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.

‘Vaxxed’ Debunked – a selection of references

There is absolutely no doubt that the fraudumentary “Vaxxed: From Cover-up to Catastrophe” is demonstrably bogus nonsense.

It is also potentially very harmful nonsense and as such deserves to be debunked when the opportunity arises. There are a huge number of references that outline just why, and indeed how, this intellectual revulsion is firmly discredited by evidence. More so, there are a range of approaches presented in various critiques. This isn’t a result of authors seeking to be creative. Rather the final product of Vaxxed is so egregiously wrong on so many levels, it can be nudged into a pile of rubble from so many angles.

Interestingly the argument can be made that the main claim put forward in Vaxxed helped in destroying any attempt at credibility. The story of a so-called CDC whistleblower was easily revealed as bogus. The companion claim, that suppressed data showing a 340% increased risk of autism among specific populations of African-American boys resonated only in the echo chambers of antivaccinationists. Particularly when in the only official statement [2] from the “whistleblower”, we read irrefutable support for vaccination;

I want to be absolutely clear that I believe vaccines have saved and continue to save countless lives. I would never suggest that any parent avoid vaccinating children of any race. Vaccines prevent serious diseases, and the risks associated with their administration are vastly outweighed by their individual and societal benefits. (William Thompson)

I trust these references are helpful.

1) This article from Snopes covers various sources of disinformation that sustain the primary lies in Vaxxed. Using articles that address the fallacious claims of Brian Hooker from an evidence based background and a range of other sources Snopes offers a compelling rebuttal.

Fraud at the CDC uncovered?

Rumour: Data suppressed by the CDC proved that the MMR vaccine produces a 340% increased risk of autism in African-American boys.

2) Did a high ranking whistleblower really reveal that the CDC covered up proof that vaccines cause autism in African-American boys? David Gorski; Science Based Medicine, August 25th 2014 [Source]

3) Autism, Atlanta, MMR: serious questions and also how Brian Hooker and Andrew Wakefield are causing damage to the autism communities Matt Carey; Left Brain Right Brain, August 26th 2014 [Source]

4) Hey, where is everybody? The “CDC whistleblower” manufactroversy continues apace Orac; Respectful Insolence, August 26th 2014 [Source]

5) Journal takes down autism-vaccine paper pending investigation Adam Marcus; Retraction Watch, August 27th 2014 [Source]

An article purporting to find that black children are at substantially increased risk for autism after early exposure to the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine has been shelved.

Although we don’t know if the events are related, the move comes amid claims that a CDC whistleblower has accused health officials of suppressing information about the link.

Not surprisingly, the prospect that the CDC has been sitting on evidence of an autism-vaccine connection for more than a decade has inflamed the community of activists wrongly convinced that such a link exists.

The paper, “Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination timing and autism among young african american boys: a reanalysis of CDC data,” was written by Brian Hooker, an engineer-turned-biologist and an active member of that community. It was submitted in April, accepted on August 5, and published on August 8.

Translational Neurodegeneration, which published the article earlier this month, has now removed it and posted the following notice:

This article has been removed from the public domain because of serious concerns about the validity of its conclusions. The journal and publisher believe that its continued availability may not be in the public interest. Definitive editorial action will be pending further investigation.

6) Retraction Note: Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination timing and autism among young African American boys; a reanalysis of CDC data [Source]

7) CDC Whistleblower William Thompson Breaks Silence Todd W; Harpocrates Speaks, August 28th 2014 [Source]

8) The “CDC whistleblower saga”: Updates, backlash, and (I hope) a wrap-up David Gorski; Science Based Medicine, September 1st 2014 [Source]

9) MMR, the CDC and Brian Hooker: A Guide for Parents and the Media Todd W; Harpocrates Speaks, September 8th 2014 [Source]

10) Kevin Barry, you magnificent bastard, I read your antivaccine book! Orac; Respectful Insolence, August 25th 2015 [Source]

