It was in the context of this research project that the Panel found that Dr Wakefield caused three of these young and vulnerable children, (nos. 3, 9 and 12) to undergo the invasive procedure of lumbar puncture when such investigation was for research purposes and was not clinically indicated. This action was contrary to his representation to the Ethics Committee that all the procedures were clinically indicated. In nine of the eleven children (2,1, 3, 4, 9, 5,12, 8 and 7) the Panel has found that Dr Wakefield acted contrary to the clinical interests of each child. The Panel is profoundly concerned that Dr Wakefield repeatedly breached fundamental principles of research medicine. It concluded that his actions in this area alone were sufficient to amount to serious professional misconduct.[1]
If you see a dirty old man hanging around the children’s playground, don’t worry, it’s probably just Ex-Dr. Andrew Wakefield waiting for the parents to wander away, so he can proposition the kids.
There is nothing wrong with propositioning children for unnecessary medical procedures.
If you don’t believe that look at all of the anti-vaccination sites defending Ex-Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s child abuse. This is considered to be protecting children. These are the people who advocate chelation and other forms of child poisoning, so ethics is not exactly their strong point. Ethics isn’t even their weak point. The anti-vaccinationists just say no to ethics. Children are just political pawns to them.
Maybe the title of this post reminds you of Rodney Dangerfield in Caddyshack.
The difference is that Rodney’s character was propositioning an adult. Andrew Wakefield propositions children, again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again.
This is important – the lumbar puncture (spinal tap) was not done for the benefit of the children. Not even a little bit. These lumbar punctures were done entirely for the benefit of Andrew Wakefield.
So, would any of us feel comfortable with Andrew Wakefield near our children?
In respect of Research and Ethics Committee approval, the Panel had regard to the particular ethical guiding principles with regard to conducting research on children. It rejected Dr Wakefield’s overall contention that Project 172-96 was never undertaken; that all the investigations carried out on the children were clinically indicated and that the research elements of the project were covered by another Ethics Committee approval.[1]
Dr Wakefield’s overall contention that Project 172-96 was never undertaken?
I did not have unnecessary spinal tap relations with those children.
I just tripped and the needle ended up in their spines.
As long as I was there, I figured I might as well get some spinal fluid samples.
And if this did happen, not that it did, it was necessary.
And if this did happen, not that it did, it was approved by the ethics committee.
And if this did happen, not that it did, I certainly would not repeat this abuse.
And then do this again.
But I definitely did not commit any other abuses.
Again.
And again.
And again.
And again.
And again.
And again.
And again.
And again.
Trust me. I, Andrew Would I lie to you, too? Wakefield, used to be a doctor before I was caught abusing children for profit.
Accordingly the Panel has determined that Dr Wakefield’s name should be erased from the medical register. The Panel concluded that it is the only sanction that is appropriate to protect patients and is in the wider public interest, including the maintenance of public trust and confidence in the profession and is proportionate to the serious and wide-ranging findings made against him.[1]
Footnotes:
^ 1 Dr Andrew Jeremy WAKEFIELD – Determination on Serious Professional Misconduct (SPM) and sanction
May 24, 2010
UK General Medical Council
Document
.
Subscribe to RogueMedic.com