In asserting that Richard Horton deserves some of the blame for the
current situation regarding the MMR vaccine in Britain, Elliman and
Bedford neglect to consider the consequences had the Editor of The Lancet
chosen to censor an early report that had been successfully peer reviewed
and was published with a commentary urging caution. This demonstrates a
rather worrying lack of understanding of the nature of the process of
scientific enquiry; namely that an hypothesis is put forward, often as a
case report or series, and further work is done to support or refute the
proposition. Given that the authors of this book review hold positions as
academic child health professionals working in prestigious institutions,
the implied support of censorship, and lack of insight into the scientific
process is surprising and disappointing.
In the case of MMR, an hypothesis was proposed, and in due course,
subsequent work refuted it. Science has fulfilled its purpose; to further
knowledge by the process of asking questions, and devising experiments to
test hypotheses. A thought experiment: imagine if the MMR – autism link
had been proven correct. Imagine the implications of a perceived cover-up
along the lines of the BSE scandal in the UK. We live in a tinderbox of
public mistrust of science, medicine, and Government. Censorship only
stokes the fires of public suspicion.
Elliman and Bedford claim that conflict of interest is a minor
consideration – “for most researchers”. Surely it is not for the
researchers, but those who are directly affected by the research – the
patients and families - to judge? Especially, if like the authors of this
review, those researchers are funded by multinational vaccine
manufacturers.
Horton’s book refreshingly engages with conflict of interest and
other important issues of public confidence. Not by shouting the same
message more loudly – as is the well-worn practice of this country’s
unimaginative public health community, but by thinking up new ideas of how
truly to address issues of public doubt. And crucially, in his well-
balanced and fascinating book, Horton takes on the issue of global measles
– an enormous cause of childhood morbidity and mortality - ignored in this
book review. Measles worldwide represents a much graver problem than the
failure of British medical professionals to meet their remuneration-linked
vaccine take-up targets. Moreover Horton provides an enlightened
discussion of autism, and rather nobly donates royalties from his book to
the Autism Intervention Research Trust.
Rapid Response:
Elliman and Bedford - a bad and unbalanced review
In asserting that Richard Horton deserves some of the blame for the
current situation regarding the MMR vaccine in Britain, Elliman and
Bedford neglect to consider the consequences had the Editor of The Lancet
chosen to censor an early report that had been successfully peer reviewed
and was published with a commentary urging caution. This demonstrates a
rather worrying lack of understanding of the nature of the process of
scientific enquiry; namely that an hypothesis is put forward, often as a
case report or series, and further work is done to support or refute the
proposition. Given that the authors of this book review hold positions as
academic child health professionals working in prestigious institutions,
the implied support of censorship, and lack of insight into the scientific
process is surprising and disappointing.
In the case of MMR, an hypothesis was proposed, and in due course,
subsequent work refuted it. Science has fulfilled its purpose; to further
knowledge by the process of asking questions, and devising experiments to
test hypotheses. A thought experiment: imagine if the MMR – autism link
had been proven correct. Imagine the implications of a perceived cover-up
along the lines of the BSE scandal in the UK. We live in a tinderbox of
public mistrust of science, medicine, and Government. Censorship only
stokes the fires of public suspicion.
Elliman and Bedford claim that conflict of interest is a minor
consideration – “for most researchers”. Surely it is not for the
researchers, but those who are directly affected by the research – the
patients and families - to judge? Especially, if like the authors of this
review, those researchers are funded by multinational vaccine
manufacturers.
Horton’s book refreshingly engages with conflict of interest and
other important issues of public confidence. Not by shouting the same
message more loudly – as is the well-worn practice of this country’s
unimaginative public health community, but by thinking up new ideas of how
truly to address issues of public doubt. And crucially, in his well-
balanced and fascinating book, Horton takes on the issue of global measles
– an enormous cause of childhood morbidity and mortality - ignored in this
book review. Measles worldwide represents a much graver problem than the
failure of British medical professionals to meet their remuneration-linked
vaccine take-up targets. Moreover Horton provides an enlightened
discussion of autism, and rather nobly donates royalties from his book to
the Autism Intervention Research Trust.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests