The swine flu vaccine - will it be voluntary or mandatory?

http://fresh-network.typepad.com/fresh_network_blog/2009/09/the-swine-flu-vaccine-will-it-be-voluntary-or-mandatory.html#more


September 03, 2009
UPDATED ON SEPTEMBER 8
(ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN THE FIRST SET OF BULLETPOINTS)

If you have been relying on the mainstream media for information about the swine flu vaccine you may be surprised to learn that there is a question about whether it will, in fact, be a matter of choice. But if you've been following what independent online sources are saying on this subject you will know the internet is abuzz with rumours the vaccine will be mandatory.

We decided to look into the issue and we found that while many of the scare stories circulating seem to have little in the way of foundation, it is indeed the case that on paper this novel, fast-tracked and virtually untested vaccine is effectively mandatory in the UK and the rest of the European Union, the United states, Canada, Australia and many other countries.
Shocking, isn't it?

Now, the step from this vaccine being mandatory on paper to governments attempting to force it on those who don't want it is a big one, and at this point it seems unlikely it will be taken. In the following report, we present the facts we have discovered regarding the mandatory vaccination risk, and our analysis of those facts.

Mandatory vaccination risk: the facts

• On June 11, the World Health Organization (WHO) raised the level of pandemic alert to level 6 – the highest level. This triggers various special powers at a local, national and international level and puts coordination under the control of the WHO. Some observers have interpreted this to mean that mandatory vaccination policies will be implemented and enforced across all 194 member states. That seems unlikely, but what is not in doubt is that laws are in place for this to occur, should authorities decide to do it. The following is from page 15 of the WHO checklist for influenza pandemic preparedness planning [1]: During a pandemic, it may be necessary to overrule existing legislation or (individual) human rights. Examples are the enforcement of quarantine (overruling individual freedom of movement), use of privately owned buildings for hospitals, off-license use of drugs, compulsory vaccination" (our emphasis). What is on paper is not overly encouraging for those who care about health freedom, but in most countries it is too early to say what will actually happen.

• The government of Greece has already announced a programme of mandatory swine flu vaccination for all of its citizens and residents, and its health minister has stated that there will be “no exceptions”.

• There are unconfirmed reports that the French government will implement a similar policy, backed up by martial law.

• According to the Natural News website: "In 2006, former President George Bush signed into law the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP). It gives power to the Secretary of the U.S. government’s Health and Human Services department (HHS) to declare any infectious disease a “national emergency” and therefore require mandatory vaccination of the entire population."

• The Massachusetts State Senate recently passed a "Pandemic and Disaster Preparation and Response Bill" that gives state authorities the power to order citizens to be vaccinated or quarantined, among other things. The bill still needs to be passed in the State House. If that happens, some believe it may be used to enforce mandatory vaccination. Penalties for those who refuse to comply with an order are reportedly up to 30 days in jail per day of refusal and/or a fine of up to $1,000 per day.

• And in the UK a change in law not related to swine flu specifically, but relevant nonetheless: a statute that came into force on April 1 this year (The Health Protection (Vaccination) Regulations 2009) puts a body called the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation in charge of all decisions regarding vaccination. According to the UK-based Vaccine Awareness Network, “JCVI members have financial and professional associations with drug manufacturers. No action has been taken to curb this.” The explanatory note on the statute says, specifically, "These Regulations place an obligation on the Secretary of State to make arrangements to ensure that qualifying recommendations of the Joint Committee for Vaccination and Immunisation with regard to provision of national vaccination programmes are implemented." Here are two news reports on this issue: "Scientists to be given power to decide on vaccinations" from the Telegraph and "Jab makers linked to vaccine programme" from the Daily Express.

Before we go any further, let's look at the vaccine itself. Beyond the reasons any vaccine is risky, this one has special risk factors. First, it will not undergo the usual safety testing prior to being made available. The various versions of the new vaccine (each contracted pharmaceutical giant is producing its own proprietary cocktail) are currently undergoing perfunctory testing on human volunteers, but as the full effects on health may not be known for months or even years, the fact these tests will run for around six weeks before the mass vaccination programmes begin offers little reassurance.

Glaxo SmithKline is the main supplier to the UK government, having been contracted to provide 60 million doses, with the first batches set to arrive next month. It has been reported that the GSK swine flu vaccine contains thimerosol – that's mercury to you and me. GSK is not the only company said to be adding thimerosol to its swine flu vaccine. Worse still, GSK's vaccine will also contain squalene, and it isn't alone in that, either.

Squalene is an adjuvant (a substance added to exaggerate the immune system's response to the viral material in a vaccine) of extremely dubious track record. Another way to describe an exaggerated immune response is "autoimmune disease" and squalene has already been implicated in causing just that. It is believed to be the main culprit behind Gulf War Syndrome (which shows up as arthritis, chronic fatigue, multiple sclerosis and/or many other debilitating autoimmune conditions and symptoms), after it was included in experimental anthrax vaccines given to soldiers in the early 1990s. Even the pro-vaccination mainstream media is reporting that this new vaccine sounds like an insanely dangerous experiment.

The current official word from the UK government is that the vaccination programme will begin when the first deliveries arrive next month. The vaccine will first be offered to:

• frontline health and social workers plus members of the public aged six months to 65 years in at-risk groups, including people with asthma, diabetes, heart disease, renal disease and anyone with a compromised immune system
• pregnant women
• people living with patients who have compromised immune systems
• anyone over 65 in an at-risk group

The government has stated that all within these groups who want the vaccine will have it by December and then it will be offered to healthy adults under the age of 50, then to healthy children, then to healthy older adults.

The US government has announced its own, different, order of priority for vaccinating its population, and while there are stronger rumours the US vaccination programme will be mandatory, they remain just that.

Let's take a moment here to reflect that while mandatory vaccinations are a travesty that may come to pass, it seems unlikely that anything will now stop the mass vaccination of the hundreds of millions around the world who will choose to have it because they don't understand the risks, as well as those who are unable to make the choice for themselves, including millions of babies and children.

The extent to which the vaccine is made mandatory will depend partly on the "pandemic" itself. Many believe this new flu – which has been no worse than seasonal flu until now – will re-emerge in a more virulent form as winter draws in. This could well happen, not least because this is when most of the population is most chronically deficient in vitamin D, which is crucial for proper immune functioning. But – good news – the Southern Hemisphere has had its winter flu season since the supposed pandemic broke, and it was no worse than any other flu season.

If the swine flu continues at this level, governments are substantially less likely to enforce mandatory vaccination policies. After all, every country would have objectors, and countries like the US and UK would have hundreds of thousands, if not millions. The Vaccine Awareness Network reports that 5% of the UK population does not vaccinate at all, and another 15% selectively vaccinates. The experimental swine flu vaccine is – to say the least – not a vaccine for anyone who is selective about the vaccines they receive. In fact, many people who would ordinarily line up for every recommended vaccination are saying they would not have the swine flu vaccine, which suggests that well over 20% of the UK population – i.e. more than 12 million people – may say no to this vaccine.

But what will happen if this flu mutates into something that justifies the term “pandemic”? That's the scenario where the vaccine is most likely to be made compulsory. The Canada-based Vaccine Resistance Movement summed the situation up well: “Regardless of what the laws or the charter presently state, or politicians are saying, a declaration of "emergency" in regard to the alleged H1N1 pandemic could change everything overnight, and we have to face this possibility NOW. Based upon the constant pronouncements by the WHO, various levels of government and their agencies, the media and their so-called "experts" on H1N1 and the vaccine pushers, we must accept an emergency declaration (essentially martial law) with forced vaccinations as a real possibility and realize what such a declaration might entail.”

The question is, in a scenario such as this, how far will governments actually go in attempting to force the vaccine on those who don't want it? The Vaccine Resistance Movement mentions martial law – i.e. military-backed mandatory vaccination – as a possibility, and there appear to be provisions for exactly this in the WHO's pandemic legislation. As mentioned earlier, some believe that legislation pending in the State of Massachusetts will be used to impose fines and prison sentences on those who refuse the vaccine.

However, it is much more likely that the furthest most governments will go in their attempt to force the vaccine on people will be withholding certain rights from those who don't have it. For example, it is quite possible that before long (and until the pandemic is deemed over), any travel requiring a passport will also require a certificate proving you have received the swine flu vaccine.

The purported logic behind mandatory vaccination is that everyone must be vaccinated for public health reasons so that “herd immunity” is achieved. However, this makes no medical sense whatsoever, even for those who believe in vaccination. If the vaccine works, everyone who’s had it is protected, so those who choose not to have it are only "harming" themselves.

The variables that will determine how this will play out don’t only, of course, pertain to how many people sicken and die as a result of the flu, but also to how many people sicken and die as a result of the vaccine. If there are multiple sudden deaths that are easily traceable to the vaccine, as occurred with the swine flu vaccine of 1976 in the US, it will be swiftly withdrawn.

What a disaster that mass vaccination programme was. More people died of the vaccine than of the swine flu, and 500 were left with Guillain-Barre Syndrome, a debilitating autoimmune disorder. GBS attacks the lining of nerves, causing paralysis and breathing difficulties, and can be fatal.

Astoundingly, the Health Protection Agency (the official body in charge of public health in the UK) wrote to 600 senior British neurologists in July to warn them to be on the alert for a possible upswing in cases of GBS as a result of the new swine flu vaccine. We only know this because the letter was leaked to The Mail On Sunday by an unknown source; there is no indication the agency had any intention of warning the public about the risk.

The worst-case scenario of all is a flu that mutates into a more virulent strain (most likely aided by the massive amount of virus circulating thanks to the WHO’s worldwide vaccination programme) and a vaccine that has next to no detectable adverse effects in the short term, but serious long-term ones in many recipients (including, possibly, GBS and all the autoimmune disorders linked with Gulf War Syndrome, along with who knows what else?) In that scenario, hundreds of millions of people around the world could have the vaccine before it is known to be dangerous – especially as that is the scenario where we’d see the highest enforcement of mandatory vaccination and the fewest number of objectors.

I don’t know about you but no matter how bad this flu gets, I would rather take my chances with that than with an experimental vaccine, and I’ll be urging all my loved ones to do the same.

No one knows what the short-term or long-term effects of this vaccine will be. Not the pharmaceutical companies who are manufacturing the shots, not the governments who ordered them and certainly not the citizens who are being asked to take them.

The only guaranteed immunity associated with this vaccine is the immunity both the UK and US governments are reported to have given the pharmaceutical companies from the almost inevitable lawsuits that will be launched by those who are injured by the vaccine and the families of those killed.

One hopeful sign in the UK is that in two recent surveys of GPs, over half of those polled either said they will refuse the vaccine or that they are undecided. In one poll 29% stated they would not have it; in the other that figure was 49%. Under the UK's priority system doctors will be among the first to be offered the vaccine, and it is hard to imagine the UK government forcing thousands of doctors to be vaccinated against their will, either then or at a later stage. This is highly unlikely to be a UK phenomenon; presumably these figures are indicative of the numbers of doctors and other medical professionals in all countries who will refuse the vaccine. And if a large proportion of the medical profession says no to it, it is highly unlikely any government will attempt to force it on the rest of the population.

In summary, although the situation doesn't look good on paper, there are many reasons to be optimistic. We believe the most likely outcome of all is that this vaccine will remain a matter of choice. Even if it is (or already has been) declared "mandatory" by your country, it remains unlikely that it will be forced on anyone who is prepared to stand up for their unalienable right to choose what goes into their body.

We will provide updates to this situation as and when we receive further information. We will also shortly be publishing a guide to boosting immunity during the coming winter months.

Mandatory vaccination risk: what you can do

• Write to your elected representative to express your concern about the possibility of mandatory vaccination.
• Join the protest against mandatory vaccination on Saturday 3rd October outside the Houses of Parliament in London. It's being organized by the Vaccine Awareness Network – more information here.
• Sign the Universal Declaration of Resistance to Mandatory Vaccination here. This petition will be presented to the World Health Organization – help the campaigners reach their target of 1 million signatures.