Brian Deer at the University of WI La Crosse: “An Elaborate Fraud”

By Anne Dachel

It was truly a sad day for education on October 4, 2012 at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse as Brian Deer came to La Crosse to speak as part of the Distinguished Lecture Series in Life Sciences. The title of Deer’s talk was, An Elaborate Fraud: The MMR Vaccine & Autism. I was there with a number of other parents from the autism community from WI, MN, IN, and IL.

The University of WI-La Crosse made their position clear in the opening remarks of professor of immunology, Bernadette Taylor, before an audience of hundreds of UWL students. “There is no debate… This University did not invite a debate on that issue.”

Case closed: the University would not allow for a free exchange of ideas so informed, intelligent students could make up their own minds.

Brian Deer was then allowed to present his version of the most heated controversy in medicine today: Is our aggressively expanded vaccination schedule behind the exponential increase in autism. According to Deer and the UWL, the debate is over. Only a few desperate parents still believe in a link. The science has spoken.

This was a forum for Deer to expound on his claim that Dr. Andrew Wakefield had perpetrated a fraud on the public when he wrote about the possible link between the MMR vaccine and bowel disease and autism in children and Deer expressed no concern over why autism is now an epidemic affecting one in every 88 children, one in every 54 boys in the U.S.

Deer showed slides throughout his lecture. On the opening slide, in full view as the students came in, Deer had this quote highlighted: “If he wasn’t so fucking greedy, he’d a been tougher to spot.” In small type below were the words “Sam Rothstein, Casino, 1995.” Shown with the quote was a hand holding five aces—one extra ace of spades.

In his opening remarks, Deer explained that this was from the movie, Casino, which was about fraudulent gamblers and how they were caught, an obvious reference to Wakefield.

Deer attacked everything about Wakefield and his work. He ridiculed him both personally and professionally. He claimed Wakefield manipulated data and falsified the records of his patients. He said that Wakefield tried to blackmail officials into funding additional studies. He said Wakefield recruited patients to use as “guinea pigs” for his fraudulent research. He alleged that none of the 12 patients Wakefield wrote about actually had bowel disease. He said that the claim of Michelle Cedillo in Vaccine Court had been a fraud and that she was shown on video to display autistic behavior before her MMR. He even made a reference to Dr. Wakefield’s mother where he speculated that she might have been into the sherry before he interviewed her.

Deer singled out Josh Edwards from the UK. He described him as a boy who had GI disease that resulted in the removal of his bowel because of a “severe food intolerance,” and not the result of the MMR vaccine.

(See this Age of Autism story about Josh Edwards. Also see his mother, Heather Edwards, on the video about parents in the UK whose children were damaged by the MMR.)

Deer never mentioned that the British government indemnified the manufacturer of the MMR vaccine against all liability for MMR damage and that the UK government will be liable if it’s recognized that this vaccine triggers bowel disease and autism.

I submitted a question to Mr. Deer which was read during the Q and A. “Dr. Peter Fletcher, former Chief Scientific Officer in the UK, supports the position of Dr. Wakefield. What is your opinion on this?”

In response Deer announced that Dr. Fletcher was NEVER CHIEF SCIENTIFIC OFFICER IN THE UK. He claimed that Fletcher was someone who worked for the government but who left his position after a disagreement with his employer.

In truth, I’ve been in contact with Dr. Fletcher for years and even a cursory search online will show that he truly is the former Chief Scientific Officer in Britain. This is a clear indication of the validity and honesty of Deer’s claims.

Dr. Wakefield’s appearance. 

Andrew Wakefield also came to La Crosse on Oct 4, but he wasn’t allowed to speak at the University. Instead, before Deer’s 5:30 talk, Wakefield held a 1 pm outdoor press conference at Myrick Park, near the campus. There Wakefield talked about the autism epidemic and how the medical community has failed to recognize or treat the overwhelming health problems that affect increasing numbers of children. He presented his story about the parents who came to him for help because of the severe bowel disease their children had developed after the MMR vaccine. He described how the government has covered up the truth in the epidemic and what it’s meant to him personally. He assured parents that he’s not going to stop until the truth is recognized and we stop inflicting this damage on children.

One local doctor was there and he brought up the studies that show no link and he claimed that Wakefield’s work had never been duplicated. Wakefield disagreed and offered to debate him about it. In response to my question about why the medical community and the American Academy of Pediatrics has not recognized autism as either an epidemic or a crisis, Wakefield said that if you talk with doctors privately, they will admit something is wrong and that they are concerned. Publicly, they know that talking about autism as an epidemic invites speculation on the cause and that leads to the controversial link to vaccines, something most doctors are not willing to do.

La Crosse Tribune reporter, Patrick Anderson, was at the park for Wakefield’s speech. He talked to parents and listened intently to their stories. I spoke with him and gave him copies of both of Wakefield’s books, Callous Disregard and Waging War on the Autistic Child, along with Silenced Witnesses, about the parents of the children Wakefield saw.

Anderson acknowledged that there are two sides to the controversy in his story that had the headline, Finding vaccine truth: Crowds hear two takes on dismissed study.

I posted a number of comments on the Tribune story and sent this letter to the editor in an email:

I saw your coverage of Brian Deer’s talk about Dr. Andrew Wakefield and the link between the MMR vaccine and bowel disease and autism in children at UW-L on Oct 4, 2012. The title was, Finding vaccine truth: Crowds hear two takes on dismissed study. Actually, the two sides in the debate weren’t presented at the UWL. The University would not provide a forum where Dr. Wakefield could present his position.

I was at Deer’s talk where associate professor of immunology, Bernadette Taylor, introduced him saying, “There is no debate… This University did not invite a debate on that issue.” The University wouldn’t allow for a free exchange of ideas so informed, intelligent students could make up their own minds.

Dr. Wakefield would have presented his side—he came to La Crosse and spoke at Myrick Park on Oct 4—but the University wouldn’t allow him on campus to talk. Instead the students were given only Deer’s claims which are highly controversial with mounting evidence and experts challenging them all. As a WI resident and a UW system graduate, I find the actions and attitude of the UW-La Crosse truly disappointing and concerning.

The two TV stations in La Crosse also covered Deer’s visit.

WXOX La Crosse had the story, British journalist to speak at UW-L about false vaccine autism link, in which presented Deer as the hero in uncovering the fraudulent claim about the MMR vaccine. (They had no place for comments on the story.)

WKBT La Crosse had the story, Vaccine-Autism debate reaches La Crosse. I posted comments on both the WKBT piece and the La Crosse Tribune story.

I put up links to coverage about Dr. Peter Fletcher.

Former science chief: ‘MMR fears coming true’

An open letter from Dr. Andrew Wakefield

Peter Fletcher/Anne Dachel on the Autism Epidemic

I posted interviews that disproved what Deer was saying.

Dr. Mercola interviews Dr. Wakefield

CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson interviews Andrew Wakefield

Alex Jones interviews Andrew Wakefield

I posted the trailer to the new film, The Greater Good, about vaccine side effects.

I posted a link to the studies that dispute the safety claims.

From the personal comments attacking what I wrote, it’s clear that this controversy is not settled and that many people don’t want both two sides to be heard in this debate.

