Anti-vaccination group forced to change name

22

A controversial group that claims vaccines cause autism and cancer will be forced to change its name after a tribunal found it was likely to mislead parents into thinking it provides fair and balanced information.

The Administrative Decisions Tribunal decided the name "Australian Vaccination Network" (AVN) was likely to mislead an ordinary member of the public into thinking it provided comprehensive information about vaccination.

The victory is the end of long-running legal battles between the AVN and various arms of the NSW government as they have sought to prevent it from spreading misinformation about vaccines.

NSW Fair Trading Minister Anthony Roberts welcomed the result.

"This is about being open and upfront about what you stand for, not hiding behind a name which could mislead the community about a very significant public health issue," he said. "The time has come for AVN to find a name which reflects its anti-vaccination stance."

Written By: Amy Corderoy
continue to source article at smh.com.au

22 COMMENTS

  1. I can think of a bunch of other organizations that should have to change their name due to their lack of evidence and the physical and psychological harm they do to unsuspecting or gullible citizens – especially our innocent children.

    If only other regional and state governments had the balls to confront rich, powerful social structures and unsupported or fantasy businesses that should have to clearly state their irrational, mind-virus agendas in the public sphere…. Mac.

  2. Who could sue them for damages? The vaccine maker for lost sales, the insurance companies for early deaths, the hospitals for having to treat people who get preventable diseases, families who lose a bread winner. The state for practising medicine without a licence.

    I had a friend who many years ago wrote a medical application that recommended changes in diet and exercise. I was surprised to find that avoiding practising medicine without a licence was a major concern.

    Perhaps they could be nailed with misleading advertising.

  3. The anti-vacc contingent is so strong on the internet, researching the answer to my question gives me pause. So I’ll ask it here if only to address the issue:

    Is herd immunity provided by vaccines compromised when a group of dingbats gives “the enemy” the blue-print to our defense and it (ironically) evolves itself around the current barrier… consequently making current vaccines obsolete and eventually jeopardizing us all?

    • In reply to #5 by Lilium:

      Is herd immunity provided by vaccines compromised when a group of dingbats…

      I’ve never heard of that, so now I’m curious too. I read the Wiki entry for “herd immunity”, but it said nothing about it. I would say no, they don’t cause a virus to evolve around the “barrier”, but I could be wrong. I would say the people immunized pose a greater danger to themselves. Since vaccination isn’t 100% effective, I would worry about those viruses that infected an immunized person. Hopefully someone else will chime in here :-)

      • In reply to #6 by A3Kr0n:

        Since vaccination isn’t 100% effective, I would worry about those viruses that infected an immunized person.

        Re-reading your comment, I intuitively (ack!) feel you are right but I think the point of immunisation to the point of herd immunity is to make those rare mutants who dodge the vaccine unable to spread to the next susceptible individual i.e. you immunise to the point where the non-responders are protected by the rest of the immune herd. Vaccine response rates are presumably taken into account when deciding at what point herd immunity occurs.

      • In reply to #6 by A3Kr0n:

        In reply to #5 by Lilium:

        Is herd immunity provided by vaccines compromised when a group of dingbats…

        I’ve never heard of that, so now I’m curious too. I read the Wiki entry for “herd immunity”, but it said nothing about it. I would say no, they don’t cause a virus to evolve around the “barrier”…

        “herd immunity” isn’t really immunity,it’s a probability game, you catch a virus from a vector, some one or some thing that has the active virus. the fewer vectors the less likely that the virus will be passed along. if 90% of a population is immune, the 10% that isn’t will be less likely to come in contact with a vector, therefor are “protected”. if they do come in contact with a vector, they are likely to get the virus. evolution doesn’t just “happen” and then stop, it is continuous process. viruses are evolving, they will eventually adapt through natural selection to the current immunities unless they are forced into extinction (small pox), we have to do the same. we are starting to loose the battle with bacteria because we have failed to realize this continuous process.

    • In reply to #5 by Lilium:

      Is herd immunity provided by vaccines compromised when a group of dingbats gives “the enemy” the blue-print to our defense and it (ironically) evolves itself around the current barrier…

      Lower vaccination levels (in a rough sense) decrease the ‘distance’ between the infected and the susceptible. The susceptible who become infected increase the chance that a mutation could occur that may circumvent the antibodies produced by a particular vaccine. I don’t think that being in a partially-vaccinated population makes the above more likely due to the use of vaccination in that population but it will increase the chance of someone getting a bacteria/virus which may need multiple jabs of the same vaccine to reach fully protective levels of antibodies in enough people to create sufficient herd immunity e.g. diptheria, tetanus or measles. Hence why separate MMRs are a bad idea – the gaps between single doses give a longer time before full immunity.

      So I guess the answer (by my non-statistically sound back-of-the-envelope reasoning) is yes. Apologies if the above already occurred to you – I’m not sure if I’ve answered your question.

  4. The blind leading the blind due to ignorance on both sides.

    This is little better than the village idiot Taliban paranoid type drivel about anti polio vaccinations being a Western conspiracy to somehow harm their children.

    What better example can there be for the need for thoroughgoing science education and the removal of ignoramuses from school boards.

  5. Let’s just do a thought experiment here.
    What if the vaccines WERE causing autism? ( I know they aren’t but, again, a thought experiment)….

    This group would surely be able to generate statistics that inform parents of the frequency of autism vs the efficacy of the vaccine, wouldn’t they? If one case of autism is generated for every 1 million lives saved, is that acceptable? If it were ten? a hundred? a thousand? ten thousand?

    I mean, as a parent, I use products and chemicals all the time that have to potential to help OR TO HURT my children. If a chid gets migraines, the chemicals that are used to help have side effects, but not every patient gets the side effects…. There are statistics that drug companies can furnish. Where are the statistics on this side effect? Surely these groups claim to “know” something, where is their proof?

    So, i am calling for them to step up and furnish actual results that are something other than “gut feelings” and Jenny McCarthy-esque “beliefs”.

  6. Political parties are required to register their names to avoid confusion with other parties on the electoral register. Companies are prohibited from using certain “sensitive” words in their names without approval. I wonder why similar rules are not enforced for all charities, religions, think tanks, advice groups and lobby firms. They should not be permitted to mislead with their name either when they establish, or thereafter. And there should be an adjudicator who can impose fines or force a name change if necessary.

  7. These people may have had their nervous systems hijacked by a parasitic virus; a successful effort to dismantle vaccination programs would be very beneficial for the virus.

    I’m kidding, of course. They’re nuts.

  8. If I’m not mistaken, chimps are susceptible to many of the same diseases that humans are. And I think they receive flu shots and other vaccines as well. If the anti- vaccine crowd insist that they cause autism, it might be useful to do a comparative study of how many chimps have become autistic as a result of receiving vaccines. I suspect very few.

  9. Just had to stop by and say as much as I love the idea of a vaccination, it doesn’t always work and can have negative side effects. I developed a severe allergy to eggs after an influenza vaccine. I cannot eat eggs nor have any type of egg based vaccine. My son has an autoimmune disorder that he reacts to everything with a hypersensitivity reaction including to the adjuvant in vaccine. This makes him medically unable to receive them. I have dealt with being labelled a bad parent and not caring about harming other children for his inability to be vaccinated. Not only does it make it hard for him to have friends but the state in which I live does not accept any exemption from vaccines for schooling, making him homeschooled and confined. This alone could hurt his college experience and shape where he attends. Its not his fault for having this disorder and I’m protecting my child’s safety by not vaccinating him. This should not be looked down upon or harm his education. I’m all for vaccines but we do need Americans especially to know there are risks involved.

Leave a Reply