Baratosy, M.B., B.S., Ph.D.

[Guest guest]

Baratosy, M.B., B.S., Ph.D.

An Australian medical practitioner, he uses alternative medicine in his general

practice and combined with complementary and orthodox medicines for the maximal

benefit for his patients.

Writing in response to some of the accusations raised against Dr. Lanctot, he

notes: " That as far as her promoting a campaign of fear and discouraging people,

especially children, from being vaccinated, people have a right to know about

what is being done to them. Immunization is one of those cases where they are

encouraged to have it done but are not told the truth about risks and dangers.

Telling the truth and giving relevant facts about immunization is not a

" campaign of fear " .... In Australia, the High Court, in a decision in the early

1 9201s, dealt with the concept of " informed choice " . This means that the person

must be given all the information, even if they did not ask, so that they can

choose whether to have the treatment or not...

As for her duping the public and undermining the credibility of and the public's

confidence in the medical profession, he believes that the medical profession

has done this to itself. People have been moving away from orthodoxy to

alternatives for some time now. A study from the U.S. has shown that there were

more alternative consultations than orthodox consultations and more money was

spent on these than orthodox medicine. The public is already suspicious of the

medical profession, drugs and surgery and is moving away...

Being accused of undermining vaccination campaigns only means that Dr. Lanctot

is giving information so that parents can make an informed choice. It is not a

crime, especially if immunization is not compulsory. Parents must be told the

truth so that they can decide whether to go ahead and immunize or not... (is

this a quote?)

It is incorrect to accuse Dr. Lanctot of prejudicing the population's health and

welfare. By advocating safer, alternative treatments, people's health and

welfare will only improve. If we examine orthodox treatments we will find that

up to 20% of admissions to hospitals are caused by iatrogenesis, that is, doctor

induced problems. Most orthodox treatments have not been proven scientifically.

Prof. J. Garrow was quoted in the Australian Doctor's Weekly (28 June 91) as

saying that 65% of conventional medical treatment was not proven. The U.S.

Congress publication, " Assessing the efficacy and safety of medical

technologies " (1978) quoted 80% to 90% as being unproved. When there were

doctor's strikes in the U.S., Israel and Colombia, death rates fell. A study by

J. and S. McKinlay of Boston University, concluded that only up to 3.5% of the

decline in disease was due to medical measures. I think that the medical

establishment has over-estimated its usefulness... (end of quote?)

As far as her discouraging cancer patients from following recognized treatments

of surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and instead advocating non-recognized

714X treatment, he noted that cancer specialists themselves have admitted that

the war against cancer has been lost. After 50 to 60 years of the same

treatments, that is, surgery, radiation and chemicals, the survival rate has not

improved (there are few exceptions such as leukemia). Figures from a London

hospital have shown that the death rate from breast cancer, from 1805 to 1933

without any treatment, was as good as survival with treatment. Another study

done in the U.S., between 1950 and 1973, showed the same thing. We must have a

clear picture of the treatment and whether the treatment is worse than the

disease. In the treatment of breast cancer, there is little difference in the

survival rates between radical mastectomy, mastectomy, lumpectomy and any of

these, plus or minus radiation or chemotherapy. What I am trying to say is that

even the orthodoxy does not know which is the best treatment (so we can say that

at present treatment is experimental) and there is evidence to show that no

treatment may be just as successful...

I see many children in my practice. Some are immunized and some are not, my own

children are not. I see the difference between the immunized and the

non-immunized. They're much healthier and have less infections, colds, otitis

media and tonsillitis. Dr. Odent has written a letter in the JAMA (1994)

where his figures show a five times higher rate of asthma in pertussis immunized

children compared to non-immunized children. He is also quoted in the

International Vaccination Newsletter (Sept. 1994): " Immunized children have more

ear infections and spend more days in hospital. "

This, I believe is an indication of immune system suppression due to vaccines.

One of the flaws in studies of vaccines is that there are no true placebo

groups. The vaccine is tested in one group of immunized children and is compared

to another group of immunized children. My advantage is that I have a group of

children under my care whose parents have decided not to immunize and I can

compare these children with immunized children. The un-immunized are definitely

more healthy and so far none have caught any nasty illnesses. The irritability

that children experience after immunization is a mild form of encephalitis,

which can produce a minimal brain damage. The severity of the initial

encephalitis bears no relationship to the eventual damage. This mild damage can

cause autism, learning difficulties and hyperactivity. In one study a large

proportion of juvenile offenders were discovered to be minimally brain damaged.

Minimally brain damaged children were more likely to behave in a violent way.

So far, there is no evidence that immunizations have abolished any disease.

Countries such as the U.S. which have compulsory immunization have similar rates

of disease as those which do not. The U.S. has the highest expenditure in the

world on medical services. It has compulsory immunization, yet it has the 20th

worst infant death rate. Japan, where immunization is given at age two, the

infant death rate is one of the lowest in the world. This is similar in Sweden

where the pertussis vaccine is not used.

Reproduced with permission of Here's The Key Inc, CP309, Waterloo, Qc JOE 2NO,

Canada. Tel: 001 450 297 2533. Fax: 001 450 297 4140

Selected extracts taken from The Trial of the Medical Mafia by Jochim Schafer

ISBN 2921783029.

To reach Guylaine Lanctot, M.D. Tel: 001 514 297 4128. Fax: 001 514 297 4140

Book: There is Always an Alternative-- Baratosy MB BS (Australian) ISBN

0646 222112

Chapter 6; Pt Vaccination

VIDEO: Vaccination: The Hidden Truth-

It is an Australian documentary covering the anti-vaccination movement, looking

at the damage and doubts in the minds of doctors and parents alike. Bronwyn

Hancock introduces a wide range of passionate feelings and factual data, from

the scientific [Dr. Viera Scheibner} to the medical [Dr. Mark Donohoe, Dr.

Ritchie, Dr. Robyn Cosford, Dr Baratosy, Dr. Archie Kalokerinos, Dr. Issac

Golden], to the dog breeder [Ashleigh Oulton], to the activist and authors [Greg

Beattie and IanSinclair] to the concerned parent [shane Tucker], plus many

others. An absorbing, comprehensive and powerful programmefor anyone concerned

about the effects vaccines are having on the health of ourselves and our

children. Time 90 minutes.

Bronwyn Hancock article