Hilary's Desk

Like many of my friends, there was once a time when I trusted the system; was ignorant about the actual lack of “evidence base”; and assumed that what I was told was right. Because of this naivety, I learned the hard way that the system can be wrong. Since then, I’ve done my best to keep myself out of this system, but when neded, I have never hesitated to confront the system  in order to get the best for my family or friends, and protect them from the worst. I’ve only been able to do that, with a backbone honed from years of research into all sorts of diagnostic scenarios, so that I know what is supposedly gold standard treatments, what evidence (or lack of) that’s based on, and the flaws.  Read Full Blog

Where are the skeptics, when it comes to looking at the “responsibility” of using intravenous vitamin C in serious illness? Where you’d predict them to be. Shoring up the medical system like good little marionettes.  Read Full Blog

In the wake of the TV3 documentary "Living Proof",  thoughout New Zealand, families who have members in ICU with H1N1, are being told that their near-death family members cannot be given intravenous vitamin C because it would cause renal failure. The medical literature does not support this statement. Many times we hear about vitamin C and kidney stones, but where did that "information" come from? According to Professor Hemila of Finland, it is an "urban legend". Quite why the medical profession feel it so necessary to create urban legends, is another matter altogether. Professor Hemila details the literature on this on his a page on his website called "Safety of Vitamin C: Urban Legends" (page pdf'd):  Read Full Blog

Are doctor prepared to their patients to die, rather than take note of either Allan Smith, or the known medical literature? Hence, this open letter to New Zealand Herald. 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

“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

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

OPEN LETTER : Dear Drs Michael Osterholm, Kris Ehresmann and Ed Belangia; None of you get it, do you?  You say you “know the idea that the flu vaccine doesn't prevent deaths in the elderly sounds almost blasphemous” and that you “didn't really want to believe it at first either,” but that the new research is “incontrovertible”? The new research is no less “incontrovertible” than the research done between 1960 and 1976, which showed exactly the same - and Dr J Anthony Morris’s honesty, lost him his job in FDA. Can’t nuke the bread-and-butter of all vaccines, the annual flu-vax till ringer! And yes, that’s what was said!  Read Full Blog

Here's how the story goes. In 2005 Glaxo Smith Kline, amongst other vaccine firms, threatened the UK Government, saying - "You've got to increase the use of ordinary annual flu vaccine in UK, or if a pandemic comes, we won't supply pandemic vaccine!  So there."  Fast forward to 2010. The UK Government wanted to back out on the 2009 H1N1 vaccine contract, but GSK refused.  And I bet they reminded them of that wee discussion in 2005. "Not gonna let you cancel", says GSK. "We'll downgrade your order of H1N1 vaccine from 130 million doses down to 34.8 million doses, but here's the deal:" Read Full Blog