Hollywood anti-vaxxers now hate Gov. Jerry Brown
Mandatory vaccination push earns Governor title “corporate fascist”
After California became the epicenter of a measles outbreak earlier this year, the state’s legislature proposed a tough, new bill making vaccinations for children attending public school mandatory (with few exceptions.)
Governor Jerry Brown just signed that bill into law.
Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday signed into law one of the nation’s strictest childhood vaccination requirements, approving a bill that generated multiple protests and controversy as it moved through the Legislature.
Senate Bill 277, authored by Sacramento pediatrician state Sen. Richard Pan and former Santa Monica-Malibu school board president state Sen. Ben Allen, eliminates parents’ ability to claim “personal belief” exemptions to schoolchildren’s vaccine requirements at both private and public schools in California.
Only medical exemptions, approved by a doctor, will be allowed under the law. A licensed physician will have to write a letter explaining the child’s medical circumstances that make immunization unsafe for that child.
Opponents are so unhappy with the new rule that they began preparing a lawsuit before the ink had dried.
But opponents who have rallied against the bill at the state Capitol, saying the legislation violates their parental rights, immediately vowed both to sue the state and take their case to California voters.
“We are going to have a referendum to ask the public to put a hold on the law,” said Palo Alto resident Christina Hildebrand, president and co-founder of A Voice For Choice. “We will continue to fight this — we are not going away,” said the mother of two unvaccinated children.
It looks like he’s now off the guest list for A-list Hollywood parties:
California Gov says yes to poisoning more children with mercury and aluminum in manditory vaccines. This corporate fascist must be stopped.
— Jim Carrey (@JimCarrey) July 1, 2015
Talk about ungrateful! It was only last September that Brown signed another bill giving Hollywood millions of dollars in film-industry incentives. There was even a film czar that played a key role in getting the legislation passed!
He wasn’t a “corporate fascist” then, and the move actually helped struggling state businesses.
Hollywood could soon reclaim its once-shaky status as America’s production headquarters. After a near panic touched off by a nationwide spending spree on state incentives for film and television production, programs around the country have begun scaling back or shutting down altogether, leaving California in a persistent but much diminished race for the spoils.
The Golden State’s new $330 million incentive program has helped renew confidence that California policymakers won’t give up on staying competitive.
Now if we could only convince Brown that tax relief would work just was well in other industries, California might be golden again.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
So anti-vaxxers have joined anti–taxters, anti-lag-sters, and anti–quack-sters in opposing Governor Moonbeam.
Welcome, one and all.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe this “Only medical exemptions, approved by a doctor…” exclusion is exactly what my state of Kansas has for a law already.
Also, the True Believers of Antivax will simply find some quack… um, I mean doctor who shares their opinions and slip them a few hundred bucks for a signed piece of paper that allows their children to be mobile infectious germ factories.
You don’t need Trump to tell you that public schools and illegal immigrants are biggest reason to vacinate.
I guess I am an anti-vaxxer. I have a child, home birthed, who was not vaccinated because of religious belief.
Also, I have never had a flu shot in 62 years. I have,in fact, been very healthy for 62 years…and the people around me, too.
Great, someone else who is scientifically illiterate.
There’s a saying that anecdotes do not equal data. You are a perfect example of that. In fact, examples like this abound, including the hoary old “my grandfather smoked 2 packs of cigarettes a day, and lived to 110!”
What is required is that one studies the entire data set, not just single instances or cherry-picked groups. A genuinely scientific study would clearly reflect the value of required vaccinations.
With respect to you original statement, the biggest reason to vaccinate is to give your child immunity to a disease. There’s another reason which gives Governor Moonbeam the right to enforce such a bill: herd immunity. As the number of un-vaccinated children increases, so does the probability disease outbreak, such as the one cited in the original blog post.
Exactly, it’s mandatory because of herd immunity. We are protecting those who are too young or too weak to be vaccinated.
Homebirth, by the way, is also risky, and most of the danger is to the child.
Empirically not in my case…for you scientifically biased.
You idiot, there is no such thing as “scientifically biased”. Science is reality. If your child has not yet died of some horrible disease, you can thank all the other people who do vaccinate their children. And if your child does catch something horrible, it will be your fault. You should be ashamed of yourself.
I’m glad you are safe, but looking at statistics this is not a good idea.
Vaccines do not impart immunity, rather they stimulate an immune response. The danger posed by vaccines stems from three causes: inflammation, allergy, and toxicity (especially from adjuvants). A further concern is that a vaccine will fail to cause a complete immune response, which will create a false sense of security.
Again, vaccines are not magical elixirs. They do not “give” immunity. They are part of a risk management protocol, which necessarily limits their distribution to known vulnerable individuals. The benefit and risk need to be weighed with the likelihood of exposure to an antigen. This is why most vaccines are not generally administered.
The need for a universal vaccination program may be real, but the source of the threats should not be ignored. The danger is that remediation programs will be mandated in order to obfuscate or excuse known and perhaps progressive causes.
Do you think Dr. Mayer Eisenstein MD, JD, MPH is unscientific, a medical quack? And where did the crazy notion that home births are dangerous come from?
