Upon what do we base our decisions?

The following is extracted and adapted from an article I wrote for Overland Magazine called Safe or Sorry. I am not sure of the volume number, but it was in 2002. The link below will take you to a document provided to the AVN by ADRAC (The Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee) after we met with them in 2001 to obtain information to report the reaction reports we then held in our database - over 800 of them. This document does not include the AVN's submissions but does cover all previously-reported vaccine reactions up to that point in time.

ADRAC Reactions Vaccines are not benign products. Indeed, the history of serious adverse reactions and deaths from vaccination goes back to the time of Edward Jenner, more than 200 years ago, when the modern vaccination age began. As long as there have been vaccines, there have been those who raised their voices to warn of the dangers. And for as long as those voices were raised, those with vested interests in the acceptance of this lucrative industry have tried their best to squash any opposition.

Vaccines have been linked with a huge range of autoimmune conditions, most of which were rare just 20 years ago, but are now approaching epidemic proportions. These include asthma, eczema, insulin-dependent diabetes (IDDM), autism, ADD, ADHD and cancer.

They have also been implicated in some instances of infant and toddler deaths wrongly diagnosed as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome), SBS (Shaken Baby Syndrome) and SUDS (Sudden Unexplained Death Syndrome).

When it comes to SIDS, we have been told to lay our children on their backs in order to keep their body temperature regulated since elevations in body temperature is thought to be associated with and increased risk of SIDS. This much-touted theory ignores the fact that one of the most common reactions to vaccinations is a high temperature.

In addition to other reactions, peer-reviewed studies going back as far as the late 1930’s have pointed to a strong causal link between vaccines, seizure disorders and permanent brain damage.

Vaccines contain many highly toxic substances such as mercury, formaldehyde, aluminium and carbolic acid. They are contaminated with bacteria and viruses from the animal tissues many of them are cultured or grown in.

Only a few of these contaminants have actually been studied and there has been some cause to fear that they could be associated with the development of cancers and immune-system problems such as AIDS. Vaccines may sometimes contain aborted human foetal tissue – a fact which some people may consider a cause for concern. They can also be genetically engineered with all of the related issues involved with GE products.

Are reactions reported?

Dr. John McEwan, head of ADRAC (The Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee) in 2001, conceded that less than 10% of all reactions are ever reported – meaning that safety figures are admitted to be at least 90% incorrect.

Representatives of the AVN met with ADRAC in August 2001 and for the first time, were given permission to provide them with reaction reports that had been submitted to our organisation by parents. We received these reports because the doctors who had been approached by the families and asked to submit this information to the government had refused - in most cases, stating that the reaction had nothing to do with the vaccinations.

Since August of 2001, the AVN has submitted more than 800 reaction reports to ADRAC - the majority of which entailed severe reactions with either permanent effects or death. Strangely enough, from the time our reaction reports were submitted to the time when this article was written (a bit over a year), the CDI Bulletin (published by the Commonwealth Department of Health) ceased to report on reaction data – something which they had done regularly up until this point.

Correspondence with the CDI indicated that a computer problem was to blame, but the timing did seem at the time to be incredibly convenient considering the fact that this problem occurred right after the great bulk of the AVN's reaction report submissions were provided to them.

This entire sorry situation means it should be no surprise that an increasing number of Australians are so concerned about the safety of vaccines, they are choosing other ways of keeping their children healthy. Indeed, one must wonder if those who do vaccinate have simply not been exposed to the other side of the story? This would not be surprising given the lack of medical information and unfair reporting by the majority of mainstream media.

Independent information

It is due to the dearth of referenced and independent medical information on this procedure which literally targets every man and his dog, that the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN) came into being. There is a real need in the community for data which would allow parents to make educated choices when it comes to vaccinating their children and themselves. Remember, this is our legal right!

The media is also partly responsible for the lack of independent information. I was contacted by the producer of George Negus’ new programme on the ABC (in 2002 - I cannot recall the name of the show) in regards to appearing on this programme to provide some balance to a previously aired piece on vaccinations. All arrangements had been made to fly me from NSW to VIC where the show was being filmed.

Less than a week before this was due to take place, the producer called and left a message on my answering machine, saying that the programme had been pulled because the “powers that be” were nervous about covering our (the AVN’s) side of the story and that this issue was "too hot" for them to handle just then.

Megan James, a very well-respected journalist with ABC’s Quantum program, filmed a 2 part series – Vaccination- Protection at what Price? The repeat of this program was pulled due to pressure from the AMA – the first time in over 16 years of Quantum’s existence that industry influence has made them censor what they air.

So with this sort of censorship and self-censorship on the part of the media, pity the poor parent who relies upon their doctors and the newspapers for independent information when it comes to making a decision about vaccinating their children.

How do we decide?

Vaccination is a science – and like all sciences, must never be above question.

Australians rely upon their government and medical community to ensure that the products we use are the safest and most effective ones possible. As the more than 18,000 Australian deaths every year from preventable medical error indicate, those in whom we have placed this trust have failed us dreadfully.

We ask that doctors have no financial interests in medical products and instead, that they recommend procedures because they are good for us rather than for the doctor’s own pocket. The government's introduction of the General Practice Immunisation Incentive (GPII) which 'gift' doctors with tens of thousands of dollars a year for pushing vaccination and penalise them financially if they don't, may influence our ability to believe that doctors are truly doing what is best for us in recommending vaccines for our children.

We ask that our government ensure that vaccines and drugs are safe before releasing or recommending them. But the fact that our 'watchdog', the TGA, is funded by those they are meant to oversee and does not do any independent safety or effectiveness tests of vaccines prior to their release can make us suspicious of the information we have been provided with. In fact, recent information shows that the government sometimes pays the manufacturers to do these studies [on vaccination safety and efficacy] rather than performing them independently themselves. This information, for many parents, indicates that our trust in the government's will to ensure the safety or effectiveness of vaccinations may be misplaced.

In order for Australians to feel they have ‘played it safe’ by using vaccines, they need to be told the truth. We require the unbiased, independent studies which have never yet been performed and we need to know that our families will be placed at less risk by the vaccines than they are by the diseases they are meant to prevent.

Objectivity, ethics and morality cannot exist when sanctimonious anti-choice zealots forge unholy alliances with government, industry and a sycophantic media.

Until such time as free debate is allowed on this issue, Australians will continue to exercise our legal rights to abstain from any medical procedures which may harm or even kill and to oppose legislation or government pressure which may abridge those rights.