Bradfield Resident

Information. Issues. Insight. Investigation.

Archive for September, 2009

Tue 29 Sep 09 | From: Jillian Skinner MP | Re: Stop the Coercive and Mandatory Immunisation (NSW) AHFA Petition

Posted by bradfieldresident on 29 September 2009

[This letter is in response to an email sent for the Stop the Coercive and Mandatory Immunisation (NSW) petition on the Health Petitions Australia website. Postal mail dated “29 SEP 2009”]

Jillian Skinner MP
Member for North Shore
Deputy NSW Opposition Leader
Shadow Minister for Health

Letter from Jillian Skinner MP (2009-09-29)

Letter from Jillian Skinner MP (2009-09-29)

29 September 2009

Dear […]

Thank you for your email outlining your concerns about the mandatory immunisation of health workers.

I have reviewed numerous scientific studies into vaccination and have consulted with many groups and individuals, so I do understand that vaccination is an issue that attracts strong views on both sides.

However, on balance, I believe that there is great value in the effectiveness of vaccines in preventing potentially deadly illnesses, and that it is imperative that health workers are vaccinated to protect both themselves and their patients.

Thank you again for contacting me about this very important issue.

Yours sincerely

[signature]

Jillian Skinner MP

Electorate office 3/40 Yeo Street, Neutral Bay 2089 Phone 9909 2594 Fax 9909 2654
Parliamentary Office Parliament House, Macquarie Street, Sydney 2000 Phone 9230 3080 Fax 9230 3406
Email jillian.skinner@parliament.nsw.gov.au Website www.jillianskinner.com

Posted in Health Petitions Australia, Mail Received, NSW Government, NSW Health, State MPs, Vaccines | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Fri 25 Sep 09 | From: Barry O’Farrell MP | Re: Stop the Coercive and Mandatory Immunisation (NSW) AHFA Petition

Posted by bradfieldresident on 25 September 2009

[This letter is in response to an email sent for the Stop the Coercive and Mandatory Immunisation (NSW) petition on the Health Petitions Australia website. Postal mail dated “25 September 2009”]

Barry O’Farrell MP
State Member for Ku-ring-gai

Letter from Barry O'Farrell MP (2009-09-25)

Letter from Barry O'Farrell MP (2009-09-25)

25 September 2009

Dear […]

Thank you for your email of 11 September 2009 concerning immunisation.

At the outset I have to indicate my own support for immunisation. Using the “precautionary principle” you refer to, allowing some infants and children to avoid immunisation can threaten the health of the mast majority.

Nevertheless, respecting your views and wishes, I have made representations to the State Health Minister, the Hon Carmel Tebbutt. I will keep you informed of the progress.

Yours sincerely

[signature]

Barry O’Farrell

Working for our community

Phone 9487 8588 Fax 9487 8550 Electorate office 27 Redleaf Avenue, Wahroonga NSW 2076 Email barry@barryofarrell.com Website www.barryofarrell.com

Posted in Health Petitions Australia, Mail Received, NSW Government, NSW Health, State MPs, Vaccines | Tagged: , | 1 Comment »

Fri 11 Sep 09 | To: The Australian Dental Association | HONcode compliance

Posted by bradfieldresident on 11 September 2009

[Note: it appears that the email generated by the contact form bounced, so it is quite possible that no ADA representative received and read it.]

From: Bradfield Resident <bradfieldresident@gmail.com>
Date: Friday 11 September 2009 01:31 (+10) (approx)
To: The Australian Dental Association – Complaints – National (ADA Inc.)
Via: http://www.ada.org.au/contactus/ContactUs.aspx

Australian Dental Association,

I have contacted the Health On the Net Foundation about apparent HONcode compliance violations on the ada.org.au website.

You can view my correspondence with the Health On the Net Foundation at https://bradfieldresident.wordpress.com

More specifically under
https://bradfieldresident.wordpress.com/category/health/organisations/health-on-the-net-foundation-organisations-health/

You are invited to comment by email addressed to bradfieldresident@gmail.com

Bradfield Resident
Friday 11 September 2009

Posted in Australian Dental Association, Fluoride, Health On the Net Foundation, Mail Sent, Water Fluoridation | Leave a Comment »

Fri 11 Sep 09 | To: Health On the Net Foundation | Australian Dental Association (ada.org.au) HONcode compliance

Posted by bradfieldresident on 11 September 2009

[Note: the “AMA” reference toward the end was a typo accidentally propagated from the previous email and should, of course, be “ADA”.]

