►March 9, 2004 - Researchers retract on autism, measles vaccine link - Say interpretation wrong in 1998 study - Bloomberg via The Boston Globe

►March 7, 2004 - Funding not going into fighting autism - Canadian Press - "When Dr. Noni MacDonald starts talking about the debate over whether childhood vaccinations cause autism, her words are steeped in anger. She thinks the public ought to be angry, too...The source of the emotion? The years of time, effort and research funding that has been spent disproving a piece of British research that last week was repudiated by most of the team responsible for it...MacDonald and others have nothing but praise for the scientists who had the courage to formally declare their work did not prove a link between the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine (called the MMR) and rising rates of autism...But she sure does begrudge the resources that 1998 article - and more importantly, the interpretation placed on it by lead author Dr. Andrew Wakefield - diverted from other areas of autism research.

Comment:  Besides the fact that the theory has NOT been disproved, the idea that all these funds have been diverted from other areas of research is ludicrous.  Some funds were diverted to vaccine-manufacturer influenced/financed research, and used to allegedly vindicate the MMR vaccine, but little funding has gone to support research looking into the possible connection between MMR and autism.  Had it been, there might well be additional evidence in support of Wakefield's theory.  Ironically, this very "absence of funding" is wrongly being used to allege an "absence of evidence", when, in fact, it does not, necessarily indicate "evidence of absence" (of, in this case, a relationship between the vaccine and MMR).

►March 5-18, 2004 - MMR: Interesting Conflicts - The vilification of Dr Andrew Wakefield in recent days has been a side show to the important issue of whether the mumps, measles, and rubella triple vaccine (MMR) poses a risk to a small sub set of children. But the attacks have served a purpose. They have highlighted the need to preserve independent medical research - and reminded the public that there is one rule for an off-message messenger like Dr Wakefield and quite another for the government and drug companies. (requires subscription) - Private Eye

Comment: Excellent article.

►February/March 2004 - Letters to BMJ in response to Pressure mounts for inquiry into MMR furore

Comment:  Be sure to read the excellent letter from Hilary Butler.

►March 8, 2004 - Autism debate blasted - Calgary Sun via www.canoe.ca

►March 4, 2004 - Scientists retract vaccine, autism link - New York Times via www.mercurynews.com 

►March 5, 2004 - MPs call for full retraction of study linking MMR to autism - Times Online, UK

►March 8, 2004 - MMR Expert Rubbishes Autism Link - Daily Record

►March 7, 2004 - Whistleblower for lack of exhaustive research into autism - letters - Scotland on Sunday - "The first grim fact is that autism has massively increased during the past two decades from what used to be a very rare disorder. The Commons health committee recommended in 1997 that the Department of Health should gather systematic data on autism, and monitor it. The department has continually refused to do so."

►March 6, 2004 - Scientists desert MMR maverick (requires subscription) - Times Online, UK

►March 6, 2004 - Key ally of MMR doctor rejects autism link (requires subscription) - Times Online, UK

►March 7, 2004 - Sick children untreated due to MMR fears - Families seek care in US as UK doctors dismiss complaints to avoid triple jab controversy - Sunday Herald, UK - "AUTISTIC children in Britain are being forced to fly to the US for treatment because of the ongoing political controversy surrounding the MMR jab...Up to 10 British children, including a seven-year-old from Edinburgh, have been treated at a specialist centre in Florida for painful bowel diseases after the NHS refused to recognise their symptoms...An investigation by the Sunday Herald has revealed that despite medical evidence of a link between the disorder and autism, NHS doctors are ignoring or dismissing the connection because they fear becoming embroiled in the triple jab controversy. Instead of acknowledging a previously unknown condition that inflames the children’s bowels, they say the painful symptoms are caused by constipation."

►March 7, 2004 - Autism debate underscores research difficulty, cost of disproving bad science - CP via www.canada.com - "When Dr. Noni MacDonald starts talking about the debate over whether childhood vaccinations cause autism, her words are steeped in anger. She thinks the public ought to be angry, too...The source of the emotion? The years of time, effort and research funding that has been spent disproving a piece of British research that last week was repudiated by most of the team responsible for it."

Comment:  Do any of those who are using this opportunity to discredit the research linking the MMR to autism care that the research has not actually been disproved?  Do they care that all that has happened is that a potential conflict has been raised?  Do they care that, although regrettable, a potential for conflict of interest does not in and of itself disprove research, but merely raises the specter that the research has been tainted and/or influenced by the conflict?  Have any of these self-righteously angry decriers ever once complained about the clear and obvious conflicts of interest in support of the MMR vaccine?