11) Reviewing Andrew Wakefield’s VAXXED: Antivaccine propaganda at its most pernicious David Gorski; Science Based Medicine, July 11th 2016 [Source]

12) Andrew Wakefield releases the trailer for his William Thompson video. Slick production and dishonesty Matt Carey; Left Brain Right Brain, March 22nd 2016 [Source]

I can’t recommend this article highly enough. In just a few paragraphs readers can see how Thompson was exploited by Hooker and Wakefield. We have this claim from the Vaxxed fiction;

“There’s a whistleblower from the CDC who is going to come out and say that the CDC had committed fraud on the MMR study and that they knew that vaccines were actually causing autism.”

Also we find when the genuine chronology of the Hooker/Thompson discourse is applied that Thompson is not a so-called “CDC whistleblower”. The manner in which Wakefield spliced unrelated conversations together to produce his fallacious narrative becomes clear. As Matt Carey writes (emphasis mine);

Well, Thompson never says in his statement that there was fraud or misconduct by the CDC team. He does say “Reasonable scientists can and do differ in their interpretation of information.”

Let’s back up a bit, what is the Hooker/Wakefield claim of fraud? In a nutshell, they claim that the CDC team found a result they didn’t want to make public and then changed the research plan/protocol so they wouldn’t have to report that. In this exchange from a phone call we can see Hooker apparently trying to get Thompson on tape saying this. Trying because Thompson refuses to say it:

Dr. Hooker: And then you basically deviated from that particular plan in order to reduce the statistical significance that you saw in the African American Cohort.

Dr. Thompson: Well, we, um, we didn’t report findings that, um…All I will say is we didn’t report those findings. I can tell you what the other coauthors will say.

As to the claim by the narrator that Thompson stepped forward and stated… “that [The CDC] knew that vaccines were actually causing autism”. Nope.

[…]

Also, Thompson provided a summary statement to Member of Congress Bill Posey. That was made public along with a great deal more documents when I released them here. What does Mr. Thompson have to say about the study in question showing that vaccines “actually cause autism”?

The fact that we found a strong statistically significant finding among black males does not mean that there was a true association between the MMR vaccine and autism-like features in this subpopulation.

It’s clear that Thompson struggled at times with mental illness. He was deeply concerned that it would become public knowledge. Wakefield’s callous disregard is on display again as we read:

The only reason people know about Thompson’s personal medical history is that Brian Hooker and Andrew Wakefield made it public. Hooker and Wakefield filed a complaint with the Department of Health and Human Services and included this statement from William Thompson:

Ya know, I’m not proud of that and uh, it’s probably the lowest point in my career that I went along with that paper and I also paid a huge price for it because I became delusional.

13) Seven things about vaccines and autism that the movie Vaxxed won’t tell you Ariana Eunjung Cha; May 25th 2016 [Source]

14) Vaxxed – a guide to Andrew Wakefield’s fraudulent film The Original Skeptical Raptor; December 22nd 2016 [Source]

15) The William Thompson Documents – There’s no whistle to blow Matt Carey; Left Brain Right Brain, January 6th 2017 [Source]

—————————————————-

Fake news, post truth, anti-vaccine

In 2016 use of the terms fake news and post truth became commonplace. Yet for those who address attacks on science, scientific consensus and the use of evidence in designing legislation, both concepts already had a long history.

Evidence based public health policy is attacked through the intentional disinformation of fake news and mocked via the subjective, emotional selective trickery of post truth. Alternatives to medicine rely upon bogus testimonials, false claims of scientific backing and pseudscience.

The anti-vaccine lobby want to be seen to be presenting a range of specific arguments against vaccination. Yet their main aim is to convince the unwary that vaccines cause harm and also kill on a huge scale. This in turn demands a feverish use of fake news and post truth. When their lack of fake evidence fails, post truth themes seeking to enrage an audience because governments “take away their right to choose” what’s best for their children’s health may quite sadly find their mark.

Presently we can see application of these concepts respectively with the promotion of the fraudumentary, Vaxxed and claims that Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and his wife profit from their investment in childhood vaccines.

