April 17, 2014

Vermont Legislature Battles over Vaccines

KID VACCINATIONS2 300x199 Vermont Legislature Battles over Vaccines

by Alliance for Natural Health

The philosophical exemption will likely be revoked if we don’t take action.

As we reported in March, a bill threatening a parent’s right to refuse vaccination for their child using a philosophical exemption was introduced in Vermont, and it could all be decided this week. Currently, Vermont is one of twenty states in the US that allow a philosophical, personal, or conscientious belief exemption to vaccination, though the pharmaceutical and medical trade association lobbies are mounting a campaign to persuade state legislators to strip philosophical or conscientious belief exemptions to vaccination from state public health laws.

Vermont has one of highest philosophical exemption rates among the states that allow it, and the percentage of vaccinated children is below the national average. Yet Vermont is ranked as the country’s “healthiest” state! Clearly, Vermonters want health freedom on vaccine choice.

Vermont is also the “greenest” state in the US. Vermonters understand that natural health and environmentalism are both about leading a life more in tune with nature, a non-toxic lifestyle in a non-toxic environment. Natural health and environmentalism should be working together.

So why does the philosophical exemption generate such vehement reactions by both the public and the medical community? Most of it is about the concept of “herd immunity,” that by not vaccinating your child you may be putting others at risk. As our colleagues at ANH-Europe note, “herd immunity” is a theory is that if a certain proportion of any population is inoculated against a disease through vaccination, it inhibits the spread of that disease within the population.

Unfortunately, that argument is not internally consistent. On the one hand, the theory goes, people who cannot receive vaccines for whatever reason (say, on religious grounds, or due to a sensitivity to a vaccine’s ingredients) are protected from the disease through a high level of vaccination within the rest of society. On the other hand, parents who don’t vaccinate their children put the health of wider society at risk. How can a handful of people not getting vaccinated be protected from getting sick while at the same time being so disease-ridden that it makes others sick? It doesn’t make sense. Yet health authorities, media commentators, and schools and parent-teacher associations waste no opportunity to bash parents over the head with this message.

The problem is, “herd immunity” is only a theory, and one that developed out of observations of natural immunity, not vaccination effects. Statisticians observed that populations were protected when sufficient members contracted the wild form of a disease, and subsequently acquired lifelong immunity. We simply do not know whether or not the same is true of vaccination in general, or of particular vaccines.

More to the point, the evidence shows that unvaccinated children can catch infectious diseases from vaccinated children! Vaccination does not always provide long-term effects as advertised. During a whooping cough outbreak in California in 2010, immunized children between eight and twelve years of age were more likely to catch the disease than kids of other ages—suggesting that the childhood vaccine wears off as kids get older, according to new research.

In other words, this powerful supporting plank of vaccine theory has no real basis in science. That’s why vaccine manufacturers push the “herd immunity” theory so hard: it sounds plausible until you really dig into the science, it sells more vaccines, and it helps to maintain an environment in which vaccines are considered essential for health.

Then there’s the question of bioindividuality. A number of children have genetic variances that make them unable to detoxify the toxic heavy metals and adjuvants in vaccines. This should be enough to qualify the child for a medical exemption, but because mainstream medicine does not recognize bioindividuality, medical exemptions are usually reserved for more mainstream medical problems.

Of course, the vaccines may be dangerous even to patients who don’t have detoxification issues. A report published this month found that immunoglobulins and vaccines have had more FDA recalls than other drug classes—there were twenty-seven recalls between 2007 and 2010 alone, some for “serious adverse events,” others for quality defects or manufacturing defects. As Dr. Joseph A. Mercola points out, pandemic vaccines are 100 percent risk-free for the vaccine maker, because the pharmaceutical industry lobby made sure that laws were passed by Congress after 9/11 that exempted them from any liability for injuries and deaths caused by government-recommended vaccines used to counter potential pandemics.

Since our last update, the Vermont Senate voted to revoke the exemption, while the House voted to retain it. A look at the bill’s history indicates how contentious the issue has been. The bill is now being discussed in conference committee to negotiate terms. A decision should be reached within the week.

We have updated our Action Alert for Vermont residents. Even if you contacted your legislators on this bill previously, please contact them again immediately and urge the conference committee to uphold a parent’s right to refuse vaccination for their child using a philosophical exemption!

