"Recall of Richard Pan over vaccine bill cleared for signatures

http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article29168398.html

By Jeremy B. White

[email protected]

"Thwarted in the Legislature, opponents of California’s vaccine mandate law have turned to the ballot box with a recall aimed at Senate Bill 277’s champion.

"A campaign to recall Sen. Richard Pan, D-Sacramento, the pediatrician who carried the bill requiring full vaccinations for school children, has been cleared to advance to the signature-gathering phase. Proponents have until Dec. 31 to collect 35,926 verified signatures from registered voters in his district...."

MMR RIP

What is the end game for all this? I thought SB277 would start to expose the system but I don't know if it has.

I wish people would stop comparing vaccines to "bleeding" patients as an example of horrible medical practices from the past. As everyone says, the science is not settled. It was misapplied, for sure, but has a place in modern medicine.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/29/maggots-diabetes-wounds_n_981943.html

I would hate for people who understand that to start thinking that vaccination is a good practice that has merely been misapplied and we should bother to improve upon it. I'd take a leech any day over a vaccine. At least one of them in on this earth naturally.

Ben:
"The RAND Corporation is funded by a wide range of entities, not just pharmaceutical corporations. If you want to assert that RAND is corrupted by big pharma you're going to need to build a stronger case than that.

I don't need to build a case to demonstrate anything to you or anyone else. Mercks criminal history speaks for itself. The fact that RAND has strong ties to the government and the pharmaceutical demonstrates a conflict of interest. Marcie Angel sums it up: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”

Merck has also directly and openly funded other studies put out by RAND (Mapping Pathways Developing evidence-based, people-centred strategies for the use of antiretrovirals as prevention & Estimating the Impact of Improving Asthma Treatment: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature). RAND's other big-pharma sponsor, GSK, has been recently exposed amid a global multi-billion dollar bribing scandal where it was paying off doctors to endorse and distribute their products (http://journal-neo.org/2014/06/04/glaxo-s-china-scandal-exposes-big-pharma-s-ugly-underworld/)

With Pediatrics'report exposed as - at the very least - an irresponsible, unethical exercise in research, and at worst, corporate propaganda masquerading as a scientific paper, those considering whether or not to have vaccines manufactured by deceitful pharmaceutical monopolies injected into their bodies, have an added incentive to hold off and search for alternatives. Tony Cartalucci: Activist Post

Also the study had no Public Transparency or Diversity: Unlike reviews of vaccine safety science funded by DHHS and conducted by Institute of Medicine (IOM) committees, whose members are drawn from a diversified pool of experts and include public workshops to ensure transparency, RAND and DHHS did not hold public workshops. Instead, they confined their vaccine safety review to information controlled by industry and government.

Of the seven members of the Technical Expert Panel assisting with design of the federally funded study, two are high ranking DHHS officials responsible for ensuring vaccine safety; two are employed by health care maintenance corporations that partner with DHHS to provide electronic patient medical records for DHHS to conduct vaccine safety studies; and one is an academic vaccine researcher with significant DHHS funding ties;

Of the four peer reviewers asked to review the federally funded study, two are DHHS employees (one is a high ranking CDC official responsible for ensuring vaccine safety) and one is a Department of Veteran Affairs employee;

The entire study should have been designated a total fraud because it compared the MMR manufactured by Merck in the US to the MMR manufactured in Japan. This is comparing apples to onions.

Ben Goldacre states in his book "Bad Pharma"
How Drug companies Misled Doctors and harm Patients:
-He writes in the introduction that the book aims to defend the following paragraph:
Medicine is Broken. Drugs are tested by the people who manufacture them, in poorly designed trials, on hopelessly small numbers of weird, unrepresentative patients, and analyzed using techniques which are flawed by design, in such a way that they exaggerate the benefits of treatments. Unsurprisingly, these trials tend to produce results that favour the manufacturer. When trials throw up results that companies don't like, they are perfectly entitled to hide them from doctors and patients, so we only ever see a distorted picture of any drug's true effects. Regulators see most of the trial data, but only from early on in a drug's life, and even then they don't give this data to doctors or patients, or even to other parts of government. This distorted evidence is then communicated and applied in a distorted fashion. In their forty years of practice after leaving medical school, doctors hear about what works through ad hoc oral traditions, from sales reps, colleagues or journals. But those colleagues can be in the pay of drug companies – often undisclosed – and the journals are too. And so are the patient groups. And finally, academic papers, which everyone thinks of as objective, are often covertly planned and written by people who work directly for the companies, without disclosure. Sometimes whole academic journals are even owned outright by one drug company. Aside from all this, for several of the most important and enduring problems in medicine, we have no idea what the best treatment is, because it's not in anyone's financial interest to conduct any trials at all. These are ongoing problems, and although people have claimed to fix many of them, for the most part they have failed; so all these problems persist, but worse than ever, because now people can pretend that everything is fine after all.

-Richard Smith, who edited the British Medical Journal for more than a decade, said there was no evidence that peer review was a good method of detecting errors and claimed that “most of what is published in journals is just plain wrong or nonsense”.
“If peer review was a drug it would never get on the market because we have lots of evidence of its adverse effects and don’t have evidence of its benefit.”

He said the process of peer review before publication could also work against innovative papers, was open to abuse, and should be done away with in favour of “the real peer review” of the wider scientific community post-publication.

“It’s time to slaughter the sacred cow,” he said, while acknowledging that do so would likely be “too bold a step” for a journal editor to take. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientific-peer-reviews-are-a-sacred-cow-ready-to-be-slaughtered-says-former-editor-of-bmj-10196077.html.

The fact that the MERCK lawyers have held this suit up in court using every legal flim flam that they could think of and the judge still says it can go forward is a major miracle and a monumental win for humanity. In regards to the Vaccine Makers in the US who have Blanket Immunity this is unprecedented in vaccine history. The fact that MERK is still jerking the court around is predictable considering their criminal history: Merck accused of stonewalling in mumps vaccine antitrust lawsuit: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/04/health-vaccine-idUSL1N0YQ0W820150604.

Merck Pleads Guilty to Criminal Charge and Pays $950 Million Fine for Vioxx: http://therefusers.com/refusers-newsroom/merck-pleads-guilty-to-criminal-charge-and-pays-950-million-fine-for-vioxx/. http://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/companies/merck, http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/brazil-fines-merck-kgaa-18m-alleged-generics-conspiracy/2014-08-12, http://www.policymed.com/2014/01/merck-fined-by-french-competition-authority-for-disparaging-generic-competition.html, Drug Giant Merck – “Destroy” Critical Doctors “Where They Live” https://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/merckdestroydoccritics/

Drug Industry Operates Like Organised Crime – But Kills More People Than The Mob – Says Dr. Peter Gøtzsche of the Cochrane Center in Copenhagen: https://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2015/06/02/200000-americans-pa-killed-following-doctors-instructions-prescription-drugs-3rd-leading-cause-of-death-in-west-drug-industry-operates-like-organised-crime-but-kill-more-people-than-the-mob/ & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dozpAshvtsA

Now Ben, I post all of this information with link for OTHERS so the can research the information for themselves, not to try and convince you of anything. You're just not that important because:

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.

Ben
"You cannot presume to lecture me about the nature of science as self-correcting and in the same breath cling to an obsolete hypothesis that vaccines are associated with developmental disorders; that's blatantly hypocritical."

Vaccine are associated with developmental disorders. The changing science has demonstrated that. Please provide an Independent double blind placebo based controlled study that confirms that vaccines are safe, effective and cause no developmental disorders. If vaccine did not cause developmental disorders than the NVICP would not have paid out in excess of 3 Billion dollars in awards to families of vaccine injured children.

"the Hooker paper you cited was retracted because the statistical analysis Hooker used was extremely poor and did not stand up to the scrutiny of his peers;"

I did not cite the Hooker paper. I cited the admission by sitting scientist Dr. William Thompson of the CDC that he was told/ordered to lie and manipulate the data of a study in 2004 paper. This is one of the studies that "the science" points to that says vaccines do not cause autism. It was not Hooker. But the Hooker paper was not removed for the reason the MEDIA & CORRUPT PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES STATED. The removal of the paper was purely political and violated the guidelines established by the publication itself.

Brian Hooker’s Findings Are Confirmed By CDC’s Results:
http://www.autisminvestigated.com/brian-hooker-confirmed-by-cdc/
http://www.autisminvestigated.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/ORtable.png
BioMed Central Breaks Policy by Retracting Brian Hooker’s Study: http://www.autisminvestigated.com/biomed-central-breaks-policy/ & http://www.autisminvestigated.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/guidelines.png
BMC’s retraction of Dr. Hooker’s paper is only the latest of policy breaches by the publisher after it deleted his article from its website in breach of policy on the permanency of articles. Citing a then-pending investigation, BMC refused to comment on that violation when contacted by Autism Investigated. Now with the paper retracted in breach of yet more policies supposedly followed by BMC, the publisher has even more explaining to do.

This is not the first unethical journal (BMJ comes to mind) and it will not be the last as long as any journal has pharma funding.

"profit margins,"
Recent reports by Markets and Markets and Research and Markets announced:
"the global vaccine market is $33.1 billion in 2014 it’s expected to reach $58.9 billion by 2019 for a compound annual growth rate of 11.8% with a longer-term outlook to surpass $100 billion by 2025.

Pharma Patent Cliff
-VACCINES AS THE GROWTH STRATEGY
The broader context is that the pharmaceutical industry has been reeling. Google “patent cliff” and you’ll read about the long list of chemical and biologic blockbuster drugs invented in the early to late 1990s with scheduled patent expiration rolling off from 2011 to 2019. The pipeline has been “pooping out.”

Merck itself acknowledged this impact in their announcement of 2014 financials:

Full-Year 2014 Worldwide Sales of $42.2 Billion, a Decrease of 4 Percent, Reflecting Unfavorable Impact of Patent Expires and Divestitures and a 1 Percent Negative Impact From Foreign Exchange [emphasis mine]

Vaccines are far more profitable than the other drugs that are pushed onto the populace. One reason, Vaccine makers cannot be sued for damages caused by vaccines so what they take in is profit. There is no end in sight with at least 300 vaccines in the current developmental pipeline.
http://www.phrma.org/sites/default/files/pdf/Vaccines_2013.pdf.
Merck is still paying off VIOXX lawsuits. The only profitable gig in town for pharma is vaccines.

"Vaccine makers stand to make over a billion dollars annually if they can persuade the ACIP to add their meningitis vaccines to the national schedule." http://www.dailycamera.com/guest-opinions/ci_28283397/robert-f-kennedy-jr-doing-math-meningitis-vaccinations.
Here is a link where someone calculated vaccine cost & profits:http://vaxtruth.org/2011/09/how-can-it-be-about-the-money-immunizations-are-free-right/.

-Not only are doctors & pharma making money but the state gets money for fully vaccinated children, the counties get money for fully vaccinated children plus school system receive money for vaccinated children. Doctors also get end of the year bonuses from big pharma as well as bonuses from insurers for achieving a 100% vaccination rate. Dr. Sears says this is one reason doctors kick unvaccinated children out of their practices-it messes with their money.

"For all intents and purposes, the science of vaccine safety is "settled" because the preponderance of evidence on one side is far greater than the other."

What evidence are you talking about anyhow? Are you talking about Gardasil safety? How about the Swine Flu vaccine from a couple of years ago or the 1970s. If you are loosely defining "safe" as not killing a large percentage of the general population given the vaccine, then yes, they are safe. That's a very low hurdle there though. If you discard vulnerable subsets from your data, everything looks great.

"I have a boss who's asking me to lie....I basically stopped lying." Dr William Thompson
Ben?

@PANDAS Mom

You have a valid point. For all intents and purposes, the science of vaccine safety is "settled" because the preponderance of evidence on one side is far greater than the other. If that changes, the science will no longer be settled. I addressed that in my earlier post but perhaps you overlooked it.

@cia parker

No one as any vested interest in keeping vaccine safety under wraps. Big Pharma? No, because 1. childhood vaccinations have a very, very slim profit margin 2. Safety issues opens the door for R&D because the market share for safe vaccinations is up for grabs 3. The individual people who make up "big pharma" have children too and are very interested in their safety as you are. Even if it were true that this was a big conspiracy, historical evidence suggests that conspiracies of this magnitude do not hold for long; hell, an ounce of rational thought dictates that conspiracies that massive cannot stand for long. Plenty of pharmaceutical drugs and medical treatments have gone under because of safety reasons, and I've yet to see a reason vaccines should be considered differently.

@@Ben

Tough luck there, Vince. Industry is where the money is. The research funding dollars that come from other sources like the government is a slow trickle. Industry gets results.
If you would like to comment specifically on what makes those studies "poorly done" and "garbage" PLEASE share. Science is a dialogue, a critiquing process, and it's only useful if it can stand up to scrutiny.

@rtp

There is more evidence of resolved medical controversies than examples equivalent to the practice of bloodletting, which was a relic of medical science's infancy (which was not exactly an apt comparison to begin with). If we're going the rational route here, we can be reasonably certain medical controveries will continue to come to light.

@Cathy
Thanks for the clarification, we are on the same page..xoxo

@Concerned Parent
I don’t think we have a numbers problem. Think that with 1% of US parents refusing all vaccination for their kids, this would easily amount to more than a million hardcore anti-vaxxers out of a 300 million plus population to draw from. Then there are also the many sympathisers from the 1 in 68 vaccine injured, autistic individuals. We also have many, who although may not count themselves as ‘anti-vaxxers’, nevertheless, supporting us in defending individuals’ rights. Concerned Parent, it’s not a numbers problem, but one of mobilization. Yet, again reflecting on the Civil Rights movement, in once march alone in 1963, over 250, 000 marched on the Lincolcn Memorial in Washington D.C. and essentially all it took was the dedication of one man and a few of his followers. Surely, is there none amongst us who can similarly light this activism fuse? I would say ‘yes’ and we are already seeing glimmers of it with the likes of Kennedy and even TannersDad. Indeed there are reasons to feel optimistic.

I hate to break the news, but science is NEVER SETTLED! Science is always being refined, revised and redefined, based on evolving discoveries and knowledge. If we say that science is settled, it means we are no longer interested in discovering new ideas, revelations or understandings of a scientific phenomena. We are always learning something new and our scientific understanding is shaped by those new discoveries. Let's unleash the science and see where it leads us! I'm not afraid of science. I'm afraid of corrupted science.

Search

Ways of GivingChop News and EventsOnline CommunitySite MapHome
AboutYour Child's HealthPatient Care & Family ServicesResearchFor Healthcare Professionals
The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
Vaccine Education
About the Center
A Look at Each Vaccine
Order Educational Materials
Vaccine Safety
When and When Not to Use Vaccines
Vaccines for Adults
Vaccine Science
Vaccine Schedule
In the News
Resources
Center Site Map

Vaccine Education CenterVaccine Education Center

Thimerosal

Preservatives are used in some vaccines to prevent bacterial or fungal contamination. The requirement for preservatives in vaccines arose from many incidents in the early 20th century in which children developed severe and occasionally fatal bacterial infections after administration of vaccines contained in multidose vials. For example, in 1916, four children died, 26 developed local abscesses, and 68 developed severe systemic infections after receipt of a typhoid vaccine contaminated with the bacteria Staphylococcus aureus. As a consequence of this and similar incidents, preservatives have been required for vaccines contained in multidose vials (with some exceptions) since the 1930s.

Thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative, has been the focus of intense scrutiny by the U.S. Congress and the news media following its removal from all routinely recommended childhood vaccines in 2001. Attention by the news media has caused some parents to fear that thimerosal contained in vaccines might have harmed their children.

Removal of thimerosal from vaccines
Removal of thimerosal from vaccines was precipitated by an amendment to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Modernization Act that was signed into law on November 21, 1997. The amendment gave the FDA two years to “compile a list of drugs and foods that contain intentionally introduced mercury compounds and …[to] provide a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the mercury compounds in the list….” The amendment arose from a long-standing interest in lessening human exposure to mercury, a known neurotoxin and nephrotoxin.

At the time the FDA Modernization Act was passed, infants were recommended to receive three different vaccines that contained thimerosal — diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP), hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib). Infants receiving all of these vaccines could have been exposed to a cumulative dose of mercury as high as 187.5 ug by 6 months of age. This quantity exceeded guidelines recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (see table below), but not those recommended by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or Agency for Toxic Substance Disease Registry (ATDSR). Thimerosal was removed from all routinely recommended childhood vaccines by 2001 as a precautionary measure.

Exposure limits for mercury in infants less than or equal to 6 months of age by percentile body weight established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Agency for Toxic Substance Disease Registry (ATSDR), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
Agency 5th Percentile
body weight 50th Percentile
body weight 95th Percentile
body weight
EPA 65 ug 89 ug 106 ug
ATSDR 194 ug 266 ug 319 ug
FDA 259 ug 354 ug 425 ug

Although no published studies to date have compared the incidence of developmental delay in children who received thimerosal-free or thimerosal-containing vaccines, several facts are reassuring that the level of mercury contained in vaccines was not likely to be harmful. Thimerosal contains 49.6 percent mercury by weight and is metabolized to ethylmercury and thiosalicylate.

Methylmercury exposure guidelines
Ethylmercury is contained in many drugs as well as biologicals. Adults and children inadvertently exposed to large quantities of ethylmercury acutely (quantities 1,000- to 1,000,000-fold greater than those found in vaccines) can suffer permanent neurologic damage and death. However, no data exist on the capacity of low-dose, chronic exposure to ethylmercury to harm the developing nervous system. To develop guidelines for chronic exposure to ethylmercury, the EPA, FDA and ATSDR used data based on chronic exposure to methylmercury, the most common form of mercury found in the environment.

Guidelines from the EPA were based in part on data from pregnant women in rural Iraq exposed to large quantities of methylmercury. In October 1971 Iraq imported more than 90,000 metric tons of methylmercury-treated seed grain. The grain, distributed free-of-charge to farmers throughout the country, was used to make bread. Consumption of this bread caused an extensive outbreak of methylmercury poisoning resulting in more than 6,000 hospitalizations and 450 deaths. By examining the quantity of methylmercury contained in hair from mothers who ingested methylmercury, and comparing calculated exposures to methylmercury with the frequency of neurologic symptoms in their offspring (e.g., mental retardation, seizures, and impaired vision or hearing), a dose of methylmercury required to cause neurologic damage in the fetus was established. (Of interest, autism was not a consequence of exposure to mercury). The EPA determined guidelines by taking the lowest quantity of methylmercury that might have resulted in harm to the fetus, and dividing by an “uncertainty” factor of 10. In other words, the guideline established by the EPA for infants exposed to ethylmercury in vaccines was one-tenth that found to be safe in fetuses exposed to methylmercury in the environment.

By using data from pregnant women in Iraq exposed to methylmercury in the environment to establish guidelines for chronic exposure of infants in the United States to ethylmercury in vaccines, the EPA made two important assumptions:

That the toxicity and body’s disposal of methylmercury are the same as those of ethylmercury
That the central nervous system of the fetus and newborn are equally susceptible to the harmful effects of mercury.
However, the body’s disposal of ethylmercury and methylmercury are not the same. One-half of the level of methylmercury is eliminated from the blood in about 50 days compared with elimination in seven days for ethylmercury. Because ethylmercury is excreted from the body far more quickly than methylmercury, dosing guidelines would be very different. In support of this important difference, Pichichero and co-workers found that the level of mercury detected in the blood of 40 full-term infants 6 months of age or younger who received thimerosal-containing DTaP, hepatitis B and Hib vaccines did not exceed recommended guidelines. Further, the developing central nervous system of the fetus is more susceptible to environmental and toxic insults than that of the newborn.

References
Pichichero ME, Cernichiari E, Lopreiato J, Treanor J. Mercury concentrations and metabolism in infants receiving vaccines containing thiomersal: a descriptive study. Lancet. 2002;360:1737-1741.

Strömland K, Nordin V, Miller M, et al. Autism in thalidomide embryopathy: a population study. Developmental Med Child Neurol 1994;36:351-356.

Rodier PM. The early origins of autism. Scientific American, February 2000, pp.56-63.

Chess S, Fernandez P, Korn S. Behavioral consequences of congenital rubella. J Pediatr 1978;93:699-703.

Deykin EY, MacMahon B. Viral exposure and autism. Am J Epidemiol 1979;109:628-638.

You should not consider the information in this site to be specific, professional medical advice for your personal health or for your family's personal health. You should not use it to replace any relationship with a physician or other qualified healthcare professional. For medical concerns, including decisions about vaccinations, medications and other treatments, you should always consult your physician or, in serious cases, seek immediate assistance from emergency personnel.
(I couldn't correct the link)

"The science is settled" is a false statement always and forever. As information is disclosed and further research is completed it will always evolve. And there will be a "moving of the goalposts" in the case of vaccine science as with all science. As we better understand the differences in methyl and ethyl mercury we will know the two can not be compared or used as a measure against one another, they are the proverbial apples and oranges, to do what has been done in the case of vaccines , using methyl as a gauge or guide makes no sense and no statement for science. Move those goalposts, get the answers, understand the synergy, the science is in it's infancy, there's a long,long way to go. Do vaccines cause autism, of course they do, the science will speak, meanwhile, as in the case of aspirin and chicken pox causing reyes, stop the nonsense , reduce the risks, weigh the benefits. These are our children and we are harming them , who cares what well paid lobbyists had to say, they will see their maker, and I doubt he cares how much money was banked while destroying lives of his children. To the pediatricians who feel somewhat relieved that they don't really have to know, and just do what they are told, their time will come too, because they DO know. Anyone who has been in the company of children over the last twenty years knows.So yes, keep moving the goalposts, it's okay.

Ben, in no way is the "science" saying vaccines have no role in autism, settled. It's poorly done, epidemiological garbage. Recently a male scientist disparaged female scientists. I frankly couldn't care less whether the scientist was male, female or otherwise. I just expect my science to not be unbiased, industry sponsored bullshit.

Ben, Science is a process of discovery, and an imperfect one at that. By it's very nature it is never "settled" and any true scientist without an agenda knows this. Claiming "the science is settled" is simply a PR tactic.

"Further, as citizens, we have the freedom to question settled science without being subjected to ridicule, contempt, or threats from public officials, profit-seeking pharmaceutical corporations, or a biased media."

Actually, no you don't. The freedom that gives you the right to question settled science (thank you for acknowledging that the science is settled, by the way) is the same freedom extended to those who wish to question your questioning of settled science.

Keep fighting your battles. I am in full confidence that if the medical orthodoxy finds enough evidence to corroborate the claims your camp is making then we will see changes, because that's what has always happened in the past with medical controversies regardless of corporate or political influence. The truth always comes out. And we can reasonably expect that the people who look at things objectively will accept that truth. What we can also reasonably expect is that the people who are emotionally invested in proving a narrative will not accept that truth if it doesn't fit their narrative. Goalposts will be moved continuously and eternally because one particular camp can't ever accept the fact that there was nothing that could be done about their child's development.

Keep fighting your battles, but I implore you not to waste your time moving goalposts.

