A chilling new report from the New York State Bar Association (NYSBA) demands that all United States residents be inoculated with upcoming coronavirus vaccinations. The May 13 report, published by more than 24,000 lawyers, demands: “When the efficacy of a COVID-19 vaccine has been confirmed, enact legislation requiring vaccination of each person unless the person’s physician deems vaccination for his or her patient to be clinically inappropriate.”
The NYSBA committee believes that “for the sake of public health, mandatory vaccinations for COVID-19 should be required in the United States as soon as it is available.” Their stated goal is “to shape the development of law.”
NYSBA believes that a majority of Americans will want the vaccine, even though polls show Americans are very distrustful of a potential coronavirus vaccination. The group understands that “some Americans may push back on the COVID-19 vaccination for religious, philosophical or personal reasons,” but believe that all individual freedom, body autonomy, parental rights, religious beliefs, and personal objections to scientific experiments should be suspended for the sake of “public health.”
By forcing everyone to succumb to mandatory injections, the association believes there will be a “public benefit” that far outweighs individual rights and individual immunity. The association of lawyers believes that any government official can declare any injection as a “public health benefit” that requires the full participation from all men, women, and children, despite their conscience objections, their religious beliefs, or desire to build their own immunity, free from medical experimentation.
To justify their stance on mandatory vaccination, the lawyers quote other instances throughout history when human rights were suspended by judges and government officials in order to force people to take injections.
“Healthcare workers and parents of unvaccinated children have unsuccessfully challenged compulsory vaccination on administrative law grounds – questioning the NYS and NYC Department of Health’s authority in mandating flu and measles vaccinations, as well as challenging the regulations as arbitrary and capricious,” the lawyers wrote.
The Nazi NYSBA is planning to discuss their recommendations for a new law for mandatory coronavirus vaccines “at a virtual meeting of the association’s governing body, the House of Delegates, on June 13.”
Mandatory vaccination, a violation of the Nuremberg code of medical ethics
In the 1920s, the German government believed strongly in racial hygiene. They wanted to create an Aryan “master race” while exterminating anyone who did not fit their criteria.
Modern day mandatory vaccination laws are built on similar principles. Modern day proponents of mandatory vaccination believe they are creating a superior race of people that are immune to disease and more acceptable to society. Anyone who does not vaccinate is deemed an impure spreader of disease who should be segregated from public schools, the workplace, etc. The coercion is real. With the rushed development of a covid-19 vaccine, some modern day government officials want the injections to be mandatory, or else life will not be able to go back to normal. Bill Gates has publicly threatened anyone who refuses covid-19 vaccines and essentially declared that nearly every man, woman and child must vaccinate with upcoming covid-19 injections or else the science will not work.
We are currently witnessing a modern day violation of the Nuremberg code of medical ethics, which was established in the wake of the Second World War, following the Nuremberg trials. The Nuremberg code is a set of principles and research ethics for human experimentation that were adopted after Germany’s medical establishment tortured and slaughtered countless innocent people in medical experiments conducted during the Holocaust.
One of the vaccines that are being rushed through clinical trials is an mRNA injection that encodes new instructions into human cells, forcing the ribosomes to generate spike proteins from within the cell. This cell-hijacking medical experiment alters human biology to force immune-responsive cells to attack the virus-like proteins being produced by the cells. This medical experimentation, if made mandatory, would not only cause adverse reactions and long term consequences, but also initiate a new era of unethical medical experimentation, where informed consent is replaced with a new holocaust of widespread human abuse and vaccine injury. (Related: Moderna’s mRNA coronavirus vaccine caused serious injury in 20 percent of patients in high dose group, requiring medical intervention.)
[We can't make the same mistakes that were made in 1976]
David J. Sencer*
and J. Donald Millart
and J. Donald MillartAbstract
In 1976, 2 recruits at Fort Dix, New Jersey, had an influenzalike illness. Isolates of virus taken from them included A/New Jersey/76 (Hsw1n1), a strain similar to the virus believed at the time to be the cause of the 1918 pandemic, commonly known as swine flu. Serologic studies at Fort Dix suggested that >200 soldiers had been infected and that person-to-person transmission had occurred. We review the process by which these events led to the public health decision to mass-vaccinate the American public against the virus and the subsequent events that led to the program's cancellation. Observations of policy and implementation success and failures are presented that could help guide decisions regarding avian influenza.
