Unfortunately, she (Meryl Dorey) added little and took the opportunity to promote a case against the use of the pertussis vaccine based on distorted and selectively presented information.
ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs, December 19th, 2011
Readers of musings and mumblings here may remember a look at one Meryl Wynn Dorey’s “ABC of immunisation lies“, following Nicola Roxon’s Immunisation Incentive announcement.
In the afternoon Dorey popped up again on ABC 666 Drive speaking with Louise Maher. Again she seized the opportunity to launch into rapid fire fiction on pertussis infection and vaccine efficacy. This trick has been picked apart a few times here. So, I shot off a long complaint with references, tables and tactics laid out. To my delight the dedicated folk at ABC Audience and Consumer Affairs waded through it and the complaint was upheld. With their permission I’ve copied the response below.
The only other point (related to media correspondence) I’d like to cover is that I also sent a synopsis of Dorey’s pertussis and autism tricks to Tiga Bayles prior to her appearance on hisLet’s Talk show. It had my name, phone number and email address. He didn’t raise any of the points as Dorey recited exactly what I’d warned him she would, choosing to feign surprise and smooth her path. He did however mention “the haters” and “sad small-minded people” who “hide behind anonymity too”.
Dorey agreed that her opponents were “cowards”, members of a “hate group” and guilty of a range of lousy transgressions, primarily around suppressing free speech. Without sounding too small minded, I did feel this was most unhelpful on Tiga’s part. Others also wrote openly to him and still more had articles published on widely read publications, such as The Drum and Mamamia. Meryl Dorey’s critics are not anonymous.
With that out of the way, we can enjoy knowing that both of Dorey’s appearances on ABC on November 25th have resulted in upheld complaints.
Reprinted with permission of ABC Audience and Consumer Affairs.
Dear Mr. Gallagher,
Thank you for your email of November 27 concerning the interview of Meryl Dorey conducted by Louise Maher on radio 666.
As your correspondence raised concerns of misleading and inaccurate content, your email was referred to Audience and Consumer Affairs for consideration and response. The unit is separate and independent from ABC program areas and is responsible for investigating complaints alleging a broadcast or publication was in contravention of the ABC’s editorial standards. In light of your concerns, we have reviewed the broadcast and assessed it against the ABC’s editorial requirements for accuracy, as outlined in section 2 of the ABC’s Editorial Policies: http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/edpols.htm. In the interests of procedural fairness, we have also sought and considered material from ABC radio.
On Thursday November 24 Louise Maher spoke to the ACT Chief Health Officer Dr Paul Kelly about a measles outbreak at a Steiner school in the ACT. The following day she looked at the government’s announcement that day that from July 2012 up to $2100 of the family tax benefit per child will be conditional on a child being immunised, and spoke to Dr Julie Leask, from the National Centre for Immunisation Research and senior lecturer at the School of Public Health at Sydney University and Meryl Dorey from the Australian Vaccination Network.
The program team believed that Ms Dorey would have something to add to the discussion about the Government’s initiative. Unfortunately, she added little and took the opportunity to promote a case against the use of the pertussis vaccine based on distorted and selectively presented information. As this was not anticipated, the presenter was not in a position to effectively challenge Ms Dorey’s assertions. To her credit, Ms Maher recognised this and acted to get expert advice to air from the Chief Medical Officer of the ACT.
That interview was ultimately aired on the following Monday. The effect of that delay was to potentially mislead listeners about the effectiveness of the pertussis vaccine. This was exacerbated by the fact that the introduction to Ms Dorey did not adequately contextualise Ms Dorey’s comments by informing listeners that she is a campaigner against vaccination who has no medical qualifications and her organisation has been the subject of a warning by the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission for providing misleading information to the public.
Notwithstanding the team’s efforts to address claims made by Ms Dorey, it is our view that she wasn’t introduced with sufficient context to ensure listeners were not misled by her unsubstantiated claims.
Radio management apologises for this lapse. It advises that it will again communicate to radio staff the importance of providing listeners with all relevant context and information when presenting controversial and potentially dangerous viewpoints – particularly if they propose to interview Ms Dorey again.
Accordingly, Audience and Consumer Affairs conclude the broadcast was not in keeping with the ABC’s editorial standards for accuracy as outlined in section 2.1 of the ABC’s Editorial Polices. Please be assured that your comments and this decision have been conveyed to ABC Radio management and the producers of the program.
Thank you for taking the time to write; your feedback is appreciated.
Should you be dissatisfied with this response to your complaint, you may be able to pursue your complaint with the Australian Communications and Media Authority, http://www.acma.gov.au.
Yours sincerely
(redacted)
Audience & Consumer Affairs
Louise Maher receiving “distorted and selectively presented information” on the use of the pertussis vaccine:
At risk of flogging a dead myth it’s worth keeping up deconstructing Meryl Dorey’s falsehoods as they keep arising.
In the near future on radio and most likely at Woodford, Dorey will trot out the old shuffled pertussis vaccination vs notification statistics to argue the vaccine is ineffective. The pertussis trick has been a standard for years but since September 2009, we’ve had access to her data sets when she used them in response to the HCCC regarding complaints raised about her. I’ve looked at each incarnation of this trick, which has scarcely changed.
Her claim begins by pointing out that in 1989-90 just before compulsory notification of pertussis began in 1991, immunisation was 71% (figure 1). This figure is sourced from the top table below, which provides figures from 3 ABS surveys of children 0 – 6 years. [Zoom resolution here].
The bottom table shows that coverage has risen to 95% for the cohort January 1st – March 31st, 2006 in children 2 years and under. It’s from Communicable Diseases Intelligence 2007;31:333. It also informs us the assessment date is June 30, 2008. You can find the same here in Dorey’s submission to the HCCC on page 6.
Figure 1
In replying to the HCCC Dorey referred to the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) figures for pertussis which now includes data to 2011 (Figure 2). [Zoom resolution here]. Her claim continues on, using the two data sources. Although retold countless times, I’ll be scrupulous and quote from Dorey herself on page 6 of her HCCC reply:
Since the AVN was established, Australia has experienced an increase of over 23% in our rate of vaccination against whooping cough with a concurrent increase in the incidence of this disease of almost 40 times. Please refer to the Australian government graphs below:
For our purposes these “government graphs” are figures 1 and 2. Sure enough, as we can see below the notification rate in 1991 is 332 and the rate in 2008 is 14,292. But… 2007 has a rate of only 4,864, 2006 has a rate of 9,764. 2005 has a rate of 11,165. And 1996 (12 years earlier) has a rate of 12, 237.
What we see going back are the peaks and troughs associated with pertussis infection and control familiar to the developed world. We also know the present epidemic began in 2008. Before this, 2007 had the least notifications in eight years. In fact according to this table (pertussis per 100,000) it’s the lowest since 1992.
Figure 2
The operative words here are “concurrent increase”. Ms.Dorey frequently palms this off as a steady, correlating increase in infection when the figures show nothing of the sort. There are many problems with this approach. She is using entirely unrelated data sets. The NNDSS data tell us nothing about vaccination or immunity of subjects. There are 18 age groups in NNDSS data. One of Dorey’s vaccination tables in figure 1 covers two age groups only, the other table covers half of the youngest NNDSS age group.
The 1991 and 1992 notification figures are so low as to be anomalies. This is the normal when a disease is placed on the “notifiable” list and practitioners adjust to new requirements.
But now, let’s return to the ABS pertussis vaccination figures Dorey kindly provided. After a slight drop from the 71% she kindly points out, we reach 2001 – a full decade after notifications began – with a pertussis vaccination rate of only 71.6%. This is most cunning on Dorey’s part.
A 0.6% increase in ten years. Why even bother with the first decade? Why not choose 2001 with a notification rate of 9,541 (almost twice that of 2007)?
Clearly it is rank selection of data to convey a falsehood about pertussis vaccination. Exactly as the HCCC have stated. Applying Ms. Dorey’s logic to 2001 and 2007 vaccination and notification rates one can argue a reduction of almost 50% in pertussis infection, with virtually the same increase in immunisation levels. We can see with rising vaccination there has been no “corresponding increase in the incidence of this disease”.
