Federal Government Announces Licensed Practical Nurse For Immunizations Funding: Fill & Download for Free

I posed this question because I believe there can be a free market solution to Torts on every level. All of the answers to this question have stated variations of the same absurd notion. They all claim people change their behavior for the better because of the threat of legal action. This statement contains three flawed premises. The first is that people act in a more careful manner because of the threat of being sued for causing an injury. The second is that Tort law is a fair and efficient method of compensation for injuries. The third is that people understand what Tort law is all about. All of these premises are false.Let’s examine each of these assumptions.Their first assumption is that the threat of a lawsuit that causes people to change their behavior to decrease the likelihood of causing an injury. My question right back to them is “Does criminal law prevent crime? “ If that was the case, the USA should have the smallest per capita criminal prisoner rate in the world. Instead we have one of the largest. What prevents most crimes is the fear of getting caught. Is there something fundamentally different about the population that commits crimes and are incarcerated, then the rest of US citizenry? Not really. It’s just that the more intelligent and affluent members of our population commit crimes all the time, they are just too smart to get caught, or they are in a state of rage or inebriation when they commit a crime that causes it to be discovered. There are also those that have the hubris to believe that their lofty station in life makes them immune to the consequences of criminal behavior, such as OJ Simpson, and the Enron executives. The truth is that most people realize if they create a condition where someone could be injured, it is going to cost them money. For example, if they own a factory, an injury will cost the loss of services of a valued employee, it will hurt morale and productivity of their other employees, it could shut down an assembly line, and finally the company’s insurance rates will go up. Or in the case of many companies who self-insure for injury compensation it is coming right out of their pockets. In the case of a factory, I In most cases, worrying about a lawsuit is down the list. In other words, in the case of this hypothetical factory, its not Tort law, which most laymen wouldn’t even know what that word meant, its about risk and reward. How can we produce a product with the least cost in order to make the highest profit? You lawyers will now come in and say, its Tort law induces these factory owners to purchase insurance. (Actually, a factory is a poor example, because I believe all states have mandatory workmen’s compensation insurance. But many states allow a company or association of companies to have a self-insurance workmen’s compensation program. For a few years, I was part of the management team for a very large self-insurance workmen’s compensation program. In our program it was the prevention and challenge to workmen’s compensation claims that was our greatest worry, not lawsuits.”) But that is not true I say there exists an alternative that would not require lawyers and their outrageous fees and ridiculous high penal awards.Their second premise is that Tort law is a fair and efficient method of compensation for injuries. The only time this is true is if the injury, the cause of injury, and the costs of the injury are so clear that either the person who is responsible for the injury or his insurance company settles the case swiftly. If the facts and responsibilities of the case are not obvious, or the injured party goes to a lawyer who promises an award far exceeding what the injured party is entitled, a lawsuit ensues. Then the case is no longer about the Tort (the actual civil wrong), it is about how much can the Lawyer extort from the defendant or the defendant’s insurance company. It is actually just anther form of legal looting, or forcible monetary redistribution. This is especially true if the claim concerned was about public liability, which could get a defendant involved in one of the more destructive parts of our legal system, class action suits.The third is that most people don’t even have any idea what Tort law is all about; much less what actions or inactions will cause them to be in violation of Tort law. We are a continuing technologically, evolving world. An injury that could occur now that people would think is entirely accidental and has no possibility of a legal action, still leaves us with an injured person who will never get compensated in any way for his or her injury, but probably at a later date will be discovered to actually have been caused by a foreseeable civil wrong. Moreover, there are injuries that occur that will always be considered an “act of god”, and no Tort law will help the injured party. There is also the fact, that many injured parties have no idea or desire to get compensated for an injury. They just suffer under our present system and are for the most part hidden. (Although the lawyers that run ads on Websites, or on billboards along our highways try to draw these people into their legal spider web.)The biggest problem with Tort law and many other laws, especially class action suits is the following. Lawyers use the law and the implied use of physical force, i.e. prison, to forcibly loot money from our citizenry. They are a totally unnecessary part of our country’s structure. They add a burden of tremendous amounts of wasted money and productivity on the part of both the legal plaintiff and defense side. They add greatly to the burden of the justice system with their endless pretrial motions, depositions, vast burdens of time, mental and physical distress upon the defendants, and costly mainly useless trial time. Often it does not end here, the case can go on to be appealed at the appellate level and then on to a state supreme court, and then sometimes even on to the Federal Level. Even then with all these laws and the massive legal system, injured parties often do not get the compensation they deserve or far too much compensation that all of US citizenry must bear its costs.You also have to consider the incredible loss of very intelligent people who are sold into the idea that being a lawyer is a mostly honorable profession. That creates a huge untapped drain of mental talent that could be far more productive to wealth production in our country, and instead becomes a massive population of wealth drainers.One of the answerers to my question seems to have been one of my colleagues. I practiced OB/GYN for my first year of residency. I can tell you categorically that in the case of Obstetrics, women’s lives are being put at risk because of the fear of a malpractice suit, which I believe is a part of Tort law. Decades ago when I was a resident, our clinic population had a C-section rate of about 8 %. That was because we followed the scientific guidelines of when it was necessary to perform a C-section. The private patients at our hospital had a C-section rate in the low 20’s percentile. I don’t know what the current differential is between a teaching hospital C-section rate and the private patient rate but I am sure it is still very high. C-sections have far higher risk for injury and death to the mother. In point of fact maternal death rates in our nation have been on the rise. Tort law is absolutely killing women in the USA today out of fear of a lawsuit. I know in many other areas of medicine extra unnecessary tests are performed and procedures are done that have no scientific basis but are done out of fear of being involved in a lawsuit.Here is my personal story of a malpractice case that almost destroyed my life.Here was the case. A 60ish year old morbidly obese women with a history of asthma underwent a total knee replacement. I decided to appropriately give the patient a spinal anesthetic and she sailed through the surgery. In the post op care unit the patient received 2mg of Morphine when her spinal was wearing off. The Orthopedic surgeon asked me to give his patient a self-administered morphine pump for postoperative pain relief. I ordered the nurses to setup a pump to deliver a maximum of 2mg of morphine every 20 minutes. This was on the high side of pain delivery, but the patient weighed over 220 pounds and for that weight I decided it was appropriate. The next day the patient was found to be unresponsive but her vital signs were stable. An intensivist (a specialist in intensive care medicine) was called and administered one ampule of narcan, which can reverse a narcotic overdose. The patient still did not respond. There was never a record of respiratory failure. The intensivist gave her three more ampules of narcan, and upon shaking the patient she had some response. She stayed in the ICU for a few days and after a period; she became fully alert, but had a slight residual weakness in a side of her body. The nursing record showed that beside the 2mg of Morphine the patient had received in the recovery room, she had only used the pump once for a total of 4mg of Morphine in about a day or more. This is a very small dose for that amount of time period. Even if is this patient was supersensitive, a full ampule of narcan would have totally reversed its affects. The intensivist put in his records that the patient had received a narcotic overdose (because of the Morphine pump orders, not what actually had been delivered) and had suffered brain injury from lack of oxygen. This was a completely ridiculous diagnosis. Four mg of Morphine over 36 hours would not put anyone in that condition into respiratory failure, and certainly would have been easily reversed with even one ampule of narcan. Besides, the fact, that there was no charted incidence of respiratory depression.Luckily for me there was a law in Florida that a Plaintiff in malpractice lawsuit has to have a pretrial interview with a physician if he suspects that malpractice has occurred. I hired this Lawyer out of the phone book, who looked like a character from a cowboy movie when I arrived back in Florida for my interview. I immediately sized up the plaintiff’s attorney. He was an obvious narcissist. He puffed up his chest and announced to me not only was he a lawyer but he also was a medical doctor. He then went on to pontificate all his tremendous credentials to put me into a state of fear. I played along and played dumb. I am pretty sure since he knew I was a Locum Tenens (a glorified medical term for a temp) that I wasn’t very bright or good at my job. He asked me a series of silly questions, which I pretended I had to think a while and gave very unspecific answers to his questions. Then the key moment came. He asked me if he decided to pursue a lawsuit, how could me to serve me.I practiced Locum Tenens Anesthesia. That meant I did not work full time. I didn’t need the money. I had other interests in life, which I loved to pursue. But for a short period of time when this case occurred I was not covered by malpractice insurance. I had never been informed that there had been any problems with any of my patients. However, there were medical political politics at that hospital. Half of the physician staff was from India or Pakistan. The other half was White, American born and trained Physicians. Both groups hated each other. My staff position tilted the Medical staff into the “White” faction. Silly bullshit like this occurs all over America. That is one of several reasons I didn’t like to work full time. I hate politics. Anyway this is one of the main reasons I stopped working at this Hospital. It is also probably the reason the medical staff tried to pin this event entirely on me. I was the named Defendant.This wasn’t my first rodeo. I told him innocently that he could serve my lawyer. That satisfied him. After I left the room with my lawyer, I told him the moment you hear that he is considering to file suit you call me. He did. I sent an overnight letter to my attorney firing him and telling to him to file with the court that I was no longer his client. My lawyer called me laughing and wishing me good luck on my strategy. I believe that were six other doctors and the hospital as named defendants. My wife at the time had a consulting service and only joined me on my assignments about half the time. For the next eight months, a certified letter attempting service was sent weekly to my home in Chicago. My ex-wife never accepted any of these certified letters as I had instructed her.I was either working in other hospitals all over the country or vacationing, making it impossible for me to be found. My ex-wife was often home and since I was a defendant on the case even though I wasn’t served, she received copies of all the legal correspondence for the case. After eight months, there was a stack of motions and other documents that reached four feet high in our closet. Even after eight months there had not even been one deposition taken. Can you imagine the law bill I would have had from just that amount of legal bullshit?Apparently after eight months, the plaintiff attorney had hired a private detective to find me and serve me. This detective found out my ex-wife’s maiden name. Her maiden name was uncommon. My ex-wife had a father who was a world-renowned expert in Neurology. He was also one of the first Physicians who had broken ranks from his colleagues and was frequently an expert witness in malpractice actions. By coincidence, the Plaintiff’s attorney had used the services of my ex-wife’s father in other malpractice suits. He called my ex-wife’s father and asked him if he knew me. My father-in-law related to me when he found out that this attorney was trying to serve me on this case, he told him that not only would he never be an expert witness on any malpractice case for this lawyer, and he would see to it that no neurologist in the country would ever testify on any of his cases!For the next 6 months the certified letters stopped. But I was still receiving motions and counter motions endlessly. Then my late ex-wife father died at a young age of 60. Two weeks later the certified service letter started to arrive weekly. That lasted a few more months. Then it mysteriously stopped, as did all the other correspondence from the lawsuit that had grown to a stack of paper five feet high. Then I got one last letter from the judge in the case. The judge dismissed the legal action against me because the plaintiff had failed to serve me within the statutory limits. I was off the hook!I put this case off my mind. However, six years later in 2002 I decided to Google myself. I was shocked to find that this case was still going on! This case went