Publications of my University Research (2007 – 2019)
My research has been done at the University of Wollongong and at Murdoch University in Western Australia . Here are the articles that I have had published and/or presented at academic conferences since 2007. I also provide this information to the community in a Newsletter that can be accessed in the publications sub-menu. In addition, I have sent many letters to health authorities requesting the science that supports the Australian government’s vaccination policy. These letters and responses are recorded in the letters sub-menu and you will note that the authorities do not answer the questions the community is asking. They simply claim that vaccines are ‘safe and effective’ and have been ‘thoroughly tested’.
This is not supported by my university research which demonstrates that vaccines have never been tested for safety using an inert placebo in the unvaccinated group. This is termed ‘undone science’ in the governments policy because it is essential scientific research that is needed to conclusively claim that vaccines are safe in humans.
Here is a pamphlet that summarises the main arguments that I presented in my PhD thesis that investigated the control of infectious diseases in Australia – The Summary of the Main Arguments in my PhD Thesis (2019).
Industry lobby group activists have been permitted to present false and misleading information about my university research in the mainstream corporate-sponsored media and to the NSW HCCC (Ken McLeod (2018), an Australian Skeptic/SAVN lobby group activist with no health qualifications. The industry lobby groups are being permitted to confuse the public with false information about independent vaccine research and this ensures that the public has to ‘trust’ that the government authorities and medical doctors (who are ‘educated’ with industry-funded studies) are using accurate and complete scientific information to design public health policy.
Here is a link to the information and presentations from the conference titled – The Censorship of the Vaccination Debate in Australia (June 2018).
November 2020 Misapplication of the Precautionary Principle has Misplaced the Burden of Proof of Vaccine Safety.’ Science Public Health and the Law Journal, Institute Pure and Applied Knowledge (IPAK)
This article describes how governments globally have reversed the precautionary principle in policy development to put the onus of proof of harmlessness of vaccines on the general public and not on the pharmaceutical companies or the government. This has allowed governments to protect industry interests in government policies, and not the public’s interest of health.
It is the reason why governments and scientists have never done the vaccinated versus unvaccinated study of the full vaccination program of 16 vaccines, using an inert placebo in the unvaccinated group, to prove that the program is safe. This is fundamental scientific evidence that has never been collected to prove that combining multiple vaccines in infants body’s promotes health in the individual or community.
This represents a crime against humanity and on 29 August 2020 I put out a video titled ‘Creating a Medical Tyranny‘ that describes the political processes that have enabled this to happen.
In May 2015 my article titled: ‘The Ethics of Childhood Influenza Immunisation: should Australian children be vaccinated against influenza?‘ was published in the Medical Veritas Journal Vol 7 Issue 2 May 11.
In 2014 the ABC (27 November) published an article titled – ‘Whooping cough cases rise among infants, raise concerns vaccine maybe losing effectiveness‘ that describes the ineffectiveness of whooping cough vaccine in controlling the incidence of the disease in the population in 2014. This article confirmed the information from my research published in 2007 on the government’s whooping cough policy and the use of the vaccine – 2007 Whooping Cough Vaccine Research. My research demonstrated that even in the nineties the whooping cough vaccine was ineffective in reducing the incidence of whooping cough in the Australian population.
Here is a summary article of my whooping cough research published in the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) Newsletter (April, 2009). Titled: An Analysis of Whooping Cough Incidence in the Australian Population. Whilst Peter McIntyre was asked to provide a response article in this April 2009 PHAA Newsletter he did not provide a referenced paper to support his claims. If anyone can provide a referenced copy of his PHAA April 2009 Newsletter claims, then please send it to me so I can publish the referenced article on my website for debate.
EuroSciCon Controlling Cancer Summit: HPV vaccines have not been proven to be safe or effective in the prevention of cervical cancer.
In May 2014 I presented a paper at the Controlling Cancer Summit in London organised by EuroScicon (12 May 2014). My paper was titled ‘HPV vaccines have not been proven to be safe or effective in the prevention of cervical cancer’. Abstract This paper was been published in the journal Infectious Agents and Cancer (June 2013) and it provided evidence that all HPV infections are harmless and asymptomatic unless environmental co-factors are present that are necessary for carcinogenic changes to occur. The FDA states on its website “Infections caused by HPV actually cause no danger in healthy women and are usually short lived”. Therefore, mass HPV vaccination programs in developed countries where the co-factors for cervical cancer development are not prevalent, and where cervical cancer is a low risk for women, result in the majority of women (99%) using a vaccine (a drug) for a disease they are not at risk of getting.
This article has also been presented in a summarised format on the Hormones Matter Website. and in the EuroSciCon Newsletter.
In April 2014 Japan stopped recommending HPV vaccines in government vaccination programs until further safety studies have been completed. This was a result of the high number of adverse events and deaths associated with this vaccine. India and Utah have also stopped the recommendation of this vaccine and France is considering similar action. Here is a link to the suspension of HPV vaccination programs in Japan. A public hearing into the danger of aluminium adjuvant in vaccines (there is 3 times as much aluminium adjuvant in HPV vaccines as other vaccines) has been debated in a public hearing in France on 22 May 2014. The report from this hearing stated that many people have a pre-disposition (genetic condition) to serious reactions from aluminium adjuvants and this needs to be considered in the recommendation of vaccines in universal vaccination programs. Here is a link to the findings.
Here is the letter I sent to the Minister of Health (5 December 2014) asking why the Australian government is subsidising the HPV vaccine?
The marketing campaign for HPV vaccines has been designed and funded by the manufacturers of the vaccines and promoted to consumers through the medical associations. The pharmaceutical companies used ready made slides and lecture kits to educate doctors about this vaccine. Here is a link to my article published on the Hormones Matter website titled – The Pharma Funded Promotion of HPV Vaccines. This article describes the way in which HPV vaccines have been promoted to consumers by doctors with campaigns that were designed and funded by the pharmaceutical companies.
Here is an article regarding the impending trial of the Bill Gates Foundation (BGF) in the Indian Supreme Court for illegally trialling the HPV vaccine on thousands of Indian children. This article has been published in many countries but it has not been published in the mainstream Australian or US media. This court case is investigating the claim that the BGF, WHO and the Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH – funded by Bill Gates) “were criminally negligent trialling the (HPV) vaccines on an vulnerable uneducated and under-informed population school administrators, students and parents who were not provided informed consent or advised of potential adverse effects or required to be monitored post-vaccination”. This information can be accessed in these articles Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Vaccine Empire on Trial in India and Bill Gates Faces Trial in India for Illegally Testing Tribal Children with Vaccines.
A Question for the AMA President (2014):
Why is the Australian government aggressively marketing the HPV vaccine ($Au450 per person) which only covers 2 of 15+ strains of HPV that are associated with causing cervical cancer, in school programs for girls and boys, when Pap screening combined with surgery is safer and more effective in the prevention of cervical cancer? All vaccinated women will still need Pap screening because at least 30% of cervical cancer is not covered by the vaccine – so why do Australians need this vaccine?
Presentation (February 2013)
In February 2013 I presented a paper at the University of Melbourne, History and Philosophy of Science Postgraduate Association Conference. My paper was titled: Vaccinations and the Medical Model of Health; how ethical is this policy? Abstract. This session was chaired by Dr. James Bradley, School of Population and Global Health. My paper concluded that Australia’s vaccination policies are not ethical because all the science has not been used to prove vaccines (and the combined schedule of vaccines) are safe and effective. The claims in the Australian government’s vaccination policy are founded on ‘undone science’ – i.e essential research that has not been done to prove the safety and efficacy of the governments vaccination schedule.
My article titled ‘HPV vaccines have not been shown to be cost-effective in countries with comprehensive Pap screening and surgery’ was published in the journal Infectious Agents and Cancer (June 12 2013 Vol 8: 21). This article provides evidence that the benefits of this vaccine are only speculative and that inadequate safety data has been collected. Therefore the risks and benefits of this vaccine are still unknown yet it has been promoted to all Australian children – boys and girls in school programs. The media has not reported accurately on this vaccine because SAVN industry activists (who have influence in the Australian media and with politicians, in particular Richard Di Natale – leader of the Greens) – David Hawkes, Candice Lea and Matthew Berryman – one or more whom have no background or qualifications in health or vaccination policies, provided false and misleading information in another article that was published at the same time in the Infectious Agents and Cancer Journal . Here are the non-evidence based claims that were published by these activists in 2013 that I have provided in Appendix 5 of my PhD thesis – Comment on the Hawke, Lea, and Berryman Paper.
A summary of this article is presented on the Hormones Matters website titled Marketing the HPV Vaccines to Prevent Cervical Cancer. This research was also presented at the 3rd world congress on Cancer Science and Therapy in San Francisco on the 21st October 2013.
Facts about HPV Infections:
HPV infections on their own (including HPV 16 and 18) are not a risk for cervical cancer when the environmental co-factors needed for carcinogenesis are not also present. Hence 80% of cervical cancer occurs in the developing countries where the risk factors are prevalent for HPV infections to progress to disease.
Risk factors for cervical cancer include (but are not limited to a
a) multiple partners for the male or female b) not wearing a condom / microbicides c) conditions conducive to STD’s such as poor hygiene and sanitation. The majority of women in developed countries such as Australia, UK and the US, are infected with HPV but they are not at high risk from any HPV infection because the co-factors for this disease are not prevalent in these countries.
The ‘HPV Vaccine’ has been promoted to women as a ‘vaccine to prevent cervical cancer’ but it has not been demonstrated to prevent cervical cancer this is why it is not called a ‘cervical cancer vaccine’. See Fact Sheet.
This vaccine has been promoted to the public on misleading statements and selective information and this has been outlined in our joint Letter to the Editor of the Infectious Agents and Cancer Journal (1st February 2013). In this letter we have asked 8 questions about the information that was used to promote HPV vaccines to the public. Dr. Silvia de Sanjose has answered these 8 questions with selective information and I have provided a critique of these 8 answers here.
HPV Vaccine Fact Sheet: The information in this fact sheet has been published in the Infectious Agents and Cancer Journal, the conference proceedings for the British Society for Ecological Medicine (BSEM 2011) and reported by the ABC in the on-line Health Report in October 2011. It has also been presented at 2 international conferences.
Here are the declared Conflicts of interest in HPV Vaccine Development that have been documented in the development and approval of HPV vaccines.
Here are some of the serious safety concerns that have been documented with HPV vaccines globally .
Presentation at the University of NSW
In April 2012 I presented a paper on the HPV vaccine at the University of NSW, Sydney. The paper was presented at the Silence and Articulation Conference (12-13 April) organised by the National Centre in HIV Social Research (NCHSR). My paper was titled: Human papillomavirus: Are HPV vaccines a safe and effective management strategy for cervical cancer disease in Australia? Abstract
In June 2012 I presented a paper at the University of Wollongong (UOW), Higher Degree Research Students Conference. This was organised by the Faculty of Arts. My paper was titled: Coercive and Mandatory Immunisation: how ethical is this policy? Abstract
This presentation was based on the poster I presented at the National Health Promotion Conference in Perth, May 2009: Coercive and Mandatory Immunisation; our ethical is this policy? Poster
Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 2012
In December 2012 I became aware that the Australian Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill was being consolidated and that a Senate Inquiry was being held regarding current human rights and anti-discrimination conduct. My submission to the Senate Inquiry provided evidence of the influence of industry on government and medical research and it was published on the government website: The Australian Government’s Vaccination Policies and the Discrimination against Healthy Individuals in Schools and the Workplace This bill was not consolidated in 2013.
Government vaccination policies are a human rights issue because this policy recommends a medical procedure, requiring the injection of unknown substances into the healthy human body; without regard for individual genetics. The government does not require doctors to inform the public of the ingredients of vaccines and their known side-effects or to assess the patients family history to see if there is a contraindication to vaccination. Currently there are institutions in Australia that are discriminating against unvaccinated individuals even though vaccination in Australia is NOT compulsory.
Presentation at the University of Wollongong
In June 2011 I presented a poster at the University of Wollongong (UOW) Postgraduate Conference. The poster was titled: The Pathogenesis of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) in the Development of Cervical Cancer: are HPV vaccines a safe and effective management strategy? HPV Poster
In September 2011 The British Society of Ecological Medicine (BSEM) published my article on the HPV vaccine in the on-line conference proceedings for the BSEM Scientific Conference The Health Hazards of Disease Prevention (March 2011). My article was titled: The Pathogenesis of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) in the Development of Cervical Cancer: are HPV vaccines a safe and effective management strategy?
The ABC on-line Health Report did an interview regarding this publication on 13 October 2011. Titled: Questioning the Evidence for HPV Vaccine.
In 2010 I submitted an abstract on the HPV vaccine (cervical cancer) to the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) for presentation at the 12th National Immunisation Conference. This academic research was performed in the School of Environmental Health at Murdoch University, Western Australia. The abstract was declined by the PHHA.
This conference is run by the PHAA with 100% funding from the pharmaceutical companies and government. Here are 5 abstracts for papers that I had published in peer-reviewed journals from 2009-2013 that were not accepted by the PHAA for presentation:
- Evidence for Coercive Immunisation Policies in Australia: How ethical is this policy? Abstract
- Questioning the Evidence for HPV Vaccine as a Prevention for Cervical Cancer. Abstract
- Questioning the evidence for Vaccinating against Bordetella Pertussis (Whooping Cough) in Australia. Abstract
- The Evidence for Childhood Influenza in Australia: Should Children be Immunised? Abstract
- Investigating the Evidence for the Promotion of Swine Flu Vaccine. Abstract
My article on the adverse reactions to the childhood influenza vaccine that occurred during the West Australian trial of this vaccine in 2010 was published on the VacTruth.com website. This article was titled: Adverse Reactions to Flu Vaccine in Children 2010
Presentation at the Australian National Health Promotion Conference in Perth in May 2009, The Ethics of Childhood Influenza Immunisation
Presentation at the Murdoch University Postgraduate Conference. This paper was titled: Should Australian Children be Vaccinated? (See article above)
A summary article of my whooping cough research titled Is the Whooping Cough Vaccine Effective? (referenced copy) was published in the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) Intouch Newsletter in April 2009. When I submitted my article to Michael Moore at the PHAA he contacted Peter McIntyre, the Director of the National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance (NCIRS) and asked him to provide a response to my article. Both articles were then published side-by-side in the PHAA Newsletter (April 2009).
The difference is that I provided a fully referenced copy of my paper and to date I have not seen a fully referenced copy of Peter McIntyre’s response – even though I requested it. The references are essential to assess the validity of the arguments being presented.
National Health Promotion Association Conference (18 – 19 May Perth 2009)
I. Coercive and Mandatory Immunisation: how ethical is this policy? (Poster)
II. Childhood Influenza Immunisation: how is this program promoted and evaluated? (Oral presentation). See article above.
Australasian College of Environmental and Nutritional Medicine (ACNEM), A new strain of influenza or a change in surveillance? Vol 28, No 4, Dec 2009
Poster Presentation 2009
The USA National Vaccine Information Centre (NVIC) Show Us the Science Give us the Choice The 4th International Public Conference on Vaccination
Natural Health and Vegetarian Life, 2009, Questioning the Evidence for Childhood Immunisation. Plus a brochure on Childhood Vaccination: Investigate the Risks, Autumn edition
Australasian College of Environmental and Nutritional Medicine (ACNEM), Coercive and Mandatory Immunisation vol 27, No.2, October 2008, p.6 – 9
2007 A thesis submitted in (partial) fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Science (University of Wollongong), Population Health, School of Health Sciences (High Distinction) An Analysis of the Federal Government’s Whooping Cough Policy
A Summary Article of my Whooping Cough Research published by the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) (Newsletter 2009)