BACK TO SCHOOL AND MANDATORY HEALTH DECISIONS

A local newspaper recently reminded parents about the three responsibilities they needed to fulfill before their children went back to school. These included:

1. New clothing for the upcoming year

2. New school supplies

3. Vaccination schedules completed

If the intent of this newspaper article was to recommend vaccinations to protect children’s HEALTH, why did their recommendations stop there? Why didn’t they mention other important HEALTHY options including:

1. A refrigerator filled with vegetables and fruits to snack on

2. The purchasing of new sporting supplies for OUTDOOR play

3. Quality family time to support a child’s self esteem

4. The importance of quality home cooked BALANCED meals

5. The importance of social interaction through after school programs and/or religious youth programs

Whether you support or oppose vaccinations, everyone can agree good health is not achieved or maintained as a result of this medical treatment alone. Why then do the options for children’s “health needs” seem to end with a syringe? Vaccinations do not prevent or treat obesity, type 2 diabetes, gall bladder disease, elevated cholesterol, or elevated blood pressure in children. Why is so much focus and controversy centered around one medical procedure when basic ESSENTIAL health requirements (exercise, nutrition, sleep, hydration and stress reduction) are barely discussed (let alone mandated?)

VACCINATIONS DO NOT SAFEGUARD CHILDREN FROM THESE CONDITIONS

.

As a COMMON SENSE doctor it is important for me to understand as complete a picture as possible before making any recommendations to patients. When questions lead to more unresolved questions, it becomes difficult to jump on board and follow recommendations just because “they have withstood the test of time.”

When it comes to the concept of vaccinations, I have questions I have been unable to find answers to. I welcome all readers to offer any tangible credible independent evidence they possess to share with all of us. Here are my questions:

The following code legally removed PHARMACEUTICAL LIABILITY as of October 1, 1988 for ANY INJURY OR DEATH sustained from adverse side effects from any existing OR FUTURE vaccine.

1. 42 U.S. Code § 300aa–22 – Standards of responsibility | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute: Unavoidable adverse side effects; warnings

   No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings.

2. Direct warnings

   No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, solely due to the manufacturer’s failure to provide direct warnings to the injured party (or the injured party’s legal representative) of the potential dangers resulting from the administration of the vaccine manufactured by the manufacturer.

   How were vaccine pharmaceutical manufacturers able to get Congress to legislate a law indemnifying them from any lawsuit seeking compensation for injuries or death when every other manufacturer remains culpable for injuries or death?

In 1983 the vaccine schedule for children 0-6 years old consisted of 10 vaccines. As of 2015 the recommended vaccine schedule had increased to 36-38 for children 0-6 years of age. My questions are as follows:

• Has third party independent research shown a significant reduction in childhood mortality as a result of these 26-28 additional vaccines used between 1983 to 2015?

• Has ANY research demonstrated the safety/risk factors for COMBINING 3,4 or even 5 vaccinations performed in one office visit on children under 6 years of age over a 5 -10 year study?

•  Has ANY research demonstrated the LONG TERM (lifetime) safety/risk factors for vaccinations?

• Why is congress working toward passing legislation mandating adults receive vaccinations from 18 years of age until death? Is there research showing 130 doses (the new increased number of lifetime vaccines that would be required by law) efficacious for preventing mortality from these diseases? Where can we find these mortality tables (if they exist?)

These are all reasonable questions that deserve answers regardless of whether or not one supports or opposes vaccinations. It is our responsibility to ourselves and our children to ensure our government and health care system discloses honest information without conflicting interests influencing their decisions.

.

I’ll close this article with an interesting Supreme Court decision for you to consider:

“On February 23, 2011, one day after the Supreme Court blocked lawsuits against drug companies for failing to make vaccines safer, they cleared the way for lawsuits against car manufacturers for failing to make seat belts safer.” (Supreme Court of the United States. Williamson et al v. Maza Motor of America, Inc et al. No. 08-1314. Argued November 3, 2010 – Decided February 23, 2011)

Maybe it’s time we consider shifting our focus to ESSENTIAL LIFESTYLE NEEDS and the quality of health benefits it offers rather than focusing so much effort on one medical procedure being forced upon parents today. If this idea doesn’t produce a positive outcome, couldn’t we always return to the current program? What does the health care field FEAR including this type of option? After all, if they are right, future compliance wouldn’t requiring mandating. Fear of death would cause families to line up waiting their turn to receive their inoculations.

 

Tags: children, disease, health, health care, lifestyle, quality of life, vaccines