Hilary's Desk

In a previous blog, mention was made of North and South’s rabidly nose-in-the-air provaccine article called “The case for vaccination”. The editor, Virginia Larson stuck her personal stake in the ground, with a scathing editorial, saying, “We did not seek out the extreme anti-immunisation campaigners for “balance” because their arguments aren’t balanced.” and ..... “they’ve already done enough damage by spreading hysteria over the MMR triple jab and are now set on painting the HPV vaccine Gardasil as part of some greater plot to poison or sterilise us.” The article’s author, North and South’s deputy editor Joanna Wane, didn’t mention the questions raised over the efficacy or value of the MeNZB. You would have thought that was deserving enough to be added to the mix of bile? Or perhaps those concerns were well founded? Not according to Perry Bisman.  Read Full Blog

While the medical profession has finally caught on, that the more "educated" a parent makes themselves on the issues around vaccination, the more likely they are to chose not to vaccinate, they are utterly offended that people can chose not to vaccinate.  Furthermore, their take on the issue of "choice" is off the wall.  Their solution to parents not making the 'right' choice, is to back parents into the wall and take pot shots at them with "Refusal to vaccinate" letters (see bottom), which read like legal documents, but are not.  These "refusal to vaccinate" letters come out of such skewed thinking patterns as can be seen in this statement in May this year, from the biggest vaccine defender of them all, Dr Paul Offit: Read Full Blog

What happens when paediatricians take a look at the disease incidence in their own country and decide that certain vaccines are not justified on epidemiological grounds?  Nothing, So long as they keep their mouths shut.  What happens when they look into the use of certain vaccines, and find that reactions are being covered up?  Nothing.  So long as they keep their mouths shut. But when they tell the world about both... , no matter that good science is on their side, there is only one possible result. To start with, they will be branded ANTI VACCINE. What better slur is there?  Anti vaccine people are idiots, don't you know?  Truth won't be discussed.  Truth is inconvenient to the vaccine industry, especially to organisations who owe their existence and income to the vaccine industry. Simple as that. Here's the story. Read Full Blog

It’s mind numbing to me, that in 2010, the medical system would still expound this myth. Oy Vey. But so we read, “Study looks at why mum’s kiss is good for baby”; “Sterile when they are born, babies inherited bacteria from their main carer, usually their mother” … right there, the fundamental premis, which underpins this study, is not supported by the medical literature.  Read Full Blog

“Warning on blood thinning medicine” rang out the headlines in the Herald on 10 June 2010, in an article which warned that warfarin can result in strokes. This type of article is particularly dangerous, because readers can assume that what is said is the only danger there is. Warfarin is way more dangerous than just causing strokes. Warfarin is a major nutrient robber, to the proportions of being a biological weapon of slow mass destruction. Read Full Blog

How do we know this? Because on page 40 of the June Issue of North and South, Dr Michael Tatley from CARM tells us, “An awfully large number of people have been exposed to vaccines and if they’re as bad as some of the anti lobby are suggesting, there must be a lot of really sick people out there. And we just don’t see them.” No, CARM doesn’t see them, and most of the time, neither do they receive reports about those children, as I mentioned in this blog. Why? Read Full Blog

As someone who spent some years working in restaurants, I laughed when I read a recent article about how bad New Zealanders are when it comes to complaining about the quality of food in a restaurant. The article talked about how people would whinge in private, complain to their mates, or not go back to the restaurant, but rarely did they have the guts to go to the restaurant and explain what they didn’t like. It’s so true. It was true back in the 70’s and is still true today. Those who do complain are mostly business people who have learned to speak their mind, or overseas people who understand the importance of standing up for themselves. Only a few kiwis have learned that it is right to complain. Read Full Blog

Drs Hazel Lewis and John Holmes from the Ministry of Health (MOH), took an opportunity in the Herald letters to the editor to “swipe” an article called “Jab no surefire protection”  which they maintain undermines an important health initiative. Never mind that the article was based on a Ministry of Health press release, and gave no negative information about the Gardasil vaccine itself. Reading it, I thought that the MOH would be delighted at the meek compliance of it all. Not so. This MOH whine actually joins the ranks of “pillock” status, because the article was rightly addressing what many published medical studies show and the MOH had identified – that most people vaccinated with Gardasil, think they don’t need smears.  Read Full Blog

Systemic rot in Pfizer has got too deep for the authorities to turn a blind eye to any more.  Pfizer has paid censured experts to educate doctors, has illegal ghost-writing practices; been warned about significant violations in paediatric trials of Geodon, was found guilty of pushing Neurontin for illegal purposes: tried to force NEMJ to hand over peer review comments... , their litany of dishonesty and corruption, just goes on, and on and on.  To me the one incident that really says it all about the system is what the FDA organized when Pfizer was caught illegally marketting Bextra.   Read Full Blog

London Time’s headline shrieks: “Leading scientist accuses doctors of increasing fear of vaccines”  When are scientists going to understand that they don’t know everything, and the world doesn’t revolve around their myopic thought patterns? Why is the primary aim of scientists to make everyone conform to their own thinking. Why do they assume that, “For most people it goes back to the primeval: ‘Well my mother had measles, I had measles, so why do I need to take the risk [of vaccinating my child]?’ What they are really saying is, ‘Can I live with myself if something went wrong?’ ” Incorrect, Prof Sir. But because Professor Sir Leszek Borysiewicz, by virtue of his many letters, thinks he’s right, so are his solutions??! Read Full Blog