Chiropractors' Association of Australia provided anti-vaccine professional training by Meryl Dorey

At this very moment the Chiropractors’ Association of Australia is conducting its annual event, the National Development Forum. I addressed a pretty significant part of the NDF in this post:  Anti-vaccinationist is lead speaker at CAA’s National Development Forum.

Indeed, so significant is the fact that the top of the bill is an anti-vaccinationist, that the CAA issued a media release to allay any fears that the lead speaker may have no credibility. Hell, he’s only anti-vaccine, right? He isn’t going to talk about vaccines (now). So, what’s the big deal? It’s not like this health thing, and the accuracy thing, is high on anyone’s radar, right? Here’s the media release:

Dr Stephen Franson’s Session on Exercise and Movement

National President of the CAA, Dr Laurie Tassell provides the following statement on Dr Stephen Franson:

“Dr Stephen Franson’s session at the 2013 NDF concerns exercise and movement, for which he is an acclaimed international speaker.”

“Dr Franson will not be addressing in any way vaccination, which is outside the scope of practice of Chiropractic.”

“Dr Stephen Franson has views on vaccination which the CAA does not support.”

“The CAA Board policy is that we encourage Chiropractors to refer a patient to a GP for advice on vaccination.”

But, hang on; on the NDF page it said Franson’s speech is about the “application of wellness principles in chiropractic”. Was it changed to “exercise and movement”? It must have been. Maybe I’m too cynical. Laurie Tassell has that effect on me.

Anyway. As they are hosting an anti-vaccinationist as their number one speaker at their professional annual event, whilst now distancing themselves from the stain of ant-vaccinationism I thought I should bring up another example of CAA sanctioned anti-vaccinationism, presented to me by a senior shill at the Glaxxon Institute of Shillery™.

Most of us are now aware that the latest round of the CAA’s anti-vaccine induced pain was brought about by Amy Corderoy’s article which showed that the CAA had approved the anti-vaccination training of chiropractors, by US wingnut Tim O’Shea, allowing them to count the anti-vaccination training toward their Continuing Professional Development (CPD) points. Really.

Also, among the various anti-vaccination articles I have covered included the appearance of deranged anti-vaccine, chemtrailing chiropractor, the Californian Billy DeMoss, at this year’s Dynamic Growth Congress – the premier event of the CAA affiliated Australian Spinal Research Foundation (who are antivax to the core). Just a couple of weekends ago, DeMoss also appeared at the New Zealand College of Chiropractic’s annual event, Lyceum. Many Australian chiropractors made the pilgrimage for that one, including the now former CAA NSW Board Member, Tim Shakespeare. The NSW CAA are starting to act at least.

Well, today, I can show you this outrageous example  of the anti-vaccinationism of the Chiropractors’ Association of Australia.

In August 2009 the CAA’s South Australia franchise held their Annual General Meeting. So, this is not just any event. The AGM is a big deal in the life of any organisation. What is most stunning is the seminar which was held immediately following the 2009 AGM. See for yourself:

CAA SA Dorey 2009 seminar flyerEven the title is a lie. Here is the text:

VACCINES—10,000 shots for our children with speaker Meryl Dorey

Meryl Dorey is President of the Australian Vaccination Network, a national volunteer-run health support and lobby group which has been in existence since 1994. She is also the Editor of Living Wisdom magazine, a publication dedicated to the  idea that health choices must be informed choices and that in order to be healthy, we need to consciously care for our  children, our bodies and our world. The AVN was instrumental in bringing about legislation ensuring that parents can be  conscientious objectors to vaccination and not lose any government entitlements and are vehemently opposed to the current push by the Australian government and mainstream medicine which would mandate the use of vaccines.

Ms Dorey will talk about Dr Paul Offit, co-holder of the patent on the current Rotavirus vaccine (a patent which he recently sold for over US $29 million) and a member of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunisation Practices which licenses and approves vaccines in the US, whom has published a study which claims that children can receive 10,000 vaccines at one time without any ill effects. The current Australian Childhood vaccination schedule contains upwards of 50 doses of vaccines by the time a child starts school and plans are under way for a vaccine that contains antigens to over 100 diseases  to be administered at birth. How much is too much?

Where is the proof that vaccines work or that they are safe? Before we allow the unbridled use of 10,000 vaccines on our children or ourselves, it is time to take a step back and examine the scientific evidence regarding vaccination’s effects on our immune systems and on the incidence and mortality from infectious diseases.

