Association of American Physicians & Surgeons Sues Rep. Adam Schiff For “Censoring Vaccine Debate”

By Arjun Walia

  • The Facts: The Association of American Physicians & Surgeons is suing Rep. Adam Schiff for “censoring vaccine debate.”
  • Reflect On: Should information that creates and generates concern among the population about vaccines and vaccine safety be censored, even if it’s factual and not actually ‘fake news?’

Vaccines are a hot topic right now, and vaccine hesitancy is growing and quickly gaining momentum. The reality of vaccine hesitancy is no longer a secret, as many studies on the matter have been published. And it is no longer simply among concerned parents. This study published in the journal EbioMedicine discusses how practitioners in France are becoming increasingly hesitant to prescribe some controversial vaccines to their patients.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The World Health Organization believes vaccine hesitancy is one of the biggest threats to global health security. Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project, was one of many academics to speak at the World Health Organization’s recent Global Vaccine Safety Summit, where she explained why this is being considered a major problem:

The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers. We have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen–and we’re constantly looking on any studies in this space–still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider. And if we lose that, we’re in trouble.

Dissenting Professionals, Conflicting Statements

This type of hesitancy among health professionals has begun to spawn organizations looking for answers to their questions. ‘The Physicians for Informed Consent’ is one of multiple examples. It’s promising that doctors, scientists and health safety advocates that have come together to share resources about vaccines, and more importantly voice concerns that they have about certain vaccines and their safety.

At the summit, Dr. Martin Howell Friede, Coordinator of Initiative For Vaccine Research at the World Health Organization, brought up the issue of adjuvants, noting some of the problems with using adjuvants that do not have a proven track record of safety. Many people at the conference also emphasized the need for more safety testing and studies to address the concerns that are being made by vaccine safety advocates. Personally, I think this is encouraging. Science should never cease to question, and who wouldn’t want more safety studies and testing on medications that are being administered worldwide?

As this issue becomes more scrutinized by the public as well as health care professionals, more and more conflicting statements made by high-ranking health authorities are being uncovered, which in themselves may lead to a breakdown of confidence in vaccines. For example, Soumya Swaminathan, MD and Chief Scientist at the World Health Organization, stated at the conference,

don’t think we can overemphasize the fact that we really don’t have very good safety monitoring systems in many countries and this adds to the miscommunication and the misapprehensions, because we’re not able to give clear cut answers when people ask questions about deaths that have occurred due to particular vaccines… One should be able to give a very factual account of what exactly is happening, what the cause of deaths are, but in most cases there’s some obfuscation at that level and therefore there’s less and less trust then in the system.

Prior to this statement, the WHO released a promotional video just days before the conference began, where Dr. Swaminathan contradicted her statement above, saying “we have vaccine safety systems, robust vaccine safety systems.”

It would be nice to have answers as to why the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid close to 4 billion dollars to families of vaccine injured children, and what that says about these ‘safety systems’ she is talking about. Clearly, there seems to be a need to make our vaccines safer and more effective. Personally, I believe forced vaccination to be quite unethical given the fact that so many questions remain unanswered.

Read more about the conference here: Scientists Share Facts About Vaccines At World Health Organization Conference For Vaccine Safety

Association of American Physicians & Surgeons Sue Rep. Adam Schiff

The growing vaccine hesitancy has led the pharmaceutical industry and its supporters to a dangerous strategy: mass censorship. For those of you who haven’t heard, politicians and social media outlets are taking action steps to censor information about vaccines that is not aligned with the industry and its regulatory ‘arm,’ the CDC. In other words, just about anyone who is even questioning vaccine safety, let alone providing evidence that vaccines are not safe, is liable to be discredited, de-monitized, or de-platformed from social media.

Leading the charge is Congressman Adam Schiff, an advocate of vaccine safety and friend of the pharmaceutical industry, who has used his power and influence to immediately strengthen censorship efforts. His moves have been seen as unfair, unethical, and even illegal. In fact, on Jan 15, 2020, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, along with Katarina Verrelli, on behalf of herself and others who seek access to vaccine information, filed suit against Adam Schiff in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Schiff has abused government power and infringed on their free-speech rights.

Here’s how the association characterizes the situation:

Who appointed Congressman Adam Schiff as Censor-in-Chief?” asks AAPS General Counsel.  “No one did, and he should not be misusing his position to censor speech on the internet.”

In February and March 2019, Rep. Schiff contacted Google, Facebook, and Amazon, to encourage them to de-platform or discredit what Schiff asserted to be inaccurate information on vaccines. He then posted the letters and press release on the website.

Within 24 hours of Schiff’s letter to Amazon dated Mar 1, 2019, Amazon removed the popular videos Vaxxed and Shoot ’Em Up: the Truth About Vaccines from its platform for streaming videos, depriving members of the public of convenient access.

Under a policy announced in May 2019, Twitter includes a pro-government disclaimer placed above search results for an AAPS article on vaccine mandates: “Know the Facts. To make sure you get the best information on vaccination, resources are available from the US Department of Health and Human Services.” The implication of this disclaimer is that if information is not on a government website, then it is somehow less credible.

On Facebook, a search for an AAPS article on vaccines, which previously would lead directly to the AAPS article, now produces search results containing links to the World Health Organization (WHO), the National Institutes of Health, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Visits to the AAPS website have declined significantly since March 2019, both in absolute terms and relative to the decline that would result from a story’s losing its recency.

“The internet is supposed to provide free access to information to people of different opinions,” stated AAPS Executive Director, Jane Orient, M.D.

Dr. Orient continues, “AAPS is not ‘anti-vaccine,’ but rather supports informed consent, based on an understanding of the full range of medical, legal, and economic considerations relevant to vaccination and any other medical intervention, which inevitably involves risks as well as benefits.”

AAPS argues in the complaint against Rep. Schiff: “The First Amendment protects the rights of free speech and association. Included within the right of free speech is a right to receive information from willing speakers. Under the First Amendment, Americans have the right to hear all sides of every issue and to make their own judgments about those issues without government interference or limitations. Content-based restrictions on speech are presumptively unconstitutional, and courts analyze such restrictions under strict scrutiny.”

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a national organization representing physicians in all specialties since 1943.

