Jump to content

Arbeit macht frei, or the Tories and the terminally ill


NormanH
 Share

Recommended Posts

''Of course the far more logical target for substantive cost savings would be the huge amount of unpaid tax, through fraud & tax avoidance, by both corporations and the U.K. rich. I understand the estimated figure for U.K. tax avoidance amounts to something in the region of £ 25 billion per annum. It could easily constitute an even higher figure I suspect. However, this doesn't seem to fit with the conditioned mentally of the populus in this brave new age of austerity. Sadly.''

Tax avoidance is a perfectly legal activity and shouldn't be labelled with fraud.

Tax evasion is the non-legal fraudulent avoidance of taxes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Oh right, I hadn't realised that the democratically elected government of the UK is fascist! Newspapers print whatever sells papers, but I've found that it's best to believe that which you personally know to be true.

I would agree with those who want tax evaders brought to justice, but that is surely a different subject?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Russethouse"]

This idea that the government should either target the disabled or  target the 'huge amount of unpaid tax, through fraud & tax avoidance,' is simplistic to say the least - do we just turn a blind eye to those  fiddling the system because its a disability benefit they are claiming or is it that you perceive some sort of 'hands off policy' because targetting disability benefit should be sacrosanct?

To my knowledge no individual on this board or elsewhere for that matter, whom I have observed, has ever put forward such an either or argument in this context. Of course both avenues of investigation, that of disability benefit fraud & tax avoidance, should be properly examined. I think that goes without saying. The reality is clear however in that Atos and their paymasters the DWP are not investigating the issue of disability benefit fairly, intelligently or honestly. . The headline figures that the government itself estimate disability benefit fraud to represent less than 0.5% of all claims yet thir stated intent to cut 20% from the disability welfare bill rather speaks for itself I would suggest?  

Or do you  just not believe it happens, or care ?

Yes, I believe there is a very small proportion of fraud amongst disablity claimants. As does the government. Yes I do care that some fraudulent claims are being made. The sums involved, if properly assessed however, pale into insignificance compared to the widespread crime of tax avoidance. The either or approach seems to be symptomatic of David Cameron & the conservative party, together with their coalition partners, as opposed to being representative of any viewpoints expressed by disability camapaigners or those sympathetic to their cause. 

Actually the Daily Mail article was little more than a rant. (Which I would suggest the author got off her sick bed to write more because she has a strong work ethic and she is probably freelance, than out of any genuine outrage) 

Whether considered to be a rant or not the author and her article spoke the truth.

However  it would be interesting to read your ideas of some positive ways  of  either cutting the benefit fraud bill or closing the tax loopholes.

In essence, with regard to Atos and disability assessment I would make the following suggestions:

i) Atos are sacked from their contract with the DWP with immediate effect.

ii) Iain Duncan Smith is removed from his post as secretary of state for Work & Pensons with immediate effect. An official apology is issued by the government for its mishandling of issues relating to disability reform.

iii) Disability assessments no longer to be performed by an organisation whose private assessors are rewarded on a direct commission basis proportionate to the number of disability claimants they pass fit to work. The same goes for the basis of remuneration for the appointed organisation concerned, if it has to be a private one.

iv) Disability assessments to take into proper account the past medical history, medical evidence and the expert medical opinion of consultants and medical experts who have properly examined & investigated the individual claimants concerned. Such expert level of medical opinion & evidence was conspicuously very often ignored by Atos assessors.

v) Individuals who are deemed to suffer from long term & incurable conditions to not face regular & unecessary reassessment of their case everything six months or so with the attendant threat of their benefits being removed.

I feel that there are many other sensible measures that might be taken to make medical assessments & disability benefits fair for those who seek and/or receive them. The above I think would at least get things rolling in a sane & honourable direction.   

As regards investigating corporate & private tax avoidance anything tangible and meaningful from this either or government would be most welcomed by all I think. This is the area of widespread crime and deception and of meaningful & worthwhile potential financial benefit. An essential & necessary ingredient to David Cameron's concept of big society, whatever that is, I would dare to suggest.       

 

 

[/quote]

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="powerdesal"]''Of course the far more logical target for substantive cost savings would be the huge amount of unpaid tax, through fraud & tax avoidance, by both corporations and the U.K. rich. I understand the estimated figure for U.K. tax avoidance amounts to something in the region of £ 25 billion per annum. It could easily constitute an even higher figure I suspect. However, this doesn't seem to fit with the conditioned mentally of the populus in this brave new age of austerity. Sadly.'' Tax avoidance is a perfectly legal activity and shouldn't be labelled with fraud. Tax evasion is the non-legal fraudulent avoidance of taxes.[/quote]

How about illegal tax avoidance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sara"] Yes, I believe there is a very small proportion of fraud amongst disablity claimants.  [/quote]

It is difficult to quantify as I tend to think in terms of the people who I have known who receive disablement benefit.

Of the three I knew who were claimants in the road of the village where I lived in the UK one person's claim was a complete fabrication, including forged documents and forged Doctor's letters. Another's claim was based on an old injury, from which he had recovered long ago, but, again, this person was a brilliant lier and manipulater, who had no desire to return to work. The third did have genuine, current problems but, again, embellished them to suit her situation.

So, in my limited view, based on people I knew and lived alongside, the fraudulent claim rate appears to be around 75% or 80%

Sue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't illegal tax avoidance called tax evasion ?

We pay every penny in tax we are due to pay, but we also claim every penny we legally can against tax and I'd suggest people such as Philip Green and Richard Branson do exactly the same, in a much, much, grander way of course. It would be nice and electorally popular if we could find a way to get more of the income of people like PG and RB but if we do I suspect we risk being a less attractive country for investors and I daresay  the competion to attract their money is pretty stiff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i) Atos are sacked from their contract with the DWP with immediate effect.

With all these civil servants being dismissed we coud probably live without  Atos, howver I suspect its cheaper to use them (or similar) rather than employ people

 
ii) Iain Duncan Smith is removed from his post as secretary of state for Work & Pensons with immediate effect. An official apology is issued by the government for its mishandling of issues relating to disability reform.

Iain Duncan Smith has done a great deal of work on Social reform, in and out of government, ackowledged thoughout the HOC, he has a wide knowledge base and cares deeply, it would be hard to find anyone better qualified
 
iii) Disability assessments no longer to be performed by an organisation whose private assessors are rewarded on a direct commission basis proportionate to the number of disability claimants they pass fit to work. The same goes for the basis of remuneration for the appointed organisation concerned, if it has to be a private one.

Even traffic wardens are incentivised and much as I wish it wasn't so (as in bankers bonuses) its hard to do, although if we went back to doing it inhouse it might be possible
 
iv) Disability assessments to take into proper account the past medical history, medical evidence and the expert medical opinion of consultants and medical experts who have properly examined & investigated the individual claimants concerned. Such expert level of medical opinion & evidence was conspicuously very often ignored by Atos assessors.

I suspect that getting all this expert medical evidence would be very expesive and not some thing that most medical people would want to spend time on, we should only have to have that sort of evidence for a few cases, others could probably be assesssed by properly trained nurses or similar, with reference when required to the better qualified

 
v) Individuals who are deemed to suffer from long term & incurable conditions to not face regular & unecessary reassessment of their case everything six months or so with the attendant threat of their benefits being removed.

Everybodies case will have to be monitored surely, how many people do you think claim incurrable back ache ? 

Do you have any examples of people in this group being assessed every six months ?

Frankly I think the whole thing falls down due to the lack of available jobs - those who no longer qualify for disability benefit seem quite likely to qualify for unemployment benefit
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="suein56"][quote user="Sara"] Yes, I believe there is a very small proportion of fraud amongst disablity claimants.  [/quote]
It is difficult to quantify as I tend to think in terms of the people who I have known who receive disablement benefit.
Of the three I knew who were claimants in the road of the village where I lived in the UK one person's claim was a complete fabrication, including forged documents and forged Doctor's letters. Another's claim was based on an old injury, from which he had recovered long ago, but, again, this person was a brilliant lier and manipulater, who had no desire to return to work. The third did have genuine, current problems but, again, embellished them to suit her situation.

So, in my limited view, based on people I knew and lived alongside, the fraudulent claim rate appears to be around 75% or 80%

Sue
[/quote]

I think 75% to 80% is cloud cucko land to be honest. So too now does Atos. They were hitting a 75% rate for passing disability claimants fit for work. By ignoring existing & extensive medical evidence & by blatantly misrepresenting the assessment interviews they conducted (certain claimants had the presence of mind to covertly audio tape their interviews thus incriminating the assessor and his/her version of events) and by falsely writing up the assessments. On appeal over 3/4 qtrs of disallowed claims have been reinstated.

This I would suggest speaks for itself.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Pommier"]The problem with rants such as this one in the Daily Mail is that genuinely incapacitated people read such rubbish and believe that they'll be forced out to work.[/quote]

Rant or not, a matter of personal subjective opinion, this article and the author spoke the truth. Time to wake up & smell the coffee I would suggest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess a lot of people who are reading this thread have no idea as to how genuinely sick and disabled people in the UK are now being treated, as they are constantly fed a steady trickle of lies from the right-wing press and media, and reassurances from this vile government about how genuine claimants have nothing to fear. This is coming from a government who used the parliamentary privilege rule to overturn some very watered down amendments passed by the Lords to steamroller their welfare reform bill into law.

As already stated by Sara only 0.3% of all disability claims are deemed to be fraudulent this figure coming from the government themselves, yet they are proposing to force anybody who is placed in the work-related activity group (WRAG) into forced unpaid labour. I will not post any links to blogs or newspaper articles, but a link to a website that helps and advises people who are claiming benefits, the link to the thread is from a man who is very distressed because his BLIND wife has been placed in WRAG, this is the same group that the government is targeting into forced unpaid labour, this government has sunk so low that it thinks blind people should be forced into employment against their will. God help us all.

I really feel that the government and the UK have now hit rock bottom.

Link:

http://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/forum?func=view&catid=10&id=71257

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sara"]

[quote user="Pommier"]The problem with rants such as this one in the Daily Mail is that genuinely incapacitated people read such rubbish and believe that they'll be forced out to work.[/quote]

Rant or not, a matter of personal subjective opinion, this article and the author spoke the truth. Time to wake up & smell the coffee I would suggest.

[/quote]

 I think you are the one who should wake up and smell the coffee - as the Labour ex minister said on his way out of his office - there is no money. All benefits are being reviewed and revised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Russethouse"][quote user="Sara"]

[quote user="Pommier"]The problem with rants such as this one in the Daily Mail is that genuinely incapacitated people read such rubbish and believe that they'll be forced out to work.[/quote]

Rant or not, a matter of personal subjective opinion, this article and the author spoke the truth. Time to wake up & smell the coffee I would suggest.

[/quote]

 I think you are the one who should wake up and smell the coffee - as the Labour ex minister said on his way out of his office - there is no money. All benefits are being reviewed and revised.

[/quote]

Yes, but reviewed and revised fairly? Frankly New Labour are as complicit in this sordid drama as the jolly old conservatives. I say again what about illegal tax avoidance? Or evasion if you prefer. The bigger crime and the infinitely larger financial benefit to be recouped.  

Looking after the chronically ill & disabled in a fair, open & humanitarian manner is a basic prerequisite for any society wishing to call itself civilised. It really is as simple as that. Austerity measures or not. The line has now been crossed. Both in terms of the behaviour of the government and the attitudes and prejudice of the healthy majority. Echoes of the third Reich indeed.

Frankly those who are fortunate enough to be healthy (& employed) don't really have anything difficult to contend with in their lives. Not by comparison. Apart from getting off their behinds, attending their place of work & paying their rightful & due amount of taxes. All rather straightforward if one is healthy & employed I would venture to suggest. After all it wasn't the disabled who screwed up the economy was it?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sara"][quote user="Russethouse"][quote user="Sara"]

[quote user="Pommier"]The problem with rants such as this one in the Daily Mail is that genuinely incapacitated people read such rubbish and believe that they'll be forced out to work.[/quote]

Rant or not, a matter of personal subjective opinion, this article and the author spoke the truth. Time to wake up & smell the coffee I would suggest.

[/quote]

 I think you are the one who should wake up and smell the coffee - as the Labour ex minister said on his way out of his office - there is no money. All benefits are being reviewed and revised.

[/quote]

Yes, but reviewed and revised fairly? Frankly New Labour are as complicit in this sordid drama as the jolly old conservatives. I say again what about illegal tax avoidance? Or evasion if you prefer. The bigger crime and the infinitely larger financial benefit to be recouped.  

