Virginians For Health Freedom
2019 Legislative Update
March 2, 2019
1/19/2018 Homeopathy Under Attack by the FDA
Right now, despite the law, FDA is attacking homeopathy to "protect" us. Starting in 2018, FDA claims the power to restrict access to natural homeopathic remedies, contrary to long-standing law by issuing a "guidance" banning homeopathic remedies (which in the U.S., have been government-approved ever since the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 recognized homeopathic preparations as drugs.)
Please submit your comments to the FDA and help protect our access to homeopathic remedies before the comment period expires, and encourage your readers, patients, clients, etc. to do so, too. It's helpful to include any proof that you may have or can find articles /studies showing that it works and is safe.
Where to submit comments:
Homeopathy in Epidemics
Where to submit comments:
Presentation from the American Institute of Homeopathy
Draft Guidance for FDA Staff and Industry Drug Products Labeled as Homeopathic
FDA Declares All Homeopathic Drugs Illegal Threatening Remedies for Millions of Americans
January 17, 2018 2:06 pm
In one fell swoop, the FDA has declared that virtually every single homeopathic drug on the market is being sold illegally. The FDA says that it does not intend to take action against such products at this time, but the writing is on the wall. If it wants to, the FDA could go after any homeopathic drug currently on the market. FDA'€™s process started two years ago, when the agency held a public hearing to evaluate its enforcement policies for homeopathic products. We suspected the agency was planning to tighten its grip on homeopathy, which, after all, competes with the pharmaceutical drugs that fund the FDA. We cannot let the FDA eliminate consumer access to homeopathy.
Chairman of Israel Medical Association and World Medical Association Opposes Mandatory Flu Vaccines for Doctors
January 17, 2018 3:55 pm
In order to get a perspective on sane and rational vaccine policy, we must again turn away from the U.S. corporate media and their primary advertising sponsors, the pharmaceutical industry. The flu vaccine is, by far, the most prosperous vaccine produced and sold in the U.S., with over 300 million doses produced annually. It is also the leading vaccine, by far, injuring and killing people as evidenced by the quarterly Department of Justice (DOJ) reports of vaccine injury and death compensations by the Vaccine Court. In the U.S., one cannot sue a pharmaceutical company for injuries or deaths related to vaccines. By simply reading the U.S. corporate "mainstream" media one is led to believe that all doctors and medical personnel support mass flu vaccination, and believe all medical staff should be forced to receive the flu vaccine every year. But such is not the case. As we have reported over the past several years, many doctors and nurses nationwide oppose mandatory flu vaccination for medical personnel. There are several lawsuits by individuals and unions nationwide fighting loss of employment due to refusing a flu vaccine. The Jerusalem Post recently reported that Prof. Leonid Eidelman, chairman of the Israel Medical Association and the next president of the World Medical Association, opposes mandatory flu vaccinations for doctors, and he opposes identifying which doctors have been vaccinated for the flu, and which ones have not.
HB-644 is now dead for the 2018 session of the General Assembly. Thanks to all who contacted members of the Health, Welfare and Institutions committee and/or Subcommittee 3 for your continued support. We will continue to fight for the individual’s rights in health care.
The 2019 Legislative Session in Virginia has come to a close. There were no licensure bills submitted this year that have affected our rights regarding natural health. We continue to monitor activities of State Senators and Delegates and work to influence them on our behalf.
The same cannot be said about other states across our country. We have posted an update on our website from the National Vaccine Information Center which outlines 113 current vaccine related bills across the United States. And Congress held hearings just this week on the recent measles outbreak in the US. As an organization, Virginians for Health Freedom supports the right of every person to the type of healthcare they choose from the provider of their choice. This includes natural remedies and the choice of whether to vaccinate or not.
In addition, we have posted two related articles on vaccines and vaccination on our website. The first is an Open Letter from a Harvard PHD that outlines why unvaccinated children “…pose no undue risk to the public”. The second is a transcript of testimony from Dr. Brian Hooker to Legislators in Washington State. One interesting quote from that testimony states,
“Over the past ten years in the U.S., there has been one reported death from the measles . . . During the same time period (based on VAERS reports), there have been 105 reported deaths associated with the MMR or MMRV vaccinations.
We will continue to post relevant articles and legislative information on our website which can be accessed at http://www.virginiansforhealthfreedom.org/
Finally, thanks for your continued support. The annual membership dues and donations support our efforts to protect health freedom in Virginia.
2018 Legislation in Review
Harvard Immunologist to Legislators:
Unvaccinated Children Pose ZERO Risk to Anyone
(Highlight the black and right click then click go to)
February 19, 2019
Measles Madness: Dr. Brian Hooker’s Statement to WA Legislators
This article originally published by Focus for Health.
Dr. Hooker provided testimony last Friday, February 8, 2019, for the Washington State House Health Committee regarding the vaccines and the Personal Belief Exemption (PBE) bill that was introduced.
Recent outbreaks of measles, especially in Rockland County, New York and Clark County, Washington have created quite a furor in the public health infrastructure of the U.S. and now within state legislatures. Industry front groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) have seized the opportunity to introduce legislation to remove personal belief exemptions and religious exemptions for vaccinations required for school attendance. Nationwide, over 70 different bills have been introduced or are expected to be introduced in state legislatures to limit these types of exemptions.
I recently had the privilege to testify in the Health Committee in the House of Representatives for Washington State and wanted to share some excerpts of my testimony. In Washington State, legislators have introduced a bill to remove the personal belief exemption specifically for the Measles Mumps Rubella (MMR) vaccine. I want to thank Karl Kanthak and Bernadette Pajer who both contributed important information for my testimony.
… it’s not low vaccination rates, it’s actually high vaccination rates with a vaccine product unable to provide lifetime immunity
The following is taken from my testimony:
There is a problem with measles in Washington State, but it’s not low vaccination rates, it’s actually high vaccination rates with a vaccine product unable to provide lifetime immunity or vigorous passive maternal protection to infants during the first year of life.
When the measles vaccine was first introduced, most people over the age of 15 who had wild measles had lifetime immunity. In developed nations, like other communicable infections, measles was no longer dangerous except in rare circumstances because of inadequate nutrition, poor sanitation, and / or lack of healthcare. Because having the measles was a routine part of childhood, teens, adults, parents, and grandparents were immune. And because of maternal passive immunity, infants were protected. The death rate due to measles in Washington State in the four years prior to the introduction of the measles vaccine was 1.4 in 10,000 cases and approximately 2 in 1,000,000 in the general population.
Legislators are being told that use of personal and religious belief exemptions are putting the public’s health in danger. They are told that two infants were recently exposed to measles and the babies are in danger. But in fact, if the mothers of the children had wild measles when they were children and they are nursing, the babies may be protected. If the mothers were vaccinated, even if they are nursing, they may not be. Additionally, maternal antibodies transported across the placenta can provide vital immunity against measles for infants.
Pushing vaccination rates up even higher with an ineffective product is not the answer. As the editor of the journal Vaccine Dr. Gregory Poland of The Mayo Clinic stated in 1994, “…as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons.” An MMR vaccination rate of 75% has been reported for the recent measles cluster in Rockland County, New York.
… vaccination does not guarantee immunization and infectious diseases routinely break out in highly vaccinated communities.
It was reported in the news and provided to legislators that in Clark County, WA there is a 22% exemption rate, but this is based on the voluntary Immunization Information Survey (IIS) which does not accurately reflect the vaccination status of all children enrolled in Washington schools. When compared to the more accurate CDC statistics for the state of Washington for MMR coverage among 19 to 35 month olds, it is 95.3% +/- 2.6%. The IIS erroneously reports this number at 81.8% and cannot be relied upon.
The current personal belief exemption rate for K-12 for the MMR vaccine in Washington State is only 2.9% (WA DOH School Survey). Vaccination rates for kindergarteners for at least one MMR vaccine are at least 93% (WA DOH School Survey). Washington State has achieved the public health goal of very high vaccination rates.
