Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

The Truth About Vaccines, page-68

First 68 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
MemeFx

3,028 Posts.

31

11/04/17

21:15

Post #: 24011631
Share

Originally posted by Menta ↑

Those who can't attack the message attack the messenger...

The Safe Vaccination Debate – Dr Judy Wilyman Reports

Dr Judy Wilyman continues her efforts to ensure the vaccination industry follows evidence based medicine and informed consent. Many roadblocks seem to exist at academic level and you would have to wonder about the underlying agenda for this attitude.
Posted on March 6, 2017 by Dr Judy Wilyman PhD in Vaccines

The Australian government’s vaccination policies (which are now mandatory to receive some social welfare benefits and in many employment situations) are not designed to protect public health. This is because they coerce the public into using a medical intervention that is being promoted on false claims of safety, efficacy and necessity. The public is being over-vaccinated and cannot freely choose vaccines when they are linked to financial payments and their employment situations. The Australian government is not being honest by claiming that people still have a free choice in these situations. These policies are not compatible with human rights codes or the Australian Immunisation Handbook (ed.10) for informed consent and this is detrimental to human health. Doctors are also paid bonuses for increasing the “vaccination rates” of the population and this is being used as a surrogate measure for the “health” of the population – without assessing the actual health of infants and children after using multiple vaccines at the prime time of their development.

The No Jab No Pay social welfare legislation (and mandates for vaccines in employment situations) are not protecting public health. This is because the government, and research institutions, have not done the scientific studies that would prove vaccines are not causing the 5-fold increase in chronic illness that has occurred in Australian children over the last two decades. This is not an evidence-based policy and it is unethical legislation. This chronic illness correlates directly with the increased use of vaccines over this time and includes allergies, asthma, autism, autoimmune diseases, neurological damage and cancer etc. In order for governments to prove that vaccines are not the cause of this significant and life threatening chronic illness, they need to have performed the following researchbefore they claimed that this program of vaccines was ‘safe and effective’:

1) Long-term health studies of the complete schedule of vaccines in vaccinated and unvaccinated infants/children

AND

2) Safety studies for each vaccine using an inert placebo in the unvaccinated groups

THESE STUDIES HAVE NEVER BEEN DONE. THIS EVIDENCE IS DOCUMENTED IN MY PHD THESIS PUBLISHED ON THE UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG WEBSITE.

Governments are claiming that vaccines are safe and effective without providing this evidence and this puts public health at risk. This is a breach of the Precautionary Principle that was agreed upon by the Scientific and Environmental Health Network (SEHN) to protect public health in government policies (1998). This principle states that:

“The burden of proof of harmlessness of any procedure/technology is on the proponent and not the general public”

Governments globally have not proved that vaccines are harmless, on the contrary, they have proved that they are “unavoidably unsafe” and that they are linked to allergies, anaphylaxis, asthma, autoimmune diseases, tics, neurological damage and autism.

It is not acceptable for the government to introduce mandatory vaccination legislation when it has not determined how much disability vaccines are causing in the population. Governments are falsely claiming that serious adverse events are “rare” when they have not collected the data that would prove this statement. Further, claims that “there is no evidence of harm” or that reactions are a “coincidence” are also based on ignorance of the medical literature. The academics who have attempted to investigate these issues have been vilified and discredited in the mainstream media for attempting to get transparency and scrutiny of the science that underpins vaccination policies. For 13 years the CDC has been claiming that the link between vaccines and autism has been discredited yet they knew this was based on fraudulent data that was manipulated by some CDC researchers.

The Australian government is not protecting public health when it has not provided evidence that it is not causing this illness. The government has reversed the Precautionary Principle to put the onus of proof of harmlessness on the public and not the proponent, and this is protecting industry interests in government policy. The Australian public cannot produce the studies needed to prove they are causing significant harm in the population because the Australian government has not (and is not) funding these studies. (This is referred to as undone science in government policy and it is described in my PhD thesis). Nor is the government collecting the post-marketing surveillance data that would provide this evidence (Peter Collignon, Director of the Infectious Disease Unit, Australian National University). However, children’s health is providing evidence of this plausible causal link.

Put simply, governments have never systematically evaluated the long-term health impact of using multiple vaccines on infants/children, and mandatory over-vaccination is not protecting public health. The longer the Australian government ignores this academic research the more serious the consequences will be for human health and the burden on families and the Australian health budget.

Dr. Judy Wilyman

Qualifications:
Bachelor of Science (BSc)
Diploma of Education (Dip Ed)
Master of Science (Population Health) (MSc)
PhD in Science and Technology Studies (Humanities) – this thesis examined the science underpinning Australia’s vaccination policies to determine if they are providing more benefit than harm to human health.
Vaccination Decisions

Expand

People should be aware that the person who claims to be talking science, and prefaces her name with "Dr", is a doctor in the humanities not science.

This certainly puts a context on the message, as Marshall McLuhan stated, "the message is the medium", and here we have a medium which presents no science, only a pop-blog involving opinion pieces.

MemeFx ( Psycho-Quant and Analytical Anodyne to Assinine Anecdotes )

.
2 Upvote

Reply

Top Stories

History-making uranium sample grades and an imminent drill run. Infini Resources is poised to transform in 2025

MIN

MinRes's Ellison knows he screwed up – for that reason, hunt for new Chair to be sped up

ACW

This biotech stock raised $11M in a risk-off environment. Its Alzheimer's drug could change the game

WC8

Pan Asia rebranding to 'clear confusion' after bagging $35M for Chile projects

AXP

Tambourah chases gold veins and mineralisation extension with drilling

There are more pages in this discussion • 4,348 more messages in this thread...

First 68 Last

SPONSORED BY