Interesting character assassination of a group of people who have the temerity to question the party line. I have heard Paul Shattock speak and have read his papers. He gives an interesting and well researched view on the relationship between neurological conditions and cell membrane permeability.

Whenever I see this histerical 'Wakefield bashing ' approach to scientific non-conformism I think back to the great successes of the scientific community. Can anyone remember how safe BSE infected burgers were said to be and how safe Thalidomide was?

Paul Lupton, Durham,

The author of this article completely excludes the fact that Dr Wakefield at first never made any connection, but put the facts on the table for others to connect the dots. Included in these facts is his discovery of a high incidence of the vaccine strain of measles found thriving in the guts of autistic children. My child is nearly cured of autism because I did not listen to the puppet establishment of pharma.

Mark, Lake Forest, CA

Everyone one here is going back and forth about their interpretations of this story.... what are the facts? Has anyone done any reasonably unbiased research on this? Just the facts ma'm. Give me them and I'll make up my own mind.

Ken, Burlington, Vermont

Anjana, Thank you for bringing some common sense. If i had any doubt, I just had to read the first comment to your article, which uses a movie as its supporting information........

Juan , Chicago, IL, USA

Lorenzo's Oil isn't quite a true story - it is a movie, after all. Lorenzo himself is still blind and bedridden, so the oil can't be said to be a cure.

The severity of the disease varies widely, so as yet there is no proof the oil even works. It could well be that the boys who "benefited" from the oil had the mild form of the disease and the oil did nothing for them, but gave false hope for others.

Bruce Small, Tucson, Arizona

A few days ago I read some articles from the CCHR like
http://www.cchr.com/files/8013/ins_pack.pdf .
As these texts speak for themselves, I ld like to emphasie that "autism" and other mentaly disorders or illnesses are defined "at random" without any scientificaly proof, so who is the one who says that these illnesses only can be treated by scientificaly proven methods?

J Pruijt, Tilburg, NL

I can highly recommend the movie Lorenzo's Oil, a true story, for anyone interested in the relationship between medical science and incurable diseases. Nutritional and metabolic diseases are almost completely ignored, because the key is always dietary and behavioral. In other words, it is all about preventitive maintenance. Western medicine focuses almost entirely on repairs.

The arrogance of this columnist is breathtaking. Is she so afraid of hope? Is she so hateful of the brave?

Brennan Hayden, Williamston, Michigan, USA

Where can I read the three studies which confirm Dr Wakefield's indings?

Tom Sargent, W Lothian, Scotland

It seems to me that Anjana Ahuja has a desire to constantly support the consensual view within science. I have noted before she is always sides with the establishment over issues like global warming, MMR debate etc. This is fine but science moves forward when there are people willing to challenge the consensual view. These 'mavericks' are often wrong. But sometimes, they are right. I fear if it was Copernicus, Galileo, Darwin or Watson and Crick we were discussing instead of Andrew Wakefield. Ms Ahuja would be condemming these mavericks with equal vigour. As a science writer it is my experience Ms Ahuja doesnt have a great deal of imagination beyond the establishment view of the world. Thats a shame. Not only is it mundane not see beyond the accepted dogma it also holds science back. Id rather have ten Andrew Wakefield's who challenge the norm and could be wrong than some unimaginative scientist who toes the establishment line.

Kevin Law, Dundee, UK

Consensus is not Science and Science is not Consensus. (Michael Crichton). Whatever has happened to the Scientific Method? Assuming "that there is no cure for autism — it is a lifelong disability" is incredible ignorance as well as antipathy! What other diseases and maladies does this author feel are not worth the trouble to cure or alleviate? DISGUSTING!

Ed Gelasi, Centerburg, OH, USA

Is there Golbel warming? YES. Are we Humans causing it? NO. The earth has been thouigh many gobel warming and colling cycles. At one time Alaska was completly green. Want we should do is plan for the changes that will take place.

Rick, moodus, USA/CT

The most obvious way to determine whether or not vaccinations have anything to do with autism is to determine if any child who has never been vaccinated has been diagnosed as autistic. Has this ever been done?

Catherine , Irvington, Virginia

Science is about challenging other's thoughts and constantly proving and disproving ideas. Being disappointed about scientific challenges is absurd. These last 10 years have seen an increase of the political left melding politiical and social theory with science and expecting scientific fact (and the scientists researching it to conform).

No One, no, no

The cause(s) of autism will no doubt prove to be many and varied. It is therefore likely then, that the cures, if any are eventually proven out will also be many and varied. A pediatrician once told me that my son was autistic, for lack of a more "scientific" explanation, because God made him that way. Since then I have fathered a second autistic son with a different mother. Is the cause then genetic? This "study" would seem to indicate so, but with a range of only two subjects, it is hardly conclusive. Research, real research is needed. Snake oil salesmen can peddle their wares elsewhere. Researchers with unpopular conclusions, however, in my experience, are often on the right track. Journalists should perhaps stick to stories about Hollywood gossip unless they are experts in the field they write about.