As I have already remarked, vaccination does not guarantee immunization and infectious diseases routinely break out in highly vaccinated communities. An example of this is pertussis outbreaks, which occur due to problems with the acellular pertussis portion of the DTaP and Tdap vaccine, creating asymptomatic carriers. An asymptomatic carrier is a person that has become infected with a pathogen, but who display no signs nor symptoms. Although unaffected by the pathogen themselves, carriers can transmit it to others or develop symptoms in later stages of disease.
SB277 [removal of personal belief exemptions in CA] did not “change the minds” of non-vaccinating parents. Instead, it pushed families out of school and created lost income to school districts.
The SB277 experience in California, where personal belief exemptions were struck down in 2016, has not led to 100% vaccine compliance even within the school system. Removal of personal belief exemptions has served to alienate parents leading to an exodus from the school system (1.2%), as well as from the state, and placing the school districts in the untenable role of “vaccination enforcers.” An additional 1.4% within the school district are still unvaccinated due to Federal Individualized Education Programs, medical and other exemptions. SB277 did not change the minds of non-vaccinating parents. Instead, it pushed families out of school and created lost income to school districts.
Regarding the Australian experience with vaccine mandates, one official stated that, “Parents reported a greater commitment to their decision not to vaccinate and an increased desire to maintain control over health choices for their children including an unprecedented willingness to become involved in protest action.” (J. Public Health Policy 2018 39:156, Helps et al.) With the removal of the PBE for the MMR vaccine, 2.9% of the children in WA State, which is 15,000 to 20,000 students, will be excluded from school. If the PBE is removed for all vaccines required for school attendance, 37,000 children will be removed from school. For small school districts, this will cause a financial crisis. Mandates do not encourage vaccination, they push exemption-using families out of schools.
Over the past ten years in the U.S., there has been one reported death from the measles . . . During the same time period (based on VAERS reports), there have been 105 reported deaths associated with the MMR or MMRV vaccinations.
The Supreme Court in the Bruesewitz vs. Wyeth case called vaccinations “unavoidably unsafe,” and the scientific literature shows an incidence of vaccine adverse events that is dangerous in light of the proposed mandate. Over the past ten years in the U.S., there has been one reported death from the measles, and it is unclear based on the medical history of the patient whether and how measles played a role in their death. During the same time period (based on Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports), there have been 105 reported deaths associated with the MMR or MMRV vaccinations.
From 2006 to 2011, the CDC funded a project by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc. for the automation of the VAERS database. VAERS up to this point has been a passive surveillance system based on voluntary reporting of vaccine adverse events (AEs) and CDC officials were concerned about underreporting of such events. The team from Harvard Pilgrim set up a monitoring system of a large health care provider (with 35 clinics) and monitoring the outcomes of from 1.4 million vaccines received. Using chart abstraction, 35,570 potential adverse events were reported within a window of 30 days post-vaccination. In other words, the rate of potential adverse events was 2.6%. As legislators, you are feeling pressure to protect infants and others susceptible to poor infection outcome, but taking away the personal belief exemption for an ineffective product is not the answer.
You must not only protect those who are susceptible to poor infection outcome, but protect those who are susceptible to poor vaccination outcome, and to consider the unintended consequences of a fully vaccinated population that does not have lifetime immunity.
.STATUS OF VACCINE RELATED LEGISLATION IN THE UNITED STATES
FEBRUARY 14, 2019
CONTACT YOUR LEGISLATORS
As of Thursday, February 14, 2019, NVIC is tracking on the NVIC Advocacy Portal 113 vaccine related bills across 27 States. Currently, the following states have bills you need to know about: Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Nevada, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming.
Breaking these 113 bills down by our NVIC position registered on the NVIC Advocacy Portal, we support on 48, oppose 60, and we are watching to see what happens with 5.
We are just a little over a month into most legislative sessions, so we are expecting more bills affecting even more states to still be filed.
This snapshot does not include all bills we track on the NVIC Advocacy Portal.
Login to the NVIC Advocacy Portal OFTEN to check for more detailed information and updates. We review bills and make updates daily. Bills can change many times over the legislative process and your timely visits, calls, and emails directed at the correct legislators are critical to this process.
Please check your state page on the NVIC Advocacy portal for bill descriptions including our position on the bill, links to the bill information in your state legislature, where the bill is in the legislative process, and most importantly, what the recommended action you can take to help pass the good bills and defeat the bad ones.
BILLS AFFECTING VACCINE EXEMPTIONS
There are currently 11 bills filed in 8 states which are adding or expanding vaccine exemptions that deserve your support.
Arizona HB 2470 and SB 1114 add a religious exemption for kindergarten through 12th grade students.
Hawaii HB 1182 adds a conscientious belief exemption for children.
Iowa SF 239 adds a conscientious belief exemption.
Mississippi SB 2255 adds philosophical and religious belief exemptions for school, and SB 2398 adds religious belief exemption. HB 479 allows adults to deny vaccines including for employment and adds a philosophical exemption for first responders.
Montana SB 99 expands the existing exemptions by allowing for a personally written exemption where someone wouldn’t need to use the state form.
New York S 477 strengthens and expands the medical exemption.
Rhode Island H 5165 adds personal and philosophical exemptions for all school and college students.
West Virginia SB 454 adds religious and conscientious exemptions for students and employees.
There are currently 18 bills filed in 10 states which are removing or restricting vaccine exemptions that need your opposition. There are 3 states under a verified threat of a bill to remove exemptions.
Arizona HB 2162 eliminates the personal and philosophical exemption for children and HB 2505 also removes the personal and philosophical exemption but replaces them with a religious exemption.
Colorado has not yet filed a bill to remove exemptions, but there has been verified discussion of one being considered. For details, see the Colorado State Page Announcements on http://NVICAdvocacy.org.
Connecticut HB 7005 removes school nurses from list of people who can acknowledge religious exemption making it harder for a parent to submit their exemption, and HB 5277 makes changes to the qualifications for a temporary waiver and is vulnerable to more restrictive or eliminating amendments. Both bills filed restrict exemptions and could lead to amendments of further restrictions or removal of the religious exemption.
Iowa HF 206 eliminates the religious belief exemption.
Maine LD 798 removes both religious and philosophical exemptions for students and staff working in nursery schools, and consequently for health care workers since the bill also calls for the elimination of exemptions for anyone granted them by rule.
New Jersey A 3818 was amended on the floor of the Assembly to remove the religious exemption, and S 2173 severely restricts the religious exemption.
New York A 2371 and S 2994 eliminate the religious exemption, and A 1135 and S 2289 restrict the religious exemption by requiring a health care provider signature. S 3424A creates a uniform religious exemption form but subjects it to an arbitrary superintendent approval process.
Oregon HB 2783 requires health care provider signatures on all exemptions, and there has been verified discussion of a bill to remove the philosophical exemption being ordered. For details, see the Oregon State Page Announcements on http://NVICAdvocacy.org.
Nevada AB 123 forces parents to consent to sharing of medical and religious exemptions to public health.
Vermont H 238 eliminates religious exemption for required vaccines.
Washington SB 5841 eliminates the personal and philosophical exemption and HB 1638 eliminates personal and philosophical exemptions for the MMR vaccine.
Wisconsin has not yet filed a bill to remove exemptions, but there has been verified discussion of one being considered. For details, see the Wisconsin State Page Announcements on http://NVICAdvocacy.org.
UPCOMING VERIFIED SCHEDULED HEARINGS (CONTACT COMMITTEE MEMBERS)
Arizona SB 1114, SUPPORT, Adds a religious belief exemption to vaccination for pupils through 12th grade. Scheduled for a hearing in the Senate Education Committee on 2/19/19.
Connecticut HB 7101, OPPOSE, Requires hospitals to offer flu vaccines to patients 65 and older before discharge. Scheduled for a hearing on 2/19/19 in the Joint Committee on Aging.
Florida SB 354, OPPOSE, Mandatory reporting and tracking of vaccines by health care practitioners in registry. SB 354 is scheduled for a hearing in Senate Health Policy Committee on 2/19/19.
Maryland SB 783, SUPPORT, Requires informed consent be given before administration of HPV Vaccine. Scheduled for a hearing on 2/26/2019.
Oregon SB 649, SUPPORT, Requires information packets be given by health care providers before vaccination. Scheduled for a public hearing on 2/18/2019.
Washington SB 5841, OPPOSE, Eliminates personal and philosophical exemptions to all mandated vaccines. Scheduled for a hearing in the Senate Health and Long Term Care Committee on 2/20/2019.
OTHER BILLS NEEDING YOUR SUPPORT IN THE FOLLOWING STATES
Improving Vaccine Informed Consent: Arizona, Connecticut, Idaho, Iowa, Illinois, Mississippi, Montana, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island.
Removing The Ability to Mandate by Health Department Rule: Hawaii, Oklahoma
Prohibit Vaccine Mandates for Certain Employees: Minnesota, Oregon
Add Positive Serological Testing in Lieu of Vaccination Requirements: Arizona, Oklahoma, and Washington
OTHER BILLS NEEDING OPPOSITION IN THE FOLLOWING STATES
Expanding Vaccine Tracking Registries: Florida, Indiana, Massachusetts, Maryland and Texas.
HPV: Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York
Meningitis: New Jersey
Flu: New York for school and day care
ACIP Recommendations to Mandates: Kentucky for college
Occupational Mandates: New Jersey
Workers in Children’s Camps: New York
School Disclosure of Exemption Rates (leads to shaming and discrimination): Arizona, Oklahoma and Texas.
Minor Children Consenting to Vaccines: New York for Hepatitis B and HPV.
Pharmacists and/or Optometrists Giving Vaccines: Montana, Oregon, and Wyoming.
COMMINICATING WITH LEGISLATORS
It is important that you make your position to bills that affect your rights known to your legislators.
Everyone should be visiting or calling their own State Representative and State Senator and asking them to OPPOSE any restriction or removal of personal, religious or medical exemptions to vaccine mandates.
Personal visits and phone calls are the most effective. You should follow up with an email note for legislators looking to read your information, but in no way should the only communication with your legislators be an email as these can be easily ignored or deleted.
If you do not know who your State Representative or State Senator are, or their contact information, you can login to the NVIC Advocacy Portal, click on the “State Teams” tab and then “My State,” and your elected officials are automatically posted on the right hand side of the page http://NVICAdvocacy.org. This is why we ask for your address when you register so we can connect you to your legislators.
When communicating with your legislators, be polite but be direct. It is important to voice your position on a bill and BRIEFLY share your vaccine reaction, harassment, or vaccine failure story in addition to the pros or cons on all bills you are highlighting.
Those seeking to restrict or remove exemptions have tried to create an environment dismissive of the experiences people have with real vaccine reactions. The VAXXED Website, http://vaxxed.com has thousands of video clips of people sharing their vaccine reactions. They also have a state map where you can click on your state and view testimonials in your state! These testimonials can be shared on social media and to legislators and staff directly.
Please refer to NVIC’s “Reforming Vaccine Policy and Law” guide for answers to questions your legislators may have. The fully referenced version can be found at: http://www.nvic.org/Vaccine-Laws/state-vaccine-requirements/Reforming-Vaccine-Policy---Law-Guide.aspx.
NVIC Advocacy Team
National Vaccine Information Center
http://NVIC.org and http://NVICAdvocacy.org
The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) works diligently to prepare and disseminate our legislative advocacy action alerts and supporting materials. We request that organizations and members of the public forward our alerts in their original form to assure consistent and accurate messaging and effective action. Please acknowledge NVIC as originators of this work when forwarding to members of the public and like-minded organizations. To receive alerts immediately, register at http://NVICAdvocacy.org, a website dedicated to this sole purpose and provided as a free public service by NVIC.