This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Vaccination scare stories make our lives so difficult

GP Dr Martyn Walling and MDU medicolegal adviser Dr John Gilberthorpe emphasise that legally the consent of a child under age 16 to use contraception or have an abortion depends on the ability of the child to understand the nature, purpose and hazards of the treatment (Clinical, August 16). This is a sick joke.

The adverse results of the WHI HRT study appeared to be a complete surprise to most international experts. How then can a child understand the true risks of using immunosuppressive and carcinogenic hormonal steroids? Doctors giving children long-acting progesterones are ignoring vascular and biochemical changes including depression and increases in brain monoamine oxidases.

Among several hundred preconception couples I have screened, few understood why they were suffering from unexplained infertility and recurrent miscarriages.

Screening tests for hormone-induced nutritional deficiencies are not generally available, nor are screens for common infections such as mycoplasmas which infect one in five sexually-active women in my experience. Gentle questions alone are unlikely to protect a child from hormonal and sexual abuse.

Prosecuting partners and reinforcing the original law, designed to protect children from the dangers of underage sex, could be much more useful. The fact the majority of unplanned pregnancies occurred in condom users or Pill takers emphasises the dangers of underage sex.

Dr Ellen Grant



Rate this article 

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Have your say