There are many people in this world I disagree with.
- I disagree with people who think that women should be kept at home, not paid equal wages for equal work or aren’t as intelligent as men.
- I disagree with people who think that there is only one ‘right’ religion and everyone who worships differently or who doesn’t worship at all is damned.
- I disagree with people who think it’s OK to wear red and pink together. I mean…come on! Think people!
There are a whole range of other people’s opinions I disagree with and I can be forthright about letting them know that many times. This has led to some great arguments, debates and yes, good-natured verbal slanging matches in the past.
What it has never led to – until recently – is threats and hundreds if not thousands of vexatious complaints. It has never led to people wanting to kill me because they don’t agree with the results of my research into the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. It has never led to people calling my home in the middle of the night to tell me to die in a fire or sending me emails saying they are sharpening their knives for me.
In my world – until recently – it was OK to disagree and even to fight about these disagreements – even to dislike each other because of irreconcilable differences. Disagreement didn’t mean wanting to physically harm the person you disagreed with, nor did it mean sending constant threats or trying to stop them from speaking in public. They are every bit as entitled to their beliefs and opinions as I am – even if my beliefs and opinions are backed by research and theirs aren’t. Each to their own.
Why won’t I tell people where our Canberra seminar will be held?
A few days ago, the AVN announced that it would be holding a seminar in Canberra on Saturday the 10th of November. For the first time, we have decided not to release the name or location of the venue – only saying that it is centrally located within Canberra so it will be easy for anyone in that area to get to.
The reason we did this is that over the last 3 1/2 years or so, every single time we have held seminars, there have either been threats to the venues, requiring us to hire security guards at our expense – or letters and phone calls to the venue urging them not to allow us to speak. The source of these threats has always been both the hate group, Stop the AVN (SAVN) and their parent group, the Australian Skeptics.
These anti-democracy campaigners will do anything and everything to take away our right to speak and your right to hear us. One has to wonder what they will gain by their campaign against free speech?
Within a matter of hours after advertising our newest seminar, the following post was placed on the SAVN Facebook page by a ‘brave’ person who has made up a profile to hide their real identity:
No doubt, there are currently several complaints winging their way to various government departments in the ACT and no doubt, this will cost the government there money in investigating and assessing these vexatious missives – but since when has SAVN or the Skeptics ever worried about costing the government money? Their stunts in NSW must have cost in the area of several million dollars now if they were added up. So what’s a bit more?
Then, just about 2 hours ago, I received an email from someone using a tormail account. I believe this is the same person who previously sent threats to me using the fantasticfox5@tormail account. You remember that person – Dan Buzzard’s mate from Stop the AVN.
This time, they used a new tormail account – one has to wonder if the other one got too ‘hot’ for them?
And here is what they said:
From: savn@tormail.org
Date: 24 October 2012 2:42:40 PM AEST
To: meryl@avn.org.au
Subject: fire alarm
wouldnt it be fun to pull the fire alarm at ur venue?
you could just cancel your talk it would save a lot of agro
We are Anonymous.
We are Legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
Expect us.
Of course, this juvenile anonymous wanna-be is just a symptom of the whole SAVN psyche. These are people who believe that it is OK to threaten those they disagree with and to do it from the protection of anonymity. They are surrounded by thousands of hangers-on who are too gutless to say anything in opposition to the abusers because – well, let’s face it – anyone who belongs to a hate group is themselves a hater. So there are the vocal haters who should be in gaol for their hate crimes and the background haters who should be ashamed of their support and enabling of these criminals.
Here is a partial list of cases in 2012 from the US Vaccine Court regarding GBS which Sian Morton has experience treating.
http://drtenpenny.com/vaccine-court-judgements-for-flu-shot-injuries/
I am very familiar with the reasons for establishing the US Vaccine Court. You may not realise that it was largely established to protect vaccination programmes which were considered extremely important public health measures and were put at risk by the potential for litigation (some warranted and much not).
I also understand the implications and significance of US Vaccine Court ruling but I don’t think you do, JPower.
Oh Sian, I have been involved with this issue for over 20 years and know exactly why the VICP was established – it was because protecting vaccination was felt to be more important then protecting children. It is because our society thinks that child sacrifice is acceptable and that products which are unacceptably unsafe continue to be used today – and their use is ever-expanding. I think that JPower is also very well aware of these facts. I suggest you might want to read more about what happened to cause the establishment of VAERS and the VICP and how the drug companies colluded to make the government think that allowing lawsuits from those who were injured or killed by vaccines would place children at risk – a decision which has meant that drug companies no longer have any incentive to make sure that their products are either safe or effective prior to licensure.
Katie and Sian. Sorry but I missed your post quoting a scientific study of the risk/benefit of any vaccine. Would you please post your references again.
Jennifer, here’s two.
Bisgard KM, Kao A, Leake J, et al. Haemophilus influenzae invasive disease in the United States, 1994–1995: near disappearance of a vaccine-preventable childhood disease. Emerging Infectious Diseases 1998;4:229-37
Peltola H. Worldwide Haemophilus influenzae type b disease at the beginning of the 21st century: global analysis of the disease burden 25 years after the use of the polysaccharide vaccine and a decade after the advent of conjugates. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 2000;13:302-17.
Also:
Fall in Human Papillomavirus Prevalence Following a National Vaccination Program
http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/10/24/infdis.jis590.full
and
Safety of Quadrivalent Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Administered Routinely to Females
http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1363509
If this is the extent of your evidence Sian, I think you might have to try a bit harder. I will not be going over the other ‘studies’ because I just don’t have time, but I think some of our other readers may want to take a look and give their input.
The first article you cited from the oxfordjounrals discusses a supposed fall in women who test positive for one of the 4 strains of HPV which are contained in the vaccine. Vaccination stated in 2006 and they started testing in 2005. According to this paper, there was a big decrease in women who showed evidence of the presence of these 4 strains in their bodies. What is the historical evidence? If records only started to be kept in 2005, how can we possibly say anything about how much these 4 strains have declined by? Also, what good does it do to ‘prevent’ 4 strains if 8 others spring up to take their place? And this appears to be what is happening. It’s called serogroup replacement and it’s just a sign that nature is far more intelligent then man. Lastly, a decline in these 4 strains – even if there is a decline – means nothing. Is there ANY evidence that HPV vaccination will reduce an individual’s risk of developing cancer?
In your second piece of garbage…I mean study…there is supposedly proof of safety of HPV vaccine. Is there an unvaccinated cohort? No, of course not! You are trying to prove that getting vaccinated is less risky than not getting vaccinated and you have no group who doesn’t get vaccinated. Do you see any logic in this? Also, the study design is…ridiculous! You prove that a vaccine is safe by taking a group of women, finding out how many are hospitalised straight away as compared with how many are hospitalised a bit down the track and you say that the vaccine is safe because in doing this study, you have excluded just about every hospitalisation that occurred (you see, I read this study a couple of months ago and there is a large table of effects – some of which happened quite frequently – all of which were ascertained to be completely coincidental).
Sian, I know you are DESPERATE to prove that you have the science on your side. The problem is, you don’t. You have plenty of propaganda, plenty of authority and plenty of studies funded by drug companies to make their drugs look great, but you don’t have science.
“In your second piece of garbage…I mean study…”
Have we forgotten our manners?
Sian, I didn’t call you a piece of garbage – I called the study a piece of garbage and I make no apologies for that. It is a piece of garbage, not worth the paper it’s printed on – even the e-paper. So I don’t need to be polite to the study though I will always try to be polite to you and others
In addition to the excellent reply from Meryl, could you please explain why the FDA states “most infections (by HPV) are short lived and not associated with cervical cancer,” If this is the case, why give a vaccine?
There are many such studies. Here’s one for the rotavirus vaccine, which shows that the benefits far outweight the risk: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1104957
This article contains links to many studies of the safety and efficacy of the Dtap vaccine: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00048610.htm
This is a very good article, where the writer has looked into the risks and benefits of several vaccines. It is worth a read: http://www.degreesofclarity.com/writing/mmr/
I have tried to post similar links in the past – sometimes they make it through moderation, other times they do not. Hopefully this one will.
There is plenty of science here:
Vaccine-Type Human Papillomavirus and Evidence of Herd Protection After Vaccine Introduction – http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2012/07/03/peds.2011-3587.abstract?sid=4fe8dd0b-be69-4f56-8ed6-280320cf33dd
and
Monitoring HPV Vaccine Impact: Early Results and Ongoing Challenges
“More importantly, monitoring HPV type distribution in Australia, where dramatic reductions in genital warts and to a lesser extent, cervical lesions, have already been demonstrated, and where vaccine coverage remains high, will be important to shed light on remaining questions about the indirect impacts of current and future HPV vaccines. Data on type-specific HPV distribution can provide the basis for evaluating additional benefits of vaccines such as cross-protection against nonvaccine types and herd immunity, but also to monitor unlikely adverse phenomena including type replacement. ”
http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/10/17/infdis.jis593.full
also:
Sustained efficacy up to 4·5 years of a bivalent L1 virus-like particle vaccine against human papillomavirus types 16 and 18: follow-up from a randomised control trial
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673606684390/abstract
There are many such studies. The science is being done.
Thanks for the references, Katie. Did you read the JAMA article? No benefits are listed so this is not a risk/benefit study. There are many risks from rotavirus vaccine: intussesception, seizures, diarrhoea, dematitis,vomiting, otitis media, bronchospasm and nasopharyngitis. The JAMA article only examined intussusception.
In the introduction, the article states, “An Australian study found a statistically significant increased risk of nearly 5-fold for intussusception in the week following the first dose of RV5. The second study, conducted in Mexico and Brazil found an approximate 5-fold increased risk of intussusception in the first week following the first dose of RV1 in Mexico but not in Brazil.
As intussesception is a medical emergency where, without treatment, most children die within two days, could you please enlighten me as to why you think this vaccine is a benefit when, in most cases of diarrhoea and vomiting are mild enough to be treated at hom.
Katie, why don’t YOU look into the risks and benefits of the pertussis vaccine instead of sending the recommendation of an advisory committee? It is studies that need to be quoted and analysed.
Why did the death rate in the US drop from 12.2 per 100,000 in 1900 to 1.3 in 1945, one year before the vaccine was introduced?
Please explain the recent outbreaks of pertussis when 95% of the victims were vaccinated? How do you reconcile this fact with your expression, “vaccine preventable disease?’
But do keep going because quoting the literature, no matter how spurious, is an improvement on the usual scorn and dismissal we have come to expect from SVAN supporters.
Jennifer – in reply to your pertussis statistics in the USA:
“That immunisation made a considerable contribution to the reduction in
pertussis mortality was demonstrated in a review of the infant pertussis
death rate in the US from 1900 to 1974. Had the decline in mortality from
pertussis continued at the same rate as it did from 1900 to 1939, there
would have been 8000 deaths from pertussis in the US between 1970 and
1974 rather than the 52 deaths that occurred.”
bit.ly/TOuP47
Prove your statements, Katie.
What a waste of time this is. As a mother i went to my doctor to seek advice and to ease my concerns, and discovered how little my pediatrician actual knew about vaccine ingredients and specific studies. I had an open mind and i was shut down by ‘health professionals’ who seemed almost trained in their responses. I went to an AVN seminar to seek further information. Meryl never claimed to be an expert giving medical advice. She introduced herself as a concerned parent and made assertions based on literature that she provides references for. It’s up to the individual to pursue this further and decide for themselves. if you think people will just listen to meryl and take it as gods word then you insult every concerned parent out there- because we DO have a brain of our own. i appreciated being in a forum where i could express my concerns and not feel ‘bullied’ for speaking up. I have also gone to an immunologist for answers aswell to obtain a balance of information, although i’ve yet to receive more than a pamphlet. Whether i choose to vaccinate or not, it’s my choice and i’m not just some lemming letting others on either side make my decisions for me.
would the mindless dingbats rating down a non sectarian balanced post wake up . its is now 421 pm let me see no one disagree with that .
The ship is sinking, Proud Participant Nurse Morton and Proud Administrator Katie. Your faithless leader has gone overboard (long, long ago). It is not too late to save yourselves, but hurry up; stop wasting your breath trying to protect your cult’s sullied reputation. It is not worth the trouble.
JPower, I tremble in my sailing boots.Lucky for me I am wearing a life jacket. Indeed, you may be disappointed to hear that I shall continue with my strong advocacy and participation in support of every similar sensible, evidence based public health measure.
Nurse Morton, I would not expect otherwise. It would be mind-blowing to wake up and realise that an entire professional career was wasted on protecting the vaccine industry when you the Nurse should have been protecting the babies and children you vaccinated who are now chronically ill.
Well, it would be if only it were true.
Meryl, once again – you should not have to put up with threats of violence or constant personal harassment. I want to make sure that you realize that while I do not agree with what you say, I fully support your right to say it.
I do not know who sent you those emails, and as far as I know the SAVN members do not know either. We do remind each other regularly that there are ethical, moral and legal restrictions on what we do. I am proud of the company I keep there, and I doubt that the active members of the SAVN are responsible for the attacks you have received.
It is relatively easy to set up an anonymous .tormail account, and I would suggest you set up a spam filter for such addresses. The message was clearly designed to get a reaction from you. There is no way to find out if the owners of those two accounts know each other – stating that they do and that Dan is somehow in cahoots with them is guesswork at best.
Referring to the sender of this email as “Dan Buzzard’s friend” is a bit rich. All you know is that the same email account that sent you a message last month also sent one to him – and he made you aware of the email he received and his response as soon as he knew of what you had received. To me, as an outsider to that discussion, those do not sound like the actions of a person who set the threatening email in the first place.
Please don’t accuse people without proof. Again, I do not condone any threats of violence you have received.
However, as a public figure, you must be open to public avenues of complaint. The government complaints you describe are both legal and ethical means for dealing with what we at the SAVN think is dangerous misinformation coming from your organization.
Hi Daniel,
I don’t know how long you have been a member of SAVN for or how much attention you have paid to this issue, but I have only just NOW started to reveal the actual extent of these attacks – for over 3 years, I said very little. If this were the first event of its kind, you could be mistaken for thinking that I might be jumping the gun a bit. But there is form – serious form here. So excuse me for saying this, I think you are not correct on this issue and I must disagree with your statement. Also, there is evidence of the connection between Buzzard and this idiot. I didn’t just pull that out of thin air.
Daniel, one of the regular posters is a Harry Phillips. He also has this charming webpage http://chronicleofthestupid.wordpress.com
Setting up a website devoted to hurling abuse at people because they follow a religion you don’t like or they have different views on science than you or who don’t vote the way you do IS NOT NORMAL.
But for the skeptics, setting up websites devoted precisely to just that is par for the course.
If you want to do something amazing for your cause then take the weight adjusted dose of vaccines. Now remember, the point of the challenge isn’t to see if you can find a plausible method of extricating yourself from it, the point of the challenge is for you to show the world just how safe these concoctions are. You can ask me to reciprocate all you like but you are the one who wants to show something so just go ahead and show it.
Another amazing thing you can do is show that ever since the polio vaccine rates of crippling in children has fallen; ever since the rubella vaccine congenital defects have decreased and since the diphtheria/pertussis vaccines respiratory tract related hospitalisations have plummeted.
Now, once you have done all those things then the issue will be over with. Obviously I can only speak for myself, but I reckon 90 per cent of opposition to vaccination would disappear overnight.
Meryl – “there is evidence of the connection between Buzzard and this idiot”
Please share it with us (if you would prefer to do this in private, then I would suggest contacting Sian Morton – I have not seen you accuse her of any threats, and she regularly states her opposition to such threats). The SAVN will take action if you have reasonable evidence. I don’t think the fact that he received an unsolicited email from the .tormail account of some loser means that he is in some way guilty. If you extend that argument, then I could create havoc in our legal system simply by setting up .tormail accounts.
I have said before, and I maintain this – the core group of SAVN members regularly discuss how inappropriate threatening messages are. We do not condone such actions, and would prefer those responsible to stop. If you make us aware of any threatening messages from an SAVN member, they will be removed from our group and banned from posting on the SAVN page. I am sure you do receive such messages, and I cannot express enough how strongly I feel that you should not have to deal with them.
Punter, calling someone names on the internet is not “threatening them”. Doing so on a public website that you have to go and visit to see the insults is not “threatening them”. Nor are these actions necessarily inciting hatred, although they can be depending on the words used and the context. I have yet to see such language from Harry, and to be perfectly frank I have stopped visiting his site because it lacks any form of intellectual rigor. I agree that Harry’s posts are unpleasant, and you will not find me using his terminology.
I note also that derision of other people is apparent in many of your posts. While I don’t think this is threatening either, I do think less of you for it.
I seem to remember accepting your little “weight adjusted dose” challenge. I remember posting that I was happy to take it on under certain conditions, and that when you had met those conditions I was happy to come and receive the vaccines. I haven’t tried to weasel out of anything – on the contrary, this is the first contact you have made with me since accepting the challenge last month.
When you have met my conditions, let me know.
I do not reply to your “request” for evidence simply because you have previously had the audacity to misrepresent every argument I have made, and then claim me to be wrong. Your ability to convince yourself that you are not straw-manning is astonishing.
Send me a message (by facebook or by email) when you are ready to take on the comparative challenge I set. Remember – all vaccine preventable disease, with serologic/microbiologic evidence of likelihood of transmission is required
Hi Daniel,
Please excuse me – I am on a deadline and I can’t respond to this right now. I will send you a private email – but yes, I agree that criticism is valid, even if it is uncomfortable at times. I was not discussing criticism but abuse, harassment and threats. none of which is valid. And I described in my blog post on the subject, why I feel that Buzzard is associated with the tormail jerk – and it is not circumstantial. I don’t believe he anticipated the outcome that eventuated, but it was apparent that it would happen with Dan inciting in the way he did on a board comprised of hackers. It’s like talking about lighting someone’s house on fire in a forum comprised of arsonists and then, when that person’s home is destroyed in a blaze, trying to say you had nothing to do with it and were innocent. I’m sorry, but you did and you aren’t.
“I note also that derision of other people is apparent in many of your posts. While I don’t think this is threatening either, I do think less of you for it.”
I couldn’t care less what you think of me as I am not trying to persuade you of anything. I don’t deny that many of my posts are sarcastic and condescending, but I am not one to turn the other cheek. If people come on here and abuse us then rest assured I won’t stand meekly by. Of course instead of just swearing at people and calling them names my posts are cutting and insightful. The skeptics don’t know how to respond to posts that take their precious beliefs and rip them to shreds so they you either a) go the Harry Phillips route; or b) jump up and down in righteous indignation. Astonishingly enough it is often both. (Sian and Rob Webb excepted).
And by the way, I was looking back at our to and fro on the other thread and the first person to make a slight at the other was, well, you! You called me a lunatic, I’m also pretty sure your use of the term “denial” was meant to be pejorative and it is safe to say that your posts were at least – if not more so – as condescending as mine. Now because I am not a skeptic I didn’t jump up and down in righteous indignation I just brushed it off and continued but given that you want to bring this up how about you be a man and apologise – not for calling me names I have heard 1000s of times before – but for bearing false witness.
But you’re right though – calling someone names is not necessarily threatening them which is why I didn’t argue it was or should be illegal. Cheating on your spouse neither is or should be illegal either – that doesn’t mean it is morally acceptable.
And I don’t know how to email you through facebook (I don’t think it lets you email non-friends any more) but if you organise the viruses/prions/bacteria anywhere in Australia I will make my way there and swallow 1000 of any of them. I will also sign any sort of waiver you think is necessary to protect you.
I am more than happy to do this regardless of what you do. It makes no difference to me. But there is really no onus on me to do anything. You want to prove something to us – if not, why are you here? I don’t go around to doctors’ offices telling everybody that you guys have got it all wrong. I write stuff on forums such as these for people with the willingness to change their mind on this issue. The only interest I have in people like you is your presence allows me to show those people with the capacity to change their minds that the so called ‘experts’ are in fact absolutely clueless when you are asked anything other than a Dorothy Dixer and invariably are forced to resort to abuse or false indignation to extricate yourself from the situation.
And I reckon I do a pretty good job just quietly.
Meryl – Thanks for your reply. I understand your frustration with the types of correspondence you must get. Take your time with any correspondence – I can understand that I am not top of your priorities.
Punter – Read our correspondence again sometime. I said nowhere that I was going to organise the exposure for you. To do so would risk my livelihood – so I simply won’t do it. That is your task. If you like, I will organise the vaccines for myself in return. The point is that I won’t throw my career away for you.
I have shown my correspondence with you to a number of people both in and outside this discussion. None of them feel my use of the word “lunacy” was directed at you, but at your argument. I still feel that my correspondence has been nothing but polite – whilst you continue with the way you treat people. And the word “denial” was a description of your position, and in no way pejorative. Read into my words what you wish, but I can guarantee you that my replies have been simple logic and information.
Less can be said for yours.
I will not respond any further until you have taken up my offer. Ask Meryl for my email address.
“I have shown my correspondence with you to a number of people both in and outside this discussion. None of them feel my use of the word “lunacy” was directed at you, but at your argument. I still feel that my correspondence has been nothing but polite – whilst you continue with the way you treat people. And the word “denial” was a description of your position, and in no way pejorative.”
What?! Your friends and colleagues take your side as you vociferously defend a position so critical to them? Amazing!
Seriously, the word “denial” not meant to be pejorative? You must have some pretty credulous friends. At any rate it misses the point. It would be easy for someone to take offense at what you wrote. But I didn’t. Similarly, if you are desperate to find offense at what I have written then you can. And you did. Therein lies the difference.
“Punter – Read our correspondence again sometime. I said nowhere that I was going to organise the exposure for you. To do so would risk my livelihood – so I simply won’t do it. That is your task. If you like, I will organise the vaccines for myself in return. The point is that I won’t throw my career away for you.”
Right. So you are more than happy to do something as long as I do something that you know is impossible for me to do. Now that’s what I call courage.
And what’s more you haven’t even said what you will do if I actually complete my part of the deal. Will you resign? Apologise to all your patients? Give back all the money you have made as a physician? Or will you just put it to the back of your mind and continue as before? After all, you now know that vaccines didn’t save lives, that the polio vaccine hasn’t reduced the number of crippled children, that the rubella vaccine hasn’t reduced the number of congenital defects. But has any of that changed your position? Of course not. Nothing will.
You haven’t said because it wouldn’t make any difference. And because you have no intention of following through.
I think it is our responsibility to look carefully at the evidence when it comes to the health of our children. I have yet to meet anyone who put in 30-100 hours research who would entertain assaulting their offspring in such a way. I’m a hard nosed scientist and vaccination is worse than snake oil. It’s criminal that such an assault is allowed on any child -yet alone a delicate baby a few hours old… There’s no science to support it. It’s a shameful sign our our anti-scientific age.
I have put in around 20 years of research, Tim, and have reached the complete opposite conclusions to you. I think you need to spend some more hours taking a critical thinking course, and also a courcse into how the scientific method works. Plus, a course in basic immunlogy would be useful. Once you have done those – see if your opinions change.
Translation of what you’ve said Katie – you have put in 20 years of research into this subject therefore anyone who disagrees with you – even if they have also done 20 years of research, is wrong. Interesting worldview you have there…
20 years of research and you had no idea about the concept of “challenge, dechallenge, rechallenge”?
20 years of research and you had absolutely no idea that mortality due to infectious disease had all but disappeared before any vaccination for them came into existence?
20 years of research and you were completely unable to tell us how much non-polio AFP there was before the polio vaccine despite your insistence that they were almost certainly at the exact same level as today?
20 years of research and you had no idea that liver cancer had actually INCREASED since the introduction of the Hep B vaccine?
20 years of research on immunology and you had no idea how to explain what was meant by a ‘dead virus’ nor for that matter how it would lead to immune system memory?
