Watch it Sunday May 3rd, Channel 7 at 18:30 EST. Moderated by Mike Munro.

Summary:

It wasn’t a good start for the anti-vaxers whose representative, Dr Giselle Cook, spent her introduction explaining to Mike Munro why he should refer to her as “pro-choice” not “anti-vaccine”. Her time would have been better spent establishing her point of view; instead she came across as flustered. For the pro, was Professor Peter McIntyre, who by contrast, was informed, concise and clearly stated that the small
risks associated with vaccinating far outweigh the consequences of disease.

We were told to interject anytime we liked, and of course it didn’t take long for Meryl Dorey to voice her opinion. But I’m pleased to report, she was smacked down several times by host Mike Munro and even by other mothers in the audience. But when she mispronounced Dana’s name and mumbled, “oh I’m sorry, I don’t really know how to pronounce it. I hope that’s right”, that was when I really began to question her sincerity for the parents of Dana McCaffery who sat only a few chairs away.

I will include a few tid-bits from proceedings today. There is too much to put in one post. However, much of it you will see on tomorrow night’s show and I don’t want to steal their thunder. Nevertheless, this gives you a taste.

——

My opinion is the anti-vaxers did not come across very well. Particularly when Mike Munro asked the McCafferys about the hate mail they had received since appearing on the show last week.  There was a clearly audible gasp from the anti-vaxer side of the room and mumblings of that’s terrible etc, until Mike Munro looked straight at Meryl Dorey and said, “Didn’t many of those emails come from your organisation Meryl?”. Many of the anti-vaxers were heard to exclaim, we wouldn’t do that etc, but the damage was done.

Meryl was unable to contain herself from accusing Prof. Peter McIntyre of being on the take from the government. She asked him how much money he received from the government for vaccinating kids. (Of course she was referring to the Maternity Immunisation Allowance scheme introduced in 1997, which they also get access to by the way). Professor McIntyre looked at her blankly and replied – none.

Mike Munro inquired of Meryl Dorey’s medical qualifications, to which she replied; only that I have been researching this for 20 years. Munro interjected – so you don’t have any formal medical qualifications? Well then perhaps we should let the doctors answer the questions.

Toni McCaffery asked Meryl Dorey if she had ever been in a neo-natal unit with kids experiencing whooping cough or measles, or seen a child go into cardiac arrest like she had Dana. Meryl, in a defying act of insensitivity said; “of course it is awful to see a child die, any child, but Dana?, Daanna?, I’m sorry, I don’t really know how to pronounce it…”

I could hardly believe my ears when Meryl Dorey dragged out the Wakefield case as evidence that vaccines cause autism. Prof McIntyre commented that this had been repeatedly debunked to which she responded that there had since been seven publications “from reputable scientific journals” showing Wakefield’s data to be correct. Prof McIntyre looked quite bemused at this comment and calmly stated that not only had some of the data been faked but amongst other flaws, the study only involved 12 children and had since been retracted by the the Lancet.

When Munro asked her to produce said papers, Dorey claimed she had sent them to one of the researchers for the show. She claimed she had sent over 30 studies to the studio in support of her arguments including evidence of vaccine damage. Munro looked decidedly unimpressed and asked her to provide evidence instead of just making all these claims. For this, she cited a child in NSW and QLD (from memory) to which Munro responded, your evidence is one or two kids? You keep saying you have evidence for these things but you are unable to produce it in the studio today? Meryl replied, ”I gave you the details of the 2 kids I just mentioned, you didn’t contact them!!??” To which Munro replied, yes we did Ms Dorey and they did not want to talk to the programme. End of discussion.

Munro inquired of a young mother with 5 month old twins about her sons’ vaccination status. The mother stated that she didn’t really know very much, so was unable to really comment, but she had chosen not to have her kids vaccinated. Munro repeated, “So you don’t really have all the information, you haven’t done the research, but you decided to not have your kids vaccinated anyway”; to which she replied yes.

This sparked the ire of a mother with child a few seats behind, who’s child was recovering from whooping cough after contracting it before he was eligible for vaccination. This mother stated that she was not entirely happy sitting in a room with 2 babies in such close proximity to her son since he had not yet completed his full schedule of immunisations and further, her son could also infect the twins, since he was still recovering. But it also made the first mother look pretty naive and irresponsible.

—-

The thing about the anti-vax lobby is that they are always screeching that parents need more information, but when you offer them scientific data they always have a reason why it is wrong or not acceptable. Often it’s the Big Pharma conspiracy (pharmaceutical companies sponsored that study therefore it’s biased), or they counter offer you something written in a book that they once read. I presented the recent Nature research which links ~15% of autism cases to genes and it was dismissed it out of hand precisely because it only accounts for ~15%, therefore, what about the other ~85%? It must be the mercury and heavy metals in vaccines. It is very difficult to argue with people when their counter arguments have no basis in science and all science you do show them is wrong. Just like the creationists, they continually move the goal posts. And whilst they say they want more information, only as long as that information aligns with their beliefs.

Toni and David McCaffery were in the audience today. I sat next to David and we chatted throughout. They both thanked myself and Richard for our support. What they did today was unimaginably tough and brave. Dana only passed away 6 weeks ago. Yet the anti-vaxers bumble along seemingly oblivious. At one stage when discussion got around to Dana’s death I heard from behind me, someone say it was only one baby. David McCaffery leaned over to me and said, “It was my baby”.


Subscribe to comments Responses closed, but you can trackback. |
Post Tags: , , , , , ,

Browse Timeline


  • Pingback: Hurtig Lån

  • Pingback: Relatively Interesting Celebrities Endorsing Stupid Things: (like) The Anti-Vaccination Movement

  • Pingback: Antivax kills. | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine

  • Grendel

    @ Where are the fact – I just found your reference list:

    http://menopause.gaia.com/blog/2008/1/hpv_vaccine_alternative_view

    So again – did you read any of these or just cut and paste the list?

  • http://kaasirpent.livejournal.com Kaa

    @where are the facts:

    “Also how do you explain the 1300% increase in Autism in developed countries?”

    Pay attention. People have answered this question OVER and OVER and OVER. You apparently either are not listening or you don’t like the answer, so you ignore it.

    The number of conditions that are diagnosed as “autism” has increased over the years as the medical community has learned more. The rate of diagnosed autism cases has risen as a result of more conditions being included in the autism spectrum. The question has been asked and answered. I fail to see why you can’t comprehend this. This cannot be the first time you’ve been given the answer to the question, yet you keep asking it over and over and over!

    Just once I’d like to see even one of you anti-vax people actually listen to an answer to one of your questions. Go do the research! You claim you and only you seem to be able to do simple research: prove it.

  • Grendel

    Thank you Toni, Your steadfast position admist your grief is an amazing contribution to the parents of Australia who care enough about children, their own as well as the children of others, to vaccinate to save lives.

    @ where are the facts – you didn’t read a single one of those papers did you? Do you even have access through the paywalls? I do. I think I’d like to see you summarize those papers and explain how a paper from 1983 discusses the effectiveness or dangers of Gardasil? For that matter, since Gardasil was released for general use only in 2006, perhaps you could explain the relevance of all of your citations to the vaccine that date prior to the vaccines release?

  • Pingback: » Toni McCaffery has had enough.

  • http://www.danamccaffery.com Toni McCaffery

    @where are the facts

    Where is your sense of human decency? Your comments are the most hateful and hurtful words that any grieving parent could read.

    As Dana’s parents, we are absolutely outraged that groups such as the AVN are intent on proving that Pertussis did not kill her and is not dangerous. We expected opposition to vaccination, but it is unacceptable and despicable that we have to ‘prove’ that Pertussis killed her. Haven’t we suffered enough – now we have to defend the very thing that killed her.

    We are outraged that without our knowledge, Meryl Dorey rang the Director of the NCAHS Public Health Unit on 12 March seeking details on Dana’s death and contended the department had misled the public.

    Even after I told Meryl what happened to Dana at the debate, a few weeks afterwards I found an AVN blog with members making false claims that stated they had information she was sick from birth, immune-compromised from the HiB vaccine or died as a result of the antibiotics or medical treatment she received.

    Not only is no-one privy to this information, it is wrong and extremely distressing. In the latest Living Wisdom, Meryl got every fact wrong about Dana – her age, when she died, where she might have caught it, when the last death was and uses language to downplay the seriousness.

    I am pleading with the AVN to leave my beautiful daughter alone and stop this misleading chatter. And I plead to other parents, please do not expose your child to this dangerous disease.

    Don’t you think as Dana’s parents, watching every agonising moment of her death, we would know what killed her. We undertook extensive research and spoke with the specialists over several weeks to understand what happened.

    Let me be very clear. She was born in perfect health, was breastfed and was putting on weight. Nothing is sacred. We decided to speak out after reading comments in media and blog sites that dismissed the severity of whooping cough, claims of ‘only one baby’, criticisms that we had not acted quickly and that I had not passed on immunity to Dana through breastfeeding.

    Reading this blog is almost too much to bear!

    Let me be very, very clear – Pertussis can and does kill 1 in 200 babies. Sadly, THREE babies have died in Australia this year – we are the only family to go public and I wouldn’t recommend it. If your baby is ‘the one’ – it is unstoppable.

    The intensive care experts were in contact with experts all around the world and tried everything. I stood and watched them try to save her and did the unthinkable and wished she had cancer instead, because maybe then she would have had a chance.

    Meryl might call what we have done a fear campaign. We call it a reality check. We only wished someone had warned us of the epidemic as we would have done everything in our power to protect Dana from catching it.

    We saw the healthiest, most beautiful baby suffer the most agonising death – and there was nothing we could do.

    We will not stand by and let this happen to another family.

    Please STOP DEBATING our daughter’s death. Show some respect and leave Dana in peace. We are so sorry we have exposed our beautiful girl to such hurtful people.

  • http://scepticsbook.com Maggie

    @watf

    Can you please detail what you mean by the following;

    “…on pubmed all studies showing that vaccination was not good for you only listed the magazines to go reference, yet looking for articles that claim vaccinations are safe are all there to be read.”

    Do you mean you had to have a subscription to read the bad-vax articles? Can you provide an example please? I am surprised by this, since most journals require a subscription and this is independent on the type/tone of the article.

    Also, you mention that you do not use homeopathy as an alternative to vaccination. AndyD may have used this example since Meryl Dorey has stated that she used it to treat whooping cough in her children (he can confirm this).

    Finally, any particular reason why you have included a long list of articles about Gardisil?

  • where are the facts

    @Fuzztwin, upon doing a recent research project for university I found it extremely interesting that on pubmed all studies showing that vaccination was not good for you only listed the magazines to go reference, yet looking for articles that claim vaccinations are safe are all there to be read.
    It’s all so funny how know it all guru’s like yourselves think that you can counterclaim everything the antivaccine do, but isn’t it the same for the people for vaccines. Also isn’t it a scientist job to try and prove things wrong.
    If the AVN promotes scare tactics, than what do you think the big pharma also do? Are you lining up to get the swine flu injection that has now become available, as this epidemic was televised to be fatal, yet in Australia we have seen no deaths, and the general flu is actually having worse side effects than the swine flu. Or what about in the European countries this year, how is it possible that a company that manufactures immunizations could actually contaminate the flu vaccine with avian flu?
    http://www.newsofinterest.tv/pharma/baxter_avian_2009_03_05.phphttp://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2005/04/23/mercury-poison.aspx
    While your at it why not check out these references about gardasil.
    1. Ho, G.Y., Bierman R., Beardsley, L., et. al., 1998. Natural
    history of
    cervicovaginal papillomavirus infection in young women, N Engl J
    Med,
    338:423-428.
    2. Woodman, C.B., Collins, S., Winter, H., et. al., 2001. Natural
    history
    of cervical human papillomavirus infection in young women: a
    longitudinal
    cohort study, Lancet, 357:1831-1836.
    3. Nasiell, K., Nasiell, M., Vaclavinkova, V., 1983. Behavior of
    moderate
    cervical dysplasia during long-term follow-up, Obstet Gynecol,
    61:609-614.
    4. Richart, R.M., Barron, B.A., 1969. A follow-up study of patients
    with
    cervical dysplasia, Am J Obstet Gynecol, 105:386-393.
    5. Davey, D.D., et. al., 2004. Implementation and reporting rates:
    2003
    practices of participants in the College of American Pathologists
    Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. Arch
    Pathol
    Lab Med., 128:1224-1229.
    6. Manos, M.M., et. al., 1999. Identifying women with cervical
    neoplasia:
    using human papillomavirus DNA testing for equivocal Papanicolaou
    results,
    JAMA, 281:1605-1610.
    7. ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study (ALTS) Group. 2003. Results of a
    randomized
    trial on the management of cytology interpretations of atypical
    squamous
    cells of undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 188:1383-
    1392.
    8. Adams, A., et. al., 2006. Negative colposcopic biopsy after
    positive
    Human Papillomavirus DNA testing: false positive HPV results or
    false-negative histologic findings, Am J Clin Pathol. 2006;125
    (3):413-418.
    9. Merck & Co., Inc. 2006. Gardasil [Quadrivalent Human
    Papillomavirus Types
    6,11,16,18 Recombinant Vaccine] product insert. Table 6.
    Like Interested says. there is tonnes of info available if your prepared to look. But it is obvious that you are as one sided as it gets.
    As for you Andy D. I am able to pull references from more than the AVN, although it is useful, especially considering the articles recieved in the newsletters are fully referenced for me to continue searching! Also by choosing not to vaccinate does not mean that I enter into homeopathy either, so maybe your stereotyping is best kept to yourself. Also if you are so stupid as to not seek alternative therapies, well more fool you! The ocassional physio, chiropractor and accupunture (a proven practice around way before western medicine)visit to recieve optimum health as well as excercise and good eating should keep the most people healthy.
    Therefore I bid you all Goodbye and wish you all the best in the Western Medicine intervention. I hope that in old age, all the antibiotics and other drugs you’ve been given over time will still work and that you are not immune as so many already are.

  • http://blog.fuzztwin.com/ Fuzztwin

    @Interested asked:
    I’m also curious as to why you have an issue with the AVN..I was unaware that there was any particular motive, other then information distribution, that this organisation had….have they also claimed to see alien life lately?

    Not that I’m aware of, but they do claim various conspiracies whenever it suits them, e.g. snippets from Meryl Dorey, National President, Australian Vaccination Network:

    “Our governments are all in the pockets of Monsanto and the like”

    “This is not journalism, this is marketing and Channel 7 is nothing more than a paid stooge for Big Pharma.”

    “This is the sort of nonsense these ‘medical experts’ are spreading – the sort of dangerous, illogical treatments they are pushing. And their word is law – and our side gets no credibility despite having the information and research on our side.”

    This vilification of the medical community is simply sociopathic when we compare our quality of life to that of our great-grandparents. Where is the proper research from anti-vaccination groups that they claim to have? Once again, for the umpteenth time, I’d love to see it.

    The AVN clearly promote the Big Pharma conspiracy, remain closed to all evidence that threatens their belief system, and therefore one can safely conclude that they are on the whole irrational, and should not be taken seriously. Not exactly an equal authority Vs. authority or reference Vs reference now, is it.

  • http://bastardsheep.blogspot.com/ BastardSheep

    @Interested, a quick google search concentrating on results from websites that aren’t anti-vaxx and actually like to have a bit of dignity in regards to their medical studies and results will bring up the results for you if you care to take a look. I’ll paste a few quick URL’s for you that I stumbled across in less than a minute of searching.
    .
    http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1195733811885
    http://www.who.int/whr/2005/chapter6/en/index1.html
    http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/dym142v1
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7a/Rubella-us-1966-93-cdc.gif
    .
    There’s many many more studies out there all showing the same thing. They may not be double blind but without purposefully exposing people to pertussis etc it’s a tad hard to conduct a double blind study. The same goes with seatbelts.
    .
    Of course, if you constantly view anti-vaxx websites such as the AVN you’re never going to see this information, simply things which have already been debunked and proven wrong such as Andrew Wakefields paper and the works of “doctor” Carley mentioned above.
    .
    The reason why the issue with the AVN is due to the misinformation and outright lies that they spread, while pretending to be pro-choice and giving people accurate information to make informed decisions. They do precisely the opposite while also promoting S.C.A.M remedies. If it has evidence for it, if it’s supported by facts they’re against it. If it isn’t supported by evidence or is opposed to the facts, they push it. They’re doing a scare campaign that will only result in many more deaths than those they have already caused.

  • Interested

    I just read you’re review…It’s amazing how the blog from the AVN tells a different story…who to believe …who to believe…
    it’s so subjective isn’t it!!

  • Interested

    sorry Andy D, since you have used the term ‘nasty sounding chemicals’..I now have the strong urge to take you seriously….please continue with the diatribe. Out of interest what are you’re qualifications?

  • Interested

    Hi,
    Just out of interest I thought I would get on and have a read. Can I please just get some points clarified,

    Since basically every thing on earth is composed of hydrogen, carbon and oxygen I found you’re argument against formaldehyde to be not very well founded. My impression was that there would be a difference between not only levels in ingested formaldehyde and injected, but also major differences in how they are broken down in the body. My impression was that injected substances are usually at a much higher concentration and are able to cross the blood brain barrier, as opposed to ingested which is broken down throught the digestive track. I would also like to know if you have information concerning the difference in these levels.

    I was also amazed to read you’re comment about financial gain for Dr’s being compared to seat belt safety for example. The last I heard there was documented evidence that was able to prove there had been a reduction in fatalities concerning the compulsory advent of seatbelts, where as sadly I have been unable to find similar double blind trials done on the efficacy of vaccination…please feel free to send me through references though, as this is such an emotional subject that I think the science behind it would obviously stand up better then heated disagreement.

    I’m also curious as to why you have an issue with the AVN..I was unaware that there was any particular motive, other then information distribution, that this organisation had….have they also claimed to see alien life lately?? I think that anyone interested in this subject would also rely on more then one source for their information, or I would certainly hope so especially considering that the decision to not vaccinate is emotional, and leads to vilification from medical authorities for the rest of these parents lives, as well as a fundamental questioning of that decision every time chicken pox goes around again, or with the recent whooping cough epidemic. And yet these parents still stand firm…and let’s face it…they can’t all be hippies and idiots!!
    So I think we can agree that this is an argument that could go on forever…authority Vs authority, reference Vs reference…and since there is a plethora of information out there for both sides I’m not exaggerating. So can I please challenge you to take a look at the kids today. Do I think vaccination is solely responsible in the destruction of our youths health, NO. Obviously there are a thousand other things that can contribute…and which will really lead to a discussion that will go on forever….but if you get a chance to sit down with these kids and do a history then it should open you’re eyes. Is it historically normal that kids average up to 10 doses of antibiotics in there first 2 years of life, that children falling on the autistic continuum are rising dramatically (obviously also affected by changes in diagnostic criteria), also usually diagnosed from the age of 2 onwards, childhood cancers are on the rise…etc…etc…
    And while diet is certainly not optimum for some of these kids, the major medical intervention these kids go through usually up to these ages are the routine administration of vaccinations, which are now 3x more then they were for their parents. If you seriously remember you’re childhood as similar to todays then fair enough, because I certainly don’t. Look around…

  • http://thinkingisreal.blogspot.com AndyD

    Sorry for the munted chemical name, the weird Greek characters didn’t translate. It’s sucrose for anyone who cares.
    .
    Did Dr Carly really use the term “toxic poisons”? Who wouldn’t take him seriously after that?
    .
    And what is “a court qualified expert” anyway?

  • http://thinkingisreal.blogspot.com AndyD

    @watf,
    When I posted the formaldehyde info, it was in response to your “no safe level to be “INGESTED” statement. I see you’ve now quoted AVN and changed that to “injected”. I’ll accept that as a simple error on your part.
    .
    Now, other than the AVN (or other anti-vax or “natural living” sites), can you point me to where the Queensland poisons centre actually makes that claim? I have been unable to find it – even on the QLD poisons (Queensland Health Department) website.
    .
    What I could find on their site (QLD Health) was:
    “Immunisation is the most effective way to prevent measles.”
    Annual vaccination against influenza reduces your chances of catching the flu and the severity of the flu if you do catch it.
    “Immunisation against mumps is recommended as part of the National Immunisation Program Schedule…”
    .
    QLD Health doesn’t seem especially worried about toxins in vaccines.
    .
    It’s easy to scare people with simplistic stats about “toxins”. For example, the chemical ?-D-fructofuranosyl-(2?1)-?-D-glucopyranoside is known to displace beneficial nutrients from the human diet which can contribute to an increased risk for chronic disease. Though this chemical is added to many children’s foods and drinks, it has been linked to the development of obesity and insulin resistance. It is a widely recognised cause of tooth decay. This chemical also constitutes 85% of one of the leading homeopathic products for influenza (and a significant proportion of other homeopathic pills).
    .
    You probably won’t find that information anywhere on the AVN website though.

