.
UPDATE May 16, 2011: Parents with new born babies are being urged to keep them at home and out of harm’s way as a whopping cough outbreak travels through Sydney and New South Wales. There have been 4580 cases of whooping cough so far this year in NSW alone. Dr Rob Menzies from the National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance said: “We’re appalled at how many kids are getting whooping cough because the chardonnay set and the alternatives don’t vaccinate their children.”
PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT THIS STORY. YOU COULD SAVE THE LIFE OF A CHILD. I was working late in front of the brilliant Lateline on ABC1 a couple of weeks ago when they broke a compelling story about the Australian Vaccination Network. I watched the report with tears in my eyes and my jaw dropped somewhere near the floor. Tears for the McCaffery family whose baby Dana died of whooping cough at only 32 days, and dropped jaw for the extraordinary cruelty and willful deceit of the Australian Vaccination Network.
From its name, the Australian Vaccination Network sounds like a reasonable organisation, right? Somewhere you might be able to find information about vaccinating your children. Maybe some pros, maybe some cons.
Well, the last part is right. The whole website is a con because it’s not objective at all. The Australian Vaccination Network is run by a group of extreme anti-vaccination zealots who have harassed and traumatised the parents of a baby girl who died of whooping cough. More than they were already traumatised by the loss of their 4 week old baby if that’s even possible.
UPDATE 27th July:
When their four-week-old baby daughter Dana died from whooping cough Toni and David McCaffery sought love and healing to ease their grief.
Instead, they say they were subjected to a campaign of harassment and abuse at the hands of anti-vaccination campaigners, a group who were yesterday labelled a serious threat to the public’s health and safety.
The Health Care Complaints Commission issued a public warning against the Australian Vaccination Network after it refused to display a disclaimer on its website to inform readers its information should not be taken as medical advice.
Earlier this month the commission investigated the network, run out of Bangalow on the north coast by Meryl Dorey, and found its website presented incorrect and misleading information that was solely anti-vaccination and quoted selectively from research suggesting that vaccination may be dangerous.
Its investigation was sparked by two complaints, one from Toni and David McCaffery, whose four-week-old daughter Dana died from whooping cough last year.
The couple, from Lennox Head, allege they were subjected to months of harassment and abuse by Ms Dorey and anti-vaccination campaigners, accusing them of lying about the cause of their daughter’s death. They received anonymous letters and emails that said whooping cough was not fatal and vaccinations were not needed.
Mrs McCaffery, whose daughter was too young to be vaccinated when she caught whooping cough, said Ms Dorey also tried to get her baby’s medical records from the hospital without permission. ”Instead of love and healing in the weeks after Dana’s death, we got ugliness … it has been terrible,” she said.
Mrs McCaffery also complained that Ms Dorey had quoted misleading statistics, spread misinformation through seminars and the internet, and gave poor telephone advice.
The second complaint against the network was made by Ken McLeod, a member of a group called Stop the AVN.
He said Ms Dorey had claimed that meningococcal disease was harmless and ”hardly kills anybody”; that vaccination was being used to spread AIDS in Third World countries; and homeopathy could take the place of vaccination.
His group now wants the state government to apply for a court injunction against the network and have it closed down. The group’s website says Ms Dorey believes ”vaccines are part of a global conspiracy to implant mind control chips into every man, woman and child and that the ‘illuminati’ plan a mass cull of humans”.
Ms Dorey did not return calls yesterday but issued a statement on her website which said the HCCC’s recommendation was ”laughable” and she was seeking legal advice.
”Nobody would expect nuclear safety advocates to issue statements on the benefits of nuclear power; Greenpeace to make films on the pleasures of killing and eating whales … Why then should we be expected to make statements we don’t believe are factual and that are not supported by the medical literature?
”If the AVN is expected to show both sides of this issue, why aren’t the medical community and the government likewise cited for their lack of disclosure on the risks and ineffectiveness of vaccines?”
A spokesman for the HCCC said it could take no further action but it was disappointing the network was refusing to make its position clear.
This story is so outrageous and so appalling, you really should take a few moments to watch it. Terrific work by Steve Canane (formerly Triple J’s Hack program).
If you can’t see the video, Lateline reports
The NSW Health Care Complaints Commission has compiled a damning report after examining Australia’s most prominent anti-vaccination group, the Australian Vaccination Network.
The commission accuses the AVN of providing inaccurate and misleading information and selectively quoting research out of context to argue against vaccination.
It’s also noted accusations that the AVN harassed the parents of a child who died of whooping cough last year, after they’d advocated the importance of childhood vaccination in the media.
The report’s likely to go public within the next two weeks.
It is not uncommon to look up side effects and health risks on the internet. Google has replaced a doctor’s consult in many homes around Australia and while I think we should obviously consult a real life flesh and blood doctor for any real medical issues I would certainly look up side effects of medication on the web. When googling vaccination, the Australian Vaccination Network comes up as the first result in my search. According to their site
The Australian Vaccination Network is working to help parents take back that right to free and informed choice by allowing them to see the less publicised side of this important issue before making a decision.
.
What they forget to add is that they are fanatics who are vehemently opposed to vaccination. Hard to imagine how balanced the information is when they are so boldly opposed to it. In fact when you read their “About us” page they provide their Constitution but no solid information on who is part of the Network and if there is in fact any scientific or medical knowledge backing their position.
Look, this is not an argument about vaccinations although I am most definitely in the pro-vaccination camp. And I believe the view that it’s a personal decision is a flawed one because one person choosing not to immunise their children can have devastating and tragic effects on someone else’s child – as the McCaffery family discovered.
But what is so outrageous about this story is the fact the Australian Vaccination Network are so devious in not disclosing their position anywhere on their website and the fact that they knowingly publish false and misleading information about vaccinations so as to further their cause.
When you are trying to persuade someone to take a particular course of medical action – one that could have life-or-death consequences for their child as well as other people’s children – you MUST disclose your position. You MUST be transparent. Anything less is gross abuse. Almost as gross as the actual abuse and harassment The Australian Vaccination Network has inflicted on a family in deep grief over the loss of their baby.
What a shocker. PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT THIS STORY SO VULNERABLE PARENTS AREN’T MISINFORMED BY THIS WEBSITE OR THIS DANGEROUS GROUP.
What influenced you in your decision to vaccinate your child or not? Do you think organisations like Australian Vaccination Network should have to declare their hand before offering one-sided and (according to independent health authorities) deliberately false information about vaccination ?
Comments
668 Comments so far
loading...
It seems the courts have settled this one.
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/anti-vaccine-group-wins-court-case/story-e6frfku0-1226280670915
Pingback: Vaccine-deniers infect The Advertiser – how many public health warnings does it take? « Sans Science
loading...
The AVN recently posted this link to an article…do get the impression that they may not have read past the title?
http://houseofgeekery.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/five-reasons-not-to-vaccinate-your-child/
loading...
A friend of mine had the opportunity to work in Afghanistan for a short time. He said that he was shocked to learn that in recent years the biggest killer of babies and children was not war or landmines as he’d expected, but measles.
The clinic told him that the Red Cross used to go in and routinely vaccinate and measles (and it’s complications) was unheard of for a good number of years. After the war disrupted vaccination rates, death and even more commonly, blindness resulting from measles became common.
loading...
“I believe the view that it’s a personal decision is a flawed one because one person choosing not to immunise their children can have devastating and tragic effects on someone else’s child” – taken from the above article
This type of comment always confuses me. If you are all so confident in your vaccinations why are you so worried about those who chose to not immunise their children? If your child has been immunised dont you feel safe?
I would like to also know, if you are saying that there is no evidence to suggest that vaccinations are dangerous; then why, if i was to ask the government to sign a waiver that nothing happens to my baby after a vaccination they would decline. Instead, they make us sign.
Im a little disappointed Mia, for someone who thinks they are taking into account both sides, your views seem to be very one sided.
And one more thing, the reasons that their are no scientific studies to support the negatives of vaccination is because all the publications for these journals are owned by the pharmaceutical companies that make these vaccines. Its not about choice. This is a multi BILLION dollar industry. This is about $$$$$
loading...
” If your child has been immunised dont you feel safe?” As should be plainly obvious, in the case of Whooping Cough the groups at risk are the little babies who are TOO YOUNG TO IMMUNISE. Like the poor little mite in the article.
loading...
I wonder how many pro-vaccinators would be rushing to have their boys circumcised if it was advised, or if they would conveniently take a ‘selfish’ stand on it as some people are claiming about anti-vaccinators? Because, in fact, they do as respected Doctor Alex Wodak (below) does. This is also becoming the mainstream view in peer-reviewed medical journals. How many pro-vaccinators will have their boys circumcised to control disease? Disease that causes cancer (HPV) and infertility, just to name a few? There is a sliding scale of what people will do to their children for the good of public health. If you are pro-vaccination, but anti-circumcision, then you can have some empathy for anti-vaccinators. I may not agree with it, but I certainly do understand it.
Before I get shot down, I vaccinated and circumcised.
Australian doctor urges circumcision to ward off HIV
Sep 19, 2010, 8:09 GMT
Sydney – Routinely circumcising baby boys is an effective way of fighting the spread of the AIDS virus among heterosexuals, an Australian Doctor said Sunday.
Alex Wodak, writing in The Medical Journal of Australia, described the removal of the foreskin as a ‘surgical vaccine’ against HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases.
Wodak, from Sydney’s St Vincent’s Hospital, said doctors were wrong to discourage circumcision and urged the health department to subsidise the operation.
Queensland is alone among the six states in providing a rebate for parents who pay for circumcision for male babies.
‘A wealth of research has shown that the foreskin is the entry point that allows HIV to infect men during intercourse with an infected female partner,’ he said.
‘Circumcision of males is now referred to by many as surgical vaccine against a wide variety of infections and adverse medical conditions over the lifetime.’
Wodak said that, with no likelihood of an HIV vaccine in the next 20 years, authorities should be active in removing the stigma from male circumcision.
‘If we’re trying to prevent an epidemic in the 2030s, we should start thinking about this in the 2010s,’ he said.
Less than 20 per cent of Australian boys are circumcised, a proportion that has risen from 13 per cent in the last decade.
loading...
Mia, what is missing in much of the coverage about whooping cough is that it isn’t just about childhood vaccination – it is adults too. Many adults are not aware that their vaccination wore off long ago and that they should consider a booster. While whooping cough isn’t fatal in adults, it is not exactly pleasant (eg coughing til you vomit, and they don’t call it the 100 day cough for nothing), but even worse, you could unknowingly transmit it to a baby too young for vaccination – and it is extremely dangerous in these little
Please everyone – talk to your doctor about a booster!
loading...
http://www.gladstoneobserver.com.au/story/2011/05/03/brisbane-woman-dies-from-diphtheria/
22 y/o unimmunised woman dies of respiratory diptheria, first case since 1993.
So very sad
loading...
I am most definitely PRO-vaccination! HOWEVER, as someone who is highly sensitive to many things and often ends up in hospital with the kind of allergies that CAN KILL ME, I understand parents being a little fearful of injecting their babies. My mother has told me on many occasions that I have always had terrible reactions to ALL injections. I once considered having the contraceptive injection and decided against it because I couldn’t be sure that I wouldn’t have a dangerous allergic reaction to it! Anyway, what I’m trying to say is that there are many reasons why parents are scared of vaccinations, I’m not sure autism is the only one. So YES, everyone SHOULD be vaccinated. Personal medical conditions do have to be taken into account, though. Just saying.
loading...
I think it is highly suspicious that our government PAYS us to get our children vaccinated!! :O
I just received a letter from Centrelink saying “your daughter is almost two… therefore you may be entitled to an immunisation allowance.”
Is it just me or does anyone think this is highly bizarre!?
When I was pregnant and hadn’t yet done the research for myself about vaccinations, I heard of the immunisation allowance and thought “an extra little bit of money to help with parenting. That’s nice.”
But now, having actually read many books & articles about vaccines, I have chosen to no longer vaccinate my daughter and I am disgusted that our government actually PAYS us to vaccinate our children! :O
loading...
RM, there is nothing sinister about it, government funding can be justified on a return on investment basis alone. The financial basis for vaccination in developed countries is examined regularly and several studies have shown that every $1 spent on vaccination saves $3 to $4 because the resulting reduction in illness means there is a reduced need for hospital based care for the very sick.
For example, measles only kills between 0.3% and 1% of children who contract it, but a high proportion require a stay in hospital. Doctors, nurses, equipment and buildings are all quite expensive so the costs (paid by all of us taxpayers via Medicare) add up quickly.
On top of simple costs, the government is also responsible for protecting the safety of its citizens. This is why, for example, the Police aim to keep as many drunk drivers off the streets as possible, and is also an argument for working to minimise the number of unvaccinated children and adults in the community as this increases the risk of major disease outbreaks. Personally I would like to see the government try a lot harder on the second point.
Antivaccinationists typically jump in at this point and argue, “well if you’re vaccinated then you shouldn’t care that someone else isn’t”. That type of claim only displays basic ignorance: no vaccine is 100% effective, typically they are about 70% to 98% effective, so when an outbreak spreads through the unvaccinated it can effect some of the vaccinated as well.
We have long accepted that people who choose to smoke should pay some of the increased cost of their medical care through higher health insurance premiums etc. We have also empowered our police forces to get drunk drivers off the road before they kill someone wherever possible, or prosecute them if they do kill someone before being stopped.
Not vaccinating yourself and your child is a similarly irresponsible decision to drink driving, one that increases both cost and risk for the community around you as well as yourself and your child. I hope that in the near future non vaccinators will be viewed with similar repugnance as unrepentant drink drivers and forced to take responsibility for the consequences of their actions in the same way.
loading...
Yes it’s despicable that the government is subsidising a program designed, and proven, to save the lives of babies and children.
Gob smacked.
loading...
I hope you have covered both side of the vaccination debate in your research. This is why the AVN are so dangerous. On the surface to so many unknowing people they seem to be pro-choice, but unless you have some scientific knowledge to refute their arguments, you have no idea that they are twisting and selectively editing facts.
loading...
It’s the carrot part of the carrot & stick approach. They have found that some people will respond to a “bribe”.
loading...
You have an extremely dangerous and selfish attitude – shame on you.
loading...
Financial incentives always work well. Especially for the uneducated.
loading...
I think it more ridiculous that I can get the Maternity Immunisation Allowance for doing the right thing and getting my child immunised, and have to have the proof of her getting her jabs to get the payment, but anti-vaxers can get it as well with a note from their doctor saying immunisation has been explained and they’re conscientious objectors!
loading...
My ex boyfriends mother is a GP, she is not a hippy and was married to a homeopath, none of their 3 kids were vaccinated, and are all beautiful big boys who have had very little illness in their lives! My kids are so I am not saying that it is wrong but it is very interesting that there are medical professionals who would definitely not let their kids be vaccinated or their grand kids!
loading...
The beautiful big boys still have a lot of life to live. Vaccine preventable diseases are often much more serious if contracted as an adult. Let’s hope this never happens.
The people who run and are members of the AVN must not have a conscience.Otherwise how could they knowingly spout the misinformation they do?
Scientists can counter every piece of unscientific nonsense they come up with,but as true scientists they will never say their information is 100% true now and forever. They know that every piece of information can be further investigated.
AVN continually report that their information is 100% accurate despite knowingly twisting the facts and even reporting things such as reactions that just aren’t true!
How much longer do we have to put up with this?
Most new parents have never seen the diseases we can now vaccinate against.This makes them vulnerable to misinformation.I am so frustrated!
loading...
The Australian Vaccination Network’s funding comes from advertising revenue (in it’s magazine Living Wisdom) and from memberships including professional memberships from businesses. Most of the businesses that sponsor them are Chiropractic (make of that what you will), but I have noticed that a mail-order supplier of organic baby/children’s goods is also a proud sponsor. http://Www.natureschild.com.au http://www.facebook.com/natureschild?ref=ts. I expressed my concern at their support of the AVN, particularly as they operate in Byron Bay, not far from where Dana McCaffrey contracted Whooping Cough, however, they are unapologetically continuing to endorse the AVN as an organisation that is pro-choice and truthful, despite their attention being drawn to the public health warning issued about the AVN.
I am a big consumer of organic children’s products, as are many of my friends and I have advised them against shopping with Nature’s Child because of this worrying lapse in judgement and corporate citizenship. If anyone else thinks this is like Sheriden sponsoring the KKK in order to get more sales of bedsheets then please let Nature’s Child know what you think of their affiliations and tell your friends not to shop with them.
loading...
It is your right in a democratic country, in which vaccination is not mandatory, to tell your friends not to buy products from a business that supports a group that you do not agree with. Just as it is everyone’s right to exercise their own freedom of choice to determine whether vaccination is the right thing for their child. The average practicing doctor will walk the line and tell the pro vaccination story, why? Because he does not have time to do his own research. It is difficult to find the TRUTH – I applaud Meryl Dorey for the stance she has taken. Someone who actually believes in something, has done her research and is standing up and being accountable to so many who seek information. From my contact with her, she has never said, “do not vaccinate”, but do your research. I suggest that you should do some as well!!
loading...
Kindly provide some actual evidence for your claim that the average doctor has not researched the efficacy of vaccination and satisfied him/herself of its merits. I think you will find it is covered in medical school under epidemiology studies.
Also, don’t assume that people haven’t done their research just because they have arrived at a different conclusion from you. I require a little more credibility from my sources that Ms Dorey, therefore I am perfectly comfortable ignoring anecdotal evidence and articles that have not been peer-reviewed by appropriately qualified persons and do not appear in reputable publications known to have expertise in the relevant research area.
Also, I am so confident of my assertions that I am happy to put my name to them. Can you say the same anonymous?
loading...
I am shocked by the level of feeling on this issue. I respect a person’s right to both choose or decline vaccination. In the current climate, it’s easy to forget that vaccination is not mandatory in Australia, and never has been. Despite this vaccination rates are far higher than they were in the 1960′s and 1970′s. It’s important to note that both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals can harbour and transmit infectious diseases.
loading...
Lateline tonight just had a story that the AVN are now also being investigated by the Gaming Commission as they are apparently registered as a charitable organisation!
Sorry, too early for the link to be on the website.
loading...
People who don’t vaccinate their children should take a walk through an old cemetery & see how many children are buried there.
loading...
Oh but we don’t need to worry about that because thats all in the past and doesn’t happen now! I think yours it a tops idea. I also think these jerks who oppose vaccination should have to watch film or look at photos of kids with polio, whooping cough, etc from not really all that long ago, and speak to the adults now who are still coping with what polio did to them.
loading...
Seriously. As if people who decide not to vaccinate their children are jerks! Grow up.
Name calling is highly mature. Hats off to you. Let me guess – you’re 2 years old?!
Honestly, I think you are being very narrow minded & judgemental.
How about YOU look at some videos and pictures of some of the millions of innocent children who have died simply from being vaccinated.
People like me on the other hand are open minded and mature enough to research BOTH sides of the story before coming to a conclusion. Then, I act upon my decision but I don’t go around calling anyone who has a different opinion a JERK.
loading...
Evidence please?
Antivaccination conspiracy theorists make a lot of wild claims, e.g.:
* millions of deaths (strange that the number of deaths per year claimed to be caused by vaccines often exceeds the total number of deaths from all causes!)
* mind control microchips in vaccines (an article posted by Meryl Dorey, the subject of this story, on the AVN website)
* a worldwide conspiracy to hide the truth involving millions of doctors and scientists which is so watertight that no one, not even my sister (who is a doctor herself) will breathe a word of it
* shapeshifting reptilian aliens who look human and have taken on roles as world leaders (e.g. Barack Obama, the Queen etc) and are secretly working to take over the world using vaccines as one of their tools (again Meryl Dorey has endorsed the author of this crackpot theory)
Any nutter with an imagination can make up conspiracy theories, what really matters is EVIDENCE.
There’s not the slightest shred of evidence to support the claim that “millions of innocent children who have died simply from being vaccinated”. On the contrary, this event is so rare that when it does happen it makes news all around the world.
While most of us would just laugh at nutters spreading whacky conspiracy theories like these, they can have a negative impact on public health when their nutty claims find an audience among the gullible and emotionally unstable members of the community.
The time has come to tackle the problem directly, with a broad education campaign on the issue. Longer term we also need to do a better job of teaching science and critical thinking in schools, so that future generations are better able to reason through issues like this without falling prey to absurd conspiracy theories.
loading...
“millions of innocent children who have died simply from being vaccinated.”
Are you actually quoting this as a serious statistic???
loading...
“How about YOU look at some videos and pictures of some of the millions of innocent children who have died simply from being vaccinated”
Are you joking? Got any evidence for this?
loading...
I was looking for information on the web about vaccinations for my at the time 6 month old, and I found this website! Until the moment I read this story I beleived everything I had read on the website to be true and stopped my daughters vaccinations. I told do many of my girlfriends that have babies the same age about this site to. I feel terrible now knowing it is misleading. This website should be shut down, to stop other parents being mislead as I was. My daughter is now almost 12 months old and I will now go to the doctor and get her vaccinations done.
loading...
Good on you. Everyone has a right to do their own research and be confident that they can base their decision on the truth. For our family, the best decision was to choose to not vaccination. Make sure you get the correct information before you make a decision. Is your general medical practitioner an expert on that as well as everything else from the top of the head to the soles of the feet?
loading...
Your comment has made my day!
loading...
I have a six month old daughter. It took me ages to decide if I wanted her vaccinated. She was born prematurely and was so tiny and weak. I kept thinking to myself – why am I going to take this tiny little baby, who is so pure, and inject her with disease? It took many months of careful consideration, I never looked at the AVN website (from what I can tell they are mentally ill), and my partner and I discussed it tirelessly. Ultimately, she is now Vaccinated according to the schedule, and is completely fine & healthy. The point I think we are all missing here is that we do have a choice – and it is the parents right, based on their circumstances, to choose whether or not their child is vaccinated. I do not believe that parents who vaccinate their children care any more about their children than parents who choose not to, and I don’t believe, as stated below, that parents who dont vaccinate their children are selfish. The AVN is a stupid and ridiculous website. But that is a seperate issue as to whether or not parents are good or bad for having vaccinated their children. I do not think people that have had their children vaccinated have the right to put down parents who have quitely chosen not to. It is their choice, you made a different one.
loading...
It’s not a tattoo we’re talking about, or what baby-clothes to wear, or even whether to serve baby organic, or conventionally grown vegetables.
Vaccines save lives. Not vaccinating risks lives.
loading...
Yes and you apparently have a choice to label people mentally ill!!! What ‘balanced’ information did you base that slur on???
loading...
Looking at the photo above, I just want to say Dana McCaffery is (was)
the most beautiful, beautiful baby. My condolences to the McCaffery family.
loading...
Mia – if you take nothing else away from this, look at the number of responses to the post. 600-odd has to be some kind of record (and I know you’ve deleted some so the real figure must be higher).
I guess what this says is that this issue resounds with us as a community. You have responses here from parents, grandparents, people not yet parents, people who have no intention of becoming parents, expectant parents and people trying to get pregnant…
I think it’s incredible that one topic can motivate so many people to engage in this sort of debate which, on the whole, has been fairly reasoned – even those with disagreements.
loading...
If people don’t want to vaccinate, I think that is their choice but aren’t they lucky to be a part of a community which for the most part DOES vaccinate, and so they benefit from the “herd immunity”. If for example we had a massive drop in vaccinations accross the community, people would soon remember why vaccination was heralded as a major step forward in modern medicine.
loading...
Oh but according to the anti-vaxers it isn’t the mass immunisations that stopped preventable diseases, it was feminism, better hygiene and changed living conditions don’t you know. Which totally explains why kids on farms only living with their families got polio in the 50s. And also why it stopped as the vaccines were rolled out…
loading...
This is from the AVN website:
AVN Response to Sydney Morning Herald Article – 27/7/10
I guess I should not be surprised when the media gets something wrong. It’s just that when they get SO MANY things wrong in one article, it’s difficult not to read that as anything but intentional bias and deliberate misstatements.
Below is a critique of the article that appeared in today’s Sydney Morning Herald, written by Kate Benson, entitled , Vaccine activists labelled a threat.
WHEN their four-week-old baby daughter Dana died from whooping cough Toni and David McCaffery sought love and healing to ease their grief.
Instead, they say they were subjected to a campaign of harassment and abuse at the hands of anti-vaccination campaigners, a group who were yesterday labelled a serious threat to the public’s health and safety.
In July 2009, the HCCC forwarded a complaint that had been made by Ken McLeod, one of the members of the hate group, Stop the AVN. We gave a full and complete response to this complaint in September, 2009. The McCaffery’s filed their own complaint against the AVN in December, 2009 and we were not informed of this until their names were added on to the original complaint in February, 2010.
Despite the fact that accusations like the ones above and below were made against both myself and the AVN by the McCaffery’s, the HCCC would not allow me to see these accusations. Instead, I was expected to respond to the complaint without having access to it. Anyone can see that this is a denial of the AVN’s and my right to natural justice.
As for this supposed campaign of harassment, neither I nor anyone else on our committee has ever contacted the McCaffery’s by any means whatsoever – emails, telephone, letter or in person. So this supposed harassment by AVN members is an unsubstantiated claim which, despite requesting further information from the HCCC on this issue, has never been verified by either the McCaffery’s or any other officials involved in this investitation.
I can easily say that Julia Gillard calls me up every Saturday night at 9 PM to have a yarn about the kids, but this would be a lie. Likewise, unless proof is provided by the McCaffery’s that I or any other AVN member has harassed them, this claim is simply untrue.
For instance, the McCaffery’s have regularly said that I have been found to have provided incorrect and misleading information to the ABC radio after an interview last year. They say this despite the fact that they KNOW that it was, in fact, the ABC presenter who was found to have given incorrect information and not me. Please read the following correspondence:
From: ABC Corporate_Affairs11
Date: 5 February 2010 4:26:39 PM AEDT
To: “‘meryl@avn.org.au’”
Subject: RE: ABC Investigation of vaccination information
Dear Ms Dorey
I refer to your emails of 28 and 29 January to ABC presenter Katya Quigley. In line with ABC complaints procedures, your correspondence has been forwarded to Audience and Consumer Affairs.
As previously advised in a number of my emails to you, the findings of the Audience and Consumer Affairs review did not relate to your contribution to the program or to how the AVN presents statistics. Consistent with ABC complaints procedures, our review related to whether the statements about the statistics made by an ABC presenter complied with the ABC’s editorial standards for accuracy in factual content. Our finding was that the ABC presenter’s statement did not meet the standard, which requires that “Every reasonable effort must be made to ensure that factual content is accurate and in context”.
