Sunday Times Journalist Challenged Over Role in US MMR Cases & Denying Being Complainant In UK MMR Case

New Information – Updated 12:00hrs 16 Feb 09

See also:  A deer in the headlights Melanie Phillips,  The Spectator16/Feb/09

The Sunday Times UK journalist Brian Deer is being challenged to explain his role in assisting George Bush’s US Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services, leading to  the failure in the USA last week of three lead cases of over 4500 pending cases of claimed vaccine injured US children.  The journalist was identified last week as complainant in the UK General Medical Council proceedings against Dr Andrew Wakefield over the alleged link between MMR vaccine, autism and bowel disease in children.  The journalist has reported extensively in The Sunday Times, London on his allegations which are now the subject of the UK GMC proceedings and was also previously a defendant in a law suit brought by Dr Wakefield. Challenges to his new denials of involvement with the UK GMC case are being made as are demands for the journalist to publish his complaints and other correspondence with the UK’s GMC and to explain his relationship with them.

But now ChildHealthSafety also demands publication of The Sunday Times journalist’s correspondence with the US Department of Justice.  The journalist has admitted his role in the failure of the US MMR Court cases announced last Thursday in judgements handed down by the US Court of Federal Claims.  The admissions of his role in the US cases were revealed by the journalist himself in a blog response, as previously reported on Age of Autism:-

……  the US government sought my help in mounting its case …… I was surprised by this. ……. I would come home, find an email from the department of justice asking me for a document, and see that the next day it was being run in court.Did the Department Of Justice Tip-Off Brian Deer? February 13, 2009

Concerned US parents are asking what was the purpose of journalist Brian Deer’s visit to the US last week and why were US Department of Justice staff sending out copies of the Sunday Times of London articles by Brian Deer, alleging scientific misconduct, in an effort to discredit Dr Wakefield prior to the  US Vaccine Court rulings last week [Reported by US journalist David Kirby: Vaccine Court To Weigh In On Thursday Feb 11, 2009  and The Sunday Times articles here by ChildHealthSafety here: Sunday Times Journalist Made Up Wakefield MMR Data Fixing Allegation 11 Feb 09 and Sunday Times – Sinks To New Low With Yet More MMR Junk Journalism 8 Feb 09]

In the UK Brian Deer’s first attacks in The Sunday Times on Dr Wakefield [Sun 22/Feb/04] were also made just days before a crucial Court decision [Fri 27/Feb/04] which took away legal funding from the British MMR vaccine damage children’s case and brought the UK’s MMR vaccine damage litigation to an end. Brian Deer was hired by a then Sunday Times editor Pauk Nuki, whose father, Professor George Nuki had sat on the UK Government Committee with others some of whom were implicated in attacks on Wakefield and were also involved in approving the now proven dangerous and withdrawn Pluserix MMR vaccine.

The Judge who made the decision which effectively ended the UK litigation, Judge Nigel Davis, is the brother of Glaxo board director Crispin Davis. Pluserix MMR was made and supplied by a GlaxoSmithKline company.  It was given to many of the children in the UK litigation. Crispin Davis had been brought onto the Glaxo Board only 2 months before The Sunday Times hired Brian Deer to write the articles attacking Wakefield. Crispin Davis was also the CEO of the owners of The Lancet.  Judge Davis later claimed that it had not occurred to him there might be a conflict of interest.   Read more about it all here: British Government & Establishment’s Efforts to Deny Compensation to MMR Vaccine Child Victims.

The involvement in the US of UK journalist Brian Deer together with the conflict of interest of the UK Judge Nigel Davis in 2004 raises questions as to the position of the US Federal Court and its now much criticised decisions last week in dismissing the lead US children’s cases. The Court has previously upheld the link between vaccines and autism in a number of cases and the defendant US Department of Health and Human Services has also conceded at least one case in secret rather than have a Court decision: AUTISM – US Court Decisions and Other Recent Developments – It’s Not Just MMR

The Sunday Times journalist also continues to deny the allegations of being a complainant in the UK GMC case in responses he has posted recently on blogs.  Journalist Brian Deer’s denials appeared in The Huffington Post and elsewhere, including:-

…this fabrication is that the GMC’s investigations were triggered by a complaint by me. This is wholly untrue.  ….. The GMC approached me and asked, in the public interest, that I supply details of my journalistic findings. ….. I am not the complainant and have letters to prove this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/keith-olbermann-todays-be_b_166103.html?show_comment_id=20800885#comment_20800885

Challenges to the journalist’s denials appear in comments posted on blogs yesterday demanding he  publish his correspondence  with and explain his relationship with the UK General Medical Council.   These include:-

Mr Justice Eady, in a UK High Court judgement, previously uncontested, stated that Brian Deer was the complainant against Andrew Wakefield, and listed three separate letters of complaint written by Deer in 2004. As a journalist Brian Deer now needs to publish all his correspondence with the GMC and its lawyers in order to clarify his relationship with them.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/keith-olbermann-todays-be_b_166103.html?show_comment_id=20891151#comment_20891151

On Feb 11 2009 it was ChildHealthSafety which revealed exclusively worldwide that journalist Brian Deer is the original complainant and whose complaints the GMC proceedings currently underway in London, England substantially follow:    Sunday Times Journalist Made Up Wakefield MMR Data Fixing Allegation.

After ChildHealthSafety’s exclusive disclosures, UK journalist Melanie Phillips writing in The Spectator discussed Brian Deer’s primary role in the UK GMC’s investigations.  US journalist David Kirby covered this in The Huffington Post. NBC TV’s Keith Olbermann on the US TV Countdown programme named The Sunday Times journalist World’s Best “Worst Person”:-

The witch-hunt against Andrew Wakefield Melanie Phillips, The Spectator – 11 Feb 2009

Keith Olbermann — Today’s Best “Worst Person in the World”David Kirby – Huffington Post -Feb 11, 2009

The Sunday Times journalist has maintained that he has no association with the drug industry and that his earnings come from his journalism and there is no evidence or suggestion to the contrary.

That he should answer however and promptly, is indicated by the timing, manner and circumstances in which he came to be hired by The Sunday Times which ChildHealthSafety revealed here: [British Government & Establishment’s Efforts to Deny Compensation to MMR Vaccine Child Victims]

And also because a British Parliamentary Health Select Committtee Report found that the drug industry spends “considerable resources” on building relationships with journalists to counter concerns regarding drug safety and to undermine critical voices and that the drug industry considers this “entirely legitimate”:-

The use of PR to counter negative publicity

221. Public relations is particularly important during times of bad publicity, especially when the safety of brands is called into question. Considerable resources are invested into building long-term, sustainable relationships with stakeholders and ‘key opinion leaders’ and journalists. These relationships are used to promote the use of certain brands and counter concerns relating to safety. Efforts to undermine critical voices in particular were identified, under terms of “issues management”. In later evidence, in response to the ISM’s memorandum, Pfizer stated that PR is entirely legitimate and can “help to educate and inform”.  According to the PMCPA, PR activities may include “placing articles in the laypress, TV documentaries, soap operas etc”.186 The following example of a project worksheet shows the marketing campaign process and the targeting of consumers and the press.

The Influence of the Pharmaceutical Industry House of Commons Health Committee Fourth Report of Session 2004–05

__________________________________________________

Vaccine Risks Outweigh Risk of Disease

Autism – A serious problem being ignored

19 Children A Day – 4 in 5 is a Boy

Autism in Britian outstrips all other major disorders affecting British children combined and is substantially more serious than measles.  Every day 19 British children develop autism spectrum disorders:

  • this will be 600,000 British children and adults in the future (birth rate approx 600,000 p.a.)
  • and horrific prospects for expectant parents
    • 1 in every 54 boys will be on the Autistic Spectrum
    • autism affects 4 times as many boys
    • so 1 in 215 girls are affected as well

[* 19 a day and 1 in 54 come from: Baird et Al Prevalence of disorders of the autism spectrum in a population cohort of children in South Thames: the Special Needs and Autism Project (SNAP); Lancet 2006;368:210 –15.  This research revealed 1 in 86 British children are being diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorders (116.1 in 10,000).

4/5   x   116.1/5000 =  1 in 54 (4/5ths of the 116.1 are boys and approx 5000 of the 10,000 children affected will be boys)]

Measles Comparison

See here how the risk to children in Western economies from measles is now insignificant for the vast majority Measles – The Official UK Statistics.

For the USA see US Measles Data and generally see Risk to Children & Government Scaremongering.

17 Responses to “Sunday Times Journalist Challenged Over Role in US MMR Cases & Denying Being Complainant In UK MMR Case”

  1. Brian Deer is an xxxxxole [Edited] and I hope his role in the Wakefield matter as well as the U.S. Dep’t of Justice is revealed and that he is dealt with accordingly. Very suspicious that last year’s finding was that Hannah Poling was found to be harmed by her vaccines and yet the plaintiffs this year were not validated. Vaccines are starting to cause a lot more harm than good. Hep b to babies in the U.S. Are they kidding ???!!!!!

    [Ed: Even more suspicious is that The US Department of Health and Human Services secretly conceded the Hannah Poling case – there was no need for a Court hearing see more here:-

    AUTISM – US Court Decisions and Other Recent Developments – It’s Not Just MMR]

  2. What was Brian Deer doing in the United States just as those illogical Vaccine Court rulings were read?

  3. If what he printed was true, what does it matter?

    [ED: How do you know what he printed or says is true? The Judge stated his letters were letters of complaint. He denies that but does not publish the letters to prove they were not letters of complaint. Which account is going to be the more accurate – his or the Judge in a legal judgment binding on him in a case in which he was a party and which was just setting out the facts which were uncontested.]

    As a journalist he is obliged to be independent objective and impartial, so the public can have some confidence in what he writes. If he wrote letters of complaint, that means he is not impartial, is directly involved, has a personal interest in the outcome of the case and therefore should not be reporting.

  4. As much as I despise Mr. Deer, how can you find out the truth about this without taking him to court? The title says the Times are being challenged… Challenged by who and how are they being challenged?

    Please post the method of the challenge otherwise this is just another blog post with another blog opinion and matters not to anyone.

  5. “How do you know what he printed or says is true? ”

    I don’t know if they are true or not. But if what he wrote IS true, then I would hope everyone would agree that autistic children were abused and a fraud was perpetuated.

    There aren’t any independent objective journalists.

    Either way, I don’t think any of this will help autistic people in anyway.

  6. Individuals without scruples are always valuable to corrupt authority, aren’t they? Deer probably initially thought his position on the MMR debacle was a guaranteed way to grab some easy moral highground in an attempt to levitate a mediocre journalistic career, then it seems as if his ego got ensnared in the struggle. Eventually it probably didn’t matter to him whether he understood the science, who was right or who suffered; when he was thrown a bone of approval by power and given a role to play, he yelped, fetched, wagged his tail and went snarling after the designated targets.

    “‘Am I not a bastard? Am I not an altogether incredible bastard?’” — Klaus Mann, “Mephisto”

  7. Is it possible that the cases of the three families were sabotaged in anyway by Mr Deer? If so, what would his motive have been for doing so? T. Ziegeweid

  8. nhokkanen

    “What was Brian Deer doing in the United States just as those illogical Vaccine Court rulings were read?”

    Nancy,

    This is not a bad question. David Kirby posted the information that the court was about to give its ruling at 8.30pm Eastern Time, Wednesday, which was already 1.30am, London time, although he also reported stirrings from the Department of Justice hours before:

    “…But by 2:30PM today, Public Affairs staff were bracing for a huge workload and a very long day on Thursday, knowing they would be taking press calls from all over the globe. They are grumbling that the Court did not give them more time to prepare.

    “Interestingly, and in an unusual move, the DOJ staff are also sending around copies of the Sunday Times of London articles by Brian Deer, about Andy Wakefield’s alleged scientific misconduct – in an effort to discredit him and his work prior to the Vaccine Court rulings.

    “I have no idea what any of this means, but I thought I would report it.”

    http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/02/vaccine-court-to-weigh-in-on-thursday.html#more

    John

    ED: In the UK Deer’s first attack on Wakefield [Sun 22/Feb/04] was also made just days before a crucial Court decision [Fri 27/Feb/04] which took away legal funding from the British MMR vaccine damage children’s case. The Judge who took the money away, Judge Nigel Davis, turned out to be the brother of Glaxo board director Crispin Davis who had been hired onto the Glaxo Board only 2 months before The Sunday Times hired Deer to trash Wakefield. Crispin Davis was conveniently for Glaxo, the CEO of the owners of The Lancet. Judge Davis later claimed that it had not occurred to him there might be a conflict of interest. Read more about it all here: British Government & Establishment’s Efforts to Deny Compensation to MMR Vaccine Child Victims.

  9. This information about Brian Deer and the US Department of Justice should be reason alone that the lawyers file an appeal with the Federal Court. The Federal Court should change their decision in favor of the three plaintiffs on this event alone. What has happened here in these cases is a travesty of justice in light of Brian Deer’s running interference for the vaccine companies.

  10. There should be a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by the lawyers in the Federal Court cases to the US Department of Justice and US Department of HHS regarding the correspondence between Brian Deer and them.

  11. If what Deer printed was true, then truth is a defense that is insurmountable. Why would anyone care or attack Deer until they can answer the question “Is what he wrote truthful”? I don’t follow the logic here The real question is if what he printed the truth? If not, if someone finds out the basis of “fact” is untruthful, then I think these other questions are legit. If what he printed was true, then the other comments seem to be more interested in upholding a dogma.

    Whether there is collusion between Deer and DOJ is secondary to the question of accuracy. If what he printed was true, wouldn’t you want the DOJ to have this information? I don’t get it.

    ED: If Deer’s repeated denials about not having submitted complaints to the GMC turn out not to be true, then how do you know anything he has written or said is true? As previously noted in response to CS, [February 15th, 2009 at 11:39 pm]:

    [ED: How do you know what Deer printed or says is true? The Judge stated his letters were letters of complaint. He denies that but does not publish the letters to prove they were not letters of complaint. Which account is going to be the more accurate – his or the Judge in a legal judgment binding on him in a case in which he was a party and which was just setting out the facts which were uncontested.]

    As a journalist he is obliged to be independent objective and impartial, so the public can have some confidence in what he writes. If he wrote letters of complaint, that means he is not impartial, is directly involved, has a personal interest in the outcome of the case and therefore should not be reporting.

    So it becomes important that he publishes his correspondence with the GMC which lasted at least 3 years including the letters of complaint cited in the English High Court judgement

  12. xxxxxxx: read – leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk then maybe apologise? [ED: Edited – abuse not tolerated]

    [ED: Brian Deer has not published his letters of complaint to back up his claims. A legally binding English Court judgement cites his letters of complaint to the UK GMC. And also read Lies, Damn Lies and Blog Posts which tells all anyone needs to know about that blog.]

  13. “then how do you know anything he has written or said is true? ”

    Personally, I have no personal knowledge either way.

    Has Wakefield successfully claimed or counterclaimed in any forum with a counter-evidence rebuttal of Deer? I know Wakefield sued him for libel and then backed out and paid Deer’s legal fees. I know that 10 of the authors of the original Lancet paper retracted it based on Deer’s original story. I know that Deer is a frequent critic of the pharmaceutical industry and has gone after them in published pieces. I have however, no proof other than the actions of Wakefield’s colleagues and Wakefield’s legal capitulation to Deer.

    I would support Deer publishing any correspondence as long as it did not jeopardize his sources. Confidential sources are important for any journalist. However, I still don’t understand why no one takes exception to the actual content of what he published and its truthfullness? Has Wakefield proven that Deer is publishing anything untruthful or has he offered evidence that it wasn’t the truth, other than a denial?

    In the end, Wakefield harmed some of those kids in his study and was being paid by attorney’s to find a link. Its important that we protect autistic children, not those who claim to be the friends of parents of autistic children. The children, are afterall, our children, our flesh and blood and they deserve better, from all sides.

    [ED: Wakefield did not harm any of the children whose cases are reported in Lancet paper. Deer’s letters of complaint will be available under FOI after the GMC proceedings are over if not earlier. Deer’s claims not to be complainant are in conflict with the uncontested facts of the Court judgement, which is binding on Deer. The libel case was settled because the Court would not adjourn it pending the outcome of the marathon and hugely expensive GMC case – fighting both simultaneously would have been extremely difficult – and Deer would always have the Reynolds defence – even if he was completely wrong – which it appears he was and is – see ‘Reynolds defence’ in new libel law test – The Guardian – “In court the newspaper did not claim that what it had published was true, but argued its case that the information was in the public interest. Its case relied on unidentified sources but
    Mr Jameel’s lawyers managed to rebut the information the sources had given.” – That would make the libel proceedings a very expensive waste of time whereas the GMC proceedings would deal with all issues just the same and exonerate Wakefield – with only one set of costs instead of two [and five if the three Defendant’s in the libel case succeeded on a Reynolds defence and had their costs paid to trial.]]

  14. Let me add this: Brian Deer isn’t a friend to autistic children. He’s full of the same bigotry about autistic people that everyone else is. However, I separate those feelings of mine with what he reported. I’m interested in what the truth is, not in defending Deer as a person.

    [ED: There does not seem to be any evidence to back up these allegations of bigotry regarding autistic children against Brian Deer or everyone else. Brian Deer is entitled to be defended just as anyone else is – he can start by publishing his letters of complaint to the GMC to show us what he claims is true – that he is not complainant to the GMC.]

  15. You don’t think autistic people suffer from bigotry? If that is your view, then I guess it is a waste of time for me to have this conversation. We’re in silly land now.

  16. What was Brian Deer doing in the United States just as those illogical Vaccine Court rulings were read?

    This is what he was doing:

    https://www.med.umich.edu/secure/pediatrics/meisterlecture.htm

    You guys really are amazing in your ridiculous conspiracy mongering.

    [ED: Orac arguing “conspiracy” theories. “As I sit detachedly atop this empty barrel, not needing to peer within, there is a faintest sound. Hark brethren – ’tis that within the cavernous void of shallow rhetoric the echoing esurience of scraping?“].

  17. Actually:

    3rd Annual Susan B. Meister Lecture in Child Health Policy
    “Science, the Media and Responsibility for Child Health: Lessons learned from the MMR Vaccine”

    Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 4:00 p.m.
    Biomedical Research Building “The Pringle” Auditorium

    Featured Speakers: Brian Deer, Investigative Reporter, The Sunday Times of London and Catherine DeAngelis M.D., M.P.H., Editor in Chief, The Journal of the American Medical Association

    (from: http://www.med.umich.edu/mott/research/chear.html)

    ED: And for the rest of the week? When publishing his letters of complaint to the UK’s General Medical Council about Dr Wakefield [so the public can see Mr Deer’s denials of being a complainant are true, despite a legally binding English Court judgement saying he did write at least three letters of complaint and he also admits he was still writing three years later] perhaps Mr Deer might wish to publish his diary and itinerary of his recent sojourn statesides so we can all be reassured about that as well?

    Come on, don’t be shy.

%d bloggers like this: