The AVN was targeted in the statement in which AMA Vice President, Dr Steve Hambleton said that recent media reports outlining the views of the AVN show that this organisation has drawn the fire of the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC).

“While we all value freedom of speech in our society, groups that promote what the NSW HCCC has described as misleading, inaccurate and deceptive information about immunisation, under the guise of ‘pro-information’ and ‘pro-choice’, are putting Australians at risk of diseases that can be prevented through vaccination” he said.

The AVN have previously been in legal strife with the AMA. Back in 2007 they published an advertisement on mandatory vaccination of healthcare workers in NSW which made some rather spurious claims about the AMA. The ad had been submitted to NSW Doctor magazine but was rejected upon the committee checking the AVN website and “finding out that we only had one medical practitioner listed amongst our Professional Members”.

So the AVN published it on their website, until the AMA’s lawyers got a gander at it. The AVN was forced to remove the ad and publish a retraction in its place which said (in part):

In particular it has been brought to the attention of the Australian Vaccination Network, the the Australian Vaccination Network accepts, that:

1- AMA (NSW) does not obtain any of its funding from pharmaceutical companies;

2- AMA (NSW) has not published any advertisement or advertorial for a pharmaceutical company in the NSW Doctor for a period of at least four years, and at no time has the advertising in NSW Doctor been almost exclusively that of pharmaceutical companies;

3- AMA (NSW) does not actively censor information made available to its members.

The Australian Vaccination Network unreservedly apologises for any offence or embarassment the publication may have caused AMA (NSW), its officers and employees.

Ads being rejected sight unseen by publishers is something the AVN are also familiar with. Remember when Sydney’s Child also rejected an ad from them back in April?

Today’s statement from the AMA is reproduced in full below. There is a link to the AMA story here.

—

Misleading claims about vaccination putting Australian lives at risk

2 August 2010 – 2:15pm

Vice President, Dr Steve Hambleton, said today that the AMA is greatly concerned that groups that are promoting discredited theories about immunisation are exposing Australians to the devastating effects of preventable illnesses.

Dr Hambleton said that recent media reports outlining the views of the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN) show that this organisation has drawn the fire of the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC).

“It is important for parents to have their children immunised. Immunisation saves lives,” Dr Hambleton said.

“While we all value freedom of speech in our society, groups that promote what the NSW HCCC has described as misleading, inaccurate and deceptive information about immunisation, under the guise of ‘pro-information’ and ‘pro-choice’, are putting Australians at risk of diseases that can be prevented through vaccination.

“We are now almost two generations away from deadly diseases such as tetanus, diphtheria and polio. Our grandparents will still remember how bad it was.

“Parents who choose not to immunise their children need to consider that they are putting not only their own children at risk, but they are also risking other children, with potentially fatal consequences.

“If immunisation rates fell because many parents relied on the efforts of other families to vaccinate their children, under the misapprehension that this would provide sufficient protection to the whole community, there would be new epidemics of old illnesses.

“The last outbreak of measles occurred in a school in an area with low immunisation rates. The outbreak was so severe that it interrupted the educational curriculum.

“The NSW HCCC’s findings and concerns regarding the AVN released last month are consistent with the views of the medical profession.

“It is critical that Governments promote the evidence and benefits of full immunisation and run an ongoing public education program that informs the public about the devastating effects of diseases that can be avoided through vaccination.

“The AMA welcomes the announcement last week that seasonal flu vaccination of young children can now be resumed, and commends the Commonwealth Chief Medical Officer for taking early action to investigate this matter and the latest advice, which means we can maintain confidence in our vaccination program,” Dr Hambleton said.
—

Follow the AMA on Twitter.
Image screen capped from Vaccination Awareness and Information Service

Fran Sheffield runs the woo-fest website that is Homeopathy Plus! The same website that was the subject of a recent Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) investigation which found her website contained misleading information. Including such gems as “homeopathic immunisation” is as effective as vaccination and that homeopathy can treat cancer, AIDS and other terminal diseases.

Regular readers might remember her being responsible for the e-newsletter alerting us to the “homeopathy cures breast cancer study” which myself and David Gorski subsequently took to pieces. Sadly, only a few weeks ago this study ended being tabled as evidence for an EDM submitted by UK MP David Tredinnick (the one who believes blood does not clot under a full moon therefore surgeons do not operate) in the House of Commons. Thanks to the quick action of Simon Singh and Evan Harris, the EDMs were modified pointing out the utter fail that this study is, including the fact that one of the authors publicly dissociated herself from the study in a comment left on my blog.

As a result of an investigation into the HP! site, the TGA recommended Fran Sheffield publish a retraction in a prominent position on her website. But as is her want, she has refused to do so and since the TGA have no powers to enforce the ruling, so her website remains unchanged.

Following the finding by the TGA, Steve Cannane’s Lateline did a story where he interviewed Fran Sheffield about her reasons for not putting up the retraction. It was clear to me from the story that she sincerely believed the nonsense spouted on her website, thus saw no reason why she should conform with a TGA ruling to the contrary.

But it seems that since the TGA ruling and Lateline story, Fran has made even more outrageous claims and jumped the shark.

She even wrote a response on her website to the Lateline story where she Gish galloped references in support of homeopathy as an effective treatment for cancer and AIDS.

In her most recent flyer (below) for a seminar running in early August she claims homeopathy works for fractures (ummmm, okay), fear of flying (??), workaholism (huh?) and nose bleeds (I have one from reading this BS).

To be fair, she does get some things right. She says homeopathy works for hangovers – well sure it does, a nice big glass of water can be great for dehydration resulting from excessive alcohol consumption. And homepathy is good for plants – I add homeopathy/water to my plants water about once a week, they love it!

But seriously, Fran Sheffield, if I fractured a bone in my body, I reckon the first place I would go is a hospital, for some good old fashioned plaster – not run my leg under the tap. This information is wrong and dangerous. About the only thing homeopathy is good for is dehydration. And the TGA sits back doing nothing. Disgraceful.

Speaking of homeopathy for burns, Arnica Montana made these claims for the victims of the the Bali bombings and the Victorian bushfires back in February 2009.

One wonders if Meryl Dorey would have saved herself a lot of bad publicity had she just quietly posted the disclaimer as requested. As it turns out, there have now been two waves of bad publicity for the AVN. The first, after the HCCC report was released some two weeks ago and now the second wave with the refusal to post the disclaimer.

It seems the tide has definitely turned in the media with respect to the AVN. Previously the majority of the reporting was staunchly about “balance” never referring to the AVN as anti-vax and generally giving Meryl a pretty easy ride when it came to her avoiding the question of “you say you’re not anti-vax but which vaccines do you recommend?”.

And if you don’t believe me, listen to Steve Liebermann – who reckons the AVN should be shut down – tear shreds off the AVN on radio 2UE.

In the extensive coverage of the last few weeks, there has only been one example of television that I have seen the term “balanced” used and that was on the frothy morning show Sunrise (not known for hard hitting journalism). This morning the show interviewed both Meryl Dorey and Prof. Booy, who had both previously appeared on Radio ABC 702 Sydney. Even when Meryl got a pretty easy ride from the interviewer, there was no misunderstanding about the agenda of the AVN, as Prof Booy made it abundantly clear by referring to the AVN at least twice as the Anti-Vaccination Network.

You can watch the full story here.

And whilst there was a follow up story in today’s SMH, (following yesterdays front page criticism), interviewing Dorey and detailing her reasons for starting on her anti-vax crusade, it was juxtaposed with a series of rather loopy quotes from Dorey. In a column entitled “Dorey on vaccines” four quotations were published. Although they’re certainly not the most loopy I have seen from Meryl, they nonetheless do not make her look particularly “balanced” and “pro-information” (as she is still feebly clinging to BTW).

“I don’t see that the measles vaccine has done anything for Australia”

“Make no mistakes folks, this measles “outbreak” has been orchestrated for one reason and one reason only – to force the issue of compulsory vaccination.”

More conspiracy nonsense from Meryl, directly contradicting one of my favourite quotes from her;

“…we are already seen as rabid, idiotic fringe dwellers by so many in the mainstream, it does our cause no good at all to bring in conspiracy theories, which though we may subscribe to them, are unprovable.”

Thanks to the hard work of Steve Cannane who kicked this campaign off with the awesome report on Lateline some 2 weeks ago, the tone has been set in the media. Steve did a follow up story last night, this time covering the government’s seemingly disinterest in instigating the vaccination education campaign they have been promising for what seems like an eternity.

In the meantime the McCafferys (who have been extremely brave and stoic throughout this entire nightmare) have contributed to a website in collaboration with Professor Booy called Chain of Protection

Meanwhile Meryl continues unabated. She continues to bleat they are not anti-vax, that the HCCC does not have jurisdiction over them, that she is seeking legal advice etc etc. It’s like a broken record.

Pro-tip Meryl, saying it over and over again will not make it right. And because you arrogantly refused to put up the disclaimer, many more people now know just that.

Below is some of the coverage I have collected from the past few days. If you come across anything else, please leave a comment and I’ll add it here.

HCCC Public Warning about the AVN

SMH Anti-vaccine Group a Threat

SMH Parents who lost baby stonewalled

SMH Still No Warning on Whooping Cough

The Medical News Anti-vaccination Group Declared Unsafe

Northern Star Warning Issued About AVN

ABC News Vaccine Group Needles Opponents
Anti-Vaccination Campaigners Slapped with Warning

Meryl Dorey and Professor Booy on Sunrise (video)

New Scientist Anti-Vaccination Website Poses a Risk

International Business Times HCCC Warns Public on Anti-Vaccine Group

Medical Observer Public Warning Against Anti-Vaccination Website

Meryl and Professor Buoy on Sunrise (video)

Saturday AM with Tony Eastley

2UE Steve Lieberman interviews Ken McLeod

The public statement was issued after a fortnight’s grace during which time the AVN were instructed to issue a disclaimer on their website stating that;

• • The AVN’s purpose is to provide information against vaccination, in order to balance what it believes is the substantial amount of pro-vaccination information available elsewhere.
• • The information provided by the AVN should not be read as medical advice.

The public warning follows a 12 month investigation into the AVN after 2 complaints were received.

The Commission’s investigation of the complaints focussed on the material presented by the AVN on its website www.avn.org.au. The Commission 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.

The AVN was given 2 weeks to post the disclaimer in a prominent position on their website. When the deadline passed, the HCCC was forced to issue the public statement.

Meryl Dorey, media spokesperson and immediate past president of the AVN responded by repeating she does not believe the HCCC has jurisdiction over the AVN and she is seeking legal advice in this regard. (She has been “seeking legal advice” about this matter for what seems like the duration of the investigation).

In a blog post entitled “AVN vigorously opposses HCCC notice” Meryl (who refers to the AVN as a “consumer advocacy and vaccine safety watchdog group”), states:

“Three times since this investigation started last September, the AVN has provided the HCCC with information on their lack of jurisdiction. Each time, this information has been ignored.”

“The HCCC states that our information is misleading because we do not include data on the benefits of vaccination,…..nobody would expect……those who argue against fluoridation of the water supply to write reports about the benefits of mass medication without individual consent.”

So apparently fluoride in drinking water is “mass medication” now?

But it gets even more hilarious.

“The AVN is currently in discussions with our legal advisors….. to defend against the unsubstantiated allegations that our information is anything but complete, unbiased and fully-referenced from the medical literature.” (emphasis mine).

Unbiased and fully-referenced? Meryl, surely you jest. Even you have admitted you don’t tell both sides of the story. And as for fully referenced? Well the HCCC had something to say about that too.

Fully referenced also might not mean what you think it means Meryl. For example, copying and pasting incorrectly attributed references from whale.to is not considered “fully referenced”.

Meanwhile Meryl is still screeching “free speech” and “democracy”. A comment left on her blog offered a much more sinister reason for the HCCC “witch hunt”.

Tracy says:
July 25, 2010 at 11:51
Doctors are hired assassins for the pharmaceutical companies and the government. Paid to kill and injure … method of death and grievous bodily harm … vaccinations. I tell you, there is something very sinister going on that they are going to such extraordinary lengths to silence the truth!

Hold on to your tin foil hats people!

Not only do the Australian public now know the true nature of the AVN’s agenda, Meryl appears to have got herself in some hot water over scanning and posting a pro-vaccine magazine article on her blog. The article, published in Cosmos Magazine, got her ire when she was apparently misquoted after declining to be interviewed. The publishers are now seeking legal advice about the breach of copyright and will be taking action to have the article removed.

And in another schemozzle, Meryl appears to have passed on the email list from her subscriber base to a third party, which breaches email privacy laws in Australia. Although in a blog post published today she denies this is the case.

This came about with the distribution of a media release from the International Medical Council on Vaccination, announcing their support for the AVN and “condemning the attempts of an Australian Government body to censor and suppress their work.” It was signed by well known anti-vaxers Sherri Tenpenny, VacTruth, Moms Against Mercury, and even Judy Wilyman, amongst others.

AVN readers have already begun to write to the HCCC complaining about the findings. One suggested:

• “The HCCC’s purpose is to provide misleading information about the importance and efficacy of vaccination, in order to perpetuate the substantial amount of one-sided, pro-vaccination information available everywhere.”

Or perhaps the science tells us that the benefits of vaccination far outweigh the risks? There’s no debate about that.

Meryl is in town for her second anti-vaccination seminar at the WA State Library. I tweeted it so everyone else could experience the joy of Meryl’s inaccurate and misleading information about vaccines (share the love and all that).

My tweet was seen by someone on Howard Sattler’s show and Howard asked Meryl if she knew of a “Dr Rachael Dunlop” who has been tweeting that she was on. Meryl said she did know of me and I was “not a medical doctor”.

Well no, I’m not and I’ve never said I was Meryl. My qualifications are not hard to find.

Which leads me to enquire, what kind of doctor are you Meryl?

*crickets*

You can hear the full audio here.

It includes the same nonsense we have come to expect from “Australia’s leading expert on vaccination” including the corker that vaccines are not sugar water, then applauding a parent for choosing sugar water (ie homeopathy) to vaccinate their kids.

Meryl, you keep bleating about “freedom of speech” and “democracy” but when people’s health is at risk these things do not apply. What if I want to exercise my right to free speech by yelling “BOMB!” on a plane? Well I can’t (and I wouldn’t) because it potentially puts people’s lives at risk. Same goes for yelling “FIRE!” in a crowded cinema when there is not one. Laws exist in our society for the safety of the masses and this includes HCCC rulings about what constitutes medical advice.

The HCCC has ruled against you Meryl. This doesn’t mean you can’t spout your opinions – you just have to make everybody aware they are opinions and should not be construed as medical advice. And hey, if you want that to change enrol in uni, do a post-grad medicine course. With 20 years of research behind you already it should be a doddle.

Credit goes to Choice Australia who put this together for their Shonky Awards, an annual event that recognises Australia’s dodgiest products. You can see the full list here.

Initially I was somewhat disappointed to learn the ruling from the HCCC was no more than a requirement to post a disclaimer on the AVN website, but as the news has spread, I am somewhat buoyed by what has been happening.

The HCCC ruling states that the AVN has 14 days to post a disclaimer clearly stating their website is anti-vaccine and that any information on the website should not be construed as medical advice.

—-
For more detailed information go here and here.

The McCafferys have posted a media release here where you can also find a statement from Ken McLeod who submitted the original complaint.
—-

Seems like a slap on the wrist right? At first yes, but since the story has spread across the webosphere, an unexpected result has emerged and one that makes me very pleased indeed. (I even happy-danced with @skepticzone in Las Vegas airport yesterday, apologies if you had to witness it).

Everywhere across the media, the AVN are now being referred to as anti-vaccine. Australia’s anti-vaccine organisation, the anti-vaccination network, and asked repeatedly why they are anti-vaccine. Regular readers of this blog will shrug and say, yeah we already knew they were anti-vaccine Maggie, so what? But what you may not know is that many people, especially vulnerable non-science educated parents and the media did not.

Like the majority of anti-vaccine groups, the AVN have gone to great lengths to conceal their true beliefs from the public and especially the media – and the reasons why are obvious. Their rhetoric generally consists of “we are pro-choice”, “we want to empower parents to make a decision by providing both sides of the story”, “we provide a balance”, “we are pro-information, blah blah informed choice” etc. You know the drill.

And although it has been blindingly obvious to anyone who knows how to use teh internets, for many busy producers, journalists and the like, the AVN has been their first port of call for “balance” (or rather false balance) simply because they didn’t know any better. Well, never fear dear readers, things they are a-changing.

Even before the HCCC fallout, Meryl appeared to be concerned about the public perception of the AVN. In July 2009 (Yahoo! Group message # 44295) she wrote;

“….While we are already seen as rabid, idiotic fringe-dwellers by so many in the mainstream, it does our argument no good at all to bring in conspiracy theories which, though we may subscribe to them, are unprovable…”

But as they say, the truth eventually comes out and it seems the game is up for Meryl “I’m pro-choice” Dorey. Even the normally sympathetic morning television host Kerry Anne Kennelly, whose show consists largely of light entertainment and info–mercials, apparently asked Meryl twice why she was anti-vaccine.

In an email sent to her Yahoo Group, Meryl described how she had initially refused to appear on the show, eventually relenting under the condition that she was given 6 minutes to discuss the HCCC findings and that she was to have the questions ahead of time.

(Coincidentally the website 6minutes were the first to break the news of the HCCC report and wrote a less than flattering piece about the AVN).

But according to her email the questions were changed;

“Turns out not one of the questions they read to me last night was actually asked and kerri anne asked me twice why we were anti-vaccine!”

Why the exclamation mark Meryl? I’ve mentioned this before, but remember when you appeared on radio to defend your Australian Skeptics Bent Spoon Award?

Interviewer: “Which vaccines do you think are good then in Aust..?
.

Meryl: “I think that all vaccines are up to the parents and…”
.

Interviewer: “That wasn’t what I asked though was it. Which vaccines are good? This was the point I think the Skeptics were making is that you’ve never actually said, which vaccine is worthwhile, which scientific designed vaccine is good, worthwhile.
.

