang to mind. He seemed keen to pursue Wakefield, especially given the ministerial interest."

Richard Horton continues (p.13):

'....During the preceding few weeks, one protagonist in the affair had said openly and publicly that his intention was to 'rub out' Wakefield. A senior doctor who had played a part in shaping the debate around MMR sat in a North London bar with a glass of red wine in front of him boasting that he was 'drinking the blood of Andrew Wakefield'.
The intensity of feeling that Wakefield provoked in some opponents was unbelievably extreme. And, in the aftermath of the David Kelly affair, in which a British scientist and respected civil servant committed suicide after being caught up in a media blitz following a few incautious remarks to a BBC journalist, only those of a very robust constitution would have been able to stand up to the continued pressure of critics who wished to destroy his reputation. Wakefield's tribulations seemed insufficient for some. Whatever one's views about his wisdom as a doctor and scientist, this kind of malicious reaction somehow seemed equally bad - perhaps even worse.....'

JABS believes this is really about:

• the cover up of the Department of Health's negligent handling of the MMR vaccine damage issue.

• the freedom of medical professionals to listen to parents about their children's disease and to investigate appropriately.

• undertaking scientific research and having it peer reviewed independently without fear, prejudice or censorship.

• the association between the MMR vaccine and a form of regressive autism with bowel disease.

JABS is a support group for parents of vaccine damaged children.

 

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Brian Deer and the news media he works for should have to pay $1,250 per hour for slander and libel. Thus this would total 12 years x $10,950,000 per year = $131.4 million. The head of the GMC should be fired and Professor John Walker Smith should replace him. Andrew Wakefield should be exonerated immediately and be compensated by Brian Deer and the news media he works for $131.4 million for slander and libel. Andrew Wakefield should be the new head of UK Healthcare.

Ms. Szatmari, a lovely women that works with homeless shelters, bought an Accord Hybrid from me back around 2005. At the time of purchase she brought her husband Dr. Peter Szatmari's to show him her car. While waiting for his wife to do some paperwork the Doctor was occupied with a stack of books he brought to which I inquired. He was preparing for an upcoming senate hearing committee in Ottawa regarding a class action lawsuit filed by parents of autistic children with regards to vaccines as the cause. Peter was summoned as the foremost expert on autism in Canada to testify. I asked Peter his opinion of on the work of Dr. Andrew Wakefield to which he quickly replied 'Oh, he's is a quack; he's been totally discredited'. Thus he was testifying against the parents suit. I continued, a car salesman, to paint him in the corner on the science and our conversation ended abruptly. Great to see the vindication in the courts, I think I'll email this link to Peter.

I have published the aetiology of autism and it is directly related to intestinal problems via cow milk and brain problems are secondary.
I also have photos taken from the American TV news telling of millions of dollars being awarded to parents who sued that there is a direct relationship between vaccines and autism.
Prof. Reuven Yagil www.camelmilkmagic.com

Brian Deer should be tried and if found guilty jailed for all the pain he has caused !

I suspect the perpetrators and professional liars will keep quiet to some degree. Of course they have already made statements that Walker-Smith's reversal does not support the Lancette study. But Walker-Smith has a slam dunk lawsuit which he will hopefully pursue. This grand turn of events surely boisters Wakefield's Texas suit and his ability to have a reversal of his own. I'm trying to imagine how uncomfortable many of the co-conspirators and culprits like Brian Deer are feeling. I'm giddy knowing they are suffering hopefully more than the men they harmed, and the children they abandoned. They deserve a severe form of punishment, what I'm not sure. A kick in the crotch would be a good start though.

FANTASTIC!!

I have been eagerly waiting for this decision , but because of the time difference I had to wait a little longer-it was worth the wait.

Now, if Dr Wakefield can win his defamation case, we can all "sigh" another relief.

Elizabeth Gillespie

As parents of autistic children we were sharing information about our children and if and when changes had occurred in their milestones (some parents said from birth they knew there was something different) alot of us had a common thread of a defining time when our children withdrew - changed. The common thread was after the mmr vaccination. Dr. Wakefields' findings came well after many of us were making the correlation of a vaccine possibity problem. My son was diagnosed in 1993 (age 2). Dr. Wakefield affirmed what parents were already suspecting. He didn't start the problem he affirmed what we suspected.

Thanks to the appeals judge for maintaining his integrity, thanks to Professor Walker-Smith for his dedicated and apparently well-documented devotion to both his art and his patients - and champagne for everybody!

Great news!

What would Dr. Nancy have to say about this decision ???

Dr. Nancy & Matt Lauer

The GMC decision heard "around the world" through Dr. Nancy, seems to be a quite a bit of medical bullshit...

Brian Deer's MMR investigation discussed


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4mDLIug6f0


i had to rub my eyes in disbelief! How wonderful! Next up Dr. Wakefield!!!!

The real crime of Wakefield et al was Thought Crime!

I am printing this off - I have letters to mail, things to stick into magazines at doctor offices --
What was I thinking! In our society of freedom; our justice system does work!!!!! If allowed too.

Oh, Carol;
Cannot compare the two; Rush has never set himeslf up as anything but a mouth piece on the radio - unlike Brian Deer who seems to have a medical degree or science degree or something - besides just jounalism.

Now how do we get Andy exonerated?

This is wonderful news. I am trying to stay positive regarding Dr. Wakefields case but am convinced that due to the mainstream public media there is nowhere on the planet that he will ever get a fair trial. And if he is not also exonerated, this same media will proclaim that they were right in the first place, which infuriates me to say the least.

BRAVO! My congratulations to the good people at JABS and CryShame.

Brian Deer is the Rush Limbaugh of journalism.

I am looking forward to Dr. Wakefield being exonerated AND vindicated. Then perhaps the truth will finally be opened up.

And what I wonder should be the effect of this decision against a certain media award winning journalist who propagated the whole idea of corruption and fraud amongst these good doctors? I know where I would like to see him. Is there a case here for false and corrupt reporting and manipulation of the facts in order to destroy Prof Walker Smith´s reputation? As well as Andrew Wakefield´s of course. Is Wakefield´s forthcoming case in the US sufficient action?

Oh I am shouting with relief and with joy. Exoneration! Wonderful word. Sanity at last!!

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.