The Iowa legislature is advancing a major medical freedom and civil liberties bill that would permanently block the governor from forcing vaccinations, closing churches, regulating private homes, or mandating business shutdowns during declared disasters or public health emergencies.

House File 2694 would impose some of the strongest statutory restrictions in the nation on gubernatorial emergency authority.

During COVID-19, Governor Kimberly Reynolds (R) used Iowa emergency powers to close businesses, restrict public gatherings, and temporarily cap religious gatherings.

The new bill, which already passed the Iowa House by a 67-23 vote on March 10, 2026, is now moving through the Iowa Senate after clearing committee stages and being placed on the Senate calendar for further action.

As of today, a new Senate amendment (S-5230) has been filed, signaling the legislation remains active in the final stages of the legislative process.

Health freedom advocates say HF2694 could be strengthened by explicitly banning vaccine passports, mask and testing mandates, medical-status discrimination, school mandates, and prolonged emergency powers to close remaining loopholes for indirect future medical coercion.

You can contact Iowa senators here and encourage them to pass the bill.

What HF2694 Would Do

Ban Forced Vaccination Orders

Under the bill, disaster emergency powers could not:

“Require a vaccination.”

Protect Houses of Worship

The governor would be prohibited from closing or regulating worship services for any reason, including under disaster or public health emergency declarations.

“The governor shall not close, place a mandate on, or otherwise regulate a place or practice of worship for any reason.”

Protect Private Homes

Emergency powers could not regulate conduct inside private residences.

Prevent Forced Business Shutdowns

Public health emergency declarations could recommend closures, but could not require lawful private businesses to cease operations.

Block Executive Election Law Changes

The governor would be prohibited from unilaterally changing election laws during emergencies without legislative approval.

Why This Bill Is Significant

HF2694 directly responds to the types of emergency powers widely used during COVID-19, when governors across the country imposed sweeping controls over:

• Vaccine requirements
• Worship gatherings
• Private businesses
• Household activities
• Election systems

If enacted, Iowa law would create permanent legal protections for:

• Bodily autonomy
• Informed consent
• Religious liberty
• Property rights
• Small business freedom
• Constitutional separation of powers

Bottom Line

Iowa HF2694 is a direct legislative strike against future pandemic-style executive overreach.

By banning vaccine mandates, protecting churches and homes, and restricting unilateral emergency powers, the bill would make Iowa one of the strongest states in the nation for codified health freedom and civil liberty protections during future emergencies.

Source: https://jonfleetwood.substack.com/p/iowa-advances-bill-to-ban-forced

Fight the Censorship Join the Hopegirl Mailing List and get my free AudioBook: The QEG Chronicles Free Energy Full Disclosure: https://bit.ly/HGQEGBook

HopeGirl Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@hopegirlblog
HopeGirl Telegram Channel Chat and Groups: https://t.me/Hopegirl587 
Get Our Free EMF Survival Guide : https://bit.ly/FTWEMF
10 Percent Off our EMF Protection Products with this Link: https://www.ftwproject.com/ref/tenoff

The post Iowa Advances Bill to Ban Forced Vaccinations, Protect Churches, Homes, and Businesses From Governor Emergency Powers appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

Maria Zeee exposes the UN’s forced AI Social Contract on Infowars, revealing the globalist plan to force everyone into life in the Metaverse, trapped in their homes.

Source:  https://rumble.com/v56gx0t-maria-zeee-on-infowars-ai-forced-social-contract-exposed.html

Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

Forbidden Tech Book: www.forbiddentech.website

The post Maria Zeee on Infowars: AI Forced Social Contract EXPOSED appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

Join me for an important discussion with Todd Callender.

Source:  https://rumble.com/v4tn9rc-bird-flu-playbook-forced-vaccines-stolen-election-and-food-shortages-w-todd.html

Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

Forbidden Tech Book: www.forbiddentech.website

The post Bird Flu Playbook: Forced Vaccines, Stolen Election & Food Shortages w/ Todd Callender appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

An appeals court has backed efforts to vaccinate children without parental consent by shielding those who force kids to take Covid shots.

A North Carolina Court of Appeals issued the ruling in the case of a clinic, where personnel gave a 14-year-old boy a Covid mRNA shot without consent from the child or his parents.

The mother of the boy sued the Guilford County school board and Old North State Medical Society over her teenage son’s forced COVID-19 vaccination in 2021.

However, appellate judges agreed that a federal law protected both defendants from legal liability.

The court ruled that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) protected the clinic and its staff.

Additionally, the court concluded that the Guilford Board of Education, which hosted the clinic, was also covered by the PREP Act.

In August 2021, 14-year-old Tanner Smith was a Western Guilford High School football player.

His family learned in a letter from the Guilford schools that he might have been affected by a COVID-19 “cluster” involving the team.

He would not be allowed to return to practice until getting a Covid test.

Free testing would be provided at Northwest Guilford High School.

Smith’s stepfather drove him to the testing site and waited outside. The teenager was asked to fill out a form while a clinic worker tried unsuccessfully to contact his mother, Emily Happel. The clinic was providing COVID-19 vaccine shots along with testing.

Judge April Wood wrote:

“After failing to make contact with Tanner’s mother, one of the workers instructed the other worker to ‘give it to him anyway.’

Tanner stated he did not want a vaccine and was only expecting a test, but one of the workers administered a Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine to him.”

Tanner’s step-father who was waiting outside the clinic was not called.

Despite calling the act of forcing a child to get a COVID-19 shot against his will and without his parent’s consent, “egregious,” the court unanimously concluded that the PREP Act preempted state law.

The judges declared that the PREP Act protected the defendants from being held liable for battery, violation of Tanner’s mother’s constitutional liberty and parental rights, and violation of Tanner’s bodily autonomy and plaintiffs’ federal constitutional rights.

Tanner made it clear to the clinic workers that he was there for a COVID-19 test and not for the Covid shot.

He asserted that he did not want a shot.

However, one of the clinic workers was heard to have said, “Give it to him anyway.”

Despite his protest and the clinic’s failure to get parental consent, Tanner was given a Pfizer/BioNTech Comirnaty mRNA Covid injection.

Tanner and his mother sued the school district and the vaccine clinic alleging battery, violation of Tanner’s mother’s constitutional liberty and parental rights, violation of Tanner’s bodily autonomy, and violation of plaintiffs’ federal constitutional rights.

The trial court dismissed the complaint due to the PREP Act shielding the defendants and the decision was appealed.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision.

While North Carolina state law provides that “a health care provider shall obtain written consent from a parent or legal guardian prior to administering any vaccine that has been granted emergency use authorization and is not yet fully approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to an individual under 18 years of age,” the court found that the PREP Act pre-empts state law.

The court acknowledged that the intent of the state law is to protect bodily autonomy and parental rights and that the violation suffered by the plaintiffs when Tanner was given the shot against his wishes was outrageous.

However, the court ultimately concluded that the federal PREP Act preempted the state statute.

The court wrote:

“Its intent is to prevent the egregious conduct alleged in the case before us, and to safeguard the constitutional rights at issue—Emily’s parental right to the care and control of her child, and Tanner’s right to individual liberty.

“Notwithstanding, the statute remains explicitly subject to ‘any other provision of law to the contrary’ under the broad provision preempting state law in the PREP Act.”

The PREP Act, which went into effect in 2005, states that when the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) declares that a disease, health condition, or threat to public health or threat of same constitutes an emergency, the Secretary may recommend the use of one or more countermeasures.

The PREP Act provides:

Subject to the other provisions of this section, a covered person shall be immune from suit and liability under Federal and State law with respect to all claims for loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the administration to or the use by an individual of a covered countermeasure if a declaration under subsection (b) has been issued with respect to such countermeasure.

The court pointed out that this immunity extends to “any claim for loss that has a causal relationship with the administration to or use by an individual of a covered countermeasure.”

The PREP Act also has a broad provision preempting state law that provides that no state law may be in effect that conflicts with the PREP Act.

To further define who was covered or granted immunity under the PREP Act, the Secretary set forth a declaration on Mar. 17, 2020, that defined “covered persons” as including, “manufacturers, distributors, program planners, and qualified persons, and their officials, agents, and employees, and the United States.”

The court concluded that the Covid shot given to Tanner was considered a covered countermeasure.

The court held that ONS Medical Society was considered a “covered person” under the PREP Act as a program planner and community group that administered a vaccine clinic and provided vaccines to patients.

The court further found that the school board was granted immunity under the PREP Act as it was a “state or local government…[that] provides a facility to administer or use a Covered Countermeasure.”

The court wrote:

Bound by the broad scope of immunity provided by the PREP Act, we are constrained to hold it shields Defendants, under the facts of this case, from Plaintiffs’ claims relating to the administration of the COVID-19 vaccine.

The Appellate Court held that the injury to Tanner, vaccination against his wishes and without his parents’ consent, is considered under the PREP Act because the PREP Act is extremely broad, providing immunity for “all claims for loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the administration to or the use by an individual of a covered countermeasure.”

“[W]e hold ONS Medical Society is a covered person as a program planner that administered a vaccine clinic, and individually administered vaccines to individuals,” Judge Wood wrote.

“The declaration clearly provides that a program planner may be a private sector employer or community group when it carries out the ‘described activities’ including administration of a covered countermeasure.”

The same law also applied to the Guilford school board.

“We are convinced by the Secretary’s interpretation in the declaration that a covered person under the PREP Act includes a ‘state or local government . . . [that] provides a facility to administer or use a Covered Countermeasure’,” Wood wrote.

“We hold this language includes the Board, which provided a facility — Northwest Guilford High School — for the administration of the COVID-19 vaccines.”

“Wisely or not, the plain language of the PREP Act includes claims of battery and violations of state constitutional rights within the scope of its immunity, and it, therefore, shields Defendants from liability for Plaintiffs’ claims,” Wood added.

The Appeals Court noted that North Carolina’s General Assembly amended state law in 2021 to require “parental consent before a vaccine granted emergency use authorization may be administered to a minor.”

“Its intent is to prevent the egregious conduct alleged in the case before us, and to safeguard the constitutional rights at issue — Emily’s parental right to the care and control of her child, and Tanner’s right to individual liberty,” Wood wrote.

“Notwithstanding, the statute remains explicitly subject to ‘any other provision of law to the contrary’ under the broad provision preempting state law in the PREP Act.”

“The PREP Act provides only one exception for a ‘Federal cause of action against a covered person for death or serious physical injury proximately caused by willful misconduct.’

“Because Plaintiffs have not made any such allegations in their complaint, we are constrained to conclude the PREP Act preempts the protections provided” by state law, Wood added.

Judges Allegra Collins and Jeff Carpenter joined Wood’s decision.

Source: https://slaynews.com/news/appeals-court-backs-forced-vaccination-children-without-parental-consent/

Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

Forbidden Tech Book: www.forbiddentech.website

The post Appeals Court Backs Forced Vaccination of Children without Parental Consent appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

WATCH Shots Fired show with DeAnna Lorraine, weekdays every Tuesdays AND Thursday at 7pm CT/8pm ET!

Source Link:  https://www.bitchute.com/video/Hp8J6ulKtnwg/

Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

Forbidden Tech Book: www.forbiddentech.website

The post Nurse Crippled, Life DESTROYED After Forced Vax appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

Source Link: https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/chd-tv/shows/good-morning-chd/breaking-german-court-orders-the-forced-vaccination-of-holocaust-survivor/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=salsa&utm_campaign=CHD+TV&utm_term=chdtv&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=3d5c5bed-28b0-4077-87af-be56eaaa7233

Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

Forbidden Tech Book: www.forbiddentech.website

The post Breaking: German Court Orders The Forced Vaccination of Holocaust Survivor appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

Humans have experienced two centuries of vaccine orthodoxy. That orthodoxy dictates that we believe vaccination is safe and effective and should be mandated by governments. It began with medical doctors insisting we get one dose of smallpox vaccine,  1 and has exploded over the past century into a U.S. government dictate that every child get 69 doses of 16 vaccines.  2

Vaccine orthodoxy equally applied to every disease, every vaccine and every person, regardless of need or individual susceptibility to harm.

Today, everybody knows somebody who was healthy, got vaccinated and was never healthy again. And when the risks of vaccination turn out to be 100 percent for us or someone we love, the logical course of action is to learn more so we can make sure it doesn’t happen again.

When I was growing up, the place to acquire knowledge for free was the town public library and I happily checked out books on history, art, biology, philosophy and literature. Then, in the 1960’s, I joined the 15 percent of women attending college,  3 in greater numbers than any generation before, and gained access to a university library where I could learn even more.

When I became pregnant in the late 1970’s, one of the first things I did was go to the public library and read books on pregnancy, childbirth and nutrition so I could learn how to give my baby the best start in life. But those parenting books did not contain information about vaccine risks. And pediatricians, who were the keepers of vaccine knowledge, did not share vaccine reaction information with mothers trusting them to “first, do no harm” to their children.

Lack of knowledge was why I did not know how to identify classic symptoms of brain inflammation  4,5 that developed within hours of my son being injected with a fourth DPT shot.

Dissatisfied with the fact that I was not empowered with knowledge about vaccination that could have kept my child safe, in 1982 I joined with parents of vaccine injured children and launched a new vaccine safety and informed consent movement in America, one that renewed the parent-led grassroots dissent of earlier generations.  6,7,8

That was 16 years before a doctor in Great Britain wrote an article about MMR vaccine and autism; 9 and 26 years before a Hollywood actress talked about how her son developed autism after vaccination; 10 and 34 years before $3.3 billion dollars had been awarded to victims of vaccine injury and death under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, with brain and immune system damage caused by pertussis, measles and influenza containing vaccines accounting for 75 percent of the cases. 11

Knowledge is Power

President Thomas Jefferson said, “Knowledge is power, knowledge is safety and knowledge is happiness.” 12 A lifelong champion of education and free thought, he ensured that freedom of religion, speech, and press be among the most important rights outlined in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. 13

Yet, today in America, when we take the initiative to become educated about vaccination and infectious diseases, we are publicly labeled as “ignorant” and “selfish” if our newfound knowledge leads us to disagree with vaccine orthodoxy. 14,15,16 Knowledge is power and, as a 19thcentury poet said so well, “doubt grows with knowledge.” 17 So, it is no wonder that physician keepers of vaccine risk knowledge, secrets and myths 18 are threatened in the 21st century by the people’s ability to gain free access to the Library of Medicine online 19 and engage in uncensored conversations about vaccination.

Educated Parents Rejecting Vaccine Orthodoxy

Study after study reveals that, increasingly, it is college educated, financially stable middle class parents, who are seeking knowledge and rejecting vaccine orthodoxy.20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27 In response, those controlling and profiting from the mass vaccination system are using classic propaganda techniques 28 to persuade lawmakers to legally compel all Americans to be vaccinated according to orthodoxy or be punished with denial of civil and human rights. 29

Last year at this time, we saw an unprecedented, highly orchestrated media campaign whipping up hysteria about a few cases of measles at Disneyland to justify eliminating personal belief vaccine exemptions from California education and child care employment laws. 30,31,32 Parents objecting to vaccine mandates were demonized and there were calls for their imprisonment, 33 as well as online censorship of public discussion of vaccine risks and failures, 34 and the de-licensing of doctors questioning vaccine safety. 35,36

This year, public humiliation of anyone who rejects vaccine orthodoxy has already begun. A New Year’s Eve editorial in a Colorado newspaper branded parents, who will not “listen and comply” with government “vaccination rules,” as “odd,” “foolish,” “irresponsible” and “reckless,” and said a law should be passed to force them to comply. 37

Two days later, a national business magazine targeted a Jewish holistic family practice doctor for shaming because he wrote a blog criticizing vaccine safety and objecting to the banning of children from Jewish summer camp if they have not gotten every dose of every vaccine on the federally dictated schedule. 38 He was described as a “threat to public health” and it was suggested that doctors like him criticizing vaccine orthodoxy should be stripped of their medical license.

Racial Profiling and Shaming of Caucasian Parents

Another disturbing type of propaganda to re-emerge as we head into 2016 is what I described in 2012 as “turning vaccine exemptions into class warfare.”  39 This involves highly educated, well-paid physician politicians and professors in academia, who are engaging in racial profiling and the shaming of educated, middle class Caucasian parents challenging vaccine orthodoxy.

“Rich, white and refusing vaccinations,” screamed one racially charged newspaper headline on Christmas Eve.  40 “If you live in a rich, white community where lots of people don’t vaccinate their kids, that could be dangerous” claimed a health policy professor.  41

As a middle class woman who worked my way through college and learned the hard way as a mother why it is unwise to blindly accept vaccine orthodoxy, I find it interesting that graduating from college, attaining financial stability and being born Caucasian has been turned into an excuse for normalizing prejudice, intolerance and discrimination that would not be condoned in America in any other setting.

Vaccine Injury and Death Does Not Discriminate

Vaccine injury and death does not discriminate between races or social classes, except when people are kept ignorant, economically dependent and unable to make informed choices. As more women, no matter what their race or social class, graduate from college in even greater numbers in America,  42 they will be seeking knowledge about vaccine risks after they become Moms. It is one reason why we are witnessing an accelerated push by government and industry to eliminate the legal right to informed consent to vaccine risk taking in America.  43,44,45,46

Those embracing vaccine orthodoxy have a right to their beliefs, but they should not be given the legal right to persecute and punish fellow citizens refusing to convert. Tyranny by any other name is still tyranny.

Exercise and Defend Civil and Human Rights

While we still have freedom of speech, press, thought, conscience and religion in America, please exercise and defend those civil and human rights at every opportunity. If we all stand up for the freedom we have left today, we will not lose more of it tomorrow.

Knowledge is the antidote to vaccine orthodoxy because knowledge is power.

Subscribe to the free NVIC Newsletter and The Vaccine Reaction journal and gain knowledge. Learn about how to identify and report vaccine reactions. Read about vaccine ingredients in the vaccine manufacturer product inserts. Download an illustrated, fully referenced Reforming Vaccine Policy and Law guide and sign up for the free NVIC Advocacy Portal to work with others in your state defending vaccine informed consent rights.

In 2016, empower yourself with knowledge about vaccine science, policy and law. Be a teacher and pass that knowledge on to your family and friends and leaders in your community.

You never know whose life you will save.

It’s your health. Your family. Your choice.

To access all references use source link below…

By Barbara Loe Fisher

(Source:  healthimpactnews.com; January 17, 2016; http://tinyurl.com/hkpnd8b)

The post Medical tyranny and forced vaccinations threaten medical freedom and choice appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

In 2015, state legislatures across the United States experienced an unprecedented flood of bills backed by the pharmaceutical and medical trade industries to restrict or remove personal belief vaccine exemptions, expand electronic vaccine tracking systems, and require more vaccines for children in school and adults in the workplace.

The web-based NVIC Advocacy Portal, which was launched in 2010 to protect and expand the right to exercise informed consent to vaccination, was utilized more in 2015 than in any other previous year. NVIC’s Advocacy program tracked 160 bills across 41 states and four national bills in 2015!

The NVIC Advocacy Portal is a free online communications network that connects registered users with their legislators through their smart phones, tablets and computers. Through the Portal, NVIC’s advocacy program staff educates users about proposed legislative and administrative policy changes and what actions they can take to protect or expand vaccine exemptions in their state to support informed consent rights in the vaccine decision making process.

Some of the significant areas in which we saw legislation introduced in 2015 that threatened informed consent rights involved bills that:

• eliminated and restricted vaccine exemptions;
• expanded vaccine mandates for both adults in the workplace and children;
• expanded police and emergency powers during declared public health emergencies;
• expanded intrusive vaccine tracking and data sharing to enforce compliance;
• mandated the public publishing of detailed vaccine exemption and vaccination rates in much smaller geographical boundaries like individual schools; and
• Expanded laws to allow pharmacists to administer more vaccines.

While much of the media attention and gloating by lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry and organized medicine focused on the loss of the personal belief and religious exemption in California and the loss of the philosophical exemption in Vermont, there was little recognition of the huge successes in states where attempts to restrict informed consent rights failed. We are very grateful for and proud of the tremendous grassroots support by families and health care professionals across the country who worked together and through the NVIC Advocacy Portal to help protect vaccine exemptions in multiple states.

In 2015, NVIC worked with citizens standing up for their informed consent rights in the following states and derailed legislative attempts by special interest lobbyists to outright eliminate the conscientious/philosophical exemptions: Maine, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas and Washington.

Additionally, during the 2015 legislative cycle, activist citizens in the following states came out on top of attacks that would have eliminated or severely restricted religious vaccine exemptions: Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, and Vermont.

Regarding adult employees, bills to mandate vaccines for child care employees were passed in California, but bills to require vaccination for health care workers in Connecticut, Missouri and New Jersey and school employees in Texas all failed.

California Bill Removing Personal Belief Exemption A Close Fight

Also, it is important to keep in mind that the number of “no” votes on SB 277, the bill that removed the personal belief exemption in California, were not far from stopping it. The final vote on SB 277 in the Assembly on June 25, 2015 was 46 in favor and 31 opposed with three votes not recorded. That means if only eight Assembly members out of the 46 who voted in favor of the bill had changed their vote to a NO, SB 277 would have been dead. The final vote on SB 277 in the Senate on June 29, 2015, was 24 in favor and 14 opposed with two votes not recorded. This means that if only six of the Senators who had voted “yes” changed their votes to “No,” SB 277 could have been dead in the Senate. This was not the slam dunk forced vaccination proponents wanted the public and media to believe.

Moving forward, we can expect more of the same in 2016, and families and health care professionals who value their health, parental rights and medical freedom are showing they are ready to take action. Already, at the conclusion of 2015 in the preliminary filing period for 2016, SB 646 was filed by  Senator Alan Hays in Florida to restrict both the religious and medical exemptions and expand use of the vaccine tracking and enforcement system. Swift action by families and health care professionals in Florida following NVIC’s alert helped contribute to SB 646 being withdrawn prior to introduction.

Looking ahead with legislative sessions just starting in 2016, the following states have vaccine bills already filed: Indiana, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Virginia. All of the bills discussed below are posted with links to bill text and more information on the NVIC Advocacy Portal at http://NVICAdvocacy.org.

NVIC’s mission since 1982 has been to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths through public education and to secure and defend informed consent protections in vaccine policies and laws.

Consistent with that mission, NVIC is opposing the following bills filed already in 2016:

• Indiana SB 275, which allows disease intervention specialists to dispense vaccines through a standing order;
• Missouri SB 819, which requires flu shots for employees and volunteers in health care facilities;
• New Hampshire HB 383, which makes the inclusion in the vaccine tracking system opt-out instead of opt-in;
• New York A 8633, which mandates flu vaccines for daycare;
• New York A 8329 and S 6017, which eliminates the religious exemption to vaccination;
• New York A 1822 and S 509, which mandates HPV vaccines for school children entering 6th grade and A 1528 ad S S2712 which would allow HPV vaccines for minors without parental consent or knowledge; and
• South Dakota SB 28, which mandates meningitis vaccines for children attending school.

NVIC is supporting the following bills that have been filed in 2016, which are in need of active citizen support to pass this year:

• Massachusetts S 317, which adds a personal belief vaccine exemption;
• Michigan HB 5126, which removes the restrictions placed on vaccine exemptions by the Dept. of Health in rule;
• New Hampshire HB 1463, which offers protection for employees against mandatory flu vaccines; and
• Ohio HB 170, which prohibits an employer from taking adverse action against a person who chooses not to get a flu shot.

We can expect many more bills to be filed, so please register and check in often at the NVIC Advocacy Portal and encourage all of your friends and family to do the same. Clearly your efforts are making a difference, and your participation is vital to protecting vaccine choices in America.

One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all “quacks.”

However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate. Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding “the science” of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines.

The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary.

Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions, and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position of the medical field.

In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position. Many doctors who consider themselves “pro-vaccine,” for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual.

Many doctors recommend a “delayed” vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule. Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot.

These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions.

In this eBook, I am going to summarize the many doctors today who do not take the most extremist pro-vaccine position, which is probably not held by very many doctors at all, in spite of what the pharmaceutical industry, the federal government, and the mainstream media would like the public to believe.

To access full article use source link below…

By Dawn Richardson

(Source:  healthimpactnews.com; January 22, 2016; http://tinyurl.com/z4w4g65)

The post Opposition to forced vaccinations growing appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.