Dale Raby, Green Bay, WI

The non-scientist often mis-understands the reality of Science. Compared with the arrogant claims of religion there are no absolutes in science; it is a constant voyage of discovery anr new revelations.
As I understand it we are only on the periphery of knowledge in autism and as with all new knowledge and technology we should always be cautious in our approach to new techniques. Put it in the same catgory as GM Foods and Cloning!

G L Spencer, Andover , UK

There have been, at least, three studies that have replicated Dr. Wakefields findings. The ONLY people who still make strong objectios to th finding are the pharmas and the govt agencies who stand to be implicated. MMR does not hurt all children. MMR is no the only cause of ASD. However, the evidence in the studies I have read is quite clear: some children with autism have measles in their guts. The measles has impaired their ability to absorb some nutrients. And, nutrional supplements have helped--not cured--these children. To deny these studies and conclusions is analagous to being a flat worlder. Read the studies; do your homework.

Julian Irby, Pensacola, Florida, USA

In the interests of full transparency maybe Anjana Ahuja should give details of her sponsors in this area of research?

David, Andorra La Vella, Andorra

ASDs have, unfortunately, become a profitable industry. I have little doubt that, if I were a child today, I would be diagnosed with some level of the spectrum, and little doubt that such a diagnosis would be of no practical benefit to me in later life.

Profitable medical fashions always have, and always will, attract peddlers of snake-oil. But while they may be more dangerous than the "specialists" who make money diagnosing everything that moves with autism, or the Big Pharma companies working on expensive drugs, it seems hard to blame them any more than these others.

Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK

The author's statement "These individuals are characterised by varying permutations of strange beliefs, such as that vaccination does more harm than good, and that heavy metals .... are poisoning children’s minds and triggering autism" is misleading journalism.
Firstly, these doctors do not say that vaccination does more harm than good. They do say that in some cases it causes harm, and in some cases serious harm. Any family doctor will confirm that (although off the record, as it is heresy to admit it).
Secondly, is she saying that a belief that heavy metals in vaccines harms the child is a strange belief? That is as preposterous a claim as any she criticizes. Would she inject a child with the raw substances found in vaccines? Not if she was sane. So why is it OK in vaccines?

Max C, London, UK

Dr Wakefield was pushed out before he could finish his research , i wonder why , this Dr obviously cares about these children , what is rather strange is that none of these children can get treatment for their bowel conditions , unless they are scoped , but noone will scope them , i wonder why

Dawn , essex, england

The authors level of ignorance is insulting to parrots!

If the "consensus", which you clearly blindly support, states that if you are autistic then you are buggered for life, then it flies in the face of the amazing progress many of these children make with some revolutionary treatments around at the moment, particularly in our case - behaviour modification.

You appear to be accusing Dr Wakefield of something you are most assuredly guilty of yourself, rash, ill-informed claims. The difference is that, despite your rant, I believe his motives are far more honourable than yours!

Mark Thomas, Oslo, Norway

Mr Stanfield asks 'What can one say in the face of such a response?' to my statement that there is no credible science supporting Andrew Wakefield.

How about showing me some? Maybe Mr Stanfield is referring to the work of Wakefields business colleague Arthur Krigsman - so far unpublished. Maybe he is referring to the work of Wakefield's other business colleague Jeff Bradstreet who believes exorcism (I kid you not) can cure autism.

There is good science and bad science. Mr Wakefield's science and those of his supporters is published in non-standard science vanity journals such as JPANDS. By contrast, both the epidemiological evidence and the clinical evidence is published in well respected, peer reviewed journals. I refer Mr Stanfield to the work of Fombonne, D'Souza (who showed Wakefield exactly WHY he was wrong - he forgot to discount false positives, as have all his supporters using his 'method') and Afzal amongst others.

Kevin Leitch, Staffordshire, UK

You have obviously not done any research on treating autism your self, therefore you have no right to do so until you do. our children can be treated, autism is not neurological is it medical and can therefore be treated. www.treatingautism.com.

larissa, kent,

Why should Dr. Andrew Wakefield admit he is wrong? He should admit he is wrong because he found measles in the gut of children with autism. Did he put the measles there? Of course not.

He should admit he was wrong for helping all those families who had children with gut problems and had autism. Would those families be ungrateful because Dr. Wakefield helped their kids? Of course not.

I met Dr. Andrew Wakefield in 1997 and feel I can call him a great doctor and a great friend since I have known him these many years afterward. The medical community needs to take Dr. Wakefield's research to the next higher level if we are going to stop the autism epidemic and help kids like our 22 year old son, Eric get better. I think it really is up to the medical community to stop the unnecessary criticism and do something to help our kids. Attacking Dr. Wakefield personally and the excellent science he has provided will not stop the autism epidemic and help our kids get better.

Raymond Gallup, Lake Hiawatha, NJ, USA

What would Andrew Wakefield and others gain by making-up such claims about the MMR apart from being vilified by MMR zealots? No amount of money is worth it.
When my daughter was given an overdose of the MMR vaccine and diagnosed with autism, I was treated extremely badly and with no apology to date. Ok so they needed to cover-up the mistake but did they really need to ruin our life by doing so!

Patsy, London, UK

If The Times would give at least as much space to a particularly knowledgeable supporter of Dr Wakefield's thesis as it did to Anjuna Ahuja to make her spiteful case, then maybe we could get somewhere in this matter. As it is, The Times is evidencing its bias; and this is too important a matter to be dealt with in such an unfair manner. Come on, Times. Show your willingness to give this an honest debate. In the meantime, I would like to observe that Kevin Leitch obviously has not done his homework, to say that there is "in fact, none at all" of good science backing Dr Wakefield up. What can one say in the face of such a response? Please; know whereof you speak before making bald statements. Otherwise it's just sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Stan Stanfield, Forres, UK

Your journlist seems to think that there is no science behind the DAN! approach. On the contrary, the children and adults treated by DAN! doctors are given numerous tests, most of them non invasive, before a treatment regime is started. Contrast this with what the NHS does - labels our children as incurable without a single test being run.
It is also wrong to state that a child died as a result of chellation. This child was given the WRONG drug. A medical mistake. This happens everywhere medicine is practiced and all to often in the NHS

Christine Macvicar, Bridge of Weir, Scotland

When my daughter was nealry four we were told that she had autism, and we were told that she would probably never learn meaningful speech, or go to school, and that I would have to look after her for the rest of her life.
Now, aged eight, my daughter is bright, highly verbal and sociable. She is very happy at her local school and attained fantastic grades in her recent SATS. She has a potentially bright future ahead of her.
So how did this change come about? By her father and I listening to the likes of Paul Shattock and others who were derided in your article. They gave my daughter her life back. Change of diet, nutritional supplementation and oral chelation therapy allowed my daughter to develop into a near normal little girl. My gratitude to these selfless scientists is beyond words. I cannot thank them enough for giving me back my little girl, and giving her the chance of an independant future.

Rebecca Hoskins, Alnwick, Northumberland

And this is supported by a Government prepared to tax millions off the road to authenticate its Green credentials.
What CO2 deficit do Bernard Mathews trucks create in the cross-transportation of eggs, chicks, birds for slaughter "et al" to save a few pence per bird on labour costs?
Sorry but it is a "No-Brainer"!

Nick Proctor, Truro, Cornwall, U.K.

We have never had any treatment from Dr Wakefield,but know plenty who have had treatment.Is it just ,that he and his fellow team are treated in the manner they are? iits,disgracefull .The Time has a lot to answer for when the day comes that we the parents along with the science that Dr Wakefield & co have prove the vaccine /autism link

.MMR RIP

ANGUS, OBAN, ARGYLL

Years from now, you'll see numerous studies that prove that what Dr. Wakefield, Dr. Usman, and others do DOES work for a number of kids with autism. My son is a patient of Dr. Usman, and I have met other patients of hers who are indistinguishable from "normal" kids--they are completely recovered. I had a fifteen minute conversation with one child who I didn't realize had been formerly autistic.

Does the biomedical approach work for all kids with autism? Unfortunately, it does not. However, it has worked for many children, and it is working for my son. If I had taken the approach you seemed to be recommending--just sit back and assume he CAN'T get better--I'd be living with a much different child than the verbal, interactive, loving son I have today. Thank you Dr. Usman, and all DAN doctors, for continuing to tirelessly treat our children.

Erin Micklo, Chicago, Illinois

As the parent of an autistic child I'd like to thank you for writing an honest article about Andrew Wakefield and this 'conference'. Autistic people need science, not quackery.

I find it fascinating that so many people think that there is a 'legion' of good science backing Wakefield up. In fact, there is none at all.

I also see that people like David Ayoub are supporters of Wakefield. David Ayoub is a man who believes that the Illuminati control us via vaccines. Please check his Wikipedia entry for details. Such is the quality of support Wakefield enjoys.

Mr Wakefield - you took the UK public for £16m. That money could've made a huge difference to autistic people. Shame on you.

Kevin Leitch, Staffordshire, UK

I was going to write a reply in praise of Ms Ahuja's article; but given the number of people who have already spoken up for Dr Wakefield's and others' treatements in the face of the article, I would more interested to see the "overwhelming evidence to the contrary" Ms Ahuja references.

Do you think you could post it here, or links to it please, Ms Ahuja?

Joe Jones, London, UK

Ha ha ha - just look where these approvals of the quack Wakefield come from - two out of three of them are the same people who believed that Saddam Hussein was about to nuke the west. and voted twice for George W Bush.

Tony Volpe, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

From your reader's resposes it appears the Times may be losing its command on the spin of a very bad public health catastophe. Dr Wakefield was correct and several hundred physicians with greater intellectual and moral discernment than Ahuja have figured that out long ago. The Times and others like them have fallen into the ragpile of corrupted media outlets directed by their corporate sponsors and frightened government healthcare agencies. The distinction between journalism, public health policy and pharmaceutical marketing is a blur. Only it appears the public has finally caught on. You have become a contrarian indicator in this matter. If you say Wakefield was wrong, we are most assured that he was, in fact, right. Thanks for confirming this.

david ayoub, springfield, IL

Childrens health is improving after these treatments. That much is obvious. There are too many children getting better now, to deny it any more.

Why does anyone think that parents are lying about their children getting better? - How ignorant is it to take the point of view that statistics are more reliable than parents!

Faith in science is sorely misplaced these days, as there is very little objective non profitable science published any more.

Pete, Sydney, Australia

I personally know parents of children who have recovered from autism using biomedical treatments such as dietary intervention, chelation, nutritional supplements, digestive enzymes, probiotics, and medications to combat yeast and viruses. Anjana Ahuja is blinded by prejudice.

Twyla, Glenale, CA

To Michael Fitzpatrick and others with some distorted bone to pick-

Good luck on your bitter campaign but children are responding to biomedical treatments and nothing you could possibly say will ever change that fact.

There is plenty of scientific rationale and more mounting. Your tabloid posts show little medical merit and add little to the discussion of why so many children are sick.

Teresa Conrick, Chicago, USA/IL

For more insight into the Dr. Wakefield's type of interventions, It is worth watching the link entitled:

VIDEO: Gastrointestinal Pathology and the Use of SCD in ASD - Pamela J. Ferro, RN
(http://www.gottschallcenter.com/links.php)

The speaker was recently invited to Boston's Northeastern University to speak about biomedical interventions in the treatment of autism---especially those which address childrens' digestive issues. Ms. Ferro's clinic has treated 300 children over the past few years, is currently treating 100, and has another 100 on the waiting list. Nearly all patients are local and have found her by word of mouth. In addition, her clinic is partially funded by the state of Massachusetts.

Children are definitely improving:)

r. prasad, boston, ma

A disappointing article. The peer reviewed publications confirming the link between autism, intestinal disease, dysbiosis and environmental stressors such as heavy metals and live viruses are legion.

My own son has tested positive for mercury poisoning and is recovering from autism the same way thousands of others are; using these crazy scientific and nutritional ideas.

I am very disappointed with the treatment of this topic in what has always been my favourite newspaper. Please can we have a story about recovering children - something about how treated children are improving and even recovering.

Sandra Woolley, Birmingham, UK

I find it obvious that Anjana Ahuja wrote this article with not only preconceived ideas but an agenda that the truth does not support. There were several blatantly wrong pieces of information out there. Starting with the timeline of Dr. Wakefields research which had already been going on before he was asked to testify. Followed up with the fact that testifying as a professional witness is common practice. Incorrect is the idea that it is necessary to fork over the 100 pounds to go to the conference to begin biomedical treatments, not in this information age and the internet. It isn't even necessary to see a doctor to implement the GFCF diet. And insurance can and will cover some of the services. I would also like to point out that the child who died during chelation therapy died because the medical personell made a mistake which happens all the time. Things get left in people during surgeries, wrong doses are given etc. As long as people administer medicine mistakes will be made.

Rachel, Marysville, WA

I was relieved and pleased to see someone in the media finally daring to point out what many sane individuals know: that when a condition as emotionally difficult as autism is discussed, hope always triumphs over facts. Andrew Wakefield is and was a trouble maker and a charlatan. No rational person who read his work (which I have) would have ever thought it plausible. Vaccines save millions of lives and he endangered them. I sympathise with the plight of parents of children with autism, but I know that I will vaccinate my children. I also know that if my child had autism I would "try anything", but I wouldn't accept tenous explanations that were patently unworkable.

Ellie Davies, Stoke on Trent, UK

I find it absurd to attribute the astounding increase to better diagnostics alone. It is impossible to miss something as "in your face" as a child who is moderately to severely autistic. I use these specifically because the California agency who has been tracking these numbers for the longest amount of time doesn't track mild cases at all and yet has seen an amazing number of new cases since the explosion of this disorder in the 1980's. I would also like to point out that all of these paragons of medicine who have so derided Doctor Wakefield and his research have done nothing themselves to help parents. Most parents get told well there really isn't anything you can do and as a parent of an autistic child I KNOW that isn't true. I would also like to point out that epidemiological studies aren't worth the paper they are printed on you can make statistics say anything. I think Anjana needs to take a look at the Simpsonwood meeting transcript before talking about these studies.

Rachel, Marysville, WA

My daughter has recovered from autism using bio-med treatments. I cannot possibly keep this information to myself, I must shout it out for all the children suffering out there. Come and interview us and tell the truth.
Did this journalist even attend this conference? I doubt it as she would have seen that each speaker backed up the lecture with science and studies published in well respected medical journals. Many of the speakers were Professors or Researchers with Universities.
However, it is good to see that the media is covering this event even if in a negative way - lets ge the word out there: autism is treatable.

jean muscroft, Llangollen, Wales

Anjana Ahuja's attitude is all too familiar among those who do not take the time to thoroughly research a topic before hitting the keyboard. If she took the time to take a close look at autism, and the many children who are being treated successfully using the DAN approach in the United States, she would have a different attitude. Instead, her uninformed opinion may discourage much needed treatment and research into autism, which is underfunded, misunderstood by too many on both sides of the Atlantic.
Here in the US, the CDC just came out with a report that shows that autism now affects an estimated 1 out of 150 children. While there may not be agreement about why this is happening, the higher numbers are more than just better diagnosis. DAN doctors may not have all the answers - yet. But at least they are asking the right questions, which is more than Anjana Ahuja is doing.

Paula Stepankowsky, Longview, Wash., USA

Ahuja's article is long on accusations but short on objectivity.

The challenge of theories such as Wakefield's is that they are not easily testable, nor are they intended to represent a single overarching cause of autism. Instead, what Wakefield and others say is (a) the child has a genetic disposition toward an autism spectrum disorder; (b) there is some kind of environmental injury to the child (multiple viral loads in combined vaccines, thimerosal, something else) which triggers the already-existing genetics to cause autism. *Not* that all or even most children getting MMRs or mercury-preserved vaccine, just that some may, and that the risks due to reducing the causes (separating the MMR into multiple vaccines, or using another preservative) are far outweighed by the benefits of reducing autism.

I would like to see Ahuja interview the many skeptical doctors who saw their own kids regress after vaccination, and changed their views as a result.

Jonathan Ezor, West Hempstead, NY, USA

My son has a bowel disorder. It's not Coeliac, it's not Crohns, it's not IBS therefore IT DOESN'T EXIST. Why? Because he has autism. Treating his "imaginary" condition with diet, supplements and anti-inflammatories has transformed his life - and ours. Thank goodness for courageous doctors like Andrew Wakefield, who despite his detractors refuses to give up seeking answers through research.

Sharon Gibbs, Guildford, UK

I am a parent of a child assessed at age 4 by an Autism specialist as having ADHD/Aspergers. After two years of basic bio-medical intervention to heal his gut he no longer has these problems. Bio-medical DOES work - although for the more serious end of the spectrum, where heavy metals certainly play a part , it can take time. I know one thing for sure, Ms Ahuja will have to apologise and eat humble pie at some point in the future as more and more parents see the benefits in thier children, and I challenge her to come and hear the sucess stories IN PERSON and see the real evidence. I would encourage any parent, especially at the ADHD end of the spectrum where it can make a real difference fairly quickly, to take a look at bio-medical interventions for themselves.

Claire Webster, Colchester,

My daughter, diagnosed at two as "severely autistic," is no longer recognisable as such.

Thanks to biomedical interventions, she has recovered the ability to process info. and feels well enough to respond to it. Once she was able to function in our world (sleep through the night, tolerate food and varying textures, cope with unexpected touch, not self-abuse, stopped drooling/toe-walking/shrieking/head banging, and was able to respond to her own name), she was FINALLY able to actually benefit from therapies (not to mention tolerate transitions).

Intensive ABA w/ Positive Behavioral Support and Verbal Behavior (30+ hours weekly) has helped her attain an educational and social level the same as her age-peers (7 years in two and a half of therapy). She is not just "mainstreamed," but actually performing academically at the same level as her peers; note, her IQ was idenified as 65 at 2.

Give her cookies with dairy or wheat - she will become "severely autistic" self in hours.

E Parker, Titusville, FL, USA

As the parent of an autistic child (and as a doctor) who attended the Bournemouth conference, I would like to congratulate Anjana Ahuja on her courageous exposure of the quacks and charlatans who are exploiting families affected by autism.
The common features of the treatments proposed are their lack of a coherent scientific rationale, and lack of evidence of efficacy or safety. Having failed to win any support among serious scientists, Dr Wakefield and his supportersare peddling junk science of the sort that earned millions for lawyers(and £400 000 for Dr Wakefield) from the MMR litigation and left 1000 families with nothing but bitterly betrayed hopes.

Michael Fitzpatrick, London, UK

as a mother of a 10 year old recovering from autism whom did attend the conference i would like to say this article is laughable. i have alway been told my son would never walk talk or do any of the normal milestones a child achieves( this was from so called specilist doctors with the nhs.and they were right untill i started my own research and came across dr wakefield. had testing done privately (dan doctor)and disscovered my son have very bad metals poisioning leaky gut amonst many other problems.6 months on from starting bio medicine my son is now doing all the things he should and has even started speaking!!! and ur telling me its rubbish well i have proof and that proof is in my son recovering from his over load of toxins. if it wasnt for drs and people like wakefield there would be no future for my son. did you know that lead poisioning by itsself is often mistaken for autism. do ur research meet our kids watch our b4 and after videos then write an article !!!!!

nikki, bognor regis, england

"Permutations of strange beliefs"? How did we get to where questioning filling newborn children with heavy metals and live viruses, or suggesting that diet may improve a medical condition are strange beliefs?

The history of medicine is littered with establishment rejection of new ideas - it took 30 years from Pasteur's discovery for germ theory to supplant miasma theory. In autism it took 20 years for the current genetic theories to supplant the ridiculous "refrigerator mother". What makes Ahuja so sure there can't be an environmental component to explaining the massive rise in autism diagnosis, and that nutritional intervention can't help counteract this in some cases?

Autism is a highly complex condition, defined not by its pathology but by its symptoms. As a parent of a child diagnosed with autism, but now in a mainstream school following biomedical treatment, I'd love to know exactly why he improved. Suppressing debate and research helps no-one, and is bad science.

Tom McNerney, London, UK

Pam in Brookfield, there was no right drug. There's no proof that chelation works to treat autism. If Dr. Usman and Dr. Kerry were practicing evidence-based medicine, the boy would still be alive.

Ken, Milwaukee, USA

Thanks to Drs.Wakefield and Krigsman,Laurence,now 14 ate his first proper meal with us at Christmas.Autistic children are being refused proper medical examinations in the U.K.Four years ago he weighed 2 stones eight pounds (aged 9).He is now normal weight for his height and improving every day.This is thanks to Dr. Krigsman examining him in New York and prescribing him appropriate medication.Laurence now has a much better quality of life.

Sue McGowan, Warwickshire, U.K.

I find it obvious that Anjana Ahuja wrote this article with not only preconceived ideas but an agenda that the truth does not support. There were several blatantly wrong pieces of information out there. Starting with the timeline of Dr. Wakefields research which had already been going on before he was asked to testify. Followed up with the fact that testifying as a professional witness is common practice. Followed up by the fact that it is not necessary to fork over the 100 pounds to go to the conference to begin biomedical treatments, not in this information age and the internet. It isn't even necessary to see a doctor to implement the GFCF diet. I would also like to point out that the child who died during chelation therapy died because the medical personell made a mistake which happens all the time. Things get left in people during surgeries, wrong doses are given etc. as long as people administer medicine mistakes will be made.

Rachel, Marysville, WA

I have been to many conferences and found the Bournemouth Treating Autism conference to be the best selection of speakers I have experienced. I have absolutely no doubt that it was incredibly good value for money.
If this reporter had attended the conference instead of lazily restating ancient prejudices she would have been presented with comprehensive and compelling evidence that vaccines indeed do more harm than good for a significant minority of children. She would also have found that mercury is, indeed, very toxic and should never go anywhere near a human being, let alone a vulnerable baby. She would also have learned exactly how biomedical interventions can halt and eventually reverse the damage that her coveted conventional medicine has caused.
More importantly, she would also have met many parents of autistic children who are far from desperate. We are, however, not prepared to allow our children to suffer under the sentence of autism. Instead, we are treating them – and they are recovering. I do not need a double blind randomised trial to know that my son is responding to biomedical intervention. It really does work.

Tim Collins, Alsager, Cheshire

I have to agree with previous comments, and would like to suggest that had Ms Ahuja thought about it she would have noticed that the tag-line is "Autism is Treatable" not "Curable". Neither of the parents who presented their stories of success claimed that their children were cured. They said that they had seen great improvements in their health and happiness through the use of biomedical treatments. On the tragic case of the child who died during chelation in the USA: yes, that was because he was given the wrong drug. I'm sure that NHS doctors have never killed anyone by mistake, have they......? In the apparent absence of any meaningful research by, or real interest from the medical establishment into Autism, we parents of autistic children will do what we can to help them. Does she have personal experience of autism? Does she feel qualified as a Doctor to comment on it.....oh, hang on, she's a doctor of Physics.... Next time, would she please turn up and listen, rather than sniping from afar.

Mark Grabiec, Nottingham,

It is shameful that The Times can publish such poorly researched articles, had Anjana Ahuja attended the conference her opinion might be worth noting. But she did not and her general level of knowledge of the area is lacking. There are hundreds of parents with sick children who also have a diagnosis of autism, unfortunately most medical practioners do not like to treat children with autism as it is either too diffiuclt or too controversial, so the children continue in pain and consequently the behaviours deteriorate also. Parents are keen to learn from those enlightened practioners who understand the state of their childs health, hence the importance of the conference.

Biomedical intervention has greatly helped my child. No doubt Ms Ahuja would view this as being the opinion of a vulnerable parent clutching at straws - this is not important, what is important is that he has improved his quality of life thro' biomedical intervention. Is it so wrong to share this information?

Claire Downey, London, UK

I have a child with autism, who has not received biomedical intervention and is improving and being mainstreamed into the 4th grade. Many of these success stories might have had the same results with good speech and OT, as well as parents willing to allow their child to follow their own path. I have yet to see a well-executed experiment that shows measles in the gut of autistic kids. If heavy metals cause autism, Japan and Iraq should have the highest rates in the world, but they don't. Thiomersal has been phased out in many Western countries over the last 15 years, but no dose-response decrease in autism has been seen. Let's also be honest with ourselves-by the DMS-IV, I would have been diagnosed as a child. I am now a finctioning adult, breeding more autistics, who will probably turn out OK, too.

Ruth B, St. Louis, Missouri

If Anjana Ahuja actually did her research and new anything about Autism she would be aware that a vast number of autistic children suffer with very debilitating gut problems. The very fact that they happen to be autistic seems to render them "untreatable" by the majority of practitioners on the NHS, many of whom undoubtedly do not want to be seen to be concurring in any way with the view that the two problems might actually be related - a political hot potato to say the least. As a consequence many of us have had to resort to expensive treatments from abroad just to give our children a reprieve from the constant daily pain they suffer. I hope the journailst in question feels satisfied that by rubbishing the good research and work of these doctors and practitioners that she is merely prolonging the pain that our children are left to suffer in.

Cathy Devereux, Salisbury, UK

"harmful agenda is, regrettably, assisted by newspapers with acres of space to fill,"

Looks like the papers will print just about anything just to fill some space...your article is proof!!

Chris, Florida,

What a great piece of journalism !

You never leave your office, read all the one sided viewpoint Brian Deer has been putting out for years and then rehash it all to continue to try and discredit anybody who is trying to help a vast cohort of children that the establishment is pretending doesn't exist.

Did you actually write this article in the past few hours/days or does The Times have stock pieces on file like this ready to go whenever the name 'Wakefield' is mentioned ?

Anjana Ahaja is to be congratulated, by doing such a shoddy job she has saved The Times a few thousand pounds which will help keep down the daily copy price - bravo !

Paul O'Neill, Geneva, Switzerland

This conference was organised by parents who have seen improvements in their children due to biomedical interventions. The speakers did not push themselves forward, they were expressly invited to come to the UK to tell parents about their work and their successes. The two parents who presented their stories of hope and success have seen remarkable improvements in their children, evidenced by IQ tests, videos, personal accounts. Why is this not something for the media to celebrate? Don't they want autistic children to be treated? In which case they have some stalwart allies in the NHS. They often seem intent on assigning autistic children to the scrap heap too. My child has regained speech since starting biomedical treatment. At the age of 7 he had 2 or 3 words, at the age of 8 he has about 500. Would The Times say I was wrong to have helped him in that way? I find that hard to believe. And the jouralist cannot even be bothered to attend the conference, speak in person to the parents concerned and file a balanced report. To use a respected broad sheet for such poorly researched material is baffling.

Stephanie Sirr, Nottingham,

Ms Ahuja did not even attend the conference, and in my opinion knows nothing about autism. I am a parent of a child with autism, and until you live with autism 24x7 I feel this person has no right to comment on people like Dr Wakefield, Dr Heard and others. Ms Ahuja should have actually attended the conference and spoken to parents, and other GP's who attended and perhaps even the professionals from the USA like Dr Usman. This article is one sided and really just a slur on the professionals. Funny how her article does not refer to people that she spoke to.

Alexia McDonald, London, UK

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but please remember to include all of the facts. The 5 year old boy who died during an IV chelation session died because of a drug error. I understand adding that part to your sentence would soften your argument... but how can you leave it out? How misleading; and how unfair to that boy's parents to place the blame on THEM and not on the person who used the wrong drug. Take a look at the pharmaceuticals being used on these kids and then come back and report the deaths and the damage...

Pam, Brookfield, WI

"Permutations of strange beliefs"? How did we get to a point where to question pumping newborn children full of heavy metals and live viruses, or to suggest that improved nutrition can have a positive effect on a medical condition is strange? It's breathtakingly arrogant to dismiss these possibilities as not worthy of research.

Does Anjana Ahuja still question the human contribution to global warming, or believe the earth is flat? Presumably not, but up to the 60s, medical opinion was that "refrigerator mothers" caused autism. Thankfully, that has now been replaced by the current genetic theory. All that the biomedical practitioners are suggesting is that the massive recent increase in autism is due to genetics plus an environmental component, and that if the environmental issues are addressed, some patients improve.

As the parent of a child diagnosed with autism, and now in a mainstream school following biomedical treatment, I can't prove it works but I'm glad we tried it.

Tom McNerney, London, UK

I just want to say about the five year child who died in the chelation therapy would no one allow him to rest. we cannot approve one death on thousand of children who use chelation. and in more sense my friend lost a baby recently involved in heart surgery who was overfed with the anthestic. conclusion human error.
the autopsy also with this five year old showed human error by the doctor and not the process of chelation. playing around with words only approve to more confussion defientley a poor peice a work of journalism.

yasmin, blackburn,

Anjana Ahuja says that the consensus on autism is that is untreatable but she is wrong. The mainstream consensus is that we don't know what autism is and therefore we don't know how to treat it. How can something be untreatable if you don't know what the something is? The consensus therefore amongst caring people MUST BE that we need to know what autism is in order to help us treat it. The condition is seriously debilitating and we must embrace those that offer hope to our children. Open your mind Anjana Ahuja or is it that you have something against the innocent children who suffer this debilitating condition?

Sara Moroza-James, Plymouth , Devon

This is a really disappointing article - Anjana Ahuja seems to have missed the point of the conference, which was not about the MMR. Many children who are diagnosed with autism suffer a myriad of medical problems related to the gut and immune system. Many parents have found that when these medical problems are treated, their child improves, which should not be surprising to anyone. For a lot of parents this can make the crucial difference between just getting through life in a sleep deprived, despairing fog, and being able to manage their lives again. Sadly, although ordinary children with gut problems receive treatment on the NHS, children with autism do not. Parents have been told that the medical problems are "just part of autism" and are sent home to cope. If life can be improved for children with autism and their families, shouldn't we look seriously at the possibilities? Maybe next time Anjana Ahuja could actually attend the conference and listen to the speakers present their findings, rather than rubbishing it from afar.

Stephanie Scott, London, UK

Did this journalist actually attend the Conference? It seems unlikely - references to "due to speak were" - for speakers scheduled for the first morning.
I find it difficult to understand how a Conference can be reviewed by someone who wasn't there, and who has not apparently received feedback from anyone who did attend.
This is misleading journalism at its finest.

Karen Charman, Beaconsfield, UK

In the interests of balance, could we have a report from a doctor who _did_ go to the conference?

Karen A, London, UK

It would appear, upon more than a cursory reading of the article, that Anjana Ahuja did not bother to attend the conference. What a pity! If she were to see a film of the actual proceedings, she would realise that her article is a very poor piece of lazy journalism and grossly misrepresents what was actually said at Bournemouth. However, I suppose not attending allowed her to write her article without the inconvenience of having to do any research or the risk of having to question the pre-conceived ideas on which her article was based. She missed the opportunity to hear extremely interesting speakers and to meet many parents who could have taught her so much.
Among the conference delegates were GPs whose minds, thank God, are less closed than hers.

Margaret Collins, Cambridge, UK

I find it amazing that all of us parents of an autistic child are portrayed as completely desperate, willing to subject our children to the latest fad in autism treatment, and unable to choose for ourselves and our kids. I believe that has gotten us here in the first place. What's wrong with asking questions? As a parent of a child with autism, my favorite words are, " we don't know but let's try to find out ".
The only danger in this place we live in is someone like this author sounding as if some people already know and others are too desperate or silly or pushing their own agenda to admit it. Although Dr. Wakefield may not be accurate in his assumptions or findings at least he's trying. Without men like him there would never be any advances in this world. I'm sure that all we know about medicine, including vaccination theory, was once considered quackery by the establishment. We will choose for our children and you choose for your own, if you have any.

Linda Del Conte, Athens, Greece