Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles.
In the Wakefield case, I remain just as perplexed by this story as Morris and Aldulaimi1 were in their 2002 commentary on the findings of measles virus in the ileal area of some children by Uhlmann and collaborators2. The molecular laboratory director Dr O'Leary in a clarification letter indicated that there were inaccuracies in the labelling of cases and controls3. Where does all this leave the finding of 95% of "affected children" testing positive for measles virus genomes compared to 11.4% of controls? Where did these specimens come from in reality?
1. Morris A, Aldulaimi D New evidence for a viral pathogenic mechanism for new variant inflammatory bowel disease and development disorder. Mol Pathol 2002;55.83.
2. Uhlmann V, Martin CM, Shiels O, Pilkinton L, Silva I, Killilea A, Murch SB, Walker-Smith J, Thomson M, Wakefield AJ, O’Leary JJ. Potential viral pathogenic mechanism for new variant inflammatory bowel disease. Mol Pathol 2002;55:84-90.
3. O’Leary JJ. Potential viral pathogenic mechanism for new variant inflammatory bowel disease. Mol Pathol 2003;56:248.
No competing interests
22 November 2011
William P. Tormey
consultant chemical pathologist
Beaumont Hospital Dublin and University of Ulster at Coleraine