The truth comes out in the end as they say,never a truer word spoken....

At the press conference in LaCrosse, Andy said he was no longer going to have to defend his position, he was now going on the offensive against Deer's bogus claims. I guess this is what that looks like! Special thanks to Tim Bolen for his post explaining the Lawsuit as it stands now.

I was wondering about Deer's use of the term "Case Dismissed" as opposed to the actual words "motion to strike is denied" when referring to Meachum's decision. I originally felt he was trying to confuse his supporters into believing this decision was about more than a jurisdiction issue. Now it seems he was just ignorant of the law. It seems he thought he was as much a genius at Law as he is a genius at gastric medicine. OOOOPPS.

Having sat through Deer's LaCrosse presentation I could only wonder why he was willing to come to yet another State in the US and perform his public defamation of Dr. Wakefield. It seemed a very risky thing to do given that the case in Texas is not yet decided. I now see that his misunderstanding of the law may have given him misplaced confidence, and hope it turns out to bite him in the ass.

I love the idea of the Facebook page. I have put off joining Facebook for all this time, but it might be a good time to change that.

Yes, Well done all those autism parents and Wakefield et al supporters who wrote to Wisconsin University, LaCrosse objecting to the choice of non scientist Brian Deer, to deliver their Life Sciences 'prestigious' annual lecture.

By all accounts Deer's lecture, 'MMR -an elaborate fraud' was boring, failed to concentrate on the title issues, unscientific, and amounted to little more than a libellous diatribe against all those persons who ever disagreed with his (Deer's)point of view or evidence. There was no opportunity to debate or challenge any of Deer's assertions; only pre selected questions were permitted after the lecture.

Jennifer Larsen, sent an initial lengthy complaint on behalf of The Canary Party in an open letter on the CP's website. It wasn't long before Deer issued a nastily worded rebuttal on his own website. Ms Larsen's reply to this was nothing less than brilliant. This beautiful, elegant and very eloquent lady, not only made 'mincemeat' out of Deer's assertions, but her well reasoned and dignified response, made a perfect foil for Deer's unpleasant libellous rhetoric.

Deer's vile comments regarding those persons who sent complaint letters to WisLaX, prompted me to write to them too. From my letter, sent to the University's Dean and Chancellor;-
"I object to Brian Deer's contention, claiming "small groups of ill-informed, misguided and sometimes frankly malicious, people have become desperate for attention." and that the "barrage of emails - often abusive or crammed with hate speech" sent to university staff following Deer's October 2012 lectures in Wisconsin" , were all sent by persons "claiming that vaccines were responsible for an epidemic of autism."
http://briandeer.com/solved/vanderhorst-larson.htm

I was also very concerned that my e-mails, which were confidential and contained personal contact and other information, might have been forwarded to Brian Deer. I was very pleased to receive a response from the Chancellor, assuring me that he had not passed on any private e-mails to 'anyone'. This begs the question about what information Deer based his allegation about "a barrage of emails - often abusive or crammed with hate speech" on. If this was 'hearsay' then Deer should NOT have repeated it. If Deer has been given access to private letters, then this represents a clear breach of trust on the part of the University academic staff. Deer's comment about Jennifer Larsens first letter being "one of the few communications that didn't ooze with personal bile", DEFINITELY implies that Deer has seen the rest of the letters. I am not condoning 'hate mail', but the University has proper procedures to deal with this, and there's no evidence at all that persons within the autism community were responsible for any of this.

The autism community was only one faction which expressed concerns about Deer's LaCrosse content and delivery, other factions included the undergraduates forced to sit through this excruciating diatribe, and the University's academic staff themselves who complained about the lack of structure and scientific content. (As yet the Dean has not responded to either of my communications, which were politely written and contained reasoned arguments and personal examples.)