California FIrst State Mandating Adult Vaccines

Published July 13, 2015, filed under HEALTH, Tyranny

Is California becoming a medical police state?

Contributed to TLB by: Health Impact News and Vaccine Impact

Editor Comments:

In a brazen act of medical tyranny, California recently became the first state in the U.S. to remove religious exemptions to those opposing vaccines for their children. The bill now signed into law, SB277, faces legal hurdles in court next.
Now, legislators in California want to pass the “first US adult vaccine mandate with NO personal exemptions and CRIMINAL penalties for failure to comply.” SB 792, would eliminate an adult’s right to exempt themselves from one, some, or all vaccines, a risk-laden medical procedure.
Will California soon become a medical police state?

URGENT ACTION ALERT Monday July 13, 2015

SB792- The first US adult vaccine mandate with NO personal exemptions (only medical exemptions approved by a doctor and defined by the bill) and CRIMINAL penalties for failure to comply will be heard in the California Assembly Human Services Committee this Tuesday July 14th at 1:30 in Room 437.
SB 792 would eliminate an adult’s right to exempt themselves from one, some, or all vaccines, a risk-laden medical procedure. This bill would make California the first state to require mandated vaccinations for all childcare workers, including all private and public school early childhood education programs (Headstart, Private preK and preschools), family daycares, and daycare centers.

Commencing September 1, 2016, a person shall not be employed at a family day care home if he or she has not been immunized against influenza, pertussis, and measles. An employee shall receive an influenza vaccination between August 1 and December 1 of each year.

This bill eliminates medical autonomy, crushes religious freedom, undermines personal freedom, and burdens quality providers with a non-optional series of medical interventions in the form of mandated vaccines that are not even 100% effective.
Bill SB 792 excerpt:

This bill, commencing September 1, 2016, would prohibit a day care center or a family day care home from employing any person who has not been immunized in accordance with the schedule for routine adult immunizations, prescribed by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The bill would specify circumstances under which a person would be exempt from the immunization requirement, based on medical safety and current immunity, as specified. The bill would make conforming changes to provisions that set forth qualifications for day care center teachers and applicants for licensure as a family day care center. Because the bill would extend the application of a crime under the act, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

Read the entire bill here.

CALL – FAX – EMAIL – TWEET — URGE a NO VOTE TODAY

Assembly Human Services Committee: http://ahum.assembly.ca.gov/hearings
(916) 319-2089 – Fax (916) 319-2189

Kansen Chu (Chair) (D) – 25 (Abstain on 277)
P.O. Box 942849, Room 5175, Sacramento, CA 94249-0025
(916) 319-2025 Fax: (916) 319-2125

Chad Mayes (Vice Chair) (R) – 42 (No on 277)
P.O. Box 942849, Room 4144, Sacramento, CA 94249-0042
(916) 319-2042 Fax: (916) 319-2142

Ian C. Calderon (D) – 57 (Yes on 277)
P.O. Box 942849, Room 2148, Sacramento, CA 94249-0057;
(916) 319-2057 Fax: (916) 319-2157

Patty López (D) – 39 (No on 277)
P.O. Box 942849, Room 4126, Sacramento, CA 94249-0039
(916) 319-2039 Fax: (916) 319-2139

Brian Maienschein (R) – 77 (No on 277)
P.O. Box 942849, Room 4139, Sacramento, CA 94249-0077
(916) 319-2077 Fax: (916) 319-2177

Mark Stone (D) – 29 (Yes on 277)
P.O. Box 942849, Room 5155, Sacramento, CA 94249-0029
(916) 319-2029 Fax: (916) 319-2129

Tony Thurmond (D) – 15 (Yes on 277)
P.O. Box 942849, Room 5150, Sacramento, CA 94249-0015
(916) 319-2015 Fax: (916) 319-2115

EMAIL:
Myesha.Jackson@asm.ca.gov,
Assemblymember.Chu@asm.ca.gov,
Assemblymember.Mayes@asm.ca.gov,
Assemblymember.Calderon@asm.ca.gov,
Assemblymember.Lopez@asm.ca.gov, Assemblymember.Maienscheim@asm.ca.gov, Assemblymember.Stone@asm.ca.gov,
Assemblymember.Thurmond@asm.ca.gov,

TWEET:
@MrTonyMendoza
@TonyThurmond
@AsmMarkStone
@BMaienschein
@ChadMayesCA
@kansenchu
@PattyLopez_D_39
@IanCalderon
@IanAD57

Also contact YOUR Assembly Member to urge a NO VOTE! http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/

SB792: Assembly Health Committee Hearing, June 30, 2015

Medical Doctors Opposed to Forced Vaccinations – Should Their Views be Silenced?

