Evidence, Please.

Applying Hitchens’ Razor to the Claims of Meryl Dorey

Advertisements

On Monday the 25th of November 2013, prominent anti-vaccination group the Australian Vaccination Network lost its appeal against the New South Wales Department of Fair Trading and was ordered again by the New South Wales Administrative Tribunal to change its name. This is fantastic news for those of us who believe that the AVN’s name is misleading and misrepresents their anti-vaccination stance. Reasonable Hank has done an excellent job of covering the news in his blog post “Australian Vaccination Network ordered to change duplicitous name“.

On the evening of the decision, ABC’s Lateline aired a report by Steve Cannane discussing the court’s decision, with interviews with Dr Rachael Dunlop and ex-president of the AVN, Meryl Dorey.

With thanks to Anne Blake for uploading the video.

I would like to say that the following quote from Meryl Dorey surprised me, but having followed her public statements for some time now, I am quite familiar with the Big Pharma Shill gambit. From the transcript of Lateline:

STEVE CANNANE: In response to today’s decision, Meryl Dorey claimed she was a victim of hate groups and vested interests.

MERYL DOREY: Many of those people either work in the pharmaceutical industry or work for the pharmaceutical industry and it is apparent that some of these people are quite close with certain members of the NSW Parliament and of our government. So, you know, you can call it a conspiracy theory, but I’d say that there is evidence.

Well Meryl, where is this evidence? I have asked twice on Twitter, but so far have had no response.


Tumbleweed .gif from RationalWiki page
"List of scientifically controlled double blind studies which have
conclusively demonstrated the efficacy of homeopathy"

Meryl, if you are going to make public claims which assert that there is a conspiracy between those who campaign against the AVN, pharmaceutical companies and the Australian government, you’d do well to back them up. If you can or will not, I suggest that the public would do well to apply Hitchens’ Razor to your statements.

“What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.”

NB: Given Meryl Dorey’s tendency to take her critics’ words as threats, I would absurdly like to point out that Hitchens’ Razor (coined by the interminably quotable late Christopher Hitchens) is an epistemological law regarding the onus of burden of proof and not a literal razor.

Further Reading:
Stop the Australian (anti)Vaccination Network on Facebook
@StopAVN on Twitter
#StopAVN on Twitter

Advertisements

Advertisements