Last week, one of the most gob-smackingly ignorant articles I’ve read to date on the issue of vaccination (and trust me, I’ve read plenty of ignorant articles on this subject – especially from the Murdoch rags) appeared in – of all papers – the Melbourne Age.

I say of all papers because the Age used to have a reputation for excellent reporting. I especially remember the series by Ryle and Hughes in the 1990s about the scandalous vaccine testing done on orphans by the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute. These articles and more made people consider The Age to be one of the more authoritative, trustworthy and intellectual journals in Australia.

How the mighty have fallen!

The current article in question, entitled People who don’t vaccinate their kids are selfish, plumbs new depths never before charted. Lower even than those attained by Claire Harvey or Jane Hansen – and in my personal opinion, those depths were already pretty low!

This article discusses an ‘outbreak’ of measles in Brunswick, VIC. And by outbreak, they mean 10 cases – almost all in adults – not children. At no point are we told the vaccination status of those involved. For all we know, every single one of them was fully vaccinated against measles. Funny how newspapers almost never report the vaccination status of cases when trying to blame outbreaks on the unvaccinated. I guess the effect would be ruined if we were to find out that those being affected were all supposed to have been protected by vaccination.

Or, maybe not.

You see, Brunswick has a vaccination rate of 94% for one-year-olds. And the article actually implies it is that 1% difference between the mythical nirvana of ‘herd immunity’ – a 95% vaccination rate – and the reality of cases amongst adults, that makes all the difference.

At 95% vaccination compliance, measles couldn’t get a look in! The virus would be running up against an invisible wall with a big transparenKeep Outt KEEP OUT sign that only these tiny little buggers can see.

But at 94%, the gate is wide open and the MEASLES WELCOME, ENTER HERE sign is flashing its garish neon message that, again, only the virus can see.

Isn’t science grand?

But it gets better (and by better, I mean worse).

Because, believe it or not, this genius of a news hack (I won’t deign to call her a journalist. I don’t believe that moniker suits her at all) actually states that:

“The more unimmunised children there are in the room, the more likely the immunised children will be affected and catch the virus.”

Where do I begin?

Is this writer really claiming that the vaccine will only protect children up to and until the point where they are exposed to it and then, it doesn’t work? Well, though I personally believe that to be the case, I don’t use this evidence of vaccine ineffectiveness to try and force other people to be vaccinated to protect – well – the vaccinated!

In addition, what possible difference can it make whether there are Skull Biker2 unvaccinated children in the room or 18? Do viruses get stronger in groups? Are they like bikie gangs – feeding on each other’s violent impulses in a tiny little example of mob rule? I can just picture them – pathogens in leather jackets with slogans emblazoned on the back – MEASLES GANG – VIC BRANCH.

Lastly, how can the vaccinated children who are so terrifyingly at risk of contracting the ‘deadly’ measles virus possibly be considered to be immunised when immunised means by definition – immune? Either you are immune and you don’t have to worry about catching an illness (eg if you have already had measles, you are immune for life – a benefit no vaccine can give you) or you are just vaccinated and still have to worry about getting the disease.

You can’t have it both ways. And trying to blame some mysterious unvaccinated child for an illness in the vaccinated is like a woman blaming her unwanted pregnancy on the fact that her neighbour stopped taking birth control pills a month earlier.

Melbourne Age – you should be thoroughly ashamed for actually paying someone to write this ridiculous claptrap. It’s time for your paper to start reporting the news with investigative reporters like Ryle and Hughes rather than regurgitating corporate sponsored lies .

by Meryl Dorey

Please note: Blog posts are opinion pieces which represent the views of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of the nocompulsoryvaccination blog. This blog is a forum, support and information site and outlet for discussion about the relative benefits and risks of vaccinations in particular – and medical procedures in general. We do not provide medical advice but believe that everyone has the opportunity and the obligation to do their own research before making decisions for their families. The information we provide (including your personal review of the references we cite) should be taken in conjunction with a range of other data, including that obtained from government, your health care provider and/or other medical source material to assist you in developing the knowledge required to make informed health choices.

26 Comments

  1. absolutely, what is wrong with people. talk about herd, people are not using common sense they are running around like sheep. I love this article and have posted it to my Back to basics-an organic state of mind facebook page with all the other juicy stuff.

  2. Thank you once again Merryl. The press are getting so desperate because they need big pharma money. I would like to see them go into a court of law with this kind of logic.

  3. Yes Meryl … It’s amazing what bs people will believe !!! I have 5 really healthy kids none vaccinated and we stay away from doctors as much as possible … Except when my son broke his leg …. That they are good at!! Money drives medicine and anyone that can’t see that does so at own risk!! Health cannot be bought or come from a pill or injection … It must be EARNED!!

    Just read this very interesting statistic regarding cancer … Dr. Hardin B Jones of University of California Dept. of Medical Physics did a 23 year study and found a startling discovery !! People who develop cancer and REFUSE medical treatment… Live on average 12.5 years. People who submit to medical treatment live an average of 3 years !! And in the only case of a total doctors strike in Israel … the burial society reported that their burial numbers dropped by 50% …
    And this same effect has happened 3 times in the world when doctors went on strike!!

    1. Thanks Peter – long time no hear from 🙂

      Your comment makes some amazingly good points about cancer treatment especially. If we have been sold a bill of goods on the effectiveness of vaccines, we have been outright lied to about chemo and radiation. The 5 year survival rate with conventional treatments is less than 2% overall. I would take my chances with absolutely nothing over being cut, burnt and poisoned thank you very much! But there are so many safe, effective and inexpensive alternatives, and their use is being actively suppressed and blocked by our corporate government officials. Vaccination, chemotherapy, fluoridated water, spraying for mosquitoes with toxic chemicals, uncontrolled release of genetically-modified organisms and insects…the list goes on and on. It is all due to the same reason. When we give up our right to say no – we de facto give the government the right to tell us what to do.

      I haven’t given up any of my rights – nor have you, I believe. And it is time for all of us to assert our ownership of these inherent and inalienable freedoms.

  4. What these idiots don’t realise is that what is put on the Internet stays on the Internet. Long after the vaccine scheme has collapsed these kind of stupidities will still be around for everyone to see. But I suppose the arrogance of the writer is even bigger than her stupidity and she doesn’t want to see that publications like this will haunt her forever.

      1. You forgot something very important though Meryl. The unvaccinated are benefiting from herd immunity of the vaccinated. So even if a tiny 1% of all one year olds were to be vaccinated, we can logically conclude (based on the age article) that not only would the 1% (vaccinated one year olds) still contract measles, but that they would magically confer ‘herd immunity’ to those 99% who were not vaccinated because vaccines are magical wands of unquestionable wonder. Vaccines protect the unvaccinated but the existence of anti vaxxers guarantee that measles will bring about certain death to the vaccinated. Well of course that makes sense!

    1. Either that, or the corporate prostitution to the industry funding the press is so pervasive, and so necessary for journos to keep their jobs, even at a paper like The Age, that even good writers sell their souls to this deliberately orchestrated scapegoating nonsense, regardless of what they themselves really believe or know deep down. Perhaps it’s a case of trusting that even the educated, discerning, Age-reading public is subject to the same psychology of irrationalism surrounding vaccines, as those who consume the absolutely gutter-dwelling Herald Sun? Perhaps enough Age readers will only skim-read these things and be left with the gist of this obvious finger-pointing exercise, rather than stop to unpackaged the detail? “Throw enough mud…”, and all that.

  5. Thank you ( again) Meryl, well written! — Any chance of a newspaper publishing your article?
    What would we do without your information and advice?

  6. Thank you so much for this Meryl. The original article did no such thing, but, just when I though myself incapable of laughing about the ludicrousness of vaccine politics in Australia (indeed I am truly at weeping point) you managed to elicit a hearty chuckle from me – especially the bikie gang analogy! As well as pointing out the obvious seriousness of misinformational and disinformational journalistic freedoms in this country at this time.

  7. You express my thoughts exactly, and I’m sure all the thoughts of those aware of the truth.(or at least widened their horizon of knowledge and realise the true information amassing out there).
    Exactly what I try to explain to GP after GP, that if the immunised are so IMMUNE from disease, then why should they force vaccine belief to those who object to being converted into the IMMUNE.
    I am handing over $70 each time I approach a new clinic for their ‘advise’.
    When it is me who is educating these medieval GPs for FREE.
    Yet , still I walk out without a precious GP’s signature.
    I feel terrible, I don’t wish to compromise a GP’s status.
    My child is at a stalemate now with this nojab nopay draconian nation-wide law.
    I can’t find a single GP in Australia (SURPRISE!!) prepared to sign this ludicrous new ACIR – Immunisation Medical Exemption form. (replacement for the previously accepted ‘Conscientious Objection letter’ which schools have been gladly accepting thus far)
    This new form now blatantly requires evidence that a child has had anaphilaxis caused by vaccination in order to object to further vaccinations.
    No evidence – no signature – therefore no Certificate of Immunisation.from ACIR.
    No certificate from ACIR – no school access?!! Said the kind school administration drone.
    Not as yet, it seems, but legislation is closing in hard and fast on this loophole.
    2016..? the sad saga resumes.

  8. Why have you deliberately misquoted the author here? 50% of this blog is based on something that the author did not actually say.

    You have incorrectly quoted the author of the article in question as saying that:
    “The more unimmunised children there are in the room, the more likely the immunised children will be affected and catch the virus.”
    The actual quote, is
    “The more unimmunised children there are in the room, the more likely the unimmunised children will be affected and catch the virus.”

    Do you care to acknowledge and correct what I can only assume is an unfortunate mistake?

    1. Please learn to read. This is a copy and paste from the original article (as was the section in the blog). Follow the link and see it for yourself and this time, read what it says.

      The more unimmunised children there are in the room the more likely the immunised children will be affected and catch the virus.

      Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/is-it-selfish-not-to-vaccinate-your-child-against-chicken-pox-20160223-gn14ny.html#ixzz41dqfPC2W
      Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook

      1. “…one of the most gob-smackingly ignorant articles I’ve read to date…”

        The author clearly hasn’t read her own article.

Comments are closed.