<div><span> Brian Deer is an award-winning investigative journalist best known for his coverage of the pharmaceutical industry. In this episode, he and Peter discuss the content of his book,</span> <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Doctor-Who-Fooled-World-Deception/dp/1421438003" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">The Doctor Who Fooled the World: Science, Deception, and the War on Vaccines</a><span>, which exposes the complex and disturbing story behind the infamous 1998 Lancet paper by Andrew Wakefield linking the MMR vaccine and autism. Brian explains how doctors led by Wakefield, a lawyer, and an anti-vaccination parents' group worked together on a study to validate their preconceived belief that the MMR vaccine caused autism. He reveals what happened behind the scenes as the study was carried out, explains problems in the lab, and discusses inconsistencies in the analysis. In the end, this is a story that serves as a cautionary tale about the consequences of science driven by an agenda rather than by a spirit of open inquiry.</span></div> <div> <p> </p> <div> <p>We discuss:</p> <ul type="disc"> <li>How Andrew Wakefield's flawed approach to scientific research led to the belief that vaccines cause autism (3:25);</li> <li>The importance of following the scientific method, and how Wakefield twisted the science to link measles virus to Crohn's disease (14:15);</li> <li>The backstory behind Andrew Wakefield's infamous 1998 Lancet paper linking the MMR vaccine and autism (26:45);</li> <li>The many flaws and disturbing aspects of Wakefield's study: suffering children and failure to do strain-specific sequencing (45:15);</li> <li>The epicenter of fraud: Bogus PCR testing furthering the belief that measles virus from the MMR vaccine caused autism (1:00:00);</li> <li>Additional issues that contaminated the study results (1:22:15);</li> <li>Discovering the misrepresented medical records for the kids involved in the study leading to the retraction of the Lancet paper and Wakefield losing his license (1:31:00);</li> <li>The resurgence of the anti-vaccination movement, Brian's motivation to write the book, and parting thoughts (1:36:45); and</li> <li>More.</li> </ul> <p>Learn more: <a href="https://peterattiamd.com/">https://peterattiamd.com/</a><br /> <br /> Show notes page for this episode: <a href="https://peterattiamd.com/BrianDeer">https://peterattiamd.com/BrianDeer</a> <br /> <br /> Subscribe to receive exclusive subscriber-only content: <a href="https://peterattiamd.com/subscribe/">https://peterattiamd.com/subscribe/</a><br /> <br /> Sign up to receive Peter's email newsletter: <a href="https://peterattiamd.com/newsletter/">https://peterattiamd.com/newsletter/</a><br /> <br /> Connect with Peter on <a href="http://Facebook.com/PeterAttiaMD"><u>Faceboo</u></a><u>k</u> | <a href="http://Twitter.com/PeterAttiaMD"><u>Twitter</u></a> | <a href="http://Instagram.com/PeterAttiaMD"><u>Instagram</u></a>.</p> </div> </div>
Actionable Insights
1. Prioritize Falsification in Science
When developing a hypothesis, actively try to prove it wrong rather than just seeking to prove it right, as true scientific courage lies in efforts to refute your own ideas.
2. Evaluate Evidence Critically
Do not rely on anecdotes or the word ‘consistent’ to establish scientific truth; instead, seek a ‘mountain of evidence’ from a body of literature and experiments to ascertain what is probabilistically suggested.
3. Deepen Scientific Understanding
To truly grasp the scientific method, including generating hypotheses, designing experiments, and critically looking for ways to be fooled, seek practical laboratory experience and mentorship rather than just memorizing facts.
4. Read Important Material Twice
When encountering incredibly rich and detailed information, such as a complex book, read it multiple times to fully assimilate all the details and avoid missing crucial parts.
5. Understand PCR Test Nuances
When interpreting PCR test results, especially for COVID, note the number of cycles required for a positive result, as a higher cycle count (e.g., above 35) may indicate contamination or an insignificant amount of material, and always repeat a positive test if the patient is asymptomatic.
6. Investigate Belief Origins
Challenge yourself to understand the ‘genesis or ideology’ of your own and others’ points of view, rather than simply holding an opinion without deep thought.
7. Be Vigilant Against Scientific Fraud
Recognize that scientific fraud, including deliberate manipulation of data, can occur even in prestigious institutions, and maintain a critical perspective on research, especially when claims are made without transparent, verifiable data.