Ovi -
we cover every issue
newsletterNewsletter
subscribeSubscribe
contactContact
searchSearch
Visit Ovi bookshop - Free eBooks  
Ovi Bookshop - Free Ebook
Join Ovi in Facebook
Ovi Language
Ovi on Facebook
The Breast Cancer Site
Murray Hunter: Opportunity, Strategy and Entrepreneurship
Stop human trafficking
 
BBC News :   - 
iBite :   - 
GermanGreekEnglishSpanishFinnishFrenchItalianPortugueseSwedish
Trouble at The Lancet: Wakefield and the Medical Profession Trouble at The Lancet: Wakefield and the Medical Profession
by Dr. Binoy Kampmark
2010-02-08 10:22:29
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author
DeliciousRedditFacebookDigg! StumbleUpon

‘It has become clear that several elements of the 1998 paper by Wakefield et al are incorrect, contrary to the findings of an earlier investigation.’  So concluded one of the longest misconduct inquiries in medical history.    The editors of Britain’s respected medical journal The Lancet felt compelled to retract a study by gastroenterologist Dr. Andrew J. Wakefield and his co-authors linking the Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine with bowel disease and autism. 

The decision followed the findings of the UK General Medical Council’s Fitness to Practice Panel.  On January 28, the Council ruled that Wakefield and his co-investigators had shown ‘callous disregard’ for the 12 children in the study, all chronic intestinal sufferers, titled ‘Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children’ (Feb 28, 1998).  Investigations supposedly approved by the local ethics committee had proven to be false.  Nor were the children ‘consecutively’ referred.

Another complicating factor to the study was the failure by the doctor in disclosing a conflict of interest in receiving money in legal cases where families were suing vaccine manufacturers for the harm caused to the children.  Nor did the complaints stop there.   Wakefield was accused of engaging in unduly invasive procedures in obtaining his material.  Despite the list of complaints against the doctor’s conduct, many felt that Wakefield’s thesis itself remained untouched.

Advertising vaccine programs for the public has not always been the strong suit of many governments.  In some instances, public suspicions have been justified.  Fiascos such as the U.S. National ‘Swine Flu’ Influenza Immunization Program in 1976 yielded a series of telling side effects which eventually led to the scrapping of the program.  As Dr. Russell Alexander of the Public Health School at the University of Washington cautioned, ‘My general view is that you should be conservative about putting foreign material into the human body.’ 

The Wakefield study, taking root in such rich soil of suspicion, did much to hamper vaccination efforts.  While numerous studies since 1998 have shown no firm link between autism and vaccines, the belief in many parents persists that it may well exist.  Vaccination rates have fallen in Europe and United States, resulting in the resurgence of various infectious diseases.  The counter-argument has been made suggesting that Wakefield got a fairly raw deal: his opponents had refused to consider literature which did back his case.  Convictions, Nietzsche suggests, are prisons that defy challenge.

The picture on Wakefield’s actual research remains unclear.  There is little doubt that The Lancet, through its peer-review process, mishandled the matter.  Warning signs were already present when 10 of the original 13 authors withdrew their names from the study.  Nor did the editors seem to question the small sample size – a mere 12 children – used to formulate such groundbreaking conclusions.  Curiously enough, the journal did something similar with a 1998 paper by Scottish scientist Arpad Pusztai, whose study dealt with feeding potatoes, both genetically engineered and non-engineered, to laboratory rats.  Pusztai’s own collaborators found his methods flawed.   The experiment lacked ‘controls’; the number of animals in that case was regarded as insufficiently small.  Even the diet of raw potatoes was questioned. 

Instead of a constructive debate on contesting positions, political sides have been taken.  Some see Wakefield as a saint martyred by the pro-vaccination movement and medical high priests trapped by dogma.  David Kirby in the Huffington Post (Feb 2) put it fairly well: ‘I believe that the public lynching and shaming of Dr. Wakefield is unwarranted and overwrought, and that history will ultimately judge who was right and who was wrong about proposing a possible association between vaccination and regressive autistic spectrum disorder (ASD).’   

There is certainly more at stake than a crucifixion here.  Autism rates are on the rise, though this may be due to the increasingly sophisticated (some might say laboured) systems of detection and ever expanding medical jargon.  Nor is it entirely clear whether autism is entirely genetic.  Vaccines will never be the sole causal factors – various environmental reasons may have to be considered.  The treatment dished out to Wakefield does also point to the troubles posed by smug orthodoxies that can take hold in the profession.  A parallel has been made between the career of Ignaz Semmelweis, who argued for the link between birth-related deaths occasioned by puerperal fever and contagion.  For that, he paid a similarly high price to that of Wakefield – academic shaming, ridicule and the loss of his job.

In the meantime, the destruction of Dr. Wakefield’s medical career can only best be assessed at some later date.  What we instead have here is a case of science morphing into the political and bungling at The Lancet.  The march of medicine has always been littered by martyrs and quacks and it remains to be seen how much quackery there was in this entire episode.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  Email: bkampmark@gmail.com


  
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author

Comments(4)
Get it off your chest
Name:
Comment:
 (comments policy)

Steve2010-02-08 10:55:27
Wakefield deserves everything that is coming to him now. His research was paid for by those trying to sue the company's that manufactured the vaccines saying the cause autism. The piss poor doctor also paid 5 year olds at his son's birthday party 5 quid for a blood sample for his research. WTF!!! This guys cherry pics and them makes up data like there is no tomorrow. He has been struck of the registry for doctors in the UK. I feel bad for those in the states, since that is where he is now.
The Huffington post, what a joke that rag is. Full of pseudoscience end of the world crackpots.

If Wakefield didn't want this attention, he shouldn't have lied. He helped spread an incorrect message that resulted in gullible parents placing their children at risk for diseases that haven't been prevalent in the west for decades. The anti-vax movement has claimed lives. Wakefield, a doctor, has helped contribute to the deaths of innocent children. He deservers what is coming and more.


steve2010-02-08 10:57:59
sorry for the grammatical errors. This subject just throws me over the edge and that leads to not spelling or punctuating correctly.


gregshilpa2010-02-17 09:25:59
Established in 1997, St. Gregorious Edu-Guidance is a leading education consultancy services providing exemplary service to students all over India. We deal in Admissions to all major professional courses in Premier Institutes across India. We are your one step solution for all career related needs, it may be MD, MBBS BE, BTech (ALL BRANCHES), , MDS, BDS, BPharm, BArch, MBA, MTech, MS, , PhD or any other courses. We provide personalized career solutions on an individual basis keeping in mind the aspirations of our client as well as the affordability factor.
FOR ALL CAREER RELATED NEEDS CONTACT US :
St. Gregorious Edu-Guidance,
#2, 2nd Floor,
J J Complex, Above Chemmannur Jewellers,
Marthahalli - P O,
Bangalore - 560037
Karnataka
e-mail :jojishpaily@gmail.com
Contact: +91 9448516637
+91 9886089896, +91 9449009983
080-32416570, 41719562




KB2010-06-02 02:49:08
Why are there no studies on the long-term effects of vaccination? Why are there so few studies that have examined what happens in the body at a cellular/molecular level after vaccination? Why are we vaccinating children in a vacuum of scientific knowledge? Why are there no long-term studies to assess illness and deaths related to vaccination? These are the kind of fundamental questions that anyone involved in vaccine policy should be addressing, but that is hardly the case.


© Copyright CHAMELEON PROJECT Tmi 2005-2008  -  Sitemap  -  Add to favourites  -  Link to Ovi
Privacy Policy  -  Contact  -  RSS Feeds  -  Search  -  Submissions  -  Subscribe  -  About Ovi