Evidence absent for The Northern Star’s support of Olivia Odey

Update October 9th – ABC Media Watch, Northern Star HPV headline wrong

Just under a week ago The Northern Star published a one sided article alleging that a healthy 16 year old female was stricken with a host of physical ailments following administration of “the Gardasil vaccine”.

This specific claim is unverified in that conclusive evidence or clinical diagnoses pointing to Gardasil are absent. More so, from the viewpoint of international epidemiology, the two complex syndromes identified are not accepted as vaccine injuries caused by Gardasil. Toward the end of the article, Teen left in wheelchair after Gardasil HPV ‘reaction’, readers are informed that Olivia Odey (now 18);

…believes her symptoms were linked to a reaction to the Gardasil vaccine against cervical cancer, which the teenager had a few weeks prior to the onset of her symptoms.

No doubt given the weight of peer reviewed literature on the topic, and evidence offered in the article, Ms. Odey is indeed left with only her “belief”. Initially after presenting to hospital, “all tests came back normal”.

“I definitely think there was a link, but there’s no way to prove it,” Ms Odey said, admitting the proposition was controversial and “brushed aside by medical professionals”.

According to the Australian HPV vaccine website, for every million doses of the vaccine given there are only around three serious allergic reactions.

Adverse Events Following Immunisation are not “brushed aside” by Australian medical professionals. Regrettably, the article does not cast the profession in a favourable light and Ms. Odey reports, “a frustrating battle with the conventional medical system”.

“They wanted to send my mum and I across the road to a mental institution and told me ‘if there was a fire you would run right out of here’.

Ms. Odey apparently experienced photo-phobia, numbness, shingles, food allergies, tingling, joint pain, lethargy and discolouration of the legs. But it was heart palpitations that led her mother to contact a cardiologist in Auckland. The cardiologist referred her to a “specialised pain doctor”. She was diagnosed within an hour and began treatment the next day. Olivia Odey had been diagnosed with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (Fact Sheet), also known as Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy and Central Neural Sensitisation Syndrome [Central Sensitisation] (Physiopedia videos).

We should note with respect to diagnosing CRPS;

There is no diagnostic test for CRPS. Diagnosis is based on a person’s medical history and their symptoms. Sometimes, a doctor may order blood tests, bone scans, x-rays, CT scans or MRI scans to rule out other conditions that have similar symptoms.

Thus being diagnosed within an hour and beginning treatment within a day is seemingly unusual to say the least. Ms. Odey’s entire recovery is unusual. We’re informed neuroplasticity explains;

To come off the pain drugs Ms Odey did a three-day course on how to “retrain your brain pathways and change your physiology just by changing your thoughts and beliefs.”

CRPS is classified as a Rare Disorder and whilst there is a significant range of symptoms and intensity, factors relating to causation include trauma such as a fracture, forceful injury, crush injury, amputation, stroke, and spinal cord injury. Other disorders may predispose to CRPS;

However, it has become increasingly clear that it plays a role in many different chronic pain disorders. It can occur with chronic low back pain, chronic neck pain, whiplash injuries, chronic tension headaches, migraine headaches, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis of the knee, endometriosis, injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident, and after surgeries. Fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, and chronic fatigue syndrome, all seem to have the common denominator of central sensitization as well. […]

What isn’t clear in Ms. Odey’s case is if these possible causes were ruled out before blaming Gardasil.

Of great significance is that;

A prior history of anxiety, physical and psychological trauma, and depression are significantly predictive of onset of chronic pain later in life. […] The onset of pain is often associated with subsequent development of conditions such as depression, fear-avoidance, anxiety and other stressors.

Again it isn’t clear if all possible contributing stressors were ruled out.

The table below summarises the range of symptoms associated with CRPS.

Source: Australian Pain Management Association

 

Given the complications listed in the above table one can appreciate the slow progression of physical therapy outlined below.

Desensitization – “to hurt is not to harm”. Over a period of time the person with CRPS will be encouraged to desensitize the affected limb so that the hypersensitivity and allodynia is reduced. For example, over a period of three years Annette, a CPRS patient, began with moving a silk scarf over her foot, progressed to being able to wear a foot stocking, to a sock, sandal and finally a closed in shoe for a short period. This process took three years but improvements are still being made.

Graded motor imagery (GMI) combined with medical management is recognized as being effective in reducing pain in CRPS. GMI involves encouraging the person to differentiate between left and right limbs to re-establish right and left concepts in the brain. Progressively, a mirror box is introduced. The person is asked to watch the mirrored image of the unaffected limb moving in the mirror. Then, the person moves the affected limb in the mirror box while watching the mirrored image of the unaffected limb. This tricks the brain into thinking it is seeing the limb with CRPS moving without pain.

Finally we can find comprehensive refutation of the notion that HPV vaccination causes Regional Pain Syndrome and Central Sensitisation from reputable sources in the literature. A Safety Study of Gardasil 9 in PRISM/Sentinel using sequential analysis, is worth consulting. Version 2 was published only three days ago – September 27th 2017. Page 2 contains the paragraph on Complex Regional Pain Syndrome. Following a clinical description of CRPS the paragraph continues (italics and bold mine);

In June 2013, the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare suspended its recommendation of routine immunization with HPV vaccine in girls and women following post-vaccination reports of serious chronic pain and concern about a possible association with HPV. In early November 2015, the European Medicines Agency’s Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee completed a detailed scientific review of the evidence related to a possible association between HPV vaccines and CRPS. The Committee concluded that the evidence did not support a causal link between the vaccines and the syndrome. Although U.S. vaccine safety information sources such as the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) have not suggested an increased risk of CRPS following HPV vaccination either, some post-HPV-vaccine cases have been reported to VAERS.

Much has been made of the Japanese suspension of HPV vaccination due to post-vaccination reports of serious chronic pain and concern about a possible association with HPV. Interestingly if we follow the link above to version 2, we find that the citation to these post vaccination reports is; Kinoshita T, Abe RT, Hineno A, Tsunekawa K, Nakane S, Ikeda S. Peripheral sympathetic nerve dysfunction in adolescent Japanese girls following immunization with the human papillomavirus vaccine. Intern Med. 2014;53:2185-200.

To better understand the reliability of the report of Kinoshita et al, we should consult the 2017 critique, Tackling Antivaxers in the Literature by David Hawkes, Joanne Benhamu and Julia Brotherton. Whilst a number of examples are addressed in this publication it is the widespread criticism of Kinoshita et al and the subject of peripheral sympathetic nerve dysfunction following the HPV vaccine that is significant.

The Introduction reads;

To understand strategies used by Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine critical authors, exemplified by a recent publication in the Nature published journal, Scientific Reports, to produce a false evidence base in the peer reviewed scientific literature.

Methods;

Critical analysis of anti (HPVE) vaccine papers, including retracted articles, links between authors of these papers and conflicts of interests, journals used to publish these papers, self citations and dissemination of these articles and associated commentary on social media.

HPV Vaccination: Japan;

Several publications have been produced by Japanese authors critical of HPV vaccination. In 2014, Kinoshita et al published a paper entitled “Peripheral Sympathetic Nerve Dysfunction in Adolescent Girls following Immunization with the Human Papillomavirus Vaccine” in Internal Medicine (a small journal with an impact factor of less than 1). To date it has been cited over 40 times. Despite several (published) letters of concern highlighting errors in the paper from highly respected researchers in the field the manuscript remains available. A recent publication by Aratani et al in the Nature published journal Scientific Reports has caused similar concern and is currently under review by the journal. This case garnered a much wider audience and an article highlighting concerns was featured in Science. This suggests that scientists are being more proactive in combatting bad HPV vaccination science.

