Andrew Wakefield's Latest Legal Action: Roundup

Andy Wakefield, the infamous UK physician struck off for the "callous disregard" with which he treated his child patients, has filed a defamation suit against The British Medical Journal, UK journalist Brian Deer, and the BMJ's editor, Fiona Godlee.  A copy of the complaint can be read here: http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/01/04/BritMedJ.pdf.  The litigation was filed January 3, 2012.  

As I often do, I'm keeping a running list of posts discussing the litigation.  I will be updating it silently as time passes.

Discussions of the litigation from folk who regard Wakefield as a discredited former physician:

• 1/4/12: SkepticalLawyer at Skeptical Lawyer: Wakefield Sues British Authors and Publishers for Libel--In Texas
• 1/4/12: Ken at Popehat: Andrew Wakefield Sues BMJ and Brian Deer Time to Test Texas's New Anti-SLAPP Statute 
• 1/4/12: Seth Mnookin at The Panic Virus: It Really Is Bizarro Day: Andrew Wakefield Sues Brian Deer, BMJ
• 1/4/12: JABS Loonies Andrew Wakefield to Make an Arse of Himself by Trying to Sue Brian Deer, BMJ, Fiona Godlee
• 1/5/12: Sullivan at LeftBrain/RightBrain: Andrew Wakefield Takes to the Courts Again
• 1/5/12: Orac at Respectful Insolence: Legal Thuggery, Anti-Vaccine Edition
• 1/5/12: Orac at Respectful Insolence: Legal Thuggery Pt. 2: An Interesting Connection
• 1/5/12: Idoubtit at Doubtful News Wakefield Sues Deer et al. for libel in the US.
• 1/5/12: Stephen R. Latham at A Blog on Bioethics Wakefield Sues BMJ for Defamation
• 1/5/12 Phillip at Dub i nGal Streisand Effect Again
• 1/5/12 Evan Mascagni at the Public Participation Project Andrew Wakefield Sues BMJ for Claiming MMR Study was Fraudulent
• 1/5/12 Autism Mum at Autism Mum Wakefield's Back
• 1/5/12 OneClick Group Andrew Wakefield Is This A Rich Texan Publicity Stunt?
• Ophelia Benson at Butterflies and Wheels Reputation, Iago
• 1/6/12 Orac at Respectful Insolence Legal Thuggery Pt. 3
• 1/6/12 PZ Myers at Pharyngula Andrew Wakefield Lashes Out
• 1/6/12 Eric Berger at The SciGuy (Houston Chronicle Blogs) Andrew Wakefield, the autism and vaccines guy, files suit in Travis County
• 1/6/12 Sullivan at LeftBrainRightBrain British Medical Journal Instructs Lawyers to "Defend the Claim Vigorously" against Andrew Wakefield's lawsuit
• 1/6/12 Forum at ASD Friendly Wakefield Rises from the Dead
• 1/7/12 Kristina Chew at Care2 Causes Wakefield Sues British Journal for Defamation in Texas
• 1/7/12 SkepticHampster at SkepticHampster The Reputation of Fakefield
• 1/9/12 Lisa Falkenberg at the Houston Chronicle: Feelings aren't the only thing hurt by research
• 1/10/12 Rachel Rivest Dunbar at Somewhat Reasonable (Heartland Institute) If the facts don't fit, you must acquit
• 1/11/12 Orac at Respectful Insolence The anti-vaccine crankosphere rallies round its hero, and Brian Deer strikes back

Discussions of the litigation from folk who regard Wakefield as a maligned hero:

• 1/5/12 Autism Action Network: Andrew Wakefield files defamation suit against British Medical Journal, Brian Deer and Fiona Godley (sic)
• 1/5/12 AEFountain at A Mother and Son's Journey What I Know for Sure
• 1/5/12 Louise Kuo Habakus at Facebook Andrew Wakefield Files Suit
• 1/6/12 Age of Autism posted the first six paragraphs of Ian Sample's Guardian article; the  comments are expression of support.  (Note: comments at Age of Autism are heavily moderated). 
• 1/7/12 Gaia Health BMJ Focuses on Science Fraud, but Is Their Own Exposed By Wakefield Suit?
• 1/8/12 Aware and Prepare Andrew Wakefield Sues British Medical Journal and British Journals Over Defamation
• 1/10/12 Editors at Age of Autism: It's a New Year and Andrew Wakefield is Fighting Back
• 1/10/12 Editors at Age of Autism Autism Parents Respond to Dr. Andrew Wakefield's Libel Writ Against the British Medical Journal
• 1/10/12 The Andrew Wakefield Justice Fund
• 1/12/12 Ethan A. Huff at The Natural News: Dr. Andrew Wakefield Sues BMJ, journalist Brian Deer, for Defamation
• 1/12/12 NWQFK at From Hell To Veins Dr. Wakefield Files Defamation Suit

News Reports:

• 1/5/12: Ian Sample at The Guardian (UK) Andrew Wakefield sues BMJ for claiming MMR study was fraudulent
• 1/5/12 Sara Reardon at ScienceInsider Author of Discredited Vaccine-Autism Report Sues for Libel
• 1/6/12 John Gever at MedPage Today Doctor Who Claimed Vaccine-Autism Link Sues Critics
• 1/6/12 Andy Coughlan at Short Sharp Science (New Science blog) Doctor linking MMR and autism sues critics
• 1/6/12 Kim LaCapria at the Inquisitr Andrew Wakefield Sues BMJ for Discrediting MMR Autism Study
• 1/6/12 Jennifer Chait at Inhabitots Wakefield who Claimed the Vaccine-Autism Connection Sues His Critics
• 1/6/12 Elizabeth Landau at The Chart (CNN Health) Embattled Autism Study Author sues medical journal for defamation
• 1/6/12 Mary Anne Roser at the Austin Statesman Doctor who did autism research in Austin sues British medical journal, writers
• Alison Frankel at On the Case (Thomson Reuters) Libel suit over autism-vaccine link lands in Texas

 

Background:

Anderson Cooper Interviews Andrew Wakefield

Comments

[Ken]

Even the pro-Wakefield Guardian's summary makes him sound obviously wrong.

[Maddy]

Just a quick thought. My dusty brain reminds me that the best defense is truth - however, proving someone was 'callous' sounds like 'intent' which could be a bit more problematical. I'm sure the legal eagles will have a better take on this than me.

[Chris]

Maddy, the term "callous" was used by the UK's General Medical Council in their ruling striking Wakefield off of their medical register. Search for it here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25983372/FACTS-WWSM-280110-Final-Complete-Corrected

Here is where it is used:
The Panel accepts that the children were not persuaded togive blood by being offered money first.
iv. you showed a callous disregard for the distress and pain that you knew or ought to have known the children involved might suffer,
Found proved
The Panel is satisfied by your evidence that the children were “paid for their discomfort”(day 67p23), which it concluded was evidence of a callous disregard.
v. in the circumstances you abused your position of trust asva medical practitioner,
Found proved on the basis of the above findings.

[looking glass]

A Few Facts.

Many decisions to remove licences to practice by the GMC are regularly overturned by a High Court of Appeal in London. Prof.John Walker-Smith´s case is being presented in the High Courts next month.

Wakefield and Walker-Smith are still hugely respected in the UK. They are men of high personal and professional integrity.

The GMC is a tool of the UK Government´s Health Department. It´s actions are politically motivated.

Wakefield did not "lose" any previous litigation brought against Brian Deer and Channel 4 in the UK. The case he brought was never heard, it was frozen on Judge´s advice due to the timing of the GMC tribunal. He had no option but to drop the case.

[AEFountain]

YOu have so kindly posted a link to my opinion regarding Dr. Wakefield's recent lawsuit again Brian Deer, BMJ and Dr. Goodlee. I would ask that you kindly reconsider the accusation of me regarding Dr. Wakefield as a 'maligned hero'. Your statement would imply I feel that is what he is, and I don't. I view him as a pioneer in looking for the cause to our children's suffering, which is more than any doctor I have seen in 18 years. I see Dr. Wakefield as a catalyst to investigating further the causes, as I do David Suzuki, who is getting the word out there that we must do more for this epidemic.

[Liz Ditz]

From commenter Anataeus Feldspar at RI

The GMC was already initiating an investigation of Wakefield as early as February 2004. Wakefield was the one who initiated his legal action in January 2005, nearly a year later. If Wakefield knew that he could not handle the GMC proceedings and the libel proceedings at the same time, why did he arrange for exactly that?

[Anarchic Teapot]

I find it hard to understand why a disgraced, struck-off medic would want to bring a libel suit when his chances of winning are practically inexistent, if the court looks at the facts.

I can only assume this is a cynical attempt to raise his PR profile so that he can get more paid gigs as an after-dinner speaker and antivax conference guest star.

Jerk.

[Anarchic Teapot]

@looking glass
Wakefield's "integrity" is not a fact, it is your opinion. The fact that he inflicted unnecessary and invasive procedures on vulnerable children and falsified test results to obtain what he wanted suggests that your opinion is wrong.

While it is right that the GMC's decisions should be reversible by a higher authority, that does not mean the GMC does what it likes and is always wrong. The first two cases I turned up were overturned on a legal quibble, which one could argue is not in the best interests of patients or medicine.

[Chris]

AEFountain:

I view him as a pioneer in looking for the cause to our children's suffering, which is more than any doctor I have seen in 18 years.

Interesting. Do you know if he has seen children as a clinician in Texas at any time? He was never qualified in the UK as a pediatric clinician, and not even as a medical doctor in the USA. I think the Texas Medical Board would be very interested if he has seen children as patients.

By the way, his "research" consisted of only twelve children, and actually did not bring up any real issues on a vaccine that had been safely used since 1971. He had absolutely no data to support his statements on the use of single vaccines.

He also did not take up an offer by the Royal Free to continue the research with a larger sample size. It was eventually done by Dr. Brent Taylor. Do you know what the conclusions are in the papers (all done before 2004) by Dr. Taylor?

Here is a hint:
Autism and Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Vaccine: No Epidemiological Evidence for a Causal Association.
Taylor B et al.
Lancet 1999;353 (9169):2026-9
*Subjects: 498 children with autism

Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Vaccination and Bowel Problems or Developmental Regression in Children with Autism: Population Study.
Taylor B et al.
BMJ 2002; 324(7334):393-6
*Subjects: 278 children with core autism and 195 with atypical autism

(did you notice that the sample sizes were much more than a mere dozen?)

[looking glass]

Another important link for the supporters of Wakefield.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/01/dr-wakefield-sues-brian-deer-and-bmjs-fiona-godlee.html#comments

[looking glass]

Reply to Anarchic Teapot. Indeed my comment as to the reputations and integrity of these men is Opinion, I should have added "before a certain hack journalist in the pay of the Murdoch family was instructed to target a smear campaign against them with the intent to destroy both men´s reputation". My error.

See my link above to the site AgeofAutism.com for further reading under the maligned hero section. Very informative and factual.

[Liz]

Re Age of Autism comments: for some reason, only comments dated 1/8/12 (today) are showing up. I know I saw previous favorable comments.

[Chris]

looking glass:

I should have added "before a certain hack journalist in the pay of the Murdoch family was instructed to target a smear campaign against them with the intent to destroy both men´s reputation"

What about those who came along before Mr. Deer, like Dr. Taylor?

[looking glass]

Reply to Liz
Try this link. it is better.

http://www.ageofautism.com/dr-andrew-wakefield/ for the section maligned hero.

[Broken Link]

http://www.chron.com/default/article/Falkenberg-Feelings-aren-t-only-thing-hurt-by-2451724.php

Another good article from the Houston Chronicle

[Anarchic Teapot]

@looking glass

AgeofAutism.com for further reading ... Very informative and factual.

*headdesk*
Then again, someone who blithely posts libellous comments about a professional journalist probably isn't very good at spotting a seething cauldron of conspiracy wingnuttery.

[Maria]

Funny!AoA is foonlwilg the book's Amazon status like it's a World Cup final. Tweeting each time it jumps up. Can't wait to see the tweet: "He's #2!!!!!!!"

[Clancy]

O. M. G.And the ralely scary part is that it will probably work. I cannot understand how anyone with an IQ of over 2 can be taken in by Wakefield and Jenny McCarthy, but clearly they are. And even scarier is when people you know, who you thought understood, make comments indicating that they are harboring some of these same idiot beliefs. Sigh.