Meryl: “It is not, it is not my role, nor is it the role of the Australian Vaccination Network to tell anyone what to they should or should not do when it comes to vaccination…”

Blah blah blah, rhetoric, rhetoric, deflecting the question. (You can hear the full audio here).

But c’mon, I’m just being a big meany. And afterall this is only one example. And as a scientist I require repeatable results. Oh wait a sec..

In an email sent to the AVN Yahoo! Group on Tue Dec 16, 2008 9:08 pm Message #36449 Meryl wrote:

“There will come a time – I pray to God that it will happen in my lifetime – when those who have pushed vaccines upon innocent, helpless babies – doctors, pharmaceutical companies, government officials – will be proven to have lied and cheated these instruments of death into our children’s bloodstream. When that occurs, the outcry will be heard around the world and there will not be enough hiding places on the globe for these murderers to hide or enough money to pay for compensation. Of course, it will be too late for the babies, like this poor child, to be saved. But we will be able to take satisfaction from the fact that never again will anyone have to be pushed to poison their child because for once and for all, it will be known as poison and we will all wonder how it was we fell for the vaccine lie for as long as we did”.

Does that sound like a pro-choice message to you?

Or how about this one? The t-shirts they sell on their website say;

“Love them, protect them, never inject them”.

And another; Yahoo! Group message #44295 sent Thu Jan 14, 2010 9:24 pm

“This is a sort-of off-topic question. I would like to donate to the efforts to help in Haiti but I don’t want ANY of my money going towards vaccines so that red cross and Unicef are out. Does anyone know of an organisation doing work on the ground there helping without vaccines?”
(Thanks to Scott Lewis and Podblack for alerting me to this one)

From a quick perusal of the blogosphere parents and babies’ blogs are also starting to cotton on. Mia Freedman who blogs at Mamamia, writing “A website of deception” described her reaction as she watched the Lateline story;

“I watched the report with tears in my eyes and my jaw dropped somewhere near the floor. Tears for the McCaffery family whose baby Dana died of whooping cough at only 32 days, and dropped jaw for the extraordinary cruelty and misleading dogmatism of the Australian Vaccination Network.”

Since then the story has been lodged with news aggregator AAP, meaning it will soon be distributed even further. And so far, every story I have seen refers to the AVN as antivax. Here are just a few of the headlines I have collected:

Anti-vaccine group rapped for false information
.
Anti-vaccine group accused of harassing parents
.
Top doctor backs disclaimer for anti-vaccination site
.
Warning order for anti-vaccine website

So not only are parents finding out that the AVN has not been completely truthful about their agenda, they also harassed the parents of a 4 week old baby who died from complications associated with a vaccine preventable disease.

Pro-tip: this is unlikely to endear you to parents Meryl. Just saying’.

If you haven’t seen the Lateline piece, DOET NOAW. It is a thoroughly researched and sensitively compiled piece by award winning journalist Steve Cannane (insert fan-girl squeeing here).

In addition, Meryl was totally pwned on radio 2UE where she was asked repeatedly why she was anti-vaccine and tried to avoid the question by saying the AVN does not tell parents what to do, but simply offer the “other side of the story”.

Interviewer: “Are you medically qualified Meryl?” “What on earth gives you any sort of qualification to make any informed comment on this at all..”
.

Meryl Dorey: “20 years of research”
.

Interviewer: “Well, 20 years of research? Well big deal, give me a break, please.”
.

“You’d know a guy called Andrew Wakefield? Do you guys still support him?…..he was struck off the UK medical register…”
.

“What qualifications do you have to disagree with the HCCC here in Australia and the UK medical registry? All of a sudden what you are saying is far superior that what these two credible worldwide organisations are?”

Man, it is refreshing to see the credulity gone from the media with respect to the AVN. Only a few months ago, they were unquestionably called upon to offer the “other side of the story” (in other words, false balance) to the vaccine “debate” (there is no debate – the risks from contracting a disease far outweigh the risks of having an adverse reaction to a vaccine).

But, I gotta hand it to Meryl, she is nothing if not consistent. That is, consistently wrong and consistently dogmatic. She continues to wheel out the canards like the incidence of communicable diseases fell before vaccines were introduced, whooping cough notifications are at their highest levels despite equally high levels of vaccination, Big Pharma Shill, conspiracy, vendetta, septics, etc…

*Boom*

That was the sound of Meryl’s head asploding. And the AVN’s house of cards crashing down.

—-
Congrats to Ken McLeod for compiling the HCCC complaint and to everyone who submitted supporting material along the way and to the HCCC for carefully considering and responsibly ruling on the complaint. To Stop the AVN for all their hard work, all the other bloggers and tweeters who have constantly kept the pressure on, and to Steve Cannane for the brilliant story on Lateline.

Lets keep slamming that oyster shut. One day it might get permanently jammed.

The commission concluded that the AVN provide misleading information about vaccination and must post disclaimers on their website clearly stating they are anti-vaccination.

The report found evidence that the AVN misleads readers by using reliable and peer reviewed literature but selectively quotes from it, often in contradiction to the conclusions or findings of the studies. The AVN also gives non-peer reviewed and anecdotal material the same authority as peer-reviewed literature.

Ms Dorey responded to these accusations by saying:

“It is true that often times our information will contradict the conclusions of studies. This is because, as opposed to most doctors and government officials, we actually read the studies…that disconnect (between the data and conclusions) can be explained by the financial links between the study’s researchers and the companies whose products are being studied…This is not selective reporting, it is accurate reporting.”

Wow, talk about a disconnect. Firstly, it’s the old Big Pharma conspiracy theory again. When you got no evidence to support your claims, its time to roll out the Big Pharma Shill canard. *Yawn*

But this is interesting – she claims to have actually read the studies? This was not the impression Tom Sidwell gleaned when he analysed one of Meryl’s responses to the HCCC a few months back. Unless she intended to copy/paste mistakes, which were traced back to whale.to and other anti-vax conspiracy websites.

From Tom’s article: “At best she hasn’t read the papers she cites and includes them out of ignorance, and at worst she is being deliberately deceptive – and I spelled this out very clearly in the analyses I sent to the HCCC.”

See The Truth Behind the AVN Claims for the full details

—

The complaint, authored by Ken McLeod, included accusations such as:

• The AVN claims to support “informed choice” but only provides information designed to dissuade people from vaccinating

• State on their website that there are links between vaccination, autism, Crohn’s disease irritable bowel syndrome and shaken baby syndrome

• Cherry picking data to suggest that Gardasil has killed young women

• Bacterial meningitis has increased since the introduction of the meningococcal vaccines

• Autism is caused by mercury in vaccines

• Vaccination is unnecessary since homeopathy can be just as effective

• Misrepresenting the facts surrounding the death of Dana McCaffery and harrassing her parents

—–

The AVN are considered Health Care providers under the public health act

This case was somewhat of a test for the HCCC, since it was not immediately clear if the AVN even fell under the HCCC legislation. Initially the Commisssion had to establish if the AVN could be classified as “health care providers”.

Mrs Dorey had this to say;

“The complaint alleges that both the AVN and myself are “health service providers” because we are providing “health education services to the public” for the purposes of the health care complaints act 1993…Neither the AVN or Meryl Dorey are health care practitioners as the term is generally understood colloquially or have we ever claimed to be.”

Yet the commission disagreed with this, noting “the provision of health education was evident” on their website and also “Mrs Dorey participating in pregnancy discussion groups and in lecturing at universities” did indeed constitute health education.

Even more embarrassing for Dorey was her own constitution which stated the purposes of the AVN were “the advancement and promotion of education and learning amongst the public”.

Plus, the legislation is quite clear about the definition of a health care educators/provider, nothing “colloquial” about it. Yet, despite the Commission findings and the fact that she lectures at uni, Dorey still denies they are considered health educators. From the Lateline report;

“We do not agree that the HCCC has jurisdiction over us and we have been saying this from the very beginning and we are seeking legal advice over this issue.”

She now claims to be seeking legal advice on this caveat, despite the fact that she has already had 12 months to do so? Odd.

—-

The Commission focussed cheifly on the issues raised by Mr McLeod and Mr and Mrs McCaffery in relation to the AVN website. Here they examined the post “10 reasons why parents question vaccination” which consists of such statements as “vaccines have never been tested”, “vaccines contain toxic additives and heavy metals” and “vaccines do not necessarily protect against infectious diseases”. They asked Mrs Dorey to provide evidence for these claims.

The Commission analysed references provided by Mrs Dorey and noted many were not relevant to her claims, she was guilty of cherry picking or omitting data to support her claims and other information was demonstrably false.

Of note is her citation of an article about Gardasil from Natural News. com – yes that guy – where she omitted paragraphs to reinforce the claim that the vaccine had been linked to deaths in young women.

On other vaccines the report stated; “The AVN has selectively quoted information to suggest vaccination against meningococcal disease has been ineffective when there is no evidence of this”.

And “The AVN claims that vaccination is linked with a range of long term side effects however has provided no evidence to support this”. (My emphasis)

The AVN is anti-vax and must declare this on their website

The Commission has recommended that The Australian Vaccination Network include an appropriate statement in a prominent position on its website which states;

1. The Australian Vaccination Network’s purpose is to provide information against vaccination in order to balance what it believes is the substantial amount of pro-vaccination information available elsewhere
2. The information provided should not be read as medical advice
3. The decision about whether or not to vaccinate should be made in consultation with a health care provider

If the AVN fails to comply the commission will issue a public statement. Of course we had hoped the HCCC could have done more to limit the dissemination of false information by the AVN, but at least the resulting media coverage will shine some light on the true nature of the AVN.