In July last year Outcomes for girls without HPV vaccination in Japan was published in the Lancet. The author’s final paragraph read;

Sadly, Japan’s failure to provide HPV vaccination for young women has now become a global concern. Similar trends are occurring in countries outside of Japan, which will lead to increased incidences of HPV-related cancers. Although further efforts are required to overcome the many barriers leading to decreasing cervical cancer mortality, many challenges remain.

A comprehensive summary of the paper is available here, Lack of vaccinations increased risk of HPV infections in Japan;

Japanese women who became adolescents between 1993 and 2008, a period in which vaccination against cervical cancer was temporarily suspended, are at higher risk of having HPV16/18 infection, which is known to trigger the onset of cervical cancer. However, the infection risk can be decreased if vaccination is re-established. […]

The authors strongly recommend that HPV vaccination encouragement is resumed before the end of 2016, to reduce the risk of future infection in different age groups and to ensure all women will receive protection against cervical cancer.

As time progresses there continues to be a lack of evidence that may be considered as verification that HPV vaccines are causally linked to the conditions mentioned by Olivia Odey and described by Alina Rylko in The Northern Star article. Ms. Odey is heading to Byron Bay to begin a health blog. Yet in the present climate in which Australian vaccine safety and efficacy has been attacked by organised anti-vaccine lobbyists the tone of the article seems patently irresponsible.

The present consensus holds that CRPS and Central Sensitisation occur at levels expected of the populations effected. Evidence doesn’t support a causal link between the vaccines and the syndrome. Reports following HPV vaccination are consistent with what is expected for the age group. No fact sheets specific to these conditions list any vaccination as a cause or a predisposing condition. Data will continue to be gathered.

As yet there is no conclusive evidence to support Ms. Odey’s “belief” that Gardasil caused her condition.

———————————————————————

European Medicines Agency (EMA) virtual press briefing – Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines

Advertisements

Lyle Shelton’s ‘red herring’ consequences to same-sex marriage

Lyle Shelton of the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) has done a fine job building straw men from supposed “consequences” of same-sex marriage legislation.

He has been pushing this shadowy notion for well over a year, using the interim time to select a favoured stable of consequences. As a constant face for the No campaign he has recently been offering these quite doubtful consequences as reason to vote No in the upcoming plebiscite. To hear Shelton tell it, oppression of select freedoms is absolutely certain. To hear others tell it he is talking nonsense. Offering red herrings. He’s certainly doing what many do when the evidence doesn’t favour their position and opinion.

Mainly, work hard at divergence. Draw attention away from the actual matter at hand. As has been recently pointed out by Nick Greiner more than one billion people live in countries where same-sex marriage is a reality. Keeping this in mind we can see that even with the stable of starring consequences the ACL and Shelton are offering a paucity of examples to defend the No Campaign. More so we should revisit his approach from last year to grasp how little has changed. As Independent Sydney M.P. Alex Greenwich notes, Lyle Shelton rarely talks about marriage with respect to the same-sex marriage debate.

On July 26th 2016 Shelton appeared on Sky News and was asked by Paul Murray to explain the No case. Mr. Shelton is no stranger to dodging an answer to questions, instead getting his own point across. He replied, “This is essentially about three things, Paul. It’s a package deal that comes with a bunch of other things”. He then went on to stress that “gay couples have equal status with heterosexual couples under law that has existed since at least 2008”. He again pressed the “package deal” point, contesting that “if we change the definition of marriage, Safe Schools comes under the banner of the rainbow flag and rainbow political agenda”.

His evidence? “You’ve got to look no further than Victoria, Premier Daniel Andrews, one of the biggest proponents of gay marriage, he’s forcing Safe Schools into his schools”. Then freedom of speech, freedom of association and freedom of religion appear to be under threat. Changing the definition of marriage “in Commonwealth law weaponises state based anti-discrimination law”. He mentioned the case of Archbishop Julian Porteus. An anti-discrimination complaint was lodged in November 2015 against the Archbishop with respect to his “Don’t Mess With Marriage” booklet.

The third problem is about “what we do to children”. Shelton contended “that mothers don’t matter to a baby anymore. That’s what same-sex marriage says in law and culture”. Later he contends that “we won’t be able to stop commercial surrogacy, which is deeply unethical, if we change the definition of marriage. It is a definite flow-on effect”. He “cannot get anyone from the gay lobby to deny that commercial surrogacy is not next”. The Australian Christian Lobby argue that commercial surrogacy is another part of the “package deal” with same-sex marriage.

The next day he ran much the same by Steve Price on 2GB. According to Shelton same-sex couples enjoy the same lifestyle as heterosexual couples. If we redefine marriage, we redefine parenting. There will be “flow on effects” including gender ideology via the Safe Schools programme, which (you guessed it) is “a package deal with same-sex marriage”.

Shelton is now frequently referring to “radical LGBTIQ” education as a result of Safe Schools. It’s rather tiring researching his presentation. He will launch into the “consequences” that he insists loom before us. Every interview. Often two or perhaps three times. Although this is of course far more palatable than the May 2016 blog piece in which he wrote on Safe Schools. Including;

The cowardice and weakness of Australia’s ‘gatekeepers’ is causing unthinkable things to happen, just as unthinkable things happened in Germany in the 1930s.

Despite using a range of “consequences” to same-sex marriage to defend a No vote, it is Safe Schools that entirely make up the first No Campaign TV advertisement. The ad’ was commissioned by the Coalition for Marriage which is led by the ACL. The ABC report in part;

Claims legalising same-sex marriage will lead to sweeping education reforms are “patently ridiculous”, Education Minister Simon Birmingham has said after the release of the first national TV ad from the No campaign.

He continues to rattle off the other consequences he has firmly committed to memory. Although as I mentioned, with one billion people living in countries with same-sex marriage enshrined in law, his sample is strikingly tiny. He still mentions Archbishop Julian Porteus from Tasmania. He never misses a chance to remind listeners that in March 2016 Bill Shorten promised the Guardian Australia’s Why Knot? event that Labor would not alter discrimination legislation to please opponents to same-sex marriage. The Guardian reported;

Labor will oppose any attempt to extend discrimination law exemptions to allow people who object to same-sex marriage to deny goods and services to gay couples.

Opposition leader Bill Shorten made the pledge at Guardian Australia’s marriage equality event Why Knot in Sydney on Thursday.

Responding to a questioner who asked him to rule out allowing bakers not to sell cakes to gay weddings, Shorten said Labor would oppose such discrimination law exemptions and repeal them at the earliest available opportunity if they passed.

“It’s not allowed now under the current law – why would we water down existing laws? We don’t need to water down anti-discrimination law to keep some people [who oppose same-sex marriage] happy.”

Shelton has summed this up as “cake makers and wedding service providers losing freedoms”. Furthermore he frequently refers to Senator James Paterson to reinforce the “loss of freedoms” consequence. The Guardian recently reported in part;

Parliament must decide how to protect religious freedom if same-sex marriage is legalised, and cannot wait until the marriage equality postal survey is finished, the Liberal senator James Paterson has said.

The Victorian senator has called for an overhaul of anti-discrimination law to allow service providers to refuse gay weddings, telling a religious freedom forum in Perth on Thursday there will be no time to deal with the issue after the survey is finished.

Constantly, along with Shorten and Paterson, Mr. Shelton will also mention Alex Greenwich to complete his trio of politicians whose individual conduct apparently confirms the consequence of eroded civil liberties.

A staple discrimination consequence often presented to Australians is that of Irish cake makers Daniel and Amy McCarthy. In 2014 bakers at the family run company, Ashers, refused to make a cake with the slogan Support Gay Marriage, above an image of Sesame Street’s Bert and Ernie. The customer was gay rights activist Gareth Lee. By May 2015 a Belfast High Court ruled the company guilty of unlawful discrimination based on grounds of sexual orientation. Ashers paid £500 plus court costs.

Nonetheless in a few weeks the UK Supreme Court will hear arguments over two days to consider the initial judgement. One must wonder however just how much consideration will be placed on the argument that certain messages in icing pose a risk to the soul. As Pink News reported last May;

The bakers claimed in a legal brief that God considers it a sin to make cakes with pro-gay messages on, but multiple courts have upheld the decision against them.

Now with the UK Supreme Court taking an interest this apparent consequence may prove inconsequential to those who are essentially discriminating against others. The attention has already resulted in a significant increase in profits. As of last May Ashers reported an increase of £200,000.

Another “consequence” raised by Mr. Shelton is truly a case of having your cake and eating it too. He’d have his audience believe Oregon couple Aaron and Melissa Klein are innocent bakers that had their right to protect their beliefs crushed. However it was the decision of the Klein’s to not serve same-sex customers due to religious beliefs, then close their shop and move their business to home. The attention to this case led to a Wikipedia page, Sweet Cakes By Melissa.

In July 2015 Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries confirmed in a final order an administrative court’s decision to fine the couple. They were fined $135,000. However along with a number of other news outlets, Pink News reported in March this year the couple wanted to overturn the judgement. There also appeared to be strange activity around the finances raised;

The Christian bakery in Oregon that waged a court battle against anti-discrimination rules are now trying to avoid paying legal costs – despite donors giving them several times the full amount.

The owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa came to national attention when they claimed it would be “sinful” to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, launching a legal battle against the state’s equality laws.

After losing the long-running court case last year, bakers Melissa and Aaron Klein were ordered to pay $135,000 in costs and damages .

More than  $400,000 was raised online after the anti-gay American Family Association (AFA) rallied its supporters to donate to Sweet Cakes to cover the fine.

It could still be several weeks at least until the appeals judges hand down a ruling.

Mr. Shelton loves to tell us of the consequence that befell 71 year old Washington grandmother Barronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene’s Flowers and Gifts. Stutzman refused to provide floral arrangements for a same-sex wedding based on her religious beliefs. A lower court found she had violated the state’s anti-discrimination laws. Last February Washington’s state Supreme Court agreed with the lower court’s ruling. Robert Vischer argues here that the court erred in its decision. The Attorney General outlines his case below (bold mine);

Fighting discrimination before the state Supreme Court

I will not tolerate discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. I had another opportunity to uphold our anti-discrimination laws recently, this time before the Washington State Supreme Court.

My office filed the lawsuit in 2013 against Arlene’s Flowers and its owner and operator, Barronelle Stutzman, for discrimination over the refusal to serve a same-sex couple seeking to buy wedding flowers, a service she and her business provided to opposite-sex couples.

Last year, a Benton County Superior Court judge ruled that Stutzman’s actions violated the state Consumer Protection Act. Before I filed our lawsuit, I sent a letter to Ms. Stutzman asking her to agree to stop discriminating, in which case my office would not seek fines or penalties. Ms. Stutzman declined that offer. She lost the ensuing lawsuit and pursued an appeal, which the Supreme Court heard in November.

Washington law is clear: Businesses cannot discriminate. If you serve opposite-sex partners, you must serve same-sex partners equally.

Recently there has been a development that reinforces how tenuous this case is to the argument of “consequences” coming from Shelton. Indeed the development itself suggests that the ACL is at best sloppy and at worst deceptive with the full import of its claims. On July 14 this year, The Daily Signal reported;

Less than one month after the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would review the case of a Colorado baker who declined to make a cake for a gay couple’s wedding celebration because of his religious beliefs about marriage, lawyers asked the high court to combine it with a similar case involving a florist from Washington state, The Daily Signal has learned.

On June 26, the Supreme Court announced it would hear the case of Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colorado. In 2012, after refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple’s wedding celebration, he was sued by the American Civil Liberties Union and charged with violating the state’s anti-discrimination law.

The case of baker Jack Phillips is also listed on the ACL website. One hopes if the reviews are successful that this consequence will be accurately reflected on the website.

We constantly hear from Mr. Shelton that in Canada, father Steve Tourloukis lost the right to remove his children from “radical sex education programs which became compulsory after marriage was redefined”. It is reported that the Ontario Superior Court of Justice upheld the School Board’s decision to deny permission to remove children from class to avoid what Tourloukis had labelled “false teachings”. It is reported in part;

The Board took the position that it was not possible to know, in advance, what does or does not amount to a “false teaching”, and that permitting the applicant’s children to be withdrawn from classes where certain topics are taught would be contrary to the values of inclusion and student well-being that underline a number of Ministry and Board policies, including the Board’s Equity Policy. The Board also argued that granting the accommodation requested by the applicant could lead to feelings of exclusion by students, including the applicant’s children.

Another “consequence” of same-sex marriage legislation that Shelton has on high rotation is that Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven wants priests and pastors who refuse to wed same sex couples to “find another job”. Shelton opens a June 27th blog post with;

With Australian same-sex marriage activists saying there are no consequences to changing the definition of marriage, the Swedish Prime Minister (pictured) has warned priests to perform gay marriages or “find another job”.

Interestingly the quote “find another job” is part of a link to an article that doesn’t present such a dismissive phrase. Because Löfven didn’t say this. This hasn’t stopped Shelton claiming so constantly on TV and radio. What the Swedish PM actually said in this regard is reported as follows in the article Shelton links to;

We Social Democrats are working to ensure all priests will consecrate everyone, including same-sex couples,” Lofven told Kyrkans Tidning magazine.

“I see parallels to the midwife who refuses to perform abortions. If you work as a midwife you must be able to perform abortions, otherwise you have to do something else… It is the same for priests,” he said.

Another constant from Shelton is the London based Jewish Vishnitz Girls school. He tells his audience that it faces closure “because it won’t teach its students that gender is fluid”. The Independent reported in part on June 26th, 2017;

A private faith school in London has failed its third Ofsted inspection for refusing to teach its pupils about homosexuality.

Inspectors visiting Vishnitz Girls School in north London last month said the Orthodox school does not give pupils “a full understanding of fundamental British values”, The Telegraph reported.

[…]

Ofsted makes clear that schools are not expected to “promote” ideas about sexual orientation or gender reassignment, but they are expected to “encourage pupils’ respect for other people, paying particular regard to the protected characteristics set out in the 2010 Equalities Act”.

Perhaps one of the most strikingly misleading claims from Lyle Shelton is a post in the ACL blog headed, You Won’t Believe The Latest Consequence Of Same-Sex Marriage In Canada.

A new law in Ontario, Canada, threatens to take children from “abusive” parents who do not agree with them changing their gender.

Australian Christian Lobby Managing Director Lyle Shelton warned that if the gender diversity requirement was removed from the Marriage Act, pressure would build for similar law here.

Ontario’s Minister of Children and Youth Services Michael Coteau said his Bill 89, passed last week, designated parents who did not agree with their children’s chosen gender as “abusive”.

The wording here is designed to mislead readers into believing that a new law has been passed solely to label parents who do not agree with their child’s gender change as “abusive”. And that should parents not agree with the gender change there is a risk the children will be taken. But is this really what Bill 89 is claiming? The Explanatory Note includes;

The paramount purpose of the Act — to promote the best interests, protection and well-being of children — remains unchanged from the current Act.

The additional purposes of the Act are expanded to include the following:

         To recognize that services to children and young persons should be provided in a manner that respects regional differences wherever possible and takes into account,

                physical, emotional, spiritual, mental and developmental needs and differences among children and young persons;

                a child’s or young person’s race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression; and

                a child’s or young person’s cultural and linguistic needs.

         To recognize that services to children and young persons and their families should be provided in a manner that builds on the strengths of the families wherever possible.

The Bill in total is extensive. 352 sections (containing subsections) within 13 parts. After the preamble the second reference to gender, for example, is mentioned (in the Bill proper) in Paramount purposes and other purposes. It is found in Part 1, Section (1), subsection iii, as below;

Part 1 (1)  The paramount purpose of this Act is to promote the best interests, protection and well-being of children.

(2) The additional purposes of this Act, so long as they are consistent with the best interests, protection and well-being of children, are to recognize the following:

(3) Services to children and young persons should be provided in a manner that,
[…]
iii.  takes into account a child’s or young person’s race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression,

The term “abusive” does not appear in the Bill copy to which Shelton has linked. There are 16 matches to “gender” and 35 matches to “abuse”. It is quite clear from reading the text surrounding these terms that removal of children would be from a demonstrably abusive environment. Exactly what constitutes abuse is well defined. Merit for Shelton’s claim that children would be taken from parents who simply do not “agree” with their child’s gender is lacking.

I find it concerning that Shelton makes this contention in such a fickle manner. The psychological challenges experienced by LGBTIQ adolescents subject to unwanted gender bias or bigotry are well documented. As are many tragic outcomes in some cases where proper support is denied. Society itself must be confident that the rights of children and adolescents will be protected in this regard.

Fortunately this Bill strives to build on the strengths of families “wherever possible” and seeks to promote “the best interests, protection and well-being of children”. It is patently clear that reference to gender identity and sexual orientation is a very small part of what makes up a child’s or young person’s identity. Australia has nothing to fear from Canada’s protection of children because the nation has same-sex marriage legislation.

A number of the other “consequences” listed above are to be revisited by Supreme Courts and one is presently subject to appeal. Others demonstrably discriminate. Indeed there will always be those seeking to draw attention to themselves, or as was said in the case of “Washington grandmother” Barronelle Stutzman, seeking her fifteen minutes of fame. Shelton constantly embellishes and misleads to create the illusion of unjustified, socially restrictive “consequences”.

Shelton’s manufactured concern about a “package deal” and demonstrably unlikely “consequences” is puerile and immoral.

Lies and Deceit from Australia’s “Vaxxed” promoters

Lies and deception are second nature to the Australian Vaccination skeptics Network and particularly the group’s conspiracy pushing driving force, Meryl Dorey.

Never one to stray far from the spotlight Dorey has been active in promoting the anti-vaccine conspiracy theory propaganda flick, Vaxxed. Along with Polly Tommy, Brian Hooker, Tasha David and Suzanne Humphries, Dorey has recently caused a stir in misleading the managers of venues booked to screen the bogus “documentary”.

This sort of scam was to be expected given the mid-May warning about the film and involvement of disgraced ex-doctor, Andrew Wakefield. On May 15th The West Australian published Parents warned on Perth screening of anti-vaccination film, Vaxxed.

Parents are being warned to ignore propaganda promoting the first WA screening of the anti-vaccination documentary Vaxxed.

The screening of the controversial film in Perth on Friday is being advertised through social media, with the southern suburbs location due to be given to ticketholders 30 minutes beforehand.

Directed by Andrew Wakefield — a former doctor whose debunked study played a key role in the anti-vaccination movement — the film reignites false claims about a link between the mumps, measles and rubella vaccine and autism. […]

Australian Medical Association national president Michael Gannon said people only had to see who the filmmaker was to know the content was questionable.

“Andrew Wakefield was found to have fraudulently produced evidence around the original MMR scare in Britain, which led to him being deregistered as a doctor,” Dr Gannon said

By the time the planned July 25th screening in QLD was due, the group was seemingly getting creative. QLD Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk heads a state government that is firmly pro-vaccine. Still, the venue chosen by the Vaxxed crew to peddle their nonsense was Miami State High School. As the ABC later reported;

Earlier this month Health Minister Cameron Dick urged residents to boycott the film that has caused controversy by linking a measles-mumps-rubella vaccine to autism.

Oh my.

In order to slip by the looming conflict of interest and the likely surety that anti-vaccine twaddle would be denied a state school venue, the Vaxxed crew decided to, well.., to lie. About the booking. The, um, purpose. About the purpose of the booking. Mmm, yes um, they did. The ABC quote the QLD Premier;

My preliminary advice is that there has been some misrepresentation to the school in question, Ms Palaszczuk said.

“They conveyed to the principal that it was to be conveying information about organic produce.”

A report at Diluted Thinking (which I recommend reading) includes a statement from the Miami State High School Principal, Sue Dalton. It’s quite clear that at no time was the intention to screen or the eventual screening of Vaxxed conveyed by those deceiving Miami State School. Sue Dalton’s statement notes;

The school hall was hired to an independent local business owner to promote their healthy lifestyle business of organic foods and coffee. It is incredibly disappointing that the agreed purpose of the use of hire did not reflect the forum that was presented last night.

Reasonable Hank also covered this abuse of state education facilities and has fortunately included video of Polly Tommy revealing her unstable anti-vaccinationism. This would appear to be a woman crippled by malignant ideology and intent on spreading potentially lethal falsehood.

The next morning, July 27th, The Gold Coast Bulletin published an ideal front page.

Incredibly the dishonest Vaxxed crew again played their hand at deceit on July 28th taking advantage of Lake Macquarie City Council. Diluted Thinking covers this matter in depth presenting an excellent examination of the facts leading to a comprehensive conclusion. Dorey and Tommey are exposed as the amateur charlatans that they are.

The Newcastle Herald have covered the appalling conduct of the Vaxxed crew. Anger as Charleston community centre The Place screens film linking vaccines with autism;

HEALTH authorities and a Lake Macquarie councillor whose son is on the autism spectrum have slammed a decision to screen a film linking vaccines with autism at a Charlestown community centre.

On Friday night The Place, a not-for-profit centre set up between Lake Macquarie council and property group GPT, hosted a screening of Vaxxed, a documentary that is being toured by the Australian Vaccination-skeptics Network (AVN).

The AVN told Hunter ticket-holders of the venue by text and email two hours before the screening.

Lake Macquarie Liberal councillor Kevin Baker, a director of The Place, said he was shocked centre management had agreed to screen the film, whose central premise is that the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine may be leading to an epidemic of autism diagnoses in children.

“It’s something that’s pretty close to me. I’ve got close family with autism including my nephew, and my son sits on the spectrum,” he said.

[…]

Hunter New England Health firmly refuted the film’s portrayal of vaccination as harmful to children.

“High vaccination rates have ensured that serious childhood diseases including measles have become rare in Hunter New England,” a spokesperson said.

“We will continue to encourage parents to vaccinate their children.”

[…]

The health service also took aim at Vaxxed director Andrew Wakefield, the lead author of a controversial study published in 1998 and since retracted that claimed the autism link.

On the topic of Dorey deception, she was behind a microphone the following day, July 29th, at the Club On East in Sutherland NSW. Dorey spends almost ten minutes preaching to the converted. However this doesn’t lend a grain of truth to anything she says. Except of course that they find it harder getting media attention than previously. This is due to the effective and ongoing work of Stop The AVN which has simply held the AVN and AVsN to account with respect to various health, fair trading and business legislation in NSW and Australia.

  • Listen to the audio below;

——————————-

Dipping into her fantasy bag Dorey claims that “we have pushed really hard to try and make vaccination reaction reporting mandatory for doctors”. It seems that until doctors report vaccines as striking down huge numbers of children through illness and death, Meryl Dorey will not be satisfied on adverse reaction reporting.

They have also tried to get an ethically impossible study completed to compare the health of the fully vaccinated and the fully unvaccinated. Perhaps this is part of the reason anti-vaccinationists dismiss herd immunity. Sound methodology for such a study is quite a challenge given that the health of “the unvaccinated” benefits from herd immunity.

Dorey then claims that following a visit to Canberra the head of the Liberal Party wrote a letter to the AVN stating, “we know why you’re asking this question and we will not do this study, because it could lead to changes in vaccination policy”.

To laughter Dorey contends that this response she has plainly made up means that, “vaccination policy is what requires protection in Australia, not the children”.

Later Dorey argues that, “we have the Health Minister in Victoria saying there are no side effects for any vaccine”. Jill Hennessey said no such thing. In fact I remember this incident because there was anti-vaccine hysteria splitting hairs. It was the media release in concern that led to the wave of abusive emails, Facebook posts and tweets. The minister never mentioned “side effects”. She mentioned vaccine “risks” and unfortunately she suggested there “are no risks”, when in fact there are minuscule risks.

There are no risks in vaccinating your children, the science is really clear. Talk to a G.P. Don’t get your advice from a quack on the Internet.

This anti-vaccine video channel has the minister’s media appearance. Still whilst she was likely overly focused on the fear being pushed by the anti-vaccine lobby and made a general statement she has since made other statements. A media release in 2017 again never mentioned “side effects”, but included.

Despite scientific evidence proving they are safe and effective, and have saved millions of lives, around 25 per cent of people still have concerns about vaccines.

This more recent and more accurate statement is what Meryl Dorey should focus on, rather than conveniently making up something based on the hysteria of almost 18 months ago. This doesn’t stop Dorey getting audience members “who know someone with a vaccine injury” to stand up. About 25 people stand up. Dorey suggests this is about half. Yet not only is this an inaccurate manner in which to gather data Dorey was present when this statement listing serious vaccine injuries between zero and five per year was made to the Social Services Legislative Amendment in 2015.

After misleading her audience on the topic of vaccine injuries Dorey leads into “the right to have free and informed health choices for our children. Nobody has the right to take that away”.

In fact I agree. So one must ask Meryl Dorey why she would seek to sabotage the Australian vaccine schedule and place countless individuals at risk of vaccine preventable disease? Why take away the very best informed health programmes that evidence based medicine has to offer? What she calls “free and informed health choices”, are in fact misinformed and radically dangerous choices prompted by fear and ignorance.

To the pile of misinformation that Meryl Dorey has been pushing onto the ignorant for her own gain for years we must certainly add Andrew Wakefield’s latest scam; Vaxxed.

 

A Little Boy Lost and the Queen of stealing children

Recently Meryl Dorey donned her crown to proclaim across the land the pressing need to hide unwell and at risk children from child welfare departments.

The audio of Ms. Dorey’s video is below;

For almost 36 minutes Australia’s self appointed queen of medical system dissent sought to terrify and motivate her Facebook Live audience by creating the illusion that child services deployed something like Black Ops caseworkers. Dorey cited a letter from a FACS whistleblower to the minister responsible for FACS NSW. The whistleblower had apparently, “in his six or seven years of working for FACS had not taken a child off of (sic) one family”.

The task of removing children was left to a particular mold of caseworker who the whistleblower advised were known as “removalists”. Dorey couldn’t find the letter, which she had read on her iPad whilst in her bed chamber. I have no reason to believe the letter doesn’t exist and have seen the term “removalists” in a newspaper reader comment published prior to Dorey’s performance. Yet I am skeptical as to certain motives attributed to these “removalists” based on Ms. Dorey’s reading of the whistleblower’s letter. She tells her audience that, “so many of his, um, workmates were actually called removalists because that’s all they did they didn’t care what happened to the children, um, they just thought of it as either their power trip or um, [chuckle] their sadisticness (sic), I have no idea but they were moving so many children off of (sic) families without ever trying to keep them together”.

With this horrifying scene set in our minds we are reminded that it’s now twenty days since Chase has been with his family. A court hearing that day was adjourned until the 22nd of June 2017 and, “until that time the parents have no visitation. They can’t even see their son.” Dorey then continues with a comparison to the stories we read about in the papers, “all the time where DoCS or FACS or Child Protection has been told that a child is at risk, um, where they’ve had, you know, terrible physical harm to the children. Where they’ve been burnt, they’ve had broken bones, they’ve been beaten to within an inch of their lives. And those cases it seems FACS does not, um, does not do anything with them, and too often the child there dies or is, um, permanently injured and nothing is done”.

Yes, you read that correctly.

“But you have a case like Chase and so may other families where parents are absolutely doing the right thing by their children. They are taking good care of their children and, um, they get their kids ripped off of (sic) them and put into hospital situation or care situation where they can be harmed significantly and traumatised”. Dorey continues to customise this invented “hospital situation” horror with the conviction of someone who has actually been there continually monitoring Chase. He’s always been with his family but for the last twenty days has been lying in a hospital somewhere, “without anyone to love him, without anyone to take care of him, without anyone to see when he’s feeling harm or pain or whatever, and this is the situation that so many families find themselves in”.

Yes, she actually said that.

(See related ♣ Update at end of post)

Then it’s on to the conspiracy behind the most recent update to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of mental disorders – DSM-5. Dorey reasons that High Functioning Autism and Asperger’s will no longer be diagnosed under autism (“which is a way the government is going to try to reduce the explosion of autistic diagnoses”). However this claim essentially contends that diagnoses of severity have been abandoned. This is not so. What this DSM-5 conspiracy basically supports is the belief that governments and health authorities across the globe will try to suppress the number of autism diagnoses in an attempt to suppress the fictional “vaccine-autism” link.

However autistic severity is based on social communication impairments and restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior (see Table 1). An extremely pertinent point with respect to severity is this reference to DSM-IV diagnoses which can be found in a great many references that rely on DSM-5 criteria. Eg; from CDC:

Note: Individuals with a well-established DSM-IV diagnosis of autistic disorder, Asperger’s disorder, or pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified should be given the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. Individuals who have marked deficits in social communication, but whose symptoms do not otherwise meet criteria for autism spectrum disorder, should be evaluated for social (pragmatic) communication disorder.

Antivaccinationists want to have their DSM cake and scoff it down. Changes in the diagnosis of autism based on DSM criteria are not new. Demonstrably so the role of shifting diagnostic criteria in raising autism diagnoses is in no way an attempt to suppress the bogus “vaccine-autism” link . A September 2015 article in The Conversation looked at the widening diagnostic criteria of autism potentially changing what is regarded as normal.

Before 1980, the word “autistic” appeared in the DSM only as a trait to describe schizophrenia. But that doesn’t mean diagnostic criteria for autism didn’t exist. A 1956 article by Leo Kanner (who is credited with “discovering” autism) and Leon Eisenberg focused on two criteria: aloofness and a significant resistance to changes in routines, noticeable in a child by 24 months of age.

Further reading for those who favour or are familiar with Autism Speaks;

Dorey goes to great lengths to weave Munchausen syndrome by proxy into her fear campaign. She argues the DSM-5 term for this diagnosis is Medical child abuse. Rather, Factitious disorder imposed on another (FDIA) is the DSM-5 diagnostic term whilst medical child abuse has been in use for some time. Nonetheless Dorey wanders off into the realm of patently absurd claims as to what this abuse is. Primarily it is not abuse Dorey argues. Rather, “it is more symptoms that are involved with controlling how people raise their children”.

Homeschooling could lead to a diagnosis of medical child abuse. Eating or feeding your child organic foods. Being a vegan or vegetarian. These can all be used Dorey argues, “to say that you are abusing your child medically and, they can be taken off of (sic) you”. And then at last we get to what is indeed child abuse but for which there is no suggestion from government health departments that children will be removed due to medical neglect.

“Not vaccinating your child at all or fully could be medical child abuse and you could get your child removed from you”.

This indeed has meat on the bones. Considering people like Tasha David and others who insist their children are “vaccine injured” without any evidence and who subject these same children to dangerous pseudoscience based on a belief in widespread vaccine induced harm. Chase is a strong example where medical neglect albeit unintentional is clear.

At about the 6:20 mark Dorey tells us that up until about ten years ago she and her husband used to call their home the “underground railroad” due to the series of families they hid from FACS or DoCS. Dorey’s feelings about the “arrogant bastard” doctor from whom a family with a 12 month old baby with infected varicella sore on her face was fleeing are clear.

Dorey claims that about ten years ago the vaccine hadn’t been introduced. It was introduced in 1999. Nonetheless this family had fled from a hospital based doctor who was apparently going to prescribe IV antibiotics. The family wanted to try a topical antibiotic but we’re told the doctor lost his cool and threatened to call DoCS. The family took off and ran to the sanctuary of the Dorey household. A second opinion confirmed infection and puss were present. The advice was to simply keep it clean. As with Chase an alert (All Points Bulletin apparently) had been issued. We never hear of how this was legally resolved.

I must say, I have my doubts. Dorey has never mentioned this before nor any others on the “underground railroad”. I did document the August 2008 AVN money making scam through the shameful exploitation of a family that was hiding from authorities to avoid the neonatal hepatitis B vaccination for a newborn, born to an HBV positive mother. The AVN set up a fighting fund which ultimately made them just under $12,000. Although donors were led to believe this would help the family not one cent found their way to them.

As always – and this is exactly what I expect is the main game here – Meryl Dorey led her gullible followers into believing she will save them from the horrors outlined above. Join, donate, harass reputable authorities, MP’s and health advocates. With respect to the 2008 scam NSW Office of Liquor Gaming and Racing (who had cause to investigate the AVN at length) observed in October 2010:

During the course of the inquiry evidence of possible breaches of the Charitable Trusts Act 1993 was detected in relation to the following specific purpose appeals conducted by AVN:
Fighting Fund – to support a homeless family, allegedly seeking to avoid a court order to immunise a child with legal and living expenses. The appeal ran for a short time in 2008 and raised $11,810. None of the funds were spent on this purpose.

Clearly Dorey dreams up these scams and exploitation of gullible followers for her own benefit.

Back to her video and Meryl swiftly moved on to the notion of “communities”. She proposes caring about and protecting each other. If anyone is being pursued by police, “because of a stupid doctor who basically couldn’t care less about the health of the child but is caring more about their ego, come to my house and I will take you in”. Acknowledging what happened at the Church of Ubuntu she realises police numbers outweigh those who have no regard for the law. So the plan is to have 20 or 30 people in each area “around Australia” on call. Human shields, Dorey suggests. To defend against DoCS. Her audience likes the idea.

Dorey on chase1

“It is time to take back control of our lives, our family and our country” rambles Dorey

Of course she’s not looking for confrontation. Nah. They are “Martin Luther King or Gandhi-like people”, Dorey assures listeners. Having just said however, “if the police show up they’re going to have to come through me”. Australia “is becoming a dictatorship”, she offers in way of explanation. Then comes more deplorable deception about Chase. Dorey claims;

I wake up in the morning and the first thing I think about is where is Chase. Is he okay? Is he crying for his parents and doesn’t know where the heck he is? And you know I’ve seen too many families hurt this way and I can’t sit back and let this happen to another family without trying to do something.

This is of course, total nonsense. Dorey was not involved in the Chase Walker issue until all the drama and danger had passed. Then she publically attacked Peter Little on Facebook with the aim of belittling him and painting him as a worthless force. A very easy task to complete. Having pushed her way into the centre she is now busy selling the Meryl Dorey brand. As always you must act because;

“Today it was Mark and Cini. Tomorrow it could be you”.

Dorey on chase2

Dorey is now arguing for the illegal heroics she recently criticised Peter Little for encouraging in others


Meryl had read a story about an elderly man whose daughter had power of attorney over him. She would take him to hospital where he didn’t want to go because “they treated him like garbage, they caused such pain and they were not making him better, the daughter was making him better”. Without explanation Dorey informs us that “the hospital” took power of attorney from the daughter who was arrested for trying to protect her father. She continues without a shred of evidence;

The father was taken to the hospital where he was killed by the hospital, they physically… and it turned out that because the hospital had made themselves guardian – not power of attorney of this older man, when he died half of his estate went to the hospital. There seems to be a financial interest in many of these cases. Not all of them but in some of them there does seem to be a financial interest.

Dorey advises her audience to register with a doctor via ACNEM – Australasian College of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine. This is in case a Fan of The AVN must attend a hospital for an emergency. The ACNEM doctor can be the family doctor and if necessary can provide a second opinion. Hospital doctors should mostly comply. But as Dorey reminds us;

They act like lords and masters but they’re not. They are our employees but they certainly don’t act like it. If I had an employee that acted like most doctors do I would have fired them years ago.

Dorey goes on for another 10 minutes boasting of her moderator power and yet again pretending B52 is another person than her. Mark and Cini through no fault of their own other than not following doctors orders are suffering the consequences of ignoring medical advice. But this is of course misleading and harmful nonsense. Consider the screenshot from NSW Community Services (taken June 12, 2017).

NSW Community Services – Child Abuse, Neglect

With respect to Cini and Mark Walker, Sue Iraci writes in part in MJA Insight in “We must hold charlatans to account”;

This story starts in 2012, when a much-loved baby boy was born to a young couple. Although the pregnancy and birth appeared to progress normally, the newborn struggled from the outset, with thick meconium in the liquor, early oxygen desaturation and a seizure within hours of birth. As time progressed, the child was diagnosed with cerebral palsy, microcephaly and frequent seizures. Eventually, he was requiring multiple medications for seizure control, and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding to minimise aspiration. […]

Early testing has not revealed a cause for the neurological problems, though a rare genetic cause is considered likely.

It is not clear what first set this family on the road to declaring the child “vaccine-injured”, but, by mid-to-late 2016, they had stopped using the recommended PEG formula, believing that he was allergic to it, and began substituting a homemade organic plant food puree diet, without the advice of a dietitian.

They also stopped the pharmaceutical medications and began giving the child unregulated cannabis oil, supplied by a deregistered doctor who had lost his registration due to personal polydrug use. They became part of a “church” that promotes the use of cannabis as a “healing herb” and, at around the same time, met a non-practising lawyer who encouraged them to “fight the system”. Having found in the neonatal records that the child had his first seizure prior to any vaccination, the narrative changed to “vitamin K damage”.

At the end of last month I published a post that looked at just how much harm Chase had been potentially subject to, and the shocking consequences to his health. There’s little doubt his parents were exploited by a mix of egotistical, reckless charlatans who hope to be unaccountable.

Meryl Dorey could have made use of evidence from last year’s NSW Parliamentary Inquiry into Child Protection. A number of problems were found with the present system. This is the result of a strong democracy, not Dorey’s “dictatorship”.

However dealing with facts has never been Meryl’s strong point.

Dorey on chase3

Only one member is aware of the Parliamentary Committee and suggests a sensible approach. No “dictatorship” would allow such scrutiny

——————-

Update June 16, 2017; Thanks to a comment from Bridgette Fahey-Goldsmith I can confirm that Cini and Mark were offered a visit with Chase which they refused because they were “overwhelmed with fear” according to Paul Robert Burton from the church of Ubunto. One can perhaps find no more striking example of the harm caused to Cini, Mark and Chase by charlatans peddling sheer hysteria with respect to child services.

What appears to have happened is that Cini and Mark believed they would come to harm if they were taken to visit Chase on their own. But why? Given social media chatter planning to snatch Chase, I can only conclude that the army of screaming, spitting “supporters” wanted their chance to chant protest songs, wave signs, abuse staff, disturb patients, terrify Chase and quite likely try to remove him from hospital. FACS and hospital staff would have predicted this also. Thus the option for a family-only visit was offered. As this didn’t suit the hippy behind the curtain, the exhausted, paranoid parents were likely fed this story of them coming to harm, alone, “somewhere on their own without anybody”.

Below is a 52 second outtake from a Facebook Live caper on June 6th 2017 in which Paul Robert Burton informed his audience;

Now I did hear… here in New South Wales, [that] Family Community Services NSW did contact Cini and Mark and they made arrangements for them to go on their own unaccompanied somewhere, and they both freaked, uh, really concerned. I don’t know in truth if they asked for them to go with their children, or they asked to attend somewhere on their own without anybody. I’ve never heard of anything like that in my life, ya know, um, in a situation like this, so I too would be fearful and I wouldn’t go anywhere unaccompanied knowing these kind of things are happening, so they didn’t go for that appointment but not because they didn’t want to see their son, ya know um, just overwhelmed with fear, ya know…

Burton also peddles the “neglected in hospital theme” as Dorey did, for a few seconds later he asks, “Who’s huggin’ him, who’s lookin’ after him, who’s massagin’ him?” The message of fear and the suggestion of Chase suffering alone is unmistakable. Burton claims to have “never heard of anything like this in my life” and that he too would be too fearful to visit his son “in a situation like this… knowing these things are happening”.

What things? No “things” are happening. An exploited and neglected disabled child is having his health restored after months of abuse from calculating and/or deluded charlatans. This is manufactured rubbish. The parents brave enough to flee from authorities across state lines are suddenly in fear of their own safety to seize their proclaimed goal – a visit with Chase. Frighteningly in the near future he may well be back at the mercy of the many circling vultures who await the return of their anti-medicine proxy with glee.

Chase Walker is indeed a little boy lost.

Listen to the audio below:

————————

Download the short Paul Robert Burton mp3 outtake here.

A Little Boy Lost and the Goat in the Sheep’s paddock

A few days ago Australia’s Seven Network screened Saving Chase as the subject of their Sunday Night programme.

The general plight of Chase can be gleaned from watching the programme. However this hasn’t just happened in the last few weeks. More so in no way, as Melissa Doyle tells viewers during the introduction, is this “a classic case of what would you do?”. Indeed Doyle confirms this in her next statement.

A child just four years old suffering from a serious disability. He is distressed, in constant pain and gripped by violent, uncontrollable seizures. Understandably his parents want him to be well and happy like other little boys. In desperation they abandoned traditional style medicine and turned to a bizarre hippy-style church for help.

The question rather, is “How can any parent subject their innocent, vulnerable, high needs child to the unverified guesswork pushed upon him by a reckless, dangerous and deregistered doctor who had caused “catastrophic” injuries through administering cannabis oil to prior patients?

https://youtu.be/xs4bhovdfG0

Arrogant, unrepentant and angry with the demands of genuine medical science, Andrew Katelaris, the so-called Dr. Pot is the last person who should be anywhere near a fragile child like Chase. Presently as a result of his disdain for medicine and accountability Katelaris is “permanently prohibited from supplying or administering cannabis or any of its derivatives to any person for the treatment or purported treatment of cancer”.

It appears to be a very thin line that he is walking on.

Despite being deregistered for breaking the law in 2005, Katelaris last year managed to break the law for non-registered health practitioners. He injected cannabis oil into two women suffering from ovarian cancer, in what was described as “a hasty, ill-conceived and unsafe clinical trial of injected cannabis oil as a treatment for malignant ascites”.

The ABC reported in part;

The NSW Health Care Complaints Commission concluded Dr Katelaris put his own interest in self-protection and self-promotion ahead of the health and safety of two vulnerable women suffering from ovarian cancer.

It found he posed a risk to the health and safety of members of the public, prompting him to be permanently prohibited from supplying or administering cannabis or any of its derivatives, to any person for the treatment or purported treatment of cancer.

The full HCCC finding published on October 25 2016 may be found here.

As is plain in the video Katelaris deems himself right and everyone else wrong when it comes to his use, or rather abuse, of cannabis. It’s impossible to call his guesswork the “medicinal” use of cannabis. Katelaris conducts no trials, keeps no clinical notes, takes no measurements and lacks the use of basic statistical models. As the HCCC noted last year in describing his bogus “trial” it lacked credibility, authorisation, scientific legitimacy or ethics approval. The best he could offer reporter Alex Cullen with regards to efficacy was that he sees results. However he admits his work is “experimental”.

Problems began with Katelaris at least as far back as 1986. The NSW Medical Board record that in this year he “self-administered morphine”. The 2006 NSW Medical Board Annual Report includes a compelling paragraph on page 24;

Andrew John Katelaris

In 1991 Andrew Katelaris was suspended for 12 months from the practice of medicine because of his opiate use. However on return to practice Mr Katelaris continued to indulge in use of restricted or illegal substances, including morphine, pethidine, cannabis and ketamine.

In December 2005 the Medical Tribunal found Mr Katelaris guilty of professional misconduct conduct and ordered his de-registration with no review period for three years. The Tribunal found Mr Katelaris had inappropriately prescribed schedule 8 narcotics, a schedule 4D drugs and cannabis to friends, family and to himself not in accordance with therapeutic standards. It was also alleged he breached his registration conditions. The Tribunal considered that the flagrant disregard by Mr Katelaris of the conditions on the his registration was conduct that portrayed indifference and an abuse of the privileges which accompany registration as a medical practitioner.

The full NSW Medical Tribunal Determination, December 15 2005 may be found here. Katelaris could not apply for re-registration for a period of three years. It is clear from reading this document that Katelaris struggled with his opioid addiction and this was compounded by surgery in March 1992 for a spinal disc lesion. His Schedule 8 authority was restored in August 1992 with restrictions that he could not take possession of Schedule 8 drugs, only prescribing for patients at the hospital where he worked. In October 1993 his authority was fully restored.

On 14 January 2002 the Pharmaceutical Services Branch of NSW Health Department received a report of an empty packet of ketamine at the home of Katelaris labelled with a name other than his. On 19 January 2002, Katelaris was admitted to a hospital Emergency Department. Records note he stated he had been self administering ketamine since September 2001. His struggle with addiction continued with appropriate restrictions being applied when necessary. Regrettably for him it has destroyed his medical career.

Nonetheless his problems with self medication are not the problem for Chase. The danger is his reckless use of cannabis on vulnerable patients combined with the conviction he is doing what is right and what is safe. With a history of obtaining opiates for “friends and family” it is clear his provision of cannabis could be dangerously reckless.

In 2009 he sought to “review an order that his name be removed from the register of Medical Practitioners”. You can read the full NSW Medical Tribunal determination here. It is noted that in addition to the 1986 use of morphine he used both morphine and cocaine in 1988. No conviction was recorded and he was placed on a good behaviour recognizance for two years. He again self-administered morphine and at his own request his right to prescribe Schedule 8 drugs was withdrawn.

It was 1989 when Katelaris initially sought for the prescribing restrictions to be lifted. Restrictions on Schedule 8 remained but the Medical Board, after interviewing Katelaris decided some restrictions could be lifted. This depended on undergoing urinalysis and informing his employer “of the undertakings”. Katelaris refused thus the application was unsuccessful. The determination continues on describing his addiction to and use of morphine, Pethidine, Ketamine, cocaine and Fortral.

The Goat in the Sheep’s paddock

In describing his poor insight Katelaris said;

Poor insight, really that I was prepared to stand outside of a majority opinion. I must admit I considered myself very much…like a goat in a sheep’s paddock where a lot of people were content to walk one way but I felt free and quite unconstrained to exercise my own independence of thought and action. I still in many ways feel it is the right of every sovereign being to exercise independence of thought and action but being part of a profession which has considerable responsibility and access to technologies and pharmaceuticals of considerable strength and power, they have to be constrained so whilst maintaining an independence of thought I now accept that one does have to, to a greater or lesser degree, fall in with the herd, certainly in regard to accepted behaviour such as self- administration I have very little problem with saying that without equivocation.

He went on to say he was “testing the law” and was “impatient to bring forward progress in Australia”. When it came to not being able to supply cannabis to others in pain he added;

…but the insight was that I failed to appreciate the authoritarian stance and lack of compassion in the legal system

The application was dismissed and the applicant had to pay the respondent’s costs. The April 2010 NSW Medical Board News included on page 8;

Application for restoration to Register – irregular prescribing, own use of cannabis and breach of conditions

Issue

Mr Andrew Katelaris (MBBS (Syd) 1982) was deregistered in 2005 by the Medical Tribunal which set a non-review period of 3 years following a finding of professional misconduct for irregular prescribing of Schedule 8 and 4D drugs to family and friends, his own use of cannabis and breach of conditions on his registration. In his application for restoration, Dr Katelaris argued that he had developed insight and was a changed man.

Findings

The 2009 Tribunal did not accept that Mr Katelaris was a changed man, referring to his conviction for 4 criminal offences since 2005 and his inability to accept the 2005 decision; the application was dismissed.

As we can see today with respect to reckless administration of cannabis Katelaris remains very much a goat in a sheep’s paddock, unable to accept his responsibility to evidence based science. Despite his penchant for obtaining opioids for “friends and family” it is Katelaris’ reckless pseudoscientific use of cannabis that has raised complaints relating to the Drug Misuse and Traffiking Act 1985. Katelaris admitted his supply of cannabis for individuals between October 2002 and September 2004 was in contravention of the Act.

It was reported today that Katelaris was arrested yesterday and will;

…appear in court today charged with possession and supply of illegal drugs and also having cash suspected of being from the proceeds of crime. Police raided the St Ives home of Andrew Katelaris yesterday morning where they allegedly seized cash and cannabis found in the Luton Place resident of the former doctor. The 62-year-old was taken to Hornsby Police Station and charged and spent the night in the cells after being refused bail. As a doctor Mr Katelaris was an outspoken supporter of the use of cannabis oil for cancer sufferers.

Although it is almost certain that Chase’s condition is not a “vaccine injury” his parents have been convinced not only of this, but that he will die if fed and medicated properly by qualified medical staff. Under the “care” of Katelaris and others he has lost 50% of his body weight and is notably emaciated [See below].

Tragically last month his parents fled with Chase to prevent him being admitted to hospital for proper care, sparking an amber alert across QLD and NSW. In disturbing insight into how the rights of Chase are unappreciated by his mother, Cini Walker she posted a video at the time asking;

“My son is … Do I even own him anymore? Who’s going to help our family? When is this nightmare going to stop?”

Ownership of another human being? Whilst it is likely incorrect to suggest Cini thinks she owns Chase as she might a piece of property, it does yield significant insight into how incapable she is of accepting the role of Child Services, the necessity of medical care and the harm caused in snatching him from hospital to flee across state lines.

They stayed at the NSW Church of Ubuntu [Facebook] until FACS authorities under the protection of police came and removed Chase due to “medical neglect”. Indeed his life had become a perverse sideshow for a number of self-serving anti-science conspiracy theorists. The so-called church was raided on December 1st last year.

Presently Chase is safe in hospital for at least another week, despite the abuse and harassment of hospital staff by his “supporters”.

Unfortunately regardless of where he is or whom he is with Chase will continue to be used as a proxy for the antivaccinationist conspiracy theorists. A poster boy for the proposed magic of cannabis.

His parents are blind to the abuse and suffering they have allowed to be forced upon him. They have been manipulated into believing Chase must not be treated by reliable medical means and are blind to the towering immorality of what they have allowed; ongoing, sustained and life threatening medical neglect.

Only the strictest of conditions and ongoing monitoring will suffice when he is released into his mother’s “care”.

Chase before (left) and after his parents ceased prescribed nutrition

  • Updates added to text on June 1st 2017