Green New Jersey USA highway sign on Cloud Background with Mandatory Vaccines text

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

Currently, 47 out of 50 states in the U.S. allow parents to make decisions regarding administering vaccines to their children, by providing religious and philosophical exemptions.

California joined West Virginia and Mississippi in 2015 by removing these exemptions, despite widespread opposition by the public, doctors, and scientists who are not among the vaccine extremists.

While it is too early to tell how increased childhood vaccination rates in California will affect childhood health outcomes, West Virginia and Mississippi have some of the worst childhood health outcomes along with high vaccination rates. (See: The State with the Sickest Children has the Highest Vaccination Rates.)

Now, vaccine extremists in New Jersey want to follow these states and restrict parental choice by passing legislation that restricts conscientious objections to vaccines.

Last week (April 5, 2018) a new proposed bill sponsored by Assemblyman Herb Conaway which would restrict religious exemptions to childhood vaccines was debated in a Health and Senior Services Committee hearing in New Jersey.

The meeting was well attended by members of the public, and the local ABC affiliate reported that the meeting “sparked outrage.”

There were big frustrations for some parents and students after the New Jersey state Assembly committee advanced a bill Thursday to make it harder to get religious exemptions for required immunizations.

In a packed room, many parents, grandparents and religious leaders pleaded with lawmakers over two hours of testimony to give the bill a thumbs down. (Source.)

Similar to the bill passed in California back in 2015, the New Jersey bill was sponsored by a medical-doctor-turned-politician, Herb Conaway.

The bill passed out of the committee by a vote of 7 to 3, with three members not present., which apparently had representatives present at the hearing, claims that the bill was brought to the Committee in deceptive ways:

This religiously intrusive bill was added to the agenda in a very secretive, unscrupulous manner – posted the night before Good Friday, just prior to a major religious holiday for millions of people.

The bill was scheduled to be heard on Thursday, April 5th, only 4 working days subsequent to posting, which was technically unlawful, as the legislature must provide at least 5 days notice to the public.

Further, the bill sponsor’s staff lied to numerous activists who called in the days immediately preceding the hearing, asserting that the bill would not be voted on.

Regardless of these deceptive procedural tactics, hundreds of concerned citizens prepared written and oral testimonies, and called and emailed all members of the Assembly Health Committee. (Source.)

The National Vaccine Information Center Advocacy Portal has listed the highlights of the bill on their New Jersey page (login – FREE – required), which also lists some action points and how to contact state legislators to oppose the bill: OPPOSE A3818 Restricting Religious Exemption To Vaccination.

What is a “Vaccine Extremist”?


One of the most deceptive techniques the vaccine extremists use to promote their agenda is to tell the public that all doctors and scientists agree that all vaccines are safe and effective, that the science is “settled,” and then they censor any contrary views, labeling other doctors and scientists “quacks” if they don’t agree with them.

Dr. Paul Offit, who owns a patent on one of the vaccines recommended by the CDC and part of the childhood vaccine schedule, earning royalties, has publicly stated that a baby could handle up to 10,000 vaccines at one time with no side effects.

Dr. Paul Offit is an example of a “vaccine extremist.” A vaccine extremist believes that ALL vaccines are good for ALL people ALL the time, by force if necessary.


Most medical doctors do not fall into this category, but somewhere in between the doctors who do not believe in vaccines at all, and the extremists. See:

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

Like Senator Richard Pan of California, New Jersey Assemblyman Herb Conaway appears to be a vaccine extremist who believes in a tyrannical approach to medical services such as vaccines.

If you live in New Jersey and you don’t believe Herb Conaway represents you, your right to informed consent, accurate medical research and science regarding vaccines which includes risks and potential dangerous side effects, then contact your state representatives and oppose this bill which may soon be voted on by the entire New Jersey Assembly.

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.