Italian MMR Autism Decision Overturned

This article reviews a recent ruling from an Italian Court of Appeals that overturns a widely ridiculed decision by a Provincial Court in 2012 that claimed that the MMR vaccine (for measlesmumps and rubella) causes autism. Apparently, that court rejected all other science, and only accepted the fraudulent work of MrAndy Wakefield to validate the claims about the vaccine and autism. The Italian MMR autism decision has started to return as a zombie trope. Probably as a result of the kerfuffle about the anti-vaccine propaganda movie, Vaxxed. 

In June 2012, a provincial court in Rimini, Italy granted compensation to the family of a child named Valentino Bocca. The family alleged that the MMR vaccine Valentino received as part of his childhood immunizations caused his autism, and the court compensated them on that theory. The lower court’s decision was never on very firm grounds: it depended in part on testimony of an expert witness who relied, in turn, on Andrew Wakefield’s debunked study. Unfortunately, this Italian MMR autism decision has been used by anti-vaccine activists as part of their claims that vaccines cause autism.

The Italian MMR autism court decision

On February 13, 2015,  a Court of Appeals in Bologna overturned the decision–a decision that apparently led to a decline in MMR immunization rates in Romagna, an historical district of Italy.

The Court of Appeal accepted the appeal filed by the Ministry of Health (ministero della Sanità). The expert appointed by the court of appeal highlighted that there is no scientific evidence supporting an MMR autism link. The expert highlighted that the lower court expert was wrong to rely on the study by Andrew Wakefield, a study debunked and rejected by the scientific community.

The expert also highlighted that while there is some temporal link between Valentino’s MMR vaccine and autism, in the sense that the diagnosis of autism followed the vaccine, the temporal connection was not strong and does not itself support a causal connection.

The expert, Dr. Lodi, stated that “In the medical history of the child there is not an objective temporal correlation between the gradual emergence of autistic disorders and the MMR vaccine, there is only the fact that the two events occur one before the other, but as shown, this is not sufficient to relate the two events .”

The Bocca’s lawyer, Luca Ventaloro, claimed that he will appeal to the Supreme Court of Cassation (Corte Suprema di Cassazione), the highest court in Italy. He based his intention to appeal on a claim that the expert ignored the latest studies, and highlighted that he is in touch with Andrew Wakefield. There are three problems with that claim:

  1. As far as I know, there are no credible studies, recent or otherwise, that actually support a link between vaccines and autism. There are some fatally flawed published studies, for example, Dr. Hooker’s retracted study, or Dr. Theresa Deisher’s problematic work (also discussed here, here, and here).
  2. There are several recent large scale reviews that highlight the lack of such a link (also discussed here and here).
  3. Andrew Wakefield is not a reliable source on anything related to vaccines, given his history. He has a history of serious ethical violations, of research fraud, of misrepresenting evidence in his self-justificatory book (pdf), Callous Disregard, and in his complaint to the Office of Research Integrity in the CDC, in connection with the so-called #CDCwhistleblower manufactroversy.

In short, the lawyer’s claims have no basis.

Furthermore, appeals to the Court of Cassation cannot be taken on matters of fact, only on matters of law. The claim of ignoring studies seems like a matter of fact–that is, the court got its fact wrong. This should not, on its face, be good grounds for appeal.

While Ventaloro, attorney for the plaintiffs, said he’s optimistic, I expect – and hope – that his optimism, based on such an unfounded set of facts and weak legal basis is misplaced, and that the Court of Cassation will do the right thing, follow the science and uphold the Court of Appeal’s decision. Science shows there is no link between vaccines and autism. On scientific questions, courts should follow the science.

Please help me out by sharing this article. Also, please comment below, whether it's positive or negative. Of course, if you find spelling errors, tell me!

There are two ways you can help support this blog. First, you can use Patreon by clicking on the link below. It allows you to set up a monthly donation, which will go a long way to supporting the Skeptical Raptor
Become a Patron!

Finally, you can also purchase anything on Amazon, and a small portion of each purchase goes to this website. Just click below, and shop for everything.

Dorit Rubinstein Reiss
This article is by Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law (San Francisco, CA), is a frequent contributor to this and many other blogs, providing in-depth, and intellectually stimulating, articles about vaccines, medical issues, social policy and the law. 

Professor Reiss writes extensively in law journals about the social and legal policies of vaccination. Additionally, Reiss is also member of the Parent Advisory Board of Voices for Vaccines, a parent-led organization that supports and advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction of vaccine-preventable disease.

138 Replies to “Italian MMR Autism Decision Overturned”

  1. Pingback: Site Title
  2. I am a private loan lender which have all take to be a genuine lender i give out the best loan to my client at a very convenient rate.The interest rate of this loan is 3%.i give out loan to public and private individuals.the maximum amount i give out in this loan is $1,000,000.00 USD why the minimum amount i give out is 5000.for more information contact us email [email protected]
    Your Full Details:
    Full Name :………
    Country :………….
    Sex :………….
    Tel :………….
    Occupation :……..
    Amount Required :…………
    Purpose of the Loan :……..
    Loan Duration :…………
    Phone Number :………
    Contact email:[email protected]

  3. Do you need personal loan? Does your firm,company or industry need financial assistance? Do you need finance to start your business? Do you need finance to expand your business? We give out loan to interested inviduals who are seeking loan with good faith. Are you seriously in need of an urgent loan contac us at Email: [email protected]
    Your Full Details:
    Full Name:
    Loan Amount Need:
    Loan Duration:
    Phone Number:
    Applied before?
    Monthly Income:
    You are to send this to our Company Email Address: [email protected]

  4. ” Science shows there is no link between vaccines and autism.”

    No, it doesn’t. That’s wishful thinking. If you read what the conclusions of the studies are, you’ll find something like “we couldn’t find any connection between the vaccine and autism”. That’s DIFFERENT. But as usual, fan-boys are more convinced than the researchers themselves. It seems that you are skeptical only with what you don’t like.

    “On scientific questions, courts should follow the science.”

    Everything human is interpretable, even the laws, even the science.
    Science is not something absolute. First they said the mad cow disease is not transmissible to humans. After a little while, they were proved wrong.

  5. I have been HIV positive for 6 years and long for the day to be free of this disease. I would love to be part of any trial that helped find the cure, i have an undetectable viral load and CD4 count of around 1100..
    I have tried almost everything but I couldn’t find any solution on my disease, despite all these happening to me, i always spend a lot to buy a HIV drugs from hospital and taking some several medications but no relieve, until one day i was just browsing on the internet when i came across a great post of !Michelle! who truly said that she was been diagnose with HIV and was healed that very week through the help of this great powerful healing spell doctor ,I wonder why he is called the great Dr, ADUWAWA, i never knew it was all because of the great and perfect work that he has been doing that is causing all this. so I quickly contacted him, and he ask me some few questions and so i did all the things he asked me to do,He ask me to buy some herbs and which I did for my cure,only to see that at the very day which he said i will be healed, all the strength that has left me before rush back and i becomes very strong and healthy, this disease almost kills my life all because of me, so i went to hospital to give the final test to the disease and the doctor said i am HIV negative, i am very amazed and happy about the healing doctor ADUWAWA gave to me from the ancient part of Africa, you can email him now for your own healing too on his email: ( [email protected] ) or call him on +2348131195952,………………. I thank Dr, ADUWAWA

  6. Skeptikal Raptor and Dorit Reiss . It must be painful for you to continually be engaging in a battle of wits with the unarmed. Keep up the good fight.

  7. The headline to this discussion is completely untrue. The decision has not been overturned. Instead, an article by Dorit the Bot says, “While Ventaloro, attorney for the plaintiffs, is optimistic, I expect–and hope–that his optimism, based on such an unfounded set of facts and weak legal basis is misplaced, and that the Court of Cassation will do the right thing, follow the science and uphold the Court of Appeal’s decision. ”

    Wishful thinking.

    Also, try this on:

    1. Obviously, your legal education is woefully lacking. The Court of Appeals is the final statement on the matter, unless the Italian Supreme court, the Court of Cassation, accepts the case, which it may not.

      Sorry that you’re so confused about basic legal knowledge. Shall I point you to some good elementary school courses in law?

    2. The court of appeal overturned the decision. The attorney’s opinion notwithstanding, right now it’s overturned on appeal. Saying anything else is simply incorrect.

    3. Heh. That’s a blog post from a crank anti-vaccine, anti-science attorney, who uses the junk science of the disgraced and discredited former doctors Andrew Wakefield and Mark Geier.

      Wishful thinking, Ms. Craig?

      1. Your cogent analysis amazes me. All you have done is discredit the author in your usual fashion and as usual, made a fool of yourself. Typical of this blog.

          1. Let me take you through this very slowly as I know you have trouble understanding.

            You are pro-vaccine, yes? Therefore, anyone who presents an opposite argument is anti-vaccine, yes? That should be obvious. Therefore, to “use crank anti-vaccine” to describe a person who disagrees with you is just plain stupid and is meaningless. Not only that, your closed mind rejects their argument, not because of the argument but because you have labelled them.

            So, all arguments that don’t agree with yours are rejected by you, not because of the argument but because of your closed mind.

            Same with science. In this arena you are completely clueless. Any scientific study that reaches a conclusion that you don’t agree with is labelled “junk” science and dismissed.

            You seem to think that labelling people or their work denigrates them or their work. It does not. It simply shows your limited thinking. Does it enter your tiny mind for one moment that people care what you label them? There are vast numbers of highly credentialed people working away to find the truth about vaccination and then there’s you squawking on the side lines pretending to be an RN. Fortunately, you fool no one except people who like or use this blog.

            You belong on this blog. Stay here.

            1. I’d suggest the argument here should be rejected because it’s simply incorrect. There’s not a lot of way to read the situation when an appeal court accepts an appeal and finds the opposite way than the lower court than that the decision has been overturned.

            2. Yes, I am pro vaccine and pro science…and…you Ms. Craig?

              You’ve yet to come up with any links to reliable studies to refute what Professor Reiss has stated about the overturning of the lower court ruling by the Italian Court of Appeals.

              You could always review these studies which examined the vaccination records of millions of children and matched those vaccination records with the clinical records, and found that no links exist between any vaccine, any ingredient in vaccines, the spacing and timing of vaccines…and the onset of autism or any other developmental disability or disorder:


            3. As usual, you don’t get the point. I am referring to your “That’s a blog post from a crank anti-vaccine, anti-science attorney, who uses the junk science of the disgraced and discredited former doctors Andrew Wakefield and Mark Geier.” Not the Italian Court of Appeals.

              You seem to think that labelling people or their work denigrates them or their work. It does not. It simply shows your limited thinking. But that’s all you can do.

            4. When you link to a crank blogger who references the junk science of two disgraced and discredited ex-doctors whose licenses were revoked by the GMC (Wakefield) and multiple medical licensing boards (Geier), I’ll gladly point out to you that you have skewed thinking.

              My comment was not libelous, Ms. Craig. I suggest that you get some basic knowledge of American law, before you make any more comments.

            5. There you go again with your “crank blogger” and “junk science”. You seem to think that labelling people or their work denigrates them or their work. It does not. It simply shows your limited thinking.

              I suggest you do some wider reading and try to become educated. How about going back to school? It would be a better use of your time than hours writing crap.

            6. You are crossing swords with a TROLL who has memorized all the plopaganda from her P-vac 101 class

            7. You’re right and although she’s a complete waste of time I’m going to tail her while she denigrates the nursing profession by using RN, a designation to which she is no longer entitled to because she’s retired and has not kept up her nursing hours, completed the required CE, nor paid her dues. ( And no Dorit Reiss, I have not done a RCT to prove that — it is a conclusion based on my knowledge of how nursing administration works.)

              AutismDad – this low level of discourse is not new. I wrote elsewhere: Winterburn writes in 1885, “It seems ludicrous that a question of so much import, and of so purely a scientific nature, should be a matter of partisan clamor, but it ceases to be comic, and becomes painfully embarrassing, when men cannot discuss a question of vital importance to themselves and the race without being accused of sinister motives or of mental unsoundness. And yet this is just what has happened ever since the earliest years of Vaccination.”

              Winterburn, an American MD, Ph.D, is quite clear about the cause of this decline in the standards of scientific discourse. “Jenner began it in his efforts to suppress every fact which told against his theory, and his mantle has passed with the passing years to men of like aptitude for the suppression of disagreeable truths.”

              Winterburn, GW. The Value of Vaccination, Boericke, 1885. Republished by General Books, 2009.

            8. Well done. It refreshing to read such insightful and intelligent writing instead of the drivel and mentally lazy pollution in many other posts.

            9. You and your “Imposter” pal are already “tailing me” whenever I post comments on the Disqus commenting platform.

              When did you give up your Registered Nurses license in Canada? Was it fifty or sixty years ago?

            10. Why do you lie so much? I don’t respond until you post your fact free, hate-mongering comments to those you stalk.

            11. Have I asked you to respond to any of my comments, guest?

              seniorcraig and her buddy the Imposter (lie lady) have been cyber stalking me with their defamatory and libelous comments, for months on the Disqus commenting platform.

              Your faux indignity and your comments which are off topic and content-free, has been duly noted.

            12. So sez Ms. Craig who repeatedly denied the fact that the Remini Italy magistrate’s court was overturned by the Italian Appeals Court.

              Silly woman.

            13. Pro-science. Meaningless. We are all pro-science, but science is not our absolute. We also have the power to reason. We have evolved into thinking beings who are not pacified by blathering, blubbering P-vac statements full of jargon, orchastrated ideological rants or choreographed political spin. We demand and expect respect from doctors and politicians. We are disappointed and disallusioned by the personal attacks on parents with concerns about vaccine safety. We are labelled deviants, enemies of the state, child abusers and more while the vaccine industry causes innumerable levels of injury and illness and death with its pharmaceutical products with FDA, CDC approval.

            14. Heh. You’ve yet to post any cogent comments with links to reliable sources from first tier, peer reviewed medical journals, AutismDad.

              You do not represent the vast majority of parents who have autistic/developmentally disabled children, who do not blame vaccines for their children’s disabilities.

              There are no personal attacks on any of you, yet you and your ilk resort to personal attacks and stalking campaigns against physicians, public health officials, researchers and science bloggers.

            15. No personal attacks against you and your ilk? Credibility ZERO. Why you even respond astounds me. I’m sure it has much to do with a warped and twisted need to appear right.

            16. Your citationless fact-free comments lead us to believe that you have no evidence-based science to back up your statements.

              Show us your proof with any study or research paper which has been published in a *first tier, peer-reviewed medical or science journal that vaccines have ever been linked to the onset of autism…or any other disorder or disease.

              The Dunning-Kruger effect is on florid display here.

              * Age of Autism, the NVIC, Autism One, Generation Rescue, and are NOT first tier, peer-reviewed medical or science journals.

            17. Same old lame old. I’ll waste no time proving anything to you. You obviously have a masters degree in protecting vaccine makers no matter the carnage.

            18. You always have the option of leaving this blog, citationless fact-free tone troll.

            19. You’d love if all who challenge you went away. Maybe you’d get a bonus from Merck.

            20. You forgot the others they like to mention: Mike Adams’ blog and that of Alex Jones; Mercola, Green Med…

              Holy crap, there’s a lot of crap websites out there.

        1. Have you read the articles on that site which Ms. Craig is touting?

          Pick an article on that site and show us how your choice of article is pro science.

    4. An attorney’s hope to win a further appeal – assuming he’ll be granted one – does not make the decision any less overturned. At this point, any win is in his mind. What we have is a court of appeal overturning the lower court’s bad decision.

    5. I read something about diabetes today in a community newspaper. Seems it has more courage that our daily. March 2015 edition. Here’s a quote
      ” Another somewhat controversial cause of diabetes in our companion animals is over vaccination. People usually receive vaccinations in childhood and most of these provide a lifetime of protection. But dogs and cats receive the same vaccinations year after year. Vaccines can cause an over-stimulation of the immune systemand this can lead to immune-mediated -diseases like diabetes.”
      ” As with humans, diabetes is on the rise in our dogs and cats. Since we control much of our pet’s lives we should try to keep them safe from this potentially life-threatening disease. We can do that by controlling the pet’scaloric intake……getting serious about exercising our pets and avoiding unnecesarry vaccinations.”
      There is no author named. But one can read between the lines plus substitute our children where it says dogs, cats, or pets. An error in this story is that people vaccinations provide a lifetime of protection. But I blame that on fear of telling the truth about vaccines. But consider that these dogs and cats to be experimental animals, and what happens to them likely happens to us.

      1. Yes, rarely are pets considered in postings.

        I thought you might find this interesting:

        The mantra in the media is vaccines don’t cause autism. Dr. Catherine DeSoto who specializes in Developmental Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience says differently. First,her further credentials: published in leading peer reviewed journals ranging
        from the Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, to Clinical Toxicology, to The Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. She’s reviewed 58 research articles involving autism and toxic metals found in vaccines.

        The result: 15 showed no link, 43 which is 74%, SUPPORTED a link. Why are we told “conclusively” there’s no link?

        I think you’ll find the following short video helpful by neuroscientist Dr. Chris Shaw (under 2 mins.)

          1. It might help if you don’t engage with the shills. Keep positive by reading articles on
            for example, and ignore the background idiocy. Have you read Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History by Suzanne Humphries MD and Roman Bystrianyk? It’s an amazingly well-researched book and is receiving great acclaim. Suzanne also has some great lectures on the immune system on YouTube.

            1. The shills and P-vacs helped me know right from wrong and motivate me. but its getting boring because of the rehearsed, orchastrated jargon and lies they spew.

            2. Dr. Humphries is ( was?) a nephrologist with no formal training in immunology, neurology or infectious disease. Many of the graphs she uses in her book look at vaccine adverse effects from the 1800s- I find that to be irrelevant today due to improvements in safety and the obvious decrease in morbidity associated with vaccines. I emailed Dr. Humphries and she was quite rude. She asked me why I thought I had the “right” to email her and question her opinion even though she makes her personal email public on the page advertising her book. She didn’t answer my questions about how her graphs looked only at mortality and not suffering and the corresponding increase in health care costs associated with hospitalizations from infectious disease. Increases in survival for diseases such has measles, polio, tetanus.etc are the result of better hygiene, diet and certainly better medical care with mechanical ventilation, antibiotics, emergency services, and better recognition and education among parents. Her co-author has no background in medicine. I would recommend focusing on those who have been studying these phenomena their entire lives, and have practical experience as well.

            3. So you’re saying that no one without formal training in immunology, neurology or infectious diseases can learn about vaccines. Does Paul Offitt have these qualifications?

            4. I’m not sure I understand your question- what does Paul Offitt have to do with my response?

            5. you seem to be interested in trashing Humphries because she has ” no formal training in immunology, neurology or infectious disease”. My point is that neither has Paul Offitt.

              I do not find history irrelevant. In fact a knowledge of history is vital in order to understand what is happening today.

            6. Paul Offitt’s specialty is infectious disease and pediatrics- not that I’m a fan of his though.

            7. And now Humphries’ specialty is vaccination. She studies it full time. You seem to find it hard to believe that people can actually learn without getting a piece of paper from a college, Mike.

            8. She’s a homeopath who refers to vaccines as “disease matter” and prescribes Vitamin C to cure pertussis in lieu of pertussis-containing vaccines.

              Apparently, you “study vaccinations full time” and that activity hasn’t provided you with a basic education in immunology, bacteriology, virology or epidemiology.

            9. So sez the citationless fact-free tone troll.

              When are you going to post a comment that is on topic and provide some proof for your assertions?

            10. Ms. Craig and her colleagues who regularly defame Dr. Paul Offit and other respected scientists, researchers and doctors, are anti-vaccine and anti-science to the core.

              That’s what you get when you engage these ignorant-of-basic-science trolls.

            11. What we are saying is that Suzanne Humphries is unqualified to discuss vaccines, which she refers to as “disease matter”:

              What we are saying is that she let her specialty lapse and is now a homeopath; she was also the subject of two blog posts by Orac:


              Dr. Paul Offit is a pediatrician and a pediatric infectious diseases specialist with hundreds of published research papers and an author of several excellent books about vaccines and junk science. He is also the director of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP)-Vaccine Education Center.

              Because of his advocacy on behalf of children, he’s been the subject of death threats and the subject of libelous blog posts on Age of Autism and other anti-vaccine, anti-science blogs.

            12. Maybe people don’t like him because he owns stock in vaccine manufacturing companies. They don’t call him Dr. Profit for nothing. And btw, as one RN to another – I wouldn’t want you for my nurse.

        1. What is your source for Dr. De Soto’s review? She has studied heavy metal toxicity and a correlation with autism, but nothing specifically about vaccines. Heavy metal toxicity can occur from a number of sources. Can you point me to an article that looks specifically at vaccines and autism by Dr. De Soto?

          1. DeSoto, M.C.& Hitlan, R.T. (2010). Sorting out the spinning of autism: heavy metals and the question of incidence. Acta Neurobiologica Experimentalis, 70 (2). 165-76. full text available

            1. Did you read the article? Here is a quote- the authors are not concluding that vaccines are the cause of heavy metal toxicity- it is multifactorial:

              In this paper, we are not focusing on vaccines,
              which is but one exposure pathway, but on
              exposure to toxic heavy metals as a broader class, of
              which a vaccine containing a heavy metal preservative
              would be but one possibility of exposure. It
              should be clear that any link between toxins and
              autism is almost certainly mediated by one’s genetic
              makeup, and that other toxins, such as organophosphates
              (Eskenazi et al. 2007) likely play a role as well.

            2. To repeat, first, her further credentials: published in leading peer reviewed journals ranging
              from the Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, to Clinical Toxicology, to The Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. She’s reviewed 58 research articles involving autism and toxic metals found in vaccines.

              The result: 15 showed no link, 43 which is 74%, SUPPORTED a link. Why are we told “conclusively” there’s no link?

              This is only one review. If you want to research the others, look them up. I am quoting the conclusion of a review of 58 studies, 15 of which showed no link. However, 43 did, so the question is not definitely answered is it?

            3. I read the conclusion, and once again- there is NO mention of vacccination as being the cause of heavy metal toxicity Those are your words, not the authors’. You can’t extrapolate a study to make it substantiate your personal point of view when the author wasn’t even making the correlation you use for your argument. The fact is you would get more mercury in one six ounce serving of tuna than you would in a flu vaccine. People have died from mercury toxicity after consuming fish contaminated with mercury. There is no doubt that heavy metal poisoning occurs, but the FDA has found the amounts in vaccines to be too low to cause toxicity. And remember that mercury was removed from all childhood vaccines in 2001 ( that is, all vaccinations a child would receive in the first year of life contain no mercury). Since that step was taken, autism has continued to rise at the same rate. Do a PubMed search and you will find numerous articles looking specifically at vaccines and autism that find no link whatsoever. If you can find me an article from a legitimate source that looks at a direct link between vaccines and autism, I’ll be happy to read it. Please don’t send me any blog links as they are often devised by people with absolutely no science background.

            4. I repeat, I was not referring to the article I posted.

              It’s aluminum in vaccines that causes the trouble.

              I know you’re desperate to prove there’s no link between vaccines and autism, but if you don’t use the word ‘autism’ and use ‘brain damage’ (that leads to autism), you will find plenty of evidence. Somehow you have led a discussion about Dissolving Illusions into autism. Not playing.

              I’m not sending you anything at all. I am not interested in engaging with someone with thinks you have to have a degree in medicine in order to graph official statistics.

            5. They put Al in instead of Mercury and mercury is still in some vaccines. The blood brain barrier is open in children less than 2 years old and if they eat gluten it may stay open much longer. Round up may hurt the gut bacteria that helps detox and GMO corn may hurt the gut lining. Kids who got vaccines after 3 years old and not many at one time did not get Autism. The Hept B vaccine for one day old babies is not good and pregnant moms should not get vaccines. Too many vaccines. If half of the kids are Autistic by the year 2025 and no one is doing anything about it, how will the country survive. It is mostly the boys who get Autism.

            6. You’re making lots of claims here- where do you get your information?

            7. Many sources. …. Youtube
              Parents Right to VACCINE INFORMED CONSENT | Dr. Paul’s Senate Testimony

            8. All anecdotal.

              The plural of anecdote is anecdotes…not data.

              Have you figured out the differences between a preservative and an adjuvant, yet?

            9. Citation by YouTube. How quaint. How about some links to citations from studies/research papers that have been published in first tier, peer reviewed medical and science journals? PubMed is you friend.

            10. “They put Al in instead of Mercury and mercury is still in some vaccines”

              You’re obviously confused, because you don’t know the difference between a preservative (Thimerisol) formerly used in multi dose vials of children’s vaccines and an adjuvant (Al) which is still used in certain vaccines to provide a faster and higher level of immunity.

              The rest of the statements in your comment are not based on science and display a spectacular ignorance about basic science.

              Come back to post when you learn the difference between a vaccine preservative and a vaccine adjuvant.

            11. because thats what it is called when you have the minority opinion right?

  8. Complete Garbage from a web troll Dorit Reiss. The whole writing is orchastrated and choreographed by a pro-vaccine conspiracy nutter.

        1. It’s so nice to see your ad hominem attacks because you actually lack even the smallest amount of evidence in support of your lies. I’m OK with that. You are a very small man trying to attack someone dedicated to social policy. You lose.

        2. No need to wait, I refuted the whole thing. If you are waiting for me to entertain her biased opinions or want me to debate utter ribbish, I will not. I leave that to sheeple and others who feel the need to rant and vent.

            1. Yawn. Nothing like bias to twist information and imply what you think. One court chose one decision, another chose a different one. No winner yet. Its not DR’s bias story that will make a difference, so its worthless no matter what she writes.

            2. A higher court, the Italian Court of Appeals, overturned the Rimini Court’s decision which was based on Andrew Wakefield’s fraudulent research.

            3. No. These are not equal court. A trial court is below a court of appeals. When a court of appeals reviews a lower court’s decision, it can affirm or overturn it. The appeal court’s decision is the one that stands. Here it overturned it.

          1. You refuted nothing AutismDad.

            Have you made a claim on behalf of your autistic child in the United States Court of Federal Claims?

            If you did make a claim, was your child awarded damages for “vaccine-induced-autism”?

            1. NVICP denies 4 of 5 claims so it can say statistics show only one fifth as many injuries.

    1. Dorit admist her family owns stock in big pharma:

      DMH to Dorit Reiss
      4 months ago
      And what would be your conflicts of interest?

      Dorit Reiss to DMH
      4 months ago My family owns, as part of its portfolio, stock of GSK.
      I found that out the first time I gave a talk about vaccines – when I looked into that.
      As a reason to speak up about this topic, from where I stand,it’s

      pretty irrelevant. What are yours?

      DMH to Dorit Reiss
      4 months ago
      You didn’t know your family own GSK stock?
      I have no conflicts.

      Dorit Reiss to DMH
      4 months ago
      Not until I looked into it. My husband handles our portfolio.
      No conflicts? No case before NVICP? No work in alternative medicine,
      making money off selling alleged alternatives for vaccines?

      DMH to Dorit Reiss
      4 months ago
      So first you gave a talk about vaccines, then you looked into whether
      you had stock in a company that makes vaccines, then you became
      interested in vaccines. Gotcha. In answer to your questions: no, no, and no.

      Dorit Reiss to DMH
      4 months ago
      No. First I started talking about vaccines on the internet. Then I
      wrote blog posts on the topic. Then I scheduled a panel on the topic
      with several colleagues. As preparation, I was asked if I had conflicts
      of interests. I knew of none. The form included “do you own stock in
      pharmaceutical companies”. So I asked my husband if we had stock.

      I hope that’s clear.

      DMH to Dorit Reiss
      4 months ago
      So, you really should disclose this when arguing for vaccines.

      http://articles.philly (dot)

      1. I was once a janitor for GlaxoSmithKline, Upjohn, Beckman, and several other pharmaceutical companies. I’m completely influenced by the gold bars that they give me.

        Here’s the point. Maybe YOUR ethics are such that you could be bought out by a $1.50 profit. Maybe even $1 million. Most people cannot be. Just because you’d sell your children and your mother out for $10.00, doesn’t mean the rest of us do.

