Textagate: telling lies can be profitable

Posted in Anti-Vaccination Lobby, Health, Legal, Scam by Paul Gallagher

A mere 15 days ago we had a look at the fact Consumer Protection in W.A. was investigating the Australian Vaccination Network as reported in The West Australian.

Along with an example of Meryl’s economic use of facts to construct fallacies it included this flyer given out during Dorey’s Supercalifragilistichomeoprophylaxis W.A. Tour 2011. Of course if you click, it will embiggen itself. We are interested in the far left panel. Yes, that’s correct that 33.3% of that side of the flyer. One third as it were. Under Become A Member Or Donate.

It’s awfully interesting because when the OLGR revoked the AVN’s charitable fundraising licence they mentioned that the AVN – which basically means Meryl Dorey:

… is not entitled to accept donations from members of the public via any method of collection including face-to-face and online appeals. AVN is not prevented from receiving donations from its members as this is not considered fundraising for the purposes of the charitable fundraising legislation.

Dorey aka the Australian Vaccination Network was also prevented from taking new memberships when the revocation came into effect. At first glance this may seem strange, but the OLGR is there to protect the public from charity fraud amongst other things. As the AVN had refused to comply with HCCC demands to warn the public about it’s antivaccination stance, the OLGR took the view that receipt of monies could not be judged to occur in good faith. Ergo, purchasing a new membership could feasibly be done under the stupendously erroneous belief that the AVN was presenting accurate information.

The wording of the OLGR revocation is clear in that Dorey is forbidden to conduct fundraising. The above flyer is directly soliciting for donations and membership. The OLGR’s definition of a fund raising appeal is:

The soliciting or receiving of any money, property or other benefit from the public constitutes a fundraising appeal if a representation is made (this may be implied) that the appeal is for a charitable purpose or for the support of an organisation having a charitable object.

An appeal may take a variety of forms — donations, sponsorship, telethons, the conduct of lotteries and competitions, the supply of food, entertainment or other goods or services, or in connection with any other commercial undertaking. A membership drive undertaken by an organisation is a fundraising appeal if one of the objects of the organisation is a charitable object.

The term is not limited to simple collections from the public.

If you have embiggened you’ll notice that (apart from charging $15 per head for attending her seminar), that the options for donations and membership include:

Membership – digital editions of Living Wisdom at $50 per year
Membership – hard copies of Living Wisdom at $75 per year
Basic Professional membership at &275 per year
Premier professional – Bronze ($500), Silver ($1,000), Gold ($1,500) per year
DONATE: I would like to make a monthly / one off (please circle) donation of $ ______ to the AVN

My understanding is that any number of people may have queried the legality of this grab for cash, not least because Living Wisdom is several editions behind and may not rear it’s woo again. The initial news item that Consumer Protection was “investigating” the AVN came from Cathy O’Leary. Meryl, calling herself a “Consumer Watchdog Advocate”, emailed her list subscribers on November 12th with the following media release. It wasn’t actually released in any media, but was emailed to Media Watch where it was seemingly ignored. So I guess it’s just an email.

Basically Meryl is trying to sully Cathy’s reputation by alluding to a Media Watch article on O’Leary. Needless to say this has no bearing whatsoever on the content, accuracy or implications of her article Anti-vaccination Group Under Scrutiny. In part O’Leary wrote:

The NSW-based Australian Vaccination Network held public forums in Perth, Busselton, Jurien Bay and Geraldton, charging $15 and giving out brochures asking people to donate to the group.

Notice Dorey does not actually refute the claim of asking for donations. Rather, she refutes the claim of there being an investigation. Dorey claims to have contacted Consumer Protection who “confirmed” this. She also makes the claim of discovering that Cathy O’Leary is a sole complainant – also “confirmed”. That strikes me as unusual. O’Leary did not lodge any complaint.

So in effect this “media release” is just another falsehood created by Meryl Dorey. It also goes on to say she filed complaints with MEAA and the Press Council. No-one cared. A “nameless” ABC contact suggested sections 1 and 5 of the Journalists Code of Ethics had likely been breached, Dorey thundered. Nothing happened. I do know that Cathy O’Leary is one of Australia’s most loved journalists since reporting on the AVN. Perhaps that was the real problem.

As for likening four small paragraphs in The West Australian to the News of the World’s demise and the scandalous abuses involved one can only call our new advocate for consumer watchdogs (which is what I presume a Consumer Watchdog Advocate is) quite deluded.

More to the point it seems things didn’t go to plan in dismissing this caper as the dastardly work of one journalist. Today on Facebook Meryl Dorey blamed volunteer group Stop The AVN for pretty much the same thing. Does she even pay attention? Apparently not. It seems the penny has dropped regarding being caught out asking for donations and more, a full 16 days since Cathy O’Leary’s article. Or perhaps some type of mail arrived? If so, I wonder if the word “investigation” was used.

Pleading innocence Dorey claims this flyer was inadvertently handed out at The Conscious Living Expo in Perth where they were being given away “for free”. Yes, free! Wow that’s mighty generous. You see, the requests for donations and option for membership had been crossed out with a “black texta”.

Meryl wrote:

Stop the AVN, in their usual vile manner, is in the process of filing complaints everywhere they possibly can, saying that we took donations or memberships whilst we were out in Western Australia. Their evidence is a flu vaccination flyer that was supposedly handed out at the Conscious Living Expo. This flyer was being given away for free (we have updated the flyers to change the membership information – all the other information is unchanged).

I had crossed out the membership / donation information in black texta but either the person from SAVN who picked one up at our stand got one that had been missed or else, they were using an older copy that was not blacked out – because when these forms were originally printed, we were still able to take members and accept donations from the general public.

How absolutely amazing. What are the odds, eh? It’s all an oversight. A complete fluke that someone happened to pick that one up. Stupid, stupid Texta. Just another little error. Like with the OLGR. Saying 23 breaches of the Charitable Fundraising Act is so excessive as Meryl pointed out last October. Just little errors:

… the simple errors …errors which any small, volunteer-run organisation can and does make

She continued on with Textagate:

As I have said numerous times, both here on Facebook, in our magazine and in other locations as well as at my seminars, the AVN is not allowed to take on new members or donations from non-AVN members because this group and various government departments have blocked that in an attempt to – as they say – stop the AVN. The fact that this assault on our freedom of communication has been allowed is a black mark against Australia and proof that it is very far from a democracy. […]

in (sic) the meantime, as much as I hate to respond to those horrible, abusive, heartless people who do not care one little bit about your children who have been killed or injured by vaccines, it was necessary to do so because they just love to sling the mud around and I value the trust and respect of our AVN members.

Is anyone keeping tally on the lies?

