Hilary's Desk

How much does the medical system know about the total hardware of the immune system, and how all parts interconnect? As you’ve seen in the last few blogs, their understanding is crucially hampered by what they now know they don’t understand. The problem is, most parents have no idea of the extent of their immunological “blindness”. Definitive knowledge of the innate immunity, our first defences, resembles a big black hole called “ignorance”. Immunologist appear to be like tree experts, walking in huge forest, saying, “Oh yeah, I recognise that clump of trees – they are antibodies, but I don’t know what they have to do with those ones. Wonder what these are? And those are....” and so it goes on.  Read Full Blog

( Part 3 of 3 ) So what might happen when you repeatedly bombard a baby’s immune system with vaccines?  Read Full Blog

This is the first in a series of blogs on this topic. This one is a long blog but you need to read it very carefully.  You need to understand exactly how the information provided by the MOH to Dr Hutchison is so misleading and the implications of that for the whole debate.   Read Full Blog

In his book, "How Doctor's Think", Dr Jerome Groopman describes an ultrasound doctor, who detects in a baby, inside a woman 5 weeks from giving birth, a strange shaped space inside the baby's brain which should look like a tear-drop with sharp edges, but just doesn't look quite right.  Not badly wrong, but just not quite right. Because the shape is pretty near normal, she almost doesn't tell the mother.  Two things change her mind. She wants to protect any obstetrician from being charged with causing damage to a baby, should it turn into something significant... and she also thinks parents should know in advance in case they need to consider the realities of bringing up a damaged child. The mother has an MRI, and a brain haemorrhage in the baby is discovered, so the birth is attended by paediatric neurologists.  Read Full Blog

In a previous blog, mention was made of North and South’s rabidly nose-in-the-air provaccine article called “The case for vaccination”. The editor, Virginia Larson stuck her personal stake in the ground, with a scathing editorial, saying, “We did not seek out the extreme anti-immunisation campaigners for “balance” because their arguments aren’t balanced.” and ..... “they’ve already done enough damage by spreading hysteria over the MMR triple jab and are now set on painting the HPV vaccine Gardasil as part of some greater plot to poison or sterilise us.” The article’s author, North and South’s deputy editor Joanna Wane, didn’t mention the questions raised over the efficacy or value of the MeNZB. You would have thought that was deserving enough to be added to the mix of bile? Or perhaps those concerns were well founded? Not according to Perry Bisman.  Read Full Blog

London Time’s headline shrieks: “Leading scientist accuses doctors of increasing fear of vaccines”  When are scientists going to understand that they don’t know everything, and the world doesn’t revolve around their myopic thought patterns? Why is the primary aim of scientists to make everyone conform to their own thinking. Why do they assume that, “For most people it goes back to the primeval: ‘Well my mother had measles, I had measles, so why do I need to take the risk [of vaccinating my child]?’ What they are really saying is, ‘Can I live with myself if something went wrong?’ ” Incorrect, Prof Sir. But because Professor Sir Leszek Borysiewicz, by virtue of his many letters, thinks he’s right, so are his solutions??! Read Full Blog

Further to yesterday's blog about Michael J Smith's opinion piece in Pediatrics, telling us not very much, a very interesting observation on it was made here, in post 9 for those who want the specific place.  Read Full Blog