Whacky Medicine, Independent Experts and Profit

[bignumber5]

???? Wrote:

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

> the problem is there's a scary

> amount of people who seem to think their 'opinion'

> (which normally means that of someone with an

> agenda and a website) is better than the

> scientific process/peer group review etc ie proper

> science

...and there always will be while population at large are so willing to doubt those who's training, expertise, jugdgement and continued employment their own tax money funds - the regulated, updated, evidence based, NICE guideline following NHS doctor. Snake oil peddlers would have gone the way of the dodo long ago if there were not a group interested in purchasing the stuff, however daft it may seem to the majority.

But imprison him, quids? The man made professional errors, and his professional body are dealing with that. But the only reason that he had any impact at all is because, with no obvious indication to do so, masses decided that they would base an enormous decision on his beliefs, despite being pointed in a very different direction by established expertise. Do we jail the journos that broke the story too? They, after all, should have a responsibility for the effects of their publications. Maybe children that go through the trauma of experiencing the diseases that they were not immunised against could sue... Someone. Everyone. Anyone. Their parents? Yeah, why not, let's hold every link in the chain accountable...

Oh no, hang on, that's not how medicine works, is it? The role of a clinician is to give you all of the established facts in order that you can make a balanced, informed decision. It's not their fault if you prioritise the Daily Mail, medical journal of the people, as being a better source because you do not understand or respect the process that has to be undertaken to sieve through information in order to give you the best option.

Britain: you may demand protection from woo merchants, or even from a lone gunman from within the establishment that publishes some fuckwitted muppetry that the tabloids jump on (protection which you are offered, in the form of ignoring them and listening to your doctor, and professional regulation of those within the profession) OR you may whinge in every other breath about nanny state this and nanny state that, but you may not have both.

[TE44]

15 health officials and experts met up in a goverment office block on 11th Feb 1988.

Thanks to the freedom of info act, we have access to the minutes of that and subsequent meetings.

Although there was controversy about whether the MMR caused autism, the real concern was the vaccine could trigger devastating conditions eg: encephalitis-type conditions,including meningitis with symptoms such as swelling of the brain, lining of the brain and spinal chord. These people read a report from the Canadian authorities who had suspended the triple vaccine

containing the urabe strain, whilst already hearing previous concerns the year before, and the years after.

In September 1992 it was the UK manufactures that forced UK officials into finally stopping vaccinations with

there urabe containing vaccine, and informed licensing authorities worldwide.

Health officials "agreed on the 4th September that no action would be taken to evoke the manufacturers license as

a change of purchasing policy was to be made by the department, revoking the licence would cause a world wide crisis"

The Department Of Health has put up a fight to keep much information from us, they refuse to give names of the people who made the decision to go ahead with this vaccine, regardless of the warning, and this was well before

Wakefield. Im more concerned with the findings that weren't published, I believe the officials and experts should come out and publish why they decided to ignore the warnings,

Bignumberfive

"In fairness to the individual parents, the purpetrators of this act of extreme arrogance were, in fact, the journalists involved, so caught up in their unwillingness to accept that perhaps their degree in English Lit did not equip them with the ability to critically appraise medical literature that they started a national health scare in the name of headlines rather than recognise their limitations. True reform of the system, in addition to the GMCs recent action, could include some sort of penalty for the science (i use the term loosely) correspondants for failing to adequately appraise the literature prior to starting a national panic based on it. The fact that this will not happen demonstrates clearly that the mainstream media do not, for all their swagger and bullshit, consider themselves to be expert, and certainly not responsible to the healthcare needs of the public. Such is the endpoint of power without responsibility.

I'm sure this is true for some parents, but many have used the freedom of info act, so they can hopefully get nearer to the truth. Those who had the power to introduce this vaccine should be responsible.

[bignumber5]

many have used the freedom of info act, so they can hopefully get nearer to the truth

Point missed, TE: you don't need the freedom of info act to read medical research, you do need training in how to read it meaningfully. This process WAS undertaken, and established opinion was NOT divided.

No one is claiming that vaccinations are 100% without problems. But the adverse incidents of the MMR, par example, are significantly less, both for the individual and for overall public health, than the sequelae of just measles. Measles can cause a whole load of things (encephalitis among them, as well as myocarditis, pneumonitis and orchiditis - the latter being classed as quite a common complication of measles; painful inflammation of the testes often leading to infertility) in far greater numbers than the vaccines. Approximately one in ten children with measles will need in-hospital treatment. This information was all available, via GPs, health visitors and paediatricians, throughout the MMR hoax. The only major unexpected variable was how willing parents were to ignore this or write it off as establishment conspiracy. That's not Wakefield's fault, and unless you want your medical decision making taken completely out of your hands, it's not the GMC/DoH/individual GPs fault either.

[daizie]

Read all issues of 'The Autism File' .. That will make it clear .

[Brendan]

Listen if the Daily Mail says that the world was a better place back when we had proper diseases like smallpox and polio and people knew their place then that?s what I?m going to believe.

Alright Mr ?scientific evidence?.

[TE44]

Bignumberfive

Point missed, TE: you don't need the freedom of info act to read medical research, you do need training in how to read it meaningfully. This process WAS undertaken, and established opinion was NOT divided.

No but you need the foia to read how decisions were made especially when The Department of Health are refusing to give the info.