Mr. Scientific, someone is someone who is scientifically ‘literate’, my first post gave the reason why vaccinations are being pushed on people. Did you read it?
I chose not to vaccinate my youngest son due to the medical (read “scientific”) reasons presented to me by HomeFirst at the time. I could also use a religious exemption. Perhaps science is your religion.
My son (18) has been just fine within the herd at public schools, despite the fear mongering herd mentality of scientism.
Yes, Eisenstein is a kook. The fact that he has medical training just means that he knows he is lying, and endangering people, and does it anyway for financial gain, just like that monster Andrew Wakefield who invented the whole vaccine-autism link for no other reason than to make money.
Yes. As is his partner, Rosi.
Maybe from some of the children harmed by your favorite quacks Eisenstein and Rossi? Oh, wait, that was all Mom’s fault anyway…
And we just won’t talk about the other successful wrongful death judgments in the cases of newborns.
Mentioning Eisenstein and Homefirst and “science” in the same sentence is a travesty. How did Eisenstein get his start in anti-vaccine quackery? Was it science? Medicine? Or a mad dentist with a tinfoil hat?
This is the man who treats autistic children with Lupron, an injectable drug sometimes used to chemically castrate sex offenders. “Top endocrinologists and autism experts have dismissed the treatment as junk science.
Eisenstein is not board-certified in any of the specialties relevant to autism and the use of Lupron, including pediatrics, endocrinology, neurology and psychiatry.”
Seriously. Is this the kind of man you want to trust with your children’s life?
re: Milhouse’s “science is reality”.
“Science is reality?” Whose science is reality? The AGW-ers or the deniers?
And, so, you do not believe in the reality of God? Is God just a figment of your vaccinations?
I know, I know: “I comment, therefore I am.”
What is reality? Are statistics reality? Is the corporeal the only reality or is the incorporeal reality, as well?
And, what about recorded historical fact? If science and fact are the basis of your reality, then you must accept the historical fact of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ and the testimony of hundreds of eye witnesses.
In the Kingdom of God there is no disconnect between science and belief.
I’ll ask my conscience if I should be deeply ashamed. A healthy “Nope” was the answer.
Keep up the fear mongering. It seems to work in the solipsism of closed minds.
Of course you know, solipsism is inherent in Darwinian materialism, narcissistic identity politics and statistic based behavioral social science-the kind foisted on the rest of us.
The philosopher Lucretius embraced mortality and not immortality. So living in the fear of dying became the evidence of disbelief in God.
Yes, science is reality. Science is how we know about this world that God created. It is the only way we can know about it. There is no other source of information available to us.
And no, there were no witnesses at all to the alleged resurrection of your idol. It didn’t happen, and nobody ever claimed to have seen it. In far-away Antioch Paul, the great liar, claimed that hundreds of witnesses existed in Jerusalem, but nobody ever met one of these imaginary witnesses.
What religious belief? Other than “Christian science”, I’ve never heard of a religion that disapproves of vaccinations. People who cite religious beliefs to justify not vaccinating their children are if anything even more kooky than those who think it’s medically bad for them.
You haven’t heard of a lot of things, as finite as you are.
So which religion rejects vaccinations?
Someone else thinks so too…
All these celebs denying the science on vaccines but claiming that consensus is science when it comes to AGW.
Anti-vaxxers, huh. That language sounds vaguely familiar. Vaccines are part of a risk management protocol. They are not magical elixirs to confer health and wellbeing, nor should they be lightly ordered as part of an emotional appeal regime.
On the other hand, when you have an increasing number of uninformed parents refusing to allow their children to be vaccinated based on ignorance, the government has an obligation to step in to preserve herd immunity.
There’s a reason diseases like measles are hardly seen in the United States any more. In fact, the death rate for measles has gone down dramatically over the past 25 years, due to vaccination.
Have I stated something to the contrary? However, herd immunity is only valid so far as there are vulnerable individuals in the population and either domestic or alien carriers.
Everyone is vulnerable. Before vaccines came along children were expected to get these diseases, and many were expected to die of them.
They are more afraid of gluten than they are of measles, mumps or chicken pox.
In my ‘Coot Generation, almost all of us ‘yoots got measles (Red or German)and mumps and Chicken Pox. It was part of being a post WW II kid. Good Grief, what’s the friggin’ fuss?
Your memory is incorrect. Measles is and was quite dangerous for children under five or so and babies in the womb. Pneumonia, brain damage, deafness, and even death were often the results. Many of those without permanent damage were very, very sick with dangerously high fevers.
Even in the last 15 years, 28% of children under five who got the measles in the US required hospitalization.
Not every kid got measles, and every kid who got it was quarantined. Measles is a deadly disease. So are mumps and chicken pox. They are not anything to joke about.
Don’t get your thongs in a twist, Estragon and Millie. Good Grief, my inference was that we live in a much, Much, MUCH whimpier age. Hell, if the vaccines for these(Everybody Got ‘um)afflictions had been available in the 50’s we’d have lined up at public school to get’um. When the Salk Vaccine came out, ALL our parents heaved a Giant THANK GOD!!
My cousin, Ivonne, died in 2-days from polio in 1948 at the age of 5-yrs. Horrific Killer that Salk and Sabin wiped out. Measles, Mumps and Chickpox weren’t remotely in Polio’s League. We ALL got’um. Miserable f***ers, but almost always easily survivable.
Oh…And “Quarantined”..?? We were kept HOME from school(Duuuhhh)and away from other kids in our neighborhood UNLESS the kids had already had what we had.
Measles, mumps, and chicken pox aren’t as fatal as polio, but they’re still killers. I know someone who lost a daughter to chicken pox. And in many places there was legal quarantine for measles. I don’t know where you grew up, but in many places you didn’t just stay home with measles because your parents were civic-minded; your parents got a legal order to keep you home.
The word “anti-vaxxer” IS purposely polemical and IS “scientifically biased” in one direction. The word feeds morbidity hysteria and strong arms any discussion about vaccinations, as witnessed by your pockmarked position comments. And, why don’t you get neurotic Woody Allen, who’s wringing his hands right now, involved too, to stir up the hysteria.
“Anti-vaxxer” is used to shame and then force feed the pabulum of “clear science” (read, “don’t question this ‘altruistic’ science”) to a now media vaccinated public.
It’s “Zen Fascist” actually.
I’m really torn. While my initial, visceral reaction to the idea of children being compelled to receive government-mandated vaccines is “Oh hell no!”, we have, as Casey points out above, “an increasing number of uninformed parents refusing to allow their children to be vaccinated based on ignorance.”
In an age of reason, I’d like to think that we could count on reasonable parents taking reasonable steps to protect both their children and the wider community. And that would include vaccinating their children.
I’d much rather see parents persuaded by thoughtful argument and acceptance of evidence-based science, rather than coerced by the State. I’d rather see charlatans and quacks debunked and metaphorically eviscerated, and their adherents come to their own decision to open their eyes and stop blindly following them. But I’m really worried about some of the unreason out there. How far backwards are we willing to let society slip, as regards the re-emergence of preventable childhood illnesses?
You better take Xanax before you blow a gasket.
Oh, wait, that is against true medical ‘science’. It has side effects.
You’re uncomfortable and upset that the links which I provided exposed your sources of “expert” “scientific” and “medical” “knowledge” in the areas of home birth, vaccines and autism as nothing of the sort.
Thanks’ Amy for projecting onto me your home-birthed vitriol, for your patronizing hubris and for polarizing the issue of home birth. The side effects are kicking in.
The home birth I mentioned above was our fourth child. There were no foreseen complications. If there had been, a ’sacred science’ medical facility would have been used.
Believe it or not a registered doctor, a HomeFirst Obstetrician, was involved with the pregnancy from the start. Dr. Lo had delivered over 1000 home-birth babies.
At our home, when the time arrived to give birht, Dr. Lo was present (and the father) for the labor and puerperium. Local medical assistance and a local hospital were on call during the whole time. I know it is hard for some people to handle even the thought of a home birth when hospital doctors always do the right thing because they are hospital doctors!
After our son was born dad cut the cord and the baby was handed over to him. Dad held our newborn close to his own bare chest while the doctor took care of mom. After the doctor’s OK the three of us fell asleep in our own bed…
And, yes, there are ongoing discussions about home births…
from the following link…
“Many women actually say safety is a major factor in their decision, noting increased C-section rates and the risk of interventions that rise with hospital births. One out of three births in the U.S. is a Cesarean section and about a quarter of all labor is induced.
Studies outside the U.S. seem to support their opinion, finding home births can be as safe or nearly as safe as birth in a hospital.
The most recent U.K. data for planned place of birth shows no significant differences in negative outcomes between births at home, at birth centers, and obstetric units for mothers who have already had children. For first-time mothers, the risk is higher, though it is still relatively small. For low-risk pregnancies and births, women enjoyed better outcomes: reduced Caesarean sections, instrumental deliveries and episiotomies…
Mainstream OB-GYNs Jeffrey Ecker and Howard Minkoff have asked for “dialogue rather than intractable opposition,” in the American Journal of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. “For those interested in encouraging hospital birth, dialogue and creating hospital practices appealing to those inclined to home birth are more appropriate than campaigning to restrict access to home delivery,” they wrote…
“The irony of Chervenak and colleagues who are leading the anti-home birth crusade is that by polarizing the issue, no one can have a reasonable discussion to try and figure how to do this best,” says Eugene Declercq, a Boston University School of Public Health professor and a CDC statistician. “It’s either research that says it’s good or research that says it’s bad. And too few people ask, ‘How can we make it better?’”
“Registered doctor”, eh? If she works for that quack Eisenstein, her registration’s not worth much.
Nobody is compelled to vaccinate their children; it’s a condition for admission to public school, and to most private schools, but you can always home school, or send them to a private school that’s stupid enough not to require it. One problem in California has actually been that state law requires private schools to accept unvaccinated children if the parents claim vaccination is against their conscience; I heard they’re changing that law now.