A couple of weeks ago, I and some other commenters on a social media discussion were referred to as "terrorists"; and not for any reasons one might assume: that we were imposing hazard or harm to others by use of chemicals, firearms, violence or some other abusive means that is clearly a risk to the safety and well-being of others.
No, nothing like that. We were lauded as "idiots" and "terrorists" because we support the right to parental choice. More specifically, a Routing Slip that was introduced into a Senate committee for Health & Welfare, protecting the rights of parents who choose to decline a voluntary immunization program and adhere to the existing state code which clearly states parents may opt out by submitting a signed statement, and not be forced to use an illegal form created by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare. Some parents object to this form since filling it out can forces the revealing of medical information that is private and protected by HIPAA and could potentially incriminate the person signing the form who may not agree with language on the document.
In this case, the opposer had no concern over the fact that they were using defamatory language nor that they were ignoring a current ID law (Idaho Statute 39-4802) which allows a parent to choose not to participate in the VOLUNTARY immunization program in Idaho. The statute specifies that the parent may submit a "signed statement" to communicate their intent to not participate. No other form is referenced in this code.
Here are some other examples where those who have chosen to decline vaccination have been characterized with derogatory language:
To those who feel the need to publicly shame others for making different choices and having different goals about how to care for and treat their children's health:
Know that if you are responsible for using defamatory language toward someone because they choose not to vaccinate, you are spreading and perpetuating false information, which this article provides extensive reference and support (please continue reading).
Once we begin these kinds of conversations and arguments, we give footing toward a structure that controls, limits and dictates our choices as parents; where do we draw the line? This kind of approach advocates for legislation of more control and policies that take away our natural, Creator-given rights to parent as we see fit - and in accordance with all that our nation is built upon, which is personal sovereignty and religious (or no) freedom to choose, as is outlined specifically in the Declaration of Independence. If we discard these most fundamental values, we are dismissing the very reasons we came to this continent to escape oppressive government laws, to a place where we could live and be free to choose for ourselves.
It is disheartening and disappointing at least, to both witness and experience this kind of treatment of parents who not only perform due diligence, but who are mocked, dismissed, discredited and bullied by communities and a medical system that fails time and again to deliver appropriate response to child after child that becomes injured or dies from vaccination, and with continued insistence that the illness or condition is genetic, or "something unknown in the environment" but couldn't possibly be "vaccine-related". How shameful is it that something that seems to be causing a connection is completely and utterly dismissed as a possibility of that child's injury or death?
Media outlets that have printed pieces with a defamatory slant toward parents who choose not to vaccinate:
Parents Who Don't Vaccinate Their Children Are Irresponsible:
Endangering the Herd:
Measles Can Kill, And It's Spreading. Sue Parents Who Didn't Vaccinate? Absolutely.
The worst of this situation has manifested itself in the form of 2 especially horrific death threats issued to one of the most hard-working, knowledgeable, and passionate supporters of vaccine-education and choice. Dr. Suzanne Humphries, M.D. a twice-board certified internist and nephrologist (kidney specialist) left her lucrative, private practice to pursue educating the public about the risks of vaccines using her extensive experience, knowledge and research.
For those who are in favor of parental rights, this narrative and strategy does not simply damage to egos or feelings; it is a dangerous tactic that contributes to an overall perception and belief that can be used to coerce and pressure parents into agreeing to allow their children to be vaccinated, and could also influence public policies and laws that would force or mandate that everyone receive vaccinations.
This line of reasoning undermines the rights of parents to make decisions that are best for their own children, the revoking of their naturally-endowed freedoms by an unjust government.
These diseases do not have to be fatal, and the recovery from these can be successfully supported naturally.
Read our articles with scientific references from medical doctors and other practitioners:
When contracted, febrile childhood diseases prime our immune systems naturally and provide natural protection from other diseases including cancer, leukemia and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma:
MUMPS: Researchers investigated whether mumps might engender immunity to ovarian cancer through antibodies against the cancer-associated antigen MUC1 abnormally expressed in the inflamed parotid gland.
MEASLES: Albonico et al found that adults are significantly protected against non-breast cancers — genital, prostate, gastrointestinal, skin, lung, ear-nose-throat, and others — if they contracted measles (odds ratio, OR = 0.45), rubella (OR = 0.38) or chickenpox (OR = 0.62) earlier in life. [Med Hypotheses 1998; 51(4): 315-20].
MEASLES: Montella et al found that contracting measles in childhood reduces the risk of developing lymphatic cancer in adulthood [Leuk Res 2006; 30(8): 917-22].
MEASLES: Alexander et al found that infection with measles during childhood is significantly protective — it cuts the risk in half — against developing Hodgkin’s disease (OR = 0.53) [Br J Cancer 2000; 82(5): 1117-21].
Measles to the Rescue: A Review of Oncolytic Measles Virus.
MV Clinical trials are producing encouraging preliminary results in ovarian cancer, myeloma and cutaneous non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and the outcome of currently open trials in glioblastoma multiforme, mesothelioma and squamous cell carcinoma are eagerly anticipated.
Aref S, et al. Viruses. 2016.
MEASLES: Glaser et al also found that lymph cancer is significantly more likely in adults who were not infected with measles, mumps or rubella in childhood [In J Cancer 2005; 115(4): 599-605].
COMMON INFECTIONS: Gilham et al found that infants with the least exposure to common infections have the greatest risk of developing childhood leukemia [BMJ 2005; 330: 1294].
EARLY EXPOSURE TO INFECTIONS:Urayama et al also found that early exposure to infections is protective against leukemia [Int J Cancer 2011; 128(7): 1632-43]. Read more….
Scientist discusses why vaccines are harmful and unnecessary
Dr. Viera Scheibner, PhD, with a doctorate in Natural Sciences from Comenius University in Bratislava, who held a scientific career in micropalaeontology and authored 3 books and 90+ scientific papers in scientific journals in Australia and overseas believes there is no scientific evidence that vaccines, which contain toxic ingredients, prevent disease. These injections actually increase susceptibility to diseases which the vaccines are designed to prevent, and also to a variety of related and unrelated viral and bacterial infections.
"Having measles not only results in life-long specific immunity to measles, but also in life-long non-specific immunity to degenerative diseases of bone and cartilage, sebaceous skin diseases, immunoreactive diseases and certain tumours."
"Due to the concern for transmission of vaccine virus, vaccine recipients should attempt to avoid whenever possible close association with susceptible high-risk individuals for up to six weeks following vaccination with VARIVAX."
"Vaccinees with close contacts who have these conditions may be at increased risk because live vaccinia virus can be shed and be transmitted to close contacts."
"Transmission of vaccine virus may occur between vaccinees and susceptible contacts."
Leslie Manookian explains "Scientific evidence demonstrates that individuals vaccinated with live virus vaccines such as MMR (measles, mumps and rubella), rotavirus, chicken pox, shingles and influenza can shed the virus for many weeks or months afterwards and infect the vaccinated and unvaccinated alike." She cites scientific and medical journals as well as "Visiting Guildeline" signs posted by hospitals and medical centers as a warning to those entering the premises of those establishments.
Those who don't actually have a disease cannot pass said disease onto others.
Simply because someone isn't vaccinated does not in any way prove or guarantee that the individual is more likely to contract a specific disease and give it to others around them. This kind of statement is conjecture at best and fear-mongering at worst.
Parents who choose not to vaccinate typically do so due to the following:
- They have experience with vaccine injury
- They have spent many hours researching and consulting with scientific sources, with medical doctors and other objective practitioners, reading vaccine product inserts and doing their homework
- Knowledge that by natural laws (see our Declaration of Independence) they have choices and freedoms to not inject or poison their child with something that won't support health
- All the latest research is now readily available online. Information that used to only be accessible to physicians, scientists and research specialists from exclusive databases or journals is now available to the public. Anyone who has the inclination and determination to learn about any topic may do so on their own incentive. Parents who want to know about vaccines are no exception; the vast majority of vaccine-questioning parents are educated, well-read and researched.
From Vaccine Awareness:
"A study in the journal The American Journal of Public Health, which surveyed 11,860 families, found that mothers who had not finished high school were 16% more likely to have completed the whole vaccination schedule for their children.
Lower education levels and socio-ecomonic status was associated with higher completion rates for vaccination.
Rates of compliance were also higher in Hispanic and black low income families.
The researchers were puzzled as to why this was and suggested giving more vaccine information to university educated mothers, and they suggested a 'cultural' difference may be to blame.
Dr. Kronenfeld, a professor of sociology in the School of Social and Family Dynamics at Arizona State University, said, “There is a controversy among more educated mothers about the safety of certain kinds of immunization, That may be part of what is going on here, but we don’t know for sure.”
Sources: American Journal of Public Health, 10.2105/AJPH.2005.076661.
This article was also referred to in:
The New York Times, 16th January 2007.
Did you know ...
Those who have actively chosen not to vaccinate or to selectively vaccinate have done so after weeks, months and years of reading journals, books, articles, manufacturer's information, as well as information from the CDC, NHS and other agencies.
Parents who don't vaccinate usually know all of the vaccine ingredients, side-effects, and details of the diseases.
Those who do vaccinate have more often than not read nothing other than the handout given to them at the doctor's office and hold an extreme fear of their child dying of "deadly diseases". If these parents have questioned at all, they will have only questioned their doctor or nurse. As a result, many harbor the belief that vaccines are mandatory in law and there is no choice.
There are always exceptions, and some parents who vaccinate have read extensively on both sides. Typically speaking, however, the more people learn, the less they want to vaccinate.
There are many cases of parents who began vaccinating, and later on learned there was aluminium and formaldehyde in vaccines. Some of these parents then want to know how to detox their child of metals and toxins. Many of these parents decide to stop vaccinating after their discoveries.
Did you know?
The pharmaceutical companies have complete immunity, provided by the federal government under the Reagan administration in 1986. The pharmaceutical companies threatened to stop manufacturing vaccines as they were being sued by consumers for damages, and requested protection.
The NVICP was instituted (National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program) to provide compensation to those who believed they or their child had received an injury from vaccines, and could file a petition with the U.S. Court of Federal claims.
Who pays compensation for vaccine-injuries?
According to this government document, funding comes from the following:
"Funding of vaccine claims depends on the date of vaccination:
a. For vaccines administred prior to October 1, 1988, awards are compensated from Federal tax dollars allocated by Congress at $110 million per year.
b. For vaccines administered on or after October 1, 1988, awards are paid from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, funded from an excise tax of $.75 on every dose of covered vaccine that is purchased."
In essence, the taxpayers of the U.S. are footing the bill for these claims, when compensation is awarded (in other words, you and me and anyone who earns an income that reports their earnings).
What information do vaccine inserts provide regarding "Adverse Events"?
Vaccine inserts, seldom seen by or provided to the parent during a clinical consultation by the nurse or doctor provide insight as to the potential risks and symptoms associated with receiving vaccination. Many vaccine-injured children or those who experienced death following vaccination have encountered symptoms and side effects listed on the vaccine inserts themselves. Vaccine-injuries are not necessarily rare. And, it isn't the case that if only one individual in a clinical trial experiences a symptom that it will be included on the insert. Only one incidence of a symptom or reaction would not be considered statistically relevant in that trial.
The number or amount of vaccine injuries as reported on VAERS and why they are higher than what is reported there:
The numbers of vaccine-injuries and deaths are not miniscule. If you search "vaccine-injury" on Youtube alone you will find dozens and dozens of testimonials by parents and more discussions of this by medical doctors and other professionals.
In 2010 alone, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a voluntary reporting system, catalogued 30,000+ reports of possible vaccine injury or death. 4,000+ were categorized serious where an ER visit/hospitalization, professional care, death or permanent injury was present. Check here for more information: http://www.medalerts.org/vaersdb/index.php
VAERS is a joint database maintained by the CDC and FDA. On the VAERS site, you can read the following statement: ""Underreporting" is one of the main limitations of passive surveillance systems, including VAERS. The term, underreporting refers to the fact that VAERS receives reports for only a SMALL FRACTION of actual adverse events." - https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/index
An explanation of what small fraction actually means:
Let's say that "small fraction" equates to 1-5%, that means the actual vaccine-related injuries and deaths are 600,000 - 3,000,000. Serious incidents fall inbetween 80,000 - 400,000. Actual deaths linked to the immunization program in 2010? 4,600 - 23,300
In that same year, 54%+ of reported fatalities occurred in children younger than the age of 3. It's no coincidence that children under 3 receive more vaccines than all other age groups combined.
So, if these numbers are accurate - based on the CDC/FDA approximations ("small fraction"), then there is a much higher number of injuries and fatalities linked to vaccines!
Regarding numbers of reported events on VAERS and how many are not reported:
VAERS (vaccine adverse events reporting system) has logged 54,105 adverse reactions related to the HPV vaccine. Among those, 2,227 are listed as “disabled,” 10,416 are listed as “did not recover,” 7,418 are listed as “serious,” and 362 deaths have been reported. Many other reports were listed on VAERS including emergency room visits after vaccination[14,928], hospitalized [5,155], and life-threatening.
A US Health and Human Services-funded study by Harvard Medical School tracked reporting to VAERS over a three-year period at Harvard Pilgrim Health Care involving 715,000 patients and found that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.” A US House Report similarly stated: “Former FDA Commissioner David A. Kessler has estimated that VAERS reports currently represent only a fraction of the serious adverse events.”
Recalculating the VAERS HPV reports using Harvard Medical School’s findings of only one percent reporting, the current VAERS information from the HPV vaccine reporting could in reality be as high as 5,410,500 adverse reactions, 1,041,600 disabled, and 36,200 deaths.
Excipient list (from the CDC) (all those ingredients used in production of vaccines).
Are vaccines safety-tested?
In Vaccine Epidemic, (Louise Kuo Habakus, Mary Holland) the authors explain that public health officials don't require randomized controlled studies because of the "unethical" nature of withholding vaccines from anyone. Because of this "unethical" situation, vaccines lack the the normal scientific gold standard when it comes to safety testing. Instead, industries use other vaccines for placebos as opposed to a truly neutral placebo such as saline solution. So, this means that children and adults are regularly injected with biologics that have not gone through the randomized controlled studies typically mandated in the pharmaceutical industry.