Tweet

The story concerned a study in progress from well known anti-vaxer Judy Wilyman (for more background see Dave the Happy Singer’s blog post).

ABC Science presented her views in a completely credulous fashion omitting any context that she has lectured with the sometimes-president of the AVN Meryl Dorey and has close affiliation with the AVN. (In response to my complaint about this lack of disclosure, the ABC apparently asked Ms Wilyman if she was affiliated with the AVN and when she said no, they were satisfied with her response).

As you’ll see below, they have also taken out of context my complaint that her views should have been reported along with a declaration that she does have anti-vaccine affiliations to say I don’t think her views should have been reported at all. This was not what I was trying to say and I don’t think my complaint conveys this (it’s reproduced below so you can decide for yourself – let me know in the comments if you think it does).

Overall, I am extremely dissatisfied with this response. I wouldn’t care if her piece was presented as opinion – but it was presented as science with comments from Prof Booy (one wonders why he keeps getting quoted in such articles – it only serves to boost the legitimacy of the anti-vaxer and does nothing for his reputation).

It also comes off as rather patronising in my opinion, beginning with addressing me as “Ms” when my correspondence was from “Dr”. You’ll also note below that ABC neglected to address my comment about an internal ABC memo which stated that any material or interviews which involve the AVN or affiliates must be published in context so that readers are aware the information is not based on evidence.

I think this was a rather important point which the ABC decided to gloss over.

There is much more to say on this, but I am currently at a conference which has been going for 12 hrs so far today and I haven’t had dinner yet. I’ll get back to this later.

Thanks to Ken and Carol for the tip-off to this poster. I’ve annotated it for the ABC just so they can understand.

To: Audience & Consumer Affairs
From: Rachael Dunlop
Subject: ABC Science HPV story
Date: 14/10/11 17:20

Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by Rachael Dunlop
—————————————————————————
ABC program: ABC Science

Response required: true

Date of program: 131011

Contact type: Complaint

Location: NSW

Subject: ABC Science HPV story

Comments: Yesterday ABC Science online published an article questioning the safety of the HPV vaccine.

The PhD student interviewed is a well known anti-vaccine campaigner who is affiliated with the Australian Vaccination Network.

The AVN was investigated by the HCCC in 2010 who issued a public warning about their website here

In short: The Commission?s investigation established that the AVN website:

• provides information that is solely anti-vaccination
• contains information that is incorrect and misleading
• quotes selectively from research to suggest that vaccination may be dangerous.

Indeed the ABC issued a warning to staff in July 2010 stating that “it’s vital that programs provide adequate context to ensure listeners clearly understand the AVN is a lobby group”.

Why were the affiliations of Wilyman not made clear? A declaration should have been published stating she is an anti-vaccine lobbyist.

Perhaps a better headline for this story would have been “Evidence for HPV vaccination questioned by anti-vaccine campaigner”. That this anti-vaccine nonsense was published on an ABC science website is a disgrace.

Network – ABC Online
RecipientName – Audience & Consumer Affairs
Referer – Complaint
—————————————————————————

My comments in bold (more comments to come)

Dear Ms Dunlop

That’s Dr to you thanks

Thank you for your emails regarding the ABC Science story ‘Evidence for HPV vaccination questioned’, published on 13 October.

In accordance with the ABC’s complaint handling procedures, your correspondence was referred to Audience & Consumer Affairs, a unit which is separate to and independent of program making areas within the ABC. The role of Audience & Consumer Affairs is to investigate complaints alleging that ABC content has breached the ABC’s editorial standards (available here: http://abc.net.au/corp/pubs/edpols.htm).

Yeah, thanks for that, but that was where I sent my email you dolts. See
To: Audience & Consumer Affairs
From: Rachael Dunlop
Subject: ABC Science HPV story
Date: 14/10/11 17:20

I also want to add here that our initial complaints were made on Twitter to @ABCScience and the editor of the latter, @ScienceNewsGeek (Darren Osborne).

I did this (a copy of my email to Darren can be found here), I also made a direct complaint to Audience and Consumer Affairs which is addressed in this post.

Contrary to what Darren said about “a few days” I did not hear back regarding my direct email to him. I tweeted to him a few days later to enquire about the status of my direct complaint and was told that apparently all complaints had now been sent on. This was despite the fact that I had already complained to ABC Audience Liaison. I received this (unsatisfactory) response from Darren when enquiring further about this;

Anyway, on with the “defence” of this nonsense by Audience and Consumer Affairs.

—

I understand you believe the story should have disclosed the affiliations of Judy Wilyman, one of the interviewees whose views it reported, and that she is an “anti-vaccine lobbyist”.

In addition, I understand you believe it was irresponsible and disgraceful for the story to report her views.

—-

Taking my comments out of context much? Yeah I see what you did there clever Consumer Affairs Peeps.

In context, I said presenting her “anti-vaccine nonsense” as if it were science with no disclaimer to indicate she has an anti-vax agenda was “totally irresponsible” and “absolutely disgraceful” particularly in the context of a recent resurgence of vaccine preventable diseases. I think I made this quite clear.

Judy Wilyman can say what she likes when it presented as opinion but you presented it as science when it was a purely a grab bag of anti-vax canards thinly disguised as science.

This was clear as day to anyone who has done their research, which apparently ABC Science has not (and is not willing to do so, beyond asking Judy Wilyman herself – see below).

Oh wait! But someone in the comments has. They Googled “Judy Wilyman” and “Meryl Dorey”and got a link to an Australian Vaccination Network blog post describing when they gave talks together. Actually the same link I provided you in my original complaint. Did you not see it?

—

The ABC Editorial Policies do not contain a specific standard requiring disclosure of information about interviewees.

Maybe not, but there was this memo which YOU distributed to YOUR own staff in July 2010 following the public warning about the AVN issued by the HCCC

Excerpt from internal ABC memo sent July 28th 2010 following the HCCC public warning

However, the manner in which factual content – including information about interviewees – is presented is subject to the accuracy standards set out in section 2 of the Editorial Policies:

“2.1 Make reasonable efforts to ensure that material facts are accurate and presented in context.

This was kinda my point – you didn’t do this

2.2 Do not present factual content in a way that will materially mislead the audience. In some cases, this may require appropriate labels or other explanatory information.”

^^^ ummmm this?

In light of your concerns, Audience & Consumer Affairs has reviewed the story, considered information provided by ABC Innovation (the division responsible for the ABC Science website), and assessed whether these editorial standards were met in the presentation of information about Ms Wilyman.

Ms Wilyman was described in the story as someone “who is completing a PhD on the Australian government’s vaccination policy at the University of Wollongong” and “who has a Master of Science in population health”. These descriptions were accurate. As well as quoting from and paraphrasing Ms Wilyman’s views, the story included a direct link to the paper in which her views were outlined in detail.

I note your view that Ms Wilyman is an anti-vaccine campaigner and is affiliated with the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN). Audience & Consumer Affairs has found no evidence indicating that Ms Wilyman has particular affiliations which needed to be disclosed in the story in order for readers to make their own judgements about her claims. We have found no evidence indicating that Ms Wilyman is a member of the AVN, and ABC Innovation has advised that Ms Wilyman has denied being a member of or having any affiliation with this group. (translation – are you anti-vaccination? No? Okay then, thanks!)

In our view, readers were provided with sufficient information about Ms Wilyman to form their own conclusions, and the manner in which she was presented was not materially misleading.

Nonsense.

While we are satisfied that the relevant editorial standards were met, please be assured that your comments about Ms Wilyman and the AVN, and your view that it was irresponsible for ABC Science to report her view…

Again, it was irresponsible to report her views without context and since when has science been about “views” and not evidence. ABC Science – WE DON’T NEED NO STICKIN’ SCIENCE!111),

…have been noted and conveyed to ABC Innovation management. Thank you for bringing your concerns to the ABC’s attention.

Yours sincerely

Simon Melkman
ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs

–

Do some stinkin’ research ABC. Cause this nonsense make ABC Science seem like an oxymoron.

Tweet

It all came to a head last week when his anti-vaccine “rants” were covered by our national media when The Australian newspaper and Radio National both took him to task over his public anti-vaccine lectures. The stories came after Australian Doctor published the audio of his talk online, against his wishes but in what they say was in the public interest.

Why is it in the public interest? Because Weiner gives talks to parents, pregnant mothers and young mums and effectively scares them into not vaccinating. Also, he’s the Vice President of the Chiropractors Association of Australia (CAA) NSW branch of whom Australian Doctor have previously accused of “fundamentalist ideologies” and “pseudoscientific dogma”. He’s also on the board of the Australian Spinal Research Foundation where he contributes content for the newsletter. So effectively, he’s a high profile chiropractor.

But leading up to the bad news week for Weiner was a heck of a lot of work behind the scenes. I thought it might be interesting to track the chronology of events which resulted in him getting pwned all over the media. Hopefully, it will give readers an understanding of the value of grass roots scepticism and how a little bit of investigation, like asking questions at the Mind Body Wallet Festival or spending two hours in a chiropractors clinic can result in exposing dangerous quackery. And anti-vaccine quackery is particularly dangerous.

Let’s begin.

November 14th, 2010. My mate Richard Saunders came across this flyer at the Newtown Festival last year where Newtown Community Chiropractic had a stall. He twitpicked it and we decided to go along (Richard didn’t end up going – we can’t remember why).

November 25th, 2010. Meryl Dorey sends out warning to chiropractors as part of her newsletter

December 4th, 2010. I attended the 2 hr free seminar with a friend and blogged it here the same day. Or watch it on the YouTube (thanks to the kind soul who made it).

March 8th 2011. A journalist from Australian Doctor contacted me as part of researching a feature on CAM published as Exploring the Alternatives (I eventually wrote a guest editorial). He was curious about chiropractors and their views on vaccination and knew I had been to listen to Weiner. He booked to go along to the seminar in March. He recorded the seminar, identified himself as from Australian Doctor and asked Weiner if he could post it on-line. Weiner declined.

(Note: according to the Australian Doctor article – which is paywalled – Weiner claims he’s done five years of a medical degree. I was unable to confirm this).

Literature handed out at Nimrod Weiner's December 2010 seminar

To provide you with some context for what happened next, chiropractors were copping it around this time for treating babies.

March 18th 2011. The first stories about a chiropractic clinic at a Victorian University treating babies and kids appears in national newspaper The Australian. Spearheaded by Loretta Marron, academics and health professionals including Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst petition the government to close the clinic down.

March 28th 2011. The British medical journal covers the story

April 27th 2011. Australian Doctor are the first to link chiropractors with the anti-vaccine group the AVN revealing that 130 of professional members of the AVN are chiropractors. This includes clinics run by the CAA president Simon Floreani, the association’s treasurer Taylor Vagg and board member Anthony Croke.

“Mr Floreani….insisted AVN was a valuable resource for patients: “For me it’s about critical thinking. You are only going to get one biased side of the debate from the medical profession. Can you trust the claims that the vaccines are safe when one-fifth of all deaths are related to medical error?

“The AVN has links and resources to an enormous amount of information that you don’t find elsewhere. As a registered health professional, your role is to help patients. I don’t think [of the AVN] as anti-vaccination. It is more pro-choice.”

—–

May 28th 2011. More bad publicity for baby-cracking chiros, where Marron says, “I would not have written a submission if the chiropractors were treating adults for lower back pain,” she says. “Pediatric chiropractic is a form of faith healing and it should be in theology, not health science.”

July 2nd 2011. A feature story on chiros treating kids appears in The Australian with another “pro-choice” chiropractor, Warren Sipser. (note: this the same one who commented in an article which Meryl Dorey went onto refer to as “vaccination is akin to rape with full penetration.”

—

The decision sparked a reaction from the anti-immunisation movement in Australia, with one sceptic, paediatric chiropractor Dr Warren Sipser, saying the judgment was “dangerous” and some children could have severe reactions.

—

18 reasons to not vaccinate. Literature from December 2010 seminar

July 11th 2011. The CAA sent a media alert out to their members about damage control, directing their members to send all media enquiries to a PR firm.

