Tag Archives: Uk

How The UK’s Medical “Protection” Society Baited A Leading Autism-Vaccine Scientist into A Show Trial Attacking His Free Speech

Drs. Andrew and Carmel Wakefield outside UK’s General Medical Council the day of its “findings” against him, Zimbio

The UK’s General Medical Council (GMC) charged Dr. Andrew Wakefield with publishing critically on vaccination. So GMC needed to ensure he wouldn’t boycott its show trial for obviously attacking his free speech. That’s what the Medical “Protection” Society (MPS) was good for. The MPS is an organization that purports to defend doctors from malpractice allegations in Britain. MPS funded Dr. Wakefield’s “defense” against the General Medical Council, but it really wasn’t a “defense” at all.

His so-called defense should have never made him “defend” himself against the “crime” of publishing on the vaccine-autism link. Even worse, MPS even got him to falsely say he should have gotten ethical approval to take blood from his own children at his son’s birthday party. They subsequently enabled Dr. Wakefield to be punished for making a joke about it in America, never mind the First Amendment. Not surprisingly, inquiries to the lawyer MPS paid to “represent” Dr. Wakefield have gone unanswered.

After the GMC’s “findings” against him were made, MPS cut funding to his appeal in order to make them stick. Of course a major medical defense organization believes publishing critically about vaccination is wrong. After all, it has many other doctors to defend who poison children into autism with vaccinations everyday. So it had to “defend” Dr. Wakefield and then throw him under the bus to protect all of its Hippocratic Oath-violating “doctors.”

On a happier note, Autism Investigated will now share Dr. Wakefield’s hilarious birthday party blood joke for readers to laugh with. Thank you Dr. Wakefield for your humor and thank you YouTuber Anthony Cox for sharing!

(Contrary to BBC Fake News, no children fainted or threw up.)

Alfie Evans Being Murdered To Deny Vaccine Payout Is False

Alfie Evans, BBC

UPDATE: A previous version of this post accused the Facebook profile primarily spreading the rumor of being a fake profile. Autism Investigated was subsequently contacted by the person behind the profile who confirmed that that was not true. This post has been altered to reflect that fact. Autism Investigated regrets the error and apologizes to the person previously named.

UPDATE II: Autism Investigated has contacted Jackie Fletcher. She confirmed that the compensated child developed the adverse reaction before age two but subsequently died later in life. This article has been rewritten to reflect that fact. Autism Investigated regrets the error and thanks the readers for the new information. Additionally, the article has also been updated to reflect the fact that Alfie Evans has just tragically passed away. May this poor child rest in peace. Deepest condolences to his parents.

The conflict between an English hospital and parents of a terminally ill child named Alfie Evans has captivated anti-vaccinationist and vaccine skeptical communities alike. Posts of outrage adorn such groups, fueling bitter infighting and personal attacks. Origin of the rage is a rumor that the hospital is deliberately killing the child before his second birthday so that his parents could never be eligible for vaccine damage payment. And it was simply untrue.

The parents have yet to even confirm an adverse vaccine reaction in the child. When vaccination causes death, the reaction is often noticed well before.

A good example has been described in BMJ by Jackie Fletcher, founder of JABS and a parent who was compensated by the Vaccine Damage Payment Unit:

During the first week of the new MMR campaign in 1988 an eighteen month old infant was given it, started with severe convulsions and subsequently died during a seizure [later in life]. This child was one of a number of children awarded Government recognition of MMR vaccine-damage through vaccine damage payments following medical assessment of the individual cases.

The child was noticeably damaged by the vaccine, later died because of the vaccine, and then the government compensated for that loss. No such history has surfaced for Alfie Evans.

The hospital did not deliberately murder him to deny his parents vaccine damage compensation. Suggesting so reflects poorly on them too. Who wants to be accused of keeping their child alive for payout? Is that what anti-vaxxers seriously want to imply?

Even though death before age two does make one ineligible, the British government still wouldn’t murder this child for £120,000. They just wouldn’t compensate that much, which already isn’t much.

Regardless, this is a tragic story of a young child whose life was cut way too short.

Autism Speaks Promotes Darkness for Vaccination-Autism Science

The official position of the world’s biggest money-grubbing autism charity Autism Speaks is that vaccines provide “no increased risk” for autism. What they really support is overt censorship of autism-vaccine science.

