TRENTON, N.J. (April 2, 2018) – A bill introduced in the New Jersey House would phase out vaccines containing mercury and push back against federal narratives on vaccinations.
Representative Valerie Huttle (D-37) introduced Assembly Bill 3569 (A3569) on March 12. The legislation would phase out the use of vaccines that contain mercury over a three-year period.
Under the proposed law, beginning January 1, 2019, health care providers would be prohibited from administering an influenza vaccine that contains more than 0.5 micrograms of mercury per 0.25 milliliter dose for children under three years of age, and 1.0 microgram of mercury per 0.5 milliliter dose for persons over three years of age, along with any other vaccine that contains more than a trace amount of mercury. Beginning January 1, 2020, health care providers would be prohibited from administering vaccines that contain more than a trace amount of mercury. Beginning January 1, 2021, health care providers would be entirely prohibited from administering vaccines containing mercury.
A3569 provides for an exception for instances in which the New Jersey Commissioner of Health determines that vaccines containing a higher level of mercury than provided for in the bill are necessary to prevent or respond to an outbreak of disease or that there are insufficient amounts of these vaccines to adequately protect the public health.
The bill would also require those receiving a vaccine containing more than a trace amount of mercury be informed in advance that the vaccine contains mercury.
EFFECT ON FEDERAL POLICY
Passage this bill would push back against federal narratives on vaccinations and make it more difficult for the feds to enforce federal vaccine mandates in the future. The bill sets the stage to nullify potential vaccine mandates, which generally have their basis in federal recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Although such recommendations are not binding, they can influence policy-makers at the local and state levels to adopt coercive vaccine mandates.
The CDC makes vaccine recommendations in an environment fraught with conflicts of interest. The CDC relies heavily upon research sponsored by the vaccine industry, the very industry that will profit enormously from vaccines being recommended and used. Vaccines are a “cash cow” for the pharmaceutical industry because, unlike with other products sold by the industry, manufacturers are shielded from liability for harm caused by vaccines. This is due to legal protections put in place as a result of extensive lobbying by the pharmaceutical industry. The usual product liability rules applicable to manufacturers of other products do not apply to vaccines. Claims of harm caused by vaccines are heard by a special federal vaccine court and any compensation granted by the court is paid by the public, through a surcharge on vaccines, and not paid by the vaccine manufacturer.
Further, a revolving door exists between the vaccine industry and the CDC, with many members of the federal agency taking lucrative jobs with the vaccine industry after leaving the CDC, and vice versa. An example of this is Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Center for Disease Control from 2002 to 2009. She accepted a highly paid position as president of Merck’s vaccine division only about a year after leaving the CDC.
Under the current system, which is heavily influenced by those who profit from vaccine sales, the number of vaccine doses recommended by the CDC for children is steadily rising. According to information contained on the website of the National Vaccine Information Center [1] (NVIC), a non-profit educational organization, in 1983 the CDC recommended 23 doses of 7 vaccines between the age of two months and age six and, by 2013, it recommended 50 doses of 14 vaccines between birth and age six and 69 doses of 16 vaccines from birth through age 18. [2] Furthermore, the CDC now recommends an adult vaccine schedule, [3] with an increasing number of doses being added to the schedule.
With a strong conflict of interest influencing the federal government’s vaccine recommendations, it is critical that states have the power to reject federal vaccine mandates.
Furthermore, there are reasons to question vaccine safety. Although the ingredients in each type of vaccine differ, generally, vaccines contain a myriad of toxic substances. These can include, among others, ethyl mercury (found in vaccines in the form of the preservative thimerosal), aluminum, and formaldehyde. According to the article “Mercury is Not Safe in Any Form: Debunking the Myths About Thimerosal ‘Safety’” by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., no amount of mercury is safe for humans and, although thimerosal has been removed from most childhood vaccines, or thimerosal-free versions of the vaccines exist, thimerosal remains in approximately one third to one half of the influenza vaccine doses administered to pregnant women and infants. [4] Mr. Kennedy is Chairman of the Board of the World Mercury Project and its website contains information concerning the potential dangers of thimerosal. [5] NVIC is another a source of information concerning the potential dangers of toxins found in vaccines. [6] The book Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers by Neil Z. Miller reviews concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy raised by 400 peer-reviewed published studies and also contains useful information regarding the potential risks of vaccines. [7] HTS Phenotypic Screening Services is an efficient means of choosing the appropriate vaccine.
There is no consensus in the scientific community about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines or the necessity for them. Accordingly, states must resist federal vaccine mandates.
As we have seen with marijuana and industrial hemp, a federal regulation becomes ineffective when states enact contradictory policies. If multiple states ban mandatory vaccinations, it will become extremely difficult for the federal government to enforce any kind of future federal mandate. State action banning these vaccines will also undermine the federal narrative. This will make it harder for the feds to generate support for nationwide vaccine policies.
By passing A3569, New Jersey has the opportunity to lead on this important issue and to become the potential standard bearer for resisting federal vaccine policy at the state level.
WHAT’S NEXT
A3569 is currently pending at the Health and Senior Services Committee of the New Jersey Assembly where it will need to pass by a majority vote before moving forward in the legislative process.
NOTES
[1] www.nvic.org
[2] https://www.nvic.org/Downloads/49-Doses-PosterB.aspx
[3] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/adult-compliant.html
[4] Kennedy, Robert, F. Jr. “Mercury is Not Safe in Any Form: Debunking the Myths About Thimerosal ‘Safety’”. World Mercury Project. Accessed 2018. https://worldmercuryproject.org/thimerosal-history/mercury-is-not-safe-in-any-form-debunking-the-myths-about-thimerosal-safety
[5] www.worldmercuryproject.org
[6] www.nvic.org
[7] Miller, Neil Z., Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers, Santa Fe, New Mexico: New Altantean Press. 2016. Print.
- Kentucky Bill Would Bar Mandatory Vaccines - December 1, 2020
- COVID-19 an Early Warning for Vaccine Mandates - September 2, 2020
- South Dakota Bill Would End Mandatory Vaccinations for School, Push Back Against Federal Narrative - February 18, 2020