“… I value the trust and respect of our AVN members”. Gosh. Have I been a bit harsh judging Meryl as ripping off AVN members? What comes next?

If you believe that what is happening is wrong. If you think that the government should not be trying to shut the AVN down and that groups like SAVN that are – let’s face it – not information groups but simply hate groups who don’t want you to have the right to make informed health choices, then please support us with your subscription and / or by purchasing books. Use this link – (link here) to read our recent newsletter and then, subscribe as a digital, hard copy or professional subscriber. If you are already a member, please renew.

Spend as little as $25 to strike a blow for freedom and if you have friends or family or clients who you think would like to know about this issue, please sign them up for a gift subscription for as little as $25.

Hmmmm. Apparently not. Emotion, conspiratorial plotting, callousness toward your children[s] vaccine injuries/deaths and then more pleading for money via the incredibly inflated AVN Shop or the non existent hard copies of Living Wisdom. A link to AVN rubbish packaged as Christmas goodies. Would anyone fall for that?

Thank you? Really? Thank you!? Sigh…

What do we see above? On the one hand Dorey attacks a journalist for (supposedly) complaining about her, “giving out brochures asking people to donate to the group” at W.A. seminars. Dorey at no time refutes this. Then suddenly when aware of presumably more complainants she has a ready excuse. A Texta no less. With this Bart Simpson excuse she vilifies those who would challenge her antivaccination message, places herself so far above the law as to ridicule Australian democracy then asks for even more money. I’ve no doubt that stash of flyers has a bunch nicely blacked out in Texta now.

More to the point as well as being duped by Meryl Dorey, once in her clutches existing members (financial or group) are the target of back to back scams. Dorey invents stories that are designed to keep alive the myth of regular vaccine injuries, big brother callousness and abuse of your steadily eroding civil rights, along with the terror of mandatory vaccination. In this scam Dorey invents fictitious nurses that she diagnosed via Google with Lupus Panniculitis, brought on by compulsory HBV vaccination. What can members do? Why, donate their Maternity Immunisation Allowance of course. And why do this? Well fictitious members are already doing so because:

…without the AVN’s lobbying Parliament to get legislation put through to ensure their rights to government entitlements, they wouldn’t have this money or the Childcare Allowance anyway so they felt that we deserved part of it for our support of them.

Which is all a load of fiction in itself. Dorey and the AVN have no history of lobbying beyond writing offensive and ranting letters. Manipulation of emotion and embellishment are constant features in her scams. Donors never receive updates or breakdowns of where this money goes. This advertisement scam and this absconding family scam are two the OLGR confirmed raised money that vanished into Dorey’s pockets. In fact check page 81 of Ken McLeod’s comprehensive Meryl Dorey’s trouble with the truth part 3 to note:

A calculation of the total amount raised from all these appeals and scams, and others not mentioned here, approaches $500,000. None of it was processed according the relevant NSW legislation; where did it go?

In my mind it’s very clear who is vile, hate filled and cares naught for children.

I don’t believe her for a second.

PS: Do pop over to the site by @reasonable_hank, who had earlier published on Textagate. I mean, it’s not until you actually see a flyer with all that Texta….

18Nov2011

With friends like these… Meryl Dorey’s exploitation of Saba Button

Posted in Anti-Vaccination Lobby, AVN, Denialism, Health, Judy Wilyman, Legal, Meryl Dorey by Paul Gallagher

Over the past few months I’ve come to accept that there is one Australian absolutely delighted with the fact that (then) 12 month old Saba Button suffered organ and brain damage following febrile convulsions brought on by Fluvax.

Meryl Dorey of the AVN has enveloped herself in the tragedy of the Button family, declaring long and loud she is their unofficial antivaccination representative. She claims to have twice met with them and had been, “in contact by both telephone and email many times over the intervening period…”. Finally, after 18 years of fabrication, untraceable images, offensive claims and being a danger to public health the woman who likens vaccination to “rape with full penetration” has landed her fish.

She writes in a conspiracy piece on her blog:

I can also tell you that this reaction was entirely preventable because neither they nor any other parent who gave permission for their precious child to be vaccinated in this campaign was informed that their babies were being used as guinea pigs in a trial that was paid for by the drug companies involved. Neither were they aware that those payments going to people who ostensibly worked for the government (both state and federal) and who were considered to be – but actually were not – independent.

All of this is a complete fabrication. No trials are conducted surreptitiously. Ethics requirements aside exactly what data could those conducting Meryl’s pretend trial hope to collate? By who, how and when would subjects be monitored, what tests would be carried out and for how long? Indeed Dorey is suggesting this “trial” was simply a stab in the dark to see what happened. No such trial took place and thus was not paid for by drug companies. Worse, this is knowingly exploitative of the Button family and reduces their personal tragedy and grief to yet another of the thousands of tactics Meryl Dorey has used to mislead Australians.

Morally it is no different to her claim yesterday that infants who die in a co-sleeping arrangement are likely vaccine induced fatalities. Why? Because GP’s point out the danger of this arrangement, so it must be an abuse of “natural instinct” and thus a conspiracy is in order. Or her ACTION ALERT! announcement that supporters of vaccines were mobilising to harass the author of Virus in the system – an article that recounted Saba’s experience.

CSL does carry out yearly trials following strict protocols on an informed, compliant sample, the results of which are published in peer reviewed literature. This is mentioned below. Yet I’m not here to make excuses for CSL whose conduct surrounding Fluvax, their economic handling of certain legitimate trial results and adherence to Good Manufacturing Practice leaves a great deal to be desired. Nor am I by any stretch of the imagination a fan of Dr. Rohan Hammett, head of Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration. One cannot however make conclusions without evidence. Unless of course, one fabricates.

As an update, one commenter below has pointed out there was a trial to gauge the epidemiological impact of the present schedule, in response to infant fatalities from influenza the year before. I’m perhaps duty bound to note that infant fatality from flu was mentioned by Judy Wilyman at the AVN’s first Perth trip on June 30th 2010 at the State Library, W.A. Judy informed the audience that the media report such fatalities as scare campaigns to “coerce us into vaccination”. This is because, “We’re being educated by the media who have pharmaceutical interests”. I should also point out that W.A. was the only state to use seasonal influenza and H1N1 together for children under five, which can be regarded as novel and thus raise concerns about earlier trials, particularly on sample size. Yet there were no guinea pigs, or state sanctioned, profit driven guesswork.

Regarding “those payments going to people who ostensibly worked for the government…”, that too is fallacious. TGA national manager Dr Rohan Hammett was before a Senate estimates committee on October 19th, being quizzed over the very nature of Fluvax, CSL, trial results, the febrile convulsions in W.A. and payments from drug companies.

