As always, your letters are wonderful! If you are not aware what these letters are about, please read the post from earlier today – False Balance or suppression of a scientific debate? – it’s definitely not too late to write in so please get some ideas from these letters and drop a quick line to both Media Watch and WIN Television. Just to repeat the information on who to write to:
Please comment on the Media Watch page that hosts this story (and read the story transcript if you didn’t view the program yourself) by clicking here. And if at all possible, please send an email (click on Ms Brown’s name below) or letter of support to:
Shirley Brown, Group Business Director
WIN TV
Locked Bag 8800
Wollongong NSW 2500
AustraliaBe sure to include me in the CC or BCC field on your emails – Meryl Dorey
Subject: Vaccination
I am protesting in the strongest possible terms to J Holms’s comments about the AVN on Media Watch last night. He is entitled to his own opinion, but it has no place in a public forum like this. He is wrong on so many fronts:
1. there is a wealth of scientific research available on the dangers and side effects of vaccination.
2. the AVN is not anti vaccination. It is pro choice – a very important distinction. It recommends that people who do choose to vaccinate be informed on both sides of the topic. The AVN came into being exactly for this reason – because the other side of the topic was never presented.
3. His job is not to pronounce that something is “bullshit”, when he has so clearly not availed himself of any elementary research. If we wanted this sort of language and ignorance we have Alan Jones.
4. Underneath my anger I found it very interesting that JH has never used that sort of language when dealing with the most bizarre and stupid people and issues – he simply becomes more sardonic. The fact that he lost his cool over this topic clearly shows that his buttons were pressed, so I’m sorry if he has personally suffered because of the issue of vaccination. Perhaps he needs to look more closely at whatever it is.
I am so disappointed in him – I have been following him for years, and always thought him erudite, articulate and objective. He has feet of clay, after all. But he has no right to pronounce the way he did. It must have contravened some sort of broadcasting law (?). I won’t let this matter rest. Next step is the Press Council.
Attack against the AVN
ABC’s propensity to biased reporting showed up loud and clear again in last night’s Media Watch attack on Meryl Dorey and the AVN. At one point in the program Jonathan Holmes claimed to sometimes take on the role of investigative journalist. He clearly hasn’t done so in this uninformed assault on an organisation that is doing a great service informing the public about the dangers of vaccinations – something most medical practitioners seem reluctant to do.
For Mr Holmes’ edification, I have attached an article by former Neurosurgeon, Dr Russell Blaylock: Truth behind vaccine cover-up, and below are some links from reputable sources showing the medical industry’s tendency to push drugs (and this includes vaccines) on behalf of large, very influential pharmaceutical companies, with little regard for effectiveness or safety.
This link is to a short talk by Dr Ben Goldacre, What doctors don’t know about the drugs they prescribe:
And here’s an excerpt of Bad Pharma >> on the same topic, also by Dr Ben Goldacre.
From another doctor: The Dangers of the Medical Industrial Complex | Dr. Mark Hyman
From Dr Russell Blaylock, M.D: Vaccines, Neurodevelopment and Autism Spectrum Disorders
The Danger of Excessive Vaccination During Brain Development: The Case for a Link to Autism Spectrum Disorders
Finally, this site has a wealth of information on vaccination: Vaccines Did Not Save Us – 2 Centuries of Official Statistics
Yours sincerely
SH BEdSt; DipT
Cooee (to WIN TV),
I didn’t see Media Watch or your show, just read some comments on their site.
In the past I never questioned vaccination, however I went to a seminar one time and listened.
So I checked many journal articles and came to the conclusion that it is bad science.
When people get hysterical about a subject, that’s when I get suspicious as it often means they have nothing else to justify their position.
Politicians have used this trick for thousands of years. Nero blaming the Christians for burning Rome was a good example.
So good for you for at giving a balanced view, I am very disappointed at the comments made by Media Watch.
By the way, I am an industrial chemist by trade who took the time to make an informed decision.
Cheers from BM
Dear Shirley Brown,
Just writing in relation to the measles story that you aired and are now receiving flack for.
I tip my hat to you, and reporter Michaela Gray, for having the guts to remain fair on this issue. Taking sides and refusing to allow a particular point of view is NOT responsible journalism. Meryl Dorey has substantiated her statement since mediawatch aired their disgusting piece last night. Her response can be read here:
http://nocompulsoryvaccination.com/2012/10/02/false-balance-or-suppression-of-a-scientific-debate/
I think I speak for the whole community when I say we demand unfettered access to all reasonable information on this important issue. We are discerning. We don’t want governmental (or corporate) suppression of material or viewpoints which may matter to us. You have done a great job in not pandering to interest groups which want the opposite. You demonstrated the true spirit of journalism where our publicly funded ABC crumbled into a propaganda machine.
Thank you again.
GB
Dear Ms Brown,
I refer to the recent show by WINTV which shows both sides of the story on vaccination. I’d like to congratulate you and your TV station for reporting ALL aspects of this controversial topic.
In the age of Internet, any manipulations of news is futile and will only ultimately lead to the obsolescence and demise of its own media company. Any readers of historical science will tell you that science is not static.
I will now remember WINTV and the name Shirley Brown as synonymous with “unbiased reporting”.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
PT
Dear Ms Brown,
I would like you to know that I support freedom of choice and support the AVN and Meryl Dorey in Active healthy debates about vaccination.
It is outrageous that you would try to stifle an individual’s right to make an INFORMED decision about their own health care.
Regards,
R
Hello Shirley,
My name is HF. I saw neither your own show nor the ABC Media Watch program, so I cannot comment much, but I would like to thank you for giving Meryl Dorey a chance to speak. I have been a member of the AVN for many years, and not once have I either seen or heard the organization comment in a false or misleading manner, quite the contrary, the sites that I have visited have been well referenced. Nor have I experienced the AVN “forcing” their opinion down my throat.
I am not against vaccinations but I am against being forced to submit myself to something that does not have a credible safety record.
There is no proof that unvaccinated people are infecting the rest of the public, quite the contrary, I have been lead to believe that once a person is vaccinated they are immune to that particular disease, so how can an unvaccinated person infect them?
There are too many unanswered questions which the “experts” don’t seem too keen to answer and too many “experts” stifling debate on the vaccination issue.
Sweeping the whole issue under the carpet will not stop those who want to learn.
Once again thank you so much for allowing a voice.
HF
This was posted to the facebook site so I will provide it again for you Fiona so you too can get the all important balance:
Vaccinations save lives. Don’t listen to people like Greg Beattie who provide us with government data which shows that mortality due to infectious diseases had all but disappeared prior to their vaccinations. Greg is being deceitful because he is focusing on just mortality when the only thing that matters is that vaccines reduce the number of illness whereas mortality is completely irrelevant. And by the way we should all get vaccinated because vaccines save lives.
People who are against vaccination are nothing more than scaremongers grossly exaggerating the dangers of vaccination. The fact is that these diseases are just a plane ride away and if we don’t get vaccinated for measles and chicken pox we will see a massive spike in childhood mortality. So don’t listen to the scaremongers and get vaccinated otherwise you and everybody you care about will be dead tout de suite.
Vaccinations are evidence based unlike that ridiculous homeopathy which doesn’t make any sense and must therefore be wrong. Of course we won’t do any randomised double-blind trials of vaccines because we already know they are safe and effective so it would be unethical to do so. And sure, we don’t actually understand how immunity provided by vaccination works either but the fact is that just because you don’t understand something doesn’t mean it is wrong. And by the way homeopathy is stupid because it doesn’t make sense and there is no evidence for it.
People who don’t vaccinate are deranged conspiracy theorists. They have it in their heads that doctors have some sort of a vested interest in vaccinations vis-à-vis their income and reputation. This is crazy of course. On the other hand, it is clear that hundreds of thousands of parents have all banded together and decided to lie through their teeth about how a vaccine supposedly caused a reaction in their child. This is obviously a fabrication and they are clearly doing it because they: a) like to scapegoat by placing the blame on their own decisions rather than factors they have no control over; b) they want go through the rigmarole of arguing with a doctor just to be accorded the same rights as everyone else; and c) are absolutely desperate to become social pariahs. Obviously they have a massive incentive to stick to their conclusions whereas physicians (peace be upon them) have no skin in the game whatsoever. Besides, vaccines are considered to be modern medicine’s greatest achievement – how could physicians possibly have any sort of a vested interest in that?
The fact is that there is no way that so many great minds could possibly be so wrong about this issue. Sure they have been wrong about many things in the past, but the fact that we now know they were wrong back then proves that we are prepared to admit to mistakes. This proves that the system works and therefore mistakes could never be made.
The dose makes the poison and we are absolutely sure that the dose that is in poisons is so trivial that there is no way it could be causing problems in infants. Now the crazy anti-vaxxers think that we should take a weight adjusted dose of the entire infant schedule to prove this but what they don’t realise is that every single one of us would be delighted to do precisely that, however – and it’s the darndest thing – every single time they have asked us to do it we were washing our hair.
Anti-vaxxers are crazy and they know nothing about statistics. They think that notification data doesn’t represent incidence data. They also have this crazy notion that we didn’t use the same laboratory tests to confirm or exclude diseases in the middle ages that we do now. This is obviously crazy as everybody knows that PCR was invented long before we had ever heard of measles or polio. They also have this strange notion that diseases can have ambivalent characteristics whereas obviously they all have completely distinct characteristics and could never and have never been in the past confused with each other. In addition, a lot of these crazy anti-vaxxers think they can use google to determine their child’s problems. This is stupid of course because diseases often present with ambivalent symptoms and physicians get paid the big bucks to make their judgement calls based on several factors – none of which are necessarily exclusive or confirmatory.
So you can go tell the ABC there is more than enough balance on here – we are only too happy to repeat the contrary arguments. I mean why wouldn’t we? They are so unbelievably incoherent they do most of our job for us.
It’s just occurred to me how incredibly unfair I was to the vaccine proponents not giving all their wonderful arguments their due so here are some more:
1) People who don’t vaccinate are selfishly relying on the “herd immunity” provided by others that do vaccinate. It is reprehensible that such people expect other people to vaccinate while they refuse to bear the burden of the rest of society. In addition, many of those people who don’t vaccinate are evil liars who lie, lie and lie again about vaccination in order to discourage others from vaccination. The fact is that all people who question vaccination are extremely selfish for expecting everybody else to vaccinate on their behalf and what’s more, many of these incredibly selfish people are also evil liars for providing information that might discourage others from vaccinating.
2) Andrew Wakefield is an evil fiend. Every single person who questions vaccinations does so because – and only because – of him. But he is an evil fiend. A journalist said so. And what’s more, unlike every other medical practitioner and particularly the pharmaceutical companies, Wakefield made money from his profession which proves he is an evil fiend. But it doesn’t end there you see because Wakefield held a patent and anybody who holds a patent on something must be an evil fiend. Unlike Paul Offit (lots and lots of peace be upon him) who is an expert on everything from autism treatments to rocket science (plus he really really likes puppies) Wakefield has a patent on something and is therefore an evil fiend. Now you think it might end there but wait! There’s more! Wakefield did a study where he actually asked the parents of autistic children what happened to their children! Yes! You heard it right! He actually had the temerity to ask the people involved. Talk about scientifically invalid. Now we all know that he was only doing it for the money though – and because he is an evil fiend, and a liar. Obviously if he were doing a real study he would have done something much more valid such as taking a group of infants and given them a vaccine, taken another group and given them something which I’m absolutely positive is very safe (and I would love to take it myself but again, I’m washing my hair) and observed similar side effects in both groups then he would be doing real science.
I think that just about has them all covered Fiona (except for the appeals to authority, poisoning the well and, of course, the death threats against those who disagree), but please tell me if you think I have missed something.
I think you’ve covered every base, Punter LOL
I, for one, really do love all your posts!
Thanks for the kind words
I approve of the ABC story, I’m sorry but your website/blog/Facebook group is not a fair presentation of both sides of the story. If you posted just 1 balenced story I could possible support you. But in all the ranting ( sorry but that’s how it comes across) or persecution complex you come across as a dyed in the wool anti vaccination conspiracy theorist nut job. I have been following your case about your “victimization” as a survivor of childhood violence and sexual abuse your claims do not ring true. If I had “suffered” the abuse you are claiming I would not have waited so long. I would have named and shamed my attackers and charged them under the full extent of the law. As soon as the first moment I felt threatened. You do not give a bully a chance.