Exploring The Politics Of Mandatory HPV Vaccinations - Whose Children Are These?


"HPV does not threaten an imminent and significant risk to the health of others. Mandating HPV would therefore constitute an expansion of the state's authority to interfere with individual and parental autonomy" - Assessing Mandatory HPV Vaccination: Who Should Call the Shots?1

July 25, 2011 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - Who has the ultimate say over how your children should be raised? Is it you who conceived and bore or adopted them...or is it the government?

Many in the fields of education, medicine and politics believe that all parents must answer to society for the final product. Many spokespersons for foundations seem to believe that parents are merely the custodial caretakers and that these caretakers must be held accountable to the state for the end product.

In researching the ramifications of AB 499, "Minors: Medical Care; Consent," one comes across statements that would have been incomprehensible only a few years ago.

As an example, two Harvard researchers, Dr. David Ludwig and Lindsey Murtagh, writing for the Journal of the American Medical Association - JAMA, on the subject of childhood obesity - which they claim is a health problem of epidemic proportions, claim that "inadequate or unskilled parental supervision" is in part, to blame and that "extremely obese children should be placed, temporarily, at least, in foster care." They further add that, "state intervention may serve the best interests of many children."

I guess these two have not heard about the problems and scandals in finding adequate foster parents who are any better skilled than the parents whom they scorn.

Dr. Arthur J. Caplan, Director of a Foundation for Bioethics Research, while countering this extreme move, is quoted in BioEdge http://www.bioedge.org/index.php/bioethics/bioethics_article/9633/ as saying "the law gives a lot of authority to parents, and rightly so."

Wait, read that again. The law gives authority to parents? I thought the purpose of our Constitution was to recognize and codify rights granted to us by God, among which is the tradition that parents have authority over their children? Was there some sort of election that changed all that?

AB 499's language implies that the guidance and rearing of children is a power which naturally belongs to the state and therefore it's only through an act of bureaucratic graciousness whereby parents are granted permission to raise the government's children.

Googling the search term "Affordable care Act" + "school based clinics" brings up grants.gov which lays out the process whereby school based health centers are established and funded. The Santa Barbara Independent reported on July 18 that Congresswoman Lois Capps has obtained a $500,000 ACA grant from the Department of Health and Human Services to expand school-based health centers in Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties.

A bill or, actually, Resolution has just gone to the Governor, AJR10, by Julia Brownley, entitled School Based Health Centers [SBCs]. Since this is a Resolution it doesn't carry the force of law, but rather expresses support for the federal Affordable Health Care along with sufficient funding to expand the number of California's SBCs from its current 176 schools to over 300. This document declares that school based clinics are "medical homes" for children, thus establishing what is essentially a parent-free zone of control.

From the Resolution's preamble, "AJR 10, as amended, Brownley. School-based health centers. This measure would memorialize the Legislature's support for the school-based health center program authorized by the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, an appropriation by the United States Congress to fund this program, policies that include school-based health centers as a partner in creating a medical home for all children, and the inclusion of school-based health centers in the reauthorization of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act." [source, http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_0001-0050/ajr_10_bill_20110502_amended_asm_v98.pdf]

So, basically the Democrats in the California legislature just gave Congresswoman Capps the authority to go shopping for federal tax dollars to open school based clinics which, AJR 10 says will become medical homes for your children. This is where their health care decision making will reside, not in your hands or your house.

The idea that government officials, foundations and non-profits know better than parents how to raise children is not exactly new. This idea that parents have to be accountable to the state for the rearing of their children; the food they eat, the values they hold, how many days they spend in schools, the lifestyle choices they must be free to make, etc., have been documented since at least the 1970's. Former state legislator John Vasconcellos [D-CA], wrote a book published around that time excoriating parents, religion and traditional upbringing for the [author's perceived] inability to give children the freedom they supposedly need to thrive.

However, until now, there has always been the inclusion of an opt-out exemption written into legislation acknowledging that parents may legitimately have certain ethical, medical or even religious objections to what the state is demanding.

Even in the matter of sex education and vaccinations, parents still have opt-out authority when it comes to vaccinations, even including the latest mandate for whooping cough, only neither the government, the media nor the medical profession are telling you that. Visit the website of the National Vaccine Information Center - NVIC.org to read about exemptions.

Now our California Governor, Jerry Brown, has signed an outrageous, non-opt-out bill, SB 48, by the leading legislative homosexual activist in Sacramento, Mark Leno, [D-SF]. It mandates that teachers indoctrinate their students with the fairy-tale belief that choosing the gay/lesbian lifestyle is desirable because those groups have historically made only positive and significant contributions to society. This same legislator, last term, authored a bill entitling students to seek out their own mental health counseling without parental knowledge or consent, but with taxpayer funding. Since the psychiatric community no longer believes that homosexuality is a disorder, guess what kind of mental health counseling your child will get?

The school site clinics will be in charge of your child's physical and mental health care, per SB 543, signed by former Gov. Schwarzenegger, 2010, not you. Parents' ethical, religious or moral beliefs must be left at the door.

Note: This type of legislation, in a de-facto manner, denies to the student, a traditional childhood. Instead, kids become much like test animals, cultivated to develop and grow in the specific manner that some elitist legislator or PhD. says is the currently recognized "best practice."

The Governor may be about to sign the aforementioned AB 499, "Minors: Medical Care; Consent," which was authored by lesbian Assemblywoman and former abortion clinic operator, Toni Atkins, [D-SD].

This legislation contains a bare minimum of words and states only that since it has already been declared that minors may contract for their own medical treatment for venereal diseases [Family Code Sec. 6926] and abortions [Family Code Sec. 6925 [a]. This bill mandates that children, starting at age 12, have the right to consent to being vaccinated with a product called Gardasil, without parental notification or consent.

This anti-viral product is being heavily advertised by its manufacturer, Merck and Co., as the major preventative treatment for four strains of the group of sexually transmitted diseases known as Human Papilloma Virus, or HPV. Merck markets Gardasil upon the assumption/assertion that it must be administered to every girl in order to protect her from the results of sexually transmitted disease which could cause cervical cancers.

Never mind that Gardasil is, "the most expensive vaccine in the U.S," costing approximately $120 for each dose - three required over the span of six months for a total of $360 [see, Discovery Magazine, http://discovermagazine.com/2007/jun/hpv].

At best this vaccine will provide limited immunity against only 4 strains of HPV, though the Centers for Disease Control acknowledge that there are as many as 40 strains of HPV.

Never mind that:

1. There are dozens of reports from reputable government watchdog groups and medical doctors, warning of the dangers of Gardasil given, especially, to children with autism, ADHD, compromised immune systems, to pregnant women or vitamin deficient children. There is one pro-Gardasil site "Exploring Options for Treating ADHD and Aspergers," which suggests that parents should consider giving ADHD girls the Gardasil shot because these children are so impulsive and may not be able to resist sexual activity which just might cause ovarian cancer.

2. The horror stories of disabling side effects to minors coming out of several states which have already authorized this vaccine. Just Google "the Gardasil girls" and the website of S.A.N.E. Vax [http://sanevax.org] for a critique of the Merck ads entitled "One Less Girl" meaning one less to get cancer because she was injected with Gardasil.

3. That Texas parents raised such a protest when Governor Rick Perry signed an executive order mandating HPV shots for minors that the legislature had to step in and rescind the order.

4. That the Centers for Disease Control recognize that there are between 30 and 40 different strains of HPV, a viral infection which is very common and generally self limiting in about 70% of women, who normally requiring little or no drug treatment.

California's Assemblywoman Toni Atkins believes that all parents are improper providers of care for the children they are raising and therefore the government must directly intervene in the family unit, micromanaging parent's decisions to ensure that little Bobby or Sally is raised in a state-approved manner.

There are a number of websites to which you can refer for further research on the side effects [see, www.pharmalot.com, http://vaccineresistancemovement.org, Nat'l Vaccine Information Center - www.NVIC.org and http://truthaboutgardasil.org/additional-webbinar-documents/]

Even the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report carried an article that while supportive of Gardasil's ability as a preventative treatment indicated that it is improper for the government to join in a partnership with a pharmaceutical company, mandating the use of a vaccine without parental input. "There is no urgency, no provocation for this very draconian action." [see, CDC to STD Vaccine maker: 'Back Off,' World Net Daily, http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54515]

The website of S.A.N.E.vax.org http://sanevax.org [Safe, Affordable, Necessary and Effective] carries this statement about the dangers of HPV infections:

"In fact, most HPV infections in young females are temporary with little long-term significance. Seventy percent of infections are gone in 1 year and ninety percent in 2 years. However, when the infection persists - in 5% to 10% of infected women - there is high risk of developing precancerous lesions of the cervix, which can progress to invasive cervical cancer. This process usually takes 15-20 years, providing many opportunities for detection and treatment of the pre-cancerous lesion. Progression to invasive cancer can be almost always prevented when standard prevention strategies are applied, but the lesions still cause considerable burden necessitating preventive surgeries, which do in many cases involve loss of fertility..."

This site also lists a comparison of the harmful effects of the HPV disease as compared to the harmful effects of the Gardasil shot, as reported by individuals who have experienced the side-effects.

Leslie Botha, spokesperson for SANEVAX admits that some of the hundreds of side effects reported by young girls following Gardasil shots such as nausea, vomiting, tingling sensations in hands and feet, etc are common side effects to many of today's advertised and marketed drugs, but the scandal is that the young women experiencing these side effects should not be happening to normal, healthy girls aged 12 and up.

Please visit this website to see the full list of contraindications and side effects. http://www.prlog.org/11587655-mercks-marketing-department-declares-hpv-is-disease-sanevax-inc-declares-gardasil-disease.html.

The effect of these intrusive legislative mandates is to destroy health care as we know it, reducing doctors and patient to the status of pawns in a game controlled by agendized lawmakers operating far beyond their [already considerable] pay grade.

Patients are now reduced by these inept meddlers to the status of mere "consumers of health care." They thrust them into an artificially constructed marketplace where pharmaceutical companies conspire with government to bring about their unattainable utopian vision of a perfect healthy citizen.

The process of course allows "science" [often pseudo-science] to trump all other considerations, ethical or religious. Bottom line, it removes kids from parental authority and control.

Assemblywoman Toni Atkins in authoring her AB 499, is acting as a shill for Merck. So powerful has this alliance become that many are now referring to the consortium of large drug companies as Big Pharma. Ms. Atkins is not acting for the good of her constituents or anyone's child, she is involved in pure social engineering, on your dime.

REQUEST: AB 499 now sits in the California Senate Appropriations Committee to which it was returned prior to a final senate floor vote. It was finally determined that this bill, though itself carrying no authorizations for funds, will be expensive to the state.

Since Gov. Brown has already, very quickly signed SB 48, it is believed that he will very quickly sign AB 499 should it get out of the Appropriations Committee and its final senate floor vote.

The best place to stop this madness would be to kill the bill while it is still in the Appropriations Committee.

This being the time when the legislature is in summer recess presents an opportunity to contact your state Senator now and voice your opposition to AB 499. Barring citizen action, it will come to the senate floor for a final vote before heading for the Governor's desk, by August 15. Tell your legislator that this bill is much too expensive given the limited immunity the injections provide, nor is there any justification for this level of parental intimidation. Urge your Senator to vote "NO" should this bill come to the floor.

One final word on the author of this bill. Assemblywoman Toni Atkins was formerly director of a Woman Care abortion clinic in the San Diego area [source, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toni_Atkins], an odd background for someone who is now a self-declared spokesman for children's interests.

Merck Pharmaceuticals received so many complaints about its over-the-top promotion of Gardasil that it promised to withdraw from direct advertising. However, it then ingenuously took the back-door approach, giving several hundred thousand dollars to the national Women-In-Government Group, as long as it would carry water for Merck.

The website The Center for Media and Democracy, a member of Source Watch [http://en.wikipedia.org/Wiki/SourceWatch] published a report regarding Merck and Co.'s agreement with Women-In-Government regarding, "helping finance campaigns to get states to pass legislation that would make it mandatory for girls as young as 11 or 12 to receive" its human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccine. Merck has "given money to Women in Government, an advocacy group that includes female state legislators throughout the United States. Many of the state bills advocating the use of Gardasil have been introduced by members of Women in Government." [source, Ed Silverman, The Heat Is On...Gardasil Backers, www.pharmalot.com/2007/01/the_heat_is_ongardasil_backers]

Gardasil for minors was first brought to the California legislature by a Mountain View Assemblywoman, Sally Lieber, a few years ago. She was forced to withdraw her name from the bill when it was learned that her husband owned stock in Merck.

Assemblywoman Toni Atkins also has indirect ties to Merck Co. Atkins, as a member of the California state Assembly is also a member of the California List, a subgroup of the national Women-In-Government. It's not your children about whom she is concerned, it's her own re-election funding source that she's protecting.

These associated so-called health care bills have common purpose - they, in an unprecedented manner - massively expand the degree of control which CA State legislators will have over decisions which were formerly and traditionally solely in the purview of parents. These laws assert the primacy of the government's judgment over that of parents in these most personal matters.If Texas parents felt the need to rise in opposition to this growing move towards collectivization, California parents should be no less vigilant in their concerns for our children's best interests.

Parents, every time your child goes to the doctor, the clinic, the HMO, question the employee of that facility as to exactly what they are doing to your child. Ask them what the limits are of any permission which is being sought.

It's your moral duty to protect our children from this unconscionable collusion between on-the-take lefty legislators and crony capitalism.

End Notes:

1. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, pg. 384. Re-printed from the Sumer, 2008 report, "Genetics and Public Policy Center." Written by Gail Javitt, J.D. Ph.D., Deena Berkowitz,, M.D. Ph.D., Lawrence O. Gostin, J.D. I.L.D.

©2011 Camille Giglio. All rights reserved.