Recent Comments
Re: “Masks help prevent the spread of COVID-19”
Seems the science isn’t as settled as you imply.
Testing the Efficacy of Homemade Masks: WouldThey Protect in an Influenza Pandemic?
“Improvised homemade face masks may be used to help protect those who could potentially, for example, be at occupational risk from close or frequent contact with symptomatic patients. However, these masks would provide the wearers little protection from microorganisms from others persons who are infected with respiratory diseases. As a result, we would not recommend the use of homemade face masks as a method of reducing transmission of infection from aerosols.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/…
Re: “Nutritional defense: What fuel are you putting in your body?”
Thank you for this timely reminder that taking care of our immune systems is an essential aspect of protecting our health.
Re: “Dear New Times Shredder”
Thank you New Times for upholding standards of civil discourse on a charged topic. If only more media outlets could rise to this level!
Re: “Newly passed vaccination laws are pushing one parent to pull her children from school”
I find it interesting that the article states there are only 75 children in our county with medical exemptions, out of how many students? I find it hard to believe that our local drs are jeopardizing investigations by the medical board (who can fine them regardless of whether or not they find any wrong doing, which then increases their malpractice insurance, resulting in loss of insurance contracts), to write fraudulent exemptions for profit? How much money would they have to be charging for these 75 fake exemptions in order to justify losing their practice? Every pharmaceutical has side effects. The Vaccine insert lists side effects that are recognized by the FDA. It should be a red flag that the CDC does not recognize contraindications listed by the FDA. Why do we as the readers, public health authorities, journalists, or the legislators for that matter, have the authority to say whether or not a child who has had some of those side effects should be forced to continue vaccinating in order to attend school? I think that should be a risk to benefit analysis that should be done on an individual case basis between the parents and the doctor.
Re: “That crazy v-word”
Ian,
Thank you for elaborating on your original comment. I am more than willing to provide you with factual info to aid in forming a reasoned opinion.
You stated that you were all for medical exemptions when they are issued by a doctor that has actually examined the patient. Those are the exact exemptions we are currently fighting to protect. We are working hard to keep the government out of the doctor-patient relationship. Senator Pan is pushing a bill through that will remove a doctors (that has actually examined a child) ability to issue a medical exemption. SB276 charges the CA Dep of Public Health to be the sole issuer of Medical exemptions. You might be interested to know that they will not be examining the child nor are they doctors.
Another relevant fact for your consideration is that under current law a doctor may write a medical exemption that is based on the adverse reactions that are listed by the FDA on the vaccine product inserts. Under SB276 the CA Public Health department will not recognize the FDAs adverse reactions as reasonable cause to warrant an exemption. They will only be issuing exemptions inline with the CDC. The CDC does not recognize the FDAs adverse reactions as just cause for an exemption. So if you kid gets paralyzed by a vaccine (a listed FDA reaction) and their doctor says that it would put their health at further risk to continue vaccinating and writes them an exemption, the Public Health Dep will be required to over ride the doctor and void the exemption. Currently only .7% of students in CA have medical exemptions. The current vaccine mandates were designed to protect those that should not be vaccinated. SB276 is no longer interested in protecting those medical fragile children rather it is sacrificing them to gain access to possible fraudulent doctors. Doesnt seem logical does it?
Re: “That crazy v-word”
Ian,
Since when was asking for open discussion about a controversial topic hysterical? How is defending a medical need for choice rather than mandates (that a physician says could further damage a child) illogical? If you read the article you would know that she started out vaccinating her child, that would make her and ex-vaxer rather than an anti-Vaxer. If the point of your comment was to reinforce the stereotype that pharma has worked so hard to create, you nailed it!
Re: “Freedom 467 miles away: How a quest for a roller coaster ended up a delicious memory”
Love that a dinning experience was more memorable than the motivating roller coaster ride.
Hey haters, not everything needs to be stuffed full of politics. I appreciate the mental breathing room of family experiencing an adventure. Life outside of lockdown still exists!