Description: This 2 piece full top box shows 4-23 dated red top label with cartridge cut showing odd "38 Colt SPL" headstamp. The 6-22 dated side label has an endorsement from Colt above the Winchester guarantee. 38 Colt Special is a 38 S&W Special loaded with a flat point bullet and was only available for a short time. This box is in excellent condition with very light soiling and a couple small scuffs on labels. The box holds 25 correct rounds in excellent condition. This is an odd box with many desirable features.


text:
package javasmmr.zoowsome.models.employees;

import java.math.BigDecimal;

import javax.xml.stream.XMLEventWriter;
import javax.xml.stream.XMLStreamException;

import org.w3c.dom.Element;

import static javasmmr.zoowsome.repositories.EmployeeRepository.createNode;

import javasmmr.zoowsome.models.animals.Animal;
import javasmmr.zoowsome.models.interfaces.CareTaker_I;
import javasmmr.zoowsome.services.factories.*;

public class CareTaker extends Employee implements CareTaker_I{

	//constructors

	public CareTaker(){
		super();
	}
	public CareTaker(String theName, BigDecimal theSalary, boolean ifDead) {
		super(theName, theSalary, ifDead);
	}

	//instance variables

	private double workingHours;

	//getters/setters

	public double getWorkingHours(){
		return workingHours;
	}

	public void setWorkingHours(double theWorkingHours){
		workingHours = theWorkingHours;
	}

	//implement the method of the CareTaker interface

	public String takeCareOf(Animal a){
		if(a.kill()){
			return Constants.Employees.CareTakers.TCO_KILLED;
		}
		if(this.workingHours < a.getMaintenanceCost()){
			return Constants.Employees.CareTakers.TCO_NO_TIME;
		}
		a.setTakenCareOf(true);
		this.workingHours = this.workingHours - a.getMaintenanceCost();
		return Constants.Employees.CareTakers.TCO_SUCCESS;
	}

		//override the method encodeToXml

		public void encodeToXml(XMLEventWriter eventWriter)throws XMLStreamException{
			super.encodeToXml(eventWriter);
			createNode(eventWriter, "workingHours", String.valueOf(this.workingHours));
		}

		//override the method decodeFromXml

		public void decodeFromXml(Element element){
			super.decodeFromXml(element);
			setWorkingHours(Double.valueOf(element.getElementsByTagName("workingHours").item(0).getTextContent()));
		}

}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Though you are appointing an individual or a group of expert developers from a leading IT company, they can perform well and complete the task with zero bugs only when they like to wear a positive attitude and positive approach.
Whenever you are going to hire a web and app development company, put an eye on the previous work culture and activity of the company and do not forget to make a deep observation they are following a teamwork culture or not, because teamwork delivers the best result.
Must check that the company you are thinking to appoint for your app development task, has a leadership quality or not. Though you are working individually or in a bunch of experts, no one can beat you, if you have strong leadership quality inside you.
If a company or an individual has a strong technical background along with extensive and proven working experience numerous previous and latest technologies, without any doubt they are the best choice for you to get a suitable technology-based business growth solution.
Search a promising company, which can fulfill their commitment and available all the time to assist you, with whom you can work for a long term and on several projects. Fake commitment from a company requires you to pay a lot of time, money, trust, etc. So, be aware of the fake commitments of the company and do not stuck in their sweet words.


- Duration : 5,5 hours.
- Pick up address: 62 Hàng Buồm, Hoàn Kiếm, Hà Nội - Friends Travel Vietnam office. Drop off at 02 Cau May, Sapa.
We are open daily from 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM. Please come over around 6:15 AM to enjoy your Breakfast with a lovely Iced coffee or Tea before departure.
Going by luxury touring coach bus from Hanoi to Sapa in Noble Limousine 28 seat bus with your own soft coach seat.
With our experienced and thoughtful drivers, you will be safe to discover Sapa with the unforgettable experience.
Let's go with Sapa Express Bus Company.
Have a short break in 30 minutes then continue as we don't have a toilet on board!
As the special privilege for our client's Friends Travel Vietnam has his own private Lounge waiting area at our Office in Hanoi, just for your convenience to relax or to get refreshed.
Free pick up at your hotel in the 62 Hàng Buồm, Hoàn Kiếm, Hà Nội - Friends Travel Vietnam office and transfer to Sapa Express' Office, No.02 Ly Thai To street.
Departure to Sapa. The tour guide will explain to you about the trip and Sapa. Then you will be served mineral water and some snacks.
Have a rest-stop at Km57 for 30 minutes, here if you need extra refreshment, and that allows you to go to toilet also.
For the safety before going up the mountain pass to Sapa, stop within 15 minutes at Km237 for the second rest-stop.
Arrival Sapa town - stop at our office, No.02 Cau May street.
Our limousine bus doesn't have a toilet on board, we will stop half way for a break of 30 min.


Great pizza at home can be a challenge. This recipe rises to that challenge! After many years of testing, we've found that this dough recipe, along with our pizza sauce mix, make a tasty and authentic pizza. Your family won't be able to get enough!
In food processor fitted with metal blade, process flour, sugar and yeast until combined, about 2 seconds. With machine running, slowly add water through feed tube; process until dough is just combined and no dry flour remains, about 10 seconds. Let dough stand for 15 minutes.
Add oil and salt to dough. Process until dough forms a satiny, sticky ball that clears sides of processor bowl, about 60 seconds. Remove dough and knead briefly on lightly oiled countertop until smooth, about 1 minutes. Shape dough into tight ball and place in large lightly oiled bowl. Cover tightly with plastic wrap and refrigerate for at least 24 hours and up to 3 days.
Remove dough from refrigerator and divide in half or in thirds, depending on how thick you want your crust. Shape each half into smooth, tight ball. Place on lightly oiled baking sheet, spacing them at least 3" apart. Cover loosely with plastic wrap coated with non-stick spray; let stand for 1 to 1 1/2 hours.
One hour before baking pizza, adjust rack in oven to second highest position, about 4-5 inches below broiler. Set pizza stone on rack and heat oven to 500 degrees.
Coat 1 ball of dough generously with flour and place on floured countertop. Using fingers gently flatten into 8" disk, leaving 1" of outer edge slightly thicker than center. Using hands, stretch dough disk into 12" round, working along edges and giving disk quarter turns as you stretch. Sprinkle a pizza peel with corn meal. Transfer dough to the peel and stretch into 13" round.
Using back of spoon or ladle, spread 1/2 cup pizza sauce in a thin layer over the surface of dough, leaving 1/2" border around edge. Evenly spread 1/2 cup of mozzarella over the sauce, followed by your desired toppings. Sprinkle with dried oregano and parmesan cheese. Brush the exposed edges of the crust with olive oil.
Carefully place the pizza directly on the pizza stone and cook until the crust is browned and the top is browned and bubbly.


ndings do not hold regarding innovative quality. Instead, we find no or even negative effects on multiple dimensions of patent quality. Overall, our results provide a new perspective on the relationship of financial resources as a crucial factor of innovation.


text:
Public Policy Global Policy and Public Affairs
ACM TechBriefs is a series of short technical bulletins by ACM's Technology Policy Council that present scientifically-grounded perspectives on the impact of specific developments or applications of technology. Designed to complement ACM's activities in the policy arena, the primary goal is to inform rather than advocate for specific policies. Topics under consideration for future TechBriefs include election auditing, AI and trust, encryption security, media disinformation, content filtering, blockchain, digital accessibility, among others.
The new edition states that the ubiquity of algorithmic systems creates serious risks that are not being adequately addressed. A recurring theme of the TechBrief is that while perfectly safe algorithmic systems are not possible, achievable steps can be taken to make them safer. To that end, it recommends that enabling safer algorithmic systems must be a high research and policy priority of governments and all stakeholders.
TechBrief on Election Security: Risk-Limiting Audits
This edition explores the benefits of risk-limiting audits (RLAs), which were designed to determine how many post-election random ballot samples must be examined manually to assure the accuracy and integrity of a vote count. The TechBrief includes an overview of RLAs, the different techniques in which they are used, what conditions are necessary for optimum utilization, and the importance of RLAs in maintaining the public trust, among other benefits.
TechBriefs Committee
Stuart Shapiro
Michel Beaudouin-Lafon
Juan De Joya
Lorraine Kisselburgh
Bran Knowles
Andrew McGettrick
Larry Medsker
Kashyap Tumkur
Moshe Vardi
TechBrief on Quantum Computing and Simulation
This edition focuses on the concept of quantum computing and simulation, a quickly advancing field of computer science with the potential for impacting many different and vitally important facets of life in the real world. Here, the TPC explores the various yet profound societal and individual risks this technology may pose, its potential benefits, and how the government, private sector, and CS as a whole should proceed with a varying combination of caution and confidence in this emerging area.
TechBrief on Smart Cities
This edition focuses on the concept of Smart Cities and how to deploy information and communication technology (ICT) to create such cities without compromising either personal or societal freedoms. Concerns raised by such emerging tech include: cybersecurity risks at every stage of every smart city technology's life cycle; effective privacy protection mechanisms as an essential component; transparancy and fairness to all city users, not just residents; and understanding the climate impact of smart city infrastructures both during design and after deployment.
TechBrief on Facial Recognition
This TechBrief focuses on policy issues raised by facial recognition and its use by governments and the private sector. Noting that "facial recognition use is increasing despite the technology's fundamental limitations, creating profound privacy and ethical challenges," the TechBrief covers the myriad of problems with such tech including that facial recognition is not a single, dependable technology, the inherent dangers to personal privacy, the evidence that bias in facial recognition systems is pervasive and profound, and that responsible application of facial recognition technology requires careful, scientifcally informed, and ongoing governance.
TechBrief on Computing and Climate Change
The first TechBrief concerns the deepening crisis of climate change, focusing on the issue that computing can help mitigate it but must first cease contributing to it. Policy implications suggested by the TPC include that all-encompassing measurements of Information and Communication Technology sector carbon emissions are needed to assess whether reduction targets have been met, computing-enabled efficiencies must be coupled with slashed energy demands, and that coordinated, clear, and enforceable governmental policies and law are needed to reduce ICT carbon emissions.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
mcafee's rootkit report: an alternative interpretation
the internet has been relatively a-buzz this week over a report (well, part of a report, actually - don't ask me why they couldn't release the whole thing) out of mcafee on the growth of the 'rootkit' threat... a lot of attention has been paid to mcafee's rather poor choice of words when the key findings blamed the "open source environment" for the increased proliferation and complexity of rootkits...
first, yes it really has nothing to do with "open source"... the concept that the author was probably struggling for when he settled on "open source" was public or full disclosure... a software licensing paradigm has nothing to do with 'rootkits' getting more complex or being deployed more frequently, but public disclosure is an enabling practice... coming out against full disclosure or anything like it isn't a popular thing to do in security circles these days, though, which may be why the author tried to find some other term...
also, mcafee named and shamed rootkitDOTcom as a possible leading cause of the worsening 'rootkit' problem... a lot of people took issue with this, mostly they're the folks who feel rootkitDOTcom is doing nothing more than practicing full disclosure and that full disclosure can do no wrong... some even try to quote bruce schneier with the old "security by obscurity is no security at all" line and to those people i'll direct you to what bruce schneier has actually written about full disclosure, particularly about irresponsible (and perhaps even criminal) disclosure...
now mcafee has it partially right, the public disclosure taking place on rootkitDOTcom and various collaboration sites and blogs IS at least partially responsible for the increase in complexity of 'rootkits'... by sharing malware source code and even compiled binaries with literally everyone (as rootkitDOTcom does) the supposed good guys are adding their voices, their knowledge, and their skills to the collaborative efforts of the bad guys...
that said, mcafee's figures show something in the growth patterns that availability of information cannot explain... collaboration sites in general and rootkitDOTcom in particular have been around for years so why then does the growth rate change so dramatically when it gets to 2005? availability of source and binaries are enabling factors, not causative ones - they don't drive the innovation or deployment of this type of malware...
something changed, something happened in 2005 that made 'rootkits' a whole lot more popular - i'll give you 3 guesses as to what that was and the first 2 don't count... that's right, sony bmg / first4internet / xcp... the media circus surrounding that debacle kept 'rootkits' in the public eye for a long time... it made them mainstream, not only in the eyes of the general internet public but in the malware creators' eyes as well... the attackers interest was piqued, their imagination was sparked, the tools they needed were easy to find and so now we are witnessing something not that unlike the slashdot effect except in malware development... throngs of people who weren't making 'rootkits' before, who probably weren't even aware of the kind of stealth technology that was available or how it could be used to their advantage, now are and that's what mcafee's numbers represent...
does that mean the media is to blame for building all this interest in 'rootkits'? maybe - i'd certainly like to blame some of the ills of the world on their sensationalism... the bad guys are still the ones responsible for doing bad things, but the media pointed a whole bunch of them in a new direction... that doesn't mean that greg hoglund and co. of rootkitDOTcom are off the hook, though... for all protestations of helping people learn about threats, learning for the sake of learning doesn't improve security - they aren't helping to close the window of exposure for this class of threat but they are helping to arm the bad guys... that's called being part of the problem rather than part of the solution...
Tags: first4internet, full disclosure, greg hoglund, malware, mcafee, rootkit, rootkitdotcom, sony bmg, stealth, xcp
what is FUD?
vulnerability escrow
what's a stealthkit?
ethical conflict in the anti-'rootkit' domain
linus torvalds is not a villian
what is snake oil?
mcafee's rootkit report: an alternative interpreta...
what is a password stealer?
what is a black hat/white hat?
what is a keylogger?
malware and disclosure
all virus prevention methods fail
anti-malware linking policy
what is a popup?
what is false authority syndrome
the case of the non-expert expert: a rebuttal to "...
the difference between security and risk
attention visitors from subeltblog - please read this
cellphone spyware part 2 1/2
rebuttal to 'how the anti-virus industry is turnin...
rob slade on rootkits
why microsoft hates 3rd party patches
microsoft says escape from wet paper bag becoming ...
cellphone spyware part deux


text:
Professor Sarah Walker
Georgina Ferry interviews Sarah Walker, Professor of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, 15 November 2021.
Topics discussed include (00:00:30) SW's studies in Medical Statistics and work in infectious diseases, HIV and bacterial infections; (00:02:44) SW's first awareness of COVID-19, work on a project in Vietnam and the implications of the disease for South East Asia; (00:05:01) the continuance of work during the lockdown period, including remote-working; (00:07:09) SW's initial reaction to COVID-19; (00:09:22) work with Professor Derrick Crook and Professor Tim Peto on Modernising Medical Microbiology; (00:10:40) seroprevalence study; (00:15:37) recruiting process for participants, in collaboration with the Office for National Statistics; (00:18:26) the pros and cons of measuring the pandemic through testing; (00:21:25) the evolution of the COVID-19 virus, including variants and mutations; (00:24:02) the continuation of the Office for National Statistics survey; (00:26:08) the level of protection afforded by the different vaccines and the challenges of asymptomatic infections; (00:29:25) reporting to Government on the ONS survey and influence on policy owing to this work; (00:30:32) involvement with Test and Trace; (00:32:39) public exposure relating to the publication of survey data each week; (00:34:10) SW's experience of media interviews; (00:35:36) viral load concept; (00:38:00) study focusing on healthcare workers and occupational infection data; (00:40:20) the path from scientific data to policy; (00:42:23) SW's personal experience of the pandemic and ability to work remotely; (00:43:52) hours of work during the pandemic; (00:44:40) SW's personal well-being and self-care; (00:45:50) well-being of the team; (00:48:15) future research interests, including the interplay between natural and acquired immunity and who is being hospitalised despite vaccination; (00:51:31) perspectives on balancing working from home and on-site and hopes for future changes to attitudes around this.
Professor Paul Harrison
Georgina Ferry interviews Paul Harrison, Professor of Psychiatry, 11 November 2021.
Dr Betty Raman
Georgina Ferry interviews Betty Raman, Senior Academic Cardiologist and Clinical Research Fellow, 16 November 2021.
Sarah Walker


text:
Orange is the New Black author Piper Kerman
Piper Kerman confirmed as first Funding Forward 2014 Keynote
Funding Forward 2014 is shaping up to be the best gathering of grantmakers commited to LGBTQ issues yet! Our planning committee is deeply engaged, our members submitted a high volume of thoughtful and innovative session proposals and the local community in Philadelphia is going out of their way to welcome us. Funding Forward 2014 is bound to be a huge success. ... click here to continue reading. Click here to register today! (Early bird rates end February 14th)
Cindy Rizzo, Board Chair
You Are Cordially Invited to Help Point the Way Forward
By: Cindy Rizzo, Vice President of Impact & Learning, Arcus Foundation
... There's a lot of excitement on the horizon, including our upcoming Funding Forward conference in Philadelphia and our partnership with foundations in the U.S. South to expand philanthropic resources in a long-neglected and under-funded region. We have also strengthened our efforts to reach "mainstream philanthropy" in order to ensure that LGBT organizations can access a wider range of foundation funders and that large foundations can better understand the broad scope of issues that confront our communities. ... Click here to read more.
The Philanthropy Track at Creating Change!
A number of sessions at this year's conference focus specifically on philanthropy or fundraising, and even more sessions will provide valuable opportunities for movement leaders and funders to connect, learn from each other, and share strategies for building a stronger LGBT movement. Click the link below for a short guide to the sessions and events related to philanthropy, as well as those that feature Funders for LGBTQ Issues members and partners. ...Click here to read more.
Wednesday, January, 29th - Sunday, February, 2nd (Houston, TX):
Funders for LGBTQ Issues at Creating Change
Check out our slate of events at this year's Creating Change. Hopefully we'll see you in Houston! .... Learn more here.
Monday, February 3rd (Webinar):
The Mid-term Elections and You: Voter Suppression in the South and Beyond
The 2014 mid-term elections will be the first major elections with national offices on the ballot since the Supreme Court's decision in the Shelby County, AL v. Holder case. One known impact of that decision is that voter suppression efforts have intensified in Southern states including Texas, North Carolina, Mississippi, Georgia, and others that previously enjoyed Voting Rights Act protections. .... Learn more here.
Friday, February 14th (New York, NY):
The Power of Two: Funding at the Nexus of LGBT Rights and Repro Rights/Repro Justice
These two movements work principally on separate tracks, while sharing core values and common adversaries. How can the power at this intersection be leveraged for the greatest effect? How can funders, often constrained by institutional structures that favor discrete issues, support intersectional alliances? ... Learn more here.
Wednesday, March 26th - Friday, March 28th (Philadelphia, PA):
It's time to register for Funding Forward 2014! The annual gathering of grantmakers committed to LGBTQ issues provides an exciting opportunity for funders to connect with one another, learn from each other, coordinate efforts, and maximize impact. ... Learn more here. ... Register here!
Friday, June 6th - Sunday, June 8th (Washington, DC):
Joint Affinity Groups Unity Summit
This summer JAG will bring together a national network of more than 2,500 members and more than 20,000 philanthropic, nonprofit, and corporate professionals of all ages: AAPI, Black, Latino, Native, women, men, LGBTQ, and people with disabilities to work together to eliminate disparities across race, gender, sexual orientation, and disability. ... Learn more here.
"ENDA: 5 Lessons in How The Movement Works"
The Advocate explores what worked in getting the Senate to pass ENDA, with the first big takeaway focusing on the importance of donors.
The Other Foundation
The Other Foundation has announced the launch of its first pilot grantmaking initiative to advance the rights and well-being of LGBTI people in Southern Africa. The deadline has been extended to February 10.
Trans Justice Funding Project
The Trans Justice Funding Project is awarding grants ranging from $1,000 to $5,000 to organizations run by and for trans communities with a budget of less than $250,000. The deadline is February 15.
National Committe for Responsive Philanthropy
NCRP is accepting nominations for its 2014 NCRP Impact Awards, which celebrate foundations of all shapes and sizes that have shown leadership, innovation and commitment to solving the countries toughtest problems. The deadline is March 1.
Independent Sector
Independent Sector is accepting nominations for the 2014 John W. Gardner Leadership Award. The deadline is January 31. Nominations are also being accepted for the American Express NGen Leadership Award, click here for the application/nominating form. The deadline is February 3.
Recent Grant Award Announcements
HRC has awarded $100,000 to the Russia Freedom Fund. The fund, which is housed at Arcus Foundation, seeks to foster a safer environment for LGBT people in Russia by supporting local organizations that have been effective at combating discrimination and violence.
The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender & Straight Alliance Fund
The LGBT&S Alliance Fund, which benefits the LGBT&S community in Southern Arizona, has $54,796 in grants awarded to 15 regional nonprofits.
The Helping Others through Partnership and Education (HOPE) Fund
The Hope Fund of the Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan has granted $50,000 to the LGBT Older Adult Coalition.
George Zuber and Anthony Snyder Charitable Fund, Mona Pittenger Giving Fund, Our Fund, and Aqua Foundation for Women
The George Zuber and Anthony Snyder Charitable Fund, Mona Pittenger Giving Fund, Our Fund, and Aqua Foundation for Women, have come together to fund a new position at SunServe, dedicated exclusively to serving South Florida's transgender community.
Stoli Vodka
To demonstrate that Stoli shares the same desire for justice and equality as the LGBT community, Stoli has awarded $300,000 to the L.A. Gay and Lesbian Center.
Thomas W. Nicholas
Tom, former CFO and Vice President for Finance and Administration at the Heinz Center, joins Arcus Foundation as the new Vice President of Finance and Operations. (Read more here.) Congratulations, Tom!
Alfonso Wenker
Alfonso,formerly of the Bush Foundation, is now the new Director of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion at the Minnesota Council on Foundations. (Read more here.) Best of luck, Alfonso!
Charities Bureau - Bureau Chief
The Office of the New York State Attorney General
Horizons Foundation
(San Francisco, CA)
Community Philanthropy Manager
Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders in Philanthropy (AAPIP)
Director of Communication
Meyer Memorial Trust
Immigration Equality
Investment and Financial Analyst
Membership Engagement Director
Chair Cindy Rizzo (The Arcus Foundation) � Vice Chair Rebecca Fox (Wellspring Advisors) � Treasurer Mitchell Singer (Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors) � Secretary Patricia St. Onge (Seven Generations Consulting and Coaching) � Maria Cadenas (Driscoll's) � Matthew "Matty" Hart (The Lafayette Practice) � Andrew Lane (Johnson Family Foundation) � Kristine Stallone (American Jewish World Service) � Nathaniel "Toby" Thompkins (Tides 21st Century)
Anonymous � Arcus Foundation � Astraea Foundation for Lesbian Justice � Boston Foundation � Calamus Foundation � The California Endowment � California Wellness Foundation � Community Foundation Santa Cruz County � Con Alma Health Foundation � Cream City Foundation � Driscoll's Charitable Fund � Dwight Stuart Youth Fund � Equity Foundation � Evelyn & Walter Haas, Jr. Fund � Ford Foundation � Foundation for the Carolinas � Freeman Foundation � Gill Foundation � Gilmour-Jirgens Foundation � Groundswell Fund � Guilford Green Foundation � Henry van Ameringen Foundation � Horizons Foundation � Jeff Chartrand Advised Fund � John Larsen Foundation � The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation � Johnson Family Foundation � Kevin J. Mossier Foundation � Kicking Assets Fund � Laughing Gull Foundation � Levi Strauss Foundation � Liberty Hill Foundation � Marguerite Casey Foundation � Mukti Fund � North Star Fund � Our Fund, Inc. � Overbrook Foundation � The Palette Fund � Philanthrofund Foundation � Paul Rapoport Foundation � Polk Bros. Foundation � Pride Foundation � Proteus Fund, Inc. � Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors � Rosenberg Foundation � The Samuel S. Fels Fund � San Diego Human Dignity Foundation � Santa Fe Community Foundation � Small Change Foundation � Stonewall Community Foundation � Vermont Community Foundation � Wells Fargo Bank � Women's Foundation of California
The 2012 Tracking Report: LGBTQ Grantmaking by U.S. Foundations (2013)
The Physics of LGBTQ Funding (2013)


text:
Q: Rich Text Editor Error Messages My SharePoint system is experiencing problems when users attempt to edit a web-part text using the Rich Text Editor.
Upon selecting "Edit" from the web-part and clicking the "Rich Text Editor" button displayed in the Web-Part configuration pane the user is immediately presented a message dialog:

Message from webpage
Cannot retrieve properties at this time.
OK
When the OK button is chosen on the dialog the HTML Editor window displays and appears normal.    The user is then able to enter text as normal but upon saving the user is then present another dialog:

Message from webpage
Cannot save your changes.
OK
When the user clicks OK the page freezes up.
I have been unsuccessful in trying to fix this and am really looking for some help in fixing.  All ideas and suggestions are welcome.
Thanks

A: First thing i would do is check your AAMs, if these are setup wrong, you will get this error.
If your AAMs are definitely setup right, you may still get this error with certain combinations of HTTPS, ports, load balancers and reverse proxies.
The rich text editor sometimes doesn't obey all the AAM rules and outputs bad postback/ajax urls, that you have fix them with a HttpModule. Use a response filter to fix the html before its delivered to the client. Some example code.
public class HTTPModule : IHttpModule {
    public override void Init(HttpApplication app) {
        base.Init(app);
        app.PostReleaseRequestState += new EventHandler(app_PostReleaseRequestState);
    }
    private void app_PostReleaseRequestState(object sender, EventArgs e) {
        Page page = HttpContext.Current.CurrentHandler as Page;
        HttpResponse response = HttpContext.Current.Response;
        if (response.ContentType.StartsWith(@"text/html")) {
            response.Filter = new PageFilter(response.Filter);
        }
    }
}

public class PageFilter : Stream {
    Stream responseStream;
    StringBuilder responseHtml;
    //todo: capture stream
    public override void Close() {
        responseHtml = Regex.Replace(responseHtml, "http://badurl", "http://goodurl", RegexOptions.IgnoreCase);
        byte[] data = System.Text.UTF8Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(finalHtml);
        responseStream.Write(data, 0, data.Length);
        responseStream.Flush();
        responseStream.Close();
    }
}

A: This has happened to me in the past and the root cause was due to a CEWP imposing some bad CSS on the page.  Try closing out some of your rendered web parts to find the one causing the issue.

A: A work-around is to give the appropriate people designer rights to the Master Page Gallery. I've found the same work-around works for people that get access denied when trying to edit reusable content pages.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Over the weekend I found out that I'd made it through as a finalist in the New York Photo Festival's RESOLUTION 2014 competition and will be exhibited at at The POWERHOUSE Arena in Brooklyn NY from March 27 – April 28, 2014.
It's really great news to have been chosen and even more so because both Christel and I will be in New York for the festival and opening night. I've never been to New York before and I've heard so many great things about the city so I'm majorly fired up to be going there – and obviously taking my camera with me!
The photo they have selected is 'Touching Distance' from the London Gay Pride Festival of two guys kissing. I'm really pleased that this photo is being picked up as it's one of the ones I'm most proud of. I shot it with my "live-on" lens (the Canon EOS 16-35mm f2.8) and whilst it's not a classic portraiture lens, it really does do the job when I'm shooting away in the streets and I wouldn't be without it.
Going to festivals, exhibitions or similar events is great but there's always so much more to attending than the nature of the competition itself. It's the people you meet in the shape of the judges, curators, other nominees and then people who are just plain enthusiastic about photography. Getting that detailed feedback, sharing your experiences and making good friends along the way is often the most rewarding aspect – as was certainly the case with the Art of Photography Show in San Diego last year and I hoping will be with the New York Photo Festival.
There are a couple different facets to RESOLUTION 2014 competition, where there will be a vote for the favourite image (where the winner will receive a 2 hour consultation with John Berthot, former sales director at MAGNUM and photo consultant for FOCUS), a draw for a free powerHouse Portfolio Review slot ($400) and then the Grand Prize itself of $500. So there'll be a lot to look forward to at the opening reception on March 28 (6-8pm) where they will announce the main winner.
If you're in the area and you can make it to the New York Photo Festival, it'd be great to see you there.


text:
'use strict';
const name = getName(__filename),
  tpl = hbs.compile('{{ commaSeparated a }}');

describe(name, function () {
  it('returns emptystring if not an object', function () {
    expect(tpl()).to.equal('');
  });

  it('only returns keys with truthy values', function () {
    expect(tpl({a: {alpha: true, bravo: false}})).to.equal('alpha');
  });

  it('delineates items with commas', function () {
    expect(tpl({a: {alpha: true, bravo: true}})).to.equal('alpha, bravo');
  });

  it('capitalizes the first word in items', function () {
    expect(hbs.compile('{{ commaSeparated a true }}')({a: {alpha: true, 'bravo charlie': true}})).to.equal('Alpha, Bravo charlie');
  });

  it('capitalizes the first word in items and maintains other capitalizations', function () {
    expect(hbs.compile('{{ commaSeparated a true }}')({a: {alpha: true, 'Bravo Charlie-Delta Echo': true}})).to.equal('Alpha, Bravo Charlie-Delta Echo');
  });
});


While some offenders pose a risk to citizens, in certain cases the community is best served by giving a nonviolent offender an opportunity to avoid conviction and incarceration. That second chance comes through the Pretrial Intervention Program.
Eligible defendants have an opportunity to enroll in and complete the program as an alternative to being charge and adjudicated. Participation is voluntary and not conditioned on pleading guilty.
When a defendant enters the program, they sign an agreement tailored to them and their situation. The agreements feature achievable goals and are structured to help the defendant avoid behavior likely to lead to future arrests. Conditions may include restitution and community service.
Upon successful completion of the program the Rapides Parish District Attorney's Office will dismiss the charges against the defendant. However, if the defendant is charged with driving while intoxicated, the law requires the District Attorney to maintain an arrest record and all records concerning the placement into the Pretrial Intervention Program for a period of five years from the date of the arrest.
Pursuant to the agreement signed by the defendant, the defendant will not file a motion or rule to expunge the arrest or investigative file until the defendant is notified in writing that they have completed both the active and inactive phases of the Pretrial Intervention Program.
As a general rule, information gathered in the course of the Pretrial Intervention Program process is considered confidential. The information gathered in the course of the program application or participation should not be admissible as evidence in the case for which the defendant was charged, or in any subsequent civil, criminal or administrative proceeding.


Happy Friday — and happy start of the 2019 Iowa legislative session.
Lawmakers convened in Des Moines Monday for what is officially the 88th Iowa General Assembly. This year session is slated to run for 110 days, or until May 3. We shall see if the Legislature keeps to its schedule!
This week also marks the return of our weekly legislative e-newsletter, The Weekly 3. It's so named based on research that three things is about the most things people can retain on a given subject at any sitting. We'll try each week to highlight three things you should know about legislation affecting Iowa children and their families.
It just so happens the Center has three staff members who are registered lobbyists and represent our organization — and really, Iowa kids and their families — at the Capitol. Sheila Hansen is there day in and day out during session, keeping an eye on the wide range of child policy issues, with a special focus on early childhood. Mary Nelle Trefz is our point person on all things health, and Angelica Cardenas focuses on child welfare issues. Please don't hesitate to connect with any of them as we go along.
Below you can read about our 2019 policy priorities: our agenda for making sure every Iowa kid has a fair shot at a happy and prosperous future. It's ambitious, and we understand well the challenges we face in achieving it. But we sure won't achieve it if we're not present as our elected officials debate.
The reason we are able to be present to advocate on behalf of Iowa kids and families is the individual Iowans who contribute financially to our organization. Many thanks to those who have supported our work over the years. If you haven't, we'd be grateful and honored if you would consider doing so. Please visit www.cfpciowa.org to donate securely online. Donations are tax-deductible as allowed under federal law.
This week the Center released its 2019 policy priorities. We're calling it a child opportunity agenda. Its specific agenda items — related to child mental health and welfare, health care, Pre-K-12 education, child care, tax policy and state budgeting — are the building blocks of child well-being and of the future prosperity of the state as a whole. Read it here.
Thursday, Jan. 17 was Early Childhood Day on the Hill — an opportunity for child advocates to talk with legislators about child care. The Center, along with a dozen other and partners, set up shop in the Capitol rotunda. Pictured (left to right): Center executive director Anne Discher speaks with Jeff Anderson of the state Early Childhood Iowa office and Rep. Michael Bergan (Dorchester); Center policy director Sheila Hansen talks with Senator Herman Quirmbach (Ames) and ECI area director Marion Kresse of BooSt Together for Children, the local ECI group for Boone and Story counties.
The ECI Day on the Hill is just one of many lively Capitol events each day. In fact, the FaDDS (Family Development and Self Sufficiency) program had their Day on the Hill last Wednesday. We got the scoop, including photos and quotes, on our Facebook page. Check it out here — and give us a "like" if you haven't already.


text:
Jalisco expands the number of hospital beds to deal with COVID-19 increases
Jalisco, Spotlight
Given the increase in hospitalization by COVID-9, the Government of Jalisco reported today that it expanded the number of beds enabled in the State.
The Jalisco Ministry of Health reported that the number of spaces increased from 1,396 to 1,538. However, the authority did not detail in which hospitals the beds were increased.
With this increase in beds, occupancy went from 48.2% to 43.8% with 673 patients affected by the virus.
The Radar Jalisco system updated the number of hospitalized last night and had risen to 48 percent, but by enabling more beds, the percentage of occupancy decreased.
Given the rise in infections, hospitalizations for the virus multiplied almost five times in the first three weeks of this year.
Currently, 673 patients are reported in public hospitals, while on January 1 there were 155.
3,755 more infections were registered yesterday, another record in the state.
The accumulated reached 451,085 people affected in almost two years of the health contingency in Jalisco. In addition, there are 17,846 fatalities in Jalisco.
Subscribe here for just .08 cents per day to read subscriber content, join the PVDN newsletter, and browse with site ad-free. Support local news.
Trending news on PVDN
EGates: state-of-the-art technology coming to Puerto Vallarta airport In order to guarantee fluid and fast access to international travelers, Mexico adds three more destinations with EGates technology: Puerto Vallarta, Guadalajara, and Los Cabos. The commissioner of the National Institute of Migration (INM), Francisco Garduño Yáñez, verified the operation of the 18 E-Gates -automated migration filters- installed at the Cancun International Airport, Quintana Roo,…
Government stops construction on four condominium developments in Puerto Vallarta for violations The Secretary of Environment (Semarnat) in Jalisco, Raúl Rodgríguez Rosales, reported that the government agency stopped the construction of four condominium developments in Puerto Vallarta for not complying with regulations.
Did the United States Government work with Mexican cartels to import drugs? Yes, according to a congressman in Mexico "I maintain that the United States government decides which narco to favor so that it supplies the country with drugs," explains Mexican politician, PT Deputy Gerardo Fernández Noroña, who 12 years after shouting "murderer" at Genaro García Luna, then secretary of Security, assures that the US is only now putting Luna on trial because he…
Biblioteca Los Mangos needs your help after a decline in donations during the pandemic 'Biblioteca Los Mangos' – Los Mangos Library, (located at Av. Francisco Villa 1001, right around the corner from the Costco on Av. Fluvial in Puerto Vallarta,) is a non-profit institution that, unlike libraries in many other countries, receives no local or federal public funding. Consider making a donation to Biblioteca Los Mangos here Located in…
Taxi driver who intentionally ran over a woman and killed her in Puerto Vallarta has been arrested Puerto Vallarta (PVDN) – On Sunday afternoon, Érika Noemí Chávez Cruz and her seven-year-old son were at Conchas Chinas beach, in Puerto Vallarta, with her presumed boyfriend, a taxi driver, according to police reports. After the couple has an argument, Érika and her son left on foot. The boyfriend boarded his taxi and ran over…


text:
Q: MS Access Pass Through Query find duplicates using multiple tables I'm trying to find all coverage_set_id with more than one benefit_id attached summary_attribute (value=2004687).
The query seems to be working fine without the GROUP BY & HAVING parts, but once I add those lines in (for the COUNT) my results are incorrect.  Just trying to get duplicate coverage_set_id.
Pass-Through query via OBDC database:
SELECT DISTINCT
    b.coverage_set_id,
    COUNT (b.coverage_set_id) AS "COUNT"

FROM
    coverage_set_detail_view a
    JOIN contracts_by_sub_group_view b ON b.coverage_set_id = a.coverage_set_id
    JOIN request c ON c.request_id = b.request_id

WHERE
    b.valid_from_date BETWEEN to_date('10/01/2010','mm/dd/yyyy')
    AND to_date('12/01/2010','mm/dd/yyyy')
    AND c.request_status = 1463
    AND summary_attribute = 2004687
    AND benefit_id <> 1092333

GROUP BY
    b.coverage_set_id

HAVING
    COUNT (b.coverage_set_id) > 1

My results look like this:
-----------------------
COVERAGE_SET_ID | COUNT
-----------------------
4193706         | 8
4197052         | 8
4193926         | 112
4197078         | 96
4174168         | 8

I'm expecting all the COUNTs to be 2.

::EDIT::
Solution:
SELECT
c.coverage_set_id AS "COVERAGE SET ID",
c1.description AS "Summary Attribute",
count(d.benefit_id) AS "COUNT"

FROM (
SELECT DISTINCT coverage_set_id

FROM contracts_by_sub_group_view

WHERE
    valid_from_date BETWEEN '01-OCT-2010' AND '01-DEC-2010'
    AND request_id IN (
        SELECT request_id
        FROM  request
        WHERE request_status = 1463)
) a

JOIN coverage_set_master e ON e.coverage_set_id = a.coverage_set_id
JOIN coverage_set_detail c ON c.coverage_set_id = a.coverage_set_id
JOIN benefit_summary d ON d.benefit_id = c.benefit_id
 AND d.coverage_type = e.coverage_type
JOIN codes c1 ON c1.code_id = d.summary_attribute

WHERE
d.summary_attribute IN (2004687, 2004688)
AND summary_structure = 1000217

GROUP BY c.coverage_set_id, c1.description

HAVING COUNT(d.benefit_id) > 1

ORDER BY c.coverage_set_id, c1.description

And these were the results:
COVERAGE SET ID  |  SUMMARY ATTRIBUTE  |  COUNT
-------------------------------------------------
4174168          |  INPATIENT          |   2
4174172          |  INPATIENT          |   2
4191828          |  INPATIENT          |   2
4191832          |  INPATIENT          |   2
4191833          |  INPATIENT          |   2
4191834          |  INPATIENT          |   2
4191838          |  INPATIENT          |   2
4191842          |  INPATIENT          |   2
4191843          |  INPATIENT          |   2
4191843          |  OUTPATIENT         |   2
4191844          |  INPATIENT          |   2
4191844          |  OUTPATIENT         |   2

A: The coverage_set_id in both the HAVING and count part of the SELECT should be benefit_id.
Since benefit_id is also in table a you can do the following
SELECT
    a.coverage_set_id,
    COUNT (a.benefit_id) AS "COUNT"

FROM
    coverage_set_detail_view a

WHERE
    a.coverage_set_id in (
        SELECT b.coverage_set_id
        FROM contracts_by_sub_group_view b
        WHERE b.valid_from_date BETWEEN to_date('10/01/2010','mm/dd/yyyy') AND to_date('12/01/2010','mm/dd/yyyy'))
    AND a.coverage_set_id in (
        SELECT b2.coverage_set_id
        FROM contracts_by_sub_group_view b2
        INNER JOIN request c on c.request_id=b2.request_id
        WHERE c.request_status = 1463)
    AND ?.summary_attribute = 2004687
    AND a.benefit_id <> 1092333

GROUP BY
    a.coverage_set_id

HAVING
    COUNT (a.benefit_id) > 1

This removes the JOIN magnification that was occurring on the FROM since those tables are not needed to pull coverage_set_id and benefit_id.  The only remaining need for the other 2 tables is to filter out data based on criteria, which is in the WHERE clause.
I'm not sure what table summary_attribute lives in but it would follow a similar pattern to valid_from_date, request_status, or benefit_id.


We, the administrators of the Camdolls website, are the owners and operators of this website (collectively referred to by all first-person pronouns, "Us" or "Our"). However, We are not the primary producers (as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2257) for the content of Camdolls, since the production of the content of this website is handled by third parties.
We operate this website but are not the "producers" of any depictions of actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct which may appear on this website. More specifically, We limit Our handling of such content, and only perform the activities of transmission, storage, retrieval, hosting, and/or formatting of material that may depict sexually explicit conduct, all material which appears on the website as the result of actions taken by third-party users of the website.
This website provides an interactive, internet-based, electronic video communications service, and serves an online platform whereby content is created by users or members themselves and is transmitted between them on the website. Individuals appearing in live content, carried on this website, create and produce themselves their own live-feeds, independently of Our editorial or managerial involvement or control. The website therefore functions to neutrally carry such content created by the models. To the extent that the platform provided by the website and its technological features are used to transmit sexually explicit content, such use exclusively reflects the independent exercise or creative expression and member. All portions of the website that contain such user-generated material are under the control of the relevant user, for whom this website is provided as an online service by Us. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2257(h)(2)(B)(v) and 47 U.S.C. § 230(c), We reserve the right, but not the obligation, to delete materials appearing on the website as the result of actions taken by the website's users, which materials are deemed, in Our sole discretion, to be indecent, obscene, defamatory, or inconsistent with the policies and terms of service for this website.
iv. the produced images were created prior to July 3, 1995.
Without limiting in any way the applicability of the above-stated exemptions, We keep original records described in 18 U.S.C. § 2257 and 28 C.F.R. § 75 for all materials appearing on this website that fall into one of the following two categories: (i) marketing and advertising materials that contain visual depictions of actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct, which materials have been acquired or created by Us for the purpose of promoting the website; and (ii) all visual depictions of Webcam Models who have elected to enable tipping, private shows, group shows, or any other service that permits collection, by the Webcam Model, of credits. Age verification records are collected and reviewed before permitting Webcam Models to collect credits.
We are strongly committed to the protection of minors. Thus we have implemented a third party login system whereby the age of majority (18 years of age or greater) of each and every Webcam Model appearing on the website is verified. Consequently, all Webcam Models are the age of majority at the time of the creation and production of their own live-feeds on the website.
This website is an on-going work that is published on a daily basis.


Prince Law Offices, P.C. Machine Gun Shoot – October 22, 2011!
Posted on September 9, 2011 August 29, 2014 by Prince Law Offices, P.C.
Prince Law Offices, P.C., your PA Gun Attorneys, will be hosting a machine gun shoot at Eastern Lancaster County Rod and Gun Club, which is located at 966 Smyrna Road, Kinzers, PA 17535 on October 22, 2011 starting at 11am. Everyone is welcome to attend. The only requirement is that you bring a driver's license and hearing and eye protection. All attendees will be required to sign a waiver.
While this event is free to all attendees, I am asking that you consider giving a donation to the Eastern Lancaster County Rod and Gun Club for their generous permission to use their range. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.


text:
Consumer Fraud Prevention Tips for Seniors
The Cook County State's Attorney's office will present a program for seniors titled, "Consumer Fraud Prevention Tips for Seniors," at 2 p.m. Thursday, February 9, 2023, at the Oak Park Arms Senior Living located at 408 S. Oak Park Avenue, Oak Park, IL 60302.
The program is free and open to the public. Seating is limited and reservations are required.
The guest speaker is Rosa Abreu, Cook County's Assistant State's Attorney. She'll discuss how consumers will learn how to spot and avoid common scams that target senior citizens and learn where to get help if they fall victim to fraud. Audience members will also learn how the Cook County State's Attorney's Office's Consumer Fraud Unit works to protect consumers from businesses that engage in deceptive practices.
Fraud is big business in America, taking in about $100 billion a year according to the U.S. Office of Consumer Affairs. Law enforcement officials believe that seniors are among the most targeted.
Social workers, attorneys and law enforcement have identified the following reasons that seniors are at greater risk of fraud: more leisure time, isolation, anxiety, and more discretionary income.
Rosa Abreu has been with the Cook County State's Attorney's Office for 20 years. She is currently assigned to the Consumer Fraud Division, where she enforces Illinois' Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act to protect the public from businesses that engage in deceptive and unfair business practices.
For more information and/or to make a reservation, call 708-386-4040.
Register for Consumer Fraud Prevention Tips for Seniors at Oak Park Arms
Town of Residence
About the Oak Park Arms
The Oak Park Arms Senior Living is a rental retirement community which provides senior housing in the form of independent living and assisted living apartments. Additional services include respite care and an award-winning adult day care program. Furnished apartments are also available for a short-term stay.
Renee Steingard
Renee has been working at the Oak Park Arms since 2018. Her goal is helping seniors find the best in Senior Living, whether it's Independent Living or Assisted Living. Call for a tour 708-386-4040.


text:
Vaccination Decisions
with Judy Wilyman PhD
A Summary of the Main Themes in My PhD Thesis
Do you know what's in a vaccine?
Where are Australia's Vaccines Made?
Vaccines are Linked to Autism
Websites Providing the Risks of Vaccination
Invitation to Doctors
The Involuntary Medication Objectors (Vaccines/ Fluoride) Party
Dr. James Lyons-Weiler's Endorsement
Attacks on my PhD Research
Dr. John Cunningham's False and Misleading Information on Vaccination
AHPRA responds to the Conduct of Dr. John Cunningham
The University of Wollongong's (UOW) Policies and Procedures
Immunisation Policy
Vaccines did not Control Infectious Diseases
Vaccine Myths Promoted by the Australian Government
Lack of Accountability of Government Vaccine Advisors
Corruption in the NSW Health Department and HCCC
The Development of Immunisation Policy in Australia Since 1950
The Lack of Evidence for Mandatory Vaccination Policies
Conflicts of Interest in Government Vaccination Policies
Academic Publications and the Industry-Funded PHAA Conference
Fact sheets for Parents
Newsletters 2012 and 2013
Removal of Human Rights
The Australian Government's 'No Jab No Pay' Social Services Policy
WA No Jab No Play Policy
Science that has not been Funded
Richard Di Natale's (Greens Leader) False Vaccination Information in the Australian Parliament
Censorship of the Vaccination Debate in Australia
Coercive Measures in the Australian Government's Vaccination Policies
Letters to Government and UOW Academics
Lobby Groups
Media Reporting of Vaccines
Misinformation by Skeptic/SAVN Lobby Group Supporters
Mamamia blog
Strategies used by Australian Skeptics Lobby Groups
Articles on Australian Skeptic's and SAVN Lobby Groups
Perth WA Newsletter
You are here: Home / Immunisation Policy
Dr. James Lyons-Weiler, Research Scientist, Author and Editor-in-Chief of the journal Science, Public Health and the Law has endorsed my PhD research on infectious diseases and their causes.
Australian Government Immunisation (Vaccination) Policy
Australia's mandatory vaccination (immunisation) policies have not been designed on the factors that controlled infectious diseases in Australia and that reduced the risks of these diseases in all developed countries by 1950/60.
Here is a pamphlet that summarises the four main themes in my PhD Thesis describing the science and political decisions that underpin Australia's vaccination program. My research investigated the historical control of infectious diseases in Australia from 1900 – 2015 and the government's reasons for expanding the use of vaccines in 1990. The 16 vaccines that are recommended in government programs in 2019 were not developed in 1950/60 when infectious diseases were controlled in all developed countries. Further from 1950 – 1990 vaccination was voluntary and it was not tied to financial incentives for doctors and consumers until 1993.
In October 2019 I did an interview with Dr. James Lyons Weiler, Editor in Chief of the journal, Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law (October 2019) in which I have described the science of the risks of vaccines that have been ignored in the implementation of legislation that mandated 12-16 vaccines in social services policies in Australia in 2016. I also describe the lack of evidence for the efficacy of many of the vaccines that have been mandated – Unbreaking Science: Dr. James Lyons Weiler interviews Dr. Judy Wilyman.
Here is a 5 minute video (Your Children Your Choice) that describes the risks of vaccines that have not been acknowledged in government vaccination programs and it provides quotes from doctors and scientists stating that the proper safety and efficacy studies have not been done to support these government policies. This undone science was the focus of my PhD thesis at the University of Wollongong (UOW) from 2011-2015.
Over the last two decades parents have become increasingly concerned about the science supporting government vaccination programs as the chronic illness in Australian children has increased 5-fold in direct correlation to the expanded vaccination program. This is the sickest generation of children in Australia's history and the government schedule of childhood vaccines expanded from seven vaccines in 1990 to fifteen vaccines by 2014 This involves 52 doses of vaccines given in 22 injections from 0 – 14 years of age. Most grandparents are not aware of this expansion in the vaccination schedule as parents were only required to use 2 or 3 vaccines on a voluntary basis up to 1990 – a time when infectious diseases were not a serious risk to the majority of children/adults in Australia.
Doctors are also not required to discuss the ingredients of vaccines with parents before they give consent. Here is the government's list of ingredients for the vaccines used in Australia (Australian Immunisation Handbook (Ed 10) Appendix 3 2018). Please print these ingredients and discuss with your doctor. Here is the complete list of excipients used in vaccines as listed by the US CDC.
Vaccines used in Australia are the same as those in the US but they are approved in Australia under a different name.
In January 2016 the Australian government mandated fifteen vaccines in social welfare policies, not health policies, for welfare payments and for entry into early childhood education (in some states). They were also mandated for many adults in employment situations.
This occurred even though vaccination in Australia has always been voluntary because the deaths and illnesses were reduced prior to the vaccines being introduced. Further, the Australian government mandated all 15 vaccines even though there was no increased risk from these diseases in 2016. This was not a transparent policy and the government and medical doctors declined to attend a public forum at the University of Technology, Sydney to provide evidence for these mandatory vaccination policies before the policy was approved – Questions and Answers: No Jab No Pay/Play Policy.
An important fact that many people do not know about government vaccination programs is that they are not designed by governments in response to the risk of infectious diseases in their own country. For example, Australia's National Immunisation Policy is not designed by the Australian government in response to the Australian death and illness rates for infectious diseases.
Australia's immunisation policy is based on Global Health Policy recommendations that are provided by public-private partnerships within the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (GAVI) and presented to governments by the World Health Organisation (WHO). Whilst the charter of the WHO is to present objective scientific research for health recommendations, this is not happening for vaccine recommendations and it is a breach of the WHO's charter for health promotion.
The GAVI alliance is an alliance that is made up of pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and many more public-private partners. All of these partners have equal input into the recommendations for national vaccination programs that they provide to the World Health Organisation (WHO).
The GAVI alliance is composed of members who profit from recommending vaccines for implementation into government policies – a captive market for their product. This is a deceptive practice because the general public is not informed about this conflict of interest in the advice that is provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) to its 193 member countries.
Conflicts of Interest in Government Vaccine Advisory Boards
Australia's vaccination policies are recommended to our Minister for Health by the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI). This group is also responsible for providing advice about research funding to research organisations and recommending the areas where additional research is needed.
In Australia, the chairman of the ATAGI committee, Professor Terry Nolan, was also the deputy chairman of the research committee for the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) from 2005 – 2015. This is the body responsible for recommending the areas for research funding.
Here are the declared Conflicts of Interest of the ATAGI Chairman, Professor Terry Nolan, the co-director of the National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance (NCIRS), Professor Robert Booy, the WA Department of Health, Associate Professor Peter Richmond, Chairman of the Influenza Specialist Group (ISG), Dr. Alan Hampson, and Member of the ISG, Anne Kelso.
It is possible that many other COI exist in these boards that have not been made transparent to the public.
ATAGI Chairman Terry Nolan was the principle researcher on the pediatric swine flu trials for CSL's Fluvax vaccine in 2009 and this vaccine was withdrawn from the market in 2010 after many children had serious adverse events to this vaccine. Associate Professor Peter Richmond was also involved in the Fluvax vaccine clinical trials in western Australian children in 2008-2010. Both Professor Nolan and Richmond were on the ATAGI advisory boards that recommended the government implement the Fluvax vaccine into the national immunisation schedule in 2009-2010.
And they were both on the team that investigated the 1000's of severe adverse events to the Fluvax vaccine that occurred in children in 2010 and resulted in the vaccine being removed from the market.
The Lack of Evidence for Mandatory Vaccination Policies in Australia
A direct correlation of harm with the increased use of vaccines (drugs) in the population needs to be invesitgated before a government claims that the combined schedule of vaccines is safe. However, governments have not investigated the combined schedule of vaccines in long-term health studies using an inert placebo.
Instead they are claiming that 'correlation does not equal causation' and that reactions after vaccines are given are simply a 'coincidence'. This is unscientific and they are claiming vaccines are safe by ignoring this plausible cause of the increased chronic illness we are observing in childen. In doing so they are breaching their duty of care to the general public and designing public health policy that will cause death and disability in the human population.
The causality studies for the combined schedule of vaccines have not been done to prove that vaccines are not causing this chronic illness and disability in the population and the direct linear increase in illnesses with the increased use of vaccines is strong evidence for a safety signal that needs investigating.
The science on this website is supported by many doctors and all the science must be included in any public health policy, not selective science, to protect the health of the population. A policy that is not open for debate by the public is indoctrination and not a policy that is based on evidence-based medicine that has been properly scrutinised by all stakeholders – particularly the public on whom it has been enforced .
The suppression of the scientific debate in Australia has led many parents and professionals to investigate the science of vaccines and to set up websites presenting information about the risks of this medical intervention to the public. Links to these websites can be accessed on the Websites describing the Risks of Vaccines .
The Australian government's vaccination policies have been influenced by the pharmaceutical companies through pharmaceutical donations to the government and lobbying of politicians by industry associated lobby groups – The Australian Medical Association (AMA), The Australian Skeptics Inc and their offshoot Stop the Australian Vaccination Network (SAVN), The Friends of Science and Medicine and the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA).
The PHAA is the face of the Australian National Immunisation Conference that is run every two years and is funded 100% by industry and the government. It has a conflict of interest in promoting vaccines to the public because of this sponsorship. In 2014 this conference allowed the SAVN lobby group, that operates as a facebook group of consumers (many of whom do not have science or health qualifications) to present a poster that described the strategies they are using to suppress the scientific debate of vaccination in public forums and in the mainstream media in Australia.
Here is a link to the SAVN lobby group poster that was presented at a scientific conference. It is titled "Analysis of the Impact of the Stop the Australian Vaccination Network Campaign on the Public Profile of the Finances of the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN)" by Alison Gaylard, David Hawkes, Anne Coady, Cate Ryan, Rachael A. Dunlop et al (leaders of the SAVN industry-associated lobby group).
Many of these individuals have used abuse, ridicule and emotional arguments to dismiss and shame academics and professionals that speak about the risks of vaccination in Australia. This abuse of academics and professionals is occuring both in the Australian mainsteam media, on the Conversation website and on social media.
A description of how the medical literature is being selected for vaccination policies in Australia is given in the presentation that I gave at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS), 15 October 2015. This was a vaccination forum organised to discuss the public's concerns about the government's new mandatory vaccination legislation that was being implemented on 1 January 2016 in social welfare policies.
The forum was titled Questions and Answers: No Jab No Pay/Play Policy. and all the public health professionals, doctors and government representatives, including the ex-directors of the NCIRS, Peter McIntyre and Robert Booy, declined to attend this forum to explain the necessity for implementing mandatory vaccination legislation in social services policies at a time when infectious diseases were not a serious risk to the majority of Australians.
An policy that is not open for debate by the public is indoctrination and not a policy that is based on evidence-based medicine that has been properly scrutinised. Here is a video of Dr. Kenneth Stoller discussing the cover up of the causal link between vaccines and autism. Here is more scientific information on the vaccine/autism link
Here is an article that describes the corruption and criminality that can occur in the State-Pharmaceutical complex with the intensification of neoliberlaism in health policies. It is titled "Immunity and Impunity: Corruption in the State-Pharma Nexus" by P. Rawlinson, Western Sydney University, Australia.
The threat from infectious diseases in Australia declined before most vaccines were used in mass vaccination programs (Professor Fiona Stanley, 2001). Today the Australian government recommends vaccines against 12 diseases before children are 1 year of age yet the majority of these vaccines were not required for children in the 50's-60's when infectious diseases were no longer considered a threat to the majority of children in Australia (Commonwealth Yearbook of Australia 1953). Here are the documented comments by public health authorities during the 20th century that are conclusive evidence for this fact.
Most of the vaccines on the government's mandated list were not even developed in the 1950'/60's when the risk of all infectious diseases declined in developed countries like Australia. Further, in July 2012 three new vaccines were added to the Australian government schedule and in 2016 they were mandated for all children in social welfare payments, for attending early childcare centres and for many employment situations. This indicates the arbitrary nature of the government's 'mandated' vaccines.
Most adults have never used these vaccines and so the vaccines were clearly not responsible for controlling infectious diseases by creating 'herd immunity' in Australia.
At the same time the government increased the parental welfare payment that is linked to fully (all 16 vaccines) vaccinating a child to $2,100. This increased use of many new vaccines and the emphasis on increasing vaccination rates in the population, instead of increasing 'health' in the population, has led many parents, health practitioners and academics to conclude that the risks of vaccines outweigh any benefit from vaccines. Evidence for this conclusion has been documented on the Prevent Disease website.
Here is a link to the ingredients of the vaccines in the government's combined schedule of vaccines. Whilst this list is from the US Centre for Diseases Prevention and Control (CDC), many of these vaccines are also used in Australia but they are approved in Australia under a different name.
This list can be used to discuss the recommended schedule of vaccines with your doctor to ensure they believe this combination of active ingredients is safe in your developing infant. This doctor's warranty will also help you to ask the right questions when investigating this medical procedure – Doctors Warranty of Vaccine Safety
I have also published here the poster titled 'Coercive and Mandatory Immunisation: how ethical is this policy?' that I presented at the Australian Health Promotion Association Conference in Perth in May 2009 to illustrate the increase in chronic illness in children that has occurred at the same time as the increased use of vaccines in the Australian population.
Whilst a correlation does not equal causation, the government has a duty of care to the public to investigate all possible causes of the increase in chronic illness because vaccination policy should be designed in the public interest. The information presented below demonstrates that the Australian government has not investigated the link between the combined schedule of vaccines and chronic illness in the population. Hence they are breaching their duty of care to the Australian public by enforcing social services policies that link the full schedule of vaccines to financial benefits and other services that people cannot live without. [/pane]
Vaccines were not Responsible for the Majority of the Decline in Risk from Infectious Diseases
Infectious diseases in Australia were controlled by 1950 1. Only diptheria vaccine was in use at this time and this was in voluntary vaccination campaigns. It also resulted in the Bundaberg tragedy that killed 12 children in 1928. Measles, whooping cough and influenza were removed from the national notifiable disease list in 1950 because the deaths and serious illness to these diseases had been significantly reduced for the majority of children. No vaccines were used for these diseases in 1950 and the measles vaccine wasn't introduced into voluntary vaccination campaigns in Australia until 1970 1.
The deaths and illnesses from infectious diseases were reduced for the majority of children by the 1950's and outbreaks were less virulent because of the changes to environmental and lifestyle conditions. Each disease needs to be assessed separately in the context of the environmental conditions at the time to determine the risk from these infectious agents. This is also the case for the polio outbreaks in the 1950's. The risks and benefits of using a vaccine for each disease must be considered separately because of the specific nature of the infectious agents, the environment and the host characteristics.
In 2013 there are too many vaccines on the vaccination schedule and the combined schedule of vaccines has not been tested for safety in infants/children by comparing vaccinated to truly unvaccinated children. The placebo used in the unvaccinated group in clinical trials is either the vaccine adjuvant (aluminium phosphate) or another a competitor vaccine. These are 'active' ingredients and not true (inert) placebos and they are known to cause adverse events in the participants. Inert placebos have never been used to test the safety of vaccines. Therefore an accurate estimate of the harm caused by vaccines is unknown. Here is a link to my poster illustrating the science that has not been done to prove the safety of the government's vaccination schedule. This poster was presented to health professionals at the National Health Promotion Conference in Perth in 2009 and it is titled 'Coercive and Mandatory Immunisation: how ethical is this policy?'
In 1966 public health officials stated that "until social and economic changes are made no amount of medical and scientific knowledge can be of much help" (Dubos R, Health and Disease,1966 p.14). In other words the most significant factor in the control of infectious diseases is sanitation, hygiene, nutrition and other environmental and lifestyle changes.
In 2001 Professor Fiona Stanley, Director of the Telethon Institute for Children's Health Research until 2012, stated:
"Infectious deaths fell before widespread vaccination was implemented" (ABS 2001, Child Health Since Federation, p.11). This comment and many others by prominent public health officials about the decline of infectious diseases in Australia are listed here Comments by prominent public health authorities.
Comments by Australia's Commonwealth director of Health, JHL Cumpston (1914 – 1945), and Australia's Nobel Laureate for Immunology (1960), MacFarlane Burnett, clearly stated that public health reforms such as sanitation, hygiene, nutrition and smaller family sizes from 1850 -1950 were the most important factors in reducing the deaths and illness due to infectious diseases. Therefore the government is incorrect to suggest that high participation rates in all vaccination programs are necessary to prevent deaths and illnesses from returning as a public health problem.
Natural herd immunity is achieved by communities through natural exposure to the infectious agents over time and in many cases through sub-clinical (infections without symptoms) or mild infections. This is why infectious diseases are less virulent in developed countries once environmental and nutritional factors have been improved. There are many reasons why herd immunity created by vaccination may not be possible and is unproven.
Proof that herd immunity has been created by a vaccine could be provided by governments by publishing the vaccination status of each case of disease that is hospitalised. Yet this information is never clearly presented to the public as evidence for the efficacy of vaccines. Whooping cough vaccine was not introduced into mass vaccination programs in Australia until after 1953 and these programs were voluntary. Yet the disease was not considered a significant risk to children after 1950 and here are the comments from prominent public health officials that support this statement:
'As causes of infant mortality in Australia all the infective disease have been overcome' (Lancaster 1956a p.104). Lancaster also noted from 1946 -1954: 'Whooping cough (pertussis) was an uncommon cause of death for children and there is a significant decline in mortality if the age of infection increases' (1956a p.104) and 'Mortality rates due to whooping cough (pertussis) are used as an index of hygiene or social well-being' (Lancaster 1956b p.893). The same decline was observed in the UK and the USA [2, 3]. The graphs demonstrating the decline of disease can be found here.
For further reading on this and to see the graphs showing the decline of infectious diseases in Australia please visit the website 'A Parent's Dilemma' www.vaccinationdilemma.com You can download the book 'Fooling Ourselves on the Fundamental Value of Vaccines' by Greg Beattie.[/pane]
Coercive measures in Government Vaccination Policies
The Australian infant mortality rate (death rate) was low before coercive measures were used in government policies. Prior to the Immunise Australia Program (IAP) in 1993 the infant (under 1 year) mortality rate was very low at 8.2 per 1,000 births [4]. This was achieved without the use of coercive measures in government policies and before many new vaccines were added to the schedule in the 1990's.
Whilst four vaccines were used in long standing mass immunisation campaigns from the 1960′ – 70's onwards there were no coercive measures in immunisation policies until the early nineties [5]. In 1993 the government introduced payments to GP's to provide free vaccines to children and linked parental welfare payments to the national immunisation program (NIP).
This significantly increased the vaccination rates of the population in the nineties and chronic illness in children also skyrocketed 5-fold during this decade. The number of free vaccines on the childhood schedule increased during this time and many of the vaccines contained Thimerosal (a compound containing 49% mercury).
Prior to 1993 the government recommended the use of vaccines against 9 diseases but by 2016 the government was recommending vaccines against 15 diseases. In other words, as the threat from infectious diseases declined in Australia the number of vaccines recommended to the public in government policies increased.
The government's explanation for adding new vaccines to the recommended schedule was to see if these diseases could be eradicated – death and illness to these diseases had already been significantly reduced in developed countries.
The government's description of the national immunisation program (NIP) on the Immunise Australia Program (IAP) website misuses the terms 'immunisation' and 'vaccination' and this results in misinforming the public about the benefits of vaccines. The government explains its use of these terms by claiming "the term 'immunisation is used on this website as it is commonly used in the community" but this misleads the public about the benefits of vaccines.
'Immunisation' is not 'vaccination' and the two terms cannot be used interchangeably. 'Receiving a vaccine (vaccination) does does not always result in immunity (immunisation) and it is known that some vaccinated individuals still get the diseases they are vaccinated against. By framing the government policy around the term 'immunisation' the government has implied greater benefit from vaccines than the evidence suggests. Here is a description of the policy illustrating why the correct definitions of these words needs to be used to inform the public about the use of vaccines Terminology of the Australian government's policy : 'vaccination', 'immunisation' and 'vaccine-preventable diseases'. [/pane]
Vaccines and Autism
Long-term controlled clinical trials of the combined immunisation schedule using an inert placebo have never been done in animals or children
There are no controlled clinical trials that have investigated the long-term health effects (5 – 10 years) of combining 12 + vaccines in infants or adults [5]. These trials are needed to prove or disprove the link between the combined vaccination schedule and the increasing chronic illness and autism in children. Trials are needed that compare vaccinated animals with unvaccinated animals to determine the causal relationships (and frequency) of adverse health events that are linked to the combined schedule of 12 + vaccines in infants. It is unethical to recommend this schedule of vaccines in humans until these trials have been carried out. These studies are essential for proving or disproving a causal link between vaccines and autism.
Currently government scientists are using selective studies to make the claim that vaccines do not cause autism. However, it is noted that the majority of these studies have been funded by industry and the parameters and design of these studies have been chosen by industry funded researchers. The outcomes of these epidemiological studies are dependent upon the design of the study. Here is a short referenced article that summarises the information governments are using to de-bunk the claim by the Institute of Medicine (2001) that vaccines are a plausible cause of autism.
Vaccines are a Plausible Cause of Autism
Small studies of the combined schedule of vaccines that have been done in animals have indicated a link between vaccines and neurological damage, chronic illness, autism and cancer [6, 7, 8]. The chronic illness that has increased in children with the increased use of vaccines includes autoimmune diseases (including arthritis and diabetes), life-threatening food allergies, autism, asthma, learning and behavioural difficulties and cancer [9].
In 2011, a review into the cause of autism was carried out by Helen Ratajczak. This review is titled 'Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes – A review' and it was published in the Journal of Immunotoxicology. This paper examines many published, peer-reviewed articles demonstrating that vaccines are a plausible cause of autism. Ratajczak states that 'Documented causes of autism include genetic mutations and/or deletions, viral infections, and encephalitis (brain damage) following vaccination. Therefore, autism is the result of genetic defects and/or inflammation of the brain'. This suggests that epigenetics (the influence of toxins in vaccines on the expression of genes) could play a role the development of autism after vaccination or the inflammation of the brain due to the vaccine ingredients.
The current medical opinion is that vaccines are scientifically linked to encephalopathy (brain damage) and this has been known since the 1980's-90's (IOM 2001 in FDA Thimerosal in Vaccines). When thimerosal was being phased out of vaccines in 2000, manufacturers were introducing human DNA into vaccines. Human feotal DNA was introduced into the second version of the MMR vaccine (MMR II) and into 22 other vaccines including the chicken pox vaccine introduced in 1995 (Ratajczak 2011).
There is plenty of scientific evidence suggesting vaccines are a plausible causal of autism and this is confirmed by the United States Government and Dr. Geberding, Director of Vaccines at Merck & Co, Inc, who say that autistic conditions can result from encephalopathy following vaccination. Here is a list of many published peer-reviewed scientific articles that support the link between vaccines and autism.
Here is a link to further scientific evidence from Dr. Brian Hooker PhD, linking vaccines as a plausible cause of autism. This includes the video titled 'Vaccines cause more autism than the CDC will admit.' (18 mins). The suggestion that the link between autism and vaccines is debunked is false not only because the correct studies have not been done but because the surveillance for adverse reactions is inadequate for determining cause and effect after vaccination.
It is also known that some of the studies being used to make the claim that 'vaccines do not cause autism' are fraudulent. In 2003 the Hon. Dan Burton gave evidence in the US Congressional Hearing into the 'Mercury in Medicine Report' and it is recorded that "studies conducted or funded by the CDC that purportedly dispute any correlation between autism and vaccine injury have been of poor design, under-powered, and fatally flawed". Here is a link to the testimonials that have been given in the US Congressional Hearing on autism in November 2012.
Here is an article by Dr. Mark Allan Sircus, Ac., OMD, DM, (P) that indicates all of the science is not being used in determining the causes of Autism. It describes the environmental and genetic links and the effects of vaccines on human development. Autism is now 1 in 88 in the USA and approximately 1 in 100 in Australia and the UK. As the number of vaccines in the schedule has increased so has the rate of autism.
New research continues to identify additional concerns about mercury, aluminium adjuvant, antibiotics and other preservatives in vaccines and the combination of 7 + vaccines that are given to infants before the development of the blood brain barrier and the excretory systems. These systems are necessary to protect the brain and remove toxins from the body.
Here is the story of Dr. Andrew Wakefield and the way the authorities acted when he suggested that further research was required to determine if the MMR vaccine was implicated in the cause of autism Dr. Wakefield Film 'Hear the Silence' Resurfaces After 10 Years [/pane]
Science that has not been funded by Governments or Research Institutions
The government and private research institutions have not funded any studies that have investigated the long-term health effects of the combined schedule of vaccines in animals or infants – using an inert placebo. They have not designed studies to establish if vaccines are the cause of the significant increase in chronic illness and autism that is being observed in this generation of children.
The precautionary principle has not been used in the design of public health policies in a way that will protect public health.
This prinicple requires that the onus of proof of harmlessness for an intervention or technology is placed on the proponent of the intervention not the general public. But the Australian government has placed the onus of proof of harmlessness of the vaccination schedule on the public – not the medical practitioners or the pharmaceutical companies.This ensures that the government is protecting the vested interests of industry lobby groups in its vaccination policies. That is, pharmaceutical profits.
The adverse health effects that are linked to the components of vaccines in the medical literature include neurological damage and immunological damage similar to many conditions that are being observed in children. A link to the ingredients in Australian vaccines can be found here and this demonstrates that vaccines are a plausible cause of these diseases.
Even though the use of 11 vaccines (in infants under one year of age) contains many environmental toxins there are no studies that investigate vaccines as a possible cause of the increase in chronic illness in children. I have listed below the well funded studies that have not investigated vaccines as a cause of chronic illness in children:
a). In 2009 The Telethon Institute for Child Health Research (TICHR) and researchers from the University of Western Australia and Curtain University were funded by the NHMRC to complete a 5-10 year study of children born in 1980. The aim of the study was to look at the impact of developmental disorders and mental health problems and relate them to possible environmental causes. The study involves looking at children from birth and their mothers pregnancies to see what environmental exposures affected their development. Vaccines which are a significant environmental exposure to all children were not included in this investigation.
b) The Children's Medical Research Institute (CMRI) in Australia claims to be 'committed to unlocking the mysteries of childhood diseases' yet this organisation has not completed any studies that examine the effects of vaccines on the long-term health of children. It is known that environmental toxins affect gene expression yet there has been no attempt to examine the components of vaccines and their influence on the genetic expression of chronic illness in children.
c) Murdoch Children's Research Institute (MCRI). This institute has not funded a study that examines the effects of multiple childhood vaccines on the development of children and their ability to reach their full potential in life.
d) The AusImmune study at the Australian National University (ANU) was carried out from 2003 – 2008 and examined the link between multiple sclerosis (an autoimmune disease) and environmental toxins – including 4 vaccines that may be a possible cause of this disease. Multiple Sclerosis is one of the many chronic illnesses that is increasing in adults. The conclusions to this study depend upon the chosen criteria and parameters of the study.
e) The US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), has not funded a study investigating the effects of vaccines on the development of children.[/pane]
The public trusts that government advisory boards for public health policy are acting in the public interest. In order to make decisions that protect the public interest in this policy it is necessary for policy-decision makers to base decisions on objective or non-biased science.
Government policy is also required to be transparent and accountable. This means that conflicts of interest on government advisory boards need to be declared and publicised to the community.
However, lobby groups are framing this issue to suggest that people who discuss conflicts of interest or question the use of so many vaccines are 'conspiracy theorists'. This is ignoring the possible influence conflicts of interest have on policy development.
In Australia conflicts of interest on government vaccine advisory boards were not publicised to the community until February 2015 – just after Terry Nolan retired as chairman of the ATAGI vaccine advisory group and deputy-chair of the NHMRC.
Australian Government Advisory Boards for Immunisation Policy
Policy decisions should be made on non-biased information yet the representatives on the US and Australian vaccine advisory boards have many financial conflicts of interest (COI) with industry. These conflicts have the potential to bias their decisions. Many drugs and vaccines are licensed in the USA by the US Food and Drug Administrator (FDA) and then automatically approved for other countries without further clinical trials.
A prominent US public health official who is often presented in the media and in documentaries about the benefits of vaccines is Dr. Paul Offit. Paul Offit has declared many conflicts of interest in his advocacy of vaccines including being a consultant for Merck Pharmaceutical Company. Here are some of Paul Offit's conflict's of interest in promoting vaccines.
The government has a duty to demonstrate that the science used in policy development is based on non-biased science and that is why representatives are required to declare COI. A declaration reveals what interests there are in an issue and the public is entitled to see these interests in order to determine if all the science is being assessed in policy development. If COI and the composition of stakeholders on vaccine advisory boards are not publicised then the public cannot assess the validity of the information. The public should not be required to trust that objective science is being used in policy development: it needs to be demonstrated.
The Significance of Conflicts of Interest in Government Policy
This information is important because the public needs to know whether all the science is being included in policy development and that advisory boards are not selecting the information that suits a chosen outcome.
Ms. Bennett, ex-CEO of the Consumers Health Forum (CHF) informed me on the 7th November 2011 that disclosure of COI was an issue that the CHF was addressing and eventually in 2015 COI for vaccine board representatives were published on the government website.
This issue is about committees being transparent to the public in declaring whose interests they may be representing. Yet the declared COI of government representiatives on vaccine advisory boards are never made easily accessible to the public (over-vaccination). The Australian government states that immunisation policy is for the good of the community therefore it has a duty of care to protect the public interest in government policy and not the vested interests of industry.
Public concerns about the number of vaccines on the childhood schedule are not being acknowledged by journalists and the Australian Government. In 2013, Australia's Health Minister, Tanya Plibersek, "rubbished fear campaigns about the risk of immunisation" instead of providing evidence for its safety by answering the questions that the public are asking. By ignoring these concerns the government is selecting the science that is being used in government policy. This doesn't make the schedule of vaccines safe and effective. A consensus in science should not be obtained by removing one perspective from the risk analysis.
Minister Plibersek also signed a 'vaccination pledge' to increase community vaccination rates on a website that is associated with the Australian Skeptics organisation: a lobby group that is peddling misinformation. The Mia Freedman website, Mamamia, regularly has subscribers of the Skeptics lobby groups present pro-vaccination information on this website and they do not provide their qualifications or affiliation with this lobby group with the information they provide on this blog. The Health Minister signed the pledge designed by this website.
On 5th May 2013 Tanya Plibersek stated that "vaccines are 100 percent not linked to autism" but this has not been proven. It is not possible for the government to make this claim because the scientific evidence to prove this statement has not been collected. The vaccination schedule for children has not been trialled in animals or a study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children (Aust. Health Department). Until the correct scientific studies are completed that "prove" or "disprove" this link, it is not possible for any government to claim that vaccines are "100 percent not the cause of autism" or any other chronic illness that is escalating in children. An evidence-based policy should be based on evidence not "a lack of evidence" to make claims about safety.
There is clear evidence that the vaccination schedule is not safe and the US government has paid out over $2 Billion for vaccine damage claims with the most recent case being The Hannah Polling case in which $1.5 million was paid to the family after she received 9 vaccines in one day and developed autism.
News limited papers and other media are informing the public that consumer concerns about the safety and efficacy of vaccines are based on "conspiracy theories and dangerous misinformation". Janet Albrechtsen, a columnist for the The Australian Newspaper (News Ltd), made this statement in reply to requests that these arguments be published in the mainstream media. Another journalist, Sarrah Le Maurquand demonstrated in her reply that journalists are not being encouraged to investigate this issue and think for themselves. Australian journalists and government ministers are required to represent all stakeholders in public health policy and it must be demonstrated that non-biased science has been used. Instead the mainstream media is informing the public that "there is no other side to this debate" as Caroline Marcus from the Telegraph did in April 2013 and Jonathon Holmes from Media Watch in October 2012.
The media is presenting Dr. Rachael Dunlop as a 'pro-vaccine advocate' without informing the public of her position as Vice-President of the Australian Skeptics. Rachael Dunlop has presented misinformation on her blog and many other subscribers of this group are using similar strategies. Therefore it is important that her position in this lobby group is openly revealed to the public when she presents information.
A book exposing the influence of industry on government policy is Vaccine Epidemic edited by the Center for Personal Rights. Globally there are many funded lobby groups who are putting out misinformation in the mainstream media and on social websites to influence public behaviour. The influence of these groups on the debate in Australia can be viewed on the Lobby group page of this website. Doctor's responses to the information presented on this website can be viewed here. [/pane]
Adverse reactions to vaccines are monitored by passive surveillance
The government uses a voluntary system of reporting adverse reactions that does not systematically monitor the health outcomes of all vaccinated individuals [5]. This means the government cannot make causal relationships between adverse reactions and vaccines (CDC) (TGA). The Australian government claims many of the reactions are just a 'coincidence' and it concludes: There is no evidence that vaccines cause significant harm in the population. Yet this statement is being made on a lack of scientific evidence because governments have not funded the studies that would provide conclusive evidence for the causal link between vaccines and many diseases increasing in global populations. In other words, this policy is founded on 'undone science' or science that has not been funded to provide empirical evidence to support the policy.
The majority of the decline in infectious diseases occurred before most vaccines were used in mass vaccination campaigns therefore herd immunity due to vaccines is not responsible for the decline of these diseases. The theory of herd immunity created by vaccines is not a reason for governments to link vaccination policies to welfare benefits, schools or employment opportunities. For further information on the influence of industry on the direction and outcomes of medical research and conflicts of interest in government policy please visit the website over-vaccination. [/pane]
[pane title="References"]
1. Commonwealth Department of Health, 1945 – 1986, Official Yearbook of the Commonwealth of Australia, No. 37 – 7
2. Stewart GT, 1977, Vaccination against Whooping Cough: Efficacy v Risks, The Lancet, January 29, p. 234-237
3. Armstrong GL et al, 1999, Trends in Infectious disease Mortality in the United States during the 20th Century, JAMA, Vol 281 No. 1, Jan 6
4. Australian Government Bureau of Statistics (ABS), Child Health Since Federation, Year Book Australia 1301.0, 2001
5. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing, Immunise Australia Program, 2004
6. La Rosa, W.R., 2002, The Hayward Foundation Study on Vaccines; a possible etiology of autoimmune diseases.
7. Shoenfeld Y and Agmon-Levin N, 2011, ASIA – Autoimmunity/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvant, Journal of Autoimmunity, 36 p. 4-8
8. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Vaccines, Blood and Biologics. Thimerosal in Vaccines. US Department of Health and Human Services. http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/UCM096228
9. Australian Government, Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 4829.0.55.001 Health of Children in Australia: A Snapshot 2004-5. [/pane]
Receive Vaccination Decisions Newsletter
Scott Morrison was Social Services Minister in 2015 when No Jab No Pay was Approved
16 Month-Old Arianna Dies in Childcare in Sydney and Parents Search for Answers.
New Publication Date of My Book: February 2020
Dr. James Lyons-Weiler, Public Health Research Scientist Interviews Dr. Judy Wilyman
Peter McIntyre's Lack of Accountability as Ex-Director of Australia's Vaccination Research Unit (NCIRS)
Copyright © 2020 · Vaccination Decisions on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in