Recognizing that browbeaters should not be allowed to ride roughshod over citizens’ sincerely held religious or conscientious beliefs, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), on January 18, announced that it was forming a Conscience and Religious Freedom Division within the HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR). The new Division’s mandate will be to enforce “federal laws that protect conscience and the free exercise of religion and prohibit coercion and discrimination in health and human services.” To date, most news stories about the new OCR Division have focused on the Division’s role in standing up for the moral or religious beliefs of health care providers, especially in regards to abortion and religious beliefs. However, the Conscience and Religious Freedom Division has indicated that it may also be willing to receive and respond to complaints from citizens who have been prevented from freely exercising their conscientious and religious beliefs related to vaccination. From now until March 27, 2018, citizens have an opportunity to tell the OCR that they want the Conscience and Religious Freedom Division to explicitly include vaccine-related situations in the categories of complaints that the Division will consider. This is a big opportunity to not only retain the right to refuse vaccines on religious and conscientious grounds but also perhaps to reinstate religious and/or philosophical exemptions in California, West Virginia and Mississippi.
Faulty Dengue Vaccine Resulting in Deaths and Increased Diseases in Philippines Seeks FDA Approval for U.S. Market
Health Impact News reported late last year (December 2017) that vaccine manufacturer Sanofi Pasteur admitted that their vaccine for dengue (a deadly tropical disease spread mostly by mosquitoes) was defective. In a press release from France, the pharmaceutical company admitted that the vaccine is harmful to those not previously infected with dengue, and could cause children not previously infected with dengue to contract a severe case of the disease. More than 800,000 Filipino children have received at least one dose of Dengvaxia. Former Philippine President Benigno Aquino III stated recently that he would not have approved a mass immunization program in 2015 using Dengvaxia had Sanofi Pasteur, the French pharmaceutical company that developed the dengue vaccine, made known then that the drug posed risks to the health of some people. Reports of severe cases of Dengue and even some deaths have been related to the Dengvaxia vaccine, and the Philippine Department of Health (DOH) has setup "express lanes" at local hospitals to deal with illnesses and injuries due to the vaccine. In the vaccine marketing trade publication FiercePharma, it is being reported that Sanofi is not going to let the "Dengvaxia mess" in the Philippines stop them from seeking FDA approval for the vaccine to be sold in the U.S.
Mandating Ineffective Vaccines Creates Public Health Crisis as Ineffective Vaccines Can Actually Enhance Disease
It’s clear that some vaccines don’t work as well as advertised. And yet, instead of first making a vaccine with better effectiveness, the solution is to use the force of law to make everyone get more shots of the failing vaccine. Even when significant vaccine failure rates for vaccines are acknowledged, the legislative solution remains fully supported. Concerns over the need for more effective vaccines are dismissed by apologetics pointing out that the current vaccines are better than nothing. The assumption is implicit: low immunity is better than no immunity. So, until a better vaccine comes along, accept the current shot at whatever level of immunity it provides. But the notion that any amount of antibodies is preferable to no antibodies at all, is dangerously wrong. The same exact antibodies that prevent disease at higher concentrations, can enhance the disease at lower concentrations.
How The CDC and Big Pharma use Non-profit Front Groups to Advance Extremist Mandatory Vaccination Policy Restricting Religious Freedoms
It’s a confusing story, which is just how groups like Every Child By Two prefer things to be. Like many organizations that abuse the 501(c)(3) rules of the Internal Revenue Service, Every Child By Two (“ECBT”) puts on a front to the world that they are an independent, compassionate organization of parents — originally founded by Rosalynn Carter no less — dedicated to the important work of getting every child vaccinated. In fact, the organization is really a sock-puppet mouthpiece for two masters: 1) the Centers for Disease Control and, 2) vaccine makers, their two primary sources of funding. Recently, ECBT took a public stand against a new rule being proposed by the parent of the CDC, the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”). On January 26, 2018, the Office of Civil Rights within HHS issued a proposed change of rules, titled “Protecting Statutory Conscience Rights in Health Care; Delegations of Authority.” The new rule makes clear that HHS will enforce any violation of civil rights within the healthcare field, specifically as it relates to the either religious beliefs or conscience of a healthcare worker or a patient. For a group like ECBT, who lobbied heavily in support of SB277 — a California law passed in 2015 that REMOVED religious and philosophical exemptions from vaccines for children — this new rule, and the specific mention of vaccination, represents an enormous threat.
Man Crippled by Flu Shot and “Life Ruined Forever” Speaks Out About His Experience with the Vaccine Court
Health Impact News may be the only news source currently publishing the quarterly Department of Justice (DOJ) reports on settlements for vaccine injuries and deaths in the Vaccine Court. After publishing the most recent report, U.S. Government Continues to Pay Out Millions to Victims Injured by the Flu Shot, one man who was crippled by the flu shot in 2013 spoke out on social media regarding his experience in trying to get compensation from the Vaccine Court. CDC doctors themselves allegedly diagnosed him with a crippling disease what was a result of the toxins in the flu shot. Formerly a very active athletic man prior to receiving a flu shot in 2013, Brett is now confined to a wheelchair and states that his life has been "ruined forever." And yet the Vaccine Court, where cases of vaccine injuries and deaths are litigated against U.S. attorneys, is allegedly only offering Brett $45,000 for his lifelong crippling vaccine injury.
The federal government Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines (ACCV) under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services just concluded their first meeting of 2018 on March 8th. These quarterly meetings include a report from the Department of Justice (DOJ) on cases settled for vaccine injuries and deaths as mandated by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP). The NVICP was started as a result of a law passed in 1986 that gave pharmaceutical companies total legal immunity from being sued due to injuries and deaths resulting from vaccines. Drug manufacturers in the vaccine market can now create as many new vaccines as they desire, with no risk of being sued if their product causes injury or death. This has resulted in a huge increase of vaccines entering the market, and the U.S. government, through the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), is the largest purchaser of these vaccines, spending in excess of $4 billion taxpayer dollars each year to purchase these vaccines. If you or a family member is injured or dies from vaccines, you must sue the federal government in this special vaccine court. Many cases are litigated for years before a settlement is reached. As far as we know, Health Impact News is the only media source that publishes these reports each quarter. The March 8, 2018 report states that 181 cases were adjudicated during the 3-month time period between 11/16/17 –2/15/18, with 142 compensated. But for some reason, the DOJ report only lists 86 of the settlements, leading one to wonder why only these particular cases were listed. 63 of the 86 cases were for injuries due to the flu vaccine, making the annual flu shot the most dangerous vaccine in the U.S., by far.
It is quite common for pediatricians (and family doctors) to encounter parents who refuse one or more infant vaccines, most often due to safety concerns. These concerns also mean that pediatricians frequently get requests to modify or delay the vaccine schedule—nearly three-fifths (58%) of pediatricians reported such requests in a 2014 AAP survey. Rather than recognize the validity of parents’ safety concerns or admit to their own ambivalence about some of the newer vaccines, many pediatricians—nearly two in five according to some estimates—choose to boot uncooperative families out of their practice. A recent Medscape survey indicates that one of the main things that pediatricians dislike about their job is “dealing with difficult patients.” However, when pediatricians dismiss families whose only crime is the desire to make informed and individualized health care decisions on behalf of their children, the doctors are doing more than just unprofessionally dumping “difficult” patients—they also are protecting their bottom line. Dr. Bob Sears confirms that HMO plans use incentive practices, conducting year-end chart reviews and awarding large bonuses to pediatric practices that score well. Dr. Sears explains: “This bonus varies depending on the number of patients the doctor sees. One of the requirements for a patient’s chart to pass the test is that they are fully vaccinated. […] Such incentives…end up forcing a doctor to consider the financial implications of accepting patients who even just want to opt out of one vaccine. …Maybe a few such families wouldn’t make them fail the chart reviews, but if they have too many, there goes their year-end bonus.”
Department of Justice Sues County in Wisconsin Over Nurse Being Forced to Receive Flu Shot Against Her Religious Beliefs
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a civil rights lawsuit against Ozaukee County, an affluent suburb just north of Milwaukee, for forcing a nursing assistant at their county-owned and operated nursing home and rehabilitation facility to receive a mandatory flu shot as a condition for her continued employment. Barnell Williams was a nursing assistant at Lasata Care Center, which has a policy of mandating flu shots for all of its employees. However, Lasata permitted employees to obtain a religious exemption from the vaccination requirement, allowing them to wear protective masks during the flu season instead of receiving the shot. According to the lawsuit, Williams applied for the religious exemption, but was denied because she was not part of a religious organization that had a "clergy" attest to her belief. Williams allegedly brought a "To Whom it May Concern" letter explaining her religious objection, as well as testimonials from others about the sincerity of her religious belief, but she was allegedly denied the opportunity to even present these documents.
“Natural Immunity Community” Creates Vaccine-Free Zone for Childcare and Home Schooling in Response to Australia’s Mandatory Vaccine Policies
Queensland parents who have been shunned by the mainstream for not vaccinating their children are fighting back. The Sunshine Coast-based Natural Immunity Community, a network of anti-vaccination families, has revealed plans to create their own childcare and homeschooling in response to the federal government's No Jab No Play regulations implemented in 2016. Network spokeswoman Allona Lahn has accused the government of insighting fear and spreading misinformation and propaganda about vaccination. She has called for a national debate on the controversial issue and told Daily Mail Australia she thinks the anti-vaxxers would win. Under the federal policy, only parents of children who are fully immunised can received any family tax benefits and childcare rebates they are eligible for. 'We are creating alternatives as we have been forced into a corner thanks to the bullying, intimidation tactics by our government,' Ms Lahn said. 'Mothers rights' have been lost in the community so we're offering services to help and support anti-vaxxers out there.' According to Ms Lahn, Natural Immunity Community membership has skyrocketed from 18 to 800 within three years on the Sunshine Coast, where parts of the region have the lowest immunisation rates in Queensland for five-year-olds.
Merck and UAB Recruiting 16 to 26 Year Old Mothers Who Just Gave Birth to Enroll in Gardasil 9 Vaccine Trials
The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) in collaboration with Merck pharmaceutical company is planning to conduct Gardasil 9 vaccine trials on postpartum mothers between the ages of 16 to 26 immediately after giving birth at the UAB hospital. According to ClinicalTrials.gov, the desired outcome of this study is to have more young women vaccinated with the Gardasil vaccine, because they do not believe enough young women are being vaccinated: "Due to low HPV vaccine uptake in the US, innovative approaches to vaccinating vulnerable populations are necessary in order to maximize the cancer prevention potential of this vaccine." Previous studies on the Gardasil vaccine have shown that young women who are in the hospital due to giving birth are open to receiving the Gardasil vaccine, particularly Hispanic populations: "The puerperium is a time period when women are engaged in the healthcare system and have almost universal access to affordable health care. Two prior studies have shown that postpartum HPV vaccination is acceptable to patients, and high rates of vaccination were achieved in these primarily Hispanic populations." Merck and UAB want to test the vaccine on 16 to 26 year old postpartum mothers because "the immune response in young women is less robust than in adolescents," and because "no studies have examined immunogenicity in postpartum women specifically." Therefore, 16 to 26 year old young mothers who have just given birth at the UAB hospital will become test subjects of the Gardasil 9 vaccine. Will these young mothers in Alabama have sufficient information to make the decision to participate in these Gardasil vaccine trials just after giving birth? Will they understand the potential risks for harm, which includes heart disease (POTS), premature menopause (“Primary Ovarian Failure”) and a whole list of autoimmune disorders that have been hidden from the public but revealed by a 2017 study done in Mexico?