The Therapeutic Goods Administration, the body charged with ensuring that all therapeutic goods sold in Australia are safe and effective (though they are 100% funded by the companies making these same products under a scheme called Cost Recovery) has named itself as chief censor of all things health-related.
Before the election, the AVN attempted to get 2 billboards erected in order to inform the public that vaccines can and do cause death in some people. One would think this would be relevant information for any parent considering vaccination?
The family of Gabby Larkin, a young woman who developed a rare form of ovarian cancer within a very short time after receiving a Gardasil HPV vaccine – a cancer she subsequently died from – graciously allowed the AVN to use Gabby’s photo and a bit of her story on our billboards.
Every single billboard company we spoke with was happy to accept our artwork. Once they submitted it for approval however, they all got the same answer from the Outdoor Media Association (OMA), the body which ensures that ‘standards’ are adhered to:
…this advertisement does not align with the Therapeutic Goods Administration Act, which notes that advertising relating to therapeutic goods “must not be inconsistent with relevant current public health campaigns”
Since we were not advertising a therapeutic good (nor would we ever do so), we felt that this policy did not apply to our billboards. The companies we spoke with agreed – but the OMA and the TGA have together decided that those who question vaccination do not deserve the rights of all other Australian citizens – the right to freedom of political speech!
It was around this time, Gabby’s parents discovered the TGA had removed their daughter’s report from the government’s database.
Gabby’s doctor had confirmed that she (the doctor) had reported Gabby’s post-vaccination death to the DAEN database where it had remained in the official statistics until very recently. For some inexplicable reason, the TGA decided to remove Gabby’s death report and apparently, many other adverse event reports as well.
A recent Freedom of Information claim (FOI HPV) has uncovered dozens of other HPV adverse event reports which have also been either removed or were never added to the database at all. If this is the situation with HPV vaccinations, one has to wonder how many other reports of Adverse Events Following Immunisation (AEFI) are likewise being hidden?
It is estimated that only 1% (approximately) of AEFI are ever reported – a shocking statistic considering the fact that vaccines are not subjected to the same sorts of clinical trials pre-licensure as other drugs and rely instead on ‘post-marketing surveillance’ to catch the risks of death and serious injury in those who receive them.
If those few reactions which are reported are arbitrarily removed from the database, what does that say about the TGA’s or the Government’s commitment to ensuring that the vaccines we are using are as safe as they possibly can be?
Australian High Court decisions have enshrined the absolute right for all citizens and residents to speak publicly about any political issue. The Court did not say we were only allowed to discuss issues if the government agreed with them. They did not say that this right was sacrosanct except when it came to issues of vaccination or other medical topics.
We’ve just commemorated the 75th anniversary of D-Day, the invasion of Europe by allied forces to preserve freedom in the face of tyranny. More than 10,000 allied forces died on the beaches of Normandy to keep our nations free. I have to wonder what these brave young men would think if they knew that the nations they died for had started to bear such a strong resemblance to the ones they’d fought against?
by Meryl Dorey
Please note: Blog posts are opinion pieces which represent the views of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of the AVN. This blog is a forum, support and information site and outlet for discussion about the relative benefits and risks of vaccinations in particular – and medical procedures in general. We do not provide medical advice but believe that everyone has the opportunity and the obligation to do their own research before making decisions for their families. The information we provide (including your personal review of the references we cite) should be taken in conjunction with a range of other data, including that obtained from government, your health care provider and/or other medical source material to assist you in developing the knowledge required to make informed health choices.
