Andy Wakefield and two other docs are facing a disciplinary panel in the UK over a "series" of alleged acts of misconduct related to their research on a link between what the Brits call MMR jabs and autism.
One of the accusations relates to the fact that some of the parents of the kids in the study were involved in litigation against vaccine manufacturers and therefore had a "vested interest" in the outcome of the study.
I suppose this is a factor Wakefield et al should have considered and disclosed. On the other hand, it seems a more reasonable assumption that these parents were pursuing litigation because they honestly believed there was causality. Similarly, if Wakefield honestly believed MMR vaccines cause autism, it would be entirely reasonable that he dedicated his career to fixing this problem.
And I resent, no condemn, the implication that parents see their autistic kids as cash registers. Anyone who believes that is despicable and should be denounced by decent society.
But there are many vested interests to consider here. Pharmaceutical companies have a vested (and entirely legitimate) interest in gaining market acceptance for their products. The medical community certainly has a vested interest in protecting medical practices it has observed in good faith, and public health agencies have a vested interest in protecting the public against health risks. Each of these can be distorted if you want to be uncharitable.
Of all the involved parties, parents have the least assailable vested interest, namely the health and welfare of our children.
Comments