Vaaxed Article Highly Misleading

M. Dennis Paul, PhD, in the following contribution takes to task the author of an earlier piece on the topic of vaccinations. M. Dennis Paul is a retired Counselor and ADR Specialist with 30 years practice; 12 of which in direct work with Autistic children. He is also a lifelong activist who has worked with the BPP, WU and other groups of the 60's and 70's, has composed articles and cartoons for underground papers of that era and more recently for and his own blog, rebel.lio. He also edits articles for, and maintains the excellent blog of, International Human Rights Attorney, Stanley L. Cohen... Caged but Undaunted

Why the Case Presented by Rowan Clarke Regarding Vaxxed (Pensive Quill Aug 29, 2017) is Highly Misleading

With considerable disapprobation, having read through Rowan Clarke's severely misinformed editorial regarding the controversial film “VAXXED”, I find myself responding to clear up much of his espoused nonsense.

I reject, based upon his comments, the claim that he viewed this film with an open mind and that he has any genuine knowledge of the issues it presents.

To begin, he states the film is centered around the “anti-vaccination movement” and that it's writer is the “progenitor of the anti-vaccine phenomenon”. Had he any knowledge of anti-vaccine movements, he would have acknowledged their existence since the time of Jenner (1796). I can assure that Wakefield et al are not that old... though some have retired. This movement began in response to fears and concerns about small-pox vaccination and, as important, compulsory vaccination. VAXXED is hardly “centered” around any movement beyond that which seeks the following (from the Producer's own statement):

1. That Congress subpoena Dr. William Thompson and investigate the CDC fraud.
2. That Congress repeal the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and hold manufacturers liable for injury caused by their vaccines.
3. That 3 separate, univalent vaccines for measles, mumps, and rubella be made available immediately.
4. That all vaccines be classified as pharmaceutical drugs and tested accordingly.

Dr. William Thompson is a whistleblower at CDC who disclosed that the CDC both lied about MMR study results and went so far as to destroy documentation. Due to increasing reports of vaccine injury, disability and death, Congress passed an industry protection bill limiting, and ending (in some instances) liability by the manufacturers. The title of the bill is markedly deceptive. Far from being “anti-vaccine”, both Dr's Wakefield and Thompson fully support vaccination in the prevention of disease. Common sense dictates that there be a rational and reasonable oversight of vaccines and vaccine production. Further, it is essential that new and ongoing research be conducted and protected and that scientific concerns regarding formulae, potential underlying and unobserved concomitant weaknesses in immunity, as well diseases, be more cautiously studied and reported, that timing and scheduling of vaccines be more cautiously regarded and, among numerous other cautions, issues with live component vaccines be more thoroughly studied and reported upon.

I strongly urge parents to study the very real and potentially disastrous direct and side effects of any drug the place inside their, or their children's, bodies. Many, if not most, reactions to vaccines are inflammatory... effecting major organs... especially the brain. The layman might not associate such reactions as breathing difficulty, shaking, etc. with the brain. They are, however, deeply connected.

It is also exceptionally important to know, as in the case of flu vaccines, how effective any current offering might be. Year after year, the CDC reports the overall ineffectiveness of the previous season's vaccine which means millions of dollars wasted and millions of people misled into believing they were protected. (There is only one way to accurately test the effectiveness of a vaccine, any vaccine. It is by challenging every individual inoculated with the antigen for which it was designed. This is never done which leaves widely disparate formulae for statistical rendering of effectiveness).

I have been wearing an elephant talisman for 60+ years and have yet to be harmed by an elephant.. Therefore, the elephant talisman affords a consistent 100% protection. Of course, I was only challenged once by the presence of a caged elephant while visiting a zoo as a child. He took a peanut from my hand.

Mr. Rowan goes on to claim that Dr. Wakefield (having earned his degrees, he is fully entitled to be called “Doctor” regardless of any intended slights by Mr. Rowan and others) claimed there was “...a link between the MMR vaccine and Autism”. This is inaccurate and misleading. Dr. Wakefield et al conducted an initial study to see if they could find a link between MMR, bowel disorders and Autism based on observations related to presenting symptoms post inoculation. That is what studies are for. Researchers see a possible link, investigate it through studies and report on their findings... most often with conclusions that offer recommendations for further studies.

None of the authors of the study stated that there was a causal link between the MMR and Autism. It appeared there may well be some connection but all the participants knew the study, as small as it was, would prove inconclusive yet might point them, and others, in directions which might either prove or disprove this hypothesis. I suggest that Mr. Rowan gain some understanding of what “hypothesis” means. What Doctor Wakefield acknowledged on his own, was that he, personally, could not disregard the close relationship between time of inoculation and disease symptoms and, compared to studies of effect from mono-inoculation, could not stand behind the MMR at that time. Far from being “anti-vax”, he was cautiously recommending a return to a known, safer, method.

First, do no harm

Mr. Rowan continues that Dr. Wakefield was found to have acted unethically with other charges levied against him. Neglecting to relate any of his comments to the co-author (lead) of the study, Dr. John Walker-Smith, who was also wrongly discredited for the same charges and subsequently exonerated is another instance of misleading readers. By association, Dr. Wakefield, the 2nd researcher/author, is technically also exonerated. However, by law, Dr. Wakefield would need to personally challenge his case to receive the same official result. At the time, he could not afford to do so as he was not funded for appeal by his carrier. Dr. Walker-Smith was covered. If one reads the appeal findings, it becomes clear that the authors were singled out by a single journalist who, it becomes apparent, was inaccurate and largely incorrect in his interpretations of medical reports.

The BMJ has stood by this journalist despite his own recession from statements made and continues to ignore that not only this journalist, but BMJ itself, are compromised by association either financially (through advertising and grants) or through administration (Murdoch Publications, whose owner sits on GMC boards as well reliant on Pharmaceutical advertising) with the manufacturers of vaccines.. including MMR. BMJ and this journalist have consistently accused Dr. Wakefield of fraud. He has never been charged with fraud and were he to be charged, Dr. Walker-Smith would also have been so charged. The false allegations have lead to further false allegations and the myths about the study and Dr. Wakefield have been played and replayed throughout the largely Pharma reliant media... and resurface whenever the topic of vaccines and autism arise. Again, I strongly urge all to investigate the effects, direct and indirect, of vaccines and to take a close look at the MMR. At the same time, look at the accepted defining symptoms of autism and other forms of PDD. It is difficult to dismiss the seeming correlations in need of much further investigation. (BMJ often displays seemingly absurd studies such as this.)

Further, the depth of false allegations against Dr. Wakefield extend to blaming him for a decrease in vaccinations in the UK. No such decrease occurred as people initially took Dr. Wakefield's opinion for a return to mono-vaccines to heart and did so... thus the vaccination rates did not, as claimed, drop precipitously upon the publication of the MMR study. It was, in fact, a later act of the UK which made the mono-vaccines unavailable and that lead to a drop in rates. The linked video also offers Dr. Wakefield's response to false allegations regarding financial gains resulting from his work on the study.

I suggest that Mr. Rowan also research the history of false claims against doctors and researchers throughout history and the resultant damage to reputations such false claims produced. Beriberi, SMON, scurvy and pellagra immediately come to mind. Were it not for the tenacity of such doctors and researchers, we would still be in the dark ages of these conditions.

It is notable that Mr. Rowan claims debunking and disreputation of facts presented in VAXXED yet apparently had watched something else as he did not realize the film was centered on a CDC whistleblower, apparently did not know that the researchers on the study, the doctor at the center of the film and Dr. Wakefield are not anti-vaxxers. He also made no effort to name any of the professionals whom he follows behind.

As his casket was lowered into the cruel earth, all his wife could recall was the practitioners words as she and her husband left his clinic. “Trust me... I'm a doctor”. Cures are not determined by edict. They are discovered through inquiry.

What many are as yet unaware... and perhaps shall remain so... is that communicable diseases have cycles of growth and recession which are entirely natural... no proven links being providable through belief in vaccines. It has been claimed that polio was eradicated, small-pox, and other diseases, by vaccine. I direct the reader, and Mr. Rowan, to the following from an old friend, Jon Rappoport . Mind Boggling FDA Confession About Small-Pox Vaccine. Variably, vaccines are, by their manufacturers and by researchers, NIH, CDC, WHO, considered viable in 30 to 70% of those inoculated... and the duration of effect varies from person to person. It is therefor impossible to make any claim to 100% eradication of an antigen. Further, it is well known that live vaccines, once injected into a body, can be communicated to surrounding susceptible bodies and that injectees can, and do, come down with symptoms of the disease for which they were inoculated. Things to consider.

Mr. Rowan continues his missive with ramblings about his personal experience with autism and I feel for him. Having 12 years of providing counseling, therapy and care for Autistic children, I do know the ups and downs quite well.

From there, he selects a few supporters of anti-vax groups in Ireland and the UK. I ask if there were more reputable and noteworthy proponents that were purposely not listed. Still, this is not really about anti-vaxxers but about rational vaxxers. Those who believe the “professionals” Mr. Rowan believes vs. those who question the timing, formulation and scheduling of vaccines... such as Dr. Thompson, Dr. Walker-Smith and Dr. Wakefield.

From this point, Mr. Rowan delves into alternative treatment. Many, I will agree, are bollocks. However, Mr. Rowan, had he a background in science or medicine, would be aware that chelation is a widely used and approved therapy for the removal of heavy metals from the human body. It's most common use is for removing lead in heavily exposed children and adults. It is also used to remove a myriad of heavy metals from machinists who inadvertently consume sizable amounts through handling lubricants used in machining. It involves the injection of a synthetic amino acid into the blood stream. Other uses are controversial only in that there are differing schools of though as to how it acts in the body. Many, many people attest to its efficacy and their well being post treatment. Vaccines have, variably, as components, forms of aluminum and mercury which are questionable with regard to vaccine damage. The concern increases as ever greater clusters of inoculations occur and combination vaccines come into market.

Bleaching is a very bad idea which evolved from a good one. Food grade peroxide has been used with no ill effect for generations Neutrophils in the body produce hydrogen peroxide as a first line of defense against infection and disease. The MMS “bleach” sold by hucksters should be removed from the market place. There are numerous other therapies that have been tried and rejected over the years with regard to autism. It is a strong caveat to do the research before trying anything.

With regard to Mr. Rowan's fear message about a return of TB, TB vaccines are not required in the US due to overall ineffectiveness in the population. BCG vaccine has a claimed effect against meningitis and disseminated TB in 20% of children. Further, in children who do become infected, it is said to prevent roughly half from developing the disease. It is not proven to prevent primary infection and, more importantly, does not prevent reactivation of latent pulmonary infection, the principal source of bacillary spread in the community. Like most diseases, TB tends to disappear as environments for living improve. Bernard, from whom Pasteur stole most of his work, understood that “it is not the germ but rather the terrain”.

The remainder of Mr. Rowan's missive I will disregard as it is extraneous babble in my honest opinion. I may be a bit harsh in presenting my rebuttal but it is not my intention to belittle Mr' Rowan. I do wish him to see that he is vastly unqualified and unknowledgeable in too may areas to go on the attack of someone who rightly questions science and conducts appropriate research to help move the discussions forward. The doctor under attack for purportedly being an anti-vaxxer and a fraud is the exact opposite. It is dishonest and irresponsible to present such claims absent any genuine comprehension of the subject(s) or the nature of science and research. I sincerely hope Mr. Rowan will truly open his mind and understand the errors of his perceptions and claims. Perpetuation of myths and other forms of misinformation, intentional or otherwise, is a disservice to everyone.


  1. Dr William Thompson is a 'whistleblower', really?

    The CDC did NOT lie about any MMR study..

    Here's the findings of a respected Science blog..

    1, No raw data was deleted or destroyed.

    2, There was a correlation between MMR vaccination and autism in a single small subgroup in DeStefano et al that DID NOT HOLD UP TO FURTHER ANALYSIS. It was not reported.
    Even Thompson doesn’t argue that this initially detected race effect means that the MMR vaccine increases the risk of autism in African-American boys!
    On the other hand, these are public statements. WHEN THOMPSON THINKS NO ONE IS LISTENING, he does imply that these race effects are important and potentially significant, as he did in his telephone discussions with Brian Hooker-the autism caused by vax proponent!

    3,Thompson clearly had problems playing well with others and likely wasn’t able to articulate his concerns well enough to convince his co-authors. He also apparently had anger management issues and difficulty dealing with stress, leading to his paid administrative leave in 2004.

    4,Thompson was in contact with antivaccinationists as far back as 2004! Why? It’s understandable why he was in contact with Sallie Bernard, given that she had been placed on the committee overseeing one of his studies. It’s less understandable why he was apparently in contact with Andrew Wakefield and Brian Hooker? Why was this? Did he do a Wakefield and have a vested financial interest in monovax's before going public with claims combined vax caused Autism?

    He may not be anti-vaccine but he sure as hell could pick better friends to hang about with than those who are Autism caused by combined shot proponents, especially ones that recorded him without his knowledge!

    I could go on and on about Thompson, Hooker, Wakefield and all the anti-vax cranks and their hangers-on but all of the crap espoused by Denis above regarding Dr Thompson has been throughly debunked. If anybody can be bothered to analysis how and why Thompson is incorrect, wrong and quite frankly just making stuff up please feel free to read the following blogpost.

  2. Wakefield is no longer a doctor, he was cut loose by the General Medical Council in Britain, which is not something take lightly or to try explain away as a difference in opinion.

    He committed fraud to try justify his baseless claims, of which the evidence was overwhelming, and created one of the most dangerous medical hysterias in modern medical history of which the ramifications are still being felt globally.

    He is a disgraced doctor of the worst kind and is the originator of this now completely debunked and maligned conspiracy theory,

    That is a fact, and to base an entire campaign based on such a fighure and his claims give it no credibility

  3. Steve R... Seriously? A respected science blog? An "author" who will not use his own name? No references? And then the utter nonsense and repeated falsehoods you add as if with some authority. You are simply just another individual who knows nothing about science, nothing about Thompson, Wakefield, Walker-Smith, Pasteur, Bernard, Jenner and a host of others who dared to question dictated "reality". You may as well have cited a comic book. Next!

    DubladdyD7....Wakefield remains a doctor. His degrees were not taken away... only a license to practice. The statement about this in my article is correct, regardless of any spin you wish to apply. "debunked and maligned"? And same old unsubstantiated nonsense as above. A mind is a terrible thing to waste... and a waste is a terrible thing to mind==F. Zappa Next!

    M. Dennis Paul

  4. together with other progress in medicine over the last century (more or less) vaccinations have helped debilitate many diseases and combat infant mortality and morbidity.
    Worldwide smallpox is a historical memory - let's hope polio and TB go the same way.
    Our children no longer risk death due to diphtheria, men no longer risk sterility due to adult onset mumps and children no longer risk deformities due to the mother being infected with german measles (rubella) during pregnancy
    The advantages of vaccinations for the general population vastly outweigh any disadvantages.

  5. Steve R said



    Trying to spin Pasteur in the same league as Thompson or Wakefield is laughable, I highly suggest you do a little research before you get the hump with those pointing out the truth rather than wacky conspiracy theories.

    Not a fan of the scienceblogs but a fan of discredited quacks?

    Here's the well referenced and researched snopes insert for this utter bollocks.

    "On 24 August 2014 a CNN iReport claiming intentional suppression of data relating to 340% increased risk of autism among specific populations of African-American boys following MMR vaccinations went viral. The story seemed to disappear mysteriously, further fueling the notion that an intentional coverup was underway.

    The idea that vaccines lead to autism is not a new conspiracy theory, nor is it a particularly uncommon one. A now heavily discredited study published in the medical

    journal Lancet in 1998 planted a seed of fear about vaccine safety; and despite efforts to counteract the widespread concern among worried parents, public health officials continue to encounter growing public resistance to vaccination. And the CNN iReport in question was based on a video which featured William Thompson, a senior researcher at the CDC, seemly “confessing” to anti-vaccinationist Brian Hooker about a coverup at the CDC and included material such as a claim by Dr. Andrew Wakefield (who in 1998 published a fraudulent research paper claiming a link between MMR vaccine and the appearance of autism and has since been barred from practicing medicine in the UK) asserting that the results of a study proving a link between autism and MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccinations had been “hidden” by the CDC:

    The claim being put forward in the video is that earlier MMR vaccination is associated with an increased risk of autism in African-American boys and that the CDC has spent the last 13 years covering this linkage up. These charges are based the result of a “reanalysis” by Brian Hooker in Translational Neurodegeneration entitled “Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination timing and autism among young african american boys: a reanalysis of CDC data.” The study which has been “reanalyzed” is from a study by DeStefano et al in 2004 published in Pediatrics entitled “Age at first measles-mumps-rubella vaccination in children with autism and school-matched control subjects: a population-based study in metropolitan Atlanta.”


  6. P/2

    That study was a case-control study in which age at first MMR vaccination was compared between autistic “cases” and neurotypical controls. Vaccination data were abstracted from immunization forms required for school entry, and records of children who were born in Georgia were linked to Georgia birth certificates for information on maternal and birth factors.

    The second iReport published on 22 August 2014 explicitly claimed that the CDC had been involved in an intentional coverup:

    William W. Thompson, PhD, Senior Scientist with the CDC has stepped forward and admitted the 2004 paper entitled “Age at first measles-mumps-rubella vaccination in children with autism and school-matched control subjects: a population-based study in metropolitan Atlanta,” which has been used repeatedly by the CDC to deny the MMR-autism connection, was a fraud.

    Dr. Thompson has admitted the 340% increase in boys receiving the MMR vaccine “on time,” as opposed to delayed, was buried by himself, Dr. DeStefano, Dr. Bhasin, Dr. Yeargin-Allsopp, and Dr. Boyle … Dr. Thompson first called and spoke with Dr. Brian Hooker, who then revealed the information to Dr. Andrew Wakefield and the Autism Media Channel.

    On 27 August, Thompson released a statement via law firm Morgan Verkamp, LLC, confirming that he had spoken with Dr. Brian Hooker and that he had “omitted statistically significant information” from his study. Titled “STATEMENT OF WILLIAM W. THOMPSON, Ph.D., REGARDING THE 2004 ARTICLE EXAMINING THE POSSIBILITY OF A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MMR VACCINE AND AUTISM,” Thompson’s statement began:

    I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.
    I want to be absolutely clear that I believe vaccines have saved and continue to save countless lives. I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefits.

    What got lost in the brouhaha over Dr. Thompson’s “confession,” allegations about a “cover-up” at the CDC, and threats of whistleblower lawsuits was what should have been the main point: Did collected data actually prove that the MMR vaccine produces a 340% increased risk of autism in African-American boys? The answer is no, it did not.

  7. Steve R said


    On 27 August 2014, Dr. Hooker’s article published in the journal Translational Neurodegeneration that concluded “African American males receiving the MMR vaccine prior to 24 months of age or 36 months of age are more likely to receive an autism diagnosis” was removed from public domain due to issues of conflict of interest and the questionable validity of its methods:

    The Editor and Publisher regretfully retract the article as there were undeclared competing interests on the part of the author which compromised the peer review process. Furthermore, post-publication peer review raised concerns about the validity of the methods and statistical analysis, therefore the Editors no longer have confidence in the soundness of the findings.

    The CDC issued a statement regarding the data in question, with instructions for accessing the study at the center of the controversy. As the CDC noted, the authors of that study suggested that the most likely explanation for the moderate correlation between autism and vaccination in young children was the existence of immunization requirements for autistic children enrolled in special education preschool programs:

    Access to the information on the birth certificates allowed researchers to assess more complete information on race as well as other important characteristics, including possible risk factors for autism such as the child’s birth weight, mother’s age, and education. This information was not available for the children without birth certificates; hence CDC study did not present data by race on black, white, or other race children from the whole study sample. It presented the results on black and white/other race children from the group with birth certificates.

    The study looked at different age groups: children vaccinated by 18 months, 24 months, and 36 months. The findings revealed that vaccination between 24 and 36 months was slightly more common among children with autism, and that association was strongest among children 3-5 years of age. The authors reported this finding was most likely a result of immunization requirements for preschool special education program attendance in children with autism.

    For a thorough analysis of the flaws and misinformation associated with the current CDC autism “cover-up” conspiracy theory, we recommend the posts on the subject at ScienceBlogs, which note of the claim at the heart of this matter (i.e, allegedly suppressed proof of a 340% increased risk of autism in African-American boys after MMR vaccination) that:

    Vaccination data were abstracted from immunization forms required for school entry, and records of children who were born in Georgia were linked to Georgia birth certificates for information on maternal and birth factors. Basically, no significant associations were found between the age cutoffs examined and the risk of autism. I note that, even in the “reanalysis” by Brian Hooker, there still isn’t any such correlation for children who are not African American boys.

  8. Steve R said


    So is Hooker’s result valid? Was there really a 3.36-fold increased risk for autism in African-American males who received MMR vaccination before the age of 36 months in this dataset? Hooker [performed] multiple subset analyses, which, of course, are prone to false positives. As we say, if you slice and dice the evidence more and more finely, eventually you will find apparent correlations that might or might not be real. In this case, I doubt Hooker’s correlation is real.

    There’s no biologically plausible reason why there would be an effect observed in African-Americans but no other race and, more specifically than that, in African-American males. In the discussion, Hooker does a bunch of handwaving about lower vitamin D levels and the like in African American boys, but there really isn’t a biologically plausible mechanism to account for his observation, suggesting that it’s probably spurious. There are multiple other studies, many much larger than this one, that failed to find a correlation between MMR and autism.

    What [Hooker] has done, apparently, is found grist for a perfect conspiracy theory to demonize the CDC, play the race card in a truly despicable fashion, and cast fear, uncertainty, and doubt about the CDC vaccination program, knowing that most of the white antivaccine activists who support [him] hate the CDC so much that they won’t notice that even Hooker’s reanalysis doesn’t support their belief that vaccines caused the autism in their children.

    Quite interesting reading, and one completely at odds with the buffoonery you are espousing Denis. Have a look at the original snopes insert for the hyperlinks to the actual sources, not simply believe some wacky conspiracy theory propagated by a self-confessed liar!

  9. Just returned to see if any intelligent comments have surfaced. Unfortunately all that appears is more wishful thinking and inability to comprehend research studies from Steve R. Snopes is neither a scientific endeavor nor is it particularly reliable in its assessments from a lay perspective. To claim there are no "biologically plausible reasons" for observations of effects within a subset of boys, absent any references, is hardly evidence for anything. Steve R's "evidence" actually falls in on itself if carefully read and understood. What could Thompson possibly gain by exposing his own part in suppressing data? It appears that Steve has need for a race card to denigrate genuine research that does not agree with his naive background in science. I suggest he again attempt reading my original piece as he seems quite unable to comprehend that Wakefield, who could, if elected, return to the UK and have his license restated, that Wakefield et al are not "anti-vaxxers", that none of them ever claimed anything more than a researchable connection between the MMR and bowel disorders... as well as autism. Despite claims of "thorough debunking", no research has either proved nor disproved the observations as empirically settled. Therefore, more research is advisable.. and absent any "vaxxer" or "anti-vaxxer" conspiracy bias.

  10. to steve r... Are you aware of the variations of MHC in different racial groups and how this might have effect on reaction to antigen/formulae introduction in any group? Have you ever asked a researcher why young groups of a black population are more desirable for certain studies... particularly those that require a greater genetic profile to study? Please do not insinuate negative racial bias into an argument where none exists beyond your own.

  11. Al Anon,

    More bullshit. I refuse to engage with someone who tries to insinuate a racist connotation to myself in a pathetic attempt to avoid the obvious and suppress argument. The fact remains Thompson's method wasn't up to scratch and he fell into personal difficulties and listened to Hooker and Wakefield , two known vested interest anti-vaxxers.

    There is a colossal amount of data and studies done over the past few decades alone, showing the effectiveness of the vaccine. While you and your cohorts are left trying to argue over one discredited anomaly in the flawed method of Thompson.

    Good luck with that.

  12. To steve r... To continue with the false narrative insisting these gentlemen are "anti-vaxxers" when they have publicly stated and demonstrated otherwise... in fact, evidencing there adherence to belief in the efficacy of vaccination... belies personal intention to distort reality, on your part, or an inability to comprehend reality... again, on your part. I remind that it was you who tossed in the race card. I am left to assume that you have no awareness of the preferability, in research, for study of the oldest genetic background on the planet nor any awareness of MHC in the study of vaccines. I am reminded of the argyle socked, suspender and headband wearing Monty Python character exclaiming that his brain hurts. Seriously, steve... Why would you expect the claim that Wakefield had a vested interest in a mono vaccine, and publicly suggest that parents opt for mono vaccines... all the while being some conspiracy laden "anti-vaxxer"... could stand up to the minimum of scrutiny? Why would you expect people to believe your claims of a "colossal amount of data" when you clearly fail to cite any... never mind an ability to comprehend data? It is time to run away, steve r. Run away... run away!