by National Vaccine Information Center
Action Alert: OPPOSE Idaho SB 1294 – Lowers age of children who can get vaccinated by pharmacists from 12 to 6
SB 1294 was introduced in the Idaho Senate Health and Welfare Committee February 10, 2016 and has passed the full Senate. The next step is a hearing in the House Health and Welfare Committee that will be scheduled in the coming days. SB 1294 would permit pharmacists to prescribe and administer vaccines to children 6 years of age or older. Legislation already allows pharmacists to vaccinate 12 year-olds, this bill reduces the age to 6 year olds.
Our rights are being undermined. Although you may not think it is a big deal if pharmacists vaccinate 6 year olds, it is for many reasons. Pharmacists do not know a child’s medical history, do not have access to their records, may never see a child again so be unaware of reactions, and have no liability for vaccines they administer. In addition, we have visited 3 Idaho pharmacists and they are not following existing law with respect to reporting reactions and notifying parents that vaccines and the vaccine registry are voluntary.
In addition, the pattern across the country is clear, once pharmacists can vaccinate younger children, they will attempt to remove parental consent as has been done in some states. So when your 10 year old goes into the drug store to buy a piece of candy or little toy, the pharmacist would be able to vaccinate them without your consent. Rights are not usually taken away in one major action but in a piece meal way – we must act to protect them. Please ACT NOW! It takes just 5 minutes to send an email.
To read the bill text click here: http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2016/S1294.pdf
ACTION TO TAKE:
1. Email and call the members of the House Health and Welfare Committee and ask them to oppose SB 1294. Write OPPOSE SB 1294 in the subject line and be sure to include your name and address.(contacts and talking points below)
2. Email and call the Secretary of the House Health and Welfare Committee and ask that she forward your message to all members of the House Health and Welfare Committee asking that they OPPOSE SB 1294.
3. Contact your own State Representative and ask him/her to OPPOSE SB 1294. Register/login to the NVIC Advocacy Portal at http://NVICAdvocacy.org Click on “Check What is Happening in Your State” on the home page or “My State” on the STATE TEAMS Tab. Your personal state legislators are listed on the right side of the page. Click on the name of your Senator to display his/her contact information.
4. Please forward any legislative responses to Leslie Manookian, Idaho NVIC Advocacy State Director at
ID********@NV**********.org
.
Please refer to the talking points below. Choose a few points which resonate with you to use in your email or voicemail.
CONTACT LIST
er*****@ho***.gov
,
cn****@ho***.gov
,
jr*****@ho***.gov
,
mb******@ho***.gov
,
bh****@ho***.gov
,
cp****@ho***.gov
,
sc***@ho***.gov
,
jv**********@ho***.gov
,
fw***@ho***.gov
,
kp*****@ho***.gov
,
pr******@ho***.gov
,
hh**@ho***.gov
Fred Wood, Chair, 332-1074
Kelley Packer, Vice Chair, 332-1045
Brandon Hixon, 332-1052
Christy Perry, 332-1044
Paul Romrell, 332-1056
John Vander Woude, 332-1037
Merrill Beyeler, 332-1180
Eric Redman, 332-1070
Caroline Troy, 332-1035
John Rusche, 332-1133
Sue Chew, 332-1049
SECRETARY: Irene Moore: 332-1138
TALKING POINTS:
1) You have DEEP concerns about SB 1294 and are strongly opposed to it. Explain why this is personal to you: a vaccine reaction in someone you know, harassment, etc.
2) Existing Idaho Code 39-4804 requires health workers who vaccinate to notify parents that vaccines are not mandatory in Idaho but the rules in use by the Idaho Board of Pharmacists violate that code by not requiring parents to be notified that vaccines are voluntary. SB 1294 should be repealed not extended to 6 year olds given that pharmacists are already violating existing code.
3) Existing Idaho Code 39-4804 requires health workers who vaccinate to notify parents that participation in the immunization registry (IRIS) is voluntary but the rules in use by the Idaho Board of Pharmacists violate that code by not requiring parents to be notified that IRIS is voluntary, the rules simply require the pharmacist to report to IRIS. This is a violation of existing code. SB 1294 should be repealed not extended to 6 year olds.
4) Vaccines are pharmaceutical products and Federal law recognizes vaccines kill and disable some recipients. These risks depend on a person’s medical history and family history. Pharmacists do not have knowledge of, nor the time to learn about, a person’s medical history. This is dangerous.
5) Vaccine makers and the healthcare providers who administer them bear zero liability for vaccine injuries and deaths. Vaccine makers have no incentive to make vaccines safe and pharmacists have no liability when vaccines go wrong yet the people they vaccinate will not be aware of this.
6) Federal law and Idaho code require that all health providers report vaccine reactions to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). How will pharmacists abide by this law when they may never see the patient again?
7) The US Supreme Court recognizes vaccines to be “unavoidably unsafe” (http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf) and to cause injury and death in some recipients. The US government has paid out more than $3 billion to the victims of vaccine injury. Hundreds of thousands have reported an adverse reaction to vaccination. Vaccine package inserts warn of the risk of brain damage, life-threatening allergy, and death, additionally, no one knows in advance who will be harmed by a vaccine. It is careless to permit pharmacists to administer a product that carries such risks.
8) Children today receive 69 doses of vaccines for 16 different viral and bacterial illnesses which more than doubles the government childhood schedule of 34 doses of 11 different vaccines in the year 2000. Thirty-five doses and 5 more unique vaccines have been added to the schedule in the last 15 years but the safety of this schedule has never been proven. Allowing pharmacists to vaccinate without access to a person’s medical records means that person may receive even more vaccines than those on the already bloated schedule.
Sincerely,
NVIC Advocacy Team
National Vaccine Information Center http://NVIC.org and http://NVICAdvocacy.org
https://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Members/ContactUs.aspx
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.
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.
Leave a Reply