The Takeaway

The terms “anti vax” and “pro vax” are really not serving in the best interest of the collective. All they do is divide people when, in reality, all of us want the same thing: healthy children and effective and safe medications if we are going to use them. With all of the concerns that are still being made about vaccines, questioning vaccine safety should not be a problem and, in fact, should be welcomed by everybody. Forcing mandatory vaccination policy and censoring information on vaccines, in my opinion, seems to be quite tyrannical and immoral at this stage. I may have a different opinion if vaccines were 100 percent safe and effective for everybody, but they’re not.

Article source: Collective Evolution

Arjun Walia — I joined the CE team in 2010 shortly after finishing university and have been grateful for the fact that I have been able to do this ever since 🙂 There are many things happening on the planet that don’t resonate with me, and I wanted to do what I could to play a role in creating change. It’s been great making changes in my own life and creating awareness and I look forward to more projects that move beyond awareness and into action and implementation. So stay tuned 🙂

Subscribe for natural health news to your inbox. Follow Natural Blaze on YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.


Arizona Bill Would Establish Parental Choice on Vaccines, Reject Federal Narrative

By Davis Taylor

A bill prefiled in the Arizona House would strengthen parental rights to make vaccination decisions and push back against any future federal vaccine mandates.

On December 11, 2019, State Rep. John Fillmore (R-Apache Junction) prefiled House Bill 2050 (HB2050), which would give parents of children who are “pupils” under Arizona law the sole right to decide whether or not their children are vaccinated. It would also prohibit schools from requiring that pupils receive the recommended vaccinations and prohibit schools from refusing to admit, or from otherwise penalizing, pupils who have not received them. However, the bill would allow a school to exclude a pupil if he or she lacks a vaccination for a disease for which there is an active case at the pupil’s school and the public health department has declared an outbreak of the disease in the area. The bill would additionally eliminate a requirement that children be vaccinated in accordance with the recommended schedule in order for their parents to received cash assistance from the state on their behalf.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Effect on Federal Policy

Passage of HB 2050 would strengthen parental rights and make enforcement of any future federal vaccine mandates more difficult. Vaccine mandates, which are based upon CDC recommendations, currently exist at the state level and apply only to children. States have historically allowed various exemptions from the mandates, but exemptions are increasingly being rolling back or eliminated, with recent examples of this in California, Washington, Maine and New York. Furthermore, there’s reason to believe that the federal government may impose mandates shortly and that the mandates may not be limited to children.

Mandates are increasingly being issued at a federal level around the world, such as in Argentina, Italy and France. [1] [2] In the U.S., in February of 2019, Dr. Scott Gottlieb, then Commissioner of the FDA, made comments to CNN indicating that the federal government has the authority to mandate vaccines and could step in with mandates if states don’t require more children to be vaccinated. [3] Gottlieb resigned as FDA Commissioner in May of 2019, shortly after making the comments, and joined the Board of Directors of Pfizer, Inc., a vaccine manufacturer, in June of 2019. [4] His departure from a high-level CDC position into a high-level position with a vaccine manufacturer was not unusual. Julie Gerberding is an earlier example of this “revolving door.” She was the director of the CDC from 2002 to 2009 and accepted a highly paid position as president of Merck’s vaccine division only about a year after leaving the CDC. [5]

In the U.S., the feds have explicitly stated the goals of increasing overall vaccination rates and increasing rates specifically in the adult population. These goals are discussed in the National Vaccine Plan (NVP) and the National Adult Immunization Plan (NAIP), respectively, which can be found on HHS’s website. [6] [7] The goals stated in the NVP include, among others, developing new vaccines. [8] The goals set forth in the NAIP include strengthening the “adult vaccine infrastructure”, increasing access to adult vaccines and increasing “community demand” for adult immunizations. [9]

There are many reasons to be concerned about vaccine mandates. Several of them are discussed below.

The government has removed liability for vaccine manufacturers and those administering vaccines.

Although almost all U.S. manufacturers are subject to product liability, the federal government has lifted this burden from the manufacturers of most vaccines Americans receive. Liability has also been lifted for those administering the vaccines. This resulted from the 1986 passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) and subsequent amendments to the Act, along with the 2011 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth. [10]

The 1986 Act also created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), a special system outside of the normal litigation process for claims of harm caused by vaccines, in which the government is the defendant, not the vaccine manufacturers. Any compensation granted by the NVICP is paid by the public, through a surcharge on vaccines, and not by vaccine manufacturers. Over $4 billion has been paid out to date under this system. [11]

The lack of liability for vaccine manufacturers creates an obvious disincentive to make vaccines as safe as possible.

The normal rules of discovery don’t apply to vaccine manufacturers.

During product liability litigation, companies generally must respond to discovery. This requires them to produce relevant records, such as e-mails and research records, and to answer interrogatories and requests for admissions.

Discovery is the process through which damaging evidence has come to light in recent high-profile product liability cases, such as those involving Bayer/Monsanto’s Glyphosate, Johnson & Johnson’s talc products and Merck’s Vioxx. Despite how useful discovery is in uncovering relevant evidence, the government has also given vaccine manufacturers a pass in this area. Discovery is not permitted in the NVICP process and, pursuant to the NCVIA, vaccine manufacturers cannot be made to submit to discovery in connection with claims of vaccine injury. Like the lack of product liability, this lack of claimants’ right to discovery is nearly unique to the vaccine industry.

The number of vaccines and the number of doses of vaccines on the schedules is growing significantly.

Not surprisingly, since liability was removed from vaccine manufacturers in 1986, the number of vaccines recommended by the industry and the CDC has risen sharply. For example, the CDC currently recommends 70 doses of 16 vaccines by age 18. [12] This is a significant increase from the 24 doses of 7 childhood vaccines recommended by the CDC in 1983. [13]

The expanding number of vaccines being administered has prompted safety concerns. For example, because aluminum is an ingredient in multiple vaccines, concerns have arisen about whether receiving all of the vaccines on the recommended schedules can cause aluminum toxicity. Some research points to this possibility. A recent study in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology concluded that the current CDC childhood vaccine schedule is 15.9 times over the recommended safe level of aluminum when researchers adjusted for body weight and also estimated that a child who followed the vaccine schedule would be in a state of “chronic toxicity” for 70% of the child’s first seven months of life, 149 days from birth to seven months. [14] [15]

Many Americans are unaware that the CDC has both a childhood vaccine schedule and an adult one. [16] A person receiving all of the recommended doses on both schedules would receive a lifetime total of approximately 149 vaccine doses. [17] Further, hundreds of new vaccines are in the developmental process and it is expected that many will be added to the CDC’s schedules.

Once the CDC’s vaccine schedules are mandated by federal law, Americans will continue to be subject to them even as more vaccines and doses are added, in a dangerous slippery slope.  Additionally, federal vaccine mandates may open the door to federal mandates for other medical treatments and procedures without informed consent.

Vaccines safety testing is far less rigorous than the public may believe.

The public would likely be surprised to learn that the safety testing required of vaccines, a product mandated to be injected into children, is far less rigorous than that required for drugs. The FDA has classified vaccines as “biologics” rather than “drugs,” thereby allowing vaccine manufacturers to forego the multi-year, double-blind inert placebo-controlled studies required for drug approval. [18] [19] Additionally, vaccines are subject to very short periods of monitoring for adverse reactions, often of 14 days or less. [20] [21]

Further, the CDC’s childhood vaccine schedule includes recommendations that children receive multiple vaccines in the same office visit, but the CDC hasn’t required safety testing of the vaccines in these combinations. [22]

The CDC also hasn’t required studies comparing the health outcomes of children vaccinated in accordance with the CDC’s schedule with those of unvaccinated children. Parents may wish to conduct their own review of the research on this topic. On July 18, 2019, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) posted an article by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman of CHD, entitled “Fully Vaccinated v. Unvaccinated – A Summary of the Research” summarizing the results of multiple vaccinated/unvaccinated studies conducted since 1999 by independent scientists and research institutions and, according to the article, “[t]hose studies indicate high incidence of chronic diseases and brain and immune system injuries among vaccinated compared to unvaccinated cohorts.” [23]

Vaccine mandates place decision-making regarding a complex medical intervention in the hands of bureaucrats.

The scientific issues related to vaccines are highly complex. Individuals may wish to retain the right to make vaccination decisions based upon the advice of their chosen medical professionals rather than relinquishing this right to bureaucratic mandates. Some additional issues to be considered in connection with vaccines include the following: their risks of adverse reactions [24]; their toxic or concerning ingredients (such as aluminum, mercury, antibiotics, formaldehyde, Polysorbate 80, MSG and aborted human fetal tissue) [25]; their surprisingly low effectiveness rates [26] [27]; their diminished effectiveness with subsequent doses [28]; the strain replacement and strain enhancement they can cause [29] [30]; the existence of vaccine strains of viruses [31]; the viral shedding that can occur following some vaccinations [32] [33]; evidence linking them to conditions such as autism [34] [35], autoimmune disorders [36] [37], allergies [38] and other medical conditions; and how their use for one infectious disease can increase the incidence of other infectious diseases, such as the incidence of shingles increasing from use of the chickenpox vaccine [39]. This list is not exhaustive.

States Must Resist Federal Vaccine Mandates.

As we have seen with marijuana and industrial hemp, federal regulation becomes ineffective when states enact contradictory policies. If multiple states ban mandatory vaccinations or pass laws that conflict with the CDC’s recommended schedules, it will become difficult for the federal government to enforce future federal mandates. Such state laws will also undermine the federal narrative and make it more difficult for the feds to generate support for nationwide mandatory vaccine policies.


HB2050 will be officially introduced and referred to a committee when the legislature convenes on Jan. 13. It must pass committee by a majority vote before moving forward in the legislative process.

Additional Reading

The websites and books below contain additional information.

  • Children’s Health Defense.
  • The HighWire with Del Bigtree.
  • Informed Consent Action Network.
  • National Vaccine Information Center.
  • Vaxxter.
  • Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchersby Neil Z. Miller [40]
  • Vaccines – A Reappraisal by Dr. Richard Moskowitz[41]
  • How to End the Autism Epidemic by J.B. Handley[42]
  • Dissolving Illusions – Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History by Dr. Suzanne Humphries and Roman Bystrianyk[43]
  • Vaccines, Autoimmunity, and the Changing Nature of Childhood Illnesses by Dr. Thomas Cowan [44]


















[17] Moskowitz, Richard, Vaccines – A Reappraisal. New York, New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2017. 241-242. Print.


[19] Moskowitz, Richard, Vaccines – A Reappraisal. New York, New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2017. 29-31. Print.


[21] Moskowitz, Richard, Vaccines – A Reappraisal. New York, New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2017. 31-42. Print.














[35] Handley, J.B., How to End the Autism Epidemic. White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing, 2018. Print.


[37] Cowan, Thomas, Vaccines, Autoimmunity, and the Changing Nature of Childhood Illnesses, White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing, 2018. Print.



[40] Miller, Neil Z., Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers, Santa Fe, New Mexico: New Atlantean Press, 2016. Print.

[41] Moskowitz, Richard, Vaccines – A Reappraisal. New York, New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2017. Print.

[42] Handley, J.B., How to End the Autism Epidemic. White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing, 2018. Print.

[43] Humphries, Suzanne, and Roman Bystrianyk. Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines and the Forgotten History, 2013. Print.

[44] Cowan, Thomas, Vaccines, Autoimmunity, and the Changing Nature of Childhood Illnesses, White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing, 2018. Print.

This article was sourced from the Tenth Amendment Center.

Subscribe for natural health news to your inbox. Follow Natural Blaze on YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.


Students in Seattle Told to Get Vaccinated or Don’t Come Back After Winter Break

By Emma Fiala

Winter break is supposed to be a time filled with family, fun, new toys and games, and plenty of time to play and relax. But for thousands of Seattle Public School students and their families, this winter break has included an unexpected demand.

Thousands of students were warned that they won’t be welcome back to school after break if they don’t comply with Washington state’s vaccine laws.

Letters sent to families indicated that students must be in compliance with the laws by January 8th. A statement on the district’s website reads:

Student records must reflect updated immunization status by January 8, 2020, or students cannot attend school until the required information is provided to the school nurse.”

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

According to district officials, 2,274 students received the letter.

Seattle Public Schools district representative Tim Robinson says that the district has “to exclude them,” explaining:

“They would be excluded here, they would be excluded at any school district, and we certainly want to avoid that. I know all schools want to avoid it because you don’t want students to miss any school time.”

The district is offering free vaccination clinics in an effort to get all students in compliance with current laws by the deadline so they don’t miss any school. The next clinics will be held on December 30 at Aki Kurose Middle School and January 3 at Seattle World School.

While the “personal preference” exemption for the measles, mumps and rubella vaccination was removed earlier this year, both “religious” and “medical” exemptions are still allowed.

And if unvaccinated or under-vaccinated students show up at school after the deadline? Robinson says they’ll “have a plan in place.”

“If they come to school, we certainly have a plan in place that if a student comes to school on the 8th and their records aren’t up to date, they’ll just be held aside, their parents or guardian will be contacted.”

More information about the vaccination clinics and state vaccine requirements can be found on the Seattle Public Schools website.

By Emma Fiala | Creative Commons |

Subscribe for natural health news to your inbox. Follow Natural Blaze on YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.


Japan’s Medical Freedom: No Vaccine Mandates And Healthier Children

By Mac Slavo

As politicians in the United States do their best to remove Americans’ freedom of choice when it comes to vaccines, Japan has medical freedom.  There are no vaccine mandates in Japan and their children are growing up healthier than ours.

Officials in California are desperately trying to take away the rights of their residents by seeking to override medical opinion about whether or not a person is fit for vaccination, while politicians in New York are mandating the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine for 6-12-month-old infants even though that vaccine’s safety and effectiveness “has not been established.” (Link to Merck’s website – the creator of the MMR vaccine,) By Merck’s own admission, this vaccine is probably not safe, especially for infants.

Care to purposely give your 3-to-4-month-young baby gastrointestinal illness and upper-respiratory distress? Up your chances of sickening your child with these serious health crises by 40 – 60 percent, simply by getting a nurse or doctor to inject the so-called “safe and effective” MMR vaccine. Yes, the Measles, Mumps & Rubella shot, or choose any of them separate too, and the results are virtually the same.

This is according to the FDA and a vaccine trial run on American kids. A shockingly high percentage of the children tested suffered extreme illnesses just days and weeks after receiving the same vaccine New York’s Governor (Bill “Adolf” de Blasio) wants to utilize in order to force-vaccinate all the Orthodox Jews (who all know better and opt out using religious exemptions).

The insidious CDC has been fully exposed only thanks to an FOIA request (Freedom of Information Act), and now the MMR may be considered the 3rd most dangerous vaccine known to mankind, running close behind the deadly HPV vaccine and the infamously defective and mercury-laden flu jab (influenza vaccine). –Natural News

data-mce-type=”bookmark” style=”display: inline-block; width: 0px;
overflow: hidden; line-height: 0;” 

Instead of using force to vaccinate, perhaps scientists and doctors should take a quick look at what’s been going on in Japan. With a population of 127 million, Japan has the healthiest children and the very highest “healthy life expectancy” in the world. The country also boasts the least vaccinated children of any developed country. Now let’s compare the good ole USSA. The U.S. has the very highest infant mortality rate of all industrialized countries. More American children are dying at birth and in their first year of life than in any other comparable nation. Oh, and more than half of those children who do survive, develop at least one chronic illness, reported the Children’s Health Defense.

You can’t handle the truth about vaccines (Ad)

The U.S. government, in bed with Big Pharma, is sacrificing our children for profit. What you won’t hear from vaccine advocates or the mainstream media, is that Merck is in court over MMR-related fraud. Whistleblowers have alleged that the pharmaceutical giant rigged its efficacy data for the vaccine’s mumps component to ensure its continued market monopoly. The evidence has given rise to two separate court cases. In addition, a CDC whistleblower has alleged the MMR vaccine increases autism risks in some children. Others have reported that the potential risk of permanent injury from the MMR vaccine dwarfs the risks of getting measles.

All of these risks involved with getting vaccinated are being covered up by government agencies (FDA and CDC) and the politicians simply don’t care.  The vaccine industry is for profit and until safety and saving lives is more important than money, the government and Big Pharma will continue to sacrifice our children to line their own pockets.

Children’s Health Defense

You can read more from Mac Slavo at his site SHTFplan.

Subscribe to Natural Blaze for health freedom and natural living headlines. Follow Natural Blaze on Twitter and Facebook.


Texans Propose to “Give The Boot” To Vaccine Mandates

By Rosanne Lindsay, ND

Lately, you may have experienced the feeling that common sense has left the room. As of April 8th common sense has reentered the room wearing spurs.

A Tenth Amendment Center blog by Davis Taylor reported that on March 8, 2019, Texas Sen. Bob Hall (R) introduced a bill SB 2350 that would prohibit vaccines from being administered until certain safety criteria have been met. Those criteria are:

  • Any study approved by the USFDA must evaluate any vaccine against a placebo control group or against another vaccine or substance approved by the FDA.
  • An FDA-approved study must evaluate the safety of a vaccine for a sufficient time to identify potential autoimmune, neurological, or chronic health conditions that may arise on or after a year from the vaccine being administered.
  • The vaccine must be evaluated for a potential to cause cancer, mutate genes, affect fertility, cause infertility, and cause autism spectrum disorder.
  • The Texas Department of State Health must post a disclosure statement of any known injuries or diseases caused by the vaccine and the rate at which the injuries occurred, and
  • The chemical, pharmacological, therapeutic, and adverse effects of the vaccine and the rate of injury of the vaccine when administered with other vaccines, have been studied and verified.

This bill does at least five positive things at once:

  • It brings back the Precautionary Principle that requires proof of any potential to harm and harmful effects prior to the introducing of any product or process,
  • It would require vaccine makers to treat their products as “drugs” vs “biologics” and undergo the same rigorous drug testing requirements.
  • It holds pharmaceutical companies to the Gold Standard of medical science, requiring 4-phase clinical trials to test any product for harmful effects.
  • It protects individuals’ freedom from mandates now being tested in several states in advance of the cradle-to-grave federal mandate Healthy People 2020 Act.
  • The burden of proof would fall on vaccine makers to prove that their vaccine products do not cause harm.

Based on the 1986 National Vaccine Injury Act, pharmaceutical companies are shielded from liability for harm caused by their products, so there is no incentive to test vaccines for harm. For the same reason, companies have also been increasing the number of vaccines added to the vaccine schedule recommended by the Centers for Disease Control.

Freedom Protected

New vaccine mandates are based on the CDC vaccine schedule, so if SB2350 became law, it would protect Texans from fascist dictates that force vaccines and violates informed consent. Most importantly, this law would bring back state sovereignty by canceling the effect of any federal mandate that usurps an individual’s freedom to choose.

If this Texas bill becomes law, the number of vaccines added to the schedule would slow or cease because each new vaccine coming down the pipeline would be required to undergo extensive testing, as well as testing of the combined effects of bundled vaccines. Under current FDA-approved drug testing requirements, companies spend millions of dollars to complete several phases of drug testing. Currently, vaccines are exempt from these requirements since they are labelled as “biologics.”

If SB 2350 is passed in Texas, it will offer a roadmap for other states to emulate to protect freedom and “give the boot” to mandatory vaccine laws and federal mandates. But the next steps are equally important and those are preventing any mandate from being wielded by government in the future.

The next steps must renew true informed consent for any and all drugs. Further, sanctions that physicians face from undue influence and coercion of their industry trade groups including the insurance industry, medical societies, the American Medical Association, and pubic health departments must be lifted. Until due process clears the way for freedom for all individuals to choose for themselves, laws like these only begin the process.

Welcome back common sense!

Rosanne Lindsay is a Naturopathic doctor, writer, Earth keeper, Health Freedom advocate, and author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and  Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally. Find her on Facebook at Rosanne Lindsay and at her website at Natureofhealing. Consult with her (Skype or Zoom consults available) at Subscribe to her blog at and at her podcast Thursdays at 5 pm on Blogtalkradio.


Model Vaccine Safety Legislation Introduced In Texas; Run With It

By Catherine J. Frompovich

Consider this a “call to action,” plus an alert for the entire United States, if not the global community.

It’s a call to assert the moral, religious and legal rights of healthcare consumers globally to know about; have access to data, prior to vaccination; and to exercise their unalienable right to the choice of care for their health, body, mind and spirit, including that of their children.

Consider this a long-missing – but definitely long-needed – call for legal relief from Big Pharma’s and the CDC/FDA’s deceptive propaganda campaigns regarding vaccines and vaccinations since the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to 300aa-34), which has seen mandatory vaccines skyrocket to the current 69 doses of 16 vaccines a child receives starting with the very first day of life!

Nothing attests to the fallacies of vaccine ‘science safety’ than the contradictory data HHS and HRSA (Health Resources & Services Administration) produce documenting expenditures for vaccine adverse reactions, injuries and claims, including legal fees, here, Page 9.

US $4,119,686,42.89 [billion] is not exactly ‘chicken feed’!

If nothing more, that amount proves something is wrong; needs to be reviewed; and definitely corrected, specifically the inaccurate “lie now become a truth” vaccines are safe!

After several decades of being lulled into an almost hypnotic-stupor-religious-like belief about vaccines, millions of healthcare consumers globally are awakening to the fact they have been hoodwinked—led down a garden path of make-believe science that apparently intended to rearrange and reprogram the human immune system, probably following the Rockefeller “business plan” for the pharmaceutical industry’s overarching successes. As a result, informed healthcare consumers now are flexing their collective-healthcare-rights muscles regarding various levels of abuse, e.g., Rx prescription gouging, plus demanding knowing what’s causing the Autism Spectrum Disorder, now one in 59 U.S. children in 2018.

No one has put forth a more intelligent plan, in my opinion, than Texas State Senator Bob Hall, who introduced SB2350 (March 8, 2019) Relating to the prohibited administration of certain vaccinations, which can be read at this LegiScan link:

However, I’d like to highlight some of the more important provisions of SB2350, which are:

Personally, I think the above bill is so appropriate and obligatory for agency bureaucrats regarding their fiduciary duties that everyone everywhere ought to use it as the quintessential prototype legislation to ask your local legislators anywhere in the world to introduce to bring about vaccine science reforms.

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on

Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on and as a Kindle eBook.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008)


Unvaccinated Children Torn From Parents in Horrifying Late Night SWAT Raid

By Dagny Taggart

Warning: If you care about parental rights, this story will infuriate you.

On February 25, a pregnant mother took her 2-year-old son to the Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine clinic in Tempe, Arizona because he had a fever of over 100. The doctor instructed the mother to take him to the emergency room because he is unvaccinated and she feared he could have meningitis.

The doctor called the emergency room at Banner Cardon Children’s Medical Center in Mesa to let them know the boy would be arriving.

But after leaving the doctor’s office, the boy showed signs of improvement. He was laughing and playing with his siblings, and his temperature moved closer to normal. Around 6:30 pm, the mother called the doctor to let her know the toddler no longer had a fever and she would not be taking him to the emergency room.

In Arizona, parents may decline vaccinations for their child based on personal, religious, or medical exemptions, but the mother was still concerned that the Arizona Department of Child Safety (DCS) would come after her. One can’t blame her for being afraid, as unvaccinated families have been targets of dystopian crackdowns and witch hunts of late.

The doctor assured her DCS would not come after her. According to police records, the mother then agreed to take her son to the hospital.

This is when things took a particularly nasty turn, reports AZCentral:

About three hours later, the hospital contacted the doctor to advise her that the child had not shown up and the mother wasn’t answering her phone, according to police records. The doctor contacted DCS.

A DCS caseworker called Chandler Police and “requested officers to check the welfare of a two year old infant,” according to police records. A caseworker said he was on his way to the house.

It was about 10:30 p.m. when two police officers knocked on the family’s door. The officers heard someone coughing.

Officer Tyler Cascio wrote in a police report that he knocked on the door several times but no one answered. (source)

The police then asked a neighbor to call the mother to let her know they wanted to speak to her. Meanwhile, the boy’s father contacted the police:

Police dispatch told the officers that a man at the home had called requesting that they call him. They called, and the man identified himself as the sick boy’s father.

The officer said they told the father they needed to enter the home for DCS to check on the child. The father refused, explaining that his son’s “fever broke and he was fine,” according to police records. (source)

Then things escalated.

Despite the father’s attempt to assure police his child was fine, things escalated.

The caseworker informed officers that DCS planned to obtain a “temporary custody notice” from a judge to remove the child for emergency medical aid.

Officers then consulted with the police criminal investigations bureau and SWAT.

Yes, SWAT.

I know – it is outrageous and terrifying.

After 1:00 AM, officers kicked down the family’s door.

One officer carried a shield, while another was described as having “lethal coverage.” Officers pointing guns yelled, “Chandler Police Department,” and entered the house.

The father came to the door. Officers placed him in handcuffs and took him and the mother outside. (source)

Neither of the parents was arrested.

Officials took all three children to Banner Cardon Medical Center.

Let’s pause here for a moment to reflect on something: Authorities took the children under the guise of caring about their well-being. The fact that armed strangers snatching children away from their parents and siblings in the middle of the night could be, I don’t know – TRAUMATIC – didn’t seem to cross their minds.


Then the “legal process” took 10 days.

The parents had to wait 10 days to see a judge and begin fighting to get their children back.

Attorneys for the parents said the children hadn’t seen each other since being taken from their parents’ home. The parents had only had one visit with their older children. DCS officials told the parents the toddler couldn’t make that visit because he was at a medical appointment.

The state’s attorney argued that the children shouldn’t be returned to their parents yet because they’d been hostile to DCS workers and weren’t cooperating. He said the parents had attended a DCS visit with members of Arizona DCS Oversight Group who were combative toward DCS workers. He said the grandfather had tried to videotape a meeting with DCS, and recording is not allowed to protect the privacy of the children. (source)

DCS wanted the parents to undergo psychological evaluations, the father was required to undergo drug testing, and the grandparents agreed to background checks so they could become temporary caregivers for the children.

While everything about this case is horrifying, there is a bit of good news.

The family has a powerful ally:

Rep. Kelly Townsend, R-Mesa, who helped craft legislation requiring DCS to obtain a warrant before removing a child from their parents or guardians in non-emergency circumstances, said she was outraged by the response of police and DCS officials in the case.

“It was not the intent (of the law) that the level of force after obtaining a warrant was to bring in a SWAT team,” Townsend said. “The imagery is horrifying. What has our country become that we can tear down the doorway of a family who has a child with a high fever that disagrees with their doctor?” (source)

In Arizona, DCS used to be able to remove children from their homes without warrants, but that changed last July when lawmakers designated limited circumstances for removing a child from their parent without a warrant:

DCS must have probable cause to believe a child is at imminent risk of harm and there’s no less-intrusive alternative to removal, or DCS must have probable cause to believe a child is a victim of sexual or physical abuse that can only be evaluated by trained medical personnel…

…Concern over DCS abusing loopholes in the system prompted a second round of legislation in 2018. The restrictions designated “exigent circumstances” when DCS may remove children without a warrant. Removing the child must be so dire that there’s no time to use the electronic system to gain authorization from a judge who’s on call 24/7. (source)

Townsend wants a review of this legislation.

Townsend wants lawmakers to review the procedures that led to police using force, traumatizing a family, and putting three children in state custody.

She said that the fact that DCS obtained a court-approved warrant proves there wasn’t a life-threatening emergency.

Outside the courthouse, Townsend said she didn’t know the parents personally but was disturbed by the case.

“It was brought to my attention that these parents may have been targeted by the medical community because they hadn’t vaccinated their children,” she said.

Townsend said parents who don’t vaccinate their children because of medical concerns aren’t criminals and shouldn’t be treated as such. She worried physicians were using it as a reason to refer parents to DCS.

“I think if DCS decides to use this as a factor they would be violating a parent’s right to have a personal exemption, a religious exemption and perhaps a medical exemption,” she said. (source)

The family wants to warn others about DCS.

The father sent The Republic a statement. His family is scared, he said, but they feel compelled to warn other families:

We have been through a very traumatic experience with our encounter with DCS. We would like other parents out there to know and realize the amount of power DCS has over the welfare of your children. Even though we remain confident in our innocence through our case, it is immediately an uphill struggle of what to do or not to do. Even if you do not agree with them or the process in which they follow.

We thought they did not have the right to check on our children because they were getting better, from what they last heard about from us. We were in our home tending to our sick kids and did not want to be bothered in this tough time of illness.  With multiple children it is difficult to keep up their needs while they are ill, and to be bothered in the middle of the night by DCS was not something we were ready to tackle.

No matter what we though was right, it turned tragic with the removal of all of our children. The process of removal in our opinion was uncalled for and we would like to see the laws/process change when dealing with expedited removal of children.

Our children have sure been through a traumatizing experience and hope they have not been harmed psychologically or emotionally as we are a very happy family who love each other and would do anything for each other.

We hope to see a positive outcome for our trial, but worry about what the kids have been though. We would like to see some sort of public service announcement by DCS to inform other parents out there that this could happen to them, because nobody, especially children should have to go through what we are going through. We love our children and are doing everything possible to get them back to us. (source)

“What about parents’ rights to decide what’s best for their child?” Townsend said. “Parents felt the child was fine. Next thing we know, the Gestapo is at their door.”

The three children have been placed with their grandparents, and the parents are able to see them but have no idea when – or if – they will get them back.

What do you think about this case?

Do you think the parents handled things well? Do you believe the state acted properly? Please share your thoughts in the comments.

H/T to Reason

About the Author

Dagny Taggart is the pseudonym of an experienced journalist who needs to maintain anonymity to keep her job in the public eye. Dagny is non-partisan and aims to expose the half-truths, misrepresentations, and blatant lies of the MSM.

This article was sourced from The Organic Prepper.


BREAKING: New York County Declares State of Emergency, Bans ALL Unvaccinated Kids From ALL Public Spaces

By Matt Agorist

Rockland, NY — In one of the most shocking moves to date about the 2019 measles outbreak, Rockland County officials have declared a state of emergency and has effectively banned any child under the age of 18, who has not received the MMR vaccine, from all public spaces.

“Effective at the stroke of midnight, Wednesday, March 27, anyone who is under 18 years of age and unvaccinated against the measles will be barred from public places until this declaration expires in 30 days or until they receive the MMR vaccination,” according to a statement from Rockland County officials.

The public spaces include schools, stores, places of worship and public transit, according to officials—essentially everything.

Exactly how authorities will know if a child is unvaccinated is unclear. However, they are still planning to take legal action against parents.

