Irony at Work: Andrew Wakefield and Academic Integrity

A friend pointed me to a link showing the schedule of events for the AutismOne conference, and aside from the normal players like Jenny McCarthy, Dr. Eisenstein, and the father-son Geier duo, I couldn't help but notice that they have actually asked Andrew Wakefield to speak.

The best part?  The topic of his speech is "Defending Academic Integrity and Research".

Here is a summary of his little chat:

"Doctors and scientists working in the public interest and specifically for the wellbeing of their patients – particularly those involved in researching vaccine safety – are coming under attack as never before. This talk emphasizes the reasons why we should value the individual over the concept of a "herd," the importance of maintaining academic integrity, and the progress that has been made despite systematic oppression of scientific and medical enquiry."

That's rich.  A guy who was stripped of his medical license due to fraud, a man who failed to disclose financial conflicts of interest, and a man who was found to have manipulated and falsified data within a published study (which was subsequently retracted) is speaking about academic integrity.  

Let's keep in mind Wakefield is the same person who (among many other things) was found guilty of four counts of dishonesty and 12 counts involving the abuse of developmentally challenged children.  The sheer number of proven charges would boggle the mind... yet this is the type of person AutismOne invites to speak about academic integrity?

Sort of makes you wonder if they have Bernie Madoff scheduled to speak about Economic Ethics.

The Profit of Vaccinations

The New York Times recently published an article about the flu season which shows that the levels of deaths have officially crossed over into "epidemic" territory.  The full article can be found here:  Flu Season Deaths Reach Epidemic Level but May Be at Peak, C.D.C. Says

This is a well balanced article speaking about the impact of the flu as well as explaining that the flu vaccine isn't nearly as effective as some other vaccines like those for the norovirus (aka: the "stomach flu" or gastroenteritis) or pertussis (aka: whooping cough).  Part of this is obviously due to how quickly flu viruses mutate, but another aspect that could be partly responsible is the simple fact that on any given year only around a third of the population bothers to actually get a vaccine.  This means there is a much greater chance that the virus can spread among those who have no protection from the vaccine, as well as among those who the vaccine wasn't effective.

Clearly there are failures in the system and improvements must be made.  Not only do we need better vaccines, but we need to do a better job informing the public as to the benefits.  The good news is we appear to be making progress on both of these fronts, and the percentage of those who receive flu vaccines is on the rise each year.  There are also new vaccines in development that hope to address some of the problems with the current targeted vaccines although progress is slow, and funding is difficult to obtain.

This latter point is one which I wanted to speak about, because all too often we hear antivaxxers complain that vaccines are merely a profit mechanism for pharmaceutical companies and that there is no true benefit.  As the article explains it could take as much as $1 Billion to actually bring a vaccine to market, which at first glance seems like an insurmountable figure.  If a new vaccine was to be developed which either prevented the flu or even merely significantly reduced the chances of contracting a flu virus and if the usage of that vaccine was on par with vaccines for MMR or Hib, chances are we would see a vaccine acceptance rate somewhere above 90%.

So let's be conservative and use a vaccination rate of only 80% for the "one-time" flu vaccine.  We know not everyone would bother to be vaccinated the first year, but after a few years when people realized they no longer need an annual flu vaccine, they would probably be more willing to get the single vaccine, and since many other vaccines have rates well above 90%, I don't think 80% is that unbelievable.

So if we focus on the United States alone, we know there are around 312,000,000 (312M) people who could potentially be vaccinated.  80% of this is around 250,000,000 people who would likely receive a flu vaccine.  So let's assume the cost of this vaccine is $35.  The current wholesale costs of single year flu vaccines is closer to $10, but a one-time vaccine is likely to be incrementally higher due to the complexity.  For example an adult vaccine for MMR costs around $35 while the vaccine for varicella is over $60.  A childhood vaccine for Hib may be only $12 while rotavirus can be over $70, so it isn't hard to a flu vaccine could cost at least $35 wholesale - at least for the first few years after release.

Ok, so now we have 250,000,000 potential customers each of which will spend $35 for a grand total of $8,750,000,000 ($8.75B).  Even if we assume only a 50% vaccination rate (156M) and an even lower cost of $25 per vaccine, the total is still $3,900,000,000 ($3.9B).

Of course the $1B it takes to bring a vaccine to market does not include the costs to produce, distribute, and market the vaccine, so it isn't as if there will be billions in profit the first year, but the flip side of this equation is that we are only factoring in the population of the US.  Chances are once the vaccine was available it could be submitted for approval in numerous other nations with the potential to sell hundreds of millions of doses to those nations.

The moral of this story is, there would be a lot of money to be made from a one-time flu vaccine, yet to date we haven't seen anything available.  Since antivaxxers seem to feel vaccine manufacturers are only interested in profits, how can they explain that not a single manufacturer has unleashed such a vaccine on the public?  It shouldn't matter if the vaccine is effective or not, because as any good antivaxxer will tell you vaccines don't actually work (and yes I'm being sarcastic).  Antivaxxers are even willing to claim publicly that the polio vaccine and the smallpox vaccine did nothing to prevent those diseases (suggesting the diseases just magically disappeared on their own apparently), and they feel that vaccines are generally ineffective.

These same antivaxxers will tell you that the MMR vaccine does far more harm that good and that there is no evidence that viruses like the Measles have been controlled by the vaccine in any way.  They will also claim that the HPV vaccines don't work at all and that it is merely a method for the manufacturers to collect millions upon millions from insurance companies and the unsuspecting public.

You see this is one of those situations where antivaxxers want to have it both ways.  One one hand they claim vaccine manufacturers are simply in it for the money and that the vaccines themselves don't actually work.  On the other hand, they can't explain why the market hasn't delivered something like a one-time flu vaccine which would quite obviously be a gigantic windfall for the pharmaceutical companies.

So which is it antivaxxers?

It would seem to be the fact we don't have a one-time vaccine for the flu only proves that the system works.  We have clinical trials and data which shows us the effectiveness of vaccines, and if a vaccine is found to be ineffective it wouldn't be approved.  We have a system of checks and balances in place to ensure the public is protected and that vaccines are not only effective but that they are safe.  We have a system which rewards responsibility, and one which puts the safety and health of the public as the priority far head of profit.

We aren't talking about a nutritional supplement or a vitamin that can be sold by anyone trying to make a buck.  Vaccines are subjected to rigorous safety and effectiveness testing which can take years to complete and which requires verifiable proof of efficacy before that vaccine is ever approved for use.  Can we say the same thing about the various supplements and pills sold on antivaxxer websites?

Sort of makes you wonder what type of clinical trial or testing was done on something like the miracle "brain repair" pills sold by a well known anti-vaxxer.  I think we all know the answer, and it rhymes with none.

If vaccines were really all about profit and if the health of the public was an afterthought as so many antivaxxers have suggested, I have no doubt we would have a half dozen one-time flu vaccines on the market this very moment.  Yet we don't - and I've yet to see an antivaxxer who can explain this without contradicting themselves.

Reuters: Indiana Has 13 Cases of Measles as Vaccinations Decline

Thanks to antivaccinationists like Lowell Hubbs, preventable diseases like measles continue to be a problem because antivaxers are incapable of picking up a history book and reading about how we used to lose thousands of lives every year due to them, nor do they bother to learn about the thousands more that developed disabilities as a result of these diseases.

Instead, antivaxers like Mr. Hubbs claim vaccinations are harmful or that they cause autism even though there is zero scientific evidence to support that wild theory.  There are no clinical trials indicating it to be true, there are no medical or scientific studies, and there is not one single piece of peer reviewed, published research in any reputable medical journal worldwide which has so much as linked vaccines to autism much less proven causation.

Yet the antivaxers press on because they are determined to put people in harms way.  They ignore and outright avoid the science.  They refuse to consider the available scientific data.  They find excuses and place blame upon others rather than accepting the facts, and they invent wild conspiracy theories rather than admitting that they just might actually be wrong about vaccines.

Instead of wanting to protect people from preventable disease, antivaxers seem to be perfectly fine with a few people dying here or there provided they don't give in to those "dangerous" vaccines.  So what if a few people die from complications surrounding the measles?  Who cares if someone contracts polio and is permanently disabled as a result?  What's the big deal if a few people die from cervical cancer which may have been prevented if only they had been given a vaccine?  None of that matters to an antivaxer, because antivaxers really don't care about diseases... they merely care about how many people they can convince to follow them over the proverbial cliff.

The following quote from the article seems to sum it up best:

"Whatever risks there are (to vaccination) they pale in comparison with the danger of the natural disease".

~Dr. Jorge Parada, professor of medicine and direction of the infection prevention and control program at Loyola University Medical Center

Mark my words - we will see another large scale outbreak of preventable disease in our lifetimes.  Lives will be lost, children and adults will suffer, and antivaxers will quietly slither away into the darkness without so much as acknowledging they are part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

Thanks antivaxers - if your goal is to kill or permanently disable a large number of people... you're doing a remarkable job.

Read the full and original article here.

Destroying the "MMR Vaccine Causes Autism" Myth

In 1998, a unethical doctor named Andrew Wakefield published a study which suggested the MMR vaccine may be responsible for autism.  This claim came from his observations of a whopping 12 children.  Not 12,000, not 1,200, not even 120... but 12 children. 

Wakefield didn't come right out and claim the MMR vaccine was entirely responsible for autism, nor did he claim the vaccine was the only thing responsible, but he instilled enough fear about the vaccine in parents that vaccination rates plummeted as a direct result.  In parts of the UK, at one point only 60% of the children had received both doses of the MMR vaccine which lead to outbreaks of the measles to the point of it becoming an epidemic.  Children were hospitalized as a result, and there were even some deaths.

Granted Wakefield's "study" was originally published in a reputable medical journal (the Lancet) so people assumed it was at least factual.  With time however, people soon discovered that Wakefield acted unethically when he performed his research.  He manipulated and fabricated patient records.  He paid children to give him blood samples.  He left out key information that would have countered his claims, and he failed to mention that he had collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from trial lawyers for testifying against vaccine manufacturers (a blatant conflict of interest that he never disclosed).

As Brian Deer from the UK's The Sunday Times reported:

However, our investigation, confirmed by evidence presented to the General Medical Council (GMC), reveals that: In most of the 12 cases, the children’s ailments as described in The Lancet were different from their hospital and GP records. Although the research paper claimed that problems came on within days of the jab, in only one case did medical records suggest this was true, and in many of the cases medical concerns had been raised before the children were vaccinated. Hospital pathologists, looking for inflammatory bowel disease, reported in the majority of cases that the gut was normal. This was then reviewed and the Lancet paper showed them as abnormal.

Eventually Wakefield's dishonesty and unethical behavior did in fact catch up with him, and ten of the original thirteen co-authors of the original study formally retracted their names from it.  Eventually the General Medical Council in the U.K. recommended that his license to practice medicine be revoked, which it subsequently was.  His original study was retracted from the very journal that had originally published it, he was forced out of the organization he was working for here in the US, and his follow-up study where he attempted to blame autism in animals on vaccines was also withdrawn.

However, even after all of this to some degree the damage has been done.  In some areas vaccine rates still not not risen to the levels they were prior to Wakefield's fraud being published, and of course we have seen a number of celebrities and reporters bring this issue to the surface which only serves to spread fear to parents who are ignorant of the facts and/or don't have time to learn the full story.  Although vaccination rates are once again on the rise, we continue to see the "MMR vaccine causes autism" myth repeated from time to time just as we continue to hear from Wakefield sympathizers (like Mr. Hubbs) who claim the entire ordeal was some massive conspiracy to unfairly target a man who dared challenge 'the medical system'.

Interestingly enough, I stumbled across a study published in The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry entitled "No effect of MMR withdrawal on the incidence of autism: a total population study".  This study (an actual peer-reviewed study published in a reputable journal mind you) examined the incidence of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) in Japanese children who were born between 1988 and 1996 to determine if the incidence of ASD would rise after the MMR vaccine was no longer being administered (Japan stopped using the MMR vaccine in 1992).

The end result of the study was that although usage of the MMR vaccine had been falling for several years (and eventually was no longer administered) the incidence of ASD continued to rise.  The incidence of ASD ranged from 47.6 to 85.9 cases per 10,000 children before the vaccine was withdrawn to 96.7 to 161.3 per 10,000 after it was withdrawn. A very similar pattern was witnessed for children diagnosed as having ASD with episodes of definite regression.  This is the form of ASD where the child appears to develop normally up to a specific age and then appears to regress (which is the very same form of ASD that Wakefield attempted to blame upon the MMR vaccine).

In needs to be stated that the authors of this study did not suggest the rise in the incidence of ASD was in any way related to the removal of the MMR vaccine and that was not the purpose of the study.  However, the results of the study did openly state that countries that withdraw the MMR vaccine cannot be expected to witness a reduction in the incidence of ASD as so many antivaxxers would like to believe.