        And let’s get to your stupid assertion that somehow Dorit has the ability to move the GSK stock by anything. GSK has a market cap, which means the total number of shares of stock in public trading X the current price per share, is over $114 billion. Even if she owned 10,000 shares, with a net value of $450,000, she’d gain a few thousand dollars IF she could manipulate the stock price. If Professor Reiss was manipulating the stock price, then she’s really bad at it, because over the past year, it’s dropped by nearly 20%.

        But I still can’t get over the stupidity of your argument. YOU think people sell themselves cheaply or even not so cheaply. There isn’t an amount of money I could be given that would have convinced to me to harm one patient, one life on this planet. None. In fact, I invented something that saved thousands of lives, and I gave away the rights to the company, so that they could save thousands of lives. Yes, I made a lot of money. But it wasn’t enough to sacrifice my ethics.

        So just because you’re a fool and immoral, doesn’t mean Professor Reiss, myself, Paul Offit, or the Chief Janitor of GSK would ever follow your immorality.

        Now go be a troll someplace else.

      2. Heh. You’re accusing Professor Reiss of having a motive for posting her legal opinion and for posting comments?

        You do know don’t you, that if you have any retirement investments in large cap, medium cap or small cap mutual funds, which are managed by investment firms, you cannot avoid having investments in pharmaceutical companies…investment banks…automobile manufacturers…and hundreds of other companies?

        How about staying on topic and give us your opinion about the overturning of the lower court’s decision ( which was based on the faulty, fraudulent research of Andrew Wakefield), by the Italian Appeals Court.

    1. They will simply ignore it and pretend it didn’t happen. Just like they pretend that Walker-Smith’s High Court Case overturned the GMC decision on Andrew Wakefield.

      1. If they’re their usual less than bright selves, they’ll end up claiming that “Big Pharma” paid off the court.
        That would be unfortunate for them, as the Italian courts tend to not sit idle when such claims are made and extradition requests soon follow for libel and other charges.

        1. If you think government health agencies can’t pull the strings in court cases you are clueless. Wakefield’s work on 12 children was never on trial. What was on trial was whether he, Murch and Walker Smith would bow down, which they didn’t. Murch found innocent. Walker Smith exonerated. Both accused of trumped up things never that never happened. No different for Wakefield, except he decided for some reason not to pursue it.

            1. Pointing the finger? And if you think I’ll read the garbage you linked to get bent.

            2. I have read it. Is it some major surprise one person doesn’t know what another person is doing? Why don’t you tell us in what context it was asked AND answered. And what horrible things he mentioned.

            3. It is a major surprise when people are working on a research project and one person doesn’t tell the others that he is secretly working for a group of lawyers.

              It is a major surprise when people are working on a research project together and one person changes the data without the knowledge of the others.

              It is a major surprise when people are working on a research project together and there is agreement to change the wording in the paper, but one person doesn’t do so.

              It is a major surprise when people are working on a research project together and one of them gives a press conference providing an entirely different interpretation of the data to what everyone else thinks.

            4. It wasn’t a research project. Wakefield accepted payment for services rendered. Its called a job.

            5. So, his Lancet article was bought? A service provided? Results predetermined? Thank you for saying that.

              Well, more than ever he should have told the other authors.

            6. That’s it Doritt invent what I said instead of understanding it. I can’t even interpret this nonsense.

            7. Give me some advise then, and I may possibly get down to your level.

            8. Walker-Smith was not exonerated. The Court of Appeal (Leveson LJ) has made it quite clear that a quashed decision on grounds of lack of sufficient reasoning is not exoneration. It simply voids the findings, with the option by the finder to set out the reasoning or even re-hear the case. The GMC chose not to because Walker-Smith had withdrawn from medical practice, and the case was of no relevance to Wakefield.

              Wakefield was not funded to appeal (by the same body that funded Walker-Smith) because Wakefield’s own lawyers came to learn (including from parents) that their client was lying, and advised the funders that he would not prevail on appeal. I can prove this, and, in due course, I will publish it.

            9. Makes some sense Brian Deer would be represented by a picture of a slobbering dog.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.