A brief comment on the ongoing Wakefield saga. Stephen Black highlighted that Brian Deer, whose Huffington Post comments Mike Palij linked to at http://tinyurl.com/c8xykb , has a (dubious) record of campaigning against vaccines. I'll just add that the journalist Melanie Phillips whom Deer quotes in support of his arguments in the Huffington Post article has a long record of vociferous campaigning in favour of Wakefield in the Daily Mail. That's not to say that what she writes in the quotes provided by Deer is necessarily erroneous, only that it should be treated with caution.
Allen Esterson Former lecturer, Science Department Southwark College, London http://www.esterson.org ******************************** [tips] "Wakefield redux" redux sblack Sun, 15 Feb 2009 17:38:25 -0800 Mike Palij (on February 11) brought to our attention a recent dust-up in the autism-vaccine war. The focus was on Andrew Wakefield, the British doctor who first proposed in a 1998 report in the respected medical journal _Lancet_ that autism was caused by MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccination. This claim was influential in support of the anti-vaccination movement, and appears to have helped persuade many parents to refuse vaccination as possibly harmful to their children. But in 2004 ten of Wakefield's 12 co-authors took the unusual step of retracting the paper. Currently Wakefield is on trial before the General Medical Council (of Britain) on charges of professional misconduct relating to his research. These charges seem to have arisen, at least in part, as a result of an investigation by the London Times journalist, Brian Deer. Deer has since written a further article for the Times alleging that Wakefield fabricated his data. As Mike noted, Keith Olbermann, an American TV commentator, recently named Wakefield as his "Worst Person in the World". This is apparently on the basis of the accusations in Deer's most recent Times article. Mike then told us that "Brian Deer... apparently is not a disinterested reviewer of facts. This was brought out in David Kirby's blog on the Huffingtom Post... Kirby presents details about Brian Deer that cast doubt on Deer's objectively and veracity; see: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/keith-olbermann-todays-be_b_166 103.html " Mike notes that "Olberman has since offered an apology (correction?) for his Worst Person nomination" but, appropriately cautious, Mike also points out that " Whether David Kirby is a disinterested reviewer is also open to review, as he has written at least one book on the vaccine-autism controvery". This seems to be an understatement. Kirby's book is called Evidence of Harm - Mercury in Vaccines and the Autism Epidemic: A Medical Controversy According to Wikipedia, "Evidence of Harm was reviewed negatively in the British Medical Journal. The reviewer described Kirby's book as "woefully one-sided", and wrote: "In his determination to provide an account that is sympathetic to the parents, Kirby enters into the grip of the same delusion and ends up in the same angry and paranoid universe into which campaigners have descended". OK, now that I've got through reviewing all that, here's what's new. The "Autism News Beat", which bills itself as "an evidence-based resource for journalists" claims that Olbermann was wrong to retract his "Worst Person" award to Wakefield and to criticize Deer, and that Olbermann retracted due to pressure from the anti-vaccination movement. In the words of Autism News Beat, all Deer was guilty of was "investigative journalism". You can read it here: http://autism-news-beat.com/?p=318&cpage=1#comment-2209 So I think the best we can do is hope for some clarity on all this from the General Medical Council when it completes its trial. Stephen ----------------------------------------------------------------- Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University e-mail: [email protected] 2600 College St. Sherbrooke QC J1M 1Z7 Canada ***************************** [tips] Wakefield Redux Mike Palij Wed, 11 Feb 2009 21:08:13 -0800 Since the first article on Wakefield came out on the London Times website, a couple of events of note have happened. (1) Remember that the Times of London is a Rupert Murdoch paper. That will either raise or lower the truth value on your truthometer (or bring to mind quaint headlines like this one from the Murdoch NY Post: "Headless Body Founrd in Topless bar". See: http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/anniversary/35th/n_8568/ (2) Brian Deer, the writer of the London Times article apparently is not a disinterested reviewer of facts. This was brought out in David Kirby's blog on the Huffingtom Post after Keith Oblerman had listed Wakefield as his "Worst Person in the World"; see: http://skepticcat.blogspot.com/2009/02/olberman-andrew-wakefield-worst-pers on.html However, Kirby presents details about Brian Deer that cast doubt on Deer's objectively and veracity; see: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/keith-olbermann-todays-be_b_16610 3.html Olberman has since offered an apology (correction?) for his Worst Person nomination (3) Olberman is in a perpatual war with Bill O'Reilly and when he quotes Murdoch he does it in as "Pirate voice" with Arrgh! thrown in. It is ironic that he used an article in a Murdoch paper which he later had to retract. (4) Whether David Kirby is a disinterested reviewer is also open to review, as he has written at least on book on the vaccine-autism controvery. -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
