Tag: immunization schedule

  • STOP THE COVID SHOTS FOR SCHOOL

    Despite a huge public outcry, consisting of more than 31,000 public comments posted on the CDC’s website, despite hundreds of experts warning of serious risks to children, the Centers for Disease Control has voted to add the Covid mRNA vaccine to the VFC Program, which provides free Vaccines for children and as well as add the COVID-19 vaccines for children as young as six months old to the new Child and Adolescent Immunization Schedules, which will be rolled out in February 2023. This will add 54 injections (72 antigens because of combined shots like MMR) to 72 injections (90 antigens.) Its nothing to do with health. This will allow the pharmaceutical companies to escape product liability which means the “emergency” can end, but the liability protection for the pharmaceutical companies continues.

    More than a dozen states automatically add new CDC recommendations to their required schedule of vaccines for schools and daycares. There is information about vaccine laws and exemptions in every state here. 

    TELL HEALTH DEPARTMENT NO! WE DON’T WANT THE COVID VAX FOR SCHOOL

    Idaho will require the Health Department to submit a rule change to the legislature. Prior to that submission, they are required to host public hearings. IT IS TIME TO SPEAK UP NOW AND SAY “NO!”

    Negotiated Rulemaking Meetings and Public Hearings Schedule

    We must stop them before they try!

    “Every state must reject this CDC mandate for children immediately. Even the CDC’s own data reveals that these COVID shots are harming children. Pharmaceutical companies merely see children as a budget item to increase their bottom line and they continue to ignore the serious adverse events and deaths caused by these experimental shots.” 

    Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver

    Call to Action

    We know you are outraged and want to take action immediately. Now is the time for the parents and grandparents to reach out to the Health Department, the Education Department, and school administration, as well as the legislators who are running for office, and let them know that there is no medical or scientific justification to add a vaccine to the childhood schedule especially when there is no clinical data to justify shot.

    Parents hold power — don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

    CONTACT:

    Governor Little: https://gov.idaho.gov/contact-us/

    Department of Education

    Make clear to your superintendent and commissioner that exemptions are not enough and that you will be pulling your child from school if this vaccine is mandated for attendance, costing the district tens of thousands of dollars in funding.

    Sherri Ybarra: Superintendent of Public Instruction
    Telephone  208-334-2270  Fax  208-334-2632

    Email  board@osbe.idaho.gov

    P.O. Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720-0037

    650 West State Street, 3rd Floor  Boise, ID 83702

    Department of Health and Welfare

    Director: Dave Jeppesen, 208-334-5500 https://healthandwelfare.idaho.gov/director-contact

    Deputy Directors: Miren Unsworth and Lisa Hettinger, 208-334-5500

    YOUR LEGISLATORS & LEGISLATIVE CANDIDATES *find your district:

    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/child-health-topics/action/demand-public-health-agencies-and-lawmakers-stop-covid-vaccine-mandates/

    COVID Adds 18 More Shots For Our Children

    Today’s vote on adding the COVID-19 vaccines means 18 more shots — one per year between the ages of 6 months and 18 years — will be added to the schedule, according to Toby Rogers, Ph.D.

    “So overnight the childhood schedule would go from 54 injections (72 antigens because of combined shots like MMR) to 72 injections (90 antigens),” Rogers said. “This has absolutely nothing to do with health — it’s all about profit and power.”

    The number of shots added to the schedule may, in fact, be higher than Roger’s estimate because the accepted revisions did not appear to specify the number of booster doses recommended and linked only to the Interim Clinical Considerations for the use of COVID-19 Vaccines Currently Approved or Authorized in the United States.

    The accepted COVID-19 vaccine recommendations that will go into effect in 2023 include the following primary series:

    • Age 6 months-4 years: 2-dose series at 0, 4-8 weeks (Moderna) or 3-dose series at 0, 3-8, 11-16 weeks (Pfizer-BioNTech)
    • Age 5-11 years: 2-dose series at 0, 4-8 weeks (Moderna) or 2-dose series at 0, 3-8 weeks (Pfizer-BioNTech)
    • Age 12-18 years: 2-dose series at 0, 4-8 weeks (Moderna) or 2-dose series at 0, 3-8 weeks (Novavax, Pfizer-BioNTech)

    For children who are moderately or severely immunocompromised, the recommended primary doses are increased from a 2-dose series to a 3-dose series.

    CDC DATA REFLECTS THE SHOT IS NOT SAFE FOR CHILDREN!

    Ironically, the CDC presented data at its ACIP meeting on September 1, 2022, that confirms that COVID shots are not safe for children. The data presented were summaries of reports from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), Vaccine Safety Data Link (VSD), a private insurance-based system that monitors hospital records, and V-safe, a voluntary smartphone-based monitoring program that relies on text messages and web surveys. 

    The data presented at the ACIP meeting revealed that within seven days after vaccination, 40-50 percent of children 5-11 years of age reported a “systemic reaction,” 10-15 percent had a “health impact,” and 2-4 percent needed “medical care.”  Within seven days of vaccination, 60-75 percent of children 12-17 years had “any systemic reaction,” 10 to 25 percent were “unable to perform daily activities,” and 5 to 20 percent were “unable to work or attend school.”

    Therefore, more than 30 percent of children in this age group had a health impact after the second shot, and booster dose, and approximately 2 percent needed medical care. 

    The CDC data clearly shows that these injections are not safe for children and teens and should be discontinued immediately. Other countries, like the United Kingdom, stopped the COVID shots for children under 12 years, except for children in high-risk categories. Sweden has also decided against recommending COVID shots for children aged 5-11.  (SOURCE)

    Government Protects the Billion Dollar Pharmaceutical Companies at the Expense of Our Children

    By adding the COVID shots to the childhood schedule, transferring liability for vaccine injuries to the federal government’s National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). This delivers permanent legal protection to Pfizer and Moderna by allowing them to bring an FDA-approved shot to the market without facing lawsuits and bring in billions of dollars in revenues for the drug companies. 

    Pharmaceutical companies are not liable for injuries or deaths associated with Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) injections but can be held liable for injuries caused by a fully licensed “vaccine,” unless that shot is added to the CDC’s childhood schedule. This means liability protection also includes the adult COVID shots as well. This will allow the pharmaceutical companies to escape product liability which means the “emergency” can end, but the liability protection continues.

    REPORTED INJURY AND DEATH ARE NOT ADEQUATELY TRACKED

    Vaccine injury reports have skyrocketed since the COVID vaccines. This voluntary reporting system doesn’t adequately track the injuries and deaths associated with the shots. Individuals experiencing reactions are not reported by medical facilities in a consistent or regular basis. However, the reports that are coming in are shocking and leave little doubt that this shot is causing long-term harm to many. OpenVaers.com

    ‘Child Abuse on a Massive Scale’: CDC Advisers Recommend Adding COVID Vaccines to Childhood Schedule

    MORE READING ON THE TOPIC:

    https://lc.org/newsroom/details/102022-cdc-committee-unanimously-votes-to-add-covid-shots-to-childhood-vaccination-schedule-1

    https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/acip-votes-to-add-covid-19-injections

  • Are anti-vaxxers against all modern medicine, or just vaccines?

    Are anti-vaxxers against ALL modern medicine, or just vaccines? The question has been posed several times. Here is a well written article by Allie Fujito answering the concerns that many people who find the conflict of interest in the pharmaceutical industry disconcerting, the declining health of our children alarming and the explosive list of mandated vaccines alarming. 

    Here is my answer to that:

    1) The word “anti-vaxxers” is a pejorative, meant to demean and polarize. If I criticize how Ford and Toyota handled their problems with stuck accelerators (denied that there was a problem, produced their own data showing no problem, blamed the drivers….and eventually admitted there was a problem),
    that does not make me “anti-accelerator,” “anti-car,” or even “anti-Ford” or “anti-Toyota.”

    Using pejoratives like “anti-vaxxer” puts the focus on the critic, rather than where it belongs: on the problem pointed out by the critic.

    See how that works?

    2) Criticizing today’s bloated vaccine program does not mean that the critic is against everything the medical/pharmaceutical industry does.

    IT MEANS THAT WE’RE CRITICIZING TODAY’S BLOATED VACCINE PROGRAM.

    So let’s stick to discussing THAT.

    In case you do not already know:

    3) Statins, antibiotics, cough syrup, antihistamines, steroids, antacids, and chemotherapy are not mandated in order for your child to attend daycare, school, or summer camp, nor are they mandated in order to attend college, nor are they mandated to work in a hospital, clinic, doctor’s office, or school. But vaccines are.

    4) If you have a severe adverse reaction to statins, antibiotics, cough syrup, antihistamines, steroids, antacids, chemotherapy or any other pharmaceutical product, and you can prove that the product could have been made to have a better safety profile, you can sue the manufacturer.

    You cannot sue the vaccine manufacturers. They are protected by the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which indemnifies all vaccine manufacturers, as well as those who administer them, no matter how severe your reaction is.

    5) If your doctor prescribes a drug that’s inappropriate for you–say, amoxicillin when you’ve already had an allergic reaction to it–you can sue him or her for malpractice.

    You cannot sue doctors for giving you the wrong vaccine — say, giving an infant Gardasil, which is not designed for infants, and is not part of the infant schedule –nor can you sue them for giving you a vaccine where a past dose of the same vaccine had already caused you to have a bad reaction. They’re protected by the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.

    Their liability free vaccines means that vaccine manufacturers have absolutely no motivation to make vaccines safer. THEY cannot be sued for adverse reactions. THEY staff the government committees that decide the vaccine schedule. THEY define what is and is not considered a vaccine reaction. THEY control legislators via the most aggressive lobbying of any industry.

    Here is an excellent discussion of just some of the problems:https://www.ebcala.org/unanswered-questions/vaccine-epidemic

    6) Vaccines are not held to the same standard of safety testing that all other pharmaceuticals are required to undergo. Classified as “biologicals,” rather than as “medication,” they are not required to be safety-tested against an inert placebo, nor are they required to show long-term health outcomes.

    In fact, the package insert for every vaccine clearly states, “___ [this vaccine] has not been assessed for carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, or impairment of fertility.”

    Take a look at how the vaccine schedule increased after the implementation of that 1986 Act. Remember, it protects the manufacturers, not the people who get vaccinated. Keep in mind, the members of the CDC’s Advisory Council on Immunization Practices — who determine which vaccines are on the schedule — are mainly from the vaccine industry.

    That’s called “conflict of interest.”

    The conversation continued on facebook with these valid points: 

    If the chances of a severe reaction from a shot are x, and the chances of successfully preventing the disease (that the shot is supposed to immunize against) is y, what values of x and y are acceptable to go ahead with the shot?  

    Allie Fujito says: You put your finger on a major part of the issue, Grant Sbrocco .

    A couple of problems: 

    1. We don’t KNOW what the chances are of severe reactions, because reactions go unrecognized and unreported. 
    2. It’s a bit of a fallacy to compare the chance of preventing a disease with the chance of adverse reaction from the vaccine because many of the diseases we vaccinate for are not problematic for the vast majority who get them. 

    What we should be looking at is: WHO IS SUSCEPTIBLE?

    Who is likely to have complications from disease? What can we do to improve their chances?

    Who is likely to have adverse reactions to vaccines? 

    We know some of these susceptibilities, yet we do NOTHING to screen for them. 

    • We KNOW that vitamin A deficiency is responsible for most measles complications. And we know that both complications and death rates are low in developed countries. So why is vaccinating the entire population considered the one and only answer?
    • We know that some people have genetic mutations, such as MTHFR mutations, that impair the ability to excrete the heavy metals that are in vaccines. We also know of other predispositions, that may be either genetic or acquired, such as mitochondrial dysfunction, celiac disease, and other autoimmune issues. So whey THE HELL aren’t we screening for these issues before vaccinating? 

    And why has the government allowed vaccine manufacturers to completely skip studying long-term health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations? 

    READ THIS CAREFULLY.

    “Objectives: We sought to investigate roles that Merck & Co Inc played in state human papillomavirus (HPV) immunization policymaking, to elicit key stakeholders’ perceptions of the appropriateness of these activities, and to explore implications for relationships between health policymakers and industry.”

    “Conclusions: Although policymakers acknowledge the utility of manufacturers’ involvement in vaccination policymaking, industry lobbying that is overly aggressive, not fully transparent, or not divorced from financial contributions to lawmakers risks undermining the prospects for legislation to foster uptake of new vaccines.”

    MY TRANSLATION: “We looked at how Merck influences government policy regarding Merck’s most expensive–and most controversial–vaccine. We saw that the entire process is corrupt. We are afraid to say so in so many words.”

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3483914/  

    Learn More About @ Icandecide.com

    original article above posted by Allie Fujito on facebook October 19, 2017

    Here’s some additional points Health Freedom Idaho would like to add:

    7) The SAME Pharmaceutical Companies that create vaccines have ALL pled guilty to FRAUD in the last seven years. These companies have NO motivation to create safe vaccines (since any damage their vaccines cause don’t reduce profit). These corporations do not comply to laws in place to protect consumers admitting fraud. See our well cited article at Vaccine Makers Fraud 

    8) Are children healthier NOW then children in the early 80’s? Is this explosive schedule of vaccines REALLY about increasing HEALTH? Or is it about increasing the WEALTH of the pharmaceutical companies. 54% of our children are dealing with chronic (long-term) disease. 
    Have we traded acute illness for chronic disease?