Latest / UK Column Radio / Big Pharma versus Andrew Wakefield

Transcript

Big Pharma versus Andrew Wakefield · UK Column Radio

0:38
Andrew Wakefield, thank you for joining me in the trenches.
0:41
Did the COVID era change you? You know, paradoxically it gave
0:49
me hope because so many people woke up and when I started in
0:56
this 30 years ago, 30 plus years ago, there were literally 5
1:01
people around the world who were prepared to engage in a
1:04
discussion about the vexed issue of vaccine safety.
1:08
It was the end of your career. It was forbidden.
1:11
We just don't go near that. And I did and you know, I
1:16
touched the third rail and so did a few handful of other
1:19
people. COVID changed everything.
1:22
I mean, certain things changed everything.
1:24
Film I found changed everything. In the clinic you can help one
1:28
child at a time and with a film you can educate thousands at a
1:32
time. So that was one thing.
1:33
And then COVID came and when people woke up to the
1:37
realisation that their lives and in their, their jobs and their,
1:41
their, their businesses had been destroyed and their health had
1:44
been destroyed and it was all based upon effectively a lie.
1:49
Then half the adult population of the world started debating
1:55
this and have come in many cases to the right side of this, this
2:01
argument. So COVID changed a great deal
2:04
for me in there is a silver lining to the COVID cloud and it
2:08
is the awakening of many people to the reality of vaccine
2:13
issues. I'll give you one example.
2:15
Peter McCullough, world's leading paediatric, sorry,
2:18
world's leading cardiologist, the most published cardiologist
2:23
in the history of this planet. When he got engaged in this and
2:28
lost his job, he, it was COVID vaccine.
2:31
This is a problem and we should not be using it, not been
2:34
properly researched, et cetera. But the childhood vaccines are
2:37
safe. But then like every good
2:39
scientist, he went down that rabbit hole and read and read
2:42
and read and came to the conclusion that no, actually
2:46
none of them are safe. They've not been through
2:48
adequate safety testing. So suddenly you had eminent
2:52
people like that joining in the debate in a very sophisticated
2:57
way and testifying before the American Congress, and it made a
3:00
huge difference. So you wouldn't want to go back
3:06
to 2019? No, no, I I tend to look forward
3:12
in life rather than backwards. I mean, history is crucial if
3:16
we're to understand why we got to where we are and and how to
3:19
approach the future. But no let's I look forward.
3:24
I was saying to you before we started recording that your work
3:27
and, and the, the, the, the podcast episode that we recorded
3:32
a number of years ago had a profound impact on, on me
3:36
personally and of course my wife and of course our child.
3:41
And for the right reasons, because we are a lot more
3:45
sceptical now of, of vaccines, particularly the MMR vaccine.
3:50
And that's kind of the Segway. Your background is around that.
3:56
And of course, we'll we'll chat about that now in a moment.
3:59
But for my UK column audience that might not know much about
4:03
you, Andy what? What is your general bio?
4:09
General bio Graduated in medicine 1981.
4:12
Mainstream gastroenterologist. GI Surgeon.
4:18
I don't know what mainstream means anymore, but there I was.
4:22
I had a big research team at the Royal Free Hospital in London
4:25
looking at the origins of inflammatory bowel disease,
4:29
Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, epidemic diseases in
4:33
Western societies, and I started looking at viruses as the
4:38
possible 'cause. And that led to looking at
4:40
measles and measles vaccines. We were interested in unusual
4:45
patterns of viral exposure and I'll explain that in a minute.
4:50
But 1995 I started getting calls from mothers, highly
4:55
intelligent, not not anti vax, had taken their children to be
4:59
vaccinated according to the doctor's recommendations.
5:04
And they said my child was fine. And then they crashed.
5:06
They they had speech, language, interaction with their siblings,
5:11
they were sleeping at night, they were growing.
5:14
And then suddenly that all went to hell and they lost their
5:18
speech and language, no longer socialised, didn't sleep.
5:22
They're in pain. I know they're in pain.
5:23
I'm their mother. I know they've lost the ability
5:25
to communicate, but I know they're in pain.
5:28
And they had all the signs and symptoms of an underlying
5:33
inflammatory bowel disease. But the doctors and nurses
5:35
they'd seen said, oh, that's just part of autism, Put them in
5:39
a home, forget about it, move on, have another child.
5:42
That was the sort of, it was a terrible situation.
5:45
So we investigated them as we should have done.
5:49
And of course the parents were right.
5:50
The children had an inflammatory bowel disease and when we
5:52
treated that, there was improvement in not only the
5:56
bowel symptoms but the cognitive symptoms.
5:59
The children started using words they hadn't used for five years.
6:02
It was fascinating. It was like that.
6:04
Lorenzo's oil. I don't know whether you
6:06
remember the film based upon a true story, but so when they say
6:10
this happened after a vaccine in close proximity to the MMR, we
6:17
have an obligation, professional and moral that to to take that
6:21
very, very seriously. People didn't want to.
6:23
My colleagues said as paediatricians, we can't be seen
6:26
to question the safety of MMR vaccine.
6:28
I didn't know what that meant. That just made me angry.
6:30
What I mean, you can't be seen to do it.
6:32
Why? Because your colleagues might
6:34
not think well of you. I that was astonishing.
6:38
Your responsibility is to the to the patient and their parents,
6:43
not to your, you know, you're standing in the Royal College.
6:47
So I, I, we, we parted company on that particular issue.
6:51
And yeah, when we started to look at the vaccine issue,
6:58
that's when my career in particular completely
7:01
unravelled. I came to America because
7:03
America, even though the argument is equally polarised
7:06
here. Or was there is the opportunity
7:10
to do to set up a private clinic where you can do research and
7:14
continue the work and help these children?
7:17
That's what I did. They came after me there.
7:19
They accused me of, well, you know, of, of fraud and the
7:23
mainstream media got their teeth into it.
7:25
I was accused of all kinds of things.
7:28
And there was me, there was me, and then there was them.
7:31
And they, them, you know, they were the World Health
7:34
Organisation, UNICEF, the drug companies, the governments of
7:37
the world, the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health.
7:42
I mean, I was just went on and on.
7:44
So I was never going to prevail in that particular situation.
7:49
They eventually, you know, the, the clinic, they came after
7:54
that. And that was difficult.
7:56
So I thought, you know what, I've got some extraordinary
7:58
stories to tell. I'm going to become a film
8:00
maker. And so in 2004 I started screen
8:04
writing and I've now made 6-7 movies.
8:09
The last one, Protocol 7, has won 34 Film Awards.
8:15
Not that that means too much, It's certainly not why we went
8:18
into it. And it's almost dangerously
8:20
respectable. It's not not not a place I'm
8:22
familiar with. But film is a wonderful way of
8:27
communicating with people. And I had these stories from
8:31
whistleblowers and I decided to tell them.
8:34
Yeah. But let's go back to that, that
8:37
incident because it it, it's mind blowing.
8:41
It's very obvious to me, Andy, that you were over the target
8:46
because I mean, if it is just a normal science paper that got
8:51
retracted, there wouldn't have been such a a huge sort of
8:55
artillery coming after you. That paper, if I'm correct, it
9:00
was in 1998 and it was peer reviewed and published by The
9:03
Lancet and you had done a study, you and your team.
9:07
By the way, you had Co authors. I mean let's not forget that.
9:10
Also, you studied 12 kids, is that correct?
9:14
Yes, by the time when we we decided to write a paper after
9:17
the first 12 children here. OK, so just take me through that
9:21
just briefly. Sure.
9:23
So The Lancet paper was a case series.
9:29
It's very important to stress what a case series is.
9:32
A case series. This is the way in which human
9:35
disease syndromes are almost invariably described in the
9:39
literature when they're found for the first time.
9:42
You have a group of individuals, in this case children, who
9:45
present with a consistent and unusual pattern of injury.
9:53
In this case, it was regressive autism and bowel symptoms,
9:58
gastrointestinal symptoms, following in many cases the MMR
10:03
vaccine. And So what you do is you report
10:07
those. And what you report in that in
10:09
The Lancet paper is what the parents told you, what the
10:14
medical records show, what you found on clinical examination of
10:20
the child and what you found on investigation, for example,
10:24
colonoscopy or laboratory analysis.
10:28
And you can make no conclusions about causation, can't say MMR
10:34
causes. Ultimately you can't do that.
10:36
It's just an observation that leads to hypothesis testing
10:40
studies down the line. Does do these children have a
10:45
unique bowel disease? Is it different from other bowel
10:48
diseases? So you can do control studies to
10:51
answer those specific questions. And we made the point in the
10:55
paper at the end, we said this study does not confirm an
11:02
association between the MMR vaccine and the syndrome
11:07
described. More work needs to be done.
11:09
That was it. That's that's as far as it can
11:11
go. It's a very sober
11:13
interpretation, but it was taken by the media to be MMR vaccine
11:18
causes autism. And and that's when it really,
11:22
you know, kind of went into meltdown.
11:24
There was a journalist called Brian Deer, I think I if I got
11:28
his name right, and he seemed to have had a chip on your shoulder
11:31
and he really decided to come after you.
11:33
But it does appear that he, from what I can tell, that he, he
11:37
looks like a pharmaceutical hack basically.
11:40
But what was your interaction with him like?
11:43
Very little, Very very little. As little as possible.
11:47
Very, very strange individual. And as you say, he was bought in
11:55
by pharmaceutical companies when they encountered a problem like
12:00
this. He did it.
12:01
He did this with the pertussis vaccine and a Doctor Who from
12:05
Great Ormond St Hospital who reported the association between
12:10
neurological injury and pertussis vaccine.
12:12
And then he did it with me and he was kind of hit man.
12:18
I think James Murdoch, who Rupert Murdoch's son and they
12:23
have a big interest in vaccinations.
12:27
He was put onto the board of Glaxo Smith Kline, the U KS
12:32
biggest manufacturer of MMR, in fact Europe's biggest
12:35
manufacturer. And his aim was to protect the
12:39
reputation of that, that company in the media.
12:43
And my I was his target and he came after me and he recruited
12:47
or Brian Deer was recruited as a consequence of his involvement.
12:51
And, and what an interesting story is that we ultimately sued
12:59
Brian Deer and the British Medical Journal for defamation
13:04
because what they'd said was so wrong, so outrageous.
13:08
And my question to your audience, why would you do that?
13:12
When you sue someone, all the facts, every single word gets
13:16
laid out in the public domain for anyone to scrutinise.
13:19
If you would committed fraud, unless you were totally insane,
13:23
which I don't think I am quite yet, why would you do that?
13:28
Why would you spend, for example, raise $3,000,000 to
13:34
fight this kind of litigation merely to have what Brian Dear
13:38
said confirmed worldwide? You wouldn't do it.
13:42
I mean, you'd have to be literally off your rocker.
13:46
And so we didn't, we, we lost that case not because we, it
13:52
never went to court, we were denied jurisdiction.
13:55
So it never got tested on the merits of whether they'd been
13:58
defamatory or not. It just someone very high up,
14:02
despite all legal precedent said you don't have jurisdiction and
14:08
so we never got to take Brian Dear to court.
14:11
But he knows, and the rest of them know, that they would have
14:13
lost if we had done that. But there's something obviously
14:17
weird about that whole thing. I mean, firstly, The Lancet did
14:21
publish the paper and then they're attracted it, which
14:24
means that they they were pressured by the Pharmaceutical
14:28
industry. You know, it it, it was a threat
14:31
to the vaccine market. It opened up the possibility of
14:35
huge liability and for injuries already incurred, children
14:41
damaged. It was a mass and it was the
14:44
future of the Pharmaceutical industry was vaccines.
14:47
It was vaccines. There were vaccines for
14:49
everything. They were throwing new vaccines
14:52
into the market all the time. And that's where the future was
14:56
for them. And so they had to grow, they
14:58
had to satisfy their stockholders.
15:02
And so it it was unthinkable that vaccines could be causing
15:09
this and therefore it wasn't allowed to be.
15:12
But I mean, if you look up this particular story, every website
15:18
comes up saying that this led to a decrease worldwide in
15:24
vaccinations and an increase in measles.
15:29
Yes, I mean people have analysed this back and forth, I said at
15:32
the time. And I make this very clear.
15:36
I would suggest that parents have the option of the single
15:40
vaccines because we didn't see this to anything like the same
15:44
extent with the single vaccine. Parents reported an association
15:48
with MMR. Was there some effect of the
15:51
combination that was idiosyncratic and we we didn't
15:56
know, but it was a reasonable hypothesis.
15:59
And at the time, in the UK and in the US, the single vaccines
16:03
were available so a parent could opt to take one or the other.
16:07
They were protecting their child, but they were just
16:10
choosing how to do it. And the British government then
16:16
in that year took away the importation licence for the
16:20
single vaccines. Merck in America withdrew,
16:24
unilaterally withdrew the availability of single vaccine.
16:27
And I said to them, I said to the British, the girl from the
16:32
Public Health Laboratory Service in the UK is responsible for
16:36
this. I said, why would you do that?
16:37
Why would you? If your concern is protecting
16:40
children from measles principally, why would you take
16:44
away a parent's options for how they do that?
16:48
And she said because if we allowed parents the choice, it
16:52
would destroy our MMR programme. That's astonishing.
16:57
Her aim, her wish, her desire was to protect the programme and
17:02
not children. That was what they were trying
17:05
to protect and it was a real revelation.
17:09
Elizabeth Miller was her name. Vaccines are one of the largest
17:14
pharmaceutical products in the world, something like $85
17:18
billion annually, I think. I think the only other thing
17:23
that's bigger than that is I think oncology or something.
17:26
But I mean the vaccine market effectively is almost the size
17:30
of Hollywood. I mean, that is huge money and
17:33
it's growing, which which is a, which is a big red flag.
17:38
Yeah, it's growing massively and they they want to introduce more
17:43
and more and more vaccines, different strain vaccines.
17:47
I mean, it's, and the problem is this, the problem is that in
17:50
this country, in the US, there is no liability for death or
17:55
injury caused by vaccines that are on the childhood schedule.
17:59
And there are many, there are now 74 plus vaccines before you
18:05
graduate from high school. And the problem with that is
18:09
that so you have a mandatory market, the children have to
18:13
have these vaccines in many states to go to school.
18:16
And so it's there's a mandatory market and no liability.
18:21
You can't be sued. So they've got the perfect
18:24
business model. They got a mandatory capture
18:28
population and no liability for death or injury caused by the
18:32
vaccine. All they can do is make a profit
18:36
because in 1986 they introduced the National Childhood Vaccine
18:40
Injury Act, which protected the industry from liability.
18:46
They said the industry held the feet of the government of the
18:48
fire and said if you want us to go on producing these vaccines,
18:52
then you're going to have to indemnify us because it's not a
18:55
big profit margin for us and we're going to pull out of the
18:58
market and children will die of pertussis.
19:01
How do you feel about that? That's the kind of blackmail
19:03
that was exercised on the government.
19:06
And so a huge mistake in my opinion.
19:09
The government introduced a no fault compensation system where
19:13
there's a tax on every vaccine. So the individual, the people,
19:16
the public pay for it, not the the industry, not the government
19:21
pay for it. And they and then if children
19:23
are injured, they're compensated from that fund.
19:26
And it just gave the industry a get out of gaol card.
19:30
They had, you know, like I say, mandatory market.
19:33
All they could do is profit. What a great business model.
19:36
But I'm not following Andy, because if vaccines are safe and
19:39
effective, why do you need protection?
19:42
Why do you need liability protection?
19:43
Absolutely. Because they're not.
19:46
And they know they're not. And that's the truth.
19:50
And when we say vaccines, we are referring to all vaccines, not
19:52
just MMR. Yeah, all vaccines because the
19:56
safety studies for all vaccines have been wholly inadequate.
20:00
They have not tested the safety of the vaccine in populations of
20:05
completely unvaccinated versus fully vaccinated children.
20:09
So called vax on vac study, they've not done that.
20:12
That's done for every drug that goes on the market, but not for
20:15
vaccines. No vaccine.
20:17
No vaccines. Now, isn't that what RFK is
20:22
trying to do? Absolutely.
20:24
That's what he's trying to say. He's trying to say for any new
20:26
vaccine there should be a long term random oldest clinical
20:31
trial, control trial and you know, people getting the vaccine
20:37
and not getting the vaccine, not getting an alternative vaccine
20:40
as a control. That's not a control.
20:41
That's not a placebo, not getting the excipients in
20:44
vaccines as a control. Again, that's not an inert
20:47
control, but getting no vaccine. And, and so that's what he's
20:52
doing at the moment. It should apply to all vaccines,
20:55
old and new. But of course they consider that
20:57
unethical and it would I've no doubt, expose problems they do
21:02
not want exposed. What I don't understand though
21:06
is it's become almost like a cult.
21:11
It's very interesting. I mean, people are far more
21:12
willing in my experience, to talk about this now than they
21:16
were. COVID has really bought it into
21:20
the public time. Like people know that there are
21:23
problems. Everyone's got a relative or a
21:26
family member or whatever who has suffered some kind of
21:29
injuries, you know, sudden death, cardiac death after the
21:32
vaccine, 3rd or 4th dose. It's invariable.
21:37
It's, it's the truth will come out.
21:38
The truth is coming out, but as you say, it's it's been a very
21:42
painful process. And there are people who've had
21:45
all the shots and don't want to even begin to acknowledge that
21:49
they might have been duped, that they did the wrong thing, that
21:52
they would have done something differently.
21:55
And people were very reluctant. There's a sort of dissonance
21:58
that guides people's thinking and but it's been very
22:02
destructive because as you say, family units are falling out
22:07
because some didn't, some didn't get vaccinated and same in my
22:11
own family. But.
22:13
Post your Lancet moment in history.
22:19
You went into forms and then you did vaxxed.
22:22
Vax after In early 2000, I think I went to testify before the US
22:29
Congress on this issue. And afterwards I met with the
22:32
CDC at the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention
22:36
scientists in, in Cold Spring Harbour laboratories and they
22:42
said to me, Doctor Wakefield, every child gets MMR, only a few
22:46
get autism. How do you explain that?
22:47
And I said, well, you know what, that's medicine.
22:50
A lot of people smoke, some people get lung cancer.
22:52
Who does? Who doesn't?
22:53
We don't know why cofactors, genetics, we don't know, but we
22:58
believe that one of the cofactors in vaccination and
23:02
autism is the age of exposure to MMR.
23:05
The younger you get the vaccine, the greater the risk.
23:08
Why? Because the younger you get
23:10
measles, if you get measles, natural measles under one, then
23:15
the chances of a serious outcome are much worse than if they're
23:19
you're over 1, intuitively, because the immune system's more
23:22
developed or whatever it may be. So we think, I think that age of
23:27
exposure is very important. And they went away, and they
23:30
tested that hypothesis, and they found it to be exactly true.
23:36
Children who got the MMR vaccine younger were at much greater
23:40
risk of autism than those getting it after 24 and 36
23:45
months. And what did they do?
23:49
They spent the next 14 years covering up the data, putting
23:54
alternative data in its place, destroying the documents and
23:59
publishing a paper that said MMR vaccine was safe.
24:03
It was a absolutely appalling scientific fraud that had
24:09
enormous and far reaching consequences for American
24:13
children and by proxy, children of the world.
24:16
This is what the CDC says it's safe to go back in the water.
24:20
No, it's not. And then in the end, the senior
24:23
scientists on that study, Doctor William Thompson, who was really
24:25
the key figure in in Vax, the documentary Vax, William
24:31
Thompson, who had designed that study at the CDC, collected the
24:35
data, analysed the data, written the paper, came forward and
24:40
said, I can't live with this anymore.
24:43
We've done a terrible thing. Here is all the data.
24:45
I kept it. My colleagues destroyed it,
24:48
threw it into a dumpster. I kept it because I knew that
24:51
was illegal. And so we discovered the
24:55
greatest fraud ever in the history of childhood vaccine,
25:00
and we decided to make a documentary about it.
25:03
And of course, the critics said, oh, that's true, you've just
25:05
made that up. That's just typical of you,
25:06
Wakefield. Well, let me tell you this.
25:09
If we'd made it up, if there'd been one word of a lie, one
25:12
mistake in that movie, we would have been sued to the moon and
25:15
back. It was not a whisper, not a
25:19
single whisper. Why?
25:20
Because they knew every word was true.
25:24
And it went right to the top of the CDC hierarchy.
25:29
So that movie really had a dramatic impact worldwide, not
25:34
least of which is it got into Tribeca Film Festival, one of
25:36
the great film festivals in North America.
25:41
And it was then censored. It was pulled up the first time
25:44
ever in Tribeca history. The movie was censored.
25:47
A few days later, Robert De Niro went on television saying we
25:52
shouldn't have done that. Everybody should see this film
25:55
and it exploded worldwide. We could how do you couldn't
25:59
even pay for that kind of publicity.
26:00
It was amazing. It was extraordinary with a
26:03
censorship backfired on the in the biggest way that this movie
26:08
exploded globally and played everywhere and people woke up.
26:12
Many, many people woke up to what was really going on.
26:17
I remember that, that incident with Robert De Niro, did he ever
26:19
make contact with you? We were in touch.
26:22
He has a vaccine injured child himself and and so he was very
26:26
sympathetic, but he was led by his colleagues at Tribeca Film
26:32
Festival and told that in fact, they were told this is a really
26:36
interesting story. They were told that other
26:40
directors of other films that had got into Tribeca were so
26:43
furious that our film was in that they'd offered, they
26:47
didn't, they'd threaten to pull their own film from the
26:50
festival. Let me tell you this, if you're
26:52
a film maker and you get into Tribeca, you are never, under
26:57
any circumstances going to pull your film from that.
27:03
Those people do not exist. And so it was just a complete
27:07
lie. And De Niro knew it was a lie.
27:09
And, and so, you know, so it unfolds.
27:12
But it did have this paradoxical effect of of exploding the film
27:17
worldwide and getting a lot of people to watch it.
27:21
It's not common for a list celebrities to speak out against
27:28
vaccines like De Niro. I'm I'm trying to think now they
27:31
but they are a handful. I think there was somebody that
27:34
you knew back in the day. I think the the model what's
27:36
named Elle Macpherson. I think Jim Carrey also or or
27:39
he's ex. Jim Carrey was very good.
27:41
He, he, Jim Carrey was actually the first person to call me when
27:45
I came back from England having lost my medical licence, which
27:50
was very touching, yeah. So I mean, and he he had a thing
27:56
Once Upon a time with his ex girlfriend or wife.
27:58
I don't even remember the story anymore.
28:00
And they, I think they spoke to Oprah about it back in the day
28:03
when you could still speak on TV about it, but.
28:06
When when they were together. Jenny McCarthy.
28:08
Yes, yes. Are there any other big names
28:11
who who take a sympathetic position?
28:16
There are not, not so many, but it's a growing #1 because it's
28:21
become self evident. And two, because so many
28:24
children are now injured that their relatives, their
28:29
grandchildren are being harmed. And so people are bored,
28:32
particularly in the wake of of COVID.
28:34
So it's a very, very much larger group now than it ever was
28:39
before. Why does the MMR vaccine matter
28:43
so much? I mean, there are, there are
28:45
loads of vaccines, Andrew. Why does it matter so much?
28:49
It matters because it's an interesting story.
28:52
It matters to Merck, who developed the MMR Maurice
28:56
Hiliman from Merck, the late Maurice Silliman Merck had There
29:03
was no unique licence on the measles vaccine.
29:06
There were a number of manufacturers.
29:08
It was open season in the marketplace.
29:12
Maurice Silliman developed a vaccine for mumps and Merck had
29:17
a monopoly in the United States on that vaccine.
29:21
So Maurice Silliman decided corporately a very smart
29:24
decision to combine 3 live viruses, measles, mumps,
29:29
rubella, owning the patent on the mumps vaccine and get that
29:35
to be the preferred vaccine of choice, one shot rather than
29:40
three. And that's what happened.
29:42
So in the, in the, in the American market, it became MMR
29:46
became the preferred vaccine and that put all of the other
29:49
measles manufacturers out of business.
29:53
And Merck cleaned up and they cleaned up because they owned
29:58
the patent on the mumps vaccine as part of the MMR.
30:03
Very smart move, but that really closed the marketplace down.
30:08
And then in the UK we introduced the MMR and we used a strain of
30:18
mumps which was very dangerous, caused meningitis.
30:21
It had been withdrawn in Canada, withdrawn in Japan.
30:24
The British were warned don't do this, this is a dangerous
30:27
vaccine. They went ahead and did it
30:28
anywhere they didn't care. And of course, four years later,
30:32
it had to be rapidly withdrawn because it was causing
30:34
meningitis. And so they went to Merck and
30:38
said, Merck, can we make up our stocks with your vaccine?
30:43
And Merck cleaned up in, in Europe as well.
30:46
So it, it, it's it there are commercial forces at play here
30:50
that determined why MMR is so important to the pharmaceutical
30:55
company. It's not important to, to
30:58
families any more than the single vaccines would be.
31:01
I mean, it's just it was mainly a commercial reason.
31:04
How did humanity survive for thousands of years up until
31:10
what, the 1700s? It's a, it's, it's a very
31:13
interesting sort of evolutionary argument.
31:15
We if you look and they never show you this graph, but if you
31:20
look at what happened to measles, measles mortality, it's
31:24
a measure of how severe measles is mortality, death rate from
31:29
measles before the vaccine was introduced, so in up until 16.
31:34
20 that was 1968 or something when it was introduced.
31:37
Wasn't. Yeah.
31:38
So up until 1920, measles was a major killer of children in
31:45
Western societies. During epidemics, 1200 per
31:48
million were dying of measles. After 1920 there was a dramatic
31:56
fall in the case fatality rate. In a very short period of time,
32:01
50 years, it had fallen by 99.6% and it was continuing to fall.
32:10
And we introduced A vaccine. All of that decline in
32:14
mortality, the decreasing severity of measles, that was
32:18
nothing to do with the vaccine. It was due to a whole host of
32:22
factors, like a change in the virus, change in host immunity,
32:25
better nutrition, better sanitation, all kinds of things.
32:30
Nothing to do with the vaccine. Now the question is, if we'd
32:35
never introduced the vaccine, what would have happened to that
32:37
mortality curve? It would have continued down,
32:40
very likely. We can't say that for sure
32:43
because we intervened with the vaccine.
