Callous Disregard: Autism and Vaccines: The Truth Behind a Tragedy [2010] by Andrew J. Wakefield !!!

Callous Disregard: Autism and Vaccines: The Truth Behind a Tragedy [2010] by Andrew J. Wakefield !!!

Author:Andrew J. Wakefield !!! [!!!, Andrew J. Wakefield]
Language: eng
Format: azw3
Tags: !!!, read it, Autism, Vax - Risk Awareness
ISBN: 9781616081690
Publisher: Skyhorse
Published: 2010-05-24T00:00:00+00:00


This statement created the appearance that his objection was and always had been based upon a perceived conflict. In this statement he appears to have concealed the fact that it was me, not Deer, who informed him on February 18, 2004, of research − quite separate from The Lancet paper − that was funded in part by the LAB. In my opinion, by blurring the crucial distinction between actual and perceived conflicts, Horton made it appear to his readers that he had a reasonable basis for believing that I had failed to make a required disclosure.

In his GMC testimony, Horton was to change his account of this issue once again, admitting that what Deer had, in fact, alleged was that The Lancet case series was funded by the LAB:22

Smith: Were allegations – I will deal with them all because you set them out very clearly in The Lancet – did they include allegations in relation to funding issues?

Horton: Yes, they did.

Smith: Was that the first you heard of there being an issue?

Horton: That is right. That was the first time that I was made aware of the connection, both with the Legal Aid Board and the specific funding of the work that was reported in The Lancet.23

Smith: How did you handle it, Dr Horton, obviously you listened to what they had to say. What did you do thereafter?

Horton: Well the presentation by Brian Deer took the form of him standing up before a group of editors and laying out a series of allegations, not just relating to the Legal Aid Board funding of the work23 but also including the way the work23 had been handled by the ethics committee at the Royal Free Hospital – two specific allegations, one, that the work had not actually received ethics committee approval and, second, the approval that was given for a piece of work was in some sense a fabrication, that the work that took place and was reported in The Lancet was done under cover of another ethics committee approval process for an entirely different piece of work which was an extraordinarily serious allegation.



Download



Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.