They will fight you on the "emergency" front. Declaring an emergency trumps all parental rights. In an emergency, a "save lives" point of view will elicit standard of practice methods and everyone knows that is vaccines. I think you need to fight on the front that vaccines are not emergency medicine. Never were, and cannot be. A perfectly healthy person does not, in that moment, need any medical attention.

Nobody died of measles since December when the "Mouse" declared war on parents. So, the further we get away from December the more we have proven there was no emergency, and the status quo sufficed.

Greg,
one fact to consider is that our numbers are too small - are there really millions to march? Most parents(that I know of), even those with vaccine injured kids, are brainwashed by mainstream media and their blind faith in the 'American System' - whatever that is. And educating them is the hard part. In fact, the biggest impediment to change may come when the pro-vaccine parents start proactively quelling dissent at the last level of influence - by putting pressure on school authorities...

Sorry if I am sounding pessimistic, but leaving California could also be a plan for some.

Re barbara j's link, the AoA webpage is posting it incorrectly, copy and paste the link up until the first 75751.

barbara j's link corrected (hopefully):

http://web.archive.org/web/20031222032743/http://www.chop.edu/consumer/jsp/division/generic.jsp?id=75751">http://www.chop.edu/consumer/jsp/division/generic.jsp?id=75751">http://web.archive.org/web/20031222032743/http://www.chop.edu/consumer/jsp/division/generic.jsp?id=75751

Cathy's title may be leading to some misinterpretation in these comments. By "No Plan B" I think she means that we will never give up on the principles she forcefully, eloquently articulates.

"No Plan B" means that we will never compromise on the core principles of medical freedom and parental choice when it comes to our children and our/their Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

Dr. Toni Bark had it right at the last rally before this final committee vote: There is a "shit storm" coming.

SB277 has been and will continue to be a turning point in the national debate about vaccines. As civil suits, both individual and class action, begin, they will direct attention to the science so conveniently ignored by our lapdog media and finger-to-the-wind politicians. As the implications of SB277 become clearer to Americans in all states, the fight against medical tyranny will assume a position in the national conversation that it has never had since the holocaust of vaccines began.

Our fight is about numbers: The more parents who are educated about what is at stake, the more politicians and media will be forced to acknowledge and debate both sides.

Case in point: CA Assemblyman Chavez' recent announcement of a statewide media blitz and challenge to Dr. Bed Pan to join him. Chavez and like-minded politicians are not letting go of this. There are defining the issue as one of freedom, separate from vaccines.

However, inevitably, during the debate to come, even though ostensibly about "freedoms" and the "limits on the role of government in our lives," the searchlight of that debate will shine on vaccines and the rotten science and logic on which they stand.

I am optimistic that a laser focus on Plan A--never giving up--will create the civil actions necessary to defeat SB277 and the profit-mongers and vaccine lunatics behind it.

Then there are the two whistleblowers. If Merck is found guilty of fraud, a loophole in the 1986 NCVIA allows vaccine makers to be held liable in tort cases. The actual language is:

Vaccine makers are immunized from liability "absent failure to comply with regulatory requirements, fraud, intentional and wrongful withholding of information, and other criminal or illegal activity."

In short, if the Merck whistle blowers prevail and Merck (who makes all childhood vaccines) is found guilty of fraud, the courthouse doors open wide.

so many items are missing..I have to resort to waybackmachine.org and hope they aren't smart enough to erase all. Ex. this morning I was looking for this, not found, then went to wbm and sure enough it was deleted going back several years. Not that this is earthshaking,however it is interesting that they are removing so much of what was once available. http://web.archive.org/web/20031222032743/http://www.chop.edu/consumer/jsp/division/generic.jsp?id=75751">http://www.chop.edu/consumer/jsp/division/generic.jsp?id=75751">http://web.archive.org/web/20031222032743/http://www.chop.edu/consumer/jsp/division/generic.jsp?id=75751

They were using the science of the day, comparing methyl to ethyl, without including the literature that shows "Brain concentrations of total mercury were approximately 3–4 times lower in the thimerosal group than in the methylmercury group, and total mercury cleared more rapidly in the thimerosal group (with a half-life of 24.2 days versus 59.5 days). However, the proportion of inorganic mercury in the brain was much higher in the thimerosal group (21–86% of total mercury) compared to the methylmercury group (6–10%). Brain concentrations of inorganic mercury were approximately twice as high in the thimerosal group compared to the methylmercury group. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1280369/

It's a test, force them to show their work, make it a criminal offense to harm children while denying scientific research.

