Category Archives: Media

ROYAL FREE SOURCE Implicates Mark Pepys in Dr. Andrew Wakefield Coauthors’ Retraction

Mark Pepys

Photo Credit: University College London, of which Royal Free is an affiliate

Autism Investigated spoke to an inside source of the Royal Free Hospital from when coauthors of Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s 1998 paper retracted its interpretation of a possible vaccine-autism link. That source has confirmed the hospital’s role in sanctioning the retraction and also implicated then-Head of Medicine Mark Pepys. Pepys forced Wakefield out of the Royal Free two years before the retraction.

When Autism Investigated asked if Pepys was personally involved, the source responded:

“It’s been so many years I can’t say for sure categorically, but I would expect so.”

The source also indicated Pepys was one of “two or three” Royal Free officials who supported the retraction. Prior to the retraction, the hospital released a statement signed by the Royal Free and University College Medical School’s Vice Chancellor lying that Andrew Wakefield concealed his work in vaccine injury litigation from the hospital.

Throughout Pepys’ time at the hospital, he enjoyed considerable support from GlaxoSmithKline and its precursor GlaxoWellcome. He would win the GlaxoSmithKline Prize in 2007 as well as a knighthood from the Queen in 2012 alongside the corporation’s CEO.

Mark Pepys has praised the use of medical records stolen from the Royal Free Hospital for GlaxoSmithKline-sponsored vaccine propaganda. Instead of investigating the theft, he “investigated” his own hospital’s doctors for doing their jobs. That’s because he leaked them just as he forced the Wakefield coauthors’ retraction.

GlaxoSmithKline’s longtime involvement in vaccine misconduct didn’t begin or end with Pepys. Dr. Wakefield has himself stated that he believes he was targeted because GlaxoSmithKline was indemnified from vaccine injury liability over its since-withdrawn measles-mumps-rubella vaccine.

The company also hired an epidemiologist while he was manipulating safety studies of the vaccine preservative thimerosal for CDC. A GlaxoSmithKline adviser was involved in an as-yet-failed attempt at making another CDC scientist recant his statements acknowledging evidence of a vaccine-autism link.

Just last week, a doctor who co-founded Britain’s Cochrane Collaboration was ejected from the organization he helped establish. His dismissal followed his criticism of Cochrane’s favorable review of HPV vaccination: another GSK market. GlaxoSmithKline’s name comes up an awful lot in vaccine issues, more so than any other pharmaceutical company it seems.

However, there have been no greater targets of attack by GlaxoSmithKline than Dr. Andrew Wakefield and the children in his paper whose medical records it stole. There is also no worse GlaxoSmithKline shill than Sir Mark Pepys.

Sir Mark Pepys Was Knighted with GlaxoSmithKline CEO in 2012

Sir Andrew Witty, CEO of GlaxoSmithKline 2008-2017, The Irish Times

Glaxo-funded Mark Pepys was knighted with GlaxoSmithKline’s CEO in 2012. That was after Pepys forced autism-vaccine scientist Andrew Wakefield out of his job, forced his coauthors to retract and leaked vaccine-injured children’s medical records to an opposition researcher. Pepys was knighted for “services” to biomedicine. Witty was knighted for “services to the economy and to the UK pharma industry.”

GSK’s Andrew Witty knighted

Published on 03/01/12 at 11:31am

GlaxoSmithKline chief executive Andrew Witty and former ABPI director general Richard Barker were among the recipients in the 2012 New Year Honours List.

Witty was knighted for services to the economy and to the UK pharma industry, while Barker – who stepped down from his post in June – received an OBE for his work in the pharma sphere.

Elsewhere, there were knighthoods for John Buchanan, chairman of medical devices company Smith & Nephew, for services to industry.

In keeping with the government’s insistence that this year’s Honours were also about ‘local heroes’, there were gongs for people working in less high profile parts of the healthcare sector.

Christine Mills, founder of the cancer charity Hope for Tomorrow, whose fundraising efforts led to the UK’s first mobile chemotherapy unit, received an MBE – as did Terence Monaghan, who set up Stock Cares, a transport service that takes vulnerable residents in Essex to essential health appointments.

Six GPs also got awards, including OBEs for William Cunningham of Corbridge Health Centre in Northumberland and James Kingsland, president of the National Association of Primary Care.

Academics in health and medicine were well-represented in the list: Professor Stephen Bloom, head of diabetes and endocrinology at Imperial College London was knighted for services to medical science.

And Professors John Sissons of the University of Cambridge and Mark Pepys of University College London Medical School received knighthoods for services to research and education in clinical medicine, and to biomedicine, respectively.

There was also an OBE for Gideon Ben-Tovim, chair of Liverpool NHS Primary Care Trust, for services to health.

Adam Hill

Originally published on Pharmafile

Congress Knew Andrew Zimmerman Opinion was Non-Starter in 2013

There is nothing in Dr. Andrew Zimmerman’s opinions on autism that could help unresolved vaccine injury cases. Congress knows that, which is why it cancelled a planned hearing into the so-called Zimmerman issue five years ago. Autism Investigated  broke that news.

Yet there is now a resurgent effort to get Congress, the Justice Department and as many Amazon customers as possible interested in this total non-story. The father of a vaccine-injured girl is even being compelled to testify about her medical history before Congress.

Never mind that her parents completely objected to the release of her medical records five years ago. There is no reason to believe they’d feel any differently. There is every reason to believe they would be even more opposed to her private medical history being cross-examined by politicians.

This is not the autism community’s strongest case. It is not even a case. It’s a total dead horse being beaten over and over again by armchair advocates. They’re making a pretty penny off it too.

Apparently, the only new information is that Andrew Zimmerman said his expert opinion against one vaccine injury case shouldn’t have been used against others. That’s it. Two federal attorneys tried to milk his testimony for all it was worth. Shocker.

Wait there’s more… He also acknowledged that vaccines could cause autism in rare cases, just not in any that his opinion was used against at the time he gave it!

Unbelievable what some people will fall for, especially in light of what they’ll ignore.

Just remember folks, Dr. Andrew Zimmerman is no Dr. Andrew Wakefield. And the Department of Justice lawyers Zimmerman is only now whining about are no Sir Medical-Record Leaksalot Dr. Mark Pepys. Let’s also not be like him and respect the confidentiality of disabled children.

Vaccine Victim’s Father Trashed Vaccine Industry Watchdog Information

David Salamone (RIP)

Polio vaccine victim David Salamone died on September 7 at age 28. He might have lived longer if his dad actually read the information sent to him by Barbara Loe Fisher’s National Vaccine Information Center.

Instead, John Salamone provided favorable content for credential-faker Paul Offit‘s book Deadly Choices: How the Anti-Vaccine Movement Threatens Us All. Here is Salamone in his own words on page 81:

“[Barbara Loe Fisher’s group] sends me material and I put it in the circular file.”

“It would be reckless to go out there and attribute certain side effects to a vaccine when they’re not documented by science. Attacking vaccines with bad science and bad information is nothing short of reckless and irresponsible.”

“[Doctors’] response, candidly, was not great. My biggest problem was that when you talked about vaccine injury, you were immediately labeled as anti-vaccine. They wanted to put me in the same category as the Fishers of the world, the organizations that had a broader agenda of reducing if not eliminating many of the vaccines. To the contrary, I was pro- vaccine. But I was pro-vaccine safely. I was knowledgeable enough to know the history that many more people’s children and adults have been saved by vaccines than have ever died from them.”

Hope your son’s death was worth pleasing doctors, John. If only Paul Offit remembered to tweet his condolences.

PLANNED OBITUARY for Senior Turncoat John Walker-Smith

John Walker-Smith, Telegraph

Autism Investigated is scooping its planned obituary for senior turncoat author John Walker-Smith when he dies. He turns 82 this year.

Gastroenterologist and senior Wakefield turncoat author John Walker-Smith has just died. Before retiring in 2000, he was a colleague of Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s at the Royal Free Hospital where they published a number of papers on autism and bowel disease. One of those was their seminal 1998 paper that first described a connection between autism, bowel disease and vaccination. Walker-Smith would later infamously retract the possibility of a vaccine link with nine other coauthors in 2004.

Despite his betrayal of vaccine-injured children in doing so, many of their parents continued to support him. When he was practicing medicine, he had treated and helped many children with autism whose gastrointestinal symptoms were dismissed by other doctors. Had his medical contributions ended there, he would be rightly seen as a hero. But that was not to happen, as he would betray the very children he helped.

The year after Walker-Smith retired from medicine, Dr. Andrew Wakefield was run out of the Royal Free Hospital for their research. Following his dismissal, the hospital’s GlaxoSmithKline-backed Head of Medicine Mark Pepys launched an aggressive campaign to discredit the work Walker-Smith and Wakefield conducted and obstruct vaccine injury litigation. Wakefield never wavered, but Walker-Smith eventually did.

Pepys started his attacks first by intimidating the 1998 paper’s coauthors still employed at Royal Free. Then through leaking medical records to a freelance opposition researcher, Pepys targeted Wakefield and Walker-Smith directly. Within weeks of allegations of unethical research publicized against them both, Walker-Smith signed his name to the infamous retraction.

Although he would successfully appeal the allegations and strike them down in court, he kept his name on the retraction. Not once did he demand the journal reinstate the 1998 paper nor demand his medical board reinstate Dr. Wakefield’s license.

Yet Walker-Smith still enjoys considerable support in the autism community which he does not deserve. No one has done more to make censorship of vaccine injury more publicly acceptable than John Walker-Smith. His betrayal of vaccine-injured children will be his everlasting legacy.

Mark Pepys Made Wakefield Coauthors Sabotage Vaccine Litigation

rescuepost.com

“But people were taking that as further evidence of a link with MMR that we never claimed and unwittingly we were adding fuel to the fire.” – Wakefield turncoat author Simon MurchThe ObserverNovember 2, 2003

Pharma superstar Mark Pepys made 10 coauthors retract the interpretation of Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s 1998 autism-vaccine paper. But even before that, Pepys made two of them withdraw authorship from another Wakefield paper. One essentially admitted doing so to sabotage the litigation against vaccination.

Simon Murch and Michael Thomson withdrew their names from a November 2003 paper also coauthored by Wakefield. The withdrawal happened after the paper was accepted for publication in May and both approved the version as it would be published. Remarkably, Murch cited not wanting to build a case against vaccination to justify his withdrawal:

“I have withdrawn because the data was being justified in a way I couldn’t agree with. All the work I have done shows evidence of subtle inflammation of the intestine in many but not all autistic children. But people were taking that as further evidence of a link with MMR that we never claimed and unwittingly we were adding fuel to the fire.”

As Andrew Wakefield made clear, Simon Murch could not have withdrawn for scientific reasons:

“He cannot make that claim because he signed up to have it published. We were not going to publicise this but after what Simon Murch said we did. He is distancing himself because of the hierarchy where he works.”

Not “adding fuel to the fire” as Murch put it could have only meant not fueling the fires of litigation that should have burned GlaxoSmithKline. Both Thomson and Murch were also coauthors of a 2002 study that showed measles virus in guts of children with autism and bowel disease. Such a study was pivotal for planned litigation against the vaccine industry. Their later withdrawal from the 2003 paper coincided with the termination of legal aid for vaccine injury litigation in the United Kingdom.

At the time, Murch and Thomson were still employed at the Royal Free Hospital under pharma “superstar” Mark Pepys. If they didn’t pull their names, they would not have remained employed under him as Wakefield wasn’t.

Mark Pepys Made Medical School and Journal Lie Wakefield was Conflicted

pepys

Sir Mark Pepys, Head of Medicine at Royal Free Hospital (1999-2011) giving the 2016 Commencement Address at Cedars-Sinai

“Had the advice of the Institutions been sought at the time concerning conflict of interest, they would undoubtedly have advised that any potential conflict should be declared, so that others could judge whether such conflicts were real.” – Royal Free University and College Medical School Statement in The Lancet

“Funds received from the Legal Aid Board were paid into, and properly administered through, a research account with the special trustees of the Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust.” – Dr. Andrew Wakefield proving Royal Free lied above

Sir Mark Pepys needed a fake scandal to make his employees’ fraudulent retraction of the Wakefield paper’s interpretation seem legit. So he made the hospital release a bogus statement that lead author and ex-employee Dr. Andrew Wakefield had an undisclosed conflict of interest. Pepys also leaked medical records of children in Dr. Wakefield’s paper to a freelance writer who could claim credit for the allegation.

The Royal Free’s statement and the hospital employees’ imminent retraction pressured The Lancet editor to sign onto the lie that Dr. Wakefield had a secret conflict of interest. But the lie that the hospital didn’t know about the “conflict” would unravel the day the allegation was made. The lie the journal didn’t know would unravel that week.

Wakefield and two brave coauthors responded that he disclosed his litigation involvement in the journal six years earlier. Horton rejected the disclosure with a completely contradictory excuse:

We do not accept Andrew Wakefield and colleagues’ interpretation of the letter

Yet Horton then acknowledged (boldface mine):

[Wakefield’s] letter was written in response to a letter from Dr A Rousepublished in the same issue. Dr Rouse’s letter raised concerns about whether children investigated in the 1998 paper had been referred to the authors by the Society for the Autistically Handicapped, and simply mentioned that his concerns arose out of a fact sheet produced by a firm of solicitors

Right after Dr. Wakefield was acknowledged by the editor as discussing the period before publication, he completely contradicted himself (boldface mine):

Although the letter made it clear that Dr Wakefield “has agreed to help evaluate” some children for the Legal Aid Board, it does not indicate that in fact such work had been commissioned and was being undertaken well before the 1998 paper was published.

Wakefield disclosing the work was done in a discussion about the time period before publication does not indicate the work was done before publication? Is “has agreed” not past tense? Horton makes no sense, because he lied. Liars make no sense.

Unfortunately, it didn’t matter by then because the Wakefield turncoat coauthors already announced their fraudulent retraction. Never mind that the Lancet editor’s story completely fell apart, as did the Royal Free Hospital’s. Never mind that the interpretation’s own retraction also made no mention of Wakefield’s litigation involvement which was already known to its senior authors. Instead, they cited lead turncoat author’s prior defense of vaccines that began months in advance. That’s because the retraction was, as Wakefield predicted, planned months in advance.

Correction: This post previously said that the lie The Lancet didn’t know about Wakefield’s litigation ties would unravel in “the ensuing months.” It actually unraveled the week of the lie. The wording has been changed and the new words hyperlink to the British newspaper article, MMR scientist did not hide link with legal case, letter reveals.

Sir Mark Pepys – GlaxoSmithKline’s Medical Record-Leaking “Superstar”

“ARGUABLY THE FINEST PRIVATE COLLECTION OF CHILDRENS MEDICAL RECORDS..” -Cartoon satirizing a photo of freelance writer Brian Deer, http://adversevaccinereaction.blogspot.com/

“I know the names and family backgrounds of all 12 of the children enrolled in the study, including the child enrolled from the United States.” – Brian Deer on children seen at London’s Royal Free Hospital, BMJ, 2010

“Brian Deer has done an excellent job.” – Royal Free’s Head of Medicine Dr. Mark Pepys, BBC Radio, 2011

The GlaxoSmithKline puppet who bullied coauthors of the Wakefield autism-vaccine paper into signing a fraudulent retraction also leaked the medical records of children in that paper.

As you would expect from a doctor who cares nothing for patient safety, Dr. Mark Pepys does not care about patient confidentiality either. He has praised the freelance writer who obtained confidential medical information about patients seen at Pepys’ own hospital. Dr. Pepys even allowed that writer to quote him divulging information he had promised to keep secret.

The writer Pepys praised, Brian Deer, had no right to the names or family backgrounds of any of those children. That didn’t phase Mark Pepys who agreed to be interviewed by him.

Even worse, Pepys was the Head of Medicine at the Royal Free Hospital when Deer obtained confidential information on patients seen there. No investigation as to how that happened was ever launched. Instead, the Royal Free “investigated” doctors who saw the children including Dr. Andrew Wakefield.

Mark Pepys is 100% responsible for all leaks of patient information to the media, given his position at Royal Free. In his interview with Brian Deer, Pepys revealed he had no respect for confidentiality by leaking conditions for the departure of Dr. Wakefield from the hospital staff:

“one of the conditions of him going away was that I wasn’t supposed to say anything critical of him to anybody, for ever after.”

That condition wasn’t kept by GlaxoSmithKline’s designated “superstar.”

Any patient who enrolls in Sir Mark Pepys’ GlaxoSmithKline trials should know that Sir Leaksalot will sell out both their safety and their privacy for commercial gain.

Pharma Puppet Who Ejected Wakefield Was Behind Murch Retraction


“I said I wouldn’t transfer my unit if he was there.” “We paid him to leave.” – Sir Mark Pepys on autism-vaccine scientist Dr. Andrew Wakefield

A doctor heavily backed by GlaxoSmithKline who took credit for Dr. Andrew Wakefield leaving the Royal Free Hospital made his coauthors fraudulently retract the interpretation in his paper. Seven of the 10 coauthors were working for Royal Free when they signed their names to the statement, including lead turncoat Simon Murch. Wakefield even predicted the Royal Free hierarchy would force Murch’s retraction months before.

Years after Pepys orchestrated the fraudulent retraction, he tried to orchestrate an “investigation” against Wakefield’s research. In response, Wakefield wrote a letter to University College London later published in his book Waging War on the Autistic Child that revealed a history of Pepys’ dishonesty and bribery (boldface mine):

I understand from his statements on BBC Radio 4, that Professor Mark Pepys is to conduct an investigation of my research while at the Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine. May I suggest that he is not a good choice for this task, for the following reasons:

1. He has a real conflict of interest-having initially declined his appointment at the Royal Free until I had been removed. The following are extracts from Professor Pepys’ attendance note with Kate Emmerson of Field Fisher Waterhouse, the GMC’s lawyers, on 12th April 2005. 

“He [Pepys] accepted the job on the condition that Wakefield was removed (this didn’t happen).”

“MP would have dismissed W but others at the Royal Free were unwilling to do so. MP was really the only person at the Free who was putting forward anti-W views.”

2. Having taken up this appointment, (his above condition having been rejected [Pepys’ bluff had been called]), in the company of the Dean and the School Secretary, he confirmed to me that, despite having strong negative opinions about my research, he had never actually read any of it.

3. A book is due to be published later this year covering Professor Pepys’ activities in relation to my work. It will allege, supported by documentary evidence, conspiracy to execute a bribe with a senior academic from another institution in order to destroy peer-reviewed grant-awarded research looking at vaccine safety. This book will unfortunately be a source of major embarrassment for UCL and The Royal Free. May I suggest you ask Professor Pepys to provide you with his email traffic from the relevant period October 1999 to 2002? This traffic has already been examined by third parties. 

4. Professor Pepys’ extreme bias against me has been evident throughout my dealings with him. He expressed this in public in his Harverian oration, as well as on the BBC.

5. He is deeply conflicted due to his relationship with vaccine manufacturers GlaxoSmithKline. He is totally unsuited to lead any investigation of my research.

Pepys is now leading GlaxoSmithKline vaccine trials. How could any patient possibly enroll in a vaccine trial led by this guy when he promotes covering up vaccine side-effects?

Any decent human being should demand that any drug trial led by Sir Mark Pepys be shut down.

Andrew Wakefield Predicted Ex-Employer Would Force Murch Retraction

The Royal Free Hospital, Hampstead and Highgate Express

“His laboratory is under threat. He has failed to gain due promotion. He has been strongly advised to withdraw from scientific publications that involve any mention of my name or association with MMR and bowel disease.” – Dr. Andrew Wakefield on Turncoat Simon Murch, The Guardian, November 1, 2003

10 coauthors fraudulently retracted the interpretation from the Wakefield autism-vaccine paper. Seven were still working for the hospital that fired him when they signed their names to the retraction. They include lead turncoat author Simon Murch, who used his hospital email address in the retraction. His retraction was predicted by lead author Andrew Wakefield in the above quote to a British newspaper four months prior. That was when Murch began campaigning for vaccines.

Who was pressuring Murch according to Wakefield? “the hierarchy of the Royal Free and the medical school,” which already fired Wakefield for his research two years prior. At the time, the medical school denied influencing Murch’s opinion on vaccines:

“The school believes that Dr Murch’s rejection of any association between MMR and autism is his considered professional judgement as a paediatrician and a researcher.”

Curiously, however, the school did not respond to the allegation that Murch was being pressured to withdraw his name from Wakefield papers. The medical school denied that it was withdrawing treatment from sick children instead:

“In addition, the Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust completely refutes the suggestion that the trust is considering withdrawing treatment from children. The trust intends to continue to provide this important service and has no plans to reduce or withhold treatment from these children.”

That’s because its real plans were withdrawing its employees names from the interpretation of the landmark autism-vaccine paper. Four months later, that’s exactly what happened.