Stirring the Pot
Autism and Heavy Metals: An Interview With Mary Catherine DeSoto, Ph.D.

Australia: A Grieving Family and Baseless Accusations

Australia As first reported by Martin Walker on Age of Autism three weeks ago (HERE) the row rages on in the Australian media between Meryl Dorey’s Australian Vaccination Network (AVN), an information and support group with its publication Living Wisdom (HERE), and government health officials. In this latest instalment Meryl explains the origins of the accusations at the heart of controversy levelled against herself and AVN by a grieving family (HERE).

A Grieving Family and Baseless Accusations (See the original article HERE.)

For some time now, both the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN) and myself, Meryl Dorey, have stood accused of harassing Toni and David McCaffery, parents of three children; the youngest of whom, Dana, died from whooping cough in March of 2009.

Understanding the sensitivity of this issue and not wanting to increase the already unbearable pain these parents have gone through, I have stayed silent on this subject for as long as I could. At this point, however, being tried by the media, members of Stop the Australian Vaccination Network (SAVN) and the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) for this supposed harassment, it is time to set the record straight.

When Dana’s death was first announced, the finger of blame was pointed squarely at unvaccinated children in general – the AVN in particular. We were virtually being accused of being responsible for the death of this baby who was 5 months too young to have been protected by vaccines. This accusation began even before Dana’s funeral with an article in the Northern Star newspaper saying that Dana had been the “victim of ignorance”.
In addition, there were many questions that arose from the information the media were reporting about Dana’s death. These included the following:

1.    Dana had presented to doctors several times before being diagnosed. Her mother said that her only symptoms were a runny nose and possible breathing problems.

2.    She was admitted to hospital with a simple runny nose and only became seriously ill after her admission.

3.    She was diagnosed with whooping cough within a day or two of when she was admitted to hospital when a whooping cough diagnosis generally takes 10-14 days to produce a positive result.

4.    The media and her family reported that her treatments had included blood transfusions; that her heart was twice its normal size; and that she had a systemic infection – none of which are normal with whooping cough. (Please note: some of this information may not have emerged until the Channel 7 Sunday Night program)

Did I try to get Dana’s hospital records?

Toni and David McCaffery have stated in the media that I tried to obtain Dana’s records from the hospitals where she was treated. This is not true.

As a result of both myself and our organisation virtually being blamed for murdering this child by media outlets and government health officials, and because of the questions outlined above, I contacted Paul Corben at the North Coast Area Health Service (NCAHS) to ask exactly how Dana was diagnosed.

Due to the uncertainty – in my mind at least – about how a whooping cough diagnosis could be made so quickly and also the correlation of Dana’s reported symptoms and treatments, I felt that these were important questions to clear up and it was my right to ask these questions – anyone could have.

The NCAHS told me that Dana’s death was determined by using a ‘quick test’. At that time, I was unfamiliar with this type of test but subsequent research has shown me that this is a test which gives false positives up to 100% of the time.

The only truly accurate test for whooping cough is a blood culture.[i],[ii] I asked the NCAHS if a blood culture had also been taken but I was told that this information could not be released. To the best of my recollection, the conversation ended there when the NCAHS official terminated the call.

I have been accused of harassing this grieving family by making this call. It is my assertion however that the official from the NCAHS has not only committed a serious breach of confidentiality by informing a third party that I had contacted him; he in fact, has harassed the McCafferys by calling a grieving family to tell them that I had asked for confirmation of Dana’s diagnosis. What possible reason could he have had for taking this action?

Have I ever contacted the McCafferys?

The only time I have ever met either Toni or David McCaffery was on the set of the Channel 7 Sunday Night program during a televised ‘debate’ on the vaccination issue. We passed and I believe we said hello. That is the only time I have ever seen them.

I have never phoned them, written them a letter by post, email or contacted them in any other way except for the once which I will describe below.

The only time I have ever had contact with the McCafferys in any way was in late 2009 when I posted a letter to the editor and a media release to their Facebook page. This was in response to complaints that the McCafferys had filed against me with the ABC regarding a radio show I had appeared on in October 2009.

The McCafferys claimed that I had provided incorrect information to the ABC, but the final outcome of the ABC’s investigation of this issue stated that the journalist had actually made a mistake when she was speaking – the error was not mine.

Despite providing information to the McCafferys in this regard, and also having my information peer-reviewed by Dr Gary Goldman, a reviewer for such publications as the New England Journal of Medicine and the Journal of the American Medical Association, to this day, the McCafferys continue to claim that I provided incorrect or misleading information to the ABC.

I felt that it was within my rights to respectfully defend myself against these accusations and Toni McCaffery stated, under my post to her Facebook page that, “Meryl has responded, as she is very entitled to. I just ask that everyone when stating their opinions is respectful and is factual.”

This is the only time I have ever made contact with this family and I do not believe that this would or should constitute harassment in any sense of the word.

My husband, Ken Dorey

The first time I heard about the accusation that my husband Ken had harassed the McCaffery family was when Steve Cannane from Lateline, pointed a microphone at me and asked why my husband had gone to see David’s parents the day before Dana’s funeral.
Ken has known Carmel and Ken McCaffery for many years. They are both members of the Big Scrub Rainforest Landcare Group and Ken has been called to their home several times to help identify birds, to remove snakes that have gotten into their kitchen and just for a cup of tea and a chat.

Approximately 2-3 days before Dana’s death, I received a call from Carmel asking me to give Ken a message that she would like him to come over to identify a frog they had found.
The McCaffery’s home is between our farm and our house so 2-3 days later, Ken went by to help them identify the frog. He remembers clearly getting out of the ute and walking up to Carmel to ask her where the frog was.

At that point, she told him that her little granddaughter had just died of whooping cough.
Ken and I were both aware that a Lennox Head child had died from whooping cough – it was in all the media – but this was the first time that either of us knew who that child was.
Ken spent between 45 minutes and an hour listening to Carmel talk about what a devastating blow this was to all their family and how her husband, Ken, was incredibly broken-up about it. At the end of the conversation, Ken remembers Carmel saying to him that the doctors told Toni and David that it was most likely that Dana had caught whooping cough from an unvaccinated child in the hospital.

Ken remembers saying, “Carmel, you must know what Meryl does. It is not as simple as that. If at any time you would like to speak with her – and I know this won’t help your grieving…”
Ken remembers Carmel shaking her head – not in an angry way – but just shaking her head, so he left it there. This was the only time my name was mentioned but the accusation seems to be that Ken went there to tell Carmel and Ken that I wanted to speak with them. This is not true and our family would never intrude on a grieving parent or grandparent in that manner.

Ken and Carmel spoke for about 10 to 15 minutes more and then, someone else arrived on the McCaffery’s farm so Ken took that as his cue to leave. Until that point in time, nobody else was there – just Carmel and Ken McCaffery and my husband, Ken.

There have been accusations made that Ken knew that Dana was the child that died and that he went to the home to say that I wanted to speak with them. That it was the day before the funeral and the house was filled with grieving relatives preparing food and getting things ready. This is not true.

Neither Ken nor I were aware that Dana was the child involved; her name was not published in the papers until one or two days after Ken’s visit and her funeral was even later then that.
We understand how, at a time like this when preparations were being made for this terribly tragic funeral of a precious and beloved baby, things can be forgotten and events take on new meanings, but neither Ken nor I would ever be so callous as to visit a grieving family to discuss vaccination. Ken was there at Carmel’s request and left after listening to her talk about her family’s grief and offering his condolences.

This is not harassment.

In conclusion

The AVN has over 8,000 present and former members. Many of these families have children who have either been killed or injured by vaccines. In my 17 years of working with this organisation, I have cried with these families, shared their grief, tried to help them in any way I could including opening my home to them many times when they needed a place to stay.

Some of them have stayed here for months – some for weeks – some for only a day or two – but I believe that if you were to ask any of them if they believed that I or anyone else from the AVN would harass a family who had just lost a child, the answer would be a resounding NO!

I am the mother of a vaccine injured child myself so I have a special understanding of what it is to grieve for lost possibilities – but not – thank God – of what it is to lose a child. That is a grief I hope I never know – one no parent should ever have to face.

But whether a child dies from a disease or a vaccine, they deserve and do receive the same sympathy and respect from me and from all AVN members I have ever known.

I never have and never will harass or hurt a grieving parent and anyone who knows me – or knows anyone in my family – would say that without question.

I also know that the members of our committee would never have done such a thing.
Via the media, I have asked the McCafferys several times for the names of the people who have written to harass them and stated that if they are AVN members, they will be instantly ejected from our organisation.

To date, this information has not been provided to me. These accusations of harassment in the media, despite any evidence of what any fair person would actually call harassment, has now gotten to the point where even defending myself and the AVN will be considered by some to be harassment.

Despite that, I hope that this has answered some questions people may have had about my dealings with the McCaffery family and whether or not there was any harassment involved.
I welcome your questions and will be happy to answer any and all of them as fully and openly as I can.
[i] Curbing false positives and pseudo-epidemics, The Lancet Infectious Diseases, Volume 7, Issue 3, Page 186, March 2007
[ii] Faith in Quick Test leads to epidemic that wasn’t,

Meryl Dorey



Reading a good book, Vaccination Panic in Australia, by Brian Martin, emeritus professor at the University of Wollongong in Australia. During a career spent studying public controversies about nuclear power, forestry issues, pesticides, and fluoridation, Prof. Martin had concluded that citizen campaigners were not targets of personal attack--until he came across the case of Meryl Dorey. The vicious attacks and relentless harassment directed at her and her organization will be familiar to everyone here.

Reading some of the allegations and characterizations, I found myself assuming (even though I should know better) that her organization's website would be "out there." Uh, no. Not exactly.

The book looks like it's going to be great. Maybe it's not everybody's, but it's my idea of good beach reading


Not an MD - "This is disgraceful and unacceptable. We deserve informed consent at the very least considering the protections in place for the vaccine industry."

No kidding! I could not agree more.

“Note that the manufacturer takes no legal responsibility should any adverse reaction happen to you or your dear ones taking this vaccine. Furthermore, because Health Canada approved the sale of this vaccine, under presumed occurrence of H1N1 ”pandemic”, the government is also not responsible. Also, because everything is declared on the label the expectation is that only you and your dear ones should be resposnsible for the decision to receive it.” – Dr Shiv Gopra

Pay very close attention to pages 22 and 23. Read both the ingredients and the risks.

Not an MD

Dear Patrons99. I completely agree with everything you posted. I am afraid of this new "science" funded by industry, and policed entirely by industry, with no liability whatsoever to industry, where you must beg permission to sue for needed compensation to pay for severe and life changing adverse events from the head of Health and Human Services in a pandemic. Of particular concern to me was that the 2009-2010 package insert for CSL's Afluria did not even mention the adjuvant used. I guess the vaccine industry doesn't think we have a right to know what we are, or are not, agreeing to have injected directly into our very bloodstreams. This is disgraceful and unacceptable. We deserve informed consent at the very least considering the protections in place for the vaccine industry.


Not an MD - Thank you for the links.

Shouldn't the question be asked as to whether these “innovative” new super-adjuvant laced flu vaccinations potentiate "cytokine storm" in the vaccinee during a real pandemic, for example, after the next "accidental" release of a lab-virus?

"These particulate vaccines retain the adjuvant activity of the saponin component but without toxicity."

Sure sounds like a nanotech jab and pharma "gone wild" to me. They are playing with things that they don't understand...there's no engineer anymore.

Our natural immune systems are under attack. The squalene-based "super adjuvants" are potent immunologic attackers. We are guinea pigs.

We should keep a close eye on the gauge (calibre) with which the flu jabs are administered. They seem to be getting larger. This has the "look and feel" of offensive biologic warfare experiments on us without informed consent.

Personally, I don't want that sh$t injected into me or my family. Never again! Enough already. I would sooner take my chances trying to strengthen my natural immune system, not attack it.

Not an MD

Patrons99 said, "Were the Australian flu jabs administered from multi-dose vials? How many manufacturers were involved? Did they have thimerosal? Did they have one of the squalene "super adjuvants"? MF59? ASO3? Was there informed consent? Hmmmm."

I think it is possible that CSL used their proprietary adjuvant, Iscomatrix in their seasonal flu shot Afluria, given to the under age 5 population. Iscomatrix is comprised of "saponin, cholesterol, and phospho-lipid molecules which are held together by hydrophobic forces." This adjuvant is being manufactured in the USA at CSL's Kankakee, Illinois plant. CSL has license agreements for this adjuvant with Merck, Wyeth and Solvay.

Angus Files

Just tried to look up the network but its been closed for maintenance..great site


John Stone


"...or political cowardice."

John Stone

For example, I quote the last paragraph of my article on Richard Horton from December 2008:

"It was always the strategy of the British scientific establishment and government to isolate and destroy Andrew Wakefield – to make him look as if he was standing scientifically and intellectually on his own, and to make sure when they crushed him they discredited all further opposition or dissent on the vaccination issue. In the US context Horton’s book MMR Science and Fiction would be an almost incomprehensible oddity. There is, for instance, only a single mention of thimerosal, which apparently is just another eccentric concern of Wakefield’s. In essence the alleged “vaccine crisis” of the title is entirely about Wakefield and the supposed gullibility of people who doubt official science. Horton’s book is not ultimately about scientific truth, it is about who is credible – we are being told not only is Wakefield not credible, most importantly the parents of vaccine damaged children are not credible either. And cleverly nuanced as Horton’s argument is for a liberal readership, his decision to turn on Wakefield has behind it a highly illiberal and authoritarian basis, in which the interests and voices of the patients and their families are to be finally stamped out. It is ultimately just stage management, and a stab in the back for open debate."