Take Action Vermont Legislature Battles over Vaccines

Read the Full Article and Comment Here: http://www.anh-usa.org/vermont-legislature-battles-over-vaccines/

0 commentsback to post

Other articlesgo to homepage

U.S Congressman: CDC Can’t be Trusted Regarding Vaccine Safety

U.S Congressman: CDC Can’t be Trusted Regarding Vaccine Safety

Congressman Bill Posey’s strong resolve and demands for transparency were evident as he discussed the Center for Disease Control (CDC)’s handling of vaccine safety studies which affect “our most precious resource in our nation – our children.” The 30-minute interview, conducted by vaccine industry watchdog, PhD biochemist Brian Hooker, delves into what Posey called “the incestuous relationship between the public health community and the vaccine makers and public officials.”

The Florida legislator, known as “Mr. Accountabililty,” did not mince words when criticizing current and past CDC officials including indicted fraudster Dr. Poul Thorsen; CDC director turned Merck Vaccine President Dr. Julie Gerberding; and the agency’s current spokesperson regarding autism and vaccines, Dr. Coleen Boyle.

Congressman Posey said, “The CDC can’t be trusted regarding investigating vaccine safety. Huge conflict of interest. I think the CDC should be investigated.”

Merck’s Former Doctor Predicts that Gardasil will Become the Greatest Medical Scandal of All Time

Merck’s Former Doctor Predicts that Gardasil will Become the Greatest Medical Scandal of All Time

In an interview with Dr. Bernard Dalbergue, a former pharmaceutical industry physician with Gardasil manufacturer Merck, he predicts that Gardasil will become the greatest medical scandal of all time. Dr. Dalbergue believes that at some point in time, the evidence will add up to prove that this vaccine, technical and scientific feat that it may be, has absolutely no effect on cervical cancer and that all the very many adverse effects which destroy lives and even kill young girls, serves no other purpose than to generate profit for the manufacturers.

Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime: How big pharma has corrupted healthcare

Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime: How big pharma has corrupted healthcare

An important new book by a recognized medical research expert describes Big Pharma as akin to the Mafia. In an interview conducted by our colleagues at ANH-Europe, Dr. Peter C. Gøtzsche exposes the flaws of the drug approval system, our reliance on dangerous drugs, and the deadly co-dependence between regulators and industry. Dr. Gøtzsche is co-founder of the highly respected Cochrane Collaboration and Cochrane Reviews, a leading journal of evidence-based medicine. The interview is particularly timely now that the FDA has decided to remove restrictions on the dangerous drug Avandia.

Dr. Gøtzsche’s new book, Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare, points out that the pharmaceutical industry is allowed to test their own drugs, and thus effectively be their own judge. He calls this a threat to safe medicine and asks for open access to all research data, including raw data, because otherwise, data can be easily suppressed and conclusions manipulated by industry.

Medical Cannabis is a Threat to the Pharmaceutical Industry

Medical Cannabis is a Threat to the Pharmaceutical Industry

Medical marijuana, or cannabis, is legal in 20 US states, where it is used for a variety of medical conditions such as mood disorders, pain disorders, multiple sclerosis, and even cancer. Parents of children with epilepsy met at a news conference to share their dismay that Governor Mark Dayton refuses to legalize medical marijuana. About 85 percent to 95 percent of Americans are in favor of medical cannabis, and nearly 60 percent are in favor of legalizing marijuana. Cannabis shows outstanding promise as a medicinal plant, largely due to its cannabidiol (CBD) content. Cannabinoids interact with your body by way of naturally occurring cannabinoid receptors embedded in cell membranes throughout your body.

Leaders of Teaching Hospitals Have Close Ties to Drug Companies, Study Shows

Leaders of Teaching Hospitals Have Close Ties to Drug Companies, Study Shows

Pharmaceutical company payments to doctors extend far beyond rank-and-file clinicians — and deep into the leadership of America’s teaching hospitals, according to a study published recently in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

A team of researchers at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center examined the boards of the 50 largest drug companies by global sales (excluding three companies that were not publicly traded). The researchers found that 40 percent — 19 companies — had at least one board member who also held a leadership role at an academic medical center. Sixteen of the 17 companies based in the United States had at least one. Several had more than one. All told, the research team found that 41 of the companies’ 2012 board members held leadership positions at academic medical centers. Six of the 41 were pharmaceutical company executives who served on hospital boards of directors or held other leadership posts.

The authors wrote that when academic medical leaders serve on pharmaceutical company boards, it can lead to conflicts not only for individuals, but for the critically important health care institutions they guide.

read more


Get the news right in your inbox!