Wow. Just wow.

[andygates]

Usually my "wow, just wow" posts are some piece of nature's grandeur or some head-bending bit of physics.  This time, not so much, unless you count awe at the sheer scale of the damage done if Wakefield's old and oft-disproved MMR-autism work was actually faked. 

Being wrong is one thing; being wrong and sticking to your wrong guns is another; perpetrating bogisity right from the start, scaring responsible parents from proven safe jabs and being pivotal in the whole distrust-the-scientists-they're-trying-to-poison-you tinfoil hat bollocks?  That's chutzpah on a whole new level. 

Wow.  Just wow.

Comments

[ravenbait.livejournal.com]

'kin hell.

[simoneck.livejournal.com]

It's sort of shocking that no-one else has investigated those 12 cases in more detail before now, considering the seriousness of the situation that it created.

[andygates.livejournal.com]

I think the assumption was that he was simply wrong - all the supplementary work disproved it, after all. As the article says, there were some suspicions.

Where on the "do no harm" scale does "scaring people away from vaccines" score, I wonder?

[jonnycowbells.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure it's the first time I've heard this stuff - sure I read it, particularly the parts about families admitting that symptoms were apparent before the jab, on the science museum website a couple of years ago.

There is a special place in my people-I hate-list for Wakefield. If he got convicted of murder I wouldn't think it was unreasonable.

[estaratshirai.livejournal.com]

Typically, I like not to wish eternal torment on anyone. It is more difficult on some days than others.

[andygates.livejournal.com]

Nah, but a long and disfiguring punishment beating sounds about fair.

[jonnycowbells.livejournal.com]

Btw, popbitch just pointed me at this:

http://tinyurl.com/al3xku

You could spend a good few (slightly depressing) hours/days reading through all the associated links and comments. It depressed me just how many ignorant comments were made on the Times website after they ran with the story, but they're as nothing compared to some of the views espoused by the host on the original radio show.