Safe Vaccine Debate 1. WHO Faux Pas About Adverse Events & Deaths 2. Dr Judy Wilyman Report – ABC Misreporting 3. Elizabeth Hart’s Overvaccination Report: Ethics, Conflict of Interest, GSK & Meningococcal B Vaccination

1.  : The World Health Organization’s Faux Pas About Vaccine Adverse Events And Deaths –Jul. 8th, 2017

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have maintained their VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) since the late 1980s, almost like a post-marketing survey/analysis, since no one probably pays attention to all the adverse events reported, or actually is doing something to correct what is chemical abuse to children.  Is that what consensus vaccine science amounts to?

Even more importantly, we find confirmation of damages awarded by the Vaccine Court Masters, plus attorneys’ fees, which now total $3.56 BILLION [1].  What I think readers really ought to understand is vaccine awards went from $1,371,761.92 for fiscal year 1989 to $230,140,251.20 for fiscal year 2016.  Fiscal year 2017 seems to be lagging behind in postings and updates.  What do those 2016 payout figures for “Petitioners’ Award Amount” shout out?  There’s an almost 230 times increase in vaccine damages paid from FY 1989 to FY 2016!  So, what’s going on?

It appears more vaccinees are experiencing post-vaccination damage.  However, mandatory vaccine reporting may not be submitted to VAERS with subsequent filings to the Vaccine Court.  However, there is a most significant data bank, which emerges from Page 5 of the HRSA reports, insofar as DEATHS are recorded as filed and attributed to vaccines and their adverse events.  I encourage readers to check out Page 5 to understand the gravity of what’s going on within the World Health Organization stating vaccines cannot cause death!

According to that HRSA report, here are the deaths as reported:

Vaccines: DT 9; DTP 696; DTP-HIB 8; DTaP 80; DTap-HepB-IPV 30; DTaP-HIB 1;

DTaP-IPV-HIB 18; Td 3; Tdap 2; Tetanus 2; Hepatitis A 6; Hepatitis B 56;

HIB 3; HPV 14; Influenza 115; IPV 14; OPV 28; Measles 19; Meningococcal 2;

MMR 58; MMR-Varicella 1; Pertussis 3; Pneumococcal Conjugate 9;

Rotavirus 1; Rubella 4; Varicella 9; Nonqualified1 9; Unspecified2 9 for a total

of 1,209 deaths and 16,523 injuries.

But there’s a snake in the woodpile regarding those statistics.  Only 5,143 claims were compensated while 10,169 were dismissed!  An absolute disgrace since the 1986 law passed by Congress has not been honored in its fullest intent, i.e., everyone harmed by vaccines will be compensated.

However, the more the Vaccine Court Masters can ‘cheat’ damaged vaccinees out of what’s rightfully due to claimants, the more the U.S. Treasury can deposit and keep from the taxes paid on each vaccine sold! I’ve written about that and even tried shaking it down at Treasury, only to be totally disregarded.  What does that tell you?

Another thing happening with vaccine information and data is the Internet is being sanitized of incriminating vaccination information and one is most likely to receive the following prompt from numerous search engines:

What is totally incomprehensible to me, who has been researching and studying vaccine damages since they first started appearing via moms telling doctors I either knew or worked with that their children were damaged after receiving a vaccination!  That began in the late 1980s.  No doctor knows a child better than a mom who has given birth to and lovingly cared for her child.

However, the white coats have not been faithful to their Hippocratic Oath: First, do no harm.  Vaccines contain inordinate amounts of neurotoxic chemicals and heavy metals, plus there have been no long-term studies proving vaccines—just short term studies for vaccine licensure—only a religious-like belief system of consensus science that vaccines cannot cause harm or even death, and any adverse vaccine event is a ‘coincidence’.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has a huge can of worms to deal with regarding its 2013 pontification and new methodology to classify adverse events following immunization (AEFI) in March 2013.” [2]

July 4, 2017, two Indian medical personnel published a “letter stating that the methodology was flawed.”  It was published in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics.[2]

The critical and flawed issue involved is:

According to the two, WHO’s new classification, in essence, implies that no death can result from vaccination and, if any death does occur, it is  only coincidental and not due to the vaccine.   This, they say, does not address children’s safety.  [2]

Here is the letter published by Jacob Puliyel, a pediatrician and member of the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation, and Anant Phadke, an executive member of the All India Drug Action Network, who have expressed their concerns over the new system for classifying AEFI.

According to them [Puliyel and Phadke], WHO’s new classification, in essence, implies that no death can result from vaccination and, if any death does occur, it is only coincidental and not due to the vaccine. [2]

Such an outrageously ridiculous statement made by the World Health Organization ought to automatically disqualify the WHO from any further participation in global health politics!  For such an asinine statement to blatantly emerge from what ought to be considered a prestigious health organization is nothing short of medical malpractice or total public health ineptness, plus a lack of backbone to stand up against what amounts to chemical child abuse.  To deny health harms can occur after vaccinations is nothing short of tobacco science taken to a zenith!

What seems to be happening is a corporate-mandate-and-rule-siege has taken over at every level of society, especially those areas where controllers can enforce their consensus science about vaccines, which has decimated more than two generations of children globally.

James Lyons Weiler says in his article “Fake Science: When is Medical ‘Science’ Not Science?”

If Science is to survive in the new Corporatocracy, this practice must be met with strongly worded letters to the deciding Editor by the Editorial Board with threats of mass resignation and counter-boycott, if necessary.  An Editorial Board must stand by the Journal’s peer-review process, and the Journal must stand by the outcome of that process.  To do otherwise is to allow Corporations to sanitize the literature of what they deem to be “problematic” studies, one study at a time. [5] [CJF emphasis]

The Indian medical personnel are correct in taking on the WHO, especially since India experienced 47,500 children being paralyzed in a 2011 Bill Gates Foundation polio vaccination campaign, plus the problems with the HPV vaccine [3-4].

This video explains the problems with the oral polio vaccine; which polio vaccine is considered ‘safer’.

Dr. Maurice Hilleman, MD, Merck’s premiere vaccine inventor candidly discusses SV-40.

There’s a lot more monkey business going on in vaccine pseudoscience than we apparently know, especially now with new vaccines coming to market.  They can contain nanobots, RFID chips and other genetically modified microorganisms, which can be included in mandated vaccines.  Do you really know what’s in your vaccine?  How about those patented ‘corporate secrets’?  Also, we must remember vaccines go hand-in-hand with the UN’s Agenda 21!

Probably nothing can be said more poignantly about the UN’s Agenda 21 than the words of the late Maj. Gen. Bert Stubblebine (US Army, ret.):

UN Agenda 21 is the linchpin of global depopulation plans. Defeating Agenda 21 locally requires understanding the Delphi Technique of manipulated consensus… but the core of this attack on humanity, through our food, health and property, is The Great Culling – the plan to reduce the human population by ninety-five percent. This will not happen if we stand our ground!

There is an extreme and serious medical-legal problem in deliberately obfuscating medical, scientific and research information.

Stating deaths after vaccines is only coincidental and cannot be due to vaccines must be objected to by the entire medical community, if it has any scruples left, and the entire global population.  We can’t let them get away with vaccine pseudoscience!

Source: [5]


[1],  Pg. 9


Depopulation test run? 75% of children who received vaccines in Mexican town now dead or hospitalized


2. The Dr Judy Wilyman Report: Newsletter 164 ABC Journalist, Emma Alberici, Peddling False Information on Vaccines – 30 June 2017

On 26 June 2017, Emma Alberici, wrote a story for the ABC titled ‘Why do politicians get away with peddling porkies and ‘alternative facts’.
This is interesting because she is demonstrating the answer with her own misinformed story.
The health of a community is at risk when journalists are no longer held accountable for the misinformation they provide on health and environmental subjects. 

In her story she states that Senator Hanson suggested there “might be a link between vaccinationand autism – only to apologise for her remarks”.
In fact, Pauline Hanson’s statement is correct and it is supported by the Institute of Medicine (IOM). And Pauline Hanson did not apologise for this particular remark, she apologised for another comment. This statement is completely true – Vaccines ‘might’ be a cause of autism and a causal link has been found in data by the US CDC.
Just investigate “Vaxxed: From Cover up to Catastrophe”.
There are also many scientific studies linking vaccines as a plausible cause of autism, but Emma Alberici, cannot produce a single study that proves vaccines do not cause autism.
This is critical to claiming that vaccines do not cause autism.
It is also critical for any policy that is being claimed to be based on “the best available scientific evidence”.

A good investigative journalist would not rely on health statements made by politicians or lobby group activists to base their story but they would investigate both sides of the academic debate.
This journalist concludes by saying ‘You need only look to the tobacco industry. Think of how many people died believing smoking cigarettes did not cause cancer.’
She should also have added that this was because doctors were promoting cigarettes as healthy products for many decades.

I hope Emma Alberici can provide a study that proves vaccines do not cause autism because otherwise she is providing porkies to the public about a very important health issue.

Dr. Judy Wilyman PhD
Bachelor of Science, University of NSW
Diploma of Education (Science), University of NSW,
Master of Science (Population Health), University of Wollongong
PHD The Science and Politics of Australia’s Vaccination Policies, University of Wollongong
Website: Vaccination Decisions

3. Elizabeth Hart’s Overvaccination Report: Ethics, Conflict of Interest, GSK & Meningococcal B Vaccination

Hi, FYI, see below my email to the Chair of the Human Research Ethics Committee which approved the GSK Bexsero meningococcal B vax trial in South Australia.
Looks like the same pattern is underway to get the GSK Bexsero vaccine on the Australian taxpayer-funded vax schedule as occurred with Gardasil HPV vaccination, i.e. just keep pushing until the Government rolls over and adopts it on the schedule, thereby setting in train the domino effect around the world, and another multi-billion dollar vaccine earner for Big Pharma…this is such a massive scandal…

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Elizabeth Hart <>

Date: Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 4:09 PM
Subject: Ethics, conflicts of interest, GSK, and meningococcal B vaccination
To: “Thorne, Mary (Health)” <>

Open email for the attention of:

Dr Tamara Zutlevics
Patient Ethicist
Chair of the Women’s and Children’s Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee
Dr Zutlevics, thank you for your recent response to my inquiry re the B Part of It Meningococcal B Vaccine Herd Immunity Study.  (Your response dated 29 June 2017.) 
By way of background to my inquiry, I am an independent citizen, investigating the over-use of vaccine products, i.e. overvaccination.
Discussion on vaccination policy has been polarised in Australia into aggressively ‘pro’ and ‘anti’ factions.
This polarised debate is serving the community very badly as it is hindering open discussion about the burgeoning taxpayer-funded Immunise Australia Program, and emerging problems with vaccines, e.g. the pertussis vaccine which appears to be driving the development of new strains.
This matter is particularly serious as the Australian Government is mandating vaccination to access benefits, i.e. the ‘No Jab, No Pay’ law, and impeding parents’/children’s right to properly consider the risks and benefits of individual vaccine products, i.e. impeding ‘informed consent’ before the medical intervention of vaccination.
I suggest an example of over-vaccination is mass meningococcal B vaccination, i.e. the GlaxoSmithKline Bexsero Meningococcal B vaccination currently being pressed upon 60,000 students in Years 10, 11 and 12 in South Australia, as approved by the Women’s and Children’s Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee, which you chair.
Are these students being properly informed they are guinea pigs for the GSK Bexsero vaccine, a product which has been rejected three times for the taxpayer-funded vaccination schedule by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, due to multiple uncertainties in relation to the clinical effectiveness against the disease and other reasons?  
(See for example Recommendations made by the PBAC July 2015 – Subsequent decisions not to recommend.)
Meningococcal B is a very serious disease.  It is also very rare.  This rare disease does not justify mass vaccination.
At this stage we have no idea of the possibly deleterious long-term consequences of introducing a vaccine for this very rare disease.
In South Australia the media is being used to fear-monger about meningococcal B to promote GlaxoSmithKline’s Bexsero vaccine product trial.
The Adelaide Advertiser reports: “It is hoped the findings will provide a strong push to get the vaccine on the taxpayer-funded National Immunisation Program.”
(See: Free meningococcal B-strain vaccine for 60,000 SA high school students under study into immunisation effect, 13 December 2016).
It seems to me this vaccine trial is biased from the outset, and it is alarming that a member of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI), A/Professor Helen Marshall, is a researcher on this GlaxoSmithKline-sponsored vaccine product trial
Dr Zutlevics, do you think it ethical that an academic who is a member of ATAGI, i.e. the Australian Government co-ordinated group which provides advice to the Federal Minister for Health on the Immunise Australia Program, is also involved in an industry-sponsored vaccine product trial which is coaxing thousands of students to have a still experimental vaccine, i.e. the GSK Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine, with the aim of getting it on the taxpayer-funded vaccination schedule?
For more background on this matter, please see below my emails forwarded to Professor Brendan Murphy, Chief Medical Officer of Australia, in regards to meningococcal B and W vaccination, which includes reference to A/Professor Helen Marshall, and other academics conflicted by their associations with industry, e.g. Professor Robert Booy, Head of Clinical Research at the National Centre for Immunisation Research & Surveillance, who also lobbies for the GSK Bexsero Meningococcal B vaccine product to be added to the taxpayer-funded vaccination schedule.
Dr Zutlevics, I request you and your HREC colleagues carefully consider the information provided in this email and my emails to Professor Murphy (see below), including the conflicts of interest of academics who are influential on vaccination policy, e.g. members of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation, and staff of the National Centre for Immunisation Research & Surveillance.
I request your urgent response on this matter.
Please note this is a matter of public interest and this correspondence will be circulated to other parties.
Elizabeth Hart
Open email for the attention of:
Professor Brendan Murphy
Chief Medical Officer of Australia, Principal Adviser to the Minister and Department of Health 

Professor Murphy, I request your considered response to my previous email below re questionable meningococcal W and B vaccination (dated 9 February 2017).

Gross over-vaccination of children is now rife in Australia, and the Australian government is complicit in exploiting the community with the coercive over-use of questionable vaccine products. 
It appears governments are now in the business of supporting the growth of the international vaccine industry.  The Markets and Markets vaccines report notes that:
The Australian government’s coercive vaccination bureaucracy is rife with conflicts of interest, in particular the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) which is colonised by academics with associations with the vaccine industry, including ex-officio member Peter McIntyre, who has funding associations with GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Merck[2].
Professor McIntyre is also Director of the National Centre for Immunisation Research & Surveillance (NCIRS), among other vaccine policy influencing roles.
It is notable that another member of ATAGI, Associate Professor Helen Marshall, is involved in the GlaxoSmithKline funded Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine trial that is currently being rolled out to South Australian teenage school students.[3]
Do these children and their parents fully understand that the still experimental Bexsero vaccine was rejected three times by the PBAC, and that they are guinea pigs for this vaccine for a rare disease?
According to the ATAGI conflict of interest document, A/Professor Marshall is an investigator on clinical trials associated with funding from GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and Sanofi.
She also presents at conferences sponsored by vaccine companies.
Another ATAGI member, Associate Professor Jodie McVernon, who was on Norman Swan’s ABC Health Report discussing meningococcal W and B, is also an investigator on clinical trials funded by GlaxoSmithKline, bioCSL, Novartis and Pfizer, and funded to attend workshops and symposiums sponsored by vaccine companies[2], although these conflicts of interest weren’t disclosed when she was interviewed on Norman Swan’s ABC Health Report.
It is notable that for many years the membership and conflicts of interest of members of ATAGI was kept secret from the public.
Brief conflict of information re ATAGI members is only now accessible on the Immunise Australia website because I persisted in requesting transparency on this matter, see my letter to then Prime Minister Tony Abbott:
The former Chairperson of ATAGI, Professor Terry Nolan, has also been involved with the Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine, when it was first developed with Novartis.[4]
There is no historical record of his conflicts of interests on the ATAGI website.
Professor Robert Booy, who is on the Executive of NCIRS, along with Director and ATAGI member Peter McIntyre, has also lobbied for the Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine to be added to the taxpayer-funded national schedule, e.g. as reported in Medical Observer in August 2015.[5]  Professor Booy is also the Medical Advisor for Meningococcal Australia an organisation which has campaigned for the Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine to be added to the taxpayer-funded schedule.[6]  I have asked Professor Booy if he or Meningococcal Australia receive funding/support from the vaccine industry, but he did not respond, although I see the Meningococcal Australia ‘About’ page has now been updated to acknowledge receiving funding from GSK Australia and Pfizer Australia.
Professor Booy is also a Board member of the Immunisation Coalition (since 2012 when I believe it was then known as the Influenza Specialist Group), which is sponsored and supported by GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Sanofi Pasteur, Roche Australia, Seqirus Australia, Astra Zeneka, Mylan and Bupa Australia.
Professor Booy is also on the Public Affairs and Advisory Committee of the Immunisation Coalition.
Professor Booy’s association with the industry-sponsored Immunisation Coalition (formerly Influenza Specialist Group) was not disclosed in the Medical Observer article re the Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine, and is currently not disclosed on the Meningococcal Australia website nor the NCIRS website as far as I can see.
(Professor Booy is also on the TGA’s Australian Influenza Vaccine Committee (AIVC), along with ATAGI member A/Professor Helen Marshall.)
It is very interesting to discover that vaccine manufacturers are now able to be so influential on government vaccination policy via the participation of the academics they fund (e.g. Peter McIntyre, Robert Booy, Helen Marshall, Jodie McVernon and former ATAGI Chairperson Terry Nolan) on government vaccination committees such as ATAGI and via the NCIRS and other organisations influential on vaccination policy.
In regards to meningococcal W and B, I question the implementation of mass vaccination programs for very rare diseases.
It is also important to consider if implementation of a vaccine will result in the emergence of new strains, as Dr Norman Swan suggested on the ABC Health Report, i.e. 
Due to the conflicts of interest and zealotry of the vaccine ideologues working in this area, I have no confidence that there are any independent and objective infectious diseases experts considering the ‘big picture’ on the development of new strains due to vaccination.
Professor Murphy, in my opinion the coercive over-use of questionable vaccine products is medical abuse and exploitation of the community and it’s time for ‘the authorities’ to be brought to account on this matter.   
I am particularly concerned that the over-use of vaccine products, particularly for rare and minor diseases, is damaging natural immunity and may have serious repercussions for the natural immune response of future generations.  There are parallels here with the over-use of antibiotics and the damage this is causing.
Given your role as the principal medical adviser to the Minister and Department of Health, I will continue to forward you correspondence in regards to over-vaccination.
It is your duty to ensure the Federal Health Minister, Greg Hunt, is properly briefed in this regard.
Please do not forward any more of my correspondence to the Australian government’s Immunisation Branch for a useless response.
This government department should be subjected to an urgent investigation as it is the vehicle being used to impose an ever-increasing amount of questionable vaccine products and re-vaccinations without open and transparent consultation with the community.
It also needs to be examined how this department is liaising with the vaccine industry and using the mainstream media, including the taxpayer funded ABC and SBS, to promote vaccine products and inhibit critical analysis of vaccination policy.
Professor Murphy, it is ‘on the record’ that these matters have been brought to your attention, and also to the attention of your predecessor, Professor Chris Baggoley:
I again request your urgent response to my email re meningococcal W and B vaccination (see below), including consideration of the information in this email, this matter must receive independent and objective consideration.
Elizabeth Hart
1.  Vaccines Market by Technology (Live Attenuated, Toxoid, Conjugate, Inactivated & Subunit, Recombinant), Disease Indication (Pneumococcal, Influenza, HPV, Hepatitis, Rotavirus, DTP, Polio, MMR), End User (Pediatrics, Adults) & Type – Forecasts to 2021. Markets and Markets, August 2016:
2. Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation Conflict of Interest document, as accessed on the Immunise Australia website.  (Undated.)
3. SA Health, University of Adelaide roll out meningococcal B vaccine trial. ABC News, 13 December 2016.
4. Review funded by Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics. Terry Nolan et al. Vaccination with a multicomponent meningococcal B vaccine in prevention of disease in adolescents and young adults. Vaccine 33 (2015) 4437-4445.
5. Meningococcal B vax rejection a bad move: expert. Medical Observer, 24 August 2015.

6. Subsidising meningococcal B vaccine deemed too costly for the federal budget. ABC News, 4 November 2016.


———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Elizabeth Hart <>
Date: Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 2:46 PM
Subject: Meningococcal W vaccination

Professor Murphy, Dr Norman Swan’s Health Report – Deadly meningococcal W concerns[1] notes a free vaccination program is being rolled out in Western Australia for teenagers with a vaccine “which will cover the new strain (along with three other strains)”.
It has subsequently been announced that Victoria and New South Wales will implement similar programs.[2]

So this vaccination program is bypassing the Federal Government’s funded vaccination schedule, and I presume has not been vetted by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee?
Is this a backdoor way for pharmaceutical companies to push their products, i.e. by dealing directly with the states?
This is concerning because the public must be assured that this vaccine product has been properly evaluated.  
For example, the Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine has been approved by the TGA, but was rejected three times by the PBAC for the national vaccination schedule due to multiple uncertainties in relation to the clinical effectiveness against the disease and other reasons.[3]
Given the multiple uncertainties about the Bexsero meningococcal B vaccine, I question why the TGA allowed this vaccine to be registered in the first place?
Again, this raises questions about the vaccine product containing the W strain – which specific product is going to be rolled out in WA, NSW and Victoria?  And has this product been properly evaluated?
In Dr Swan’s discussion with Jodie McVernon, Professor McVernon acknowledges the W strain “is still a very, very rare disease”.  She also notes that incidence of the B strain “is sort of going down”  this has occurred without a vaccination program being imposed.
I question the implementation of a mass vaccination program for a very, very rare disease.
It is also important to consider if implementation of a vaccine will result in the emergence of new strains, as Dr Swan suggested, i.e. 
Jodie McVernon’s response to Dr Swan’s statement was most uncertain, i.e. “Look, it’s a very relevant question but there’s no evidence that that is actually what’s happening here.
Overall, meningococcal disease in Australia was decreasing after serogroup C vaccine was introduced, and that’s because even the B disease has also been slowly declining over time, for reasons we don’t understand.”
Yes, I suggest there is much the ‘experts’ don’t understand…
Professor Murphy, I request you follow up on this report and question the evaluation of the W strain vaccine.  
It is also important to know what information will be provided to children and parents before they consent to the intervention.
Will children and their parents be allowed to consider the risks and benefits, as is required for legally valid consent, as acknowledged by the Australian Immunisation Handbook?
Will they be informed the disease is “very, very rare”.
Will they be informed that the incidence of the B strain of the disease is going down without vaccination?
There are other matters to consider, e.g.

6 responses to “Safe Vaccine Debate 1. WHO Faux Pas About Adverse Events & Deaths 2. Dr Judy Wilyman Report – ABC Misreporting 3. Elizabeth Hart’s Overvaccination Report: Ethics, Conflict of Interest, GSK & Meningococcal B Vaccination”

  1. Thank you for your excellent research…note first item of business for Greg Hunt was support meningitis VAX at urging of Newscorp /GSK after stories of deadly case ran in paper urging people to VAX same time GSK withheld supply and total people to call came when he reversed PBAC to redirect fund as unfavourable cost benefit analysis not to mention cross reaction to bacterial OMV and human cell membranes..etc excellent to see someone so intelligent and organized taking up this fight before many SA kids get harmed

  2. Elizabeth Hart is a champion in my eyes.Keep prodding Elizabeth as children NEED people like you.I can not understand how intelligent men and women fail to see what is right in front of them.Vaccines do cause injuries and dare I say AUTISM but our powers that be are completely blind.

  3. Vaccination protects children from serious illness Vaccine preventable diseases, such as measles, mumps, and whooping cough, which are still a threat and with out vaccination children would be at more risks. There is no evidence that vaccines cause autism. In 2015, a study performed in Japan showed NO association between autism and the MMR vaccine. To not vaccinate your child is putting them at risk.

    • Those statements are untrue Jake and you are endangering public health with this simplistic assessment. If you are interested in the debate you could start by doing some research and using an evidence-based argument to debate this topic. We are currently over-vaccinating children and it is necessary to assess each vaccine separately to determine its value to public health when it is known that all vaccines have side-effects in some children and life-threatening chronic illness is escalating with the expansion of the vaccination schedule. It is not acceptable (or scientific) to keep adding vaccines to the schedule if you have not proved that the vaccines are not causing this illness in our children. The government’s policy is not based on scientific methodology because it has not investigated this possibility.

  4. “The anti-vax proponents also hold extremist views because vaccination principles are generally sound. It is the manufacturers supported by a medical cartel, that are the real villains in this drama because they continue to make and promote unsafe vaccines and develop new vaccines without any formal evidence. It is also obvious that vaccination does not equate to immunisation!” this statement doesn’t make sense – if vaccination does not equal immunisation, vaccine principles are inherently NOT SOUND. vaccines don’t work, have never been shown to work, cause more harm than good since the beginning.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *