In the 21st century the control of infectious diseaes is being promoted to the community by “medical doctors” when throughout history this area of health was not included in traditional medicine. This is because infectious diseases were always considered a public health issue and controlled in the field of Social Medicine: the field of ‘medicine’ that uses political and economic decisions to make changes to the environment and lifestyle of communities to improve public health.
Expertise in social medicine requires knowledge of how diseases are transmitted. This is because being exposed to the disease agent (pathogen) is not sufficient for a person to get the disease. It is a combination of the environment, lifestyle and the agent that results in disease and this can be mild or extreme according to the interaction of these characteristics. This is why some people get sick and others don’t when they are all exposed to the same agent – and different degrees of the disease (asymptomatic, mild, severe or death).
Public health was incorporated into the field of medicine in the 1990’s in Australia but doctors are not being educated on the epidemiology of infectious diseases. That is, the importance of environmental and lifestyle characteristics in the control of infectious diseases. They are only educated on the ‘necessity to use every vaccine that is recommended by the government’.
Doctors are also not educated on the serious side-effects that have been associated with vaccines for decades or the contraindications of vaccines that were used prior to the introduction of the US Vaccine Injury Compensation Act in 1986 that removed all liability for harm from the vaccine manufacturers.
So why is there such a disparity between the medical literature on infectious diseases presented by independent researchers to that provided by medical practitioners and the government?
This is because the pharmaceutical companies are influencing every aspect of the development, marketing and promotion of vaccines to medical doctors and politicians (Stamatakis 2013). Doctors are not providing objective evidence on the control of infectious diseases and they are incorrectly stating that the public must get their advice on infectious diseases from doctors.
My university research has been completed in the field of Social Medicine at the University of Wollongong and powerful lobby groups have spread false and misleading information about my PhD research in the mainstream media in an attempt to remove its credibilty from public debate.
My PhD thesis provides evidence that current government vaccination programs are resulting in more harm than good to childen’s health and to the fabric of Australian society. Children’s health has significnatly declined as the vaccination program has expanded since the 1990’s and thousands of parents are now long-term carers for children who will never reach their potential in life.
My research (Chapter 6 and 8) also provides evidence that doctors are not educated about vaccines and infectious disease control using objective scientific information and this is why the government and Medical Board of Australia do not want an open and transparent debate about the government’s mandatory and coercive vaccination programs. These policies are breaching human rights and they have been sold to the public on the false claim that “the national immunisaiton program is in the best interests of the community”.
Further, the Australian government is falsely claiming there is a consensus on the science of vaccination by creating an ‘appearance of a consensus’ through the criteria for medical registration. The Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act states that health professionals cannot promote “anti-vaccination material” or they will be de-registered from the profession – this is a label (anti-vaccination) that is being used to dismiss the risks of vaccines that have been associated with vaccines for decades.
This has removed the autonomy for doctors in Australia to assess the full body of medical literature which means they are no longer serving the best interests of their patients but the best interests of the state – the government. This is a breach of the medical code of conduct by Australian doctors who are not presenting the ingredients of vaccines or the serious risks of vaccines to their patients for a fully informed choice in using this medical procedure.
In order for Australians to protect their health it is necessary to do your own research and to challenge your doctor with the medical literature that they are not providing on the control of infectious diseases or the ingredients and serious risks of vaccines.
Judy Wilyman PhD