“Local police will not be asking for documentation of vaccinations, but will enforce it retroactively if a parent is found to have allowed their unvaccinated kids into the public spaces,” according to the county.

This state of emergency and demand for children to get vaccinations or face becoming an “unperson” comes amid the CDC issuing an update to their website adding an entire slew of people who should not get the MMR vaccine—including anyone who “has a parent, brother, or sister with a history of immune system problems.”

What’s more, most people who get the measles make a full recovery within a week or so. Although some studies do link unvaccinated people to measles cases, according to multiple other studies, the MMR vaccine is likely worse than getting measles.

In 2017, the Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) reported in the British Medical Journal that every year, approximately 5,700 U.S. children suffer from seizures as a direct result of the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine.

“In the United States, measles is generally a benign, short-term viral infection; 99.99% of measles cases fully recover,” said Dr. Shira Miller, PIC president and founder. “As it has not been proven that the MMR vaccine is safer than measles, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that mandatory measles mass vaccination results in a net public health benefit in the United States.”

While there is a risk of seizure from contracting measles, according to the data, the risk of developing seizures from the vaccine to combat measles is five times higher. 

What’s more, the seizures from the MMR vaccine are far worse, according to the study, and can cause permanent harm.

“For example, 5% of febrile seizures result in epilepsy, a chronic brain disorder that leads to recurring seizures. Annually, about 300 MMR-vaccine seizures (5% of 5,700) will lead to epilepsy,” PIC points out.

By the pro-forced vaccination crowd’s logic, we should simply sacrifice hundreds of children a year to achieve an unproven theory of herd immunity. That is, of course, until it’s their child who is left permanently disabled by the vaccine.

On a daily basis, we are seeing media outlets dehumanizing, degrading, and even calling for the silencing of those who are pro-vaccine safety or choose religious exemptions. Using this fake epidemic as an impetus for pushing legislation, 100 bills have been filed in 30 different states proposing to expand, restrict or eliminate vaccine informed consent rights. And now, as the above declaration illustrates, legislation is no longer necessary and children can be sentenced to prison in their homes for the sole act of being unvaccinated.

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project, where this article first appearedFollow @MattAgorist on Twitter, Steemit, and now on Minds.


Libertarians for Forced Vaccinations?

By Bretigne Shaffer

It’s hard to think of a more fundamental right than the right to determine what happens to one’s own body. Forcing someone to undergo medical treatment against their will violates this most basic of rights—the right to be free from physical assault. Yet even some libertarians have jumped on the mandatory vaccination bandwagon, arguing that one person not taking every possible precaution against contracting a disease constitutes an assault against another. But this line of thinking requires some very tortured logic.

To begin with, nobody has a “right” to a germ-free environment outside of their own property (and good luck establishing one there). Proponents of vaccine mandates assert this “right” as if it is a long-standing social or legal norm, but it is not. Human beings have been living among each other for millennia, and there has never been a widely asserted right to freedom from any and all pathogens at others’ expense.

There has, historically, been a widely held and asserted expectation of quarantine in the case of exceptionally dangerous illnesses. However, this is not at all what the proponents of mandated vaccines are calling for. Quarantine is simply the demand that those who are already infected with a disease remain isolated in their homes or elsewhere until they are no longer able to infect others.

This is profoundly different from what the pro-mandate crowd demands: that those who are not infected undergo a medical procedure to minimize their chances of becoming infected. This is a much more intrusive demand and a potentially dangerous one.

Furthermore, measles—the scariest thing the mandate pushers can come up with—is not even on the list of federally quarantinable diseases. And rightly so, as it hardly qualifies as an exceptionally dangerous disease in the developed world.

Long before the vaccine was available, the mortality rate had fallen to around 1 in 10,000 cases, and it was widely considered to be a benign childhood illness that nearly everyone contracted.

So what has changed in the last few years? How is it that all of a sudden, measles has gone from a disease not even worthy of mandatory quarantine for the infected to one that has generated near-mass hysteria and demands for the far more intrusive forced medical intervention against those who are not infected?

In 2016, then-Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson announced that he had reversed his position on vaccine mandates and now supported them. The reason? Someone told him about herd immunity:

…I’ve come to find out that without mandatory vaccines, the vaccines that would in fact be issued would not be effective. So … it’s dependent that you have mandatory vaccines so that every child is immune. Otherwise, not all children will be immune even though they receive a vaccine.

Had Johnson looked just a little more deeply, he would have learned that the theory of vaccine-induced herd immunity is not as solid as its proponents would have us believe. The idea was first put forward by A.W. Hedrich in 1933, based on his observation that measles outbreaks were suppressed when 68 percent of children had contracted the measles virus. This observation had nothing to do with vaccination, as the measles vaccine had not even been developed yet.

This is an important distinction for a few reasons. Perhaps most importantly: While the immunity conferred by contracting measles lasts a lifetime, that conferred by vaccination does not. What this means is that a 90 percent vaccination rate does not equate to 90 percent of the population having immunity. As Dr. Russell Blaylock says:

It was not until relatively recently that it was discovered that most of these vaccines lost their effectiveness 2 to 10 years after being given. What this means is that at least half the population, that is the baby boomers, have had no vaccine-induced immunity against any of these diseases for which they had been vaccinated very early in life. In essence, at least 50% or more of the population was unprotected for decades.

If we listen to present-day wisdom, we are all at risk of resurgent massive epidemics should the vaccination rate fall below 95%. Yet, we have all lived for at least 30 to 40 years with 50% or less of the population having vaccine protection. That is, herd immunity has not existed in this country for many decades and no resurgent epidemics have occurred. Vaccine-induced herd immunity is a lie used to frighten doctors, public-health officials, other medical personnel, and the public into accepting vaccinations.

The larger point, though, is that even if the idea of vaccine-induced herd immunity did hold up to scrutiny, it would at best be a positive externality—not something that anyone has the right to demand from others at gunpoint.

Others have written more comprehensively on the fallacy of using medically fragile people as an excuse for forcing everyone to be vaccinated. So I’ll just say this: Nobody has an obligation to vaccinate themselves or their children in order to protect the most medically vulnerable among us.

My own daughter is intellectually disabled and suffers from seizures. Much of the outside world is a dangerous and scary place where she could easily be badly hurt or worse. Yet I would never dream of using force to compel those around me to make the world safe for my daughter. Keeping her safe is my job and my husband’s job—not everyone else’s.

I doubt that those who promote this line of thinking have really thought through the implications of what they are asking for: requiring everyone to alter their lives and actions in order to accommodate the most medically fragile, at all times and in all spaces. What they are demanding has implications far beyond vaccines.

And if they really do believe that not being vaccinated constitutes a form of aggression against others, then why confine their demands to children? You do not have the right to force a medical procedure on another person.

Why should you and I and the vast majority of all adults in the US be exempt from the requirement to be completely up to date on all of the vaccines the CDC and its pharmaceutical industry cronies have decided we should have? Are we not also committing aggression every day we go out in public, exposing others to diseases we do not yet have but might possibly contract?

Of course, if disease transmission is really what the proponents of vaccine mandates are worried about, then they should also demand that those recently vaccinated with live-virus vaccines not be allowed in schools or any public spaces. And if they aren’t demanding this, then one has to wonder whether the transmission of disease really is their primary concern.

The bottom line, though, has nothing to do with the science behind vaccines, nor with herd immunity, nor competing claims about vaccine safety and vaccine harm. Nor does it have to do with how serious diseases like measles are or are not. It is simply this: You do not have the right to force a medical procedure on another person.

This is libertarian thinking 101. You are free to do whatever you wish with what is yours—and other people are not yours. You do not own them, and you do not get to make decisions over their bodies and their lives. You may exclude them from your property if you wish, but you may not force them to undergo medical (or non-medical) procedures against their will. You don’t even have to be a libertarian to understand this. The right to bodily integrity, to be free from assault, is the most fundamental of all human rights. If it is not protected, then no other rights even matter.

Bretigne Shaffer was a journalist in Asia for many years, a yoga instructor for a few more, and is now a mother and freelance writer and filmmaker. She is the author of Memoirs of a Gaijin and Why Mommy Loves the State.

This article was sourced from

Image credit: Truthstream Media


Italy Joins the Anti-Vax War by Banning Unvaccinated Children from School

By Jason Erickson

As we continue to chronicle, the anti-vax war is reaching new levels following a directive handed down by the World Health Organization that listed the anti-vaccine movement as a leading threat to global health.

This has resulted in U.S. politicians like Adam Schiff (D-CA) unilaterally calling upon tech companies to begin restricting the public’s access to the debate, after which Facebook/Google/Amazon all took swift action.

Entire countries (Australia) have declared the potential for anti-vax messaging to be so dangerous that certain speakers like David Icke had to be effectively banned from speaking on their soil for fear of spreading the virus of information and, by extension, actual viruses we presume.

There is only one end if we continue to accelerate down the slippery slope of eradicating informed consent, and that is mandatory vaccinations for all. Naturally, the areas where this first would be seen is among health care practitioners – already happening – as well as in schools.

Italy is the latest to ramp up their mandatory vaccination program for students after previously waffling on the idea. As reported here by Heather Callaghan in August, 2018:

Previously, Italian law mandated that children must have received vaccines slated for 10 different diseases in order to attend preschool and kindergarten.

Yet, a shift in political winds has reversed the government mandate. Mandatory vaccination is expected to be halted in Italy for one full year, allowing all children to attend public school.

A report from News Medical states:

The amendment was passed by the upper house of Italy’s parliament last week Friday. The motion gathered 148 to 110 votes. It still needs to pass the lower house before it can be adopted by the nation.

The ongoing debate has now reached a sad resolution according to the most recent report from the BBC. Children will not only be banned from school, but Italy has laid out financial penalty that parents could face.  And, once again, we see the authorities citing the measles propaganda, which has been used as the linchpin for all of the aforementioned crackdowns on anti-vax messaging.  My emphasis added:

Parents risk being fined up to €500 (£425; $560) if they send their unvaccinated children to school. Children under six can be turned away.

The new law came amid a surge in measles cases – but Italian officials say vaccination rates have improved since it was introduced.


Ms Grillo said the rules were now simple: “No vaccine, no school”.

Italian media report that regional authorities are handling the situation in a number of different ways.

In Bologna, the local authority has sent letters of suspension to the parents of some 300 children, and a total of 5,000 children do not have their vaccine documentation up to date.

In other areas there have been no reported cases, while still others have been given a grace period of a few days beyond the deadline.

Is the law having an effect?

The new law was passed to raise Italy’s plummeting vaccination rates from below 80% to the World Health Organisation’s 95% target.

As should be quite evident, this top-down system of globalist directives (and forced compliance) is a violation of national sovereignty as well as individual sovereignty. These dangers have been outlined strongly by U.S. Senator Rand Paul, whose thoughts can be heard here in a recent Senate hearing.

This violation is coupled with the fact that of all the propaganda about viruses that could have been chosen, they have decided that measles is the most dreaded among them. I would encourage readers to visit Catherine Frompovich’s excellent article aptly titled, “It’s Finally Time for Everyone to Get Real About Measles.” She begins with her own personal story of growing up amid a far worse “epidemic” and recounts the natural resilience that was understood at the time.

Believe it or not, but this writer survived a measles epidemic no one even thought about controlling nor how to, except what Moms were very adept at doing, especially making certain their children got measles so they could enjoy life-long immunity. Sometime during the 1940s, I contracted measles, German measles, and chickenpox and lived to tell the story that not only I, but entire schools were infected, while none of my schoolmates died. There was no scaremongering in the media; children had a week off from school, which we thought was great; but also—more importantly—received a “tuned-up” immune system.

Catherine then goes onto completely dismantle this current hysteria that is leading to what we are seeing in countries like Australia and Italy, but also in the U.S. where many vaccination enforcement bills are slated to be rolled out.

Of course, all indications point to the fact that regular people everywhere ARE “getting real” about measles, as well as vaccination, and have begun opting out in ever greater numbers after researching the available science for themselves. Only a coordinated effort to both restrict the access to this information, as well as coerce people into making decisions against their will, can combat health freedom.  And THAT is the message that the global population should be receiving quite clearly.

Jason Erickson writes for This article (Italy Joins the Anti-Vax War by Banning Unvaccinated Children from School) may be republished in part or in full with author attribution and source link.