Health Impact News Editor Comments
The United States is very close to becoming a police state and giving up our Constitutional rights to medical professionals. We already see clear signs of medical tyranny as the government and medical officials move towards universal mandatory vaccines for everyone.
For more information on new proposed rules by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) see:
Is the U.S. About to Abdicate Constitutional Rights and Liberty to Unelected Medical Officials?
In this very important announcement below, the National Vaccine Information Center is urging the public to strongly oppose these proposed expanded powers by the CDC.
URGENT: Contact U.S. Legislators to STOP CDC Proposed Rule for Forced Detention, Isolation, Vaccination and Quarantine!
by NATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER
Dear NVIC Advocacy Team Members,
Your action is urgently needed this week to help stop an extremely threatening and overreaching proposed Centers for Disease Control (CDC) rule granting police powers to forcibly detain, isolate, vaccinate and quarantine citizens. This is very serious and we need you to contact your U.S. legislators and ask them to demand that the CDC withdraw this proposed rule. The Notice of Public Rulemaking (NPRM) is published in the Federal Register.
To familiarize yourself with the important details of the CDC’s proposal, read (or watch a video) of this very important referenced commentary on this NPRM by Co-founder and President of NVIC Barbara Loe Fisher. We also published a press release that summarizes the problems with NPRM. NVIC has also published additional resources on government police powers.
ACTION NEEDED:
1) Contact your U.S. Congressional Representative and both of your U.S. Senators Representatives and ask them to stop this outrageous federal overreach and unnecessary expansion of police powers by demanding the CDC withdraw the proposed rule. To find who represents you in the U.S. Congress and U.S. Senate, register/login to the NVIC Advocacy Portal, click on the “NATIONAL” tab on the top of your home page, and the names of your personal U.S. Congressional Representative and your two U.S. Senators will be listed on the right hand side. Click on their names to be linked to all of their contact information. Send your letter by email, fax or regular mail then follow-up with a personal phone call expressing your concerns. You should be contacting all three of your U.S. legislators.
2) Submit public comments with your concerns directly to the CDC on the proposed rule by Oct. 14, 2016 at 11:59 PM EST.
3) Share this alert with family and friends by forwarding this email or sending them to http://NVICAdvocacy.org on our National page or sharing this note from the NVIC facebook page.
4) Register with the NVIC Advocacy Portal to view and receive updates.
SAMPLE LETTER TO U.S. LEGISLATORS:
Oct. 11, 2016
The Honorable FIRSTNAME LASTNAME STREET ADDRESS Washington, D.C. 20515
RE: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) by CDC and HHS Concerning Quarantine CDC Docket No. CDC-2016-0068
Dear Representative or Senator LASTNAME,
As a constituent of yours, I am writing to you for your assistance. I have serious concerns about an overreaching proposed HHS/CDC Rule that would expand police powers to forcibly detain, isolate, vaccinate and quarantine citizens. This Notice of Proposed Rule Making was published in the Federal Register on 8/15/16 and is currently open for public comment until 10/14/16.
I am asking you to demand that the CDC withdraw this proposed rule for the following reasons:
- The proposed rule is a violation of civil liberties. U.S. health officials could hold a person in custody for 72 hours without the right to contact an attorney to appeal the detention. Detainees could be asked to sign a contract with the CDC that gives consent to the “public health measures” being applied to the adult or a minor child, which may include “quarantine, isolation, conditional release, medical examination, hospitalization, vaccination, and treatment.” The proposed rule states that “the individual’s consent shall not be considered a prerequisite to any exercise of any authority” by the CDC. After release, the person can be electronically tracked and monitored, including by electronic tracking devices attached to the body.
- The proposed rule is a clear case of federal government overreach. Federal and state laws are already in place to address the control of outbreaks of serious communicable diseases. When similar rules have been proposed in the past they have been withdrawn over concerns of civil rights violations and the cost to implement. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-04-01-quarantine_N.htm
- The proposed rule has very subjective and unreasonably broad definitions of illness. The proposed rule defines a potentially “ill” person deserving of special government scrutiny to be someone with “areas of the skin with multiple red bumps, red, flat spots or blister like bumps filled with fluid or pus that are intact or partially crusted over,” warning ominously that “the presence of skin rash, along with fever, may indicate that the traveler has measles, rubella (German measles), varicella (chickenpox) meningococcal disease or smallpox.” These definitions (on pages 54239-40) are very subjective and will open the door for travelers to be detained for something as simple as a skin rash while suffering from a bad sunburn, acne, rosacea, eczema, psoriasis, the hives, or severe allergies and a mild fever that could be due to an old fashioned cold. Measles is not Ebola and chickenpox is not smallpox.
Sincerely,
YOUR NAME YOUR STREET ADDRESS YOUR CITY, STATE, ZIP YOUR EMAIL YOUR PHONE
NVICAdvocacy.org NVIC.org
The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) works diligently to prepare and disseminate our legislative advocacy action alerts and supporting materials. We request that organizations and members of the public forward our alerts in their original form to assure consistent and accurate messaging and effective action. Please acknowledge NVIC as originators of this work when forwarding to members of the public and like-minded organizations. To receive alerts immediately, register at http://NVICAdvocacy.org, a website dedicated to this sole purpose and provided as a free public service by NVIC.
Comment on this article at VaccineImpact.com.
Leaving a lucrative career as a nephrologist (kidney doctor), Dr. Suzanne Humphries is now free to actually help cure people.
In this autobiography she explains why good doctors are constrained within the current corrupt medical system from practicing real, ethical medicine.
One of the sane voices when it comes to examining the science behind modern-day vaccines, no pro-vaccine extremist doctors have ever dared to debate her in public.
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 article, 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.