Meryl Dorey

In March last year Meryl Dorey wrote (bold mine);

Australia has a long history of holding its elected representatives accountable when there is even a hint of corruption or profiteering – yet the current PM’s wife is Chairman of the Board of a company involved in vaccination and other pharmaceutical pursuits whose value has increased dramatically due – at least on the surface in my own opinion – to policies which her husband has helped push through Parliament. Did Mr Turnbull excuse himself during the debate on No Jab No Pay? Did he tell Parliament that he had a conflict of interest and excuse himself from the vote on this legislation? These are genuine questions – I don’t know the answer and my investigations so far have not been fruitful. Despite the apparent conflict of interest, not a word has been raised about this in the media or by the opposition.

Ah yes. “Not a word has been raised about this in the media or by the opposition”. Not so. Particularly with the number of media reports on the Turnbull’s investments.

Firstly had Dorey done her research well (or is that not employed the post truth tactic of cherry picking?), she’d know that six months earlier Lucy Turnbull was questioned about potential conflicts of interest for an article that was published in the media. Most importantly, quoting Mrs. Turnbull;

“I am currently in the process of assessing my role on company boards to ensure there are no conflicts of interest,” she says.

“We are seeking advice from various sources, and we hope to be in a position to decide in the next fortnight, whether I can keep doing what I am doing,” she says.

Just over a fortnight later the same paper wrote up Labor’s attacks on the Turnbull’s wealth. The byline was;

Labor’s attacks look like a shabby smear, but the bar is set very high for prime ministers and their partners.

Now in fairness to Meryl I should address why Bill Shorten didn’t challenge the PM for not excusing himself from the vote on No Jab No Pay, based on that conflict of interest. Firstly, Dorey did contend that “on the surface in my own opinion”, the value of Prima BioMed “increased dramatically due to policies which [Turnbull] helped push through Parliament”.

Okay, so it was a feelpinion. Worthless. But we can do better.

Two paragraphs earlier Dorey was ranting at Malcolm Turnbull, including;

Are you afraid that your wife’s profits at Prima BioMed (profits that jumped to AUD $5.5 million mere weeks after No Jab No Pay legislation was announced) might be affected if enough people start to question vaccination?

Above Dorey has linked to a May 21st, 2015 Financial Review piece headed, Patience Pays Off for Prima Chairwoman Lucy Turnbull. A small three paragraph piece, it finishes;

After a $15 million equity injection from US firm Ridgeback Capital last week at 1.73¢ a share, the stock has climbed from 2.2¢ to 16¢ after the bell on Thursday – jumping 190 per cent yesterday alone. And Turnbull’s stake? Now worth a tidy $5.5 million.

Clearly Dorey has fabricated the notion that the value of Prima BioMed increased due to the passing of No Jab No Pay.

Dorey can claim any rubbish she likes to try to sell the line Turnbull is shaping legislation to boost the share value of Prima BioMed. But the $15 million from Ridgeback Capital didn’t go to a company that manufacturers childhood vaccines. Yes Lucy Turnbull is Chair of the board of Prima BioMed, a biotechnology company working on cancer immunotherapy. Dorey really stretches the facts to contend it is accurately described as, a company involved in vaccination and other pharmaceutical pursuits. The company presently focuses on three main products targetting autoimmune disease and cancer which you may read about here.

The most notable link to vaccination is the development of CVac, the commercialisation of which was one reason for the formation of Prima BioMed in 2001. CVac, targetting ovarian cancer, ultimately trialled unsuccessfully. A potential trial for pancreatic cancer was cancelled in Febuary 2015. Read up on CVac here and Lucy Turnbull’s personal financial loss here.

More on the Turnbull’s investments here. Remember it’s now 18 months since Lucy Turnbull told Fairfax she was, “assessing my role on company boards to ensure there are no conflicts of interest”. Her full history of board, Foundation and senior committee positions indicates a person devoted to the success of not for profit, charity and with a love of science and medical innovation.

