Posted on 07/16/2009 1:39:20 PM PDT by kimber
(CNSNews.com) - There is a knock at the front door. Peeking through the window, a mother sees a man and a woman, both in uniform. They are agents of health-care reform.
“Excuse me, ma’am,” says the man. “Our records show that your eleven-year-old daughter has not been immunized for genital warts.”
“And your four-year-old still needs the chicken-pox vaccine,” says the woman.
“He will not be allowed to start kindergarten unless he gets that shot, you know,” says the man—smiling from ear to ear.
“So, can we please come in?” asks the woman. “We have the vaccines right here,” she says, lifting up a black medical bag. “We can give your kids the shots right now.”
“We are from the government,” says the man, “and we’re here to help.”
Is this a scene from the over-heated imagination of an addlepated conspiracy theorist? Or is it something akin to what is actually envisioned by the health-care reform bill approved this week by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee.
The committee’s official summary of the bill says: “Authorizes a demonstration program to improve immunization coverage. Under this program, CDC will provide grants to states to improve immunization coverage of children, adolescents, and adults through the use of evidence-based interventions. States may use funds to implement interventions that are recommended by the Community Preventive Services Task Force, such as reminders or recalls for patients or providers, or home visits.”
Home visits? What exactly is the state going to do when it sends people to “implement interventions” in private homes designed “to improve immunization coverage of children”?
The draft of the bill posted on the committee Web site provides more details.
Title III of the bill is entitled, “Improving the Health of the American People.” It includes four subtitles. They are: “Subtitle A: Modernizing Disease Prevention of Public Health Systems,” “Subtitle B: Increasing Access to Clinical Preventive Services,” “Subtitle C: Creating Healthier Communities,” and “Subtitle D: Support for Prevention and Public Health Information.”
The program authorizing home “interventions” to promote immunizations falls under “Subtitle C: Creating Healthier Communities.” This subtitle directs the secretary of health and human services to “establish a demonstration program to award grants to states to improve the provision of recommended immunizations for children, adolescents, and adults through the use of evidence-based, population-based interventions for high-risk populations.”
The bill lists eight specific ways that states may use federal grant money to carry out immunization-promoting “interventions.” Method “E” calls for “home visits” which can include “provision of immunizations.”
Says the draft bill: “Funds received under a grant under this subsection shall be used to implement interventions that are recommended by the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (as established by the secretary, acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) or other evidence-based interventions, including—“(A) providing immunization reminders or recalls for target populations of clients, patients, and consumers; (B) educating targeted populations and health care providers concerning immunizations in combination with one or more other interventions; (C) reducing out-of-pocket costs for families for vaccines and their administration; (D) carrying out immunization-promoting strategies for participants or clients of public programs, including assessments of immunization status, referrals to health care providers, education, provision of on-site immunizations, or incentives for immunization;(E) providing for home visits that promote immunization through education, assessments of need, referrals, provision of immunizations, or other services; (F) providing reminders or recalls for immunization providers;(G) conducting assessments of, and providing feedback to, immunization providers; or (H) any combination of one or more interventions described in this paragraph.”
Many vaccines routinely administered to children in the United States are utterly uncontroversial. But in recent years there have been controversies about the chicken pox vaccine and the vaccine for HPV, which causes genital warts, which can cause cervical cancer.
On March 15, 2007, Bloomberg news summarized a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, which discovered that the chicken pox vaccine does not provide permanent protection against chicken pox, leaving children who have been immunized vulnerable to getting ill with the virus later in life when it can cause a more serious bout of the disease.
“Merck & Co.'s chickenpox vaccine weakens as children age, possibly leaving them vulnerable to a more serious infection as adults, a U.S.-sponsored study in California found,” reported Bloomberg. “The power of the vaccine, Varivax, the only one available in the United States against chickenpox, starts to fade after five years, according to the study in today's New England Journal of Medicine. The results suggest that children should get a second dose, which advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended in June.”
Bloomberg quoted the study as saying, "Waning immunity is of particular public health interest because it may result in increased susceptibility later in life, when the risk of severe complications may be greater than that in childhood.”
In March of this year, the Washington Post reported about the controversy sparked when the Merck pharmaceutical company campaigned to have states mandate that school girls receive Gardasil, its vaccine against HPV.
“Merck also began an ambitious marketing campaign and lobbying push to persuade states to add the vaccine to the list of those required for children to attend school,” reported the Post. “But the company eventually abandoned the strategy in the face of an intense backlash from critics who argued that the decision should be left to parents. Although many states considered such mandates, so far only Virginia and the District have imposed one, and [a Merck official] said the company has no plans to pursue that strategy again."
The Post's report noted that at least some experts questioned the wisdom of promoting use of the vaccine when its long term impact is still unknown.
“Federal health officials, Merck and others say they are confident that the vaccine is safe," reported the Post. "But some experts said they are concerned that there is insufficient evidence about how long Gardasil's protection will last, whether serious side effects will emerge and whether the relatively modest benefits for boys are worth even the small risks associated with any vaccine."
Which inoculation?
My son became diabetic at the age of 8.
thanks will read now.
Maybe this has already been discussed in this thread (I have not reqd the whole thing) but if someone comes to the door and says that they are there to give my kids shots so that they may enter school, can;t I just show them the same exemption letter that I show the school?
Who defines WHO has mental illness? Young teens turned suicidal taking all the pharma uppers and downer anti-depressants they pimp on TV commercials. So are SIDE EFFECTS from these drugs a definition of mental illness?
Could be. I hope we never have to find out how the term, high risk populations, is defined.
I don’t trust the gov’t, either, or vaccination shots. My children went through the first round as babies and toddlers but never had any more. Never had the chicken pox shot. Never had flu shots, etc. We do plan to have them receive certain vaccinations, but only with our approval. Some pediatricians have given me trouble because my children’s vaccinations don’t match the state’s schedule. I wouldn’t want a “state vaccination team” coming to my door.
I’ve never had the mumps and whoa to the person that tries to make me get vaccinated.
How so?
The bill opens the door.....RATS are in charge.....
I am feeling a strong urge to withdraw and unplug. Or maybe just run.
Gee You really think so? 8*)
Draconian steel thug booted zerocare coming our way
All states have at least a religious and medical exemption for vaccinations. Many also have a third exemption - philosophical. The only exceptions are MS and WV, which only have medical. You do NOT have to belong to a religious organization to choose the religious exemption. And, you can “get religion” at any time in your life. My state has all three exemptions available. I fill out a form, have it notarized and mail it to the health department. Next year we will be homeschooling, so it will not be required.
Vaccines are only mandated for school entry and there are exemptions available to most. If they tried to force a vaccination on my family, I would claim that I was religiously opposed to them. There will be scare tactics, fearmongering, and other unethical methods employed to get vaccine compliance. They already do all of these things for the regular vaccines on the market.
www.insidevaccines.com/wordpress has evidence-based info about vaccines, including information on exemptions.
That’s right.
You can alway take one with you, and that would be one less to assault individual liberty in the future.
Are you sure there is no Thimerasol in any vaccine? A doc I read from the CDC lists it as an ingredient in quite a few vaccines.
(Waves!)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.