Freedom Of Choice With Brian Martin & Dr Rima

ScientificVaccineFacts

A critical analysis of the Australian government’s rationale for its vaccination policy

Judy Wilyman, University of Wollongong

Year

2015

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy

Department

School of Humanities and Social Inquiry

Recommended Citation

FILE: /main/production/doc/data/journals/ro.uow.edu.au/theses/assets/article/ir_citation.inc

Wilyman, Judy, A critical analysis of the Australian government’s rationale for its vaccination policy, Doctor of Philosophy thesis, School of Humanities and Social Inquiry, University of Wollongong, 2015. http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/4541

FILE: /main/production/doc/data/assets/site/ir_etd/article/article_info.inc (cont)

Abstract

Vaccination policies in Australia need to be scrutinised because the use of a medical intervention in the prevention of infectious disease has serious health and social implications. Deaths and illnesses to infectious diseases were significantly reduced due to environmental and lifestyle reforms prior to the widespread use of most vaccines in the mid-20th century. Mass vaccination campaigns were adopted after this time as the central management strategy for preventing infectious diseases, with many new vaccines being recommended in the National Immunisation Program (NIP). The implementation of mass vaccination programs occurred simultaneously with the development of partnerships between academic institutions and industry. The Australian government’s NIP, like all member countries of the World Health Organisation (WHO), is recommended by the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (GAVI). This is a partnership with the WHO and UNICEF that includes the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), the Rockefeller Foundation, the United Nations Development Fund (UNDF) and other private research institutions. All members of this public-private partnership influence the development of WHO global health policies.

It is important that independent research is carried out to assess whether all the vaccines being recommended today are safe, effective and necessary for the protection of the community. It is also important to have comprehensive evidence that it is safe to combine multiple vaccines in the developing bodies of infants. The framework for undone science is used to analyse the Australian government’s claim that the benefits of vaccines far outweigh the risks. Whilst the government claims serious adverse events to vaccines are rare this is not supported by adequate scientific evidence due to the shortcomings in clinical trials and longterm surveillance of health outcomes of recipients. A close examination of the ‘Swine Flu’ 2009 vaccine and the vaccine for human papillomavirus (HPV), intended to prevent cervical cancer, shows shortcomings in the evidence base and rationale for the vaccines. This investigation demonstrates that not all vaccines have been demonstrated to be safe, effective or necessary. It also concludes that the government’s claim that the benefits of vaccines far outweigh the risks cannot be sustained due to the gaps in the scientific knowledge resulting from unfunded research and the inadequate monitoring of adverse events after vaccination.

http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/4541/

http://www.bmartin.cc

http://drrimatruthreports.com

https://www.facebook.com/Organoid/?fref=ts

4 thoughts on “Freedom Of Choice With Brian Martin & Dr Rima

  1. reg,. Brian Martin & HIV/AIDS …
    Q: is it possible that the initial outbreak of the HIV virus (1960 ish) was … DELIBERAELY & DIRECTLY DELIVERED / ADMINISTERED … to the gay community … homosexual men … but how ? …
    * drinks in gay bars
    * via recriational drugs
    * flue vaccines laced with HIV virus
    and it spread like wild fire ?
    but did it, did it spread like wild fire, on its own, maybe not –
    maybe it was reintroduced, over & over again at intervals, to keep it circulating & alive –
    you see I have heard the stories of rampid drug use & all night sexual encounters
    and I wondered that their penis did not drop off as a result, but I was certain that the penis was rubbed raw from too much intercourse
    no one is made of rubber, you see
    certainly after a few times, the next day the men regretted havng ‘done it too many times’, because ‘it’ was sore & sensative & they abstained for a week or so, till it came good again.
    today we hear stories of HIV infection, but / and, is it to the same extent as then, and if so, is it possible that the virus is still being administered to the public via some method of distribution ?
    I have though & thought about it with every video I have watched & it makes sense to me.
    ” little old ladies like me have nasty minds”

  2. Retroviruses are not sexually transmissable
    HIV is not sexually transmissable
    No virus can descriminate against – men, women, etc.
    And yet gay men are predominantly susceptable to HIV/AIDS
    It is said to be the lifestyle acquired condition.

  3. several years ago ABC 7:30 report Q’land ran a story, about how gay men in Australia or maybe just Q’land were participating in unprotected sex & developing HIV – deliberately.
    to which I wrote a comment to the effect that society had finally got it through their heads that they were an abomination & should kill themselves & therefore they were punishing themselves – selfharming – killing themselves.
    becaus no one would deliberately expose themselves to a deadly virus
    gay men are gay, not stupid
    but in fact – most likely it is the drug use & or the type of drugs & quantities of drugs, that are used & total immunesystem burnout & then the toxic meds that are used to treat HIV/AIDS that kill them.
    go figure that no one spoke out sooner – hey
    I suppose it was a need to know thing going on

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *