Re: [vaccination-respectful-debate] Health Legislation and the AVN

[John Cunningham]

Here's some video of Parliament.
https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10151455983993195

Well worth watching to hear about some facts behind the AVN naming fiasco, as opposed to what Greg has emailed his members.

John

[Tasha David]

John,

It was hard enough to read the hansard, so I think I might just give the video a miss.  All I was thinking when I was reading these scornful and derisive comments, is these people do not even care that my children and thousands of other children have been hurt by vaccines.  They are just acceptable collateral damage to them, invisible, voiceless and expendable.  Why would you take such pleasure in sharing, what to me is really just a bunch of bullies gleefully putting the boot in to parents like me and the only advocacy group that my children have in this country?  Do we not deserve to have a voice in society, or are we just supposed to shut up and tend to our children's wounds in silence?  In a lot of ways the AVN is a victims support group, a place for victims of vaccine injuries and deaths to come and find support and comfort.  A place we can share our stories so that other families can learn from our tragedies and we can finally be heard.  Why would you want to take that away from us? 

John

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Vaccination-Respectful Debate" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vaccination-respectf...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to vaccination-re...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/vaccination-respectful-debate?hl=en-GB.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[John Cunningham]

Here's more:

The Hon. Helen Westwood

"I will comment on the 2010 report of the Committee on the Health Care Complaints Commission on the operation of the Health Care Complaints Act 1993. Previous speakers referred to the 2012 decision of the Supreme Court in Australian Vaccination Network Inc. v Health Care Complaints Commission. That case led to the development of the provisions in schedule 2. I was the chair of the Committee on the Health Care Complaints Commission when that report was published.

When the Health Care Complaints Commission began its action against the Australian Vaccination Network, as chair of the committee I was concerned that the commission may not have the power to act as it was so doing. As the chair I wrote to the commissioner and asked him whether he thought he had that power. The committee members—Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile was a committee member at that time, as was the Hon. David Clarke, amongst others—had doubts about whether the Health Care Complaints Commission had the power. We sought advice because the committee was willing recommend to the then Government that amendments were necessary to ensure that the commission had that power. The commissioner wrote back and his advice to the committee at that time was that the commission believed it had the power and it proceeded with the action.

We now know from the 2012 Supreme Court decision that the Health Care Complaints Commission did not have the power; hence these amendments are before the House. It is important to put the issue in that context. There was concern. I believe the Committee on the Health Care Complaints Commission fulfilled its role when it sought advice from the commissioner. Honestly, a number of committee members were concerned that the commission did not have the power and we were willing to advise the Government to make amendments. It was only because the commissioner wrote to the committee and advised that he believed the commission had the power that we the committee did not recommend to the then Government to make those amendments.

The bill is important for the same reasons given by previous speakers. I am gravely concerned when organisations misrepresent the facts, and the role and intent of their organisation. That could lead to parents—or for that matter any person looking for accurate, evidence-based material or information that relates to their health or the health of their child—believing that the organisation has information and can fulfil that role based on science and peer-reviewed research. When an organisation represents itself as being able to provide information, that is not only reprehensible but it should be a crime because the consequences for our public health are serious. In addition, not only are the consequences for public health serious, the consequences for children are dire."

End of quote.

Just to reiterate: It is ONLY because of the actions of the AVN that this legislation is now before Parliament. When the AVN cries foul, persecution and tyranny, it is only because the HCCC was challenged that the Act has been changed. Thanks go to Meryl Dorey and the AVN.

[Katie Brockie]

My two cents worth.

The chances of severe adverse reactions to immunisations is 1 in a million. In some cases, one in 3,000,000. Many parents believe their children have been vaccine injured, or have died from vaccines, but there is never any evidence or proof provided. This sounds harsh, but I don't mean it to be.

In the current measles epidemic in Wales, many anti-immunisation people are saying "only 340 (or whatever the number is) of these cases have been laboratory confirmed. Therefore, they are probably something else, not measles.

Yet, when a person says they have a vaccine injured child, there is no equal skepticism.

There are not thousands of vaccine injured children in Australia. There are probably a handful. That is tragic enough, but without the vaccinations, there would be hundreds more damaged or dead children.

You could form a support group for people who believe their children have been injured by vaccines, but that doesn't mean that you can or should attempt to infuence new parents about their vaccination decisions.

If the AVN was merely a support group, I don't think there would be so much denigration from all the Govt parties. It's when the AVN spreads misinformation and attempts to influence vulnerable new parents that citizens (and MPs) get angry.

I get just as upset when I read the scornful and derisive comments here and on the AVN page about people who have died from chickenpox or measles or diptheria, or people who have been paralysed by polio. They don't care that my father lives in a wheelchair from polio, they laughed when someone posted a link about a child who had died from chickenpox. If someone's child is hospitalised with influenza, they blame the parents for not feeding them the right foods, etc etc etc.

Katie

[A MacDonald]

How did this reach the RD site?

It seems JC gets his facts from bullies and not from actual court documents - not the first time.

This is not a debate subject. I could be, but have we not already got threads regarding a name change?

Andrew.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Vaccination-Respectful Debate" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vaccination-respectful-debate+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[John Cunningham]

Just making sure Andrew that people are aware of the falsehoods that Greg has been spreading about the issue. He said the government offered them no help about changing their name, when they obviously have. 

John

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vaccination-respectf...@googlegroups.com.

[A MacDonald]

John,

are you asking a question, or tendering a new debate topic?

I'm confused.

The language used in Parliament recently, reminds me of SAVN. It's foul. I've read recent AVN blogs, and think you need to think critically of the "help" you say the government offered.

Anyway, this is not a discussion page, it is a debate site.

I think you need to go elsewhere with this one.

[Katie Brockie]

My original reply to punter's post was denied by the moderator, so I have re-worded this.

Punter - yes all of that DID happen. Here's a selection of comments, many
are on the AVN FB page right now:

(Here I provided several copy/pastes of posts on the AVN FB page, which provided evidence to back up what I originally said)

I could go on, but I think I've proved my point.


Punter said:
"1 in a million? You sure it isn't 1 in a trillion. Hell, we could even
make it 1 in a googolplex given that we are just free to make up any number
we like."
We are not free to make up any number we like when it comes to severe
reactions to immunisation. You are wrong.

Katie