Originally published on www.mercola.com
- After a public health emergency is declared, governors have the power to invoke legislation to shut down a business or force health care
- While some argue herd immunity will protect society from infection, the theory doesn't work for vaccines
- People who refuse the vaccination may lose their jobs or their businesses and those who defy orders to shut down may end up in jail
- 80% of people 65 and older said they would take a COVID-19 vaccine; 60% over age 65 have at least one chronic disease that affects vulnerability to the illness, yet vaccines are not being tested in this age group
- The vaccines being developed use RNA technology, which the leading company says need more years to test safety and effectiveness; the first vaccine is currently in human trials five months after China publicly acknowledged the illness
Despite years of laboratory research, animal studies, human trials and evaluation of evidence, vaccines have unanticipated negative health effects. The Health Resources and Services Administration reports1 "The United States has the safest, most effective vaccine supply in history." Yet, in 10 years of reporting to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 5,564 cases for injury were brought before the vaccine injury court.
This does not represent the thousands of other injuries and deaths from vaccines reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) -- only those brought before a judge. And, in case reports and studies, even more injuries have been reported. For example, in 1989 a measles vaccine was rolled out in Africa. It wasn't long before some noticed it doubled the mortality from other diseases in young girls, yet it wasn't withdrawn until 1992.2
During the 1990s researchers Dr. Peter Aaby and Christine Stabell Benn were studying the effects of vaccines on mortality and came to the shocking conclusion that five of the nine vaccines studied clearly increased mortality from other conditions.3 Then, when they examined a tenth vaccine -- an antimalarial vaccine that appeared to offer between 18% and 36% protection against malaria -- they found that it also increased overall mortality by 24%.
In January 2020, a military study4 was released showing personnel who had received a flu vaccine had a 36% increased risk of contracting a coronavirus (before COVID-19) and human metapneumovirus. Additionally, the vaccine was not consistently beneficial against flu viruses.
This study also demonstrated the flu vaccine protected against other types of respiratory pathogens. So, while it increased the risk to some, it reduced the risk to others -- and neither was planned in years of research and development, which demonstrates how difficult it is to predict results.
Unfortunately, those who get their health information from mainstream media may have believed Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who spoke with CBS News in 2019.5 He flatly denied vaccines can cause injury or death. This is not just a case of misinforming the public: It's an outright lie based on reflection of evidence from thousands of court cases.
These facts are important since each of these vaccines was developed over years of testing and study, not in mere months.
Some anticipate that the first vaccine for COVID-19 will be available by fall 2020, just nine to 10 months after the disease reached the U.S. Since vaccine safety protocols are measured in years and not months, it is more important than ever to take control of your health when it comes to deciding whether you want to take a COVID-19 vaccine that's only been studied a few months.
The Law Changes on Governor's Orders
Within the U.S., the governor of California issued the first shelter-in-place order March 19, 2020.6 He called the situation "fluid" and "open-ended," which is how much of the world is currently functioning.7 Shelly Luther, a salon owner from Dallas, Texas, understands the fluidity of the circumstances all too well.
She was recently sentenced to seven days in jail after violating a stay-at-home order by opening her salon. Her case gained national attention after she was requested several times to close. When she was before Judge Eric Moyé, he told her he would consider a lighter sentence if she apologized for what he characterized as her "selfish" behavior.8 She was later released after the Supreme Court of Texas intervened and ordered it.9
In an interview with Fox News10 Luther outlined the precautions she and her stylists took with each client, all of which maintained hygiene and social distancing. Distancing was only broken when the stylist was close enough to cut the client's hair.
Luther spent two days in jail before the court intervened and the governor of Texas modified the executive orders to eliminate jail time.11 Until the modification was published, those who didn't obey the order could have been jailed up to 180 days. (I should note that governors have the power to declare a state of emergency under which they can issue orders that invoke legislation pertinent to the state.)
The National Law Review answered the question about the legalities of being made to close businesses and stay home in New Jersey, which is slightly different from some other states as New Jersey has an additional Emergency Health Powers Act that authorizes greater control. However, while not many states have this legislation, it can be enacted across the U.S. if each state deems it necessary:12
"The same law allows the State to '[r]equire the vaccination of persons as protection against infectious disease;' and although the vaccine cannot be 'administered without obtaining the informed consent of the person to be vaccinated,' the state may require quarantine for "persons who are unable or unwilling to undergo vaccination …" N.J.S.A. § 26:13-19."
In simple language, the state has the power. As interpreted by National Law Review:
"So, can the government shut down your business and make you stay home? Yes. And they can vaccinate you, quarantine you, and are immune from suit for doing any of those things."
Freedom of Speech Doesn't Include All Groups
If the freedom to choose or refuse vaccination created controversy in other years, the coming months and years will likely see an escalation of this. Individuals and groups who refuse vaccination are crucified in the court of public opinion, while those who question the safety and efficacy of the shots are mocked.
The argument for mandatory vaccination is the notion that vaccines can achieve "herd immunity." That theory is based on the claim that if enough people are vaccinated against an illness, it can no longer spread, including among a small minority who may not have been vaccinated. The only issue is that this is a only a theory, and one that doesn't work for vaccines. You can read why in my previous article, "Why Herd Immunity is a Hoax."
Australia's national rugby league star Bryce Cartwright could be banned this season if he refuses a flu shot. Once the COVID-19 vaccine is in full production and distribution, the careers of many professional athletes may come into question if teams demand their players get vaccinated.
Cartwright and his wife have chosen not to vaccinate themselves or their children, for which they have come under attack in the media. In notably biased coverage of the situation, the Daily Mail cleverly juxtaposed "admitted" with "misguided," altering the assumption a reader may make in reading the statement:13
"Mrs Cartwright admitted to followers in an Instagram Q & A last year that convincing her husband to see the what she misguidedly believes are the 'harms of vaccination' …"
The Seattle Times14 reported the result of surveys from Morning Consult indicate not everyone is interested in getting jabbed with a coronavirus vaccine. The results showed that if a vaccine were available, 14% would not get it and 22% aren't sure.
In both cases, the highest numbers are in the 35- to 44-year-old age range.15 Additionally, Republicans and political independents are more likely than Democrats to refuse the vaccine. Overall, 64% say they will get a vaccine when it's available. More concerning is the result showing that at the time of the survey, 80% of those over 65 would get a vaccine.
Health Care Is the New Warfare
Recently, Cartwright's wife Shanelle took to Instagram to defend her husband's beliefs, succinctly writing:16 "It might not be relevant to you now, but bet your bottom dollar this will be the new normal if we don't stand up now."
The battle lines are being drawn now, before the vaccine comes to market, fueled in part by increasing fear. In early March, just as it was evident the novel coronavirus would spread across the U.S., one family experienced just how much life could be disrupted.
Two parents with seven children, who recently moved to Kentucky, entered a bank to open a joint account.17 Five of the youngest children had to go into the bank with them. When they returned home, they were surprised by a law enforcement officer and a child protective services worker waiting for them on their doorstep.
The parents learned an anonymous complaint had been called in to Child Protective Services. The tipster said a mother, five children and a man who wasn't their father were in public and the children had bruises on their arms, which looked like they had been roughly grabbed.
Yet, when the family arrived home, the police confirmed the man was their father, the family had seven children (not five) and they were all wearing long sleeves, making it impossible to see bruising. The family presumes the call came from the bank since the report got the number of children wrong and the bank employees had been fearful of the children.
No Evidence, but the State Can Keep the Case Open
One of the boys was made to take off his shirt to look for bruising. The male investigator attempted to get the girls to take off their shirts as well, but when the mother objected, he agreed to have them roll up their sleeves. None of the allegations of abuse that were filed were substantiated in the home, but the story doesn't end there.
Without evidence on the children and finding the man was their father, the state still allowed investigators to continue to poke around the home and question the children. Even without corroborating evidence, the state can take an additional 45 days to close their unsubstantiated case.
Novak Djokovic, the No.1 ranked tennis player and winner of 17 Grand Slam singles titles, has also expressed concern over taking the coronavirus vaccine.18 Should the vaccine be required, he is unsure what he'll decide to do but is clear he doesn't want to be forced to take something.
Yet, unless things change, laws like the one in New Jersey may make mandatory vaccinations required someday. Taking the potential effects another step, parents who do not consent to vaccinate their children may be accused of abuse and have their children taken from their home.
Human Vaccine Testing Begins Years Earlier Than Normal
Vaccines usually take years to develop, going first through laboratory cell tests, then animal studies before finally being used in human clinical trials. However, testing and development of the vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 has been put on a fast track, bypassing steps other vaccines undergo to reduce the number of potentially dangerous side effects.
According to reports, Pfizer has begun human testing on healthy volunteers a mere five months after China revealed they had a problem with COVID-19.19 Along with their German pharmaceutical partner BioNTech, Pfizer announced the vaccine may be ready as early as September. April 29, 2020, BioNTech revealed 12 participants had been vaccinated since April 23, 2020.20
The participants in the human trial will be given doses ranging from 1 mcg to 100 mcg for the researchers to find the optimal dose on which to do further testing. BioNTech named the vaccine BNT162, and added "In addition, the safety and immunogenicity of the vaccine will be investigated."
In other words, researchers are unsure of the safety of the vaccine, which the company estimates will be given to 200 people aged 18 to 55 years in the first trial. Pfizer released their first quarterly report for 2020, in which they discussed their plans for releasing the vaccine with BioNTech, saying:21
"The two companies plan to jointly conduct clinical trials for the COVID-19 vaccine candidates initially in Europe and the U.S., across multiple research sites.
The companies estimate that there is potential to supply millions of vaccine doses by the end of 2020, subject to technical success of the development program and approval by regulatory authorities, and the potential to rapidly scale up the capacity to produce hundreds of millions of doses in 2021."
While it's estimated that the greatest number of people willing to take the vaccine are over 65, no initial testing for safety and efficacy is initially planned for that group. Statistics show that 60% of U.S. adults have at least one chronic disease and 40% have two or more.22 Chronic diseases such as Type 2 diabetes can alter the effectiveness of the vaccine or make it more dangerous.
The New Normal Needs New Strategies
The type of vaccine in development for coronavirus uses messenger RNA, which is different from traditional vaccines. Moderna Therapeutics, a pharmtech company focused on messenger RNA drug development, released a white paper in 2017.
They predicted that mRNA and DNA vaccines can be developed more quickly than traditional vaccines, which are created, tested and manufactured in four to seven years as compared to 10 to 15 years for traditional vaccines. They also wrote:23
"As with all new vaccines, time is needed to establish the level and duration of immunogenicity and the safety profile of mRNA vaccines in larger, more diverse populations."
In other words, the same company that focused only on mRNA drug development that had four of the six mRNA vaccines in clinical trials in 2017, believes time is required to establish the safety and effectiveness of this type of vaccine development. Yet, these are the types of vaccines currently in human testing five months after China told the world about SARS-CoV-2.
As this situation continues to unfold, it is necessary now more than ever to take control of your health. Here are several recent articles that offer suggestions to support your immune system, address fear of the unknown and give you strategies to think globally but act locally to protect your health.
8, 10 Fox News, May 8, 2020
13, 16 Daily Mail, May 5, 2020