Mother Knows Best
Dachel Media Review: Autism Doubles American Officials Yawn Families Suffer

The Dismal Return of Brian Deer

Deer crossedBy John Stone

In the hubbub which followed Andrew Wakefield’s threat to sue Emily Willingham and Forbes Magazine Brian Deer thought he would take a bow in its on-line pages  . As ever what immediately strikes is the lack of integrity of a scientific establishment which rests its case on the allegations of this unfortunate figure. As usual confronted by criticism all Deer can do is duck and weave and call his critics “malignant cranks” (of course there a few other things he’s called us over the years, but this is not a gentleman with much finesse). This is the man who makes a meal of the fact that his vastly more qualified critic Dr David Lewis, as a leading scientist in the Environmental Protection Agency had worked on issues of the safety of sewage disposal. In David Lewiswhat should be a serious exchange of views in supposedly august scientific journals like Nature  and the British Medical Journal Deer is allowed to use this fact to disparage him: the Nature letter was removed last year after further complaints, the BMJ one stands with the title ‘MMR and human waste disposal’, but did it not used to read ‘MMR and Human Waste’ ? The man is protected by very powerful people. He is a pharmaceutical VIP .

Last week I called upon him – under his nose -  to justify certain things and as usual he just ran leaving the lesser surrogates of the government pharmaceutical complex to cover his back. People like Matt Carey, Dorit Reiss and Este Banes (the new version of fraudulent Prof Reuben Gaines). Hadn’t Deer, the editor of BMJ, Fiona Godlee, and their advisor Prof Ingvar Bjarnason already been forced to admit in Nature that there no basis in the claim of fraud over the biopsies for the children in the Lancet paper ?

“But he (Bjarnason) says that the forms don’t clearly support charges that Wakefield deliberately misinterpreted the records. “The data are subjective. It’s different to say it’s deliberate falsification,” he says.

“Deer notes that he never accused Wakefield of fraud over his interpretation of pathology records…

“Fiona Godlee, the editor of the BMJ, says that the journal’s conclusion of fraud was not based on the pathology but on a number of discrepancies between the children’s records and the claims in the Lancet paper…”

No answer.

Was not the claim (made by Deer in his first letter of complaint against Wakefield, Walker-Smith) that the Wakefield Lancet paper was commissioned by the Legal Aid Board and based on their protocol in itself fraudulent, and disproven the High Court appeal of Walker-Smith?

No answer.

Had he not made three formal complaints to the GMC against the three doctors and come to a mutually beneficial agreement that he not be named as complainant, thus enabling to continue reporting without the public knowing about his conflict?

No answer.

The Texas court have now been deliberating on Andrew Wakefield’s appeal over the court’s jurisdiction in his defamation case against Deer, Godlee and the BMJ for a year. Who knows what is holding the court which originally said it would report back within six months ? What is certain is that if this crew wriggle away it will not serve justice (we have seen their ridiculous pretexts that the BMJ do not do business in the US’s second largest state and they did not realise that Wakefield lived there ). To the best of my knowledge there is still no date named.

Meanwhile, with somewhat greater certainty we look forward to the publication of David Lewis’s new book  ‘Science for Sale: How the US Government Uses Powerful Corporations and Leading Universities to Support Government Policies, Silence Top Scientists, Jeopardize Our Health, and Protect Corporate Profits’  on May 27. Be the first to get a copy.

Jon Stone is UK Editor for Age of Autism.


John Stone

Robin P Clarke

I just noticed your comment. Deer had published on his website the names of the children in the paper in 2004-6 prior to being granted limited legal access to documents by Mr Justice Eady.



We can't leave it along - cause not only did he get the medical records he slashed and burned and twisted around and outright lied about what was in them along with messing up the time lines.

Robin P Clarke

"Brian Deer: [....] obtained confidential medical records without authorization;"

The story I heard was that Saint Brian obtained authorised access to the medical records as part of the evidence in the earlier libel trial at the UK High Court which got abandoned. Or not? (Though there's still the question of whether he was entitled to use them outside of that lawsuit.)
In any case it doesn't make him any less of a false witness but I still think best not to promulgate errors in his indictment thus opening the door to counter-disproofs.

Angus Files

Aye Barry he doesn't have a real gob either just a pharma talking shop.. AKA Patsy.

As Mr Stone comments Deer cant answer a direct question ... ever, anywhere,just another talking ranting salesman out of pharmas Menagerie who are of no interest to anyone only themselves.
I used to think Mr Deer had a complex but.. he hasn't .. he loves every Nano of himself..pass the sick bucket.



And Cherry -- not only what they want us to believe today -- but what is behind it -- way kind of profit scheme has some sick mind that thinks they are smartest in all the world ---thought up now.


It would be good to think Deer has lost his gob for good and cant answer anyone ever again..and we all lived happily ever after...


You say that as if he actually has a real job.

Think about it…. a "freelance reporter' who's only ever written (..poorly) about a single subject??? And yet, he can somehow afford to spend days on end as a courtroom spectator?? And then somehow gain access to the private medical records of vaccine injured children??

Yeah, sure. Freelance reporter. That must be what he is.

The funny thing for me is that this smug ass thinks he's so much smarter than the rest of us. Yet he's too dumb to realize that this thing is about to heat up in a big way. And the people who've been protecting him up to this point, are going to hang it all on him as soon as the truth starts to emerge.

It's never good to be scapegoat. But to be a scapegoat for THIS crime…. good luck with that Brian.

Cherry Sperlin Misra

Hey Jenny Allan, They are not lying- Its just that those scientists who are scouring the data for clues to the cause of autism are about 20 years and they were yanked in from some other area of study. None of them have even seen an autistic kid . - Just being cynical.
I also liked the one about bowel problems being due to poor diet. When girls have their menarche at age 11 we are told it is due to BETTER diet.
Isnt it a pity that today, when we pick up a magazine or newspaper, we think, " Well, I wonder what they want me to believe today"

Jenny Allan

@ Danchi
Thank you for this excellent informative post.


Lets be clear about something. Autism is caused by Brain Inflammation or Encephalopathy. Autism does not have to have gastrointestinal issues along with it although about 90% of the children do have GI problems.

Here is the definition of a vaccine adverse reaction from the largest selling medical textbook, the Merck Manual (see below), filed under their category of brain, spinal cord and nerve disorders: brain infections.

Encephalitis is inflammation of the brain. Patients who suffer encephalitis can be left with physical disabilities, mental deterioration and persistent cognitive dysfunction – which matches the definition of autism.
Vaccines can cause encephalitis and encephalitis can cause autism.

From the Vaccine Epidemic:
‘Vaccines can cause brain damage. Most people are completely unaware of this, but that is exactly how The Merck Manual, the largest-selling medical textbook, defines an adverse reaction to a vaccine: ‘Encephalitis is inflammation of the brain that occurs when a virus directly infects the brain or when a virus or something else triggers inflammation . . . Encephalitis can occur in the following ways: A virus directly infects the brain. A virus that caused an infection in the past becomes reactivated and directly damages the brain. A virus or vaccine triggers a reaction that makes the immune system attack brain tissue (an autoimmune reaction)‘ .

A vaccine adverse reaction that causes brain damage (encephalitis) is the same thing as a complication from an infectious disease. Any pediatrician, doctor, or state or federal public-health official who tells you that vaccines are completely safe, that adverse reactions to vaccines don’t exist, or that vaccine-induced injuries are so rare that they virtually never occur is either ignorant or is committing scientific fraud. Is it worse to have your child vaccinated by a doctor who does not know the possible adverse reactions, or to be lied to by a doctor or government bureaucrat who does know the terrible damage vaccines can cause?

The Merck Manual further defines the symptoms of encephalitis: “Symptoms of encephalitis include fever, headache, personality changes or confusion, seizures, paralysis or numbness, sleepiness that can progress to coma and death.”

Vaccine package inserts that list encephalitis as an adverse reaction: Merck M-M-R® II, Merck Hepatitis B, Merck GARDASIL, Merck Chickenpox Vaccine, Glaxo Pertussis Vaccine, DTaP IPV and HIB Combo Vaccine, Flu Mist Vaccine, Flu Vaccine Package Insert AFLURIA, Flu Vaccine Package Insert AGRIFLU and Flu Vaccine Package Insert FLUARIX.

Medical journal and textbook articles about vaccines causing encephalitis:

In the book: "The Vaccine Papers" and "Fear of the Invisible"
the author: Janine Roberts, she spent over a decade investigating vaccines by attending in the US and the UK government/official vaccine conferences. She interviews many scientist including Maaurice Hilleman, and Dr. Wakefield. In the books are official transcripts, web site links where possible (if they haven't been removed) and most of all Roberts cites her sources by names. She reveals evidence that the World Health Organization has discovered the MMR vaccine is contaminated with chicken leukosis virus, but has decided not to tell the public of this, and to continue to make the vaccine with eggs from contaminated chickens. She discovered that the top government scientists admit to colleagues that vaccines are contaminated with viruses from chickens, humans and monkeys, with RNA and DNA fragments, with 'cellular degradation products', and possibly 'oncogenes and prions.' They report alarmingly that it is impossible to commercially purify vaccines.

In the "Vaccine Papers" there is a section that goes into detail on why Gut Disorders are a manifestation of vaccines and how Wakefields Study found MMR virus in the intestinal walls of some children.

These two books are a treasure trove of information from inside government vaccine meetings. Heavily cited with sources names and copies of transcripts. When you finish these books you will no longer wonder why chronically ill children are the norm, why there is a cancer epidemic among children and adults, where all the "rare" disease people are developing are coming from. Scientist themselves say they are concerned about the consequences of DNA fragments in vaccines. You will also learn how some vaccines are being made on growing mediums of Dogs, Aborted Fetal Cells, Monkey tissue, some Flu vaccines are made from Insect cells, and the vaccine industry has quietly approached the FDA, congress and the CDC to begin developing vaccines on "immortal cancer cells". We're probably just seeing the tip of the iceberg in genetic damage in people.

Jenny Allan

Some links to evidence for rises in autism and bowel disorders in US and UK -I understand this is a worldwide problem.
I was cynically amused by the statement:- "Scientists are scouring genetic and evironmental data to find a cause for the rise in autism."
We all know where they are NOT looking!

In Scotland, (where I live), the rise in bowel diseases has been put down to "poor diet, lack of sunlight and low levels of Vitamin D." (Not 'looking' here either!!)
Dramatic increase in hospitalization of US children with inflammatory bowel disease

June 25, 2013: University Hospitals Case Medical Center
The largest investigation to date has found a dramatic increase in hospitalizations for children with inflammatory bowel disease during the past decade in the US. The study found a 65 percent increase in IBD hospital discharges from 2000 - 2009.

Rapid rise in Scots children with bowel diseases

An increasing number of children in Scotland are being diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease, a new Edinburgh study shows.

Researchers said a rise in cases, up by more than 75% in the past 13 years, could be due to poor diet, lack of sunlight and low levels of Vitamin D.
Autism Cases on the Rise; Reason for Increase a Mystery

Scientists are scouring genetic and evironmental data to find a cause for the rise in autism.
WebMD Feature Archive By Kathleen Doheny
WebMD Feature Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD
The number of children diagnosed with autism or related disorders has grown at what many call an alarming rate. In the 1970s and 1980s, about one out of every 2,000 children had autism.

