Referral of Dr Peter Mansfield to the GMC : Health authority has no power

Editor—Majeed's editorial on the referral of Dr Peter Mansfield to the General Medical Council is flawed as he assumes that Worcestershire Health Authority has power in managing its responsibility for a successful public health immunisation campaign.1 It is precisely because the authority is impotent as a public statutory public body that it asked the GMC to intervene. The continuing debate about measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine dents the confidence of many public and professional people, not least because of the assumption that there is no smoke without fire. Majeed's third reference indicates his anxiety despite his initial position statement on the safety of the vaccine. Patients and the media take heed of these different emphases. Maintaining a high level of vaccination cover against diseases that are seen rarely or not at all poses serious difficulties. Majeed's role as an educationalist—a position of power and responsibility—could provide a forum where these difficulties are debated. The role of medical journals and the media should not be ignored in that debate. Their keenness for headlines containing bad news, however misguided or ill informed, while relegating good news to the middle pages or waste bins, provides a particular challenge for health education campaigns. As the chairman of Worcester City primary care group I have a responsibility for ensuring a high coverage of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination. I am unable to identify the power I wield in this role, other than to attempt to communicate to patients, health professionals, and the media. There is no evidence that single vaccines for mumps, measles, and rubella are safer than the combined vaccine as they have not been subject to the same level of scrutiny and no successful voluntary campaign of separate vaccinations has been conducted for these illnesses. If, however, measles, mumps, and rubella coverage falls as a result of Mansfield's and Desumo's activity, children will be more likely to contract these illnesses. Some of these children will die, as has happened in Holland and Dublin. Worcestershire Health Authority exercised its responsibility correctly by asking the GMC to intervene. Majeed offers no alternative actions for Worcestershire Health Authority, despite asserting that there are other options. His article, and the BMJ in choosing it as an editorial, does not do justice to the issues. I also despair about the lack of responsibility demonstrated by an educationalist who displays such a superficial understanding of this complex matter.