►March 7, 2004 - Dangerous disease - opinion - Scotland on Sunday - "Up to now, parents who fundamentally oppose the MMR have either had to source and pay for single injections - at up to £350 per course - or gamble that if they leave their children unprotected they will not catch one of the diseases. The former option is becoming increasingly rare, with sources of single inoculations drying up - at the moment the mumps vaccine is almost impossible to obtain. A mass order for single vaccines from the NHS would soon have manufacturers vying to meet the demand, of course, and it looks increasingly sensible to offer parents that alternative, so long as they are willing to pay for a service which is above and beyond basic need. Some will see this as caving in to ill-informed prejudice but this would be a small price to pay to protect all our children from disease."

►March 7, 2004 - Leading article: The MMR superstition (requires subscription) - The Times Online

►March 6, 2004 - Autism link claim took vaccine from hero to villain (requires subscription) - The Times Online

►March 7, 2004 - The needle and the damage done - opinion - Scotland on Sunday - "THE hours after her one-year-old son Victor was injected with the MMR vaccination were among the longest of Iustina Del Veneziano’s life...After an agonising decision process before deciding to go ahead with the jag, the Edinburgh mum was watching for any small indication that she might have made the wrong move. She didn’t have to wait long."

►March 7, 2004 - Single MMR jag demand soars despite claims - The Scotsman - "Accusations that research linking the triple jag to health risks was 'fatally flawed' has only served to further entrench public scepticism over the jag’s safety, according to doctors providing single-vaccine alternatives."

►March 4, 2004 - Authors of MMR study retract findings - The Herald, UK

►March 4, 2004 - Scientists retract earlier MMR-autism tie - UPI via The Washington Times

►March 4, 2004 - MMR Doctors Reject Own Autism Link Report - Ten doctors who co-authored a controversial study in Britain that suggested a link between childhood vaccinations and autism said this week there was not enough evidence to draw that conclusion. - Reuters via Planet Ark

►March 5, 2004 -MMR doctors disown jab study - Daily Mail via www.femail.co.uk

►March 4, 2004 - Controversial MMR and autism study retracted - The Lancet via New Scientist

►March 5, 2004 - Researchers Reject Famous MMR-Autism Study - Experts Say Likely to Close the Door on MMR Vaccine Controversy - WebMD

►March 5, 2004 - Injection of sense (requires subscription) - Times Online, UK

►March 5, 2004 - MMR: the controversy continues - Even though Dr Andrew Wakefield, the leading protagonist of the MMR-autism link, has been discredited, and the Lancet paper that launched the scare in 1998 has been repudiated by 10 of its 13 co-authors, the controversy continues. This suggests that the key factor in the scare is not Dr Wakefield's flawed science, but the wider climate of fear of environmental dangers and suspicion of scientific, medical and political authority. - www.spiked-online.com

►March 6, 2004 - Retraction of an interpretation (requires registration) - journal article (The Lancet)

►March 6, 2004 - A statement by the editors of The Lancet (requires registration) - journal article (The Lancet)
 
►March 6, 2004 - A statement by Dr Simon Murch  (requires registration)- journal article (The Lancet) 

►March 6, 2004 - A statement by Professor John Walker-Smith (requires registration) - journal article (The Lancet)  

►March 6, 2004 - A statement by Dr Andrew Wakefield (requires registration) - journal article (The Lancet)   

►March 6, 2004 - A statement by The Royal Free and University College Medical School and The Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust (requires registration) - journal article (The Lancet)  

►March 4, 2004 - Anti-MMR Scientists Change Their Minds - The Mirror, UK

►February 29, 2004 - Now Andrew Wakefield demands apology from The Lancet - Sunday Telegraph via www.awares.org 

►March 4, 2004 - Co-authors retract support for original claim linking MMR to autism - The Scotsman

►March 3, 2004 - Scientists retract study linking autism, vaccine - Canadian Press via The Toronto Star

►March 3, 2004 - Clinic dismisses attack on MMR doctor - News Shopper - "STAFF at an Eltham clinic offering single measles, mumps and rubella vaccines have dismissed claims that research linking the MMR vaccine to autism is 'poor science'...However, staff at the Direct 2000 clinic, in Grove Market Place, Eltham, believe the revelation is an attempt to influence a judicial review into the withdrawal of legal aid for families suing vaccine manufacturers."

►March 4, 2004 - Researchers Retract a Study Linking Autism to Vaccination (requires registration or subscription) - The New York Times

►March 4, 2004 - Researchers retract autism link - AP via The Australian

►March 3, 2004 - Scientists Retract Vaccine-Autism Link - AP via www.wtopnews.com

►March 3, 2004 - MMR researchers issue retraction - Ten doctors who co-authored the study which sparked health fears over the MMR jab have said there was insufficient evidence to draw that conclusion. - BBC   - "In a statement, to be published in The Lancet, the doctors say: 'We wish to make it clear that in this paper no causal link was established between MMR vaccine and autism as the data were insufficient...However, the possibility of such a link was raised and consequent events have had major implications for public health...In view of this, we consider now is the appropriate time that we should together formally retract the interpretation placed upon these findings in the paper.'"

Comment:  To read the always fair-minded and insightful Nicholas Regush on this and other breaking news stories,  go to www.redflagsdaily.com

►March 3, 2004 - MMR has always been safe - Doctors - 'OUR policy has been that MMR is and has always been safe.' - Isle of Man Online - "'In other words Dr Wakefield had been paid by the Legal Aid Board to investigate if there was a case linking MMR and autism and he did not disclose this to the editors of the journal, as is required,' said Dr Kishore...'It is hoped that this new revelation will help to dispel any lingering doubts which members of the public have about the safety of MMR and that parents would ensure that their children are vaccinated with MMR. It is also worth recalling that in the past there had been serious problems resulting from use of single vaccines.'"

Comment:  The failure to disclose the possible conflict of interest does not in and of itself mean that there was anything wrong with Wakefield's research.  The research may or may not have been influenced by the alleged conflict.  If there was as much attention being paid to those with clear conflict of interest re: the vaccine manufacturers as re: someone investigating the issue for a legal aid board, the furor over this might seem fair and reasonable.  As it is, the furor appears to be more political than anything.

►March 2, 2004 - Doctor's diary: a jab in the dark - The truth about MMR must be revealed, says Dr James Le Fanu - "The Government finds itself in an invidious situation over the MMR/autism controversy, having painted itself into a corner by denying parents the option of the single measles vaccine. They, thus, have no alternative other than to insist the MMR is totally safe - irrespective of evidence that might emerge to suggest the contrary."

►March 2, 2004 - The case against the case against - Questions are being raised about some influential research that suggested there could be dangerous side effects from vaccinating children, reports Julie Robotham. - www.smh.com.au - "It was probably inevitable that Andrew Wakefield would become a martyr. The British gastroenterologist claimed in 1998 to have found a link between the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) childhood vaccine and the development of autism. And since then his reputation has been in limbo as survey after survey cast doubt on the connection...But last week he was finally cut loose."

►March 1, 2004 - Health Check: 'Any publicity about MMR - even that which undermines the author of the scare - deters people from vaccination' - www.independent.co.uk - "I wonder whether the latest twist in the MMR saga will have any impact on vaccination rates. To most people, I suspect, the claims and counter-claims about conflicts of interest and research ethics will seem utterly irrelevant to the fundamental question of whether MMR is safe."

►February 10, 2002 - Dogma on MMR does not work - Parents need information and choice - The Observer via The Guardian, UK - "The MMR debate goes to the heart of the relationship between the individual and society. This is an age in which people expect to exercise choice; but there are times when the collective good must prevail. The great programmes against cholera, polio and smallpox could never have taken place had they not been enforced. Yet here we have the makings of a public health disaster, with drift, fear and confusion. The unconfirmed findings of maverick scientists such as Dr Andrew Wakefield prey upon a public which has grown at once more consumerist and more sceptical of authority, with good reason after the BSE and foot and mouth fiascos."

►February 29, 2004 - Unfair hounding of MMR researcher - letters - Scotland on Sunday via The Scotsman

►March 1, 2004 - Dr.Wakefield and the MMR crisis (requires subscription) - Times Online, UK

►February 29, 2004 - Twisted conflicts - (letters) The Observer via The Guardian, UK - "It seems a scientist, such as Dr Andrew Wakefield (News and Leader, last week), who uncovers genuine concerns about the safety of a vaccine has to be 'squeaky clean'...In contrast, scientists who are vocal in support of the vaccine, and are responsible for checking its safety, are allowed to receive research funding from the company that produces it and to hold shares in the company, or act as consultants." (sent by Dr Milton Wainwright, Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, University of Sheffield)

►February 29, 2004 - Dirty tricks drug firms use to get publicity - The Scotsman - "SHOCKING tactics including bribery, fabrication and plagiarism are being used by unscrupulous drug companies to get their research published in influential medical journals, according to a damning new report...Only a week after controversial research on the MMR vaccine was discredited by the journal which published it following a 'fatal conflict of interest', an influential committee has revealed the widespread use of underhand tactics by researchers."

►February 29, 2004 - Doctor demands apology for MMR claims in Lancet - Telegraph, UK - "Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who first raised fears of a link between autism and the MMR vaccine, has hired a libel lawyer to demand an apology from The Lancet after claiming that the medical journal has cast doubt on his honesty...Dr Wakefield's decision to enlist the support of Carter-Ruck, the London law firm that specialises in defamation suits, follows the denunciation of his work last week by The Lancet."

►February 29, 2004 - Baby Blair had MMR jab after outcry (requires subscription) - Times Online, UK - "LEO BLAIR, the prime minister’s youngest child, received the MMR jab later than normal after sustained public and press questioning of his parents, according to family and political sources...The Blairs and Downing Street have consistently refused to confirm whether Leo has had the vaccination despite the government’s advocacy of the MMR jab as the best and safest protection against measles, mumps and rubella."

►February 29, 2004 - Autism is a mystery, not a medical conspiracy - opinion - The Scotsman - "In contrast to Wakefield, I intend to declare an interest at the outset. My son Josh is autistic. Like most children, he was given the MMR vaccine at around 18 months. Shortly afterwards, he began exhibiting the first signs of what we now identify as autistic behaviour. The link between these two events is tempting, but, for reasons of sanity, I have resisted it...In the vast majority of cases, autism manifests itself at around two years, or, in other words, just after the MMR is administered. This coincidence inspired Wakefield’s study. In 1998, his team reviewed reports of children with bowel disease and autistic symptoms. Their research led them to conclude that the MMR shot caused developmental regression, in some cases within 24 hours of vaccination."

Comment:  A temporally related relationship alone does not prove causation.  But a recent event raises a red flag and is, in fact, the most likely cause.  Moreover, the fact that autism didn't used to occur at two years old, nor did it result in the loss of skills as does the new, "regressive" form of autism, means cavalierly dismissing the temporal relationship as "coincidental" is neither wise nor scientific.  Sadly, however, this is characteristic of what happens re: the vaccine issue. The fact that others are beginning to corroborate Wakefield's findings, in spite of the difficulty finding funding to do so, and the potential risks to one's reputation and livelihood, make easy answers like the ones voiced in the opinion piece above even harder to swallow.

►February 26, 2004 - MMR medics challenged over child spinal taps - Times Online - "NEW questions about the ethics of the controversial study that linked the MMR vaccine to autism in children will be raised in Parliament today, The Times has learnt..Less than a week after the doctor who pioneered the research was accused of failing to disclose a £55,000 payment, ministers are to be asked whether he had received proper ethical approval. The fresh doubts centre on whether the lumbar punctures to which autistic children were subjected by Andrew Wakefield’s team at the Royal Free Hospital were clinically justified."

►February 29, 2004 - Wakefield unlikely to be charged over MMR scare - www.independent.co.uk

►February 29, 2004 - MMR docs' links with drugs firms - Sunday Mercury via http://icbirmingham.icnetwork.co.uk - "Four leading Midland doctors who deemed the controversial MMR vaccine safe have links to the drug giants who make or supply the jab...Campaigners have called for the General Medical Council to investigate the senior Government advisors, who all hold scientific posts in the Midlands and sat on key committees which declared the vaccine safe."

►February 24, 2004 - This carefully orchestrated campaign must not be allowed to stifle real debate on MMR (requires subscription) - www.independent.co.uk

►February 29, 2004 - No vaccination for Blair - When the PM speaks out against something, we believe the opposite - comment - The Observer via The Guardian, UK - "The government's attempt to discredit Dr Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who first pointed to a link between autism in children and the MMR vaccine, will have exactly the opposite effect to that intended...Parents who may have had their doubts before will nly be left wondering why the authorities have used such strong-arm tactics, reminiscent of the treatment of Dr David Kelly, if the vaccine is so completely safe as they now claim...But that is only half the problem. Blair's personal intervention, urging all parents to have their children vaccinated, has illustrated vividly the fix the Labour Government now is in post-Iraq - namely, people no longer believe anything the Prime Minister says."

►February 28, 2004 - Medical Journal Malpractice - letter - journal article (BMJ)

►February 29, 2004 - Sunday Times Letters (requires subscription) - Times Online, UK

►February 26, 2004 - Letters of the Week - The Guardian, UK

►November 6, 2003 - A further dose of MMR - letters - The Guardian, UK

►February 17, 2002 - MMR and autism - letters - The Observer via The Guardian, UK

►October 7, 2003 - Wealth, not health - letter - www.telegraph.co.uk

►October 30, 2003 - MMR Vaccine - letter - journal article (BMJ)

►February 27, 2004 - Parents refused aid to fight MMR - Parents who claim their children were damaged by the MMR jab have lost their latest bid for legal aid to sue the manufacturers of the vaccine. - BBC - "Officials said that since there was no scientific proof that the children had been damaged by the vaccine, there was little chance it would succeed...The children involved in this case have a range of disabilities, including autism, bowel problems, epilepsy and other learning difficulties...Some parents are now considering taking their legal campaign to the Court of Appeal."

►February 27, 2004 - Funding Blow for MMR Battle Parents - PA News via The Scotsman

►February 28, 2004 - Vaccine parents vow to fight on - The Scotsman

►February 27, 2004 - MMR Campaigners Vow to Continue Compensation Fight - PA News via The Scotsman - "'Since this litigation will no longer be funded, and there is no sign that the Government or pharmaceutical companies are taking up the very serious questions that research in the litigation has posed, we as a law firm representing many grievously injured children will now have to consider whether we press the Government to properly investigate matters the drug companies have attempted to sweep under the carpet.'”

►February 27, 2004 - Vaccination: Mother's anger at withdrawal of MMR jab legal aid - The mother of an autistic child today hit out at a decision to cut legal aid for families who are attempting to prove the MMR jab ruined their children's lives - The Peterborough Today, UK - "'To pull funding at a time when the evidence is quite clearly becoming extremely strong is absolutely outrageous...'It's the ultimate insult to deny that these children are ill and have got a problem and to deny them their day in court.'"

►February 26, 2004 - MMR and autism - A dose of dissent - The Economist - "A FEW years ago Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist at Oxford University, came up with the idea of the “meme”. He was trying to make the slippery problem of the evolution of human culture as tractable as that of biological evolution, and he thought that if cultural information could somehow be divided into separately transmissible elements, in the way that biologically heritable information is divided into genes, the rest might follow. A successful meme, he speculated, might pass from person to person like a virus...Few recent memes have been more successful than the one which causes many people, particularly in Britain, to believe that the combined measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine can cause autism in children. That meme has been responsible for a fall in vaccination rates in Britain from more than 90% to less than 80% over the past six years (see chart)."

Comment:  Perhaps the "meme" is that the MMR vaccine does NOT cause autism.  Given that there is a growing body of evidence that it is involved, the self-satisfied criticizers of those thought to be swept up in an allegedly incorrect idea, might better redirect their gaze to themselves. 

►March 1, 2004 - A comparative evaluation of the effects of MMR immunization and mercury doses from thimerosal-containing childhood vaccines on the population prevalence of autism - journal article (Medical Science Monitor) (abstract)

►February 27, 2004 - MP gathers support for vaccine - The Islander via www.kangarooisland.yourguide.com.au

►February 28, 2004 - Confidence in MMR vaccine grows after research row - www.independent.co.uk

►February 28, 2004 - Wakefield investigations on MMR children "were not approved" by ethics committee - www.briandeer.com

►February 28, 2004 - Editor in the eye of a storm - journal article (BMJ) - "Instead of Andrew Wakefield himself in the media firing line, it is the Lancet that has found itself under scrutiny. Perhaps it was in a bid to forestall this that the Lancet went public over the whole affair last week in advance of the Sunday Times story, thus angering Brian Deer. ^"

►February 28, 2004 - Pressure mounts for inquiry into MMR furore - journal article (BMJ)

►February 23, 2004 - MMR: Investigating the interests - Dr Andrew Wakefield is not the only person with questions to answer following The Sunday Times' revelations that he failed to disclose a conflict of interest in his February 1998 Lancet paper that launched the MMR-autism scare. - www.spiked-online.com - "Though I have been critical of Dr Wakefield's Lancet paper and of his campaign against MMR, I would rather that it was rejected for its scientific deficiencies rather than through the author being personally discredited. (Long before these revelations, I argued that this paper should not have been published because of its highly speculative and methodologically flawed character.) Yet Dr Wakefield and his supporters have been very quick to allege conflicts of interest (or worse) in response to anybody who criticises their position. Now they seem fated to become victims of the climate of acrimony around MMR that their activities have done much to foster."

►March 14, 2003 - MMR: the truth? - In a three-part series of articles published in the UK Daily Mail this week, Melanie Phillips provides a comprehensive endorsement of the campaign against the MMR vaccine that has been sponsored by the former Royal Free hospital gastroenterologist, Dr Andrew Wakefield. - www.spiked-online.com - "Phillips' encouragement for the increasingly irrational and irresponsible anti-MMR campaign is likely to compound the unwarranted anxieties of parents whose infants are due to be immunised and result in a further decline in vaccine uptake. It will also intensify the distress of parents of autistic children, whose burden is now increased by feelings of guilt for having them immunised."

►March 29, 2003 - MMR: the onslaught continues - journal article (BMJ) - "The controversy surrounding the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine continues to smoulder and every now and then someone stokes the fire. This time it is "top Mail writer" Melanie Phillips in a much hyped series of three articles in the Daily Mail under the banner "MMR: the truth" (11, 12, and 13 March)."

►February 28, 2004 - Parents stand firm on MMR rejection - The Journal via http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk

►February 28, 2004 - Fiona Phillips: Why Jabs Are Needling Me - www.mirror.co.uk - "MUM used to regale me with tales of how I nearly died when I was five. I had measles very badly and it damaged my eyesight...When I had mumps I screamed the house down because my throat hurt so much. Back then, in the 60s, having both illnesses was almost considered a rite of passage. My immune system did its best with both of them and consequently I have lifelong immunity to both diseases...I passed that resistance on to my children in the first and most vulnerable year of their lives. If I had been vaccinated against measles, sure my eyesight would be a lot better, but I believe my children might not have inherited a natural resistance and could have died before the age of one."

