No. Obviously not. Saying such a thing would constitute sensationalist reporting of the crudest kind, and I'm not going to resort to that. But remember this:
No. Obviously not. Saying such a thing would constitute sensationalist reporting of the crudest kind, and I’m not going to resort to that.
But remember this:
And this:
And this:
And this:
The “evidence” reported by the Daily Mail in the above instances turned out of course to be nothing of the sort, and was completely discredited years ago.
The “stories” came after the Lancet had published a study in 1998, led by Dr Andrew Wakefield, which linked the MMR jab with autism and bowel disease.
The Lancet, which originally published the research linking autism and MMR, issued a full retraction of the paper in 2010, describing it as “false”. Dr Wakefield was later struck off from the medical register for “offences relating to dishonesty and failing to act in the best interests of vulnerable child patients”.
Three years on, however, and the consequences of the scaremongering about MMR and autism are still being felt.
This week it was reported that a measles outbreak in Swansea has reached 588 cases, with the number of those contracting measles increasing by 116 in a single week with 51 people hospitalised. Measles is a disease which can cause brain damage and death in children.
Dr Roland Salmon, a consultant epidemiologist from Public Health Wales, told the BBC that local GPs were seeing a lot of children aged between 10 and 15. He added that they would have been the babies who missed out on the vaccine following the now-discredited 1998 report linking the MMR jab and autism.
The graphs below show the rough correlation between immunisation levels and rates of measles.
And this one shows that the UK has the fifth highest proportion of measles cases in Europe.
45 Responses to “Is the Daily Mail killing children?”
Alun Parsons
But the post clearly states that the Daily Mail is not responsible for children dying of measels. Firstly the post says that no one has actually died of measels yet. Secondly, read the very first sentence of the post.
“Is the Daily Mail killing children.
“No. Obviously not.”
So the very first sentence says obviously the Mail isn’t.
This is about irresponsible journalism. The Mail exaggerates and sensationalises all the time. The title of this post is an example of just such an exaggeration. But the post at öeast has the decency to admit that the title is not true in the first sentence. When does the Mail ever do that?
I wonder if you actually read this post at all? It looks like you have merely responded to the title, and not read the blog post.
That undermines your credibility.
Alun Parsons
But the post clearly states that the Daily Mail is not responsible for children dying of measels. Firstly the post says that no one has actually died of measels yet. Secondly, read the very first sentence of the post.
“Is the Daily Mail killing children.
“No. Obviously not.”
So the very first sentence says obviously the Mail isn’t.
This is about irresponsible journalism. The Mail exaggerates and sensationalises all the time. The title of this post is an example of just such an exaggeration. But the post at öeast has the decency to admit that the title is not true in the first sentence. When does the Mail ever do that?
I wonder if you actually read this post at all? It looks like you have merely responded to the title, and not read the blog post.
That undermines your credibility.
Alun Parsons
But the post clearly states that the Daily Mail is not responsible for children dying of measels. Firstly the post says that no one has actually died of measels yet. Secondly, read the very first sentence of the post.
“Is the Daily Mail killing children.
“No. Obviously not.”
So the very first sentence says obviously the Mail isn’t.
This is about irresponsible journalism. The Mail exaggerates and sensationalises all the time. The title of this post is an example of just such an exaggeration. But the post at öeast has the decency to admit that the title is not true in the first sentence. When does the Mail ever do that?
I wonder if you actually read this post at all? It looks like you have merely responded to the title, and not read the blog post.
That undermines your credibility.
Alun Parsons
The lancet is not responsible for the Mail continuing to report on the non-existent link between MMR and autism a whole three years after the Lancet retraction!
Samantha
I think it is more pertinent to look at how ALL of these: Daily Mail, Government, BMA have played a part, whether from over-reaction or lack of action. Either way these variables have all contributed to the panic of parents about the health of their children, resulting in thousands not immunising their children and the continued rise in the deaths of children.
We need to stop trying to blame one individual organisation and learn that by scare mongering, not giving parents the correct information, withholding information, and not offer scared parents the right to choose, have ALL culminated in this situation. Now we find the solution and move on.