Swine Flu at Fort Dix
On February 3, 1976, the New Jersey State Health Department sent the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta isolates of virus from recruits at Fort Dix, New Jersey, who had influenzalike illnesses. Most of the isolates were identified as A/Victoria/75 (H3N2), the contemporary epidemic strain. Two of the isolates, however, were not typeable in that laboratory. On February 10, additional isolates were sent and identified in CDC laboratories as A/New Jersey/76 (Hsw1N1), similar to the virus of the 1918 pandemic and better known as "swine flu."
A meeting of representatives of the military, the National Institute of Health, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the State of New Jersey Department of Health was quickly convened on Saturday, February 14, 1976. Plans of action included heightened surveillance in and around Fort Dix, investigation of the ill recruits to determine if contact with pigs had occurred, and serologic testing of recruits to determine if spread had occurred at Fort Dix.
Surveillance activities at Fort Dix gave no indication that recruits had contact with pigs. Surveillance in the surrounding communities found influenza caused by the current strain of influenza, A/Victoria, but no additional cases of swine flu. Serologic testing at Fort Dix indicated that person-to-person transmission had occurred in >200 recruits (4).
In 1974 and 1975, 2 instances of humans infected with swine influenza viruses had been documented in the United States. Both persons involved had close contact with pigs, and no evidence for spread of the virus beyond family members with pig contact could be found (5).
The National Influenza Immunization Program
On March 10, 1976, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the United States Public Health Service (ACIP) reviewed the findings. The committee concluded that with a new strain (the H1N1 New Jersey strain) that could be transmitted from person to person, a pandemic was a possibility. Specifically, the following facts were of concern: 1) persons <50 2="" 3="" 4="" 5="" a="" advent="" adverse="" age="" an="" and="" antibodies="" any="" been="" between="" by="" caused="" circulating="" current="" currently="" demonstrated="" described.="" detection="" documented="" early="" effects="" efficacy="" enough="" ew="" expected="" for="" formulation="" h1n1="" had="" ictoria="" identified="" in="" included="" incorporated="" indication="" influenza="" initial="" interpandemic="" isolates="" jersey="" large="" manufacture="" military="" new="" no="" not="" of="" on="" opportunity="" outbreak="" p="" pandemic="" past="" possible="" produce="" production="" provided="" safety="" scale="" season="" since="" strain="" sufficient="" sw1n1="" that="" the="" there="" this="" time="" to="" used="" vaccine.="" vaccine="" vaccines="" was="" when="" widely="" with="" years="">
ACIP recommended that an immunization program be launched to prevent the effects of a possible pandemic. One ACIP member summarized the consensus by stating "If we believe in prevention, we have no alternative but to offer and urge the immunization of the population." One ACIP member expressed the view that the vaccine should be stockpiled, not given.
Making this decision carried an unusual urgency.
The principal obstacle was the lack of vaccines. As test batches were prepared, the largest ever field trials of influenza vaccines ensued. The vaccines appeared efficacious and safe (although in the initial trials, children did not respond immunologically to a single dose of vaccine, and a second trial with a revised schedule was needed) (6). Hopes were heightened for a late summer/early fall kickoff of mass immunization operations.
Soon, however, NIIP received the first of 2 crippling blows to hopes to immunize "every man, woman, and child." The first was later in 1976, when instead of boxes of bottled vaccine, the vaccine manufacturers delivered an ultimatum—that the federal government indemnify them against claims of adverse reactions as a requirement for release of the vaccines. The government quickly capitulated to industry's demand for indemnification. While the manufacturers' ultimatum reflected the trend of increased litigiousness in American society, its unintended, unmistakable subliminal message blared "There's something wrong with this vaccine." This public misperception, warranted or not, ensured that every coincidental health event that occurred in the wake of the swine flu shot would be scrutinized and attributed to the vaccine.
Shortly after the national campaign began, 3 elderly persons died after receiving the vaccine in the same clinic. Although investigations found no evidence that the vaccine and deaths were causally related, press frenzy was so intense it drew a televised rebuke from Walter Cronkite for sensationalizing coincidental happenings.