20 years of research and you had no idea that placebos are supposed to be inert?
Can I suggest another 20?
And this time how about a different research method to what you currently employ which is to look at the conclusions of a paper and then decide the paper’s quality based on how much fidelity it has to your prejudices.
Hell, you might even go completely wacky and not waste any more time with papers ghost written by pharma company sales reps altogether.
It isn’t about how much you read Katie, it is about how much you understand.
Oh my goodness, what is the problem with free speech and discussion about real issues. I have been back in Australia for the last four years now, and unfortunately it doesn’t seem to have changed much since I left 20 years ago. Bully boy tactics! Grow up people!
I am not a hateful person but I hate it when people make unsubstantiated assertions about those responsible for anonymous emails.
I am an active and proud participant in the SAVN forum and I continue to be pleased by the constant efforts and impressive achievements of the dedicated and extremely hard-working people in this diverse group of volunteers.
Those who want to promote and protect public health in Australia are not limited to SAVN or the Australian Skeptics. There are plenty of other people who don’t like the myth and misinformation spread by the AVN. I suggest you look elsewhere for those responsible.
I am ashamed of nothing.
You CAN judge a person by the company they keep.
‘You CAN judge a person by the company they keep.’
That may be true, as long as you don’t make the mistake of misjudging the company.
I am extremely comfortable to be judged by the company I keep.
In which case, are you then comfortable being judged by the actions and views espoused by the AVN’s supporters?
Jo, I have yet to see a member of AVN send someone another person pornography; make threatening phone calls or make death threats. Had I known of one who did these things, I would be the first person to oust them and say how disgusted I was with their behaviour. SAVN are a bunch of sociopaths who don’t belong in a civil society. It is obvious that this is correct since there is NOBODY involved in that group who has the moral fortitude to state how wrong this sort of behaviour is.
What exactly are the SAVN so opposed to? If you are so certain that vaccinations are effective, and that if you and your children are vaccinated you are “safe and protected” from infectious diseases, then why worry at all about those who are not? It is sad that there are people out there who are so hateful and judgmental to those they don’t even know based entirely on a difference of opinion. I do not hate my vaccinated friends, respectfully, that is their choice. And honestly, I think that is the point, respect.
As I have said before Tania, the whole “unvaxed kids spread diseases” is a ruse. There isn’t a single skeptic anywhere on the planet who could care less about the spread of infectious diseases otherwise they would be just as critical as other groups of people who are supposedly more likely to spread disease but not only do the skeptics treat such people with kid gloves they actually recoil in righteous indignation if such people are criticized.
Most skeptics act the way they do for one reason and one reason only: they love to force other people to do their bidding. Regardless of their protestations they practically ALL believe in mandatory vaccination (I can only think of one genuine exception).
It’s truly a shame when anyone acts hatefully. Vaccination is one of the dark superstitions of our time and those who have done research realise the extent of pointless damage it causes in so many ways. Any one fighting for the right of children to fair treatment gets passionate.. And this assault is one breathtaking in its irrationality. People get upset and quite rightly so, it is a criminal assault. Before the next generation, litigation will kill this preposterous medieval stone dead.
Sian, that’s the excuse some Nazis made about others murdering Jews. “I am a Christian but …”
Everything that you don’t agree with is “unsubstantiated” which is just like burying your head in the sand. You seem like a reasonable person (I have read some of your comments) but like other people drawn into cults, you have lost perspective. You at least recognize the harm done by vaccines but, without any evidence that you can produce, you declare that the risk/benefit ratio makes it worth it. Provide scientific evidence for your assertion, not just keep saying it. Even if you can’t provide evidence, who do you think should accept the risk: the parents? The state? SAVN by withholding the evidence?
Take notice of the idiotic practice that your lot engage in of ticking when they “like” something. For example, Tania asks a perfectly reasonable question, “What exactly are the SAVN opposed to?” and your goons rush in to press the down finger, as they will with this.
Jennifer,
I hope you get to read my reply. I too, am a proud member of SAVN and one of its FB page admins. I know 100% that it was not one of our people who sent Meryl threats (from “anonymous), and pornography. I am not burying my face in the sand. Many, many times we have said we do not stand for threatening or illegal behaviour. I have also seen reams and reams of evidence to show that the risk/benefit ratio supports vaccination. SAVN does not withhold any evidence.
The SAVN are opposed to misinformation. They are opposed to people making important health decisions based on bad science and lies.
Katie, every time I read one of your comments, I think – surely NOBODY could be that fully able to ignore what is happening around them. Yet there you are, doing it again!
SAVN IS responsible. Dan Buzzard who is an active member of your group, asked people to send me goatsie images (look it up if you want to know what they are).