I think this makes it clear where I am coming from. Only a few weeks after I wrote this the Jeni Barnett incident showed how duped many of the UK's own Liberal-Democratic party were:

With one one or two exceptions I don't think these were naturally authoritarian politicians, but they swallowed the big nonsense either out of intellectual laziness and political cowardice.

John Stone


I am not sure have any argument with you - I am suggesting that the fundamental principles of reputedly "free" or "open" societies are being abused. I am not sure I would class mid 19 century Austro-Hungary as such a society (Semmelweis) either.

What I am suggesting is that we are on slippery slope if we are confident that tyranny and the politics tyranny happen only elsewhere, and not in the "Western democracies". Things are bad and getting worse - mostly surreptitiously. For me the liberal society is a noble aspiration under attack from peole who pay lip-service to it.


john stones writes:
'Frankly, we may as well back in the middle ages, the 17th century, or old Russia. This is a shameful thing in a modern "liberal" state. '

Whoa John...why the liberal' medieval sneer references? or are you unaware of the behaviour of modern liberal states? Semmelweiss didnt live in medieval russia, Homeopathy has been under its strongest attacks in 'liberal' states, where the medical profession holds sway.
Its in the liberal states that orthodox medicine has been engaged in its witchhunts against alternative practitioners and alternative thinking. You can go here to learn moer about the ral behavuour of modern liberal states with regard to healing.
The asumption that modern 'liberal' states are open minded and not authoritian is pure nonsense...

A Friend

We have to remember that we will always be on the wrong side of the propaganda wars. For example, recently I read a little blurb in the paper about a 2 month old boy who died of cardiac arrest. Of course, no comment or follow-up. Just that. End of story. Tragic. Of course, it made me wonder about his vaccine situation? Had he recently had any? I have no idea... It very well could have zero connection with vaxx's... Or, it may. Point is... the child who dies from possible Pertussis will be in the news and making news for weeks/months on end.... The media/medical professionals will use this to their advantage at every turn. The whole thing is just sad. :(


With the little facts provided this sure does seem like a case of hospital hygiene fail and runaway infection. Sadly, this is an all to common occurrence, admitted for one thing - come out with another. How easy to pawn it all off on the unvaccinated mystery kid.
Parents accused of causing this certainly do have a right to voice their objections.
A group of us spoke at the CDC ACIP meeting on Mercury in the flu vaccine. When a family appeared who had lost a child to flu.
All of us there politely acknowledged their horrific loss. Later, I went to the their website and each of the 1/2 dozen children on their Clorox sponsored website had immune related conditions and they openly admitted that was the underlying reasons for the flu severity.
It appears this hospital found and excellent way to bypass investigation on the backs of the unvaccinated.


Abi - re: febrile convulsions. I wonder if inflammatory cytokines are involved?

Apparently, the flu jabs currently being "field tested" in Australia are trivalent and include H1N1 "protection" along with seasonal. How do they know ahead of time what strains will appear?

How can any single vaccine possibly cover all recombinations and mutations of the virus? Are the flu jabs selecting-out antiviral-resistant and more virulent strains, that will be much harder to treat? Who is the manufacturer? Are vaccine schedules, in general, producing evolutionary pressure on microbes to adapt, recombine, and mutate?

Were the Australian flu jabs administered from multi-dose vials? How many manufacturers were involved? Did they have thimerosal? Did they have one of the squalene "super adjuvants"? MF59? ASO3? Was there informed consent? Hmmmm.


I find it amazing that so much attention has been given to this in the media, yet the poor child in WA whom died after a flu/swine flu shot got an inch in the local paper and nothing more. As well as showing heartbreaking footage of a child with Whooping cough, let that be balanced by showing footage of a child in the throws of a febrile convulsion after a vaccination. I mean how much longer are we supposed to fall for this? When will the general populous say enough is enough? At 100 jabs? 200? If a child dies from an infectious illness there is something dysfunctional about their immune system...why not look for reasons...rather than enforcing every child gets these shots, the majority of which will never come in contact with these pathogens, or if they do get a mild illness and lifelong immunity...naturally

Jenny Allan

Martin feels that AoA should consider banning 'Quokka' from this site but consider this:-

'Quokka' is probably just one of a plethora of cybernames and e-addresses used by this person who will never reveal his or her REAL identity. I agree that these persons are very annoying and those of us who make comments on this site will have been 'targeted' by them at some time. Why??

Well Martin, If your comments have been 'rubbished' or had the original meaning obscured or 'turned around' by these persons, be aware that this is what they have been carefully trained, (and probably paid), to do!!

