Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Newsline With Jim Middleton -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) beamed who a whole countries where isn't acceptable countries where free speech range of challenges. It different. It press a whole

still one specific group we're most fearful of and that's your views on the banning of Pastor Jones? I very serious issue. Barack Obama had to very serious issue. President

in this case. It is not like

this guy is writing a few little pamphlets and

them around and he's this because it could concern

our troops overseas. I do think that that needs to be

considered, that free have implications. Pastor Jones a great thing, but words do

is planning what he's is planning what he's calling

not a burn the Koran the day but judge the Koran day on trial. Coming up Drum, the investigation that's debunked an medical fraud debunked an elaborate rit

vaccinationses. medical fraud on childhood British medical journal The third and final part of a investigation by Andrew Wakefield which published bee dunging research

claimed a link between autism and children. The journal denounces the study as an denounces children. The journal

denounces the study as an elaborate fraud.

says it is trying to crush says it is trying to nation. His research led many parents to advantage night

children and is cited children and is cited by

the world. Dr Rachael Dunlop antivaccinations group around

is a member of the is a member of the Australian

recently about the Wakefield sceptics. She's

case on her blog and she joins

us now. Let's go back to the

case of Andrew Wakefield. What

did he do, when did this all did he do, when did this

start? Before we get into the

tell us medical journal publications,

Wakefield. The paper was

published in 1998 in the lancet

and it covered 12 children who

vak field was trying to demonstrate

called autistic which is called autistic which is a disease of the gastro

intestinal tract. He did this

children study looking at these 12

in fact in the study it didn't look at a link between autism and vaccinations, but he had a subsequent press conference and vaccinations, but he had a

after

after the study was released

and this is where the whole

vaccines and MMR caused autism

began. It got taken on by the media particularly in the UK and spread across the world and created this vaccine scare which we still have today which

many parents think is vaks keen

causes autism. What influence

did he have on vaccinations? did he have on childhood dropped, particularly the MMR vaccine in the UK, study released levels vaccine in the UK, after his

to about 79 per cent. study released levels dropped

study released levels dropped required about 92 per cent of people have to be vaccinated have this process called herd immunity. That means

of people in the

vaccinated, when we get or bacteria vaccinated, when we get viruss

they can't spread. In some vaccinations levels parts of London, in fact, as vaccinations levels dropped to impact did that have on these

kind of diseases coming into

the community? the community? It had an

impact on these sells come into the IK and some impact on these sells come back

result. He had a big impact on the levels of vaccinations results after he released this

paper. Let's deal with the

three part series the British medical journal released. They say that Wakefield is getty of

an elaborate fraud. That's not making mistakes. fraud making mistakes. Elaborate Why are they using that kind of language? Yes. Before these three publications last week and a by the BMJ which was in the

thought that perhaps it was bad science, whereby perhaps Wakefield had massaged the

misinterpreted the data a

little bit. The research Brian dear, an investigative journalist who published things in the BMJ, he sent case and he was able to show study . Those 12 correct. The 12 children in mentioned before. That's

that study when dear went and checked the that study when dear went back

came and were diagnosed or

tested on, didn't information that the in tested on, didn't match the

information that the in the paper whatsoever. It turned

out also that most of the children that Wakefield whether autistic that he studied

studied in this paper weren't

autistic. It turned he took tissue from the kid's

colons to look for increased

measures of virus, those slides couldn't be found, so that data couldn't

Tell us what Brian dear the basically. Tell us about that?

journalist found out about to write what he did? Yes. Wakefield's financial incentive

I'm a research scientist myself

and when I read this stuff last

week I didn't think as bad as it is. week I didn't think it could be

bad. We as bad as it is. It is really

was bad. We knew that Wakefield

in 1998 and this lawyer in 1998 and this lawyer was

putting together a case to show

that the MMR vaccine dangerous. Wakefield paid 150 quid an hour by these lawyers as an expert. Didn't he

end up getting over 400,000

British pounds from this legal

firm? I did a

Australian dollars. He had a

patent when he submitted for a

trying to though the trip pep injection was dangerous, if he could show that through paper, he could say I've got could show that through this

the single one by the single one by mine. In

fact, that's

about a million dollars there,

that. What dear was able but it's much

that. What dear was that. What dear was able to last week, Wakefield had a find, which what he published

last week, Wakefield had a business plan to develop

business plan to develop a test

to look for this disorder in children. This test was potentially

potentially going to be his company about 72 million

pounds a year. That is sphrordry. We're not talking molbickies here. Anderson

Cooper did an interview Andrew Wakefield recently on

CNN. Here is what Andrew

Wakefield said in defence of

himself after the first himself after the first couple

of the articles were published

by the British medical journal. It is a ruthless

pragmatic attempt to crush any pragmatic attempt to crush any

investigation into valid vaccine safety concerns, not

just my concerns, I'm here at

an expert of vaks seen from around the world who are extremely concerned about extremely concerned about the safety of vaks seen that

believe and I believe is being

done to children. Wakefield is trying to say that the

is trying to crush valid investigations into vaks seen. He also said in that He also said in that journalist

the journalist Brian dear is a

hit man. He described him as a

hit man. Wakefield is saying

this is an attempt valid research into vaccines. this is an attempt to quash valid research For 13 years now science has been trying to find this link between vaccines and 13 years of science Lots of studies Lots of studies have done. There's been In fact, we've diverted attention from looking at the causes of autism into debunking what Wakefield did. I want to

ask this question in relation to that because the to that because the Australian vaccinations network

antivaccinations in their website they refer Wakefield and the British medical journal articles medical journal articles and they

they say Wakefield's results have been verified in the have been verified in the years since this since this study was presented in 1998. Wakefield said there

are five studies

his work. One of those studies was done by one of was done by one of Wakefield's colleagues and published in journal on journal on which Wakefield was an editor. There is a big con

demrikt of interest as to whether or not that's presented at a conference but

not published. One was case studies on one or two people. link. The AVN say once again the media in response to the media in response to these BMJ articles, is marching to

the opportunity of their advertisers and

across the truth without any regard to what actually happened. If you look studies that have

since Wakefield published lancet paper, for example,

Denmark that looked 500,000 children and looked vaccinated versus unvaccinated

in MMR. In Japan they stopped using the MMR for the long time

and the rates of autism

continued to increase. Some of the components of vaks the components of vaks seen that people like the AVM vaccines in the year 2000, 2001, but MMR, continued to go up. It

do with the vaccinations. Have you got a question or comment?

As a doctor, certainly As a doctor, certainly working in Sydney or outer Sydney, thankfully as large as this was

in Britain, I didn't get the impression that impression that it had spread

to any lengths at least in metropolitan Sydney. I there are sections of Australia, but I would be

statistics. Was there any drop of vaccinations rates in

Australia? Not really. It didn't affect Australia as much as it

about 2 or 3 per about 2 or 3 per cent of

parents in this country who re fusz to vaccinate altogether.

It is a small number. hasn't changed much. hasn't changed much. It really was a big problem much more in UK. My comment on this is

couple of things. One I think

there is a segment of the community generally that would

be suspicious of science, modern medicine, et cetera, would look towards the

would look towards the rise in alternative medicines, secular spirituals. particularly a track tiff to

that group. Second, these sort

of events demeans the quality

of science to the public. We

already have a very poor understanding of science and

climate change is a great

example. Increasingly people

will question the validity of

trials in general. I think it

is very damaging this caper for

scientific discourse in the

public realm. Kerry? I've got

a comment. As the mother of a child

who's still got MEASELS, my

only comment is the doctors

stayed to me see how sick she is, can you imagine how much

sicker she would have been if

she hadn't been advantagenated.

I don't understand why anyone

wouldn't vaccinate their

children. I think it is one children. I think it is one of

these things which we are as

parents should all be doing. I

think the fact that kids who

get it get ASIC as they do and

they can die, I think it is they can die, I think it is an obligation on every responsible

parent to vaccinate their kids. I don't know anything about the

science, I know how sick science, I know how sick Lisa was. Finally today on the Drum,

British MPs have been banned from from using Twitter while sitting in the House of Commons. Lindsay Hoyle made

the ruling after a Labor

politician complained about a Liberal Democrat Tweeting

during a debate. Instead of

giving his arguments on giving his arguments on the floor of the Parliament. The

bab comes just a month after a landmark decision allowing

reporters to tweet from court

rooms in England and Wales. What's the situation in the Australian Federal Parliament

comes to Tweeting? There's

been great incidents where

particularly opposition MPs have

have tweeted from the floor in

Question Time, usually disgusted with the Prime

Minister at the time because

there's been a couple. The

speaker of the house, Harry

Jenkins has had to rule on

whether this parliamentary behaviour or not. For the

moment it has been deemed so.

A lot of MPs that I spoke to actually self censor and actually self censor and they don't believe it is

parliamentary conduct to tweet from the chamber. A lot of

government MPs refrain government MPs refrain from

doing so. A lot of doing so. A lot of opposition

ones like it because they feel

they get such a hard run in Question Time from the government appointed government appointed speaker

that it depifs them a voice to complain and protest about some

of the rulings. It is fun when

you're up there and you see

these tapping out these angry messages. Who does it? Joe

Hockey's pretty good. He'll

send off a fiery one now and

again. Peter Dutton used to

send a bad. A couple of backbenchers,

Stuart Robert will send funny ones on occasion at times ones on occasion at times too.

During the Rudd days you would

get stream after stream of

tweets from Bob Baldwin, MP, the Liberal frontbencher,

ZZZZZZZZZ. Very bored with Rudd. It confirms what I've

always thought it must be

being. The treating in Parliament by opposition

members is the equivalent of

the Mexican wave at the

cricket. It is. Or the nude your mind what's happening on

the floor you decide you're

going to tweet. It is a lot

more subtle. It's quite

useful. It's organisational risk management, that's the way I see it.

I see it. You're seeing all these people just get themselves in a whole heap themselves in a whole heap of

big mess after Tweeting and not

really know how to tweet. I

think that's the way I pretty good think that's the way I see it. There are it. There are some who are pretty good at it. You won an international award for Tweeting. I did. What do you think of

think of this. I Tweeting. I did. What do you

think of this. I have May floods. He has been interesting to follow. watching K rod tweet during the mentioned the Queensland Police

media service whore fantastic.

I don't think there's anything wrong with wrong with politicians tweeting

from the floor. I'm happy to

see their stuff. the UK must have been concerned that somebody was actually

sending on Twitter to the guy who was Tweeting the who was Tweeting the best injections to use against him. That's what he was really

worried about the Drum today. Thanks to

panel. You can check out our website at abc.net.au/thedrum. We'll see you We'll see you next time. Closed Captions by CSI.