A Call to Action to Oppose New Vaccine Bills


Part 3: A Call to Action to Oppose New Vaccine Bills

by Beth Guidry Hoffman

To those of you concerned with our right to informed consent over our bodies, and parental rights over our children, this is a timely call to action. The right to exercise our beliefs without intervention by the government, which falls under Freedom of Religion, guaranteed under the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, is being challenged with the first of two vaccine bills, H.3999. (1)

Further, the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment provides that a state may not “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Specifically pertaining to elementary and secondary schools, the above clause supports that every child deserves a public education without discrimination. (2)

H.3999, filed on May 31, 2019, by Rep. Andy Vargas (D-Haverhill), would discriminate against families who cannot afford to home school. Parents of vaccine-injured kids, special needs kids who receive services in public schools, and students on IEPs would be forced to choose between: a) vaccinating their children against their beliefs or b) having to home school, where they would lose the services they receive through the public school system.

New bills unleashed on September 4th by Senator Rebecca Rausch (D-Needham) and Rep. Paul Donato (D-Medford), according to an article in the Patch, were “crafted in collaboration with a broad group of public health organizations, constituents and other legislators.” Together, the bills (SD.2548 & HD.4470) are called “The Community Immunity Act.” (3)

Nowhere in the lengthy article is there mention of the vaccine-injured children. Although there are references to exemptions being “standardized” and stating they are shifting “responsibility for exemptions from the local to the state level,” the wording of the Patch article versus that of the actual bill resembles the parable of “The Fox & the Scorpion.” The Patch article is full of smooth talking, well-meaning “do good” proposals for public health. But the wording of the bill takes on a rather draconian tone, painting a broad stroke of control over immunization administration in the quest for “Community Immunity.”

The bill states its immunization program, referred to as a “covered program,” would include “a child care center, a school, whether public, private or charter, that provides education to students in any combination of grade levels from kindergarten to grade 12, inclusive, and including, but not limited to, any school activity open to children who are home schooled; a recreational camp; or an institution of higher education, whether public or private.”

The bill would also allow a “health care provider” to vaccinate a minor “if the minor is mature and capable of providing informed consent”… “when in the provider’s best medical judgment,” the vaccines “would be in the minor’s best interest.” It would also allow the vaccines to be administered, free from any legal ramification on the part of the health care provider.

Yes, the bill actually states: “A provider shall not be subject to … disciplinary action or liable for civil damages or subject to a criminal penalty for a decision under this subsection.”

Translation: A minor—could be deemed capable of providing informed consent—however, a parent is not automatically given the right to informed consent for their child.

Regarding exemptions, the bill says, “the department of public health shall have the exclusive authority to approve or deny exemption applications,” with approved medical exemptions based on “a generally accepted contraindication.” However, contraindications would not likely include many of the possible vaccine reactions, therefore medical exemptions would likely prove difficult to obtain, especially for the already vaccine-injured child. Such measures would disrupt the doctor-patient relationship and violate the parents’ rights to informed consent.

If granted a religious exemption under the bill, “the department shall include in the religious exemption application… that: refusing to immunize the participant may result in serious illness or death of the participant; and refusing to immunize the participant is against public health policy and may result in serious illness or death of others.”

There are facts in the scientific community, however, that are not being acknowledged and research being ignored.  Although you are hearing a lot about concern for the health of “immunocompromised” individuals by the authors of these bills, the very fact that the MMR is a “live” vaccine makes it a concern for those who are immune suppressed. “Some doctors say people with weakened immune systems such as cancer patients recovering from bone marrow transplants shouldn’t get any live vaccine and should keep their distance from anyone who’s recently had one.” (4)

In addition, the efficacy of the current measles vaccine is in question, given that there are different strains of measles. “Measles Genotype B3 has now become the predominant genotype spreading around the globe. Studies show the MMR vaccine doesn’t have the capacity to effectively neutralize measles B3.” (5)

With regard to achieving herd immunity with the measles, an NIH peer reviewed study, co-authored by Dr. Gregory Poland, found that between 2-10% of people fail to create antibodies to the disease(s) contained within the vaccine. Thus, Poland, a highly respected vaccinologist, has publically stated herd immunity with the measles vaccine is an impossibility.

Also, consider that nearly 75% of the population in the U.S. is over 18 years old. Thus, when you hear “vaccine coverage of 95%, this refers only to school children.”(6) Since vaccine immunity wanes between 5-20 years out, and most adults are not up-to-date on vaccines, herd immunity is not achievable—unless every adult is mandated to get the MMR, as well. If we fail to stand up now and successfully oppose these draconian bills, the next bill may be for mandatory adult vaccination.

Lastly—there were 5 childhood vaccine doses in 1962, 24 doses in 1983, and 72 doses in 2018.  With over 270 vaccines currently in development, what do we think the future holds? If true herd immunity cannot be achieved, then why are legislators pressing for extreme vaccine mandates? The time to speak up is now. The call to action is now.

If you oppose these bills:

  1. Call your senator & representative (& additional legislators daily, weekly, etc.) ( Email addresses are also provided.
  2. Ask the aide who answers to “Record my Opposition to H.3339, SD.2548 & HD.4470.” Feel free to express the reason you oppose, but this is not necessary. (unconstitutional/discriminatory/denies informed consent & parental rights, e.g.)
  3. Best strategy of all–Contact the 17 members of the Joint Committee on Public Health ( Email addresses provided. Since a public hearing is likely this fall, now is the time to call.


2 Replies to “A Call to Action to Oppose New Vaccine Bills

    1. Oh, look! A blanket statement made by a provaxxer who doesn’t understand any possible health implications whatsoever when it comes to medicine. Shocker!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *