review of
Andrew J. Wakefield's Callous Disregard—Autism and Vaccines—The Truth Behind A Tragedy
by tENTATIVELY, a cONVENIENCE - January 12-18, 2022

For the full review go here: "Everything's Peachy-Keen: Don't Look, Behind the Curtain": https://www.goodreads.com/story/show/1669415-everything-s-peachy-keen?chapter=1

As far as I can recall, I'd never heard of Wakefield until I started researching in connection w/ the newly announced 'pandemic' in mid-March, 2020. I immediately recognized that the monolithic narrative we were being fed by the mass media was propaganda of a most insidious nature but the details of that took some time to accrue for me. Wakefield was someone who was referred to disparagingly in the mass media as espousing the notion that vaccination causes autism. Ha ha, what a fool. Given that I cd see that a stupendous amt of spin doctoring was going on about everything medical I decided to learn more about what Wakefield himself was saying so that I wdn't just be another fool accepting the word of the FACT CHOKERS & not thinking for myself. Hence I bought 2 bks of his, this being the 1st one I've read. It ISN'T the 1st bk I've read on autism, I didn't want to start w/ him, I decided to start w/ a bk by a friend that I know & trust (w/o necessarily agreeing w/ her 100%) so I read Elizabeth Fein's Living on the Spectrum - Autism and Youth in Community (you can find my review here: https://www.goodreads.com/story/show/1381449-living ) wch I found to be excellent & wch gave me a good introduction to some aspects of the subject.

I really wasn't sure what to expect of Wakefield. On Wikipedia, wch I have both respect for & criticisms of, I find Wakefield disparaged to a degree that shows that the authors of the article feel that they're above a retaliatory lawsuit. The entry begins:

"Andrew Jeremy Wakefield (born 1956) is a British anti-vaccine activist, former physician, and discredited academic who was struck off the medical register for his involvement in The Lancet MMR autism fraud, a 1998 study that falsely claimed a link between the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield

Callous Disregard is Wakefield's defense against these allegations, wch are presented as 'fact' in the above entry. In anticipation of reading Wakefield's bk I wasn't really sure of what to expect. It seemed possible to me that I might actually agree w/ the allegations against him & that I might just find him to be a bad doctor, a shallow sensationalism seeker, a fraud. However, I found Callous Disregard to be very convincing &, at the very least, I'm inclined to consider Wakefield as a sincere & knowledgable doctor who's been scapegoated. I also found that Wakefield's position on the matters he's associated w/ is far from what he's presented as having sd. I find it particularly egregious that on the Wikipedia page sidebar he's summarized as "Known for Lancet MMR autism fraud".

It's interesting to note that in The Lancet's entry sidebar there's nothing discrediting the journal - this despite their having published at least 3 papers that've been retracted, the most recent of wch was something far more clearly fraudulent than what Wakefield's been accused of:

"In May 2020, The Lancet published a metastudy by Dr. Mandeep R. Mehra of the Harvard Medical School and Dr. Sapan S. Desai of Surgisphere Corporation, which concluded that the malaria drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine did not improve the condition of COVID-19 patients, and may have harmed some of them.

"In response to concerns raised by members of the scientific community and the media about the veracity of the data and analyses,The Lancet decided to launch an independent third party investigation of Surgisphere and the metastudy. Specifically, The Lancet editors wanted to "evaluate the origination of the database elements, to confirm the completeness of the database, and to replicate the analyses presented in the paper." The independent peer reviewers in charge of the investigation notified The Lancet that Surgisphere wouldn't provide the requested data and documentation. The authors of the metastudy then asked The Lancet to retract the article, which was done on June 3rd 2020."

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lancet#Metastudy_on_the_use_of_hydroxychloroqu...

Now what's particularly noteworthy about this latter scandal is that it seems to've largely slipped past the notice of the general public. Hydroxychloroquine still seems to be 'discredited' even though it's a cheap drug that's been long-since readily available all over the world. It doesn't seem to be far-fetched that Wakefield is so 'discredited' b/c he questions issues of vaccine safety while the fake discrediting of hydroxychloroquine goes largely unnoticed b/c hydroxychloroquine has been presented as being an alternative to COVID-19 vaccination. In other words, in both cases the degree to wch the subject is demonized or swept under the rug depends on the degree to wch it supports Big Pharma's vaccine narrative.

