Tag Archives: The Lancet

Glaxo Cartoon Celebrates Theft of Vaccine-Injured Kids’ Medical Records

Below is a pro-vaccine cartoon with Autism Investigated commentary. (The all-capitalized letters are from the original cartoon.)

Backround:

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

Brian Deer Became Opposition Researcher for Glaxo to Avoid Litigation

Mark Pepys Made Medical School and Journal Lie Wakefield was Conflicted

British Medical Board Charged Doctors with Criticizing Toxic Vaccines

Dr. Andrew Wakefield Turncoat Author DENIES Retraction Was of Autism-Vaccine Link Possibility

The Lancet

“the possibility of such a link was raised and consequent events have had major implications for public health…we should together formally retract the interpretation placed upon these findings” – 10 of the 13 coauthors of Andrew Wakefield’s paper.

“That’s [autism-vaccine possibility retraction] not what we said. We retracted the interpretation that was all. We retracted the interpretation that was all.” –One of those turncoat authors to Autism Investigated

Autism Investigated has spoken with one of the turncoat authors of Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s landmark 1998 paper. That author denied retracting the autism-vaccine link possibility to Autism Investigated, repeatedly insisting just the “interpretation” was retracted.

“I don’t want to carry on with this conversation,” the author said and then hung up on Autism Investigated.

So what was retracted then if not the possibility but the interpretation? Apparently, the possibility wasn’t retracted just the fact that the possibility was raised from seriously ill children who developed their first symptoms after vaccination.

What a disgusting individual GlaxoSmithKline’s “superstar” Sir Mark Pepys is for engineering this fraudulent retraction. What a disgusting company GlaxoSmithKline is for continuing to fund him. They have such control over the United Kingdom but they won’t have that same control over the United States.

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.

Wakefield Turncoat Authors Committed The Research Fraud

Wakefield Turncoat Author Simon Murch, Photo from Twitter

“the possibility of such a link was raised and consequent events have had major implications for public health…we should together formally retract the interpretation placed upon these findings” – 10 of the 13 coauthors of Andrew Wakefield’s paper.

Yes, you’ve read that correctly.

It is true that coauthors of the landmark 1998 vaccine-autism paper committed research fraud. They don’t include lead author Andrew Wakefield, however. They are the 10 coauthors who wrote the “retraction of an interpretation” led by Simon Murch.

The interpretation they “retracted” was of the possibility that vaccines cause autism. Their excuse? “Major implications for public health.”

That’s right, vaccines couldn’t possibly cause autism because people stopped vaccinating. That’s what they’re literally saying. It’s total nonsense unsupported by any “precedent” in academic publishing. Autism is a perfectly valid reason to stop vaccinating, anyway.

Their basis would then be used verbatim in disciplinary charges against two coauthors for publishing critically on vaccines. One of those coauthors also signed the “retraction.” Three coauthors in all were charged, including lead “retractor” Simon Murch. Yet people still showed up at the General Medical Council “fitness-to-practice” hearings to support two of the Wakefield turncoat authors.

The whole hearing should have been boycotted by anti-vaccinationists and vaccine skeptics including Wakefield himself. None of the Wakefield turncoat authors should have ever been defended after they signed their names to that statement.

Since when were a bunch of gastroenterologists, pathologists, a radiologist and a shrink an authority on what you can or cannot read? Since never, they signed their names at the coercion of the medical journal. They also didn’t want to lose their licenses, as two of them almost did and as Wakefield actually did.

None of that is a good excuse.

Over the years, Autism Investigated has written extensively about how the journal should restore the retracted 1998 paper. On reflection, it was a mistake since its restoration wouldn’t get rid of the other bogus “retraction” by the 10 coauthors themselves. So the paper is better left retracted anyway.

Now here is the shameful statement by Simon Murch and the other nine Wakefield turncoat authors in all its disgusting glory.

Lancet

Terrorist Al’Jazeera Network Blames Opposition to Toxic Vaccines for Sending Measles to the United States

Al’Jazeera viewers react to Islamic terrorist attack in England, Credit: Infowars

The Islamist State of Qatar and its network Al’Jazeera contributes to the instability of the Middle East that causes hundreds of thousands of deaths and a global refugee crisis. How ironic then that Al’Jazeera blames opposition to toxic vaccinations for the spread of measles from the Muslim world to the United States. It also got some nose-ringed airhead named Mara Van Ells to spew their propaganda.

The terrorist network’s below video got 50 million views for reporting 54 cases (OMG!) of measles primarily among Somali residents of Minnesota. That same network vehemently opposed the travel ban on Somalians coming to the United States. Al’Jazeera also wants open borders for the United States.The ban could have prevented the very outbreak Al’Jazeera blamed on dissent from the child-poisoning vaccine program.


Of course Al’Jazeera must mention autism-vaccine scientist Dr. Andrew Wakefield. He lost his license in the UK for “reporting in the Lancet paper of a temporal link between the syndrome [he] described and the MMR vaccination.” If Qatar and the UK have one thing in common, it’s punishing people for their free speech. Then like any good piece of vaccine indoctrination propaganda, Al’Jazeera names some of the vaccine industry’s fraudulent “studies.”

The video makes no secret that it wants expansion of mandatory vaccination laws like that which was passed in California. Mandatory vaccination expanded under Jimmy Carter’s presidency led to out of control vaccine injuries and deaths and ultimately liability for vaccine manufacturers. Such draconian measures only help dictatorships around the world. More authoritarianism in America will deflect western scrutiny of authoritarian regimes like that of Qatar and its Al’Jazeera broadcaster.

FDA Chief: Expert Witnesses of Vaccine Injury Shouldn’t Publish Papers

Dr. Scott Gottlieb is seen in this American Enterprise Institute photo released in Washington, DC, U.S., March 10, 2017. Courtesy The American Enterprise Institute/Handout via REUTERS ATTENTION EDITORS – THIS IMAGE WAS PROVIDED BY A THIRD PARTY. EDITORIAL USE ONLY. NO RESALES. NO ARCHIVE. – RTS12CMQ

Despite claiming to have “empathy” for autism families, FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb has none. The FDA chief who gave false testimony to Congress about vaccines believes vaccine injury experts should be summarily censored. He also believes expert witnesses to vaccine injury should not be allowed to publish their findings.

In 2009, Gottlieb wrote that the vaccine-autism link should be summarily dismissed to protect vaccines:

Fears about autism have been a growing impediment to higher vaccination rates – and thus a growing public-health danger. 

In that same article, Gottlieb also supported the campaign to censor publications by expert witnesses to vaccine injury:

[Andrew Wakefield’s] original research on this issue was already controversial – 10 of the 13 authors retracted some of the findings in 2004, but Wakefield, its lead author, has not.

The “retraction” happened when the editor of The Lancet decided that expert witnesses to vaccine injury should not be allowed to publish on vaccines. That editor Richard Horton then bullied those 10 coauthors into signing a statement supporting combined measles-mumps-rubella vaccination. Gottlieb cites this “retraction” as evidence against the paper.

Now he has barred his senior staff from meeting with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other proponents of a vaccine safety commission.

Regardless, Scott Gottlieb should not be FDA chief because he should play no role in promoting products his agency regulates.

He is also one of the doctors who lies about vaccine dangers.

LANCET: Anti-Semitism is Fine, Suing Vaccine Manufacturers is “Fatal”

Photo Credit: EAT Foundation

Read the editor’s rejected letter to the editor of The Lancet about the double-standard in his journal concerning vaccine injury and anti-Semitism:

Not even anti-Semitism is a fatal conflict of interest worthy of retraction, so why is vaccine injury litigation?

The Lancet keeps a published “An open letter for the people in Gaza” by Manduca et al. despite the undisclosed, anti-Semitic conflicts of interest of two coauthors. Yet The Lancet now keeps “Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children” by Wakefield et al. retracted solely because of a coauthor’s undisclosed involvement in vaccine injury litigation.

The stated reasons for the paper’s retraction are findings by the General Medical Council (GMC) that were overturned on appeal by the senior author. The Lancet’s ombudsman made clear in email that reasons not explicitly mentioned in the retraction statement are the reasons for the paper’s continued retraction. Wakefield’s undisclosed “interests” of litigation are those reasons.

Meanwhile, The Lancet keeps the Gaza letter published even after it was revealed that two of its coauthors circulated anti-Semitic conspiracy theories by a former Ku Klux Klansman. One of those coauthors is still registered with the GMC despite her non-disclosure to the editor of The Lancet. That is because a “conflict of interest” as defined in GMC’s guidance for doctors is left to the subjective decision of the doctor.

The editor of The Lancet – being registered with a license to practice – would know that. Yet he is perfectly happy to be cited in the GMC’s discredited decision against Wakefield et al. as the person whom Wakefield was obligated to disclose his litigation involvement to. The editor even assisted the GMC in its pursuit of Wakefield after accusing him of a “fatal conflict of interest.”

Per GMC’s guidance, Wakefield was under no obligation of disclosure. The GMC decisions cited in The Lancet retraction explicitly held him to a different standard because of what he published.

Neither the GMC nor the editor took any such exception with the anti-Semitism of Gaza letter coauthors. The editor called it “irrelevant,” saying “I have no plans to retract the letter, and I would not retract the letter even if it was found to be substantiated.”

Since anti-Semitism is not even worthy of retraction or disciplinary erasure, vaccine injury litigation should not be either. If the editor of The Lancet agreed, he would have restored Wakefield et al. with a statement urging the GMC to restore Andrew Wakefield’s registration. The editor refused.

Holtzbrink Systematically Retracts Science Critical of Vaccines

The Nazi-built Holtzbrinck Publishing Group systematically scrubs any paper that casts vaccines in a negative light. Look at the case of a 2016 animal study of HPV vaccine from Japan.

Like many animal studies in medicine, the purpose is to learn more about a disease in humans by replicating its symptoms in animals. That is what scientists sought to do in this study published in Scientific Reports:

In the case of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, an unexpectedly novel disease entity, HPV vaccination associated neuro-immunopathetic syndrome (HANS), has been reported and remains to be carefully verified. To elucidate the mechanism of HANS, we applied a strategy similar to the active experimental autoimmune encephalitis (EAE) model – one of the most popular animal models used to induce maximum immunological change in the central nervous system.

Then suddenly in 2018, the Publisher retracted the paper by totally lying about the study’s purpose:

The Publisher is retracting this Article because the experimental approach does not support the objectives of the study. The study was designed to elucidate the maximum implication of human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine (Gardasil) in the central nervous system. However, the co-administration of pertussis toxin with high-levels of HPV vaccine is not an appropriate approach to determine neurological damage from HPV vaccine alone. The Authors do not agree with the retraction.

The study never said its objective was to “determine neurological damage from HPV vaccine alone,” but to “elucidate the mechanism of HANS [novel disease entity, HPV vaccination associated neuro-immunopathetic syndrome].” This retraction totally lied about the study’s objectives; no wonder the authors don’t agree with it!

The publisher, not the journal, retracted the post. The publisher of Scientific Reports is Nature Publishing Group, which also retracted this 2000 paper on developmentally impaired children. It did so simply because it included children in the 1998 vaccine-autism paper retracted by The Lancet. The retractions cited a medical circus hearing that punished the lead author of both papers for the following:

 b. You knew or ought to have known that your reporting in the Lancet paper of a temporal link between the syndrome you described and the MMR vaccination, Admitted and found proved i. had major public health implications, Admitted and found proved ii. would attract intense public and media interest, Admitted and found proved

Nature Publishing Group is owned by Holtzbrinck Publishing Group, which also owns BioMedCentral. That publisher retracted a 2014 study for linking measles-mumps-rubella vaccination to autism and for the author’s opinion being that vaccination causes autism:

A reader flagged that there were undeclared competing interests related to the article: the author, Dr Hooker, was on the Board of Directors for Focus Autism which supports the belief that MMR vaccine causes autism.  We were concerned enough about the allegations and the content to remove it from the public domain immediately because of the potential harm to public health

Holtzbrinck also owns Frontiers. When the first vaccinated versus unvaccinated study of autism was accepted for publication by Frontiers in Public Health, the vaccine troll army responded. Frontiers took down the study abstract and cancelled publication explicitly in response to vaccine crybabies on the internet.

The study was since published elsewhere, but there is an ongoing theme. Whether it’s the HPV vaccine, the MMR vaccine, or vaccinations in general, Holtzbrinck censors vaccine risk papers. Avoid publishing in its journals like the plague.

Comment to Del Bigtree That He Out Lancet Liar Richard Demirjian and Son


Lancet Liar Richard Demirjian Libels Vaccine-Autism Science. Comment here, include contact info below.

My son’s autistic behaviors did NOT begin a week after administration of the vaccine, in fact they began several months afterwards with several medical complications occurring in between. The bottom line is that, if my son is indeed Patient 11, then the Lancet article made a false assertion set in immediately after MMR. -From letter by Richard Demirjian, Lancet Liar

That is who Del Bigtree is keeping anonymous. Demirjian is a fabricator. He knowingly lies that his son was misrepresented in an early vax-autism paper. Richard Demirjian does NOT deserve the title of Lancet Father. He is the Lancet Liar!

Here is what the paper really says about his son Vahe Demirjian.

Only “viral pneumonia” is mentioned, nothing about autism

Richard Demirjian knows what the paper says. Autism Investigated left messages. He blocked Autism Investigated from calling.

His son has blocked Autism Investigated on Facebook when shown the above table. Therefore, the Demirjians are evil people. They throw your kids to the fire.

Please comment underneath Del Bigtree’s new episode. Tell him to out Lancet Liar Richard Demirjian and his son. They don’t deserve to be hidden.

Share their contact information obtained by Autism Investigated everywhere you can so that other people can write the Demirjians. We need to tell them that the anti-vaccine movement will tell the world that they have no character. Therefore, they must retract their lies about vaccine-autism science and tell the BMJ to retract its attacks on the Lancet paper.

Vahe Demirjian’s online contact information:

https://vahedemirjian.academia.edu/contact
www.facebook.com/vahe.demirjian.1
vahedemirjian@cox.net

Richard Demirjian’s phone number and address:

949 718 0180
11 Canyon Terrace, Newport Coast, CA 92657