Deadly anemia drugs like Procrit made billions – FDA kept their dangers a secret to protect pharma profits

via: NaturalNews
Monday, August 06, 2012
By: J. D. Heyes

[NaturalNews] The agencies and bureaucracies of our Leviathan government were created for our own good, we are constantly told, which is also the excuse we’re given anytime a group of lawmakers or citizens calls for any of them to be dismantled.

That excuse may no longer hold water for the Food and Drug Administration which, according to a recent Washington Post report, could have some liability in covering for a drug that a growing body of research says is dangerous and deadly.

For many years, the report said, three drugs known as Epogen, Procrit and Aranesp were among the top-selling prescription drugs in the U.S., raking in more than $8 billion annually for a pair of Big Pharma corporations – Amgen and Johnson & Johnson. In fact, these two companies were stars among stars; for a number of years, Epogen was the single costliest medicine under Medicare, costing U.S. taxpayers as much as $3 billion a year.

“The trouble, as a growing body of research has shown, is that for about two decades, the benefits of the drug – including ‘life satisfaction and happiness’ according to the FDA-approved label – were wildly overstated, and potentially lethal side effects, such as cancer and strokes, were overlooked,” the Washington Post reported.

Shocking, to say the least, but there’s more.

Medicare researches last year said, in an 84-page study, that they found among most kidney patients – the original and largest market for the trio of drugs – no solid evidence the medications made anyone feel better, improved their chances of survival or even had any “clinical benefit” outside of elevating one statistic for red blood cell count.

So while the drug companies had made tens of billions in profits over more than two decades, much of it from unsuspecting taxpayers, millions of patients were given dangerous doses of the medications to no advantage.

How?

Economic incentives, willing participants, congressional liability

“To answer the question, The Washington Post obtained the agreements between the drug makers and the Food and Drug Administration, reviewed thousands of pages of transcripts and company reports, and relied on new academic research, some by doctors who once administered the drugs but now look askance at the drug makers’ original claims,” the paper reported.

The paper said part of the blame comes from economic incentives built into the U.S. healthcare system, which can lead to inefficiencies and potentially deadly uses for drugs. But there is more here than simply that.

Drug makers cannot and will not manufacture and market drugs at a loss, that much is a given. But the FDA, according to the Post’s report, shares as much blame as anyone for this travesty. So, too, does Congress.

The paper said Amgen launched a well-funded research and lobbying campaign that was ultimately successful to win “far-reaching approvals” from the FDA. But both companies held drug trials that obviously missed (or ignored) the dangers while touting benefits that, 22 years later, would be disclosed as unfounded.

They also took more than 10 years to fulfill research commitments to the FDA, which – finally – moved to reign in the largest doses of the drugs. The agency was then stifled in its efforts by a “high-powered lobbying effort” aimed at Congress until lawmakers forced regulators to back off.

‘It was just easy to do’

Sound familiar?

The paper also points an accusing finger at doctors and hospitals.

“Americans might like to think that doctors focus on only their health. But physicians and hospitals have to pay the bills, too, and, in some cases, the more they treat a patient, the more they earn. This was especially true in the case of the anemia drugs: The bigger the dose, the more they made,” said the Post.

Incentives offered to them by the drug makers to increase doses ultimately worked. By 2007, some 80 percent of 175,000 dialysis patients on Medicare were being given the drugs at levels above what the FDA believes now is safe.

“It was just so easy to do – you put this stuff in the patient’s arm, and you made thousands of dollars,” Charles Bennett, endowed chair at the Medication Safety and Efficacy Center of Economic Excellence at the University of South Carolina and a critic of the use of the drugs in cancer patients, told the paper. “An oncologist could make anywhere from $100,000 to $300,000 a year from this alone. And all the while they were told that it was good for the patient.”

Sources:

http://www.washingtonpost.com

http://www.naturalnews.com/023852_patients_drugs_drug.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/Big_Pharma.html

http://www.drugs.com/stats/procrit

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Lethal chicken disease created by ‘gene-swapping’ vaccines – Harbinger of things to come?

via: NaturalNews
Sunday, August 05, 2012
By: Scott Morefield

[NaturalNews] In yet another example of mad science gone awry, approximately 7 to 17 percent of the chicken population of Australia’s two main chicken producing states, Victoria and New South Wales, has died as a result of two deadly new disease strains; strains created when three vaccines used to prevent the herpes virus infectious laryngotracheitis in chickens ‘unexpectedly’ swapped genes. The disease normally kills five percent of the chicken populations it infects, so in this case the ‘solution’ has turned out to be far worse than the original potential problem.

In Australia there are usually two similar live virus vaccinations against the virus, which causes mild to severe respiratory disease (difficulty breathing, sneezing, coughing) in chickens. However, because of shortages in 2008/2009, a new European vaccine was introduced. Because of the use of multiple live virus vaccines in the same poultry population, an entirely new, more virulent, disease has been created, one that results in death for a significant percentage of the population it was meant to protect. According to the journal Science, “These findings highlight the risks of using multiple different attenuated herpes virus vaccines, or vectors, in the same populations.”

Joanne Devlin, a lecturer at the School of Veterinary Science at the University of Melbourne and the lead author of the paper detailing the problem, wrote, “To try to understand the origin of the new field strains, what we did is sequence the entire genome of the new field strains and we also sequenced the genome of the vaccine strains at the time.” Similar elements to the two vaccines were found in the new viruses.

Move on, nothing to see here

Devlin also acknowledges that the new, deadly variants were possible because the vaccines contained live viruses. Not to worry; however. The University of Melbourne’s Ian Gust assures us that this couldn’t possibly occur in humans because chickens and people are vaccinated using different methods and different strains of the herpes virus. Since the herpes virus is delivered with three entirely different diseases, measles, mumps, and rubella, we are told it cannot breed across various species. Currently, there are five live virus vaccines given to humans – measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, and polio. What could possibly go wrong?

Continue Reading At: NaturalNews.com

Microchip-Laden Drugs Given FDA Approval

via: GreenMedInfo
By: Sayer Ji
August 3, 2012

Rumors regarding the development of a ‘digital pill’ with a microchip inside have been circulating for some time, but today, the FDA actually green lighted the product.

The company, Proteus Digital Health, gained FDA approval for its 1 square millimeter device (the size of a grain of sand), which it believes will “shift the care paradigm” into an era of digital medicine.

According to Proteus Digital Health’s website:

Digital Medicines are the same pharmaceuticals you take today, with one small change: each pill also contains a tiny sensor that can communicate, via our digital health feedback system, vital information about your medication-taking behaviors and how your body is responding.

The company added “As a result, you can be sure you’re taking your medicines as prescribed, while at the same time receiving unprecedented feedback on your physical response to treatment.”

The aim of the “ingestible sensor” is to electronically verify patient compliance in taking the medication.

Continue Reading At: GreenMedInfo.com

Collusion Between Pharmaceutical Industry and Government Deepens

via: Mercola
by: Dr. Mercola
August 2, 2012

There’s no shortage of stories detailing conflicts of interest—so many in fact that you may be getting sick and tired of hearing of them. However, this is a truly important issue that must be tackled, and one of the ways of doing that is by exposing it to the harsh light of day. As long as people remain unaware, or turn a blind eye, it will continue unabated.

The price we pay for not paying attention is the loss of health, as the information disseminated by grossly compromised health agencies is skewed in favor of various industries, with Big Pharma leading the pack as one of the most powerful political and governmental influences.

Here, I will review two important revolving-door cases, and while neither is recent news, many of you may still be unaware of them.

Former CDC Director Now President of Merck’s Vaccine Unit

In the summer of 2011, Merck president Julie Gerberding said in a news interview¹ that she’s “very bullish on vaccines,” as she recounted the various ways she helps Merck sell its products. What she didn’t divulge was her motivation for leaving her job as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—an agency charged with overseeing vaccines and drug companies—and join Merck in the first place, back in January 2010.

If you don’t see the enormity of the influence her former high-level ties to the CDC can have, just consider the fact that Merck makes 14 of the 17 pediatric vaccines recommended by the CDC, and 9 of the 10 recommended for adults, and while vaccine safety advocates are trying to rein in the number of vaccines given to babies, safety concerns keep falling on deaf ears. The vaccine industry is booming, and it’s become quite clear that profit potential is the driving factor behind it.

One of the reasons for this is because vaccine patents do not expire like drugs do, so each vaccine adopted for widespread use has the potential to make enormous, continuous profits for decades to come. Vaccine makers also enjoy a high degree of immunity against lawsuits—and in the case of pandemic vaccines, absolute immunity—so the financial liability when something goes wrong is very low, compared to drugs.

Gerberding has a Long History of Disregard for Vaccine Safety

Joining a parade of other high-ranking government officials who pass through the revolving doors between government and Big Pharma, Gerberding left a trail of controversy behind her when she left the CDC. While a 2009 article by the Institute for Southern Studies lists a number of them², I believe they left out the most important ones, namely her misinformation campaign about the pandemic swine flu vaccine, as well as her naive stance on vaccine safety issues in general.

The CDC disseminated extremely exaggerated data on the 2009 H1N1 ”pandemic” and urged almost everyone in the U.S. to take the new, untested vaccines. When questions arose, they blocked CBS’s requests for samples of the swine flu cases and added obstacles to getting information. Despite the many dangers that have since been linked to the hastily developed vaccine—including the confirmed link to narcolepsy—the H1N1 vaccine is now part and parcel of the “regular” seasonal flu vaccine, although most people are completely unaware of this fact. And the CDC is now, for the first time ever, urging the seasonal flu vaccine on everyone in the country, from six months’ of age until death.

Even more disturbing, the CDC withheld data on miscarriages from the H1N1 vaccines under Gerberding’s lead, while insisting that pregnant women be put first in line to receive it. This was a dramatic reversal of its own recommendations. More than 3,500 post-vaccination miscarriages may have simply been ignored by the CDC.

One of Merck’s potentially most dangerous vaccines right now is Gardasil; a vaccine that so far has been linked to thousands of adverse events and at least 49 unexplained deaths. It’s a situation that the FDA and CDC have repeatedly denied, even as the adverse reports mount.

Gerberding’s 2004 report to Congress, ‘Prevention of Genital Human Papillomavirus Infection‘³ likely played a significant role in getting the controversial vaccine approved in the first place. Needless to say, the approval of this questionable vaccine guaranteed her future employer billions of dollars-worth of profits. Gerberding has also been a staunch defender of thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative used in many vaccines, and has consistently denied any links between vaccines and autism.

All in all, Gerberding has repeatedly demonstrated that safety is nowhere on her list of priorities or concerns when it comes to vaccines. It’s easy to see why Merck would want her to head up their vaccine unit. For the rest of us, however, her blatant disregard for provenvaccine safety is bad news indeed.

Continue Reading At: Mercola.com

30 years of secret, official transcripts prove vaccine schedules in US and UK are based on government lies

via: NaturalNews
Wednesday, August 01, 2012
By: Ethan A. Huff

[NaturalNews] A comprehensive investigation into the inner workings of the U.K.’s nationalized healthcare system has revealed a shocking legacy of corruption and lies concerning the country’s vaccine policy. According to Dr. Lucija Tomlijenovic, Ph.D., from the University of British Columbia in Canada, the advisory and governing bodies that set vaccination policy in the U.K. have, for many decades now, hidden the truth about vaccine dangers, and deliberately pushed unsafe vaccines on the public in order to uphold the official vaccination schedule.

Official documents uncovered from secret meetings of the U.K.’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), an independent body that helps set vaccination schedule policy in the U.K., reveal that JCVI ignores independent data showing vaccines to be unsafe, and reinforces questionable data produced by vaccine companies claiming that vaccines are safe. The group also discourages all research that might question the safety of vaccines, and knowingly lies to parents in order to increase the overall vaccination compliance rate.

“[T]he JCVI made continuous efforts to withhold critical data on severe, adverse reactions and contraindications to vaccinations to both parents and health practitioners in order to reach overall vaccination rates which they deemed were necessary for ‘herd immunity,’ a concept which with regards to vaccination, and contrary to prevalent beliefs, does not rest on solid scientific evidence,” writes Dr. Tomljenovic in her paper.

“Official documents obtained from the U.K. Department of Health (DH) and the JCVI reveal that the British health authorities have been engaging in such practice for the last 30 years, apparently for the sole purpose of protecting the national vaccination program.”

The 45-page paper blows the lid off the myth that government vaccination policy is based on sound science, and instead shows that vaccine advisory committees, which help set vaccine policy, are typically padded with vaccine industry shills that specifically promote vaccines in spite of evidence showing their dangers. This has been true in the U.K. since at least the early 1980s, and it is certainly true in the U.S. as well.
(http://www.naturalnews.com/033455_Institute_of_Medicine_vaccines.html)

Dr. Tomlijenovic explains; for instance, how JCVI has known since as early as 1981 that the measles vaccine, which is part of the government’s official vaccine schedule, is linked to long-term neurological damage and death. She also outlines, with full citations, evidence showing that JCVI has long been aware that many of scheduled vaccines cause permanent brain damage in children, but have continued to promote those vaccines anyway.

JCVI knew MMR vaccine was capable of causing brain damage

Another stunning discovery in Dr. Tomlijenovic’s paper deals with the MMR vaccine, and how JCVI was aware that this controversial jab can cause brain damage. The transcript from a 1990 meeting of the JCVI CSM/DH Joint Sub-Committee on Adverse Reactions notes that JCVI was aware that MMR was definitely linked to causing at least 10 known cases of both meningitis and encephalitis.

JCVI addressed the issue of MMR safety again in 1991, noting that in a follow-up review of the earlier cases of meningitis and encephalitis that were definitively linked to the vaccine, two of the children developed permanent neurological damage as a result. One other developed behavioral problems, which are linked to autism, and another developed cerebral astrocytoma, a type of brain tumor. None of this critical information was publicly disclosed.

You can read Dr. Tomlijenovic’s full 45-page paper on vaccine corruption here:
http://www.ecomed.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/3-tomljenovic.pdf

Sources for this article include:

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com

http://www.naturalnews.com/Vaccines_Get_the_Full_Story.html

Continue Reading At: NaturalNews.com

Mounting Evidence Shows Many Vaccines Are Ineffective & Contribute To Rise Of Outbreaks Caused By Mutated Viruses

via: Mercola
By: Dr. Mercola
July 30, 2012

In the middle of July, NBC News reported that :

“The U.S. is on course for a record year for whooping cough, health officials said this week. And while vaccinating kids is clearly the most important defense, health experts say adults may not realize they’re supposed to be getting regular shots, too.”

The article goes on to hype what are actually predictable pertussis (whooping cough) increases and promote the ineffective pertussis vaccine—basically giving the media their marching orders for this fall’s propaganda campaign, which centers on blaming increases in pertussis on parents who file non-medical exemptions for their kids, which is pure nonsense.

Surprise! Whooping Cough Spreads Mainly through Vaccinated Populations

In 2010, the largest outbreak of whooping cough in over 50 years occurred in California. Around that same time, a scare campaign was launched in the California by Pharma-funded medical trade associations, state health officials and national media, targeting people opting out of receiving pertussis vaccine, falsely accusing them of causing the outbreak.

However, research published in March of this year paints a very different picture than the one spread by the media .

In fact, the study showed that 81 percent of 2010 California whooping cough cases in people under the age of 18 occurred in those who were fully up to date on the whooping cough vaccine. Eleven percent had received at least one shot, but not the entire recommended series, and only eight percent of those stricken were unvaccinated.

According to the authors :

“This first detailed analysis of a recent North American pertussis outbreak found widespread disease among fully vaccinated older children. Starting approximately three years after prior vaccine dose, attack rates markedly increased, suggesting inadequate protection or durability from the acellular vaccine.” [Emphasis mine]

The pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine is included as a component in “combination” shots that include tetanus and diphtheria (DPT, DTaP, Tdap) and may also include polio, hepatitis B, and/or Haemophilus Influenza B (Hib). CDC data shows 84 percent of children under the age of three have received at least FOUR DTaP shots—which is the acellular pertussis vaccine that was approved in the United States in 1996—yet, despite this high vaccination rate, whooping cough still keeps circulating among both the vaccinated and unvaccinated.

So, as clearly evidenced in this study, the vaccine likely provides very little, if any, protection from the disease. In fact, the research suggests those who are fully vaccinated may in fact be more likely to get the disease than unvaccinated populations.

Continue Reading At: Mercola.com

Why Whooping Cough Vaccine Does Not Work As Advertised

via: GreenMedInfo
by: Sayer Ji
July 28, 2012

A newly published article written by a former WHO vaccine committee member has revealed that estimates for pertussis vaccine efficacy have been greatly inflated because of inaccurate case definitions adopted by the WHO in 1991 which required laboratory confirmation and 21 days or more of paroxysmal cough, excluding and therefore concealing a veritable submerged iceberg of vaccine-resistant cases of pertussis infection.

He states

I was a member of the WHO committee and disagreed with the primary case definition because it was clear at that time that this definition would eliminate a substantial number of cases and therefore inflate reported efficacy values.4–11 Nevertheless, the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research of the Food and Drug Administration accepted this definition, and package inserts of the US-licensed DTaP vaccines reflect this.

The article, written by James D. Cherry, and published in the July. 2012 edition of Pediatrics, the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, pointed out that following the 2010 pertussis epidemic in California, “there was considerable concern in the press and in public health communications about the possible contribution of vaccine failures to the problem.”  At that time, the media and government health officials focused on the lack of sufficient vaccine coverage  and subsequent waning herd immunity, without questioning whether pertussis vaccination actually results in effective immunization, which clearly it was not.

Perhaps already a tacit acknowledgement that the vaccines are much less effective than the manufacturers state is the fact that the CDC recommends infants and children get the DTaP vaccine no less than 5 times by age 6 (2 months, 4 months, 6 months, and 15 months through 18 months of age, with a booster at 4 through 6 years of age).

The reality is that pertussis vaccines have failed many times in the past, and will continue to do so.  In three major outbreaks in Great Britain (1974-5, 78-78 and 82) 30% of infected children had received all three required doses of pertussis vaccine.[i]  Worse yet, in the 1993 pertussis epidemic in Cincinnati, OH, infection occurred primarily among children who had been immunized.  The authors concluded:

Since the 1993 pertussis epidemic in Cincinnati occurred primarily among children who had been appropriately immunized, it is clear that the whole-cell pertussis vaccine failed to give full protection against the disease.[ii]

More recently, in Kings County Washington, between 2002-2007, of the 176 cases of pertussis in infants under age 1 77% were age-appropriately vaccinated.[iii]

Continue Reading At: GreenMedInfo.com

Medication During Pregnancy Shown to Cause Fetal Damage

via: NaturalSociety
by: Alicia Martin
July 28, 2012

About two-thirds of women in the United States take one or more prescription medications during pregnancy, many of which the potential effects on a fetus are unclear. In developed countries, birth defects are the leading cause of infant mortality. The complex melange of factors that contribute to a healthy pregnancy make it very difficult to specifically identify causal factors, but it is widely agreed upon that taking medication during pregnancy can result in fetal damage.

Use of Medication During Pregnancy a Dangerous Decision

In 1979, the United States Food and Drug Administration introduced a system to classify pharmaceuticals based on fetal risks. The two highest categories of risk in this system are ‘Category X,’ where fetal abnormalities could occur, and/or there is positive evidence of human fetal risk based on adverse reaction data, and the risks involved in the use of medication during pregnancy clearly outweigh potential benefits. Then there is ‘Category D,’ where it is claimed that the use of the drug will provide more benefits than risks, despite positive evidence of human fetal risk based on adverse reaction data from investigational or marketing experience or studies in humans. Needless to say, pharmaceutical drugs should be avoided, especially while pregnant.

An analysis of almost 13,000 doctor visits made by women of childbearing age between 1998-2000 showed that one out of every thirteen was on a class D or X medication, and given the steep and steady increase in prescriptions for psychotropic drugs in the past decades, it’s likely that this number is also increasing.

In addition to these medications which are known to pose a risk, the data on many other prescription drugs is limited at best. According to Dr. Cheryl Broussard, Epidemiologist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, most medications have not been adequately evaluated for use during pregnancy, and one study showed that more than 90% of medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 1980 to 2000 had insufficient data to determine the risk in human pregnancy.

Continue Reading At: NaturalSociety.com

Massive outbreak of whooping cough proves vaccine is ineffective

via: NaturalNews
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
By: J. D. Heyes

[NaturalNews] Whooping cough – otherwise known as Pertussis – is looking to make a rather nasty comeback this year. So much so that health officials are already warning of the danger.

In fact, they say, the U.S. could face its worst year for whooping cough in nearly 50 years. Already the numbers of cases are rising so fast it’s become a full-blown epidemic. What’s worse, the epidemic may have been caused; in part, by a faulty, ineffective vaccine.

So far some 18,000 cases of pertussis have been reported, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said recently, a figure that is more than twice the number seen at this point a year ago. At the current rate, the number of those affected for the entire year will be the highest since 1959; then, 40,000 cases were reported, The Associated Press said.

Health officials say the disease has claimed the lives of nine children so far, and they are urging all adults, especially women who are pregnant and adults who spend a lot of time around children, to get a booster shot as quickly as possible.

“My biggest concern is for the babies. They’re the ones who get hit the hardest,” Mary Selecky, health department chief in Washington state, where outbreaks have been particularly high.

Wisconsin and Washington have each reported more than 3,000 cases of whooping cough; other states with high numbers of cases include Arizona, Minnesota and New York.

The children of parents who opt out of vaccines not generally affected

Pertussis cases have been rising steadily for a number of years, officials say, but nothing like this year’s spike. The current unusual spike has led health officials around the country to look into why so many cases are suddenly occurring. Theories being floated include better reporting of cases and better detection methods, an evolution in the bacteria that causes the sickness, or problems with the vaccine.

AP said the vaccine that had been given to kids for decades was replaced in the late 1990s after concerns about rashes, fevers and other side effects surfaced. The newer version is considered to be safer but now there are fears it doesn’t remain as effective over the long haul, according to Dr. Anne Schuchat, head of the CDC’s immunization and respiratory disease programs.

What the dramatic uptick in pertussis cases does not appear to be linked to; however, is an increasing number of parents in some of the most affected states exempting their children from vaccines. Washington state; for instance, has one of the highest vaccine exemption rates in the country, but CDC officials said most of the children who have come down with whooping cough were vaccinated.

Pertussis is caused by bacteria that infect the top of the throat (pharynx), where it meets the nasal passages. The bacteria cause irritation in the throat, which in turn causes coughing that can sometimes be so violent as to injure ribs. The name “whooping cough” comes from the sound children make as they try to gasp for air during coughing episodes.

The illness spreads easily between people; when someone afflicted with pertussis coughs, sneezes or otherwise spews forth little droplets of fluid, the bacteria are put into the air and are easily inhaled. After the bacteria infect someone, symptoms appear in one to two weeks.

Vaccine may not be working

There are a number of indicators that suggest there could be a problem with the vaccine.

For one, health officials in Washington say they are alarmed to see high rates of whooping cough among youngsters who are 13-14 years old.

For another, whooping cough cases – once a common threat but which fell dramatically following the introduction of a vaccine in the 1940s, nearly to the point of becoming an afterthought in history – began to climb again in the 1990s. For about a quarter century before then, there were only about 5,000 cases reported each year.

And in 2004 and 2005 cases rose to more than 25,000. After dipping for a few years, they rose to more than 27,000 in 2010, a year which saw the incidence of pertussis rise most in California.

All of those factors have some investigators wondering if the vaccine thought to be safer is actually less effective.

Sources:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com

http://ozarksfirst.com/fulltext?nxd_id=677682

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002528/

http://online.wsj.com/article/APae1ad7cd922e440eb33dc460e3abe635.html

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Pregnant? How to Avoid Hospital Vaccine Woes

via: GreenMedInfo
by: Alan Phillips, J.D.
July 24, 2012

A recent news story described a newborn being taken away from her mother shortly after birth because of the mother’s refusal to accept a Hepatitis B vaccine. In my law practice, I also hear stories from time to time about newborns being vaccinated in the hospital after birth without the parents’ permission and against the parents’ wishes. Most of the time, these kind of problems are avoidable with a information about your rights and some common sense preparation.

The mother whose child was taken away had planned a home birth, and made the mistake of not having a contingency plan, a “Plan B” in case they ended up in the hospital, as some planned home births inevitably do for one reason or another. Once in the hospital, they refused the Hep B vaccine, but not in a manner consistent with their state’s legal options. Sadly, we don’t have the right to decide what goes into our and our children’s bodies, at least not absolutely. As disturbing as that be to many of us, it’s the legal reality. So, if you’re expecting a baby, find out what your state’s vaccine requirements and exemption options are!

These may vary from state to state, so go to an authoritative source—a site that posts the actual laws (links to three such sites are here (www.vaccinerights.com/exemptions.html), or to your local or state health department (call them or go to their website). Non-authoritative sources such as anti-vaccine websites mean well, and they often have great information about vaccine health concerns, but they also often misunderstand and misrepresent exemption rights and procedures, and some have lost rights by relying on them. Where legal rights are concerned, if it’s important, it’s worth getting right the first time.

It’s not only important to know the law for your own sake, but because many people on the other side of the fence misunderstand the law and your rights, too. For example, North Carolina has health department regulations allowing parents up to three months to get their newborn his or her first Hep B vaccine. You don’t need an exemption to say “no” in a NC hospital at the time of your child’s birth, at least according to the law. However, I was once contacted by a new parent who said she was threatened by a doctor with having her baby taken away from her right after birth if she didn’t get the baby vaccinated. So, we need to know our rights to be able to defend against, and counter the abuse of, the medical community.

Why would a doctor do this? Well, in addition to being among the all-too-common narrow-minded pharmaceutical salespeople that so many doctors are, the truth is that most professionals have a legal requirement to report suspected cases of abuse and neglect, and that could include any parent who is not in compliance with the law with respect to their children. The woman referred to above whose child was taken away? She was, essentially, attempting to exercise a philosophical exemption in a state that had only medical and religious exemptions.

Continue Reading At: GreenMedInfo.com