MMR and autism: evidence of scientific fraud

In 1998, Andrew Wakefield and colleagues published a paper in the medical journal, Lancet, which triggered a major public health scare, linking autism to the MMR (measles mumps rubella) vaccine. Wakefield's research has since been widely criticised on both scientific and ethical grounds. Many of his co-authors have disassociated themselves from the research and last year the paper was retracted, meaning that the editors of the Lancet no longer considered it worthy of publication. But still vaccination rates have fallen, measles cases in particular have skyrocketed, and children have died as a result.

Measles: Not a stroll in the park

Earlier this week, the British Medical Journal published an article by journalist, Brian Deer, who painstakingly cross-checked the descriptions of the 12 children presented in the 1998 paper with the children's health records and correspondences between the research team and other health professionals.

Deer demonstrates that all 12 children were systematically misrepresented by Wakefield et al to give the misleading impression of a close temporal association between administration of the MMR and the onset of regressive autism in previously healthy children.


The article includes a summary, which is pasted below:

The Lancet paper was a case series of 12 child patients; it reported a proposed “new syndrome” of enterocolitis and regressive autism and associated this with MMR as an “apparent precipitating event.” But in fact:
  • Three of nine children reported with regressive autism did not have autism diagnosed at all. Only one child clearly had regressive autism
  • Despite the paper claiming that all 12 children were “previously normal,” five had documented pre-existing developmental concerns
  • Some children were reported to have experienced first behavioural symptoms within days of MMR, but the records documented these as starting some months after vaccination
  • In nine cases, unremarkable colonic histopathology results—noting no or minimal fluctuations in inflammatory cell populations—were changed after a medical school “research review” to “non-specific colitis
  • The parents of eight children were reported as blaming MMR, but 11 families made this allegation at the hospital. The exclusion of three allegations—all giving times to onset of problems in months—helped to create the appearance of a 14 day temporal link
  • Patients were recruited through anti-MMR campaigners, and the study was commissioned and funded for planned litigation

I'm a cognitive scientist. I do research on how kids with autism think and how their brains work. I'm not an immunologist and I'm not an epidemiologist, so I don't really have anything to add to the autism-MMR "debate" that hasn't already been said a million times.

But what I will say is this. If you've stumbled upon this blog looking for information about autism and you have concerns about vaccines, I'd urge you to read the Deer article in the British Medical Journal. I'd also urge you to remember that vaccines save children's lives. The science there is beyond any doubt.

Links:

  • For comprehensive coverage, I highly recommend the LeftBrainRightBrain website.
  • Liz Ditz has compiled an exhaustive list of responses to the Deer article.