The British Medical Journal Shows Misjudgment, Bias in Further Attack on Andrew Wakefield

The publication allegations of fraud against Andrew Wakefield in the British Medical Journal follows a series of events in which the journal seemed to be showing editorial bias in an attempt to aid journalist Brian Deer in his crusade against Wakefield.

The journal removed correspondence from its website which questioned Deer's access to confidential medical and legal documents, and refused to acknowledge Deer's competing interest (documented and established in a High Court judgment) as the complainant in a case against Wakefield and two other doctors.

Age of Autism reports:

"Another aspect of bias was manifest over the publication of Deer's last article in BMJ 'Wakefield's autistic enterocolitis under the microscope'. There was consternation amongst both professionals and parents as BMJ blocked responses for days, ultimately allowing some of the professional responses to be posted ... But all of this is only a matter of indifference to the BMJ's editor-in-chief, Fiona Godlee, providing nothing ever impedes the vaccination programme."

+ Sources and References
Post your comment
Click Here and be the first to comment on this article