Dr. Andy Wakefield

Dr. Mercola Interviews Dr. Andrew Wakefield

April 10, 2010

Why Medical Authorities Went to Such Extremes to Silence Dr. Andrew Wakefield

[2010 April] Andrew Wakefield Interview by Dr Mercola

Mumps in this country, in the U.S. the CDC did a study. When Maurice Hillerman went from Merck, the head of vaccines at Merck went to the CDC… I have a mumps vaccine; I would like you to use it. They did a study and they said there is no need. Mumps is a trivial disease in children; we do not need this vaccine. Exactly the same happened in the UK. The Department of Health, the Medicines Control Agency, the regulators in the UK said, this is a trivial disease in children. We do not need a mumps vaccine. But it got in. ....So you have effectively taken a trivial disease and by vaccinating, you have turned it into a more dangerous disease. Now, they are in a real mess. They are in a real mess because one dose of MMR doesn't prevent it. Two doses of MMR don't prevent it; three doses. You are creating a population that is dependent upon reboosting with vaccines for the rest of their lives to avoid this complication, a man-made complication.....There was incompetence. They were incompetent. They were so zealous. So urgently needed to get this vaccine into the market that they ignored the potential problems and now we have a big, big problem. Mumps vaccine is a dangerous vaccine. It does not work.

Coming down to the issue of giving it (Hepatitis B vaccine) on day one of life, there are several issues that surround that. The first is when we did this primate study giving that hepatitis B vaccine on day one. We looked for the safety studies of that policy. What had been done to establish the safety of giving it on day one? Not just giving it on day one but giving it on day one to every infant whether they were born at 24 weeks or 30 weeks or 36 weeks or 40 weeks, whatever their gestational…their birth weight was, whether they were 10 lbs or 3 lbs or 2 lbs, they were getting the same shot at day one as a matter of policy. Safety studies… We couldn't find them. And that was really shocking, really shocking. How could this be? If you're going to make a case for it, if you're going to do it, your'e going to make it a matter of policy for every kid in the country then you'e got to be absolutely certain that you got the safety set that is right because if not, you may produce insidious problems, minor degrees of damage which you don't pick up straight away but are catastrophic.

The word informed consent is an oxymoron. To be able to give informed consent, you have to have the information to give. If the safety information does not exist, you‟re not in a position to give that information. So the process of informed consent never gets out of the starting blocks.


For those of you who have swallowed this type of reporting hook line and sinker, here is a list of 28 studies from around the world that support Dr. Wakefield’s controversial findings:

  1. The Journal of Pediatrics November 1999; 135(5):559-63
  2. The Journal of Pediatrics 2000; 138(3): 366-372
  3. Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003; 23(6): 504-517
  4. Journal of Neuroimmunology 2005  
  5. Brain, Behavior and Immunity 1993; 7: 97-103
  6. Pediatric Neurology 2003; 28(4): 1-3
  7. Neuropsychobiology 2005; 51:77-85
  8. The Journal of Pediatrics May 2005;146(5):605-10 
  9. Autism Insights 2009; 1: 1-11
  10. Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology February 2009; 23(2): 95-98
  11. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry 2009:21(3): 148-161
  12. Journal of Child Neurology June 29, 2009; 000:1-6 
  13. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders March 2009;39(3):405-13 
  14. Medical Hypotheses August 1998;51:133-144.
  15. Journal of Child Neurology July 2000; ;15(7):429-35
  16. Lancet. 1972;2:883–884.
  17. Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia January-March 1971;1:48-62
  18. Journal of Pediatrics March 2001;138:366-372
  19. Molecular Psychiatry 2002;7:375-382. 
  20. American Journal of Gastroenterolgy April 2004;598-605.
  21. Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003;23:504-517.
  22. Neuroimmunology April 2006;173(1-2):126-34.
  23. Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol Biol. Psychiatry December 30 2006;30:1472-1477.
  24. Clinical Infectious Diseases September 1 2002;35(Suppl 1):S6-S16 
  25. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2004;70(11):6459-6465 
  26. Journal of Medical Microbiology October 2005;54:987-991
  27. Archivos venezolanos de puericultura y pediatría 2006; Vol 69 (1): 19-25.
  28. Gastroenterology. 2005:128 (Suppl 2);Abstract-303