Looking after the chronically ill & disabled in a fair, open & humanitarian manner is a basic prerequisite for any society wishing to call itself civilised. It really is as simple as that. Austerity measures or not. The line has now been crossed. Both in terms of the behaviour of the government and the attitudes and prejudice of the healthy majority. Echoes of the third Reich indeed.

Frankly those who are fortunate enough to be healthy (& employed) don't really have anything difficult to contend with in their lives. Not by comparison. Apart from getting off their behinds, attending their place of work & paying their rightful & due amount of taxes. All rather straightforward if one is healthy & employed I would venture to suggest. After all it wasn't the disabled who screwed up the economy was it?   

[/quote]

Well Sarah my mother is not particularly healthy (no mobility) and my oldest friend is healthy but hasn't been employed for the past 10 years and is now a pensioner - they are both having a pretty tough time benefit wise too....

 Neither is it particularly easy to be employed, both my children are on contracts and goodness knows where there next job will come from.. believe me, if you think the disabled are being particularly singled out you are mistaken - everything is far more difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with these newspapers is they keep telling different stories. The DM at the beginning of last week was talking about unemployment particularly amongst older people being very high. Towards the end of the week it said in another article that 9 out of 10 older women have to work. With the sale of newspapers generally down because people use the Internet more they are struggling. I think that is leading to more sensational, outrageous and at times generally irresponsible articles being printed. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying they are all lying but I often find it's best to use the article as a starting place to start a search to find out what is really going on. In fairness whilst the DM is probably the worst of the lot they are not alone, even papers like The Guardian have been caught doing the same thing.

The problem with social payments of any kind is that people do abuse them. I can't speak about people with disabilities first hand but I certainly have known a few people who have continued to claim unemployment benefits and also worked (taking a couple of hours off every so often to 'sign on'). One hears from time to time of 'disabled people' who are claiming benefits fraudulently yet they are caught doing things like people with bad backs caught playing tennis or golf for example. Unfortunately these people are a small group and we sometimes tend to think there are a lot more like them which of course there may be. How do you find these people? The obvious way is to means test. Not a nice thing but the truth is that they need to do this because because of this small group of cheats.

I saw something on TV the other day about insurance companies and people who are terminally ill. The 'piece' was about a woman who was dying and had such an illness and the reluctance of the insurance company, to whom she had paid quite a bit of money to over the years, refusing to pay out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Private Eye always highlights articles in papers where one article says one thing and another article says the opposite about a particular subject. As Q says take these as a starting point to carry out research.

I think it says a great deal about the UK that people can get disability allowance. However, as with any system it is open to abuse. I know of two people receiving this yet the basis on which they receive it does not show in how they live their lives.

Any genuine person should not be affronted by scrutiny. The Government is handing out taxpayers money so surely there is a duty to ensure it only goes to those who are proven to deserve it.

Tax evasion is another thing and should run in parallel with investigating benefit fraud.

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Quillan"]

The problem with these newspapers is they keep telling different stories. The DM at the beginning of last week was talking about unemployment particularly amongst older people being very high. Towards the end of the week it said in another article that 9 out of 10 older women have to work. With the sale of newspapers generally down because people use the Internet more they are struggling. I think that is leading to more sensational, outrageous and at times generally irresponsible articles being printed. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying they are all lying but I often find it's best to use the article as a starting place to start a search to find out what is really going on. In fairness whilst the DM is probably the worst of the lot they are not alone, even papers like The Guardian have been caught doing the same thing.

The problem with social payments of any kind is that people do abuse them. I can't speak about people with disabilities first hand but I certainly have known a few people who have continued to claim unemployment benefits and also worked (taking a couple of hours off every so often to 'sign on'). One hears from time to time of 'disabled people' who are claiming benefits fraudulently yet they are caught doing things like people with bad backs caught playing tennis or golf for example. Unfortunately these people are a small group and we sometimes tend to think there are a lot more like them which of course there may be. How do you find these people? The obvious way is to means test. Not a nice thing but the truth is that they need to do this because because of this small group of cheats.

I saw something on TV the other day about insurance companies and people who are terminally ill. The 'piece' was about a woman who was dying and had such an illness and the reluctance of the insurance company, to whom she had paid quite a bit of money to over the years, refusing to pay out.

[/quote]

 

Quillan, the problem with U.K. newspapers is that they are not telling this story at all. Period. This is why it was somewhat surprising, to say the very least, to see such honest & intelligent reporting under the banner of the Daily Mail. A paper not exactly renowned for its balanced, honest & intelligent reporting. But it did only appear online. And that is the point isn't it? Frankly I think people might have died of shock if such an article had appeared in the paper version. But of course it never would. It would never have been allowed into print.

The truth is that in the U.K. we are saddled with an obedient and establishment supporting media when it comes to stories of this nature. The Murdoch empire has a lot to answer for in this but they are not the only ones. Even the BBC now toes the line since its emasculation following the Andrew Gilligan affair. Proper investigative journalism is quite a rare thing now in the U.K. With a few noteworthy exceptions. Frankly the disconcerting aspect in this is that people tend to believe the propaganda they are drip-fed these days. Opinions are easily formed and nurtured it would seem.

A case in point, a controversial one perhaps, was MMR and Wakefield. None of the true facts were reported in the press and a universal villification of Wakefield took place courtesy of Brian Deer and the BMJ. Health Editors of papers were more than willing to play ball with the misinformation fed into the public domain. No questions asked. Well some were but a polite invite to Downing Street and a word in the ear sorted these out quite effectively. In reality the BMJ and Brian Deer were guilty of fraud and not Andrew Wakefield. The truth will come out at some point in time I would imagine but a case in point in terms of an unwelcome truth buffering up against the establishment & an establishment friendly media. Again the worrying aspect of this being that many people unquestionningly believe the content they read in U.K. newspapers.  

Means testing of disability benefit does seem a reasonable suggestion to me. If honourably applied. The overwhelming problem with the DWP / Atos assessments of the chronically ill and disabled is that they are being carried out deliberaterly fraudulently by Atos with seemingly the full blessing of the DWP and its kindly overseer Iain Duncan Smith. They have got away with this because people reading their daily newspapers and listening to their tv's in the U.K. are simply none the wiser. My worry is that if they were would they care? 

One of the recurring themes in modern life that never ceases to amaze me is healthy people thinking they have got it tough. Having to work & pay their taxes. In reality most people have no inkling of how lucky they are. My husband worked for 25 years whilst struggling with a progressive and degenerative neurological illness. He worked hard enough to be able to retire very early on his own funds. He has never drawn a social benefit in his entire life. However, he is more than willing for his taxes to support those less fortunate than himself. One memory he holds of work is that of perfectly healthy people moaning about having colds & how hard they were having to work. Such people did seem sadly out of touch with reality in his opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the recurring themes in modern life that never ceases to amaze me is healthy people thinking they have got it tough

While health is  the single most important thing, there are thousands of other things than can cause great concern and unhappiness and sometimes it does feel tough - we all have different parameters.

Frankly I think mean testing benefits would cause no end of problems, people pay into the system in the knowledge that they may need to avail themselves of it one day - if you start effectively saying if you save and try and look after yourself you will never be able to get anything out,  you just fuel bitterness and resentment and even more of the attitude you seem to so deplore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sara"]

A case in point, a controversial one perhaps, was MMR and Wakefield. None of the true facts were reported in the press and a universal villification of Wakefield took place courtesy of Brian Deer and the BMJ. Health Editors of papers were more than willing to play ball with the misinformation fed into the public domain. No questions asked. Well some were but a polite invite to Downing Street and a word in the ear sorted these out quite effectively. In reality the BMJ and Brian Deer were guilty of fraud and not Andrew Wakefield. The truth will come out at some point in time I would imagine but a case in point in terms of an unwelcome truth buffering up against the establishment & an establishment friendly media. Again the worrying aspect of this being that many people unquestionningly believe the content they read in U.K. newspapers.

[/quote]

I would love to know where you have found the data that back's this up your comment on this. All the data (as opposed to newspaper articles) seems to contradict what you have said. The big test of course will be his courtcase in the US, where he now lives, against Deer and the BMJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sara"] ...people reading their daily newspapers and listening to their tv's in the U.K. are simply none the wiser. My worry is that if they were would they care? 

One of the recurring themes in modern life that never ceases to amaze me is healthy people thinking they have got it tough. [/quote]


Over the past couple of years, since economies started collapsing like a pack of cards, and austerity measures became the order of the day, people reading their daily newspapers and listening to their TV's (whether in the UK or anywhere else, TBH) have been constantly bombarded with news about yet another sector of society about to be deprived of something they currently have, for the greater good and as part of the Great Belt-Tightening Exercise. From schools to libraries, teachers to train drivers, the old, the young, the sick, the disabled....

I regret having to say this, but two things come into play after a time. The first I've already spoken of on here, and I believe it's a human trait which comes increasingly to the fore in these situations, to our individual and collective shame: we ALL think we're a more deserving case than the next person, on some level. And when everyone's got less, it does put a dent in the most altruistic of spirits. Add to this something which we probably should blame the media for (even if, as you contend, they're being gagged somehow) and that's "compassion fatigue". It doesn't matter how much or how little all this stuff affects individuals, after a while you realise that you can't feel sorry for everybody and that, indeed, you'd need the wisdom of Solomon to decide who really WAS most deserving of your sympathy and support.

The government, this government, any government of whatever persuasion, faced with an increasingly smaller pot of money to distribute to so many, is going to make some almighty cock-ups (sometimes real, sometimes perceived). It's no good blaming the healthy for being healthy, though. And I believe you can be healthy and STILL have it tough. Tough comes in all sorts of guises. Perhaps one of the dangers of not recognising this fact is that some people (an undefined percentage) seem to believe that if you pretend to be unhealthy, you can have it less tough, because you will get financial help. Those are the people who need to be found and weeded out of the system, and it's a sad fact that they are also the people who DO get media coverage, not the thousands on disability benefit who need and deserve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quillan, there is an excellent U.S. radio piece on Dr David Wakefield & the MMR controversy by investigative journalist Gary Null. It is over 4 hours long. It includes interviews with Dr Wakefield himself and the notorious Brian Deer. As well as other prominent figures within the medical, legal and vaccine research fields. It also includes evidence from mothers of the Lancet children who were at the centre of the controversy.    

It is the most incisive and impartial piece I have come accross on this highly controversial story. Preferential certainly to the politicised commentaries posted in the U.K. media on this matter I would suggest. A good starting point for those interested in the subject.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/progressive-commentary-hour/

You can download the 3 individual parts under the heading "Progressive Commentary Hour  - 01/23/12..A special three part Progressive Commentary Hour on the vaccine controversy"

Having listened to this in detail & examined other evidence out there, in my personal opinion, things do seem to point in one direction. It is quite damning I feel on the part of the BMJ and Brian Deer. There is other evidence out there but this one does encapsulate the facts quite well re. the GMC inquiry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sara"]

Quillan, there is an excellent U.S. radio piece on Dr David Wakefield & the MMR controversy by investigative journalist Gary Null. It is over 4 hours long. It includes interviews with Dr Wakefield himself and the notorious Brian Deer. As well as other prominent figures within the medical, legal and vaccine research fields. It also includes evidence from mothers of the Lancet children who were at the centre of the controversy.    

It is the most incisive and impartial piece I have come accross on this highly controversial story. Preferential certainly to the politicised commentaries posted in the U.K. media on this matter I would suggest. A good starting point for those interested in the subject.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/progressive-commentary-hour/

You can download the 3 individual parts under the heading "Progressive Commentary Hour  - 01/23/12..A special three part Progressive Commentary Hour on the vaccine controversy"

Having listened to this in detail & examined other evidence out there, in my personal opinion, things do seem to point in one direction. It is quite damning I feel on the part of the BMJ and Brian Deer. There is other evidence out there but this one does encapsulate the facts quite well re. the GMC inquiry. 

[/quote]

Strange how these people could interview the 'mothers' of the 'Lancet Children' because firstly it assumes that only mothers were involved which is wrong and secondly the names of the parents involved have never been released. In the article which you are intitially talked about which is entitled "Secrets of the MMR scare: how the case against the MMR vaccine was fixed" mothers and fathers who were interviewed were given numbers. So how anyone can claim they got the names from that article is beyond belief. You may want to read the report yourself so you can see I am right and they are wrong, a link is given below.

http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5347

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...