Anti-vaccine nurses and midwives 41

On October 11 2016, the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia responded to a number of complaints regarding anti-vaccination material and advice being disseminated by registered nurses, enrolled nurses, and registered midwives, by publishing a new position statement on anti-vaccination misinformation:

NMBA position on nurses, midwives and vaccination

The NMBA has become aware that there are a small number of registered nurses, enrolled nurses and midwives who are promoting anti-vaccination statements to patients and the public via social media which contradict the best available scientific evidence. The NMBA is taking this opportunity to make its expectations about providing advice on vaccinations clear to registered nurses, enrolled nurses and midwives.

The NMBA recognises the Australian National Immunisation Handbook 10th edition as providing evidence-based advice to health professionals about the safe and effective use of vaccines and the public health benefits associated with vaccination. The NMBA supports the use of the handbook by registered nurses, enrolled nurses and midwives who are giving vaccines. The handbook is available from the Immunise Australia Program website.

The NMBA expects all registered nurses, enrolled nurses and midwives to use the best available evidence in making practice decisions. This includes providing information to the public about public health issues.

All registered nurses, enrolled nurses and midwives are required to practise in accordance with professional standards set by the NMBA, including the codes of conduct, codes of ethics and the standards for practice, in particular the social media policy and the guidelines for advertising regulated health services.

What should I do if I notice a nurse or midwife is promoting anti-vaccination material?

If you have concerns about a nurse or midwife you can make a complaint to AHPRA. The NMBA will consider whether the nurse or midwife has breached their professional obligations and will treat these matters seriously. Any published anti-vaccination material and/or advice which is false, misleading or deceptive which is being distributed by a registered nurse, enrolled nurse or midwife (including via social media) may also constitute a summary offence under the National Law and could result in prosecution by AHPRA.

Tracey Marr-Bolton is a registered nurse from Victoria:

Marr-Bolton was identified as a registered nurse in March 2017, when she trolled the Stop the Australian (Anti) Vaccination Network Facebook page, throughout March and April 2017, with anti-vaccination misinformation. Marr-Bolton stated to SAVN page members that she was a registered nurse and that she had over thirty years of nursing experience, including working in ICU.

After being identified as a registered nurse, Marr-Bolton went on an abusive posting spree, continuing to post anti-vaccination misinformation, even after acknowledging warnings that she was in breach of the NMBA position statement included above.

Marr-Bolton’s initial Facebook username – tracey.marr.180 – indicated her real name to other Facebook users:

Marr-Bolton attempted to hide her anti-vaccination activism by changing her Facebook username to traceleochella:

SAVN page members sought out Marr-Bolton’s AHPRA registration so as to verify her claim of being a registered health practitioner.

Marr-Bolton was initially registered under the name Tracey Anne Marr, until early April  2017:

Marr-Bolton then changed her registration name to Tracey Anne Bolton, in an attempt to further conceal her anti-vaccination activism:

Marr-Bolton also sent abusive private messages to a SAVN page member, claiming that her privacy had been breached by SAVN page members searching the public AHPRA register of  practitioners. She then continued to troll the SAVN page, even after changing her Facebook and registration names.

From March 30 2017, messages from Marr-Bolton to a SAVN page member:

Marr-Bolton’s comment, above, that the “hospital came out second best for their lies”, refers to a previous employer that terminated her employment, as outlined in this Maribyrnong Leader article, from 2015:

Western Health nurse dismissed for administering wrong dosages

A NURSE has been sacked for administering the wrong drug dosages to critical-care patients at a hospital in Melbourne’s west.

Footscray Hospital intensive care nurse Tracey Marr lodged an application in January to the Fair Work Commission for unfair dismissal.

But the commission rejected her claim and upheld Western Health’s decision to sack Ms Marr.

The hospital argued she had made potentially life-threatening errors on three separate occasions.

On March 6, 2013, Ms Marr gave the incorrect dosage of the drug Tirofiban, which helps reduce the rate of thrombotic cardiovascular events, to a patient.

On September, 26, 2013, she administered Oxynorm, a painkiller, to a patient who was using a patient-controlled analgesia pump, when their medical chart indicated the drug not be administered if they were using a PCA pump.

On August, 4, 2014, she gave Actrapid, an insulin drug, to a patient despite already administering it two hours earlier.

Ms Marr, 54, was employed by Western Health in the ICU at Gordon St between 2006 and the date of her dismissal on December 24, 2014.

The commission found her contract termination wasn’t “harsh, unjust or unreasonable.”

In a Fair Work Commission transcript, posted on the Australasian Legal Information Institute website, Ms Marr disputed the August 4 incident claiming the term QID (four times a day) wasn’t written before 1am and 3am on the patient’s medication chart as the hourly frequency for the administering of Actrapid and was added sometime after 6am.

She gave evidence that there was a culture in the ICU whereby doctors, on occasion, don’t give the hourly frequency, leaving it up to the nurse to decide when to administer the drug.

But the commission was satisfied QID was written on the chart and didn’t accept the claim that when a doctor doesn’t state the frequency they could be intending to leave it up to the nurse to determine. Doctor Patrick Dunne, who prescribed the drug, told the commission he wasn’t in the practice of writing blank prescriptions.

“Insulin is not a medication that I would ever leave as an open PRN (when-necessary order), i.e. without an interval frequency, due to the potential harm that could be caused to a patient from over-treating,” Dr Dunne said.

The latest Health Department data confirms medical mistakes are extremely rare with only 3 per cent of 23 reported events accounting for a medication error.

On March 5 2017, Marr-Bolton posted an anti-vaccination conspiracy theory to the SAVN page:

On March 25 2017, Marr-Bolton posted an anti-vaccination paper which asserts, wrongly, that Australian vaccines contain “thiomerasil” [sic], and went on to accuse doctors of being liars:

On March 28 2017, Marr-Bolton posted a link from an anti-vaccination website to bolster her arguments:

On March 30 2017, Marr-Bolton accused SAVN page members of being hackers, and stated that she would inform AHPRA of her activities on the SAVN page:

On March 31 2017, Marr-Bolton accused a named medical practitioner of acting illegally, and continued to abuse other page members and accuse them of breaching her privacy:

On March 31 2017, Marr-Bolton posted to the SAVN page a second time to make accusations of illegal activity against page members:

On March 31 2017, Marr-Bolton posted to the SAVN page a third time and stated that she would be lodging vexatious AHPRA complaints against two named registered health practitioners:

On April 13 2017, Marr-Bolton returned to accuse the medical profession of being dishonest:

On April 15 2017, Marr-Bolton returned to start posting anti-vaccination and other abusive comments on the SAVN page reviews section:

On April 15 2017, Marr-Bolton posted a CDC conspiracy link to the SAVN page:

On April 17 2017, Marr-Bolton posted a debunked and retracted anti-vaccination paper to the SAVN page:

On April 17 2017, Marr-Bolton posted an article about the Disneyland measles outbreak, not realising that it argued against her anti-vaccination position:

On April 17 2017, Marr-Bolton posted an article criticising the stockpiling of Tamiflu and other antiviral medications, not knowing that these medications have nothing to do with vaccines:

The following addenda contain excerpts from the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia’s competency standards, codes, guidelines, and social media policy from which readers may wish to choose when lodging any complaint regarding the anti-vaccination activism of Tracey Marr-Bolton.

Thanks for reading.


Addendum 1

National competency standards for the registered nurse (PDF)

Professional practice

Relates to the professional, legal and ethical responsibilities which require demonstration of a satisfactory knowledge base, accountability for practice, functioning in accordance with legislation affecting nursing and health care, and the protection of individual and group rights.

1 Practises in accordance with legislation affecting nursing practice and health care

1.1 Complies with relevant legislation and common law

1.2 Fulfils the duty of care

1.3 Recognises and responds appropriately to unsafe or unprofessional practice

2 Practises within a professional and ethical nursing framework

2.1 Practises in accordance with the nursing profession’s codes of ethics and conduct

2.2 Integrates organisational policies and guidelines with professional standards

2.3 Practises in a way that acknowledges the dignity, culture, values, beliefs and rights of individuals/groups

2.4 Advocates for individuals/groups and their rights for nursing and health care within organisational and management structures

2.5 Understands and practises within own scope of practice

2.6 Integrates nursing and health care knowledge, skills and attitudes to provide safe and effective nursing care

2.7 Recognises the differences in accountability and responsibility between registered nurses, enrolled nurses and unlicensed care workers

Critical thinking and analysis

Relates to self-appraisal, professional development and the value of evidence and research for practice. Reflecting on practice, feelings and beliefs and the consequences of these for individuals/ groups is an important professional bench- mark.

3 Practises within an evidence-based framework

3.1 Identifies the relevance of research to improving individual/group health outcomes

3.2 Uses best available evidence, nursing expertise and respect for the values and beliefs of individuals/groups in the provision of nursing care

3.3 Demonstrates analytical skills in accessing and evaluating health information and research evidence

3.4 Supports and contributes to nursing and health care research

3.5 Participates in quality improvement activities

4 Participates in ongoing professional development of self and others

4.1 Uses best available evidence, standards and guidelines to evaluate nursing performance:

4.2 Participates in professional development to enhance nursing practice

4.3 Contributes to the professional development of others

4.4 Uses appropriate strategies to manage own responses to the professional work environment

Provision and coordination of care

Relates to the coordination, organisation and provision of nursing care that includes the assessment of individuals/ groups, planning, implementation and evaluation of care.

5 Conducts a comprehensive and systematic nursing assessment

5.1 Uses a relevant evidence-based assessment framework to collect data about the physical socio-cultural and mental health of the individual/group

5.2 Uses a range of assessment techniques to collect relevant and accurate data

5.3 Analyses and interprets assessment data accurately

6 Plans nursing care in consultation with individuals/groups, significant others and the interdisciplinary health care team

6.1 Determines agreed priorities for resolving health needs of individuals/groups:

6.2 Identifies expected and agreed individual/group health outcomes including a time frame for achievement

6.3 Documents a plan of care to achieve expected outcomes

6.4 Plans for continuity of care to achieve expected outcomes

7 Provides comprehensive, safe and effective evidence-based nursing care to achieve identified individual/group health outcomes

7.1 Effectively manages the nursing care of individuals/groups

7.2 Provides nursing care according to the documented care or treatment plan

7.3 Prioritises workload based on the individual/group’s needs, acuity and optimal time for intervention

7.4 Responds effectively to unexpected or rapidly changing situations

7.5 Delegates aspects of care to others according to their competence and scope of practice

7.6 Provides effective and timely direction and supervision to ensure that delegated care is provided safely and accurately

7.7 Educates individuals/groups to promote independence and control over their health

8 Evaluates progress towards expected individual/group health outcomes in consultation with individuals/groups, significant others and interdisciplinary health care team

8.1 Determines progress of individuals/groups toward planned outcomes

8.2 Revises the plan of care and determines further outcomes in accordance with evaluation data

Collaborative and therapeutic practice

Relates to establishing, sustaining and concluding professional relationships with individuals/groups. This also contains those competencies that relate to nurses understanding their contribution to the interdisciplinary health care team.

