Tweet

A few days ago, I received an email via the organisers of a talk I’m giving in Canberra in a few weeks’ time. I’ve decided to publish it here with comments correcting the person’s accusations as I was frankly gobsmacked at their lack of ability to research some very simple claims.

Backgound: The email is from Judy Wilyman who is a PhD student who is being supervised at the University of Wollongong (UoW) in NSW by Dr Prof Brian Martin (yes, THAT Brian Martin).

Ms Wilyman began her PhD at UoW in 2007, then in 2008-2010 she transferred supervision to Murdoch University, WA, where she was supervised by Dr Peter Dingle (who no longer works there, and yes, THAT Peter Dingle). She transferred back to UoW in 2011, to Dr Prof Martin again, where she is completing a project entitled “A critical analysis of the Australian government’s rationale for its vaccination policy”.

Phew, so far that’s a long PhD!

It seems she objects to me giving a talk to the Canberra Skeptics on February 15th. I won’t copy paste the entire email, for clarity I’m going to address each claim separately, but there is a copy in full here.

Firstly, she got the date wrong (15.1.12). I’m speaking on 15.2.12.

“…she is regularly observed putting misinformation about vaccination on websites such as ‘The Skeptics Book of Pooh Pooh.”

I like to think I only publish accurate information, so I always check references and sources to the best of my ability before publishing. It would have made it easier for me if Ms Wilyman indicated which information on my site was wrong, because I can’t find any.

Note that she says “regularly” which leads me to think she doesn’t agree with much of what I post here. She also mentions other websites, and perhaps she means the piece I wrote some months back for Mamamia. There was a healthy debate about the info I posted there, mostly from people who don’t agree with vaccination full stop, but the information was very well received. I would have thought if it was an example of my “regular misinformation”, I would have been thoroughly corrected by the health professionals who applauded me for the piece and passed it on to their patients and colleagues.

“She recently received a letter from Murdoch University asking her to remove a poster (presented by myself at the National Health Promotion Conference in Perth in 2009)which she had inaccurately presented on this website”.

Not exactly. I received an email following a very polite phone call from IP lawyer Madeleen Rousseau from Freehills in WA on January 20th, 2012. To say she sounded exasperated on the phone is an understatement. You see it appears she has been given the job of chasing down where Ms Wilyman has misused the Murdoch logo on said poster and without permission. Her job is to try to remove all traces of it from the Internet.

I removed the poster from the above link, sent a confirmation email to Ms Rousseau, she responded with a thank you, that was it. Notice she says in her correspondence, “Murdoch…has spent considerable time and energy in having the poster removed from various (anti vaccination) websites and cannot allow the poster to be used in any format on any website”. She was polite, I co-operated, there were no stand-over lawyer tactics or threatening letters.

As for Judy’s allegation that  I had somehow “..inaccurately presented (the poster) on this website..” I’m not entirely sure what she means by this. On the contrary, it appears that Judy has misused the Murdoch logo which is why their IP lawyers are trawling the Internet and attempting to erase the poster from history.

Next she says I was asked to remove derogatory comments about academics. There was no such request in the email I have published in full above. I don’t ever recall being asked this. This is a fabrication as far as I can tell.

Next she says I left derogatory comments about her on my site, incorrectly referring to her as anti-vaccine. I did indeed call her anti-vaccine and for good reason. Let’s see why.

Ms Wilyman has pieces published on well recognised anti-vaccine sites including Whale.to, SaneVax, the AVN blog (whose website was called anti-vaccine by the HCCC), she has given lectures with Meryl Dorey, President of the AVN in Western Australia.

In June 2010, she wrote a letter to the West Australian newspaper which contained the usual anti-vaccine canards and scaremongering we have come to expect from her mates over at the AVN. It was covered in detail over at Second Sight who reported on what she wrote:
“…childhood vaccination schedule is “not based on science”. Vaccines contain toxins. Vaccines are not monitored by doctors. Vaccines are a “known cause of allergies, anaphylaxis and autoimmune diseases”. “There is no proof for the theory of herd immunity”. “Infectious diseases declined by 1950 in Australia due to improvements in sanitation, hygiene and nutrition.”

Even by this short account (and there is much more I don’t have time to cover), Ms Wilyman is anti-vaccine. See Dave The Happy Singer here for further information.

Ms Wilyman, you can claim you’re not anti-vaccine all you like, but your writings contain well known anti-vaccine canards and are published on high profile anti-vaccine websites. If you can show me evidence to the contrary I will look at it and remove my classification of you as anti-vaccine if I am satisfied you have changed your stance. At the moment, I’m not.

Next “and her derogatory remarks about the ABC’s policies are offensive to the community who would like an academic debate on this important topic”.

The community wants a debate on the ABC’s policies? That’s a first to me.

“She is openly spreading misinformation about the vaccination topic and yet your organization has invited her to speak about vaccination and the misinformation on Dr. Google?”

Below is the description of my talk sent to the organisers

Firstly, she hasn’t cited the apparent misinformation I am spreading and secondly my talk is about health information on the Internet with vaccination as an example. This does not mean the entire talk will be about vaccination. And is she saying that conspiracies and chemtrails are not misinformation? Curious.

Ms Wilyman is a PhD student, approximately 4/5 years into her project. She seems to know my blog/website quite well. As a research student one would have thought she would be able to do one of two things: 1) click the “About/contact” button on my website – I get plenty of email via this method; 2) Google my email address as the organisers of the talk did to forward me her email. Perhaps she didn’t contact me directly because she was attempting to tarnish my reputation with the organisers hoping they would cancel my talk? Pure speculation of course…

No, you’re not an “independent researcher”, you’re a PhD student. And why do I need to contact you to find out your views about vaccines? They’re pasted everywhere on the internet on lots of anti-vax sites.

“Please could you also inform me of the qualifications that Rachael Dunlop has to speak on the topic of vaccination as my understanding is that her specialization is heart research”.

My qualifications are easy to find Ms Wilyman. And if you are, as you claim an independent researcher you could have done some, you know research, and found out that my specialty is not heart disease.

Are you really too lazy to look further than the name of my employer (The Heart Research Institute)? This shows your complete lack of research ability. You see there are lots of research groups under the roof of HRI. Some work directly in heart disease, some work on diabetes, some work on nutrition. Me? I’m a cell biologist who happens to work on ageing and MND. You could have found that it you went to PubMed. Or even Google (chortle). Or even my Twitter bio. Fail.

As for my qualifications? You know she just might have me on this one. Given that the theme of my talk is Dr Google I can think on someone who is better qualified than me to talk about this issue, Wilyman’s mate Meryl Dorey. She’s had more than 20 years of education on Dr Google.

But there’s one thing that I have that Ms Dorey doesn’t have and that’s the ability to critically analyse information, whether it be a scientific study or a news article or a website.

You see, I have a PhD already (sorry to rub it in Judy) and more than 6 years of research experience which includes writing, reviewing and critically analysing scientific information. So my BS meter is pretty finely tuned. Thus, I can confidently say I’m more than qualified to sift between fact and fiction on the Internet. And given that I’ve been studying the tactics of the anti-vax movement for more than 3 years, this is a bonus. One might say, a desirable but not essential qualification.

Finally. “I will copy this across to the community as it is important that the public is aware of the credibility of the information they are receiving”.

And I will also copy this critique of your lack of ability to do your research across the community.

You’re welcome and thanks for trying.
—-

UPDATE: It seems Ms Wilyman has been alerting a lot of people to my talk. This just in

—-

Another update: Judy Wilyman has again written to Canberra Skeptics and the email has been published on Meryl Dorey’s blog. You can see the text in full on Reasonable Hank’s blog here. Contains the text that because I’m on the editorial board of a CAM journal I’m somehow a Big Pharma Shill. It’s worth a look. You will LOL.

Tweet

But this morning I had reason to leap out of bed at the ungodly hour of 05:30 to hit the computer and report on some very good news.

Our government has gone done something good and given that this doesn’t happen very often, I reckon it’s worthy of a pre-dawn blog post.

The news, which was brought to my attention by Fuzztwin on Twitter, reports on changes to the current childhood immunisation schedule to include three new vaccines and increase the incentives for parents who complete the schedule, effective 2013.

From http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/inject-children-or-lose-money/story-fn7x8me2-1226205382138

Chickenpox or varicella which as not previously been covered by the schedule (and hence was an out-of-pocket expense for parents wanting to vaccinate against chickenpox) will now be included.

Also new is vaccinations for meningococcal C and pneumococcal.

The new schedule brings the number of infectious diseases covered by the schedule to twelve.

Importantly, reports indicate that the number of shots kids will be required to get will actually be reduced however, since there will be new combination vaccines used.

According to a report in The Herald Sun a new combination vaccine will cover measles, mumps, rubella and chickenpox in one shot and will be administered at 18 months replacing the previous MMR given at 4 years. The number of visits will increase however, owing to the new scheduled shot at 18 months.

There are also changes to the incentive scheme for parents and this is where it gets interesting (well, for nerds of legislation like me).

Under the current maternity immunisation allowance scheme introduced in 1997, parents receive two one-off payments totalling $258 if they complete the vaccination schedule. This will be scrapped under the new system and replaced with three payments of $726 each, paid at one, three and five years. If kids are not fully vaccinated, then the $2100 will be withheld. (This is part of the current family tax benefit part A end-of-year supplement so it’s not an entirely new benefit).

From http://www.smh.com.au/national/tax-threat-to-parents-who-dont-have-their-children-immunised-20111124-1nwwx.html

Health Minister Nicola Roxon said: “We know that immunisation is fundamental to a child’s lifelong health and that’s why we want to make sure that children are immunised at the right time.

“We want all Australian kids to grow up healthy, and immunisation is essential to that.”

What is not mentioned in any of the news stories is whether this effects the current options for conscientious objectors. Under the current system, you can still get the maternity immunisation allowance even if you don’t vaccinate, if you identify as a conscientious objector (CO). Excerpt from the Centrelink website which administers the payment:

a recognised immunisation provider (e.g. your doctor) signs a letter or form saying that:

• they have told you about the benefits and risks of immunising your child and you have a conscientious objection to immunising your child (your provider should complete a Health Insurance Commission Immu-12 form),

• immunising your child with a particular vaccine is medically contraindicated (your provider should use the Health Insurance Commission Immu-11 form),

• the child has a natural immunity to the disease, or

• the vaccine is not available,

• you or your partner are a member of the Church of Christ, Scientist and you have a letter from an official of the Church advising that you are a practising member of the Church.

This is certainly going to be the bit the anti-vaxers are interested in. The news stories appeared overnight (at least one was published at 12:00) so we have yet to see a reaction from Meryl and her buddies. But you can expect some major *head asplosions* on this one, guaranteed. Particularly since Meryl had previously claimed she has some sort of influence when it comes to vaccination policy. It seems she might have missed this one.

This is not the only piece of good news in this story either. Reports also detail a new pertussis awareness campaign in the form of mail-outs to warn parents about the dangers of the current epidemic and advise on ways to protect their kids.

This is a direct response to campaigning by the McCaffery family who lost their baby Dana in 2009 at 4 weeks of age in the grips of a pertussis epidemic. The family was never warned about the risks of pertussis or that they needed, as parents and carers, to get boosters, since the effectiveness of the vaccines wanes over time.

From the Age:

Ms Roxon said the aim of the whooping cough campaign was to raise awareness, particularly among parents planning pregnancies and others to be aware of the dangers to infants and the need to have vaccinations at two months, four months and six months after birth.
.

But the vaccinations do not provide lifelong protection from whooping cough and children should have booster shots at age four and then during teenage years, Ms Roxon said.

.

”Whooping cough is not just a childhood disease, as adolescents and adults can account for half the cases in the community.”

Overall, this is a step in the right direction by the Australian Government and I applaud Nicola Roxon for (finally) taking action. The introduction of the chickenpox vaccine is also a welcome addition to the schedule, since it costs as much to get as the current maternity immunisation allowance (~$200) making the incentive seem moot.