For Politics Buff

You've been caught lying, making a false claim about O'Leary and now covering up. The Hornig paper did in fact discover two cases one autistic one control, but yes the group was very differently selected. Given the damage that had been done to Wakefield's reputation by Deer it is not surprising that he was hors de combat by the time Omnibus hearing came up, but so what? As to the substance of the evidence of Bustin at the Cedillo hearing:

Politics Buff

I can see you that you are not a scientist. The language that was used in the PLOS O'Leary paper is what is used when an author flails around trying to explain why he now gets different results than he did previously. Are you really seriously believing that the Royal Free children were so unique that the results could not be reproduced with a larger sample of children at a later date? Because that is what he is saying. He suggests that "Other factors to consider include differences in patient age, sex, origin (Europe vs. North America), GI disease, recency of MMR vaccine administration at time of biopsy, and methods for confirming neuropsychiatric status in cases and controls."

So, MMR causes measles virus in the gut in European children but not North American children? Really? Or MMR causes measles virus in the gut only when children are diagnosed in Europe, but not when they are diagnosed in North America? Why don't you believe Chadwick? He testified. Under oath. Why didn't Wakefield? The petitioners could have called him at any time. They didn't. That speaks volumes. You might want to watch this video which explains how the results were originally cooked:

Jenny Allan

Politics Buff says:-
"Let's be clear about this. Even if Wakefield did discover a novel kind of bowel disease in autistic children (which is far from clear), that proves nothing about the involvement of the MMR vaccine in that bowel disease. Yes, children with autism can have bowel disease. Yes, children without autism can also have bowel disease. This proves nothing about autism causation."

From the 1998 Wakefield et al Lancet paper (Quote-emphasis mine)):-
"WE DID NOT PROVE prove an association between measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described.
.....IF THERE IS A CAUSAL LINK between measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and this syndrome, a rising incidence might be anticipated after the introduction of this vaccine in the UK in 1988. Published evidence is inadequate to show whether there is a change in incidence or a link with measles, mumps and rubella vaccine."

That paper was published 16 years ago and there is certainly a well documented subsequent 'rising incidence' of both autism and child bowel disorders in the UK. Note Wakefield and Politics buff are saying more or less the same thing, albeit 16 years apart.
How much longer can the politico/medico/corporate establishments going to keep denying this epidemic and its causation?

John Stone

John Fryer

Regarding Horton:


@ LTR-

Apologies for my error!

Thanks Bendetta for the catch.

John Fryer

The Lancet paper by the Royal Free was a small scale study on a dozen children and could never be taken as deciding anything.

The horror by which it was received by the medical and government interests shows that any mention of vaccine problems will never be tolerated even when here the authors distanced themselves from the link made by 8 of the 12 parents of the slide to autism just AFTER their childs MMR vaccine.

I find the decade long crucifiction by a journalist (arent they supposed to report and study events and not change them) and the 18 months study by a professor on the shortcomings of the university he trained at, rather disproportionate to the lightweight set of clinical reports which could have taken a hundred times less effort than put into dismantling it. They have been repeated many times and with more cases by some of the same researchers.

Richard Horton is to me very fair and has been attacked as savagely as others in this matter and his retraction if you read his book was almost beyond his means to prevent it.

The link of MMR to autism is clearly explicit in this book if you read between the lines.

Stella Chess decades ago found a huge link of rubella live virus and autism. The link is an amazing 1 000 fold or at the level of 7 per cent or so.

Today, every child gets repeat rubella live virus attenuated for safety and the current levels of autism are at 1 per cent or thereabouts.

Lets say ten times less with exposures direct at 12 months or so or indirectly by shedding to the mother to be.

I find the risk of autism from wild and attenuated species of virus to cause concern far more than it cant be related; which is the best yet seen by me.

Viruses evidently do launch people into neurological problems so why the hurry to subject babies to viruses at ever earlier ages?

The work of Stella Chess has not been repeated, so stands alone almost as the clue to the autism rise in recent years.

At the time the link was noted, the autism rate of 1 case per 10 000 or so made it a disease almost unknown to the public.

Since the introduction of rubella virus for all UK babies in 1988 the rates of autism have steadily and increasingly risen; arguably a hundredfold or so.

It is noted that the over diagnosis of autism was a serious accusation made even those decades ago. No change here.

Are other viruses capable of neurologic harm? Evidently there are both proofs and accusations, although the link of smallpox to autism once found, is hopefully of histroic interest today.

When can we hope the 1 000 fold link of rubella and autism may be the same?

Or do we just give the whole world rubella live virus and thank God for the 1 per cent autistic infants that we get by saving the world from rubella harm by denying the very same rubella harm in 2014 that was noted once decades ago.

For Politics Buff

Politics Buff

"There was never any measles virus present in those samples. Even O'Leary admits that."

No -a lie. In the Hornig follow up paper (of which O'Leary was a co-author) it states:

"Our results differ with reports noting MV RNA in ileal biopsies of 75% of ASD vs. 6% of control children...Discrepancies are unlikely to represent differences in experimental technique because similar primer and probe sequences, cycling conditions and instruments were employed in this and earlier reports; furthermore, one of the three laboratories participating in this study performed the assays described in earlier reports. Other factors to consider include differences in patient age, sex, origin (Europe vs. North America), GI disease, recency of MMR vaccine administration at time of biopsy, and methods for confirming neuropsychiatric status in cases and controls."

So, there was persistent measles virus (commonly in the Royal Free cases) but it was not exclusively associated with autistic cases. It would be wrong, however, to make the assumption that this was not significant pathology for those sick children who had it (autistic or not).

As to Chadwick, I don't believe him. Supposing this evidence had been given to the GMC rather than the US "vaccine court" he would have had to be able to stand up to cross-examination from Wakefield's attorney. We also note the strange behaviour of Prof Bjarnason who waited until the day the GMC hearing was over to level accusations against Wakefield and colleagues in BMJ Rapid Responses.

Of course, this was a whole lot safer than making the allegations as a prosecution witness.


Thank you, John Stone, for your constant advocacy and knowledge.

Politics Buff

@Benedetta. There was never any measles virus present in those samples. Even O'Leary admits that. And a student involved in the testing swore under oath during the Autism Omnibus that he had been pressured to change the results he had obtained.

Let's be clear about this. Even if Wakefield did discover a novel kind of bowel disease in autistic children (which is far from clear), that proves nothing about the involvement of the MMR vaccine in that bowel disease. Yes, children with autism can have bowel disease. Yes, children without autism can also have bowel disease. This proves nothing about autism causation.


Thank you, Benedetta. I posted exactly once in this entry. It was an honest question in regards to studies that I could look at in regards to autism / bowel disease / mmr, etc. I assure you I was not moving any goal posts. It appears you mistook me for someone else or you are otherwise confused. I only point this out since I try to comment using one pseudonym. :) I would hate for anyone to be confused about my intentions going forward. That said, I have not had a chance to read any of the links or studies posted yet but I appreciate those of you who posted in regards to my question.


...and the saga continues...and our children are still suffering.

Elizabeth Gillespie



Long Time Reader didn't move the goal post or write that post --- it was Politic Buff - who has been on here before that likes to ask us seemly wise and misleading and who cares questions.

Add Politic Buff's question to my list -- see below.


From LTR:

"Can someone elaborate on these studies that are now showing up that lend credence to the Lancet article? Links?"

My post:

LTR moved the goal posts:


The PLOS paper does not make a connection between MMR and IBD in autistic children."

LTR is a vaccine injury enabler. S/he is more interested in playing semantic games than in truth. The truth is that Lancet 1998 identified a novel new form of gut disease in children with autism who presented at Royal Free. The PLOS paper supports the conclusion that autism is associated with a unique form of gut disease. The Lancet 1998 paper specifically states there is no proof of an association between MMR and ASD.