Therefore, if autism isn't caused by the MMR vaccine (and the antivaxxers know the science has discredited that idea) and if autism isn't caused by thimerosal (as the removal of thimerosal from childhood vaccines has not resulted in any decrease in the incidence of ASD) what are we left to believe?  The antivaxxers such as Mr. Hubbs continue to see their theories debunked by sound science, so instead of acknowledging the science or admitting that their conclusions may have actually been wrong, they simply retreat and pretend that nothing ever happened.  They will then come out with yet another theory as they try to move the goalposts without anyone noticing. 

One thing is for sure... momentum is not on the side of the antivaxxers, and with so much science stacking up against them they have done the only thing possible - they have started speaking in such incredibly general terms that it makes it much more difficult to challenge them (albeit much more difficult for them to be taken seriously as well).  In the past they had focused upon the MMR vaccine or upon thimerosal or upon aluminum... but when science shows none of those have any statistical weight upon the incidence of ASD, they have now shifted to making unsubstantiated claims about various unnamed "toxins" in vaccines or in the body, and they are now attempting to claim that ASD isn't caused by a specific vaccine alone or even by a number of vaccines, but merely that it is 'triggered' by the sheer volume of vaccines given to children.
 
In 2012 and beyond we can expect to see a new round of antivaxxer hypocrisy as they develop new and improved "detoxification" techniques and products that will claim to improve health and magically cure autism or other conditions caused by these mystery toxins, yet don't expect to see any peer-reviewed science supporting these claims as it won't be available.  The only question that remains is... how much longer will the scientifically ignorant wing of the public continue to trust a group which changes their point of focus more often than Harold Camping and his Rapture predictions?

Medical Veritas: The Journal For Quacks

Medical Veritas is the name of a "medical journal" invented by promoters of alternative and homeopathic medicine.  They have even coined the phrase "Journal of Medical Truth" as if to suggest they are the only journal interested in finding truth and fact, and they have recently featured such articles as "Ending Vaccination Humanicide", "American Academy of Pediatrics' Shaken Baby Syndrome Fraud", and  my personal favorite "Musical Cult Control: The Rockefeller Foundation's War of Consciousness Through the Imposition of A=440Hz Frequency Standard Tuning".

NO I did not make any of this up, NO as sad as it may sound these articles are not meant to be satirical in nature, and YES that last one actually does in fact suggest that radio waves are guilty of mind control.  Specifically it states "this imposed frequency that is “herding” populations into greater aggression, psychosocial agitation, and emotional distress predisposing people to physical illnesses and financial impositions profiting the agents, agencies,  and companies engaged in the monopoly".  So basically they feel a specific frequency is guilty of forcing people against their will to do a variety of things including becoming agitated and sick, and then in turn it forces them to spend money on remedies.

I've read science fiction that is less far fetched than this crazy idea, but it does beg the question: "What's the frequency Kenneth?".  Did we mention that the homepage of Medical Veritas is hosted of a "web.me.com" blogger page?  You could probably stop reading right now as it is clear this journal is far from scientific or reputable, but for humor sake let's dig a little deeper shall we?

Medical Veritas is not a respected journal nor is it recognized within the medical community and aside from some alternative medicine or anti-vaccine websites you aren't about to find it cited, nor will you find reputable research scientists mentioning it on their curriculum vitae. It's editors include numerous anti-vaccine types including several who don't hold any relevant education or experience. It includes one (Bonnie S. Dunbar) who holds a PhD in Zoology, one (Betsy Hicks) who is specifically called a "well respected diet counselor" but has no formal education whatsoever (although she is married to a doctor so that should count for something I guess), and they even include one (Toni Krehel) who is listed as an "AP" which is an acupuncture professional from what I gather. Ms. Krehel claims to specialize in the "approach of fusing together Chinese Medicine, Homeopathic Medicine and frequency specific BioEnergetic technology" (I am seriously not making this up).

The fun doesn't stop there however. One of their Senior Editors is a man (Michael K. Primero) who holds a masters in science and technology and who wrote his masters thesis based upon the premise that HIV is not the cause for AIDS.  Another (Tomas Teskey) is a DMV... which is a Veterinarian.  His self-proclaimed expertise is not in vaccines or humans, but rather in horses where this expertise (and I quote) is "taking a specialty approach to the equine hoof".

