Intended for healthcare professionals

Rapid response to:

Feature Medicine and the Media

Medical response to Trump requires truth seeking and respect for patients

BMJ 2017; 356 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j661 (Published 07 February 2017) Cite this as: BMJ 2017;356:j661

Rapid Response:

Re: Medical response to Trump requires truth seeking and respect for patients

Medical response to Trump requires truth seeking and respect for patients.

Peter J. Archer opines that “…vaccine safety has become a ‘hot button’ topic and that culture war is raging between two extremes, on one side “all vaccines are inherently safe, and effective, by definition” argument, and on the other the people arguing the exact opposite. With the extremists on both sides engaging in highly emotional name-calling and hysteria, it has become almost impossible for a rational voice to be heard…”

In reality (not just as I see it) it is the proponents of vaccination who resort to irrational arguments and name-calling, and abusive emails and worse, while failing to provide scientific evidence for their assertion that all vaccines are safe and effective, ignoring the product inserts and orthodox medical research articles pointing out that vaccines do cause a long list of serious reactions, including deaths and that all outbreaks and epidemics occur in the vaccinated. As such they actually provide most of the evidence (besides case reports by parents of the affected babies, children, and adults) for those who oppose vaccination, and including myself.

I have studied by now more than 400 000 pages of medical papers (and counting) published in peer-reviewed medical and scientific journals and as such I should be in a position to provide an informed opinion and overview of vaccines’ effects.

I don’t see it as war of any kind, just truthful reporting. If with my knowledge I would still “believe” that vaccines are safe and effective I would not be able to claim rationality. I don’t use the words ‘believe’ or ‘belief’, the proponents of vaccination do. They are the ones who resort to argumentum ad hominem, often instead of argumentum ad rem, and attack those who are just pointing to the documented facts, as a rule sourced from the bona fide medical literature and product inserts and the eye witness reports by parents/carers.

What matters is the objective reality that exists on its own without people even knowing about it and irrespective of their affiliations.

It is the proponents of vaccination that often endeavour to silence those who see the objective truth and who even marginally criticise their sacred cow. It doesn’t help to proclaim, “I am not against vaccination, I just want safe vaccines” they will be branded by the proponents of vaccination as extremists and at times attacked in the most serious manner.

As a vocal opponent of all and any vaccines because of the overwhelming scientific evidence of their ineffectiveness (far from preventing the targeted diseases actually causing them) and the documented deleterious effects. I don’t care whether they continue publishing a lot of their undocumented hollow statements which to the informed and discerning readers provide further evidence of their ignorance and a lack of scientific acumen. However, I am totally opposed to them using the power of the state to enforce and mandate their toxic and deadly vaccines and refusing to accept responsibility. Worse still, to use the law and the court system to accuse, prosecute and incarcerate the innocent parents/carers of causing what eminently are vaccines’ deleterious effect and deaths, alleging the much discredited, invalid, infamous, indeed not much short of criminal, shaken baby syndrome and its synonyms.

I rarely get 'psycho' emails, one or two over the years, and after responding “Please, keep emailing me, you write very interestingly”, I never heard from the one of them again. And the other admitted that all his/her three children are autistic. Without actually saying it, I felt that he/she perhaps could not admit it to himself/herself that he/she caused his/her childrens’ autism by taking them to the doctor to be vaccinated.

As for the emotionality: on my books it is cruel to demand that the opponents of vaccination stay unemotional when so many children are seriously injured by vaccines or die. Even worse, when you are the parents or other carers falsely accused of causing the symptoms/death and all your children are taken away.

In science there is no such thing as I give an inch, and you give an inch. It is more along “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth” even if you were the only one who says it. Fortunately, the numbers of those who see the truth and say it are growing.

Competing interests: No competing interests

18 February 2017
Dr Viera Scheibner (PhD)
scientist/author retired
n/a
Blackheath NSW Australia