Questions for the Sunday Times --John Stone (original) (raw)
- Brian Deer has intimated that he does not understand the science in the MMR controversy:
"My best qualification is a BA in philosophy, which is no use to anybody. So my first question of the Wakefield Lancet paper was merely: �Is this too good to be true?� If doctors, and especially the editor of that journal, didn�t do likewise - surely suspecting the effect Wakefield�s claims were likely to have, both on the public and on the Lancet�s impact factor - it was hardly the fault of mere newspaper reporters that the scare took off as it did."
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/330/7491/552#100186
Why, then, has the Sunday Times put so much behind a mere hunch?
Since we are supposed to be so interested in the money, how much has Deer received for all this, and from what sources? I note the Deer does not seem to be a regular Sunday Times journalist: a search through the archive brings up 21 entries since January 2005, or an article every seven and half weeks.
Why did the Sunday Times suppress Robert Sandall's article 'MMR-RIP' (December 14, 2003) which showed how desperate British officials and the pharmarceutical defendants were to prevent spinal fluid samples being taken from affected children?
http://www.bridges4kids.org/articles/12-03/TimesMag12-14-03.html
This article is no longer available from the Times-online website.
- Brian Deer has stated that the "MMR debacle" is "a tedious area"?
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/330/7503/1284#108827
Why, then, does he go on? Why, if he is confident of his subject, does he call for censorship of those criticising him?
- This is the link to the latest addition to Deer's website.
http://briandeer.com/wakefield/jabs-jackie.htm
Does the Sunday Times really want to be associated with the tone and style of this reporting? Does it sound objective, or dignified?
- Why - if he means to be objective - has Deer failed to report that the proprietor of the Lancet, Sir Crispin Davies, was appointed a director of GlaxoSmithKline in July 2003, and knighted by the Blair Government in June 2004?
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/328/7438/528#76418
Why has he failed to mention Dr Michael Fitzpatrick's association with GlaxoSmithKline as a trustee of the lobby organisation Sense about Science?
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/328/7438/528#76545
Since he has protested about the contribution of others on the topic to BMJ Rapid Responses he must be aware of these things.
See also my letter to Sunday Times editor John Witherow of Thursday last before Deer's latest publication, which I have now posted in Richard Horton's new weblog 'Know Thyself':