---
title: "Judy Wilyman"
chunk: 2/5
source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judy_Wilyman"
category: "reference"
tags: "science, encyclopedia"
date_saved: "2026-05-05T03:37:17.425529+00:00"
instance: "kb-cron"
---

== PhD award ==
Wilyman entered a PhD a program in 2007 in the same UOW Faculty as awarded her Masters, but with her research focus expanded to cover Australian vaccination policy more generally. In 2008, the supervision of her studies was transferred to Peter Dingle at Murdoch University, and returned to UOW in 2011 under Brian Martin. The thesis was accepted by UOW in 2016. Although details of the examiners have not been released, in May 2016 The Australian reported that one of two original examiners did not recommend that a PhD be granted. It was passed after a third academic evaluated the thesis and recommended changes.
The thesis came under heavy criticism from multiple directions, including medical professionals, due to claims within the thesis, including advancing a conspiracy theory that the World Health Organization (WHO) and the pharmaceutical industry supposedly conspire to promote vaccinations in the absence of evidence of safety and efficacy. The awarding of the thesis lead to criticism and questions about the standards being applied and whether or not the thesis supervisors and examiners had sufficient knowledge to oversee the research and led to calls for the university to review the doctorate. A number of individuals and medical organisations – including academics and researchers from other parts of the University of Wollongong – criticised the findings of the thesis, emphasising the need for vaccinations in order to prevent serious disease; and the University of Wollongong was criticised for a perceived lack of transparency in their doctoral process and an alleged failure to uphold standards of scholarship.
The university responded to the criticism by asserting that the research was conducted and examined under high standards, and spoke in defence of academic freedom. The University also agreed to conduct a review into their overall doctoral process, but the scope did not include specific PhD recipients, and therefore did not encompass Wilyman's work.

=== Doctoral claims ===
Biological scientist Helen Petousis-Harris writes that the thesis abstract contains conclusion, and quotes Wilyman's aim of her thesis as an attempt to "assess the rigour of the claims supporting the efficacy, safety and necessity for the use of an expanding number of vaccines in the Australian Government's National Immunisation Program". Brull reports that according to supervisor Martin, Wilyman's thesis makes four major points:

Wilyman claims that the death rates from diseases in Australia had declined before most vaccines were introduced, leading to a suggestion that other factors may have had a role in the reduced infection rate.
It is alleged in the thesis that Australia's vaccination policy follows international models, rather than being based on local conditions.
In her thesis, Wilyman claims that there is a conflict of interest when research on vaccination is conducted by pharmaceutical companies.
She alleges that some areas of research which relate to vaccination policy have not been examined, even though there may be value in doing so.
Other, more specific, claims include that the World Health Organization (WHO) formed a secret committee, which in turn orchestrated "hysteria relating to a global swine flu pandemic in 2009" and that the organisation is "perceived to be out of touch with global communities and … controlled by the interests of corporations and the World Bank".
At one stage during Wilyman's candidature, Australian immunisation expert and advisor to the WHO Peter McIntyre offered to advise her on her research, but withdrew his offer as she was "not willing to entertain" alternative points of view that contradicted her beliefs. Wilyman's PhD thesis falsely claims that "diseases for which vaccines are recommended have not been demonstrated to be a serious risk to the majority of children".
Medical academics and the Australian Medical Association (AMA) have questioned whether Martin had sufficient knowledge to supervise the thesis, with McIntyre observing "No doubt the examiners selected have credentials within that area of study but they are likely to lack necessary credentials in health sciences that would enable them to be aware of the full picture here". Similarly, an editorial in The Australian was harshly critical of both Wilyman and the University. It dismissed the central idea of the thesis as "rather like a sociologist who insists that jet aircraft remain aloft only because of a conspiracy between aeronautical engineers and greedy airlines" and noted the problem of academic overreach, with the faculty presuming to judge the quality of work well outside its area of expertise. It characterised the University of Wollongong as putting itself on the wrong side in a "battle of life and death", and questioned whether the granting of the PhD "could 'reasonably be expected' to lead to lower levels of vaccination?"

=== Academic health science sector responses ===
University of Auckland biological scientist Helen Petousis Harris, who has a PhD in Vaccinology, was highly critical of the thesis and writes: