1. Health
Vincent Iannelli, M.D.

Pass the New California Vaccine Bill

By March 21, 2012

Follow me on:

Not surprisingly, the vast majority of people in the United States support the requirement that kids get their routine childhood immunizations.

Those results from a new Harris Interactive/HealthDay poll aren't surprising because the vast majority of people are fully vaccinated.

What is surprising is that with so many people supporting immunization requirements, then why do so many states have laws that make it so easy to get vaccine exemptions? And this has nothing to do with exemptions from forced vaccinations, which doesn't happen (as much as people try to jumble the issues), but simply exemptions from the requirements to have vaccines to attend school and daycare.

A new bill in California, AB 2109, will supposedly make it harder to get a vaccine exemption. How much harder? Instead of simply signing a personal belief vaccine exemption form on their own, parents will be required to have a written statement signed by a health practitioner that says the parent was given information about the benefits and risks of immunizations and the risks of certain vaccine-preventable diseases.

Making sure that parents are fully informed before thinking about choosing a vaccine exemption, especially since the decision impacts everyone else in the community, seems like the least we can do if these types of vaccine exemptions aren't eliminated all together. So instead of just being influenced by Dr. Bob Sears, who not surprisingly has come out against the California vaccine bill, or an anti-vaccine zealot in a web forum, this law will help to make sure the discussion about vaccines occurs with a licensed health care practitioner.

Now that doesn't seem so hard, especially when the consequence of choosing a vaccine exemption may mean that your child, who you have chosen to not vaccinate, gets measles or pertussis and gets another child sick who is too young to be vaccinated or who has a problem with their immune system, so that their vaccines didn't work.

The bill, which has bipartisan support, was introduced by Dr. Richard Pan, a pediatrician, last month and is supported by the California Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the California Immunization Coalition.

"Parents are on the front line when it comes to the protecting the health of their children and their communities," Dr. Pan said. "This bill empowers them with up-to-date, accurate information about immunizations. As a pediatrician, I have spent my career making sure families, physicians and public officials are working in unison to build healthier communities. AB 2109 strengthens this relationship through education to help save our children from infectious outbreaks that can only be prevented by working together."

The anti-vaccine folks, who make up a small but very vocal group, are organizing to help defeat AB 2109 though, providing their followers with phone numbers and talking points to contact members of the committee discussing the bill. Parents who support vaccines and the end of vaccine-preventable diseases should do the same and help get it passed.

"With the increase in outbreaks of common vaccine preventable diseases in California and nationally, now more than ever, parents need to get the right information about vaccines before exempting their children from immunization," said Jeff Goad, Pharm D., President of the California Immunization Coalition. "This legislation simply mandates that parents receive accurate information about the risks and benefits of vaccines and the diseases they prevent before making decisions about not vaccinating their children."

Related:
California Assembly Working to Protect Public Health
When the Next Contagion Strikes: Vaccination Nation
Age of Autism's Anne Dachel takes on Bill Moyers over vaccines. Hilarity ensues.
Best Vaccine Books

Comments
March 22, 2012 at 12:50 pm
(1) Dr. Bob Sears says:

I agree with Dr. Iannelli that such discussions should take place between a doctor and parents who decline vaccines. It’s in everyone’s best interest that parents are fully informed. My primary problem with this bill, however, is this: What should parents do after they’ve been to five different doctors, spent a few hundred dollars on visits (most insurances don’t cover vaccine consultations UNLESS they are part of a regularly scheduled checkup), and still can’t find a doctor who will sign their form. THIS WILL HAPPEN. Some doctors will refuse to sign out of principle.
So, do we not let these kids into school? The problem is, school education is MANDATORY. It’s the law. So, how can we have a law that may prevent a child from attending school? There MUST be a way for parents to demonstrate they’ve been informed about the risks and benefits of vaccines WITHOUT A DOCTOR’S SIGNATURE.

March 22, 2012 at 1:11 pm
(2) Emily Lindsey says:

Vaccinating children will always be a topic of debate. The basic question comes down to at what will we decide that our families belong to us and we should be able to raise them as we wish? Whether that is circumcision, vaccinating, breastfeeding or the alternates these are choices that families make and many times with their healthcare providers. Forcing another visit for parents who wish to delay or skip for whatever reason adds burden to our healthcare system that is already in crisis and crashing and more red tape that for those with resources will skirt through; those without resources will be forced to do something they may not like but cannot afford to see another physician or even go back to theirs. I see patients every day who worry about their next copayment and delay visits because of that. I see parents who are allotting themselves 3-4 diapers per day and if that is all they can afford. Many of these I work with are middle class families who do not qualify for assistance and live paycheck to paycheck. Lets not widen the gap in families that are being served and their medical choices. Just as they chose to feed their baby one way they can choose what to give and when. What is next, mandating breastfeeding for the 1st year as recommended by the AAP and other medical groups? It truly is a public health issue and has been validated by far more studies than vaccines for risk vs benefit; but we let parents choose and so this should stay as well.

March 22, 2012 at 1:16 pm
(3) David says:

we are granted many freedoms in our Constitution and Bill of Rights
freedom FROM is as important as the freedom to do things-vaccines are NOT proven science-if it were then let the Big Pharma producers carry liability insurance on their product just like any other product creator-We The People do not need to pay for the chidren that are damaged in Big Pharma’s quest for profit-you only have to meet one child that has been permanantly damages by a vaccine to make you rethink the mandatory aspect of this—do your own research and go get in line for the endless vaccines that are available-I have and you could not vaccinate me for love or money-my body MY choice-I choose NOT

March 22, 2012 at 1:26 pm
(4) Kamal Verma says:

Leave us parents alone to make choices for our children, we are not illiterate idiots which it seems like the bill proposer is trying to make us out to be. My mother was a physician used alternative medicine at every step was never in this profession for gain, but was her vocation to heal/cure people. I am quite qualified & have done numerous research & educate people in my community & where ever I can reach about advantages of alternative healing, & nutrition, healthy lifestyle vs just pumping medicine at the drop of a hat. The solution is not going to doctors for everything, they are harassed by insurance, liability over booked clinics, emergency anyway but setup forums to educate people about nutrition & healthy eating & lifestyle vs mandating vaccinations. Mandating vaccines is not the solution at all. In this current economic situation we can ill afford food on the table to add this additional cost & time consuming processes to our numerous problems.

March 22, 2012 at 1:28 pm
(5) Vincent Iannelli, MD says:

Just because they can’t find a health provider that panders to their beliefs, like some other doctors out there, doesn’t mean that they won’t easily find one or more that will follow the spirit of the law and sign their form.

“The problem is, school education is MANDATORY. It’s the law.”

I think that there are many homeschoolers in California and across the rest of the country who will have a problem with that statement.

“There MUST be a way for parents to demonstrate they’ve been informed about the risks and benefits of vaccines WITHOUT A DOCTOR’S SIGNATURE.”

What do you suggest?

Studies have shown that most of the parents who sign a personal vaccine exemption have seen an alternative health care provider, many of which have anti-vaccine beliefs themselves.

Having them talk to someone and perhaps dispel any misinformation that has influenced their decision seems like a good idea.

March 22, 2012 at 1:29 pm
(6) Nicoco says:

Wow….

Now let’s have these pharma shills interview parents of children with Autism. There’s the true epidemic! I read on another site that some children have legitimate reason for not being vaccinated, like having a child poisoned resulting with a life-long disabilility is not a legitimate medical reason. Here is the thing, it is money and more money. I am not going to sugar-coat anything and will speak on behalf of these children and their families.
What a coincidence that these two bills being considered involve taking the rights away for parents to chose. One will take away exemption and the other is actually considering the school districts to man flu clinics. As a parent and advocate of a child with Autism I can tell you how related these two are. One entices money be made for the corrupt doctor sell-outs, and the other the school districts guaranteeing their clients. Challenge me on this and I have a quick response for all you out there who have an opinion,but not a story to tell.
The middle man seems invisible,but it links these entities. It is in the best interest for the pharmaceutical companies for people to be sick. It is also lining the pockets of corrupt researchers banking their careers. Not to fear though, the pharmaceutical companies will come to the rescue with their assortment of meds.
Like I previously stated, I won’t sugar-coat it.

March 22, 2012 at 1:29 pm
(7) Dr Tim O'Shea says:

We are missing the point in this whole discussion. This law has nothing to do with the ongoing debate on vaccine safety and efficacy. Instead, Bill AB 2109 effectively ends that debate. If we pass a law requiring parents to get permission to opt out of a medical procedure, that’s sets a radical new precedent in American jurisprudence. What’s next, permission not to be euthanized? Or a law requiring permission to refuse chemotherapy?

With the abysmal failure of the 2010 swine flu vaccine program and the exposure of the political maneuvering that caused the production of millions of doses of a vaccine which was later found to be so dangerous the stockpiles were eventually destroyed, one would have expected that organized medicine retreat and regroup, as Dr Russell Blaylock comments. Instead we are seeing the opposite – redoubling of efforts to force vaccinations and to put an end to exemptions, which have been in effect for the past century.

If people want to vaccinate, they certainly should. But nowhere else on earth, or in history, has any country dared to legislate away the parents’ right to choose or refuse a medical procedure. That is the novel juncture at which we find ourselves today: the slippery slope before us.

http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/vaccines/end-of-vaccine-exemptions-in-california/

March 22, 2012 at 1:29 pm
(8) Laura says:

If doctors would start doing less talking and more listening, they might be able to hear what parents are saying happened to their children as a result of their vaccines. Instead, the majority remain deaf to parents in their ignorance, arrogance, and apathy. That is not the practice of medicine, and it is no surprise that more and more people have a distrust in MDs and are seeking out alternative practitioners who actually listen to them. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that injecting toxins and poisons directly into the bloodstream of infants, toddlers, children, and people of all ages is not a wise thing to do. It also does not take a rocket scientist to understand the greed and corruption that exist in today’s vaccine program. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that giving a newborn a vaccine for a sexually-transmitted or IV-drug using disease is not advisable, especially when that vaccine comes with a long list of associated deaths, comas, seizures, and 3X the risk for developing autism. If this is how even one vaccine is given, the rest need to be questioned, too. Educated parents are refusing vaccines in ever-growing numbers. They are far more educated regarding vaccines than their doctors. When I approached Assemblyman Pan at a recent rally, he could not answer any of my questions regarding his beliefs as to why he thought vaccines were safe and effective. His only response was, “I vaccinate my own children. I have read the studies.” Parents are going to be asking for a little more than that type of dismissive response! Mothers, please return to trusting your gut instincts, which should go into overdrive when someone wants to inject a bunch of toxins, chemicals, animal products, poisons, diseases, preservatives, etc. , into your healthy child. If you don’t, you just might not have a healthy child anymore.

March 22, 2012 at 1:57 pm
(9) Ed Jenner says:

All I keep reading from the anti-vax crew are the same, tired arguments: 1) Doctors won’t listen! 2) It’s all about money! 3) There have been no studies! 4) They’re taking away my freedoms!

Blah, blah, blah. I’m so tired of countering you, but I’ll do it one more time.

1) Doctors won’t listen because they’ve heard it all before. You come armed with your Google University “evidence”, which is not evidence at all but print-outs from anti-vaccine sites. What did you expect? I’m surprised they don’t laugh in your face at how arrogant and hipocritical you come off when you want to “listen to both sides” but then accuse those with who you don’t agree of…

2)…being paid by Big Pharma. Please! The cost of vaccines is not even a fraction of the money that big pharma would make if you had epidemics of vaccine-preventable diseases. Think about it. What’s cheaper? A vaccine against pneumococcus, or several weeks of antibiotic treatment and maybe even a hospitalization or two? And then all of the…

3)…studies that need to be done before a vaccine goes out to the public. Contrary to what pseudo-documentaries and rich doctors online who sell anti-vaccine books, vaccines like the HPV vaccine and even the seasonal flu vaccine are all tested in THOUSANDS of people before they’re approved for human use. It’s because of these “witches’ brews” that we can stop worrying about vaccine-preventable diseases and focus on sending our kids to…

4) …public school, which is a right and a privilege. They have a right to be educated and safe while learning. You have the privilege of sending your bag of viruses and bacteria to study with mine. However, I will be damned if you are going to have the privilege to read pseudo-science, refuse to read science, and then expect public schools with children who may be immune compromised for a myriad of reasons welcome you with open arms. If you want school that bad for your little vector, home school or vaccinate. Period.

March 22, 2012 at 2:01 pm
(10) Robert Schecter says:

The support of the majority of the population does not make a policy right.

You reveal your delusional thought process, perhaps brought on by an irrational love of vaccines, when you attempt to rationalize away the fact that forced vaccination attached to forced education is still forced vaccination. Besides many states such as California and Virginia even have requirements forcing vaccines on homeschoolers.

As to why states have these laws, legislators think it’s their business to tell people how to live their lives. That’s why we have laws intruding on every aspect of our lives – from what type of washer or light bulb we can buy to what type of car we can drive.

The notion that your side is the source of reliable information is s to laughable. After all your own Paul Offit thinks 3,000 people died from measles related complications in the pre-vaccine era when the number was closer to 350. Is that the reliable information parents can expect at the doctor’s office

Pan’s Orwelian assertion that forcing parents to do something they don’t want is somehow empowering is absurd

And give the whole “anti-vaccine” thing a rest. It’s nothing more than mindless gibberish. The issue is not about being pro or anti vaccine; it is about freedom (do you know what that is?) and choice.

As far as small and vocal, does that not really describe the vested interests behind this bill: for example the shadowy California Immunization Coalition. Certainly this bill did not emerge from a public clamoring for it. Rather it’s the product of an insider on the payroll of the state’s healthcare establishment: Pan has received over $175,000 from that establishment over the past two years. Seems to have been a good investment.

March 22, 2012 at 2:04 pm
(11) Sylvia says:

I am appalled that such an outrageous bill is even being considered, and I plan on voting against anyone who supports it, starting with Richard Pan.

I do not take kindly to such blatant abuse of my rights as a parent to decide what is right for my children.

And I will definitely make sure that my friends and family are aware of those who support this bill so they can vote them out of office as well.

We do not need more government interference in our health care choices. They need to butt OUT, or hit the pavement!

March 22, 2012 at 2:12 pm
(12) Liz Ditz says:

Dr. Sears and Emily Lindsay:

My county (population about 730,000) has 15 drop-in or by-appointment health and vaccination clinics which can and should provide the kind of accurate information about vaccines, and would be an excellent and low-cost source for vaccine-refusing parents.

What kind of numbers are we talking about? AB 2109 would take effect in 2013. Entering kindergarteners would have been born in 2007; there were about 566,000 kids born in that year. According to The Bay Citizen, the average Personal Belief Exemptions sought are 2.28% of kindergarten enrollment.That’s about 13,000 in the whole state — hardly a huge burden to the state or to pediatricians/family practice doctors.

It’s important to note that AB 2109 is no stronger a vaccine mandate than already exists.

March 22, 2012 at 2:17 pm
(13) victoria says:

So—are doctors going to mandated to inform parents about the RISKS of vaccines?

Things like vaccine-induced encephalitis, epilepsy, auto-immune disorders, and death? I think not.

Will they discuss what’s IN the vaccine and what those compounds DO to children? Things like aluminum, thimerisol, aborted fetal cells, formaldehyde, and and pig DNA? I think not.

How about the fact that vaccines given in combination have never been tested for safety and that vaccines as a whole have never been tested to see if they cause cancer? I think not.

It’s NOT informed consent if you don’t INFORM THEM.

The bill is a waste of time put forward by Big Pharma so they can try and ring in more sheeple to take their poisonous drugs.

And how much did you get paid to write this article?

March 22, 2012 at 2:20 pm
(14) Annie Goodwin says:

Emily Lindsay wrote,

What is next, mandating breastfeeding for the 1st year as recommended by the AAP and other medical groups? It truly is a public health issue and has been validated by far more studies than vaccines for risk vs benefit; but we let parents choose and so this should stay as well.

When a parent choses a feeding method, he or she is making a choice just for his or her child.

When a parent choses to refuse some or all vaccines, she is also making a choice for other people’s children, both in terms of risking a vaccine-preventable disease and in terms of the consequences of a vaccine outbreak. The index patient in the 2008 San Diego measles outbreak was a patient of Bob Sears. In addition to infecting other children, a daycare / early childhood education center was closed for two weeks. What effect do you think that had on parents’ employment? Who compensated the parents who incurred extra, unbudgeted costs because of this measles outbreak? Who compensated the daycare and the swim center for lost revenues?

March 22, 2012 at 2:21 pm
(15) Ed Jenner says:

“And give the whole “anti-vaccine” thing a rest. It’s nothing more than mindless gibberish. The issue is not about being pro or anti vaccine; it is about freedom (do you know what that is?) and choice.” – Robert Schecter

No, you’re pretty much anti-vaccine. The label sticks because you have written over-exaggerated claims of vaccine “injury”. You deny the evidence that vaccines are safe and effective. Even when taking out the issue of mandates, you still refuse to say that any vaccine is okay to use. Your thought process is “vaccines bad” THEN “freedom from bad vaccines”, not “freedom” them “no vaccines”.

If you were either a scientist or a constitutional lawyer, we’d give more credence to your statements. But even in your delusion you continue to write the word “forced” yet are unable to produce one single instance in modern times in America where a person has been held down and vaccinated, or vaccinated at gun point, or jailed for not vaccinating. None of your writing make any sense.

Then again, I could be wrong and you could just share with us your scientific or legal background as well as citing some of your sources for the accusations you freely toss about.

March 22, 2012 at 2:30 pm
(16) RS says:

Health Authorities Now Admit Severe Side Effects of Vaccination: Swine Flu, Pandemrix and Narcolepsy Tue, 20 Mar 2012

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/243247-Health-Authorities-Now-Admit-Severe-Side-Effects-of-Vaccination-Swine-Flu-Pandemrix-and-Narcolepsy

March 22, 2012 at 2:40 pm
(17) Liz Ditz says:

Tim O’Shea,a chiropractor, the author of the profoundly ignorant and anti-scientific book The Sanctity of Human Blood: Vaccination Is Not Immunization, wrote:

But nowhere else on earth, or in history, has any country dared to legislate away the parents’ right to choose or refuse a medical procedure.

Oops. Wrong. According to Diekema*, “All states allow exemptions for medical reasons, 48 for religious reasons, and 20 for philosophical reasons. ”

AB 2109 doesn’t “legislate away the parents’ rights”. It just requires that parents hear or read accurate information. The kind of information that (for example) O’Shea and the National Vaccine Information Center do not provide.

*Diekema, DS “Improving Childhood Vaccination Rates” New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) 366;5 nejm.org (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1113008)

March 22, 2012 at 2:43 pm
(18) Informed Consumer says:

California does not need this law. Doctors are already charged with informed consent duties to discuss and inform on treatments/interventions being recommended, their risks and benefits, the risks and benefits of not undergoing treatment/intervention, and to provide opportunity for questions to be asked by the patient to enable THE PATIENT to make an informed decision on whether or not to proceed or refus the treatment/intervention.

Vaccination is a medical procedure/intervention that is already acknowledged by government/manufacturers as carrying risk. This bill penalizes parents for exercising their informed consent rights. If passed, what medical procedure will be next on the chopping block that people/parents will have no say in refusing?

Informed consent may not be convenient, but it is necessary and guides modern medicine. If it is not applied to all medicine, we all lose. Informed consent is a bit like freedom of speech. I don’t always agree with what someone has to say, but will defend to the ground their right to freedom of speech.

This issue is no less important.

March 22, 2012 at 2:44 pm
(19) Robert Schecter says:

Ed:

It’s OK for people to use vaccines… if they want.

It does not depend whether I’m a constitutional lawyer or whatever. What matters is the strength of my arguments.

Where does it say being “held down” needs to be part of the definition of force?

Parents who get vaccines because they don’t qualify for a medical exemption in states such as West Virginia are being forced. If they were not they could just ignore the law. When they don’t want a vaccine, are denied and exemption then reluctantly go ahead and do it so their kid can attend school they were forced into it.

Even in states such as New York, where religious sincerity tests are conducted, parents are often denied an exemption. Many then vaccinate. Why? Because of the force employed through compulsory schooling laws.

Here is a definition of force:

violence, compulsion, or constraint exerted upon or against a person or thing

Vaccination laws regard compulsory vaccinations. Force and compulsion are synonymous. What do you not understand? If you love the vaccination program so much, embrace it; don’t deny its true nature. If these laws did not get parents to vaccinate where they otherwise would not have, do you support their elimination?

http://www.facebook.com/TheVaccineMachine

March 22, 2012 at 2:52 pm
(20) Ben says:

Yeah, nevermind that the medical exemption is nearly impossible to get. Nevermind that the philosophical exemption is being attacked in every state (see the current situation in Vermont). Nevermind that in states like California the religious and philopsophical exemption are tied together, so elliminating the philosophical also eliminates the religious. Nevermind that one who can prove their child is vaccine injured has no recourse against the company that made it EVEN if one can also show that the vaccine could have been made safer. This is just one more step in the direction of making vaccines mandatory for everyone. Please tell me of another type of medical intervention that you are “responsible for” participating in unless you decide to opt out. This is a personal liberty issue for sure. For those who think that people should be forced to vaccinate because of the community, what happens when the government decides that you should be forced to do something against your beliefs? We must protect personal liberty everytime regardless of whether or not we agree with the person/group that is under attack. And also, if the majority of people are actually vaccinated as the author claims, then what is all the fuss about?

March 22, 2012 at 3:07 pm
(21) samaxtics says:

It’s about the money.

In Canada where doctors are not /not as beholden to the pharmaceutical companies, you don’t get all this hysteria. The jabs are given at a health clinic by registered nurses so a parent who elects to enact their constitutional right to refuse this medical procedure for their child is not depriving a doctor of any income. I am glad for this system as otherwise it would negatively affect the patient/doctor relationship we hold dear to have a doctor constantly marketing/pushing vaccines at office visits in order for him/her to reach the quota where the bonus kicks in.

So to punish the parents who refuse vaccines and thereby affect the bonus potential, the answer is to make them pay for a visit, sit through a one-sided lecture and charge them again to sign the paper? Annually? #baksheesh.

March 22, 2012 at 3:15 pm
(22) Robert Schecter says:

Great point, Ben. A medical exemption is basically no exemption.

http://www.facebook.com/TheVaccineMachine

March 22, 2012 at 3:36 pm
(23) Vincent Iannelli, MD says:

“If we pass a law requiring parents to get permission to opt out of a medical procedure, that’s sets a radical new precedent in American jurisprudence.”

Even without the philosophical or personal exemptions to the vaccine mandates for school entry, these mandates would still be considered to be a weak mandate. There has always been a way to opt-out and no one is forcibly vaccinated.

And how is it a ‘radical new precedent’ when the Supreme Court has always upheld the constitutionality of vaccine mandates?

March 22, 2012 at 3:43 pm
(24) Sarah says:

SO funny that people think talking to an M.D will help them see the light. It isn’t like it is easy to opt out. You have to go to the school and turn in a form and they look at you cross eyed and pretend they don’t have them form. Most people only opt out because they HAVE done research. Even my h usband said if he hadn’t married me he never would have even THOUGHT about not doing the vaccines – that is just what you do!

My dad is an M.D. and HE is the one that encouraged me to look into vaccines before doing them. He didn’t TELL me what to do. I have a primary care doctor for my children and he is for vaccines but respects us not doing them and does not harass us. He knows we have researched vaccines. An M.D. is not GOD! You get good ones and bad ones. What we are really talking about is taking away individual freedoms and rights – one little chink at a time. To those who vaccinate and are so fearful of my c hildren I suggest you take steps to have more confidence in your own and/or your children’s health. It was like a burden was removed when I decided to take complete responsiblity for our health – not depend on anyone else to do it for me, no more blaming others and/or being fearful of others bringing down disease on us.

It is MUCH harder to not vaccinate than to go with the flow.

March 22, 2012 at 3:51 pm
(25) Vincent Iannelli, MD says:

“In Canada where doctors are not /not as beholden to the pharmaceutical companies, you don’t get all this hysteria.”

I actually think that the lack of vaccine mandates in Canada and the UK has more to do with the history of vaccine mandates in England.

The Vaccination Act of 1853 required everyone to get the smallpox vaccine in England and Wales, which was a much stronger compulsory vaccine mandate than the weaker mandate for school children that we have in the United States. They later added a conscientious exemption clause and finally repealed the Act in 1946.

The UK actually thought about a vaccine mandate again in 2004, because of big increases they were seeing in measles in unvaccinated people, but they chose to stick with their current plans, with vaccine rates going down when disease rates are low and then climbing again once the rates of vaccine-preventable diseases starts to rise.

March 22, 2012 at 4:31 pm
(26) Ren says:

If the vaccines work, then why worry? I’ll tell you why. Because, like with everything else in the known universe, nothing is 100% safe or 100% effective. There will be those people for whom the vaccine does not confer full immunity. Others will have an underlying, chronic medical condition that prevents them from being immunized. They all will rely on herd immunity (a scientific and mathematical concept denied by the most ardent anti-vaccine groups) to remain safe. As vaccine rates drop, that herd immunity goes away, leading to outbreaks.

Upping the vaccine rates, informing the parents through reliable sources (e.g. healthcare providers) instead of facebook pages (looking at you, Bob), and promoting the general welfare is something we should all praise.

Oh, and Bob Schecter, can you please answer Ed and tell us why you’re not anti-vaccine, being as how you write for the most anti-vaccine organizations we have in this country at this time?

March 22, 2012 at 4:33 pm
(27) Ren says:

In “Jacobson vs. Massachusetts”, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that there is no Constitutional right to endanger the public by refusing to take vaccines. “Jacobson” in the case was refusing to take the smallpox vaccine at the time of a smallpox epidemic in Massachusetts. In “Zucht vs. King”, the Court ruled that States have the right to impose health regulations as part of their “police powers” for guarding public health. Then, in “Prince vs. Massachusetts”, the Court ruled that religious freedom does not include the freedom to expose the public to dangerous infections.

Sadly, Christian Scientists convinced the NY State Legislature in the 1970′s to allow exemptions on “philosophical” differences. When asked for comment, God gave a school run by the First Church of Christ, Scientist a pretty bad polio outbreak. (He likes to make his point.) Guess what vaccine the Christian Scientists were refusing for their kids?

March 22, 2012 at 5:54 pm
(28) Annie Goodwin says:

A person is entitled to her own opinion and beliefs, but not her own facts. Laura wrote:

It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that giving a newborn a vaccine for a sexually-transmitted or IV-drug using disease

She is referring of course to the Hepatitis B vaccine, of which the first dose is given at birth.

Sadly, Hepatitis B is spread to infants from infected mothers, and as Eric Mast, M.D., M.P.H tells us, Hepatitis B is spred from child to child

Laura goes on to claim that the Hepatitis B vaccine is associated with a long list of associated deaths, comas, seizures, and 3X the risk for developing autism. She provides no citations or evidence for these claims, but one can infer that she is referring to reports at the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). These reports are a passive system; the serious allegations are then investigated. As Steven Novella MD wrote, “What voluntary reporting systems are not, however, are scientifically rigorous assessments of true risk. They are useful for generating, but not testing, hypothesesThe primary weakness of voluntary reporting systems, like VAERS, is that they are voluntary – people take it upon themselves to report what they believe may be a vaccine side effect.” Reuben Gaines, an epidemiologist, wrote a post explaining how anti-vaccine groups like NVIC misuse and exploit VAERS reports.

March 22, 2012 at 5:57 pm
(29) Annie Goodwin says:

Laura wrote:

Laura goes on to claim that the Hepatitis B vaccine is associated with 3X the risk for developing autism.

As far as the autism claim goes, Laura is referring to a highly questionable study, Gallagher & Goodman (2010), “Hepatitis B Vaccination Of Male Neonates And Autism Diagnosis, NHIS 1997–2002 ” DOI: 10.1080/15287394.2010.519317. Remember that the hepatitis B vaccine was introduced in 1991, and wasn’t fully implemented until 1996. The study counted as autistic and vaccinated children who received the vaccine after their autism diagnoses. Secondly, there is no statistically significant difference between the two groups (HBV/no HBV) in their autism prevalence (p = 0.07). I’d call that study busted, in the words of Mythbusters. No replication, either.

March 22, 2012 at 7:26 pm
(30) Emily Lindsey says:

Actually feeding choice does routinely cause problems in other children, that is why the latest AAP statement as well as the federal statements are so strong on that point. Breastfeeding is NOT a lifestyle choice, it is a public health choice. Children who are not breastfed routinely contract diseases that breastfed children did not or got a lesser form of and fought off (therefore achieving immunity) and then pass it onto others around them such as respiratory diseases. Vaccines just like breastfeeding CAN protect but it is a parents choice.
As to what the cost is to our healthcare system, an average office visit (short) is going to cost around $150 so if 13,000 children need that form filled out and have to be seen then you are looking at over 1 million dollars just so parents can have a doctor sign a form stating they were told of the benefits to vaccination.
I might support this more if all parents had to be told of the risks and benefits to vaccinating before any shot was given just as we do for other procedures that carry a minimal risk to the patient.

March 22, 2012 at 7:55 pm
(31) Christina Schmidt says:

My little girl was healthy, chubby and happy until her 1 yr shots (MMR. Varicella, Polio) at 14 months old. She started having seizures, pupils of her eyes dialating off and on, tappinf the top of her head over and over, crying unconsolably at times. Her health deteriorated as the weeks went on, high pitched screaming for hrs. and arching her back, throwing herself backwards when we would try to hold and consol her (this was about 8 days after those shots). She had her diagnosis of autism a few mths later. We were referred to Early Childhood Intervention by the pediatrician who completely ignored my concerns about what I saw after those vaccination shots by the way! Today she is 9 and suffers w/ toxic body burden, chrones, inflammatory bowel, lymes disease, immune disfunction and many food allergies and food intollerances.

March 22, 2012 at 8:14 pm
(32) Liz Ditz says:

I’ve been perusing the Bay Citizen’s Immunization Stats for All Bay Area School Districts and comparing it to socio-economic status (SES) as indicated at Ed-Data, the California school data website.

As a general rule of thumb: the lower the SES (measured by percentage of students on free or reduced-price lunch) the lower the Personal Belief Exemption rate. That doesn’t necessarily mean higher vaccine uptake; it looks like some low-SES schools have pretty high “conditional entrance” rates, meaning a child can start school without all the requisite vaccines.

The “winner” (if you want to call it that), is Marin County’s Lagunitas School District, which is a two-school district, with a 56% personal belief exemption. Breaking it down further, at San Geronimo Elementary (enrollment 133; kindergarten enrollment of 30; no English language learners; 24% on free or reduced price lunches) a whopping 63% of incoming kindergartners have a PBE.

The next 3 districts with high PBE rates are in Sonoma not Marin. There, at Sebastapol Independent Charter School, a new high: 86% PBE, with a kindergarten enrollment of 43. I wonder if it’s a Waldorf “inspired” school….BINGO! Inspired by Waldorf ideas and ideals , we opened our school in the fall of 1995. Now Sebastopol Independent Charter School is one of the longest-running Waldorf inspired public schools in the country.

March 22, 2012 at 8:18 pm
(33) Liz Ditz says:

More perusing the Bay Citizen’s Immunization Stats for All Bay Area School Districts and comparing it to socio-economic status (SES) as indicated at Ed-Data, the California school data website.

Enough with the rich, mostly white folk. Let’s look at Ravenswood Elementary District in San Mateo County. The entire district reports a 0% PBE rate, and from 0% to 6% conditional entry….I’ll pick the largest school, Brentwood Oaks Elementary, with a kindergarten enrollment of 80, 0% PBE, and only two “conditional entry” students. 79% Hispanic/Latino, 10.6% African-American, 80% free/reduced-price lunch….

Oh, and Silicon Valley? Lower-than-average PBEs, except for…You guessed it! The Waldorf School of the Peninsula, in Los Altos, with a 73% PBE.

So lower-income folks value the protection that vaccines provide.

March 22, 2012 at 8:42 pm
(34) Todd W. says:

Dr. Sears thinks that physicians will refuse to sign the form. He thinks this so strongly that he asserts it as an inevitable fact that it will happen, and even implies that it will be a significant, widespread problem. This assumes that there are a significant number of physicians who are not decent human beings who will follow the intent of the bill. It also ignores the fact that there are most certainly physicians who will readily sign the form, perhaps even without giving legitimate, accurate information, such as Dr. Sears himself or Dr. Jay Gordon.

Considering that the philosophical exemptions allow parents to simply check a box, refusing immunization and putting their child (and other children and adults) at risk of disease for any reason at all, requiring that they get information on the benefits and risks of vaccines and the diseases they prevent seems to me to be a wise move. For example, they can check the box for a reason as simple as “I forgot to take my kid in for their immunizations”.

This law does not take away philosophical exemptions. Instead, it requires that parents demonstrate that they have received information about the vaccines they are refusing. One would think that supposed “pro-informed choice” advocates would be completely in support of this legislation, since it encourages the sharing of information and education so that parents can make sound decisions.

@victoria

So—are doctors going to mandated to inform parents about the RISKS of vaccines?

Yes. If you took the time to actually read the legislation, you would see that the information is about the “benefits and risks” of vaccines. Granted, the information is based on reality, not the fearmongering of people like Dr. Sears, NVIC, Age of Autism, Bob Schechter and others.

March 22, 2012 at 8:44 pm
(35) Annie Goodwin says:

I was looking for something else and ran across The Asian Liver Center at Stanford University. I learned something new:

Why should Asian and Pacific Islanders care about Hepatitis B?
Despite the fact that only 0.2-0.5% of the U.S. population has chronic hepatitis B infection, this is still 1.25 million people, over half of whom are Asian and Pacific Islander (API) Americans. Depending on their country of origin, 5-15% of API immigrants have chronic hepatitis B. In some Pacific Rim countries, as many as 10-20% of the population are chronically infected.

Hmmn. Seems like if you live in an area where there are high numbers of API folk, you’d want to protect yourself and your child.

March 22, 2012 at 11:09 pm
(36) Chris says:

Victoria:

Things like vaccine-induced encephalitis, epilepsy, auto-immune disorders, and death? I think not

Certainly. They will explain that it happens every so often, but not as often as the actual disease, The Clinical Significance of Measles: A Review. Now do tell us which vaccine causes encephalomyelitis one out of a hundred times, with about one quarter dying and about a third with permanent disability. Please be sure to provide the scientific documentation to support your statement.

As to costs: How exactly is it cheaper to treat a disease than to prevent it.

Just a bit over twenty years ago California had a measles epidemic:
Pediatric hospital admissions for measles. Lessons from the 1990 epidemic.
West J Med. 1996 Jul-Aug;165(1-2):20-5.

It cost the State of California some big bucks. From the paper (which is available for free): “Hospital costs amounted to $18 million, two thirds of which was paid for by Medi-Cal.”

Not to mention the dozens who died.

March 22, 2012 at 11:28 pm
(37) joejoe says:

What you incompetent reporters should be writing about is the fear that the educated non-vaxing parents have of vaccines, currently we are in the midst of an neurological epidemic due to toxic exposure from vaccines, the general medical consensus is that vaccines are safe, yet the research they use is all funded by Big Pharma.The Non-Pharma research shows just the opposite, which is a direct correlation between increased vaccine exposure and increased neurological disorders including autism.At this time, we are the most vaccinated nation in the world, yet our children are the sickest, 1 in 5 now suffer from some sort of neurological disability, and this is the true reason parents as myself distrust vaccines and the Big Pharma funded research behind them!

March 23, 2012 at 7:17 am
(38) Ren says:

@Joejoe

Citations, please. Also, correlation DOES NOT equal causation. Say it with me… Correlation DOES NOT equal causation. Correlation DOES NOT equal causation. Correlation DOES NOT equal causation.

If correlation equaled causation, then we would have to do research into microwaveable popcorn, for it closely correlates with the rise in autism rates as well.

March 23, 2012 at 9:57 am
(39) Todd W. says:
March 23, 2012 at 11:38 am
(40) Lauren says:

All of those parents who want their children to have “freedom” from vaccines are relying on my children and all the other children who were vaccinate to provide herd immunity for their unvaccinated kids. People love to talk about freedom and their rights and forget with those rights comes responsibilities–to their own children, and, believe it or not, to the immunity-compromised people (infants, elderly, pregnant women, etc.) their children might infect with preventable diseases.

You can complain about “Big Pharma” all you want but look back 100 years when people died all the time from these diseases. Vaccinations make the world a better place. Period. There may be an extremely small risk with vaccines but we all take bigger risks every time we get in a car.

March 23, 2012 at 11:39 am
(41) Cassa says:

Dr Sears has a good point about investigating whether physicians intend to actually use this legislation to take away any kind of actual consent by refusing to sign the form.
Dr Iannelli, we know you want this legislation to pass. Do you see yourself as being able to sign the form for unvaccinating parents if you were requested to do so?

March 23, 2012 at 12:01 pm
(42) Vincent Iannelli, MD says:

“Dr Iannelli, we know you want this legislation to pass. Do you see yourself as being able to sign the form for unvaccinating parents if you were requested to do so?”

Since I have written that I even disagree with the practice of firing patients who don’t vaccinate, I don’t think that you will find any evidence that I would not sign the form. I think that most other health care providers would sign it too. Your signature on the form just means that you discussed the risks and benefits of vaccines with the parent. It doesn’t mean that you agree with their decision.

“Dr Sears has a good point about investigating whether physicians intend to actually use this legislation to take away any kind of actual consent by refusing to sign the form.”

That would kind of defeat the point of having these kinds of exemptions.

I think that it is ironic that Dr. Sears is involved in this defeat. If he had not been so successful with his book in getting so many parents to adopt alternative immunization schedules or simply not vaccinate at all, then they likely would not have be revisiting these exemption laws in so many states.

March 23, 2012 at 12:44 pm
(43) Cassa says:

Dr Iannelli,
Thank you very much for your clarification.
I applaud your respect for free choice, even when you disagree with the choice made.
It seems that generally, the refusal to treat unvaccinated children is becoming more common; I doubt that anyone who is willing to refuse to provide medical care to a child, would be willing to sign a form.

It seems ironic that rather than offer medical care to ensure such children are treated quickly and appropriately , and their parents know to quarantine them if they have something contagious, whether pink eye or something more serious, the current medical thinking of some, seems to be to make as many barriers to accessing medical care for these children as possible.

March 23, 2012 at 1:33 pm
(44) Vincent Iannelli, MD says:

“I doubt that anyone who is willing to refuse to provide medical care to a child, would be willing to sign a form.”

Well, if they have fired all of their patients who don’t get vaccines and don’t accept new patients who don’t vaccinate, then they likely won’t have any one who needs a form to be signed.

“their parents know to quarantine them if they have something contagious”

Do you have any evidence to show that statement is true, whether it is for a vaccine-preventable disease or anything else?

School nurses seem to have to send a lot of kids home with pink eye and other contagious illnesses.

And in the majority of cases the last few years, measles outbreaks were spread when an unvaccinated person with measles went to a doctor or ER and spread it to other people.

March 23, 2012 at 1:05 pm
(45) Todd W. says:

@Cassa

While I do not agree with physicians “firing” patients whose parents refuse vaccinations (after all, it is a disservice to the child), I can understand why they do it. If a parent is refusing vaccines for their child, that increases the risks of infection for every single other patient that doctor sees. Many diseases are contagious before any obvious symptoms occur, so a child infected with measles may be brought in for a well-baby visit. For about two hours after that child leaves the practice, every person that passes through may be infected, including those too young to have been immunized. Without showing any signs of infection, it is highly unlikely that any attempts would be made at infection control (e.g., wearing a mask, using a separate entrance, etc.). While vaccination probably will not completely eliminate this risk, it does cut down on it dramatically. So, I can see why a physician might want to exclude any patients whose parents refuse vaccination.

Once symptoms appear, it is much easier to take proper precautions against spreading the infection (e.g., calling the doctor before heading in to the office, using masks, clearing common spaces of pathogens after the sick patient leaves, etc.).

So, like I said. I don’t agree with the practice, since it punishes the child who is innocent of poor decision-making, but I do understand where they’re coming from.

Education and communication are key, and this bill would help facilitate that.

March 23, 2012 at 1:30 pm
(46) Cassa says:

Todd W, however,a “fired” patient does not get to come back to the office for treatment when sick.
This means the sick child is either ill enough to be hospitalized,must visit the ER ( and spread lots of germs there) or their parents must use home remedies or go to an alternative practitioner.

There is no option of going back to the doctors office and wearing a mask.

Of course, if the philosphical exemption goes the way Dr Sears describes, with doctors scolding patients and refusing to sign the forms, the chance of the parents trusting or trying to visit a pediatrician is pretty low.

Ironic of course; if a parent refuses the hep b vaccine the child can be fired. Yet no adults vaccinated before the 80s have been Hep b vaccinated either, unless it was a special deal for their type of work.And adults are notorious carriers of whooping cough, yet it is still rare for adults to have got the required booster.
The idea that adults have an amazing ability to be non infectious despite lack of vaccines but children don’t, seems to be the theory here.
I suppose the real fear is adult outcry if they were held to the same standard.

March 23, 2012 at 1:48 pm
(47) Ren says:

@Cassa

How do you know if someone who came into contact with measles in the last 9 to 12 days is infectious or not? What signs/symptoms would they exhibit in order to know to slap on a mask and go to the doctor?

Because this seems to be one of the continuing arguments of the anti-vaccine crowd: “If my child gets sick, I’ll just isolate/quarantine at home.” In the case of measles, symptoms don’t show up until 9 to 12 days after infection, and the person is infectious for about 2 or 3 days before symptoms. You’d be sending the infectious child to school for 2 or 3 days to school, symptom-free, infecting others.

Why is this concept so hard to grasp? Does it really require a master’s degree in epidemiology? Really?

March 23, 2012 at 1:55 pm
(48) Todd W. says:

@Cassa

Like I said. I don’t agree with doctors firing non-vaccinating patients, but I can understand why they do it (i.e., to reduce liability and the risks to their other patients).

Of course, if the philosphical exemption goes the way Dr Sears describes, with doctors scolding patients and refusing to sign the forms, the chance of the parents trusting or trying to visit a pediatrician is pretty low.

That’s a very big “IF”. I don’t think it will be very likely to play out the way Dr. Sears imagines.

Ironic of course; if a parent refuses the hep b vaccine the child can be fired. Yet no adults vaccinated before the 80s have been Hep b vaccinated either, unless it was a special deal for their type of work.And adults are notorious carriers of whooping cough, yet it is still rare for adults to have got the required booster.
The idea that adults have an amazing ability to be non infectious despite lack of vaccines but children don’t, seems to be the theory here.
I suppose the real fear is adult outcry if they were held to the same standard.

Adults should get boosters. Adults should be immunized against Hep b (my doc recommended I get it, since my blood labs at one visit didn’t show any antibodies; I followed my doc’s advice and am now fully immunized against hep B and hep A). No one, I think, believes that adults are “non-infectious”. Most vaccine advocates I know feel very strongly that adults should keep up to date on their boosters.

As far as vaccination programs go, it is far, far easier to implement programs to vaccinate children than it is for adults. And, pediatric programs generally result in better overall public health and disease prevention than programs that only target adults (e.g., see hep B infection prevention efforts).

March 23, 2012 at 2:01 pm
(49) Cassa says:

Ren, actually you are missing ( or describing ) my point. Wouldn’t it be better if unvaccinated children went to the doctor and got medical treatment, rather than tried home remedies because physicians refuse to see them?

Of course as an adult, do you know the symptoms of whooping cough in adults, or have you checked with your doctor as to when you last got your whooping cough booster and whether you are still vaccinated?

Have you checked with your doctor and got a HEp B series if it is safe for you to do so?
if not what are the symptoms of Hep B that would keep you out of the doctors office, or out of work?

If you haven’t visited your doctor to ensure your own vaccines are updated, then , then respectfully you are also in the same situation.
If you have, have all the other adult members of your family done so?

March 23, 2012 at 8:53 pm
(50) Lugrita says:

The reality is that this bill is about money, not about preventing disease. There is lots of money in vaccines, and they don’t want to miss out on a source of revenue…and our kids are that source of revenue for them. I have a vaccine-injured child and we nearly lost her from the few vaccines that she received (and I was not against vaccines at the time). Neither she nor my older three children will ever receive another vaccination, and this inane bill won’t convince me otherwise. I almost lost my daughter because of vaccines and she still has the occasional seizure 4+ years later (pediatrician confirmed the vaccine reaction years ago). That’s all the convincing that I need. Those of us who choose exemptions do so for valid reasons.

March 23, 2012 at 10:48 pm
(51) Lugrita says:

I want to add that I am an immunocompromised individual. I am on a heavy immunosuppressant due to my life-threatening disease…I’m one of the people who should supposedly be protected by herd immunity, and any sickness could easily land me in a hospital. And still, I refuse to allow any further vaccinations for any of my children after what happened to my youngest daughter as a result of vaccines. It was THAT bad. I don’t fear them getting sick. I fear them dying or getting irreversible damage (as one of my children has) due to vaccines. But I do homeschool, so you need not fear my children in your public schools. :)

April 17, 2012 at 4:09 pm
(52) Debunking Atheists says:

The government knows what is best for the children the parents. They spend 800+ million on conventions for the organizational watchdogs that watch over governmental spending abuse. They also buy hookers for the secret service, not to mention the deaths and adverse reactions to vaccines. You know who pays for the studies to see if the vaccines are harmful or not? Want to guess? That is right the people trying to push the vaccine for approval does ALL THE STUDIES AND TESTS to determine if it is safe to sell. Fox guarding the hen house. Ho yea, they are more qualified then the loving parents to make such choices. It really doesn’t matter because the NDAA and NDRP states we will all be in forced camps and the government can shoot whatever they want into our veins. Wahoo! USA, USA

April 17, 2012 at 7:31 pm
(53) joejoe says:

I think that doctors should pay us well informed parents for wasting our time listening to their Big Pharma funded pseudo science exonerating vaccines from their link to autism, when in fact their is plenty of research showing otherwise. I think that doctors need to show us 100% proof that vaccines are more beneficial than avoiding them all together, also there needs to be a open forum where doctors answer all questions in public, on TV, we need to put them on the spot, with independent peer reviewed research. After all, if you want to push something as dangerous as vaccines you better back it up because the herd immunity crap, or the greater good crap just doesn’t cut it for parents.

April 17, 2012 at 9:42 pm
(54) lia says:

I am a mother of 2 and me and my family have kaiser, I see my childs pediatrician on a regular basis, I ALSO delay/split vaccinations for my children. I can tell you that my pediatrician constantly trys to pressure/coerce/shame me into fully vaccinating my children.I have already switched peds twice. I have done my own research at both for and against vaccine website, ive also read books and attended talks on vaccines. Almost all the information my childs pediatrician has given me on vaccines has been wrong….it is pathetic! I know she would NEVER sign anything like this for me. This bill is just another way to try and force vaccines….PERIOD!

April 17, 2012 at 10:02 pm
(55) Vincent Iannelli, MD says:

“Almost all the information my childs pediatrician has given me on vaccines has been wrong….it is pathetic! ”

Just curious, but can you give us some examples of what your pediatrician has said that is wrong?

May 9, 2012 at 1:04 am
(56) John C says:

Dr. Iannelli, I know this is an old post, but just curious: when you went through medical school, how much time in the curriculum was devoted to the study of vaccines?

May 9, 2012 at 9:51 am
(57) Vincent Iannelli, MD says:

“Dr. Iannelli, I know this is an old post, but just curious: when you went through medical school, how much time in the curriculum was devoted to the study of vaccines?”

That’s a good question.

I went to UT Southwestern Medical School and did my residency at Childrens Medical Center in Dallas.

Now that is relevant to your question because it exposed me and means I was trained by some of the biggest names in pediatric infectious disease, including John D. Nelson, MD (author of the Pocket Book of Pediatric Antimicrobial Therapy), George H. McCracken, Jr., MD, who along with Dr. Nelson are the editors of The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, and Dr. Heinz Felix Eichenwald, an internationally renowned expert on children’s infectious diseases (may he RIP), etc.

So we learned a lot about vaccines, especially as we often saw the consequences when kids got sick with vaccine preventable diseases in the pediatric intensive care unit.

May 29, 2012 at 8:39 am
(58) Proongoda says:

Gifted day! I am the firstly on your site. Escape me to stop smoking.

June 27, 2012 at 5:07 pm
(59) Baba Singh says:

Legislation like AB2109 might be for the common good if it weren’t for the fact that the industry that manufactures vaccines has used extraordinary powers to promote their products, many of which have been recalled and have injured many, many people. In the U.S., there were so many lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers that the federal government established a ‘Vaccine Court’ that PREVENTS YOU FROM SUING A VACCINE MANUFACTURER FOR DEFECTIVE PRODUCTS. In its own words, it “provides” you, the parent of a child potentially injured by a defective vaccine, with a “less adversarial alternative to the often costly and lengthy civil arena of traditional tort litigation”. In this post-financial crisis age, we would have to be stupid to give more power to corporations that have this much government protection. Our legislators are not sales reps for Glaxo-Smith-Kline, they should be serving to protect US from THEM. (check out http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/vaccine-programoffice-special-masters )

July 8, 2012 at 12:02 pm
(60) Viktoria says:

How does not vaccinating your child put anyone else at risk? After all, all the vaccinated children are already protected, right? Really, the logic behind some statement is lacking completely. Why would a parent want to sign a waiver that he or she will be endangering the society by not vaccinating their children. If vaccines are effective as they claim they are, then vaccinated kids are protected and non-vaccinated kids do not endanger anyone.

August 15, 2012 at 10:55 pm
(61) Vitamin Supplements and Natural Products says:

Great site you have here.. It’s hard to find high-quality writing like yours nowadays. I seriously appreciate individuals like you! Take care!!

September 24, 2012 at 1:23 pm
(62) Dr. Michael Dooley says:

I never have a problem with people getting more information. However, I have a problem with the state requiring parents to get the information and having to pay (support a private business) to get it.

If the state has weekly or monthly FREE informational sessions where the signature can be obtained locally for everyone, I would have no problem at all.

Bias will be a problem no matter what. If you get the info from an MD, you will most likely be leaned toward getting the vaccines. If you go to a DC, you will most likely be leaned away from vaccines.

I would be interested, if the bill passes, to see a study done with people putting down their decision on vaccinations before and after the mandatory information is received. That way, the state can continue the program if it is changing minds, (either way). Of discontinue it if it is not.

Leave a Comment

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>
Top Related Searches
  • new california
  • march 21
  • ©2014 About.com. All rights reserved.

    We comply with the HONcode standard
    for trustworthy health
    information: verify here.