A Step in the Right Direction: Politician Equates Autism to Vaccines

I love that Trump calls Autism an epidemic.  It is great to see it acknowledged when the media prefers to call a measly, little outbreak of measles an epidemic.  It is true that Trump behaves as an informed parent by giving one shot at a time and hopefully he is writing down the lot number (on those bottles) and asking them to use bottles opened right at that moment.  I am all for parents choosing to educate themselves, and then doing what they feel is best for their children; however, any person who can put even one vaccine into their child, in that moment, they are pro-vaccine, because they are for at least one vaccine.  This means that the parent is believing that this one vaccine will not harm the child in any way and will protect him or her from the disease in question.  This may also mean that the parent does not believe that a vaccinated person can spread diseases.  Other than the informed parents who allow vaccines, there exists another brand of pro-vaccine parent, the sheople.   

Sheople are people who do not seek any further information about vaccines other than what doctors and propaganda tell them.  These people are pro-uninformed, pro-future victims, and most especially, the average fodder for politicians and Big Pharma.  Big Pharma is their god and they would NENER accept that their god could hurt them; therefore, this group does not acknowledge that vaccines can harm in any way.  Yes, they are pro-vaccine, because that is what they are told to be.  If their doctors and the media told them vaccines are bad, they would be anti-vaccine.  This group allows outside forces to think for them.  They make up the majority of the pro-vaccine group, but to me, these sheople are not the only ones who fit into a pro-vaccine category.  The world is getting more of the Trump kind of pro-vaccine thinker—we need more, and yes, there are many of the sheople kind of pro-vaccine thinkers—we need less, but they are all for vaccines on some level.  

For many years even before I became a mother, people told me I would change my mind and vaccinate my child, because I would fear diseases eventually.  This never happened, because I am pro-health, pro-balance, pro-embracing life, and what people call “anti-vaccine.”  To me, Trump would have to stop injecting his child in order to not be for any vaccines at all, anti-vaccine, but it does not really matter to me.  (And, yes, I can only go by what he says in this article.  He could be completely vaccinating his child, or not at all.  Again, it does not really matter to me.)  I only resent when politicians force their belief systems on to me and force me to choose between public school and vaccinations, while discriminating against healthy kids without behavioral issues.  (Brown recently signed SB 277 which can let special ed kids off the hook, but not healthy, independently functioning kids.)

All through being vocal not for vaccines, the only people I met in my daily life who became not for vaccines were parents of vaccine injured children.  Now, they do not give them at all.  They are now anti-vaccine, not even for one vaccine.

 The following is the article to which I refer and the link below.

"BRILLIANT TRUMP REVISES VACCINE SCHEDULE FOR HIS SON

By Kim Stagliano
Donald Trump and his beautiful (and obviously smart) wife have revised the AAP vaccine schedule for their son, Baron. I wonder how many peds tossed him/his wife out on their behinds when they asked for a change in the vax schedule as has happened to so many of us?

I'd hazard a guess that a large part of Trump's financial success comes from his ability to correctly assess risks and benefits, wouldn't you? Looks like he's done that for his child's health too.  Bravo!
(That's Suzanne Wright in a gorgeous suit that matches the room decor. Wow.)

Again, from the Sun Sentinel. This time from their BLOG. Head over to leave a comment there, won't you?  I'm sure the naysayers will be out in force. Here's the text:
"The Donald is no stranger to strong opinions, whether he's trading barbed comments on network television with Rosie O'Donnell or dispatching the latest contestant on The Apprentice.
In an interview with Palm Beach Politics, Donald Trump offered a controversial opinion on a new topic: autism.
The New York-Palm Beach real estate mogul is no doctor, but he said he thinks the rising prevalence of autism is related to vaccinations given to children at a young age.
Autism now affects 1 in 150 children, a sharp increase from a few decades ago.
But whether vaccinations have anything to do with it is passionately debated, and many dismiss the notion as a conspiracy theory.
"When I was growing up, autism wasn't really a factor," Trump said. "And now all of a sudden, it's an epidemic. Everybody has their theory. My theory, and I study it because I have young children, my theory is the shots. We've giving these massive injections at one time, and I really think it does something to the children."
He made the comments following a press conference at his Mar-A-Lago estate announcing a fundraising and lobbying push by Autism Speaks to get the brain disorder covered under private insurance policies.
Amid Mar-A-Lago's perfectly trimmed lawns and blossoming bougainvillea bushes, the press conference was held in typical Trump style: in a gold-trimmed ballroom, as moneyed guests at his waterfront compound splashed in an adjacent pool.
Here's more of what Trump had to say about autism and vaccinations:
"When a little baby that weighs 20 pounds and 30 pounds gets pumped with 10 and 20 shots at one time, with one injection that's a giant injection, I personally think that has something to do with it. Now there's a group that agrees with that and there's a group that doesn't agree with that." (A of A Managing Editor's note, Donald! That's Autism Speaks! Kick them out of your house!)
Referring to his and his wife Melania's 22-month-old son Baron, Trump continued: "What we've done with Baron, we've taken him on a very slow process. He gets one shot at a time then we wait a few months and give him another shot, the old-fashioned way. But today they pump the children with so much at a very young age. We do it on a very, very conservative level.""
Thank you, Donald Trump."
 

http://www.ageofautism.com/2007/12/trump-did-not-f.html%20

Root Canals and Health

 

 

As a practitioner, I know that dental health is extremely important to overall health.  If, for example, you have been diagnosed with breast cancer, I’d recommend that you get your teeth checked out by a holistic biological dentist.  It doesn't hurt and it just might help.  If you have a mercury filling, root canal, or other dental work  on any of the teeth that coincide with the stomach meridian which crosses the breast, I would strongly suggest a holistic biological dentist be seen immediately. For those of you without a practitioner who knows which teeth correspond with which organs, the stomach meridian is related to the left upper and lower, first and second molars.  As my crude drawing shows, the stomach meridian descends the body and leg, so breast cancer is only one possibility of a problem that may manifest along this meridian.  Dental work on the teeth may affect you systemically, so it's worth keeping it in mind when you hear yourself saying, "But I tried everything."

Root canal posts can be made of mercury, but no matter the material, a perfect environment for dangerous bacteria to thrive has been established.  Holistic biological dentists may be able to save the tooth that a regular dentist had set for a root canal, so the issue of pathogens or not, may be completely avoided.  If you have had root canals, after you have them removed, have the remains sent to a lab.  If you're experiencing a health issue, you will most likely find at least one kind of strep infection in the results.  This is where the dental associations of the world are remiss.  They don’t test what their dental work creates.  We need to build the record ourselves.  Individually, when we've had our dental work taken out, we need to send it to the lab.  We need to blog about our results.  If you've had root canals removed and sent the remains to the lab, if it shows no bacterial, viral, or fungi activity, then this too is helpful to the on-going learning that has been under way for at least eighteen years.  It would be nice if doctors entered their patients dental history into their charts.  MD's seeing hundreds of patients may start to see a correlation, or a lack of one.

Ponder this.  It's interesting that the public so easily accepts that poisons injected into the bloodstream when called vaccines are safe and can't harm people, yet a tooth that is made dead by a root canal is thought not to be able to harbor and to cause disease.

After the teeth are set right, natural medicine has the opportunity to be truly able to set you on the right track.  Collectively, we offer herbs, oils, homeopathy, acupuncture, sound balancing, chromotherapy, and many other modalities, as well as offering supportive advice on diet and environmental  factors.

https://www.hugginsappliedhealing.com/find-dentist.php
http://hugginsappliedhealing.com/store/
https://iaomt.org/intro-articles-biological-dentistry/

Death by Doctor or Coincidence?

A baby receives vaccinations, goes home from the doctor’s, and either dies or has brain damage for the rest of his or her life.  It’s called a coincidence.  For at least thirty years, it’s been called a coincidence.  The news doesn’t investigate.  You’d think people out for a scoop would investigate how many babies don’t go to a doctor and in fact are unvaccinated and die of SIDS.  I’m guessing the number is extremely low.  Perhaps one baby a year just suddenly dying for no reason, if even that.

What would happen if a person returned home from a homeopath’s, acupuncturist’s, or other natural practitioner’s office and died?  Would that, initially, be seen as a coincidence, too?  Most likely, that night, it would be on the news all over the country.  “Man dies immediately after acupuncture.”  “Baby dies immediately after receiving Homeopathic DTaP.  News at eleven.”  No-one would wait for the autopsy report.  No-one would wait for the court’s verdict.  Legislators would cry foul and try to get all natural health modalities outlawed.  Why?...Because it would be a win for Big Pharma.

Why do people accept death by western medical doctors so easily?  Why can’t people believe that toxins injected into the bloodstream of a sixth month old healthy child can kill him or her?  Why are western medical doctors allowed to perform autopsies on these children without others in the know watching over them?  Why?...Because Big Pharma has a lot to lose.  When will serving your children up to them stop?  When will enough be enough?  It has to happen to you before you’ll believe that vaccines and SIDS can be a co-created event, a co-incident?   

It isn’t just SIDS.  It’s Shaken Baby Syndrome, too.  They invented that to hide the possibility that your baby’s brain can bleed because of vaccines.  Guess who goes to jail with that diagnosis...you.  So when you know you are not a child abuser...(well, is visiting a doctor who will inject poisons into your child while you smile abuse???)...and now you’re stuck in jail and all your other kids have been taken away from you, will you start to look at vaccines then?

How many babies need to die after shots before an authority like the CDC, or the AMA will look at this?  I can tell you.  There is no number.  They’ve had thirty years of numbers.  They will not stop.  Only you can stop them by the decisions you make on behalf of your children.

 

Rates of Sudden Unexplained Unexpected Death Syndrome to Rise in California

Mississippi has strict vaccination laws and high infant mortality rates.  With California’s legislation—AB 499 (12-yr-olds can make medical decisions and receive vaccines without their parent’s knowledge), AB 792 (daycare workers will be vaccinated), AB 1117 (doctors will be rewarded $125 for each fully vaccinated 2-yr-old), and especially SB 277(vaccinate or no public school)—California’s infant and child mortality rates will soar.

This is because vaccinated people infect people (Globe newswire 3/3/2015; NPR 4/18/2014; Times Online 12/27, 2014; CDC.gov, Emerging Infectious Diseases 4/2014; vaccinationcouncil.org) and vaccines are toxins injected into the bloodstream. Toxins. The vaccinated infecting the population is occurring worldwide. The Netherlands mumps outbreak 2009-2012, for example, had only 242 unvaccinated out of the 1,474 people who had mumps and reported vaccination history. No-one died. 83 other people who had mumps are unconfirmed vaccinated/unvaccinated, so are not included at all (Cdc.gn/eid “Epidemic of Mumps among Vaccinated Persons, the Netherlands, 2009-2012).

Mississippi has the worst rates of infant mortality. The Washington Post says, "Overall, the residents of Mississippi are the unhealthiest in the country" (Washingtonpost.com/…/mississippi-yes-mississippi-has-the-n…/). They don't correlate high vaccination compliance with poor health and death rates. Babies just die because of unsafe bedding and parents beating them, or forgetting about them.  Easy to believe when it's not you who is being accused of killing your child.

Imagine when this happens in California. This accusing parents of neglect. This accusing parents of offering unsafe sleeping environments.  This accusing parents of Shaken Baby Syndrome. And since SIDS and Shaken Baby Syndrome started being tied in with vaccine injury, the authorities have come up with a new mysterious syndrome-Sudden Unexplained Unexpected Death Syndrome. I predict this syndrome rate is going to rise in California. Parents and grandparents alike are going to be baffled. “But we did everything right!”

There’s a reason kids in Mississippi are in trouble. Parents are forced to vaccinate.

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2015/07/22/infant-death-rate-sleep-conditions/30530761/
 

SB 792 & The Truth Behind Influenza

SB 792 Will not affect you if you've already had natural measles and whooping cough.     “'Flu' is basically defined as a 100°F or higher fever or feeling feverish (not everyone with the flu has a fever), a cough and/or sore throat, a runny or stuffy nose, headaches and/or body aches, chills, and fatigue. So if you have that you think you have the flu. Right? Actually no. What is often poorly understood is that a person actually has a syndrome (influenza-like illness, or ILI) that can be caused by various agents. Only a proportion of this syndrome is caused by influenza A and B viruses, but differential diagnosis on clinical grounds alone is not possible. So in other words, just because you or your doctor think you have the “flu” doesn’t mean you have the influenza virus. In a 2009 editorial by Thomas Jefferson of the Cochrane Vaccines Field, explained just what the incidence of ILI is and what percentage are actually caused by the influenza virus. Using perspective studies the Cochrane group determined that during the winter season about 7% of people come down with ILI – 93% don’t. Of that 7% only a small fraction are from influenza – 11% influenza, 6% RSV [Respiratory syncytial virus], 3% Rhinovirus, 2% PIV [Parainfluenza virus], and a whopping 77% from unknown causes. Based on this the conclusion was: …evidence presented here points to influenza being a relatively rare cause of ILI and a relatively rare disease. It follows that vaccines may not be appropriate preventive interventions for either influenza or ILI. [46] - See more at: http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2014/06/24/measles-and-measles-vaccines-fourteen-things-to-consider-by-roman-bystrianyk-co-author-dissolving-illusions-disease-vaccines-and-the-forgotten-history/#sthash.dYvhnO8b.dpuf"   The Vaccination council proves that the influenza vaccine is not necessary, yet workers will have to write and submit an exemption in order to get out of the annual shot.  The good news is that if you've had whooping cough and measles, you can show prove of that and you don't have to get those shots.  According to Section 1: b3, it is ok to write an exemption for one of the most dangerous shots, the flu shot. Amended  IN  Assembly  July 02, 2015

Amended  IN  Assembly  June 22, 2015

Amended  IN  Senate  April 30, 2015

Amended  IN  Senate  April 07, 2015

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2015–2016 REGULAR SESSION

Senate Bill

No. 792

---

Introduced by Senator Mendoza

February 27, 2015

---

An act to amend Sections 1597.055 and 1597.54 of, and to add Sections 1596.7995 and 1597.622 to, the Health and Safety Code, relating to day care facilities.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

SB 792, as amended, Mendoza. Day care facilities: immunizations: exemptions.

Existing law, the California Child Day Care Facilities Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of day care centers, as defined, and family day care homes, as defined, by the State Department of Social Services. A violation of the act is a crime. Existing law requires a child to be immunized prior to admission to a day care center or family day care home. Existing law authorizes an exemption from those provisions for medical reasons or because of personal beliefs, if specified forms are submitted to the day care center or family day care home.

This bill, commencing September 1, 2016, would prohibit a day care center or a family day care home from employing any person who has not been immunized against influenza, pertussis, and measles. The bill would specify circumstances under which a person would be exempt from the immunization requirement, based on medical safety, current immunity, declining the influenza vaccination, or the date upon which he or she was hired, as specified. The bill would make conforming changes to provisions that set forth qualifications for day care center teachers and applicants for licensure as a family day care home. Because the bill would extend the application of a crime under the act, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Digest Key

Vote: MAJORITY   Appropriation: NO   Fiscal Committee: YES   Local Program: YES  

---

Bill Text

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.

 Section 1596.7995 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read:

1596.7995.

 (a) Commencing September 1, 2016, a person shall not be employed at a day care center if he or she has not been immunized against influenza, pertussis, and measles. An employee shall receive an influenza vaccination between August 1 and December 1 of each year.

(b) A person is exempt from the requirements of this section only under any of the following circumstances:

(1) The person submits a written statement from a licensed physician declaring that because of the person’s physical condition or medical circumstances, immunization is not safe. The statement shall indicate the probable duration of the medical condition or circumstances that contraindicate immunization.

(2) The person submits a written statement from a licensed physician providing that the person has evidence of current immunity to the diseases described in subdivision (a).

(3) The person submits a written declaration that he or she has declined the influenza vaccination. This exemption applies only to the influenza vaccine.

(4) The person was hired after December 1 of the previous year and before August 1 of the current year. This exemption applies only to the influenza vaccine.

SEC. 2.

 Section 1597.055 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:

1597.055.

 (a)  Notwithstanding any other educational requirements, a person may be hired as a teacher in a day care center if he or she satisfies all of the following conditions:

(1)  Is 18 years of age or older.

(2)  Possesses a regional occupation program certificate of training in child care occupations issued by a regional occupational program which is accredited by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges.

(3)  Has completed at least 95 hours of classroom instruction in child care and development and child care occupations and at least 150 hours in supervised field experience in a licensed day care center or comparable group child care program.

(4) Commencing September 1, 2016, has provided evidence of current immunity, as described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 1596.7995.

(b)  Subsequent to being hired pursuant to subdivision (a), a teacher shall make satisfactory progress towards meeting the educational requirement for a fully qualified teacher, as specified in departmental regulations. For purposes of this section, “satisfactory progress” shall mean completion, with passing grades, of a minimum of two units each semester or the equivalent number of units each quarter until the educational requirement is satisfied. Six of the required semester or equivalent number of quarter units of early childhood education from an accredited university or college shall be completed during the next two consecutive regular semesters or equivalent quarters.

(c)  A teacher hired pursuant to this section shall not be exempt from satisfying any other noneducation requirements imposed by law on teachers in day care centers and shall have onsite supervision by a fully qualified teacher until six of the units specified in subdivision (b) are completed.

SEC. 3.

 Section 1597.54 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:

1597.54.

 All family day care homes for children, shall apply for a license under this chapter, except that any home which on June 28, 1981, had a valid and unexpired license to operate as a family day care home for children under other provisions of law shall be deemed to have a license under this chapter for the unexpired term of the license at which time a new license may be issued upon fulfilling the requirements of this chapter.

An applicant for licensure as a family day care home for children shall file with the department, pursuant to its regulations, an application on forms furnished by the department, which shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:

(a) A brief statement confirming that the applicant is financially secure to operate a family day care home for children. The department shall not require any other specific or detailed financial disclosure.

(b) (1) Evidence that the small family day care home contains a fire extinguisher or smoke detector device, or both, which meets standards established by the State Fire Marshal under subdivision (d) of Section 1597.45, or evidence that the large family day care home meets the standards established by the State Fire Marshal under subdivision (d) of Section 1597.46.

(2) Evidence satisfactory to the department that there is a fire escape and disaster plan for the facility and that fire drills and disaster drills will be conducted at least once every six months. The documentation of these drills shall be maintained at the facility on a form prepared by the department and shall include the date and time of the drills.

(c) The fingerprints of any applicant of a family day care home license, and any other adult, as required under subdivision (b) of Section 1596.871.

(d) Evidence of a current tuberculosis clearance, as defined in regulations that the department shall adopt, for any adult in the home during the time that children are under care.

(e) Commencing September 1, 2016, evidence of current immunity, as described in Section 1597.622, for the applicant and any other person who provides care and supervision to the children.

(f) Evidence satisfactory to the department of the ability of the applicant to comply with this chapter and Chapter 3.4 (commencing with Section 1596.70) and the regulations adopted pursuant to those chapters.

(g) Evidence satisfactory to the department that the applicant and all other persons residing in the home are of reputable and responsible character. The evidence shall include, but not be limited to, a criminal record clearance pursuant to Section 1596.871, employment history, and character references.

(h) Failure of the applicant to cooperate with the licensing agency in the completion of the application shall result in the denial of the application. Failure to cooperate means that the information described in this section and in regulations of the department has not been provided, or not provided in the form requested by the licensing agency, or both.

(i) Other information as may be required by the department for the proper administration and enforcement of the act.

SEC. 4.

 Section 1597.622 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read:

1597.622.

 (a) Commencing September 1, 2016, a person shall not be employed at a family day care home if he or she has not been immunized against influenza, pertussis, and measles. An employee shall receive an influenza vaccination between August 1 and December 1 of each year.

(b) A person is exempt from the requirements of this section only under any of the following circumstances:

(1) The person submits a written statement from a licensed physician declaring that because of the person’s physical condition or medical circumstances, immunization is not safe. The statement shall indicate the probable duration of the medical condition or circumstances that contraindicate immunization.

(2) The person submits a written statement by a licensed physician providing that the person has evidence of current immunity to one or more of the diseases described in subdivision (a).

(3) The person submits a written declaration that he or she has declined the influenza vaccination. This exemption applies only to the influenza vaccine.

(4) The person was hired after December 1 of the previous year and before August 1 of the current year. This exemption applies only to the influenza vaccination. vaccine.

SEC. 5.

 No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution.

Immunologist Tetyana Obukhanych

People trust the CDC and other groups that will decide on the current vaccination schedules for any given year.  It already may be more vaccines than you feel is appropriate for your child.  It may be that you want to give one dose of one vaccine at a time so you can write down the lot number from the bottle and follow the integration of the vaccine in your child.  Unfortunately, SB 277 will dictate to doctors to give as many vaccines at one time that the schedule mandates. 

I am here with a warning.  Authorities decided that tetanus should be given when tetany is not a contagious disease.  Little babies have already been forced to have the Hep B vaccine in hospital within two days of life and it's part of the schedule for young children.  Hep B also is not contagious.  The young child (and newborn baby) would have to be having sex or engaging in needle sharing drug use in order to get it. (Schools are careful with blood.)  Can you trust a group that forces vaccines on a schedule that can change and includes vaccines for non-communicable disease?

A scientist can express thoughts better than my simple observations.

"An Open Letter to Legislators Currently Considering Vaccine Legislation from Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD in Immunology

Posted on April 17, 2015 by Thinking Moms' Revolution

Re:  VACCINE LEGISLATION

Dear Legislator:

My name is Tetyana Obukhanych.  I hold a PhD in Immunology.  I am writing this letter in the hope that it will correct several common misperceptions about vaccines in order to help you formulate a fair and balanced understanding that is supported by accepted vaccine theory and new scientific findings.

Do unvaccinated children pose a higher threat to the public than the vaccinated?

It is often stated that those who choose not to vaccinate their children for reasons of conscience endanger the rest of the public, and this is the rationale behind most of the legislation to end vaccine exemptions currently being considered by federal and state legislators country-wide.  You should be aware that the nature of protection afforded by many modern vaccines – and that includes most of the vaccines recommended by the CDC for children – is not consistent with such a statement.  I have outlined below the recommended vaccines that cannot prevent transmission of disease either because they are not designed to prevent the transmission of infection (rather, they are intended to prevent disease symptoms), or because they are for non-communicable diseases.  People who have not received the vaccines mentioned below pose no higher threat to the general public than those who have, implying that discrimination against non-immunized children in a public school setting may not be warranted.

1. 
   

   State Senator Richard Pan of California, sponsor of vaccine legislation
   IPV (inactivated poliovirus vaccine) cannot prevent transmission of poliovirus (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #1). Wild poliovirus has been non-existent in the USA for at least two decades. Even if wild poliovirus were to be re-imported by travel, vaccinating for polio with IPV cannot affect the safety of public spaces.  Please note that wild poliovirus eradication is attributed to the use of a different vaccine, OPV or oral poliovirus vaccine.  Despite being capable of preventing wild poliovirus transmission, use of OPV was phased out long ago in the USA and replaced with IPV due to safety concerns.

2. Tetanus is not a contagious disease, but rather acquired from deep-puncture wounds contaminated with C. tetani spores. Vaccinating for tetanus (via the DTaP combination vaccine) cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is intended to render personal protection only.

3. While intended to prevent the disease-causing effects of the diphtheria toxin, the diphtheria toxoid vaccine (also contained in the DTaP vaccine) is not designed to prevent colonization and transmission of C. diphtheriae. Vaccinating for diphtheria cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is likewise intended for personal protection only.

4. The acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine (the final element of the DTaP combined vaccine), now in use in the USA, replaced the whole cell pertussis vaccine in the late 1990s, which was followed by an unprecedented resurgence of whooping cough. An experiment with deliberate pertussis infection in primates revealed that the aP vaccine is not capable of preventing colonization and transmission of B. pertussis (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #2). The FDA has issued a warning regarding this crucial finding.[1]

• Furthermore, the 2013 meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors at the CDC revealed additional alarming data that pertussis variants (PRN-negative strains) currently circulating in the USA acquired a selective advantage to infect those who are up-to-date for their DTaP boosters (see appendix for the CDC document, Item #3), meaning that people who are up-to-date are more likely to be infected, and thus contagious, than people who are not vaccinated.

State Senator Elizabeth Steiner-Hayward of Oregon, sponsor of vaccine legislation

5. Among numerous types of H. influenzae, the Hib vaccine covers only type b. Despite its sole intention to reduce symptomatic and asymptomatic (disease-less) Hib carriage, the introduction of the Hib vaccine has inadvertently shifted strain dominance towards other types of H. influenzae (types a through f). These types have been causing invasive disease of high severity and increasing incidence in adults in the era of Hib vaccination of children (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #4).  The general population is more vulnerable to the invasive disease now than it was prior to the start of the Hib vaccination campaign.  Discriminating against children who are not vaccinated for Hib does not make any scientific sense in the era of non-type b H. influenzae disease.

6. Hepatitis B is a blood-borne virus. It does not spread in a community setting, especially among children who are unlikely to engage in high-risk behaviors, such as needle sharing or sex. Vaccinating children for hepatitis B cannot significantly alter the safety of public spaces.  Further, school admission is not prohibited for children who are chronic hepatitis B carriers.  To prohibit school admission for those who are simply unvaccinated – and do not even carry hepatitis B – would constitute unreasonable and illogical discrimination.

In summary, a person who is not vaccinated with IPV, DTaP, HepB, and Hib vaccines due to reasons of conscience poses no extra danger to the public than a person who is.  No discrimination is warranted.

How often do serious vaccine adverse events happen?
It is often stated that vaccination rarely leads to serious adverse events.  Unfortunately, this statement is not supported by science.  A recent study done in Ontario, Canada, established that vaccination actually leads to an emergency room visit for 1 in 168 children following their 12-month vaccination appointment and for 1 in 730 children following their 18-month vaccination appointment (see appendix for a scientific study, Item #5).
When the risk of an adverse event requiring an ER visit after well-baby vaccinations is demonstrably so high, vaccination must remain a choice for parents, who may understandably be unwilling to assume this immediate risk in order to protect their children from diseases that are generally considered mild or that their children may never be exposed to.

State Senator Kevin Mullin of Vermont, sponsor of vaccine legislation

Can discrimination against families who oppose vaccines for reasons of conscience prevent future disease outbreaks of communicable viral diseases, such as measles?
Measles research scientists have for a long time been aware of the “measles paradox.” I quote from the article by Poland & Jacobson (1994) “Failure to Reach the Goal of Measles Elimination: Apparent Paradox of Measles Infections in Immunized Persons.” Arch Intern Med 154:1815-1820:
“The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons.”[2]
Further research determined that behind the “measles paradox” is a fraction of the population called LOW VACCINE RESPONDERS.  Low-responders are those who respond poorly to the first dose of the measles vaccine.  These individuals then mount a weak immune response to subsequent RE-vaccination and quickly return to the pool of “susceptibles’’ within 2-5 years, despite being fully vaccinated.[3]
Re-vaccination cannot correct low-responsiveness: it appears to be an immuno-genetic trait.[4]  The proportion of low-responders among children was estimated to be 4.7% in the USA.[5]
Studies of measles outbreaks in Quebec, Canada, and China attest that outbreaks of measles still happen, even when vaccination compliance is in the highest bracket (95-97% or even 99%, see appendix for scientific studies, Items #6&7). This is because even in high vaccine responders, vaccine-induced antibodies wane over time.  Vaccine immunity does not equal life-long immunity acquired after natural exposure.
It has been documented that vaccinated persons who develop breakthrough measles are contagious.  In fact, two major measles outbreaks in 2011 (in Quebec, Canada, and in New York, NY) were re-imported by previously vaccinated individuals.[6]^–[7]
Taken together, these data make it apparent that elimination of vaccine exemptions, currently only utilized by a small percentage of families anyway, will neither solve the problem of disease resurgence nor prevent re-importation and outbreaks of previously eliminated diseases.
 

Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, sponsor of federal vaccine legislation

Is discrimination against conscientious vaccine objectors the only practical solution?
The majority of measles cases in recent US outbreaks (including the recent Disneyland outbreak) are adults and very young babies, whereas in the pre-vaccination era, measles occurred mainly between the ages 1 and 15.  Natural exposure to measles was followed by lifelong immunity from re-infection, whereas vaccine immunity wanes over time, leaving adults unprotected by their childhood shots.  Measles is more dangerous for infants and for adults than for school-aged children.
Despite high chances of exposure in the pre-vaccination era, measles practically never happened in babies much younger than one year of age due to the robust maternal immunity transfer mechanism.  The vulnerability of very young babies to measles today is the direct outcome of the prolonged mass vaccination campaign of the past, during which their mothers, themselves vaccinated in their childhood, were not able to experience measles naturally at a safe school age and establish the lifelong immunity that would also be transferred to their babies and protect them from measles for the first year of life.
Luckily, a therapeutic backup exists to mimic now-eroded maternal immunity.  Infants as well as other vulnerable or immunocompromised individuals, are eligible to receive immunoglobulin, a potentially life-saving measure that supplies antibodies directed against the virus to prevent or ameliorate disease upon exposure (see appendix, Item #8).
In summary: 1) due to the properties of modern vaccines, non-vaccinated individuals pose no greater risk of transmission of polio, diphtheria, pertussis, and numerous non-type b H. influenzae strains than vaccinated individuals do, non-vaccinated individuals pose virtually no danger of transmission of hepatitis B in a school setting, and tetanus is not transmissible at all; 2) there is a significantly elevated risk of emergency room visits after childhood vaccination appointments attesting that vaccination is  not risk-free; 3) outbreaks of measles cannot be entirely prevented even if we had nearly perfect vaccination compliance; and 4) an effective method of preventing measles and other viral diseases in vaccine-ineligible infants and the immunocompromised, immunoglobulin, is available for those who may be exposed to these diseases. 
Taken together, these four facts make it clear that discrimination in a public school setting against children who are not vaccinated for reasons of conscience is completely unwarranted as the vaccine status of conscientious objectors poses no undue public health risk. 
Sincerely Yours,
~ Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD
Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD, is the author of the book Vaccine Illusion.  She has studied immunology in some of the world’s most prestigious medical institutions. She earned her PhD in Immunology at the Rockefeller University in New York and did postdoctoral training at Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA and Stanford University in California.
Dr. Obukhanych offers online classes for those who want to gain deeper understanding of how the immune system works and whether the immunologic benefits of vaccines are worth the risks:  Natural Immunity Fundamentals.

Appendix
Item #1. The Cuba IPV Study collaborative group. (2007) Randomized controlled trial of inactivated poliovirus vaccine in Cuba. N Engl J Med 356:1536-44
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17429085
The table below from the Cuban IPV study documents that 91% of children receiving no IPV (control group B) were colonized with live attenuated poliovirus upon deliberate experimental inoculation.  Children who were vaccinated with IPV (groups A and C) were similarly colonized at the rate of 94-97%.  High counts of live virus were recovered from the stool of children in all groups.  These results make it clear that IPV cannot be relied upon for the control of polioviruses.

Item #2. Warfel et al. (2014) Acellular pertussis vaccines protect against disease but fail to prevent infection and transmission in a nonhuman primate model. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111:787-92
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24277828
“Baboons vaccinated with aP were protected from severe pertussis-associated symptoms but not from colonization, did not clear the infection faster than naïve [unvaccinated] animals, and readily transmitted B. pertussis to unvaccinated contacts. By comparison, previously infected [naturally-immune] animals were not colonized upon secondary infection.”
Item #3. Meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors, Office of Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Tom Harkins Global Communication Center, Atlanta, Georgia, December 11-12, 2013
http://www.cdc.gov/maso/facm/pdfs/BSCOID/2013121112_BSCOID_Minutes.pdf
Resurgence of Pertussis (p.6)
“Findings indicated that 85% of the isolates [from six Enhanced Pertussis Surveillance Sites and from epidemics in Washington and Vermont in 2012] were PRN-deficient and vaccinated patients had significantly higher odds than unvaccinated patients of being infected with PRN-deficient strains.  Moreover, when patients with up-to-date DTaP vaccinations were compared to unvaccinated patients, the odds of being infected with PRN-deficient strains increased, suggesting that PRN-bacteria may have a selective advantage in infecting DTaP-vaccinated persons.”
Item #4. Rubach et al. (2011) Increasing incidence of invasive Haemophilus influenzae disease in adults, Utah, USA. Emerg Infect Dis 17:1645-50
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21888789
The chart below from Rubach et al. shows the number of invasive cases of H. influenzae (all types) in Utah in the decade of childhood vaccination for Hib.

Item #5. Wilson et al. (2011) Adverse events following 12 and 18 month vaccinations: a population-based, self-controlled case series analysis. PLoS One 6:e27897
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22174753
“Four to 12 days post 12 month vaccination, children had a 1.33 (1.29-1.38) increased relative incidence of the combined endpoint compared to the control period, or at least one event during the risk interval for every 168 children vaccinated.  Ten to 12 days post 18 month vaccination, the relative incidence was 1.25 (95%, 1.17-1.33) which represented at least one excess event for every 730 children vaccinated.  The primary reason for increased events was statistically significant elevations in emergency room visits following all vaccinations.”
Item #6. De Serres et al. (2013) Largest measles epidemic in North America in a decade–Quebec, Canada, 2011: contribution of susceptibility, serendipity, and superspreading events. J Infect Dis 207:990-98
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23264672
“The largest measles epidemic in North America in the last decade occurred in 2011 in Quebec, Canada.”
“A super-spreading event triggered by 1 importation resulted in sustained transmission and 678 cases.”
“The index case patient was a 30-39-year old adult, after returning to Canada from the Caribbean.  The index case patient received measles vaccine in childhood.”
“Provincial [Quebec] vaccine coverage surveys conducted in 2006, 2008, and 2010 consistently showed that by 24 months of age, approximately 96% of children had received 1 dose and approximately 85% had received 2 doses of measles vaccine, increasing to 97% and 90%, respectively, by 28 months of age.  With additional first and second doses administered between 28 and 59 months of age, population measles vaccine coverage is even higher by school entry.”
“Among adolescents, 22% [of measles cases] had received 2 vaccine doses.  Outbreak investigation showed this proportion to have been an underestimate; active case finding identified 130% more cases among 2-dose recipients.”
Item #7. Wang et al. (2014) Difficulties in eliminating measles and controlling rubella and mumps: a cross-sectional study of a first measles and rubella vaccination and a second measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination. PLoS One 9:e89361
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24586717
“The reported coverage of the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine is greater than 99.0% in Zhejiang province.  However, the incidence of measles, mumps, and rubella remains high.”
Item #8. Immunoglobulin Handbook, Health Protection Agency
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140714084352/http://www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1242198450982
HUMAN NORMAL IMMUNOGLOBULIN (HNIG):
Indications

1. To prevent or attenuate an attack in immuno-compromised contacts
2. To prevent or attenuate an attack in pregnant women
3. To prevent or attenuate an attack in infants under the age of 9 months

[1] http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm376937.htm
[2] http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=619215
[3] Poland (1998) Am J Hum Genet 62:215-220
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9463343
“ ‘poor responders,’ who were re-immunized and developed poor or low-level antibody responses only to lose detectable antibody and develop measles on exposure 2–5 years later.”
[4] ibid
“Our ongoing studies suggest that seronegativity after vaccination [for measles] clusters among related family members, that genetic polymorphisms within the HLA [genes] significantly influence antibody levels.”

[5] LeBaron et al. (2007) Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 161:294-301
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17339511
“Titers fell significantly over time [after second MMR] for the study population overall and, by the final collection, 4.7% of children were potentially susceptible.”
[6] De Serres et al. (2013) J Infect Dis 207:990-998
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23264672
“The index case patient received measles vaccine in childhood.”
[7] Rosen et al. (2014) Clin Infect Dis 58:1205-1210
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24585562
“The index patient had 2 doses of measles-containing vaccine.”  "


http://thinkingmomsrevolution.com/an-open-letter-to-legislators-currently-considering-vaccine-legislation-from-tetyana-obukhanych-phd-in-immunology/

 

The Co-Created Happening: Vaccinations and Health Problems.

When my little one was a baby, other babies around us were being vaccinated and had eczema, asthma, ear infections and such.  It was so obvious to see which babies were vaccinated, or not.  One day, I saw a two-year-old I knew well and knew that he wasn't vaccinated before, but now he had health problems.  I looked at his dad and snapped, "He's vaccinated?"  He didn't know how I knew, but the boy's health had been obviously compromised. 

Well, kids with ear troubles caused by vaccinations end up needing tubes in their ears and many end up hard of hearing or deaf, but the vaccines had nothing to do with it. Doctors say it's a coincidence when health problems happen after receiving vaccines.  My child doesn't have any problems and she wasn't vaccinated. I suppose that's just a coincidence, too. Actually, the doctor is speaking the truth: a co-created incident is health problems with being vaccinated and equally, health with not being vaccinated.

SB 277: Raw and Uncensored

  SB 277 discriminates against California’s children in two ways. 

First, it only goes after healthy kids without an IEP.  (SB 277: Section 2: 120335 of the Health and Safety Code, following 56026.)  An IEP is an Individual Education Plan that is set up by administrators, teachers, parents, and other district employees that may offer services in smaller class sizes as well as audiologists, psychologists, and adaptive physical education teachers.  Children who are diagnosed with a condition before school age can get an IEP and start school at 3 years of age.  Other children may be referred to the right people to start an IEP once they have started school and found to be struggling with behavior, learning, hearing, speaking, et cetera.  Kids with an IEP may opt out of vaccinations, or pick and choose which vaccinations the parents think is right for their kids, as long as appropriate paperwork is handed in before January 1, 2016.  (At least this is how I interpret this legislation.  For certain, if you want your kids in school until July 1, 2016 when SB 277 goes into effect and for grades other than kindergarten and 7th, you need to have all paperwork in by January 1st, 2016.)

Healthy, present children who behave themselves are not allowed to have an IEP.  They have to wait until they are vaccine injured and when they get an IEP, they may opt out of further vaccines.  Actually, parents can only opt out of the current vaccine schedule of any given time if they have put in the appropriate paperwork now before the law takes effect that they don't want to follow the mandated vaccine schedule.  (Again, this is how I have interpreted the law.)  This means that right now ALL parents of Californian school children should hand in the appropriate exemption form plus have the doctor sign the chart paper where he/she signed it saying that he/she gave you the vaccine talk (to satisfy AB 2109) and hand them into the school.  Now.  Because when your child becomes vaccine injured as they surely will with an unlimited vaccination schedule, you can opt out of further vaccines once they get an IEP.  (Do not sign the official form that they want you to sign that satisfies AB 2109 legislation, because they can use that against you and possibly to take your kids away from you.)  Of course, you could try for the medical exemption by then, but doctors will be very scared to write those, so it's better to think ahead.  Basically, a special education kid can't be denied his or her special education services, but a healthy child can be denied a public education.  Discrimination, but at least one group can get out of being vaccinated.

Second, SB 277 only goes after kindergarteners, seventh graders, and students moving into a new school district.   Though this is a relief to parents of children who are starting in eighth through twelfth grades, it is still discrimination because it only targets some kids.

Why are they getting away with installing this pick and choose legislation when surely if vaccinations are truly needed, it should be mandatory for all?  They know SB 277 is not really needed, they know too many people will rise up if special ed kids are denied services, and people with kids eighth grade to twelfth grade will give up the fight because they believe it no longer effects them and this will decrease the numbers caring about SB 277.  Everyone should care though, because this is not about vaccines.

Some may argue that the only time to make harsh legislation, like SB 277, is when more of the public are dying from a certain disease than are living.  I still wouldn't want vaccines under these extreme  circumstances. I personally feel the ingredients of vaccines make them a game of Russian Roulette and also know that they damage the immune system.  I also know that homeopathy, herbs, and acupuncture as well as eating natural, organic, non-GMOed foods are a far safer bet.   No epidemic is occurring here in California.  No school children are dying off more than those living, therefore, this is not a vaccination issue at all.  It’s an issue of Californian residents not being able to keep their right to decide on medical treatments for their children.

It doesn't matter what any governor says, my child has done well without aborted fetuses, formaldehyde, mercury, mouse protein, polysorbate 80, phenol red, and aluminum injected into her bloodstream.  SB 277 has the open possibility of the number and kinds of vaccines given to increase exponentially.   As the law stands now, if you allow doctors to inject your child with many vaccines on a schedule that they decide is good for all children equally, and your child dies or becomes injured, you can’t even take the manufacturers to court.  (Search for the petition to change this.)  Does it make you nervous that legislation is put in place that both forces kids to get vaccinated and protects the manufacturers of those products?  Why should they bother to make a sound product when they can sell it anyway without any consequences and further, have the government support their sales?

Vaccinations have been called safe.  With more and more deaths occurring after the administration of vaccines, you'd think "safe" wouldn't be the word they'd use.  They already know the truth.  SB 277 will make it very clear to the masses when their children start dying off in droves, but it will be too late, because those same people will have allowed a lot of other vaccine legislation to happen that will be killing the parents off, too.

To read this ridiculous legislation, please click on the link.  (Ridiculous, because how does a baby born in 2020 get paperwork in before January 1, 2016?  This legislation should include a comment that all parents have the right to get paperwork in with the child's enrollment in school whether at 3 or 5 years of age and it doesn't.  Future kids with IEP's may not be able to become exempt due to no paperwork in by 2016.)
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB277

Autism Before Vaccinations Is Possible

I used to think doctors were the number one killer of Americans.  Yes, over heart disease, cancer and accidents.  I looked at their ridiculous repair work with over medicating and cutting up the human body as beyond ridiculous, especially when herbs, homeopathy, and acupuncture were available.  But now, I think they take a backseat to dentists.  Dentists do the unconscionable.  They put amalgam fillings and mercury posts of root canals into people's mouths.  I look in children's mouths and see that even three-year-olds are filled with mercury.  How can they do that even now when they know how harmful it is?  There was a dentist in the mid-1800's who spoke out against the use of mercury and yet, it is still happening.  I can only imagine it lines the dentists' pockets with gold.  But how dare they hurt their clients so blatantly!  One dentist told me that it's what the parents want.  I snapped, "Then you're not truly giving informed consent, are you!"  If parents were informed completely, there is no way they would approve it anymore than a bullet to their child's head.

Mercury vapor can poison you by kissing someone with mercury in their mouth.  In your own mouth, it can harm you when you eat and swallow.  Dentists are poisoning themselves every time they work with it.  Due to putting it into people's mouths and taking it out, it has entered our environment to the point that now everyone is aware of how it has contaminated fish.  We did that.

When I was nine, I received nine mercury fillings within a week.  My personality completely changed.  I had been extroverted way more than what I became.  I felt as though I could pick my nose in my classroom and no-one would see me.  The teacher, Mrs. Berry,  became very hateful toward me.   The kids treated me like I was a freak, one boy tripping me with a ball because I was talking to his younger sister.  Back then, there was no politically correct way to behave with those who were different.  I flunked fourth grade.  I believe that even if it was mild, I entered the autistic spectrum to at least some degree.  Many, many years later, when I had the mercury removed, it was as if I awakened.  I could suddenly do math easily and think clearer.  I'd always had a super memory, but something was different now.  I was less foggy-brained.

Children can also become autistic through being poisoned by 10% of his or her mother's mercury poisoning.  Whatever mercury poison that remained in my body after the removal of the fillings, whatever exposure I had to mercury through products unbeknownst to me, however much mercury was rained down on me from chem trails, my daughter was poisoned with 10% of that.  If your levels are low, your kids will be better off.  Get your mercury fillings removed long before you conceive a child.  Check also and see how much mercury preservative is/was used in the vitamin k shot (received at the birth of a child unless you refuse it) and to whatever else the kids have been exposed.

Prevention and treatment of autism could start with getting to an holistic biological dentist, following a careful diet, and using awesome products like Dr. Dale's homeopathy and herbs.  (She has a mercury and chem trail detox formula as well.)  It could end with not getting vaccinated and not using western chemicals (drugs).

Mercurochome: Hg Mercury

merbromin

(məˈbrəʊmɪn)

n

1. (Medicine) a green iridescent crystalline compound that forms a red solution in water: used in medicine as an antiseptic. Formula: C20H8Br2HgNa2O6. See also Mercurochrome

[C20: blend of mercuric + dibromofluorescein] (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Mecurochrome).

 

A friend was asking if we remembered the product, Mercurochrome.  My mom remembered it.  I, of course, was attracted to the word “mercury” that I could see within the word, even if others see “cure.”  People wonder how kids can have autism without vaccines. Well, one reason is that during gestation, a baby is poisoned by 10% of the mother’s mercury toxicity.  The mother may have been poisoned by 10% of her mother’s toxicity from products containing mercury like this one, as well the mother herself using products like this one. 

 

Something to think about: Scientists have always known how toxic mercury is.  One dentist in the mid-1800's even spoke out against it.  Information is available and yet toxic chemicals continually end up with government approval for your consumption.