All over the UWL campus were posters about Deer’s lecture with the headline, “An Elaborate Fraud: The MMR Vaccine & Autism.”

All I could think was that the phrase, “an elaborate fraud” was a perfect description for what the University of WI-La Crosse and Brian Deer had perpetrated on the students who attended his talk.

Here is a five minute interview done yesterday, Oct. 6, by a radio station in Milwaukee, WI. Deer used this opportunity to trivialize and dismiss the autism community and our children.

Anne Dachel is Media Editor for Age of Autism., Visit her news site at AnneDachel.com

 

Comments

[Patricia]

Jenny
The unmistakable essence of Deer in this rebuttal of the Canary Party letter. Full of sneering disparagement. He is fond of this method of attack, sneering attempts to belittle his critics in order to bolster his own flagging self aggrandisement.
I am wondering if the Canary Party will take it any further. I would like to know more about the deposition of 6 hours that he refers to and whether he did in fact come out of it whiter than white as he describes?

[Fever]

For For Fever

Sounds correct !

[Jenny Allan]

http://briandeer.com/solved/vanderhorst-larson.htm
VanDerHorst-Larson: misinformed mother scatters food for the birds

Brian Deer's website response to a storm of protest over his lecture at Wisconsin University La Crosse. From above:

"After the collapse of what was only ever a fringe campaign in the United States, claiming that vaccines were responsible for an epidemic of autism, small groups of ill-informed, misguided and sometimes frankly malicious, people have become desperate for attention. This led to a barrage of emails - often abusive or crammed with hate speech - to university staff following my October 2012 lectures in Wisconsin, attended by more than 800 students, faculty and visitors.
The complaint below by one Jennifer VanDerHorst-Larson, who said she was founder of something she called the "Canary Party", was one of the few communications that didn't ooze with personal bile. But even she hadn't checked her facts.
Ms VanDerHorst-Larson's complaints are numbered, and I respond beneath each."

[For Fever]

Even Brian Deer does not dispute that Peter Fletcher was chief scientist at the Department of Health but he might have mentioned it at his presentation. The real point is that Fletcher is a highly qualified and professionally high ranking person, and if he makes claims of this kind in a national newspaper he will not have done it lightly.

[Fever]

To Ann Dachel :

You wrote "I submitted a question to Mr. Deer which was read during the Q and A. “Dr. Peter Fletcher, former Chief Scientific Officer in the UK, supports the position of Dr. Wakefield. What is your opinion on this?”

In response Deer announced that Dr. Fletcher was NEVER CHIEF SCIENTIFIC OFFICER IN THE UK. He claimed that Fletcher was someone who worked for the government but who left his position after a disagreement with his employer.

In truth, I’ve been in contact with Dr. Fletcher for years and even a cursory search online will show that he truly is the former Chief Scientific Officer in Britain. This is a clear indication of the validity and honesty of Deer’s claims."

In response to these claims, you mentionned some links...that, to my mind, can't give a definite proof of Dr Dr Fletcher position. Please, don't misunderstand me : I don't put into question the fact that Dr Fletcher had been a Chief Scientific Officer of the UK Department of Health.
It would be more simple (?) to mention OFFICIAL documents ( official letters, reports...)attesting this qualification. Press articles, although sometimes usefulf hints, may not be too hastily relied upon,...as you may know in the case of B.D..

[John Stone]

In this case, as far as I know, Deer didn't say defamatory things about the judge's character (which even he knows would be highly inadvisable) he just completely mis-reported what he did.

[Carol]

One of the problems I see, Jenny, is that Deer when asked in future about Justice Mitting's decision can say, "I was accused of smearing Justice Mitting. I wasn't smearing him. It was perfectly within his remit to do what he did," and by this means evade the plain fact that Justice Mitting didn't actually do what Deer says he did.

[Jenny Allan]

Patricia asks:-
"...does that mean also then that an audience of say 200 would have been merely "hearsay evidence"?

Yes, I think it would be very difficult to 'pin down' Brian Deer in a court of law, on the basis of the students' recollections of what he actually said at the La Crosse lecture.

[Jenny Allan]

Carol says:-
"I don't think Deer is smearing Justice Mitting"

I beg to differ. Deer's obscure inferences and long winded 'explanations' were designed to imply the High Court Judge was somehow incompetent. Maybe that is not quite what Deer said at that lecture, 'semantics again', but that, almost certainly is what an uninformed audience would have assumed.

In fact, as has been pointed out by those who attended the High Court hearing, and is beautifully explained in the written Mitting Judgement, this Judge has taken time to fully expain the reasons for all his conclusions. (Contrast this with Judge Amy Meacham's one line dismissal of the Texas Wakefield litigation suit).

Deer also implies the GMC should have appealed the Mitting judgement, and presented their arguments better!! This also implies guilty verdicts for all three doctors, and that these should have been upheld by the appeal Judge.

Deer takes great care to ensure his words cannot be used against him. But he makes frequent mistakes. There is some evidence that at least some of Deer's La Crosse lecture was 'scripted for him' by someone based in the US. (Hence that ridiculous assertion that ethical approval should have been sought from an Institutional Review Board, a purely US system, very different from UK procedures).

[Patricia]

Jenny
"no tapes and no transcripts...." does that mean also then that an audience of say 200 would have been merely "hearsay evidence?" Not wishing to sound sarcastic BTW.
I really am puzzled here. There is a court case against him in the US still under appeal and yet the man is still able to slander and defame as much as he likes?

[Carol]

Jenny Allan,

I don't think Deer is smearing Justice Mitting, but he is mischaracterizing his judgement. Mitting didn't say to the GMC, "Oh, you didn't give me the right stuff so I'm just going to throw your decision out." Mitting laid out arguments for both sides (filling in where the GMC had fallen down on the job), assessed their relative merits and issued his decision reinstating Walker-Smith.

[Jenny Allan]

@ Carol
"Also, Deer........in order to leave his audience with the impression that Walker-Smith is still tainted.."

Deer's two monologues 'plumb the depths' of malevolent untruthfulness and smears. It is plain he imagines he can safely say anything he likes in the US, protected by powerful political and corporate interests. I'm afraid all of this diatribe would be unacceptable in the UK, and almost certainly actionable. Perhaps that is why I could find no reference to Deer's address to the elective conference in June 2012 at Oxford University. Deer, always insists on no taping and no transcripts, and the La Crosse Tribune and other press outlets which publicised Deer's forthcoming 'lectures', did not publish any 'follow ups'. However, Deer has not been able to prevent attending persons from transcribing his monologues.

Smearing a distinguished UK High Court Judge might turn out to be Deer's nemesis. In the UK you do not 'mess' with High Court Judges, and 2000miles of Atlantic Ocean will not protect Deer from the wrath of Justice Sir John Mitting.

[Birgit Calhoun]

It strikes me as curious that the fungal meningitis cases caused by steroid shots from a compounding pharmacy are currently being discussed with utter alarm when shots from vaccine makers are beyond reproach.

Can anyone comment?

[Birgit Calhoun]

Unfortunately educational institutions are no longer independent. They, too, are beholden to the mighty dollar coming from all kinds of corporations. And politics plays no small part in that. There was a time when science equalled truth and scientists were eager to expose fraud in science. I don't believe that is the case any longer.

[Carol]

Also, Deer, if you'll notice, in order to leave his audience with the impression that Walker-Smith is still tainted, tells them that Justice Mitting quashed the judgement only because the GMC failed to provide its reasoning. That sounds...plausible, but it's not accurate.

Justice Mitting provides a long and detailed analysis of the case, laying out arguments for both sides before coming to his conclusions based on that analysis.

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/english-court-exonerates-mmrautism-doctor-uk-general-medical-given-sound-thrashing/

[Carol]

John,

And Justice Mitting rose to the occasion, laying out crystalline arguments pro and con so that even I could understand what the 172-96 business was all about.

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/english-court-exonerates-mmrautism-doctor-uk-general-medical-given-sound-thrashing/

[Jenny Allan]

From Deer's response to questioning about the High Court Walker-Smith appeal:-

"Again, the prosecution presented their case and proves absolutely conclusively that they did not have IRB approval for this research"

Mr Deer, you seem to be very ignorant about UK ethical approvals, which are granted by Health Trusts' ethics committees. The Royal Free Clinicians had full ethical approval for the 1998 Lancet study. The properly signed consent forms were all prominent within the 12 Lancet childrens' medical casenotes. Strangely you seem to have overlooked these forms when presenting your evidence to the GMC. Strange that.

Institutional Review Boards are purely a US institution and according to Wikipedia, they are riven with conflicts of interest, resulting in at least one of these boards being shut down.

From Wikipedia:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_review_board

" Although designed to protect the rights and welfare of the research subjects, IRBs have been criticized by bioethicists for conflicts of interest resulting in lax oversight.As of 2005, the for-profit Western Institutional Review Board claimed to conduct the majority of reviews for new drug submissions to the FDA.In a 2006 study of 575 IRB members at university medical centers, over one-third reported industry financial ties and over one-third admitted they "rarely or never" disclosed conflicts of interest to other board members.A 2009 sting operation by the Government Accountability Office lead Coast IRB to shut down after approving the fake product "Adhesiabloc", called "the riskiest thing I’ve ever seen on this board" by one of the IRBs not approving the fake product."

Ah yes-VERY ETHICAL -NOT!! When I pointed this out on the La Crosse Tribune comment thread, which quoted Deer's IRB mistake, I was accused of 'playing at semantics' by the regular trolls. Well THEY should know, being experts in weasel words!! Personally I just prefer plain English.

[John Stone]

Carol

Yes, I had the opportunity to sit through virtually all the Walker-Smith hearing at the High Court and I can tell you that Judge Mitting accorded Joanna Glynn (the GMC attorney) every opportunity to provide him with the missing arguments to consider and not only could she not, it ended up with her citing an obscure ruling which put the onus back on the judge to consider what reasons there might be which had not been stated (based on a case where the reasoning had been simple but the adjudicating panel had failed to state it), annoying him very considerably.

John

[Carol]

During Q&A, Deer was asked about Justice Mitting's exoneration of Walker-Smith. (Mitting did conclude after careful consideration that the children were seen on the basis of clinical need and not as part of the research project in question and remarked that even where the GMC offered reasons for their conclusions, they were often wrong.) Here's Deer's explanation with the prefacing verbiage omitted.

"....Again, the prosecution presented their case and proves absolutely conclusively that they did not have IRB approval for this research at which point the defendants who had said nothing about anything then said no, that's absolutely right, we didn't ask for ethical approval for what we did, we didn't do that research project, this was all done on a clinical basis, this was all done for the individual good of the children which is a completely different case and you have this bizarre spectacle as the hearing went on of Walker-Smith's legal team producing documents even as the hearing was going on, coming round and giving out these documents and it became what's this, what's this, what we got now, so the whole case suddenly changed halfway through as the defense changed their case so when they went forward to appeal, well when it came to the panel's findings, they did not set out the reasoning by which they found that Walker-Smith was guilty because they'd been pursuing the wrong line of argument so what then happened was that Mitting, the judge, said, because one of the things you have to do when you're doing judicial work, judges always, you often if you see any video of judges summing up in a case, you'll see what happens is that they describe the facts, they describe the conclusions they come to as the judge, in between they set out their reasoning, they explain how it is they got to their conclusions and what the General Medical Council failed to do was to include paragraphs on its reasoning of how they got the judgement on Walker-Smith so the judge said, you have not shown your reasoning, therefore I'm going to quash this, they could've reviewed it again, gone back, taken the case again and come up with their reasoning, but Walker-Smith by this stage was 75 years-old, wasn't practicing medicine and nobody could give a damn anyway so that brought a technically long answer is what happened."

Get that? The GMC panel was actually unable to include reasoning about how they came to their conclusions because they didn't have reasons (due to the prosecution pursuing the wrong line of argument).

[Meadow Davidson]

Mr. Deer,

I write in response to your lecture at UWL on the evening of Thursday, October 4th. You see, I am a mother of an autistic child, and I was offended by your comments concering parents of children with Autism. I do not think it is fair to assume you understand the life-changing experience of learning you have a disabled child. You assume we are all looking for someone or something to blame, often times blaming ourselves. This is not true for me, my family and many other families facing this trial in their lives.

When my son was diagnosed, I was not angry. I did not look for someone to blame. I decided that my role as mother became that much more important in this child's life, so I had better get to work. I rolled up my sleeves to educate myself to give my son the best chance at the best life possible. Blame never entered my mind.

I was also offended as I witnessed you mocking parent's of Autistic children at conferences learning about medical diseases that were affecting some children on the spectrum. I wonder if you took the same kind of notes while frantically trying to learn medical jargon so you could follow along in court and sound credible at your lectures, as you do not have a medical degree either.

I was appalled at your implications that parents of autistic children raise questions about their child's health for attention. I promise you we get plenty attention at the grocery store, at the movies, at restaraunts, at parks, at school, at the doctors, at church, and everywhere we go. We do not need to seek the lime-light.

You implied we were liars. I am not a liar, Mr. Deer, and this is very insulting.

"An Elaborate Fraud: The Autism Parents" would have more truthfully described your lecture, but honesty doesn't seem to be your priority.

[Cater's Daddy]

Cheryl, I have only read Callous Disregard so I can't add anything to your knowledge base on the matter, but I had to post just to cheer you on!

[Angus Files]

Theresa I am sure Deer has stuck another hundred pins into his voodoo doll of you...still not worked..

sh-one-t happens Brian..

Angus

[Please Don't Play It Again Sam]

Has anyone noticed what a phoney manner Deer has, the hard bitten private eye mode out of Raymond Chandler - more than 60 years out of date. How can anyone take it seriously?

[Garbo]

"The University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, as an institution receiving research funds from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), is subject to the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA (rDNA) Molecules. As mandated by the Guidelines, the Chancellor of the University has appointed an Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC)."

