Taking away the right to choose under the guise of informed disclosure/awareness

In case you aren’t aware there is a trend happening in the US as of late and it needs to be addressed before it spreads to neighbouring countries, namely where I reside. It is a trend that is very on the line of taking away our right to choice and freedom; all for profits. It is a trend that is making some parents feel forced; into doing something that they do not wish to do and it is also causing wrongful descriptions upon a categorized group of people.

 

What am I talking about? The bill that is requiring parents to get an extra signature on their vaccine exemption forms. Sounds pretty innocent when you word it like that; I mean what’s an extra piddly little signature anyway? I’m guessing that this is why it isn’t causing as big of a stink as it should but that’s not fact; it’s only a guess. I can only give my opinion based on the facts at hand because others may see this bill differently and I can only hope that what I have to say is considered by people in regards to this bill.

So why should I worry, why should my opinion matter since I do not reside in the states affected nor am I even in the US? Precedent, We see it all the time; one state passes a bill, other states follow and soon Canada may consider trying to pass their own similar bills. This is one reason why I am concerned and why my words should not be simply dismissed based on the fact that I do not reside in the area where the bill is passed. Is it really logical that my opinion is null based on that alone? Should we dismiss opinions or studies etc. because their origin is in another area? Does that make their information less valid because of this? No it doesn’t but alas there are those who use this excuse right away because they cannot dispute the information or perhaps they feel that the information is correct and try to make it seem unworthy of discussion; because there really are sides here and it becomes a very sad sorry world when one person’s choice or opinion is removed simply because another’s has basically taken over and deemed correct without any/very little information present.

Now how does a signature reduce people’s rights/freedoms and how can people possibly profit from this? It’s pretty clear once you understand the bill and I want to make it clear to people that while this bill does not state that vaccines are mandatory in anyway, it puts people in a position where they do not see the option to choose. So let us walk through it shall we. So if this bill were passed the situation would be as follows. You would need a signature from a doctor on an exemption form that can basically state anything as long as it includes that information about the benefits of vaccines were explained and still refused. There is no specific letter or form required to be signed, so doctors can pretty much make up their own form to be signed as long as it includes a statement about information being given. In a perfect world this would be no issue, but here in reality there are numerous problems to this and one of them being doctors lashing out and health facilities adding that little bit extra like, parents are aware that they are putting their child at risk or some other rubbish that could generate problems for the parents in the future.

A product should not be mandated; it should not be forced upon and for those that deny that vaccines are being forced upon the public must be blind to not see how they are. A ton of people truly believe that their children cannot survive without vaccines, that if they do not receive them in a timely manner that they will surely die a horrible, devastating death. While these misconceptions need to be addressed in another post altogether it helps form the picture of the constant push parents feel in regards to vaccines, which bring me to the next bit about freedom and choice. Parents who wish to get an exemption don’t want to sign a paper that says they are horrible for refusing something that they believe is not needed, goes against their beliefs or may bring harm to their child. How many doctors are going to be good about this and sign an exemption without the backlash? Especially when a lot of people who are getting exemptions do not see the mainstream doctors, run underneath the boheimeath health care empire, who are the only ones able to actually sign exemptions under the new bill. What if there is no doctor in your area willing to sign, since there is nothing in the bill to account for this possibility parents are left to go against their will and vaccinate, because even those who homeschool apparently fall under this bill as well. With no way to get a signature and the only option being presented is to give in, isn’t this essentially forcible vaccination under duress?

At first I didn’t even think about profit, normally it is usually the very last thing I look at which seems absurd to some people who have a base of “follow the money”. Now while I don’t think that, that method is horrible; in fact it is very useful and has brought about many conclusions, answers and motives to many interesting things. I though take information as my base and only use the money matter when I want to “plump up” the information, so to speak. Also since where I reside we have a slightly different system it didn’t even factor in at first. Of course that’s what research is all about isn’t it; discovering things you never considered. In the US it costs money to see a doctor, for each visit you have to pay, or your benefits company pays or like here; we pay in our taxes. In the US its more ‘out of pocket’ which also makes it easier to see that money is actually being made. So this extra visit (or possible numerous visits if it becomes difficult to get a doctor to sign) is making someone money. Not only that but you are required to go twice, since the bill also states that a new exemption is required again in grade 7.

If you look strictly at the money, you can see why this bill would want to be passed by doctors; and they have been making sure to show up in huge numbers to speak on behalf of the bill at hearings, also it should be noted that doctors are the only ones actively pushing for this bill. At a recent hearing for the bill the room was filled with two sides. At one end of the room were those who wished this bill to be passed and they were all doctors, every single one. On the other side of the room were those who opposed the bill and they consisted of people fighting for their rights to choose, doctors that were speaking out and most importantly; parents who have a child or children that were injured or died because of vaccines. Why do I think they are more important to note? Because unlike all the doctors who were there because of a conference with all the perks of a vacation, coincidentally taking place right next to the hearing, these parents had to take time out of their insanely busy lives (taking care of a vaccine injured child + working + the rest of the family’s needs + maybe just maybe, a bit of their own) to not only travel all the way to the hearing but also pay for the trip, out of their own pockets, when most of these parents are struggling already because of all the medical bills that they have to pay for their child who was injured.

So these doctors have every interest in this passing, they will get at the very least two paid visits from each exemptioner and if they’re lucky, the parent will give in and they will make money off of every vaccine that will be given; there’s what, almost 40 now? Why would doctors care so much about making money, is it perhaps that with all these people getting exemptions and having no need to visit their practices, starting to show up in their lack of profits? I can only guess as to why, but it all seems very sad to put people into this position all for money.

Not only are parents feeling forced to go against their choice, they are being shed in this shameful light that is so ridiculous and makes my head spin that people actually eat these lies up. This is being done namely through mainstream news reports and usually quoted from doctors or health care representatives. Over numerous articles, those who do not vaccinate are being put into a category with some or all of the following traits and also reasoning; too lazy to get their children vaccinated, stupid, do not understand science, living with misconstrued fear, abusive to their children, neglectful, burden to society by relying on others vaccination status, following a new trend, listening to misinformation and not reading “facts”, causing “outbreaks”, killing other people and children, have disease ridden children, do not know how to take care of children and/or keep them healthy, are poor and/or illiterate, are taking advice from a ‘disgraced’ doctor, taking advice from celebrities, taking advice from online, misguided, crunchy-granola-tree hugging-hippy people and the list goes on. Basically the general population is given the idea that those who do not vaccinate their children are uneducated, poor, awful parents who are creating these ‘bio-hazardous’ children that will go around and kill a bunch of people. Oh ya and they are lazy too.

Not only is this an unfounded, uneducated and completely bullshit bit of thought,, but people we are supposed to hold in high regard, people in charge of our health for f**sakes; are the ones saying this. Type in anti-vaccine into a search engine and site after site of remarks from people/authorities that push for vaccines; about an imaginary little group of people that are apparently bent on spreading fear, disease and killing a bunch of innocent people. Do the same search but for something like vaccine injury and you will see a different side; a picture more suiting of this “group” of people. What you’ll find is mostly people who has or whose children have been injured or killed by a vaccine and then doctors and other ‘specialists’ who are speaking out. They are well read individuals that take on the task – above their other responsibilities- to not only sift through countless amounts of information but also learn about studies, health, science, environment and other things they though they’d never have to know so much about. They aren’t people who have jumped on some ‘band-wagon’ and followed the crowd, they are not new and they are not some mob spreading fear. They are people who should be commended for their hard work instead of condemned for the knowledge they have learned. They know more about health and vaccines than most common doctors and their children are disease free, disease safely fought without spread and are lacking in nothing. Put simply; what is being portrayed is in fact the opposite of what is real.

If bills like this continue to be passed it will not only be taking away people’s rights, it gives a portrayal that vaccines should not be refused, that people who do are in the ‘low-end’ of society and put their children and others safety at risk, but most of all it sets precedent for other similar laws to pass easily. Bills like this only end up in the wallets of those who put them forth.

 

Advertisements

All Our Fish in One Barrel

 

The IOM; I certainly hope no one is relying on them, for anything. I lash out at them for good reason, time and time again they keep disappointing us with reviews of old studies (and not full reviews, just the end conclusion reviews) and seeming to never produce anything new and useful to us. It of course didn’t surprise me to find another review by the IOM float my way, again they are going to great lengths to deter from what actually needs to be examined and this time they are using very sneaky tactics….that or they really are, giant morons…and I really doubt that to be true. I can’t begin to claim that this is a new tactic, I truly do not know for sure. What I can say for fact though, is that I am coming across recent articles and studies using these same tactics. What I am referring to is the fake out; articles and studies are being put out that seem like they are actually looking into the proper issues, that after all this time, those in charge are finally wising up and going to examine these concerns properly. I’ve seen them posted around, quite often with much enthusiasm about “finally science catching up”, finally there can be acknowledgement about what’s happening to all these people, these children.  As you read through you will find that it’s sort of like a hush puppy. A nice little treat, laced with poison; the illusion of what you want, riddled with things that will hurt you in the end. This is no different, so don’t get excited because they have given you a whiff of a vax vs unvax study, sniff a little harder and the poison will be clearly smelt.

 

The first thing that should be noted, before even the fact that this is only a review and not a study in any way, is that the reason why the IOM is even conducting this review in the first place is not because of our concerns. By our I am referring to the common person; the parent of a vaccine injured child, the nurse who suffered a reaction from a job requirement. They are not the concerns of the doctors or scientists who are speaking up, not even from the statistics coming to light of SIDS numbers, or VAERS numbers or the sudden low birth rates in girls who received the HPV vaccines or the huge rise in miscarriages and still births following H1N1 vaccination. Nope, apparently all our efforts and media coverage and studies and actual numbers that should raise concerns; have not even mattered, have not been heard. The concerns of shareholders have been heard instead. What’s really happening? Who knows for sure, maybe all those parents saying no are actually starting to affect sales, maybe shareholders are getting nervous from all the screaming families and wanting to back out. Whatever the reason it has nothing to do with all of us out there on the battlefield…I don’t think battlefield is too harsh a word either. We are the ones caring and fighting for the injured, we have to battle against something that a huge percentage of people (ourselves included at one time) believe whole heartedly have saved them and continue to do so.

The second part to note is the actual review itself which is going to look at a number of things to determine whether the proposed study will even take place. I personally do not think that they will even conduct the proposed study based on what they are looking at. The very first is actually reviewing past studies, which they have done several times and determined that no other studies are needed; I do not see this changing. Next is determining the design, methods and limitations in conducting such a study; more than likely it will be concluded that such a study will be too complicated to produce. Financial feasibility is of course looked at and why wouldn’t it be, for they do it with everything; every new “treatment”, vaccine etc. goes through this before it is done or put out for public use and consideration, basically whether it is worth the money. Again this more than likely will get a giant thumbs down because it will be seen as a very expensive study and when coupled with the review determining that this is not even needed to be done, it will most likely be scrapped. I saved this part of the review till last because it is a ‘red flag’ issue. Ethics. If you’re a big follower of this….-let’s call it- conflict….then you will understand right away what is happening. For everyone else I’ll try to explain as short and simple as possible. It has been determined (rather slyly and also without proper reasoning) that being unvaccinated is unethical, that saying no to receiving a vaccine for yourself or your child is unethical. So by their definition, they determine (time and time again) that studying already unvaccinated individuals is unethical. Remember, no one is withholding treatment, or refusing to give vaccines if requested; these are already unvaccinated individuals. What is unethical about that? Hell what is unethical about refusing a product, especially if that product has so many people claiming injury.

The third and final part to note is of course the actual proposed study. Now of course at first, everyone could be getting all giddy at the idea of finally getting that vax vs unvaxed study, to finally see for certain if all these people are as nutty as everyone thinks or if they are right and many, many people are suffering because of this. I’m hoping that if they, by some miracle actually decide to go ahead and do this, that they give more details on the proposed study. Going by what information they have currently given; this is going to be a lot of money wasted on crap, again. The very first problem is the groupings; they are not adequate and are not properly focused. By what is gathered here, they are grouping completely unvaccinated individuals with ‘alternate schedule’ vaccinated individuals. This is not vax vs unvaxed and the results will obviously come out skewed. This brings us to another foreseeable problem; the real concerns are not being addressed. This proposed study is examining the vaccine schedule, the focus is on health outcomes of those vaccinated according to said schedule, this will allow them to group unvaccinated individuals with those who have had all their vaccines but with an alternate schedule, instead of fully vaccinated vs completely unvaccinated. The specific parameters need to be stricter and should not be so loose as to include even at birth injections, or one vaccine in the same category as one who is completely free of vaccines. This brings us to the last tidbit; the health outcomes. Now those of you in the loop know and for many of you who don’t …….standard tests are crap. You can have a the whole array of standard tests done that will come up fine, then do one specific test that is not of the norm and voila, there really is something wrong. Those dealing with vaccine injuries know that standard tests will show up zilch even though something is terribly wrong. A perfect example is an autism child suffering greatly from milk and wheat. Some of the symptoms will point to an allergy, most mainstream health officials still will only admit to an allergic reaction in these children even though standard allergy tests will come up negative. However, if you do a urine peptide test, the results will show that milk and wheat are a problem…but even with that clear evidence, they will still claim allergy because there are certain things that at this point in time, absolutely cannot be said. So this will be a very big deal if this study were to be performed, this one little area alone could risk skewing the results into showing that absolutely nothing is wrong when it is possibly that a whole lot is wrong….and getting worse.

So sometime in mid-2012 we will hear from the IOM again, once they have conducted their review and we will meet again here to go over their findings.

 

Here’s the link to the article