Now, before I go any further w/ this review, I want to give the reader what's my most important take-away from this bk. I make no claim to be entirely accurate in my representation of what Wakefield says, I may be misunderstanding or unintentionally slightly misrepresenting him. Curious readers shd read his words for themselves to get a better understanding. I don't want to add to what appears to be the distortion of Wakefield's public statements. SO, w/ that disclaimer of sorts out of the way, here goes:

Wakefield & his fellow doctors got young patients referred to them who were experiencing gastrointestinal distress AND developmental regression that may've been autism. Some of the parents claimed that these problems started shortly after they rc'vd their MMR (Measles Mumps Rubella) vaccinations. Clinical study of the patients suggested that the vaccination in a minority of recipients might possibly be causing gastrointestinal problems & that these problems could be so severe that the children were unable to develop any further in a normal way but were, instead, regressing under the influence of extreme pain & inadequate digestion of nutrients. It was never claimed by Wakefield & co that the MMR vaccine directly caused autism. It was, instead, suggested that the connection between the MMR vaccine & the gastrointestinal problems in some children, not all, merited further investigation - as did the relationship between the gastrointestinal distress & arrested & regressed development. The patients were mostly very young. Wakefield took the position that single-disease vaccinations were safer b/c they were less of an assault on the body.

The mere suggestion of this possibility was taken as threatening by the medical establishment b/c the possibility of a lawsuit seemed likely. Wakefield was singled out to be scapegoated b/c he had been hired by a lawfirm to do research relevant to side-effects of the MMR vaccine. This hiring did not fund Wakefield's work w/ the patients who were reported on in the eventually retracted Lancet paper in wch the observations alluded to above were set forth. Wakefield had several enemies who wanted to discredit him. In one case, a doctor who eventually testified against him claimed that he hated Wakefield b/c Wakefield was trying to get a Nobel prize & was, therefore, skewing the case studies from the very beginning to support a sensational outcome. In other words, Wakefield's enemies had various ulterior motives for scapegoating him - some of wch might've been related to their own financial relationship to the purveyors of the MMR vaccine. B/c the persecution of Wakefield was so intense, many people saved their own ass by turning against him or, at least, distancing themselves.

That's my summary. I find it reasonable. I find it reasonable that some children might suffer side-effects from a vaccination of 3 viruses at once & that these side-effects cd be so severe that development in, say, an 18 mnth old might be so affected by the side-effects that the child's development wd also be severely impeded &/or regressed. I find it predictable that people in the medical industry wd rush to protect themselves against disgrace & lawsuit by scapegoating & disgracing any doctor who might put forth such a hypothesis.

This bk was published in 2011. I don't know what Wakefield is saying now, I'm mainly addressing myself to what I've found in this bk & how it relates to things in my own life. Callous Disregard seems to be basically Wakefield's defense against his so-called 'discrediting'. I still intend to read at least one bk that takes a different position from Wakefield's but I admit that I find Callous Disregard fairly convincing AND I admit that I have an extreme bias against the medical industry & an increasing bias against vaccination in general - mainly as a side-effect of what I consider to be the completely unjustified social pressure in favor of being injected w/ a GMO to ostensibly ward off COVID-19 (something wch, according to personal observations, isn't even working anyway given that my vaccinated friends are still getting more sick than I am).

In the "Acknowledgements" section at the beginning of the bk, there's a website listed: www.callous-disregard.com . I took the precaution to determine if this website is still valid & discovered that it's apparently been domain-grabbed & is now used as a website to promote CBD - this even though the "Callous Disregard" heading is till there. Too bad. Doing a search for "Andrew J Wakefield website" yielded results w/ headings like "the discredited doctor hailed by the anti-vaccine movement". It took my reaching the 5th page of the search results to find a website connected to Wakefield that presents his statements: https://vaxxedthemovie.com/dr-andrew-wakefield-deals-with-allegations/ . Also appearing on the same page of search results is a link to an article entitled "The Lancet Should Reinstate the Andrew Wakefield Paper" by Martin Hewitt ( https://static1.squarespace.com/static/57698667d2b8574e2db7710a/t/590ef6f7f5e231... (1).pdf ).

SO, I'll get to some details:

The front cover of the bk claims that it's a "National Bestseller". I don't know whether to take that as pure hype or if there really is such a big readership for a bk written by a doctor defending himself against charges brought about b/c his case studies showed a possible connection between MMR vaccinations & severe deleterious reactions. It seems like the type of bk parents of autistic children might read in an attempt to get an explanation for their child's condition; it also seems like a bk that doctors might read to determine if they find Wakefield's arguments convincing or bogus.

From the "PREFACE":

"Letter from Dr. Peter Fletcher, Ex-Principal Medical Officer with responsibility for the UK's Committee on Safety of Medicines and later Senior Principal Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Officer" - p i

[..]

"My fourth comment relates to the safety evaluation of medicinal products intended for healthy people. The two biggest examples are hormonal contraceptives and vaccines. The differences between the two are mind-boggling. The contraceptives have been evaluated more intensively than any other group of medicinal products both in humans and animals. In contrast, vaccines have been minimally investigated and there seems to be no hope of an improvement in the future." - p ii

From the "FOREWORD":

"As the parent of a child who regressed into autism after his vaccinations, I have always considered Andy Wakefield to represent the kind of doctor and scientist who will ultimately help us end the epidemic of children with autism."

[..]

"I really wish the primary trigger for autism was something everyone could dislike like cigarettes or rat poison. It would make ending this epidemic so much easier. Unfortunately, it appears that a product intended for good—vaccines—also has a dark side, which is the ability to do harm in certain children. This ability to do harm has unfortunately increased quite a bit in the last few decades because children today receive so many more shots than when most parents were kids." - p iii

This latter was written "April 22, 2010". Keep in mind that this was roughly 11 yrs before the FDA gave the EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 'vaccine' (I prefer putting 'vaccine' in single quotes to question whether this even qualifies as a vaccine given that it's a GMO). The point being that questions & criticisms regarding vaccine safety significantly predated the current raging debate.

Wakefield is usually the one who takes the hit for being the author of The Lancet paper but the coauthors included these other Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine doctors: Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology Professor John Walker-Smith, Department of Histopathology Dr. Amar Paul Dhillon, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Dr. Mark Berelowitz, Department of Neurology Dr. Peter Harvey, Dr. Simon Murch Senior Lecturer, Dr. Andrew Anthony Research Pathologist, Dr. Mike Thompson Consultant, & some junior doctors. (list taken from diagram on p v)

The title is explained in an endnote:

"At the GMC [General Medical Council] I was accused and found guilty of "callous disregard" for the suffering of children." - endnote 1, p 7

Obviously, the title of the bk is intended to show that the "callous disregard" applies more accurately to the medical system that thwarted Wakefield & co's investigations into health problems possibly caused by the MMR vaccine.

"This book is composed of a series of essays that deal with the now infamous paper – a humble case series – written by doctors at the Royal Free Hospital and published in The Lancet in February 1998. The essays were originally intended to stand alone and some repetition is inevitable." - p 3

"It is the story of how the powerful deal with threats to their interests. It was recently suggested to me in an interview with a major US network that this was really just a conspiracy theory. As it happened, earlier that week, internal memos from the pharmaceutical giant Merck were disclosed to the Australian court in the Vioxx litigation. They talked about how Merck had to "neutralize" dissent from those doctors who questioned the safety of this drug. In relation to these concerned doctors, one of the emails read:

"We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live.3

"It would seem that rather than being conspiracy theory, this can sometimes be corporate policy." - p 4

"3 Rout M. (2009, April 1). Vioxx maker Merck and Co drew up doctor hit list. Retrieved from http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/vioxx-maker-merck-and-co-drew-up-d..." - endnote 3, p 7

I double-checked to see if the link still works & I'm happy to say it does. Here's the beginning of the article:

"Vioxx maker Merck and Co drew up doctor hit list

"Posted on April 27, 2009
The Australian | Apr 1, 2009
By Milanda Rout

"AN international drug company made a hit list of doctors who had to be “neutralised” or discredited because they criticised the anti-arthritis drug the pharmaceutical giant produced.

"Staff at US company Merck &Co emailed each other about the list of doctors – mainly researchers and academics – who had been negative about the drug Vioxx or Merck and a recommended course of action.

"The email, which came out in the Federal Court in Melbourne yesterday as part of a class action against the drug company, included the words “neutralise”, “neutralised” or “discredit” against some of the doctors’ names.

"It is also alleged the company used intimidation tactics against critical researchers, including dropping hints it would stop funding to institutions and claims it interfered with academic appointments.

"“We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live,” a Merck employee wrote, according to an email excerpt read to the court by Julian Burnside QC, acting for the plaintiff.

"Merck & Co and its Australian subsidiary, Merck, Sharpe and Dohme, are being sued for compensation by more than 1000 Australians, who claim they suffered heart attacks or strokes as a result of Vioxx.

"The drug was launched in 1999 and at its height of popularity was used by 80 million people worldwide because it did not cause stomach problems as did traditional anti-inflammatory drugs.

"It was voluntarily withdrawn from sale in 2004 after concerns were raised that it caused heart attacks and strokes and a clinical trial testing these potential side affects was aborted for safety reasons.

"Lead plaintiff Graeme Peterson, 58, claims the drug caused him to have a heart attack in 2003 after he took it for back pain and arthritis every day from May 2001.

"Merck last year settled thousands of lawsuits in the US over the effects of Vioxx for $US4.85billion ($7.14 billion) but made no admission of guilt.

"The company is fighting the class action in Australia."

Some of us take it for granted that this sort of thing is business-as-usual & find plenty of evidence to support it. Other, considerably more naive people, dismiss such things as 'conspiracy theory'. It's my opinion that such naive people are in denial about the lengths that many people will go to to get to be rich & powerful.

For the full review go here: "Everything's Peachy-Keen: Don't Look, Behind the Curtain": https://www.goodreads.com/story/show/1669415-everything-s-peachy-keen?chapter=1 ( )