As chiropractors, many of our patients look to us for access to information on vaccination choices that they may not receive  from their other health professionals. Be empowered and armed with knowledge about this important issue of informed choice from a leader in the field.

The CAA SA bought Dorey’s lies about Dr Paul Offit hook, line and sinker. Not only that, they enhanced Dorey’s lie to create a bigger lie: “Before we allow the unbridled use of 10,000 vaccines on our children or ourselves…” I don’t even have any words for that grade  inept duplicity.

The lies about Dr Offit, told above, have been addressed by Liz Ditz. I’m not going to go over it again. Here is an expanded list:

Meryl Dorey: Seven Assertions. One is Factual. Six Are False.

Here are Meryl Dorey’s claims, made September 22, 2011 on the Australian Vaccination Network Facebook page (image and link at the bottom of the post).

Paul Offit Works in Pennsylvania — TRUE!

Paul Offit sat on the FDA Committee--FALSE!

That Approved His Rotavirus Vaccine — FALSE!

Paul Offit Continues to Derive Revenue from RotaTek patent — FALSE!

Paul Offit “Has Set Himself Up” As An Expert on Vaccines — FALSE!

Paul Offit “Opposes All Vaccine Exemptions” — FALSE

Paul Offit Published A Study Proving the “100,000 Vaccines at Once” Safety Claim–FALSE!

We’ve also seen the lie about the “upwards of 50 vaccines” before as well. Another friend has tidied up this particular lie, here, after having her jimmies sufficiently rustled once too often by Dorey’s  persistent guessings and wrongifications.

So, there we have it. Meryl Dorey, of the peak anti-vaccination organisation in the country, was given an official platform to lie to the CAA SA, by the CAA SA, the state chiropractic representative body, at their AGM; and she was doing it for $60 a pop. That’s really bad.

But wait. There’s more. Dorey’s two-hour lie-fest also went toward two hours of CPD, just like the CAA did with O’Shea. Two hours of professional training. From an anti-vaccinationist whose greatest gift is getting stuff wrong, after hearing stuff over a back fence, for twenty years. I mean, at least O’Shea was a chiropractor. He has some qualifications of sorts. Dorey? Nothing:

CAA SA Dorey Seminar 2009 CPD pointsOne would hope that in the current climate the Chiropractors’ Association of Australia would look very dimly on any board members who were in charge at the time of that abomination. There appears to be a push on to cleanse the National and State boards of the stain and infection of anti-vaccinationism which has dwelled there for so long, unhindered, and flourishing.

So, who was on the CAA SA Board back then? Here it is. I expected Brett Hill. But, he’s not what I’m really looking for today. Back then Hill was a member of VISA: a different anti-vaccine organisation. Who else was on the 2009 Board?

CAA SA Board 2009 Chow Hill SimBilly Chow and Patrick Sim? Wait. We’ve heard one of those names before. Billy Chow featured in my series on anti-vaccine chiropractors. And he was quoted only yesterday as the “spokesperson” for the CAA, in this article. So, he’s now a Board Member of the National Chiropractors’ Association of Australia? Wait, with Sim? So, two of the Board Members of the CAA SA who approved an anti-vaccination talk by an anti-vaccine liar, as CPD, are now National Board Members of the CAA:

CAA SA Sim and Chow on National Board

I am amaze.

I would love to say that the anti-vaccinationism of the CAA is all in the past, and that this sort of thing doesn’t happen any more. But, all one needs to do is peruse the personnel of the various boards. They need a fire-hose, and a tanker of Dettol, and they need it now.

About reasonable hank

I'm reasonable, mostly.
This entry was posted in anti-vaccination dishonesty, australian vaccination network, AVN, chiropractic, skeptic, stop the australian vaccination network and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Chiropractors' Association of Australia provided anti-vaccine professional training by Meryl Dorey

  1. Glad to be of service, Hank.

  2. wzrd1 says:

    Wow! I missed one thing Meryl pulled. The Therapeutic Goods Administration found against her and AVN over Black Salve. She put up a Freeman on the land defense, essentially declaring herself sovereign of the state.
    Can’t figure out *why* that defense failed.

    Meanwhile, it boggles the mind that she and the AVN refuse to place the HCCC safety warning, as ordered by the New South Wales Health Care Complaints Commission in 2010.

    Oh, that’s right, she is her own law and sovereign nation.

