Dr. Adrian K Midgley
[back] Wikipedia   [back] Experts

[A Wikipedia Allopath editor, who deals mostly with vaccination and vaccine diseases, on Wikipedia.  It is interesting to observe his behaviour, as this is a microcosm of medical politics.  His main aim in life is suppressing non-Allopathic medicine and any criticism of Allopathy on Wikipedia.  This mostly involves deleting pages, as you can see below, either through some spurious excuse or by merging into a page he created and controls eg merging (a Wiki euphemism for deleting) a whale created page called 'Vaccine critics' into a page he created called Anti-vaccinationist, then into another Midgley created paean of vaccination propaganda called Vaccine controversy (a classic of watering down).  His main contribution to vaccination was suppressing all links to whale.to, even original documents such as the 30 or so smallpox books.   ]

A vaccinator (Allopath)
Creation of a pejorative page
RFC on whale editor
Merger attempts
Page Deletions
Page Deletion attempts
The 'reasons'.
Assorted text and link deletions [All links to whale.to have been banned since April 2006.]
Making out vaccine critics are cranks/insane ['Anti-vaccine is a pejorative term.]

Wikipedia: User:MidgleyA Midgley poster boy

Slanted text inserts
[See this slanted piece (ref ) about Hadwen's his trial for manslaughter charges when he refused to use a vaccine and was consequently persecuted in an attempt to silence his anti-vaccine and anti-vivisection views.  ]

A vaccinator (Allopath)
I finished giving my patients their MMR boosters to avoid that last year, and treated or observed a couple of people who chose not to get them or didn't get them for Mumps. My advice, which you can by all means repeat, is that everyone should ensure they have an adequate level of immunity to Mumps, ahead of the spread of disease, by the best means available to them. If they live in or visit Exeter I shall be happy to assist them in this. Midgley 23:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC) [ref]

Creation of a pejorative page [Note that this page is created and controlled by him.]
Note how the
Anti-vaccinationist/Assertion table is useless.
He deleted 4 quotes by anti vax people [ref]. Even after he had put a reply to each one.
He is trying to merge various pages created by the whale editor into this page.  So you can see this page
National Anti-Vaccination League turn into this piece.  
The list of anti-vax organisations here  had the links to those sites removed.

[Posted on his page] "For your work against quacks, viz. anti-vaccinationists and others, I award you this picture of Sir William Osler and three colleagues!" [10]

RFC on whale editor [ref]
This was an attempt to ban the whale editor from editing Wikipedia, which was only averted by the intervention of an editor called

Merger attempts [Here he is attempting to merge pages into his Anti-vaccinationist page.]
Beddow Bayly, Viera Scheibner, National Anti-Vaccination League  Charles Pearce
So you can see this page
National Anti-Vaccination League turn into this piece.  

Page Deletions
Assemblage Point [46], Peter Fletcher [47]  Richard Shulze [ref]

Page Deletion attempts
Boyd Hayley [ref] Robert Mendelsohn [ref], Autism epidemic [ref]

The reasons
Richard Schulze (naturopath) [deletion ref]. [Richard Shulze is one of the best Natural Healers. See Dr Richard Shulze]
Delete unless verified - it has had a verify tag and comments on it since January, and no action has occurred, and it is now high in the Google ranking for this subject. Midgley 13:41, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Autism epidemic   [Deletion page]
This article has a name which gives a clue to its troubles. If it had been called "Autism (Incidence)" or "Autism (Incidence and reporting)" then it could have been a discussion on a sub-topic of Autism. As it is, it is a brawl, hath little of structure or consensus and is not - looking at the long history in the talk page - getting better over time. There is actually a topic worth writing an article about, but that isn't the topic and this isn't the article, and it never will become that from here. Delete, and start from scratch, and get someone to volunteer to write it who is noted for NPOV, before the rest of the editing process gets going. Midgley 22:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Boyd Hayley  Deletion page. [Most notable independent scientist on thimerosal, the vaccine ingredient.  See here.]
Another not-a-biography page with disreputable references, toxic hyperbole, buzz phrases "50% Mercury by weight". It is Thimerosal controversy being re-written along with conspiracy theorising, Gulf War syndrome and WP:OWN by the usual author, Ombudsman. An academic Chemist with not a single published paper referred to in the article. Not notable, at least, on nothing like this basis. Not WP:BIO Not good." 'Speedy DELETE Midgley 00:56, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Robert S. Mendelsohn [Deletion page. Most notable anti-vaccine medical doctor of 20 century. See here.]
This is not a useful page about an interesting person. The authors are mainly noted for efforts to present poorly reasoned attacks on vaccination in a wide and inappropriate variety of articles. The Quackwatch commentary linked from the page is informative."--Midgley 01:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Assemblage_point  [Deletion page. See here.]
"Delete This has the appearance of an advertisment. The names seem too close to be coincidental, and the site link and book link seem likely to be closely related to the author's benefit. The coloured light stuff is quackery, but that of itself is not suggested to be the reason for deletion." Midgley 02:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Peter_Fletcher  Deletion page. [Rare ex-government critic of MMR vaccine]
"POV non WP:BIO. Not encyclopaedic. There are very very many retired civil service doctors in England and the only thing adduced about him is that he was to have been one witness in a trial which will not occur since the legal aid board determined it had no chance at all of success. Basically this is yet another attack page on immunisation presented as a biography - possibly we should decide that these are speedy delete candidates. DELETE." Midgley 10:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Keep - this is just another attempt by Midgley to remove information that is inconvenient for his opinion. Midgley has been on Wikipedia a short time, but has a consistent record of personal attacks, borderline vandalism, malicious sockpuppetry and impersonation. --Leifern 13:05, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

William_Job_Collins [Deletion page. Notable anti-vaccine medical man. See.]
"nn (there are currently 100 000 doctors practicing in the UK of whom more could be gleaned from The Medical Register than is here - "he was a doctor who worked with two other doctors, and did not use a particular treatment. His father also was a doctor and did not use that treatment". The links are to a clonelet of the author's whale.to website which has been determined by RFC to be not WP:RS - the site in question was established after whale.to ceased getting links from WP. This is one of many nn articles generally lacking in interest and WP:V and by User:Whaleto in pursuit of his WP:SOAPBOX WP:VSCA."   Midgley 09:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Alan Cantwell. [One of the main bogey men to Allopathy, see Cantwell, M.D.]
Midgley is behind this one.

Assorted text and link deletions [All links to whale.to have been banned since April 2006.]
Here on the page he created called  anti-vaccinationists, he deleted 4 quotes by anti vax people [ref]. Even after he had put a reply to each one. 
Removing text re measles [57] Deleting whale.to link [58]
Here he has removed thimerosal info [61]
Another editor taking exception to be labelled anti-vaccine [62]
Midgley 3 hrs [49]
eason for deleting Nexus article: [50] 1 minute reader reason for deleting National Anti Vaccine League. [51]

Making out vaccine critics are cranks/insane ['Anti-vaccine is a pejorative term.]
 This vaccinator created the
Anti-vaccinationist page on Wikipedia so he could control that page and also make out anti-vaccine people are cranks (the term, like cranks, is pejorative), which he demonstrated by linking the page to the crank page [ref]  [ref].  Anti-vaccinists is a term that fell out of use for this reason.  Now he is attempting to delete by merger  Beddow Bayly, Viera Scheibner, National Anti-Vaccination League, into this page. So you can see this page National Anti-Vaccination League vanish into this piece.  

Bear in mind they deleted a very similar page called Vaccine critics [13]

You can see his thinking: I write as someone who treats a small number of psychotic patients, and therefore might come from someone psychotic or a group simulating psychosis for their own amusement. (John's writing is not very closely similar, one may have an idée fixée without being mad even in a lay sense)).[ref] [ref]  Psychotic is Allopathic for forbidden thinking/beliefs [See: Terminology]

Please also see here (emphasis added) the use of "anti-vaccinationist" as a pejorative term "For your work against quacks, viz. anti-vaccinationists and others, I award you this picture of Sir William Osler and three colleagues!" [[10]]

Some opinions
Vitamin C for heart disease is in that camp. By medical monopoly, I suspect we mean the system where medicine is done largely by people who get a medical degree, and then follow postgraduate courses of study and training. The assertion that Pharma doesn't work (but Vitamin C which presumably is therefore not pharmacutical???) is incredible. Pharma started working around Willow bark and Foxgloves, and there is no obvious point at which to say all after this is rubbish. And, not vaccine... Midgley 21:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC) [diff ]

THe response above seems to be orthogonal to every axis f this universe. John, you put that item in. I think it is irrelevant. Midgley 21:46, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

. Isn't there a bit of a paradox in the text as given - which was not all mine - in that if we define safe as including death and serious brain damage, what on earth is it that happens that allows anyone to say htat vaccines are not? Are we talking global thermonuclear warfare here, or peril to immortal soul? Or has someone got carried away? Or is it more simply a matter of whatever is defined as safe being largely defined in terms of "safer than vaccines", such that rather than the steady ratchetting up of requirments for safety that has occurred as disease becoems less manifest, it is actually a circular definition intended as polemic? Midgley 21:47, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

BMJ Letters Dec 98--March 2006