Navigating Vaccine Mandate Exemptions: A Source Guide

Source 1: Safeguarding-Exemptions.pdf

Part I: Vaccine Efficacy and Transmission

• Section 1: Pertussis, Diphtheria, and Meningococcal Vaccines: This section challenges the notion that certain vaccines prevent transmission, citing evidence that pertussis, diphtheria, and meningococcal vaccines primarily reduce symptoms without significantly impacting the spread of the respective diseases
• Section 2: Chickenpox and MMR Vaccines: This section examines the transmission period following chickenpox vaccination and delves into the historical mortality rates of measles, mumps, and rubella before and after vaccine introduction.
• Section 3: Legal Framework and Liability: This section explores the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, highlighting the legal protection granted to vaccine manufacturers and administrators, shielding them from liability for vaccine-related injuries or deaths.

Part II: Market Forces and Vaccine Schedule Expansion

• Section 1: Eliminating Market Forces: This section argues that the 1986 Act, by eliminating market forces and liability, led to a significant expansion of the childhood vaccine schedule, as illustrated by comparing the 1986 and 2023 schedules.
• Section 2: Guaranteed Market + No Liability = Expansion: This section reiterates the claim that the combination of a guaranteed market and lack of liability has fueled the rapid growth of the vaccine industry and the corresponding increase in the number of recommended vaccines.

Part III: Placebo-Controlled Trials and Drug Safety

• Section 1: Importance of Placebo-Controlled Trials: This section emphasizes the vital role of placebo-controlled clinical trials in establishing causation between a product and adverse events, advocating for their use in vaccine safety assessment.
• Section 2: Disparities in Safety Review Periods and Controls: This section compares the safety review periods and controls used for Pfizer’s top-selling drugs with those used for vaccines administered in the first six months of life, highlighting the shorter review periods and absence of placebo controls in vaccine trials.

Part IV: Post-Licensure Studies and Autism as a Litmus Test

• Section 1: The Need for Robust Post-Licensure Studies: This section argues that the lack of comprehensive post-licensure studies raises concerns about the safety evaluation of vaccines, particularly for adverse events reported after vaccination.
• Section 2: Autism and Vaccines: This section focuses on autism as a key area of concern, noting the significant percentage of parents who attribute their child’s autism to vaccines. It presents a timeline of vaccine introduction and autism prevalence, implying a potential correlation.
• Section 3: CDC’s Response to FOIA Requests: This section criticizes the CDC’s response to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests concerning autism and vaccines, pointing out the inadequacy of the studies cited by the CDC.

Part V: HHS Responsibility for Vaccine Safety

• Section 1: Conflict of Interest within HHS: This section raises concerns about conflicts of interest within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), citing reports that highlight substantial ties between HHS committee members and the pharmaceutical industry.
• Section 2: FDA as a Promoter, Not a Regulator: This section critiques the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), suggesting that it acts more as a promoter of vaccines than a regulator of their safety.
• Section 3: Reasons for HHS’s Abandonment of Safety: This section explores potential reasons for the perceived neglect of vaccine safety by HHS, attributing it to the department’s dual roles in promoting vaccines and defending them against claims of harm, as well as the “revolving door” between HHS and the pharmaceutical industry.

Part VI: Mandates and Exemptions

• Section 1: The Illiberal Nature of Vaccine Mandates: This section argues that vaccine mandates are inherently illiberal, asserting that they are necessary only when safety and efficacy are questionable.
• Section 2: Exemptions as a Last Line of Defense: This section positions vaccine exemptions as crucial safeguards against questionable mandates, emphasizing their importance in protecting individual rights.
• Section 3: The First Amendment and Religious Freedom: This section links vaccine exemptions to the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom, suggesting that the intent of this amendment is to protect individuals from coercion in matters of conscience.

Source 2: Vaccine Mandates and Vaccine Exemptions Presentation – ICAN – Informed Consent Action Network

This source is a presentation, and its structure is not readily discernible from the provided excerpt. However, the excerpt highlights that the presentation covers childhood vaccine mandates and exemptions, offering resources for parents, schools, and healthcare providers. The presentation appears to be grounded in government and peer-reviewed sources, bolstering its credibility.