There is simply no substance to the claim by Dorey and others of a conflict of interest based on profits from childhood vaccines.

Belgin Sila Colak/Arslan

Last October when Victorian Health Minister Jill Hennessy was targetted by antivaccinationists the public got a glimpse of the name behind the Facebook group Anti-Vaccination Australia. Belgin Colak, aka Belgin Sila Colak, aka Belgin Sila Arslan.

Earlier this Month (March 6th) she posted this on her public timeline.

A “Yale study” eh, I thought. I followed the link and ended up at a “trueactivist” Feb. 17 piece. Under that deceptive headline the authors ran through a number of bogus, disproved claims about vaccines based at best on temporal correlation. A number of comments were scathing as to the misleading intent of the article. Now have a good read of Belgin’s claims above. “Multiple studies and other countries” report vaccine induced disorders. And these “very brave and unabashed scientists [who] have been able to show a correlation of what many have known for quite some time”? Where are they?

Had Belgin read the comments she’d have picked up on the objections to the alternative facts the authors had used. The worst was;

As with most research studies, the researchers stop short of claiming the vaccinations cause the all too common brain disorders.

In other words there really was no study from Yale suggesting autism and multiple brain disorders were linked to vaccines. Belgin’s love of fake news was on display here, for there was in fact an accessible link to the actual study published in Frontiers in Psychiatry. The title was Temporal Association of Certain Neuropsychiatric Disorders Following Vaccination of Children and Adolescents: A Pilot Case–Control Study. The institutes involved were, 1) Department of Public Health Sciences, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA and 2) Yale Child Study Center, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.

What conclusion did these “very brave and unabashed scientists” offer? Bold mine;

Conclusion: This pilot epidemiologic analysis implies that the onset of some neuropsychiatric disorders may be temporally related to prior vaccinations in a subset of individuals. These findings warrant further investigation, but do not prove a causal role of antecedent infections or vaccinations in the pathoetiology of these conditions. Given the modest magnitude of these findings in contrast to the clear public health benefits of the timely administration of vaccines in preventing mortality and morbidity in childhood infectious diseases, we encourage families to maintain vaccination schedules according to CDC guidelines.

This is so clear we should thank Belgin. This study offers what antivaccinationists often demand. It’s saying there may be correlation in a small group but not causation. Vaccines work. Keep on vaccinating. The end.

A week ago I noticed Belgin post what can only be described as simply reprehensible exploitation of Saba Button.

The health department knew this vaccine had been reported several times, yet they still administered this vaccine on (sic) children regardless of numerous ER reports. You’re told a fever, seizures and crying is normal. Some never wake up, some end up with autism, and some are permanently disabled. Every vaccine causes damage! They’re still out there murdering babies, destroying lives, pushing more vaccines on children and now on expectant mothers. Every parent should be aware of this and have a choice!

Alternative facts and post truth galore. I addressed this case back in November 2011, because of similar exploitation at that time by Meryl Dorey. There are no excuses or denials to be made. Fluvax was not suitable for under 5 year olds. There were problems with both CSL, who incorrectly advised the TGA and the W.A. Health Department. Meryl Dorey was variously, fallaciously claiming hundreds of cases and hundreds of admissions. The ABC reported “hundreds of reactions” on April 18th, 2010 with 47 taken to hospital reported on April 23. The West Australian on the same day reported 23 admissions. This led to the suspension nationwide by Commonwealth chief health officer Professor Jim Bishop.

Why was it even used? During a 2006 Fluvax trial with a sample of 272, 1 child had a febrile convulsion. The TGA argue that one adverse event in a clinical trial is “not usually regarded as an adequate signal of a major safety problem”. In 2010 the febrile seizure rate caused by Fluvax was 3.3 per 1,000. This is remarkably similar to the rate in the 2006 trial. Yet TGA national manager, Dr Rohan Hammett told a Senate estimates committee hearing that the 2006 data showed “no sign of a febrile convulsion signal”. More so CSL may have advised the TGA of fever (not seizure) rates from 2005 – far less than 2006 fever rates. It is a convoluted, detailed issue. Do read this post. Fortunately Saba was compensated.

