Hilary's Desk

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

FDA has introduced changes designed “to return to science” with policies to “make things more pure and clean.”  You mean, FDA wasn't talking science before? Shock horror.  Don't the Ministry of Health, IMAC and others say that the opinion of FDA and CDC, is already the paragon of purity and cleanliness? What's that washing powder slogan?, ...   "Whiter than white"  Read Full Blog

This morning, on Nine to Noon, Kathryn Ryan listened while Professor Peter Collignon carefully detailed his concerns about the lack of data on flu vaccine side effects; the short comings of the current reporting systems world wide; the inadequate reasoning behind the use of the H1N1 vaccine. Everything Professor Collignon stated this morning, underlines everything I said to the Health Select Committee on vaccination rates, on April 15th, 2010.  So let's see how my suggestions to expand the use of the National Immunisation Register to include other health data might pan out in the current situation of serious Fluvax reactions in Australasian children. Read Full Blog

An April 4th, a new study came out showing that the rise in autism was because mothers talked over the fence, so the next mother, trotted off to doctors, getting the next “in” diagnosis,  Read Full Blog

The Lancet has retracted the 1998 paper (1). Now, all the pillorying and slandering of Andrew Wakefield will start in earnest. The question is, "How does Richard Horton manage to go to sleep each night?". And here's why.  In 2004, the Lancet "partially" retracted the paper, on the basis that Andrew Wakefield never declared to the Lancet, financial conflicts of interest. When confronted in front of the GMC, with 1997 faxes , and proof of receipt, showing that that required information had indeed been received by the Lancet, Richard Horton said that he had never seen it. Read Full Blog

In October 2009, Rhonda Renata emailed me about the death of her daughter Jasmine on 22nd September 2009. She had emailed John Key, Tony Ryall, and a few others and had got the usual fluff political responses from a dogma-ingrained system. From the time of Jasmine’s death, she had scoured the internet and found many cases of Gardasil recipients who had had similar stories to Jasmine. She wanted answers as to her daughter’s death, and wanted to know what to do next.  Read Full Blog

How would you feel if your healthy child died, or had a serious reaction to Gardasil? What would you expect to happen in terms of your concerns, and your “need-to-know”? How would you go about finding closure? What are the obstacles along this way?  Read Full Blog

A recent abridged email provides another piece to the jigsaw puzzle: Read Full Blog

"Turia sets dangerous example" was the headline for a letter by Anna Hardy RN, on behalf of the Stewart St Surgery Team at Marton. (Herald on Sunday, July 17, 2005 page 36)  The surgery was in an uproar because Tariana Turia, a former Associate Health Minister, decided against giving her granchildren, then aged 3 and 5, the MeNZB vaccine. Read Full Blog