The CDC Military-like Vaccine Extremist Program to Vaccinate Every Child in America

[Created4]

With military precision, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) announced at an Aug. 27, 2015 press conference that national vaccination rates among young children in the U.S. continue to be very high but that more must be done to tag and track down children without every government recommended vaccine and publicly shame schools that fail to maintain a 95% plus vaccine coverage rate.

Government health officials partnering with industry have declared war on citizens exercising freedom of thought, speech and conscience, who question the safety and effectiveness of government vaccine policies and defend the human right to informed consent to medical risk taking.

Military strategies employed to win wars view casualties as necessary losses. Unfortunately, it appears that those waging the “take no prisoners” culture war view both the vaccine injured and human and civil rights as necessary losses.

Read the full story at VaccineImpact.com

[donnay]

Some will say, "we brought these actions on ourselves" because we research and understand freedom.

[Working Poor]

The majority believes vaccines are the best thing since sliced bread and they will never be convinced otherwise.

[Leaning Libertarian]

I found this below article. As I am passionate about this issue, I wanted to share it. Although specific to one politician in California, this shows how the pharmaceutical industry is buying our representatives like prostitutes, and they in turn are passing mandatory vaccine laws. It is scary to think there is no liability whatsoever on the part of manufacturers, yet the product is legally mandated. This is not the same USA I grew up in as a kid. Former CDC Director, Julie Gerberding left the CDC to work at Merc, a leading vaccine manufacturer. She was appointed executive vice president for strategic communications, global public policy and population health for Merc. In May of 2015, it is reported she sold 38,368 shares of Merc stock for a total of 2.3 million dollars. The bottom line is it will all come to light, if you "follow the money."

FOLLOW THE MONEY ON MADATORY VACCINES
by Louise Gliatto
There are two things I do when I research a legislative bill. I check the Political Party affiliation of the author and their campaign contributors.
I went to the Secretary of State’s web site to” Follow the Money” on Senator Richard Pan, MD., Democrat and author of SB277, Mandatory Vaccinations for all children in CA. The only exemption from “forced” vaccinations will be for a documented by your doctor for a serious medical condition. There will be no more exemptions for religious or personal beliefs.
Surprise, Surprise!! Senator Pan has received approximately $500,000 in campaign contributions from the Pharmaceutical companies and Pharmaceutical PACS. You can verify this by going to: cal-access.ss.ca.govand type in Pan. I have only listed a few of the companies in the interest of not boring you: GlaxoSmithKline PAC, Merk & Company, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Astellas, Pharma US and Astrazenca.
I can’t help but wonder if Senator Pan’s coauthors and supporters of SB277 are aware of the amount of contributions he has accepted from big Pharma and Medical Associations who are heavily lobbied by the drug companies.
Look at some of the Mandatory Vaccines that our children will be forced to have in order to attend school. Notice that the manufacturers are those who have given money to help elect the Senator. He is their dream Candidate, a Pediatrician. You know the saying, “Trust Me I’m a Doctor!”
1. Hepatitis B, Engerix-B by GlaxoSmithKline
2. Haemophilus influenza, Merk and GalxoSmithKline
3. MMRII, Merk
4. Polio (IVP), GalxoSmithKline
5. Rotavirus, GalxoSmithKline and Merk
6. Small Pox Sandofi Pasteur
7. Tetanus, Sandofi Pasteur
8. Meningococcal, Novartis, GalxoSmithkline, Pfizer
9. Chicken pox, Merk
10. Typhoid, Sandofi Pasteur
More to think about…did you know that THE VACCINE INDUSTRY HAS BEEN GIVEN IMMUNITY FROM LAWSUITS? In 1986 vaccine manufactures and administers of vaccines were given immunity from liability with the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act which does not allow parents to sue the drug companies. They have to sue the Federal Government with Federal judges and no jury. We all know how that would turn out! The Vaccine Adverse Reporting System annually reports about 11,000 serious vaccine reactions, including up to 200 deaths and many more permanent disabilities. But poor reporting in America suggests that annual adverse vaccine reactions, in fact, number from 100,000 – one million. Then to ‘seal the deal’, the US Supreme Court decided in 2011 (Bruesewitz v. Wyeth) to grant big pharma immunity from liability even if their products were knowingly contaminated or flawed. The reason the manufacturers don’t have liability is because the US Supreme Court concluded “vaccines are unavoidably unsafe products.”
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-152.pdf
Nobody is held accountable or liable when a child is injured or killed by vaccines except the parent whose “informed consent” rights have been violated by laws that make vaccinations mandatory by legislators wielding power they should never have been given.
This is a great deal for the Drug companies: Mandatory Vaccinations with guaranteed consumers and guaranteed cash flow from the federal government with no liability for damages and no incentive for product safety. Since 1989, the Federal Government has paid only 2.3 billion dollars for vaccine injuries. Given the total lifetime care of a vaccine-injured child, many parents believe this figure should be substantially higher. http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/statisticsreports
SB277 has passed and was signed by Jerry Brown this June. This is a movement to recall Senator Pan, the author of the bill. Help protect your parental and religious rights.
Taking the unjustified and intrusive step of eliminating a parent’s right to exercise informed consent when making medical decisions for their children and potentially harm ANY child for the “greater good” is unwarranted, unconstitutional and un-American.
“The pharmaceutical industry does not create cures, they create customers.” (Vactruth.com)
Go to: www.RecallPan.com to donate and for more information about recalling Senator Pan.
Go to: Californians for Vaccine Choice on facebook. — with Louise Gliatto.
California Secretary of State - CalAccess
CAL-ACCESS.SS.CA.GOV

[Working Poor]

I found this below article

I respect your effort to find a source against mandatory vaccines. The thing is who the hell is Louise Gliatto? I went to her "facebook" page and saw nothing on who she is or what makes her so called "credible". I am totally looking for a source that cannot be disputed or discredited.

I know vaccines cause harm I have experienced the harm first hand.But miy experience and those who like me have experienced harm are not considered "credible" it is merely anecdotal and is not even considered statically relevant Yet, when one person who dies from measles who has a plethora of other health problems but blaming her death on some unvaccinated person but this evidence is not considered "anecdotal". The person who died was the first person in 12 years from measles but the thousands of children and adults who are injured by vaccines is nothing. I am very concerned about what vaccines are doing to our children and I want to find a source that is undisputed. It saddens and scares me to no end that anyone who stands against mandatory vaccines is discredited no matter what their findings are.Modern medicine is brutal and they are willing to make big mistakes in the name of moving forward. I know it is all about money and nothing is too high a sacrifice in order to get it and keep it.

[Leaning Libertarian]

I respect your effort to find a source against mandatory vaccines. The thing is who the hell is Louise Gliatto? I went to her "facebook" page and saw nothing on who she is or what makes her so called "credible". I am totally looking for a source that cannot be disputed or discredited.

I know vaccines cause harm I have experienced the harm first hand.But miy experience and those who like me have experienced harm are not considered "credible" it is merely anecdotal and is not even considered statically relevant Yet, when one person who dies from measles who has a plethora of other health problems but blaming her death on some unvaccinated person but this evidence is not considered "anecdotal". The person who died was the first person in 12 years from measles but the thousands of children and adults who are injured by vaccines is nothing. I am very concerned about what vaccines are doing to our children and I want to find a source that is undisputed. It saddens and scares me to no end that anyone who stands against mandatory vaccines is discredited no matter what their findings are.Modern medicine is brutal and they are willing to make big mistakes in the name of moving forward. I know it is all about money and nothing is too high a sacrifice in order to get it and keep it.

On July 7th and 8th, 2000; There was a meeting to discuss the result of a scientific review of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information. This meeting was fully transcribed, and had the top epidemiologists and health officials in the world in attendance. In the transcript of the meeting, these health officials discuss the dangers associated with the preservatives in vaccines, they discuss the "statistically significant" probability the increase in autism and learning disability is associated with vaccines, then go on to discuss how best to conceal this information from the public; rather than how to best alert the public.

http://www.thinktwice.com/simpwood.pdf

It has been my experience anyway, deniers of vaccine injury will deny with religious fervent. If you use a source from "Louise Gliatto" they will say "who is she? She isn't credible." (notice this denial didn't even mention any aspect of the validity of her argument.) If you use a source like the link above where the sources are among the most credible on the planet, they will change tactics. Rather than attacking the source, they will sling personal attacks calling you a "cook, conspiracist, etc...," (notice again this denial doesn't mention the validity of the argument) Here is the reality though. In the 1970's autism accounted for 1 in 10,000 live births. Now autism accounts for 1 in 58 live births. This number has ever increased annually. Consider the pace we are going. There will shortly be a turning point where autism should no longer be considered a mental disorder. This is because the majority of humans on the planet will have autism. There are even video's and professors now trying to now claim autism is the new stage of human evolution. I find that statement disturbing. Until we get serious about finding a way to change the pandemic of diagnoses, and consider no possible ground to sacred to fully and independently investigate (including vaccines), we will have serious problems. But going back to deniers, you can't even point out this simple truth without denials. They will claim "There is no real increase in prevalence, it is just more are now diagnosed due to better awareness and diagnostic procedure." This sounds really smart, but take that effect with any other novel concept besides autism to see how in reality it is pretty dumb. Let's try train wrecks as an alternative. in the 1970's 1 in 10,000 vehicular accidents were train wrecks. Now today 1 in 58 vehicular accidents are train wrecks. There is no real increase in prevalence of train wrecks, we have just gotten so much better at identifying and diagnosing train wrecks. See how absurd that sounds? Use the word Autism and suddenly the absurdity of the argument is more hidden, but really it is the same.

[Isaac Bickerstaff]

"We have no idea what causes autism, but we know for certain that it isn't the vaccines.
because when the vaccine has been legally determined to have caused an injury, it is labeled 'autism-like symptoms,'"

[Zippyjuan]

"There is no real increase in prevalence, it is just more are now diagnosed due to better awareness and diagnostic procedure."

True. Along with a constantly expanding definition of what is included in the autism spectrum. Kids are called autistic today who weren't given that title even a couple decades ago. Maybe a kid is bored and doesn't pay attention. Autistic. Maybe they are a bit "slow". Today, they get called autistic. The full title is "autism spectrum disorder" and the spectrum it covers has grown over time- covering a wide range of "symptoms". There is no test to see if a person is truely autistic but a doctor considers symptoms and declares the person to be autistic. A different doctor may interpret the same symptoms differently.


http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/54...anded.html.csp

One reason for the dramatic increase in children diagnosed with autism in Utah is the expanded definition of the disorder, according to a new study.

University of Utah researchers applied today's criteria for autism-spectrum disorders to children who were considered challenged in the 1980s and who participated in an autism study at that time. The new study found a majority of those kids would now be classified as autistic.


"The modern criteria have expanded the number of folks who are included in this diagnosis," said one of the study's authors, Deborah Bilder, an assistant professor of psychiatry who works in the U.'s autism diagnostic clinic.

It is known that the expanded definition has increased the identification of high-functioning individuals with autism. The new study shows it has also boosted identification of those who have both autism and an intellectual disability.

"It does support the idea that a part of this increase in prevalence is related to the broadening criteria," said Bilder.

http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/se...sm-rise?page=2

"A kid labeled autistic today could have been labeled mentally retarded 10 years ago in the same school system," Shattuck says. It wasn't until 1992 that schools began to include autism as a special education classification.

Today, children diagnosed as having autism spectrum disorder are often more mildly affected than the classic "Rain Man" stereotype some people associate with the disorder, Shattuck says. After autism was first identified in 1943, some of the first studies found most of the children mentally retarded. "Today the minority of kids [with ASD] are mentally retarded,'' Shattuck tells WebMD.

[CPUd]

[Danke]

http://anticorruptionsociety.com/cen...ntrol-exposed/

[Working Poor]

http://anticorruptionsociety.com/cen...ntrol-exposed/

I am sure if these people have not been discredited the will be...

[Leaning Libertarian]

True. Along with a constantly expanding definition of what is included in the autism spectrum. Kids are called autistic today who weren't given that title even a couple decades ago. Maybe a kid is bored and doesn't pay attention. Autistic. Maybe they are a bit "slow". Today, they get called autistic. The full title is "autism spectrum disorder" and the spectrum it covers has grown over time- covering a wide range of "symptoms". There is no test to see if a person is truely autistic but a doctor considers symptoms and declares the person to be autistic. A different doctor may interpret the same symptoms differently.

This is quite another tactic. Certainly this can account for some of the increase. IMHO it can not account for such a radical change of 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 58. I appreciate your link to the Scientific Study conducted by the University of Utah. Where I grow a sense of skepticism is when their funding source is directly from the CDC, through their NIOSH Extramural Research and Training Program Grant. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/centers.html

With such a prevalence in increase, it is my opinion autism at least deserves unbiased "independent" research, where there is not financial incentive for one outcome over the other.

I don't really have full faith and trust in the CDC. Julie Gerberding was the former Director of the CDC. In 2009, she went on from this position to serve as the Director of the Vaccine Division for Merck, a leading vaccine manufacturer. It is reported earlier this month, Ms. Gerberding sold 38,368 of her held shares in Merck stock for $2,340,064.32 http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/former-cdc-director-julie-gerberding-sells-38368-shares-of-merck-stock-for-2-3-million/#sthash.qVLp9pbV.dpuf

A lot of the "science is settled" mentality related to vaccines and autism, have a multi-million vested interest in ensuring "there is no link." I can appreciate their advanced degrees in the field, but can also appreciate the amount of money they would lose if there was shown to be a link between vaccines and autism.

but... then I suppose I could play the devils advocate... Since there is "no link" between vaccines and autism, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Act of 1986, funding vaccine injuries with taxpayer money, is a complete waste of taxpayer funds. They squandered millions of taxpayer funds by declaring Baily Bank's and Hannah Polling's autism resulted from vaccines. Therefore, this act should immediately be reversed. Any existing and future claims should be handled by the judicial system where claimants file tort claims against the vaccine manufacturers. As there is "no link" whatsoever, all these cases will surely be summarily dismissed as frivolous. Of course vaccine manufacturers would never allow this to happen, and this is their hypocrisy. Collect millions in profits, have no product liability, fully fund their own studies, and even in the event a suit gets settled against the vaccines it is paid by taxpayer funds.