In addition, the Herald journalist’s use of the words “serious threat to the public’s health and safety” is something that was made up by the journalist. These words do not appear anywhere in the HCCC announcement and one has to wonder who is in fact running the Sydney Morning Herald when they can make such obviously slanderous comments without any proof or reason?
The Health Care Complaints Commission issued a public warning against the Australian Vaccination Network after it refused to display a disclaimer on its website to inform readers its information should not be taken as medical advice.
For many years, the AVN has had a disclaimer on its website. The HCCC was informed of this back in September 2009, yet like so much of the information provided to this organisation by the AVN, they either chose to ignore it or were incapable of understanding it.
Our disclaimer states that, “If medical advice is required the services of a competent professional should be sought.”
What the AVN objects to and has objected to since the beginning of this process over a year ago is the following:
1. The HCCC has no jurisdiction to investigate the AVN. Both our lawyers and our barrister have pointed this out to this government body several times with references to the Act under which the HCCC was formed. Despite this, the HCCC has refused to address our concerns over lack of jurisdiction in any meaningful way, simply stating that they disagree with our reading of the relevant legislation. If the HCCC has jurisdiction over the AVN and myself, then there would be very few members of either the media or the general public who would not likewise be considered – from time to time – to be ’health educators’ under the HCC Act – including the complainants, Ken McLeod and Toni and David McCaffery – all three of whom are self-proclaimed activists for mass vaccination.
2. Requiring a vaccine safety and health watchdog group such as the AVN to use specific wording on their website or in print or at any time at all makes a mockery of the right to freedom of communication as upheld by the High Court of Australia and by convention in this great democracy we live in. The laws of Australia do not allow censorship of websites unless the content is deemed to incite violence against others or to include racial vilification or child pornography. The AVN website does none of these things and therefore, the HCCC is acting outside the law and is discriminating against not only our organisation, but the thousands of parents across Australia whose children have been killed or injured by vaccines.
Earlier this month the commission investigated the network, run out of Bangalow on the north coast by Meryl Dorey, and found its website presented incorrect and misleading information that was solely anti-vaccination and quoted selectively from research suggesting that vaccination may be dangerous.
The HCCC’s ‘investigation’ consisted of a review of our website and in particular – one single page of our website which currently contains hundreds of pages of information including links to the manufacturer’s package inserts for all currently licensed vaccines – information which should be freely available to all but which the health department chooses to exclude.
In addition, I would like to use the following quote from my last response to the HCCC (all correspondence between the AVN and the HCCC can be accessed by clicking here)
“In the most general of terms, I Meryl Dorey will define my identity for the purposes of this response. I consider myself to be a health activist struggling against environmental causes of ill health. I would consider these struggles to be political in nature and any attempt to censor me or the AVN would be seen as an attempt to censor my political views.
“In my opinion, the whole of the ‘investigation’ findings from the HCCC, are a crude attempt to stifle contrary political opinions about public health that emanate, in this circumstance from those who consider that vaccinations can have no adverse reactions and that groups who raise questions about their safety and effectiveness must be censored to support government policy.
“This opinion is based upon my dealings with the HCCC and the apparent bias which was most evident in the statement made to me by your investigator, Leanne Evans on the 26th of May, 2010.
“When questioned about how either the AVN or myself could get a fair hearing from the HCCC when the Commission seemed to ignore so much of the referenced information I had provided in previous responses, Ms Evans stated that, “The HCCC is a government department and as such, we can’t go against government policy which is pro-vaccination.”
Our organisation has been running for 17 years. In that time, we have distributed information packs, magazines, newsletters and flyers. Our website contains a very tiny portion of the information we have published and yet, our website was the only thing the HCCC ‘investigated’ and that investigation concentrated on one single page.
The HCCC requested references to the information on this page – references which the AVN provided. These references were ignored by the investigation with the same questions being asked over and over again until the HCCC made their decision to state that our information is misleading. It is the feeling of the AVN that the bias shown by the HCCC since the beginning of this process required that regardless of the evidence we were able to provide them with, the conclusion was predetermined. The HCCC was required to uphold government policy on this issue which is pro-vaccination and anti-informed choice.
His group now wants the state government to apply for a court injunction against the network and have it closed down. The group’s website says Ms Dorey believes ‘‘vaccines are part of a global conspiracy to implant mind control chips into every man, woman and child and that the ‘illuminati’ plan a mass cull of humans’’.
Evidence yet again that the Sydney Morning Herald is either intentionally ignoring all of the rules of investigative journalism or else, they don’t understand how to do research.
Mr McLeod and the others associated with his hate group have continually stated that I believe these outrageous and ridiculous statements. The reason they make this statement is because last year, I posted an article about the Swine Flu vaccine that was printed in the Pakistan Daily to my blog. According to them (and the page is no longer up so it is impossible for me to check the proof of this statement), there was a link to a website owned by a David Icke who believes the statements Mr McLeod attributes to me.
Mr McLeod’s contention is that since I posted the article, I am personally responsible for and supportive of not only every word in the article, but every link including sponsored links that appear on the page.
As anyone who has ever used the internet would be aware, this is a fallacious assumption. Pages often have links to other websites that are not under the control of the page owner. If you have Google ads or any other sponsored links, you will almost always see links on your own page that you do not approve of. It does not mean that you support or agree with those links and for Mr McLeod to make these outrageous claims or the Sydney Morning Herald to print them is slanderous at best – deceitful at worst.
Ms Dorey did not return calls yesterday but issued a statement on her website which said the HCCC’s recommendation was ‘‘laughable’’ and she was seeking legal advice.
It is true that the Herald called yesterday but I was out of the office and did not return until too late to respond.
Next, to put things into context, the word “laughable” referred to in the quote above is the only word the reporter actually got right in her entire article. This comes from a press release that the AVN issued yesterday. If the reporter was privy to the information in that press release, one has to wonder why only one word was used – and that out of context with the actual release?
For the edification of those who care about the truth, here is the paragraph that was quoted:
“The HCCC states that our information is misleading because we do not include data on the benefits of vaccination,” says Meryl Dorey, Media Spokesperson for the AVN. “Yet this is a laughable assertion when you consider that nobody would expect nuclear safety advocates to issue statements on the benefits of nuclear power; Greenpeace to make films on the pleasures of killing and eating whales; or those who argue against fluoridation of the water supply to write reports about the benefits of mass medication without individual consent.
“Why then should we be expected to make statements we don’t believe are factual and that are not supported by the medical literature? If the AVN is expected to show both sides of this issue, why aren’t the medical community and the government likewise cited for their lack of disclosure on the risks and ineffectiveness of vaccines?”
I’m sure that any thinking person – though not necessarily any journalist – would realise that the use of the word laughable in this case, was intended to reflect the fact that the HCCC’s investigation was incomplete, biased and of grave concern to anyone who believes that Australians have the right to access all available information about any medical procedures before making a choice,
loading...
Just like Australians researching vaccination have the right to know that the Australian Vaccination Network is, despite its misleading name, an anti-vaccination organisation.
loading...
“The HCCC’s ‘investigation’ consisted of a review of our website”
How else would you have suggested the HCCC investigate you, then? The AVN website is where most of the people looking for information are going to find you, so why wouldn’t they look at that? GK a few posts down pulled apart just one of your pages spectactularly!
People have anecdotally said here they have been harassed by your advocates when taking their kids to get vaccinated.
Doesn’t sound like much choice advocacy to me.
loading...
Oh and I love how you guys refer to Stop the AVN as a hate group, and fascists as well. From some of the antics that you and your supporters have got up to, that is a BIIIIIIG call.
loading...
“Why then should we be expected to make statements we don’t believe are factual and that are not supported by the medical literature?”
From what we’ve heard so far, making factually incorrect statements unsupported by medical literature is exactly what the AVN DOES do. It would appear it is precisely what the public CAN expect from the AVN.
loading...
This is the disclaimer from your site:
DISCLAIMER NOTICE
The AVN makes no guarantees of any kind with regard to any products and other materials contained on this site. No warranty or guarantee is expressed or implied with any information at this site.
The AVN has, as far as it is possible, taken care to ensure that the information given on this site is accurate and up to date. However, this information is provided with the understanding that the AVN is not liable for the misconception or misuse of information provided. This information is continually being updated and so may not be accurate, current or complete and is subject to change without notice.
The information on this site is intended and applicable for Australian audiences only and adheres to Australian legislation and regulatory guidelines.
Where does it say about consulting a professional like you say?
loading...
Sorry for re-commenting but I replied to this with two links – one to a Google-cached copy of the Pakistan Daily article Dorey says is impossible to check and one to the identical article (original) on David Icke’s website. I guess the links got it caught in a spam trap?
Suffice it to say, Meryl got it wrong. The very article she linked to and part-quoted on her blog, supposedly written by Farooq Hussain, contained an explicit accusation that the Swine flu vaccine was the work of the Illuminati, contained microchips and would be used to mass cull the population.
It didn’t specifically mention “lizard people” but that’s what David Icke’s Illuminati are. Someone with even introductory “research” skills would have discovered that by now. It’s hardly a secret.
loading...
Why would you even set up a website vindicating vaccination anyway?
Does the AVN want preventable diseases in our community, or something else equally as sinister?
loading...
Wikipedia has a fantastic vaccination article and the anti vaccination movement and explians it well and what bets they have a point with and what parts are flawed logic. It answered all my questions and I now get both sides of the story.
loading...
Mia, just out of interest (and no worries if you’re not able to tell us), have you received any hate mail from the AVN?
Apparently it’s their MO to attack anyone who questions their dubious claims (as stated above, even grieving parents) and I was curious if you’d received the same treatment?
I for one am SO pleased you’ve written this post as people need to know the truth about the AVN.
loading...
Good question Claudia.
We’ve certainly received some personally abusive comments on this post which we have deleted. And some comments about the McCaffery family which you just wouldn’t believe.
Those were also deleted.
So the answer is a resounding yes.
What I have found most disturbing about this has been the AVN’s attacks on the McCaffery family, vulnerable people in deep grief over the senseless loss of their baby daughter.
Just…..beggars belief that anyone could be so cruel and heartless.
loading...
It’s just so, so sad and how anyone can attack them at any time let alone when their baby had just died is beyond comprehension.
I was having a read of their FB group and some of the comments there were terrible too, I would have loved to join to let them know my thoughts but they have a disclaimer along the lines that unless you are pro AVN then don’t bother joining!
I was also reading one discussion thread where a mother was debating the vaccination issue and she wasn’t too keen on vaccination but decided to go ahead and claimed how impressed with the whole process she had been. The members of the group then went on to say ‘reading that makes me feel sick. I feel so sad for you and your family’ kind of comments – an absolute guilt trip.
They are warped and will not see sense, reason, logic or SCIENCE and will not tolerate any opinion that isn’t 100% anti vaccination.
loading...
I listed to Meryl Dorey on Adam Spencer’s breakfast program yesterday morning and she was so ‘no I NEVER said this or that’. She was so controlled and seemed so measured…but like you say Claudia if you go to the Facebook page of the AVN you see her and her follower’s true thoughts. Appalling.
loading...
Absolutely – plus she also denied writing something to Steve, the Lateline reporter, until he showed her the print out and then she fluffed some ‘it’s been taken out of context’ answer!
I don’t understand how anyone can give her the time of day, let alone look up to her and be a ‘fan’ of the AVN on facebook.
loading...
Then someone here tried to discredit Steve Cannane who is AWESOME of being biased as he’s a member or friend or something of the skeptics, and that the interview was scripted to make her look bad!
loading...
Hi Mia,
I just wanted to say a big thankyou for deleting the horrid posts that were on here in regards to the McCaffery family.
As an admin of the Stop the AVN page, I have been subject to abuse, ‘cyber’ stalking, bullying etc due to being a part of this and my stance on vaccination (obviously very much pro!)- including a member making an account in the name of my dog that I put to sleep in April of this year.
However, what has happened to me pales in comparison to the abuse and harrasment the McCaffery family have experienced. Meryl writing TWICE(that we have evidence of) that darling Dana “supposedly” died from pertussis, is unfortunately only one thing that she and other AVN members have done to this family.
Once again, thankyou so much for allowing both sides to comment, but also not allowing those who continue to harrass and abuse this family to post here and cause more heartache for a family that has already been through enough!
Tabs, R.N., PostGrad Dip. Immun.
loading...
Wow. There is a ridiculous amount of incorrect information on the AVN site. Not even in terms of propaganda or selective choice of references, but scientifically, factually incorrect. It saddens me to think that for parents with little or no scientific/medical training this could appear convincing.
E.g
their article entitled “10 reasons why parents question vaccination” here http://avn.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=188:channel-7-one-sided-reporting-in-your-own-words&catid=75:admin&Itemid=65
Under Point 3, and I quote “For instance, SV 40 (simian or monkey virus 40 – just one of 60 monkey viruses known to contaminate the polio vaccines) has been linked with cancers in humans; there is a chicken retrovirus which contaminates the measles and mumps vaccines called Reverse Transcriptase. This substance, an ancient non-human DNA code, is thought to switch on the HIV virus and cause it to become AIDS in humans; AIDS itself has been linked with a virus called SIV (Simian Immunodeficiency Virus) which contaminated both the polio and smallpox vaccines; the current MMR (measles mumps rubella) and other vaccines which contain bovine (cow) blood products are thought to be able to spread the human and always fatal form of mad cow disease, Creutzfeld-Jacobs disease, more readily than eating contaminated meat.”
Firstly, not a single one of these claims contains any kind of reference to a scientific or medical study which supports it. Secondly the clearest example of their own ignorance and mis-information is contained in the claim that “there is a chicken retrovirus which contaminates the measles and mumps vaccines called Reverse Transcriptase.”
There is no chicken retrovirus called Reverse Transcriptase.
THIS IS LOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
Why?
Reverse transcriptase is a form of enzyme that plays a vital role in the formation of double stranded DNA from single stranded RNA.
Enzymes are proteins (constructed from amino acids). Viruses are viruses, made up of various genetic material including both DNA and RNA. Which in turn is made up of nucleic acids. Nucleic acids are not the same as amino acids!!!!!!!
I repeat – enzymes are not viruses. And they are certainly not a virus called reverse transcriptase contaminating the MMR!
Further, the authors of this site are purposefully misleading.
How?
They take certain facts which are true, and conflate them to make their claims sound convincing.
E.g HIV actually is a retrovirus. It is also well known to be linked to a Simian (Monkey) form of the virus – SIV. Thus if you google HIV, these terms will come up in the literature, making the claims seem legitimate.
They contradict themselves “This substance, an ancient non-human DNA code, is thought to switch on the HIV virus and cause it to become AIDS in humans;”,
Which substance…. the Reverse Transcriptase. As above, this is an enzyme, specifically it is a RNA-dependent DNA polymerase. It is not non-human DNA code. Or perhaps they mean the chicken retrovirus…? Which as far as I’m aware, people with HIV/AIDS show no signs of at the conversion stage.
In any case, neither of these has any role in “switching on” HIV. It’s not too clear why HIV transitions to full blown AIDS at this point. But its fair to say that AVN will be the last to know given their standards of research.
This is a huge post. I hope it made sense. If I had the time and resources I would go through page by page and dissect their appalling pseudo science. It horrifies me that in only one point, of one of their many pages, I could find such flawed and patently false claims about science generally, let alone their commentary on vaccination.
Parents, please be aware. Speak to a medical professional. You are more than entitled to make up your own minds. But… please do so on the basis of FACTUAL information.
Best wishes.
GK
loading...
thanks for taking the time to explain all that.
loading...
Thank you so much for this post. The time you’ve taken to step this out for us is great and, from a non-medical background, it’s made it much easier for me to understand how things can sound very legit on the surface until you start digging.
loading...
Thank you for providing a clear and understandable explanation.
loading...
Thanks GK.
Always great to use facts to dismantle lies!
loading...
Wish I had the energy to respond to this but wholeheartedly agree with you Mia.
I would like to know who all the kids are at the playground who are not vaxed so I can steer well clear of them with any young babies/kids who aren’t fully vaxed yet, but clearly there is no way to do that.
I also wish all those selfish people who don’t vax could donate their vax to a child in the developing world whose parents would chop their right arm off to protect their children against hepatitis, tetanus, whooping cough etc.
loading...
Now THAT is a brilliant idea.
loading...
isn’t it.
loading...
What is scary about the AVN site is if you type in vaccinations into google search engine and press “I’m feeling lucky” it takes you there to their site!
loading...
They should be called the Anti Vaccination Network so people know straight up what their agenda is.
loading...
no surprises there!
thanks for the update
loading...
Hi everyone, I am going to spread my limbs here and disagree. Thanks in advance.
1) “And I believe the view that it’s a personal decision is a flawed one because one person choosing not to immunise their children can have devastating and tragic effects on someone else’s child”…..I did my research and read a book that I now find is advertised on the AVN website called Choosing Not To Immunise our Children. I bought the book from another source a few years ago. This book was something that helped me understand what vaccination was, its history and how we use it today and what effects it brings to society and how my child being vaccinated aids in health or not for the individual and society at large. I cannot go into all the things I learnt but I did understand from it that vaccination is only 1 part of the health we enjoy today. Sanitation is one. Nutrition standards is another. A healthier society from clean water, animals and people living separately, higher educations, women’s rights etc have all contributed to our living standard as we enjoy it now. So when your child who is immunised gets sick it is not my non-vaccinated child who *gives* it to yours, yours is sick because of your child’s immune response irrespective of vaccination. Simplified version which I know is open to all sorts of attack but I am putting it out there as best I can from my view…
And also, am I one of the vulnerable parents who view the AVN website because I have wanted, in the past, information about vaccines? I thought I was empowered and informed in making choices given a range of information and as a result, was then educated by this information?
Again, the AVN director harassed this family who lost their child, but using this to point out their *deviousness* is a separate issue. They are not devious, they did not give this family any false information as this family never went to their site FOR information. The site has always remained as it is. They are extreme and while I read a book that is listed on their site, the Directors views are actually not something I agree with. She does sound off the planet in terms of “global conspiracy”…etc. Vaccination was established to help society at a time in our lives and the motivation for vaccination remains something society does as a means to help.
2. “PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT THIS STORY SO VULNERABLE PARENTS AREN’T MISINFORMED BY THIS WEBSITE OR THIS DANGEROUS GROUP.” The group is extreme, but a lot of the information on anti-vaccination is just information from another view point. I guess I am wanting to to point out that this comment appears to be saying that parents who want any information about vaccination rather than just going with what the doctor says (which, let’s be frank here, is not EVER about giving information about vaccinations in a broader sense) have completely lost the plot on their civic duty and we need to weed them out. Are you really saying here Mia: Spread the word about the AVN so that parents who are swayed into wanting information (read: crazy idiots!) that may give them an understanding about vaccinations (read: all information other than from a Doctor is FALSE) are made to realise that you have to vaccinate or else!
loading...
Caroline – this is not about someone pushing a non-government line. If it were that, the HCCC investigation would have been over in a few days. Instead they took 12 months and checked the references provided by the AVN, and they found that the AVN does not understand them, because quite often they directly contradict the conclusions the AVN draws. In other words, the AVN does not give information that can help parents. It distorts and twists the scientific literature to show what they want. In that sense parents are vulnerable, because we don’t expect people to lie to us.
And I submit that there is a plethora of good information on vaccination out there for parents. It ranges from scientific or medical analyses of papers for lay people to personal stories from parents, blogs and magazine articles specifically designed to give parents the correct information about vaccines. The AVN is not part of this.
loading...
Awesome Deb, thanks for explaining exactly why the AVN has been brought to question. I can believe, given the Directors outlandish views that they may have done this. I don’t think that this is clear enough on this blog post. I read that they were “devious” but not that they twisted the findings. Thanks
loading...
It was in the Lateline story, and there are a couple of posts explaining the nitty gritty.
loading...
Hey Caroline – Deb explained it but yes, the website is deceitful because it does twist science and does not disclose their anti-vaccination position.
So it is hugely unethical to promote yourself as a balanced site where people can get factual information about vaccinations when
a) the information you present is not factual
b) you don’t disclose your extreme bias upfront
Hope this clarifies what I meant…
loading...
Yes, the AVN are radical and fanatical and not cool. This is true and they should be stopped. However, there are still two sides to the vaccination story and whilst people should not take info from this organisation, particularly vulnerable people who are just searching for answers, it doesnt mean that the whole ‘anti’ vax argument is in valid. Im not for or against. Im in science and i understand both sides – partic in first world countries. Unless you understand how the body works, it is hard to fully comprehend both arguments. Im just saying that whilst this organisation has it wrong, there are still legit ‘anti’ facts out there. Just like there are fanatical religious groups who ruin the reputation of other non fanatics who may follow the same religion
loading...
I´m a vacinator. But I think people have the right to both sides of the story. I personally have never looked into it too much but i would love to read a summary of why Anti´s are that way and have it explained but a neutral party. for example – the reason why the MMR autism link is not valid and why people think it is( age of shots at same time autism shows up? higher rates of diagnosis not actual autism it self?
I´d like to know the real story behind why people are so against it and how there logic is flawed. Or wht point they may have. At I love statistics- ie. if your child gets mumps the chances of dying are….. if you vacinate the chances of serious adverse effects are….
That type of unbiased information would remove the the rug from under the feet of the anti´s.
loading...
There are PLENTY of sources for explanations of the anti vaxxers, you just need a few hours to surf around the internet! Plenty of blogs by skeptics, who although they are skeptical about many things, have many ethical scientists contributing. Paul Offit is a great author to read about this subject. Stop the AVN website also has many contributors of scientific based information refuting everything the avn is spouting.
loading...
Unless parents are otherwise warned against vaccinating because of some kind of vulnerability or alergy, that reasonable, but if it is because you think it is going to cause ADD or by some mythical bullshit, then yeah… Sheer ignorance and stupidity.
loading...
Having worked with children who have autism – with parents who swear black and blue that their child’s condition was caused by their vaccinations – I have sat on the fence about this for a long time.
Until I got whooping cough myself. It’s a nightmare.
Now I’m a nursing student and I love illness prevention. It means that your kids don’t end up in my hospital beds. It means that your kids don’t take up medical resources we need for disease that aren’t preventable. It means that we don’t end up like developing countries; we don’t get illnesses like rubella, chicken pox (as much) and other conditions.
Sure, it’s not perfect – but getting sick from/dying from some condition that should have been left in the 1900s is pretty damn crap too.
loading...
I can understand why some people could believe that vaccinations could cause their childs autism- they’re usually administered at around the same time that it usually becomes apparent. Of course, that’s ignoring the fact that only in very rare cases will autism be caused by environmental factors and not genetics. Sad.
loading...
Hi Ella, I’m a nurse as well and contracted Whooping cough, apparently nurses were the biggest group in the community to contract this strain my GP tells me.
loading...
When you vaccinate your kids, you`re not doing it so much for them but for the other kids they come into contact with. It`s a social courtesy whereby increasing your own childs immunity to diseases automatically increases the immunity of the herd as a whole. As others on this post have pointed out, vaccines aren`t 100% effective, and there will always be a slim chance they could still contract a disease they`ve been immunised against. However, the more people in the group that are immunised, the less likely that the disease can spread, thus the incidence of the disease is overall lowered. If your kid has a serious reaction to a vaccine then fine, don`t immunise. They`ll probably be protected as long as every other kid in the herd who can be immunised is immunised. But for everyone else who believes it is a personal choice to immunise their kid or not, all I can say is well, it isn`t really about your kid at all.
And as for homeopathy, if you go to youtube and search for `That Mitchell and Webb Look Homeopathy A&E` (sorry, can`t link as I`m at work) you will know my views on homeopathy.
loading...
By the way, with regards to homeopathy, I didn`t mean to drag it out randomly, as it doesn`t come up in these articles a lot. But I do wish to make the point that it should be in no way considered an effective alternative to an actual vaccine. Also Mitchell and Webb are hilarious.
loading...
They are hilarious! I love their show.
loading...
Yeah, there have been a few of us point out these points, but apparently its all about the rights of the parents to not immunise their kids, nothing to do with their community responsibilities at all. Jerks.
loading...
I did indeed type before I got to read most of the previous comments. But rights? We don’t have a bill of rights, and if we ever got around to one I doubt the minutia of vaccinations would be in it. I know many private child care centres have the right to refuse admittance to non vaccinated kids though…
loading...
Yeah, the stellar argument I got in response to my point of “well if you want rights, you have responsibilities that go with them…” was that my position was noted. That was IT!!! LOL Awesome argument.
I was talking about this with my friend last week, and as she pointed out – She has a right to send her son to school and know that all the kids are as protected from preventable diseases as possible…
loading...
I think ‘jerks’ is a bit harsh. It actually is the right of the parents. If you had a severly disabled child as a result of vaccination then you may think twice before typing ‘jerks’. We are lucky enough to live in a world with CHOICE. We need to respect others choices. A non vaccinated child is NOT going to make your child sick, so we should just let people make their own choices in life, you never know someones backstory.
loading...
I stand by calling them jerks. I think unless you have a decent medical reason (allergy eg) to NOT vaccinate your kids, you should.
I’ve said it before on this thread – the “right” to not vaccinate has only become prevalent since Gen Xers (who were all vaccinated) have grown up WITHOUT the diseases we were all vaccinated for. Our parents wouldn’t have dreamed of not getting us vaccinated. Its a luxury that is dangerous.
My arguments in favour of vaccination are all over this thread if you’d like to have a read.
loading...
As i said above, if you had a child who is severly disbaled as a result of vaccination, you may have think twice about calling them ‘jerks’. As i also said above, you should never judge people without knowing their whole backstory. If mrs Smith down at the park has an unvaccinated child, for her own PERSONAL reasons, then why on earth should she have to justify her choice. Many, many, many people have reasons – legitamite reasons- for choosing not to vaccinate. It is not for you to judge.
loading...
What do you count as a legitimate reason though? I think its your kid having an adverse reaction to immunisation. Not some airy fairy hippy ideology of wanting to stick it to the man because its the government. I’ve got no problem with questioning what you’re told, but not doing something just because, or worse, based on dodgy arguments like these clowns’ website is not on. People would kill for their kids to be vaccinated n developing countries. I think its incredibly selfish for people who “just don’t like the idea” to rely on others for their kids’ health and safety. I have said plenty of times, fair enough if there is a legitimate medical issue which makes it dangerous for kids to be immunised, but unless that can be proven, everyone gets immunised.
What are the many many legitimate reasons you mention?
loading...
*disabled*
loading...
With all due respect, in regards to herd immunity which was the basis of my post, a number of non vaccinated children in a herd will make the rest sick. If your child is a medical anomaly and has an averse reaction to a vaccine, fine, don’t vaccinate. But the only thing protecting them is the immunity of the rest of the herd- the kids that are vaccinated. That’s why it’s vital that the kids that can be vaccinated are vaccinated, so they can protect children who can’t be. Just because a disease has been declared ‘eradicated’ doesn’t mean that the virus causing it has been physically vaporised off the face of the planet- it is always there, waiting for a host. You are right in that parents do have a choice to vaccinate their kids or not, as Australia hasn’t mandated compulsory vaccinations yet. However,just as you have a right not to vaccinate, public schools have a right to send your kid home if there is a suspected disease outbreak in a school, and private schools and day care centres have a right to refuse your child admittance altogether, in order to preserve the health of the rest of their charges.
loading...
“A non vaccinated child is NOT going to make your child sick”
Guess Dana’s Mum and Dad would disagree with that statement
loading...
I was talking about this thread at netball last weekend, and I mentioned the AVN and that they were from the Northern Rivers. One of the girls piped up and said “yeah, that’s where we’re from, I got whooping cough and it was the worst thing ever – coughing constantly, vomiting from it, not being able to sleep from it”. What a great thing to not want to protect yourself, your kids and others from…
loading...
A non-vaccinated child CAN make other people, especially babies who have not reached the age to be properly vaccinated, sick. This is the point many have been making. So it’s not simply a personal choice, it’s a choice with repercussions for the community as a whole. We do not live in an individualist bubble, we live in a society.
loading...
A non vacinated child can spread disease, particularly to children to young to be vaccinated. Your attitude is very naive and I hope that you come to your senses and vacinate your children.
loading...
A non vacinated child can spread disease, particularly too children to young to be vaccinated. Your attitude is very naive and I hope that you come to your senses and vacinate your children.
loading...
No,Homeopathic vaccinations are not to be considered as a substitute for vaccines. There are many homeopaths out there who will agree im sure. However, for reasons i cannot explain scientifically, i have seen homeopathics work brilliantly in children and animals (therefore not placebo). The Brauer teething relief has worked amazingly on my babaies and on many babies i have given it to in my many years in pharmacy. So just because science cant explain it, dont discount homeopathy completly. If it works, great, homeopathics are for the most part very very safe. I dont understand it – science cant explain it – and homeopathy used to make me very angry. Then i realised that if it was working, then why should i question it?! Its not poison, usually its just water and sometimes a tiny bit of alcohol, so now i just accept it. If it makes people feel better, then great. Prescription meds run on a massive placebo percentage too. Sorry, not having a go, just thought i would explain my experiences. I know this has noting to do with the story at hand and NO dont replace vaccines with homeopathics.. but dont discount homeopathy entirely. xxx
loading...
With dilutions of some ingredients as low as 6C, the Brauer product is not what most people mean when they refer to homeopathic products. At 6C, there is still some active ingredient (Avogadro kicks in at 12C) so it’s almost herbal by comparison to popular 30C “remedies”.
I’m unable to find out what the vehicle is in the product but it might also have some mild therapeutic value – not to mention the value of rubbing the gums.
The placebo effect most certainly does apply to animals and children – though it is experienced by the carers who are convinced they see beneficial change.
And homeopathy should be “discounted” – it’s far too expensive for what you get.
loading...
They’re a despicable bunch at the AVN. I wish the government could ban their website – someone needs to stop them publishing their lies.
loading...
Ahh the zealotry on both sides lives.
loading...
Good grief…
http://www.smh.com.au/national/antivaccine-group-a-threat-20100726-10smn.html
loading...
Just came here to post that link – you and Mia beat me to it!
loading...
Interesting. Seems Mia may be deciding which comments to publish???
loading...
If comments under multiple names come from the same IP address they do get deleted. I am sure you will agree it creates a more even playing ground
Hope you understand
Lana (moderator)
loading...
Ah yes, but I am not claiming to know things I do not. I am not claiming ‘science’ that is not science at all in a bid to convince unsuspecting visitors to this website to take certain decisions about vaccination.
I listen to the advice of my doctor, my pediatrician, my friends who are doctors, my grandfather who is a doctor and other parents whose views I respect.
I also read myself and guess what? EVERYTHING I read and hear says vaccinate. Everything.
By not accidentally venturing onto the AVN website, I was able to make an informed decision based on actual experts and my own common sense.
loading...
“by not accidentally venturing onto the avn website..”
OK. So you are saying that all information about vaccination is/should be pro vaccination and the rest is so out of line that censorship of the information is required? You want censorship of this stuff, right?
loading...
” So you are saying that all information about vaccination is/should be pro vaccination and the rest is so out of line”
So what your saying is we should all visit the AVN that has no scientific or medical certifications and take there word for it???
loading...
Mia, this is a wonderful article. Thank you. The AVN is a sinister, fanatical group attempting to mislead the public with superstitious pseudoscience. Children have died and more will in the future if their pernicious influence is not curtailed.
All credit to you for encouraging rational thinking and science.
loading...
There was a post a few years ago on this site where I think I made my position on anti-vaccination pretty clear. Let’s just say I am not a fan. I find it hard to even post about it any more, it makes me so phenomenally infuriated – seriously brings me to tears. I didn’t know anything about this story or this group but I am off to read everything on it.
Can I just say thank you to all the amazing and wonderfully knowledgable commentators below who provide such important and valid information in a far more logical and scientific way than I am able.
Two years ago there was a child with leukemia in my old neighborhood who died of the measles, contracted in an area where vaccinations rates had fallen dramatically. There are areas in England where they are having to run pro-Measles vaccinations campaigns to fight against the anti-vaccination scaremongering. These things just should not be happening in today’s world in a country like England. They shouldn’t.
loading...
My parents were anti-vaccination and I earned my immunity to most childhood diseases the old fashioned way….including getting a full blown case of measles when I was 8mos pregnant with my first child. I was a little uneasy about vaccinating my children at first, having grown up hearing horror stories, but I did my research, talked to the experts and decided to vaccinate. I came to the conclusion that although there are potential negative effects from vaccination, the percentage of complications are significantly smaller than from contracting the illness itself.
I know a girl who was born deaf as a result of her mother contracting rubella when she was pregnant. If I had gone into labor when I had the measles, there is a good chance I would have passed it on to my newborn daughter with possible dire consequences. And then there are the vulnerable, like newborns and immunocompromised, who are counting on “herd immunity” to keep them safe.
From the video clip it does sound as if the AVN are misrepresenting themselves as authorities on the topic and think it’s only reasonable that they clarify their stance. If they are all about making informed choices, as they claim, then they should not have anything to lose.
loading...
What was it like being pregnant and having measles? Sorry to hear that happened.
Was yr bub affected at all?
loading...
The main thing I remember was being totally exhausted and feeling sick, but not being able to get comfortable to rest, due to big tummy, itchy rash, etc… Measles is not one of the viruses that cause birth defects, however it can cause early labor. If early labor occurs then the newborn would have a very high chance of contracting the disease from the mother, with an increased risk of developing complications. Luckily I carried to term and was well over the disease by the time bub came along.
loading...
I haven’t read through all the comments yet so apologies if this has already been stated.
To everyone who believes there is a “link” between autism and the MMR vaccine – are you even aware that Andrew Wakefield (the author of the first paper and the only published paper to find a “link” between MMR and autism) has since been struck off the medical register for his unethical conduct? Are you aware that in the course of his research he gave lumbar punctures (extremely painful procedures) to perfectly healthy children? And that he took blood samples from children at his son’s birthday party? And if you accuse the government of being in the pay of “big pharma” then how do you explain Andrew Wakefield’s undeclared payment of £50,000 from families who believed the MMR vaccine caused autism? This experiment was not from sixty or seventy years ago, all of this was happening in the late 90′s.
Lastly, “The Lancet” medical journal (where the paper was originally published) has since retracted the paper in full.
loading...
Illuminadora, slight correction, The Lancet paper did not make any links between MMR and autism. Wakefield made these claims at a press conference after the paper was published. There was no data to suggest MMR/autism link in the now withdrawn paper. Wakefield was looking at GI problems and MMR. He later claimed that proteins leaching from “leaky gut” could somehow travel to the brain and contribute to autism, but he never demonstrated that.
You might also know that a study that had been accepted in Neurotoxicology claiming that thimerosal contributed to impaired neurological in baby macaques was also withdrawn following the GMC findings. It has since been republished in the last few days in a different journal with Wakefield’s name removed. No self respecting journals will accept “research” from Wakefield anymore. Expect to see his work in Medical Veritas or books such as “callous disregard” (which BTW strikes me as an odd choice of title for his defence of the GMC “witch hunt”)
loading...
It’s even worse than that. This ‘hero’ subjected children with autism, who often have sensory processing difficulties, to those lumbar punctures and colonoscopies. I’m horrified at the thought of trying to prepare my own children for such invasive procedures, imagine trying to do it for children with autism. And it was completely unneccessary.
loading...
I have followed the vaccine debate for the last 15 years, and there is clearly problems on both sides of the argument. Real science as opposed to vaccine science will be the ultimate loser in the long run. The pro-vaccination side have always presented their side with a kind of evangelical fervor one usually associates with religious movements. The HCCC complainant himself makes a reference to polio vaccination as being a kind of magic. The science of vaccination totally ignores other public health measures that coincide with the decline in infectious disease, such as treated drinking water, sewerage systems, prevention of malnutrition, and the inconvenient truth that the largest fall in infectious disease occurred prior to mass vaccination. These factors are given only cursory acknowledgement, when they are likely to be the biggest contributors to change in disease patterns, far bigger than vaccination ever was. Science is not entitled to it’s own facts, and it does not exist in a vacuum. It’s exists within the society that funds it. Vaccine science should not be entitled to present information selectively as it does routinely. Nowhere is this selective representation more evident than with polio epidemics of the 1950′s. According to my 89 year old father, there was a lot of discussion amongst members of the public during the rollout of polio vaccines in the 1950′s. Apparently many people were making anecdotal connection between vaccination with DTP and the onset of paralysis. They were making this connection because the paralysis was quite often occurring in the same leg that had been injected just a few days before. There was also increasing concern and consequent discussion about the number of people who were becoming paralysed following receipt of the vaccine. These facts have since been scientifically validated, yet are notably absent from the public health campaigns that rely on presenting vaccination as the saviour of humankind. My father was probably more cautious than most because he had previously suffered a serious reaction to a small pox vaccine and had nearly died from from a severe allergic reaction to penicillin. As a result neither myself nor my siblings ever received the polio vaccine.
On the anti-vaccination side you’ll find large numbers of people with chronic medical conditions, children with disabilities who observed their children were somehow damaged by vaccines, and confirmed non-vaccinators who would never take a vaccine. They can’t necessarily be tarred with the same brush, and they shouldn’t be dismissed or abused because their experience differs from the majority. To do so will only result in a further decline in vaccination coverage. The pro-vaccination zealots need to realize this fact. As long as there exists mass vaccination programs, there will exist a percentage of losers whose lives will be changed forever.
loading...
Out of interest- what’s your view on the story that Mia wrote?
The story isn’t about the debate of pro-vacc vs anti-vacc, it’s about an organisation (AVN) giving out completely *false* information, and harrassing a family who lost their infant to Whooping Cough.
*edit= had to re-post cos I put the wrong email in lol.
loading...
I’ll begin by quoting a commenter who reckoned that childhood immunisation led to ‘peanut allergies’. Comparing a food allergy, which can be avoided, to a lifelong deformity caused by polio shows that some people haven’t grasped, or experienced how serious a failure to vaccinate can be. Because vaccination was so successful in the sixties, later generations have been spared the horror that was poliomyelitis; permanent paralysis of part or all of the body. It was/is irreversible. For life. Avoiding peanuts would have been a godsend to these people if that fixed the problem.
I have colleagues and friends who were affected by this virus at birth, who today face an early confinement to a wheelchair, well before their time. Vibrant, talented, amazing people who were struck down in their childhood by a virus that was later contained by a vaccine. To hear today that people are actually attempting to reverse this procedure is insanity.
Science has much to learn, but vaccination is one of its success stories. No amount of spin can replace the empirical data on this issue. Although this is a blog, and not a peer reviewed site, I am happy to provide the data if required. The thirty plus years of empirical data on this issue far outweighs the scaremongering by those that believe that aluminium, mercury and peanuts cause worse problems.
aka gigdiary
loading...
There are a great many of us who are with you and who are rightly disgusted and distressed about the AVN and their handling of the issue that was brought up about Dana McCaffery and the rubbish that has followed on.
I commented about the peanut allergy link, but my initial suspicion was proved correct – I don’t have allergies as such, I have had eczema all my life, my brother and sister (and Mum and Dad, eventually – late 40s/early 50s boomers) were immunised, and they didn’t get it, but I did. Some people just do, I’m cool with that and I deal with it.
One of the comments I made was that those who don’t believe in vaccination ask their parents/grandparents about the kids they knew who had polio. They ALL had kids who were in calipers/hospital for years/never to be seen again.
NOT wanting to vaccinate your kids is a luxury of Gen X (and now Y I guess), who have grown up with the benefits of mass, pretty much compulsory, immunisation, and haven’t had to face the realities of the shocking diseases it protects us against. I made the point below when Greg was whining about people’s rights to NOT vaccinate their kids – with RIGHTS come RESPONSIBILITIES and your responsibility as a member of society is to NOT put others at risk of diseases that can be prevented. Surprisingly, I got no response.
loading...
It’s a luxury we can’t afford.
loading...
I’m thrilled that you’ve finally used your real name Gig! It’s a lovely name. Makes you sound less like an old woman. Sorry, digressing…..
If I were to make a logistical argument out of not immunising our kids, I would say that a polio or whooping cough or german measels epidemic would CRIPPLE our alreading struggling health/hospitals system. We have enough problems with too few beds, too few nurses etc etc, we do not need hundreds of kids filling our already bursting wards with diseases FOR WHICH THEY COULD HAVE BEEN IMMUNISED AGAINST. And if hospitals and crippled childrens’ homes were overflowing in the 50s and 60s, imagine what they would be like if the same epidemics struck our growing population TODAY.
But at the end of the day, this is NOT just a logistical argument. It’s not just about increased bed numbers. Vaccines were/are designed to stop our babies and kids from succumbing to hideous, painful, crippling dieseases. To spare our kids from immeasurable suffering. And if you think I am being a little rhetorical with my words, my story of my dad is in the comments a little way down.
I actually asked dad if he would write a comment about what it’s like living in a hospital ward full of kids with polio, and/or what it’s like living with a physical deformity. He declined, and I’m not really surprised, he hardly ever talks about it. He hates hospitals, the smell, the sterility, the squeeky shoes in the corridor. Dad’s older sister remembers his time in hospital. How could one forget? She remembers once every 3 or 4 months making the epic trip from Mackay down to Brisbane to see dad. She remembers he was always so skinny. She remembers him being in plaster up to his hips. She remembers the tears when they had to leave. She remembers the little girl in the bed next to dad, who had already had one leg amputated, and had to have the other leg taken off due to infection. She remembers dad learning to walk, at AGE 8. She remembers his first day of school, and remarked that she reckoned his callipers weighed more than he did.
I remember stuff too. I remember our family holiday at Mission Beach every year, and dad sitting on the beach in jeans. I remember dad’s nervous shake of the head when he was asked to go in the dads’ race at the sports carnival. I remember being asked “what’s wrong with your dad’s legs?” and replying “they’re just a bit wonky”. And I remember being very young when I first felt the sting of my father’s shame and embarrassment about his legs. I remember learning very early that my dad could handle the physical part of his disability, but the emotional stuff: the memories of being in hospital, the shame he felt because of what his legs looked like, the burden he carried because he wasn’t able to do so many things, particularly when us kids were little, almost tore him apart. And I DON’T ever remember a time when I wasn’t fiercely protective and immensely proud of my dad.
How much of a slap in the face must it be for the thousands of people who live with the after affects of Infantile Peralysis, to hear that there is a group of people poo-pooing the vaccination? Have their collective lifetimes of suffering all been for nothing?
loading...
I was at the Northcott Centre today and yesterday which started life as the society for Crippled Children (ie kids with a range of disabilities, but largely Polio, back in the day). There was a story of their history on the wall, and the photos showed kids in class in calipers. Like, whole classes full of kids. In calipers. I was in tears reading the history because apparently it was considered shameful to have a kid with a disability or disease – they would get isolated and not get any schooling or anything. Fascinating history, they actually had to find out by the Rotary Club peeps doorknocking because kids with disabilities were just kinda hidden!
One of the services they have there is the Post Polio service. I was super proud though, when I got to the bit that showed Broderick School for Spastic and Disabled Children (old name) at Canterbury Hospital. One of our teachers was really involved with Broderick House, and he got kids from there to come to our school for classes. We had a great girl do PE with us in a wheelchair, and we got to do wheelchair sports for a couple of units. Was unreal!
loading...
I think part of the problem is that because the diseases we are talking about are still relatively uncommon, those who choose not to vax will probably find that their kids are OK (partly due to herd immunity, partly due to luck – after all nobody is saying that everyone who caught these diseases in the past died or was permanently disabled, but even if only a small proportion of people were the massive number of infections meant large numbers of deaths and disability and this is what we are not seeing now – and I hope we never do). The perceived risk of vaccine complications scares them more than the perceived risk of catching the disease.
I just hope that the choices people are making now don’t move us back to what it used to be like. It’s all well and good to say “my choice not to vax won’t affect you if you vax” but as we’ve discussed, it’s not that simple due to the inability of some to be vaccinated due to their age or other medical problems, and the fact that vaccines aren’t 100% effective and may require boosting. And the more people who choose not to vax and can say – “see my kids turned out to be fine” – the more others have anecdotal evidence to back up their own decisions. Surely there will be a tipping point somewhere along the line though.
One of the anti vax websites was talking about childhood diseases and how necessary they might be in strengthening our immune system, suggesting that adults didn’t get them much in the “bad old days” so they must have a purpose. Um…how about adults didn’t get them because they either caught them as children and so were immune (or dead) when later epidemics occurred. If they had been fortunate enough to miss them when they were younger they were probably as likely as anyone to get them later as an adult.
loading...
Nak, absolutely. I wonder if people would think differently about turning their backs on the polio vaccine if there were still kids struggling around in callipers in every school and playground in Australia….
loading...
great comment
loading...
Brilliant Gig.
loading...
thanks, kateinlondon, always nice to hear from you…you give me courage
loading...
And what does this mean? Is that supposed to imply that the vaccine isn’t useful? Statistically, of course the majority of cases would be for vaccinated people; fortunately, there are more people vaccinated than those that are not, and as has been stated multiple times above, the vaccine’s efficacy is not 100%, that doesn’t make it ineffective.
loading...
This was written in reply to something i wrote.. that has now been deleted, as have several other things i have posted on this topic. Everything was written as my opinion, and i have not attacked or abused anyone yet i seem to have been deleted..Interesting and sad. I am a big fan of Mia and this website but i do find it strange that some of my views that could be considered ‘anti-vax’ have been deleted….??
loading...
Probably better to post your comment using the name you used for the censored comments, there, Censored?. Just sayin…
loading...
We had a stream of comments from one person using multiple names. We have no problem with dissenting opinions but if one person uses various names in the same thread we do delete them. Sorry if your comments were caught up in that…
loading...
Hi everyone,
I very strongly believe it’s a personal choice to vaccinate or not to vaccinate, but I’d just like to point out that most of readily available information on vaccination (i.e. that produced by the Govenment and drug companies) is equally unbiased the other way. I’m not saying the Australian Vaccion Network is not biased, but I certainly think it naive for Australians to think that the Government and all mainstream information on vaccinations aren’t either!
I had great difficulty reaching the decision to vaccinate by daughter (which I did, but the way), but in the process of researching in order to reach my decision I was appalled at the lack of credible information about statistical side affects and potential long term harms of vaccination.And more particularly how the Government and drug companies refuse to publish the risks.
My heart breaks for the McCafferey’s and in fact their story was one of the reasons I ended up vaccinating my daughter, but I am personally very glad for those who dare to challenge the the Government stronghold on vaccination “propaganda” (without wishing to sound dramatic).
I acknowledge the Government’s concern is the general health of the population, but selfishly, MY concern is my daughter’s health and well being and I don’t want to be railroaded into making a decision to inject aluminium and other heavy metals into her delicate young immune system because someone else thinks it’s the best thing for me to do.
No where in the information pedalled by the Government was I told about links between the MMR vaccine and autism, nor the serious potential impacts on a developing brain and nervous system some vaccinations can have!
To create a perception (as I maintain is created by the Government and some, though thankfully not all medical practitioners) that any parent who dares question immunising their child is irresponsible or stupid THAT is bias, that is deception.
loading...
As has been said many times during this thread, there is no such link between MMR vaccine and autism. Every study proceeding that one flawed study has shown this to be so.
I like how reasonably you’re speaking so I’m not having a go at you at all but the government information is not biased – it’s based on science – unlike anything by the AVN.
loading...
Science provided by those who make an enormous amount of money from vaccines.Pharmaceutical companies control the TGA remember.
loading...
Sorry Sarah, but that makes no sense…
Could you please explain what you’re trying to say.
loading...
You’re right it doesn’t make sense. It sounds like even more conspiracy theories. Maybe I just don’t get it. Wouldn’t drug companies make more money by people getting sick from diseases you can vaccinate against? If people are going deaf from measles and need hearing aids then that is a huge lifelong burden. I buy hearing aids every five years and it costs around $5,000 (and no government subsidies either – private health covers about $600..).
loading...
Pharma companies do not control the TGA. The TGA is a government-owned regulatory body. Pharma companies submit data for review before their drugs can be approved. The TGA also reviews data from other sources, including adverse events reporting.
Anyone who has worked for a pharma company in an area like regulatory affairs can tell you that the the idea that they control the TGA is totally laughable. Talking to people in these roles, it’s quite obvious that what the TGA says, goes, not the other way around.
loading...
This is a very recent study that does show a link. I think there has been a lot of bad science in this area, but still, the increase in Autism is alarming and investigations into the cause need to be supported – whether it challenges current doctrines or not…
New Study Shows Vaccines Cause Brain Changes Found in AutismPosted Jul 01 2010 12:00am By Dan Olmsted and Mark Blaxill
Abnormal brain growth and function are features of autism, an increasingly common developmental disorder that now affects 1 in 60 boys in the US. Now researchers from the University of Pittsburgh and Thoughtful House Center for Children in Austin, Texas, have found remarkably similar brain changes to those seen in autism in infant monkeys receiving the vaccine schedule used in the 1990’s that contained the mercury-based preservative thimerosal.
The group’s findings were published yesterday in the journal Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis. They used scanning techniques that assessed both brain growth and brain function in the same animals over time. The research team was able to see differences in the way the brains of vaccinated and unvaccinated animals developed. Scans were performed before and after the administration of primary MMR and DTaP/Hib boosters that were given at the human equivalent of 12 months of age.
Throughout the study period, vaccinated animals showed an increase in total brain volume – a feature of the brain in many young children with autism – when compared with unvaccinated animals. However, a specific part of the brain associated with emotional responses that is thought to be important in autism, the amygdala, did not show abnormalities until after the 12-month vaccines had been given. In addition, after the 12-month vaccines only, the functional brain scans showed significant differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. These functional scans looked at the activity of receptors for morphine-like compounds (opioids) that may play a role in the brain of children affected by autism. Vaccine administration was associated with an increase in opioid binding activity in the amygdala compared with a decrease in the unvaccinated group.
The results indicate that multiple vaccine exposures during the previous 3-4 months may have had a significant impact on brain growth and development in ways that are consistent with the published data on autism. For the amygdala, the novel findings of abnormal growth and function appear to be a function of more recent vaccine exposures – the 12-month primary MMR vaccine and the DTaP and Hib boosters.
In an accompanying editorial Dr. Kris Turlejski, the Editor-in-Chief, described the findings as “alarming”, “support[ing] the possibility that there is a link between early immunization and the etiology of autism.”
In the same primate model, the research team has already identified delayed acquisition of vital brainstem reflexes in infants exposed to the thimerosal-containing hepatitis B vaccine on the first day of life, compared with unvaccinated animals. A larger, second phase study is currently underway to see if these findings can be replicated.
Dr. Andrew Wakefield, who is not a listed author but whose support in the design of the study is acknowledged, said “I hope the model will not only provide important insights into the origins of autism, but also ways of safely testing possible new autism treatments and vaccines.”
ReferencesLaura Hewitson, Brian J. Lopresti, Carol Stott, N. Scott Mason, and Jaime Tomko. Influence of pediatric vaccines on amygdala growth and opioid ligand binding in rhesus macaque infants: A pilot study. Acta Neurobiol Exp 2010. 70: 147–164
Kris Turlejski. Focus on Autism Editorial Comment Acta Neurobiol Exp 2010. 70: 117–118
Dan Olmsted is Editor of Age of Autism. Mark Blaxill is Editor-At-Large. Their book The Age of Autism; Mercury, Medicine and a Manmade Epidemic is available for pre-order HERE.
loading...
Wakefield? The same Dr Wakefield who is no longer allowed to practise medicine in Britain due to his lisence being revoked for fraudulant and unethical behaviour relating to his first claim of vaccines causing autism? The same Dr Wakefield who is the head of Thoughtful House Center for Children who – whaddya know? – worked on this most recent study? Once you start to join the dots it makes it a little difficult to view this as a credible study.
loading...
Sorry that was me! Forgot to put my name.
loading...
Actually if you read the message it says that Wakefield didn’t have anything to do with the study, he just supported it’s design – I am not a scientist and don’t know the ins and outs, but I think you would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater if you dismiss the study just because it says in the article that Wakefield supported it.
I’m not anti-vax, but I also believe that we should be investigating why autism is on the rise, and if, as many people have experienced (and I have witnessed) it appears to be linked to vaccination – then let’s not get hysterical about it – but let’s look at the schedule, the adjuvants, the genetic predispositions, and see if we can find a link.
If a link is found, it doesn’t mean that we throw out vaccination, it means that maybe we find a better way of doing it. Different preservatives and safer adjuvants, a different schedule, looking at genetics (and yes, this area is moving forward) and seeing if we can improve upon it.
I think there is room for us to question the harmful side effects ( even if it is just one in however many) and see if we can improve vaccination – rather than thinking that if there is a link to harm, that we have to throw the whole thing out.
There is a balance and that is what we need to find
loading...
@Summer. Apart from the obvious problem of this study being associated with (currupt) Wakefield.
I dug a little, and found this article about the paper:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/07/too_much_vaccineautism_monkey_business_f.php
I’d encourage to read it right through, but to summarise:
This “new study” is based on the same animals and experiments conducted for two previous “studies”, in which Wakefield was named as the supervising author. It would appear his name has been omitted from this one due to his lost reputation. In fact, the abstract for this study was published two years ago, and Wakefield was named alongside several other authors who have also “disappeared” from the study.
The new “lead author” is part of a group of people attempting to sue in the US for autism they claim was caused by vaccines. This conflict is not declared.
Of the 12 vaccinated and 4 unvaccinated monkeys, only 9 vac and 2 unvac monkeys were used to obtain the results. There was no explanation of what happened to the other 5, and one wonders how any study can claim results based on just two animals.
The monkeys were given 4 years worth of vaccines in one year, supposedly due to them maturing faster. The monkeys were given thiomersal-free vaccines, that had thiomersal deliberately added to them before use. This means that the monkeys received more than double the level of thiomersal that a child received in the 1990s, and since vaccines are now thiomersal-free, the study is irrelevant in any current context anyway.
Finally, to further disprove this junk-science study, research has shown that autism diagnosis continues to rise even though thiomersal was removed from child vaccines a decade ago. If thiomersal was to blame, as this bogus study suggests, then one would expect autism rates to have plummeted by now.
Suffice to say that the study is worse-than-fatally flawed and the only thing it proves is the extraordinary levels that AofA will go to in order to support their theories.
loading...
thanks for doing that it saved me as i was about to do the same thing!
loading...
Can I just point out one thing? If there has been one ‘hypothesis’ that has been studied to death about what causes autism, it’s the MMR vaccination. And then when that was proven, scientifically, to not cause autism, it became about thimerosol, or about the adjuvants, or about the number of vaccinations we give or the timing of the vaccinations or about the combination of vaccinations… The list goes on and on. All of these shifting targets have been studied and have been shown to not have any causation regarding autism. Correlation does not, and never will prove causation. And do you know who misses out with all of this? The kids with autism. There is a hell of a lot of money that gets pumped into research because these people will not let it rest. Vaccination has been studied repeatedly, and repeatedly and conclusively been cleared. Why can’t we let this go and allow researches to study genetics (as we know that there is a significant genetic component) or look for more affective treatments for these kids instead of continuing to beat a dead topic to death, waisting money and time that these kids don’t have enough of.
loading...
it’s also possible that it’s not actually prevalence of autism that is on the rise, rather correct diagnosis of the condition, thus creating the impression that there is an increase in autism
loading...
It’s not a new study, it’s the same study that the discredited Wakefield did and they are now marketing it as a new study.
http://counteringageofautism.blogspot.com/2010/07/age-of-autism-reporting-like-its-2008.html
loading...
to clarify- I mean it’s not the orginal 1998 study that was completely and utterly discredited, it was the study that he conducted on the monkeys
they are marketing it as a new study- which it isn’t
loading...
Hi Tinker,
Thanks for that – I stand corrected. That’s what happens, not being a scientist… Pretty bad scientific behaviour then – no wonder anti-vaxxers cannot get any credibility with that sort of thing going on.
I do stand by my above post though – that genuine! investigation isn’t a bad thing and that we can always look for ways to improve upon what is being done.
loading...
Agreed, but there are a lot of other environmental variables around now…..
loading...
Re the supposed monkeys and Autism research:
The blog “Respectful Insolence” is always good for a hilarious debunking of the latest antivaxer lunacy, and Orac doesn’t fail us this time: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/07/too_much_vaccineautism_monkey_business_f.php
Enjoy!
loading...
Okay, I bit
Quote: And more particularly how the Government and drug companies refuse to publish the risks.
So I thought of the only vaccine I could think of off the top of my head (Tamiflu), googled it, and found prescribing information and consumer medicine information straight away, both containing information on risks, contraindications and side effects.
These are produced for all drugs, and are required by Government.
Looks to me like the drug companies, under direction of the government, ARE publishing the risks.
loading...
I have to say I’ve found this debate very interesting and moving. I am moved by the arguments of collective responsibility and people’s experiences. I’m going to seek further info on the safest vaccine program for my children now they are older and I feel can copebetter with the volume of vaccines. I still believe that our ability to choose is deeply important and this has to be valued or where do we draw the line in the regulation of society.
I don’t accept people being called ridiculous names like stupid because they do not vaccinate, and also some negative connotations that we are also breatfeeders and home birth. There is nothing wrong with this! More tolerance would be good and I know the majority have been great here.
loading...
Bedazzled,
The myth that vaccines put some kind of stress on the immune system is exactly the type of misinformation that is the subject of this controversy. The antigen exposure from the entire vaccine schedule is less that your child gets exposed to from ‘kissing’ the dog or eating a handful of dirt.
loading...
Mick may have been a bit broad sweeping in his ‘entire vaccine schedule’ statement. His comment and this post was about vaccinating children, not adults able to decide whether to have a vaccination. Separate issues.
loading...
Sorry I don’t agree I feel the number & volume of vaccine is too much for newborns, I wouldn’t change any of the decisions I’ve made. I am not a scientist, I accept the massive role of science in our culture and it’s benefits and weaknesses. Obviously I am also very open to natural therapies, which mainstream science rubbishes despite thousands of years of scientific evidence, in particular Ayurveda and Traditional Chinese Medicine. As a point of interest when Britain colonized India their army cut off the hands of almost every Ayurvedic doctor, as their knowledge was so powerful with regard to the human body, they feared these doctors would kill them with their bare hands. Their studies of mankind, the environment and the Universe are all written down in the Vedic teachings. Including very Western concepts such as surgery! Written 5000 yrs ago! Dr Deepak Chopra is a REAL doctor and Ayurvedic practitioner, his book Perfect Health is a great introductory read. This stuff is not myth, or to be laughed at. It’s just a shame people don’t want to even open their minds to the idea natural medicine can assist the body to heal itself. To my mind the steriotypes continually thrown around about a natural approach to parenting is sad. We benefit the community by not clogging up dr surgeries, hospitals and I for one always confine my kids to our home when they are sick because I care about others. At my great expense too if you are familiar with child care fees.
loading...
I’m a big believer in natural and traditional medicines as well. I actually view vaccination as an extension of this. Vaccination works on the premise of a tiny/dead amount of a disease being introduced to the system and the system figures out how to fight it. So if that same disease shows up in your system again, it knows how to fight it.
loading...
A doctor interviewed on TV proximate to the first rounds of injections called those young women who had reactions ……… Wait for it Sarah…… Hysterical! He’s the dr I think who is doing the current anti- bacterial ads. I think, I was a bit shocked by that statement. Sorry to hear about your friends. I can understand they must feel very confused and angry. We have been wonderful guinea pigs throughout history. I’m sure someone will tell you it’s just a coincidence, an immaculate STD! Sarcasm flowing now just a little bit!!!
loading...
Very interesting article about whooping cough deaths in the USA, and how vaccinating can actually be making things worse…
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/07/15/whooping-cough-kills-5-in-california-state-declares-an-epidemic.aspx
loading...
Oh gawd!
Firstly, Mercola is a laughing stock in the scientific and medical communities – he gets it wrong over and over again. I would like to think he is innocently stupid, but so many of his articles have the same basic structure: “mainstream medicine is evil/ineffective, here is some bogus research/research which doesn’t support my claims unless it is misinterpreted, now buy my dodgy product”.
Secondly, get out your dictionary and look up the terms “not perfect” and “makes things worse”. Note that they have different meanings.
Despite AVN claims to the contrary, the medical community is very much aware of two facts:
1) No vaccine has perfect efficacy. Instead, efficacy typically ranges between about 85% to 99% for different types of vaccines. Research to develop ever more effective and safer vaccines is always underway and new/better vaccines are developed, tested and released regularly.
2) For many diseases there are different “strains” in circulation and the best available vaccine may not protect against all the strains. That doesn’t make the vaccine worthless, just imperfect. For example, the HPV vaccine protects against only 4 strains out of a total of about 30 (from memory). However those 4 strains are responsible for 75% of cases of cervical cancer. So does it make sense to use the vaccine, even though it only protects against 4 out of 30 strains? Absolutely! Who else but an antivaxer group like the AVN could argue against a 75% reduction in cervical cancer?
Lastly, there are no absolutes when it comes to infectious diseases and vaccination. Whenever you hear someone demanding or claiming absolutes (e.g. all, none, always, never) then you know you are listening to pseudoscience. Real scientists work with probabilities.
So when Mercola says, “some fully vaccinated children still contract whooping cough” he is completely correct. However that fact isn’t the earth-shattering scandal he makes it out to be – it’s just a result of the fact that, as I said above, no vaccine is perfect. The better question to ask is, “how much does vaccination reduce the chance that my child will catch whooping cough?”, bringing us back to vaccine efficacy and those 85% to 99% figures. A risk reduction of only 85% is still much better than 0%, i.e. not vaccinating.
After vaccination, the next biggest factor in risk is herd immunity, i.e. how many of the people your child comes into contact with are vaccinated? This determines how likely is it that one of them could pass an infection on to your child – and is the reason why parents whose children are vaccinated still care about whether you vaccinate your kids or not. Because if you don’t, you increase the risk of illness for everyone – vaccines aren’t perfect, remember.
Please don’t quote Mercola, whale.to or Natural News in a serious forum, nothing will shred your credibility faster than promulgating quackery in public.
loading...
Ken and his “Stop the AVN” friends don’t confine their villification and hatred to the AVN. Any practicioner who offers an alternative to the orthodoxy are fair game as far as they are concerned,regardless of qualifications. I have seen Dr Mercola blatantly defamed by some members of the SAVN, in the same way they defame and hound Meryl Dorey.
loading...
Being part of the scientific community myself, I must have missed the memo telling me Mercola was a laughing stock.
I think the current problem with the vaccination debate is that both sides are so vehemently opposed to the other side’s thinking that there never seems to be any constructive debate about ALL the issues surrounding vaccination. I would love to have a sensible discussion with my GP, but when I even suggested not vaccinating my twins I was told that “…it would be my fault if they die.” Parents should have the right to choose, but they should also have the right to open discussion instead of being shot down for expressing a different opinion.
loading...
I think one of the problems is that Mercola is an osteopath and while I love my osteopath I wouldn’t go to her for my vaccination information as I would only be relying upon her lay opinion. Lots of people put Dr in front of their name, you have to be careful which ones you are listening too (see Gillian McKeith for another ‘Dr’ that happily promotes bogus medical information).
I completely agree about the open discussion though. You should be able to ask for information and a discussion from your GP.
loading...
Hi Karen, Mercola is an American osteopath meaning he is a qualified physician and has done virtually the same training as any other MD in the States. This differs from the UK and Australia where osteopaths are not physicians. In Mercola’s case however, I would not take any medical advice from him. As someone else has already said here, he runs an alternative medicine website designed to scaremonger and encourage you to buy his magic cookware/steak knives/Himalayan Salt Lamps. Total woo.
loading...
I just watched a country practice episode from 1981 about immuniaations- M0lly wasn´t going to do it because of something or other then a girl in town died of diptheria.
Good old Country Practice- covered all he big issues!
loading...
That is hilarious!
I remember crying my eyes out when Molly died – I can still remember the scene with her lying down and the screen slowly fading to black from the outside as Brendan runs screaming “Molly!”. Must have been traumatic enough to imporint it in my 10 year old mind!
loading...
Aaaah, A Country Practice. That well known propaganda arm of the fascist government.
loading...
I did hesitate about vaccinating my two kids but all my friends who are doctors and nurses said they had done theirs.
In the end, I decided to protect the heard, and also that if my child were to become sick and die, I would feel worse if it were because I did NOT vaccinate her than if if she died because I DID do it. I’d feel more guilty for failing to listen to the Dept of health and a doctor than for failing to listen to someone in a health food shop who may be very well meaning, but whose qualifications I don’t understand and may not be accountable to a credible Health board.
loading...
This story is … I don’t know how to say it nicely. It’s dangerous. It disturbs me that otherwise literate people demand that others need to state their position on something before communicating about it. As follows:
“But what is so outrageous about this story is the fact the Australian Vaccination Network are so devious in not disclosing their position anywhere on their website…”
Why? Our health dept is obviously pro-vaccine. Do you make the same demand of them? The AVN, as an organisation, provides an arena for discussion. Turns out that most who participate are critical or at least questioning. Who’s fault is that?
About harrassing a family in grief, what happened? What contact was there between the group and the family?
An ABC lateline program indicated the only ‘harrassment’ that took place was a letter from the Director of Public Health writing to inform the parents that an enquiry had been made regarding diagnosis.
The enquiry is surely not ‘harrassment’. It is in the public interest and it wasn’t made to the parents. The letter, on the other hand, seems outrageous. Why don’t reporters ask the obvious question…. What was the purpose of writing a letter to the parents to tell them there had been an enquiry? Then ask… What, of substance, did the AVN do to harrass anyone?
We deserve to know these things. Afer all, a community group is about to be censored in a move that bypasses all that we hold dear concerning democracy, and you are giving us no substance to make any judgement for ourselves.
Let’s also examine the motives of the Director of Public Health in writing to the parents. Dig a little deeper before putting pen to paper, please!
loading...
Fabulous comment. Great to see someone thinking from an impartial point of view and not just believing what is said in the media … from either side of the argument
loading...
“About harrassing a family in grief, what happened? What contact was there between the group and the family?”
are you suggesting dana’s family have lied? don’t you think they have had much bigger things to deal with? what would they achieve by saying these things unless they were true? there is evidence of harassment, and actually contacting the family after their daughter’s death is bad enough, especially given their nutty agenda.
censoring a community group run by liars and nutters is no biggie in my mind. i would say the same thing if it were neo-nazi or white supremist. they are just as bad and just as dangerous.
loading...
Greg,
There was much more to the harassment than that. There was of course the insensitive comments on the AVN Facebook page that were shown on the Lateline story, which you didn’t mention. There were also many other examples on Facebook, including one AVN member suggesting that “the McCafferys should be the subject of an endless stream of websites and blogs vilifying them” due to their position opposing the AVN.
Meryl personally posted numerous erroneous claims on Dana McCaffery’s memorial page, including her constant statement that Dana “supposedly” died of Whooping Cough. Also in the weeks following Dana’s death, the McCafferys received a barrage of anti-vaccine information sent to their house.
As for “having a right to know these things”. Are you serious? You wouldn’t have a problem with some stranger being supplied with the confidential medical records and test results of your 32-day-old daughter a week after she died?
Digging deeper only makes the AVN look worse.
loading...
thanks roger, exactly what i wanted to say.
loading...
Roger
Firstly, the group were accused of being responsible for a baby’s death. That’s a substantial accusation. They are well within their rights to make enquiry to the department that handled it, and which possibly inspired the accusation. If you were accused of being responsible for someone’s death would you make enquiries? I’m sure I would.
Second, whether or not the organisation is responsible for the girl’s death is certainly a matter of public interest. Enquiring about the validity of the diagnosis seems a sensible starting point to me. Why are you against it?
Third, what about the letter? Why was it written? Anyone…?
Fourth, when someone makes a comment on a web forum, I believe the comment belongs to that person. It is a forum. The organisation merely provides the arena. If the problem is moderation then that should be addressed. I don’t believe there was a complaint about moderation of a forum, or did I miss something?
Last, you suggest personal contact was made with the parents. With respect, I doubt that to be true. Otherwise the reports in the media would have stated that.
Value our free speech. If the AVN are spreading info you believe is dangerous then counter it with education. Don’t take away our rights.
loading...
The AVN is taking away people who CAN’T be vaccinated for whatever reason’s rights to be protected from diseases by encouraging people NOT to immunise their kids. You want to talk about rights? What about responsibilities? Like the responsibility of looking after those who can’t look after themselves because of suppressed immunity or being too young to have developed immunity? You can’t have rights without responsibilities, and encouraging people against vaccination is completely IRRESPONSIBLE.
loading...
Yes, we see where you sit on the issue. No argument from me with your choice.
loading...
No argument from you about any of my points, it would seem.
loading...
Firstly, the AVN weren’t accused of anything at that stage. In fact, it was their behaviour during this incident that was the reason for the “stop the avn” group forming. The McCafferys blamed the low immunisation rates in their local area and the govt for not advertising the fact there was an epidemic, not the AVN.
Subsequently, the AVN have been blamed for contributing to the low immunisation rate in the area, and I’m sure some people have then “joined the dots”, as well they should.
If I was on the receiving end of a phone call where someone was enquiring about the private details of a child’s death, then I would probably bring that to the parent’s attention. Wouldn’t you? Even if it were just to ask permission to release that information.
I cannot believe you would have no problem with a stranger demanding private medical records from a public health official, but not with the official then contacting the parents in question. Are you serious?
Yes, forum comments belong to the poster. The despicable comment shown on Lateline was written by Meryl, as were many others posted on Dana’s memorial page. The specific one mentioned above was written by someone else, in response to a post by meryl. 3 weeks later, it is still on the AVN facebook page.
I think you need to see more media. Both the phone call (To a parent of one of the McCaffery’s), and the harassing mail have been previously announced on media, in particular the Sunday Night programme from last year.
On the topic of free speech. I have no problem at all with any crackpot being able to air their views. The AVN are free to state their opinions, and the HCCC have not attempted to stop them doing so. All they have to do is admit that they are anti-vaccination, state that they do not give medical advice, and tell readers to consult a medical professional. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
The problem I have with the AVN is not that they have a different opinion. They are welcome to it. The issue is that they present lies as facts. I’m not talking about different opinions, I’m talking about blatant, unequivocal lies. You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts. The AVN present lies for the sole purpose of discouraging parents from vaccinating.
If URLs work in this comment, I’d encourage you to read a few of these for some examples of their incontestable lies:
http://www.antivaxxers.com/?p=1713
http://vaccinateyourchildren.wordpress.com
http://www.youngausskeptics.com/2009/08/australian-vaccination-network/
loading...
You claim a lot of things that I feel are impossible to substantiate based on what has been publicly reported, unless you have some ‘insider’ info.
A quick look at your first URL reveals that I am dealing with a very organised movement to destroy the organisation. That explains things.
loading...
“A quick look at your first URL reveals that I am dealing with a very organised movement to destroy the organisation. That explains things.”
you say that like it is a bad thing?
as an educated and well-informed parent i am glad people like roger are taking the time to work against the avn and debunking the myths and fallacies they perpetrate.
loading...
If the facts stand up then there’s no problem right? If the AVN are telling truths then it is not going to destroy them. If they’re caught telling lies and conspiracy theories then it’s going to take a lot of effort to convince people that they can be relied upon.
It’s no point prortraying yourself or the organisation as a ‘victim’ when you have done wrong in these circumstances. People will get very cynical.
loading...
I wrote a long blog post countering the lies and misinformation on the AVN website long before I knew about StopAVN. When I heard about the complaint, I wrote a lengthy letter to the HCCC supporting it and am highly gratified to see smatterings of my wording in their report.
All sorts of people want to see the AVN shut down, not just StopAVN, and ordinary Mummies like me are willing to go to great lengths to help.
loading...
Hi, I am moderator of this site and am enjoying watching this interesting thread evolve.
May I just ask all sides to continue to maintain respect for the Mamamia comment rules:
Differences of opinion are welcome but keep it respectful or the host will show you the door. If you’re rude or abusive, your comment will be deleted (so will comments responding to other rude comments because they won’t make sense – so save your breath). And if you’re offensive, you’ll be banned.
Back to it… and thanks for adding to the conversation…
loading...
Wow. Thanks, Johanna for that clarification.
My God, Roger, that is so different from the version you presented.
loading...
Greg this group is not being censored in any way. They are perfectly free to continue writing anything they want on their website and at their seminars. All they have to do is admit that they have no intention of presenting all the information and will cherry pick the bits they want and distort the rest. In other words, what has been curtailed is not their ability to talk to parents, but their ability to manipulate them.
loading...
Censorship begins with this. The AVN are obviously being singled out because some info they spread is at least unpopular and allegedly inaccurate.
No-one else has been asked to make a public declaration like they have. Our publicly paid health advisors choose not to air concerns about vaccines for fear it will hamper vaccination programs. They do this because they genuinely believe in the value of the programs. To me that’s big brother-ish. I don’t want to be shielded from info which may affect my decisions. Do you?
Also, do you support the same order being placed on our health dept?
I personally value my freedom of speech and my capacity to seek out info that may or may not be ‘approved’ by the State for my consumption. Perhaps you think differently. That’s OK. We’re not all the same.
loading...
Their information is not ‘allegedly’ inaccurate – there has been a 12 month investigation which has found it is definitely inaccurate.
How are they being singled out? With a name like “Immunise Australia” it is pretty obvious what the government website’s agenda is, so there is no need for them to spell it out again. The AVN has a misleading name, therefore they need to be explicit about what they are offering. I suppose the health department could write “We support people in Australia being immunised” but what would be the point?
You are making a big assumption that our publicly paid health advisors have concerns which they are hiding. To know this you would have to be guessing with no evidence, or they are stating their concerns and not hiding them.
Personally I do want to be shielded when I make decisions – shielded from people trying to manipulate me with fear tactics. How can anyone make an informed decision when they are being lied to?
loading...
@Greg. Well, let’s see…Do we support the same order being placed on the Govt?
No need I’d suspect, since it’s already there. It’s quite clear that they support vaccination. The Immunise Australia site says:
“An Australian, State and Territory Government initiative, the Immunise Australia Program aims to increase national immunisation rates for vaccine preventable diseases.”
Pretty clear to me what their position is.
The disclaimer page at the site includes this statement: “The information contained on this site is not a substitute for, and is not intended to replace, independent professional advice.”
By contrast, the AVN claim to provide unbiased information, and their site says “All the information you need” and they “disseminate to the public all information concerning human health”. In other words, they claim to provide complete information and there is no need to look any further. Even on the disclaimer page, there is no mention of seeking medical advice.
You don’t see a problem with this?
loading...
Sorry Deb, this is different to what you just explained to me I feel. Have they actually altered scientific evidence or edited it out of context or omitted sentences? What? I am confused?
loading...
Hi Deb, me again. You say manipulated by “fear tactics” but what most people believe of Herd Immunity as a medical term is very much a fear tactic given to parents and citizens that being a good citizen requires of us to make one choice or (insert fear) others will die.
loading...
Greg, you have overlooked an important distinction:
We aren’t talking about the AVN being “censored” from sharing opinions which vary from the mainstream.
We aren’t even talking about stopping the AVN from disseminating “untrue claims” (i.e. lies).
The HCCC and SAVN only want to see lies labelled as lies. Just as we put health warning labels on cigarette packets, the AVN’s literature should be labelled to say, “These claims are scientifically false. The AVN’s recommendations go against all medical evidence, if you follow them you are more likely to suffer ill health than if you don’t”.
Another way to look at it is like this:
If you want to sell “flavoured magic water”, you can advertise it by saying, “I think this is the best-tasting flavoured magic water around”. You’re expressing your opinion, everything is fine.
But if you decide instead to advertise it by saying, “This flavoured magic water cures all types of cancer”, without having gone through the relevant processes for testing and approval, then the authorities will step in and shut you down. In that case, the interests of public health overrule your right to free speech, or “freedom to lie” in this case.
It’s the same with the AVN: they have the right to express their opinions, but they don’t have the right to lie when it has public health implications. If they were truthful, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
loading...
Ken
You and others make claims that the AVN harrassed a grieving family. From the available info I doubt that to be true. You also claim that they tell lies. That may or may not be correct.
I have just read a disturbing correction of a quote which Roger Jacobs, a supporter of your views dishonestly presented on this forum. In my view he has displayed your cause in an unfortunate light.
In my opinion the websites he has referred to don’t do you any favours either. There is an obvious agenda to silence a group simply because it questions the value of vaccines. It seems I am trying to have a civil discussion with spokespersons for that agenda.
I will leave you in glorious victory over our common freedom. Enjoy.
loading...
Greg, you may not have the time, inclination or ability to assess the scientific accuracy or otherwise of the AVN’s claims about vaccination.
Fortunately you do not have to – the HCCC have done the job for you.
I will even save you the trouble of reading their lengthy and detailed report: it says their claims are false from start to finish.
So given that this is an organisation which we’ve established is dedicated to knowingly disseminating lies, what if anything is an appropriate course of action for concerned members of the public?
As a society we task the government with stepping in to stop the sale of medical products which are being promoted with false or even simply unproven claims (e.g. “This flavoured magic water cures all cancers”). We’ve accepted that to be a worthy and valuable area of enforcement for government regulators – indeed we become impatient when they appear slow to act.
It’s entirely appropriate that regulators should manage the promotion of medical information just as they manage the promotion of medical products – especially as the public health consequences are equal or greater if false medical information is widely disseminated than if ineffective products are widely sold.
On that basis I think it’s entirely appropriate for members of the public to lodge complaints when we see false medical information being disseminated, urge the regulators to act when they appear slow to do so, and seek to raise awareness of the offending organisation as well as the health consequences of their actions.
loading...
Hi Greg!
So the AVN don’t tell lies?
Please read this – http://twitter.com/nocompulsoryvac/status/18732457775 (from AVN’s official twitter)
Then read this – http://adage.com/globalmarketers09/
I double dare you to reply to this. :p
loading...
“Our health depart is obviously pro-vaccine.”
Ya think?
loading...
Greg,
“Our health dept is obviously pro-vaccine.”
The correct term is “evidence-based”.
“Do you make the same demand of them?”
Actually they must meet considerably higher standards; they must be able to demonstrate that each and every one of their policies is based upon sound scientific principles and evidence – and that those policies are continuously refined and updated with advances in the field of medical science.
“The AVN, as an organisation, provides an arena for discussion.”
The correct term, as per the HCCC report, is “provides misleading and inaccurate information on the subject of vaccination”.
I will suggest that the discussion of demonstrated lies by proven liars is not an activity that’s particularly worthy of protection in the name of free speech.
loading...
“The AVN, as an organisation, provides and arena for discussion.” Oh, I must have missed that when I saw on their facebook page that you can’t post on their page unless you’re a supporter…
loading...
In my experience Kris, you can’t post on any of their sites unless the post supports their views.
loading...
Oh yeah, I wasn’t surprised in the slightest.
loading...
Ironically I added them on Twitter and sent them a couple of links to refute their arguments. Yet they decided to “follow” me.
Probably hoping to convert me…
loading...
Greg, you might be interested in reading this if you think the AVN did not harass the McCafferys. http://www.antivaxxers.com/?p=2311
loading...
Well what charmers they are! Thanks for the link, Rachael.