By Dr. Mercola
Your freedom of thought, conscience and religious beliefs as well as medical freedoms are under attack, so it is really vital that you listen to the information presented by Barbara Loe Fisher in this interview with Dr. Mercola.
Fisher co-founded the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) in 1982 and she has been a leading health rights advocate defending the human right to informed consent to medical risk taking, including the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices — a right that has been severely eroded in the U.S. over the past three decades.
“If we don’t have the right in this country to make health care choices, including vaccine choices, that impact our bodies and the bodies of our children, we’re really not free in any sense of the word,” she says.
“I’ve seen this evolve over almost 35 years now. It became clear several decades ago that the goal of public health officials and the medical trade organizations and industry was to have everyone in the country … have to get every single government-recommended vaccine … That is what I saw happening, but I didn’t know how long it was going to take.”
This year, yet another 100 vaccine related bills were introduced and most tried to either add more vaccines to state mandates or restrict or eliminate vaccine exemptions.
The NVIC opposed about 70 percent of them. Fortunately, only eight of those bills were actually passed this year, and none of the bills to eliminate vaccine exemptions passed.
The reason for this, Fisher says, is because people saw what happened in 2015 and started to get much more involved in the political process in 2016.
I want to express my deep appreciation and gratitude to all you who worked with NVIC and participated in the legislative process in your states this year. Yes, some battles were still lost, but it is through persistence that we can collectively make a huge difference.
“It’s the only reason we didn’t get the medical and religious [vaccine] exemption taken away in Virginia this year,” Fisher says. “The only reason was because people got energized and showed up.”
Public Health Officials Militarize Vaccine System Through Rule Making
Unfortunately, because we’ve been successful in stopping these state bills trying to take away your freedom, public health officials are now starting to invoke rule making authority to bypass the democratic process altogether.
Rule making authority is given by Congress to federal legislators, and given by state legislators to the people who operate government and government employees.
On August 15, 2016, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) in the Federal Register to amend the Public Health Service Act, which governs public health law. We warned you about this several months ago in this newsletter.
What the CDC wants to do is expand the use of police power to detain and involuntarily quarantine you if you are traveling by airplane into the U.S. If you have a cough, rash, low-grade fever or other minor symptoms of illness, they want to enlist airline personnel to report you to the CDC.
Then, if public health officials think you might be infected with or could get infected with measles or another communicable disease, they want the legal authority to apprehend and:
- Detain you for 72 hours without access to an attorney to appeal the detention
Evaluate you medically
- Offer you a contract to sign that will allow them to treat you, such as vaccinate you, as a condition of being released
- Electronically monitor you after your release
- Disease Eradication Efforts Historically Turn Into Militarized Efforts
The same would apply if you travel between states, especially if you’re traveling on an airline or by ship, bus or train. NVIC is vehemently opposed to this and submitted a public comment on Oct. 14, 2016, calling on the CDC to withdraw the NPRM.1 The CDC has not implemented this rule yet but they have the authority to do so, even though CDC officials received more than 15,500 public comments by Oct. 14 — most of them opposing the NPRM.
Five Years Ago US Supreme Court Banned Vaccine Injury Lawsuits
Then, in 2011, the Supreme Court heard the case of Bruesewitz v. Wyeth. Vaccine manufacturers, medical trade organizations and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services declared that all vaccine injury lawsuits should be banned.
“The Supreme Court said, ‘Any FDA-licensed vaccine is unavoidably unsafe and there shall be no more lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers.’ Done. Not even if you could show a vaccine could have been made safer,” Fisher says.
“On that same day, the Supreme Court said that seatbelt manufacturers, car manufacturers, are liable for defective seatbelts, but vaccine manufacturers are not liable for defective or unsafe vaccines. So here we are, with the medical trade associations all saying ‘no more non-medical exemptions,’ after they have narrowed the medical exemptions so that no medical condition qualifies for medical exemption.”
Intimidation Tactics Are Being Used Against Doctors
During the measles outbreak of 2015, doctors criticizing vaccine safety and mandatory vaccination laws or giving children medical vaccine exemptions were publicly attacked. This year, the state Medical Board charged California pediatrician Dr. Bob Sears with “gross negligence” for “improperly exempting” a 2-year old boy from vaccination.2
Dr. Sears gives vaccines in his practice but allows parents to make the choice about whether or not to vaccinate their children. He has been an outspoken supporter of flexible exemptions in mandatory vaccination laws and now his medical license may be on the line simply because he wrote a medical vaccine exemption after a child had an adverse reaction to a previous vaccination.
As noted by Fisher, the medical contraindications that CDC officials consider an official reason to grant a child a medical vaccine exemption have become so incredibly narrow that about 99 percent of all children, including those who have had previous vaccine reactions, do not qualify for a medical exemption. What’s happening to Sears is sheer harassment and nothing else, designed to make other doctors think twice before they suggest a child might be at high risk for suffering a vaccine reaction. Fisher asks:
“How can you mandate a product that can cause injury or death that some people are more susceptible to having a reaction to, basically removing the medical exemptions so nothing qualifies [and then] remove the personal belief exemption so you can’t exercise freedom of conscience and religious belief, and penalize you if you don’t obey the law that literally could take your life or your child’s life?
This is insanity. It’s cruel. It is inhuman. You [Dr. Mercola] opened up this interview with the statement that freedom of thought, conscience and religious belief is under attack. Absolutely, our bodies are under attack by laws that are punitive, particularly for those of us who have genetic or biological reasons for having a greater susceptibility [for vaccine injury].”
Vaccine Injuries Are More Common Than You’re Led to Believe
Vaccine injuries are real. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database, which was created as part of the Vaccine Compensation Act, shows that about 71,000 reactions and nearly 350 deaths have been reported following receipt of the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine alone since 1990.
Studies have shown that doctors and other vaccine providers are massively underreporting injuries and deaths that follow vaccination, perhaps fewer than 1 to 10 percent of serious adverse events are ever reported to VAERS, so the real number may be around 35,000.
Adding insult to injury, the government is not doing a good job on finding out how many people are actually suffering serious health problems after vaccination. Even when reactions are reported to VAERS, health officials rarely follow up on vaccine reaction reports.