Letters from AVN members to the Greens

Senator Richard Di Natale - wants to force the AVN to disband in order to silence debate on the issue of vaccination. Last week in an article published by the Daily Telegraph (yes, the same newspaper that started the "No Jab, No Play" compulsory vaccination campaign and has close financial ties to Glaxo Smithkline and other vaccine manufacturers), Dr Richard Di Natale claimed that he had received abusive messages from members of the AVN. We do not dispute that abusive messages were sent to Senator Di Natale, but we absolutely do dispute that these messages would have been sent by AVN members. As always, when we ask our members to participate in letter-writing campaigns, we ask them to send copies of their letters through to our office. Below are the letters we have received. Though many of them are forthright and ALL of them are articulate and intelligent (as we have come to expect from our members), not one of them could be considered to be abusive in any way! If you have not yet written to Senator Christine Milne, leader of the Australian Greens, please do so as soon as possible and let her know that your vote will depend on the Greens' support for freedom of speech and choice. (I'm sure nobody whose letter is reproduced below would mind if you borrowed some of their ideas for your own letters).

Dear Senators, My name is XXX XXX and while I have not become a member of the Greens, I certainly vote for your party, and have done for all of the elections I have been eligible. I have been raised historically left-wing in my politics, and yet Labor does not attract me as a political force. Your party and its commitment to social justice, awareness and respect for people of varying opinion, and protection of those otherwise unable to protect themselves...in fact championing the cause of the disenfranchised, is what brings me to support your cause. I am a Chiropractor and I believe I have a great deal of experience and knowledge regarding the health sciences. I have strong awareness of research methodology, and the merits of the scientific method – that of not taking hypothesis as fact – of testing hypothesis exhaustively in an effort to disprove, and thence to progress knowledge. I also understand the influence that both industry and the media can have on the political process.  An issue close to my heart, and one to which I have devoted a great deal of study, is that of vaccination. And recent events, particularly a speech by Senator Di Natale, the apparent policy position of the Australian Greens he has advocated through said speech, and the resulting motion passed by the Australian Senate worry me on a range of levels. I will acknowledge immediately that my well-researched personal opinion is that vaccination is not the public health achievement that it is lauded as (and I’m happy to explain this at a future time if you would like to know why), but nonetheless I would hope very much that you will engage with me in an open way as to your opinions and the basis for those opinions. I seek in this correspondence to have a balanced, unemotional debate because I feel the very fabric of why I vote for your party and the respect I hold for the tenets of your party is/are being challenged. Please note, that while I am personally very much anti-vaccination, I deeply respect everyone’s right to their opinion, and all I ask is that people fully inform themselves of the evidence, and that whatever decision they then choose is theirs alone, and should be respected and not denigrated or discriminated against as a result. No judgement here, if someone chooses to vaccinate after undertaking such investigation. The Greens have always respected and protected the right to free speech, and as per the text of Senator Di Natale’s speech, it would appear that he shares a deep commitment to this fundamental right. Historically the Greens have also been instrumental in supporting the rights of people to conscientiously object to procedures or events that they may feel infringe upon their rights as sovereign individuals, particularly in the realm of medical or other health interventions. Your stance on so many aspects of life and liberty certainly make one presume this, and it is a clear reason why I vote for your party. I would very much desire to enter into conversation with someone such as Senator Di Natale (whom I assume from his speech is very clearly a proponent of vaccination as a public health initiative) as to the relative merits of his versus my position. Perhaps we can both learn from such a discussion. I am not some ‘fringe’ element. I believe I have a great many questions that are valid; questions which go to the heart of the safety and efficacy claimed for vaccination programs around the world. It is of course these elements of the debate which allow the act of vaccination to be framed as for ‘the greater good of society.’ And the apparent loss of an individual’s right to dissent is disregarded and in fact guilt and blame are instead heaped on such people due to the concept of herd immunity and the threat that vaccinations are not effective unless everyone (relatively speaking) is vaccinated.  The vehemence with which this issue is being explored right now, both here in Australia, but also around the world, is surely harmful and the debate would surely be served by a clearer enunciation of the differences both sides hold and the reasons why they hold them. Unfortunately, it seems that the orthodoxy choose instead to ridicule, deride or attempt to gag such debate, or through their proxies engage in severe abuse of the people who hold an alternative view. This is just not right. No matter how strongly one holds an opinion; no matter what level of evidence one feels that one has, it does not justify anonymous pornographic and profane abuse or anonymous threats to life being sent or phoned throug to those you disagree with. While I’m not claiming that the Greens are intentionally doing this through proxy, the recent resolution, or more particularly the text of the concurrent speech suggests that as a party you are now wholly supporting this gag of debate, and publically supporting and lauding the perpetrators of said abuse. This is shameful. A more positive outcome would be to engage with the opposite side (which, despite suggestions to this effect, are NOT small-numbered or unlearned, and who run the gamut from parents that have suffered vaccine-damaged children, to a great many professionals including many within the orthodox medical community and academia) to identify why they hold such fears, and engage in the research that would either prove their worries inaccurate, or lead to improvement of the application of vaccination in such a way that it could reduce risks to the population. The orthodox response, seemingly including that found in the Senator’s speech to Parliament can currently be characterised as the denial of risk, the trumpeting of apparent benefit (“medical miracle”), the attempt to stifle the conversation as ‘harmful’ or a ‘public nuisance’ or a ‘public risk’ and the demonising of the few who are willing to publically defend an alternative view and ask questions. This approach is scientifically inaccurate, unfair, inappropriate and seemingly deliberately deceptive. I am used to this from the vaccine industry, orthodox political medicine, and even the bureaucracy of governments espousing policy, but I expect greater from you. In your current role in the parliament, I see you as a foil for this, a power-block than can act as a check-and-balance and critically appraise any issue that comes before you. Indeed, in an ideal world I would expect this from any politician in a representative democracy, who in my view are charged with the responsibility to uphold and protect our society and investigate issues of public risk. I am a member of the AVN, and I find that most of the statements made against the organisation are ill-informed at best, and downright libellous at worst. Rarely do people seek the AVN to comment before they make claims as to what the AVN stands for. On the rare occasion that comment is sought, such comment is usually ignored, or heavily edited to alter context and support the idea that the AVN is some ‘quack’ organisation. Whoever was responsible for briefing Senator Di Natale on this issue (or writing his speech if he did not do this himself) is clearly guilty of same. Can I ask what you think is the benefit that Meryl Dorey gets from her position? Do you believe she does this for any purpose other than to passionately argue for a position that she strongly believes to be true? What gain can she receive from the hours and hours of volunteer work she puts in to defend the organisation she founded and the information and resources it provides? Why can people not congregate to support the many people who have been vaccine-damaged without fear of persecution from the very authorities they usually have blindly trusted with their children’s safety? I am the first to admit that both sides of the debate have (and often still do) use emotive anecdotes to fuel the debate, and historically some of the sources relied upon have perhaps not been of the best quality. However I think it fair to say that many resources now relied upon to support many of the arguments raised by the anti-vaccination, and for that matter, the pro-informed choice camps are of very high quality. They are sources around the world from the peer-reviewed literature. While I have a great many questions I would seek a response to (from someone opposing, hopefully without ridicule or derision) at another time if someone is willing to engage with me on the issues, the first is simply this: “Why is a small membership-only, volunteer-run community organisation public enemy number one? Why, when there is a plethora of other organisations, resources, internet sites etc both locally, and around the world that provide the same information? Why, if the orthodoxy is so confident about safety and efficacy is there such an apparent fear to engage in the debate, and instead belittle and demonize their opponents?” Members and Senators of the Australian Greens, and in particular, Senators Milne and Di Natale, I appreciate your willingness to read this letter (if indeed you have not delegated it to a staffer); I appreciate your time. I hope to have some honest debate and not ‘sound-bite’ replies. Yours, with respect and in anticipation of your reply... DR XXX Chiropractor B.App.Sc.(Comp.Med.)(Chiro.) M.Clin.Chiro.(RMIT University) As an addendum to this letter, I have dissected the Senator’s speech for what I believe to be significant inaccuracies, and I would appreciate clarification on the source of said statements (if you feel it is my right to ask for such). Please, all Greens senators read this and think about the ramifications of the comments I have made. Thank you in advance. Senator DI NATALE(Victoria) (23:15): I rise to address an issue of vital importance to the health of the Australian community, the issue of vaccination. As a former doctor and public health professional, I find it hard to overstate the importance of vaccines to public health. Alongside measures such as access to clean water, sanitation and improved air quality, vaccination is one of the most successful and cost-effective public health interventions in human history. = Such statements are commonly made with little to no attempt to support them. Can you provide support for such statements? This assumes that safety and efficacy data are accurate, which I dispute.  Indeed, it is hard to overstate the importance of vaccines in terms of the human suffering they have prevented. As many as half a billion people died from smallpox in the 20th century. This century, the death toll is zero. That is because a program of vaccination completely eradicated smallpox by 1979. The eradication of smallpox is one of the greatest achievements of science but just one example of what this life-saving technology has achieved for humankind. = Why is it that you can claim prevention through vaccination when you have not assessed general health status of populations, whether populations were exposed to the causative organism at all, whether populations provided the other public health interventions you describe above but not vaccination were similarly protected? There seems to be blind faith that the vaccination program was the primary factor, with little evidence to support this claim. Such statements are made often without critically appraising their basis. Australia in particular is a vaccination success story. = What is your response to the mortality statistics that have been provided by a range of authors in Australia and elsewhere, based on solid data from the departments of health and other relevant bodies? The evidence that clearly shows little impact of illness decline after the introduction of vaccines. The first vaccine was used here as far back as 1804, which was a smallpox vaccine. Since then, more and more vaccines have become routinely used. Tetanus, diphtheria and polio were early successes. We have had a measles vaccine since 1969 and a mumps vaccine since 1981. All of these potentially life-threatening conditions are now rare, but not unheard of, in this country. = Are they truly life-threatening if children are appropriately supported, nourished, healthy, and if parents are adequately taught how to improve lifestyle to significantly reduce indicidence or severity. Immune status of the child is critical here, surely you would agree? Children born in Australia today are protected from many more diseases, from chickenpox to human papillomavirus, thanks to safe and affordable vaccines. = If you look at the history of chicken pox, it is NOT a serious disease, especially in the context outlined in my comment immediately above. HPV protection, assuming 100% sero-conversion and a true immune response on exposure (usually many years after vaccination, when they become sexually active) is only for 4 strains...of how many exactly? It is deceptive statements like this that reinforce the public perception that they are fully protected when they are not. Some authors have suggested this in turn can modify more appropriate protective behaviours ‘when the time comes’ because of being lulled into this false sense of security. In other countries, families are still suffering the costs of many of these preventable diseases. = True. And what are we doing in those countries to markedly improve sanitation, refridgeration, food quality, water quality, education, life-stress associated with work load, poverty etc? Everyone should have the same protection that Australian children do. That is why it is so important that Australia continues to provide generous support to organisations such as the GAVI Alliance, which are committed to saving the lives of the millions of children in developing countries who lack access to the vaccines we take for granted. Indeed, vaccination has been such a success in Australia that a strange thing has happened. We have started to forget what it is like to suffer from the preventable infections we fought so hard to conquer. Few parents today have had the experience of watching a child with measles develop complications that become a life-threatening condition. = Once again, such complications arise in immunocompromised individuals, in part because parents no longer have the knowledge and skills or resources described above. We are spared the horror of watching a child with whooping cough turn blue and suffer a seizure from a coughing fit. = Actually, we are in the midst of the highest indcidence of whooping couch outbreaks in many years, so parents are not being spared this horror – and this despite incredibly high rates of pertussis vaccination – certainly much higher than rates in the past when outbreaks have occurred (maybe herd immunity over time needs higher and higher percentages of the population covered to actually work?). There are valid hypotheses out there that Parapertussis may be causing many of these cases, which is not vaccinated for, and mimics clinical signs and symptoms of pertussis. We no longer encounter people on a daily basis whose limbs have been twisted by paralytic poliomyelitis. = Have you been advised of the reports of polio that have occurred as a result of polio vaccination programs in India? Do you know the history of the Salk and Sabin solutions, and the slow reaction times in changing which got administered despite the number of people that contracted Polio as a result? Again, the time when Polio was rampant was economically and socially depressed with much lower quality of life. As these horrors have faded from daily life, we should be celebrating the life-saving innovation that has saved us and our kids from death and disease. Instead, there are people who now question the usefulness of vaccination itself. = Only because the quality and design of the supportive research is so clearly lacking. A temporal association with vaccination programs and disease incidence reduction is CLEARLY not proof of cause and effect. Anyone who argues differently doesn’t quite understand the scientific method of enquiry. The AVN, the Australian Vaccination Network—misleadingly named—founded in 1994, have styled themselves as providers of vaccine information. = Why misleading? The group is Australian. It is a community network of members. They discuss the topic of vaccination. In fact, their mission is to deter parents from getting their children vaccinated. = This is clearly an abuse of parliamentary privilege. Read the purpose of the organisation on their website. It’s about providing information that is, yes, exposing and highlighting the potential risks associated with vaccination because the government and GP’s have chosen to abrogate their responsibility to do so. So much for informed consent when you intentionally design your ‘information’ materials to minimise notification of risk, or avoid it completely. They accomplish their mission by sowing fear and doubt in the minds of parents who have young kids, and by dressing it up in the language of science. = What is this statement? It is inappropriate to present material from scientific journals that questions the blind faith of government policy, which the government actively suppresses? They pretend to be neutral providers of information to allow parents to make a choice, but in reality they are fiercely anti vaccine. =Individuals within the organisation are definitely fiercely anti-vaccine, all with good reason (many with vaccine-damaged children) – but all adhere to the principle of allowing anyone to make their own choice. But expectant within this is the idea that people will actually do their own research and not blindly follow policies informed by questionable pharmaceutical company research and a TGA that earns its existence through licensing fees levied on said companies. An organisation that no longer has funding to do any of its own independent research. The claims made by the AVN, and particularly by their founder, Ms Meryl Dorey, beggar belief. Despite being corrected numerous times by health professionals, scientists and so on, they continue to propagate outright myths about vaccines and their safety. They say that the MMR vaccine causes autism, a claim they know has been thoroughly and comprehensively debunked. = No. It is not claimed that it causes Autism. It is claimed that it MAY. And the research you claim has been thoroughly and comprehensively debunked was a single case study (on the link between gut disease and regressive autism) that ALSO did not claim a causal link, but suggested a possible link, and asked for further research to be undertaken. Around the world, the actual findings of the case report HAVE been replicated – purely that a then-novel (now, no longer novel) form of gut disease is linked to regression. They claim links between vaccines and sudden infant death syndrome. = Have you looked at the preliminary data collected by PhD researcher Viera Schiebner, that no one was willing to further research?Have you looked at the marked decrease in cot death in Japan when they raised vaccination age to 2? They claim HPV does not cause cancer but that vaccines do. They are on the record claiming that the vaccine against pertussis, or whooping cough, is not safe and has not been tested. The list goes on. As well as making false claims about vaccines, Ms Dorey and the AVN make even more ludicrous claims about the diseases they were designed to prevent. They dispute the harms of dangerous childhood diseases in order to downplay the benefits of a vaccine. = Please. Look at the many, many definitions and prognoses about Chicken Pox as a prime example in medical literature and text-books, before someone designed a vaccine for it. Not serious. Benign illness in most children. And those that it is serious in? The immunocompromised who should not receive the vaccine anyway. One especially preposterous example is the claim that measles is beneficial to children, making them more robust and leading to growth spurts. Ms Dorey has claimed that the word measles in Sanskrit means 'gift from a goddess' and has publicised a book called Melanie's Marvellous Measles that downplays the dangers of this disease. = One of many books for sale, that present a range of views, and are not necessarily the views of Ms Dorey or the AVN! Just SLIGHTLY a leap to make here, Senator. Mr President, as a doctor I can inform the Senate that measles is not a magical gift from Mother Nature. It is a virus that damages the human body and has the potential for serious and sometimes fatal complications. In 2001 the World Health Organization estimated 158,000 deaths from this disease. It is one of the leading causes of preventable death worldwide. To suggest that a parent should deliberately expose their child to this disease is reckless. Measles is dangerous and it can be fatal. = “Potential” “Sometimes” “Can be” Please see earlier comments on quality of life measures. I would argue that obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and a GREAT many more chronic preventable illnesses are FAR more ‘leading’, certainly in terms of population involved around the world. 158,000 of the world population is really a PRETTY small figure in this context. When concerned citizens seek to shine a light on the absurd beliefs of the AVN their reactions are telling. Doctors are called 'killers' and 'terrorists', and vaccinations are likened to rape by the AVN. To silence critics they take out apprehended violence orders. = This sounds like it has come direct from the people you laud below. If you investigate the matter in any depth you’ll find that the harmful bullying tactics, are actually being perpertrated by the people you are grateful to below. And when tragedies have occurred that put the lie to their nonsensical claims, they have gone so far as to harass grieving parents. Ms Dorey is alleged to have called Chris Kokogei, whose child died of chickenpox, and said that his child died because his child was weak. In 2009 Dana McCaffery, the daughter of David and Toni McCaffery, tragically died from a whooping cough infection. Incredibly, in response to this tragedy, Ms Dorey went as far as to contact the New South Wales director of the public health to dispute the cause of death and ask for confidential medical information. = It would be wonderful if, before you make such claims in parliament, you read her side of this story. She’s written a number of detailed blogs on the events in question, and the story is far from as clear as you claim. When the story became public the McCafferys had to endure months of harassment from the AVN and had to endure watching Dorey go on TV denying a child could die of whooping cough and accusing them of turning Dana into a martyr. = Can you show the months of harassment? Noone in the AVN has ever seen any. None has ever been produced. A beat up perhaps to gain emotional support from the broader community? Fortunately, there are people in the community fighting against the harmful and bullying tactics of the AVN. In response to this disgraceful harassment of the McCafferys, the group Stop the AVN was formed with the purpose of combating the dangerous campaign. I am grateful to people like Daniel Raffaele, Peter Bowditch, Ken McLeod and others who have endured the harassment of Ms Dorey and her followers, but they do it in order to save other parents the unending pain and heartache that they themselves have had to endure. = This paragraph suggests the source of your speech. Please understand these are actually the people perpetrating harassment, leaving disgusting answering machine messages, sending pornography, and many, many similar acts. The AVN doesn’t, hasn’t and won’t! Dana McCaffery was too young to receive the whooping cough vaccine. She died, though, because the vaccination rate in the Northern Rivers area of New South Wales where she was born is alarmingly low, at only 70 per cent. When you reach a threshold level the conditions for an outbreak occur. The virus was only able to survive and thrive in that community because vaccination rates were so low. = Really? Herd immunity. There is no discussion of vaccine shedding from those who have been vaccinated, and the potential for infection of babies and youngsters, again, because people assume that once vaccinated, they and the people they come into contact with are safe. No discussion of efficacy and sero-conversion. No discussion about fully vaccinated populations that experience outbreaks. And this is the very area where the AVN is strongest and where they are based. Such are the consequences of an irresponsible campaign based on fear and lies. Unfortunately, I do not have time to complete the catalogue of crimes against reason and common decency perpetrated by this group. I do not know what motivates them. I imagine that they are sincere, but they are misguided, probably due to some combination of superstition, paranoia and scientific illiteracy. = How offensive can you manage to be in one single statement? I think you will find that all of the people who make the decision not to vaccinate have done a great deal of research. It is the remainder of the population that due to THEIR scientific illiteracy, rely on doctors and governments to provide truthful information. All of that can be forgiven, but the tactics they have used to spread their message of fear and doubt to unsuspecting parents are abhorrent. = Nice use of emotive language! Abhorrent how, exaxtly? It is true that we do enjoy freedom of speech in this country, and I am a fierce defender of that freedom. But because of the potential for harm we have rules about misleading medical claims, we regulate medicines and we regulate doctors. In the case of the AVN, that regulation is not working. = The AVN is not a medicine or a doctor. Hence the HCCC embarrassingly lost their case in NSW for investigating the organisation outside their scope. And despite this, they are so focussed on ‘winning’ they had the law changed to increase their scope! One organisation. Despite a GREAT many on the internet and around the world offering similar information. Are you next going to expect that claims made by other community-based advocacy organisations all be vetted and controlled? Where is the logical end of your argument here? For instance, among the many complaints directed against Ms Dorey and her group, the TGA ordered her to retract claims about a dodgy cancer cure called 'black salve' but she has not done that—in violation of the TGA order. Well-meaning parents in this country who, in good faith, search for information on vaccines are confronted with AVN propaganda. Without knowing the background, it is difficult for them to weigh the credibility of this information against the medical literature.= Would that be the medical literature supportive of your position or the great deal of medical literature that case doubt on your position?  It is no wonder that some parents are deciding to delay or forgo vaccination, but that could be a fatal decision. For that reason, the AVN need to be held to account. I condemn them, the Australian Greens condemn them and the Australian Senate condemns them.

Dear Senator Di Natale I refer to your recent motion in the Senate calling on the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN) to disband and cease its campaign against vaccines. I am an active Greens member and am usually a great admirer of the work by both yourself and our other Greens Senators.  But I was shocked when I read the story on the ABC News that you had raised this motion.  In looking at the motion, Senate Order of Business No 152, and comparing it to our national policies, I failed to find one that relates to it.  I certainly know the issue of vaccines, in any context, has not been the subject of discussion from a National Greens point of view. I have deep concerns that your motion infringes on the basic human rights of free speech, something as a Greens member I find disturbing.  In order to make my point, could you tell me whether you are now going to raise a similar motion calling for the disbanding of climate change denying groups as well?  While I detest and am frustrated by people who deny human-caused climate change, I grudgingly recognise their rights to free speech.  If I was to agree with what you have done, I would have found raising such a motion, in regards to climate change, far more imperative considering the human race's survival is at stake.   Ethically, I see a moral dilemma with your motion, because you have set about a precedence which cannot be ignored.  I can just see that once Tony Abbott has control over both Houses, he and his members will use your example to call for the silencing of any objectors he disagrees with (ie. Coal Seam Gas projects, marriage equity campaigners, etc).  Should you criticise anyone on it, you have no where to go with the argument. I have been to the AVN website and had a look over the information on it, and I find the very wording of your motion at odds with the apparent intent of the AVN group.  For instance: a) the AVN has said they want to raise parent awareness that some vaccines are not safe for every child, due to their state of health or family medical background and that they need to question everything to make an informed decision; b) they have in turn questioned the ethics behind the compulsory vaccination of children; c) they call for non-pharmacuetical funded studies into what the possible affects of bundling multiple vaccines are on a child's immune system and neurology; d) they call for parents to have the right to be able to have vaccines administered individually if they feel it necessary due to medical reasons (as in the US); e) they call for a National Adverse Reaction Register to be established, as well as legislation that allows for compensation for adverse reactions (as in the US); f) they call for mandatory discussion of family medical history, the child's general health and wellbeing, and the possible adverse reactions (stated by the vaccine manufactures) with parents before Doctors administer vaccines; g) and most obvious to me, they are calling for a review into the ethics of the relationship between pharmaceutical companies, governments and doctors who mandate that the public must not question anything about this relationship or how they go about the business in delivery of these programs. These points are not the actions of a group who are totally against vaccines.  I could understand your motives better, if this group had called for violence or hatred of individuals (as some of the right wing climate denying groups have done).  While the group had a bit of media interest, this is not a group running adverts on television, releasing pamphlets into peoples homes, or holding mass demonstrations.  They simply have a website where they have listed their concerns on a wide range of issues relating to vaccines.  So I believe it is unfounded to use the term "campaign against vaccines".  I have to assume that you have confused parents who do not get their children vaccinated out of laziness with people who genuinely have concerns and medical reasons for not following the vaccine schedules laid out by pharmaceutical companies. While I do believe that the AVN could highlight their concerns in a more cohesive and reasoned manner, I don't think that they have been irresponsible, nor do I believe anyone has the right to tell them to immediately disband.  I believe it goes against our Democracy policy to do so - something that as a candidate you formally agreed to uphold.   More importantly, I think that using the Senate to bully these people into staying quiet is morally and ethically wrong. Yours sincerely TW

Dear Christine and Richard, What has happened to all the good work in previous times by Bob Brown?? What has happened to Freedom of Speech? The Greens have historically had a positive relationship with AVN. Former leader Bob Brown, advocated for the AVN extensively in parliament, and was instrumental in introducing the conscientious objection clause in the Childcare Payments Bill 1997 (the same clause the Greens in NSW are now trying to have removed). So what has changed? Certainly not the AVN, of that much I am aware. Is this a new look Greens party? Or is it simply the work of one ill-informed senator on a personal crusade. I know for myself personally of the damages caused by vaccinations.  It is heartbreaking. Devastating. We as parents have the right to choose what is best for our children and families, not some multi-billion dollar campaign which destroys children’s/family’s lives whilst lining the pockets of pharmaceutical companies and politicians/doctors etc. I have just moved interstate and not signed up to support The Greens in my state until I see confirmed cessation of actions/activities against the AVN by The Australian Greens.  Until I know for sure I will no longer be supporting The Greens and certainly not the other 2 'major parties'. Regards, C - a former Greens Member and supporter

Dear Senator Christine Milne and Senator Richard Di Natale In March I wrote to the Australian Greens in regards to the Human Rights and Anti Discrimination Bill 2012. I received a reply stating that the Greens support parents right to choose whether they vaccinate their children and we respect the option for people to be conscientious objectors to immunisation. You can read the Australian Greens full policy on health here -  http://greens.org.au/policies/care-for-people/health In view of    Senator Di Natale: To move – That the Senate –

(a) notes:

(i) the low vaccination rates in certain parts of Australia. and the threat this poses to the health of Australian children, and

(ii) the irresponsible campaign run by the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN), which is spreading misinformation about the risks of vaccination and discouraging parents from vaccinating their children; and

(b) calls on the AVN to immediately disband and cease their harmful and unscientific scare campaign against vaccines.

I would like to know have the greens now changed their health policy and do the Greens now propose that freedom of information, freedom of choice and speech be removed from Australian citizens? Yours sincerely, SM

Dear Greens You have just lost my vote. How dare you try and squash the freedom of information and freedom of choice you say you stand for. Richard Di Natali's motion to have the Australian Vaccination Network shut down is the sort of thing Abbot would do. If you actually bother to understand and read what the AVN is about, or spend 5 minutes researching vaccines and some of the possible and very credible scientifically backed claims to the inherent dangers of them, then perhaps you would be educated enough to make some kind of reasonable choices. Banning information is what Hitler stood for. Shame on you for supporting this. What an utter disappointment. SM

Dear Senator, I write in strong objection to your disinformation and your proposed tyrannical suppression of the AVN which is blatant curtailment of the inalienable right of free speech. Your support of toxic vaccines places you in clear Breach of Trust & Duty of Care obligations as per your oath of office and constitutes a presents a clear and present danger to the community. The consequences resulting from your propaganda very likely may, as is often the case with toxic vaccines, prove injurious or fatal in whereby each case will constitute criminal neglect to add to the shameful litany of crime continually stemming from seditious state and federal governments. Vaccine efficiency and safety is only espoused by lavishly funded vested interests and never supported by objective independent studies that conclusively confirm widespread serious injury and frequently lethal consequences. In addition national health is further compromised by the insidious influence and control over the TGA by criminal pharmaceutical companies and vaccine manufacturers. This unabashed corporate shill brutally suppresses proven cheap and effective natural cancer cures while relentlessly curtailing beneficial health supplements to the great disadvantage and progressively worsening health of the nation. Its atrocious tyranny also imposes the vicious medical fraud of vaccines that are known and repeatedly proven to cause massive widespread injury and death. Toxic vaccinations are the most maliciously heinous crimes against humanity and will be addressed upon an exponentially rising tide of outrage and disgust. Your position supports the chemical rape and torture of defenceless infants and countless other innocent victims besides. Please be advised this deeply aggrieved nation seeks remedy and redress with a tipping point against traitorously corrupt governments fast approaching. Yours sincerely, TL

Senator Di Natale, I cannot tell you how strongly disappointed I am with you & the Greens party for proposing the motion that the AVN should be disbanded. Our country prides itself on its democracy & freedom of speech. As a former doctor working with our indigenous population you may well have come across the work of Dr Archie Kalokerinos & his book "Every Second Child". He saw the damage the vaccine programme did & was mortified, risking his own career to let people know what was happening. People are entitled to make the most informed decision they can with regard to their health. If you are so convinced that vaccination is for everyone, then perhaps you would like to pass a new motion suggesting compensation for people affected by adverse vaccine reactions which you claim are rare & far between. The AVN has medically referenced information on their website, which concerned people seek out & to which they are entitled. They are not running a campaign. Can you find me any research which shows there were any cases of regressive autism before the vaccination programme was augmented? I was going to vote Green in the upcoming election, but no longer. Regards JL Retired ICU Nurse

I shall not be renewing my membership with the Australian Greens, and shall immediately rescind my regular payments schedule to them, instead diverting to AVN, along with scheduled pre-election donation......very very disappointing MM

Thank you, I'm a strong greens supporter especially in these critical times of climate change versus governments who have their head in the sand!! Nothing is more important at present I believe. However I'm most disappointed by the greens push in the senate to ban the AVN from existing. We live in a country of free speech don't we?? There are thousands of cases of injury and even fatality resulting from vaccines and its imperative is that parents make an informed choice... One that we definitely don't get from our GP. It's another area of head in the sand when it comes to vaccine safety and problems. I believe there are numerous long term side effects and health problems (costing the government mega money) that are not being researched either. You can't force people to vaccinate and you should not force the AVN from delivering information that is scientific, researched and from the parents who live with injured children ... Not to mention those who have suffered the loss of their child through this toxic system. I totally understand the need for government to want to gain herd immunity, and the control that is needed for this, but really where are we going to end with it all...? The number of vaccines given to babies with the most immature immune system is completely out of control... And rising! We are already breeding a race of children whose intelligent immune systems are completely overloaded and are not learning to work properly for themselves... The incredible rise in auto immune diseases, allergies, autism etc is evidence of this. I'm not a crack pot, I'm an Acupuncturist and have studied extensively on this, there are so many other professionals in the natural health world who agree with me... Surely we can't all be wrong. Sorry to go on, I know this is a critical time in politics and I wish you all the very best and hope with the current mess that the Greens can become even stronger, I simply wish to pass on my frustration and thoughts on one of my personal passionate topics! All the best, thank you for listening.. I hope something can be done. VW

Truly disappointing as a now former Greens supporter. I will no longer support them until I am satisfied that they will support the AVN instead of this dangerous smear campaign.
Numerous scientific campaigns have been put forward along with numerous parental claims about the devastating truth of vaccination.
Wish people would realise that the mighty dollar isn't the truth. C

I must admit I have been voting for the Greens for a quite a while now because they seemed to be the party that stood for protection of the environment and for social justice. However I am so surprised and disappointed with these latest developments I will definitely be putting them last on any ballot paper I fill in. HA

A politician wants to forbid an organisation that doesn't agree with government policy. That sounds to me like Australia is getting very close to some kind of dictatorship. Aren't these people ashamed of themselves?
 And as the AVN is accused of lying, then I know a few other organisations that should be forbidden, starting with all main political parties. In a free country like Australia claims to be an issue like this should never even be up for discussion among politicians. Let alone they come with something like this. RF

Dear Senator Milne As a former supporter of the Greens party, mainly for its belief in free speech, I was absolutely appalled to read Senator Richard di Natale’s speech on http://richard-di-natale.greensmps.org.au/content/news-stories/science-and-public-health Not only for attacking the AVN in the Senate without doing his research first , but perhaps most shockingly, for his open support of abusers and harassers like Daniel Raffaele, Peter Bowditch and Ken McLeod whose vitriolic abuse and threats the former president of AVN, Meryl Dorey, has had to endure daily just because she selflessly provides information to public on her website. I am sure others have already brought this to your attention but here is the AVN’s reply to Senator di Natale http://nocompulsoryvaccination.com/2013/07/05/whatever-was-senator-di-natale-thinking/ The points highlighted in this reply are the reason I won’t be voting Greens in the upcoming election unless your party dissociates itself from this witch hunt. Best regards JM Manly, NSW

Dear Mr. Di Natali, I would like to address the motion you are putting to the Australian Senate regarding the disbanding of the Australian Vaccination Network, not from the AVN side of things but from the fact that you are eroding my civil rights and my freedom of speech.  I am a fifth generation Australian.  My great grandfather and three great uncles fought in the Boer war, my two grandfathers and their brothers fought in Gallipoli, my father fought in Darwin and my uncles fought in New Guinea and Borneo in the second world war, my cousin was in Vietnam and my son-in-law in East Timor.  Can you please tell me why the likes of my forebears and other Australians fought in these wars if not for our civil rights and the freedom of speech?  This is only my side of the family without what my husband Robert's forebears also contributed. I emphatically disagree and protest at the action your are taking and will be making my voice heard in the coming election On the vaccination question, I have heard the research and know that 93% of children have been fully vaccinated,5% are parents that have put off vaccinating or have forgotten and 2% are those that object to vaccinating for various reasons.  Herd vaccination is keeping children, for the most part, disease free.  If vaccination is so successful I am having a lot of trouble trying to understand that the only children in Australia that carry those diseases are the un-vaccinated ones (who presumably never get sick themselves) that pass the disease onto the ones who are vaccinated and therefore immune, and these immune children get sick?  I thought they would not be able to get it again because they are immune. Please explain!!!!! I have sent a copy of this message to Senator Milne and look forward to a response from both of you. Yours sincerely, RS