From: Bradfield Resident <bradfieldresident@gmail.com>
Date: Friday 11 September 2009 00:39 (+10)
Subject: Australian Dental Association (ada.org.au) HONcode compliance
To: honcode-en@healthonnet.org

Health On the Net Foundation,

it is unclear as to whether your email is in response to my original email complaint on 25 August (https://bradfieldresident.wordpress.com/2009/08/25/to-health-on-the-net-foundation-honcode-principles-and-the-australian-dental-association/), to my online form submission on 28 August, or both. I write here assuming the email complaint (with considerably more information than the online form submission) was considered.

I find some of the explanations offered with regards to the Australian Dental Association website’s compliance with the published HONcode guidelines to be quite weak, especially considering the ostensible aim of the HONcode to improve the quality of medical information published online.

Principle 1 – Authority

The “ADA Inc. Oral Health Education Committee” is not identified. It is not a person – one might also suppose its members change over time – and as such I do not understand how it can be considered to be the “author”. As the committee is not identified, it follows that its (members’) qualifications have also not been identified. Additionally, the site does not indicate what the “Consumer Information” section is, which this committee allegedly authored. The statement that “[t]he views and opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the ADA Inc., the ADA State Branches or their affiliates” on the disclaimer page (http://www.ada.org.au/disclaimer.aspx) further clouds the situation.

Principle 2 – Purpose of the website

The ADA site makes good on the requirement to declare that the site is not to replace the advice of a health professional. It goes on to disclaim any impression of reliability, accuracy, completeness or usefulness. Although not being able to stand behind one’s documentation (website) erodes the reader’s confidence, it is in keeping with the HONcode guidelines, and I haven’t complained about that aspect of the requirements.

I have noticed that the website has been updated/repaired since my complaint; the About page (http://www.ada.org.au/about/default.aspx) links to the Overview (http://www.ada.org.au/about/overview.aspx) and Functions (http://www.ada.org.au/about/functions.aspx) pages are now functional.

However, there is no “description of the website’s mission, purpose and intended audience”:

  • “All information is intended for your general knowledge only” is not a description of the website’s purpose
  • “its aim the encouragement of the health of the public and the promotion of the art and science of dentistry” is the aim (purpose/mission?) of the ADA (“also necessary”); there is no separate description for the website itself
  • You write, “[t]his site contains three portals for General public, Dental Professionals, and Members. / Therefore it is understood that this site is for the General public and health professionals.” Whatever you happen to mean by there being three “portals”, and whether or not one might infer that this site is for (effectively) everyone, there is no actual description of the intended audience.

Personally, I think these are minor issues and very easily addressed (eg “the purpose of the ADA and of this website is to…”, “the intended audience of this site is…”). However it does concern me that your evaluation drops the bar so low on “necessary” requirements to the point where they are not actually required – either your guidelines are enforced or they are pointless and the overall quality of the entire HONcode accreditation comes under question.

Principle 4 – Information must be documented: Referenced and dated

Sources information are not needed, becuase this site information was authored
by fully qualified dentists.

Did an authorised Health On the Net Foundation representative really write that, or am I reading a forged email? This statement is completely ludicrous. I quote again from the HONcode Guidelines documentation (http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Guidelines/guidelines.html):

All sources of the medical content must be given. You have to clearly indicate the recognized, scientific or official sources of health information quoted in your articles. If you used another website, a book, an article, a database or any other support, it has to be specified. You have to provide a precise link to the source, whenever it is possible and the references should be in relation with the content referred.

To say now that sources of information are not needed is a complete farce. I would also reiterate that the authors of the information are not identified, but that is hardly the point here. Is it truly the Health On the Net Foundation’s intention for principle 4 to be something like “All sources of the medical content must be given unless the author is a dentist”? If so, please amend the HONcode guidelines documentation accordingly.

You write:

The complaint regarding the principle 4 – Date is justified.
Therfore we are taking care of your complaint. A member of the HONcode team has
contacted this site about this matter.

So, we agree on one point at least. Perhaps an investigation of your procedures is in order to determine how the lack of dates was missed in previous reviews.

Principle 5 – Justification of claims

You write:

we were not able to find any treatment information on the following link:
http://www.ada.org.au/oralhealth/FLN/flfaqs.aspx

This page contains some information about Fluoride, but not the treatments.

Again I have to ask, did an authorised Health On the Net Foundation representative write that, or am I reading a forged email? The entire page is about fluoride treatments in all shapes and sizes. The first occurrence of the word “treatment” on the page is in the statement: “Drinking fluoridated water several times a day is the ideal way to give your teeth a quick fluoride treatment.”

Some unjustified claims from that page:

  • Large numbers of studies over the last fifty years have shown conclusively that fluoride strengthens teeth against decay without causing harmful effects.
  • Fluoride acts in a number of ways to strengthen teeth and make them more resistant to tooth decay.
  • Topical fluoride can not only stop the development of tooth decay, but also make the enamel more resistant to future acid attacks. It also helps by reducing the amount of acid produced by the bacteria in your mouth.
  • While most of the fluoride effect is topical, a systemic effect still occurs, and enamel with built-in fluoride is still more decay resistant.
  • Very high levels can even cause brown staining or pitted enamel. This is very uncommon, and usually results from children swallowing too much fluoride from toothpaste or fluoride tablets rather than from drinking fluoridated water.
  • While these [other fluoride treatment methods] are still beneficial, the safest and most cost effective method, with the greatest reduction in tooth decay is seen when teeth are exposed to frequent, low concentrations of fluoride as in water fluoridation.
  • Because of the mainly topical effect of fluoride, people of all ages and backgrounds will benefit [from water fluoridation].
  • When fluoride is in the mouth, the teeth become much more resistant to decay.
  • Fluoridated water is the safest, most effective, and least expensive way to reduce tooth decay in children and adults.
  • In speaking about Sydney’s water fluoridation, the New South Wales Chief Health Officer in 2002 reported “a significant dental health benefit, by reducing dental caries, along with the associated savings in the cost of treatment.”
  • All Australian capital cities (except Brisbane) have been fluoridated for decades and have not seen an increase in bone fractures or other ill effects.

Your brief comment here refers to just this page, which I suppose is the one I listed in the online complaint form. I repeat below further comments from my initial email complaint which have not been addressed by your email.

The AMA site makes numerous claims about products and treatments that, aside from on occasion appearing to be patently false or contradictory, are completely unjustified.

The site also repeatedly directs readers to, if not a specific brands of products, specific types of product, such as fluoride toothpaste, fluoride tablets, fluoride gels, fluoridated food products and additives, and even fluoridated water, without any “alternative therapy” offered for cleaning teeth and maintaining dental health.

As a simplification, the product/treatment here is fluoride and its application/consumption. There are a number of documents provided on the website, for example, on the Fluoride Resources page (http://www.ada.org.au/oralhealth/fln/flresources.aspx) that might be intended as justification, however there is little or no association made between the majority of claims made in the rest of the site and these documents.

General safety claims are also made about mercury-containing dental amalgam as a type of product.

The medical information is certainly far from balanced. Concerns about harmful effects are, if mentioned a all, mentioned only briefly and in a significantly dismissive way, giving the impression that concerns have been raised only by an uneducated public, when in fact thousands of qualified dental and medical professionals around the world have very strong concerns about the potential harmful effects, and indeed questions about the efficacy of the use of fluoride in the first place. Documents on the website make claims for efficacy of “about half” and even “60%”, which are significant exaggerations at best. Statements such as “There is universal agreement between all the major public health bodies throughout the world regarding the benefits of water fluoridation” (“Fluoride – Nature thought f it first”, prefaced by a letter from the president of the ADA, at http://www.ada.org.au/app_cmslib/media/lib/0609/m16777_v1_fluoride%20-%20nature%20thought%20of%20it%20first.pdf) are grossly misleading (it is an undeniable fact that many countries do not support nor implement water fluoridation).

Finally

It is my expectation that the HONcode seal displayed on the Australian Dental Association website (http://ada.org.au) should indicate that the site is undergoing a reexamination. This is not presently the case.

