Nov. 8, 2000
That great national authority on health care and on children,
Hillary Rodham Clinton, owes it to her public to give her opinion on
two current controversies in New York State. Does she support
government-mandated medical treatment of children over the objections
of their parents?
In Utica, NY, parents of 77 middle schoolers were warned in October that their children will be taken and turned over to Child Protective Services for neglect unless they are vaccinated against
hepatitis B within two weeks. Yet, there is no emergency, no epidemic
of hepatitis B against which children need to be protected, and no
evidence that hepatitis B is being transmitted at school.
The "emergency" is that the school district will lose a
substantial amount of state funding if students do not comply with the
vaccine mandate. So school district physician Dr. Mark Zongrone,
giving his financial (not medical) diagnosis, says, "We refuse to let
How did we get to a circumstance in America where a school, for
its own financial self-interest, imposes medical treatment on children
in opposition to their parents' wishes? Is this America or Nazi
Hepatitis B is primarily an adult disease spread by multiple sex
partners, drug abusers, and those in occupations where they are exposed
to blood. Unless the child is born to an infected mother, children
under the age of 14 are three times more likely to die or suffer
adverse reactions from the hepatitis B vaccine than to catch the
Down the highway in Albany in September, a family court judge
ordered the controversial drug Ritalin to be given to a seven-year-old
diagnosed as having ADHD (Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder).
The parents, who had tried Ritalin but wanted to stop it because of
adverse effects, were visited by the Albany County Child Protective
Services, served with a petition to appear in court, and intimidated
into compliance by what was described as "at least the theoretical
threat of having their child removed from their custody."
Public schools are increasingly accusing parents of neglect when
they refuse to drug their children with Ritalin, and some are fighting
back. Two major class-action lawsuits have been filed against the
manufacturer of Ritalin, and Britain's National Institute of Clinical
Excellence is expected soon to announce strict guidelines for its use
and even ban it for children younger than five.
We would be very interested in Hillary Clinton's comment about
these New York cases. We would also like to know where she stands on
the letter Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN), chairman of the House Committee on
Government Reform, wrote to HHS Secretary Donna Shalala on October 25.
His letter was the result of a July 18 hearing that produced
evidence about the health dangers from vaccines containing thimerosal
(mercury). Babies who are injected with the vaccines specified on the
Universal Childhood Immunization Schedule, which are typically
delivered in four to six shots during one doctor's visit, may receive
40 times the amount of mercury that is considered safe under
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines.
An independent evaluation conducted by the National Research
Council confirmed the EPA guidelines as accurate, and the FDA's own
website states that "lead, cadmium, and mercury are examples of
elements that are toxic when present at relatively low levels."
Credible testimony was also given regarding the possible relationship
between symptoms of mercury poisoning and the skyrocketing rate of
autism, now occurring in one in 500 children nationwide.
Requests to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to recall all
thimerosal-containing vaccines by Chairman Burton and by parents of
vaccine-injured children have so far been ignored. This is despite the
fact that the FDA admits that the vaccines on the Childhood
Immunization Schedule are all available in a thimerosal-free version.
Apparently, the FDA is not planning to recall any of the 50
thimerosal-containing vaccines but only suggests a "phase out" over
time, thus allowing the pharmaceuticals to unload their defective
merchandise on unsuspecting children. For years to come, these toxic
vaccines will continue to be injected in babies in Public Health
Clinics, doctors' offices, and managed care facilities.
It is unconscionable to continue to put thousands of babies every
day at risk from mercury poisoning, especially when the government is
recommending use of these vaccines and the schools are making them
mandatory, and when safe alternatives are easily available.
Leaving these dangerous vaccines on the market so that the
pharmaceuticals can continue to receive revenue from current
inventories seems to be the pattern. Even after it was known that oral
polio and whole cell pertussis vaccines caused a higher rate of adverse
reactions, clinics and doctors continued to use their supplies for
years rather than pitch them in favor of safer vaccines.
If there is any reason for HHS and FDA to continue to put
thousands of babies at risk from dangerous vaccines other than to
protect the profits of the powerful pharmaceuticals, we'd like to know
what that might be. What does our great national health care
authority, the one who wants the "village" to raise children, have to
say about the government's responsibility for vaccine injuries to