Facebook Pixel

Dr. Andrew Wakefield Will Continue Research on Autism and Vaccine

By HERWriter
Rate This

Dr. Andrew Wakefield lost his medical licence because of his belief that there is a link between autism and the MMR vaccine, and still will not back down from that stance. Though his medical licence has been revoked, he says he will continue with his research for children with autism.

"Wakefield still staunchly defends his original study, claiming independent studies in five countries back his findings, and arguing that the U.S. government has secretly settled with the families of children with autism. "

Dr. Wakefield has written a book called "Callous Disregard" based on his theory concerning autism and the MMR vaccine, and the case the British government brought against him.

Depending on what you read, Dr. Andrew Wakefield is either a dishonest irresponsible man who is misleading the public, or he is a hero who is willing to stand against great odds for what he believes in. Which is he? We must ultimately each make up our own minds for ourselves as to what we believe on this.


Add a Comment9 Comments

EmpowHER Guest

College Living for Students with Learning Disabilities, Executive functioning Deficits, Autism Spectrum Disorders (including Autism, Aspergers, and PDD-NOS)

For students with special needs, life after high school is full of possibilities, including college.

Finding the right college program for students with autism spectrum disorders, Asperger’s, nonverbal learning disorder, ADD/ADHD and other learning disabilities is vital for a college student’s transition into independent adulthood. The right program should provide support for each student’s unique needs and goals.

With the help of New Directions, young adults with learning disabilities are experiencing independence for the first time in their lives. Some of our clients pursue collegiate endeavors and some pursue vocational training/tracks. New Directions helps students attend universities, community colleges, and technical and vocational schools.

For more information, go to http://www.newdirectionsfya.com/ or call 954-571-5102 to contact Dr. Drew Rubin, Ph.D.

October 1, 2010 - 7:05am
EmpowHER Guest

Wow, Jody, not one person that has commented here agrees with you. Maybe that is because their opinions are informed by the facts, rather than making up 'facts', as you seem to do, to fit your pre-established position

May 26, 2010 - 10:24pm
EmpowHER Guest

What I find the ironic thing about this book is that he called it Callous Disregard. As I point out in my blog, WakefieldWatch, Andy showed his callous disregard for the truth when he proceeded to rely on the false positive testing by Unigenetics. Andy showed his callous disregard for ethics when he took tens of thousands of pounds from the solicitors to prove their litigation theory. Andy again showed his callous disregard for ethics when he did not divulge that he was developing his "measles transfer factor" which would need a market that could only be created by destroying confidence in the MMR vaccine. Andy shows a callous disregard for honesty when he whines about the GMC's findings and "not being heard" when he refused to put on a defence before the GMC.
Andy shows a disregard for the truth when he blames Brian Deer for his woes, since he brought them all on himself.

The most ironic book title since Gutenberg finished his invention.

May 26, 2010 - 4:38pm
EmpowHER Guest

There is the further possibility that he's neither dishonest nor a hero, but rather believes and advocates his position even though it's not supported by statistics or mechanistic data. One doesn't have to be ill-intentioned for one's actions to have negative consequences for the public; unfortunately, the public is very willing to believe apparent experts who honestly but mistakenly represent a poorly-founded position.

May 26, 2010 - 4:25pm
(reply to Anonymous)

No, there is no possibility that he is not dishonest. It was conclusively proven during unrefuted testimony that he was informed that the samples he was using were contaminated and were producing false positives. He was developing a measles "transfer factor" which would replace the MMR vaccine, if he could instill public mistrust in it. He stood to make millions. He was paid tens of thousands of pounds by the lawyers and never disclosed it. No, there is not a shred of a possibility that he was not dishonest.

May 26, 2010 - 8:36pm
EmpowHER Guest
Anonymous (reply to Anonymous)

No, there really isn't that possibility. The results--the basic facts--reported in Wakefield's anti-MMR paper clearly do not match the clinical records taken during the study. Diagnoses, histories, and descriptions of the children involved were changed. This is, by definition, dishonest.

May 26, 2010 - 4:34pm
EmpowHER Guest

People get up set when they find out that drug companies sponsor studies and low and behold, the researcher finds in favor of the drug -- well Wakefield did the same thing. A legal firm representing parents against a drug company paid him to come up with his findings. He is a gastroenterologist, not a specialist in autism or vaccines.

May 26, 2010 - 1:04pm
EmpowHER Guest

Yes, generally placing belief over science doesn't go well in scientific fields. Shocking, that. But he didn't actually lose his license because of a belief. He lost it because he violated ethics rules about how to treat children in an experiment and because he falsified data. You really should try doing some basic fact-checking.

May 26, 2010 - 9:51am
EmpowHER Guest
Anonymous (reply to Anonymous)

Anonymous wrote: He lost it because he violated ethics rules about how to treat children in an experiment and because he falsified data.
Yes, I completely agree.
The question isn't whether Wakefield is right or not: his research is not valid (e.g falsified data--at the very least), and has not been replicated by scientists who perform research using the proper procedures. There may be links between autism and unknown variables, but until a strong cause and effect relationship is discovered, it is unethical and harmful to make mere suggestions about it under the guise of valid research. That is the sign of an unethical scientist, and suggests that he is not interested in true scientific inquiry but that he has some other agenda.

May 27, 2010 - 8:41am
Enter the characters shown in the image.
By submitting this form, you agree to EmpowHER's terms of service and privacy policy
Add a Comment

We value and respect our HERWriters' experiences, but everyone is different. Many of our writers are speaking from personal experience, and what's worked for them may not work for you. Their articles are not a substitute for medical advice, although we hope you can gain knowledge from their insight.


Get Email Updates

Related Topics

Autism Guide

Have a question? We're here to help. Ask the Community.


Health Newsletter

Receive the latest and greatest in women's health and wellness from EmpowHER - for free!