Liberal senator Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, quizzes Dr. Hammett beginning with justified concerns that the TGA knew of high fevers in 2009. Yet more disturbing is that 2005 trial data yielded fever rates of 22.5%. The 2006 fever rates were 39.5%. Despite this, CSL advised the TGA in 2009 of the 2005 figure [pp.42-43]:

Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS: Are you demanding an explanation? You should be.
Dr Hammett: We are. We have written to CSL.
Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS: It emerged that the company knew two years ago about research suggesting a sharp rise in feeders linked to its seasonal flu vaccine but omitted this from information given to doctors. We have canvassed this in these estimates. My question is: when did you and when did the government first know about this? Is this the first you have heard of it? That is really what I would like to know.
Dr Hammett: No, it is not, Senator. In 2009 a study was published which related to clinical trials undertaken in 2005 and 2006. That study was published in peer-reviewed scientific literature. We were advised by CSL of its publication at about the same time as it was actually published. You will recall that that in the years before the Fluvax incident with febrile convulsions—and, indeed, for the last four decades—seasonal flu vaccine has been regarded as an incredibly safe vaccine. In 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006 and 2005 there was no suggestion of safety problems with the flu vaccine.
In retrospect, knowing now what we know in 2010, that there was a problem with the 2010 vaccine, people are going back through clinical trials and saying, ‘With the aid of the ‘retrospector scope’, could we have picked anything?’ Indeed, in those earlier clinical trials there were rates of fever for the Fluvax vaccine that were higher than some other comparable vaccines. However, as noted in yesterday’s article, most of those fevers were mild or moderate and there was no sign of a febrile convulsion signal. Febrile convulsions were not occurring in those studies that were done.
As I have said, we have written to CSL and made inquiries as to whether there was any delay in notification of us of these issues and have sought to gain a greater understanding of what they knew when. We have not yet received a response, but we are awaiting that.
Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS: Can I ask you to take on notice how much money has been paid to CSL? It is an enormous amount of money that you pay them. You obviously must have a very close relationship with CSL—and I mean that simply because of the nature of the work that they do and how much they provide in terms of products to the Commonwealth. Surely, Dr Hammett, you must have been aware of what this company was doing and certainly known about its research in relation to these fevers.
Ms Halton: Let’s just back up a second. There are a couple of things. Dr Hammett is the regulator. He does not pay the CSL anything. He has a very clear role, which is as a regulator. He takes that role very responsibly and very seriously. There is a separate part of the government which purchases vaccine, including from CSL. So I think we need to make a distinction here about who is paying what for whom and what the nature of the relationship is, because I do think it is—
Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS: I am happy for that to happen, Ms Halton, but the point that I am getting to is, given the close relationship—whether it is on the side of the purchasing arm or on the side of the TGA—this is a serious issue. Two years ago, at a period much earlier than has been previously canvassed in these estimates, there was an issue about fever. My question is: when did the government first become aware of this?

Senator Nick Xenophon later cuts to the chase addressing Hammett [p.44]:

Because time is so limited, I will put some questions on notice for you. First, can you provide details of when the TGA first became aware of the peer-reviewed article? Second, at what point was action taken? Third, did the TGA embark on other inquiries as a result of that peer-reviewed article? Fourth, do you agree with Professor Peter Collignon’s view? It is:
The TGA should be ensuring companies do update their data—it should be compulsory that the TGA should be informed of any new information, and the TGA should ensure the product information is updated to reflect that.

What really stinks coming from CSL is that the 2010 product information did not include the already documented 2009 higher fever rates. It is true these fevers are usually mild to moderate and of short duration – a factor which influenced the TGA to take no action.

It is here – and only here – that Meryl Dorey is more than welcome to raise concerns and recount poor practice or lack of insight and follow up on the part of either CSL or the TGA. However perhaps the greatest damage done by CSL is to public confidence in the safety of influenza vaccination, particularly for at risk children.

So what of actual febrile convulsion? Dorey variously claims hundreds of hospitalisations or hundreds of cases. 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 reports 23 admissions. This led to the suspension nationwide by Commonwealth chief health officer Professor Jim Bishop.

Fluvax was given to W.A. babies resulting in a seizure rate of 3.3 per 1000. On this point MJA Insight write:

This rate of febrile convulsions [noted in 2006 trial data] (1 per 272) is similar to the estimate for the 2010 season (3.3 per 1000) which led to the unprecedented decision by Australia’s chief medical officer to suspend the use of paediatric flu vaccines.

A TGA spokeswoman told MJA InSight that a single adverse reaction report within a clinical study was not usually regarded as an adequate signal of a major safety problem. Lead author of the clinical study, Professor Terry Nolan, also told MJA InSight that the small sample size of the study meant the rates of febrile convulsions were not comparable with those seen in the community in 2010.

“We did a clinical study. It was published in a peer-reviewed journal. The serious adverse events were notified to the sponsor [CSL]”, said Professor Nolan, who is also head of the school of population health at Melbourne University.

It is not Professor Nolan’s role to inform the TGA. Nor do other members of the ATAGI receive special bonuses or payments from drug companies to influence perception of vaccines. Nevertheless Dorey manufactured a letter from a supposed “whistleblower”. A sordid tale about another W.A. based ATAGI member being handsomely rewarded by evil drug companies led her to wind up her article with:

In fact, we are told that all of our medical advisors must be paid by the drug companies because it seems to be impossible to find qualified people who haven’t been tainted by drug company cash.

This is why the AVN says that we can’t trust our government when it comes to their assessment of the safety or effectiveness of drugs and vaccines. There is a holy trinity comprised of the government, the drug companies and the doctors. This triad is protected by self-regulation (via the TGA which is completely funded by pharmaceutical licensing fees) and a complicit media which is beholden to drug company advertising.

Sounds conspiratorial? Well I’m sorry, but these are the facts.

No Meryl, that is simply fantastic conspiracy twaddle wasting good space on your blog when the real facts are far more convincing and indeed far more concerning.

But Meryl wasn’t finished with that simple post-W.A. trip tantrum, presumably to let off steam after her enormous W.A. tour flop. Last Wednesday November 16th she posted:

We read fiction:

I personally know of one 70 year old woman and a 19 year old man who were hospitalised within hours of getting the shot and who died within 7 and 2 days of that (respectively) Those deaths were never reported as being related to the vaccine.

More accusations are made about the TGA “knowing” and the CDC not buying Fluvax for this reason. No sources are cited. Then most offensively:

I will check and see how donations can be made to Saba’s fund. I know there is one that was set up for her when she was first injured. Her parents could not possibly be taking care of her in this way if it weren’t for that fund. Here’s hoping that compensation will be swift and generous for this poor victim of vaccines.

So far there is no word and I imagine no feedback will be forthcoming. In all the press surrounding Saba Button Meryl Dorey and the AVN is totally absent. Dorey has never breathed a word of the lawyer acting for the Buttons. History shows exactly what will happen to any money she would have gleefully collected and pocketed before the OLGR revoked her charitable fund raising licence for exactly that reason. Members of Stop the AVN can be proud they have this time stopped her stealing money from another family in need.

Those familiar with Dorey know if this was a death from a vaccine preventable disease her accusations would be of earlier vaccines – especially HBV leading to the death, possible antibiotic induced fatality, a lack of breast feeding or a simple media fabrication designed to scare people into vaccinating. Without sighting the medical records Dorey might well deny any disease at all. “You didn’t die from [measles or whooping cough] thirty years ago and you’re not going to die from it today”, she announced on national TV. All that’s needed is homeopathy, fresh air and clean water. Avoid doctors and hospitals.

Let’s face it. Dorey cares little for children, vaccine injured or maimed by the diseases she has helped bring back to dangerous levels. On either side they are tools to help her to offend, mislead and to cultivate fear. Snaring an innocent family with a very rational view of the world in her web of deceit can only be a negative for them. There are ample facts that assist their case. Facts Dorey is largely ignorant of. I fail utterly to see how lies and conspiracy theories manufactured by a proven threat to public health can be welcome.

Saba Button is in need of constant care via conventional medicine. Dorey is an out and proud enemy of conventional medicine. Despite the catalyst for her injuries Saba will forever be an at risk patient and need vaccination and conventional prophylactic measures to protect her from future viral threats. She will be surrounded by doctors, specialists and hospital staff perhaps for most of her life. The very people and places Dorey insists keep people sick – for profit.

It’s time Meryl Dorey did at least one morally correct thing and just left the Button family alone.

13Nov2011

Measles: A Gift from a Goddess?

Posted in Anti-Vaccination Lobby, Health, Scam, Science by Paul Gallagher

One of the more ridiculous falsehoods spread by Meryl Dorey in her promotion of disease as better than vaccination, is that in ancient Sanskrit “measles” means “gift from a goddess”.

She further claims that this is so because robust health and “huge” growth follows measles. Which is not exactly what I’d expect to see in a child who’d been bed ridden, suffering fevers perhaps seizures, diarrhea, exhaustion, malnourishment, drowsiness, muscle pain, photophobia, dry cough, bloody nose, possible brain damage, etc, etc and of course the chance of death. This entire claim is utterly bogus and toweringly irresponsible given that some listeners will be influenced by it.

From page 26 of Dorey’s Iverell Forum presentation slides (AVN seminar teachings)

In fact the Sanskrit मसूरिका or “masuurikaa” translates variously as measles, lentil, eruption of lentil shaped pustules, procuress (female procurer) and smallpox. So, with apologies to Sanskrit we shall move on to examine exactly what relationship a Goddess may have with this disease and why. As with many early cultures and belief systems, significant phases in life are assumed controlled by divine power. Diseases are believed to come in response to divine retribution, anger, punishment or even the working of an evil witch or sorcerer.

With respect to this Merylism we at least have enough to visit the beliefs of rural Indian folk. Here we find the goddess Sitala Mataji also known as Shitala, Sheetala or just Sitala. Broadly speaking Sitala Mataji is the Hindu pox goddess, worshipped in Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh and particularly in Northern India and Western Bengal. With Bengal situated in the north-east of the Indian sub-continent geographical proximity supports a common anthropological view of infectious disease.

Sitala Mataji loves cold and coolness and this is reflected in her name. She likes cold food offerings cooked the day before. One derivation Shitala Devi means the Cold Goddess. Measles is caused by the anger of Sitala Mataji. When we talk about measles and this goddess it’s important to realise this is understanding measles in strictly religious terms. Hindus may refer to measles as choti mai or choti mata (the smaller mother) whilst smallpox is bari mai or bari mata (the larger mother). Before the eradication of smallpox in the 1970’s Sitala was associated with smallpox.

According to legend Sitala is one of seven sisters who live in the neem tree and who bring epidemic diseases. She is often in the company of Gheṇṭukarṇa, the god of skin diseases, Jvarāsura, the fever demon, the Cauṣaṭṭī Rogas, (the sixty-four epidemics), Olāi Caṇḍi/Olāi Bibi, the goddess of cholera, and Raktāvatī, the goddess of blood infections. The measles rash represents “heat” and “dirt” that must come out lest the child die. Child talismans of goat, lion or bear hair warding off the fear which measles brings, and indeed the way measles “frightens” children strongly reflect links to the spirit world.

Shrines to Sitala Mataji can be found near neem trees. Other talismans against evil spirits and fear include spreading neem leaves and rose petals across a child’s bed in the case of Punjabi Christians who also spread neem leaves on the floor and use them to brush the measles rash. Hindus place neem leaves over the entryway to the house and under the infected child’s bed.

They would also keep a can of wet cow dung at their door or child’s door so that people entering – who may be “impure” – can put their feet or leg in the wet dung which is “pure”, before entering to visit the victim. A herb kala dana which is also used for Evil Eye infections should be burnt as it’s smoke is good for measles, assisting the rash to “come out”. Some herbal teas assist in promoting fever which is viewed as assisting the heat and rash to leave the body.

Although Sitala looks out for children and mothers she is simultaneously destructive and protective. In An anthropology of infectious disease: international health perspectives, Inhorn and Brown (1997) cite a number of authors, writing:

Although Sitala is by nature cool when she is angry she becomes heated and attacks with pox diseases, overheating her victims as well. Excess heat in the body then causes the skin rash to appear. The idea is that the disease of measles is the goddess and that when measles occurs the goddess herself is within her victims, burning them. From this it follows that measles victims themselves are in something resembling a “godlike” state and it is appropriate for them and their families to follow a restricted “purification” diet while the disease is in progress [p. 308].

In order to placate Sitala Mataji parents wait until about the fifth day and having wrapped their child tightly in a white cloth take them for a blessing at the temple. The tight wrapping also increases perspiration and the progression of the rash. On returning from the temple wet cow dung is used to make symbols resembling ⋂ on the wall of the house or house compound.

Cotton wool is spaced out evenly stuck to the dung. Red ceremonial worship powder is dabbed onto the cotton wool as Sitala is further encouraged to chill out (no pun intended) with prayers said in the child’s name. The symbols also serve to warn others away.

As expected in areas of counterfeit vaccines/medication and where less than half of “allopaths” are properly qualified there are stories of families following doctors orders to the letter only to loose the child. Others who sought to placate Sitala Mataji and went to the temple found their child recovered. Some Hindu women suggest these beliefs and strong relationship between measles and Sitala are a “carryover” from when smallpox was a major killer.

The legend of the vengeful burning arises from the story of a poor daughter in law ordered by her cranky mother in law to prepare sweets and food for the Sitala Satam celebrations, which were the next day. The daughter in law did but exhausted and having fed her child about 11pm, fell asleep. At the stroke of midnight Sitala Mataji came by and was burnt by the stove which had not been put out. Sitala cursed this woman and said “As I was burnt so let your child be burnt”.

On waking the woman realised her folly and saw her child was burnt. Other villagers pointed out it was the young mother’s fault that Sitala had been pained by the hot stove, become angry and thus, that her child had become burnt. The woman got permission to seek Sitala in the forest and eventually came upon an old woman with dandruff and “some tiny microbes” in her hair. The old lady asked where she was going and if she could spare time to clean her hair of insects and such. The young mother being a rather selfless type complied, handing her baby to the old woman.

After about an hour the baby revived and cried and the mother suddenly realised the old woman was Sitala Mataji in disguise. Showing devotion she fell into the holy lotus position and begged forgiveness for her mistake. This made Sitala very happy who forgave the young mother and promised to always be helpful to her – as long as no stoves were left on on that particular day. The next year the young mother’s jealous sister in law purposely left her stove on so her child would be burnt by Sitala Mataji. She journeyed into the forest but ignored the old woman and returned with a dead baby.

Devastated, crying, seeking forgiveness from the young mother and praying with true devotion to Sitala Mataji she begged the goddess “to make the dead child alive”. Sitala Mataji then blessed this child and later the jealous daughter made a confession and asked for forgiveness. So, the festival became one celebrated with devotion. All sweets and food are prepared the day before. Stoves are turned off and sprinkled with water. Devotees have a cold bath in the morning, and it is women and small children who worship mostly seeking blessing from the goddess Sitala Mataji.

The impact of this legend may be rightly gauged as profound. The life and death of a child is solely down to offending or proper appeasement of the goddess Sitala Mataji. In some North Indian villages as reported by Inhorn and Brown [p. 311] 74% of mothers believe measles cannot be prevented “whether through immunisation or otherwise”. It is a dangerous yet essential part of life. 70% believe no doctors should be seen lest the goddess – who resides within measles – is offended. Of 18 cases among Sikhs in India none were taken to a doctor. Three died [p. 313].

Apart from increasing perspiration, wrapping also prevents “measles-associated pneumonia” – a widely held fear. It is believed pneumonia is caused by cold. Even after recovery, isolation and wrapping continues to prevent “breathing problems”. Sitala has a brother god who causes the gasping for breath seen in pneumonia which suggests measles-pneumonia is also a part of Hindu mythology. In families with severe poverty and illiteracy other children die of dehydration from measles induced diarrhea, which is also seen as a means of removing the heat inflicted by Sitala Mataji.

In simple terms, in the cultures Dorey was misrepresenting, measles is seen as a curse from a goddess. One who demands in response such absolute devotion that children die as their superstitious parents fear offending her with medicine and instead smear cow dung on the walls of their home, pray and burn ritual herbs. In a fit of anger she attacks and burns small children through the fault of the mother who must then carry the burden of hit and miss spiritual appeasement. It is these very beliefs and others like them that will for a long time prevent significant reduction of measles in developing nations.

Clearly there is no gift from any goddess. No “huge” growth spurt. Only a pitiful struggle for survival and the fear of Sitala’s brother god. Ken McLeod on page 24 of Meryl Dorey’s trouble with the truth part 3: lies and fraud offers [bold mine]:

In a Sanskrit dictionary the word “masuri ” means “small-pox,” and the Sanskrit equivalent of the English word “measles” is “masurika मसूरिका”, from ‘a kind of herb’, ‘lentil’ or ‘pillow’, as in “an eruption of lentil-shaped pustules.” There is no etymology involving gifts from goddesses. The World Health Organisation tells of a superstition in the Indian subcontinent that smallpox resulted from a wrathful kiss by the Goddess of Smallpox, Shitala Mata. That is quite the opposite to Dorey’s claim.

One must pause and wonder if Dorey has any remote appreciation of the harsh living conditions and unbridled suffering such villagers may endure. Or if she understands their struggle as she sprouts her own cow dung over the simple truths that control their quality of life. If she is so inclined then why not smear cow dung on her own walls or offer a can full at the next pox party?

Strange isn’t it. We won’t see the antivaccination devotees stepping in wet cow dung before crossing the threshold to visit a sick child. Nor would we see devotees of Sitala Mataji giving their children the saliva of children already infected with measles. All things considered I’m pretty sure who is the most misguided.

Gift from a Goddess? I call cow dung.

6Nov2011

Australian Vaccination Network: Consumer Protection Investigates

Posted in Anti-Vaccination Lobby, AVN, Health, Judy Wilyman, Legal, Meryl Dorey, Scam by Paul Gallagher

Meryl Dorey has done it again. Found her way onto the files of yet another government body.

Cathy O’Leary of The West Australian reported yesterday:

Consumer Protection is investigating whether an anti-vaccination group breached charity laws by seeking donations at a series of meetings in WA in the past two weeks.

The NSW-based Australian Vaccination Network held public forums in Perth, Busselton, Jurien Bay and Geraldton, charging $15 and giving out brochures asking people to donate to the group. Last year, it was stripped of its charity status by the NSW Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing because of fundraising irregularities and it was ordered not to carry out public appeals in that State.

Here’s a copy of the donation form circulated in Perth.

So why would Consumer Protection (apart from the obvious) be interested? As you may well know on October 14th, 2010 just past high noon the NSW OLGR revoked the AVN’s Charity Licence. They had discerned that… well, let’s have Meryl tell the tale:

Approximately 2 hours ago, I received a notification from the OLGR that they would, effective Wednesday, October 20th, be revoking the AVN’s charitable status. They have sent me a letter listing the reasons for this revocation (those reasons are reproduced below) and also the announcement that is being Gazetted today.

(a) that any fundraising appeal conducted by the holder of the authority has not been conducted in good faith for charitable purposes

The Organisation has failed to publish a disclaimer on its website as recommended by the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC). This has resulted in an unacceptable risk of potential donors to the Organisation being misled when making a decision whether or not to make a donation, which has led to appeals not being conducted in good faith.

(c) that any fundraising appeal conducted by virtue of the authority has been improperly administered

The Organisation’s website is misleading in that it may lead people making donations to believe that they are donating to a cause which promotes vaccination whereas the Organisation adopts an anti-vaccination position. When requested by the HCCC to publish a disclaimer on its website the Organisation failed to do so.

(f) in the public interest, the authority should be revoked.

The failure of the Organisation to comply with the HCCC recommendation resulted in the Commission publishing a Public Warning on 26 July 2010 advising that this failure “poses a risk to public health and safety”. In this circumstance it is in the public interest to not permit the Organisation to conduct fund raising appeals under the Act.

Pretty straight forward right? Wrong. In fact there were 23 various breaches under the clauses, sections and conditions of the Charitable Fundraising Act 1991. You may ask yourself why has Meryl only proffered a, c and f above. The reason becomes readily clear. Dorey seeks to maintain the “not under HCCC jurisdiction” theme.

In effect, as you can’t see above the OLGR decision is based upon far more damning evidence. Never one to let facts intrude upon reality Meryl moves the cups about the table and turns three points into a bogus “entire” decision:

As you can see, the OLGR based their entire decision on the HCCC’s demand for us to declare ourselves as being anti-vaccine and putting their disclaimer on our website – two things which we refused to do (they say we failed to do it – there was no failure involved – this was a deliberate move on our part to defend our freedom of communication). Indeed, instead of changing our current disclaimer to what the HCCC requested, we issued this statement – explaining why the HCCC was wrong and any moves to suppress the AVN were anti-democratic.

Riiiiight. A department of Trade and Investment NSW based their “entire decision” on the Health Care Complaints Commission’s findings. No wonder they can be dispensed with in just two short paragraphs. But wait! That last sentence is rather bold is it not?

What possible “statement” could explain why the HCCC was wrong, suppressive and anti-democratic? That can now be swung around the turret and aimed squarely at the OLGR? Why, it’s none other than the Debating Vaccination article that sells for $5:00 in the AVN Shop dear reader.

Even though it’s available for free via the above link and had also been emailed to members on August 12th, 2010 under the heading Read It In Advance, including a link to Dr. Brian Martin’s own URL. The URL I used when comparing all the free stuff Dorey sells for profit. No doubt because she’s so charitable and all. So deserving of a charitable fundraising licence.

The very “statement” that’s available in many areas for free but sold by AVN will defeat criticism and revocation of their charitable status and authority to fundraise respectively.

It’s all so clear now. A rambling piece of incoherent, self-serving, post modernist waffle that goes as far as claiming scientific fact is subjective truth, and as such, the door to conspiracy central is legitimately open because it’s mere dissent. Written by an erstwhile physicist, antivaccination supporter and Judy Wilyman – PhD hopeful – supervisor. Clearly it just steam rolls two government departments, then. It contains:

There is no rulebook, called the scientific method, that scientists follow. They do not necessarily use the approach of verification, namely finding evidence that supports current ideas, though there is plenty of this. Nor do they commonly use falsification, namely trying to disprove prevailing ideas, though they sometimes do this.

In other words (helping us understand why he might no longer be practicing physics) Brian Martin argues science is about biased verification and rejection of valid falsification. It’s about “prevailing ideas”, not following “the scientific method”. With this marked misunderstanding of the world he lives in, it is thus quite logical to deny vaccine efficacy, and exhume all the fallacies health authorities have patiently put to rest.

Surely there was more to the OLGR decision. The HCCC acted in consonance with dark forces, Dorey claimed. What of this decision? She further wrote (I’ve helped with striking out the long exposed lies), after blaming “active members of the organisation, Stop the AVN”:

14/10/2010 – For Immediate Release:

For over two years, the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN), a national volunteer-run health lobby and support group, has been under attack. Our message of individual informed health choice conflicts with the government’s policy which is pro-mass vaccination. Part of this attack has included complaints to the Office of Liquor Gaming and Racing (OLGR), the body that oversees charities.

Earlier this year, the OLGR audited the AVN. It found several errors with our bookeeping (sic) system and some minor problems with the way in which we accounted for fundraising income. The OLGR openly stated that there was no evidence of fraud or criminality. Despite this, it has announced that the AVN’s authority to fundraise is being revoked.

“Had the OLGR based its decision upon the simple errors which were found during our audit – errors which any small, volunteer-run organisation can and does make – it would have been unfair but not unexpected.” says Meryl Dorey, media spokesperson for the AVN. “What makes this decision difficult to understand is that the revocation was based solely upon a questionable decision by the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) which we believe is not relevant to the OLGR’s mandate.”

The campaign to shut down the AVN has included:

~~Attacks and threats against our advertisers, members and professional supporters.~~

~~Death threats against committee members.~~

~~Hate mail.~~

~~Abusive phone calls and emails.~~

~~Numerous vexatious~~ complaints against (sic) to various government agencies.

In a democracy, it is always in the public’s interest to allow citizens access to full and accurate information on all issues so they will be empowered to make their own decision. The OLGR’s statement that rescinding the AVN’s charitable status is in the public’s interest seems to confuse the Australian public with the Australian medical industry.

In a true democracy, the government should be defending its policies in the court of public opinion – not by abusing its power by suppressing legitimate dissent.

As you can now see the entire “release” is false as the revocation of authority and a number of events this year reinforce. It is quite right and proper for the OLGR to note the HCCC’s ruling that Dorey misleads the public and as such donors are duped, appeals are in effect scams and money made via fund raising sustains an ongoing “risk to public health”.

It is very easy to grasp. Yet Dorey is asking that members believe that the OLGR found bookkeeping errors “and some minor problems”, then for the persecutory reasons rattled off time and again revoked their licence. In truth fraud and deception was common. That citizens now held her to account was completely her own doing.

Ridiculously the theme of “suppressing dissent” had taken firm hold. It goes without saying that the AVN has for 17 and more years run a lying, scamming, money grubbing campaign of fear and misinformation that far from expressing dissent has led to wide spread ignorance and genuine community health challenges. As for threats and harassment it is grieving parents, volunteers, busy journalists and Michael Wooldridge who can cite actual intimidation.

Dorey used the intervening week to beg for new members (who could legally continue to donate) and money. Her state of mind then further deteriorated as she herself expanded upon and acted out the themes of threats, oppression and dark forces. Her paranoia and flight from reality is captured in an email to members only a month later on November 15th. It included:

Warning To Chiropractors

Members of the organisation that is trying to stop the AVN have made threats to send mock patients to any chiropractic office where the practitioner has a history of providing information to their clients on vaccination. The idea is that they can then report the chiropractor to the chiropractic registration board.

Be on guard for hidden cameras and microphones. [….] Similar things have been happening with naturopaths for some time now. Yet more evidence that we need to stick together and support each other.

In truth it is great news for public health that Consumer Protection W.A. has taken this initiative. Western Australia was to be Dorey’s great revival tour. After the CSL Fluvax scare the entire state waited for their anti-vax Messiah… didn’t they? Surely this was to be her vindication where all the oppressors would be proven wrong.

Yet the fact is in well over a year Meryl Dorey has made not one compliant twitch. Apart from the odd calculated wave to appear deceptively bipartisan her conduct has remained unchanged from that outlined above. Combative, paranoid, proud, arrogant and unrepentant. Meryl Dorey and her AVN remain a threat to public health. It doesn’t matter where they go the message is the same misinformation, leading to the same old grab for cash.

The public have a right to know and to be protected. Kudos to Consumer Protection.

13Oct2011

“Vaccine Shedding”: Time Up For Another Vaccine Myth

Posted in Anti-Vaccination Lobby, Denialism, Health, Science by Paul Gallagher

One myth often pulled out by antivaccination lobbyists to malign vaccine safety is the senseless term “Vaccine Shedding”.

Whilst in context we all know what is meant, it’s worth pausing to consider that the term is a byproduct, if you will, of the antivaccination movement’s skill at sowing misinformation. The unrivaled ability to scan a headline and regurgitate some ghastly tale about vaccines. To squeeze another fallacious vaccine “danger” onto the shelf, content in the knowledge it will soon have a life of it’s own.

The colloquial use of this nonsensical term seeks to convey that an individual who has been vaccinated can readily shed part of the vaccine and cause infection in the unvaccinated. Which by definition demands them to have shed not a vaccine but an infectious agent. Indeed a virus or bacterium. Which by extension demands the vaccine to contain a live virus or bacteria. This then opens the door to viral shedding the vast complexities of vaccine induced immunity and viable modes of excretion – aka shedding. That won’t stop your garden variety anti-vaxxer claiming any vaccine can lead to infection of the unvaccinated via this ghastly “vaccine shedding”.

But that’s only part of the story. “Vaccine shedding” is a double barrelled myth in that transmission is assumed to occur ipso facto. Shedding is not transmission. Period. Yet denial of vaccine efficacy requires internalisation of some whacky stuff. Including the erroneous belief that viral shedding follows MMR vaccination. Yet worse is the myth that inactivated vaccines pose the risk of infection due to “vaccine shedding”. Pertussis often brings out the malicious side of anti-vaxxers. DTaP is inactivated. Indeed the pertussis component is acellular. Update: The acellular pertussis vaccine is an example of a subunit vaccine.

So, you may wonder at the nature of Cynthia Janak who writes in Will the vaccinated infect the unvaccinated? That is the question with Whooping cough:

Before I continue I want to tell you about a fact that is known by the CDC, etc. That is called vaccine shedding. This is the transmission of the virus from a vaccinated person to an unvaccinated person. [….] I want you to understand that this is true for vaccines including the Whooping Cough. What you could have happen is that all these parents and child care workers are going to get the vaccine and then take care of children. [….] The vaccinated have the potential to infect the unvaccinated child. This could cause the next epidemic of disease like what happened with the small pox epidemic.

So, in Cynthia’s mind “vaccine shedding” is, “…transmission of the virus from a vaccinated person to an unvaccinated person”. Wrong. And it’s true for whooping cough. Impossible. Yet Cynthia Janak asserts there’s potential for an epidemic like smallpox? Pure fiction. Contracting pertussis because an unvaccinated and infected child or adult who ignores boosters has breathed on someone is, however, a simple fact. Aiming to inflate the danger of her misguided concern about “vaccine shedding” as “known by the CDC”, Cynthia uses references to FluMist.

FluMist a live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) sprayed into the nostrils and well understood regarding shedding. Concerns about administering a live virus this way should be respected. So should the facts about any risks. It sheds in low concentration for short periods via nasal discharge. It is not associated with person to person transmission. Given that wild type influenza sheds at far higher concentration, is found on fixtures, objects, skin and is strongly associated with transmission, severe illness and complications it seems Cynthia has been selective about what’s “known by the CDC”.

“Vaccine shedding” is better suited to mid 19th century notions like the infectious miasma, wafting about in terrifying unseen clouds held aloft by our lack of knowledge. Nor does the rare instance of shedding suddenly turn any agent into a virus with the infectious capability of Ebola. But anti-vax voices are often raised in triumph that the crime of “vaccine shedding” places the community at greater risk than the rising numbers of unvaccinated.

The scale of error associated with this belief is akin to the myth of potential vaccine injuries outweighing the benefits of vaccination. Serious injuries that do occur are primarily in populations genetically predisposed to latent complications and manifestation is extremely rare. Injuries, disability and death from vaccine preventable disease would occur at magnitudes many hundreds or thousands of times greater and can manifest in anyone. Vaccine injuries are artificially inflated by confusing correlation (sometimes years apart) with causation, and by including red marks, crying, sleep disturbance or omitting that event X was a serious allergic reaction to latex syringe components. Similarly, arguing ones unvaccinated child is at risk from, or has been infected by, a recently vaccinated child is quite a claim.

Viral shedding itself is by no means ignored by the medical community. It’s of primary concern in the management of immune compromised patients, pregnant women and newborns. Varicella is an excellent example in that a.) viral shedding is well understood and b.) the risk from shedding can be discerned from precautions taken. Following varicella vaccination, viral shedding can be detected in the stools for six weeks.

In the case of immunodeficiency disorders or immune suppression from drugs, transfusions, stem cell transplant, chemotherapy etc, the recommendations are to avoid contact with fecal matter of vaccinated subjects and to observe good hygiene. To put this in context, unvaccinated children who spend one hour in a room with an infected child (shedding varicella) stand a 95% chance of contracting varicella (chicken pox). This is why vaccination against varicella is vital and choosing to not vaccinate your child places him or her and by extension countless others at risk of serious complication.

For nursing mothers post natal varicella vaccination need not be delayed if they are varicella-susceptible as varicella hasn’t been found in breast milk post maternal vaccination. There is no problematic risk of viral shedding to newborns provided hand washing and other hygiene measures are followed.

Whilst rare, a post-varicella immunisation vesicular rash can form. Again whilst quite rare, viral shedding can occur at this site. Plainly stated it’s incredibly rare for an unvaccinated child to be infected with varicella from a vaccinated subject and a series of events, including transmission, must occur within a small window of opportunity. Greatest precautions must be taken in the case of immune suppression. Writing in Vaccines in immunocompromised patients, Janet R. Serwint, MD Consulting Editor notes:

Because the varicella virus rarely can be shed through a postimmunization vesicular rash that may develop, recommendations include avoiding contact until the rash resolves.

In March this year there was an interesting case of viral shedding. The antivaccination lobby bellowed that Varicella zoster virus DNA had been found in the saliva of people over 60 vaccinated with the live Zostavax vaccine manufactured by Merck. In this age group Herpes zoster (shingles) is the target. Shingles is the result of infection with VZV earlier in life which may reactivate as immunity declines or from novel infection. Despite blog headings like Vaccinated people SHED LIVE HERPES for up to a month AFTER vaccination, be aware it was 2 of 36 “vaccinated people” who made the grade.

There was no indication of infection risk at the time. Today transmission is considered rare. Packet inserts carried the standard warnings found in varicella immunisations to avoid contact with infants, nursing mothers and immunocompromised individuals. “Doctors never tell you this”, lied the anti-vax lobby. The end result is that, fortuitously, it appears a saliva test could be developed allowing for detection and antiviral therapy before the painful rash appears. All up with rare potential for transmission from about 5% of recipients of a vaccine that’s not widely used it was a non event.

With MMR the lack of viral shedding renders any risk of horizontal transmission in this manner null and void. If challenged with the claim of “vaccine shedding” specific to Measles, Mumps, Rubella vaccination you’re being misled.

Peak shedding of Rotavirus occurs on “post-vaccination days 6 through 8”. Published in The Lancet Rotavirus vaccines: viral shedding and risk of transmission, notes:

Immunocompromised contacts should be advised to avoid contact with stool from the immunised child if possible, particularly after the first vaccine dose for at least 14 days. Since the risk of vaccine transmission and subsequent vaccine-derived disease with the current vaccines is much less than the risk of wild type rotavirus disease in immunocompromised contacts, vaccination should be encouraged.

The “vaccine shedding” bogeyman got a free kick with the FluMist LAIV vaccine. You may remember the hype. The spraying of “living influenza virus” straight into children’s brains was going to lead to mutation and death on an unprecedented scale. It would genetically revert to the wild type. Transmission would thus be uncontrolled. It would quickly prove useless against changing seasonal strains. ADR’s would rise…. and so on. Ultimately the cost proved to be a deterrent. Mayo Clinic have produced a welcome article on LAIV Myths.

In a comprehensive 2008 study with a sample aged 2 – 49 years, shedding “of short duration and at low titers” was detected in nasal swabs on days 1 – 11. LAIV recipients “should only avoid contact with severely immunocompromised persons for 7 days after vaccination”.

On Shedding and Transmission of Vaccine Viruses, in a larger piece on influenza vaccination of HCP, the CDC write:

One concern regarding use of LAIV among HCP has been the potential for transmitting vaccine virus from persons receiving vaccine to nonimmune patients at high risk. Available data indicate that children and adults vaccinated with LAIV can shed vaccine viruses for >2 days after vaccination, although in lower titers than typically occur with shedding of wild-type influenza viruses. Shedding should not be equated with person-to-person transmission of vaccine viruses, although transmission of shed vaccine viruses from vaccinated persons to nonvaccinated persons has been documented in rare instances among children in a day care center.

One study conducted in a child care center assessed transmissibility of vaccine viruses from 98 vaccinated persons to 99 unvaccinated controls aged 8–36 months; 80% of vaccine recipients shed one or more virus strains (mean duration: 7.6 days). [….] The estimated probability of acquiring vaccine virus after close contact with a single LAIV recipient in this child care population was 0.6%–2.4%.

It was also documented that should HIV positive children be exposed to LAIV shedding, “… serious adverse outcomes would not be expected to occur frequently”. So the combination of live virus shedding and immune deficiency in the case of LAIV presents low risk. Certainly the overall risk associated with the rare transmission following shedding after LAIV is insignificant given the risk of regular influenza virus transmission.

We’re running out of dramatic scenarios for the antivaccination lobby to cling to. With polio the wild virus replicates in the intestine and is shed in stools for up to a month. Transmission in developed nations is thus faecal-oral like other stool shed viral components. It is of course so rare as to be unheard of. However, given that the IOM report into evidence and causality of vaccine adverse effects found a causal link between the oral polio vaccine (OPV) and vaccine associated paralytic polio (or Vaccine Derived Polio Virus), we should seriously consider shedding in areas where this is documented.

In fact the question has been asked if prolonged VDPV shedding could be a source of reintroduction following polio eradication. The more compromised the immune system the more likely the individual is to have problems with vaccine induced immunity. A study looking for VDPV shedding in immune deficient subjects in Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire found no cases in a sample of 419, and therefore a “minimal risk of reintroduction [after eradication]”. In respect of general exposure to shedding in these environments transmission of the wild type polio virus eliminates any concern over post vaccination viral shedding. Crowding, sewerage, water quality etc all contribute to wild polio spread in ways that do not apply to the developed world.

Remembering that viral shedding is of paramount concern in the management of immune deficiency and immunocompromise, let’s revisit the Janet R. Serwint, MD of Vaccines in immunocompromised patients. Rather than warn against exposure to immunised children the recommendation is to ensure schedules are up to date and an annual inactivated influenza vaccine is on board. Pay attention to reference to MMR, varicella and rotavirus:

One strategy worth emphasizing is the immunization of household contacts, particularly other children and adolescents in the family. This procedure is essential to try to minimize exposure of the immunocompromised patient to household contacts who might contract vaccine-preventable illnesses. Pediatric health-care clinicians need to update and review the vaccine status of all siblings and pediatric-age household members. Annual influenza vaccination of all family members with inactivated influenza vaccine is recommended in addition to ensuring routine immunization of all other recommended vaccines.

MMR, varicella, and rotavirus vaccines, although live viral vaccines, are recommended for immunocompetent household contacts because transmission of the virus is rare. The lack of viral shedding with MMR eliminates concern regarding transmission. Because the varicella virus rarely can be shed through a postimmunization vesicular rash that may develop, recommendations include avoiding contact until the rash resolves. For the rotavirus vaccine, avoidance of contact with the stools by the immunocompromised patient and good hand hygiene measures by all family members for at least 1 week after vaccination should be implemented.

In conclusion it’s clear that “vaccine shedding” is a nonsense phrase. The lack of accounts of children transmitting viruses to younger siblings and friends after vaccination is a dead giveaway. Whilst viral shedding is a reality we can be confident that:

Viral shedding applies only to live virus vaccines and is significantly low, low risk
Post vaccination viral shedding of rotavirus and varicella is detected in the stools for 4-6 weeks respectively. It’s of such low risk as to be of cautionary interest regarding immunocompromised individuals
Genuine concern about viral shedding in these groups is managed with sound hygiene and avoiding contact with stools
In rare cases of post varicella immunisation vesicular rash shedding may occur. Transmission is still unlikely
The lack of viral shedding following MMR eliminates any concerns about transmission
Claims of DTaP shedding and transmission are bogus
Stories about whooping cough transmission from vaccine shedding are demonstrably false
Stories of polio infection being a risk due to shedding are designed to scare
Antivaccination lobbyists use false and incomplete information about shedding to create fear of vaccines/the vaccinated
Shedding of LAIV is at markedly low concentration, short duration and transmission is dwarfed by seasonal influenza transmission
Accurate information about the topic is drowned out by antivaccination sites and “mothering” forums making inaccurate claims