Not as if we could make this any more entertaining, but the chief editor and founder (Gary Goldman) holds a PhD in Computer Science but no education in any medical related field nor has he spent any time as a medical researcher, and one of the editors is actually Andrew Wakefield... yes that Andrew Wakefield. The same Andrew Wakefield who had his medical license pulled in the UK after he was found to have manipulated research, engaged in unethical bias, and essentially fabricated information that was included in his now-retracted "study" which attempted to link the MMR vaccine with autism. Wakefield even lists this study (keep in mind it has already been retracted and is no longer published) on his Medical Veritas biography (see item 80) without so much as a mention from Wakefield or from Medical Veritas that the study was found to be a fraud, officially retracted and thus no longer consider published, and Wakefield himself stripped of his ability to practice medicine.

Now I'm not trying to suggest every editor affiliated with Medical Veritas is uneducated or not qualified to speak on medical issues. I'm sure there are numerous doctors and experts who have given their names to Medical Veritas and who speak on other matters unrelated to vaccines, but as I have shown above there are also a number of individuals who are totally unqualified to speak on the subject of vaccines or any other human medical issue for that matter.

This just goes to show if you dig beyond the surface, you always find the lack of science and dishonesty associated with the anti-vaccine movement.  They generally don't care because the people they prey on aren't intelligent enough to figure these types of things out on their own, and antivaxers generally don't care about facts in the first place, so any antivaxer who reads this information will find excuses to dismiss the facts as if they don't matter.  Science does matter however... it matters a lot.

The reality is, there are dozens upon dozens of legitimate medical journals out there who would be more than willing to publish peer-reviewed science that can improve upon modern medicine.  You will often hear anti-vaccination conspiracy theorists such as Lowell Hubbs claim that "big pharma" or the CDC, FDA, AMA etc controls all of these journals, but that simply isn't true.  In fact, there are dozens of journals from other nations far, far outside any perceived influence of the American government.  In fact, The Lancet did in fact publish Wakefield's MMR "study" where it remained for years before his fraud was finally discovered, so that just goes to show that respected journals will in fact publish information which is contrary to popular opinion.

Other medical journals have published numerous articles which have called into question knowledge which was previously accepted, and that is the entire point of continuing to study medical and scientific issues.  Doctors, scientists, and researchers are continually improving upon established treatments and they are continually learning new things about the human body, which is why we see thousands of studies and articles published each and ever year many of which expand upon or even correct existing knowledge.  Nobody is trying to suppress such knowledge, but they do require studies to be peer-reviewed and the results must be able to be replicated by others, which explains why so much of the garbage found within Medical Veritas could never be published in a true medical journal.

But hey - you can purchase all 10 issues of Medical Veritas for only $700 - and for that kind of money you are guaranteed more medical conspiracy theories than you can shake a stick at.  If you would rather just flush your money down the toilet (which would likely offer you just as much scientific information as an entire collection of Medical Veritas issues), you could also just send them a donation via a link on their homepage. Actually I take that back... flushing your toilet would at least offer you a visual display of fluid dynamics, so that is actually more scientific information than you would receive by reading Medical Veritas. 

It seems the quacks finally realized since they couldn't be bothered to actually perform double-blind clinical trials or to produce peer-reviewed science it was much easier to just rewrite the rules of scientific publication and invent their own journal.  That is sort of like getting turned down from a few dozen different publishers for your book and then starting your own printing company.  Then when you print a few copies of your book you can run around and tell others you are a "published author".  If only it were that easy.

How far will these people stoop in order to sell a few nutritional supplements, some newsletters, or a few books?  It is not only disappointing, but it is downright disgusting, and the editors and contributors to "Medical Veritas" should be ashamed of themselves for attempting to circumvent the system for their own selfish interests.  If you have legitimate peer-reviewed science to publish there are countless journals who would love to have it, but if you have to resort to rewriting the rules of publication just so you can play... all you have done is show that you are incapable of meeting the qualifications for legitimate publication. 

That is really no better than collecting all of the medical conspiracies you can and posting them on your own personal website as if that somehow adds credibility to them.  Then when someone challenges your claim on an issue, you don't refer to a legitimate medical journal or peer-reviewed study, but rather point them to your personal website where you have collected a vast assortment of unscientific nonsense as if quantity somehow suggests quality.  Unfortunately for the editors and publishers of Medical Veritas, it just doesn't work like that.  Real science can stand on its own merits and doesn't need to bend the rules in order to be proven or accepted as fact.

The Real Victims

Mr. Shiny Shorts (NOT a victim)

I was thinking about innocent victims the other day and it seems very clear that vaccination conspiracy theorists like Mr Hubbs don't really care about others.  They would rather get their way regardless of how much science and evidence exists that prove that vaccines do far, far more good than harm.  They could care less about the millions of lives saved by vaccines, or the millions of humans who are protected from contracting diseases each and every year.

One only has to examine the published data from the World Health Organization (WHO) to clearly see those countries who have the highest rates of vaccination have a much lower infant mortality rates than those counties who have much lower vaccination rates.  Case in point, if you were to compare the US, Sweden, and Norway with countries like Niger, Nigeria, and Somalia here is what you would find:

United States:
Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 7
Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 8

Sweden:
Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 2
Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 3

Norway:
Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 3
Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 4

Chad:
Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births):  124
Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 live births):  209

Nigeria:
Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 96
Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 186

Somalia:
Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 119
Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 live births): 200

Obviously vaccines are not the only determining factor when it comes to infant mortality.  There are other factors such as access to clean water and quality medical care as well as adequate supplies of food.  However if you examine the numbers you will find a direct correlation between vaccinations and child mortality rates regardless of these other factors.

If you really take the time to examine the numbers - no matter what countries you examine, the trends are clear.  Those countries who vaccinate the greatest portion of their population have fewer children dying while those countries who have not had as much success in vaccinating their populations have many more children dying each and every year from preventable diseases like measles (which according to the 2008 figures killed 164,000 people globally).

Think of that - 164,000 people dying from a disease we have a known and proven vaccine to prevent.  450 deaths every single day simply because our vaccination rates are not where they need to be worldwide.  However there is some good news - measles vaccination programs have reduced deaths 78% from 2000 to 2008 worldwide.  Those are indisputable facts and prove that higher vaccination rates lead to fewer deaths, yet people like Lowell Hubbs still refuse to accept these facts and act as if the WHO, UNICEF, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Red Cross, and dozens of other agencies are all in on some vast conspiracy to push vaccines for the sake of personal profit.

Perhaps even more shocking than the number of children who die from measles is the number of children who contract measles but don't die.  It is estimated that between 1%- 5% of those children with measles die from complications from the disease, which tells us that 95%-99% recover and live.  That equates to over 16,000,000 children who contract measles each and ever year.  That is 16 million children that have to suffer in pain while their bodies fight against the virus.  Apparently in the mind of a vaccine conspiracy theorist like Lowell Hubbs, 16 million children suffering for two to three weeks is much better than those same 16 million children receiving a single dose of the measles vaccine.

So let me ask: Are those 164,000 children who die from the measles the true victims, or is it the children who receive vaccines in countries such as the US?  Is it the millions of other children who contracted measles but didn't die, or is it people like Lowell Hubbs who pretend to understand issues of medicine even though he has never set foot in a research lab or taken so much as a remedial biology or immunology course in any college or university worldwide?

It seems clear when you really examine the facts, people like Mr. Hubbs don't care about these people at all.  They might claim to care and they might pretend that what drives their insanity is a desire to protect others, but the truth is Mr. Hubbs and his ilk are only interested in one thing and one thing alone.  They wish to ban all vaccines - and by doing so they wish to prevent people from making informed decisions on their own. 

The antivaxxers would be more than happy to see millions of children die each and ever year if it meant there were no vaccines, because in their minds vaccines are responsible for autism.  Aside from the fact that is zero scientific evidence to support this theory, and although there never has been any scientific evidence to support such a theory,  even if it were true antivaxxers like Mr. Hubbs would have us believe millions of dead children are better than a few thousand with autism, even though the vast majority of children who fall within the autism spectrum go on to lead relatively normal or near-normal lives.

Yea that makes sense.  Sounds like a great trade off... provided you or your children aren't the ones suffering.  These types are arguments are always easy for the antivaxxers to make when they realize they have already been vaccinated so they are safe from the diseases they wish to push onto the world's populace.

With all of this said, there is another smaller group who suffers negative impacts from anything and everything Mr. Hubbs stands for, and that group includes other people who just so happen to share the name "Lowell Hubbs".  Imagine sharing a name with a prolific vaccination conspiracy theorist who spends dozens upon dozens of hours each and every week writing on blogs and forums and websites and discussion groups all about various conspiracy theories. 

Imaging interviewing for a job only to have the potential employer type your name into Google and see all of this quackery associated with your name.  Imagine people emailing you or calling you and asking if you are the nutcase on the Internet who believes all vaccines are harmful or that science should be determined based upon wild theory or fabricated evidence or perhaps even nothing more than a strong opinion?

There are a lot of victims here, but I dare say anyone who shares the name Lowell Hubbs is harmed (at least on an emotional and psychological level) as much as anyone who has ever suffered from a disease treated or eradicated by a vaccine.

But Lowell Kevin Hubbs from Sioux Falls, South Dakota doesn't care about anyone else.  He merely cares about himself and meeting his goal of convincing the rest of the world to believe what he believes.  Because in the mind of a crazed conspiracy theorist, collateral damage or side effects imposed upon others just doesn't matter.  The end goal is a complete and total eradication of anything and everything related to vaccinations - innocent victims and anyone else who gets in the way be damned.

Journal: Study Linking Vaccine to Autism Was Fraud

I'm not sure we have room for any additional nails in this coffin, and I have covered this story in the past here and here, but once again we find yet another study which proves that Andrew Wakefield and his fabricated science is nothing short of blatant fraud.

Read on:

Journal: Study linking vaccine to autism was fraud

LONDON – The first study to link a childhood vaccine to autism was based on doctored information about the children involved, according to a new report on the widely discredited research.

The conclusions of the 1998 paper by Andrew Wakefield and colleagues was renounced by 10 of its 13 authors and later retracted by the medical journal Lancet, where it was published. Still, the suggestion the MMR shot was connected to autism spooked parents worldwide and immunization rates for measles, mumps and rubella have never fully recovered.

A new examination found, by comparing the reported diagnoses in the paper to hospital records, that Wakefield and colleagues altered facts about patients in their study.

The analysis, by British journalist Brian Deer, found that despite the claim in Wakefield's paper that the 12 children studied were normal until they had the MMR shot, five had previously documented developmental problems. Deer also found that all the cases were somehow misrepresented when he compared data from medical records and the children's parents.Wakefield could not be reached for comment despite repeated calls and requests to the publisher of his recent book, which claims there is a connection between vaccines and autism that has been ignored by the medical establishment. Wakefield now lives in the U.S. where he enjoys a vocal following including celebrity supporters like Jenny McCarthy.

Deer's article was paid for by the Sunday Times of London and Britain's Channel 4 television network. It was published online Thursday in the medical journal, BMJ.

In an accompanying editorial, BMJ editor Fiona Godlee and colleagues called Wakefield's study "an elaborate fraud." They said Wakefield's work in other journals should be examined to see if it should be retracted.

Last May, Wakefield was stripped of his right to practice medicine in Britain. Many other published studies have shown no connection between the MMR vaccination and autism.

But measles has surged since Wakefield's paper was published and there are sporadic outbreaks in Europe and the U.S. In 2008, measles was deemed endemic in England and Wales.

Online: http://www.bmj.com

Now there are a few very key facts related to this story that bear repeating.  First, we know now - 13 years after this study was originally published, that Wakefield's science was not only shoddy, but outright fraudulent.  That said, it should not come as a surprise to anyone to learn that vaccine conspiracy theorists like Mr. Hubbs are still professing Wakefield's innocence and claiming the original study was accurate.  They claim Wakefield's conclusions were sound and that he is merely being picked on for daring to question the medical establishment.

However, as time has shown us, even though the rates of MMR vaccination have dropped significantly since Wakefield originally perpetuated his fraud onto the innocent public, the rates of autism have gone relatively unchanged.  In fact according to recent data, rates of autism have actually INCREASED during this period which is the exact inverse of what Wakefield, Mr. Hubbs, and all other anti-vaxxers would want us to believe.

However, during this same period of time we have seen numerous outbreaks of measles.  The World Health Organization (WHO), has stated that more than 20 million people worldwide are affected by measles each year and it is the single leading cause of vaccine-preventable deaths among young children, resulting in 164,000 deaths globally in 2008.  Therefore, by publishing his fraudulent study, Andrew Wakefield has actually led to increase risk, and thus increased number of deaths, of children that are no longer being vaccinated. 

Thankfully Wakefield's fraud has had very little impact within the US, therefore for the most part due to the continual usage of the MMR vaccine within our population, we have not seen major outbreaks across the nation.  However in the United Kingdom where people followed Wakefield's work more closely (and where his study effectively went unchallenged the first few years after publication), they have actually witnessed outbreaks in both England and Wales. There was also the first measles related deathreported in the UK in over 14 years, and it was due to a young boy being unprotected from the measles virus because he did not receive the MMR vaccine. 

So even though we have not witnessed a decrease in the rates of autism (as Wakefield would have us believe would be the case with fewer children receiving the MMR vaccine) we have seen outbreaks of measles which have been proven to lead to death.  The lesson we can take from this is that not only do the actions of the anti-vaxxers not actually solve the autism issue, but in fact they lead to higher rates of viral infections which can result in pain, long-term side effects, and even loss of life.

So what does Mr. Hubbs think of all this?  Well according to his most recent statements, and in spite of the mountain of evidence which has proven Wakefield to be nothing short of a charlatan, Mr. Hubbs still supports Wakefield 100% and even continues to post information about Wakefield's study on his silly website.  In fact, Mr. Hubbs has even signed an online letter of support for Wakefield and he continues to make excuses in a vain attempt to paint Wakefield as the victim.

Sorry Mr. Hubbs, but the real victims are those children who are now suffering due to their parents (unsubstantiated) fears of having autistic children which due in large part to the fraud that is one Andrew Wakefield, led them to bypass the proven safety which comes along with the MMR vaccine.  The real victims are those 164,000 humans who die each year from measles which equates to 450 deaths each and every day or 18 deaths every hour! 

Wakefield himself is not and has never been a victim, but the damage he has done will last decades, and for that we have no one to blame other than Wakefield himself and his loyal troop of ignorant followers such as Mr. Hubbs who overlook science and instead believe this is all some vast conspiracy to protect profits of the drug companies.

Is it any wonder that Mr. Hubbs and his fellow anti-vaxxers have never been able to come up with one single peer-reviewed study which has proven there is even a remote link between autism and the MMR vaccine?  They have a lot of excuses, but at the end of the day they are still left with zero science.

So this leads us to the next point - the fact that Wakefield actually doctored information and altered facts about his patients.  Wakefield even went so far as to make claims about these children which have now been proven to be factually incorrect such as his claim that the children were "normal" prior to receiving the MMR vaccine (whereas in reality at least five of the 12 children referenced had documented developmental problems).

This is the type of person that Mr. Hubbs considers to be an expert... a man which has been proven to falsify data, to manipulate findings, to change information, to distort historical fact, and even one who engaged in unethical behavior by paying children at a birthday party $5 to take samples of their blood.  This is a man who has had his license to practice medicine revoked, his studies retracted, and who has been found of numerous ethical violations and professional misconduct.

The problem here is that Mr. Hubbs' standard list of excuses won't work here.  The fact is Wakefield did originally publish his work, so the conspiracy theory employed by Mr. Hubbs that nobody is ever allowed to publish work which calls into question actions taken by drug companies, "big pharma", or mainstream medicine has been proven to be factually incorrect.

Even though the study has since been proven to be nothing more than a fraud, the simple truth is for over a decade Wakefield's study was published and available, which proves that anyone can publish a study if they actually take the time to perform the research (or in Wakefield's case take the time to fabricate and manipulate the research).  This minor fact seems to go a long way to call into question why Mr. Hubbs' other laundry list of "experts" have never bothered to publish any of their nonsense, but that is an issue we have addressed previously (and likely will do so again in the future).

Another common excuse from the convoluted mind of Mr. Hubbs is that drug companies or medical agencies such as the CDC, FDA, or AMA seek to destroy anyone who dares speak out against them.  However, once again we see this excuse has more holes in it than a box of Cheerios.  First, the particular article cited above was paid for not by a drug company nor a medical agency, but actually by a newspaper (the Sunday Times of London) as well as a television channel (Britain's Channel 4).  Thus unless Mr. Hubbs wishes to add investigative journalists and media outlets to his list of people who are in on this vast conspiracy, there really isn't anything to this one.

The facts continue to pile up against Wakefield, and against conspiracy theorists like Mr. Hubbs, although perhaps the most damning statements and admission of guilt comes from Mr. Hubbs himself:

"noone [sic] said anything about that the [...] studies PROVED a vaccine link to autism.” ~Lowell Hubbs

Therein lies the problem.  While Mr. Hubbs is out there attempting to defend snakeoil salesman and ethically challenged "experts", he ignores the true goal of science which is to find proof.  This all just goes to show that in a mind of a conspiracy theorist it isn't important to determine fact or to discover the truth.  No - in the mind of a conspiracy theorist the one and only true goal is to challenge authority and deny reality.

Is it any wonder why anti-vaxxers like Mr. Hubbs can never be taken seriously?