Saturday, October 23, 2010

School Nurses and Parents' Right to Informed Consent

I just responded to a facebook friend who commented on one of my Notes. This mother of a vaccine-injured child informed the school nurse of her Religious Exemption status. The nurse reportedly treated the mother "like a 3 year-old child" who was making a foolish decision by exercising her legal right to refrain from further vaccinating after her son had experienced serious complications from previous vaccines. This mother also reports the school nurse attempted to include her in a conspiracy to deny other parents their legal right to informed consent by advising her to keep quiet about the fact that parents are entitled to Religious Exemption. The school nurse reportedly told this mother not to tell anyone else about the fact that she was claiming religious exemption for her son, or that such a thing exists and others are entitled to do the same.

How many of us who are exercising our rights to Religious or Philosophical Exemptions from vaccination have experienced something similar?

My advise to my facebook friend is to write a letter to the nurse documenting her concerns about having been asked to with-hold information from other parents about their legal rights and about the dangers of vaccinating children who are at increased risk of having negative reactions. I advised this mother to copy the letter to the superintendent of the school district, making the episode a matter of public record. Thinking about it now, sending a copy to the local newspaper and to members of the school board wouldn't be a bad idea.

School nurses are in positions where they have a responsibility to exercise care and concern for the children who attend their schools. They also have a responsibility to ensure that parents have accurate information when it comes to the health and well-being of their children. At the very least, they should not be actively denying parents information they need to make informed decisions and they certainly should not be actively recruiting other parents to help assist them in denying parents information about their legal rights.

When something happens to a child who attends the school where this nurse is on staff, an investigation needs to be started to determine if the parents of that child were denied information about exemptions that may have prevented the injury or death of the child, and if this is the case, the school nurse needs to be held accountable. It seems to me a case could be made for conspiracy and criminal negligence, or even negligent homicide if a child dies.

My thoughts about this are that it is highly likely that other parents have encountered this kind of scenario, not only with school nurses, but with pharmacists and nurses who are administering vaccinations at drug stores, Walmart, and other public places. If this has happened to you, I urge you to document the episode, include the date and time of the incident, note where it took place, and the name of the "health professional" involved. Also note if others were present and witnessed the discussion. Then make it public.

This is serious. Children are being harmed and we cannot keep silent just because it may upset someone. As I noted in my message to my facebook friend, "There is a reason for everything. This conversation happened to you and it is your cue to take action." If for no other reason than to protect ourselves from the guilt and pain of knowing we could have done something and chose not to, we must not be silent.

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Plea to the Media: PLEASE Provide Information About Vaccine Exemptions!

On Tuesday night (October 19, 2010) I sent an email to News25 (Evansville, IN) reporter Kimberly Barbour after watching her reporting of all the kids sent home from EVSC because they don't have up-to-date vaccinations.
Here is my original message:

From: Marci Terry Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 10:29 PM
To: Kimberly Barbour
Subject: EVSC and vaccines

I just saw the story on the 10:00 news about students in the EVSC not being allowed to attend school unless they have received the "recommended" vaccinations.

Are you aware that "recommendations" are not the same as "Law?"

Indiana DOES provide parents with the option of exemptions. You are incorrectly telling parents that their children must receive vaccinations, which puts you in the position of assuming the role of a medical professional.

You may be held liable if children have adverse affects - including death - as a result of being vaccinated when they already have established immunity.

You may want to retract this story.

Marcella Piper-Terry, M.S.

Yesterday afternoon I received the following email response from Ms. Barbour:
Subject: RE: EVSC and vaccines Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:50:23 -0500


Ms. Piper-Terry,

Thank you for your response. It is state law for schools to have shot records for all students. Indiana, thankfully, is a state that allows medical exemptions, but there still has to be documentation provided for them to include in their shot records. I have explained the state law in several previous stories on this topic. The schools have also explained this in their many notices to parents.

Kimberly Barbour
WEHT-TV News 25

Here is my reply to Ms. Barbour's email:

Ms. Barbour:

Thank-you for your email.
Indiana does provide for medical exemption, as do ALL states in the U.S.
Forty-eight states, including Indiana, also provide for Religious exemptions; Mississippi and West Virginia are the only two states that do not allow this exemption.

Many people realize that they do have a religious exemption to vaccinations when they understand how the vaccines are made and how they do or do not work. Most people do not realize that vaccines contain mercury and aluminum, and that there have never been safety studies to examine the effects of vaccinating children with multiple antigens and additives simultaneously.

I have religious exemptions for myself and my children, based on my belief that God made our bodies perfectly and His design ensured that we were able to fight off illnesses if our immune system is allowed to rally itself naturally in the face of diseases such as the flu or chicken pox. Because I believe God made our bodies perfectly, I believe it is against His will for me to allow anyone to inject viruses, bacteria, mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80, neomyacin, or anything that has been cultured in non-human DNA or aborted fetal tissue into their bodies - or mine.

Religious exemption is a very easy thing to do, and it is the legal right of parents to choose this if it is consistent with their beliefs.

All a parent has to do is write down on a piece of paper that they are not vaccinating because it is against their religious beliefs, sign it, and give it to the school nurse.

People need to know that this in an option and it is their legal right.

People need to know that there are many conditions that are contraindicated for vaccination. For example, if a child has had a previous reaction to vaccines, such as having a seizure or running a high fever, it is contraindicated for them to be vaccinated again with that vaccine. It is also a contraindication for many vaccines if a FAMILY member has a seizure disorder or has had a reaction to vaccines.

If you think I'm making this up, you need to look at the vaccine inserts that contain the information directly from the manufacturers.

Here is a link from Johns Hopkins that will take you to a table where you can look at the vaccine inserts for yourself.

People also need to know that there are many children who should NOT receive vaccinations because they have underlying mitochondrial disorders that make them exponentially more vulnerable to vaccine damage. Children in Evansville are more likely to have mitochondrial disorders because of the very high rates of heavy metals here from the coal burning power plants. The amount of manganese in this area has gone up by more than 1 million pounds per year over the last four years, and manganese CAUSES mitochondrial disorders. These are alterations in DNA that damage the body's energy system, including the ability to produce and utilize ATP (Adenosine Tri-Phosphate). This changes the way the immune system responds to challenge and results in systemic damage rather than the child responding with increased immunity.

Here is a link where you can get information about mitochondrial disorder and what people should look for when considering if they may want to get their child tested for this before getting vaccinated:

Please note that mitochondrial disorder is passed from mother to child - OR - can happen at any time during the lifespan as a result of exposure to toxic levels of certain substances, among them manganese, lead, mercury, arsenic and antimony - all of which are extremely high in the Evansville area because of the amount of coal that is burned here. This is one reason why we have such high rates of diabetes, thyroid disorders, chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, and autism. ANYONE who has these issues needs to be tested for mitochondrial disorder before being vaccinated, and any Mother who has these issues needs to know that her child is at increased risk of vaccine injury if he or she has an underlying mitochondrial disorder that has not been diagnosed. This was the case for Hannah Poling, whose family was awarded millions of dollars (correction: $1.5 Million) recently in vaccine court for her vaccine injuries - not because she has autism, but because she regressed into autism after vaccination DUE TO underlying mitochondrial disorder. To hear more about Hannah Poling's story and her parents' research into what happened to their daughter, click this link.

(Note: Please understand that thimerosal has not been removed from childhood vaccines. It is still present in flu shots which are being given routinely to pregnant women, so infants are actually now receiving mercury at an even more vulnerable stage of brain development. For more on thimerosal in flu vaccinations and the overall issues related to giving flu shots to pregnant women and children, click this link.

You should also understand that even in the absence of thimerosal altogether, infants and children are receiving toxic levels of aluminum, etc. in vaccines. For more on aluminum in vaccines, please review the article written by Dr. Bob Sears: "Is Aluminum the New Thimerosal?"

Back to my email to Ms. Barbour:
It is not too much to ask for people to be told the truth about the risks they are taking. The consequences of vaccine injury are lifelong.

Please help to set the record straight by informing parents of "the rest of the story."

Thanks so much,
Marcella Piper-Terry

Additional note: People also need to know that if an infant or child was fed soy formula there is increased risk of mitochondrial disorder because of high levels of manganese in the formula. These children should be checked to see if they have mitochondrial disorder before even considering vaccinating as the risk for vaccine injury increases to 1 in 50 for those with mito d/o.
Here are a couple of links for information about issues related to soy formula, mitochondrial damage, and manganese from environmental exposures (power plants):

Journal of NeuroToxicology

Journal of the American College of Nutrion

Soy Formula and Manganese Studies from the Violence Research Foundation

Toxicology information on Manganese. See section 11.

Scholarly articles on Manganese and Mitochondrial Damage

Environmental Health Article, Manganese, Particulate Matter, and Mitochondrial Damage

Friday, October 8, 2010

It's Flu Season. Let the Fear-Mongering Begin!

Yesterday morning a pediatrician left a comment on my critique of the MMR study, asking pointedly why I chose to critique such a small study. The doctor stated that the study in question was the smallest one he's ever seen. He asserted that there are many more vaccine studies, "some with over a million subjects." He wanted to know why I don't critique them. I asked him to please provide the links because I have not been able to find any such studies. The fact is, it is standard operating procedure for the vaccine makers to conduct studies with very small sample sizes and to then make sweeping declarations of the safety of their products. This is particularly true for the flu vaccine.

Last week I walked into the local CVS pharmacy and asked for the package insert for the flu vaccine they will be using this Saturday at their "vaccine clinic." The girl behind the pharmacy counter didn't know what I was talking about. So I asked if they have the vials on hand. She said yes. I asked to see the box. She retrieved it from the refrigerator. I wrote down the name - "Fluvirin" and noted that it is the multi-dose variety.

Here is the manufacturer's insert:

Each .5 ml dose contains 25 mcg. of thimerosal (ethyl mercury), which means if your child gets two doses, he or she will be getting 50 mcg. of thimerosal.

If you ask your doctor if this is safe, you will most likely be told "Yes." If you ask if the research has been done to prove safety of this particular vaccine, you will most likely be told "yes." I suggest you don't stop there.

On page 10 of the package insert (link above), you will find the information about the clinical studies in the pediatric population. Here it is:

In 1987 a clinical study was carried out in 38 ‘at risk’ children aged between 4 and 12 years (17 females and 21 males). To record the safety of FLUVIRIN, participants recorded their symptoms on a diary card during the three days after vaccination and noted any further symptoms they thought were attributable to the vaccine. The only reactions recorded were tenderness at the site of vaccination in 21% of the participants on day 1, which was still present in 16% on day 2 and 5% on day 3. In one child, the tenderness was also accompanied by redness at the site of injection for two days. The reactions were not age-dependent and there was no bias towards the younger children.

Three clinical studies were carried out between 1995 and 2004 in a total of 520 pediatric subjects (age range 6 - 47 months). Of these, 285 healthy subjects plus 41 ‘at risk’ subjects received FLUVIRN. No serious adverse events were reported.

FLUVIRIN should only be used for the immunization of persons aged 4 years and over.

That's it. The 2010-2011 Fluvirin Vaccine has been deemed safe to administer to ALL U.S. children 4 years and older, and this decision is based on studies of 38 children that were done in 1987, and 326 children studied between 1995 and 2004.

That's not a lot of kids to base the decision that the vaccine is safe for ALL children.

What's even more troubling is that this year's vaccine contains two strains of seasonal flu (A & B) AND it also contains H1N1.

H1N1 did not resurface until 2009. The vaccines that were studied in 1987, 1995, and 2004 did not contain H1N1.

This flu vaccine has NEVER been studied in children. But it has been deemed "Safe for all U.S. children aged 4 years and above."

Yesterday morning I contacted the USI Student Health Clinic to find out what flu vaccine they are giving and to what groups. I spoke with a nurse who told me they are using Fluzone multi-dose vials and they are giving it to "all ages" including pregnant women. The nurse added, "We gave it to them last year."

Here is the package insert for Fluzone:

Page 1: "Safety and effectiveness of Fluzone have not been established in pregnant women, nursing mothers, or children <6 months of age."

Page 3: "6.1. Clinical Trial Experience - Fluzone - Pediatric Studies: The 2003-2004 formulation of Fluzone was studied in 19 children 6 to 23 months of age and in 12 children 24 to 36 months of age, given in 2 doses one month apart. Local reactions and systemic events were solicited for 3 days after each dose. Most local and systemic reactions were mild. The proportions of local and systemic reactions in children were simliar to the proportions in adults."

This vaccine, which contains mercury, is being recommended for ALL children 6 months and older. It has been deemed "safe" on the basis of clinical trials that included a total of 31 children between the ages of 6-36 months.

THe formulation that was studied in 2003-2004 is different from the formulation this year, so this year's flu vaccine has not been studied AT ALL for its effect in infants and young children.

Page 4: "8. Use in specific populations - 8.1 pregnancy: Pregnancy Category C.: Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Fluzone. It is also not known whether Fluzone can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. Fluzone should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed."


People are afraid of the flu. They are afraid because the CDC tells them to be afraid.

This is the lnk to the CDC's own report of the 2009-2010 flu season:

On pg. 3: "A dramatic increase in hospitalizations in the younger age groups was indicative of the influenza pandemic's impact on children." If you look at the numbers and do the math, the "dramatic increase" in children 4 and under was 83 hospitalizations per 100,000 as compared with 34/100,000 (avg. from the previous 3 flu seasons).

The "dramatic increase" in hospitalizations in kids 4 yrs and under amounts to 6.83 kids per month in a city of 100,000 people, as compared to between 2.62-4.25 kids per month in the same city during each of the previous 3 flu seasons.

Breaking it down by week... during last years "pandemic" flu season, in a city of 100,000 people there was an average of 1.63 hospitalizations for flu (confirmed by laboratory analysis) in children four years and younger.

In the previous three flu seasons, in the same city of 100,000 people, hospitalizations for kids 4 and under were between .63 and 1.01 kids per week.

So, according to the CDC's own document, the "dramatic increase" on the pediatric population (kids four and under, in this case), as measured by hospitalizations for laboratory confirmed flu, amounted to less than one child per week in cities of 100,000 people.

Who is "fear-mongering" now?

Scaring the public with terminology like "dramatic increase" in order to sell more vaccines to pregnant women and parents of infants and toddlers when the vaccines have not been tested for safety in these groups is unethical and unconscionable.