    “Also how do you explain the 1300% increase in Autism in developed countries?”
    .
    Well, my own research has shown that the use of electronic goods, from radios to TVs to computers in the developed world, has increased in direct proportion to the perceived increase in autism. As such, I can faithfully conclude that electronic radiation causes Autism*. What’s your theory, and why?
    .
    *I don’t really believe that, I made it up as a simple exercise in correlation.

  • Fuzztwin

    @where are the facts, is this http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/comment/carley.htm the same Dr Carley you refer to above?

  • http://scepticsbook.com Maggie

    @where are the facts, would you please provide a link to this information (i.e., the mercury one above). I would be very interested to see your source. Thanks.

  • where are the facts

    Dr Carley, a court qualified expert in vaccine induced diseases, states that,”Mercury is 1000 times more toxic than lead, and is second only to uranium as the most toxic metal. If children receive all recommended vaccines, they’ll receive 2370 times the allowable limit – if there is such a thing as a safe amount of a toxic poison – in the first two years of life.”

  • where are the facts

    “According to the Australian National Research Council and the Poisons Information Centre (Queensland), there is no acceptable safe amount of formaldehyde if being injected into a human body. It is a toxic substance and should be avoided at all cost.”
    Andy are you saying that injecting into the body is the same effect as consumption where the stomach is able to break down foods?
    I’m not suggesting it is a bribe, but the money is a financial incentive for doctors to try and encourage parents to vaccinate which in itself provides positive reinforcement to continue that practice. If vaccination was so effective why would it need to be promoted financially.
    Also how do you explain the 1300% increase in Autism in developed countries?

  • http://thinkingisreal.blogspot.com AndyD

    @ where are the facts:
    .
    Since you said there’s no safe level for ingesting formaldehyde, here’s a fact for you
    .
    Formaldehyde – a simple organic chemical made of hydrogen, oxygen and carbon — is a widespread and natural constituent of all living systems, from bacteria and fish to rodents and humans. In fact, formaldehyde is one of the most abundant organic compounds in the universe.
    .
    So, do you ever eat organic things – and I don’t mean “organically-grown” produce, I mean anything remotely derived from living organisms, like plants?
    .
    Apples, Apricots, Bananas, Beetroot, Cabbage, Carrots, Cauliflower, Cucumbers, Grapes, Onions, Pears, Plums, Potatoes, Spinach, Tomatoes, Water-melons… all contain SOME naturally-occurring formaldehyde.
    .
    Tell us how you manage to eat without breaching the “no safe level of formaldehyde” limit?
    .
    It’s easy to make a list of nasty-sounding chemicals like copper, chromium and manganese*, that have known ill-effects at unsafe levels – but is it honest to do so and then claim there is no safe level? (*Note – those three are dangerous and are also essential nutrients.)

  • http://bastardsheep.blogspot.com/ Bastard Sheep

    Where are your facts, are you saying that the only reason doctors are given the money is as a bribe? Most anti-vaxxers go on at length about this payment as though it’s a bribe, nothing more nothing less and speak about how making them compulsory would be even worse.

    Using that same logic must mean that the only reason seatbelts are compulsory is due to bribes to the government from big nylon, and helmets for motorbikes and bicycles are only compulsory due to bribes from big styrofoam.

    Surely it’s possible and a whole lot more plausible that this money is as an incentive for doctors to try and encourage parents to do the right and best thing for their child?

  • where are the facts

    Maggie, these questions need to be asked, because these may be the reasons why her immune system was depleted enough for her to contract pertusis in the first place. Secondly why is it you say about the areas where vaccination is down but you have no data whatsoever that tells you whether the people in these areas with whooping cough are vaccinated or not. Secondly why is it when it wasnn’t an epidemic and fifteen years after having my injection for pertusis I still contracted the illness, when they are saying that it only wears off on the around 50 population. Where is the proof that any of these work at all. I am a person that was fully vaccinated, and from being a healthy baby prior to vaccines have gone to being sick all of the time due to a depleted immune system. I also contracted alot of the illnesses I was supposedly immune from due to vaccines. How do you explain people like me?
    Also most people are told that a baby with a fever with uncontrollable screaming is just normal after an injection, when it is actually a side effect that should be recorded, and the parents should be asking the questions about whether it is safe to continue to vaccinate, as this was the case with my mother and still continues to be the case.

  • http://scepticsbook.com Maggie

    @where are the facts. You presume I know nothing about the immune system? Presume away.

    It does appear however that you do not seem to know much about statistics. Australia may have a high average level of vaccination, but there are pockets of low levels, such as the north coast of NSW where levels are down to ~66%. This is certainly low enough for a communicable disease to spread and cause an epidemic. The maths does work.

    If Dana died from pertussis and you accept this, why do you ask these questions? How is this relevant to her death?

  • where are the facts

    Also Maggie what the pro-choice would like is mandatory reporting from doctors on vaccine side effects. It may be more paper work, but at least it would be accurate, opposed to the 1 to 10 percent that are actually reported. So the information from CDC hardly seems correct.
    If you think that the AVN is scaremongering, than it’s great to know you think the ingredients in the vaccines are completely safe when even doctors have said that there is no safe level of aluminium, mercury of formeldahyde to be ingested. I am also pleased to know that you think it is completely safe for a child to receive a dose higher than the adult dose, when the proportion in weight to size is so minimal (Sarcastic)!
    Do you really think pro-choice people are so nieve as to not research the choice of whether to vaccinate their child or not? It is NOT something we take lightly, and we do continually research to make sure that what we are doing is the best for our children.

  • where are the facts

    Maggie, respect is something that we do have, but we also like to know the facts.
    Dana did die from whooping cough, yes that is known, but if you also knew anything about the immune system you would know those questions are relevant.
    Also why is it that Australia currently has the highest percent of population vaccinated, yet there is a whooping cough epidemic. The math doesn’t work.
    You take offense easy if it upsets you to ask questions.

  • http://scepticsbook.com Maggie

    @where are the facts, you may wish to direct your questions to Meryl Dorey, who telephoned the Dept of health to ask similar types of questions, following Dana’s death. Dana died as a result of contracting pertussis. To infer that there was another reason possibly related to other vaccinations she may or may not have received is irrelevant and offensive.

  • where are you facts?

    It is obvious you don’t have any idea of the money Ms Dorey was referring to, no it was not the baby payments but that all doctors prior to last year received an extra $18.50 on top of he medicare rebate for every single vaccination given! Also doctors do still receive an annual bonus for having over a certain percent of their patients vaccinated.
    Also where are the facts surrounding Dana. It is the saddest thing for any parent to have to bury a baby but where is the rest of the equation???
    Was Dana a premature baby?
    Was Dana breastfed? As a baby suposedly receives antibodies from the mum in the first eight weeks of life.
    Did Dana receive the Hepatitus B injection?
    Did Dana receive the Vitamin K injection?
    Did Dana have any reactions to these injections?
    Was Dana on any medication, etc?
    These questions need to be answered to get the bigger picture.

  • http://thinkingisreal.blogspot.com AndyD

    Dorey complains that Dr Cook was described as anti-vax against her will. Dr Giselle Cook was “similarly” described on Radio National in 1996!
    .
    “On the opposite side of the medical fence is a very small, but noisy, minority of doctors and health workers who actually do argue against vaccination, … One of those is Dr Giselle Cook”
    .
    Maybe I’m misinterpreting but I would think that arguing against vaccination would make you anti-vaccination. (The AVN also claims to be “pro-choice” yet carries no positive reports on vaccination and sells shirts saying “never inject”.)
    .
    If diseases respond to living conditions, not vaccines, how does one explain the return of preventable diseases in countries where conditions are probably superior to what they were when said diseases first began to decline? This even defies a simple correlation-causation defence.
    .
    Also in that discussion, Cook implies that the rise in meningococcal correlates with the, apparently vaccine-related, fall in HiB – “If you suppress an illness, another rises”. But, if vaccines are ineffective and diseases respond instead to living conditions, how is vaccination responsible for HiB reduction? It would surely be the case that improved living conditions caused a reduction in HiB and therefore, improved living conditions caused the rise in meningococcal.
    .
    Or am I getting the whole “correlation=causation” thing messed up?

  • Chris Sol

    Oh, I just found Meryl’s blog about her experience with these programs. Could you comment on her take of the proceedings? I note also that the mother of the 15 week old child in the audience has posted a comment, correcting Meryl’s massively inaccurate recollection of her and her daughter’s sitation. Your take would be very informative.

    http://nocompulsoryvaccination.blogspot.com/2009/05/channel-7-sunday-night-program-study-in.html#comments

    Thanks,
    Chris

  • Chris Sol

    As Nihilodei says, everything has risks and you are always weighing up relative risks in all decisions made. In its simplest form, the vaccination situation can be dumbed down as follows:-

    Not vaccinating has a risk of Bad Stuff Happening of, say, 1 in 1000.
    Vaccinating has a risk of Bad Stuff Happening of, say, 1:100000.

    I’ve made up the numbers, but really that’s what it’s all about. And when you put it like that, it’s obvious to vaccinate.

    There will always be the 1:100000 (or whatever the number is) who have the bad reaction from vaccination, and if you’re one of the parents then you’ll feel responsible and question whether you made the right decision. But you did.

  • Nihilodei

    So to anyone who raises the risk of vaccination; did any one of you ever judge the risk if that first simple car trip with baby?

    Obviously you used a standard car restraint with its inherent risk. Maybe you did have Moonshine or Skye in your lap as hubby drove through the streets and on the roads… because child retraints are responsible for a certain injury occasioning in death.

    Lets face it… you are a bit two faced when it comes to getting in to a car and vaccinating your kids when the risk involves other parents charges and not yours

  • Alan

    Louise wrote >
    >The ‘professor’ was lying about there being no
    >deaths from measles in the last 20 years but you
    >people take his word as gospel.
    Louise, the ” around Professor is a rude personal attack on someone just because you don’t believe what he was saying.
    Cecily wrote>>
    > Prof McIntyre got the bit about kids getting SSPE
    >at 20 years of age wrong…..can be any age. I know
    >lots 7, 8, 14, 16, 17,. My daughter got measles at
    >10 and a half months of age – SSPE diagnosed at 7
    >years & DIED at 12.
    I think this is the answer to Louise’s comment.
    I understood when P. McIntyre said it on the show … there have not been immediate deaths from Measles in 20 years, but there are and will be deaths from SSPE until we get rid of the bug … these are recorded as Measles deaths because they can be linked to the Measles infection. He explicitly said this on the show.
    I do not want to see Polio come back … my wife’s Uncle had it and he wasn’t crippled like others, but it has affected him for the rest of his life …
    Some people should not use some vaccines and if you know your child/family has had bad reactions, then it is probably OK not to vaccinate your children, but you must rely on most other children to be vaccinated … that is why you didn’t get Polio …

  • http://thinkingisreal.blogspot.com/ AndyD

    I should add that it might also be useful, when linking to anti-vax sites to use “poor” linking strategies like “link here”. Others recommend the use of rel=”nofollow” but that takes some effort and html knowledge – and there’s questions over whether it does what we think it does. The nofollow is automatically applied to links in comments – usually.

  • http://thinkingisreal.blogspot.com/ AndyD

    Maggie, the best some of us can do is write and/or comment to the best of our ability and, most importantly, to link properly to credible sources such as your page on anti-vax in Australia.

    This means using carefully chosen link text such as “vaccination, whooping cough, toxins”, not “read this here”.

    People linking to valuable information need to think about what the intended audience will be searching for. It might seem humurous to link to “dumb-arse anti-vaxxers” but it will do nothing to elevate the linked page in Google results when someone searches for “vaccination information” or “whooping cough vaccination”.

    Linking to http://antiantivax.jottit.com/ is useful for people already reading your site but for random Googlers, it would be better to link to something like “The truth about vaccination” or even vaccination, MMR, mercury, toxins

    The headings used for blog articles also matter. “Idiots!” is short and sweet but not nearly as useful to the campaign as “vaccination information for parents”. Sometimes boring is better when the issue matters.

    It’s a pain in the rear to do it all the time but it will make a difference if everyone does it. I’ve taken to either inserting appropriate keywords into the article or listing links (to sites like yours) at the end with appropriate text.

    We all did it with our sylvia browne link campaign and it worked like magic. The same needs to happen here to get science-based information on page one of Google results.

    For me it’s about directing traffic to authoritative sites rather than attracting it to my own.