Dr. Andrew Wakefield reveals real story behind vaccines, autism and more

Dr. Andrew Wakefield reveals real story behind vaccines, autism and more







(NaturalNews) In an interview on The Robert Scott Bell Show, Dr. Andrew
Wakefield talks about vaccines and autism, the MMR vaccine, the General Medical Council's
case against John Walker Smith and many other important issues
pertaining to vaccines. Also discussed is the story of Patti Finn, a New
York attorney who was attacked viscously by her own professions simply
for offering people informed consent and working on the
unconstitutionality of the lack of vaccine exemptions in her State.

Robert Scott Bell: The autism community came together, we had a
great event, they were supporting you and raising some funds for your
legal efforts to go after the British Medical Journal, Brian Deer, etc. and now we're learning of some tremendous news. This week after the expo, your co-author on the Lancet MMR paper, Professor John Walker Smith was exonerated, won a legal appeal.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: Absolutely, in the High Court in the UK,
the long awaited outcome of John Walker Smith's appeal. People who
don't know, John Walker Smith is one of the founding fathers of
pediatric gastroenterology in the world, he is an outstanding physician
and very, very well respected and a leader in the field, a teacher of
so many of today's young pediatric gastroenterologists. Back in 1998 we
published in the Lancet on the discovery of a new bowel disease
in children with autism and an association in time that the parents
had made with MMR vaccine and for that, for those efforts, he was in an
effort I think to get me to stop vaccine safety research, to send a
message to everybody else, he lost his medical license along with me.
He was allowed to appeal, I couldn't afford to but he was funded to
appeal and he was completely and utterly exonerated in the high court.
The judge issued a resounding condemnation of, I think in legal terms,
at least in my opinion, the way in which the General Medical Council's
case was handled. Asking why would a man of this caliber even consider
taking a risk in effect. That's my reading of the opinion, but you
know some of the criticisms of the GMC were very, very harsh and it may
interest the readers- here you may think that there would be experts
in research and experts in pediatric gastroenterology and child
psychiatry sitting on the panel to judge this doctor, but there
weren't. There were two lay people, one general practitioner with no
experience in research, and rather than having a child psychiatrist
they had an adult psychiatrist and rather than having a pediatrician
they had a geriatrician. So right from the outset you can see how
flawed the process was.

Robert Scott Bell: Oh, tremendously so and you know the right to
a fair and speedy trial is supposedly available to us here in America,
of course there's a lot of doubt about that but talking about how many
years this took, even with the support and funding he had that you did
not have to finally achieve this victory.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: Yeah in 2004 the allegations were first made by Brian Deer. A complaint was filed by him to the General Medical Council.
No patient, no parent ever, ever complained against any of the doctors
concerned. In fact, they have been universally supportive and have in
many cases been turning out in support at the various hearings that
have taken place. So it's a perverse situation where you have a
journalist making a complaint against doctors where the parents and the
patients have been treated well and really are very, very supportive.

Robert Scott Bell: Incredibly so, many of the parents actually
ended up on video on YouTube in support of both you and in this case
the release of this information that finally came out that exonerated
him, that is Professor Walker Smith. Though, you're right in saying
that, that it's really a kind of strange notion that a reporter can
file a complaint like this when no patients had and in fact, quite the
opposite. The support for both of you and everybody involved has been
tremendous from the parent community.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: That's right, and the case really essentially was the General Medical Council's
case is that he was performing experimental research on children that
was inappropriate, that the tests were not indicated, and that this was
an ethical violation. Now, here you have a journalist telling the
world's leading pediatric gastroenterologist the test he's ordered on
children to establish the source of their gastrointestinal symptoms, for
example, is inappropriate. How bizarre a situation is that? Deer has
no medical or scientific training whatsoever, and Professor Walker
Smith's case and my case indeed has been that this was done for
clinical purposes, this was to understand the origins of the suffering
of these children and to alleviate it and that's what was achieved and
in the process a novel, apparently novel inflammatory bowel disease was
discovered and the tragedy, Robert, now is that we've spent all these
years fighting this battle when the time could've been spent so much
better, actually caring for these children and getting them better and
that's very, very sad.

Robert Scott Bell: And preventing further incidents and the
saddest of all the ironies here is that he makes an accusation that you
guys were experimenting improperly on children, which is nonsense in
my opinion from what I've seen as well, yet the very practice of
vaccination he's defending could be argued, I'd say much more
legitimately so, to be a massive experiment upon the general pediatric
population. Based on the fact that I don't know that they've
identified, or let's say tested any one or two or ten vaccines together
in the way that they're often giving them now in sequence, very
frequently, sometimes together or right after one another.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: Yes, I think that the tests of the triple
vaccines such as MMR are inadequate. There have never been any safety
studies of giving two doses and yet that is now almost universal
practice in the developed world, but that's never, ever been subjected
to a safety study. And as you say, some children are now receiving
nine, ten vaccines on the same day. That has never, ever been subjected
to any kind of scrutiny by the FDA or anyone else. How can that
possible adopted into common clinical practice and not be negligent?

Robert Scott Bell: Yeah and I've watched this over the years
with our own CDC here in the states, promoting each year with more
excitement and fear, the annual influenza, I call it the flu shot
season rather than flu season. Without experiments as far as safety,
much less efficacy, they just throw this thing out there. And now there
are studies and papers, in fact I covered one yesterday, talking about
different aspects of primary immunity, cell-mediated immunity where
they're now acknowledging the things that homeopaths and these natural
doctors and clinicians have been saying, hey listen the antibody's not
all that you say it is. It isn't even in many cases necessary for
prevention of disease. There's so much more to the immune system that
is active, rather than passively relying on, oh we've identified it
because we have an antibody present, which is the whole basis for
vaccine-ology.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: I think you're quite right. There is so
much that we do not know. We don't even know what's in the vaccines.
That was exemplified by the recent discovery of the porcine circovirus
DNA and the rotavirus vaccines- really most alarming and absolutely no
basis for complacency whatsoever, and then when this kind of study
comes along and turns on its head our understanding of how we think
vaccines work, then we must realize that we know very, very little.

Robert Scott Bell: And that's a frightening proposition on many
levels, but it's also one that if you're more invested in ego than
science, you would defend almost to the death and attack those who
would point out hey, you know, what about this? I don't think we looked
at this and rather than as a true scientist, which you have done, you
have embraced that, that is what real science is, embracing what these
discoveries and observations are and digging deeper into them, they
pretty much tried to shut down any genuine scientific inquiry into
these vaccines, which begs the question of who is profiting from the
continual non-science involved in promoting the agenda?

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: I think that there is a huge gap in our
understanding of vaccine safety, and yet we have an industry that is
indemnified, doesn't carry any risk, any liability for vaccine damage.
So why would you do the safety studies? This is what they've done,
they've taken shortcuts, they've not done the safety studies that are
necessary. And well now, children I believe are now paying a
considerable price for that.

Robert Scott Bell: Oh a huge price, absolutely huge price. I
referenced a little bit of my own history of vaccine injury early on,
back in the 1960s or early '70s and how it's kind of stimulated thought
for me later on, how in fact I've been dealing with- children and
adults, even adults into their 70's, working with certain natural
techniques to address some of the injuries that occurred even in
childhood. That's not accepted as we know by the old guard of the
pharmaceutical-industrial complex, but the doctors I talk to that are
medically oriented are embracing the information, or at least being
inquisitive about it, which is what the whole pursuit of science is
supposed to be.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: I think there is an increasing degree of
unrest and uncertainty in the mainstream medical profession. Firstly
they say, why hasn't this gone away if it was all fraud or false or
just coincidence, why are we still having this debate about vaccines
and autism 15, 16 years later? And the answer is, of course, because
it's real and the parent's stories are entirely valid. So that's why it
hasn't gone away, not because of me or you or anyone else. It simply
hasn't gone away because people have seen with their own eyes what
happened to their children, to the people in their community, on their
street, in their church and they know. They trust their instincts and
they are not persuaded by the science or the quasi-science that has
gone to try and reassure them. So it's not going to go away until
people address the issues properly and deal with it, and are honest and
transparent with the public.

Robert Scott Bell: Yes, and if we see the positive thing, you
know we start out today talking about your colleague John Walker Smith,
how do we anticipate or can we anticipate something to support your
efforts should you even want to be reinstated there? I don't even know
what you're looking to do in that area, but certainly it was a great
injustice that they did what they did to you. But now that one of your
co-authors has been found to be completely exonerated, is this
something that could help you in your efforts?

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: that's a very interesting point Robert. Is
there a merit to try and get back on the medical registry in the
United Kingdom? I don't anticipate practicing medicine in the UK again.
My home is in Austin, Texas and that's where I intend to stay and
fight this fight. But it's something on which I'll be taking legal
advice and I'll let you know.

Robert Scott Bell: Well great. Keep me up to date on that.
Anything we can do to support you. In fact, we're going to be
interviewing Patti Finn, who's a New York attorney who has been
attacked viscously by her own professions simply for pointing out that
in the state of New York and in West Virginia she actually worked on
the unconstitutionality of the fact that there were no exemptions
really unless you got a medical exemption for vaccines in that state-
though in New York I believe you have philosophical or specifically
religious exemptions, but the simple act of communicating that to
parents even though it's in the constitution, it's in the statutes
there, that was deemed unethical and somehow immoral.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: Isn't that incredible? Isn't that
absolutely extraordinary that a lawyer offering people what is in fact
informed consent, the risks and benefits of vaccines and the option to
forego vaccination on behalf of your children is deemed to be unethical
by her. That is extraordinary. Of course, there is a big move not to
disclose the true extent of vaccine injury to parents on the basis that
their children may then not be vaccinated. But if a vaccine adverse
reaction occurs, then those parents are going to completely distrust
the system from there on in. They're going to tell their friends and
relatives and so it spreads. So this lack of transparency, this lack of
honesty is not only totally unethical, but leads to the downfall of
public health vaccination programs in itself.

Robert Scott Bell: Isn't that- yeah, that's another irony of
this. If they were just forthcoming and honest about this they might
have more compliance so to speak. I don't like the term compliance
because it indicates the use of force in many cases or deception, but
their own reluctance to investigate these things is causing more
suspicion than would have occurred had they embraced it and looked at
it.

Robert Scott Bell: We're back, Dr. Andrew Wakefield is with us
again, and so grateful to have you on board. In fact, it was so
heartening to see you last weekend at the Health Freedom Expo and how
you were embraced and respected and thanked, whereas much of your old
family, if I could call it that, that artificial family of modern
medicine back in Britain or other areas in the old media if you will,
has looked at you with great disdain and basically strewn you to the
ash heap. I'm glad you're not there anymore and recognizing that there
are a whole group of people out here that really respect and appreciate
what you're doing.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: It was a great meeting, what a wonderful
group of people the health freedom people are. I mean I met a few of
them down here in Texas but to get together at such a huge venue and
particularly George Noory's panel, that was most exciting. Some very
interesting people.

Robert Scott Bell: Very fascinating what's happening there and
the bridges that are being made. I want to say a shout out to Tim Bolen
for helping bring it all together, it was a lot of work behind the
scenes because so much of the battles we've fought in the health
freedom community are mirrored in what you're going through with the
so-called autism community and I think the alignment is very powerful,
and even if not everyone agrees with everybody on everything, the thing
is there's a great deal of respect. You know, Mark and David Geier,
brilliant doctors and scientists and they have a different perspective
on some things, but they were embraced a couple of years back I
thought, and I've interviewed them before and I respect them immensely
for standing up for real science in this regard. And so, there are
places that people can go that may not be let's say embraced by that
which is the old powers, the old media, big government, big pharma
complex, but there's a lot more out there that is very encouraging to
see.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: Yes, may I echo your thanks to Tim Bolen
for putting it together. That was a wonderful move on his part and Mark
and David have done some wonderful work. They've kept publishing
through thick and thin on the issue of thimerosal in particular, its
role in the autism epidemic and they've done a wonderful job. We're
collaborating with them now on a separate study which seeks to look at
this, so it's great to see them still very much in the hunt.

Robert Scott Bell: They're not backing down, like the Tom Petty
song, I won't back down. We're seeing more courageous stands against
the so-called monsters that are out there. Where we used to cower in
fear, I'm just talking in general terms, now people are having the
courage of their convictions as they identify it and as I said, if they
attack the moms for standing up and acknowledging what they saw in
their own children, that would ultimately be their downfall. And we've
seen the rise of the warrior moms and now the warrior dads on this
issue to where they could've attacked certain doctors, etc, because of
your license, they pull your license, but moms don't have or need a
license. And you can't deny what they've seen, and their attacks are
now coming back to haunt them.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: Well I think they've completely misunderestimated - I think that was a George Bushism, wasn't it-

Robert Scott Bell: That was a good George Bushism! Well, now that you're in Texas, I guess it could be excused.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: That they've underestimated the mothers,
who are formidable. What a formidable force, and far more frightening
in many respects than the CDC or the pharmaceutical industry. They know
what happened to their children, they're not going to be put off,
they're not going to back down from this fight and they are a
tremendous inspiration. So much of what I've understood, what I know
now about autism and the gut-brain link and the immune system link and
detoxification and so on has come from parental insights and not,
sadly, from any insights from the medical profession or scientists.
That is instructive in itself. Therefore when they say this is what
happened to my child in the face of a vaccine, we have to take that
extremely seriously.

Robert Scott Bell: Very much so. And I'm encouraged to see that
yesterday, this is research that was published in the online journal
Immunity, well I think it's also a published journal or printed, but Immunity by Cell Press,
so it isn't that there's no science being done but that often it
doesn't make the front page of the paper or CNN doesn't cover it or who
else has interviewed- even George Stephanopoulos, I remember he
interviewed you on this, he'll likely not give much coverage to the fact
that you're cohort in the paper was exonerated in this way. And so you
find that if it ends up being a footnote, it's something- we can't
rely upon the old media. That's why we have the new media, that's why
we have natural news with Mike Adams, that's why we have the Robert
Scott Bell show, Alex Jones and others that are putting this out there.
George Noory in his own way overnight on Coast to Coast, getting
information out that is not normally brought out in such a way, and
it's embraced, not marginalized, ridiculed and basically thrown off
into a corner somewhere.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: That's right, I hope to be talking to Mike
Adams and Alex Jones soon on this particular issue. It is a very, very
sad time when the mainstream is constrained, first by example by the
head of HHS, saying do not give the other side of this debate equal air
time. Do not give it consideration. They actually said this, and so it
will not be covered, the other side will not be covered and then, on
the other hand, just carrying the public relations message forward of
the CDC and the pharmaceutical industry and saying, for example, that
the mercury-autism debate is over when 74 percent plus of the studies
that have been published support a link. That is the facts of the
matter, that is the science behind it, and yet the public is being told
that the science is in, it's all over, there's no problem, not to
worry. No. The public have been deceived time and again, so it is a
blessing that we have no an alternative media that doesn't need to
pander to its sponsors.

Robert Scott Bell: Well that's true, and the first amendment is
alive and well despite the attempts to squash it out and the fires of
liberty are burning brightly here and there and with you and in that
Cell journal, Immunity, talking about the immune system has two main
branches, innate immunity and adaptive immunity. I mean, the simple act
of acknowledging that is almost revolutionary. When they say, oh wait,
maybe it isn't the antibody that is all that we need, so there's a lot
of good things coming out. I know you gotta go take care of your wife
so I don't want to hold you any longer, but I'm so appreciative of your
willingness to stand up and do the right thing. Of course you know you
have an open door here. As things continue, we'll monitor not only
that lawsuit but other events that are coming out to empower parents
and children everywhere not only to get well and to stay well, but also
to prevent themselves from being harmed by that which is patently
unscientific and quite dangerous.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: Robert thank you very much, it's great to talk to you again.

Robert Scott Bell: Dr. Wakefield, real quick before you go, give out the website for the justice fund for those who want to support your efforts.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: Thank you very much, it's the DrWakefieldJusticeFund.org

Robert Scott Bell:And we have the links up at
RobertScottBell.com to get directly to that should you want to support
all the good works that are happening here because there are many
so-called fronts on this to simply bring out the facts and allow people
to have the freedom to chose which direction they want to go. We're
not trying to force anybody into anything, and that's why I respect you
immensely, Dr. Wakefield.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield: Thank you so much.

Source for this transcription: http://www.naturalnewsradio.com