Comment:  Excellent opinion piece.  For more on the problem of immunity re: vaccines compared to measles, go to Scandals: What Is Wrong With This Picture?, Scandals: When is an oops not really an oops?  When you get to solve the problems you cause, and make money doing both!, Scandals: Playing With Fire - It's Not EASY To Fool Mother Nature, and Scandals: Don't Worry, Be Happy.

►February 28, 2004 - Majority of parents back MMR vaccine - www.telegraph.co.uk

►February 24, 2004 - Parents back doctor's MMR findings - The Scotsman 

►February 23, 2004 - The smearing of Andrew Wakefield - Daily Mail via www. melaniephillips.com 

►February 23, 2004 - MMR jab skeptics still back doctor - The Journal 

►February 26, 2004 - MMR and autism - A dose of dissent - Doubt has been cast on the paper that started the MMR-and-autism scare - The Economist

►February 26, 2004 - Most parents will allow MMR jab - icSouthLondon - "Eight out of 10 British parents now think the triple measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccination is safe and almost nine in 10 would give it to their child, according to a new poll ...Two years ago the number who thought it was safe was seven in ten."

Comment:  If I understand this poll correctly, it shows that around 1 in 10 parents thinks the MMR is not safe but would still give it to their child.  Can that be? 

►February 26, 2004 - Was the original MMR study unethical? - The Guardian, UK - "Not entirely. What has got lost in the outcry over the undisclosed conflict of interest of Andrew Wakefield, the lead researcher, is that the Lancet, which published his study in February 1998, does not regret publishing the core findings. Only one aspect of it (albeit the most contentious) - the linking of the combined measles, mumps and rubella vaccination (MMR) to bowel disease and autism - does editor Richard Horton consider 'entirely flawed'...Dr Horton still considers the paper important because it identified a new syndrome suffered by children who had symptoms both of chronic bowel disease and autism. 'I do not regret for one second publishing details of this new syndrome,' he said...'"I'm disappointed that Liam Donaldson [chief medical officer] has stated this was poor science. By stating that he dismisses a very important novel observation.'"

►February 26, 2004 - Give us the choice of vaccines - Letters to the Editor - The Telegraph, UK - "Have you any idea how frustrating it is to read or listen to the reams of opinion on the MMR debate and to feel that last on the list of importance are the very children damaged, as their parents believe, by the vaccine?...But deep down there is utter desolation that something that is of paramount importance in our lives is like a toy being batted back and forth. Who was to know what a hot political potato this would turn out to be?" 

►February 27, 2004 - Call for independent inquiry into MMR research - Croner via www.healthandcare.net

►February 26, 2004 - Nine Out of Ten Parents Will Give Children MMR Jab - PA News via The Scotsman

►February 27, 2004 - Eight out of ten think MMR jab safe, TV poll finds - The Scotsman

►February 27, 2004 - Anti-MMR parents 'accused of abuse' - Daily Mail via www.femail.co.uk

►February 26, 2004 - UK Parliament to raise ethical questions over MMR study - The Times, UK via www.awares.org

►February 27, 2004 - MMR scientist did not hide link with legal case, letter reveals - by Jeremy Laurence, Health Editor, The Independent, UK - "Andrew Wakefield, the researcher who sparked the MMR scare with a paper in The Lancet six years ago, did not cover up his links with the Legal Aid Board, it emerged yesterday...Dr Wakefield was accused at the weekend of failing to disclose the conflict of interest over his research at the Royal Free Hospital in London, suggesting a possible link between the MMR vaccination and bowel disease and autism, which has led tens of thousands of parents to boycott the triple vaccination...But he did reveal his links with the Legal Aid Board in a letter published in The Lancet on 2 May 1998, less than three months after his original research paper."

Comment:  "RFD Comment:  'The plot thickens...'" To read the rest of this comment and get the kind of insight into health issues only Nicholas Regush can provide, go to www.redflagsdaily.com (Much of the website now requires a subscription.)

►February 27, 2004 - Journalist takes MMR battle away from high court - MediaGuardian, UK - "A freelance journalist is hoping to use his upcoming legal action against medical journal the Lancet to move the debate about the controversial MMR jab from the high court to a county court in south London.,,Brian Deer said he was taking his claim for damages relating to a breach of confidentiality over his exclusive story on the man behind the claims that MMR may be linked to autism to Lambeth county court on Monday.

►February 26, 2004 - Social workers 'right to question parents' - This is London - "The row over the MMR "witch-hunt" deepened today as social workers defended their right to interview the mothers of autistic children...They insisted some parents could be harming their children to draw attention to themselves, and admitted subjecting one mother to an eight-week investigation before accepting she had done nothing wrong...It came after the Evening Standard revealed up to 20 parents of autistic children faced accusations that they were suffering from Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy."

Comment:  It's hard to believe this could be happening given that Roy Meadows, who has now been discredited, was the champion of this apparently ill-conceived theory.  How much tragedy and suffering must the parents of autistic children endure?  (And any old excuse in an attempt to detract from the real issue, i.e., does MMR contribute to autism?)

►February 26, 2004 - A Statement by the Editors of The Lancet (pdf) - includes statements by Murch, Walker-Smith and Wakefield, as well as Richard Horton, the editor of The Lancet

Comment: " BL Fisher (of NVIC) Note: The extent to which the forced vaccination proponents have gone to smear Andrew Wakefield and the meticulous biological mechanism research he has conducted into MMR-vaccine associated autism is in direct proportion to the fear they have that his hypothesis is correct: MMR vaccine can cause a persistent vaccine strain measles virus infection in genetically vulnerable children that leads to chronic inflammatory bowel disease and autistic behaviors. It is unfortunate they are so frightened of the scientific truth Dr. Wakefield is pursuing that they find it necessary to behave like a band of thugs out to score a hit...For the past 22 years, NVIC co-founder Kathi Williams and I have watched babies die and be horribly crippled by vaccine reactions while officials in industry, public health agencies and medical organizations have refused to support the kind of biological mechanism research that Dr. Wakefield is doing so that parents and doctors can have more information about children at high risk for suffering vaccine reactions and find ways to spare their lives. Parents around the world are not fooled by the ignorant, inhumane behavior of forced vaccinaton proponents, whose zealous defense of one-size-fits-all vaccine policies injure and kill innocent children...The truth will shine bright and clear in the end."

►February 26, 2004 - Dr Wakefield is just the man to research MMR safety - opinion - The Herald, UK - "There is something just a little too neat about the officially-sanctioned vilification of Dr Andrew Wakefield...Now the Lancet, the medical journal which published Wakefield's original, peer-reviewed, research back in 1998, says he was compromised by a conflict of interest because he was receiving legal aid money at the time, for another study of children whose parents wanted to take court action against the manufacturers of the vaccine. No sooner had the Lancet editor voiced his concerns, but Blair, his health secretary, John Reid, and their chief medical officer, Dr Liam Donaldson, lined up to urge all parents to have their children protected, claiming the Wakefield study was "poor science" and even suggesting he be investigated by the General Medical Council. If the GMC applied the same rules to all academics, it could be very busy. The Lancet has printed a great many articles which are potentially compromised. It was one of 13 leading medical journals which, in 2001, accused the pharmaceutical corporations of distorting the results of published research."

►February 25, 2004 - We Still Have MMR Doubts - Gloucestershire Echo 

►February 25, 2004 - MMR medics challenged over child spinal taps (requires subscription) - The Times Online, UK

►February 25, 2004 - City Doctor Backs Man at Centre of MMR Row - The Bath Chronicle

►February 25, 2004 - What is the uptake rate for MMR in Lincolnshire? - Lincolnshire Echo

►February 25, 2004 - New info campaign on MMR needed immediately - Labour - The Irish Politics Network via www.politics.ie

►February 22, 2004 - Lancet Pans Scientist's Dual Role - The Washington Post via Newsday

►February 22, 2004 - Journal Editor Apologizes for Autism-Vaccination Article - ScoutNews, LLC via www.healthcentral.com

►February 24, 2004 - Isolated surgeon sought out by parents takes PR cover - The Guardian, UK

►February 24, 2004 - The MMR arguments - The Western Mail via http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk

►February 25, 2004 - Blair urged to reassure public on vaccine - The Advertiser

►February 25, 2004 - Government's double standards over MMR - The Daily Mail via www.femail.co.uk - "But health chiefs were immediately accused of hypocrisy by parents and campaigners - who pointed out that many of the Government's top scientific advisers have links with drug firms that make or supply the vaccine...At least 19 experts have interests in firms involved in the measles, mumps and rubella triple vaccine, campaigners said...They sit on two key committees which declared the vaccine safe: the Committee on Safety of Medicines and the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation."

Comment:  Excellent article.

►February 24, 2004 - Parents back doctor's MMR findings - The Scotsman - "However, Ms Cooper, of Ayrshire, defended the research. She said: "This poor guy is doing nothing but trying to get justice for people who have been a victim...'The big thing in all this is saying that Wakefield had a conflict of interest, but these are the key words. If you are talking about conflict of interest, there are so many scientific and medical researchers who have a financial interest in companies manufacturing such products. All Wakefield’s interest was being 100 per cent behind the children and the parents who are the victims in all this.'"