According to NIH, University of Wisconsin has 37 pages of NIH grants for FY 2012 (all campuses), and 167 patents attached to those grants, including some related to HPV, Epstein-Barr virus, a vaccine for picornavirus (in which the U.S. Government "has certain rights"), recombinant-resistant retroviral helper cells & products derived therefrom; etc.. They have instituted new FCOI rules as of August; not sure if they apply retroactively, but it sure would be interesting to know what pharma companies are funding research at UW. Maybe someone nearby can do a little digging into the FCOIs of the professors in charge of this monocular presentation.

[Raymond Gallup]

If people don't care for the lies by Brian Deer may I suggest making donations to the following:

The Dr. Wakefield Justice Fund
http://www.drwakefieldjusticefund.org/

The best way to counteract this guy, Brian Deer and help Andy Wakefield.

I have done it and will do it!!!!

[MelissaD]

I am just wondering if any of our autism families are alumni of University of WI? I would think almost certainly. If I was, I would be calling the office of their President, complaining about the previous forum, asking for equal time for "our" side and most importantly NOT donating to their alumni fund drives and encouraging fellow graduates to do the same. That is what Universities worry most about it - the money. If you could create bad press about the Deer forum even in social media circles of graduates that might impact University fundraising it might get someone's attention at the U of WI...

[Theresa Cedillo]

Brian Deer states that Michelle Cedillo's case in the U.S. National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was a fraud. He also states that Michelle showed autistic behaviors in video prior to receiving the MMR vaccination. Michelle is my daughter and I'd like to address these comments.

First, Michelle's vaccine injury claim never would have become a viable case in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program if it were fraudulent. There is a process in place in which claims are reviewed by the court. Her claim would never have become a case if it had been fraudulent. Second, the video Deer is referencing is our own family home video. I turned these videos over to the court willingly. There is no proof that any of her behaviors displayed in our videos are from autism. The US Goverment witnesses isolated very limited pieces, some only seconds in length, and called into question these behaviors. On the last day of testimony, I was called before the Special Master to testify. Under oath, I explained the setting of the video and the behavior. It was decided by the Special Master that these segments would not be used in his decision.

I am sure Michelle and her case are very dear to Deer's heart because she is living proof of Dr. Andrew Wakefield's theory of autism and GI disease following MMR vaccination. Michelle has tested positive for vaccine strain measles virus RNA in colon biopsies from her body - Michelle's body - vaccine strain Measles RNA in her body. Michelle has now been diagnosed with Crohn's disease. This diagnosis came from mainstream pediatric gastrointerologists - not Krigsman or Wakefield (no offense to either fine doctor). Michelle is also diagnosed with severe autism. These diagnoses came AFTER becoming sick AFTER receiving the MMR vaccination. Prior to MMR - no diagnoses. After MMR - diagnosis.

Keep speaking the truth Dr. Wakefield. We surely will.

[cmo]

Thank you Cheryl for your LaCrosse efforts. You seem to be much wiser and more charming than Mr. Deer...

I am sure you will find enough information to give the "other side" of the MMR story. (sometimes known as the truth... which is always logical & refreshing)

You should check if the U of LaCrosse has received any funds for the "Ten year search for the Autism gene"... this could be a factor for their recent activity.

[Angus Files]

don't forget the Murdochmurderers involvement..

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/revisiting-james-murdoch-brian-deer.html

[John Stone]

Not to forget that La Crosse microbiology professor Michael Winfrey told La Crosse Tribune on 30 September:

“We are a university,” he said. “We value and encourage people to look at both sides of issues and make informed decisions.”

http://lacrossetribune.com/news/local/vaccine-autism-debate-coming-to-la-crosse/article_88fe3612-0a92-11e2-bf97-0019bb2963f4.html

Like hell!

[Jenny Allan]

Cheryl says:-
"They all heard one side of a very biased story and now that is the general opinion in the university. Sad that the scientists at UWL are not being at all scientific. I thought science was about looking at the evidence and making informed decisions. I am learning every day that it is more like politics than what I was taught science was."

Thank you Cheryl. I am delighted to hear that young persons are not afraid to question things which they instinctively feel are wrong, or are being misrepresented, and I hope your University tutors also have the courage to stand up and complain about the decision to invite non scientist Brian Deer to deliver, what you correctly realised was a politically imposed lecture.

You are also correct in your assessment that this was nothing at all to do with science, since science is an evolving process requiring continuous auditing, assessing and most certainly questioning, debating and often redefining. If you want to know more about the UK parents' side of the Wakefield et al/MMR vaccine story, then this link should help:-
http://www.cryshame.com/

Good luck with your studies. I am sure you will do very well. God bless.

[Angus Files]

Funny as Frock you see the venom being spilled from the Orac site and you think..do these people have real life .. friends?

I wouldn`t think sooo..

Angus

[Jen]

Ya that "Lilady" even got rebuked by one of her cronies in the cesspit. She tracks entire conversations of people (I think she must do this 24/7) and has some pretty inappropriate actions/statements regarding people like Jake C. It is cringe- worthy.

[Angus Files]

Patricia they all seem a bit pissed off these days ,talking to themselves about ones ,self..even "pharma narcissism"has a sell by date ....oh!and are we waiting for them on the way down...

happy days!!!

Angus

[MamaBear]

Will someone please find out:
Who is Brian Deer?
Who pays his way (travel, meals, lodging)?

In other words, follow the money!

[patricia]

Jenny I get your point about the difference between blogs and comments page in a local newspaper. I did use to post on the cesspits but soon gave up, it was just boring. I do believe that proper information should be put up wherever and whenever it is needed but actually engaging in discussion is a counter productive process. I have been very amused to see the antics of that Lilady character ad how she races back and forth between base camp and the comments pages. She is pathetically keen to tell everyone back at base how busy she has been and how she scored so many points -"Did you read what I said"? Cringe making. And very illuminating. How insecure they all are. They always end up talkig to themselves. It's still going on Jenny, as I write this. Lookinglass is off to bed.

[Angus Files]

The Autism/Vaccine Link: Andrew Wakefield/Brian Deer, UW-L Thursday 4 October 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5vpZSLW4ds

[Jenny Allan]

Patricia-I admire you for your courage in posting comments on that troll's den LB RB. The difference between that website and the LaCrosse Tribune's is that a 'local' newspaper is likely to be perused by locals and if all they get is the troll's rantings, with NO challenges, then that is what will be believed.

Brian Deer's lecture was an outrage and an affront to education. WE know that, but those Wisconsin students, ordered to listen to this diatribe will assume that Deer is spouting gospel truth!! This man has been given powerful high level corporate and political protection in the past, but my intuitive 'gut feeling' is that Deer is being led by his own vanity into those scapegoat shoes. Perhaps he has already negotiated his retirement under a new name in some far eastern shangri la.

The Tribune comment thread was approaching 300 comments last time I looked and has served its purpose. I agree, the trolls made themselves look bad and certainly did Brian Deer no favours, but then Brian Deer is not their paymaster.

I am not an expert in troll biology. This species was not in existence when I was studying the life sciences. They cannot be categorised as either nocturnal or diurnal, since they certainly appear to require very little sleep. There were really only three main ones on that Tribune thread, dominated by Lilady and Dyson. Whether or not these persons really are a 'little lady' or a species of vacuum cleaner is open to question. Personally, I think there are a number of people working 'shifts'!!

I've got no idea why my link to the High Court transcript no longer works. I'm still looking for another link. Dr Wakefield has indicated that he is now looking for the GMC to restore his medical licence post Mitting.

[jen]

Oh, and I forgot to add that there are all the siblings out there of affected children. And all together, we are many.

[jen]

You go Cheryl! I'm so glad to hear that some students like yourself were disappointed in UWlax's approach to this issue. I mean if they were going to have someone as controversial as Deer there (especially when the high court in Britain recently dismissed the GMC's findings as hogwash and U London won't touch it with a ten foot pole) they should have had the decency to have Dr. Wakefield be able to respond- which he was more than willing to do.
I actually wrote the Chancellor and the head of Science and Health and noted that, like yourself, I do not have a child with autism but work with special needs children. One of my kids attends a top university that actually held a symposium on vaccine safety. So what is UWlax's problem? It does not look good when an institution of higher learning acts in such a biased manner. Yes, they may not realize this much yet but there are many of us out there who work with special needs kids and although we do not have a child with autism- we do follow the issue closely and see what is going on. I am very thankful to parents who have sounded the warning bell about vaccines and I chose to vaccinate my son very minimally. Please keep us informed on your presentation.

[Louis Conte]

I have to add a thought to all of this...what kind of sick monster is this guy? In the middle of all of this he elects to attack Michele Cedillo. Did this child have anything to do with the "elaborate fraud" he alleges?

This is simply yet another indication of the malevolence going on here.

Besides what he has done to an honorable man, Deer's actions have allowed more children to be injured. Additionally, his actions have resulted in injured children being denied treatment.

And for this he gets University speaking gigs.

[Launching cabbage & tomatoes at UWI-LaCrosse leaders]

The University did not allow a debate? What the hell has happened to higher education in America? It is shameful and the leaders there should bury their heads in the sand.

College is supposed to be all about debate, questioning the status quo. When authorities tell you the questions have been asked and answered and there is no debate and the universities buy that, then you know the Universities no longer serve their intended purpose.

UWI-Lax has been sold to the highest corporate bidder. Parents, don't send your kids there!

[JerseyGuy]

Good for you, Cheryl! If you'd like some historical background on the politics of this issue, check out this article:

http://www.autismfile.com/science-research/what-we-can-learn-from-silent-spring

It shows that 50 years ago the chemical industry tried to do to Rachel Carson what pharma is now doing to Wakefield.

And we'd all love to hear about the response to your seminar. Maybe you can submit a report to AoA.

[Benedetta]

Ohhh Guys give CHERYL all she needs and coach her tooo--- a student (unlike me) that is not worshipfull of her professors..
The professors 35 years ago long sold out so that is many years of dogma you are fighting.

[patricia]

Cheryl I loved your comments. It's a relief to know there are some independant thinkers at your Uni. I am sure you will receive much support for Oct 15th from all the crew on AoA. Definitely want to have a follow up on your seminar!

[patricia]

Jenny, a coupe of points. You say it is a mistake to "ignore" those Deer accolytes still posting (God do they never sleep? I have dipped into some of their cesspits now and then and there they all are, 24/7. Get a life, comes to mind.) May I suggest that one does not actively engage in discussions with them, it is too enervating and is a little like "shouting down a well" as old Frankie once said. Let them ad hom as much as they want. It ultimately weakens and discredits anything they have to say and makes them sound like the idiots they are.
Secondly. I am curious to know why, when you say that the "original court direct link has been deactivated, possibly due to new legal action against the GMC" Do you know what that is all about?
Thirdly - about putting up links on that Tribune comments page. None of them work for me. Am I alone in this? I find it much more powerful if a page can be pasted up fully if this is possible. I am not PC literate ad can't do it, but I suspect few people bother to write up the link themselves. But as I said maybe I am alone with this problem. Thankyou jen.

[Jim Thompson]

Thank you Jenny Allan for the link to the Mitting verdict. http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/english-court-exonerates-mmrautism-doctor-uk-general-medical-given-sound-thrashing/

The General Medical Council (GMC) decision for Professor Walker-Smith was reversed by a court of law. The reason given was that although the GMC declared they knew all the answers—they were clueless as to the right questions.

One might liken this GMC ruling to a witch hunt proceeding in Salem, Massachusetts as follows: “If the sky is blue on a cloudless midday then the accused person standing in front of this assembly is guilty of being a witch. Now, since it is midday and the sky is cloudless, please answer this question. Is the sky blue? Yes? Guilty it is then!”

Here is a question for the academia and students at the University of Wisconsin in LaCrosse. Why are doctors punished for trying to protect children from injury by vaccines when it is not a crime to injure them with vaccines?

[Jenny Allan]

Barry says:- "Ignore Lawrence, he's a troll. The fact that he's here, means big pharma thinks he needs to be here. Which means WE are making progress. His arguments are little more than semantics, likely constructed by the same people who construct Brian Deers elaborate lies."

Yes indeed. The trolls are out in force on the Tribune and other comment threads. But their arguments are threadbare, and they are reduced to an ever more frantic repetition of the, now totally discredited, GMC evidence and verdicts against Dr Wakefield and his clinician colleagues, and a great deal of ad hominem venom directed against Ann Dachel, Age of Autism and all those persons, who irritatingly (to THEM), politely and persistently present the truth. It is a mistake to just 'ignore' them. They are all out of their LB RB 'comfort zone' and MUST be challenged relentlessly.

http://lacrossetribune.com/news/local/finding-vaccine-truth-crowds-hear-two-takes-on-dismissed-study/article_4f1d528a-0e9c-11e2-b597-0019bb2963f4.html?mode=comments

The trolls have absolutely NOTHING on me which they can use for an ad hominem attack;(no doubt they have been 'digging'). Instead my comments are attacked for being untruthful. I just LOVE that; it gives me a great platform to attack THEM for their lies and misrepresentations. The Mitting written Judgement is brilliant. Eleven of the Lancet childrens' cases, as presented by the GMC, were examined in great detail by Judge Mitting and in simple understandable English, the Judge quietly but ruthlessly demolishes all the GMC's arguments and verdicts, giving his reasons, logically explained. (The 12th child, as a US citizen, was considered to be outside the jurisdiction of the GMC).

The Mitting Verdict is linked below and those of you who intend to write e-mails to the University of Wisconsin, complaining about that outrageous Deer lecture might like to quote from it in support of your arguments. The UK High Court is a REAL court of law, with complete authority over quasi judicial organisations like the GMC. (The original court direct link has been inactivated, possibly due to new legal action against the GMC).

