What do you think?
Rate this book
Callous Disregard: Autism and Vaccines—The Truth Behind a Tragedy
Andrew Wakefield reveals the the inside story of the vaccine-autism connection, and his controversial research.
As Andrew Wakefield states in his prologue, “If autism does not affect your family now, it will. If something does not change—and change soon—this is almost a mathematical certainty. This book affects you also. It is not a parochial look at a trivial medical spat in the United Kingdom, but dispatches from the battlefront in a major confrontation—a struggle against compromise in medicine,corruption of science, and a real and present threat to children in the interests of policy and profit. It is a story of how ‘the system’ deals with dissent among its doctors and scientists.”
In the pursuit of possible links between childhood vaccines, intestinal
inflammation, and neurologic injury in children, Wakefield lost his job in London’s Royal Free Hospital, his country of birth, his career, and his medical license. A recent General Medical Council
ruling stated that he was “dishonest, irresponsible and showed callous disregard for the distress and pain of children.” Maligned by the medical establishment and mainstream media, Wakefield endeavors to set the record straight in Callous Disregard. While explaining
what really happened, he calls out the organizations and individuals that are acting not for the sake of children affected by autism, but in their own self-interests.
Audible Audio
First published May 24, 2010
47 people are currently reading
306 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews
September 30, 2013
poorly written book by a disgraced doctor with an introduction by a playboy centerfold.
the sequel to this, Charlatan by pope brock is much better written and shows how medicine like wakefield's can succeed.
the sequel to this, Charlatan by pope brock is much better written and shows how medicine like wakefield's can succeed.
July 25, 2016
My contempt for this man and his book knows no bounds.
July 3, 2014
I would give this book zero starts if I could. This book is incredibly difficult to follow and poorly written. It screams of a child caught doing something bad who is saying, "Yea, I was caught and did something wrong , but ........" Not worth your time.
April 10, 2014
Its scary what the media can accomplish when there is an agenda. Everything I thought I knew was just a distortion of the truth. You don't have to believe him, but you should really understand what happened before commenting one way or the other.
January 1, 2018
Wakefield has caused an incredible amount of harm to the world with his theories, none of which have ever held up to scrutiny. He used a sample of 12 children and from that declared MMR dangerous and recommended cessation. That is about as irresponsible as it gets. His study has been reviewed and analyzed, and millions of children in several countries have been studied, and not once has he been validated.
The best thing that could happen is if his works are gathered up, put in a pile and burned, except for a single copy to be placed in a museum under lock and key. It can be a warning to us all what irresponsibility can lead to.
The best thing that could happen is if his works are gathered up, put in a pile and burned, except for a single copy to be placed in a museum under lock and key. It can be a warning to us all what irresponsibility can lead to.
August 13, 2010
I found this book to be well documented, insightful, and a good review of research criteria past and present.
Although I will leave a window of doubt open regarding how well Dr. Wakefield has been able to avoid the pitfalls of noteriety, it is my belief that his opponents continue to attack him from a misinformed platform; that MMR vaccine CAUSES autism. I respectfully ask that they read the research and respond to the associations found between gut health and autism, which was the major premise of his research.
Although I will leave a window of doubt open regarding how well Dr. Wakefield has been able to avoid the pitfalls of noteriety, it is my belief that his opponents continue to attack him from a misinformed platform; that MMR vaccine CAUSES autism. I respectfully ask that they read the research and respond to the associations found between gut health and autism, which was the major premise of his research.
Read
July 14, 2013I was able to see Dr. Wakefield speak last week and bought the book at the event. I'm glad that he is still out there working for the truth over established norms.
Vaccines are meant to cause an extreme reaction in the body; that's just how they work. I'm interested to see how he lays out his conclusions and how he was railroaded by the British Medical Board. After seeing his presentation I am convinced he was railroaded.
The opening warns you that this is a dry boring book, full of medical fact and low on narrative. The man speaks the truth.
Vaccines are meant to cause an extreme reaction in the body; that's just how they work. I'm interested to see how he lays out his conclusions and how he was railroaded by the British Medical Board. After seeing his presentation I am convinced he was railroaded.
The opening warns you that this is a dry boring book, full of medical fact and low on narrative. The man speaks the truth.
October 4, 2015
brilliant and due diligence documentation
Clear rebuttal for all the wrongful charges. A witch hunt by contemporary academic and physician leagues to protect their trade and self interest. A persecution like the day of Galileo and the medieval church yes still medieval with relentless brutality to protect their own survival. Yet nature can not be killed by cowardice and ignorance.
Clear rebuttal for all the wrongful charges. A witch hunt by contemporary academic and physician leagues to protect their trade and self interest. A persecution like the day of Galileo and the medieval church yes still medieval with relentless brutality to protect their own survival. Yet nature can not be killed by cowardice and ignorance.
July 12, 2020
Andrew Wakefield is a fraud and a hack. His falsified data and bogus science has caused thousands of deaths, yet people continue to believe him because it fits their Big Pharma and government "mind control" narrative. There's a reason why his medical license was revoked - he's a total disgrace to the profession and should be locked up for life.
September 2, 2013
The book was interesting, read like a text book.I have heard of too many people whose kids got autism after the vaccine. In my mind there is no way that it is not related. I do not think we can trust the big corporations that make the vaccine. For them it is all about $$.
June 8, 2010
English physician Andrew Wakefield's research showed a link between the MMR vaccine, bowel problems and potentially autism. As a result he lost his license to practice medicine in England. This book tells his side of the story, declaring how government defends the pharmaceutical industry over children.
This is not an easy book to read. You have to have a good understanding of medical terminology to follow it. You also need a good understanding of Wakefield's story before reading the book as he seems to write from the perspective that you know what has gone on. So it is easy to get lost. It gets rather long and technical in places as well. Mercola's interview with Wakefield is a better way to learn about his experience if you just want a general understanding.
This is not an easy book to read. You have to have a good understanding of medical terminology to follow it. You also need a good understanding of Wakefield's story before reading the book as he seems to write from the perspective that you know what has gone on. So it is easy to get lost. It gets rather long and technical in places as well. Mercola's interview with Wakefield is a better way to learn about his experience if you just want a general understanding.
June 10, 2017
I totally believe Dr Wakefield's story. He was treated unfairly and dishonestly. It drives me nuts seeing him thrown under the bus and lied about on a seemingly daily basis to this day. Seriously, people need to find a new scapegoat; they have beat this one to death. At any rate, the book itself was a little dry, and occasionally hard to follow. I am glad I read it none the less. I was after the other side of the story, not entertainment. Many children are suffering without proper research being done regarding the true causes of regressive autism, and it is criminal.
July 22, 2015
It was fascinating to hear his side of the story. The information he covers is startling and it really allows you to see how it works from the inside. He does have an axe to grind and the detail he goes into while trying to address each false claim is dry but I understand why he did it and I would be doing the same. Thank goodness for people like Andrew Wakefield, may the universe lay her bountiful blessings upon you.
January 18, 2022
review of
Andrew J. Wakefield's Callous Disregard—Autism and Vaccines—The Truth Behind A Tragedy
by tENTATIVELY, a cONVENIENCE - January 12-18, 2022
For the full review go here: "Everything's Peachy-Keen: Don't Look, Behind the Curtain": https://www.goodreads.com/story/show/...
As far as I can recall, I'd never heard of Wakefield until I started researching in connection w/ the newly announced 'pandemic' in mid-March, 2020. I immediately recognized that the monolithic narrative we were being fed by the mass media was propaganda of a most insidious nature but the details of that took some time to accrue for me. Wakefield was someone who was referred to disparagingly in the mass media as espousing the notion that vaccination causes autism. Ha ha, what a fool. Given that I cd see that a stupendous amt of spin doctoring was going on about everything medical I decided to learn more about what Wakefield himself was saying so that I wdn't just be another fool accepting the word of the FACT CHOKERS & not thinking for myself. Hence I bought 2 bks of his, this being the 1st one I've read. It ISN'T the 1st bk I've read on autism, I didn't want to start w/ him, I decided to start w/ a bk by a friend that I know & trust (w/o necessarily agreeing w/ her 100%) so I read Elizabeth Fein's Living on the Spectrum - Autism and Youth in Community (you can find my review here: https://www.goodreads.com/story/show/... ) wch I found to be excellent & wch gave me a good introduction to some aspects of the subject.
I really wasn't sure what to expect of Wakefield. On Wikipedia, wch I have both respect for & criticisms of, I find Wakefield disparaged to a degree that shows that the authors of the article feel that they're above a retaliatory lawsuit. The entry begins:
"Andrew Jeremy Wakefield (born 1956) is a British anti-vaccine activist, former physician, and discredited academic who was struck off the medical register for his involvement in The Lancet MMR autism fraud, a 1998 study that falsely claimed a link between the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_...
Callous Disregard is Wakefield's defense against these allegations, wch are presented as 'fact' in the above entry. In anticipation of reading Wakefield's bk I wasn't really sure of what to expect. It seemed possible to me that I might actually agree w/ the allegations against him & that I might just find him to be a bad doctor, a shallow sensationalism seeker, a fraud. However, I found Callous Disregard to be very convincing &, at the very least, I'm inclined to consider Wakefield as a sincere & knowledgable doctor who's been scapegoated. I also found that Wakefield's position on the matters he's associated w/ is far from what he's presented as having sd. I find it particularly egregious that on the Wikipedia page sidebar he's summarized as "Known for Lancet MMR autism fraud".
It's interesting to note that in The Lancet's entry sidebar there's nothing discrediting the journal - this despite their having published at least 3 papers that've been retracted, the most recent of wch was something far more clearly fraudulent than what Wakefield's been accused of:
"In May 2020, The Lancet published a metastudy by Dr. Mandeep R. Mehra of the Harvard Medical School and Dr. Sapan S. Desai of Surgisphere Corporation, which concluded that the malaria drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine did not improve the condition of COVID-19 patients, and may have harmed some of them.
"In response to concerns raised by members of the scientific community and the media about the veracity of the data and analyses,The Lancet decided to launch an independent third party investigation of Surgisphere and the metastudy. Specifically, The Lancet editors wanted to "evaluate the origination of the database elements, to confirm the completeness of the database, and to replicate the analyses presented in the paper." The independent peer reviewers in charge of the investigation notified The Lancet that Surgisphere wouldn't provide the requested data and documentation. The authors of the metastudy then asked The Lancet to retract the article, which was done on June 3rd 2020."
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lan...
Now what's particularly noteworthy about this latter scandal is that it seems to've largely slipped past the notice of the general public. Hydroxychloroquine still seems to be 'discredited' even though it's a cheap drug that's been long-since readily available all over the world. It doesn't seem to be far-fetched that Wakefield is so 'discredited' b/c he questions issues of vaccine safety while the fake discrediting of hydroxychloroquine goes largely unnoticed b/c hydroxychloroquine has been presented as being an alternative to COVID-19 vaccination. In other words, in both cases the degree to wch the subject is demonized or swept under the rug depends on the degree to wch it supports Big Pharma's vaccine narrative.
Now, before I go any further w/ this review, I want to give the reader what's my most important take-away from this bk. I make no claim to be entirely accurate in my representation of what Wakefield says, I may be misunderstanding or unintentionally slightly misrepresenting him. Curious readers shd read his words for themselves to get a better understanding. I don't want to add to what appears to be the distortion of Wakefield's public statements. SO, w/ that disclaimer of sorts out of the way, here goes:
Wakefield & his fellow doctors got young patients referred to them who were experiencing gastrointestinal distress AND developmental regression that may've been autism. Some of the parents claimed that these problems started shortly after they rc'vd their MMR (Measles Mumps Rubella) vaccinations. Clinical study of the patients suggested that the vaccination in a minority of recipients might possibly be causing gastrointestinal problems & that these problems could be so severe that the children were unable to develop any further in a normal way but were, instead, regressing under the influence of extreme pain & inadequate digestion of nutrients. It was never claimed by Wakefield & co that the MMR vaccine directly caused autism. It was, instead, suggested that the connection between the MMR vaccine & the gastrointestinal problems in some children, not all, merited further investigation - as did the relationship between the gastrointestinal distress & arrested & regressed development. The patients were mostly very young. Wakefield took the position that single-disease vaccinations were safer b/c they were less of an assault on the body.
The mere suggestion of this possibility was taken as threatening by the medical establishment b/c the possibility of a lawsuit seemed likely. Wakefield was singled out to be scapegoated b/c he had been hired by a lawfirm to do research relevant to side-effects of the MMR vaccine. This hiring did not fund Wakefield's work w/ the patients who were reported on in the eventually retracted Lancet paper in wch the observations alluded to above were set forth. Wakefield had several enemies who wanted to discredit him. In one case, a doctor who eventually testified against him claimed that he hated Wakefield b/c Wakefield was trying to get a Nobel prize & was, therefore, skewing the case studies from the very beginning to support a sensational outcome. In other words, Wakefield's enemies had various ulterior motives for scapegoating him - some of wch might've been related to their own financial relationship to the purveyors of the MMR vaccine. B/c the persecution of Wakefield was so intense, many people saved their own ass by turning against him or, at least, distancing themselves.
That's my summary. I find it reasonable. I find it reasonable that some children might suffer side-effects from a vaccination of 3 viruses at once & that these side-effects cd be so severe that development in, say, an 18 mnth old might be so affected by the side-effects that the child's development wd also be severely impeded &/or regressed. I find it predictable that people in the medical industry wd rush to protect themselves against disgrace & lawsuit by scapegoating & disgracing any doctor who might put forth such a hypothesis.
This bk was published in 2011. I don't know what Wakefield is saying now, I'm mainly addressing myself to what I've found in this bk & how it relates to things in my own life. Callous Disregard seems to be basically Wakefield's defense against his so-called 'discrediting'. I still intend to read at least one bk that takes a different position from Wakefield's but I admit that I find Callous Disregard fairly convincing AND I admit that I have an extreme bias against the medical industry & an increasing bias against vaccination in general - mainly as a side-effect of what I consider to be the completely unjustified social pressure in favor of being injected w/ a GMO to ostensibly ward off COVID-19 (something wch, according to personal observations, isn't even working anyway given that my vaccinated friends are still getting more sick than I am).
In the "Acknowledgements" section at the beginning of the bk, there's a website listed: www.callous-disregard.com . I took the precaution to determine if this website is still valid & discovered that it's apparently been domain-grabbed & is now used as a website to promote CBD - this even though the "Callous Disregard" heading is till there. Too bad. Doing a search for "Andrew J Wakefield website" yielded results w/ headings like "the discredited doctor hailed by the anti-vaccine movement". It took my reaching the 5th page of the search results to find a website connected to Wakefield that presents his statements: https://vaxxedthemovie.com/dr-andrew-... . Also appearing on the same page of search results is a link to an article entitled "The Lancet Should Reinstate the Andrew Wakefield Paper" by Martin Hewitt ( https://static1.squarespace.com/stati... ).
SO, I'll get to some details:
The front cover of the bk claims that it's a "National Bestseller". I don't know whether to take that as pure hype or if there really is such a big readership for a bk written by a doctor defending himself against charges brought about b/c his case studies showed a possible connection between MMR vaccinations & severe deleterious reactions. It seems like the type of bk parents of autistic children might read in an attempt to get an explanation for their child's condition; it also seems like a bk that doctors might read to determine if they find Wakefield's arguments convincing or bogus.
From the "PREFACE":
"Letter from Dr. Peter Fletcher, Ex-Principal Medical Officer with responsibility for the UK's Committee on Safety of Medicines and later Senior Principal Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Officer" - p i
[..]
"My fourth comment relates to the safety evaluation of medicinal products intended for healthy people. The two biggest examples are hormonal contraceptives and vaccines. The differences between the two are mind-boggling. The contraceptives have been evaluated more intensively than any other group of medicinal products both in humans and animals. In contrast, vaccines have been minimally investigated and there seems to be no hope of an improvement in the future." - p ii
From the "FOREWORD":
"As the parent of a child who regressed into autism after his vaccinations, I have always considered Andy Wakefield to represent the kind of doctor and scientist who will ultimately help us end the epidemic of children with autism."
[..]
"I really wish the primary trigger for autism was something everyone could dislike like cigarettes or rat poison. It would make ending this epidemic so much easier. Unfortunately, it appears that a product intended for good—vaccines—also has a dark side, which is the ability to do harm in certain children. This ability to do harm has unfortunately increased quite a bit in the last few decades because children today receive so many more shots than when most parents were kids." - p iii
This latter was written "April 22, 2010". Keep in mind that this was roughly 11 yrs before the FDA gave the EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 'vaccine' (I prefer putting 'vaccine' in single quotes to question whether this even qualifies as a vaccine given that it's a GMO). The point being that questions & criticisms regarding vaccine safety significantly predated the current raging debate.
Wakefield is usually the one who takes the hit for being the author of The Lancet paper but the coauthors included these other Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine doctors: Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology Professor John Walker-Smith, Department of Histopathology Dr. Amar Paul Dhillon, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Dr. Mark Berelowitz, Department of Neurology Dr. Peter Harvey, Dr. Simon Murch Senior Lecturer, Dr. Andrew Anthony Research Pathologist, Dr. Mike Thompson Consultant, & some junior doctors. (list taken from diagram on p v)
The title is explained in an endnote:
"At the GMC [General Medical Council] I was accused and found guilty of "callous disregard" for the suffering of children." - endnote 1, p 7
Obviously, the title of the bk is intended to show that the "callous disregard" applies more accurately to the medical system that thwarted Wakefield & co's investigations into health problems possibly caused by the MMR vaccine.
"This book is composed of a series of essays that deal with the now infamous paper – a humble case series – written by doctors at the Royal Free Hospital and published in The Lancet in February 1998. The essays were originally intended to stand alone and some repetition is inevitable." - p 3
"It is the story of how the powerful deal with threats to their interests. It was recently suggested to me in an interview with a major US network that this was really just a conspiracy theory. As it happened, earlier that week, internal memos from the pharmaceutical giant Merck were disclosed to the Australian court in the Vioxx litigation. They talked about how Merck had to "neutralize" dissent from those doctors who questioned the safety of this drug. In relation to these concerned doctors, one of the emails read:
"We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live.3
"It would seem that rather than being conspiracy theory, this can sometimes be corporate policy." - p 4
"3 Rout M. (2009, April 1). Vioxx maker Merck and Co drew up doctor hit list. Retrieved from http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/20..." - endnote 3, p 7
I double-checked to see if the link still works & I'm happy to say it does. Here's the beginning of the article:
"Vioxx maker Merck and Co drew up doctor hit list
"Posted on April 27, 2009
The Australian | Apr 1, 2009
By Milanda Rout
"AN international drug company made a hit list of doctors who had to be “neutralised” or discredited because they criticised the anti-arthritis drug the pharmaceutical giant produced.
"Staff at US company Merck &Co emailed each other about the list of doctors – mainly researchers and academics – who had been negative about the drug Vioxx or Merck and a recommended course of action.
"The email, which came out in the Federal Court in Melbourne yesterday as part of a class action against the drug company, included the words “neutralise”, “neutralised” or “discredit” against some of the doctors’ names.
"It is also alleged the company used intimidation tactics against critical researchers, including dropping hints it would stop funding to institutions and claims it interfered with academic appointments.
"“We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live,” a Merck employee wrote, according to an email excerpt read to the court by Julian Burnside QC, acting for the plaintiff.
"Merck & Co and its Australian subsidiary, Merck, Sharpe and Dohme, are being sued for compensation by more than 1000 Australians, who claim they suffered heart attacks or strokes as a result of Vioxx.
"The drug was launched in 1999 and at its height of popularity was used by 80 million people worldwide because it did not cause stomach problems as did traditional anti-inflammatory drugs.
"It was voluntarily withdrawn from sale in 2004 after concerns were raised that it caused heart attacks and strokes and a clinical trial testing these potential side affects was aborted for safety reasons.
"Lead plaintiff Graeme Peterson, 58, claims the drug caused him to have a heart attack in 2003 after he took it for back pain and arthritis every day from May 2001.
"Merck last year settled thousands of lawsuits in the US over the effects of Vioxx for $US4.85billion ($7.14 billion) but made no admission of guilt.
"The company is fighting the class action in Australia."
Some of us take it for granted that this sort of thing is business-as-usual & find plenty of evidence to support it. Other, considerably more naive people, dismiss such things as 'conspiracy theory'. It's my opinion that such naive people are in denial about the lengths that many people will go to to get to be rich & powerful.
For the full review go here: "Everything's Peachy-Keen: Don't Look, Behind the Curtain": https://www.goodreads.com/story/show/...
Andrew J. Wakefield's Callous Disregard—Autism and Vaccines—The Truth Behind A Tragedy
by tENTATIVELY, a cONVENIENCE - January 12-18, 2022
For the full review go here: "Everything's Peachy-Keen: Don't Look, Behind the Curtain": https://www.goodreads.com/story/show/...
As far as I can recall, I'd never heard of Wakefield until I started researching in connection w/ the newly announced 'pandemic' in mid-March, 2020. I immediately recognized that the monolithic narrative we were being fed by the mass media was propaganda of a most insidious nature but the details of that took some time to accrue for me. Wakefield was someone who was referred to disparagingly in the mass media as espousing the notion that vaccination causes autism. Ha ha, what a fool. Given that I cd see that a stupendous amt of spin doctoring was going on about everything medical I decided to learn more about what Wakefield himself was saying so that I wdn't just be another fool accepting the word of the FACT CHOKERS & not thinking for myself. Hence I bought 2 bks of his, this being the 1st one I've read. It ISN'T the 1st bk I've read on autism, I didn't want to start w/ him, I decided to start w/ a bk by a friend that I know & trust (w/o necessarily agreeing w/ her 100%) so I read Elizabeth Fein's Living on the Spectrum - Autism and Youth in Community (you can find my review here: https://www.goodreads.com/story/show/... ) wch I found to be excellent & wch gave me a good introduction to some aspects of the subject.
I really wasn't sure what to expect of Wakefield. On Wikipedia, wch I have both respect for & criticisms of, I find Wakefield disparaged to a degree that shows that the authors of the article feel that they're above a retaliatory lawsuit. The entry begins:
"Andrew Jeremy Wakefield (born 1956) is a British anti-vaccine activist, former physician, and discredited academic who was struck off the medical register for his involvement in The Lancet MMR autism fraud, a 1998 study that falsely claimed a link between the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_...
Callous Disregard is Wakefield's defense against these allegations, wch are presented as 'fact' in the above entry. In anticipation of reading Wakefield's bk I wasn't really sure of what to expect. It seemed possible to me that I might actually agree w/ the allegations against him & that I might just find him to be a bad doctor, a shallow sensationalism seeker, a fraud. However, I found Callous Disregard to be very convincing &, at the very least, I'm inclined to consider Wakefield as a sincere & knowledgable doctor who's been scapegoated. I also found that Wakefield's position on the matters he's associated w/ is far from what he's presented as having sd. I find it particularly egregious that on the Wikipedia page sidebar he's summarized as "Known for Lancet MMR autism fraud".
It's interesting to note that in The Lancet's entry sidebar there's nothing discrediting the journal - this despite their having published at least 3 papers that've been retracted, the most recent of wch was something far more clearly fraudulent than what Wakefield's been accused of:
"In May 2020, The Lancet published a metastudy by Dr. Mandeep R. Mehra of the Harvard Medical School and Dr. Sapan S. Desai of Surgisphere Corporation, which concluded that the malaria drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine did not improve the condition of COVID-19 patients, and may have harmed some of them.
"In response to concerns raised by members of the scientific community and the media about the veracity of the data and analyses,The Lancet decided to launch an independent third party investigation of Surgisphere and the metastudy. Specifically, The Lancet editors wanted to "evaluate the origination of the database elements, to confirm the completeness of the database, and to replicate the analyses presented in the paper." The independent peer reviewers in charge of the investigation notified The Lancet that Surgisphere wouldn't provide the requested data and documentation. The authors of the metastudy then asked The Lancet to retract the article, which was done on June 3rd 2020."
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lan...
Now what's particularly noteworthy about this latter scandal is that it seems to've largely slipped past the notice of the general public. Hydroxychloroquine still seems to be 'discredited' even though it's a cheap drug that's been long-since readily available all over the world. It doesn't seem to be far-fetched that Wakefield is so 'discredited' b/c he questions issues of vaccine safety while the fake discrediting of hydroxychloroquine goes largely unnoticed b/c hydroxychloroquine has been presented as being an alternative to COVID-19 vaccination. In other words, in both cases the degree to wch the subject is demonized or swept under the rug depends on the degree to wch it supports Big Pharma's vaccine narrative.
Now, before I go any further w/ this review, I want to give the reader what's my most important take-away from this bk. I make no claim to be entirely accurate in my representation of what Wakefield says, I may be misunderstanding or unintentionally slightly misrepresenting him. Curious readers shd read his words for themselves to get a better understanding. I don't want to add to what appears to be the distortion of Wakefield's public statements. SO, w/ that disclaimer of sorts out of the way, here goes:
Wakefield & his fellow doctors got young patients referred to them who were experiencing gastrointestinal distress AND developmental regression that may've been autism. Some of the parents claimed that these problems started shortly after they rc'vd their MMR (Measles Mumps Rubella) vaccinations. Clinical study of the patients suggested that the vaccination in a minority of recipients might possibly be causing gastrointestinal problems & that these problems could be so severe that the children were unable to develop any further in a normal way but were, instead, regressing under the influence of extreme pain & inadequate digestion of nutrients. It was never claimed by Wakefield & co that the MMR vaccine directly caused autism. It was, instead, suggested that the connection between the MMR vaccine & the gastrointestinal problems in some children, not all, merited further investigation - as did the relationship between the gastrointestinal distress & arrested & regressed development. The patients were mostly very young. Wakefield took the position that single-disease vaccinations were safer b/c they were less of an assault on the body.
The mere suggestion of this possibility was taken as threatening by the medical establishment b/c the possibility of a lawsuit seemed likely. Wakefield was singled out to be scapegoated b/c he had been hired by a lawfirm to do research relevant to side-effects of the MMR vaccine. This hiring did not fund Wakefield's work w/ the patients who were reported on in the eventually retracted Lancet paper in wch the observations alluded to above were set forth. Wakefield had several enemies who wanted to discredit him. In one case, a doctor who eventually testified against him claimed that he hated Wakefield b/c Wakefield was trying to get a Nobel prize & was, therefore, skewing the case studies from the very beginning to support a sensational outcome. In other words, Wakefield's enemies had various ulterior motives for scapegoating him - some of wch might've been related to their own financial relationship to the purveyors of the MMR vaccine. B/c the persecution of Wakefield was so intense, many people saved their own ass by turning against him or, at least, distancing themselves.
That's my summary. I find it reasonable. I find it reasonable that some children might suffer side-effects from a vaccination of 3 viruses at once & that these side-effects cd be so severe that development in, say, an 18 mnth old might be so affected by the side-effects that the child's development wd also be severely impeded &/or regressed. I find it predictable that people in the medical industry wd rush to protect themselves against disgrace & lawsuit by scapegoating & disgracing any doctor who might put forth such a hypothesis.
This bk was published in 2011. I don't know what Wakefield is saying now, I'm mainly addressing myself to what I've found in this bk & how it relates to things in my own life. Callous Disregard seems to be basically Wakefield's defense against his so-called 'discrediting'. I still intend to read at least one bk that takes a different position from Wakefield's but I admit that I find Callous Disregard fairly convincing AND I admit that I have an extreme bias against the medical industry & an increasing bias against vaccination in general - mainly as a side-effect of what I consider to be the completely unjustified social pressure in favor of being injected w/ a GMO to ostensibly ward off COVID-19 (something wch, according to personal observations, isn't even working anyway given that my vaccinated friends are still getting more sick than I am).
In the "Acknowledgements" section at the beginning of the bk, there's a website listed: www.callous-disregard.com . I took the precaution to determine if this website is still valid & discovered that it's apparently been domain-grabbed & is now used as a website to promote CBD - this even though the "Callous Disregard" heading is till there. Too bad. Doing a search for "Andrew J Wakefield website" yielded results w/ headings like "the discredited doctor hailed by the anti-vaccine movement". It took my reaching the 5th page of the search results to find a website connected to Wakefield that presents his statements: https://vaxxedthemovie.com/dr-andrew-... . Also appearing on the same page of search results is a link to an article entitled "The Lancet Should Reinstate the Andrew Wakefield Paper" by Martin Hewitt ( https://static1.squarespace.com/stati... ).
SO, I'll get to some details:
The front cover of the bk claims that it's a "National Bestseller". I don't know whether to take that as pure hype or if there really is such a big readership for a bk written by a doctor defending himself against charges brought about b/c his case studies showed a possible connection between MMR vaccinations & severe deleterious reactions. It seems like the type of bk parents of autistic children might read in an attempt to get an explanation for their child's condition; it also seems like a bk that doctors might read to determine if they find Wakefield's arguments convincing or bogus.
From the "PREFACE":
"Letter from Dr. Peter Fletcher, Ex-Principal Medical Officer with responsibility for the UK's Committee on Safety of Medicines and later Senior Principal Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Officer" - p i
[..]
"My fourth comment relates to the safety evaluation of medicinal products intended for healthy people. The two biggest examples are hormonal contraceptives and vaccines. The differences between the two are mind-boggling. The contraceptives have been evaluated more intensively than any other group of medicinal products both in humans and animals. In contrast, vaccines have been minimally investigated and there seems to be no hope of an improvement in the future." - p ii
From the "FOREWORD":
"As the parent of a child who regressed into autism after his vaccinations, I have always considered Andy Wakefield to represent the kind of doctor and scientist who will ultimately help us end the epidemic of children with autism."
[..]
"I really wish the primary trigger for autism was something everyone could dislike like cigarettes or rat poison. It would make ending this epidemic so much easier. Unfortunately, it appears that a product intended for good—vaccines—also has a dark side, which is the ability to do harm in certain children. This ability to do harm has unfortunately increased quite a bit in the last few decades because children today receive so many more shots than when most parents were kids." - p iii
This latter was written "April 22, 2010". Keep in mind that this was roughly 11 yrs before the FDA gave the EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 'vaccine' (I prefer putting 'vaccine' in single quotes to question whether this even qualifies as a vaccine given that it's a GMO). The point being that questions & criticisms regarding vaccine safety significantly predated the current raging debate.
Wakefield is usually the one who takes the hit for being the author of The Lancet paper but the coauthors included these other Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine doctors: Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology Professor John Walker-Smith, Department of Histopathology Dr. Amar Paul Dhillon, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Dr. Mark Berelowitz, Department of Neurology Dr. Peter Harvey, Dr. Simon Murch Senior Lecturer, Dr. Andrew Anthony Research Pathologist, Dr. Mike Thompson Consultant, & some junior doctors. (list taken from diagram on p v)
The title is explained in an endnote:
"At the GMC [General Medical Council] I was accused and found guilty of "callous disregard" for the suffering of children." - endnote 1, p 7
Obviously, the title of the bk is intended to show that the "callous disregard" applies more accurately to the medical system that thwarted Wakefield & co's investigations into health problems possibly caused by the MMR vaccine.
"This book is composed of a series of essays that deal with the now infamous paper – a humble case series – written by doctors at the Royal Free Hospital and published in The Lancet in February 1998. The essays were originally intended to stand alone and some repetition is inevitable." - p 3
"It is the story of how the powerful deal with threats to their interests. It was recently suggested to me in an interview with a major US network that this was really just a conspiracy theory. As it happened, earlier that week, internal memos from the pharmaceutical giant Merck were disclosed to the Australian court in the Vioxx litigation. They talked about how Merck had to "neutralize" dissent from those doctors who questioned the safety of this drug. In relation to these concerned doctors, one of the emails read:
"We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live.3
"It would seem that rather than being conspiracy theory, this can sometimes be corporate policy." - p 4
"3 Rout M. (2009, April 1). Vioxx maker Merck and Co drew up doctor hit list. Retrieved from http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/20..." - endnote 3, p 7
I double-checked to see if the link still works & I'm happy to say it does. Here's the beginning of the article:
"Vioxx maker Merck and Co drew up doctor hit list
"Posted on April 27, 2009
The Australian | Apr 1, 2009
By Milanda Rout
"AN international drug company made a hit list of doctors who had to be “neutralised” or discredited because they criticised the anti-arthritis drug the pharmaceutical giant produced.
"Staff at US company Merck &Co emailed each other about the list of doctors – mainly researchers and academics – who had been negative about the drug Vioxx or Merck and a recommended course of action.
"The email, which came out in the Federal Court in Melbourne yesterday as part of a class action against the drug company, included the words “neutralise”, “neutralised” or “discredit” against some of the doctors’ names.
"It is also alleged the company used intimidation tactics against critical researchers, including dropping hints it would stop funding to institutions and claims it interfered with academic appointments.
"“We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live,” a Merck employee wrote, according to an email excerpt read to the court by Julian Burnside QC, acting for the plaintiff.
"Merck & Co and its Australian subsidiary, Merck, Sharpe and Dohme, are being sued for compensation by more than 1000 Australians, who claim they suffered heart attacks or strokes as a result of Vioxx.
"The drug was launched in 1999 and at its height of popularity was used by 80 million people worldwide because it did not cause stomach problems as did traditional anti-inflammatory drugs.
"It was voluntarily withdrawn from sale in 2004 after concerns were raised that it caused heart attacks and strokes and a clinical trial testing these potential side affects was aborted for safety reasons.
"Lead plaintiff Graeme Peterson, 58, claims the drug caused him to have a heart attack in 2003 after he took it for back pain and arthritis every day from May 2001.
"Merck last year settled thousands of lawsuits in the US over the effects of Vioxx for $US4.85billion ($7.14 billion) but made no admission of guilt.
"The company is fighting the class action in Australia."
Some of us take it for granted that this sort of thing is business-as-usual & find plenty of evidence to support it. Other, considerably more naive people, dismiss such things as 'conspiracy theory'. It's my opinion that such naive people are in denial about the lengths that many people will go to to get to be rich & powerful.
For the full review go here: "Everything's Peachy-Keen: Don't Look, Behind the Curtain": https://www.goodreads.com/story/show/...
January 18, 2016
This is about the complex legal process that resulted in Dr Wakefield's being (unjustly) struck off the medical register. Although it's well-written, parts of it probably need to be read twice to be fully comprehended. That's why I gave it only three stars.
February 3, 2023
I read it. I actually read it, cover to cover. This is the most poorly written argumentative book I have ever read. Generations should remember this book as the perfect anti-example to productive and conducive science.
August 7, 2013
A lot of great info.
July 23, 2020
We are not a tragedy
Read
December 10, 2019DNF @ 100 pages
Look. People are gonna believe what they wanna believe. It's that simple. So I'm not going to talk about the actual subject of this book.
Instead I'll just say that you would do better to read up on Wakefield, his paper, and the whole vaccination/autism thing anywhere else than here. Wakefield is a doctor, not an author, and man it's obvious here. This is full of medical stuff only medical people would be capable of understanding, let alone retaining. His "that's not true!!!" repetitions, while possibly accurate, were annoying and made him seem juvenile.
This filled in some gaps I had in my knowledge of the way everything went down in the nineties, but honestly I just want to read about it in some other form.
Look. People are gonna believe what they wanna believe. It's that simple. So I'm not going to talk about the actual subject of this book.
Instead I'll just say that you would do better to read up on Wakefield, his paper, and the whole vaccination/autism thing anywhere else than here. Wakefield is a doctor, not an author, and man it's obvious here. This is full of medical stuff only medical people would be capable of understanding, let alone retaining. His "that's not true!!!" repetitions, while possibly accurate, were annoying and made him seem juvenile.
This filled in some gaps I had in my knowledge of the way everything went down in the nineties, but honestly I just want to read about it in some other form.
December 11, 2022
Loved this book I related to so much of it having a son with regressive autism, guy problems, server constipation, constant viral problems, pneumonia, regression! The book taught me so much and why my son cant pop sitting on a toilet. Since I let him go his own way no more accidents. No more smearing it’s literally changed my life. Following Andrews advise i have managed to get sentences out of my son within a few months, responds to his name, listens and is now almost getting himself dressed. And one girl at the therapy is no longer having daily seizures since she cut the gluten” that’s not been proven” So I know this man Is no fraud I thank him from the bottom of my heart for sacrificing his livelihood to help our kids. A true hero x
January 26, 2017
Not really what I was expecting. While I agree the author was very badly treated by the medical establishment, I found the book got a bit tedious after a while because he spent all his time defending his actions and at great length. I would like to have seen more general information about how the vaccines industry operates.
January 16, 2015
Yeah. I'm actually reading this.
July 23, 2017
His real story.
December 10, 2023
The polarisation evident in these reviews is incredible - here you see the culture wars and the paradigm war before your eyes, warring for the heart and soul of science. I've done a lot of research about and around Wakefield, and it's clear that like many other physicians, he was taken out by the Vaccination Industrial Complex, which happens to anyone who dares to challenge, even meekly, the religious fervor of mass vaccination - for religion is what it is. The hate directed at Wakefield in some of these posts is either completely ill-informed, or constitutes deliberate hit-pieces with the vaccine industry behind them. Quite apart from reading the book itself to hear Dr Wakefield's side of the story, try reading Dr Tess Lawrie's article on the UK Column website, titled "Dr Andrew Wakefield was right all along". Thank you for your great courage, Dr Wakefield. Try reading also the recently published book by Robert F. Kennedy Jr and Brian Hooker Ph.D., 'Vax-Unvax', to read the REAL science about mass vaccination.
January 23, 2024
Having read The Price of Panic: How the Tyranny of Experts Turned a Pandemic into a Catastrophe, Callous Disregard would not leave my recommended reading algorithm. What this lacked in comparison to The Price of Panic is a critical analysis of the way vaccines were sold to the masses. It reads as one man’s personal tirade against a journalist and professional community that refused to endorse his efforts. There were a few good points here and there around how his personal reputation has been attacked in the aftermath (like the way certain examination questions were posed on students); but the crux of the issue was that the study was flawed, it hasn’t been replicated, and there was a perceived conflict of interest. If you are looking for a book that offers an explanation between vaccinations and autism, this is not it; nor is it a critical review of systemic issues in medicine.
I disagree with some other reviews that outline the science was hard to follow, I think it has been sufficiently condensed to laymen terms so long as you’ve completed high school science/math. Given that the book is largely an expression of frustration I don’t think the science needs to be overly communicated
I disagree with some other reviews that outline the science was hard to follow, I think it has been sufficiently condensed to laymen terms so long as you’ve completed high school science/math. Given that the book is largely an expression of frustration I don’t think the science needs to be overly communicated
June 14, 2023
Horrifically irresponsible
This wiki entry puts it succinctly: "Wakefield's study and his claim that the MMR vaccine might cause autism led to a decline in vaccination rates in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Ireland, and a corresponding rise in measles and mumps infections, resulting in serious illness and deaths."
And to think that there are people on this site who think this charlaton is worth reading. Read the background, including the science that has roundly debunked this man and his casuistry.
This wiki entry puts it succinctly: "Wakefield's study and his claim that the MMR vaccine might cause autism led to a decline in vaccination rates in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Ireland, and a corresponding rise in measles and mumps infections, resulting in serious illness and deaths."
And to think that there are people on this site who think this charlaton is worth reading. Read the background, including the science that has roundly debunked this man and his casuistry.
October 17, 2025
I read this book when I heard about Dr Wakefield reading an article. I thought I wanted to read his side of the story. It is very insightful and full of documented information. As is with everything, it is important to get informed and get both sides of an argument . Dr Wakefield is very convincing and I personally feel that the truth lays somewhere in between the two parties on the vaccine subject.
I recommend this book .
I recommend this book .
Read
May 10, 2025The way that the author was treated by the GMC isn't any different from how Mike Mew was recently treated by the GDC. Certain observations are just deemed unauthorized by the regime. We'll see how that changes over the next 4 years in the US with MAHA. Not very hopeful.
April 29, 2018
Good history, but ponderous at times.
June 17, 2020
2.5 - a non-neutral discussion surrounding the events of the Lancet 12.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews