Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who champions the alleged link between measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and autism in young children, stands discredited for misleading his medical colleagues and The Lancet, the professional journal that published his findings.

The investigation has found that when he warned parents to avoid MMR, and published research claiming a link with autism, he did not disclose he was being funded through solicitors seeking evidence to use against vaccine manufacturers.

The Lancet said yesterday that The Sunday Times's evidence meant that the finding linking MMR and autism was "entirely flawed" and should never have been published. Last night, John Reid, the health secretary, called for an inquiry by the General Medical Council (GMC) "as a matter of urgency".

Evan Harris, a Liberal Democrat MP who sits on the British Medical Association's ethics committee, said the GMC had inadequate powers and pressed the government for a full independent inquiry.

After reviewing The Sunday Times's findings, Richard Horton, the editor of The Lancet, said he should never have published Wakefield's article linking MMR to autism. It was "fatally" flawed. Wakefield was not contactable yesterday, but he said last week when confronted with the investigation findings that he was unrepentant. He denied misleading his colleagues or The Lancet.

The scandal arises from the journal's publication in February 1998 of a scientific report on the "findings" in the cases of 12 autistic children, apparently admitted routinely to the Royal Free hospital in north London in 1996-97.

Wakefield was the lead author of the report. He wrote that the parents of eight of the 12 children blamed MMR: they said symptoms of autism had set in within days of vaccination.

The Sunday Times has now established that four, probably five, of these children were covered by the legal aid study. And Wakefield himself had been awarded up to £55,000 to assist their case by finding scientific evidence of the link.

Wakefield did not tell his colleagues or medical authorities of this conflict of interest either during or after the research.

The children were subjected to a battery of invasive procedures, including colonoscopies and lumbar punctures.

In the months that followed the examination of the first children, many more were channelled through the hospital. The parents of many were clients of one solicitor, Richard Barr, of King's Lynn, Norfolk, who was leading the legal attack and had organised Wakefield's funding from the Legal Aid Board (now the Legal Services Commission).

The research paper published in The Lancet contained no scientific evidence of a link with MMR, only the "association" made by parents. But at the unprecedented press conference to launch the report, attacked the three-in-one jab as posing risks of causing autism and bowel problems.

"It's a moral issue for me and I can't support the continued use of these three vaccines given in combination until this issue has been resolved," he said. Neither in the report nor at the conference did he disclose the legally-funded work he was doing for Barr's clients.

Explore Health News

• Swine flu

Times Recommends

• Fern Britton: 'I still can't see that I was wrong'
• Extreme cooking
• Easy French: Tarte Tatin