Belgin Sila Arslan claims there were or are fatalities and cases of autism. False. Every vaccine causes damage! False. Babies are being “murdered”. Repulsive. A visit to The Saba Rose Button Foundation presents a very different view.

The SABA ROSE BUTTON FOUNDATION is a not-for-profit charity focussed on raising funds to help children who have special needs and their families. The funds raised will pay for these special children to participate in ‘intensive blocks’ of physiotherapy, for specialised equipment that is needed, for parental respite and for care in the home.

Vaccine Injuries

I stated above that antivaccinationists ultimately seek to convince the unwary that vaccines harm and kill on a significant scale. Both references here to Belgin confirm this. Dorey also insists vaccines injure and kill – but never has the subjects or the evidence to confirm this. On her blog she lies smoothly, as here;

Many of you know of children who were injured or killed by vaccines. I personally know the families of at least 10 children who died as a result of vaccination and dozens (this is within my family and my close friends) who are permanently injured.

Other material above shows Dorey beating the conspiracy drum: profit from evil vaccines. Fortunately for me she raised the passing of No Jab No Pay legislation. Professor Julie Leask is not a fan of No Jab No Pay. This may well delight the anti-vaccination lobby. During the Social Services Legislation Amendment (No Jab No Pay) Bill hearing in Brisbane on November 2nd, 2015, Professor Leask answered questions on vaccine injury. Her submission to the inquiry was firmly against No Jab No Pay. Thus with some hope one may view her information on vaccine injuries as something antivaccinationists might entertain.

Put simply there are between zero and less than five injuries that would require compensation each year, according to Leask citing a vaccinologist.

The audio and text below is from page 41 of the hearing.

If you listened to the audio you heard the anti-vaxxers in attendance groan in denial at the “zero to less than five” serious vaccine injuries per year figure. But this didn’t stop Meryl Dorey publishing Julie Leask’s anti-No Jab No Pay submission to the Social Services Legislation Amendment Bill on her blog. Splendid post truth cherry picking right there.

To conclude we can expect to see anti-science groups gradually develop skills in the use of fake news/evidence and post truth. Recent stories in Australia involving measles cases in the unvaccinated and a case of tetanus are concerning. Cases of vaccine preventable disease are likely to become more and more common. As the unvaccinated spread their wings management of imported disease will demand more resources and frustrate health authorities.

Politically, science has lost a certain respect and may be under threat as rabid post truth movements such as Trumpism take root. Yet the harm such thinking and ideologies cause, and the cost inflicted financially and socially is easily seen and eagerly discussed. Exploitation has its limits.

And that is always a positive.

UPDATE: What does a health minister and an anti-vaxxer have in common?

Pod On The Hill podcast (by Victorian Labor). Episode 6, March 30th 2017.    

  • Outtake of discussion of anti-vaxxers – 3min 27sec – Download mp3
  • Or listen to outtake below:

———————————

Full episode on Soundcloud. Forward to 23 minute mark for beginning of anti-vaxxer discussion.

Del Bigtree misleads his audience over vaccine safety testing

In a second episode dealing with the Lies of Vaxxed published by More Truth © an old standard of the anti-vaccine lobby is subject to facts.

The lie Del Bigtree smothers his uncritical audience with is that, “there is not a safe vaccine out there” presumably because as he continues to lie, “there is not a decent safety study on any of the vaccines”.

Lies of Vaxxed: Episode 2 “Vaccine Safety Testing”

What we learn from the video above is that there are six main stages of vaccine development is the US. Including;

  • Exploratory
  • Pre-clinical
  • Clinical development
  • Regulatory review and approval
  • Manufacturing
  • Quality control

During the exploratory stage scientists focus on identifying an antigen that can prevent a specific disease. Without success during this process development goes nowhere. It cannot continue. Nonetheless, the exploratory stage takes years of diligent laboratory research.

When the exploratory stage yields viable results production continues into the pre-clinical stage. Here progress with tissue or cell-culture preparation involves animal testing. This aspect of the pre-clinical stage will assess the safety, or lack thereof, of any potential vaccine. Another aspect of the pre-clinical stage is assessing the ability of the potential vaccine to stimulate an immune response.

Despite the cost and time invested by this point, the majority of potential vaccines do not satisfy the rigour of the pre-clinical stage. In these cases again development cannot continue.

The diligence of the clinical stage can be seen as a three part process.

  • In the quest to ascertain safety, trial vaccines are tested on a small sample of healthy adults.
  • Vaccines are tested on a sample of several hundred adults.
  • Finally the clinical stage involves testing the vaccine on tens of thousands.

With vaccines being developed for children the clinical stage process continues. The age of test subjects is lowered incrementally until the target age is safely reached.

The final stages of clinical development include randomised and double blind trials. The potential vaccine is tested against a placebo. It takes from six to ten years to complete these safety tests. Whilst medications in the USA are subject to the same intense testing it’s worth noting that sample populations are three times smaller than for vaccine studies.

There are six more stages overseen by the FDA for regulatory review and approval of vaccines. This involves safety inspection of manufacturing facilities by the FDA and even more testing.

Safety monitoring, including phase IV trials, continues indefinitely once a vaccine has been approved. In the USA there is the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and the Vaccine Safety Datalink – a nationwide set of linked databases.

I certainly recommend watching this video because it is clear that safety is the primary element in vaccine manufacture. Claims to the contrary by Del Bigtree and the Vaxxed cronies are demonstrable lies. Under present manufacturing guidelines and restrictions most potential vaccines do not reach clinical development. As is clear in this video the reason is safety.

Professional anti-vaccinationists like Bigtree, or any who promote Vaxxed in order to consciously profit from their manufactured controversy, are a malignant force in public health. As such they deserve our derision.

 

♣ Despite this reality, in Australia the self appointed “vaccine experts” from the anti-vaccine lobby such as Meryl Dorey, Judy Wilyman and Tasha David insist no randomised double blind trials or testing against placebo has ever been carried out.

♥ Australians may likely remember from 2010, a significant number of AEFI. Febrile seizures in children aged 6-59 months following administration of CSL’s Trivalent Influenza Vaccine. One chid was ultimately compensated. This event resulted in the FDA inspecting CSL laboratories and outlining five “objectionable conditions”. Australia’s TGA reported at length on the event, the FDA inspection and the process of TGA inspection of CSL manufacturing facilities.

Whilst this was an unwanted, unfortunate event, it is also an example of safety and quality control procedures being firmly implemented.

 

AVSN president Tasha David misleads ‘We Are Vaxxed’ audience

Current president of the Australian Vaccination Skeptics Network, Tasha David, visited Atlanta Georgia in the USA to attend the so-called “CDC Truth rally”.

This caper was a big deal for antivaccinationists obsessed with the dishonest, deceptive film Vaxxed. In forming a view about the push to promote Vaxxed and the individuals involved it is important to understand how utterly false and potentially harmful it is. Like most outspoken antivaccinationists Tasha David keeps reminding us of her own dishonesty.

Whilst in the US, on the weekend of October 15-16, David joined the parade of vaccine victims appearing as video subjects for We Are Vaxxed. Although dishonest throughout her stint it is the first lies she offers that are so patently absurd. Initially David offers:

The government made us change our own name because we’re not allowed to choose our own name in Australia, so that’s basically one of the reasons why we’re here because in Australia we don’t have a Bill of rights we don’t have guaranteed freedom of speech, so we’re not allowed to speak on a lot of things.

Freedom of speech? Bill of Rights? Not allowed to choose our own name in Australia? Oh my. The government had “made us change our own name”? Balderdash and Blubberblurt. The Australian Vaccination-Skeptics Network are obsessed with manipulating discourse and social media to keep their prior name – the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN) – alive.

The AVN was formed in 1994. Twenty years later Tasha David became president. Clearly the AVN had a long run with the name they had chosen. It was however a confusing name and always intended to deceive. Regrettably the official sounding name was successful in fooling members of the public, and a legitimate midwifery organisation listed the AVN as reputable. The NSW Department of Fair Trading received complaints to this effect.

In December 2012 they ordered the AVN to change its name within two months or be deregistered. Minister for Fair Trading at the time, Anthony Roberts, said the group’s name “is confusing and has misled the public as to its operational intention”. The order was a huge blow to the twisted morale of the group which thrived on whenever possible snubbing regulators and mocking the vital purpose of regulation. They unsuccessfully challenged the order and by March 2014 changed their name to the Australian Vaccination-Skeptics Network.

By the time of the name change the Fair Trading Minister was Stuart Ayers. The ABC reported:

Fair Trading Minister Stuart Ayres says the association’s original name was misleading.

“The title wasn’t reflecting their strong anti-vaccination stance and so we after receiving numerous complaints requested them to change their name,” he said.

“They’ve now complied with that request and the new title reflects their anti-vaccination stance.”

The Australian Medical Association (AMA) says it hopes the name change makes sure the organisation is not mistaken for a government agency.

It would appear that David’s intellectually contorted statement suggesting government strong arm tactics and suppression of free speech is a calculated lie crafted to gain sympathy. In reality it is the health of Australian democracy and Fair Trading legislation that led to the order to change their deceptive name.

  • Listen to the first 2 min of David’s interview. NB: I edited out the confusion around live video streaming but have not altered the commentary in any way.

Tasha David continues:

I see that you guys are up in arms about that new CDC um, rule we’ve been talking about – forced vaccinating um, children, or people basically in the US. But I’m really sad to say that they’ve already passed that law in Australia. It’s called the Biosecurity Act 2015 so basically, um, they can force vaccinate you if you have a disease or um, some kind of illness that is a risk to human health.

Now that could be anything. Could be a cold you know, so we’ve already got the legislation in place. I haven’t seen it be used yet but the fact that it’s even in place is scary to me, you know, so…

Here, David is contending that forced vaccination is a reality in Australia if circumstances meet conditions outlined in the Biosecurity Act 2015. She further contends that the Act permits forced vaccination of an individual suffering “some kind of illness that is a risk to human health… that could be anything… could be a cold”. Putting aside David’s alarming lack of understanding the role of vaccination we should look closer at the Biosecurity Act 2015.

The Act is headed, An Act relating to diseases and pests that may cause harm to human, animal or plant health or the environment, and for related purposes.

The HTML version I’ve linked to has 681 pages, including endnotes. The word “vaccination” appears eleven times, the majority of these being in subsections or related sections. That is to say this vast document does not present a number of novel reasons for vaccination. Rather parts of the Act describe when vaccination is relevant to interpretation and application of the Act.

David is in error when claiming the Biosecurity Act 2015 deals with “anything” or “a cold”. The diseases this Act is designed to manage are in fact far removed from such a dismissive notion. Chapter 2 – Managing biosecurity risks: human health includes Listing Human Diseases:

(1)  The Director of Human Biosecurity may, in writing, determine that a human disease is a listed human disease if the Director considers that the disease may:
(a)  be communicable; and
(b)  cause significant harm to human health.
(2)  Before making a determination under this section, the Director of Human Biosecurity must consult with:
(a)  the chief health officer (however described) for each State and Territory; and
(b)  the Director of Biosecurity.
(3)  A determination made under this section is a legislative instrument, but section 42 (disallowance) of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 does not apply to the instrument.

With regard to Human Biosecurity Control Orders it should be noted that these are not applied frivolously and when an individual objects to the application of such measures the Director of Human Biosecurity “must take into account any factors that may affect the health of the individual”. Thus an established risk to an individual of an adverse reaction from vaccination would prevent administration of a vaccine.

With respect to imposing biosecurity measures the Act includes, in Chapter 2:

[Protections] aim to ensure that a power is exercised, or biosecurity measure imposed, only when circumstances are sufficiently serious to justify it, and only if it would be effective, it is appropriate and adapted for its purpose, and it is no more restrictive or intrusive than is required. [Protection] also ensures that the requirements of this Chapter do not interfere with an individual’s urgent or life‑threatening medical needs.

It’s important to realise with respect to disease a great deal of this Act and the application of biosecurity measures involve individuals entering Australian territory and the operation of aircraft or vessels entering or leaving Australia. Managing risks to human health include human biosecurity control orders. Section 59 of the Act includes:

A human biosecurity control order that is in force in relation to an individual may require the individual to comply with certain biosecurity measures. [Those measures] include vaccination, restricting the individual’s behaviour and ordering the individual to remain isolated.

In Division 2 of the Act it states under Entry Requirements (bold mine):

The Health Minister may determine one or more requirements for individuals who are entering Australian territory at a landing place or port.

for an individual to provide either:
(i)  a declaration as to whether the individual has received a specified vaccination or other prophylaxis within a specified previous period; or
(ii)  evidence that the individual has received a specified vaccination or other prophylaxis within a specified previous period

With respect to vaccination identical requirements exist under Exit Requirements.

Unvaccinated Australians are freely travelling to and from the country without being vaccinated against potential disease. Despite the Biosecurity Act travellers have brought measles to Australia, resulting in a sixteen year diagnostic high in 2014. Tasha David may claim that under this Act a simple cold could lead to forced vaccination, but there was no evidence of Human Biosecurity Control Orders in the wake of a recent measles outbreak in Melbourne. David would benefit from understanding just why she hasn’t seen this Act used to force vaccination for trivial reasons.

Section 74 of the Act notes when an individual is expected to comply with a biosecurity measure. Subsection (2) reads:

The individual is required to comply with the measure only if:
(a)  the individual consents to the measure; or
(b)  the Director of Human Biosecurity has given a direction for the individual to comply with the measure…

Section 92: Receiving a vaccination or treatment:

An individual may be required by a human biosecurity control order to receive, at a specified medical facility:
(a)  a specified vaccination; or
(b)  a specified form of treatment;
in order to manage the listed human disease specified in the order, and any other listed human disease.

With respect to the use of force one notes Section 95: No use of force to require compliance with certain biosecurity measures:

Force must not be used against an individual to require the individual to comply with a biosecurity measure imposed under any of sections 85 to 93.

Note: Force may be used in preventing an individual leaving Australian territory in contravention of a traveller movement measure (see section 101) or in detaining a person who fails to comply with an isolation measure (see section 104).

Thus contrary to Tasha David’s claim that, “they can force vaccinate you” under implementation of the Biosecurity Act 2015, we can see in this case that the Act itself prevents forced vaccination. It’s clear that no force can be used for the imposition of biosecurity measures under Sections 85 to 93. Vaccination, being Section 92, falls within this range.

No doubt antivaccinationists will disagree with any legislation that involves vaccination to protect the public from serious disease. What is important however is to underscore how this group will continually mislead the public without compunction. The Biosecurity Act 2015 is not used for just “anything” or simple “colds”. Nor does it permit forced vaccination.

David continues with considerable more nonsense. Offensive, crude dishonesty. Her next target is No Jab No Pay but it is the impact she claims to have observed that is quite sickening.

So these people that are single parents that don’t have that money to pay, you know that need that money just to survive… they can’t work, they can’t afford child care. So they’re basically on the street. We have so many stories on our web site of people living in cars, that are having abortions because they can’t afford to have a child in Australia now because of these laws.

Typically there is no evidence for these claims. If they were true the right thing for Tasha David to do would be to advise these individuals to have their children vaccinated and thus be eligible for the payments in question. Or perhaps the AVSN could help with some of that donated cash instead of spending it on trips to the USA.

Either way I doubt the AVSN will change their deceptive habits.