A one sided and completely biased perspective on the doctor in question: http://biologyfiles.fieldofscience.com/2012/01/what-makes-expert-dangerous.html
"What is most odd here is that this scientist, with all of her training, has not provided us on her Website with evidence-based information to support what she's claiming. All we have is an assertion of "corrupted attempts to develop new vaccine strategies," a misty phrase that doesn't seem to have much to do with whether or not vaccines work but does hint at a juicy conspiracy. That's a cardinal sign of a pseudoscience. Where's the real science to support her assertions?"
Just for balance. I'm sure the discerning readers here at Mdc can come to their own conclusions.