F. William Engdahl came up with an interesting insight on the Wakefield UK witch hunt drama in a piece he wrote for NEO (New Eastern Outlook), an online Journal, published June 8, 2016. Engdahl points out Wakefield was defacto exonerated of the charges from the British General Medical Council’s Panel (GMC).
F. William Engdahl is an American scholar and investigative journalist living in Germany with 18 books in circulation, including Seeds of Destruction, an anti-GMO book that looks thoroughly behind the scenes. If you see the titles of what he’s written you may understand why he’s an American living in Germany
Here’s the result of Walker-Smith’s appeal against the GMC ruling from Britain’s High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Administrative Court. From Engdahl’s article:
The Justice ruled that charges brought against Walker-Smith by the British General Medical Council’s Panel, the GMC “… panel’s determination cannot stand. I therefore quash it.” Walker-Smith won his appeal against a General Medical Council regulatory board that had ruled against both him and Andrew Wakefield for their roles in authoring a 1998 Lancet MMR paper, which raised questions about a link to autism. The complete victory means that Walker-Smith has been returned to the status of a fully licensed physician…”
Engdahl reports that the judge cited “inadequate and superficial reasoning and, in a number of instances, a wrong conclusion… The end result is that the finding of serious professional misconduct and the sanction of erasure are both quashed.”
The justice in charge also noted that the board’s trial of Walker-Smith and Wakefield had no actual complainants, no harm came to the children who were studied, and parents supported Walker-Smith and Wakefield through the trial, reporting that their children had medically benefited from the treatment they received at the Royal Free Hospital. Somehow this has not been made public.
The only reason Dr. Wakefield was not technically rewarded his license to practice is because he lacked the large sum of funding required to get a hearing at Britain’s High Court of Justice. Prof. Walker-Smith’s insurance had agreed to put up the money, but Dr. Wakefield’s insurance refused.
Thus the defacto exoneration of Dr. Wakefield holds true since he and Walker-Smith were associates who co-authored the Lancet paper that was distorted by vested interests.
What Really Put the Lies About Wakefield in Place
They both examined 12 children who were autistic and in great gastrointestinal and bowel pain from inflammation that wouldn’t abate. Their parents all told both doctors that their kids were fine until the MMR, but none of the other doctors would even listen to them. Dr. Wakefield and Prof. Walker-Smith listened.
They wrote up a clinical report, not a research study as such, on the children. The Lancet, a major medical journal, published it. The report merely explained what the parents had reported about the MMR and the severe gastrointestinal issues of the 12 autistic children.
The paper recommended further studies with the MMR broken up and given individually as a measles vaccination, a mumps vaccination, and the rubella vaccination all spaced apart.
Before the Lancet paper was published, two other researchers discovered the same problems of gut disorders and autistic behavior in seven children. Their 1996 presentation was called “Entero-colitis and Disintegrative Disorder Following MMR – A Review of the First Seven Cases.”
After the Lancet publication, a Wake Forest University study determined that 70 of 82 autistic children they studied had measles virus in their guts. However, the measles virus strain they discovered was not a wild virus. It was the same strain used in MMR vaccines.
These studies corroborate and confirm that doctors Wakefield and Walker-Smith’s findings were real, not fraudulent or fictitious.
Both doctors had merely hypothesized the possibility of the MMR’s three in one shot as risky and requested further studies.
So what’s the big deal and who put out the idea that the Lancet clinical report was fraudulent research? It begins with three letters GSK or GlaxoSmithKline, a very large pharmaceutical company that has a monopoly on the MMR vaccine in Europe. Merck monopolizes the MMR in North America.
GSK had influential representatives in all key areas of the fraudulent witch hunt and burning of two honorable MDs. But the impetus for the whole witch hunt started with the London Sunday Times, which was then run by Rupert Murdoch’s son James. The Murdoch family is heavily invested in GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), a vaccine manufacturer. James Murdoch is even on GSKs board of directors.
James had his hack medical science journalist, Brian Deer, create the Wakefield fabrication of fraudulent research using illicit funds and conning helpless children and on and on. It created a firestorm in London that ignited another vaccine promoter, Dr. Fiona Godlee, who happens to be the editor in chief for the British Journal of Medicine (BMJ).
She propagated Deer’s lies officially in the BMJ. Much later she partially admitted wrong doing to the online newsletter Age of Autism.
Brian Deer is a really aggressive creep. He was spotted at a GSK international meeting in a posh Switzerland hotel after his successful assassination. The talk he gave was on improving the public perception of vaccines. It’s pathetic that Google has many of Brian Deer’s articles at the top of search pages for Wakefield.
He appears around the 15 minute mark of this video:
The bottom line is the bottom line of GSK was threatened heavily. If the medical consensus agreed to breaking up the MMR into individual vaccinations, GSK would stand to lose a lot of money with the cancellation of its blockbuster MMR vaccine in the EU and elsewhere.
You can find even more details in the sources below. It’s important we have facts as weapons to counter the opinions of rabid pro-vaxxers on the street and in the media when they constantly bring up the red herring lies of Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s past.
by, Paul Fassa