It’s still early in Australia, and since this story only broke overnight, I wait with interest for the response of the anti-vaxers. I’ve also searched, but to no avail, for a government media release, as I’m keen to find out if any changes have been made to the CO conditions.

One suspects they will remain in place, at least in some form, since they are necessary for kids with genuine medical reasons for not vaccinating, but given that the maternity immunisation allowance scheme is to be scrapped, it appears they will at least need to be migrated, if not re-drafted.

I await with interest.

—
Update: the government statement about changes can be found here

Tweet

I get emails. And recently I was reminded of one I got back in June which somehow slipped from my consciousness. With all the negative attention Nimrod has been receiving of late the response from some authorities has been, “we can’t respond unless someone reports him.” Indeed, last month, chair of the Chiropractic Board of Australia urged people to make a formal complaint against Mr Weiner after Australian Doctor posted audio of his two-hour public lecture on the dangers of vaccination.

So I went back through my emails and found a complaint from Dr John Cunningham, forwarded to me and submitted to AHPRA (then passed onto the Chiropractic Council of NSW) on April 4th, 2011. Dr Cunningham received the following response on May 31st, 2011 (my emphasis).

—

—-

Really? So it’s okay for a registered health professional to disseminate false, misleading and dangerous information under the guises of “it’s my opinion”? But what if the evidence says the opposite, which in this case it most certainly does.

If you take a look at the references Weiner uses in the 4 pages of anti-vax rhetoric posted on his website (which was the subject of Cunningham’s complaint), and his 2-hr long lecture on “18 reasons to not vaccinate” (pdf of references here) you’ll find a grab-bag of some of the most prominent anti-vaxers. He cites all my favourite loons including the AVN and their previous publication “Informed Choice”, Not-a-doctor Andrew Wakefield, Viera “parsnip box” Scheibner, Joseph Mercola, Whale.to and Vaccine Information Service Australia or VISA (amongst others).

There’s a glass and a half of crazy right there.

Weiner also drags out the some of the old favourite canards of the antivaxers. See the following paragraph as an example of vaccines cause everything;

–

“Other conditions linked to vaccination include pervasive developmental disorder (PDD), Asperger’s syndrome, eczema, encephalitis, Guillain-Barre syndrome, convulsions, seizures, anaphylaxis, thrombocytopenia, optic neuritis, ocular palsies, retinitis, deafness, otitis media, ulcerative colitis, bowel disease, Crohn’s disease, headaches, dizziness, hearing and vision problems, arthritis, arthralgia, learning disorders, chronic fatigue, diabetes, multiple sclerosis and more.”

–

He doesn’t provide a reference for these claims.

And as usual, Weiner beats the dead horse of vaccines = autism

–

“After years of denying a link between vaccination and autism, on November 9, 2007 the US government in Court of Federal Claims admitted that vaccines can cause autism.”

–

The reference Weiner cites for this claim is David Kirby writing for the Huffington Post in 2008. Kirby is also the author of “Evidence of Harm” a book detailing the personal stories of parents of children who have autism who went onto establish the advocacy group SafeMinds. So there may be a conflict of interest in what Kirby has to say.

There also *may* have been some advances on our understanding of the evidence against a link between vaccines and autism – which have occurred since 2008, both in the courts and in the lab.

But despite the fact that Weiner claims to base his information on the latest science, he uses outdated references, claims Wakefield’s work is “sound” and uses scary language that has no basis in science.

There’s more…

–
Robert Mendelsohn, MD writes: “My suspicion, which is shared by others in my profession, is that the nearly 10,000 SIDS deaths that occur in the U.S. each year are related to one or more of the vaccines that are routinely given to children.”

–

My suspicion? So you don’t have any evidence for that then? The reference for this statement is simply Mendelsohn. Ibid:250 which makes no sense to me. In any case, Mendelsohn is well known for his “unusual ideas”.

For example, he has opposed water fluoridation, immunization, coronary bypass surgery, licensing of nutritionists, and screening examinations to detect breast cancer. He has a listing on Quackwatch and whale.to.

The spurious claims about vax go on for 4 pages and at last check they were still there. (I’m actually surprised it is still up given the criticism Weiner has been under of late. Perhaps his cognitive dissonance is so strong that he thinks he is right. Sadly, I suspect this is the case).

But whether Weiner thinks he is right and that vaccines are bad “in his opinion” is irrelevant when it comes to his role a health care professional, especially when dealing with kids. Remember he’s a pediatric chiropractor dealing with kids as young as one-day-old.

And science is not formed via opinion, it’s based on evidence and there is no evidence for just about everything he claims (even chiropractic subluxations actually).

The fact that the CCNSW thinks it’s okay says a lot about their responsible approach to chiros under their jurisdiction and patients.

This story was covered in Australian Doctor today and rest assured, we have not seen the last of the Weiner files. More to come very soon.

Tweet

Odd that this should happen really, since I often get accused of not reading what the anti-vaxers have to say. This couldn’t be further from the truth. In additional to the tripe on the Facebook pages, the forums, the mailing lists and comments on news articles, I have perused the information pack for conscientious objectors, flicked through Living Wisdom and looky over there >>> a copy of Callous Disregard by Andrew Wakefield.

It’s more than I suspect they do with respect to research. Although, Meryl Dorey says she reads papers about vaccination but apparently comes away with completely different conclusions to the authors, making the exercise rather futile.

Indeed, the recent HCCC investigation concluded that whilst the AVN may cite peer-reviewed research, they quote selectively from it, often in contradiction to the conclusions or findings of the studies themselves.

Ms Dorey explained this discrepancy with the following:

“It is true that oftentimes, our information will contradict the conclusions or summaries of the studies. This is because, as opposed to most doctors and government officials, we actually read the studies and frequently, the summary and conclusion does not agree with the raw data itself…..Many times, that disconnect can be explained by the financial links between the study’s researchers and the companies whose products are being studied. So, whilst the AVN does frequently draw different conclusions to those printed at the end of these articles, it is because our analysis of the data shows that the printed conclusions do not correspond with the raw data. This is not selective reporting – it is accurate reporting.”

Raw data. It doesn’t mean what you think it means Ms Dorey. And the financial links? Oh course, the old shill canard again. When you ‘aint got nothin’ else.. (and you don’t know how to read papers).

The AVN have been in oodles of trouble lately, the most recent being for multiple breaches of copyright associated with selling material on their website without permission. Which is funny, because one of the things I came across in the information in Living Wisdom was their permission to reproduce policy:

“Whilst reproduction and dissemination of the information found in Living Wisdom is actively encouraged (unless otherwise stated), it is expressly forbidden for anyone to reproduce any of this information for the purpose of profit…”

My emphasis.

Which directly contradicts the reason they were recently in strife – for selling other authors’ material on their website, without permission.

An article from the Sydney Morning Herald describes:

“an anti-vaccination group is under fire for allegedly breaching copyright laws by selling newspaper and medical journal articles online without permission from the authors.

The packs, which were selling for up to $128, included home-made books filled with articles photocopied from journals around the world, information on drugs taken from MIMS, the medical guide used by doctors and nurses, and copies of brochures inserted in medication boxes by pharmaceutical companies.

Under the Copyright Act, articles can be copied for personal research or for use by students but cannot be disseminated widely or sold.”

In response, Meryl said she was “unaware she had breached copyright”. This is despite the fact that she is listed as the editor of Living Wisdom and therefore probably wrote the policy. Even if she didn’t, one would think it is part of her job to understand copyright restrictions as the editor of a magazine for more than a decade.

But the duplicity of the AVN is something we have come to know well. This is a recent screen capture from their website.

So it appears Meryl knew about some of these copyright rules “a couple of years ago” at least.

One wonders if the authors contacted by the Sydney Morning Herald decided to take any action against the AVN given some might be owed a nice wad of booty. Based on the AVN’s permission to reproduce policy, they themselves would be joining a queue to recoup any lost funds. So what’s good for the goose is good for the gander right?

Oh wait, except when you’re a bunch of hypocrites.

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

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.

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