The Harley Street doctor commissioned as an expert witness at Scotland's delayed Covid-19 inquiry has defended his appointment amid controversy that his research linked childhood vaccines to increased rates of Autism.
Dr Ashley Croft, 70, described himself as a "self-educated observer" and qualified public health physician at today's first hearing and said he was the author of published research on the virus.
He said he had also acted as an advisor in a medical-legal capacity "for both sides" in a number of legal actions involving Covid-19 and had advised insurance firms.
Dr Croft was asked by the Inquiry’s Senior Counsel, Stuart Gale KC, for his response to the Herald's article, which referenced a paper he wrote in 2019 linking the childhood vaccination schedule with a rise in Autism cases among children.
Two more papers published by Dr Croft and a co-author, Anthony Mawson from Jackson State University in the USA, also include claims about an increased risk of autism in vaccinated children.
READ MORE: Concern over Scottish Covid-19 Inquiry expert's widely-debunked vaccine claims
The 2019 paper was published in the IJERPH - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health - a Swiss journal and Dr Croft said it had been peer-reviewed.
He read out a summary of this report to the inquiry, before Lord Brailsford, which does not reference his claim.
The report suggests, in section 12, that one of the environmental factors which could be linked to increasing rates of Autism is the "childhood vaccination schedule" although he does not mention the MMR vaccine specifically.
Claims of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism were initially promoted by Andrew Wakefield, a doctor who was subsequently found guilty of fraud and serious professional misconduct.
Wakefield was struck off the medical register by the General Medical Council in 2010.
READ MORE: 'Scotland deserves better': Lawyer demands answers over Covid inquiry expert
The lawyer asked Dr Croft, who is an expert in the treatment of Malaria and former advisor to the British military, if he was "a fellow traveller of Dr Wakefiled in relation to his widely debunked theory."
He replied: "Not, not at all. I've never met Dr Wakefield. I accept [this] has been debunked and has no credence."
In another paper, published in 2020, he suggests that while vaccinated children are less susceptible to certain vaccine-preventable infections they are significantly more likely to be diagnosed with chronic conditions and neurodevelopmental disorders including ADHD.
Leading human rights lawyer Aamer Anwar, who is representing bereaved families in the inquiry, said the inquiry had got off to a "shambolic" start due to controversy over Dr Croft's appointment.
It emerged Dr Croft was heavily criticised by a High Court judge in a case involving medical negligence in which he was called as an expert.
The case, in 2020, centred on delays by Ministry of Defence doctors in diagnosing a soldier, Darrell Stewart Jones, with HIV.
Dr Croft's testimony, on which the soldier's case was primarily based, was described by a judge as "flawed and unreliable" and there was "a lack of familiarity with the subject matter".
Mr Aanwar said: "It is of note that the Inquiry avoided raising this issue at all with Dr Croft. For the Inquiry to start with this witness, gives cause for the bereaved to question the credibility and robustness of this inquiry."
Mr Anwar said it was also "deeply disrespectful" that the inquiry started without paying their respects to those who lost their lives to Covid.
Dr Croft's report for the inquiry, which focuses on the findings of 22 studies, concludes that vaccines "reduce, or probably reduce" the number of people who get the virus or suffer serious disease.
READ MORE: What can we expect from the Scottish Covid-19 Inquiry
However, he asserts that it "remains unclear if Covid vaccinations resulted in fewer deaths".
Research from the World Health Organisation (WHO) in November 2021 showed more than 27,000 deaths in Scotland had been saved by Covid vaccinations at that date.
He also concludes that there was insufficient or no evidence to support lockdowns, the 'test and trace' programme and the use of face masks outwith healthcare settings.
Asked if he believed he was qualified to provide the report he said: "I set out my qualifications frankly at the time I was approached.
“Tha main quality I feel I have which is important is independence from any lobbyists or factions.
"I wasn’t giving advice formally during the pandemic to any government bodies or commercial organisation so like other people I was an observer on what was going on and I hope a self-educated observer so I now come to the inquiry from that position as a qualified public health physician who experienced and studied what was happening and [is]coming to explain the scientific background of the pandemic."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel