Medical regulators in the UK have now ruled that Stephen Andrew Wakefield acted unethically in the conduct of his study linking vaccinations and autism.
The doctor who first suggested a link between MMR vaccinations and autism acted unethically, the official medical regulator has found.
Dr Andrew Wakefield’s 1998 Lancet study caused vaccination rates to plummet, resulting in a rise in measles – but the findings were later discredited.
The General Medical Council ruled he had acted “dishonestly and irresponsibly” in doing his research.
, Dr Wakefield said the claims were “unfounded and unjust”.
The GMC case did not investigate whether Dr Wakefield’s findings were right or wrong, instead it was focused on the methods of research.
During the two-and-a-half years of hearings – one of the longest in the regulator’s history – he was accused of a series of charges.
‘Callous disregard’
The verdict, read out by panel chairman Dr Surendra Kumar, criticised Dr Wakefield for the invasive tests, such as spinal taps, that were carried out on children and which were found to be against their best clinical interests.
The panel said Dr Wakefield, who was working at London’s Royal Free Hospital as a gastroenterologist at the time, did not have the ethical approval or relevant qualifications for such tests.
The GMC also took exception with the way he gathered blood samples. Dr Wakefield paid children £5 for the samples at his son’s birthday party.
Dr Kumar said he had acted with “callous disregard for the distress and pain the children might suffer”.
(emphasis original)
It’s likely that they will pull his certification to practice medicine, though this might not mean much, as Wakefield left the UK, and now practices in the United States.
His research, which was not merely bad, but corrupt, had sickened thousands of children who were either not vaccinated, or caught disease from their unvaccinated friends. (vaccines are not 100%, and the loss of herd immunity is a serious issue)
Additionally, Lancet has already rescinded the original article.
One hopes that he ends his life in jail, because he wasn’t just wrong, he pushed forward his bogus study in the hopes of making money from an equally bogus therapy that he had patented.
[on edit]
A sharp eyed reader noticed that I got his name wrong. I have corrected, but have left the original strike through to show what a complete prat I am.
You could at least get his name right. Stephen Wakefield?
Crap….You are right.
Will correct.
Such misconduct is not rare but it is only flagged when it is used to promote counter-mainstream ideas. Drug companies, for example, use "dishonest and irresponsible" practices on a regular basis to back claims of effectiveness and safety of their products.
Actually, the level of dishonesty of Wakefield makes Merck look like an upstanding citizens.
The drug companies when they misbehave try to prevent "bad" information from getting out.
Wakefield just made shit up.
Both are dishonest and dangerous, but Wakefield is a whole lot further past the line.
Maybe it is a matter of opinion, but in my mind the deceptions that we live with on an ongoing basis (government, corporate, ideological; from the "war on terror" to vioxx to the "free markets") make anything a single person can do – however committed and resourceful he may be – akin to a grain of sand in the desert.