Guillain-Barré Syndrome
What NIIP did not and could not survive, however, was the second blow, finding cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) among persons receiving swine flu immunizations. As of 1976, >50 "antecedent events" had been identified in temporal relationship to GBS, events that were considered as possible factors in its cause. The list included viral infections, injections, and "being struck by lightning." Whether or not any of the antecedents had a causal relationship to GBS was, and remains, unclear. When cases of GBS were identified among recipients of the swine flu vaccines, they were, of course, well covered by the press. Because GBS cases are always present in the population, the necessary public health questions concerning the cases among vaccine recipients were "Is the number of cases of GBS among vaccine recipients higher than would be expected? And if so, are the increased cases the result of increased surveillance or a true increase?" Leading epidemiologists debated these points, but the consensus, based on the intensified surveillance for GBS (and other conditions) in recipients of the vaccines, was that the number of cases of GBS appeared to be an excess.
Lessons Learned
NIIP may offer lessons for today's policymakers, who are faced with a potential pandemic of avian influenza and struggling with decisions about preventing it (Table). Two of these lessons bear further scrutiny here.
Media and Presidential Attention
While all decisions related to NIIP had been reached in public sessions (publishing of the initial virus findings in CDC's weekly newsletter, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR); New York Times reporter Harold Schmeck's coverage of the ACIP sessions, the president's press conference, and 4 congressional hearings), effective communication from scientifically qualified persons was lacking, and the perception prevailed that the program was motivated by politics rather than science.
In retrospect (and to some observers at the time), the president's highly visible convened meeting and subsequent press conference, which included pictures of his being immunized, were mistakes. These instances seemed to underline the suspicion that the program was politically motivated, rather than a public health response to a possible catastrophe.
But while the World Health Organization adopted a cautious “wait and see” policy to monitor the virus’s pattern of disease and to track the number of emerging infections, President Gerald Ford’s administration embarked on a zealous campaign to vaccinate every American with brisk efficiency. In late March, President Ford announced in a press conference the government’s plan to vaccinate “every man, woman, and child in the United States” (1). Emergency legislation for the “National Swine Flu Immunization Program” was signed shortly thereafter on April 15th, 1976 and six months later high profile photos of celebrities and political figures receiving the flu jab appeared in the media. Even President Ford himself was photographed in his office receiving his shot from the White House doctor.
Within 10 months, nearly 25% of the US population, or 45 million citizens, was vaccinated, but serious problems persisted throughout the process (2). Due to the urgency of creating new immunizations for a novel virus, the government used an attenuated “live virus” for the vaccine instead of a inactivated or “killed” form, increasing the probability of adverse side effects among susceptible groups of people receiving the vaccination. Furthermore, prominent American scientists and health professionals began questioning the campaign’s large expense and its drain on scarce public health resources (2).
With President Ford’s reelection campaign looming on the horizon, the campaign increasingly appeared politically motivated. The rationale for mass vaccination seemed to stem from only the barest of biological reasoning — it turned out that the flu wasn’t even related to the virus that caused the grisly 1918 epidemic and, indeed, those who were infected with the flu only suffered from a mild illness while the vaccine, for the reasons stated above, resulted in over four-hundred and fifty people developing the paralyzing Guillain-Barré syndrome. Meanwhile, outside the United States’ borders, the flu never mushroomed into the anticipated public health disaster. It was the pandemic that never was. The New York Times went so far as to dub the whole affair a “fiasco,” damning one of the largest and probably one of the most well-intentioned public health initiatives by the US government (1).
The American public can be notably skeptical of forceful government enterprises in public health, whether involving vaccine advocacy or limitations on the size of soft drinks sold in fast food chains or even information campaigns against emerging outbreaks. The events of 1976 “triggered an enduring public backlash against flu vaccination, embarrassed the federal government and cost the director of the U.S. Center for Disease Control his job.” It may have even compromised Gerald Ford’s presidential re-election as well as the government’s response to a new sexually transmitted virus that emerged only a few years later in the early ‘80s, killing young gay men and intravenous drug users. What happened in 1976 is a cautionary public health tale, the story of a vaccination quagmire that still resonates in the public psyche and in our discussions about vaccines today.
No comments:
Post a Comment