If Andrew Wakefield and Linus Pauling’s hypotheses were right, then subsequent studies would have shown that they were right. When well-designed studies refuted their claims, they chose to attack those who had found them to be wrong. They did what any good lawyer would do; they argued conspiracy. (The legal aphorism is that when the law is on your side, argue the law; when the facts are on your side, argue the facts; when neither is on your side, attack the witness.) The minute that you hear researchers claim conspiracy, you should suspect that their hypotheses are built on sand. And although
...more
