Black Triangle

Despite the overwhelming amount of science failing to find a link between MMR vaccine and autism, as well as the dishonest and unethical behaviour of Wakefield, there are a number of journalists still prepared to push the hoax. One of these is Fiona Phillips. You can watch her talking about MMR on Question Time, and read her call the “callous” Andrew Wakefield a caring doctor. Here she recounts her appearance on the Jeremy Vine show:

On Wednesday I was on Radio 2’s Jeremy Vine show where I had the displeasure of being shouted down by journalist Cristina Odone who said that the MMR vaccine is indisputably safe for all toddlers and that parents of children with autism are “hysterical”.

Another typical response from the bullying might of the pro-vaccine army.

It is simply irresponsible to assert that MMR suits all children and that anyone who disagrees is a hysterical parent.

Some children have an allergic reaction to peanuts. Most don’t.

Does that mean you feed peanuts to all children?

Fiona Phillips is, in part, a little bit right, but a hell of a lot more wrong. Cristina Odone is wrong to say MMR vaccine is “indisputably safe for all toddlers”. It isn’t, and sensible commentators do not make this claim. The manufacturers’ datasheet, such as immunodeficiency, leukaemias, and a history of hypersensitivity to the components of the vaccine. There are also known adverse effects of the vaccine, including the Idiopathic Thrombocytopenic Purpura (ITP) noted by the MHRA in 2001 [PDF]. However, ITP is more common with measles infection. That the MHRA should publicise a rare and serious adverse event during the MMR vaccine scare should come as some reassurance that conspiratorial views that the government and vaccine manufacturers are involved in a cover-up of vaccine harms are just that, conspiracy theories.

The peanut analogy employed by Phillips would be a good one, if there was evidence that the autism-MMR vaccine link existed. But it doesn’t. You can’t compare a real known risk, with an imaginary risk pushed by quacks pushing “cures” based on a vaccine cause.

UPDATE: You can hear Fiona Phillips on the Jeremy Vine show here.

In an editorial full of fail in the Mail about the Wakefield judgment, two point stands out for me. The first is an amazing lack of knowledge about the public money spent on the Wakefield hoax:

And the parents? They were denied the legal aid (available to every Tom, Dick and terrorist [they really are beyond parody] Harry) to fund a court case that might have resolved the matter quickly and conclusively.

It is worth remembering that Wakefield had received £55,000 in legal aid in 1996 concerned with these cases two years prior to the Lancet paper. Even more importantly, the Legal Services Commission had spent £15 million on the cases by 2003, and only denied further monies when it was clear that nothing would come of spending a further £10 million of public money. A court case quite clearly was not resolving the matter quickly and conclusively. You only need to look to the US to see the likely outcome, where Wakefield’s research was described as a “deception”.

The second point relates to the invocation of the John Gummer:

After all, when it comes to health issues, governments and scientists are not infallible.

Who can forget John Gummer forcing his daughter to eat a beef burger at the start of the BSE crisis, the thalidomide scandal, the countless drugs that have had to be withdrawn, and HIV infected blood supplies?

The Gummer comment is interesting because the Mail pushed the Blair should tell us about Leo Blair’s vaccination status at every opportunity, helped by the anti-MMR Member of Parliament Julie Kirkbride. Blair’s aides at the time were very concerned not be seen to be using the children for political purposes, and probably didn’t think the story would get the legs it eventually got. Blair stuck to the scientific advice he was given, as well as citing international bodies like the WHO. I know some have criticised Blair for his judgment on this, although not David Cameron, but at the time Gummer’s example was the more recent example of the use of children by politicians. I think Blair was unfairly maligned on the issue of Leo Blair. Far more criticism should be made of the rightwing press and dodgy MPs were attempting to use his children for political purposes a la Gummer.

The Independent asked at the start of the GMC investigation into Andrew Wakefield the following question:

Are we wrong to detect the distant whirr of the same spin spin machine that so recently set about destroying the reputations of David Kelly, Andrew Gilligan and others?

Independent leader from February 24th 2004

This week they have finally come to a conclusion on this point.

Dr Wakefield has accused the GMC of staging a sort of show trial, designed to punish him for daring to dissent from the views of the medical establishment regarding the safety of this vaccine. This seems a conspiracy theory too far.

Independent leader from January 29th 2010

The recent tragic death of Stephen Gately, which may have been due to a heart problem, was exploited by Jan Moir in her Daily Mail column to make a wider point:

All the official reports point to a natural death, with no suspicious circumstances. The Gately family are – perhaps understandably – keen to register their boy’s demise on the national consciousness as nothing more than a tragic accident.

Even before the post-mortem and toxicology reports were released by the Spanish authorities, the Gatelys’ lawyer reiterated that they believed his sudden death was due to natural causes.

But, hang on a minute. Something is terribly wrong with the way this incident has been shaped and spun into nothing more than an unfortunate mishap on a holiday weekend, like a broken teacup in the rented cottage.

Consider the way it has been largely reported, as if Gately had gently keeled over at the age of 90 in the grounds of the Bide-a-Wee rest home while hoeing the sweet pea patch.

The sugar coating on this fatality is so saccharine-thick that it obscures whatever bitter truth lies beneath. Healthy and fit 33-year-old men do not just climb into their pyjamas and go to sleep on the sofa, never to wake up again
[...]
Another real sadness about Gately’s death is that it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships.

Gay activists are always calling for tolerance and understanding about same-sex relationships, arguing that they are just the same as heterosexual marriages. Not everyone, they say, is like George Michael.

Of course, in many cases this may be true. Yet the recent death of Kevin McGee, the former husband of Little Britain star Matt Lucas, and now the dubious events of Gately’s last night raise troubling questions about what happened.

It is important that the truth comes out about the exact circumstances of his strange and lonely death.

Daniel Finkelstein of The Times suggests three errors in Jan Moir’s “statistics”.

The first is that you can learn something useful from a sample size of two.

The second is that you select your sample by reading back copies of the Daily Mail and finding famous people who fall into the category you wish to study who have been in front page news stories in the last month.

There is, you see, a chance that this method will bias the sample.

And third, Ms Moir appears to have forgotten how useful it is to have a comparison group.

It did not strike her that by employing the same sample selection method (Daily Mail stories) she could have found two marriages to compare with the civil partnerships.

Of course, Finkelstein flatters the mail by using the word statistics, but his post does highlight one aspect of the Mail. They use individual anecdotal cases to “prove” their pre-existing prejudices.

Stephen Gately’s death and Kevin McGee’s death are linked to suggest dangers of a homosexual lifestyle. It’s fair to say that the Mail is a homophobic newspaper.

The death of a girl following HPV vaccination (unrelated to the vaccine), and the case of another child who developed health problems following MMR vaccine (unrelated to the vaccine) are used to cast doubt on vaccines. It’s fair to say the Daily Mail is an anti-vaccine newspaper.

Charlie Booker nails the Mail with more style:

It has been 20 minutes since I’ve read her now-notorious column, and I’m still struggling to absorb the sheer scope of its hateful idiocy. It’s like gazing through a horrid little window into an awesome universe of pure blockheaded spite. Spiralling galaxies of ignorance roll majestically against a backdrop of what looks like dark prejudice, dotted hither and thither with winking stars of snide innuendo.

In the space of 4 days we have had a flurry of irresponsible news reporting about HPV vaccine following the death of a child. One of the rent-a-gobs that newspapers persist in obtaining quotes from is Jackie Fletcher, “leader” of the JABS campaigning group. JABS is largely concerned with propagating the hoax MMR vaccine-autism association, but in recent years has taken on a more overtly anti-vaccine stance. This has led to Jackie Fletcher being approached on stories unrelated to MMR vaccine in recent months. So how did she fare this week?

Daily Express:

Last night, Jackie Fletcher of Jabs, a campaign group for safe vaccinations, called for immediate withdrawal of all the HPV jabs. She said: “These dangerous side-effects must be investigated straight away. Recalling the jabs is not scare-­mongering.”

and again:

Jackie Fletcher, founder of the support group JABS, said: “We feel the Department of Health should suspend the programme temporarily until they have got to the bottom of this girl’s sad death.

“We have girls registered with us who believe they have been severely affected by the HPV vaccine, including semi-paralysis and muscle weakness. There is at the very least a question mark over its safety.

“This is an invasive procedure and should be removed from schools and put into the hands of GPs.

“The Department of Health just seems to want to allow girls to play Russian roulette with their health.”

The Yorkshire Post:

“A young girl went to school on Monday and she did not come home,” says Jackie Fletcher, founder of Jabs, the support group for children damaged by vaccines.

“Until investigations have been carried out and until the conclusions are made public, the immunisation programme, not just in Coventry, but across the country, should be suspended.

“We have had reports of girls who are now facing long-term health problems following the injections.

“One girl has been in hospital since September suffering from paralysis, another has suffered multiple seizures which means she can no longer drive and another has had severe muscle spasms.

“As an organisation, we are not claiming that these cases are directly linked to the immunisation programme, but they are very serious complaints and surely it is worth thorough investigation?”

So in the space of four days Fletcher has:

• Called for the withdrawal of a vaccine that will save hundreds of women’s lives
• Made further unsubstantiated claims against HPV vaccine off the back of this tragedy
• Accused the government of playing Russian Roulette with girls lives

We know now that the vaccine is extremely unlikely to have caused the tragic death of a young girl; she passed away because of an invasive tumour in her lungs and heart. Will Fletcher retract any of this ill-informed nonsense? Will newspapers ever stop going to her for inflammatory quotes?

In the case of the MMR vaccine-autism “controversy” (it never was in scientific circles), the media argued that a balance had to be struck between the opposing sides of the debate. When Wakefield was pushing his orginal theories, one might give the media some slack. He was, or appeared at the time, a respectable scientist presenting his opinions at a press conference at the Royal Free Medical School – hardly a quack institution.

In the case of Jackie Fletcher and JABS, no such case can be made. It is quite clear they are an anti-vaccine organisation. Already, forum members at JABS are insinuating foulplay in the post-mortem in the current case:

Be interesting to get a little more information on the pathologist who carried out the post-mortem examination. What is his background, how independent is he from government influences. Will the results be verified by a second/third opinion?

No serious journalist should be approching JABS or Jackie Fletcher for comments about vaccines. They are not a legitimate organisation concerned with true vaccine safety, unlike the authorities who they criticise who have an appallingly difficult job in this environment, but a crank organisation more akin to a flat earth society.

many of those prescribed Tamiflu are stockpiling it to be sure of having access to the powerful drug

Independent 10th of August

Doctors should stop giving Tamiflu to children as a routine treatment for swine flu, researchers concluded after finding the drug can cause more harm than good.

Independent 11th of August

To be fair, no wonder people are confused with the BMJ and Liam Donaldson having a disagreement over oseltamivir.

All you need to know about Tamiflu (oseltamivir).

1. Evidence that it is effective in children is limited, the BMJ study actually adds very little to what we knew before the pandemic started.
2. However, oseltamivir may have some effect, and you might consider that important if you judge the influenza infection a serious risk to your child’s health.
3. If you don’t judge currently judge the risks of the disease to be great (your judgement may vary compared to others), then be aware that a child suffering relatively mild symptoms of influenza may well develop nausea and vomiting if they take osetamivir (about 1 in 20). Nightmares have also been reported.
4. These adverse effects are reversible and not life-threatening (whereas some have died from Swine flu).
5. Your decision may change based on your perceived risk of the influenza – which could change if the virus mutates.

The government are taking a safety first approach to oseltamivir’s use, and I have some sympathy. One can imagine how the media would react if a child died from Swine flu after being denied oseltamivir. They’d be crucified. On the other hand, nausea and vomiting may be unpleasant, but there won’t be the same media outcry.

One could compare oseltamivir with a bathing ring.

Standing on a beach with one foot high waves coming into shore you might be pretty confident that you and your child can cope without the bathing ring. However the life guards are handing them out for free, because the odd rogue wave has taken people out to sea. Most kids tolerate having the bathing ring anyway. That’s probably comparable to the current H1N1 influenza outbreak, which currently has relatively mild symptoms in most people.

With a more severe influenza outbreak (either a mutation of the existing influenza pandemic, or a more serious Avian influenza) you are stood on the beach looking at 30 foot wave heading towards you. You are going to grab anything that might make you float regardless of the strength of the evidence. Bathing rings float, they might help.

The problem we appear to have is that the government planned for, and prepared the public for, an outbreak of influenza that was much more severe. This was noted in the Radio 4 programme The Report. We can be thankful that is the case, but there may well be a substantial argument for revisiting the prescribing of oseltamivir to those with mild symptoms.

More on Oseltamivir’s adverse effects, including the controversial neuropsychiatric problems, here.

BBC news 8pm Radio 4 reported on the case of a school with a suspected case of Swine flu. The brief report ended with the following.

“The child and his 24 classmates are being treated with the vaccine Tamiflu”

Arrghhhh!

I recently linked to John Rentoul’s series of headlines in the form of a question to which the answer is no.

Here’s another. The Sunday Express asks:

IS THIS THE FACE OF MADDIE?

No.

And as if there wasn’t already sufficient evidence of the British newspaper industry acting like scum, the News of the World provide us with an insight into their “news” gathering techniques. Attempting to entrap a poverty-stricken family for newspaper sales. Nice. (Hat-tip Will)

Readers may remember the appalling reporting of a safety concern about Meningitis C vaccine by The Independent. The MHRA have today reported that the withdrawn batches were not contaminated:

Two batches of a meningitis C vaccine (Menjugate Kit) that were recalled as a precaution in February were safe, tests by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) have proved.

The vaccine was recalled on 25 February 2009 because some samples from the batches that had been used in a transport experiment to America tested positive for Staphylococcus aureus bacteria, which can cause blood poisoning. None of these samples entered the supply chain.

The manufacturer, Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics conducted sterility tests of all recalled batches and the batches proved to be sterile. The MHRA also conducted its own independent testing which confirmed the sterility of the vaccine batches.

There was no evidence of any risk to UK children, and there were no reports of any infections following vaccination with vaccine from these batches. The Department of Health was able to trace the vaccine to individual GP surgeries within 24 hours – the only country in the world that is able to do so – which helps to ensure vaccine can be taken out of the supply chain quickly.

What we therefore can learn from this episode is:

a. The regulatory authorities in the UK are serious about the safety of vaccines, and act in a precautionary manner to protect the health of children.

b. That newspapers continue to print crap about vaccines, without any consideration of the accuracy of their reporting, the anxiety they will cause parents, or the effect they may have on public health.

The Independent’s behaviour in this episode has been atrocious. The “science” editor, Steve Connor, wrote the following at the time:

Doctors have been asked to trace all babies in Britain who have been injected in the past month with the meningitis C vaccine

This appears to have been a complete fantasy in the mind of the reporter.