Hilary's Desk

Today, the Herald printed it's usual annual flu propaganda (I've removed the URL) and a private email to the reporters who put their names to it, was returned. The Herald doesn't allow enough words on the comment facility to deal with the issues, and they only want videos or photos, not facts. Therefore, this blog will address the issues.

 Continue Reading

Back to Basics, Part 1 and Part 2, lay the framework for asking the key questions of this blog, which relate to "Just how 'scientific' are vaccines, in principle, in practice, in fact and in application?" In order to understand the implications of that in babies, the lack of understanding about the neonatal immune system (and new discoveries which are very disturbing) - another three part blog series - has to be read:

Vaccines and Neonatal Immune Development

How a baby fights infection and Develops Immunity

 Continue Reading

This week's "The Science" contains an opinion piece on future vaccines for TB which deserves a historic comment.  The title of the article "Opinion: A TB vaccine blueprint" isn't likely to make headlines in the lay media for pretty obvious but unstated reasons.  They relate to the fact that most parents today, are under the "illusion" that the great white plague was vanquished by the old BCG vaccine used since 1950 in many countries.

In fact, the BCG has done nothing of the sort.  One of the most notable" features" of the BCG vaccine, other than the fact that it's pretty much a useless vaccine, is the fact that the USA has never used the vaccine. 

How many of you knew that?

Here's another fact.  TB declined in USA at the same rate as it declined in the countries which used BCG.

 Continue Reading

There are none so blind as those who appear to be control freaks.  Peter Gluckman’s words - “For the first time ever, we have a way of working out what mothers should eat” – were considered worthy of the subtext box front page of the paper version of the Herald on Tuesday. You have to wonder why.  Here’s the online version.  Continue Reading

Yesterday, in discussing the cozy relationship of the medical profession with big pharma while paying lip service to nutrition, I remembered an old book I have on this topic.  It's quaint title is, "Intestinal Gardening for the Prolongation of Youth". It was written by Dr James Empringham, and published in 1926.  It's fascinating; makes me chuckle, and roll my eyes at the same time.  Why?  Because it shows just how insular the average doctor was.  And by proxy, still is.  Much of what he writes is just plain common sense, which us fruitloops have long been wise to.  There are a few interesting gems in this book, so have a gander at this lot: Continue Reading

Open Letter to the Hon Minister of Health, Tony Ryall,  Dear Mr Ryall,  We realise that health policy is determined by your advisors, but we believe that it's time for you to independently do some research on Pubmed, Google Scholar and apply some commonsense to the escalating industry entrenchment around the expensive testing for and treatment of rheumatic fever.  What most concerns us is the apparent reading and research deficit suffered by the New Zealand medical profession regarding rheumatic fever, resulting in employment of chemical solutions rather than application of meaningful preventive strategies which if enacted would not only prevent rheumatic fever, but a whole raft of other medical conditions as well. Continue Reading

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.  Continue Reading

It never ceases to amaze me, when people who put themselves out as scientists, display woeful researching skills, and appear not to hear what is said on programmes they criticise. Peter Griffin at Sciblogs had this to say about the 60 Minutes documentary “Living Proof”. Amongst his various ramblings, he misses the fact that experts were asked to comment.. but refused. He also asked heaps of redundant questions:   Continue Reading

It’s mind numbing to me, that in 2010, the medical system would still expound this myth. Oy Vey. But so we read, “Study looks at why mum’s kiss is good for baby”; “Sterile when they are born, babies inherited bacteria from their main carer, usually their mother” … right there, the fundamental premis, which underpins this study, is not supported by the medical literature.  Continue Reading

The telephone rings. It’s someone with a fully vaccinated child, whose kid has earache. Again. And was prescribed antibiotics. Again. Did the doctor run tests to see what it was? No. So let’s toss an antibiotic napalm bomb into a kid, which will nuke what good bacteria there are that have a job to do in keeping bad bacteria under control. Dumb, dumb and dumber. But this is “infectious disease” medicine we are talking about. And it has been this way for decades, and its time it stopped. Continue Reading