Andrew Wakefield's retracted 1998 Lancet paper claiming an MMR-autism link rested on an unblinded pilot study of just 12 children with no epidemiological or laboratory evidence, relying entirely on retrospective parental recall. (6:15)
Wakefield had hidden financial conflicts, including receiving over £435,000 from personal injury lawyer Richard Barr to generate lawsuit evidence and filing a patent for a competing single-measles vaccine six months before the Lancet publication. (36:20)
Hospital records and GMC proceedings revealed that Wakefield falsified patient data, fabricated diagnoses, and subjected children to unnecessary, invasive procedures like colonoscopies and lumbar punctures without ethical clearance. (60:06)
Sensationalized media coverage collapsed UK vaccination rates below herd immunity thresholds, causing fatal measles outbreaks before investigative journalist Brian Deer exposed the fraud, leading the GMC to revoke Wakefield's license in 2010. (22:38)
Detailed notes
## Background
This video essay was published by the channel hbomberguy on YouTube on May 26, 2021. In the page description, the creator introduces an investigation into the science behind the modern anti-vaccine movement to discover whether any of it holds up to scrutiny.
## TL;DR
The video provides a comprehensive debunking of the modern anti-vaccine movement by systematically exposing Andrew Wakefield's fraudulent and formally retracted 1998 Lancet paper. Relying heavily on investigative reporting by Brian Deer, the presentation reveals Wakefield's severe financial conflicts of interest, including undisclosed funding from a litigation lawyer, competing single-measles vaccine patents, and plans for commercial diagnostic testing kits. It details how Wakefield falsified medical records, manufactured diagnoses, and subjected children to medically unnecessary, invasive procedures without ethical approval or informed consent. Tracing the fallout through uncritical media sensationalism, dropping immunization rates, and deadly outbreaks, the essay examines Wakefield's eventual striking off by the General Medical Council and his lucrative transition into fringe conspiracism. Ultimately, it emphasizes the importance of confronting vaccine hesitancy through empirical truth, real-world proof of safety, and proactive public health measures rather than succumbing to despair.
## Atmosphere & style
The presentation strikes a dynamic balance between righteous fury, sharp investigative rigor, and frantic satirical comedy. Viewers experience an emotional progression that moves from wry exasperation at bad scientific methodology to genuine horror and disgust as the full extent of Wakefield's child abuse and predatory profiteering comes to light. Throughout the video, hbomberguy alternates between deeply researched, forensic dissections of medical fraud and expressive, over-the-top comedic outbursts, ultimately grounding the experience in an empathetic and determined plea to overcome public health despair.
## Bulletin
- [06:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=375s) Andrew Wakefield's retracted 1998 Lancet paper claiming an MMR-autism link rested on an unblinded pilot study of just 12 children with no epidemiological or laboratory evidence, relying entirely on retrospective parental recall.
- [36:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2180s) Wakefield had hidden financial conflicts, including receiving over £435,000 from personal injury lawyer Richard Barr to generate lawsuit evidence and filing a patent for a competing single-measles vaccine six months before the Lancet publication.
- [01:00:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3606s) Hospital records and GMC proceedings revealed that Wakefield falsified patient data, fabricated diagnoses, and subjected children to unnecessary, invasive procedures like colonoscopies and lumbar punctures without ethical clearance.
- [22:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1358s) Sensationalized media coverage collapsed UK vaccination rates below herd immunity thresholds, causing fatal measles outbreaks before investigative journalist Brian Deer exposed the fraud, leading the GMC to revoke Wakefield's license in 2010.
## Key takeaways
- [02:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=140s) The modern anti-vaccine movement stems primarily from Andrew Wakefield's retracted 1998 Lancet study rather than any valid empirical science.
- [04:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=246s) Public health messaging testing by Brendan Nyhan demonstrated that rapid debunkings often cause a backfire effect among vaccine-hesitant parents.
- [11:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=665s) Wakefield's initial study relied on a statistically invalid sample of 12 children, conflating temporal coincidence around the 12-to-15-month developmental milestone with causation.
- [17:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1066s) To support his claims, Wakefield cited discredited ex-doctor Hugh Fudenberg, who had his medical license revoked for stealing controlled substances.
- [20:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1212s) Lancet editors and independent scientists warned at publication that confusing correlation with causation would trigger public health tragedies.
- [22:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1358s) The British press sensationalized Wakefield's claims with alarmist imagery, causing MMR uptake to fall below herd immunity thresholds and sparking deadly measles outbreaks.
- [28:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1693s) Wakefield invented 'autistic enterocolitis,' claiming gut inflammation leaked dietary morphine-like compounds into the brain, without providing any mechanism for why single shots would be safer.
- [36:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2180s) Six months before publication, Wakefield patented a rival single-antigen measles vaccine with Hugh Fudenberg, giving him a direct commercial incentive to attack the triple MMR shot.
- [43:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2594s) Independent laboratories failed to replicate findings of measles virus RNA in patient gut samples, discovering widespread laboratory contamination and machine miscalibration.
- [52:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3170s) Personal injury lawyer Richard Barr paid Wakefield over £435,000 to construct evidence for a lawsuit against vaccine manufacturers, recruiting families through the anti-vaccine group JABS.
- [01:00:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3606s) Brian Deer's investigation and the GMC inquiry proved Wakefield falsified patient onset dates to fit Barr's required 14-day litigation window and documented nonexistent autism diagnoses.
- [01:07:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4052s) Pediatric study subjects endured invasive, unapproved procedures including colonoscopies and spinal taps, with one child suffering 12 bowel perforations in a follow-up investigation.
- [01:16:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4560s) The GMC found Wakefield guilty of serious professional misconduct and callous disregard for pediatric distress in 2010, permanently revoking his medical license alongside The Lancet's retraction.
- [01:20:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4815s) Wakefield relocated to Texas and transitioned into a lucrative conspiracist career, monetizing anti-vaccine sentiment through books, documentaries like Vaxxed, and speaking tours.
- [01:23:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5003s) Mainstream media figures like Bill Maher helped perpetuate Wakefield's and Fudenberg's debunked claims by disguising dietary pseudoscience as genuine medical skepticism.
- [01:32:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5540s) Exposure of Wakefield's fraud helped restore UK vaccine uptake, illustrating that transparent accountability and observing peers safely get vaccinated remain the strongest remedies for hesitancy.
## Detailed walkthrough
### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=0s) Introduction: Profiteroles and the Modern Anti-Vaccine Debate
The video opens with hbomberguy wielding a syringe over a plate of pastries, joking that he is immunizing his profiteroles against the devastating condition of “Not Enough Cream-itis.” Transitioning from pastry cream to public health, he notes that human vaccination has become one of the most fraught, fiercely debated controversies of modern times. While the earliest organized resistance to immunization surfaced in the nineteenth century—a movement he quips “died out on its own a long time ago of small pox”—the modern movement coalesced in the late 1990s around the claim that pediatric vaccines cause autism. This crusade quickly gathered steam, picking up support from washed-up celebrities and even the 45th President of the United States, Donald Trump, who once tweeted that massive “horse doses” given to young children were directly responsible for an epidemic of doctor-inflicted autism.
Faced with a massive subculture armed with books, documentaries, and Facebook groups boasting tens of thousands of members, the public is confronted with two diametrically opposed possibilities: either mainstream medical institutions have conspired to deceive the global public to protect pharmaceutical profits, or the anti-vaccine movement is completely divorced from reality. To check his own history, hbomberguy phones his mother to ask if he was ever vaccinated as a child, only to be met with a weary sigh and the deflected response: “Have you been looking into moving out lately, son?” Setting aside grammar pedantry about ending sentences with prepositions, he commits to untangling over two decades of cultural and medical warfare, seeking to discover what actual evidence the modern anti-vaccine movement is built upon.
- The 19th-century anti-vaccination movements emerged alongside mandatory smallpox inoculation laws before fading as public health outcomes proved indisputable.
- The modern movement gained massive online traction in the late 1990s and 2000s, migrating from early internet forums onto social media platforms and into mainstream political discourse.
[02:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=140s) The Easy Version and the 1998 Lancet Paper
In an effort to provide a rapid summary for anyone unwilling to sit through a feature-length investigation, hbomberguy presents “The Easy Version,” summarizing the entire scientific crux of the controversy in under a minute. The panic traces directly back to a single paper published in 1998 in *The Lancet*, one of the world's oldest and most prestigious medical journals. The study suggested an association between the combined measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine and the onset of developmental regression, primarily autism. Because the paper appeared in such an esteemed venue, it carried immediate, unquestioned scientific authority across international media.
However, the easy version ends just as quickly as it begins: the study's conclusions completely disintegrated upon scrutiny. Subsquent rigorous, high-powered investigations examining millions of children worldwide consistently failed to demonstrate any causal link between MMR and autism. The scientific methods of the original study turned out to be thoroughly corrupt, leading *The Lancet* to formally retract the publication. Holding up a printed mockup, hbomberguy demonstrates how retracted papers are marked in bold red lettering across every page to signal their total invalidity. Beyond this discredited paper and speculative pet theories about preservative ingredients—arguments that assume the harm exists before proving it—the movement possesses no supporting empirical foundation whatsoever. As hbomberguy summarizes the fundamental lack of evidence: “The anti-vax movement had next to no evidence 20 years ago and now they have even less.”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: The Easy Version of the Vaccine-Autism Paper
accDescr: Diagram showing the publication, refutation, and formal retraction of the 1998 MMR study.
subgraph Origin["1998 Publication"]
A["1998 Lancet Study"] -->|"Claims link between"| B["MMR Vaccine & Autism"]
end
subgraph ScientificReplication["Independent Replication"]
B -->|"Follow-up studies on"| C["Millions of Children Worldwide"]
C -->|"Empirical finding"| D["Zero Causal Link Found"]
end
subgraph RetractionProcess["Scientific Outcome"]
D -->|"Methodology exposed"| E["Formal Retraction by The Lancet"]
E -->|"Result"| F["Big Red 'RETRACTED' Stamp"]
end
```
[04:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=246s) The Backfire Effect: Why the Easy Version Fails
Condensing the debate into a fifty-second debunking does not resolve the broader social crisis, because the easy version fails to persuade anyone who is actually vaccine-hesitant. Simply informing a skeptic that a paper was retracted does not penetrate entrenched defensive beliefs, no matter how entertainingly the debunker presents the information. Real-world cognitive research highlights how stubborn ideological investments can be. Political science professor Brendan Nyhan and his research team spent three years evaluating more than 1,700 parents to observe how they responded to different messaging strategies designed to encourage childhood vaccination.
The results of Nyhan's study were deeply alarming: none of the corrective interventions persuaded anti-vaccination parents to change their minds. Worse, aggressively attempting to debunk medical falsehoods frequently produced a backfire effect, leaving anti-vaccine parents even more resistant to immunizing their children than they were before. Reflecting on these bleak findings, Brendan Nyhan summarized the team's reaction to *The New Yorker*: “It's depressing. We were definitely depressed.” Acknowledging that logic alone rarely dislodges emotionally grounded positions, hbomberguy concludes that an honest exploration requires stepping into the origin of the panic. Rather than relying on second-hand summaries from partisans, he sits down to read the original 1998 paper for himself, only to immediately yell in genuine disbelief: “This is the worst fucking paper I've ever read in my life!”
- Brendan Nyhan's multi-year study of 1,700 parents demonstrated that traditional fact-checking and public health corrections can reinforce vaccine skepticism rather than alleviate it.
- Public discourse surrounding health issues relies overwhelmingly on commentators, blogs, and algorithmic echo chambers rather than direct reading of source material.
[06:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=375s) Reading the Worst Paper Ever: Andrew Wakefield's 1998 Study
Sitting down with a hot drink in a studio prone to spontaneous bursts from an uncooperative fog machine, hbomberguy examines the 1998 paper in detail. The publication bears the tongue-twisting title: “Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children.” Its primary author is Andrew Wakefield—whom hbomberguy quickly corrects from “Dr.” to “disgraced ex-doctor”—widely treated as the founding figure of the modern anti-vaccine crusade. Wakefield's stated hypothesis was that gastrointestinal disease and childhood developmental issues were clinically linked, specifically investigating whether bowel inflammation correlated with behavioral signs of autism.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Structure of Andrew Wakefield's 1998 Study
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating the disjointed leap from clinical bowel evaluations to parental recollections about vaccines.
subgraph ClinicalExam["Purported Medical Scope"]
A["12 Child Patients"] --> B["Bowel Symptoms"]
B --> C["Colonoscopies & Biopsies"]
C --> D["Non-Specific Colitis Finding"]
end
subgraph UnscientificLeap["The Vaccine Claim"]
D -.->|"Juxtaposed with"| E["Parental Recollections"]
E -->|"Self-reported memory"| F["'Onset was associated by parents with MMR'"]
end
```
The paper investigated “non-specific colitis”—general colon inflammation seen in diseases like Crohn's—by evaluating twelve children who exhibited both gastrointestinal distress and developmental regression. Yet the grand revelation tying these bowel symptoms to vaccines is staggering in its lack of clinical rigor. There are no laboratory experiments, epidemiological samples, or clinical mechanisms linking the MMR shot to the children's condition. The link rests entirely on the anecdotal recollections of the parents, who simply stated that they remembered their children developing behavioral symptoms sometime after receiving the MMR vaccine. Reading verbatim from the text, the reader highlights the paper's core finding: “Onset of behavioral symptoms was associated, by the parents, with measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination.” Wakefield's supposed landmark breakthrough placed colonoscopies, tissue biopsies, and complex urinary excretion charts side-by-side with casual parental say-so. As hbomberguy scoffs, dismissing the study's central premise: “A note from your mother isn't science. It's how you get out of P.E.”
- The paper evaluated an extremely tiny sample of only 12 children, examining bowel biopsies alongside parental histories.
- The term "non-specific colitis" indicated that the researchers were documenting general, undefined intestinal inflammation rather than a unique, identifiable pathology.
- The entire foundation linking the MMR triple-jab to autism rested on retrospective parental recall rather than objective clinical timelines or scientific trials.
[09:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=585s) The Illusion of Cause: Ape Brains and Parent Opinions
After a brief aside wondering why *The Economist* interviewed ContraPoints instead of him and getting his camera set up, hbomberguy examines page three of Andrew Wakefield’s 1998 study in *The Lancet*. This page features a table detailing each child’s behavioral diagnosis—predominantly autism—alongside what their parents identified as the "exposure," meaning the specific event that parents believed triggered the condition. Unsurprisingly, most parents blamed the MMR vaccine. As hbomberguy notes, relying on a collection of parental opinions in a scientific paper is “about as useful in science as a bath made of teeth,” yet it is worth unpacking why someone would arrive at that conclusion in the first place.
Interrupting himself to ask his animator Angie to draw him as a ferret (refusing to explain why), he explains the fundamental cognitive trap at play: human beings are naturally wired to assume that when two events occur closely together in time, one must have caused the other. He characterizes this as the byproduct of evolutionary survival: “That’s how we as ape people whose fur fell off one day think about things with our tiny, godless little monkey brains.” If an early human ate unfamiliar wild berries and fell violently ill that afternoon, making an immediate causal link was essential to staying alive. While he jokes that this is the rare instance where evolutionary psychology is actually real, these intuitive correlations do not hold up to scientific rigor. In modern life, getting sick might have nothing to do with the berries and everything to do with importing crates of cheap Carabao energy drinks from Thailand.
[11:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=665s) The Problem of Time, Memory, and Coincidence
A major factor distorting parental recollection is the fallibility of human memory regarding spans of time. Just as months under pandemic quarantine blur together because daily novelty vanishes, people struggle to accurately pinpoint incubation periods. If an individual gets coughed on in the afternoon and begins to feel sick that evening, they reflexively blame the immediate cougher, forgetting that viruses take days or weeks to incubate—perhaps having caught it two weeks prior from a delivery driver. Wakefield’s paper asserts that parents reported noticing autism symptoms within weeks, days, or even mere hours after the MMR jab. However, remembering the exact date of behavioral symptom onset in a developing child is extraordinarily complex and unreliable.
To illustrate this, hbomberguy references an archival BBC documentary where an interviewer openly questioned a mother claiming her son became autistic literally overnight following a fever after the jab. In reality, signs of autism develop gradually over time, meaning early subtle indicators are easily missed before an overt change catches a parent’s attention. A later documentary featured parents named Stacy and Damien who initially blamed MMR for their daughter Rebecca's condition, only to realize upon reflection that she had exhibited clear behavioral markers well before receiving the vaccine. What parents report as the onset is almost always merely the first symptom they personally noticed.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: MMR Vaccination and Autism Timeline Overlap
accDescr: Diagram illustrating how the UK MMR vaccination schedule directly overlaps with the typical developmental age when autism symptoms first become noticeable to parents.
subgraph Development ["Childhood Timeline (Months 12 to 18)"]
direction TB
A["Age: 12 to 15 Months"] -->|"Standard UK Schedule"| B["MMR Vaccination Administered"]
C["Age: 12 to 18 Months"] -->|"Developmental Milestone"| D["First Noticeable Autism Symptoms"]
end
B -.->|"Temporal Proximity"| E{"Parental Attribution"}
D -.->|"Coincidental Onset"| E
E -->|"Post Hoc Fallacy"| F["Erroneous Belief: Vaccine Caused Autism"]
```
- In the UK, the MMR vaccine is routinely scheduled between 12 and 15 months of age.
- Statistically, the average age when developmental symptoms of autism become obvious enough for parents to notice falls between 12 and 18 months.
- The Wakefield study's own data highlights the arbitrary nature of these correlations: one parent attributed their child's autism to an ear infection that happened a week before noticing symptoms.
[13:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=820s) JABS, Small Sample Sizes, and Pilot Studies
Before Wakefield published his paper, vaccine-skeptic groups were minuscule fringe entities. One notable organization was JABS (Justice, Awareness and Basic Support), founded by Jackie Fletcher. Fletcher maintains that her son developed severe autism ten days after his MMR shot and has spent decades attempting to sue vaccine manufacturers and the British government for compensation. In any large population of millions receiving routine vaccines, pure statistical coincidence guarantees that a handful of children will develop behavioral or medical symptoms immediately following an injection. Prior to the media storm kicked off by Wakefield, JABS consisted of barely 30 sets of parents; only after years of sensationalized press coverage did their membership swell into the thousands.
Beyond the biased recall of parents, the study suffered from an absurdly inadequate sample size: exactly 12 children. While drawing sweeping conclusions about the wider population from 12 subjects is scientifically invalid, hbomberguy clarifies the proper context of sample size critiques. Small groups are routinely used in legitimate science for "pilot studies," which serve as preliminary investigations to determine if an anomaly warrants funding a massive, rigorous trial. A tiny handful of parents out of tens of millions claiming a correlation is, at most, grounds to run a proper study on a large scale—an opportunity someone would eventually receive with fascinating results.
- Prior to the media panic, parent groups blaming vaccines for autism were negligible in size (approximately 30 sets of parents in JABS).
- JABS membership expanded into thousands only after sensationalized press coverage validated their claims years later.
- A sample of 12 children is statistically meaningless for proving population-wide causation and serves only as a potential pilot check.
[15:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=939s) Inventing a Disease: Medical Fan Fiction and the Bowel Theory
The science within Wakefield’s 1998 paper is fundamentally broken, to the point where the paper itself explicitly admits in its concluding text that it does not prove a causal association. However, hbomberguy explains that Wakefield treats this required academic disclaimer as a cynical shield. Under standard peer-review expectations, admitting study limitations gives a paper scientific legitimacy. Wakefield used this loophole to make unverified, wild speculations while retaining plausible deniability. Because the 12 children reportedly exhibited vague, non-specific gastrointestinal complaints, Wakefield manufactured a grand hypothesis linking intestinal inflammation directly to developmental regression.
In the final sentences of the paper, Wakefield and his co-authors coin a brand-new medical syndrome: chronic enterocolitis linked to neuropsychiatric dysfunction, suggesting the MMR vaccine may trigger this intestinal damage, which then travels upstream to cause autism. Hbomberguy describes this leap as pure “medical fan fiction.” Despite including the obligatory caveat that further research was required, Wakefield managed to smuggle an entirely fabricated disease into *The Lancet*, one of the most revered medical journals on earth. Mainstream journalists with little to no scientific training immediately seized upon the text, reporting uncritically that doctors at the Royal Free Hospital had discovered an alarming bowel disease linked to the MMR vaccine that leads to autism. As hbomberguy points out, “Wakefield invents a new disease that combines bowel disorders and autism and then speculates that MMR vaccination might cause the disease he just made up.”
[17:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1066s) Scraping the Barrel: The Fudenberg Citation
Toward the end of the 1998 paper, Wakefield sought out external literature to bolster his claims, forcing him to scrape the bottom of the scientific barrel. The primary citation he relies upon to corroborate an immediate onset of symptoms post-vaccination is an obscure paper by H. Hugh Fudenberg. Wakefield cites it with the line: “Fudenberg noted that for 15 of 20 autistic children, the first symptoms developed within a week of vaccination.”
Looking into the actual source reveals just how disreputable the citation is. Fudenberg’s paper was published in 1996 in *Biotherapy*, a fringe publication catering to dubious alternative therapies that collapsed and folded just two years later. Fudenberg’s paper was a tiny pilot study testing an unproven substance dubbed "Dialysable Lymphocyte Extract" on children with autism. Beyond making the unevidenced claim that three-quarters of his small cohort became autistic within seven days of receiving a shot, Fudenberg's background and methodology were rife with red flags that Wakefield's paper conveniently ignored.
[18:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1125s) Hugh Fudenberg and the Precedent for "Curing Autism"
To construct any scientific precedent for his conclusions, Andrew Wakefield relied on the work of Hugh Fudenberg. Fudenberg was an American immunologist who went so far as to assert that a proprietary dialyzable leukocyte extract he manufactured could completely eliminate autistic symptoms. He famously claimed that of twenty-two children diagnosed with classic autism, ten of them became entirely normal, successfully mainstreaming into regular schooling while their clinical characteristics normalized. As hbomberguy points out with utter disbelief, claiming children with classic autism miraculously “became normal” through an unverified extract is absurd on its face, but the background of the researcher makes it even more astonishing.
At the exact time that paper was circulating, Fudenberg was no longer a licensed physician. His medical license had been revoked after he was caught stealing controlled pharmaceutical substances from his workplace for his own personal recreational use. During formal hearings, the South Carolina Medical Board found him guilty of engaging in dishonorable, unethical, and unprofessional conduct, charges that Fudenberg himself openly admitted to. He admitted to drug theft, got fired, and forfeited all professional credibility, only to publish claims a year later declaring he had discovered the cure for autism. Wakefield was forced to cite this completely discredited researcher because there was simply nobody else claiming a link between immune treatments and autism recovery.
- Hugh Fudenberg claimed that out of 22 children with classic autism, 10 had their characteristics "fully normalized" using his extract.
- His medical license was revoked in South Carolina for unlawfully obtaining and misusing controlled substances.
- Despite having no standing and an active revocation, Fudenberg served as the primary scientific precedent cited by Wakefield.
> “What I'm trying to say here is, ex-doctor Hugh Fudenberg's paper is one of the most obviously bullshit things I've ever read, and Wakefield had to cite it to create a precedent for his findings.” — hbomberguy
---
[20:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1212s) The Immediate Scientific Pushback and The Lancet's Warning
The scientific community did not wait years to voice skepticism; those who reviewed Wakefield’s manuscript—and particularly anyone who took the time to check his cited sources—immediately noticed glaring flaws. The concerns were so acute that in the very same issue of *The Lancet* in which the study appeared, the journal simultaneously printed a critical response titled *"Vaccine adverse events: causal or coincidental?"* This accompanying commentary warned directly about the public health disaster that occurs when correlation is mistaken for causation.
The editorial proved eerily prescient, warning that if public anxiety and sensation overtook rational scientific assessment, immunization rates in the United Kingdom would collapse. Other doctors recognized right out of the gate that the study had proven nothing, relying on flawed methodology, a negligible sample size, and unverified assumptions. In retrospect, the response reads less like standard peer criticism and more like an ignored prophecy of an impending public health tragedy.
> “Vaccine-safety concerns such as that reported by Wakefield and colleagues may snowball into societal tragedies when the media and the public confuse association with causality and shun immunization.” — *The Lancet* commentary
> “Like, they knew. They fucking warned us.” — hbomberguy
---
[21:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1273s) The Press Conference and Bypassing Science
Despite the substantial methodological flaws and internal contradictions of the study, Wakefield published it anyway. Then, in a radical break from standard scientific protocol, he immediately arranged a public press conference. Academic researchers do not routinely call nationwide press briefings to discuss a preliminary, five-page paper—technically designated in *The Lancet* as an "early report"—that explicitly conceded it had proven no causal link between the vaccine and the syndrome.
Calling a press conference for an inconclusive study with a sample size of twelve is done for personal publicity, not science. During this media appearance, Wakefield chose to ignore the cautious caveats printed in the paper itself and instead dramatically asserted that his team had uncovered a public health crisis. He suggested to the assembled press corps that the combined measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine might be putting millions of children in jeopardy. He recommended that the National Health Service immediately suspend the triple MMR jab and replace it with three single vaccinations administered separately over prolonged intervals.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Wakefield Media Escalation
accDescr: Progression from Wakefield's 12-child Lancet report to national health panic via media sensationalism.
subgraph Study ["The Paper"]
A["Lancet Early Report<br/>(12 Children)"]
B["Paper Admits:<br/>No Causal Link Proven"]
A --> B
end
subgraph PR ["Media Pivot"]
C["Independent Press Conference"]
D["Recommends Halting Combined MMR<br/>Calls for Single Vaccines"]
B --> C
C --> D
end
subgraph Impact ["Public Fallout"]
E["Sensationalized Broadcasts<br/>(Needles and Crying Babies)"]
F["Immunization Drops &<br/>Measles Outbreaks Occur"]
D --> E
E --> F
end
```
> “Holding a press conference for this is something you do if you want attention for your controversial paper, not if you're trying to do science.” — hbomberguy
---
[22:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1358s) The Media Panic and the Rise of the Single Jab
The British press rapidly amplified Wakefield's warnings. Mass anti-vaccine sentiments do not ignite simply because a dense medical paper is archived in an academic journal; everyday citizens and working journalists rarely read academic papers. However, when a handsome doctor affiliated with the Royal Free Hospital stands in front of television cameras claiming a routine childhood injection might be causing brain damage and bowel disease, the media finds the narrative irresistible. Throughout the late 1990s and early 2000s, British television news and tabloids treated the MMR scare as an omnipresent story, second only to news about the late Princess Diana.
News broadcasts relied heavily on sensational visuals, pairing ominous narration with close-up shots of hypodermic needles piercing skin and toddlers weeping in clinical offices. Decades of reporting presented the issue not as settled science versus an outlier, but as a balanced debate between an embattled crusader and a defensive government. As a direct consequence, parents who had never previously questioned vaccines began assuming their children's autism must have stemmed from the MMR dose simply because television anchors repeatedly suggested it. When immunization rates subsequently crashed below safe herd-immunity thresholds, preventable measles outbreaks returned to the UK and Ireland, resulting in hospitalizations and child fatalities.
Rather than reconsidering their coverage when medical organizations affirmed vaccine safety, many journalists grew intensely defensive, authoring editorials defending their right to stoke fears. Throughout the frenzy, Wakefield operated like a bona fide media celebrity, frequently appearing on television and distributing self-produced video cassettes to newsrooms. In these appearances, he repeatedly stated that he was not anti-vaccine, but merely advocated for dividing the triple vaccine into separate, spaced-out single doses. He continued to theorize about a speculative, novel bowel disorder—allegedly triggered when the triple viral load overwhelmed an immature immune system—that allegedly enabled toxins to leak into the brain and induce autism.
- British TV news repeatedly emphasized visceral footage of children crying while being injected with needles to maximize audience engagement.
- Vaccination uptake plummeted across the British Isles, sparking a measles outbreak in Ireland that claimed the lives of three children.
- Wakefield distributed a 23-minute promotional video to media outlets where he explicitly urged separating MMR into three separate single vaccines on four separate occasions.
- Rather than identifying as anti-vaccine, early Wakefield consistently maintained that he was pro-immunization, pitching single vaccines as the only safe choice for families.
> “If you even glanced at a TV or a newspaper in the mid-2000s, it was, 'MMR might cause autism,' or it was, 'Princess Diana is still dead.'” — hbomberguy
> “There is sufficient anxiety in my own mind that with the safety--the long-term safety of the polyvalent--that is the MMR vaccination and combination--uh, that I think that it should be suspended in favor of the single vaccines.” — Andrew Wakefield
[28:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1693s) The "Autistic Enterocolitis" Leaky Gut Theory
Eventually, Andrew Wakefield coined a clinical-sounding name for his proposed condition: "Autistic Enterocolitis." According to his explanation, the attenuated measles virus present in the MMR vaccine somehow lodges itself in the intestinal lining. This supposedly triggers severe bowel inflammation, preventing the body from properly digesting everyday dietary staples like bread and milk. In Wakefield's telling, these poorly digested foods transform into a morphine-like substance that leaks through the inflamed gut wall, enters the bloodstream, travels to the brain, and causes autism. As Andrew Wakefield himself explained it in media appearances:
> “Morphine-like substances from the gut that you and I produce in our diet from milk and wheat are actually getting access through that leaky gut into the developing brain.”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Wakefield's Purported Leaky Gut Mechanism
accDescr: Flowchart showing Andrew Wakefield's proposed causal chain from the MMR vaccine to autism via gut inflammation.
subgraph Gut ["The Gut"]
V["MMR Vaccine (Measles Virus)"] -->|"lodges in bowel"| I["Intestinal Inflammation"]
I -->|"impaired digestion"| F["Wheat & Milk"]
F -->|"converts into"| M["Morphine-like Substances"]
end
subgraph Brain ["The Brain"]
M -->|"leaks through gut wall"| B["Developing Brain"]
B -->|"induces"| A["Autism"]
end
```
The fundamental bizarre flaw in this hypothesis is that it specifically targets the measles component of the vaccine. If measles virus in a vaccine is capable of producing an intestinal syndrome that causes autism, there is no logical basis to assume that an isolated, single-antigen measles jab would be any safer. Yet Wakefield repeatedly insisted that the danger lay strictly in the combined MMR jab rather than separate shots. When pressed in interviews, he offered no scientific mechanism to explain this distinction, simply repeating:
> “My opinion, again, is that the monovalent—the single vaccines, measles, mumps, and rubella—are likely in this consten—uh, context to be safer than the polyvalent vaccine.”
In one notable broadcast interview, a reporter cornered Wakefield on this exact contradiction, pointing out that if the measles component deposits virus into intestinal tissue, a single jab could theoretically do the identical thing. Wakefield conceded that “theoretically, it might,” but immediately dodged the implication by framing the issue around patient liberty:
> “While that question mark exists, at the very least, parents deserve a choice for how they protect their children against these infections, whether it be with the—the MMR vaccine or whether it is with a single vaccine.”
He invariably steered questions back to parental choice and alternative vaccines, acting less like an impartial clinical researcher and more like a dedicated salesman trying to drum up demand for a competing product.
---
[31:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1863s) Media Irresponsibility and Melanie Phillips
Autistic enterocolitis has never been recognized or accepted as a legitimate medical condition within the field of gastroenterology. However, because ordinary citizens and journalists lacked the technical background to recognize that the biological mechanism was nonsensical, news outlets seized on it as a bold and controversial new hypothesis. Among the most aggressive media champions was columnist Melanie Phillips, then one of Britain's highest-paid journalists. Even while responding to public criticism for amplifying debunked science, Phillips penned an article doubling down on the claim, dubbing it a “unique gut-brain disease”—an irony given that inventing a completely unprecedented disease mechanism out of whole cloth is precisely why it sounded unique in the first place.
Phillips was an established fixture of British reactionary commentary, having garnered the “Bigot of the Year” award and built a reputation on denying anthropogenic climate change, alleging Barack Obama was an Islamist, labeling liberal Jewish critics “Jews for genocide,” opposing Irish self-determination, and framing gay rights as an assault on traditional family structures orchestrating cultural Marxism. Her promotion of Wakefield’s claims was entirely in character, but the broader disaster was that mainstream British journalism joined her in uncritically echoing Wakefield’s talking points.
This media-wide failure had severe real-world repercussions:
- Widespread public panic and distrust in routine childhood immunizations.
- A revitalized modern anti-vaccination movement that persists globally.
- Measles outbreaks directly leading to preventable childhood illnesses and deaths.
Following this grim assessment, the host pauses to take a slurp from his mug, humorously assuring the audience that the prop actually contains real hot coffee rather than being empty screen pantomime, joking, “I'm not doing a bit... It's not tea, though. It's coffee. I'm not a farmer.”
---
[33:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1982s) How the Media Framed Autism
Compounding the pseudoscientific coverage was the dehumanizing manner in which news broadcasts discussed autism itself. Rather than portraying autism as a wide, multifaceted spectrum of neurodivergence with varied presentations and support needs, television networks actively tracked down the most extreme, distressing cases available to capture dramatic footage. They focused heavily on children who were completely non-verbal or experienced severe co-occurring physical disabilities, creating what functioned as an exploitative, almost pornographic display of suffering designed to elevate the emotional stakes of the controversy.
In doing so, the press fostered a narrative that being autistic was a fate far worse than contracting measles—a dangerously misinformed calculation that erased public awareness of what measles actually does. Because widespread vaccination had largely shielded several generations from seeing its horrors, society had forgotten that measles is a lethal, highly contagious disease capable of causing devastating lifelong complications, permanent disability, and death.
The lingering societal prejudice surrounding neurodivergence remains visible in commercial spaces. The host recounts wandering into a high-end Waitrose supermarket purely to exploit their oversized parking spaces, only to spot a magazine on the display racks bearing the headline: *“Reignite your child’s brain with alternative treatments.”* As he points out, phrases like this invariably mean “alternatives to treatment” and operate on the insulting premise that autistic individuals have dormant or extinguished brains.
> “Autistic people have to navigate a world that refuses to accommodate them in the slightest to the point they're regularly confronted with the idea other people think their brain has gone out.”
After a brief mock-incendiary joke about Waitrose, the video returns to the consequences of the 1990s media climate: terrified parents refused the combined MMR jab, and those who could afford it turned to private clinics charging roughly £60 per shot for separate measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines.
---
[36:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2180s) In My Opinion, Andrew Wakefield is a Lying Conman Who Wanted Your Money
A booming voiceover introduces the next chapter, originally titled *“Andrew Wakefield is a Lying Conman Who Wanted Your Money.”* Catching himself on the legal dangers of British libel law, the host pauses, taps at his keyboard, and amends the title to: *“In My Opinion, Andrew Wakefield is a Lying Conman Who Wanted Your Money.”*
The massive public demand for separate vaccines created an enormous commercial opportunity. If millions of anxious parents were refusing the standard state-provided MMR jab and desperately seeking single-disease alternatives, whichever entity manufactured and supplied those single jabs stood to reap massive financial profits. The clear conflict of interest becomes unmistakable upon examining patent registries:
- Exactly six months before publishing his February 1998 *Lancet* paper warning against the combined MMR vaccine, Andrew Wakefield filed a formal patent for his very own single-antigen measles vaccine.
Enter Brian Deer, an investigative reporter with a track record of uncovering pharmaceutical malfeasance and medical fraud. Unlike his peers in the British press pack who swallowed Wakefield’s press releases without scrutiny, Deer began investigating the underlying claims and clinical data. Deer phoned the Royal Free Hospital with basic research questions that Wakefield had evidently never faced before. Within just three hours of that inquiry, a public relations representative hired by Wakefield lodged a formal complaint against Deer with his newspaper editor. Rather than backing off, the sudden PR retaliation signaled to Deer that there was something serious being hidden, leading directly to his landmark 2004 television investigation, *MMR: What They Didn't Tell You*.
[38:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2287s) The Secret Vaccine Patent and Hugh Fudenberg
Investigative journalist Brian Deer uncovered the paper trail that exposed the core of Andrew Wakefield’s operation: a patent filed in June 1997, well before his infamous paper was published. Having completed the bulk of his research on the twelve children, Wakefield rushed to secure intellectual property rights over a competing product. The patent document, titled as a new vaccine and immunization for the prevention or prophylaxis of measles virus infection, revealed that Wakefield was actively developing an alternative measles vaccine to sell once public confidence in the MMR jab was undermined.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Andrew Wakefield's Commercial Vaccine and Diagnostic Network
accDescr: Diagram illustrating Wakefield's patent, business ventures, collaborators, and financial interests.
subgraph IP["1997 Patent Filing"]
Patent["Measles Vaccine Patent<br>(June 1997)"]
Wakefield["Andrew Wakefield<br>(Inventor)"]
Fudenberg["Hugh Fudenberg<br>(Co-Inventor, misspelled 'Fundenberg')"]
Wakefield --- Patent
Fudenberg --- Patent
end
Looking closely at the filing reveals that Wakefield did not act alone; listed beside him as co-inventor was none other than Hugh Fudenberg. Fudenberg was an American quack whose medical license had been revoked and who claimed he could cure autism using molecules extracted from his own bone marrow. His organization, the grandly titled Neuro Immuno Therapeutics Research Foundation, was listed alongside an address that Deer later visited, only to find the foundation gone and replaced by a real estate agency, which eventually turned into a hairdresser. Highlighting the hasty, slipshod nature of the enterprise, Wakefield even misspelled his collaborator’s name on the legal document as "Hugh Fundenberg."
- The patent application was officially submitted in June 1997.
- A voiceover narrator reads directly from the text of the patent: “The present invention relates to a new vaccine/immunization for the prevention and/or prophylaxis against measles virus infection.”
- When visiting the listed headquarters of Fudenberg's research foundation, Brian Deer remarked: “Doesn't look like one of America's premiere research foundations.”
- Hbomberguy summarizes the glaring absurdity: “And just in case it wasn't extremely obvious what a hasty fucking scam Wacky-field and his one friend who agreed with him were putting together, F--Fudenberg's name is spelled wrong on the patent!”
[40:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2426s) Wakefield's Corporate Empire and Financial Projections
By 1999, Wakefield had transitioned into the director of multiple commercial medical enterprises, including Immunospecifics Biotechnologies Ltd and Carmel Healthcare Ltd (named after his wife, who later divorced him). He used the patent he had obtained immediately prior to the MMR scare to pitch these companies to wealthy investors. In addition to a rival single measles vaccine, Wakefield realized that if his fabricated condition—"Autistic Enterocolitis"—was accepted as real, it would spawn a massive diagnostic market. He drew up plans to produce and distribute commercial testing kits specifically designed to detect this supposed new illness.
Confidential prospectuses obtained by Brian Deer showed that Wakefield calculated staggering potential returns. He estimated that these businesses could be worth tens of millions of dollars—reaching up to roughly $72 million adjusted for modern inflation—while years earlier he had pitched a figure of £72.5 million per year (nearly $200 million in contemporary money) to the commercial arm of the Royal Free Medical School. Wakefield formed a third entity, Unigenetics Ltd in Ireland, which secured £800,000 (over $2 million today) in government funding to engineer the diagnostic tests. Meanwhile, pharmaceutical players like Canada's Axcan Pharma funded his travel to discuss commercialization, while Wakefield explored consultancies with Johnson & Johnson and pursued inroads with Merck and SmithKline Beecham. Far from being a champion of vaccine safety, Wakefield had orchestrated a health scare solely to clear the market for his own proprietary treatments and diagnostic tests.
- Target audiences listed in Wakefield's prospectuses included litigation-driven testing and parents seeking confirmation of vaccine injury.
- Meeting documents revealed Wakefield planned to charge "premium prices" for the diagnostic technologies.
- Hbomberguy highlights the dark reality behind Wakefield's media appearances: “Watching Wakefield repeatedly push for getting alternative vaccines ‘just in case’ is really chilling to watch now.”
- Pointing out the ultimate conflict of interest, Hbomberguy notes: “No wonder he wasn't anti-vaccine. He wanted you to buy his!”
[43:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2594s) The Science Crumbles: Contamination at Unigenetics
Wakefield’s commercial ambitions soon encountered insurmountable obstacles, the primary one being that Autistic Enterocolitis was entirely fictitious, making a working test biologically impossible. At Unigenetics in Ireland, Wakefield partnered with pathologist John O'Leary to generate the lab results required to validate the kits. O'Leary initially claimed to have discovered measles virus genetic material in gut biopsies taken from autistic children, providing what seemed to be the sole piece of laboratory evidence supporting Wakefield’s entire hypothesis.
| Entity / Scientist | Financial / Institutional Role | Outcome of Testing & Scrutiny |
|:--- |:--- |:--- |
| **John O'Leary** *(Unigenetics)* | Held an 11.1% equity stake in Immunospecifics; led diagnostic testing in Ireland | Independent labs proved his positive results were caused by false positives, calibration errors, and severe sample contamination. Results could not be replicated once scrutinized. |
| **Hugh Fudenberg** *(Neuro Immuno Therapeutics)* | Listed co-inventor on Wakefield's rival single-measles vaccine patent | Completely discredited after losing his medical license and claiming his own bone marrow cured autism; scared away potential institutional investors. |
| **Irish Government** | Provided public research grants to develop the enterprise | Wasted £800,000 (over $2 million modern equivalent) on unviable diagnostic kits. |
This foundation collapsed when independent laboratories attempted to replicate O'Leary's findings and failed. Investigators discovered that the positive results were produced entirely by machine miscalibration and systemic laboratory contamination: negative control tubes that contained no viral matter whatsoever were testing positive for measles. O'Leary, who stood to make a fortune from his 11.1% equity share in Immunospecifics, found his positive results evaporated as soon as outside scientists examined his methodology. Coupled with the fact that serious investors were alarmed to discover the rival vaccine's co-inventor was an unlicensed quack, Wakefield's corporate ventures stalled.
- A journalist in archival footage reported: “He'd found measles virus in most of the samples he'd tested from children with autism and bowel disease.”
- Hbomberguy explains the fatal flaw in the Irish laboratory: “The only way his equipment could get the results he was getting is if there was contamination or if his machine had been calibrated wrong. It turned out later it was both!”
[44:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2684s) Mark Pepys and Wakefield's Ouster from the Royal Free
Although the Royal Free Hospital's administration had initially enjoyed the prestige and publicity brought by Wakefield’s 1998 publication, institutional support evaporated in late 1999 with the appointment of Mark Pepys as the new head of medicine. As an expert in disciplines directly relevant to Wakefield’s claims, Pepys recognized the work as scientifically unsound and flagged the blatant ethical conflicts of interest. The medical school sent Wakefield a formal letter expressing concern over the baseless scientific claims his companies were exploiting for financial gain.
Rather than dismissing him immediately, the school offered Wakefield a generous academic lifeline: they agreed to keep employing him if he conducted a comprehensive, controlled follow-up trial on 150 patients to rigorously validate the speculations made in his initial 12-child pilot study. Wakefield formally agreed to the terms, but he never performed the study because doing so would inevitably prove his hypothesis wrong. After Wakefield repeatedly stalled and ignored demands to produce the research, the hospital forced him out in late 2001. Wakefield spin-doctored his departure to the press, posing as a persecuted whistleblower who was silenced by the medical establishment for daring to challenge MMR safety, masking the fact that he was fired for refusing to test his own claims.
- The official letter from school leadership placed "Autistic Enterocolitis" in skeptical quotation marks.
- Describing the generous offer of a 150-patient study, Hbomberguy notes: “This would be any legitimate scientist's dream. The freedom and support to fully explore a hypothesis and discover the truth.”
- Mark Pepys did not mince words regarding Wakefield's integrity, later stating that Wakefield was “a wanker and a fraud.”
- Following his November 2001 dismissal, a journalist reported: “Last November, Andrew Wakefield left the Royal Free Hospital by mutual agreement.”
- Wakefield attempted to frame his firing as a noble stand for science, claiming at the time: “I have been asked to go because my research results are unpopular.”
[47:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2852s) The Search for Measles Virus RNA
By 2003, Brian Deer’s investigative reporting was unraveling the remaining scientific pillars of Wakefield's 1998 paper. Wakefield’s claim that MMR caused bowel pathology and autism hinged on demonstrating the physical presence of the measles virus inside the children’s intestinal tissue. Without verifiable viral material, the entire concept of Autistic Enterocolitis—along with the rationale for his diagnostic kits and replacement vaccines—was completely baseless.
In media appearances, such as a BBC documentary tracking the laboratory investigation, Wakefield insisted that researchers were methodically searching for this evidence using molecular techniques. He framed the absence of definitive findings as merely an early stage of an ongoing, rigorous search, assuring the public that finding the genetic blueprint of the measles virus was simply a matter of time and refined testing. In reality, Wakefield was concealing the fact that the laboratory had already looked for the viral RNA during the original study and had completely failed to find it.
- Wakefield explained the scientific challenge in an archival interview: “The question we've been asking, is measles virus present in the intestine of these children?”
- Wakefield emphasized the stringent requirements for scientific proof: “The gold standard now is to find the gene of the virus in there.”
- Summarizing the existential stakes of this testing, Hbomberguy points out: “The big deal here is if Wakefield can't find the gene of the virus then his theory is wrong.”
[48:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2909s) The Lab Found No Measles Virus
Brian Deer discovered that Andrew Wakefield had already looked for the measles virus inside his subjects' guts long before the paper was published—and it simply was not there. Dr. Nick Chadwick, a specialist working in Wakefield's lab on detecting measles RNA in tissue samples, was tasked with examining gut biopsy samples from the children in the study. Wakefield firmly believed that the measles virus was present in the children's intestines causing bowel disease and triggering autism. Yet Chadwick's sensitive assays never detected any measles whatsoever. As Nick Chadwick bluntly confirmed to Brian Deer:
> "Dr. Wakefield's theory was that it was measles virus itself that was responsible for a bowel disease and then leading on to some kinds of autism and you found no measles virus?"
> "That's correct."
Despite contributing substantial work to the project, Dr. Chadwick's name was completely absent from the final 1998 paper published in *The Lancet*. He later stated in a signed declaration that he had explicitly requested his name be removed because he was profoundly uncomfortable with Wakefield continuing to push an unverified hypothesis in the face of zero positive test results. Wakefield ignored his own lab's findings because he was already planning a business selling diagnostic testing kits based on the premise. He continued searching for the virus for years, forming the subject of a BBC documentary four years later. During an interview in that documentary, when pressed on why he had not waited to prove his claims before going public, Wakefield defiantly admitted that definitive scientific proof might still be "10, 15 years away," yet insisted he should not have waited.
[50:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3034s) Confrontation, Lawsuits, and Retraction
Wakefield consistently dodged questions about his hidden commercial conflicts, avoiding Deer for over a year. Deer eventually cornered him in person at an autism conference. Footage captures Wakefield happily answering inquiries from attendees and parents, only to abruptly bolt from the room the moment he spots Deer. Rather than addressing the glaring financial incentives behind discrediting MMR, Wakefield retaliated by filing a sprawling defamation lawsuit against Channel 4, *The Sunday Times*, and Deer's personal website, briandeer.com.
In 2004, the credibility of the research deteriorated further when 10 of Wakefield's 12 co-authors formally and publicly retracted the interpretation section of the 1998 paper. By that point, the vast majority of the scientists who had worked alongside him had gone on the record to reject his conclusions.
[52:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3170s) Part Five: It Gets Much Worse
Brian Deer's investigation took an even darker turn when he uncovered that two years before *The Lancet* study was published, Wakefield had been secretly retained by a personal injury lawyer named Richard Barr. Barr had recognized that a class action lawsuit against MMR manufacturers on behalf of parents of autistic children could yield millions of pounds, but he lacked scientific evidence linking the vaccine to bowel disease or autism. He hired Wakefield to generate that evidence, paying him £150 an hour. Over the course of the study, Wakefield billed more than £435,000—well over $1.1 million in modern terms—which was more than eight times his annual hospital salary.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: The Litigation Funding and Parent Recruitment Pipeline
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating how Richard Barr funded Andrew Wakefield and coordinated with JABS to recruit parents for a biased study to serve a class-action lawsuit.
subgraph Legal_Funding ["Litigation Syndicate"]
Barr["Lawyer: Richard Barr<br/>(Seeking MMR class action)"]
Barr -->|"Pays £435,000+<br/>(£150/hr)"| Wakefield["Dr. Andrew Wakefield<br/>(Royal Free Hospital)"]
end
subgraph Laundering ["Idea Laundering Pipeline"]
Wakefield -->|"Isolates co-researchers<br/>Hides legal backing"| Paper["1998 Lancet Paper<br/>(12 Case Studies)"]
Paper -->|"Manufactured 'proof'"| Court["Court / Lawsuit Claims"]
end
```
The anti-vaccine advocacy group JABS (Justice, Awareness and Basic Support) played a central role in funneling participants into the study. Jackie Fletcher, the founder of JABS, was both a litigant in Barr's lawsuit and instrumental in finding parents who blamed the MMR vaccine for their child's condition. The dynamic functioned as an "idea laundering" scheme: parents who suspected vaccines approached a lawyer, the lawyer paid a doctor to evaluate their kids, and the doctor converted the parents' unsubstantiated beliefs into a published scientific paper that the lawyer could then introduce in court as independent medical proof.
- Finding families who blamed the vaccine in 1996 was so difficult that the researchers cast an international net, even flying Child 11 and his family in from California.
- Several participating parents were litigants in Barr's lawsuit, while other families did not even blame MMR for their children's conditions.
- Wakefield systematically deceived his colleagues by siloing the medical staff and working with each researcher individually, concealing the legal funding and leaving them to believe they were engaged in genuine clinical research.
[56:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3379s) The GMC Hearing and the Libel Backfire
As these undisclosed financial arrangements were brought to light, the UK's General Medical Council (GMC) initiated a formal fitness-to-practice disciplinary hearing against Wakefield to examine whether his conduct had been unethical. The hearing lasted 217 days, making it the longest inquiry in GMC history—running longer even than the O.J. Simpson criminal trial.
Wakefield's decision to sue Brian Deer for defamation proved to be a catastrophic miscalculation. Because the libel claim hinged on allegations regarding Wakefield's conduct during the study, the trial judge ordered the disclosure of the children's unredacted, confidential medical records as essential evidence. In an attempt to silence investigative reporting, Wakefield inadvertently granted Deer full access to the underlying case files. While Deer and his legal team sat in a room reading through the uncovered case histories, Wakefield's attorneys scrambled to take a cab to the courthouse to formally withdraw the lawsuit before any more could be exposed. Under UK legal rules, abandoning the suit meant Wakefield was forced to pay Deer's legal defense costs, all while Deer walked away with the unredacted documents that exposed the truth behind the study.
[58:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3485s) Brian Deer Uncovers the BMJ Investigation
Brian Deer was far from finished after Andrew Wakefield dropped his libel lawsuit. As Deer explained, the legal maneuvering backfired: “But in the context of that lawsuit, a great deal of information was disclosed to me by Wakefield's lawyers and it was quite clear I had to continue.” Deer pressed on with his investigation, sitting through the General Medical Council (GMC) fitness to practise hearings where the very confidential medical records Wakefield had tried to bury were laid out in detail. Piecing the timeline and data together, Deer published a groundbreaking series of exposés in the *British Medical Journal* (BMJ).
Deer tracked down the anonymized families from the 1998 *Lancet* paper and sat down with them to review what Wakefield had written about their children. The discrepancies were staggering. When Deer reviewed the medical records and paper description with the father of Child 11, the father flatly refuted the study: “And he looked at the paper and he just looked at what it said about his own child and he said, 'That's not true.'” In personal correspondence with Deer, the father expressed utter bewilderment at the published narrative. Wakefield had falsely told the father that his son was the "13th child" examined and had been left out of the study entirely, using that excuse to explain why the published case did not match the boy's actual medical history. In reality, Wakefield had rewritten the child's medical timeline from scratch.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Legal Disclosure to BMJ Exposé
accDescr: Diagram showing how Wakefield dropping his libel lawsuit against Brian Deer resulted in disclosed records that exposed data manipulation in the Lancet study.
subgraph Legal ["Legal Actions"]
A["Wakefield drops libel lawsuit to hide records"]
B["Discovery forces disclosure of medical files to Deer"]
end
subgraph Investigation ["Deer's Investigation"]
C["Deer attends GMC hearings & analyzes files"]
D["Deer contacts study parents directly"]
end
subgraph Findings ["Revelations"]
E["Parents discover published records are fabricated"]
F["Child 11 father told his son was excluded '13th child'"]
G["BMJ publishes landmark series exposing total fraud"]
end
A --> B
B --> C
C --> D
D --> E
E --> F
F --> G
```
[01:00:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3606s) Faking the 14-Day "Temporal Link"
To serve Richard Barr's class-action litigation against the vaccine manufacturers, Wakefield needed to demonstrate a tight "temporal link" between the MMR jab and the onset of behavioral symptoms. Because autism symptoms typically emerge around the age children receive the MMR vaccine, establishing causation in court required onset within 14 days—or even fewer—to prevent the court from viewing the timing as mere coincidence.
Wakefield's paper presented a neat table claiming that 8 out of the 12 children developed symptoms within 14 days of vaccination. Deer’s investigation and GMC hearing evidence revealed this was completely fabricated. Many parents had never reported any two-week onset window. In several cases, hospital records showed symptoms began months after the 14-day window; in others, behavioral abnormalities had been recorded *before* the children ever received the MMR jab. Faced with data that was either far too late or far too early to support Barr's legal claims, Wakefield simply altered the dates and parental allegations on paper to fit the lawsuit's requirements.
Wakefield consistently deflected scientific scrutiny by wrapping himself in parental advocacy. On television, he insisted: “Damn right, you do.” Hbomberguy highlights the profound hypocrisy of Wakefield's posture:
> “He got all high and mighty about how you need to believe the parents when he had made up most of what the parents had said, and the media fucking ate it up, too.”
Mainstream news broadcasts uncritically framed Wakefield as a heroic maverick championing desperate families, failing to realize he was merely citing fraudulent claims he had invented himself for a lawsuit that was paying him.
- Barr's legal action required a clear, immediate onset (within 14 days) to legally argue causation.
- The *Lancet* paper claimed 8 of 12 children suffered behavioral regression within 14 days.
- Hospital records showed most children developed symptoms months later, while others exhibited developmental delays prior to vaccination.
[01:01:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3716s) The Invention of "Autistic Enterocolitis"
Wakefield's concoction of a brand-new medical syndrome—termed "autistic enterocolitis"—was entirely driven by the demands of the lawsuit. To mount a successful product liability claim, the legal team could not present a collection of unrelated digestive complaints. As the presiding judge later noted: “Barr needed it to cause a distinct and specific clinical syndrome.” A uniform, novel diagnosis allowed Barr to claim that the vaccine caused an identical pathology across the claimant cohort.
To manufacture this uniformity, the 1998 paper claimed that 11 of the 12 children suffered from a consistent form of "non-specific colitis." The actual pathology records told a completely different story:
- Only 3 of the 12 children showed any significant bowel inflammation.
- The Royal Free Hospital's designated pathologist and her team reviewed the biopsies and explicitly ruled out colitis in over half the children.
- Unhappy with findings that undermined the legal narrative, Wakefield brought in an alternate pathologist who had previously collaborated with him; this second pathologist also failed to find colitis in his formal reports.
- Wakefield overrode both pathology teams, discarded their clinical assessments, and unilaterally wrote into the published manuscript that 11 of the children had non-specific colitis.
The deception went beyond gut biopsies; the study even falsified developmental diagnoses. Although the entire premise of the paper hinged on investigating bowel pathology in children with autism spectrum disorders, several children in the trial did not have autism at all.
Child 7 had never received an autism diagnosis before, during, or after the Royal Free investigations. The boy had only been referred to the hospital because his older brother (Child 6) had an autism diagnosis. Wakefield nevertheless entered Child 7 into the paper as autistic, falsely recording that his symptoms had appeared exactly 24 hours after his MMR vaccination.
Similarly, Child 12 had never been diagnosed with autism. A specialist in developmental pediatrics had evaluated the child and noted developmental delay, yet explicitly declined to make an autism diagnosis. Wakefield—a gut surgeon with no psychiatric or developmental credentials—disregarded the specialist, entered the child as autistic, and documented an onset of symptoms following the 15-month MMR jab, even though the parents never attributed their child's condition to the vaccine. Wakefield also assigned Child 12 an unverified diagnosis of chronic non-specific colitis.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Diagnostic Manipulation in the Lancet Paper
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating how Wakefield fabricated both bowel and developmental diagnoses to meet legal parameters.
subgraph Bowel_Findings ["Bowel Pathology Claims"]
P1["Hospital Pathologist: Rules out colitis in majority"]
P2["Second Pathologist: Omits any mention of colitis"]
P3["Wakefield overrules both: Claims 11 of 12 have colitis"]
P1 --> P3
P2 --> P3
end
subgraph Autism_Findings ["Autism Diagnosis Claims"]
D1["Child 7: No autism diagnosis; referred because brother was autistic"]
D2["Child 12: Developmental delay, explicitly NOT diagnosed with autism"]
D3["Wakefield writes both up as autistic with post-MMR onset"]
D1 --> D3
D2 --> D3
end
subgraph Legal_Goal ["Legal Utility"]
G["Creates illusion of uniform 'Autistic Enterocolitis' for Barr's lawsuit"]
P3 --> G
D3 --> G
end
```
The realization that his raw data would not withstand scrutiny explains why Wakefield hastily abandoned his defamation action once Deer was granted access to the hospital files, and why he never executed the larger replication studies demanded by the scientific community. Over the subsequent twenty years, global health datasets examining millions of children have failed to replicate any link between MMR and autism. The *Lancet* paper was not an innocent pilot study or controversial preliminary research; as Hbomberguy stresses, “It was a lie for money, but the worst thing about this study was that somehow even that wasn't the worst thing.”
[01:05:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3958s) Invasive Procedures and Informed Consent
The paper's ethical transgressions extended far beyond manipulated data into physical mistreatment. In his quest to find physiological evidence linking the gut to autism, Wakefield subjected the young cohort to a grueling battery of invasive clinical tests during a week-long hospital stay. The children were subjected to:
- Frequent sedation and heavy doses of laxatives;
- Repeated blood draws;
- Full colonoscopies and endoscopic biopsies;
- Lumbar punctures (spinal taps) to extract cerebrospinal fluid;
- Brain MRI scans under deep sedation;
- Electroencephalograms (EEGs) with electrodes attached to their heads.
Other physicians would later observe that this extensive battery of interventions was punishing even for adult patients, let alone very young, developmentally challenged children who could not comprehend what was being done to them.
Under basic medical ethics, invasive, non-therapeutic procedures cannot be conducted without informed consent, which requires detailing all potential risks and side effects to patients or their legal guardians. The human rights organization CIRCARE later acquired the documentation packet that Wakefield distributed to parents alongside the official consent form. While Wakefield's handout itemized the extensive list of procedures he planned to carry out, the disclosures downplayed significant risks to recruit children into tests intended to generate evidence for a lawsuit.
[01:07:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4052s) Omitted Risks, Colonoscopies, and Bowel Perforations
Wakefield’s patient consent form notably omits every single risk involved in the medical procedures performed on the children. The word "risk" literally does not appear anywhere on the document. Hbomberguy pauses the narrative to deliver a sincere public service announcement: colonoscopies are standard, safe, and vital diagnostic tools that effectively catch and prevent bowel and rectal cancer in adults (particularly those over 45), noting personal grief from losing an uncle and a close friend to bowel cancer at young ages. However, performing this invasive procedure on small children is an entirely different matter.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Colonoscopy Complications in Young Children
accDescr: The physical and clinical sequence leading to severe harm in young children subjected to unnecessary colonoscopies.
subgraph Vulnerability ["Anatomical Vulnerability"]
A["Small, weak, developing intestines"] --> B["High-risk maneuvering around corners"]
end
subgraph Catastrophe ["Surgical Event & Harm"]
B --> C["Intestinal perforation"]
C --> D["Bacterial leakage into abdominal cavity"]
D --> E["Systemic infection, organ failure & lifelong disability"]
end
```
In children under the age of five, intestines are significantly smaller, weaker, and far harder to navigate with an endoscope, creating substantial danger:
- **Perforation and Infection:** Puncturing the bowel wall allows gut bacteria to leak out, triggering devastating internal infections and tissue damage.
- **The Case of the Five-Year-Old Boy:** During a subsequent follow-up attempt to generate more proof for "autistic enterocolitis," a five-year-old autistic boy’s bowel was perforated in twelve separate places during a colonoscopy.
- **Catastrophic Outcome:** The child suffered multiple organ failure and fought for his life; the incident resulted in permanent, lifelong disabilities that required round-the-clock care.
- **Hospital Settlement:** The Royal Free Hospital had to pay nearly £500,000 in damages (equivalent to roughly $1 million today) to the boy and his family.
- **Lack of True Consent:** The parents revealed they had never been informed of the operational risks beforehand, which Hbomberguy defines as outright assault.
While the five-year-old child nearly died in the follow-up, Wakefield’s original 1998 study had already subjected children as young as three to these identical procedures. Rather than detailing the genuine dangers of threading feet of tubing into a toddler's gut, Wakefield’s consent document asserted that the procedure was entirely painless and well tolerated. It casually added that if a child became distressed or difficult to manage, the procedure would simply be carried out under general anesthesia—while failing to mention any risks of anesthesia either. “In case you're watching, Andy, this is what informed consent looks like, you piece of shit,” Hbomberguy remarks while contrasting Wakefield's handout with a standard medical consent form detailing risks of perforation, bleeding, and sedation reactions. Wakefield needed signatures because his legal paycheck depended on manufacturing evidence of a new disease.
---
[01:10:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4241s) Abuse, Distress, and Inappropriate Medications
Accounts gathered by investigative journalist Brian Deer expose that the environment on the ward was marked by terror and distress rather than routine clinical care. Children routinely fainted, vomited, and physically fought back against the invasive testing, sometimes requiring clinical staff to force-feed them fluids required for the diagnostics.
> “Nurses were leaving and saying they didn't like what was being done to these children. Junior doctors were unhappy. It needed three people to hold these kids down in some cases just to have blood taken. These are difficult children to explain to what is going on. I feel very sorry for the children who I feel were being abused.” — Brian Deer
Invasive neurological procedures were handed out just as carelessly:
- One child vomited so violently and uncontrollably from prior testing that doctors could not perform a scheduled lumbar puncture and had to send him home.
- A lumbar puncture performed on another child went so critically wrong that the patient had to be rushed to an entirely different hospital for emergency treatment.
- As Hbomberguy emphasizes: “If you do stuff like this to kids in your study for no clinically justified reason, that's child abuse!”
To maintain the pretense that these subjects suffered from genuine intestinal disease, Wakefield put almost all of the children on anti-inflammatory bowel medications. In children under six years old, these pharmaceutical drugs carry severe, life-threatening risks including heightened bleeding and susceptibility to infections. Because many of the children experienced communication barriers, they were physically unable to report early adverse side effects, heightening the medical danger purely to support Wakefield's litigation-driven theory.
---
[01:12:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4343s) Experimental Bone Marrow Extracts and Birthday Party Blood
The General Medical Council (GMC) discovered that Wakefield also gave an unlicensed experimental substance to a child in the study without waiting for approval from an ethics committee. The substance in question was Dialysable Lymphocyte Extract—a purported autism treatment derived from the work of Hugh Fudenberg, the disgraced former doctor who had lost his medical license and claimed he could cure autism using extracts from his own bone marrow.
Wakefield seemingly secured parental permission through a blatant conflict of interest: the child’s father was made managing director and awarded equity in a company set up to manufacture and sell the very extract being tested. Stepping back through the chain of events with dark humor, Hbomberguy summarises:
> “Andrew Wakefield might have offered a cushy job to a guy to let him experiment on his kid with a drug that he probably got from a guy who got fired for stealing medical supplies, wasn't a doctor anymore, and thought he could cure autism using his bone marrow. The Aristocrats!” — Hbomberguy
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: The Unethical Sourcing of Blood Samples
accDescr: Wakefield bypassed institutional review boards by purchasing blood from children at a birthday party.
subgraph Institutional ["Standard Protocol (Ignored)"]
A["Hospital Ethics Board"] --> B["Formal Blood Requests"]
B --> C["Consenting Volunteers"]
end
subgraph Party ["Wakefield's Method"]
D["Child's Birthday Party"] --> E["£5 Cash Bribes"]
E --> F["Children Fainting & Vomiting"]
end
```
The GMC investigation brought to light an even more bizarre breach of ethics: Wakefield needed control samples of non-autistic blood to compare against his test subjects for the lawsuit. Instead of recruiting volunteers through normal hospital protocols or consulting an ethics board, Wakefield gathered guests at his own child’s birthday party, lined them up, and offered them £5 notes in exchange for having their blood drawn.
Wakefield had openly joked about this at a 1999 conference, laughing alongside an audience. When pressed about it during his fitness-to-practise hearing, his defense was that he had exaggerated details like children fainting and vomiting for comedic effect. Later, he maintained that skipping the hospital ethics board was a mere technicality:
> “The only problem was that it did not have an approval from the hospital ethics committee. That does not make it unethical.” — Andrew Wakefield
---
[01:16:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4560s) The Struck-Off "Doctor"
In 2010, the General Medical Council concluded the longest inquiry in its history by finding Andrew Wakefield guilty of serious professional misconduct. The panel ruled that he had abused his position of trust, subjected children to unnecessary invasive procedures, and acted against the clinical interests of his patients.
- **Loss of License:** Wakefield was officially struck off the UK medical register, permanently stripping him of the legal right to practice medicine.
- **Revoked Title:** Because he is no longer licensed, referring to him as a "doctor" is factually incorrect. In his self-directed 2016 documentary *Vaxxed*, he cannot legally style himself as "Dr." and instead resorts to the post-nominal medical degree initials "MB, BS."
- **The Verdict on His Cruelty:** Summarizing the medical panel’s final assessment of his research conduct, the Council noted that he had displayed a “callous disregard for any distress or pain” experienced by the vulnerable children in his care.
[01:16:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4604s) The Retraction and the Book Tour: *Callous Disregard*
In 2010, the same year the General Medical Council findings emerged, *The Lancet* finally issued a formal retraction of Andrew Wakefield's 1998 paper. Hbomb offers a sarcastic slow handclap to editor Richard Horton, remarking that "better too late than never" is hardly an expression worthy of praise when decades of damage have already been done. Outside the hearings, Wakefield’s remaining cadre of supporters held demonstrations, repeatedly chanting, "We're with Wakefield." In a telling display of irony, while a television news crew attempted to interview one of Wakefield's critics, an agitated supporter shouted the critic down to prevent him from speaking, all while an off-screen protester brandished a book insisting that Wakefield's faction was the one being silenced. Wakefield himself stepped before the crowd of supporters to proclaim the process entirely unjust. When Wakefield told the crowd, “And I invite anyone to examine the contents of these proceedings and come to their own conclusions,” Hbomb dryly retorts: "I think we just did, buddy."
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: The Anatomy of Wakefield's Media Defense
accDescr: Diagram illustrating Wakefield's deflections from medical findings to book promotion and conspiracy allegations against journalists.
subgraph Defense ["Wakefield's Deflection Tactics"]
A["Lancet Retraction & GMC Rulings"] --> B["Publish 'Callous Disregard'"]
B --> C["Media Appearances: CNN & Sanjay Gupta"]
C --> D["Evade Direct Questions: 'Read My Book'"]
D --> E["Conspiracy Allegation: Brian Deer as Pharma Hitman"]
end
```
Though Wakefield shed much of his broader public credibility once the scale of his fraud and medical abuse became undeniable, he retained a loyal core of followers—primarily parents of autistic children who had invested so deeply into his claims that they refused to face reality. For Wakefield, these distressed families represented an ideal consumer base. During the closing days of his fitness-to-practise hearing, he used his high-profile television appearances to hawk his new book, which argued that the GMC hearings were merely an establishment plot to silence him and protect vaccine manufacturers. In a darkly ironic move, he titled the volume *Callous Disregard*—borrowing an exact phrase the Council used to condemn his treatment of pediatric patients. As Hbomb observes, trying to flip the council's censure into an indictment of mainstream medicine produced an absurd result: Wakefield emblazoned a direct quotation about child abuse directly over a giant portrait of his own face, creating a grimly unintentional parallel to O.J. Simpson's *If I Did It*. Inside the book, Wakefield thanked his "long-suffering wife," who appeared with him on the cover—though, as Hbomb quips, she is now his ex-wife, having apparently suffered enough.
Whenever interviewers confronted him with his documented falsifications, Wakefield relentlessly pivoted to advertising. When Dr. Sanjay Gupta noted on CNN that the numbers and onset dates in the 1998 study were fabricated, Wakefield dismissed the evidence: “Dr. Gupta, please, I urge you, go and read my book. You will understand it. Many people don't.” He repeated the routine with Anderson Cooper, claiming the entire truth lay in the pages of *Callous Disregard* and demanding to know if the British Medical Journal or reviewing doctors had read it. Cooper swiftly cut through the evasion: “Sir, I'm not here to let you pitch your book. I'm here to have you answer questions,” later blunt-force reminding him, “But sir, if you're lying, then your book is also a lie.” Having failed disastrously to silence investigative reporter Brian Deer through libel lawsuits, Wakefield defaulted to claiming Deer was a corporate assassin hired to wreck his career:
> “He is a hit man. He's been brought in to take me down because they are very, very concerned about the adverse reactions to vaccines that are occurring in children.”
> — *Andrew Wakefield*
When Cooper pressed Wakefield on who "they" were, pointing out that Deer was an independent, multi-award-winning journalist, Wakefield fumbled nervously, admitting, "Who is paying this man? I don't know." Later in the broadcast, Cooper asked Deer directly whether he was receiving funding from the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, to which Deer simply laughed and replied, “No, I'm not.”
---
[01:20:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4815s) The Texas Mansion and the Lucrative Anti-Vaccine Grift
In 2011, *The New York Times Magazine* writer Susan Dominus profiled Wakefield to see what had become of him after his fall from medical grace. Although Wakefield played the role of a martyr destroyed by medical dogma, Dominus highlighted the lucrative reality: he staged this performance while signing stacks of books for an endless line of devotees, including a weeping mother carrying immense guilt because she believed she had failed to protect her child from autism. Far from facing financial ruin, Wakefield was residing in an affluent enclave in Austin, Texas, occupying a sprawling, luxurious estate nestled among private hills and woodland.
Wakefield turned his scientific disgrace into a booming business enterprise. His self-serving book generated healthy royalties, and he charged substantial speaking fees as the keynote hero of the anti-vaccine lecture circuit. These revenues joined the hundreds of thousands of pounds he had initially pocketed from legal aid funds for the discredited study, alongside profits from sympathetic documentary productions. By 2016, his self-directed film *Vaxxed* was being aggressively merchandised on his website with bulk discount deals—offering packs of ten DVDs specifically so buyers could purchase stock to hand out to local politicians, teachers, and pediatricians. Wakefield had effectively built a business model where his followers paid out-of-pocket to distribute his promotional material.
---
[01:21:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4888s) Complicit Victims: The Supporters Outside the Hearing
Reflecting on the archival footage of the GMC hearing's conclusion, Hbomb recalls watching the scene unfold live on television as a teenager a decade earlier. While he initially viewed the crowd outside as fanatical defenders of a fraudster, he now recognizes them as Wakefield's victims. One protester in particular stuck in his memory over the years: a woman holding a placard reading "Don't stifle uncomfortable science," wearing an incongruous Playboy-branded scarf. Hbomb argues that the truly uncomfortable truth confronting these demonstrators was that the crusader they revered had conned them for personal profit.
For parents who had rallied behind Wakefield during the initial MMR panic, admitting his dishonesty meant carrying an intolerable burden of personal guilt for helping spread a dangerous, fabricated health scare. Wakefield's deepest harm was transforming vulnerable people into accomplices. Many were struggling parents of severely disabled children requiring around-the-clock care, grasping for any coherent narrative to explain why their lives had been upended. Wakefield handed them a scapegoat, and they paid him handsomely for the illusion. In Hbomb's eyes, whether Wakefield ever genuinely cared for these families is irrelevant, because their money spent just the same.
Closing out the chapter on Wakefield's career, Hbomb addresses the central question asked of major fraudsters throughout history: how could an individual inflict such widespread societal dread, unravel public health, and cause tangible harm to children? The answer requires no complicated psychological analysis:
> “Why would someone do that? Uh, money. Thank you for watching.”
> — *hbomberguy*
---
[01:23:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5003s) Modern Vaccine Hesitancy and Celebrities: The Bill Maher Syndrome
As the video transitions into its concluding analysis, Hbomb points out that the deep-seated vaccine skepticism felt in contemporary society did not materialize out of thin air; Wakefield's work is woven directly into the very DNA—or as Kat interjects in a voiceover joke, the "RNA"—of the modern movement. Trace almost any contemporary anti-vaccine conspiracy theory or rhetoric far enough back, and the lineage invariably terminates at the fraudulent 1998 *Lancet* paper and the cottage industry created around it.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: The Evolution of Vaccine Hesitancy from Wakefield to Modern Media
accDescr: Flowchart tracking the progression of anti-vaccine rhetoric from Wakefield's 1998 study through talk-show culture like Bill Maher.
subgraph Origin ["The 1998 Seed"]
W["Wakefield Study (1998)"] --> M["Tabloid & Media Scare"]
end
subgraph Culture ["Celebrity Platforming"]
M --> BM["Mainstream Figures (e.g. Bill Maher)"]
BM --> G["'Just Asking Questions' / 'Fair & Balanced'"]
end
subgraph Fallacies ["Rhetorical Substitutes for Data"]
G --> N["Diet & Lifestyle Over Germ Theory"]
G --> A["Parental Anecdotes as Empirical Proof"]
G --> F["'Feelings are as valid as facts'"]
end
```
A prominent example of how Wakefield's legacy infected mainstream public discourse is television host Bill Maher. For years, Maher has indulged the supposed link between childhood immunizations and autism, routinely hosting anti-vaccine voices on his program under the guise of being "fair and balanced" because he occasionally invites a pro-science guest to challenge them. Maher frequently claims he does not reject germ theory outright, yet insists that proper nutrition and personal wellness provide superior protection against viral pathogens:
> “I am not a germ theory denier. I understand that germs and viruses cause diseases. I may have been a little cocky about it because I discovered from first-hand experience that I could stave them off better with proper nutrition.”
> — *Bill Maher*
Hbomb ridicules the absurd logical endpoint of this philosophy: if your child dies of measles, it must simply be because they failed to eat enough vegetables; and if someone catches the bubonic plague, they just needed to lay off McDonald's. Maher never offers rigorous peer-reviewed clinical data or empirical research; instead, his arguments rest entirely on anecdotes from parents who claim their healthy children declined immediately after vaccination. When called out for treating emotional impressions as equivalent to medical consensus, Maher defaults to the defense that "lots of people feel the same way." In Maher's worldview, because an anxious public feels something must be wrong, those feelings alone qualify as science. During an exchange on his program, guest Alec Baldwin wryly mocked Maher’s obsession with relitigating his vaccine controversies: “Bill, you having us on the show and rehashing all these problems you got yourself into on your last show, it's like going on a date and talking about your ex-wife.”
[01:25:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5131s) Bill Maher’s Brand of “Skepticism”
To understand how anti-vaccine ideas permeate mainstream pop culture, Hbomb examines the self-styled intellectual titan Bill Maher. Digging back to a 2005 interview on CNN's *Larry King Live*, Maher can be seen making concrete scientific assertions to Larry King, who mentioned taking an annual flu shot for twenty-five years. Maher argued that King was making a mistake, insisting that the best defense against disease is simply a strong immune system supported by proper nutrition, and claiming that the flu shot actually damages the immune system. He framed his views around an explicit distrust of what he termed "Western medicine"—a Eurocentric misnomer, as modern vaccines and treatments are developed globally.
When the conversation shifted to the avian flu, a pressing threat at the time, Maher brushed it off with vague dismissals, completely ignoring that vaccination helps prevent viruses from spreading and developing dangerous mutations in the first place. His pseudo-libertarian skepticism collapsed in hindsight: Maher eventually contracted COVID-19 himself, had to cancel his show, and turned out fine as an asymptomatic 65-year-old specifically because he had taken the COVID-19 vaccine. Meanwhile, Larry King himself passed away from complications of COVID-19.
When King defended vaccination during that 2005 broadcast by citing the near-eradication of polio, Maher dismissed the achievement, asserting that vaccines are just a money-making racket and claiming there are probably books out there proving polio's eradication was unrelated to the vaccine—books Maher had clearly never read. As Hbomb observes: “This isn't skepticism. This is ignorance trying to sound like skepticism.” Maher’s entire position distilled the core ethos of mainstream anti-vaccine sentiment: a superficial posture of doubt that falls apart the moment consequences arrive.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Bill Maher's Skepticism vs Reality
accDescr: Diagram tracing Bill Maher's unscientific vaccine claims to their debunking and real-world outcomes.
subgraph Reality["Actual Evidence and Real-World Outcomes"]
D["Flu vaccines reduce Alzheimer's risk"]
E["Origin: Uncited 1997 talk by Hugh Fudenberg"]
F["Maher takes COVID-19 vaccine; survives asymptomatic"]
end
Claims -->|"Refuted by data"| Reality
```
- Maher claimed that receiving the flu shot more than five years in a row increased a person's risk of developing Alzheimer's tenfold.
- Legitimate scientific literature shows the exact opposite: receiving vaccinations correlates with a reduced risk of Alzheimer's.
- Tracing the source of Maher’s specific claim leads to a 1997 presentation given at a vaccine conference referencing unverified research attributed to none other than Dr. Hugh Fudenberg.
---
[01:30:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5416s) Tracing the Pseudoscience to Wakefield and Fudenberg
Virtually the entire modern apparatus of vaccine hesitancy leads right back to Andrew Wakefield and Hugh Fudenberg. Despite the fact that both men were stripped of their medical licenses and their work was completely discredited as garbage, their impact remains massive. Wakefield became a celebrity among conspiracists, even serving as a guest of honor aboard the "Conspira-Sea" cruise—a gathering where attendees trade theories about flat Earth, climate change, time travelers, and whether horses are real. Skeptics aboard observed that Wakefield looked visibly uncomfortable rubbing shoulders with such bizarre fringe figures, yet he remains trapped in that world because that is where the money is.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Andrew Wakefield's Audience Pivot
accDescr: How Wakefield transitioned from marketing his own patent to broad anti-vaccine conspiracies.
subgraph Original["1998 Strategy"]
O1["'MMR is dangerous'"]
O2["'Buy my alternative single vaccine'"]
end
subgraph Fringe["Current Anti-Vax Market"]
F1["Reject all vaccines outright"]
F2["Adopt pandemic denialism from Texas mansion"]
end
Original -->|"Forced to pivot"| Fringe
```
Because an audience of conspiracy theorists has no appetite for Wakefield's original 1998 grift—where he claimed only the combined MMR shot was dangerous in order to sell his own patented single replacement—Wakefield had to pivot to arguing that all vaccines are dangerous. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, Wakefield emerged from his Texas mansion to tell the public that contracting a virus that had already killed over three million people was preferable to receiving a vaccine.
- “According to a survey of US health care professionals in 2016, 77% of parents refusing vaccination for their children still cite a fear of a link with autism.”
- Wakefield's original con—positioning his own single-measles vaccine patent as the safe alternative—had to be discarded once his primary supporters became blanket anti-vaccination activists.
---
[01:32:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5540s) How the Truth Restores Public Trust
Despite how entrenched conspiratorial beliefs can seem, presenting the factual truth produces measurable, real-world results. In the United Kingdom, public vaccination rates tracked the arc of the scandal: rates plummeted as the media sensationalized Wakefield's claims, began climbing once investigative journalist Brian Deer exposed the fraud in *The Sunday Times*, and returned to pre-scare levels once the General Medical Council stripped Wakefield of his medical license. Having been burned by the MMR panic, the British public effectively developed a cultural resistance to anti-vaccine misinformation, leading to noticeably higher willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine compared to other nations where skepticism started higher. As Hbomb puts it: “It seems like our past experience with bullshit vaccine scares has inoculated us against future ones.”
Hbomb emphasizes that de-converting people does not require secret persuasion tricks; laying out the full, transparent timeline allows people to recognize the fraud on their own. Contrary to the claims of conspiracists, the legitimate scientific community operates under extraordinarily strict safety standards. When the slightest potential side effects arose with COVID-19 vaccines, regulatory bodies like the FDA and the CDC immediately paused distribution to investigate before clearing them. Wakefield’s proposed alternative vaccine, by contrast, was such an incompetent piece of junk science that it could never have cleared clinical trials:
- Wakefield's patent application was so carelessly prepared that one of the co-authors had their own name misspelled on the very first page.
- Regulatory bodies like the FDA and CDC actively halt rollouts over minuscule safety signals, proving the stringent accountability of modern clinical medicine.
- “Really, Andrew Wakefield was always doomed to end up as a scam artist.”
[01:35:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5703s) Living Proof and Overcoming Vaccine Hesitancy
Andrew Wakefield continues to appear at “health freedom summits,” encouraging people to avoid vaccination in favor of eliminating toxins through cooking hacks and supposedly affordable commercial products. While Wakefield publicly performs resistance to vaccines, hbomberguy remarks that he genuinely hopes Wakefield secretly receives the COVID-19 vaccine for his own survival, joking that otherwise his upcoming wellness cruises will rack up a serious body count. Beyond debunking bad science, there is an organic, highly effective mechanism for changing minds: living proof. When an individual hesitates out of fear that coronavirus vaccines are unsafe, the single most persuasive factor is often watching their friends, family, and coworkers get inoculated and thrive without adverse consequences.
During early polling before the vaccines officially rolled out, a substantial segment of the American population adopted a “wait and see” stance. This hesitation carried immense intrinsic risk, given the severe realities of COVID-19 compared to the negligible risk profile of the vaccine. Roughly one-third of infected individuals—even those with mild initial symptoms—develop lingering long-term complications. Healthy long-distance runners suddenly found themselves unable to climb a flight of stairs without gasping for breath, while others suffered lost eyesight, lost teeth, or death. Over time, as hundreds of millions safely received their doses, public sentiment steadily shifted. While harboring theoretical doubts about an unreleased vaccine in 2020 was understandable, watching half the people in your daily life get jabbed and remain completely healthy eroded those fears.
Issuing a direct call to action, hbomberguy urges viewers to get their COVID-19 vaccine as soon as possible—even if it means pairing it with an appointment for a colonoscopy. Getting vaccinated protects personal health, prevents transmission to vulnerable individuals, and clears one’s conscience. Furthermore, each person who gets vaccinated becomes visible, reassuring evidence for hesitant loved ones. As hbomberguy observes:
> “The truth is, it was easy in 2020 to have your doubts about a theoretical vaccine that no one had had yet, but now when half the people around you already have it and they're obviously fine, it's a whole lot harder to have those doubts.”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Dynamics of Vaccine Adoption
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating how living proof overcomes hesitation while grifters entrench denial.
subgraph S1["Initial Landscape (2020)"]
A["Theoretical Vaccine Fears"] --> B["'Wait-and-See' Hesitancy"]
end
subgraph S2["The Shift to Acceptance"]
B --> C["Mass Public Rollout"]
C --> D["Living Proof: Peers Safe & Healthy"]
D --> E["Widespread Community Uptake"]
end
subgraph S3["The Entrenched Fringe"]
B --> F["Deep Ideological Distrust"]
F --> G["Grifters & Conmen (Wakefield, Alex Jones)"]
G --> H["Paid Supplements, DVDs & Denial"]
end
```
[01:37:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5824s) The Entrenched Grift and Demanding the Vaccine
Despite the overwhelming success of the vaccine rollout, polling data reveals an immovable bloc of people who flatly refused vaccination from the beginning and remain entrenched. Many have invested massive amounts of pride and personal ego into denying contradictory evidence, a mindset vigorously exploited by predatory grifters. Hundreds of opportunists operating in the mold of Andrew Wakefield eagerly assure followers that their conspiratorial suspicions are correct, hawking dietary supplements, DVDs, and cooking hacks so their audience never has to perform any difficult critical thinking. Joking that comparing Wakefield to Infowars host Alex Jones might seem hyperbolic, hbomberguy cuts directly to real broadcast footage showing Alex Jones warmly welcoming Wakefield as an esteemed guest on his program.
Faced with such rigid denialism, the ultimate goal of science communication must be to discover fresh, persuasive methods for conveying truth to people who are entirely unaccustomed to hearing it. But while society wrestles with reaching the willfully unreachable, hbomberguy argues that their unused vaccine doses should simply be given to someone who enthusiastically wants them: himself.
He launches into an unhinged, comedic rant demanding immediate access to every available dose so he can resume normal life:
> “Give me the vaccine, doctor! Hell, give me all of them! Let me combine their power! Soon I will be unstoppable!”
- He complains that while prioritizing older demographics was sensible at first, months have passed and he is desperate to go outside again.
- He fantasizes about pretending to shop at high-end supermarket Waitrose and using his free football match tickets.
- He jokes about taunting his former hairdresser to boast how useless she is to him now, threatening to seize her salon building and convert it back into an offshore research foundation.
[01:39:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5940s) Choosing Action Over Despair
Stepping out of the comedic frenzy, hbomberguy reflects on the creeping depression that arises when confronting modern anti-vaccine culture. It is tempting to surrender to nihilism and assume you are trapped in an enclosed room alongside thousands of vocal idiots determined to spout dangerous absurdities. However, shifting perspective reveals a far more comforting truth: the planet contains hundreds of millions of sensible people who understand the science, yet many of them are simply paralyzed by the same exhaustion and despair.
The true solution is to channel that depressive, nervous energy into tangible action: persuading the people whose minds can still be reached, reinforcing public health, and constructing a safer world for everyone. Even if stubborn conspiracists insist on remaining angry and ignorant, society should eradicate diseases anyway so their children will not die of preventable illnesses like polio. Confronting problems of this scale requires admitting that individuals actually have the power to enact change. Echoing this optimism, hbomberguy deadpans that if humanity works together, maybe someday we will finally invent a technique to clean up the colossal mountain of junk littering his mother's—or rather, *his*—garage.
Reflecting on the duty of the rational majority, hbomberguy explains:
> “Maybe the answer here is that we just need to accept that we should put the depression energy into making a difference, into changing the minds of the people who can be, and into doing what we can to improve the state of our world around these people and just let them be mad and let them continue to be stupid but in a world where their kids won't die of polio because we got rid of it for them.”
[01:40:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=6045s) Credits, Acknowledgments, and Brian Deer's Heroic Reporting
Wrapping up the feature, hbomberguy expresses relief that he avoided ending on an overly moralizing note and turns to acknowledging the team and collaborators who made the massive video essay possible. He thanks his Patreon patrons for keeping the channel running, as well as a sensitivity reader who vetted the script to guarantee autistic people and autism spectrum conditions were addressed with dignity and accurate terminology. Foremost among his acknowledgments is investigative journalist Brian Deer, whom he describes as a real-life superhero responsible for unearthing nearly every major revelation regarding Wakefield's medical fraud.
During the writing of the video, Deer published his definitive book, *The Doctor Who Fooled the World*. Describing the book as an essential, comprehensive account of Wakefield's deceit, hbomberguy urges viewers to purchase it via the non-affiliate link provided in the video description or explore the extensive historical documentation preserved on Deer's website, briandeer.com, which successfully survived Wakefield's retaliatory libel litigation. Hbomberguy jokes that his personal dream is for Brian Deer to spot a distinct spike on his book sales chart directly corresponding to the release of this YouTube essay.
Highlighting the sheer scale of the production, he details the immense labor required to pull the project together without facing ruinous legal fallout:
- **Cowriting and Production:** Kat coordinated the project, cowrote substantial segments, conducted deep research, and continuously fact-checked the material to catch numerous factual inaccuracies.
- **Camera Work:** Production intern Rachel assisted with studio filming.
- **Legal Defense:** Teams of libel lawyers across two separate countries were retained to vet every assertion made in the video, given the notoriously litigious history of Wakefield and his associates.
- **Scientific Consultation:** The script was evaluated by doctors, vaccine experts, professional science communicators, and medical researchers.
- **Custom Artwork:** Animators illustrated anatomical diagrams, and an award-winning *New Yorker* cartoonist was commissioned to illustrate a bespoke *Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney* courtroom background that flashed on screen for a mere ten-second throwaway gag.
- **Guest Appearances:** Creator Brian David Gilbert contributed voiceover work and unexpectedly delivered unprompted, fully costumed video footage of himself dressed up as Andrew Wakefield.
In closing, hbomberguy emphasizes how thankful he is for the audience's patience and for the Patreon community’s feedback on early cuts—noting with amusement that a surprising number of his viewers are working scientists who provided invaluable technical notes. After marveling that the video was completed so quickly despite the administrative nightmare, he deadpans that he will never invest this much exhausting effort into a YouTube project ever again.
Regarding Brian Deer's monumental body of work, hbomberguy states:
> “Deer's book, *The Doctor Who Fooled the World*, is basically the most definitive source on Andrew Wakefield and all the damage he did. I literally cannot recommend it enough if the topic interests you at all.”
## Notable quotes
> [02:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=140s) The anti-vax movement had next to no evidence 20 years ago and now they have even less. — hbomberguy
> [01:32:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5540s) It seems like our past experience with bullshit vaccine scares has inoculated us against future ones. — Hbomb
> [01:35:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5703s) The truth is, it was easy in 2020 to have your doubts about a theoretical vaccine that no one had had yet, but now when half the people around you already have it and they're obviously fine, it's a whole lot harder to have those doubts. — hbomberguy
## Mentioned
hbomberguy, Andrew Wakefield, Donald Trump, The Lancet, Brendan Nyhan, The New Yorker, ContraPoints, The Economist, Jackie Fletcher, JABS, H. Hugh Fudenberg, Biotherapy, South Carolina Medical Board, Royal Free Hospital, National Health Service, Princess Diana, Melanie Phillips, Brian Deer, John O'Leary, Mark Pepys, Nick Chadwick, Richard Barr, General Medical Council, British Medical Journal, Immunospecifics Biotechnologies Ltd, Carmel Healthcare Ltd, Unigenetics Ltd, Neuro Immuno Therapeutics Research Foundation, Channel 4, The Sunday Times, Axcan Pharma, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, SmithKline Beecham, MMR: What They Didn't Tell You, Callous Disregard, Sanjay Gupta, Anderson Cooper, CNN, Susan Dominus, The New York Times Magazine, Vaxxed, Bill Maher, Larry King, Alec Baldwin, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Alex Jones, Infowars, The Doctor Who Fooled the World, Brian David Gilbert
## Video description
What is the science behind the anti-vaccine movement, and is it any good? Let’s find out!
My Twitter: https://twitter.com/hbomberguy
My Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/Hbomb
Kat's Twitter: https://twitter.com/lolkat
CHAPTERS:
0:00 - Intro
2:20 - The Easy Version
6:15 - An In-Depth Analysis of the Worst Study Ever Done
22:38 - In Which The Media Gets Everyone Killed
33:03 - How Not To Talk About Autism
36:22 - Andrew Wakefield is a Lying Conman Who Wanted Your Money
52:50 - It Gets Much Worse
1:05:58 - Andrew Wakefield Abused Children For Money
1:16:00 - The Part Where He Loses His License
1:23:23 - CONCLUSION
1:40:16 - Credits
Get Brian Deer's book The Doctor Who Fooled The World:
https://briandeer.com/doctor-who-fooled-world.htm
hbomberguy argues that the modern anti-vaccine movement stems not from legitimate medical discovery, but from a fraudulent 1998 research paper orchestrated by Andrew Wakefield for undisclosed financial and legal incentives. Grounded in investigative reporting and regulatory hearings, the analysis demonstrates how fabricated pathology, abusive clinical testing on children, and sensationalist media coverage sparked a enduring public health crisis.
Falsified Data and the Fabricated Enterocolitis Hypothesis (6:15)
Andrew Wakefield’s 1998 Lancet paper examined 12 children, asserting that the combined measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine caused intestinal inflammation ('autistic enterocolitis'), allowing dietary proteins to leak into the bloodstream and trigger autism. Subsequent investigations by journalist Brian Deer and the UK General Medical Council (GMC) revealed that the underlying clinical data was systematically falsified. Pathology records demonstrated that hospital specialists had explicitly ruled out colitis in over half the children, with only three exhibiting significant inflammation; Wakefield overrode both teams and claimed 11 had non-specific colitis.
Secret Patents and Litigation-Driven Funding (52:50)
The entire study was conceived and financed as an instrument for class-action litigation against vaccine manufacturers. Two years before publication, personal injury lawyer Richard Barr retained Wakefield at £150 per hour to produce supportive evidence, ultimately paying him over £435,000 in legal aid funds—more than eight times his hospital salary. Barr coordinated with the anti-vaccine group JABS to funnel pre-selected claimants into Wakefield's hospital ward, while Wakefield adjusted recorded symptom onsets into a narrow 14-day window to legally establish causation.
Unethical Testing and Patient Mistreatment (65:58)
To generate physical evidence for the litigation, Wakefield subjected the 12 young children to an invasive battery of non-therapeutic procedures during week-long hospital stays. Children under the age of five were subjected to repeated blood draws, sedated MRIs, colonoscopies, and lumbar punctures. The diagnostic regimen caused profound distress, fainting, and vomiting, culminating in an emergency hospital transfer when a spinal tap went critically wrong.
Media Complicity, Backfire Effects, and Contemporary Grift (22:38)
Wakefield's claims achieved mass influence primarily through uncritical journalistic amplification. British television news and commentators like Melanie Phillips framed unverified hypotheses as a balanced debate between an anti-establishment crusader and defensive institutions. This framing portrayed autism as a tragedy worse than measles, eroding public memory of the virus's severity and causing UK vaccination rates to plunge below safe herd-immunity levels.
hbomberguy concludes that while entrenched conspiracists remain impervious to traditional debunking, the most effective antidote to vaccine hesitancy is the visible reality of immunized communities thriving without consequence. He argues that the public must channel exhaustion into pragmatic advocacy to safeguard public health and protect future generations from preventable disease.
## Background
该视频由创作者 hbomberguy 于 2021 年 5 月 26 日发布在 YouTube 平台上。视频简介指出，本片旨在深入剖析反疫苗运动背后的所谓‘科学’依据，探讨其真实性与可信度。
## TL;DR
视频通过极其详尽的调查与论证，彻底拆解了现代反疫苗运动的源头——安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield）1998 年发表在《柳叶刀》上的臭名昭著论文。hbomberguy 指出，该研究不仅样本量极小且缺乏对照组，更被调查记者布莱恩·迪尔（Brian Deer）证实存在蓄意篡改病历、伪造发病时间以及虚构“自闭症性小肠结肠炎”等恶劣造假行为。其背后推手实则是为了巨额诉讼利益的律师，以及韦克菲尔德本人意图推销其竞争性专利疫苗与诊断试剂盒的商业贪欲。论文导致患儿遭受包括无指征肠镜穿刺在内的残酷身体折磨，并最终让韦克菲尔德被永久吊销行医执照。全片还深刻批判了媒体为了轰动效应散播恐慌的不负责任行径、对自闭症群体的污名化，并呼吁公众相信科学，以实际接种行动粉碎延续至今的疫苗阴谋论。
## Atmosphere & style
视频在荒诞狂欢与严肃愤怒之间自如切换，充满 hbomberguy 标志性的英式冷幽默、夸张道具表演与犀利吐槽。随着调查一步步撕开学术欺诈与儿童虐待的骇人黑幕，主讲人的情绪从前期的戏谑讽刺逐渐转为战栗与愤慨，叙事张力层层递进。观众在被密集的笑点逗乐之余，更能深刻感受到面对无知傲慢与利益构陷时的沉重窒息感，而结尾处关于走出绝望、以行动改善世界的号召则带来了极具力量的理性慰藉。
## Bulletin
- [02:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=140s) 1998年发表在《柳叶刀》上声称MMR疫苗引发自闭症的研究，样本仅有12名儿童，其所谓证据全为家长的主观模糊回忆，最终该论文被顶刊全面撤回并盖上“RETRACTED”印章。
- [35:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2128s) 安德鲁·韦克菲尔德早在论文发表前6个月便申请了竞争性替代单剂麻疹疫苗专利，并计划通过兜售虚构的“自闭症肠炎”诊断试剂盒谋取数千万乃至上亿美元暴利。
- [52:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3170s) 该项研究实质上是由诉讼律师理查德·巴尔出资逾43.5万英镑委托定制的法庭伪证，韦克菲尔德通过系统性篡改受试儿童病历和发病时间表来迎合诉讼需求。
- [01:05:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3958s) 韦克菲尔德让多名无临床指征的受试幼童经历灌肠、全麻肠镜和腰椎穿刺等侵入性折磨，甚至在自家孩子生日派对上以每人5英镑现金诱导儿童抽血作为实验对照。
- [01:14:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4448s) 经过长达217天的纪律审理，英国总医学委员会于2010年以学术造假和麻木不仁的虐童行为正式吊销韦克菲尔德的行医执照，将其永久除名。
## Key takeaways
- [02:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=140s) 现代反疫苗恐慌的唯一科学“基石”是1998年安德鲁·韦克菲尔德发表于《柳叶刀》的12人小样本研究，后续涉及数百万儿童的大规模流行病学调查彻底推翻了疫苗与自闭症的关联。
- [09:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=585s) 人类进化形成的时间紧邻因果认知偏差，使许多家长将英国常规在12至15个月接种MMR疫苗与儿童在12至18个月显现自闭症特征的时间巧合，错误绑定为因果关系。
- [28:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1693s) 韦克菲尔德凭空捏造了未被医学界认可的“自闭症肠炎”假说，妄称麻疹病毒破坏肠道形成“肠漏”，使食物转化为类似吗啡的物质渗入大脑引发自闭症。
- [18:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1125s) 该论文严重依赖被吊销执照且认罪偷盗管制药品的休·富登伯格的边缘文献，而富登伯格声称能用自身骨髓提取物治愈自闭症。
- [21:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1273s) 韦克菲尔德刻意绕过同行评审直接召开新闻发布会，主流媒体为博眼球大肆渲染恐慌，导致疫苗接种率暴跌并引发麻疹疫情爆发与儿童死亡。
- [33:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1983s) 大众媒体将自闭症极端猎奇化并刻画为“比死亡更可怕的诅咒”，甚至导致家长产生宁愿让孩子冒麻疹致死风险也不愿接种疫苗的病态心态。
- [40:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2426s) 韦克菲尔德隐瞒了自己名下替代性单联疫苗专利及关联商业公司，其抹黑MMR疫苗的核心驱动力是为了给自己的产品开拓数千万英镑的垄断市场。
- [48:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2909s) 实验室技术专家尼克·查德威克博士在论文发表前便已证实所有受试儿童样本中均不存在麻疹病毒RNA，查德威克因韦克菲尔德隐瞒全阴性结果而愤怒要求撤下署名。
- [52:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3170s) 这篇造假论文由集体诉讼律师理查德·巴尔以每小时150英镑、总计超43.5万英镑巨资赞助，旨在通过反疫苗组织JABS定向招募患儿，完成“定做证据-提起诉讼”的观点清洗闭环。
- [58:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3485s) 布莱恩·迪尔通过法庭未脱敏病历核查发现，论文中所谓14天内起病的自闭症时间表全系韦克菲尔德亲手篡改，受试儿童中甚至有人根本未被确诊过自闭症，病理学家也已明确排除结肠炎。
- [01:07:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4052s) 韦克菲尔德在未尽知情同意告知义务的情况下，对受试幼童实施全麻肠镜、腰穿及未获批实验药测试，后续跟进实验更导致一名5岁患儿肠道被穿孔12处致残。
- [01:14:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4448s) 2010年英国总医学委员会裁定韦克菲尔德在学术研究中存在严重欺诈，并对儿童承受的痛苦表现出“麻木不仁的漠视”，依法永久剥夺其行医执照并除名。
- [01:20:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4815s) 身败名裂的韦克菲尔德赴美后将自己包装为医学殉道者，通过高价巡回演讲、自费捆绑销售宣传纪录片《疫苗黑幕》以及与极右阴谋论者合流，持续向绝望的自闭症儿童父母敛财。
- [01:29:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5360s) 当代针对流感疫苗会使阿尔茨海默病风险激增十倍的广泛谣言，其科学源头同样直接追溯至休·富登伯格在1997年反疫苗会议上的无凭据口头发言。
- [01:30:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5453s) 调查记者布莱恩·迪尔的深度真相调查直接促成了英国MMR疫苗接种率的历史性反弹，并铸就了英国公众在面对新冠等新型疫苗时极高的群体信任度。
- [01:35:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5703s) 克服疫苗犹豫的最佳武器并非晦涩的说教，而是身边亲友接种后安然无恙的“活证据”，面对顽固的反疫苗产业，公众应将沮丧转化为理性行动与科普传播。
## Detailed walkthrough
### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=0s) 引言与现代反疫苗运动的荒诞背景
视频在一种混杂着诡异与滑稽的氛围中开场。hbomberguy 一边发出魔性的大笑，一边拿着注射器给泡芙（profiteroles）注心，戏称自己正在为甜点接种疫苗，以预防可怕的“奶油不足炎”（Not Enough Cream-itis）。玩笑过后，他迅速切入正题：在人类社会中，疫苗已经变成了一个极具争议的话题。自 20 世纪 90 年代末起，反疫苗运动逐渐抬头，声称疫苗会导致自闭症。这场运动得到了不少过气名人的吹捧，甚至连美国第 45 任总统唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）也曾公开发表反对现代医学的言论，发推文将疫苗接种比作给小马注射大剂量药物。
面对由纪录片、网站、拥有成千上万成员的 Facebook 群组以及前总统站台所构建的庞大反疫苗网络，大众不禁会产生疑问：为什么主流社会和医学界一致认为他们错得离谱？难道真的是主流医疗机构联合起来欺骗大众，只为了靠卖疫苗敛财吗？hbomberguy 讽刺道，这场长达二十多年的疫苗争论错综复杂，如今正需要他用最擅长的方式——“用嘴毁灭一切”（在镜头前大嚼泡芙）——在一个单独的 YouTube 视频里彻底了结它。中途他还特意向母亲喊话求证自己小时候是否接种过疫苗，结果换来了母亲一句扎心的反问：“儿子，你最近在看搬出去住的房子了吗？”
- 19 世纪疫苗初问世时就曾存在反疫苗运动，但那批人早已因为天花而自然消亡。
- 现代反疫苗运动的核心论点是“疫苗可能引发自闭症”。
### [02:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=140s) 极简版概括：荒谬的论文与科学的缺席
为了照顾那些不想看完漫长视频的观众，hbomberguy 首先给出了用时不到一分钟的“极简版本”（The Easy Version）。整场现代反疫苗恐慌的源头，始于 1998 年发表在著名医学期刊《柳叶刀》（The Lancet）上的一项研究，该论文声称麻疹、腮腺炎和风疹三联疫苗（MMR vaccine）与儿童自闭症之间存在联系。MMR 疫苗原本是一项伟大的医学进步，它免去了孩子们挨多针的痛苦，也让家长们不必去搞懂风疹究竟是什么。发表在顶尖期刊《柳叶刀》上这一事实，最初让这项研究看起来极具公信力。
然而，后续的大规模严谨科学研究彻底推翻了这一结论。在涉及数百万儿童的多次重复研究中，没有任何一项显示出 MMR 疫苗与自闭症之间存在关联。《柳叶刀》最终全面撤回了这篇论文，并在其每一页上都印上了醒目的红色大字“RETRACTED”（已撤回）。荒谬的是，除这篇已被彻底撤稿、毫无科学信誉的烂论文之外，反疫苗运动再也没有拿出过任何哪怕稍微有点可信度的证据。反疫苗群体中虽然流传着各种边缘假设，胡乱猜测疫苗中的某种化学物质导致了自闭症，但在疫苗根本不导致自闭症的前提下，这种推导完全是本末倒置。正如 hbomberguy 所总结的那样：“The anti-vax movement had next to no evidence 20 years ago and now they have even less.”（反疫苗运动在二十年前几乎没有任何证据，而如今他们的证据甚至更少了。）
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: MMR疫苗与自闭症争议的极简脉络
accDescr: 展示1998年论文发表到被撤稿及科学界后续实证的简要演变过程
subgraph Origin["论文出炉与引爆恐慌"]
A["1998年安德鲁·韦克菲尔德论文<br/>发表于《柳叶刀》"] --> B["声称 MMR 疫苗与儿童自闭症相关"]
end
subgraph ScientificResponse["科学界的大规模检验"]
B --> C["针对数百万儿童的<br/>多项后续大型研究"]
C --> D["证实两者之间完全没有任何关联"]
end
subgraph Discredit["彻底身败名裂"]
D --> E["《柳叶刀》撤回该论文<br/>全页标记 RETRACTED"]
E --> F["反疫苗论点缺乏任何可靠科学实证支撑"]
end
```
### [03:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=222s) 劝说的困境：如何面对深信不疑的人？
尽管事实非常清晰，用时仅 52 秒就能把整个事件的核心讲得一清二楚，但这根本无法真正改变坚定的反疫苗者的立场。如果一个人已经对某种观念产生了深厚的情感投入，他们就会变得极其固执封闭，甚至变成自说自话的内容创作者。单纯告诉他们“那篇论文已经被撤回了”，绝不可能动摇他们的信念。
hbomberguy 援引了政治科学教授布伦丹·奈恩（Brendan Nyhan）的一项深入研究。奈恩及其团队花费了整整三年时间，追踪调查了 1700 多名家长面对各类疫苗说服话术的反应。实验结果令人沮丧：无论采用何种事实澄清手段，原本就反对接种疫苗的家长都没有改变想法；更糟糕的是，试图纠正有关疫苗的虚假言论，反而导致部分家长变得更加抵触疫苗。奈恩在接受《纽约客》（The New Yorker）采访时曾坦言：“It's depressing. We were definitely depressed.”（这真让人沮丧。我们当时彻底感到沮丧了。）面对当前严峻的公共卫生现实，了解如何真正转变他人的认知变得至关重要。公众通常不会亲自阅读晦涩的科学论文，而是依赖于那些与自己观点一致的博主或视频制作者的二传解读。为了从根源上弄清楚人们最初是如何被说服并相信疫苗危险的，必须亲自回到 1998 年那篇始作俑者的论文中去一探究竟。
### [06:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=375s) 史上最烂论文：将父母的模糊回忆当作科学
这篇论文的全名冗长而拗口——《儿童回肠淋巴结节增生、非特异性结肠炎和广泛性发育障碍》（Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children）。论文的第一作者正是后来身败名裂的前医生安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield），他被广泛视为现代反疫苗运动的鼻祖。该研究表面上的目的是探讨儿童肠道疾病与发育障碍（尤其是自闭症迹象）之间的关联。所谓的“非特异性结肠炎”，是指研究团队并未去界定某种特定类型的炎症，只是记录受试儿童身上恰好出现的各类肠道炎症，试图寻找其与自闭症之间的潜在联系。按照韦克菲尔德当时的说法，他只是碰巧注意到了许多同时患有自闭症和肠道疾病的儿童，于是启动了这项研究。
当怀着严谨求证心态的读者真正翻开这篇引发了数十年全球恐慌的论文时，里面的内容令人大跌眼镜。整篇论文所谓的“高度科学性发现”，其实不过是几位家长的口述回忆——论文白纸黑字地写着：“Findings: Onset of behavioral symptoms was associated, by the parents, with measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination.”（发现：行为症状的出现，由家长关联到了麻疹、腮腺炎和风疹疫苗接种。）整篇论文里充斥着极其刺眼的割裂感：在各种看似高深严肃的结肠镜检查、活检组织分析以及尿液排泄图表旁边，赫然并列着家长凭空回忆疫苗接种时间点的杂乱口供。hbomberguy 愤怒而荒谬地质问，全世界的人为了这篇论文彻底发疯、争论不休，但论文的核心根本没有任何扎实的实证，全是一群家长的模糊主观猜测。正如他在试图挂海报平复心情时吐槽的那样：“A note from your mother isn't science. It's how you get out of P.E.”（你妈妈写的假条不是科学，那只是你逃避体育课的借口。）
### [09:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=585s) 错把巧合当因果：人类猴脑的认知陷阱
在调整好摄像机角度、随口吐槽为什么《经济学人》（The Economist）采访了 ContraPoints 而不是自己之后，Hbomberguy 正式切入安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield）论文的核心。翻开这份臭名昭著的研究第三页，醒目地列着一张表格，上面记录了12名儿童的行为学诊断（绝大多数是自闭症），以及他们的家长所认定的“暴露源”——也就是家长单方面认为导致孩子患病的罪魁祸首。不出所料，绝大多数家长都将矛头直指麻风腮三联疫苗（MMR）。正如 Hbomberguy 讽刺的那样，在一项科学研究中采信一堆家长的个人臆断，其学术价值“就像用牙齿砌成的浴缸一样毫无用处”。但他随即让画师安吉（Angie）把自己画成一只雪貂，并开始严肃拆解为什么普通人会产生这种荒谬的联想。
这种认知偏差深植于人类大脑的进化机制之中。作为褪去体毛、顶着小小“无神猴脑”的猿类后代，人类本能地倾向于将时间上相近的两件事视作因果关系。在远古时代，如果你吃了一种奇怪的新浆果，当天便上吐下泻，为了生存，大脑必须强行将两者绑定在一起——这正是少数站得住脚的演化心理学案例之一。但在现代生活中，这种思维极其容易翻车：让你肠胃不适的可能根本不是浆果，而是你从泰国走私回来的廉价卡拉宝（Carabao）能量饮料。人类对时间跨度的感知同样极其迟钝，就像在隔离期间，四个月的时光可能因无所事事而一晃而过；如果今天有人朝你咳嗽，你晚上觉得不舒服，就会下意识怪罪对方，完全忽略了呼吸道疾病有数天乃至数周的潜伏期，真正的传染源可能是两周前送能量饮料时咳嗽的快递小哥。
这种糟糕的回忆机制在儿童发育诊断上尤为致命。论文表格声称，有些家长在接种疫苗几周、几天甚至几小时后就察觉到了异常。在当年一部 BBC 纪录片中，一位母亲甚至当着镜头坚称孩子是在打完疫苗后“一夜之间”变成自闭症的，让采访记者都难以置信地追问：“真的是一夜之间？你确定吗？”然而，自闭症的特征是逐步显现并随时间发展的。家长首次意识到异常的时间点，仅仅代表那是“他们个人首次注意到的时刻”，绝不意味着孩子此前毫无症状。在另一部更为客观严谨的纪录片中，一对名叫史黛西（Stacy）和达米安（Damien）的父母在重新回忆女儿丽贝卡（Rebecca）婴儿时期的表现后，终于承认自己犯了主观归因的错误，坦白女儿在接种疫苗之前其实就已经显现出了发育异样的迹象。正如 Hbomberguy 所总结的：“家长并不一定能在症状非常明显之前就注意到它们，但这并不意味着这些症状不存在，也不意味着他们的孩子在此之前不是自闭症患者。”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 疫苗接种与自闭症症状发现的时间线巧合
accDescr: 展示英国MMR疫苗接种窗口与自闭症症状通常显现窗口的高度重合，导致家长产生虚假因果归因。
subgraph Timeline["时间线重合"]
V["12至15个月：接种MMR疫苗"]
D["12至18个月：自闭症特征显著化"]
V -.->|"时间高度重合"| D
end
subgraph Cognition["人类归因偏误"]
D --> Notice["家长首次注意到行为异常"]
Notice --> Search["寻找近期异常诱因"]
Search --> Blame["主观归咎于刚刚打过的疫苗"]
end
```
### [12:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=766s) 时间线巧合与反疫苗团体的温床
从统计学和发育生理学来看，这两件事的重合纯属残酷的时间巧合。在儿童发育的前两年中，自闭症行为特征通常在12至18个月大时开始引起家长的注意；而在英国，MMR 疫苗的常规接种窗口恰恰定在12至15个月之间。将两者强行联系起来，完全是在将纯粹的巧合当成元凶。在韦克菲尔德自己的论文表格中，甚至能直接找到这种胡乱归因的铁证：有位家长竟然将孩子的自闭症归咎于发病前一周得过的耳部感染。耳部感染当然不可能导致自闭症，但如果这是家长记忆中唯一发生过的异常事件，焦虑的大脑便会不由自主地把它们拴在一起。
在韦克菲尔德的论文出炉之前，反疫苗的民间声浪其实极度微弱。当时虽然存在极少数坚信疫苗致病的家长团体，比如由杰基·弗莱彻（Jackie Fletcher）创立的“JABS”（正义、知情与基本支持组织，其英文缩写恰好是英国俚语中的“打针”），但规模微不足道。弗莱彻多年来四处奔走，坚称自己的儿子在接种 MMR 疫苗10天后突发严重自闭症，并频频试图起诉政府和疫苗制造商索赔。从概率上讲，即便某种疫苗绝对安全，在几千万接种儿童的庞大基数下，也必然会有极少数孩子的发病在时间上紧跟接种发生，从而让这些家长深信不疑。但在韦克菲尔德与媒体推波助澜之前，全英国抱有这种想法的家长充其量只有30来个家庭；直到2002年恐慌全面爆发时，JABS 的会员才在媒体轰炸下膨胀到了数千人。
这也引出了该研究在科学方法上的另一致命硬伤：样本量极度不足。仅仅依靠12个孩子的样本，在统计学上根本无法推导得出任何关于广泛人群的有效结论。虽然科学界在进行探索性研究时普遍允许采用小规模群体进行所谓的“先导实验”（Pilot Studies），以便为后续的大型临床试验提供设计参考，但这种极小样本绝对不能用来下定论。正如 Hbomberguy 所指出的：“成千上万接种了该疫苗的儿童的父母中，仅有一小部分人认为可能存在关联，这充其量只是在一个更大的儿童群体中开展更严谨研究的理由，以此查明这种关联是否真的存在。”然而，获得后续大型研究机会的人究竟利用这个机会做了什么，其背后的真相还要丑陋得多。
- 英国儿童常规 MMR 疫苗接种时间：出生后 12 至 15 个月
- 自闭症症状通常被家长明显察觉的时间窗口：出生后 12 至 18 个月
- 韦克菲尔德论文中家长的荒谬归因案例：一名儿童的自闭症被归咎于发病前一周的耳部感染
- JABS 组织规模变迁：恐慌爆发前全英仅约 30 对父母，恐慌高潮的 2002 年 5 月暴增至数千名成员
- 研究样本限制：仅有 12 名儿童，属于极其初步的小样本，不具备任何流行病学推论效力
### [15:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=944s) “医学同人同人志”与自相矛盾的结论
回顾整篇论文，其核心论证不仅千疮百孔，甚至荒诞离奇。最具讽刺意味的是，论文自己都在文末的讨论部分白纸黑字地承认他们根本没有证明两者存在任何因果关联。但韦克菲尔德极其阴险地将这一科学免责声明当成了规避审查的挡箭牌。在医学顶级期刊中，得出确凿结论往往需要极高的证据标准；韦克菲尔德借着“我可没说我已经证明了”这套说辞掩护，堂而皇之地在没有任何扎实证据的情况下，展开了毫无节制的狂野臆测。
研究中的这12名儿童表面上表现出某些非特异性的肠道异常，韦克菲尔德便将这堆模糊的表象拼凑在一起，构建出一个足以让他飞黄腾达的惊天理论：疫苗通过损伤肠道进而诱发了自闭症。在论文的最终结论中，作者团队写道：“我们发现儿童中存在一种慢性小肠结肠炎，它可能与神经精神功能障碍有关。在大多数病例中，症状的出现是在接种麻疹、腮腺炎和风疹疫苗之后。需要进一步的研究来调查这种综合征及其与该疫苗之间可能存在的关联。”
通过这短短几句话，韦克菲尔德凭空捏造出了一种将肠道疾病与自闭症生搬硬套在一起的“全新疾病”（即所谓的自闭症小肠结肠炎），紧接着又毫无依据地推测正是 MMR 疫苗导致了他自己刚编造出来的这种病症。正如 Hbomberguy 愤怒指出的那样：“这完全就像是在写医学同人小说。”尽管正文里写着“可能”和“需要进一步研究”，但这种虚构的疾病就此堂而皇之地刊登在了全球最负盛名的顶级医学期刊《柳叶刀》（The Lancet）上。随之而来的，便是大批缺乏基本科学素养的媒体记者盲目跟风报道，甚至连电视新闻解说词都将其大肆渲染为“皇家自由医院（Royal Free Hospital）的医生可能发现了一种联合疫苗与肠道疾病之间的联系，而这种肠道疾病会进一步恶化为自闭症”。严肃的同行评审刊物成了阴谋论的发源地，而科学免责声明反倒成了炮制虚假恐慌的遮羞布。
### [17:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1066s) 垃圾引文：福登伯格与山寨期刊
除了捏造病症和偷换逻辑，这篇论文中还有一个几乎被所有人忽视的极其诡异的细节，而这个细节恰恰暴露了绝大多数读者根本没有真正从头到尾读过原文。为了支撑自己站不住脚的假说，韦克菲尔德必须在文末拉拢其他学术文献来为自己背书；但在主流医学界根本找不到任何支撑的情况下，他只能彻底去垃圾堆里“淘金”。
论文引用了一篇声称能呼应其观点的文献，文中写道：“福登伯格（Fudenberg）指出，在20名自闭症儿童中，有15人在接种疫苗后一周内就出现了最初的症状。”这个所谓的福登伯格（H. Hugh Fudenberg）及其1996年的论文，发表在一家名为《生物疗法》（*Biotherapy*）的边缘刊物上。那是一家专门为江湖术士和伪科学提供发表阵地的野鸡期刊，在发表该文章仅仅两年后便彻底停刊倒闭。
福登伯格那篇被韦克菲尔德奉为圭臬的论文，本身是一项针对自闭症儿童使用所谓“可透析淋巴细胞提取物”（Dialysable Lymphocyte Extract）的极小型先导研究。它不仅大言不惭地声称多数儿童在打针一周内就退化成了自闭症，其背后掩盖的荒唐内幕更是令人瞠目结舌。韦克菲尔德为了凑齐谎言的拼图，不惜将这种彻头彻尾的伪科学垃圾包装成严肃学术引文塞入《柳叶刀》，而一场更深层的学术欺诈大戏才刚刚拉开序幕。
### [18:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1125s) 休·富登伯格的荒谬论文与医学界的早期预警
休·富登伯格（Hugh Fudenberg）声称自己研制出的一种萃取物能够治愈自闭症。引述其论文原话：“在22名典型自闭症患儿中，有10人恢复正常，能够进入普通学校就读，其临床特征也完全恢复正常。”然而荒唐的是，在该论文发表时，富登伯格甚至根本没有行医执照。他的执照在前一年就已被吊销，原因是他在工作中盗窃管制药物用于“个人使用”。南卡罗来纳州医学委员会判定他犯有“不光彩、不道德或不专业的行为”，富登伯格甚至在听证会上对此供认不讳。一个偷盗毒品、当庭认罪、被开除并丧失所有信誉的前医生，仅仅一年之后便声称自己治愈了自闭症，而安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield）为了给自己的论点寻找先例，不得不引用这种极度荒谬的材料。
在专业科学界内部，任何读过韦克菲尔德论文或者查阅过其引用来源的人都深感不安。这种担忧严重到《柳叶刀》（The Lancet）在刊登该论文的同一期杂志上，就直接配发了一篇针对性反驳文章——《疫苗不良事件：偶发还是巧合？》（Vaccine adverse events: casual or coincidental?）。该评论敏锐地指出了论文的诸多漏洞，并对疫苗恐慌的煽动提出了严肃预警。正如评论员所言：“Vaccine-safety concerns such as that reported by Wakefield and colleagues may snowball into societal tragedies when the media and the public confuse association with causality and shun immunization.”（韦克菲尔德及其同事所报告的这种疫苗安全担忧，一旦媒体和公众将关联性与因果关系混为一谈并拒绝接种疫苗，就可能如滚雪球般演变成社会悲剧。）在当时，这一论断或许显得过分悲观，但回过头看，它几乎是一场精准得令人战栗的预言。
### [21:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1273s) 越过同行评审的新闻发布会
尽管该研究漏洞百出且缺乏同行支持，韦克菲尔德依然坚持发表，并紧接着做了一件在科研界极不寻常的事：他立刻召开了一场新闻发布会。通常没有人会在发表了一篇承认自己“什么都没能证明”的五页小论文后召开新闻发布会。事实上，该论文在《柳叶刀》上甚至仅仅被归类为一篇简短的“早期报告”（Early Report）。
召开新闻发布会的唯一目的就是为了吸引眼球，而非严谨求证。在此次发布会上，韦克菲尔德声称自己的研究发现了一项足以动摇公共卫生体系的巨大风险。他当着满屋子记者的面断言，三联麻风腮疫苗（MMR）可能会将数百万儿童置于危险之中，并公开建议政府应当立即停用现行的 MMR 疫苗，改用分别注射的麻疹、腮腺炎和风疹单剂疫苗。这一举动彻底改变了事态的发展轨迹，主流媒体嗅到了爆炸性新闻的气息，开始不顾一切地大肆炒作。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 韦克菲尔德论文发表与恐慌发酵流程
accDescr: 展示韦克菲尔德如何越过常规科研检验，通过召开新闻发布会直接借助媒体引爆疫苗恐慌
subgraph Research["科研层面"]
A["5页《柳叶刀》早期报告<br/>（样本量仅12人，未证实因果）"]
B["引用被吊销执照的前医生<br/>休·富登伯格的荒谬论文"]
C["同行发出警示评论<br/>（警告误将关联当因果）"]
A -.-> B
A -.-> C
end
subgraph MediaOutreach["舆论引爆"]
D["违规召开新闻发布会"]
E["公开宣称MMR危及数百万儿童<br/>主张拆分为单剂疫苗"]
A --> D
D --> E
end
subgraph Impact["社会恶果"]
F["主流媒体大规模渲染恐慌"]
G["接种率暴跌，爆发麻疹疫情"]
E --> F
F --> G
end
```
### [22:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1358s) 媒体狂欢、恐慌蔓延与麻疹爆发
反疫苗的大众运动从来不是因为一篇学术论文本身而自发形成的，因为大众通常根本不读论文，甚至报道此事的记者们也从未读过。但当一名专业医生公开发表言论，宣称政府在全国范围内推行的疫苗正在危及数百万儿童时，媒体便找到了绝佳的轰动素材。在2000年代中期的英国，打开电视或翻开报纸，充斥眼帘的除了“戴安娜王妃依然已故”，便是“MMR 疫苗可能导致自闭症”。
成百上千篇新闻、电视特稿和纪录片竞相出炉。电视镜头反复播放尖锐的注射针头以及幼童撕心裂肺的尖叫哭喊，配以阴森紧张的旁白。这种制造恐慌以博取收视率的报道方式，成功让数百万家长对疫苗接种产生恐惧。在此之前，全英国只有极少数家长会将自闭症归咎于疫苗——即便是韦克菲尔德最初的样本里也只找到了7名这样的家长。然而在媒体日复一日的灌输下，大批原本不知情的家长开始深信不疑，认为是针剂毁了自己的孩子。
这一恐慌带来的直接后果是触目惊心的：
- MMR 疫苗接种率急剧下滑至危险水平；
- 英国及邻国出现大量麻疹新增感染病例；
- 爱尔兰暴发严重麻疹疫情，直接导致三名儿童死亡；
- 面对医学界集体疾呼“毫无证据，请停止恐慌宣传”时，许多记者不仅不纠错，反而撰文为自己的耸动报道百般辩护。
### [26:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1563s) 媒体宠儿安德鲁·韦克菲尔德与其“单剂疫苗”主张
在媒体掀起的狂欢中，安德鲁·韦克菲尔德成为了万众瞩目的名人。各大电视台争相采访他，无数报道循环播放他的发言片段，甚至用富有英雄色彩的黑白慢动作镜头来包装他。对于那些被媒体报道说服、正苦苦寻找孩子患病由头的家长而言，韦克菲尔德俨然成了一位揭露真相的救星。
韦克菲尔德充分利用聚光灯进一步散播对 MMR 疫苗的怀疑。他在新闻发布会、各大专访以及向记者分发的一盘长达23分钟的录像带中反复重申自己的主张：停用三联疫苗，分步接种单剂疫苗。韦克菲尔德在镜头前明确表态：“There is sufficient anxiety in my own mind that with the safety--the long-term safety of the polyvalent--that is the MMR vaccination and combination--uh, that I think that it should be suspended in favor of the single vaccines.”（在我心中存在足够的担忧，针对这种多价疫苗——即 MMR 联合疫苗——的长期安全性，我认为应当暂停使用它，转而采用单剂疫苗。）
具有讽刺意味的是，与如今全盘否定所有疫苗的现代反疫苗运动不同，引爆这场危机的韦克菲尔德在当时公开宣称自己是“支持疫苗接种”的。正如他本人在受访时所说：“We advocate vaccination. This is not anti-vaccine in any way.”（我们倡导接种疫苗，这绝非任何形式的反疫苗。）他强调父母应当继续为孩子接种，只是应该选择单剂替代方案，并声称三种病毒同时注入可能超出了部分儿童免疫系统的承受极限，进而诱发一种奇怪的新型肠道疾病并最终导致自闭症。这一关于“肠道疾病导致自闭症”的伪科学推测，随后也沦为媒体频繁炒作的焦点。
### [28:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1693s) “自闭症肠炎”：荒唐的类吗啡与肠漏假说
安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield）声称自己发现了一种与“退行性自闭症”相关的全新综合征，并坚称这可能与 MMR（麻疹、腮腺炎、风疹）三联疫苗有关。为了包装这一发现，他甚至发明了一个听起来十分专业的医学名词：“自闭症肠炎”（Autistic Enterocolitis）。根据韦克菲尔德试图给出的科学解释，三联疫苗中那“半死不活的麻疹病毒”不知怎么就卡在了儿童的肠道里，进而引发了他们研究中所谓的广泛炎症。而肠道一旦发生炎症，就无法正常消化面包和牛奶等日常食物，反而会将这些食物转化为一种类似吗啡的物质。接着，这些物质穿过受损的肠壁，直接渗透进大脑，最终导致了自闭症。
在当时的历史采访录像中，韦克菲尔德面对镜头言之凿凿地宣称：“我们在饮食中从牛奶和小麦里产生的肠道类吗啡物质，实际上正在通过渗漏的肠道进入发育中的大脑。”（“Morphine-like substances from the gut that you and I produce in our diet from milk and wheat are actually getting access through that leaky gut into the developing brain.”）
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Wakefield Autistic Enterocolitis Hypothesis
accDescr: Diagram showing Andrew Wakefield's flawed theory linking MMR vaccine measles virus to autism via gut inflammation.
subgraph VaccineInput["疫苗诱因与假想病灶"]
V["MMR 疫苗中的麻疹病毒"] --> G["病毒滞留肠道并引发严重炎症"]
end
subgraph GutBrainAxis["假想的消化与渗透机制"]
G --> D["无法正常消化牛奶和小麦等食物"]
D --> M["食物分解异常产生『类吗啡物质』"]
M --> L["物质穿过『肠漏』渗入血液系统"]
end
subgraph BrainImpact["脑部病变假设"]
L --> B["毒素进入发育中的大脑并引发自闭症"]
end
```
这种所谓的机制极其荒诞。在专业胃肠病学领域，“自闭症肠炎”不仅从未被学界认可为一种真实存在的疾病，而且在病理机制上完全站不住脚。然而对于普通大众甚至许多记者而言，他们缺乏鉴别医学胡话的专业背景，这套伪科学理论反而在传播中被赋予了“大胆而有争议的新突破”的光环。
---
### [29:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1741s) 无法自圆其说的单联疫苗推荐与媒体的集体沦陷
韦克菲尔德这套理论最离奇的漏洞在于：如果真的是疫苗里的“麻疹病毒”导致了肠道炎症和自闭症，他究竟凭什么断定将三种疫苗拆开后的“单联麻疹疫苗”就会绝对安全？在面对媒体追问时，韦克菲尔德始终无法给出任何生化或免疫学依据，只是不停机械地重复：“发生这种特殊综合征的风险，与三联疫苗（即 MMR）有关，而不是单联疫苗。”（“The risk of this particular syndrome developing is related to the combined vaccine--the MMR--rather than the single vaccines.”）当记者步步紧逼，指出单联麻疹疫苗在理论上也同样可能将病毒残留在肠道中、诱发同样的危险时，韦克菲尔德只能含糊其辞地狡辩称那“仅仅是理论上的可能”，随即熟练地将话题转移到情感牌上：“只要这个问号依然存在，父母们至少应该拥有选择权，来决定如何保护他们的孩子免受这些感染，无论选择 MMR 疫苗还是单联疫苗。”（“While that question mark exists, at the very least, parents deserve a choice for how they protect their children against these infections, whether it be with the--the MMR vaccine or whether it is with a single vaccine.”）
这种反常的举动让敏锐的观察者察觉异样：他看起来根本不像一个中立求真的科学家，反而像是一个拼命在兜售替代产品的金牌销售。遗憾的是，彼时的英国新闻界彻底丧失了批判性。其中最具代表性的是高薪专栏作家梅拉妮·菲利普斯（Melanie Phillips）。这位以否认气候变化、反对平权、发表大量荒谬极右言论而屡获“年度偏见人物”（Bigot of the Year）的保守派写手，在遭到外界批评后依然撰文为韦克菲尔德背书，将其吹捧为一种“独特的肠-脑疾病”。
全英媒体几乎步调一致地对韦克菲尔德的每一句诳语不加辨别地大肆炒作。这种不负责任的新闻报道在英国民众中点燃了恐慌，直接摧毁了接种率，不仅为现代反疫苗运动打下了坚实的地基，更最终导致多名无辜儿童死于本完全可以通过接种来预防的传染病。
---
### [33:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1983s) 媒体对自闭症的剥削与恐慌营销
如果说媒体对伪科学的盲信令人作呕，那么整个社会对待“自闭症”本身的言论基调则更加令人心寒。自闭症是一种复杂的神经发育状况，具有极其多样的个体表现和严重度差异，但当时的大众媒体完全抹杀了这种复杂性。电视台为了最大程度地制造收视轰动，极力猎奇并专门挑选最极端的案例拍摄：镜头死死对准那些无法进行语言沟通、甚至伴有严重肢体障碍的患儿，将其包装成一种近乎“苦难色情”（pornographic obsession with suffering children）的视觉奇观。
在媒体铺天盖地的渲染下，自闭症被刻画成一种“比死亡更可怕的命运”，甚至让许多家长觉得“宁可让孩子冒着感染麻疹的生命危险，也不能让他们患上自闭症”。麻疹是一种极度危险、可能致残甚至致死的烈性传染病，现代社会之所以遗忘了麻疹并发症的致命残酷，完全是因为疫苗构建的保护网。但媒体煽动的恐慌彻底颠倒了黑白。
这种对神经多样性人群的病态认知一直延续至今。Hbomberguy 讽刺地提到，就连高端连锁超市 Waitrose 的货架上，至今还会摆放着封面赫然印着“用替代疗法重新点燃你孩子的大脑”的所谓健康杂志——这种言论的潜台词无异于认定自闭症儿童的大脑“已经彻底熄灭坏掉了”。自闭症群体每天都在一个拒绝为他们提供基础包容与便利的世界中艰难生存，而整个社会和媒体当年却团结一致地向大众灌输着同一个谎言：自闭症是天底下最悲惨的诅咒。
---
### [35:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2128s) 巨额利益链条：提前半年的单联疫苗专利
在恐慌情绪被推到顶峰后，英国各地的很多家长不再信任 MMR 疫苗，但他们并非全都打算放任孩子感染疾病。由于韦克菲尔德极力呼吁政府将三联疫苗拆分，许多人心惶惶的家长选择退而求其次：去私立诊所自掏腰包为孩子接种单联疫苗。
当时单联疫苗的价格极为昂贵，每打一针需要花费大约 60 英镑。如果全英国有成千上万乃至数以百万计的父母因为害怕常规三联疫苗而转投昂贵的替代疫苗，生产并销售这种替代疫苗的人无疑将坐拥一座数额惊人的金矿。
随后，一个极具讽刺意味且触目惊心的事实浮出水面：早在韦克菲尔德发表那篇引发全球轰动的《柳叶刀》（The Lancet）论文整整六个月之前，他就已经正式提交了一项属于他个人的“替代性单联麻疹疫苗”专利申请。
- 韦克菲尔德在公开场合以学术名义声称三联疫苗危险，并高呼给家长“单联疫苗的选择权”。
- 私底下，他早已备好了属于自己的商业专利，一旦政府采纳其拆分建议，他将直接成为最大受益者。
- 这种赤裸裸且极其严重的利益冲突，在其学术报告和媒体巡回宣传中被彻底隐瞒，构成了现代医学史上最恶劣的学术骗局之一。
---
### [37:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2236s) 调查记者布莱恩·迪尔的介入与公关反扑
就在媒体几乎一边倒地随波逐流、将韦克菲尔德捧为孤胆英雄之际，一位真正的专业调查记者站了出来——布莱恩·迪尔（Brian Deer）。迪尔长年深耕于医药行业的深度调查，屡获新闻界殊荣，对揭露制药巨头和医疗造假有着极其敏锐的嗅觉。他也是极少数没有对韦克菲尔德的惊人主张照单全收、而是决定顺藤摸瓜去查验原始数据的记者之一。
迪尔给韦克菲尔德当时任职的皇家自由医院（Royal Free Hospital）打去电话，提出了一系列极其基础而关键的核查问题。显然，早已习惯了媒体盲信与追捧的韦克菲尔德根本无法招架这种专业的审问。令人震惊的是，在电话打过去短短三个小时之内，韦克菲尔德雇用的“私人公关”（Publicist）就直接找到了迪尔所供职的《星期日泰晤士报》（The Sunday Times）报社高层发起投诉。
普通医生搞学术研究竟然需要专门雇佣媒体公关来包装形象并施压记者，这一反常举动彻底印证了迪尔的直觉。公关的反扑不但没有吓退迪尔，反而像火上浇油一样激发了他更强的调查决心。正是这起遭遇，拉开了迪尔长达数年的深入调查序幕，并最终催生了 2004 年那部彻底撕下这场骗局遮羞布的重磅调查纪录片——《MMR：他们未曾告诉你的真相》（MMR: What They Didn't Tell You）。
### [38:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2287s) 竞争性疫苗专利与拼错的发明人
安德鲁·温克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield）的整个阴谋中，最令人震惊的发现之一是由记者布莱恩·迪尔（Brian Deer）揭露的——温克菲尔德竟然申请了一项专利。这项专利提交于1997年6月，也就是在他那篇臭名昭著的《柳叶刀》（Lancet）论文发表之前。专利申请书上写着：“本发明涉及一种用于预防和/或阻断麻疹病毒感染的新型疫苗/免疫接种。” 视频主创 Hbomb 讽刺地指出：“现在，我虽然不是什么了不起的、满口科学术语的大人物，但这听起来确实有点像一种麻疹疫苗。” 换句话说，温克菲尔德在通过媒体制造 MMR 疫苗恐慌的同时，已经悄悄准备好了一款可以用来替代、并由他自己销售的竞争产品。
更荒谬的是，这项专利的共同发明人一栏赫然写着休·富登伯格（Hugh Fudenberg）的名字。富登伯格就是那个在被吊销行医执照后，声称能用自己的骨髓治愈自闭症的江湖郎中。他的公司“神经免疫治疗研究基金会”（Neuro Immuno Therapeutics Research Foundation）也作为商业地址被列在专利上。迪尔曾前往该地址寻找富登伯格，却发现公司早已倒闭，大楼变成了房地产中介，如今甚至成了一家理发店。当迪尔最终找到富登伯格并询问他如何治愈自闭症时，富登伯格发出了令人啼笑皆非的怪声。更滑稽的是，在这份严谨的专利文件上，富登伯格的名字甚至被拼错了，写成了“Hugh Fundenberg”。
- **专利提交时间**：1997年6月，早于《柳叶刀》论文发表。
- **共同发明人**：休·富登伯格（Hugh Fudenberg，专利上被拼错为 Fundenberg）。
- **关联机构**：神经免疫治疗研究基金会（Neuro Immuno Therapeutics Research Foundation）。
---
### [40:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2426s) 庞大的商业帝国蓝图
到了1999年，温克菲尔德已经成为了数家医疗公司的董事，其中包括 Immunospecifics Biotechnologies, LTD 和 Carmel Healthcare, LTD（后者以他当时的妻子卡梅尔命名，不过她后来与他离婚了）。温克菲尔德开始拿着他那份在恐慌爆发前刚刚拿到的专利，四处寻找投资者。除了替代疫苗，温克菲尔德还盯上了另一个巨大的市场：如果“自闭症肠炎”（Autistic Enterocolitis）被证实是一种新型疾病，那么针对这种疾病的诊断试剂盒将带来无限商机。
布莱恩·迪尔获取的一份面向潜在投资者的机密招股说明书显示，温克菲尔德计划生产并销售这种诊断试剂盒。说明书将目标受众明确标注为“受影响儿童的父母”以及“诉讼支持”。这些文件还计算了这些业务的潜在价值，预计每年可产生高达330万英镑的利润，折合通胀后相当于今天的7200万美元。而在几年前，温克菲尔德向皇家自由医学院（Royal Free Medical School）的营利分支机构估算的数据更为惊人：每年7250万英镑，相当于今天的近2亿美元。此外，温克菲尔德还成为了爱尔兰 Unigenetics, LTD 公司的董事，并成功申请到了80万英镑（现值超过200万美元）的政府资金用于开发该检测。加拿大 Axcan Pharma 公司甚至出资邀请他飞去商讨商业计划，他还在与强生（Johnson & Johnson）、默沙东（Merck）和葛兰素史克（SmithKline Beecham）等制药巨头接触。Hbomb 愤怒地指出：“这家伙确信自己会财源滚滚。我很好奇，这是否指向了抹黑 MMR 疫苗背后的财务动机。”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 安德鲁·温克菲尔德的商业帝国与利益冲突
accDescr: 展示温克菲尔德如何通过抹黑MMR疫苗来为自己的专利疫苗和诊断试剂盒创造市场需求。
subgraph Goal ["核心目的：抹黑 MMR 疫苗以创造市场需求"]
A["发表 1998 年《柳叶刀》论文"] --> B["制造 MMR 疫苗恐慌"]
end
subgraph Products ["计划销售的产品"]
C["替代性单剂麻疹疫苗<br>(1997年6月申请专利)"]
D["‘自闭症肠炎’诊断试剂盒"]
end
subgraph Entities ["关联商业实体"]
E["Immunospecifics Biotechnologies, LTD<br>(销售试剂盒)"]
F["Carmel Healthcare, LTD<br>(以妻子名字命名)"]
G["Unigenetics, LTD (爱尔兰)<br>(开发检测技术)"]
end
subgraph Partners ["合作伙伴与资金"]
H["休·富登伯格 (Hugh Fudenberg)<br>(共同发明人/已被吊销执照的医生)"] --> C
I["约翰·奥利里 (John O'Leary)<br>(持有 11.1% 股份/实验数据造假)"] --> G
J["爱尔兰政府资助<br>(80万英镑/约200万美元)"] --> G
end
B -->|"为替代疫苗创造需求"| C
B -->|"为诊断试剂盒创造市场"| D
D --> E
D --> G
C --> E
```
- **创办公司**：Immunospecifics Biotechnologies, LTD、Carmel Healthcare, LTD、Unigenetics, LTD。
- **诊断试剂盒目标受众**：“受影响儿童的父母”与“诉讼支持”。
- **商业估值**：招股书预估每年330万英镑（现值约7200万美元）；此前向医学院估算每年7250万英镑（现值约2亿美元）。
- **政府资助**：从爱尔兰政府获得80万英镑（现值超200万美元）资金。
---
### [43:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2595s) 假疾病的检测困境与科学破产
然而，温克菲尔德的商业帝国面临着几个致命的绊脚石。首先，“自闭症肠炎”根本就是他凭空捏造出来的一种假疾病，因此极难发明出针对它的有效检测方法。为了解决这个问题，温克菲尔德在爱尔兰的 Unigenetics 公司引入了同事约翰·奥利里（John O'Leary）。奥利里声称他的检测方法能够在自闭症儿童的肠道中找到麻疹病毒。这本是温克菲尔德及其同伙最接近证明该疾病存在的一次，但谎言很快就破灭了。
其他试图复制奥利里实验结果的实验室无一例外地发现，奥利里的设备之所以能得出阳性结果，完全是因为样本受到了污染，或者仪器校准错误。事实上，两者皆有——甚至连不含麻疹病毒的试管也检测出了阳性。奥利里在 Immunospecifics 公司持有11.1%的股份，如果检测成功，他本可以大发横财。然而，一旦外界开始严格审查他的工作，他就再也无法得出之前的阳性结果了。这导致80万英镑的纳税人资金彻底打了水漂。另一个阻碍则是，任何稍微调查一下这款替代疫苗的投资者都会发现，其共同发明人富登伯格是一个因试图用骨髓治愈自闭症而被开除的疯子医生，这导致根本没人愿意出资。Hbomb 总结道：“第一个阻碍是，‘自闭症肠炎’是他凭空捏造出来的一种假疾病，这意味着你很难为它发明出一种检测方法。”
- **技术失败**：约翰·奥利里的检测结果被证实是由样本污染和仪器校准错误导致的假阳性。
- **利益冲突**：奥利里持有 Immunospecifics 公司 11.1% 的股份。
- **资金损失**：80万英镑的爱尔兰政府/纳税人资金付诸东流。
---
### [44:51](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2691s) 皇家自由医院的清洗与温克菲尔德的解雇
就在温克菲尔德试图启动他的商业版图时，他工作的皇家自由医院（Royal Free Hospital）迎来了关键的人事变动。虽然医院的许多高层此前很喜欢温克菲尔德那篇争议性论文带来的关注度，甚至有人直接参与了他的新公司，但在1999年底，医学院迎来了一位新的医学部主任——马克·佩皮斯（Mark Pepys）。佩皮斯是相关领域的专家，一眼就看出了温克菲尔德研究中的猫腻。他给温克菲尔德写了一封信，对这些公司运作中“缺乏科学依据”以及极其明显的“利益冲突”表示担忧。毕竟，当你打算靠这个赚取数百万英镑时，你显然有着强烈的既得利益去证明疫苗、肠道疾病和自闭症之间存在联系。
即便如此，医院依然愿意支持温克菲尔德，但前提是他必须进行一项更大规模、更严谨的研究。他们提出协助他开展一项针对150名患者的研究，以验证他之前仅凭12个病例就妄下结论的假设。对于任何真正的科学家来说，这都是梦寐以求的机会，但温克菲尔德虽然口头答应，却从未真正着手去做。佩皮斯后来直言不讳地评价温克菲尔德是“一个混蛋和骗子”。最终在2001年，由于一再无视开展研究的要求，温克菲尔德被要求离开医院。然而，温克菲尔德却利用自己在公众中建立的“发现疫苗与自闭症关联”的英雄形象，将此粉饰为一场阴谋。Hbomb 评论道：“利用公众眼中他作为‘发现疫苗与自闭症关联之人’的声誉，温克菲尔德说：‘我被要求离开，是因为我的研究结果不受欢迎。’” 事实上，他只是因为骗局败露且拒绝自证清白而被扫地出门，他的正统医学职业生涯至此彻底终结。
- **人事变动**：1999年底，马克·佩皮斯（Mark Pepys）出任皇家自由医学院医学部主任。
- **拒绝研究**：温克菲尔德拒绝了医院提供支持的150人规模的后续验证研究。
- **职业终结**：2001年，温克菲尔德因拒绝履行研究协议被皇家自由医院解雇（名义上为双方协议离职）。
---
### [47:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2853s) 寻找麻疹病毒的弥天大谎
到了2003年，布莱恩·迪尔的调查工作进入了高潮，并开始揭露这一切背后的真相。迪尔在调查中发现了一个关于最初研究期间的惊人秘密。温克菲尔德关于 MMR 疫苗危险性的理论，以及他销售诊断试剂盒的商业计划，完全建立在“能在自闭症儿童的肠道中找到麻疹病毒”这一前提之上。在 BBC 的纪录片中，温克菲尔德曾信誓旦旦地表示，要证明这一点，就必须在组织样本中找到病毒的 RNA。
温克菲尔德在接受采访时曾说：“现在的金标准是在里面找到病毒的基因。” 在这些镜头前，温克菲尔德极力暗示他们才刚刚开始寻找病毒，所以暂时还没找到是完全正常的。然而，迪尔的调查表明，这完全是一个彻头彻尾的谎言。他们其实早就进行了检测，而结果将彻底击碎温克菲尔德的所有理论。
- **理论核心**：必须在自闭症儿童的肠道样本中检测出麻疹病毒的 RNA（基因）。
- **舆论欺骗**：温克菲尔德在媒体上声称“才刚刚开始寻找”，以此掩盖尚未找到病毒的事实。
### [48:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=2909s) 实验室里的隐瞒：查德威克博士与消失的麻疹病毒
调查记者布莱恩·迪尔（Brian Deer）在深入调查后挖出了一个惊人的内幕：安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield）在发表那篇臭名昭著的论文之前，其实早就亲自让人找过麻疹病毒了，结果是一无所获。当时在韦克菲尔德手下工作的尼克·查德威克博士（Dr. Nick Chadwick）是检测组织样本中麻疹 RNA 的专业技术专家。韦克菲尔德理所当然地让查德威克检测了研究中那些儿童的肠道组织样本——毕竟韦克菲尔德坚信这些孩子的自闭症就是由肠道中的麻疹病毒引起的。然而，无论查德威克如何反复检测，样本里根本没有任何麻疹病毒的踪影。
这意味着韦克菲尔德在论文投给《柳叶刀》（The Lancet）之前，心里就比谁都清楚自闭症儿童的肠道里根本检测不到麻疹病毒。当迪尔后来向查德威克求证时，迪尔问道：“韦克菲尔德医生的理论是，麻疹病毒本身导致了肠道疾病，进而引发了某些类型的自闭症，而你根本没有发现麻疹病毒？”查德威克干脆地回答道：“没错。”正因如此，最终在 1998 年正式发表的论文作者名单上并没有查德威克的名字。查德威克在一份署名声明中证实，是他本人明确要求撤下自己的名字，因为韦克菲尔德在检测结果全为阴性的情况下，依然一意孤行地兜售这套伪科学理论，让他感到极度不安。而韦克菲尔德之所以要无视自己实验室得出的反面证据，是因为他当时正谋划着基于这套理论推出配套的检测诊断试剂盒生意。
- 查德威克博士使用高灵敏度检测方法分析所有参与研究儿童的肠道活检样本，麻疹病毒 RNA 检出率为零。
- 查德威克因反对韦克菲尔德在缺乏证据的情况下强行下结论，主动要求在《柳叶刀》论文中放弃署名。
- 韦克菲尔德选择性忽略内部实验数据，在此后数年间依然公开坚称麻疹引发肠道病变并导致自闭症。
---
### [50:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3003s) 仓皇逃跑与荒唐的诽谤诉讼
韦克菲尔德在此后的数年里四处搜寻能支撑自己观点的所谓“证据”。英国广播公司（BBC）甚至专门跟拍了一部关于他寻找麻疹病毒的纪录片。尽管这部纪录片大部分时间站在韦克菲尔德一边、预设他终究会找到证据，但其中也出现了一个极为讽刺的瞬间。面对记者的步步紧逼，BBC 采访者当面质问他：“难道你不应该在公开发表言论之前先拿出证明吗？”韦克菲尔德竟大言不惭地回应道：“正如我所说，就确凿的科学证据而言，证明可能还需要 10 到 15 年的时间。”采访者紧接着反问：“那你难道不应该等一等吗？”韦克菲尔德却厚颜无耻地回答：“不。”
随着调查的深入，迪尔掌握了更多关键内幕，并试图直接找韦克菲尔德对质。但整整一年时间里，韦克菲尔德不仅拒接电话，连信件也一概不回。最终，迪尔在韦克菲尔德发言的一场自闭症专题研讨会上将其堵住。会议结束后，韦克菲尔德原本还笑容满面地留在大厅里，气定神闲地回答担忧的家长和其他记者的提问，然而就在他认出迪尔的那一瞬间，神色大变，立刻以最快速度转身逃离了会场。面对自己败露的商业利益冲突，他唯一的防御手段就是落荒而逃。而在该段逃跑视频被电视播出后，气急败坏的韦克菲尔德竟然反咬一口，对制作纪录片的英国第四台（Channel 4）、刊登迪尔报道的《星期日泰晤士报》（The Sunday Times）提起了诽谤诉讼，甚至极度心胸狭隘地连迪尔的个人网站 briandeer.com 也一并起诉。
到了 2004 年，事情迎来了灾难性的转折：论文最初的 13 名合著者中有 10 人公开发表声明，正式撤回了该论文中的解释结论部分。在论文发表五年半后，绝大多数曾与韦克菲尔德共事的科学家都公开表示他的结论纯属胡说八道。至此，反疫苗运动的这篇奠基之作，彻底沦为了一个彻头彻尾的笑话——一个学术骗子为了给自己的专利单价替代疫苗招揽数以百万计的生意，不惜编造一小撮家长的言论比所有正规医生都懂医学的荒谬谎言。
---
### [52:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3170s) 恶劣升级：律师赞助的“学术定制”洗脑术
然而，事实的黑暗程度远不止于此。调查记者行当有一条铁律：如果被调查对象气急败坏地试图通过起诉来阻止你挖掘，那说明你绝对查到了痛处。迪尔继续深挖，结果顺藤摸瓜发现了一个更加肮脏的金钱黑幕：早在《柳叶刀》论文发表的整整两年前，韦克菲尔德其实就已经被一名叫理查德·巴尔（Richard Barr）的律师秘密雇佣了。这名律师敏锐地嗅到了利用自闭症儿童家长的名义向 MMR 疫苗生产商提起集体诉讼能够带来的数千万英镑巨额利润；但由于缺乏任何科学证据表明疫苗会导致自闭症，他便掏巨资雇佣了韦克菲尔德去“制造”证据。
韦克菲尔德为这项研究所耗费的时间向巴尔按每小时 150 英镑的标准收费，最终累计入账超过 43.5 万英镑（折合当今币值超过 110 万美元），这比他在皇家自由医院（Royal Free Hospital）的年薪足足高出八倍有余。更令人震惊的是，反疫苗倡导组织 JABS（正义、认知与基本支持，Justice, Awareness and Basic Support）的创始人杰姬·弗莱彻（Jackie Fletcher）不仅是诉讼的原告之一，更是为韦克菲尔德搜罗测试儿童的拉线人。这构成了一套极其狡猾的“观点清洗”闭环：几名怀疑疫苗导致自闭症的家长想打官司索赔，却没有医学根据；律师出资雇佣医生将这些家长的片面说辞写成一份医学论文；紧接着，律师又堂而皇之地在法庭上声称“已经有最新科研成果表明疫苗与自闭症存在关联”。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 疫苗诉讼与伪科学论文的利益闭环
accDescr: 展示律师理查德·巴尔、反疫苗组织 JABS、韦克菲尔德与法庭证据制造之间的利益输送流程
subgraph LegalFunding["资金与诉讼发起"]
A["原告律师：理查德·巴尔"] -->|"资助逾43.5万英镑"| B["受雇医生：安德鲁·韦克菲尔德"]
A <-->|"联合发起集体诉讼"| C["JABS 创始人：杰姬·弗莱彻"]
end
subgraph CaseFabrication["招募与洗白过程"]
C -->|"招募带有偏见的患儿家庭"| D["挑选出的12名患儿家长"]
D -->|"向医生陈述主观归咎"| B
B -->|"将家长口述包装为临床成果"| E["1998年《柳叶刀》论文"]
end
subgraph CourtLoop["法律闭环"]
E -->|"伪造科研依据支持索赔"| A
end
```
为了促成这桩官司，他们不惜在全球范围内物色契合剧本的案例。由于 1996 年相信疫苗致病的家长极少，第 11 号儿童甚至是特地从美国加利福尼亚州坐飞机运过来的。为了保密自己的真实动机，韦克菲尔德在医院内部采取了严格的分隔管理：他只分别与团队里的各个科学家单独对接，绝不召集全体会议。其他科研人员被蒙在鼓里，误以为自己是在严谨地探索肠道疾病与自闭症的前沿课题，却不知道自己早已沦为这帮律师谋取数百万暴利的工具。正如 hbomberguy 所总结的那样：“我再怎么强调这篇论文是一团多么糟糕的狗屎也不为过。”
- 韦克菲尔德按 150 英镑时薪从诉讼律师理查德·巴尔处领取报酬，总金额超过 435,000 英镑。
- 12 名实验儿童多数由原告律师及反疫苗组织 JABS 定向输送，包括专程从美国加州飞往英国的儿童。
- 韦克菲尔德刻意避免让研究团队的科学家们共同开会，以隐藏研究背后的诉讼委托背景。
---
### [56:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3379s) GMC 创纪录听证会与自掘坟墓的诉讼
这一骇人听闻的丑闻曝光后，韦克菲尔德在医学界的名誉彻底粉碎。尽管他几年前就被医院扫地出门，但在英国仍保留着行医执照。英国总医学委员会（General Medical Council, GMC）针对韦克菲尔德的严重职业失当行为展开了全面调查，启动了针对其从业资格的听证程序。这场听证会核心审查的是他的职业伦理而非学术观点，最终马拉松式地持续了 217 天之久，不仅成为总医学委员会历史上历时最长的一次听证，甚至比轰动全球的辛普森案审判时间还要长。正如 hbomberguy 讽刺道：“这是韦克菲尔德唯一算得上的真正成就：他搞出了这么大的一摊烂摊子，以至于光是把所有细节理清楚就花了这么长的时间。”
与此同时，韦克菲尔德此前对布莱恩·迪尔提起的名誉侵权诉讼，最终演变成了他一生中犯下的最严重的战略灾难。由于韦克菲尔德起诉的是迪尔对其研究行为不端的揭露，根据英国法律，他在研究中涉及的所有底层档案都自动成为了案件的核心呈堂证供。法官当庭裁定：迪尔及其辩护律师有权调阅参与该研究的所有儿童的绝密、未经涂黑的原始医疗档案。韦克菲尔德企图通过滥诉让记者噤声，反而弄巧成拙地把所有不可告人的秘密亲手送到了迪尔眼前。
就在迪尔和律师坐在房间里翻看那些未经掩盖的真实医疗记录和实验原始文件时，韦克菲尔德的法律团队惊慌失措地跳上一辆出租车赶往法院，企图在迪尔读完之前紧急撤诉以阻止证据外泄。当晚迪尔回到家时，接到了律师打来的电话，告知诉讼已经彻底终结。根据英国法律规定，原告主动撤诉必须承担对方的法律支出，韦克菲尔德不仅底牌被看光，还得自掏腰包全额支付迪尔高昂的律师诉讼费用。
### [58:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3485s) 布赖恩·迪尔的调查与被篡改的病历记录
在安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield）撤回旨在阻止调查的诽谤诉讼后，调查记者布赖恩·迪尔（Brian Deer）并未停下脚步。韦克菲尔德为了终止诉讼向迪尔支付了诉讼费用，那张支票至今仍被迪尔骄傲地展示在个人网站上。迪尔回忆道：“但是在诉讼的背景下，韦克菲尔德的律师向我披露了大量信息，显而易见，我必须继续追查下去。”（“But in the context of that lawsuit, a great deal of information was disclosed to me by Wakefield's lawyers and it was quite clear I had to continue.”）迪尔不仅继续深入调查，还旁听了英国总医学委员会（GMC）针对韦克菲尔德执业失德行为的多场听证会，会上辩论的大量医疗档案正是韦克菲尔德此前试图通过撤诉来隐藏的证据。通过拼凑这些线索，迪尔彻底理清了这项研究背后的真相，并在《英国医学杂志》（The BMJ）上发表了一系列极具震撼力的调查报道。
迪尔顺藤摸瓜找到了这项研究中原本匿名的几位儿童患者的家长，并向他们展示了论文中关于各自孩子的描述，结果揭示出一个惊人的事实：论文满篇皆是谎言。迪尔把医疗记录拿给论文中的“11号患儿”的父亲看。迪尔回忆说：“他看着那篇论文，看着上面关于他自己孩子的描述，直接说道：‘那不是真的。’”（“And he looked at the paper and he just looked at what it said about his own child and he said, 'That's not true.'”）
在随后与迪尔的通信中，这位父亲详细写道，韦克菲尔德当年曾告诉他，他的儿子其实是诊室接诊的第 13 个孩子，因此根本没有被收录进最终发表的 12 人论文中——韦克菲尔德以此为借口，解释了为什么论文里公布的信息与他儿子的真实情况完全对不上。事实证明，韦克菲尔德彻底篡改了该患儿的病史记录，并用谎言欺骗家长来掩盖真相。而且，11号患儿绝非唯一一个故事被恶意篡改的受害者。
---
### [01:00:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3606s) 捏造时间窗口与父母的“证词”
为了让这项研究能够在律师理查德·巴尔（Richard Barr）策划的针对疫苗厂商的官司中派上用场，他们必须确立疫苗接种与症状出现之间的“时间关联”（temporal link）。由于自闭症的发病年龄恰好与接种 MMR 疫苗的年龄重合，原告团队必须证明症状是在接种后的 14 天之内爆发，甚至越快越好；否则，公众与法庭就会认为这纯属偶然巧合。然而，包括 11 号患儿在内，绝大多数受试儿童的自闭症发病时间都根本不符合这一苛刻的标准。
论文中的图表声称，12 名儿童中有 8 名的家长表示症状是在接种后 14 天内开始出现的。但迪尔调取总医学委员会听证会档案及真实病历后发现，许多家长压根从未说过这样的话。真实的医疗记录显示，大多数儿童出现症状的时间远远晚于这 14 天的窗口期，甚至还有一些孩子在接种疫苗之前就已经表现出了疑似自闭症的行为特征。换言之，几乎所有儿童的自闭症起病时间不是太晚以至于在法律上毫无用处，就是太早从而直接排除了疫苗的嫌疑。面对这种局面，韦克菲尔德直接篡改了家长的主诉内容和发病时间表，硬生生把数据伪造成符合诉讼期望的样子。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 韦克菲尔德论文数据篡改流程
accDescr: 展示韦克菲尔德如何为了配合反疫苗诉讼而系统性伪造发病时间、病理诊断及患儿疾病状态
subgraph LegalTarget ["诉讼目标 (理查德·巴尔的要求)"]
L1["确立 14 天内发病的时间关联"]
L2["建立专属综合征以证明同源致病"]
end
subgraph Tampering ["系统性造假手段"]
T1["篡改起病时间: 强行将晚于/早于接种改为 14 天内"]
T2["无视病理学家报告: 强行将肠道阴性诊断改成结肠炎"]
T3["虚构自闭症: 将未确诊儿童包装为自闭症患儿"]
end
subgraph PaperPublished ["1998 年《柳叶刀》伪造结果"]
R1["8 名儿童被声称 14 天内发病"]
R2["11 名儿童被标记为非特异性结肠炎"]
R3["炮制概念: 自闭症性小肠结肠炎"]
end
L1 --> T1
L2 --> T2
L2 --> T3
T1 --> R1
T2 --> R2
T3 --> R3
```
这种肆无忌惮的捏造让韦克菲尔德日后的公开言论显得格外虚伪与令人作呕。在疫苗恐慌蔓延期间，他反复在聚光灯下将自己塑造成一名“倾听家长呼声”的良心医者，声称自己只是如实转述家长的话。在媒体采访中，韦克菲尔德道貌岸然地宣称：“我们相信——我们信任家长所讲的故事。”（“We believe--we trust in the parents' story.”）他甚至咄咄逼人地质问外界：“当他们对你说‘我相信我的孩子在接种 MMR 疫苗后倒退了’时，你到底认不认真对待？你当然必须认真对待，绝对必须认真对待。”（“When they say to you, 'I believe my child regressed after the MMR vaccine,' do you take that seriously or not? Damn right, you do. Damn right, you do.”）他将对这篇劣质研究的质疑偷换概念成对心碎父母的攻击，而新闻媒体对此全盘照单全收，纷纷赞扬他是“少数愿意倾听疫苗受害儿童家长的医生之一”。事实上，他倾听的不过是自己为了金钱报酬而在诉状和论文中亲手杜撰的谎言。
---
### [01:01:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3716s) 虚构的新综合征：“自闭症性小肠结肠炎”
韦克菲尔德之所以凭空发明一套新的医学病名，其根本原因同样在于诉讼策略。在针对疫苗制造商的集体诉讼中，为了在法庭上坐实疫苗的危害，引用法官的话说：“巴尔需要证明疫苗引起了一种独特的、具体的临床综合征。”（“Barr needed it to cause a distinct and specific clinical syndrome.”）如果这群孩子只是患有各种互不相关的零散肠道问题，根本无法确立统一的因果链条；但如果他们全都得了一种此前未知的“新型疾病”，原告方就能顺理成章地主张这一切都是由同一种因素——MMR 疫苗——造成的。
为此，韦克菲尔德杜撰了所谓的“自闭症性小肠结肠炎”（Autistic Enterocolitis），并多次在媒体上大肆宣扬这是一种全新发现的综合征。然而要让这个理论成立，受试儿童的肠道病变形态必须高度一致。在《柳叶刀》论文中，韦克菲尔德声称 12 名儿童中有 11 人患有某种“非特异性结肠炎”，以此营造出他们均患有同一种肠道疾病的假象。
然而真实医疗记录揭露的内幕令人瞠目结舌：
- 真实的病理记录显示，全组 12 名儿童中，仅有 3 人存在较为明显的肠道炎症。
- 研究小组最初配备了一名专业病理学家负责评估肠道病变，当该病理学家及其团队明确排除了半数以上患儿的结肠炎嫌疑时，韦克菲尔德因结果不利于诉讼，特意调来了第二位曾与他共事过的病理学家重新化验。
- 结果，第二位病理学家在出具的复核报告中甚至连“结肠炎”一词都未提及。
- 韦克菲尔德索性彻底绕过专业团队的科学判断，无视所有病理学家的结论，在论文里独断专行地直接写下“11 名儿童均患有相似的非特异性结肠炎”，由他一个人拍板认定这些孩子全部患有“导致自闭症的肠道新疾病”。
---
### [01:03:29](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3809s) 甚至根本没有自闭症的患儿与彻底造假
论文造假的荒谬程度还不止于此。既然这篇论文的核心结论是论证疫苗引发了自闭症，那么前提理应是受试者确实患有自闭症。但令人震惊的是，论文中被列为自闭症的儿童里，竟有人根本从未被诊断过自闭症：
- **7 号患儿**：无论是在参与该研究之前、期间还是之后，该儿童从未被任何专业机构诊断为自闭症。他之所以被转诊进入该项目，仅仅是因为其兄长（6 号患儿）患有自闭症。然而，韦克菲尔德在论文中直接将 7 号患儿登记为自闭症患者，并凭空谎称他在接种疫苗 24 小时后便迅速出现了自闭症症状。
- **12 号患儿**：该儿童同样从未获得过自闭症的医学确诊。儿童发育专家的原始诊断明确指出该患儿存在其他发育障碍，但并未诊断为自闭症。韦克菲尔德作为一名没有任何精神病学或神经发育专业资质的肠道外科医生，不仅擅自将该患儿归类为自闭症，而且在家长明确表示不怀疑疫苗的情况下，刻意标注患儿在 15 个月大时接种了 MMR 疫苗，暗示发病与疫苗接种存在紧密的时间对应，并顺手给他打上了“慢性非特异性结肠炎”的假标签。
这彻底解释了为什么当布赖恩·迪尔通过法律途径获准调阅这些原始病历时，韦克菲尔德会以极快的速度撤回对迪尔的诽谤诉讼。这也是为什么当同行要求他开展更大规模的重复样本研究时，他始终推脱不办——一旦这篇漏洞百出的造假论文被放在聚光灯下接受大样本复核，他的学术骗局便会无所遁形。
时至今日，全球医学界没有任何一项独立研究能够复现韦克菲尔德的所谓“发现”。这项引发全球性反疫苗狂潮的研究是一场由投机律师与贪婪医生联手炮制的彻头彻尾的骗局。在随后的二十多年里，涉及全球数千万名儿童的大规模流行病学数据均证实疫苗与自闭症之间毫无关联。这篇论文不仅方法粗糙、结论成疑，而且其本质就是一桩为了敛财而伪造的学术诈骗——甚至在论文正式见刊之前，参与署名的部分科学家就已经察觉不妥并要求撤下自己的名字。然而，金钱驱动的数据造假甚至还不是这桩丑闻中最黑暗的一环。
---
### [01:05:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=3958s) 残酷且侵入性的儿童人体试验
随后的话题进入了更为严峻沉重的领域：对儿童的实质性医疗虐待。为了强行在自闭症与肠道病变之间拼凑出证据链，韦克菲尔德对这些年幼的孩子施加了极其残忍且高度侵入性的医学检查套餐。这些受试儿童被安排在皇家自由医院住院整整一周，期间经历了一连串令人窒息的折磨：
- 频繁使用镇静剂并大剂量灌服泻药；
- 频繁的静脉抽血化验；
- 全身麻醉下的结肠镜检查；
- **腰椎穿刺（腰穿）**：将粗针直接刺入儿童脊椎骨缝抽取脑脊液；
- 在镇静状态下进行长时间的核磁共振（MRI）扫描；
- 在头部布满电线和电极的脑电图（EEG）监测，以及其他多项带来极大痛苦的非常规程序。
曾有其他专业医生直言，这样一份极具侵入性且痛苦密集的检查清单，即便是对身体强健的成年人而言都难以承受，更何况是面对这群身心极其脆弱、甚至患有严重发育障碍的年幼自闭症患儿。
在正规现代医学伦理中，“知情同意”（informed consent）是一条不可逾越的底线。医生在执行侵入性高风险操作前，必须详尽告知潜在风险与伤害，且唯有在获得完全理解并自愿批准的情况下方可推进。由于这项研究中的受试者全都是低龄儿童，签署知情同意书的责任完全落在家长身上。韦克菲尔德为此专门起草了一份附带在知情同意书后面的家长告知手册，旨在向家长解释各种检测手段及其潜在风险。国际人权组织“人类研究伦理倡导委员会”（CIRCARE）后来设法获取到了这份手册的复印件，尽管文件列出了韦克菲尔德计划进行的大部分检验项目，但其背后隐瞒真实实验意图与严重伦理违规的黑幕，才刚刚开始浮出水面。
### [01:07:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4052s) 肠镜检查的真实风险与伪造的知情同意书
安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield）发给家长的知情同意书存在极其致命的问题：整份文件上居然完全没有提及这些医疗手段的潜在风险，甚至连“风险”（risk）这个词都未曾出现过。所谓的结肠镜检查（colonoscopy），是将一根带有摄像头的粗长管道由直肠一路插进患者的肠道深处。对于成年人（尤其是 45 岁以上人群）来说，这确实是一项重要、安全且能够拯救生命的癌症筛查手段，及早发现肠癌便能挽救生命。但对肠道细小、脆弱且操作难度极高的小孩来说，这种侵入性操作潜藏着非常严重的并发症危机。内窥镜一旦刺破肠壁造成穿孔，肠道内的细菌就会迅速泄漏至腹腔，引起剧烈感染和致命的内脏损伤，五岁及以下幼童发生严重并发症的概率更是大幅飙升。
这些可怕的风险绝非纸上谈兵。在韦克菲尔德等人为了给 1998 年论文寻找后续证据的过程中，一名年仅五岁的自闭症男童在接受结肠镜检查时遭遇了灾难性医疗事故：他的肠道在操作过程中被生生刺破了 12 处之多，导致多器官衰竭，命悬一线。该男童根本没有任何接受肠镜的临床医学指征，纯粹是被当作小白鼠，用来为韦克菲尔德虚构的“自闭症性小肠结肠炎”（Autistic Enterocolitis）搜刮证据。最终，皇家自由医院（Royal Free Hospital）不得不向受害男童及其家庭支付了近 50 万英镑（约合如今的 100 万美元）的巨额赔偿金，以补偿该事故给孩子造成的终生残疾与全天候看护费用。孩子的父母表示，他们在签署同意书时从未被告知过任何风险；如果此话当真，韦克菲尔德的所作所为在法律和实质上就是一场人身侵害（assault）。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 侵入性肠镜对幼童的伤害逻辑链路
accDescr: 展示韦克菲尔德为伪造疾病证据而强推肠镜，隐瞒穿孔与麻醉风险，最终导致幼童重伤的链路
subgraph StudyRisks["违规施术与风险隐瞒"]
A["缺少临床指征的侵入性肠镜"] --> B["故意隐瞒穿孔、感染与全麻风险"]
B --> C["幼童肠壁脆弱细小易受损"]
end
subgraph Consequences["灾难性后果"]
C --> D["肠道穿孔与细菌外溢导致感染"]
D --> E["多器官衰竭与终身重度残疾"]
E --> F["巨额医疗事故赔偿与法律责任"]
end
```
韦克菲尔德在 1998 年的研究中，甚至对年仅三岁的幼儿实施了这种严酷程序。然而他的同意书却轻描淡写地宣称，这些程序通常“耐受良好”且“完全无痛”，完全抹杀了把数英尺长的内窥镜硬塞入儿童体内所带来的真正风险。文件中甚至大言不惭地写道：“如果您的孩子感到痛苦或操作过于困难，将在全身麻醉下进行。”而全身麻醉本身的风险也只字未提。一份正常的知情同意书必须明确警告穿孔、大出血以及镇静剂不良反应的可能；韦克菲尔德之所以公然隐瞒，是因为他必须骗得家长点头——他未来的丰厚报酬完全押在能否从这群孩子的肚子里挖出支持他捏造疾病的“证据”上。
- 正常的肠镜检查是诊断结直肠癌最精准且能救命的手段，建议 45 岁以上的成年人按期筛查。
- 五岁及以下儿童接受肠镜检查时，发生肠穿孔及严重内脏损伤的概率极高。
- 后续跟进实验中，一名 5 岁自闭症男童肠道被刺破 12 处导致多器官衰竭，皇家自由医院为此赔偿了近 50 万英镑（约 100 万美元）。
- 韦克菲尔德在同意书中向家长声称该检查“完全无痛”，并在孩子挣扎时直接转用全麻，全程隐瞒穿孔和麻醉并发症。
### [01:10:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4247s) 临床虐待、强行用药与骨髓提取物交易
调查记者布莱恩·迪尔（Brian Deer）收集到的大量证人证词表明，这些受试儿童在医院里的遭遇绝非“安全无痛”，而是一场不折不扣的噩梦。护士们由于无法忍受对孩子们的折磨而相继辞职，初级医生也极为反感。一位目击者悲痛地回忆道：“有时光是抽个血就需要三个人死死按住孩子。要把发生的事情解释给这些沟通困难的孩子听极其不易，我为这些被虐待的孩子感到非常难过。”在检查过程中，孩子们不断经历昏厥、剧烈呕吐与拼命反抗，甚至被迫灌下大量检测用液体。一名儿童由于在此前的一连串程序中呕吐不止，根本无法配合进行腰椎穿刺，只能被送回家；另一名儿童的腰穿操作则严重失误，不得不被紧急送往另一家医院急救。没有正当临床理由而对儿童强加这些折磨，性质就是赤裸裸的虐童。
韦克菲尔德将这群孩子当作真正的肠道疾病患者来摆弄，几乎给所有人都开具了针对其虚构病症的抗炎药物。这些药物对儿童（特别是六岁以下幼童）具有很高的潜在危险，可能引发增加出血倾向、感染风险以及其他危及生命的并发症。许多受试患儿本就存在言语交流障碍，根本无法准确向大人表达自己承受的不适与副作用，从而让危险成倍放大。韦克菲尔德仅仅为了给反疫苗诉讼制造对自己有利的伪证，就让健康儿童平白无故承担严重的药物风险。不仅如此，英国总医药委员会（GMC）还查明，他在未获得医院伦理委员会批准的情况下，擅自给其中一名儿童服用了一种名为“可透析淋巴细胞提取物”（Dialysable Lymphocyte Extract）的实验性药物——这正是休·富登伯格（Hugh Fudenberg）声称能治愈自闭症的所谓神药。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 实验性药物利益输送关系图
accDescr: 展示韦克菲尔德与富登伯格、涉事患儿父亲之间的不正当药物试验与商业利益勾结
subgraph SupplyChain["违规药物来源"]
A["休·富登伯格<br/>(声称自抽骨髓提取神药)"] -->|提供未审批药物| B["韦克菲尔德"]
end
subgraph QuidProQuo["利益交换闭环"]
B -->|违规试药| C["受试自闭症儿童"]
B -.->|赠予股权/高管职位| D["患儿父亲"]
D -->|同意用药许可| B
end
```
这种所谓的“药物”荒谬绝伦。当被问及药物成分的来源时，被吊销执照且因偷窃医疗物资被解雇的富登伯格竟然坚称那是“从我自己的骨髓里抽出来的”。更令人震惊的是，为了让患儿的父亲同意在孩子身上进行人体试验，韦克菲尔德甚至让该父亲担任了负责生产销售该药物的公司的常务董事，并让其持有公司股权。虽然由于闭门交易缺乏直接书面契约，在法律口径上无法百分之百定罪为“直接用职位换取试药权”，但患儿父亲恰好入主依靠该药获利的公司这一事实，暴露了极其肮脏的利益勾结。韦克菲尔德竟能让一个自称用自己骨髓治自闭症的被吊销执照者的未获批药剂，注入一个无辜幼童的体内，这种毫无道德底线的行径简直荒唐至极。
- 护士与年轻医生对非人道虐待深恶痛绝，多人愤而辞职；为了完成抽血，有时必须由三名成人强力按住患儿。
- 一名儿童因多项检查引发剧烈呕吐导致腰穿失败被遣送，另一名儿童因腰穿事故被紧急送往外院抢救。
- 几乎所有孩子都被迫服用了治疗虚构肠病的抗炎药，面临出血与感染等致命副作用。
- 韦克菲尔德未经伦理委员会批准，私自给一名儿童试用富登伯格从自身骨髓中提取的未审批实验药物，涉事儿童父亲随后成为了该制药公司的常务董事并持有股权。
### [01:14:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4448s) 生日派对买血闹剧与被彻底吊销医师执照
在总医药委员会的听证调查中，韦克菲尔德被揭发出的另一桩劣迹令人瞠目结舌：在他自己孩子的生日派对上，安德鲁·杰里米·韦克菲尔德居然把前来参加派对的小宾客们排成一排，掏出现金买他们的血。为了给针对疫苗厂商的诉讼拼凑对照组数据，他急需非自闭症健康儿童的血液样本进行比对。然而，他既没有走正规渠道向医院提出申请，也没有向社会公开发布伦理合规的志愿者招募，甚至完全跳过了伦理审查委员会，而是直接自掏腰包，给在场的小朋友每人 5 英镑来抽他们的血。这并非旁人的蓄意抹黑，而是韦克菲尔德自己在 1999 年的一次学术会议上神采飞扬公开讲述的得意“趣事”。
“The only problem was that it did not have an approval from the hospital ethics committee. That does not make it unethical.”
——安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（在后续采访中狡辩生日聚会抽血事件完全合规）
面对伦理审查的严厉质询，韦克菲尔德在听证会上给出的最有力辩护，竟然是声称自己在演讲中提到的“有孩子当场呕吐、昏倒”的情节是他为了戏剧效果“编造出来的”。他试图用承认自己是个彻头彻尾的骗子来洗脱虐童嫌疑，这一昏招在委员会面前自然毫无作用。他在事后接受采访时甚至试图硬拗概念，宣称这只是手续上缺了医院伦理委员会的盖章，并不代表事情本身“不道德”，公然挑战医学伦理底线。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 韦克菲尔德听证会调查与处罚判定
accDescr: 展现总医药委员会（GMC）对韦克菲尔德多项恶行的最终审查与吊销执照裁决
GMC["英国总医药委员会 (GMC)<br/>历史上最漫长的调查审理"]
GMC --> Charge1["无视伦理：生日派对现金买血"]
GMC --> Charge2["违背医德：对幼童施加痛苦侵入性检查"]
GMC --> Charge3["商业欺诈：为诉讼利益捏造疾病伪证"]
Charge1 & Charge2 & Charge3 --> Verdict["2010 年正式除名 (Struck off)"]
Verdict --> Consequence["永久剥夺行医资格<br/>失去『医生』(Doctor) 头衔"]
```
2010 年，这场英国总医药委员会历史上耗时最长的正式调查终于迎来宣判。调查结论认定，安德鲁·韦克菲尔德严重违背了作为一名医生的基本职责，背叛了病患的根本利益，被依法正式吊销行医执照，将其从医疗名册中永久除名（struck off）。自此，他在法律层面上不再是医生。如今所有在视频或媒体中尊称他为“医生”的做法都是彻底错误的，甚至在他于 2016 年自导自演的宣传纪录片中，他也因法律限制无法冠以“Doctor”头衔，只能委曲求全地署名本科学位“MB, BS”。总医药委员会在最终判决中毫不留情地痛斥，韦克菲尔德对受试儿童的痛苦与折磨表现出了“麻木不仁的漠视”（callous disregard）。
- 韦克菲尔德在自家孩子的生日聚会上，以每人 5 英镑的价格诱导客人家属幼童抽血充当对照实验样本。
- 面对委员会对其导致儿童呕吐昏厥的质询，韦克菲尔德辩解称这些可怕细节是他在 1999 年演讲中“编出来活跃气氛的”。
- 2010 年英国总医药委员会历时数年的调查结案，判定其违背医德并正式吊销执照，永久禁止行医。
- 韦克菲尔德彻底丧失医生头衔，此后对外只能使用医学学士学位头衔（MB, BS）。
### [01:16:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4604s) 撤稿、抗议与推销自传
就在调查听证会认定安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield）的行为可能让儿童遭受痛苦的同一年，《柳叶刀》（The Lancet）终于正式撤回了他在1998年发表的那篇臭名昭著的原始论文。对此，hbomberguy 讽刺地为杂志编辑理查德·霍顿（Richard Horton）鼓掌，嘲讽道：“太迟总比没有好，大概吧。”听证会尘埃落定时，韦克菲尔德最后的死忠支持者们在场外高喊“我们支持韦克菲尔德！”举行抗议。讽刺的是，当新闻采访团队试图采访一名批评者时，一名支持者大声叫嚷试图封住对方的嘴，而画面外另一人则高举书籍坚称是自己一方遭到了言论压制。
韦克菲尔德随后出现在拥趸面前，公开声称这一切判决都是彻头彻尾的不公，并宣称：“我邀请所有人去审查这些程序的具体内容，并得出自己的结论。”面对这一发言，hbomberguy 犀利地反唇相讥：“我想大家刚刚才得出结论，老兄。”尽管虐待儿童和学术造假的全部内幕曝光后，韦克菲尔德失去了绝大多数声誉，但他仍拥有一小群狂热的追随者——通常是那些已经追随他太久、难以接受真相的自闭症患儿父母。对韦克菲尔德而言，这些绝望的家长成了最完美的敛财市场。hbomberguy 指出，他之所以在听证会最后几天露面，核心目的其实是在全国电视上推销自己的新书《无情漠视》（Callous Disregard）。
书名源自医疗理事会对韦克菲尔德虐待儿童行为的严厉评价，他原本想借此反讽主流医学界对 MMR 疫苗“受害者”冷酷无情，却完全没意识到把指控自己虐童的评语印在印有自己大头照的封面上是多么荒诞不经——简直是一场辛普森式的“如果是我干的”自我嘲弄。该书在致谢中提到了他“长期受苦的妻子”，而这位同在封面上的妻子后来已经和他离婚，hbomberguy 调侃道：“我想她受的苦已经够多了。”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Wakefield Book Promotion Strategy
accDescr: Diagram showing how Wakefield converts legal defeat into commercial book promotion to his followers.
subgraph LegalFallout["声誉破产与撤稿"]
A["《柳叶刀》正式撤回论文"] --> B["听证会裁定学术造假与虐童"]
end
subgraph Exploitation["将指控转化为商品"]
B --> C["借用理事会评语出版自传《无情漠视》"]
C --> D["在各大电视采访中拒绝正面回答"]
D --> E["不断要求主持人和公众购书'阅读真相'"]
end
subgraph TargetAudience["目标受众与敛财"]
E --> F["绝望且拒绝认错的自闭症儿童父母"]
F --> G["转化为高价书籍购买者与忠实信徒"]
end
```
### [01:18:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4728s) 电视对峙与“职业杀手”阴谋论
在听证会后的每次采访中，韦克菲尔德都像当年推销单价疫苗专利一样，疯狂推销自己的新书。当 CNN 首席医疗记者桑贾伊·古普塔（Sanjay Gupta）指出其论文中的数据和日期全系伪造时，韦克菲尔德避实就虚地喊道：“古普塔医生，求你了，我强烈建议你去读读我的书。读了你就会明白，很多人都不明白。”他在安德森·库珀（Anderson Cooper）的节目中继续用这一套路搪塞，反问英国医学会（BMJ）和调查医生是否读过他的书，坚称“真相就在《无情漠视》那本书里”。库珀当场打断他，直截了当地点破：“先生，我读了布赖恩·迪尔（Brian Deer）极其详尽的调查报告。先生，我来这里不是为了让你推销你的书，我来这里是为了让你回答问题。”库珀进一步质问：“如果你一直在撒谎，那么你的书也是谎言。”
在通过诉讼恐吓记者布赖恩·迪尔彻底失败后，韦克菲尔德的唯一辩护便是声称迪尔是疫苗制造商雇来的“杀手”，目的是毁掉他的事业。在面对库珀的追问时，韦克菲尔德被逼得手足无措：
> “等等，先生。让我在此打断你。你说他是个职业杀手，他是被‘他们’派来的。‘他们’是谁？他是谁的职业杀手？这是一位获得过多项大奖的独立记者。”
> ——安德森·库珀
被逼到墙角的韦克菲尔德只能紧张地干笑，支支吾吾地承认自己其实根本不知道是谁在付钱。当库珀随后向布赖恩·迪尔求证韦克菲尔德指控其收受英国制药工业协会（ABPI）资金的说辞时，迪尔只是笑出声来并予以彻底否认。
### [01:20:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4815s) 德州豪宅、廉价剥削与同谋的悲剧
2011年，《纽约时报杂志》撰稿人苏珊·多米纳斯（Susan Dominus）探访了韦克菲尔德。韦克菲尔德将自己包装成一名因挑战“疫苗安全”教条而断送事业的殉道者，但多米纳斯敏锐地记录下，他是站在一条排着长队等他签书的狂热拥趸面前说这番话的——队伍中甚至有一位泪流满面的母亲，为自己没能阻止孩子患上自闭症而深感自责。此时的韦克菲尔德住在德克萨斯州奥斯汀的一处高档隐秘社区，拥有一座被大片山林包围的豪华大宅。
这本自传为他带来了丰厚的收入，再加上反疫苗集会上的高昂演讲出场费、早期研究获得的数十万英镑赞助，以及多部以他为主角的纪录片，构成了极其惊人的利益链。2016年，他执导的反疫苗宣传片《疫苗黑幕》（Vaxxed）在官网上打折销售，只要一次性购买十张就能享受优惠，宣传语甚至号召信徒：“买十张分发给你当地的立法者、教育工作者和医护人员！”韦克菲尔德不仅向信徒兜售谎言，甚至让信徒自掏腰包为他免费做推广。
看着十年前听证会外的一段录像，hbomberguy 回忆起一名手举“不要压制令人不适的科学”标语、甚至戴着《花花公子》围巾的抗议女性。他感叹道，对这些人而言，最令人不适的真相其实是：他们拼命维护的偶像从头到尾只是为了钱欺骗他们。承认韦克菲尔德是个骗子，就意味着这些在恐慌期间为他摇旗呐喊的人必须分担散布恐慌的内疚感；韦克菲尔德最残忍的地方，正是把这些需要照顾残障儿童的脆弱父母变成了同谋。回到这一切的核心动机，面对“人为何能制造如此巨大的恐惧与切实的伤害”这一疑问，hbomberguy 给出的答案极其简单直接——“为了钱”。
- 韦克菲尔德凭借书籍版税、反疫苗巡回演讲出场费和宣传片维持了奢华的德州庄园生活。
- 《疫苗黑幕》（Vaxxed）通过打包捆绑销售（10张套装）转嫁宣传成本，让支持者自费替其分发宣传。
- 支持者群体中很大一部分是需要全职看护残疾儿童的家长，他们在脆弱之中为虚假的解释买单。
### [01:23:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5003s) 现代疫苗怀疑论的遗毒：以比尔·马赫为例
反疫苗思潮在当代的泛滥绝非凭空产生，其核心逻辑深植于韦克菲尔德1998年种下的恐慌之中。追溯如今任何一种疫苗怀疑论调，几乎总能顺藤摸瓜找到当年的谎言。电视主持人比尔·马赫（Bill Maher）便是这套逻辑的典型传播者之一。马赫长期在节目中宣扬疫苗与自闭症之间可能存在联系，并频繁邀请反疫苗活动家登台，虽然偶尔也会请反方嘉宾来制造表面上的“客观公正”，但他本人的立场始终是怀疑现代医学。
马赫自称并非“细菌理论否定者”，声称自己承认细菌和病毒会致病，但他坚称自己凭借“亲身体验”发现了比疫苗更好的手段——靠良好的营养和饮食来增强免疫力抵御疾病。hbomberguy 借此讽刺这种荒谬逻辑：“如果你的孩子死于麻疹，那一定是因为他没好好吃蔬菜；要是得了黑死病？顺民们，少吃顿麦当劳就行了！”多年来，马赫从不引用任何权威数据或科研来源，其论据完全建立在主观感受和轶事传闻之上，反复宣称“有太多家长跑来说‘我的孩子原本很正常，打了疫苗后就变了’”。马赫把这种毫无统计依据的家长传闻当作硬核证据，甚至以“很多人和我有同样的感觉”作为辩解，将个人情绪凌驾于科学事实之上。在节目中，嘉宾亚历克·鲍德温（Alec Baldwin）当面吐槽他不断炒作这些伪科学争议，简直就像在约会时一直絮絮叨叨聊自己的前妻一样令人尴尬。
### [01:25:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5131s) 比尔·马赫的“伪怀疑论”与无知傲慢
Hbomberguy 带着极度讽刺的口吻指出，既然像比尔·马赫（Bill Maher）这样的“思想界泰斗”都认为疫苗可能危险，那他必然有十分过硬的理由。为了探寻马赫究竟依据了什么科学事实，Hbomb 翻遍资料，找到了马赫在 2005 年接受《拉里·金现场秀》（Larry King Live）采访的文字记录。在那场采访中，主持人拉里·金提到自己已经连续接种了 25 年的流感疫苗，马赫却宣称对抗疾病的最佳防线是自身的免疫系统和良好营养，甚至声称流感疫苗实际上会损害免疫系统。马赫大谈自己对“西方医学”的强烈不信任，Hbomb 对此吐槽道，所谓“西方医学”本就是个欧洲中心主义的误称，全球有无数非西方国家同样在研发疫苗和现代药物，马赫却根本不在乎这些基本常识。
谈到当时引发全球恐慌的禽流感时，马赫更是轻佻地表示自己一点都不担心，并给出了一串语焉不详的高见。Hbomb 辛辣地讽刺马赫的发言：“这种见识确实显得非常聪明，直到现实中真的发生了类似的大流行——人们担心的就是这个，比尔。”马赫完全无视了疫苗能够阻止病毒传播并从源头上遏制病毒变异的事实。不过极具讽刺意味的是，马赫在新冠疫情期间乖乖接种了疫苗；当他随后被查出感染新冠而不得不取消当周脱口秀时，他因疫苗保护而全程无症状且状态良好。Hbomb 打趣道，鉴于未接种疫苗的 65 岁老人感染新冠的高危程度，他真庆幸马赫打了疫苗，但电视台真应该顺势把他的节目彻底砍掉，免得公众失去这位“国宝”。
更加令人唏嘘的是，这类伪自由意志主义对现代医学的虚妄怀疑，一旦撞上真实残酷的世界便会瞬间粉碎——当年采访他的拉里·金，正是死于新冠病毒引发的并发症。在当年的节目中，马赫咬定疫苗不过是药企骗钱的工具；当拉里·金反驳称疫苗消灭了脊髓灰质炎（小儿麻痹症）等重大疾病时，马赫给出的辩解堪称无知与傲慢的集大成者。对此，Hbomb 精辟地总结道：“这不是怀疑论，这是试图装成怀疑论的无知。”（“This isn't skepticism. This is ignorance trying to sound like skepticism.”）马赫的所有说辞在科学上完全站不住脚，甚至连一本支撑自己观点的书都没读过，却依然凭借记忆中 90 年代末那场疫苗恐慌留下的模糊杂音，扮演着理客中的反智角色。
- 拉里·金曾在采访中表示自己连续 25 年每年接种流感疫苗，最终因感染新冠并发症不幸离世。
- 比尔·马赫坚称健康饮食和自身免疫系统足以应付一切，但在 65 岁高龄时仍选择接种了新冠疫苗并因此免于重症。
- 马赫反驳疫苗历史功绩的核心逻辑仅仅是“外面大概有书能证明我是对的，只是我没读过”。
---
### [01:29:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5360s) 阿尔茨海默病谣言与幕后黑手休·富登伯格
在 2005 年的那场访谈中，马赫确实抛出过一个极其具体的“硬核科学论点”：他信誓旦旦地告诉拉里·金，如果一个人连续五年接种流感疫苗，患上阿尔茨海默病的风险就会增加整整十倍。Hbomb 顺着这个异常具体的指标展开溯源，结果令人啼笑皆非：真实的流行病学研究显示，接种疫苗实际上与阿尔茨海默病患病率下降直接相关。进一步深挖后发现，马赫口中所谓的数据，源头竟是 1997 年某场反疫苗大会上的一篇发言幻灯片，演讲者在没有任何同行评议论文支撑的情况下，随口宣称某位科学家做出了这一发现。
当 Hbomb 抹去被隐去姓名的文献资料时，屏幕上赫然出现了那个熟悉的名字——休·富登伯格（Dr. Hugh Fudenberg）。伴随着重金属乐队 Disturbed 的《Down with the Sickness》标志性咆哮，真相昭然若揭：当今世上绝大多数反疫苗伪科学话语，都能直接追溯到安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield）与休·富登伯格这对臭名昭著的搭档身上。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 反疫苗谣言传播溯源
accDescr: 展示休·富登伯格与韦克菲尔德的伪科学如何渗透到大众媒体并影响普通家长的过程。
subgraph Origin["伪科学策源地"]
HF["休·富登伯格<br/>（被吊销执照的免疫学家）"]
AW["安德鲁·韦克菲尔德<br/>（篡改数据的造假外科医生）"]
end
subgraph Media["媒体再加工与扩散"]
Conf["1997 疫苗会议演讲<br/>（声称流感疫苗致阿尔茨海默病）"]
BM["名人传声筒：比尔·马赫<br/>（2005 拉里·金访谈大肆宣扬）"]
end
subgraph Impact["现实恶果"]
Parents["公众记忆残留与恐慌<br/>（2016 调查：77% 拒苗家长仍惧怕自闭症）"]
end
HF --> Conf
Conf --> BM
AW --> Parents
BM --> Parents
```
这种谎言的毒害跨越了数十年。根据 2016 年针对美国医疗从业人员的调查，在拒绝为孩子接种疫苗的家长中，仍有高达 77% 的人将“害怕导致自闭症”作为首要理由。公众拒绝现代医学保护的底层逻辑，归根结底只是出于对当年韦克菲尔德为了牟利而炮制的恐慌留有的模糊记忆。尽管这两位始作俑者早就被吊销了行医执照，他们的科研成果已被彻底证实为学术垃圾，但韦克菲尔德至今依然在反疫苗阴谋论圈子里被奉为英雄。
- 科学界针对疫苗与认知障碍的严谨追踪研究一致表明，接种疫苗会降低阿尔茨海默病风险，与反疫苗阵营的说辞恰恰相反。
- 2016 年美国医护人员调查数据显示：77% 拒绝让子女接种疫苗的家长，依然将“疫苗与自闭症存在关联”作为主要恐惧来源。
- 连续接种流感疫苗致阿尔茨海默病风险提升十倍的虚假指控，始于 1997 年休·富登伯格未经验证的口头断言。
---
### [01:30:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5453s) 阴谋论游轮的摇钱树与英国疫苗信任的涅槃
身败名裂的韦克菲尔德在英国混不下去后逃往美国，并迅速成为了反疫苗群体的座上宾。他甚至受邀成为“Conspira-Sea”阴谋论主题巡游游轮的特邀嘉宾，与深信气候变化骗局、地平论、时间旅行者乃至“马其实并不存在”的各类狂热分子混在一起。讽刺的是，随船暗访的怀疑论者注意到，面对这群全盘接受各种江湖骗术的极端信徒，韦克菲尔德本人脸上写满了难以掩饰的尴尬与厌烦。然而，为了从这个巨大的资金池里捞钱，他不得不彻底撕下伪装，全面倒向极端反智立场。当年他还辩称“我不是反对所有疫苗，我只是说 MMR 这一种危险，大家该用我专利里的单价疫苗”；如今面对这群全盘反疫苗的受众，他只能全盘推翻旧说辞，改口称所有疫苗都有毒害。在数百万人丧生的新冠疫情期间，他甚至从豪宅中钻出来，公然宣称染上致命病毒也比接种疫苗好得多。
然而，Hbomb 强调，还原这段荒诞历史的核心目的，在于证明“真相本身拥有强大的力量”。从数据图表可以清晰看到，当年随着调查记者布赖恩·迪尔（Brian Deer）的一篇篇重磅调查报道见报，英国跌入谷底的 MMR 疫苗接种率立即止跌反弹；当英国总医药委员会正式吊销韦克菲尔德的行医执照后，接种率更是一举恢复到了恐慌爆发前的正常高位。英国公众因为切身经历过这场由谎言引发的灾难，反而形成了一种集体免疫力。在随后的全球新冠疫苗接种意愿民调中，许多国家一开始都因陈旧的疫苗疑虑而接种意愿低迷，唯独经历过 MMR 风波洗礼的英国民众一骑绝尘，对疫苗展现出极高的信任与接种意愿。
Hbomb 指出，向大众揭露真相从来不需要什么神秘的沟通花招，只要把整件事的前因后果和盘托出，公众完全有能力做出正确的理性判断。真正的科学界对疫苗的安全性要求严苛到了极致：任何潜在副作用只要出现一丝苗头，FDA 和 CDC 就会立刻叫停使用展开排查，直至确认万无一失才重新放行。反观韦克菲尔德当年鼓吹的单价替代疫苗，其科学水平烂到连临床试验都无法通过，其专利申请书的第一页甚至把合作作者的名字都拼错了。正如 Hbomb 所指出的那样：“说实在的，安德鲁·韦克菲尔德注定会沦为一个江湖骗子；他当年当医生的时候，科学水平就烂得一塌糊涂。”现代所有正式投入使用的新冠疫苗都历经了严苛的检验与层层把关，与韦克菲尔德之流欺世盗名的假把式有着云泥之别。
- 英国的 MMR 疫苗接种率在布赖恩·迪尔发表调查报道后显著回升，并在韦克菲尔德被吊销行医执照后彻底恢复至恐慌前的水平。
- 在全球多国针对新冠疫苗接种意愿的调查中，英国公众的接受度和信任度因先前对 MMR 虚假恐慌的历史反思而始终处于高位。
- 韦克菲尔德当年申请的单价替代疫苗专利漏洞百出，连合作者的姓名都在首页面拼写错误，在学术和临床标准下根本不具备可行性。
### [01:35:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5703s) 活生生的证据：改变认知的最佳方式
安德鲁·韦克菲尔德（Andrew Wakefield）可以在镜头前假装自己绝不会接种新冠疫苗，甚至到处出席所谓的“健康自由峰会”（Health Freedom Summits），劝告大众千万别打针，转而推荐大家用廉价产品和烹饪小窍门来“排出体内毒素”。但主讲人讽刺道，看在韦克菲尔德自己的份上，真希望他已经在暗中偷偷接种了，否则下一趟反疫苗游轮旅行恐怕会闹出人命。谈及如何扭转公众对疫苗的恐惧，主讲人指出，最有效的武器其实是“活生生的证据”（living proof）：“如果有人觉得新冠疫苗可能存在危险，能帮到他们的最好办法之一，似乎就是看着身边的亲朋好友纷纷接种，并亲眼见证他们全都没事。”
在疫苗问世前的早期民意调查中，许多美国人声称要“等一等，确认安全了再打”。主讲人直言这种观望非常危险，因为病毒本身的破坏力与疫苗潜在的副作用相比完全不成比例：即使是轻症感染者，也有高达三分之一的人留下长期后遗症，比如原本能跑长跑的健将变得连楼梯都爬不上，还有人丧失了视力甚至脱落了牙齿，更不用提那些因感染而失去生命的人。但随着越来越多的人接种并安然无恙，事实本身彻底转变了舆论风向。在2020年，人们很容易对一种无人接种过的理论性疫苗产生疑虑；然而，一旦周围有一半的人打了针且活蹦乱跳，“那些一直在观望的人似乎认清了现实，决定‘我也要他们打的那种东西’”。
因此，主讲人发出了一段呼吁行动（Call to Action）：只要身体条件允许，请务必去接种新冠疫苗（甚至顺便在做肠镜检查时打上一针）。接种不仅保护自己，还能大幅降低将病毒传播给脆弱群体的概率；在利己与利他之外，接种者本身就能成为身边犹豫不决者眼中的活证据。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 疫苗观望与观念转变流程
accDescr: 展示公众从对新冠疫苗的早期担忧，通过身边人接种的活证据，转变为积极接种的心理路径。
subgraph Hesitation["初期疑虑与观望"]
A["理论上的新疫苗<br/>（早期民调：观望态度）"]
B["高风险现实：<br/>感染导致后遗症与死亡"]
end
subgraph Proof["活生生的证据"]
C["身边越来越多的人接种疫苗"]
D["观察期结束：<br/>接种者全都健康无虞"]
end
subgraph Action["观念扭转与行动"]
E["疑虑消散，跟进接种"]
F["保护自身与脆弱群体，<br/>成为下一个活证据"]
end
A --> B
A --> C
C --> D
D --> E
E --> F
```
### [01:37:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5824s) 顽固的反疫苗产业与情绪宣泄
数据中依然存在令人担忧的阴暗面：有一小部分人从一开始就坚决拒绝疫苗，并且至今毫无松动。即使身边有数以亿计的人安全接种，他们依然对现代医学充满敌意。主讲人分析，人类往往在“拒绝承认与自身世界观相悖的证据”上投入了过多的自尊与骄傲（ego and pride）。更糟糕的是，市场上充斥着数百个像安德鲁·韦克菲尔德这样的人，他们随时准备向大众灌输谎言，迎合偏见，然后顺理成章地兜售保健品、光盘或生活指南，让人心安理得地停止思考——“当然，需要收取一点微薄的费用”。
面对观众可能产生的疑问——“把韦克菲尔德比作极右翼阴谋论主持人亚历克斯·琼斯（Alex Jones）是不是有点过分了？他怎么可能堕落到那种地步？”——主讲人直接切入了一段震惊全场的真实访谈录像。画面中，亚历克斯·琼斯热情洋溢地说：“很高兴你能来我们节目”，而韦克菲尔德满面堆笑地回应：“很高兴来到这里，亚历克斯，非常感谢。”
主讲人坦言，改变这部分人的想法原本是他们自己的责任，但未来的沟通关键在于寻找更具说服力的方式，将真相传达给那些不习惯听真话的人。而在说服那些“铁了心不愿被说服的人”之前，主讲人幽默地请求将留给他们的疫苗配额直接打给自己：“求求你们把他们的疫苗给我吧！我之前很高兴看到先给老年人做测试，但这都过去几个月了，我真的想打！我想出门！我想装作自己又去高端超市 Waitrose 购物了！我想用掉手里的免费足球门票！我想去嘲弄我的前理发师，告诉她对我来说她已经毫无价值，并威胁要把她的理发店改回医学研究基金会！给我疫苗吧，医生！见鬼，把所有疫苗都给我！让我把它们的神力融为一体！很快我将所向披靡！”
- 疫苗顽固者的心理根源：将个人自尊（Ego）与错误的信念深度绑定，抗拒压倒性的现实证据。
- 反疫苗产业链的套路：利用偏见巩固受众信任，再通过售卖替代疗法产品变现。
- 韦克菲尔德的真实下场：彻底沦为与亚历克斯·琼斯等边缘极右阴谋论者同流合污的骗子。
### [01:39:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5940s) 走出绝望：把沮丧化为改变世界的力量
在发泄完对疫苗的渴望后，主讲人的语气沉静下来，坦白了许多理智者在面对反疫苗狂潮时的无力感。当面对数以千计无休止发表荒谬言论、执迷于愚昧的人时，人们很容易陷入抑郁，感觉自己仿佛被锁在一个充斥着笨蛋的房间里。然而，主讲人给出了一个截然不同的思考角度：“但实际上，我越琢磨越觉得，我是和一个由数百万比这些人更明白事理的人组成的群体，一起被困在同一个星球上，只不过他们也像我一样，光顾着因为这群人而感到抑郁了。”
主讲人提出的解决之道在于思维的转换：我们应当把这种由沮丧带来的能量，投入到能够产生实际影响的事情中去——去改变那些能够被改变的人，去尽我们所能改善周围的世界。至于那些顽固不化的愚昧之徒，就让他们继续愤怒、继续犯蠢好了，但至少在一个因为我们消灭了脊髓灰质炎（Polio）而使他们的孩子免于夭折的世界里犯蠢。“这算是便宜他们了，这帮无知的小混蛋。”主讲人总结道，在面对如此庞大而复杂的历史遗留问题时，最艰难的往往是承认“我们确实有能力做出改变”。无论境况看起来多么令人绝望，世界始终拥有变得更好的可能。话音未落，镜头切到了乱七八糟的房间背景，主讲人冷不丁补了一句冷幽默：“说不定哪天我们携起手来，就能发明出收拾干净我妈车库——不对，是我车库里这一堆烂摊子的办法！”
### [01:40:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=6045s) 致谢名单、幕后制作与调查记者布莱恩·迪尔
正片在欢快的音乐声中结束，主讲人开始向幕后支持团队与观众致谢。除了感谢在屏幕上滚动的 Patreon 赞助者们维持了频道运转，他还特别感谢了审阅文稿的“敏感度审读员”（sensitivity reader），确保全片在探讨自闭症议题时使用了恰当且具尊严的语言规范。
主讲人将最崇高的敬意献给了调查记者布莱恩·迪尔（Brian Deer），称赞他简直就是一位“超级英雄”：正是迪尔耗费了数十年时间进行深入调查，一手揭露了安德鲁·韦克菲尔德学术造假、虐待儿童与商业欺诈的全部真相。迪尔在视频制作期间出版了调查专著《欺骗世界的医生》（The Doctor Who Fooled the World）。主讲人表示这本书是关于韦克菲尔德及其恶劣影响的最权威来源，视频所呈现的内容仅仅触及了迪尔调查的冰山一角。主讲人在视频简介中贴出了迪尔的个人网站 briandeer.com 购买链接，并特意强调这绝非商业返利推广：“我们做这个没有任何报酬。我觉得这是他应得的钱。我的私人幻想就是他能看到这本书的销量曲线上，因为本视频的发布而出现一个明显的暴涨。”
随后，主讲人揭秘了本期庞大而复杂的制作过程。为了确保节目内容滴水不漏并抵御潜在的恶意诉讼，团队不仅与事实核查员紧密合作，甚至聘请了两个不同国家的专业律师进行法律把关，因为“故事里的某些角色极其喜欢打官司”。整个项目还咨询了疫苗学专家、执业医师、科学传播者与医学研究人员。为了几秒钟的视觉笑点，团队甚至邀请了一位曾获大奖的《纽约客》（The New Yorker）漫画家耗费数小时手绘《逆转裁判》（Phoenix Wright）风格的法庭背景。
最后，主讲人感谢了长期受累的制片人 Kat（负责了大量研究、撰稿协调与事实核查）、摄像实习生 Rachel、提供专业修改建议的科学家赞助者们，以及知名创作者布莱恩·戴维·吉尔伯特（Brian David Gilbert）——吉尔伯特不仅在视频中客串配音，还自发穿戴全套行头把自己打扮成安德鲁·韦克菲尔德录制了视频素材送给剧组。在一片打趣与对高强度制作的“抱怨”中，主讲人笑着表示再也不会为了一个视频投入这么多心血，全片在欢声笑语中圆满落幕。
## Notable quotes
> [02:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=140s) The anti-vax movement had next to no evidence 20 years ago and now they have even less. — hbomberguy
> [01:25:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5131s) This isn't skepticism. This is ignorance trying to sound like skepticism. — hbomberguy
> [18:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=1125s) Vaccine-safety concerns such as that reported by Wakefield and colleagues may snowball into societal tragedies when the media and the public confuse association with causality and shun immunization. — 《柳叶刀》评论员
> [09:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=585s) 家长并不一定能在症状非常明显之前就注意到它们，但这并不意味着这些症状不存在，也不意味着他们的孩子在此之前不是自闭症患者。 — hbomberguy
> [01:35:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5703s) 如果有人觉得新冠疫苗可能存在危险，能帮到他们的最好办法之一，似乎就是看着身边的亲朋好友纷纷接种，并亲眼见证他们全都没事。 — hbomberguy
> [12:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=766s) 成千上万接种了该疫苗的儿童的父母中，仅有一小部分人认为可能存在关联，这充其量只是在一个更大的儿童群体中开展更严谨研究的理由，以此查明这种关联是否真的存在。 — hbomberguy
> [01:18:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=4728s) 如果你一直在撒谎，那么你的书也是谎言。 — Anderson Cooper
> [01:39:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc&t=5940s) 我越琢磨越觉得，我是和一个由数百万比这些人更明白事理的人组成的群体，一起被困在同一个星球上，只不过他们也像我一样，光顾着因为这群人而感到抑郁了。 — hbomberguy
## Mentioned
hbomberguy, Donald Trump, The Lancet, MMR vaccine, Brendan Nyhan, The New Yorker, Andrew Wakefield, ContraPoints, The Economist, BBC, Jackie Fletcher, JABS, Royal Free Hospital, H. Hugh Fudenberg, Biotherapy, Melanie Phillips, Brian Deer, The Sunday Times, Immunospecifics Biotechnologies, LTD, Carmel Healthcare, LTD, Unigenetics, LTD, John O'Leary, Axcan Pharma, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, SmithKline Beecham, Mark Pepys, Nick Chadwick, Channel 4, briandeer.com, Richard Barr, General Medical Council, The BMJ, CIRCARE, Richard Horton, Callous Disregard, Sanjay Gupta, Anderson Cooper, CNN, ABPI, Susan Dominus, Vaxxed, Bill Maher, Larry King, Larry King Live, Alec Baldwin, Disturbed, FDA, CDC, Alex Jones, The Doctor Who Fooled the World, Brian David Gilbert
## Video description
What is the science behind the anti-vaccine movement, and is it any good? Let’s find out!
My Twitter: https://twitter.com/hbomberguy
My Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/Hbomb
Kat's Twitter: https://twitter.com/lolkat
CHAPTERS:
0:00 - Intro
2:20 - The Easy Version
6:15 - An In-Depth Analysis of the Worst Study Ever Done
22:38 - In Which The Media Gets Everyone Killed
33:03 - How Not To Talk About Autism
36:22 - Andrew Wakefield is a Lying Conman Who Wanted Your Money
52:50 - It Gets Much Worse
1:05:58 - Andrew Wakefield Abused Children For Money
1:16:00 - The Part Where He Loses His License
1:23:23 - CONCLUSION
1:40:16 - Credits
Get Brian Deer's book The Doctor Who Fooled The World:
https://briandeer.com/doctor-who-fooled-world.htm
SOURCES:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wNJ3tj3X2HZ0PTnUGnlrjpFsQu6tYKYTS7JvhFG2TMk/edit
[Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BIcAZxFfrc)
Source quotes
[2:20] hbomberguy: The anti-vax movement had next to no evidence 20 years ago and now they have even less.
[85:31] hbomberguy: This isn't skepticism. This is ignorance trying to sound like skepticism.
[18:45] 《柳叶刀》评论员: Vaccine-safety concerns such as that reported by Wakefield and colleagues may snowball into societal tragedies when the media and the public confuse association with causality and shun immunization.
[9:45] hbomberguy: 家长并不一定能在症状非常明显之前就注意到它们，但这并不意味着这些症状不存在，也不意味着他们的孩子在此之前不是自闭症患者。
[95:03] hbomberguy: 如果有人觉得新冠疫苗可能存在危险，能帮到他们的最好办法之一，似乎就是看着身边的亲朋好友纷纷接种，并亲眼见证他们全都没事。
[12:46] hbomberguy: 成千上万接种了该疫苗的儿童的父母中，仅有一小部分人认为可能存在关联，这充其量只是在一个更大的儿童群体中开展更严谨研究的理由，以此查明这种关联是否真的存在。
[78:48] Anderson Cooper: 如果你一直在撒谎，那么你的书也是谎言。
[99:00] hbomberguy: 我越琢磨越觉得，我是和一个由数百万比这些人更明白事理的人组成的群体，一起被困在同一个星球上，只不过他们也像我一样，光顾着因为这群人而感到抑郁了。
Source quotes
[2:20] hbomberguy: The anti-vax movement had next to no evidence 20 years ago and now they have even less.
[92:20] Hbomb: It seems like our past experience with bullshit vaccine scares has inoculated us against future ones.
[95:03] hbomberguy: The truth is, it was easy in 2020 to have your doubts about a theoretical vaccine that no one had had yet, but now when half the people around you already have it and they're obviously fine, it's a whole lot harder to have those doubts.
Original transcript
[0:00] [wholesome music]
[0:05] [tense music]
[0:08] [HBOMB laughing]
[0:10] Don't worry.
[0:11] Vaccines are perfectly safe,
[0:12] according to me.
[0:14] You might notice a little prick.
[0:16] [laughing maniacally]
[0:20] Oh!
Hello, and welcome back to Hell.
[0:22] I'm just vaccinating
my profiteroles,
[0:25] immunizing them against
the horrendous disease
[0:27] known only
as Not Enough Cream-itis.
[0:30] Unfortunately,
while vaccines are great
[0:32] at stimulating my balls,
[0:34] in humans they've become quite
the controversial topic.
[0:37] In the late '90s
an anti-vaccine movement started
[0:39] to pick up steam claiming
that they cause autism,
[0:42] and the movement has plenty
of washed-up celebrities
[0:44] flushing it including
what's-his-name,
[0:46] and that one,
and some more.
[0:48] Here's 45th President
of the United States
[0:51] Donald Trump coming out
against medicine.
[0:53] He once famously twet:
[0:59] I mean, of course they aren't.
Horses aren't even real.
[1:01] But if there's
an entire movement of people
[1:04] with documentaries and web sites
and Facebook pages
[1:07] with thousands and thousands
of members backed
[1:10] by the former U.S. President,
[1:12] why does everyone else seem
[1:14] to think they're
obviously wrong?
[1:15] Has the mainstream medical
establishment science-cucked
[1:18] a majority of people
into thinking they're safe
[1:21] so they can keep making money
selling them?
[1:22] The vaccine debate is complex
and multi-layered,
[1:26] and hasn't been resolved
for over two decades
[1:28] so obviously it needs me to come
and put an end to it
[1:31] in the space
of a single YouTube video
[1:33] by doing what I'm best at:
destroying things with my mouth.
[1:37] [chewing loudly
and aggressively]
[1:43] Oh, hi, Mum!
[1:45] Was I vaccinated?
[1:47] [Mum exhales sharply]
[1:48] Have you been looking into
[1:49] moving out lately, son?
[1:52] HBOMB: N--
[1:53] [upbeat music]
[1:56] Now, the clever clogs among you
will know that there was
[1:59] an anti-vaccine movement
of sorts in the 1800s
[2:01] when they were first introduced,
[2:03] but that movement died out
on its own a long time ago
[2:06] of small pox.
[2:07] The main argument
in the modern movement
[2:08] is that they might cause autism,
[2:10] so let's see what on paper
this claim is supported by.
[2:14] Yes, I just ended a sentence
with a preposition
[2:16] and if that annoyed you,
we get it.
[2:17] Your school was expensive.
We're all very happy for you.
[2:20] Part One: The Easy Version,
[2:22] in case you don't feel
like watching
[2:23] this whole fucking video.
[booming]
[2:25] In 1998, a study came out
alleging a link between
[2:28] the MMR vaccine and autism.
[2:30] MMR vaccinates against measles,
mumps, and rubella,
[2:32] which saves kids from having
to get multiple painful shots
[2:35] and parents from having
to know what rubella is.
[2:37] It was published
in "The Lancet,"
[2:39] a very well-known
medical journal
[2:40] which made it seem credible.
[2:41] However, the paper
was eventually found guilty
[2:44] of being bad.
[2:45] The science turned out
to be bonkers
[2:47] and multiple other studies
on literally millions
[2:50] of children did not show
that there was a link
[2:53] and the paper
was eventually retracted
[2:54] by the journal
that published it.
[2:56] [booming]
So retracted that it literally
[2:58] has "retracted" written
all across every page
[3:02] in big red letters.
[3:04] My printer just does black
and white,
[3:06] so I've actually got an artist's
impression of the real version.
[3:09] So far that's some pretty
shaky ground
[3:10] on the anti-vaccine side,
[3:12] but later new evidence
came out that--
[3:15] oh, that's it.
That's all the evidence.
[3:16] This segment is over now--
[3:17] Part Two:
The Existential Horror of--
[3:19] wait, that's it?
[3:20] No, seriously.
That's all the evidence.
[3:22] There is nothing else
even remotely credible.
[3:25] There are some fringe
pet theories
[3:28] as to what chemical in
the vaccines causes the autism,
[3:31] but since vaccines
don't cause autism,
[3:34] they're kind of putting
the cart before the squid, here.
[3:37] The anti-vax movement had next
to no evidence 20 years ago
[3:41] and now they have even less.
[3:42] But hold on there, daddy-o.
[3:44] Sure, you can sum up the entire
issue in--52 seconds, wow.
[3:48] But really I don't think
that's good enough.
[3:50] Everyone who's anti-vax
at this point
[3:52] has probably already heard
and isn't convinced
[3:54] by the easy version.
[3:56] I mean, if you're on
the fence about vaccines,
[3:58] you're not gonna change
your mind because someone
[3:59] told you there was a paper once
but it got retracted,
[4:02] no matter how much they
pitch-shift their voice in post.
[4:05] [playing slowly]
Bonkers!
[4:06] But what if you did want
to change someone's mind
[4:08] on topics like this?
[4:10] The data on this issue
is discouraging.
[4:12] Research shows that when someone
becomes personally invested
[4:15] in an idea they can become
very closed-minded or worse:
[4:18] a YouTuber.
[4:20] Political science professor
Brendan Nyhan
[4:22] and his team spent
three years studying how
[4:24] over 1,700 parents reacted
to various different attempts
[4:27] to convince them
to vaccinate their children
[4:29] and found that no matter
what they tried,
[4:31] parents who started out
against vaccination
[4:33] didn't change their minds,
and worse,
[4:35] trying to correct false claims
about vaccines
[4:37] actually made some parents
more against vaccinating.
[4:40] Nyhan told "The New Yorker,"
[4:41] "It's depressing.
We were definitely depressed."
[4:44] Now, as a fellow fan
of logic and reason,
[4:46] I'm also doing great,
[4:48] but in today's particular--
shall we say…
[4:51] [flames roaring,
people screaming]
[4:53] It's extra pressing
that we figure out how
[4:55] to get everyone on the same page
with regards to public health.
[4:58] So the purpose of this video
isn't just to point out
[5:00] a group that's wrong
about something.
[5:02] The real question is,
[5:03] when someone is wrong
about something--
[5:05] not just this--
how do you change their mind?
[5:08] Now, personally,
I'm not sure how to do that.
[5:10] If it was easy for humans
to change their mind about stuff
[5:13] then this video wouldn't need
to exist, would it?
[5:16] But maybe we'll find
some answers by exploring
[5:19] what convinced people
vaccines might be dangerous
[5:21] in the first place.
[5:22] We should probably begin
[5:23] with that old 1998 study
[5:25] because let's be honest:
[5:27] how many people on either side
of this discussion
[5:30] have actually read it?
[5:31] People don't read
scientific papers.
[5:33] They check out the blogs
or videos of people
[5:36] who they already agree with
and they tell them what
[5:38] the science said.
[5:40] And, I mean, same.
[5:41] I heard all the other people say
the science was bad
[5:44] and I believed them,
[5:45] and the anti-vax people probably
just believed whoever told them
[5:48] it was true,
so to be unbiased about this,
[5:51] let's really start
at the beginning,
[5:53] look at the original paper--
[5:55] and that's the wrong page.
[5:57] Let's actually read
this old paper
[6:00] and see what it has to say
and come to an honest conclusion
[6:04] about its findi--
[6:05] [WOMAN] Five minutes lat--
[6:06] [HBOMB] What the fuck?
[6:08] This is why people
are against vaccines?
[6:10] This is the worst fucking paper
I've ever read in my li--
[6:13] [groovy music]
[6:16] ♪ ♪
[6:18] [HBOMB slurping from a cup]
[6:20] [exhales]
[setting cup on table]
[6:22] Right, let's talk about
the study.
[6:24] I'm calling it "The Study"
because its real title was,
[6:26] "Ileal-lymphoid-nodular
hyperplasia,
[6:28] non-specific colitis,
[6:30] and pervasive developmental
disorder in children,"
[6:32] which is a bit
of a tongue twister.
[6:34] I had to do a not-insignificant
amount of Googling
[6:36] to find out whether it's
pronounced ee-leal or eye-leal.
[6:39] Don't know why I bothered.
[6:40] If I got it wrong it's not
[6:41] like you would have noticed.
[6:42] The paper's lead author
is Dr. Andrew Wakefield.
[6:45] I'm sorry.
There's a mistake in my script.
[6:46] The paper's lead author
is disgraced ex-doctor
[6:49] Andrew Wakefield.
[6:50] Wakefield is seen by many
as the founder
[6:52] of the modern
anti-vaccine movement
[6:54] since he was behind the paper
that started the whole thing.
[6:56] Let's keep an eye on that gu--
oh, fuck!
[6:58] The smoke machine occasionally
goes off on its own
[7:01] for no reason and I can't
be bothered to get up.
[7:02] The paper's supposed purpose
was to investigate a connection
[7:05] between bowel disorders
[7:07] and developmental issues
in children,
[7:09] in particular targeting signs
of autism.
[7:11] So, first off,
what's a colitis?
[7:13] Right, uh, hold on.
[keyboard clacking]
[7:14] Okay, colitis is inflammation
of the colon,
[7:16] one of the main symptoms
of bowel diseases
[7:18] like Crohn's disease,
for example.
[7:20] [DEMONSTRATION WOMAN]
Colitis.
[7:21] [HBOMB] By the way,
we're gonna use words
[7:22] like bowel,
colon,
[7:23] and intestine interchangeably
in this video.
[7:26] Don't let it confuse you.
They're mostly the same thing.
[7:28] If you're a doctor,
pretend you didn't hear that.
[7:29] The paper says
non-specific colitis because
[7:32] it's not looking
for specific kinds
[7:34] of inflammation.
[7:35] It's looking
at whatever inflammation
[7:36] these children happened to have
[7:38] and seeing how they compare
because maybe they're all linked
[7:40] and maybe they're even linked
to the autism.
[7:43] According to Wakefield,
[7:44] he just happened to notice a lot
of kids with both autism
[7:48] and bowel disorders
and he launched the study
[7:50] to investigate a possible link.
[7:52] [fog machine hisses]
[shouts]
[7:53] But what does all that have
to do with vaccines?
[7:55] I mean, surely it must
have found something
[7:57] for it to have caused
all this controversy.
[7:59] Well, allow me to list
[8:00] the paper's highly
scientific findings.
[8:03] Some of the parents
of the children in the study
[8:06] think they remember
the autism symptoms
[8:09] starting after the MMR vaccine.
[8:14] No, really.
That's it.
[8:15] [READER] "Findings: Onset
of behavioral symptoms
[8:18] "was associated,
by the parents,
[8:19] with measles, mumps,
and rubella vaccination."
[8:22] [HBOMB] For literally decades,
right?
[8:24] I've been hearing about
this paper
[8:26] and I've assumed that there must
have been something there.
[8:29] Like, something
to at least explore
[8:30] or discuss or debunk.
[8:32] Everyone lost their
fucking minds over it
[8:35] so surely there's something,
[8:37] and I finally go and read it,
[8:38] and it's just a bunch
of fucking parents' opinions.
[8:41] There's nothing there!
[8:42] I can't fucking believe this!
[8:44] [soothing jazz music]
[8:47] Like, seriously,
the disconnect between
[8:48] the attempts at real science
and the stuff the parents think
[8:52] they remember is, like,
so jarring.
[8:55] Like, next to colonoscopies
and biopsies
[8:57] and graphs
of urinary excretions,
[9:00] you'll suddenly
get sentences like:
[9:11] [HBOMB] A note from your mother
isn't science.
[9:13] It's how you get out of P.E.
[9:15] I'm sorry, coach.
I didn't really have polio.
[9:18] [exhales] Maybe some home
decorating will relax me.
[9:20] I love this poster
because I'm smart
[9:22] and now all my guests
will know I'm smart.
[9:24] I have tons of guests.
I'm a party animal.
[9:27] I have a charisma
of at least six.
[9:30] [grunts]
[9:31] [quirky music]
[9:34] ♪ ♪
[9:36] [grunting]
[9:39] ♪ ♪
[9:45] I wonder why "The Economist"
interviewed Contrapoints
[9:47] and not me.
[grunts]
[9:49] There.
Perfect.
[9:50] Does that look all right to you?
[9:52] No, Rachel,
don't wave the camera.
[9:54] That's not
how people communicate.
[9:55] Page three of the study provides
[9:56] a table listing each child's
behavioral diagnosis--
[9:59] largely autism--and also
what their parents identified
[10:02] as their exposure,
the thing which--
[10:04] in their opinion--
caused the diagnosis.
[10:07] Of course, most of them blame
the vaccine.
[10:09] Now, while a bunch of opinions
are about as useful in science
[10:12] as a bath made of teeth,
[10:14] we might as well explore how
someone might end up
[10:17] having that opinion.
[10:18] [bright music]
[10:21] It's actually really common
for us to--
[10:22] actually, hey, Angie?
[ANGIE] Yeah?
[10:24] [HBOMB] Could you draw me
as a ferret, please?
[10:26] [ANGIE] Okay.
W--why?
[10:28] [HBOMB] I will not explain why.
[10:30] It's actually really common
for us to assume two things
[10:32] that happened to us around
the same time must
[10:33] be caused by one another.
[10:35] That's how we as ape people
whose fur fell off one day
[10:38] think about things
with our tiny,
[10:40] godless little monkey brains.
[10:42] If you ate some strange
new berries
[10:43] and got sick that day,
[10:45] you're basically programmed
to connect the two
[10:47] for the sake
of your own survival.
[10:49] This is the one in ten times
[10:50] that evolutionary psychology
is real.
[10:52] The rest are fake, Malcolm.
[10:53] But these correlations we make
[10:55] in our heads between events
aren't necessarily true.
[10:57] It might not have been
the berries.
[10:59] It could have been all
the budget energy drinks
[11:00] you import from Thailand.
You know what?
[11:02] Maybe you can have
too much Carabao.
[11:05] Another big problem here
is how humans relate
[11:07] to spans of time,
just like how under quarantine,
[11:10] you might not even notice
four months passing because
[11:13] nothing happens anymore.
[11:14] If someone coughs on you today
and later in the evening
[11:17] you start to feel a bit sick,
[11:19] a lot of people might remember
being coughed on
[11:21] and assume that's how
they got it,
[11:22] but illnesses can take days
or weeks to incubate.
[11:25] Maybe you don't remember
the time you got coughed on
[11:27] two weeks ago by the guy
who was delivering
[11:29] the last crate of energy drinks.
[11:31] Oh, Carabao,
why is it so hard to quit you?
[11:33] Win football tickets?
[11:35] I can't wait to be in a crowd
of people again!
[11:37] [coughing]
[11:38] The table claims some
[11:39] of the parents noticed
the symptoms
[11:40] a few weeks, days, or even hours
after getting the vaccine,
[11:44] but I do have to wonder how easy
it is for someone
[11:46] to recall something as complex
as the exact date
[11:50] of the onset of a child's
behavioral symptoms.
[11:53] A BBC documentary from back
in the day interviewed
[11:55] a parent and they said on camera
that their son became autistic
[11:59] overnight after the vaccine.
[12:03] [MOTHER] He had the fever,
the high temp--
[12:05] [MOTHER] He was never
the same again.
[12:07] [HBOMB] Even the interviewer
was like, "Literally?
[12:09] Literally overnight?
Like, are you sure?"
[12:11] The signs of autism
appear gradually
[12:13] and grow over time.
[12:15] When parents first take notice,
[12:17] there could easily be
other signs they missed.
[12:19] Another better documentary about
all this we'll get to later
[12:22] actually found parents
who realized they'd made
[12:24] this exact mistake.
[12:26] [NARRATOR] Stacy and Damien
no longer believe
[12:28] that their daughter's autism
was caused by MMR.
[12:30] After researching
and remembering Rebecca
[12:32] as a baby,
they realized that she
[12:34] had already shown symptoms
before she was vaccinated.
[12:37] [HBOMB] Parents don't
necessarily notice
[12:39] the symptoms until
they're fairly obvious,
[12:41] but that doesn't mean
the symptoms weren't there
[12:43] or their child
wasn't autistic beforehand.
[12:46] I'm bringing this up because
it's important to make
[12:48] the distinction that whenever
someone describes something
[12:50] like their child's
first symptom,
[12:52] what they are really describing
is the first symptom
[12:55] they personally noticed.
[12:56] Here's a timeline
of the first two years
[12:58] of a child's development.
[12:59] Statistically,
the average age
[13:01] that symptoms of autism become
noticeable to parents
[13:03] is around 12 to 18 months.
[13:05] Children in the UK receive
a dose of the MMR vaccine
[13:08] from between 12 to 15 months.
[13:10] Isn't it possible
that these parents
[13:12] are blaming
a coincidental event?
[13:14] You can even see evidence that
this happens in the paper
[13:17] because some
of the other parents
[13:18] blame other totally
coincidental events.
[13:21] One of them blames
their child's autism
[13:23] on an ear infection they got
a week before
[13:26] they first noticed the symptoms.
[13:28] Do ear infections
cause autism now?
[13:31] No.
No, of course not,
[13:34] but if it was the only
other thing that you remembered
[13:36] happening to your child,
[13:37] you can see how someone might
[13:38] end up assuming they're related.
[13:40] Before this study was released,
[13:41] there were a few
very small clusters of parents
[13:44] that thought vaccines
caused autism
[13:46] or other illnesses.
[13:47] JABS--the Justice, Awareness
[13:49] and Basic Support group--
[13:51] wow, they really worked hard
to make their name say JABS--
[13:53] had been around
for a few years beforehand.
[13:55] The founder of JABS--
Jackie Fletcher--
[13:57] asserts to this day that her son
[13:59] suddenly became
severely autistic
[14:01] ten days after
his MMR vaccination,
[14:03] and has frequently tried
to sue the government
[14:05] and MMR manufacturers
for money over it.
[14:08] It's important to recognize
that statistically
[14:10] even if vaccines
are perfectly safe,
[14:13] you're going to get
a small amount of parents
[14:15] like her who are convinced
that vaccines are harmful
[14:17] because they got one
right before something
[14:19] like this happened.
[14:21] Before there was
a scientific paper
[14:22] and thousands of news pieces
telling them to,
[14:25] there really weren't
that many parents
[14:27] of autistic children
who blamed the vaccine.
[14:29] According to a pro-JABS piece
made in May 2002 when
[14:33] the scare was happening,
[14:34] there were thousands of members,
[14:35] but before all that,
[14:36] there were only about 30 sets
[14:37] of parents at best,
[14:39] and speaking of groups
being too small
[14:40] to be statistically meaningful,
[14:42] another big problem--
or to put it another way,
[14:44] a small problem,
is sample size.
[14:46] [laughs]
[14:47] Please hold your applause
until the end.
[14:48] On its own,
[14:49] a study of a small sample size
[14:51] like 12 children can't prove
anything about
[14:54] the rest of a population.
[14:55] I've made this point
about people drawing
[14:57] sweeping conclusions
from small studies before.
[14:59] However, it's important
to understand
[15:01] sample size criticism
in the proper context.
[15:04] Studies on small groups happen
all the time in science
[15:06] for a good reason.
[15:07] They're often called
pilot studies
[15:09] and they're useful
for figuring out how
[15:11] a bigger study should work
in preparation
[15:13] for the real thing
or for checking to see
[15:15] if there's something worth
looking into in the first place.
[15:17] A fraction of parents
of the tens of millions
[15:20] of children who've had
this vaccine saying they think
[15:22] there might be a connection
is at best grounds to do
[15:25] a better study on a bigger group
of children to find out
[15:28] if this connection
actually exists.
[15:31] We're going to come back
to this later
[15:32] because someone had
the opportunity
[15:34] to do one of those
and what they did
[15:36] with that opportunity
is very interesting.
[15:39] That was an awful take.
Let me do that again.
[15:41] In summary,
the science is really bad.
[15:44] It's bonkers.
[15:46] The study even admits it doesn't
prove anything at the end.
[15:54] [HBOMB] The next sentence
is hilarious.
[15:59] [HBOMB] The issue being that
they don't have any proof.
[16:02] In science it's expected
to admit the limitations
[16:05] of your study.
[16:06] Papers and medical journals
[16:07] have high standards
for what constitutes
[16:09] solid proof.
However,
[16:11] Wakefield is using this
as a shield.
[16:13] By hiding behind the defense
that he hasn't claimed
[16:15] to prove anything,
[16:16] he can then speculate about
[16:18] a lot of things
he hasn't proved.
[16:20] For example,
these children appear
[16:21] to share similar--
though non-specific--
[16:24] bowel problems.
[16:25] I say appeared because, well,
we'll come back to that,
[16:27] but Wakefield takes
this vague collection
[16:29] of similar things
and concludes with the theory
[16:32] that could make his career,
[16:33] that the vaccine
may cause autism
[16:35] and it happens through
the bowels.
[16:37] [NARRATOR] "We have identified
a chronic enterocolitis
[16:40] "in children that may be related
[16:41] "to neuropsychiactric
dysfunction.
[16:43] "In most cases, onset
of symptoms was after measles,
[16:46] "mumps,
and rubella immunization.
[16:47] "Further investigations
are needed to examine
[16:50] "this syndrome
and its possible relation
[16:51] to this vaccine."
[16:53] [HBOMB] In literally the final
sentences of the paper,
[16:56] Wakefield invents a new disease
that combines bowel disorders
[16:59] and autism and then speculates
that MMR vaccination
[17:03] might cause the disease
he just made up.
[17:06] This is absolutely buck wild,
as some would put it.
[17:10] It's like medical fan fiction.
[17:13] Sure, he admitted it just may be
and said we need more research
[17:17] to prove anything,
[17:18] but now his made-up disease
is in a published scientific paper
[17:23] in one of the most prestigious
medical journals in the world.
[17:26] Journalists with little
to no scientific knowledge
[17:28] go on to report on this paper
as if it's discovering
[17:31] this new disease.
[17:33] [NARRATOR] Doctors
at the Royal Free Hospital
[17:34] believe they may have discovered
a link between
[17:36] the combination vaccine
and a bowel disease
[17:39] that can progress to autism.
[17:40] [HBOMB] What are you
talking about?
[17:41] He admitted he didn't
prove anything
[17:43] and then wildly speculated
at the end!
[17:44] No!
[17:46] There is one last
really weird thing
[17:48] about this paper
we haven't mentioned yet,
[17:50] which most people don't seem
to mention,
[17:52] which I find a little bit weird
and indicates that no one
[17:54] has actually read it.
[17:55] Towards the end of the paper--
[groans]
[17:58] Wakefield tries
to find other papers
[18:00] that kind of support
his findings,
[18:02] so he really has to scrape
the bottom of the barrel.
[18:05] [NARRATOR] "Fudenberg noted that
for 15 of 20 autistic children,
[18:08] the first symptoms developed
within a week of vaccination."
[18:11] [HBOMB] Wow, that's a really
interesting thing to "note,"
[18:14] isn't it?
[18:15] We should probably actually
[18:16] go read Fudenberg's paper
[18:18] and see what it has
to say for itself.
[18:21] [quiet rumbling]
[18:23] Fudenberg's 1996 paper
cited here is from "Biotherapy,"
[18:27] a fringe journal for quacks
that actually went out
[18:30] of business two years later.
[18:31] The paper is a pilot study
on the effects
[18:33] of a substance called Dialysable
Lymphocyte Extract
[18:37] on children with autism.
[18:38] In addition to alleging
that several of the children
[18:41] had become autistic within
a week of getting vaccinated--
[18:43] are you ready for this?
[18:45] Fudenberg claimed that
this extract he'd created
[18:48] could cure autism.
[18:50] [NARRATOR] "Of the 22
with classic autism,
[18:52] "10 became normal in that they
were main-streamed in school
[18:55] and clinical characteristics
were fully normalized."
[18:58] [HBOMB] "Became normal!"
[19:00] Holy shit!
[19:02] And you wanna know
something funny?
[19:04] You wanna know something funny?
[19:06] At the time that the study
was published,
[19:08] Fudenberg didn't have
a medical license!
[19:12] It was revoked the year before
because he was caught stealing
[19:15] controlled substances
from his job for "personal use!"
[19:19] The South Carolina Medical Board
found him guilty of engaging
[19:22] in dishonorable, unethical,
or unprofessional conduct.
[19:26] He admitted he'd done it
in the hearing, too.
[19:28] So he got caught stealing drugs,
admitted it,
[19:31] got fired,
lost all credibility,
[19:33] probably wasn't even allowed
within 100 yards
[19:35] of a stethoscope,
and then a year later,
[19:38] he cured autism,
according to him,
[19:41] and you know he's trustworthy
because he admitted
[19:43] to stealing all
those medical supplies.
[19:45] What I'm trying to say here is,
[19:47] ex-doctor Hugh Fudenberg's paper
[19:50] is one of the most obviously
bullshit things I've ever read,
[19:54] and Wakefield had to cite it
to create a precedent
[19:57] for his findings.
[19:58] This is the best he could get.
[20:00] You can see why it's a bit weird
no one brings this up, right?
[20:03] In scientific circles,
[20:04] everyone who read
Wakefield's paper--or worse,
[20:07] bothered to check the sources
it cited--
[20:10] had, you know,
a few minor concerns.
[20:12] It was so concerning that
The Lancet published--
[20:15] in the same issue--a response
to the paper.
[20:20] "Vaccine adverse events:
casual or coincidental?"
[20:23] It points out numerous problems,
[20:25] some of which we've
discussed here already,
[20:27] and has some words to say
about fear-mongering
[20:29] about vaccines like this.
[20:31] [NARRATOR] "Vaccine-safety
concerns such as that reported
[20:33] "by Wakefield and colleagues
may snowball
[20:35] "into societal tragedies when
the media and the public
[20:38] "confuse association
with causality
[20:41] "and shun immunization.
[20:43] "This would be tragic because
passion would then
[20:46] conquer reason
and the facts again in the UK."
[20:49] [HBOMB] This commentary would
probably have seemed
[20:51] darkly apocalyptic at the time,
but in retrospect,
[20:55] it was a shockingly
accurate prediction.
[20:57] Like, they knew.
They fucking warned us.
[21:00] So even before the paper
was in the public eye,
[21:02] other doctors and scientists
were looking at it and saying,
[21:06] "This ain't it, chief."
[21:07] Is that still
a current reference?
[21:09] I've aged ten years
in the last two weeks.
[21:12] Time is meaningless.
[21:13] But despite a lot
of obvious concerns
[21:15] and clear weaknesses,
[21:17] Wakefield published
the study anyway,
[21:19] and then--and this is weird--
[21:20] he immediately held
a press conference about it.
[21:23] This isn't something that anyone
normally does in science,
[21:27] especially not after publishing
a five-page study
[21:30] that admits
it didn't prove anything.
[21:32] The paper was so small
and its findings
[21:34] so insignificant that it barely
even qualifies as a paper.
[21:37] In fact, it was published
in "The Lancet"
[21:38] as an early report.
See?
[21:40] The top left corner?
[21:42] Zoom in on it.
It's--it's there.
[21:44] [dramatic music]
[21:46] You gotta be quicker
on the draw than that.
[21:47] Holding a press conference
for this is something
[21:49] you do if you want attention
for your controversial paper,
[21:52] not if you're trying
to do science.
[21:54] And here's where
the whole thing really started.
[21:56] During the press conference,
[21:58] Wakefield pretended his study
had discovered a risk
[22:00] so earth-shaking that
the government
[22:02] should stop using
the MMR vaccine
[22:04] and replace it with measles,
mumps, and rubella vaccines
[22:07] given separately.
[22:20] [HBOMB] This is the moment
that changed everything.
[22:22] Wakefield told a room full
of reporters that based
[22:25] on his study,
[22:26] he felt the MMR vaccine
[22:28] could be putting millions
of children at risk.
[22:30] The mainstream media were
in love with the notion
[22:32] that the paper
had found something
[22:34] so they ran with it
all the way into Hell.
[22:37] [tense music]
[22:40] ♪ ♪
[22:43] The paper was bad,
sure,
[22:44] but mass movements against
vaccines don't start because
[22:47] of the release of a paper.
[22:48] Like we discussed,
people don't read papers.
[22:50] I didn't read it for,
like, 20 years,
[22:52] and you know who else
didn't read it?
[22:54] Every journalist
who reported on it.
[22:56] But when a doctor publicly says
the government
[22:58] is putting millions of children
at risk with vaccine
[23:01] rolled out nationwide.
[23:02] Even if his papers are load
of all shit,
[23:04] you gotta report on that.
[23:06] The possibility
was too tantalizing to ignore.
[23:09] It's really hard to get across
how unavoidable the issue was.
[23:12] If you even glanced at a TV
or a newspaper in the mid-2000s,
[23:15] it was,
"MMR might cause autism,"
[23:18] or it was,
"Princess Diana is still dead."
[23:20] [REPORTER] Measles
kills thousands
[23:22] of people every year,
but today
[23:24] questions about the vaccine.
[23:27] [REPORTER] Vaccination could
be linked to a new side effect,
[23:30] a combination of bowel disease
and autism.
[23:32] [HBOMB] Hundreds of articles,
news pieces,
[23:35] and documentaries were made
about the potential significance
[23:38] of this study.
[23:39] They rarely show or discuss
[23:40] the contents
of the paper itself,
[23:42] but the doctor behind it
came out against MMR!
[23:44] There's a potential link!
[23:46] There's a potential link,
everybody!
[23:47] Panic!
[23:48] And you know what happens
[23:49] when every news resource
[23:50] is screaming about
the potential risks
[23:52] of a vaccine?
[23:54] You make millions
of people terrified
[23:56] to vaccinate their children.
[23:58] I was growing up during
the MMR scare,
[24:00] and the main thing I remember
from the TV news at that time
[24:02] was big shots of pointy needles
and children screaming
[24:06] as they get given an injection
and ominous voice over saying,
[24:09] "Oh, these vaccines might
be dangerous."
[24:11] It's almost like TV deliberately
scares people for ratings
[24:14] because that's how this works.
That's the entire point.
[24:16] If you want to know
why thousands of parents
[24:18] think MMR gave
their children autism,
[24:20] it's not because they came
to that conclusion on their own.
[24:23] We've seen how,
[24:24] before all
of this reporting happened,
[24:25] only a teeny tiny minority
of parents made
[24:28] the connection between autism
and the vaccine.
[24:30] They could only find
seven parents
[24:32] of autistic children who blamed
MMR in the original study, even.
[24:36] The only thing that changed
was how many news outlets
[24:38] were telling everyone
the vaccine might cause it.
[24:41] After years of the media
telling them it could
[24:43] have been the jab,
[24:44] some parents started
to believe it.
[24:46] [JOURNALIST] The symptoms
started to appear
[24:48] when he was two,
soon after he had his MMR.
[24:57] [HBOMB] His parents didn't
believe it was a coincidence
[24:59] because every news resource
was telling them it might
[25:01] have something to do with
the vaccine
[25:03] and trusting that the media
had done the work
[25:05] and knew what they
were talking about.
[25:07] They believed what they
were being told.
[25:10] The end result of publications
and broadcasts like this
[25:13] was a lot of concerned parents,
a lot of unvaccinated children,
[25:18] and a whole lot of new cases
of measles.
[25:21] [JOURNALIST] With inoculation
rates falling
[25:22] to dangerous levels--
[25:23] [JOURNALIST] In Ireland,
[25:25] the debate over MMR
has been fueled still further
[25:28] by a measles outbreak
which killed three children.
[25:30] Whatever the official evidence,
[25:32] which rejected a link
between MMR and autism,
[25:35] fewer parents were prepared
to take a risk.
[25:38] [HBOMB] I wonder
why that might be.
[25:39] Could it be because every time
you turned on the television,
[25:41] there's footage
of a screaming child
[25:43] with a needle in its arm?
[25:44] Once literally
every other doctor
[25:46] had come out saying, "Look,
there's no proof.
[25:48] Please stop doing this,"
[25:49] a lot of journalists
got really defensive suddenly
[25:51] and started putting out
pieces like,
[25:53] "No, I will not stop reporting
scare-mongering bullshit!"
[25:56] Wait, the same journalist
wrote both of these.
[25:58] She just spent, like, six months
of her career complaining
[26:01] about people criticizing her.
Amazing.
[26:03] So, what was Andrew Wakefield
doing during all this?
[26:06] Well, he was getting
interviewed nonstop
[26:08] and having clips played
in almost all
[26:10] of these news pieces.
[26:11] He was like a celebrity,
[26:12] especially to the growing list
of parents newly convinced
[26:15] by the media's reporting that
he'd discovered
[26:17] why their children had autism.
[26:18] For a couple of years,
[26:20] Andrew Wakefield was the sort
of guy who you filmed
[26:22] in slow motion in black
and white.
[26:25] Holy shi--
[26:26] Wakefield used his time
in the spotlight
[26:28] to spread even more doubt
about MMR and continued
[26:31] to repeat the recommendation
that parents get
[26:33] separate vaccines instead.
At the press conference,
[26:36] in interviews in the aftermath,
[26:37] and four whole times on
a 23-minute video tape
[26:40] he sent to journalists,
[26:41] he claims he thinks
separate vaccines
[26:43] would avoid the risk of autism.
[26:45] [JOURNALIST] Andrew Wakefield
says he appealed
[26:46] to the chief medical officer
more than six months ago
[26:49] to give worried parents
the option
[26:50] of the single vaccine.
[26:52] [ANDREW] My recommendation
has been that children
[26:54] should continue to be vaccinated
but to separate the vaccines.
[26:56] There is sufficient anxiety
in my own mind
[26:58] that with the safety--
the long-term safety
[27:00] of the polyvalent--that is
[27:02] the MMR vaccination
and combination--
[27:04] uh, that I think that it should
be suspended in favor
[27:07] of the single vaccines.
[27:09] There is sufficient anxiety
in my own mind
[27:12] that it would be sensible
to divide them
[27:15] into separate doses.
[27:16] There is sufficient anxiety
that the parents must have
[27:21] a choice of how they protect
their children.
[27:22] [HBOMB] It's really kind
of interesting that
[27:23] while the modern
anti-vaccine movement insists
[27:26] that all vaccines are dangerous
in some way,
[27:29] the guy who started the fear
and anxiety
[27:31] that led to this
was pro-vaccine.
[27:33] [ANDREW] We advocate
vaccination.
[27:35] This is not anti-vaccine
in any way.
[27:37] [HBOMB] He was really specific
about the fact that he thought
[27:40] parents should keep vaccinating,
[27:41] just that they should use
alternatives to MMR.
[27:44] [ANDREW] The single vaccines
are likely in this constec--
[27:46] uh, context to be safer.
[27:48] [HBOMB] Remember that disease
he speculated about
[27:50] at the end of his paper?
[27:51] That there might be some kind
of bowel disorder caused
[27:54] by MMR that then leads
to autism?
[27:56] This came up in the media a lot
as well.
[27:58] [JOURNALIST] Could the MMR jab
be causing a strange new kind
[28:02] of bowel disease that
[28:04] was turning
the children autistic.
[28:06] [ANDREW] Measles, mumps,
and rubella given together
[28:08] may be too much
for the immune system
[28:10] of some children to handle.
[28:11] There is a--a bowel disease,
[28:13] a new syndrome associated
with regressive autism
[28:16] and that that may be related
to MMR.
[28:18] [HBOMB] Eventually he even
came up with a name for it:
[28:20] Autistic Enterocolitis.
[28:22] Wakefield's theory when he tries
to explain it
[28:25] is that the almost dead
measles virus present
[28:28] in the MMR vaccine can get stuck
in the intestine somehow
[28:32] causing all that inflammation
they apparently found
[28:35] in the study--
more on that later--
[28:36] which leads to it
not digesting certain foods
[28:39] like bread and milk properly,
turning them into--his words--
[28:43] a morphine-like substance which
then leaks out of the bowel
[28:47] and into the brain
causing autism.
[28:49] [ANDREW] Morphine-like
substances from the gut
[28:52] that you and I produce
in our diet from milk
[28:55] and wheat are actually
getting access through
[28:58] that leaky gut into
the developing brain.
[29:01] [HBOMB] This theory is, uh,
very strange.
[29:04] One of the many strange things
about it is that it specifically
[29:07] implicates the measles part
of the vaccine.
[29:10] If measles,
when it's in a vaccine,
[29:12] can cause a syndrome that leads
to autism,
[29:14] how could you possibly be
so certain that
[29:17] the separate vaccine for measles
would be safe?
[29:19] [ANDREW] The risk of this
particular syndrome developing
[29:22] is related to
the combined vaccine--the MMR--
[29:25] rather than the single vaccines.
[29:27] [HBOMB] Okay, sure, but why?
[29:29] On what basis
are you saying that, Andy?
[29:31] How could a doctor so easily
make that recommendation?
[29:34] [ANDREW] And it may be that
giving the measles on its own
[29:38] reduces the risk of this
particular syndrome developing.
[29:41] [HBOMB] He just keeps saying it!
[29:43] [ANDREW] My opinion, again,
is that the monovalent--
[29:47] the single vaccines,
measles, mumps, and rubella--
[29:49] are likely in this consten--
uh, context
[29:52] to be safer than
the polyvalent vaccine.
[29:54] [JOURNALIST] That's
the MMR vaccine?
[29:57] [HBOMB] There's actually
a real reason why he recommended
[29:59] the separate vaccines so much.
[30:01] Uh, we'll get to that later.
[30:02] Here's the one example
I could find
[30:04] of an interview asking him
to explain himself.
[30:06] [INTERVIEWER] But even supposing
the measles element
[30:09] of the MMR vaccine had deposited
the virus
[30:12] in the intestinal tissue
of these children,
[30:16] a single jab of measles
might do the same.
[30:20] [ANDREW] Theoretically,
it might.
[30:22] [INTERVIEWER] But you're
advocating a jab--
[30:24] single jabs instead of MMR.
[ANDREW] I said theoretically.
[30:26] [HBOMB] Oh, only theoretically.
Well, that's fine, then.
[30:29] What a great scientist.
[30:31] [INTERVIEWER] But if you say
it may do,
[30:33] then how can you advocate
a single jab of measles
[30:35] even if there's only
a theoretical possibility
[30:37] that it might damage, uh,
a child?
[30:39] [ANDREW] While that
question mark exists,
[30:41] at the very least,
[30:43] parents deserve a choice for how
they protect their children
[30:45] against these infections,
[30:47] whether it be with the--
the MMR vaccine
[30:49] or whether it is with
a single vaccine.
[30:51] [HBOMB] He always finds a way
to pivot back to how
[30:53] in the midst of all of these
questions and concerns--
[30:56] which he started--parents
should at least have
[30:58] the option
of a separate vaccine.
[30:59] Honestly, you'd think he
was some kind of salesman
[31:02] for alternative vaccines.
[31:03] Autistic Enterocolitis is not--
and has never been--
[31:06] accepted as real
by Gastroenterology,
[31:08] the field specializing
in the stomach and intestines.
[31:11] But an ordinary person--
or worse, a journalist--
[31:14] might not understand it enough
[31:16] to know that
it doesn't make sense.
[31:17] So of course it got reported
as an interesting new idea.
[31:21] [NARRATOR] It was a bold
and controversial theory.
[31:24] [HBOMB] That's an interesting
choice of words.
[31:26] This piece by that
really defensive lady
[31:28] Melanie Phillips--one
of the most well-paid
[31:30] journalists in Britain
at the time--
[31:32] is still continuing to spread it
in this very article
[31:34] about being criticized
for spreading it.
[31:36] She calls it
a "unique gut-brain disease."
[31:39] When you imagine a new disease,
[31:41] of course it's gonna
sound unique, Melanie.
[31:43] No red flags popping up around
the fact that no disease
[31:46] has ever functioned
like this before?
[31:48] No?
Fucking hell!
[31:49] This completely unprove--
"unique, bold,
[31:52] and controversial" theory
was irresistible to Phillips,
[31:56] a "Bigot of the Year"
award-winning writer famous
[31:59] for also denying climate change,
calling Obama an Islamist,
[32:02] describing a group
of liberal Jews
[32:04] as "Jews for genocide,"
[32:07] and opposing both
Irish independence
[32:09] and gay rights,
[32:10] which she dismissed
as an attack
[32:11] on the traditional family
by cultural Marxism.
[32:14] It's not shocking that Phillips
was wrong about MMR.
[32:17] It's her job to be wrong
about everything.
[32:19] The truly shocking thing
about this is that for once
[32:22] the entire rest
of the British media
[32:24] were on the same side as her,
[32:26] uncritically regurgitating
everything Wakefield said
[32:29] to millions of people.
[32:30] This completely irresponsible
reporting caused fear,
[32:34] vaccine hesitancy,
[32:35] kick started
an anti-vaccine movement
[32:37] that's still here today,
[32:39] and resulted in the deaths
of children
[32:42] from completely
preventable diseases.
[32:44] And that's the tea, sis.
[32:46] [slurps]
[32:48] There's real liquid in there.
I'm not doing a bit.
[32:51] I will spill it if I try
and show it to you.
[32:53] I'm sorry, but there's--look.
[32:55] See?
It's real.
[32:57] It's not tea, though.
It's coffee.
[32:59] I'm not a farmer.
[33:02] Perhaps the only thing
more frustrating
[33:04] than seeing the media
do everything it can
[33:07] to push pseudoscience
was how everyone
[33:09] actually addressed the topic
of autism.
[33:11] Autism is a complex condition
we still don't fully understand
[33:16] with many variations
and symptoms and severity,
[33:19] but the media
never mentioned that.
[33:21] They deliberately went looking
for the most severe
[33:23] and extreme cases
they could find
[33:25] and then filmed them
to exploit for television.
[33:28] Children who couldn't
communicate verbally
[33:31] or had severe physical
disabilities as well.
[33:34] The intent to make
the "MMR question"
[33:37] as serious as possible resulted
[33:39] in an almost
pornographic obsession
[33:42] with suffering children.
[33:43] They went out of their way
to portray autism
[33:45] as a horrific tragedy
that it's worth risking
[33:48] a disease to avoid,
and yeah,
[33:50] measles is a disease.
[33:52] Like, it kills people.
[33:54] It can cause incredibly
severe complications
[33:57] that are with people for life.
[33:58] We as a society are no longer
really aware
[34:00] of just how dangerous measles
can be because we don't see all
[34:04] those complications as much
because of vaccinations.
[34:06] Measles, mumps, and rubella
are legitimately dangerous
[34:09] and potentially life-threatening
diseases
[34:12] and it says a lot about how
we think about neurodivergence
[34:16] that it's worth risking that
to avoid being autistic
[34:19] to some people.
[34:21] Hell, I was in Waitrose
a few months ago.
[34:22] I never shop there
but I pretend to
[34:25] so I can use their unnecessarily
massive parking space,
[34:28] and I saw them selling
a magazine
[34:29] with this on the cover.
[34:31] "Reignite your child's brain
with alternative treatments."
[34:36] What they mean there is,
"alternatives to treatment."
[34:39] This is not how a healthy
society discusses its people.
[34:43] Autistic people have to navigate
a world that refuses
[34:45] to accommodate them
in the slightest
[34:47] to the point they're
regularly confronted
[34:49] with the idea other people think
their brain has gone out.
[34:53] Come on.
Get it together, Waitrose.
[34:55] You're the up-market upper class
rich people supermarket.
[34:59] You're supposed to be
the smartest.
[35:01] What's going on there?
[35:02] The only thing that needs
igniting here
[35:04] is your fucking shops.
[35:07] Did we get clearance
to say that?
[35:10] Okay, that was a joke.
[35:11] While the MMR scare
was at its height,
[35:13] the entire media landscape
was a unified front
[35:17] in saying wrongly that autism
is the worst fate imaginable
[35:21] for a child and much worse
than dying of measles.
[35:25] So a lot of kids didn't
get vaccinated.
[35:28] Then again,
it wasn't all bad.
[35:30] Some parents just vaccinated
their children for measles,
[35:33] mumps,
and rubella separately.
[35:35] Which, by the way,
was pretty expensive.
[35:37] [JOURNALIST] But they don't want
their child to have MMR.
[35:40] They'd rather pay
for single vaccines
[35:42] at £60 a shot.
[35:44] [HBOMB] 60 quid?
[35:45] By jolly, gov'na!
[35:47] Imagine millions
of parents wanting
[35:49] an expensive alternative vaccine
because all of a sudden
[35:53] a study had come out saying
that the regular one
[35:56] might cause autism
and a prominent scientist
[35:58] was cautioning against it!
[36:00] [JOURNALIST] He'd urged
the government
[36:01] to split MMR
into separate vaccines.
[36:04] [ANDREW] Giving the measles
on its own reduces
[36:06] the risk of this particular
syndrome developing.
[36:09] [HBOMB] Why, whoever
was producing and selling
[36:12] the alternative vaccine would
be in for a fucking gold mine,
[36:15] wouldn't they?
[36:16] They'd make an absolute fortune!
[36:19] Here's the funny thing
about that.
[36:21] Part four: Andrew Wakefield
is a Lying Conman
[36:25] who wanted your mone--oh, sorry.
[36:26] That puts me at risk
of libel, doesn't it?
[36:28] Hold on.
Let's revise that.
[36:29] [keyboard clacking]
[36:30] Part 4: In My Opinion,
[36:32] Andrew Wakefield
is a Lying Conman
[36:34] Who Wanted Your Money.
[36:36] So we have Wakefield's paper
and the implication that MMR
[36:40] might cause autism in there,
[36:41] and you have Wakefield saying,
[36:43] "Hey, get separate vaccines."
[36:44] You and I can both agree that
there might be a conflict
[36:48] of interest there if--
if Wakefield was selling
[36:52] an alternative vaccine, right?
[36:53] We can all agree that would
be fucked up, wouldn't it?
[37:00] Here's Wakefield's patent on
an alternative measles vaccine.
[37:03] This little piece of shit
was filed six months before
[37:07] the study was released,
so, uh,
[37:09] what's going on there, Andy?
[37:11] Something you want to tell us,
buddy?
[37:15] [booming]
[37:16] It's time to introduce
[37:17] someone new to the story.
[37:18] Brian Deer is an award-winning
investigative reporter
[37:21] with a long history of exposing
medical fraud,
[37:24] specializing in
the pharmaceutical industry,
[37:26] and the perfect sort
of person for the middle
[37:27] of this health scare.
[37:29] Deer was one
of the few journalists
[37:30] who didn't simply accept
what Wakefield was saying
[37:33] at face value and thought
to dig a little deeper
[37:36] into the study and what he
was really up to.
[37:38] Deer called the hospital
Wakefield worked at
[37:40] with some basic questions,
[37:42] the kind that Wakefield
[37:43] apparently wasn't used
to getting.
[37:45] Within three hours of doing so,
[37:47] Wakefield's publicist--you know,
[37:49] doctors hiring publicists
to promote them.
[37:51] That happens all the time--
[37:52] had made a complaint about Deer
to the newspaper he worked at.
[37:56] Deer, of course,
only grew more interested.
[37:58] His eventual 2004 documentary--
[38:00] "MMR: What They
Didn't Tell You--"
[38:02] is the better documentary
I mentioned before,
[38:04] and by better I mean blew
the doors off
[38:07] of Andrew Wakefield's
whole scheme.
[38:08] It was Deer who discovered
Wakefield's patent.
[38:11] Let's take a look
at that patent now.
[38:13] [NARRATOR] "The present
invention relates
[38:14] "to a new vaccine/immunization
for the prevention
[38:17] and/or prophylaxis against
measles virus infection."
[38:21] [HBOMB] Now, I'm not a big time
science-talking fancy guy,
[38:24] but this sounds a little bit
like a measles vaccine.
[38:27] The patent was submitted
in June, 1997
[38:30] so Wakefield had done most
of the study
[38:32] and then rushed to patent
a method of making
[38:34] a competing vaccine
he could sell later,
[38:36] and guess what?
[38:37] If you look closely
at the patent,
[38:39] you can see a familiar name
on there next to Wakefield's.
[38:42] Remember Hugh Fudenberg?
[38:44] The quack who thought he
could cure autism after having
[38:47] his medical license revoked?
[38:48] His name is also on the patent!
[38:51] He's credited as a co-inventor
of this vaccine!
[38:54] Fudenberg's company--
the very real
[38:57] and legitimate-sounding
[38:58] Neuro Immuno Therapeutics
Research Foundation--
[39:02] is listed on the patent along
with a business address.
[39:05] In the documentary where
he revealed the existence
[39:07] of this patent,
[39:08] Brian Deer went to that address
to try to find Fudenberg
[39:11] and discovered the company
had already shut down
[39:13] and the building had become
a real estate agency.
[39:15] Looking that address up now
it appears
[39:17] to be a hairdresser's.
[39:18] [BRIAN] Doesn't look like one
[39:19] of America's premiere
research foundations.
[39:21] [HBOMB] When he did find him,
[39:23] Deer asked Fudenberg about
the whole
[39:24] thought-he-could-cure-autism
thing
[39:26] and, well, I--
[laughs]
[39:50] [dramatic music]
[39:52] [HBOMB] Just
to quickly remind you,
[39:53] this man is the co-inventor
[39:54] of Wakefield's
alternative vaccine.
[39:57] You know what?
You got me.
[39:59] Vaccines might be dangerous!
[40:00] And just in case it wasn't
extremely obvious what
[40:03] a hasty fucking scam Wacky-field
and his one friend
[40:08] who agreed with him
were putting together,
[40:10] F--Fudenberg's name
is spelled wrong on the patent!
[40:14] The other inventor
of this vaccine
[40:16] besides Andrew "Jeremy"
Wakefield
[40:19] is one Hugh Fundenberg.
[40:24] Nice one, Jeremy.
[40:26] By 1999, Wakefield
was the director
[40:29] of several medical businesses.
[40:30] Immunospecifics Biotechnologies,
LTD,
[40:33] and Carmel Healthcare, LTD,
[40:35] named after his wife
at the time.
[40:36] She later divorced him.
[40:37] He started shopping
these companies around
[40:39] for investors based on the very
convenient patent he'd got
[40:42] right before the health scare
he caused.
[40:44] But in addition to the vaccine,
[40:46] Wakefield had another product
in mind.
[40:48] If Autistic Enterocolitis
turned out to be real--
[40:50] big if there,
I know--
[40:52] that would mean there would be
a completely new market
[40:54] in the form of testing
for this new disease.
[40:56] Wakefield planned on producing
and selling diagnostic kits
[41:00] meant to test
for Autistic Enterocolitis.
[41:02] A private
and confidential prospectus
[41:04] for potential investors acquired
by Brian Deer claimed:
[41:18] [HBOMB] Describing the target
audiences as:
[41:25] [HBOMB] These prospectuses
also calculated how much
[41:28] these businesses would be worth.
[41:39] [HBOMB] Adjusting for inflation,
[41:41] that upper estimate
is about $72 million.
[41:44] If you think that's bad,
years earlier,
[41:46] he estimated
a much larger number
[41:48] to the for-profit branch
[41:49] of the Royal Free
Medical School.
[41:50] £72.5 million per year--
[41:54] almost $200 million
in today's money.
[41:57] In an inventor school investor
meeting document
[41:59] that Deer obtained,
[42:01] Wakefield teased they
could charge premium prices
[42:03] for the technology he intended
to develop.
[42:05] Wakefield also became director
of a third business,
[42:08] Unigenetics, LTD.,
in the Irish Republic.
[42:11] Wakefield applied for
[42:12] and was successfully
given £800,000--
[42:15] more than $2 million today--
in government funding
[42:18] to begin developing the test,
[42:20] and this is all on top
of how much money
[42:22] Wakefield would get
if he managed to get
[42:24] the funding to manufacture
his alternative vaccine.
[42:26] Companies like Axcan Pharma
in Canada were paying
[42:29] to fly him out
to discuss his business plans.
[42:32] According to Brian Deer,
[42:33] he was also negotiating
a consultancy
[42:35] with Johnson & Johnson
and developing connections
[42:37] with both Merck
and SmithKline Beecham.
[42:40] This guy was sure he was gonna
be rolling in money.
[42:43] I wonder if this might point
to a financial incentive
[42:46] to discredit MMR.
[42:48] [inhales deeply]
[42:49] Hmm…
[42:52] [screams]
[42:53] Watching Wakefield
repeatedly push
[42:55] for getting alternative vaccines
"just in case"
[42:58] is really chilling to watch now.
[43:00] You have to watch him sit there
and create demand
[43:03] for his planned future products,
[43:05] and no one watching knows
what he's up to.
[43:07] They think he's a doctor just
asking questions about MMR.
[43:11] No wonder he wasn't
anti-vaccine.
[43:13] He wanted you to buy his!
[43:14] That said,
there were a few roadblocks
[43:16] to the success
of these businesses.
[43:18] The first is that Autistic
Enterocolitis
[43:20] is a fake disease
he just made up,
[43:22] which means it's very hard
to invent a test for it.
[43:25] [booming]
[43:26] In Ireland at Unigenetics,
[43:27] Wakefield brought in
a colleague, John O'Leary,
[43:29] to try to get the testing kits
to work.
[43:31] O'Leary claimed his test could
find measles virus
[43:34] in the bowels
of autistic children.
[43:36] [JOURNALIST] He'd found
measles virus in most
[43:38] of the samples he'd tested
from children with autism
[43:41] and bowel disease.
[43:42] [HBOMB] This is the closest
Wakefield or any
[43:44] of his cohorts would ever come
[43:46] to proving Autistic
Enterocolitis exists,
[43:48] but this quickly fell apart.
[43:50] Every other lab that tried
to recreated his results found
[43:53] the same thing.
[43:54] The only way his equipment
[43:55] could get the results he
was getting
[43:57] is if there was contamination
or if his machine
[43:59] had been calibrated wrong.
[44:01] It turned out later it was both!
[44:02] Test tubes that didn't
have measles in them
[44:05] tested positive for measles.
[44:07] O'Leary had an 11.1% stake
in Immunospecifics,
[44:10] the company which would
be selling the kits
[44:12] which would have made him
incredibly rich
[44:14] if the test
had eventually worked,
[44:15] but strangely he stopped
being able to get these results
[44:18] once people started scrutinizing
his work,
[44:20] so that's £800,000
[44:22] of tax payer money down
the drain.
[44:27] The second problem
was that potential investors
[44:29] who looked into this alternative
vaccine even slightly
[44:32] would notice that the guy
who co-invented it
[44:34] was a doctor who
had just been fired
[44:36] and thought he could cure autism
using his fucking bone marrow!
[44:39] So I guess what I'm saying
is there was a slight delay
[44:42] in finding people willing
to fund it.
[44:44] Finally as Wakefield tried
to launch his businesses,
[44:47] there was a critical shake-up
at the hospital he
[44:49] was working at.
[44:50] While many
of the Royal Free Hospitals
[44:52] higher-ups were fans
of Wakefield's
[44:53] controversial paper
and the attention it brought
[44:56] to the hospital
and medical school,
[44:57] and some of them
were even involved directly
[44:59] with his new businesses,
in late 1999,
[45:02] the school got a new head
of medicine named Mark Pepys.
[45:06] Pepys was a specialist
in fields close
[45:08] to what Wakefield
was speculating about
[45:09] in his papers,
[45:10] and like most scientists
who knew anything
[45:12] about the subject,
could tell something was up.
[45:15] Wakefield was sent a letter
voicing concerns about
[45:17] the scientifically
unjustified basis of the work
[45:20] the companies were doing along
with the incredibly obvious
[45:23] conflicts of interest
happening here.
[45:25] You know, you kinda have
a vested interest
[45:27] in proving a link
between vaccines,
[45:28] bowel disorders,
and autism,
[45:30] when you intend to make millions
of pounds off it.
[45:32] Even then, they volunteered
to support Wakefield more
[45:35] but not in the way he wanted.
[45:37] Remember that thing I said
about pilot studies?
[45:39] I'm sure you do.
You have a good memory.
[45:40] I really respect that about you.
[45:42] They offered
to continue employing him
[45:43] but only if he undertook a new,
much bigger study
[45:47] to actually explore the original
study's findings properly.
[45:50] He was offered help with a study
on 150 patients
[45:53] to confirm what he had only
really speculated about so far
[45:56] with a study of 12.
[46:15] [HBOMB scoffs]
[46:16] "Autistic Enterocolitis"
is in quotes.
[46:19] They don't believe him.
It's great.
[46:20] This would be any
legitimate scientist's dream.
[46:23] The freedom and support
to fully explore
[46:26] a hypothesis and discover
the truth.
[46:28] Wakefield agreed to perform
the study
[46:31] but then he never actually
did it.
[46:32] Pepys would later go on
to say Wakefield was "a wanker
[46:36] and a fraud."
[46:37] Eventually in 2001,
[46:39] after repeatedly ignoring calls
to do the study he'd agreed
[46:42] to do,
he was told to leave.
[46:44] Check out this article
all about--
[46:46] oh, I love journalism!
[46:47] [JOURNALIST] Last November,
[46:48] Andrew Wakefield left
the Royal Free Hospital
[46:51] by mutual agreement.
[46:52] [HBOMB] Capitalizing on
his perceived reputation
[46:55] with the public as a man
who had discovered
[46:57] a link between vaccines
and autism, Wakefield said:
[47:03] [HBOMB] This was meant
to sound conspiratorial like,
[47:06] "They let me go because
I'm making MMR look bad,"
[47:08] but it seems like he
was just unpopular with people
[47:10] because they could tell
he was a fraud, and a wanker.
[47:13] At this point,
[47:14] Wakefield's career as far
as real medicine
[47:16] was concerned was over
[47:18] and his businesses failed
to get off the ground
[47:20] because he no longer had
any legitimacy left.
[47:22] What pharmaceutical company
or other investor
[47:24] is gonna give money to a doctor
who just got fired
[47:27] for refusing to prove
the thing he's trying
[47:29] to get funding for even exists?
[47:32] In 2003, Deer's investigation
was in full swing
[47:35] and beginning to uncover all
of this.
[47:36] He also made a really
interesting discovery
[47:38] about something
that took place during
[47:40] the original study.
[47:41] You know that whole Autistic
Enterocolitis thing?
[47:44] Both his theories
about MMR's danger
[47:46] and his new businesses
making testing kits
[47:48] for the disease rested
on being able
[47:50] to find the measles virus
in the intestines
[47:52] of children with autism.
[47:53] [ANDREW] The question
we've been asking,
[47:54] is measles virus present
[47:57] in the intestine
of these children?
[47:59] The BBC documentary covered
this search extensively
[48:03] with Wakefield saying
in an interview
[48:04] that proving it was there would
require finding the RNA
[48:07] of the virus in tissue samples.
[48:09] [ANDREW] The gold standard now
is to find the gene
[48:12] of the virus in there.
[48:13] [HBOMB] The big deal here
is if Wakefield can't find
[48:16] the gene of the virus
then his theory is wrong.
[48:18] In these interviews,
[48:19] Wakefield is trying to imply
that they've only
[48:21] just started looking
for the virus
[48:23] so they haven't found it yet
but that's okay.
[48:25] They've only
just started looking, right?
[48:27] This turned out
to be a lie.
[48:29] Deer discovered that Wakefield
had already looked for it
[48:32] and it's not there!
[48:34] Dr. Nick Chadwick worked
on Wakefield's paper
[48:36] and was a specialist on methods
of finding measles RNA
[48:40] in tissue samples.
[48:41] Wakefield actually helped
co-author some of his work,
[48:44] so of course Wakefield
had Chadwick look
[48:46] for measles RNA in
the tissue samples taken
[48:49] from the children in the study.
[48:50] These were the children
Wakefield was sure
[48:52] must have measles somewhere
in their guts since he
[48:55] was blaming their autism on it.
[48:56] However,
when he looked,
[48:58] he never found
any measles whatsoever.
[49:10] [HBOMB] This means
that Wakefield already knew
[49:13] before he even published
the paper that measles couldn't
[49:16] be found in the guts
of autistic children.
[49:18] [Brian] Dr. Wakefield's
theory was that it
[49:20] was measles virus itself
that was responsible
[49:22] for a bowel disease
and then leading on
[49:24] to some kinds of autism
and you found no measles virus?
[49:28] [NICK] That's correct.
[49:29] [HBOMB] The final
published version
[49:30] of the 1998 study doesn't have
Dr. Chadwick's name on it
[49:33] even though he did a lot
of work for it.
[49:35] Chadwick later wrote in
a signed declaration
[49:37] that he specifically asked
for his name to be left off
[49:40] the paper because
he wasn't comfortable
[49:42] with how Wakefield
was still pushing his theory
[49:44] even though he'd found zero
positive tests for measles.
[49:47] By this point he
was already planning
[49:49] to launch a business
selling testing kits
[49:52] based on this theory,
[49:53] so he ignored the work
in his own lab
[49:55] that disproved him
and kept saying
[49:57] he thought measles could cause
a bowel disease
[49:59] that leads to autism
and kept looking there
[50:01] for measles
for years afterwards.
[50:03] The BBC documentary is about
his hunt for the measles virus
[50:07] because even four years
after launching his paper,
[50:10] he still hadn't found anything
else to back up what
[50:12] he was saying.
[50:13] I actually have to
give some credit now
[50:14] to this BBC documentary.
[50:16] Even though they mostly side
with Wakefield
[50:17] and assume he's going
to find the proof soon,
[50:20] there is one segment where
the interviewer's like,
[50:22] "Wait a second!"
[50:23] [INTERVIEWER] Shouldn't you
[50:24] have proved it
before you said it?
[50:26] [ANDREW] As I say,
proof may be 10, 15 years away
[50:30] in terms of definitive
scientific proof.
[50:32] [INTERVIEWER] So shouldn't you
have waited?
[50:33] [ANDREW] No.
[50:34] [HBOMB] Obviously after
discovering all this,
[50:36] Brian Deer had even
more questions for Wakefield,
[50:39] which Wakefield was continuing
to avoid.
[50:41] [BRIAN] I've been trying now
to speak with him for a year.
[50:44] We even wrote
but he didn't reply.
[50:47] [HBOMB] Deer eventually
just went
[50:49] to an autism conference
Wakefield was speaking at.
[50:51] After his presentation,
[50:52] Deer approached him
with questions.
[51:02] [HBOMB] There's something kind
of cathartic about just
[51:04] how guilty Wakefield acts here.
[51:06] Like, he's happily
hanging around after his talk
[51:09] casually answering questions
from concerned parents
[51:12] and other reporters
and then the instant
[51:14] he recognizes Brian Deer--
[51:16] the guy he's been
actively avoiding
[51:18] for over a year--he turns
and leaves the room
[51:20] as fast as he can.
[51:22] Wakefield's only defense against
his clear financial incentive
[51:25] to discredit MMR is to run away
and hope you leave him alone,
[51:29] and since Deer clearly
wasn't doing that,
[51:32] Wakefield decided to escalate.
[51:33] A few months after this footage
of him heroically
[51:36] running away like a baby
[51:38] from basic inquiry
was broadcast,
[51:39] wacky Andy filed
a defamation lawsuit
[51:42] against Channel 4,
who produced the documentary,
[51:44] "The Sunday Times" who published
some of Deer's reporting,
[51:46] and additionally
he sued Brian Deer's
[51:49] personal web site,
briandeer.com.
[51:53] Can you imagine being
that petty?
[51:55] In 2004, ten of
the paper's original 13 authors
[51:59] came forward to publicly retract
the interpretation section
[52:02] of the paper.
[52:04] Half a decade after
its publication,
[52:05] a vast majority of the people
who worked with Wakefield
[52:09] on his paper have gone on record
to say they think
[52:12] his conclusions are bollocks.
[52:13] At this point Wakefield's
study's coffin
[52:16] has fallen through the floor
from the sheer weight
[52:19] of all the nails that
have been hammered in it.
[52:21] So that's the foundational study
of the anti-vaccine movement:
[52:26] a hack fraud's bullshit paper
claiming that a handful
[52:30] of parents knew better
than all doctors
[52:32] so he could sell an alternative
competing vaccine
[52:36] that he patented,
[52:37] w--which he thought he
was gonna make millions selling!
[52:42] The evidence against
the movement can't get
[52:45] much worse than that,
can it?
[52:49] That was a joke!
[52:50] Part Five:
It Gets Much Worse.
[52:52] Brian Deer didn't stop there.
[52:54] Wakefield was trying
to sue him to get him
[52:56] to stop digging,
and guess what?
[52:58] One of the first rules
of investigative reporting
[53:00] is that if they try and sue you
for finding things out,
[53:03] you're probably onto something.
[53:04] [BRIAN] I mean, he brought me
into the story via virtue
[53:07] of the fact that years ago
he sued me.
[53:09] [HBOMB] He discovered
that two years before
[53:11] the paper was published,
[53:12] Wakefield had been hired
by a lawyer
[53:15] to conduct the study.
[53:16] The lawyer,
Richard Barr,
[53:18] had realized there
was potentially millions
[53:20] and millions of pounds
in bringing
[53:22] a class action lawsuit
against MMR manufacturers
[53:25] on behalf of parents
of autistic children,
[53:27] but since there
was no actual evidence
[53:29] the vaccine did this,
[53:30] he paid Wakefield to find some.
[53:32] Wakefield charged Barr £150
an hour for the time
[53:36] he spent working on the study,
[53:38] eventually totaling
over £435,000.
[53:42] In today's money that's more
than $1.1 million.
[53:45] This was more than eight times
his yearly salary
[53:48] at his job at the hospital.
[53:50] Six months before "The Lancet"
published the study,
[53:52] Barr sent Wakefield
a letter saying--and I quote--
[53:55] actually, I got Shaun to say it.
[54:05] [HBOMB] Oh, okay.
[54:07] This whole thing was bullshit,
wasn't it?
[54:09] And hey, remember JABS?
[54:10] JABS was involved
with the lawsuit
[54:12] and it turned out
their members helped
[54:14] to recruit many of the parents
to the study in the first place.
[54:17] I swear to God,
[54:19] this isn't one of the joke logos
we made.
[54:20] This is actually the header
on their Facebook page,
[54:22] this low resolution
shitty nightmare.
[54:25] Jackie Fletcher,
the founder of JABS,
[54:27] was also a litigant
in the lawsuit.
[54:29] They needed her connections
to the dozen or so other parents
[54:32] who actually blamed MMR
to be able to do all of this.
[54:35] Some of the parents
were even involved
[54:37] with the lawsuit, too.
[54:38] It's kind of clever,
if you think about it.
[54:40] A couple of parents
blamed vaccines
[54:41] for their child's autism
and wanted
[54:42] to sue its manufacturer,
[54:44] but there was no evidence
it wasn't just a coincidence,
[54:46] so they told their opinions
[54:48] to a doctor their lawyer
had hired who would then report
[54:51] those opinions in a paper,
and now in court,
[54:54] you can say there's
scientific evidence implying
[54:56] a link between vaccines
and autism,
[54:58] even though the link is just
those opinions from before.
[55:01] There's probably a word
for this trick.
[55:03] Idea laundering?
I dunno.
[55:05] Not all of the parents knew
the study was being done
[55:07] to help a lawsuit,
[55:08] but they were all
chosen deliberately.
[55:10] However,
like we explored earlier,
[55:12] not many parents in 1996 blamed
vaccines for autism,
[55:16] so they had to cast a wide net
to even find the couple
[55:18] of parents they did.
[55:20] Child 11 wasn't even
from England.
[55:22] He was from California.
[55:23] If a contact of JABS
or Richard Barr thought
[55:26] you might suspect vaccines
made your child autistic,
[55:30] you and your child were
being flown around the world
[55:32] to take part in this study,
and even then,
[55:35] some of the parents still turned
out not to blame the vaccine.
[55:38] I cannot stress enough what
[55:40] a fucking shambles
this paper was.
[55:42] Most of the other doctors
working on the study
[55:44] had no idea the guy running it
had been paid hundreds
[55:47] of thousands of pounds
to discredit MMR.
[55:49] According to Chadwick's
later testimony,
[55:51] Wakefield worked separately
with each individual scientist
[55:54] working on the study instead
of bringing them all together
[55:57] which would have been
the normal thing to do.
[55:59] This afforded Wakefield
a good level of secrecy
[56:01] about his motives.
[56:02] The other scientists must
[56:03] have largely thought
[56:04] they really were looking into
[56:05] a connection between autism
[56:07] and bowel disorders in children.
[56:08] So even the doctors
and scientists involved
[56:11] were being lied to
and tricked into lending
[56:14] their time and effort
to a study being done
[56:16] to help a lawsuit make
some lawyers a lot of money.
[56:19] Once all of this came out,
[56:21] Wakefield was,
medically-speaking, fucked.
[56:24] While he'd been asked to leave
his post years earlier,
[56:26] he still had a license
to practice medicine in the UK,
[56:29] but amidst all
of these discoveries,
[56:31] the General Medical
Council began
[56:33] a fitness to practice hearing
against Wakefield,
[56:36] going through the records
of the study to evaluate whether
[56:38] his behavior had been ethical.
[56:40] [JOURNALIST] The row he started
dominated the headlines.
[56:42] Now his conduct--not his views--
will be making the news.
[56:46] [HBOMB] This hearing would go on
to last for 217 days
[56:50] making it the longest in General
Medical Council history
[56:52] and longer than the
O.J. Simpson trial.
[56:55] This is Wakefield's only
legitimate achievement.
[56:57] He made such a fucking mess,
[56:59] it took that long
to pick through it all.
[57:01] Meanwhile, remember when
Wakefield sued Brian Deer?
[57:04] This would turn out to be
the worst mistake he ever made
[57:07] in his life.
[gavel clacks]
[57:08] Because Wakefield's libel case
was related to accusations
[57:11] of what he did during his study,
[57:13] that meant that the records
of what happened in the study
[57:16] were evidence in the case now.
[57:18] I mean, how else were they
gonna prove it was libel or not?
[57:21] The judge agreed that Deer had
to be granted access
[57:23] to the confidential un-redacted
medical records
[57:26] of the children from the study.
[57:28] By trying to sue a journalist
into shutting up,
[57:30] Wakefield had accidentally
given him permission
[57:33] to see everything.
[57:35] Deer recalls being sat in a room
with his lawyer reading
[57:38] the medical records
of the children
[57:39] and other records
of what happened in the study
[57:41] while Wakefield's legal team
were rushing to get a cab
[57:44] to take them to the courthouse
so they could drop the suit
[57:47] and stop him reading it
as fast as they could.
[57:49] [engine revs,
booming]
[57:50] Deer got home that night
[57:51] to a call from his lawyer
[57:53] saying the case--
[Windows update chimes]
[57:54] New firmware available?
Thanks, Windows.
[57:56] Deer got home that night
to a call from his lawyer
[57:58] telling him the case was over,
and as a fun bonus,
[58:01] because of how lawsuits work
in the UK,
[58:03] Wakefield had
to pay Deer's legal costs,
[58:05] the check for which Deer keeps
proudly displayed
[58:07] on his website,
but Deer wasn't done yet.
[58:10] Wakefield had just dropped
a lawsuit
[58:12] to stop him finding things out.
[58:14] [BRIAN] But in the context
of that lawsuit,
[58:16] a great deal of information
was disclosed to me
[58:19] by Wakefield's lawyers
and it was quite clear
[58:20] I had to continue.
[58:22] [HBOMB] Deer continued
his research
[58:23] and also attended many
of the GMC's hearings about
[58:25] Wakefield's conduct
which discussed many
[58:28] of the same records
he just dropped
[58:30] a lawsuit to hide,
and based on all of this,
[58:32] he put the pieces together
and figured out exactly
[58:35] what happened during the study.
[58:36] The result of his work
[58:37] is an absolutely
incredible series
[58:39] of articles first published in
the British Medical Journal.
[58:42] [Windows update chimes]
[58:43] There's another
fucking firmware--
[58:45] why is there so much firmware?
[58:46] Deer figured out who some
[58:48] of the previously-anonymous
parents of the children
[58:50] in the study were
and showed some of them what
[58:52] the study said about
their children
[58:54] and it turned out
the paper was lying.
[58:56] For example,
he showed the medical records
[58:58] to the father of child 11.
[59:00] [BRIAN] And he looked
at the paper
[59:01] and he just looked
at what it said about
[59:03] his own child and he said,
"That's not true."
[59:07] And that was, uh,
one of the parents of one
[59:10] of these children in the paper.
[59:11] [HBOMB] In a correspondence
with Deer,
[59:13] he literally wrote:
[59:47] [HBOMB] He told Deer Wakefield
had said his son
[59:49] was the 13th child
they'd looked at
[59:51] and wasn't included
in the paper,
[59:53] and that's why none
of the information
[59:54] in the study seemed
to describe his son.
[59:56] According to Brian Deer,
[59:58] Wakefield had rewritten
his son's medical history
[60:01] and lied to him
to cover it up,
[60:03] and this wasn't the only parent
[60:04] who had their story changed
by Wakefield.
[60:06] You see, for the study
to be useful in Barr's lawsuit,
[60:09] they needed to establish
a "temporal link"
[60:12] with the vaccine.
[60:13] Since this is the age autism
usually develops,
[60:15] they needed it
to be within 14 days,
[60:17] and if possible,
even closer.
[60:19] I mean, otherwise it might seem
like it was just a coincidence,
[60:23] which it is,
but like child 11,
[60:25] the onset of autism
wasn't convenient enough
[60:27] in almost any
of the other children.
[60:29] The table suggests that eight
of the 12 children's parents
[60:32] claimed the symptoms happened
within 14 days
[60:35] but according
to Brian Deer's reporting
[60:36] from the Medical Council
hearings,
[60:38] many of the parents
never said this,
[60:40] and most of the children's
medical records put
[60:42] their symptoms starting
way after this time period
[60:45] with some
of them showing symptoms
[60:46] of what could have been autism
before they were vaccinated.
[60:50] Almost every child's autistic
symptoms either started
[60:53] way too late to be useful
in the lawsuit
[60:55] or way too soon.
[60:57] Wakefield just lied and changed
the times and allegations
[61:00] of the parents around until
the paper said what
[61:03] he needed it to say.
[61:04] This is the thing that makes
so much of what he said
[61:07] during the scare really
fucking infuriating.
[61:09] Like, he would constantly bring
up how he was just listening
[61:11] to the parents and reporting
what they were saying.
[61:14] [ANDREW] We believe--we trust
in the parents' story.
[61:18] [HBOMB] If you think there
was a problem
[61:20] with my shitty study,
[61:21] you're calling all
of those parents liars.
[61:23] How dare you?
[61:24] [ANDREW] When they say to you,
[61:26] "I believe my child regressed
after the MMR vaccine,"
[61:28] do you take that seriously
or not?
[61:30] Damn right, you do.
Damn right, you do.
[61:32] [HBOMB] He got all high
and mighty about how
[61:34] you need to believe the parents
when he had made up most
[61:37] of what the parents had said,
[61:39] and the media fucking ate
it up, too.
[61:41] [JOURNALIST] Andrew Wakefield
is one of the few doctors
[61:43] to listen to parents who believe
their children
[61:46] were damaged by MMR.
[61:47] [HBOMB] He's the only doctor
who listens to the lies
[61:50] that he wrote for a lawsuit
he was being paid to help with.
[61:55] Fucking hell!
[61:56] Remember that new syndrome
Wakefield came up with?
[61:59] Now we know why he did that.
[62:01] To pursue
a class action lawsuit against
[62:03] the vaccine's manufacturers
and convince the court
[62:05] of the vaccine's danger,
to quote a judge,
[62:08] "Barr needed it to cause
a distinct and specific
[62:11] clinical syndrome."
[62:12] If all the kids just
had random bowel disorders,
[62:15] there wouldn't be a clear
enough link to the vaccine,
[62:17] but if they all had
a fancy new disease
[62:20] he could argue they
were all caused
[62:21] by the same thing.
[62:23] Wakefield invented
Autistic Enterocolitis
[62:25] which he repeatedly called
a genuinely new syndrome
[62:28] in the media so the lawsuit
could justify itself.
[62:31] Of course,
to do this,
[62:32] all the children's
bowel disorders
[62:34] would have to actually
look similar enough
[62:36] that they could reasonably
be called the same thing.
[62:38] The paper listed 11
of the 12 children
[62:40] having some form
of non-specific colitis creating
[62:43] the illusion that they all had
a similar disorder.
[62:45] According to
the actual medical records,
[62:48] only three of them had any major
inflammation whatsoever.
[62:51] The study had a pathologist
on board to determine what sort
[62:54] of bowel diseases
the children had.
[62:55] When she and her team
ruled out colitis
[62:58] in over half of the children,
[62:59] which would obviously have
been bad for the lawsuit,
[63:01] Wakefield brought in
a second pathologist
[63:03] who had worked with him before
to run the tests again.
[63:06] When the second pathologist
didn't even make mention
[63:08] of colitis in his reports,
[63:10] Wakefield ignored both
of them
[63:11] and just wrote in the paper
that 11 of the 12 children
[63:14] had similar
non-specific colitis.
[63:16] Wakefield went over the heads
of everyone on his team
[63:19] who didn't find any colitis
and decided by himself
[63:22] that all the children had
a special new gut disorder
[63:25] that causes autism!
[63:28] What the fu--
[63:29] [echoing]
But that's not all!
[63:30] You know how most
of the children
[63:32] in the study were diagnosed
with a form of autism
[63:34] and how, like,
that's the entire point,
[63:36] that most of them had autism?
[63:38] Like, that's the whole thing?
[inhales sharply]
[63:40] Well, it turns out that some
of the children reported
[63:43] as autistic in the study
didn't even have autism!
[63:47] [DEATH STAR GUY] Standing by.
[63:49] [booming]
[63:50] [HBOMB] Child seven
was never diagnosed
[63:53] with autism before, during,
or after this study.
[63:56] He was referred to the study
because child six--
[63:59] his brother--was diagnosed
with autism.
[64:02] Wakefield reported that
this child was also autistic
[64:05] and started showing signs
of autism 24 hours
[64:08] after being vaccinated!
[64:09] I mean, why not if you're
just making shit up, right?
[64:12] Child 12 had also never
been given an autism diagnosis.
[64:16] The developmental specialist who
diagnosed them said they had:
[64:21] But did not diagnose them
with autism.
[64:23] Wakefield, who,
just to remind you,
[64:25] is a gut surgeon with no
[64:27] psychiatric expertise
whatsoever,
[64:29] decided this was enough for him
to say they were autistic,
[64:32] and since their parents
didn't blame the vaccine,
[64:34] he said:
[64:39] And made sure to mention
the child had MMR at 15 months
[64:43] just so you know it started
soon after the vaccine
[64:46] even though the parents
didn't blame it.
[64:48] Oh, and while he was there,
[64:49] he diagnosed them with chronic
non-specific colitis, too.
[64:52] You can see why Wakefield
dropped his lawsuit
[64:54] as fast as he could when Deer
got permission
[64:56] to read these, right?
[64:58] This is likely why he never
did the larger study
[65:00] when he was asked to.
[65:01] Once this fraudulent paper
was out,
[65:03] all the extra attention
and scrutiny he gained
[65:06] would have made it impossible
to lie
[65:07] and get away with it again.
[65:08] To this day,
[65:09] no attempt to recreate
[65:11] Wakefield's findings
has ever succeeded.
[65:13] The paper that started
the obsession
[65:15] with the connection
between autism and vaccines
[65:17] was a total fraud,
[65:18] crafted by a lawyer
and the opportunistic doctor
[65:21] who he bought,
and in the last 20 years,
[65:23] data from millions
and millions of children
[65:26] all over the world indicates
no link whatsoever.
[65:29] The only paper that came close
to showing that link
[65:32] is a study so full of lies
that even before it was out,
[65:35] scientists who worked
on it were asking
[65:38] to have their names taken off.
[65:39] The paper wasn't
just badly made.
[65:41] It wasn't just questionable.
[65:43] It wasn't bold
and controversial.
[65:45] It was a lie for money,
[65:47] but the worst thing about
this study was that somehow
[65:51] even that wasn't
the worst thing.
[65:55] [haunting wind blowing]
[66:03] Hey, folks,
the next section deals
[66:05] with some pretty heavy stuff
so if you're not into stories
[66:08] of child abuse, uh,
skip to the next chapter.
[66:13] As we've already explored,
[66:15] Wakefield was trying to discover
a new disease linking autism
[66:18] and bowel disorders,
so during the study,
[66:20] he did everything he could
to find that link.
[66:23] For this reason, each child
underwent a rough battery
[66:26] of invasive procedures.
[66:28] The children spent a full week
at the hospital,
[66:30] during which they
were frequently sedated,
[66:32] given laxatives,
had blood samples taken,
[66:35] and then they
were given colonoscopies,
[66:36] lumbar punctures where a needle
is inserted between the bones
[66:39] of your spine to extract fluid,
[66:41] MRI scans--again,
under sedation--
[66:43] electroencephalograms
where wires and electrodes
[66:46] are run to the patient's head,
[66:47] and a variety of other
uncomfortable procedures.
[66:49] A doctor once described
this list of tests
[66:52] as a lot even for adults
to go through,
[66:54] never mind autistic children.
[66:56] Now, there's this thing
in medicine
[66:58] called informed consent.
[67:00] Doctors can't just do
invasive procedures on people.
[67:03] You have to inform the patient
of the potential risks
[67:05] and dangers and you
can only move forward
[67:07] with their approval.
[67:08] In this study,
the children were very young,
[67:10] and some of them--
emphasis on some--were autistic.
[67:13] This meant
the children's parents had
[67:15] to give informed consent
for them.
[67:17] Andrew Wakefield wrote
a handout to parents
[67:19] to go with
the consent form describing
[67:21] the procedures
and their potential risks.
[67:23] CIRCARE, a human rights
organization,
[67:25] acquired a copy of this handout,
[67:27] and while the form does mention
almost every procedure
[67:30] Wakefield intended to do,
[67:32] it doesn't mention any
[67:33] of the risks associated
with them.
[67:35] I'm serious.
[67:37] The word "risk" is literally
not written anywhere
[67:41] on the form.
[67:42] So let's talk about the risks
[67:44] of some of these procedures.
[67:45] For those of you who don't know,
[67:46] a colonoscopy is when
a large tube with a camera in it
[67:49] is inserted through your rectum
all the way up into your guts.
[67:53] Normally, this is an important
and safe diagnostic procedure.
[67:56] It's the most accurate test
for rectal and colon cancer
[67:59] and this saves a lot of lives.
[68:01] Sorry, I'm gonna take a moment
and turn this video into
[68:03] a public service announcement
for colonoscopies.
[68:05] Um, get one.
[68:07] I'm being serious.
[68:09] If you're an adult,
especially over the age of 45,
[68:11] and you've never had
a colonoscopy,
[68:13] please seriously consider
getting one.
[68:15] I've lost an uncle
and a close friend
[68:17] to bowel cancer
at shockingly young ages.
[68:20] It's a really common cause
of death,
[68:22] and if they catch it early,
it's treatable.
[68:24] Colonoscopies are perfectly safe
[68:26] and often
life-saving procedures,
[68:28] but in children whose intestines
are smaller and weaker
[68:30] and harder to maneuver in,
[68:32] there are risks
of serious complications.
[68:34] The scope can puncture
the intestine
[68:36] which causes bacteria
from the gut to leak out
[68:38] and cause infection
[68:39] and other serious
internal damage.
[68:41] Risks of complications
are significantly higher
[68:44] for children five years
or younger.
[68:46] [DOCTOR] We try
to be very careful
[68:47] to come around corners.
[68:49] [HBOMB] And these risks
are genuine.
[68:51] As part of the attempts
to find more evidence later
[68:53] and follow up on the original
1998 study,
[68:56] a five-year-old autistic boy
was given a colonoscopy
[68:59] that went exceedingly wrong
and was left fighting
[69:02] for his life
with multiple organ failure
[69:04] after his bowel was perforated
[69:06] in 12 places during
the procedure.
[69:08] There was no medical reason
[69:10] this child needed
this procedure.
[69:11] He was just being used
as a guinea pig
[69:14] to find any proof they could
[69:16] that Autistic Enterocolitis
was real.
[69:18] The Royal Free had
to pay almost £500,000--
[69:21] roughly $1 million today--
in damages to the boy
[69:24] and his parents for causing
lifelong disabilities
[69:27] that required full-time care.
[69:28] His parents reported that when
they gave consent,
[69:31] they had not been told
of the risks.
[69:33] If this is true,
[69:35] what happened here
is an assault.
[69:36] They almost killed this child,
and in the 1998 study,
[69:40] they inflicted this procedure
on children as young as three.
[69:44] Wakefield's consent form insists
that these procedures
[69:48] are usually tolerated well
by children
[69:50] and that it
is entirely painless.
[69:52] It gives zero mention
of the very real risks
[69:55] of inserting several feet
of a scope into a child.
[69:59] It even says, "If your child
becomes distressed
[70:02] "or the procedure proves
too difficult,
[70:04] it will be performed
under general anesthetic."
[70:07] The form doesn't mention
the risks
[70:09] of this anesthetic, either.
[70:10] This normal consent form
for a colonoscopy
[70:13] makes incredibly clear
that there are risks
[70:15] of perforation and bleeding
[70:17] and the possible
adverse reactions
[70:18] to being sedated, too.
[70:20] In case you're watching, Andy,
[70:21] this is what informed consent
looks like, you piece of shi--
[70:24] Wakefield needed these parents
to consent to these procedures.
[70:28] His paycheck was resting
on finding something
[70:30] in the bowels of these children
that could possibly point
[70:33] to the disease he was trying
to invent,
[70:35] so he wrote a handout that
conveniently didn't mention
[70:38] how risky some of these
procedures actually were,
[70:41] and from other accounts given
to Deer about what happened
[70:43] during the study,
[70:45] the children's experiences
were far from safe and painless.
[70:47] [BRIAN] "Nurses were leaving
and saying they didn't like
[70:50] "what was being done
to these children.
[70:52] "Junior doctors were unhappy.
[70:54] "It needed three people
to hold these kids down
[70:56] "in some cases just
to have blood taken.
[70:59] "These are difficult children
to explain to what is going on.
[71:03] "I feel very sorry
for the children
[71:05] who I feel were being abused."
[71:08] [HBOMB] Children were fainting
and vomiting
[71:09] and trying to resist
the testing.
[71:11] They had to be force-fed some
[71:13] of the fluids required
for the tests.
[71:15] They couldn't give one child
their lumbar puncture
[71:17] because he
was uncontrollably vomiting
[71:20] from all the other procedures
that had been done on him
[71:21] and he was sent home.
[71:23] Another child's lumbar puncture
went so badly
[71:25] that he had to be rushed
[71:26] to a different hospital
for treatment
[71:29] If you do stuff like this
to kids in your study
[71:32] for no clinically
justified reason,
[71:34] that's child abuse!
[71:36] Wakefield treated the children
[71:38] as if they had genuine
bowel conditions.
[71:40] To that end,
[71:41] almost all of them were given
[71:42] anti-inflammatory drugs
for the disorders
[71:44] he'd made up for them.
[71:45] These medications often have
[71:46] an increased risk to children,
[71:48] particularly under
the age of six.
[71:50] The risks of adverse events
[71:51] includes life-threatening
complications
[71:53] including increased bleeding,
increased risk of infections,
[71:56] and other severe side effects.
[71:58] Some of these kids
had problems communicating,
[72:00] which would make reporting
any side effects they
[72:03] were experiencing
very difficult,
[72:04] further increasing the risk
of severe problems
[72:07] if something went wrong.
[72:08] Considering that barely any
of these children
[72:11] actually had bowel disorders,
[72:13] Wakefield was essentially
putting children
[72:15] at risk of the side effects
of these drugs for no reason
[72:18] while he looked for proof
of the disease he was trying
[72:21] to invent to make
a lawsuit look good.
[72:23] The Medical Council
also discovered
[72:25] that during the study,
[72:26] Wakefield gave
an experimental drug
[72:29] to one of the children
without waiting for approval
[72:32] from an ethics committee.
[72:33] The drug was called…
[72:37] [tape clicks]
Wait a second.
[72:40] [high pitched
high-speed playback]
[72:41] The paper is a pilot study
on the effects
[72:43] of a substance called
Dialysable Lymphocyte Extract
[72:46] on children with autism.
[tape clicks]
[72:48] Did Wakefield test one
[72:49] of Fudenbergs
autism-curing drugs
[72:51] on one of the children
in his study?
[72:54] What the fuck?
[72:55] Thanks, Andy.
[72:56] I'm sure whatever
you gave those kids
[72:57] was perfectly safe.
[72:59] I mean, if this genius
was behind it--
[73:00] [BRIAN] Where--where does that
come from?
[73:01] [FUDENBERG] My bone marrow.
[73:03] [HBOMB] To convince
the child's father
[73:04] to agree to let him administer
this drug to his child,
[73:08] Wakefield offered him a job
as managing director
[73:11] of a company making
and selling the drug.
[73:13] [tape clicks]
Um, okay.
[73:14] My producer told me
I can't say that.
[73:16] There's no way of proving
that happened
[73:18] behind closed doors,
so just to clarify,
[73:20] we don't have evidence
that Wakefield offered
[73:22] a man a job to give
his son a drug.
[73:24] It might just be a coincidence
that the father became
[73:27] managing director of a company
that would profit
[73:29] from selling the drug
if it worked.
[73:30] Maybe he just happened
to have equity
[73:33] in the company
that would be making
[73:34] the drug that was experimentally
given to his child.
[73:37] We will never know for sure how
that happened.
[73:40] [clears throat]
[tape clicks]
[73:41] Let's just walk
through that again.
[73:44] Andrew Wakefield might
have offered a cushy job
[73:48] to a guy to let him experiment
on his kid with a drug
[73:53] that he probably got from a guy
who got fired for stealing
[73:57] medical supplies,
wasn't a doctor anymore,
[74:00] and thought he could cure autism
using his bone marrow.
[74:06] The Aristocrats!
[chuckles]
[74:08] On top of all of this,
during the investigation,
[74:11] the Medical Council found out
that during one
[74:14] of his own children's
birthday parties,
[74:17] Andrew Jeremy Wakefield lined up
all the other kids at the party
[74:22] and offered them money
for their blood!
[74:25] I--I have to try
and explain this.
[74:28] In order to find any potentially
useful evidence
[74:31] for his study for the lawsuit,
[74:32] he needed the blood
of non-autistic children
[74:35] so he could compare it
and see what he could find,
[74:38] but to get the blood instead
of, like, putting in a request
[74:41] for non-autistic
children's blood,
[74:44] or, like, calling for volunteers
to--to come to the hospital
[74:47] and give their blood,
[74:49] and without running it past
an ethics committee,
[74:52] he offered his children's
friends five pounds
[74:57] for their blood!
[laughing]
[74:59] And no, that's not, like,
an allegation that someone might
[75:02] have made up.
[75:03] Wakefield told people that story
[75:06] at a conference in 1999.
[75:13] [crowd laughing]
[75:22] [HBOMB] At the hearing
he claimed to have made up
[75:24] the part about throwing up
and fainting
[75:26] for dramatic effect.
[75:27] His best defense
of his extremely unethical
[75:30] and weird behavior was that
he made some of it up.
[75:34] Shockingly, telling
the ethics committee
[75:36] that he was a fucking liar
didn't help his case.
[75:38] Speaking later in an interview,
[75:40] Wakefield defended
the birthday party
[75:43] child blood bribes saying
it was all totally fine.
[75:48] [ANDREW] The only problem
was that it did not have
[75:50] an approval from
the hospital ethics committee.
[75:54] That does not make it unethical.
[75:56] [HBOMB] He's trying
to "well actually"
[75:58] a fucking ethics board!
[76:00] After reviewing all
of this in 2010,
[76:03] the longest inquiry in General
Medical Council history,
[76:06] concluded that Andrew Wakefield
had failed in his duties
[76:09] as a doctor,
[76:10] acted against the interests
[76:11] of his patients,
and was,
[76:12] you know,
a lying conman.
[76:14] Sorry, that one was me.
[76:15] And he was struck off
the medical register
[76:17] making him no longer able
to practice medicine
[76:19] and officially not a doctor,
[76:21] so whenever someone calls him
a doctor in videos now,
[76:24] they're making a mistake.
[76:25] Look, I don't wanna single
this guy out,
[76:26] but you--you--don't put "doctor"
in his name.
[76:29] He's not a doctor now!
[76:30] Even in the documentary
he made about himself in 2016,
[76:33] he can't put doctor in front
of his name.
[76:35] He has to put MB, BS.
[76:37] Well, we know he's at least
one kind of BS,
[76:38] if you know what I'm saying.
[76:39] To quote the Council's charges,
[76:41] he showed "callous disregard
for any distress or pain
[76:44] the children might suffer."
[76:46] That same year,
[76:47] "The Lancet" finally formally
retracted the original study.
[76:51] According to "The Lancet's"
editor, Richard Horton…
[76:59] Well done, Richard.
[77:01] Here's a round of applause
for you.
[77:03] [hand slaps]
[77:04] Better too late than never,
I guess.
[77:07] That's not really an expression,
is it?
[77:08] The conclusion of the inquiry
is protested
[77:10] by Wakefield's
remaining supporters.
[77:13] [CHANTING] We're with Wakefield.
We're with Wakefield.
[77:17] [HBOMB] While
a news crew attempts
[77:18] to interview one
of his critics,
[77:20] one of his supporters attempts
to shout him down
[77:22] and make sure
he can't say anything
[77:23] while another off-screen
holds up a book insisting
[77:26] it is they who
are being silenced.
[77:28] The irony is, apparently,
lost on them.
[77:31] Wakefield appeared before
his flock
[77:33] to say this
was all completely unjust.
[77:35] [ANDREW] And I invite anyone
to examine the contents
[77:39] of these proceedings and come
to their own conclusions
[77:42] [HBOMB] I think we just did,
buddy.
[77:46] Wakefield did lose a lot
of his popularity
[77:48] when the extent of his abuse
and fraud was made known,
[77:51] but he still had
a few dedicated fans,
[77:53] often the parents
of autistic children
[77:55] who'd followed him
so far that they refuse
[77:57] to accept what he did.
[77:59] To Wakefield,
these desperate people
[78:01] are the perfect market.
[78:03] I suspect the main reason
he turned up
[78:05] in the last few days
of his hearing
[78:06] was to advertise the book
he'd written all about it
[78:08] on national TV.
[78:09] The book alleges that
the Medical Council hearings
[78:12] are just trying to crush him
to protect vaccines.
[78:14] He titled the book
"Callous Disregard"
[78:16] after one of the Council's
comments about him.
[78:18] It's trying to be
an ironic reference
[78:20] like he's accusing
mainstream medicine
[78:22] of callously disregarding
the victims of MMR,
[78:25] but I don't think he considered
the implications
[78:27] of quoting a doctor pointing out
he abused children
[78:30] on the cover of a book with
a big picture of his face on it.
[78:33] It's a real "If I Did It"
situation."
[78:36] Also in the dedication,
[78:37] he thanks
his long-suffering wife
[78:39] who's with him here on
the cover.
[78:40] She's not his wife anymore,
though.
[78:42] I guess she suffered enough.
[78:43] And like separate vaccines
before it,
[78:45] Wakefield made sure
to recommend his book
[78:47] in every interview he got.
[78:48] [GUPTA] These numbers,
the dates were all fabricated
[78:51] to sort of make a case.
[78:53] [ANDREW] Dr. Gupta, please,
I urge you,
[78:55] go and read my book.
You will understand it.
[78:57] Many people don't.
[78:58] [HBOMB] It's very funny watching
[78:59] him try to sell his merchandise
[79:01] now that everyone knows
he's a fraud.
[79:03] [ANDREW] If you read my book,
[79:04] you will be able
to read the truth,
[79:06] and has the BMJ read my book?
[79:08] Have the doctors
who apparently looked
[79:10] at all the records read my book?
[79:12] No, because the truth is in
that book, "Callous Disregard."
[79:14] [ANDERSON] Well sir,
I've read Brian Deer's report
[79:16] which is incredibly extensive.
[79:17] Sir, I'm not here
to let you pitch your book.
[79:19] I'm here to have
you answer questions.
[79:20] [ANDREW] If you read the record
that I have set out
[79:23] in the book,
you will see the truth.
[79:26] [ANDERSON] But sir,
if your lying,
[79:27] then your book is also a lie.
[79:28] [HBOMB] Wakefield's defense
[79:30] against Brian Deer's
allegations--
[79:31] now that suing him to shut him
up has failed disastrously--
[79:34] is to say Deer is a hit man paid
by vaccine manufacturers
[79:37] to ruin his career.
[79:39] [ANDREW] He is a hit man.
[79:40] He's been brought in
to take me down because
[79:42] they are very, very concerned
about the adverse reactions
[79:45] to vaccines that are occurring
in children.
[79:47] [ANDERSON] Wait a minute, sir.
Let me stop you right there.
[79:48] You say he's a hit man
[79:50] and he's been brought in
by they.
[79:52] Who is they?
Who is he a hit man for?
[79:53] This is
an independent journalist
[79:55] who's won many awards.
[79:57] [ANDREW] Yeah, he's--
[chuckles nervously]
[79:58] And he's, you know--
who bought this man in?
[80:00] Who is paying this man?
I don't know.
[80:02] [HBOMB] Who is behind
Brian Deer's reporting?
[80:05] Follow the money!
[80:06] Also, buy my book, please.
[80:08] [ANDERSON] Wakefield went on
to claim later in the interview
[80:09] that you're being paid
by the Association
[80:11] of British Pharmaceutical
Industries.
[80:13] Are you?
[BRIAN laughs]
[80:14] No, I'm not.
[80:15] [HBOMB] In 2011,
[80:16] "New York Times Magazine"
staff writer
[80:18] Susan Dominus caught up
with Wakefield.
[80:20] Though Wakefield presents
himself to her
[80:22] as someone whose career
was destroyed
[80:24] for going against the dogma
that vaccines are safe,
[80:27] Dominus is careful to point out
that he does this while
[80:30] signing copies of his book
for an enormous line
[80:32] of loyal followers,
[80:33] one of whom is a tearful mother
[80:35] who blames herself for not
preventing her child's autism.
[80:37] At the time the article
was written,
[80:39] Wakefield lived
in a beautiful house
[80:41] in a reclusive
and expensive neighborhood
[80:43] in Austin, Texas,
[80:44] surrounded by many acres
of hills and forest.
[80:51] [HBOMB] The book made him
a decent amount of money
[80:53] as have his many paid
speaking engagements
[80:56] at anti-vaccine conferences
where he's lauded
[80:58] as the celebrity who got
the movement started.
[81:00] There's the hundreds
of thousands
[81:02] of pounds he got paid
to do the study, of course,
[81:04] and the multiple documentaries
about him and his life
[81:07] can't have been too shabby
for him.
[81:08] It's genuinely shocking
how obviously
[81:10] he's just grifting
anti-vaccine people
[81:12] for as much money as he can.
[81:14] His 2016 film,
"Vaxxed,"
[81:16] is available at a discount
on his web site
[81:18] if you buy it in a pack of ten.
[81:21] "Give a copy to your
local legislators,
[81:23] educators,
and medical professionals!"
[81:25] Wakefield wants his followers
to pay him
[81:27] to do advertising for him.
[81:28] When I look back at footage
of the last day
[81:31] of Wakefield's hearing,
[81:32] I'm inevitably looking back
at myself ten years ago
[81:36] when I saw the same footage live
on TV.
[81:38] [TV hisses]
At the time,
[81:39] I saw these people
as Wakefield's defenders
[81:41] but in a way they
were also his victims.
[81:44] For a decade now--no,
since I was a teenager,
[81:47] I've been thinking about
this woman with the sign saying,
[81:49] "Don't stifle
uncomfortable science."
[81:52] I remember I first noticed her
because I saw her and thought,
[81:55] "Wait, is she wearing
a Playboy scarf?"
[81:57] Surely the most
uncomfortable thing
[81:59] for these people here must be
the possibility
[82:02] the man they're here to defend
has lied to them for money.
[82:05] For someone who'd sided
with Wakefield during the scare,
[82:08] accepting that he had lied
would mean taking on some
[82:10] of the guilt for helping
to spread it.
[82:12] One of the worst things
about Wakefield's actions
[82:14] is he's made
these people complicit.
[82:17] Maybe Wakefield actually cares
about these people.
[82:19] Maybe not.
But either way,
[82:21] their money spends just
the same.
[82:23] I wonder how many
of these people
[82:25] bought his books
or his documentaries.
[82:28] I wonder if any of them stop
and think about how they've
[82:30] made him rich.
[82:31] Some of these people
are extremely vulnerable,
[82:33] parents of children
with disabilities,
[82:36] some of which require
full-time care,
[82:38] who fell for Wakefield because
he was offering them
[82:40] an explanation for why
these things happen.
[82:44] It brings me no joy to tell you
they paid for this view.
[82:49] [CHANTING] We're with Wakefield.
We're with Wakefield.
[82:53] We're with Wakefield.
We're with Wakefield.
[82:57] [audio stuttering]
[83:02] [HBOMB] At the end of all this,
[83:04] I ask the eternal question asked
[83:06] of every major fraudster
in history.
[83:08] How could someone do all this?
[83:10] Cause all this fear and doubt
that has led to real,
[83:14] tangible harm against
your fellow human beings?
[83:18] Why would someone do that?
[83:21] Uh, money.
Thank you for watching.
[83:23] [dramatic classical music]
[83:26] ♪ ♪
[83:39] [guitar music strumming]
[83:41] There's probably a lot
of people you could blame
[83:43] for anti-vaccine beliefs getting
as far as they have.
[83:45] The anxieties people have right
now didn't come from nowhere.
[83:49] Wakefield's legacy is built into
the very DNA
[83:51] of modern vaccine hesitancy.
[83:53] Or the RNA,
am I right?
[83:55] Nice one, Kat.
This is very clever.
[83:57] Whenever you try to trace
a trend of skepticism
[83:59] about vaccines far enough,
[84:01] it almost always leads back
to the fear and anxiety
[84:04] that started in 1998
and the men behind it.
[84:07] Take for example Bill Maher.
[84:09] Maher is a proponent
of the possible link
[84:11] between vaccines and autism
and frequently
[84:13] has anti-vaccine activists
on his show.
[84:15] Granted, he also has people on
who think that's ridiculous,
[84:17] so that's kind of
like being fair and balanced.
[84:20] His general stance is that
vaccines can be good
[84:23] but he doesn't really go
for them because
[84:24] he's got a better idea.
[84:25] [BILL] Uh, I am not
a germ theory denier.
[84:27] I understand that germs
and viruses cause diseases.
[84:31] I may have been
a little cocky about it
[84:32] because I discovered
from first-hand experience
[84:35] that I could stave them off
better with proper nutrition.
[84:38] [HBOMB] If your child dies
of measles,
[84:40] it's because he didn't eat
his vegetables.
[84:42] Bubonic plague?
[84:43] Skip a trip to McDonald's,
sheeple!
[84:45] Throughout the years,
[84:46] Bill has repeated over
and over
[84:47] his distrust of vaccines
and the possible side effects
[84:50] they might pose.
[84:52] I've tried to find an example
of him citing a source
[84:54] or giving some kind of data,
but no,
[84:56] it's always this general sense
that people think something
[84:59] might be wrong.
[85:00] [BILL] There's all these parents
who say,
[85:02] "I had a normal child,
got the vaccine--"
[85:04] this story keeps coming over
and over.
[85:06] [HBOMB] Lots of parents are
saying stuff
[85:08] and that's basically evidence.
[85:09] And of course there's
the old stand-out,
[85:11] "Lots of people feel like me."
[85:13] [BILL] I was attacked for saying
we should look into this
[85:16] and I don't believe in it,
[85:17] and lots of people feel
the same way.
[85:19] I've heard a lot of stuff
about feelings being
[85:20] more important than facts,
[85:22] so this is basically science,
right?
[85:24] [ALEC] Bill, you having us on
the show
[85:25] and rehashing all these problems
you got yourself into
[85:27] on your last show,
[85:29] it's like going on a date
and talking about your ex-wife.
[85:31] [cheers and applause]
[85:34] [HBOMB] If an intellectual titan
like Bill Maher thinks vaccines
[85:38] might be dangerous,
[85:39] he must believe it
for a good reason.
[85:41] I did a lot of digging on this
and I found a time when
[85:43] he made a concrete
scientific claim about vaccines.
[85:45] In 2005 he was interviewed
on "Larry King Live."
[85:48] This isn't footage
of that interview.
[85:50] I couldn't find footage
of this one,
[85:51] but there is a transcript
on the CNN web site.
[85:53] During this interview
they discussed the flu shot
[85:55] which King had been taking
for 25 years.
[85:57] Maher tells him the best defense
against disease
[85:59] is to have a strong
immune system--
[86:02] I guess that's where
the proper nutrition comes in--
[86:04] and says that the flu shot
is actually bad
[86:05] for your immune system.
[86:07] He cites a strong distrust
[86:08] of what he calls
western medicine,
[86:10] which is a bit
of a Euro-centric misnomer.
[86:12] A lot of non-western countries
develop vaccines
[86:15] and other modern medicine,
you know?
[86:16] Whatever, he doesn't care.
[86:18] The conversation then turns
to the avian flu
[86:20] which was a real concern
at the time.
[86:22] Bill states that he's
not worried about bird flu
[86:24] and gives a fascinatingly
vague list of reasons why.
[86:29] Which was a very clever insight
right up until something
[86:32] like that really did happen.
[86:34] Uh, that's why people
were worried about it, Bill.
[86:48] Bill is such a good
public speaker.
[86:50] The fact that vaccines actually
help stop the disease
[86:53] from spreading and therefor
developing those mutations
[86:55] in the first place
is lost on him.
[86:58] Well, it was,
[86:59] but he got vaccinated
for COVID-19
[87:00] so clearly he sees
the value now.
[87:03] This is attached
to an announcement
[87:04] that he got the virus
so this week's show has
[87:06] to be canceled.
[87:08] Apparently he's asymptomatic
and feels fine,
[87:10] so I guess vaccines
are pretty good, aren't they?
[87:12] Considering how at-risk
unvaccinated 65-year-olds are
[87:15] for this virus,
[87:16] I'm really glad
he got vaccinated
[87:17] for his sake,
[87:19] but they should probably
just cancel his show completely.
[87:21] I mean, we don't want
to risk losing
[87:22] a national treasure.
[87:23] The reality is a lot
of pseudo-libertarian skepticism
[87:26] about "western medicine"
instantly falls apart
[87:29] the second it has to interact
with reality where people
[87:32] really do die of diseases.
[87:34] For example,
the man he is speaking to.
[87:37] Larry King passed away this year
of complications from COVID-19.
[87:41] Anyway, Maher tells King that
vaccines are just
[87:43] a trick to get money.
[87:51] [HBOMB] If bird flu
had got bad enough,
[87:52] you can guarantee Maher would
have paid top dollar
[87:54] for the vaccine.
[87:55] Anyway, the discussion
[87:56] goes downhill even further
[87:58] for Maher when King points out
[87:59] that vaccines are great
and polio
[88:01] was virtually eradicated
thanks to vaccination.
[88:04] Bill gives this--
[kisses]
[88:05] beautiful reply.
[88:32] [HBOMB] I think Bill really does
a good job of summing up
[88:34] a lot of people's belief
about vaccination here.
[88:37] Maher thinks it's smart
to be skeptical
[88:39] about vaccines right up until
there's consequences
[88:41] for himself,
of course,
[88:43] but his explanations
are all unfounded
[88:44] and unscientific.
[88:46] The best he can say is
there's probably books out there
[88:48] that prove he's right.
[88:50] Maybe, but he's not read them.
[88:52] This isn't skepticism.
[88:54] This is ignorance trying
to sound like skepticism.
[88:57] To bring it all full-circle,
[88:59] it seems like Bill's beliefs
about vaccines
[89:01] are really based on that
big scare
[89:03] that started in the late '90s.
[89:04] After all, the only factoid
he seems to ever be able
[89:07] to remember is that lots
of parents said they were bad
[89:10] that one time,
and that's not even a fact.
[89:12] That's some opinions
he remembers.
[89:14] I'd joke that it's a pity
they don't make a vaccine
[89:17] for confirmation bias,
[89:18] but he wouldn't have got it,
would he?
[89:20] There is, however, one time
in this old interview where
[89:22] he really does attempt
to make a scientific claim.
[89:25] He tells Larry that if you get
the flu shot more
[89:27] than five years in a row,
[89:29] it tenfold increases
the risk of getting Alzheimer's.
[89:33] Hmm, that's a really
specific thing to say.
[89:35] Maybe by checking this claim out
we can figure out who
[89:38] he's getting his beliefs from.
[89:39] I looked and there
are actually studies
[89:41] on the impact of vaccination
on rates of Alzheimer's.
[89:44] Um, the risk of Alzheimer's
goes down.
[89:48] Okay, so this clearly isn't
his source.
[89:50] I did some more digging, though,
[89:51] and I found that in 1997
at a vaccine conference,
[89:55] in one guy's presentation
he said that a scientist
[89:58] had found that this happens.
[90:00] There's no study cited here,
[90:01] but that's at least a source
for Bill's claims.
[90:04] Let's check the doctor's papers
and see if we can find out
[90:06] for ourse--wait a second.
[90:07] I blurred the scientist's
name out by accident.
[90:10] Let me fix that.
[mouse clicks]
[90:11] Dr. Hugh Fudenberg?
[90:13] [Disturbed's
"Down with the Sickness"]
[90:16] No matter how you look at it,
[90:17] a vast, vast majority
of anti-vaccine rhetoric
[90:20] and pseudoscience can be traced
directly back to these two guys.
[90:24] According to a survey
[90:25] of US health care professionals
in 2016,
[90:28] 77% of parents refusing
vaccination for their children
[90:31] still cite a fear
of a link with autism.
[90:34] When people refuse medicine
for their children,
[90:37] they largely point
to the hazy memory
[90:39] of the scare Wakefield started
for money.
[90:41] So, yeah, it's pretty important
to point out they both lost
[90:44] their medical licenses
and their science was garbage,
[90:47] and despite being
an obvious hack fraud conman,
[90:50] Wakefield is still embraced
by the anti-vaccine community.
[90:53] Wakefield was a guest of honor
at Conspira-Sea,
[90:56] the week-long cruise
for all kinds
[90:58] of conspiracy theorists,
[90:59] where believers
of all stripes gather
[91:01] to share their theories
about climate change,
[91:03] the earth being flat,
time travelers,
[91:05] and horses being real.
[91:07] The kind of funny thing
is Wakefield himself
[91:09] seems pretty embarrassed
by this.
[91:11] A skeptic who went on the cruise
noted how unhappy he looked
[91:14] with the implication of being
a hero to a community that
[91:17] absolutely loves
complete quacks.
[91:26] Luckily for Wakefield,
the toilet is full of money,
[91:28] and all he has to do to get it
is lean further and further away
[91:31] from science and deeper
into this culture.
[91:34] He's had to pivot to saying
all vaccines are dangerous
[91:37] because his new
anti-vaccine audience
[91:39] aren't very receptive
to the old claim that,
[91:41] "I'm not anti-vaccine.
[91:42] "Just one vaccine is dangerous,
[91:44] and I recommend mine instead."
[91:46] I don't think these people
would buy a ten-pack
[91:48] of that story.
[91:49] And of course in the middle
of the pandemic
[91:51] that is currently happening,
[91:53] Wakefield emerged
from his mansion
[91:55] to remind everyone that a virus
that has so far killed
[91:58] over three million people
[92:00] is better than being
vaccinated against it.
[92:08] [HBOMB] Presumably of COVID-19.
[92:20] I don't think that
was too dramatic, do you?
[92:22] [HBOMB] The fact the movement
he started is still based
[92:24] almost completely on his lies
is pretty important to point out
[92:28] and in fact it's useful
to point it out
[92:30] because despite
how it might look,
[92:33] the truth can be
a powerful thing.
[92:35] Once Wakefield got chased out
to America and had
[92:37] his medical license taken away,
[92:39] vaccination rates
in the UK recovered.
[92:41] I love this because you can
basically see the effects
[92:44] of Brian Deer's reporting
on a graph.
[92:46] Like, the scare starts
and it gets worse
[92:47] and worse and worse,
[92:49] and then Brian Deer's reporting
comes out,
[92:50] and bam,
it's on its way back up.
[92:52] Like, the truth does make
a difference.
[92:54] And then
when Wakefield's license
[92:56] was taken away,
[92:57] we went right back up
[92:58] to pre-scare levels.
[92:59] Of course, getting chased out
to America meant
[93:02] he started peddling his lies
in America.
[93:04] So, sorry about that.
[93:05] But it does seem pretty clear
[93:06] that the truth helps people
[93:08] make up their minds
about this stuff.
[93:10] Fascinatingly, a lot of Britons
seem to remember the MMR scare
[93:13] and the revelation that it
was based on lies
[93:15] and learned a lesson about
vaccine alarmism.
[93:17] According to polls
of global willingness
[93:19] to take the COVID-19 vaccine,
[93:21] other countries start
relatively low,
[93:23] perhaps dimly remembering
[93:25] some people saying vaccines
are bad.
[93:27] Then acceptance grows
as it becomes
[93:29] increasingly clear
the new vaccines are safe.
[93:31] Wait, where's the UK?
[93:32] Well, boys,
we're just chilling up here.
[93:34] We've been through this before,
you see.
[93:36] That's my British accent?
[93:37] It seems like our past
experience with bullshit
[93:40] vaccine scares has inoculated us
against future ones.
[93:44] Kat wrote that line.
[93:45] I didn't find
the one weird trick doctors hate
[93:48] to de-converting people
from being against vaccines
[93:50] and changing their minds
or anything here.
[93:52] What we've really discovered
is that if you lay
[93:54] the whole story out like this,
[93:57] people can do a good job
of making up their own minds.
[93:59] The actual scientific community
works very hard
[94:03] to be receptive to potential
side effects.
[94:05] When even the potential maybe
possibility maybe
[94:08] of one of the vaccines having
side effects came up,
[94:11] the FDA and the CDC briefly
recommended not getting it
[94:14] for a while until later
when they checked
[94:16] and were sure it was fine.
[94:17] Vaccine safety is taken
extremely seriously
[94:20] by medical scientists
and doctors for obvious reasons.
[94:24] Actually, here's a fun example
of how stringent
[94:26] the community is about vaccines.
[94:28] Wakefield's alternative vaccine
was based on such bad science
[94:31] it would never have made it out
of clinical trials.
[94:34] The medical work behind it
was awful.
[94:36] I mean,
one of its author's names
[94:38] is spelled wrong on page one.
[94:40] The science on
the following pages
[94:41] is roughly what you'd expect
from something like that.
[94:44] I think I might actually make
a bonus video for patrons
[94:47] just covering this vaccine
patent because it is wack.
[94:51] Really, Andrew Wakefield
was always doomed to end up
[94:55] as a scam artist.
[94:56] He wasn't very good
at the science
[94:57] when he was a doctor.
[94:59] All the Coronavirus vaccines
currently in use
[95:02] have passed tests and checks
[95:03] that his alternative measles
vaccine would never have done.
[95:06] Wakefield can pretend he's not
gonna get the vaccine
[95:09] and appear at
health freedom summits
[95:11] that recommend you don't get it
[95:13] and instead eliminate toxins
with only affordable products
[95:16] and cooking hacks.
[chuckles]
[95:18] But I certainly hope
for his sake
[95:20] that he just gets the vaccine
in secret because otherwise
[95:22] the next cruise is gonna have
a fucking body count.
[95:25] There is another way the truth
can change people's minds;
[95:28] living proof.
[95:29] If someone thinks
the Coronavirus vaccines
[95:31] might be dangerous,
[95:32] one of the best ways
to help seems
[95:34] to be people around them
getting it
[95:35] and showing them how it's fine.
[95:37] In early polls before
a vaccine was out,
[95:39] a lot of people in the USA
claimed they were going
[95:42] to hold off until they were sure
it was safe,
[95:44] which is a pretty risky decision
considering the danger
[95:46] of the virus versus any possible
side effects of the vaccine.
[95:50] Like, a third of people
who get infected
[95:52] even if it's minor are left
with long-term complications.
[95:55] Like, long-distance runners
are left unable to climb stairs
[95:58] without getting out of breath.
[96:00] People have lost eyesight,
people have lost teeth,
[96:02] and of course a lot of people
have died of the disease,
[96:06] but over time,
[96:07] as more and more people did get
the vaccine,
[96:09] that by itself changed
a lot of minds.
[96:12] The truth is,
[96:13] it was easy in 2020 to have
your doubts
[96:15] about a theoretical vaccine
that no one had had yet,
[96:18] but now when half the people
around you already have it
[96:21] and they're obviously fine,
[96:22] it's a whole lot harder
to have those doubts.
[96:25] Over time the people waiting
and seeing seem to have decided
[96:28] they've seen enough
[96:29] and they want what those guys
are having.
[96:31] So this is my call to action
in case anyone needs it.
[96:34] You should get a COVID vaccine
if you can.
[96:36] You know, get one while you're
there for your colonoscopy.
[96:39] The vaccine makes life safer
for you
[96:41] and reduces the possibility
of passing the virus
[96:43] to someone more vulnerable.
[96:45] So you won't have that
on your conscience, either.
[96:47] I know having a conscience
is virtue signaling now,
[96:50] but still,
it's a nice bonus.
[96:51] And on top of that,
[96:53] if there are people in your life
who could be at risk
[96:55] who need convincing
of the vaccine's safety,
[96:58] you could be
the evidence they need.
[97:00] It's amazing how compelling
seeing other people
[97:03] get vaccinated can be.
[97:04] There is sadly one concerning
thing about the data.
[97:08] There are some people
who started out saying no
[97:10] to vaccination
[97:11] and have largely
stayed that way.
[97:13] Maybe some of them will budge
as more and more people
[97:16] get vaccinated
but there's probably
[97:17] a group who are so distrustful
of vaccines because
[97:20] of everything we've discussed
so fa
[97:22] that they can't have
their minds changed
[97:24] even by the hundreds of millions
of obviously completely
[97:27] safely vaccinated people
all around them.
[97:29] People can invest a lot of ego
and pride
[97:32] in not accepting evidence
that contradicts their beliefs
[97:34] about the world,
[97:36] and it really doesn't help
[97:37] that there are hundreds
of people
[97:38] exactly like Andrew Wakefield
who are ready
[97:41] to tell them everything
they believe
[97:42] is already true and they just
need to buy their supplements
[97:45] or DVDs or cooking hacks
[97:48] and enable people
to convince themselves
[97:51] that they don't need
to do any more thinking.
[97:53] For a small fee,
of course.
[97:55] Ah, come on, though.
[97:56] Comparing Wakefield
to Alex Jones,
[97:57] that's a bit much.
[97:58] There's no way Wakefield
would stoop to--
[98:00] [laughs]
[98:01] Have you learned nothing?
[98:02] [ALEX] Good to have you here
with us.
[98:03] [ANDREW] It's great to be here,
Alex.
[98:04] Thank you very much.
[98:05] [HBOMB] Changing
these people's minds
[98:07] really should be their job
[98:08] and it's nobody else's fault
that they're struggling with it,
[98:11] but I think the future
of this kind of discussion
[98:13] resides in finding
more compelling ways
[98:16] of communicating the truth
to people who aren't used
[98:18] to hearing it.
[98:19] I hope in some way this video
has helped.
[98:21] In the meantime,
[98:23] while we figure out how
to convince people
[98:24] who seem committed
to being never convinced,
[98:26] at least the vaccine intended
for them can go to someone
[98:29] who's sure they want it.
[98:31] Specifically, me.
[98:33] Please send me their vaccine.
[98:35] I was glad they were testing it
on the old people first
[98:37] but it's been months now,
and I want it.
[98:38] I wanna go outside!
[98:40] Be able to go outside!
[98:41] I want to pretend I shop
at Waitrose again.
[98:44] I wanna use
my free football tickets!
[98:46] I wanna taunt
my former hairdresser
[98:48] with how useless she is
to me now
[98:50] and threaten to turn
her building
[98:51] back into a research foundation!
[98:53] Give me the vaccine, doctor!
[98:54] Hell, give me all of them!
[98:56] Let me combine their power!
[98:57] Soon I will be unstoppable!
[99:00] It's easy to get depressed
and begin to believe
[99:04] that you're basically locked
in a room with thousands
[99:07] of fucking idiots who're
just willing
[99:09] to say stupid shit constantly--
[99:12] just committed
to just being wrong,
[99:15] but actually,
the more I think about it,
[99:19] I'm actually locked in a planet
with millions of people
[99:24] who do know better
than these people
[99:26] but they're just
so busy being depressed
[99:28] like me at them.
[99:29] Maybe the answer here is that we
just need to accept that we
[99:32] should put the depression energy
into making a difference,
[99:35] into changing the minds
of the people who can be,
[99:37] and into doing what we can
to improve the state
[99:39] of our world around
these people
[99:41] and just let them be mad
and let them continue
[99:44] to be stupid but in a world
where their kids won't die
[99:47] of polio because we got rid
of it for them.
[99:50] Good for them,
ignorant little wankers.
[99:52] Because maybe the hard thing
to do when we're confronted
[99:55] by the scope of these problems
is accept that we really
[99:58] can do something about it.
[100:00] No matter how hopeless
things may seem,
[100:03] the world always can get better,
[100:06] and maybe together someday
[100:11] we can invent a way
of cleaning up this fucking mess
[100:14] in my mum's gara--
in my garage!
[100:16] [lively music]
[100:19] ♪ ♪
[100:45] Hey, thank you for watching.
[100:46] That was pretty good,
wasn't it?
[100:47] I managed to avoid getting
too preachy at the end there.
[100:49] I'd like to thank my patrons
whose names are scrolling past
[100:51] the screen right now.
[100:52] You guys literally keep
the lights on.
[100:54] I'd like to thank
the sensitivity reader
[100:56] who took a look at some
of the segments
[100:57] and made sure that we were using
the appropriate language
[100:59] when we were talking
about autism.
[101:00] I'd also really like
to thank Brian Deer
[101:03] who's basically a superhero.
[101:05] He's the guy who found out most
of this stuff,
[101:08] really saved the day,
[101:09] and just thank you so much, man.
[101:12] And also while we were making
this video,
[101:14] Brian Deer released a book about
the whole thing.
[101:17] Deer's book, "The Doctor Who
Fooled the World,"
[101:19] is basically
the most definitive source
[101:21] on Andrew Wakefield and all
the damage he did.
[101:23] I literally cannot
recommend it enough
[101:25] if the topic interests you
at all.
[101:27] Deer is by far the most
knowledgeable person
[101:29] on everything that happened.
[101:31] I mean, he's the guy who
discovered most of it himself
[101:33] through actual decades
of investigative reporting.
[101:35] I had no idea he was doing
a book until it came out
[101:38] when I was writing this video,
[101:39] and we just barely scratched
the surface
[101:41] of the stuff he covers.
[101:42] There's a link to his site
in the description
[101:44] and it's not an affiliate link
or anything.
[101:45] We're not being paid to do this.
[101:47] I've decided he deserves
your money.
[101:49] I want him to be able to chart
the release of this video
[101:52] on a graph of his sales figures.
That's my personal fantasy.
[101:55] Tell him Hbomb says hi.
[101:56] If you wanna know more about
this whole topic
[101:58] or just check out Brian Dear's
honestly heroic reporting,
[102:02] you should really go read
his book
[102:04] and go to briandeer.com because
it survived the lawsuit
[102:08] and there's some
great stuff there.
[102:10] So thanks to Kat for doing all
of that additional research
[102:12] and for cowriting a lot
of these segments
[102:14] and just generally
fact-checking me.
[102:16] I got a lot of facts wrong.
[102:17] And I'd like to thank my, uh,
intern Rachel, uh,
[102:20] who did great work
with the camera.
[102:23] D--don't do that.
[102:24] [chuckles]
[102:26] Oh, wow, there are more credits.
Oh, my God.
[102:29] Thank you so much for being
so patient with this video.
[102:31] I'm actually surprised we got
it done so quickly,
[102:33] to be honest.
We had a whole production.
[102:35] Like, we had to work
with fact checkers,
[102:37] lawyers in two different
countries
[102:39] to make sure
we couldn't get sued
[102:40] for anything we were saying
about these people,
[102:42] because, you know,
you might have noticed
[102:43] some of the characters
in this story are litigious.
[102:45] We conferred
with vaccine experts,
[102:47] doctors,
science communicators,
[102:49] medical researchers,
sensitivity readers,
[102:52] animators--you know,
someone had to draw
[102:53] the internal anatomy
for that one thing.
[102:55] I made an award-winning
cartoonist for "The New Yorker"
[102:58] spend hours of her life drawing
the courtroom
[103:01] from "Phoenix Wright" for a joke
that went by in,
[103:04] like, 10 seconds.
[103:06] Sorry about that,
by the way.
[103:07] And my poor long-suffering
producer Kat
[103:09] had to coordinate most of this
for me because I was busy
[103:12] editing the actual video.
[103:13] And thank you to my patrons
for watching an early draft
[103:16] of this and giving me feedback.
[103:17] It turns out a bunch of people
who watch my videos are, like,
[103:19] scientists so we got some
really good notes from them.
[103:22] All in all I'm pretty happy
with how this video turned out.
[103:25] So, yeah, that's nice.
[103:27] That said I'm never putting this
much effort into a video again.
[103:29] Forget it.
[103:31] ♪ ♪
[103:42] Can you believe that
Brian David Gilbert did voices
[103:44] in this video?
That's great.
[103:45] It's amazing.
[103:47] He sent me just video footage
of him dressed
[103:48] as Andrew Wakefield.
[103:50] I didn't ask for him to do that.
[103:51] He just sent that to me.
[103:52] Like, what a cool guy.
That's great.
[104:06] Oh!
[cackling]
