Andrew Wakefield is a former British doctor who became widely known for his research paper published in 1998, which claimed a possible link between the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine and autism.

His work, along with subsequent media coverage, fuelled a growing critique of vaccines and led to a significant decline in vaccination rates in some countries.

More specifically, in 1998, he and his team published the study in The Lancet, which involved 12 children and found evidence of a new syndrome involving gastrointestinal and developmental issues in children who received the MMR vaccine.

Vaccines are snake oil

However, it’s important to note that the study did not actually prove a causal relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism.

Nevertheless, Andrew was obliterated by the pharmaceutical establishment.

The Lancet retracted his paper in 2010, citing ethical concerns, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and flawed methodology.

The scientific consensus overwhelmingly rejects any link between the MMR vaccine and autism.

That said, consensus is not science.

Consensus, in simple terms, refers to a general agreement or shared opinion among a group of people. Science relies on empirical evidence, rigorous testing, and the application of the scientific method to understand and explain the natural world. Consensus, on the other hand, can be influenced by various factors such as social dynamics, personal biases, and external pressures, which may not always align with objective scientific truths.

Scientific validity is not determined by the number of people who agree on a particular idea or concept, but rather by the evidence and logical reasoning supporting it.

Therefore, what the consensus is, surrounding Andrew’s work, is irrelevant.

Comments are closed.