Tuesday, August 4, 2015

Join AIC! Welcome to Our New Page

Ever since the first glimmers of California's Bill SB 277 began to build momentum I started talking to my friends about just how dangerous such a bill could be. How dangerous this law could be for all of us. My good friend Jacee Moreno, (co-founder of ACI) and I both have vaccine injured children, so together we are trying to do something about it.

A description of SB277 from the California government website says this:

This bill would eliminate the personal belief exemption from the requirement that children receive specified vaccines for certain infectious diseases (including diphtheria, hepatitis B, haemophilus influenzae type b, measles, mumps, pertussis, poliomyelitis, rubella, tetanus, and chicken pox) prior to being admitted to any public or private elementary or secondary school, child care center, day nursery, nursery schools, family day care home, or developmental centers, and would make other
conforming changes. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov

Once SB277 passed, now immediately a new bill SB 792 to infringe on the freedom of adults to informed choice as well, even further this bill would make it a CRIME for a daycare center or school, including a HOME daycare center to employ an unvaccinated person and leaves no room for personal or religious exemption.
This bill 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. Because the bill would extend the application of a crime under the act, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov
Soon after a Florida representative introduced H.R.2232 To amend the Public Health Service Act that would force states to comply with these draconian laws against religious and personal freedoms and most importantly against Informed Consent.
This bill amends the Public Health Service Act to prohibit the Department of Health and Human Services from awarding grants to public entities of a state for preventive health service programs unless the state requires each student in public elementary or secondary school to be vaccinated in accordance with the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. https://www.congress.gov
Again no exemptions for personal beliefs or religion are allowed!

These laws could force our already vaccine injured children to endure more damage by forcing vaccines. They also infringe on our parental rights to choose what medical interventions are right for our family. Even more they completely disregard religious rights.

Photo Credit: https://defensivetraininggroup.wordpress.com/2015/05/13/and-in-other-troubling-news/

Lets talk about Informed Consent: What does it mean? Read the definition of Informed Consent according to TheFreeDictionary.com Medical Dictionary

in·formed con·sent (in-fōrmd' kŏn-sent'),

Voluntary agreement given by a person or a patients' responsible proxy (for example, a parent) for participation in a study,immunization program, treatment regimen, invasive procedure, etc., after being informed of the purpose, methods, procedures,benefits, and risks. The essential criteria of informed consent are that the subject has both knowledge and comprehension, that consent is freely given without duress or undue influence, and that the right of withdrawal at any time is clearly communicated to the patient. Other aspects of informed consent in the context of epidemiologic and biomedical research, and criteria to be met in obtaining it, are specified in International Guidelines for Ethical Review of Epidemiologic Studies (Geneva: CIOMS/WHO 1991) and InternationalEthical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects (Geneva: CIOMS/WHO 1993).

Farlex Partner Medical Dictionary © Farlex 2012

Therefore requiring vaccination as a condition of employment or being admitted to public school's or daycare's and HOME daycare's not only morally wrong, but it is against the International Ethical Guidelines from the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences.

Let's talk about religious exemptions to vaccines. What constitutes a religious conflict with vaccination? Many vaccines are known to have been developed using aborted human cells and DNA.

"Merck, as well as other vaccine manufacturers, uses two well-established human cell lines to grow the virus for selected vaccines," Merck said in a statement to ABC News. "The FDA has approved the use of these cell lines for the production of these Merck vaccines." http://abcnews.go.com

One viewpoint puts it this way:

All vaccines are made in violation of God’s Word.
Vaccines are made with toxic chemicals that are injected into the bloodstream by vaccination.
All vaccines are made with foreign proteins (viruses and bacteria), and some vaccines are made with genetically engineered viral and bacterial materials.
A conflict arises if you believe that man is made in God’s image and the injection of toxic chemicals and foreign proteins into the bloodstream is a violation of God’s directive to keep the body/temple holy and free from impurities.
A conflict arises if you accept God’s warning not to mix the blood of man with the blood of animals.
Many vaccines are produced in animal tissues.
A conflict arises if your religious convictions are predicated on the belief that all life is sacred.
God’s commandment "Thou Shall Not Kill" applies to the practice of abortion.
When you believe that the practice of abortion should not be encouraged or supported in any way, a conflict arises with the use of vaccines produced in aborted fetal tissue even though you did not have any other connection with the abortions from which the vaccines are derived. http://www.know-vaccines.org

Let's talk about personal exemptions to vaccines. Why might you have a personal belief philosophical objection to vaccines? Perhaps you don't consider yourself religious but as stated above you have a deep seated personal conviction against abortion. Perhaps you are not comfortable with injecting yourself and your children with toxic chemicals in order to prevent disease. Perhaps you prefer other avenues to health, such as a clean diet and exercise, the use of alternative medicine, and/or practitioners. According to the National Vaccine Information Center right now only 17 states allow an exemption to vaccination based on philosophical, personal or conscientiously held beliefs:

  • Arizona 
  • Arkansas 
  • California 
  • Colorado 
  • Idaho 
  • Louisiana 
  • Maine 
  • Michigan 
  • Minnesota 
  • North Dakota 
  • Ohio 
  • Oklahoma 
  • Texas 
  • Utah 
  • Vermont 
  • Washington 
  • Wisconsin
So why should YOU, as an Arkansan, be concerned about legislation in California?

We all know that the world watches California, groundbreaking legislation concerning controversial issues often originates in California. I asked Shawn Seigel; a vaccine researcher and author, and host of The Vaccine Myth: An Issue of Trust radio/internet show, how I should explain why Arkansans should care about California legislation. knowing that California legislation is important to national influence. Notice his response:

I wouldn't approach it from that perspective, Victoria. More to the point, California's part of a well publicized agenda, Healthy People 2020, that ultimately wants to see all people, of all ages, vaccinated; that not just California, but a dozen states entertained bills to eliminate non-medical vaccine exemptions this past legislative session, and those bills will return next year, in more states. It's a national agenda, and Arkansas won't escape the push.
I also want to include a quote here from Mr. Seigel from an article he wrote a year ago regarding the issue of trust, that we hold in our government and doctors to do what's best for us. This is his thought provoking explanation:

It’s an issue of trust, and there is no question here. The CDC, the FDA, the nation’s department of Health and Human Services, the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, state health agencies, the American Academy of Pediatrics, many doctors and some journalists are well aware that there are extreme and catastrophic vaccine reactions, and that many more thousands of vaccine recipients are going to suffer them, yet, with a few notable exceptions, they say nothing. More egregiously, in literally portraying vaccination as safe they knowingly mischaracterize it. They not only betray our trust, they show it great disdain.
It’s not that diseases can’t be seriously damaging; it’s that the liberty to determine what level of risk is acceptable for your child is yours, not theirs, and that authority is severely compromised because they will not tell the truth. Moreover, if they snub their noses at their responsibility to give us complete information in one area of vaccination, we cannot trust them to be truthful in other areas: vaccine history; vaccine effectiveness; and the true nature of the threat of disease. They can only be trusted to advance the vaccination paradigm.
- See more at: http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org
So in conclusion the issues here are our rights a human beings, parents and America's are being threatened. This kind of legislation is dangerous to your rights! Imagine the next medical legislation that could be opened up because of this forced medical procedure; imagine forced birth control, even abortion! Forced medical care is one size fits all and everyone knows nothing fits all.

Join us in this movement to raise awareness and explore ways to fight this legislation NOW before it come home to Arkansas!


Victoria Meyers and Jacee Moreno












No comments:

Post a Comment