  3. Trevor says:

    Dorey isn’t even qualified as an “anti-vaccine” speaker. It speaks volumes of what they allow for their training when they allow someone to contribute to it that has no proven ability whatsoever. In a sense they are worse than her; they should realise that as a body representing qualified (I use that term loosely) individuals that their education should also come from someone qualified. At least aim to find someone with medical qualifications that is anti-vaccine…or is that just a tad difficult?

  4. Nilbeliever says:

    In addition to the *cough* “content” *cough* of their professional development hours, the required number of them compared to other professions makes interesting reading.

    From the AHPRA site, medical practitioners are generally required to undertake 50 hours per year minimum. How many would be reasonable for chiros, who repeat the “we do 5 years’ university study” talking-point like a religious mantra in response to any critical comment? Remember, quite a few want to set themselves up as primary health care providers. Wait for it…

    25 per year. Yep, half that of other medical practitioners, apparently. And only 12.5 of them are required to be “structured”. The other “informal” 12.5 hours can be, for instance, “self study”, “clinical discussions with colleagues” and “internet research”.

    Another point of comparison – accountants are required to undertake 40 hours of professional development per year minimum, all “structured”. It seems that manipulating someone’s finances is taken more seriously by relevant professional bodies, than manipulating someone’s spine!

    Go figure.

    • Ben says:


      Comparison to accountants is not really warranted. Let’s compare apples to apples.

      Physios require 20 hours (can be all in-formal).

      Osteos require 25 hours (can be all in-formal) plus requires First aid/CPR, (as do chiros)

      • Andy says:

        Physios are not touting themselves as primary caregivers and calling themselves “Doctor”, so they are not really apples for the sake of your comparison.

        Osteos, in Australia, are very similar chiropractors, as I understand it – so I guess they could be apples but I don’t see them claiming primary-care status either. I’m willing to stand corrected on those points.

        • Ben says:


          Leaving aside your primary caregiver jibe for a minute. As far as allied health professions go, Physios, Chiros and Osteos are very similar in scope. Physios probably have the widest scope straight out of uni due to their integration into the wider healthcare/medical community and base level training. Whereas, surprise, surprise, Chiros and Osteos have a spinal focus due to their historical beginnings. When all is said and done, Physios, Chiros and Osteos have the freedom to perform all the same techniques and treat all the same conditions, obviously dependent on training. That is why I call it apples for apples, as far as AHPRA is concerned (not what the CAA thinks).

          Now regarding primary caregiver status. No Chiros should be claiming primary caregiver status unless they have done the hard yards and are also a medic.

          As for the doctor title, a lot of Chiros are embarrassed to use it, so don’t. I know this one is.

      • Nilbeliever says:

        Ben, thanks for your reply. Your apparent efforts to keep a reasonable sense of perspective in relation to your field are laudable IMHO. That said…

        …chiros are also generally considered a profession, which necessarily engenders some comparison to requirements of other professions (in areas of ethics for instance). While it might be fair enough to limit comparison to “allied” health professions from an expertise and functions viewpoint, I don’t think it tells a full story.

        I was quite surprised to find out that accountants had more onerous continuing education requirements that chiros – given the relative seriousness of the consequences of getting things wrong in each profession. One suspects that a lot of chiro patients might also be surprised (and perhaps not a little dismayed) by these comparative factoids, when added to GP’s being required to undertake double the CPD of chiros – which was really more the focus of my comment, TBH.

        Perhaps comparing to physios and osteos demonstrates nothing more than an overlapping need for more development hours in all three fields. Or perhaps all three professions can separately demonstrate that what they’re already doing is sufficient. But just like my comparison with accountants doesn’t necessarily put chiros *on the hook*, neither does saying “but physios / osteos also do…” automatically get your profession *off the hook*, either.

        If some chiros are going to go hard on the “wellness” advisory path including anti-vax nudge-nudge-wink-wink, and/or allow (or tacitly encourage) patients to assume that the chiro should be first port-of-call for any and all medical concerns (and thus usurping the GP role) then some comparison is warranted. Sorry all, bit of a derail.

      • Ben says:

        I take your point. Another thing to consider when talking about any CPD, it could be considered an industry in itself. You’d hope that CPD providers wouldn’t put money ahead of the need to provide quality education. Sure I’m all for making money from providing quality education, but some of the requirements of AHPRA maybe motivated to appease professional organisations and their money making CPD events. Maybe that’s a bit cynical.

  5. Sam says:

    Slow News day for you hank?

    I’m not defending these actions at all. However you have picked up stuff from a long time ago now.

    There has been more recent events over the past few weeks such as more facts about the article in the age being very incorrect about the chiropractor causing the cervical fracture in the infant? I saw on your twitter feed you were very keen to jump to conclusions.

    If you keep using dated information,and are unable to show both sides of an argument around chiropractic care perhaps you are just as bad as those chiropractors that keep using dated incorrect information around vaccination?

    • I think it’s pretty significant that the CAA provided anti-vaccination CPD. Sorry if you don’t like it. 2009 is not “a long time ago”, and two of the then CAA SA board members are now on the CAA National board. Maybe you should take up your concerns with the CBA? The CAA doesn’t really care.

      You might want to re-investigate what you claim that I claim about the fracture of the baby’s neck. Get back to me when you have.

      You’ll find that I’m pretty quick not to jump to conclusions. How about you show me where I have. I’ve been clear in the comments on my own posts that I haven’t jumped to any conclusions; yet, I have also been clear that I don’t trust the CAA to be accurate in their claims. I was vindicated in that regard, wasn’t I.

      Now, you state that I use dated information. I used CAA documents from 2009 to show that the CAA used Meryl Dorey (!) for CPD training, and that two of the then board members who approved it are now on the CAA National Board. Tell me where I’m going wrong.

      You also say that I’m not showing “both sides of an argument” around chiropractic care. Given that I’m clearly interested in the anti-vaccinationism and the unethical behaviour of chiros basing treatments on magic and hubris, including that conducted during clandestine excursions into hospitals, I would say I have shown their side. That is the purpose of my blog, silly.

      • wzrd1 says:

        Ah! So, the purpose of your blog is silly?
        If so, you’ve got it down pat by covering silly Chiropractors that shouldn’t be permitted to practice on stone, let alone humans. 😉

        I’d comment about lousy regulatory agencies, but here in the US, we’re not faring much better.
        So, I’ll avoid being the pot calling the kettle black. :/

  6. Thinus says:

    Yep Sam – I think your information might be dated – see more recent information
    Love how the CAA quotes an “internationally renowned medical radiologist” from North America, who declined to be named for “regrettable fear of retribution”.
    Also note that they conveniently forgot to mention the results of the second CT scan

  7. Sam says:

    What a surprise that an anti-chiropractic physician still wants to blame the chiropractor.

    I do agree that the report is flawed. Spondylosis is a degenerative condition that can only occur in the elderly (unless you are Benjamin Button). This case will be shown to have been a Congenital spondylolysis of C2. I look further to release of further information. At that time Hank can then decide whether he wants to revisit his retweets around the events of the 29th of September.

    You are right. You used things from 2009 to make a case against Chiropractors on the CAA National board. You are correct they were CAASA Members at the time. However i see 2009 as less relevant as the other more importaint posts you have made in the past about current chiropractors facebook updates etc. I just get the feeling as if you are scraping the barrel a little bit. That’s all. I hope you have less to post about in the future.

    • Take up the contents of the report with those more qualified than I. Nevertheless, Poisoning the Well regarding John Cunningham’s stance on chiropractic doesn’t change the contents of the report. Nice try.

      How about if I say, “gee, a report written by a chiropractor absolves the chiropractor of all wrongdoing. Go figure”. See what I did there?

      How does the fact that the CAA SA CPD training is from 2009 change the fact that it happened? How does it change the fact that it fits a pattern? How does it change the fact that current CAA National board members were responsible for the anti-vaccination training? How does it change the fact that this is a pattern for CAA National and State Board members? How does it change the fact that this pattern is still in place, with many State and National board members being anti-vaccinationists? Did it not happen? Is it all okay now? Should we all just walk away knowing that Australian chiropractic is in great hands, along with all its marks? Or are you just having a great big fucking whinge, just because?

      I retweeted many articles which referred to the incident. I can’t find anywhere where I made any claims. You’ll have to help me out. I also retweeted an article where the CAA challenged the claims. I guess you’ll now have to state I was claiming that the chiro didn’t break the baby’s neck? Your logic dictates this.

      I made many tweets where I stated “HANDS OFF THE BABIES”, especially in relation to anti-vaccinationists, subluxationists, and marketers. I stand by that. Chiropractors have no place going near a baby unless clinically indicated.

    • Thinus says:

      Umm no Sam – did you actually read the article?
      Original claim was made by a Paediatrician (Dr Pappas)
      A Chiropractor, by means of a submission to QLD parliament, said that there had been no fracture.

      A detailed rebuttal of this ( ) by an Orthopaedic Surgeon (NOT a Physician) clearly shows the flaws in the CAA statement.

      CAA countered this with a radiology report by an unnamed Radiologist.

      I prefer to be able to reference my resources rather than rely on a report by Dr “x”

      • Nilbeliever says:

        That’s pretty interesting, actually. Because Laurie Tassell and the CAA appear to have an almost preternatural ability to totally contradict earlier pronouncements with later ones, without batting so much as an eyelid. Initial statement back at the end of September (

        “CAA president Dr Laurie Tassell (Chiro) said there was no doubt the baby had a hangman’s fracture.”

        Now they claim (same page, same link):

        “The CAA is outraged that the AMA and its camp followers have launched a campaign to stop Chiropractors treating children based on an alleged injury that never happened,” Dr Laurie Tassell said.

        “It is shameful that the entire Chiropractic profession has been smeared and attacked, over something that did not occur.”

        Same quoted speaker? Originally there was “no doubt”, now it “never happened”???

        People can make up their own minds about such apparent inconsistencies, I guess…

    • Andy says:

      Sam, can you point me to where the CAA have publicly disavowed the AVN and its anti-vaccine message? Neither vaccination nor chiropractic have undergone massive change in recent times, so I would consider four years to be current unless there is a clear statement somewhere that the anti-vaccine lecture given by an unqualified housewife resulted from a significant error in judgement, was not usefully educational and should never have happened. Without that, on what basis do we assume the lecture to be irrelevant or for CAA attitudes to the AVN and its message to have changed?

      A CAA message in support of vaccination, and some useful profession-wide action against anti-vaxxers, would be a nice bonus. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

  8. Sam says:

    Hi Thinus,

    The parliamentary report doesn’t state it was a chiropractor that had the MP bring the case up in parliament.

    There seems to be lack of full facts in this case for a reason. Now that can be for a variety of reasons. This could be due to chiropractic negligence (however ahpra, separate to CAA have already cleared the chiropractor) or it could be due to other medico legal issues perhaps? I’m not too sure why it has played out in the media like is has? Perhaps because chiropractic is such a target at the moment? Can you shed any light on this?

    Andy, the CAAs code of conduct supports any ruling from AHPRA so the more recent moves of AHPRA to rule vaccination out of chiropractors scope of practice is in turn endorsed by CAA. This is the reason why I have an issue with stuff from 2009 being bought up.

    • Nilbeliever says:

      “There seems to be lack of full facts in this case for a reason. Now that can be for a variety of reasons. This could be due to chiropractic negligence (however ahpra, separate to CAA have already cleared the chiropractor)…”.

      Is that so? Perhaps you could point to an official AHPRA statement to that effect? I understood that AHPRA merely referred the complaint to the CBA. There’s also the question about why someone who had been “cleared” was required to go for further training in the area s/he was cleared on…?

      I’d also like to know: who leaked the confidential medical report to the MP, and why? Y’see, there are some ideas about this event here –

      “Such reports are highly sensitive, and are kept strictly confidential for very good reasons. In this case, both the child involved and the father of the child have a rare congenital spinal condition. This, plus other details in the leaked report could easily identify them. Experts and witnesses must be confident that they can speak freely and give frank opinions to the regulator without fear of leaks. Future investigations will be compromised if there is a legitimate concern on the part of expert witnesses that their opinions will become part of a media circus… This leak represents a massive governance failure on the part of the CBA, and for the sake of the integrity of future investigations cannot be without consequences for those involved.”.

    • Andy says:

      Endorsed by the CAA – but enforced by whom?

  9. Thinus says:

    My eyes just caught something else on that 2009 flyer. The speech was “proudly sponsored by Medfin”.
    Medfin is the medical financing branch of the NAB – interesting to see that one of major banks “proudly” supports the AVN.

  10. Pingback: The Congress of the Chiropractor – Dynamic Growth 2014 | reasonablehank

  11. Pingback: Chiropractors’ Association of Australia (NSW) brings in anti-vaccine subluxationist as lead seminar speaker | reasonablehank

  12. Pingback: Letting the anti-vaccine freak flag fly – Ohm fires off a last one before teaching CAA members | reasonablehank

  13. Pingback: Honk if you want a chiropractic college in South Australia | reasonablehank

Leave a Reply