Senator Barbara Boxer (D) and Representative Anna Eshoo (D-Palo Alto), have proposed federal legislation that would for the first time impose Federal, as opposed to State, vaccine mandates to attend an educational program. The legislators' bill entitled A Head Start on Vaccinations Act would require all children enrolled in Head Start to get all of the vaccinations recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) according to the CDC's timetable. There would be no exemptions for religious or personnel beliefs. Read More...and Take ActionIndeed, Monterey Herald reports the ladies' plan to introduce the federal bill next week. Alto tried to exercise her comedic abilities when she said, "This bill is a 'booster shot' for our nation's vaccine policies and will mitigate the spread of deadly disease." Get it?
They swooned "the genius" of American scientists for creating vaccines to eradicate polio and emphasize that this bill is necessary making sure over a million "of our children" are protected from deadly disease. But repeating the term "deadly disease" does not wipe out the fact that zero people have died from measles since the early 2000s, that many of the people who got measles from California were vaccinated, and that 108 people that we know of have died after getting measles vaccines. And the tragic results of the polio vaccine are a whole other story. And another.
Medical exemptions would still be allowed under the federal bill, but those are extremely rare and difficult to obtain.
Since writing about California's proposal to eliminate any school children vaccine waivers for personal beliefs - it turns out, multiple states have either passed, or are in the process of moving similar bills through. Many of them surround tightening exemptions by requiring the parents to submit to a medical consult (intimidation, warning) before being allowed to opt their children out. Again, this is setting the stage for things to come. Exemptions were always viewed as "loopholes" from the start, with time limits set to "close the loop."
Isn't it interesting how an outbreak of measles, now on its way out in California, could have so many lawmakers at the helm ready to "take swift (permanent) action"? The infamous historical battle cry that precedes the complete loss of human rights and gains of abuse: We have to do something NOW! Because of A we must do B - it's for the children! They sure do write quickly when they need to accomplish something.
One woman writing for Thinking Mom's Revolution summarized some reasons why proposals for such new mandates are unsurprising, and why so many people never get to hear important medical information - my emphasis added:
One word: Profit. As of 1988, vaccine makers and the doctors who administer vaccines bear no liability for vaccine injury (23). They cannot be held accountable by law for adverse events from vaccination. In fact, the entire adverse event reporting system (VAERS) is voluntary! This means that the more aggressive our vaccine schedule, the more profitable it is for vaccine makers. But what about the Centers for Disease Control, don't they direct the vaccines our children really need? Please note that the CDC uses worldwide disease data to formulate our policies, which makes no sense at all. How could one possibly compare a malnourished child living in unsanitary conditions and subsequently exposed to illness to a child exposed to that same illness in a first-world country? I invite parents to take a look at the resumes of some of the heads of pharmaceutical companies and members of the CDC like this one (24). One can very clearly see those in charge of vaccine policy have a dangerous conflict of interest with those who profit from that policy. Remember, pharmaceutical companies contributed $34 million dollars in campaign funds in 2014 (25). It would behoove anyone attempting office these days to err on the side of 'big pharma.'What a sweet gig! As Vaccine Liberation Army points out, there are over 200 new vaccines in the pipeline - do parents really want to risk losing the ability to refuse future potentially mandated vaccines? By corralling the public, and closing all exits, the government in tandem with pharmaceutical corps and their medical community underlings would have carte blanche over your body.
Add to that, the fact that nearly all media - currently spewing forceful vaccine tripe - in the U.S. is owned by "The Big Six" corporations. Who are some of their sponsors? And if Comcast finally succeeds in the planned merger with Time Warner, wouldn't that take our big six down to "The Big Five"?
Media outlets have thrown any thin veil of credibility out the window. For instance, USA Today introducing the idea of jailing or suing parents for not vaccinating their children by posing it as a question in a headline. Before, no one would have thought to ask that. Even doctors with all of their prestige, cannot "opt-out" of playing ball. "Revoke the license of any doctor who opposes vaccination" says a widely-circulated Washington Post op-ed. Those media polls are to gauge YOU - and your reactions. So, it should come as no surprise that people who were merely in the thinking, searching, and health conscious kind of way, suddenly find themselves painted as a fabricated neo-conspiracy theorist.
Marxists like to comment on "the tyranny of choice" for consumers. Don't you mean the illusion of choice? An American can barely choose what information they are allowed to hear, let alone a medical procedure they want - or don't want.
About the author
Heather Callaghan is a natural health blogger and food freedom activist. You can see her work at NaturalBlaze.com and ActivistPost.com.