Vaccine-choice advocate libelled by Mamamia?


Many people have known for some time that some of the writers at the “fluff” site, Mamamia, are not exactly… should one put it….. suffice it to say that, to my mind, they are not exactly Einstein.

One might receive the distinct impression that the writers there are aged about 20, that they know very little of the world, and that they lack the basic understanding to realise that there’s a whole world out there beyond their own rectal passage. And beyond their own website. You know – a world in which some people actually choose to be educated on matters of importance.


I recently had the misfortune to encounter a Mamamia article in which vaccine-choice advocate, Meryl Dorey, was accused of lying. According to Mamamia article  Anti-vaxxers come up with their most abhorrent lie yet, Meryl Dorey had the audacity to speak at a recent expo and state that Shaken Baby Syndrome is not always as it seems. Tch tch tch. How dare anyone tell the truth. But it appears to me that Mamamia’s motto is “Never let the truth get in the way of a libellous, sloppily-researched Mamamia hit-piece”.


Apparently, referring to bleeding behind the eyes, Dorey stated that “There are so many things that can cause that symptom and in Australia there is a doctor by the name of Archie K who also put a lot of those symptoms they’re looking at with shaken baby down to lack of Vitamin C. He even believed that vaccinations caused a deficit of Vitamin C and [that] would cause the bruising and the broken bones that a lot of people were seeing in their babies, as well.”


According to Mamamia, what Dorey said “is completely unfounded, untrue” and, apparently, “her arguments are based on bogus science”. Really?


Let’s look at Dr Archivides (Archie) Kalokerinos for a moment


The Sydney Morning Herald ran a piece on this well-respected physician in 2012, under the heading Doctor prevented infant mortality. The article goes on to describe Dr Kalokerinos’ work in addressing “ the impossibly high infant mortality rate he encountered in regional NSW.”


“In one Aboriginal community every second Aboriginal infant was dying. Kalokerinos adopted a radical ”counter intuitive” therapy – boosting the immune system – and brought the infant mortality rate there down to zero. He embraced preventative medicine, particularly in the beneficial use of vitamin C. Some of Kalokerinos’s theories were controversial, but he had some powerful support. The dual Nobel-prize winner Linus Pauling, in the foreword to Kalokerinos’s book Every Second Child, endorsed his views. In 1975, film director Phillip Noyce produced a documentary on him and Aboriginal healthcare entitled, God Only knows Why, But it Works. It was claimed that a ”Schindler’s List” could be drawn up, of children he had saved and their offspring.”


Furthermore, we see that Dr Kalokerinos “was surprised to discover that some of the children had symptoms of scurvy. After trying to treat them with antibiotics and vitamin C, he found that the effects of vitamin C therapy were dramatic. He reported on this, encountering scepticism from some within his profession. He believed there was a link between vitamin C deficiency and sudden infant death syndrome. He also found that some children had a disease that affected their taste buds so that food tasted foul, and they were being tube-fed. He realised they were suffering a zinc deficiency and came up with a treatment that is now routine.”


Now let us look at Linus Pauling, who endorsed Dr Archie Kalokerinos’ views


In this Linus Pauling biography , we read that “In addition to the general recognition as one of the two greatest scientists of the 20th century, he was usually acknowledged by his colleagues as the most influential chemist since Lavoisier, the 18th-century founder of the modern science of chemistry. His introductory textbook General Chemistry, revised three times since its first printing in 1947 and translated into 13 languages, has been used by generations of undergraduates. After Pauling entered the field of chemistry as a professional in the mid-1920s, his work, grounded in physics, has affected the work of every chemist. He is also often considered the founding father of molecular biology, which has transformed the biological sciences and medicine and provided the base for biotechnology.”


Hmmmm……let me see……..whose opinions and research do I put more stock in? That of Dr Archie Kalokerinos and Nobel Chemistry Prize winner, Linus Pauling? Or that of, in my opinion, a blinkered little writer at Mamamia whose sole goal appears to be the further dumbing-down of the masses?


So when Dr Archie Kalokerinos writes here about the subjects of Shaken Baby Syndrome, SIDS, vaccination, and vitamin C, we should all dismiss his 50 years of work? In favour of nothing more than the parochial views of a writer at Mamamia who, as far as I’m concerned, doesn’t know which end is up?


Sorry, Mamamia. Some of us are too intelligent to switch off our minds and join your flock of gullible fluff-worshippers.


Without any difficulty whatsoever, I was able to find this on Pubmed. Why, look at that – Shaken Baby Syndrome is not always as it appears to be.

[Metabolic disease or shaken baby syndrome?].

Abstract We describe two children with subdural haematoma and glutaricacidaemia type 1, who were diagnosed late because of initial suspicion of shaken baby syndrome.

And again “Intraretinal hemorrhages and chronic subdural effusions: glutaric aciduria type 1 can be mistaken for shaken baby syndrome.”


How difficult would it have been for Mamamia to do even the slightest amount of investigation before posting an article which, to my eyes, clearly libels someone?


By all means, if the article author wants to pretend to themselves that Shaken Baby Syndrome is always as it appears to be, they should go ahead and believe that. But to publish an article and not acknowledge facts that are provided to them and, in fact, to censor such evidence? As far as I’m concerned, that is wrong, unprincipled and ignorant. In fact, I think it’s just plain dumb, dumb, dumb.


Just keep on churning out that fluff, Mamamia. The calibre of ovis aries people you aim your writing at are clearly very, very happy with fluff.

archie's book



5 thoughts on “Vaccine-choice advocate libelled by Mamamia?

  1. I imagine that Archie must have been a very interesting man. He clearly had an open mind that allowed him to see the truth of what needed to be done for his patients. That open-mindedness saved many lives. It’s interesting that the news about Prof. John Walker-Smith is only filtering around to some at this point. One would think that this should have been major headline news for days at the time, particularly in light of the media saturation that the original case was given. But of course it wasn’t popular news. It certainly didn’t suit the agenda. I did read of it at the time, but not in the Australian media. Maybe it was mentioned here, maybe it wasn’t – I think the point is that it was actually something very important and his exoneration wasn’t given enough attention in order that someone like yourself (who would have a great interest in it) would be aware. And this is where the media should hang its head in shame. They crucified the blameless Wakefield to the extent that people can’t hear his name without thinking “discredited”. In the same way, it should have been likewise with the news of his colleague’s exoneration – everyone should know that Wakefield’s colleague was exonerated because that news, in effect, meant the exoneration of Wakefield as well. The great thing is that truth will always win in the end, and Dr Wakefield will have his day.

  2. Hallelujah…….!!!What a great weekend, firstly Wakefields partner has been exonerated and now this? Smiling from ear to ear. By the way, I knew Archie, and can atest to his sincerity and genuine dedication to his work, supported by his wonderful wife Kath.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>