The following is from one of Quokka's oh so reasonable comments:-

'It is always a risk to try and read people's minds isn't it? I haven't commented on a lot of things. Please don't attempt to read too much into that.
I will be blocked from this site for refusing to name call wish ill on people - who can say.
I have spent a lot of time - in fact sadly on occasion had to inform families of a death of thier child and I simply feel that if you have knowingly - whether intentionally or not - added to the unimaginable pain being felt - it is important to acknowledge that and apologise for any hurt caused.'

Difficult to argue with isn't it?? -and it puts us all in the wrong-as it is MEANT to do!! This person is an expert in 'word spinning'. Think lawyers, politicians and even 'soap operas'!!

If AoA bans the 'Quokkas', they will simply reappear under under different aliases!!


@ patrons99 2:15 PM

"We need biomarkers."

Please add fibrinogen split products (FSPs) to the list of potential biomarkers which could be readily measured both before and after vaccination as a function of time, using the vaccinee as their own control.


@ Martin Walker 1:43 PM -

After examining the statistics that you cite, how can anyone reasonably dismiss the "portal theory of vaccine-associated disease"? This theory can go head-to-head against the vaccine-induced herd immunity theory, anytime.

If and when the vaccine-induced herd immunity is shot down, you have simultaneously discredited the vaccine-preventable diseases theory.

Once you have shot down the vaccine-preventable diseases theory, you have simultaneously shot down, global vaccine policy.

Why don't we get VERY systematic, and prove once-and-for-all that global vaccine policy is a horrible mistake which might be costing the lives of billions of people?

Perhaps, global vaccine policy is not a mistake at all, and really represents genocide and willful crimes against humanity?

Martin Walker

What I don't understand about the pseudonymous Quokka - and his continual bleating about apologies - is that by his silence he seems to condone the anonymous, evil, barbarous, violent, pro-industry belittlement of Meryl Dorey, the mother of a vaccine damaged child who runs an information network.

Does he , could he tell us, agree with statements made by fellow blog commentators, such as, Meryl should 'die in a fire' or 'just die'. If he does agree with these comments I don't think that AOA should allowed him on site anymore.

Best Wishes,


Cherry - good point! I'm not an epidemiologist...that probably shows.

"Perhaps we can get some inkling of more reliable data by studying populations of non vaccinated kids."

A prospective, randomized, double-blinded comparison between fully vaccinated and completely unvaccinated, starting at birth, would be the gold standard. Such a study would be likely be lengthy and expensive to conduct, logistically. Enrollment and study size might be a problem. Who would finance and conduct such a study? Hmmmm.

Short of a prospective comparison between fully vaccinated and completely unvaccinated, why not start a secure database of names of completely unvaccinated and track them over time for incidence diseases of any kind? If they were spread over a wide geographic area and wide range of ages, that would tend to argue against confounding genetic and environmental exposures.

Perhaps, large scale, case-control or cross-sectional study designs could be considered. I wonder what Dr Mayer Eisenstein thinks of this topic.

How many of his ca. 30,000 completely unvaccinated patients have ASD?

Cherry Sperlin Misra

To Patrons 99, Even the world's very best epidemiologists will be unable to tell you about risk from disease versus risk from vaccines and the reason is this: The mercury which was injected into nearly every child (except the unvaccinated) damaged the immune systems of those children. Therefore, if , for example in 1980 you had 25 deaths from whooping cough, you only know that you have 25 deaths in a population of kids with deranged immune systems. You still have no idea how many deaths you might have in a healthy population of kids. Perhaps we can get some inkling of more reliable data by studying populations of non vaccinated kids.

Martin Walker

The problem with any debate through comments on this or any other site is that the pharma-vaccine industry lobby simply and endlessly avoids crucial questions. The issue in Australia at the moment is free speech and informed choice vs State government censorship, these are big issues that have to be debated out in the open and not from behind pseudonyms on web sites and blogs. The AVN has been accused, often anonymously and without any declaration of vested interests, of publishing untruthful and adverse comments on vaccines and vaccination.

Below are some statements from documented sources and here is an exam question for Quokka and his slippery authoritarian mates. In no more than 100 words, describe the kind of society you propose to ensure that these statements are not made again in any public media. Finally how would you correct those who published such statements?

- In the UK between 1970 and 1990, over 200,000 cases of whooping cough occurred in fully vaccinated children. (Community Disease Surveillance Centre, UK)

- In 1979, Sweden abandoned the whooping cough vaccine due to its ineffectiveness. Out of 5,140 cases in 1978, it was found that 84% had been vaccinated three times. (BMJ 283:696-697, 1981)

- In the New England Journal of Medicine July 1994 issue a study found that over 80% of children under 5 years of age who had contracted whooping cough had been fully vaccinated.

- In 1990, the Journal of the American Medical Association had an article on measles which stated " Although more than 95% of school-aged children in the US are vaccinated against measles, large measles outbreaks continue to occur in schools and most cases in this setting occur among previously vaccinated children." (JAMA, 21/11/90)

- In 1967, Ghana was declared measles free by the World Health Organisation after 96% of its population was vaccinated. In 1972, Ghana experienced one of its worst measles outbreaks with its highest ever mortality rate. (Dr H Albonico, MMR Vaccine Campaign in Switzerland, March 1990)

-In Germany, compulsory mass vaccination against diphtheria commenced in 1940 and by 1945 diphtheria cases were up from 40,000 to 250,000. (Don't Get Stuck, Hannah Allen)

- In the 1970's a tuberculosis vaccine trial in India involving 260,000 people revealed that more cases of TB occurred in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. (The Lancet 12/1/80 p73)

- In Oman between 1988 and 1989, a polio outbreak occurred amongst thousands of fully vaccinated children. The region with the highest attack rate had the highest vaccine coverage. The region with the lowest attack rate had the lowest vaccine coverage. (TheLancet,21/9/91)

John Stone

The trouble is that this is getting frighteningly close to such things as the blood libel against the Jews and accusations of witchcraft.

An infant dies, it is claimed almost certainly falsely from whooping cough - more certainly the published information is inconsistent. A segment of the community becomes to blame, although belief in the efficacy of whooping cough vaccine borders on superstition. It is certain the vaccine cannot eradicate the disease: whether it helps to reduce it or proliferate it - or even make very much difference - is less than clear. The science is uncertain and almost obliterated by the propaganda. But emotions run high and officials make accusation against citizens asking reasonable questions, and the state denies them physical protection.

Frankly, we may as well back in the middle ages, the 17th century, or old Russia. This is a shameful thing in a modern "liberal" state.

A Friend

"G'day A Friend - Dana's parents made the complaint to the HCCC. In Australia they can as individuals.

The HCCC didn't involve themselves. Dana's mum and dad didn't involve the AVN."

G'day, Quokka. Let me be clear here. Dana's parents have the right to do whatever they want to do. They can appeal to any organization that they wish to (or are allowed to). I have no problem with that. Having said that, they would also need some proof of the "harassment" that they allege. I can appreciate that to a grieving family any sort of commentary from a group outside of your own belief system, may feel at the time to be "harassment". I understand. My point is... there needs to be something more than that in order to accuse and/or attempt to censor an organization or an individual. Let me rephrase that... anyone can accuse someone of something but in order to go further than that... (ie censor a website or use the media to promote your view), the bar needs to be set higher. I can't imagine that you would disagree with that, do you?

Old French Saying for Quokka

'Cet animal est tres mechant: quand on l'attaque, il se defend' (This beast is very wicked: when attacked it defends itself).

Instead of pleading moral justification can you demonstrate that Meryl's account isn't true? Otherwise she has been publicly pilloried by officials, subject to anonymous physical threats, and she should have the right to defend herself.

Can you say whether:

a) It is alright to threaten people as Meryl has been threatened?

b) You believe official censorship should reign on vaccination issues?

c) If an official claim is factually inconsistent, even if involving the death of infant, it is wrong to challenge it?

Martin Walker

In my initial e-mail to the AOA, I drew attention to the terrible threats of murder and violence that have been publicly issued against Meryl Doray. A small part of these threats are on these two pages below, and you can read more about them on the Australian Vaccine Network site.

I will ask you again Quokka, do you support your fellow pro-vaccine industry trolls in such threats?

Where I come from Quokka, what you are doing is called 'dodging the issue' on the subject of threats made against Meryl Dorey the parent of a vaccine damaged child by pro-industry propagandists. It's called threatening those who express a desire for freedom of informed choice and it's called hiding behind a ridiculous pseudonym while slandering people campaigning for a democratic health care system.

There is a world of difference between campaigning for freedom of informed choice, such as Meryl Doray is doing, and campaigning with vested interests to force compulsory vaccination on parents, such as you are doing.


Benedetta - You nailed it!

"But I am sure you were talking about statistics. You are saying more children die or are harmed by the acutal disease than that are children harmed or die by vaccine reactions. Do you know the stats?"

Your question is a VERY important one. It will require the world's best, independent, unbiased epidemiologists to answer the question.

One caveat here: your question is independent of the question as to whether the vaccine schedules actually prevent disease. The theory of "vaccine-preventable diseases" is dependent on the theory of "vaccine-induced herd immunity". Both theories are seriously flawed. Yet, global vaccine policy today rests solely on these theories.


G'day A Friend - Dana's parents made the complaint to the HCCC. In Australia they can as individuals.

The HCCC didn't involve themselves. Dana's mum and dad didn't involve the AVN.


Hello Martin. It is lovely to hear from you. How are you? I hope you are well. Thank you for responding to my concern that a grieving family is suffering.

It is always a risk to try and read people's minds isn't it? I haven't commented on a lot of things. Please don't attempt to read too much into that. Perhaps I will be blocked from this site for refusing to name call wish ill on people - who can say.

I have spent a lot of time - in fact sadly on occasion had to inform families of a death of thier child and I simply feel that if you have knowingly - whether intentionally or not - added to the unimaginable pain being felt - it is important to acknowledge that and apologise for any hurt caused.

It is a lot like if you accuse someone of lying and then find out they weren't - you apologise and move on.

I don't know what you call it elsewhere in the world - but where I come from but in WA we would refer to your comment as being "out on the full".


Sue Page

"Yes vaccines cause side effects, and yes sometimes children are harmeded"

But that is okay, right!

So, some how it is worse that a child be damaged by the actual disease than a child that reacts to a vaccine?

But I am sure you were talking about statistics. You are saying more children die or are harmed by the acutal disease than that are children harmed or die by vaccine reactions.

Do you know the stats?

A Friend

"It isn't really relevant whether you consider it harrassment or whether you set out to harrass them - they felt harrassed - you have caused this suffering family pain and they have responded with anger - very understandable. Apologise and leave them alone".

I would tend to agree with you IF this hadn't become a media circus and if other groups hadn't have been involved. It appears that the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) amongst other groups have involved themselves in that matter. At that point, the organization and the person involved must be able to defend themselves against the claims. It would be a disgrace if this "Commission" (or some other organization) was able to shut down and/or censor information from these types of sites simply because of some perceived notion of harrassment.

Martin Walker

What I don't understand about the pseudonymous Quokka, is that by his silence he seems to condone the anonymous, evil, barbarous, pro-industry, violent condemnation of Meryl Dorey a considerably resourceful mother of a vaccine damaged child who runs an information network. for other parents.

Does he, I wonder, agree with sentiments expressed by fellow blog commentators, that Meryl should die in a fire, or do the world a favour and just die? If he does, I really don't think that AOA should allow him on site anymore.

Sue Page

Having spoken at the time to the baby's family as well as to the NCAHS spokesperson, as well as having had my own personal dealings with Meryl, I will simply say that her version of "truth" bears no resemblance to mine nor theirs. Nor is her website information helpful. Yes vaccines cause side effects, and yes sometimes children are harmed, but the rates and severity are so distorted by Meryl's "facts" you would be as foolish to trust them as to give your bank account details to someone in Nigeria


It isn't really relevant whether you consider it harrassment or whether you set out to harrass them - they felt harrassed - you have caused this suffering family pain and they have responded with anger - very understandable. Apologise and leave them alone

Heidi N

I think it's common to see different interpretations of events. It makes it difficult to socialize sometimes. I hope this whole situation works out.

michael framson

"gives evidence about a society on the verge of fascism." Martin Walker

The descent into fascism that is happening before our eyes is evident because the truth no longer matters. The only thing that matters is the propaganda.


Any death of a child is tragic. To exploit that death for industry ends makes it moreso. The pertussis vaccine does not prevent the recipient from carrying and passing along the disease to others-- it's in the product insert. The blame and attacks on AVN were baseless to begin with. The attacks simply threaten to produce more dead children, both by distracting bystanders from the fact that their infants can still catch a disease from vaccinated individuals as well as censuring an organization bringing important vaccine safety information to the public.


@ jen - yes, agreed. Please do hold your head up high Meryl Dorey and AVN.

It would certainly be bad enough if cummulative synergistic toxicity of the vaccine schedules predisposed or potentiated the vaccinated to be more susceptible to outbreaks and recurrences of the common diseases of childhood.

But what if the vaccine schedules also predisposed or potentiated the vaccinated to be more susceptible to (a) systemic vasculidites, (b) autoimmune diseases, (c) SIDS/SUID, and (d) cytokine storm, either with or without exposure to a real epidemic? Serious question. If there’s data on this question, I’d certainly like to see it.

We need biomarkers. Has anyone compared measurement of ESR, C-reactive protein, D-dimer level, blood clotting time, platelet function, zeta potential, and darkfield microscopy, as a function of time before and after vaccination, in the same subject, i.e. using the vaccinee as their own control? This would seem to be a fairly straight forward study to perform.

A Friend

A few years back, it was all in the news about outbreaks of pertussis in my area. You couldn't turn on the tv without hearing a report of this dangerous situation. Come to find out, it was determined that ultimately these cases were NOT pertussis cases. Of course, this turn of events was not reported on (or if it was, it was not reported on with the same gusto as the original reports). Read this to get the full story.

"This report describes two hospital outbreaks and one community outbreak of respiratory illness during 2004--2006 in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Tennessee that were attributed initially to pertussis. However, subsequent investigations revealed negative or equivocal laboratory results and epidemiologic and clinical features atypical of pertussis, suggesting that pertussis was not the cause of these outbreaks. The findings in this report underscore the need for thorough epidemiologic and laboratory investigation of suspected pertussis outbreaks when considering extensive control measures".

I am not suggesting that this is what has happened in this case but certainly it does show that complete investigations MUST be done in these cases.


the only dodgy thing here seems to be the NCAHS!!! They seem to be stirring up the pot and hopefully will be exposed as such. Hold your head high, AVN.

Jenny Allan

Thank you Meryl. Your compassion, sincerity and integrity shine through all the hateful slime which has been directed at you and other citizens of so called 'civilised democracies' who have dared to question the safety of certain vaccines and other government sponsored mass medications.


From what I've read, it's not uncommon for whooping cough outbreaks to occur even among the recently vaccinated.

"The Institute of Public Health of Ljubljana was notified of a case of pertussis in a 16 month old boy, on 31 August 2004. The boy had received three doses of pertussis vaccination in the 12 months before becoming ill. The diagnosis was laboratory confirmed (RT-PCR and culture isolation)....Epidemiological and clinical investigations revealed that at least three of the 12 children in the same kindergarten group as the index case had pertussis symptoms. Another six children in the same group had acute respiratory infection symptoms. All nine suspected cases were also laboratory tested (RT-PCR), but the results were negative. The children in the kindergarten group were between one and two years old. All the children had been immunised with three doses of DTP(acellular)-HiB. Less than a year had passed since the last immunisation."

From "Pertussis outbreak in recently vaccinated children in a kindergarten in Ljubljana during a resurgence in pertussis incidence"


Meryl, that was a sensitive, well-written, and very informative explanation.

John Stone

The calm and rationality of Meryl's writing alone mark her out for attack - no one can be allowed to be this reasonable any more.

Her dignity and courage are inspiring, and western liberal democracy is fast going down the plughole.

Jim Thompson

Meryl Dorey:

It seems that it is the charity and love you give that makes you a target. Avoid contact with the parents, other than consolation for their loss, as this may only fuel more lies and exploitation and deters you from your life’s work. At some point they may recognize this and seek you out for reconciliation. Their loss, as you know, is life changing.

Martin Walker

The response to Meryl Dorey's reasoned and balanced information about vaccination on her site, has been amazing, take this as a response to the article above:

Marge Innovera says:
July 31, 2010 at 12:17 am
Meryl, since you’re American, let me respond to this post in American: You’re a lying sack of shit. There’s a job for you at Fox News.

Yet even this is fairly low key compared to the following posts, on pro vaccination sites in favour of the State regulatory body ruling on the AVN. These posts suggest the murder of Meryl Dorey and her colleagues.

These extreme posts on the AVN site and other sites, are truly frightening, especially in a situation where the police will not act to protect citizens.

That the police also support the suppression of free speech and refuse to act on violent threats against those who express views on vaccination gives evidence about a society on the verge of fascism.

With the opposition to free speech and the promotion of enforced vaccine now going global; With grass roots pro-vaccine organisations in Australia publicly supporting suggestions that these who believe in informed choice should be killed, we all have to defend defended each other.

below is the post that I placed on the AVN site yesterday.

July 31, 2010 at 2:46 am
Dear Meryl, As you know I have been studying and writing about the pharmaceutical lobby that promotes allopathic medicine and vaccines and campaigns against alternative medicine, for the last twenty years. These groups include Skeptics, the American Council Against Health Fraud, the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI) and many others, which are now proliferating in Australia. These groups came into existence in the 1980′s, in the US and Britain and have now gone global.

However, while these groups, in Europe and the US, indulge in propaganda, distortion, rigged research and character assassination, I have never seen them use foul language and ignorance with such gay abandon. That this commentator (Innovera, above) fails to see that s/he is undermining their own cause and that of their organisations, is a true reflection of their failure to support a rational debate. Do you think this person is a member of HCCC? (the State regulatory body)

Continue to be proud of your organisation and your work in the public interest, your article above is a master class in writing for a heart-felt cause, your rationality, humanity and intelligence shines through.

If you could get your blog on AOA, I’m sure that there are many US citizens who would wish to question Innovera’s bizarre attack on their language skills.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)