Hilary's Desk

But not the "actual flu" mind you. The one that everyone thinks is the flu when it's not the flu. Now, let's be precise. The Herald yesterday had this bizarre piece  (pdf) which treads new ground.

For once, we are told a bit of truth. Very selective truth. Continue Reading

Perhaps this Australian documentary should have been labelled...

Totally missing the point. Or .. A bunch of Lies.  Take your pick.

The Australian 60 Minutes journalist who had the responsibility for doing the research for this programme, is professionally incompetent.

You will not understand this blog unless you take the time to download all the full text medical articles, tables, graphs etc in this blog, and study for yourself what a 60 minutes journalist refused to look at.  Or .... chose not to.

The increase in pertussis has nothing to do with the unvaccinated at all.  It's all happening because doctors in Australia have finally woken up to the fact that pertussis can happen in vaccinated people and are testing for it.

The reason all the old studies over-estimated pertussis vaccine efficacy was, as Cherry said in a 1998 medical article, that doctors believe that vaccinated people never got pertussis, so they never diagnosed it.  SIMPLE.  Pertussis after a vaccine was coincidence and something else.   According to Dempsey 2009, that situation still exists in USA today. 

As to the Australian whole cell whooping cough vaccine, it was implemented solely on the basis of trust, because as CDI admitted in 1994, there were NEVER any efficacy tests done on it, and there were no "serological correlates" or tests to prove immunity, for them to use as a basis of discussion anyway. 

Wonder what the Australian public would have said back then, if some doc had said, "We don't know if this works, because we don't know how to test for immunity to pertussis, but we assume this bright idea is a good one."

The Australian CDI went one further in 1997, and admitted that they ALSO... didn't collect data on the vaccination status of whooping cough cases either.  Continue Reading

Following on from yesterday's blog about Paul Offit's Science Friction, .. today's blog is about how Nikki Turner's presentations to the Parliamentary Select Committee are tainted with the same "blight".  Part of Paul Hutchison's recommendations to Parliament included Nikki Turner's unfactual statement (under her IMAC guise) that if vaccination against measles stopped, New Zealand would see 5,000 to 6,000 measles hospitalisation and 20 - 60 deaths per year. A pretty spectacular statement when the medical literature (and Starship hospital policy) makes it so clear that complications and deaths can be radically reduced with vitamin A.  In this upload, you will see IMAC's measles claims, and following that, you will see the death decline graph for New Zealand. Following on from that you will see....   Continue Reading

A few days ago, I set my husband a task. To read Paul Offit’s book called, “Deadly Choices How the anti-vaccine movement threatens us all” By half way through he was unamused. Beguiled by his sighs of discontent, I decided to stop my current track of writing. and start reading. Naturally I started with the Prologue, where the first sentence read; “There’s a war going on out there – a quiet, deadly war.”  Continue Reading

Yesterday, in discussing the cozy relationship of the medical profession with big pharma while paying lip service to nutrition, I remembered an old book I have on this topic.  It's quaint title is, "Intestinal Gardening for the Prolongation of Youth". It was written by Dr James Empringham, and published in 1926.  It's fascinating; makes me chuckle, and roll my eyes at the same time.  Why?  Because it shows just how insular the average doctor was.  And by proxy, still is.  Much of what he writes is just plain common sense, which us fruitloops have long been wise to.  There are a few interesting gems in this book, so have a gander at this lot: Continue Reading

Today was yet another embarrassing day for the "love a quick fix" medical system.  The Sunday Independant in the UK revealed that secret documents marked "closed until 2014", showed that in 1982, the Medical Research Council was warned that benzodiazepines, which were marketted as "completely harmless", could cause brain shrinkage, and brain damage.  The Department of Health, very conveniently, has "no record" of that meeting.  A Professor Malcolm Lader, asked to set up a unit to research benzos, but was refused permission or funding to do so.  He didn't push the issue, because  even back then, he knew what happens to people who come up against "competing interests", and he assumed that prescription of benzos would "peter out".   Continue Reading

In the Sunday Star Times today, Judge David McNaughton delivered a swift message to Starship doctors about predictive and substandard medical care, and the presumption of guilt without good cause.  The Judge found Famaile Lino not guilty of abusing his six month old child after Starship jumped to conclusions, and robustly defended their own preconceived mindsets.  The Lino's lawyer said, " "It's a very important case. It shows how suddenly a person can be at home with their feet up looking after their children, and a nightmare commences."  Here's the rub though.  Court cases like this USUALLY only happen to people like the Linos or the Kahuis.  Starship doesn't usually go after people who know what's going on; the limitations of the medical profession; and how to defend themselves.    Starship are of course, scuttling into a "risk management" position, by defending the indefensible: Continue Reading

By Peter Butler.  This website provides you with two “clicking” options, representing two people and two different perspectives – HILARY’S DESK and OUT OF THE MOULD. I suppose you could say that it is two sides of the RRMT “coin”. It is not a case of which side is more important.  Continue Reading

By Peter Butler.  Here is the follow up to “VOICES AND CHOICES”.  Continue Reading

When I wrote our home education curriculum it incorporated what I consider an essential foundation stone. A lifestyle must surely include the integration of every aspect of daily living. You cannot put different issues into little boxes with an appropriate label, and then apply differing standards and values to their implementation. To do so will produce inconsistencies, double standards and hypocrisy. The societal attitudes of the present day however, would suggest that this need not be too much of a concern. After all, absolutes seem to have little impact on many people’s lives because the “Absolute” Himself has been dethroned, relegated to a back seat, completely ignored or completely forgotten, leaving the “marvels” of secular humanism to solve the world’s problems. I believe that all of life issues have their answers in the one and only Creator and Saviour God. I respect anyone’s right to disagree with this, but if so, with what will it be replaced? Continue Reading