The Saga of Andy Wakefield Continues…

The recent attacks against Dr. Andrew Wakefield for undisclosed business dealings are the latest battles in an apparent collusion by some segments of Big Pharma, orthodox or allopathic medicine, and governments to take down Andy Wakefield in what will become a failed attempt to preserve the current international vaccine agenda.

As the January 13, 2011, New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM)Perspective article entitled “The Age-old Struggle against the Antivaccinationistsby authors Dr. Gregory Poland and Dr. Robert Jacobson points out, opposition to vaccination is a long-standing battle.

Nothing shows this more clearly and effectively than the book, Horrors Of Vaccination Exposed And Illustrated: Petition To The President To Abolish Compulsory Vaccination In Army And Navy, written in 1920 by Charles Michael Higgins for which Google reports over a million (1,070,000) search results.

We learn that there are over one hundred (100) books known to be in circulation espousing concerns over vaccines and vaccinations, the listings for which can be seen at: (http://vactruth.com/vaccine-books/).

After a reading of much of this literature, one finds oneself in almost complete disagreement with the above NEJM authors.  Their conclusion of safety is not supported by facts as this writer reads them.

While it is easy to agree with some of Poland’s and Jacobson’s solutions, they are clearly “a day late and a dollar short.”   One is struck by the apparent naivety of these authors and their lack of exposure to data that have long convinced many of the dangers of our present vaccination schedule and program.

It is not reasonable to conclude, as they have, that “…none of the antivaccinationists’ claims of widespread injury from vaccines have withstood the tests of time and science” particularly when autism—now a virtual epidemic—has been proven causative and/or contributory in courts of law via a growing number of documented cases.

Regarding ‘follow the money’ pursuits, it should be noted that making money is a good thing.  It is HOW one makes money––whether through honest contribution to the betterment of life, or at the expense of others––and HOW one uses money that are important.

Nothing in this writer’s reading of the latest circus of media papers changes beliefs about the character of Dr. Wakefield.  Rather, it raises more concern about the motives, knowledge and/or naivety of Dr. Wakefield’s attackers.

In that context, having scanned the latest “journalistic” attacks upon Wakefield for “undisclosed business deals,” which accuse Wakefield of intention to profit on a new vaccine of his design, one is loath to understand why we’ve yet to hear mainstream media attacks upon Dr. Paul Offit, the physician who writes books in support of vaccines while earning “lottery” style profits from the Rotateq vaccine he co-created with Children’s Hospital of Pennsylvania (CHOP) to ‘immunize’ against Rotavirus.

What’s going on here?

At this site: (http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/02/voting…) please note authors Dan Olmsted’s and Mark Blaxill’s commentary:  …the extraordinary valuation placed on CHOP’s patents [$182 million sale to Royalty Pharma] raise concerns over Offit’s use of his former position on the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to help create the market for rotavirus vaccine — to effectively vote himself rich. [Offit’s earnings estimated between $29 & 55 million]

Further the authors note:  The $29 million-$55 million range is consistent not only with CHOP’s published royalty arrangements but with typical medical patent standards:

–At Boston Children’s Hospital, inventors get 25% of “net lifetime revenues” for all income over $500,000. For royalty amounts smaller than $500,000 inventors receive 45-100% of revenues.

– At Arkansas Children’s Hospital, inventors get 35% of “net royalties” after the first $200K and 50% before that.

– At the University of Virginia, inventors get 15% of “total royalty income” over $1 million and a sliding scale of 25-50%for amounts smaller than that.

– At the University of California, inventors get 35% of “net royalties.” [Emphasis added]

Physicians and hospitals often profit from medical patents, as you can see, so why witch-hunt about Dr. Wakefield’s purported business deals, if there were any?

It is noteworthy that the authors of this NEJM paper have reported many significant conflicts of interest in their disclosure forms, which one must account in evaluating their objectivity. We all make money from our work, so attacking Andy Wakefield for such possible endeavor but not Offit, Poland, and Jacobson makes no sense and merely ‘argumentum ad hominum’ [attacks against a person]. In my view, it is motive and distortion of truth, which are the ‘smell tests’ for the ‘conflict of interest’ issues.

Getting caught up in fallacious ‘argumentum ad hominem’ does nothing to advance the investigation and safety assessment of vaccines.  Rather than directing more attention to the circumstances of Andy Wakefield, we need to return our focus to children’s health.  Passion, in this context, needs to be first for children’s health, and secondarily, vaccine safety with somewhere trailing down the line––vaccine efficacy.  Attacking or defending Andy Wakefield or Paul Offit does not clarify the role of vaccines in either health or disease.  It just makes for salacious accusations.

Following this ‘rabbit-hole-to-nowhere’ blame game is completely off-point.  If ‘following the money’ demonstrates Andy Wakefield to be lacking in character (which this writer seriously doubts), then so-be-it.  Then, let’s “follow the money” for all who profit from the productions, sales, distribution and injecting of vaccines.

In a video detailing much of circumstances surrounding this media “feeding frenzy”, parents of the twelve children cited in the withdrawn Lancet article, were overwhelmingly supportive of Dr. Wakefield.  The parents spoke about other doctors having failed to properly investigate their children’s symptoms and directing open hostility to them because of these parents insistence on the association of their children’s problems with vaccines. (http://www.viddler.com/explore/ziggy/videos/1)

These were the parents’ assertions, and not Wakefield’s as Brian Deer has charged. Wakefield merely reiterated the parents’ statements. This is a key fact that Dr. Wakefield’s persecutors are neglecting, intentionally or not. Hearing the moms recount their stories leaves little doubt of their veracity. These truths turned the parents and Dr. Wakefield into pariahs by the medical industry.

In the video one of the parents of Wakefield’s Lancet 12–– meaning the twelve children reported in the withdrawn Lancet article–– reads a very moving letter that the parents prepared collectively to share their defense, deep appreciation, and respect for Dr. Andy Wakefield.  Nonetheless, criticizing vaccines appears to result in a virtual political holocaust, as is clearly seen by what is happening to Wakefield.

Do not, however, lose heart…“the truth shall set us free.”  Many are working tirelessly to prove the ‘age-old’ case of how vaccines contribute to the now epidemic of diseases and disorders that have risen in tandem with vaccines escalating use.  Let’s just hope clarity comes before any more of our children are damaged.

* * *

*BREAKING NEWS––(The BIG Lie II – British Medical Journal Caught Out – Wakefield Fraud Allegations Based On Incorrect Information)

Posted on January 16, 2011––Fascinating information about Wakefield’s persecutor, Brian Deer

PS: Addendum: THERE ARE MANY NON VACCINE SOLUTIONS to both infectious and non infectious disease. TAKE HEART IN THIS WONDERFUL, MIRACULOUS STORY…

This commentary from the October 29, 2010 article on mercola.com, details an amazing story of a man dying from a bodily shut down due to a severe case of H1N1 influenza.

IV Vitamin C’s Swine Flu Success Story

IV vitamin C made headlines last year when the compelling story of Allan Smith, a man conventional doctors claimed “could not survive” after contracting a severe case of swine flu, hit the airwaves.

Allan’s family refused to accept the hospital’s hopeless prognosis and the subsequent decision to turn off his life support. Instead, his family insisted the hospital try high-dose IV vitamin C.

Initially the hospital refused, saying they “didn’t think it would work,” until the family enlisted a top legal expert to fight for their right to have vitamin C administered.

What makes this story even more remarkable is the fact that once admitted to the hospital with swine flu, Allan was also diagnosed with leukemia, which dramatically worsened his chances of recovery.

Well, not only did the vitamin C cure Allan’s swine flu infection, but after spending nine weeks in an induced coma, he walked out of physical rehab after 13 days as opposed to the predicted three months.

Even more astounding, just over a year later, he also has no further signs of leukemia … (http://articles.mercola.com/sites…)

You can watch a video of this story entitled, Allan Smith’s Recovery from Swine Flu and Hairy Cell Leukemia Documented on TV3′s 60 Minutes Programme [sic] here: (http://www.3news.co.nz/Living-Proof-Vitamin-C…) and more… (http://www.3news.co.nz/Vitamin-C…)

This writer authored an article, entitled The Gift of Vitamin C, which you can read at: (http://www.orthomolecular.org/libr…)

Support change. If you find the information worthy, send it on.

Laraine C. Abbey RN, CNS (retired)
Nurse-Clinical Nutritionist
Health, and Vaccine Safety Advocate
Founder/President
BetterFoodForBetterKids.org

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention The Saga of Andy Wakefield Continues… - Vactruth.com -- Topsy.com

  • Mehta

    Well, the opinion of the professors at my university is different. While, there might be relation between Autism and Vaccines. The research by Wakefield isn’t 100% accurate. Mutliple professors have shown the mistakes in the data, etc.

  • http://BetterFoodForBetterKids.org Laraine Abbey

    Mehta, You didn’t read the article. Your comment makes no sense in that it does not relate to any points in the article. Further it is obvious you never read Wakefields original paper either. Please send the name of the university and
    names of the professors you refer, plus a list of the “mistakes” and I will attempt to respond to you and them.
    You can contact me at [email protected]

  • George Gouskos

    First and foremost, I would like to say that I have read your article and have insolently come to the conclusion that you should rename your site “vaclies.com”.

    The underlying inuendo in your article is that the only motive to research and develop vaccines against deadly viruses is the profit motive. Would you happen to have the asterik like scar on your left shoulder? Would you know what it is there for? Do you know that as late as the 20th century smallpox killed, yes killed, anywhere from 300,000,000 to 500,000,000 worlwide? As many as 2,000,000 in 1967 alone, before it was finally eradicated in 1979.

    The attack on Andrew Wakefield is clearly on his methods. The fact that that the ileoscopies on those children on record at the Royal Free hospital showed “no abnormal condition” or the clear documentation of issues with the majority of these children prior to the vaccine does not ring any alarm bells?

    I would clearly advise you to pay careful attention about what you say and write with regards to respected doctors and immunologists such as Dr. Paul Offit. Barbara Loe Fisher had smeared The well respected doctor with many lies before he actually referred to her as “she lies” in a televiaion interview. She tried in vain to sue Dr. Offit and the case never even went to trial and was thrown out of court.

    Why was Andrew Wakefield’s lawsuit against Brian Deer and the London Times thrown out of court as well? Very simple; the evidence is staggerring against him.

    Get your facts straight with regards to the history of immunization. here in Montreal, Canada at the beginning of the 20th century, 45 out of 100 children would not live to see the age of 5 because of rampant disease and it was no better anywhere else in North America.

    Insolently yours,

    George

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    George,

    Thanks for reading the article. Please tell us where you got the numbers from — and then perhaps you can elucidate why we saw a dramatic decline in diseases in which we have no vaccine at all, for example scarlet fever.

    Thanks.

    Jeffry John Aufderheide

  • Christina England
  • http://www.catherinejfrompovich.com Catherine J Frompovich

    With regard to gentleman George’s comment, perhaps he is not as well informed as he ought to
    be with regard to the statistical data about vaccines/vaccinations. There are numerous well respected
    journals and other research documents that show the ineffectiveness of vaccines. Below are a few examples:

    Figure 28: Measles Vaccine & Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
    This chart shows the relationship between Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn’s Disease in Unvaccinated versus Vaccinated children. Source: The Lancet (1995)
    Since the chart didn’t copy onto this site, the data show vaccinated children experienced almost ten times the occurrences of these diseases as do children who are not vaccinated.

    These two charts illustrate data from Centers for Disease Control MMWR and the journal Pediatrics just how effective vaccinations are in the vaccinated population: Over 90% of those vaccinated contracted the very disease for which they were vaccinated. Again, these charts did not copy onto this site. The data show that
    92% of those vaccinated for mumps contracted mumps [CDC MMWR]; and 97% of those vaccinated for chickenpox contracted chickenpox [Pediatrics Journal].

    So, really how effective are vaccines in preventing diseases? Currently research is indicating that vaccines are
    implicated in childhood diabetes and childhood chronic diseases. Interesting? So why all the huff and puff
    about something that may be doing more harm than good, as opposed to really being scientific about finding
    out why today’s children are so doggone sick.

  • http://www.catherinejfrompovich.com Catherine J Frompovich

    For those who doubt any ‘skulduggery’ involved in the Andrew Wakefield
    saga, please check out this web site http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/766/149/
    wherein it states:

    “BMJ & Lancet Wedded to Merck CME Partnership
    Monday, 14 February 2011
    Why did the BMJ fail to disclose its partnership agreement with Merck, major vaccine manufacturer–13 vaccines, including the controversial MMR vaccine ?

    “Is it just conceivably possible, that the BMJ’s decision to commission and publish Brian Deer’s series of articles attacking Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s personal and scientific integrity–and lend its unwavering editorial endorsement–without giving him an opportunity to defend himself–might be influenced by a SIGNIFICANT financial conflict of interest?

    “The discovery that a psychiatry textbook penned by two influential academics who gained notoriety, was actually ghostwritten shocked Dr. David Kessler, former commissioner of the FDA, who called it “a new level of chutzpah [that] takes your breath away.”

    “How about the discovery that in 2008, the pharmaceutical giant, Merck–using its tradename, MSD signed a partnership agreement with the BMJ Group that effectively gave the company control of 350 interactive continuing medical education courses in over 20 medical therapy areas?

    “This unique partnership will change the face of medical education in Europe and beyond, allowing users access to most of BMJ Learning’s library of ‘Continuing Medical Education’ (CME) and ‘Continuing Professional Development’ (CPD) content. The agreement between MSD and BMJ Group comprises about 350 interactive learning courses in over 20 medical therapy areas.”
    Why did the BMJ fail to disclose its partnership agreement with Merck?

    “Why did the BMJ conceal from readers– of the Brian Deer series of articles and the BMJ editorial excoriating Dr. Andrew Wakefield, charging him with deliberate fraud and financial conflict of interest– the fact that the BMJ had a partnership with Merck, a major manufacturer of vaccines–including the MMR vaccine, which is at the center of the Wakefield controversy?”

    Question: Shouldn’t everyone be dealing from the top of the deck?

  • Laraine Abbey-Katzev

    What opinions from what professors? and…Please specify what “research” in the Wakefield paper is “inaccurate”. To research means investigate, explore, study, experiment. Accuracy applies to the results of research and the claims made about the research. Without providing the “mistakes” you claim are in the data, I can’t respond. Frankly, when you don’t know what you are talking about, its better not to comment. You don’t need to parrot someone else’s foolery. Just because they are professors, doesn’t mean they know what they are talking about on this issue.

    I repeat, you did not read Andy Wakefield’s paper.


Vaccines Exposed!