One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all “quacks.”
However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate. Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding “the science” of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines.
The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary.
Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions, and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position of the medical field.
In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position. Many doctors who consider themselves “pro-vaccine,” for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual.
Many doctors recommend a “delayed” vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule. Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot.
These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions.
In this eBook, I am going to summarize the many doctors today who do not take the most extremist pro-vaccine position, which is probably not held by very many doctors at all, in spite of what the pharmaceutical industry, the federal government, and the mainstream media would like the public to believe.

Read:

Medical Doctors Opposed to Forced Vaccinations – Should Their Views be Silenced?

on your mobile device!

FREE! – $0.99

****************

TLB recommends you visit Health Impact News & Vaccine Impact for more pertinent articles and information.

Full Source for this article and a great deal of much needed information - Please Visit: TLB - http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2015/07/13/california-now-wants-to-be-first-state-to-mandate-adult-vaccines-criminal-penalties-for-those-who-refuse/

ACTION ALERT: HB181 Law to Regulate Naturopaths

HB 181 is a bill that has passed the Idaho House that would regulate naturopaths in the state of Idaho. The bill is now in front of the Senate Health and Welfare Committee. The bill dictates everything a naturopath can and can't do and importantly requires that a person have attended one of only a couple of naturopathic colleges. It also creates a new board to regulate naturopaths.

A doctor I know in Boise who is an MD and a naturopath would not be able to practice integrative medicine any longer because she did not go to the right naturopathic college according to the legislature. One of the problems with these regulatory boards is that they can and do abuse their powers and this law would mean that only the 20 or so Idaho naturopaths who trained at the "right" school can continue practicing while all the others could not. This abuse of powers is seen in Western medical boards as well where doctors are threatened with having their licenses withdrawn if they don't follow every edict of the regulatory body like vaccines or drugs for kids.

Given that many folks choose a naturopath instead of an MD and that regulation by the federal government has increased with the Affordable care act it is not hard to envision a time when naturopaths are not allowed to practice at all and the only "medicine" that is approved by the government is Western medicine.

If you like me, don't want to be restricted in the type of medicine that you use in your family, it is important to stop this bill.

Please call or email every member of the Senate Health and Welfare committee to stop this bill. All I've written above can be used as talking points.

Chair Lee Heider 332-1347
Vice Chair Fred Martin  332-1407
Patti Anne Lodge  332-1320
Sheryl L. Nuxoll  332-1355
Marv Hagedorn  332-1334
John H. Tippets  332-1429
Abby Lee  332-1325

Dan Schmidt 332-1405

Maryanne Jordan  332-1352

lheider@senate.idaho.gov, fmartin@senate.idaho.gov, palodge@senate.idaho.gov, snuxoll@senate.idaho.gov, mhagedorn@senate.idaho.gov, 

jtippets@senate.idaho.gov, mjordan@senate.idaho.gov, alee@senate.idaho.gov, dschmidt@senate.idaho.gov

Following is the message my doctor in Boise sent out to all her patients:

URGENT! PLEASE HELP!

The Idaho Legislature is considering the passage of HB181. It has passed the House of Representatives. It is up for review in the Senate today. This bill would make all naturopathy the exclusive domain of the 20 or so naturopaths that went to naturopathic college. I have my naturopathic credentials from the American Naturopathic Medical Institute but I did not attend a four year college of naturopathy. If this passes, this means I would no longer be able to practice integrative medicine.

More background from someone else:

Bill 181 comes down to licensing naturopaths. Some states license them and some don't. Idaho has not licensed in the past. Instead, they practice under the Smith Act which allows naturopaths to use other means besides prescription drugs (which is the very definition of naturopathy). Bill 181 wants to make it required that all naturopaths in the state of Idaho be licensed and that in order to be licensed they have to do whatever the Health and Welfare committee decides they must do to be licensed. We already know from the Health and Welfare committee (from previous attempts to push this bill through every year since 2007) that their licensing structure is that naturopaths must have attended 1 of 2 approved naturopathic schools in the US. Both of these schools are more homeopathic than naturopathic and are not only expensive but the degree is a 5 year degree. Instead of allowing naturopaths who already have degrees (from other schools) be grandfathered in, they would basically have to close their doors as naturopaths in Idaho and those who could afford to do so may choose to go and get the 5 year degree for naturopathy all over again. That is the main problem with it although there are others.

I should add that they would then be regulated to only practice naturopathy according to the approved methods from those schools. The Health and Welfare Committee would do the regulating and the woman heading it up has already stated her agenda (Kristy Perry is her name).

Leslie Manookian
leslie.manookian@me.com

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.~ Benjamin Franklin

UNLICENSED BIOWEAPONS VACCINES

Unlicensed Vaccines and Bioweapon Defense in World War II

Martin Furmanski, MD, Newport Beach, California

Joel Schofer presented well the ethical controversy surrounding use of unapproved agents for chemical and biological warfare defense in Operation Dessert Storm.¹ 

Such dilemmas are not new, however, nor the risks purely ethical or medically theoretical. They occurred several times during World War II, the most dramatic and sobering being the yellow fever vaccine incident of 1942.

In January 1942, immediately after Pearl Harbor, the US military decided to vaccinate all active duty personnel with yellow fever vaccine. This decision was based largely on the fear that an enemy power would launch a strategic biologic attack by releasing a virulent virus in areas that harbored the vector. The area at risk included vital areas of the United States: much of the East, Midwest, and South and southern California. It also included essentially all overseas combat areas: China, the Pacific Islands, Australia, India, Burma, southern Britain, coastal France, the Mediterranean area, and the southern Soviet Union. The army had since January 1941 already addressed possible accidental transmission of the virus from endemic areas by selective vaccination, fumigation, and quarantine.²
 
Concern regarding biological attack was well founded. From 1932 to 1945 the Imperial Japanese Army undertook a massive and ethically horrific program to develop biological weapons. The United States became aware of this effort, sought intelligence, and took the threat seriously. The FBI investigated repeated overt and covert attempts by Japan to Japan to obtain virulent yellow fever virus in 1939.³
 
In 1942, all military personnel received typhoid, smallpox, and tetanus vaccines, and soldiers who refused vaccination were subject to court-martials-a military legal principle originating in World War I and continuing to this day.⁴

  However, during World War II, a yellow fever vaccine had not yet been licensed for civilian use in the United States and an FDA approved vaccine would not be available until 1953. The yellow fever vaccine used in early 1942 contained human serum and despite earlier published reports of unexplained or homologous serum jaundice occurring after its use, the perceived urgency of the biological weapon threat propelled this vaccine into use. Unfortunately, many lots were contaminated by the hepatitis B virus. An epidemic of unexplained hepatitis began in March 1942, and yellow fever vaccination was halted on April 15, 1942. Approximately 51,000 military personnel with symptomatic hepatitis were hospitalized and subsequent investigation of veterans concluded that approximately 330,000 persons had been infected.⁵
 
This is the largest point source outbreak of hepatitis B ever recorded. Although chronic hepatitis following yellow fever vaccination was recognized, the vaccinated soldiers have fared surprisingly well: on follow-up they have an unexpectedly low carrier rate and no increase in death from chronic liver disease. They have, however, a small excess in deaths from liver cancer.⁶
 
Of course, in 1942 the principles of the Nuremberg Code(1947) had not yet been formulated, nor had the US military officially adopted them as policy(1953).^7,8 

Although modern codes of medical ethics did not exist to restrain the use of unlicensed vaccines by the military, the tens of thousands of latrogenic casualties from the yellow fever vaccine experience may well have had a chilling effect on further use of other experimental vaccines.

In fact, in 1944 an erroneous report of Nazi weapons using botulinum toxin was taken seriously by the US government and in response a crash program produced enough unlicensed botulinum toxoid to immunize the entire D-day assault force. Despite strong recommendation by the US Surgeon General to immunize all personnel before the Normandy invasion, the theatre surgeon, responsible directly to Eisenhower, opted to hold the toxoid in stockpile.⁹

  Ironically, during Desert Storm large-scale administration of this toxoid had to await the formal informed consent process.
____________________________________________________________________________
Reference:
1. Schofer,JM. Violations of informed consent during war, JAMA, 1999: 281-1657
2. Coates, JB. Hoff, BG, ads. Preventive Medicine in World War II, Vol. III Personal Health Measures and Immunizations, Washington, DC: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army: 1955:306-313.343-345.
3. Harris, SH, Factories of Death: Japanese Biological Warfare, 1932-1945 and The American Cover-up, New York, NY: Routledge: 1994.
4. Nichols, HJ, Simmons, JS The surgical treatment of typhoid carriers. JAMA 1919-73:680-684.
5. Scoff, LB, Beebe, GW, Hoofnagle, JH, et al. A serologic follow-up of the 1942 epidemic of post-vaccination hepatitis in the United States Army, N Eng/Med Journal medicine 1987: 316:965-970.
6. Norman. JE, Beebe, GW, Hoofnagle, JH, Scoff, LB, Mortality follow-up of the 1942 epidemic of hepatitis B in the US Army. Hepatology, 1933:18:790-797.
7. Lederer, SE, Military personnel as research subjects. In:Reich WT., ed. encyclopedia of Bioethics, New York, NY: Simon and Schuster Macmillan;1995:1771-1775.
8. Annas GJ, Informed Consent to Human Experimentation: The Subject's Dilemma, Cambridge, Miss: Ballinger:1977.
9. Cosmas,GA, Cowdrey,AE, The Medical Department; Medical Service in the European Theater of Operations(United States Army in World War II, The Technical Services) Washington DC: Center of Military History, United States Army: 1992:590

EXPOSED: VACCINE INDUSTRY

The Entire Vaccine Industry Is Being Exposed For Unproven Assumptions And Misrepresentations of Data – Dr. Dave Mihalovic

by Dr. Dave Mihalovic  Oct 10, 2012 ‘Nothing ever will change when it comes to the effectiveness or preventative nature of vaccines. That’s because they aren’t effective and they will never prevent disease. The fact is, they were never designed to. When it comes to disease prevention, vaccines are a myth of orders and magnitude so large, that most people could never really conceive the true historical facts on why vaccines were first developed …’

****************************************************************************************

The Entire Vaccine Industry Is Being Exposed For Unproven Assumptions And Misrepresentations of Data

There are no safe vaccines. There never was and never will be with the current misrepresented data and unproven assumptions that have spanned over a century in the making. The fact is, every single vaccine is now being exposed for the lack of demonstrated evidence to actually prevent a single case of disease over a placebo. Think it’s an exaggeration? Think again.

The reality of two centuries of mortality graphs, and disease declines and vaccine effectiveness vs. dangers is always in stark contradiction to the claims of government health officials.


People are now listening more than ever and the message is spreading like wild fire. The evidence being highlighted is that the historical significance and effectiveness of vaccines is nothing more than repeated myths absent of any real-life data.

The questionable contributions of vaccines and other medical measures were highlighted with incredible accuracy in 1977 by John and Sonja McKinlaywho brilliantly detailed how medical care is generally unrelated to improvements in the health of populations.

“History is replete with examples of how, understandably enough, self-interested individuals and groups denounced popular customs and beliefs which appeared to threaten their own domains of practice, thereby rendering from heresies (for example physicians’ denunciation of midwives as witches, during the Middle Ages),” they wrote.

Not much has changed. The pro-vaccine camps have been dismissing the anti-vaccine community for quite some time (even their own peers who are physicians) as they have resorted to some very nasty measures to ensure that people do not discover the truth about vaccines. Marco Torres wrote an excellent article in 2010 on how Everything is Lie in our current mass exchange of mainstream information and any truth still left scattered on the internet is picked up and tossed around by disinformation specialists as Torres points out in the middle of the article (Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation).

So what’s different today about our knowledge on vaccines than it was thirty years ago? Everything. Every month that passes is exposing more quackery and myths about vaccinations and their misrepresented benefits. More people are becoming aware so the truth can no longer be suppressed.
A report which is again being highlighted by the alternative media (of course) is a remarkable study published in the Cochrane Library which found no evidence of benefit for influenza vaccinations and also noted that the vast majority of trials were inadequate.

The authors found that vaccines administered parenterally, that is, outside the digestive tract, usually meaning by injection, reduced influenza-like symptoms by 4%. They found no evidence that vaccination prevents viral transmission putting the whole herd immunity myth once again into question.

The maximum success rate of the flu vaccine is 6.25% which is a pretty big under-achievement, considering that the average reaction to placebo injections of distilled water is 30%.
More independent scientific studies are also coming forth showing evidence of massive fetal toxicity associated with flu vaccines. Recent research I reported on is now published in the journal Human & Experimental Toxicology showing a 4,250% increase in fetal deaths according to Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data when comparing three consecutive influenza seasons.

The HPV vaccine is another excellent example of a massive cover-up that is incrementally being exposed. The most recent scientific study was found online at PubMed from the National Institutes of Health — Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccines as an Option for Preventing Cervical Malignancies: (How) Effective and Safe?.

The study carried out a systematic review of HPV vaccine pre- and post-licensure trials to assess the evidence of their effectiveness and safety. They found that HPV vaccine clinical trials design, and data interpretation of both efficacy and safety outcomes, were largely inadequate. They also noted an abundance of selective reporting of results from clinical trials (i.e., exclusion of vaccine efficacy figures related to study subgroups in which efficacy might be lower or even negative from peer-reviewed publications).

The authors note that the widespread optimism regarding HPV vaccines long-term benefits appears to rest on a number of unproven assumptions (or such which are at odd with factual evidence) and significant misinterpretation of available data. For example, the claim that HPV vaccination will result in approximately 70% reduction of cervical cancers is made despite the fact that the clinical trials data have not demonstrated to date that the vaccines have actually prevented a single case of cervical cancer (let alone cervical cancer death), nor that the current overly optimistic surrogate marker-based extrapolations are justified.

Likewise, the notion that HPV vaccines have an impressive safety profile is only supported by highly flawed design of safety trials and is contrary to accumulating evidence from vaccine safety surveillance databases and case reports which continue to link HPV vaccination to serious adverse outcomes (including death and permanent disabilities).

Late last year, the Annals of Medicine exposed the fraudulent nature of Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines such as Gardasil and Cervarix. Key messages the researchers report include a lack of evidence for any HPV vaccines in preventing cervical cancer and lack of evaluation of health risks.

Vaccinations such as HPV are not preventative, they do compromise safety and physicians will never provide accurate explanations of vaccine risks and benefits because they do not know themselves. Physicians can only rely on the information from vaccine manufacturers and since long-term pharmacokinetic effects which study the bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of vaccines and their ingredients are never examined or analyzed, a Physician can never fully inform of patient of ANY benefits or risks. That ladies and gentlemen is the BOTTOM LINE!

Take into consideration all of the unintended (or perhaps intended) mutations that are taking place with whooping cough, polio and hepatitis vaccines. Or what if we consider all of the known and very dangerous excipients and preservatives (including thimerosal) in flu vaccines that continue appearing year after year as evidenced in approved 2011/2012 influenza line-up of vaccines introduced last year. Stay tuned as I will soon release my report for the 2012/2013 flu season which will clearly show that nothing has changed.

Nothing ever will change when it comes to the effectiveness or preventative nature of vaccines. That’s because they aren’t effective and they will never prevent disease. The fact is, they were never designed to. When it comes to disease prevention, vaccines are a myth of orders and magnitude so large, that most people could never really conceive the true historical facts on why vaccines were first developed (and that had everything to do with the promotion and not prevention of disease). That’s not something I usually get into, but the cat is out of the bag and the vaccine industry is crumbling. It’s only a matter of time before every single human being is faced with the reality that vaccination and immunization are impossible to interrelate.

The validity and scientific merit of the vaccine industry is now hanging by a thread all I can say is…it’s about time!

Dave Mihalovic is a Naturopathic Doctor who specializes in vaccine research, cancer prevention and a natural approach to treatment.

Read the article