on to the supreme court of Florida not once but twice! The case went on for almost ten years until finally the Supreme Court upheld the trial judges decision to dismiss the case because of the contumacious behavior of the plaintiff’s attorney. If I had been an active defendant in this case, just the legal bills would have ruined my life, not to mention being involved in a legal action that lasted that long. Think of the incredible hardship of my poor colleagues being involved in an action that lasted so long. Isn’t it likely that just the stress on their minds from this lengthy lawsuit interfered with their decision-making ability and probably caused second-guessing and incorrect medical therapies?There was a dramatic ending to this story. After losing this lawsuit and all the appeals, the Plaintiff’s lawyer was disbarred. He was found out dipping into client’s award money. Then he lost his medical license after being arrested for illegally prescribing Oxycodone out of motel rooms!Anyway, can you imagine the monumental waste of time on this case by all the doctors and lawyers and the judges on a case that did not even have a whiff of malpractice associated with the case? There were weeks of court time, on the local, appellate and the Florida Supreme Court. This patient had undergone a mild stroke postoperatively. It had nothing to do with the small amount of narcotics that she was administered.Maybe this case was absolutely off the grid as far an average malpractice case. I have no idea. But thank god I outsmarted that lawyer.Again to emphasize this point I am going to repeat myself, Tort lawyers would have you believe that it is only the legal system that would defer harmful behavior. That one can legislate bad behavior away from human beings. This is complete nonsense. Does criminal law prevent criminal behavior? Does the civil law of any kind prevent illegal behavior?I have spent seven years of my life in business. I developed a spectacularly complete computerized accounting system for a specialized industry, the janitorial and window cleaning contracting business. You would think this was a simple business. In many ways it was simple, but Unions, taxes, unemployment compensation insurance, workmen compensation, public liability, equipment, multiple contracts in the hundreds for our company, supervision, costs, supplies, and many other factors made a large contractor such as ours with as many as 3500 employees a nightmare, My software eliminated 2/3 of our accounting department. It gave up to the minute cost accounting and produced user programmable accounting reports. It had many other bells and whistles. But from that experience and then from starting a company that sold this software nationwide, I found that businessmen are just as big of lawbreakers as anyone you could find. They just are usually too smart to get caught. I also managed our self-insured workmen compensation program. It was the cost of the claims made, not the law, that made us be have a safer work place. In other words, yes if someone got injured you had to pay it out of our pocket. That is what changed our behavior, not the threat of a lawsuit.In point of fact, the first time I was sued was also for malpractice! One of my clients who I sold my computer system had already received more on hand and remote teaching then any of my other customers. But he wanted more. This was the last system I had sold, so I had plenty of time to waste at that moment. I told him, I would happily fly back to his office and give him more onsite instruction. But I insisted he pay the outstanding bill of twenty thousand dollars. He refused. I asked my father for advice. Bad idea. He told me to refuse. I said, he is threatening to sue us. My father told me this story.His father had a newspaper, cigarette and candy stand in the roaring twenties. My son saw that sometimes a customer would shoplift. My grandfather saw it too. The shoplifting was very petty and some of these customers were frequent customers and it probably did not cut into his profits by any large amount. But my grandfather told my father that customers like this I don’t need.Anyway, because of this advice I called the customer back and insisted on getting paid before I return. The customer sued my company for malpractice in federal court. My lawyer laughed and said there is no way this person can win. That was when I learned never to believe in lawyers even if they are 100% sure.I had to return to Pennsylvania, spend more money and time and also pay for the lawyer. The judge was 95 years old didn’t know a computer from a stopwatch. The plaintiff’s lawyer totally screwed with this judges brain and won the case. I play ed my next card, I filed for corporate bankruptcy. They personally sued the stockholders, my sisters and brother for $200,000. That was $160,000 more then the buyer had paid for this system. My lawyer said there is no way they can pierce the corporate veil and collect from us personally. He was wrong again!Anyway, I believe that under the system of government that I have outlined in other posts and on my link end site, which I call a Competitive Democracy a multi-tiered insurance system could fully compensate for not only all types of torts but for all risks that a human being can suffer during his lifetime.Just to outline my how things would be under my new constitution, the Federal Government would be restricted to three areas, the military, a much different state department, a greatly expanded justice department, and an enforcement branch. There would be no legislature, no President, no other parts of our present executive branch would exist. There would be several sets of lower Federal courts, each with three judges and requirements for legal representation. One set of courts would exist to monitor the states for violating the rights of our citizens. One set of courts for guaranteeing contracts. One set of courts for upholding and deciding the penalty for criminal actions arising at the state and lower level.One set of courts for deciding insurance awards. The only part of my new Federal government that would be elected would be the Supreme Court Justices. For now, I arbitrarily decided that there would be one Justice elected from each state for an eight-year term. But that is just my initial thought. It could be that the number of justices would have to mirror the population of the states. The Supreme Court would have the responsibility of drafting a common criminal code that would apply to all states. It makes no sense in our country that what is criminal in one state can be noncriminal in an other state. The Supreme Court would be responsible for all other court appointments on the lower levels. It would be responsible for the State department, the only remnant of the old executive branch but even then it would be highly modified. It would be responsible for the enforcement division, which would become an amalgamation of all our present civilian law enforcement and counterintelligence agencies. Foreign intelligence would go back to the military where it really belongs.You see under my system, there will be no state prisons. There will only be county jails, and a citizen can only be held in jail for one month. If a criminal trial takes longer then that, it would be dismissed. Even on the state level, three judges would be requiring for all court actions. There would be no jury system. A criminal verdict would require a unanimous decision by the three judges. This is one of the methods whereby I maximize freedom for our citizenry. Because my competitive Democracy depends on the ability of our citizens to freely move from state to state without hindrance. Therefore I cannot allow a state to imprison anyone. Also there can be no national guard, to prevent the unlikely event of a state seceding from the USA as in the Civil war.Under my system of government the only taxes that can be collected are state income tax on a fixed percentage and state sales tax. There can be no tariffs, no taxes on out of state income or products. No state can collect an award of money or property from another state. There are no property taxes. There can be no confiscation of real property.This means that an insurance system would have to be licensed out at the Federal level. Because if you only had State insurance systems, a person who got an award might not be able to collect if the state insurance company moved all its assets to another state. The reason is that under my system States, municipal and local governments have no legal access to assets outside their states.But here is just one system I think that could work and insure people for anything that can happen to them. First of all we have to stop this parental bullying that our legal system demands that we have. Most of us can think for ourselves and decide what risks we are willing to take and what things we need to insure ourselves against.First off, I totally agree that property owners whether developed property or undeveloped, whether private, rentals, retail, or other commercial real estate, a responsibility for the possible harm that could come from ownership requires mandatory insurance. But do we really need ten years to explore if one incident was malpractice or malicious? You could just force property owners or any other business that sells products to hold an “all harm” policy. That means if anyone is harmed by something that happens to a person on an insured property, whether its falling into a pit, a broken window falling on pedestrians, pollution filling a neighborhood, a bad medical outcome, a product they sell that causes injuries, just about anything, an insurance policy can cover it. If the Insurance Company denies the complaint, then the injured party takes the complaint up to the Federal insurance court. It would only take one out of the three justices to rule in favor of the injured. If it was obvious that the insurance company was being obstructive, the Federal insurance court, which has access to funds across the nation, can fine the Insurance Company for forcing this matter into court. All the Federal Insurance companies will have to pay a fee to the Federal Government to be a backstop in case the awards exceed the Federal chartered insurance companies reserves. But the Federal government will send examiners to make sure that the insurance company has sufficient reserves for all its policies. However, we all know there is always the possibility of another massive hurricane that could deplete a company. That is why you need a Federal Government backstop.In addition, there could exist companies that have a Federal Charter (to backstop in case awards become to massive) that individuals could purchase to pay for any damages that occur in their life. There could be exclusions for anything that the individual feels they don’t need or are willing to take the risk. For example, I am a rock climber. It is a dangerous sport. I could either accept the danger and check off that I wont pay the insure company for the fee to cover this activity, or I could pay a rather high fee for the risk to the insurance of my getting hurt. It would be the choice of every individual in our country to pay for full coverage which the insurance company could itemize extras for dangerous activities.This is just an off the cuff possible market solution. If we truly had an unregulated insurance system with no vicious, unscrupulous lawyers, the free market would develop hundreds of solutions. The free market could create solutions that would fit everyone’s lifestyle and everyone’s budget. I discussed in another answer how I would take care of the extreme poor.

If you are an “ends justify the means” kind of person, this read is not for you. If you think mandatory vaccine legislation is all about measles, this read is not for you. If you believe every sound bite uttered from the mouths of mainstream media’s news anchors is absolute truth and should be used as the basis for ranting on social media, this post is not for you. If you like to think critically with an open mind and understand the dark side of politics and big business in this country, then please read on. I was very involved in the ultimately successful effort to kill this bill, and I will tell the story that mainstream media did not report on. I will do so as respectfully as I can, and before I start, I want to make a few things clear:It is a tragedy when a child dies from or is permanently disabled by a “vaccine-preventable” illness.It is equally a tragedy when a child dies or is permanently disabled from the medical intervention meant to prevent that illness. I have experienced both in my family.I am not so much anti-vaccine as I am pro-responsible medicine and anti- one-size-fits-all, broad-sweeping medical legislation.I have zero tolerance for any politician inserting him or herself in the sacred space between doctor and patient.The “grassroots” movement behind 1312 supposedly popped up to protect our great state’s most vulnerable population (the children) from lazy, uninformed mothers who also believe the earth is flat (or any number of variations on that narrative).A pharmaceutical lobbyist whom I will refer to by her initials, SK, formed a parent group called Colorado Parents for Vaccinated Communities (CPVC) in 2017.CPVC is financially supported by vaccine manufacturers, including Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline. SK’s lobbyist company was paid $1,000 a month directly by GlaxoSmithKline. In January 2019, the payments stopped.Also in January 2019, Colorado residents learned that another mandatory vaccine bill would be introduced during the spring legislative season by a freshman representative who is also a newly-minted ER nurse. In the meantime, SK posing as a parent in a local mom's group, admitted that the bill "belonged" to the parent group, CPVC which presents a conflict of interest since CPVC is funded by big pharma.When the bill was filed, it would ADD four new vaccines to the mandatory Colorado school schedule, three of them manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). GSK is also coming out with their own version of the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella). In case I need to connect the dots, GSK stood to make multi-millions off the passage of this bill which could have mandated four more of their vaccines for all school children. They are good about sharing that wealth, though. Enough of it goes towards funding the campaigns of politicians who agree to advance their agenda.This is what the bill proposed in its original form:Under this bill, the BOH (board of health) would mandate all vaccines recommended by ACIP (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices), and would have