The end of Autism Speaks’ position statement provides the first clue.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has compiled a comprehensive list of this research. You can view and download the list here.

What does the academy include in this list of “research?”

British journalist Brian Deer investigates Dr. Andrew Wakefield (the man who initially claimed a link between autism and the MMR vaccine), his practices during the study that was published on this alleged connection, and uncovers truths that lead to the revocation of Dr. Wakefield’s medical license and to the retraction of the article he published on the subject.​

At the center of the “practices” were his so-called conflicts of interest. The UK General Medical Council that took his license stated:

Having regard to its findings at paragraph 31.c., the Panel is satisfied that your conduct in failing to disclose your involvement in the MMR litigation, your receipt of funding for part of Project 172-96 from the Legal Aid Board and your involvement in the Patent, constituted disclosable interests. Your failure to disclose these to the Editor of The Lancet was contrary to your duties as a senior author of the Lancet paper.

He was “contrary” to his “duties,” you say? Sounds harsh. Let’s see how that’s defined in “paragraph 31.c.”

iii. had a duty to disclose to the Editor of the Lancet any disclosable interest including matters which could legitimately give rise to a perception that you had a conflict of interest; Found proved

Let that sink in, Dr. Wakefield had a duty to disclose:

any disclosable interest including matters which could legitimately give rise to a perception that you had a conflict of interest

Is abiding by that duty even possible? Not even the General Medical Council thinks so. That’s why they tell doctors in their own guidance to “use your professional judgement to identify when conflicts of interest arise.” They clearly held Dr. Wakefield to a different standard, as Autism Investigated already reported. But why?

c. In the circumstances set out at paragraph 31.b. above, 

What are those “circumstances?” Why, the fact that he published on children being poisoned into autism by vaccination.

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

BINGO! They took away his license and retracted his paper because of what he published. They make no secret of it.

In the United Kingdom, you can attack Jews and still keep your medical license. Don’t even think about criticizing a vaccine though.

It is totally shameful the American Academy of Pediatrics would openly celebrate such overt censorship while poisoning more children. It is also shameful that Autism Speaks does the same while asking for money to “shine a light on autism.” They don’t want to shine a light on anything.

Autism Speaks wants to keep the causation of autism in the dark. President Trump should dump Autism Speaks.

BBC Host’s Anti-Vax/Anti-Semite Comparison Backfires Spectacularly

Adam Rutherford, Age of Autism

Mainstream news about autism is totally fake. Last year, BBC said wearing a medieval helmet is an “ASSET” in the workplace.

Now look what anti-vaxxers are compared to!

It didn’t end well for Rutherford, however.

(The editor was promptly blocked by Rutherford.)

While The Lancet retracted Wakefield’s early vaccine-autism paper, the journal keeps published An open letter for the people in Gaza. Dr. Ang also remains registered with a license to practice by the UK’s General Medical Council. She was never even charged with having an undisclosed conflict of interest, unlike Dr. Wakefield.

The Lancet and the UK government both clearly take exception with vaccine injury litigation. They do not take any such exception with anti-Semitism.

Adam Rutherford doesn’t either.

UK Gov’t Authority Fabricated “Duties” Against Early Vax-ASD Science

 

The UK government completely made up “duties” to disclose conflicts of interest to defame the lead author of early science linking vaccines to autism. It is perhaps the most clear-cut proof of the UK government’s conspiracy to cover up the vaccine autism link.

The vaccine people are quick to cite the UK General Medical Council (GMC’s) findings of “disclosable interests” against Dr. Andrew Wakefield. Meanwhile, the vaccine people completely ignore the GMC’s own Financial and commercial arrangements and conflicts of interest guidance. The guide tells doctors to “use your professional judgement to identify when conflicts of interest arise.” By second-guessing Dr. Wakefield’s professional judgement to punish him, the GMC completely fabricated the “duties” it said he violated according to its existing rules.

Though GMC’s findings of unethical research and dishonesty were overturned on appeal, vaccine people still use the red herring that Dr. Wakefield was not the one who appealed. However, the “disclosable interests” findings were only against Dr. Wakefield and were not grounded in findings against any other researcher.

But as the GMC’s guidance on its own website shows, those findings were not based on any existing rule either. One need only compare the GMC “findings” and the GMC’s actual position on conflicts of interest to see that they are a hoax. Nobody and certainly no government should recognize any findings or verdicts by the GMC panel that ruled against Dr. Andrew Wakefield.

LATEST RESEARCH: An Autism Link Wrapped Up In Aluminum?

The Daily Mail(UK) introduces the latest research study as follows:

Aluminium in vaccines may cause autism, controversial new research suggests. 

Autistic children have up to 10 times more of the metal in their brains than what is considered safe in adults, a study found.

Aluminium crosses the membrane that separates the brain from circulating blood and accumulates in cells involved in maintaining a constant internal environment, such as temperature, the research adds.

Study author Professor Chris Exley from Keele University, said: ‘Perhaps we now have the link between vaccination and autism spectrum disorder (ASD), the link being the inclusion of an aluminium adjuvant in the vaccine.’ 

Aluminum and mercury exposure from vaccines have both been disputed as causing neurological disorders, including autism. Earlier research on mercury has similarly indicated that it is found at elevated levels in the brains of deceased autistic patients. Over the years, however, more attention has been drawn to aluminum because it remains present in many more vaccines. But its critics have faced their share of pushback, like all contemporary critics of vaccines.

In 2008, Austrian journalist Bert Ehgartner was ejected from his blogging platform for writing critically of aluminum in vaccines. He went on to create a 2013 documentary Die Akt Aluminum (The Age of Aluminum)which took issue with human exposure to aluminum because of its toxicity.

It has been suspected that more vaccines containing aluminum were added to the recommended schedule to mask any observed effects on autism rates from the reduction of vaccines containing mercury. If true, that would give a whole, new meaning to the term “aluminum foil.”

Emily Willingham: Forbes’ Formerly Contributing “Contributor”

By Jake Crosby

Since May, Emily Willingham has gone from a Forbes “Contributor,” to “Subscriber,” and back to “Contributor” again according to her bio on the Forbes website. The difference between the first and second time she was listed as “Contributor” is that during the first time, she was actually contributing – albeit with embarrassingly misleading stories. Since her demotion to “Subscriber,” Forbes has published nothing from her, and she began referring to herself as a “Former journalist” in her Twitter bio. She would then replace it with her current bio which says, “All sweetness and light wrapped in a glittery sugar-spun cloud of happiness. Plus unicorns! So many unicorns.” This Twitter update along with the reversion to her old “Contributor” status at Forbes happened shortly before her receipt of UK lobby group Sense About Science’s 2014 John Maddox Prize, apparently to minimize attention to the fact that she no longer contributes.

Named in honor of Nature’s late editor, the John Maddox Prize is given out each year to reward someone who “has promoted sound science and evidence on a matter of public interest” according to Sense About Science. Willingham was rewarded for writing a Forbes article that is now the basis of a libel suit against her. Sense About Science is funded by the BMJ Group, which the plaintiff suing Willingham is also suing for libel.

Despite the fact that Willingham is now listed as a Forbes “Contributor” again, she still has not actually contributed a single article since May – one month after she wrote the article she is being sued over. Even before that, she conflated the research results of an early CDC study of thimerosal with those of a later one to wrongly deny that CDC researchers ever found an association with autism when they actually had. When asked on Autism Investigated about this misrepresentation of Willingham’s, Forbes Senior Editor Matthew Herper had no comment. When she won the award, he inadvertently drew attention to her no longer contributing to Forbes by referring to her writing in the past tense: “I loved having her write for us. She’s awesome.”

Willingham’s award is more a curse than an honor for Forbes, bringing yet more attention to her embarrassing reporting and to the even more embarrassing fact that she is still not contributing there anymore. The only purpose the reversion of her status back to “Contributor” from “Subscriber” currently serves is to minimize attention to that fact. It appears just as unlikely that this “Contributor” will ever contribute anything to Forbes again.

Addendum: See on The Epoch Times.

Jake Crosby is editor of Autism Investigated and a blogger at The Epoch Times. He is a 2011 graduate of Brandeis University with a Bachelor of Arts in both History and Health: Science, Society and Policy and a 2013 graduate of The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services with a Master of Public Health in Epidemiology. He currently attends the University of Texas School of Public Health where he is studying for a Ph.D. in Epidemiology.