Will Current Media Frenzy Attacking Possible Autism Vaccine Links Be Counter Productive?

Will the current media frenzy unleashed with the BMJ-Brian Deer fraud allegations (unproven in a court of law) against Andrew Wakefield, followed up with another Paul Offit big media tour, and a star celebrity turn by Bill Gates yelling "LIARS" in his very loud voice finally result in an increase in vaccinations or will it be counterproductive?    Feel free to register your vote on the poll at the top of the sidebar. 

Should Wakefield Be Prosecuted as "Special to CNN" Commentator Advocates?

Alex B. Berezow, according to the CNN Opinion site, is the editor of RealClearScience and holds a Ph.D. in microbiology.  Mr. Berezow has provided a "special to CNN" opinion in which he argues that Dr. Andrew Wakefield should face  criminal prosecution for fraud in the United Kingdom AND in the United States. Alex B. Berezow Ph.D. repeats the accusation published in the BMJ that Wakefield falisfied patient histories in the now retracted Lancet study.  

Berezow leaves no doubt that, in his mind, Wakefield is guilty of fraud:

"It is for these reasons that Wakefield should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of American and British law. Perhaps if he spends the next few years behind bars, people who have suffered from the impact of his actions will see that justice is being done."

Berezow does not consider the other possibility, the possibility that Wakefield is NOT guilty of fraud.  This humble small town Canadian lawyer lacks the intellectual brilliance of a microbiologist and CNN commentator, and lacks the ability to get past, as the mainstream media appears to have done,  that old fashioned "presumption of innocence" thing. 

It is not my place to tell authorities in any jurisdiction who they should prosecute, or for what alleged offences.  I do not advocate that Dr Wakefield should face prosecution based on the work of journalist Brian Deer or any journal publication.  If a prosecution does take place though,  as Mr Berezow desires, it would, at least, give Dr. Wakefield an opportunity to answer the allegations. At this time the fraud allegations, remain just that ... allegations, notwithstanding the massive media piling on and promotion of those allegations as though they were proven facts.

Will a fraud prosecution happen?  Or will unproven fraud allegations continue to be made with abandon in the mainstream media?  Dr. Wakefield would obviously lose much if convicted.  But the credibility of the BMJ, the Mainstream Media and Brian Berezow would suffer greatly if Dr Wakefield was acquitted or found NOT GUILTY.

I am going to guess wildly that no prosecution will occur, that those who allege Wakefield committed fraud  are happy to let the Mainstream Media repeat the allegations as fact and let it end at that.

What Court of Law Convicted Dr Andrew Wakefield of Fraud?

The "autism" news has been overwhelmed in the past 48 hours with news that Dr Andrew Wakefield committed fraud in conducting and publishing the MMR study which has since been retracted.  

I was aware that a medical society tribunal in the UK had found problems with the MMR study but I was unaware that a court of law, or governing medical society tribunal, had found Wakefield guilty of the serious offence of fraud.

If anyone knows which court of law,  or governing medical society tribunal,  found Dr. Wakefield guilty of fraud could you post a link to this site please?

Thank you.

Council of Europe Committee Report Denounces Unjustified Swine Flu Scare, Waste of Public Money

Attached is the press release from the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) outlining the conclusions of the provisional PACE report, The handling of the H1N1 pandemic: more transparency needed. The Press Release  denounces the unjustified Swine Flu scare and waste of public money. Fiona Godlee, Editor-in-Chief of the British Medical Journal,  told the Council that, according to an investigation by her journal, scientists who drew up key WHO guidelines on stockpiling flu vaccines had previously been paid by drug companies which stood to profit.

Meanwhile, here in New Brunswick, Canada, on the same day the Council of Europe report was released questioning the handling of the H1N1 flu our Department of Health announced plans to expand  our seasonal flu vaccination program to cover all children under 18 "after the success of last fall's H1N1 campaign."  The Department of Health Deputy Chief Medical Officer Paul Van Buynter measured success solely by the large numbers of New Brunswickers who received the H1N1 shot.  There is no mention of the many credible voices, in Canada and in Europe who have questioned whether the scare campaign launched in Europe and elsewhere including here in New Brunswick was justified.

Press release - 455(2010)

PACE Health Committee denounces ‘unjustified scare’ of Swine Flu, waste of public money

Strasbourg, 04.06.2010 – The handling of the H1N1 pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), EU agencies and national governments led to a “waste of large sums of public money, and unjustified scares and fears about the health risks faced by the European public”, according to a report by the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) made public today in Paris.

The report, prepared by Paul Flynn (United Kingdom, SOC) and approved today by the committee ahead of a plenary debate at the end of this month, says there was “overwhelming evidence that the seriousness of the pandemic was vastly overrated by WHO”, resulting in a distortion of public health priorities.

Presenting his report, Mr Flynn told the committee: “this was a pandemic that never really was”, and described the vaccination programme as “placebo medicine on a large scale” (see video below).

In its adopted text, the committee identifies what it calls “grave shortcomings” in the transparency of decision-making about the outbreak, generating concerns about the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on decisions taken. Plummeting confidence in such advice could prove “disastrous” in the case of a severe future pandemic, it warns.

In particular, the WHO and European health institutions were not willing to publish the names and declarations of interest of the members of the WHO Emergency Committee and relevant European advisory bodies directly involved in recommendations concerning the pandemic, the parliamentarians point out.

However, attending the meeting was Fiona Godlee, the Editor-in-Chief of the British Medical Journal, who told the parliamentarians that, according to an investigation by her journal, scientists who drew up key WHO guidelines on stockpiling flu vaccines had previously been paid by drug companies which stood to profit.

The WHO has been “highly defensive”, the committee said, and unwilling to accept that a change in the definition of a pandemic was made, or to revise its prognosis of the Swine Flu outbreak.

The committee sets out a series of urgent recommendations for greater transparency and better governance in public health, as well as safeguards against what it calls “undue influence by vested interests”. It also calls for a public fund to support independent research, trials and expert advice, possibly financed by an obligatory contribution of the pharmaceutical industry, as well as closer collaboration with the media to avoid “sensationalism and scaremongering in the public health domain”.

The report is due to be debated by parliamentarians from all 47 Council of Europe member states on Thursday 24 June during PACE’s summer session in Strasbourg.

Contacts

In Paris: Francesc Ferrer, mobile: +33 (0)6 30 49 68 22

In Strasbourg: PACE Communication Division, tel. +33 (0)3 88 41 31 93, mobile: +33 (0)6 30 49 68 20