To Vaccinate Or Not To Vaccinate?
A friend of mine has drawn my attention to a problem in New Jersey and I would be interested in hearing from others on this subject.
Here in New Jersey, children are required to be administered more vaccines than any other state in the nation. Last year, the New Jersey Public Health Council mandated that children 4 more shots be administered, bringing the schedule to 35 doses of 13 vaccines.
New Jersey Coalition for Vaccination Choice, the group leading the fight for parental choice on this issue, has this to say on their web site:
The New Jersey Coalition for Vaccination Choice is a network of parents, physicians, holistic organizations and autism support groups, concerned with the lack of parental rights regarding health care, and the overwhelming number of mandated vaccinations. We believe that vaccination choice embodies informed consent, a key ethical medical standard of which NJ residents are presently deprived. It is crucial that the NJ legislature pass A260/S1071, the Conscientious Exemption to Mandatory Immunization. 19 other states already provide a similar exemption; parents in NJ also deserve this right.
In December 2007, the NJ Public Health Council, a group of eight volunteer, unelected, governorappointed officials, including lawyers and dentists, voted to add four new vaccine mandates, beginning Sept. 2008. Shortly thereafter, this mandate was signed into law.
The four new mandatory shots were added to the already crowded schedule of vaccines as a requirement to attend daycare or school in New Jersey. NJ requires more shots than any other state. The new mandates are as follows along with reasons to question their mandatory status:
Annual influenza shot for children 6 to 59 months
- Where are the studies comparing vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children demonstrating the safety and effectiveness of administering annual flu shots to children as young as six months old?
- Seasonal reformulation of flu shots precludes any long term safety data. The CDC does comment each year, however, on the ineffectiveness of the vaccine because circulating strains don’t match the vaccine. (CIDRAP News, Feb. 8, 2008, “CDC says influenza B flu strain doesn’t match vaccine.” AP Medical News, April 7, 2008, “CDC: Flu season worst in 4 years; vaccine didn’t work well.”)
- More than 90% of the flu shots given in the 2007-08 flu season contained high levels of thimerosal/mercury. [FluLaval (Glaxo-Smith Kline), Fluvirin (Novartis) and Fluzone (Sanofi Pasture) all contain 25 micrograms (mcg) of mercury per .5 ml dose. Fluarix (Glaxo-Smith Kline) contains trace amounts (less than 10 mcgs, however, mercury remains toxic even in miniscule amounts)]
- The amount of mercury in a typical pediatric dose of flu shot, which will be given each year, exceeds the safety limit established by the EPA for a 550 pound person. (EPA standard for “safe” mercury levels in the human body; point 1 (.1) microgram of mercury per 2.2 pounds of body weight.)
- The first time flu shot for anyone, including 6 month olds, is a double dose, 2 shots
- Flu shots contain egg albumin and egg protein. There is potential for anaphylactic reaction if a child has an egg allergy, which is not commonly known at 6 months of age.
- According to package inserts for various influenza vaccines, no formulation of the flu vaccine has ever been tested for 1) Carcinogenicity (ability to cause cancer), 2) Effect on reproductive capacity, 3) Safety in pregnant women and fetal harm, 4) Safety in children under 4 years of age
Pneumococcal (Prevnar) series shot for children aged only 2 months! to 59 months
- Is a “7-in-1” containing at least 7 viruses in one dose
- This genetically engineered vaccine has been poorly tested, is ineffective and unusually prone to adverse effects. There is also growing evidence that this shot’s effectiveness is rapidly diminishing due to changes in the ecology of pneumococcal organisms; it has been linked to the development of antibiotic-resistant strains of pneumococcus.
Tetanus-Diptheria-Acellular Pertussis (Tdap) booster for sixth-graders
- In addition to the attenuated viruses, the vaccine includes formaldehyde and high levels of aluminum, both are known neurotoxins.
- Adverse reactions include encephalitis, convulsions, facial palsy, diabetes, and death.
- This is now a 5 dose series requiring continual boosters since NO long-term studies have ever been conducted to confirm the length of effectiveness.
Meningococcal vaccine for sixth-graders
- Adverse reactions include Anorexia, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, myalgia, facial palsy, and encephalomyelitis
- NJ Dept. of Health recommends the conjugate version (Menactra) which is not effective against the meningococcus strain B that comprises 55% of meningitis cases in the US
New Jersey is the first jurisdiction anywhere in the world to make flu shots and meningococcal shots compulsory.
Many in this Coalition believe it is medically and scientifically irresponsible to mandate such vaccination.
No clinical trials have EVER been done to study
the collective effects of all these vaccines!Vaccination is a medical procedure which carries the risk of adverse reactions and side effects, including death. Therefore, vaccination choice and informed consent is imperative. We call for passage of A260/S1071, the Conscientious Exemption to Mandatory Immunization.
My intent here is not so much to address the medical effectiveness of the various vaccines. The question at issue is should the government be allowed force parents to give their children shots when parents feel they are not necessary.
As a conservative, obviously my inclination is to side with parents on this issue and repudiate overly aggressive, nanny state intervention. And with the rise of autism, I also sympathize with parents who are fearful that all of these shots may be contributing to or causing this condition (albeit this connection has not been established).
Conversely, I am also mindful of public health concerns for some contagious diseases like measles and mumps and that some of these vaccinations are, in fact, needed.
With that, I’d like to hear from others on this very important issue.
[...] check out my latest post at Conservatives with Attitude! on the question of parental choice and children’s vaccinations in New [...]
June 21st, 2009 at 12:03 pmMike:
You asked for opinions without regard to the medical effectiveness of the vaccine. I think it is a legitimate exercise of the police power to mandate vaccinations both of children and adults, for the same reason that I believe it is legitimate for the government to screen people at the border for contagious diseases and to quarrantine anyone who is a legitimate public health risk. With regard to people already here, it is sometimes necessary to innoculate everyone in order to destroy a dangerous disease in order to deprive the disease of necessary hosts.
June 22nd, 2009 at 8:36 pmEd:
I think you have a point when it comes to certain diseases, but it seems to me kids have gotten by pretty well for quite some time without flu shots, for example.
I think we need to strike the right balance and allow parents a certain amount of control.
June 23rd, 2009 at 9:39 amMike,
June 23rd, 2009 at 11:33 amI think your thoughts are exactly right. We can’t let our government and drug companies decide what gets injected into our children. How many vaccines are we going to tolerate before we relaize these shots might be doing more harm to our kids than good? Does the flu shot ever work anyway? I think these vaccine mandates are just decided by political deals. BTW if you do some research, you might change your opinion on vaccines causing autism. Do you think our government is actaully going to admit they are causing autism with all these shots?
My body, my jurisdiction! Why is the government forcing us to take substances that carry the risk of permanent injury or death? Why do they force us to subject our children to the same? Who do we hold accountable when the vaccines maim and kill? Not the manufacturers! They have a congressional shield when the vaccine makes it to the mandated list! The taxpayer pays an excise tax on each mandated vaccine that is administered. The tax money funds a kitty. The “Compensation Program” pays plaintiffs who are successful enough to make it through the system and this money comes from the tax kitty. The Program has paid out billions of taxpayer dollars in compensation “awards.” This smells fishy. This smells like the public is responsible for the products of a private manufacturer. This smells like the manufacturer walks away with billions of dollars in profits while people like you and me are left holding the bag! This smells like the vaccine makers have no incentive at all to make safer vaccines. This explains why so many vaccines are pushed onto the mandated list! Who is doing what in our best interest?
July 27th, 2009 at 3:05 pmI am 100% in support of the parents right to object to childhood vaccinations if this violates their beliefs.
July 27th, 2009 at 10:11 pmOur children are sicker than ever with asthma, excema, autism, auto-immune diseases and more. Why??? And why so many more in NJ? Hmmm …any chance the pharma companies here in NJ have any influence on our governing bodies to mandate more.
Children should not bear the burden.
Give parents the right to choose, not the state.
Food for thought: If the experts recommend not to feed solid FOOD until at least six months old, how can it possibly be safe (or justified!) to inject ALL these rounds of VACCINES into infants UNDER six months?!?!? And a mandated flu shot at six months BEFORE WE KNOW IF THE CHILD IS ALLERGIC TO EGGS!?!? (Recommendations for starting eggs are at one year old!!!)
READ what goes into some of these vaccines; READ about the live viruses being injected into your young child and lastly COMPARE THE VACCINATION RECOMMENDATIONS FROM 1983 TO NOW!!! http://generationrescue.com/vaccines.html
(AFTER GOING TO THIS PAGE, SCROLL DOWN TO NUMBER THREE AND CLICK ON THE LINK)
I’m not someone who practices holistic or alternative therapies, eats naturally, objects to meat, etc, etc; I’m a concerned parent who follows the masses in MOST areas of life. But when it comes to my child, I don’t care what everybody else is doing; if it just doesn’t make sense or seem right, I’m not doing it. The risks posed by the vaccines are far scarier than SOME of the diseases!! If NJ forces us to take “all or nothing”, my vote is then for NOTHING!!
July 27th, 2009 at 10:22 pmThe amount of vaccines mandated in NJ is spiraling out of control. Everyone should have the right to CHOOSE what is done to their bodies, without fear of prejudice or discrimination. It should not have to be only because of a religious objection, but because we are endowed by our Creator with unalienable rights, among them Liberty. America is not (yet) a police state.
July 27th, 2009 at 10:50 pmAs long as the government has the power to herd our children into a common public school, it will also arrogate to itself the power to screen the children for infectious diseases and require mandatory immunizations.
If you want to oppose mandatory vaccinations, oppose government controlled schools. That does not mean vouchers; it means abolition of the public school.
When that day comes, parents will have the final say as to what curriculum is fed into our children’s brains - and what immunizations are put into their bodies.
July 27th, 2009 at 10:59 pmWhat other medical procedure is mandated by the government? Let alone a mandated medical procedure with a freaking nuerotoxin? (thimerosal) When did it become ok for the government to mandate medical procedures for my family?
We need the Conscientious Exemption to Mandatory Immunizations in New Jersey.
As an example - I am deeply concerned about the Swine flu vaccine. I recently read an article that says it has been determined that the benefit outweighs the risk and everyone should get vaccinated. Oh really? Where are the risk analysis that have been done on the vaccine? Show me the numbers. How can they determine the risk analysis if the vaccine hasn’t been developed and tested yet? Where are the studies to determine if it is safe? How many lives will be lost or damaged by the vaccine? The is no data and yet it has been determined that the benefit outweighs the risk.
It is as if everyone has forgotten the 1976 debacle. There were more deaths from the vaccine than the flu.
The purpose of an immune adjuvant added to a vaccine is to enhance (turbo charge) your immune response to the vaccination. The one that has been chosen for the swine flu vaccine is Squalene. Google that and you will come up with (possible) links to Gulf War Syndrome. Oh goodie.
And yes Mighty Mo - the Vaccine makers and federal officials will be immune from lawsuits that result from the swine flu vaccine, under a document signed by Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius.
So again - it hasn’t been rolled out yet - but the benefit outweighs the risk and the makers and federal officials will be immune from lawsuits and the adjuvant has a shady history - and oh yea everyone must get vaccinated. Really?
Is anyone else not ok with this?
July 28th, 2009 at 1:07 amVaccination is absolutely necessary for public health reasons. If there is any vaccine against a pathogen, that vaccine must be administered.
Should the federal government be involved in this? Only as a last resort, if city, county, and state governments fail.
July 28th, 2009 at 1:38 amAs long as BIG PHARMA and the government has complete jurisdiction over what we HAVE to put in our children’s bodies and are reaping the profits I will be protesting. I don’t disagree that some vaccines are beneficial; however, I do not approve or want my children to have of all of them, especially in the very early months and years of their precious developing lives. NJ NEEDS CONSCIENTIOUS EXEMPTION TO MANDATORY VACCINATIONS.
My children’s pro-vaccine pediatrician even agrees that the flu vaccine mandate is ridiculous, as do many other pediatricians.
Parents need to be heard, not ignored!
July 28th, 2009 at 8:38 amMike, you concluded your article saying that you are inclined to side with parents, but that you are also “mindful of public health concerns for some contagious diseases like measles and mumps and that some of these vaccinations are, in fact, needed.”
As a conservative, you should know one thing by now, you can’t have it both ways. And since the government is so tied into vaccinations and big pharma, you surely realize that it is highly unlikely that any mainstream media will present unbiased facts.
You also say that you don’t want to address the medical effectiveness of vaccines. Why not? Be NOT addressing it, you are simply accepting as fact that they are effective, and therefore worthy of this great debate. Tell me what other business, product, service, etc., that gets this free pass like vaccines do? Just because we’ve been doing it for so long, we are expected to believe that they work, and that they have, in fact, had a positive effect on public health. There is a whole different school of thought out there that understands that, in the long run, we are tampering with our immune systems in ways that we cannot even begin to imagine, and autism is just the tip of the iceberg.
Before we simply assume that vaccines have a positive impact on the public health, you may want to research the science, or lack thereof, as well as the political history involved. You might just see that this is not as altruistic an industry as they would like everyone to believe they are. And don’t go to the drug companies for the research, that’s like going to the tobacco companies to find about cigarettes and lung cancer.
July 28th, 2009 at 10:55 amIt comes down to one basic question: does the government know what’s best for you and your children, or do you? Although there are many people that will line up as sheep to the slaughter, I, for one, choose to make my own decisions.
I think the government’s role should be to supply information and let the people decide what course of action is best for them.
Cigarette, alcohol and other labeling requirements are fine. Mandatory seat belt and helmet laws, and others should be abolished.
The nanny state must end. Liberty and individual responsibility must be restored.
July 28th, 2009 at 12:04 pmDi Marco:
The government cannot supply information that is not politicized. In the case of pharmaceuticals, the First Amendment precludes the government from letting industry lobby the government in support of the information it wants disseminated, and the First Amendment also protects anti-industry groups from similarly lobbying the government to have its information disseminated with the government’s imprimatur. The government should not be in the business of disseminating information or otherwise determining whether an idea is true.
The right of privacy advocated so strongly (and I would add, correctly) by liberals also protects conservatives and t he causes they champion. The right of privacy and the right to have our own bodies respected from government intrusion applies in the immunization context as well as the other contexts traditionally favored by the Left. Forced immunizations should be presumptively invalid and unconstitutional, but the government should be allowed to offer what the law defines as a “compelling government interest” in order to trump the right of privacy. If the government can identify a specific harm that will be specifically remedied by immunization and cannot be remedied in any other reasonable way, I think it is a proper government function of protecting the health and safety to require all persons to be immunized.
Also, it might be appropriate in some cases for the government to treat the parents of a child not immunized who then contracts a disease for which an immunization was available as guilty of a crime or a form of child abuse.
July 28th, 2009 at 2:27 pmI agree that any information provided is subject to be politicized. However, I would rather they say that wearing a seatbelt could save your life than mandating their use. This has been the case with cigarettes for over 30 years. Individuals ultimately could weigh all the factors and information available and decide what course of action they wish to take and endure whatever consequences that might occur.
As for “compelling government interest”, one can construe that to be a slippery slope. If it is truly “compelling”, a case should be able to be made that will convince the people. Other than when people vote, I have a great deal of faith in people’s ability to make the decision that is right for them.
July 28th, 2009 at 3:13 pmyour site is very great!!!
September 11th, 2009 at 6:37 amgood site, good work, thanks!!!
September 14th, 2009 at 9:09 am