Dr Ben Goldacre’s AllTrials Or AllLies? Hiding Info On Killer Medical Drugs For Pharma Profit & Misleading 80,000 Supporters About the AllTrials Campaign

This is about trying to keep children and adults safe from killer drugs in the UK, USA and worldwide.

Dr Ben Goldacre’s AllTrials campaign is looking more and more like a front to ensure Pharma can keep on killing people for money with dangerous drugs and cover up the scientific data which shows it.  On one side is Dr Ben Goldacre screaming like a shrill shill “its lies, all lies” and little else, [like facts to back his denials up].  All Dr Goldacre needs to do is avoid answering the criticisms to convince people “its true, all true“.

On the other side is drug safety expert Professor David Healy setting out facts on his latest blog with his take on them in a series on Goldacre’s “AllTrials” campaign which he likened previously to a Trojan Horse: Sense about Science: Follow the Lawsuit June 16, 2014.  

The impression Dr Goldacre gives is that he is little more than the drug industry’s front man.  Goldacre is supported by not-for-profit “Sense About Science” [which seems anything but sense about anything].  Sense About Science is an industry founded not-for-profit who are really running the AllTrials campaign and not Goldacre.  It looks like at least some of the 80,000 people who have subscribed as AllTrials supporters on the back of Dr Goldacre’s efforts and of those who donated over £40,000 [US$70,000] to Goldacre’s fundraising efforts for Sense About Science have been duped.

Goldacre has posted on Healy’s blog claiming repeatedly that Healy’s facts and conclusions are all lies.  Goldacre stamps his little foot  and screams and screams, showing himself up whilst in the process convincing the reader he has no answers to the criticisms.  [If Goldacre had any, you will not see them in his comments on Healy’s blog.  See Goldacre’s most recent comments here and here. So much for Goldacre’s claims to believing in scientific debate and peer review when he does not answer challenges with facts.]

Professor David Healy reveals information about how GlaxoSmithKline has been hiding information about killer drugs which it presents as safe and effective when they are not, like Paroxetine which causes children to commit suicide when supposedly meant to treat depression.   Professor Healy states:

Right now today GSK are refusing to tell the children who have been injured by their drug in Study 329 that they were injured by their drug.  Tomorrow GSK will do the same and tomorrow and tomorrow. ….. The reason GSK, Pfizer, Lilly and AbbVie don’t want anyone to get access to the data is so that no-one can access the damage.  No-one can find out about the Dan Markingsons who die or are injured in company trials.  They are not doing this out of a concern for Dan Markingson’s confidentiality.  They are doing it in order to avoid being sued.”

GlaxoSmithKline signed up to AllTrials on its own terms. GSK negotiated their way onto AllTrials by specifying what they would and would not reveal.

If you thought AllTrials was about getting all drug trial data published and so opened up to scientific scrutiny, like Dr Ben Goldacre and cronies want you to think, then you and 80,000 other individuals who publicly backed AllTrials on that basis and some who donated towards over £40,000 [US$70,000] at Goldacre’s exhortations, seem to be wrong, judging by the information Professor Healy reveals.

Professor Healy also quotes evidence given by Tracey Brown of Sense About Science to an English Parliamentary investigation and another well-informed medical commentator also explains in detail here. 

Tracey Brown was asked by the Parliamentary Science and Technology Committee on 15 May 2013:

Ms Brown, just to be clear, is the aim of the campaign to have all four levels published?

Tracey Brown: No, …… What we are finding out is that “full” means something different for different people ….“

Different people?  Now who could she mean?  GSK signed up in February 2013 and this evidence was in May 2013. And Ms Brown says “What we are finding out“.  So Sense About Science [ie. Ms Brown] was in the process of finding out from GSK – an organisation instrumental in founding and originally funding Sense About Science and thus getting Ms Brown her job [after she abruptly jumped ship from Marxism to back capital following the end of the Cold War] that GSK do not want full scientific disclosure of the data.

If you gave money to Dr Ben Goldacre’s fund-raising campaign and feel you were duped are you going to email Dr Goldacre and ask for your money back?  How about unsubscribing from AllTrials?  What chance is there that Marxist Ms Brown will willingly let you do that?

Dr Ben Goldacre has cultivated a public image of a tousled unkempt irresponsible geeky young man to appeal particularly to the under 25 year-old childless males and the over fifty men who apparently predominantly populate the ranks on sites like Dr David Gorski’s ScienceBlogs blog and Dr Ben Goldacre’s BadScience Forum.  These are sites where you can see rampant untrammeled internet abuse, bullying and harassment of anyone who does not agree with them by one too many of those who infest those sites.

And now what we seem to be seeing, in our interpretation, is the cultivation of a particular image of Dr Ben Goldacre who seems to be fronting industry manipulation through the internet and social media by use of the such an image.  What else can it be?  Professor Healy has given Dr Goldacre numerous opportunities to comment and set the record straight. Dr Goldacre seems to respond with a lack of facts mixed with his brand of bullying and accusations and not much else.

To make up your own mind read yourself the exchanges between David Healy, Ben Goldacre of AllTrials, and Tracey Brown of Sense about Science and their own comments see Sense about Science: Follow the Rhetoric, Sense about Science: First Admit no Harm, Sense about Science: Follow the Lawsuit.  A major issue is GSK’s signing up to AllTrials and its appearance of being a Trojan Horse.

Here on CHS we declare an interest.  We do not believe anything Dr Goldacre has to say about these matters and we certainly do not trust him any further than a dead possum can throw him.

Sense About Science – Dr Ben Goldacre’s Industry Founded Backers Exposed

If you want priceless “must read” stuff then Sense about Science: First Admit no Harm June 9, 2014 is yet another in a series of sensible, straight-talking tough blog posts from mainstream medicine’s drug safety expert Professor David Healy. This is a second post exploring Sense about Science.  The first post is here: Follow the Rhetoric.

Anyone interested in Pharma will know about its ability to Astroturf – to create patient organizations whose role is to promote an illness or subvert an existing one.  Creating awareness of conditions sells drugs.

Less well known is what happens at a higher Astral level.  You can’t sell a product that gets a bad reputation or is removed from the market.  The marketing mission at this meta-level is to risk manage by influencing the debate on Risk.

You do this by setting up think tanks, hiring ex-regulators, academics and others, capturing the regulatory system, and working with a body with a name like Sense about Science.

The regulators advise you on how to get an indication for a drug even though it doesn’t work for that. The academics advise on how to do trials that use a problem your drug causes to hide a problem your drug causes.  The lawyers advise on the trials or studies that need doing in order for you to be able to defend the product in academic and legal settings.

All are involved years, perhaps a decade, before any sign of a legal action or public fuss.  You are able to brief them on the likely legal actions or publicity you could face because the right hand already knows what problems your drug causes, even though the left hand never concedes anything – even after the drug has been removed from the market.  It would be irresponsible to your shareholders not to have defences like this in place.

Click to read on to see the whole superb Healy article and you will not be disappointed:

Sense about Science: First Admit no Harm June 9, 2014

And irony of ironies, here is Dr Ben Goldacre getting you all to give money to Sense About Science – raising funds so Sense About Science can run Ben Goldacre’s AllTrials campaign which is being so successful getting laws proposed to apply throughout the European Union which will ensure drug safety takes 101st place well behind drug industry profits in 1st. 

Ben Goldacre is fundraising for Sense About Science

Quite a coup for Dr Ben Goldacre.  Well done Doc. 

Your parents should be proud of their self-admitted “nerd” son:

Nerds at the parliamentary committee on the Draft Defamation Bill June 14th, 2011 by Ben Goldacre

EU Drug Safety Disaster – AllTrials Campaign – Dr Ben Goldacre Intervenes But Fails To Explain Why AllTrials is Achieving The Opposite of His Promises Of Greater Drug Safety

Shortlink to this post:

EU Drug Safety Disaster – AllTrials Campaign – Dr Ben Goldacre Intervenes But Fails To Explain Why AllTrials is Achieving The Opposite of His Promises Of Greater Drug Safety

Age of Autism is currently running a story on this:  Goldacre’s Munich Agreement – Publishing Data on the Pharma’s Terms

CHS commented, including to say we don’t trust Dr Goldacre.  Then Dr Ben Goldacre dropped by to comment.   The debate is looking interesting.  You could do yourself a favour by taking a look: Comments.

CHS has recently reported this issue:

• EU Draft Drug Safety Laws A “Disaster” – Congratulations To Dr Ben Goldacre & AllTrials On Undermining Drug Safety Worldwide

• Dr Ben Goldacre Forced By CHS to Answer Criticism Over Drug Safety – But Not Before Goldacre’s Usual Response – Bullying, Abuse & Harassment

Martin Walker’s book on Dr Ben Goldacre can be found here:  Cultural Dwarfs and Junk Journalism: Ben Goldacre, Quackbusting and Corporate Science

Meanwhile we cherrypick:

This is what CHS first wrote:

• Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | June 04, 2014 at 09:57 AM

Dr Ben Goldacre then posted this:

• Posted by: Ben Goldacre | June 04, 2014 at 10:12 AM

CHS then wrote this:

• Posted by: ChildHealthSafety | June 04, 2014 at 11:17 AM

 

 

 

EU Draft Drug Safety Laws A “Disaster” – Congratulations To Dr Ben Goldacre & AllTrials On Undermining Drug Safety Worldwide

Shortlink to this post:

EU Draft Drug Safety Laws A “Disaster” – Congratulations To Dr Ben Goldacre & AllTrials On Undermining Drug Safety Worldwide

Dr Ben Goldacre’s involving himself in drug safety regulation looks like turning into a nightmare for everyone except the drug industry.  When we look at who is really behind his AllTrials Campaign, there is good reason to be worried.

Dr Ben Goldacre, as a seeming new convert to drug safety regulation, published a book “Bad Pharma” last August about the drug industry.  He also took it seemingly upon himself to found the AllTrials campaign with great public fanfare to get drug industry clinical trial data opened up to scientific scrutiny.

The most recent outcomes have been described as a “disaster” by internationally respected expert Dr David Healy: Making Medicine More Dangerous for You and Your Children – Drug Industry Wins System Which Hides Drug Hazards  

Others also are concerned about the fallout and effects of Dr Goldacre’s meddling.  CHS reports on some of those further concerns here. We specifically quote below Trudo Lemmens of the University of Toronto.  Trudo Lemmens is Associate Professor and Scholl Chair in Health Law and Policy at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law, with cross appointments in the Faculty of Medicine and the Joint Centre for Bioethics.

Trudo Lemmens observations are most revealing about the disaster Dr Ben Goldacre and his playmates have been instrumental in unfolding.  In short Dr Goldacre has been instrumental in building a platform of political pressure for change of drug regulation with the drug industry taking over the impetus to manipulate regulation favourable to it and get its own way to the detriment of you, your family and children.

Well done Dr Ben Goldacre.

Dr Ben Goldacre’s response to criticism is to use his extensive BadScience Forum network and social media to stir up bullying, abuse and harassment on the internet of anyone who dares criticise him: Dr Ben Goldacre Forced By CHS to Answer Criticism Over Drug Safety – But Not Before Goldacre’s Usual Response – Bullying, Abuse & Harassment.

But first CHS directs your attention to The AllTrials Campaign.  Who is really behind it? 

It is run for Dr Ben Goldacre by lobby front group Sense About Science. That Sense About Science are behind Dr Goldacre’s campaigning is more than a little troubling. 

Sense About Science were first exposed by journalist George Monbiot writing in the UK’s Guardian newspaper in 2003: Invasion of the entryists How did a cultish political network become the public face of the scientific establishment? 9 December 2003 The Guardian.

Sense About Science were also exposed by Lobby Watch as having strong links to the GMO industry, the Living Marxism group and Spiked.

Sense About Science are listed under “Contact Info” buried at the end of a very long page as the only contact point for AllTrials on the AllTrials website:

c/o Sense About Science, 14A Clerkenwell Green, London, UK, EC1R 0DP. Phone: +44 (0) 20 7490 9590 Email: alltrials@senseaboutscience.org  Web: Contact form

Quite why a bunch of British Marxists should also suddenly espouse capitalistic ideals of industrial and commercial science after the Berlin Wall came down following “Glasnost” and “Perestroika” in the former Sovier Union is something which defies belief.  It is almost as if whatever their old job was as Cold War Warriors, there was a new job to do and they just jumped from their Marxist horses mid gallop for capitalist ones to ride off in a completely different direction.

Here are some of the entries on Lobby Watch’s website under the heading “LIVING MARXISM LINKS”

Living Marxism

Sense About Science

Genetic Interest Group

Science Media Centre

Fiona Fox

Spiked-online

Frank Furedi (Click & then see Living Marxism profile)

Getting drug trial data opened up for scientific scrutiny is something many many others have been working at for decades, having to counter the manipulations of the drug industry to avoid that happening.

So how come no-longer-so-fresh-baby-faced Dr Ben Goldacre with his new friends thought he could succeed in a few months where others have toiled for decades and continue to do so against the well greased wheels of the drug industry in political life?  Or was that ever a  serious consideration?  Is it all smoke and mirrors? 

The involvement of Sense About Science and its history suggests it is and always was.  On the most favourable view we at CHS can take, at the very least Dr Goldacre has been unwise in his choice of friends.  And at the most one can only speculate. 

Dr Goldacre also enlisted the help of Dr Fiona Godlee, the editor of a leading medical journal, the British Medical Journal.  The BMJ has close ties to the drug industry.  It makes millions of dollars annually from drug industry advertising and promotion worldwide.

And was it wise of British Prime Minister David Cameron to let Dr Ben Goldacre be appointed to advise in the British Cabinet Office on using randomised controlled trials in “Evidence-Based Policy“.  If the drug industry can get away with manipulation of the systems of clinical trials over decades, and still do it with great success, just imagine what damage could be done in the UK and across the European Union by Dr Goldacre’s promotion of such harmful practices.  We will get political policies “proven” by controlled trials just like killer drugs like VIOXX and useless drugs like Tamiflu have been proven.  If Dr Goldacre did not foresee the issues identified by Trudo Lemmens as noted here below, then Dr Goldacre had no business advising anyone.  When we have people like Dr Ben Goldacre looking out for the public interest in Europe, we at CHS suggest the Taliban or Al Qaeda are the least of our worries. 

Dr David Healy is a serious longstanding academic and medical practitioner who is an expert in clinical trials in psychopharmacology, the history of psychopharmacology, and the impact of both trials and psychotropic drugs on our culture.  Dr Healy’s interests in and concerns for drug safety are far longer and deeper than Dr Ben Goldacre’s seemingly sudden, recent and superficial conversion to such a worthy cause.  Dr Healy’s book “Pharmageddon” is about how pharmaceutical companies have hijacked healthcare with life-threatening results set out in a riveting story that affects us all: University of California Press (2012) – available on Amazon.com.

And here are the concerns of expert Trudo Lemmens of the University of Toronto. Trudo Lemmens has just critiqued the recently distributed draft European Medicines Agency Clinical Trials Data Release Policy regarding the release and use of drug trial data:  EMA’s Proposed Data Release Policy: Promoting Transparency or Expanding Pharma Control over Data? PLOS Guest Blogger Trudo Lemmens May 30, 2014

Trudo Lemmens is Associate Professor and Scholl Chair in Health Law and Policy at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law, with cross appointments in the Faculty of Medicine and the Joint Centre for Bioethics.

To quote extracts of Trudo Lemmens critique, this is where – and predictably where with warnings from experts like Dr Healy – that Dr Ben Goldacre’s meddling has led.  There were clear warnings.  Surely Dr Goldacre and Dr Godlee must have been aware of these issues?

Trudo Lemmens comments are also relevant to the rise of right wing anti-European Union nationalist groups in the EU.  There is considerable public disquiet about the corrupt EU political system.  It is clearly a system which cannot be fixed and is a big driver for the recent election successes in the UK and across the EU of right-wing politics.

Trudo Lemmens wrote:

In short, EMA’s approach is strengthening industry’s legal control over data, making it more difficult and legally risky for independent scientists to use them. These are in essence regulatory data, created for public interest use. For the EMA, a key public institution, to now support the privatizing of pharmaceutical knowledge through contractual affirmations of companies’ rights over these data is truly astounding. Dr. Rasi’s recent response to the Ombudsman, that EMA’s new policy is a ‘reasonable compromise’, and does not prevent researchers from asking for access to specific data sets on the basis of the existing access to information policy, does not reassure. His response does not recognize the legal concerns raised by the draft TOU and Redaction Principles, let alone justify the approach taken. And Abbvie’s withdrawal of the legal challenge of the Humira data release notwithstanding, EMA appears back in the business of imposing more extensive limits on what it gives access to in response to specific access requests.

This troubling development is not entirely surprising. Even if the transparency movement had some major victories, including the adoption of transparency requirements in the recent European Clinical Trials Regulation, opposition has been mounting. Industry may now employ other regulatory initiatives to fight transparency. The European commission recently released a draft directive aimed at streamlining and strengthening Trade Secret protection in Europe. The European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) jumped already enthusiastically on the occasion, emphasizing the need to protect the “proprietary know-how” of drug development, including in the “clinical trials phase”. In the context of ongoing and largely secret transatlantic trade negotiations between Europe and the United States and Canada, the pharmaceutical industry has also been lobbying hard to strengthen data and IP protection and to include better data protection in the package. EMA now appears to be lending a helping hand.

Extracts from:

EMA’s Proposed Data Release Policy: Promoting Transparency or Expanding Pharma Control over Data?  By PLOS Guest Blogger Trudo Lemmens May 30, 2014.

Dr Ben Goldacre Forced By CHS to Answer Criticism Over Drug Safety – But Not Before Goldacre’s Usual Response – Bullying, Abuse & Harassment

Shortlink to this post: 

Dr Ben Goldacre Forced By CHS to Answer Criticism Over Drug Safety – But Not Before Goldacre’s Usual Response – Bullying, Abuse & Harassment

[See also recent closely related post:

Congratulations Dr Ben Goldacre On Undermining Drug Safety Worldwide]

It is rare to see Dr Ben Goldacre embarrassed into answering serious criticisms.  This follows a blog post here on CHS.  This blog post in fact:  Making Medicine More Dangerous for You and Your Children – Drug Industry Wins System Which Hides Drug Hazards. 

Although rare, you will also see, this was only after Dr Goldacre’s usual much less than rare response of engaging in bullying, abuse and harassment failed.  CHS has reported previously on bullying abuse and harassment meted out from Dr Ben Goldacre’s BadScience Forum: Dr Ben Goldacre’s Grovelling Apology For Sexual Abuse, Bullying & Harassment of Female Doctor & Medical Journalist By His BadScience Forum Trolls and Bullies

People like Dr Ben Goldacre and another with a role in this, Simon Singh, seem to be hypocrites in claiming to espouse and endorse the role of science in taking knowledge forward, only when it suits them. Here you can see what happens when others subject people like them to scrutiny and call them to account. 

A chain of events leading to the current situation was triggered when The London Review of Books invited and then rejected Dr David Healy’s careful, thorough but critical review of Dr Ben Goldacre’s book “Bad Pharma“. The rejection of Dr Healy’s review is bizarre and especially from The London Review of Books.  Dr Healy writes about that here: Not So Bad Pharma March 28, 2013.

Do note in the context of Dr Ben Goldacre answering criticisms now, that was posted by Dr Healy over a year ago.

Dr David Healy is a serious academic and medical practitioner who is an expert in clinical trials in psychopharmacology, the history of psychopharmacology, and the impact of both trials and psychotropic drugs on our culture.  Dr Healy’s interests in and concerns for drug safety are far longer and deeper than Dr Ben Goldacre’s seemingly sudden, recent and superficial conversion to such a worthy cause.  It is also worth noting that Dr Healy’s book “Pharmageddon” is a better account than Goldacre’s populist pulp paperback.  “Pharmageddon” is about how pharmaceutical companies have hijacked healthcare with life-threatening results set out in a riveting story that affects us all: University of California Press (2012) – available on Amazon.com.

Dr Ben Goldacre cultivates an irresponsible unkempt slightly weird geeky image which seems intended to and it seems it also does appeal to “trendy” social media savvy young “turks” [and a number of the not so “trendy” who seem to like to think they are].  “Cool” may be a more common term but 1970s ageing hippy term “trendy” seems more appropriate in this context.  

Simon Singh is a physicist turned broadcaster turned “science” author who managed single-handedly with just one word “bogus” in a “science” article to end up being sued in a defamation law suit in the English courts which it seems was avoidable in quite a number of different ways.  The defamation case was followed by a high profile campaign supposedly about scientific freedom of speech depicting himself as a martyr to it. 

It cost him personally £50,000 [he claims].  He subjected his family to two years of avoidable stress, with a figure of around ten times that hanging over them had his appeal not saved him [and them]. 

Singh could have apologised over the complained about meaning of the term “bogus” – with its overtones of dishonesty – whilst still saying the same sort of thing in another way and still making his point.  That this is the case appears confirmed by video coverage supporting his legal fight which is posted on YouTube.

Singh’s claim to a “victorious” end result included a change to English defamation law which some defamation lawyers consider makes very little difference.  It appears a valid perspective that his efforts may have in the long term a chilling effect on science journalism which his martyrdom it was claimed would avoid.  To us on CHS Singh looks selfish and publicity hungry whilst wittingly or not serving commercial interests which remain faceless. 

The rejection of Dr Healy’s review of Dr Ben Goldacre’s book is so bizarre that Dr Healy then followed up his initial blog post with a series of articles again last year addressing the issues factually and in detail.  So the main criticisms go back starting over a year ago.

This chain of events led to Dr Healy’s 21st May blog post this year upon which CHS commented.

And there we see the outcome.  It was that post by CHS which in turn led to the bullying, abusive and harassing responses directly by Dr Ben Goldacre, Simon Singh and some of their camp followers.  This demonstrates it is not just a few of their followers who engage in this conduct.  It was also that post which, as will be seen below, drew direct attention to Dr Ben Goldacre’s role in bringing about a situation in which drug safety worldwide appears to be being undermined by the drug industry.  You will also see Dr Ben Goldacre admitting his hand was forced to answer the criticisms against his will.

Internet bullying, abuse and harassment is a modern scourge and people like Dr Ben Goldacre and Simon Singh are examples of those leading its spread.   Goldacre has over 325,000 “followers” just on Twitter and Singh has over 50,000.  And Twitter allows only a few words, so it is a perfect medium for one-line, soundbite abuse, bullying and harassment.

This is nothing short of ensuring if any individuals criticise the likes of Goldacre and Singh, instead of the criticisms being answered, they get their names blackened on the internet by the hordes of bullies and hangers-on who do it for Goldacre. 

This has a very damaging effect on science and public comment and free speech.  It is not responsible behaviour and people of such ilk should be shunned and rejected just in the same way those who espouse violence rather than persuasion and argument to get their own way are.  Violence is just another form of bullying, abuse and harassment.

You can see a rare example of Dr Ben Goldacre himself asking his hordes to stop bullying, harassing and abusing another journalist – of course well after the damage was done and no doubt because the example made clear to UK radio station LBC’s management just what Goldacre’s BadScience Forum engage in: Sigh. Do not abuse Jeni Barnett personally February 11th, 2009 by Ben Goldacre.  Ironically a point radio presenter Jeni Barnett was making was that she did not know much about issues of vaccines causing autistic conditions but that there seemed to be a lot of bullying going on about it.  

In short, it seems to us on CHS that Goldacre had to act in the Jeni Barnett case because he had to limit the damage to himself from the behaviour of his camp followers. If it was not so public we on CHS have little doubt Goldacre would do nothing.  And that is evidenced by the fact his BadScience Forum still exists doing what it does on a daily basis.  These examples show Dr Ben Goldacre knows what goes on.  He is not ignorant of it.

So here CHS focusses on what seems, on a critical analysis, the less than responsible behaviour of Dr Ben Goldacre, Simon Singh and others like them.  There are informal international networks of people like Dr Goldacre, Simon Singh and their camp followers.

Here is a specific recent example of a leading distinguished scientist being silenced by bullying because he had the temerity to question what appears to be an odd position that there has been no global warming so far this century: Climate change science has become ‘blind’ to green bias Sarah Knapton, Science Correspondent The Telegraph 16 May 2014.  It seems the bullying led Professor Bengtsson to cease engaging in the issue – and we link to a bullying blog on this to make the point about how widespread this kind of bullying, abuse and harassment is and how damaging and irresponsible it is.

CHS is fortunate in now being able to cite specific examples of Dr Goldacre, Simon Singh and others engaging directly in online bullying, harassment and abuse. Dr Ben Goldacre’s BadScience Forum is set up and run in a way which encourages online bullying, abuse and harassment.  It is routine for one too many of its members.

CHS’ post was published 21st May.  A week later at 2pm 27 May this is what Simon Singh “tweeted” to his 50,000+ Twitter followers:

Simon Singh@SLSingh

I seldom swear, but here’s fuckwittery of the highest order RT @lecanardnoir Quacks still have it in for @bengoldacre http://qako.me/1nsvAoy

Now firstly note this is a response to serious criticisms of Ben Goldacre made first by Dr David Healy on serious issues of drug safety.  So Singh is quite deliberately engaging in bullying, abuse and harassment and publishing it to his camp followers.

Within 15 minutes this is how Dr Ben Goldacre replied to Singh copied to Goldacre’s 325,000+ “followers” and Singh’s 50,000+:

ben goldacre@bengoldacre

@SLSingh @lecanardnoir yeah, channeled directly from the fevered imagination of @DrDavidHealy

So here we can see the bully Dr Ben Goldacre engaging directly himself in bullying, abuse and harassment of an internationally respected medical professional and academic and doing so in response to serious criticism made of Goldacre. It was the normal Goldacre response – bully.

There were in total over 40 replies and numerous “re-tweets” of the exchanges mostly involving more bullying, abusive and harassing comments from Goldacre and Singh camp followers. 

However, notably Goldacre later admits to having to reply grudgingly to Dr Healy’s criticisms – with the intervention no doubt of others behind the scenes like the industry lobby front organisation Sense About Science, pointing out how damaging it might be not to.  Rather than being pleased to have the opportunity to showcase his perspective to a critical academic Goldacre moaned on Twitter:

Sadly driven by @DrDavidHealy A real shame to have to stop productive work and reply to him“

This was of course only after well over a year of Dr Healy’s criticisms, as a leading expert on these issues, being online.  And Goldacre did not post his responses on his own blog.

The exchanges between Goldacre and Healy can be read starting here with Dr Goldacre’s response in which Goldacre opens [surprise!] abusively with disparagement and [according to Dr Healy’s reply] misrepresenting the position:

This blog post by David Healy is absurd.”

And this is how Dr Healy started with his response to Goldacre [our emphasis]:

The first point to make is this post isn’t about AllTrials. AllTrials is a footnote.

It’s about the dismay that many felt at EMA backsliding. It’s about how it was obvious that something like this was on the cards. Against this background uncritical endorsement of industry looked like a bad idea. There was a desperate need to stay awake. It looks like too many of us have been asleep.

Ben offers an outline of the AllTrials strategy here. It’s helpful to have this.

His accusation that these posts misrepresent campaigns, smear people, shout abuse, and hector from the sidelines looks like a description of posts by others elsewhere. With very few exceptions any comments to the various posts on this blog that in any way fail to support Ben or AllTrials have been deleted.

The post repeated an alternate analysis – that the main thing industry wants to hide are adverse event data.

Now that CHS has provoked the dialogue, you can have the benefit of reading and making your own mind up about how absurd Dr Ben Goldacre might or might not now be looking.  That is a position you would not have been in before.

What we probably will never have an answer to which all will find satisfying are answers to these questions made in CHS’ prior post on this issue:

Dr Ben Goldacre founded the AllTrials campaign.  Why did he found the AllTrials campaign? What was in it for him?  Who suggested it?  Who funded it? Who supported it? And why have we ended up with what Dr Healy describes as a disaster for us all and a victory for the drug industry, all successfully fronted by Dr Ben Goldacre?

Other information regarding Dr Goldacre’s connections and interests directly and indirectly to drug maker GlaxoSmithKline can be read here What’s Behind Ben Goldacre?

And this appeared here:

Dr Goldacre’s ‘Bad Science’ column began in the Guardian in 2003 and he rapidly rose to prominence receiving the Association of British Science Writer’s award for that year for an article on the MMR issue ‘MMR: Never mind the facts’. It may be noted that the ABSW awards were at the time sponsored by MMR manufacturers and defendants GlaxoSmithKline [1]. It was also not disclosed at any time, though Dr Goldacre’s column dealt heavily in issues of epidemiology and public health policy that his father, Michael Goldacre, was a professor public health at Oxford and a leading government epidemiologist [2, 3, 4] whose work had included papers on MMR (notably GSK’s Pluserix vaccine after it was withdrawn by the manufacturers in 1992) [5].  In the case of Pluserix it should also be taken into consideration that the NHS had apparently indemnified the manufacturers for the use of what was known to be a faulty vaccine (already being removed from use in Canada in 1988 and its license revoked there in 1990) [6, 7]. Despite the growing public celebrity of the younger Goldacre, and the professional prominence of the older, no authoritative information for their familial relationship came to light before 2009, although it is the sort of matter that might normally be in the area of public comment.

It is evident that had this been generally known from the beginning Ben Goldacre’s column would have been seen in quite a different light. Also, if this had been known and Ben Goldacre had wished to assert that he was nevertheless an independent voice, the public would still have been better informed. Moreover, there must have been a huge circle of people “in the know” who never commented in the public domain until Ian Fairlie did in 2009 [2], which is in itself a remarkable circumstance.

Ben Goldacre repeatedly ducked answering questions about the shortcomings of the epidemiology of the safety of MMR both in his Guardian blog and in British Medical Journal over an extended period [1,8]. Typically he would engage in ad hominem attacks against his critics on the issue (never mentioned by name) but not answering their specific questions. For a long time his website carried the intimidatory message “…personal anecdotes about your MMR tragedy will be deleted for your own safety” [9] and he has an on-line shop which sells novelty merchandise declaring the safety of MMR, including at various times t-shirts, thongs, mugs and baby-bibs, as well as characteristically abusive items about nutritionists and homeopaths [10]. Another problem was that though Goldacre styled himself as a junior doctor he was coy about which institutions he was affiliated to, which at one point included the Institute of Psychiatry [11]. This not only disguised potential conflicts over MMR because of the Institute’s relations with pharmaceutical manufacturers, but also mobile phone radiation. At one point Goldacre was involved in making a personalised attack on a fellow journalist Julia Stephenson while not disclosing that his institution included the industry funded Mobile Phones Research Unit [11]. Of course, if you personally attack those people who may have suffered ill effects from the products you are defending this is taking the debate to somewhere else than science (and perhaps to somewhere not very pleasant).

Making Medicine More Dangerous for You and Your Children – Drug Industry Wins System Which Hides Drug Hazards

Shortlink to this post:  

Making Medicine More Dangerous for You and Your Children – Drug Industry Wins System Which Hides Drug Hazards

Why You Should Not Trust Dr Ben Goldacre On Drug Safety – Is Goldacre Really GlaxoSmithKline’s Trojan?

[See also recent new posts: 1) Congratulations Dr Ben Goldacre On Undermining Drug Safety Worldwide and 2) Dr Ben Goldacre Forced By CHS to Answer Criticism Over Drug Safety – But Not Before Goldacre’s Usual Response – Bullying, Abuse & Harassment]

If you go out and buy a car which the dealer knows has serious undisclosed faults, a crime has been committed.

It is an accepted fact even in the drug industry that most drugs do not work in most people.  So if you go out and buy a drug which for most people does not work and which has serious undisclosed faults which could kill or injure [eg. VIOXX] no one in the drug industry goes to gaol.

This CHS post is about safety: your safety, your children’s safety and your family’s safety.

This is also in part about how drug companies withhold data on drug trials which show their drugs do not work and are dangerous.

This post is also about Dr Ben Goldacre’s role in giving the appearance of holding the drug industry to account over drug trial data whilst the end result seems to be Dr Ben Goldacre is helping the drug industry make it look like progress is made whilst in fact manipulating drug safety issues so that we have the same old same old.  In recent times Dr Goldacre along with Dr Fiona Godlee, British Medical Journal Editor, have been campaigning to get drug companies to sign up to the AllTrials campaign. 

Dr Ben Goldacre founded the AllTrials campaign.  Why did he found the AllTrials campaign? What was in it for him?  Who suggested it?  Who funded it? Who supported it? And why have we ended up with what Dr Healy describes as a disaster for us all and a victory for the drug industry, all successfully fronted by Dr Ben Goldacre:

Everyone is in a spin.  AllTrials are asking for more donations to continue their successful campaign.

As someone who has been working the GSK system, I can say with confidence that this is a disaster.

Dr David Healy has published HERE a remarkably astute analysis of how GlaxoSmithKline has succeeded in manipulating the AllTrials campaign and giving the appearance of transparency in making drug trial data available:

…….  soon after being fined $3 Billion, GSK trumpeted their endorsement of transparency by signing up to the AllTrials campaign and declaring their intention to put in place a method to allow researchers access to clinical trial data that would go beyond the wildest dreams of researchers.  See April Fool in Harlow, and GSK’s Journey.

Healy notes regarding Dr Ben Goldacre:

When GSK signed up to AllTrials Ben Goldacre rolled over and purred.  The BMJ featured Andrew Witty on their front cover as the candidate of hope.  ………….

In contrast, on this blog, 1boringoldman and on RxISK a small group have warned consistently that this was not good news.  That what would be put in place was a mechanism that gave the appearances of transparency but in fact would lock academics into agreeing with GSK and other companies as to what the outcomes of their trials have been.

No one wanted to rain on the AllTrials parade – it never seems like a good idea to fracture a coalition. RxISK put the AllTrials logo on its front page.

Not content with a few academic ghost authors, GSK’s maneuver has put industry well on the way to making Academia a ghost, a glove puppet manipulated by company marketing departments.

Meanwhile Iain Chalmers co-wrote an editorial with GSK endorsing the GSK approach (The Attitude of Chicks to Trojans and Horses) and the British Government produced a document on clinical trial data access that could have been written in GSK central.

Seasoned observers of Dr Goldacre’s progress and career may feel they have good reason to be sceptical of Dr Goldacre’s actions and motives.  Sun Tsu counselled that to know what the enemy thinks observe what they do, not what they say.

Dr Goldacre in his books and other writing gives the appearance of being critical of the drug industry.  But he only ever seems to write about issues and events that have been known about for a very long time.  Of course, if enough people start making the same observation then perhaps Dr Ben Goldacre may change his approach and write the occasional exposé. Until then, it is a fairly safe bet that Dr Ben Goldacre will carry on as he has always done and never write anything critical about the drug industry which has not already been well covered elsewhere.

In short, Goldacre has ensured he and his camp followers have the fig-leaf to claim he is critical of the drug industry whilst the reality is no damage is done as it has already been done by many others before.

The fact that Dr Goldacre, from absolutely nowhere, suddenly emerged to found the AllTrials campaign is frankly bizarre.  Why him and why then and now?

Dr Ben Goldacre also owns and operates an online “BadScience” forum.  Members of the forum are encouraged to attack practitioners of herbal and complementary and alternative medicine on blogs, in comment fora and to public authorities claiming their treatments are not scientifically proven.  Dr Goldacre wrote in his advice to his forum members: “The time for talking has passed. I draw the line at kidnapping, incidentally.“

Now there are good reasons to conclude one too many of these people are bullies.  But there is one supervening reason.  Other reasons include that some members of the BadScience forum block discussion and that some for sport in their spare time disrupt other fora on the internet and attack, bully, abuse and harass ordinary people and parents of very sick children wanting to share information. Groups like Dr Ben Goldacre’s BadScience forum are organised for just such a purpose on the internet.

A bully picks on others who are weaker than them and Dr Ben Goldacre and one too many of his followers seem to be no exception to this. A bully makes sure, right or wrong, he is always on the stronger side.  Dr Ben Goldacre’s main approach is to attack what he claims is “Bad Science“.  He has for years written as a columnist in a UK national newspaper, The Guardian, a “Bad Science” column.  His website is called “BadScience” and his forum is called “BadScience“.

It is of course also a mystery how it could be that a medical doctor with no degree level scientific training and qualifications was appointed to write a column about science.  And at the time Dr Ben Goldacre was a psychiatrist at the Institute of Psychiatry.  Psychiatry is the least successful branch of medicine in history with treatments lacking any scientific foundations like cutting nerves in a patient’s brain and applying 400 volts to a patient’s brain with what is called electro-convulsive “therapy” [ECT].  Do that to your laptop and the results will not fail to disappoint.

So here is the problem and harm Dr Ben Goldacre poses to everyone by his actions.  The drug industry has had the same approach for over a century.  Medicines from herbs, vitamins and many other other natural products like cod liver oil are known for be safe and effective.  The modern pharmaceutical industry has its foundations and origin in supplying just such products.  But now they are inexpensive and not patented, but still effective and so are a threat to the drug industry’s profitability.

The main reason why Complementary and Alternative Medicine is not “scientifically proven” is because no one has been funding the research to prove remedies already known to be safe and effective for hundreds and even thousands of years.  Dr Ben Goldacre knows this.  So like all bullies he takes the stronger side to bully those in a weaker position.