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/english-court-exonerates-mmrautism-doctor-uk-general-medical-given-sound-thrashing/

[Jenny Allan]

For 'Aussie Dad' and others.
This was the response from the legal department of 'The Sunday Times of London' following Deer's CNN Anderson Cooper interview, following his BMJ article 'How the case against the MMR vaccine was fixed' and the accompanying Godlee, Smith & Marcovitch editorial, 'Wakefield's article linking MMR vaccine and autism was fraudulent', January 2011:-

Here is the statement:-
"It is quite clear that you do not understand English. Brian Deer is not a member of the Sunday Times staff. He is a freelance journalist who runs his own website and blog and is not under the control or direction of the Sunday Times. Mr. Deer should not represent himself as a Sunday Times journalist. He is not a member of staff, does NOT have a regular salary from us, is not on our pension scheme and pays his own tax as a freelance. If he says that he writes for the Sunday Times that would be correct. He is a contributor to The Sunday Times on an occasional basis but again we have no control over him ..."
- Alaistair Brett, Legal Manager, Sunday Times"

[oneVoice]

I agree Barry.
He came here because he knows/they know (pHarma) that Dr. Wakefield has lot of supporters.Truly
shameful that Dr. Wakefield was not allowed to speak.What
happened to academic freedom??? I think the university had received funding from big pHarma ($$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)
so they are controlled by big pHarma.Money flows many different ways; professional education,grants etc. Information is controlled and manipulated.This is also to control other doctors and researchers,so they do not do research on the gut system (the immune system arises from the gut system)or anything big pHarma feels inappropriate. We need more independent universities and independent researchers in order to save our children and STOP AUTISM.
STAY STRONG DR.WAKEFIELD.Your day will come.
I also hope that the students are smart enough to understand that they only saw one side of coin.Sickness is
big business in North America.

[Cheryl]

I am a student at UWL and was very excited that this debate was coming to La Crosse. I have been an in-home therapist for autistic children for the last 5 years and am getting my masters in cellular and molecular biology so have always followed this topic closely. I even gave Dr. Taylor Dr. Wakefield's book Callous Disregard 4 or so years ago just because I wanted her opinion. I don't think she read it and she won't give it back :-/ I was extremely disappointed that Wakefield was completely shut out. It didn't seem like anyone really knew he was coming or that it was important at all. They all heard one side of a very biased story and now that is the general opinion in the university. Sad that the scientists at UWL are not being at all scientific. I thought science was about looking at the evidence and making informed decisions. I am learning every day that it is more like politics than what I was taught science was. Good thing all the grad students and some professors have to listen to me for 30 mins when I give my seminar on Wakefield's side of the story on October 15th! Any information or resources would be greatly appreciated!!

[nhokkanen]

I attended Brian Deer's Friday session. Deer admitted receiving criticism that his Thursday presentation lacked technical information.

The UW-LaCrosse faculty member who chaired the event organizing committee said that the voluminous quantity of emails he's received this week complaining about Deer's appearance constitute "hate mail." Other attendees mentioned death threats against a lyme disease researcher.

These highly educated and resourceful community leaders are now self-appointed victims -- of their overactive imaginations. The authentic victims here are the children, once again either dismissed by Deer as not sick and not autistic, or leveraged to demonstrate his illusion of humanity.

[Carolyn Kylesmom]

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
—
Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 – 1860)

Looks like we are in the "Violently Opposed" phase . . .

TAKE HEART !
Soon they will act like we are crazy and the story will be " why did we parents give our children vaccines when we knew they were susceptible?"
We will then be blamed for that. And sadly, that will be progress.

[send e-mails]

Please scroll down to the comment signed "URGENT - send e-mails" for more info. on writing officials at University of Wisconsin, La Cross about the Brian Deer farce.

Chancellor Joe Gow
jgow@uwlax.edu

Dean of the College of Science and Health, Bruce Riley
briley@uwlax.edu

[Aussie Dad]

Does this quote by Brian Deer yesterday to the Milwaukee radio station mean he DOES work the Sunday Times (a Rupert Murdoch paper)? I thought he and they had distanced themselves from each other.

"I’ve spent eight years, on and off, investigating this issue for the Sunday Times of London and the British Medical Journal and we’ve spent all this time looking into this and we’ve found no evidence whatsoever."

[Taximom]

Good heavens.

Click on the name of Lawrence, the serial vaccination-defender who keeps posting here, and you'll get taken to a pro-vaccination website ("The History of Vaccines"), with none other than Paul Offit listed on the editorial advisory board.

and this:

"Contributions from the following organizations support The History of Vaccines:

GlaxoSmithKline

The Independence Foundation

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.

Pfizer Inc

Sanofi Pasteur"

Wow, I guess they must be getting pretty worried if they are paying "Lawrence" (Brian "Lawrence?") to post here.

[Taximom]

I think he's really gone out on a limb in the radio interview--he actually said that the MMR has never caused brain damage? Hmm, those 2000+ cases that the US Department of Health and Human Services ADMITTED AND COMPENSATED? Seems like someone just might want to point that out....

He is frantically trying to cover his butt, but it won't do any good. He will be the first one the pharmaceutical companies point to when they can no longer cover up the truth.

[AussieMum]

Spot on @Barry!

I was going to ask Lawrence if he was going to declare any conflicts of interest, however when you click on his name
- enough said!

Thanks for the update Anne.

Elizabeth Gillespie

[Deborah Nash]

I'm lost for words. Brian Deer has succeeded in reaching a new low.
The greedier he gets the deeper the hole he digs for himself. In the end it will be his undoing!

Thank you to everyone who went on behalf of us all.

[John Stone]

Barry

Yes, I was just making the point that Lawrence is an absurd figure whose appearance scarcely seems spontanous and who doesn't understand his brief.

[Barry]

Guys,

Ignore Lawrence, he's a troll. The fact that he's here, means big phrama thinks he needs to be here. Which means WE are making progress.

His arguments are little more than semantics, likely constructed by the same people who construct Brian Deers elaborate lies.

MMR causes autism, and that is the bottom line. People like Brian Deer and Lawrence are being paid to lie, and keep the average person citizen from ever realizing that truth.

[John Stone]

Just to point out that Lawrence has been buzzing around here since January in a state of high agitation, I think since it was announced that Andy Wakefield was suing Deer and BMJ, but his latest intervention shows that he hasn't got the even most basic knowledge of the issues to begin to hold an opinion.

[Twyla]

@Lawrence re:"How about the statements that Walker-Smith's attorney made that the MMR - vaccine link was "disproven" and settled science?"

The GMC ruling was not about the MMR. They couldn't say, "We're taking away your license because you dared to speculate about an MMR/autism link." It was about a whole lot of trumped up stuff about the children's treatment, a birthday party, etc. No doubt Walker-Smith's attorney did not want to make the case be about the MMR/autism link. He wanted to focus on the actual allegations against Walker-Smith. He did not want to say, "My client is not guilty because the MMR really does cause autism." That would spark a huge controversy and is not actually relevant to the GMC decision. So no doubt they just wanted to put that issue aside at the outset.

A little like families who file claims in the vaccine court and don't base it on their children's autism but on an underlying medical condition such as ADEM. The vaccine-autism link is a hot potato, too hot to touch.

[Steve]

Why would you have to announce that "there is no debate" unless that was certainly untrue? The students at UWLAX need to absolutely raise a major stink about this. What a clown show.