9 Establishes, maintains and appropriately concludes therapeutic relationships

9.1 Establishes therapeutic relationships that are goal directed and recognises professional boundaries

9.2 Communicates effectively with individuals/groups to facilitate provision of care

9.3 Uses appropriate strategies to promote an individual’s/group’s self-esteem, dignity, integrity and

9.4 Assists and supports individuals/groups to make informed health care decisions

9.5 Facilitates a physical, psychosocial, cultural and spiritual environment that promotes individual/group safety and security

10 Collaborates with the interdisciplinary health care team to provide comprehensive nursing care

10.1 Recognises that the membership and roles of health care teams and service providers will vary depending on an individual’s/group’s needs and health care setting

10.2 Communicates nursing assessments and decisions to the interdisciplinary health care team and other relevant service providers

10.3 Facilitates coordination of care to achieve agreed health outcomes

10.4 Collaborates with the health care team to inform policy and guideline development


Addendum 2

Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia Codes and Guidelines.

Code of Professional Conduct for Nurses in Australia

1 Nurses practise in a safe and competent manner.

2 Nurses practise in accordance with the standards of the profession and broader health system.

Conduct Statement 2

Nurses practise in accordance with the standards of the profession and broader health system


1 Nurses are responsible for ensuring the standard of their practice conforms to professional standards developed and agreed by the profession, with the object of enhancing the safety of people in their care as well as their partners, family members and other members of the person’s nominated network. This responsibility also applies to the nurses’ colleagues.

2 Nurses practise in accordance with wider standards relating to safety and quality in health care and accountability for a safe health system, such as those relating to health documentation and information management, incident reporting and participation in adverse event analysis and formal open disclosure procedures.

3 Nurses practise and conduct themselves in accordance with laws relevant to the profession and practice of nursing.

Conduct Statement 3

Nurses practise and conduct themselves in accordance with laws relevant to the profession and practice of nursing


1 Nurses are familiar with relevant laws and ensure they do not engage in clinical or other practices prohibited by such laws or delegate to others activities prohibited by those laws.

2 Nurses witnessing the unlawful conduct of colleagues and other co-workers, whether in clinical, management, education or research areas of practice, have both a responsibility and an obligation to report such conduct to an appropriate authority and take other appropriate action as necessary to safeguard people and the public interest.

4 Nurses respect the dignity, culture, ethnicity, values and beliefs of people receiving care and treatment, and of their colleagues.

5 Nurses treat personal information obtained in a professional capacity as private and confidential.

6 Nurses provide impartial, honest and accurate information in relation to nursing care and health care products.

Conduct Statement 6

Nurses provide impartial, honest and accurate information in relation to nursing care and health care products


1 When nurses provide advice about any care or product, they fully explain the advantages and disadvantages of alternative care or products so individuals can make informed choices. Nurses refrain from engaging in exploitation, misinformation or misrepresentation with regard to health care products and nursing care.

2 Nurses accurately represent the nature of their services or the care they intend to provide.

3 Where a specific care or a specific product is advised, nurses ensure their advice is based on adequate knowledge and not on commercial or other forms of gain. Deceptive endorsement of products or services or receipt of remuneration for products or services primarily for personal gain, other than remuneration in the course of a proper commercial relationship, is improper.

7 Nurses support the health, wellbeing and informed decision-making of people requiring or receiving care.

8 Nurses promote and preserve the trust and privilege inherent in the relationship between nurses and people receiving care.

Conduct Statement 8

Nurses promote and preserve the trust and privilege inherent in the relationship between nurses and people receiving care


1 An inherent power imbalance exists within the relationship between people receiving care and nurses that may make the persons in their care vulnerable and open to exploitation. Nurses actively preserve the dignity of people through practised kindness and respect for the vulnerability and powerlessness of people in their care. Significant vulnerability and powerlessness can arise from the experience of illness and the need to engage with the health care system. The power relativities between a person and a nurse can be significant, particularly where the person has limited knowledge; experiences pain and illness; needs assistance with personal care; belongs to a marginalised group; or experiences an unfamiliar loss of self-determination. This vulnerability creates a power differential in the relationship between nurses and persons in their care that must be recognised and managed.

4 Nurses fulfil roles outside the professional role, including those as family members, friends and community members. Nurses are aware that dual relationships may compromise care outcomes and always conduct professional relationships with the primary intent of benefit for the person receiving care. Nurses take care when giving professional advice to people with whom they have a dual relationship (e.g. a family member or friend) and advise them to seek independent advice due to the existence of actual or potential conflicts of interest.

9 Nurses maintain and build on the community’s trust and confidence in the nursing profession.

Conduct Statement 9

Nurses maintain and build on the community’s trust and confidence in the nursing profession


1 The conduct of nurses maintains and builds public trust and confidence in the profession at all times.

2 The unlawful and unethical actions of nurses in their personal lives risk adversely affecting both their own and the profession’s good reputation and standing in the eyes of the public. If the good standing of either individual nurses or the profession were to diminish, this might jeopardise the inherent trust between the nursing profession and the public necessary for effective therapeutic relationships and the effective delivery of nursing care.

3 Nurses consider the ethical interests of the nursing profession and the community when exercising their right to freedom of speech and participating in public, political and academic debate, including publication.

10 Nurses practise nursing reflectively and ethically.

Conduct Statement 10

Nurses practise nursing reflectively and ethically


1 Nurses practise nursing reflectively and ethically, in accordance with the Code of Ethics for Nurses in Australia, in order to learn from experience and contribute to personal and professional practice.

2 Nurses develop and maintain appropriate and current quality nursing advice, support and care for each person requiring and receiving care and their partners, families and other members of their nominated social network. This responsibility also applies to colleagues of nurses.

3 Nurses evaluate their conduct and competency according to the standards of the nursing profession.

4 Nurses contribute to the professional development of students and colleagues.

5 Nurses participating in research do so in accordance with recognised research guidelines and do not violate their duty of care to persons receiving nursing care.

6 Nurses advise employers and any persons in their care of any reduction in their capacity to practise due to health, social or other factors, while they seek ways of redressing the problem.


Code of Ethics for Nurses in Australia

1 Nurses value quality nursing care for all people.

2 Nurses value respect and kindness for self and others.

3 Nurses value the diversity of people.

4 Nurses value access to quality nursing and health care for all people.

5 Nurses value informed decision-making.

Value Statement 5

Nurses value informed decision-making


Nurses value people’s interests in making free and informed decisions. This includes people having the opportunity to verify the meaning and implication of information being given to them when making decisions about their nursing and health care. Nurses also recognise that making decisions is sometimes constrained by circumstances beyond individual control and that there may be circumstances where informed decision making cannot always be fully realised.

1 Self: Nurses make informed decisions in relation to their practice within the constraints of their professional role and in accordance with ethical and legal requirements. Nurses are entitled to do this without undue pressure or coercion of any kind. Nurses are responsible for ensuring their decision-making is based on contemporary, relevant and well-founded knowledge and information.

2 Person (health consumer): Nurses value the legal and moral right of people, including children, to participate whenever possible in decision-making concerning their nursing and health care and treatment, and assist them to determine their care on the basis of informed decision making. This may involve ensuring people who do not speak English have access to a qualified health interpreter. Nurses recognise and respect the rights of people to engage in shared decision-making when consenting to care and treatment. Nurses also value the contribution made by persons whose decision-making may be restricted because of incapacity, disability or other factors, including legal constraints. Nurses are knowledgeable about such circumstances and in facilitating the role of family members, partners, friends and others in contributing to decision-making processes.

3 Colleagues: Nurses respect the rights of colleagues and members of other disciplines to participate in informed decision-making. Making these collaborative and informed decisions includes involving the person requiring or receiving nursing care (or their representative) in decisions relating to their nursing or health care, without being subject to coercion of any kind.

4 Community: Nurses value the contribution made by the community to nursing and health care decision-making through a range of activities, including consumer groups, advocacy and membership of health-related committees. Nurses also assist in keeping the community accurately informed on nursing and health-related issues.

6 Nurses value a culture of safety in nursing and health care.

Value Statement 6

Nurses value a culture of safety in nursing and health care


Valuing a culture of safety involves nurses actively engaging in the development of shared knowledge and understanding of the crucial importance of safety in contemporary health care. Nurses who value a culture of safety appreciate that safety is everyone’s responsibility. Nurses support the development of risk management processes and a practice environment designed to reduce the incidence and impact of preventable adverse events in health care. Nurses also support the open disclosure of any adverse events to any person affected during the course of their care.

1 Self: Nurses value safe practice and a safe working environment; practise within the limitations of their knowledge and skills; and recognise and avoid situations where their ability to deliver quality care may be impaired. Nurses have a moral and legal right to practise in a safe environment, without fear for their own safety or that of others, and they seek remedies through accepted channels, including legal action, when this is not the case. Nurses value the maintenance of competence in contributing to a safe care and practice environment.

2 Person (health consumer): Nurses recognise that people are vulnerable to injuries and illnesses as a result of preventable human error and adverse events while in health care settings. Nurses play a key role in the detection and prevention of errors and adverse events in health care settings, and support and participate in systems to identify circumstances where people are at risk of harm. Nurses act to prevent or control such risks through prevention, monitoring, early identification and early management of adverse events. Nurses contribute to the confidential reporting of adverse events and errors, and to organisational processes for the open disclosure of these events to persons affected during the course of their care.

3 Colleagues: Nurses work with their colleagues to create a culture of safety. Nurses support the development of safer health care systems through non-punitive human error, adverse event management and related education. Nurses value the critical relationship between consumer safety and interprofessional competencies, including trustful communication, teamwork and situation awareness. Nurses view the detection of their own errors and risks or those of their colleagues as opportunities for achieving a safer health care system.

4 Community: Nurses, acting through their professional and industrial organisations and other appropriate authorities, participate in developing and improving the safety and quality of health care services for all people. This includes actively promoting the provision of equitable, just and culturally and socially responsive health care services for all people living, or seeking residence or asylum, in Australia. It also involves raising public awareness about the nature and importance of consumer safety programs in health care services.

7 Nurses value ethical management of information.

8 Nurses value a socially, economically and ecologically sustainable environment promoting health and wellbeing.


Addendum 3

Social Media Policy

When using social media, health practitioners should remember that the National Law, their National Board’s code of ethics and professional conduct (the Code of conduct) and the Guidelines for advertising regulated health services (the Advertising guidelines) apply.

Registered health practitioners should only post information that is not in breach of these obligations by:

  • complying with professional obligations
  • complying with confidentiality and privacy obligations (such as by not discussing patients or posting pictures of procedures, case studies, patients, or sensitive material which may enable patients to be identified without having obtained consent in appropriate situations)
  • presenting information in an unbiased, evidence-based context, and
  • not making unsubstantiated claims.

Additional information may be available from professional bodies and/or employers, which aims to support health practitioners’ use of social media. However, the legal, ethical, and professional obligations that registered health practitioners must adhere to are set out in the National Boards’ respective Code of conduct and the Advertising guidelines.



Posted in anti-vaccination, anti-vaccination dishonesty, hospitals, Immunisation, nurse, public health, skeptic, stop the australian vaccination network, vaccination | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Anti-Vaccination Australia goes after Kitty Flanagan and The Weekly

On April 12 2017 the ABC’s comedy news program, The Weekly, gave us a gem on the dangers posed by the anti-vaccination movement. It was accurate. And it understood the minutiae of the awful anti-vaccination arguments. And Kitty Flanagan was at her best:

The anti-vaccination movement responded as only the anti-vaccination movement knows how. It went after Kitty Flanagan, host Charlie Pickering, and The Weekly.

Anti-Vaccination Australia is the rabid Facebook group founded by and administered by Belgin Colak-Arslan, of Sydney, and Breana Stanley, of Melbourne. Both were at the forefront of the attack and doxxing of an innocent man from Byron Bay, because his name is similar to Reasonable Hank’s real name.

As is our wont, anti-vaccinationists’ comments are published here so they can speak for themselves. Our families and friends deserve to know exactly how the anti-vaccination movement behaves, on a daily basis. As usual, this list – which includes typically condoned and uncensored anti-Semitism and misogyny – is not extensive. Links to Facebook profiles  are provided so as to verify the authenticity of these profiles; they are real antivaxers, not “trolls” or “plants”, as the leaders of the anti-vaccination movement always claim.

Peter Angel:






Jimmy Pontian (who claims to be a veteran registered nurse, but, refuses to provide his registration details):

They’re pathetic. Not a journalist bone in their body

David Bebarfield:

Fuck vaccines,
Fuck the media,
Fuck American drug cartels,
Fuck the government.

Anastasia Xenitellis:

I wonder how much they were paid to do this segment…

Bryce Frazer:

“ABC” A Bunch of Cunts

Andrei Fazekis:

Tel-lie-vision is there for those who are too inept to make their own decisions, like fish in a pond which are riddled with a common disease of ignorance. Or cognitive dissonance.

Donovan Christie:

Aka Televise Zion

Colin Collie McLeary:

She is a washed out has been .. who would sell her soul to the devil to get on TV .. in fact she just did ..

Jazz McLaughlin:

What an absolute fuckwit.

Rachel Ascher:

I can’t bear to watch. What a load of nonsense!!! Sad, Sad, Sad, and the audience is laughing bunch of brain dead zombies!!!

Lewis Hiley:

Comedians can be hired like prostitutes to do whatever you pay them to do

Greg French:

Her, Penn & Teller and Elmo. A bunch of Muppets with someones hands up their arses.

Sharon Abbott:

Oh look Chemtrails in a can

Catherine Johnson:

I USED to like Kitty Flanagan .
I didn’t realise she was so stupid and another sheeple

Wendy Tremain:

Charlie and Kitty .. you are dropped!

Holly Whittenbury:

but charlie has always been a self righteous pompous little prick have you only just noticed?!

 Marlize Marx:

I wonder how much they got paid to spread the lies

Madge Windsor:

Worst read script ever and a friend even put it on my news feed. He has since removed his post lol, fancy trying to argue vax with me!

Sandra Spadini:

This woman is simple. Trying to be comical with such an important issue. Her method for explaining the benefits of immunisation is an insult to the nation. Delusional is what she is.

Daniel Yarro:

That is some brainwashing (for fools and uneducated people only) shit!

Elizabeth Deleva Papagiannis:

I couldn’t get passed watching half of this piece of s$1t

Colin Collie McLeary:

Kitty Flanagan .. has been comedian, who would sell her soul to the devil to get on TV .. oh she just did ..

Helen Stephens:

I always thought these two were desperate, poor excuses for comedians. Now I’m sure of it. Good on the people of Byron!

Amaya Ferret:

The paid side

Kathy Matthew:

A so called Comedian – well she is prob just another paid puppet!

Sarah Johnston:

Charlie Pickering is the Buzzfeed of TV. I had to stop watching The Project years ago because I couldn’t stand him and his smug bias.

Sumukhi Dasi:

Astounding ignorance!

A comedy of ERRORS Kitty!

What a propaganda puppet, no mind of her own, just a vox poppolli cash cow, a status quo quotient quacker! What a dumby!

Kat Creasey:

Shes an idiot
And charlie still owes me money

Jazzi Galo Silva:

Pathetic, garbage load of propaganda

Adam Crabb:

They need some clowns on Unicycles with big red noses & horns to vaccinate these imbeciles.

Katerina Robertson:

What idiot she is .could not stand watching the rubbish coming out of that mouth .i wanted how Much she actually got paid to act like a clown ??

Lewis Hiley:

Just hired goons to say whatever you tell them to say. Comedians are not that smart to even realise they are being used

Riân Grant:

Fuck…. i use to love her..

William Scott:

It’s called “pay to say” !, abc is the worst propaganda monger in Australia !.

Carole Cornock:


Holly Whittenbury:

i used to like kitty but this is ridiculous. I thought she had the ability to think….so disrespectful and she has no idea what she is actually supporting.

Diane Teasdale:

well paid for this I am sure………………..

Brenda Rule:

Just as stupid as mike bairds sloth campaign.

Keri Lea:

I’d love to know how much these pricks are being ‘sponsored’ to spout this drivel?

Karen Scott:

Disgraceful wasn’t funny at all and so pro vax. Even a dig in there about Pauline Hanson.


Images will be added as they come in. Like the following…

Dave Tucker:

Fuck off kitty you have lost me you sell out with your reddiculas bull shit

Bree Nai:

kitty has no kids and likely has no actual interest in the vaccination debate because it doesnt affect her. Its easy to joke about something that you are not affected by.

Kiandra Jarrett:

Two of my family members have shared this infuriating to watch!

Tamai Bremner:

what the actual f#@!

Kiandra Jarrett:

Full on and so wrong. Sharing lies.

Angela Sotiriou:

Whores of the Elite!!

Jessica Kelly:

Oooooh Angela, I so love your post

Angela Sotiriou:

I commented on the Weekly fb page on the 12th and am still getting replies today!!! Oh some of the comments are just so childish.

no I didn’t think i would make a breakthrough, but sometimes it’s just amazing to see their reaction and comments.

Kathryn Rose Madigan:

Sorry but I won’t even read this, Kitty Flanagan is a imbecile. Never liked her, she is not even funny. Crikey talk about the dumbing down of the masses, if people are in to her.

Vickie Keiser:

With a little yellow school bus and wooden “people”? This is the “science” offered by mainstream? (Just looking at the picture associated with the link.)

Robert Schecter:

I love how these pathetic morons think their saying something is hilarious makes it so. Vaccine groupies are beyond delusional

Sharon Harvey:

What’s this? Pro vaxers using celebrities to get their message out???!!! Hypocritical much. Also, very apt using a comedian, cos the whole industry is a joke!

Peter Angel (comment repeated):


Andrea Torok:

just another IDIOT who sold her soul to Satan!

Michelle Lannon Vahey:

No words
Can’t fix stupid

Rachael Mahe:

She got one thing “right” – a can of deodorant has nearly as many chemicals and additives as one vaccine – good example but you still a stupid sheep ! Baa baa !!

Stevens Mazz:

Spraying it on to the skin and injecting it is two different things. She’s a dumb arse

Sharon Abbott:

Maybe chem trails in a can

Rachel Ascher:

Why oh why do people like to advertise the fact they are stupid. I don’t get it.

Greg French:

Yep lets all take medical advise from a comedian, 2 Illusionists and a muppet. What could go wrong?

Kathryn Sproule:

What ignorant uninformed fools to the World Agenda.
I shake my head to the comments of so called safe levels of formaldehyde mercury cow antibiotic blood of embrio calves aluminium. …it goes on. Im so over dumb ppl

Vaccine Free Australia is another rabid anti-vaccination group.

Kiandra Jarrett:

Two of my family members have shared this. Infuriating to watch

Anna Kist:

Made me decide that she is a dumb twat.

Tammy C McLeod:

Fuck, I had to turn that shit off.

Margaret Smith:

made me want to vomit

Louise Woods:

Its very fitting they we have a comedian flying the flag for the vaccine mentality, cos its a HUGE JOKE that vaccines are presented as safe n effective n they think informed parents like dumb sheep will line their children up in front of the big pharma firing squad for target practice!!!!

Jenny Healy:

So sad that there are no real investigative journalists in the mainstream media, as if there were we wouldn’t see rubbish like this. Talk about biased. Never a balanced perspective in regards to such an important topic.

Rana Kordahi:

There should be vomit  emoticon

Dagmar Ganser:

Until you KNOW what you are talking about Kitty, please abstain from such rubbish. Please listen to the documentary series The Truth About Vaccines. Then, and only then, will you be able to shed light on the subject.


Posted in abuse, anti-vaccination, anti-vaccination dishonesty, Anti-vaccine thugs, australian vaccination network, Immunisation, public health, Public mobbing, skeptic, stop the australian vaccination network, vaccination | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

Australian chiropractic gone to the dogs (and turtles)

News broke yesterday that the Veterinary Surgeons Board of SA had instigated legal action against a chiropractor for treating animals. From Meagan Dillon at The Advertiser:

A CHIROPRACTOR is being prosecuted for allegedly treating six dogs and a cat at his southern suburbs practice — charging up  to $55 per session and diagnosing diseases such as cancer and arthritis, court documents reveal.

The Veterinary Surgeons Board of SA has charged Christies Beach Chiropractic owner Dr Bernard Nadolny with eight counts of treating an animal for fee or reward. Dr Nadolny appeared in the Christies Beach Magistrates Court last week, when his case was adjourned until May.

The charges were laid under the Veterinary Practice Act, which prohibits people from providing paid veterinary treatment unless, at the time the treatment was provided, the person was qualified to do so.

Image courtesy The Advertiser

Long time readers might recall images which have appeared in this blog over the last four years. If there is one thing you can count on, it’s the ability for registered health practitioners with an overindulgence in hubris to self-incriminate.

What follows is a collection of screenshots from the pages of chiropractors, found with a very brief search of the terms “dog” and “pug”,  from our own album collection.

The Chiropractic Board of Australia must wring its hands and tug its collar in despair.

October 22 2015anti-vaccination chiropractor Tim Shakespeare:

April 11 2013anti-vaccination chiropractor and current president of the Chiropractors’ Association of Australia Queensland, Bruce Whittingham; and anti-vaccination chiropractor and current board secretary of the Chiropractors’ Association of Australia, Adam Smith:

May 22 2013anti-vaccination chiropractor, and former national board member of the Chiropractors’ Association of Australia, Billy Chow:

May 22 2013 – anti-vaccination chiropractor, and former national board member of the Chiropractors’ Association of Australia, Billy Chow:

December 3 2015anti-vaccination chiropractor Anthony Golle:

January 9 2014Openspace Healing:

March 16 2015 – anti-vaccination chiropractors Simon Floreani – a former national president of the Chiropractors Association of Australia – and Jennifer Barham-Floreani:

November 1 2013anti-vaccination chiropractors Matthew Hodgson and Whitney Ohlund, at Platinum Chiropractic Erina:

April 24 2014anti-vaccination chiropractor Peter Snodgrass:

January 28 2014anti-vaccination chiropractor Peter Snodgrass:

November 14 2013 – anti-vaccination chiropractor Peter Snodgrass:

April 12 2012anti-vaccination chiropractor Peter Snodgrass:

September 3 2013anti-vaccination chiropractor Kirby Collins:

June 11 2013 – former business of anti-vaccination chiropractor Gordon Benz:

And last, but, not least, dragging his anus across the carpet of Australian chiropractic…

May 30 2013Clicking the Pug, with anti-vaccination chiropractors Matthew Hodgson and Whitney Ohlund, at Platinum Chiropractic Erina:

This collection will remain live as more screenshots come in; this collection was only a quick selection.

