If you take the time to read this, you will see clearly the interwoven ‘money’ behind this proposed killing spree on the part of big pharma. ~J
February 28, 2015
Annie Sparrow on February 19, 2015 – 6:08PM ET
Mennonite girls gather at the health and safety clinic in Ohio (AP/Tom E. Puskar)
In the previous 2 sections, this article introduced basic information on The Nation itself and on those concerned about vaccines, and began an analysis of The Nation article by responding to its assertions by presenting other material through links to immunology and epidemiology studies and to vaccine history.
Through out there is an effort not to guide your thinking by using emotion or sarcasm but to offer as many quality links as possible, to encourage you to learn as much as possible yourself and to research things for yourself. This involves your life, not just the lives of infants and school childrren, because the proposed mandates will include you and everyone you know. The Nation article provides no references at all, so there is an attempt to fill in many blanks here by bringing The Nation readers a much broader view of vaccines and of the global controversy surrounding them, than you may have had.
We pick up where we left off:
TN: Yet in the United States the anti-vaccination movement has seen increasing numbers of parents refuse measles and other vaccines “on behalf” of their unprotected children.
Yes, more and more parents distrust the MMR having learned out it, and some distrust other vaccines as well.
TN: That misguided movement began with the unconscionable malpractice of Andrew Wakefield.
Parents – what The Nation article would call “that misguided movement” – say they came to Wakefield, not he to them. He was a doctor who had been entirely uninvolved in autism or vaccines before they asked his help – about their children’s gut problems. They say they went to him because he was a well-respected gastroenterologist.
But let those parents speak for themselves. Progressives can do their own comparison between wht is said by them and by The Nation.
This parent whose children were part of Wakefield’s study addresses accusations against Wakefield that have been made since the beginning by corporate media. Since they are the same accusations being made by The Nation article, she is responding in a sense to the article here, so progressives have an opportunity to learn more, including from her direct experience.
I, as a parent of two children in the Lancet study, have had to speak out about the vicious attacks on Dr. Andrew Wakefield by his own government, the US government and the media blaming him for the measles outbreak in Wales.
The Lancet study was not paid for by the Legal Services Commission and our children were referred to the Royal Free Hospital because they were very sick and would still have had investigations done even if they were not part of the Lancet research as many more children have done after the Lancet study by other consultants at the Royal Free and other hospitals in London.
Dr. Andrew Wakefield listened to the concerns of many parents about their sick children suffering with bowel conditions and a form of Autism, a bowel condition and brain damage that was ignored by other professionals. These parents were demonstrably ‘black listed’ for saying their children became ill after the MMR vaccine.
Parents were speaking about this situation years before Dr. Wakefield came on the scene and our government also knew about these concerns years before the Lancet study yet they did nothing to investigate, leaving hundreds of other children at risk of side effects. Our government did not listen to parents but accused them of making the symptoms up and threatening to take their children away if they did not stop making a connection with MMR vaccine. As a result, these children and young adults live in a great deal of pain to this day (one doctor saying to my son ‘we believe you believe you are in pain’).
There is much more I could say about the experience of my family and others but I want to make it clear that the children’s claims in relation to MMR were supported by many other experts in several disciplines all of whom provided reports for the court. I attach a list of them. These experts would all have given evidence at the Royal Courts of Justice on behalf of hundreds of children we claim were damaged by the MMR vaccine had the cases been allowed to continue. In addition the solicitors representing the claimants were in touch with and drawing on the expertise from many more than these, but many did not want to be formal experts. I don’t know how much the experts listed were paid, but they were all paid fees just as Dr. Wakefield was in the normal way that experts are paid in litigation cases (and probably much less than the defendants’ experts were paid!).
MMR Claimant Experts (who produced reports that were served)
Professor M B Abou- Donia
professor of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology and a professor of Neurobiology Duke University medical centre
Pharmacology and neurobiology
Dr Kenneth Aitken
K.Aitken Consultancy, Independent Consultant
Child Clinical Neuropsychologist,
Professor William Banks Professor in the Department of Pharmacology & Physiology, both departments at Saint Louis University School of Medicine
Pharmacology and Physiology
Dr. Edward Bilsky Associate Professor of Pharmacology University of New England College of Medicine
James Jeffrey Bradstreet, MD, Fellow, AAFP
International Child Development Resource Center Adjunct Professor of Neurosciences Department of Psychology Stetson University Celebration, Florida
And many more ….