LTR, like Brian "Those KIds Din't Have Bowel Disease" Deer is all about denying proper medical attention to mostly children suffering an agonizing, treatable condition.


Politics Buff:
---- A NOVEL type of inflammation in a weird place was found in kids with autism at the Royal ---

Hurry let us change the subject hrry - hurry - hurry.
Yes, let us make a list.

1.) just diarrhea
2.) just constipation
3.) money was given because of law suits to Dr. Wakefield
4.) Dr Wakefield was unethical cause he did spinal taps
5.) Dr. Wakefield was unethical cause he collected blood for the controls as his son's birthday party
6.)Dr. Wakefield was inventing his very own vaccine.
7.) Dr. Wakefield was claiming vaccines caused autism before there was vaccine given -- well I can't grasp that one -- something about medical records - said something aout ear infections before vaccines but when we go back through the literature ???? It just is not so.

I am sure I have left out some other stuff

But in the end;
Dr. Wakefield found a novel type of gut inflammation and the measles virus was present.

For Politics Buff

The point about the 1998 Wakefield Lancet paper - apart from the fact that it was properly conducted - is that it raised important issues which have had longevity in spite of establishment hostility including the autism-gut axis and the reality that vaccines cause brain damage, including autistic symptoms, seizures etc. Another issue is persistent measles virus which does not seem to be purely associated with autism. But the big problem the medical establishment, British and US governments had was that Wakefield was looking at a sub-group of vaccine damaged children, and if he was allowed to do that, where would it end?

Politics Buff


The PLOS paper does not make a connection between MMR and IBD in autistic children. It shows that some children with autism have IBD, and some children without autism have IBD, but that there are some differences between those two groups.

No one denies that some kids with autism have IBD. No one denies that some kids without autism have IBD. Wakefield's work suggested that there was a temporal link between MMR vaccination and the symptoms of autism, and that there were bowel abnormalities in those children. It's that temporal link that is missing from the PLOS paper.

Christina Waldman

In general, criticizing or putting pressure on a powerful judge or court to hasten their Decision is a bad idea. Better the right decision in due time than to risk offending, I'd suggest.

Some links for LongTime Reader

This btw is Ginger Taylor's list of studies linking vaccines with autism (although this was not a aclaim of the Wakefield 1998 Lancet paper


@ LTR-

Is that recent enough for you? It is based on a tissue bank of over 2000 samples taken from the bowels of ASD kids, independently biopsied, confirmed for IBD, and stored at Wake Forest University. The IBD is confirmed by electron microscopic examination down to the molecular level.

@ John Stone-

Yes the hideous reptile has emerged. He really hates that Nature article, and he hates the video showing him sneering, "Those children don't have bowel disease" at a picture of a kid who had most of his colon removed due to IBD. I encourage anyone interested in vaccine justice to post those two items far and wide.

BMJ, Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and NIH have inextricably linked their own credibility to that of Brian Deer. These groups tout him to be a trusted expert on immunizations. No wonder vaccine hesitancy is growing stronger by the day.

Deer's obvious flaws make an easy argument to demonstrate the level of criminal incompetence of the vaccine establishment. Brian Deer: lied about filing the GMC complaint; lied to patients of Royal Free; obtained confidential medical records without authorization; and lied that children with IBD did not have gut disease in contradiction of expert medical opinion and testimony. He is the perfect useful idiot for the vaccine establishment, and the play him like a fiddle.

Deer's inaccurate nonsense is the direct, root cause for at least a decade delay in evidence based medicine (there's an oxymoron!) recognizing the clear, indisputable association between IBD and ASD.

Some links for LongTime Reader

Godfrey Wyl
"Sooo, what is your alls guess of why is it taking so long --a year; already -- for this court in Texas to make their decision?"

In 2013, the average civil appeal in Texas was disposed 8.3 months after filing, but that includes simple appeals. With the TCPA being relatively untested, it is likely that there will be some precedential weight to the ruling. The Third Court of Appeals is still disposing of cases from 2011.

There are three main issues, which break into as many as 13 pieces. Appellants also filed a post-submission brief and exhibits in January, as is their prerogative. The court is under no obligation to consider these, but if they do, it will represent a further delay.

There will be some motivation to rule by the end of August, which concludes the court's fiscal year.

Jeannette Bishop

For LongTimeReader:

Perhaps others have a more recent compilation, but this seems pretty thorough ...


"The Lancet published it first.
They retracted it after a long while.
But more studies are showing up all over the world that agree with the Lancet article."

Can someone elaborate on these studies that are now showing up that lend credence to the Lancet article? Links?

John Stone


Thankfully, it is not the original judge who is reviewing her own decision in which she cited a law but failed to give any explanation of why it applied in this instance (obviously a great parallel with the absence of reasoning of the ombudsman at the Lancet and indeed the panel at the GMC).

Of course, it is frustrating that court has not yet returned but I guess they deserve the benefit of the doubt at least until they do.


Sooo, what is your alls guess of why is it taking so long --a year; already -- for this court in Texas to make their decision?

Isn't the judges' husband tied to the pharmaceutical/medical industry in some way? If this is the case my guess would be she and hubby are trying to find someway to dismiss Wakefields suit that will not be overturned on an appeal or create circumstances that will prevent Wakefield from going to a higher court. If hubby has ties she wouldn't want to make it so obvious. She also has to be thinking about blow back because Dr. Wakefield has a growing numbers of supporters in the US. Twitter, Instagram and Facebook have become powerful means of communicating all around the world and I'm sure being the lead story on every Vaccine Choice website with instructions on how to send her a message is attention she doesn't want. This is what I suggested to Jake on his site this morning. Writing campaign to Dr. Wisia Wedzicha to reinstate Dr. Wakefields Lancet paper.


Sooo, what is your alls guess of why is it taking so long --a year; already -- for this court in Texas to make their decision?
Are they really making a study of it? It is hard to tease the truth out of lies - especially if lies are told by institutions. Trusted government institutions.
Perhaps the hoe that in a year - we all lose interest?
Perhaps the court is waiting to see if the masses rise up out the mire or---- not -and then decide what side of the fence is the safest to land on?

I do hope and pray that they are studying on it.

John Stone


It would be good to think of him having to answer the questions of a proper attorney in a Texas court room. He certainly can't/won't answer the questions in BMJ (indeed they refused to publish most of them).



It would be good to think Deer has lost his gob for good and cant answer anyone ever again..and we all lived happily ever after...



The Lancet published it first.
They retracted it after a long while.
But more studies are showing up all over the world that agree with the Lancet article.

This has to be hard - A scientific journal wants to claim it printed discoveries to help man kind - other wise they are just like any ol'e magazine - telling women when going on a date to talk about what the man is interested in -- 12 beauty steps to healhier skin---

On the other hand when you are reporting really important stuff you might find you are up againest the owerful

Can't have have it both ways - it just don't work.


The Lancet and Dr. Wezdicha = no accountability whatsoever.

John Stone


Yes, I did follow Jake up on this this morning writing to Dr Wedzicha. The obvious problem is that she did not provide any explanation for her decision for disregarding the High Court finding. As a result we do not know on what grounds the Lancet are resisting restoring the paper.


This is Jake Crosby's latest post to his website, "Autism Investigated," and it's absolutely relevant to your article today.

Jake's email correspondence with the Lancet's new ombudsman, Dr. Wisia Wedzicha, should be shared far and wide, as it fully exposes the Lancet's cover-up.

It's long past time for AoA and Jake to repair whatever went wrong between them.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

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

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

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

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

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

Your Information

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