If readers find any more, they can email us at reasonablehank [at] gmail [dot] com. You can send a link to the photos, or your own images, and we’ll add them here.


Posted in anti-vaccination, chiropractic | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

As Byron Bay Council defends appearance of professional antivaxer, unimmunised child airlifted to Brisbane with tetanus

On March 15 2017, a deliberately unimmunised seven-year-old child suffering from tetanus was airlifted to Brisbane. From ABC North Coast’s Bruce MacKenzie, today:

A northern New South Wales doctor says a seven-year-old child who is in a critical condition after being diagnosed with tetanus was not immunised.

The girl was initially treated at Lismore, before being transferred to Brisbane’s Lady Cilento Children’s Hospital on Wednesday.

Tetanus is a potentially fatal disease which is transmitted by bacteria in soil, and can enter the bloodstream through minor wounds.

On March 15 2017, immunisation experts and advocates emphasised the danger posed to the NSW Northern Rivers by professional anti-vaccination entrepreneur, David Avocado Wolfe, in his sold-out talk given at the Mullumbimby Civic Hall, on March 16 2017 (last night). From ABC North Coast’s Joanne Shoebridge and Samantha Turnbull:

Pro-vaccination campaigners are concerned David ‘Avocado’ Wolfe, a self-described “rock star of the superfoods and longevity universe”, will exacerbate vaccine scepticism during his visit to northern New South Wales this week.

Mr Wolfe will speak in Mullumbimby, which has the lowest vaccination rates in Australia, on Thursday night.

The internationally renowned conspiracy theorist has more than 10 million Facebook followers and has been outspoken in his stance against vaccination in the past.

The Byron Bay Shire Council runs the Mullumbimby Civic Hall:

Northern Rivers Vaccination Supporters spokeswoman Alison Gaylard criticised the Byron Shire Council, which has representatives on the board of the Mullumbimby Civic Hall, for making the venue available.

“The council also runs immunisation clinics, so it’s a bit ironic they’re willing to give this man and his opinions a platform,” she said.

The Council’s representative, Mark Arnold, added the following:

Council’s director of corporate and community services Mark Arnold said the council did not have a position on vaccination.

“Our halls are managed by local committees and there is currently no list of who can or can’t hire the public venues,” he said.

On March 16 2017, whilst noting that he is personally “pro-vaccination”, and noting that the council needs to review its venue hiring policies, given the community concern, Deputy Mayor Basil Cameron defended businessman Wolfe’s paid appearance as a matter of “freedom of speech.” From ABC North Coast, with Joanne Shoebridge:

But, not all Byron Bay councilors are nonchalant about allowing council-run premises to be used by anti-vaccination businesspersons.

In today’s The Northern Star, Councilor Paul Spooner was blunt about this use of the premises:

Cr Spooner said he would have made an attempt to stop last night’s event, if he knew about it earlier.

“I was quite concerned that council had let out the Mullumbimby Civic Hall to David Wolfe because I think it’s quite irresponsible.

“By not vaccinating, we’re really opening the door to illnesses that have caused a lot of death in the past and I think this generation has forgotten that.”

Cr Michael Lyon said he was “pro-choice”.

“I don’t believe in forced vaccination,” Cr Lyon said.

“(The Mullumbimby Civic Hall) is not council-funded.

“It’s run by the council, but the council does not subsidise it.

“I don’t think we’re saying we support anti-vaccination if we’re letting the hall, that is a long bow to draw.”

Cr Spooner said that response was a “cop out”: “It’s a council facility, the council has put a board in place and and recently put in air condition.”

Not all Byron Bay councilors are, however, as amenable to rational thought as Cr Spooner:

Jeannette Martin said she supported David Wolfe’s visit and she was concerned about the Federal Government’s move towards increasing vaccination rates through the newly announced No Jab, No Play program.

“Noone was forced to go (to David Wolfe’s talk). I am pro choice,” Cr Martin said.

“I think there’s a lot of research coming out that makes the (vaccination) program questionable and if we follow the money the people who are doing well are the pharmaceutical companies.

“I have concerns about the extent of the program and have extreme concerns about forcing vaccinations, I think people need to do their own research.”

This anti-vaccination post also appears on Cr Jeannette Martin’s Facebook profile:

In a show of their regard for “freedom of speech”, late yesterday, Wolfe event organisers banned all media from the Mullumbimby event. From ABC North Coast’s Facebook page:


A media ban has been imposed on the David ‘Avocado’ Wolfe event in #Mullumbimby tonight.

ABC North Coast reporter Samantha Turnbull had her ticket refunded this afternoon and received a call from the event’s public relations manager saying media would be banned from attending the event.

Mullumbimby has the lowest vaccination rates in Australia.

*Note, the original tickets were purchased at the journalists’ expense and not provided by the event organisers.

We send our best wishes and thoughts for the recovery of the little girl who had no choice in any of this.


Posted in anti-vaccination, anti-vaccination dishonesty, Anti-vaccine thugs, australian vaccination network, AVN, Conspiracy theory, Immunisation, public health, skeptic, stop the australian vaccination network, vaccination | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Antivaxers violently react to proposed government immunisation-childcare policy and vilify bereaved parents

This news broke today:

UNVACCINATED children will be banned from all childcare centres and preschools in Australia under a hard line proposal spearheaded by the federal government.

The immunisation rates of all preschools and daycare centres will be made publicly available to parents, and a loophole allowing formal objections will also be closed as part of the Turnbull government’s plan to boost vaccination rates.

In a powerful endorsement of The Sunday Telegraph’s four-year No Jab, No Play campaign, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has written to state and territory leaders demanding all jurisdictions introduce nationally consistent laws to protect Australian children, and has vowed to take the policy to the next Council of Australian Governments (COAG) meeting.

The Australia-wide laws would not only remove exemptions for objectors but would ensure vaccination rates at each centre and preschool were publicly available.

In Sydney this week the Prime Minister met mother-of-four Toni McCaffery, whose baby daughter Dana died of whooping cough at four weeks of age.

Image courtesy of The Sunday Telegraph

The following screenshots of reactions from anti-vaccination activists – including attacks against the bereaved McCaffery and Hughes families (both of whom lost babies Dana and Riley, respectively, to whooping cough), as well as attacks on Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, his wife, and members of his government – are taken from various anti-vaccination Facebook groups and pages, today.

Anti-vaccination activists state that Malcolm Turnbull “needs a bullet”, and that he needs to “be put down.” Another states he would be “happy to punch him in the head.”

This collection will remain live.

No Vaccines Australia page 

Page administered by Ian Hastings of Sydney and Adelaide (also runs No Fluoride Australia).

The attack on Toni McCaffery is a lie. From The Sunday Telegraph, on May 26 2013:

TONI McCaffery suspects a daycare centre was the most likely point where her daughter Dana contracted whooping cough in 2009.

Dana was just six days old when Mrs McCaffery took her inside the centre while dropping off her four-year-old daughter Aisling.

Just over three weeks later, Dana was dead, her tiny body ravaged by whooping cough.

After Dana died, Mrs McCaffery set up a spreadsheet to track her movements and pinpoint where her baby had been exposed to the disease, narrowing the potential places down to the shopping centre, the school and the childcare centre.

Then six cases of whooping cough were confirmed at Aisling’s childcare centre.

Indeed, the McCafferys themselves have been consistent regarding the source of Dana’s infection from the beginning.

A NSW Health pamphlet featuring Dana’s story was released in 2011. The text is from NSW Health, but, this shows the McCafferys’ consistency:

On the fifth day, the whooping cough toxins caused her organs to shut down and Dana had a cardiac arrest. She was only 32 days old when she died.

Nobody knows where Dana was infected with whooping cough. It may have been at her sibling’s school or preschool. A loving relative or friend, or a complete stranger may have unknowingly passed the infection on.

The Australian Vaccination-skeptics Network also attacked Toni McCaffery using Hastings’ lie:

Anti-Vaccination Australia group 

Group administrators are Belgin Sila Colak-Arslan and Breana Stanley.

Group moderators are Shawn Dhu, Bronwyn Hancock, Erin Kingston, Dan DeBuriatte, and assorted fake profiles.

Anti-Vaccination Australia page

Post by administrator Belgin Colak-Arslan:

Belgin Colak-Arslan public profile 

Serene Johnson is a registered nurse

Unvaccinated Australia group 

Group administrators are Brett Smith, Olivier Vles, Carmen Louise, Steve Kefalinos and various fake profiles.

Severe Adverse Reaction to Vaccination group 

Group administrators are Tanya Hammond, Lois Vitler, and Rob Thompson (fake profile).

Australian Vaccination-skeptics Network page 

Page run predominantly by AVN president Tasha David:

Australian Vaccination-skeptics Network fans page 

Page run predominantly by AVN past-president Meryl Dorey:

Vaccine Free Australia group 

Group administrators are Courtney Hebberman, Luke O’Hehir, Leah Hudson, Olivier Vles, and Zane Cosgrove.

Bring Vaxxed to Australia/New Zealand group

Group administrators are Tasha David (AVN president), Tasha David (other profile), Jennifer Smith (AVN representative), Sarah Cox (abused her own son with bleach enemas), Samantha Wisteria, Jennifer Heywood, Peta Dowle, Jamie Elizabeth Crook, and other fake profiles.

To be continued…


Posted in abuse, anti-vaccination, anti-vaccination dishonesty, Anti-vaccine thugs, australian vaccination network, AVN, death threats, Immunisation, meryl dorey, mobbing, public health, skeptic, stop the australian vaccination network, Tasha David, vaccination | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

Health Australia Party executive charges for online “homeopathic immunisation” consultations

Australian anti-vaccination homeopath, Isaac Golden, is the national secretary for the anti-vaccination Health Australia Party.

Homeopathic immunisation is not a thing. It is fraud. It dissuades vulnerable parents from accessing real immunisations for their children. It cons vulnerable parents into believing that their children are immunised against potentially deadly diseases. They aren’t.

Tonight, in the rabid anti-vaccination Facebook group, Anti-Vaccination Australia, a member posted evidence that Golden pre-charges his customers for his online homeopathic immunisation consultations. The customer is clearly in Queensland; Golden is in Victoria:

Here is the screenshot, enlarged:

On February 9 2017, Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews sent out a media release announcing the new, broadened powers of the Victorian Health Complaints Commissioner, specifically mentioning dodgy health providers:

New Laws To Crack Down On Dodgy Health Providers

Victoria’s health complaints watchdog will be given greater powers to name and shame dodgy health service providers and practitioners, and protect the public by banning them from practising.

The Andrews Labor Government will today introduce the Health Complaints Bill 2016 into Parliament, to establish a tough new complaints system to crack down on dangerous unregistered health practitioners.

Under the proposed new laws, the existing Health Services Commissioner will be replaced by a new watchdog, the Health Complaints Commissioner, creating a more comprehensive health complaints system that better protects the public and providers of health services.

The new Commissioner will receive beefed up powers to take action against dangerous and unethical health providers who are not registered under national health practitioner regulation law.

In a major change, the Bill will allow anyone to make a complaint, rather than just the person who received the health service.

The Commissioner will also have the power to instigate an investigation even when no complaint is lodged, for example, if the media have uncovered an unscrupulous unregistered provider making fake or harmful claims.

Under the proposed laws, the new Commissioner would have the powers to investigate and crack down on high profile cases such as the blogger who faked cancer to profit from her wellness app, the fake gynaecologist performing ‘fertility treatments’ on women for a decade, or the unregistered ‘dodgy’ dentists, and ban them from providing these unethical and dangerous treatments.

Other examples include a formerly registered dentist who claimed ‘ozone therapy’ could cure cancer, or people purporting to be able to ‘convert’ gay people through medical or therapeutic means.

Individuals who breach the Commissioner’s ruling would face up to two years in prison.

If the community is at risk, the Commissioner will be able to issue public warnings and name and shame providers in the media in order to protect the public.

The laws will also prevent dodgy healthcare practitioners who are not regulated under national health practitioner regulation law and are banned in other states from moving to Victoria and offering their healthcare services here.

For example, under the new legislation, a midwife who is prohibited from practising in South Australia would automatically be banned from practising in Victoria, whereas previously a complaint would need to be lodged about the midwife’s care before the Health Services Commissioner could take action.

Quotes attributable to Minister for Health Jill Hennessy

“We’re taking action to crack down on dangerous and health practitioners who take advantage of vulnerable Victorians.”

“Our tough new laws will give the Health Complaints Commissioner the power to name and shame and put these dodgy health providers out of business for good.”

“We’re closing loopholes in the existing legislation to make sure Victorians receive the health care protection they need.”

Time for a test-case.


Update March 11 2017

Another anti-vaccination group member – in Vaccine Free Australia – has just confirmed that Isaac Golden is still providing homeoprophylaxis kits:


Update April 18 2017

Anti-vaccination group member, Jenny Healy, states her belief that her two children are “immunised using [Golden’s] Homeophalaxsis kit”:


Posted in anti-vaccination, anti-vaccination dishonesty, Health Australia Party, homeopathy, Immunisation, public health, skeptic, stop the australian vaccination network, vaccination | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Health Australia Party and Jason Woodforth – Anti-vaccine in excelsis.

At the July 2016 federal election, a rebranded natural health political party ran senate candidates in four Australian states: the newly branded Health Australia Party was quickly outed as an anti-vaccination, anti-fluoride, and anti-chemtrails party.

The HAP quickly descended into chaos after the election, due to its failures in all states.

During the lead-up to the election – and even after the election – the HAP leadership  was at pains to paint their poor showing – and the accurate public depictions of them as an anti-vaccination party – as deliberately misleading; the work of a biased media, they argued.

Indeed, HAP national spokesperson Jason Woodforth even decried the “anti-vaccine” tag:

Mr Woodforth rejected the suggestion HAP is anti-vaccine.

He said the reason the party was seen as anti-vaccine was because it did not support the “no jab, no pay” or “no jab, no play” policies.

“The Health Party believes in safe and effective immunisation, always has. The problem we’ve got is there’s no adverse reactions register,” he said.

He believed people were not given enough warnings before vaccination, which he said could lead to severe, even permanent health conditions.

This is anti-vaccination template: we’re not anti-vaccine (they are); we’re pro-safe vaccine (they’re not); there’s no adverse events register (there is); there aren’t enough warnings given to parents (there are); there are severe and permanent injuries from vaccines (not for the bulk of health conditions they claim are vaccine-induced, like autism, SIDS, shaken baby syndrome, asthma, eczema etc).

“We’re really not anti-vaccine, you see…” anti-vaccinationists always tell us, knowing that their real beliefs and intentions are anathema to live babies and public health, and to the community. Anti-vaccinationists are very well aware of just how awful they are; that’s why they don’t tell us the truth. They cannot be both a) honest, and b) successful. It’s one or the other.

Let’s be clear: there is a wealth of evidence that the Health Australia Party is over-populated by anti-vaccination activists. That the HAP leadership would even consider denying their anti-vaccinationism is cringe-worthy.

Even more striking was the behaviour of HAP national spokesman Jason Woodforth, immediately following the election. As expected, before the election, Woodforth was decrying the anti-vaccine tag. After the election, Woodforth went full-blown anti-vaccine, in public, on his Facebook page. Our diligent friend at Diluted Thinking has a collection of the anti-vaccinationism of Woodforth and many other HAP leaders. And Woodforth has been busy this year as well.

On March 3 2017, Woodforth shared this post of anti-vaccination and anti-Vitamin K lies to his Facebook page; the familiar names of his sources will follow, below:

Woodforth’s source is Shawn Dhu, this WA anti-vaccination thug who has made several threats to many critics, as well as a journalist:

And the source for Dhu’s post – “thank you LL”  – is Lulu Langford (AKA Louisa Kenzig), a WA, deregistered enrolled nurse and crackpot, unregistered healthcare provider who attacked the family of deceased baby, Riley Hughes. Here’s just one example, in which Kenzig denied that Riley ever existed:

That’s the community from where Woodforth gets his information.

It should be noted that Woodforth still features his affiliation with the Health Australia Party, on his Facebook page:

What follows is a collection of Woodforth’s public anti-vaccination posts, only going back as far as January 2017; the posts are only from this year.

On March 1 2017, Woodforth shared lies from conspiracy theory website Natural News, regarding the HPV vaccine:

On February 28 2017, Woodforth shared anti-vaccine lies about the Hepatitis B vaccine and the Vitamin K shot. This type of activism has resulted in deaths and it will again:

On February 19 2017, Woodforth shared anti-vaccination standards from US anti-vaccination activist, JB Handley:

On February 22 2017, Woodforth called out the “sheeple” and listed worthy conspiracy theories including chemtrails:

On February 17 2017, Woodforth promoted anti-vaccination activists Robert F Kennedy and Robert De Niro:

On February 7 2017, Woodforth shared an anti-vaccination post imploring the “sheeple” to wake up:

On January 19 2017, Woodforth shared a post from Handley which asserts that vaccines cause autism:

On January 18 2017, Woodforth promoted anti-vaccination misinformation about the measles vaccine and measles complications:

On January 15 2017, Woodforth shared a post from Handley citing the anti-vaccine, CDC conspiracy theory promoted by Kennedy:

On January 14 2017, Woodforth posted misinformation against the polio vaccine:

On January 6 2017, Woodforth posted anti-vaccination lies about glyphosate in vaccines:

On January 4 2017, Woodforth posted anti-vaccination misinformation against the tetanus immunisation:

On January 3 2017, Woodforth promoted a dishonest anti-vaccination post from Natural News:

On January 2 2017, Woodforth shared a lie from US anti-vaccination activist Ginger Taylor, claiming that antivax fraud and ex-gastroenterologist Andrew Wakefield had been cleared for his ethics breaches and fraudulent research; he has not:

Once again, tell your families, and tell your friends. Save this evidence for coming elections, both state and federal. Provide this evidence the next time the Health Australia Party attempts to claim it isn’t anti-vaccine. It is. It always will be.


Posted in anti-fluoride, anti-vaccination, anti-vaccination dishonesty, Anti-vaccine thugs, australian vaccination network, Health Australia Party, Immunisation, meryl dorey, public health, skeptic, stop the australian vaccination network, Tasha David, vaccination, Vitamin K | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Dr Kevin Coleman – the antivaxers’ champion 2

Update March 20 2017

Dr Kevin Coleman promoted his myth, that the influenza immunisation led to his stroke, in Anti-Vaccination Australia:

Original post February 26 2017

On November 28 2015, readers were introduced to NSW Central Coast general practitioner, Dr Kevin Coleman, via this blog post: Dr Kevin Coleman – the antivaxers’ champion.

Coleman’s Facebook profile, now, as it was back in 2015, reads like a CV of his medical qualifications and medical employment. It is abundantly clear that Coleman uses his medical registration and employment on his social media, making every comment and post he publishes answerable under the Medical Board of Australia’s Code of ConductGuidelines for advertising regulated health services, and Social Media Policy (see the appendix at the end of this post for sections of these three documents):

To further introduce Coleman to newcomers, he also has history with regulators (from the 2015 blog post):

Coleman is no stranger to professional controversy. In 2010, Coleman was cautioned by the Medical Professional Standards Committee [inquiry PDF] for undertaking an inappropriate breast exam, without permission, on a patient. From the Health Care Complaints Commission publication:

The Health Care Complaints Commission recently prosecuted a complaint against Dr Kevin Thomas Coleman, a general practitioner, before a Medical Professional Standards Committee. The complaint alleged that Dr Coleman undertook a breast examination without the patient’s consent, without explaining to the patient the reason for the examination, and that the examination was inappropriate. It was further alleged that he failed to maintain adequate medical records.

In its decision of 12 April 2010, the Committee found Dr Coleman guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct and cautioned him.

Coleman still has conditions attached to his registration. For example:

2. To practise only in a group practice (group is defined as at least 3 practitioners), with one other practitioner (supervisor) always on site. Nursing home and home visits are permitted if approved by the Medical Council of NSW.

3. To not consult, treat, interview or examine any female patient over the age of 13 years, whether in his surgery rooms, a nursing home or on house calls, unless a chaperone (an adult third person) is continuously present.

a) Prior to any such consultation, examination, treatment or interview, he must inform each female patient, or the parent or other adult carer of each child patient, of the necessity for a third person/chaperone to be present at all times.

And, importantly, note the final condition. Keep this in the back of your mind:

Registration is also subject to conditions that relate to personal health. Particulars are not published due to privacy considerations.

The impetus for the November 2015 blog post (apart from Coleman’s abundant anti-vaccination posts on various Facebook fora, also contained in the 2015 blog post), came  on November 20 2015, when Coleman gave a speech to the poorly-attended No Jab No Pay No Way anti-vaccination protest rally, outside the offices of The Sunday Telegraph, in Sydney:

Some bullet-points from Coleman’s speech are as follows (also from the 2015 blog post):

  • Coleman alludes to vaccines being a source of criminal behaviour
  • Coleman asserts that there has not been enough research done on the vaccines/autism debate
  • Coleman again asserts the flawed hypotheses that vaccines have not been studied appropriately, and that post-immunisation surveillance is not adequately carried out
  • Coleman alleges that vaccine safety data is deliberately distorted
  • Coleman alleges that accusations of vaccine injury are ignored, based on the claims of the anti-vaccine activists present
  • Coleman alleges that general practitioners ignore the lifestyle factors of their patients in lieu of writing scripts
  • Alarmingly, Coleman notes that he was admitted to a stroke unit in 2009, attributing his condition to an influenza immunisation
  • Coleman mistakenly equates the real harm done by vaccine preventable disease, with the many made-up claims of vaccine injury, thus doing a great disservice to those he claims to honour

On November 29 2015, a complaint was lodged with the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission, based on the information contained in the 2015 blog post. This information consisted of the full transcript and video of the protest speech, as well as overwhelming evidence of his online activities in support of the anti-vaccination movement, and two articles quoting Coleman in Australian Doctor (also included in the 2015 blog post).

On March 30 2016, the complainant was sent the findings (redacted letter available here), from a weak and inadequate investigation based on addressing a Strawman: that Coleman is “not anti-vaccination”.

The issue at hand is clearly Coleman’s promotion of anti-vaccination misinformation – using his medical registration and his place of practise – on his social media, and at a public anti-vaccination rally, rather than whatever Coleman deems to call himself. For the record, it would be inaccurate to claim that Coleman is “anti-vaccine”. Coleman is not against all immunisations, by his own admission. He just shares a lot of anti-vaccine lies, dressed up as facts and “medical research”. From the March 30 2016 HCCC/Medical Council of NSW findings:

Dr Coleman has not consented to the release of his response and therefore I am unable to provide you with a copy.

I understand the main issue you had was with regards to Dr Coleman’s promotion of anti-vaccination and that he may be providing inaccurate information to the public which could lead to further illness and place further stress on the Australian healthcare system.

In his response Dr Coleman has advised the Commission that he is not anti-vaccination, but rather “pro-choice”. He believes that parents should be provided with objective, evidence based advice about vaccinations to enable them to make an informed decision about whether or not to vaccinate their child, rather than penalising them if they choose not to vaccinate.

Dr Coleman goes on to advise that he does not advocate for parents who do not vaccinate their children. He sympathises with both sides of the vaccination debate and shares his medical research on his facebook page. He does not provide advice to patients about vaccinations for their children and his interest in the issue is academic.

The Commission, in consultation with the Medical Council of NSW, has assessed your complaint and has decided to take no further action with this matter as from the information provided it appears that Dr Coleman is not advocating anti-vaccination but is advocating for the rights of the public to make their own informed decision.

However while Dr Coleman is entitled to his opinion this needs to be balanced with professional opinion which is positive toward vaccination.

Therefore the Commission, in consultation with the Medical Council of NSW has reminded Dr Coleman to make his position clear to patients that he is not advocating either for or against vaccination.

So, Coleman claims he is not anti-vaccine. Coleman claims he does not advocate for parents who do not immunise their kids. Coleman claims that he shares “his medical research” in sympathy with “both sides of the vaccination debate”. Coleman claims he is sharing information so that parents can make an “informed decision” about immunisation. And the HCCC and the Medical Council of NSW swallow it all: “Dr Coleman is not advocating anti-vaccination…”

One thing which stands out to any reader of Coleman’s social media is his overwhelming urge to post anti-vaccination material, and outright falsehoods, with an astonishing dearth of advocacy that parents should immunise their kids. Indeed, there would be appear to be only one side to this advocacy, given the weight of evidence which is published on Coleman’s social media, the odd comment equivocating about the benefits of some immunisation, notwithstanding.

Given the insipid investigation, and findings, above, into Coleman’s activism, one only needs to have a look at the sum of “his medical research” since the 2015 blog post which formed the basis of the rejected HCCC/Medical Council of NSW complaint.

On February 26 2017, on his profile, Coleman posted an article in which it is claimed that the HPV vaccine was responsible for the death of a girl. Regardless of the text contained in the article, Coleman implied that the vaccine has not been adequately tested for safety. It has. From the very article posted by Coleman:

“HPV (human papilloma virus) vaccine protects against cervical cancer, which can be a major killer of women, ” the statement said.

“Studies show that there are no serious safety concerns associated with HPV vaccine.”

According to the US Centre for Disease Control, one of the world’s leading medical authorities, “HPV vaccine is very safe, and it is effective at protecting against some HPV types that can be very bad.”

On February 23 2017, in Anti-Vaccination Australia, Coleman stated that there haven’t been any randomised controlled trials of vaccine safety, and entertained the admin of Anti-Vaccination Australia who had posted an anti-vaccination blog post:

On February 21 2017, on his Facebook profile, Coleman posted the anti-vaccination canard that vaccines haven’t had an effect on the decline in infectious disease and that this decline is due to hygiene and sanitation. The name of the website is “Medicine Kills Millions”:

On February 19 2017, Coleman called vaccination a “sacrament”,  posting an incorrect claim that medical error is the third leading cause of death in the USA; it is not:

On February 19 2017, Coleman shared a video from anti-vaccination activist JB Handley, falsely claiming that there are no randomised controlled trials for  the “sacrament” of vaccination:

On February 16 2017, Coleman stated that parents are “right to question vaccination”, based on his claim that “the medical system is corrupt”:

On February 16 2017, Coleman shared an article advocating for the infection of children with measles, and against immunisation, from discredited anti-vaccination micropaleontolgist, Viera Scheibner, who is not a vaccine researcher:

On November 21 2016, Coleman shared a post from the anti-vaccination page of the debunked anti-vaccine movie, Vaxxed, produced, directed by, and starring the disgraced anti-vaccination fraud, Andrew Wakefield:

On October 17 2016, Coleman shared an anti-vaccination conspiracy theory post:

On October 7 2016, Coleman shared a post from discredited anti-vaccination PhD graduate, Judy Wilyman, listing doctors who are anti-vaccine:

On October 3 2016, Coleman shared an anti-vaccination newsletter from Judy Wilyman:

On September 29 2016, Coleman shared a conspiracy theory post from anti-vaccination Facebook identity, Bev Pattenden, in which lies are published about the HPV vaccine:

On September 29 2016, Coleman shared a post from conspiracy theorist Bev Pattenden, containing a speech by anti-vaccination activist, Judy Wilyman:

On September 4 2016, Coleman shared this post by anti-vaccinationist, conspiracy theorist and fundamentalist Bev Pattenden. Pattenden believes that “evil” vaccination is a covert operation in which the population will be “micro-chipped” by “the devil and his demon helpers” who are intent on culling the population by “poisoning ourselves and our children” so as to have “less people on the planet”:

Welcome to all the new members. Please scroll down to read for a while before posting anything, to see if it is here before you post. I have to refuse quite a few posts, because they are here so many times before.
Posts that are outright promotions of vaccines will not be posted, but those who are open to debate usually are.
This is an anti-vax/pro choice group, meaning I am now anti-vax, but I realize that some still want to vaccinate, and that is their choice.
That is what this is all about. “the freedom to choose”, which will be destroyed if we allow ourselves to be micro-chipped.
Please realize that this is a spiritual battle as well as a temporal one.
The devil and his demon helpers do not really care if you are an atheist, an agnostic, or what “religion” you are, they just want you to harden your heart against God, so that you cannot learn the truth.
The longer you resist the truth, the harder it becomes to accept it when it comes along. Some will never learn, and the parable of the seeds, as explained by Jesus tells it well.
Mark 4:13-20.
But still we must continue to explain the evil of vaccinations, that has captured the soul of so many for so long, in which we are told that poisoning ourselves and our children was good for our health.
It is, and was a lie, propagated by those who benefit financially and want less people on the planet.

On September 4 2016, Coleman shared an anti-vaccination, conspiracy theory post:

On August 29 2016, Coleman shared an anti-vaccination post, in which it is claimed that vaccines are responsible for conditions unrelated to vaccination:

On August 11 2016, Coleman promoted a publication written by an anti-vaccination conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaccination researcher:

On August 5 2016, Coleman astonishingly appeared to make a direct link between historic iatrogenic HIV/AIDS infections, and the government’s No Jab No Pay immunisation and child care policy. Coleman was congratulated as a “great man” by anti-vaccination activist Trent Wiseman, a carpenter from Melbourne:

On July 24 2016, Coleman promoted Sydney naturopath Marilyn Bodnar, who was committed to stand trial in the near-starving-death of a baby under her healthcare supervision:

On May 28 2016, Coleman promoted a demonstrably false anti-vaccination lie about Irish nuns and the deaths of orphans in Ireland:

On May 19 2016, Coleman promoted dangerous claims regarding Vitamin C and miracle cures. Coleman sourced his medical information from anti-vaccination carpenter, Trent Wiseman:

On May 2 2016, Coleman promoted the anti-vaccination movie, Vaxxed, produced and directed by, and starring anti-vaccination fraud Andrew Wakefield:

On April 4 2016, Coleman shared a post from Truthkings, the conspiracy theory website of anti-vaccination activist, Sherri Tenpenny:

On April 4 2016, Coleman shared what appears to be the only PubMed article on his Facebook profile, a study by disgraced anti-vaccination father-and-son team, the Geiers. The father, Mark Geier, has had his medical licence revoked in the US, due to his unethical practise of medicine. Geier used Lupron to chemically castrate autistic boys, based on his flawed belief that an overabundance of testosterone was implicated in autism in boys:

On February 22 2016, Coleman promoted the Facebook pages of anti-vaccination activist, Judy Wilyman, and fake cancer cure businessman, Ian Gawler:

On February 5 2016, Coleman shared an anti-vaccination article about measles:

On February 5 2016, Coleman, again, shared the anti-vaccination post regarding measles, falsely equivocating the pros and cons of measles immunisation:

On January 22 2016, Coleman shared a post from anti-Semitic, homophobic, Islamophobic, Port Arthur denialism website, The Crazz Files, in which conspiracy theories about the Hammond family are promoted:

On January 6 2016, Coleman shared anti-vaccination lies about measles immunisation and measles deaths:

On January 6 2016, Coleman showed that he does not fully understand the significance of using measles mortality data in arguing against the efficacy of measles immunisation. Anyone with basic knowledge of the anti-vaccination movement knows that anti-vaccination activists dishonestly argue that measles immunisation is ineffective, based not on measles notifications, but, on mortality data. Of course, modern medicine got better and better at preventing deaths from measles, hence the decline before widespread immunisation. This is separate from measles notifications, or morbidity data. Coleman states, “This is impressive!”, of the mortality graph he posted:

On December 31 2015, Coleman stated that influenza immunisation is a “scam”:

On December 30 2015, Coleman promoted the hideous website of anti-vaccination entrepreneur, Stephanie Messenger, and her dangerous anti-vaccination children’s book, Melanie’s Marvelous  Measlesin which it is advocated that getting measles is beneficial for children:

On December 28 2015, Coleman stated that the government’s No Jab No Pay legislation is “scientifically hazardous”, and claimed that “long term, transgenerational impact of vaccines” is not researched, thereby ignoring the existence of post-marketing surveillance:

On December 22 2015, Coleman shared the anti-vaccination lies about the Irish nuns and deaths of orphans:

On December 20 2015, Coleman promoted this anti-vaccination blog post:

On November 28 2015, Coleman shared this article from 2011 in which it is argued that the Gardasil vaccine is dangerous. The court case against Gardasil has disappeared. Coleman  also asked a series of questions which are already answered in the Gardasil product information, easily available on the internet:

On November 27 2015, Coleman promoted the Gardasil court case, claiming that Gardasil safety data must somehow be hidden; it isn’t:

Given the regulatory importance placed upon the dangerous anti-vaccination activities of nurses and midwives, and chiropractors, by the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia, and the Chiropractic Board of Australia, one must hope – hopefully not in vain – that the Medical Board of Australia takes these alleged breaches seriously, this time.

We must compare the activities of Dr Kevin Coleman with those of practitioners already sanctioned by the NMBA and the CBA, and wonder what uproar would follow if that which still appears on Coleman’s social media was still available on any nurse or chiropractor’s pages. How many more “reminders” does the Medical Council  of NSW and the HCCC afford Dr Coleman? The medical community, and medical associations, cannot remain silent on this egregious case. Not any more.



Good medical practice: a code of conduct for doctors in Australia

1.2 Use of the code

Doctors have a professional responsibility to be familiar with Good medical practice and to apply the guidance it contains.

This code will be used:

  • to support individual doctors in the challenging task of providing good medical care and fulfilling their professional roles, and to provide a framework to guide professional judgement
  • to assist the Medical Board of Australia in its role of protecting the public, by setting and maintaining standards of medical practice against which a doctor’s professional conduct can be evaluated. If your professional conduct varies significantly from this standard, you should be prepared to explain and justify your decisions and actions. Serious or repeated failure to meet these standards may have consequences for your medical registration
  • as an additional resource for a range of uses that contribute to enhancing the culture of medical professionalism in the Australian health system; for example, in medical education; orientation, induction and supervision of junior doctors and international medical graduates; and by administrators and policy makers in hospitals, health services and other institutions.

The code applies in all settings. It is valid for technology-based patient consultations as well as for traditional face-to-face consultations and also applies to how doctors use social media. To guide doctors further, the Medical Board of Australia has issued Guidelines for technology-based patient consultations.

1.4 Professional values and qualities of doctors

While individual doctors have their own personal beliefs and values, there are certain professional values on which all doctors are expected to base their practice.

Doctors have a duty to make the care of patients their first concern and to practise medicine safely and effectively. They must be ethical and trustworthy.

Patients trust their doctors because they believe that, in addition to being competent, their doctor will not take advantage of them and will display qualities such as integrity, truthfulness, dependability and compassion. Patients also rely on their doctors to protect their confidentiality.

Doctors have a responsibility to protect and promote the health of individuals and the community.

Good medical practice is patient-centred. It involves doctors understanding that each patient is unique, and working in partnership with their patients, adapting what they do to address the needs and reasonable expectations of each patient. This includes cultural awareness: being aware of their own culture and beliefs and respectful of the beliefs and cultures of others, recognising that these cultural differences may impact on the doctor–patient relationship and on the delivery of health services.

Good communication underpins every aspect of good medical practice.

Professionalism embodies all the qualities described here, and includes self-awareness and self-reflection. Doctors are expected to reflect regularly on whether they are practising effectively, on what is happening in their relationships with patients and colleagues, and on their own health and wellbeing. They have a duty to keep their skills and knowledge up to date, refine and develop their clinical judgement as they gain experience, and contribute to their profession.

2.2 Good patient care

Maintaining a high level of medical competence and professional conduct is essential for good patient care. Good medical practice involves:

  1. Recognising and working within the limits of your competence and scope of practice.
  2. Ensuring that you have adequate knowledge and skills to provide safe clinical care.
  3. Maintaining adequate records (see Section 8.4).
  4. Considering the balance of benefit and harm in all clinical-management decisions.
  5. Communicating effectively with patients (see Section 3.3).
  6. Providing treatment options based on the best available information.
  7. Taking steps to alleviate patient symptoms and distress, whether or not a cure is possible.
  8. Supporting the patient’s right to seek a second opinion.
  9. Consulting and taking advice from colleagues, when appropriate.
  10. Making responsible and effective use of the resources available to you (see Section 5.2).
  11. Encouraging patients to take interest in, and responsibility for, the management of their health, and supporting them in this.
  12. Ensuring that your personal views do not adversely affect the care of your patient.

4.2 Respect for medical colleagues and other healthcare professionals

Good patient care is enhanced when there is mutual respect and clear communication between all healthcare professionals involved in the care of the patient. Good medical practice involves:

  1. Communicating clearly, effectively, respectfully and promptly with other doctors and healthcare professionals caring for the patient.
  2. Acknowledging and respecting the contribution of all healthcare professionals involved in the care of the patient.
  3. Behaving professionally and courteously to colleagues and other practitioners including when using social media.

5.3 Health advocacy

There are significant disparities in the health status of different groups in the Australian community. These disparities result from social, cultural, geographic, health related and other factors. In particular, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians bear the burden of gross social, cultural and health inequity. Good medical practice involves using your expertise and influence to protect and advance the health and wellbeing of individual patients, communities and populations.

5.4 Public health

Doctors have a responsibility to promote the health of the community through disease prevention and control, education and screening. Good medical practice involves:

  1. Understanding the principles of public health, including health education, health promotion, disease prevention and control and screening.
  2. Participating in efforts to promote the health of the community and being aware of your obligations in disease prevention, screening and reporting notifiable diseases.

6.3 Doctors’ performance – you and your colleagues

The welfare of patients may be put at risk if a doctor is performing poorly. If you consider there is a risk, good medical practice involves:

  1. Complying with any statutory reporting requirements, including the mandatory reporting requirements under the National Law as it applies in your jurisdiction.10
  2. Recognising and taking steps to minimise the risks of fatigue, including complying with relevant state and territory occupational health and safety legislation.
  3. If you know or suspect that you have a health condition that could adversely affect your judgement or performance, following the guidance in Section 9.2 Your health.
  4. Taking steps to protect patients from risk posed by a colleague’s conduct, practice or ill health.
  5. Taking appropriate steps to assist your colleague to receive help if you have concerns about a colleague’s performance or fitness to practise.
  6. If you are not sure what to do, seeking advice from an experienced colleague, your employer, doctors’ health advisory services, professional indemnity insurers, the Medical Board of Australia or a professional organisation.

7.2 Continuing professional development

The Medical Board of Australia has established registration standards that set out the requirements for continuing professional development and for recency of practice under the National Law.11

Development of your knowledge, skills and professional behaviour must continue throughout your working life. Good medical practice involves:

  1. Keeping your knowledge and skills up to date.
  2. Participating regularly in activities that maintain and further develop your knowledge, skills and performance.
  3. Ensuring that your practice meets the standards that would be reasonably expected by the public and your peers.
  4. Regularly reviewing your continuing medical education and continuing professional development activities to ensure that they meet the requirements of the Medical Board of Australia.
  5. Ensuring that your personal continuing professional development program includes self-directed and practice-based learning.

9.2 Your health

Good medical practice involves:

  1. Having a general practitioner.
  2. Seeking independent, objective advice when you need medical care, and being aware of the risks of self-diagnosis and self-treatment.
  3. Making sure that you are immunised against relevant communicable diseases.
  4. Conforming to the legislation in your state or territory in relation to self-prescribing.
  5. Recognising the impact of fatigue on your health and your ability to care for patients, and endeavouring to work safe hours wherever possible.
  6. Being aware of the doctors’ health program in your state or territory if you need advice on where to seek help.
  7. If you know or suspect that you have a health condition or impairment that could adversely affect your judgement, performance or your patient’s health:
    • not relying on your own assessment of the risk you pose to patients
    • consulting your doctor about whether, and in what ways, you may need to modify your practice, and following the doctor’s advice.

9.3 Other doctors’ health

Doctors have a responsibility to assist medical colleagues to maintain good health. All health professionals have responsibilities in certain circumstances for mandatory notification under the National Law.16 Good medical practice involves:

  1. Providing doctors who are your patients with the same quality of care you would provide to other patients.
  2. Notifying the Medical Board of Australia if you are treating a doctor whose ability to practise may be impaired and may thereby be placing patients at risk. This is always a professional, and in some jurisdictions, a statutory responsibility under the National Law.
  3. Encouraging a colleague (whom you are not treating) to seek appropriate help if you believe they may be ill and impaired. If you believe this impairment is putting patients at risk, notify the Medical Board of Australia. It may also be wise to report your concerns to the doctor’s employer and to a doctors’ health program.
  4. Recognising the impact of fatigue on the health of colleagues, including those under your supervision, and facilitating safe working hours wherever possible.


Guidelines for advertising regulated health services

6.2 Prohibited advertising under the National Law

Section 133 of the National Law prohibits advertising that:

  • is false, misleading or deceptive or is likely to be so
  • offers a gift, discount or other inducement to attract a user of the health service without stating the terms and conditions of the offer
  • uses testimonials or purported testimonials
  • creates an unreasonable expectation of beneficial treatment, and/or
  • encourages the indiscriminate or unnecessary use of health services.

The sections below explain each part of section 133.

6.2.1 Misleading or deceptive advertising

Section 133 of the National Law states:

  1. A person must not advertise a regulated health service, or a business that provides a regulated health service, in a way that –
    1. Is false, misleading or deceptive or is likely to be misleading or deceptive

A common meaning of ‘mislead or deceive’ is ‘lead into error’. The courts have considered the phrase ‘mislead or deceive’. People who are misled are almost by definition deceived as well. Misleading someone may include lying to them, leading them to a wrong conclusion, creating a false impression, leaving out (or hiding) important information, and/or making false or inaccurate claims.

As the ACCC explains, ‘Patients can be physically, psychologically or financially affected by misleading conduct, and these effects can be long lasting. It is essential that patients be given honest, accurate and complete information in a form they can understand.’5

Examples of advertising that may be false or misleading include those that:

  • mislead, either directly, or by implication, use of emphasis, comparison, contrast or omission
  • only provide partial information which could be misleading
  • use phrases like ‘as low as’ or ‘lowest prices’, or similar words or phrases when advertising fees for services, prices for products or price information in a way which is misleading or deceptive
  • imply that the regulated health services can be a substitute for public health vaccination or immunisation
  • use words, letters or titles that may mislead or deceive a health consumer into thinking that the provider of a regulated health service is more qualified or more competent than a holder of the same registration category (e.g. ‘specialising in XX’ when there is no specialist registration category for that profession)
  • advertise the health benefits of a regulated health service when there is no proof that such benefits can be attained,6and/or
  • compare different regulated health professions or practitioners, in the same profession or across professions, in a way that may mislead or deceive.

Using comparative advertising often risks misleading and/or deceiving the public because it can be difficult to include complete information when comparing one health service with another.

The ACCC has provided tips on how to avoid being misleading and deceptive when advertising. They may be useful for advertisers considering the requirements of the National Law:

  • Sell your professional services on their merits.
  • Be honest about what you say and do commercially.
  • Look at the overall impression of your advertisement. Ask yourself who the audience is and what the advertisement is likely to say or mean to them.
  • Remember, at a minimum, that it is the viewpoint of a layperson with little or no knowledge of the professional service you are selling that should be considered.7

More information about the meaning of ‘mislead or deceive’ is available on the ACCC website.

6.2.2 Gifts and discounts

Section 133 of the National Law states:

  1. A person must not advertise a regulated health service, or a business that provides a regulated health service, in a way that –
    1. Offers a gift, discount or other inducement to attract a person to use the service or the business, unless the advertisement also states the terms and conditions of the offer

Any advertisement that offers gifts, prizes or free items must state the terms and conditions of the offer.

The use of unclear, unreadable or misleading terms and conditions attached to gifts, discounts and other inducements would not meet this requirement.

Consumers generally consider the word ‘free’ to mean absolutely free. When the costs of a ‘free offer’ are recouped through a price rise elsewhere, the offer is not actually free. An example is an advertisement which offers ‘make one consultation appointment, get one free’, but raises the price of the first consultation to largely cover the cost of the second (free) appointment. This type of advertising could also be misleading or deceptive.

The terms and conditions should be in plain English, readily understandable, accurate and not in themselves misleading about the conditions and limitations of the offered service.

Advertising may contravene the National Law when it:

  • contains price information that is inexact
  • contains price information that does not specify any terms and conditions or variables to an advertised price, or that could be considered misleading or deceptive
  • states an instalment amount without stating the total cost (which is a condition of the offer), and/or
  • does not state the terms and conditions of offers of gifts, discounts or other inducements.

6.2.3 Testimonials

Section 133 of the National Law states:

  1. A person must not advertise a regulated health service, or a business that provides a regulated health service, in a way that –
    1. Uses testimonials or purported testimonials about the service or business

The National Law does not define ‘testimonial’, so the word has its ordinary meaning of a positive statement about a person or thing. In the context of the National Law, a testimonial includes recommendations, or statements about the clinical aspects of a regulated health service.

The National Law ban on using testimonials means it is not acceptable to use testimonials in your own advertising, such as on your Facebook page, in a print, radio or television advertisement, or on your website. This means that::

  1. you cannot use or quote testimonials on a site or in social media that is advertising a regulated health service, including patients posting comments about a practitioner on the practitioner’s business website, and
  2. you cannot use testimonials in advertising a regulated health service to promote a practitioner or service.

Health practitioners should therefore not encourage patients to leave testimonials on websites health practitioners control that advertise their own regulated health services, and should remove any testimonials that are posted there.

The National Law does not directly regulate social media. However, testimonials used in advertising a regulated health service through social media may contravene the National Law.

There are many opportunities for consumers or patients to express their views online that are not affected by the National Law restriction on testimonials in advertising. Patients can share views through their personal social media such as Facebook or Twitter accounts or on information sharing websites or other online mechanisms that do not involve using testimonials in advertising a regulated health service.

For example, consumer and patient information sharing websites that invite public feedback/reviews about experience of a regulated health practitioner, business and/or service are generally intended to help consumers make more informed decisions and are not considered advertising of a regulated health service.

To clarify, practitioners are not responsible for removing (or trying to have removed) unsolicited testimonials published on a website or in social media over which they do not have control.

6.2.4 Unreasonable expectation of beneficial treatment

Section 133 of the National Law states:

  1. A person must not advertise a regulated health service, or a business that provides a regulated health service, in a way that –
    1. Creates an unreasonable expectation of beneficial treatment

This can arise when advertisers take advantage of the vulnerability of health consumers in their search for a cure or remedy. The claims of beneficial treatment can range from unsubstantiated scientific claims, through to miracle cures. Advertising of treatments or services must not encourage or promote unreasonable expectations.

For example, advertising may contravene the National Law when it:

  • creates an unreasonable expectation (such as by exaggerating or by providing incomplete or biased information) of recovery time after providing a regulated health service
  • fails to disclose the health risks associated with a treatment
  • omits the necessary warning statement about a surgical or invasive procedure9
  • contains any inappropriate or unnecessary information or material that is likely to make a person believe their health or wellbeing may suffer from not taking or undertaking the health service, and/or
  • contains a claim, statement or implication that is likely to create an unreasonable expectation of beneficial treatment

– either expressly, or by omission, indicating that the treatment is infallible, unfailing, magical, miraculous or a certain, guaranteed or sure cure, and/or
– practitioner has an exclusive or unique skill or remedy, or that a product is ‘exclusive’ or contains a ‘secret ingredient’ that will benefit the patient.

6.2.5 Encouraging indiscriminate or unnecessary use of health services

Section 133 of the National Law states:

  1. A person must not advertise a regulated health service, or a business that provides a regulated health service, in a way that –
    1. Directly or indirectly encourages the indiscriminate or unnecessary use of regulated health services

The unnecessary and indiscriminate use of regulated health services is not in the public interest and may lead to the public purchasing or undergoing a regulated health service that they do not need or require.\

Advertising may contravene the National Law when it:

  • encourages a person to improve their physical appearance together with the use of phrases such as ‘don’t delay’, ‘achieve the look you want’ and ‘looking better and feeling more confident’
  • provides a patient or client with an unsolicited appointment time
  • uses prizes, bonuses, bulk purchases, bulk discounts or other endorsements to encourage the unnecessary consumption of health services that are unrelated to clinical need or therapeutic benefit
  • uses promotional techniques that are likely to encourage consumers to use health services regardless of clinical need or therapeutic benefit, such as offers or discounts, online/internet deals, vouchers, and/or coupons, and/or
  • makes use of time-limited offers which influence a consumer to make decisions under the pressure of time and money rather than about their health care needs. An offer is considered time-limited if it is made to purchase for a limited or specific period of time, or available for use within a limited period of time or by a specific date, without an option to exit the arrangement.


Social media policy

When using social media, health practitioners should remember that the National Law, their National Board’s code of ethics and professional conduct (the Code of conduct) and the Guidelines for advertising regulated health services (the Advertising guidelines) apply.

Registered health practitioners should only post information that is not in breach of these obligations by:

  • complying with professional obligations
  • complying with confidentiality and privacy obligations (such as by not discussing patients or posting pictures of procedures, case studies, patients, or sensitive material which may enable patients to be identified without having obtained consent in appropriate situations)
  • presenting information in an unbiased, evidence-based context, and
  • not making unsubstantiated claims.

Additional information may be available from professional bodies and/or employers, which aims to support health practitioners’ use of social media. However, the legal, ethical, and professional obligations that registered health practitioners must adhere to are set out in the National Boards’ respective Code of conduct and the Advertising guidelines.



Posted in anti-vaccination, anti-vaccination dishonesty, australian vaccination network, AVN, Dr Kevin Coleman, Health Care Complaints Commission, Immunisation, Judy Wilyman, meryl dorey, public health, skeptic, stop the australian vaccination network, Tasha David, vaccination | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Australian antivaxer calls for execution of Channel 9’s Deborah Knight

Those of us who follow the behaviour of the anti-vaccination movement are quite used to seeing the violenceviolent rhetoric, death threats, threats of violence, abuse, misogyny and general vitriol heaped upon bereaved families, public health advocates, politicians, journalists and others by anti-vaccination activists and related conspiracy theorists.

This offensive and dangerous behaviour is generally incited by anti-vaccination leaders, such as Tasha David – the president of the discredited anti-vaccination pressure group, the Australian Vaccination-skeptics Network – and Meryl Dorey – the immediate past-president and founder of the AVN.

After more than a year of infighting between the AVN’s leaders and the new brigade of Australian anti-vaccination liars – those who administer the rabid Facebook group, Anti-Vaccination Australia – these leaders of Australian anti-vaccinationism are attempting to instigate a truce, in an attempt  to form a common wall of misinformation against Australian healthcare. But, the tactics of anti-vaccination thugs are constant.

The two main administrators of Anti-Vaccination Australia, Belgin Sila Colak-Arslan, of Sydney – who recently featured in the news for her vile doxxing of a Byron Bay physiotherapist, his family, and his workplace, in her mistaken, fervent belief that he is Reasonable Hank – and Breana Stanley, of Melbourne – who featured in the news for lying to hospital emergency staff when her unvaccinated toddler contracted  measles; Stanley subsequently taking her knowingly-still-infected toddler to a shopping centre – have previously knowingly lied to the media about abuse which originates in their group.

Today, a member of the Anti-Vaccination Australia group – incited by anti-Semitic, misogynist, homophobic, Islamophobic, Port Arthur denialist, Adam Crabb, of Sydney – and obviously inspired by Donald Trump’s recent attacks on the media – called for Today host Deborah Knight to be “killed on site”:

These “journalists” are enemy of the people, should be killed on site

To give dangerous antivaxer Bryce Fraser some credit, he did go back and edit his comment:

These “journalists” are enemy of the people, should be killed on sight

The anti-vaccination leaders will  once again deny that this happened; maybe they’ll even threaten legal action, again, if anyone states that this did happen.

Meanwhile, over on Crabb’s blog, Crabb refers to Deborah Knight as “the Blonde troll”:

Greg Hunt, are you kidding me??? what does this bottom feeder know about vaccine damage? the Blonde troll calls us, Offenders which means a person who commits an illegal act. We are offenders because we want to protect our children from brain damage & death? Because we don’t want our little angels to suffer hundreds of seizures a day or become a vegetable in a wheelchair, for life? We are offenders because we do not wish or consent to our kids becoming a product of the medical industrial complex & treated like sick cattle? this only goes to show that Australia is heading back into the dark ages & these ghouls make me sick. These despicable & heartless trolls need to have their rotten faces shoved in the misery & devastation that vaccines have caused so many families worldwide.

Here’s the Today segment:



The Fraser comment appears to have been deleted, replaced by this new comment, again from Fraser:

These “journalists” are enemy of the people, should be drawn and quartered

As well as this comment, from Skye Ollington:

She really is a stupid blonde


Posted in abuse, anti-vaccination, anti-vaccination dishonesty, Anti-vaccine thugs, australian vaccination network, AVN, death threats, meryl dorey, mobbing, public health, Public mobbing, skeptic, stop the australian vaccination network, Tasha David, vaccination | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Chiropractors’ Association of Australia finally comes out in favour of immunisation

Today, the Chiropractors’ Association of Australia finally came out in support of immunisation, giving a backhander to long-time ally, the anti-vaccination organisation, the Australian Vaccination-skeptics Network in the process:

It has come to our attention that the Australian Vaccination-sceptics Network contains a link to the CAA National website. We have requested that they remove this link to our website as a matter of urgency.

The Chiropractors’ Association of Australia (CAA) does not support the views promoted by the Australian Vaccination-sceptics Network. We have also informed them that the CAA has adopted the following policy on immunisation:

“The CAA supports the Australian government’s view that immunisation is an important health care initiative. It is outside the scope of practice for chiropractors. When considering immunisation, patients should consult with either their GP or Maternal and Child Health Nurse for further information.”

When providing chiropractic care to infants and young children, practitioners must have a good understanding of the principles of public health including disease prevention and health promotion.

Congratulations, CAA. It’s been a long, hard road for you; but, you still need to divest yourselves of your anti-vaccination members, former presidents, and former board members*.

Of course, none of this would have happened unless evidence-based chiropractors — mostly within the new association, Chiropractic Australia —  rose up and spoke against the crackpots in the profession.

Now, about those subluxations…

*This comment by the AVN’s Meryl Dorey was made to an evidence-based chiropractor in December 2016. Just two months ago, Meryl Dorey was mocking a chiropractor for supporting immunisation:


 Update February 7 2017

Overnight, Meryl Dorey published a scathing attack on the CAA:

The blog post contained the following:

I have spoken with the AVN Committee and to date, nobody from the CAA has contacted them about removing any link. In addition, since I was the one who set up the AVN’s web page and their links (medical, natural health and general), I can tell you that for many years, the CAA link has been reciprocal – in other words, they linked to the AVN and the AVN linked to the CAA.

Are the leaders of the chiropractic profession in Australia now guilty of cowardice? When their founder, Daniel David Palmer, felt so committed to the health of his patients that he spent time in prison in their defence, have his descendants strayed so far from their roots that their income has now become more important than their morals and knowledge?

Anyone who knows me at all, knows that I revere the chiropractic profession. My family’s healthcare provider has been a chiropractor for the last 25 years. But when I see that profession so afraid to hold to the courage of their convictions that they are willing to allow their patients to make decisions based only on information they themselves disagree with, I have to ask whether their usefulness as a healing modality is in its last days?

In the comments, underneath her blog post, Dorey also stated:

I…have received email messages from chiropractors who say that they left the CAA years ago due to their drifting towards repression and tyranny. What a shame that so many chiropractors are not well-informed about this vital issue.

Today, the CAA issued this blunt statement:




Posted in anti-vaccination, anti-vaccination dishonesty, australian vaccination network, AVN, chiropractic, Immunisation, meryl dorey, public health, skeptic, stop the australian vaccination network, Tasha David, vaccination | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment