MMR doctor Andrew Wakefield 'abused his position of trust'

**brianp** · 28th January 2010, 03:33 PM

The GMC has determined that MMR doctor Andrew Wakefield 'abused his position of trust':

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...S&attr=2015164

**Matt** · 28th January 2010, 03:43 PM

This is taking its time. They've been investigating him for years, it's been established that he acted unethically in numerous ways. He lied and faked results for personal gain. Only now do they announce that they've concluded he's a very bad man but we still have to wait to see if they'll strike him from the Medical Register.

**Pebble** · 28th January 2010, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by Matt

This is taking its time. They've been investigating him for years, it's been established that he acted unethically in numerous ways. He lied and faked results for personal gain. Only now do they announce that they've concluded he's a very bad man but we still have to wait to see if they'll strike him from the Medical Register.

"The allegations against me and against my colleagues are both unfounded and unjust — I repeated unfounded and unjust — and I invite anyone to examine the contents of these proceedings and come to their own conclusion."

I see that the process is not leading to any insight. Obviously performing risky procedures on children - is for their own good, and he is so incapable of bias that conflict of interest disclosures are unnecessary.

Banning him seems reasonable, but will have little impact on his US practice.

**Croydon Bob** · 28th January 2010, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by Matt

This is taking its time. They've been investigating him for years, it's been established that he acted unethically in numerous ways. He lied and faked results for personal gain. Only now do they announce that they've concluded he's a very bad man but we still have to wait to see if they'll strike him from the Medical Register.

Yes. I was surprised it has taken so long.

Now for the loonies claiming a conspiracy...

**Squalo Tigre** · 30th January 2010, 07:51 AM

Originally Posted by Matt

This is taking its time. They've been investigating him for years, it's been established that he acted unethically in numerous ways. He lied and faked results for personal gain. Only now do they announce that they've concluded he's a very bad man but we still have to wait to see if they'll strike him from the Medical Register.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/h...re/8486936.stm

Well if a doctor can be found found guilty of putting her patients at risk of premature death and still not get struck-off anything is possible ........................

**Pebble** · 30th January 2010, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by Squalo Tigre

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/h...re/8486936.stm

Well if a doctor can be found found guilty of putting her patients at risk of premature death and still not get struck-off anything is possible ........................

But in a statement after the hearing the GMC criticised the independent panel.
Niall Dickson, GMC chief executive, said: "We are surprised by the decision to apply conditions in this case.
"Our view was the doctor's name should have been erased from the medical register following the panel's finding of serious professional misconduct.

Is this called having your cake and eating it? Set up an independent panel so that you can not be accused of unduly influencing proceedings and then complain when you don't get the right result. Inappropriate use of opiates does get you into manslaughter terrritory, so that is where the questions should lie in this instance, but in general taking risks with the lives of others is what medicine and surgery is all about. The issue is not whether risks are taken, it is whether the risk benefit ratio is clearly balanced in favour of benefit and that risks have been minimised.

**bindeweede** · 30th January 2010, 11:55 PM

Brian Deer, who says he triggered the GMC's case, writes in the Sunday Times.

For six years Wakefield and I have been locked in battle. It was my investigation that triggered the GMC’s case. He sued me for libel — and was then forced to send me a cheque to cover my legal costs when the action was withdrawn.
My first big story in The Sunday Times about his work was in February 2004. I exposed his deal with a lawyer, Richard Barr, who was preparing a case against the manufacturers of the MMR vaccine and revealed that the parents of the Royal Free children were mostly litigants, recruited through anti-vaccine campaign groups.

More......

The panel’s findings were astounding, both in their number and substance. More than 30 charges were found proven against Wakefield. For him alone they ran across 52 pages. Embracing four counts of dishonesty — including money, research and public statements — they painted a picture of a man not to be trusted.
Other proven charges included nine of mistreating developmentally challenged children: causing invasive “high-risk” research to be carried out without ethical approval and against their best clinical interests.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7009882.ece