►February 24, 2004 - Claim that MMR work mixed science and spin - The Guardian, UK - "Tony Blair yesterday weighed in to the MMR controversy by appealing once more for parents to give their children the all-in-one measles, mumps and rubella jab."

►February 24, 2004 - Blair calls for end to MMR debate - Times Online, UK

►February 24, 2004 - Dispute over MMR jab 'must stop' - www.telegraph.co.uk

►February 24, 2004 - The facts, claims, realities and the unanswered questions - The Independent, UK

►February 24, 2004 - The Sleaze Behind Our Science - The Conflicts of Interest Revealed by the MMR Story are Everywhere - www.dissidentvoice.org

►February 24, 2004 - Confidence climbs slowly in Wales as MMR row simmers - The Western Mail via http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk

►February 24, 2004 - MMR: Should we or shouldn't we? - The Independent, UK

►February 24, 2004 - Letters: Controversy over accusation of research bias on MMR (free for first week) - www.timesonline.co.uk -  "Sir, The hysterical reaction to the disclosure that Dr Andrew Wakefield was funded by the legal aid authorities to undertake research in relation to litigation by parents at the same time that he submitted his seminal paper on MMR to The Lancet (report, February 23) reveals a remarkable divergence between current legal and medical views of what constitutes bias."

►February 24, 2004 - Blair will be to blame if there's a measles epidemic - opinion - The Telegraph, UK - "The Government seems to believe that it has won the argument over the MMR jab. Andrew Wakefield, the scientist who first suggested a possible link between the triple vaccine and autism, has been villified by the scientific establishment. Parents stand accused of over-reacting and of selfishly putting the health of the nation at risk. Vaccination rates have dropped below 60 per cent in some areas...But the scare over the triple vaccine is not the fault of over-anxious parents, who cannot be blamed for wanting to protect their children. Nor can all the blame lie with Dr Wakefield and his research paper published six years ago in the Lancet. Dr Wakefield has been "discredited" because he was taking money from the Legal Aid Board at the time of his report...The board was paying him to discover, on behalf of parents hoping to sue for damages, whether the jab was harmful to their children. But this does not necessarily mean his research was biased. He should have disclosed his interest; but many scientists are paid for research by drugs companies."

►February 23, 2004 - Doctor in gun on autism link - New Zealand Herald

►February 23, 2004 - I will welcome inquiry, says doctor attacked on MMR (requires subscription) - Times Online, UK

►February 23, 2004 - Blair calls for end to MMR jab fears - www.express.co.uk

►February 23, 2004 - Defiant MMR doctor insists on an inquiry - The Independent, UK

►February 23, 2004 - Lancet admits mistake in publishing vaccine article - radio transcript - BBC via The World Today via www.abc.net.au

►February 23, 2004 - Elvis lives, MI5 murdered Diana, MMR is dangerous (requires subscription) - Times Online, UK

►February 23, 2004 - MMR doctor faces investigation over claims research was flawed - The Scotsman

►February 23, 2004 - MMR Doctor Accused of 'Mixing Spin and Science' - PA News via The Scotsman

►February 23, 2004 - Profile: Dr Andrew Wakefield - BBC News Online profiles the man at the centre of the MMR controversy. - BBC

►February 23, 2004 - Should there be an MMR inquiry? - The General Medical Council is preparing to investigate the research methods of the doctor at the centre of the MMR debate (includes letters from readers) - BBC

►February 23, 2004 - MMR study doctor calls for probe - The doctor behind controversial research linking autism with the MMR jab has called for an investigation into claims his work was flawed. - BBC

►February 23, 2004 - MMR study branded "poor science" - Reuters

►February 23, 2004 - MMR doctor 'must face investigation' - Chief Medical Officer Sir Liam Donaldson has said the doctor at the centre of the MMR row must be investigated. - www.itv.com

►February 23, 2004 - Demand grows for full MMR inquiry - Public deserves an independent investigation, says MP - The Guardian, UK

►February 23, 2004 - Parents of autistic children battle on - www.telegraph.co.uk - "The parents who believe that the measles, mumps and rubella jab caused their children's autism were battling on yesterday in their fight to get their case recognised by the Government...They were undeterred by new allegations which claim that the research from Dr Andrew Wakefield, first linking autism and the MMR vaccine, was flawed by a conflict of interest...'They are not going to get the genie back in the bottle,' said David Thrower, whose 16-year-old son Oliver has severe autism...'New research is coming in. These people do not see our children. Oliver's autism is the regressive type. He was a normal baby until his vaccination.'"

►February 23, 2004 - A pariah and a firebrand in the eye of the storm - www.telegraph.co.uk

►February 23, 2004 - Journal repents over vaccine-autism link - Reuters, Washington Post via www.smh.com.au

►February 22,2004 - World Briefs: Journal: It was wrong to publish medical study - The Daily Herald via www.harktheherald.com