This is Google's cache of It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on 9 Aug 2012 00:13:44 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more

Text-only version
Information on the Australian government schedule of vaccines for the National Immunisation Program (NIP)

Judy Wilyman responds to the Illawarra Mercury (11.6.12)

July 31, 2012

I would like to correct the misinformation that has been placed on the internet by the Illawarra Mercury about the research presented by PhD research student Judy Wilyman. On the 11th June Dr. Mathew Berryman, a  Research Fellow in the SMART Infrastructure Faculty at Wollongong University and a subscriber to the Skeptics lobby group, misrepresented my comments about the promotion of vaccines to the public and took these comments to the media. The actual comments that I made can be found on my website: Vaccination Decisions.

Dr. Berryman, a specialist in infrastructure technology (and not health policy or vaccination) made 3 comments that I would like to correct:

1.       He stated ‘the arguments I am presenting are unscientific’. This is untrue. The research I am presenting on whooping cough was completed as part of a research project for my Master of Science degree (Population Health) and has been published by the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) and other peer-reviewed organisations. This research can be found on my website.

2.       The comments I made with reference to the promotion of vaccines to the public stated the government has been promoting the whooping cough vaccine on ‘anecdotal evidence’ and I gave an example. Anecdotal evidence is the evidence from one individual – it is their experience and it is not representative of the community. This is not the type of evidence that is used in a public health policy and the public is entitled to see what evidence is being used to suggest a particular vaccine is for the ‘good of the community’. There are other children that have died from vaccines therefore we cannot use individual cases to promote the need for a vaccine to the public.

3.       To suggest that “I had misused the case of 4-week-old Dana McCaffery’s death from whooping cough against the wishes of her family” is a complete fabrication. The McCafferys agreed to promote the vaccine to the Australian public and received an award ($1000) from the Skeptics organisation in 2009 for doing this.

The public must be able to openly debate this topic and be consulted on the policies that are implemented. It is important that researchers in universities who are bringing you a different perspective should not be criticized by members of lobby groups for presenting their scientific arguments.


Response to Sunday Telegraph Article: Doctor’s unite to smash the anti-vaccine group (22.7.12)

July 23, 2012

This article is misleading the public about the use and efficacy of vaccines. Firstly the article states ‘Since the introduction of childhood immunisation in the 1930s vaccine-preventable diseases have declined by more than 99 per cent’. This statement is untrue because it suggests that the decline of infectious diseases is due to childhood immunisation programs. The majority of the decline in infectious diseases occurred before 1950 (1, 2). The only vaccine in use in mass vaccination pro...

Continue reading...

HPV Vaccine for Boys

July 20, 2012

Answers Needed from Government Health Ministers

On the 12th July Australia was the first country to start a government sponsored vaccination program offering HPV vaccine to boys 12 -13 years of age. This has been implemented despite significant consumer concerns about the ingredients of this vaccine and the efficacy against any type of cancer. Below is a letter that has been sent to the TGA and other prominent public health officials in 2011 but no answers have been provided. Please investi...

Continue reading...

Newsletter 3 Is Vaccination in Australia Mandatory?

July 10, 2012

would like to provide you with the directive from the Australian Medical Association (AMA) that was recently sent to doctor's regarding the signing of concientious objector's forms for vaccinations. It seems that even though the government states "vaccination in Australia is not compulsory" the doctor's are being told they do not have to sign the refusal forms that parents require to obtain $2,100 in welfare benefits that are now linked to using 12 vaccines in infants under 12 months of age...

Continue reading...

Newsletter 2 15th June 2012

June 15, 2012

Last week I sent a letter to the Federal Human Rights Department expressing concern about the way vaccines are being promoted to the public and about the conflicts of interest that exist in policy decisions. Many people decided to put their own interpretation on this information and this led to an unfounded article being published in the Illawarra Mercury titled ‘Whooping Cough Row’. The sentiments expressed in the Mercury article are untrue and the Wollongong University is fully suppo...

Continue reading...

Conflicts of Interest in Vaccination Policy

June 4, 2012

The following letter has been sent to the Australian human rights department because of concerns about the conflicts of interest held by government policy advisors. The references and attachments can be found in the letters sub-menu on the publictions page of this website.

 To the Federal Human Rights Commissioner

Vaccination and chemicals injected into the human body are a human rights issue. I would therefore like to bring to your attention the selective presentation of the vaccination deba...

Continue reading...

Australian Weekend Magazine 'Feeling the Strain: Whooping cough epidemic' 28 -29th April

May 9, 2012

Reply to: ‘Australia is in the Grip of a Whooping Cough Epidemic. How worried should we be?'
By Mary-Rose MacColl

An article on whooping cough immunization should be based on evidence and known historical facts yet the article in the weekend Australian perpetuates myths and promotes immunization on anecdotal evidence. This results in an emotional response to disease prevention. The stories of sick children that are discussed in this article represent anecdotal evidence of the dangers of who...

Continue reading...

Newsletter 1 1.5.12

May 3, 2012

Vaccination Decisions Newsletter 1.5.12


Welcome to the first newsletter for the Vaccination Decisions website. I feel it is necessary to present the public with the evidence I have researched over 8 years at university because it is clear that vaccination is being promoted to the public on incomplete science. The government claims that vaccinations are ‘safe and effective’ but this claim can be made from 2 positions:

1.    Based upon observed empirical evidence or

2.    A l...

Continue reading...