BMJ Brain Deer Wakefield

[Guest guest]

THE GUTTER PRESS

BMJ and accusations of FRAUD based on no legally acceptable evidence?

The research by the Royal Free in the 1990's has been extensively talked about.

This week another member of the team has been vindicated in the High Court. Dr is not a dishonorable doctor despite those that WRONGLY condemned him in some LYNCHING party.

This leaves Wakefield alone facing all the venom of Deer, the BMJ and anyone who cares to set up a blog or comment on these blogs to his disfavour.

My own views are and have always been neutral, favouring the theory that a NEUROTOXIN is certain to have NEUROTOXIC sequalae on any human exposed and more especially young children, one day infants and in 2012 those now exposed in the womb.

Without going into research; fraudulent, honest or even useless, this exposure to the next generation is CRIMINAL.

Brain Deer is bizarre in that he shows clear prejudice against the medical system but aligns with this system in the challenge made by the Royal Free to highlight autism children having other ISSUES than a simple DISORDERING of their brains.

had already pointed out that there is a connection between AUTISM and the BOWEL at a rate approximately half that described by the Royal Free team. But he seems to take a pathological dislike to Wakefield whatever is said and refuses to look at alternative explanations.

The ability of both , the BMJ and all to pick on one person only in the study to CRUCIFY is ODD.

As each point has been RAMMED home the heat has risen so that both in PRINT and VERBALLY both Deer and Fiona Godlee for the BMJ have stated that FRAUD was involved in this published paper.

Interessingly Fiona points out in the interview (see below) that ONLY Brain Deer and no one else in the world has his KNOWLEDGE.

While putting the BMJ in a parlous position the UNIQUE view of Mr Deer is clearly SPELLED OUT.

No IFS or MAY BEE's. The paper is FRAUD Fiona godlee states in a very forceful voice which then drops to that of what I detect as FEAR? Had she some premonition of some TSUNAMI that she might have let loose on the BMJ?

Her (Ms GODLEE) allegation is not just serious but DESTROYS the life time work of this DOCTOR (ANDREW WAKEFIELD).

HIGH STAKES indeed.

We are not dealing with just one man's livelihood ruined but there are KNOCK ON effects for all other people honestly or dishonestly (according to the statements of people involved) researching autism and the future of tens of millions of autism children both living and yet to be born.

VERY HIGH STAKES.

And for GENERAL GOOD HEALTH of the future generations.

We have in 2012 TOO MUCH autism in the world today.

Some years ago the problem did not exist. Before 1943 for example.

This is no time to exclude ANY theory for autism cause however crazy or even fraudulent UNTIL we have proof of what causes AUTISM.

We know many CAUSES already. One of which is the same PATHOGEN found in MMR even!

This multiple causation idea in itself makes epidemiology very fraught even if honestly done. (the life of Professor Sir Doll shows science can be BOUGHT).

The BMJ's link to MERCK is not good for BMJ or its employees to BASH those calling for RESEARCH on MERCK products.

The fact this link was SECRET for years does not bode well for any legal fighting (defence of the good name and integrity of Wakefield) to come.

I cannot personally see FRAUD but am not privy to the documents the parties in dispute have.

In fact NO ONE outside of the RESEARCHteam can have this knowledge LEGALLY and especially JOURNALISTS.

It seems IMPERATIVE that all the TWELVE children (now young adults or adults) are looked at TODAY to help sort this MESS out.

Where are they and what is their future?

Hiding behind ANONYMITY means that accusations of FRAUD hardly seem appropriate.

How can Fiona Godlee and much less Deer know that FRAUD is involved.

It is theoretically possible for someone to claim they are the children or the parents and how would we know? Or how would Deer know he wasn't being FOOLED?

There are laws of PRIVACY.

For me, the case for seems clear cut but too many people irrationally line up with unsubstantiated attacks on Wakefield for which I can see no proof except that those attacking him are themeselves breaking laws.

The judge condemning the BMC was not kind to Wakefield and seems to accept the hypothesis that even with no idea for causation of autism we can eliminate unpaltable options.

Hardly a sense of JUSTICE or HIGH JUSTICE but more of a lynching.

But now stands very much alone for any faults of a paper subscribed to by many individuals and an honorable hospital.

http://www.bmj.com/podcast/2011/01/10/sting-tale

13 minutes into this is the bald statements of FRAUD.

I wait to see the endgame.

BMJ and accusations of FRAUD based on no legally acceptable evidence?

I see clear exerting of POWER by the PRESS, by the MEDICAL INDUSTRY and the JUSTICE handed down by the HIGH COURT is to be CONGRATULATED.

Recent knowledge also implicates specifically those that suffer BAD reactions to MMR and who are then given TYLENOL/ACETAMINOPHEN.

Far from being a dead hypothesis it seems that more research is called for.

And this before the known SYNERGY of this drug with antibiotics known to be part of the vaccine mix.

We also need to be aware that for the VAST MAJORITY the vaccine causes ABSOLUTELY no HARM whatsoever.

But how many does it have to KILL or make permanently DAMAGED to make it a product which must come with CLEAR WARNINGS of RISK to BENEFIT and the ability of parents to make their choice.

As has already pointed out where is the sense of a person NEEDING say RUBELLA protection to have to undergo REPEAT vaccines for several other VIRUSES at the same time and being exposed to MULTIPLE LIVE VIRUSES when in an IMMUNE COMPROMISED condition.

There is more to ANDREW WAKEFIELD than one paper, poor, good or fraudulent.

And more to Deer than a reporter who exists on some undisclosed INCOME.

My own view on Deer was made up when he sneaked himself into the home of a person given COMPENSATION for colossal harm from vaccines that NORMALLY help most of us and then tried to destroy that family as well by his brand of prejudiced journalism and venomous accusations of FRAUD by this family.

The word used to lower the reputation of the great journal called the BMJ is to introduce it to his unique brand of REPORTING called:

THE GUTTER PRESS