retraction in paper re: Wakefield - off topic (sorta)

Submitted by an LD OnLine user on

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/region_wide/2005/07/16/9508081d-0052-4f6d-8679-28f63e6ac5c3.lpf

[Nearly 5 years after the British media began systematically trashing Dr. Wakefield this retraction marks the first mainstream newspaper to admit they were wrong in their smear campaign. I suppose the “donation to charity” they made bought them a reprieve from a civil suit for libel.]

In an article published on June 20, we referred to allegations printed in The Sunday Times relating to Dr Andrew Wakefield.

The allegations related to two studies conducted by Dr Wakefield into the link between the Measles, Mumps and Rubella vaccination and the onset of autism.

The Sunday Times alleged that the nature of the funding of one of the studies could potentially have affected the outcome.

We have been informed that defamation proceedings have been commenced against The Sunday Times in connection with this article.

We would like to make it clear that there was in fact no conflict of interest nor was Dr Wakefield personally paid to undertake the study as was alleged.

Furthermore we wish to clarify that the studies were carried out under proper ethical authorisation.

Finally we accept that the subjects of the studies were selected through appropriate NHS referrals.

We apologise to Dr Wakefield for any distress caused and at his request have paid an appropriate sum to selected charities.

Submitted by Dad on Thu, 07/21/2005 - 9:24 AM

Permalink

I can’t wait to read about what occurs with the London Times. They were the first print media to puiblish the (apparantly) unfounded allegations of Wakefield’s “corruption”. I don’t suppose he will let them off with a simple retraction and a donation to charity (I do hope he chose to help familes with autists in the UK)…

I wonder what the MOH will do if the Times is indeed found guilty of libel (or some similar charge)… Wakefield’s science has held firm (and in fact has been replicated by at least 3 independant teams). The only thing the MOH had was to suggest Wakefield took money to skew his findings and was violating ethivs by using “experimental surgery” on children contrary to British Laws and Regs.

Ya know, Galileo was thrown in prison for suggesting the Earth revolved around the Sun (everyone knew the Earth was the center of the universe) and Lister was ridiculed out of his profession for suggesting operating rooms needed to be sterilized (how could it be that these “germs” too tiny to see could cause infections?).

Every scientific discovery which rocks the boat goes thru 3 stages: first it is ridiculed, then it is viciously attacked, and finally it is accepted as self-evident. It used to be that to reach stage three you needed to “rotate the old guard” of scientists so that those who were too young to recall before the target hypothesis were now in command of the temple. How wonderous that we live in the Internet Age which can sp[eed up this timeline into a matter of a decade or so.

Back to Top