Tag Archives: Murch Retraction

Autism Investigated and a Longtime Reader Challenge Peter Hotez


Not since Autism Investigated’s founding has the editor challenged the vaccine people at their own events. But on March 6, vaccine developer Peter Hotez came to University of North Florida to deny he poisoned his daughter Rachel into autism. He transcribed his denial into a book, titled Vaccines Did Not Cause Rachel’s Autism. Compared to past encounters between 2011-2013, both Hotez and the venue that hosted him were surprisingly friendly. The level of nonsense spewed was about the same, however.

Although the event was an “Autism Symposium,” Hotez spent much of his talk discussing infectious diseases. Among those were the neglected tropical diseases that he spent his career researching. He spent relatively little time discussing his daughter, although he was clear that she was very severely afflicted. He repeated the usual mantra of no link to autism, of course, mentioning the fraudulent retraction of the seminal autism-vaccine study. Hotez went even further to deny there is not even an autism epidemic. “It’s really better diagnosis.” The one good thing about his talk was when he plugged and read from Autism Investigated’s meme about him.

Autism Investigated attended the event with Maurine Meleck, a longtime reader, advocate, author and grandmother of two men diagnosed with autism. One of them is recovered, but the other is still disabled and she cares for him. Unexpectedly, she was the first to ask a question. When she brought up the recovery of one of her grandsons and the improvement of the other, Hotez completely denied recovery was even possible for autism. “You don’t recover from autism,” he said.

She continued, “Schools are exploding with children in special education, many of whom have autism. How could you deny there’s an epidemic?”

“I didn’t say there’s no epidemic,” he said.

“You did!”

Hotez doubled down on his denial, stating that by “better diagnosis” he meant better diagnosis of girls with autism. “The key take away from my talk is that whatever causes autism, vaccines are not to blame!”

A few more people asked questions after that. One was a woman who admitted she delayed the MMR vaccine for her child. Hotez didn’t approve, “I wouldn’t do that!”

Another questioner said she felt there was a real autism epidemic. Then the mic finally was passed to Autism Investigated.

Hotez was then asked about the seminal 1998 autism-vaccine study coauthors’ fraudulent retraction of the interpretation. Hotez didn’t even know about the coauthors’ retraction, “I think it was an expression of concern.” He was corrected, having been told how the coauthors’ retraction had nothing to do with the accuracy of the conclusion but was really a statement in favor of vaccines, making it a fraudulent retraction. Hotez mentioned that the lead author Andrew Wakefield lost his medical license. When Autism Investigated informed him that it was because he didn’t cosign the fraudulent retraction, Hotez deferred to talk afterwards.

After the event ended, the editor and Maurine Meleck both introduced themselves. Meleck gave Hotez a copy of her book Rooting Out Bedhead: Autism and Other Brushes with Chaos. Upon the introduction of Autism Investigated’s editor, Hotez nervously laughed, “Oh, so you’re Jake Crosby! You write such mean things about me!”

Giving Autism Investigated his business card, Hotez said, “I have to run to the airport, but would love to talk more!”

He did compliment Autism Investigated’s post on JB Handley, ironically, saying, “You’re one of the nice ones.” Of course, that’s comparing the editor to someone who’s not nice to other vaccine skeptics simply because they don’t think he’s the smartest man in the room.

The event was ultimately one giant paradox. It was an event that was strangely out of sync with other events where the response by other pro-vaccine speakers like Paul Offit were overtly hostile. Yet the event was ultimately the same in its pushing of nonsense to promote toxic vaccinations. Hotez will never stop being in denial of his daughter’s autism, for it would mean that vaccines were involved.

SharylAttkisson.com: Jake Crosby on Original Autism-Vaccine Cover-Up

Originally posted on SharylAttkisson.com

Note: Views in this and any other opinion piece that appear on this site do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.sharylattkisson.com and are solely those of the author.

By Jake Crosby, MPH

U.S. public health officials like National Institutes of Health doctor Anthony Fauci deny the vaccine-autism link by repeating disinformation about a seminal autism-vaccine study. That study, published in The Lancet in 1998, examined 12 children treated at London’s Royal Free Hospital Medical School. Most developed adverse symptoms shortly after their routine measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccinations.

The study marked the beginning of the first major research undertaking of the autism-vaccine link at an academic institution. Because parents were startled by the findings, and—in my opinion— because there were huge financial implications in terms of possible lawsuits against vaccine makers, the study and its lead author, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, were targeted in a giant campaign to discredit them. Those pursuing this smear campaign, not surprisingly, have ties to vaccine maker GlaxoSmithKline.

One of those people was the Head of Medicine at Royal Free Hospital from 1999-2011, Dr. Mark Pepys. He wanted to stop Dr. Wakefield’s work but the witch hunt would look too obvious if the accusations came directly from the medical school that forced him out two years prior. So Dr. Pepys would need a journalist who could take credit for those accusations while insulating the medical school from scrutiny by being the journalist’s protected “source.”

To begin the smear, medical records of children in the study were leaked to a Sunday Times journalist named Brian Deer. He received children’s names, family backgrounds and hospital admissions dates. Deer would later boast about having this information in the BMJ. In 2004, he posted a child’s medical note and a table of children’s names and the dates they were admitted to the Royal Free on his website. This was a serious violation of medical privacy rules, laws and practices. According to study co-author Simon Murch, “the Data Protection Act must have been broken.”

Dr. Pepys had strong ties to GlaxoSmithKline even before the merger that created the company, enjoying substantial support from precursor Glaxo Wellcome. Before he accepted the position of Head of Medicine of the Royal Free in 1999, he demanded Dr. Wakefield’s dismissal. Dr. Pepys ultimately took credit for ousting Dr. Wakefield at Royal Free Hospital in 2001, effectively dismantling the first autism-vaccine research unit in an academic institution.

After the 1998 study’s publication, Dr. Wakefield’s co-author Dr. Simon Murch was promoted to Director of the Centre for Paediatric Gastroenterology at Royal Free Hospital. Then, in September 2003, Dr. Murch submitted a letter to The Lancet repudiating the notion of any possible link between autism and vaccines. His submission came just two months after Crispin Davis, CEO of Lancet publisher Reed Elsevier, joined the board of directors at GlaxoSmithKline.

With Dr. Murch’s repudiation, the United Kingdom (UK) government’s Legal Aid Board cut off financial aid to help victims in lawsuits against MMR manufacturers, including GlaxoSmithKline. The GlaxoSmithKline alliance with Pepys-headed Royal Free Hospital and the Davis-published Lancet continued as Deer continued to advance the smear. In his reports, Deer claimed Dr. Wakefield’s study was unethical and that he concealed its funding source. The latter claim was “found proved” by a disciplinary tribunal but ultimately overturned.

Deer also took an unusual step for a journalist: he filed a professional disciplinary complaint against Dr. Wakefield and two of his co-authors including Simon Murch.

A week after the complaint, 10 of the 13 Dr. Wakefield’s co-authors, led by Dr. Murch, issued a fraudulent retraction of the interpretation of the 1998 study. It was a statement of regret over raising an autism-vaccine link possibility that was falsely portrayed as a scientific retraction.

After the fraudulent retraction, vaccine interests falsely misrepresented it as if it was a scientific repudiation of any link between vaccines and autism. That retraction became a basis for rejection of thousands of vaccine autism injury claims in U.S. vaccine court.

Then, the smear machine prompted a medical fitness-to-practice tribunal of Dr. Wakefield. Dr. Wakefield’s medical license was revoked in 2010. The chair of that tribunal, Dr. Surendra Kumar, was a GlaxoSmithKline shareholder. After that decision in 2010, “The Lancet” fully retracted Dr. Wakefield’s study.

Ultimately, in 2012, a High Court overturned the reasons of unethical research and misrepresented participant enrollment that remains stated in The Lancet retraction. Unsurprisingly, “The Lancet” has not reversed its retraction.

So today, health officials across the pond here in the U.S., including Dr. Fauci and his superior, NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins, continue to cite the false retraction as if it scientifically proves vaccines do not cause autism. They ignore the factual details on the excuse of “The Lancet” journal’s undeserved reputation.

Jake Crosby has a Master of Public Health degree in epidemiology from George Washington University and is editor of AutismInvestigated.com.

Editor’s Note: Crosby received no response for comment from the relevant authors mentioned in his op-ed.

Richard Horton is Thief-in-Chief of Medical Record-Stealing Journal

“The role of Brian Deer mystifies me. I agree with you that he has had access to many confidential documents, which seems surprising.” –Lancet editor Richard Horton in an email to a mother that he’d also leak to Sunday Times‘ reporter Brian Deer, who illegally acquired the medical records of her children.

In 2004, Lancet editor Richard Horton stated that Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s 1998 seminal paper on the vaccine-autism link should have dishonestly omitted disabled children’s adverse vaccine events from publication. He said this as he was colluding with the Royal Free Hospital to fabricate lies about the research by distorting medical records the hospital illegally leaked to opposition researcher Brian Deer. They subsequently got all the coauthors still working at the hospital to fraudulently retract the interpretation. They then had the article fully retracted in 2010 after getting the UK’s General Medical Council to sign on to the stolen medical record-based lies.

Then in 2012, the stolen medical record-based reasons stated for The Lancet‘s full retraction of the seminal autism-vaccine paper were overturned in court. So Autism Investigated demanded its editor and three most recent ombudsmen restore the article. In 2015, current ombudsman Malcolm Molyneux admitted to Autism Investigated that the basis of the retraction was not stated in the retraction. Ironically, he later asserted a “strong case” for retraction in his annual report. Of course it’s obvious he’s lying because his editor Richard Horton is telling him to, having colluded with Sir Mark Pepys who shut down that research and ousted its lead scientist.

In the “Ombudsman’s report for 2015,” current ombudsman of The Lancet Malcolm Molyneux wrote:

A surprising complaint received later in the year proposed that a research study that was published in The Lancet in 1998 and fully retracted in February, 2010, should be reinstated to the literature. My adjudication was that the argument for reinstatement of the paper, based on a case in the UK’s High Court brought by one of the paper’s authors, was not directly prejudicial to the strong case for the paper’s retraction. 

In reality, he admitted that the basis for the retraction could no longer be stated by the journal’s retraction statement:

Dear Mr Crosby,

Thank you for your letter of June 13, 2015, in which you request that the Lancet Editor reinstate the retracted paper Ileal-lymphoid-nodular-hyperplasia, non-specific colitis and pervasive developmental disorder in children.

In the retraction statement, the editors of The Lancet stated that “several elements of the 1998 paper by Wakefield et al are incorrect. In particular….’” The retraction then mentions the enrolment procedure and ethical clearance, but implies that there remain other elements on which the decision was based.

Having considered all of the relevant material, I can see no sufficient reason for reinstatement of the Wakefield paper. I do not believe that COPE’s guidelines have been violated by retraction of the paper in question, or by failure to reinstate it.

I do not believe there is justification for any further debate about this extensively discussed article.

Yours sincerely,

Prof Malcolm Molyneux, Lancet Ombudsman

If there was a “strong case” for retraction, Molyneux would be able to make it. Since there is actually no case, he cannot. The Lancet’s full retraction is as fraudulent as 10 of the 13 coauthors’ previous retraction also forced by Pepys and Horton.

Now the editor of the medical record-stealing medical journal has the gall to come to America in March. Let’s tell that medical record thief to his face that he’s not welcome in our country.

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

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.

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.