Menu

AVN replies to Mandy Nolan’s soap box

Meryl Dorey from the Australian Vaccination-skeptics Network Inc (AVN). Photo supplied.

Meryl Dorey

In 1994, five years after my son was injured by his DPT and MMR vaccines, I joined together with a group of parents and health professionals to form a community organisation that eventually became the Australian Vaccination-skeptics Network Inc (AVN).

We worked with Parliament to introduce the Conscientious Objector Clause, a law that protected the rights of a generation of Australians. This legislation was in place until January 2016 when No Jab No Pay was enacted.

Australia is supposed to be a tolerant society that has room for all opinions and nobody should ever be silenced. I was therefore saddened to read last week that Mandy Nolan has been afraid to publicly discuss her decision to vaccinate her children, herself (and her cat). This sort of fear should be unacceptable in a country such as ours. I know this all too well as I’ve had threats to my life, because I am an advocate for informed health choice for all Australians.

Free choice

The AVN has collected reports of many thousands of serious reactions and deaths following vaccination; reports that in most cases are neither acknowledged nor accepted by government and medical authorities. We feel that where there is a risk, there must always be a choice.

As parents we need realistic and strong informed consent based on facts provided by medical practitioners including side-effects and contra-indications of any pharmaceutical interventions – risks versus benefits.

Parents have been parenting for a long while now, and with the support and guidance of independent and unbiased data, our decisions about birthing, schooling, healthcare and vaccination, are and should always be our own.

Opinion pieces, studies sponsored by manufacturers and policy fuelled by financial interest should never be the go-to on a possible life-altering decision.

Where will it end?

Would a person who’d discovered they were allergic to penicillin be treated with contempt? In today’s Australia, educated people who have researched this subject or whose personal or family experience has led them to decide that vaccines are not right for them are being treated as second-class citizens. No Jab No Pay and No Jab No Play are now in ‘play’ and the government is openly discussing No Jab No Job/No School/No Pension.

Herd immunity

These laws are based on ‘herd immunity’ – to date unproven in relation to vaccines. The theory claims that the unvaccinated are more likely to contract and transmit diseases than their vaccinated peers.

Travel to a largely unvaccinated country, get shots and you’re apparently in a protected bubble. Back home and they’d have us believe we need a 95 per cent plus vaccination rate to be protected and that a lone unvaccinated individual can be responsible for an epidemic.

When it comes to vaccines containing live viruses, however, (measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, rotavirus, oral polio and some flu vaccines), the opposite seems to be the case. People who receive these vaccines can be infectious for up to 90 days afterwards.

Whooping cough, with more than 95 per cent of our children vaccinated, has been epidemic for over a decade. Recent studies show that the vaccinated may be more likely to be infectious owing to vaccination.

Mandy’s statement that the link between vaccination and autism has been ‘shown to be utter bullshit’ is the common belief of those trying to prove that vaccines are essential to Australia’s health.

In 2014, a head CDC scientist, Dr William Thompson, co-author of a seminal study purporting to prove that vaccines and autism were not linked, became a whistleblower. He said essential data had been intentionally omitted and the study actually showed that the risk of developing autism following vaccination was as much as 700 per cent higher in the vaccinated. His statement can be viewed a www.bit.ly/1V0DpwV.

Tobacco science

Mandy brought up the tobacco industry in her article; I’m glad she did because the scientific consensus for many decades was that smoking was not harmful.

Today’s global paediatric vaccine market is estimated to be worth USD $22.4 billion, and is thought to double to USD $54.1 billion in only eight years’ time. The truth is that many studies supporting vaccine safety and effectiveness, much like the studies supporting cigarettes, were written, paid for and designed by the companies who profit from these products.

Malcolm Turnbull, our PM, has vaccine companies in his recorded portfolio. His wife, Lucy, was until recently the chair of just such a company. Neither acknowledges the blatant financial conflicts of interest; oh that’s right, they’re covered by the slogan ‘for the greater good’ while their companies become even more profitable because of his government’s policies.

To vex or vax?

To paraphrase Otis Redding: ‘All we’re asking is for a little respect’. Respect to do our own research in consultation with the healthcare practitioners of our choice; respect and understanding that nobody will ever care more passionately about the health and wellbeing of our children than their own parents; and respect to be treated as full citizens of this democracy.

Let’s urge the government to finally do the study they promised years ago – using data that are already available in the ACIR database – comparing the health of the fully vaccinated with the partially and fully unvaccinated. To vaccinate or not to vaccinate – there really is a question.


48 responses to “AVN replies to Mandy Nolan’s soap box”

  1. Neal Brown says:

    Well said Meryl. Very balanced reply to a too often emotively-charged subject. Thank you.

    • Glen Wallaby says:

      Big thanks to the echo crew for allowing the publicated reply to Mandy Nolans vaccine article from Meryl Dorey (AVN)…
      Most appreciated to hear such a sensible & responsible reply, to such a controversial & dangerous topic…facing most families of the community…

  2. Sharne Warren says:

    Yes good to hear from an informed opinion. I chose not to vaccinate my children in the ’80’s, it wasn’t a problem for me, I wasn’t punished by the government, being a single parent. I wasn’t ostracised by a community or school. It was about choice for me. I don’t need others to follow or agree, in fact my sister asked me if she should not vaccinate her children but we lived very different lifestyles, I felt she had to make that choice but based on her lifestyle perhaps vaccination was appropriate for her, and back then even vaccinating children wasn’t such a threat to the child or civil liberties as it is today. Thanks for your wonderful article for freedom of choice!

  3. Jeremy D says:

    Thank for a very good article. Australia is becoming more and more a regime.

  4. Rod says:

    Sorry but 95% of children are not vaccinated against hooping cough Meryl. The figure is much lower than that especially in areas like the northern rivers. I like how you anti vaccers pick and choose, like about the evidence against smoking- the quote about scientific evidence for smoking is way off line.
    The truth is you use spurious unsupported or disproven “evidence” whilst trying to sound reasonable. The respect will come when you recognise the common good and not put people with autoimmune diseases and young children at risk.
    The short term memory lost about the effects of polio on people( and these are ongoing for many people who suffered this disease) is amazing.

    • Meryl Dorey says:

      According to the government, in 2016, 94.7% of children were fully vaccinated against pertussis (whooping cough) and the figure is higher today.

      http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/immunisation/Documents/2016-annual-coverage-report.pdf

      I don’t understand what your point is about tobacco? Are you claiming that doctors did not support smoking as safe? If that is your claim, you are incorrect and the history of this issue is available.

      If you are interested in becoming better-informed about this issue, I highly recommend the books, Dissolving Illusions by Dr Suzanne Humphries and the Vaccine Safety Manual by Neil Z Miller. Both of these books are well-referenced from the primary medical literature. And if you are interested in Australian statistics and why they show clearly that vaccinations were not the cause of the decline in mortality from infectious diseases, Greg Beattie’s book, Fooling Ourselves on the Fundamental Value of Vaccines is excellent.

      Happy researching!

    • Patricia Dow says:

      It’s whooping cough not hooping. Plenty of paralysis still out there just not called polio anymore. Sister Kenny has great success in recovering people from polio. People who have compromised immune systems should definitely stay away from recently vaccinated people and also the common cold could place the immune compromised in a dangerous situation – no vaccine for that. When my sister was going through chemo her specialist said stay away from crowds full stop to be on the safe side.

  5. Catherine says:

    I know a couple of parents who had healthy young children. Their lives were turned upside down after vaccinating. These poor parents then did all the research and uncovered the dangers, which doctors sadly do not discuss.

    It’s a shame research is not done by the majority of those who are critical of parents who choose not to vaccinate their children.

    Thanks Meryl for a great response.

  6. Greg says:

    Whoa, Meryl, where do we start?

    How about at the beginning . . . . . with a preliminary comment along the well worn path of the general absence of authoritative, peer-reviewed comment in the bulk of conspiracy theorists contentions.

    OK:
    “In 1994, five years after my son was injured by his DPT and MMR vaccines . . .”
    With respect, do you have confirmation of this . . . . or are you saying “my son was vaccinated and he subsequently suffered some (unnamed) detrimental health episode”?

    “Australia is supposed to be a tolerant society that has room for all opinions and nobody should ever be silenced.” Nobody is trying to silence you Meryl. Yell as loud as you like, but if peer-reviewed evidence states you are endangering others, then for the good of the majority, your actions are blocked, or at least discouraged.

    “The AVN has collected reports . . . . “:
    Firstly shouldn’t that be the AVSN – as the acknowledged full title is the “Anti Vaccination SKEPTICS Network Inc”?
    And correct me if I an wrong, but weren’t they forced to change their name from their original Australian Vaccination Network a few years ago as it was deemed the name of the organization was too-smart-by-half, misleading?

    “No Jab No Pay and No Jab No Play are now in ‘play’ and the government is openly discussing No Jab No Job/No School/No Pension.” Selecting just one of those options, would you point us to one authoritative, legitimate source where a “No Jab No Pension” option is being considered.

    “Herd Immunity””
    Glad you raised the issue:
    “. . . . . (2017) Local Health Districts reveals Northern NSW also had a much higher incidence of whooping cough than any other area in the state in 2016 as well. Children living in the north coast region, which has the lowest vaccination rate in the country, suffered four times more whooping cough than comparable areas in 2016.”
    Enough said, I suggest.
    BTW, “Whooping cough, with more than 95 per cent of our children vaccinated, has been epidemic for over a decade.” I think you mean “endemic” – not “epidemic”.
    And for the reason it is endemic – perhaps refer to the previous paragraph.

    “In 2014, a head CDC scientist, Dr William Thompson, co-author of a seminal study purporting to prove that vaccines and autism were not linked, became a whistleblower. He said essential data had been intentionally omitted and the study actually showed that the risk of developing autism following vaccination was as much as 700 per cent higher in the vaccinated…”
    Was it just an oversight the anti-vaxers omit to include the following (in context) from Dr Thompson’s “seminal study”
    “I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.
    I WANT TO BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR THAT I BELIEVE VACCINES HAVE SAVED AND CONTINUE TO SAVE COUNTLESS LIVES. I WOULD NEVER SUGGEST THAT ANY PARENT AVOID VACCINATING CHILDREN OF ANY RACE. VACCINES PREVENT SERIOUS DISEASES, AND THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR ADMINISTRATION ARE VASTLY OUTWEIGHED BY THEIR INDIVIDUAL AND SOCIETAL BENEFITS.” (My emphasis – but it is the bloke you are quoting that is saying this.)
    Notwithstanding my condemnation of non-authoritative, peer-reviewed comment, perhaps you may like to check out http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/08/22/brian-hooker-proves-andrew-wakefield-wrong-about-vaccines-and-autism/
    and condemn my non-authoritative, peer reviewed content.

    Space and time constraints must prevail, sorry.

    But in the end, I’m not going to convince you, nor you I. So let us agree to disagree. But in the meantime, please accept you and your ilk are not being persecuted. And please consider the reason current rules are in place is for the greater good.

    And once again, in the words of your vaunted (and quoted-by-you) “seminal-study-author” Dr William Thompson “I want to be absolutely clear that I believe vaccines have saved and continue to save countless lives. I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefits.”

    ‘Nuff said!”

  7. Andrew Murray says:

    All very well argued Meryl, apart from the bit on Dr. William Thompson…..

    The reader might think that a conspiracy to defraud people about vaccines and autism was uncovered and “actually showed that the risk of developing autism following vaccination was as much as 700 per cent higher in the vaccinated”. Well, not actually.
    Snopes even has a section on this bloke. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/bad-medicine/

    Oh dear.
    This is the best the AVN can come up with?

    • Bruce says:

      When you rely on Snopes to debunk ex vaxxers you’ve lost your argument. Snopes Is regularly caught out lying; it’s a left leaning, pro Democrat Party and Pharmaceutical advocate.

      I’d rather rely on the information in vaccine package inserts, you know, the ones the doctors, paediatricians and health agencies try their damdest not to show you. The inserts that list all the contraindications, injuries and deaths you can suffer when you are the recipient of a vaccine.

      The government and health agencies are wilful in contravening the Nuremberg Code, specifically, providing informed consent.

      While I have no objections to those who choose to inject themselves with these toxic tubes of puss I for one elect not to.

    • James says:

      Thanks Meryl for all your hard work. It is easy to pick the Trolls out when they use snopes as a reference. Snopes is a disinformation web site.

    • Meryl Dorey says:

      References to Snopes are as bad as references to Wikipedia. The fact is that the data from Dr Thompson’s study did show that the risk for the vaccinated – especially for black boys – was far higher than for the unvaccinated. In some cases, more than 7 times higher.

      For those who would like more information on this particular issue, the documentary film VaxXed is a great resource. You can download it on Vimeo, if you’d like. And here is a summary of some of the data from that film an the Thompson study:

      https://jennifermargulis.net/facts-on-vaxxed-a-cheat-sheet/

    • Jack says:

      Snopes? Oh dear!

  8. Wayne mccosh says:

    Thanks for this Meryl. What has happened to this country when such denigration is systemically and deliberatly pushed on the people, while at the same time the federal government and it agencies are restricting infomation needed to make an informed choice.

  9. Lynn Nerdal says:

    Thanks for being the voice of reason Meryl, wise words for those who want to hear them. A little respect goes a long way.

    I started my own research on vaccination forty years ago, many years before I had my own children and many years before I had access to the internet.

    I really appreciate your thoughtful response to Mandy, there are so many facts for parent’s to consider it can be very confusing. Hopefully you have provided food for thought and further research.

  10. Colin says:

    Wonderful work Meryl, thank you very much for taking the time to spell it out clearly and concisely for those who have never done the research needed to properly understand the situation.

    Having worked with many vaccine damaged children and adults I have spent a great deal of time reading and researching this area. It’s really a minefield of damning evidence that should give all of us cause to question the idea that all is well, without consideration for the politics, hidden research findings, corporate greed, corruption and a disregard for freedom of choice that should ring alarm bells for those of us who are still capable of using our deductive thought processes effectively.

  11. Shelley says:

    I will take your advice and not make any important decisions based on opinion pieces. Especially this one.

  12. R. whitling says:

    Thanks Meryl for all your hard work, over such a long period of time, protecting our right to freedom of choice for medical procedures. And for those who claim that our right should be extinguished in the name of ‘herd immunity’ – where are the massive disease outbreaks now when most adults are no where near up to date with the vaccine schedule?

  13. Kelly says:

    Very well written, thank you.
    Why is it suddenly people who haven’t received all the vaccines on the ever increasing schedule are considered a danger to society.
    It’s call advertising and marketing.
    Punishing many healthy kids and families in its wake.
    This madness has to stop.
    Vaccines must be a choice.

  14. ELLIE says:

    Thank you Meryl …. for you excelkent work and reply.

  15. Rob says:

    Meryl, if my 6mo baby gets whooping cough while in a public place from your unvaccinated child (like when I am doing my shopping) and dies unnecessarily should you accept some responsibility for that death?

  16. Margot says:

    Yes Meryl well said.

  17. Rossco Phillips says:

    Like fluoride in our water. Where’s the choice for an intelligent educated (on the relevant subject) person to decide and have that respected? I have three grown children, none of them based, and never been sick with these plagues. There is an abundance of info if you dig, and that’s how they make it … hard to find. Australian means free to make your own decisions, free of big Pharmaceutical and corporate heavies.

  18. Aja says:

    Thanks so much Meryl – a voice of reason amid the strident hysteria that passes for debate nowadays, even in the Parliament.

  19. H. Walker says:

    Thanks to The Echo for publishing Meryl’s letter. We can’t go on ignoring all the reports of adverse reactions to vaccines, up to and including death. Dr. William Thompson’s account of corruption at the CDC in America should be causing widespread international outrage, detailing as it does a major cover up in an important study of the MMR vaccine which has misled millions into believing it is safe and has no role in autism.

    All the adverse reactions are listed on the comprehensive insert found in the vaccine packaging, similar to the inserts which by law are found in drug packaging. However, no one is ever offered these interesting sheets of paper for an enlightening perusal prior to being vaccinated. Instead we trust our medical professionals, who, by and large, have never read the inserts either. Or I hope they haven’t, because who could knowingly inject a substance into a baby which could possibly cause one or some of the listed side-effects? Which begs the question; is the prevention worse than the disease?

  20. Billy says:

    Mandy said it.

  21. Jon says:

    I’m in favour of vaccination but penalising anti-vaxxer parents and kids by denying them some of their child benefits is a cruel and negative reaction by government. This is bound to impact on kids’ foods and clothing needs and merely reinforces anti-vaxxers’ sense of alienation. Time for a rethink on this strategy.

  22. Joe says:

    Clever strategy by AVN. Responding to a local celebrity in an anti-vax heartland is an easy way to avoid real criticism while pitching straight to your base.

    • Meryl Dorey says:

      The strategy of the AVN, if you want to call it a strategy, is to support freedom of health choice on all issues; to provide a forum for the open and respectful discussion of scientific research regarding vaccination safety and effectiveness; and to oppose all attempts at censorship, bullying, discrimination and obfuscation by the government, the media, vaccine manufacturers and their front groups within our society on this issue.

      Aren’t these laudable strategies that all citizens of a democracy should not only support, but fight for as their rights -regardless of their viewpoints on this particular subject?

  23. Lyndsay says:

    I’m generally a supporter of Mandy’s articles but not this one.
    There are too many vested interests on the pro-vax side who too easily dismiss the anti-Vax arguments.
    When you try really hard to find the real scientific proof of pro claims you find thousands of articles which end up citing polio as justification for everything and you find too much undisclosed data of failures and broad assumptions and the most horrifying bias.
    Take herd immunity for example. They only ever mention percentages of kids when we all know our herd is comprised of adults of all ages who can be unwitting carriers.
    Natural immunity is always ignored and the assumption that you have to contract disease to be a carrier is also rubbish. Your own immunity might protect you but doesn’t prevent you from being a carrier.
    Assumptions of life-long immunity are also nonsense when you consider immunisations are only effective for a matter of years.
    Unimmunised people are a danger to themselves perhaps but not especially to others.
    Immunising infants can have terrible consequences to their natural immunity and cause allergies. My immunised offspring had terrible reactions and the other has barely been sick in her life. I put that directly down to immunisation.
    I’m glad there has been Meryl around to seek the truth. Nobody inside the industry nor in politics especially our PM has done that. They have just lined Thierry pockets and played a numbers game with our lives.

  24. Gayle Cue says:

    For me the issue is freedom of choice. As adults, it is a choice for ourselves and as parents, in the case of underage children, we have the right and the responsibility to decide what is injected into their physical body. This is true if the substance is a medical vaccine or heroin. Our health, our choice.

    A note to the Echo, are you aware that your Echonetdaily used the inflammatory term ‘anti-vaxxers’ in the headline, (although this is not the headline on the actual article.) My question to you is why did you choose this inaccurate term? Possibly to incite controversy, and eliminate the opportunity for members of our community to read a reasonable response without an emotional charge? Meryl’s article is not anti-vaccination. It is about freedom of choice based on research.

    As a big player in a small pond, the Echo can take a leading role in providing balanced and well presented news and opinions in our community – a form of media so sadly lacking in our country, well actually lacking around the world.

  25. Mrs Sandra Leadbeatter says:

    Firstly I eventually vaxed my children (before it was mandatory) But penalising anti vaxers is morally wrong ! Freedom of choice just like abortion! Parental choice should prevail. As Jon ^ said alienating anti vaxers just renforces that sense of alienation that they already feel. Stuffing things down people throats will never work!

  26. Wayne Baird says:

    People use Snopes these days in the same sentence as ‘research’! Come on. There are a myriad of scientific articles showing the dangers of vaccines, but having said that, the term ‘peer review’ means what? A group of big pharma owned shills slapping each other on the back. The topic of vaccines makes many people fearful the media and the AMA has been successful in terrorizing parents for decades. The least fearful are the non or ex-vaxxers, who if they provide good nutrition to their children, have content and heathy children. Many very rarely have the need to visit their doctors and when they do they use medical professionals who covertly support their health choices. If they are not covert they will be hunted down and ‘shamed’ by the media and certain elements of the public who have nothing better to do than expose people who make decisions for children which drifts away from the main stream. The elephant in the room is the rapidly rising incidence of Autism and the cost to society. Doctors are mostly afraid to do read widely on vaccines as it has the potential to destroy their livelihood. Healthy children are poor customers

  27. Peter says:

    whats the big deal.. my kids are vaccinated. I have nothing to fear from an un-vaccinated kid

  28. Jane says:

    What I would like to know is also the fairly new information regarding GUT HEALTH and the ‘Microbiome’ that a Dr Michael Mosley is in Australia promoting his new book on – has he or other researchers in this new field looked into the effects that vaccinations on infants has on its newly developing GUT HEALTH ? Or asked the question ? He has mentioned the benefits of vaginal birth and breastfeeding in new information but I would love to ask this him and others who are delving into it …

  29. Jo Brady says:

    As a parent, when researching whether or not to vaccinate your children, the question you need to ask yourself is, what are you (potentially) trading off in order to prevent your child/children from contracting harmless childhood diseases.

    It’s important to evaluate research that suggest (for example) a surge of childhood cancers since the early 1980’s. http://www.cancervic.org.au/cancer-information/children-teens-and-young-adults/cancer-council-and-childhood-cancers

    My question is why did the Cancer Council feel the need to “”discretely invest 10m in cancer research specifically identified as ‘children’s cancer”?

  30. Mulch says:

    I agree with the freedom of choice argument – I’ve been a big advocate for stuff the road rules and drive how you want for many years – haven’t killed anyone … yet …

  31. Concerned Gigi says:

    Why have infant mortality rates plummeted in western countries plummeted in less than a century? Do your own tour of the older parts of any Australian cemetery to see the number of graves for the very young. What are you saying? Parents didn’t feed and care for their children properly? Look at historical death rates for childhood whooping cough and diphtheria, study the terrible outbreaks of polio that terrorised the first half of 20th century Australia.

    I saw a lovely yummy mummy interviewed in a documentary about vaccination rates in this area. She said she probably wouldn’t vaccinate her baby because she wanted everything to be ‘as natural as possible’. Well guess what – viruses and bacteria are part of the natural world and they sometimes kill us no matter how much organic produce we eat, unflouridated water we drink, exercise we do or whatever else. If you think this is best – like microbes deserve to live too, just like sharks in the ocean – then good, be upfront about this. Don’t carry on about inert vaccines spreading the diseases they combat and doctors being either dopes or in a conspiracy to maintain customers!

    Get out of your first world complacency!

  32. @advodiaboli says:

    There is so much disinformation here it may be best to revisit some of Ms. Dorey’s claims that I have already shown to be false. On March 30th last year the attack on the Turnbull’s was examined. Incorrectly at the time Ms. Dorey wrote;
    “… yet the current PM’s wife is Chairman of the Board of a company involved in vaccination and other pharmaceutical pursuits whose value has increased dramatically due – at least on the surface in my own opinion – to policies which her husband has helped push through Parliament.”
    Above Ms. Dorey writes;
    “His wife, Lucy, was until recently the chair of just such a company.” Then Dorey writes, “Neither acknowledges the blatant financial conflicts of interest;…”.

    Yet in September 2015 – 33 months ago, not “recently”, Lucy Turnbull specifically stepped down from her role as Chairman stating;
    “I am currently in the process of assessing my role on company boards to ensure there are no conflicts of interest”.
    What is to be gained from misleading readers on this point Ms. Dorey? The full post, “Fake news, post truth, anti-vaccine” can be found below;
    https://luckylosing.com/2017/03/30/fake-news-post-truth-anti-vaccine/

    Fortunately there is text and audio from the Social Services Amendment Bill, November 2015 on that page including input from Julie Leask. Ms. Leask is no fan of No Jab No Pay and stated this at the time. She also informs Parliament that serious vaccine injuries in Australia are “between zero and less than five per year”. This is vastly disproportionate from Ms. Dorey’s claim of many, many injuries purportedly making up a register in her possession.

    The TGA remind Australians that there have been no vaccine related deaths in Australia;
    https://www.tga.gov.au/behind-news/interpreting-information-database-adverse-event-notifications

    I agree that doctors did advertise cigarettes from the 1930’s to 1950’s. However I do not accept claiming that “the scientific consensus for many decades was that smoking was not harmful”, in any way relates to the modern consensus on vaccine safety.

    ““Vaxxed” and the manipulation of William Thompson’s telephone audio”
    https://luckylosing.com/2017/11/30/vaxxed-and-the-manipulation-of-william-thompsons-telephone-audio/

    “Lies and Deceit from Australia’s “Vaxxed” promoters”
    https://luckylosing.com/2017/07/30/lies-and-deceit-from-australias-vaxxed-promoters/

    “My personal request of Meryl Dorey” (Jan. 2012), uses Ms. Dorey’s own manipulation of pertussis statistics and the crucial facts she omits to show that far from causing a pertussis epidemic the vaccine, whilst not perfect, is safe and effective.
    https://luckylosing.com/2012/01/04/my-personal-request-of-meryl-dorey/

  33. @advodiaboli says:

    Also Ms. Dorey above writes;

    “So if a child gets whooping cough, the chances are it was a fully vaccinated child or adult who spread it – not a healthy unvaccinated person.”

    Yet then cites a “lab animal” study of a small sample. The other two citations present the same text.
    And;
    “As for the claim that the new result may not be applicable to people, Merkel notes that, for ethical reasons, it may be difficult to duplicate the study in humans, as that would require purposefully exposing experimental subjects to a 3-month bout of pertussis.”

    Both studies examine the fact that the pertussis vaccine may not prevent the spread of the disease from those vaccinated. This leaves the question does the pertussis vaccine protect individuals from the dangerous symptoms of pertussis? And the answer is a firm yes. Looking at the reference;

    “Does this mean the current vaccine is useless? Not at all, the pair says. Until researchers can develop a new pertussis vaccine that blocks transmission, the protection the acellular vaccine offers to individuals is vital.

    “It’s the symptoms of pertussis infection that kill people,’ Scarpino says, ‘and the existing vaccine prevents the most debilitating effects of whooping cough.’

    In that sense, the research underscores the importance of getting vaccinated, especially for children. ‘There are lots of people out there who may be transmitting pertussis unknowingly,’ Scarpino says. ‘Not vaccinating your own child puts her or him at increased risk of severe disease, even death.’

    The reference states not vaccinating your child may be fatal. This is in line with the vaccine status of infants who die from pertussis.

    Thus Ms. Dorey’s claim ” the chances are it was a fully vaccinated child or adult who spread it – not a healthy unvaccinated person”, is not borne out in the study – particularly the last aspect. Vaccinated and unvaccinated can pass on pertussis but the only factor that would lead to a conclusion it is more likely to come from a vaccinated child is because most are vaccinated – not because it’s a function or flaw of the vaccine.

    It is true however that asymptomatic vaccinated and unvaccinated adults can pass pertussis to infants or children and other adults.

  34. Jo Brady says:

    @advodiaboli talk about misinformation… a simple google search will give you the accurate information about Lucy’s departure from Prima Biomed. By the way Prima Biomed is now name Immutep…. they’re in the business of developing immunotherapy drugs … a case of create the problem AND the “cure”. How many shares in Immutep do the Turnbulls still hold?
    Lucy Turnbull quietly exits sole ASX role | afr.com
    https://www.afr.com/…/lucy-turnbull-quietly-exits-sole-asx-role-20171123-gzrbkp
    Nov 23, 2017 – Last Friday at the Prima Biomed AGM, Lucy Turnbull used her chairman’s address to announce that she was leaving the company the next day.
    Regarding deaths by vaccines, try researching SIDs it’s the medical fraternities dirty little secret.

  35. Jo Brady says:

    “It is true however that asymptomatic vaccinated and unvaccinated adults can pass pertussis to infants or children and other adults.” Let’s add “asymptomatic vaccinated and unvaccinated adults AND CHILDREN”.

    @advodiaboli .. I’m glad you brought this up .. so vaccines don’t work?

    The pro-vax tendency to blame the unvaccinated for the spread of any childhood disease … is about as credible as pointing the finger at who started a headlice infestation.

Leave a Reply to Sharne Warren Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 

Become a supporter of The Echo

A note from the editorial team

Some of The Echo’s editorial team: journalists Paul Bibby and Aslan Shand, editor Hans Lovejoy, photographer Jeff Dawson and Mandy Nolan

The Echo has never underestimated the intelligence and passion of its readers. In a world of corporate banality and predictability, The Echo has worked hard for more than 30 years to help keep Byron and the north coast unique with quality local journalism and creative ideas. We think this area needs more voices, reasoned analysis and ideas than just those provided by News Corp, lifestyle mags, Facebook groups and corporate newsletters.

The Echo is one hundred per cent locally owned and one hundred per cent independent. As you have probably gathered from what is happening in the media industry, it is not cheap to produce a weekly newspaper and a daily online news service of any quality.

We have always relied entirely on advertising to fund our operations, but often loyal readers who value our local, independent journalism have asked how they could help ensure our survival.

Any support you can provide to The Echo will make an enormous difference. You can make a one-off contribution or a monthly one. With your help, we can continue to support a better informed local community and a healthier democracy for another 30 years.”

Echonetdaily is made possible by the support of all of our advertisers.