1.Dr Judy Wilyman Report: Newsletter 214 The Australian Media will not Report the Case for Vaccination Choice
16 November 2018
On the 10 November 2018 citizens in Perth held an event discussing the scientific and political reasons for our right to choice in vaccination.
This event was promoted as “Let’s talk about Vaccination Choice and Vaccine Injury” and a press release was provided to the media.
For the first time in a decade the Australian media did not present this as an “anti-vaccination event”.
This is because the media decided to ignore our community event altogether and not publicise the concerns that many Australians have about losing our right to choice in vaccination.
The Australian media will only present Australian’s concerns as ‘anti-vaccination‘ or a ‘conspiracy theory’.
If you believe in medical freedom in Australia and your right to choose what you inject into your own body – in the name of health, then the Australian media will not give you a voice to present the scientific and political arguments supporting your position – even if you have a MSc and a PhD in public health.
Here is the 30 min video of the presentation that I gave at this event describing why vaccines have always been a voluntary medical intervention in the historical control of infectious diseases and why they must remain voluntary in genetically diverse populations.
This presentation provides evidence that vaccines are being promoted by doctors on the myth of ‘vaccine-created herd immunity’.
This claim is propaganda that is now being taught in Australian schools from kindergarten to university.
The presentation also shows how Australian doctors are breaching the hippocratic oath by promoting the government’s vaccination policies and by ignoring the known risks of vaccines.
This is because the risks are being presented by the government as “anti-vaccination material”.
I have provided the evidence for these conclusions in this 30 min video by describing the politics that is allowing this to happen in Australia.
You can find a more in-depth analysis of this evidence in my PhD in public health that is published on my website and on the University of Wollongong website.
Or you can watch this 30 min video that was presented at the Vaccines and Immunisation Conference in Osaka Japan (23 October 2018).
This is the scientific and political information that doctors are not receiving in their education about the control of infectious diseases that is critical to human health.
The media and industry-associated lobby groups are informing the public that my PhD is in “humanities” and not public health.
This is misleading.
Look at the contents of my PhD – it specialises in the science, politics and ethical issues in the control of infectious diseases.
I enrolled in the UOW School of Public Health in 2004 and my MSc and PhD specialise in Social Medicine (public health).
The University of Wollongong provided supervisors from the School of Humanities (Social Sciences) in 2011 to cover the politics, science and ethics involved in the decisions to use vaccines to control infectious diseases.
My PhD specifically covers the epidemiology of infectious diseases in Australia and the reasons why the Australian government is choosing to mandate multiple vaccines in the childhood schedule.
In the presentation I state that doctors are not specialists in immunisation.
By this I mean that they are not being educated on the epidemiology and historical control of infectious diseases, nor are they educated on all the ingredients of vaccines or the serious adverse health outcomes that have been associated with vaccines for decades on the package inserts.
Associations need to be investigated before a product is claimed to be ‘safe’.
Hence I have stated that “doctors do not have speicalised knowledge in immunisation”.
This is a direct quote from several doctors and it is a fact that is not being revealed to the community.
Doctors are breaching their hippocratic oath to put the patient’s best interests first because they are not providing information on the ingredients of vaccines or their known adverse health effects in the human body.
This is important to health outcomes in their genetically diverse patients.
These issues are explained further in this 30 min presentation at the science conference in Japan and in my PhD.
Please note that Sweden is one of several countries that has stated it will not mandate vaccines in discriminatory government policies because of the known health risks and also because it is against the constitution.
If this policy of forced medication in healthy people is not necessary for Sweden then it is not necessary in any community.
Bachelor of Science, University of NSW
Diploma of Education (Science), University of Wollongong
Master of Science (Population Health), Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Wollongong.
PhD in The Science and Politics of the Australian Government’s Vaccination Program, UOW School of Humanities and Social Inquiry.
Website Vaccination Decisions
2. Robert Kennedy’s Children’s Health Defence: $4 Billion and Growing: U.S. Payouts for Vaccine Injuries and Deaths Keep Climbing
The Health Resources & Services Administration just released new dollar figures reflecting payouts from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.
The payouts for vaccine injuries just went past the whopping $4 billion mark.
Using the government’s own conclusion that only 1% of all vaccine injuries are reported, the $4 billion is just the tip of the iceberg.
Despite assurances from CDC and our Federal agencies that all vaccines are safe, the payouts say otherwise.
Vaccine injuries can and do happen—to previously healthy children and adults.
Consumers deserve to know the facts about the full range of vaccine risks.
However, vaccination programs have always resulted in more serious vaccine injuries for some.
In the 1970s and early 1980s, for example, the diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus (DPT) vaccine and its whole-cell pertussis component had chalked up so much vaccine damage that a television documentary likened receiving a DPT shot to playing “vaccine roulette.”
After the DPT debacle began attracting widespread attention, vaccine manufacturers started pressuring Congress for protection from vaccine injury lawsuits.
In 1986, President Reagan signed into existence a radical piece of legislation—the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA)—which launched what the Act described as an “alternative remedy to judicial action for specified vaccine-related injuries.”
A key component of the legislation involved creating the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), which was given responsibility for deciding (through the workings of a special “vaccine court”) whether specific injuries and individuals would be eligible for financial compensation.
Over the vaccine court’s 30-year history, individuals and families have filed over 20,000 petitions for vaccine injury compensation.
This month, even as 12% of filed petitions remained unadjudicated, the payouts crossed over the $4 billion threshold.
This amount was awarded in response to barely a third (31% or 6,276) of the filed petitions.
There is no telling how much more money the taxpayer-funded program might have shelled out if the court had not chosen to dismiss the remaining petitions (56%)—possibly doing so fraudulently in at least some cases.
Running the Gauntlet
Over the three decades, despite the stated intent to furnish an “accessible and efficient forum for individuals found to be injured by certain vaccines,” the NVICP has devolved into a protracted and litigious David-versus-Goliath battleground.
The vaccine court, in actuality, is “not a court at all but…a consumer-funded government claims program that uses…employees of Health and Human Services (HHS), rather than judges to make decisions on compensation.” While government-funded Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyers vigorously represent and defend the interests of HHS and vaccine manufacturers, the consumer-unfriendly system forces the vaccine-injured to meet an exceptionally high burden of proof.
For dismissed claims, there is no assurance that the program will even cover attorneys’ fees and costs.
Children’s Health Defense recently called attention to a glaring example of the NVICP’s pro-industry and anti-vaccine-injured bias.
In 2007 and 2008, DOJ attorneys exhibited “highly unethical and appallingly consequential official misconduct” during an Omnibus Autism Proceeding (OAP) orchestrated to determine the fate of 5,400 families who had filed claims for vaccine-induced autism.
The potential value of the claims exceeded $100 billion—an amount that “would have bankrupted the [compensation] program many times over.” HHS’s Department of Justice lawyers, “under pressure” to deprive petitioners of their rightful relief, successfully achieved that aim through allegedly fraudulent means.
In September 2018, Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Rolf Hazlehurst (parent of one of the vaccine-injured children involved in the OAP) requested that the DOJ Inspector General and Congress investigate this fraud and obstruction of justice by HHS and DOJ officials.
Individuals who file claims with VICP must meet specific “medical criteria” and are out of luck unless their illness, disability, injury or condition is covered in the NVICP’s Vaccine Injury Table and manifests within a specified time frame. As an illustration of the difficulties that NVICP petitioners may encounter, consider someone who experiences myocarditis (heart inflammation) following vaccination.
A 2018 article in BMJ Case Reports recently observed that myocarditis is one of “the more serious vaccine-related sequela” and “has been reported following many different vaccines.”
Another recent article in a European medical journal describes post-vaccination reports of myopericarditis (inflammation of both the pericardium and the heart muscle) and other autoimmune disorders and offers two extremely plausible mechanisms “by which vaccines can cause autoimmune reactions.”
In the Vaccine Injury Table, however, the only place where cardiac symptoms are mentioned is in connection with anaphylaxis—with the table’s notes indicating that “there are no specific pathological findings to confirm a diagnosis of anaphylaxis”—and most autoimmune illnesses are also conspicuously absent.
Tip of the Iceberg
By anyone’s accounting, the $4 billion paid out to date by the NVICP is an attention-getting amount of money.
However, that amount pales in comparison to the billions of dollars’ worth of autism claims that the vaccine court unfairly dismissed.
According to HHS, moreover, “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported,” and studies confirm that many health providers are unfamiliar with the system for reporting vaccine injuries.
The shocking underreporting of vaccine injuries also fails to account for the fact that one in six individuals who experience an “adverse event following immunization” (AEFI) have a recurrence with subsequent vaccination, often rated as “more severe than the initial AEFI.”
If even a small percentage of these unreported and recurrent vaccine injuries were brought forward for compensation, the entire NVICP house of cards—and the CDC’s deceptive claims of unassailable vaccine safety—would crumble.
A Gold Rush: Liability Protection Encourages More Vaccines
Instead, whether intended or not, the end result of the 1986 Act and the NVICP has been to create a “gold rush” environment that encourages manufacturers to develop even more vaccines, while conveniently exempting them from liability for the injuries and deaths that result from their powerful immune-system-altering products.
With no incentive to make vaccines safe and a large and lucrative market guaranteed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s childhood vaccine schedule—as well as a growing effort to foist unnecessary and dangerous vaccines on adults—vaccine manufacturers appear to have it made.
The public and vaccine safety advocates must continue to remind the government that the approximately 6,300 claims that have been compensated over the NVICP’s 30-year history represent the very tip of the iceberg.
3. GreenMedInfo: Attacking Ourselves – Top Doctors Reveal Vaccines Turn Our Immune System Against Us
The research is hard to ignore, vaccines can trigger autoimmunity with a laundry list of diseases to follow.
With harmful and toxic metals as some vaccine ingredients, who is susceptible and which individuals are more at risk?
No one would accuse Yehuda Shoenfeld of being a quack.
The Israeli clinician has spent more than three decades studying the human immune system and is at the pinnacle of his profession.
You might say he is more foundation than fringe in his specialty; he wrote the textbooks.
The Mosaic of Autoimmunity, Autoantibodies, Diagnostic Criteria in Autoimmune Diseases, Infection and Autoimmunity, Cancer and Autoimmunity – the list is 25 titles long and some of them are cornerstones of clinical practice.
Hardly surprising that Shoenfeld has been called the “Godfather of Autoimmunology” – the study of the immune system turned on itself in a wide array of diseases from type 1 diabetes to ulcerative colitis and multiple sclerosis.