Ben Goldacre defends Dr. Andrew Wakefield
… and lays the blame for the MMR/Autism hoax where it belongs - on the shoulders of the British Press.
http://www.badscience.net/2008/08/the-medias-mmr-hoax/
“Dr Andrew Wakefield is in front of the General Medical Council on charges of serious professional misconduct, his paper on 12 children with autism and bowel problems is described as “debunked” - although it never supported the conclusions ascribed to it - and journalists have convinced themselves that his £435,643 fee from legal aid proves that his research was flawed.”
Well worth a read.
Of course, the paper never supported the conclusions ascribed to it.
But who first ascribed them?
Yes, it was… Andrew Wakefield!
This is akin to suggesting that if a fire is started those throwing petrol on it are solely responsible for the fire, and that the bloke who struck the first match, and who occasionally popped back to throw petrol on the fire was blameless.
Comment by Anthony — September 2, 2008 @ 11:56 am
Fair comment; Wakefield is certainly not innocent, and I think the badscience article is pretty clear about that.
However, it’s also clear the media could have done a great deal more to prevent the fiasco they had set in motion by frightening parents into not having their children vaccinated. Instead they chose to continue to report lies about MMR because bad news sells newspapers and good news doesn’t. With the predictable result of a substantial increase in Measles, Mumps and Rubella.
Yes, Wakefield started it, but it took the Press to turn it into a disaster.
Derek
Comment by Derek Sorensen — September 2, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
{Derek}Yes, Wakefield started it, but it took the Press to turn it into a disaster.[Derek}
Tricky stance Derek.
The press are the medium sure, but they would equally have been if Wakefields conclusions were proven correct and MMR did indeed present a danger. In that case the clamouring of Fleet St would have been a good thing.
The fault here lies squarely with Wakefield, he was wrong, his science was inaccurate. Even if the press overreacted and the public were vulnerable - read gullible - enough to swallow it, it doesn’t stop the original mistakes being mistakes. If we are still shooting the messenger in this media-whoring age then somebodies badly missing the bullseye.
Which reminds me of:
“If we hit that bullseye then all the dominoes will fall like a house of cards, checkmate.”
Zapp Brannigan (Futurama). Great stuff.
brad
Comment by brad — September 11, 2008 @ 7:40 pm
Brad, you make some fair points. Had the MMR “risk” been genuine, then we would be rightly praising the Press for bringing it to the public’s attention. And at the point when it wasn’t know whether the risk was real or not, they can be forgiven for raising the question. But they went much further than that.
Another post from Ben Goldacre (there are other sources but I had this one bookmarked):
http://www.badscience.net/?p=249
That was posted in June 2006, and the research Goldacre refers to was published in May of that year. And yet even a year later the tabloids were still publishing scare stories about MMR. The point is, the press could not have failed to know that the MMR scare was baloney at least as far back as 2006. So why has it taken them so long to stop printing scare stories? Because scare stories sell newspapers, and reassurances don’t.
Derek
Comment by Derek Sorensen — September 11, 2008 @ 9:01 pm
[Derek]Because scare stories sell newspapers, and reassurances don’t.[Derek]
Exactly. I’m confused, what is your argument?
Of course the Tabloids were still publishing misleading (blah blah) fucking (blah) nonsense.
Are you surprised?
Surely the issue here is how many actual families put their children at risk after listening to the nonsense the press ran with.
So I agree with you, the press should be fucked off for their lies and exaggeration of the real situation, and that may have resulted in some kids missing out on the vaccination. But it’s still WAKEFIELDS fault!!!!
Who else? Would the press have got it without him?
Would families have stressed if he didn’t fuck up?
The truth will set you free, but lies will keep you nicely in the public eye.
brad
Comment by brad — September 11, 2008 @ 10:03 pm