Tag Archives: exemptions

Welcome to Calipharma: Where Your Children are For Profit and Parental Freedoms are Nonexistent

How to push & achieve mandatory vaccination, pick a wealthy state, pay the politicians well & voila. EWR
Posted on:

Tuesday, September 10th 2019 at 3:45 pm

Don’t California my [Insert State Here]: The egregious injustice of SB276 and its trailer bill, which solidified sweeping vaccine legislation into law, was enacted under the false pretenses of fraudulent exemptions, targets medically fragile children, and will usher in an age of medical tyranny

“They came first for philosophical exemptions and I said nothing, because my kids are in private school. Then they came for religious exemptions and I said nothing, because I am not that kind of religious. Then they came for our medical freedom and I said nothing, because I could still home school. Then they came for me and took my children. And no one was left to speak up.” – Lavenda Memory

How a bill becomes a law: apparently, by enough good people who know better–doing nothing, saying nothing.

Yesterday, both SB276 and its trailer bill, SB714 passed through the California Assembly and Senate and were signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom, catapulting the next civil rights movement into full swing, and setting the stage for a sweeping wave of medical tyranny and government overreach.

Medical freedom fighters came out in droves to decry the draconian bill SB276, peacefully occupying the assembly and the senate, until threatened with arrest and ordered to disperse from the latter.

Despite mainstream media portrayal, SB276 opponents are by and large not anti-vaxxers, but rather, ex-vaxxers and vaccine-hesitant mothers (and a few courageous fathers) with documented adverse reactions in themselves or their children that by the testimony of their own doctors has rendered them ineligible for further vaccinations.

Despite lack of coverage by every major media outlet, some of the California legislators who voted no and supported the protestors relayed to SB276 opponents that this was the largest outpouring of activism that they had ever witnessed for any bill during their political tenure.

In spite of the widespread opposition to the bill at the California Capitol, the viral #JUSTASKING and #SOS social media campaigns that lit up Governor Gavin Newsom’s Instagram page in yellow, and vocal outcries by parents across the nation, the bills were signed into law amongst pleas from medical freedom fighters, “No segregation–no discrimination–yes on education, for all!”.

Voting was divided squarely down party lines. These bills were passed thanks to unanimous yes votes by Democrats, revealing that their allegiance unequivocally lies with corporate interests over the constituents to which they are beholden on this issue.

Republicans voted no across the board, with some assembly members, such as Waldron, Mathis, and Melendez, cheering on the protestors as they chanted, “Moms know best!” from the rafters.


“It is quite stunning to watch liberals applauding censorship, particularly the muzzling of the bullied mothers of injured children in order to protect pharmaceutical products from criticism”. 

-Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

READ MORE
This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here //www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.”

The NZ govt has ‘no plans’ to make vaccination mandatory

Pre election I did see a snippet from Labour saying they hadn’t ruled it out. I suspect if you read this whole article here you’ll see they are quietly warming you to the idea as is the role of lamestream media. As was the purpose of the pre election article.

“As New Zealand grapples with a measles outbreak, is it time for New Zealand to do the same?” is the punch line so to speak. Asking you the public so as you not them will decide (sort of).

I heard recently that a certain NZ hospital was not admitting non vaccinated patients. Another admission I recently heard of was accompanied with three separate requests to vaccinate, in spite of the illness of the patient. I’m sure the inserts tell you not to vaccinate sick people.

Call for compulsory vaccinations as NZ grapples with measles outbreak? reads the article headline …. grapples with a condition we all had as kids & didn’t die from.  Now it’s hysterical hype from the folks who want you to line up & line their pockets. Nary a mention of weighing up the risks, possible injuries or even death. EWR


From stuff

“The Government has no plans to pass legislation to increase vaccination rates, despite a major study showing law changes have worked well overseas.

The proportion of children in California showing up to kindergarten unvaccinated more than halved after the US state passed two bills between 2014 and 2017 – one requiring parents to prove they had spoken to a doctor about the risks of not vaccinating and another which banned “personal belief exemptions”.

As New Zealand grapples with a measles outbreak, is it time for New Zealand to do the same?”

READ MORE:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/113991173/call-for-compulsory-vaccinations-as-nz-grapples-with-measles-outbreak?%3Fcid=facebook.post&cid=facebook.post&fbclid=IwAR2p0kFgJ4luMoDPYhLJbaWk_70piwB1x01aheBr8OsZkEbThKi6VVF9pn8

No Mercy for Mothers Or Their Vaccine Injured Children

From thevaccinereaction.org

Today, parents whose children have been injured by vaccines are being demonized and discriminated against for speaking publicly about what happened to their children after vaccination.1 There is no other minority in America being subjected to public humiliation and censorship for simply speaking the truth.2

Pediatricians are also cruelly bullying and coercing mothers into giving vaccines to sick children already struggling with vaccine injuries that have compromised their health.34 These mothers are desperately trying to protect their children from further harm by refusing to give them more vaccines. Yet, many pediatricians are showing no mercy and insisting on implementing one-size-fits-all government vaccine policy regardless of the risk to these vulnerable children’s lives.5 6

Legislators Ignoring the People and Voting to Violate Human Rights

Vaccines are pharmaceutical products that carry two risks: a risk of harm and a risk of failure and those risks can be greater for some people because we are not all the same.Even though there are vaccine science knowledge gaps and doctors cannot accurately predict who is more susceptible to being harmed by vaccination,7 some statelawmakers are also determined to force implementation of one-size-fits-all federal vaccine policies that recognize few contraindications to vaccination qualifying for a medical exemption.8 9

Despite historic public protests with thousands of parents and concerned health care professionals showing up at public hearings in state legislatures to oppose bills that strip religious and conscientious belief exemptions from public health laws, majority party legislators in Oregon, Colorado and Maine this week chose to ignore the people and voted to push forward bills that violate parental and informed consent rights.10 11 1213

The people are standing up against medical tyranny in numbers never seen before in state Capitols. Brave legislators are speaking out, too, in an effort to resist the push by zealous health officials and medical trade associations to force parents to give their children every dose of every federally recommended vaccine without exception. An Oregon legislator opposing a bill to eliminate the personal belief vaccine exemption in that state said, “I believe this bill, if it passes the House and the Senate ultimately, truly is the beginning of the death of freedom.”

Public health policies and laws that prevent parents from exercising freedom of conscience and informed consent to vaccination for their minor children violate human rights.14

If doctors deviate from government vaccine policy, they are being demonized and discriminated against, too. In California, where parents have been prohibited from exercising religious or conscientious beliefs when making vaccine decisions for their children, a bill is sailing through the legislature that will strip doctors of their legal right to exercise professional judgment and conscience when giving a child a medical vaccine exemption.15 16

Laws that prevent doctors from exercising judgment and conscience when caring for children are immoral and dangerous.

Mother Details Abuse by Doctor on NVIC’s Cry for Vaccine Freedom Wall

The Cry for Vaccine Freedom Wall, which was launched on the website of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC.org) in 2009, contains first person testimonials of adult patients and parents of minor children who have been harassed, threatened, coerced and sanctioned for attempting to exercise freedom of thought, conscience and informed consent to vaccination. Following is a testimonial posted on Apr. 7, 2019 on the Cry for Vaccine Freedom Wall by a mother with vaccine injured children:

My sons were 2 and 4 when my daughter was born. She began having seizures at birth and was very ill. The boy’s pediatrician refused to see her so I began searching for another one that would.

I should first mention that both of my boys had severe reactions to their vaccinations. The oldest had seizure activity with his 6-month vaccinations. He was referred to a neurologist at 9 months old who told me he probably had autism. That didn’t make sense to me at all. I held off on any other vaccinations until he was 15 months old and again, it triggered seizure activity.

I decided to do delayed vaccination with my second son. His first vaccines were at 5 months old and soon after, he got his first double ear infection. From then until he had tubes put in his ears at 11 months old, he had non-stop double ear infections. The tubes fixed the issues he was having with his hearing as a result of fluid buildup and he started learning words left and right. I would consider his speech at that point to be advanced.

I took him in to receive a vaccination at 13 months of age and he lost every single word, even mama and dada. Today, at the age of 13, he has multiple learning disabilities and still receives speech therapy for delays.

I began interviewing different pediatricians and settled on one that agreed to let me go at my own pace with the vaccinations. Soon after the switch, I took my then 18-month-old and most recent vaccine-damaged son for a checkup. The doctor proceeded to ask me which vaccination he was receiving that day. I told him we wouldn’t be getting any that day and he began to argue with me, stating I had told him I would give him one every visit and stating the research that supported the safety of vaccines. He spent a good 20 minutes bullying me into giving my child a vaccination and when I wouldn’t give in, he kicked us out of his practice in front of staff and other patients.

After watching both of my boys slip away in one form or another as a result of vaccinations, I wasn’t about to let someone bully me into giving them something I firmly believe would have further harmed them. But I was scared. The doctor wanted to scare me, wanted to belittle me, and wanted to bully me into doing things his way.

If this same situation happened in regard to anything other than vaccines, it would be considered abuse. The doctor would have abused me, but I also would be abusing my children by knowingly causing them harm.

It seems very black and white to me and it’s time that it stopped!17

Yes, it is time that doctors and lawmakers to care about the children who are born healthy but cannot get through the process of vaccination without suffering severe reactions that permanently damage their health.18 It is time for doctors and lawmakers to have compassion and show mercy to mothers instead of demonizing, bullying and punishing them for trying to protect their children from harm.

SEE REFERENCES AT THE LINK

https://thevaccinereaction.org/2019/04/no-mercy-for-mothers-or-their-vaccine-injured-children/

Unvaccinated Children Pose ZERO Risk to Anyone: Harvard Immunologist to Legislators

From vaccineimpact.com

Dr-Tetyana-Obukhanych.jpg
Dr. Tetyana Obukhanych

An Open Letter to Legislators Currently Considering Vaccine Legislation from Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD

Dear Legislator:

My name is Tetyana Obukhanych. I hold a PhD in Immunology. I am writing this letter in the hope that it will correct several common misperceptions about vaccines in order to help you formulate a fair and balanced understanding that is supported by accepted vaccine theory and new scientific findings.

Do unvaccinated children pose a higher threat to the public than the vaccinated?

It is often stated that those who choose not to vaccinate their children for reasons of conscience endanger the rest of the public, and this is the rationale behind most of the legislation to end vaccine exemptions currently being considered by federal and state legislators country-wide.

You should be aware that the nature of protection afforded by many modern vaccines – and that includes most of the vaccines recommended by the CDC for children – is not consistent with such a statement.

I have outlined below the recommended vaccines that cannot prevent transmission of disease either because they are not designed to prevent the transmission of infection (rather, they are intended to prevent disease symptoms), or because they are for non-communicable diseases.

People who have not received the vaccines mentioned below pose no higher threat to the general public than those who have, implying that discrimination against non-immunized children in a public school setting may not be warranted.

1. IPV (inactivated poliovirus vaccine) cannot prevent transmission of poliovirus. (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #1). Wild poliovirus has been non-existent in the USA for at least two decades. Even if wild poliovirus were to be re-imported by travel, vaccinating for polio with IPV cannot affect the safety of public spaces. Please note that wild poliovirus eradication is attributed to the use of a different vaccine, OPV or oral poliovirus vaccine. Despite being capable of preventing wild poliovirus transmission, use of OPV was phased out long ago in the USA and replaced with IPV due to safety concerns.

2. Tetanus is not a contagious disease, but rather acquired from deep-puncture wounds contaminated with C. tetani spores. Vaccinating for tetanus (via the DTaP combination vaccine) cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is intended to render personal protection only.

3. While intended to prevent the disease-causing effects of the diphtheria toxin, the diphtheria toxoid vaccine (also contained in the DTaP vaccine) is not designed to prevent colonization and transmission of C. diphtheriae. Vaccinating for diphtheria cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is likewise intended for personal protection only.

4. The acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine (the final element of the DTaP combined vaccine), now in use in the USA, replaced the whole cell pertussis vaccine in the late 1990s, which was followed by an unprecedented resurgence of whooping cough. An experiment with deliberate pertussis infection in primates revealed that the aP vaccine is not capable of preventing colonization and transmission of B. pertussis. The FDA has issued a warning regarding this crucial finding. [1]

Furthermore, the 2013 meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors at the CDC revealed additional alarming data that pertussis variants (PRN-negative strains) currently circulating in the USA acquired a selective advantage to infect those who are up-to-date for their DTaP boosters, meaning that people who are up-to-date are more likely to be infected, and thus contagious, than people who are not vaccinated.

5. Among numerous types of H. influenzae, the Hib vaccine covers only type b. Despite its sole intention to reduce symptomatic and asymptomatic (disease-less) Hib carriage, the introduction of the Hib vaccine has inadvertently shifted strain dominance towards other types of H. influenzae (types a through f). These types have been causing invasive disease of high severity and increasing incidence in adults in the era of Hib vaccination of children (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #4). The general population is more vulnerable to the invasive disease now than it was prior to the start of the Hib vaccination campaign. Discriminating against children who are not vaccinated for Hib does not make any scientific sense in the era of non-type b H. influenzae disease.

6. Hepatitis B is a blood-borne virus. It does not spread in a community setting, especially among children who are unlikely to engage in high-risk behaviors, such as needle sharing or sex. Vaccinating children for hepatitis B cannot significantly alter the safety of public spaces. Further, school admission is not prohibited for children who are chronic hepatitis B carriers. To prohibit school admission for those who are simply unvaccinated – and do not even carry hepatitis B – would constitute unreasonable and illogical discrimination.

In summary, a person who is not vaccinated with IPV, DTaP, HepB, and Hib vaccines due to reasons of conscience poses no extra danger to the public than a person who is. No discrimination is warranted.

How often do serious vaccine adverse events happen?

It is often stated that vaccination rarely leads to serious adverse events.

Unfortunately, this statement is not supported by science.

A recent study done in Ontario, Canada, established that vaccination actually leads to an emergency room visit for 1 in 168 children following their 12-month vaccination appointment and for 1 in 730 children following their 18-month vaccination appointment (see appendix for a scientific study, Item #5).

When the risk of an adverse event requiring an ER visit after well-baby vaccinations is demonstrably so high, vaccination must remain a choice for parents, who may understandably be unwilling to assume this immediate risk in order to protect their children from diseases that are generally considered mild or that their children may never be exposed to.

Can discrimination against families who oppose vaccines for reasons of conscience prevent future disease outbreaks of communicable viral diseases, such as measles?

Measles research scientists have for a long time been aware of the “measles paradox.” I quote from the article by Poland & Jacobson (1994) “Failure to Reach the Goal of Measles Elimination: Apparent Paradox of Measles Infections in Immunized Persons.” Arch Intern Med 154:1815-1820:

“The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons.” [2]

Further research determined that behind the “measles paradox” is a fraction of the population called LOW VACCINE RESPONDERS. Low-responders are those who respond poorly to the first dose of the measles vaccine. These individuals then mount a weak immune response to subsequent RE-vaccination and quickly return to the pool of “susceptibles’’ within 2-5 years, despite being fully vaccinated. [3]

Re-vaccination cannot correct low-responsiveness: it appears to be an immuno-genetic trait. [4] The proportion of low-responders among children was estimated to be 4.7% in the USA. [5]

Studies of measles outbreaks in Quebec, Canada, and China attest that outbreaks of measles still happen, even when vaccination compliance is in the highest bracket (95-97% or even 99%, see appendix for scientific studies, Items #6&7). This is because even in high vaccine responders, vaccine-induced antibodies wane over time. Vaccine immunity does not equal life-long immunity acquired after natural exposure.

It has been documented that vaccinated persons who develop breakthrough measles are contagious. In fact, two major measles outbreaks in 2011 (in Quebec, Canada, and in New York, NY) were re-imported by previously vaccinated individuals. [6] [7]

Taken together, these data make it apparent that elimination of vaccine exemptions, currently only utilized by a small percentage of families anyway, will neither solve the problem of disease resurgence nor prevent re-importation and outbreaks of previously eliminated diseases.

Is discrimination against conscientious vaccine objectors the only practical solution?

The majority of measles cases in recent US outbreaks (including the recent Disneyland outbreak) are adults and very young babies, whereas in the pre-vaccination era, measles occurred mainly between the ages 1 and 15.

Natural exposure to measles was followed by lifelong immunity from re-infection, whereas vaccine immunity wanes over time, leaving adults unprotected by their childhood shots. Measles is more dangerous for infants and for adults than for school-aged children.

Despite high chances of exposure in the pre-vaccination era, measles practically never happened in babies much younger than one year of age due to the robust maternal immunity transfer mechanism.

The vulnerability of very young babies to measles today is the direct outcome of the prolonged mass vaccination campaign of the past, during which their mothers, themselves vaccinated in their childhood, were not able to experience measles naturally at a safe school age and establish the lifelong immunity that would also be transferred to their babies and protect them from measles for the first year of life.

Luckily, a therapeutic backup exists to mimic now-eroded maternal immunity. Infants as well as other vulnerable or immunocompromised individuals, are eligible to receive immunoglobulin, a potentially life-saving measure that supplies antibodies directed against the virus to prevent or ameliorate disease upon exposure (see appendix, Item #8).

In summary:

1) due to the properties of modern vaccines, non-vaccinated individuals pose no greater risk of transmission of polio, diphtheria, pertussis, and numerous non-type b H. influenzae strains than vaccinated individuals do, non-vaccinated individuals pose virtually no danger of transmission of hepatitis B in a school setting, and tetanus is not transmissible at all;

2) there is a significantly elevated risk of emergency room visits after childhood vaccination appointments attesting that vaccination is not risk-free;

3) outbreaks of measles cannot be entirely prevented even if we had nearly perfect vaccination compliance; and

4) an effective method of preventing measles and other viral diseases in vaccine-ineligible infants and the immunocompromised, immunoglobulin, is available for those who may be exposed to these diseases.

Taken together, these four facts make it clear that discrimination in a public school setting against children who are not vaccinated for reasons of conscience is completely unwarranted as the vaccine status of conscientious objectors poses no undue risk to the public.

Sincerely Yours,

~ Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD

Tetyana Obukhanych earned her Ph.D. in Immunology at the Rockefeller University, New York, NY with her research dissertation focused on immunologic memory. She was subsequently involved in laboratory research as a postdoctoral research fellow at Harvard Medical School and Stanford University School of Medicine, before fully devoting herself to natural parenting.

(Original Source: legislature.vermont.gov – Testimony Senate Health & Welfare Committee Wednesday April 22, 2015 H.98 – public records)

Editor’s Note: This article has been slightly edited to reflect the language from the letter submitted to the Vermont General Assembly on April 22, 2015. As part of the Vermont Senate Health & Welfare Committee, it is a matter of public record and accessible here.)

UPDATE: The above links on the Vermont government website no longer work. Here is a copy.

 

For appendix also go to the SOURCE:

http://vaccineimpact.com/2017/harvard-immunologist-to-legislators-unvaccinated-children-pose-zero-risk-to-anyone/?fbclid=IwAR0wC_5o69DMo-Uwqhh0cFNkGKnNCPOdafNCrVhR9U66xKq2yLzLB9u0NJo

Bill Gates’ Former Doctor Says Billionaire ‘Refused to Vaccinate His Children’

No surprises here. A good while back Dr Oz featured in a similar vein. He didn’t vaccinate his kids. If vaccines were so good why aren’t they vaccinating? People should be joining dots. I learned a few years back that back in the 1970s, 80s one of our local small town NZ GPs didn’t vaccinate his kids either. One of those who actually read the inserts I suspect. Read this article for a Doctor & nurse who didn’t read them & got quite a shock when their pregnant patient referred them to one (having declined vaccination). This article is from transcend.org via yournewswire.com

 

The physician who served as Bill Gates’ private doctor in Seattle in the 1990s says the Microsoft founder and vaccine proponent “refused to vaccinate his own children” when they were young.

7 Feb 2018 – “I don’t know if he had them vaccinated as adults, but I can tell you he point blank refused to vaccinate them as children,” the physician said at a behind closed doors medical symposium in Seattle, adding “They were gorgeous kids, really smart and vivacious, and he said they would be OK as it was, they didn’t need any shots.

The comments caused a stir among physicians at the symposium with claims he was breaking doctor-patient confidentiality, according to reports. However as he was speaking to other physicians, he was not breaking the industry code of conduct.

Gates has three children with his wife Melinda – Jennifer, Rory and Phoebe – born between 1996 and 2002, and according to his former doctor, they are all unvaccinated and healthy.

The news that Bill Gates does not vaccinate his own children, despite being the world’s most active campaigner for mandatory vaccinations, should come as no surprise. Studies prove that the elite do not vaccinate their children. But at the same time they expect the masses to have their children vaccinated.

The elite do not vaccinate 

In California, the children most likely to be unvaccinated are white and come from the wealthiest families in Los Angeles, according to a recent study.

The percentage of kindergartners with state-issued personal belief exemptions doubled from 2007 to 2013, from 1.54% to 3.06%. That’s about 17,000 of the wealthiest children, out of more than half a million, opting out of receiving vaccinations.

READ MORE (NOTE WITH THIS LINK NOW DEAD, A FURTHER ARTICLE IS ADDED BELOW)

https://www.transcend.org/tms/2018/02/bill-gates-former-doctor-says-billionaire-refused-to-vaccinate-his-children/?fbclid=IwAR0ltYBYtfk6wpkXTUa1NKaENx_Qm4hC17bXHrN4Kku3b8PmGsfZUzO80pI


 

A Harvard immunologist has written an open letter explaining why unvaccinated children pose no risk to their vaccinated counterparts

Dear Legislator:

My name is Tetyana Obukhanych.  I hold a PhD in Immunology.  I am writing this letter in the hope that it will correct several common misperceptions about vaccines in order to help you formulate a fair and balanced understanding that is supported by accepted vaccine theory and new scientific findings.

Do unvaccinated children pose a higher threat to the public than the vaccinated?

It is often stated that those who choose not to vaccinate their children for reasons of conscience endanger the rest of the public, and this is the rationale behind most of the legislation to end vaccine exemptions currently being considered by federal and state legislators country-wide.  You should be aware that the nature of protection afforded by many modern vaccines – and that includes most of the vaccines recommended by the CDC for children – is not consistent with such a statement.  I have outlined below the recommended vaccines that cannot prevent transmission of disease either because they are not designed to prevent the transmission of infection (rather, they are intended to prevent disease symptoms), or because they are for non-communicable diseases.  People who have not received the vaccines mentioned below pose no higher threat to the general public than those who have, implying that discrimination against non-immunized children in a public school setting may not be warranted.

  1. IPV (inactivated poliovirus vaccine) cannot prevent transmission of poliovirus. Wild poliovirus has been non-existent in the USA for at least two decades. Even if wild poliovirus were to be re-imported by travel, vaccinating for polio with IPV cannot affect the safety of public spaces.  Please note that wild poliovirus eradication is attributed to the use of a different vaccine, OPV or oral poliovirus vaccine.  Despite being capable of preventing wild poliovirus transmission, use of OPV was phased out long ago in the USA and replaced with IPV due to safety concerns.

READ MORE

http://yournewswire.com/harvard-unvaccinated-children-risk/