Open Letter
To University of Wollongong (UOW) Academics

20 February 2017

Re:  Ben Dickinson, a Reporter at Post Newspapers WA, asks to be removed from this emailing list.

Dear Professor Alison Jones, Professor Yeatman (and the 60 UOW academics supporting the statement about vaccination on the UOW website),

I have received a request from a reporter to remove his name from this emailing list but he has not described the reason why he is not interested in reporting on this important issue of children’s health. This includes the fact that 143,000 Australian parents have now considered that the health of their child is more important than the $15,000 financial bribe that the Australian government is giving to parents if  they use all of the 16 vaccines (~24+ doses of vaccine by 4 years of age) recommended on the National Immunisation Program. This is a discriminatory social welfare policy that is not based on public health legislation. The vaccines parents are being asked to use are recommended by government advisory boards with financial ties to pharmaceutical companies and by a government regulator (the Therapeutic Goods Administrator (TGA)) that is 100% funded by the pharmaceutical companies and other industries. The government describes this as a User-Pay system (Cost-Recovery), however this arrangement completely removes any incentive for industry to ensure that its products are safe or effective because the TGA approves the drugs for the market AND monitors their safety.

Vaccines are a drug for healthy children and many of these vaccines are for diseases that were not controlled by vaccines and are not a risk to the majority of Australians. This evidence is published on the University of Wollongong (UOW) website (A critical Analysis of the Australian Government’s Rationale for its Vaccination Policies) and lobby groups (many with industry funding) have gone to great lengths to prevent the public from seeing this PhD research with credibility. Not only are academics signing their names to statements about vaccines that they have not investigated but journalists/reporters are ignoring the valid scientific evidence and not reporting it to the public.

Here is my letter of reply that I have sent to Ben Dickinson in his role as a Reporter at the WA Post:

Dear Ben,
I included you on this email list because you have previously written a story that falsely represented the concerns that parents have about vaccines. This is not about anti-vaccination and it is your duty as a journalist to ensure that you research both sides of a scientific argument. This issue is about children’s health and the medications they are being given – in this case when they are healthy.

Parents are questioning how many vaccines are being given and how necessary they all are because children’s health is deteriorating with every new addition to the schedule. PhD’s are not awarded if they do not contain valid scientific arguments for debate. It is important to address the arguments not attack or label the messenger.

I will remove you from the email list and look forward to you and your fellow journalists researching these concerns that are being presented by academics, health professionals, lawyers and parents.
Kind regards,
Dr. Judy Wilyman
The Science and Politics of Australian Vaccination Policies
Vaccination Decisions