In fact, we have 71.6% coverage in 2001. And 95% in 2006. Both provided by Dorey. That’s five years, but she chooses to cite the 1990 figure of 70% from the upper table, and the assessment date of June 2008 in the lower table of figure 1. Why? Because the initial year of notification (1991) is absurdly small, and 2008 is the beginning of an epidemic.
Indeed, a close look at notification rates in Figure 2 shows comparable rates in the first and second decades, excluding only the epidemic which began in 2008. Ms. Dorey really needs to explain how these figures can be expected to justify her claim.
Next comes age groups, and our understanding as to why Dorey never mentions them. Most infections in Australia are in adults with no immunity. Her 95% in figure 1 applies only to under 2 year olds. This is half of one age group out of the 18 provided by the NNDSS. We know immunity begins to wane certainly by about age ten (if not earlier) and that adults are definitely in need of a booster. In effect most pertussis notifications are from those with no immunity. Figure 3 is pertussis notifications for 2007 (pre-epidemic) by age and sex [Zoom here]:
Figure 3
In any year (including epidemic years) most notifications come from adults. Rather than pointing to total figures Ms. Dorey should be honest and admit that most infections come from the adult population with an immunisation rate of only 11.3%. See page 18, Adult Immunisation Survey. This is insufficient to provide herd immunity.
Adults may show no symptoms or very mild symptoms and not seek any care. What this means is that adult infection levels are higher than notification levels. It’s important to stress that Meryl Dorey will cite infant or childhood vaccination levels, but most notifications come from adults. Ms. Dorey’s claim of total infections casting doubt on 95% of childhood vaccination is again found wanting.
The fact that 0 – 4 is the highest childhood age cohort and comparable with adults of over 30 is due to newborns being unvaccinated and not completing the schedule for many weeks. This places them at extended risk.
So, even giving Dorey’s dodgy data sets a fair run they still fail on a number of fronts to deliver the goods. In fact they undermine her so-called proof. Infections come from non immunised, and as we’ll see below reduction in childhood immunisation is catastrophic. She has some explaining to do.
We know the pertussis vaccine is not a magic bullet and that vaccinated children can catch pertussis as immunity wanes. In general they develop much milder symptoms and are not at risk of death and disability as are unvaccinated infants and small toddlers. It is crucial to ensure vigilance against waning immunity. Boosters should be considered.
Low immunisation levels have been linked to the present outbreak. Tragically it’s been known for quite some time that this epidemic is likely to have begun in Meryl Dorey’s backyard – where she has her greatest influence. The SMH reported in October 2010:
The highest rates of so-called “conscientious objectors” to immunisation are in parts of the north coast – such as Byron Bay – where 12 per cent of children born between 2001 and 2007 were never immunised for any condition. […]
An epidemic of whooping cough in 2008 and 2009 began on the north coast. It quickly swept across the state driven by low vaccination rates in some wealthy parts of Sydney. Low-income areas in western Sydney also had less immunisation and were linked to outbreaks, Dr Menzies said.
California is also experiencing an epidemic on the back of reduced immunisation levels. Dorey recently posted this Californian article about waning pertussis immunity on Facebook, claiming it indicated an ineffective pertussis vaccine. She omitted Dr. Carol Baker:
PARENTS who refuse to vaccinate their children are contributing to the worst whooping cough outbreak on record in Queensland, with notifications likely to exceed 7000 this year.
Four to 8 per cent of children on the Sunshine Coast are registered as so-called “conscientious objectors”, meaning their parents refuse to immunise them. […] Whooping cough is deadly to babies who are too young to be vaccinated. One in 200 babies who contract whooping cough will die.
The advice from all states and federal health authorities is to immunise and ensure immunity is up to scratch with boosters. The outbreak in Australia is due to low immunisation levels and waning immunity in children who have been vaccinated.
This woman is so laughably wrong that it almost seems cruel to get stuck into her… but when kids don’t get vaccinated, kids die”.
Cassandra Wilkinson, ex Labor staffer
Steve Canane hosts Cassandra Wilkinson, Joe Stella and Peter Black in a discussion on the merits of vaccine denier and “obviously crazy…. nutter” Meryl Dorey’s booking to speak at the upcoming Woodford Folk Festival.
Presently Australia is experiencing a major whooping cough (pertussis) epidemic.
