In Australia politicians and journalists are promoting vaccination programs with the aim of “increasing the immunisation rates in the population”.
This statement implies that increased vaccination rates result in healthier communities.
This implication is false.
Children born in the last two decades are the most vaccinated in history (using more vaccines and having the highest vaccination rates), yet they also have the highest levels of chronic illness, including allergies, anaphylaxis, autism and autoimmune diseases (MS, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis etc) than any other generation.
As the number of vaccines on government National Immunisation Programs (NIP) has increased since 1990, so too has the chronic illness in global populations.
The Australian Health Department has even told the Senate Community Affairs Committee (link here) that:
The Department does not collect data on autism prevalence. The Department is not aware of any evidence of any major shifts in prevalence of autism in Australia.
If this is the case, how can governments claim that their NIP’s are evidence-based when scientists have not proven that vaccines are not the cause of the escalating chronic illness and disability in the population?
And when governments are not monitoring chronic illness to evaluate the success of vaccination programs in improving the health of the population.
Mandatory vaccination policies are not evidence-based. They are policies being promoted on the beliefs of politicians, academics and journalists using selective information and with the assistance of powerful lobby groups.
Recently, the Australian Health Minister for Victoria, Jillian Hennessey, stated “there are no risks in vaccinating your children” and the leader of the Greens, Richard Di Natale (a qualified doctor) has presented false and misleading information about vaccines in parliament.
Richard Di Natale presented misinformation about vaccines and lobby groups in Australia in a speech in 2013.
In this speech he promoted individuals from the Stop the Australian Vaccination Network (SAVN) who are using complaint procedures and abusive blogs to suppress a proper debate on vaccination.
This former doctor and current leader of the Greens even stated he doesn’t know what motivates parents to question vaccines. He claims “….they are misguided, probably due to some combination of superstition, paranoia and scientific illiteracy.”
If Richard Di Natale had studied the medical literature he would have discovered the reasons why parents are choosing not to use all or some of the recommended vaccines.
In Australia the whooping cough vaccine is promoted on anecdotal evidence, parents promoting the death of their child to whooping cough, and lobby groups such as the Australian Skeptics (who have many supporters in SAVN) have provided awards to these parents for their efforts.
Australian parents are not promoting vaccines for awards or financial gain but it is important for the community to know that they receive financial rewards from pro-vaccine lobby groups for their efforts.
Public health policy is not designed on anecdotal evidence.
Australians should also know that medical practices receive thousands of dollars in grants from pharmaceutical companies to increase the vaccination rates of their practices. Please consider these conflicts of interest in this public health policy and consider all the medical literature (or the absence of medical evidence) when you decide to vaccinate yourself or your child.
Dr. Judy Wilyman