The Australian government’s National Centre for Immunisation, Research and Surveillance (NCIRS) department is responsible for assessing the research that is provided to the ATAGI (The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation) for the recommendation of vaccines to Australia’s national immunisation program (NIP).
Peter McIntyre is the ex-director of the NCIRS and through his work at this government research and surveillance unit he has influenced these recommendations for 20+ years (1997-January 2018). As a government representative he is required to be transparent and accountable for the information he provides for public policy. He needs to demonstrate that the mandating of drugs/vaccines in government social services policies are in the best interests of the public and that these policies are based on objective information and not industry-funded studies.
In November 2015 the Australian government mandated 12-16 vaccines into social services and employment policies at a time when there was no increased risk from infectious diseases and when there was no legislation in any Health Act to legitimise these policies. Here are the actions of Peter McIntyre that have suppressed public debate of vaccination and need to be investigated to justify mandatory vaccination in exchange for social services (childcare, welfare payments and employment) and the removal of our human right to bodily autonomy.
Peter McIntyre’s Suppression of Scientific Debate from 2009 – 2019:
- In 2009 I submitted a referenced summary of my whooping cough research for publication by the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA). My paper was titled “Is the whooping cough vaccine effective?” (Referenced copy). The PHAA asked Peter McIntyre (NCIRS) to respond and both articles were published side-by-side in the PHAA Newsletter in April 2009. When I requested a fully referenced copy of Peter McIntyre’s response he did not provide it.
- In the Australian newspapers he has falsely claimed that I turned down an invitation to present my whooping cough research at the NCIRS in 2009 after this PHAA newsletter was published. I wasn’t able to present my information because he did not provide me with a date for this event to occur.
- Since at least 2012 McIntyre’s NCIRS has supported the media in promoting the whooping cough vaccine to the public based on anecdotal evidence (a parent’s account of their child’s experience with a disease). This was after my research showed that many vaccinated children are still getting whooping cough. This fact means that the government cannot promote the vaccine on the effectiveness of the vaccine in the population – because the evidence does not show that it is effective. Hence the NCIRS is allowing the Health Department (IAP) to run media campaigns that advertise a drug (vaccines) based on anecdotal evidence. This type of evidence is NOT used to design public health policy because there are equally many stories of vaccines causing death and damage to human health. The NCIRS support for vaccine advertising based on anecdotal evidence, and without presenting all the risks of vaccines and lack of effectiveness, contravenes the doctor’s medical code of conduct. It also contravenes the TGA’s advertising policies and it is not a policy that will protect the health of the majority of the population.
- In October 2015 Peter McIntyre refused to present the government’s case for mandatory vaccination policies in a public debate that was organised at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS). This debate was prior to the approval of the No Jab No Pay legislation and approximately 45 other government and health authorities also refused to be on the Q and A panel to justify this policy with evidence. These 45 authorities are listed in the video. This included Robert Booy (NCIRS), Julie Leask (Sydney Uni/NCIRS), Christian Porter (Minister for Social Services September 2015 onwards), Sussan Ley (Minister for Health 2015). Scott Morrison was Social Services Minister from December 2014 until September 2015.
- In November 2015 the NCIRS and ATAGI representatives were not required to give evidence at the Public Hearing into the No Jab No Pay policies. That is, provide reasons why it is necessary to mandate 12-16 vaccines in social services policies. Why were Peter McIntyre (NCIRS), Robert Booy (NCIRS) and Terry Nolan (chairman of ATAGI) not required to give evidence at this public hearing into mandatory vaccination legislation? Instead the hearing was dominated by industry/consumer lobby groups presenting their opinions – the Northern Rivers Vaccination Supporters and the Australian Skeptics/SAVN and Friends of Science in Medicine – but no evidence presented by the government research committee representatives or advisors?
- Peter McIntyre was the author of a letter supported by industry lobby group activists (Friends of Science in Medicine/Australian Skeptics/SAVN) that was used to set up a petition to illegitimately remove my PhD from publication in January 2016. This was refused by the Vice-Chancellor of the University, Paul Wellings, who stated “we are standing by this PhD thesis” (Australian Newspaper 2016).
- He refused to publish his own 1994 PhD on the HIB vaccine in open repository on the University of Sydney website as I have done on the University of Wollongong website. This has allowed my thesis to be scrutinised by the community of scientists/academics but Peter McIntyre’s has not been open to scrutiny by the community of scientists/academics.
- He uses the defamatory and false Wikipedia comments about my research to discredit my reputation and research to the public and to politicians. Wikipedia is controlled by powerful industry lobby groups who operate through the Skeptics organisations. In Australia they operate through the Australian Skeptics/SAVN and they influence all the official channels for debating vaccination science – the media, the PHAA (National Immunisation Conference), the state and federal Health Departments, the University of Wollongong’s complaint procedures and the misuse of the university’s logo to promote the government’s vaccination policies.
- Peter McIntyre has conflicts of interest in policy because of the funding of the NCIRS safety and efficacy studies that is provided by the pharmaceutical companies. At the same time he has been a member of the government vaccine advisory board (ATAGI) that recommends vaccines directly to the health minister for the national immunisation program.
- In May 2017 in an interview with the Medical Journal of Australia Peter McIntyre stated that unvaccinated children are not a risk to vaccinated children, particularly older ones. Why didn’t he provide this information at the Public hearing for the Senate Inquiry in November 2015 and at the public Q and A panel at the University of Technology Sydney in October 2015? This fact proves that there is no justification for the No Jab No Pay/Play policies Or the removal of any unvaccinated child from schools or employees from the work force.
- In 2018 he provided false information in the Australian newspapers about my qualifications, the focus of my PhD and about the academic support for my research. The Australian media will not publish my response to his false comments.
- In September 2018 Peter McIntyre was drafted into a court case at the same time as my confidential affidavit was leaked to the Australian media and defamed with false information. This is a federal crime but the Australian Federal Police have refused to investigate the government’s role in leaking my expert witness report to the mainstream media. Instead of Peter McIntyre defending his NCIRS research in the courts to justify mandatory government vaccination policies he allowed my affidavit to be leaked to the media to prevent the case from going to court.
- The information in my PhD thesis has never been publicly challenged or debated and the first critique of my PhD was published in January 2019 by Peter McIntyre, Margaret Burgess, Julie Leask and Kerrie Wiley – all members of the NCIRS/Sydney University researchers for NCIRS. This critique was published in an industry-funded journal, Vaccine, and they used false and misleading information in an attempt to disparage the rigour of my research. Here is my response to the NCIRS critique of my independent research which they are hiding behind instead of publicly debating the evidence in my thesis that debunks the claim that it is necessary to mandate any vaccine in the community – Judy Wilyman’s PhD Thesis on Vaccination Policy: Scholarly and Socially Relevant