In spite of the complete discrediting of the original Wakefield study, and in spite of huge criticism, the Daily Mail still won't accept the safety of MMR, or take responsibility for the damaging effect they are having on public safety.

Measles cases hit a record high as MMR fears remain - Measles cases hit a record last year - as parents continue to worry about the effects of the controversial MMR jab. [Daily Mail]

- - - - - - - - - -

I have a fairly ambivalent attitude to the right of people to have freedom of speech. I believe that within reason we should be allowed to say what we think, however I also believe that the pen is at times mightier than the gun, that words have the power to cause incredible damage, and that with all freedoms come a certain responsibility that society has to enforce. An extreme view holds that we should be allowed to say whatever we want regardless of the consequences. The Daily Mail continues to provide the best example of why complete freedom of speech is undesirable - this is a newspaper that should be shut down.

The role of the Daily Mail in the MMR "controversy" is well-documented. Long after the rest of the mainstream media realized that the famous 1998 Wakefield study was a load of nonsense, the Daily Mail continued on what became a crusade, lionizing the discredited and disgraced doctor and printing article after article playing on the fears of new parents.

By 2005, seven years of reviews and studies had completely discredited the original findings, journalists had revealed the financial incentives that created a massive conflict of interest for Wakefield's team (he was paid to act as an 'expert' witness for parents trying to pursue lawsuits against MMR manufacturers), and a Cochrane systematic review concluded that there was “no credible evidence” of any relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism, going as far as to demand that the Daily Mail apologize for it's role in promoting the scare story [2]. Indeed, their insanely irresponsible stance resulted in the exasperated British Medical Journal slamming the Mail (and in particular journalist Melanie Phillips), asking "Why can’t the Daily Mail eat humble pie over MMR?" [3].

Out of step with public opinion and the popular press, the Mail faced ridicule, and the overt campaign against MMR seems to have stopped in the last 18 months, but between the lines they are still battling to promote fear and uncertainty, which brings me to today's reports, 10 years after the original Wakefield scare.

Measles cases in Britain have reached a record high, and most news outlets are putting this news in context - for example, the BBC states:

"MMR immunisation rates dipped following research which raised the possibility that the jab may be linked to an increased risk of autism. However, the research has since been debunked, and a string of studies have concluded that the triple vaccine - which protects against rubella and mumps as well as measles - is perfectly safe." [1]

Compare and contrast with the Daily Mail's take on things:

"Measles cases hit a record high as MMR fears remain. Measles cases hit a record last year - as parents continue to worry about the effects of the controversial MMR jab."

What is particularly odious about this type of reporting is just how subtly the truth is disguised and manipulated. There is no mention of concerns about MMR being unfounded, the Mail merely dryly repeats a Health Agency release. In effect, they are reporting "Measles cases are rising because the vaccine is controversial, and the government says you should vaccinate". Predictably, the comments section is riddled with accusations of conspiracies, cover-ups and corrupt G.P.s killing babies, along with ludicrous suggestions that measles isn't a dangerous disease.

What grates most of all is their unblinking use of the word "controversial". For the Daily Mail to suggest that the vaccine is controversial is the equivalent of me going to an Arsenal game, punching someone in the face, and and then reporting that "a fight broke out".

If the Daily Mail printed an editorial tomorrow admitting they were wrong, MMR uptake would increase overnight, but instead, after a decade of nonsense, they still insist on pushing their agenda.

There has been a lot of attention recently on websites that are "pro-ana", encouraging young anorexics to starve themselves. Many people have suggested that these sites be shut down for the harm they are causing. I can't help but feel that if the government wants to start shutting down websites that are hazardous to public health, they should start with dailymail.co.uk.

[1] Measles cases jump to record high (BBC).
[2]Vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella in children (Cochrane Library).
[3]Why can’t the Daily Mail eat humble pie over MMR? (BMJ).