“People talk about conspiracy, and let’s just put that to one side. Let’s just say there’s a ruthless, pragmatic effort to protect your bottom line…. and that’s what matters to you, protecting policy and profit. And I think that’s what we’re witnessing here. And so in the UK what we have is The Lancet, the journal in which we published [the study], which is owned by the publishing company Elsevier. The head of Elsevier also happens to sit on the board of GlaxoSmithKline, or at least did when all of this was taking place.
Now, that’s getting a little uncomfortable… a little cozy, that relationship. Here we have the manufacturer of the vaccine that we’re calling into question, and he’s in charge of the medical journal that’s responsible for publishing our work and the retracting the work later on? And then we have his brother is a high court judge who dismissed the appeal of parents seeking compensation for MMR damage?
You know, this is all just a little too close. It’s a conflict of interest. Then, we have the chairman of the panel, Dr. [Surendra] Kuma, who sat in judgment on me and found me guilty, who did not disclose the fact that he is a shareholder and stockholder in GlaxoSmithKline.
Now, the irony of this would be lost on you because part of the case against me was conflict of interest… and here we have a conflict of interest that was completely undisclosed. And then just a few weeks after the decision of guilty against me and my colleagues, he (Kuma) goes out there and says we ought to mandate, we ought to force children in this country to be vaccinated.”
— Andrew Wakefield