Vaccination Liberation - Information
Legal: Science: Misc: Searches:

Package Inserts
Ingredients of Vaccines
Artificially Sweetened Times
Books Videos Tapes
100+ Anti-Vax links
Smallpox Alert!

News Stories
related to distroying the right to refuse vaccines
A landmark policy shift in Israel with regard to non-vaccinating parents

A new law is to be implemented these days in Israel, by which monthly child-welfare payed to each family that has children, will be reduced only to those parents who do not vaccinate a child by the national recommended immunization schedule, or keep their children in non-recognized education facilities (e.g. home schooling)

Read rest of story here:

SHEA Position Paper
Revised SHEA Position Paper: Influenza Vaccination of Healthcare Personnel
October 2010 - Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31:987–995
SHEA views influenza vaccination of HCP as a core patient and HCP safety practice with which noncompliance should not be tolerated.

Therefore, for the safety of both patients and HCP, SHEA endorses a policy in which annual influenza vaccination is a condition of both initial and continued HCP employment and/or professional privileges.

Read rest of story here:

Tuesday, August 31, 2010
The vaccination rate among health care workers (HCWs) against seasonal influenza runs abysmally under 50%, and in recent years there have been multiple calls to make yearly vaccination a requirement of employment.

Hospitals are looking at this as both a liability and an economic issue, on top of their concerns for patient welfare. So this movement has `legs’.

Of course, legal challenges still lie ahead, but the momentum is clearly moving in the direction of mandatory vaccinations for Health Care Workers.

Read rest of story here:

Should we abolish the religious exemption for mandatory vaccinations?
October 19, 2010
American Council on Science and Health
Professor Dachille wrote she agreed with our call to eliminate the philosophical belief exemption for mandatory childhood vaccines, but went on to say:

Read rest of story here:

Vaccine-fearing parents responsible for measles outbreaks
October 14, 2010
Parents philosophically opposed to the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine are responsible for hundreds of sickened children in the last few years, government data show.

Measles has essentially been eradicated in the United States since 2000 thanks to the MMR vaccine — but sporadic infections still do occur, due to importation from foreign countries. There was an average 56 cases annually from 2001-’08, according to Reuters Health, which cites a new report by CDC researchers in The Journal of Infectious Diseases. And in 2004-’08, 68 percent of the patients who developed measles were not vaccinated “because of personal belief exemptions.” Twenty states continue to have such exemptions.

“Parents who elect not to have their children vaccinated against measles, mumps and rubella are putting their children’s lives in jeopardy,” says ACSH’s Dr. Elizabeth Whelan. “We call for an abolition of personal belief exemption, also called the philosophical exemption. From a public health perspective it makes no sense to allow parents to abdicate their responsibility to protect their own children, and it’s even worse to allow them to expose other children around them. No government should be complicit in some parents’ superstitious fear of vaccines and put children at risk.”

Read rest of story here:

Using Fear & Prejudice to Attack Vaccine Exemptions
by Barbara Loe Fisher
    [Includes a 9 minute video interview.]
This summer, inaccurate and misleading information about B. pertussis whooping cough and the pertussis vaccine is being put out there by medical doctors, who should know better. Media campaigns designed to create fear about infectious disease are nothing new. This one appears to have three goals: first, to emphasize pertussis risks while ignoring vaccine risks; second, to place blame for whooping cough cases and deaths on the unvaccinated; and, third, to attack religious and conscientious belief exemptions, which serve as informed consent protections in U.S. vaccine laws.

In 2009, public health officials declared a pandemic H1N1 influenza emergency and played up the potential complications of the swine flu while playing down the potential risks of the untested new swine flu vaccine. 1 When two-thirds of Americans “just said no” to swine flu shots, NBC’s chief medical editor Dr. Nancy Snyderman ridiculed them and quipped “Just get the damn vaccine.” 2

Now Snyderman has issued a similar standing order to “get vaccinated” but, this time, she is accusing parents of unvaccinated children for causing the deaths of six California infants, who have reportedly died from complications of B. pertussis whooping cough. On July 28, 2010, Dr. Snyderman further alleged that “most people” with religious objections to vaccination are not telling the truth and that the “needs” of the “community as a whole” are “better than the individual” and “more important.” 3

Read rest of story here:

Big Pharma, Bad Medicine
Marcia Angell May/June 2010
Boston Review
This article is part of Big Pharma, Bad Medicine, a forum on the impact of the pharmaceutical industry on medical training and science, and the responsibilities of physicians.

In May of 2000, shortly before I stepped down as editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, I wrote an editorial entitled, “Is Academic Medicine for Sale?” It was prompted by a clinical trial of an antidepressant called Serzone that was published in the same issue of the Journal.

The authors of that paper had so many financial ties to drug companies, including the maker of Serzone, that a full-disclosure statement would have been about as long as the article itself, so it could appear only on our Web site. The lead author, who was chairman of the department of psychiatry at Brown University (presumably a full-time job), was paid more than half a million dollars in drug-company consulting fees in just one year. Although that particular paper was the immediate reason for the editorial, I wouldn’t have bothered to write it if it weren’t for the fact that the situation, while extreme, was hardly unique.

Among the many letters I received in response, two were especially pointed. One asked rhetorically, “Is academic medicine for sale? These days, everything is for sale.” The second went further: “Is academic medicine for sale? No. The current owner is very happy with it.” The author didn’t feel he had to say who the current owner was.

Read rest of story here:

Health Fascism in Australia.
July 09, 2010
By Martin Walker

The sinister Skeptics group, agents of what used to be CSICOP now the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI) organised from the US and linked to the major corporate lobby groups, American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) and American Council Against Health Fraud (ACAHF), which is in turn linked to the Australian CAHF) are making ground in Australia. Supported by authoritarian ideological influences in government and Big Pharma, the Skeptics are running constant attacks on homeopathy, natural cancer treatments, those who question vaccination and those who support any form of alternative medicine.

With the present world fiscal crisis, all those linked to Big Pharma and Science are fighting a bitter battle to preserve drug company competitiveness. But where fascist influences in government and health with most force come together is in attacking anyone who speaks out about freedom of choice and expression in relation to vaccination.

Read rest of story here:

Suzanne Humphries, MD [medical doctor], July 5, 2010
Mainstream medicine has hit a new low in its war against physicians who have become alternative healers. The battle has been going on for decades, but lately, in bully-like fashion, pharma’s minions are ramping up the vilification. They’re now discrediting any healing method not based in their version of accepted science - excuse me, I meant their religion of pharmaceutical belief which has been misnamed as “science”.

Physicians who see that the popular medical-pharmaceutical construct endangers its recipients with marginally tested drugs of questionable efficacy, but with well documented adverse effects, are labeled as quacks. A physician who recognizes the significant conflicts of interest, and resultant corruption in the circle of influence that comprises the nation’s government/public health officials, lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry, and in many instances his or her own colleagues is considered a quack.

Read rest of story here:

The CDC Votes in Favor of a Flu Vaccination Assault on Americans’ Health
July 1, 2010
Richard Gale & Gary Null

The recent unanimous 11-0 vote by the members of the Centers for Disease Control’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) favoring every American over the age of six months receive the flu influenza vaccine is one more attempt by our federal health officials to open up our bodies to the free market capitalism of pharmaceutical coffers. It is another step to mandate a vaccine across the nation, a policy that has many supporters in the pro-vaccine science community.

The vote raises an alarm about our federal government’s scientific integrity, and calls into question its true allegiance and purpose: to protect the health of American citizens or increase Big Pharma profits. If the recommendation were ever enforced, the US would be the only nation in the world with mandatory flu vaccination. ...

To put this into greater perspective, since the FDA relies on industry-funded clinical trials and subsequent data to approve vaccines and drugs, there also appeared in the news this month a critical finding from the German Institute for Quality and Efficacy in Health Care, published in the peer-reviewed journal Trials. The study investigated 90 approved drugs in the US (and let us make no mistake, vaccines are drugs! In fact, the flu vaccine is listed as a Category C drug; which means there are no adequate safety studies to determine whether flu vaccination adversely affects pregnant mothers and their fetuses.) and discovered that 60 percent of the 900 papers were unpublished and some were concealed from the federal regulatory agencies. Forty to sixty percent omitted clinical details or changed their final analysis. Among the pharmaceutical industry studies alone, 94 percent were unpublished, and 86 percent of the university studies sponsored by drug makers remained unpublished. ...

Canada’s Vaccination Risk Awareness Network (VRAN) website is a community of physicians, researchers and vaccine researchers and journalists reporting on vaccines’ flawed promises and pseudo-science. Among all vaccines, the flu vaccine is presented with “The Most Useless Vaccine Of-All-Time Award.”

Read rest of story here:

Doctors reject calls for enforced pre-school immunisation
02 July 2010
DOCTORS have rejected calls for UK children to be fully immunised before they are allowed to start school.

Read rest of story here:

Malawi: Christian sect in measles vaccine standoff
Wed Jun 16, 11:31 am ET
BLANTYRE, Malawi – More than 100 members of a Christian religious sect have barricaded themselves in an abandoned building in southern Malawi over their refusal to give their children the measles vaccine, a regional health official said Wednesday.

Read rest of story here:

Majority Support Parental Vaccination Choice According To New Harris Poll
CHICAGO, May 24, 2010
Majority Support Parental Vaccination Choice According To New Harris Poll

Over Half Of Parents Say Pharmaceutical Industry Has Too Much Influence Over Government Vaccine Mandates and Support More Safety Research

CHICAGO, May 24 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — A new Harris Interactive poll shows a majority of American parents believe they, rather than the government, should have the final say in which vaccines their children receive.

The poll, commissioned by the Center for Personal Rights, queried a representative sample of American parents about vaccination. The survey was conducted online within the United States by Harris Interactive on behalf of the Center for Personal Rights, Inc. from May 5-11, 2010 among 1,144 parents of children age 17 years or younger.

Poll results indicate a majority of American parents, 52%, believe that “parents should have the right to decide which vaccines their children receive without government mandat

Read rest of story here:

Another source:

Oregon’s vaccine aversion getting national attention
Frontline segment uses local examples in show exploring ‘Vaccine Wars’
The Portland Tribune, Apr 22, 2010, Updated Apr 22, 2010
[story preping the release of PBS April 27 broadcast.]
The show (, centers on the debate in Ashland, which has one of the highest rates in the country of parents who claim a “religious exemption” from vaccinations that the state requires for children enrolling in kindergarten.

Read rest of story here:


Doctor Accuses PBS Frontline of Selling Out on Vaccine Concern
Dr. Rashid Buttar, a renowned physician

Shame on PBS Frontline, ” The Vaccine War”
Jay Gordon, MD FAAP

Huffington Post: Frontline's "The Vaccine War" Misses Half the Story

Dismissed! on Age of Autism

AAP: The Internet is Causing the Autism Epidemic?
22 tongue in cheek lessons

Frontline’s Producer Feeds the “Hungry Lie”

Paul Offit's Day Job: Teaching How to Counter Vaccine Safety Concerns

You can watch the full program online here –

Big Brother to track your medication compliance with electronic transmitters in pills
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
(NaturalNews) Now that the U.S. government has achieved its monopoly over health care, new technologies are in the works that will allow the government to remotely monitor and track whether ordinary citizens are complying with taking medications prescribed by conventional doctors. One new technology described at the U.S. Senate Committee on Aging allows "pills to be electronically outfitted with transmitters" which would track the patient's compliance with medications and broadcast that information back to government health care enforcers who check for "compliance and efficacy."

Read rest of story here:

Source: from archive of 12-12-02 webpage:

Can employees be forced to be vaccinated? 12-12-02

I am being asked to produce documentation of immunization for measles, mumps and rubella for a medical/surgical nursing job. My nurse colleagues and I have never heard of this required for employment to any hospital. Does an employer have a right to force an individual into getting an MMR vaccination for the sole purpose of employment? Look forward to your comments. Thanks.

Ann Kiernan replies:

If you were not a health care worker, the answer would certainly be NO! But since the nature of nursing involves occupational exposure to infectious diseases, the employer might be able to ask about your immunization status and perhaps even to require re-vaccination if you do not have proof of current protection.

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), after an applicant is given a conditional job offer, but before s/he starts work, an employer may conduct medical examinations, regardless of whether they are related to the job, as long as it does so for all entering employees in the same job category. But, after employment begins, an employer may make disability-related inquiries and require medical examinations only if they are job-related and consistent with business necessity. Also, an employer may require employees to submit to medical examinations that are required by another federal law or regulation. 29 C.F.R. 1630.15(e)(1998) See: Enforcement Guidance on Disability-Related Inquiries and Medical Examinations of Employees Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

So, is immunity to measles, mumps and rubella either "job-related and consistent with business necessity" or required by other law? Maybe, according to our research at the Centers for Disease Control.

The CDC report strongly recommends that health care workers be immunized for hepatitis B, influenza, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella zoter, and tetanus.

Another federal agency, OSHA, says in its Technical Manual governing hospitals that: "Vaccination for rubella, measles, mumps, and influenza is recommended, especially for women of child-bearing age."

It is not directly relevant to your situation, but a recent federal appeals decision upheld a Navy captain's right to insist that both military and civilian personnel on his ship be vaccinated for anthrax when they were entering " high threat areas and contiguous waters". Mazares v. Dep't of the Navy, 302 F.3d 1382 (Fed. Cir. 2002)

Thanks for raising such an interesting issue. We have only scratched the surface here. This would be a good question to pose to your state nursing society or professional board for a definitive answer.

Information here is correct at the time it is posted. Case decisions cited here may be reversed. Please do not rely on this information without consulting an attorney first. ----Disclaimer End----

The following is an edited copy of a page saved from the AMA web site in March 2002.

H-440.970 Religious Exemptions from Immunizations

Since religious/philosophic exemptions from immunizations endanger not only the health of the unvaccinated individual, but also the health of those in his or her group and the community at large, the AMA
(1) encourages state medical associations to seek removal of such exemptions in statutes requiring mandatory immunizations;
(2) encourages physicians and state and local medical associations to work with public health officials to inform religious groups and others who object to immunizations of the benefits of vaccinations and the risk to their own health and that of the general public if they refuse to accept them; and
(3) encourages state and local medical associations to work with public health officials to develop contingency plans for controlling outbreaks in exempt populations and to intensify efforts to achieve high immunization rates in communities where groups having religious exemptions from immunizations reside. (CSA Rep. B, A-87; Reaffirmed: Sunset Report, I-97)

October 2004: this article is still on the AMA site:
Note: you may have to click on the 'AMA ACCEPT OUR POLICY' link to get the page to load. is an organization dedicated to promoting the legal removal of religious exemptions. They promote the ideas that it is a child's right to be "immunized" but apparently never checked to find out that sanitation, nutrition and hygiene are the great immunizations.