Your founder, Daniel Raffaele, has said that he would see my demise and threatening calls were made from his house to mine in the middle of the night (some people have even claimed this is an internet meme! It’s not – it’s a criminal threat)
There are so many instances where people who are still moderators on your page and active members too have both threatened and abused me and others on the AVN site. If you can’t see this, you have totally lost your perspective. Let’s just hope you are never on the receiving end of what we have gone through. If you were, you would not be so blasé about this activity.
“They are opposed to people making important health decisions based on bad science and lies.”
And yet there the SAVN page is with its banner stating “Vaccinations saves lives”. But we both know that is completely unsubstantiated don’t we?
But Meryl’s right. Your capacity to keep on trying to forge ahead despite overwhelming evidence against your position could well be the stuff of legends.
And for some reason when I read you write “reams and reams of evidence” all I think of is “unfalsifiable mush”.
Reams and reams of evidence only matter when you are talking direct observations. It is irrelevant how many population studies get done – one sound study trumps a million bias ones.
But really, why bother? I don’t think I have ever encountered someone who was as willing to deny the bleeding obvious as you.
Jennifer, I have provided scientific evidence on many occasions but – forgive me for the analogy which is almost as offensive as yours – it is as useful as throwing pearls to pigs. Most of the people in this forum have absolutely no idea how to differentiate quality information from dross and accept without question the most pitiful articles from the most discredited of sources.
I spent Monday at the inaugural Vaccinology Update at the new Royal Children’s Hospital in Melbourne organised by SAEFVIC. The auditorium was packed and the speakers were some of the most impressive, informed and experienced experts in their field. They spoke on important issues of vaccine safety and talked about the findings of current research, as well as exciting research currently underway. It was clear from listening to all speakers that vaccine science and immunology is extremely complex and far from black and white in many areas.
There were fascinating discussions about the effectiveness of influenza vaccination and the concerns about pertussis, which reflect much of the discussions that go on in the AVN and SAVN forums. The detail is far too complex for this blog comment but I can say there is plenty of quality evidence to support both influenza and pertussis vaccination as effective public health measures. Interestingly in future there may be changes to who is targeted and when to improve the effectiveness of these strategies even further. I predict fireworks.
Many of the speakers were very experienced paediatricians who have done a good deal of intensive research (not the sort that tends to trigger press releases and news reports) and who familiar with the worst cases of vaccine-preventable diseases. These people are deeply committed to health initiatives that improve and protect health. The sort of discussions and information sharing that occur at these sorts of events could not be further removed from cult thinking.
Tania asked a reasonable question. The answer is that the SAVN are opposed to the spreading of myth and misinformation by a misleadingly named organisation which may jeopardise public health. If every vaccination was 100% effective in 100% of people we would be less concerned (although we would still be concerned that some children would be vulnerable to choices made by misinformed parents) but as it has been said thousands of times before, a high level of vaccination is required within the community to help protect those who are too young to be vaccinated, those who cannot be vaccinated or those for who vaccination has not been effective.
Please tell me Sian. What discredited source are we relying on for our beliefs? I am willing to bet that the vast majority of those who question vaccination do so because of their own experiences. As we discussed on the facebook page that is considered sufficient evidence for adverse reactions to antibiotics or gunshot wounds but is considered nothing but lies when it happens after vaccination. You didn’t answer it then and I dare say you won’t answer it now but I’ll ask again anyway: What’s the difference? Why don’t burns victims coming into the ER get some doctor giving them a lecture on how the housefire that they have just been in most likely had nothing to do with their injuries as there are lots of fires without people getting burnt and lots of burns that happen in the absence of a housefire and besides, many people have made fraudulent insurance claims due to fire so obviously that discredits all future burns victims.
It boggles the mind that you can’t see just how feeble and ridiculous your position is but then you have a hell of a lot at stake don’t you?
You see Sian, every single person at your precious conference had one thing in common: If most people believed what I believed about vaccinations they would lose everything. But according to you we should dote upon their every utterance.
Tristan, actually I have nothing at stake. It makes little practical (professionally or ecomonically) difference to me whether people choose to vaccinate or not.
Sian – aren’t you a vaccination nurse and isn’t your husband a GP? I am not saying that you would do anything deliberately bad to hurt people for money – I don’t believe you would for a minute. But you do have something at stake because if people stopped vaccinating, you would both be out of work. Your whole world and prestige is at stake as well as your livelihood.
Actually we are both busy enough as it is and do not need more work. Vaccination is far from being our bread and butter. We do not do it for money at all. It would be no loss to us at all if all vaccinations stopped being administered at our surgery. There are plenty of other useful and important things we could do. So, that is not our motivation. Try again.
Sian, I think that vaccinations ARE your bread and butter though you obviously don’t see it this way. Dr Robert Mendelsohn from the US said it best – “Vaccinate a child once and you’ve got a customer for life”. And that was in the late 1970s – early 1980s – a time when there were only a few vaccines – DPT, OPV measles and rubella. Compare that to today’s schedule with more than 50 doses of 14 vaccines by school age and you start to see that we may have a very big problem on our hands. Dr Mendelsohn believed, and there is much evidence that he is right, that vaccinating sets in motion a range of effects requiring constant office visits, prescriptions of antibiotics and encourages the development of chronic conditions such as asthma, eczema, autoimmunity etc.
If vaccinations were to stop tomorrow, my personal belief is that most doctors would have to greatly reduce their practices. I say this from personal experience, I joked with my first GP that it would probably be cheaper for me to pay him rent then to pay by the visit because we were at his surgery at least once a week with my first, vaccine-injured child. Compare that to my fourth child, who is completely unvaccinated. She had her first visit to a doctor at 7 years of age. First and only. She was at the hospital a couple of times – once for stitches and once for a broken bone – but never a routine visit to a doctor except for that once at 7 years old.
If everyone’s kids were like that, would you still say that you are ‘both busy enough’. I don’t think so Sian.
Though I don’t believe you are motivated by money, I also don’t think you are well-informed enough about this issue. As a vaccine-administrator, you really do need to look at little bit deeper at what vaccines are meant to do and why the theory behind vaccination does not really stand up to rigorous scientific testing (which is probably why vaccines are never scientifically tested).
Is there a reason my comment is awaiting moderation? I note you have replied to it.
Your personal experience with your one child differs greatly from the families I see in the course of my work. Most children I see at 4 years of age have not been back to see our doctors since their 18 month vaccination. And the younger children invariably have nothing but vaccination consults in their notes. Since I always ask about their health and problems with previous vaccinations you would think I would be told constantly of severe reactions, allergies, diabetes etc.The truth is, in my experience, the vast majority of children I see remain healthy, happy and active with no health concerns between and after vaccination.
But, as you say, what would I know?
Sian Morton, your experience differs greatly from the families that I see daily. And as for your comment in moderation – I may have not clicked on the moderate before responding – my apology. I have fixed that now.
SIAN, look up sv40 and see 100,000,000 people have been given a cancer virus in the polio oral vaccine , Tests now show it is being passed on to offspring and will endd up close to a BILLION people will have cancer from this little error ,aids came through the same error in a different monkey , had a test yet??
ned kelly, I have read this post and I have nothing further to add. Clearly you are on top of this issue. Go you.
Sian Morton – You seem to have enormous respect for Ph.Ds, (except mine, of course) IF and only if, they produce studies that support your position. Have you heard of the Cochrane Collaboration? If not, look them up. They are independent of pharmaceutical interests.
You can look up their review of research on flu vaccines at:http://www.thecochranelibrary.com/details/collection/978807/Influenza-evidence-from-Cochrane-Reviews.html.
Dr. Roger Thomas of the University of Calgary, lead author of a research paper published in 2010 by the Cochrane Library had this to say to the National Post, “What troubled us is that [shots] had no effect on laboratory-confirmed influenza.” The study found that immunizing nursing-home workers does nothing to prevent confirmed influenza cases among the homes’ elderly residents. “What we were looking for is proof that influenza … is decreased. Didn’t find it. We looked for proof that pneumonia is reduced. Didn’t find it. We looked for proof that deaths from pneumonia are reduced. Didn’t find it”.
He’s worth a derisive comment surely?
Perhaps the worst risk from flu vaccines is Guillain-Barré Syndrome where the victim suffers from progressive paralysis. In 2009, in Quebec, the number of cases of the syndrome doubled after use of the flu vaccine. http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/10/swine-flu-shots-may-be-linked-increase-in-rate-of-rare-neurological-syndrome-quebec-study/
In my opinion, one case of Guillain-Barré as a result of a vaccine is one too many. But you probably think the risk of being paralyzed for life is worth it? How do you explain your reasoning ?
As a nurse, do you obtain a signed consent form for vaccines you give, that explain the possible side-effects? If not, why not? Are you not guilty of violating your ethical code?
Please quit using the expression, “vaccine-preventable disease” because there is no such thing. It’s all part of the propaganda you have swallowed so well.
Jennifer, I cannot see where you would have gained the impression that I am particularly impressed by PhDs. I am certainly impressed by intellectual discourse and people who demonstrate a deep grasp of their area of expertise, but I am not especially impressed by qualifications or status without substance. As for being derisive, again I am not sure where that impression is coming from (unless you are referring to a few of the comments directed at me).
And yes, I am aware if the Cochrane Collaboration and find it an extremely valuable resource.
I ensure I obtain a valid constant from every patient I vaccinate.
As a physiotherapist in my past life I worked with several people deteriorating and then recovering from guillain barre syndrome so I would not wish that condition on anyone. If I was in any way convinced that vaccination was responsible I can assure you I would think twice.
It is certainly true that no vaccine is 100% effective in 100% of people, diseases can be prevented by vaccination so I will continue to refer to them as vaccine preventable diseases
Where is this utopia in which you live, Sian? No allergies, no diabetes, no etc. It’s a wonder the office can afford to keep the lights on.