Intended for healthcare professionals

Rapid response to:

Views And Reviews Acute Perspective

David Oliver: Vaccination sceptics are immune to debate

BMJ 2019; 365 doi: (Published 22 May 2019) Cite this as: BMJ 2019;365:l2244

Rapid Response:

David Oliver is not qualified to answer questions on vaccination

David Oliver admits he is not qualified[1] to consider or respond to my questions about MMR vaccine products, i.e. about shorter term maternally derived antibodies via vaccinated mothers, or why parents and others are not offered the option of antibody titre testing after the first dose of MMR vaccine[2].

In regard to my questions he says “...I don’t ‘think anything’ about them because despite being a medical qualified and research trained doctor I have no relevant content expertise and am not prone to wading into areas of data science I don’t have the experience, content expertise, training or un-earned overconfidence to do”.

Does David Oliver presume that a mere layperson cannot have anything of value to say about vaccination, that citizens are not entitled to ask questions relevant to vaccination policy?

Does David Oliver suggest that my questions are not worthy of response from those accountable for vaccination policy and practice?

I ask again, is there someone with responsibility for vaccination policy and practice, and with knowledge of the MMR vaccine products, able to respond to the questions outlined in my previous rapid response on this article? See: Vaccination, the medical establishment, and immunity from accountability:

1. David Oliver’s response to Elizabeth Hart on David Oliver: Vaccination sceptics are immune to debate:
2. Elizabeth Hart. BMJ rapid response: Vaccination, the medical establishment, and immunity from accountability:

Competing interests: No competing interests

26 May 2019
Elizabeth M Hart
Independent citizen investigating conflicts of interest in vaccination policy and the over-use of vaccine products
Adelaide, Australia