Keeping Anderson Cooper Honest: Is Brian Deer The Fraud?
"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
I watched Brian Deer’s appearance on Anderson Cooper 360, the one where he closed his eyes for extended periods of time when Anderson asked him certain tough questions, and kept wondering to myself, “Who IS this guy?”
The answers are coming in fast and hard as to who Brian Deer really is, and I must say I am thoroughly astonished at how badly many major news outlets, particularly CNN and Anderson Cooper, failed the US viewing audience by giving this one journalist, without doing background on him or talking to the Lancet 12 parents, such a platform to falsely reassure American parents. The more I learn about this guy, the weirder it gets. This is a long one, so apologies in advance.
Here’s what we’ve learned about Brian Deer:
1. He’s not a Sunday Times reporter, and never has been, so who the heck is paying his bills?
That’s certainly true from the email above from the Sunday Times, but what does Brian Deer say? He says this:
CHETRY: BRIAN DEER, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST, SUNDAY TIMES OF LONDON: Good morning.
DEER: I’ve been an investigative journalist working for “The Sunday Times of London” since the early 1980s.
DEER: I was commissioned by the “British Medical Journal” to write the piece, yes. That’s what the journalists do.
CHETRY: What about “The Sunday Times of London” and Channel 4 in Britain?
DEER: I work for them. Right. Yes, of course, they pay, I’m a journalist. I was hired to do a job, like you are.
DEER: You are being paid to your job and I’m being paid to do my job.
Mr. Deer attended Andy Wakefield’s GMC hearings for 160 days between 2007 and 2010. Who paid for all that time? He has published very little since 2004, despite being a freelance journalist. Jane Bryant of the OneClick Group asked Mr. Deer about this during the GMC hearings, here is their conversation:
Jane Bryant: “Brian, who is paying you for your attendance at the Hearing day after day?”
Brian Deer: “The Sunday Times and Channel 4.”
Jane Bryant: “They are all paying you every day?”
Brian Deer: “Well, my finances, you know, it's not necessary....”
Jane Bryant: “I am asking a legitimate question. How much are you being paid?”
Brian Deer: “Who's paying YOU?”
Jane Bryant: “Nobody.”
Jane Bryant: “I provide my services completely free of charge.”
Brian Deer spluttering: “That's... that’s..”
Jane Bryant: “How much are you being paid by the Sunday Times?”
Brian Deer: “I'm not prepared to discuss my personal finances.”
Jane Bryant: “You are not prepared to discuss your finances?”
Brian Deer: “I've told you who’s paying me! I've told you I've never been paid by the drugs companies! I'm not in any way connected with drugs companies!”
Jane Bryant: “I'm not asking you about drugs companies, I'm asking how much you're being paid.”
Brian Deer, shouting: “Some CLOWN, some CLOWN put on his website that he.....”
Both Channel 4 and the Sunday Times have confirmed that they did not pay Mr. Deer to attend the 160 days of GMC hearings. So who did?
When Brian Deer was introduced by Anderson Cooper, it was like this:
BRIAN DEER, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST, "THE SUNDAY TIMES OF LONDON"
Nice job, CNN and Anderson, you have no idea who this guy really is.
2. When Brian Deer began his investigation of Andy Wakefield, he was supported by a pharmaceutical front group
On Anderson Cooper, the following conversation took place:
COOPER: Well, he [Brian Deer] -- he's actually signed a document guaranteeing that he has no financial interest in any of this, or no financial connections to anyone who has an interest in this.
WAKEFIELD: Well, that's interesting you should say that, because he was supported in his investigation by the Association of British Pharmaceutical Industries, which is funded directly and exclusively by the pharmaceutical industry. So…
COOPER: According to him, he's received no funding from -- from any parties that have interests in this over the last three years.
Anderson Cooper, did I read that right? “The last 3 years.” Since Deer published his first piece on Andy Wakefield 7 years ago, why didn’t you ask Deer about the last 7 years, rather than the last 3? Maybe you could also get Deer to sign something saying he hasn’t killed anyone in the last month. Ridiculous!
In fact, Deer was originally funded to investigate Andy by a front group for the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industries, just as Andy Wakefield said. From a confidential source:
“Deer was provided with free assistance by Medico-Legal Investigations a company owned and controlled by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry - I have documentation on this. MLI specialise in getting medical doctors prosecuted by the General Medical Council. And that was done before he published in The Sunday Times in Feb 2004.”
3. His most recent hit piece was funded by the British Medical Association, who has many reasons to shut Wakefield up
Anderson Cooper, in cross-examining Andy Wakefield on CNN, said the following:
COOPER: But this is not just one man. This is -- this is published in "The British Medical Journal."
As we all know, Deer’s article appearing in the British Medical Journal has given this story far more gravity with the American media. But, how many reporters even know what the British Medical Journal is? It doesn’t take long to discover the following from the BMJ’s own website:
- BMJ Journals receive advertising revenue from “display advertising for pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical products”
- BMJ Group [publisher of the British Medical Journal] is a wholly owned subsidiary of the British Medical Association.
What is the British Medical Association? According to their website, they are:
“the independent trade union and professional association for doctors and medical students, with over 140,000 members worldwide.”
Let me try and put this in plain English (since CNN and Anderson Cooper clearly don’t understand it):
The British Medical Journal receives most of their funding from ads sold to pharmaceutical companies. Additionally, the journal is 100% owned by the BMA, a trade union that represents all of the United Kingdom’s doctors. The UK has socialized medicine, it is nothing like the US in this regard. All the doctors belong to the BMA and the BMA represents the doctors interests in every aspect of their practice, including salary negotioations with the British government.
The BMA is an exceptionally powerful trade union representing doctors. If vaccines cause autism, this will be very bad for the BMA’s members. So, the BMA hired Brian Deer to write a hit piece for their trade journal.
And, Anderson Cooper reported, “According to him [Brian Deer], he's received no funding from -- from any parties that have interests in this over the last three years.” But, the British Medical Journal, wholly owned by the British Medical Association, just paid Brian Deer to write his most recent hit piece, as Brian Deer said:
DEER: I was commissioned by the “British Medical Journal” to write the piece, yes. That’s what the journalists do.
Give me a break!
4. Deer is the person who filed the complaint against Andy Wakefield with the GMC in the first place – he wagged the dog!
Above, I mentioned that Deer was originally supported by a front group for the Assocation for the British Pharmaceutical Industries called Medico-Legal Investigations, a group that a source mentioned “specialise in getting medical doctors prosecuted by the General Medical Council.”
Again, from a source:
“The timing of Deer‘s first letter of complaint to the GMC of 25th February 2004 shows Deer wasted no time after the publication of his Sunday 22rd February 2004 Sunday Times stories against Wakefield. Before a single word had been written by him Deer had consulted with and been given free advice and assistance by Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry company Medico-Legal Investigations Limited, whose speciality was getting doctors on charges before the GMC.”
For those needing some guidance, the General Medical Council is the UK’s licensing board for all doctors: they giveth the ability to practice medicine, and they can take it away, too.
Deer’s first two original complaints are available HERE and HERE and they are simply indisputable, as is the transcript from a court document, right HERE, which states, unequivocally:
“Well before the programme was broadcast Mr Deer had made a complaint to the GMC about the Claimant [Andy Wakefield].”
Let’s try to put this particular fact in some perspective. The General Medical Council is the body that took Andy’s license away. Their ruling caused the Lancet 1998 paper to be retracted, and led directly to the most recent media circus.
Yet, none of the parents from the original 1998 study had an issue with Andy Wakefield. No one at the Royal Free Hospital where he worked had an issue with Andy Wakefield. No one at The Lancet who published Wakefield had an issue with his work.
Brian Deer, a journalist hired by a pharmaceutical front group, a group that specialized in reporting doctors to the GMC, was the only person in all of Britain interested in filing a complaint about Wakefield’s study with the GMC, and he didn’t even do so until 6 years after Wakefield’s work had been published in The Lancet.
Brian Deer created this story, and now reports on this story, and the American media doesn’t understand remotely what’s actually taken place. Journalists, is it really that hard to smell a rat? Anderson Cooper couldn’t ask Brian Deer about this, because I’m sure he doesn’t understand who the GMC is, that Deer himself filed the complaint that led to the GMC hearing, or how this all works.
As I showed you above, the documentation is clear that Brian Deer filed the original complaint on Wakefield with the GMC, we have both his actual complaint and something stated in British court to prove it. When confronted with this information, what does Brian Deer actually say?
Here’s journalist Jane Bryant discussing her interview with Brian Deer outside the GMC hearing in 2008:
When asked if Deer was the complainant and if this was his case with the GMC, Deer simply exploded. Springing to his feet, placing his body inches from mine and invading my space, Deer proceeded to threaten, to rant and to jab his fingers close to my face.
Brian Deer: “No! I've not complained! I've got letters from the GMC saying I'm not the complainant! Ask me the question again! Ask me and I'll tell you!”
Here’s journalist Martin Walker:
“The GMC hearing could be part of a law school learning module on abuse of process, nowhere more so than in its origins. How could it be possible for a single pro vaccine journalist to have such command of the medical-legal process that he can initiate one of the biggest prosecutions in GMC history against three doctors whose research casts doubt on the safety of MMR? How could it be possible that an agency solely funded by the pharmaceutical industry could help this journalist bring the complaint before the GMC? Finally and perhaps most disconcertingly, how is it possible for the General Medical Council, an organisation granted serious legal powers under an act of parliament, to work in collusion with the government and the pharmaceutical industry dragging out a prosecution over a period of five years in order to protect the government’s vaccine programme?”
5. Deer appears to be the journalist stooge in this whole thing, and the real instigator of the Wakefield investigation may be far more powerful
From another source:
“Deer was also not working alone. Deer was working hand-in-hand with Dr. Evan Harris a British Member of Parliament, Glaxo-Wellcome Fellow and active Member of the British Medical Association and Harris even at that early stage attended with Deer at the offices of The Lancet, as Lancet Editor Dr Horton recorded later in his book, on these events ["MMR Science and Fiction: Exploring the Vaccine Crisis,"]. This was also confirmed by Harris indirectly in Parliament and later by the public attendance by him with Deer at the GMC hearings against Wakefield in London, England.”
If you’ve been tracking this whole mess, and if you’re anything like me, this is the “A-Ha” moment, when more of this makes sense.
To make everything just a bit uglier, here’s AoA’s own John Stone discussing Evan Harris:
“Evan Harris, the MP who made allegations in a debate about MMR in the House of Commons in March 2004, disclosed that his father, Frank, was a recently retired professor paediatrics, but not that the latter had sat on the Committee on Safety in Medicines in 1990-92 (an appointment listed in his entry in Who’s Who) in the period leading to the withdrawal of the Urabe strain MMR vaccines in September 1992.”
Again, in plain English:
Evan Harris was a member of the British Parliament (sort of like a US Congressman) from 1997-2010 (he just lost the most recent election). He was also a Doctor who attended Oxford Medical School (sort of like Bill Frist was a doctor turned politician). His father was a doctor and a medical professor, and his father sat on a British medical safety board during a scandalous withdrawal that took place of a failed MMR vaccine. Evan Harris has said, during a speech in parliament:
"On the safety of MMR, the evidence and scientific consensus are overwhelming. There is a lot of good research that fails to find any significant safety problem with MMR..."
Now it all makes sense.
6. The CEO of the Lancet joined Glaxo’s board, soon before Deer’s first article in 2004 in the Sunday Times
From a JABS briefing note regarding the GMC hearing:
“A further deeply unsatisfactory feature is that Dr Horton has never disclosed that his boss, Sir Crispin Davis, chief executive of Reed Elsevier, was appointed a non-executive director of MMR defendants GlaxoSmithKline in summer 2003 only a few months before the Sunday Times article in February 2004 that accused Dr Wakefield.”
Plain English: Dr. Richard Horton was the editor of The Lancet, publisher of Wakefield’s study. Horton, in particular, seems to have developed amnesia about the Wakefield study, and effectively threw Andy under the bus. Contrary to how some media members portray them, medical journals are for-profit entities, and Reed Elsevier is a company that own The Lancet along with many other journals. In the Summer of 2003, the CEO of Reed Eselvier became a board member of GlaxoSmithKline, one of the world’s largest vaccine makers, and a maker of the MMR.
I’d like to pint out that this connection between The Lancet and Glaxo is not hard to figure out. So what did Anderson Cooper ask Brian Deer? The following:
COOPER: ... as you know, James Murdoch, the owner of -- of your employer, "The London Times," joined the board of GlaxoSmithKline, which is a manufacturer of MMR. He joined that board in 2009.
DEER: Yes. (CROSSTALK)
COOPER: Some people have brought that up as a -- as a conflict of interest.
DEER: No, it's absurd, absolutely absurd.
Note to Anderson Cooper: wrong dude, wrong year.
Oh, and there you go again, in interviewing Deer you referred to the London/Sunday times as “your employer”—implying Deer is an employee of the Sunday Times, when he’s not.
7. The Sunday Times editor who originally hired Deer also had a serious conflict
Does it ever end?
“Deer was hired to investigate Wakefield by Sunday Times editor Paul Nuki, who is son of Prof George Nuki, who was on the Commitee on Safety of Medicines when MMR and Pluserix were introduced.”
8. Deer had access to the medical records of the Lancet 12 children long before the GMC hearing, which is apparently illegal
British laws are equally strong about the confidentiality of medical information. The parents of the Lancet 12 have been clamoring for years to understand how Brian Deer had access to their children’s medical records, since they never gave their permission. Here’s a note in the last 48 hours from a Lancet 12 parent to me:
“I was not interviewed by Brian Deer. I have appeared in the media representing families of vaccine damaged families and talked about my [child] but never gave out any confidential medical information only what reactions he had after the MMR vaccine. Brian Deer knows medical information that he would only have found in his medical notes and long before the start of the GMC so he cannot state that he got the information from the GMC.”
Here’s another comment:
“Brian Deer had the names of the Lancet Children and dates they entered the Royal Free hospital on his web‐site for all to see long before the GMC hearing. His view was that some of us parent were in the media. The problem with that is that I did not tell the media that my boy was part of the Lancet study until Brian Deer let it be known. I have e‐mailed him on numerous occasions asking him how he got hold of my child’s medical notes without my permission. He has never interviewed me or my family and has not replied to this question.
I believe Brian Deer got hold of confidential information on our children and want to know how this can happen. He told me in an e‐mail that he managed to prise confidential documents from the Royal Free Hospital. This question below has not been answered by Brian Deer: Could Brian Deer also please let the BMJ know the means by which UK legislation allows free lance (or any other) journalists, to view original research files, and compare them with Royal Free (or any other hospital or private practice) medical files of children with full identities available, all test results available, without parental consent; the studies' authors consent; privacy restraints or hospital ethics committee approval?”
Here’s a Lancet 12 parent’s recent complaint to the BMJ for his most recent article:
“I am making a formal complaint to the BMJ for allowing Brian Deer to publish this article about my child and others. How can the BMJ allow a journalist without any qualifications in bowel disease to make these assumptions? My [child] suffers every day with their bowels and are in great pain. The bowel disease they have has been getting worse throughout the years and other doctors who specialise in bowel disease have confirmed the disease. If it had not been for Dr. Wakefield, Professor Walker Smith and Professor Simon Murch I dread to think how my [child] would have coped. Professor John Walker-Smith was just last week awarded a Distinguished Service Award by The European Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition. He was nominated by Professor Alan Walker of Harvard Medical School and agreed unanimously by the Board. What qualifications does Brian Deer have? How many lives has Brian Deer saved? Brian Deer did not have the courtesy to interview me in the beginning and yet he boasts about knowing my boys medical information. What information does the BMJ have to back Brian Deer's complaints up with? I demand full disclosure.”
9. Deer actively assisted the US Department of Justice in their defense of vaccines in the recent omnibus proceedings
Here’s Brian Deer bragging about his assistance of the US Department of Justice in defending itself in the Autism Omnibus proceedings:
“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."
Is there a problem with Brian Deer assisting the US government? There is if he is sharing confidential medical files he’s not supposed to have.
(Note: we have FOIA emails showing Deer corresponding with the DOJ, more on that at a later date.)
10. The Lancet 12 parents are terrified of Brian Deer and deem him to be unhinged, dangerous, and able to cause harm to their families
I have personally spoken, in the last 24 hours, to Lancet 12 parents living in the UK. They have no idea how big this story is in the US, as it’s barely even news in the UK. It was unfathomable to me that they would fear this unmarried, childless man who I watched on CNN, and here are some of the explanations I received for where their fear comes from:
“One thing that happens are accusations of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. People feel that their children could be taken away at any time if they make demands on the system, and there are a range of pretexts. Parents can be told their adult children don't want to see them. Also we are a very centrally run country: it can be easy to make people's lives a misery through executive abuse, deprivation of services etc. Mostly, I suspect, people just knuckle under - don't think of questioning the system.”
And, here’s another comment:
“I think also you have to remember that we live in a society in which all of Deer's manifold illegalities happened with the covert support of the state.”
Wow, I guess I need to drop a God Bless America right now! Brian Deer, welcome to the red, white, and blue, where the people still have the final say, and feel free to speak their mind without fear of retribution.
Here’s journalist Jane Bryant discussing Deer:
“The only conclusion that can be reasonably reached from the debacle described is that journalist Brian Deer is considerably more than economical with the truth. He is a nasty, aggressive man, completely out of control and rapidly developing own-goal status for the pro vaccine lobby. A similar incident occurred with Deer outside the office of the General Medical on the 27 March 2007, at the start of the Defence presentation. Caught on film hectoring and lecturing the parents of the vaccine damaged autistic children, the parents are so frightened of Deer that they are scared to place this film in the public domain.”
And, here’s an email from Brian Deer to a member of parliament in the district where one of the Lancet 12 parents lives:
“My experience of [Lancet 12 parent] is that she is a spiteful, vexatious lady, who apparently continues to conspire on behalf of Dr Andrew Wakefield in false allegations that evidence exists to suggest that the MMR vaccine causes autism. Her motives appear to me to be both emotional comfort and substantial financial gain…In my view, [Lancet parent] needs to confront her own conscience with regard to her conduct of recent years of promoting baseless fears of MMR.”
- Brian Deer email, October 23, 2006
11. Deer’s most recent report in the BMJ, the one making all the news, is based on an impossibility that the press should be able to understand
From a post on AoA yesterday:
“Central to the latest claims of journalist Brian Deer published in the British Medical Journal 6th January is the allegation that Dr Wakefield ‘altered numerous facts about the patients’ medical histories in order to support his claim to have identified a new syndrome.’
What Deer and the BMJ fail to point out is that not only did Wakefield not produce the results, which were the work of a team of 12 other specialists at the Royal Free Hospital, London, England but that:-
It was not possible for Wakefield or anyone else to falsify the prior clinical records of the children because no one at the Royal Free Hospital London had them nor is it normal practice for them to have had them. So there could be no fraud over ‘altering’ those histories. It just was not possible.”
Plain English: In Britain, when you are referred from a local doctor to a major hospital, like the one where Andy worked, your previous doctor's records DO NOT travel with you.
When the GMC held a hearing, they were able to get the "local" records of all the kids. Because Royal Free hospital is a more sophisticated place, and because they had NONE of the previous records to work with, they made their own diagnoses.
Through the GMC hearing, Deer had access to the local records of the kids (which Wakefield and colleagues never had) - if Deer found differences, he reported those as "fraud." It's a confusing, but important, nuance, and any doctor in Britain could verify how these things work - Americans are used to bringing our medical records with us when we switch doctors.
From an American attorney:
“Attacking the Royal Free team for dx differing from local GP's is like saying that the Mayo Clinic commits medical fraud every time they come up with a dx for a new and exotic disorder that differs from the local docs -- that's why people go to Mayo in the first place, last resort, and that's why the UK parents went to the Royal Free.”
And, finally, from an AoA post:
My first reaction to this latest story was: "Why in heck would Wakefield have to invent stories about children who exhibited autistic symptoms after MMR and had significant bowel disease? They're a dime a dozen!"
12. Despite Anderson Cooper’s assurances to the American people, Brian Deer has not interviewed the Lancet 12 parents
Here’s what Anderson Cooper said to Andy Wakefield:
COOPER: Brian Deer has talked to the patients -- has talked to the parents -- has talked to the parents of the patients who were in your original study. And he discovered that not one of the 12 cases you claim to have studied was free of -- quote -- "misrepresentation or alteration." In no single case could the medical records be fully reconciled with the descriptions, diagnoses or histories published in the journal. Some of the parents in your original study say what you claimed about their kids' medical histories was not true. Are those parents now lying?
So, on the first night Anderson Cooper discussed this case (last Wednesday), he implied Brian Deer had talked to ALL of the Lancet 12 parents (the same parents who are scared of Brian Deer and think he is unhinged). The second night Anderson discussed this case, he had Brian Deer on, and here is what he said:
COOPER: Did you speak to any of the parents from the 12 cases?
DEER [closing his eyes tightly]: I personally interviewed one, two, three families of the 12. Somebody else -- two others were interviewed on my behalf by other journalists. So, that's five of the 12. Oh, no, actually, I interview -- and I have had conversations with another, so quite a substantial number...
That’s quite an answer, Brian Deer. Anderson Cooper said, 24 hours earlier, that you’d talked to all the parents. With eyes tightly shut, you have to count to figure it out?
Here’s what I know: of the parents I know of, NONE ever talked to Brian Deer about their children’s history, and none can imagine that any parents did.
I have also confirmed that the very first parent of the Lancet 12 that Brian Deer did in fact interview, he posed as “Brian Lawrence” and never revealed his true identity to the parent of Child #2. Anderson Cooper, do you routinely use a false identity to trick people into talking to you? I doubt it.
Here’s an email sent from one of the Lancet 12 parents to Brian Deer, confronting him on his misrepresentations:
From: Lancet 12 Parent
Sent: 16 April 2010
Subject: [my child]
Why are you saying that [child name] does not have bowel disease? You are not a doctor and have no expertise in bowel disease. Dr. Wakefield, Professor Simon Murch and Professor Walker-Smith do.
You never interviewed me and have no knowledge about [child] conditions.
Please stop as you are putting [child’s] health at risk.
[Lancet 12 Parent]
Here’s a Lancet 12 parent, in a private email about their child’s bowel disease (that Deer alleges the child doesn’t have):
“One thing we do know is that [child’s] body is still unable to tolerate any food what so ever, after the doctor wanted to see if the steroids had had any impact on this, we were told to try [child] with a small amount of plain boiled potato, within minutes he vomited it back up, not only was he violently sick he was up most of the night crying in pain and hitting out at me for making him so poorly. If only he could talk and tell us where the pain was, it's heart breaking knowing he's in pain but unable to tell us. It is now 1 year since [child] has eaten.”
13. Anderson Cooper called Brian Deer “an independent journalist who's won many awards” and he’s neither
Hopefully, this article has convinced you that Brian Deer is not an independent journalist.
As far as awards go, his fairly narcissistic and odd website (checkout the picture gallery!) cites exactly ONE award he has one, in 1999, at The British Press Awards HERE: Specialist Reporter of the Year -- Brian Deer, Sunday Times
Many awards? Independent? Give me another break!
What can I say? I’ve told you everything I know, draw your own conclusions, who is the real fraud here? Why isn’t this news in the UK?
I have personally shared this information with Anderson Cooper’s producer and CNN’s medical editor. I have personally introduced Lancet 12 parents to CNN and others as of Friday.
I hope they interview the Lancet 12 parents and let America see our side. This is one of the most ridiculous whitewashings I have ever seen. CNN and many others got caught with their pants down—will they clean up their own mess, or leave it to the parents to deal with?
Thank God for the Internet, AoA, and the ability to speak the truth.
J.B. Handley is co-founder of Generation Rescue
J.B. Handley (if you are out there), How I miss your articles!
Posted by: susan welch | September 29, 2019 at 04:22 PM
I know "keeping AC honest" is in reference to his own tagline, but you would first have to get him honest, at which point you can set about keeping him honest. The former, given his ancestry, is likely impossible.
Posted by: Carter's Daddy | February 05, 2017 at 11:43 AM
Just want to say "thank you" for this report of your investigation of Brian Deer.
It's been far too long that Dr. Wakefield has been unable to practice medicine in UK and just came in to try to catch up with the details of the Brian Deer smearing of Dr. Wakefield.
But continue to hope that all of the charges and nonsense against him will be reversed as the truth becomes know. VAXXED DVD will be released mid-September 2016.
Posted by: Barbara | September 02, 2016 at 01:09 AM
Anderson Cooper is Gloria Vanderbilt's son and heir to an old family fortune, I believe. I'm guessing Anderson has financial interests in Vanderbilt Hospital and so will participate in the wide-scale profiteering and racketeering in the corporate health sector.
(Yes, I believe Cooper is gay, married to Keanu Reeves and has 2 adopted Korean girls. But that's the only part that's cool about Cooper.)
Cooper, or Vanderbilt, - and CNN, (or should we be calling it the pro-U.S. Armed Forces Channel?) are corporate media products and so are protecting among many interests, (such as war racketeering profits) corporate health interests and medical malpractice insurance profits by helping to cover up the many conspiracies now burgeoning in the health sector after medical malpractice tort reforms and healthcare liability legislation.
"Big MedicoLegal" is the new big financial sector scandal and will be bigger than mortgage fraud.
The medical indemnity insurers, and doctors' mutuals, like the Medical Protection Society and The Doctors' Company, etc etc (there are many, as well as general insurers offering medical malpractice insurance) are profiteering out of medical malpractice tort reform and associated removal of liability by not paying compensation. The American Association for Justice (AAJ) has a few reports.
Dr Andrew Wakefield told the truth and blew the whistle and so the machinations of this high-scale conspiracy fell on his head. NHS Exposed, NHS Reform and a number of critical pro-justice websites have been outlining the fraud, deception and conspiracy between the Medical Protection Society and their many "Big Law" law firms, the GMC, the BMJ and anyone who will take a bribe/kickback/ incentive. These 'rewards', I've been noticing recently, include 'reputation management' tactics, where the Medical Protection Society and other insurers and doctor-owned societies around the world are rated highly on the new and many internet marketing sites all the compliant doctors and lawyers helping the Medical Protection Society to 'minimise and limit' medical malpractice claims and helping them to stop compensation to all the injured patients and close any loopholes they can find.
This NEEDS not only collusion with the medical industrial complex but also between other corporations (health, media, law, etc) and of course, government, who passed special-interest health reform legislation (immunity laws) to take away patients' rights.
Dr Andrew Wakefield- thank you! We are not all hoodwinked public and I am a victim of the Medical Protection Society, too.
Posted by: wilson | August 04, 2014 at 01:00 PM
Hi there, Handley. Great piece of investigate work. I'm sure we're many out there admiring individuals like you who put the time and energy into getting the truth of things, stimulated by your sense of fairness and justice rather than money like the rat Brian Deer. But the again, he was just an easy victim, easy to buy - if not him that may have someone else to smear researchers who just report that findings, that uncover side-effects that may damage the big pharma main goal - monetary profits !
Posted by: pete skyler | November 01, 2013 at 01:14 PM
Please please please get this information out there,get the national media to publish this!!! i came upon this by pure chance in one of my daily searches about autism,parents need to know the real facts,all the facts xx.
Posted by: Tracey Brown | October 01, 2012 at 05:02 AM
Something that I just learned from my duaghter the nurse - that all the Tagamet, Cimetidine ,Prilosec all those heart burn, indigestin medicines are antihistamines! I did not know that, but apparently the drug companies know.
Posted by: Benedetta | July 20, 2011 at 03:36 PM
"Right behind the gut epithelium lie cells of the intestinal
immune system,the biggest immune system of the body.It detects
the invading bacteria (or viruses)and generates a strong
immune response to fight off the invaders.In the process the
immune cells secrete a cocktail of signals that bring about the
symptoms of inflammation.Inflammatory signals reach the epithelial cells that are very sensitive to them and die.The death of more epithelial(inside lining of the gut)cells creates
bigger gaps in the gut lining so that more bacteria (or germs)
can enter.The result is a constant immune response and a chronic inflammation." So from this study it is the possibility that autism is an auto-immune disorder that is mis-diagnosed by the "experts".The study is from the University of Cologne.Dr.Wakefield got to close to discover the truth and the lies.That is why he had to be "nutralized"
as big pharma takes care of professionals who stands in the way of the billion dollar vaccine empire.
Posted by: oneVoice | July 20, 2011 at 07:36 AM
An article from the future:"The experts who were supposed to be protecting the children ignored the clear evidence
presented to them by Dr.Wakefield.Thousands of children continued to suffer needlessly. It took many years for the doctors to become convinced to make the necessary changes to delay vaccinations.
Today, Dr.Wakefield is hailed as a hero,
the "Savior of children".We must never forget how long and how hard he had to fight for the truth,because they were not part of the "accepted" science of his day."
Immunity arises from the bowels and established by breast-
feeding. Live vaccines can damage the bowels and the immune system.
Posted by: oneVoice | July 17, 2011 at 02:19 AM
Rubella vaccine on its own can destroy around 20per cent of platelets on day 45 after this vaccine. The destruction is rising but there are no further details of the effect. This work was done decades ago when the vaccine was first made by Wellcome. Tests on ADULTS.
What the 4X does it do when mixed with other viruses and gets put many times into little infants starting at 1 year or before?
And who is interested when it makes billions for Big pHarmers.
Posted by: John Fryer Chemist | April 24, 2011 at 04:50 AM
There are many factors involved in the whole picture beyond just one extreme or another... The fact is that we do not live in a world that has only good or only evil. We have had MANY attrocities on our planet caused my man against man for many millenia and it's not promising to stop any time soon... After things from crucifixions to human sacrifices (sometimes of people's own babies) to the Mongolians threading ropes through the hands of Chinese women and hanging them from their ships to the inquisition to the holocaust and even the eugenics movement in the west which FORCED sterylization on numerous people without their personal consent... aphartheid for years in South Africa... medical experimentation without consent by both the nazis and the Japanese in WWII... and many other things... a person would have to be extremely naiive to believe that EVERYONE in the whole picture is always well-meaning... Instead, we have a mix...
We have the sincere and well-meaning folk who have a clue what's going on and know the system well and challenge it when needed.
We have those in the first part of that category, but are afraid of the repercussions of what people might do to them if they dare to stand up and question. After all, whistle blower protection clauses wouldn't even have to exist if there wasn't bullying from above towards those who expose the truth about a given situation.
We also have those who are well-meaning and may or may not have a clue what's going on to at least some degree, but put so much faith in the system that they fail to question when questioning SHOULD be done because they so blindly trust their peers that they think just because they only desire good and no harm towards people that everyone else thinks that way too. (That's an extremely blind westerners' mindsets that those of us who've lived beyond that and have a clue in this world realize is on the extreme of naiivity). That doesn't mean we should look at everyone around us as if they're out to do us harm because that can lead to the opposite extremes. While there are many "conspiracy theories" out there, there are sometimes some conspiracies that really are there.
There are people in this world who really are only out for "me and mine" and will do whatever it takes to get there.
2 words for you on the self-promoting arrogant and destructive nature when taken to an extreme: North Korea... The human rights violations there are extreme... However, most w/ self-ambition don't go quite to that extreme and they hide it better. If you knew the half of what's going on in NK, you'd realize that what those who question vaccine safety are speaking up on (and not all who question vaccine safety are 100% anti-vaccine... They're often more concerned that vaccines be examined on an individual basis to determine the safety, efficacy and necessity level of each and to see which ones would or would not be beneficial for any given child).
Don't know if you've ever seen "Hotel Rwanda", but that was not some sort of "conspiracy theory" or Hollywood gore... It was a documentary of stuff that REALLY HAPPENED.
There are those in this world (even some in the west) who still have variations on the eugenics philosophy strongly influencing them.
There are even those who are focussed on the concept of "de-population"... some more openly and some more subtly than others... There are those focused on a one-world gov't and control (If you don't believe me, investigate the UN's Agenda 21... which includes a mixture of good and evil in their approach). People with such ambitions do have their ways of rising to places of authority and influence... and will say and do what's needed on the surface to accomplish what they want... even if it means they need to seem nice at least on the surface to convince people to comply with their ways... Not everyone's like that, but enough of such people rise to authority that we do need to be aware and not blind to it. (I have 2 words for you: Communinist Revolutions... They have a history of making great promises on the surface and then leaving the people in a bigger mess than what they started with wanting to be free from)
China is forcing women into abortions and forcibly sterylizing them... This is a major human rights violation... and people like Hilary Clinton and some westerners not only accept it, but actively assist and promote what's being done to some degree or another.
The pawns of those who have these wild agendas, but have been pacified and manipulated to think that those w/ the evil intentions actually mean good and are doing a service to the world and actively promote what's being done without having the full information. Thus, they think they're doing good when they're actually contributing to destruction.
There are those who do what they're told just because that's what's expected of them.
There are those whose love of money or fame or power is so strong that it warps their sense of right and wrong and makes it fuzzy.
In the West, people expect some degree of at least perceived moral behaviour, so those bent on personal gain and/or the destruction of others in our modern society have to put on a nice face and have good PR in order for others to play along w/ their schemes and not realize what they're doing until it's too late.
There are all sorts... Not all good and not all extremely and frighteningly scary... As someone whose relative was murdered by someone who wanted to know what it felt like to kill somebody and had that as one of his goals in life, I realize all too well that this world is a mixed up place with a huge mix of people on many levels of the positive and negative spectrum... I had an En. student (am an ESL teacher) who is a trained dr. and left a drug company after having seen things that were very concerning to him in how things were handled and pushed/promoted to dr.s when he was living and working in the States. He's not anti-medicine. He's just aware that not every way that things are done in such circles is above board.
If you wish to have a reality check, I recommend getting out of the western bubble and having a bigger look. Then you can even see the destruction that some westerners do in some other countries and pass off as progress.
Yes, doctors know many things... Some diligently check things out for themselves and should be commended for such and some just know what they've been told... and that changes over the years... When my parents were young, doctors were CONVINCED that formula feeding was somehow superior and more scientific than breastfeeding infants and that breastfeeding was somehow disgusting and socially and scientifically inferior... Granny didn't breastfeed her children. Grandma was TOLD by her dr. not to even try breastfeeding (I think she eventually started w/ her 3rd or 4th child, but I'm not sure). Now we know otherwise. There's a LOT in the industrial medical models of how things are done that are not always scientifically sound. Just because the industry promotes something doesn't always mean it's a good model to follow.
"Scientific" research studies are often biased and twisted in the field as well... even in the west... naturally since that's where the funding is and people vying for funding for their research will seek out what they can get funding for.
Posted by: abbasdaughter | February 27, 2011 at 05:45 AM
SteveH, what I understood from that quote you took out is that this man Deer does not understand what these parents are going through with their autistic children and truly lacks empathy as can be seen through his lying and name calling towards ( at least 1) of the Lancet parents.
Thank you for sharing this with the world about Brian Deer. We will wait for Anderson Cooper to see his own ignorance in interviewing Deer and help people see this liar for who he is.
Posted by: Elizabeth | February 07, 2011 at 04:39 AM
The truth eventually comes rising to the surface. Since the drug companies have the most to gain by backing Deer, and Dr. Wakefield seems to have lost financially by stating his truth, I would put my money on Wakefield rising to the surface at the end of all of this.
For the sake of all our health and the wellbeing of future victims of the powerful Legal Drug Pushers, I pray this truth comes out soon.
Posted by: Pat Jordan | February 04, 2011 at 08:23 AM
Brian.....I'm trying to have an open mind. We see kids that or born with autism and some that regress. The research you provided the link to only makes it more believable that a live measles virus that is injected into a young child could also bring on autistic symptoms. Brian, my second observation is you've never seen a child with autism that has had diahrea so bad that there is not a diaper on this earth that would hold it in.
Posted by: Diane W Farr | January 27, 2011 at 04:18 PM
An interesting article. I was working on an adjuvant for a measles vaccine during grad school. I wrote to Wakefield. All I can say is that, after we had a series of emails, he did not follow up on doing a set of gene chip studies on his autistic patients. That would show whether there are activated gut genes that are different between autistic and normal people.
I think the points about Brian Deer are serious ones that need to be aired. They are more serious than the technicalities that Wakefield has been accused of. I would strongly advocate bringing those forward, stripped of any conclusions. I would also advocate strongly filing a lawsuit in the UK if necessary in order to raise the profile of Mr. Deer's fabrications. Those are very serious matters.
I do not, myself, find Wakefield's MMR hypothesis convincing. I can, however, conceive of a plausible mechanism in which some predisposing genetic factors could result in an immune system response with impact on the brain. Not investigating that possibility is wrong. It should go forward.
I am quite convinced by a different vaccine/illness theory for autism. There is a professor Patterson at Caltech who has shown he can replicate autism at will in animals. The same brain changes are seen. The same kind of behavior. A paper is here: http://neuro.cjb.net/cgi/content/full/27/40/10695
In Patterson's studies he can produce autism during a critical period in gestation by inoculating the mother. He has recently recieved a private grant to extend his work to Rhesus monkeys. See: https://sfari.org/current-grant-recipients/-/asset_publisher/Qv9z/content/a-non-human-primate-autism-model-based-on-maternal-infection
Posted by: Brian | January 27, 2011 at 02:44 PM
Thank you for exposing these morons who are trying to hide in vain an epidemic of diseased children.
Posted by: Raymond | January 24, 2011 at 11:53 AM
Whether or not the MMR vaccine is 'safe' or whether or not there is a 'link' between it and autism may not be the real issue here. The problem concerns the claims that are made with regard the constituents of the vaccine itself.
I will try to illustrate the point with regard to the alleged viral constituents of the MMR vaccine. First of all Dr Stefan Lanka a German virologist and molecular biologist claims that no natural human disease causing viruses have ever been physically isolated to date by ANYBODY and that claim remains unrefuted (despite all objections to the contrary). That also applies to the viral constituents of the MMR vaccine which is alleged to be based on ‘a mixture of live, weakened viruses from measles, mumps and rubella’. Ask yourself how can dead bits of nucleic acid (a chemical) wrapped in a protein coat (another chemical) miraculously be alive in a vaccine????????????. Viruses are NOT living biological organisms (check it out) they are dead chemicals pure and simple – dead bits of RNA or DNA mainly with a protein coat. No scientist to date has ever physically isolated a human disease causing virus dead or alive, that’s right,NOT ONE.This may come as a shock to most people including the so-called ’scientists’ who perpetuate the myth, but that’s the truth as far as can be determined. Here’s an example of what is tantamount to scientific fraud.
According to various past reports Dr Jeffrey Taubenberger, a molecular pathologist at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology in Rockville, Md., and his team toiled for 10 years to piece together the alleged deadly Spanish Flu virus in a high-security laboratory at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.
They obtained samples from small pieces of lung tissue, preserved in wax after the autopsies of two soldiers among the Spanish flu’s 675,000 American victims, and from the frozen body of an Inuit woman who died from the virus in November 1918 and was buried in the Alaska permafrost.
The claim is then made that although the alleged virus’ eight gene segments, or strands of RNA, were in fragments (selected from numerous ‘other’ fragments), Taubenberger’s team was able to piece them back together using gene sequencing and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) — a biochemical multiplication method of creating copies of specific fragments of DNA.
The glaring problem here is that the ‘Spanish Flu virus’ has NEVER been physically isolated, photographed and biochemically characterized in the first place scientifically by ANYONE to date. Taubenberger et al had to rely on a purely speculative conceptual ‘model’ and the magical PCR technique that produces something out of nothing – short bits of gene substance that were NEVER demonstrated to exist in the corpses in question!
How is it possible to know what to look for and be able to identify and determine the Spanish Flu virus precisely from ‘virus-like particles’ such as cell debris and other organic contaminants if the model Taubenberger et al used was NEVER based on a real physically isolated and biochemically characterized virus?
Thus with the magical PCR method it’s not only possible to multiply arbitrarily so that one detects only small fragments of new nucleic acid sequences that did not previously exist in the tissue samples from the corpses. It also means that a positive PCR is not proof for the existence of a whole genome (‘viral’ or otherwise).
Dr Stefan Lanka has also commented on Taubenberger’s fiasco thus:
If viruses had been present, then these could have been isolated, and out of them their gene substance could have been isolated too; there would have been no necessity for anyone to produce laboriously, by means of PCR technique- with clearly a swindle intention – a patchwork quilt of a model of the genetic substance of the idea of an influenza virus.
Finally, and notwithstanding all this. PCR reproducibility and specificity have never been effectively determined using any isolated human pathogenic virus as a ‘gold standard’. Moreover, Kary Mullis (a biochemist), who received a Nobel Prize for inventing PCR, says that it is being misused in HIV research. It is a method for studying genetic code fragments and matching them to similar fragments, not for identifying viruses as the cause of AIDS or ANY OTHER ILLNESS [emphasis mine]. He says that humans are full of retroviruses, which have never been shown to kill anybody, and that the mystery of ‘HIV’ has been generated by the $2 billion a year being spent on it (FOTI, Roberts p. 191).
In the case of influenza the problem thus remains. What is it that is producing the flu-like symptoms that are invariably credited to the so-called human ‘pathogenic viruses’ if none of them have ever been proven to physically exist let alone to have been effectively isolated and biochemically characterized to this day? What we have been led to believe about these viruses is Alice in Wonderland phantasy along with the standard textbook pictures and speculative computer models of their alleged genome sequences. The same applies to measles, mumps and rubella symptom complexes and the alleged ‘pathogenic viruses’ that are blamed for their cause.
Dr Tom Lankering made a recent comment in The Aspen Times (24.12.10) regarding the effectivity of flu vaccines:
In my recent studies I have been enlightened by some interesting information about the flu vaccines. A systematic review of 51 studies involving 260,000 children age 6 to 23 months found no evidence that the flu vaccine is any more effective than a placebo in that group.
A JAMA study showed the incidence of clinical influenza in the vaccinated group was 2 percent but in the un-vaccinated group it was only 3 percent. This means that out of 100 people, one person was attributed with avoiding the flu because of the vaccine.
You might wish to draw your own conclusions from all this when you consider what Dr Wakefield is up against.
Posted by: TONY | January 22, 2011 at 12:27 PM
Here is a late comment. J.B., your article is absolutely brilliant. It filled in the various gaps of knowledge I had about the phony Brian Deer. After reviewing this meticulously researched and excellent review of Brian Deer's history, I was not surprised to see the comment of "Concerned Human Being" who clearly represents pharmaceutical interests.
Posted by: Michael B Schachter MD, CNS | January 21, 2011 at 11:46 AM
you wrote "this unmarried, childless man ", presumably meaning you think he is homosexual. What's that got to do with it?
Posted by: steveH | January 20, 2011 at 03:22 PM
Dear Concerned....I sincerely believe you are concerned and I love your writing style. We are concerened human beings as well. We are concerned that autistic children show the same symptoms as "mad hatter's disease" that was caused from the mercury in their felt hats. Yes, I know mercury has been phased out of most childhood vaccines but now we use aluminum; which is just as toxic. We are concerned parents because most of our children have either have chronic constipation or diahrea. We get concerned when doctors find the live measles virus in our children's guts. This doesn't mean they have autism but it makes us want to furhter research this. I became majorly concerned when I received my son's diagnosis of autism the same week I found out I was pregnant with my 2nd child. I was concerned and decided that I would be better informed and space out my second child's vaccines and not vaccinate when he was already sick. I would love to believe vaccines do save lives and do no harm. I became so concerned that the science to vaccine safety was so flawed that I could not trust and did not vaccinate my 2nd chilld. How can you call someone selfish for not vaccinating? You are asking me to have another autistic child just so one family doesn't have to take off work to care for their child with chicken pox. There have been no deaths reported from the measles in the US since the scare and of the kids that recently got the whooping cough in California, 60% were vaccinated. I'm absolutely positive that if we didn't have a measles vaccine that immunologists would have an answer for us on how to lessen the symptoms and prevent death. Concerned human being, it's true vaccines cause autism and other developemental problems. The problem is that the CDC and NIH is confusing you by saying it's genetics and the environment. Common sense will tell you it's not all genetics. When they say environment, that means vaccines but they know most of us will think about the air we breath when they use this word. Yes, I'm prepared to go to hell. I was already told this would happen if I intervened in God's way and tried to cure my son of autism. This is what a concerned grandma told me "Lord knows we have enough lawyers and politicians, we need more greeters and stockers at Walmart; you will go to hell by intervening in your child's destiny."
Concerned human being, you may think that you'll persuade someone to run out and get their child vaccinated. What will happen is that some of us will question our belief's again, do the research, and once again be reassured that we have made the best choice for our family by not vaccinating. We welcome posts like yours because it only reassures us again that there are no good facts regarding vaccine safety.
Posted by: Diane Farr | January 13, 2011 at 09:37 AM
You seem incapable of approving a comment that criticizes your logic, so I hold out little hope of this falling on ears with any level of hearing left to them.
Ask yourself what anyone or any organisation or any government would possibly have to gain from such speciously conceived conspiracy theories.
Then ask yourself again what advances medical science has brought to the well-being of humankind over hundreds of years of human endeavour, hope, consideration and thirst for knowledge put towards the benefit of humankind.
It is my opinion that the people expressing here must live in considerable fear to feel it necessary to be so afraid of science, rather than consider the women and men who have struggled at the frontier of science, experimented (often on themselves for ethical reasons) and fought to make your lives, and the lives of your children longer, happier, healthier and more able.
To say that ambition never touched these noble aims is to be ignorant, but part of what makes humans great is to be human and all the foibles, error and magnificence which that entails. Sadly, in the case of the MMR vaccination and the Wakefield paper, all evidence points to the first two points, but certainly not the last.
It seems to satisfy your fear-addled world to believe more readily in the imagined conspiracy theory regarding a freelance journalist than the many professional medical practitioners, scientists and commentators who have in the past 12 years struggled to correct a misconception which has possessed parents all over the world with little evidence or enquiry. And it is a correction which has wasted time, money and, quite possibly, cost lives.
Shame on you.
I am tired of hearing misguided parents, fuelled by the rhetoric spouted by sites such as yours, baying on the dangers of vaccination under the unforgivable guise of 'what's best for my child'. For the love of God/humanity, whatever you believe in - how terrified of life can you be to think that this level of money-grubbing callousness exists? This issue has been so rigourously explored, and you are still convinced it is a conspiracy? Would you trust a plumber with your electricity? No, because the plumber is not an expert on electricity. But you trust an electrician.
So why can you not trust the many scientists who have expressed concern about this report from the outset? What makes you, a parent, more knowledgeable than a doctor or a scientific researcher? I am not suggesting for one moment that we should question nothing, but - my God - your language above. It's disgraceful. It's fearmongering. And fear is not evidence. On the contrary, it frequently points us in the wrong direction.
Any parent of an autistic child has an incredible journey. It must be heartbreaking and tempting to attempt to find a level of culpability to help cope with an incredibly challenging situation. But is it right to endanger the lives and wellbeing by clinging to a belief, the odds for which are lengthening through rigorous scientific critique?
May whatsoever God you may or may not believe in judge you. And remember your opinions on vaccination at the next polio, smallpox, measles, whooping cough or tetanus outbreak. That is, if we can orchestrate a smallpox outbreak, given that it has been eradicated - through vaccination. If Ian Dury were alive today, perhaps we could have the polio conversation, but these success stories, fraught as they were with initial misguided efforts, have made such a difference to our lives today.
Don't peddle fear. Examine, teach, question and learn. And at some point, you will always have to trust, because you cannot be an expert on everything. You simply cannot. This is why, when we nurture an inter-dependent society, we can achieve such greatness as a species.
Posted by: Concerned human being | January 13, 2011 at 07:30 AM
Here is a quote from Anderson Cooper in a 2004 interview:
"I think the notion of traditional anchor is fading away, the all-knowing, all-seeing person who speaks from on high. I don't think the audiences really buy that anymore. As a viewer, I know I don't buy it. I think you have to be yourself, and you have to be real and you have to admit what you don't know, and talk about what you do know, and talk about what you don't know as long as you say you don't know it. I tend to relate more to people on television who are just themselves, for good or for bad, than I do to someone who I believe is putting on some sort of persona."
O.K., Anderson Cooper, time to admit what you didn't know. Read J.B.'s article, talk to the Lancet 12 parents, do your own research, and then admit that you didn't know what the heck you were talking about, that Brian Deer is the liar and Andrew Wakefield is the hero of this story.
Posted by: Twyla | January 11, 2011 at 11:50 PM
Thanks for this excellent demolition job. That's even though I think the role of vaccines in autism has been greatly over-estimated -- I find the main factor to be the change to non-gamma-2 dental amalgams.
The BMJ has outstanding form for dishonesty. They published an outrageously libellous pile of lies in a specially-concocted "obituary" against Prof David Horrobin, which generated about 100 published complaints following which they were ordered to retract. The only reason they weren't sued for libel was that they kindly waited their time till the libelee had just died so was unable to sue for outstanding nastiness towards his widow and family.
P.S. talking of uk libel courts, the problem is that the pharma shills have such vast resources of cash to throw against any challenge that justice gets buried under force of finance.
Posted by: Robin P Clarke | January 11, 2011 at 05:37 PM
I had the same impression on Anderson Cooper 360 story. I thought it was so biased. I didn't like the way Wakefield was portrayed in the shadows while they made that bobblehead Brian Deer look like a little choir boy wallowing in all the media attention.
This story is just is meant to cause fighting and divide people further. BMJ should be shamed of themselves for giving him a platform.
Posted by: Sarah | January 11, 2011 at 11:35 AM
This is truly and excellent article, and thank you so much for researching this and writing about it. I wish someone in mainstream media would have enough guts to pick up on this. It's just terrible how this story is being mis-told over and over again.
Posted by: Twyla | January 11, 2011 at 02:50 AM
From the parent of a 7 year old autistic boy, who regressed into autism after his second MMR shot at 21 months of age.
Thank you from the bottom my heart, for your tireless efforts to expose these sociopathic thugs. Maybe someday we’ll return to a place, where innocent children will be safe from this unconscionable, greed driven tyranny.
Posted by: Barry | January 10, 2011 at 11:15 PM
Go J.B.!!! You GO Guy!!!
RE: "I have personally shared this information with Anderson Cooper’s producer and CNN’s medical editor. I have personally introduced Lancet 12 parents to CNN and others as of Friday." YES YES YES!!!
"I hope they interview the Lancet 12 parents and let America see our side." THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED.
"Thank God for the Internet, AoA, and the ability to speak the truth." AMEN BROTHER:)
Re: "Psalms 7: 14-17
The wicked conceive evil;
they are pregnant with trouble
and give birth to lies.
They dig deep a pit to trap others,
then fall into it themselves.
The trouble they make backfires on them.
The violence they plan falls on their own heads."
LET US PRAY CONTINUALLY THAT THIS DIVINE JUSTICE OCCURS.
Posted by: AutismGrandma | January 10, 2011 at 11:08 PM
It is clear that Brian Deer is a fraud.
The governments case against Cedillo was based on fraudulently obtained information.
Anderson Cooper let the fraud known as Brian Deer make a sucker out of him.
Posted by: michael framson | January 10, 2011 at 10:01 PM
Thank you for writing this and for mapping the links so clearly. The US media loves a scandal so why are they not jumping on this?
Posted by: Lisa B | January 10, 2011 at 09:28 PM
It is always better for the public to see both sides, facts, and conclusions, Anderson Cooper decided he didn't need to see both sides, just his and for that i have decided he is not investigating for our sake but for his and i feel i no longer trust CNN
Posted by: g | January 10, 2011 at 08:59 PM
I have so many things to say, i have to actually compose myself before posting !!!!
Another GREAT piece of REAL Journalism here...on a blog....by one of us 'crazy parents'
Crap, if I am considered to be one of you guys, one of you 'crazy parents' then I am PROUD to be standing and fighting with all of us crazies! LOL!
One thing I am going to post before I come back after I compose myself..lol!...I did notice in the papers filed (linked here, the first link to the complaint filed by Deer)...is that Deer, in his complaint uses "Mr." Wakefield, but he uses "Dr." for the other doctor??? It wasnt a one time error, he used "Mr." Wakefield instead of Dr. Wakefield thru the entire complaint letter....
This isnt an English thing because otherwise wouldnt he use "Mr." for all of them, not just for Dr. Wakefield?
I think if I am reading this right and not looking over an England/US 'title' difference, then to me, it shows, right off of the bat the TARGET on Dr. Wakefields back...maybe a subtle way of getting into the GMC's head that Dr. Wakefield is 'not a respected DR'? A way to get anyone reading to maybe look at Dr. Wakefields work as 'less important', ya know?
I wonder in how many other of Deers pieces of Fiction..ohh...sorry "articles" he has written does he use MR instead of DR (at least BEFORE Dr. Wakefields license was SOLD out to big pharma?!?!?)?
I dont care what anyone says, he will ALWAYS be DR. Wakefield to me, and I will always use it to refer to him, in writing or in speaking....
anyway...please correct me if I am way off here and I am totally mis-interpreting MR vs DR???
PROUD Mom to Ethan, Alex, and Megan
Posted by: Angie | January 10, 2011 at 08:25 PM
@Jeff C.--Thanks! I'm not very aware of the PR & commercial performance of these issues you added. I do know there are some extreme vaccine proponents who don't want go anywhere near H1N1 in commentary in some other blogs. I'm guessing that is in the "best forgotten and out of sight" category for some.
Posted by: JenB | January 10, 2011 at 07:11 PM
They will have to do better reporting in the future. It's as if they think that they (Matt Lauer, Cooper) can just look into the camera with concern and say " but this isn't going away anytime soon " at the end of one of their extremely biased,shoddy interviews. That's right it's not going away AND you guys can't make up for your lack of integrity with the " it's not going away anytime soon" comment at the end. Get it right.
Posted by: Jen | January 10, 2011 at 06:03 PM
To add to the reasons that others have given for the timing of this "article" lets not forget the PSA from Safeminds that was shown in the movie theaters. I don't know the details regarding how long it took to raise the money or how much money they raised but it didn't seem to take much effort. I would imagine it is a little un-nerving to Offit, et al.
Also, it seems to me that I'm seeing more comments from people that say they don't have a child with autism BUT they feel like the government is hiding something. It seems to me like the harder they try to "convince" everyone the more it seems like they are lying.
I too have found the recent scriptures soothing and comforting in a stressful time. I hope that all who are suffering right now will find some comfort.
Posted by: Shelly | January 10, 2011 at 05:51 PM
I've enjoyed the Psalms and Proverbs that have been quoted the last few days.
This one jumped to mind this afternoon.
Unfortunately, it is painful waiting for the vaccine defenders to dig their hole deep enough to be swallowed up in it themselves.
Psalms 7: 14-17
The wicked conceive evil;
they are pregnant with trouble
and give birth to lies.
They dig deep a pit to trap others,
then fall into it themselves.
The trouble they make backfires on them.
The violence they plan falls on their own heads.
I will thank the Lord for he is just;
I will sing praise to the name of the Lord Most High.
Posted by: Pamela | January 10, 2011 at 05:21 PM
Support JB on Huff Po today. Mark his comment as a "favorite" on this ridiculous article, "Wakefield Debunked, But Vaccine Fear Lives" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-ropeik/wakefield-debunked-but-va_b_805826.html#postComment
Comments can be ordered by "favorite." This will keep JB, linking back to his article here at AoA, at the top of the comment string.
Posted by: Pamela | January 10, 2011 at 05:00 PM
Perfectly done, Samaxtic. But they don't know that Dr. Wakefield took an unbreakable vow - to protect children. Wound to the wrist of every parent who sought his aid.
Posted by: Hermione Stag | January 10, 2011 at 04:59 PM
Rachael – thanks for the link, God bless Dr. Deth. I met him at the last DAN! Conference in Long Beach. He spent 20 minutes between sessions discussing with me my son’s response to methyl-B12, his test results, and possible future treatments. Dr. Tim Buie from Harvard was also a presenter at the conference. During his session, he spent several minutes praising Dr. Wakefield’s contributions to our knowledge of the gut-ASD connection (this was after the GMC hearing). Hopefully, we’ll hear something from him soon.
Posted by: Jeff C. | January 10, 2011 at 04:42 PM
Thank you again Mr. Handley,
He who answers a matter before he hears it,
It is folly and shame to him.
Thank you Dr Wakefield,
For a righteous man may fall seven times and rise again, But the wicked shall fall by calamity.
Posted by: Adam M | January 10, 2011 at 04:35 PM
Actually, BD brings Bellatrix LeStrange to mind:
"Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy?" "You need to mean them ! You need to really want to cause pain -- to enjoy it -- righteous anger won't hurt me for long -- I'll show you how it is done, shall I? I'll give you a lesson --"
Wild-eyed and maniacally running through the halls of the GMC whilst taunting with a cackling shrill-"I stitched up Andrew Wakefield".
Posted by: samaxtics | January 10, 2011 at 04:33 PM
JenB – adding to your list of why the frenzy in the US – the public rejection of the H1N1 vaccine despite a full-blown media campaign, the legislature overturning of Texas Gov. Perry’s Gardasil mandate, the commercial flop of Gardasil, the low uptake rates of the seasonal flu vaccines, the increased use of philosophical and religious exemptions…the list goes on and on. The chumps are no longer unquestioningly following the edicts of the medical experts. They are trying to blame it all on one man and one study despite the fact that they know it goes way beyond Andy Wakefield.
The “experts” are running out of things to do to him. I can only imagine what will come next.
Posted by: Jeff C. | January 10, 2011 at 04:20 PM
Richard Deth, professor of pharmacology, offers his response to the controversy surrounding a study to link a childhood vaccine to autism.
Chilling research into vaccine-autism link
Posted by: Rachael | January 10, 2011 at 04:06 PM
It is telling that Deer "writes for" the Sunday Times, but they "have no control over him..."
It's also very curious to me (maybe this is more commonplace than I am aware of?) that a medical journal would pay a reporter to write something for them to publish, something that I think even a layperson can see does not hold water. Do they believe this leaves them in a position of less responsibility for what is written? This article is "peer-reviewed" after all.
As for why the big media "frenzy" here in the U.S., these things come to my mind: the polls saying 25% believe vaccines are in involved in the autism epidemic, 89% saying vaccine safety research should be a priority (doesn't that mean that 89% are not comfortable with what mainstream medicine says about the vaccine schedule, etc.), the press the Hannah Poling settlement fishy legal language received, and I'm not happy to write this, but in light of the effects of the public release of the Hannah Poling case, I think some want to prevent coverage of the most recent vaccine court decision.
I also think Dr. Wakefield's (and others') recently completed monkey vaccine study is something they really want to discredit before it is even scrutinized by the public.
Posted by: JenB | January 10, 2011 at 03:57 PM
I was in another doctor's office this morning, this time with my husband - he was getting a steroid shot in his spine hoping the inflamation will go down.
CNN was on - favorite channel of medical offices, I guess.
Newest studies of why autism happens; wait for it: All depends on how close apart the children are born.
I never said a word, but there were several in the room that tsked and shook their heads in disgust.
Posted by: Benedetta | January 10, 2011 at 03:09 PM
According to the bibliography wiki Anderson Cooper had a brother that committed suicide. Anderson Cooper's mother says she believes that an allergic reaction to a asthma medicine caused her son to go into psychosis. I witnessed this heart breaker in my own duaghter this summer. So, Anderson Cooper of all reporters should have been so very sensitive about all this. But he was not - he has not got a clue. Perhaps someday will will dawn on him.
Anderson Cooper also had a father that died at a very young age of 50 with a heart attack, and I am so very suspious that vaccines do have a lot to do with such early heart deaths since my daughter had Kawasaki's and my son had swelling of the heart and heart murmur shortly following their vaccines.
His own family is most probably very affected by all this, and it does not seem that he has spent a second in thought or in reading material for the other side other than what he has been taught.
Posted by: Benedetta | January 10, 2011 at 03:00 PM
Wow, JB...thank you so much for outlining it crystal clear for all to see. THIS is the real story. Let's hope Sharyl Attkisson picks it up! Great work as always!
Posted by: Jenny | January 10, 2011 at 02:37 PM
The way in which the establishment went after Wakefield shows me all I need to know. The establishment clearly has much to hide. Otherwise one man with a crazy theory should have been old news by now. Clearly that one man with a crazy theory was right. So right that the establishment is scared enough to have a nut like BD go to bat for them. Of coarse when the house of cards fall down they can blame the nut, BD, because he is the face. Gosh, how I pray for that day. BD, if you are reading, I hope you are nervous!
Posted by: SY | January 10, 2011 at 02:25 PM
First, weasles, can we talk weasles, why does Brian Deer remind me of them? And oh, if you ever read the book NEVER BE LIED TO AGAIN, the man was a pure illustration of a liar, did all the body language of a consistant liar. Second, the vast majority of the American people are NOT being allowed to know the true state of their nation as it now appears to be impossible that the mainstream press reported to be nothing more than “journalism of appeasement, corruption, smoke and mirrors” failing on a daily basis to keep their citizens informed of the most important events occurring around them. What more can be the news of the day, then say, forty kids snatched away from a kidnapper called autism in one day? Or that a product (think baby cribs or toys) are recalled because it killed ONE baby within a day. Where are our priorities? I'd like to have Deer held to some standard of why or how he appropriated those records? BMJ Fiona said to me by email that he obtained those through FOIA documents? Since when can FOIA obtain private medical records? And, why does Fiona lie that her journal is fair, and stands against pharma, when she is paid by them to put these documents out? What the HELL is happening to our world? Common decency and honesty has been lost for profit and gain and blood money? We don't deserve to be called the "united" states. That said, I found an old youtube that Polly put out in UK with David Kirby about how media there is even worse. They didn't even hear anything about this latest diatribe? Really, what is going on that they fear so much? Could it be, low uptake of flu vaccines, or moms questioning their doctors FOR ONCE, or the vaccine court decisions of late, or the fact, that people generally are waking up from their deep slumbers? God, I hope so. I think we need to stop putting our boob tubes/mind altering stuff on, and start investigating for ourselves, what the real truth is.
Posted by: kathy blanco | January 10, 2011 at 02:23 PM
Anyone seen this today on HuffPo? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-ropeik/wakefield-debunked-but-va_b_805826.html#postComment
JB, maybe you could submit your article as a response.
Posted by: Pamela | January 10, 2011 at 01:48 PM
Great summary, as always JB. To those of us fully immersed in this subject, the deceit is crystal clear. Unfortunately, the general public knows nothing of the details. To them, it is much easier to believe the story line of a single corrupt researcher rather than a coordinated attack from the medical establishment.
We really need a short summary presented by an established mainstream reporter that has followed the ASD-vaccine situation (e.g. Alysin Camerota or Sheryl Atkinson). The report should be concise at hit the flowing points:
1) The Wakefield story was not the result of an independent investigation but that of a single journalist with a history of deceitful statements and numerous conflicts of interest
2) The timeline he lays out could not have taken place (the Child Health Safety article, but *vastly* simplified)
3) The parents of the twelve reject Deer’s conclusions and fully support Dr. Wakefield
4) The medical journals are not independent, non-profit entities, but are linked to, and controlled by the pharmaceutical industry
5) This is not solely about the MMR-Autism link, but the explosion of the schedule (without adequate testing) concurrent with the vast increase in childhood immune and neurological disorders (ASD, ADHD, Asthma, Allergies, diabetes, etc.)
Pretty much the article you wrote above, but condensed for those without a personal stake in the issue. Trying to get too far into the details will get us dismissed as 9-11 truther or Obama birth certificate types. The public is not inclined to learn the details; I never did until I was personally affected. The conflict of interest within the medical establishment is a story that practically tells itself if steered in the correct direction by a skilled reporter.
Posted by: Jeff C. | January 10, 2011 at 01:42 PM
JB YOU are a hero, too!! THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Julie L. | January 10, 2011 at 01:15 PM
Killer article, JB. Brian Deer is definitely the fraud.
Posted by: Jake Crosby | January 10, 2011 at 12:50 PM
OMG JB take them down! The house of cards is in a pile on the floor!
Posted by: Nora | January 10, 2011 at 12:48 PM
Why the medical establishment, the GMC no less, gives credence to someone with no medical background on something as critical as immunization and why did the Lancet gives someone with no medical background a platform.
Um...because Keith Olberman "bronzed" him on Countdown?
Posted by: Media Scholar | January 10, 2011 at 12:47 PM
Does Deer remind anyone else of a floppier version of Bricktop from "Snatch"? (Not a PG clip):
NHS is in direct and open cahoots with the Association of British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) which apparently hired Deer as a hitman, so UK parents have reason to be concerned about bureaucratic harassment for questioning Deer.
ABPI's wiki page says they produce booklets for schools and patient literature http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_the_British_Pharmaceutical_Industry
I found it interesting that, like the close ties between industry and govt. in the US, ABPI and NHS have the "full circle"-- from iatrogenic brain injury to drug profits-- covered. Some of the companies which appear to be promoted by this "cooperative" are American, like Eli Lilly and J&J. Here's a few of NHS's "booklets":
Posted by: Gatogorra | January 10, 2011 at 12:02 PM
It is almost certainly not in the news in the UK because the UK media consider it to be legally dubious. In fact, they mostly didn't touch it before, when previously launched in 2009, outside Times newspapers. Despite the immense prejudice against Andy even they cannot work out how he could have fabricated the paper without the other signatories - independently responsible for it various findings if not its design - noticing.
Posted by: John Stone | January 10, 2011 at 11:56 AM
Again, as he is so honest, Mr. Deer sometimes likes to use his middle name when talking to some of the Lancet 12 parents...
Lancet parent 11 : Brian Deer using the name Brian Richards.
Posted by: cmo | January 10, 2011 at 11:20 AM
I will be spreading this information far and wide.
Thanks JB, again for keeping it real.
Posted by: Casey | January 10, 2011 at 11:10 AM
Sorry for off-topic, but this grabbed my eye == http://abcnews.go.com/Health/AutismRisk/closely-spaced-pregnancies-linked-increased-autism-risk/story?id=12564585
The timing is somewhat interesting given the anti-Wakefield media blitz of the past week.
So, now autism starts in the womb, so how can we blame post-partum vaxes? Then again, is there not just as much of a correlation factor between proximity of second birth and proximity of vax? Diffuse, deflect, dissuade, business as usual.
Posted by: Rob | January 10, 2011 at 11:01 AM
It has been my experience that even in the US, where you hand your medical record to each doctor, their notes still contradict previous entries; and are generally hasty and haphazard scrawlings containing numerous errors.
This may mark the beginning of the end for Deer, he has become a liability to those he works for.
Posted by: GH | January 10, 2011 at 10:43 AM
Beyond the fact that Brian Deer lied the bigger question is:
Why the medical establishment, the GMC no less, gives credence to someone with no medical background on something as critical as immunization and why did the Lancet gives someone with no medical background a platform.
Inquiring minds want to know.
The degree to which they attack Wakefield reflects the degree to which they fear him.
Posted by: Sarah | January 10, 2011 at 10:40 AM
When Anderson Cooper asked Brian Deer if Andrew Wakefield had falsified the medical histories of all the Lancet children, Deer said that he had showed the Lancet paper to the father of Child 11 and the father had said, "That's not true." Deer then invited Wakefield to sue him.
That was it. That was Deer's entire answer to Anderson Cooper's question: the father of one child said that something in the Lancet paper wasn't true. (I suspect that it had to do with his child's number in the study.)
Cooper didn't even notice that Deer didn't answer his question.
Posted by: Carol | January 10, 2011 at 10:16 AM
JB - We Love it! Thanks so much for all your efforts and breaking this down step by step. Just what the folks at CNN need because obviously they forgot how to be real journalists!
Posted by: Son in Recovery | January 10, 2011 at 09:56 AM
I would also suspect a link between Deer
and medical and pharmaceutical interests in the US to have brought this out now prior to the release of Mnookin and Offits books.
Thank God for the internet, AOA, the ability to speak the truth and J.B.
Posted by: Maurine Meleck | January 10, 2011 at 09:37 AM
JB, Fantastic detail showing the deceitfulness and lies of Deer and his behind-the-curtains UK medical gang.
Anderson Cooper showcasing Deer's fraud and abetting Deer's attempt to quash Andrew Wakefield et al. perfectly illustrates how America's vaunted press has long been a rubber stamp for the Vaccine Industry and the public health institution Generals.
Thanks so much -- it's up to us.
Posted by: david burd | January 10, 2011 at 09:14 AM
"Why isn’t this news in the UK?"
Because the 2 authors with new books are here in the US.
Posted by: AnneS | January 10, 2011 at 09:11 AM
youtube clip of Lancet parent 11 taking about Brian Deer using the name Brian Richards.
from the excellent film by Alan Golding.
"Selective Hearing, Brian Deer and the GMC".
now in its full length on youtube.
Posted by: MarkH | January 10, 2011 at 08:34 AM
1) Who finances Brian Deer's work? We know now he misrepresented himself as a staff writer for the "Sunday Times." So who has financed this decade long attack on families of autistic children and the doctors who helped them?
2) How does a "free lance" journalist gain access to confidential medical records that were only in the possession of the NHS? Why was a "free lance" journalist privy to private information not revealed over the course of the trial?
3) What recourse do these families have as far as holding Deer legally responsible for the misappropriation of their confidential medical records? Deer bragged about having these records in his apartment for lengths of time. Who allowed this to happen?
Posted by: Katie Wright | January 10, 2011 at 08:00 AM
Again .. JB .. thanks....
It is more than odd the latest Brian Deer attack on Dr. Wakefield received saturation coverage in the United States .. and .. from all accounts .. almost no coverage in England?
Why should a recent allegation made by a British reporter .. in a British medical journal .. against a former British Doctor .. alledging "elaborate fraud" had been committed in a now 12 year old British study .. be considered newsworthy in the US .. but .. not in Britain?
Instead of "covering" rehashed old news in Great Britain .. the US media should be asking:
Where is Dr. Poul Thorsen .. who is alleged to have stolen #2 million dollars of US CDC research monies .. and .. why isn't the US media (ANDERSON COOPER???) demanding his capture so the American people can ascertain if Dr. Thorsen acted alone in his "fraud" .. or .. did he have accomplices in the US who hired him in the first place?
Posted by: Bob Moffitt | January 10, 2011 at 07:36 AM
JB - this is so good, thank you so much. Since it seems medical reporters are either too busy or incapable of reading anything longer than a press release would it be possible to boil this down to 10 sentences and start circulating it? I would love to see these facts spread far and wide. I hate Brian Deer. He reminds of a spoiled, overweight, yippy, snarling, tiny lap dog.
Posted by: Alison MacNeil | January 10, 2011 at 06:45 AM
Just to mention that Paul Nuki , who hired Deer at the Sunday Times, now runs the National Health Service information website NHS Choices.
Posted by: John Stone | January 10, 2011 at 06:28 AM