Book review - "The Doctor Who Fooled
The World"
by Brian Deer
June 26, 2025
In
1996 I was commissioned to write a book about the Internet. It was to
explain it to people who didn't know anything about it or the technology
behind it or what it could be good and bad for. There was some hysteria
about the possibility of a flood of pornography filling our lounge rooms
so I actually had to research porn (it was boring!) to answer the inevitable
questions in interviews. I also looked for other forms of bad information,
because it was obvious even then that there would be dubious information
coming down the tubes. One of the bad things I found was a group of
web sites spreading fear about vaccinations. I commented at the time
that none of the pornography I was forced to watch was as offensive
as some of these sites.
In 1999 I started paying more attention to the anti-vaccination sites
and it wasn't long before I was sneeringly told that a paper by a Dr
Andrew Wakefield had been published in The Lancet (the world's
second-most prestigious and influential medical journal) which proved
that the MMR vaccine caused autism. As I had experience of people citing
unlikely research results in the hope that nobody would check, I read
the paper for myself (I had access to the medical library at Westmead
Hospital) and it proved no such thing - it only suggested there might
be a link. There were several red flags on the paper, one of which was
that the editors of The Lancet felt the need to include an
editorial statement implying the clichés "further research is
needed" and "the science is not settled".
The biggest red flag for me came from something I had been taught
about research methodology at university - the sample of subjects looked
too good to be true. It seemed highly unlikely that the parents of the
children had independently and randomly sought out a doctor (who didn't
see patients!) at a small and relatively unknown London hospital. I
mentioned my concerns in a conference presentation in 2001. The most
charitable view was that there had been some cherry-picking going on
mixed with some confirmation bias. The peer review process can't always
detect outright fraud, so this was a case of "the benefit of the doubt".
But fraud it certainly was.
Journalist Brian Deer had been investigating suspicious matters around
the pharmaceutical industry for some years, and in 2003 he was approached
by an editor at the Sunday Times and asked to apply his investigative
skills to the Wakefield story, which by then had started to have a serious
effect on vaccination levels and public health. There was enough information
and doubt from within the medical profession itself to suggest that
the public didn't know all the things it should have known, and it wasn't
long before the facts started coming out - that Wakefield was paid a
large amount of money to find what he wanted to find, that he had applied
for a patent on a measles vaccine that would have made him very wealthy
if it replaced the current vaccine, that the subjects of the study had
not been randomly chosen but had been supplied by a lawyer, Roger Barr,
who intended taking legal action against vaccine manufacturers, that
Barr had used a loophole in the regulations to stripmine the Legal Aid
system for tens of millions of pounds (shared with Wakefield), that
Wakefield and Barr both had close associations with prominent anti-vaccination
campaigners, that the laboratory doing the tests for measles DNA had
less credibility than a school science project, … . The list went on.
In 2010 Wakefield's registration as a medical practitioner was cancelled
and The Lancet retracted the 1998 paper. It took too many years,
but we thought that at last it might all be over. We were wrong.
Brian Deer (described as "a lying dog of a journalist" by a leading
anti-vaccination campaigner) has now written a complete history of the
Wakefield saga. The book goes back some years before the notorious 1998
paper to reveal the involvement of lawyer Barr and vociferous anti-vaccination
organisations, through the almost unbelievable litany of lies, corruption
and fraud that surrounded Wakefield and the coordinated attempts to
use his fraudulent "research" to damage the public's perception of the
safety and efficacy of vaccines, to his elevation to hero status in
the anti-vaccination movement and his current incarnation as the director
and producer of anti-vaccination films liked the execrable Vaxxed:
From Cover-Up to Catastrophe. (The use of the word "cover-up" in
the title caused irony meters across the world to shatter, given the
way that Wakefield et al had covered up his deceit. Also, when the film
first came out in 2016 someone commented about the propaganda: "Leni
Riefenstahl would have baulked at making something this dishonest".)
I could summarise the book into something like those old Reader's
Digest condensed novels but I wouldn't know what to leave out and
this review would be about 300 pages long. The book is an essential
read for anyone who has followed Wakefield over the years (and even
someone who has
followed him as closely as I have found many new things to wonder
and grimace at), it is essential reading for anyone who thinks that
scientific and medical research can't be corrupted by greed and self-interest
or to support an agenda, it is essential reading for anyone who thinks
for a nanosecond that the anti-vaccination movement is based on any
philosophy
that includes honesty, ethics or morality. Strangely, the book also
reinforces the claim by anti-vaccinators that all medical research is
corrupt and driven by money, although they will make an exception in
this case.
You need this book. You can get a copy by inter-library loan.