or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Former Chief Scientific Officer, DoH, concerned about MMR
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Former Chief Scientific Officer, DoH, concerned about MMR - Page 4

post #61 of 70
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I have read in several interviews that he no longer makes any money off of rotateq. I do not think he has "loyalty" to Merck, no.

No loyalty to Merck, who funds his position at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, and pays him generous speaker's fees?

post #62 of 70

I don't care if Dr. Offit possibly made or possibly continues to make gazillions of dollars off Rotateq, a vaccine he spent years developing. That doesn't change the facts here about Wakefield and Fletcher and the six year old tabloid article in the OP. Trying to discredit Offit who has nothing to do with any of this seems pretty desperate. He seems to come up a lot in this way. 

 

edited to fix typo


Edited by AbbyGrant - 6/21/12 at 7:47am
post #63 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbbyGrant View Post

I don't care if Dr. Offit made and continues to make gazillions of dollars off Rotateq, a vaccine he spent years developing. That doesn't change the facts here about Wakefield and Fletcher and the tabloid article in the OP. Try to discredit Offit who has nothing to do with any of this seems pretty desperate. He seems to come up a lot in this way. 

Same for Wakefield.  He was mentioned twice in the OP's article - and was hardly central to the article.  Yet, here we are.  I think all sides like to bring up figures they dislike or judge questionable.


Edited by purslaine - 6/21/12 at 11:41am
post #64 of 70
Thread Starter 

Autism Science Foundation is a non-profit corporate front group for the pharmaceutical industry.  

 

Paul Offit is on their board of directors. http://www.autismsciencefoundation.org/about/leadership/board-of-directors

 

His books comprise 33% of their "recommended reading" list: http://www.autismsciencefoundation.org/autism-science/recommended-reading

 

ASF's priorities are to fund drug treatments for autism, and to defend vaccines. They claim that the vaccine/autism question "has been asked and answered," and don't bother to mention any of the studies that do indicate a link, nor do they mention studies and case reports clearly linking vaccines with brain damage, autoimmune disorders, etc.  Their position is that there is absolutely no reason to question vaccine safety. Their officially stated mission is to fund genetic research (which has so far achieved nothing, as they ignore the environmental factors which have triggered the staggering increase in autism), develop medical treatments, and to defend vaccination: http://www.autismsciencefoundation.org/about/our-mission

 

They criticize "non-evidence-based treatment options," even including the gluten-free, casein-free diet as "dangerous." They point to the fact that autistic children on a gluten-free, casein-free diet have lower bone density, without mentioning that non-autistic adults with UNTREATED celiac disease also have lower bone density (hello, because they're not absorbing necessary nutrients). They completely miss the idea that parents who keep their autistic children on a GFCF diet do so because their children have severe issues regarding gluten and casein.

 

Offit is also one of their principal bloggers/speakers, along with Seth Mnookin and a long cast list of pharma-funded principal players.

http://www.autismsciencefoundation.org/about/leadership/scientific-advisory-board

http://www.autismsciencefoundation.org/about/leadership/board-of-directors

post #65 of 70

     Quote:

Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

Same for Wakefield.  He was mentioned twice in the OP's article - and was hardly central to the article.  Yet, here we are.  I think all sides like to bring up figures they dislike or judge questionable. While it may sometimes be desperate, I do think both "sides" are genuinely ticked and angry at certain figures and events.


 At least he was mentioned and is relevant to the topic. Offit is out of left field and was brought in just for the sake of argument.

post #66 of 70
Good thing I provided all those other links that don't include that organization then, taxi.
post #67 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

Same for Wakefield.  He was mentioned twice in the OP's article - and was hardly central to the article.  Yet, here we are.  I think all sides like to bring up figures they dislike or judge questionable. While it may sometimes be desperate, I do think both "sides" are genuinely ticked and angry at certain figures and events.

 

Because people want to know what research/evidence he bases his opinions on.  And while the article has a few mentions of a "'steady accumulation of evidence' from scientists worldwide that the measles, mumps and rubella jab is causing brain damage in certain children,"  Wakfield is the only source actually given a name, and thus the only source we can evaluate.

post #68 of 70
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pers View Post

 

Because people want to know what research/evidence he bases his opinions on.  And while the article has a few mentions of a "'steady accumulation of evidence' from scientists worldwide that the measles, mumps and rubella jab is causing brain damage in certain children,"  Wakfield is the only source actually given a name, and thus the only source we can evaluate.

True. But Dr. Fletcher is not quoted as naming Wakefield as a source in that article.  The journalist decided to mention Wakefield, and apparently decided either not to ask Dr. Fletcher for sources on "the steady accumulation of evidence," or not to name them.

post #69 of 70

Those are all articles where Offit himself as the source states he no longer profits.........

 

I can't really accept that seeing as the source isn't exactly an unbiased one.

 

If the profit share reports were released and illustrated that neither he nor any of his sub companies made money, that would be a different story. This is almost impossible because although it's a "public" company, The Merck family still controls 70% of the shares in the company. As such, they can list a share as being held by whomever within that 70%. For example, they can roll it into an LLC when in reality it's held by an individual acting under anonymity. Perhaps for reasons of conflict of interest, or other reasons..

 

Offit made over 29 MILLION DOLLARS as a result of his association with Merck. They fund his chair at CHOP. He still works with them. If anyone really believes Offit doesn't do things that benefit Merck and thereby himself...well, it seems awfully naive and myopic. 

post #70 of 70

I have removed a few posts of namecalling and possible defamation regarding Wakefield. Please stick to posting facts that are published. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Former Chief Scientific Officer, DoH, concerned about MMR