The Cedillo Decision
After Omnibus: Soldiering On

Did the Department Of Justice Tip-Off Brian Deer?

Divulge By J.B. Handley
OK, let me be honest, I only have the vaguest understanding of who this Brian Deer character is. I love Andy Wakefield as much as the other several hundred thousand parents who love him, and I knew Brain Deer was some sketchy reporter in the UK, but I really didn't (and still don't) know much about him or his motivations. If you are in the UK, please use the comments sections to educate me.
That said, I found it rather odd that Brian Deer torpedoed Andy over the weekend with a seemingly made-up outrage piece, only days before the judges ruled in the Vaccine Court. The timing struck me as odd. I ran this by a couple of people, and most figured it was probably just coincidence, until I read this post just made by Mr. Deer himself. You be the judge:
You have it about right there. I'm proud of my work investigating Wakefield. Unlike Kirby, I am not a campaigner, have never advocated any pharmaceutical product, and have never made statements on whether or not any vaccine may or may not cause any medical condition. If there are any editorial changes in any of my published work to that effect, I don't know of them. I'm a reporter, and have simply sought out the facts on Wakefield's research.

That said, I'm also very proud that, like the GMC, the US government sought my help in mounting its case in Cedillo, copiously borrowing pages of evidence from my website and displaying some in court. I was surprised by this. I assumed that they would have sophisticated contacts with other governments and with industry, and could pretty much get what they wanted. However, on a number of occasions I would come home, find an email from the department of justice asking me for a document, and see that the next day it was being run in court. Bit of a seat of the pants job by the DoJ (brought about by the plaintiffs changing their case at the last minute). Indeed, I recall supplying a key document on the O'Leary lab business, which the DoJ didn't seem to know about just weeks before the hearing. Hence the late surfacing of Bustin and Chadwick. It was me wot done that, and I'm glad.

I don't say these things to boast, only perhaps to wonder why – if there are all kinds of grand conspiracies behind the defence of vaccine safety – governments and regulators are so untogether that a mere journalist can get ahead of them in the game.
I think, for example, the British department of health should simply seize the medical records of the Lancet children, analyse them and pass the matter to the director of public prosecutions. All this GMC stuff, allowing doctors to investigate themselves, is a huge waste of dosh, although I say so myself. I gave them my materials, as was my public duty, but IMO the GMC's lawyers should have said "this is not for us", and brought in the DoH and the police.

J.B. Handley is co-founder of Generation Rescue and a contributor to Age of Autism.



Out of curiosity, can you post a link for where Brian Deer posted his comments? I was trying to find the original source and haven't been able to.

Kathy Blanco

So sorry I didn't know Wax man background, but he did get after the shee shee heads of IDSA, that's what I was going by...other than that, I can say, there are people out there who would be in an attorney general position, that could do something...but I won't hold my breath....

objective man

I am in the UK, and work in a health care related field with a son who we feel could have been vaccine damaged. My training and inclinations are against "quackery" and I have been a victim of some of those with my own health. There are some wonderful people in the health community here and in the wider world, but importantly there a significantly large number of those who are out of their depth, both in the management of the NHS and practitioners, In fact I feel that here in the UK there is medicine, and then there is the NHS, some of which is the same thing. Having said that in the history of my health, I have had equally shoddy treatment from mainstream doctors from the UK and North America. Therefore if I was being objective and rational, and were to base my decisions on past experiences, as I might with my business decisions, then I would have to be more suspicious of the mainstream medical community and more appreciative of the “alternative” view. In addition we have in the UK the situation of a notional free media, only really free because of the general ethics of many journalists, a good many of which are honest and clever. Many influential papers are owned by Rupert Murdoch including the Sunday Times. Only today I read in that paper a raving opinion from Christine Lamb, it was a lot of space about something she obviously didn’t understand, but had a whole page and some pictures to herself, I bet many of the readers of this forum would like that chance. A month ago the Sunday Times exposed Labour Peers (only Labour peers, Murdoch is right winger and well connected in the UK, Australia and UK) in the upper house of Parliament taking “bungs”. They may have too, Our MPs , all of them, appear to want to be able to have unlimited and un-scrutinised expenses. This is the backdrop to Brain Deer. He is able to “get away with it”. He is the only one playing this tune, if there was more to it, then other journalists, in other papers and other media would be jumping on this bandwagon. But they re not. I reckon he could be in the pay of an interested party, it would be very easy to hide in this world we all live in.

Julie Penny

To "Certainly Not Brian Deer"

Thank you for directing me to the transcript from the Simpsonwood conference. I read the salient quotes that someone had compiled (with links to those parts of the transcript), and, along with the “Generation Zero” data that SafeMinds FOIAed and then analyzed—I’d say, yes, it appears that, indeed, the government has been colluding all along. (Same as with the anthrax vaccine and the Gulf War Syndrome). Also, the judges’ decisions lacked internal coherency. Their conclusions that MMR didn’t cause the autism were drawn from thin air, contravening their own logic as set forth in their decisions. Tacked on. Like so many pre-arranged talking points. Yes, it was a sham.

As an environmentalist I see this kind of nonsense all the time at Town Board, Planning Board, Zoning Board of Appeals, Conservation Board hearings—in the end they end up disregarding Town Codes and Town Studies, all caving in to developers and the political powers that be when it comes down to making their decisions.

Certainly, adding up: Hannah Poling's victory in court, the study from the University of Pittsbugh with the vaccinated macaque monkeys (who showed gut inflammation) as opposed to the unvaccinated monkeys whose gut tissue was normal (a study I found absolutely compelling)—along with Simpsonwood and Generation Zero—the sum of it all is so damning and incontrovertible and it seems to me that this should be appealed. (Although, the Dems lock-step with Big Pharma too).

My heart goes out to the brave and loving families that represented all the other kids. Especially, Michelle Cedillo and her family. The level of her acute sufferings was/is terrible and heartbreaking. The depth of love and devotion of her family is a beautiful thing—an affirmation—in all this nightmare and suffering. I don’t know how these judges can look at themselves in the mirror knowing that their cowardice will continue to sentence children, some still to be born, to the horror that is autism.


Albert-- there's no discovery in "vaccine court". How can we look at the "evidence" that Deer sent to the DOJ?

As far as the "evidence" that Deer has published along with his claims regarding Dr. Wakefield's theory and research- feh. Deer is the Donald Segretti of Vaccine-gate-a ratf***er, nothing more.


"seemingly made-up outrage piece?"
I suggest you look at his evidence.

Certainly Not Brian Deer

To Julie Penny,

The bottom line in all of this is there is no integrity involved with vaccine court.

If you seek evidence of collusion between the vaccine industry and government examine the Simpsonwood Transcripts.

At one point while they are discussing their options in terms of developing "research" one states:

"Now, just as in the kitchen where the chef chooses the ingredients they are going to use, the kids you choose to let into your analysis can have a great effect on what happens eventually."

This means that they were all aware of how useless it is to think they had anything on their screen other than a VSD study specifically designed to give them the desired results. Essentially they admitted the intent to produce a "no show" study by corrupt methods.

Shortly later, one Dr. Clarkson (a man who testified against our children in vaccine court) seems concerned that someone will notice that there are zero groups missing, just as he did. Zero groups meaning no Thimerosal-containing vaccines.

One Dr. Chen then reveals shortly later when it sinks in, "I think the bottom line is that while the zero group is different, and I think all of us would agree with that, the issue is that it is impossible, unethical to leave kids unimmunized, so you will never, ever resolve that issue.

If we can never, ever leave kids unimmunized through these age groups in order to study them ideally as we would like, then of the kids who did become or are left unimmunized for whatever reason, be it that their parents
are socially responsible or be it that they have some other pre-existing condition medically, we just have to work with that."

Right there the guy admits the study is fatally flawed government-style research and they simply conduct research in order to support their pro-vaccine position.

At this point another voice suggests: "But Bob, a study could be done. You could use the acellular pertussis that doesn't have Thimerosal in ComVax, and have children be immunized, but not have any Thimerosal."

That voice belonged to the chief medical officer of vaccine court, Vito Caserta. Of all the least likely people to be present at a secret vaccine defense meeting holding hands he's the one.

Justice is blind, but vaccine court has had eyes and ears involved in every aspect of developing the vaccine industrial complex vaccine-induced Autism defense.

It's not very often that one can prove collusion. Caserta's mere attendance and active participation at the 2000 Simpsonwood meeting constitutes a complete lack of neutrality.

Not only is this a pretty strong basis for any appeals, but should serve as a foundation to disband vaccine court forever.


Kathy B, you're hilarious. After all your posts about how we shouldn't bother trying to talk to politicians, you suggest approaching Henry Waxman? For years he has been a major supporter of vaccines and pharma. Here's just a few links:


Well, this just smells like rotten, mercury-laced, tuna!


The thought has more than crossed my mind.


What is so strang about the whole situation is that Even Brian Deer seems incredulous at how sloppily the vaccine court was doing it homework. Using him as the main source? It is just plain lazy that the government lawyers could not do any better than just take Deer's words as truth. All of verdicts read like the lazy way out also, with desriptions of provocative theories about inflammation and glutamate pathways, improvements with biomedical treatments, and then cop-out conclusions that read like they just took text from Stephen Barrett of quackwatch and changed the words.

Seriously, those documents read like something from the start of the decade, when every alternative treatment was getting the quackwatch assault, and all the judges had to do was use Barrett as the "expert" who would dismiss anything and everything not "mainstream".

I have a feeling that those judges and govt. lawyers simply checked quackwatch articles for general information and then called up Deer for his take on the MMR. That was probably all the work that they did, and it was enough to get them past the Daubert test. They didn't need to do anything more and they could even let their intern lawyers take the cases.

The upside to this is that it shows just how sloppy and careless the government really is. They had to use tactics and data from almost ten years ago to get a sneaky victory. The fight will continue and they will still have the same data and Deer's stories but eventually they can't dismiss all the new research.


Deer *has* kept talking...and talking and talking. The following is a cut and paste of Brian Deer's letter to Keith Olbermann, reproduced with the apparent permission of Deer by "Orac" on the neurodiverse site, "Respectful Insolance"
( ). It seems the Deer is threatening to sue "Countdown" on grounds which contradict what he himself wrote in the post Kent has reported here.

The producers,
On Wednesday 11 February 2009 you placed into the mouth of your presenter Keith Olbermann a grievously defamatory item concerning me. You named me the third of the day's "world's worst persons" and, among other things, accused me of dishonesty and "malfeasance" in connection with my work as a journalist for The Sunday Times of London. The item has been widely seen in the UK.

On the previous day, you broadcast a similarly defamatory item concerning Dr Andrew Wakefield, whose false claims of having found a possible link between a childhood vaccine and autism have been the subject of my investigations. Wakefield can no doubt deal with his own reputation. However, it's clear to me that, although I share your apparent general opinion of Wakefield, the item concerning him contained inaccuracies, and appeared to have been crudely lifted from my work, without any effort whatsoever on your part to check your facts, or to properly describe my findings. I think that by subsequently attacking me you believed that you could somehow mitigate your previous errors.

These two instances evidence your inability to deliver three daily targets for your "world's worst person" item, and you now resort to baselessly picking on people about whom you know little. It's clear to me that you do so in order to deliver entertaining defamations, at little cost to the programme, and in circumstances where you believe your victims will have no redress.

It is untrue that, as you say, I am the complainant against Wakefield in UK disciplinary hearings. I have ample correspondence to prove this. As a journalist with public as well as professional duties, I was approached almost five years ago by the UK doctors' regulator, the General Medical Council, and asked if I would supply them with my journalistic findings, post-publication, at that time concerning Wakefield. This I did, in a manner familiar to journalists, both in the UK and the US, in dealings with statutory regulators. There can be no possible issue about this, or any justifiable allegation of misconduct on my part. Nor could there be any justification for your suggestion that this would somehow disbar me from continuing my investigations into Wakefield's activities, or that I had improperly concealed my previous actions, or that my prior supply of journalistic findings invalidated findings reported last weekend which are not yet charges faced by Wakefield. Your item implied that, in reporting my new findings, I was somehow merely reporting my own prior allegations. This is utterly false, and grossly damaging to my reputation. To assist your employer to commercially profit by recklessly attacking me appears to have been your intent.

You were apparently supplied with your baseless allegations by a New York-based freelance journalist, David Kirby, who has made substantial sums of money through attacking childhood vaccines, and who is an advisor to Wakefield. Extraordinarily, you even supplied Kirby with a copy of the script of your attack on me, prior to broadcast, and thus appear to have acted in cahoots with him. Kirby was sufficiently motivated, and stupid, to publish your script on a website before the item was aired.

Your defamation of me has been taken up by others, and you are plainly responsible for this. You have no possible defence, since your claims are simply false. They were fabricated and placed with you by antivaccine campaigners and cranks. You can argue no privilege or free speech right to make such false allegations, not least since you published them with complete disregard for their truth or falsity. NBC's lawyers will no doubt explain to you the particular difficulties of such conduct in the UK jurisdiction.

I am presently travelling, and have no access to office facilities. I write to you via a junk antispam email address.

I look forward to your prompt response, and ask that you supply a copy of this email to your legal department.

I can presently be contacted at xxx-xxx-xxxx.

With best wishes,

Brian Deer


"In this regard I believe the last time Deer uttered in the mainstream press was 15 July 2007,"

John, any idea how the "journalist" Deer paid his bills during this time if he wasn't writing? Or is he independently wealthy?


Kathy Blanco -- Unfortunately if you do some digging you'll soon discover that California Rep. Henry Waxman will only help people who benefit from vaccines, not those who've been damaged by them.

Sue M.

This is so sick and twisted. Using Brian Deer as a source?

God help us...


Lisa S.

I have to respectfully disagree with you. While I normally don't debate the politics of Autism, I have to put my 2 cents in.

It doesn't matter who is in office. Can you honestly say that McCain would not have caved in the same situation? McCain, Bush, Obama, it doesn't matter. They are not in our situation and not a one of them will likely hear our side of the story. The optimist in me likes to think that if the did (well, Obama, anyway....maybe McCain, too) hear our story, they would be outraged.

But no, they are powerful people. Powerful people have powerful people, those with lots of money, near them. And who is more wealthy than the Pharmaceutical giants? Oil companies? Microsoft?

The problem lies not in who is running the kingdom, but in the power behind the throne. Obama's information is filtered through money and lies. So what would you think he would hear?


As sickened as I am to read this, I am comforted by the fact that Brian Deer will cause his own down fall by his own big mouth.

lisa s.

It is crystal clear to me that the IACC decided to cancel the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study because the pharmaceutical companies (namely, Merck) informed the Bush Administration that "it would not be in the government's best interest" to pursue that study. And the reason it would not be in the government's best interest was because such a study would clearly, definitely show worse health and developmental outcomes for children who received the recommended vaccine regimen since 1990 vs. those who did not. We need to find a big donor to sponsor this study. The gov't ain't ever gonna do it. And those of you who thought Obama would take this on were sadly mistaken. He is proving himself to be in lock step with the Bush Admin. even in defending torture. He obviously is not a humanitarian, and thus, could not care less about these children.

Kathy Blanco

We should could get Henry Waxman on this, like he did with the lyme guidelines with ACIP. Found out there was collusion all over the map. Please consult with ILADS and call them on how we can get started on this? I can do some initial work if needed..


I witness Brian stop and abuse the parents of vaccine injured children ,others with children who have serious bowl disease and whos children died after shortly after vaccination. this was one the return to the GMC in 2008 , in the papers it said he was "hounded" but the truth was he stopped of his own free will and spoke to parents for 15 minutes. he dismissed our childrens illness as minor diorea and constipation named parents as liars and there children as not autistic and dismised the hannah poling case. his lack of companion really haunts me, in my mind he enjoyed the confrontation and perhaps was expecting the assemble protesters to attack or assault him ,I am so proud of these people who argued their point eloquently and kept their cool despite provocation.
brian decribes himself nicely as the "middleman" passing information between governments who don't want to get their hands dirty,
keep talking Brian.

Pierre Morin

Dear Mr. Handley

I found your article quite troubling , that by the simple fact , that it seems to affirm collusion between Mr.Brian Deer and the Dept of DOJ.

But it is Deer statement , that made my blood run cold ;
"That said, I'm also very proud that, like the GMC, the US government sought my help in mounting its case in Cedillo, copiously borrowing pages of evidence from my website and displaying some in court"

There is a glee in his word , that I found very disturbing ,

Somoene shouls ask him , what this poor handicap girl did to him , to justify his perverse satifaction of being involve in destroying her chance of getting some financial compensation for a vaccine adverse reaction events .

I have great difficulty with this type of
behavior ,

Pierre Morin
Montreal Quebec canada

Julie Penny

I felt that way too. Last night I had jotted down the dates:

1. The IACC, under Tom Insel, orchestrates a stealth “re-vote”(and, contravening the Combating Autism Act) nixes the existing budget for Independent research for vaccines and autism: Jan. 12th

2. Brian Deer’s Sunday Times article: Feb 8th

3. Keith Olbermann announces Dr. Andy Wakefield "Worst Person in The World": Feb 10th

(Luckily, Olbermann listened to the autism community who besieged Countdown and announces Brian Deer "Worse Person in the World" (but, as the “Bronze” 3rd Runner Up)—Feb 11

4. Vaccine Court Decision: Feb 12th

It certainly looks like collusion to me. Can a class action suit be brought against the Department of Justice for “collusion”? (The HHS, CDC too?)

And, for thwarting the will of “Congress” which had, under the Combatting Autism Act—a provison of law—allocated specific moneys to do research to see if there is a link between vaccines and autism .

They were carefully lining their ducks up in a row. Coincidence? I don’t think so. Orchestrated? Certainly seems so.


what a disgusting, gloating, boastful pig (Brian Deer). Buy ARI's puzzle pieces to support the vacc/unvacc study!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I don't even think that I can wrap my mind around the ramifications of what is being said here. I'm willing to bet that the DOJ did not contact DK for any documents.
Oh this makes me sick.

John Stone

In this regard I believe the last time Deer uttered in the mainstream press was 15 July 2007, the day before the GMC hearing commenced. Certainly no reputable newspaper should have used a journalist to report on a topic once it was known that their evidence was to be used in a legal hearing regarding the matter.


To Michael, and anyone else who can help:

I'm thinking that your comment: "They are terrified of the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated outcome studies." is spot on.... So, how we help to get to the end of the movie (it is Friday the 13th)? Why can't we petition Autism Speaks, since they have more money, to fund a vaccinated vs unvaccinated study? Why do we have to wait for Congress to pass a bill that requires it? It seems that AS is now moving in the right direction. So how do we make this happen???


See David Gorski's online comment yesterday that the U.K.'s Brian Deer just happened to be in the United States this week.

Orac, Feb. 12: "Well, unfortunately for Keith Olbermann, Brian Deer is actually in the states..."

michael framson

Beyond the DOJ and HHS, I certainly think there were those that knew in advance, the rulings of the Special Masters. The rulings were known for months, and all that remained was finding the appropriate wording. Someone or ones in the grapevine most probably alerted the IACC (and by extension, Deer) of what the rulings would be. Now the rulings provide political cover to the IACC (Insel et al) to justify rescinding the money on vaccine/autism research. I'm sure Allison Singer was aware. Remember the forces that don't want us to get behind the curtain that hides the ugliness of vaccination-induced illness are all working towards the same goal.

They are terrified of the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated outcome studies.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

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.


Post a comment

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

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)