[John Stone]

Lawrence

You really haven't got a grip on this at all. The paper was not a research paper, it was as stated an early report on children seen according to clinical need of which Prof Walker-Smith was senior author and signatory. Prof Walker-Smith never claimed that he was not an author of the paper. The court also agreed with him that it was not a research paper or the protocol 172/96, and not funded by the Legal Aid Board as part of the MMR litigation.

As to his attorney's views on the autism/MMR connection I expect he was just repeating what he was told in the newspapers. He was asked by the judge what his opinion was, but it was not part of defence brief and Prof Walker-Smith wasn't consulted. When the attorney was asked at the same time about the current standing of the autism bowel hypothesis he was scarcely well-informed.

[Benedetta]

Oh G.H.
that is a very good question!
I wonder if we will ever know that answer!

[Silvermaven]

Someone should tell them they are now Third Class University. The only thing that could possibly be learned was how to describe new laws for medicine.
And on the s@$$ list growing every day in WWIII for the people.
We know that all syndromes are caused by stealth prion protein caused from genetically altered organisms used in vaccines.
And we know how to fix it, but jackals like Deer work to let them keep killing the public and at the same time trying to keep his bud's out of prison.
Because we also know that each and every antigen given in the name of protection adds to the prion synergy of the stealth that now shares their genes with what ever they want.
You see it really does not matter any more what kind of altered genetic's get in---in prion synergy it survives.
http://www.morgellons-research.org/morgellons/morgellons-microscop3.htm
And being found in ALL So Called SYNDROMES.
Lets hope the minds of science and research can help us find a cure and treatments that work before it is too late for all of man and beasts.
The only thing that can be learned by this exercise at WI. is how best to prescribe the LAW for criminals who prescribe for LIES.
THIS CONCERNS ALL YOU TAX PAYERS WHO ENJOY BEING ROBBED----
When the sick and disabled can't work who pays?
INSTEAD OF GETTING REAL TREATMENT TO KILL ALL THOSE SERONEGATIVE INFECTIONS THEY SAY WE DON'T HAVE...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yOno_2m_8LY
HOW LONG ARE THEY GOING TO MAKE THE BILLIONS STILL SUFFERING THEIR LIES OF SYNDROMES WAIT FOR REAL TREATMENT SO WE CAN HAVE OUR TIME GIVEN AND YOU CAN STOP PAYING TO KEEP THEM UP IN LIES ?
https://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.diseases.lyme/browse_thread/thread/51a54deb1d6da3ad?hl=en&noredirect=true
Folks they know the truth...Which is why they now describe vaccines that could possibly be used in an emergency to depress the immune system for time....Because they know it works very well. Pam2cys is mycoplasma for vaccine use.
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20120913/Pam2Cys-nasal-spray-may-be-useful-agent-against-pandemics-and-emerging-viral-strains.aspx

http://www.silobreaker.com/pam2cys-nasal-spray-may-be-useful-agent-against-pandemics-and-emerging-viral-strains-5_2265973191803404385

http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/09/20/infdis.jir548.short?rss=1

[Lawrence]

Again with Walker-Smith. How about the statements that Walker-Smith's attorney made that the MMR - vaccine link was "disproven" and settled science?

How about the fact that Walker-Smith threw Wakefield under the bus by saying that he was merely "treating" the children & was not aware that he was part of a research study?

How about the fact that, having proven (to the Court) that he wasn't involved with Wakefield's study, that his successful appeal had nothing to do with the validity of Wakefield's study?

Any feedback on this guys?

[Jim Thompson]

“There is no debate… This University did not invite a debate on that issue.” Bernadette Taylor, Professor of Immunology

“Deer failed to disclose that he was privately the author of at least three complaints to the General Medical Council that later took away Wakefield's license. Violating journalistic ethics, Deer had created the very news that he later covered.” Age of Autism comment.

“That a lie which is half a truth is ever the blackest of lies.”
Alfred Lord Tennyson

[cmo]

Brian Deer's opening slide for the Wisconsin students, most of who were "required" to be there.... “If he wasn’t so ucking greedy" ... simply shows a world class / UK Murdoch / hick.

Funding for Deer's talk would be interesting and should be fully disclosed.

Did Deer say he used his "middle name as his last name" to scam UK parents with interviews? I would rather doubt it.

The GREED is located in the 30 billion dollar vaccine industry who will destroy children and anyone else in their way.

[patricia]

PS to my post re the GMC. I forgot to add perhaps the most important point. If that trial had been declared invalid there would of course be now no need for Wakefield to Appeal.

[patricia]

Jenny has spoken of the many references made over the last few days to the GMC findings.
Someone will no doubt tell me I am looking at the case in the wrong manner I dare say. But it seems logical to me that in view of the damning criticism by Judge Mitting of its procedures, which were declared wholly inadequate by him and advice was given, and taken, by themselves to change their organisational structure, before continuing to operate as a quasi legal court, in view of all of this, the whole case should have been declared invalid in my view, should it not?
The fact that Prof Walker Smith was exonerated was just, and a welcome relief of course, but the matter of his trial by the GMC was truly a travesty and one which none of the doctors should have had to endure. (No compensatory factors for Prof W Smith allowed here? Why not?)
My contention is "m'luds!" that this GMC case should have been officially consigned to the trash can and to history. and not be able to be for ever quoted. It is so exhausting having to correct people's understanding of what ultimately happened in the Higher Court, to the case.

[URGENT - send e-mails]

We cannot sit silently by. Please E-mail these people with the truth, and spread the word on Facebook about e-mailing LaCross University. (The pen is mightier than the Lancet.)

Chancellor Joe Gow
jgow@uwlax.edu

Dean of the College of Science and Health, Bruce Riley
briley@uwlax.edu

Pertinent facts and links for your e-mail:

In his letter to the BMJ, National Whistleblower Center board member David Lewis, who examined the children's histopathological grading sheets, makes is clear that Wakefield's co-author, pathologist Amar Dhillon did indeed diagnose colitis "in a number of children" contrary to Deer's statement at your university that none of the children had bowel disease.
http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/09/re-how-case-against-mmr-vaccine-was-fixed
Dr. Lewis: http://www.whistleblowers.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=74&Itemid=76

Brian Deer stated at your university that Dr. Peter Fletcher was never Chief Scientific Officer in the UK. This statement is easily proven false:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-376203/Former-science-chief-MMR-fears-coming-true.html

Deer misrepresented the UK's former Chief Scientific Officer due to his criticisms of the MMR: "There are very powerful people in positions of great authority in Britain and elsewhere who have staked their reputations and careers on the safety of MMR and they are willing to do almost anything to protect themselves."

Wakefield's co-author in the Lancet Paper, Dr. John Walker Smith, was recently exonerated and had his license to practice medicine restored, showing that Deer's allegations against Wakefield and Walker Smith, which were rubber stamped by the General Medical Council, had no foundation. http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/03/professor-john-walker-smith-exonerated-in-autism-mmr-case.html

Brian Deer's attacks against Wakefield began when his Sunday Times Editor, Paul Nuki, told him "Find something big" on the "MMR" as Deer himself revealed here: http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c672

Paul Nuki had a DIRECT FAMILY TIE to a government employee responsible for MMR safety. Paul Nuki is the son of PROF. GEORGE NUKI who sat on the Committee on Safety in Medicines when it passed Pluserix MMR vaccine as safe for use in 1987.

In February 2009, Sunday Times proprietor James Murdoch was appointed to the board of MMR manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline with a brief to “help to review "external issues that might have the potential for serious impact upon the group's business and reputation"” This was swiftly followed by new attacks on Andrew Wakefield’s reputation by Deer and other Times Newspaper journalists.

Deer failed to disclose that he was privately the author of at least three complaints to the General Medical Council that later took away Wakefield's license. Violating journalistic ethics, Deer had created the very news that he later covered. (GMC created a letter a year later stating Deer was not listed as the complainant.)

Deer also failed to disclose that there were no complaints against Wakefield by the children's families, most of whom very strongly support him, and many of whom credit his team with a diagnosis that led to effective treatment of their children's bowel disease.

The Lancet withdrew the Wakefied paper seven months after the Lancet's owner, Sir Crispin Davis, became a non-executive director of MMR manufacturer Glaxo SmithKline. His brother, Nigel Davis, was the high court judge who presided over the secret hearing to remove funding from MMR litigation. Nigel Davis then issued a statement (referring to himself in the third person): "the possibility of any conflict of interest arising from his brother's position did not occur to him."

The chairman of the GMC panel that struck Wakefield off the medical register, Surendra Kumar, failed to disclose that he owned shares in MMR manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline,

Deer's opening slide at the La Cross talk, clearly intended to refer to Wakefield, speaks volumes about Deer’s lack of neutrality: “If he wasn’t so fucking greedy, he’d a been tougher to spot.”
(The only money Wakefield earned as an expert witness was donated by him to the Royal Free Hospital. This is well documented.)

In light of the above information, the students at La Cross were not properly informed by Professor Bernadette Taylor who stated ““There is no debate.”

[Allen Taloff]

The university allowed Deer to speak but did not
allow rebuttal or debate. What was the university
afraid of, loosing any and all grant money from
Big Pharma? The answer is obvious. Why allow one
individual to speak and NOT allow any form of debate.

[GH]

I am wondering who made the decision to fund him to fly thousands of miles for one speech at an obscure university in Wisconsin, and why.

[Carol]

Did Deer mention Dr. Walker-Smith at all? It would be humiliating for any normal person to have a public comeuppance such as that administered by Justice Mitting.

Justice Mitting said that the Deer-instigated charges against Walker-Smith were crap.

[Benedetta]

Nothing like getting in a public forum an using an F bomb - to show how low class you really are.

I suppose that young adults are desensitized to it - with all the movies, and even public officials have been caught saying it--- but still a student does not expect to hear this from a public speaker they have been asked to attend by their professors --- you expect such a public speaker should be intelligent enough to be able to put a sentence together expressing themselves without resorting to cursing. This should have been easy for him since it was not even a debate to put just *his* words vibrating the air.

If he is a journalist and it is his stock and trade I would have expected him to have a more wide, varied, descriptive,and professionla vocabulary. Not only is he not a science writer with any science training --- he is not even a very good reporter or writer. He is in a profession that has some very - very good talent -- no wonder he had to take blood money.

That is the dangers of being a mediocre person with ambition.

[Barry]

“An Elaborate Fraud: The MMR Vaccine & Autism.”

**************

The sad irony, is that Brian Deer himself is the most elaborate elaborate fraud of all time!! We all know that the MMR vaccine causes autism, and Dr Wakefield's findings would have brought the world closer to that truth... were it not of course for Brian Deer, and the team of people who are fabricating his lies for him.

I say team of people because if Brian Deer is dumb enough to attach his face to this fraud, then he's obviously too stupid to come up with it on his own. The guy's a moron, who's only job is to say anything his masters pay him to say.

Real questions that need to be answered are WHO is paying Brian Deer to spread these lies, WHY are they so desperate see Dr. Wakefield silenced, and why is the media, and even "academic institutes" being so dishonest about presenting both sides of this story?

[Carol]

Deer, having visited Child 3 and his parents twice, gives his assessment:

"As for a connection with MMR, there was only suspicion. I do not think his family was sure, one way or the other. When I asked why they took him to the Royal Free, his father replied: 'We were just vulnerable, we were looking for answers.'"

What Deer doesn't tell us is that Child 3's doctor testified that the boy developed severe bowel and behavioral problems immediately after vaccination with a bad batch of MMR. Why doesn't Deer mention that to his readers?

[patricia]

Jenny you too, thanks for stirling work on the comments pages. It's important to put out the real story and as much truthful information as people can assimilate. Low-life from known cesspits of misinformation are becoming more and more irrelevent, but I did notice a few voices of real interest at what AW's supporters had to say. LaCrosse Uni comes out of it very badly.

[PS]

The WHO should declare autism a pandemic and create a vaccine for it. If they can push millions of vaccines for something as trivial as a fever and a rash, imagine how many people would rush to avoid a serious disease like autism! Since they don't believe in the harm of vaccines anyway, pharma can make a proper killing!

[patricia]

You have done brilliant sterling work Anne for which many people are grateful and better informed. Thankyou.

The more I read of Anderson's article the more it became clear to me that he was actually far from giving an even handed report. He paid lip service only to the idea that there was another side to the discussion - I cannot call it a debate - on autism and vaccines. He did not give a fair hearing to Wakefield, on the contrary he simply reported verbatim Deer's story of events and it was not up for challenge.

Deer's opening words took my breath away ...."Nothing would have made me prouder or more fulfilled in my life, than to have discovered that vaccines cause autism.."
"Proud"?? "Fulfilled"??? This man is a psychopath FGS. Does anyone really believe this BST?
He went on to even greater heights of grandiloquence ..." because if that were true, then there would be something really remarkable that could be done for children..." As if this reptilious little man had a humane breath in his body. I have said it before elsewhere and I shall say it again, IMO this man is a psychopath, and such people do not have humane feelings for anyone but themselves.
What puzzles me is why Anderson put this quote to paper. Was he touched? Was he moved by such a declaration of heartfelt tender regard for the welfare of our children? Had he not witnessed for himself this selfsame being, parading grandiosly outside the GMC building, sneering at sick children and their parents?
If he was so taken in,if he listened to all that BST and came away from that lecture without the shadow of a doubt that something was not quite right in the state of Denmark, then the man is a complete fool. I hope and pray some of those younger minds present had the intelligence to do their own thinking and research on the matter. Their University does them no credit whatsoever and should, for their own faculty of science, be hanging their heads in shame at this travesty that took place in LaCrosse.

[Jenny Allan]

Introducing his lecture with a quotation containing profanity just about sums up Brian Deer. This University should hang its collective head in shame for inviting this person, who has NO medical or scientific qualifications whatsoever, to deliver a prestigious life sciences annual lecture.

Deer has harboured a seven year grudge against Dr Wakefield (and in some of his other blogs he has expressed contempt for ALL doctors and scientists). His references to card tricks seem to echo what was reported about a similar Deer lecture at the Johns Hopkins University two years ago.

I hope the University will publish a transcript or release a video of Deer's lecture, although I suspect that like Johns Hopkins they WON'T!!