If and when a
full-scale bio-terror attack occurs, the live pathogens or agents responsible
for the pandemic will likely be dispersed via A) chemtrails
by government airplanes
and/or drones, B) by the U.S.
Postal Service via Tide
detergent samples, C) by the government and medical establishment via tainted
vaccines, or by D) the portable petri dish commonly known as the Trojan
A wealth of recent medical research indicates that vaccines are no longer safe and may cause serious neurological problems, seizures, autism and even death. A recent push by the medical and government establishment in America to make vaccines mandatory may go into effect after a pandemic in which martial military law will be called and personal freedoms like the right to refuse a vaccine will be denied.
In a major bio-terror related pandemic, it will be the tainted vaccines which are ultimately responsible for killing 99% of the victims.
Date: December 23, 2002
Abstract: The eradication of smallpox was one of humanity's great success stories. After thousands of years of suffering at the hands of the virus, the human race gathered all its wit and cunning and conquered the scourge, eradicating it forever. Well, forever lasted less than 25 years. It does not bode well for the future of our species that it took but a blink of the eye for one of history's worst killers to make a comeback — not on its own, mind you, but brought back by humans to kill again.
During the age of innocence — the '90s, during which it seemed history had ended — the big debate was whether the two remaining known stocks of smallpox in the world, one in Russia and the other in the U.S., should be destroyed. It seemed like a wonderful idea, except that no one could be absolutely sure that some smallpox stores had not fallen into other hands. In fact, we now think Iraq is working on weaponizing smallpox, and perhaps North Korea and others too.
The danger is greater now than ever — first, and ironically, because of our very success in eradicating it in the past. People today have almost no experience with, and therefore no immunity to, the virus. We are nearly as virgin a population as the Native Americans who were wiped out by the various deadly pathogens brought over by Europeans. Not content with that potential for mass murder, however, today's bad guys are reportedly trying to genetically manipulate the virus to make it even deadlier and more resistant to treatment. Who knows what monstrosities the monsters are brewing in their secret laboratories.
What to do? We have enough vaccine on hand, some diluted but still effective, to vaccinate everyone in the U.S., with more full-strength versions to come. President Bush has just announced that his Administration will take the concentric-circle approach: mandatory inoculations for certain soldiers, voluntary inoculations for medical and emergency workers, and then inoculations available to, but discouraged for, everybody else.
It sounds good, but it is not quite right. If smallpox were a threat just to individuals, then it could be left up to individuals to decide whether or not they want to protect themselves. When it comes to epidemic diseases, however, we don't leave it up to individuals to decide. The state decides.
Forget about smallpox. This happens every day with childhood diseases. No child can go to school unless he's been immunized. Parents have no choice. Think of it: we force parents to inject healthy children with organisms — some living, some dead — that in a small number of cases will cripple or kill the child. It is an extraordinary violation of the privacy and bodily integrity of the little citizen. Yet it is routine. Why? Because what is at stake is the vulnerability of the entire society to catastrophic epidemic. In that case, individuals must submit.
Which is why smallpox vaccines were mandatory when we were kids. It wasn't left up to you to decide if you wanted it. You might be ready to risk your life by forgoing the vaccine, but society would not let you — not because it was saving you from yourself but because it had to save others from you. The problem wasn't you getting smallpox; the problem was you giving smallpox to others if you got it. Society cannot tolerate that. We forced vaccination even though we knew it would maim and kill a small but certain number of those subjected to it.
Today the case for mandatory vaccination is even stronger. This is war. We need to respond as in war. The threat is not just against individuals, but against the nation. Smallpox kills a third of its victims. If this epidemic were to take hold, it could devastate America as a functioning society. And the government's highest calling is to protect society — a calling even higher than protecting individuals.
That is why conscription in wartime is justified. We violate the freedom of individuals by drafting them into combat, risking their lives — suspending, in effect, their right to life and liberty, to say nothing of the pursuit of happiness — in the name of the nation.
Vaccination is the conscription of civilians in the war against bioterrorism. I personally would choose not to receive the smallpox vaccine. I would not have my family injected. I prefer the odds of getting the disease vs. the odds of inflicting injury or death by vaccination on my perfectly healthy child.
Nonetheless, it should not be my decision. When what is at stake is the survival of the country, personal and family calculation must yield to national interest. And a population fully protected from smallpox is a supreme national interest.
If it is determined that the enemy really has smallpox and might use it, we should vaccinate everyone. We haven't been called upon to do very much for the country since Sept. 11. We can and should do this (TIME, 2002).Title: AMA Paper Proposes Law Forcing People Into Experimental Vaccine Trials
Date: January 27, 2012
Source: Natural Society
Abstract: How would you react if I were to tell you that you or your child were forced to participate in experimental vaccine trials? A paper published by the American Medical Association’s Virtual Mentor wants to do just that. It seems that the amount of current participants in current experimental vaccine trials is a bit too low, so why not create a federal law forcing each person to need to “opt-out” of experimental vaccine trials in an attempt to better society?
AMA Proposes Law ‘Forcing’ Individuals to Participate in Experimental Vaccine Trials
The proposed law is lunacy to say that least, stating that individuals must make a “mandated choice” to participate in such experimental trials. People shouldn’t be automatically enrolled in experimental trials or need to state in advance their decision to “opt-out”. Along with the law will come a customer list for big pharma, where each participant’s information will be shared with the pharmaceutical companies in order to gather trial and field test data. Of course this isn’t so different from how things operate now, where individuals are enrolled into big pharma’s database even if you exempt your child from vaccination. But if big pharma can’t produce enough positive data from those who actually want to volunteer for introducing a new product to the FDA for approval, they may just try to force people to participate or use a segment of the population that is ignorant to the laws surrounding the trials.
What happens if these experimental vaccines cause harm? There are laws already set in place that essentially give vaccine manufacturers immunity to legal repercussions. That is to say that if your child is harmed from a vaccine, the vaccine manufacturers are not financially or morally responsible. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 protects vaccine manufacturers from any liability.
Another example of similar medical and political tyranny is when a document was signed by Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, where both vaccine makers and federal officials were granted complete legal immunity from any repercussions — regardless of whether or not the case is valid. Signed in July of 2009 by Sebelius, the document drew upon the provisions of a law signed in 2006 created for public emergencies. Granting swine flu vaccine makers legal protection and establishing a compensation fund, the legislation allows for vaccine makers to virtually disregard consumer safety.
It is interesting to note that these laws are still needed even though health officials and vaccine makers tout vaccines as being 99.99% effective. But it isn’t so surprising, given the countless occasions in which vaccines have ruined both the lives of children and parents. Furthermore, previous attempts to test the anthrax vaccine on unsuspecting participants went sour after the public was alerted to the shocking history behind the anthrax vaccine. In a 2007 report by the CDC in conjunction with theVaccine Healthcare Centers of the Department of Defense and the watchdog group Government Accountability found that ”between 1 and 2 percent” of vaccinated military personnel experienced ”severe adverse events, which could result in disability or death.”As a result of public outrage, the government called off the testing.
What would even happen if there were complications in future trials? Going by past history with other experimental vaccines, severe complications would probably just be hidden. The controversial trials of experimental AIDS vaccines that led to the loss of innocent lives have already been ignored by mainstream scientists and reporters. Even the scientists responsible for the deaths covered up the situation, failing to report the fatalities of their trials in order to prevent the public from finding out.
Giving big pharma a guaranteed customer list of individuals while simultaneously giving them immunity from lawsuits is quite the deal. Through activism and spreading the word, hopefully such a deal will not be made (Natural Society, 2012).
Title: Texas Now Requiring Meningitis Vaccination For
All College Students
Date: February 13, 2012
Source: Natural News
Effective beginning spring semester 2012 for all students enrolled at both public and private colleges and universities across Texas, the mandate expands a previous one enacted in 2009 that requires only students living on campus to get the shot. And even though all students still have the freedom to decline the vaccination as a matter of conscience or for religious reasons, many of them are not being told this by their schools, and are just going along with it.
Though the entire state of Texas had only 34 reported cases of meningitis among young people between the ages of 15 and 29 in 2009, Gov. Perry, the Texas Medical Association (TMA), and several state senators expressed vehement support for the new bill, S.B. 1107, which further expands the government's reach into the personal health choices of Texans.
Authored by Texas State Senator Wendy Davis (D-Fort Worth), S.B. 1107 is the companion bill to the earlier Jamie Schanbaum Act of 2009, which was enacted beginning January 1, 2010, in honor of Jamie Schanbaum, a University of Texas student who developed Meningococcal Septicemia that ended up causing her to lose both her legs and all ten of her fingers, according to reports.
But rather than continue to give students the option to evaluate the facts and decide for themselves whether or not to get the vaccine, both the Texas state government and the TMA have decided to force it on everyone, despite the fact that the condition is extremely rare. The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) also lists some very serious reported adverse events associated with the meningitis vaccine that include nerve damage, double vision, the deadly skin disease Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, and even death.
The whole charade hearkens back to Gov. Perry's 2007 executive order that mandated Gardasil vaccines for all Texas schoolgirls. This mandate was later repealed, but it appears as though Perry and the other vaccine-pushers in Texas are up to their dirty work once again trying to force chemical injections on the young people of Texas (Natural News, 2012).
Title: Some States Weigh Opt-Out Laws For
Date: February 15, 2012
Source: USA Today
Abstract: Lawmakers in seven states are considering legislation that would make it easier for parents to opt out of mandatory immunization requirements for their children, sparking debate among public health experts and some parents.
All but two states —West Virginia and Mississippi — as well the District of Columbia, allow parents to opt out of school-required vaccines based on religious beliefs, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). Those two states are now considering bills that would allow exemptions because of philosophical beliefs.
West Virginia state Sen. Donna Boley, who is sponsoring a bill, said a philosophical exemption allows parents who object to vaccines to opt out for their own reasons. "I've had parents encourage me for quite some time that would like to be in charge of what's put into their children's bodies," Boley, a Republican, said.
Diane Peterson, an associate director at the Immunization Action Coalition, a group that works to increase immunization rates says "that's not a move in the right direction."
Bills that would allow philosophical exemptions have also been introduced in five other states, Peterson said. Lawmakers in an eighth state, South Dakota, rejected two bills this month. Nineteen states already allow philosophical exemptions, according to the NCSL.
The move to expand that number is alarming many public health experts. Wendell Hoffman, an infectious disease doctor in Sioux Falls, S.D., argues that vaccinations have rid the country of diseases that once ravaged the populace. Those diseases threaten a comeback if more children don't receive vaccinations, he says.
"Your eyes are not deceiving you if you notice that small pox, polio, measles and rubella have been eliminated from the United States in 1949, 1979, 2000 to 2004 respectively," he told South Dakota lawmakers.
The debate over vaccines is also causing more physicians to refuse to treat families that don't vaccinate, said Douglas Diekema, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Washington who has studied the issue for the American Academy of Pediatrics.
"There have always been physicians who have felt this way, but I think they are becoming much more vocal about it, and they're being joined by others," Diekema said.
Barbara Loe Fisher, president of the National Vaccine Information Center in Virginia, supports the exemptions. Until there's more science on vaccines' effects, she said, parents should have the option to exempt their children.
There are movements
in some states to roll back existing exemptions, including in Vermont and
Title: Vaccinate All School Children Against Flu: Experts
Date: May 30, 2012
Abstract: Under the plans a new universial vaccination programme could start in the autumn of 2014 with a nasal spray vaccine, called Fluenz, that avoids the use of needles.
Schoolchildren from the age of five would be vaccinated every year. Currently only children with serious long-term illnesses are given the seasonal flu jab.
A panel of independent experts which advises the government believes the move could save lives and stop flu spreading through the general population.
The panel is in the final stages of evaluating research on vaccinating schoolchildren before formally recommending the expansion of the programme.
Parents were clamouring for flu jabs for their children last year when thousands were still falling ill from the H1N1 swine flu virus but were told they could not have it on the NHS as the vaccine was in short supply.
According to the minutes of a meeting of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation last month, vaccinating children would be both "cost effective" and prevent serious illness in adults.
The minutes state: "Members considered that an extension of the annual influenza vaccination programme should include school-aged children."
Dr George Kassianos, spokesman on immunisation for the Royal College of GPs, told GP magazine that the advisors support for expanding the immunisation programme was ‘extremely welcome’.
"It will be beneficial to children and will benefit other patients as well," he said. "If we can reduce the infection rate among children we can reduce the morbidity and death rate in the community generally, and especially among the elderly."
A study published last year found that immunising healthy children would prevent eight in ten flu infections and free up 790,000 GP appointments a year.
The minutes show the committee, which includes leading paediatricians, said the programme would be cost effective but there are not enough school nurses to implement it at present.
It was warned that such a programme would be received with 'very mixed opinions by parents' and that health professionals could also object.
The committee said it would produce recommendations, which are binding on the Department of Health, at its next meeting.
The new vaccine, made by AstraZeneca, was licensed in December and contains three strains of flu. It is made using hens' eggs so cannot be given to children with a known severe allergy.
It is given in two doses four weeks apart and listed side effects include headache, loss of appetite, fever and muscle pain.
Children already receive 12 jabs against eight diseases by the time they start school.
All seasonal flu vaccines must be updated annually to match the three most common strains of the disease in circulation.
Pregnant women were added to the seasonal flu vaccination programme in 2010 after they were disproportionately affected by the H1N1 swine flu pandemic.
Elderly people over the age of 65, people with long-term conditions of any age and people in care homes and their carers and healthcare workers should be vaccinated annually against flu.
Jackie Fletcher, founder of Jabs campaign group, said: "I can understand targeting particularly vulnerable individuals but to vaccinate all four to 16-year-olds in close quarters at school is a perfect way to spread the disease according to the literature."
Prof Ian Jones, Professor of Virology, University of Reading, said: “Vaccinating all school children, regardless of whether they are high risk or not, has been discussed before and was an option when pandemic flu appeared to be targeting the young.
“There is very strong evidence of benefits from vaccinating all children as not only does it protect the vaccinated child, but it also benefits society generally as children act as ‘superspreaders’.
"There are many safety tests that are gone through and this particular vaccine has been used extensively in the US. It’s also extremely unlikely that there could be any issue of ‘over-vaccinating’ as it is a nasal spray."
Prof Adam Finn, Professor of Paediatrics, University of Bristol Medical School, said: “The catalyst for this interest is the arrival of a new nasal flu vaccine, which is very easy to give and is licensed for children from age two. There are, essentially no safety concerns about the nasal flu vaccine.
“The only country in Europe that is giving universal childhood vaccinations is Finland. There they are using the old injected vaccine but uptake is not great. Most of the data and experience comes from the USA. The Japanese took this approach for a long time but then gave up in the late 1980s / early 1990s.
“We are currently doing a series of studies in Bristol on acceptability, cost-benefit and the impact of such a proposal. My impression is that there is a need for more research before a decision is made.”
“Each year the World Health Organisation will still advise which mix of flu strains need to be protected against, so this will not do away with the need for regular updates.”
The panel is expected to make a statement to the Department of Health on the plans next month.
A Department of Health spokesman said: "The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation has said it is unable at this stage to recommend an extension of the flu vaccination programme as there are a number of issues that it believes need further consideration, for example the public response to such a programme.
"Extending the vaccination programme to healthy children would be a huge undertaking, increasing the number of people who get the vaccine, so it is important that we get this decision absolutely right.
"In the meantime, we continue to recommend that people in at risk groups, 65s and over and pregnant women do get vaccinated — they are the most at risk from suffering complications. The JCVI is clear that is the current priority” (Telegraph, 2012).
Title: Shingles Jab To Be Given To All OAPs In Their 70s
Date: July 27, 2012
Abstract: Up to 4.5 million OAPs aged in their 70s could be given the free vaccination from next year.
The Department of Health (DoH) confirmed the plans on Friday following advice from the advisory panel on immunisation.
Around one in four adults, mainly the elderly, will develop shingles, a painful condition caused by the reactivation of the chicken pox virus.
While they can cause burning rash, headache and muscle pain for up to four weeks as the immune system weakens, debilitating nerve pain often persists for months.
The lingering pain from shingles is known as postherpetic neuralgia. The
virus lies dormant in the spine following recovery from chickenpox.
Only one shingles jab is required, unlike a flu injection, which has to be administered every year.
Ministers first announced a vaccination programme in January 2010 but it has been delayed by supply problems to the NHS.
Drug manufacturers say the vaccine is difficult to produce and overseas contracts were already signed and consequently needed to be met first.
But the DoH’s Joint Committee of Vaccination and Immunisation has now admitted there may be “sufficient supply” to implement the plans.
Free vaccinations for those aged between 70 and 79 could now be available by next year, according to minutes of a meeting last month, uncovered by GP magazine.
A small supply of the injections is already available on the NHS but very few patients or doctors are aware they exist.
Earlier this month, health officials bought 60,000 doses from drug manufactures with any patient aged over 50 is entitled to a free jab while stocks last. The cost of the plans have not been publicy disclosed.
Campaigners welcomed the news.
“This is really significant for older people's enjoyment of life,” Marian Nicholson, director of the Shingles Support Group, told the Daily Mail. “One lady I spoke to said it was like childbirth but lasted far longer, and with no baby.
“You just can't predict who is going to suffer.”
Figures show that more than 250,000 adults are infected with singles, which is most common in people aged over 50 and is the most severe in the elderly.
A DoH spokeswoman has said: "We want to introduce a national
shingles immunisation programme and are disappointed that there is not enough
vaccine available to do this" (Telegraph, 2012).
Employees Urged To Get Flu Shots
Date: September 28, 2012
Source: Washington Post
Abstract: Federal employees should take advantage of the free flu vaccine available to them at work and agencies also should consider providing the vaccine for free to contractor employees who work near them, according to guidance issued this week.
“The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that all persons 6 months of age and older, with some exceptions, get their seasonal flu vaccine as soon as possible. It is no longer necessary to determine if someone is in a high-risk group for flu to receive the flu vaccine, because virtually everyone can benefit,” according to a memo from the Office of Personnel Management and the Health and Human Services Department.
As special agent-in-charge at the National Archives, Maltagliati tracks down missing U.S. historical documents.
Stafford has spent the summer as a National Park Service intern, helping to monitor the health of 10 streams along the George Washington Memorial Parkway.
Barbara Bovbjerg, of the Government Accountability Office, keeps a close eye on retirement issues for Congress.
The memo said that influenza vaccine “is free to federal employees in federal health clinics across the country” and that providing it free to contractor employees is allowed if the contractors are located with or have substantial physical proximity to agency employees. “This conclusion is supported by a policy position that such vaccination is justified in order to maintain the health of agency employees and to maximize the productivity of agency operations,” the memo said.
The agencies issued similar guidance ahead of the flu season last year.
The memo also recommends
that employees take “everyday preventive actions” against the spread of flu
germs such as washing their hands and staying away from work if they are sick (Washington Post, 2012).
To Get Your Flu Shot: What You Need To Know
Date: September 28, 2012
Source: Fox News
Abstract: It’s that time of the year again—time to get your flu shot. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is urging everyone above 6 months of age to get their flu shots now. Last year, about 46 percent of people were vaccinated. But this year, there are several gentler and tailored options—meaning fewer reasons to skip it.
“Flu season begins in October and peaks in January and February, so we feel the quicker people can get vaccinated the better,” said Dr. Michael Jhung, medical officer in the influenza division of the CDC. “We’ve already seen some cases,” he said. It takes about two weeks after vaccination for antibodies to develop in the body and provide protection against the flu.
Pregnant women are strongly urged to get vaccinated because they have an increased risk of hospitalization and death if they get the flu while pregnant. Last season, about 47 percent of pregnant women were vaccinated against the flu.
This year’s vaccination is slightly different from last year’s. It contains three parts. Like last years, it contains one part that protects against H1N1, formerly known as swine flu. But the two other components, which protect against H3N2 and influenza B viruses, are slightly tweaked.
If you’re afraid of needles, you can seek out the intradermal shot, which uses a thinner and shorter needle that only penetrates your skin and does not go into the muscle. “You can barely feel it,” said Jhung. It’s about 10 percent the size of a regular needle, which probes deeper into your muscles. The intradermal shots don’t contain the preservative thimerasol either, but they do have a slightly higher risk of local reactions like redness and itching on your arm. Also, it’s only available for those between the ages of 18 and 64.
Another gentler option for those aged 2 to 49 is the nasal-spray flu vaccine. It’s made with live, weakened flu viruses, rather than the dead viruses used in the shots. The viruses in the nasal spray vaccine do not cause the flu, but it is only recommended for healthy people, and not recommended for pregnant women.
Those older than 65 may want to talk to their doctors about getting the high potency shot, which became available last year. “Older individuals have a decline in their immune response,” said Jhung. They may need a stronger dose to stimulate their immune systems into action. The CDC does not necessarily recommend it, but those older than 65 should discuss the option with their physician. It does not come with any increased risks.
Getting a flu shot doesn’t necessarily mean you won’t get the flu. The shot is only about 60 percent effective in preventing the flu. That means that about 40 percent of people who have been vaccinated will still get the flu. That’s because there may be a slight mismatch in what the shot protects against and the virus that is circulating. Also, some people may be exposed to the virus right after getting the shot, before their immunity kicked in, or in some people, like older individuals, their immune systems did not have a strong enough response to the vaccination.
“The flu shot is by far the best way to protect against influenza,” said Jhung. Plus, if you have been vaccinated and do still get the flu, your symptoms will likely be milder. The chances of having serious complications that land people in the hospital are smaller if they’ve been vaccinated.
Flu shots are
available through doctor’s offices, local health clinics and many drugstores
and even big box stores like Walgreens and Target (Fox News, 2012).
Hospital Employees’ Jobs In Jeopardy If They Don’t Get Flu Shot
Date: October 4, 2012
Source: CBS Denver
Abstract: Hospital employees across Colorado are being threatened with their jobs if they don’t get the flu shot by the end of the year.
This requirement is being implemented now even though the State of Colorado only requires more than half of all employees to receive the vaccination. The mandate for all employees doesn’t take effect for several years.
These health care workers feel they are being given a choice: get a flu shot or lose your job.
“I don’t want to get the flu shot and to me it seems I’m getting forced to put a virus into my body that I object to,” said one hospital employee who didn’t want to be identified.
The new state health regulations require flu shots for health care workers to be phased in over the next several years. Right now 60 percent are required.
Almost all hospitals in Colorado, including Exempla Lutheran, have made the vaccinations mandatory.
When asked what happens when employees tell their supervisors they aren’t going to get the flu shot, Exempla Lutheran nurse Renie Lindgren said, “Everyone seems to be compliant.”
At Exempla Lutheran those employees who refuse can be suspended. At Denver Health Medical Center, Centura Health and Banner Health, employees who don’t get a flu shot by the end of the year will be suspended and then fired.
When asked if it is fair to threaten employees with the loss of their jobs, Colorado Hospital Association President and CEO Steven Summer said, “We need to have a workforce available when the public needs it if they are sick. I think people choose to work in a hospital.”
The only way to avoid a flu shot requirement is for medical reasons. In those cases, health care workers are required to wear masks.
“For people already being hit with the ultimatum of it is the shot or your job, I would ask where are they at with the percentages,” said National Vaccination Information Center spokeswoman Theresa Wrangham.
Hospitals said it’s not a matter of just meeting the 60 percent compliance requirement, employees must follow their policies.
“To me it’s against your civil rights. I can see you are trying to protect patients and all of that and I get that but I feel I should have the choice to take a shot or wear a mask,” said the unidentified hospital worker.The Colorado Department of Public Health said if hospitals want to go beyond the current flu shot requirements that is up to them. The hospitals maintain their policies are for the protection of their employees, patients and the public (CBS Denver, 2012).
Title: R.I. Becomes First State To Mandate Flu
Shots For Health-Care Workers
Date: October 5, 2012
Source: Providence Journal
Abstract: Rhode Island today became the first state in the nation to mandate seasonal flu shots for all health-care workers.
Overriding the objections of health-care workers' unions and the Rhode Island affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union, Health Director Michael D. Fine filed new regulations requiring seasonal flu shots for doctors, nurses and others -- employees, temporary workers and volunteers -- working for hospitals, nursing homes, home-care agencies and other health-care organizations.
Workers can be exempted from the requirement for documented medical reasons. They can also sign a form saying that they refuse to get immunized. But those who are not immunized will have to wear a surgical mask for each patient contact during "a period when flu is widespread," as declared by the health director (Providence Journal, 2012).
U.S. Panel Advises All Pregnant Women Get Pertussis Booster
Date: October 24, 2012
Abstract: An advisory committee for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention voted on Wednesday to recommend that pregnant women be immunized against pertussis during each pregnancy in hopes of stemming a growing U.S. outbreak of the illness, also known as whooping cough.
Giving a booster shot during pregnancy increases the chances that antibodies from the mother will be passed along to her baby, offering the infant increased protection until the child is old enough be immunized, starting at two months.
According to the CDC, the United States is on track to have the most reported cases of whooping cough since 1959, with more than 32,000 cases reported so far this year, including 16 deaths, most of which occurred in infants.
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices favored the expanded use of the whooping cough booster shot given to adolescents and adults, known as Tdap, by a vote of 14-0 with one abstention, the CDC said.
The childhood vaccine, called DTaP, is given in a series of five shots starting at two months.
The recommendation builds on the panel's decision in June 2011 to offer the vaccine during pregnancy only to women who have not previously been immunized.
According to the panel, providers of prenatal care should offer the booster shots regardless of the patient's history of receiving Tdap. If not given during pregnancy, Tdap should be given immediately after delivery, before leaving the hospital or birthing center.Whooping cough typically begins with cold-like symptoms such as a fever, runny nose and sneezing and is accompanied by a mild cough that grows more severe by the first or second week. A high-pitched whoop, giving the illness its name, can follow violent coughing fits (Reuters, 2012).
Health Care Workers Face Firing Over Flu Shots: Union
Date: October 24, 2012
Source: CTV News
Abstract: The Health Sciences Association of B.C. is concerned that workers could lose their jobs if they don’t comply with a new provincial policy requiring health care workers either get a flu shot or wear a mask during flu season.
Union president Reid Johnson said while they encourage members to get the flu shot, people ultimately have the right to make their own health choices.
Reid is worried that workers who do not comply could be punished.
“We got a directive recently from the Health Employers Association of B.C. that the provincial medical health officer said this is the way it’s going to be and if you don’t comply you could be fired,” Reid said. “We weren't even consulted on it.”
Reid wants the policy withdrawn because it’s punitive and a violation of privacy rights.
“Maybe they've had bad allergic reactions to it,” he said. “They might have personal, philosophical or even religious reasons why they don't want to get vaccinated.”
B.C.’s provincial health officer Dr. Perry Kendall said the policy will prevent the spread of the flu, which can be deadly for elderly patients.
“Its not mandatory flu shots it’s an influenza control program,” Kendall said. “Unfortunately, despite all our efforts on educating and getting voluntary compliance, on average, the health care worker influenza [immunization] rates across Canada have been below 50 per cent.”
Kendall said the new policy, which was based on similar systems in the U.S., is needed to protect patients.
“If people can't for medical reasons, or won't for conscientious objection reasons, then we think that wearing the mask will provide a significant degree of protection for the patient,” Kendall said.The union wants to meet with employers to discuss the policy before it comes into effect Dec. 1 (CTV News, 2012).
Some Erlanger Employees Resist Flu Shots; Dr. Creel Says They Are Necessary To
Help Prevent Deadly Flu Outbreak
Date: October 27, 2012
Source: The Chattanoogan
Abstract: employees to have the annual influenza vaccination or possess "an approved qualified exception." The new policy has some Erlanger employees, who have qualms about flu shots, starting a petition drive.
Erlanger spokesperson Pat Charles said, "Erlanger joins a long list of leading health care systems across the country, including Johns Hopkins Hospital, making employee vaccinations mandatory in order to better protect vulnerable patients from the potentially deadly flu virus."
She said Dr. James Creel, Erlanger’s chief medical officer, is a strong proponent of mandatory vaccinations for hospital employees.
He said, “As the leading and largest healthcare provider in this region, Erlanger is ethically obligated to take every precaution to prevent the spread of influenza and to keep our patients, co-workers and others safe from acquiring the flu virus in a healthcare setting. People come to us with the expectation of getting well and we should give them that assurance,” he stated.
There are 173 signatures thus far on an online petition "Stop the Flu Shot Mandate for Erlanger Employees."
Beth Jolley, who is leading the petition drive, said, "This year, Erlanger Health System in Chattanooga, TN, is imposing an influenza vaccine mandate on all of its employees as a condition of employment (in other words, if you don't receive a flu shot, you will be terminated). There are many employees who have personal convictions for not wanting to receive the flu vaccine but are not allowed to opt out unless they have a 'valid medical reason'. Whether or not you get a flu shot or believe they are beneficial, PLEASE sign this petition if you believe Erlanger employees should have the right to decide if getting a flu shot is in the best interests of their own personal well-being. THANK YOU!!!"
She wrote this letter:
System Infection Control Director,
I am writing to you out of concern for Erlanger's new mandate that all of its employees receive the influenza vaccination as a condition of employment. I realize this is a controversial issue, but for some employees that I have talked to, there is a real fear of taking vaccines due to the abundance of information available regarding their potential risks. I believe that vaccines Erlanger feels are important should be offered, but not forced upon their employees. I have asked others who believe this is a personal decision that should be decided by the individual healthcare worker to sign this petition. My research has led me to discover that imposing such a mandate is legal in the state of Tennessee. However, just because something is legal, doesn't necessarily mean it's the right thing to do.
Below are some of the reasons one may not want to receive the flu shot and should be able to opt out for philosophical/personal objections if they so choose:
1) Dr. J. Anthony Morris (former Chief Vaccine Control Officer at the FDA) states: "There is no evidence that any influenza vaccine thus far developed is effective in preventing or mitigating any attack of influenza. The producers of these vaccines know that they are worthless, but they go on selling them anyway."
2) Direct from the 2012-2013 FDA website's FLUVIRIN® Formula information page: "FLUVIRIN® has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility.”
3) FLUVIRIN® contains two and half times the formaldehyde (embalming fluid and a known carcinogen according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human services) as the level listed as "an immediate danger to life and health" by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
4) Flu shots contain thimerosal (49% mercury, a toxic chemical, by volume) as a preservative, in the amount of 25 micrograms. This is 250 times the EPA's safety limit of exposure
5) Erlanger employees are responsible people who will opt to wear a mask should they exhibit any flu symptoms or will stay home from work when necessary.
6) "The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is a strong supporter of appropriate education, ready access and signed declination statements for HCP vaccinations... Influenza vaccination exemptions should be allowed for HCP with valid medical contraindications to vaccinations, or religious and/or personal objections.”? OSHA: "Every year there are numerous circulating strains of influenza that are not included in the vaccine. In years where the antigenic match is good, the vaccine only provides protection against the 3 strains in the formulation. In years when the antigenic match is poor, the vaccine may provide no protection at all. The limits of current influenza vaccine technology are especially problematic in the context of a mandatory influenza vaccination program that results in job loss. Lastly, reliance on a mandatory influenza vaccination policy may provide healthcare workers, health care facility management and patients with an unwarranted sense of security and result in poor adherence to other infection control practices that prevent all types of infections, not just influenza. Influenza vaccination has always been just one part of a comprehensive multi-layered infection control program."
“The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), a national organization of physicians in all specialties founded in 1943 to preserve the sanctity of the patient-physician relationship, objects strenuously to any coercion of healthcare personnel to receive influenza immunization.” The AAPS further states, “It is a fundamental human right not to be subjected to medical interventions without fully informed consent.” The National Vaccine Information Center states, "It is unfair, irresponsible and unethical for employers to force health care workers to choose between their health, their deeply held spiritual or
conscientious beliefs or their job."
If not this year, it is my sincere hope that Erlanger will reconsider imposing vaccination mandates on its employees in the future. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Beth Jolley, MA, CCC-SLP
Erlanger employee for five and a half years (The Chattanoogan, 2012).
TriHealth 'Fires' Workers Without Flu Shots
Date: November 24, 2012
Abstract: Health system TriHealth had a message for 150 employees Wednesday: We really mean it this time.
The 150 workers who didn’t get the required flu shots by the Nov. 16 deadline received termination notices the day before Thanksgiving.
To keep their jobs, they need a flu shot by Dec. 3.
“The flu vaccine still is the best way to protect our employees and our patients against the flu,” spokesman Joe Kelley said.
TriHealth required all 10,800 employees to get flu shots. This is the third year it’s issued terminations for failure to get vaccinations.
TriHealth operates Good Samaritan and Bethesda North hospitals, the Queen City Physicians and Group Health Associates doctors groups and Hospice of Cincinnati.
It has offered the shots for free since Oct. 1 and will continue to offer them through Dec. 3.
Several of the region’s biggest health systems also require flu shots. Insurers and employers often recommend them to fight off the flu, but health systems are increasingly adamant in an effort to protect patients.
Some have gone even further.
Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center in previous years has restricted access to patient rooms for everyone except families during flu season (Cincinnati, 2012).