For the rest of the letter and to the full list, go here.
And here progressives have an opportunity to “meet” Wakefield, here what he has to say, and decide for themselves whether he appears to be a danger to children, a medical fraud, and out for profit.
The Nation readers are certainly aware of the concept of “reverse blame,” a method by which those responsible fro wrong-doing take attention away from themselves and project it outward onto someone else. So, if one takes the accusations against Wakefield and applies them to those accusing Wakefield – the vaccine manufacturers and those invested in them – then it is the vaccine industry itself which is the danger to children, a medical fraud, and out for profit.
Back to The Nation article as it begins making accusations of Wakefield that the mother’s letter and Wakefied himself may have addressed already. The value of analyzing The Nation article point by point, however, is that it can progressives a chance to see the arguments on both sides at the same time so they can watch what is happening around vaccines with more knowledge and awareness.
TN: A doctor who has since lost his license, he and his coauthors of a 1998 article in The Lancet made up a syndrome consisting of diarrhea and developmental disorder (“regressive autism”) that he tried to link to the MMR vaccine for the sole purpose of financial gain. He was not at the time a practicing doctor, and had no expertise with autism, but he manipulated parental fears and an editor’s penchant for controversial papers to secure publication in The Lancet, a respected medical journal. Extraordinarily, despite his financial conflict of interest, despite having fabricated the syndrome and falsified the data to “fit” his criteria, his paper passed peer review.
The Nation author’s attack on Wakefield starts with an issue of timing – did Wakefield start a movement or was he approached by people who were seeking help for their autistic kids (see letter above). Were they an already existing “movement” of parents of autistic children concerned about vaccines?
The Nation’s accusations continue. The reader could get mired in a “He did it” versus “No, he didn’t” situation, so The Nation readers are encouraged to consider themselves an open source investigation into this since the mandating of a corporate product – vaccines – that can injure and kill people, including progressives and members of their own families – is on the table.
Needless to say, with the The Nation article and the mother’s letter and the video of Wakefield, The Nation’s readers are faced with two entirely conflicting reports of what happened. So it might be even more useful to take a step back from the fray and emotion, and look at who the players are and what is at stake, what is occurring structurally, and apply your political senses..
On one side, you have Andrew Wakefield, until the attack on him, a highly respected UK gastro-enterologist (which was why mothers went to him about their autistic children’s gut issues). Everything he wrote on the association between autism and bowel issues has been supported in multiple other papers. He did not oppose vaccination but was concerned about the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella together) and suggested that parents use the single measles vaccine instead until the MMR could be researched further. He lost his job and license and left the UK and moved to the US where he began doing research, applying the CDC vaccine schedule, starting with infant monkeys and following them through as they got older . He filed libel suit against those who were attacking him. What it contains as evidence and where it is now in the courts is something others can research for themselves. He is likely getting donations from families for his monkey research with vaccines. Whether either of those is unethical profit seeking is up the the readers here to decide for themselves..
On the other side, there are people on the boards of or heavily invested in two of the largest vaccine corporations in the world, GSK and Merck – which both make the MMR vaccine. These people own global media empires – including Fox News, the WSJ, Reuters, News of the World and more – are partners with the Rockefellers, were involved in taking private corporate control over the Human Genome Project, and have influence over the Lancet which pulled Wakefield’s article . For more read Murdoch and Vaccines
Here is a snapshot of just some of those involved who would be familiar to progressive readers of The Nation readers: Rupert and James Murdoch, David Rockefeller, George Soros, the CEO of Reuters, Goldman Sachs, and more – they’re all close partners with a heavy stake in recombinant DNA (GMO) vaccines.
This little chart shows the vaccine industry on one side and Wakefield on the other and the connection between those behind the inquiry and behind the Lancet. For progressives it might give a fuller idea of the forces at play around the vaccines. Wakefield’s single study (confirmed by many other peer reviewed studies) stepped on some “important” toes. They certainly tried to crush him using their global media.
Wakefield being attacked here by The Nation seems very odd, since The Nation should obviously – based on progressive politics – be exposing the corporate interests and especially Murdoch’s involvement, rather than attacking an individual and bizarrely claiming he alone is responsible for an grassroots movement. This becomes an even odder accusation since that amorphous “movement” of parents of vaccine-injured children existed long before a few UK mothers came to Wakefield for help.
But Progressives have been so flooded by so many media articles excoriating Wakefiend, including from the NY Times, and now again here, that they may be triggered just by Wakefield’s name, as though he were the personification of evil and is some great danger, some charlatan and scam artist.
Somehow Wakefield went from a respected MD to all that is unethical – medically, academically, financially – based on his one paper. Though progressives see Murdoch as dangerous politically and abhor Fox News he owns, when they hear about a individual doctor named Wakefield being attacked by Murdoch’s media and almost all the rest of western media, and all at the same time, it’s strange they do not ask whether something corporate is afoot or notice that “progressive media” has not only not weighing in on behalf of ordinary people whose children have been vaccine-injured (and which there is evidence since the government’s vaccine compensation program has ordered payment to parents for their children’s autism caused by vaccines), but progressive media has done no research whatever.
Progressive media has not investigated vaccines
Why has progressive media not exposed the immense financial interests at stake or the tremendous corruption of the pharmaceutical/vaccine industry? Instead, as in this Nation article, parents seeking help are set apart as part of a “misguided movement” and the doctor who did a paper asking questions about one vaccine, is roundly demonized.
In this way, progressives have ended up knowing nothing real about Wakefield, about vaccines, about immunology, about the vaccine experiments at Auschwitz by the pharmaceutical industry that put Hitler into office, about the history of the Rockefeller control over of all of medicine – medical schools, research institutes, medical journals, the WHO, the CDC, etc.. But progressives have learned a great deal that isn’t true by it being trumpeted over and over and over again by mainstream media and echoed by “progressive” media.”
Corruption of the pharmaceutical/vaccine industry
The corruption of the pharmaceutical industry is so rampant, warnings have gone out from everywhere – from the WHO, from Harvard, from insiders, from Croatia, fromChina, from a Cancer site reporting on work out of UC San Diego, from Forbes, etc. These are but a few examples.
Why hasn’t Amy Goodman covered any of this? Why is she not reporting on the outrage over vaccine mandates in NY, occurring right under her nose? Could it be because she is funded by Soros who is invested in vaccines?
Progressive media did not cover the food safety bills, covertly written by Monsanto
The same thing occurred around the food safety bills, which put the entire food supply under corporate control, Monsanto control.
The Nation and progressive media provided no investigations or education to its readers of the corrupt history of “food safety” in the US, including what Bill Clinton did to food safety, both in Arkansas and then as president, nationally and globally, or that Hillary Clinton was supported by Monsanto and pushed for the corporate centralization of the food supply. Progressives relying on the The Nation didn’t know the bills were written by Monsanto’s VP, Michael Taylor.
The Nation playing on negative emotions, encouraged its progressive readers to go against their own interests and support Monsanto’s take over of all food in the US
Instead, The Nation encouraged its readers to support the final bill by using antipathy for conservatives, suggesting anything the GOP opposes must be good”:
“Even” food safety. The terrible and even stupid GOP are so bad, they “even” oppose safe food. That is a message for progressives to support “food safety” – though they were given none of the details in the bills or of the Democratic Party’s involvement in making food considerably more unsafe on behalf of corporate interests. The message for The Nation readers is to push Obama to get “food safety” passed.
And the titles of The Nation articles on vaccines and on food safety set up its readers to be uncomfortable with “the other,” and thus think or do the opposite of what they want or don’t want.
Volunteer grassroots writers offered the only quality coverage of food safety
The Nation offered nothing substantive on the history of food safety and its previous dire consequences under Clinton, or on the Monsanto-planned take over of food under Obama. Whereas, there was stellar grassroots work on the subject. Many – dare one mention them positively ? – conservatives, libertarians, people with no political affiliation and a few progressives, who had direct knowledge of what was happening to farmers, made up an ad hoc media which tried their best to reach progressives and liberals to warn them they were being duped.
One example but there were so many, was work by Nicole Johnson, a mother in California who did what is still some of the most in-depth research on food safety.
The 2009 Food ‘Safety’ Bills Harmonize Agribusiness Practices in Service of Corporate Global Governance
What does food safety have to do with Wakefield and vaccines? Actually, quite a bit.
Nicole Johnson pointed out in Food “Safety” Reform and the Covert Continuation of the Enclosure Movement the odd failure of the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) to lift a finger to help its members – organic farmers. She then lists some of their behind the scenes connections.
Those powerful interests which led the NSAC to betray its members and not fight to protect non-GMO, real food in the US, are highlighted below.
“Has NSAC become a controlled opposition group? Does it appear to advocate for the interests of its grassroots membership while actually advancing the agenda of vested interests?”If you examine NSAC’s membership list, you’ll find that among its participating members is the Wallace Center at Winrock International. Winrock International was founded by Winthrop Rockefeller and counts in the long list of its funding partners numerous foundations, government agencies, international agencies, private sector groups and more, all of whom are aligned with vested interests that want international standards harmonized in order to eliminate barriers to international trade. Winrock International receives financial support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund,the Rockefeller Foundation, the DOE, USAID, the US Department of State,the USDA, the World Bank, the FAO, SYSCO and the Tides Foundation. Winrock International also has long-standing ties with Monsanto, which has benefited from Winrock’s help in introducing its products to farmers in developing nations around the world. It’s hard to image that any organization advocating for the grassroots could be in partnership with a group funded by the likes of these powerful vested interests and not be subject to their influence or control.
What does this have to do with Wakefield and vaccines?
Every single one of those gigantic foundations, agencies, and corporations that supported Monsanto’s food safety bill giving them control over all food in the US – are involved in vaccines and seeking mandates.
They successfully used The Nation to influence progressives – without their realizing it – to support Monsanto’s removal of American’s rights over their food.
And the are using The Nation again, this time in support of vaccines and the pharmaceutical industry’s removal of Americans’ rights over their own bodies.
Wakefield is the media boogie man. And The Nation’s is using him in that way as well so progressives will emotionally reject him and whatever he has to say, so they will automatically and intensely reject hims, someone concerned about vaccines, and thus progressives will reject all concern about vaccines.
“All the present hullaballoo is not really about what Wakefield did. It is simply a ploy by a weak government and even weaker mainstream media to distract from the ever growing problem of vaccine damage and the expectation that the “CDC Whistleblower” William Thompson will ultimately give evidence before Congress that the CDC have known all along that MMR can cause autism (which is what Wakefield feared in 1998).
Others believe there is a massive attack on Wakefield because of the monkey study he has been working on since he left the UK a few years ago.
“The first phase of this monkey study was published three months ago in the prestigious medical journal Neurotoxicology, and focused on the first two weeks of life when the vaccinated monkeys received a single vaccine for Hepatitis B, mimicking the U.S. vaccine schedule. The results, which you can read for yourself here (http://fourteenstudies.org/pdf/primates_hep_…), were disturbing. Vaccinated monkeys, unlike their unvaccinated peers, suffered the loss of many reflexes that are critical for survival.
Dr. Wakefield and his scientific colleagues are on the brink of publishing their entire study, which followed the monkeys through the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule over a multi-year period. It is our understanding that the difference in outcome for the vaccinated monkeys versus the unvaccinated controls is both stark and devastating.
There is no question that the publication of the monkey study will lend substantial credibility to the theory that over-vaccination of young children is leading to neurological damage, including autism. ….
Perhaps you’ve already seen for yourself that you can’t open the link to the study. This supports the idea that scientific censorship is occurring. I saw the earlier study but cannot find it now. It was showing a loss of the nursing reflex, a survival reflex if ever there were one.
If this study is as described above, there is immense financial incentive for vaccine manufacturers to tarnish Wakefield, and their corruption is legendary. The missing videos in this article by the Office of Medical and Scientific Justice tell their own tale.
But it’s possible that the attack on Wakefield may go beyond needing a totemic figure to represent “false science” and “the evil of anyone questioning vaccines,: and even beyond the monkey study as well. It may be much bigger. Who is involved?
From Murdoch and Vaccines
“This group (that is connected to attacking Wakefield) is currently advancing a world leading biotechnology trust, heavily invested in “genetopharmaceuticals” and flu vaccine genetic engineering. Strike the word “flu.” They are heavily invested in vaccine genetic engineering.
“Members of this group, along with George Soros-directed assets, virtually monopolized the genetics industry during the 1990s, culminating in thecorporate privatization of the Human Genome Project.
(Merck’s) Pneumovax vaccine, is broadening markets as [that is, because] the main ingredient –laboratory engineered H1N1 virus– mutates, as in the Ukraine, becoming more deadly.
These interests are the biotech industry. They are about genetic engineering. They have been genetically engineering grains, vegetables, fruits, oils, trees, animals, fish, insects, …. and more.
It is that “more” that Wakefield seemed to have gotten too close to.
These people are making large profit on the MMR and can expect to make billions more globally if vaccine mandates can be put in place. It is their global media empire which attacked Wakefield. Why? He simply wrote about gut issues in his paper and suggested that use of the single measles vaccine, rather than a trivalent vaccine (measles, mumps, and rubella combined) might be advisable until there were more research on the MMR.
Go to 1:37 in the video to hear about Wakefield’s recommendation of the single measles vaccine because it had been more adequately tested for safety and the response he got, before it was actually removed from the market altogether.
Why does this matter, one vaccine versus another?
Wakefield’s big crime may have been in just this – encouraging a return to the single measles vaccine. Why was that a problem? Because he may not have just suggested one vaccine rather than another.
Those involved in the MMR and other vaccines are involved in genetic engineering of vaccines and all the new vaccines are recombinant DNA (GMO) vaccines.
The single measles vaccine that Wakefield suggested was an earlier vaccine and likely was not genetically engineered.
If that simple vaccine was safe and the MMR was not, the enormous but unspoken threat Wakefield was touching on was that if there was a problem with the newer vaccine, that could potentially expose that it was actually quite different from the previous vaccines – that it was in fact a GMO vaccine. While that might not immediately sound negative, might even sound like “advanced science in better vaccines, the reality is that those vaccines are shooting GMOs into kids’ DNA and their DNA is being altered. Vaccines are altering DNA.
Children are being genetically engineered by vaccines.
If that is so, Wakefield’s encouragement to return to a single vaccine might lead the millions of people opposing GMOs in agriculture because of the increasing awareness of the diseases attendant on the DNA altering just of plants, to grasp in an instant the horror of children also being altered.
So a realization about GMO vaccines threaten a multitrillion dollar industry on the cusp on vaccine mandates for the entire world and the dream of astoundingly increased markets and thus profits beyond imagining. There are all those non-vaccinated children. There are all the adults in the world. There are all the vaccines they would get the CDC and WHO to list as required vaccines and all the multiple times any of the vaccines could be required to be given. And there was all that power over humans, over an particular DNA group of humans, allowing the pharmaceutical industry to putanything at all they wanted to concoct into those GMO mixes.
Wakefield’s simple recommendation of what was likely an older and non-GMO vaccine threatened exposure of a plan for the global alteration (and degradation with lower species) of all human DNA.
That threatened exposure of a worldwide crime against humanity using vaccines, and by the very companies that put Hitler into office, experimented with vaccines on prisoners at Auschwitz, and went to prison for genocide and crimes against humanity. That exposure would throw a ringer into control of all human DNA. And it would destroy investments.
And that doesn’t cover the patent aspect of this, because the vaccine industry is not just shooting GMOs into kids’ human DNA and corrupting it with pig DNA, insect DNA and may be even synthetic DNA, what they are shooting into children is patented
Anyone with any knowledge of how nefariously Monsanto has used its patented seeds to contaminate farmers’ organic fields and then for Monsanto to claim ownership of its intellectual property, asserting it has been injured, will only take a moment to consider the legal implications of shooting patented pharmaceutical industry intellectual property into a child
Who owns the child’s DNA now?
Who owns the child’s blood?
Who owns their organs?
Who owns their children?
It’s a guess only that Wakefield’s work comes close to describing the extreme consequences of GMO vaccines, for he was looking at the collapse of autistic children’s functioning. How close was he to seeing it may have been due to DNA damage. And if he saw that, would he consider that GMO vaccines are damaging to children’s DNA?
Is that why some children with autism have such a profound breakdown, mentally, physically, and even at the level of their mitochondria? Has their human DNA been so damaged, it can’t function?
Is the great increase in autism not necessarily just linked to the number of vaccines but the fundamental CHANGE in the vaccines?
This change may be even more fundamental than the GMO change to food, since human DNA must support people doing things plants don’t, such as think and move and speak – all function that autistic kids can lose.
Expose that the vaccines are GMOs and children’s DNA is being wrecked with lower-species DNA, and there is a real danger that with that injection of truth into the vaccine controversy, and like autistic children’s functioning, the entire vaccine empire could collapse, too. This multi-trillion dollar industry is hoping to double, triple, quadruple its profits through vaccine mandates to everyone in the world. With mandates in place, the skies the limit financially, and they already have more than 200 more vaccines in the pipeline.
There has been a huge effort by the pharmaceutical industry and the agencies it has captured to deny any association between vaccines and autism. Parents, and now researchers and doctors, point to the heavy metals (mercury, aluminum), cancer causing substances like formaldehyde, viral fragments and more, that could be playing a part in the breakdown or death of children. But pharma has managed to keep things at that level – it’s toxins versus pharma controlled studies denying any harm and pharma-controlled media filling the airways and internet and papers and magazines and billboards with the necessity to vaccinate or children may die.
Those who know that unvaccinated children are 2-5 time healthier than those who are vaccinated, who know that huge numbers of children have been and are being disabled or killed by vaccines, who know how corrupt the whole system is, have not been able to reach others past the mountain of lies, scientific confusion and attacks on people like themselves, who do know and are attempting to warn others.
But GMO vaccines are is quite different. This is not about endless arguments over health or studies or outcomes, or over whether children are being injured by vaccines or are being saved from deadly diseases by them – with those controlling media and Congress having any say they wish. This is not about arguments.
No, this is about the undeniable fact of genetically engineered vaccines that are genetic engineering of children and adults by shooting GMOs in their DNA, and with patented material, and with the downgrading of human DNA with other species’ DNA. There is no way around that.
Wakefield had to be attacked to distract as hard as possible from what is really going on until mandates are in place, until terrorism laws are in place to prevent any resistance to this, eve any reporting the truth of it.
Are children’s human DNA being increasingly deconstructed with each additional GMO vaccine?
Others can determine that. But without question, children’s DNA, their blue print as a human is being, is being altered. And the pharmaceutical industry wanted that mandated.
That’s a show stopper.
Back to The Nation article:
TN: [Wakefield’s] paper was then used to support litigation against three companies that produced the MMR vaccine, and to lobby for use of Wakefield’s own measles-only vaccine. Wakefield went on to make more than more $600,000 in the process of the lawsuit alone.
Though The Nation is a political magazine that excoriates Murdoch, claiming to “Take on Rupert Murdoch”, http://www.thenation.com/article/161984/nation-takes-rupert-murdoch# and though it was Murdoch papers that began and led the attack on Wakefield, and though Murdoch is connected to the GSK that produces the MMR (the measles vaccine that Wakefield questioned), The Nation article oddly doesn’t mention Murdoch once. This is despite of the fact that what Murdoch did deeply affects The Nation readers personally, and in fact is a matter of life or death (so say all camps concerned about vaccines.)
TN: In his 1998 paper, Wakefield alleged that eight children developed autism six days after receiving the MMR vaccine. I remember the paper well, because I was a pediatric fellow in London at the time. I and every other pediatrician were immediately besieged by parents demanding measles-only vaccines. We were staggered by Wakefield’s ridiculously small, uncontrolled and clearly biased study about a syndrome that none of us had heard of, even though the MMR vaccine had been widely used since 1968. But it was also hard to imagine that The Lancet would publish something with such obvious global ramifications unless there was irrefutable scientific evidence uncontaminated by financial interest.
Not a word from The Nation that the CEO of Reuters who is on the board of Merck which makes the MMR and is involved with Elsevier Publishers that puts out the Lancet that removed Wakefield’s peer reviewed article.
TN: It took six years for The Lancet to admit Wakefield’s financial conflict of interest
From Lancet Boss Failed to Disclose Own Conflicts to Parliament While Denouncing Wakefield
“Sir Crispin Davis, until recently chief executive of Reed Elsevier which owns the Lancet, failed to disclose his own conflicts while denouncing Andrew Wakefield to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee in March 2004. Sir Crispin failed to disclose either that he was a non-executive director of MMR defendants, GlaxoSmithKline, or that it was his own brother Sir Nigel Davis who had endorsed the Legal Services Commission’s decision to pull the plug on the funding of the case in the High Court 3 days before ((HERE).
“This was barely more than a week after allegations had been levelled against Wakefield by Lancet editor Richard Horton, and Sunday Times journalist Brian Deer. Nor do Davis’s conflicts ever seem to have been mentioned by Horton.
“Remarkably, these relationships had been mentioned in Sunday Times article about Sir Crispin, just weeks earlier …
TN: but it did not retract the paper until 2010. Meanwhile, the rise of measles in the United Kingdom and United States reflects the damage done, and the consequences extend well beyond the West.
Part 4 will continue the analysis.