It’s been in epidemic proportions since 2008-2009. Interestingly 2007 was the third lowest year on record since notification became compulsory in 1991. 2009 was a notably bad year for pertussis. A major contributor to epidemics is low pertussis vaccination rates, as evidenced here, in the UK and the USA. Adult boosters are crucial in combating this.
Contrary to certain claims this epidemic is not due to the pertussis vaccine nor does it demonstrate inherent flaws in the efficacy of pertussis vaccination. We do know that the age at which pertussis vaccine induced immunity wanes has fallen. Exactly how this relates to the acellular vaccine vs the older whole cell vaccine and the bordetella pertussis bacteria, is complex. However, there is a basic account here, along with interviews on The World Today and some musing on the error in blaming vaccine efficacy.
California experienced a severe epidemic in 2010, confirming the problem with waning immunity. Often used as a trick by antivaccination lobbyists to claim “the vaccinated” mostly get pertussis, the reality is different. Vaccinated individuals can catch a much milder form of pertussis, yet unvaccinated patients experience severe illness, disability and even death. In this same article, under Waning Pertussis Immunity Comes as No SurpriseDr. Carol Baker writes in part:
The California epidemic was caused by underimmunization of some children, and by waning immunity in fully vaccinated children. It showed that we are not where we need to be to have herd immunity. The 2010 California outbreak caught everyone’s attention.
Recently in Australia claims were made about pertussis vaccine inefficacy on ABC which I looked at here. It’s a favourite theme of the AVN and if you’re keen to look at exposing tactics it has popped up here, and here involving abuse of WHO data whilst we even have a cameo from Viera Scheibner pushing much the same at about the 6:45 mark.
Regarding adult boosters of 1 dose, the NCIRS fact sheet on pertussis (below), backed by citations states [my bold]:
The efficacy of the pertussis components of dTpa vaccines administered to adolescents and adults is inferred from the serologic results obtained in infants immunised with paediatric DTPa in pertussis efficacy trials. For both dTpa vaccine formulations, the immune responses to all pertussis vaccine antigens in adolescents and adults 1 month after a single dose of dTpa were non-inferior to those of infants after 3 doses of DTPa.
A large clinical trial in adolescents and adults demonstrated overall vaccine efficacy against confirmed pertussis of 92%, and a clinical trial in adults demonstrated prolonged immunogenicity from a single dTpa booster dose, with pertussis antibodies remaining above pre-booster dose levels in 85% of participants for 5 years after immunisation.
It’s widely known pertussis boosters are or have been available free in many states and territories. This may vary between new parents, family members, foster parents and other adults as a view of this Immunise Australia page suggests. It’s probably best to contact your own health department or just call the local GP. So, how are adults going keeping up with boosters?
An estimated 11.3% of Australians aged 18 years and over had received a pertussis vaccination as an adult or adolescent. Uptake was substantially higher among parents of infants aged less than 12 months old (51.5%).
Hmmm. It seems we can certainly lift our game. If you haven’t had a booster for 4-5 years please get one. If you’re an adult likely to be in contact with a newborn then definitely get one.
If you’re none too happy with the conduct of the antivaccination lobby the single greatest effect you can have against them is to get a pertussis booster. As adult herd immunity rises less infections will be passed to at risk children, non-immunised infants, other adults and there will be less notification in total. This will serve to deflate the claim that rising diagnoses are ipso facto proof that childhood vaccination is a failure.
The Australian Vaccination Network wrongly compares 95% pertussis vaccination rates in young children (11% of diagnosed age groups) with 11.3% of adult vaccination (89% of diagnosed age groups). Then claim total population infection (100% of all diagnoses) is due to ineffectiveness of childhood vaccination alone.
For example Meryl Dorey compares vaccination rates of small children – which are around 95% – with diagnosis across all age groups – which include adults at around 11.3% – to secure high notification levels. Of the 18 age groups making up notifications only 2 correspond to the 95% vaccination rate. 16 age groups fall outside that at which immunity begins to wane (the 11.3% vaccination rate). Including numbers of infants too young to have completed pertussis vaccination, it’s clear Dorey’s figures come most primarily from the unvaccinated and non immune.
Today, ABC AM interviewed a parent who lost a four week old to pertussis. She said:
I hadn’t had a booster and the most heart-wrenching thing for us is that we were not warned, there was meant to be a yellow warning sticker go on [her] blue book in the hospital, we didn’t get one.
We didn’t know about adults requiring boosters, nor did any of the adults around us, none of our family or friends knew and we also didn’t know that the area I was living in was in the grip of an epidemic.
Well, now we do know. There’s really no excuse if you’re able to be vaccinated.
On Friday November 25th after Nicola Roxon and Jenny Macklin announced the Stronger Immunisation Incentives reform, Meryl Dorey went on a lying frenzy.
First up was ABC 612 Mornings programme with Terri Begley. You can listen in the player below or download the audio here.
Let’s deal with Dorey’s second lie first. That Nicola Roxon’s media release makes no mention of Conscientious Objectors. This is also being propagated on the AVN’s Yahoo! email list as “despicable” on the part of Nicola Roxon. There’s “no mention” of it cries another AVN member whilst yet another writes authoritatively:
That exemption is rendered effectively unavailable to all those parents who hear, officially or semi-officially, only that there is no exemption, as is implicit in Dr Roxon’s media release, which is therefore highly deceptive.
Highly deceptive? Implicit in Dr. Roxon’s media release? [R]endered effectively unavailable? What planet are these people on? You can read the release in my prior post in PDF (on page 2) or visit the Health Ministers web page here. And what do we read smack bang in the middle of this “highly deceptive… despicable” media release?
Existing exemptions will continue to be available for people who register as conscientious objectors to immunisation.
Oh.
Would that stop Meryl Dorey from lying on air? Surely our self styled guru would at least read the media release. Search for the words “conscientious objector”? As Meryl told Terri Begley:
I have not seen anywhere in this information that’s coming out today to say that you are entitled to be a conscientious objector and still get the money. If the money is being given out it should be given out to all, whether you vaccinate or not, um, otherwise it becomes a matter of discrimination and I don’t think the Government wants to be discriminating against people, that is the wrong thing to do.
Frankly, that’s just not good enough. There are a lot of implicit accusations there, all wrong and all based on ignorance at best or Dorey’s own deception at worst. This is perhaps Roxon’s mistake here. She has failed to see that such a move will give the antivaccination lobby a soap box from which to embellish their misinformation and promote Conscientious Objection. Dumping the Maternity Immunisation Allowance and linking Family Tax Benefits as an “incentive” to complete vaccination schedules, may well become an incentive toward Conscientious Objection.
Earlier Dorey tries to make a link between pertussis vaccination of very young children in the ACT and the notification levels of pertussis in all age groups. National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System data do not provide notification for each state and territory by age. I’ll get onto that again after we visit Dorey’s second ABC interview.
You may remember Dorey’s reply to the HCCC over complaints made. In September 2009 she wrote [bold mine]:
… the current increase in the incidence of pertussis has nothing to do with any purported decline in the rate of vaccination. Instead, we are seeing an outbreak of pertussis despite a substantial increase in vaccination against it – an experience which is being duplicated in every country for which mass vaccination against this illness exists.
She cited articles with the opposite argument to hers and even went as far as plagiarising a WHO graph. Despite the HCCC finding against her Dorey has made this claim often only last July blaming the vaccine for an increasing death rate. She makes this claim again on air except this time implicates the USA claiming [bold mine]:
…they are actually blaming the use of the whooping cough vaccine for this outbreak that’s occurring in the countries where the vaccine is being used.
This has also been picked up over at Thinking is Real which includes a terrific piece by piece breakdown of Meryl’s earlier distortion of an article she’d posted to Facebook. Dorey claimed it as proof that the pertussis vaccine is “ineffective”, where it says no such thing. It’s essential reading for those interested in Dorey’s tactics. Indeed the article reinforces all we know about pertussis immunity and the newer acellular vaccine.
Then it’s on to Louise Maher for Drivetime on ABC 666. Again you can listen below or download the audio here.
By this time Meryl has discovered CO still applies but is arguing government flyers and media reports aren’t stressing this fact loudly enough. Dorey’s risk to public health is borne out again as she raises the need for parents “who have done their research” to be able to avoid vaccination, get CO forms signed and still be able to collect FBT, way above the vital need to have their children vaccinated.
Nicola Roxon’s intent to raise the profile of vaccination schedules as essential to public health is being outdone by a conspiracy theorist arguing that the vaccines we’re using are not even known to “be safe and effective”, yet parents are being “bribed” to comply. Instead the government should be testing these perhaps unsafe and ineffective vaccines and comparing the health of vaccinated vs unvaccinated children, Dorey suggests with a straight face.
Then the distortion about pertussis again [bold mine]:
… we’re finding in the United States and in all other countries that use the mass whooping cough vaccination that the vaccination is not leading to a decrease in disease.
No doubt Dorey would be aware that the ACT Government’s alert on pertussis includes informing the population about a targeted adult vaccination program and states under “What else can you do to protect your baby?”:
Ensure your baby is vaccinated on time, this can be done from 6 weeks of age.
Ensure everyone in your household is up to date with their vaccinations.
The efficacy of pertussis vaccination is beyond doubt. It’s role in saving infant lives is irrefutable. Whilst vaccinated children may contract pertussis they receive a much milder infection and experience non life threatening symptoms. All pertussis fatalities in Australia have occurred in unvaccinated children. It is quite outrageous on the part of the ABC that Dorey was given uninterrupted air time to spread her rapid fire calculated untruth designed to malign an essential vaccination for infant health and presently, infant survival.
Asked about pertussis Ms. Dorey answered in dissonance to government advice and claimed vaccination “doesn’t seem to be the answer”, then proceeded to present a statistically implausible correlation between the rate of vaccination of babies in the ACT and the notification level of pertussis across all age groups in the ACT. It’s simply the same old trick Dorey has been using now for years. Comparison of unrelated data sets.
The Dept. of Health and Ageing National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System represents the prevalence of legally notifiable diseases. It carries no information on the vaccination status, active immunity or lack thereof in the cases counted. Vaccine induced immunity for pertussis is temporary. It wanes and this is the primary concern in combating spread of pertussis. Of the 18 age groups covered, 16 are outside the age at which immunity can be said to wane. Of course, Dorey did not give age group specifics nor qualify her claim in the context of an epidemic.
Notification simply does not reflect the efficacy of pertussis vaccine induced immunity in vulnerable newborns. Notification does not reflect the origin of infection, but rather the location of diagnosis and compliance with the requirement to notify. This is further complicated by tourism, immigration, business travel, diplomatic and political visitors to our nation’s capital, potentially impacting on infection of the ACT populace.
Adults rarely experience the debilitating symptoms and as such represent a silent reservoir of infection. Around 11.3% of adults can be considered to have pertussis vaccine immunity. For this reason the ACT is offering free pertussis boosters. Authorities state:
Infants too young to be fully vaccinated are most at risk of catching the disease and suffering serious complications from pertussis. Most infants catch pertussis from their parent or carers.
Dorey claimed pertussis infection rates in the ACT were “seven times that of Tasmania and more than twice the level of most states and territories”. The second claim is false. No other state or territory is “more than twice” that of the ACT.
According to the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System on pertussis notification, the rates per 100,000 citizens at present for 2011 are: ACT – 217.3, NSW – 157.1, N.T. – 127.6, QLD – 167.7, S.A. – 128.1, Tasmania – 31.9, Victoria – 137.7, W.A. – 112.5.
Dorey also said:
…even though we’ve had a huge increase in vaccination rates over 20 years it has not correlated with any decline in whooping cough, in fact we have more cases of whooping cough now than we’ve ever had on record and that is despite an over 95% rate of vaccination amongst children.
Again the irrelevance of quoting unrelated data sets is borne out. This statement falsely assumes pertussis vaccination that provides temporary immunity in small children should also be contributing to the eradication of pertussis in the entire community.
There are other very good reasons documented by the National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance. In their November 2009 Pertussis Fact Sheet on page 2 we find:
In recent years, there have been periodic epidemics which have occurred at intervals of 3–4 years (1997–98, 2001, 2005–06, 2008– 09), set against a background of endemic circulation. However, increasing immunisation coverage has been associated with reductions in disease among immunised children and adolescents. Between 1998 and 2008, there were 84,758 notifications of pertussis nationally, ranging from 5,670 in 1998 to 14,347 in 2008. However, the increase in notification rates over time could also be due, in part, to better case ascertainment through the increased availability of serological testing and more sensitive tests (e.g. polymerase chain reaction).
Of the last 20 years only the last three show childhood infection rates that compete with adulthood rates. This is due to an epidemic, not a failure of vaccine efficacy. Pertussis vaccine induced immunity does not offer 100% protection against contraction of pertussis in all children. However it does provide sound immunity in the majority, and renders infections far milder than those that strike unvaccinated children saving the lives of those vaccinated.
The reason we have “more cases of whooping cough now…” is due to excellent reporting which shows up in Notification data and a present epidemic of pertussis. One contributing factor is the prevalence of misinformation such as that peddled by Ms. Dorey leading to a drop in infant vaccination. Ms. Dorey omitted to include a fall in immunisation rates predicates a rise in infection in both vaccinated and unvaccinated children. In fact her deception can be further borne out if we quote from the article posted on her Facebook page. The one in which she claimed Californian pertussis vaccination was “ineffective”.
The California epidemic was caused by underimmunization of some children, and by waning immunity in fully vaccinated children. It showed that we are not where we need to be to have herd immunity. The 2010 California outbreak caught everyone’s attention.
In June 2009 the Journal Paediatrics published an article on the fall out from parents refusing pertussis vaccination for their child – Parental refusal of pertussis vaccination is associated with an increased risk of pertussis infection in children.The authors concluded in part [bold mine]:
Vaccine refusers had a 23-fold increased risk for pertussis when compared with vaccine acceptors, and 11% of pertussis cases in the entire study population were attributed to vaccine refusal.
Ms. Dorey’s statement of a “huge increase” in vaccination in the past 20 years is misleading. In 1989-90 71% of children were immunised. In 1995 61% of children were immunised. In 2001 71.6% of children were immunised. By March 2006 95.1% of children were immunised. There has been no steady increase in pertussis infection to match the increase in vaccination. This epidemic began in 2008. 2007 notifications were the third lowest on record since data collection began in 1991.
Pertussis infections rise and fall dramatically and until 2007-2008 the bulk of infections occurred in adults. In 2001 there were 48.5 cases per 100,000. In 2002 there were 28.0 cases per 100,000. In 2003 – 25.3, in 2004 – 42.9…. by 2007 there were 22.6 cases per 100,000. As mentioned this makes 2007 the third lowest year since records began. It is higher than only the first two years, 1991 and 1992 (1.9 and 4.5 per 100,000 respectively) when the notification of pertussis was still new to health practitioners. More so, Dorey has this very information in front of her but simply chooses to cite selectively. Consider the variation in Australian pertussis totals in the far right column. This does not show a steady increase:
Click to Embiggen
Little wonder the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission investigation established that the AVN:
provides information that is solely anti-vaccination
contains information that is incorrect and misleading
quotes selectively from research to suggest that vaccination may be dangerous.
The HCCC also stated that the AVN refusal to comply with requests may “…result in members of the public making improperly informed decisions about whether or not to vaccinate, and therefore poses a risk to public health and safety.”
Most frustrating is that this manipulation of unrelated data sets by Ms. Dorey has already been the subject of an upheld complaint, published on November 11th, 2009. Dorey’s obfuscation of her intent to mislead listeners and the failure of the ABC to properly disclose her biased agenda as an anti-vaccination lobbyist has also been the subject of an upheld complaint, published June 29th, 2010.
There can be no doubt that yet again Dorey has misled listeners in a most egregious manner that, in the context of the present epidemic, places the lives of Australian newborns at risk. The ABC has shown extremely poor judgement in putting Dorey to air as very few if any commentators can deal with the speed and volume of her misconception.
Dorey has absolutely no qualifications and as such should not be providing any on air information. She did not cite any scientific material, nor – for good reason – the source of her figures. Nor is her argument supported by any peer reviewed literature. Indeed quite the contrary.
In short the ABC has recklessly given Dorey a platform from which to seize control and misrepresent the Immunisation incentive, sway uncertain parents toward not vaccinating and repackage her lies on failing pertussis immunisation. In this light they have completely failed listening audiences.
Losing In The Lucky Country 