The Gloves Are On For Dr. Andrew Wakefield

Dr. Andrew Wakefield isn't taking the allegations against him lightly.

The ‘gloves’ are on with Dr. Andrew Wakefield in one corner, and Brian Deer, the British Medical Journal (BMJ), and Dr. Fiona Godley in the other corner!

Andrew Wakefield, as plaintiff is not about to take the destruction of his reputation lying down.

Quoting from petition to the court in Travis County, Texas we find “charges made by the defendants that Dr. Wakefield fraudulently and intentionally manipulated or falsified data or diagnoses in the Lancet paper are false.”  “…Defendants [Deer, BMJ et al] knowingly and with actual malice, misrepresented information, data and diagnoses, for the purpose of creating the false impression that it was Dr. Wakefield who had manipulated or altered data and diagnoses.”

Further, the Petition states, “On a January 5, 2011 the Defendants published their article entitled Secrets of the MMR Scare: How the Case Against the MMR Vaccine was Fixed, authored by Brian Deer (Exhibit A).  This article contains numerous false and misleading statements concerning Plaintiff, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, which constitute libel per se and per quod.  Examples of the defamatory statements in this article include the following: “ The petition to the court goes on enumerating details of the case.

I have followed this situation from inception and personally am convinced that Dr. Wakefield is a hero embroiled in a current–life David and Goliath story.  Dr. Wakefield is up against the most powerful (and I believe, evil) forces of our time in the form of the pharmaceutical/medical industry.  I pray for him to prevail.  But win or lose, I personally wish to thank him for the gift of light and truth he is bringing forward in service of us all, and especially for the many damaged children of our time that I personally know to be wrought by vaccines.

You can read in the PDF petition in its entirety as follows:

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/01/04/BritMedJ.pdf

 

Photo Credit: Generation Bass

  • Russell Blaylock,M.D.

    When the accused fails to respond to a charge as serious as the ones attributed to Dr. Wakefield, it implies guilt to the public at large. I think Andrew has taken the proper course. I have spoken to him in private concerning this case and feel confident he will be vindicated. It is interesting how this has all come about. The perpetrators of this medical disaster, the pharmaceutical makers of vaccines, knew that a great number of well-respected researchers were raising serious concerns over vaccines and finding possible links to autism and that the public would be convinced that there were serious problems with vaccines. By implying that the entire case for vaccine-induced neurodevelopmental problems was based on the work of one person, Andrew Wakefield, all that was necessary was that they slander that person. If they could make the public believe that the entire case of vaccine-induced autism was fraudulent by destroying the reputation of the implied sole person making the claim, they could end all criticism. It also intimidated other scientists who feared similar treatment. When Wakefield proves his case, those who conspired to destroy his reputation should not only pay heavy monetary cost, but should also face long terms in prison.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dawnpapple Dawn Babcock Papple

    Thank you for this wonderful write up. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/dawnpapple Dawn Babcock Papple

    Thank you for this wonderful write up. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/dawnpapple Dawn Babcock Papple

    Thank you for this wonderful write up. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/dawnpapple Dawn Babcock Papple

    Thank you for this wonderful write up. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/dawnpapple Dawn Babcock Papple

    Thank you for this wonderful write up. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/dawnpapple Dawn Babcock Papple

    Thank you for this wonderful write up. 

  • Rothmanrain

    I think he has a defense fund. PLEASE let everyone know so we can give to him!!!

    Danielle

  • Argus

    Andy’s reputation was already long destroyed before last year’s article in the BMJ.  So it’s hard to see how he would be able to prove any damages in this action.
    If it even gets that far.  Jurisdiction is likely to be a problem since the parties he sued have no connection to Texas and aren’t even U.S. citizens.  He filed in state court rather than federal court.
    It’s almost as if he wants to have the suit thrown out – then he never has to go through that pesky discovery process – which in the past has ended up exposing even more of his misdeeds.  And he won’t have to risk being censured by a judge and having to pay his opponent’s legal expenses – like what happened when he tried a similar suit in Britain. (And that was before he had his medical license revoked)
     I wonder if the real purpose of this filing is to whip up his supporters and get them to donate to his legal fund.  Will the money be given back if the case doesn’t proceed?

  • Anonymous

    Having read the broad outline of the situation and case, I was astonished to hear a radio broadcast purporting to ‘examine’ the case against Wakefield. Licking Deer practically to death by intonating that he was a ‘peoples’ hero’ (well almost) accompanied a brief and somewhat belligerant interview with Dr Wakefield or his representative which was very well put. I wish him every success and hope that this Deer gets well and truly caught in the glare of truth’s headlights. Nasty little you know what.

  • Argus

    “. . . hope that this Deer gets well and truly caught in the glare of truth’s headlights.”

    You mean like already happened to Andy?

    The truth about Wakefield’s actions is already out there – though it took some time to expose.
    And he has gotten what he deserves.

    Brian Deer has nothing to fear.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OKDIKZN4FA6AVPCMYASXK6VAA4 joe joe

    Argus, you’re a fool if you think that you will sway someone’s opinion. Yes, Texas has jurisdiction, do you really think that big law firm would take the case if they didn’t see a good chance to win? Dr.Wakefield’s attorney smell blood, that’s why they took the case, just that simple!

  • Laraine Abbey


    There are none so blind as those who cannot see.”

  • C. Patton

    I appreciate Dr. Wakefield’s courage. We need those doctor’s who are willing to take a hard look at the anecdotal evidence and are not afraid to present a “minority report” that runs contrary to the status quo.

  • PatR

    You are a Deer Shill.

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    My bias is that my child was injured by vaccines. I have to ask – have you ever administered, distributed, purchased, tested, etc. a vaccine involved with your profession? I ask because I get the sense you have done so. An honest reply would be appreciated.

    Thanks.

  • Marypat747

    Be assured, Dr. Wakefield, many people are praying for you and your fight to clear your name and get the truth out for the welfare of others.  Thank you

  • Argus

    Well said, Laraine.

    So have you opened your eyes yet to see what this man really is?

    It will not be enough for him to win this case by simply declaring the statements in the BMJ article to be ‘libel’. He will have to first prove they are not true. That’s tough to do when the facts say otherwise.

    This is another reason I do not think this case will ever get to the trial stage. Andy will bail before that and declare victory anyway.

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    My bias is that my child was injured by vaccines. I have to ask – have
    you ever administered, distributed, purchased, tested, etc. a vaccine
    involved with your profession? I ask because I get the sense you have
    done so. An honest reply would be appreciated.

    Thanks.

  • http://twitter.com/CanPatriotSK Heather Martin

    Dr. Wakefields story has managed to permeate into Canada, but has unfortunately become more like a tidbit of gossip rather than an item for serious educated discussion.
    Several public health nurses I have spoken to in recent weeks, who I doubt read any journal articles by Wakefield, or about the surrounding controversy themselves, have slandered Dr. Wakefield when I bring up my objections to vaccinating children.  The powers that be have been 100% effective in their smear campaign against him.  Nurses are more trustworthy than doctors regarding health information and so when nurses are ignorant (and passionately so), how does a layperson stand a chance? 

    I fear the truth will only come once enough casualties have piled up that the facts cannot be ignored. 

    A win by Wakefield will be a quiet victory in the media for sure and you can bet their response will be spin doctored to conclude that “vaccines are completely safe”.

  • http://twitter.com/CanPatriotSK Heather Martin

    People don’t just wake up one morning and say…. “y’know, I think I’ll file a lawsuit so I can whip up support and get people to donate to my legal defence fund”…. Gee what a fun idea!

  • http://twitter.com/CanPatriotSK Heather Martin

    What are you afraid of Argus?  Let the court decide… If you are right then truth will prevail… If you are wrong… then truth will prevail….. There is no downside to this legal action.  Perhaps you want his failure more than you want the truth to come out?

  • Suzysunshine

    Argus, I still ask you to read Andrew Wakefield’s book “Callous Disregard.” You have blinders on and I think you are afraid to seek the truth. I dare you to read the book and comment AFTER you have done so.  If you refuse then your comments will continue to not be taken seriously by this community.  thank you.

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    Argus, please respond. My bias is that my child was injured by vaccines. I have to ask – have you ever administered, distributed, purchased, tested, etc. a vaccine involved with your profession? I ask because I get the sense you have done so. An honest reply would be appreciated.

    Thanks.

  • Argus

    I haven’t said I am afraid of anything.  I said is that the truth is already out and it does not favor Andy.  He can say what he wants outside of a courtroom, but he will not be able to fool a judge.  That’s something for him to be afraid of.
    There is a downside to this legal action . . . for him – unless he bails out before it progresses too far.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1538768549 Erika Light Roberg

    Argus, did you even bother to read the Petition that has been filed by Dr. Wakefield? Have you researched the matter any further than reading about it in mainstream media?

  • Joan of Arc II

    It seems Argus definitely is NOT answering your question that you have posted to him several times, Jeff.  What does that mean.  Fish bait?

  • Catherine J Frompovich

    It seems Argus definitely is NOT answering your question that you have posted to him several times, Jeff.  What does that mean.  Fish bait?

  • Catherine J Frompovich

    It seems Argus definitely is NOT answering your question that you have posted to him several times, Jeff.  What does that mean.  Fish bait?

  • Anonymous

    I’m glad to hear that Dr. Wakefield has filed charges against Brian Deer and the British Medical Journal (BMJ). I always believed that Dr. Wakefield was innocent and that the only purpose of discrediting him was so that the public would continue to believe that the MMR vaccine is safe and that there is no connection between the vaccine and autism. In fact, it is obvious that that was the purpose.
    It has surprised me that the general public has so readily believed the charges against Dr. Wakefield, without investigating the facts.
    I encourage everyone to pray that his lawsuit will be successful, that he will be exonerated, and that it will no longer be possible to keep denying the truth about vaccines and the harm that they cause, and especially the relationship between vaccines and autism. Thousands of parents have seen their child regress into autism after vaccination, usually after receiving the MMR vaccine at about 15 or 18 months of age. To call it a coincidence makes no sense to me.

  • AussieMum

    Argus, see what Australia did with a defamation case lawyers initially thought impossible;

    http://www.aar.com.au/pubs/cmt/fodefdec02.htm

    Mum to vaccine injured son.

  • Argus

    Yes I have read the petition.  And here are the three things that I think are problems with his case.

    1. Lack of jurisdiction in Texas.  The case could get thrown out for this reason without proceeding any further.

    2. Lack of damages.  The complaint claims damages to his reputation and work as a researcher. academic, and physician. But his career in these areas ended years ago – due to – his own behaviour.

    3. The article was published in Great Britain – where there is no First Amendment and the standards for proving libel are much lower.  If the BMJ article was published to withstand this – how can it be expected to be found libelous in the US - where malicious intent must be proven along with falsity.

    It seems very premature to be declaring victory just because this petition has been filed.

    Now, lets hear some thoughts on these three points.  And no more “tests” to decide who is “qualified” to talk about it.

  • Laraine Abbey

    It seems apparent to me that you are a vaccine stakeholder, because you appear bright enough to grasp truth, but are doggedly dodging it.  I believe that any serious student of the original Lancet paper by Wakefield, et al, and Brian Deer’s writings about that paper, can see that Deer is not truthful and makes misrepresentations. The parents of the Lancet article’s children caught him in a variety of lies and and gave many examples of this in videoed interviews (which I also watched).

    These facts are pointed out in Andy’s book “Callous Disregard” which I also read.  After having read it, I went back and re-read the Lancet paper, Deer’s stuff,  and the truth is simply obvious to anyone who pursues it.  Andy is being martyred by a deservedly threatened vaccine industry.  This house of cards is coming down.  Its just a matter of time and the crucifixion of Andy Wakefield can’t stop it.  Even, the failure of his law suit won’t stop it,  since its bigger than Andy Wakefield.

    The failure of the lawsuit, will only mean there is too much money thrown at this by corrupt special interests with their very deep pockets.

    Thanks to my extensive library on the politics of health care, no evil or stupidity arising from special interests and their pals in the government or within the alphabet agencies, is surprising to me.

    So who are you?  Who do you work for?  Big Pharma (in vaccine production) or one of the alphabet agencies such as the ‘Fascist Drug Association’ (FDA), Centers for Deceitful Communication (CDC), or are you Paul Offit in diguise??

  • Laraine Abbey
  • Argus

    You’re right – I’m sure a lot of planning went into this. He took about a year to think about it – then filed just before the statute of limitations on the claim ran out.

  • Argus

    And this proves exactly . . . what? Australian law does not apply in the U.S.

  • Argus

    Then I guess Andy should have filed his case in Australia, where it appears he would not have a jurisdiction problem.

  • Argus

    “The failure of the lawsuit, will only mean there is too much money thrown at this by corrupt special interests with their very deep pockets.”

    Lining up the excuses already?

  • Catherine J Frompovich

    How come you answer Laraine and NOT Jeffry’s question he’s asked several times? Hmmmmm.

  • Catherine J Frompovich

    How come you answer Laraine and NOT Jeffry’s question he’s asked several times? Hmmmmm.

  • Betty Riening

    Wakefield has not the slightest hope of winning. He knows this and his lawyers know it.  He must be praying that it is thrown out on grounds of Texas not having jurisdiction, or as a SLAPP suit (although that may prove expensive).  If  defense is filed, he will face utter ruination, even among his fans.

    This lawsuit has been brought to appease people such as Dr Blaylock, who Wakefield will whine to. “Oh, I tried, but everything was stacked against me.”

    If Wakefield had a case, he would have sued in London.

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    It could possibly be because he has selective eye sight.

  • Lowell

    WHAT??? Say…W..HAT??? Are you kidding; and who do you think you are kidding???? Who are you actually describing? Who are the corrupt special interests??? Describe their corruption in detail, please. I would love to hear that one. And their special interests would be in what? Is that answer anywhere in your self serving mind; one of protection of their children and seeing to it that they are basing health care decisions as to their infants, childs and teens health, on valid science and unbiased truth? And opposed to what? The corrupt self serving interests of pharma, the FDA, CDC, and pediatrics; and oh, and I should not forget to mention the corrupt pharma and CDC connected WHO. Want to talk some more about deep pockets, there Argus?

    The only commenter here right now lining up the very twisted excuses is you, Argus!

    Is it just a coincidence that the name of the newspaper I used to battle it in the replies section as to vaccine related letters, is known as the Argus Leader? The pharma, medical side, and state connected shills used to come in there too; just like you are doing here, with the same endless denial.

    Why can you not answer the questions that have been put to you here, Argus? You keep evading those; and what is the reason? We all know what the obvious reason is; and that is why you were asked the questions in the first place. It is as well not about who is qualified to debate the subject; it is about credibility and identifying who has so much conflict of interest existing that they can not be honest, nor have been honest about anything from square one. All people are doing here is looking for and presenting the real truth, so that decions can be made based on facts, opposed to the garbage and misinformation we are as well continually fed by the corporate controlled mainstream media. Who are the corporations and sources that control the media? Any source that holds a public status as being the experts, be it falsely or for real. Any corporate power as well with the ability to throw large amounts of money at advertizing, and as well lobbying. 

    I ask you Argus? Is it you that actualy represents the corrupt special interests with their deep pockets; or is it the vaccine truth seekers and promoters? Another question, you will likely refuse to answer.

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    Catherine, a possible answer could be a lie of omission. In other words, if he doesn’t answer me, he doesn’t outright admit any involvement with vaccines. Just a hunch. It’s obvious he’s over-compensating on the topic attempting to qualify the rhetoric from a ‘science-based pharmaceutical’ angle.

  • Catherine J Frompovich

    So, answer her, “Who are you?”

  • Laraine Abbey

    Lowell, Argus was quoting me when I spoke of corrupt special interests (perhaps Argus being one of them) and saying I was lining up excuses if Andy should not continue or prevail in his lawsuit.  Its obvious what Argus is because he won’t answer any such comments or questions about who or what he is serving.  I wouldn’t be surprised to found out that Argus is Brian Deer!  He sure sounds like him.

  • Laraine Abbey

    Read my response to Lowell.  I think you are right Jeffry.  Like the Argus of Greek mythology, this Argus character may be “slain by Hermes” too, with Hermes now being the court of vaccine justice.

  • Laraine Abbey

    Are you Brian Deer?

  • Argus

    You are correct, Betty – and another reason Andy is staying away from the courts in Britain is that last time he tried it, he was slapped down. He knows there would be even less tolerance for a second go-round.
    Apparently the Texas anti-SLAPP statute is new. I wonder if he and his lawyers reckoned on that. Like you said, he must be praying it doesn’t get that far.

  • Argus

    It’s flattering that you all think that I am one of the players in this drama.

    I’m just someone who has followed these events with interest over the years.

    There’s no reason to answer questions about who I am or what I do or don’t do for a living; nothing I have said here depends on having expertise or special knowledge.

    Of course, I apparently lack that “special knowledge” of the vast worldwide conspiracy to cover up the truth that Andy is a saint – or I would fall in line instead of pointing out inconsistencies.

  • Tim Kasemodel

    According to the lawer who spearheaded the legislation -
    http://www.foift.org/?page_id=1923

    “The burden of proof is initially on the party who files the Anti-SLAPP motion (DEER, GODLEE, BMJ) to establish (by a preponderance of the evidence) that the lawsuit was filed in response to the exercise of his First Amendment rights.  Then the burden shifts to the plaintiff to establish (by clear and specific evidence) a prima facie case for each essential element of the claim.”I do not believe I have seen any  Anti-SLAPP motion filed by the defendants….

    That statute provides for mandatory fee shifting when a party wins an Anti-SLAPP motion so that the person or entity wrongfully filing a lawsuit must pay the defense costs.  There is a discretionary fee award if the Court finds that the Anti-SLAPP motion was frivolous or brought solely for the purpose of delaying the proceedings.”Perhaps the reason we have not seen the Anti-SLAPP  filing because BMJ knows that they might not have as tight a case as they have many believe……

  • Argus

    I have not heard about any response – through the legal system –  by the defendants to Andy’s lawsuit. I don’t know what the usual timetable is or what deadlines need to be met.
    Until then, we’ll just have to speculate on the possible outcomes.

  • Tim Kasemodel

    You can speculate based on what Brian Deer says.  I will speculate on what Dr. Wakefield says.  I speculate that Deer and the BMJ are counting on the case not being heard, but that it will. 

    I have spent the past 14 years with a child who has the same bowel condition Dr. Wakefield suggested we look further into its causes and treatments, seeing that no main stream gastro doc will stray anywhere near acknowledging my son even has a problem because they fear that they will be the next Wakefield or Krigsman.

    I have read and followed both sides of the issue with the benifit of seeing firsthand that what Dr. Wakefield says is true.  I “speculate” that when Brain Deer is put in front of a good Defense Attorney his ego and inability to control the vitriol will be his end.  He will not be able to answer a simple yes or no question without wanting to twist it the way he needs it to be twisted.  Brian Deer has never had to sit down and answer hard questions “under oath”, by a real judge. 

    Keep in mind that Dr. Wakefield was not in a “real” court in Britain, and he was not “slapped down”, he withdrew his suit, I think for very obvious reasons.

    During the Vioxx investigations it was revealed that the Drug manufacturer said they had to go after their critics “where they live”……     Well, now here is their chance – Dr. Wakefield lives in Texas.

  • Tim Kasemodel

    You can speculate based on what Brian Deer says.  I will speculate on what Dr. Wakefield says.  I speculate that Deer and the BMJ are counting on the case not being heard, but that it will. 

    I have spent the past 14 years with a child who has the same bowel condition Dr. Wakefield suggested we look further into its causes and treatments, seeing that no main stream gastro doc will stray anywhere near acknowledging my son even has a problem because they fear that they will be the next Wakefield or Krigsman.

    I have read and followed both sides of the issue with the benifit of seeing firsthand that what Dr. Wakefield says is true.  I “speculate” that when Brain Deer is put in front of a good Defense Attorney his ego and inability to control the vitriol will be his end.  He will not be able to answer a simple yes or no question without wanting to twist it the way he needs it to be twisted.  Brian Deer has never had to sit down and answer hard questions “under oath”, by a real judge. 

    Keep in mind that Dr. Wakefield was not in a “real” court in Britain, and he was not “slapped down”, he withdrew his suit, I think for very obvious reasons.

    During the Vioxx investigations it was revealed that the Drug manufacturer said they had to go after their critics “where they live”……     Well, now here is their chance – Dr. Wakefield lives in Texas.

  • Laraine Abbey

    Ericka, I think Argus must be one of two categories.  Either a player/stakeholder in the vaccine or related industry OR a very naive individual who is only following mainstream media and believing their pap.  I believe that anyone who reads the original Lancet article and the Deer writings can see that Deer was not truthful.

  • Laraine Abbey

    I meant to state first that I agree with you, and think you are right and wise to point out following mainstream media only, would convince anyone that Andy is heinous individual when those of us who study behind the scenes believe it is Deer who is the heinous individual.

  • Argus

    I don’t know why you say that Wakefield’s previous suit was not before a ‘real’ court in Britain.  True – it never got to the trial phase – because Andy kept stalling and asking for continuances – but after the judge had had enough of this, he wrote a scathing opinion in which he denied any further continuations.  Here’s just one thing he had to say:
    “I am quite satisfied, therefore, that the Claimant wished to extract whatever advantage he could from the existence of the proceedings while not wishing to progress them or to give the Defendants an opportunity of meeting the claims. It seems to me that these are inconsistent positions to adopt. This conduct is a powerful factor to be weighed in the exercise of the court’s discretion in circumstances which are clearly unique.”
       [Case No: HQ05X00900 in the High Court of Justice Queen’s Bench Division]  Sounds real to me!
     Faced with the prospect of having to proceed with proving his case in court, Andy decided it was better to fold and pay his opponent’s legal fees.

  • Shirley Rubin

    We are fortunate, for the sake of our children and grandchildren and beyond, that there are dedicated people like Loraine Katzev who doggedly follow through on health issues that affect future generations despite the pharmaceutical evils perpretrated for profit. It is sad that the diligent work of Wakefield is unfairly and falsely disputed to the detriment of avoidance many cases of autism.

  • Argus

    Here’s another reason we may not have seen any legal reponse from the BMJ and the other defendants – they may not have been served with legal notice yet.
    Apparently last time Wakefield tried the libel route in Britain, he took almost three months to serve the defendants after filing the case. The judge made note of this as just one of several ways Andy was delaying justice in his opinion denying further continuances.

    So are we seing a repeat performance, here?

  • Laraine Abbey

    Ericka, I think Argus must be one of two categories.  Either a
    player/stakeholder in the vaccine or related industry OR a very naive
    individual who is only following mainstream media and believing their
    pap.  I believe that anyone who reads the original Lancet article and
    the Deer writings can see that Deer was not truthful.

    I meant to state first that I agree with you, and think you are
    right and wise to point out following mainstream media only, would
    convince anyone that Andy is heinous individual when those of us who
    study behind the scenes believe it is Deer who is the heinous
    individual.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lowell-Hubbs/1285214003 Lowell Hubbs

    I have followed these events with interest over the years as well, Argus! The only understanding and knowledge you lack, is by your own choice.

    And I proclaim absolutely no conflicts of interest; other than providing information that just may prevent one more child and the family from enduring the needless damage of the current and profit insane CDC vaccine schedule. How about you?

    Perhaps you need to take off your selective vision glasses and put on some real glasses! 

    Documents emerge proving Dr Andrew Wakefield innocent; BMJ and Brian Deer caught misrepresenting the facts
    http://www.naturalnews.com/031116_Dr_Andrew_Wakefield_British_Medical_Journal.html

    The War on Science – The British Medical Journal & Dr. Wakefield, (and explanation of the real time line).
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/12/the-war-on-science-the-british-medical-journal-dr-wakefield.html

    Lancet Boss Failed to Disclose Own Conflicts to Parliament while Denouncing Wakefield
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/03/lancet-boss-failed-to-disclosed-own-conflicts-to-parliament-while-denouncing-wakefield.html?cid=6a00d8357f3f2969e20133ec587000970b

    Sir Crispin Davis and James Murdoch No Longer on GSK Board
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/01/sir-crispin-davis-and-james-murdoch-no-longer-on-gsk-board.html#more

    How the case against the MMR vaccine was fixed
    http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/09/re-how-case-against-mmr-vaccine-was-fixed

    Why the mainstream media won’t conduct an honest, intelligent interview with Dr Wakefield – Dr Wakefield answers to his critics-video
    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/salud/salud_vacunas67.htm#Videos

    Why Medical Authorities Went to Such Extremes to Silence Dr. Andrew Wakefield – video
    http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/04/10/wakefield-interview.aspx

    Dr. Wakefield and the Problem of Pseudo-Courts
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/01/dr-wakefield-and-the-problem-of-pesudo-courts.html#more

    Why the vaccine industry is so desperate to silence dissent
    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/salud/salud_vacunas67.htm

    VACCINE SAFETY CONFERENCE OUTLINES RESEARCH GAPS
    http://www.vaccinesafetyconference.com/index.html

    Research References, (replicating and supporting Dr Andrew Wakefields findings; the studies the CDC refuses to acknowledge exist; cherry picking the science or claiming to the lack of, while doing their CDC funded and bogus epidemiological studies). 
    http://www.callous-disregard.com/research.htm

    A well done analysis of those said epidemiological studies
    http://www.putchildrenfirst.org/index2.html
    http://www.14studies.org/
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/03/the-fallacy-of-thimerosal-removal-autism-increase-a-failure-of-science-a-bigger-failure-to-children-.html

    Gastrointestinal flora and gastrointestinal status in children with autism — comparisons to typical children and correlation with autism severity
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3072352/

    Abnormal Measles-Mumps-Rubella Antibodies and CNS Autoimmunity in Children with Autism
    Vijendra K. Singh, Sheren X. Lin, Elizabeth Newell, Courtney Nelson
    http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=ShowAbstract&ArtikelNr=65007&Ausgabe=228593&ProduktNr=224178

    If it is NOT the vaccines ..Argus, then how is this possible? Reversal of so called autism, while mainstream looks the other way and as well falsely classifying it all as unproven and dangerous treatments. What do they have to offer??? Only more pharmaceutical drugs, and no hope!

    recovering caroline: the journey

    Caroline was born on June 2, 2006 and was a happy, healthy, playful baby… until 6 months of age when she received the DTaP, IPV/OPV, Hep B, PCV7 and a Flu shot all at her 6 month well child visit.  After that, she began exhibiting a shaking behavior any time her excitement or sensations became more than she could process.  Other than that, she was still fairly typical.  She began to babble and was developing a few words… Ma-ma, da-da…the words that touch a parent’s heart.  However, after 12 months of age (and the MMR), she lost them and did not gain any others.

    carolines story – (read more)
    http://www.regardingcaroline.com/history.html

    http://www.regardingcaroline.com/blog.html

    carolines journey to recovery videos, (watch these amazing videos) http://www.regardingcaroline.com/carolinevideo.html

    Autistic Child Fully Recovered with Biomedical Treatment
    http://www.biomedicaltreatmentforautism.com/parent-success-stories/holly-riley/autistic-child-fully-recovered-with-biomedical-treatment/

    Biomedical Treatment For Autism, Dr. Kenneth P. Stoller, MD, FACHM 
    http://www.biomedicaltreatmentforautism.com/

    Autism is Treatable
    http://www.autism.com/

    Chapter 7 
    Immunizations and Autism
    By Dr. William Shaw
    http://www.biologicaltreatments.com/book/ch7.asp

    My letter. April 7, 2009
    http://www.whale.to/vaccine/reversing_autism.html

    Biomedical Treatment in Autism
    http://www.greatplainslaboratory.com/home/eng/autismandpdd.pdf

    If this is all due to in the last 25 years some new trait in faulty genetics in the parents and/or children, Argus; then WHY has not Paul Offit conclusively found that elusive autism gene, no matter how much research money they have thrown at looking for it?

    Impaired Carbohydrate Digestion and Transport and Mucosal Dysbiosis in the Intestines of Children with Autism and Gastrointestinal Disturbances
    http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0024585

    Anti-Vaccine Friendly Doctors
    http://www.novaxdoctors.webs.com/
    http://novaxdoctors.webs.com/doctorlist.htm

    It is NOT just the MMR vaccine, it is all the aluminum adjuvants playing a role in autism as well. Mercury plays a role, and even in utero as per the thimerosal containing and recommended flu vaccines for every pregnant woman. Otherwise Why then has as well has heavy metal detox worked so well in regard to reversal of autism? A three part protocol and process. http://www.drbuttar.com/  

    J Inorg Biochem. 2011 Nov;105(11):1489-99. 
    Epub 2011 Aug 23.
    Mechanisms of aluminum adjuvant toxicity and autoimmunity in pediatric populations.
    Tomljenovic L, Shaw C.

    Neural Dynamics Research Group, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22099159

    Aluminum Toxicity 
    Read more:
    http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/165315-overview

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lowell-Hubbs/1285214003 Lowell Hubbs

    GROW…UP… Argus! 

    If all or most of the claims made by Deer and the GMC concerning Wakefield are found to have been falsified, and they were; and the real FRAUD is revealed; what affect will that have on whatever you are connected to? Specifically speaking as to if that all eventually becomes evident through the major media? 

    Knowing what I clearly know about existing pharmaceutical companies, I am surprised they haven’t taken him out? But oh no, so far he is just been their needed prime example of what happens to you in the medical profession when you question the sanctified vaccine holy water and the rite of passage into the again big pharma profitable world of chronic illnesses, generated by vaccines. 

    It is and was all yet good for them; but now he is in a real court of law; opposed the the kangaroo medical field court they had him in. No bias, no conflict of interest; all information on the table. Sure going to get interesting isn’t it? And tell me one reason WHY you believe he should not have his day being heard in that court, as long as the court legally has and can accept the claim; and which it clearly has?

  • Argus

    To answer your question, I have not stated anywhere that I believe Andy should not get his day in court. I simply pointed out reasons why this suit may not get to trial – and wondered aloud if he really wants it to go that far.  After all, last time he filed a libel suit against Brian Deer, he withdrew it – even though it meant having to pay all the legal expenses of both sides – just because the judge said he couldn’t stall the proceedings any longer and had to move on to the trial phase.  How do you explain that about a guy that supposedly wants to clear his name and seek justice?

  • Argus

    To answer your question, I have not stated anywhere that I believe Andy should not get his day in court. I simply pointed out reasons why this suit may not get to trial – and wondered aloud if he really wants it to go that far.  After all, last time he filed a libel suit against Brian Deer, he withdrew it – even though it meant having to pay all the legal expenses of both sides – just because the judge said he couldn’t stall the proceedings any longer and had to move on to the trial phase.  How do you explain that about a guy that supposedly wants to clear his name and seek justice?

  • Argus

    Weeks have passed and there is news indicating that the defendants in Britain have been formally served with legal notice of the defamation suit.  Is Andy delaying the process here like he did with his previous libel suit?  Strange behavior for someone so anxious to “have his day in court”.

  • Argus

    meant to say ”Weeks have passed and there is *no* news . . .”

  • Lowell Hubbs

    Why would he delay the process? He wants the truth to come out, and this time it will; in the least biased court he can get. If you can not review enough of this mans speeches and statements of fact to determine that much; then all you are interested in is denial, and continuing the MMR damage without Wakefields solid voice for these children. Wake up and pull your blinders off!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lowell-Hubbs/1285214003 Lowell Hubbs

    Please provide a source of your said information. Its not very difficult to find and view the speeches Wakefield has made even in front of the medical profession. It is as well not difficult to find and view the many video taped interviews Wakefield has been called to do. He outlines the information very well, and in any honest mind it should leave very little doubt as to the truth of any existing matters in the case. If you can not determine that his desire for the truth to come out is genuine, then you are not even looking for the actual facts of the case. Why would anyone want to file a legal claim like that and with only an intention of backing out of it later. It would be pointless. Quite obviously if Wakefield is exonerated in real a court of law; you have some sort of vested interest that stands to lose something, there Argus? What would that be?  

  • Argus

    “Please provide a source of your said information.”
    The court document itself: 
    http://briandeer.com/wakefield/eady-judgment.htm

    “Its not very difficult to find and view the speeches Wakefield has made even in front of the medical profession.” He can say whatever he wants in those settings with little fear of consequences. But it is very difficult to find where he has been willing to give testimony under oath. Because then he would have to make a choice between continuing to spin his stories – risking perjury – or telling the truth – and alienating his small band of supporters. In fact we can add to the list of situations where he has avoided giving sworn testimony the first hearing of one of the omnibus vaccine-autism cases in front of the VICP panel in the U.S. Court of Federal Appeals. The day he was supposed to appear as a witness, he was a no-show.
    Look here for information about that:
    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Autism_omnibus_trial

    “Why would anyone want to file a legal claim like that and with only an intention of backing out of it later. It would be pointless.”
    Because that is exactly what he did when he sued Brian Deer et. al. for libel in 2005.  The point is that he wants the publicity of the libel suit and public perception that he is ‘in the right’ without the bother of an actual trial which he will surely lose.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lowell-Hubbs/1285214003 Lowell Hubbs

    It is unknown as to why he didn’t show up, Maybe or perhaps he was not needed and knew he wouldn’t be called. It is an assumption of a wrongful action with no real information nor actual details behind it.At what point in that was his credibility falsely destroyed by the powers that be? By the current article that is now on this site it seems to clear allot of things up that weren’t clear before, and seems that it appears they were already going after him in 2007, near to the same time as the federal court hearing.

    At this point I have only one focus of importance; the outcome of the Texas filing. That is the only thing that is going to put the fire under the GMC to tell the truth; and for the public to see the truth. The media will not be able to alter nor black out this outcome. No amount of medical side or pharma money or put pressure on nor change the inevitable outcome. You can speculate, distort, and deliberate the garbage from the past, but not this.

  • Undecider

    It’s a difficult slog for those up against the Eugenics Industrial Complex.  This is a fight we’re all a part of.

  • Robsmac

    Argus is most likely a Woo Fighter. If his parent’s basement floods he’ll drown. Give the guy a break… he’s doing important work trolling the internet and saving us from Bigfoot hunters.

  • Ciaparker2

    I think Wakefield was waiting for this verdict by Sir John Mitting, and can now go forward for a shoo-in victory.

  • Robsmac
  • kaym

    As much as I greatly admire Dr Andy Wakefield, I worry about the court system being fair to him in the end. If only hoards of high ranking Doctors all over the world did want Andy Wakefield achieved then perhaps people will start taking notice and stop seeing him as the bad guy. Imagine if the tide of doctors coming out in droves and supporting Dr Andy Wakefield findings. Maybe that’s what it would take to stop the bullies in the industry from destroying individuals bringing the truth to light. Just a thought…if only people had the courage

  • Argus

    Why do you say you admire a man that has been shown to be fraud?

  • Argus

    Really? Can you explain how Mitting’s decision possibly helps Andy’s case?

  • Argus

    Because Laraine is not trying to change the subject. We are here to talk about the disgraced Andrew Wakefield.

  • Argus

    Why do you say you admire a man that has been proven to be an unethical fraudster?

  • Laraine Abbey

    Argus, au contraire. Andy has not been shown to be a fraud by any serious independent student of the situation. Brian Deer has been caught in lies and ignorantly denying bowel disease even in a child with a colostomy bag. This makes Deer an ignoramus in my, and many others’, view. He will prevail whether in the court of justice, or simply the court of life. Its just a matter of time. “The truth shall set you free”––well maybe not you….

  • http://www.facebook.com/ciaparker2 Cynthia Parker

    Who has shown him to be a fraud? The corrupt GMC, reprimanded by Judge Mitting for its shallow reasoning and false conclusions? Judge Mitting found that there was no fraud committed by Dr. Walker-Smith, so, by extension, none committed by Dr. Wakefield either. I, as well as thousands of other mothers of vaccine-damaged children, admire Dr. Wakefield and Dr. Walker-Smith for their intelligence and integrity. Obviously it would have been much better for their careers to just play along with Big Pharma, the way most medical professionals are doing, but they chose to support the truth.

  • Laraine Abbey

    Good answer Cynthia. It is clear to me that Argus is not a truth-seeker, but rather an industry insider who is trying to maintain the charade of Dr. Wakefield with an evil agenda and as lacking in character, when it is factions within the medical industry and pharmaceutical greed that is really driving this unwarranted attack upon Dr. Wakefield.
    You may be interested to know that many of us are donating to the Wakefield Justice Fund. Perhaps, you would consider this too. I can get the info on this for you if interested.

  • Laraine Abbey

    Anyone who would like to support Dr. Andrew Wakefield defend himself can go to this site and donate: http://www.drwakefieldjusticefund.org/content/contribute
    Dr. Wakefield has served us, and is continuing to serve us by exposing the evil behind these special interests, so here is a chance to serve him.