32:46
But the point is that man and microbe man and measles were
32:51
coming to terms with each other. A successful parasite doesn't
32:54
kill people, it keeps them alive so it can spread from one to
32:58
another. And measles was becoming a more
33:01
successful parasite because it wasn't killing people.
33:04
But we introduced A vaccine and that confused the entire
33:07
situation. And you could argue and, and
33:13
experts at the time did argue, there is no need for this
33:15
vaccine. Don't interfere.
33:19
Ask yourself what is different about that one in a million
33:22
child that makes them susceptible rather than
33:25
universal vaccination. Approach it from that individual
33:29
child's perspective. But no, they saw profit at the
33:34
end of it. They wanted to emulate what they
33:35
perceived to be the successive polio vaccine, and so public
33:40
health took over and made the decisions.
33:42
But they never talked to you about that mortality curve
33:46
because it really undermines their entire argument.
33:51
That curve you're talking about, I think, is in Roman Bistjanic
33:54
and Suzanne Humphrey's book Dissolving Illusions.
33:58
You'll see the US data there, but if you look, if you look at
34:02
Thomas Mccown's modern rise of population, you'll see exactly
34:06
the same for the the United Kingdom.
34:09
So basically in a nutshell, and you what you're saying is that
34:12
plumbers were a lot more successful at eradicating
34:15
measles than the vaccine they. Were they cost more?
34:17
The plumbers always cost more, but yeah, they were.
34:22
They did a fine job. Yeah.
34:24
Measles isn't eradicated, and you can't eradicate a disease
34:27
where the vaccine itself causes measles.
34:30
So in way back when there was a Disney outbreak in the States,
34:34
there were, I think, 100 and, gosh, 180 cases.
34:39
I can't remember the precise number in this country.
34:41
And it turned out that 43% of those were caused by the
34:46
vaccine. They didn't tell you that at the
34:48
time. They didn't want you to know
34:49
that. They wanted you to think it was
34:50
all unvaccinated people getting measles. 43% were caused by the
34:55
vaccine. When you have a situation where
34:58
the vaccine is causing the disease, you will never
35:00
eradicate the disease. The same thing happened with
35:03
polio. The The polio vaccine caused
35:05
polio. Yes it did.
35:07
Absolutely the biggest it killed.
35:08
People. The biggest cause of paralytic
35:11
polio worldwide now is the IS escape.
35:15
Escape mutants from the vaccine. And then after a few movies, you
35:23
ended up doing a movie, not a documentary, called Protocol 7.
35:27
And as I was telling you before we started recording it, it was
35:31
it came up in conversation when I applied for my my US visa.
35:35
That was based on a true story. It was because of the position
35:39
I'd taken over the years. People came to me from the
35:42
Pharmaceutical industry and from regulatory agencies like the CDC
35:46
and said, you know, we've done a terrible thing.
35:48
Here's the evidence. And so I became a kind of
35:51
repository for whistleblowers and I used to hand them off to
35:54
special interest lawyers, you know, Public Interest Lawyers to
35:58
sue or not sue according to their merits.
36:00
But I just thought, you know, these would make wonderful films
36:03
like Erin Brockovich and The Insider and so on and so forth.
36:07
So I started screen writing in 2004 and wrote this story.
36:12
Gosh, in 2012, I think Protocol 7, I wanted to let it play out
36:17
in court because it was going to court that took decades and
36:20
decades. So in the end, I just said the
36:22
public need to know. And we got on and made the movie
36:27
and it, it was a lot of fun. It was such fun making a a movie
36:36
rather than a documentary. I just, it was just great.
36:39
I love working with actors and, and it did really well.
36:44
It did really well. It, as I say, it won 34 Film
36:47
Awards so far and and it's playing to audiences worldwide.
36:54
It's available streaming and yeah, you can have it written
37:01
down here. Is it Wakefield mediagroup.com.
37:05
You can see it there at wakefieldmediagroup.com.
37:08
So now it's done very well, and it could have done better if
37:12
there hadn't been suppression, censorship.
37:15
But that's the way of the world, I'm afraid.
37:17
Just keep making those movies. When you look back, Andy, do you
37:23
have any regrets or or was the attack by the Pharmaceutical
37:28
industry a blessing? You know, it, it, it was very
37:35
difficult. I won't pretend it hadn't been
37:37
very, very difficult, particularly for my family and
37:40
for my children who have all been very, very supportive and
37:45
loyal. But I spent far too much time
37:48
away from my children. And so if I have one regret,
37:54
it's that. But it, I do hope that
37:57
ultimately they will look at their children and their
38:00
children's children and say they're safer and they're
38:04
healthier because people ask questions about something that
38:09
was assumed to be safe and turned out not to be.
38:11
I, I, I really, and I hope they can forgive me for the time
38:17
spent away from them. That's my one misgiving about
38:22
it. But I did realise halfway
38:25
through when things were really, really bad, I realised, you
38:28
know, I had a sort of reflective moment and I thought, you know
38:31
what? This isn't about you.
38:34
Forget about your you. This is not about you.
38:36
This is about something. Far more important than that is
38:40
the health of children who have no voice.
38:42
They've lost their voice and someone needs to be able to
38:45
speak for them. So shut up and get on with it.
38:49
I think that sentiment, though, shared by a lot of people now,
38:53
Andy, and I mean, you know, my, my mom was just saying to me a
38:57
few days ago, you know, if she knew what she knew now, thanks
39:02
to people like you and and others, she wouldn't have
39:05
vaccinated me when I was a baby with the MMR.
39:11
And I think we now have the opportunity to, to apply that to
39:17
our, our next generation and, and hopefully their, you know,
39:20
their generation after that. And we keep hearing though that,
39:25
well, we're going to see an increase in all these diseases
39:28
again because of people who are going against the vaccine thing.
39:32
And I, I don't think that at all.
39:34
I mean, I think that that's just propaganda from the pharmacy,
39:38
from the, from the Pharmaceutical industry.
39:40
But I mean, I think there is hope, isn't there?
39:43
I do. I think the first thing to say
39:45
is that whatever happens it they've only got themselves to
39:50
blame. They can blame you and me for
39:52
having this discussion, but that's not where the root of the
39:55
problem lies. They are to blame.
39:57
They have created this situation to do with COVID.
40:00
We've seen this. They have created a permanent,
40:03
unforgivable mistrust in public health because they've been,
40:08
they've lied, they've used propaganda, bullying, whatever
40:12
they've and they've lied. And they will never regain that
40:15
trust. Never.
40:18
I think Bobby Kennedy and the states will go a long way to
40:20
restoring the integrity of public health.
40:24
But I'm afraid that the people who've perpetrated this, who've
40:27
allowed this to happen. Will not be forgiven and have
40:31
only themselves for to blame for you and I having this
40:34
conversation right now, it's because it's a very necessary
40:38
conversation to have. So we live in interesting times.
40:44
I do I do have hope for the future.
40:48
I think that with the right people in the right places,
40:51
we're going to make a lot of progress.
40:53
We're going to get some information, I think in the last
40:56
quarter of this year from Bobby Kennedy studies as to what the
41:00
precise role of vaccines and autism is.
41:04
I think it'll take a while to unravel a very, very complex
41:09
scenario given the fact there are so many vaccines being given
41:13
to children now, but I remain optimistic.
41:18
But the the battle is also a little bit more complex.
41:23
It's not just about which vaccines are safe and effective
41:29
in, in my view, I don't think any are, but it's also the fact
41:34
that the Pharmaceutical industry is in bed with governments
41:37
everywhere. And so, you know, you have
41:38
mandatory vaccines, you know, and so like, schools won't let
41:44
kids in unless they have certain vaccines.
41:46
And so now it becomes a a very big challenge just to live.
41:52
Yes, and they make it as difficult as possible.
41:54
I think Tony fact she said something to the effect in in
41:58
the COVID era, He said when you make things difficult for people
42:02
in their lives, then they lose their ideological bullshit and
42:06
get vaccinated. What an appalling situation.
42:11
If you make things difficult for people in their lives, you've
42:14
lost your job, you've lost your income, your family are going to
42:17
starve. We're going to force you, we're
42:19
going to coerce you with any weapon available to us to make
42:23
sure you comply with our diccat that you're going to get the
42:26
vaccine. This is the kind of person that
42:29
has destroyed public confidence in public health And and it's a
42:33
fact. And and I there's nothing
42:38
nothing good about that man is science.
42:41
Broken. Yes, I think the world science
42:44
itself knows. The true science is not the
42:47
ability to freely ask questions and answer them in a proper
42:51
scientific setting is not. But that's not science.
42:55
Vaccine science isn't science. Pharmaceutical industry science
42:58
isn't science. That is not the appropriate
43:01
application of of the scientific method.
43:04
So science itself, pure science with a capital S remains as ever
43:10
as it ever was a, you know, a, a laudable goal to seek to attain
43:16
the corruption of science delivered in a small with a
43:20
small S is, is, yeah. And even you look at the
43:24
journals now Bobby Kennedy has said anyone with the National
43:28
Institutes of Health grant is cannot publish in the following
43:33
journals because they're corrupt.
43:35
The BMJ, The Lancet, the whatever the American.
43:39
I don't know whether the BMJ was in there, but the the New
43:43
England Journal of Medicine, these kind of things.
43:45
So yeah, there's the system is broken.
43:49
I mean even multiple editors of multiple journals themselves
43:53
have said the whole peer review process of journals that
43:57
everything is just all corrupt and broken.
43:59
Yeah, they've become a mouthpiece for the
44:01
Pharmaceutical industry. Were you on your own in this?
44:06
Were you a Lone Ranger? Or did you have scientists,
44:11
perhaps even in secret, supporting you and and and being
44:15
on your side? In secret, yes, very few were
44:23
prepared to stand up and be counted.
44:25
There were some, I mean they've a few come to mind, outstanding
44:30
people like Marcel Kinsborne, late Marcel Kinsborne from Tufts
44:34
University, who would represent children, brain injured children
44:39
in vaccine court in America, people like that.
44:43
But they were a small handful. The Pharmaceutical industry now
44:49
knows that more and more people this this, it's almost like a
44:53
critical mass now. I think that's right.
44:55
I think it's become unstoppable. It's become a major force and it
45:00
is a testament to perseverance. I think that people have kept
45:05
pushing and pushing and parents have kept insisting, insisting.
45:08
And, and in the end you can move mountains and occasionally it
45:13
takes something like COVID to really mobilise a very large
45:19
number of people, a number of very good scientists.
45:22
Yes, they've lost their jobs. Yes, they've suffered the same
45:25
fate as I have in many ways. But they've been resolute in
45:31
their commitment to answering this question, testifying before
45:35
Congress and writing papers. And they've they've survived,
45:40
they've thrived, they've continued their work.
45:42
And that's very, very encouraging.
45:46
What's the moral of the story? What is of the story?
45:53
I guess the story has to be has to be written.
45:59
The moral of the story for me goes back to the clinic, it goes
46:05
back to the clinical arena, goes back to the parents story,
46:09
principally the mother's story. And the golden rule of medicine
46:13
is to listen, in particular to listen to mothers.
46:19
Mothers understand their children far better than anyone
46:23
else on the planet. Most certainly more than
46:26
paediatricians who may never have seen them before.
46:30
Mothers have an intuitive insight into the well being of
46:34
their children, What ails them, what makes them better?
46:38
Are they suffering? Are they in pain?
46:40
Whatever it may be, mothers have to trust that instinct.
46:45
Doctors, the men in white coats, the men and women in white coats
46:49
have tried to usurp that extraordinary power, the power
46:53
of maternal insight. Don't let them do it because
46:57
mothers know best. That is what's really kept us
47:00
alive for thought since the beginning of life on this
47:05
planet. And so mothers need to trust in
47:09
their own innate instincts and fathers need to trust in that
47:15
gift in in in their wives or the mothers of their children.
47:18
So that is for me, it's a very, very simple message.
47:24
It's not a complex overarching. It is just what is at the core
47:29
of all of this. And I've met so many mothers who
47:31
said I just knew. I just knew.
47:34
In that clinic. I had this feeling in my gut.
47:37
It wasn't intellectual, it was visceral.
47:40
I had this feeling that this was wrong.
47:42
I knew it was wrong. I wanted to say no and I didn't.
47:46
When you hear that voice, trust it because it's there for a
47:50
very, very good reason. It's a good point that you're
47:53
making there because you're talking about trust, and more
47:56
specifically, trusting mothers. The last few years all we've
47:59
heard is trust the science, trust the doctors, trust the
48:02
experts. God save us from experts.
48:11
Remember when Fauci was on TV and he said if you question me,
48:14
you question science? The arrogance of that statement,
48:22
it's exquisite. It says everything you need to
48:25
know about Tony Fauci. I think, you know, he's a kind
48:29
of almost a villain on the run in this country.
48:32
Now, the way to push back is to arm yourself with knowledge.
48:37
And the way to do that is to I, I don't give advice about
48:42
whether to vaccinate or not. I, I, that's not my job.
48:46
My job is to now to make them films that do the heavy lifting,
48:54
that take all of the information and condense it into an
48:57
entertaining, coherent whole, that do the heavy lifting for
49:02
parents. So I say watch facts.
49:06
Watch 1986, the act. And you and I know that once you
49:10
start that process, once you go down that rabbit hole, you go
49:14
down and down and down and down, and you keep digging and you
49:17
keep reading and you educate yourself.
49:19
And then and only then are you in a position just like you did.
49:24
Only then are you in a position to go to your doctor and say,
49:27
actually, doctor, I have the following 350 questions.
49:30
I'd like you to answer these starting from #1 and do the
49:36
research because the information is there.
49:40
Read the CDC website. Watch facts.
49:44
Look at the conflicting arguments and then come to an
49:48
informed decision because that's what it all is about at the end
49:51
of the day, an informed decision about whether to vaccinate or
49:55
not. If you go to your paediatrician,
49:58
they'll say Oh yeah, they're safe and effective.
50:00
That's not good enough. That's not an informed decision.
50:05
So that's what I say, please get educated.
50:09
The information is there. A lot of people have worked very
50:13
hard to provide that information to you, including, for example,
50:16
the wonderful book by Suzanne Humphreys, Dissolving Illusions.
50:21
The information is there. Read it and then challenge your
50:26
doctor and you will find actually that he knows very
50:29
little because he's not read those books or watched those
50:32
movies. And when you expose his lack of
50:35
information, you will be appalled and you will leave the
50:38
clinic until he's informed himself.
50:42
But Speaking of being appalled, I'm constantly appalled at
50:47
friends who do more research on the next car that they're going
50:53
to buy than on what is going to get injected into their child.
50:58
Yeah, it is an astonishing situation.
51:01
And largely it's come about because we've been reassured by
51:05
the men in the white coats. We've been LED down, We've
51:07
allowed ourselves. Let's be honest, we're
51:09
consenting adults. We can make decisions.
51:12
We've been, we've allowed ourselves to be LED down this
51:15
path in the, in the sort of in the, the trust that we hold
51:23
inappropriately in this case for men in white coats.
51:26
Doctors don't do always know best.
51:28
Doctors often often make mistakes and we need to
51:34
recognise that and challenge it and do our own research.
51:40
OK, Andy, how can I follow your films?
51:47
Well, the films are like I say, available are Wakefield
51:50
mediagroup.com. Wakefield Media is quite a
51:54
mouthful, but there it is Wakefield mediagroup.com and if
51:57
you want to get in touch with us at all, info@wakefieldmedia.com.
52:03
The other one is to go to Yao TV, send people to Yao TV.
52:07
That's our TV channel, streaming channel for independent films,
52:12
and the films are available there as well.
52:13
Yao is a hybrid Eastern word for freedom.
52:16
So freedom, TVY, ow.tv, there you are.
52:23
And on that note, Andrew Wakefield, thank you for joining
52:26
me in the trenches.