Monthly Archives: April 2012

AV is for Anti-Vax

The anti-vaccination loony Meryl Dorey is once more moaning about skeptics and those who would see her and her flying monkeys held accountable for the dangerous misinformation they spread. It seems that the constant barrage of complaints is getting to Meryl. Perhaps if she didn’t act to a total disregard for government regulations she might have nothing to worry about in the first place.

In her latest blog post Dorey moans about the HCCC-Report 

1- The Health Care Complaints Commission received a 90-page complaint by Ken McLeod – member of Stop the AVN and a man whose obsession with me seems to border on the psychotic. McLeod filed the original complaint, resulting in a 12-month ‘investigation’ by the HCCC and a public warning – both of which were later deemed to be illegal by the NSW Supreme Court. -Meryl Dorey, 28 April 2012 nocompulsoryvaccination.com

On the contrary neither the Investigation, nor finding by the Health Care Complaints Commission where ‘illegal’ although the courts did find the HCCC acted outside its jurisdiction on a technicality and therefore shouldn’t have investigated the AVN in the first place. Although the Health Care Complaints Commission had to officially retract the public warning it had issued, the content of the warning itself was never found to be incorrect.

Now It looks like Meryl Dorey and the AVN are being asked to disclose their financial income to the Department of Fair Trading. Conveniently Meryl doesn’t keep track of her finances, and therefore has an excuse at the ready for not complying with government requests.

I have informed the Dept of Fair trading that I cannot break down our income from sales of products to members and non-members because we are not required to keep track of this and therefore, we have not done so. This doesn’t seem to be satisfactory to them and they are continuing to ask me to provide them with this information or they may have to consider their ‘options’ in regards to our registration. -Meryl Dorey, 28 April 2012 nocompulsoryvaccination.com

Very convenient Meryl, perhaps the Office of Liquor Gaming and Racing doesn’t require you to keep that info but apparently the Department of Fair Trading does, or they would not be asking for it. You need to abide by ALL regulations not just the ones most convenient to you.

Meryl continues her tirade against all who oppose her anti-vaccination stance.

The real villains here are those members of the Australian Skeptics and Stop the AVN who – though they themselves have not been harmed by any of these products, by any of this information or by any of these remedies – intentionally waste the public’s time, money and expertise by pursuing vexatious and absolutely ridiculous complaints. The Skeptics have worked out a way to rort the system by using current legislation to victimise those who they disagree with. And the ones who lose out when this sort of fraud is perpetrated by a group that opposes freedom of choice and speech are the Australian taxpayers. -Meryl Dorey, 28 April 2012 nocompulsoryvaccination.com

How dare we “use current legislation (sic)” to file complaints against you. Perhaps if you weren’t so often in the wrong you’d have nothing to fear from those complaints. Just some food for thought.

It has to be asked What sort of “charity” fears government investigation? 

More on the Scrayen Threat.

My Apologies for not posting this sooner. Last week was the Global Atheist Convention and I forgot that I had this sitting in Draft.

So recently the controversial (soon to be infamous) homeopath Francine Scrayen sent me a Cease and Desist notice as a result of some criticisms I wrote on this blog. My opinions of Scrayen and the way she treated one of her patients are less than humbling. After reading a report from the State Coroner I am happy to say that I find Ms Scrayen’s involvement; as detailed in the report to be nothing less than that of a callous fraud. Homeopathy is a fake “medicine” that has never been proven to work. So I have to seriously question the integrity of anyone who would sell it as a cancer treatment. According to both the Coroner Report and the letters written by Ms Dingle, Francine Scrayen has done just that.

Clearly Ms Scrayen is not happy about my criticisms and wants me to censor myself. I believe that the Cease and Desist notice she sent me was intended to intimidate more than anything else. She graciously decided that a four day public holiday would be sufficient time for me to prepare my legal response. However I’m not convinced that the court would consider that to be an acceptable time frame, and for this reason I do not think the Cease and Desist is anything more than an intimidation attempt.

There is such a thing as acting in “Bad Faith” and someone looking to file legal action would probably not want to act in any way that could possibly be construed as Bad Faith, such as giving someone a public holiday to seek legal advice for example. I also have to question her motivation for going after me rather than the sources I reference.

She claims that I have made the following “false” statements about her. There are sixteen point in all but a lot of them are just the same thing repeated. I suspect this was done to make the legal threat look more intimidating. So rather than just repeating myself on multiple similar points I will cut it down to the key points. I think I can justify my statements. Obviously this is just a quick summary for the purpose of a blog post. Going through the courts will require far more scrutiny and more extensive examination. 

has been sued for the death of Penelope Dingle;

Legal Correspondence 

On this point I would suggest that Ms Scrayen retake an English class and learn the difference between past and present tense. Since no where on this website have I ever claimed that Ms Scrayen “has been sued for the death of Penelope Dingle” starting off on a lie is not a good start Francine. I do however state that she is currently being sued for the death of Penelope Dingle.

Feel free to check my source. Does Ms Scrayen deny that she is being sued by Toni Brown for the death of Penelope Dingle? If so perhaps she should file action against the newspaper for covering the storey.

My Source: http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/13310801/woman-sues-homeopath-over-sisters-cancer-death/

defrauded Penelope Dingle;

 Legal Correspondence 

Did Francine Scrayen convince the deceased that she could cure her cancer? Yes, did the deceased receive the service that Ms Scrayen charged her for? No, therefore any reasonable person could conclude that Ms Scrayen committed an act of fraud by misleading the deceased with false promises. My opinion after reading both the Coroners Report and the letters that Penelope Dingle wrote to Ms Scrayen is that the deceased chose to have an effective treatment that would cure her of cancer. But instead Ms Scrayen provided a bogus treatment (Homeopathy) that has never been shown to cure cancer. 

sold witchcraft;

Legal Correspondence  

Ms Scrayen provides an alternative medicine that has never been proven to work beyond a placebo effect. To date the scientific community has been unable to determine any mechanism by which Homeopathy might work. In light of this fact it is perfectly reasonable to call Homeopathy “Witchcraft” as it falls into the same category as other mythical clap trap, such as magic, psychic powers and many more.

Selling magic water or magic sugar pills would fall within the general populations idea of witchcraft.

killed Penelope Dingle;

Legal Correspondence  

Going all out to persuade a cancer patient to avoid treatment so that you can sell them your mythical clap trap certainly sounds like killing to me. There is no doubt that any reasonable person would interpret a person to exploits a cancer patient in this manner as; at the very least indirectly killing the patient. I feel that my claim that “Ms Scrayen killed Penelope Dingle” falls well within the grounds of fair comment, especially in the context of my publications.

intentionally influenced Penelope Dingle into making bad medical choices;

Legal Correspondence 

Who am I to disagree with the State Coroner? Does MS Scrayen expressly deny influencing Penelope Dingles medical decisions? Because the findings of the State Coroner state otherwise.

Source: http://www.danbuzzard.net/storage/Dingle_Finding.pdf

is the very worse type of fraud;

Legal Correspondence 

Ms Scrayen is indeed the very worst type of fraud and I will be happy to repeat my opinion in court. Duping a cancer patient so you can sell your unproven “medicine” to them, sounds pretty despicable to me. Especially when the patient who might otherwise live ends up dead from lack of treatment. Cheating the sick and desperate is the worse type of fraud that one can commit.

sold fake medicine;

Legal Correspondence  

FACT: Francine Scrayen is a Homeopath, or does she deny providing homeopathic (fake medicine) “treatment” to the deceased?

I want to thank everyone who’s been blogging and tweeting about this. Normally this blog is quiet and only a few people ever read the articles that Scrayen complains about, that is until she sent me a Cease and Desist notice.

I believe they call this the Streisand Effect. Apparently Ms Scrayen’s attempt to silence me has only drawn more attention to the facts surrounding the death of Penelope Dingle. It has also lead to a lot more people downloading and reading the Coroners ReportIf Scrayen wants to put both herself and Homeopathy on trial in the Supreme Court then she can pursue legal action against me and open her “treatments” up to the scrutiny of the courts. Many of us, myself included look forward to the possibility of a Supreme Court examining the evidence, or rather lack thereof for Homeopathic treatments.

Coroners Report. <- Read this and decide for yourself.

Letters by Ms Dingle

Francine Scrayen sends me a Cease and Desist.

It looks like two of my previous blog posts have upset Ms Scrayen to the point where she is willing to call in the lawyers. Of course nobody likes such harsh criticism of their business practices, especially when they are already surrounded by intense public scrutiny.

Ms Scrayen is so strongly opposed to my opinions and criticisms of her that she even wants me to remove them from my blog. 

I have no desire to publish inaccuracies and posting such a retraction would be doing just that. My opinions and criticisms of Francine Scrayen are based upon the facts surrounding the death of Penelope Dingle and I am more than willing to defend them in court if need be.

Ms Scrayen may be unhappy with what I’ve written about her, but I will not be removing it unless it is shown to be false. If Ms Scrayen thinks she can silence my criticism with lawyers then she is in for some disappointment.

I’m sure Ms Scrayen will read this so I’ll make this perfectly clear. You cannot silence legitimate criticism with lawyers. If you can prove the Homeopathy works and is effective for treating cancer, as Penelope Dingle was led to believe. Then I will gladly make the necessary corrections to maintain the accuracy of my blog. But if you want to sell unproven medicines to vulnerable cancer patients then you can expect to be justifiably criticised for it; especially if the patient then dies due to your ineffective treatment.

Cease and Desist Letter.

Coroners Report

My First post about Francine Scrayen

My Second post about Francine Scrayen