the authority to add any others they deemed as necessary without going through the due processes in place now. Currently, Colorado does not require the flu and HPV vaccines for school entry, but they are recommended by ACIP/CDC. Every school child would need to get an annual flu shot (even if it wasn’t effective that year), and every school child would need to be vaccinated against HPV (a sexually transmitted disease). In my opinion, if the government can mandate my choices regarding the sexual health of my children, I am no longer living in a free country.All exemptions submitted would have to use the CDPHE (Colorado Department of Public Health and Education) developed and standardized “certificate.” (Currently, a statement signed by a parent is all that is needed to be exempt for religious or personal reasons.) CDPHE would develop educational materials regarding the benefits of immunizations. There was no requirement that they mention the documented risks of any of the vaccinations in the materials they develop. (See vaccine package inserts for documented risks.) In order to get a religious or philosophical exemption, parents would have to read/watch this one-sided material before getting their standardized form to sign. The problem here is compelled speech. The form would likely have had some version of “I am knowingly and willingly endangering my child and other children by refusing this vaccination.” Please keep reading; I’m going somewhere with this.Medical exemptions would ONLY be allowed based on contraindications as described by the ACIP/CDC. Licensed physicians would not be able to site their personal knowledge of an individual child, or any information contrary to the ACIP/CDC, when submitting a medical exemption. Here’s one example of how that can play out: My friend’s daughter had seizures following a round of vaccinations. It was determined by her pediatrician that the seizures were caused by the girl’s unique response to the vaccinations. (Keep in mind that some people are deathly allergic to Advil. How hard is it to believe that not all children respond the same way to vaccines?) The decision was made between my friend and her doctor to delay further vaccinations and proceed with extreme caution. Her seizures do not qualify for a medical exemption under ACIP guidelines. My friend would have had to take a religious or personal exemption for school attendance, and sign off on a form saying she was endangering her own child by following her doctor’s advice. Please keep reading.Immunization and exemption data would be collected by CDPHE, the local school, and physicians. The information would be centrally stored in CDPHE’s CIIS (Colorado Immunization Information System). Demanding a child’s data be stored in this state database is a violation of privacy under the laws governing a child’s educational and health data (FERPA and HIPAA). Let me say this succinctly: taking a religious or personal exemption (even for seizures) would result in that child’s LOSS OF MEDICAL PRIVACY RIGHTS.**Religious and personal exemptions must be submitted in person and signed by a representative at CDPHE or local health department.Fun fact: this bill had a fiscal note of zero. Medicaid would have had to pick up the cost of all the additional vaccines added to the schedule. The CDPHE would have to pay for extra hours/employees to handle all the parents coming in. Educational materials would have to be developed, printed, and distributed...all for free!Even if you are 100% pro-vaccine, wanting every shot available now, and every one that comes out in the future, no questions asked, you should still see some obvious flaws with this bill.Literally thousands of parents (mostly mothers) banded together to fight against HB19-1312. They came from every conceivable background, and held beliefs running the spectrum from “100% no vaccines ever for my children” to “I’ll take all of them, but this legislation makes me uncomfortable.” There were Democrats and Republicans, Christians and Athiests, acupuncturists and medical doctors, teachers and homeschool parents all coming together to fight what my own pediatrician called, “that horrible vaccine bill.” It gave me just a little bit of hope to know that humanity can and will unite and drop their petty differences when faced with a crisis of this magnitude.HB19-1312 represented so much more than mandating vaccinations for school children. It set the precedent that the government in some way owns your children. It takes away a basic right to bodily autonomy. (Shall we re-visit the Nuremberg code?) It starts our society down a very slippery slope. Had a similar bill passed in Oregon, children like my friend’s daughter with the seizures would have basically been put on a form of house arrest, not being able to be present “anywhere where school children congregate.” That is frightening to me. It should be to you.One day at the capitol, I stood in line next to a precious mama whose family came here from Cuba. She drove for hours with her two disabled children to sign up to testify for the senate hearing because that is a freedom her family was denied before they came to the United States. She wanted her children to understand how important it is to protect our freedoms, and that the vaccine legislation being heard that day in her opinion (and mine) was a subtle yet severe infringement on very basic rights we’ve heretofore enjoyed in this country. She cried as she told me, “This is why we left Cuba. I can’t believe this is happening here.” She never got to testify. The powers that be cut our time to two hours, which added up to about 30 testimonies out of the hundreds that were willing to stay as long as necessary to have their voices heard. Ironically (??), exactly 30 people showed up to testify in favor of the bill. Every single one of them was heard, including a very young “pharmaceutical scientist” employed by AstraZeneca and whose specialty is in respiratory devices. She told the senators, “Their emotions are real; their injuries are not,” and with that simple and arrogant statement, hoped to nullify the impact of all who gathered in opposition.I will leave you with a few more thoughts:First, a quote from the New York Times: “In the largest settlement involving a pharmaceutical company, the British drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline agreed to plead guilty to criminal charges and pay $3 billion in fines for promoting its best-selling antidepressants for unapproved uses and failing to report safety data about a top diabetes drug, federal prosecutors announced Monday.”Vaccine manufacturers have been liability free in the United States since 1986. I do not believe for one second that a criminal corporation like GSK has found Jesus only when it comes to vaccines, a product for which they have zero accountability for if it harms your child.Toilets and sewer systems did as much for the eradication of certain diseases as vaccinations did. God bless civil engineers. They should make more TV shows about you, and fewer about doctors.The actual science is not settled. Anyone who says it is, must have no respect for real science, and way too much hubris for my taste. Unless you can have a meaningful and respectful conversation with me about TH2 shift, insertional mutagenesis, the emerging field of epigenetics, and the critical differences between ingestion and injection when it comes to substances such as aluminum, you have not done your homework regarding vaccines.There has NEVER been a double-blind true inert placebo safety study done. The entire schedule has never been studied as a whole. Even meaningful studies about combining vaccines into one injection have never been done. The safety trial on GlaxcoSmithKline’s MMR was a non-inferiority study. That means all they had to prove was that their vaccine was not significantly less safe than Merck’s MMR II. Lies, damned lies, and statistics. Read the study results and tell me that vaccines are safe and effective for all children all the time.I really hate the term “anti-vaxxer.” It implies an all-or-nothing, throw the baby out with the bath water kind of approach. I am simply a person who thinks for herself and does her own research. I actually support smaller pharmaceutical companies like Sound Choice who wish to bring more ethical options to the market now dominated by greedy businessmen with no regard for true health whatsoever. We need to find a better way -for the sake of our children- and it will never happen if we aren’t intellectually honest about what is really going on in the world of politics, big pharma, and the changing landscape of pediatric illness.**For Colorado residents who were confused on this deceptive issue, “opt-out” of CIIS database applies to “immunization information” but not “exemption data.” There is no way to totally opt out your child’s exemption data from this database. When one does opt their child out of the immunization database, that child is not removed from the system, instead that child is put on the list of those objecting to having the information available. Furthermore, even though this information is supposed to be confidential, it is available to all school health officials, doctors, hospitals, and health departments. There is no way to know -and no limits on- how this information could be used. How much do you trust your government? (Thank you to CHCA & CHEC for providing this information.)

Main, perhaps only cause of asthma, is drugs mostly vaccination but also antibiotics so it’s pretty dumb to vaccinate someone with a vax induced disease"Vaccinations are now carried out for purely commercial reasons because they fetch huge profits for the pharmaceutical industry......There is no scientific evidence that vaccinations are of any benefit, but it is clear that they cause a great deal of harm...Today there are 800,000 children and youngsters under the age of 15 years (Germany) with asthma. 800,000! Neurodermitis, once a rare complaint, has become so common that there are several support networks with many thousands of members. The 'Frankenpost' of April 2004 reported an estimated 27 million people now suffer from hayfever, neurodermitis and allergic asthma in Germany."---Dr Buchwald MD The Decline of Tuberculosis despite "Protective" Vaccination by Dr. Gerhard Buchwald M.D. p130, 132, 134.)“Vaccines and suppression of eczema in many cases from vaccination is where we need to look. When I was a nurse in pediatrics from 1971 - 1974 we had 2 children who would come into the hospital from time to time in my 2.5 years on a pediatric, 6-20 year old unit From 1974 - 1978 I worked in a pediatric office practice as nurse office manager - a busy one with 4 peds - one of the busiest in the city - we had only 1 child that I can remember having asthma - ONE!!!!!!!! Vaccines at that time were DPT, oral polio, MMR or just measles and rubella vax for some....we saw many many ear infections at 3 months and beyond after vaccines started and many many antibiotics we say not as much eczema as I am seeing today and therefore not as much suppression with steroids (which results in suppression of the skin condition and development of the deeper lung condition of asthma) NOW add Hep B at birth and more; hep a, Prevnar (9-strain vaccine), HIB, chickenpox vaccine --Voila!-----Naken RNSalzburger Elternstudie (Survey of / by parents) (2001-2005) Results: Unvaccinated children -- virtually no asthma; vaccinated 1 in 10; and three to five times less Neurodermatis.......Englische Kohortenstudie (1988 - 1999) Results: Vaccinated children are up to 14 times more likely to have asthma than the unvaccinated and up to nine times more like to have skin problems. ......Langzeitstudie in Guinea-Bissau:"Striking increases in chronic illnesses have occurred in temporal association with an increase in vaccination rates. Asthma and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, causes of lifelong morbidity and frequent premature death, have nearly doubled in incidence since the introduction of many new, mandatory vaccines. There is no explanation for this increase. The temporal association, although not probative, is suggestive and demands intense investigation. Instead of following up on earlier, foreign studies suggesting a greater-than-chance association, the CDC, through vaccine mandates, is obliterating the control group (unvaccinated children)."---ORIENT MD"When the link between the use of unsafe, mercury-laden vaccine and autism, ADHD, asthma, allergies and diabetes becomes undeniable, mainstream medicine will be sporting a huge, self-inflicted and well-deserved black eye. Then will come the billion-dollar awards, by enraged juries, to the children and their families. I can't wait."--RIMLAND MD"I am also a chemist. I just finished reading the spec sheet on Tetramune from the netlink given a few days ago. I was amazed to see the Pertussis portion of the vaccine is prepared in a hydrolyzed form of casein!!!!! In laymens terms this is a salt version of MILK PROTIEN!!!! Hello - there is the allergy,asthma connection. This has me so angry I can hardly contain myself. My sons life has been ruined because a doctor has no clue. Patrick had already been diagnosed w/ a severe milk allergy!!!! The more I research the more frustrated I become. Hope this info helps."--- Jacki“Babies treated with even one course of antibiotics during their first year of life may have twice the risk of developing asthma later in childhood as unexposed babies, an analysis of past research shows.”“children who had even a single dose of Tylenol before their first birthday had a 60% risk of developing asthma.”AS TO MMRMmr is SatanicWe only see measles as a problem due to Allopath fearmongering to sell vaccination"It is well known that measles is an important development milestone in the life and maturing processes in children. Why would anybody want to stop or delay the maturation processes of children and of their immune systems?"--Viera Scheibner"Chronic tendencies, such as recurring respiratory infections, often heal after measles. Chronic health problems disappear, such as psoriasis or chronic kidney problems. The children’s hospital in Basle (Switzerland) used to get children with chronic kidney infections to contract measles intentionally in order to heal them, up until the 1960s . Children susceptible to infections are healthier and stronger after contracting measles; the need for medical treatment clearly decreases . Children in the Third World countries are less likely to contract malaria and parasites after measles . The risk to suffer breast cancer decreases to less than half. MS is also much lower in people who had measles. Hay fever is more rare in children who have older siblings and had measles than in those who were vaccinated against measles . A large African study showed that children who have had measles are 50% less at risk from allergies than those vaccinated,. Furthermore it is shown that experiencing measles protects from diseases of the immune system, skin diseases as well as degenerative cartilage, bone and tumourous diseases."---"In Eastern medical philosophy, poisons are believed to accumulate in the baby's body during life in the womb. After birth, the body at some time attempts to rid itself of the poisons. This leads to the many childhood diseases with eruptive rashes, and in particular, measles. Since the 16th century, it has been realized in Eastern medicine that measles is connected with infection. However the basic function of the disease is the same: the infection is regarded as the necessary agent for poisons to "come out". So, although the dangers of measles are clear, the illness is seen as a step towards overall health.Measles as a transition. The impact of measles can be best understood by observing changes in your child's behaviour, attention and attitude before and after the illness. Often, he or she is restless and irritable for some weeks or months before developing measles as though a storm is brewing. The family and other people around the child often greet the appearance of measles with relief, because at last the cause of the problem is evident. As the rash develops, and the disease goes into its second stage, the child becomes more confused and irrational. This is the most dangerous phase, and it represents the transition point.At this time, the body turns the corner as the poison leaves and the immune system gains the upper hand against the invaders. Then, as the crisis passes and the fever subsides, the child's awareness returns -- but with a different outlook. The negative and irritable behaviour has gone, and he or she is emotionally delicate and open to new influences. The child sees ordinary and familiar things in life for the first time, but through new eyes, as though he or she has had a form of ritual experience.On the physical level, the poisons accumulated during life the womb have been expelled. At the higher emotional and mental levels, negative forces such as greed and selfishness have also been expelled. So a child who has measles is afterwards less self-centered and more openhearted, and often more able to express his or her individuality. The personality becomes rounder and fuller, and more joyful and contented, as a step towards maturity and adulthood.""Children who are fed too frequently or fed improperly, and who are troubled with constipation and the passing of undigested food with the bowel movements, are made susceptible not only to diphtheria, but also to scarlet fever, measles, whooping-cough, etc. Indeed, it can be proved that normal, healthy children--children who have bowels that are regular, and who are not troubled with intestinal indigestion--cannot be made to take any of these diseases."--Tilden 1921"Measles is the manner in which a child's body throws off toxemia. When children are cared for improperly, they become toxemic, and their skin eliminates toxin to a greater degree than does the skin of grown people."--"It is my belief that measles heads the list of the diseases of childhood which are the result of starch and sugar toxemia."-(Food is Your Best Medicine)."I have myself, through Natural Hygiene, over 16 years, treated all forms and hundreds of cases of typhus and typhoid fevers, pneumonia's, measles and dysentery's, and have not lost a single patient. The same is true of scarlet and other fevers. No medicine whatever was given".--Dr Trall 1860.Febrile infectious childhood diseases (FICDs) are associated with a lower cancer risk in adulthood.A Swiss study found that adults are significantly protected against non-breast cancers — genital, prostate, gastrointestinal, skin, lung, ear-nose-throat, and others — if they contracted measles (odds ratio, OR = 0.45), rubella (OR = 0.38) or chickenpox (OR = 0.62) earlier in life:Febrile infectious childhood diseases in the history of cancer patients and matched controls.Chicken pox and reduced rates of brain cancer in adulthood:History of chicken pox may reduce risk of brain cancer later in lifeMumps and reduced rates of ovarian cancer:Mumps and ovarian cancer: modern interpretation of an historic associationMeasles and reduced risk of lymphomasMeasles - Disease Information Statement (DIS) - Physicians for Informed ConsentAnd on the contrary....both the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) and chicken pox vaccine contain human DNA which has been linked to childhood cancers like leukemia and lymphoma, autoimmune diseases and gender identify confusion....Marcella Piper-TerryFebrile infectious childhood diseases in the history of cancer patients and matched controls.#vaccines #measles #cancer #wedid #crazymothers #hearthiswell - Fermented FarmacyAs to treatment it was always safe in healthy children eg my whole school of 110 kids got measles I was first and spent nice few days in sickbay just for isolationAnd safe with all kids under proper medical care even 100 years agoNo one before the vax fearmongering started ever feared measlesThat’s homeopathy and naturopathyWhile nutritional medicine proved vit c made it safe 70 years ago eg Klenner in 1950s"But the ordinary child who gets measles, even the child with a moderate degree of malnutrition and so forth, if you give intravenous vitamin C supplementary to other forms of treatment, the response very often, not always, is absolutely dramatic If you get them early enough. You must get them early. If you delay, and they have been unconscious let us say for days, or a day or two, you cannot reverse it. The damage is permanent. If you get them early, give them this treatment and there is no problem. And that makes me very, very angry, because they talk about "Oh, we must stop these kids getting measles" and so forth. Well, all right, I can fix them if they get measles."---dr k(International Vaccine Newsletter June 1995)Vitamin a"Knowing that measles often leads to vitamin A loss, we had begun to wonder if Africa's high death rates from measles might also be connected with vitamin A deficiency. To test this, children hospitalized with measles in Tanzania were given vitamin A capsules. The **measles death rate fell by half**. It was at this point that we discovered, to our astonishment, that a similar experiment had been conducted 50 years earlier in a London hospital - with the same results: medicine too has doors it did not enter, paths it did not take."--Sommer“If a source of vitamin A, such as butter, cod-liver oil or egg yolk formed a part of the diet, infective lesions were never seen in the rats and the addition of these substances to the deficient diets, unless the animals were too severely infected, generally resulted in rapid improvement and ultimate cure.”---Mellanby"There is a "cure" for measles. It is called vitamin A... cod-liver oil. As early as 1932 doctors used cod-liver oil to reduce hospital mortality by 58%, but then antibiotics became the treatment of fashion, *(Clin. Infect. Dis., Sept. 1994, pg 493) *and vitamin A was ignored until 1980. A 1993 study showed that **72% of hospitalised measles cases in America are vitamin A deficient**, and the worse the deficiency the worse the complications and higher the death rate. *(Pediatric Nursing, Sept./Oct. 96.) *Yet doctors and hospitals in New Zealand do not use vitamin A."As to the Allopaths solution to measles it can only be described as satanic"AT LEAST 26 families claim their children died as a result of the controversial measles, mumps and rubella jab, the Sunday Express can reveal. In some cases the Government has awarded parents up to £100,000 under its 1979 Vaccine Damage Payment Act. In others, post mortem reports concluded the jab was the most likely cause of death. Despite this, the Department of Health insists no child has ever died from MMR."MMR diseases (Lawyer list many years ago, UK). Legal aid was withdrawn, see MMR legal fundingAutism (287), Crohn’s disease and other serious chronic stomach problems (136), Epilepsy (132), Other forms of brain damage (induding meningitis, cerebral palsy, encephalopathy, encephalitis etc.) (77), Hearing and vision problems (81), Arthritis (50), Behavioural and learning problems (in older children) (110), Chronic fatigue syndrome (41), Diabetes (15), Guillain-Barre syndrome (9), Idiopathic thrombocytopaenic purpura (and other purpuras) (6), Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis (SSPE) (3), Wegener’s Granulamatosis (2), Leukaemia (1), Multiple sclerosis (1), Death (18).how they make the Measles vaccine, start at 5:00. "I found a CDC paper called '*Isolation of the Measles virus*.' If we think a patient might have Measles get some fluid from that patient...and put in fridge. Next, get a marmoset monkey, kill it, take it's cells and put cells in cell culture because they are 10,000 times more responsive to measles than our human cells. The cell culture isn't ready yet to grow measles virus. Next thing is to make the monkey cells cancerous by exposing to radiation. Next give those monkey cells Epstein Barr virus, which is a horrific disease. Next, add a toxin to the cell culture that is so dangerous the advice is to wear rubber gloves, don't let human skin touch it. The CDC says at this point the cells are starting to fall off the sides of the vessel, in other words they are poisoned, they have cancer and EBV and they are falling over, they are ill. Give them 2 days to recover and add nutrients. Now get sample out of fridge and add to these diseased and cancerous cells. Watch with microscope for 2 days. If after this time 50% of the cells are distorted then you have an isolate of measles virus and you are instucted to put in fridge and keep to be used as vaccine. At no point is measles virus seen, at no point is the measles virus proved to cause the illness in the cells. We know they are poisoned, we know they have been given cancer & Epstein Barr syndrome. That is now ready to be made into a vaccine to be put into our kids. This noxious mixture is the basis that can be used in vaccines." Janine Roberts on Vaccines (Janine Roberts on Vaccines)The five stages of vaccine awareness1. Vaccines are safe and effective2. Vaccines are unsafe but effective3. Vaccines do more harm than good4. Vaccines are ineffective and dangerous5. Vaccines are silent weapons for human farming: killing, sterilising, mind control, and disease creation for fear and income. Vaccine advocates are psychopaths or useful idiots“Vaccination is child abuse and a crime against humanity.” - Dr Buchwald MD''Vaccination is not disease prevention - it's a particularly nasty form of organised crime in that it manipulates parents' protective instincts to get them to submit their child into getting poisoned for profit under the guise of disease prevention.'' ~ Erwin Alber."The greatest threat of childhood diseases lies in the dangerous and ineffectual efforts made to prevent them through mass immunization.....There is no convincing scientific evidence that mass inoculations can be credited with eliminating any childhood disease."-Dr Robert Mendelsohn (received his Doctor of Medicine degree from the University of Chicago in 1951. For 12 years he was an instructor at Northwest University Medical College, and an additional 12 years served as Associtae Professor of Pediatrics and Community Health and Preventive Medicine at the University of Illinois College of Medicine. He was also President of the National Health Federation, former National Director of Project Head Starts Medical Consultation Service, and Chairman of the Medical Licensing Comittee of the State of Illinois.)"Parents who allow their children to be vaccinated should be charged with child abuse and sent to prison for a very long time."---Dr Vernon Coleman MB (Coleman's Laws.)"The 'victory over epidemics' was not won by medical science or by doctors--and certainly not by vaccines.....the decline...has been the result of technical, social and hygienic improvements and especially of improved nutrition. Here the role of the potato...deserves special mention.....Consider carefully whether you want to let yourself or your children undergo the dangerous, controversial, ineffective and no longer necessary procedure called vaccination, because the claim that vaccinations are the cause for the decline of infectious diseases is **utter nonsense.**"--The Vaccination Nonsense (2004 Lectures)---**Dr. med. G. Buchwald **“I was the first to announce the "autism epidemic", in 1995, and I pointed out in that article that excessive vaccines were a plausible cause of the epidemic. As you know, an enormous amount of clinical laboratory research (as opposed to epidemiological research), has been accumulated since that time, supporting my position. (I did not know then that the vaccines contained mercury, although I had been collecting data since 1967 from the mothers of autistic children, on any dental work they may have had during their pregnancy.) The evidence is now overwhelming, despite the misinformation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Institute of Medicine.” ~ Bernard Rimland (November 15, 1928 – November 21, 2006) was an American research psychologist, writer, lecturer, and advocate for children with developmental disorders. Rimland's first book, Infantile Autism, sparked by the birth of a son who had autism, was instrumental in changing attitudes toward the disorder. Rimland founded and directed two advocacy groups: the Autism Society of America (ASA) and the Autism Research Institute."We have about 30,000 or 35,000 children that we've taken care of over the years, and I don't think we have a single case of autism in children delivered by us who never received vaccines.......Every doctor now essentially in this country has done something as heinous as the Nazis did, unknowingly." ~ Dr Eisenstein MD“I think that the biological case against Thimerosal is so dramatically overwhelming anymore that only a very foolish or a very dishonest person with the credentials to understand this research would say that Thimerosal wasn’t most likely the cause of autism……you couldn't even construct a study that shows thimerosal is safe. It's just too darn toxic. If you inject thimerosal into an animal, its brain will sicken. If you apply it to living tissue, the cells die. If you put it in a petri dish, the culture dies. Knowing these things, it would be shocking if one could inject it into an infant without causing damage." ----Dr. Boyd Haley, Professor and Chair, Dept. of Chemistry, University of Kentucky and one of the world's leading authorities on mercury toxicity.