Doctoring the news


Wonder what the BBC will make of this story:

‘Perhaps we now have the link between vaccination and autism’: Professor reveals aluminium in jabs may cause sufferers to have up 10 times more of the metal in their brains than is safe

Aluminium in vaccines may cause autism, controversial new research suggests. 

Autistic children have up to 10 times more of the metal in their brains than what is considered safe in adults, a study found.

Study author Professor Chris Exley from Keele University, said: ‘Perhaps we now have the link between vaccination and autism spectrum disorder (ASD), the link being the inclusion of an aluminium adjuvant in the vaccine.’ 

The researchers speculate autism sufferers may have genetic changes that cause them to accumulate aluminium which healthy people are able to remove.

The findings are controversial after the disgraced gastroenterologist Andrew Wakefield said in 1995 that the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine is linked to bowel disease and autism. 

Andrew Wakefield is of course now a pariah, driven out of his career and publicly vilified not least on the BBC which will not countenance any suggestion that he may have had a point about the MMR vaccine being linked to autism in some way.  Wakefield is wrong, dangerous and should be ‘shot’ on sight.

You kind of suspect that the ‘authorities’, the medical profession, the government and the likes of the BBC, know he may be right but crushed him for the better good.  What is the likelihood that some of the 100’s of thousands of young children getting a cocktail of drugs will not have some allergic reaction?  Mothers-to-be are told not to drink, smoke, eat certain foods…and yet a cocktail of drugs is 100% safe for very young children? Peanuts and apparently, we learn to day, fish can have tragic consequences for some.

What’s the chance those ‘authorities’ know that some children might develop autism due to the MMR vaccine but because the vast, vast majority do not they have decided that it is better to ‘sacrifice’ those that will become autistic for the good of that vast majority?  They won’t ever admit this as to do so would result in parents not taking a chance and avoiding the MMR jab regardless of the probably miniscule risk.

As with climate change the BBC has decided that the ‘science is settled’ and that means the news is one message only with no further discussion or debate….and that is a political, not scientific, decision.



Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Doctoring the news

  1. Arthurp says:

    Not many know but the Government acknowledge that vaccination is inherently dangerous.

    Do you want £120,000?

    You could get a payment if you’re severely disabled and your disability was caused by vaccination against any of the following diseases:

    haemophilus influenzae type B (HIB)
    human papillomavirus
    influenza, except for influenza caused by a pandemic influenza virus
    meningococcal group B (meningitis B)
    meningococcal group C (meningitis C)
    meningococcal group W (meningitis W)
    pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 (swine flu) – up to 31 August 2010
    pertussis (whooping cough)
    pneumococcal infection
    rubella (German measles)
    smallpox – up to 1 August 1971
    tuberculosis (TB)


  2. Jonathan McNabb says:

    The following interview by US analyst Lionel with journalist Sharyl Attkisson might be of interest: – the interview as a whole is interesting, but in relation to this interview from the 33 minutes point is particularly relevant discussing US media coverage.


  3. Rob in Cheshire says:

    The fact that the medical establishment talks of “herd immunity” tells you all you need to know. We are like cattle as far as they are concerned, if a few must be sacrificed for the greater good, then so be it.

    There is an awful lot of money in Big Pharma. I don’t know if Dr Andrew Wakefield was on to anything, but I do know that they destroyed him. I find that instructive, and I am sure it had the effect of making any other researcher consider his career before making any claims that would offend the powers that be.


    • Arthurp says:

      I don’t think you understand what is meant by ‘herd immunity’.

      Put simply, if a person is infected then the disease has to spread to other people before the body is able to defeat it. If it cannot do so – for the reason that almost all the people that the infected person comes in contact with are immunised – then the disease can’t spread and infect other susceptible people. Thus the group of people as a whole are immunised although some in the group aren’t.

      (If you know the physics of a nuclear bomb, there must be sufficient neutrons released and absorbed by other nuclei before the exponential release of energy occurs – impurities or moderators or even the size of the nuclear material being below a ‘critical mass’ prevents that from happening.)


      • Rob in Cheshire says:

        I know exactly what is meant by “herd immunity”. I hoped I had made the point that the term itself indicated a view of the non-medical general public which I find instructive, to say the least.

        Since when have you felt like you were part of a “herd”? I don’t.


  4. StewGreen says:

    Whoa, don’t look at full colour complex issues in a black and white way.
    Don’t think that just cos the media are incompetent that that means Wakefield is in the clear.
    Wakefield and the Lancet broke clear experimental rules and that’s why he was struck off.
    Yes the Lancet similarly continues to flaunt the rules in the way it reports Climate Science, but that is another thing.
    When you have an theoretical treat you expect two things : a scientific mechanism and a real world observation of incidence.
    And this case although the Keele Prof is postulating a mechanism in the real world when you compare similar towns where one has a low incidence of vaccination, there is no corresponding lower count of autism Yes autism seems to be diagnosed more often these days, but it seems to make no difference whether a baby has been vaccinated or not.


  5. JimS says:

    I remember a time when the BBC ran discussions with a ‘celebrity’ female in the studio and some unknown ‘expert’ on the phone.

    To this bear of little brain the impression that I got was that the anti-vaccine views of the studio bimbo were far more important than those of the unknown clinical practitioner.

    I don’t think that that there can be any doubt that vaccination has been a medical triumph. There may well be minor side-effects and research around this is always worthwhile, not the least because it extends our understanding that will have uses elsewhere, but that is no reason to lose our sense of perspective.


  6. RJ says:

    This is anecdote rather than data, but when the Andrew Wakefield research was published a number of the doctors and nurses I worked with accepted it because it fitted in with their experience of the side effects of the MMR jab. Even after he had been officially discredited they were always careful to ensure that their children had seperate vaccinations for measles, mumps and rubella. At work they accepted that the MMR vaccine was safe, but in their private lives they made sure that their children never came near it.

    In this instance Big Pharma didn’t play a role in destroying Wakefield. They would have made more money if he had been proved right and children had been given individual vaccinations for each disease. It was the NHS that was desperate to destroy Wakefield. Three injections would have been more expensive that the MMR cocktail: leaving aside the cost of the drugs the GP costs for administration would have been three times as high.


  7. Richard Pinder says:

    I don’t know if this secret or not but I heard that there were two batches of MMR jab bought for the NHS. Batches bought by some Blair crony in the House of Lords that had a lead based preservative. And then new batches brought in after this without the lead based preservative in them.

    I always wondered if the NHS destroyed Wakefield by using the later batches to discredit Wakefield who would have used the older batches?