If the Lancet case report did not say MMR vaccine causes autism, what did some of the co-authors partially retract in 2004?
Nothing. Some of the original co-authors partially retracted an interpretation despite the fact that it never existed in the case report. The co-author’s partial retraction reads, “We wish to make it clear that in this paper no causal link was established between MMR vaccine and autism as the data were insufficient. However, the possibility of such a link was raised and consequent events have had major implications for public health. In view of this, we consider now is the appropriate time that we should together formally retract the interpretation placed upon these findings in the paper, according to precedent.” Again, the original case report itself never interpreted the data as establishing a causal link between MMR and autism, so there was no “causal” interpretation to retract.
Related Questions
- If the Lancet case report did not say MMR causes autism, and if his collection of biopsies for research purposes was pre-approved by the Ethical Practices Committee, why is there a case against Dr. Wakefield (and colleagues)?
- Did the 1998 Lancet case report say that the MMR vaccine causes autism?
- Why do people think the MMR vaccine causes autism?