Now let us put some numbers to this so you can see just exactly what kind of bully Dr Ben Goldacre is.  The U.S. National Institutes of Health [NIH] spends annually on medical research about US$27 billion, on pharmaceutically-oriented Western medicine.  The amount it spends on alternative medicine is a tiny tiny fraction of approximately US$130 million and it did not start supporting CAM research until 1992.

So how can Goldacre claim most of CAM has no scientific basis?  That is easy.  No one has paid to do the science on it whereas they spend billions of dollars on research the drug industry benefits from.  For CAM research to catch up would require the US NIH to devote its entire annual budget just to CAM research and do so for several decades.

Yet Dr Ben Goldacre is reported to have said:

one of the central themes of my book [Bad Science] is that there are no real differences between the $600 billion pharmaceutical industry and the $50 billion food supplement pill industry“.

Clearly that is not true when one looks at the amount just the US government spends via the NIH on pharmaceutically-oriented Western medical research.

One of the other problems with Dr Ben Goldacre is that he targets easy targets where criticism might be justified say where an individual makes claims about a product which are not supportable.  That kind of thing is easy.  But the impression given to the entire world by the actions of Dr Ben Goldacre is that all of these treatments are useless and peddled by charlatans when that is not true.

And you must also ask yourself, how can it be then that Dr Ben Goldacre is not campaigning for say half of the US NIH budget to be spent establishing the sound scientific credentials for CAM?  Surely, Dr Goldacre cannot be ignorant of the fact that herbal and CAM treatments and remedies have in many cases long histories of safe and effective use? 

And so why does Dr Ben Goldacre spend so much of his time bullying others when he would be doing a much greater service campaigning for research to prove CAM treatments as safe and effective.  Instead he spends his time trying to eradicate safe and effective CAM treatments and deny them to everyone to the benefit of the drug industry.

Why would he do that if we all can benefit from the wider availability of proven safe effective inexpensive natural treatments?  What is in it for him to harm everyone else’s interests in that way?

And why is he so hell-bent on pursuing the drug industry’s agenda of wiping out herbal medicine and CAM treatments instead of campaigning to establish they are safe and effective?

To know what the enemy thinks observe what they do, not what they say.

And we recommend to all CHS readers to go to Dr David Healy’s blog and read what Dr Healy has to say about Dr Ben Goldacre’s AllTrials campaign and how badly it has ended for all of the rest of us.

This is what Dr Healy has to say about what Dr Ben Goldacre’s AllTrials campaign has achieved:

The key thing that companies are trying to hide are the data on adverse events.  To get to grips with the adverse events in a clinical trial is a bit like playing the children’s game Memory – where you have a bunch of cards with faces turned face down and you get to pick up two and then have to remember where in the mixture those two were when you later turn up a possible match.

Patterns of Deception

In the same way, picking up adverse events is about recognizing patterns – patterns of events, and patterns of deception.

To do this you have to be able to spread maybe a hundred documents out over a big area and dip back into them if something in one document reminds you of something in another.  The new GSMA-ESK remote access system simply won’t allow this.

Not only will it not allow this but it is about to make things far far worse than they are at present.

At the moment when it comes to studies like Study 329, GSK have been stuck by a Court order with putting the Company’s Study Reports up on the web where they can be downloaded and pored over – all 5,500 pages of them for Study 329.  They have refused to do the same for the 77,000 pages of raw data from Study 329, making it available to a small group of us through a remote desktop system.

For all other trials – future and past – investigators won’t even be able to get the Company Study Reports in usable form.  They too will only be accessed remotely.

For anyone who wants to look at the efficacy of a drug this might just about work for outcomes that involve rating scale scores or lipid levels.   The efficacy of drugs is pretty well all that most Cochrane groups, Iain Chalmers and Ben Goldacre are interested in.  The Cochrane exceptions have been Tom Jefferson, Peter Doshi and the Tamiflu group.

But this system is a bust when it comes to adverse events and it won’t work if the efficacy outcomes are in any way complex.

Dr Andrew Wakefield Not Guilty Says BBC – General Medical Council Wrong

With the UK’s national media in a feeding frenzy whipped up by the UK’s Department of Health claiming the current outbreaks of relatively few measles cases are all the fault of Dr Andrew Wakefield, the BBC appears to have slipped up and confirmed that the main plank of the General Medical Council’s case against Dr Wakefield and his two colleagues at the Royal Free Hospital, London, England in 1998 has bitten the dust. 

The main plank of the GMC’s case was that there was only one study carried out by Dr Wakefield and his colleagues on the “Lancet 12” children, that it did not have ethics approval and that it was the study reported in February 1998 in the UK’s medical journal “The Lancet”.

Whilst the BBC is meant to be independent and unbiased as a news source, it has been propping up the UK Government and Health Department’s official line for many years over the MMR/autism issue not being caused by vaccines and that Dr Wakefield was wrong. 

But who in fact is wrong?  If you cannot get your facts right over something pretty major then how can you have your facts right on that issue? 

In a report yesterday it appears to have allowed a significant chink in the UK Government’s position.  The BBC confirms there were in fact two studies carried out: one was for the Legal Aid Board but it was not the one the GMC panel Chaired by Dr Surendra Kumar decided it was.

The three defendant doctors claimed there were two studies: that the Lancet study was not the Legal Aid Board study and that the Lancet study had a different ethical approval – contrary to the GMC’s allegations.

So why has the BBC not covered this.  It is important news.  But here we see them including these significant facts as an aside in a different news report.  This shows however that the BBC’s health journalists are fully aware of the facts and have a grasp of these important details but do not report their importance and significance to the British public who pay directly to fund the BBC.  It is defrauding the British public – they are not getting what they pay vast millions of pounds sterling for.

Further, the complainant to the GMC, Mr Brian Deer, who had been paid by Rupert Murdoch’s Sunday Times to get “a big story” about the MMR vaccine, withheld crucial lost documents from the GMC investigation, the GMC’s lawyers, the Defendant doctor’s lawyers and everyone else including all the world’s media.  The documents date back many years showing that all the three doctors subjected to the GMC investigation did in fact have and were routinely operating under ethics approval 162/95 and not ethics approval 172/96 – which was for a different study never carried out which Dr Kumar and his GMC panel decided was carried out.

Additionally Dr Kumar’s position as GMC panel Chairman demonstrates it was a “Kangaroo Court“.  Barely two months after the decision to strike Dr Wakefield from the medical register, Dr Kumar was publicly calling for compulsory MMR vaccination. 

Compulsory MMR vaccination is an approach described in 2008 as “stalinist” by the BMA chairman Dr Hamish Meldrum who also said forcing parents to have their children innoculated was “morally and ethically dubious”: No jabs, no school says Labour MP BBC 11 May 2008.  Dr Kumar’s strongly held views on MMR vaccination were never disclosed and raised the question of whether Dr Kumar should have been debarred just from sitting on the panel under the Nolan Principles regulating standards in public life in the UK.

Here is what the BBC reported [CHS emphasis added]:

The General Medical Council found Dr Wakefield guilty of serious professional misconduct in 2010 and he was struck off the medical register. It did not investigate whether his findings were right or wrong but focused on the way he carried out his research.

Dr Wakefield’s study considered whether there was a link between the three-in-one MMR vaccine and autism and bowel disease.

It focused on tests carried out on 12 children who had been referred to hospital for gastrointestinal problems.

Dr Wakefield was also paid to carry out another study at the same time to find out if parents who claimed their children were damaged by the MMR vaccine had a case. Some children were involved in both studies.”

Government rejects measles outbreak ‘blame’ – 13 April 2013 Last updated at 07:34

And on CHS we have shown in numerous reports with how numerous times the causation position that MMR vaccine causes autistic conditions has been proven time and again and that there is a considerable body of medical and scientific evidence to that effect.  Here are just a few examples:

Vaccination Causes Autism – Say US Government & Merck’s Director of Vaccines

US Government In US$20 million Legal Settlement For Vaccine Caused Autism Case

Japanese & British Data Show Vaccines Cause Autism

Ginger Taylor’s List of Research Linking Vaccines to Autism

All is of course ignored by the BBC –  cowed into submission and controlled by the UK Government – which holds the purse strings for its budgets.

Vaccines, Aluminium Adjuvants & Brain Damage – Latest Research – Summary Report – 10th Annual Scientific Conference On Aluminium

Here we provide links to Gaia Health‘s excellent and informative summary and report with links to good source reference material about the UK’s Keele University 10th annual meeting on aluminium:

Current Status of Aluminum Adjuvant Research March 26, 2013

Aluminium is highly toxic and neurotoxic in parts per billion.  It is used as an adjuvant in childhood vaccines and adjuvants are a known cause of “sensitisation”. 

The topics covered in the summary and report include:

• Aluminum as a neurotoxin.

• Aluminum as an adjuvant in vaccines.

• The in vivo data.

• Aluminum in vaccines and autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

• Connecting pediatric vaccines with aluminum.

• Where we go from here?

“Sensitisation” means if your child did not have an allergy before the shot, there is a very high probability it will have an allergy after.  “Sensitisation” is the process by which an environmental cause like a vaccine makes people who were not allergic before become allergic – so if you wonder where those life-threatening food allergies and other allergies come from – adjuvants in vaccines are one of the prime candidates [along with Thiomersal/Thimerosal in vaccines].

“Neurotoxic” means it kills braincells and causes nerve damage.  And in parts per billion that means for a dose of one gram to be a part in a billion means a child would have to weigh 1000 kilogrammes which is around 2.2 thousand pounds weight – a bit big for a baby.

Latest Research – Vaccines, Brain Damage & Aluminium Adjuvants In Vaccines

POST MOVED:

This post is now found here:

Vaccines, Aluminium Adjuvants & Brain Damage – Latest Research – Summary Report – 10th Annual Scientific Conference On Aluminium

90 Studies – Mercury Not Safe In Medicines and Vaccines – Toxic and Neurotoxic in parts per billion

Get wise and don’t get fooled.  Mercury and its organo-mercurial compounds like Thiomersal [aka Thimerasol] [still being used in some vaccines] is highly toxic and neurotoxic in parts per billion. 

For a dose of 1 gram on a teaspoon an infant would need to weigh 10,000 metric tonnes to fall within the US Environmental Protection Agency’s daily limit.  “Neurotoxic” means it kills braincells and causes nerve damage. 

Video: University of Calgary Faculty of Medicine – How Mercury Causes Brain Neuron Degeneration

If you want quick access to around 90 citations and abstracts of papers with the “best bits” highlighted showing mercury is unsafe in medicines and vaccines you may want to bookmark and peruse Vaccination News’ lists of citations and abstracts:

Page 1 – Vaccination News Citations – Evidence for Thimerosal Risk

Page 2 – Vaccination News Citations – Evidence for Thimerosal Risk

It also causes “sensitisation” which means if your child did not have an allergy before the shot, there is a very high probability it will have an allergy after.  Thiomersal “sensitises” which means it makes people who were not allergic before become allergic – so if you wonder where those life-threatening food allergies and other allergies come from – Thiomersal/Thimerosal is one of the prime candidates [along with adjuvants in vaccines].

Beyond Conformity – Useful Vaccine Information

Don’t be fooled by Government health officials’ and their propaganda or by dodgy medical information courtesy of well-publicised-to-be crooked medical journal publishing from one too many crooked mainstream medical journals and some of their authors.

If you want bottom line analysis and well-referenced and well-sourced information, including from official data and from formally published research papers, you may want to bookmark for future reference and peruse Hilary Butler’s “Hilary’s Desk” from Beyond Conformity, New Zealand.  

Well worth reading and noting for future reference.  

Here are links to some of Hilary Butler’s recent articles from Beyond Conformity.

Part One (of four) Herald on Sunday Flu propaganda 18-Mar-2013

Part Two: What the Herald on Sunday should have shown readers 16-Mar-2013

Part Three: Dr Huang’s Shiver’s propaganda 15-Mar-2013

Part Four: The matter of New Zealand annual Flu deaths. 14-Mar-2013

Parents want the truth about the flu vaccine, Professor Phillips. 14-Mar-2013

New Zealand’s first breast milk bank. 13-Mar-2013

Prior Articles By Ms Hilary Butler with thanks to Vaccination News for the compilation:

Direct Drug marketing in New Zealand is a fact.

Gardasil, fairywands and bulldust.

FDA questioned about genetically engineered HPV DNA in Gardasil worldwide.

Whipping up fear.

Does the plot thicken?

More HPV vaccine lies

Toxic Metals found in Sweden’s Pandemrix Swine Flu vaccine

What about you?

More autism/vaccination questions

Oh my darling Portia

Paracetamol should not be used for infectious fevers – revisited

Does Nikki Turner live in Gaga land?

Windmills of my mind

Lessons from Ernest Shackleton

Antisystematosis and Plurasideaffects

Getting to the Point.

Part 1 of 3. Unanswered questions about the Hepatitis B vaccine

Part 2: Unanswered questions about the Hepatitis B vaccine

Everyone knows who dunnit…

Cognitive dissonance or “being deceived”

Insight Documentary 19 June 2011

Influenza vaccines, KOPS, and the truth

Pneumonia vaccine not only useless, but dangerous

Polio and lemmings

A few voices are waking up to the fact that …

Did Gardasil kill Jasmine?

Can vaccines become cranial and immunological cluster bombs? (Part 3 of 3)

How a baby fights infection and develops the immune system (Part 2 of 3)

Vaccines and neonatal immune development (part 1 of 3)

A reader writes in – B4 school check

World’s first Orwell “Truth Department” award goes to….

It’s all about money

Serenity’s grandmother wants answers

IMAC’s new minions

Just do it

Nikki Turner’s Science Friction

Paul Offit’s Science Friction

Pneumovax 23 – an emperor with no clothes

E.coli vaccine and other related nonsense

Who exactly is mad, Dr Holt?

It’s all your fault!

Medical error and hypocrisy

Ministry of Health seriously misled the Immunisation Select Committee

The coming adult needle cushion

Deadly choices – Paul’s porkies.

AAP’s fever and antipyretic policy statement shores up big pharma

Gardasil – in the quest for evidence.

On Breastfeeding and idiots.

So who is the fanatic?

Puppets, fanatics, nuts and sluts.

Nutrition. Again.

Rheumatic Fever and common sense.

Blog posts from previous years

Scientific Evidence Says Vaccinating With HPV Vaccine Is Ineffective, Dangerous For You And Your Daughters & Wrongly Promoted As “Anti-Cancer”

Thank God for researchers with courage who are prepared to tell the truth against the financial might of the drug industry, its manipulation and its political lobbying to market harmful ineffective drugs.

A peer reviewed well researched well referenced letter has been published in The Journal of Infectious Agents And Cancer telling the truth – yes – really – yes it has – honest to God:

Letter to the Editor HPV vaccines and cancer prevention, science versus activism Lucija Tomljenovic^1*, Judy Wilyman², Eva Vanamee³, Toni Bark⁴ and Christopher A Shaw¹ 1st February 2012 [.pdf version here].  

The analysis and text is insightful and important.  The letter would be valuable alone just for the papers and evidence it cites.

Using evidence from published peer reviewed literature and official sources, the letter rips into an editorial published 20 December 2012 in the Journal. 

The letter reveals scientific and factual evidence that the data behind claims that HPV vaccines prevent cancers and save lives with no risk of serious side effects are “optimistic” and contrary to the evidence and largely are from “significant misinterpretation of available data” which is “presented to the public as factual evidence“. 

That translates to:

drug industry and government health officials making up BS“

The authors use scientific and factual evidence to indicate how they say the editorial wrongly presented the complex scientific and factual issues as a simple battle between ‘unjustified “anti-HPV vaccine activism” vs alleged absolute science and indisputable evidence of HPV vaccine safety and efficacy.  That translates into:

the use of BS evidence passed off by one too many medical journals these days as science to accuse those who use good scientific and factual evidence to question validly the drug marketing hype and BS published in journals as if it were science“

We apologise to our regular readers for the colloquial nature of the translations of the published peer reviewed text.  This has been included so that “scientists” who publish the kind of BS concerned can more easily understand and distinguish the valid science and facts from their normal diet of drug industry sponsored BS junk science.  Normal service will be resumed as soon as we can.

The vaccine safety profiles are based on highly flawed safety trial designs and are contrary to accumulating evidence from vaccine safety surveillance databases and case reports linking the vaccines to serious side effects including death and permanent disabilities. That translates into:

the drug industry and government health officials hiding death and serious injury with BS so they can sell ever more vaccines and turn you and your daughters into pin-cushion profit centers“

The letter shows that the efforts to get as many pre-adolescent girls vaccinated can be viewed validly as a cynical way for the drug industry to make money out of you and your daughters with hype and misrepresentation of the science and the facts.  Reduction of cervical cancers might be best achieved by optimizing cervical screening (which carries no serious health risks) and targeting other factors of the disease rather than by the reliance on vaccines with questionable efficacy and safety profiles.

The authors show:

• HPV vaccines have not thus far prevented a single case of cervical cancer let alone death;
• the evidence is that HPV vaccines prevent some pre-cancerous symptoms which mostly spontaneously resolve without vaccination and it is ineffective against other kinds of HPV infections;
• the successes claimed are against a backdrop of high misclassification and poor diagnosis where diagnoses may just be error.

They say it is not science but an optimistic assumption that HPV vaccination will reduce 70% of cervical cancers – seemingly based on exaggerated and invalid extrapolations which fail to take into account important basic scientific issues like:

• whether they can measure what they claim to;
• that the vaccine cannot address all HPV infections and may cause an increase in those kinds of infections;
• whether the vaccine has any effect for women who have multiple types of HPV infections and/or pre-existing HPV infections;

Merck’s Gardasil vaccine:

• was priority Fast Tracked by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 6-months when it failed and continues to fail to meet any of the required criteria for Fast Track approval;
• is demonstrably neither safer nor more effective than Pap screening combined with conventional prevention;
• it cannot improve the diagnosis of serious cervical cancer outcomes

This has meant “unwarranted confidence in the new HPV vaccines” has “led to the impression that there was no need to actually evaluate their effectiveness“.

In the USA Gardasil alone is associated with 61% of all serious adverse reactions including 63.8% of all deaths and 81.2% cases of permanent disability in females younger than 30 years of age.

The unusually high frequency and consistency of adverse reactions worldwide with nervous system-related disorders ranking the highest, strongly suggests the vaccine is the cause along with repeated reports of very similar cases of the same serious adverse reactions.  Nervous system and autoimmune disorders are most frequently reported.

[ED: and what is the justification for the rush to approve a vaccine given to young girls when the majority of cervical cancers affect women over the age of 40-50? So why not make sure it is safe?  And by the time these girls are 40-50 years old there are likely to be effective treatments anyway.]  

New Website & Reference Source On Autism, Shaken Baby Syndrome, SIDS etc – Publications of Dr F E Yazbak

We list here the current list of publications found on a new website which houses the publications of Dr F E Yazbak MD. These articles provide insightful informed expert medical analyses and assessments of medical and other evidence and cover issues such as autism, shaken baby syndrome, SIDS and other related matters. The site has specifically been created for this purpose by Sheri Nakken, RN, MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath.  Please go to the site to check for any new or additional publications.

Dr Yazbak is an emininent physician and one of the very few medical practitioners who has taken the trouble to investigate the medical facts and evidence base regarding these issues. F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP of Falmouth, Massachusetts, was formerly the Assistant Clinical Director of the Charles V. Chapin Hospital, a specialized infectious disease hospital and the Director of Pediatrics at the Woonsocket Hospital in Rhode Island. He was also the Pediatric Director of the Child Development Study, the Brown University division of the NINDB Collaborative Study and an assistant member of the Institute of Health Sciences at the University. He practiced pediatrics and was a school physician in Northern Rhode Island for 34 years. 

Since 1998, Dr Yazbak has devoted his time to researching vaccine injury and the increased incidence and autoimmune causes of regressive autism focusing on maternal re-vaccination with live viruses.

He has been recognized as an expert witness in autism, vaccine injury and Shaken Baby Syndrome litigation and has published extensively on those subjects.

He and his wife maureen, a pediatric nurse practitioner, have four children and twelve grandchildren. Their family like many others has been severely affected by autism.

Recent Posts

The Deer Crusade and Collateral Damage  10 Mar 2013

Ethyl Mercury in vaccines: Was Hilleman right? 22 Feb 2013

General

• Dr. Yazbak’s speech at “Hear Their Silence Rally” 2000
• Letter supporting Wakefield & Murch from Maureen & F. Edward Yazbak
• About F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
• Comments in the BMJ by Dr. Yazbak

Autism

• 1 in 88 – Autism/ASD among Children of Military Families by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP & Raymond W. Gallup
• An Investigation of the Association Between. MMR Vaccination and Autism in Denmark. G.S. Goldman, Ph.D. F.E. Yazbak, M.D., F.A.A.P
• Appeal to the Autism Community 2005
• Autism 2000: A Tragedy
• Autism 2001: The Silent Epidemic
• Autism 99: A National Emergency
• Autism and Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Finland: A Recent Increase 2002
• Autism in the United States: a Perspective 2003
• AUTISM SKYROCKETS IN QUEBEC: A SECRET NO MORE 2004
• Autism, Vaccination and Immigrants – Yet Another Clear Correlation by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
• Commentary on the Work of F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP by Dr. Boyd Haley
• Conflicting Reports on Autism Data 2005 (by subscription only)
• Direct Individualized Funding for Autism: What is that (by subscription only0
• Epidemiological Autism Studies: Why parents of children with autism are so upset!
• Looking Out of Olmsted County 2005
• Open Letter to Autism Speaks by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP, Feb. 2007
• So what else happened in Denmark? 1 October 2004
• The CDC, Autism And Elastic Statistics
• The CDC, Spinach and Autism 2007
• The Expert and Decorum (on Cedillo Autism Hearing)
• The Unconvincing Thimerosal Epidemiological Studies
• There Goes That Argument! by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP – February 28, 2011
• When 1 in 150 is really 1 in 67 By Raymond W. Gallup & F. Edward Yazbak, MD
• Why Don’t Children Regress Before They Turn One? by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP, January 10, 2011

MMR & Autism

• ‘Not Really’ (Letter to British Medical Journal/BMJ) 2004
• A Black Spot …on a Good Journal
• A Tale of Two Cities: Flawed Epidemiology By F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
• Alive and Well: The MMR-Autism Connection
• An Investigation of the Association Between MMR Vaccination and Autism in Denmark
• AN OPEN LETTER from Dr Andrew J Wakefield, Dr Peter Fletcher, Dr Peter Harvey, Dr Richard Halvorsen GP, F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP, Jane Maroney El-Dahr M.D.
• An Unconvincing Finnish Study
• Autism, MMR and 60 Minutes Another Pediatrician’s Perspective 2000
• CDC-sponsored MMR study supports Wakefield’s findings
• Double Standards (Part 1 of 3) by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP (Part 1 of 3)
• Double Standards – Busting Rules by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP (Part 2 of 3)
• Double Standards – Intimidation in the Courts
• Double Standards – Translation in the Court by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP (Part 3 of 3)
• DR. ANDREW WAKEFIELD IS BEING BLAMED FOR THE DECLINE IN MEASLES, MUMPS AND RUBELLA VACCINATION IN THE UK. BUT THAT’S NOT WHAT REALLY HAPPENED.
• MMR – Autism Epidemiological Studies: Just a distraction
• MMR cannot be exonerated without explaining increased incidence of autism
• MMR Studies that Count, Studies that Don’t
• MMR, Autism and Thanksgiving
• Over Here & Over There By F. Edward Yazbak , MD , FAAP
• REGRESSIVE AUTISM AND MMR VACCINATION
• The Doctor Over There (Rapid Response to British Medical Journal/BMJ) 2004
• The Price of Saving Face By F. Edward Yazbak , MD , FAAP
• These Researchers Seem Never Finish-ed (re: 2002 Finnish Study)
• When Finding Nothing Is Wonderful By F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
• Yazbak responds to BMJ article: Wakefield’s article linking MMR vaccine and autism was fraudulent

SIDS/Sudden Infant Death Syndrome

• SIDS, VACCINES AND VAERS: A FOLLOW-UP
• SUDDEN INFANT DEATH SYNDROME IN VAERS: A REVIEW By , F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP

Shaken Baby Syndrome

• Dr. Mercola Interviews Dr. F. Edward Yazbak (Shaken Baby Syndrome lies), Feb. 2011
• Multiple Vaccinations And the Shaken Baby Syndrome by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
• Shaken Baby Syndrome or Vaccine-Induced Encephalomyelitis? The Story of Baby Alan
• Shaken Baby Syndrome: Pitfalls in Diagnosis and Demographics
• Shaken Or Not: That Is The Question 2005
• The NON-Shaken Baby Syndrome: The Rest Of The Cases (by subscription only)

Hepatitis B Vaccine

• Neonatal Hepatitis B Vaccination: Acceptance in Israel
• THE SAGA OF PEDIATRIC HEPATITIS B VACCINATION

Influenza

• DELIVERING INFLUENZA VACCINE TO PREGNANT WOMEN (letter to the editor)
• Fatal pre/perinatal outcomes following flu vaccine in pregnancy
• Flu Vaccine Safety: Creating a Myth
• Flu Vaccine Safety: Creating a Myth by F. Edward Yazbak MD
• Flu-46 (by subscription only)
• Influenza Vaccination – Is It Worth The Risk?
• Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the Recommendations of the ACIP by David M. Ayoub, M.D. & F. Edward Yazbak, M.D
• Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
• Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Very Bad Idea By F. Edward Yazbak
• Influenza Vaccination of Infants: A Useless Risk (1/2 way down page)
• The Birth Of A Pandemic
• The Flu Shot — Or Not (subscription only)
• THE FLU VACCINE CRISIS: DID WE MISS A RED FLAG?
• The Flu Vaccine Saga: The Latest Twist 2005

Autism & Rubella Vaccine

• Autism : Is there a vaccine connection? Part I. Vaccination after delivery
• Autism : Is There a Vaccine Connection? Part II. Vaccination around Pregnancy
• Autism : Is There a Vaccine Connection?: Part 3 Vaccination Around Pregnancy, The Sequel

Miscellaneous

• A NOT-SO-PERFECT VACCINE: THE DIPHTHERIA, TETANUS AND ACELLULAR PERTUSSIS VACCINE: AN INVESTIGATION
• Adverse Outcomes Associated with Postpartum Rubella or MMR Vaccine
• An investigation of infant deaths following initial hepatitis B vaccination based on the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS, 1992-2002)
• Combination and Multiple Vaccinations: A Mixed Reaction 3 and [1 +1] ? 5 (subscription only)
• HYPING VACCINES: AN INVESTIGATION: Chickenpox, Lyme, Rotavirus, And A Highly Revealing Analysis Of Flu Statistics
• Is Mandatory Vaccination Destroying An Important Bond? 2006
• Kicking It Up A Notch, CDC Style (subscription only)
• LET JUSTICE BE DONE by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
• Live virus vaccination near a pregnancy: flawed policies, tragic results
• Peer Review: A Slippery Slope (subscription only)
• ProQuad: The new kid on the block
• RIP: NIP Quietly Slips Away (subscription access only)
• The Chickenpox Vaccine by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP – January 13, 2011
• The Difference: Bruesewitz v Berkovitz by F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP, March 8, 2011
• The Infant Mortality Rate: An Index of a Nation’s Health 11 February 2005
• The Infant Mortality Rate: An Index of a Nation’s Health 2005
• Trust Me: I Have The Statistics To Prove It (by subscription only)
• UNRELIABILITY OF SCIENTIFIC PAPERS AS EVIDENCE 17 March 2004
• Vaccinate Johnny To Protect Grammy — And Other Wild Ideas
• Vaccination of Very Premature Infants
• VACCINATION, RUBELLA AND CONGENITAL RUBELLA SYNDROME 2004
• Vaccines – Like Apple Pies On A Conveyor Belt
• VIOXX and Vaccines: Vive La Difference

Vaccination News Articles

• Vaccination News Articles

Mercury

• The Battle Of The States: What Happened In Illinois?
• The Mercury Memo 2005
• Thimerosal Containing Vaccines, Part I – n the Dark, March 2011
• Thimerosal Containing Vaccines, Part II — WHO
• Thimerosal Containing Vaccines, Part III — The Convincing Evidence April 2011
• Thimerosal: The “safe” mercury!

Controversial Doctor and Autism Media Channel Director proven right – MMR Vaccine Causes Autism & Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Press Release March 8, 2013.

Two landmark events – a government concession in the US Vaccine Court, and a groundbreaking scientific paper – confirm that physician, scientist, and Autism Media Channel [AMC] Director, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, and the parents were right all along.

In a recently published December 13, 2012 vaccine court ruling, hundreds of thousands of dollars were awarded to Ryan Mojabi, [i] whose parents described how “MMR vaccinations,” caused a “severe and debilitating injury to his brain, diagnosed as Autism Spectrum Disorder (‘ASD’).”

Later the same month, the government suffered a second major defeat when young Emily Moller from Houston won compensation following vaccine-related brain injury that, once again, involved MMR and resulted in autism. The cases follow similar successful petitions in the Italian and US courts (including Hannah Poling [ii], Bailey Banks [iii], Misty Hyatt [iv], Kienan Freeman [v], Valentino Bocca [vi], and Julia Grimes [vii]) in which the governments conceded or the court ruled that vaccines had caused brain injury. In turn, this injury led to an ASD diagnosis. MMR vaccine was the common denominator in these cases.

And today, scientists and physicians from Wake Forest University, New York, and Venezuela, reported findings that not only confirm the presence of intestinal disease in children with autism and intestinal symptoms, but also indicate that this disease may be novel. [viii] Using sophisticated laboratory methods Dr. Steve Walker and his colleagues endorsed Wakefield’s original findings by showing molecular changes in the children’s intestinal tissues that were highly distinctive and clearly abnormal.

From 1998 Dr. Wakefield discovered and reported intestinal disease in children with autism. [ix] Based upon the medical histories of the children he linked their disease and their autistic regression to the Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR vaccine). He has since been subjected to relentless personal and professional attacks in the media, and from governments, doctors and the pharmaceutical industry. In the wake of demonstrably false and highly damaging allegations of scientific fraud by British journalist Brian Deer and the British Medical Journal, Dr. Wakefield is pursuing defamation proceedings against them in Texas. [x]

While repeated studies from around the world confirmed Wakefield’s bowel disease in autistic children [xi] and his position that safety studies of the MMR are inadequate, [xii] Dr. Wakefield ’s career has been destroyed by false allegations.  Despite this he continues to work tirelessly to help solve the autism catastrophe.

The incidence of autism has rocketed to a risk of around 1 in 25 for children born today. Meanwhile governments, absent any explanation and fearing loss of public trust, continue to deny the vaccine autism connection despite the concessions in vaccine court.

Speaking from his home in Austin, Texas, Dr. Wakefield said,

There can be very little doubt that vaccines can and do cause autism. In these children, the evidence for a n adverse reaction involving brain injury following the MMR that progresses to an autism diagnosis is compelling. It’s now a question of the body count. The parents’ story was right all along. Governments must stop playing with words while children continue to be damaged . My hope is that recognition of the intestinal disease in these children will lead to the relief of their suffering. This is long , long overdue .”

Dr. Andrew Wakefield is a best selling author, [xi] founder of the autism research non profit Strategic Autism Initiative (SAI), and Director of the Autism Media Channel.

“Identification of Unique Gene Expression Profile in Children with Regressive Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Ileocolitis” PLOS ONE March 8, 2013, available online at: http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058058

To see an exclusive interview with one of the study’s key authors Dr. Arthur Krigsman, go to autismmediachannel.com Contact: info@autismmediachannel.com or (001) 512 992 7389

[i] Decision Awarding Damages to Ryan Mohabi 13 Dec 2012

[ii] Family to Receive $1.5M+ in First-Ever Vaccine-Autism Court Award September 9, 2010 2:14 PM

and

Decision Awarding Damages 21 July 2012

[iii] Entitlement Ruling Determining MMR Caused Bailey Banks’ Autistic Condition (see footnote 4)

[iv] Vaccine Case: An Exception Or A Precedent? February 11, 2009 3:20 PM CBS News By Sharyl Attkisson

[v] KIENAN FREEMAN RULING CONCERNING “ENTITLEMENT” – September 25, 2003

[vi] MMR: A mother’s victory. The vast majority of doctors say there is no link between the triple jab and autism, but could an Italian court case reignite this controversial debate? By Sue Reid – Daily Mail 15 June 2012

[vii] JULIA GRIMES – DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES January 12, 2011

[viii] Walker S., Fortunado J, Krigsman A., Gonzalez L. Identification of Unique Gene Expression Profile in Children with Regressive Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Ileocolitis

[ix] Wakefield AJ. Callous Disregard: Autism and Vaccines – The Truth Behind a Tragedy. 2010. Skyhorse Publishing, NY, NY. Chapter 1, footnotes 1 & 4, p.20

[x] For Affidavits see www.DrWakefieldJusticeFund.org

[xi] Wakefield AJ. Waging War on the Autistic Child. 2012 Skyhorse Publishing NY, NY. Chapter 2, footnotes 2 11, pp. 255 256

[xii] Jefferson T et al, Unintended events following immunization with MMR: a systematic review. Vaccine 21 (2003) 3954–3960

Children Get Narcolepsy From Flu Vaccine – Confirmed in British Medical Journal

See BMJ and press reports:

Risk of narcolepsy in children and young people receiving AS03 adjuvanted pandemic A/H1N1 2009 influenza vaccine: retrospective analysis BMJ 2013 (Published 26 February 2013) 

[html online version here]

BMJ News Release: Increased risk of sleep disorder in children who received swine flu vaccine

Media reports:

Swine flu jab raises risk of narcolepsy in children

Telegraph.co.uk – ‎3 hours ago‎

The agency’s findings are likely to help parents seeking damages, who claim the jab gave their children narcolepsy. Caroline Hadfield, 42, from Frome in Somerset, is suing the Government because her son Josh, seven, developed the condition within weeks …

UK study confirms GSK flu shot link to rare sleep disorder

Reuters UK – ‎1 hour ago‎

The vaccine, more than 30 million doses of which were given during the H1N1 flu pandemic in 2009-2010, contains a booster, or adjuvant, and may have triggered an adverse immune reaction in some children at higher genetic risk of narcolepsy, scientists …

Swine flu jab linked to sleep disorder: Fears one million children received jab …

Daily Mail – ‎9 hours ago‎

Almost a million children were given a swine flu jab which put them at increased risk of the sleep disorder narcolepsy, say scientists. New research shows the Pandemrix vaccine carries a 14-fold extra risk of triggering narcolepsy, in which sufferers can fall …

Swine flu jab linked to narcolepsy

Belfast Telegraph – ‎10 hours ago‎

Pandemrix, a vaccine used in response to the swine flu pandemic that began in 2009, increased children’s risk of narcolepsy – a chronic disorder which causes excessive daytime sleepiness, research suggests. For every 55,000 doses delivered around one …

Research shows link between narcolepsy and Pandemrix flu vaccine

Nursing Times – ‎40 minutes ago‎

Scientists from the Health Protection Agency (HPA) worked with research teams at two Cambridgeshire hospitals – Papworth and Addenbrooke’s – to look into narcolepsy in children. The study, which has been published in the British Medical Journal, followed …

GSK flu vaccine linked to sleep disorder

Financial Times – ‎10 hours ago‎

HPA scientists concluded that Pandemrix, the vaccine produced by GSK to protect against the swine flu pandemic between 2009 and 2011, was associated with a risk of one narcolepsy case for every 55,000 children vaccinated. That is 14 times greater than …

Swine flu vaccine linked to narcolepsy in kids

Channel 4 News – ‎11 hours ago‎

Researchers from Addenbrokes and Papworth hospitals in Cambridge looked at 75 children aged between four and 18 who were diagnosed with narcolepsy after January 2008. Eleven had been vaccinated with Pandemrix before showing signs of …

Higher risk of narcolepsy in children who had swine flu vaccine

OnMedica – ‎1 hour ago‎

UK children given the swine flu vaccine Pandemrix in 2009-10 are 14 times more likely to have narcolepsy than other children, according to a study published online today in the BMJ. A team of UK researchers who identified the higher prevalence of the sleep …

Flu vaccination linked to narcolepsy

Practice Business – ‎1 hour ago‎

In collaboration with researchers from Papworth and Addenbrooke’s hospitals in Cambridge, the study looked at 75 children aged between four and 18 who were diagnosed with narcolepsy from January 2008 and who attended sleep centres across England.

Swine flu jab narcolepsy risk

ITV News – ‎8 hours ago‎

A mother from Somerset is threatening to sue the government after new figures show a link between the swine flu jab and Narcolepsy. Caroline Hadfield says her son Josh, 4, developed the condition within three months of the injection. She says he was a …

Glaxo’s Swine-Flu Shot Linked to Narcolepsy in UK Kids

Businessweek – ‎10 hours ago‎

Among 75 children between the ages of 4 and 18 diagnosed with narcolepsy, 11 had been vaccinated with Pandemrix before symptoms began, seven of them within six months, scientists at the U.K. Health Protection Agency found. The study was published …

Flu vac may cause sleep disorder

iAfrica.com – ‎2 hours ago‎

Using the Pandemrix vaccine increased the risk of narcolepsy among people aged four to 18 by a factor of 14 compared to those who did not get the jab, they said. The risk in absolute terms was between one in 52 000 people and one in 57,000, but this figure …

Swine flu findings ‘consistent’ with European studies

ITV News – ‎7 hours ago‎

Professor Liz Miller, a consultant epidemiologist with the Health Protection Agency, said that findings which have linked the swine flu vaccine to an increased risk of narcolepsy, are consistent with those from European studies. She added that further studies …

Increased risk of narcolepsy from swine flu jab

ITV News – ‎8 hours ago‎

Research has found that a swine flu jab given to children carried an increased risk of developing narcolepsy. Experts said the vaccine Pandemrix increased the child’s risk of the disorder, which causes excessive daytime sleepiness. Pandemrix, used in the …

Pandemrix Vaccine Triggers Narcolepsy

TopNews United States – ‎3 hours ago‎

According to a new research, swine flu jab known as pandemrix vaccine triggers narcolepsy in children. It has been found that out of 55,000 doses delivered, one child suffers from the condition. It was learnt that the drug put the children at a 14 times greater …

Bill Gates & Vaccine Programmes – Dump The “Mistakes” – Vulnerable Vaccine Injured Sick Kids Dumped Out of Sight to Die

The following is from an extensive article by journalist Christina England which you can read in full here: Bill Gates Continues ‘God’s Work’, Third World Vaccine Workers Shot Dead Feb 26th, 2013 | By Christina England

It appears that Mr. Gates will go to any lengths to vaccinate the world, even if the world makes it very clear that they do not want his vaccines. Rather than vaccinating more children, if he was such a humanitarian, why has he allowed vulnerable, sick children to be dumped in the middle of nowhere to die? Surely the world would applaud him far more loudly if he spent his millions making sure that any vaccine casualties were sufficiently cared for.

……. whether Gates believes he is doing ‘God’s work’ or not, dumping severely vaccine damaged children in a remote village in Africa without a doctor on site is almost certainly not God’s work and this is exactly what Gates has allowed to happen to the children adversely affected by the MenAfriVac Meningitis A vaccine.

Over the last few months I have written four articles covering recent events in Chad, Northern Africa, where 106 children became ill after receiving the meningitis vaccine, 40 of which were left paralyzed and suffering from convulsions. [6,7,8,9]

This week, VacTruth received word from a Chadian contact that said:

Last night the Chadian minister of health evacuated all children paralyzed from MenAfriVac meningitis A vaccine, including very ill children, to Faya. I have just spoken to one person, who told me that seven girls and a boy are seriously ill with convulsions.

Please, help us. This forced evacuation of very ill and paralyzed children on a military plane, to a destination where there is not even basic medical personnel and equipment, is deliberately sending vulnerable children to a place where they are likely to die.”

Faya is a small town surrounded by desert at least 100 miles away from the children’s home village of Gouro. This is extremely worrying, especially after VacTruth received several medical records confirming that these children did indeed suffer vaccine injuries.

This approach is one way to make sure vaccine adverse reactions go under reported.

Science Illiterates, Quackbuster & “Skeptic” Thugs and Bullies Get Kicking “Down-Under”

The anti-safety vaccine lobby galloping in red tunics and full cry with hounds let loose and running blind fell off the precipice and crashed into a bloodied pile in the deep Gorge of Stupidity down under in Australia.  You can read about it here: Will the real Australian sceptics please step forward?

Yep, the mixed bag of various cranks and the kinds of nutters who follow the seemingly mathematically challenged “scientist” Dr David “Orac” Gorski did what they are best at.

Unhappy about Ms Meryl Dorey’s excellent work in Australia telling people the truth about how ineffective and unsafe vaccines can be for children and others, they started a legal case to attack her new venture “The Real Australian Sceptics“. 

They claimed “Australian Skeptics” was their trademark [and so ignorant they even cannot spell “sceptic”] but just like their spelling failed to take into account what a trademark is and that they don’t have one.  In a remarkable piece of “dumb-assed” cussedness they got themselves and their legal case trashed comprehensively.

Clearly one must be sceptical about “skeptics” [and probably a whole lot more than just that].

And is “thugs and bullies” an appropriate term?  The Bolen Report spelt that out in technicolour recently. 

You can read about it here: Australian Skeptics Dragged into Court over Rape, Mutilation,  and Death Threats Against the Australian Vaccination Network Leadership… Opinion by Consumer Advocate  Tim Bolen  Sunday, October 14th,  2012.

Such nice people.

Australia Bans Flu Vaccine – Child In Coma – Many Hospitalised

Another year.  Another flu vaccine. Another national vaccine ban as Australian children became seriously ill after the flu vaccine.  And like governments around the world, including yours, in Australia if your child gets sick after a vaccine, you are on your own as CHS previously reported: Australian Government Dumps On Sick Kids Injured by ‘Flu Vaccine

Western Australia News reported in 2010: Flu vaccination ban goes national after fever, convulsions in children April 23, 2010 Chris Thomson. 

Vaccinations for children under five were suspended in Australia in 2010 as many children were hospitalised within hours of the shot. A baby just one year old was in a coma in a Perth hospital.  Children suffered febrile convulsions.  These are fits associated with a high temperature.  Other adverse reactions to the vaccine were fevers and vomiting.  

As was then reported in the Sydney Morning Herald in Australia: “Don’t give children flu jab” says chief medical officer

Although that was 2010, the ban continues for that vaccine. 

But just weeks ago CHS reported on bans in the EU, Canada and in the UK for other flu vaccines:

• EU Flu Vaccine Bans Still Unreported – Medics Sick After Vaccine Refuse More

• Now UK Recalls Another Novartis Flu Vaccine – Agrippal – Recall Follows EU and Canadian Bans of Agriflu and Fluad Flu Vaccines

And all of this is for a vaccine even the experts say is ineffective: New Study – Flu Vaccine Doesn’t Work.   There have been numerous studies which CHS has reported previously numerous times – [see links below or CHS Site Map for other reports].

But government health officials under the influence of the drug industry insist on wasting billions of their taxpayers’ funds on these campaigns which threaten the lives and health of their nation’s children.  Health officials in the USA and the UK have been found to falsify statistics to issue grossly exaggerated claims of widespread deaths from flu when that is not true:

• UK Fakes Flu Death Numbers

• CBS News Investigation – Forced Swine Flu Vaccination Under Obama’s “National Emergency” Based on Wildly Exaggerated Statistics 

The following is about the 2010 ban in Australia:

Australia’s chief medical officer Jim Bishop today said health professionals should immediately stop immunising children under five years old with the flu vaccine.  Professor Bishop is concerned about a spike in the number of West Australian youngsters experiencing fever and convulsions after getting the shot: “Don’t give children flu jab: chief medical officer“  Syndey Morning Herald April 23, 2010

This is a precautionary measure while the matter is being urgently investigated by health experts and the Therapeutic Goods Administration,” he said.

Previous CHS reports on the Flu vaccine:

US Drug Company Released Deadly Virus In EU In Vaccine

Children Risk Untested Flu Vaccines In Hyped Pandemic

“Children to Die” – Latest Flu Scaremongering

World Pandemic Health News Round-Up

Swine ‘Flu Jokes

US Docs “Children to Die” In Flu Non-Pandemic

EU Takes Emergency Measures Over Glaxo’s ‘Flu Vaccine – Causes Narcolepsy in Children

Flu Vaccine Caused 3587 US Miscarriages & Stillbirths

Flu Vaccine Cripples Healthy US Cheerleader for Life

EU And Canada Flu Vaccine Ban – Not Reported By Press

Most UK Medics Refusing Flu Vaccines – UK’s New Chief Medical Officer Resorts To Bullying

New York Times – Flu Vaccine Does Not Work – Yet More Research Says

Bill Gates Polio Eradication Plans – To Cause The Polio Equivalent of 235 Years of Cases Of A Twice As Deadly Disease

Bill Gates outlined his plans for polio eradication on the UK’s BBC television last night as the invited guest to deliver the annual Richard Dimbleby lecture.  Instead of feting Gates, the BBC’s journalists should have been spelling out what Bill Gates’s plans mean and the concern the aim of polio eradication is impossible in any event. 

In 2006 Science ran articles reporting how experts involved in attempted eradication had become highly skeptical about and doubted the ability ever to eradicate polio: Polio eradication: is it time to give up? Science May 12, 2006 Roberts, Leslie

But Gates ploughs on regardless whilst his plans will result in causing thousands of cases of a twice as deadly indistinguishable disease, called non polio accute flaccid paralysis [NPAFP].  This will be the result of the especially intensive vaccination campaigns which it seems will continue until not one case of polio is reported: New Paper – Polio Vaccine – Disease Caused by Vaccine Twice As Fatal – Polio Eradication Impossible

To get an idea of the figures take the 47,500 NPAFP cases just in India against the 205 cases total worldwide of polio.  Bill Gates wants to cause the current NPAFP equivalent of 235 years of polio cases but for a disease, NPAFP which is twice as fatal as polio.  Third world children and their families will pay the price with Bill tucked up comfortably in Seattle USA with his billions.

And last night the BBC were sucking up big-time to the world’s second richest man when what Gates’ plans mean and why he is really doing this deserves full investigation and reporting.  Clearly, the BBC’s independence and reputation for reliable reporting is no more and long gone.

W.H.O. AND OTHER EXPERTS BELIEVE POLIO ERADICATION IMPOSSIBLE

The polio vaccination campaign experts who believe eradication impossible include Isao Arita, a WHO expert from Japan, Donald A. Henderson, the director of the smallpox program, polio expert Konstantin Chumakov of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Vadim Agol of the Russian Academy of Medical Science’s Chumakov Institute for Poliomyelitis. Arita in 1990 started directing the polio eradication campaign in the Western Pacific in 1997 and who predicated his faith in medicine’s ability to triumph over viruses.

Dr Puliyel’s paper implies that polio eradication is impossible because an artificial virus from a lab could leak out and circulate: New Paper – Polio Vaccine – Disease Caused by Vaccine Twice As Fatal – Polio Eradication Impossible

Whilst such leaks are possible and have happened with other viruses, there are other issues about man-made polio viruses affecting the feasibility of eradication and the continued circulation of the polio virus. Leaks from a laboratory of an artificial virus are not the main or only issue affecting the feasibility of polio eradication.

Additionally, we do not know how much polio virus there is in silent circulation – with asymptomatic non clinical cases.

In other words, the virus may never be eliminated – we do not see the clinical cases. The only cases of polio which are reported are paralytic ones – the reporting system is for paralytic polio cases – cases where paralysis is clearly evident – and very short temporary paralysis cases where the individual rapidly recovers may never be noted as polio or reported.

…. the confirmation in 2000 that vaccine-derived polioviruses (VDPVs) can circulate and cause polio outbreaks, making the use of OPV after interruption of wild poliovirus transmission incompatible with a polio-free world. A comprehensive strategy has been developed to minimize the risks …. appropriate long-term biocontainment of poliovirus stocks (whether for vaccine production, diagnosis, or research), the controlled reintroduction of any live poliovirus vaccine (i.e., from an OPV stockpile), and appropriate use of the inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV). ….. there is wide agreement that no strategy would entirely eliminate the potential risks to a polio-free world.”

Aylward et al, Risk Management in a Polio-Free World, Risk Analysis, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2006. ]

Was Polio the Problem In the First Place

We cannot be sure now whether the paralysis cases of the 1940s and 1950s pandemics were caused by polio virus. In other words, is the elimination of a polio virus relevant to eliminating childhood paralysis cases at all? This is an issue which was being discussed in the 1950s and still appears to be a live issue: “The history of the etiology of poliomyelitis is a history of errors.” J.F. Eggers, Medicine, 1954:

If Not Poliovirus, Then What Is Causing Today’s Cases of Flaccid Paralysis?

Will The Poliovirus Eradication Program Rid the World of Childhood Paralysis? With So Little Poliovirus Detected Around the World, What Is Causing Today’s Outbreaks of Acute Flaccid Paralysis? By Neenyah Ostrom April 20, 2001

The “slow” explosive rise and peaks of the graphs of the supposed 1940s & 50s polio pandemics covering a 20 year period do not fit the known pattern of other infectious diseases – compare the graphs shown here: Vaccines Did Not Save Us – 2 Centuries of Official Statistics

… with this from the US CDC:

Additionally, a number of the first vaccination campaigns of the vaccine era are associated with increases in childhood paralysis including diphtheria and pertussis [whooping cough] campaigns; Pertussis Vaccination and Serious Central Nervous System Disorders: Early Case Series Evidence and Public Reaction

[BLUE TEXT ADDED 30 JAN 2012]

Bill Gates – Buying Immortality In History – By Beating An Already Beaten Disease & Killing Kids

Bill Gates is on a mission to buy himself historical immortality as a philanthropist eradicating the world’s diseases. But the world’s supposedly independent media have failed to tackle what is seriously wrong with this picture.  Gates is using an already beaten disease and his billions to gain for himself the credit in history for its eradication.  Some children who are not at risk of polio will likely die from a disease which is twice as fatal [NPAFP] as a result of the ensuing vaccination campaigns.

Polio has been on its way out for decades with most of the world already polio free and only three countries with 205 cases between them last year.  India, already polio free, has seen over 47,000 cases of NPAFP [non polio acute flaccid paralysis] rising in direct proportion to the number of doses of polio vaccine given. To get an idea of what the Bill Gates proposals will mean with intensive vaccination campaigns to eradicate the last cases of polio is that this will cause the NPAFP equivalent of 235 years of polio cases and Bill will be imposing this on third world children from the comfort of Seattle, USA and his billions of dollars.  There will inevitably be deaths. [BLUE TEXT ADDED 30 Jan 2013].

The polio eradication plans have been condemned in a peer reviewed medical journal with eradication being impossible to achieve, the campaigns causing a disease NPAFP which is twice as fatal, being unethical and not worth the cost to hard-pressed third world economies for the limited benefits:  New Paper – Polio Vaccine – Disease Caused by Vaccine Twice As Fatal – Third World Duped – Scarce Money Wasted – Polio Eradication Impossible – April 7, 2012.

It has been believed by W.H.O. and other experts over at least 10 years that polio eradication is not possible – see this CHS post made 30 Jan 2013 with references: Bill Gates Polio Eradication Plans – To Cause The Polio Equivalent of 235 Years of Cases Of A Twice As Deadly Disease.

But no one seems to dare to challenge the world’s second richest man: a man who ceded his Chairmanship of Microsoft following a long complex European Union investigation into the illegal business practices of Microsoft under his Chairmanship which saw sanctions and a US$326 million fine: Commission concludes on Microsoft investigation, imposes conduct remedies and a fine Brussels, 24 March 2004. 

But tomorrow Gates is giving the BBC’s annual Dimbleby lecture.  This will set out Bill’s vision of how he is to use his billions of dollars to defeat polio seemingly singlehandedly: [Bill Gates: The world can defeat polio 28 January 2013 Fergus Walsh].

Additionally, laying the credit for the fall in polio solely on vaccination campaigns, none of the media mention key factors in the reduction in polio worldwide.  These include Improved economic conditions and natural attentuation of disease.  With these major scientific confounders it is impossible to credit vaccines with defeating such diseases alone or at all.  If vaccines have provided any contribution it is a comparatively much smaller one.

Attenuation is the process by which diseases steadily diminish all by themselves and die out.  It is a well-known phenomenon in medicine:  Vaccines Did Not Save Us – 2 Centuries Of Official Statistics

Improved economic conditions bring the biggest contribution – cleaner water followed by improved nutrition:  How UNICEF Harms Third World Children And Misleads About Their Deaths January 21, 2013.

A significant problem with the existence of an illness like NPAFP is that it raises the question of whether the 1940s and 1950s polio pandemics upon which present-day vaccination campaigns are based were in fact caused by polio or whether the pandemics were of something else.  Those pandemics did not follow the regular repeating cyclical pattern of epidemics and pandemics of other infectious diseases, and were over before the polio vaccine was first introduced, as these US CDC graphs show:

Instead of reporting the facts and issues we see the BBC and world’s media simpering to Gates over his supposed philanthropy:-

Bill Gates: My Plan to Fix The World’s Biggest Problems Wall Street Journal January 25, 2013,Bill Gates

Bill Gates close to completely eradicating polio Washington Post-26 Jan 2013

‘I have no use for money’: Bill Gates plans to use his billions to eradicate polio UK Daily Mail Damian Ghigliotty  21 January 2013

Bill Gates interview: I have no use for money. This is God’s work Neil Tweedie UK The Telegraph 18 Jan 2013

Not only are people around the world not trusting the established for profit media, but this distrust means people are turning to more reliable sources for news. 

Here is a remarkable piece of brown nosing by the BBC’s medical correspondent Fergus Walsh [Bill Gates: The world can defeat polio 28 January 2013 Fergus Walsh, BBC].  It is the only UK media report mentioning the critical peer reviewed journal paper by Dr Puliyel.  

The Puliyel paper Polio programme – let us declare victory and move on is justifiably critical of unethical and dangerous polio campaigns.  But the BBC’s Fergus Walsh fails to mention the main criticisms and their justification. And he misrepresents the only one he does mention

Walsh mentions the criticism that polio vaccine causes the twice as fatal disease NPAFP but fails entirely to mention the critical and strong evidence of the vaccine being the cause of the fatal disease NPAFP – that NPAFP cases rise in direct proportion to the numbers of doses of polio vaccine given.  Walsh also fails to mention the criticism that the vaccine caused 47,000 cases when India is polio free – having zero cases of polio.

Walsh instead claims, without any source or attribution for his claim, that NPAFP can be caused by many other things.  And Walsh says nothing else about any of the other criticisms in the peer reviewed paper by Dr Puliyel – which is also cited on the US National Library of Medicine’s database pubmed.

But then the BBC is not a reliable source of news – as the world has seen recently over the gross sexual abuse of children by ‘Sir’ Jimmy Savile which took place over many decades under the noses of many BBC managers. Not only did no one at the BBC do anything about it, when they had the chance to report the news, the BBC stopped the broadcast going out.

If Bill Gates has business interests or investments in the drug industry, the one place we will never hear of them – if there are any – is from the UK’s BBC.  But if anyone does know if Bill has any such interests or investments or does not and can prove it either way, please do let everyone know.

Whilst Gates company Microsoft was engaging in illegal practices harming the development of healthy necessary competion, his company’s software has been causing vast problems for businesses around the world over decades with an unparalleled history of crashes and bugs.  Gates, having gotten rich on the back of that, now claims he has no need for the money and is doing God’s work.  Which begs the question – why he did not ensure the money was put into developing better software which did not cause so much economic harm – that would be philanthropic – but is Bill Gates really a philanthropist doing “God’s work” or something else, like the work of another less “user friendly” immortal?

Flu Shot Linked to Child Narcolepsy – Reuters Reports

Reuters reports that GlaxoSmithKline’s Pandemrix H1N1 swine flu vaccine has caused 800 cases of narcolepsy in children.  Taking under-reporting into account, this could amount to between at least 5,600 cases or a figure around up to 40,000 in the countries concerned. Cases have been recorded in children from Sweden, Finland, Norway, Ireland and France. Narcolepsy is a serious condition which can debilitate a child for life.  Sufferers can fall asleep on the spot any time without warning.

To gain an idea of the potential extent of this adverse reaction in children caused by this vaccine and to adjust for under-reporting it is necessary to multiply by up to 50 times.  [Under-reporting in all drugs and not just vaccines is 98 in every 100 adverse reactions – hence multiply by 50: Spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting vs event monitoring: a comparison: Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine Volume 84 June 1991 341.]

Read the Reuters’ report here:

Insight: Evidence grows for narcolepsy link to GSK swine flu shot – By Kate Kelland, Health and Science Correspondent, Reuters, STOCKHOLM | Tue Jan 22, 2013

See also our CHS article today:

Piers Morgan Very Sick Days After USA TV Flu Shot Stunt Backfires – Piers Told “Don’t Ever Take A Flu Shot Again”

And these selected CHS articles:

Flu Vaccine Doesn’t Work

New York Times – Flu Vaccine Does Not Work – Yet More Research Says

Flu Vaccine Caused 3587 US Miscarriages & Stillbirths

Flu Vaccine Cripples Healthy US Cheerleader for Life

Most UK Medics Refusing Flu Vaccines

EU Flu Vaccine Bans Still Unreported – Medics Sick After Vaccine Refuse More

UK Fakes Flu Death Numbers

CBS News Investigation – Forced Swine Flu Vaccination Under Obama’s “National Emergency” Based on Wildly Exaggerated Statistics

Call for FDA Ban on Glaxo Weight-Loss Drug – Public Citizen Group Petitions FDA

April 14, 2011

Weight-Loss Drugs Alli and Xenical Should Be Removed From the Market, Public Citizen Tells FDA

Xenical and Alli Can Cause Severe Injury to Liver, Pancreas, Kidneys

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The over-the-counter weight-loss drug Alli and its prescription form Xenical should be removed from the market immediately because they not only can damage the liver, but also, based on new information obtained from FDA adverse reaction files, have been associated with 47 cases of acute pancreatitis and 73 cases of kidney stones, Public Citizen said today in a petition to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

 Both drugs are forms of orlistat; Xenical has 120 milligrams (mgs) and Alli has 60 mgs. Their serious risks greatly outweigh their benefits, which are questionable, because neither has been shown to be much more effective than diet and exercise.

“Any one of these serious risks alone would be sufficient basis for banning Xenical and Alli,” said Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group. “These drugs have the potential to cause significant damage to multiple critical organs, yet they provide meager benefits in reducing weight loss in obese and overweight patients. For this reason, the FDA should tell the manufacturers of these drugs, Hoffman-LaRoche and GlaxoSmithKline, to pull Xenical and Alli, respectively, from the market immediately.”

This is Public Citizen’s second petition to have Xenical taken off pharmacy shelves. In April 2006, Public Citizen urged a ban of Xenical because research in rats had demonstrated that orlistat caused the formation of pre-cancerous lesions in the colon. The FDA rejected that petition.

U.S. physicians have been writing fewer prescriptions for Xenical, even long before over-the-counter Alli was available, because of its serious risks and marginal effectiveness. Prescriptions for Xenical in the U.S. declined 81 percent from 2.6 million in 2000, when Xenical first became available in the U.S., to just 490,000 in 2007. By 2009, the number of Xenical prescriptions in the U.S. further decreased to 110,000 prescriptions, representing only 4 percent of its peak in 2000, but still exposing tens of thousands of patients to a drug with serious risks that greatly outweigh its meager benefits.

Meanwhile, sales of Alli plummeted from $145 million in the first year of marketing (mid-2007 to mid-2008) to $84 million between mid-2009 and mid-2010, the latest years for which data are available.

The weight lost by users of both prescription and the over-the counter-strength orlistat was minimal, Public Citizen said in the petition. For example, people taking Xenical while dieting and exercising for one year (in contrast to those just altering their diet and exercise) lost only 5.6 additional pounds from the 60-mg dose and seven additional pounds from the 120-mg dose compared to the group that engaged only in diet and exercise. Similarly, those in a four-month study of Alli lost only two to four more pounds than those who solely changed their diet and exercise routines.

But the biggest problem with the drugs is their potential to cause serious injuries and death.

On May 26, 2010, the FDA issued a warning about “severe liver injury” resulting from using orlistat. The agency identified 12 foreign reports of severe liver toxicity associated with Xenical and one domestic case for Alli. Two of the patients died of liver failure and three required liver transplants.

Another serious adverse effect of taking Xenical or Alli is acute pancreatitis, which may be especially difficult to diagnose since orlistat’s most common side effects, including abdominal pain and nausea, are also typically symptoms of pancreatitis. Public Citizen’s research of FDA MedWatch adverse reaction reports found 47 cases of pancreatitis associated with Xenical or Alli. Thirty-nine of those patients required hospitalization and one died.

 Public Citizen’s analysis of FDA’s MedWatch reports also identified 73 cases of kidney stones associated with Xenical or Alli use, of which 23 required hospitalization. In a review of the medical literature, Public Citizen also identified at least three patients taking orlistat who developed acute kidney failure because tiny calcium salt crystals formed throughout the kidneys. In one reported case, the patient required dialysis and ultimately died.

Other risks of these drugs include interference with the absorption of fat-soluble vitamins and drugs, fecal urgency, gas with discharge and abdominal pain.

###
Public Citizen is a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C. For more information, please visit www.citizen.org.

British Medical Journal fails to disclose commercial conflicts in Wakefield attack

I have submitted the following letter to BMJ this morning:-

What about BMJ, Merck and GSK (and Andrew Wakefield)?

BMJ is a part free journal. In view of the recent renewed attacks on Andrew Wakefield (which were all free of access) what are we to make of the fact that BMJ Learning is in partnership with Merck under the alias of Univadis [1,2], or that MSD and GSK sponsor BMJ awards [3]? Should not these competing interests be openly declared?

[1] Vera Hassner Sharav ‘BMJ & Lancet Wedded to Merck CME Partnership’ (including Martin J Walker ‘Merck’s Medical Media Empire’), http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/766/9/

[2] Univadis log-in page, http://www.univadis.com/RH/UK_loginpage/

[3] http://groupawards.bmj.com/sponsors