Surprisingly, in her own response to the Commission, Meryl Dorey in fact admitted to being anti-vaccination, stating there is a need to provide an alternative to mainstream vaccination information.

According to the final report:

“In her response to the commission Ms Dorey conceded that provides anti-vaccination information. Ms Dorey stated there is a need to provide information about vaccination, alternative to that disseminated by the government.”

No longer can Ms Dorey hide behind “we are not anti-vax we are pro choice” which has always been her public persona.

Meryl has already issued a press release stating that the report constitutes an “outrageous attack”; “the threat to freedom of speech and the implications regarding loss of medical choice inherent in this decision make this an issue that cannot go unchallenged”. Interestingly, all references to skeptics with a capital “S” (thereby inferring Australian Skeptics) have been removed and replaced with Stop the AVN and their supporters.

The story has also been reported on 6 minutes here which contains a link to the full article as a pdf.

There is already a comment from Age of Autism UK editor John Stone, the same website who recently referred to the action as “fascist“.

—-

UPDATE #1

Apologies for any errors in the initial post, I am currently at TAM8, and am suffering from severe sleep deprivation! Plus, the post was written between the hours of 2 am and 5 am Las Vegas time (yawn).

Since then, I have had 4 hrs sleep and made some changes, plus others have now blogged the story.

See the story on YouTube
Podblack has a report here
ABC news has a related story here
Orac chimes in
Adelaide Now
Northern Star
Mia Freedman’s Mamamia
Immunisation – getting the right advice audio on 2UE
The World Today Top doctor backs disclaimer for anti-vaccination site
AAP story from Danny Rose

A few weeks back on the Think Tank we heard the story of David Tredinnick, the UK Conservative MP who spent 700 quid of taxpayers money on astrology software. It turns out he believes in all kinds of woo, including  such tosh as, depending on the phase of the moon, “surgeons will not operate because blood clotting is not effective and the police have to put more people on the street”. He is also a big fan of homeopathy, and in response to the recent Committee on Science and Technology evidence checks findings about homeopathy, he submitted four early day motions (EDMs) to the House of Commons for consideration.

For those non UK readers, EDMs are motions tabled by Members of Parliament for debate “on an early day” (namely an unspecific date in the future). EDMs cover all manner of subjects that the MP thinks parliament should be made aware of and possibly debate. They can address serious matters such as climate change, or trivial events such as the Pidgeon Bombs EDM which was tabled in the 2003–04 session of the UK Parliament. This EDM concerned itself with a disclosure by MI5 that it had proposed using pigeons as flying bombs World War II. According to Wikipedia, the motion condemned the proposal, describing humans as “obscene, perverted, cruel, uncivilised and lethal”, and proposed that the House “looks forward to the day when the inevitable asteroid slams into the Earth and wipes them out thus giving nature the opportunity to start again”. (I realise this is Wikipedia but I sincerely hope this is true).

EDMs remain open for signature for the duration of the parliamentary session but are rarely ever signed by all 400 MPs and few make it to the floor for debate.

Despite the recent evidence check and the damning findings that the National Health Service should cease funding homeopathy, no further clinical trials of homeopathy should be conducted, evidence shows homeopathy doesn’t work, explanations for why homeopathy works are “scientifically implausible”, David Tedinnick was just busting to share some “new information” about homeopathy! So he tabled four EDMs, one citing “new research” concerning homeopathy as a effective treatment for breast cancer (which came out prior to the evidence check BTW) (EDM285), for depression (EDM286) and also insomnia (EDM287). Tredinnick also objected to the British medical association’s recent public statements that homeopathy is witch craft and calling for no further commissioning of, nor funding for, homeopathic remedies in the NHS (EDM284).

He cited published peer reviewed studies as evidence for his claims. One of them I happen to know very well, since I spent the better part of a Saturday back in February debunking the entire paper. The reason I did this was because Richard Saunders had received an e-alert from Homeopathy Plus! With a headline screaming “Homeopathy as good as chemotherapy for breast cancer and non-toxic!”. Which is a pretty extraordinary claim for some magic water. And also likely to be complete bollocks (I won’t keep you in suspense – it is).

EDM285 is reproduced below.

That this House welcomes the study published in the International Journal of Oncology, 2010 Feb; 36(2): 395-403 which revealed that homeopathic remedies have a beneficial effect on breast cancer cells; notes that researchers at the University of Texas conducted an in vitro study to determine whether products prescribed by a clinic in India have any effect on breast cancer cell lines; further notes that the researchers studied four ultra-diluted remedies, carcinosin, phytolacca, conium and thuja against two human breast adenocarcinoma cell lines, MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 and a cell line derived from immortalized normal human mammary epithelial cells, HMLE; observes that the remedies exerted preferential cytotoxic effects against the two breast cancer cell lines, causing cell cycle delay/arrest and apoptosis; believes that the findings demonstrate biological activity of these natural products when presented at ultra-diluted doses; and calls for further research in this important area.

Yeah, I guess Tredinnick, like Homeopathy Plus either didn’t read the entire paper or doesn’t understand how to interpret the scientific literature cause this aint what I gleaned from the paper.

So the Twitterverse was mobilised to gather rebuttals to these 3 papers. Once Dr Evan Harris had my blog and Orac’s from Science Blogs in his sticky fingers, Dr Julian Huppert got straight onto composing a rebuttal. And it is a joy to read.

So let’s see what became of EDM 285 once it Harris and Huppert had gone to town on it.

EDM285A1 now reads like this:

Line 2, leave out from `403′ to end and insert `as an example of the failure of adequate scientific peer review because the paper provides no statistical analysis to support any conclusion, indicates that the experimental control, 87 per cent. alcohol solution, was itself toxic to the cell cultures, does not illustrate or explain the different chromatographic profiles of the solvent and the test substances, and does not provide sufficient data to allow proper evaluation of the study; notes that the lead author has retired and runs a homeopathy website which falsely claims that homeopathy is as effective as a conventional chemotherapy agent, Taxol, in treating breast cancer; further notes that one of the authors, Alison Pawlus, has publicly disowned the paper; regrets that isolated poor-quality studies are cited by proponents of homeopathy to endorse dangerous and exploitative cancer-curing claims in the face of overwhelming weight of scientific evidence against them; and agrees with the conclusions of the Science and Technology Select Committee’s Fourth Report of Session 2009-10, Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy HC45 that putting patients through pointless further clinical trials, and the spending of scarce public sector funds on research into homeopathy cannot be justified.’.

The comment about Alison Pawlus, listed as an author on the study publicly disowning the paper is derived from a comment she left on my blog where she stated;

“As an unintentioned co-author on this study, I feel obligated to respond….”

Alison went onto say “…I asked to not be included because I did not think it was a sound study…”

And

“I believe this study demonstrated changes in alcohol percentages on cells rather than the efficacy of homeopathic medicine.”

The amendments to the EDMs constitute a marvellous result and are testament to the dedication of Dr Evan Harris and Dr Julian Huppert. The fact that this message got out so quickly is also a credit to the power of the blogosphere and twitterverse. In fact, this was how I originally got my hands on the full text of this article, by tweeting for someone to source it for me. Thanks @xtaldave!

But David Tedinnick is not the only one who has jumped to conclusions about the findings of this paper. I already mentioned Homeopathy Plus! making a giant leap in logic from “cells treated in culture” to “homeopathy is better than chemo for cancer.” Many others have picked up this meme and run with it, despite the fact that not even the paper itself makes this claim.

The only reference to a common cancer drug appears buried in the discussion and states, “Interestingly, the cytotoxic effect of two of the remedies investigated in this study, Carcinosinand Phytolacca, appeared similar to the activity of 0.12 ?M paclitaxel (Taxol), the most commonly used chemotherapeutic drug for breast cancer, when it was tested in the two adenocarcinoma cell lines investigated in this study in parallel experiments (data not shown)”.

I repeat, DATA NOT SHOWN. Interesting that homeopathy sympathisers can go from this, to homeopathy can cure cancer. But then facts, evidence and science never really did interest them much. As for David Tredinnick, well it seems he is not much interetsed either, as revealed in a debate between him and Dr Simon Singh BBC Radio 4. You can listen to the audio here.

You can also read two great stories about the loonie beliefs of David Tredinnick from The Guardian by Nature’s @AdamRutherford here and The Lay Scientist’s @mjrobbins here.

The entire exercise was summed up by tweeter @paulNUK2010 who relected; “How to get your scientific papers peer reviewed by experts in the field – get David Tredinnick to cite them in an EDM #homeopathyEDMs”.

So very true.

As I said in my original blog post, the journal that published this tosh has an impact factor of 2.234 but a fail factor of 10^23.

Sadly, these amendments do not mean the loonie EDMs have been thrown out. We still need MPs to show their support by signing the amended versions.

If you live in the UK, please write to your MP here. You will find a form letter to use for a guide here.