2004 STATEMENT FROM DR. ANDREW WAKEFIELD

[Guest guest]

February 2004

Received from Dr. Wakefield -

PERMISSION GIVEN & APPROVAL TO SEND AROUND THE PLANET BY DR. ANDREW WAKEFIELD

OK to forward

Please read carefully

Sheri

Statement from Dr Wakefield

Serious allegations have been made against me and my colleagues in relation

to the provision of clinical care for children with autism and bowel

disease, and the subsequent reporting of their disease.

These allegations have been made by journalist Deer who has

expressed, in front of witnesses, his aim of destroying me.

All but one of the allegations, which are grossly defamatory, have been

shown to be baseless. One allegation remains against me personally.

That is, that I did not disclose to the Lancet that a minority of the 12

children in the 1998 Lancet report were also part of a quite separate study

that was funded in part by the Legal Aid Board .

It is the Lancet's opinion but not mine that such a disclosure should have

been made since it may have been perceived as a conflict of interest. This

is despite that fact that the funding was provided for a separate

scientific study.

It needs to be made clear that the funds from the Legal Aid Board were not

used for the 1998 Lancet study, and therefore I perceived that no financial

conflict of interest existed.

The Lancet defines a conflict of interest as anything that might embarrass

the author if it were to be revealed later. I am not embarrassed since it

is a matter of fact that there was no conflict of interest. I am, however,

dismayed at the way these facts have been misrepresented.

Whether or not the children's parents were pursuing, or intended to pursue

litigation against the vaccine manufacturers, had no bearing on any

clinical decision in relation to these children, or their inclusion in the

Lancet 1998 report.

It is a matter of fact that there was no conflict of interest at any time

in relation to the medical referral of these children, their clinical

investigation and care, and the subsequent reporting of their disease in

the Lancet.

As far as the 1998 Lancet report is concerned, it is a matter of fact that

we found and reported inflammation in the intestines of these children.

The grant of £55,000 was paid not me but to the Royal Free Hospital Special

Trustees for my research group to conduct studies on behalf of the Legal

Aid Board. These research funds were properly administered through the

Royal Free Hospital Special Trustees.

The Legal Aid research grant to my group was used exclusively for the

purpose of conducting an examination of any possible connection between the

component viruses of the MMR - particularly measles virus - and the bowel

disease in these children. This is entirely in line with other studies that

have been funded by the Legal Aid Board (latterly the Legal Services

Commission) and reported in the BMJ . If and when this work is finally

published, due acknowledgement will be made of all sources of funding.

It is unfortunate that, following full disclosure of these facts to the

editor of the Lancet, he stated that in retrospect he would not have

published facts pertinent to the parent's perceived association with MMR

vaccine in the 1998 Lancet report. Such a position has major implications

for the scientific investigation of injuries that might be caused by drugs

or vaccines, such as Gulf War Syndrome and autism, where possible victims

may be seeking medical help and also legal redress.

Health Secretary Reid has called for a public enquiry. I welcome this

since I have already called for a public enquiry that addresses the whole

issue in relation vaccines and autism.

It has been proposed that my role in this matter should be investigated by

the General Medical Council (GMC). I not only welcome this, I insist on it

and I will be making contact with the GMC personally, in the forthcoming

week.

This whole unpleasant episode has been conflated to provide those opposed

to addressing genuine concerns about vaccine safety with an opportunity of

attacking me - an attack that is out of all proportion to the facts of the

matter.

I stand by everything that I have done in relation to the care,

investigation and reporting of the disease that I and my colleagues have

discovered in these desperately ill children.

My family and I have suffered many setbacks as a direct consequence of this

work. As a family, we consider that our problems are nothing compared with

the suffering of these children and their families. For the sake of these

children, this work will continue.

--------------------------------------------------------

Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath

Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Nevada City CA & Wales UK

Vaccines - http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm

Vaccine Dangers & Homeopathy Online/email courses - next classes Sept 10, 2008