Tag: signs

Is MRC-5 the Name of an Electively Aborted Baby Boy?

Why do anti-vax folks think that MRC-5 is the name of an electively aborted baby boy who is an ingredient in vaccines?

MRC-5 is the name of a cell line that is used to make some vaccines.
Since many think that we have a “moral obligation to protect the life and health” of our children and those around us, what does that make those folks who use propaganda to scare parents away from getting their kids vaccinated and protected.

Of course…

Is MRC-5 the Name of an Electively Aborted Baby Boy?

So what’s the real story?

MRC-5 is a line of human diploid cells that are used to make some vaccines.

“The second human cell line is MRC-5 (Medical Research Council 5) (human, lung, embryonic) (ATCC number CCL-171), with human lung fibroblasts coming from a 14 week male foetus aborted for “psychiatric reasons” from a 27 year old woman in the UK. MRC-5 was prepared and developed by J.P. Jacobs in 1966 (J.P. Jacobs et al, 1970).”

Vatican Statement on Vaccines Derived From Aborted Human Fetuses

And despite what the sign implies, vaccines do not contain aborted fetal tissue or fetal parts.

The original MRC-5 cells aren’t even involved in making vaccines anymore. The cells used today have been copied, over and over again.

They are descendant cells, which is why a common way to explain all of this is to say that vaccines are said to have a “distant association with abortion.”

“It should be obvious that vaccine use in these cases does not contribute directly to the practice of abortion since the reasons for having an abortion are not related to vaccine preparation.”

The Question of Parental Rights and Mandated Vaccinations

And even then, the cells are removed before the final vaccine is produced.

“Many Catholic experts concur that cooperation today is not really possible in an event that was over and done with many years ago. Because the abortion occurred long ago, and for reasons completely unrelated to vaccines, it is untenable to conclude that vaccine recipients today somehow cooperate in the original abortive event.”

The Morality of Vaccinating Our Children

So what about MRC-5 cells is keeping you from vaccinating and protecting your kids?

Vaccines are safe, with few risks, and are obviously necessary, preventing millions of deaths each year.

Don’t let someone holding an anti-vax sign to scare you away from making the right choice to vaccinate and protect your family.

More on MRC-5

The Missing Information That Big Pharma Won’t Tell You About Vaccines

Do you know why some folks still don’t vaccinate and protect their kids, even as we are seeing more and more outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases?

Why don't anti-vax folks have to give informed consent?
Why don’t anti-vax folks have to give informed consent?

Yup.

They are in on the “missing information” about vaccines that the rest of us don’t seem to know about…

The Missing Information That Big Pharma Won’t Tell You About Vaccines

Of course, we all know about this “missing information.”

It is the misinformation about vaccines that anti-vax folks spread to scare parents and make them think that vaccines are dangerous, don’t work, and aren’t necessary.

“We feel that there’s things that public health are not telling the people and these are facts that are not well known. That are not given. So it’s not misinformation, it’s missing information. And there’s always two sides and more to information that should be given to all of us, right? We should be getting fully informed consent, right?”

not an anti-vaccine protestor

What else can you call this missing information?

How about alternative facts?

They certainly aren’t true facts about vaccines or vaccine-preventable diseases.

And that makes it ironic that they talk about getting fully informed consent.

You can’t get or give fully informed consent if you are misleading people, as these folks do with their “not protesting” signs about vaccines.

After vaccines became "liability free" you had to first sue in Vaccine Court.
After vaccines became “liability free” you had to first sue in Vaccine Court.

Take the sign about doses of vaccines tripling after they became liability free.

Is that true?

Of course not.

For one thing, as most people know, vaccines are not liability free.

But for the sake of argument, let’s try and think about what they are trying to say.

They are implying that ‘we’ tripled the number of vaccine doses after the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which set up the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

Of course that didn’t happen.

What's missing from the anti-vax protestors sign? That the immunization schedule hardly changed in the 1980s.
What’s missing from the anti-vax protestors sign? That the immunization schedule hardly changed in the 1980s.
This sign is missing information on years of development and testing that occur before a vaccine is approved.

Most new vaccines weren’t added to the immunization schedule until the late 1990s and after.

Their other sign covers a few different anti-vax talking points – that vaccines are only tested for 4.5 days and that vaccines aren’t tested as thoroughly as drugs.

Of course, neither are true.

As you do even a little research on these kind of immunization signs, you can see that the “missing information” they are talking about is simply more anti-vax misinformation.

More on Anti-Vax Misinformation

About That 4 Billion Dollars Taxpayers Have Paid for Vaccine Injuries…

Why do some folks think that taxpayers have paid 4 billion dollars in vaccine injuries and deaths?

Anti-vax protestors at the Neptune statute in Virginia with misinformation on the 4 billion dollars for vaccine injuries..
How many doses of vaccines have been given during the time that the $4 billion was paid out? How many lives were saved because they didn’t get polio, measles, and Hib, etc.?

Oh, these folks…

About That 4 Billion Dollars Taxpayers Have Paid for Vaccine Injuries…

So, is it true?

Have taxpayers paid 4 billion dollars for vaccine injuries and deaths, like their signs say?

Nope.

For one thing, these anti-vax protestors are mixing together a couple of separate anti-vaccine talking points that are used to scare parents away from vaccinating and protecting their kids.

  1. While the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 did set up a $0.75 vaccine excise tax to fund the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, it is the vaccine manufacturers who pay the tax.
  2. And billions and billions of doses of vaccines (over 3.5 billion just since 2006) have been given since 1989, the time since the $4,060,857,713.42 has been paid by the Vaccine Court. The payment has been for 6,355 compensated claims over those thirty years, most of which are for vaccine injuries, not deaths. Fewer than 10% of Vaccine Court cases are for vaccine deaths.

Does that matter?

Now up to 4 billion dollars for vaccines injuries, the payout is after billions and billions of vaccines have been given.
That’s about 1 compensated claim, the majority of which are settled, in about 775 thousand doses. So not quite 1 in a million…

It does if you consider that many more kids would die if we didn’t routinely vaccinate and protect our kids!

“Analyses showed that routine childhood immunization among members of the 2009 US birth cohort will prevent ∼42 000 early deaths and 20 million cases of disease, with net savings of $13.5 billion in direct costs and $68.8 billion in total societal costs, respectively.”

Zhou et al on Economic Evaluation of the Routine Childhood Immunization Program in the United States, 2009

And it would be far more costly if we returned to an era when epidemics of vaccine preventable diseases became routine.

Too bad I can’t fit all of that on a sign…

More on Vaccine Court Payouts

Reactions to SB 276 Passing the Assembly

On the same day that the LA Times wrote what some are calling a false balance about Bob Sears, SB 276 passed the California Assembly and Gavin Newsom called for the addition of amendments that would protect doctors who have been writing an excessive amount of medical exemptions.

Gavin Newsom's proposed amendments could weaken SB276.
Exempting individual medical information on exemptions from the Public Records Act is not a bad idea.

Coincidence?

Reactions to SB 276 Passing the Assembly

As the amendments only serve to weaken SB276, Governor Newsom should consider backing off on his request to change the bill, especially as he had previously said he would support it.

Protecting kids from vaccine preventable diseases is unethical and evil???
Protecting kids from vaccine preventable diseases is unethical and evil???

While the amendments will protect those who have been writing inappropriate medical exemptions, they won’t appease most people who are against SB 276.

Who is talking about forcibly injecting people with vaccines? Remember, mandates don't force anyone to get vaccinated and protected...
Who is talking about forcibly injecting people with vaccines? Remember, mandates don’t force anyone to get vaccinated and protected…

Especially as most of those folks still don’t understand exactly what SB276 does!

SB 276 does not eliminate all medical exemptions.
SB 276 does not eliminate all medical exemptions.

What silent loophole are these folks talking about?

The nephew of California State Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez is immunocompromised.

“His doctor said no, he can’t have live vaccines, so no, he can’t be immunized against measles or chicken pox. Every time he is not in the hospital, he wants to be in school, but those diseases could kill him. Definitely put him back in the hospital. These are the children, the truly medically fragile children that we are trying to prevent from getting these diseases and why it’s so important.”

California State Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez Assembly Floor Session, Tuesday, September 3rd, 2019

He has a medical exemption to getting vaccinated.

Unless the medical exemption is to all vaccines and not just live vaccines, he won’t lose his exemption and won’t need a “silent loophole.”

Having a “known severe immunodeficiency” is a well known contraindication to getting live vaccines, including MMR and the chickenpox vaccine.

Not only would his exemption be allowed, it not be one of only 5 exemptions that his doctor is allowed to make!
Not only would his exemption be allowed, it would not be one of only 5 exemptions that his doctor is allowed to make!

SB276 also doesn’t limit the number of medical exemptions that doctors can write. It just states that if a doctor writes 5 or more exemptions in a calendar year, then those exemptions will be reviewed by a medical panel to make sure that they are legitimate.

Why do 5 exemptions trigger a review? Because the average doctor will likely not need to write that many medical exemptions, as there are very few true medical reasons to avoid or skip vaccines. What if a doctor writes 10 or 15 legitimate medical exemptions? If they are reviewed and found to be legitimate, then 10 or 15 of their patients will have medical exemptions!

How will they revolt - because they don't want to vaccinate and protect their kids?
How will they revolt – because they don’t want to vaccinate and protect their kids?

Are Newsom’s amendments going to stop folks who are talking about revolutions?

Wait, which amendment is she talking about???

Is it going to protect kids from those who might continue to get unnecessary, permanent exemptions until the protections of SB 276 finally do take effect?

More on SB276