Bradfield Resident
Sydney, Australia

Friday 11 September 2009

Quoted text:
Wed 09 Sep 09 | From: Health On the Net | In response to your complaint regarding the site : http://www.ada.org


Bradfield Resident
bradfieldresident@gmail.com
https://bradfieldresident.wordpress.com

Posted in Australian Dental Association, Fluoride, Health On the Net Foundation, Mail Sent, Water Fluoridation | Tagged: | 4 Comments »

Thu 10 Sep 09 | From: Barry O’Farrell MP, NSW Member for Ku-ring-gai | Re: AHFA Fluoride Petition

Posted by bradfieldresident on 10 September 2009

[This letter is in response to an email sent for the AHFA Fluoride Petition for New South Wales residents on the Health Petitions Australia website. Postal mail dated “10 September 2009”, received some days later]

Barry O’Farrell MP
State Member for Ku-ring-gai

Letter from Barry O'Farrell MP (2009-09-10)

Letter from Barry O'Farrell MP (2009-09-10)

10 September 2009

Dear […]

Thank you for your email of 4 September regarding you request for the removal of fluoride from our drinking water.

I read your email with interest and note your comments and concerns.

There is currently no legislation before the Parliament on the matter of fluoridation of our drinking water but please be assured that I will consider your views at the appropriate time.

Yours sincerely

[signature]

Barry O’Farrell

Working for our community

Phone 9487 8588 Fax 9487 8550 Electorate office 27 Redleaf Avenue, Wahroonga NSW 2076 Email barry@barryofarrell.com Website www.barryofarrell.com

Posted in Health Petitions Australia, Mail Received, NSW Government, State MPs, Water Fluoridation | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Thu 10 Sep 09 | From: Dr Peter Hill, Acting Chief Dental Officer, NSW Health | Re: AHFA Fluoride Petition

Posted by bradfieldresident on 10 September 2009

[This letter is in response to an email sent for the AHFA Fluoride Petition for New South Wales residents on the Health Petitions Australia website. Postal mail dated “10.9.09”, postmarked “15SEP09”]

Centre for Oral Health Strategy
New South Wales

Scan of postal mail

Letter from Dr Peter Hill, NSW Health (2009-09-10)

Dear […]

Thank you for your correspondence to the Minister for Health, dated 4th September 2009 seeking the removal of fluoride from your drinking water. The minister has asked me to respond to you on his behalf.

Various Councils have approached NSW Health on the matter of fluoridation of the public water supplies under their control. Following consideration of the individual Council’s issues by the Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies Advisory Committee (FPWSAC), as is required under the Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies Act 1957, the Director-General of NSW Health gives separate approval under that Act to allow the fluoridation of each of those Council’s water supplies. That approval is then published in the NSW Government Gazette, as required under the Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies Act 1957.

Councils are in various stages of compliance with those approvals to incorporate a fluoridation dosing system into their water treatment plants which comply generally with the statutory regime provided under the Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies Act 1957.

Research into the toxicity of compounds used in fluoridating water has been carried out for the past 60 years. The overwhelming weight of the scientific evidence does not link water fluoridation at optimal levels (one part per million) to side effects such as bone fracture, cancer, and other health related problems.

NSW Health’s policy on fluoridation is that it is a safe, effective and equitable means of reducing dental decay at a population level. In 2007 the NHMRC completed a Systematic Review, which confirmed that position. Indeed it is a position held by all Australian governments at state and federal level and most local governments in NSW.

I trust this information is of assistance to you. If you require any further information please contact Shanti Sivaneswaran, Principal Advisor, Centre for Oral Health Strategy NSW on (02) 8821 4300.

Yours faithfully

[signature]

Dr Peter Hill
Acting Chief Dental Officer
10.9.09

NSW HEALTH

PO Box 533, Wentworthville NSW 2145
Telephone +61 2 8821 4300
Facsimile +61 2 8821 4302
Website: www.health.nsw.gov.au

Posted in Centre for Oral Health Strategy, Health Petitions Australia, Mail Received, NSW Health, Water Fluoridation | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Wed 09 Sep 09 | From: Health On the Net | In response to your complaint regarding the site : http://www.ada.org

Posted by bradfieldresident on 9 September 2009

From: honcode-en@healthonnet.org
Date: Wednesday 09 September 2009 20:58 (+10)
Subject: In response to your complaint regarding the site : http://www.ada.org
To: bradfieldresident@gmail.com

Dear Sir/Madam,

We would like to thank you for contacting the Health On the Net Foundation
(HON) regarding the site : http://www.ada.org

We found following principles are not justified:

Principle 1 – Authority

The information for authority can find on the following link:

http://www.ada.org.au/disclaimer.aspx

“Information presented in the “Consumer Information” section was authored by the ADA Inc. Oral Health Education Committee. This Committee meets regularly and is responsible for reviewing and updating the “Consumer Information” section. All Oral Health Education Committee members are fully qualified and board registered dentists. In addition to this process, all information posted on the ADA inc website is reviewed and approved by the ADA Inc IT Manger/webmaster who also is a fully qualified and board registered dentist.”

Principle 2 – Purpose, Mission, Audience

The information for principle 2 can find on the following link:

Purpose : http://www.ada.org.au/disclaimer.aspx

“All information is intended for your general knowledge only and is not a substitute for dental or medical advice or treatment for specific dental or medical conditions. You should seek prompt professional care for any specific health issues.”

Mission : http://www.ada.org.au/about/default.aspx

”  its aim the encouragement of the health of the public and the promotion of the art and science of dentistry.”

Audience : http://www.ada.org.au/about/default.aspx

This site contains three portals for General public, Dental Professionals, and Members.
Therefore it is understood that this site is for the General public and health professionals.

Principle 4

Sources information are not needed, becuase this site information was authored
by fully qualified dentists.
For more information please see Principle 1.

Principle 5

we were not able to find any treatment information on the following link:
http://www.ada.org.au/oralhealth/FLN/flfaqs.aspx

This page contains some information about Fluoride, but not the treatments.

The complaint regarding the principle 4 – Date is justified.
Therfore we are taking care of your complaint. A member of the HONcode team has
contacted this site about this matter.

Thank you for contributing to the improvement of the quality of health
related web content. Please do not hesitate to contact us again in the
future.

Best regards,

The HONcode team.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Code of Conduct Department          | HONcode: http://www.hon.ch/Conduct.html
Health On the Net (HON)             | HON: http://www.hon.ch/
81 Boulevard de la Cluse            | My electronic mail is
CH-1205 Geneva, Switzerland         | HONcode@healthonnet.org
Phone/Fax:(41 22)372 6273/8885      |
------------------------------------------------------------------

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This email contains confidential information. The authorized
recipient of this information is prohibited from disclosing this
information to any other party.

#mar#

Posted in Australian Dental Association, Fluoride, Health On the Net Foundation, Mail Received, Water Fluoridation | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

Sat 05 Sep 09 | To: Health On the Net | Re: Confirmation of receipt of complaint

Posted by bradfieldresident on 5 September 2009

From: Bradfield Resident <bradfieldresident@gmail.com>
Date: Saturday 05 September 2009 21:48 (+10)
Subject: Re: Confirmation of receipt of complaint
To: honcodecomplaint@healthonnet.org

HONcode Team,

I am yet to receive a response with regards to my complaint about the Australian Dental Association website (http://ada.org.au) which I made over a week ago. I sent an email to honcodecomplaint@healthonnet.org on Tuesday 25 August — see a copy at https://bradfieldresident.wordpress.com/2009/08/25/to-health-on-the-net-foundation-honcode-principles-and-the-australian-dental-association/ — and subsequently used your online compliance violation form on Friday 28 August (the receipt for which is below).

The ADA website still shows an apparently valid HONcode seal, and the HONcode verification page still shows “REEXAM” status, as it did when I first looked on 25 August.

Bradfield Resident
Sydney, Australia

Saturday 5 September 2009

Quoted text:
Fri 28 Aug 09 | From: Health On the Net | Confirmation of receipt of complaint


Bradfield Resident
bradfieldresident@gmail.com
https://bradfieldresident.wordpress.com

Posted in Australian Dental Association, Fluoride, Health, Health On the Net Foundation, Mail Sent, Water Fluoridation | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Fri 04 Sep | To: Members of Federal Parliament | Do Not Introduce Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccination AFHA Petition

Posted by bradfieldresident on 4 September 2009

[This is a copy of the email sent for the Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccination (Federal Parliament) petition on the Health Petitions Australia website, copied from a Member’s response.]

From: [name, email]
Sent: Friday, 4 September 2009 10:49 AM
To: Abbott, Tony (MP); Adams, Dick (MP); Albanese, Anthony (MP); Andrews, Kevin (MP); Bailey, Fran (MP); Baldwin, Bob (MP); Bevis, Arch (MP); Bidgood, James (MP); Billson, Bruce (MP); Bird, Sharon (MP); Bishop, Bronwyn (MP); Bishop, Julie (MP); Bowen, Chris (MP); Bradbury, David (MP); Briggs, Jamie (MP); Broadbent, Russell (MP); Burke, Anna (MP); Burke, Tony (MP); Butler, Mark (MP); Byrne, Anthony (MP); Campbell, Jodie (MP); Champion, Nick (MP); Cheeseman, Darren (MP); Chester, Darren (MP); Ciobo, Steven (MP); Clare, Jason (MP); Cobb, John (MP); Collins, Julie (MP); Combet, Greg (MP); Higgins Electorate (P. Costello, MP); Coulton, Mark (MP); Crean, Simon (MP); Danby, Michael (MP); D’Ath, Yvette (MP); Debus, Bob (MP); Dreyfus, Mark (MP); Dutton, Peter (MP); Elliot, Justine (MP); Ellis, Annette (MP); Ellis, Kate (MP); Emerson, Craig (MP); Farmer, Pat (MP); Ferguson, Laurie (MP); Ferguson, Martin (MP); Fitzgibbon, Joel (MP); Forrest, John (MP); Garrett, Peter (MP); Gash, Joanna (MP); Georganas, Steve (MP); George, Jennie (MP); Georgiou, Petro (MP); Gibbons, Steve (MP); Gillard, Julia (MP); Gray, Gary (MP); Grierson, Sharon (MP); Griffin, Alan (MP); Haase, Barry (MP); Hale, Damian (MP); Hall, Jill (MP); Hartsuyker, Luke (MP); Hawke, Alex (MP); Hawker, David (MP); Hayes, Chris (MP); Hockey, Joe (MP); Hull, Kay (MP); Hunt, Greg (MP); Irons, Steve (MP); Irwin, Julia (MP); Jackson, Sharryn (MP); Jenkins, Harry (MP); Jensen, Dennis (MP); Michael.Johns@smtp2.aph.gov.au; on.MP@aph.gov.au; Katter, Robert (MP); Keenan, Michael (MP); Kelly, Mike (MP); Kerr, Duncan (MP); King, Catherine (MP); Laming, Andrew (MP); Ley, Sussan (MP); Lindsay, Peter (MP); Livermore, Kirsten (MP); Macfarlane, Ian (MP); Macklin, Jennifer (MP); Marino, Nola (MP); Markus, Louise (MP); Marles, Richard (MP); May, Margaret (MP); McClelland, Robert (MP); McKew, Maxine (MP); McMullan, Robert (MP); Melham, Daryl (MP); Mirabella, Sophie (MP); Morrison, Scott (MP); Moylan, Judith (MP); Murphy, John (MP); Neal, Belinda (MP); Nelson, Brendan (MP); Neumann, Shayne (MP); Neville, Paul (MP); Oakeshott, Robert (MP); O’Connor, Brendan (MP); Owens, Julie (MP); Parke, Melissa (MP); Pearce, Chris (MP); Perrett, Graham (MP); Plibersek, Tanya (MP); Price, Roger (MP); Pyne, Chris (MP); Raguse, Brett (MP); Ramsey, Rowan (MP); Randall, Don (MP); Rea, Kerry MP (Constituents); Ripoll, Bernie (MP); Rishworth, Amanda (MP); Robb, Andrew (MP); Robert, Stuart (MP); Roxon, Nicola (MP); Ruddock, Philip (MP); Saffin, Janelle (MP); Schultz, Alby (MP); Scott, Bruce (MP); Secker, Patrick (MP); Shorten, Bill (MP); Sidebottom, Sid (MP); Simpkins, Luke (MP); Slipper, Peter (MP); Smith, Tony (MP); Smith, Stephen (MP); Snowdon, Warren (MP); Somlyay, Alex (MP); Southcott, Andrew (MP); Stone, Sharman (MP); Sullivan, Jon (MP); Swan, Wayne (MP); Symon, Mike (MP); Tanner, Lindsay (MP); Thomson, Craig (MP); Thomson, Kelvin (MP); Trevor, Chris (MP); Truss, Warren (MP); Tuckey, Wilson (MP); Turnbull, Malcolm (MP); Jim.Turnour.M@smtp2.aph.gov.au; P@aph.gov.au; Vale, Danna (MP); Vamvakinou, Maria (MP); Washer, Mal (MP); Windsor, Tony (MP); Wood, Jason (MP); Zappia, Tony (MP); petitions@health-freedom.com.au
Subject: Do Not Introduce Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccination

Dear Member of Parliament,

I wish to express my concern to you with regard to mass vaccination of the Australian public for swine flu, using a vaccine with no long term studies yet potential for dangerous side effects.

There is much talk amongst politicians, medical associations and the media with regards to making this swine flu vaccine mandatory. I do not consent to mandatory vaccination and I wish to point out that my right to do so is protected under informed consent laws relative to each Australian States criminal Acts.

I am very informed as to the risk benefit ratio and the risks far out weigh the perceived benefits.

To put things into perspective, malaria kills 3,000 people every day, and it’s considered “a health problem”… But of course, there are no fancy vaccines for malaria that can rake in billions of dollars for drug companies in a short amount of time. For example; Chinese scientists have already found the cure for malaria yet it is not a drug that can be patented by big corporate money. http://www.sbs.com.au/dateline/story/about/id/600026/n/The-Last-Bite

But getting back to the H1N1 issue, one Australian news source, for example, states that even a mild swine flu epidemic could lead to the deaths of 1.4 million people and would reduce economic growth by nearly $5 trillion dollars ( http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,25392380-2,00.html ).

This sounds like the outlandish cries of the pandemic bird-flu, when President Bush said two million Americans would die as a result of the bird flu! Where is the Bird Flu now?

As of August 28th 2009 (update 63) ( http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_08_28/en/index.html ), there have been 2185 deaths world wide from H1N1. Compared to seasonal flu, this does not constitute a pandemic let alone justify mandatory mass vaccination with a vaccine that will have dangerous side effects and little proof of efficacy.

Approximately 36 thousand Americans die from seasonal flu every year, 200 thousand are hospitalised. Between 250 – 500 thousand people die from seasonal flu world wide, also resulting in three to five million cases of severe illness. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs211/en The world wide 2185 deaths from H1N1 virus, does not constitute a pandemic yet alone grounds to begin mandatory vaccination of the Australian public.

Just a couple of months ago, scientists concluded that the 1918 flu pandemic that killed between 50-100 million people worldwide in a matter of 18 months — which all these worst case scenarios are built upon — was NOT due to the flu itself! http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSTRE5146PD20090205?feedType=RSS&feedName=scienceNews&sp=true

Tami Flu vaccine, used against seasonal flu, does not work effectively and is not a safe drug. Serious side effects include convulsions, delirium or delusions, and 12 deaths in children and teens as a result of neuropsychiatric problems and brain infections Japan actually banned Tami flu for children in 2007. http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2005-11-19-tamiflu_x.htm

In 2007, the FDA in the USA finally began investigating some 1,800 adverse event reports related to the drug. http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-11-25-tamiflu-brain_N.htm

In fact the Tami Flu vaccine has been found to be almost useless http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/397/27 < The risk and dangers compared to perceived benefits of Tami flu are great.

Recently a confidential letter from the United Kingdom Health Protection Agency was sent to about 600 neurologists alerting them to watch for an increase in Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) as a result of the swine flu vaccination. GBS can be fatal as it attacks the nerve lining, causing paralysis and suffocation – as those affected are unable to breath.

The UK Daily Mail reported on the July 29 letter and pointed to a similar U.S. swine flu vaccination used in 1976 when:

* “More people died from the vaccination than from swine flu (25 deaths);
* 500 cases of GBS were detected;
* the vaccine may have increased the risk of contracting GBS by eight times;
* the vaccine was withdrawn after just 10 weeks when the link with GBS became clear;
* The U.S. government was forced to pay out 1.3 million dollars to those affected.”

So, instead of giving warnings to the people who’ll be vaccinated, secret letters were sent to neurologists to keep track of the number of human guinea pigs who contract the dreadful GBS without knowing the risk.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1206807/Swine-flu-jab-link-killer-nerve-disease-Leaked-letter-reveals-concern-neurologists-25-deaths-America.html#ixzz0OqsdiuaX

The dangers of using live attenuated viruses in vaccinations can also lead to an out break in flu, just exactly the opposite of what the vaccine was made for. It can actually spread the virus rather than cure it.

The vaccine time below helps illustrates my points.

Vaccine history

• In the USA in 1960, two virologists discovered that both polio vaccines were contaminated with the SV 40 virus which causes cancer in animals as well as changes in human cell tissue cultures. Millions of children had been injected with these vaccines. (Med Jnl of Australia 17/3/1973 p555)

• In 1871-2, England, with 98% of the population aged between 2 and 50 vaccinated against smallpox, it experienced its worst ever smallpox outbreak with 45,000 deaths. During the same period in Germany, with a vaccination rate of 96%, there were over 125,000 deaths from smallpox. ( http://www.soilandhealth.org/02/0201hyglibcat/020119hadwin/020119hadwin.toc.html )
The Hadwen Documents

• In Germany, compulsory mass vaccination against diphtheria commenced in 1940 and by 1945 diphtheria cases were up from 40,000 to 250,000. (Don’t Get Stuck, Hannah Allen)

• In 1967, Ghana was declared measles free by the World Health Organisation after 96% of its population was vaccinated. In 1972, Ghana experienced one of its worst measles outbreaks with its highest ever mortality rate. (Dr H Albonico, MMR Vaccine Campaign in Switzerland, March 1990)

• In 1977, Dr Jonas Salk who developed the first polio vaccine, testified along with other scientists, that mass inoculation against polio was the cause of most polio cases throughout the USA since 1961. (Science 4/4/77 “Abstracts” )

• In the UK between 1970 and 1990, over 200,000 cases of whooping cough occurred in fully vaccinated children. (Community Disease Surveillance Centre, UK)

• In the 1970’s a tuberculosis vaccine trial in India involving 260,000 people revealed that more cases of TB occurred in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. (The Lancet 12/1/80 p73)

In 1976 mass vaccination of Swine flu begain in the USA. Within a few months, claims totaling $1.3 billion had been filed by victims who had suffered paralysis from the vaccine. The vaccine was also blamed for 25 deaths. However, several hundred people developed crippling Guillain-Barré Syndrome after they were injected with the swine flu vaccine. Even healthy 20-year-olds ended up as paraplegics. And the swine flu pandemic itself? It never materialized. ( http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/04/29/Swine-Flu.aspx )

• In 1978, a survey of 30 States in the US revealed that more than half of the children who contracted measles had been adequately vaccinated. (The People’s Doctor, Dr R Mendelsohn)

• The February 1981 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association found that 90% of obstetricians and 66% of pediatricians refused to take the rubella vaccine.

• In 1979, Sweden abandoned the whooping cough vaccine due to its ineffectiveness. Out of 5,140 cases in 1978, it was found that 84% had been vaccinated three times! (BMJ 283:696-697, 1981)

• In the USA, the cost of a single DPT shot had risen from 11 cents in 1982 to $11.40 in 1987. The manufacturers of the vaccine were putting aside $8 per shot to cover legal costs and damages they were paying out to parents of brain damaged children and children who died after vaccination. (The Vine, Issue 7, January 1994, Nambour, Qld)

Please do not introduce mandatory vaccination upon the Australian people.

Yours sincerely

[name]
[address]
[email]

Posted in Federal Government, Federal MPs, Health Petitions Australia, Mail Sent, Pandemic A(H1N1)v 2009, Swine Flu H1N1, Vaccines | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Thu 03 Sep 09 | To: BOC Australia | Making water safe

Posted by bradfieldresident on 3 September 2009

From: Bradfield Resident <bradfieldresident@gmail.com>
Date: Thursday 03 September 2009 17:42 (+10)
Subject: Making water safe
To: [BOC contact address]

BOC,

in your currently airing television commercial there is a mention that you do something to help make our water safe. Could you please indicate what that is, or how you are involved in water treatement?

I expect that it involves perhaps the supply of chemicals, such as chlorine, and possibly also plant equipment, advice to governments (Federal, State and local) on treatment procedures, safety, and so on.

Does BOC have any contract(s) to supply materials for water fluoridation? If so, what can you say about the content and source of these materials?

Bradfield Resident, NSW
Thursday 3 September 2009


Bradfield Resident
bradfieldresident@gmail.com
https://bradfieldresident.wordpress.com

Posted in Mail Sent, TV, Water Fluoridation | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »