Journal withdraws the original MMR vaccine-autism study

The medical journal The Lancet has retracted the 1998 article that was the first to link the MMR vaccine to autism. The withdraw comes hot on the heels of a hearing that found Dr. Andrew Wakefield, the author of that article, acted unethically during the experiments listed in the article.

Full retractions from journals are rare; it is tantamount to saying that the article should have never been published. With this move, The Lancet is effectively stating that the conclusions drawn in the article were incorrect. Put simply, they are saying the conclusion that the MMR vaccine is linked to the development of autism that the article claimed was not good science.

As with all science, no theory can be absolutely proven or disproven. However, nearly all subsequent studies of the vaccine-autism link have found no conclusive evidence that supports Wakefield’s claim. So over ten years after the original study was published, the General Medical Council (GMC) in Britain, where The Lancet is published, took steps to investigate Wakefield’s work.

The language that surrounds the hearing and withdraw is carefully worded. They do not make claims as to whether Wakefield was right or wrong. Rather, GMC’s investigations were aimed at uncovering if Wakefield had acted unethically in his methods of research. And after one of the longest trials in GMC’s history, Wakefield was found to have acted with “callous disregard for the distress and pain the children [he used in the study] might suffer.”

Amongst other experiments, Wakefield, a gastroenterologist, conducted spinal taps of children, an activity which the GMC claims he had neither the ethical approval nor proper training to carry out. In addition, Wakefield did not disclose in the article that “he had been paid to advise [lawyers] acting for parents who believed their children had been harmed by the MMR.” [BBC]

Wakefield’s supposed findings have had a lasting impact. Immediately after its publication in The Lancet, the number of MMR vaccines administered in Britain plummeted, which, inevitably, led to the raise of fatal cases of the measles. Though subsequent studies have discounted Wakefield’s findings, it has been an uphill battle to rebuild the vaccine’s prevelance in society.

Dr Shona Hilton, of the Medical Research Council, said: "We need to continue rebuilding trust with parents that MMR vaccination is safe." [BBC]

However there are still those who believe Wakefield’s findings. As the GMC was handing out its verdict of unethical researching, protestors outside the building made their side of the argument known. One woman stated, “One woman shouted: "These doctors have not failed our children. You are outrageous." [BBC]

And Wakefield himself, who now works in the US, said “"I am extremely disappointed by the outcome. The allegations against me and my colleagues are unfounded and unjust and I invite anyone to examine the contents of these proceedings and come to their own conclusions." [BBC]

The Lancet’s full withdraw of the article, however, shows the voice of the scientific community. In their release, they stated, "We fully retract this paper from the published record."

Dr. Adam Finn, a pediatrician at the University of Bristol Medical School, said: "This is not before time. Let's hope this will do something to re-establish the good reputation of this excellent vaccine. And I hope the country can now draw a line under this particular health scare and move onto new opportunities for vaccination." [BBC]