—

“We wish to alert you to an article that may be appearing in this weekend’s edition of The Weekend Australian…..As always, we continue to make every effort to mitigate negative press that at times is being played out in the media, as well as our attempts to generate positive media..”

—

July 23rd, 2011. A bunch of concerned citizens and some members of SAVN attended Weiner’s talk. They were “…criticised by the audience for doing such dreadful things as pointing out errors made by the speaker.”

July 24th 2011. I received a call from a journo who was investigating how widespread anti-vaccine beliefs were amongst chiropractors. The story was published a few days later.

–

“Of the (AVN) network’s 198 professional members, 128 are registered chiropractors. Many are members of the professional body the Chiropractor’s Association of Australia, or CAA.”

—

August 8th 2011. After obtaining legal advice, Australian Doctor posts the audio of Weiner’s talk online with commentary, even though Weiner did not agree to it. They state; “… we believe it is in the public interest, particularly given Mr Weiner’s profile within the chiropractic profession.”

—

We…reported on accusations against the Chiropractors Association of Australia – the profession’s peak body – that it has turned its back on science to peddle “fundamentalist ideologies” and “pseudoscientific dogma”. The CAA has strenuously denied the claims.

On the issue of vaccination, it says the profession’s role is to educate the public on health issues – the risks and benefits of vaccinations is just one of those issues. So here we offer a talk on vaccinations given to members of the public by Nimrod Weiner…..vice-president of the NSW Chiropractors Association of Australia and ..on the board of the Australia Spinal Research Foundation, a self-styled scientific research body.

—

August 15th 2011. Another journo, again from The Australian newspaper emailed to ask me about the Australian Doctor audio, since he knew I had blogged about the talk. A story entitled “Call to probe anti-vax rant” was published on August 17th (seen by approximately 128,985 people) where Weiner’s comments were described as “outrageous” by the Australian Medical Association who called on the CAA to intervene.

--

Mr Weiner declined to comment, referring questions from The Australian to a PR company, which said the Chiropractors Association of Australia (NSW) had no position on vaccination and “any comments that Nimrod Weiner may have made would be his private opinions, not those of the association”.

—

August 18th 2011. The following day, the story appeared on Radio National on the back of Australian Doctor audio and The Australian newspaper article.

August 19th 2011. Another critical article appeared in the press

Interestingly, shortly after these national stories broke, a link on Weiner’s website to his vaccine talks was showing a 404 but it could be found in Google cache. Today, as I was researching to write this article I again found the page, but it appears an attempt to hide it has been made, as indicated by the “_offline” text at the end of the url. You can still get the page though if you do some digging, but it has been moved thus breaking all previous links.

I guess the question now is will Weiner continue to give these seminars. According to this screenshot he has previously charged for the seminars.

UPDATE: Another critical article appeared in Australian Doctor today, where the Chiropractic Board of Australia is calling on people to complain about Weiner;

–

The chair of the chiropractic board is urging people to make a formal complaint about high-profile chiropractor Nimrod Weiner over his public seminar on the alleged dangers of vaccines.

Phillip Donato stressed that chiropractors had a duty under the profession’s code of conduct to provide up-to-date, evidence-based information. He said: “It appeared at the very least he is misinformed and may be providing misleading information to the public. We would encourage notifications so that we can have a look at the case properly.” Australian Doctor understands that notifications have already been made.

–

Indeed a complaint made to AHPRA then passed onto the Chiropractic Council of NSW was dismissed in June this year. The complainant flagged anti-vaccination material on Weiner’s website as being in breach of section 10.2 of the Code of Conduct for Chiropractors, which states; “good practice involves: c) understanding the principles of immunisation against communicable diseases.”

The complaint was dismissed on the grounds that “The Council considered that Dr Weiner was entitled to put his opinion forward and that this did was not in breach of the Code.”

I don’t think we’ve seen the end of this saga. I’ll be sure to keep you posted.

Precious metals nanowater? The panel is unimpressed. “Is there insanity in there?” Watch to see them kick him off the set, by calling him “offensive”, “crazy” and “disgusting” when he claims to be able to cure cervical cancer and leukemia.

Thanks to Chris for the tip-off.