Q. Why was this law passed?
A. Thimerosal has been hypothesized to be a cause of childhood autism. This
hypothesis is not supported by the results of extensive study. However, proponents of
the law remain concerned about exposure to thimerosal. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Pages/CaliforniaThimerosalLaw.aspx
California passed this law, where is the "science" that took them from here to where they are now? It appears they have been taken in by considerable ,paid for lobbying efforts by pharmaceuticals. This proves how easily propaganda spread by pharmaceutical sponsored media, with truth suppressed by those in charge( bringing about full blackouts on all science not in agreement with them) can influence otherwise intelligent people. The CDC have admitted in front of congress to the fact that there have been no testing of the health effects of thimerosal since 1929 , that no research has been done that looks at the long term outcomes comparing the vaccinated to the unvaccinated. They admit to one study completed by the fraud Thorson, no matter that congress uncovered 23 or more. They lied, and continued to lie, leaving our children as victims of an experiment, which is unlawful under the Nuremberg law. They discount our children that are dead or harmed by vaccines, as collateral for the greater good, necessary for an imaginary herd effect. Herd immunity NEVER occurred within a society of only vaccinated, it required an entire community of naturally immune adults coupled by frequently vaccinated children. That combination no longer exists, and neither does herd immunity. What are we , when we don't go to war over acceptance of mandated chemicals that could ,and too often do, maim the minds and bodies of our children . Since when do we do dangerous things to our children because we've taken on a new religion, FAITH in our doctors, faith that they did their homework. They didn't,if they had they would tell the truth, lead isn't as dangerous to the developing brain as mercury, ask them how many mcg would be safe to inject? No neurotoxin is safe they say. Then what ARE they doing? Why are they allowing such harm to be done? Why?

Greg,
Well said. This is the society that the powers that be have been cultivating for over 30 years. More passive & docile. (sorry if anyone is offended) I grew up in the era of civil disobedience, sit ins and marches and when this country used to have investigative reporters who sought out the authorities who were attempting to push their agenda instead of the peoples agenda, they were confronted with difficult questions and those interviews were publicized and you could see the affect of the demonstrations on their faces. When the masks were removed and the money behind the actually laws had faces to them, the tides always shifted. The press is no longer an ally-they have become the enemy in the most egregious ways possible. Now days,lobbyist hide behind their Iphones and manipulate the scene from behind closed doors at the behest of their Masters because there is no one they are afraid of. Pharma has the political parties in their pocket and they pull the strings from safety of exposure. This kind of covert action minimizes the effective of any push back from the people. The only way to get their attention is to make some noise. I'm not talking about violence I'm talking about assertive actions such as what Greg mentioned.

Fight the bill in court. Enlist the aid of Civil Rights lawyers and the ACLU. Families should get together and file Class Action Suits on behalf of their minor children. File a Class Action suit against Dr. Pan individual. Contact the World Court and discuss having the California Senate members who voted for these bill and the Governor accused of "Crimes Against Humanity". Take your unvaxxed children to a public school and have authorities physically remove you and your child from the premises in view of cameras. They have a right to be there. Make some noise. The Parents in California must do this not outsiders because the pharma owned media will make much to do about outside forces stirring up trouble. It's a scary space to step into and risky considering the current mindset of authorities but assertiveness, civil disobedience, marches, lawsuits-nothing should be ruled out. Planning should be ongoing because what has been done up to now has been ineffective.